9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out

9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak OutJoin 23-year architect Richard Gage, AIA, in this feature length documentary with cutting-edge 9/11 evidence from more than 50 top experts in their fields - high-rise architects, structural engineers, physicists, chemical engineers, firefighters, metallurgists, explosives experts, controlled demolition technicians, and more.

Each is highly qualified in his/her respective fields. Several have Ph.D's - including National Medal of Science awardee Lynn Margulis.

She, along with the other experts, exposes the fraud of NIST and discusses how the scientific method should have been applied and acknowledges the overwhelming evidence of high temperature incendiaries in all dust samples of the WTC.

High-rise architects and structural engineers layout the evidence in the features of the destruction of these three high-rises that point inevitably to explosive controlled demolition.

Watch the full documentary now

5.7k
8.67
12345678910
Ratings: 8.67/10 from 275 users.

More great documentaries

Comments and User Reviews

  • knowledgeizpower

    Well Guess This Pretty Much Solves The 9/11 Debates :)

  • JarveTheWinged

    These conjectures have all been disproven by Chris Mohr, Skeptoid, Debunking911, James Randi Educational Foundation, National Geographic Channel, Popular Mechanics,Mythbusters, and many other more qualified Engineers and Architects. If you watch this, do your brain a favor and check out its critics.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1002456105 Carl Jodoin

    FInally a 9/11 doc which just gives the facts straight.

  • knowledgeizpower

    I was hoping it would solve it :) Denial Denial on to the next Doc for me....

  • leonardobdas

    This new theory sounds way more credible. But it does not explain building 7, the theft of evidence, etc.

  • Achems_Razor

    There is nothing that they can explain about WTC7 not being a controlled demolition, it is all in black and white.

  • CapnCanard

    It was exceedingly difficult for me to try to accept the Gov't's Big Lie of 9/11. It is so obvious, but most people just want to believe the authorities rather than listen to a majority of experts. And the guilty will continue with their story no matter how much evidence is presented. The deniers want to believe in the story that is presented... otherwise they would have to admit to being duped. It is identical to the Emperor wearing no clothes ...

  • CapnCanard

    BTW, thank you AE 9/11 Truth. We really need some experts to tell us what happened. Thanks

  • Sion88

    In scientific terms, this theory is a long shot. You would need to have all of the 30 tons of aluminium fuselage melt (which doesn't seem likely) and you would need to have it evenly distribute across all of the steel beams all the way to the bottom floors in order for the buildings to come down like they did.

    If we're gonna talk in terms of probabilities, this theory is less probable than controlled demolition.

    Agreed or no?

    AD.: Also, it is said in this documentary that most of the jet fuel blew out the opposite side of the building following impact.

  • 733

    I can't believe people still buy into this conspiracy crap.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UVXHQXSK23JFYGO5RVUGUPBA3Y Emily

    We continue to see documentaries exposing the irregularities of the 9/11 investigation. These men and women are not kooks, crooks, or "conspiracy nuts" but rather professional, educated people who want their well-founded questions asked. When are we going to have a truly objective, unbiased investigation?

  • http://twitter.com/fishntrips_recs S.E.T.H

    A well made, objective and informative documentary by a strong team with a legit agenda. Well done :)

  • Jane Doe

    I can't believe people still won't look at the evidence right in front of their faces.

  • Jane Doe

    Some people refuse to believe it's even possible because of how awful it really is. Nobody wants to know that their government is willing to do such horrible things, all for some oil (any reason is f*cked up)

  • Guest

    You are right...it is like a Tug of War with the memories of that day in between. We have some architects, engineers, control demolition experts asking for reopening of investigation and the ones on the other side saying bullpie. We have the millions of us taking either side in our own little world at home and then we have the Gov official watching all this thinking; let them play, while they're arguing we can continue with our agendas.
    az

  • alakyang28

    but why?

  • Achems_Razor

    Very good doc. I realize it is exceedingly hard to realize that the ones responsible for the 9/11 murders in the name of power and monetary gain have not one iota of empathy for fellow human beings, and then to possibly find out that it was all caused by the ones that are supposed to be the protectors.

  • knowledgeizpower

    BECAUSE They don't give a Damn About you all they care about is Their Own Wealth, Greed, and Power To Control You, They want YOU to believe that you need them in order to make Decisions.. You Can Make Decisions For Yourself...Don't Be Afraid TAKE BACK WHAT YOU ALREADY HAVE IN THE FIRST PLACE :)

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    actually there are many experts who dont accept the initial story but in now way is it the majority.

  • http://www.facebook.com/danny.braham Daniel Braham

    Did you even watch this?

  • DontBeAFool333

    If I looked hard enough I could find 1000 people who claim the towers were demolished by Aliens. More conspiritorial nonsense. But hey, they got to be on telly, and most of them have probably written books that they'd like you to buy.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    I am not an engineer and an architect. so I can't speak to why building 7 went down. But I am a political science major, so the politics and the motive of demolishing building 7 is completely lost upon me. If all bush wanted to do was to start a war with Iraq, I would control demo one one us the twin towers and that would be enough. Why would the government to put in the effort to control demolish one additional pointless building that drew absolutely no attention what's so ever, and played no part in the build up to war. The 2 world trade center building and an attack on the pentagon was not enough to start a war, they had to destroy an additional arbitrary building. Just so they have to cover it up later?

    If you are trying to argue control demolition, then it has to somehow play into the larger plan. How does the barely noticeable destruction of one additional building play into any conspiracy plan? Other then making more work for themselves to cover up later. Can someone enlighten me here. Why would who even planed this put this controlled demolition in there just as a loose end?

    Please understand, I am a left wing communist, so I don't want to believe in government accounts, but the whole conspiracy theory just makes no sense.

  • LIVEFROMLIMBO

    a better question is what did building 7 contain?

  • morgmorg

    Shouldn't the people who oversaw the building of WTC be arrested for doing such a crappy job?
    I mean if the towers were designed and built to withstand fires and airplanes crashing into them someone clearly didn't do their job.
    Iff, the buildings were NOT constructed properly I would be inclined to agree with the official story.

  • Sion88

    Mythbusters are very credible indeed.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    The better question is ... WHAT?
    I don't know how to respond to that, What are you trying to say? What did it contain that it needed to be destroyed on site? Did they truck something there that they needed for the demolition and could not be trucked away? secret computer files and folders and they figured the old way of disposing secrets are just not dramatic enough?

    you are going to need to tell me what you suspect it contains, and why demolishing the building is the most logical way of disposing what ever that thing is.

    Cause i would think trucking the evidence away would be the easiest solution. Rigging a building for controlled demolition is hard work, hiring a good moving company is far simpler.

  • npaa

    9/11 a true history becoming legend.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000620708233 Daryl Walters

    America killed it's own president (JFK), and yet the official story is still in their history books and the real perpitraitors will never be brought to justice. Why will this be any different?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Daniel-Jones/100001464640163 Daniel Jones

    wow that was profound logic dude. Thanks for the heads up....

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Daniel-Jones/100001464640163 Daniel Jones

    You demonstrate proof of co-dependency if I ever heard it. Research Stockholm Syndrome mate. I'm convinced you and most sheeple are suffering from it these days....

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UNU6G6ERGK36QI3SUJQJDKBIGI B

    Richrd Gage's theories have all been debunked at Skeptoid, debunking 911, James Randi Educational Foundation, and by Chris Mohr, plus many others. Check these sites for a full and balanced story.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Daniel-Jones/100001464640163 Daniel Jones

    You've just called the foxes in defense of the chicken coup massacre. These are not unbiassed experts by any means.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Daniel-Jones/100001464640163 Daniel Jones

    Military grade thermite is the only thing that can explain the presence of that aluminum and also why ground zero cleanup crews were finding pools of still molten metal weeks after the demolition of those buildings.

    Hot enough to melt metal and yet a perfectly preserved terrorist passport is found on top of the pile of rubble within hours of the event?

    The official story strains credulity far more than the unofficial verdict in my opinion.

    Inside job top to bottom and all points in between.

  • Ghost_Buster

    it's a very good doc. it's clear that it's controlled demolition. someone had something to gain from it right? possibly the military, cia and other industrialists, and i'm talking long term income.and why did they took the trash to china?

  • slpsa

    The evidence of demolition is overwhelming. These people are not conspiracy theorists. They are THE experts, not just any experts. You choose who to believe.

  • CapnCanard

    Well, let take a crack at your skepticism. 1st) WTC 7 contained SEC files on multiple Wall Street investigations, now that is not to say anything would've been prosecuted, I personally believe they wouldn't have but why not just take it all out anyway to insure a greater cover for the guilty on Wall Street? 2nd) Both WTC 1 and 2 were losing money. Lease holders couldn't make great profit with these towers and they had been floating the idea of getting rid of them, but there are far more economic costs than you could imagine. So the easy way is to take them down ILLEGALLY and then collect the insurance rather than using legal methods and paying the super high costs of abestos removal etc etc. In addition, Larry Silverstein made 3 to 4 billion once the policy paid off... before that he was sitting on a potential 1 billion in liability. 3rd) in 1999-2000 the PNAC openly suggested that the USA needed a new Pearl Harbor in order to make the 21st C the New American Century. They were trying to enact something the GOP has wanted to do since 1945, and that is to roll back all of FDR's New Deal policies. (in fact the GOP still talks about this and is actively pursuing such measures-re: Wisconsin, Mich, Ind. et al
    4th) International support for American wars... the wars help the USA control of oil resources in a time of Peak Oil. What better way than to have an attack that is meant to enrage and incite war against those in countries where oil is available? Those are just some quick rationales for the possible why. You could reference the Reichstag fire of 1933 or the Gulf of Tonkin etc. Given history this is standard operating procedure.

  • CapnCanard

    in reply to Yeung Xiao:

    some WTC 7 tenents: Securities and Exchange Commission, U.S. Secret Service, Salomon Smith Barney, American Express Bank, Internal Revenue Service, New York City Office of Emergency Managament, which amazingly wasn't being utilized by the Mayor or any NYC officials. Wikipedia has all the tenents listed for WTC 7. Do the work.

  • CapnCanard

    majority... well, the ones who speak out must feel very secure in their careers, those who don't are wary of possible recriminations.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_4RAPJETOQZXRSAOQRU7SQSIIEU Pangaea

    Considering you have a "political science major" I find it striking that you dont know about "problem, reaction, solution"
    You are obviously totally bewildered as to why (if it was part of a gov agenda) it was done.

    Im still half way on the fence with 911 related conspiracies.. but i`ll give you one out of many reasons why this was done.
    Lets assume it was part of a gov agenda..

    1) The government creates or exploits a problem blaming it on others
    2) The people react by asking the government for help willing to give up their rights
    3) The government offers the solution that where planned long before the crisis

    this very same sequence has been used right though history right around the world, its nothing new.

