yeah, these are people who research religion, not the actual evidence on the 9'11 events. So in short it would be nice to have a reliable team do research on it and then talk about it.
Well wait a minute. I know most theories are off the wall and for people who want an alternative reason who can't accept the truth. But there are some that present some decent evidence (like 9-11). You can't just say that all conspiracy theories are mumbo jumbo. Like these guys actually know what happened. I believe in not believing everything your told especially by the government and Wikipedia. The more I watch these guys the more arrogant they get.
Some evidence are the small balls of metal found in the rubble of the towers. Several experiments have shown that these balls of metal can only be produced in a thermite reaction involving steel. I'm not saying I'm on this caller's side but there is evidence out there that needs to be refuted by the US government. Not all of the conspiracy theories regarding 9/11 involve purely the absence of evidence.
Am I the only one who thinks the events of that day happened as they say, but al-Qaeda wasn't responsible, nor any conspiracy larger than a few dozen? Why would bin Laden deny it at first? And with the American people out for blood, isn't al-Qaeda a more genial target than Saudi Arabia, in which most of the terrorists lived? How did he hide so long in Abbotabad? Doesn't it make more sense they bribed him with amnesty to take credit for what he was rumored to be planning anyway?
Saying that the government would have no interest in revealing videos of the plane hitting the Pentagon is just plain stupid. According to a NY Times poll, 86% of Americans believe the government is hiding something about 9/11. Since the Pentagon official story is the weakest one (for lack of evidence) why wouldn't they make these videos public?
For people who don't have access to all the evidence, these guys are being too naive for believing so blindly in the official theory.
@cassioam Why? It's obvious from your posts that you lean towards the completely insane and questionable. I don't think you'd know brilliant or profound if it fucked you in the ass.
@cassioam Ok, let me be blunt, douchebag. I personally knew someone who died on the plane that went into the pentagon. I lived in the area. i take umbrage at two bit little shits like you that want to enhance their penis size by latching on to conspiracy bulllshit. You don't know, and you opinion is worthless and insulting. Clear enough?
@moopism Oh, that's why you're so emotional? Is that why you keep calling completely strangers stupid and douchebags instead of having a rational debate? Even if I decided to believe in an internet troll like you, what would that prove? People who were in the plane that allegedly hit pentagon died, everyone knows that and that was never a pro-inside-job argument, so I miss your point. Anyway, you have bigger issues, man. Maybe therapy will help you the your rage problem.
What it proves is that unhinged conspiracy theorists have no sense of decorum. I'm done with you. Thank you for proving you are simply too stupid to even express common empathy.
Unfortunately for you, I doubt you will ever seek the help you need.
The government official theory is also a conspiracy theory. Matt thinks that "peer reviewed scientific study" can be applied in a situation where only government officials had access to the evidence. I don't know where the one reporter who claims he saw a plane hit the Pentagon fits these peer reviewed scientific studies.
It's pretty ironic that Matt now decided to consider one eye witness as evidence. This just shows how he is clearly being emotionally biased.
I thing that in my opinion supports some kind of conspiracy is that they named Bin Laden within 30 minutes the first plane had hit the tower. I watched it live and remember it well. Even the 14-year-old me had trouble believing it.
I'm on the fence. Maybe I lean towards the opinion that US government let it happen, in one way or another. For example, to me it seems they let the plane hit the pentagon.
@Apjooz Oh they definately took advantage of it. There is some evidence they may have known something was going to happen and let it. Maybe, who knows?
For me as long as the deductive argument about free fall can be shown to be false they whole inside job theory loses most of its support. Building 7 started to collapse 8 seconds before the 'crimp' most truthers speak of.
The twin towes outer walls were hung from the core in a way, and their fall makes sense. The core fell much slower.
The the 3 buildings falling at free fall & concrete and metal melted together, thus breaking the laws of physics. In order to believe that you have to believe in the supernatural, and if you believe in the supernatural then Ahla the true messiah just proved himself! I can find NO PROOF of any supernatural thing, so if you can Great prove it to Amazing James Randi and collect one million dollars!
I don't know why it's so hard to believe that certain parts of government let 9/11 happen and reenforced what was already happening. There have been government agents who have claimed that the white house knew Al Qaeda's plan. The planes hit the building, the pentagon, and one crash landed. Sure, those things happened. It still doesn't mean steel towers collapse due to fire l at free fall speed through every other support truss in the building. Show me the physics, NIST fails to be convincing.
I want to sell these two nimrods a Mannlicher Carcano rifle that shoots magic bullets. Although I think the magic airplanes that knock down three huge office buildings but only hit two trumps even that.
at the same time being a SKEPTIC should mean being skeptical of official Government positions, it's a FACT Governments lie and what starts wars like Gulf of Tonkin incident leading to Vietnam, but most conspiracy theories are arguments from ignorance, they use some truth then construct a myth based on what some want to believe, there's alot of things we will never know but nothing seems more unlikely than the 'official story', the most powerful and secure nation taken down how it did, unlikely
You truthers are stupid! I'm a Christian, but even I know it wasn't an inside job. Show me a peer-reviewed paper that validates your kooky theory. Unless you have that, your insane theory is false. A lot of you truther atheists suck too, for being so stupid to not aknowledge God's existence. Read The Answers Research Journal (A PEER-REVIEWED science journal from the perspective of creationists). See? I'm right, you're all wrong ;) Creation is real. There's no kooky conspiracy. Losers -_-
Anyone who believes the 911 conspiracy has not thought it out at all. The cover up would require the cooperation of hundreds of thousands and cost billions of dollars, and no one would have to have come forward for the last 10 YEARS.
@Antamar123 Really? Well, given the track record in certain cases such as JFK, Watergate, Iran-Contra, the Anthrax attacks, the 7-7 attacks, the drug war, the Vince Foster case, and the Oklahoma City Bombing , don't be to sure that any insiders with a conscience would be too quick too come forward.
The cover up would not require hundreds of thousands of people; maybe hundreds at most.
@kevtruth I agree and Bobby Kennedy as well. I am not at present adding them, but look at persons taken out in aircraft "accidents": Ron Brown, JFK, Jr and his wife and sister in law, and Paul Wellstone.
God is a spirit, an immaterial conscious being. All things in the universe consists of matter and/or energy, so if God isn't matter, is energy by definition. Energy is the capacity to do work, is eternal, omnipresent, wasn't created and can't be destroyed, can create matter, was the only thing present before the BB, and the energy required to make the universe must had been powerful. All these match Biblical descriptions of God. He wants us to elevate our consciousness to the next level, is real
These people say conspiracy theorist just want to have attention and be right well that's what they are doing. They keeping talking about this guys lack of evidence and that he has to put forward evidence and the side they support hasn't provided evidence either they just said this is our story and it's right they didn't prove anything
@cacasarq Unless you want to live in reality and remember there where hundreds of people working in the building every single day as well as people outside the building every single day as well as bomb sniffing dogs that patrolled the building every single day... then it's not "easy to believe" that they managed to plant explosives inside a building and then set them up so perfectly that it made it appear as a collapse from the top after a fire could have easily damaged if not set them off early
I didnt know they patrolled the towers every day with dogs. I can belive that. Make sense... If it is truth, one of the best arguments. But I never seen any news with this information.. And Brazil's youtube has some of the videos censored. Our TV networks just buy the info.. If you have any link to prove what you said..please sand to me. I realy dont like the "inside idea job" ... Its just very strange,,Thanks.
@cacasarq The bomb sniffing dogs where common as the towers had been bombed before in Feb 26 1993 (just google it should come up fairly quick). This was also by Al Qaeda by the way lending more credence to them being behind the planes (the planes being the most damning evidence against the inside job conspiracy because how would they convince people to kill themselves for the plan? Certainly not money.)
There where rumors that they had pulled the dogs for a week but even then planting (Cont)
@cacasarq (cont) enough explosives to detonate multiple floors at the same time whilst remaining hidden from view of the thousands of people working there and contained enough to not be damaged or prematurely set off by the fires that raged for a few hours is not feasible.
I agree with the caller.. the gov has the evidence.. just show it. Obama showed his birth certificate and shut 95% of the birthers and left the crazies in it's place!
I agree with the caller.. the gov has the evidence.. just show it. Obama showed his birth certificate and shut 95% of the birthers and left the crazies in it's place!
@DephyOne that is an argument for that specific person not being a homosexual. If two consenting adults want to be gay, we should let them. If you are using a condom there is almost no bacterial transfer.
wait guys, we can't have it both ways. The reporter who repeatedly says he saw the plane, isn't that the same as the people who saw Joseph Smith's tablets? You give the 'one reporter' credence, then the people trotted out to say the they saw the tablets - we gonna accept them? Or the Sheriff that saw the UFO?
The claims are a bit different, though. Magic tablets, plane hitting a building. As for the UFO thing, sure, he saw a UFO. But, his claims about what it was are suspect.
