20 years after the 9/11 attacks, the results of my modest Twitter poll show 72% of respondents do not believe the US govt account of 9/11 at all, while 92% believe it is at least partially false. I wonder what the consensus on the least believable element of the story might be.
https://twitter.com/timtron2020/status/1433709904548745217
One element that was met with scepticism even as it was reported live by CNN anchorman Garrick Utley was the news that a hijacker's passport had been recovered from the rubble of the Twin Towers' destruction. "If you can believe that" was certainly not on Utley's teleprompter.
Much scepticism has focused on the collapse of WTC7, the third tower that was destroyed in NYC on 9/11. This is because it was not hit by an airliner but suddenly fell that afternoon at the rate of gravitational acceleration, showing strong resemblance to a controlled demolition.
Another element of the story that has attracted scepticism is the flight path of AA77, which made a smooth 270° turn while descending at high speed to hit the only reinforced section of the Pentagon with an amateur pilot at the controls. Captain @danhanley4 is an expert witness. 
The collapse mechanism that destroyed the Twin Towers so rapidly and completely has never been experimentally reproduced. Some sceptics, citing Newton's Third Law, say the falling upper section should itself have been destroyed at the same rate it destroyed the structure below.
The aggressive smearing in the media of anyone who asks questions about 9/11 as a "truther" could be seen as a powerful reason for scepticism in itself. It should be deplored because many asking questions are *the families of those who lost their lives*.
This remains, for me, one of the best documentaries on the 9/11 event and its aftermath (full movie): filmsforaction.org/watch/911-pres…
@threadreaderapp unroll please
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