    The solutions specificly in context to 9/11 are many. .. but one that stands out is the patriot act and its later amendments.

    So there's "ONE" possible reason why "they" did what they did,.. assuming it was part of a gov (or others) agenda :)

  • Jack1952

    I have also been puzzled why any conspirators would complicate their plans by involving a controlled demolition. The more complicated the plot, the easier it becomes to uncover. If it was uncovered before the the plan could come to fruition, the entire regime would be exposed. It would be placing the administration in an unnecessary and precarious position. It seems to be too risky an option to implement. If it was an inside job, it was a poor plan and they are quite fortunate that they weren't caught.

    Most Americans would have approved of war if they believed that hijackers had flown a number of planes into important landmarks and were determined to continue attacks of a similar type.

  • Jack1952

    I would think that a paper shredder and an incinerator would have disposed of any unwanted material. Simpler to implement and no one would have asked questions...certainly not any architects and engineers. I'm sure all covert government agencies have these at their disposal. No need to attract snoopy investigators.

  • Jack1952

    This is easily the best documentary on this subject. It will convince many watchers that 9/11 was an inside job. Even if their allegations are true there is still a lot more work to do before there are any indictments. This only touches on elements of one area that have to be investigated. To prove wrongdoing in court, a prosecutor must provide conspirators, their planning stages, where the hijacked planes came from, how the planes were commandeered and flown, who flew those planes, who and how they planted the explosives, how the airlines were involved, just to name a few off the top of my head. Compelling watch but not much good in court. Even those interviewed realize that this doesn't even begin to be enough evidence to present to a jury.

    The lady who claims that people feel the need to apply a pathology to the "truthers" was a little hypocritical. Wasn't she doing the same thing to those who don't believe in a conspiracy?

  • Jack1952

    You assume that anyone who doesn't believe in a conspiracy has never researched the topic. I have read and watched a great deal on this subject and remain skeptical. If the "truthers" are correct, I want it proven without a shadow of a doubt and I most definitely would want those responsible to face the consequences for their actions. It definitely does not make me a "sheeple". I am highly critical of the American government and their reasons for war in Iraq. I want to know who the enemy is. If the enemy includes elements in the government I would want the "truthers" to ferret them out. If they truly believe these allegations, they must continue with their investigations to ultimately prove it.

  • Achems_Razor

    One of the reasons was (MONEY) Major "Put" options before attacks on airlines, financial institutions, US Treasury notes, business supplying the military would see dramatic increases reflecting the new business they were poised to receive.

    If the towers were not completely demolished, how would Silverstein collect all the insurance profit, the buildings would of been fixed, and then still had to deal with removing all the asbestos from buildings, and all the maintenance due that was required, a major loosing proposition. Plus to much of a chance people may have uncovered some evidence if everything was not pulverized.

  • CapnCanard

    Jack1952, well a paper shredder just doesn't make an impact like a plane into a building. Apparently the intent of any false flag operation is to cause terror resulting in shock and awe, stress, hostility, and a societal desire for revenge. Many questions are purposefully left unanswered. This would open up avenues for further exploitation of the citizens emotional turmoil. You could say that we got played. Take an act like the Reichstag Fire of 1933, it was proven to be a successful and it is widely believe that the Nazi's burned down the Reichstag as a false flag operation and then blamed the fire on a Dutch citizen, Marinus Van Der Lubbe, who happened to be a member of the COMMUNIST PARTY. Following the execution of Marinus Van Der Lubbe the Nazis went from a 50% majority to outlawing any other political party, especially the COMMUNIST PARTY in pre-War Germany. Well in the first 10 years it looked like it worked pretty darn well for the Nazis, though after 1944-45 things started to unravel fast. You all know the rest of the story.

  • mo_dem

    Are you aware that Larry Silverstein bought a 99 year leasehold of the WCT complex on July 24, 2001, just weeks before 9/11? Are you aware that the complex was virtually worthless because it was filled with asbestos that required removal, the cost of which rivaled the cost of the leasehold itself? Do you not think Silverstein knew this fact? Do you know that Silverstein purchased the towers because "I felt a compelling urge to own them"? Are you aware that Silverstein was awarded $4.5 billion in insurance money? Pretty good payoff for following a "compelling urge", don't you agree? As in most evil deeds, follow the money.

    War with Iraq was not the main reason for this false-flag attack, although an important one. Don't you agree that we must keep shoveling taxpayer money to the military industrial complex to keep our economy alive? And don't you think it has done a good job since our economy is booming? Remember the Patriot Act? With its passage into law, we kissed our constitution and bill of rights good-bye. To secure the passage of this anti-freedom law, a high body-count was required and it had to be terrifying enought to shock the country into taking leave of its senses. As in most traitorist deeds, follow the politicians.

  • mo_dem

    You want to try a guess for...never?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Daniel-Jones/100001464640163 Daniel Jones

    @Jack1952

    Not really Jack. It's just the knee-jerk non-thinking reactions that remind me of Stockholm Syndrome in these cases . I agree with your sentiments. You have to agree the above was just regurgitated verbage though. Sheeple refers to non-thinking types and not to anyone who disagrees with me I assure you.

  • SurvivorVeteran

    You should take the advice in your username.

  • Guest

    For one, building #7 is the main concern.
    Just think that it used to house very important US-Gov. agencies.
    I personnaly do not believe in an "All out" planned conspiracy.
    And that is where the case become gets confusing.
    Building #7 was re-enforced for obvious reasons and never endured what the 2 other towers did. Left aside the number of floors!
    At any time, the "Opportunity" to bring down that building at the right moment was a "God's Given" for many.
    Who really could care if WTC#1 & 2 would be brought down in dust?

    In regard to the Pentagon, no one is permited to view the films of the surrounding surveilance cam anyhow!
    So, there is no case and no conclusion to draw.

    The terrorists may have been under surveilance way before they got into this by authorities who believed that they were "In Control" but who later found out that were taken short.
    The regarded USA agency has to keep the whole strictly confidential.
    bare in mind that the "We the Corporates" only look for arms sales.

    All considered, I don't think that this time, the Gov agencies kept any documents that could be corroborated by any civil servant on his death bed or in retirement outside the reach of the USA Gov.
    As it once was the case quite a few times in the last 50 years that went by. They've learn their lessons!

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    Nope! I'd say that the 2 main buildings 100 floors had to fall approximately within their footstep. At that height, a lenght of some (15-50) floors topping, tipping over on its flank goes againts the laws of gravity.

    Which is far from the case of building #7 where a huge amount of goverment documents were stored.
    In short, what if your government agency find out that some weordo's wants to crash a jet into some of the WTC?
    And you have quite a bit of a "Good" relationship with the highest politicians who'd tell you : -"Keep an open eye, we want the details".
    -And keep all this strictly confidential, minimum number of person aware, don't scrap the surveilance operations.
    -Keep the useless outside the surveilance operations!

    However, one morning you wake up and hear that these guys are already into the process of their things?
    Gosh! Get on the phone...?
    Call here, phone there and then over there...

    I'll tell y'a, knowing how much some human beings are opportunist beasts, one will find a way to turn the event into a usefull one.
    What ever that opportunity can turn out to be.

    This is all there is to it.
    For the rest of the "Evidences", they've been destroyed.
    Intentionnally and deliberately, obvously.
    Against many laws enforced in the occidental world.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    Aliens? Yes, my little niece tells me that it was the Kinglons!
    The ones who subdued Mr. Spock!

    Pierre.

  • slpsa

    Yueng, if you are a political science student, spend some time reading the PNAC documents online, I think you will find what you are looking for under the Middle East Section. Your answers are there, in print, for your studious eyes to ingest. This think tank pretty much laid out what has happened from day 1 in this fake War on Terror. There are now some famous names redacted from the PNAC list of contributors. Originally Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, and Don Rumsfeld were listed, they are now gone from that site. Along with other Bush cronies. Anyone who studied the site back in 2001 and for several years afterwards can attest those names were there until the whole PNAC paper became a focal point.

  • bushlies

    It's very obvious that buildings don't behave in the manner of building 7 even when fully engulfed in fire. That is definitely the smoking gun! It is difficult for me to believe that even when evidence as obvious at this, there are still people who rely on their powerful denial systems to ignore the truth. Wake the !@#$ up America! I don't know who is more at fault, our greedy, power hungry, dishonest government or the people who let them get away with it! It is definitely time for change, otherwise we all deserve what we get.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    I do not doubt there is money to be made in war. I don't doubt people profited from the subsequent war effort. But why bring down building 7 specifically. What evidence is there that could not be trucked away. Why is the demolition of a building a logical way to destroy evidence. Government has a ton of secrets they destroy on a daily basis, why do they chose to spend so much more energy then necessary to dispose of evidence. especially in a public way that would catch so much attention. Why would they hire a demolition crew to bring down tower 7, rather than simple hiring a moving company to truck it away.

    Controlled demolition is not easy in any way shape or form. it take a lot of energy and it is not the best way to dispose of evidence, the debris goes everywhere. I can't think of a reason why who ever planed this would bring down a building and draws no attention just to cover it up later. Imagine if they left the building standing, and simply denied access to the building. what would change about any of the war justifications besides one less thing to cover up?

    Lets not insult each other. This has nothing to do with education level. There are dumb people and smart people on both sides. I have nothing against believing in conspiracy, but the theory the truthers are posing is inconsistent with evidence.

  • Jack1952

    This is the website for the people who are in this documentary. They believe in a conspiracy and are determined to expose it. It is a strongly biased website. I'm not claiming they're wrong but they definitely do not present a balanced story. They are the prosecutors.

  • Jack1952

    They are not THE experts. They are individuals who have the credentials that legitimize what the CTs are alleging. There are other experts who do not concur. This documentary did not speak to any of the contemporaries of the experts who did not agree with the assessment made in this film. The aim of this documentary was to provide reasons to open a new and comprehensive investigation. It made no attempt to make a balanced argument by bringing in opposing experts. That these experts were not presented in this film, does not mean they do not exist.

  • Jack1952

    @ mo_dem

    Insurance companies will not pay off on a claim if they believe there was an intentional destruction of an insured building. They wouldn't be in business for very long if they did.

  • Jack1952

    Only one person reported the building demolished before it came down. This was a reporter from the BBC who had just went on the air. There had been reports that the walls of building 7 were bulging and some of the firefighters believed that the building was in eminent danger of collapse. It has been suggested that this reporter thought that it had already collapsed and spoke in error. It makes no sense to give the media knowledge of events before they happen. They would not be on the "need to know" list.

    That was not the mayor who said "pull" the building. It was the owner of building 7 who said it and he is the one on those videos. He may not have meant that he wanted them to destroy the building. He may have meant that they should pull everyone out of the building because he was told that it looked like an collapse was eminent.

