9/11 staged by the US evidence video

[Grem]

I don't really care, as much as I do love conspiracy theorys, I have learned something, discuss your theorys all you want, you will never find answers.

 

[Chasym]

Hey, don't forget to go see The Da Vinci Code this weekend so you can have another silly conspiracy theory to talk about as if it were (pardon the pun) gospel.

actually ive felt the way the davinci code does long before it existed, from several history videos ive seen on history channel and in books i read, that was around before davinci code and has existed for years in underground french religions. the movie wont show me anything new.

 

[Chasym]

In response to Bush's reaction at the school on 9/11 from bowlingfortruth.com

Really it wouldn't have made any difference. Yes, he is an important person. However, our government functions and reacts without the President. The president is a diplomat, policy maker, and figure head. He isn't an emergency response coordinator (would you even want him doing that? :shok. Like the quote says, we would likely be more concerned if he jumped and ran off unphazed within seconds of hearing it. He's there to give comforting speechs and pick a long term response. The immidiate was already being handled and really not his place to micro manage.

ive discussed this with many friends. And just sitting there was the by far dumbest thing he could have done. And no he didnt have to jump up and storm out to impress anyone either.
a simple, "Im sorry to cut this so short, But something very urgent has come up. I'm sorry but im going to have to ask to reschedule this another time"
would have been quite the intelligent and leadership like way to go. theres not much ridicule in politley leaving without causing panic, next to just sitting there like a moron.

 

[Chasym]

I don't really care, as much as I do love conspiracy theorys, I have learned something, discuss your theorys all you want, you will never find answers.

this i know, the video they released of the pentagon the other day is funny if they want me to believe that lil thing is the nose of a plane lolz.
Now what about the other 84 pentagon videos they wont release from lock n key...hmm.
glad some people are filing criminal investigations on this crap and going to court of the rights of information.
But our government seems to be immune to lil laws like that when they really dont wanna show something.

 

[Chasym]

http://8200n.com/unbelievable3/unbelievable3.html

heres a funny conspiracy thing, laughed myself, the first one i couldnt really make out, the second one took me a min but the add upside down looks like a guy scratching his crotch.
and the cradle of filth song played backwards is just creepy as all get up...

 

[Halifirien]

yeah rones posted that link too, but im the kind of person who doesnt always go for the scientific explanation. Not saying its not right or that its wrong, but science tries to find an explanation to debunk anything, ghosts, aliens,why MJ touches little boys. i dont believe science has an explanation for everything and for me, some of the things in this case is one of those times.

I missed this gem while I was glancing over the thread, but it's pretty much the red flag that says "Why bother discussing this topic?" If you have an opinion/belief that collapses under the weight of evidence to the contrary and your only response is "Yeah, but I believe it anyway," there's not much point in wasting breath on it. I feel guilty for even popping into this thread.

I'm out.

 

[Stirce]

So the plane can crash into the pentegon and be incinerated and almost go through the whole building. But hit the twin towers and almost hang out the side? I dont know what really happened that day, I know what I belive and I belive the goverment if feeding us alot of smoke and mirrors. there are some things I just dont understand, 1) Why did that other building fall next to the towers fall?
2) goverment has the video of the so called plane hitting the pentegon but they only show the so called nose of the plane. Why not show the plane just before It hits the pentegon?
3) Ive never understood why the towers feel so neatly, see that the plane crashed into the side of it you would think it would of feel that way first even if just alil bit see that the suports would of gave out over there first? maybe im wrong but it looks alot like smoke and mirrors to me.

 

[Chasym]

I missed this gem while I was glancing over the thread, but it's pretty much the red flag that says "Why bother discussing this topic?" If you have an opinion/belief that collapses under the weight of evidence to the contrary and your only response is "Yeah, but I believe it anyway," there's not much point in wasting breath on it. I feel guilty for even popping into this thread.

I'm out.

actually no thats not saying lets not discuss it. Science isnt always right is my point, science can be just as much a theory as anything. Hell im gonna flash back to science class and use a familiar term that goes something like "Scientific Theory". Since there is no certain way to know exactly what happened in a situation like this till you ask god itself. There have been some valid points that have made me think, well hmm maybe in that certain spot that makes more sense.
but overall i still believe the official story is not the 100% true story, regardless of a conspiracy are not. There is certainly more to it than they will ever let out.

