87 votes

It's Time to Put This 9/11 Conspiracy Thing to Rest Once and For All

There is a lot of hearsay and folklore surrounding this event which may or may not be true. So we're going to need to sift through some news-clips, firsthand testimony and whatever else that can provide credible information on this important topic. There comes a point that you learn too much and you can't revert back to ignorance. In a way it's very much like when you first realized that Santa Claus is really a fiction. At that point there is really no amount of logic that can resurrect your belief in Santa again. So when did you quit believing in Santa Claus?

As kids we believed in Santa Claus. Our parents were the gatekeepers of information and, though benign, our environment during that formative time was a controlled one. We were taught to believe in Santa Claus. Initially we accepted all the information that we received at face value. However, as time progressed, we gained bits and pieces of information that led to a cognitive dissonance which, in turn, led us to question our image of Santa Claus. These “bits and pieces” led to questions such as “How could Santa Claus fit through my chimney” or “How does Santa Claus leave gifts in millions of homes during a single night”? Armed with all these bits and pieces of information, we began to get a different picture that caused all the previous illogic that we had learned to come crashing down. This finally led to an epiphany that Santa Claus really isn’t anything like what we had first thought!

There are other things in life that we have always taken for granted as “fact” that later prove to be only an illusion as well. It’s only a matter of getting more information. As in the case of the Santa Claus myth, it is only a matter of time as new evidence unfolds that we are forced to rethink our view on what the truth is.


Please watch this first video linked here. It’s only one minute. You’ve read this far into my article so please take just one small minute and watch this first video. You’re going to be impressed. This is a local news video of a witness named Kenny Johannemann testifying to explosions that happened in the basement of one of the WTC towers. While he is testifying you still see both of the twin towers burning behind him in the background. This was live footage and it's only ONE minute long. Go ahead and watch this here:


The explosions in the basement were separate independent events which had nothing to do with where the airplanes hit some 80 to 100 floors above. Those explosions were from charges that were set up to weaken the structure preparatory to pulling the tower.

You say, “wait, this doesn’t fit anything I know, maybe there is some other explanation for those explosions in the basement.” True. This is just one piece of evidence, but it’s a piece of evidence that raises a lot of questions. You didn’t see this on TV either. Does that prick your interest?

The government has promoted a “theory” that maybe the fuel from the jet trickled down the elevator shafts into the basement and subsequently exploded. Could this be? Let’s continue and look at other evidence. Barry Jennings was another witness that got stuck in Building Seven during 9/11. Remember, Building Seven was NEVER hit by a jet. In Barry's case an explosion blew out a stair well below him leaving him hanging and stranded for hours until the fire department got him out. Both the twin towers went down during the time he was stranded. Building Seven, a tall building in it’s own right (47 stories tall), came down at around 5:20 (later that day). Fortunately, he was saved. Watch his account here:


Again, the explosions he talked about were from charges that were set up to weaken the structure preparatory to pulling down this building. You say, “Hold On! Building Seven housed the FBI and the CIA offices, so who would have access to set up explosives in there? There has got to be another explanation.” True, but realize that building seven was never hit by a jet. Still, this is just one more piece of evidence which raises even more questions. Again, you didn't see Barry’s testimony on TV.

William Rodriguez, head janitor at the towers, was meeting with some people in basement level #1 (the highest of several basement levels) when an explosion from below pushed everyone upwards, causing ceiling tiles to fall and walls to crack. Just as William started to express to others what he thought that explosion might be, an airplane hit and shook the building from above. His story begins at 9:31 here:


Now, let’s look for other different kinds of evidence. Steve Jones, a physicist, obtained WTC dust samples from the collapsed WTC towers from people who lived nearby. He analyzed it and found that the dust contained residues of explosives. Steve Jones first became famous when he became known as the “voice of reason” during the Pons / Fleischman "Cold Fusion" debacle of 1989, if you remember that. For a Nuclear Physicist, like Steve Jones, analyzing dust samples for explosive residues is a relatively simple task. It may be similar to asking a PhD mathematician to do arithmetic. He reported his detailed findings here in Boston:


In this lecture, you recall, he offered other scientists to take parts of his samples in order to analyze the "red chips" that he had recently discovered. That was December 2007. These specks have now, in fact, been confirmed to be unexploded “nanostructured super-thermite” particles. That confirmation is not just a smoking gun, it is the gun. See the article here:


The actual scientific paper in its entirety can be found here in PDF form. Be sure to click the “download” link here:


If you get into the actual paper, you learn that the explosives may actually have been sprayed into position like paint or insulation!