    Why admit to missing trillions if you were going to destroy the evidence in a few days? What if the destruction plan didn't work? He would have put himself in an embarrassing situation, unnecessarily.

  • branrx

    Yeah doesnt make sense, unless last plane was bound for building seven?? LOL.. Was that the goal? We'll take out the symbolic World Trade Center, The Pentagon and Building 7?

  • Jack1952

    Capncanard, no plane flew into building 7 and its destruction did not receive a lot of media coverage until the "truthers" started to call it the smoking gun. Building 7 is the most compelling argument that the "truthers" have. This, more than any other element of 9/11, has turned many Americans against their own government. If any conspirators are ever brought to trial, they can blame the foolishness of destroying building 7 as it will play the leading role in the prosecution. If they did intentionally destroy that building, it was one dumb move.

  • Jack1952

    @ Daniel Jones

    That knee-jerk reaction does not only apply to those you refer to as "sheeple". There are many conspiracy types whose positions can be predicted on any given news story. There are "sheeple" on both sides of this issue. It is just a matter of what shepherd they are following.

  • Jack1952

    It seemed to me that a lot of them were retired or near retirement. Their careers would not have been as important a consideration any more. Supporting a conspiracy theory like this one could have given them a notoriety that they never had before...a notoriety that they might embrace and not avoid.

    1500 experts out of the tens of thousands of engineers and architects in the United States is hardly a majority.

  • Guest

    good link...thank you!
    az

  • Guest

    interesting!
    az

  • Guest

    Insurance companies would pay anything if the same amount was to slide from under the carpet into the other hand.
    az

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    hahaha OMG it all makes sense. The last plane was bound for an unremarkable 40 story building because who would support the war if it was only 2 TWC and the pentagon. There must be one more!!

  • FrothyBeer

    Search "Larry Silverstein pull it" on YouTube.

  • Irishkev

    The people are so hypnotized that they can't see the obvious. Add to that the fact that even questioning the official account is deemed unpatriotic. It sickens me how blatant the destruction of evidence was. If they can get away with this, whats next?

  • Irishkev

    Also, why are so many of the 911 witnesses who wanted answers dying in mysterious circumstances? I was going to to post a link to a utube video on this subject but it seems to have been taken down.

  • FrothyBeer

    @Jack1952 - Do you mean the terrorists did controlled demolitions? What was their motive?

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/alronvitis norlavine

    What a great solid documentary, devoid of drama and 'non essential patter'.
    I am not as brave as the film maker so that's as far as my comment goes..

  • fonbindelhofas

    It seems to me that every false flag operation needs biger and biger shock. Can we expect that some Iran linked terorist will use a nuke so US could nuke it in retalation and AFTER take oil.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WLBNEV2QH2R5SWTEELOXOJQPEM N B

    The "why?" and the "who?" will almost certainly become more obvious after the "how?" has been determined. Resist the urge to jump to conclusions.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WLBNEV2QH2R5SWTEELOXOJQPEM N B

    One thing at a time. First, the official investigation should be re-opened to determine exactly what made the buildings collapse. The evidence uncovered from that investigation can then be used to figure-out who was behind it and for what reason.

  • fonbindelhofas

    To me the only truth in official story is- its a job of religious extremists. The ones who continue to say "god bless America". Smiling, well dressed, bush type folk on fox news.

  • Irishkev

    Man, I hope that doesn't turn out to be a prophetic comment.

  • http://tinyurl.com/3kurlm2 Intbel

    There is no question as to whether or not there was/is a conspiracy. The unanswered 'conspiracy' question is "Who were/are the conspirators?"
    Answer - we don't know.

    What is obvious is that the official story does not stand up to any serious, scientific scrutiny so the official story is a lie.

    The only reason to lie is to attempt to hide what is true and there are only two reasons to lie:
    1. An attempt to protect one's self.
    2. An attempt to protect others.

    People are quite capable of protecting themselves from truth - witness those who resolutely deny the evidence of honest scientific enquiry.

    So the authors of the official story must be lying to protect themselves.
    The next question, then, is from what are the authors protecting themselves? Why are they so scared?

    Seems to me they can only be scared of either dire threats from the conspirators or scared their own complicity may be revealed.

    Either way they know the truth of the matter, are maintaining a lie and have sacrificed all personal integrity and as such, should not hold any public office.

    I'll not vote for any candidate seeking public office unless that candidate agrees the official story is a lie because refusal to do so indicates lack of integrity, fear or stupidity or all three - hardly qualities acceptable in a person seeking public office. What might happen, do you suppose, if everyone adopted that stance?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    yeah, well pull it can mean many things, the first thing that comes to mind is pulling out the people who are there. Or pull down the building later cause there is too much damage.

    This is not conclusive evidence in anyway shape or form especially if you want me to believe this super planner who ever they are rigged up an entire building (which takes a couple of days) for control demolition as a way to dispose of files. I can't imagine any would think control demolition is a good way to destroy files.

    no one is answering my question. What is there that needs to be destroyed on site and can't be trucked by a moving company to an incinerator. What would change about the events of 9 11 if they simply did not rig the building for demolition, and just denied access to the building? Post two security guards at the door for example.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    This is not conclusive evidence in anyway shape or form especially if you want me to believe this super planner who ever they are rigged up an entire building (which takes a couple of days) for control demolition as a way to dispose of files. I can't imagine any would think control demolition is a good way to destroy files.

    no one is answering my question. What is there that needs to be destroyed on site and can't be trucked by a moving company to an incinerator. What would change about the events of 9 11 if they simply did not rig the building for demolition, and just denied access to the building? Post two security guards at the door for example.

    I mean if these are such good super planner, why would they destroy an additional building, just as a loose end to cover up later.

  • Guest

    I like your thinking Yeung Xiao, it's about time it was accepted that it happened the way it appeared, any cover up would be nothing more than people covering their mistakes. All the guys that didn't act on info received, didn't respond as they should - no one wants to be the idiot that got it wrong and without doubt there are plenty of people that got it very wrong.

  • Achems_Razor

    Insurance companies would pay up, or they would be toast, would be classed as terrorists, what kind of insurance company would say the US did it, that it was a false flag, even if they had proof, would be major repercussions right down the line, does not matter where the insurance company's originate from.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_4RAPJETOQZXRSAOQRU7SQSIIEU Pangaea

    "no one is answering my question"
    lol.. its seems this whole page is dedicated to ppl giving you suggestions as to why

    "if you want me to believe"
    Sounds to me like you dont want to believe, or even acknowledge other possibilities, never mind the evidence its self.
    So why worry yourself about it, just walk away and think what you want, better then bloating yourself up with various theories.
    You said here somewhere that you where majority in political science, my personal suggestion to you would be to ask your tutor/lecturer to give a talk on corruption, and how its been naturally linked with politics since the dawn of civilisation, tho in most cases there is nothing civil about it at all.

  • melloyeyo

    This is the Reichstag's fire of 2/27/1933 all over again. Both for the same purpose: seize total control of government and suppress democratic liberties creating an enemy.

    Anyone contradicting all those people talking in this doc, have to be a better architect than all of them.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Anthony-Denehey-Clift/663918993 Anthony Denehey-Clift

    It's amazing how people start ranting that the government destroyed the towers, or how people think conspiracy theorists are "wankers", after this documentary stated nothing of the sort. This was not about a conspiracy, but rather how no proper independent investigation has taken place. Was there a conspiracy? We don't know, that's the point.

    A prerequisite of each participate, is that they share their education and experience in their independent fields, and it was refreshing to know we were in conversation with knowledgable, intelligent people, none of which made any suggestion as to why the government may be covering up, and only focused on scientific evidence.

    Everyone should stay to the end, as the Psychologists explaining how difficult it is to entertain the thought that the official story isn't true due to a type of national trauma, is something not touched on by other documentaries, no matter what it's angle is.

    Conspiracy theorists and those who completely believe the official story are one of the same in my opinion. The truth is in the middle.

  • http://twitter.com/bryan61684 bryan

    wow such a full proof investigation! i personally think the thermite part seal the demolition hypothesis. being someone who's family is in the scrap metal business i totally agree the molten metal part of the investigation..

    @Yeung Xiao

    i think your question is irrelevant here.. this doc is about "WHAT" not why or who.. the whole question is "what brought down the 3 towers is it by demolition or the official claim".., and personally i think you didnt finish the doc..

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    There are many suggestions to how to answer my question but none of them are good. So far i am getting variations of one response here, which is Building 7 is demolished in order to assure the destruction of some incriminating national secrets (in paper or computer form). That demolition of building 7 is a good way to dispose of files and computers.

    Demolishing a building with the files still in side is a horrible way of destroying those files. If you look at any of the street images from 9/11 there were paper scattered everywhere on the street for anyone to pick up. (yeah those might be from the two TWCs but if you are arguing against me you believe those are controlled demolitions as well, and just showcases how bad controlled demolition is at destroying files.) Far less secure then 2 security guards. A far better way to destroy files is trucking them to a large incinerator, which takes less work then a building demolition. And if they did that already, then why would they need to destroy the building. If these super planner are so good at everything else, why would they do something do counter productive. It makes no sense.

    So I will ask my questions again. What is there that needs to be destroyed on site and can't be trucked by a moving company to an incinerator. What would change about the events of 9 11 if they simply did not rig the building for demolition, and just denied access to the building? Post two security guards at the door for example.

    I understand false flag operations. Vietnam war was justified with a false flag operation. and I believe CIA does some horrible stuff. I am a left wing Marxist, so trusting the government is in no way shape or form my first instinct. But the truther's theory makes no sense.

  • Norm

    It was never said that the fire in bldg 7 was anything more than an "office" fire. And even if it was, diesel fuel burns at a lower temp than jet fuel so there is still no reasonable explanation for the collapse. It would seem to me that it would take many "sections of girder" penetrating the walls to cause "immense structural damage" when these buildings were designed to withstand much more damage before collapsing.

  • CapnCanard

    Jane Doe, of course you are correct ... it is maddening. I have come to the conclusion that they believe that they control the world and who could ever prosecute them? No seriously, who? I feel that it would take a REAL REVOLUTION for the guilty to stand trial. Just one indication that the authorities will shift blame to the victims. With 9/11 there is no reason for them to ever accept responsibility. In our system of Gov't that wouldn't make any sense whatsoever...

  • Norm

    You're stuck on one persons statement about why the building was brought down - to destroy evidence. Maybe it was brought down for the same reason the towers were brought down, to instill anger and fear into the public while allowing the government to set up new civilian controls and to go to war. It doesn't matter why really, you're just hung up on one question that will never be answered until the truth is uncovered. Until then you will always have that one reason to believe the government.
    So you're studying political science? What high school?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    That really makes no sense, because the destruction of building 7 draw no public attention what's so ever. In fact it is the truther community that jumped on the fall of building 7 as evidence. The government has done nothing but down play building 7. which is why I say if your theory is true, then it seems these super planner took the effort to demolish a building just so they have one more loose end to cover up.

