This is an excellent video and anyone who tries to refute this is going to have a very hard time.

http://www.911weknow.com/index.php?option=...1&Itemid=31

I think those who have already done so might be able to argue with you...


This film is a montage of uneducated people speaking to things they know absolutely nothing about.

This post should be removed!

You did not even watch the clip, if you posted this. They have interviews with engineers, demo specialists, workers who were in the basement of the towers before they collapsed and many more. This movie illustrates exactly how these building were brought down.

Watch the movie before you post again. This movie is an hour and a half long and you did not even have time to watch it yet.

Lol, hour and a half? No ty.

Theres alot of 9/11 threads, try reading around and seeing what the other side has to offer first.

I have


I have followed the 9/11 stuff on this forum for a long time, this movie is very good. Anyone who has the time to watch it should do so. I have watched many others and this one does the best job imo.

zeitgeist is good too

I watched it and yes it was good. This goes further into detail.

Baloney..

It's old news.
Seen it all!

There's no substantiation of anyone's credentials included here.

The WTC collapse is well understood by actual engineers who's business it is to understand such things.


It's crap.

LOL i find it funny that any one with half a brain could think a jet fuel fire melted steel... its just stupid. even in a controlled burn jet fuel cant melt steel and I knew that 5 years before 9/11

Sorry MID but this subject YOU have no idea what your talking about. Those towers did not come down by jet fuel and flames. Again I say you need to watch the clip to post in this thread. This thread is about that clip so please do not comment on it again until you have seen it.

umm, why would it have to melt the steel in order to collapse? if you take away a percentage of the strength by heating the steel it would not be able to hold the weight. common sense man, but for the sake of arguement lets just say, it didnt melt the steel but instead warped the steel, or made it eaiser to bend.

Unlike a lot of CTers 'round here -- hell, unlike /me/ -- I've never once seen MID talk when he has no idea what he's talking about. Perhaps if you'd like to bring up specific points with him, you'd find that out.

I might also add that (by virtue of you posting and not being a small, greasy spot) you weren't /at/ the WTC when they fell to say definitively whether or not they came down by the action of jet-fueled fire, so you might want to be a little more circumspect in how you phrase things. Especially if you want to pursue a discussion with MID.

--Jaylemurph

a 20 hour inferno vs 3 hours of "smoke".

I don't think so. They talk about the B25 Empire State Building crash. They talk about a slow flying 707 crash. They don't mention a near 500mph impact and serious fire. There was serious, spreading fire and significant impact damage to floors, core and exterior steel. Any "comparisons" are invalid, taking all the factors into account.

common sense is knowing that even if the steel was only weakened that there is still no way on earth that the towers would have collapsed at the speed of free fall-- never mind that there was molten steel in the sub basements and the videos show clear evidence of squibs and it took 6 weeks to cool

I still find it amazing that people who claim to have looked at 9/11 in detail still talk about melted steel, etc. People talk about common sense; well, sense isn't so common.

I'll debunk it without even watching it.

To believe that you also have to believe:

1) George W. Bush and his administration, who have mismanaged two wars, one horribly, while neglecting the other, and was partially responsible for the aftermath of Katrina, could have organised something like this and not have one single hint escape. You also have to believe that one of the most corrupt administrations ever, with all it's scandals and crooks could have kept the secret for at least seven years, without some disillusioned crook trying to get the story out. And if you don't believe that, you have to believe in some mythical secret society that has absolutely no evidence for it's existance. And I'm sorry, but paranoid rantings trying to link the seal on the American dollar bill to rich and private(nothing wrong with wanting privacy) businessmen.

2) You have to believe that the US is more of a threat to your life than the global and violent Islamic radical movement, responsible for the Madrid and London bombings, embassy bombings in africa, Pan Am flight 103, murdering Theo van Gogh and attempting to murder Salman Rushdie, not to mention random acts of violence around the world, and within their own country.

You have every right to believe whatever you want, no matter how contradictory it is to reality, but don't expect anyone to be convinced.

I don't know how anyone can not think theres something fishy about what happened on 9/11. There are too many things that can't be rationalized.

This is a concept I see many "truthers" failing to understand. Is the government hiding something? Yes. They are hiding systemic failures and / or incompetencies associated with personnel, that the government wishes to avoid making public. They are doing what governments always do. That's why I do support further investigation into what happened.

I do NOT believe the government had anything to do with organising / facilitating 9/11.

The use of the term "...something fishy..." is so ambiguous. Apologies, but it says to me that you haven't really CHECKED on facets of 9/11; you have just heard something and it "sounds right".