Planes exist, the pentagon exists. We know planes could hit the pentagon. But, we don't know that angels brought golden plates to some guy in the 1800s. Not all claims are created equal, as Matt has said once before.
@meanpersonable The claim of having seen the plane and the claim of having seen an alien craft are not of equal strength. Joseph Smith's tablets, likewise, would be easy to misidentify.
@IoEstasCedonta If you mean that planes are known to exist, but there has never been any main stream proof of alien craft, I agree. So a person claiming to have seen a plane somewhere should be shown more respect than someone who claims to have seen an alien craft, on some continuum of credibility. I am not sure what you mean by JS's tablets "would be easy to misidentify."
@ftw522 as an athiest who has gay friends I can still find some arguments another rational human being might have against gays.One being: When a man has sex with a woman (vaginal) he is not exposed to the bacterial and viral diseases that would be found in a mans fecal cavities. I's dirtier than the given option. I have no problem with gays at all I just thought id throw that in there.
@Trucidofy you must remember the the Glasser siblings who are on the show are Jewish.. you should see one episode when the girl talks about how judaism is a "ethicity" while christianity isnt.. they are both stupid as religions and its hypocritical as hell lol.
So this is critical of 'conspire theory' huh? this is from 'a-theists' who should know the propaganda of the church was a conspire trip...?
I bet these people dont go into the CO-INCIDENCES between 9/11 and the UK 7/7 ?check this 9/11 - 7/7 : Modus Operandi - The Anatomy of Attack Part 1 /watch?v=5a7aKaDS7CE
@zezt 2--NOR the occultist clues pointing to a mindset that is connected with SECRET SOCIETIES with symbolism etc---errr didn't Bush AND Kerry admit to being initiated into the Skull and Bones secret society and BOTH wont share what it is---hence SECRET, hence CONSPIRE. wake the fuck up. And also dig how the evil conspiring fukers havn't even invited the first responders to the 9/11 anniversary!! Yeah. checkout: I CALL BULLSHIT! THIS COUNTRY IS FUCKED UP! /watch?v=afWh_gqVo50
Agree with the hosts on believers & pitchman holding secret answers, & critical thinking.
Caller, are you amilar with the Popular Mechanics article on 9/11?. The caller needs to know that steel SOFTENENS at temperatures BELOW the burning temp of jet fuel (bu 600 degrees). This weakens the strength of steel causing it to collapse under load. That's why the planes were targeted in the middle to upper third. Weight load of the non-impact floors above impact zone caused the collapse.
Unfortunately, eye witnesses are not reliable evidence, sometimes we will see what we expect to see, hear what we expect to hear or misinterpret what we have heard or seen.I could not hear explosions as the towers fell, it could have been the sound of floors pancaking into each other but what first weakened those supports for the towers to fall so neatly into it's footprint? Thermite???
Building.7 had no plane crash into it, but it too pancaked down into it's footprint.HOW & WHY??
@sheilach1 While a single eye witness might not be a reliable source for informations, many eye witnesses saying the same thing can be considered reliable.
WTC 7: Did you miss the part that this building was hit by quite a large chunk of debris falling from the main towers? It was also burning for quite a long time before collapsing.
I have saved ALL the images & videos I could find of the events on 9-11-2001.The wings should have left marks on the face of the Pentagon but didn't, they should have sheared off but didn't, the hole was right at ground level but no engines gouged the lawn which must have happened if it was a 757 that hit the Pentagon, the only video showed something flying low at ground level but it left no drag marks from the engines so it could not have been a 757. What was it???
Still no EVIDENCE of what hit the Pentagon.The only film clip released showed a few, edited frames one of which showed a twisted white trail of smoke from something moving behind a object the obscured it, the next frame showed the explosion of the impact and burning fuel? or bomb? or missile??
That is ONLY evidence that something flew into the Pentagon NOT WHAT flew into the Pentagon.The 757 had large engines hanging below the wings, why didn't they gouge the lawn and where are they?
@sheilach1 "Still no EVIDENCE of what hit the Pentagon."
watch?v=YTNRkb7AaQk
"The 757 had large engines hanging below the wings, why didn't they gouge the lawn and where are they?"
As long as a plane is in the air, the wings a slightly bent upwards due to lift (force). The engines are thus not as low as when a plane on the ground.
these guys r such clowns, its like why is it so impossible to believe that 9/11 could have been a inside job? it clearly was, from the way bush acted when he was first told, from the way the buildings collapsed lyk a controlled demolition, from the way they found Molten steel at the bottom of all 3 buildings, from the way that everybody around heard numerous explosions before/after the planes hit. is this not enough 4 u 2 even contemplate whether what they told u was true? u guys r like sheep.
If there were other videos of a passenger plane hitting the Pentagon I would love to see them.
I saw some small sheet metal parts on the lawn but no wings, tail or engines and the bodies recovered in the Pentagon could have been from people working there.I suspect it was a armed drone that struck the Pentagon, not a passenger jet. Could such a frail craft plow through so many walls?
Isn't odd that that "plane" hit the only side of the Pentagon that had just been reinforced?
Other buildings have had fires and did not collapse, other buildings have had planes fly into them and their still standing.Buildings don't collapse into their footprint unless their supports are expertly cut with explosives or thermite.
Building 7 only had a fire and yet it also collapsed into it's footprint.
The Empire state building was struck by a large bomber during WWII and it's still standing.Other tall buildings have had terrible fires, still standing.
"Other buildings have had fires and did not collapse, other buildings have had planes fly into them and their still standing."
"The Empire state building was struck by a large bomber during WWII and it's still standing.Other tall buildings have had terrible fires, still standing."
You're doing as if the E.S.B. had the same architecture as the twins towers. The supporting elements of the twins was their steel facades and these was severely damaged by the kinetic energy of the planes.
I hate to say this, but the absence of releasing evidence (talking about the footage) DOES make me quite suspicious, yes. You know? It's kind of like how there's no evidence of God..it makes me suspicious that there is not one....O_O
A settlement is forced upon people because if they refuse the settlement, they will get NOTHING by suing!, the big money ALWAYS WINS these cases.
Never in history has ANY building hit by a plane or on fire EVER pancaked down at free fall speed like the trade center buildings - NEVER.How handy that they were just sold to a developer who bought a fat insurance policy in the unlikely event of them being destroyed . Payed off big didn't it.
@sheilach1 Give me another incedent in history of a plane - and not just any plane; a large passenger plane - striking a building.
What happens when supports are weakened, as in the towers? Whatever they're supporting falls down.
As for the insurance policy: is it wrong for everybody apart from you to take out insurance? When they took out insurance, why couldn't it be for if a fire occurred, or the plumbing broke? insurance is money this is set aside for possible repairs or replacements.
If there was a aircraft that flew into the Pentagon, were is the EVIDENCE? No wings, no engines, no gear.There were many cameras that would have shown what flew into the Pentagon, some were at the Pentagon itself but the FBI confiscated those cameras and have NEVER released those tapes. WHY?
To kill this conspiracy, just release those tapes.Yes, I know ONE tape was released that was edited so that only some frames were shown and no passenger jet could be seen.
I'm glad that this show dedicated an episode to this particular topic. There should be more of these. It makes me feel glad that there's actually some sanity in the world.
I used to think Russell and Matt had scientific minds, but after watching these videos I have serious doubts. Why? Their lack of curiosity and they seem to have no interest in the 9/11 issues. Here are just a few: 1) 100-200 times the normal rate of short stock selling of TWA and Americans airlines for the day of 9/11 2) The four flight recorders were not found at WTC1 & 2 (never has occurred in land crash). 3) NORAD ran exercises, the day of 9/11 (which sent US military jets to Alaska/Canada).
@Trucidofy P.s, I like how you avoided how you got my age completely wrong, EVEN THOUGH IT SAYS IT BLATANTLY ON MY PROFILE.
Oh, you checked me did you? What'd you do, go to my Youtube profile? This obviously tells you a lot about me personally...enlighten me, what should I be investigating? And why do you assume I haven't investigated - what's that based on?
You MUST be joking about being a teacher, all you must do is teach kids to be illiterate and immature...
@Trucidofy 1. My explanation was your poorly put together sentences, incorrect grammar and spelling, and general incoherence with what you're talking about. AND YOU SAY YOU'RE A TEACHER
2. The insult came from you, first.
3. Keep on attacking? What the heck, it's Youtube dude...I expressed dislike to your paragraphs of caveman babble, then you responded with more caveman babble. Why would I listen to you tell me to leave? =/
4. Get what eventually?! What are you talking about dude xD
@Trucidofy ...I was thinking about touching this, but no. I cannot. It must be a troll. P.s I'm 19 years old =/ That's past mandatory schooling, brother.
@Trucidofy Yet you can't string a literate sentence together. Therefore you must be an American teacher, in which there evidently isn't a high standard put in place to become one.
