9/11 conspiracies. Really, they still exist?

[Seanchaidh]

A Tin and aluminium air plane cant force a concrete down or create an explosion force that huge is not possible without help from the government. And friend that
was in the Air force told me this and he knows this stuff for sure .

Is he a metallurgist? That's the guy I'd trust to make such a conclusion, because he'd be the kind of guy who'd know that steel can bend when it's hot even when it's not melted. Let's say by jet fuel. Now I'm no blacksmith, but I'm pretty sure a metal doesn't need to be liquid to be pliable, and I'm also pretty sure a building that weighs one metric fuckton would be able to replicate the force of some guy swinging a hammer. The metal starts to bend and maybe break, the floor collapses and the entire weight of the building above that floor slams into the floor below it, and then that one's support blows out and even more weight falls on the next floor until the whole thing is down.

Your friend is right, though, that just tin and aluminum wouldn't do that to the building. And... if your friend was paying attention, he'd have noticed that tin and aluminum didn't do that to the building, otherwise it would've fallen immediately as the jets collided. No, the suspect chemical here is pure unadulterated hydrocarbon.

 

[Private Custard]

I strongly believe that an airliner did not hit the Pentagon. The damage was not wide or tall enough. Plus, the FBI removed surveillance tapes that would have shown the impact clear as day and only released this as proof.

Definately not a 757 flying 10ft above the ground at 400mph by a man that was branded completely useless by his light aircraft instructors!

I also believe that if you ignore all the evidence for this theory, you are a blinkered fool!

 

[mooncalf]

I agree wholeheartedly that conspiracy theories are more often than not a whole load of BS not worth paying attention to. Facts though...

The US supplied Al Qaeda with funds (at least) to run the Soviets out of Afghanistan. Saddam bought weapons from the US even while slaughtering Kurds. I don't need conspiracy theories, the undisputed historical facts are horrific enough. But I recognise that when I say "The US", I don't mean it's well-meaning citizenry, just the evil men and women who've been leading them on murderous wild goose chases and witch hunts.

 

[Bigeyez]

I strongly believe that an airliner did not hit the Pentagon. The damage was not wide or tall enough. Plus, the FBI removed surveillance tapes that would have shown the impact clear as day and only released this as proof.

Definately not a 757 flying 10ft above the ground at 400mph by a man that was branded completely useless by his light aircraft instructors!

I also believe that if you ignore all the evidence for this theory, you are a blinkered fool!

Where is there a scale on how wide or tall a hole in a building is when a plane hits it?....

Oh wait there isn't one. You have no idea what a plane hitting a building would do. This theory in particular is the most amusing because it doesn't even try to throw a fact, or misconception out there. It simply says "oh look that hole is too small, nope a plane didn't hit that".

Last time I checked you don't really need to be that good at flying to crash a plane either. All these hijackers had to do was grab the yoke and steer the planes. They could have had zero flight experience and done it.

-------

Well all I have to say is, if it wasn't an inside job why the fuck won't the US government release a true and factual account of what happened? The reports that were released were incomplete, some of which were outright lies and there was a lot of cover up involved. Not to mention that there has been a denial of information release on many of the points of 9/11.

Also...why was there an invasion of Afghanistan plan drafted and ready to roll out before 9/11 happened?

I think that there's a lot of people out there that are too scared to think that there is something more sinister going on. What's too out there to believe that there was a more underlying motive for the invasion of Afghanistan? Iraq followed with as little truthful information and look at what that achieved. Huge increase in profits for companies with ties to the white house Administration, securing of major oil centres in the region and more BS to justify the continually rising death count of US troops and Iraqi citizens, and the worlds condemnation for it.

The Gov't did release a report. Along with DOZENS of other REAL experts/investigators. The only ones saying it's a conspiracy are the loose change guys and other completely unqualified people on the internet.

Afghanistan? We knew it was a problem before 9/11. Thats beside the point anyway because it's the U.S. militarys job to come up with military planning with a possible enemy BEFORE we go to war. It's called being prepared.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11...thats a whole other can of worms.

So i was bored and went on youtube watching commentaries for south park, and i listen to the one about the "mystery of the urinal deuce" and down below i see comments from people saying that it was the government that planted bombs in the building and that it wasnt planes that crashed into the buildings. Really? There are still retards out there that dont believe that terrorists were the ones who blew up the two towers? The biggest arguement being "fire cant melt steel". If i remember right i think thats how they made swords back in the dark ages. I dunno, im a bit tired at the moment so i cant remember the melting point of steel, but ya, i dont believe any of these conspiracies about 9/11, what about you ppls?

just watch zeitgeist they prove it was the government, also your omly talking about the world trade center what about shanksville and the pentagon you cant expect me to believe a whole plane was vaporized by fire and the bodies where still identifiable. also what about world trade center 7 3 buildings collapsed and the plane didnt even touch 7

Building 7 collapsed from the damage it sustained when the towers fell...

