The Smoking Guns of 9/11

[nb45001]

why is the 4th plane being shot down a conspiracy theory

[Videot99]

When I look at the future of humantiy I see 3 possible outcomes: freedom (rare so far), totalitarianism (very common throughout history) and destruction. The first requires attention, open-mindedness and ethics. The other 2 fill the void at will. Wake up America!

[PewterPlunder]

there is no evidence of collapse either... study your physics. .... theres just some building dis-appearing

[dougroadster]

Great video, nice assembly of moronic lies and distortion. Study your physics.

[Roborav]

Of course they were vaporized in the blast or if any explosives were found they took em away fast in case sum one found out. Ne 1 who believes the official story and the news media reporting on 9/11 is a NUTTA.

[Roborav]

The proof is there for all to see on 9/11 day, you Jabroni's who believe what the news and politician's tell you. All three buildings come down in straight line perfectly? Impossible you'd expect at least one to come down sideways or anyway as the metal would get tangled. Of course they planted explosives beforhand so they would be controlled explosions in the towers. That's evidence enough as far as i'am concerned. As well as all the other stuff

[PoetryHound]

That's not evidence. That's an assertion. There's no evidence of explosives, which make it an unsubstantiated assertion. If you believe things without any supporting evidence, that's called a religion, or in this case, a cult. Welcome to the 911 conspiracy cult.

[craghopper23]

This is a poor film preseting flimsy "evidence". But there are much more solid reasons to doubt the offical story than those presented here. You are correct, PH, about evidence needing to be supported but you need to apply that same standard to the offical story. When you do it is clear the official story is full of unsupported assertions and assumptions.

[Roborav]

Inside Job as simple as that. The whole world knows that now. 911 went according to their plan more or less for Bush, cheney and co, shame they didn't thought about their end plan and how to finish it off. War on Terror wat a bunch of CRAP!

[PoetryHound]

Too bad there's no evidence to support your assertions. All you guys have are unsubstantiated assertions, speculation, and questions - "What about this? What about tha?" You never have any evidence. That's why most of the world dismisses you as crackpots.

[SULTAANAH]

if bush tell us the truth we wont have need for these kind of stuff. To this day bush have not come out and give us the facts

[Versaski]

Holy shit you're fucking stupid.

[Videot99]

Goverment is GOOD. More government is even better. More power to the fewest. Yeah! Heil!

[fromtheguide]

The "thermite explosions" you think you see are panes of glass shattering. Also you set charges off to start the collapse of a building. The weight of the building falling into itself (imploding) does all the work after that. Oh, yeah. Planes shatter like lightbulbs when the hit immovable objects (like buildings or the ground) while moving at high speed.

[Videot99]

There's a little truth in every big lie. That's the only way it has any hope of working. This stupid site won't let me post again!

[PoetryHound]

No, FEMA did not say the fuel burned off within minutes ofter impact. They said MOST, not all. But I'm heartened that you find FEMA a credible source of information.

[helpslipfranklins]

Sooo, most of it burned off, but there was still enough to shoot a massive fireball 100 stories down?? Gotcha.

[PoetryHound]

Wrong, there was no fireball. The fuel caused explosions on various floors on the way down. I'll give you a reference if you don't want to just continue to dismiss things out of hand.

[helpslipfranklins]

"According to PM, BURNING FUEL traveling down the elevator shafts would have disrupted the elevator systems and caused EXTENSIVE DAMAGE TO THE LOBBIES." How about your own reference? Can you contradict yourself anymore?? So, was it burning fuel, or random explosions that caused these supposed burning people to fill the lobbies 1 minute after the first plane hit??? Wow man, I think youve come up with a whole new conspiracy on your own. Nice job.

[PoetryHound]

I have no idea what you're talking about, but if I have to decide who to believe about the impact of the fuel, I think I'll side with the experts at PM as opposed to non-expert franklins.

[PoetryHound]

No, seismologists do not agree with your interpetation of their data, neither the Columbia University one, who had the most sensitive instruments, nor the Protec ones.

[Videot99]

1. The most important explosions in question, as recorded in video sound tracks and seismometers, happened just before and during the collapse. FEMA themselves said the fuel burned off within minutes after impact.

[Videot99]

I strongly recommend everyone listen to Robin Hordon's interview at google video. He was a Boston FAA flight controller on 9/11. Just search on his name. He knew right away it was an inside job, and is finally not scared to say so. While you're there watch the victims' familys' plight "9/11: Press for Truth". It's a real eye-opener.

[Videot99]

What difference does it make whether fuel went down the elevator shaft? Typical strawman argument, not worthy of debate. There is still no way that would have brought those buildings down the explosive way we saw them come down. On top of that, William Rodriguez, the last surviver to escape, was in the basement at the time and has said there were massive explosions in there before the first plane even hit. Loosening the base first is standard demolition technique. Use some intuition, too.

[PoetryHound]

The importance of the cascading jet fuel is that it explains what caused some of the explosions. There's no evidence of any explosives - no evidence that they were planted, no evidence that anyone saw them, no detritus of explosives in the debris, & not demo experts who concur with the controlled demo theory. Nothing.

