911 conspiracy theories dissertation

Download 911 Conspiracy Theories Dissertation

Post on 09-May-2015

2.394 views

Category:

News & Politics

1 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  • 1.Was 911 an inside job? By Elliot Jones

2. As part of my Extended Diploma: Creative & Media course, I am doing adissertation for my extended project.Everything written here is my ownpersonal opinion on what I believe happened on the day of the 11thSeptember 2001. Though my opinion is different to the majority, I am in noway telling you what to believe, I am explaining the facts that are there foreveryone to see but because of the media and the government are left quietand unspoken. I mean no disrespect to anyone who has been affected by this,or lost someone due to the attacks.The topic I have chosen for my dissertationis writing the true facts of A) The two planes crashing into the twin towers, B)The pentagon being hit. I will not be covering the strange crash of Flight 93 asthere just isnt enough evidence to suggest what could of happened eitherway. It was such a strange and empty event. I will also say how I believe theAmerican Government have involvement with these three horrific events. Allof the above happened all in one day. 11th September 2001. 111 days beforethe end of the year.I will talk briefly on Flight 93 and the Pentagon but as mymain focus is the biggest story, which blew the media and general public away;the two planes crashing into The Twin Towers.If for some reason you have not heard of any of the 3 events before I will giveyou a quick understanding of what the government has said had supposed toof happened on this day. United Airlines Flight 93 was a passenger flight whichwas supposedly hijacked by four al-Qaeda terrorists as part of the September11 attacks. It crashed into a field near Shanks Ville, Pennsylvania during anattempt by some of the passengers to regain control, killing all 40 peopleaboard plus the hijackers. The aircraft involved was a Boeing 757222.On the 60th anniversary of The Pentagons groundbreaking, a team of five al-Qaeda affiliated hijackers took control of American Airlines Flight 77, en routefrom Washington Dulles International Airport to Los Angeles InternationalAirport, and deliberately crashed into the Western side of the Pentagon at 9:37am EDT. All 64 people on the airliner were killed as were 125 people who werein the building.At 8:46 a.m., five hijackers crashed American Airlines Flight 11 into the WorldTrade Centers North Tower and at 9:03 a.m., another five hijackers crashedUnited Airlines Flight 175 into the South Tower in New York City; both towerscollapsed within two hours. 3. A variety of conspiracy theories question the mainstream account of theSeptember 11 attacks in the United States. These theories stress that theofficial report on the events is not sufficiently forthrightor truthful. Manycritics allege that individuals in the government of the United States knew ofthe impending attacks and intentionally failed to act on that knowledge. Somecritics state that the attacks could have been a false flag operation carried outby high-level officials in the U.S. government who may have engaged incompartmentalization to keep knowledge of their actions limited. The commonsuspected motives were the use of the attacks as a pretext to justify overseaswars, to facilitate increased military spending, and to restrict domestic civilliberties.Many of the theories have been voiced by members of the 9/11 TruthMovement, a name adopted by some organizations and individuals whoquestion the mainstream account of the attacks. Some 9/11 Truth Movementmembers question the accuracy of the mainstream account of the attacks, andthey are committed to further investigation. Others claim that the collapse ofthe World Trade Centre was the result of a controlled demolition and/or thatUnited Airlines Flight 93 was shot down. Airliner did not crash into thePentagon; this position is debated within the Truth Movement.Published reports by the US National Institute of Standards and Technologyrejected the controlled demolition hypothesis. The community of civilengineers generally accepts the mainstream account that the impacts of jetaircraft at high speeds in combination with subsequent fires, rather thancontrolled demolition, led to the collapse of the Twin Towers. Some alsooppose that a commercial did crash there, but that it was allowed to do so viaan effective stand down of the military.I will be writing about September 11 in the order that the events happened onthe day. I believe this will give a more clear understanding of everything; I alsohave the times of when each attack was recorded. There are 25 myths all in allof the September 11 attacks which the government wont answer, or if theyhave people have gone out and found the facts about the matter anddebunked it for themselves, I am going to talk about these 25 myths and 4. hopefully explain and show you the truth to the best of my ability. At the endof this dissertation I have left a timeline of