Anyone hear of the 9/11 conspiricy? - Documentary [UPDATED]

> http//www.seeloosechange.com
[quote1a4ce4ff1d]The documentary you are about to see, Loose Change [2nd Edition ReCut], will prove that what happened on September 11, 2001 was no act done by nineteen hijackers affiliated with Al Qaeda, nor a plan implemented by Osama Bin Laden. Instead, the infamous event was a cold, calculated, and malicious attack on the American people carried out by a group of tyrants ready and willing to do whatever it takes to keep their strangled hold on this country; [b1a4ce4ff1d]9/11 was a self-inflicted wound[/b1a4ce4ff1d].

All that is asked of you when viewing this documentary is to watch it with an open mind--set aside your political beliefs for an hour and a half. Remember, this documentary is only an eye-opener; new evidence of the inside-job is revealed each and every day. Therefore, when you are finished with the video, please take the time and further investigate by pointing your browser to Universal Seed and the Loose Change Forums.

So, what are you waiting for? See the documentary in which well over 30 Million "Truth-Seakers" like yourself have seen.[/quote1a4ce4ff1d]
> http//video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501&hl=en

I guess it's a matter of opinion. But after watching that...hmm. Well. I don't know.

I don't want to start a political debate. But watch it, if you havn't seen it yet.

)

Posted before but I can't find the other threads about it.

been posted several times before... someone had a link to a site that had rebuttals to these theories.. worth a read.

repost
http//forum.freeipodguide.com/viewtopic.php?t=37418&highlight=loose+change

Yea, but it's been updated.

wtf why doesn't the search function never work for me, i searched loose change and it didn't give me anything relavent.

Try using the "Search for all terms" option. Otherwise you'll get every thread with any occurrence of the words loose [i1e6603196b]or[/i1e6603196b] change.

i saw this in my tv'video class, i alwyas knew that it was strange that there was no plane debre in the pentagon or P.A. crash...

This thread is going to explode soon I'm sure so I'll get my two cents in. I'm not one to usually believe in conspiracy theories, but this entire situation has question marks all over it. I'm not saying it was a complete inside job, but there are so many 'coincidences' and "what the?"s and I highly doubt there was zero government involvement/knowledge.

For example, flight 93. Debris over an 8 mile radius? I personally beleive it was shot down.

Explosions heard on site at the twin towers?
The only buildings to ever collapse due to fire?

The US government has been involved in these kinds of things before (Lucitania, Pearl Harbor) so there's no reason to believe they wouldn't have involvment here. They benefit from it. $0.02

How was the government involved in Pearl Harbor? I've never heard of anything about that.

[quote7092e8ebe9="burritopunk"]This thread is going to explode soon I'm sure so I'll get my two cents in. I'm not one to usually believe in conspiracy theories, but this entire situation has question marks all over it. I'm not saying it was a complete inside job, but there are so many 'coincidences' and "what the?"s and I highly doubt there was zero government involvement/knowledge.

For example, flight 93. Debris over an 8 mile radius? I personally beleive it was shot down.

Explosions heard on site at the twin towers?
The only buildings to ever collapse due to fire?

The US government has been involved in these kinds of things before (Lucitania, Pearl Harbor) so there's no reason to believe they wouldn't have involvment here. They benefit from it. $0.02[/quote7092e8ebe9]


wait with pearl harbor is it because the U.S. needed an excuse to declare war?

i cant think of anyother reason it would benefit the U.S. and it still seems really extreme

Well, the US knew Japan was going to attack the United States. Eventhough it cost the lives of Americans, it gave them a precedent to enter WWII.

Edit I'm not saying the commander in chief and his staff were sitting in their war room ordering the attack, but possibly turned the other cheek knowing it would justify their position in the war.

I would like to point everyone's attention to this

http//www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons

I really need to refrain from posting in these threads, because it gets my blood pressure up.

There was no 9/11 conspiracy, people. Please. This is OLD news.

And this is a great example of how somebody can start a lie or mistruth, and people will spread it like wildfire.

[bc058e99ca3]There WAS plane debris at the Pentagon.[/bc058e99ca3] Independant reporters, including Jamie McIntyre from CNN, photographed chunks of plane wreckage himself and broadcast them.

All of the Loose Change bullshit has been quite soundly refuted or explained. People really thrive on conspiracy theories, and sometimes they're a lot of fun, but this one really pisses me off because IMO it dishonors those who lost their lives and trivializes the true nature of the incident in order to perpetuate some nutjobs anti-government agenda.

/leaves thread in a huff

I'm pretty sure that one day the loose change guy is gonna come out and laugh and say "it was all a joke and tons of you fell for it, including college professors"

I mean...in loose change, it cites wikipedia as a source

Try writing a scholarly article while citing wikipedia...see if you get published.

maddox.xmission.com he's got his shit down right there.

[quote58de10a502="tylerc"]I would like to point everyone's attention to this

http//www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons[/quote58de10a502]

I see what you mean, but...

Why would the government NOT SAY anything about it? They're like, "Yea, uh...we're not showing you anything."