[PoetryHound]

Again, according to Popular Mechanics, burning fuel traveling down the elevator shafts would have disrupted the elevator systems & caused extensive damage to the lobbies. NIST heard first-person testimony that "some elevators slammed right down" to the ground floor. "The doors cracked open on the lobby floor and flames came out and people died." Filmmaker Jules Naudet entered the WTC 1 lobby minutes after the first plane struck & saw victims on fire, a scene he found too horrific to film.

[helpslipfranklins]

Once again, using PM is like saying "My cousin, whos an engineer said". Try using an unbiased source. Secondly, as I stated above, the plaster and windows were blown apart, but there were no burn marks from burning fuel shooting down the elvator shafts. Most of the burning fuel was consumed by oxygen when the planes hit. Theres plenty of footage of FDNY getting ready in the lobbies after both planes had already hit. Or did you mean "after the explosions went off"?? Get your bullshit straight.

[PoetryHound]

PM is legit and the proof is that no one questioned their credibility BEFORE the publication of the 911 article. You just don't like what it says so you flail away trying to discredit the publication, but not the analysis.

[cribsterzzz]

How about you show me JUST ONE other modern-day steel framed high rise which has failed due to fire! Just one will do, JUST ONE!!! Oh and the THREE which DID collapse all on the same day, 9/11, can't be used in the search. I'll give you a head start on your attempt...Windsor tower in Madrid. Google that 1 and tell me about how awesome our diesel fuel must be!

[PoetryHound]

Hi cribsterzzz. It turns out that there are a number of steel buildings that have collapsed or partially collapsed due to fire. Mostly they're not highrises - very few highrises collapse for any reason. Of course, on 911, the collapses weren't due solely to fire. There's the minor detail of planes used as missiles. But I'm glad you raised the Windsor Tower. Did you know that much of the steel that was exposed to fire collapsed while the concrete remained standing?

[cribsterzzz]

I have a bit of knowledge on statics and mechanics of materials. Have an ME degree (product design career though), but I learned a bit in school which allows me to run a few numbers and follow along on some mathematics heavy websites relating to this issue. Impossible for a building to fall at a velocity faster than the speed gravity (in a vacuum no less) without the use of explosives...period!

[cribsterzzz]

Yet THREE buildings did just that!!! Surprised, intrigued...na who would disagree with history such as the U.S.S Maine, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin, JFK, etc. etc. Our leaders would never do such a thing!

[PoetryHound]

cribserzzz, before moving on to other topics, do you acknowledge what I said in answering your previous question? Steel buildings HAVE collapsed from fire, including a partial collapse of the steel in the building you mentioned, the Windsor Tower.

[cribsterzzz]

Didn't know just saying it happened makes it true...so ya, ahh really thought u didn't answer my question. But either way, I'm all ears or eyes if you got a link or a collapse site name for me (earthquakes excluded please...I'm sure you knew that though)!

[cribsterzzz]

Oh and your acknowledgment to the "partial" collapse of the Windsor should alone cease any rebuttal you have to disagree with a controlled demo on WTC7. FACTS: ~30hour inferno = "partial" collapse vs. ~8hour smolder from drums of diesel fuel! (or whatever "they" says it was) = COMPLETE FREEFALL COLLAPSE (faster than gravity itself!) NA!!! can't buy that haus!

[PoetryHound]

These bldgs are different from WTC - only similarity is failure of steel in fire, which was what you doubted.

Windsor:

w w w*mace*Manchester*ac*uk (slash) project (slash) research (slash) structures (slash) strucfire (slash) CaseStudy (slash) HistoricFires (slash) BuildingFires (slash) default.htm

Kader Toy Factory:

w w w*wsws*org/articles/2003/ma...­kade-m16.shtml

McCormick Place roof collapse:

w w w*chipublib*org (slash) 004chicago (slash) disasters (slash) mccormick_fire.html

[PoetryHound]

Yes, the conditions of Windsor were very different than WTC7. The only similarity is that structural steel failed. Remember, YOU'RE the one that cited Windsor. No one says the WTC7 fires were only smoldering. I agree that the North view videos certainly LOOK like WTC7 was a CD, but if you look at all the evidence (and the lack of evidence of explosives), it turns out not to be.

[PoetryHound]

In other words, you are unable to counter the facts I provided from the PM article. The 2 Chertoffs are not cousins unless it's very distant. They don't know each other at all. If you're claiming that Michael Chertoff is close to Benjamin or even knows him, you'll need to provide a good reference. Also, cite some of the "strawman" arguments from PM.

[Videot99]

Oh, and yes, the "Senior Researcher", age 25, for the March 2005 PM article was indeed Benjamin Chertoff. He would not answer questions about his connection to DHS, but when his mother in Pelham NY was asked, she replied, "Yes, of course, Michael is a cousin". That article is full of strawman arguments responding to 9/11 theories that no thoughtful person would have put forth in the first place. They were probably planted.

[Videot99]

T'would do no good...if you can look at WTC7 collapse and not see demolition written all over it, then there's no point. Everything is just peachy-keen with the world, and Santa is coming any day now.

