The truth behind 9/11?

{Sigh}

I saw a flash movie that states that the pentagon was not hit by a plane but a missile. It had alot of info and pictures to back it up, it shows a picture of the “plane” as its coming in to hit the pentagon. It was video footage of the impact but the plane can only be seen in 1 frame because it went so fast. It looked like something completely different than a plane. It then shows a picture of the side that got hit and shows no wreckage at all, just the damage to the pentagon. Then it shows other plane wrecks where bits of the plane are scattered all over. The “plane” also put a perfect hole through a few layers of the pentagon, something that no plane can do. A nearby building that had survailance caught the crash on tape but it was confinscated by the fbi shortly after and was never seen again.

I’ve seen that too SpEEd0, and it is probably actually more credible than that FOX special of “Did we land on the moon?” Yeah, that show insulted my intelligence.

This has to be one of the funniest comments I have heard. That we are nieve to think that terrorists flew into the World Trade Center towers. That’s rich.

Watch your words Lebowsk1, you might be next on the list, your getting too close :wink:

I too thought the buildings fell a little too perfect and my suspicions were aroused as to what really happened… but then I thought not too much more about it.

I also recently saw a doco discrediting the conspiracy theories around 9/11 - but I didn’t like there angle very much and I quickly realized that it was a doco with a specific agenda… that 9/11 happened as told to us by the media and the politicians…they were hitting hard against the Pentagon/missle theory.

Well, if the Pentagon was really hit by a plane… where is the wreckage? Just show me some footage of the plane coming into crash into that building and I will be OK… I was wrong. You would think for a big governmental building they would have had security cameras that would have recorded this? Every man and his dog caught a glimpse of a couple of planes crashing into the towers… but the pentagon?

No, I agree that terrorists destroyed the WTC towers. All I’m saying is that some of the terrorists involved may be a lot closer to home than you think.

Re: Pentagon
Yeah, the official story is crazy. According to that the plane would have had to skim the tops of the cars travelling on the nearby road during approach, then clipped the grass by the Pentagon and enter the building in a physically impossible manner and, of course, there’s no footage of the plane despite it hitting the freakin’ PENTAGON…

Anyway I think this is an important issue because I fear that a similar ‘terrorist’ atrocity may occur soon in order to boost fear in the people and justify further military expansion into Iran. Alex Jones actually predicted 9/11 2 months before and on his show begged people to call the White House and say “If we are attacked we know YOU did it” Of course people didnt listen (or probably even see it) but hopefully they will be brought to rights next time.

Random 9/11 Truth Movement fact no.697: the supposed ‘debunking’ article in Popular Mechanics magazine was written and researched by Benjamin Chertoff, who just happens to be… the cousin of Secretary of the Department of Homeland Defence Michael Chertoff. See ‘Nepotism’.

I think it’s pointless trying to work out if they used explosives for those of us whole aren’t engineers. How are we s’posed to know who’s telling the truth?

But you can work out if a conspiracy theory is just a bunch of lies or not. If we, as common lay people, can find one flaw in the conspirators theory then you can throw away their theory because the rest will also be lies.

Take the moon hoax thing for example. Anyone should be able to disprove some of the conspirators arguments and realise it’s just a bunch of lies. No stars in the background, everyone knows there can’t be. So why are the conspirators saying there should be? To fool unsuspecting people who don’t research the claims.

Here’s my conspiracy theory, The US government creates conspiracy theories and sells them to Fox. Then conspirators are labeled as crackpots. When some people really do uncover something big no-one will believe them.

You can explore what professionals said about it at the time. I have read many reports of experts saying that the collapse appeared consistant with a demolition (excuse lack of citations, tired…)

I think really important truths are something accessible to all people, especially in this ‘Information Age’ that we find ourselves in. Research and an open mind can discover truth from falsity.

But yeah, I’m not really into the moon landings conspiracy theories. I currently believe that the landings did take place.

Oh of course this kind of thing happens. You get “shills” who are insiders acting like outsiders, there’s all kinds of double-double crossing going on in the world of power. I do think that once you get a handle on the situation it is possible to see through that kind of thing by basically asking “who stands to benefit?”

