This is the most important thing for people who are first starting to wake up. Once they realize that the government is capable of doing something like this.....all doors begin to open.

With the 9/11 anniversary coming up here, they will begine rolling out the propaganda very soon.

May this information help guide you along your journey!





One of the important things for people to look into with this theory of the "Pancake Method" that they have pushed as the official story is just how buildings fall. You are looking at virtually 15% of a structure crushing the remaining 85% of a structure......find 15% of anything and see if it will crush the remaining 85%. Simple math and physics won't allow this to happen. In order for something to fall as these towers did, you MUST blow the support columns before something like this can fall.

Here is what happens when the support columns fail to be blown:



or even better:



What you will see is that falling objects will fall to the path of least resistance. When that falling object meets resistance.....it pickes a new path where there is no resistance. Now, looking at this:



Notice with this particular video of Building 7 falling on 9/11, there is NO RESISTANCE met as the building is falling which means that those support columns were gone. NOT A SINGLE PLANE hit this building! This must be understood! This building fell at freefall speed with no resistance at all on the way down.

There were reports of explosions on the basement:



---just a side note, the guy in that video is now dead of an apparent "suicide"

The same can be said for the other 2 WTC buildings that fell. Even though those paricular buildings were hit by planes, they were hit on the upper portion. Even if the structure was severed all the way to the core at the top, you are talking a welded steet structure represetning 15% of the total structure falling on the remaining 85%.....it wouldn't cause it to collapse all the way down without meeting no resistance during it's path.

Objects that meet resistance fall to the side once they hit that initial resistance. That is simple laws of physics.

Fact is that the beams had to be cut. With the story of "jet fuel", it's important to understand that jet fuel is mostly composed of kerosene. With kerosene, you are looking at the almost all of that fuel burning off in the first few seconds of that blast. If kerosene could melt steel, why doesn't your kerosene heater melt once you fire it up? It's not made to burn that hot...plain and simple.

Lots of people suggest thermite was used:



Click Here for Story --- Evidence of Thermite Found at Ground Zero

Before 9/11, NEVER in the history of steel buildings has fire brought down a steel structured building. Looking at the fires at the WTC buildings, they didn't look too bad to the point where you could see people hanging out of the impact zone YET they want us to believe that fire can bring down a steel building. If you still believe that fire can bring down a steel structured building, may I direct your attention to this Spanish Skyscraper a few years ago:



This fire burned all night and the building did not collapse:



The story then goes to why Norad didn't send up F-16s, as policy states, to intercept these planes? Why did they allow one to supposedly hit the Pentagon? I say "supposedly" for a reason as you'll see shortly. On to Norad though:

Click Here for Story --- Norad Stand Down Drills/ Operations Running on Morning of 9/11 for Confusion

When you look at the story above, check the London 7/7 Bombings and you'll see that they were also running drills of the VERY SAME attack that actually happened. What this did was confuse the people from responding JUST AS it did on 9/11 with Norad. Why weren't there planes scrambled on that day? They were confused as to whether it was an actual attack or just an exercise as can be heard here and the story of how PNAC was so important:



With the Pentagon, do you think a plane hit the building? Maybe you should think again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFz7gLz7CVk

Compare the holes in the Pentagon building to that of the WTC buildings...what do you see? Does it look like a plane flew into that building? Watching this event live, I remember thinking to myself that it was only a small hole that was left by this alleged plane. It was a very small hole and the larger hole wasn't even there until it collapsed into that hole. Remember it was originally a small hole.....not the final hole that you see!

I ask you to look at this video that they provided that supposedly "proved" that a plane hit the Pentagon:



When you look at this video, do you see plane or missile? There are numerous reports of people seeing what appeared to be a missile flying overheard.



Not only that but when you consider the flight path of this plane, it is nearly impossible even for a skilled pilot to fly this route MUCH LESS these incompetent pilots who couldn't even fly a small Cesna. Do you really think they could fly a 747 on this difficult path?

Here is a clip of a 9/11 Commisioner "slipped up" about a missile hitting the Pentagon:



You have the story of Flight 93 that was romanticised in the media but Rumsfeld makes a nice Freudian slip here stating that they shot it down:



However, there were witnesses who reported that there were no bodies in the wreckage....how is this?



What happened to the plane if this is the case? Was that infamous "crash site" already there?



Naturally, this is just a small percent of the information available. There are other things that can be questioned and the fact that people do not is an utter crime in my book. One of my favorite parts to this story is that through all of this supposed "horrific, steel melting inferno" of the WTC buildings......they managed to find this:



This is one of the passports to the terrorists which they just happened to find amongst all of this rubble. They also found several head scarfs as well....riiiight. Notice that everything is messed up pretty bad except for that picture.

How about this too that not too many people talk about. It was said that the terrorist were identifed through their DNA and that the passengers were identifed the same way, correct? How do you match DNA without a prior DNA sample? I doesn't happen....you must have a prior DNA sample in order to confirm a person's DNA. You just don't get DNA and say "yep, that's them" without first comparing it to an original sample.

Where did they get the DNA of the terrorists?

Click Here --- For more information on how DNA testing is done

As I said, this is just the tip of the iceberg that everyone can find. We have to understand how deep this thing goes and why 9/11 was important to these people. We must remember that their deaths were not in vain and the only way to do this is to expose the truth. Dont' let everyone else's "apathy driven" lives corrupt your ability for compassion.

Here is a simple site, with scientific data from architects and engineers, that are challenging 9/11's official story. Here is a simple "11 Remarkable Facts About 9/11" that you can show people who believe the official story:

Click Here --- 11 Remarkable Facts About 9/11

I suggest surfing the site for more information and facts.

Remember this on 9/11 and may the bastards that carried out this attack be brought to justice!

M.o.1