9/11 Conspiracy Thread (There can be only one!)

[shaman_]

I'm gonna jump in here with some thoughts.

The 'simple explanations' are full of holes.

So you claim. I’m sure it may seem that way if you spend a lot of time reading the half baked theories presented by the conspiracy sites. However you have had plenty of opportunity to show us these holes but your evidence does not stand up to any scrutiny

And X-files had an episode that essentially predicted the even that would happen months before it actually did happen. It's also dealt briefly with things like depleted uranium, something my mother knows a lot of. Do you?

I’m interested to see if Kenny understands what you mean here because I don’t.

I've already given links showing just how many scientists disagree with the official theory, as well as the vast amount of normal people who do, but you seem to turn a blind eye to such things.

If there are so many relevant experts how come the one we keep discussing is a crackpot retired physics professor writing articles outside his field of expertise?

According to 1 eye witness, only one light post was knocked down by the craft itself. I believe I heard that the rest were knocked down by explosives.

If you believe this then you will believe anything. Do you really think explosives are a good way to bend a light pole? Have a look at the photos.

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/lamps.html

Out of curiosity, is there a conspiracy theory that you have thought was unbelievable?

How many people claimed to see American Airlines written on it?

Scott you didn’t read the summary of witness accounts in my last post.

If they were knocked out soon after the craft passed over them, only an eye witness would have been able to see that the craft itself didn't hit them.

There are eyewitnesses that did see the plane hitting the poles though.

From what I remember, there were some very suspicious 'rescuers'. And why did they have to bury the crime scene with a bunch of gravel?

http://www.911myths.com/html/lawn_covered.html

 

[scott3x]

I'm gonna jump in here with some thoughts.

Ok

So you claim.

Indeed I do

I’m sure it may seem that way if you spend a lot of time reading the half baked theories presented by the conspiracy sites.

Many experts believe it's the official story that's the half baked farce:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/wtc_fema_911.html

However you have had plenty of opportunity to show us these holes but your evidence does not stand up to any scrutiny

I would argue that it's the official story that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Admittedly, you do have to do a little research. And ofcourse, you have to have a mindset that is open to the possibility that one's own government could be part of such things.

Originally Posted by scott3x

And X-files had an episode that essentially predicted the even that would happen months before it actually did happen. It's also dealt briefly with things like depleted uranium, something my mother knows a lot of. Do you?

I’m interested to see if Kenny understands what you mean here because I don’t.

As to the x-files episode:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIZ205ccX8M

As to the depleted uranium:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=2374

If there are so many relevant experts how come the one we keep discussing is a crackpot retired physics professor writing articles outside his field of expertise?

1- He's not a crackpot.
2- He's not discussing outside his field of expertise; his focus is on the cause of the collapse of the WTC buildings, something that's certainly within the realm of physics.
3- We keep discussing Steven Jones because I believe he's got good points that official story believers don't pay enough attention to.
4- I have discussed other experts as well.
5- My guess is that more experts aren't speaking out because (a) they're not interested in being called a crackpot and (b) they're not interested in being put on indefinite paid leave or (as was the case with Kevin Ryan) outright fired. And if someone has already said it well, why say it again. They can simply add their support, perhaps anonymously so as not to incur (a) and (b).

Let me make one thing clear as well: I believe there are definitely some NIST types who know the truth but who are being paid to come up with creative lies.

 

[scott3x]

Originally Posted by scott3x

According to 1 eye witness, only one light post was knocked down by the craft itself. I believe I heard that the rest were knocked down by explosives.

If you believe this then you will believe anything. Do you really think explosives are a good way to bend a light pole? Have a look at the photos.

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/lamps.html

I'm not sure a plane would either. Remember the idea is that the eye witness only saw one light pole get knocked down by the craft; the others, therefore, must have been dealt with in a different manner.

Out of curiosity, is there a conspiracy theory that you have thought was unbelievable?