[PoetryHound]

Videot, no one ever complained about Popular Mechanics until they published their 9-11 analysis. And all you have now is unsubstantiated smears. Their analysis is obvously not a whitewash and Michael Chertoff has no connection to the magazine. Now, do you have any facts to counter the information I provided from PM or just these baseless assertions?

[helpslipfranklins]

This is just more of your ridiculous denial. Everyone knows the connection is there. The connection makes the article just another "paid for" opinion/testimony. Why do you insist on using "expert testimony" that can be disputed by other equally qualified "expert testimony"??? It proves about as much as qouting the experts who claim the PM 9/11 article was bogus. There are plenty of places to find the debunkers of debunkers. You just dont care little sheep.

[PoetryHound]

They have the same last name. That's it. They have both said they don't know wach other. What's your evidence that they do? There is absolutely zero evidence that Michael Chertoff had anything to do with the PM article. Zero. Your problem is that you don't HAVE equally qualified "expert testimony." You just have hacks.

[Videot99]

Thanks, helpslipfranklins.  I believe you're exactly right - the whole terrorism strategy is all about the North American Union, dissolving the US and its Constitution, and creating a world-wide fascist police state. Welcome the New World Order!

[PoetryHound]

Of course this is all just more unsubstantiated assertion, which is the bread and butter of the 911 conspiracy folks. You guys never seem to be able to cite any evidence of government plots or explosives or missiles or whatever, and you just dismiss the counter evidence with a wave of your hand. Not a very educated approach.

[helpslipfranklins]

You are such a clown. You refuse to actually look into any of this, and then you come out here claiming there isnt any evidence. And I wouldnt go insulting anyone elses intelligence with all the gullibility youve been preaching.

[PoetryHound]

Still no evidence from you. Stop ponificating and provide something credible. You can start by providing a source for your claim that the elevators had auto sealing devices in order to prevent fire from spreading.

[helpslipfranklins]

Your just a little boy playing a video game arent you. You type a response, then when I havent responded in 7 minutes you jump back on here shouting "I win, I win, you didnt respond, I win!!" You really expect anyone to take you seriously?

[Videot99]

Hound-Popular Mechanic's reports, like the 9/11 Commission Report, are such obvious white-washes that they end up being evidence for the opposition. The first PM article about 9/11 was written by Michael Chertof's cousin, for God's sake! When and why did this magazine become the spokesmen for the government? When the government bought the publication out, replaced the top executives, and used it as a mouthpiece for the common folk! There's a lot deeper truth, for those who care to look.

[Videot99]

Ah..."coincidence theory" is so comforting...

[Videot99]

This is ridiculous. I've made post after post that said they were posted, and they never show up. And the "Views" counter hasn't moved in a long time, even though I know it should be moving. You can certainly tell who bought this site!

[PoetryHound]

Yes, this frequently happens to me too.

[llaurita2]

Let me get this straight. Thirty years ago, the Nixon's couldn't cover-up a 3rd rate burglary with all powers at their disposal. Didn't work because the handful of people involved unraveled and the guilty were exposed. You want us to believe that the Bush's covered-up the greatest conspiracy in history, silencing everyone involved in the planning, execution and cover-up. Two possible answers (a) 9/11 was real or (b) you assholes are no-life douches who live with mom and have never been laid.

[helpslipfranklins]

hanks for proving the point. This isnt COVERED up. Its quite common knowledge. 49% of New Yorkers believe the govt was involved, and you thinks its covered up?? Guess what smart guy, its not the first time. Google "Operation Northwoods" if anyone wonders if the US govt is capable of something like this. Yeah, Cuba instead of Iraq.

[supertarget76]

It may be "common knowledge" to 49% of the residents of NYC, but try asking the firefighters, rescue workers, other eyewitnesses, and structural engineers if 9-11 happened in a way different than the official explanation, and you will get a nearly unanimous (or completely unanimous) "no". Hmm, I wonder why that is.

[PoetryHound]

These polls tend to ask questions like, "Do you think the government was involved in 911 or tried to withhold information about it?" The answer is of course yes because of the second part of the question. But just try asking people if they thought bombs were planted in the building.

[PoetryHound]

I love it when conspiracy theorists mention Operation Northwoods. The most significant thing about it is that it was thrown out and never went forward.

[helpslipfranklins]

Id rather ask the families of the victims why it took them a year of pressuring king Bush before he would even allow an investigation of one of the most horrible crimes of US history. Then Id ask them why, after fighting so hard to get the 911 commission going, they would/could not answer 70% of the families questions presented. Just check their site.

[SouljahMahn]

bcz its a publicity front to disuade the populations' focus

[hend0815]

few words to mr. bush and his clan and anybody involved : hang ´em higher !

[MillieIshtarMotou]

I'm just Sorry that terrorism was blamed because of this..anyway...who knows? the american government may have planned that attack anyway

[Roborav]

George Tenet was a lying Bush puppet, Stupid FATFUCKER knew everything, no wonder he left the CIA.