    I have made a point to not go into personal attacks, hope to keep that going. but just in case you are wondering, Communication major and political science minor a canadian university.

  • Achems_Razor

    The money also flows around WTC7, in Feb. 2002 Silverstein Properties won 861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC7. Silverstein properties estimated investment of WTC7 was 386 million so WTC7 collapse resulted in a profit of about 500 million.

    9/11 research . WTC7 . net

  • Jack1952

    @ Norm

    Go to the link that I have provided above. This is the type of stuff a defense lawyer would use at trial.

    There is no way to know what the structural damage was to building 7. There are allegations that witnesses have claimed to see the walls of the building shifting and that they were afraid that the building was in danger of collapsing.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    I watched the first hour. it featured a lot of people saying the exact same thing over and over again. There is a couple of logical fallacies that kept poping up, one of which is the whole "accelerating toward the ground which means it met no resistance." Anything falling towards the ground will accelerate unless the resistance force is equal to the force of gravity. I should not have to go into too much detail on that one. but that is besides the point. i did not finish because I do not have the time to watch people say the same thing over and over again, if there is a good part i missed in the second hour, please point it out.

    The question of building 7 is relevant because the majority of this doc is about building 7, the truther movement made it relevant. The argument from the truther movement is because there is no good reason for building 7 to fall, then it must be a controlled demolition. because it is a controlled demolition, therefore all 3 building must be controlled domolition.

    In order for this line of reasoning to be true, then building 7 must add something meaningful to the war justification, which i do not think it does. The other explanation is they did it just so they have one more thing to cover up.

    This is why a part of my question is what would change about any subsequent event if building 7 was left standing.

  • Jack1952

    @ FrothyBeer

    We have only heard from those who believe there was a controlled demolition. They may have misinterpreted the data. I am only saying this as a possibility not that they are wrong.

    NIST did their investigation under the assumption that the towers came down due to extensive damage caused by passengers jets crashing into them. At the time it seemed unnecessary to investigate any other possibilities. The "truther" movement did not start with any real impact until a few years later.

  • Primaryorange

    We can't sit here and question the logic behind madmens decisions lol. Its without a doubt whoever was responsible for WTC1-2, was also responsible or knew about WTC-7. They are connected, the motives were to kill people in tower 1-2. How can we expect someone willing to attritube or commit to such acts, as people who would make logical decisions about building 7.
    Its like trying to figure out why a cannibalistic serial killer decides to chase squirrels through the park as his form of excersize, when there is a perfectly good gym in his building. lol.

  • fonbindelhofas

    @Yeung Xiao
    "makes no sense, because the destruction of building 7 draw no public attention"
    cos the plane reached no destination,... i bet if it had crashed into building the story would be much much different and no lack of atention.

  • http://twitter.com/bryan61684 bryan

    this people are not just "people" their world experts in their craft and the fact their saying the same thing is what makes their arguement strong being that their in different fields of work..

    the 2nd part is about the the 2 tower and a more detail look in to it..

    there can be many possibility why they included the b7 but all of it is conspiratorial in nature unless the cause of the collapse is tackle first.. the only reason they allocated b7 a lot of time because its so obvious you dont need to be expert to see its control demo..

  • Jack1952

    @ Achems_Razor

    You make a good point. It would be a public relations nightmare if they had refused to pay. Any evidence they had to justify a refusal would have to be hard to refute. The billions they paid out would have also been hard for them to ignore. I'm sure there are those in the insurance company that was involved who would be quite happy to see Silverstein return that money and go to jail if it is found out that he was complicit.

    @ Azilda

    They might pay out it they thought it would pay off in the long run. However, there should be a paper trail if there was a conflict of interest. There would be a lot of unhappy investors if this was found out to be true. More people to go to trial and ultimately to jail. They may have to build a new facility to house all the conspirators. The conspiracy ring seems to be getting larger and larger.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    ok that makes a little bit more sense then the rest of these "suggestions". But that is still just insurance fraud. it is a little better then destroying files, but not by much. Just because they gained from it, does not mean they caused it.

    Further more, buildings closer to the trade centers which were left standing were also demolished later. in the process of the clean up. I am pretty sure they are paid out for those as well. why did they not rig those to explode?

    I don't think your fellow truthers would agree that WTC7 was rigged to be demolished for just for the insurance money.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    Ironically it is Achem's Razor that opts for the more complex solution rather then the simple one.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    You just pretty much admitted that there was no good reason to bring down building 7. And these super planner are as smart as we want them to be and as dumb as we want them to be at the same time. they would use sound engineer to fake phone calls to family members and simulate a live conversation which is very hard to do. and keep all the people in the planes hidden for all this time, and randomly destroy a building just for fun so they have one more thing to cover up. I mean common.

  • Achems_Razor

    Yes, WTC 5 and 6 were pulled after, and they had major raging fires, but they did not collapse on their own. I think that WTC7 probably could of been repaired, but then no profit to Silverstein & co.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Daniel-Jones/100001464640163 Daniel Jones

    What about flight 93? Just a hunch it was heading for building 7 before it was shot down and then covered up so hamfistedly. Why was it covered up? What really happened on that plane that required such a pr/propaganda campaign to obscure? The debris field covered 5 miles. Was the failed plane the only one NORAD managed to respond to? So many interconnected "coincidences". But we have one very strange "crash" and one very strange controlled demolition. I've listened to the passenger tapes and someone saying "Hi mom this is Dave Jones calling" just smells a bit funky.

    You've been offered sound and credible justifications for why building 7 had to be demolished but I'd add it was the first to have all crime scene debris removed as well. Yet another incidence of breach of standard crime scene protocols of epic proportions.

    Perhaps acceptors of the official story are coincidence theorists and conspiracy theorists are actually seeking common sense explanations to explain the facts.

    But we can not look at any of the events of that day in isolation. They are all interconnected. As is the guiding hand that controlled it all - whoever that was.

    Thing is though, very few hands could have influenced such momentous and interconnected events. That should make our job easier in the end I would think. Kind of limits the field so to speak.

  • Irishkev

    Most sorry Yeung, but just destroying files(to cover up the squandering of 2trillion dollars) would not have provided the excuse to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, which had to be brought under US control to ensure oil supplies. These oil supplies are vital for the immensely profitable war machine, which if unchecked, will be coming to a town near you before long. Happy Oblivion my friend.

  • Irishkev

    Hey Yeung, are you sure that (like many people), the trees aren't blocking your view of the forest? I would love to be as certain as yourself that everybody with a different view is wrong.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_T7ODJVN3LMFADTEO7MKCC2SHMI joeanimal

    watch the Documentary "Missing Links-" The Definitive Truth about 911",

    it should answer the Questions as to Who, Why, and How~!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Daniel-Jones/100001464640163 Daniel Jones

    Wickipedia says he made $4.5 billion on 1 and 2 and I've read somewhere else that 7 made it almost $7 billion in total. Can't remember source. Google it. Only his buildings were destroyed and they were all making a loss and facing huge asbestos removal costs....Thus the loss of so many "first responders" lives from officially denied respiratory ailments since the event. They are so furious as a result of this and their first hand contradictory knowledge of events incidentally that they were barred from all official 10 year anniversary 911 ceremonies in NY. Fact. Google it. This fact alone cries out for explanation..

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_T7ODJVN3LMFADTEO7MKCC2SHMI joeanimal

    watch this Doc....it will Xplain Who, How an Why......

    " Missing Links-The Definitive Truth about 911 "..

    thank you and have a nice day~!

  • Jack1952

    The attacks were thought of as an act of war. When this was decided, a forensics team was no longer required. Forensics in not a science that is often (never?) used when nations feel they are at war and rubble is almost always cleared away as soon as possible.

    Why is it that no conspiracy theorists has ever gone to the small town in Pennsylvania to speak to eyewitnesses who tell of a passenger plane crashing? Why is it they don't take the published passenger list and see if these people did actually exist? Go to their home towns and talk to relatives and friends and those who worked for them. Has any of them ever approached United Airlines to ask if one of their planes is missing? Have they ever talked to baggage handlers, airport workers, mechanics and passenger crews who knew and worked with the supposed crew of flight 93?
    Have you ever read an article, watched a documentary or even heard of a "truther" doing this? This is something that the defense lawyer would do. If there is material that exists where this has been done, please refer me to it.

  • Jack1952

    The United States did not have to go to war with Iraq to get oil. Saddam Hussein would gladly have made a deal if it put money in his pockets. The oil for food scam that he took part in proves this.

    Does Kuwait look upon the United States as an occupier? I would be curious to know what the average Kuwaiti thinks.

  • Jack1952

    I guess you won't be an active participant in any future elections, then. That's too bad. Everyone should take part in the governing of their own country.

  • Guest

    To Jack 1952: Sometime "Act of war" which is what war is about (As you claim) and other times "Basic criminals as declared by the Bush admin at that time since they wanted to detain "Unrecognized" soldiers and thus simple crirminals brought at Guantanamo to torture them!

    Senselesss concept.
    Beside, at the end of WWII, the Brits have detained quite a few NAZI war criminals FYI.
    More than a year in nice mansions and well fed.
    Never tortured any of them.
    But the "Brits were listening"...
    And they've lean a lot, a whole lot.

    Too many think that only a few got hang while even bankers were. Left aside the camp managers.

    When privates properties are brought down (Or sunken), in all previous army conflics, civil insurances are nullified.

    Why wouldn't so-called "Conspiracists" just don't dig into the things you mentioned, you ask?
    Exactly because; If Bush's admins took care of getting rid of the most important rubbles, what is there to dig into?

    Finally, don't tell me please that Bush's admins as well as Blair's couldn't be aware that there were no WMD in Irak.
    The French knew while Powell delivered his speech and they tried to explain but...

    To sums that up, the whole world now known that the USA doesn't care, not a bit about the worlwide regulations about war crimes. A bunch of dangerous beasts ruled by laws that vary from one day to another.
    And that was the reason why there is no coalition in Iraq.
    Only in Afghanistan before the other nations examine the case a little deeper.

    Pierre.

  • Irishkev

    @ Jack1952, Okay man, but tell me then, why did Bush send the troops to Iraq? Maybe he meant to send them to Iran but got the spelling wrong. Please enlighten me.

  • Tommomin

    what is sure, that is tha the media falled to bring objective news.
    At least the media should report that a lot of experts have another opion, and than an open debate on tv, radio etc..

    Whe in the west think that we are free from propaganda and live in a free world. but tha isn,t the case.

    Iám from Holland, also here is the case the same, no paper, radio or tv is bringing this news.
    Normaly journalist are very fast with brinning new theories and views about big happenings, why not now.

