Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
FOR TEN YEARS, a growing number of conspiracy theorists have been calling for new investigations into the 9/11 attacks and for certain information to be reconsidered – or considered at all – in a review of the official account of the day’s events.
Groups such as the 911 Truth Movement question why the Twin Towers collapsed, why Tower 7 of the World Trade Centre collapsed, what struck the Pentagon building in Virginia, and whether any planes were actually involved in the attacks at all.
Here is an overview of the main theories concerning the events of 9/11 – each category has several variations. (Note: TheJournal.ie cannot support nor dismiss any of the proposals listed below).
Controlled demolitions
The Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) account of the destruction of the Twin Towers says that steel support structures within the buildings likely melted and buckled under the intense heat caused by the fires within the buildings.
It says that most of the buildings’ weight was being borne by the exterior walls, while the interior core was a hollow steel shaft containing the elevators and stairwells, and that the events of that day went beyond what the builders could have controlled.
The top-down collapse was described as a ‘pancake’ collapse, meaning that one floor came down onto the next from the top of the building towards the ground. According to the 9/11 Commission report, ”No one anticipated the possibility of a total collapse”.
The South Tower, which was the second building struck, collapsed in ten seconds at 9.59am local time and the North Tower went down a half-hour later. World Trade Centre 7 collapsed later that evening.
People challenging the official account claim that the collapse theory it outlines does not explain why the central columns of the building did not stay standing after the floors collapsed and the outer parts of the building fell. There are also accusations that it was US intelligence services who planted the explosives in the base of the buildings.
Physicist Professor Steve Jones has published numerous articles claiming that the only logical cause of the Towers’ collapse was controlled demotion. His research cites eyewitness testimony, studies the formation of dust clouds from the buildings and the speed of the buildings’ collapse. He also notes that no modern high-rise building had ever collapsed because of a fire.
Jones says physics ‘doesn’t allow’ for a building like the 7 World Trade Centre building to fall as it did that day (in a ‘pancake’ collapse), folding down onto itself without the roof buckling or showing it was striking anything on the way down.
No planes, but holograms and missiles
The theory that no planes were actually used in the 9/11 attacks found its greatest proponent in David Shayler, a man who claimed to have worked for MI5. Shayler has also been involved in the 7/7 conspiracy movement which claims that the London bombings were actually a power surge that was covered up by the government, police and intelligence service.
In 2005, Shayler claimed that the 9/11 attacks were not carried out using planes, but that holograms were set up to make it look as though planes were involved. He says that without a forensic investigation of all of the rubble, it is impossible to determine what really happened that day, but he believes that controlled demolition or missiles were used.
Shayler says that although he initially thought the attacks were down to ‘incompetence’ by US intelligence, he later began to think that the CIA, State Department and FBI saw an opportunity to use Islamic terrorism as a front to carry out an attack that would lead to the US invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Meanwhile, critics of the accounts of planes striking the Pentagon question how the civilian plane passed through the Pentagon’s security system and claim that there is no concrete evidence of a plane having struck the building. Instead, a missile is believed to have struck the building.
According to the official account of the crash, the impact of the plane and resulting fire led to the destruction of much of the aircraft itself, and eyewitnesses report seeing the plane over the Pentagon and of seeing the bodies killed in the incident.
For more information on groups challenging the official accounts of 9/11, see WTC7, 911 Truth and Scholars for 911 Truth. The 9/11 Commission Report can be found online here and FEMA’s report can be downloaded here.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
I’m sorry but either this headline is misleading or we’re being mislead, the headline clearly says “drop in Irish medical costs” but goes on to mention going to places like Spain, Belgium, Germany, UK, Northern Ireland, Tunisia and Hungary. Not exactly shopping local is it?
How can they seriously claim this is an example of a drop in IRISH medical costs, it isn’t, it’s an example of how Irish medical costs are still higher compared to going abroad. Need a hip replacement? Well it’ll cost you here but if you want to hop on a plane, fly around Europe and see the sights it’ll still be cheaper abroad… but believe it or not thats just an example of how cheap we are. Honest… no seriously.
Hi Brian – the drop is in Irish prices since the last index on Irish prices, which was in Spring 2011.
It’s not a drop in Irish prices compared to EU prices – apologies if that wasn’t clear,
As for the figures at the end of the article, that is to illustrate the point that the costs differ between countries.
Thanks
Aoife
The article clearly says “The survey also shows there is a variation of up to 70 per cent in some treatments, with some people able to save up to 50 per cent by travelling abroad to countries like Spain, Belgium and Germany for treatment.” This would seem to suggest that Irish patients can save on their treatments by going abroad, for example it makes no distinction on Laser Eye Surgery between going to Dublin or Hungary, just that a major saving can be made.
On knee replacements they make no distinctions between shopping around within Ireland or abroad “Patients requiring common but more invasive medical procedures, such as knee replacements, can make savings of 9 per cent or c.€1604 by traveling to Connaught from Leinster. A further 30 per cent saving can be achieved by engaging the services provided by Avantis Health and having the procedure in Spain.” To be fair I do know of people who have travelled abroad for treatment, and it was much cheaper than here. We are being ripped off here.
Hi Brian
yes the article says that as a lead on from the initial point that Irish costs are in general slightly lower than in the Spring time of this year. The points are separate but connected:
- Costs have lowered in Ireland this year
- It costs less for certain treatments in different areas of Ireland
- It costs less for certain treatments in European countries compared to Ireland
This would suggest that people can shop around both in Ireland and abroad.
But this is separate to the point that the costs have lowered in Ireland.
The figures are included as examples – unfortunately I do not have the space to include all of the details for all the treatments outlined in this article.
Hope that is clearer for you
Aoife
The “article” is a press release from a company that makes money from people purchasing healthcare abroad, so I’d take everything it says with a large pinch of salt.
Yet again a press release from a company is dressed up as news. This is a bit like McDonalds releasing a “study” showing people can save money in burgers by shopping around and using their outlets.
And you wonder why people cross the border!
Just wondering how breast augmentation costs an average of €2.7k in Ireland when the average for the provinces and Dublin are all above 3k….figures don’t seem to add up.
have your say