And the "5 frames" released of the Pentagon being hit, you don't see a plane, nor anything for that matter...lisighli

Whatever. I really don't care. Well I do, all those innocent lives lost, but the Government is a fuckup and corrupt anyways. ) (Not just with 9/11)

it made me think, thats all

Before another 9/11 "The US Placed Nukes at the WTC", "The Government Blew Up The Pentagon With Truck Bomb", "The Administration Knew Months Before", "The Jews Knew About 9/11 & Stayed Away From WTC", "United 93 Was Shot Down" or "Bush Had Sen. Wellstone Killed", "Bush Knew Where Saddam Was Long Before He Was Captured" conspiracy theory thread pops up, I have to post this. It's a great read.

The Questions Conspiracy Theorists Need To Ask Themselves
by John Hawkins

Because I regularly read through offbeat websites in order to compile new editions of "Anyone can post on the internet", I get a lot of opportunities to peruse the latest crackpot conspiracy theories. During any given week I may read about Planet X, the Illuminati / Free Mason / Jewish / (take your pick) plot to rule the world, concentration camps being prepared across America by the military, the "Bush Family Evil Empire", and even lizard people who rule world. If some raving moonbat has come up with it, I've probably run across it at one point or another.

Now if these ridiculous beliefs were relegated to the fringes of society I probably wouldn't bother with writing an editorial to shoot down the thinking behind these theories. However, this sort of bizarre paranoia has crept into "mainstream thinking". Things like the "Jewish Conservatives manipulating the President", "The Republicans rigged the 2002 elections", & "Bush knew (about 9/11)" have been tossed around by people many see as more credible than the average fruit loop writing for these conspiracy websites. That's why I thought it would be worth tossing out a few questions that anyone who starts to buy into these sorts of theories should consider. To begin with…
[b5d9da253d9]
How many people know about this conspiracy?[/b5d9da253d9] It's very difficult to keep any sort of newsworthy conspiracy that hundreds or thousands of people are supposedly involved in out of the mainstream press. Keep in mind that we live in a world where the President can't even get a BJ from an intern without it becoming public knowledge. Even things as sensitive as battle plans for upcoming invasions get into the papers. That's why you should certainly be skeptical of any sort of vast conspiracy that requires people keeping quiet about it indefinitely.
[b5d9da253d9]
How reliable is your source?[/b5d9da253d9] As the ongoing saga with the New York Times has illustrated, the mainstream media is not always completely reliable. However, they're infinitely more trustworthy than people who post anonymously on the net. I'm often surprised to see that people who don't trust one thing that Fox News or the New York Times says will blindly lap up whatever some conspiracy website or moonbat radio talk show host like Art Bell has to say. Yet, even though these sources burn them again and again, their readers still buy into what they have to say. It makes no sense.

[b5d9da253d9]Do you have ready answers for the obvious questions?[/b5d9da253d9] Let's look at a conspiracy that was floating around after 9/11 -- that the Pentagon was hit by a truck bomb, not a plane. Well in that case, what happened to the plane that was hijacked? How could it be that various people WATCHED the plane flying towards the Pentagon? Is it possible that the hundreds of firefighters and military personnel who must have known the truth were somehow silenced? Why would anyone go through such an elaborate charade? If you can't convincingly answer the most basic questions about a conspiracy, then it's tough for the theory you're supporting to hold any water.

[b5d9da253d9]Are you acting as if commonly held beliefs are unique?[/b5d9da253d9] This is one question that a lot of the more "mainstream" conspiracy theorists should ask themselves more often. For example, over the last year and a half we've constantly heard people asserting that beliefs held by a large majority of Republicans are really unique to a handful of Conservative Jews who somehow manipulated Bush into going to war to help Israel. Who the conspiracy theories pick out of the bunch and try to assign sinister motives to in situations like that usually says more about the conspiracy theorist than the person or group they target.
[b5d9da253d9]
Are you relying too much on a handful of contrary facts?[/b5d9da253d9] Rarely do you ever see a story where every fact, "falls into place". By that I mean people's memories are faulty, perceptions differ, politicians spin issues, press biases creep in, things are taken out of context, & typos and factual errors come into play as well. When these things inevitably happen, conspiracy theorists tend to seize a handful of inconsistencies and try to prove that there's a cover-up or conspiracy happening. But, this is just how life works. If you don't believe me, leave a couple of kids alone in a room full of breakables with a football, come back a few minutes after you hear something break, and then separate the kids and ask what happened.
[b5d9da253d9]
Are you being too cynical about the government?[/b5d9da253d9] There's only one thing worse than believing that your government always tells the truth and that's believing that they always lie. If you're willing to buy into any sort of claptrap because you won't put anything past your government, then you're apt to be proven wrong over and over again.

[b5d9da253d9]Shouldn't you be a little more skeptical about those conspiracy theories?[/b5d9da253d9] I've heard some variation of the following from conspiracy theorists, "How can you just dismiss this conspiracy theory out of hand? There have been conspiracies that have turned to be true before so this one could be true as well!" Yes, there have been conspiracy theories that panned out, but very, very, few of them. In fact, if you simply blew off every conspiracy theory that came down the pike you'd rarely ever be wrong. Because of that, conspiracy theories merit a lot of skepticism.

