In Case You’re Still Pretending 9/11 Was A Terrorist Attack
For those of you still under the impression that 9/11 was a plot by bearded, freedom-hating terrorists bent on death, destruction, and 72 virgins, please watch this documentary.
The unanswered questions:
- The official story is scientifically impossible. Jet fuel burns at 1,800 degrees, steel begins to melt at 2,700 degrees but can still hold its strength for up to 3 hours. How did the towers weaken sufficiently to fall with insufficient heat and time--only 56 minutes in the case of the South Tower?
- The remnants of the towers indicated that high-temperature cutting charges were used.
- No steel-frame building in history has ever collapsed from fire. On 9/11 three steel-frame buildings experienced complete structural failure from fire, including 7 World Trade Center, which was not even hit by an airplane. Burning fuel is also the official line in this case.
- There is well-documented evidence of detonations just before the collapse of the towers indicating demolition charges were used.
- The impact supposedly destroyed the planes' crash-proof flight-recorder black boxes. But the FBI conveniently found, in perfect condition, the passport of Satam al Suqami, one of the alleged American Airlines Flight 11 hijackers?
- Nearly half of the individuals the FBI claims hijacked the planes have been found to be alive and well.
- An hour after the first World Trade Center crash, the FAA and NORAD allowed an obviously hostile airplane to smash into a conveniently unoccupied wing of the Pentagon, headquarters of the world military-industrial complex?
- There seems to be no physical evidence of an airliner at the Pentagon or crash site in Pennsylvania.
- The Pentagon plane was caught by many local video cameras as it flew into the Pentagon. These videos were confiscated by the FBI within hours of the crash and have never been shown to the public, even though they could prove the goverment's assertion.
- "Put" options, a bet on falling prices, for United Airlines stock increased to 4 times normal the day before the attack.
- San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown says that on the morning of 9/11 Condolessa Rice called him and warned him not to fly that morning.
But all we have now is the absence of truth, so theories fill the void. Will 9/11 remain as unanswered as the JFK assasination? New York Magazine has a must read article on the various conspiracy theories. Seems most people are content to pretend it was terrorists if that's what our government wants us to believe. The article breaks the theories down into HOP(Happen On Purpose) levels. We all agree somebody made it Happen On Purpose.
In his paper "What Is Your 'HOP' Level?" Nick Levis, who co-coordinates the N.Y. 9/11 Truth meetings with Father Morales and Les Jamieson, categorizes the basic narrative theories about September 11. The options essentially boil down to four.
(A) The Official Story (a.k.a. "The Official Conspiracy Theory"). The received Bushian line: Osama, nineteen freedom-haters with box cutters, etc. As White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said, there was "no warning."
(B) The Incompetence Theory (also the Stupidity, Arrogance, "Reno Wall" Theory). Accepts the Official Story, adds failure by the White House, FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. to heed ample warnings. This line was advanced, with much ass-covering compensation, in The 9/11 Commission Report.
(C) LIHOP (or "Let It Happen on Purpose"). Many variations, but primarily that elements of the U.S. government and the private sector were aware of the hijackers’ plans and, recognizing that 9/11 suited their policy goals, did nothing to stop it.
(D) MIHOP ("Made It Happen on Purpose"). The U.S. government or private forces planned and executed the attacks.
I guess I think that it's such a big event, most of the world's power-mongers would have been crawling over each other to be involved, each manipulating the other for their own purposes. Rumsfeld's Partnership for a New America authored "Rebuilding America's Defenses" where they state:
Further, the process of transformation [to a military preiminence enabled by information technology], even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.
So Rumsfield got his Pearl Harbor, somebody else got the $400 billion in missing gold, Israel got America killing their enemies for them.
April 3rd, 2006 - 14:42
This video is FAR too full of inaccuracies and anecdotal and circumstancial evidence to prove anything.
And saying that the SF mayor was warned….laughable!
We all know how much GW loves San Fransciso! And then most of the “proof” is just NOT proof, it’s cropped up quotes and silly suggestions, such as the PUT order on the airline stock.
