"9/11 was an inside job"

money - it was something like 2.3 trillion dollars... yeah. next day, 9/11 happens. interesting sequence of events, if you ask me. regardless of the their past, that's a shit load of money to simply disappear and never be questioned.
censorship - tapes of the plane crashing into the pentagon were confiscated. and the footage they did release shows/proves nothing. remember, this is the pentagon we're talking about - there's probably 10 other angles of the crash, but for whatever reason they are locked away. secondly, norman mineta's testimonial (where he eludes to the fact that dick cheney had insider info about the stand-down procedure) was excluded from the commission report. fishy? I think so. that being said, i can understand what you said about separating witnesses and what not but that still could have lead to a watering down/selecting certain testimonials that suited their point of view. or even correcting it (i.e., "oh no, this is what actually happened, etc.) oh yeah, apparently the black boxes were found from the twin towers but no one ever speaks about it...
pentagon - where did the plane go? the hole it left in the building doesn't coincide with a jet of that size. plus according to the hijacker's pilot instructor, the dude could fly for shit, let alone a 757 with that precision (i.e., that low, that fast). i mean, where's the tangible footage of the crash?
flight 93 - i just don't know why there wasn't much debris. little to no pieces of the plane itself or the passengers (i hate to say it) and yet passports and other pieces of documentation were recovered?! shit don't make sense.
bush - i guess when you think about, what was he supposed to do. it's his advisors that run shit anyways, but i thought he'd wanna leave and be debriefed about the situation at hand (oh yeah, whispering isn't debriefing, imo). i forget the exact timeline of the events, but if Bush was informed about what had happened before he went into the classroom, why was he in the classroom?! pr or national crisis? c'mon man. commercial flights don't just crash into office buildings by accident.
shot down - i don't want to speculate too much about the timing and what not, but it just seems odd that planes were running wild and nothing was done. i hate to imagine, but what if there were more hijacked planes that day? next level russian roulette, if you ask me.
 
i guess that's i'm saying. i know it sounds ludicrous, and who knows maybe it is, but look at what was "gained" from allowing it to happen and how shit was handled.
10-15 years down the road i could be very well be eating crows for breakfast on this one, but i just don't feel that the truth was/has been spoken. fuck, maybe my ignorance blinds me. butt fuck it, lol.
btw, i'm not expecting you to agree with me, nor should I, and i don\t hold your opinion against you (nor anyone else's for that matter). it is what it is. c'est la vie.
i've been trolled, haven't I? fuck these 9/11 threads
 
christ, this again?

All I gotta say is: most of the people who still believe it was the work of the US government seem obsessed to choose the facts/side that they agree with, while pretty much every bloody angle has been debunked a million times over (hyperbole but get over it), published everywhere, counter to it all. Or they just read some site that spouts a bunch of shit off and they latch on to it.

From what I've seen, most people who favor conspiracy over Islamic terrorists is some denial that there are people who are batshit crazy/evil who will do shit to kill. It is not universal, but it seems to be a common foundation.
 
lol wut?

the people claiming that the government killed everyone are in denial that there are people who will do shit to kill???????

From what I've seen, the people who believe what they're spoon fed for some reason think mud hut terrorists are more capable pulling off of the events than the most powerful and richest forces in the world. talk about denial, "the government would never kill anyone!"
 
someone explain the pentagon to me and i'll stfu. no hard feelings, i just can't wrap my head around that shit - much more so than anything else. i won't start some gay flame war 'cause my opinion was already somewhat stated above, but i'm just curious...
Explain the turn the plane made with this noob pilot
Explain the lack of tangible footage
Explain the lack of physical evidence of the plane and the damage to the pentagon
The other shit I don't care too much about (i.e., that side of yhe building wall was recently reinforced, what documentation was contained in that specific location, etc.)
 
the money thing is curious. I'd actually never read too much about it. An operation like this wouldn't cost that much though. Hell, each of the hijackers probably spent less than $700 on their seat/equipment, which as i type, i realized how absurd it is that for that price, they were able to do such a terrible thing. So i don't know where the money went. Very interesting/suspicious point.

censorship though is once again explained by the location. It's the pentagon, probably the least publicized yet official govt facility in the country. Apart from conspiracy theorists trying to prove a point, why would they need to release the tapes? It is again, strange, but not unlike the govt in the past. The whole world doesn't need to see what happened. Just the people in charge.