Steve Jones’ findings may not fit the stories that you have heard in the news but it does lend support to what Johannemann, Jennings and Rodriguez testified that they saw. You say, “The news media isn’t going to shoot itself in the foot by making something up.” So how do we rectify all the contradictions that we were told in the news? Could Steve Jones and these witnesses be glory-seeking kooks trying to make a name for themselves?

Well, then take a look at this:

Here is a BBC report announcing the collapse of the Solomon Building (the official name for Building Seven). There is only one problem. The reporter standing at the scene and announcing this didn't realize that, in fact, you could still see Building Seven still standing off to the right. It actually collapsed within about 20 minutes after that live report. Watch it here:


How did the BBC know in advance that Building Seven would collapse? The fact that it was announced in advance is strong support that the flow of information on this tragedy was being controlled (but in a more sinister way than how information about Santa Claus was controlled in your life).

Were the people at the BBC the only people privy to this information? Probably not. Larry Silverstein was the leaseholder of Building Seven. In a 2002 PBS documentary he talked about how he discussed the Building Seven situation with the fire department and he suggested to the fire department that they pull it. He then stated that the fire department made that decision to "pull it" and then, as he put it, "we watched the building collapse". Well, there is one problem with his testimony that you may want to consider. It takes at least a week to rig a building like that with explosives before you pull it. So are buildings constructed with built-in explosives just in case they need to be blown up in a hurry? Building Seven went down that same day. Whoops! Watch Larry's testimony from the PBS documentary here in this short clip:


Incidentally, luckily for Larry, he insured his property in the nick of time just six months before September 11th! It was a sweet deal. So who orchestrated this terrorist event anyway? They had to get past the FBI and CIA and prepare at least three buildings for demolition as well as direct the activities of men with box cutters (if they even existed). It’s clear from the evidence presented here so far that at least some of the media was in on this. What else could explain the BBC blunder? They had to control the information to those of us who might not like the idea that a few thousand people had to be killed in order to fulfill some kind of agenda. So what’s in it for these people that were “in the know?”

Aaron Russo was a famous movie producer (Remember “The Rose” and "Trading Places" starring Eddie Murphy?) who became best friends with one of the Rockefeller family members. This is the same Rockefeller family that is a large shareholder of the Federal Reserve Bank -- a private company that loans money to our government and contributes to our huge national debt. You see the name “Federal Reserve” at the top the dollar bill. Yes, we're talking about that Bank! Anyway, the upshot of this friendship was that in the year 2000 (11 months before 9/11) Aaron Russo learned from his Rockefeller buddy that there was going to be an "event". He was told that out of this event the U.S. would go into Afghanistan and look for Bin Laden in Caves and then the U.S. would go into Iraq. His fascinating testimony about this "event" and how it fits into their agenda starts at 26:45 here in this interview (If you have the time watch the whole thing - chances are you have never seen an interview quite like this one):


Another thing. In April 2013 a 40 story skyscraper in Chechnya caught fire and thoroughly burned into a crinkling cinder [see the video within the next link below]. However it did not collapse. By comparison WTC Building Seven had a few small fires and was never hit by a plane. It did collapse. See that article here:


Now see this:

Amazingly, all this evidence is only the tip of the iceberg. Each of these are separate independent pieces of evidence from unconnected sources. When taken together they paint a clear picture.

You are a juror in a court of law. What would be your verdict? Remember, the word “conspiracy” is not in the dictionary to describe a fiction.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Where was any eyewitness

Where was any eyewitness saying they saw something other than a plane hit the Pentagon?
That's the only link you've ever posted, I think you probably jack off to that documentary, but it never once produces any real evidence, only opinions. And it's whole case is based on eyewitness testimony of people who saw a PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON.


