The 9/11 Forum

9/11 truth can be a convoluted mess on the internet and elsewhere. I often think about what my hypothetical 9/11 PowerPoint presentation for family, friends and the rest of the world would look like. How would I sell 9/11 truth*? Do I have enough information? What would my truther site look like?

I'd like to think of myself as a great organizer. In highschool my career aptitude test suggested that I should get into package design. I know a thing or two about the art of bringing people in. I have no problem visualizing the layout of the ultimate truther site.

Lets say that I take up the tremendous task of designing my own 9/11 truth website (it would be hard for me because I haven't made a web page since the bronze age of internet). First of all, I probably wouldn't have "truth" in the title of my site. Something like "9/11 Research" seems more unbiased. I'm cool with having truth in a subtitle... I'll do whatever I can to get more hits for my page - with the exception of posting lies. In fact, I would make sure that all sides of any argument would have their spot on my website.

Maybe one day I'll make the website or help someone whom wants my design expertise.

So 9/11freeforum group, what would you want to be on the front page
As of now, what information do you think is most important to you and/or the truth movement
What would you present first if you want others to keep reading
What info would you consider closest to a smoking gun in the fight for a reinvestigation

*truth - no affiliation with other truther websites. just the bare-bone facts and analyzes

One of the Dr. Steven Jones youtubes has him bringing up airline put options very early into his presentation. That is definitely front page headline material imo.

I would say that the over arching problem with the 911 truth movement is CONCLUSIONS and FAILURE TO DOCUMENT / REPORT THE OBSERVATIONS.

Any site which purports to study 911 must deal with the above plus the errors and oddities of the official account.

I would begin by stating all the mis statements which exist created by the media and the government officials (NIST, FEMA, 911 Commission etc.).

I would go on to examine the evidence claims of the OCT... such as how they determined who hijacked the planes and even how they know planes were hijacked and what planes actually hit the towers etc. Why the officials are withholding evidence using in many cases "national security" concerns as the reason... such a the release of the construction documents and logs for the WTC buildings.

I would also include a reference section about technical aspects of structure, mechanics, physics, engineering, aviation, forensic science, chemistry, video and image analysis, optics, and so forth.

I would have a section of unanswered questions... or questions which should be asked and answered or were and the answers were not credible in the OCT.

I would not present any theories or hypotheses about what happened.

SanderO wrote:I would say that the over arching problem with the 911 truth movement is CONCLUSIONS and FAILURE TO DOCUMENT / REPORT THE OBSERVATIONS.

Any site which purports to study 911 must deal with the above plus the errors and oddities of the official account.

I would begin by stating all the mis statements which exist created by the media and the government officials (NIST, FEMA, 911 Commission etc.).

I would go on to examine the evidence claims of the OCT... such as how they determined who hijacked the planes and even how they know planes were hijacked and what planes actually hit the towers etc. Why the officials are withholding evidence using in many cases "national security" concerns as the reason... such a the release of the construction documents and logs for the WTC buildings.

I would also include a reference section about technical aspects of structure, mechanics, physics, engineering, aviation, forensic science, chemistry, video and image analysis, optics, and so forth.

I would have a section of unanswered questions... or questions which should be asked and answered or were and the answers were not credible in the OCT.

I would not present any theories or hypotheses about what happened.

Aren't you getting bogged down in the minutae?

This happened 10 years ago, and the preponderance of the evidence, as used in civil courts all over this country, easily disproves the government story. Therefore it is a lie and rather meaningless.

If it is a lie, it is meaningless.

The official story can be falsified... many parts of it. And there are many questions raised by the official account which need to be answered.

Details are what evidence is about.

An example would be the plane which hit the pentagon. Where are all the vids taken that day? Why are they not released? If they show the commercial flight claimed.. why not prove it with the videos?

Several researchers on this site have looked at the visual record and done a yeoman's job and sorting out SOME of what happened and this is in conflict with the OCT and much of the 911 Truth movement. All three can't be correct. So what we have is claims of science and what would be junk science.

Perhaps your site could present the claims and the science behind / supporting them.

SanderO wrote:The official story can be falsified... many parts of it. And there are many questions raised by the official account which need to be answered.

Details are what evidence is about.

An example would be the plane which hit the pentagon. Where are all the vids taken that day? Why are they not released? If they show the commercial flight claimed.. why not prove it with the videos?

Several researchers on this site have looked at the visual record and done a yeoman's job and sorting out SOME of what happened and this is in conflict with the OCT and much of the 911 Truth movement. All three can't be correct. So what we have is claims of science and what would be junk science.

Perhaps your site could present the claims and the science behind / supporting them.

I don't have a site, if you mean website. I'm just an observer.

I'm no authority, but it seems we've seen the vast majority of the videos taken that day. I myself have seen dozens from all different angles and perspectives. After awhile, one must inject a little common sense into the equation used to determine what happened.

What does your common sense tell you?

But not to belittle your common sense, in a court of law they call on experts for their opinions about observations. If common sense could suffice they'd pull someone off the street.

The jury does get to decide and they are common folks... but they are reviewing the presented evidence including the expert witness testimony.

My common sense tells me that 2 767 type airplanes struck the towers. I agree with you that regarding the Pentagon, if they had videos that proved a 757 struck there they would have them plastered all over the television news. That they did not suggests there was no video evidence to support their story.