    PS: a verry good documentary, one of the best about this subject.

    unfortuanly it is not stopping the new cruasades.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    okok, new answers for the why bring down building 7 question. So far there is 3 answers that keep popping up. I well summarize them and point out how they do not answer my simple questions.

    1.) destroy incrimination documents in file or computer form.

    This is the dominate theory. A lot of people have gave me different version of this theory. Building 7 was demolished to get rid of secret files and the clean up evidence.

    This theory has a major flaw. Demolishing a building with the files still in side is a horrible way of destroying those files. If you look at any of the street images from 9/11 there were paper scattered everywhere on the street for anyone to pick up. (yeah those might be from the two TWCs but if you are arguing against me you believe those are controlled demolitions as well, and just showcases how bad controlled demolition is at destroying files.) Far less secure then 2 security guards. A far better way to destroy files is trucking them to a large incinerator, which takes less work then a building demolition. And if they did that already, then why would they need to destroy the building. If these super planner are so good at everything else, why would they do something do counter productive. It makes no sense.

    2.) Instill further fear onto the country and provide further justification for war.

    This also is one came up from time to time. Some even suggested that flight 93 was heading towards building 7. One more building would be scarier kind of argument.

    This is a weaker argument, because the destruction of building 7 draw no public attention what's so ever. In fact it is the truther community that jumped on the fall of building 7 as evidence. The government has done nothing but down play building 7. If you followed the truther movement from the start, and know how much the truther jumped on building 7 as a flaw in the official account, You would not say the government did it to scare us further cause you would say they tried to cover it up. Which is why I say if your theory is true, then it seems these super planner took the effort to rig up an entire building for demolition just so they have one more loose end to cover up. Again very counter productive.

    3.) Insurance money from the building.

    This is actually the most plausible argument. Trade tower 7 was destroyed to make get insurance money. But the only one posing this as a serious argument is Achem's razor. But this feel small and petty for such a grand conspiracy. The flaw with this argument is that it can be applied to any insurance settlement. my house get robbed when i have theft insurance, that does not necessarily mean I planned a conspiracy to rob myself. Unless this theory gets a more backing from the truther community I am not going to respond to it too seriously.

    The other arguments is they did it because they can, or for the fun of it, or because they are crazy. If you are making is argument, you just pretty much admitted that there was no good reason to bring down building 7. And these super planner are as smart as we want them to be and as dumb as we want them to be at the same time. They would use sound engineer to fake phone calls to family members and simulate a live conversation which is very hard to do and keep all the people in the planes hidden for a decade. and randomly destroy a building just for fun so they have one more thing to cover up. If that is not working really hard to justify a per-conceived notion I don't know what is.

  • Guest

    This is very difficult for me to admit...but after watching this, I'm beginning to have some doubts about what I've been "officially" told. And the primary reason for that is because of the trucking away of the debris of wtc7 before it could be properly analyzed. If that is accurate, which would have (apparently) gone against all precedent in the event of a collapsed building, someone owes me one h*ll of an explanation of the reason for it. If that is accurate, why wouldn't they want to know beyond doubt the the cause of the building's failure? Like the lady scientist said, if the most likely cause appeared to be from controlled demolition, why on earth would they not remove any support for that contention from a full examination of the debris?

    Someone help me out here.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    If you google building 7 debunked you will find a lot of information, such as video before the total collapse showing the penthouse losing structural integrity and collapsing before the rest of the building. This is not what happens in a control demolition (unless they rigged the pent house separately just to throw us off.) Applying achmes Razor, the simplest explanation is that WTC7 sustain heavy damage from falling pieces of WTC 1 and 2 and the fire cause the building to lose enough integrity to fall.

    this does not mean the rest of the conspiracy is false, a CIA controled plane could still bring about the natural collapse of building 7. just that there is a simple and logical explanation for the fall of building 7. Controlled demolition of building 7 is an unnecessary complication even from their perspective.

    Plus the truthers can't answer the simple question of why do super planners want to bring down building 7. You can see a fairly complete discussion of that here.

  • Guest

    @Yeung Xiao
    I'm familiar with other, perhaps more reasonable, explanations for wtc7's collapse. For example, the info at the debunking 9/11 myths website. But what I don't recall seeing there is anything about the debris field not being properly investigated (which, I admit, I may have missed...), just to remove the kinds of doubts which were bound to occur. That just seems to me to be one h*ll of an oversight, one for which there might be one h*ll of an explanation. I am certainly not a conspiracy theorist, and it would take much, much more to get me to join their ranks, but...after a totally unprecedented event like this one, why wouldn't they follow the codes and laws, rope that area off for as long as it took, and find out beyond doubt what caused wtc7 to fail precisely the way it did? (If, in fact, they didn't do that.) At best, that just looks like completely unaccountable stupidity, in a period of time when you would think they would be most careful to adhere to what they are instructed to do in the event of a building collapse.

  • Guest

    I see your point Yeung Xiao: If one event on 9-11 cannot be proven as being part of an "All Out" total conspiracy for all the events that took place on 9-11, then the right conclusion to come to is that no conspiracy what so ever was carried out on that 9-11 day.

    The exact equivalent to your antigonists that take for granted that if one sole event was planned on that day, it necessarly mean that all events that took place on that day was a part of an "All Out" total conspiracy.

    This attidude is the best one to induce a total confusion.
    That is why law courts need accusions chief.

    Regarding "Who" could be condemned?
    I'd say : We know for a fact that we didn't got every NAZI criminals at the end of WWII. We only done where could be done!
    Up to a point where notorious NAZI were offered safe heaven in the USA to create the famous CIA.
    Just ask your "STAR" Bush Sr. about that.
    His father subsidised them until he was legally advise not to do so!

    Did we ever hear of a proclamation of war measures before the rubbles were taken away in China? I must admit that I don't know.
    Otherwise, if the case(S) remain within the juridiction of a civil court, then the peoples who took the decisions at time should be brought to justice.
    Do what can be done, the rest...
    May follow or not because George was smart enough to pass a law that forbid any and all trials where a USA admin would be prosecuted about any and all 9/11 events.

    On another hand, if war against Afghanistan was declared through any valid Gov. declaration, then what's the point of Guantanamo?
    It's only soldiers poorly, very poorly equiped who do not look as soldiers at first sight.

    But as we al know by now, some countries have an elastic sense of the rule of law.
    As bizarre as you, resorting to the same strategy of your opponents, just like the USA Gov. with the very same totalitarian manner observed in China, or in Russia a little while ago.
    There's no limit for "Cash & Carry".
    Benifice of doubt? Belongs to tthe one who hold the gun.

    All this remain solely in the hands of the "Persons", individuals who are legally concerned with the case: -The owners otherwise known as "We the Corporates".
    Everything considered, in democracy, the person who go goes through an ordeal is the one who sew in court, isn't it?
    Ask George Carlin "Who" own the USA...

    Meanwhile, jf you are located in the USA, pay your taxes so that Obama can pay back your friends, the communists.
    Maybe you're intitled to a little bonus? Ask Dick...

    Pierre.

  • Jack1952

    @ Pierre

    I realize that English is not your first language but to demolish 3 buildings because they felt a need to torture is not going to stand up in court.

    You never answered my question concerning the reason witness in Pennsylvania and United Airline employees are not interviewed by the conspiracy theory. You misdirect by referring to the rubble in New York.

    The overall consensus after 9/11 was that Osama Bin Laden was responsible. Most believed it was an act of war by a terrorist organization not a nation. This is a gray area as to the definition of war. The insurance company may have paid because it was good for their public image.

    Iraq is another issue and I strongly disagree with the Bush administration over their decision to invade that country. That decision does not imply guilt in the destruction of the World Trade Center.

  • joshua89

    You probably could.
    But I doubt they be educated, accredited experts speaking on the subject with any real tangible arguments.
    Watch the doc. Ask some questions.

  • Jack1952

    The why is called motive. Essential in any criminal trial.
    Motive, means and opportunity must all be considered. From this we find the who.

    Your use of the word "maybe" would suggest a fishing expedition.

  • magarac

    Where is the difference in blindly believing the "truth" presented from any side?

  • Jack1952

    Don't be surprised if no one visits this site. I have asked CTs to take a look at some of the pictures there and comment but I have never heard from them. Can't say why. Just saying.

  • Jack1952

    You assume that everyone looks at both sides of the story. Some people would rather say that they are right in their assumptions than to say they don't have all the answers and the subject needs more research. They, then, confuse comprehensive research with subjective research. They cannot understand that it is not research if one only delves into material that validates a preconceived assumption. That is why the conspiracy folk appear to outnumber the conspiracy doubters in this comment section. This documentary suits their needs perfectly.

  • DontBeAFool333

    I suspect it's because they don't like to confront anything that might drag them away from their theories. Not that it would make any difference, a different theory would just pop up... and so it goes on.

  • Jack1952

    @ Irishkev

    Why not invade Kuwait or Saudi Arabia or Canada? They all have more oil than Iraq. There are definitely those who wanted the invasion to get oil. There were those who did it for political reasons, others for personal, religious or idealogical reasons. Greed is a powerful motivator but not the only one. To say that 9/11 was initiated by Bush so he could invade Iraq can only be conjecture until there is documented proof that one is directly the cause of the other.

  • DontBeAFool333

    Indeed, and also I think that the conspiracy doubters are just tired of the CTs just changing the story to keep their theories going. There would be no point in another official inquiry, none whatsoever because they would never accept the results, and it would be a massive waste of time and money. Can you imagine any CT after another official inquiry holding their hands up and saying, 'OK, we got it wrong' when the results just proved the accepted course of events?

  • Greg_Mc

    I have been trying for 3 days to find time to watch this doc because the subject matter not only fascinates me but I believe that full disclosure via evidence of how these buildings actually came down is of vital importance.

    I just read Vlatko's warning below about subject matter in the comments and actions he will take if the rules are not followed and while this comment may be breaking those rules I want to say it anyway as I dont think I am crossing the line to much, and if I am remember I am a first time offender Vlatko and agree with your rules of staying on topic. The topic of this doc is a sensitive one and discussing your opinion on the facts presented by the people in it can bring to the surface some emotions within you (which is not only ok but a normal thing to happen), so when someone discredits or just doesnt agree with your views especially if they do it in a way that is not constructive or polite your emotions may push past the surface and while they may not become overwhelming they might possibly impact you more than you think when you reply (remember emotions are a good thing to have, they make you human, even though not all emotions are happy ones they help make you who you are which is hopefully a good caring person. And I do think that at times some responses on here are not kind, but that most of the people I regularly run into on various pages are good people). I am no expert but I think it is possible that on some level there have been comments/discussions taking place on here where people gave a more emotional response than the fact based one's they are generally known for giving. It is not really my place to say all this but just ignore me if you prefer. I think if we keep in mind Vlatko's rules and why he has put them in place (basically to keep people like me from yammering on and getting off topic) and refrain from blatantly insulting people and getting off topic the discussions on here, especially on a sensitive topic like this, can still be a way to get your views across (while remembering to talk about the docs content and facts) and try to influence people with differing views to see your point on whatever the doc you watched is and afford them the same respect. I personally know from months of reading comments on here from various people that many of you are more educated or knowledgeable than I am on certain things or see things from a different perspective than I do, so if I actually listen/read what others have to say I may just learn something. And as I tell my son from time to time, I have learned things from many of the people on this site not only from what they say but by researching things people state as fact to see if they are correct or not.