Clearly, -someone- always believes in any conspiracy theory out there. But in terms of myself, I don't believe that the WTC wasn't hit by planes at all, for instance (some have claimed they were holograms).

Scott you didn’t read the summary of witness accounts in my last post.

Yes, I did.

There are eyewitnesses that did see the plane hitting the poles though.

Perhaps they mistook a missile for a plane.

Originally Posted by scott3x

From what I remember, there were some very suspicious 'rescuers'. And why did they have to bury the crime scene with a bunch of gravel?

http://www.911myths.com/html/lawn_covered.html

Alright, perhaps the gravel was put there for the dump trucks.

 

[Ophiolite]

Remember the idea is that the eye witness only saw one light pole get knocked down by the craft; the others, therefore, must have been dealt with in a different manner.

You are much smarter than most of the conspiracy nutters, but this line is pure, unadulterated stupidity.

A ruddy great aircraft, presumably full of people (or if you prefer a low flying guided missile) has just crashed into the HQ of the armed forces of the world's only superpower. There is noise, there are flames and explosions, there is smoke, people are running everywhere. Sirens are going off. Car alarms have been triggered.

Amidst all of this you are saying to yourself, "I wonder what happened to the other lamp posts?" Get real.

 

[moementum7]

You are much smarter than most of the conspiracy nutters, but this line is pure, unadulterated stupidity.

A ruddy great aircraft, presumably full of people (or if you prefer a low flying guided missile) has just crashed into the HQ of the armed forces of the world's only superpower. There is noise, there are flames and explosions, there is smoke, people are running everywhere. Sirens are going off. Car alarms have been triggered.

Amidst all of this you are saying to yourself, "I wonder what happened to the other lamp posts?" Get real.

I'm sure someone here has asked this question before, but why doesn't the pentagon just release the footage of the airliner crashing into the pentagon?
And why is the only footage they did choose to release so gosh darn ambiguous?
Is it true that some gov agency went around and retrieved all tapes of the event happening?...think I heard that somewhere.
You can drive near the pentagon and film all the same footage, so I don't think it is a national security issue.

Just curious, I would prefer to here from a coincidence theorist, (I think that's what they call you), as apposed to a conspiracy theorists side...anyone?

 

[shaman_]

Ok




Indeed I do



Many experts believe it's the official story that's the half baked farce:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/wtc_fema_911.html

That's not a criticism of the official story but yet more claims of the steel being removed quickly. The steel was there for many months. It wasn’t removed quickly.

I would argue that it's the official story that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Admittedly, you do have to do a little research. And ofcourse, you have to have a mindset that is open to the possibility that one's own government could be part of such things.

I’m open to the possibility. The evidence however does not exist.

As to the x-files episode:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIZ205ccX8M

As to the depleted uranium:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=2374

I can’t watch youtube from work. I vaguely remember the episode though.

However I don’t see the relevance of that or the article on uranium.

1- He's not a crackpot.

He wrote a paper claiming that jesus visited America. That is why I call him a crackpot.

2- He's not discussing outside his field of expertise; his focus is on the cause of the collapse of the WTC buildings, something that's certainly within the realm of physics.

His field is cold fusion not structural engineering or metals. There are experts far more qualified to speak on this and they do not agree with him.

3- We keep discussing Steven Jones because I believe he's got good points that official story believers don't pay enough attention to.

We talk about him because he is the best expert you have.

His points become ignored after they have been debunked.

4- I have discussed other experts as well.

The majority in the appropriate field certainly do not agree with the conspiracy theory. If you are swayed by credentials then you should not ignore this.

5- My guess is that more experts aren't speaking out because (a) they're not interested in being called a crackpot and (b) they're not interested in being put on indefinite paid leave or (as was the case with Kevin Ryan) outright fired. And if someone has already said it well, why say it again. They can simply add their support, perhaps anonymously so as not to incur (a) and (b).