Before you buy into a conspiracy theory, ask yourself these questions and generally -- actually, in almost every case -- you'll find that it doesn't hold water.

Good post, stack.

Another thing that bugs me about the techno-clueless conspiracy theorists, is the idea that because the security cameras at the Pentagon didn't catch a clear image of the jet impacting the building -- only a small vague blur at the edge of one frame, and a flaming building in the next -- that there could have been no plane.

747's travelling at top speed move at almost 900fps. That's 900 FEET PER SECOND. Anybody who knows anything about cameras knows that security cameras in particular are little more than webcams in their framerate and fast motion abilities. There was more than enough time "between" frames for a jet moving that fast to cover the small field of view of the camera in question.

But the diehard theorists don't let such things as common sense and technical facts and limitations get in the way of their ignorant tirades. roll

Maddox takes a handful of the dumb theories that conspirators state and uses those to disqualify any government involvement or knowledge.

I mean, is it really out of the realm of possibility that there was zero government knowledge? I'm not saying the attacks were ordered as a self-inflicted wound, nor do I buy into everything Loose Change has to offer, but it does raise some good points.

Why is there no wingspan damage done to the pentagon?

Why was the steel from WTC sold to China and other nations before any kind of investigation could have been done?

Why not release another video of the pentagon attack to prove the theorists wrong?

How did a terrorist passport made miraculously end up atop the rubble at the WTC?

And why, if you are a terrorist, would you not nosedive into the center of the Pentagon, killing a multitude of people, rather than flying a few yards off the ground, leaving no marks on the grass, and hitting the side. It just makes no sense. Even the most skilled pilots would have a hard time doing it. Why not just go for the heart?

Look, I wish I could just believe what is being told reguarding the attacks, but in my gut, I just feel there is some piece to the puzzle missing.

[quote5e5a08125d="stackmjwiz"]Before another 9/11 "The US Placed Nukes at the WTC", "The Government Blew Up The Pentagon With Truck Bomb", "The Administration Knew Months Before", "The Jews Knew About 9/11 & Stayed Away From WTC", "United 93 Was Shot Down" or "Bush Had Sen. Wellstone Killed", "Bush Knew Where Saddam Was Long Before He Was Captured" conspiracy theory thread pops up, I have to post this. It's a great read.

The Questions Conspiracy Theorists Need To Ask Themselves
by John Hawkins

Because I regularly read through offbeat websites in order to compile new editions of "Anyone can post on the internet", I get a lot of opportunities to peruse the latest crackpot conspiracy theories. During any given week I may read about Planet X, the Illuminati / Free Mason / Jewish / (take your pick) plot to rule the world, concentration camps being prepared across America by the military, the "Bush Family Evil Empire", and even lizard people who rule world. If some raving moonbat has come up with it, I've probably run across it at one point or another.

Now if these ridiculous beliefs were relegated to the fringes of society I probably wouldn't bother with writing an editorial to shoot down the thinking behind these theories. However, this sort of bizarre paranoia has crept into "mainstream thinking". Things like the "Jewish Conservatives manipulating the President", "The Republicans rigged the 2002 elections", & "Bush knew (about 9/11)" have been tossed around by people many see as more credible than the average fruit loop writing for these conspiracy websites. That's why I thought it would be worth tossing out a few questions that anyone who starts to buy into these sorts of theories should consider. To begin with…
[b5e5a08125d]
How many people know about this conspiracy?[/b5e5a08125d] It's very difficult to keep any sort of newsworthy conspiracy that hundreds or thousands of people are supposedly involved in out of the mainstream press. Keep in mind that we live in a world where the President can't even get a BJ from an intern without it becoming public knowledge. Even things as sensitive as battle plans for upcoming invasions get into the papers. That's why you should certainly be skeptical of any sort of vast conspiracy that requires people keeping quiet about it indefinitely.
[b5e5a08125d]
How reliable is your source?[/b5e5a08125d] As the ongoing saga with the New York Times has illustrated, the mainstream media is not always completely reliable. However, they're infinitely more trustworthy than people who post anonymously on the net. I'm often surprised to see that people who don't trust one thing that Fox News or the New York Times says will blindly lap up whatever some conspiracy website or moonbat radio talk show host like Art Bell has to say. Yet, even though these sources burn them again and again, their readers still buy into what they have to say. It makes no sense.

[b5e5a08125d]Do you have ready answers for the obvious questions?[/b5e5a08125d] Let's look at a conspiracy that was floating around after 9/11 -- that the Pentagon was hit by a truck bomb, not a plane. Well in that case, what happened to the plane that was hijacked? How could it be that various people WATCHED the plane flying towards the Pentagon? Is it possible that the hundreds of firefighters and military personnel who must have known the truth were somehow silenced? Why would anyone go through such an elaborate charade? If you can't convincingly answer the most basic questions about a conspiracy, then it's tough for the theory you're supporting to hold any water.