    Oh yeah one more little thing on insulting people on here. Most of you are intelligent enough that you don't have to crudely insult or put down people on here in your comments, you have the brains (because I have seen it done) to do so in a subtle way which is more fun anyway.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    "You can't argue against science." That's a pretty crummy line to have. The science is about arguing about itself. Obviously, its besides the point, but it does show an absolutist view of the world.

    While I appreciate that the documentary doesn't jump to conclusions. It does highlight a few things.
    1. Experts talking outside of their field. Architects aren't experts on how a building can collapse or the mechanic workings of a building.( Hence why we don't call them Civil or Structural Engineers) Obviously, most of the individuals questioned are experts talking in their field. You could argue that there is no such thing as a real expert on Jet Airliner related building fires, but I won't go that far.
    2. Experts talking about a unique situation. People were comparing a normal office fires to a jet airliner plane crash which isn't the case.
    3. None of the experts had data to back up their conclusions. IE scientific peer-reviewed papers. Of course, I could be wrong and be willing to look into any that someone here would like to present me.
    4. Still 1 sided. There is no dissenting opinion presented, no attempt at a rebuttal, none of other points presented as to the official explanation to the building 7 collapse. No refutation was given to any of the explanations given by other investigations such as Pop. Mechanic's. Documentaries like this paint a straw-man or fail to prove that it doesn't paint a straw-man.
    5. An emotional ending which does not lend credibility and does not add arguments.
    6. Thermite scientific paper was discredited and the journal is not peer reviewed.
    7. Someone of the responses in the video could have been taken of context or misunderstood then presented to misconstrued opinions.

    Few questions I would like to get answered:
    1. Do the filmmakers have any association with other 9/11 CT organizations?
    2. Do the filmmakers already had a bias before making this movie?
    3. What stops them from making a investigation on their own? Certainly, you don't want the government to be investigating?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_KTZSQGYOSS7KMMMFXF6ND6HWTQ Lewis

    As a non American, I suppose I shouldn't say anything against the party, its problems or its fundamentalists of right/left/religion etc. This post is directed at any one person, and is my own opinion.

    Although this documentary falls into the (US Media) trap of repeatitions/phillabustering ad nausium at times, it does definately raise just & fair questions, that should be looked at, and to give some new avenues of thought to think of/about things.

    It is to that end, the goal so to speak, which should be those whom believe they are real Patriots, upholding their end of the agreement bound within The Constitution, to protect their fellow citisens, and making sure that his/her government is accountable to them, not the other way around.

    Otherwise why else bother to still have an old parchment in a museum, if only to look at it with nostalgia.
    Surely the Founding Fathers would be rolling in their graves if they knew that their efforts & proclamations of nation building, against Imperialism and improper governance, so cherished and taught, that some of those articals are actually being forgotten and ignored for reasons of peer/community pressure and acceptance/tolerance.

    I support the concept of haviing a truth and reconciliation process, should the American citisenry so decide. and call it to be enacted.

  • Guest

    Dear Thang Tran. You appear to suffer from the attention deficit syndrome or else, you don't have a good idea of what is a legal "Expert"?
    What you'd think of an architec or an engineer who's been working for some (25-30) in a corp that builds high rise buildings?
    The least I can tell is that they know better than you!
    Anyhow, the peoples who view that doc can figure all this by themselves instead of relying on a vulgar pseudo scientifico rookie that gotten a yesmen job at Pop-Mechanic.

    You must have missed that part of the doc. where a scientist ran tests on comparable I-beams? Missed it? I seen it...
    It was much more realist that the one the 911 inquiry had done by their yesmen.
    Oh! He didn't shown his results directly on camera?
    Well I'll tell y'a, that scientist deserve the benifice of doubt while Bush's gang doesn't. Not at all.
    USA Govs. are known to be blattant liars.
    And this is heavily documented throught the past some 45 years.

    You say: -"Experts talking about a unique situation"?
    Yeah, quite exceptional, a building that contains IRS & CIA documents & puters, is the 3thrd building to falls down to its own footsept! A unique situation that I wouldn't be a bit scared to bet that it wouldn't even happen anywhere else in hundred of years.

    You say: -"Thermite scientific paper was discredited and the journal is not peer reviewed".

    Reply: -Where Thang Tran? In which document or scientific paper?
    -Give me the HTML link and even though they'd sell the document, I'll buy it. Even more if it is a vulgarisation emited by Pop-Mechanic!

    Not reviewed? I have the document and that wasn't published in a "Vulgarised" magazin, but rather a "Journal".

    And in the end dear Thang Tran, you don't even have the decency to compose your comment so that anyone reading it is lead to believe that Thang Tran has the same text structure as Yeung Xiao and the notorious agitator NAND Gate.
    Does that make it clear?

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    Anyhow, they'll have to because Bush was clever enough to pass a law that prevent any court action against any attempt to bring any US-Org. or individuals who took decision in the 911 event.

    On the contrary, I have the feeling that anyone digging a bit too deep into 911 could be ostracized at will.

    Soon, this will be forgotten and another country will see its democratic govenment toppled and replace by a dictator yesman.
    Thus protecting democracy and freedom.

    Business as usual.

    Pierre.

  • jim dunne

    "My model explains all the observed features on 11th September: the
    explosions, molten metal coming out of the window, the time passing
    between the crash and the collapse, the fact that the explosions took
    place in a floor below the place it was burning, and the rapid
    collapse," Christen Simensen of SINTEF, a research organization in
    Norway, told Life's Little Mysteries.

    Sintef Telecom & Informatics

    Itemized Lobbying Expenses for Sintef Telecom & Informatics

    Sintef Telecom & Informatics $10,000 -
    American Defense International

    American Defense International (ADI) is mainly a lobbying firm. It
    describes itself as "a Washington, DC-based consulting firm
    specializing in government affairs, business development, and public
    relations ... [which] serves a worldwide client base -- both
    businesses and governments -- with a unique combination of technical
    expertise, relationships, and the ability to work with Washington's
    most important decision makers and opinion leaders." [1]
    "As the descriptions of [the ADI] staff and Board of Advisors show,
    ADI's top-notch personnel includes former senior government officials,
    military officers, and congressional aides. Having started with a
    focus on national defense and military matters, ADI has since branched
    into other areas including homeland security,

    But Norwegian expert Dr Christian Simensen has another theory. He believes powerful explosions caused by a chemical reaction between molten aluminium from the aircraft and water ripped out the buildings’ internal structure.

    “Both scientific experiments and 250 reported disasters suffered by the aluminium industry have shown that the combination of molten aluminium and water releases enormous explosions,” said Dr Simensen, from the SINTEF institute based in Trondheim, Norway.

    [Michael Rivero: ] The reaction that Dr. Simensen is referring to is one where molten aluminum “steals” oxygen from water, thereby producing hydrogen gas.
    But for hydrogen to explode it must be captured (hydrogen floats upward in air even better than helium) and held in the proper ratio with free oxygen, and while there was certainly oxygen in the World Trade Towers there was nothing to prevent any hydrogen being created by the interaction of water with molten aluminum from percolating up through the ruined building and into the sky.
    Unless perfectly mixed with the correct amount of pure oxygen, hydrogen doesn’t explode, it burns. It is “low brissive”, to use the correct explosives term. The explosions that are recorded on the 9-11 tapes are high brissive explosions. There is also the explosion captured on the video tape of the start of the collapse of World Trade Building 7, which had no molten aluminum in it, having not been hit by any airplane.

    Dr. Simensen’s ‘theory’ is the latest in a long line of nonsensical ideas hurled recklessly into the public arena in a desperate and pathetic bid to prop up a failed propaganda stunt.

  • Guest

    And what does that Sintef's USA Gov. yesman add to what's alreay known? Weirdo's that need to be kept into a cupboard?
    Good job, good salary.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @Greg Mc

    Stop being so self-deprecating! Your posts are always great, whether short or long.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    How building 7 actually fell is contested grounds. How can control demolition explain the visible collapse of the penthouse before the rest of the building. That is not a typical for controlled demolition.

    Furthermore the truthers seem to have given up on answering my question.

    What is there that needs to be destroyed on site and can't be trucked by a moving company to an incinerator. What would change about the events of 9 11 if they simply did not rig the building 7 for demolition, and just denied access to building 7? Post two security guards at the door for example.

    It is a simple and logical question, the answer should not be the super planners did it for fun, which is pretty much all I have been getting.

    Before saying this question is not important, please remember that the entire truther movement is based on the answer to a similar question about the twin tower. Some super planners demolished twin towers as a false flag operation to justify imperial ambitions in the middle east. I am just looking for a similar answer. Something that would justify rigging building 7 for demolition.

    There is a detail break down of argument so far below. If you have anything new to contribute or a better theory on why these super planners would demolish building 7. post it here.

  • globalunitea

    If a "truther" is a person who believes that the US government planned 911 as a means of perpetuating the wealth and power of a small few, then I AM A CRAZY TRUTHER! Anyone who doesn't believe this sinister few would spare any amount of innocent lives and allow countless to suffer for profit simply needs to read about what the US has done to Iraq.. or understand how/why the Federal Reserve was established. The opposite of the truth is a lie. Go ahead, liars... keep lying to yourselves.

    Yeung Xiao - why are you asking what the motivation was for demolishing WTC 7? One can only speculate... for insurance profit? (After all, money is generally the bottom line with these creeps). Perhaps there was evidence which would need to be destroyed? As for the penthouse falling.. Did you miss that part where the WHOLE BUILDING fell at once???? You need to focus on more pertinent issues.

  • Guest

    @Greg Mc

    I was chastised recently by a friend, myself, for being self-deprecating, so you're not alone!