Releasing the pentagon video tapes would do nothing; look at the birthers. They said Obama was not born in Hawaii, so Obama releases his birth certificate. That wasn't good enough so Obama releases his "long form" which is generally not released by government agencies. Now Orly Taitz is on TV yammering about Selective Service forms and Trump is questioning how did Obama get into college. You can never provide enough evidence!
@ThincKritically Sure, and I never you YOU were a conspiracy theorist. Yes, Im surprised over Maths lack of reasoning (suported by evidence) in this video. Like when he claimed that he saw the planes hit, and just knew the towers would fall. Thats no different from the people saying, I felt fyssy inside, and just knew that it was God. So yes, they did a bad job on this one, but I still think they are correct. And I still think the current version of what happened is correct.
@ThincKritically No see, absense of evidence doesnt make the other side right. ANd what evidence is lacking btw? And even if we couldnt explain why the towers went down, that doesnt mean that the side saying CIA was behind it, and the bush administration KNEW it gains any credability.
isn't "a plane crashed into the pentagon" a claim? where is the evidence to support the claim? a reporter on a US news channel is enough evidence for you?
The fact is this: when someone says they believe religion because theres evidence for that in the bible or whatever, you say its crazy How can you trust some stoneage old uneducated people ? The only reason being that its not what you like
dont you see that youre the same?
"A reporter said it was a plane" seriously? an engine proves a plane?
you dont use the scientific method at all.
I gotta say half of the atheists are more idiotic than religious people
@mHalfLife No no no, LOL. First of all, they are not claiming anything here as far as I can tell. And btw, saying a missile hit it is also a claim. Saying CIA was behind it and bush know is ANOTHER claim. They are responding to these claims. But yes, im surprised by their lack of reasoning in this video too
People with no engineering background ao knowledge of physics talking about what planes do when they crash into buildings. Prove the bombs were there, truthers.
@Tarn1968 No they don't. Christians, at least, say that they don't have the answers, that God will tell them later, and are encouraged to try and "save" unbelievers for their own good. Truthers claim to know all the answers from blurry videos, taking things out of context, and illogical demonstrations, then insist everyone who doesn't agree with them is either a sheep, shill, or conspirator.
Search "Richard Gage Cardboard Box" if you don't believe me. Note the idiotic comments on that video.
it is very likely to be an inside job because physics shows that buildings dont fall that way (unless they're made to fall that way). building dont fall at all (at least they shouldnt since they're designed to with stand attacks). and kerosene doesnt melt steal BUT thermite does and was found at ground zero but dismissed by the government.
@SSHitMan well there is no point telling my physics credentials ( A* student) BUT it sounds like you dont know simple Newtonian physics. let me explain: a building (like WTC)cant fall at free fall speed because of the steel structure inside slows it down considerably and it WILL make it fall to one side (like jenga allways falls to one side). so why dont you look at the evidence and use science to check the results. 3000 people died that day with no real untempered evidence being given public
A stack of jenga sticks ranks as one of the most incompetent comparisons to the towers since Richard Gage used cardboard boxes to model steel buildings. Rather than use your "A* student" creditials to leverage incompetent demonstrations as fact, you need to be consulting engineers other than the incapable AE911truth members.
@kyuubi4square IT WAS NOT MENT TO COMPARE EXACTLY HOW IT FELL just that something with structure falls to the side like the fucking WTC and jenga. so go do some research an dont believe everything you are told on belief.
Take your own advice. Any competent engineer will tell you that the WTC construction does not allow for the kind of "fall" you BELIEVE it should have had. You lose when you make assumptions about how a building performs without knowing the implications of its construction. This isn't belief, it's fact, and if you're a physics student congrats on the grades but your assumption would equate to a failing grade in any structures or architecture geared course, plain and simple.
@kyuubi4square that is what i said. the structure makes it very very improbable(if not impossible) to fall in the way it did. that is why people hypothesize that the nano thermite could have been used to cut the structure in specific ways to make the 3 buildings fall in the exact same way. the twin towers fell at free fall speed straight down yes, impossible with the steel structure inside as you said (and as i said). and WTC7 fell in the same way as the two without being hit at all.
As I said the "topple like a tree" scenario is incompatible with the design of the towers. They fell precisely as they were expected to; straight down
The tube-in-tube design was the downfall, the floor connections were sheered apart by the force of the floors falling before the loads could be transferred to the core columns, thus the core was the last part of the towers to collapse. Once again, ask a competent engineer, stop guessing with your lack of education
@kyuubi4square People are constantly trying to blame the tube-in-tube design because that is the only thing they can make hay out of but where do we ever see the layout of the horizontal beams in the core. The length of beams in the core had to be more than double the height of columns at each 12 foot level. So how many tons of steel were on each level of the building?
The NIST could not put that in 10,000 pages. They couldn't even specify the total for the concrete.
@ThePhysicsOf WTC 1/2 were never designed to withstand a plane that was first built after they were completed loaded heavily with fuel crashing into them.
The steel was not melted. It was heated. Take a spoon and try to bend it. Then grab some oven gloves and heat it on your stove until it glows. Note how much easier it is to bend.
@EGRJ well it shows your research then because the steel WAS melted which is not possible by PLANE fuel (POSSIBLE with nano-thermite which traces was found at the scene). molten metal was flowing for WEEKS after. your argument fails because of the lack of research you have done.
@ThePhysicsOf The cut steel was cut during rescue and cleanup, not the fall. Thermite or charges to heat metal to those temperatures, then keep it burning for weeks, would have to have been pre-planted in the rubble.
bit(dot)ly/hXWtvt
The official story requires heated steel, not melted. I think it's about 600 degrees they said steel loses its strength at. Have you tried that spoon experiment yet? Try it with a knife. Or a fork. Any length of steel that can be heated visibly will do.
@EGRJ "The cut steel was cut during rescue and cleanup, not the fall." so how do you propose it fell? since there have been less equipped buildings that have not fell(or not fell in that way that ALL 3 fell) from plane attacks or fires. NANO-thermire could easily have been planted in the building during restoration which happened 3 months prior to 9/11. also there is no evidence (that could NOT have been manufactured) to say it was Muslims, so they are the victims like the 3000 deaths.
@ThePhysicsOf Wait, there are other tube-in-a-tube buildings over 40 stories that have had 767s heavy with fuel deliberately flown into them at hundreds of MPH and not collapsed? Hot dog! So what buildings were they?
And again: steel does not need to melt to fail. It just needs to be heated enough to lose strength. Found that spoon yet?
I like how you dismiss all the evidence on the grounds that it "could've" been manufactured.
@ThePhysicsOf Oh, and I forgot; restoration would've entailed several dozen people touching, inspecting, and moving just about every inch of the buildings. In fact, having trained construction men on site would make it even harder to conceal the NT.
I can't seem to find anything via Google, so how look did this "restoration" take, and around what date was it?
@EGRJ if you want good evidence for what i am talking about then look up alienscientist on youtube because he can explain in DETAIL from an objective, scientific stand point.
@ThePhysicsOf Btw, termite doesnt ONLY come from C4, google it. And btw, fire is hot enough. It doesnt have to melt. Its only has to heats it up to a point where the bearing bars of the tower (at the top) cant take it. And that happens way before it starts melting. AND, the WTC towers WERE made to fall down if hardly injured, and they didnt fall straight down at all.
@gulbirk what are you talking about C4? i said nano thermite NOT normal thermite. and "made to fall down if hardly injured" wow well if thats true (which i doubt ) then that STILL doesnt explain WTC 7 . watch this video because it will answer most or your spewings MUCH better than i could, Also there is a whole playlist. you will watch it if you care about truth and not just believe what ever crap they tell you
@whatyouchating not the government exactly, but the same powers to be. Back then when it was the dead sea scroll the church was the government, so i guess you can say the government wrote the bible, then king james had it reedited in 1611 he was the government, so the government did write the bible. Only sense 1984 the NIV came out with their translation of the bible which most people use today. And i think the vatican got to aprove that and u know they the government which control christianity
@agoloshapov Unlike the WTC, the Pentagon is not in the middle of downtown DC. It's perfectly reasonable that nobody in the vicinity had a video camera. We do have one security camera, but it was very low frame rate, so you see only the before and after as the plane struck the building in between the frames.
Prove that I didn't do 9/11. Because I admit, I am a puppet working under the Bush-Binladen Alliance, otherwise known as the BBA. There was only those "bomb" fragments that weren't significant to form a scientific conclusion.
Building 7 was done to distract people from the real attacks....because blowing it up for no reason would make people less suspicious of it, when the only attacks were on the two towers. Gotta love you guys.
@jess1up Yes there was. Truthers only ever to show pictures of the one side with little damage and not the other (akin to showing only the back of the Murragh building). The damage was immense because one of the towers fell on building 7.
