Zeitgeist, the movie is split into three parts: Christianity, the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and the U. S Federal Bank. I would like to consider the value of the statements which this movie presents. The film is composed of various films clips, pictures and many quotations accompanied by comments.
I, the viewer am also flooded with series of dates and facts the validity of which I have no way of confirming. It is hard to take a statement not supported by any provable evidence seriously. I now have to decide whether to trust what I am being told or think about the matter in further detail.The part of the film I found most interesting was number two: "All the World's A Stage".
The topic here is the incident of 9/11 where two planes crashed into the twin towers in New York. I expected a factual explanation of what happened that morning. Instead I got a conspiracy theory of one sided arguments. I was sceptical at first but as the movie wore on I discovered there might be something to it after all. The makers of the film claim that U. S.
government was responsible for the planes crashing into the twin towers.They claim that the falling of the twin towers wasn't due to the planes crashing into them but that they were brought down along with building 7 by controlled demolition. I would like to look into this matter. The first argument that was presented commented on the way the buildings went down. They fell in a "pancake" fashion.
The buildings didn't fall to the side instead they collapsed in on themselves. Everyone who has seen a controlled demolition will know how the building will slide to the ground without damaging any neighbouring construction.Well if we look at the way the first 9/11 building fell we can see it collapsed in exactly this fashion. Coincidence? I believed so at first but when I found out it wasn't only one building but all three that fell like this I became a little less sure. Yes, I considered the possibility of the buildings being built in a way that they wouldn't allow them to damage much around themselves if they fell. But then there are the words of the architects.
Frank A. Demartini, the World Trade Centre construction manager says "The building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jet liners" We designed the building to take the impact of the Boeing 707 hitting the building at any location. "Says Les Robertson WTC Structural Engineer. 1 Of course the architects wouldn't admit to making a mistake during the construction but instead make up a ridiculous lie that a building could withstand a plane crash. Someone might say. What that someone might not realise is that the plane didn't' hit base of the building but the top.
It really doesn't seem normal that a building should collapse when the only part of the structure that is dented is at the top.So what caused the rest of the structure to break down? 35 tones of jet fuel burning would have created enormous heat. However would this temperature be high enough to melt columns made of structural steel with a melting point of about 1500i?? C when jet fuel burns at about 300i?? C? "It was the fire that killed the buildings - nothing on Earth could survive those temperatures with that amount of fuel burning"2 says Chris Wise a structural engineer. I can't entirely agree with this statement.
The first plane hit the north tower around the 100th floor.The second plane collided with the north building about 20 floors lower. Even this is still relatively high up. The raging fire would have melted the central column and floor supports in and around the areas of impact. I don't think the heat would have eaten through the steel all the way down to the foundations. I'm not an expert but it seems illogical to me for two buildings to be hit near the top and both of them come down.
Besides there is still building 7. This building didn't get hit by a plane. The only thing registered wrong was a fire on two floors.This building came down in the same fashion as the two before. The problem is not many people know about building 7 as it didn't appear on any major news reports.
The question I ask myself is "Why? " . Why would the U. S. government have two airplanes crash into the two tallest New York towers? The movie doesn't say. Why, When as an aftermath Dow Jones Industrial Average stock market index fell by about 700 points, New York's GDP declined by no less than 25 billion $, 18000 small businesses were displaced or destroyed, 3000 deaths3. The movie doesn't say.
It is probably this that keeps most people from believing conspiracy theories of this sort. The absurdity of the thought of the government doing something as bad as this to their own people. When one looks back at the history of mankind and sees all the horrors of WW1 and WW2 where one man's orders caused the death of over 10 million innocent people throughout Europe. Is it really that absurd to think that a few very highly placed men would sacrifice 3000 people when there is a beneficial outcome in store for them? Many people lost jobs, family, and possessions on September eleventh.
A very limited amount of people made a great deal of money on September eleventh. Either on insurance scams, later armament in the Iraq war or other reasons not known to me. However when 1% of the population owns over 40% of the world's wealth something isn't right. Big decisions are made by powerful people. So it has been sighted in the past that taking another's life won't stand in one's way when there is a great amount of money involved.
I'm not saying the America government killed 3000 of its own people. What I'm saying is people shouldn't dismiss opinions and ideas of others as absurd as they might seem.