Please do tell about the dna identification you mentioned further above, in particular the dna identification of the hijackers, especially since the FBI has already spoken of false identity problems with regard to hijackers.

Also, what dna would they have compared the hijackers' remains against?

It's in the bottom link of my

It's in the bottom link of my original comment. But on the same site they have the video of Hani Hanjour boarding AA flt 77. Here I will help you out and repost links to my evidence, because I can do that with my belief, I can actually provide real evidence to support it.

About the dna id and everything else on these sites



Thank you

That's the one.

Seriously?! That's the

Seriously?! That's the one?

You do realize that they are trying to make a case that a plane did not hit the Pentagon, off of slight discrepancies in eyewitness testimonies as to the PATH OF THE PLANE THEY SAW HIT THE PENTAGON don't you!?

There is not a single person in that video that says they saw something other than a plane hit the Pentagon.

The pentagon is in really bad spot for seeing

I think they designed it that way. You have to drive by it to see it. So the only people who might have seen anything were driving by like the cabbie on the video. I lived right next to, like on the border of, DC in 2001 and saw the hole while driving my wife out of the city after the attacks and I personally didn't think the hole was big enough for and airplane and it was round. How do you account for no damage where wings and a tail should be? Or the fact that all the videos, save 2 really bad ones, were confiscated and never released? Or even that the Pentagon couldn't defend itself against an airplane (put aside the stand--down order from Dick Cheney, which I trust you know is testified fact from Norman Manetta)

They have given you guys an impossible mission and I am really starting to feel bad for all of you guys. I hope you all get decent benefits at least.

See I said you wouldn't

See I said you wouldn't produce a drop of real evidence. Where's your 3 hour video of eyewitnesses who say they saw something else hit the Pentagon other than a plane? I have yet to see even one.

Everything that anyone on this thread asks to see is in the links I posted, I can't hold you guys hands to click on them and look.

Maybe a hologram was used

Oh you poor, poor victim. Circulating government made videos that make no sense to anyone on this blog, then living off our tax dollars. BTW none of your witnesses are filmed because they're paid shills like yourself. Here is another key witness who walked out of the rubble, will you at least listen to her story since she is an actual witness and not a shill like you?


Known pentagon TROLL

Gotcha Tiger, Hard at work.?? hate to make you look so silly at your job. Check out this felon's other comments HAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHA. Screw this dude.

As usual this booger eater

As usual this booger eater has to come in and not come anywhere close to engaging the issues. Notice how he didn't even approach commenting on anything I posted.

Stay with the personal attacks on me and away from the issues, so you're not even further exposed as the brainless imbecile you are. Daily Paulers can see who the intelligent one is here pal.

ecorob's picture

It ain't you, bub!

You are a classic troll, easily identifiable and not worth the 8 bucks an hour they pay you. Try the minit mart, its more your speed. (Sorry to disrespect all the hard working minit mart folks)

its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
9/11 Truth.

And you are a classic fool

And you are a classic fool who makes personal comments rather than debate the issue. But I know why you do it, because you can't debate me. You are like the other downvoters here who can not produced a single drop of real evidence to refute me or support your claims.

Planes have wings!

where are the wing marks, Tiger? I'm sorry you're embarrassed of your job, don't blame me.

Crime scene destroyed on national TV on 9-12

Felonies, committed for weeks. No denying the US government was complicit in that crime.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

Here is the problem: Americans not qualified to be jurors

Much of the American public is now so intellectually superficial and sorely lacking in the ability to reason and evaluate truth or falsity based on evidence and inductive / deductive analysis ..

And so conditioned to react on social cues and emotion?

That they are not *qualified* to serve on a jury.

Thank god to this point I have never been accused of a serious crime, because being at the mercy of a jury composed of average American's is equivalent to being at the mercy of a coinflip.

I can't imagine how many innocent people are in jail based on the verdict of shallow thinking sheeplike juries that can't evaluate clear evidence without it being pre-digested and "interpreted for them"

IMO this is one of the main, overlooked lynchpins of why there is no longer any real justice left here.

9/11 proves it without a shadow of a doubt.

You Might Consider Adding This

to your post. It covers a LOT of stuff!



Some it will take a lifetime to realize...

It took me 9 years to awaken...