Have you been there? The entire site, including both towers, is one city block...and its small. Two giant towers come down, you get lots of damage.
Unless you have evidence for peer review to counter that claim, you are wrong.
@johnycannuk No I haven't been there and that doesn't make it false. Where can I find the images you're talking about? How do you explain no damage on the sides othe the Pentagon? It doesn't look like any wings hit it at all. Also the amount of jet fuel in the airplane should have burned for days not hours. You really think that small explosion was an airplane?
@jess1up I recommend the Popular Science special issue to start and then get the full issue of Skeptic Magazine - the skeptic issue has multiple pictures of the airplane wreckage at the Pentagon and the severe damage to building 7.
@johnycannuk These guys should check out CIT's investigation on the Pentagon they interviewed 20 people that all claim the plane came in from a different flight path than the official one so that proves that the light poles couldn't have been downed by a plane.
To be honest conspiracy theories tend to be misrepresented sometimes. I notice mainstream television always bring on complete fuckin nutjobs who claim planes were holograms and they never hit the buildings. No serious 9/11 truther believes that, its a classic propaganda technique the Nazis used to discredit the actual movement. If you set aside the way the buildings fell or the pentagon etc.. Theres plenty of evidence to suggest the official story is a lie.
@lordlacolith Terrible term that doesn't mean anything. I suppose you would say the same to Noam Chomsky? One of his well known quotes "If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged"
Conspiracy theorists make the same mistake bullies make when it comes to the need for attention. If they see some dude in a food court or wherever and they start talking shit about them and their target just ignores them, then he/she MUST be a pussy. If the government doesn't react to a conspiracy theorist, then it MUST mean they're scared and have something to hide, when in fact... they just aren't taking the bullies/conspiracy theorists seriously and don't wanna deal with their shit
@hempartist420 We allrrady have the technology to fly UAVs why not do that to create a reason to invade the middle east. Do you believe Bush was a great president by the way.
i love that they had ozzie on here. i am a conspiracy fallower. there is some good points that have been made but i watched a documentery and seen pictures of melted metal in the rubble, plain fu can not melt metal and by that i think that when they say there was thermite, i think that they are correct and the phone calls from the plain or inposible and the towers fell to uniformly but thats the thing i dont know but if you asked me what i think i would say it was an inside job
It's always fascinating to observe people, who don't believe in god and his ideology, go on looking for another mental construct such as conspiracy hypotheses as a replacement for religion. xD
@Scorpitarios ..."it's always fascinating to observe people, who don't believe in god and his ideology, go on looking for another mental construct such as conspiracy hypotheses as a replacement for religion"
Self imposed mental constructs (rational & irrational) are the primary tools we use to identify ourselves with. You take that away and the universe falls apart. I'm impressed you realize that belief in god is a mental construct. Self righteous holders of the truth don't like to hear that.
Honestly, Matt is twisting logic around in this one.
In the religious videos he says he sees no evidence for a God, therefore he doesn't believe in one.
I see no good evidence for the story brought forward by the Government, therefore I'm not believing it. I can then formulate the best theory I can come up with based on the evidence after that.
But it still stands that I am disbelieving the official story.
yeah, these are people who research religion, not the actual evidence on the 9'11 events. So in short it would be nice to have a reliable team do research on it and then talk about it.
crispy380 4 weeks ago
Well wait a minute. I know most theories are off the wall and for people who want an alternative reason who can't accept the truth. But there are some that present some decent evidence (like 9-11). You can't just say that all conspiracy theories are mumbo jumbo. Like these guys actually know what happened. I believe in not believing everything your told especially by the government and Wikipedia. The more I watch these guys the more arrogant they get.
mjc71189 1 month ago
This is THE BEST response to CT I've seen ...outside of all the scientific evidence, articles, and books that also refute it, lol...
MadBasstid 1 month ago
Towers don't free fail in their own foot print without controlled demo.....<----combat engineer......end of story
Pkilla1029 1 month ago
@Pkilla1029 1) They didn't free fall. 2) Source?
DuggabbooDC 3 weeks ago
Some evidence are the small balls of metal found in the rubble of the towers. Several experiments have shown that these balls of metal can only be produced in a thermite reaction involving steel. I'm not saying I'm on this caller's side but there is evidence out there that needs to be refuted by the US government. Not all of the conspiracy theories regarding 9/11 involve purely the absence of evidence.
kai388 1 month ago in playlist More videos from FFreeThinker
Am I the only one who thinks the events of that day happened as they say, but al-Qaeda wasn't responsible, nor any conspiracy larger than a few dozen? Why would bin Laden deny it at first? And with the American people out for blood, isn't al-Qaeda a more genial target than Saudi Arabia, in which most of the terrorists lived? How did he hide so long in Abbotabad? Doesn't it make more sense they bribed him with amnesty to take credit for what he was rumored to be planning anyway?
IoEstasCedonta 1 month ago
Saying that the government would have no interest in revealing videos of the plane hitting the Pentagon is just plain stupid. According to a NY Times poll, 86% of Americans believe the government is hiding something about 9/11. Since the Pentagon official story is the weakest one (for lack of evidence) why wouldn't they make these videos public?
For people who don't have access to all the evidence, these guys are being too naive for believing so blindly in the official theory.
cassioam 3 months ago
@cassioam Please don't breed.We have enough stupid people already.
moopism 2 months ago
@moopism please, continue to impress me with your brilliant and profound words.
cassioam 2 months ago
@cassioam Why? It's obvious from your posts that you lean towards the completely insane and questionable. I don't think you'd know brilliant or profound if it fucked you in the ass.
moopism 2 months ago
@moopism You are right, I am stupid and you're smart. Your splendid arguments leave me no option but to give up. Have a nice life, Einstein.
cassioam 2 months ago
@cassioam Ok, let me be blunt, douchebag. I personally knew someone who died on the plane that went into the pentagon. I lived in the area. i take umbrage at two bit little shits like you that want to enhance their penis size by latching on to conspiracy bulllshit. You don't know, and you opinion is worthless and insulting. Clear enough?
moopism 2 months ago
@moopism Oh, that's why you're so emotional? Is that why you keep calling completely strangers stupid and douchebags instead of having a rational debate? Even if I decided to believe in an internet troll like you, what would that prove? People who were in the plane that allegedly hit pentagon died, everyone knows that and that was never a pro-inside-job argument, so I miss your point. Anyway, you have bigger issues, man. Maybe therapy will help you the your rage problem.
cassioam 2 months ago
@cassioam "what would that prove?"
What it proves is that unhinged conspiracy theorists have no sense of decorum. I'm done with you. Thank you for proving you are simply too stupid to even express common empathy.
Unfortunately for you, I doubt you will ever seek the help you need.
moopism 2 months ago
The government official theory is also a conspiracy theory. Matt thinks that "peer reviewed scientific study" can be applied in a situation where only government officials had access to the evidence. I don't know where the one reporter who claims he saw a plane hit the Pentagon fits these peer reviewed scientific studies.
It's pretty ironic that Matt now decided to consider one eye witness as evidence. This just shows how he is clearly being emotionally biased.
cassioam 3 months ago
I thing that in my opinion supports some kind of conspiracy is that they named Bin Laden within 30 minutes the first plane had hit the tower. I watched it live and remember it well. Even the 14-year-old me had trouble believing it.
Apjooz 3 months ago
911 being an inside job is an interesting conspiracy thoery.
It is interesting to me because I fell for it for a few years before finding moe evidence and finally seeing the holes in the theory for myself.
I still think they used 911 as a reason to do a lot of damage, but it was done by bin laden, and not Bush. Bush isn't that smart.
The truth movement seems to hide videos that point out the holes in their theories.
Silentsam7532 3 months ago
@Silentsam7532
I'm on the fence. Maybe I lean towards the opinion that US government let it happen, in one way or another. For example, to me it seems they let the plane hit the pentagon.
Apjooz 3 months ago
@Apjooz Oh they definately took advantage of it. There is some evidence they may have known something was going to happen and let it. Maybe, who knows?
For me as long as the deductive argument about free fall can be shown to be false they whole inside job theory loses most of its support. Building 7 started to collapse 8 seconds before the 'crimp' most truthers speak of.
The twin towes outer walls were hung from the core in a way, and their fall makes sense. The core fell much slower.