[b5e5a08125d]Are you acting as if commonly held beliefs are unique?[/b5e5a08125d] This is one question that a lot of the more "mainstream" conspiracy theorists should ask themselves more often. For example, over the last year and a half we've constantly heard people asserting that beliefs held by a large majority of Republicans are really unique to a handful of Conservative Jews who somehow manipulated Bush into going to war to help Israel. Who the conspiracy theories pick out of the bunch and try to assign sinister motives to in situations like that usually says more about the conspiracy theorist than the person or group they target.
[b5e5a08125d]
Are you relying too much on a handful of contrary facts?[/b5e5a08125d] Rarely do you ever see a story where every fact, "falls into place". By that I mean people's memories are faulty, perceptions differ, politicians spin issues, press biases creep in, things are taken out of context, & typos and factual errors come into play as well. When these things inevitably happen, conspiracy theorists tend to seize a handful of inconsistencies and try to prove that there's a cover-up or conspiracy happening. But, this is just how life works. If you don't believe me, leave a couple of kids alone in a room full of breakables with a football, come back a few minutes after you hear something break, and then separate the kids and ask what happened.
[b5e5a08125d]
Are you being too cynical about the government?[/b5e5a08125d] There's only one thing worse than believing that your government always tells the truth and that's believing that they always lie. If you're willing to buy into any sort of claptrap because you won't put anything past your government, then you're apt to be proven wrong over and over again.

[b5e5a08125d]Shouldn't you be a little more skeptical about those conspiracy theories?[/b5e5a08125d] I've heard some variation of the following from conspiracy theorists, "How can you just dismiss this conspiracy theory out of hand? There have been conspiracies that have turned to be true before so this one could be true as well!" Yes, there have been conspiracy theories that panned out, but very, very, few of them. In fact, if you simply blew off every conspiracy theory that came down the pike you'd rarely ever be wrong. Because of that, conspiracy theories merit a lot of skepticism.

Before you buy into a conspiracy theory, ask yourself these questions and generally -- actually, in almost every case -- you'll find that it doesn't hold water.[/quote5e5a08125d]

This is a good post.

However, with subjects of this nature, it seems like people
A. Completely believe and entrust the theory
B. Think its all rubbish.

I find myself to be in the middle, which is where I think a lot of people are. It's really surprised me when I talk to people reguarding this kind of subject that the majority of them think something is a little fishy. I guess i'm not that much of a nut afterall.

About the pilot flying the plane into the Pentagon -- he wasn't a skilled pilot. He learned just enough to point the airliner in a general direction and fly it there. He's lucky he hit the building at all. As witnesses noted (BTW the theories always seem to ignore the dozens of civilian witnesses who saw the plane hit the building) the plane flew in at treetop level. It did not dive into the Pentagon, it flew almost level right into the side of it. Also, you do realize the center of the Pentagon is a big empty plaza, right? Nothing there but a small park/plaza and a cafe. If you're aiming to kill the most people possible, you certainly wouldn't aim there.

In any event of this magnitude, there will always be chaos and unanswered questions. That's why they're always fodder for conspiracists. There are many naturally occurring things that cannot ever be explained, which gives the nuts a blank check -- some of their theories can't be scientifically disproven, therefore they survive even when common sense dictates otherwise. Until we landed there, nobody could "disprove" the moon was made of green cheese. Oh wait, according to the conspiracists, we never landed on the moon -- it was all a stunt produced on a Hollywood set to deter the Russians from even trying. roll

Say what you will about the governments actions leading up to, and since 9/11 -- sure, we all have legitimate concerns about those. But to even acknowledge a little "doubt" about how 9/11 itself unfolded is to validate all the conspiracists like Loose Change. There can be no doubt -- either the government was involved directly in the attacks on 9/11, or they weren't. There is no "little bit" of involvement. And the very idea of such a conspiracy is so unfathomable and unburyable as to be impossible. Clinton couldn't suppress Lewinski, Reagan couldn't hide Contra-gate, Nixon couldn't dodge Watergate, but Bush Jr. can hide something this big for 5 years? Please.

[quote026e1ab7a3="dmorris68"][b026e1ab7a3]There WAS plane debris at the Pentagon.[/b026e1ab7a3] Independant reporters, including Jamie McIntyre from CNN, photographed chunks of plane wreckage himself and broadcast them.
[/quote026e1ab7a3]



But not from the flight that "supposedly" crashed into the pentagon...no is there?


look at the pictures man, view the "Loose Change" movie.


look at the gas station footage....



it's all there, the government killed those innocent people to raise gas prices, cuz obviously, raising cigerette prices weren't enough.



and i wouldn't be shocked if the government was forming some kind of necular missile to destroy half the world...idk

[quote26eaf1436b="dmorris68"]About the pilot flying the plane into the Pentagon -- he wasn't a skilled pilot. He learned just enough to point the airliner in a general direction and fly it there. He's lucky he hit the building at all. [/quote26eaf1436b]

That's what I was saying, its miraculous that he could angle the plane like that bring it in that low since he was a below-average pilot.