[PoetryHound]

"...we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse... Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors." -- Deputy Chief Peter Hayden

[Videot99]

Thanks, yeah, I saw that - actually a clip in this video is taken from it with the permission of Rick Siegel, the guy who took the shots from Hoboken, NJ. Unfortunately, the government ransacked Rick's office and he had to flee the country (no guilt evident there!) His video is called 9/11 Eyewitness. It's excellent.

[PoetryHound]

Siegel's video is hilariously off-the-wall. Even other conspiracy theorists are dismissive of him, as is evidenced here:

www*911review*com (slash) reviews (slash) 911eyewitness (slash) index*html

[DeepUndercoverAgent]

You need to watch one of the other WTC videos on youtube, I can't find it right now but it's one of the most watched WTC videos. It was recorded on camcorder by a man watching the whole thing from across the river in NJ. He caught military helicopters flying to the towers moments before the collapse, and a figher jet flying overhead at estmiate mach 1.5 speed just before before tower 7 collapsed. Look for the video, it will expose the bullshit.

[supertarget76]

The WTC towers did NOT fall "effortlessly straight down" - the south tower failed where the jet hit it, & tipped toward the gash, as you would expect. Besides the large explosions of the jets hitting the towers, there were smaller explosions from the fire, as should be expected. If there were "major explosions" as some theorize, it would be on most of the videos of the event, & the people around the WTC would have heard them - but (reality bites) they did not.

[WNanette]

Does your planet have chocolate? I'd love to come for a visit...

[supertarget76]

Yes, lots of chocolate! mmmm.

[helpslipfranklins]

Have you not seen the many videos of witnesses claiming exactly what youre saying. Not hard to find a clip of FDNY talking about the multiple explosions they heard. Look around.

[supertarget76]

Yes, there are usually explosions/loud bangs in a building fire (probably more so in a skyscraper).

[Videot99]

You're sure not hearing the same NYPD and NYFD people I am. They say there were major explosions during ALL the collapses. They also say they were threatened if they said anything, but some spoke before the threats went out, and others refused to be silenced. This is further corroberated with the audio tapes finally released in August. Go check it out yourself, before calling people stupid!!!

[PoetryHound]

The NYPD and NYFD were not threatened. That's an unsubstantiated assertion. Tower 7 was heavily damaged by the collapse of the north tower and burned for 6 hours without any suppression attempts, possibly aggravated by the diesel storage and lines in the building. When it started to lean and crack, the NYFD pulled people out of the area, expecting the bldg to fall. No explosions were seen or heard when it fell.

[PoetryHound]

Explosions in WTC 1 & 2 occured as jet fuel cascaded down utility and elevator shafts to the bottoms of the building. These occured well before the buildings' collapse, unlike in a demolition. Many people heard things that sounded like explosions as well. There is no evidence of any bombs or detonators planted on site. The buildings began their collapses at the impact zones not at the bases as in demolitions. You're stupid if you think I called anyone stupid.

[Videot99]

Thanks - you just did it again. I guess I really must be stupid. If you have a gas stove, you better stop using it - the steel is going to melt on you. Steel pots, too, for that matter. I have video of statements directly from firemen and NYPD.

[PoetryHound]

Not sure what your point is here. I thought we were talking about whether there were planned demolitions or not and what the pre-collapse explosions were caused by.

[helpslipfranklins]

No point in arguing with Hound. Hes clueless to a fanatical point. Ive proven him wrong so many times on these issues I gave up. Hes really good at warping reality to suit his argument.

[helpslipfranklins]

Read up and you'll see the elevators had auto sealing devices to prevent fire from spreading that way. Also, even though plaster from the walls and the windows of the ground floors were blown off and out, there were NO firemarks anywhere to explain the big fireball theory. Plenty of aftermath pictures for evidence.

[PoetryHound]

Would you mind citing a source for your assertion that the elevators had auto sealing devices in order to prevent fire from spreading?

[PoetryHound]

According to Popular Mechanics, burning fuel traveling down the elevator shafts would have disrupted the elevator systems & caused extensive damage to the lobbies. NIST heard first-person testimony that "some elevators slammed right down" to the ground floor. "The doors cracked open on the lobby floor and flames came out and people died." Filmmaker Jules Naudet entered the WTC 1 lobby minutes after the first plane struck & saw victims on fire, a scene he found too horrific to film.

[PoetryHound]

This vid doesn't provide any evidence, much less prove anything. Instead of just asking questions, why not do some legit research. Instead of saying Tower 7 looked like a planned demolition & therefore it was a planned demolition, go find out what firemen and demolition experts say about it. BTW, they say the demolition conspiracy theory is BS.

[WNanette]

I'd love to come visit your parallel universe sometime.

[PoetryHound]

Well, it doesn't have all the distortions, misinterpretations, and baseless assertions of the 9-11 conspiracy theory universe, but I prefer it to the absurd land of particle beams, imaginary bombs and disappearing planes.

[bigbootz]

what ive always found odd about the wtc collapses was that not just one bot both the towers fell the exact same way....they both fell effortlessly straight down...the planes were travelling fast but seeing those flashes..im not sure what to think, did the CIA classify many documents regarding 911?