    As for all the fighting, I'm really trying to more or less completely avoid this 9/11 subject, because even after 10 years we see people's emotions about it can become simply too powerful to permit even a little objectivity, which I think is necessary for calmly discussing legitimate questions about it (whichever side is subscribed to) on a site like this. I've honestly never seen anything so catastrophically polarizing in my life. Even atheists and believers generally get along much better than this! And I admit I've felt those things in myself, too, and I didn't like them one little bit.

    edit- In my opinion, @Jack1952's posts are consistently the best example of how to approach this subject, whichever side you're on.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Geez, so many comments, if America wants a war all they need to do is say that Iraq have weapons of mass destruction, then show a picture of a metal tube. It worked for Iran, no need for all that complex building blowing citizen killing stuff. With the supposed genius in planning can carrying out the build blowing 'plot', they could think up a million ways of invading a country without lifting a finger. The only thing America did to clean up the Iran mess was firing like... 2... maybe 3 people. Yeah... if anything, it is the mentality of the majority that needed to be changed, a lot of people believed that there was a weapon of mass destruction and supported the Iran effort. All that needed to convince them was news... about a tube.

    The first time I heard it I was wandering what all the fuss was about, since to me a metal tube meaning weapons equates to a glass of water meaning hydrogen bomb.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Due to this documentary and new revelations in the form of company files from Miley Cyrus Inc, including some provided by Wikileaks. There is growing suspicions that Miley Cyrus Inc. perpetuated the attacks on 9/11 for tremendous profits from insider trading, insurance, and as part of a conservative ideology with anti-Muslim sentiments. Miley Cyrus, fueled by greed and racial hatred, led this great nation to pre-emptively attack Muslim countries and no one, not even the 9/11 truthers were aware, until now.

    Just go to 911truthers,org and look it up. Or visit Wikileaks and read the wires between the company and government representatives yourself in case you doubt me.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    That is exactly what I am trying to say. Look at Vietnam, that is a classic false flag. claiming they attacked a military ship that is not in US water is enough to justify that mess. That is easy to cover up and does not take a lot of energy. Iraq war did not even have a justification. even if the super planners wanted to be dramatic, one plane into one building and no demolition is more then enough.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Nah, just blow up the US embassy... oh wait... XD

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    I am not saying you are crazy. You seem to be a rational human being. and US did some horrible things in Afghanistan and Iraq. What really makes my blood boil is the CIA over throwing democratically elected government in Iran and installing a dictator to protect corporate interest (in the 1970 I believe). But that does not change any facts about this issue.

    The penthouse collapsed before the rest of the building. so buiding 7 did not fall entirely like a controlled demolition. I am not saying it is not, I am just saying there is ambiguous evidence.

    But you have to answer the why. Why demolish building 7? It seems to have done nothing for the government, besides give them one more thing to cover up. When i started i was really hoping to get an answer.

    Here is a possible answer (and I am no demolition expert so I don't know if it is true) Demolition on the scale of twin towers require s another building to house the equipment needed. these equipment (for whatever reason) needed to be there at the moment of demolition and moving them away after would be too suspicious. that would be a good reason (if it was true that the equipment would be needed).

    That answer is not a great answer, but it would be better then they did it for fun, or they did it to destroy files.

  • ZarathustraSpeaks

    The truth here is simple to see if your are willing to look at it without the need for some mysterious conspiracy. The ONLY reason this and most other conpiracy theories thrive is EXACTLY the same reason that that belief in a greater being is impossible to ever completely refute. People that WANT and/or NEED to believe will always find ways to believe no matter how illogical it is to do so.(like the mystery of George Bush who was incompetent in everything he ever did as president except this one event) People need mystery in their lives because if they dont have mystery they have no meaning in their life. Sorry but its that simple.

    "In the deep glens where they lived all things were older than man and they hummed of mystery."
    Cormac McCarthy
    The Road, last lines of novel.

  • Roschachmoloch

    9/11 was tragic but hey, we all know it was an inside job, even more tragic, whatever the conspiracy theories out there, less tragic, I'm sure the conspirators have moved on and are probably working on their next task, soon to become another on the long list of conspiracy theories, tragic.
    Gone are the days when the powers that be had the patience to listen to the public, whatever they do, mostly wrong!
    We know that we can complain, mourn, grumble, sue, and come up with all sorts of conspiracy theories, until we're blue, pale, pink and whatever else in the face. Does that change anything? Every decade that goes by testifies to the fact that our leaders are becoming less and less secretive about what they intend to do with the populace. I admire their boldness, and remember it is us who select and vote for these "educated pieces of garbage" into power.
    They are just well trained murdering liars. Again tragic.
    I can tell you now that their next best dish of bloodshed will be best served cold! What a tragic tragedy!

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Sigh, I really do hope that you guys would finally elect someone you like, how is Obama going for you? I don't think Bush was educated or well trained either. I don't think it is an inside job, simply because it doesn't need be complicated to fool the population. I just wished they would use a computerised model to test how much explosives are needed, or if the weight of the plane is enough, then go to the wreckage and either find the steel backbone to test the strength and pump out some data, or find the explosive remains that could add to the amount expected. Then it gets published in the public domain so other independent specialists could repeat and test the theory. It's not really that hard. I'm looking at the from a scientist's point of view though, there is all that complicated politics and a the time, they have to clean the mess up fast due to all the danger of health and safety, also the local harassment of Muslims was getting out of control. There is also no way that they are going to keep the debris for a long time cause it was so huge. So really the only thing people can do is speculate.

  • gsjikwblao

    The penthouse (it has been reported) rested on large central columns. These columns must be violated to cause the building to implode (fall inward). The collapse of the penthouse (a sage in the roof line) immediately before the rest of the building is the evidence (along with free fall speed and falling directly into footprint) that the building was brought down with controlled demolition. It is not the evidence that it was not.

  • Greg_Mc

    Lol I have tried 3 times to reply to your comment below and somehow or another each time it has disapeared before I was done. Nothing to do with the site it is because at home unless it is late at night I don't get to sit for more than 5-10 minutes without having to get up and do something and when I get back my computer has froze or done something that causes the reply to box to disapear.

    Anyway I came by my self deprication honestly, I am in person very sarcastic and have an odd sense of humour. It in the past had the tendency to annoy some people. So to keep the peace with the humourless drones I had the unfortunate luck of being exposed to at times I turned the jokes so they made fun of me. I got to crack my jokes and one liners and we all had a good laugh so it worked out well, and the self deprication just grew from there lol.

    As for the fighting I have written 2 replies that disapeared I thought were pretty good but I just don't have a 3rd time in me so i apologize for saying nothing on it except that Thang and Nand have found an entertaining way to deal with it.

    I went back and read a couple of jack1952's comments and he does approach the subject and his replies in a very well done manner. He is calm, answers and puts people in their place with solid facts and common sense. I wrote a comment that is somewhere up above where I said that some years back I saw a doc I barely remember that mentioned something about building 7 and certain files that were in it and how the fact they were destroyed helped some Gov agencies and people etc and I wondered if anyone else saw it or a doc that was similar. And 3 pages back Jack in replying to someone else about pretty much the same thing made one common sense short sentence that blew any idea I may have had about building 7 and the barely remembered doc all to hell lol.

  • Hodd

    I just wish they would investigate the event. The fact that building 7 collapsed on its footprint should be enough for anyone to agree something isn't right, for the life of me I cannot understand the blatant disregard for that single event. To this day there has been no viable explanation for that building falling.

  • Branefart

    Umm .. Not to put an end to any debate but there is plenty of video showing the towers steel structure actually bending from the heat and the weight of the building, you're smart, google it.

    People need to stop being such f**ktards, the Government didn't do it. A group of people who really hated the U.S enough to die for did, fact!

    jeesh .......

  • kamakaze

    I do not claim to know exactly what happened on 9/11 but I just wish a couple things. 1)People saying their own government wouldn't kill its own citizens obviously have not been educated as far as history goes... look up operation Northwoods (now unclassified CIA plan to bomb our own ship and blame Cuba in order to invade Cuba), also the Gulf of Tonkin (where our govt. said Northern Vietnamese attacked our ship which got us into the Vietnam War- and is now proven to be false and never happened), or even the fact that it's very likely that FDR knew Pearl Harbor was going to happen before it did and did not do anything about it just to get the public outrage and us involved in WW2... 2) Most importantly, please watch some documentaries on the subject with the best and most thorough being Fabled Enemies (please watch this - don't take my word on anything...watch Fabled Enemies and others, do the research yourself and draw your own conclusions). Please don't take my word, the government's word or the word of anyone else. You have a brain, take a bit of time to look into things and draw your own conclusions.

  • Trev whit

    just ask one question. why was all the debris taken away so fast?It is true in all investigations no matter murder, car accident causing death, train crash, bank robbery, plane crash are all cordon off and investigated thoroughly. why not in 9 11?

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Wait, Pearl Harbour isn't in US, so not sure if it counts. You know what would help? Teach children in school about wars of America, don't think anyone heard about the Gulf war before 9/11.

    Edit: Damn it the sarcasm didn't go across >.< I'm sorry that I have disappointed you NAND D: ... Oh wait, now that I think about it not many people know this, Australia has their own 'Pearl Harbour' event, where Darwin was bombed. When the movie Pearl Harbour came out, many people I know (I also live in Australia) thought it was about Darwin (I know...). And no one has heard about the Gulf war in Australia either. What... America was in mid-east before? No way... I can assure you that they have a brain.

    I really should stop commenting so much on this topic... going to watch more Qi ^_^

  • http://www.facebook.com/mohanad.aljibreen Ned Jibreen

    I'm no scientist and I don't even have a bachelors degree, it took me about 15 seconds to realize what was told through the media was absolute rubbish on that day.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    If I wanted to place a "false flag" to convince the U. S. to go to war against the Middle East I could do the following:
    1. Take unreliable intelligence of a middle eastern country that details its WMD's and make a case to the world and the U. N. Apparently, this worked.
    2. Train Muslim extremists into conducting an attack on 9/11. Tell them to ram planes into the towers and various other places. The terrorists die and therefore their secrets go to the grave. If the towers go down good, if they don't then that's fine too. You don't need a high death toll to convince people that we need to go war to someone. Planned demolition isn't required nor is it feasible. You take a plan which is nearly full proof and much more easier to fabrication and maintain a secret, and change over to a plan that has much more space to fail (demolitions don't work and tower doesn't fall people will notice the bombs) and leave evidence for. You don't need to demolish your own building 7. Its not hard to destroy evidence and its not hard to find remote office locations. You don't need to call attention and demolish a building when all of the cameras are pointed at this skyline.

    Even if you accept the conspiracy's so called evidence at face value many questions still arise as a result of their reasoning. Why would use a combination of controlled demolition and a airplanes to kill people with? I could see one or the other but both. To argue that guaranteeing knocking the towers down would guarantee enough "terror" to convince America you need to prove that the towers not going down wouldn't have led to us to go into Afghan. I don't think there is a rule where if terrorist don't knock down a building you don't launch an attack on their host country. Obviously this doesn't make a theory wrong, though it could still be, just incomplete in its explanations.