Have you spoken to building engineers who have the necessary skills to speak authoritatively about building collapse? I - have - several of them.

Have you spoken to F-15 / F-16 pilots about alert states and response times? I have - several of them.

(I also have 20+ years of aviation experience myself, as aircrew, air traffic control, and operations).

Have you spoken to airline pilots (heavys - 747 / 757 / 767 / A300, etc) about what happened? I have - many of them.

There is NOTHING "fishy" about 9/11.

let me get this straight? You want the "debunkers" to sit through a hour and a half of conspiratorial outpourings (with, for some reason, it appears, Slovak subtitles), otherwise their opnions are not valid and ought to be removed.

Yup, the ttruth movement, standing up for freedom of speech.

Can't you just summarize the video?

Apparently not because, heaven forbid, it would require actual thought about the subject, and that may lead to the conclusion that, just perhaps, it may all be a bunch of crap.

Reread MID's first post and look closely at his first and last comments in that post. It is unlikely anyone would want to carry out a discussion with him, not me that is for sure.

Well on topic I do know for sure that the claim that these terrorist learn how to fly these planes at small flight schools is rather dubious. The flight simulators needed to learn to fly such huge planes are not simply located at small flight schools. So that leads me to conclude that either the 'terrorists' were not flying the planes or they had additional training only a few companies in the world could offer them.

I have also seen the videos of the towers falling, it was a controlled demolition most likely. Does it matter what other people think even if they do not believe such facts? No, cause in the end the majority of people do not think at all, and do not have an opinion one way or another, they simply believe whatever their governments tells them to without question.

i did reread his post. it seemed to sum it up in a nutshell, i thought.

As regards the points you've mentioned, I do think that some parts of them might be worth closer investigation; but I don't know if the video under discussion merely considers those points, or whether it goes into the whole "switched-planes-and-vast-government-conspiracy" line of argument that so many spend so much of their time arguing, and, at an hour and a half long, I don't think I'd have the willpower to find out.

I did not see the video either. I doubt the points I brought up were in the video..well not the one about flight simulator accessibility at least. Zeitgeist did a good enough job convincing me that something is amiss not sure if I want to invest that much time in another video either. But I do think calling something simply nonsense, regardless of what people think, is either tactful or signified any intelligence. Maybe it is acceptable at the pub when people are half drunk but that type of language is not impressive in the least to me when discussing such a serious topic but that is just my view.

Exactly. As someone who welds steel on a daily basis I can tell you that the temperature at which steel loses its strength is WAY below the melting point.

They had CPLs, and then did sim training at other locations. Do you know what you know what you are claiming? How many sim hours do you have? How many instructional hours do you have? I would say zero for each, because the questions you ask indicate an unfamiliarity with aviation.




Are you an expert in CD? I doubt it. These people, however, are:

http://www.implosionworld.com/Article-WTC%...209-8-06%20.pdf

Here's the problem with your post....


Again if you watched the video this is what they address.

A man by the name of Steve Forbes who worked on the 107th floor of the 2nd tower said that the weekend before the attacks they had the buildings power cut off for an entire weekend. He said "which is unprecedented for a building like this and to have so much computer equipment in". He also said that the week prior to the attacks he would here heavy duty equipment being used on the floors above him yet no one could tell him what it was. G.W. Bush's brother was hired to put in a 8.6 Million dollar security system in the World Trade Center Towers in 2000. Would this not be the ideal time to put in the lines for the Demo? The official story continues to say that WTC #7 was not brought down by demo, but this video shows about 4 different videos of 4 different groups stating they are about to bring down building 7 evacuate the area. How would they have got the demo in there and ready on the same day? The video also points out that building 7 housed thousands of crucial documents for Enron and Worldcom legal case. It also stated that a 70 Billion dollar lawsuit for Enron was in the works due to a scandal and all the documents were in that building.

Why are there so many anomalies to debunk? Why is there so much to debate? If this happened the way the official story says it did and it is logical then we would not be talking about it. The fact is we have an illogical story for a huge Catastrophe.

Cradlefish your point is that they are not capable of pulling this off because Bush is incompetent. Well my answer is that if 30% of the population feel that 9/11 was an inside job with more and more people every day adding to that 30%. Then I would say they didn't pull it off.

Your smart.....


Is it to much to ask someone to watch the video before they start arguing with me. Let me put it into perspective for you. Let say you love playing dungeons and dragons (right?). And I have never played it before but I decide I know everything about it and I tell you how we are going to play. Would you want me to learn the game first or would you just go along with how I decided to play?