If the qualified experts truly believed the US masterminded this then some of them would speak up in the seven years since then. They’re not. The best you have is Steven Jones which is shaky ground (and I’m being kind there).

I'm not sure a plane would either.

You don’t think a plane could bend over a few poles?

Yes, I did.

Then you wouldn’t have had to ask “How many people claimed to see American Airlines written on it?”

26 did.

Perhaps they mistook a missile for a plane.

You don’t really think that many people would see a missile and think it was a plane do you? They described wings and seeing “American Airlines”. Are you suggesting the missile knocked down the five poles?

Come on Scott you are refusing to accept any evidence that damages the conspiracy theory.

 

[shaman_]

I'm sure someone here has asked this question before, but why doesn't the pentagon just release the footage of the airliner crashing into the pentagon?
And why is the only footage they did choose to release so gosh darn ambiguous?
Is it true that some gov agency went around and retrieved all tapes of the event happening?...think I heard that somewhere.
You can drive near the pentagon and film all the same footage, so I don't think it is a national security issue.

Just curious, I would prefer to here from a coincidence theorist, (I think that's what they call you), as apposed to a conspiracy theorists side...anyone?

Don't know. Perhaps they have footage of it perhaps they don't. Perhaps it is so spectacular that they don't want to release as it would be a sight for muslim extremists to rejoice over. You don't want your enemies to see their successes. It may set a benchmark or encourage further acts. :shrug:

 

[KennyJC]

A key witness remembers 9/11.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTL_I_LhddY&feature=user

This is a guy who didn't start saying there were bombs in the basement until 2004. Previous to that he is quoted as saying jet fuel in the elevator shafts was the cause of what he experienced.

He changed his story about numerous other things too which can only prove he is a liar and now he makes a living out of his lies.

According to 1 eye witness, only one light post was knocked down by the craft itself. I believe I heard that the rest were knocked down by explosives.

So you agree that the "craft" did knock down at least one? So what if the eye witness did not happen to notice it hitting other lamp posts.

How many people claimed to see American Airlines written on it?

Didn't you read shamans post?

26 mentioned that it was an American Airlines jet.

39 others mentioned that it was a large jet/commercial airliner.

It's not looking good for the no-planers.

I haven't heard that it was a massive amount.

http://www.911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.html

Yes. Massive amounts.

I hadn't heard of any body parts either.

Many of our people have provided the necessary expertise to the people of New York City, Washington DC and Pennsylvania that has allowed these communities and the victim's families to have the confidence that everything humanly possible is being done to recover, properly identify and return the victims to their families.
http://www.dmort.org/DNPages/jan2002newstext.htm

Here is one such example of victims families receiving remains of their loved ones:
http://gilroydispatch.com/news/contentview.asp?c=73724

As well as personal artifacts:
http://onlineathens.com/stories/091104/new_20040911030.shtml

I do believe that pictures of victims were shown in court in the Zacarias Moussaoui trial but have not been made public.

From what I remember, there were some very suspicious 'rescuers'. And why did they have to bury the crime scene with a bunch of gravel?

Yet another disgusting claim by you.

Ed Pickens, the senior construction scheduler: "On that first day we discussed with the FBI where to place the dumpsters needed to cart away debris. We discovered, however, that the dumpsters had to be brand new because the debris was evidence and could not be contaminated in any way. So we had to deliver numerous new dumpsters to the site immediately. And then I informed the FBI that we were going to have to build a road for the trucks carrying the debris because the ground around the heliport—the area closest to the blast—was too soft.

The FBI authorized construction of the road, and I called a contractor, who got the gravel, and we got things moving"
http://www.pubs.asce.org/ceonline/ceonline01/0111feat.html

They were very different events. There's publicly available video of one or both of the towers being hit by plane(s). In the case of the Pentagon, however, all the decent video of the event was confiscated and remains under wraps to this day. Why?

