Added: 1 year ago
From: TPOCS
Views: 1,286
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (21)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Another common question is HOW? HOW do you place explosives in a building without people noticing. It's real helpful if your the president and your brother happens to be in charge of security of the the building you want to place explosives in, which happens to be the case.

  • @nunyabizbitch when you have nuclear explosives placed in the rock under the towers you can easily turn a skyscaper into dust like on 9-11

  • One thing this video and a lot of others like "Loose Change" fail to mention....heat displacement. Even if you took a few thousand gallons of jet fuel and concentrated it ALL onto a single beam of the WTC, its NEVER going to reach more than a few hundred degrees. Why? Ask any plumber who has had to sweat copper pipes when its cold outside. The heat will displace down the tube and you will NEVER get a good weld.

  • @delanogaston

    This video is only 15 minutes long! The point of it is to have a very short video you can show anyone that covers several of the main "glaring" questions about 9-11. A lot of people will not sit through a two hour video, mainly because they don't want to face the issue at all. Most everyone can be coerced into sitting for 15 minutes.

  • @TPOCS I'm not saying this video is incomplete or anything...as I said, most documentaries leave this part. To me, its one of the most compelling pieces of evidence. Its FAR more convincing than the spools laying on the ground outside the pentagon, or the debris shooting out the sides as the towers fall...I don't think those points hold much water personally.

  • @delanogaston

    I have seen just about every video out there on 9-11 and if I remember correctly, most all of them point out jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel, and that most of the jet fuel was burnt up in that huge fire ball when they first crashed. The fires were primarily the materials in the offices burning, which also could not burn hot enough to melt steel.

  • @TPOCS Actually jet fuel burns PLENTY hot enough to melt steel, but the debunkers say that it doesnt need to melt the steel, only weaken it as the report clearly states.

    What IM saying is, that sure the fuel is hot enough to burn steel if the heat didn't displace. So if I was cut-welding a piece of steel that was 12" long, no problem. If i'm trying to weaken a huge piece of steel thats thousands of feet long, the heat will displace throughout the beam and never get hot enough at the exadt point

  • @delanogaston

    That is not true. Jet fuel cannot possibly burn hot enough to melt steel. From what I've read, steel melts at 2700 degrees. At the most, jet fuel burns between 700 to 1800 degrees if the conditions are right. The fires in the towers where around 700 - 800 degrees as evidenced by the oxygen starved black smoke that poured out of the towers.  But I get your point too. Steel conducts heat so it would have been dispersed throughout the immediate steel structure.

  • the video only makes sense if there was less resistance below to pancake that fast, thus it needs explosions and demolitions below O.o it makes so much sense it's scary! Something was seriously wrong with all this...

  • Comment removed

  • @EclecticSceptic Ever hear of The Manhattan Project? How many people were in on that? As for the media, just because they are not informed doesn't mean "they're in on it" anymore than your lack of information makes you "in on it". How many whistleblowere have "disappeared" or had "an accident" over the last century? Plenty. Lots of motivation to keep quiet, not to mention jail time. Pax.

  • @MayadaJeffery Explain to me how there is an analogy between the Manhattan Project and the inside-job conspiracy theory of 9/11.

  • @EclecticSceptic

    I swear you are a major pill. You twist everything so you can bait people. His point had nothing to do with the theory of 9-11 being an inside job. He was addressing the poster that said people couldn't be kept quiet, therefore it couldn't be some grand conspiracy because the people would speak out. The Manhattan Project is one such example of how people can be kept quiet. The bunker for our leaders under that hotel outside Washington is another. Nobody knew it was there.

  • they wont answer , IT WAS AN INSIDE JOB !!!

    WE ARE THE RESISTANCE AGAINST THE NEW WORLD ORDER !!

  • My question is why did the Pentagons Air Defenses Fail? How could ANYthing hit it?

  • @RecceMan90 Good point. Also I saw an interview with a former FAA official, and he said that THE SECOND they lost ground communications with the planes, there would have been notifications and jets scrambled. Why didn't any of this happened? When the first jet flew into the WTC not ONE NEWS AGENCY had heard anything about it. U remember the plane than overshot the runway by a few minutes a few years back? That was all over the news before the plane even turned around!!!!

  • The Answer to all your questions is: The Pentagon was hit by a rocket! The World Trade Center (Building 7) was purposely demolished, why, "Insurance Fraud".

  • I don't think we were lied to about 9/11...

    I mean if we were then 1000s of people were in on it..

    that's quite a tall tale.. :D

    i mean you got the explosive people the security people.. the owners of the buildings... the people at the airports.. the government.... fire fighters too i assume and police men.. Also you got the investigators and all of the wealthy people who were involved in a minor way..And you're trying to tell me none of them would feel guilty about this? slightly unlikely!!!

  • @GravDiga

    Did you watch the video? Amazing you can watch the video and act as if there's nothing to it. Seemingly just because you don't believe people will keep their mouths shut. People will keep their mouths shut, usually just to hang onto their jobs. And yes I'm sure they feel guilty as hell. Fact is many things have been kept quite for long periods of time and only come out after events are declassified. It's not that hard to shut people up. A stern threat is all it takes for most.

  • @GravDiga The whole "thousands of people would have to be in on it" is the oldest debunking tool in the book..but youre wrong. Not many people would have to be in on it at all.

    Let me ask you this...if you were the ruler of a very powerful country like say, Saudi Arabia...and you had trillions of dollars at your disposal, you don't think you could pull this off? Our own CIA has been caught lying MULTIPLE times so why does it shock u so much to find out there's a possibility they did it again?

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more