Dick Cheney i believe did have inside info, which makes me dislike him more, because he took no action on it. The govt had been hearing about an attack for awhile, but didn't do shit. I'm sure at the time it was common procedure, but in retrospect...damn, what were they thinking?

Flight 93 is simple. They did find debris. Search for flight 93 crash site and debris. However the people who made loose change spoke only with people who lived nearby and not the first responders to the scene. Not going to find any debris from inside your house 3/4 of a mile away. And much of the debris was buried because of how the plane hit.

yea i agree on bush. He probably should have left, but at the time i doubt he or any one else really understood what was happening. But still, get out that class and find a TV or something.

shot down-im a bit confused. What do you mean russian roulette? Planes had been overflying the US for nearly 100 years by 9/11, without once ever being hijacked and crashed into buildings. You're using hindsight. Of course it makes sense now, but previously, it would have been pointless to have planes up patrolling for commercial planes. And by the end of it, they did have planes up, and were contemplating shooting down a delta flight that was unresponsive. The fact is that no one wanted to condemn several hundred people to death under the premise that their plane may or may not be hijacked.

The pentagon plane was like flight 93. It flew into a building going almost 700 mph. Check the video to see what happens at those speeds. And bear in mind this is a fighter jet meant to take damage, not a commercial plane which can be brought down by hitting a duck. And yes, i know this against a power plant protection level concrete wall, but the pentagon was meant to survive a nuclear blast, and if it makes sense, the plane did do damage to pentagon, proving it's not...a concrete wall.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--_RGM4Abv8
 
I thought that the black boxes on the planes with their recordings would've ended all this... I feel like saying our government did this would be like someone in WWII saying why did our government bomb pearl harbor :/ not hating on those that believe our gov did it, just seems odd too me ppl still talk about conspiracies and 9/11
 
wut? and i hate to tell ya bud, but look into what really happened in the weeks leading up to pearl harbour. im not saying it was an inside job, but it was certainly provoked by the american government. i firmly believe that pearl harbour could have been prevented if it wasnt for the greed of Roosevelt and his international banker buddies.
 
the government also didn't mind having something for the country to rally around cause an entry into the war mightve been hugely unpopular without that attack
 
1294097120obiwan911.jpg
1294097163israel_troll.jpeg

1294097094get-out-plane.jpg
 
some dude in my school who has said hes an extremist muslim said 9/11 was an inside job because the buildings next to the trade center fell down.
 
there are so many unanswered questions.... so why don't we just fly some planes into some buildings? i kinda doubt some scientist can predict EXACTLY what will happen, and i bet the buildings will prolly collapse, thus debasing some theory of an inside job
 
What is this? I dont even?

We had all kinds of good debates, then you drop in your 2 cents and look like an idiot. Why would a muslim extremist claim it was an inside job? And if he said he was a Muslim extremist i.e against America I'd beat the fuck out of him. He's probably Muslim but you're just ignorant so you assume he's an extremist. And why does it make it an inside job cuz the other buildings fell?

Gtfo.
 
there are many facts supporting it was an inside job, one that should move you, a good amount of the 19 men that where supposidly the hijackers are still alive to this day.
 
the trusses dont need to melt to fail. they just need to weaken. i dont know what melted some of the trusses. and the implosion effect seen in demolishing buildings was due to a similar failure in the trusses. and since it was high it fell then dominoed each floor. if the plane hit say the 3rd floor then id expect to see a leaning fall.
 
all i've learned over the years hearing people's arguments that it was an inside job is that those people will never accept any of the evidence presented. they will go as far as saying everyone that is credible, isn't because they're being paid by the evil government to lie. and all the evidence the conspiracy nuts can come up with is saying something looked like something else and then blatantly mis-comparing those somethings that looked like something else to try to sound their insane reasoning.
 
Agreeing with skiierman on this one.

Like others have said, the trusses don't have to melt to fail, they just need to weaken.
 
they tested that on Discovery channel and airplane fuel would do it. it doesnt have to melt it anyway just make it structuarly weaker.
 