How do you know there was decent video? The blurry videos that are public do show something consistent with an AA 757:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBHi9CbrNf4

I'm not sure, but I may have read somewhere that some unreleased video was shown at the Zacarias Moussaoui trial.

If I felt that the majority of the evidence pointed to a plane in the case of the WTC towers, I would still believe it was a plane even if there were no video evidence.

Bullshit. If there was no video of the plane hitting the WTC, you would then say "they collapsed the building to cover-up that no plane hit the building". That's how the mind of a conspiracy nut works.

Just out of curiosity, what evidence would you use that a 767 hit the WTC if there was no video?

I did no such thing. I said that while I still believe that a missile hit the Pentagon, I wouldn't contest it vehemently because I haven't investigated the Pentagon crash as much as I've investigated the collapse of the WTC buildings.

And despite the fact you have not investigated it, you still automatically side with the assumption that no plane hit the Pentagon.

I mean, he said that the no plane theory is so ridiculous that it must have been created by the government to divert truthers, and you agreed with him, before going on to say that you do think it wasn't a plane that hit the Pentagon. Perfect irony.

 

[James R]

If no plane hit the Pentagon, what happened to American Airlines Flight 77?

 

[Sock Puppy]

The great zig-zagging missle that knocked over numerous light posts and smashed into a large generator before finally hitting the pentagon. It just looked like a large plane with American Airlines written on it, but that was just to fool the eye witnesses. The light posts were cut down afterwards even though nobody witnessed this (bit like your demolition setup), and the mass amount of AA 757 wreckage was merely planted... as were the body parts of the people on board the plane who were of course carted there after being shot in a bunker in the Pentagon then cut up into little peices.

And all this before the rescuers arrived on the scene seconds/minutes later.

Two words:

"Conspiracy elves".

 

[Sock Puppy]

Originally Posted by scott3x
According to 1 eye witness, only one light post was knocked down by the craft itself. I believe I heard that the rest were knocked down by explosives.

That. Is. Absurd. Back to the imaginary explosives. Who saw these explosives? Who planted them? Did they plant explosives that just knocked the poles over instead of blowing pieces out of them? This smacks of the "Hush-a-Bomb" from the "Rocky and Bullwinkle Show".

I'm not sure a plane would either. Remember the idea is that the eye witness only saw one light pole get knocked down by the craft; the others, therefore, must have been dealt with in a different manner.

So - what? The big giant plane wings just...retracted as the plane rocketed past, eh? "Hey, watch out! You almost hit that lightpole! Whew!"

Seriously, enough.

Clearly, -someone- always believes in any conspiracy theory out there. But in terms of myself, I don't believe that the WTC wasn't hit by planes at all, for instance (some have claimed they were holograms).

Scott, this is not the benchmark you really want to be applying yourself to. "Well some people think the WTC was hit by...holograms. But not me." The people who believe in the giant, impacting holograms are, since no other phrase really applies, completely, utterly insane. No, in a legal, executorial fashion. They should not - literally - be making any decisions for themselves. I'm not so often a great believer in medication, but this sort of delusion unquestionably qualifies. They - again, completely literally - need help. Badly. If your stance is such that you can still see them on the horizon, you need, very badly, to rethink your opinions and their foundation.

Perhaps they mistook a missile for a plane.

Highly unlikely, unless you can conjure up a model of missile around two hundred feet in length. Misidentified by people who work at the Pentagon. Which sometimes deals in such things, if I recall correctly.

Alright, perhaps the gravel was put there for the dump trucks.

We're making progress.

 

[moementum7]

This is a guy who didn't start saying there were bombs in the basement until 2004. Previous to that he is quoted as saying jet fuel in the elevator shafts was the cause of what he experienced.

He changed his story about numerous other things too which can only prove he is a liar and now he makes a living out of his lies.

Have you got any direct proof on hand(links) that you could share, if that's true it is quite dispicable.