 

[Tagrineth]

So the plane can crash into the pentegon and be incinerated and almost go through the whole building. But hit the twin towers and almost hang out the side? I dont know what really happened that day, I know what I belive and I belive the goverment if feeding us alot of smoke and mirrors. there are some things I just dont understand, 1) Why did that other building fall next to the towers fall?
2) goverment has the video of the so called plane hitting the pentegon but they only show the so called nose of the plane. Why not show the plane just before It hits the pentegon?
3) Ive never understood why the towers feel so neatly, see that the plane crashed into the side of it you would think it would of feel that way first even if just alil bit see that the suports would of gave out over there first? maybe im wrong but it looks alot like smoke and mirrors to me.

This is rapidly becoming a pet peeve of mine.

Please read the thread and the info referenced / linked from it pertaining to the discussion before posting, as there have been several links which explain the WTC's collapse in great detail.

 

[Stirce]

This is rapidly becoming a pet peeve of mine.

Please read the thread and the info referenced / linked from it pertaining to the discussion before posting, as there have been several links which explain the WTC's collapse in great detail.

I have read, http://brian.carnell.com/archives/years/2001/11/000021.html.

http://architecture.about.com/library/weekly/aawtc-collapse.htm

They have theories and hypothesis. They talk about how strong that steel was, and that it was the floor falling on top of the other floors that made the building fall so evenly. alot of it was blamed on the fire reaching 1,300-1,4000 degrees F.
but there were reports of fire fighters up there on these floors, these fire fighters talked as if the fire wasnt that much of a raging infernal. Now even if it was the steel being weakened by the extreme heat and the floors falling on top of each other why were there no bottem layers of steel still sticking up? why did the building not tip at all when the weak layers started falling on top of the stronger lower layers. maybe its just me but it just doesnt fit all so neatly as they say it does.

 

[Solitia]

Ugh, just skimming this topic at work pissed me off.

Thanks to Trippy for at least putting up the "non-mainstream" viewpoint without sounding like a moron. I'd use the "Thank You!" feature but I loathe it.

To Chasym, who believes in science when it's put in a conspiracy theorist's video as a "plausible simulated destruction" via a controlled demonstration, and not when it's in any video that opposes what he's decided for himself to be true: I don't think you're really winning anyone over to your argument here by saying that such-and-such video is finally "evidence" and that you have known the Truth ever since you saw it on the History Channel and in underground religious ceremonies (re: DaVinci Code).

You opened a can of worms by saying that you had evidence. That means people want you to deal in facts, not rumor-mongering or sensationalism. You're going to have to do a lot better than this if you want me to think you're not just a nut.

 

[Vandoura]

Uh Vand, the plane was moving about 250mph. Some of the explosion went into the building unlike the video you showed of a fighter jet crashing into a cement wall, this wasn't a cement wall that reflected everything outward. What new video are you talking about? I have seen nothing on the major outlets and all the conspiracy sites are still showing the same 3-5 frames that don't show anything but the explosion.

If anyone is going to argue it wasn't the boeing that hit the pentagon, their theory needs to answer the 4 questions I posted and Stouter quoted again.

hmmm i though they have added more frame toward it but oh well, i wanna see the hotal camera part official should release it. *wait 40 years*, all right finally release it!

 

[Tagrineth]

I have read, http://brian.carnell.com/archives/years/2001/11/000021.html.

http://architecture.about.com/library/weekly/aawtc-collapse.htm

They have theories and hypothesis. They talk about how strong that steel was, and that it was the floor falling on top of the other floors that made the building fall so evenly. alot of it was blamed on the fire reaching 1,300-1,4000 degrees F.
but there were reports of fire fighters up there on these floors, these fire fighters talked as if the fire wasnt that much of a raging infernal. Now even if it was the steel being weakened by the extreme heat and the floors falling on top of each other why were there no bottem layers of steel still sticking up? why did the building not tip at all when the weak layers started falling on top of the stronger lower layers. maybe its just me but it just doesnt fit all so neatly as they say it does.

It's pretty simple really. Strong lower layers vs. several hundred thousand tons of "stuff" falling down all at once.

 

[Firestreak]

actually no thats not saying lets not discuss it. Science isnt always right is my point, science can be just as much a theory as anything. Hell im gonna flash back to science class and use a familiar term that goes something like "Scientific Theory". Since there is no certain way to know exactly what happened in a situation like this till you ask god itself. There have been some valid points that have made me think, well hmm maybe in that certain spot that makes more sense.
but overall i still believe the official story is not the 100% true story, regardless of a conspiracy are not. There is certainly more to it than they will ever let out.