To a total idiot, this documentary might make total sense to them and it might serve as some sort of proof, but none of it proves anything except that the filmmaker is willing to pass off unknowns as knowns…
Any serious examination of the facts will lead an intelligent person to dismiss this documentary as garbage…
its dumb music and emotion-hooking splicing and quotes from morons and silly PNAC contortions and talk of Kennedy and cuba and etc etc etc
its perfect for the average moonbat who is in say…hmmm…9th grade, failing in social studies and tends to delieve conspiracy theories…
But then again…
April 3rd, 2006 - 16:10
Yea, I’m sure he just made that up for effect or something.
I’d love to hear yours. Start with the melting point of steel, then titanium.
Everyone agrees it was a conspiracy, so we’re all engaging in conspiracy theories. Who the conspirators were is being debated. Obviously the FBI’s story is at least half incorrect, as the conspirators that supposedly vaporized themselves into the side of a building are actually alive and well.
Right, cause the Northwoods memo never really happened. Or, at least your not willing to assimilate it into your version of reality. It is proof that the military has considered staging false flag operations against American assets, no one disputes that either.
The idea that someone would purposely bring down the towers was completely unbelievable to me. So we are definitely well within the unbelievable already. I agree with many of your critisism of the documentary. There are some obvious leaps. I also don’t need good video production in order to make me question what I’m being told, and I don’t need to fabricate “truth” or “fact” in the absence of it. We just don’t know at the moment, the evidence is conflicting.
Though, I do feel like you already had your mind made up before watching the documentary and were looking for validation of that prior belief. It’s as if you wouldn’t believe any “conspiracy theory.” How easily we are manipulated.
April 4th, 2006 - 18:09
Derek, you answered me with even MORE silly conspiracy theories. I only hope that
ONE DAY
you can look back on yourself and laugh. Im laughing now, but it wont be funny anymore if you’re still this gullible when you grow up.
As per my mind being made up already – as to this video it was, I admit that easily. I have no reservations in admitting that I was already convinced that this video was crap before I saw it.
ABSOLUTELY ZERO THEORIES on 9/11 have managed to make even 1/10th the amount of sense that the “truth” (I added the scare quotes for your sake, derek) makes. The entire OBL story, the video of him talking about the attacks, his repeated threats to attack America on a grand scale, the simplicity and effectiveness of the attack (it wasnt difficult, it just required resolve, some cash, and extensive planning), and the fact THAT I SAW THE SECOND PLANE HIT live on national TV and I guarantee you that there is
NO WAY
any president, any military, or any group of government/quasi-government people would ever have the thought cross their mind that they could:
a) get away with it
b) conceive and carry out the plan without someone having misgivings and telling all
c) think it was a good idea
d) ensure no ameteur video would surface and refute the official story
e) let US servicemen (or whoever) die on such a mission and not explain their absense
f) shoot down flight 93 if it was in fact a US government operation
g) etc etc etc
As for the melting point of steel etc READ THE POPULAR MECHANICS ARTICLE and you’ll see it plainly debunks much of the willful ignorance on display in this video, such as the “NO WINDOWS ON THE PLANE” witness who was actually…
“FACT: Birnbach, who was a freelance videographer with FOX News at the time, tells PM that he was more than 2 miles southeast of the WTC, in Brooklyn, when he briefly saw a plane fly over. He says that, in fact, he did not see the plane strike the South Tower; he says he only heard the explosion.”
And as to the MELTING STEEL:
“Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn’t need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength–and that required exposure to much less heat. “I have never seen melted steel in a building fire,” says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. “But I’ve seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks.”"
As a matter of FACT I saw the steel and I saw the bend in it with my own eyes. It hardly melted, nobody claimed that. It simply got so hot that it lost the strength to remain completely rigid and once the center of gravity was lost and the building sagged just a bit, it was all inertia and the whole thing collapsed.
I am amazed that you would propagate such inane crap on your site when much of it has already been
CONCLUSIVELY
shown to be incorrect. Most of the lies within that film (they are clearly LIES because when the truth is known there is no legitimate excuse to peddle falsehoods) are inexcuseable because they reflect either willful complete IGNORANCE or an intentional attempt at chicanery and misleading. In additon, such lies are pushed by those with AGENDAS themelves, so with all the mumbling and finger-pointing about PNAC and whatever it requires a huge leap of faith to take the message with any seriousness when the messengers themselves are motivated by ideology.
So, to sum it up: THE VIDEO SUCKS.
