9/11 Conspiracy Theories: You Decide
Several people share a theory that the buildings were detonated, which is also hinted at in the 911Revisited video. A group of three firemen who had been at ground zero agreed that the way the buildings fell was similar to a demolition explosion. However, it isn’t clear whether they are simply making a comparison, or hinting at foul play. Joe Casaliggi, a fireman from Engine 7 speaks shortly after the three firemen. He questions why, with each tower over 100 stories high, filled with mostly offices, hardly any furniture was found; everything had disintegrated beyond recognition. The buildings had, as Casaliggi puts it, “collapsed to dust.” Yet again, it is difficult to determine whether his statements stem from suspicion or if he is simply noting the sheer force with which the buildings collapsed.
While some parts of the 911Revisited video are ambiguous, others are certainly not. Towards the middle of the video, MIT Engineer and Research Scientist Jeff King gives a lengthy speech on the “Collapse Analysis” of the two buildings. King openly states that he was immediately convinced that the collapses “were not spontaneous”. He showed his suspicions to a patient, a retired army core engineer educated and experienced in demolition and construction, and the patient agreed, even going so far as to point out that the presence of “squibs” or “little puffs of smoke coming out of the buildings,” were “a clear sign of controlled demolition”. King also questions the motives behind the quick cleaning and removal of debris at ground zero, calling the area “scrubbed,” making evidence unavailable for investigation. King also notes that while forensic reconstruction would be necessary as part of any 9/11 investigation (one was done when TWA Flight 800 crashed in 1996), none was conducted.
Dr. James H. Fetzer, former marine corps officer, gives his scientific analysis of what happened on 9/11, one which is hard to argue. Fetzer reports on Galileo’s law of free fall, which is mathematical and cannot be debunked as mere speculation. The law states the objects on Earth free fall at a specific rate, and that the amount of time it took each building to fall (8-10 sec.) is a scientific impossibility. Also mathematically impossible is the notion that the steel columns in the core of each building, the “primary structural support of the buildings,” would have crumbled so quickly, when they were scientifically insured to withstand heat up to 2000 degrees Fahrenheit, for up to 6 hours. In actuality, the temperatures measured far less than that in both buildings, and neither stood for anywhere near 6 hours with the South Tower falling after 56 minutes and the North Tower falling after 97 minutes. This also strikes some as abnormal, since the North Tower was the first to be hit and yet the second to fall. In addition, the 911Revisited video claims that the White House’s investigation mentions nothing of the core columns.
Some claim it is far too coincidental that the buildings “fell into their footprints” straight down as they did, in such a way that most of the steel broke into neat 30 ft. segments, “a size easy to load onto a truck.” The segments were, in fact, removed from the site rather quickly by a company called “Controlled Demolition”. After reporting on the “unusual power outages and evacuation drills” that had gone at the WTC the week prior to 9/11, the question arose as to what, if any, mistakes were made by those responsible for security at the Twin Towers. Apparently, the agency in charge, Securacom, was directed by none other than Marvin Bush, youngest brother of George W. Bush. The video soon ends, leaving viewers with the voice of Morgan Reynolds, former economist for the labor department under the Bush administration. When asked if he thought 9/11 was an “inside job” Reynolds answered with a confident “yes,” citing that evidence was “overwhelming.”
On the other side of the argument, several people have spoken out about their disbelief in any such conspiracy theory. The editors of Popular Mechanics recently released a paperback ($12.98 Amazon.com) entitled Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can’t Stand Up to the Facts (Hearst, 2006). It includes an introduction by U.S. Senator John McCain, as well as detailed analysis as to why none of the known 9/11 conspiracy theories “hold up.”
The fascination with conspiracy theories stems from society’s desire to always be “in the know” and uncover any secrets the government might be hiding. No one wants to feel like they are being lied to or taken advantage of. The debates can go on forever, each side having its own set of credible experts. When one side is heard, its arguments are so believable that we can’t help but feel persuaded; then the other side is heard and we’re back to where we started. As horrifying as it is to think that our own government would lie to us, still today many are unconvinced that the Bush administration is completely innocent. Perhaps we will never know what really happened, what is rumor, what is speculation. Thomas Jefferson once said, “It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.”