You're correct about the center of the Pentagon, I meant doing a nosedive into the building rather than coming up the side. Not sure why I said 'center.'

Good post though.

The government is way too incompetent to pull off something like this. If you believe in this conspiracy, you're giving them way too much credit.

I've said this before, but invest your time better by considering government actions leading up to the Iraq invasion and subsequent mess-up. Also think about the Patriot act and loss of privacy.

[quote196abbd67c="hehehhehe"]The government is way too incompetent to pull off something like this. If you believe in this conspiracy, you're giving them way too much credit.

I've said this before, but invest your time better by considering government actions leading up to the Iraq invasion and subsequent mess-up. Also think about the Patriot act and loss of privacy.[/quote196abbd67c]
While I can probably guess I don't necessarily share your political opinions, I applaud your point of view. We can debate those real issues you mention all day long, as they are perfectly valid -- it's this fantasy conspiracy BS that I can't stomach.

We never landed on the moon and the Earth is flat...

[quote228cd856c9]it's all there, the government killed those innocent people to raise gas prices, cuz obviously, raising cigerette prices weren't enough. [/quote228cd856c9]

What....did you say?


[quote228cd856c9]Say what you will about the governments actions leading up to, and since 9/11 -- sure, we all have legitimate concerns about those. But to even acknowledge a little "doubt" about how 9/11 itself unfolded is to validate all the conspiracists like Loose Change. There can be no doubt -- either the government was involved directly in the attacks on 9/11, or they weren't. There is no "little bit" of involvement. And the very idea of such a conspiracy is so unfathomable and unburyable as to be impossible. Clinton couldn't suppress Lewinski, Reagan couldn't hide Contra-gate, Nixon couldn't dodge Watergate, but Bush Jr. can hide something this big for 5 years? Please.[/quote228cd856c9]

Well put.

[quotea1a43945e9="irannaked"][quotea1a43945e9="dmorris68"][ba1a43945e9]There WAS plane debris at the Pentagon.[/ba1a43945e9] Independant reporters, including Jamie McIntyre from CNN, photographed chunks of plane wreckage himself and broadcast them.
[/quotea1a43945e9]



But not from the flight that "supposedly" crashed into the pentagon...no is there?


look at the pictures man, view the "Loose Change" movie.


look at the gas station footage....



it's all there, the government killed those innocent people to raise gas prices, cuz obviously, raising cigerette prices weren't enough.



and i wouldn't be shocked if the government was forming some kind of necular missile to destroy half the world...idk[/quotea1a43945e9]

Somehow I don't trust a conspiracy from someone who talks about necular missiles.

It could just be me, but I got the impression that irannaked was being overly sarcastic. But if it liwasli just me, and he's being serious, then... shock

some of you guys are retarded licoughliirannaked. And the only buildings to ever collapse due to a fire? No shit, they weren't designed to take the heat from Jet engine fuel

I was being sarcastic.

and it's been proven that the steal take over 1000 to melt and jet fuel burns at only 800.


and if you watch how the towers fall down, random windows blew out, wich was believed to be from demolotion.
I tried thinking it was the weight that caused the windows to shatter, but i doubt it.


the only way we will know who exactly is responisable for the "Terriost" attacks is if the government stop
s pulling people's legs

[quote7a0920848f="irannaked"]I was being sarcastic.

and it's been proven that the steal take over 1000 to melt and jet fuel burns at only 800.


and if you watch how the towers fall down, random windows blew out, wich was believed to be from demolotion.
I tried thinking it was the weight that caused the windows to shatter, but i doubt it.


the only way we will know who exactly is responisable for the "Terriost" attacks is if the government stop
s pulling people's legs[/quote7a0920848f]
Although it depends on the specifc alloy used, steel typically takes around 2500 degrees F to melt into liquid form, but long before it melts, it will soften and lose all structural integrity. The worst ordinary house fires -- without a jet fuel accelerant -- burn at up to 850C/1560F. The temps inside WTC from the fuel burn exceeded 2000F -- close to the melting point, and certainly hot enough to soften the steel into rubber. Which is why the steel sagged and buckled. The steel beams were actually wrapped in foam insulation to protect against ordinary fire (not a jet fuel burn), but its believed the impact force and resulting explosions dislodged a significant portion of the insulation, thus the steel was exposed to the full intensity of the burn.

The windows blew out because the floors pancaked. Massive air displacement and flexing walls due to several tons of steel and concrete tearing loose and falling down tends to wreak havoc on ordinary rigidly installed glass like that. ;)

Nobody is pulling anybody's leg about who is responsible for carrying out the attack. Al-Qaeda did it. You think that's made up? The evidence trail back to OBL is a mile wide and undisputed the world over, and he quite happily takes the credit for giving the go-ahead, and every one of the hijackers is traceable back to him and AQ. Now whether we should have seen it coming is another thing entirely, but the implication that the US government was complicit in any way is just... well, ridiculous doesn't even fit for what I'm thinking. Horse-hockey. Yeah. Horse-hockey fits.