The plane that hit the Pentagon wasn't "vaporized". Thats a line only conspiracy theorists say. It was completely and utterly destroyed and in a million pieces but thats just it, there were still pieces left. The plane didn't just up and vanish. Oh and you also know that you can identify a body pretty easily as long as you can grab dental records right. Bodies that have been burned beyond any physical recognition are indentified like that. Same goes to bodies of people who have been dead for ages. It really doesn't take much to do it.

--------

I'm sick of hearing about 9/11, I live in Australia and it's still talked about quite often, I know the incidents a tragity. But there have been worse things around, recently even. So I don't see why I should be concerned with conspiracy therioes

Pssssh don't you know? We're the United, FUCK YEAH, States of, FUCK YEAH, America! Our Tragedies are bigger, badder, deadlier, then anyone elses tragedy! Becuase just like our Cars, Boats, Guns, and Women thats how we do things in the God Damn U.S. of A!

/lol

 

[Sick boy]

I'm sick of hearing about 9/11, I live in Australia and it's still talked about quite often, I know the incidents a tragity. But there have been worse things around, recently even. So I don't see why I should be concerned with conspiracy therioes

 

[Cubilone]

When I'm saying US is a police state, I don't mean it is officially a police state. What I've heard from a friend of mine who lives in Michigan is that people call the cops for no reason at all, this is very different from the attitude I'm used to here in Southern Europe (and most of Europe). And the cops are really overzealous about their jobs. That, together with the notion that "security" is above all, is sickening. Do you know what is needed to travel to the US nowadays? An f'ing INTERVIEW to prove that you are safe to enter the country and not a terrorist. What?? You must be joking.

As for everything people have replied to what I've said about terrorists and the media: you have created an image of a terrorist that is far from the truth. It is incredible how widely it is believed that a group of people really want to destroy the US, all in the name of... what? What is their motive? Historical terrorists such as the assassin of Franz Ferdinand, were then deemed anarchists, very different from the shadowy islamic figure with suicidal tendencies of today; even that incident has never been fully tracked down to its roots. It was never found out who actually paid for Franz Ferdinand's assassination, and it wasn't the Serbs. And you say that the media is not government controlled? Then why is information about 9/11 censored? How is it possible for most media outlets to report the same news stories while avoiding others? How come, for instance, no media groups are reporting how bloated a story swine flu is? Hm.

About forging/planting/somehow changing evidence: the US government would want to prove their casus beli, it's only natural they'd warp the story so it seems tangible. "Conspiracy theorists" wouldn't have a problem if there were no contradictions anywhere... You have to take the means into account here as well.

As for Hitler's quote (it could be anybody), that the bigger the lie, the more people believe in it, how many of you saying that it's not a valid argument are atheists...?

Believe me, I am open to ideas and discussion. The official 9/11 is fishy any way you look at it. Instead of discussion, I always find hate and contempt when trying to really see what the the real arguments of "debunkers" are. When they say that counter-evidence is Conspiracy Theorist bullcrap, how can there be discussion? The gif above? Building 7's freefall? Bush's delay to act? I only hear you people talking about steel, citing different facts each. Why not look at the bigger picture?

 

[Iron Mal]

There are always going to be conspiricies about major events like this, hell, JFK was assassinated around four decades ago yet we still have people who dedicate a large portion of their time to investigating the infamous grassy knoll.

If there is still that much dedication to JFK then what's going to stop people looking into 9/11?

 

[Private Custard]

OK, just to clear things up. If a plane hits a building, it WILL create a hole the same size as the plane, you simply cannot argue with that, it's simple!

Before the section of the pentagon collapsed, there was a hole not even big enough for the fuselage of an airliner, let alone the damage the wings (with two huge engines) and tail would have done to the surrounding walls.

I'll say it again. If you ignore the evidence, you are a fool.

 

[TheFacelessOne]

As long as there is humanity, there will be stupidty.

Simple. As. That.

Conspirasists just need something nicer to believe than having the thought that terrorists could do the same thing again, just as easily.

They won't stop, not even if you shove a video showing the planes, clear as day, hitting and destroying the buildings.

Just ignore them, and let them continue their rant.