Ok, well how do you explain the few hundred people killed in the Pentagon plane crash (or however many it was). Were many random families paid to pretend their relatives died? Seems a bit far fetched to me that the truth would never come out, or have you also got evidence of one of them admitting that they actually never lost any family in that crash? And what about the plane company that owned the plane, the traffic controllers, the eye-witnesses etc?

As for the missile thing there was an interesting documentary in the UK about it. It basically made the case that the plane’s main body punched through the Pentagon, and the wings folded on impact, leaving a fairly small entry hole. Surely you can all grasp the fact that at 300mph (or whatever) metal wings are as good as tin foil when smahing into reinforced concrete? Plus, if it was a plane-sized missle why was most of the above-ground Pentagon building still standing? A multi-ton missile would have made a slightly bigger hole than the one made. And there was various security footage of the plane hitting the Pentagon, I saw it on the documentary, i’m surprised all of you conspiracy enthusiasts haven’t seen it!

I think the lack of extra footage though is more likely to be due to the Government being unwilling to release their CCTV etc footage, because which Government would want to show the world reels and reels of footage that shows how incompetent they were?

Well, we could debate this back and forward. Without footage of the impact we have to talk indirectly about what happened and it is difficult to be precise.

This is why I believe the focus should stay on events at the WTC building complex because they collapsed in the cold light of day with cameras all over them. Holographic planes (a particularly wild theory), lack of a pentagon plane, these things are not neccesary to prove that the official report and media version of events are inadequate to explain what occured.

In fact I’d say the main focal point should be Building 7:

  • it was not hit by a plane
  • it collapsed at 5:20pm
  • owner Silverstein said in a PBS documentary that the decision was taken to “pull” the building, something which takes weeks to arrange and set up
  • the official report said the collapse was caused by fire
  • the collapse was textbook demolition (building crinkled towards the centre and fell into own footprint with no resistance)
  • charges can be seen going off in one particularly revealing shot (will find link later)
  • buildings much closer to the 2 main WTC buildings stayed upright, despite being hit by pieces
  • but to address your points with regard the Pentagon, there is a theory that the plane was ditched out at sea, and there were eye witness reports that seemed to be describing a missile. All they need to do is release a little authentic footage showing the approach/impact, but they don’t seem to want to do that.

i saw a questionable pentagon video which seemed like a missle may have been plausible…

it was too fast and blurry to tell…

can’t remember where i saw it but its floating around somehwere.

Yeah, a couple of frames were released but as you say, there is nothing fitting the description of a plane on them. In fact the explosion itself is more in line with that caused by a missile: it is white-hot as opposed to the yellow/red billowing fireball we saw at the WTC. Check out the video “9/11: in Plane Sight” (it is available free online from www.informationclearinghouse.info )

But people, never forget Building 7. wtc7.net/

Hmm. Are we meant to compare to the 110-story towers?

WTC7:

(Wikipedia) that sounds like it could set up a pretty intense fire.

If we are talking about building 7 then you are comparing it to a 47-story building.

Well, there wasnt such a fire. Photographs of Building 7 prior to its collapse show only small areas of fire.

It is still a mystery as to exactly how these small, isolated fires could break out in the first place, seeing as no plane hit, and no chunks of the twin towers hit the building.

And besides, the collapse itself was not consistant with such events:

"The precisely vertical collapse of WTC 7 around 5:20 on the afternoon of September 11th necessitated that all of the load-bearing columns be broken at the same moment. Inflicting such damage with the precision required to prevent a building from toppling and damaging adjacent buildings is what the science of controlled demolition is all about. No random events, such as fires or explosions, could be expected to result in such a tidy and complete collapse.

Moreover, it is a fact that fire has never caused any steel frame high-rise building to collapse in any manner, let alone with the vertical precision of Building 7’s destruction"

Check out this site on the Windsor building fire, and conduct a compare/contrast exercise on building 7: davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html

Well, I don’t have much of a problem accepting that elements of the current U.S. Government (and previous Governments) could be capable of planning and carrying out an attack on their own citizens, but I do have a problem accepting that such an attack could ever be accomplished without it being clearly and comprehsively proven to be the work of said Government.