All of this is plainly obvious to me and my overly rational mind. I just fail to see how any rational person could have any doubt at this point about how the attacks themselves transpired. ?

If the government had no hand in 9/11, then it happened to due to previous administrations' appalling foreign policies.

I don't believe 9/11 is as cut and dry as the government say it is but that's not to say that I think the government acted alone. To be honest, I don't think I'd ever believe a word this administration says. Call me a conspiarcy nut, retard, idiot, I don't give a shit, this is what I believe. I'm not going to critisize others for believing there is no conspiracy.

Why were only two frames of the Pentagon tape released? Why did it take them 5 years to release more frames of the same thing (and don't say out of consideration to their families, they couldn't care less about the victims families), which really don't show anything? If you can't show me a plane in any of those pictures, then you can't say it was a plane. I can't show you a missile so I can't say it was a missile. I don't see anything.

Witnesses who say they did see a plane are more credible than witnesses who say they didn't see a plane. Why? Because they support your point of view.

Also, the WTC were built to withstand planes hitting them, the designer even said so, so you can't really pull that card. Firefighters, cops, paramedics all saying there were explosions; are they liars?

Governments can't be trusted and to believe everything they say would be foolish. Heard about what happened at the Gulf Of Tonkin?

[quote674c7ee344]Also, the WTC were built to withstand planes hitting them, the designer even said so, so you can't really pull that card. Firefighters, cops, paramedics all saying there were explosions; are they liars? [/quote674c7ee344]

That is not true. There was a documentary a few years ago that went in depth about the structure of the building (with real interviews with engineers and builders), what exactly happened to the building after impact. It was uncapable of taking that kind of hit without great damage (collapse); the fireproofing of the buildings were inadaquate.

There were many explosions and some fires after the towers collapsed. What are you trying to say?

http//www.pbs.org/wgbh/buildingbig/wonder/structure/world_trade.html

[quote8134f09a2f]Although they were in fact designed to withstand being struck by an airplane[/quote8134f09a2f]

http//911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html

[quote8134f09a2f]According to Hyman Brown, a University of Colorado civil engineering professor and the World Trade Center's construction manager, 1 and 2 World Trade Center were designed to survive an impact and resulting fires from a collision by the largest commercial aircraft at the time, a Boeing 707-340. 1 Contrary to widely promoted misconceptions, the 767-200s used on 9-11 were only slightly larger than 707s.[/quote8134f09a2f]

Also, I was saying that firefighters, cops, paramdeics and others all witnessed explosions as the buildings collapsed, not after they collapsed, as if it was a controlled demolition (their words, not mine).

TSJ, if you want to argue that our government [ia0d287a9d0]policies[/ia0d287a9d0] had a hand in leading up to 9/11, then that's an entirely rational argument. Not one that I necessarily agree with, but one that I can certainly understand. We've made a lot of enemies, Al Qaeda is but one of many.

But if you want to argue that the US Government, or any agent working on behalf of, had an active hand in planning and carrying out the attacks of 9/11, then that's where you lose me. Totally and completely lose me.

[quotea0d287a9d0]Why were only two frames of the Pentagon tape released? Why did it take them 5 years to release more frames of the same thing (and don't say out of consideration to their families, they couldn't care less about the victims families), which really don't show anything? [/quotea0d287a9d0]
The government has always operated that way. Evidence and official records are seldom and reluctantly released. I've worked for the government and the military, they are a massive beauraucratic machine that moves at a fraction of a snails pace and seldom trust the public with much information, and in my experience that is often justified (not always, but quite often). Based on my experience with the government and law enforcement, I see nothing at all out of the ordinary about it. Not that I excuse it -- I make NO excuses for our government -- but it's nothing unusual either.

[quotea0d287a9d0]If you can't show me a plane in any of those pictures, then you can't say it was a plane. I can't show you a missile so I can't say it was a missile. I don't see anything.
...
Witnesses who say they did see a plane are more credible than witnesses who say they didn't see a plane. Why? Because they support your point of view. [/quotea0d287a9d0]
Poppycock. You can't prove a negative. Credible witnesses who positively see something will always weigh heavier than witnesses who failed to see something, particularly when there are more than one who saw it. If there were not a single witness who saw a plane then this argument might hold a tiny amount of water, but combined with all the other supporting evidence, even that would be quite the leap of faith to think there wasn't a plane.

You mention a missile -- do you really believe that? As multiple cameras were rolling and the impacts were witnessed by thousands of people, nobody caught this "missle" and broadcast it? A blur on somebody's videotape promulgated by a known anti-government conspiracist carries more weight than everything else to the contrary? THAT smacks of using anything to support your opinion of the current administration.

This operation was not carried out in some rural backwoods or some remote desert, it was carried out in the busy heartland of American during rush hour, in front of thousands of people. You SAW the planes hitting the WTC. There aren't normally cameras rolling at the Pentagon, so it wasn't televised. Does it really take a stretch to believe it was a plane when

1. The plane with real live civilian passengers was reported hijacked and went missing
2. Numerous witnesses saw the plane crash into the Pentagon
3. Plane wreckage WAS found at the scene.
4. 3 other planes had been hijacked and crashed that morning.