Be kind and always be willing to explain softly the treasons that have been perpetrated against others, against those you call brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, grandparents, friends, acquaintances, etc...we're all in this together and even the other Nations of the world know and are seeking the truth of this event...

Truth will win out in the end...it must in order to preserve what we were, what we are and what we can become...the next dimension is only as far away as man lets it stay...

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

Wait, you're saying Santa

Wait, you're saying Santa doesn't exist?! That conspiracy theory was debunked a long time ago by the Easter bunny.

"I will not submit to authority of man. I'm alive, I'm awake, this is more than I can take." -Jordan Page

Fascinating interview with

Kurt Shonnenfeld...he was the official videographer for FEMA at ground zero. I'll never doubt the gov't involvement in this...ever!


I'd also like to know if his book "El Perseguido" has ever been published in English. Used copies of the spanish original are going for $65.00 plus.

Conspiracy theories

I never seem to buy into conspiracy theories, like the Sandy Hook thing. It was created by reporters looking for a scoop. Sometimes creating stuff, and not letting the reports come out. I wondered why they showed the shotgun retrieval after dark. Turns out, the cops put it there, for safe keeping while they cleaned up the horrific mess that the unstable miscreant created!

Thing is, I have a growing distrust of the powers that be. I still can't bring myself to believe what happened on 9/11, especially with building seven!

ecorob's picture

"The cops put it there!"

Oh, my Lord...what an undeniable buffoon you are.

its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
9/11 Truth.

Great Post! But I would alter one little but important thing.

"You are a juror in a court of law. What would be your verdict?"

I've learned to specifically NOT ask anyone to be the juror, but instead be the responsible INVESTIGATOR whose task it is to sniff out the tiniest leads, follow up on them and try to present the most plausible account of what happened.

If you ask them to simply be the juror. They will (often arrogantly) sit back and say you haven't "proven" your case, completely forgetting the government hasn't proven sh*t. The question to ask, after presenting your evidence, is "which position has the most plausible evidence (quantity and quality)?"

Why do so many Daily Paulers

Why do so many Daily Paulers not know that insults and personal attacks do not help your argument, just the opposite. Maybe it makes you feel better if you can't win the debate on the issues, but it doesn't help your case at all. If you want to get a point across or refute something someone has claimed, stick to the issues and do it, personal attacks and insults are childish and an indication that you cannot refute their argument.

ecorob's picture

You ask this question...

Yet, call DP'ers "booger eaters" and "masturbators"?

You are a walking contradiction and disinfo troll. Slither away, snake, before we bury you in a PILE of undeniable truth.

You aren't earning your 8 dollars an hour. Perhaps, taco bell would be better suited for you?

its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
9/11 Truth.

I am a millionaire

AND I will jack you off and then eat your boogers if you will just watch the damn video, but you won't because you are a troll. Is that a personal attack? booo hooo hooo.

stop posting government videos.

and answer simple questions like "Where are the wing marks on the Pentagone?" and you won't look like such a troll. Love you anyway.

Or How About

How come that particular part of the pentagon was closed down for renovation or some such thing at the time?


I can't speak for everyone

But in a lot of cases - especially the case of 9/11 - after years of debating people and presenting the same clear, obvious, 'in-your-face' irrefutable evidence ...

And people who have heard that same evidence over and over, are still in a state of denial and still actively fighting against the evidence without a rational leg to stand on?

People lose their patience.

This has been going on for years, man.

Some people don't have it in them to evaluate evidence based on reason.

ie. they are scientifically illiterate. Or they are primarily emotional people who are deep down afraid, or attached to authority like a child is to a parent. Or they are hardcore conditioned statists who deify authority and defend it irrationally to the death.

Even if they are regular readers and posters on the DP -- this is no guarantee that any particular individual has it in them to think critically.

Their brains are not really wired for reason.

Well Said!

Too much gmo junk food, fluoride, and aspartame too.


This is

Pretty much the exact same reason I gave when people would complain about "paulbots" being angry and/or know-it-all a-holes... after you are forced to fight for people to listen to what you are saying for so long you begin get annoyed with people who ridicule you for it.

Ron Paul convert from the Heart of Dixie