Food for thought: Why did the 3 buildings not fall in a lopsided manner? Why did they all fall the same way? Why did all three of the buildings fall evenly and at free-fall speed perfectly into their own footprint? If each building was individually weakened on different sides of the respective buildings, wouldn't they logically not all fall in the same manner?

If they fell because of planes, the buildings would've fallen in a lopsided manner and not in their own footprints and not at freefall speed. Think of it this way: if somebody punches you in the balls, do you hunch over and then fall over, or do you suddenly turn into dust and immediately fall in your own footprint?

Two planes flew into two buildings that were desinged to each designed to withstand a plane crash and some how three buildings fall demolision style: evenly, at a freefall speed, into their own footprint. Something doesn't sound wrong with that to you?

You're right, the trusses do need to be weakened... by explosives.
 
they didn't actually fall straight down. If you look at the videos of the 2nd tower i think it was, the top is actually lopsided. And as each floor collapsed onto the floor beneath it, everything got pushed outwards. I guess they did essentially fall straight down, but not in a perfect neat manner. Oh and they would have collapsed similarly because the interiors of both towers were exactly the same. If 1 reacts to a plane hit like that, odds are, the other will too.

i don't think the punching comparison makes much sense just because we don't have the capability of collapsing in on ourselves. Humans aren't a rigid structure like a tower.

biggest misconception of the wtc right here. They were NOT designed to withstand what happened to them. The architect once said they might have been capable of withstanding a hit from a 707 on approach to jfk or la guardia. A 707 is a smaller plane than a 767, and on approach, it would be going less than 200mph. That's fast, but possible. A larger, 767, going almost 700mph is not nearly as feasible. Theres a huge difference between maybe being able to take an accidental hit to staying up after someone deliberately flies a plane into it.

i simply don't understand how people think explosives were used. Watch a tv show about implosions. The insides of those buildings are gutted, and wires/explosives are literally everywhere and impossible to hide. And on top of that, despite 6 months of daily work, 700 tons of explosives, and all their computer simulation, they still manage to fuck up taking down a 4 story barn.

...people give the govt far too much credit.
 
9/11 refers to the dimensions of osama's cock. 9 inches long by 11 inches around. osama received a rim job, osama received a blow-job, but that shit was NOT an inside job!
 
this sums it up nicely. Posted by one of the administrators on the pilotsfortruth or whatever it is site's forum

"I'm not an expert, nor even a pilot."

...but i'm sure they are all legitimate sources.
 
I searched the forum and can't find where you got that quote from but what does it matter? An admin manages the website, not the movement. Plus, you said it was "one of the administrators", not all of them. You don't have to be a pilot to be involved with aviation anyways. A more appropriate name probably would've been Aviation Experts for 911 Truth but I didn't name the organization now did I....

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/credandexper.html
 
In his autobiography Bush talked about how pissed off he was, but he didn't want to startle the kids or parents, so he finished the book.
He also ordered for any remaining planes in the air to be shot down, but this was after all the hijacked planes crashed
 
it does matter when it comes to reputation. If NS had been founded and run by some guy who sat in his office all day, and had never skied, and had no idea how to, do you think it would have become this big?

Having someone who is not an expert nor a pilot run a website about pilots for 9/11 truth completely destroys any hope it has of being a legitimately recognized source. Basically it's saying "we don't believe the 9/11 story....oh, and some of us might be pilots, so we'll claim to represent the aviation community."

Good point about the name though.

Also, their credentials don't prove much to me. Of the 6 represented airlines, 4 don't exist anymore. And some haven't existed since 2001. And they have a research team that has absolutely no access to any of the materials or information. I'm curious as to what their findings will be.
 
no it wasnt... and even if they knew about the attack before it happened its not like they would shoot like 200 us citizens out of the air
 
The planes could have easily been spotted and shot down and many of lives could have been saved.. NYC has a no fly zone, and only a specific flight path to get into JFK. The planes that hit the towers we'ren't on that specific flight path, and passed the no fly zone. The airforce had shitloads of time to prepare and shoot those mothafuckahs down.. there must have been some problem or some other shit..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top