Silentsam7532 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WATCH THIS
/watch?v=bvay28lZiHU
Watch at 6:00.... Wiki ,Deborah Palfrey, that is how she died
ALL the other deaths are weird , but there is no proof that there deaths are from the coverup
BUT that single death is enough to persuade me
judge for yourself
and if you still believe some guy in a cave did it, go die you ignorant tard
nigdean789 4 months ago
Comment removed
nigdean789 4 months ago
Paul Wellstone. Now that's an interesting one. How bout Gary Webb?
kevtruth 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The the 3 buildings falling at free fall & concrete and metal melted together, thus breaking the laws of physics. In order to believe that you have to believe in the supernatural, and if you believe in the supernatural then Ahla the true messiah just proved himself! I can find NO PROOF of any supernatural thing, so if you can Great prove it to Amazing James Randi and collect one million dollars!
thesilverjunkie2 4 months ago
I don't know why it's so hard to believe that certain parts of government let 9/11 happen and reenforced what was already happening. There have been government agents who have claimed that the white house knew Al Qaeda's plan. The planes hit the building, the pentagon, and one crash landed. Sure, those things happened. It still doesn't mean steel towers collapse due to fire l at free fall speed through every other support truss in the building. Show me the physics, NIST fails to be convincing.
UPplRSick 5 months ago
@UPplRSick They did not fall at free fall speeds. I use to think that as well. They use editted videos to make it look that way.
The cores fell far slwer, and only the walls and floors fell that fast because they actually hung from the core and roof of the towers.
WTC7 started its collapse 8 seconds before truthers start the video. Its only from the one angle that it looks funny.
I am a physics major and I had problems with the free fall accelerations until I saw more footage.
Silentsam7532 3 months ago
This caller sounds like AronRa's simple brother - the one they don't talk about.
ndrthrdr1 5 months ago
I want to sell these two nimrods a Mannlicher Carcano rifle that shoots magic bullets. Although I think the magic airplanes that knock down three huge office buildings but only hit two trumps even that.
RPenta 5 months ago
at the same time being a SKEPTIC should mean being skeptical of official Government positions, it's a FACT Governments lie and what starts wars like Gulf of Tonkin incident leading to Vietnam, but most conspiracy theories are arguments from ignorance, they use some truth then construct a myth based on what some want to believe, there's alot of things we will never know but nothing seems more unlikely than the 'official story', the most powerful and secure nation taken down how it did, unlikely
ViperRob42 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You truthers are stupid! I'm a Christian, but even I know it wasn't an inside job. Show me a peer-reviewed paper that validates your kooky theory. Unless you have that, your insane theory is false. A lot of you truther atheists suck too, for being so stupid to not aknowledge God's existence. Read The Answers Research Journal (A PEER-REVIEWED science journal from the perspective of creationists). See? I'm right, you're all wrong ;) Creation is real. There's no kooky conspiracy. Losers -_-
moonpielover69 5 months ago
Anyone who believes the 911 conspiracy has not thought it out at all. The cover up would require the cooperation of hundreds of thousands and cost billions of dollars, and no one would have to have come forward for the last 10 YEARS.
Antamar123 5 months ago
@Antamar123 Really? Well, given the track record in certain cases such as JFK, Watergate, Iran-Contra, the Anthrax attacks, the 7-7 attacks, the drug war, the Vince Foster case, and the Oklahoma City Bombing , don't be to sure that any insiders with a conscience would be too quick too come forward.
The cover up would not require hundreds of thousands of people; maybe hundreds at most.
RPenta 5 months ago
@RPenta Can just add the Martin Luther King murder. Thanks. Wait one more. Waco
kevtruth 4 months ago
@kevtruth I agree and Bobby Kennedy as well. I am not at present adding them, but look at persons taken out in aircraft "accidents": Ron Brown, JFK, Jr and his wife and sister in law, and Paul Wellstone.
RPenta 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
God is a spirit, an immaterial conscious being. All things in the universe consists of matter and/or energy, so if God isn't matter, is energy by definition. Energy is the capacity to do work, is eternal, omnipresent, wasn't created and can't be destroyed, can create matter, was the only thing present before the BB, and the energy required to make the universe must had been powerful. All these match Biblical descriptions of God. He wants us to elevate our consciousness to the next level, is real
dejesusluisx 5 months ago
These people say conspiracy theorist just want to have attention and be right well that's what they are doing. They keeping talking about this guys lack of evidence and that he has to put forward evidence and the side they support hasn't provided evidence either they just said this is our story and it's right they didn't prove anything
kmisialek3 5 months ago
"Bo evidence of wings or engine..." Actually there are a number of pictures of the engine laying on the lawn...and other pieces of airplane...
So...uhm....
johnycannuk 5 months ago
Every truther needs to watch this video.
undernorm 6 months ago
if you are an engeneer or an architect, is easy to belive they exploded the twin towers from inside.
cacasarq 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@cacasarq no it's not, not at all
JadedRoy 6 months ago
@cacasarq Unless you want to live in reality and remember there where hundreds of people working in the building every single day as well as people outside the building every single day as well as bomb sniffing dogs that patrolled the building every single day... then it's not "easy to believe" that they managed to plant explosives inside a building and then set them up so perfectly that it made it appear as a collapse from the top after a fire could have easily damaged if not set them off early
DarkBunnyLord 5 months ago
@DarkBunnyLord
I didnt know they patrolled the towers every day with dogs. I can belive that. Make sense... If it is truth, one of the best arguments. But I never seen any news with this information.. And Brazil's youtube has some of the videos censored. Our TV networks just buy the info.. If you have any link to prove what you said..please sand to me. I realy dont like the "inside idea job" ... Its just very strange,,Thanks.
cacasarq 5 months ago
@cacasarq The bomb sniffing dogs where common as the towers had been bombed before in Feb 26 1993 (just google it should come up fairly quick). This was also by Al Qaeda by the way lending more credence to them being behind the planes (the planes being the most damning evidence against the inside job conspiracy because how would they convince people to kill themselves for the plan? Certainly not money.)
There where rumors that they had pulled the dogs for a week but even then planting (Cont)
DarkBunnyLord 5 months ago
@cacasarq (cont) enough explosives to detonate multiple floors at the same time whilst remaining hidden from view of the thousands of people working there and contained enough to not be damaged or prematurely set off by the fires that raged for a few hours is not feasible.
DarkBunnyLord 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I agree with the caller.. the gov has the evidence.. just show it. Obama showed his birth certificate and shut 95% of the birthers and left the crazies in it's place!
lestliness 6 months ago
I agree with the caller.. the gov has the evidence.. just show it. Obama showed his birth certificate and shut 95% of the birthers and left the crazies in it's place!
lestliness 6 months ago
Conspiracy theorists haven't understood the burden of proof, they are just as unknowing in scientific thinking as religious people.
MardasMan 6 months ago
@MardasMan You shouldn't generalize.
OMGITSDRJESUS 6 months ago
@DephyOne that is an argument for that specific person not being a homosexual. If two consenting adults want to be gay, we should let them. If you are using a condom there is almost no bacterial transfer.
ftw522 6 months ago
wait guys, we can't have it both ways. The reporter who repeatedly says he saw the plane, isn't that the same as the people who saw Joseph Smith's tablets? You give the 'one reporter' credence, then the people trotted out to say the they saw the tablets - we gonna accept them? Or the Sheriff that saw the UFO?
meanpersonable 6 months ago 21
The claims are a bit different, though. Magic tablets, plane hitting a building. As for the UFO thing, sure, he saw a UFO. But, his claims about what it was are suspect.
Planes exist, the pentagon exists. We know planes could hit the pentagon. But, we don't know that angels brought golden plates to some guy in the 1800s. Not all claims are created equal, as Matt has said once before.
berniebay 2 months ago
@meanpersonable The claim of having seen the plane and the claim of having seen an alien craft are not of equal strength. Joseph Smith's tablets, likewise, would be easy to misidentify.
IoEstasCedonta 1 month ago
@IoEstasCedonta If you mean that planes are known to exist, but there has never been any main stream proof of alien craft, I agree. So a person claiming to have seen a plane somewhere should be shown more respect than someone who claims to have seen an alien craft, on some continuum of credibility. I am not sure what you mean by JS's tablets "would be easy to misidentify."
meanpersonable 1 month ago
@Trucidofy what possible argument could you have against homosexuals that isn't religiously based?
ftw522 6 months ago
@ftw522 as an athiest who has gay friends I can still find some arguments another rational human being might have against gays.One being: When a man has sex with a woman (vaginal) he is not exposed to the bacterial and viral diseases that would be found in a mans fecal cavities. I's dirtier than the given option. I have no problem with gays at all I just thought id throw that in there.
DephyOne 6 months ago
@deshaebeasley Jewish is an ethnicity.
ftw522 6 months ago
@ftw522 just as long as you group all the other religions as ethnicitys as well then thats fine.
deshaebeasley 6 months ago
@Trucidofy you must remember the the Glasser siblings who are on the show are Jewish.. you should see one episode when the girl talks about how judaism is a "ethicity" while christianity isnt.. they are both stupid as religions and its hypocritical as hell lol.
deshaebeasley 6 months ago
watch?v=_d33-Lk5Zbw
deshaebeasley 6 months ago
Thumbs up if you hate Truthers!!!!
bgjohnson12341 6 months ago 64
This has been flagged as spam show
@bgjohnson12341 911 was an inside job..