events of the day, which I found onthe official September 11th page on Wikipedia. It was released as the officialtimeline report of the day.Firstly, going by the order of the day, the world trade centre was first hit. So Iwill be talking about the myths and facts of this first. If we go all the way backto 1945, where a B-25 bomber that got lost in the fog crashed into the side ofthe Empire State Building; conspiracy theoristspoint to this as proof that commercial planeshitting the World Trade Centre could not bringdown the towers. They also discussed theconstruction of the towers compared to theconstruction of the Empire State Building andhow the Towers structure was in some waysmore fragile. While the Towers were mostlyempty space by volume, this is true of any largebuilding/skyscraper. The idea of the towersEmpire State Building after been hit by a B-25 bomberbeing less structurally sound than the EmpireState Building is challenged by a variety of technical sources, from sucharchitectural businesses like Emery Roth & Sons that designed the TwinTowers. Because of its configuration, which is essentially that of a steel beam209 deep, the towers are actually far less daring structurally than aconventional building such as the Empire State building where the spine orbraced area of the building is far smaller in relation to its height. Also Thebuilding as designed is sixteen times stiffer than a conventional structure. Thedesign concept is so sound that the structural engineer has been able to beultra-conservative in his design without adversely affecting the economics ofthe structure. Both of these statements show that the Empire State Buildingwas that of weaker than the Towers. So then why didnt the Empire StateBuilding fall if it had the same impact that the Towers had? The empire statebuilding also burned for 40 minutes. I also have another statement from theWorld Trade Centres lead engineer John Skilling. John told the Seattle Timesthis; "We looked at every possible thing we could think of that could happen tothe buildings, even to the extent of an airplane hitting the side Our analysis 5. indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from theairplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lotof people would be killed. [But] the building structure would still be there."TheWorld Trade Centre was built with this exact attack in mind, but yet it stillcollapsed, could this be bad design and architectural work, or something else?Within the building there was damage to the windows and lobby floors waybelow where the plane crashed. The 911 Truth movements have said that thisis evidence of explosives being planted in the buildings, but the argument thatothers put forward is that the jet fuel from the planes had just trickled downthe elevator shafts and caused explosions down below which then damagedthe lobby. Jet fuel being ignited would have just caused fire though, especiallyif it only trickled, there would not have been enough of it to cause such anexplosion, and fire cant blow through windows. Though even fire doesnt looklike the case, after looking into this the white marble walls have no sign whatso ever of being exposed to fire, also the plants next to the blown out windowsshow no signs of being burnt. After also getting in an explosives expert theyhave said he doesnt believe the damage was caused by the jet fuel from theplane trickling down the elevator shafts, looking at the appearance of thelobby. It is argued that one of the reasons the World Trade Centre collapsed isthat the fire on the floor could have melted the steel. Which is one of myfavourites to be honest as there is no way that fire could have done such athing. Steel melts, or liquefies, at 2750 degrees F. Jet fuel burns at up to 1500degrees F. within 10 minutes, the jet fuel was exhausted, and the fire thenraged among the building itself: through the furniture, rugs, curtains, papersand whatever else. The temperature preceding the collapse reached amaximum of 1832 degrees F. With fire out of the question of being able tomelt the steel, it leads me onto a certain type of explosive, particularlythermite. Molten steel was discovered in the basements of the collapsedWorld Trade Centre, which was confirmed by these 3 people; Mark lorieux ofControlled Demolition, Inc. Peter Tully, President of Tully Construction, andfinally the American Free Press newspaper. These pools of molten steel wereburning 70 feet below street level for 100 days after 911. Since we know thejet fuel burnt off within a couple of minutes and jet fuel fires cannot evencome close to the temperatures it takes to create a molten or liquid state insteel, then how do they explain this? Once again, hydrocarbon fires can only 6. reach a maximum temperature of 1517 degrees F. The melting point of steel is2,795 degrees F and the boiling point of steel (when it becomes a moltenliquid) is 5,182 degrees F. Molten steel was encountered primarily duringexcavation of debris around the South Tower when large hydraulic excavatorswere digging trenches