Science has no core set of beliefs it is only a methodology. Something is always considered a theory unless it can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. No one can prove to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that the towers fell right because you(and me) are not educated in the actual physics that we'd need to understand to be explained this.

However mountains of other people who ARE educated this way tell me that this is how the tower was supposed to fall, so I have the choice to believe people who for a living study incidents such as these, or I can believe kids in their basement who are majors in film and politically WANT to blame people who had nothing to do with the attacks except a failure to prevent them.

It's just like the JFK assasination. When the last bullet hit his head, he had was blown into the direction that the bullet struck him.

Idiots have for decades taken this to mean there was a second gunman. Scientists have been able to show why this happened and replicate in expiraments, but people who prefer to believe the conspiracy are not interested in such things.

If evidence means nothing to you that contradicts your view, then stop showing evidence that supports your view. I'm not interested in hearing about another problem with the "cover" that's been long since refuted and nobody cares about. If you don't care about evidence because it shows you're wrong, then stop showing bad evidence yourself. Just say, "I believe the government is responsible because I'm paranoid and I really hate George Bush and want everyone else to too."

Forget all the DNA evidence. Forget the billion witnesses. Forget it was broadcast live all over CNN. Forget the detailed explanations of what happened by trained experts in the fields that study it. Forget the passengers who for some reason never came home, their families who have formed lobbying organizations and are all over the press... no... because..

"I don't think the towers would fall like that, i mean they should fall over come on it common sense!"

 

[Torqameda]

Again, I'm gonna put my 2 cents into this...

As the first post (the one that started this says) that there is evdience that the government may have staged the whole thing. And as the thread has progressed, many people have swayed both ways with opinions on this paticular topic. I, personally, am not politcal at all, and completely doubt that Pres. Bush, or any other branch of the government could possible stage a wide-scale event causing the massive loss of life. However, there is much ambiguity to this topic. In past history, governments of many nations have done horid things to create scenarios in their favor. So, could it possibly, or remotely be true? Yes- but I see very little evidence that proves it is true. When I first heard about this idea in a topic, and I questioned it for a minute, and then did some research myself. Many people who believe in this theory are people who have watched "Farenheit 911". This paticular movie has SOME facts to it. But most of the movie are baised, politcal motivated clips. Argue all you want, that fact is that if you are a "Farenheit 911" fanatic, I would recommend you to the movie, "Celsius 411", or a similar title to that name. This movie was a counter-action employed to counter "Farenheit 911" and put down its theories. With that out of the way, I would like to say that never doubt anything. It could be possible that this conspiracy has truth to it, but I doubt it. And furthermore, if you need/want to put down the president, or any form of government, get your facts straight. There was a miscommunication in the intelligence for the government; inspectors reported that there was a possiblity of WMD's in Iraw; Afghanistan was needed to be cleansed of its terrorist organizations; Yes, Pres. Bush irresponsibly went to war with Iraq without the discretion of congress, and bypassed several U.N treaties, which thank all that is holy, were not nullified because of his actions. But Iraq was key, but had nothing to do with 9/11. And it's also not a matter about if Iraq is a bad or good thing. It's now about getting the troops home. The revelance with this and 9/11 is that the Bush Administration has faced more perils than most presidents have. And everyone makes mistakes, all presidents have made mistakes, some which made the nation pay so dear. But to place blame on the government for 9/11 is very doubtful, and seems that there would be no reason to do it. Again, I am not a Bush Lover, nor am I a hater. I am a seeker for the truth, and I feel that do not place blame, hate, and distrust on something if you do not know all the facts. And that's my 2 cents...

 

[Stirce]

It's pretty simple really. Strong lower layers vs. several hundred thousand tons of "stuff" falling down all at once.

Well thinking like that the towers should of fallen from day one. Now i could of understood a few floors falling down even the top of the building falling off but the whole building falling all the way to the ground. Sorry just dont work for me. Now I might be wrong but wasnt the south tower hit 2nd but fell first? but they both took about 10 secs to fall?

 

[Pelori]

Here's another plausable explanation for ya'll.... ALIENS DID IT. It's just as plausable as the anyone else. Science hasnt disporven the possiblity of ALiens, and maybe they thought twin falic symbols standing by each other was gay or something.......

