Exclusive to OpEdNews:
OpEdNews Op Eds

Why I still question 911

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags  (less...) Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com

Why did I become interested in 911- and why have the questions never gone away?

Sometimes, many times, I have wished they had. If it only it could have been that simple. A return to innocence or maybe - because the collapses were such an assault on the senses - ignorant incredulity might be better words.

It would be so much easier if I could believe the official story that a few hijackers with boxcutters and some perfunctory flight training on single-engined planes could have hijacked four large airliners, silenced the crews, turned off transponders, and then expertly guided two of them into the Twin Towers. But I have since learned from expert and highly experienced pilots that hitting a tall building at speed is just not that easy. One hit might have been lucky, but two?

What am I to make of this from an experienced pilot?


"Regarding your comments on flight simulators, several of my colleagues and I have tried to simulate the 'hijacker's' final approach manoeuvres into the towers on our company 767 simulator. We tried repeated tight, steeply banked 180 turns at 500 mph followed by a fast rollout and line-up with a tall building. More than two-thirds of those who attempted the manoeuvre failed to make a 'hit'. How these rookies who couldn't fly a trainer pulled this off is beyond comprehension."

And it would be so convenient if I could blindly believe - as the official story claims - that another amateur pilot took a third plane down through a very sharp turn and a very rapid descent to level out at ground level and crash into the ground floor of the Pentagon - again, a manoeuvre many experienced airline pilots say is virtually impossible.  Apparently, the giant plane left virtually no marks on the grass during its approach nor any appreciable debris outside the building.



What am I to make of this, from another experienced pilot?

"I shan't get into the aerodynamic impossibility of flying a large commercial jetliner 20 feet above the ground at over 400 mph. A discussion on ground effect energy, vortex compression, downwash reaction, wake turbulence, and jetblast effects are beyond the scope of this article. Let it suffice to say that it is physically impossible to fly a 200,000-lbs airliner 20 feet above the ground at 400 mph. The author, a pilot and aeronautical engineer, challenges any pilot in the world to do so in any large high-speed aircraft that has a relatively low wing-loading (such as a commercial jet) and traveling at 400 mph.) ...

Furthermore, it is known that the craft impacted the Pentagon's ground floor. For purposes of reference: If a 757 were placed on the ground on its engine nacelles (I.e., gear retracted as in flight profile), its nose would be about fifteen feet above the ground! Ergo, for the aircraft to impact the ground floor of the Pentagon, Hanjour would have needed to have flown in with the engines buried in the Pentagon lawn. Some pilot."

I am no expert in building collapses. But I watched the Twin Towers fall. Both of them. And I could not understand it. Straight down, in pieces, into dust, hundreds of floors, crumbled, pulverised. In ten or so seconds. When I visited them years ago, I read that both towers had strong central cores, massive columns of steel. Does fire cause collapse like that? Not usually. Surely steel-built towers can burn for days. They may buckle and bend, but not collapse into nothing, straight down, with no resistance.

What am I to make of singer Willie Nelson saying this:

"And I saw those towers fall and I've seen an implosion in Las Vegas. There's too much similarities between the two. And I saw the building fall [Building Seven] that didn't get hit by nothing. So, how naive are we? What do they think we'll go for?"

Yes the other collapse was WTC Building Seven, not 110 storeys but 47 storeys, which stood just nearby the Twin Towers. Building Seven wasn't hit by a plane, but during the afternoon it did what the other two did. It simply fell down. Neatly. Like a pack of cards. In six seconds. What am I to make of what actor Martin Sheen has said?

"I was very dubious. I did not want to believe that my government could possibly be involved in such a thing, I could not live in a country that I thought could do that. That would be the ultimate betrayal. However, there have been so many revelations that now I have my doubts, and chief among them is Building Seven - how did they rig that building so that it came down on the evening of the day?...when did they rig that building? That's the most interesting question and I have not received a satisfactory answer." 
 

 Martin Sheen and Willie Nelson are artists, creative people, not scientists. But what am I to make of it when I read the opinion of a world-renowned scientist and the recipient of the National Medal of Science, America's highest honor for scientific achievement , Dr Lynn Margulis: 

“It is clear to me that … 9/11… was planned in astonishing detail and carried out through the efforts of a sophisticated and large network of operatives…whoever is responsible for bringing to grisly fruition this new false-flag operation, which has been used to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as unprecedented assaults on research, education, and civil liberties, must be perversely proud of their efficient handiwork. 

Next Page  1  |  2

 

Writer and freelance journalist

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Why I still question 911

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
10 people are discussing this page, with 26 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

As well you should be interested, Mr. Francis. The... by Stephen Demetriou on Tuesday, May 20, 2008 at 6:54:44 PM
A sensible, realistic investigation into the ... by Michael McCoy on Tuesday, May 20, 2008 at 9:04:17 PM
marvelous, fascinating collection of carefully con... by Robert Hoogenboom on Tuesday, May 20, 2008 at 10:35:50 PM
They violated no laws of physics.  Whereas on... by Maxwell on Wednesday, May 21, 2008 at 2:34:15 PM
On that horrific day, I clearly remeber something ... by POdVet on Tuesday, May 20, 2008 at 9:42:36 PM
Excellent analysis. Questions will remain until Ju... by aberamsay on Wednesday, May 21, 2008 at 6:02:12 AM
        &n... by rhalfhill on Wednesday, May 21, 2008 at 4:48:49 PM
Does anyone know what become of the attempt to put... by Oh on Wednesday, May 21, 2008 at 8:31:10 PM
"I shan't get into the aerodynamic imposs... by Roark Howard on Friday, May 23, 2008 at 9:34:01 AM
Why do you think that Willie Nelson is and expert ... by Roark Howard on Friday, May 23, 2008 at 9:35:16 AM
Another leftist "expert" huh?... by Roark Howard on Friday, May 23, 2008 at 9:36:09 AM
I am no expert in building collapses. But I watche... by Roark Howard on Friday, May 23, 2008 at 9:41:27 AM
Yes the other collapse was WTC Building Seven, not... by Roark Howard on Friday, May 23, 2008 at 9:47:37 AM
What do you mean by "the collapse was well un... by rhalfhill on Saturday, May 24, 2008 at 2:40:17 PM
Thank you for pointing that out.  Of course,&... by Roark Howard on Saturday, May 24, 2008 at 5:22:09 PM
Certainly, 19 young Arab men and a man in a cave 7... by Roark Howard on Friday, May 23, 2008 at 9:49:07 AM
Nineteen men of any color, even with the backing o... by rhalfhill on Saturday, May 24, 2008 at 2:55:54 PM
By what standard are you basing your claim that th... by Roark Howard on Saturday, May 24, 2008 at 5:27:37 PM
Actually the Air force is and has been required by... by POdVet on Tuesday, May 27, 2008 at 7:40:46 PM
please provide the citation where this law exists.... by Roark Howard on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 at 1:13:44 PM
There are clar pictures of the external pannels fa... by Roark Howard on Friday, May 23, 2008 at 9:51:26 AM
Panels that were blown off the building by the exp... by rhalfhill on Saturday, May 24, 2008 at 3:24:26 PM
“Virtually?”  the difference betw... by Roark Howard on Saturday, May 24, 2008 at 5:38:59 PM
sory that was supposed to be 10 to the 11 power no... by Roark Howard on Saturday, May 24, 2008 at 5:42:43 PM
In controlled demolitions, explosives do not pulve... by Roark Howard on Saturday, May 24, 2008 at 5:53:15 PM
Real name? Or are you really Ayn Rand's fictio... by Al Francis on Saturday, May 24, 2008 at 7:22:27 AM