[Videot99]

Bigbootz - there are cover-ups layered on cover-ups. Please see 9/11 Press for Truth on Google Video for lots more...

[supertarget76]

The flashes are outside of the dense cloud of dust... Are they bombs that somehow failed to explode inside the building, but when thrown outside, somehow exploded all by themselves? Or are they what you should expect - window glass reflecting the sunlight.

[TruthBearer]

Those couldn't have been flashes, the sun was on the other side...

[supertarget76]

No, the sun was shining from the left, and a little to the back. Some of the flashes were in front of shaded areas, but the glass pieces were (evidently) in the sunlight. The flashes COULD NOT have been in the thick dust, or they would not have been visible (at least not as a point - maybe as a brightening of the area, but that is not the case).

[supertarget76]

The scientific explanation of how the WTC failed structually, is that the trusses softened from the heat and sagged downwards, pulling and bending the vertical members sideways; with all the weight on these members, and with them weakened by the heat, and BENT, there is no way they could have NOT failed.

I think that Bush is a crook, but the evidence says that Islamic radicals attacked America. The conspiracy theorists are so blinded by their hate of Bush, that they can't see the truth.

[n00binator91]

brother, u are absolutely FUCKING right. (cept the statement about bush) My friends dad died in those towers, and when he saw these videos, he was in a state of depression. THIS IS A SLAP IN THE FACE TO ALL 9/11 FAMILIES. god bless u dude. we need more patriots like u, supertarget.

[helpslipfranklins]

Tell that to the families that had to fight tooth and nail for over a year before Bush would even consider a 9/11 investigation. A crime this massive and historical, but no need for an investigation??? For both the JFK assassination and Pearl Harbor it took a week. Ask the families why 70% of the questions prepared for the commission were ignored. Yeah, go right ahead and ask the families, you morons.

[supertarget76]

No, no, NO! The WTC collapsed because of "hyper-speed steel eating termites" that government scientists secretly developed to collapse steel buildings and bridges, in a project code named "chomp-chomp". I read it on the internet, so it's gotta be true!!

[merged55]

HA the light poles still standing up on the path where "the airplane" supposed went through..idiots.

[Videot99]

So that answers ALL the questions?

[Fordism]

Ok guys, you get in a plane and crash at 800 mph?When you walk outta that plane send me a picture of whats left of that plane.Oh wait you wouldn't be able to because you'd be dead because of theexplosion of fuel tanks and the abrupt crash due to that little factor called THE GROUND!Also notice that there was no debris at any of the buildings, except for some papers,metal schrapnel,and piles of dust.You gonna tell me that the gov't went in there and froze time, stole all of the debris,and left?

[rockondon]

that metal is from a much smaller aircraft.explain how a commercial jetliner could fly so low?explain how

a jetliner can reach 800mph or are you lying?explain to me the bright red paint ??oh wait where are the wings?bush whacker

[snappa45]

dude, you hit the ground going about 500 miles an hour and see how much of you is left.

[Videot99]

I can guarantee it won't be absolutely NOTHING - no parts, no engine parts, etc (oh, yeah, except of course for a couple passports and other pieces of PAPER!) Sorry to be out of touch, I'm really wrapped up in an engineering problem right now. 30 years of designing electronics and I still run into things that make me go, "Huh?" But I'm working on a contracting by-the-job basis so I have to bang my head against the wall until either the wall or my head gives in. I'm getting way behind.

[sgsgsgdick]

Response 2:

Genuine question: is theory that hijacked planes were NOT flown into the towers? If so, I shouldn't even be in the debate because that is lunacy. It's equally crazy to believe the hijackers were part of a US government conspiracy. There are Islamic groups dedicated to attacking US interests - there just are. They've done it in the past. And that the hijackers came from their ranks is exhaustively documented and can't seriously be disputed.

[sgsgsgdick]

#5: And please don't say Qaeda is a front for "these people."

I've seen TerrorStorm and listened to Alex Jones. I think he's a crackpot and a radio shouter without the credibility or expertise to reach conclusions about 9/11.

Anyway, good luck to all of us in getting through this.

[sgsgsgdick]

I'm new to commenting, so please forgive the typos and errors. Thanks.

[Videot99]

Typos no problem-you're a competent debater and I enjoy the challenge. Plus you haven't used TOO many diminutives or expletives like most "myth debunkers." Watch that stuff-words like "tripe" and "crackpot" do not help your argument.

Working now-I'll get back soon.

[Videot99]

sgsgsgdick, sorry, I forgot about this debate. This is too complex an issue to take on these little comments. I would ask that you go to google video and watch the new video "9/11 Mysteries". Then we'll have a common basis for debate.

[sgsgsgdick]

Response 1 to Videot99: Yup, I've looked at the "mountain of evidence." I probably have not studied the issue as "obsessively" as you have, but I've done my homework. And I have looked obsessively at the various videos, which to me tell a clear story: planes crash into buildings, start massive fires, and buildings collapse. All of the flashes and booms and extra plans are hokum.