My point is this, sure it's possible that our gov caused or let 9/11 happen. It is also possible that Islamic terroists did it as well. In the end it doesnt change what happened, several thousand people lost their lives sensesly and for nothing. Even if the "truth" whatever it may be came out, that will change nothing, people will still have died. ANd even if said truth came to light, there will still be people who disbelieve, even if god/alla/jehova/shiva/buddha came and said it him/herself, people will still say "well was that really god and can we belive him/her".

Ya'll are trying to point blame, but perhaps you should see how horrid this event was and try and do your part to educate furture generations that this was wrong, in hope that maybe in the furture our children and there children and there children will think and events like this wont happen. Optimistic and unrealistic is this, but one can dream.

 

[Rones]

Stirce, please read all of the thread. Your questions have been thorougly answered already, several times, because its the same questions/theories getting posted over and over again.

hmmm i though they have added more frame toward it

They can't add what doesn't exist. It was a fast moving object and not a high speed camera. So it didn't get that many frames of it.

 

[Tagrineth]

Well thinking like that the towers should of fallen from day one. Now i could of understood a few floors falling down even the top of the building falling off but the whole building falling all the way to the ground. Sorry just dont work for me. Now I might be wrong but wasnt the south tower hit 2nd but fell first? but they both took about 10 secs to fall?

Put it this way. The buildings were hit somewhere in the middle sections. From there, an inferno began, complete with white-hot jet fuel flowing down the cracks, so to speak, and terrifyingly hot flames. Not necessarily a lot of fire, but extremely hot fire.

Eventually, as the structure on the impact floor weakens, a breaking point is reached where that floor is no longer able to sustain the hundred or so STORIES of TOWER above it. Thus, everything above comes straight down, collapsing the all but destroyed floor.

The floor directly below has already been weakened considerably by the fire and the heat being carried by jet fuel. It collapses immediately under the weight of a few thousand tons of steel, concrete, and other miscellaneous materials falling onto it.

The next floor has not been weakened as much, but still is structurally unsound after many minutes of intense heat. It collapses instantly as well.

At this point, between 1/4 and 1/2 of the tower is now falling straight down, and has built up some inertia.

At least one more floor was likely still weakened, causing it to collapse almost immediately, allowing even more inertia to build up in the thousands of tons... which are still falling straight down.

Enter: the structurally sound floor. By the time a few - even as low as 3-4 - floors have collapsed instantly, allowing the top end of the tower to fall, there is so much inertia, such an extremely gigantic amount of kinetic energy built up, that the first structurally sound floor - though it may not break instantly like the floors above it - will break very fast under the fast-moving, terrifyingly heavy half-a-TOWER falling onto it.

Note also that the first structurally sound floor also had to deal with a solid block of compacted "stuff" - not a hollow leading floor - from the previous, unsound floors being collapsed onto each other, increasing the force of the impact and increasing the likelihood that the first structurally sound floor will give way.

Once the first structurally sound floor has been collapsed, what do you think the logical result will be?


On top of everything else, as the floors are crashing downward, they are blowing materials outward due to the massive impacts - chunks of concrete. Desks. Chairs. Computers. Pillars. Steel support beams. Showers of glass. In videos, one can clearly see also that the first tower to fall did not fall straight down; the top end of the tower tips slightly on the way down.

A portion of the ejected materials likely struck the other tower, and the shocks from the various floors being crushed under the absurd weight of a few dozen floors of concrete and steel would've shaken the very foundation of the two towers, which could have easily been transferred through the weakened foundation up the neighbouring tower, which could easily have caused the impact floor to collapse sooner, as well as exacerbating the weakened condition of the floors below.


This is what my family and I conjectured on 9/11/2001. Even without reading the more scientific, more professional analyses linked in this thread, could you accept this as a reasonable explanation?

 

[masterorion]

Well thinking like that the towers should of fallen from day one. Now i could of understood a few floors falling down even the top of the building falling off but the whole building falling all the way to the ground. Sorry just dont work for me. Now I might be wrong but wasnt the south tower hit 2nd but fell first? but they both took about 10 secs to fall?

actually, no. think of it this way...you can stand on a soda/pop can that doesnt have a dent in it. you can stand on it until a dent (small tap by an outside object) is put into the can, then it crushes under the weight. think of this as the towers. the 4 outside steal beams are perfectly straight until a plane collides with it, after that, its nothing but a matter of time until the structure collapses under teh weight above it.