Pretty simple

[quote name='Clovis' date='Jun 20 2008, 10:45 AM' post='2352547']
Reread MID's first post and look closely at his first and last comments in that post. It is unlikely anyone would want to carry out a discussion with him, not me that is for sure.

Exactly with his closed mind about so many subjects I really do not care if he posts or not. What upsets me about him is that he knows everything!! Doesn't even need to watch the video. His opinion on the subject is seen one 9/11 thread you've seen them all. That is why I want him to sit his butt through that video before he posts again.

This video does not even discuss the flight patterns or the terrorists. It talks almost exclusively about the how the demo was used and a very strong idea on how it was put into place. It also talks to several engineers and even the interview with the trade center architect/engineer. It also has eye witness account from people who work in the offices and the basement workers. There is alot more and I highly recommend watching it.

How far below? Lets see how much you know about it. They have steel engineers interviewed in the video who talk all about it.


So lets test your knowledge.

You're determined to get people to watch your hour and a half long video, aren't you?

ye gods, an hour and a half and it doesn't even discuss what some, perhaps, might consider a fairly important aspect? Instead it sounds like it just talks about the same old things that people have been arguing about on the various 9/11 threads here, for what seems like forever, then. Well, thanks for the précis , anyway.

Ye gads, woman, what are you trying to do?! Inject actual working knowledge into a 9/11 thread? What on Earth are you trying to accomplish?

Everybody knows the /only/ way to prove things is referring to a poorly-made documentary on Youtube that cites people with no discernible credentials. Direct, personal knowledge means nothing. I bet you really work for the Secret Bad US Shadow Government that was behind 9/11. You're a disinformant, right?!!!?!

--Jaylemurph

Edit: Excuse me. I see Enigma beat me to the punch.

And 45% of the US thinks that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, who are you really going to trust. If so many people believe something that is so contrary to reality, that doesn't mean they're right, it means they're uninformed.

The 45% your referring to are religious people who were raised this way. The 30% I am talking are people who find faults in what is being pushed on us.

That's pretty optimistic. In every movement, there's the 1% that thinks and the rest that just follows. Most of that 30% is just regurgitating the faults (and "faults") that a handful of people pointed out. Having a lot of sheep in your herd just means that the idea you're pushing is attractive.

The door swings both ways, so whats your point?

Yet they don't find even more obvious faults in the conspiracy theory they embrace.

As Siara seems to be away, perhaps I could draw your attention to this, which certainly backs up what Siara said:
"Strength loss for steel is generally accepted to begin at about 300ºC and increases rapidly after 400ºC, by 550ºC steel retains about 60% of its room temperature yield strength. This is usually considered to be the failure temperature for structural steel."
http://www.azobuild.com/details.asp?ArticleID=3621

The Government called the fact that there were "drills" taking place that were simular to the 911 attacks a "bizarre coincident". On 7/7, UK crisis management specialist Peter Powers said the terrorist attacks "almost precisely" matched the drills they were having. I don't understand how people can know that when the bombs went off in london, there was a government drill involving bombs on the exact same trains and bus, without questioning what they have been told.

Thomas Kean, the chairman of the 9/11 Commission explained the commission's failure to follow the money trail of the 9/11 hijackers by saying it was "of little practical significance". Tony Blair said an investigation into the 7/7 bombings would be a "ludicrous diversion". And yet, some people still have no questions even though in some cases no answers have even been sought.




1) To believe this you have to believe all of europe can be liberated in less time than peace can be brought to a country smaller than texas. It only looks like the war has been mismanaged, never mind the man behind the curtian. Never mind the neco-con think tank Project for a New American Century clearly siad they wanted an expanded millitary presence in the ME and even named Saddams regime as a target before 9/11. Never mind the two countrys that were likened to the Nazi regime flank the new country they liken to the nazi regime on both sides. I guess its another "bizarre coincident" that if he "have" to attack Iran, that we just happen to have them surrounded. We are not fighting for anything over there, its an occupation and the continuing violence is the justification.

2) You have a better chance of being struck by lightning than you do of being killed in a terrorist attack and yet its has brought what was once considered the greatest country in the world to its knees. Its rather embaressing.

No one is claiming there aren't terrorist, no one is claiming all attacks have been inside jobs. Just because there are bears in the woods doesn't mean everything with fur and four paws is a bear. However, I frankly do think the government is more of a threat to my life than these "terrorists". Government is a dangerous servant and a fearful master and to meny people are willing to accept whatever they have been told without question. Its not our job to to be yes-men to the people we elect, its our job to make sure they do their job and are accountible to the the people. The majority of Americans have questions about the attacks of 9/11 and we deserve answers.