[sgsgsgdick]

#3

The hjijackers' path from jihadi ranks to the 9/11 planes - and the 9/11 plot - started before Bush's election, and no informed person can seriously believe the Islamists are so in collusion with the Bushies as to have carried out the plan together.

[sgsgsgdick]

#4: I agree that the Bushies have used 9/11 as cover for abusive and destructive power grab and an idiotic war. But that just convinces me the Bushies are zealots and fools, nothing more.

You cite Northwoods, and say "these people" also carried out 9/11 "except scale." Friend, Northwoods was (a) 40 years ago at the height of anti-Communist fervor, and (b) not implemented. Al Qaeda &co are (a) very real and very current, and (b) have a proven history of attacks that predate 9/11.

[sgsgsgdick]

Conspiracy theorists: just. plain. wrong. If we listen to your tripe we will all surely be killed. Al Qaeda and its offshoots are real, and they want you dead. (Of course, the Bush administration has made things much worse in most ways, but that doesn't mean they planned and carried out the thing.) Please focus on the real problems.

[Videot99]

Sorry, but I've been studying this issue rather obsessively for 3 years now. I am not a "theorist" - I KNOW Arabs did not bring down those towers. Considering that 9/11 has been used as the excuse for everything from war to the cancellation of our constitutional liberties, YOU'RE the one that is not focusing on the real problem. Have you really looked at the growing mountain of evidence?

[Videot99]

If you truly care about the future of the US and the world (and it sounds like you do), I very strongly urge you to watch TerrorStorm (rated 5 stars, free at Google video) and carefully consider the data presented there. 9/11 is actually only part of the sad story - the entire "War on Terror" is a giant fraud being perpetrated against the citizens of the world. It's not an easy thing to face.

[helpslipfranklins]

Great clip and info youre putting out. For those of you reading that are really concerned and would like to follow along. Research North American Union and NAFTA superhighway. Were just getting started.

[Videot99]

Is it really so difficult to believe that there is a criminal element of government that would pull something like this? If that's how you think, please Google the Northwoods Papers from the 60's, recently released under the FOIA, epecially the last 5 pages. There's nothing new here, except scale. These people are getting desparate - that's why they're so dangerous and must be exposed --> now!

[Videot99]

8. The fires, as is evident in the videos and from firefighters' reports, were small and smothering before huge explosions sealed their fate. Furthermore the buildings had MASSIVE overdesigned steel structures designed to withstand several hits by commercial jet liners. 9. If WTC7 was truly so damaged on the relatively undocumented side (and I have seen pictures that show no such thing) it would not have fallen straight down is it did, but would have tilted.

[Videot99]

6. The temperatures found under the debris fields far exceeded anything that fuel fires could have produced. Explosives and thermate are the only possibility. 7. Why did Gulliani have all the debris shipped straight out of the country so nobody could test it, even as fire engineers were protesting the illegality of this manuever? Fotunately Dr. Jones was able to abtain some samples from debris that was to be used for memorials.

[Videot99]

5. The very nature of the symmetry all 3 collapses, most especially WTC7, screams extremely well done demolition. Have you seen the neat pile of leftover debris from WTC7, with the walls piled on top of the interior exactly as is the goal of controlled demolition?

[Videot99]

1. Witnesses have said that sections of the towers had been closed down in the weeks before for "electrical improvements. 2. Even NIST has backed of from the fuel fire argument because the flames could not have been hot enough to melt steel. 3. There was a bank much closer to the towers than WTC7 that was truly damaged but did not collapse. 4. The owner, Larry Silverstein, himself admitted WTC7 was "pulled."

[inflate98]

Combine the structural damage to the lower and mid-level floors from the falling debris of Tower 1 with the fire throughout the lower floors, and it is easy to see how the building would have collapsed. No effort was made to fight the fire, first because there was no water, and second because much of the equipment to do so was destroyed already anyway. The risk to the remaining equipment and men was too great.

[inflate98]

What is being ignored by many of the conspiracy theorists is that WTC 1, 2 and 7 were each of very non-standard construction, and this was part of why they came down. WTC7 was built on top of an existing ConEd power plant, with a sort of steel "bridge" arcing over the plant below. There was a huge fire, fed by thousands of gallons of diesel fuel, at the base of the building. There was no water to fight this fire.

[inflate98]

Your last statement is the strongest argument I can think of as to why WTC was NOT intentionally demolished. It would have been fairly obvious to building occupants if explosives were being put in place to bring the building down before 9/11 - in particular because building 7 was the command post for emergency operations in Manhattan. It was not merely some random office building.

[Videot99]

(Sorry I accidentally removed your last comment inflate98 - I was trying to edit my last comment.) If WTC7 was demolished, and it was obviously a very professional job, not something a couple of terrorists could have pulled off, at the very least it proves that explosives were planted before the attacks. There was not enough time on 9/11 for a job like that to have been planned and implemented.