Are you really telling me that you believe that the U.S. Government killed about 3,000 of its citizens, destroyed two of its largest and most prestigious buildings, contaminated a massive civilian population with god knows what and all in front of the world’s media in one of America’s largest cities, and no-one has any damning conclusive proof? And i’m not talking about your crack-pot web sites with all their ‘facts’. Don’t you think that if this had really happened it wouldn’t just be the conspiracy theory community claiming various plots, but that it would the media, academics and mainstream public opinion proving such plots.

If you really want to have your theories taken seriously you’re going to have to explain how such an operation can be planned and executed without someone blowing the whistle or proving to the world beyone doubt what the Government was up to. Because it would take an awful lot of man power and resources and all of the people involved would have to be firm believers in killing many of their own civilians, or paid an awful lot to keep quiet.

The conspiracy theories seem utterly ridiculous to me, where as a terrorist attack using America’s stupidly unguarded airlines, to simply crash planes into large buildings, seems like a much more sensible and logical explanation. But then, conspiracy theories rarely side with the most likely explanation of an event.

No, there is damning conclusive proof. Building 7 demolishment, caught live on tv. Testimony from firefighters and even reporters on the scene that there were secondary explosions that brought down the towers (these reports being dropped from subsequent coverage), actual recorded evidence of said explosions, the physical impossibility of what happened (it is still unprecedented, including the huge Madrid fire), building 7, building 7…

Ad hominem. I would recommend you check out Alex Jones. As he says in his latest documentary “The owner of the complex admitted on a PBS documentary that he took the decision to pull building 7 and yet I am called a crank for saying the official report is nonsense?”

Ok, 400 of the relatives of those killed are currently trying to bring a lawsuit against Bush and his administration with regard 9/11. Firefighters are trying to sue. Hardly the “conspiracy theory community” but I don’t blame you: mainstream media pays no attention to these facts.

A hugely respected firefighters publication printed an article that detailed how ridiculous the official story was and they actually fought to release taped communications between firemen on the day that disproved the official version.

Compare this to the so-called academic and mainstream media: for example, the Popular Mechanics Magazine rebuttal of the conspiracy theories. This ‘article’ was written by the cousin of the Secretary for Homeland Security.

Look at the kind of thing the mainstream news now features: Rush Limbaugh, Ann ■■■■■■■ Coultier… it is propoganda.

Ok:

There are on-record details of wargame drills practiced over the Twin Towers in the weeks (and the very morning of 9/11).
John Ashcroft warned not to fly on 9/11.
First attack on WTC years ago has been officially aknowledged as a guy trained and equipped by the CIA.
Alex Jones urged people to call the White House on his July 2001 show and tell them “if we are attacked, we know you did it”
Employees of Odigo, an Israel based text messaging company, did not show up for work on 9/11 because they were warned.
Building 7 fits the description of a demolition.

Just check out Alex Jones’s stuff.

REPEAT: Building 7 was not hit by an airliner, yet it still collapsed entirely. There is no sensible or logical explanation for this: even the official FEMA report stated that even their best theory had a low probabilility of occuring. Before further research could be carried away all the evidence was removed from the site.

Also, I’m not sure why you think it is a “ridiculous” idea that the government was involved in 9/11 when it has been stated on-record by the Project for a New American Century (inc. Wolfowitz and co) that:

“A new Pearl Harbour would greatly increase the speed of the process we have set in motion” (paraphrased)

Just ask “who stands to benefit?”

Alex Jones was on Waking Life. :smile: He was the loud cab driver that spoke through a bull horn.

popularmechanics.com/science … page=1&c=y

Relic: That Popular Mechanics article was written by the cousin of the Secretary for Homeland Defense. It is a propaganda piece featuring several pieces of wrong information, most glaringly the complete falsification of the history of air intercepts in the USA. The article claims there has only ever been ONE case (Pain Stewarts plane going off course) when in reality there have been hundreds in the past few years. Anyway, if you consider who wrote it the motivation behind it becomes clear and the strawman arguments are easily identified.

Alex Jones considers it a “hit piece” and dealt with it on his show.