MOST OF IT IS ALL WRONG. SOME OF IT IS MOSTLY WRONG.
A SMALL FRACTION OF IT IS OPEN TO DEBATE, but any debate would be clouded and distorted and would VERY QUICKLY devolve into an argument between “conservative warmongers” and “stupid lefties”.
April 10th, 2006 - 21:45
hmm. interesting, in your 5000 word comment you really didn’t present any evidence that was in any way more compelling or conclusive than the stuff in the video. Um, the experts do not agree, despite whatever website you copied that from says. And Mr Dunn has also never seen a steel building collapse from fire, or probably anything besides explosives. And they did find molten steel if you remember. It took days for the burning to go out. It was unexpected at the time, since the jet fuel obviously couldn’t be the cause of it. The news anchors didn’t really have any answers for it. Everything about that day was unexpected yet strangely convenient.
are you sure you watched the movie? they didn’t say that the goverment shot down flight 93, they say it never took off. There was no plane in the ground.
And thanks for the ALL CAPS, is that supposed to be you screaming? Are you 12?
April 11th, 2006 - 06:51
Youre a lost cause, dude.
April 11th, 2006 - 10:56
Do you so wholly accept everything the goverment tells you? I supposed you believe Mr. Oswald shot Kennedy too (after having poured over the evidence so thoroughly as you’ve done with this). Or wait, that would involve a conspiracy, and those don’t exist. Certainly not when we’re talking about the most powerful public leader in the world. I’m sure he’d never lie or deceive.
You make me believe in conspiracies even more because you leave the door so wide open for them with your lack of ability to question. They can do as they please, the grander the better cause all they have to do is throw the phrase “conspiracy theory” out there and they get people like you automatically start spouting off all this pent up stuff about how conspiracy theories are stupid and only 9th graders would believe in such thing, swing into full-blown debunking mode for them and they don’t even have to defend themselves.
You don’t provide compelling evidence yet you deride those that don’t see it your way. No, see, here’s the video of the plane flying into the Pentagon. Or here’s a picture that shows actual plane wreckage in Pennsylvania. Thank God they got the other plane on video or we’d, or I’d, be questioning that too. But to attempt to just call people silly for believing in such things is childish and naive.
April 12th, 2006 - 14:54
I suppose this is somehow fake: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,191520,00.html
No I dont believe EVERYTHING the govt tells me. That is a stupid assumption on your part, then again it is probably far easier for your to drown out the cognitive dissonance by painting me with some extreme brush, eh?
That right! Im gullible and you can see what I am too blind to see….suuuure.
I question a lot of things. Unfortunately, you just need to know that I dont buy into your bullshit conspiracies.
See, you are paranoid. I question things, but I am not paranoid.
There is a thick, broad line with reason and logic on one side and paranoia and distrust on the other.
You see, I am a part of the majority of Americans who reject your extreme (and extremely paranoid and delusional) views. Thats the difference. It is so chic to be some stupid protestor who hates Bush and hates Starbucks and all that shit. But that is so OLD by now. It’s like an army of lookalike soundalike people who sit around and stew about every damned thing, and its retarded, and most Americans dont think like that. They might not like Bush, but they arent as deranged as the lefty fringe you so proudly cling to is.
You are silly because your post title and your defense of the dumb video clash completely. You recognize the faults of the video yet your post title makes you out to be someone claiming this video as definitive proof. Thats why you are silly.
AND you are silly b/c you have no proof whatsoever that 9/11 was an inside job. YOU HAVE NONE. you have lots of shreds of, hmm, we’ll call them “evidence” even though they arent up to such a standard to be called evidence…and you assemble these shreds and you discount anything and everything that comes from anyone you might think is like me or anything from the government.
AND THEN SUDDENLY it all makes sense to you!
You know what? It would all make sense to me, too, if I blocked out and ignored all competing evidence.
And I am accusing you of being as dumb as a 9th grader. I WILL SAY THAT FLAT OUT THAT IF YOU BELIEVE THE THINGS YOU SAY THAT YOU ARE DUMB AS A 9TH GRADER.
And that is not an insult, it is an observation. It is true. There is no other way to describe you if you will sit there and question Popular Mechanics and numerous experts and you will question their judgement.
Either you are the most arrogant dude or you are dumb as hell.
There is no other explanation. Sorry.