 

[Bigeyez]

*snip because it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand*

As for everything people have replied to what I've said about terrorists and the media: you have created an image of a terrorist that is far from the truth. It is incredible how widely it is believed that a group of people really want to destroy the US, all in the name of... what? What is their motive? Historical terrorists such as the assassin of Franz Ferdinand, were then deemed anarchists, very different from the shadowy islamic figure with suicidal tendencies of today; even that incident has never been fully tracked down to its roots. It was never found out who actually paid for Franz Ferdinand's assassination, and it wasn't the Serbs. And you say that the media is not government controlled? Then why is information about 9/11 censored? How is it possible for most media outlets to report the same news stories while avoiding others? How come, for instance, no media groups are reporting how bloated a story swine flu is? Hm.

About forging/planting/somehow changing evidence: the US government would want to prove their casus beli, it's only natural they'd warp the story so it seems tangible. "Conspiracy theorists" wouldn't have a problem if there were no contradictions anywhere... You have to take the means into account here as well.

As for Hitler's quote (it could be anybody), that the bigger the lie, the more people believe in it, how many of you saying that it's not a valid argument are atheists...?

Believe me, I am open to ideas and discussion. The official 9/11 is fishy any way you look at it. Instead of discussion, I always find hate and contempt when trying to really see what the the real arguments of "debunkers" are. When they say that counter-evidence is Conspiracy Theorist bullcrap, how can there be discussion? The gif above? Building 7's freefall? Bush's delay to act? I only hear you people talking about steel, citing different facts each. Why not look at the bigger picture?

Ok let me break this down for you. Why would Al-Qaeda want to attack us? Well if you pop open your history book you would see that during the russian skirmishes in Afghanastain we were supplying what would become Al-Qaeda with weapons, money, and training. Bin Laden specifically was one of allies during the conflict. We recognized his knack for leadership and his popularity with the people so we used him and other warlords/nobles to launch our little proxy war against Russia. Finally when the situation was no londer tipping in Americas favor we turned to Bin Laden and the other warlords and said "Oh well guys, it's been fun but your on your own now!, CYA!". Needless to say they didn't take that so well. Every since then Bin Laden and the other Al-Qeada leaders have hated us because we essentially hung them out to dry against the Russians. We used them as cannon fodder for a proxy war and when they started to lose we basically told them "Fuck you" and withdrew all our aid.

THATS why Bin Laden hates America.

"Conspiracy theorists" wouldn't have a problem if there were no contradictions anywhere"

Where? What contradictions? Name them? Oh wait there isn't any. Theorists are funny because they make claims like this without any evidence or facts to back them up.

When they say that counter-evidence is Conspiracy Theorist bullcrap, how can there be discussion? The gif above? Building 7's freefall? Bush's delay to act? I only hear you people talking about steel, citing different facts each. Why not look at the bigger picture?

What counter evidence? WHERE IS THERE A SCRAP OF EVIDENCE THAT HINTS AT THE US GOV'T BEING BEHIND THE ATTACKS???. There isn't any.

What does the gif above prove? It shows an object flying at high speed hitting the pentagon...thats it. It's a low budget security camera thats running at too slow a speed to really show anythign in detail. Thats why it really doesn't fucking matter how many security cameras the pentagon had. None of them would have been able to show more then what that camera did. We're talking about a plane going over 400 miles an hour. Nothing short of a Hi-speed professional camera would have been able to clearly show the plane. I really doubt the Pentagon has a fleet of hi-speed cameras watching their parking lots and entrances...

Again buiilding 7 collapsed due to the damage it sustained from the towers falling. Damage it sustained includes the shrapnel from the towers themselves doing damage to the outer building structure and the shockwave caused by the fall of the towers further weakening the building. Those two factors combined with enough time passing by and the weakened outer structure of the building could no longer support itself and it collapsed. Remember supports and structures weaken over time. Thats why in many earthquakes building don't always fall down during the earthquake itself but hours or even days after.

But again who wants to listen to facts when someone spins an interesting story.

-------------

OK, just to clear things up. If a plane hits a building, it WILL create a hole the same size as the plane, you simply cannot argue with that, it's simple!

Before the section of the pentagon collapsed, there was a hole not even big enough for the fuselage of an airliner, let alone the damage the wings (with two huge engines) and tail would have done to the surrounding walls.

I'll say it again. If you ignore the evidence, you are a fool.

Except that we don't know exactly how the plane hit the Pentagon. The low quality security cameras in the area simply couldn't show exaclty how the plane hit the building. All they show is an object hitting the building.

We can simply infer from the damage however that the plane hit the pentagon at an angle and not flat on. Once impacted the plane pretty much tore itself to relatively "tiny" pieces.

 

[Cubilone]

I can agree with the "as long as there is humanity, there will be stupidity" notion...

 

[Private Custard]

The simple fact remains that no matter what angle the plane supposedly hit the pentgon, said plane has wings that would have damaged the exterior of the building.

You can argue with me until you're blue in the face, you'll never alter fact........planes have wings.

