I decided to ask everyone here what they think about the idea that 9/11 was a self inflicted wound.
So, in you guys' opinions, was 9/11 an inside job?

Like OMG no way dude

no.. I don't think so

Do you have any reasoning? She was on for about 30 mins. and brought up all kinds of stuff, like building 7, I'm interested in this, because it seemed like guys like Clinton and Guiliani couldn't catch a break from the 9/11 truth people.

I guess I should post what she has said about it.
-------------------------------------------------
Karen S. Johnson: Backing my claims about 9/11 questions

Karen S. Johnson
East Valley Tribune
Monday, May 5, 2008

A recent letter to the editor asked for evidence of my claims regarding the tragedy of 9/11. Below I present some points that are presently known. I won’t be able to convince anyone who doesn’t want to be convinced, but for those who are willing to deal with factual evidence, consider the following:

• 37 different people reported explosions in the basement of the World Trade Center Towers before the first plane hit, and seismic equipment recorded both the explosions and the impacts. In addition, people were injured by the explosions in the basement, providing well-documented evidence. Yet this evidence is ignored.

•The media and government have promoted the “pancake theory” as the cause of the collapse of the Twin Towers — that is, fire weakened the steel support beams, causing the upper floors to collapse. Then the weight of the collapsing floors above caused the floors below to collapse. This theory is not consistent with scientific principles or the facts. Frank Legge, who has a doctorate in chemistry, and Tony Szamboti, a mechanical engineer, reported in December in the Journal of 9/11 Studies: “It appears therefore that the official concept of a free-fall collapse of the upper portion through the initiation story, due to heat effects from fire, is a fantasy. If the temperature did become high enough for collapse to occur” — and everyone agrees that it did not — “it could not have happened in the observed manner. In particular it could not have been sudden and thus could not have produced the velocity, and hence the momentum and kinetic energy, upon which the official story depends for the second stage of collapse.”

• The theory that the buildings collapsed due to controlled-demolition explosives, however, is consistent with scientific principles and the facts. The “demolition” theory, in fact, is the only one which scientists have been able to corroborate. That is, “… all observations are in accord with the use of explosives in a time sequence.” (Legge and Szamboti, December, Journal of 9/11 Studies.)

• Peer-reviewed reports indicate that the masses of dust particles created by the disaster contained tiny pieces of metal that had been exposed to both extreme temperatures (higher than could have been produced by a burning office or burning airplane fuel) and extreme pressure (such as an explosion) that would fragment material into minute particles. Official reports ignore this.

• In December, physicist Steven Jones announced the discovery of thermite chips in World Trade Center dust samples. The chemical composition of these chips are an exact match to known thermite samples used in controlled demolitions — further corroboration that explosive devices were involved.

• Steel support beams recovered from the site of the World Trade Center exhibit cut edges that are characteristic of thermite used to slice steel support beams in building demolitions but are not characteristic of steel beams that have been burned in a fire.

When the 9/11 Commission Report was finally released, it was woefully inadequate. It never even addressed the collapse of Building 7, for example. Former FBI Director Louis Freeh has stated that there are inaccuracies in the report and unanswered questions. Even the two chairmen of the 9/11 Commission — Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton — have accused the CIA of “obstructing” the commission, and one commissioner, U.S. Sen. Max Cleland, resigned, stating that the commission was “compromised.”

Private individuals with specialized knowledge — scientists, engineers, architects, demolitions experts, and the firefighters and police officers who were on the scene on Sept. 11, 2001, have tested theories, constructed models, provided testimony, and dug for the truth about what really happened on 9/11. They have been ignored by media and the government.

The mainstream media parrot the less-than-credible conclusions of the 9/11 Commission without giving any thought to the many omissions and inconsistencies. In a truly free country, the press would ask hard questions and do real investigating, but this is not happening. Only the alternative media, such as Internet news sites, have done any solid investigating.

The events of 9/11 led immediately to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security and passage of the Patriot Act (what double-speak), both of which deprive us of Constitutional rights and have brought us to the brink of becoming a police state. Homeland Security is currently trying to force a national ID card down our throats, although some governors have politely (or not so politely) told Secretary Michael Chertoff where he can go.

If we’re going to sacrifice our freedom, there ought to be a very good reason, and we have a right to know what that is. It isn’t enough for government to say, “Trust me.” It’s way past time for Congress to authorize an independent investigation of 9/11 that will consider the mass of new evidence that has been gathered in the past seven years. The longer they stall, the more suspicions grow.

Sen. Karen S. Johnson, R-Mesa, represents District 18.

I still don't think it's an inside job.

okay, but why?

What would be the point of it?

Why did Hitler have the Reichstag burned down? It's fact that the loss of life on 9/11 has been used to encroach on civil liberties and to grow the power and scope of government, not to mention as justification for war.

That's true.

I have no proof. It's my belief that it's not an inside job.

Gotcha, thats kinda what I'm trying to figure out. The truthers have all this stuff that they are MORE than willing to share about why they question the official story, so i'm just sort of trying to figure out who leans what way and why.

Well, you do have a point about it being the justification for a war. And the war wasn't even used for that justification.
It went from looking for Osama to let's attack Sadam.

That happened in a hurry, meanwhile, we still haven't even found bin laden...it seems kinda odd that the FBI most wanted list, when you look up Bin Laden, it makes no mention of 9/11.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/27/AR2006082700687_pf.html

Check back farther on this forum, this stupid conspiracy theory gets rehashed here about every 3 months. SSDD Remember to change the tinfoil lining in your hats, the rays are starting to get through

Im with winx and forge. This is BS!!

Excuse me,, and everyone else posting!

I dont think so because I dont believe that the current administration is smart enough to have planned it. Now tell me that maybe this has been in the works way back when Bush Sr. was around and I might believe it.

clinton's foreign policy caused it

NO!

The Terrorists' thirst for blood is never satisfied.

The "terrorists" are muslem religious fanatics on a holy war (jihad), they are out to eliminate what they consider is the great satan (USA). As well as all other western influence which they believe goes against their fundamental beliefs..They are anti Zionist and will not stop until Israel is laid waste.

The fact that the terrorists claimed responsibility and their long standing promise to destroy us doesn't mean anything?