Why is it so hard to believe the Pentagon weapon was a plane??? It defies logic, I'm sorry, but it does.

Of course there were many explosions, both primary and secondary. What of it? Intense heat and fire was building up in places that were mostly airtight. Floors were collapsing. Containers were bursting. WTC had propane tanks and gas lines in the building. If those on the ground likened it to a controlled demolition, then it was because that was the closest thing they had to compare it too -- nobody had ever witnessed or even fathomed the idea of what transpired on 9/11. Are you suggesting that the government secretly undertook the massive effort of prepping and demo'ing one of the largest buildings in the world that happened to be occupied by mostly civilians 24x7 in the middle of downtown Manhattan, and that nobody noticed? C'mon...

I'm not going to call anybody here stupid, a retard, or an idiot, but I will reserve those names for those people that dream up this crazy shit and put the ideas in people's heads in the first place. Then again, perhaps they are quite brilliant since they actually managed to convince people, or at least make then believe some of this junk.

[quote4bb28efe72]Also, I was saying that firefighters, cops, paramdeics and others all witnessed explosions as the buildings collapsed, not after they collapsed, as if it was a controlled demolition (their words, not mine).[/quote4bb28efe72]

So you're saying it's plausible that the people "very high" in the government knew beforehand the exact time and date of the attack, got their "men" set up explosives in the WTC, had them detonated as the planes impacted the buildings?

Umm what if the people who flew the planes were also in on it.

Honestly, I do not know what I believe.

The simple fact is We were attacked, went to a country that had NOTHING to do with it (Iraq) we went their only because Saddam is a KNOWN terrorist. We went over there took the oil embassy immediately under control and NEVER found WMDs.

[quote2473c2e39a="TryinToGetPaid"]Umm what if the people who flew the planes were also in on it. [/quote2473c2e39a]
I'm not sure I follow, but I do believe the people flying the planes WERE in on it. ;)

i used to think that it was interesting.. but soon after just realized it was bullshit.. are you going to tell me the government was behind the guy with a bomb in his shoe found shortly after 9/11.. or the subway station terrorist attack in london.. or the recent uncovering of the plot of chemicals on planes.. or the simple fact that everything in that story has been explained if you do some simple research.

im sorry folks.. but we are in a time where even though you may not want to do so.. you have to take closer looks at the people that board your plane, train, or bus. maybe the guy that created the conspiracy is scared so shitless that hes in self-denial of the world around him. im not saying the government hast done bad stuff in the past.. because there have been events already proven with the government hiding something.. but this goes far beyond the realm of belief and show how easy people can be manipulated . there are people out there who actually hope this all is true because of their anti-government views.. maybe the king of those people made this video. who the hell knows or cares.

Good to see you back posting TSJ!

As far as the towers go, I figured it was the fuel fire that led to the collapse (even though those loose-change type films say all the fuel burnt outside the building). The towers withstood the initial shock.

As far as witnesses go (and I'm not arguing any side on this), they don't seem very credible. There are various witnesses that say they saw a fighter jet, a missile, an unmarked passenger plane, etc... hit the Pentagon so who can you really believe? We hear all the time about how much our own memory can even fool us, and I don't expect many people to be rational and 100% alert of their surroundings in such circumstances. Not to mention that many idiots can't properly identify any specific flying objects anyway.

Yes I believe that the US government had a hand in 9/11. BUT, that doesn't mean that I think every single person from the top to the bottom was in on it. There could easily be people (regardless of their rank) in on it, and that doesn't mean that they had to have explosives rigged themselves.

If you watch 24, then you know it's entirely plausible that people in the government can orchestrate certain situations for their own (or for the country's) advantage.

I also never said that it was a missile that hit the Pentagon, or that I can see one. It was just an example as one of the more widely used explanations.

I believe planes hit the WTC, nobody can deny that, I believe the towers fell to the ground, you can't deny that. All I'm saying is that the proof the government has given leaves more questions than answers, and I'd like answers (that actually dispell) to those questions.

Also, there were numerous cameras that taped the Pentagon on 9/11, but the F.B.I confiscated them before they could be broadcast or shown to anyone. Why? Why can they show some shitty, grainy still frames from a security camera, but they can't show actual video tape of the impact and explosion?

Also, stack; I never said "it's plausible that the people "very high" in the government knew beforehand the exact time and date of the attack, got their "men" set up explosives in the WTC, had them detonated as the planes impacted the buildings?". You completey made that up yourself and I said nothing of the sort.

Well, I can't argue with a TV show. I'm out of this thread -- as I said, my blood pressure can't take it. ;)

[quotecf9f6ed2f9]Honestly, I do not know what I believe.

The simple fact is We were attacked, went to a country that had NOTHING to do with it (Iraq) we went their only because Saddam is a KNOWN terrorist. We went over there took the oil embassy immediately under control and NEVER found WMDs.[/quotecf9f6ed2f9]

Honestly, deep down you probablly do have a hunch that terrorists (Osama and Co.) who hate Western civilization to its very core were responsible for the attacks on September 11th.