 

[moementum7]

Don't know. Perhaps they have footage of it perhaps they don't. Perhaps it is so spectacular that they don't want to release as it would be a sight for muslim extremists to rejoice over. You don't want your enemies to see their successes. It may set a benchmark or encourage further acts. :shrug:

Hmmm, no.
I mean it's possible....but doesn't seem probable.
Who knows, still seems strange to me.
If the gov really wanted this conspiracy stuff to end all they would have to do is show this footage...well at least that would be enough for me anyway.
Come to think of it I don't think there is ANY clear footage of ANY of the planes to clearly identify them before impact at any location...how much of a pain in the ass is that.

 

[KennyJC]

Have you got any direct proof on hand(links) that you could share, if that's true it is quite dispicable.

I recommend you read the whole thing which is here:
http://911stories.googlepages.com/home

Here are excerps:

--------------------

However, Rodriguez did say this to NIST:

"The fire, the ball of fire, for example, I was in the basement when the first plane hit the building. And at that moment, I thought it was an electrical generator that blew up at that moment. A person comes running into the office saying 'explosion, explosion, explosion.' When I look at this guy; has all his skin pulled off of his body. Hanging from the top of his fingertips like it was a glove. And I said, what happened? He said the elevators. What happened was the ball of fire went down with such a force down the elevator shaft on the 58th (50A) – freight elevator, the biggest freight elevator that we have in the North Tower, it went out with such a force that it broke the cables. It went down, I think seven flights. The person survived because he was pulled from the B3 level. But this person, being in front of the doors waiting for the elevator, practically got his skin vaporized." Read his entire statement here.


That wasn't a slip. On September 11, 2002, Rodriguez was interviewed by CNN:

“And at that terrible day when I took people out of the office, one of them totally burned because he was standing in front of the freight elevator and the ball of fire came down the duct of the elevator itself, I put him on the ambulance.” Source

-----------------------

My bad, it was actually 2006 when Rodriguez first claimed bombs were used in the basement:

-----------------------

In October, 2004, Rodriguez filed a 237-page lawsuit (since dismissed) against the United States of America, the Bush family, and many others, alleging a massive conspiracy to commit and cover up the crimes of 9/11. The suit covered the gamut of 9/11 conspiracy theories, and for good measure threw in accusations of election fraud, drug running, and other crimes. It even suggested that United flight 93 may have been shot down with a “high-powered microwave weapon.”

Yet the lawsuit made no mention of what today is Rodriguez’s most important “evidence”: the basement explosion. Rodriguez had to throw that claim into the stew pot in an affidavit in 2006.

 

[moementum7]

Thanks for sharing...looks like another pentagon survivor is speaking out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88JQL4esHFg&feature=related

The whole pentagon scenario is messed up.
I wish they would just show the plane hit the building and end all this crap.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paWiZ2Y8fRg&feature=related

 

[Ganymede]

The whole pentagon scenario is messed up.
I wish they would just show the plane hit the building and end all this crap.

The Pentagon can't release something that doesn't exist.

 

[KennyJC]

Thanks for sharing...looks like another pentagon survivor is speaking out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88JQL4esHFg&feature=related

What's with the body language in the last part of the video? She seemed straight forward enough describing her experiences, but when she starts going all Woo her body language changes. Typical of a bad liar.

I don't know why she thinks she should have been covered in kerosene. I also don't know why she claims there was no debris on the lawn as there was plenty of it photographed.

The whole pentagon scenario is messed up.
I wish they would just show the plane hit the building and end all this crap.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paWiZ2Y8fRg&feature=related

What makes you think there is clear video showing the impact of Flight 77? There were 85 videos deemed relevant to the investigation, 56 of which did not even show the Pentagon building. Of the remaining 29, 16 did not show the crash site and the 13 others were after the crash.

As far as I'm aware there are only 3 cameras capturing the impact and those are the 3 that are on YouTube.