In other words, you decide whats "reality" and everyone else must conform to your perception? When Newton first explained that white light was not "pure" but rather it consisted of a spectrum of colors people thought he was a nut. So even if everyone believes something which is contrary to "reality" it still means they are uninformed. So, how do you know you have it all figured out and that your version of reality is factual? The folks in your camp on this issue don't even have questions by which they could confirm of dis-prove their reality, its just been handed to them and accepted no questions asked.



It is a pointless exercise. In my last discussion with him, his argument consisted of defending someone by contradicting that persons own version of the incident, claiming people deserve it when the government does bad things and that adopted people have no claim to family titles like "father" or "son". It was actually kind of creepy.

That's right, compare yourself to Newton. It's all a game for you, I know it, if you truly believed that your government murdered 3000 people just to start a war in Iraq(which they were probably going to do anyway, whether 9/11 happened or not), why are you on the internet where they can find you, wouldn't it be wise to be hiding and stockpiling weapons and like minded people to protect yourself from this monster?

As for reality, nope, I don't decide what's reality. It's out there, the Earth is 4.54 billion years old or so, and while I agree with freedom of thought and everyone's right to believe what they want, people who believe that the Earth is ten thousand years old are wrong, there's no nice way to say it, they are wrong, and either uninformed or willfully ignorant.

What reality is was decided before I was born and it will go on after I die, and I know for a fact that I cannot influence it in any way. The reality is, a bunch of washed up celebrities, uninformed and docile civilians, and fringe scientists and engineers are most likely wrong, and people who actually know what they're talking about are right. I think some people are so willing to believe that their government is evil and out to get them they will believe the most ridiculous things imaginable, and suspend every ounce of reason and critical thought in their body to do so.

Just a thought that's occurred to me from time to time: now, supposing that the conspiracy theory is true for a moment. Who was it done by? The Bush adminsitration? or the NWO and/or the Illuminati or any of the other various secret world government theories? I just wonder if someone might be able to clarify that point for me?

Does anyone really think its plausible that the US government had anything to do with 9/11, considering the fact that ANY evidence that could draw the link between them could potentially topple the government? The Bushies and what not may be stupid, but they're not THAT stupid. If it was shown that the US was behind 9/11 there would be a coup, of that you can be sure. I just don't see the gamble being worth the risk. They could have used other reasons to justify invading Iraq without something so potentially dangerous to themselves.

Well the person who mentioned the flight school issue was going to flight school. The government stated clearly they learned how to fly from small flight schools so it remains doubtful those small flight schools teach others to fly Boeing 757s and 767s or even have the flight simulators to do so even if they wanted to.

As far as experts in CDs those on Zeitgeist were also credentialed were they not? So when you have two sets of 'experts' one who claims it was a CD and others who back up the governments explanation that it was not...who has a bigger reason to lie? I will believe the first set and consider the latter just government payed spokesmen.

Good luck on getting a straight answer to a straight-forward question. I've been asking for things like actual names of members of the Vague Society of Nebulous Meanies (so far I've gotten "the Jews" and "the Rockefellers", both as a fungible mass, as the only response) or just exactly what they want to accomplish, or why (for which the answer seems to be -- say it with me Pinky -- "Try to take over the World!").

Usually I just get some foamy answer like "Can't you see what they're doing?!" or "You must be a disinformant."

--Jaylemurph

It's old news.
Seen it all!

There's no substantiation of anyone's credentials included here.

The WTC collapse is well understood by actual engineers who's business it is to understand such things.


It's crap.

You know all this, without watching????????????????????????????????

uhh yep I do.


Let me break it down for you.

Whats the best way to get America behind a war that no one thinks we should be in? Have that country attack us, so now we don't have a choice. We needed the oil and control over there. What you people are forgetting is that WAR is a big business. There are so many aspects of why this would benefit the government.

I think Zietgeist did a good job summarizing the money trail and who had to benefit. This event gave America the extra authority it needed take certain freedoms away and gain control over aspects they could not before. The emotions of people were preyed upon. Patriot Act was passed giving them the right to do so much without consiquince. The owner of the twin towers received in a law suit double the amount of the insurance policy because it was a terrorist attack. The twin towers were built in the 60's there for maintenance and updating them was costing millions a month. There are a ton of people and people in high up places that benefited from the catastrophe.

You need to quote the other person's post which I believe you are quoting the philosophical MID.

Huh? We attacked al Qaida and Taliban targets in Afghanistan in response to 9/11...vigorously. We didn't go to Afghanistan to get oil.