OMGITSDRJESUS 6 months ago
@bgjohnson12341 Sooooooooo hate them.
P.S. Call them twoofers lol
tjohn1986 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bgjohnson12341
WATCH THIS
/watch?v=bvay28lZiHU
Watch at 6:00.... Wiki ,Deborah Palfrey, that is how she died
ALL the other deaths are weird , but there is no proof that there deaths are from the coverup
BUT that single death is enough to persuade me
judge for yourself
and if you still believe some guy in a cave did it, go die you ignorant tard
nigdean789 4 months ago
@bgjohnson12341 oh yeah, american imperialism and power interests couldnt possibly get together.... what a joke... hello bay of pigs???
13stevejohnson 4 weeks ago
2:26 Lets never forget that...
pochopaz7381 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
911 was an inside job fact
FIGHTFANNERD3 6 months ago
So this is critical of 'conspire theory' huh? this is from 'a-theists' who should know the propaganda of the church was a conspire trip...?
I bet these people dont go into the CO-INCIDENCES between 9/11 and the UK 7/7 ?check this 9/11 - 7/7 : Modus Operandi - The Anatomy of Attack Part 1 /watch?v=5a7aKaDS7CE
zezt 6 months ago
@zezt 2--NOR the occultist clues pointing to a mindset that is connected with SECRET SOCIETIES with symbolism etc---errr didn't Bush AND Kerry admit to being initiated into the Skull and Bones secret society and BOTH wont share what it is---hence SECRET, hence CONSPIRE. wake the fuck up. And also dig how the evil conspiring fukers havn't even invited the first responders to the 9/11 anniversary!! Yeah. checkout: I CALL BULLSHIT! THIS COUNTRY IS FUCKED UP! /watch?v=afWh_gqVo50
zezt 6 months ago
Agree with the hosts on believers & pitchman holding secret answers, & critical thinking.
Caller, are you amilar with the Popular Mechanics article on 9/11?. The caller needs to know that steel SOFTENENS at temperatures BELOW the burning temp of jet fuel (bu 600 degrees). This weakens the strength of steel causing it to collapse under load. That's why the planes were targeted in the middle to upper third. Weight load of the non-impact floors above impact zone caused the collapse.
tdibent1 7 months ago
These guys are just as religous and christians...
Ginyuu5 7 months ago
Unfortunately, eye witnesses are not reliable evidence, sometimes we will see what we expect to see, hear what we expect to hear or misinterpret what we have heard or seen.I could not hear explosions as the towers fell, it could have been the sound of floors pancaking into each other but what first weakened those supports for the towers to fall so neatly into it's footprint? Thermite???
Building.7 had no plane crash into it, but it too pancaked down into it's footprint.HOW & WHY??
sheilach1 7 months ago
@sheilach1 While a single eye witness might not be a reliable source for informations, many eye witnesses saying the same thing can be considered reliable.
WTC 7: Did you miss the part that this building was hit by quite a large chunk of debris falling from the main towers? It was also burning for quite a long time before collapsing.
Scorpitarios 7 months ago
I have saved ALL the images & videos I could find of the events on 9-11-2001.The wings should have left marks on the face of the Pentagon but didn't, they should have sheared off but didn't, the hole was right at ground level but no engines gouged the lawn which must have happened if it was a 757 that hit the Pentagon, the only video showed something flying low at ground level but it left no drag marks from the engines so it could not have been a 757. What was it???
sheilach1 7 months ago
@sheilach1 "The wings should have left marks on the face of the Pentagon but didn't"
Actually, I have seen Images showing that the wings in fact did leave a mark on the face of the pentagon.
Scorpitarios 7 months ago
Still no EVIDENCE of what hit the Pentagon.The only film clip released showed a few, edited frames one of which showed a twisted white trail of smoke from something moving behind a object the obscured it, the next frame showed the explosion of the impact and burning fuel? or bomb? or missile??
That is ONLY evidence that something flew into the Pentagon NOT WHAT flew into the Pentagon.The 757 had large engines hanging below the wings, why didn't they gouge the lawn and where are they?
sheilach1 7 months ago
@sheilach1 "Still no EVIDENCE of what hit the Pentagon."
watch?v=YTNRkb7AaQk
"The 757 had large engines hanging below the wings, why didn't they gouge the lawn and where are they?"
As long as a plane is in the air, the wings a slightly bent upwards due to lift (force). The engines are thus not as low as when a plane on the ground.
Scorpitarios 7 months ago
these guys r such clowns, its like why is it so impossible to believe that 9/11 could have been a inside job? it clearly was, from the way bush acted when he was first told, from the way the buildings collapsed lyk a controlled demolition, from the way they found Molten steel at the bottom of all 3 buildings, from the way that everybody around heard numerous explosions before/after the planes hit. is this not enough 4 u 2 even contemplate whether what they told u was true? u guys r like sheep.
AnnonamusKillah 7 months ago
@AnnonamusKillah These guys are not Clowns they Debunk Religion what more do you want?
romans52345 6 months ago
If there were other videos of a passenger plane hitting the Pentagon I would love to see them.
I saw some small sheet metal parts on the lawn but no wings, tail or engines and the bodies recovered in the Pentagon could have been from people working there.I suspect it was a armed drone that struck the Pentagon, not a passenger jet. Could such a frail craft plow through so many walls?
Isn't odd that that "plane" hit the only side of the Pentagon that had just been reinforced?
sheilach1 7 months ago
Other buildings have had fires and did not collapse, other buildings have had planes fly into them and their still standing.Buildings don't collapse into their footprint unless their supports are expertly cut with explosives or thermite.
Building 7 only had a fire and yet it also collapsed into it's footprint.
The Empire state building was struck by a large bomber during WWII and it's still standing.Other tall buildings have had terrible fires, still standing.
sheilach1 7 months ago
@sheilach1
"Other buildings have had fires and did not collapse, other buildings have had planes fly into them and their still standing."
"The Empire state building was struck by a large bomber during WWII and it's still standing.Other tall buildings have had terrible fires, still standing."
You're doing as if the E.S.B. had the same architecture as the twins towers. The supporting elements of the twins was their steel facades and these was severely damaged by the kinetic energy of the planes.
Scorpitarios 7 months ago
I hate to say this, but the absence of releasing evidence (talking about the footage) DOES make me quite suspicious, yes. You know? It's kind of like how there's no evidence of God..it makes me suspicious that there is not one....O_O
kazoorocketman54 7 months ago
A settlement is forced upon people because if they refuse the settlement, they will get NOTHING by suing!, the big money ALWAYS WINS these cases.
Never in history has ANY building hit by a plane or on fire EVER pancaked down at free fall speed like the trade center buildings - NEVER.How handy that they were just sold to a developer who bought a fat insurance policy in the unlikely event of them being destroyed . Payed off big didn't it.
sheilach1 7 months ago
@sheilach1 Give me another incedent in history of a plane - and not just any plane; a large passenger plane - striking a building.
What happens when supports are weakened, as in the towers? Whatever they're supporting falls down.
As for the insurance policy: is it wrong for everybody apart from you to take out insurance? When they took out insurance, why couldn't it be for if a fire occurred, or the plumbing broke? insurance is money this is set aside for possible repairs or replacements.
PsychoticSnake 7 months ago
If there was a aircraft that flew into the Pentagon, were is the EVIDENCE? No wings, no engines, no gear.There were many cameras that would have shown what flew into the Pentagon, some were at the Pentagon itself but the FBI confiscated those cameras and have NEVER released those tapes. WHY?
To kill this conspiracy, just release those tapes.Yes, I know ONE tape was released that was edited so that only some frames were shown and no passenger jet could be seen.
sheilach1 7 months ago
@sheilach1 the evidence was a plane wreck buried in the pentagon. And there is video footage of a plane flying into the pentagon.
PsychoticSnake 7 months ago
People who interpret the mainstream media as honest have no concept of reality.
SimonIntense 7 months ago 2
I'm glad that this show dedicated an episode to this particular topic. There should be more of these. It makes me feel glad that there's actually some sanity in the world.
murdock283 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I used to think Russell and Matt had scientific minds, but after watching these videos I have serious doubts. Why? Their lack of curiosity and they seem to have no interest in the 9/11 issues. Here are just a few: 1) 100-200 times the normal rate of short stock selling of TWA and Americans airlines for the day of 9/11 2) The four flight recorders were not found at WTC1 & 2 (never has occurred in land crash). 3) NORAD ran exercises, the day of 9/11 (which sent US military jets to Alaska/Canada).
yhenry77 8 months ago
Comment removed
yhenry77 8 months ago
WATCH THE ARRIVALS!!
pinball281 9 months ago
@Trucidofy P.s, I like how you avoided how you got my age completely wrong, EVEN THOUGH IT SAYS IT BLATANTLY ON MY PROFILE.