2:15 of this video shows an object consistent with the scale, shape and colour of Flight 77:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is_qBXqObes

You have light poles knocked over that were consistent with the wing span of Flight 77 and the path it took into the Pentagon. It was witnessed by 136 people so far as I'm aware, most of whom are quite clear in stating that it was a large plane, and others who specifically stated it was an American Airlines plane.

We already know that two planes hit the WTC, so why is it so hard to believe the same thing happened with the Pentagon? Why make things more difficult by flying a missile, planting multitudes of plane/body parts after impact, mysteriously hiding Flight 77 and it's passengers somewhere without being noticed, paying off people to be eyewitnesses, cutting down lamp posts after impact... If I was in charge of the conspiracy, I just fly a plane into the Pentagon. Why wouldn't they, afterall? Trying to make it look like a plane crash without it actually being a plane crash would be an impossible task when you consider there were so many people on the scene.

 

[GeoffP]

Yeah: why would they use a missile? Because it would be incongrous with the planes that hit the Towers? It never fails to make me smile how Troofers disown the really crazy Troofers who claim it was missiles and holograms at the Towers, and then turn around and claim the Pentagon hit was a missile.

 

[Neddy Bate]

It never fails to make me smile how Troofers disown the really crazy Troofers who claim it was missiles and holograms at the Towers, and then turn around and claim the Pentagon hit was a missile.

Sorry, but this is wrong. The real 911-truthers do not put stock in any of those far-fetched theories. They are only looking for truth, in any form. Why are you still talking about these absurd claims, when they are obviously meant to derail any progress in this otherwise semi-civilized discussion?

Why not try to address more pertinent issues, such as:

1. The unfathomable delay in the timeline before fighter jets were scrambled to intercept the hi-jacked bogies
   
2. The "dancing Isreallies" who celebrated and videotaped the attack as it unfolded in NY, (later confirmed to be Mosad agents sent to "document the event")

Well, you probably already have all the answers memorized, so I'm sure you'll enjoy rebutting the above. Unfortunately, when you're done with those, I might have a few more for you.

On a more cheerful note, thanks to all who sacrificed their retirement funds in order to bail out the obscenely rich folks on Walll Streeet, now that their drunken gambling party has wound down, and they realized that it's about time for someone (besides themselves, of course) to pick up the tab. Now they can get back to "playing the market", gambling against us with our grandchildren's retirement accounts.

"Nothing to see here -- move along people." -- Officer Barbrady

 

[Read-Only]

Sorry, but this is wrong. The real 911-truthers do not put stock in any of those far-fetched theories. They are only looking for truth, in any form. Why are you still talking about these absurd claims, when they are obviously meant to derail any progress in this otherwise semi-civilized discussion?

Why not try to address more pertinent issues, such as:

1. The unfathomable delay in the timeline before fighter jets were scrambled to intercept the hi-jacked bogies
   
2. The "dancing Isreallies" who celebrated and videotaped the attack as it unfolded in NY, (later confirmed to be Mosad agents sent to "document the event")

Well, you probably already have all the answers memorized, so I'm sure you'll enjoy rebutting the above. Unfortunately, when you're done with those, I might have a few more for you.

On a more cheerful note, thanks to all who sacrificed their retirement funds in order to bail out the obscenely rich folks on Walll Streeet, now that their drunken gambling party has wound down, and they realized that it's about time for someone (besides themselves, of course) to pick up the tab. Now they can get back to "playing the market", gambling against us with our grandchildren's retirement accounts.

"Nothing to see here -- move along people." -- Officer Barbrady

What is it with some of you people anyway? So many take the same ignorant approach to the "Wall Street" thing as they do the 9/11 thing.

Just what part of LOAN!! do you not understand??? And the fact that those loans will help SAVE those very same retirement funds that you're crying and wailing about!!!!!!

Sheesh!! Such uneducated nutters!!!!:bugeye: