Over 2,800 architects and engineers have publicly agreed that there are many issues with the official 9/11 commission report given to the public as the definitive evidence of what happened. They discuss the broken laws of physics and the resilience of the structure itself which is a key factor in questioning the official story. 

Some of the main points they bring up:

  1. Rapid onset of destruction
  2. Constant acceleration at or near free-fall through what should have been the path of greatest resistance
  3. Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions including 118 FDNY personnel
  4. Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members distances of 600 feet at more than 60 mph
  5. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding pyroclastic-like dust clouds
  6. Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the “crush zone”
  7. Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors each an acre in size missing from the Twin Towers’ debris pile
  8. Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles
  9. Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams
  10. Nanothermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples

Additionally, WTC7 which most people don't think about as clearly, wasn't hit by a plane, and yet it caught fire and collapsed in the same free-fall speed as the twin towers. That can only happen when the support beams have been broken at the base of the structure.

"It bears repeating that fires have never caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise before or since 9/11. Did we witness an unprecedented event three separate times on September 11, 2001? The NIST reports, which attempted to support that unlikely conclusion, fail to persuade a growing number of architects, engineers, and scientists. Instead, the evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that all three buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition. Given the far-reaching implications, it is morally imperative that this hypothesis be the subject of a truly scientific and impartial investigation by responsible authorities." (From europhysicsnews.org page 23-28)

What the engineers don't focus on is the multiple warnings that other governments gave to the US prior to the attack. Or the war-time drills NORAD was simulating in which a jetliner is hijacked the same day. Our government officials claimed to have no prior knowledge or prediction of someone using a hijacked plane as a weapon, which is patently false.

Or the redacted pages of the 9/11 commission report (that's still considered classified) that describe who funded the attack. From what the members of congress who were permitted to see the documents have said; it links members of the Saudi Royal family to funding the attack. The Saudis threatened to pull their American investments if the pages were released, so naturally, they were kept hidden from the public. The 9/11 commission deemed the information of who funded the attacks "of little to no importance."

Did I mention the members of the 9/11 commission board were appointed by the president? The president chose Henry Kissinger as the chairman of the commission who just so happens to have on-going business with the Bin Ladin family in Saudi Arabia, and who was responsible for multiple government cover-ups including the overthrow of the Allende government in Chile which led to the deaths of thousands. Kissinger resigned due to the negative publicity, but the Bush administration continued to hinder the investigation by giving it one of the smallest independent commission funding levels in recent history ($3 million), and by setting a very early deadline.

Bush and Cheney both agreed to testify, but under specific conditions:

They would not be under oath.

They would testify together.

The testimony would not be recorded, except for notes from one member.

The notes were not to be made public.


9/11 Deception: Three Major Lies - Good Intel Media

So given all of this information you may ask yourself; Why? Why would a small group of people in our government allow this to happen?

Because if 9/11 was prevented and the US government was praised as being fully capable of defending our country, there would have been no need or public support for the Patriot Act that was passed a month later. There would have been no need to invade the middle east. There would have been no need to begin the global "war on terror". This is what is known as a false-flag operation, in which a government creates a crisis, only to provide a solution to the crisis that involves consent of the governed in order to achieve. During states of fear, emotional distress, and trauma, we don't think clearly and are more likely to give up freedom for protection.

"Never let a good crisis go to waste"