Oh, you checked me did you? What'd you do, go to my Youtube profile? This obviously tells you a lot about me personally...enlighten me, what should I be investigating? And why do you assume I haven't investigated - what's that based on?
You MUST be joking about being a teacher, all you must do is teach kids to be illiterate and immature...
JustABSide 9 months ago
@Trucidofy 1. My explanation was your poorly put together sentences, incorrect grammar and spelling, and general incoherence with what you're talking about. AND YOU SAY YOU'RE A TEACHER
2. The insult came from you, first.
3. Keep on attacking? What the heck, it's Youtube dude...I expressed dislike to your paragraphs of caveman babble, then you responded with more caveman babble. Why would I listen to you tell me to leave? =/
4. Get what eventually?! What are you talking about dude xD
JustABSide 9 months ago
@Trucidofy ...I was thinking about touching this, but no. I cannot. It must be a troll. P.s I'm 19 years old =/ That's past mandatory schooling, brother.
JustABSide 9 months ago
Comment removed
JustABSide 9 months ago
@Trucidofy Yet you can't string a literate sentence together. Therefore you must be an American teacher, in which there evidently isn't a high standard put in place to become one.
JustABSide 9 months ago
@Trucidofy Sweet Jesus, I can't listen to you. Go to school.
JustABSide 9 months ago
I love these guys. So refreshing.
TheMonko1979 9 months ago
Opening theme made me think of this line: "Tarquin jams into first!" I have no idea why, or what it's from. o.0
UnitedKingdomify 9 months ago
This is the perfect show for Richard and Sal to call in to.
"Hi this is Rusty."
brin3535 10 months ago
Releasing the pentagon video tapes would do nothing; look at the birthers. They said Obama was not born in Hawaii, so Obama releases his birth certificate. That wasn't good enough so Obama releases his "long form" which is generally not released by government agencies. Now Orly Taitz is on TV yammering about Selective Service forms and Trump is questioning how did Obama get into college. You can never provide enough evidence!
Ericwvb2 10 months ago
@ThincKritically Sure, and I never you YOU were a conspiracy theorist. Yes, Im surprised over Maths lack of reasoning (suported by evidence) in this video. Like when he claimed that he saw the planes hit, and just knew the towers would fall. Thats no different from the people saying, I felt fyssy inside, and just knew that it was God. So yes, they did a bad job on this one, but I still think they are correct. And I still think the current version of what happened is correct.
gulbirk 10 months ago
@ThincKritically No see, absense of evidence doesnt make the other side right. ANd what evidence is lacking btw? And even if we couldnt explain why the towers went down, that doesnt mean that the side saying CIA was behind it, and the bush administration KNEW it gains any credability.
gulbirk 10 months ago
isn't "a plane crashed into the pentagon" a claim? where is the evidence to support the claim? a reporter on a US news channel is enough evidence for you?
Godvernment 10 months ago 2
the building could have been hit by 5 more planes and it would not have fallen its bs
Taurion4467 10 months ago
The fact is this: when someone says they believe religion because theres evidence for that in the bible or whatever, you say its crazy How can you trust some stoneage old uneducated people ? The only reason being that its not what you like
dont you see that youre the same?
"A reporter said it was a plane" seriously? an engine proves a plane?
you dont use the scientific method at all.
I gotta say half of the atheists are more idiotic than religious people
and i believe in nothing without proof
mHalfLife 10 months ago
@mHalfLife No no no, LOL. First of all, they are not claiming anything here as far as I can tell. And btw, saying a missile hit it is also a claim. Saying CIA was behind it and bush know is ANOTHER claim. They are responding to these claims. But yes, im surprised by their lack of reasoning in this video too
gulbirk 10 months ago
BUILDING 7 AHAGAHAAGAHGGHGHHHAAA SPEED OF GRAVITY AHAHAHAHAGGGHAGAGHGHH FIRE DOESNT DO THAT AHAGGHGGAHHAGAGHAA
OMGITSDRJESUS 10 months ago
People with no engineering background ao knowledge of physics talking about what planes do when they crash into buildings. Prove the bombs were there, truthers.
thewarriorsrok 10 months ago
Good job guys!
AlienEntity1 10 months ago
@Tarn1968 No they don't. Christians, at least, say that they don't have the answers, that God will tell them later, and are encouraged to try and "save" unbelievers for their own good. Truthers claim to know all the answers from blurry videos, taking things out of context, and illogical demonstrations, then insist everyone who doesn't agree with them is either a sheep, shill, or conspirator.
Search "Richard Gage Cardboard Box" if you don't believe me. Note the idiotic comments on that video.
EGRJ 10 months ago
it is very likely to be an inside job because physics shows that buildings dont fall that way (unless they're made to fall that way). building dont fall at all (at least they shouldnt since they're designed to with stand attacks). and kerosene doesnt melt steal BUT thermite does and was found at ground zero but dismissed by the government.
ThePhysicsOf 10 months ago
@ThePhysicsOf I love it when truthers pretend to know physics!
SSHitMan 10 months ago
@SSHitMan well there is no point telling my physics credentials ( A* student) BUT it sounds like you dont know simple Newtonian physics. let me explain: a building (like WTC)cant fall at free fall speed because of the steel structure inside slows it down considerably and it WILL make it fall to one side (like jenga allways falls to one side). so why dont you look at the evidence and use science to check the results. 3000 people died that day with no real untempered evidence being given public
ThePhysicsOf 10 months ago
@ThePhysicsOf
A stack of jenga sticks ranks as one of the most incompetent comparisons to the towers since Richard Gage used cardboard boxes to model steel buildings. Rather than use your "A* student" creditials to leverage incompetent demonstrations as fact, you need to be consulting engineers other than the incapable AE911truth members.
kyuubi4square 10 months ago
@kyuubi4square IT WAS NOT MENT TO COMPARE EXACTLY HOW IT FELL just that something with structure falls to the side like the fucking WTC and jenga. so go do some research an dont believe everything you are told on belief.
ThePhysicsOf 10 months ago
@ThePhysicsOf
Take your own advice. Any competent engineer will tell you that the WTC construction does not allow for the kind of "fall" you BELIEVE it should have had. You lose when you make assumptions about how a building performs without knowing the implications of its construction. This isn't belief, it's fact, and if you're a physics student congrats on the grades but your assumption would equate to a failing grade in any structures or architecture geared course, plain and simple.
kyuubi4square 10 months ago
@kyuubi4square that is what i said. the structure makes it very very improbable(if not impossible) to fall in the way it did. that is why people hypothesize that the nano thermite could have been used to cut the structure in specific ways to make the 3 buildings fall in the exact same way. the twin towers fell at free fall speed straight down yes, impossible with the steel structure inside as you said (and as i said). and WTC7 fell in the same way as the two without being hit at all.
ThePhysicsOf 10 months ago
@ThePhysicsOf
"as you said"
As I said the "topple like a tree" scenario is incompatible with the design of the towers. They fell precisely as they were expected to; straight down
The tube-in-tube design was the downfall, the floor connections were sheered apart by the force of the floors falling before the loads could be transferred to the core columns, thus the core was the last part of the towers to collapse. Once again, ask a competent engineer, stop guessing with your lack of education
kyuubi4square 10 months ago
@kyuubi4square People are constantly trying to blame the tube-in-tube design because that is the only thing they can make hay out of but where do we ever see the layout of the horizontal beams in the core. The length of beams in the core had to be more than double the height of columns at each 12 foot level. So how many tons of steel were on each level of the building?
The NIST could not put that in 10,000 pages. They couldn't even specify the total for the concrete.
watch?v=ZT4BXIpdIdo
psikeyhackr 10 months ago
@ThePhysicsOf WTC 1/2 were never designed to withstand a plane that was first built after they were completed loaded heavily with fuel crashing into them.
The steel was not melted. It was heated. Take a spoon and try to bend it. Then grab some oven gloves and heat it on your stove until it glows. Note how much easier it is to bend.
EGRJ 10 months ago
@EGRJ well it shows your research then because the steel WAS melted which is not possible by PLANE fuel (POSSIBLE with nano-thermite which traces was found at the scene). molten metal was flowing for WEEKS after. your argument fails because of the lack of research you have done.
ThePhysicsOf 10 months ago
@ThePhysicsOf The cut steel was cut during rescue and cleanup, not the fall. Thermite or charges to heat metal to those temperatures, then keep it burning for weeks, would have to have been pre-planted in the rubble.
bit(dot)ly/hXWtvt
The official story requires heated steel, not melted. I think it's about 600 degrees they said steel loses its strength at. Have you tried that spoon experiment yet? Try it with a knife. Or a fork. Any length of steel that can be heated visibly will do.
