Thursday, February 11, 2010

A question posed that should not be backed away from.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100211/ap_on_el_gu/us_texas_governor_s_race_sept11

A fellow right leaning (republican even) person has finally questions 9/11. I almost fell off my chair. It is about time someone questioned it. Even if she did back down it still put the question for people to think about. It will take more like her, but with a spine to stand behind her words to get the real truth out no matter what it really is.

My belief is that what the media and government tells us upon that fateful day was nothing short of a lie. Most things they said either does not make sense at all, don't add up or is a straight lie. I am not saying I believe the government was or was not involved, I am only stating I believe they have lied about the events.

On my own study of the issue I would like to point out to just a few key factors and facts. Fact 1 the hole in the pentagon was not in accordance with the hole that would be made by a 747 in fact the hole was almost 1/2 the size it should have been and that is not including the engines which had no holes or any remains to be found. Fact 2, if the planes at the world trade center burned fuel for hours, how come the plane at the pentagon did not? In fact there were books and wood desks unharmed at the entry point of the hole in the building and many camera views to support this. Fact 3, there was several videos of this act at the pentagon and not one has been released. Fact 4, The plane in PA that the people supposedly took over and brought down, has been on 2 different accounts by donald rumsfeld been referred to as the plane shot down. The parts of the plane were spread over miles not in a smaller area of a couple hundred yards indicating a crash, the break down of the plane indicates that it was shot down. If the plane was indeed taken back, why was it shot down? Fact 5, If the two world trade center buildings were crashed into, how did building 7 (home of FBI/CIA among other federal homes) that was not hit, collapse as free fall speed? Why would owner Larry Silverstein indicate that the build was to be pulled and the media video taped the building stating it was collapsing then the video of the building did not begin to collapse until several seconds later, collapsing inwards like a demolition and not from fire burning in one corner of the building, in which is should have collapsed to it's side and not inward. Fact 6, how would jet fuel cause steel to melt and pour out of the building's side like we seen? Answer is it can't. Thermite however could, but that would have had to have been planted either in the plane or in the building prior to the 9/11 events. Unknown facts, there was recovery of several of the black boxes and video's that have been taken into custody by the government and not released to the public, my question is why? If their statements are correct it will end the questions, if they are not truthful well that is a whole new can of worms.

I just want the truth and it does not appear that we are getting it. Any who want to challenge my statements and research I ask that you research on your own and come with facts not attacks with no backing. I think the more you look at the facts the more you will agree we have not been told the truth. The Patriot Act (which was written prior to the events of 9/11) for a fact would not have been passed without those events and should be repealed promptly.

Please demand answers from the government.




2 comments: