If you haven't read the introduction to this, it's in 9/11 Part 1 here.      

Quite by coincidence I watched two documentaries back-to-back last night from PBS in the States. The combined three hours charted the proposed development and building of the Twin Towers back in the late sixties and early seventies and it went right through to their destruction and its aftermath. It was fascinating from start to finish with much of it in black & white. Old neighbourhoods were simply flattened to make way for the 16-acre, 110-storey developments and these remained unpopular with New Yorkers for many years.

It had me review again my attitude towards America that grew in my head over many years of influence from that quarter. In Ireland in the seventies we teenagers aspired to an Anglo-American view of the World as communicated to our young minds through the medium of popular music and film. 'Easy Rider' and 'Woodstock' were the images and the 'Beatles' and 'Stones,' the soundtrack. By comparison, the Warsaw Pact was a big grey wall of faceless nothing. Over here, 'Kojak' was on the TV and 'Kelly's Heroes' was in the cinema. It was all so vital and alive and anything seemed possible in those fun days because of America. In the midst of it the foundations for the Twin Towers were laid in 1976.

For myself and my peer group back then, America was the good guy, no question about it. They had pushed back and defeated the Nazis and were saving us from communist slavery. Their 'can-do' approach to everything was so refreshing and our media presented us a picture of Americans as peacemakers, providers and friends. America was positive for everybody. Those attitudes thus formed in my teens, were cemented in my twenties, re-enforced in my thirties and just taken for granted into my forties. I simply never questioned anything that emanated from America, I accepted their version of everything and looked up to the Yanks and their superior aspirations and methods.

It is understandable therefore that for nearly ten years after that fateful day in New York, I, like you,  simply accepted the official version of events and therefore all that took place as a result of it  was understandable from that perspective. I heard rumors of course about people who did not believe the US Government version of events but to me, these were probably just conspiracy theorists, the kind that believed in UFO's and Global Warming and that sort of thing. The PBS documentaries last night again stated firmly that the fires in both buildings were so intense and hot that trusses simply melted and then both buildings just fell down – case closed.

I cannot remember the reason I ended up on a U-Tube video about 9/11 but once you get one of them, you find there are loads. Disbelievers of the official version of events call themselves truth-ers. The first unsettling video I saw was by a young American guy who had access to film footage taken by two French brothers in New York that morning. The sole video footage of the first aircraft impacting the WTC is theirs and theirs only. Nobody else recorded that first impact though there are hours of all the other stuff after that. That film, years after the day, seemed to me to ask difficult questions that I had not considered before. As a more mature man, I had learned that everything was not necessarily as it appeared either but as an internet native I also knew that one video didn't mean anything in itself. So I went hunting for other versions of the truth

At one hour and thirty minutes long, this one explores most of the main anomalies. It is easy to watch but worth seeing to the end. It starts with the building of the WTC in the seventies and shows just what materials went into it and what it was designed to withstand. It is important that I balance this fairly by telling you the PBS account of the building of these towers points to a design weakness in the plans. The 9/11 doubters though cite these so-called design weaknesses as engineering innovations and one of the reasons the buildings should never have fallen. Tall buildings traditionally had a strong inner central core that all of the stresses encountered were routed back to. In the WTC 1 & 2, they had both a powerful inner core, (or shaft), and a steel mesh outer core also, meaning that stress loads were shared between the two of them. Because of the enormous height of them, the biggest anticipated stresses were to come from strong winds and both were designed to withstand 150MPH winds from the Atlantic blowing non-stop for thirty minutes, an unheard of event. But if you do watch this ninety minute documentary, at the very least it should start you asking some questions.

This second documentary video asks even more questions At two hours, twenty-five minutes, "Hidden Secrets", is far more comprehensive and fact-filled. It starts with false flag operations, a matter of historical fact today. Then the narrator takes us through documented facts leading up to September 11th in the USA and elsewhere including the amazing whereabouts of Bin Laden directly before the attacks. Then the film turns to the events of that day and it includes radio & TV  recordings of major players as a soundtrack to the voiceover. Then it really starts to become worrying. 

This third one has a practical European spin to it and looks at some of the points raised by the other two with some sarcasm added. It looks at the physical facts of the day from an engineering point of view and then there is an amazing passage that deals with each of the eighteen hijackers individually. Quoting the mainstream media in the months after 9/11 they show random reports of fourteen of the hijackers clearly demonstratiing that these men are still very much alive. They deal with the only kind of detonated explosives that could bring both buildings down on their own footprints at free fall speeds (thermate or thermite). Purely in terms of the basic laws of physics, what we saw happening could not possibly have happened in 
the way the official version says it did. 

"9/11 Exposed – Edition Two (2015)," is an hour & fifty minutes of mainly eye-witness testimonies and interviews with some of the 1,300 engineers and architects who dispute the official version of events on that fateful day in New York. but, there are many more excellent videos that deal with the horrible happenings on that day, some approaching it from quite different angles. It is a fact of record that the US Government had launched an extensive inquiry into some budget money missing from the Pentagon. When I say some, I mean two point three TRILLION dollars. Dick Cheney is filmed on news TV the night before 9/11 explaining this inquiry. Mountains of evidence had been collected in the previous months and located in two places, the Pentagon and building seven of the World Trade. The aircraft, (or missile), that hit the Pentagon, did so in the very area the sensitive information was being worked on. The rest of the evidence under investigation was destroyed in the inexplicable collapse of building seven that evening. As a result, no further inquiries can ever take place…………

The Bush/Walker connections come under a repeated spotlight both with the Bin Laden family and the cast of central characters during that day's events. Larry Silverstein, the leaseholder of all of the buildings, comes out of 9/11 looking mighty suspicious. You should watch one or even all of these films but of course, do so with a healthy helping of skepticism. But I think even if you do and even if your brand of politics is Neo-Con, you will find much to disturb you in the flickering factual images. For example, the free fall nature of the collapses in all three WT buildings. If you toss a steel ball off the top of a building, it will fall down directly, even accelerating as it drops. This is free fall. Now with a solid structure like a 110-story building, even if nine or ten of the top floors implode on themselves, every floor beneath them will present a resistance to collapse, probably slowing and even stopping it all falling. This is Newton's third law! To achieve free fall, each floor must be blown out in sequence as it goes down to remove the resistance in an orderly fashion and this is professional demolition. The wisps or "squids," you see emitted from each floor as they come down looks suspiciously like this.

The official enquiry, (by NIST), tried first to deny free fall but by looking at and timing any one of the sixty or seventy news reels of the events, free fall is what took place. That alone should dismiss the official version from NIST. But what does it all really mean? What is the true significance of 9/11 and why have I become so pre-occupied by it?

I will try really hard to deal with that in Part 3.