EGRJ 10 months ago
@EGRJ "The cut steel was cut during rescue and cleanup, not the fall." so how do you propose it fell? since there have been less equipped buildings that have not fell(or not fell in that way that ALL 3 fell) from plane attacks or fires. NANO-thermire could easily have been planted in the building during restoration which happened 3 months prior to 9/11. also there is no evidence (that could NOT have been manufactured) to say it was Muslims, so they are the victims like the 3000 deaths.
ThePhysicsOf 10 months ago
@ThePhysicsOf Wait, there are other tube-in-a-tube buildings over 40 stories that have had 767s heavy with fuel deliberately flown into them at hundreds of MPH and not collapsed? Hot dog! So what buildings were they?
And again: steel does not need to melt to fail. It just needs to be heated enough to lose strength. Found that spoon yet?
I like how you dismiss all the evidence on the grounds that it "could've" been manufactured.
EGRJ 10 months ago
@ThePhysicsOf Oh, and I forgot; restoration would've entailed several dozen people touching, inspecting, and moving just about every inch of the buildings. In fact, having trained construction men on site would make it even harder to conceal the NT.
I can't seem to find anything via Google, so how look did this "restoration" take, and around what date was it?
EGRJ 10 months ago
@EGRJ if you want good evidence for what i am talking about then look up alienscientist on youtube because he can explain in DETAIL from an objective, scientific stand point.
ThePhysicsOf 10 months ago
@ThePhysicsOf Btw, termite doesnt ONLY come from C4, google it. And btw, fire is hot enough. It doesnt have to melt. Its only has to heats it up to a point where the bearing bars of the tower (at the top) cant take it. And that happens way before it starts melting. AND, the WTC towers WERE made to fall down if hardly injured, and they didnt fall straight down at all.
gulbirk 10 months ago
@gulbirk what are you talking about C4? i said nano thermite NOT normal thermite. and "made to fall down if hardly injured" wow well if thats true (which i doubt ) then that STILL doesnt explain WTC 7 . watch this video because it will answer most or your spewings MUCH better than i could, Also there is a whole playlist. you will watch it if you care about truth and not just believe what ever crap they tell you
ThePhysicsOf 10 months ago
@whatyouchating So to put it simply, yes the government wrote the bible. Government isnt nothing more than a institution which govern the people
bossswanky 10 months ago
@whatyouchating not the government exactly, but the same powers to be. Back then when it was the dead sea scroll the church was the government, so i guess you can say the government wrote the bible, then king james had it reedited in 1611 he was the government, so the government did write the bible. Only sense 1984 the NIV came out with their translation of the bible which most people use today. And i think the vatican got to aprove that and u know they the government which control christianity
bossswanky 10 months ago
@whatyouchating not the government exactly, but the same powers to be
bossswanky 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
they dont believe the bible but they believe the government same authority who wrote the bible
bossswanky 10 months ago
@agoloshapov Unlike the WTC, the Pentagon is not in the middle of downtown DC. It's perfectly reasonable that nobody in the vicinity had a video camera. We do have one security camera, but it was very low frame rate, so you see only the before and after as the plane struck the building in between the frames.
NaSoLab 11 months ago
this is a "man on the street" interview. i don't like it no matter who does it.
hollaboutit 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
9 11 was indeed a inside job, fools
jtlpocket 11 months ago
and don't forget to check out THE VENUS PROJECT
Stillillgal 11 months ago
let's say i don't believe in the govermant story
but i don't believe in the IJ theory totally
LETS ALL SAY THAT WE DON'T KNOW it's the best things to say
Stillillgal 11 months ago
@Tarn1968 There are so many loopholes in 911 in general. You're a fool if you actually believe that story. I'm not a creationist either dumbass.
jess1up 11 months ago
@jess1up
I did 9/11. Shut up troll.
AceofDlamonds 11 months ago
@AceofDlamonds Come find me and make me shut up bitch! If I wasn't talking to you mind your own business retard.
jess1up 11 months ago
@jess1up
Prove that I didn't do 9/11. Because I admit, I am a puppet working under the Bush-Binladen Alliance, otherwise known as the BBA. There was only those "bomb" fragments that weren't significant to form a scientific conclusion.
Building 7 was done to distract people from the real attacks....because blowing it up for no reason would make people less suspicious of it, when the only attacks were on the two towers. Gotta love you guys.
AceofDlamonds 11 months ago
don't you also want to punch them in their shitfaces?
Kornhulio18 11 months ago
Explain how building 7 fell. There was not enough damage to make it fall how it did, look at the Oklahoma city bombing that building didn't fall.
jess1up 11 months ago
@jess1up Yes there was. Truthers only ever to show pictures of the one side with little damage and not the other (akin to showing only the back of the Murragh building). The damage was immense because one of the towers fell on building 7.
Have you been there? The entire site, including both towers, is one city block...and its small. Two giant towers come down, you get lots of damage.
Unless you have evidence for peer review to counter that claim, you are wrong.
johnycannuk 11 months ago
@johnycannuk No I haven't been there and that doesn't make it false. Where can I find the images you're talking about? How do you explain no damage on the sides othe the Pentagon? It doesn't look like any wings hit it at all. Also the amount of jet fuel in the airplane should have burned for days not hours. You really think that small explosion was an airplane?
jess1up 11 months ago
@jess1up I recommend the Popular Science special issue to start and then get the full issue of Skeptic Magazine - the skeptic issue has multiple pictures of the airplane wreckage at the Pentagon and the severe damage to building 7.
The actual evidence is not hard to find.
johnycannuk 11 months ago
@johnycannuk There are now new videos that show that building 7 had no severe damage as well as fire on only a few floors.
anewlow23 11 months ago
@johnycannuk These guys should check out CIT's investigation on the Pentagon they interviewed 20 people that all claim the plane came in from a different flight path than the official one so that proves that the light poles couldn't have been downed by a plane.
anewlow23 11 months ago
To be honest conspiracy theories tend to be misrepresented sometimes. I notice mainstream television always bring on complete fuckin nutjobs who claim planes were holograms and they never hit the buildings. No serious 9/11 truther believes that, its a classic propaganda technique the Nazis used to discredit the actual movement. If you set aside the way the buildings fell or the pentagon etc.. Theres plenty of evidence to suggest the official story is a lie.
awiiiunluckykid 11 months ago
@awiiiunluckykid Godwin'd in two sentences. Congratulations.
lordlacolith 11 months ago
@lordlacolith Terrible term that doesn't mean anything. I suppose you would say the same to Noam Chomsky? One of his well known quotes "If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged"
awiiiunluckykid 11 months ago
@awiiiunluckykid I don't know why you think Chomsky is immune to Godwin's Law.
lordlacolith 11 months ago
@lordlacolith and besides Godwins Law was made obsolete by the Neocons ;)
awiiiunluckykid 11 months ago
Comment removed
awiiiunluckykid 11 months ago
Conspiracy theorists make the same mistake bullies make when it comes to the need for attention. If they see some dude in a food court or wherever and they start talking shit about them and their target just ignores them, then he/she MUST be a pussy. If the government doesn't react to a conspiracy theorist, then it MUST mean they're scared and have something to hide, when in fact... they just aren't taking the bullies/conspiracy theorists seriously and don't wanna deal with their shit
berner 1 year ago
@hempartist420 We allrrady have the technology to fly UAVs why not do that to create a reason to invade the middle east. Do you believe Bush was a great president by the way.
tony38727 1 year ago
Yes, a lot of the "CT's" theories have been peer reviewed and are solid. The support for the 9/11 truth movement is growing everyday.
WombatAssasssin 1 year ago
i love that they had ozzie on here. i am a conspiracy fallower. there is some good points that have been made but i watched a documentery and seen pictures of melted metal in the rubble, plain fu can not melt metal and by that i think that when they say there was thermite, i think that they are correct and the phone calls from the plain or inposible and the towers fell to uniformly but thats the thing i dont know but if you asked me what i think i would say it was an inside job
TheShnaw 1 year ago
It's always fascinating to observe people, who don't believe in god and his ideology, go on looking for another mental construct such as conspiracy hypotheses as a replacement for religion. xD
Scorpitarios 1 year ago
@Scorpitarios ..."it's always fascinating to observe people, who don't believe in god and his ideology, go on looking for another mental construct such as conspiracy hypotheses as a replacement for religion"
Self imposed mental constructs (rational & irrational) are the primary tools we use to identify ourselves with. You take that away and the universe falls apart. I'm impressed you realize that belief in god is a mental construct. Self righteous holders of the truth don't like to hear that.
nrgetick 1 year ago
Honestly, Matt is twisting logic around in this one.
In the religious videos he says he sees no evidence for a God, therefore he doesn't believe in one.
I see no good evidence for the story brought forward by the Government, therefore I'm not believing it. I can then formulate the best theory I can come up with based on the evidence after that.
But it still stands that I am disbelieving the official story.
WombatAssasssin 1 year ago
@WombatAssasssin Well said
kevtruth 1 year ago