[Videot99]

Futhermore, anyone who believes all these politically convenient terrorist attacks are what we are being told they are really needs to examine the facts much more closely. Every attack shows all the signs of government sponsored synthetic terrorism. We are being manipulated in a very, very ugly way by people that don't don't give squat about the welfare of humanity. Please wake up.

[hogarth2006]

There is no credible evidence available to prove that anything other than the effects of the aircraft impacts and resulting fires caused the collapse of the towers. None. The average IQ is 100 by definition. This means that 50% of people are below average. Guess which half wear tinfoil hats?

[Videot99]

Anyone who can watch the collapse of WTC7 and not think there's something very wrong going on there is not processing reality...for whatever reason. I don't care what your IQ is!

[inflate98]

Since there are no clear pictures or videos of the OTHER SIDE of the building during its collapse, it is impossible for laymen to come to a judgement other than the official explanation. To do so is to make assumptions that cannot be proven.

Besides, even if WTC7 WERE deliberately pulled down, what does that prove?

[SnoopySuited]

First of all 800 C is still only 1400 F. And I was refering to a celsius measurement. No one said that the steel melted. You show me expert testimony of someone saying that's what happened.

[SnoopySuited]

WTC 7 was 47 stories tall. In all the videos we see of the WTC 7 collapse we can only see about 20 stories. The rest is not visible because of other buildings. How can we make accurate descriptions about how long it took to fall, or if compares to a controlled demolition when we see less than half of the building?

[cagwa]

You're an idiot. You've proven nothing.

[knowledgeispower777]

Rasteve is George Bush.

[rasteve]

The towers and wtc7 were collapsed by fire, and Kennedy was shot by Oswald. Your goverment is the honest in the world and they would never start a war for economic reasons. God bless america! The US world destruction tour is continued.......

Greetings from the good old Europa,Germany

[lfl420]

Fire has never caused a steel structure to collapse.

Ever.

Yet on 9/11/01 THREE steel structures all collapsed at near freefall speed into their own footprint...due to fire?!? I don't need any credentials besides my eyes and common sense to realize that the official story it total bullshit. I suggest you all open your eyes and minds as well.

[TraditionalConservat]

It seems impossible that a steel frame and reinforced concrete wouldn't buckle at least. A freefall without buckling seems highly unlikely to me now. This video makes the planned demolition theory uncomfortably credible:

www.loosechange911.com

[rapsody]

we shouldnt believe dr. steven jones and mit engineer jeff king, but we should believe you?

building 7 being shorter than the twin towers somehow implies that it collapsed due to fire? i dont see the connection

http://www.911research.com/wtc­/analysis/official/index.html

http://www.911research.com/wtc­/analysis/challenge.html

[Videot99]

2. Most of the flashes (there are many) are in the shadows of that dust and smoke.

[Videot99]

You don't have to be an expert - just use your own eyes!

1. 6.2 seconds is the gravity freefall of a building the height of WTC7. How does fire do that? How does fire make it fall straight down into its own footprint?

[chibiq]

Another conspiracy nut who miraculously became an expert on plane crashes, building structures, explosives, and demolitions right after 9/11.

[chibiq]

1. The building was SHORTER than the twin towers, and weakened by the fire.. easily explained.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S­teven_E._Jones (ctrl+F to "However, no details of this analysis or proof of the verification by universities have yet been provided.")

[chibiq]

2. The flashes were metal, glass, etc reflecting the sun. (Note the sun's position shown by the smoke's shadow)

[koganinpo]

Did you see WC7 fall? it fell straight down right into its basement, also wheres the fire i dont see any?

[hunghunk2006]

it doesnt take an "EXPERT" to do the research readily available in literature and is easily accessible! scientific facts perhaps make him more of an expert than you? free fall, steel beams need 5000 degrees to melt like were found in the base of the WTC footprint, yet jet fuel only gets up to 2500 at best? perhaps YOU are the nut here, tell me how the weather is in your own anal cavity

[SnoopySuited]

I love how conspiracy mess up the facts. When the 911 conspiracy fad first started, CTs said that you need 1200 degrees to melt steel, then 2000, now its 5000? Truth is, you only need 800 degree heat for steel to weaken. You don't need steel to melt for the strength to be compromised.

[hunghunk2006]

no dumbass, you need 800 degrees CELSIUS!!!!! try doing the conversion method on that, i'm sure u will come out to far more than 4000, nearly 5000 degrees. and you DO need the steel to melt for it to be compromised, THEY SAY FLAT OUT THAT THE STEEL MELTED LEADING TO THE COLLAPSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! which is not scientifically possible with burning jet fuel made of kerosene!!!

[koganinpo]

thank you, i was about to say if you dont know the diffrence between C' and F' how can you say anything about science haha

[chibiq]

It's warm, thanks. Now tell me something, do you honestly think the steel part of the building was the only part that was burning, and the only part capable of bringing down the structure as it did? Of course the structure did fail, and the steel beams obviously gave way, but there are more vulnerable things supporting the building. Don't you think if something that huge was planned, that they would've at least had the brain capacity to hide the explosives on the interior of the building?