 

[v3n0mat3]

I have personally went through and picked apart every single bit of misinformation that these conspiracy theorists presented. It's pretty sad that these are just college kids who hate Bush (not saying that I like him either) so they are making up rumors about him. Like, for example, the rumor that Bush's family provided the fuel that fueled the Nazi aircraft in WWII. Completely baseless. Completely retarded. Obvious propaganda.

 

[Bigeyez]

The simple fact remains that no matter what angle the plane supposedly hit the pentgon, said plane has wings that would have damaged the exterior of the building.

You can argue with me until you're blue in the face, you'll never alter fact........planes have wings.

Lol ok lets do an experiement. Take your remote control and lay it flat out on a table. Measure how long it is. My remote control is about 6 inches long. Ok take that remote and lift one side of the remote control so that it is at about say a idk 60 degree angle pointing up away from the table..

Now mesaure the distance across your desk that the remote control now covers. *GASP* WHATS THIS? The remote control now covers a distance of about 5 inches instead of 6!!!! ZOMGZWTFBBQHOLYCONSPIRACYTHEORYBATMAN!!!

How is it possible that a 6 inch long remote control only covers 5 inches of distance on my desk??? Angles, my dear boy, angles.

 

[Private Custard]

We're not talking a minor discrepancy here Bigeyez, before the side of the Pentagon collapsed, there was a nice tidy hole, not even big enough for the fuselage.

Seriously, you can carry on trying to hammer a massive square peg into a tiny round hole, it's not possible.

 

[Bigeyez]

We're not talking a minor discrepancy here Bigeyez, before the side of the Pentagon collapsed, there was a nice tidy hole, not even big enough for the fuselage.

Seriously, you can carry on trying to hammer a massive square peg into a tiny round hole, it's not possible.

How big was the hole? How big was the fuselage of the plane? You don't know do you?

How would the loose change people know? Did they go onsite and measure the hole? Were they part of the investigation team and found out how big the entry hole was?

No they made a bullshit assumption based on news footage taken out from the highways overlooking the pentagon. Now if you've ever been trained to measure distance by eyesight only (which the loose change guys aren't nor did they ask anyone that was) you'd know it's pretty damn hard to try and guessimate the length of something perpindicular to your position, even moreso if your hunreds of yards away from said object which the news trucks were. So their "the hole was too small" argument is flawed from the start because they don't know how big the hole was.

But thats ok, you go ahead and keep believing what you want to believe. Keep ignoring facts and evidence disputing you, it's ok.

 

[Private Custard]

You'll never persuade me that a plane flew into a building and somehow managed to not touch it with its wings, never.

I'm not saying a plane didn't hit the pentagon, but it was something a shitload smaller than a 757!

We may as well stop discussing it to be honest.

 

[Laughing Man]

They did do it them slefs. A Tin and aluminium air plane cant force a concrete down or create an explosion force that huge is not possible without help from the government. And friend that
was in the Air force told me this and he knows this stuff for sure .

So because he is in the airforce he is an expert in the effects of passenger airliners crashing into multistory buildings? Sounds more like he is an expert in total bullshit.

Have you ever seen the documentry "Loose Change ?" look it up on youtube because it perfectly explains how 9/11 was a inside job with great detail.

Since when have works of pie sky theoretical fiction been worthy of being called a documentary? I've seen it if you want to see the works of a mental patient and not feel guilty at having a laugh then loose change is the film for you.

1,148 °C (2,098 °F)=Normal Steel Melts at
210 °C (410 °F)=Highest point Jet fuel Burns at

What's the deal with people quoting the burning temp of jet fuel vs the melting point of steel? Steel does not have melt to become weak, you only need a fraction of the melting temp to compromise the integrity of the steel.

OK, just to clear things up. If a plane hits a building, it WILL create a hole the same size as the plane, you simply cannot argue with that, it's simple!

Really is it, shall I prove you totally wrong with one very simple video, ok here goes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--_RGM4Abv8

That plane was totally destroyed and the wall was totally undamaged, last time I checked the Pentagon was a key military structure so while it may not have the same building construction as the wall of a nuclear power station it would still have had a significant level of reinforcement. So NO a plane hitting a building DOES NOT create a hole the same size as the aircraft, infact it may not even create a hole at all.

The fact is Occam's razor says it best; in the absence of all other evidence the simplest explanation is often the best. I'll leave you to decide which of the many theories and options would, given what we know, be the simplest.

 

[Bigeyez]

This is a discussion? I'm providing you with evidence to back up what I'm saying and your simply saying "Nope, didn't happen". Not much of a discussion there. Oh and where did I say the wings never touched the building...But alas your right when you say we might as well stop talking about this. It's obviously a waste of time.