I think the main reason people come up with these whacko theories about President Bush and 9/11 is that [bcf9f6ed2f9]the truth forces them to uncomfortable conclusions.[/bcf9f6ed2f9] If it really was al Qaeda that launched this shocking terrorist strike on the US, then we really do have to take action against them. If President Bush didn't really use a trick to cause these events in order to get us into war, then he's not the monster they make him out to be.

"We went their only because Saddam is a KNOWN terrorist". By indicating that Saddam is a "terrorist", that's a reason why we're not supposed to crack down on his regime?

Saddam was probablly not involved (I don't believe he was) in the planning and execution of the attacks, but there is no doubt he posed a credible threat. Saddam financed terror groups, harbored terrorists, paid money to the families of suicide bombers, disobeyed every important UN resolution regarding disarmament for 10+ years, failed to comply with UN inspectors, continued to seek capabilities of mass destruction. And your BS conspiracy that the US went in for oil is not a "simple fact". Maybe because the oil industry is so vital to Iraq's economy?

[quote21a15b8fd7="theysayjump"]...[/quote21a15b8fd7]

Well, you are right that people, including yourself, WANT answers. However, you have to realize that media is a powerful source. Once broadcasted, millions of people will have access to it including people who you wouldn't trust such as the Terrorists themselves. A place like pentagon would be classified as highly important security area to the US Government. The reason they would have protected the films from being broadcasted may be to protect themselves from being vulnerable.

Somethings are not meant to be answered like how "we" were brought to Earth. The answer to that would be capable of destorying a very important element in our life. Maybe this is one such case. You all know what I mean. P

[quote8648104f75="dmorris68"]Well, I can't argue with a TV show. I'm out of this thread -- as I said, my blood pressure can't take it. ;)[/quote8648104f75]

I was being facetious about that part. wink

[quotec801575b3a="theysayjump"][quotec801575b3a="dmorris68"]Well, I can't argue with a TV show. I'm out of this thread -- as I said, my blood pressure can't take it. ;)[/quotec801575b3a]

I was being facetious about that part. wink[/quotec801575b3a]
I figured as much, however I'm REALLY REALLY going to bow out of the thread now, as I've made my point as best I can and there's no sense flogging the deceased equine. ;)

Do you think Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK?

[quoteb040933c07="theysayjump"]Do you think Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK?[/quoteb040933c07]
He shot him but there were others involved...

[quotecdb5817f82="Wolfeman"][quotecdb5817f82="theysayjump"]Do you think Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK?[/quotecdb5817f82]
He shot him but there were others involved...[/quotecdb5817f82]

What do you mean by others? Others who shot or fired shots also? Others who orchestrated it all? Others in the government who orchestrated it?

[quotec044be1361="theysayjump"][quotec044be1361="Wolfeman"][quotec044be1361="theysayjump"]Do you think Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK?[/quotec044be1361]
He shot him but there were others involved...[/quotec044be1361]

What do you mean by others? Others who shot or fired shots also? Others who orchestrated it all? Others in the government who orchestrated it?[/quotec044be1361]
I think he was setup as a fall guy. I don't believe they were other shooters. The magic bullet has be disproven now too...

I'll go with a yes. I think all you have to do is want to see the truth.

http//www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php

Convincing? Hell yeah. If a plane smashed into the Pentagon much more damage would have been done. It's simple physics, if you can see it you just do want to.

explain why security gard and dog's were pulled weeks before the attack.

explain why people said they heard numerous drilling and no one was informed as to what it was for.

explain why the black box's were never found, although they were made to withstand "fire at 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit (1,100 C) for one hour. The FAA requires that all solid-state recorders be able to survive at least one hour at this temperature." and are located at the back of the plane...


im telling you, the government is behind it

http//www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons[]http//www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons

[quote8ba98bd883="theysayjump"]If you watch 24, then you know it's entirely plausible that people in the government can orchestrate certain situations for their own (or for the country's) advantage.[/quote8ba98bd883]

I love that show, and gotta agree with you there. )

[quotee14988becb="tylerc"]I would like to point everyone's attention to this

http//www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons[/quotee14988becb]

lol, that is the best page in the universe.

Seriously, the government can't do anything without getting caught. How do you expect them to plan and pull off all this involving thousands of people and not have one person come forward?

[quoteeec5220f01="Wolfeman"]Seriously, the government can't do anything without getting caught. How do you expect them to plan and pull off all this involving thousands of people and not have one person come forward?[/quoteeec5220f01]

I'm not saying you're wrong, but even President Bush doesn't know things that the U.S. Government knows. ;)

[quote6e53102c6b="TFOAF"][quote6e53102c6b="Wolfeman"]Seriously, the government can't do anything without getting caught. How do you expect them to plan and pull off all this involving thousands of people and not have one person come forward?[/quote6e53102c6b]

I'm not saying you're wrong, but even President Bush doesn't know things that the U.S. Government knows. ;)[/quote6e53102c6b]
rolleyes