[hunghunk2006]

THE FIREFIGHTERS IN THE TOWERS THEMSELVES REPORTED ONLY SMALL FIRES!!!! the steel beams could only GIVE WAY as proven in many buildings that were on fire, specifically in Madrid, that burned away all BUT the steel beams. the proof is in the SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE! wtf are you talkin about hiding it ON THE INSIDE of the building? no shit!!!!

[chibiq]

Fast-forward the video to 1:02, and read. "Flashes in the Collapsing Towers - NOTE: Thermate residue Has now been found In WTC debris!" I'm sorry man, but it just seems very unlikely and unreasonable to think explosives pulled the towers down.. and that was Spain, not all steel buildings are made the same. Every joint in the steel structure decides its fate, and obviously with all of that weight pulling on it..

[hunghunk2006]

it was a very VERY similar structure that is my point, look into it please. also, there is NO WAY ! the tower came down in 8 and a half seconds, that is nearly the speed of freefall. they try to sell us on THE PANCAKE METHOD, saying floor fell onto floor onto floor, so on and so on....that would NOT cause the freefall speed. im sorry, i got my views, you have yours.

[SnoopySuited]

Which tower fell in 8 and a half seconds? Towers 1 and 2 took 13-16 seconds, and tower 7 took at least 8, but like i said, the view is obscured.

[chibiq]

most if not all of the floors were on fire for hours, all of them being weakened in the process. if the collapse started at a lower floor, as each floor fell on to the first collapsed floor, the one above should collapse.

for example, that old game, Jenga. The lower you take pieces out, the more likely and more violent the collapse will be.

[SnoopySuited]

You have to provide evidence when you make these comments. The firefighters reported 'isolated fires' not small fires. I know what quote you are talking about and the firefighter was on floor 78, about 20 stories below where the plane hit. Is that a small fire?

Also, the top part of the building in Madrid did collapse.

[hunghunk2006]

the TOP PART! the majority of that building, THE ONE THAT WAS BUILT WITH A SIMILAR STRUCTURE TO THAT OF THE WTC, REMAINED THE ONLY STANDING PORTION. ISOLTATED fires would not be able to bring down that entire tower building!

[koganinpo]

exactly and in WC7(not the two towers) theres no fire on the video

[Videot99]

A note on thermate in the debris: Dr. Jones announced the discovery via spectroscopic analysis at the recent convention in LA. He worked with two different samples that had been set aside for memorials, and then had two other universities verify his findings. A peer reviewed report is due out soon. Here are his findings (after pasting remove the SPACE that YouTube keeps putting in the word "scientific"):

http://www.prisonplanet.com/ar­ticles/june2006/200606scientif­icanalysis.htm

[Videot99]

A note on the pancake theory vs. reality: Dr. Judy Wood, a multi-degreed mechanical/materials engineer, has shown that even under unreasonably idealized conditions a pancake collapse would have taken 30 seconds, not the 10 seconds shown in video. This indicates the entire frame of each tower must have gone limp simultaneously.

http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/­BilliardBalls.html

[leitermann]

haha, I like that music for sure, as for building 7, i need no flashes to be convinced, though they add to my conviction, i DARE Anyone to find me a more perfect demolition - be it controlled or not - than building 7. I recently tivod a history channel show on demolition to learn a bit about the mechanics of it all, and of course see if i could find any implosions nearly as precice and uniform as #7... there must have been 20 or more - but not a single one half as beautiful as that.

[leitermann]

and of course, some insist that the appearance of a 'uniform collapse' onto it's footprint was only an illusion from the many angles that i've seen it from, and that it was infact very sloppy and lopsided from other vantage points, and much more fire-damaged than it appeared... but to me that seems rather insignificant considering it was at least precise enough not to topple over onto any of the surrounding buildings, which is quite a fortunate accident...

[leitermann]

and most importantly of course, the fire - raging inferno it possibly may have been - was spread throughout 4, MAYBE as many as 6 floors of the 47 story overengineered steel framed building...

In the past 50 years there have been hundreds of very serious fires in steel framed buildings, some for close to or more than 24 straight hours, leaving nothing but the Steel Frame itself intact...

[leitermann]

Yet no steel framed high rise building in known history has collapsed because of fire (besides of course wtc1 and 2)...

And perhaps the planes weekened the structural integrity of the north and south towers enough that the fires were actually able to trigger the "pancake effect" (which i'm very skeptical of, but isn't entirely inplausible)...

[leitermann]

...but I see no pancaking, and certainly no evidence of consecutive floors pausing for even a moment while slamming down on top of one another, as I would expect to see in an uncontrolled colapse...

[leitermann]

...but what I do see is what appears to be the penthouse first disapearing followed by a slight dip in the center of the exterior walls, then by a 6.5 second 47 story collapse... If it WERE a controlled demo, I'd give it an 10 out of 10. Plus the thermate, and all the government agencies and corporate files occupying it... etc...etc...etc... i'm going to sleep, 911, inside job, believe whatever you want, i'm tired.

[antiklaus]

interesting, but the music is a little distracting in places... despite that, the video itself makes a lot of valid points.

[jkh0100]

very interesting.. i honestly dont trust this government.. even before this video..