    In conclusion, the more likely perpetrator for the 9/11 attacks is either Muslims extremists or Miley Cyrus. If you side with controlled demolitions as the cause of the towers going down then side with Miley Cyrus. The government benefited when airplanes rammed into towers, Miley Cyrus benefited when the towers went down.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Miley Cyrus Inc. is the parent company of Time Warner, Rudolph the Red Nose Murdoch, Paramount Pictures, and Walt Disney. Miley Cyrus was also linked to the London Bombings and Madrid bombings. Her concert tour coincides to the date and location of the bombings from 2004 and 2005.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Which is why the truth movement shouldn't use the media as part of their evidence. What i find is that the only opposing evidence against Miley Cyrus is the lies told through the media.

  • His Forever

    Oh, give me a break! There were live cameras everywhere! They didn't miss a beat after the first plane hit.

  • Jack1952

    I am not saying a government wouldn't kill its own citizens to further its own agenda. They most definitely would. However, your examples do not hold much water.

    Operation Northwoods did not happen so there are no casualties. The Gulf of Tonkin incident may not even have happened and even if it did there were no American casualties. You give an example then discredit it. That FDR knew about the Pearl Harbor attack in advance is pure speculation. He would have been a hero of immense proportions had he prevented the destruction at Pearl Harbor and they would still have gone to war because he could have shown that the Japanese could not be trusted. Watching a documentary that is obvious in its bias is not what I would call complete research. When I do research, I look at everything and by using the total evidence I try to deduce the most reasonable chain of events. I do not claim anything to be a conclusion of my research. That would imply that I know all the answers.

  • Achems_Razor

    Howdy Charles, I take it you have seen the whole doc. since you asked me what I thought about 9/11 what is your viewpoint on it so far, sans the Miley Cyrus Thang!

  • kamakaze

    I never said Operation Northwoods happened... I was showing a blatant example of the govt. willing to kill its own citizens for whatever reason (invade Cuba in this instance). You say the Gulf of Tonkin incident did not happen and that was my point, that the govt. said it happened (when it didn't and is now proven to not have happened) in order to get the public behind America getting involved in Vietnam. Plus you are sadly mistaken to say there were no casualties because of the Gulf of Tonkin lie. While no Americans did die in the incident (because it never happened) , over 40,000 Americans did die in the Vietnam war which was fought because of this lying incident. I also said "it was very likely FDR" knew about Pearl Harbor beforehand, I didn't say it was a fact. Also I do not get all my information from 1 documentary or any one source or that I know all the answers (in fact, I outright said to not believe me or anyone else and for everyone to do their own research). Fabled Enemies is a documentary that I think people should watch and not a documentary that I get all my information from.

  • Jack1952

    @ Kamakaze

    Operation Northwoods may have been an operation proposed by one faction of the CIA. When proposals are requested, one can expect all kinds of suggestions, including bad ones. A reason it was not implemented may have been because the government felt that it would have been an atrocity and therefore wrong of them to do it. How serious the CIA viewed this proposal is a matter of speculation.

    You've expanded Tonkin into the entire Vietnamese War. Tonkin is one incident in the war albeit an important one.

    We don't know what FDR knew. To accuse someone of such a traitorous act needs more than mere speculation.

    None of these incidents or alleged incidents have anything to do with 9/11. It has no weight as evidence.

  • gsjikwblao

    That doesn't account for the free fall speed directly into the footprint.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    From the New York Journal:

    Abstract: Hey a few days ago a group of scientists received data from their neutrino experiment that the particles were travel about 30 miles faster then the speed of light which shatters general relativity's speed limit. Guess what the scientists did? They disclosed their data and procedures for other scientists to either 1. prove through more experimentation 2. disprove through more experimentation 3. find flaws in their experimentation and procedures by evaluating the data for themselves.

    When you find something that is shockingly defiant of the mainstream explanations you must be open to criticism and scrutiny. Its the process of peer review and credibility that separates a conspiracy theory from science. It's a facet of academia that most of the population doesn't realize exists. People don't make press conferences about discoveries, rather they express them and their data to other scientist to ascertain whether such a discoveries is valid. It isn't a democratic process but more like proofreading. The more the better, but a majority isn't required.

    Note: Just because it has an abstract and the source says Journal doesn't mean its peer reviewed.

  • His Forever

    Mr. Razor: To an everyday Joe like myself, Every doc sounds right when you watch it (ancient aliens, no moon walk, 911 explosives, etc.) I haven't finished this doc (it lagged so badly on my computer). But, because there are so many people on both sides claming to know what happened, I'll go with my gut and say "no conspiricy" and it is as simple as it looks: a terrorist attack that had devistating consequences. What is the most convincing thing in all the 911 docs that makes you think it was an inside jobe by the government?

  • Guest

    Truthers = religious cult taking a blind leap of faith in the face of rationality and all reason. I've never known such gullible people as the 9/11 truthers with there silly little phrases like false flag, straw man, inside job blah blah. They really are the person in the pub who nobody wants to be stuck in the corner with. Don't bother answering there silly questions their already brainwashed.

  • Jack1952

    Hilarious!! The best part about talking online is that, unlike the pub, I can leave anytime I want. I can discuss my opinion without being shouted down. Nor do I have to look at that stubborn look of pity and disgust they always seem to exhibit when confronted by ideas that do not conform with their own. You forgot the "falling in its own footprint" phrase. As soon as you hear that one you know whats coming after.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5B4EBUJWRNIKVGNTMOAHKS4OSA Adam

    Interesting documentary. But despite a lot of talk about missing evidence and lack of scientific inquiry, it is just a lot of talking heads giving their personal opinions. Now I have nothing against these guys, but I would like to see some actual facts and numbers. Statements like "it just cannot collapse like that" are completely not acceptable in scientific method.

    Does anybody know about a documentary or website that actually did a detailed analysis of the available evidence and present it along with their assumptions and factual data? That would be very interesting to see.

  • Jack1952

    There are two links posted below by Yi Wen Qian that show an analysis of a top down collapse. These two links are a little technical and do not depend on anecdotal evidence.

    There is also a Dutch program that was posted by NAND Gate, to which Miss Qian was responding, in which firemen are describing how they witnessed the collapse, one floor at a time, as the top of the building came crashing down. In this film there is also a demolition expert who emphatically states that this could not have been a controlled demolition.

    Do a google search using the phrase debunking 9/11 and you will find a site that covers a lot of the claims made by the "truthers". It covers a lot of ground and is easy to understand, even by a layman like me.

    The tops of the twin towers must have weighed an incredible amount. I can't see how the towers wouldn't have collapsed with so much weight crashing down on it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Thank you Jack, btw, it's miss :P

  • Jack1952

    I'm a little red faced. I'm sorry. I'll correct it immediately.

  • charles1957b

    So where are the PILE OF FLOORS? Are top downers also saying that in the end "FALLING POWDER" can do the same as falling floors? I have personally seen the results of a true pancake collapse in my home town. The L'Ambiance Plaza. This 9/11 pancake collapse has been discredited, by the governments own sources for years. Since the first year really. That is why they came up with the "falling block" version of the story. This is even more assinine, where the upper block somehow takes on new strength of materials qualities, leaving it able to destroy the bottom 80%(+/-) of the building. Where did Americans learn this non-sense science? Meanwhile objects flying out of the buildings horizontally and even upwardly at 75-100 mph for hundreds of yards are completely ignored. I refuse to suspend the laws of physics, even for one day.
    King Charles

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    I am not sure about your pancake collapse, but if you smear a lot of honey on a pancake, and then drop it on another pancake from 10 meters, the honey will splat outwards, horizontally. Actually just clap with wet hands. I would imagine debris would splat more since it's not sticky. And the upper block didn't gain strength, when the top block falls it broke the floor under it, then the weight of the collapsed floor adds to the block above, then crushes the next floor.

    I am trying to understand your falling powder... in the paper I linked there is a picture showing crushing down and crushing up, is this what you are referring to?

  • charles1957b

    Entire buildings turned to dust. You can ignore it, but you can't make it go away.

  • Guest

    @charles1957b - Take a playing card and hold it lightly length-wise between your thumb and forefinger. Bend the card slightly and continue applying light pressure until the card breaks free. Note the speed and direction of the card. You will see the laws of physics aren't suspended but rather verified.

  • Guest

    To the contrary, I would fully expect a building to turn to dust as it collapses. Watch any video of any building collapsing for whatever reason and you will see dust. The higher the building, the more dust. That stored energy has to go somewhere when it is released.

  • C_Crom

    This is a fantastic documentary. Anyone who can watch this and think that the official story is still true is in denial to an incredible degree. As the psychologists say at the end it represents a sense of pride and lack of humility that people can have by looking at this empirical evidence and just say 'nope, didn't happen.' Thank you, AE 9/11 Truth.

  • C_Crom

    There is certainly dust but not to the extent that there is in these buildings. Everything was pulverized, including 80,000 tons of structural steel.
    Regardless, how do you explain the molten iron, the thermite and thermate, and the fact that these buildings fell at free-fall speeds?

  • C_Crom

    AE 9/11 for Truth. It's not just people's opinions. They've actually looked at evidence, gathered samples, done the research themselves. They say 'it just cannot collapse like that' because they've done the research, not because they just think it couldn't happen like that.

    Didn't you even watch the video?

  • Guest

    Please don't take this as any slight to you but this doc with all its "proofs" is almost a spoof of science. Unbelievable as it may sound, I was becoming embarrassed for some of these people. At almost every point of their assertion they have drawn the wrong conclusion from their research. They were also making assertions that I couldn't believe an engineer would make. I could go down a list here but that would take too long.

  • C_Crom

    Lakhotason, no offense taken. I'm just curious as to what you are referring to. What spoof of science? What assertions were unbelievable? NIST says the buildings fell at free-fall speed but wouldn't say how or why. This can only be explained through the use of incendiaries and explosives. No?

  • Guest

    Oh yes there is dust to that extent and if there had been more concrete used in those buildings there would have been more dust.

    The steel was not pulverized. Look at any picture after the collapse and you will see steel beams.

    Molten iron? You'll need to be a little more specific.

    Thermite!. My absolute favorite. What's ironic is I would have been surprised if thermite wasn't found. A sheet of thermite is often installed in a safe that secures documents and hard drives containing sensitive information. In the case of the government that would be classified information and in the commercial world it would be proprietary information. Any unauthorized attempt to breach the safe ignites the thermite and destroys the information thus keeping the information secure. I know this because at one time part of my job was to render safe these devices, remove them, and destroy them. I imagine WTC was chock full of these devices.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Hi, you seem to be a real open minded guy. I posted a link somewhere down, perhaps you are interested to read it. I know it is kinda hard to digest, but it is I think one of 2 papers I know of that have been peer reviewed and published. The paper didn't suggest at all that the building went into free fall or demolition.

    I know that you see a lot of experts claiming that 'it just cannot collapse like that', however I have yet to see a publish paper that suggests this. The clean up did make it almost impossible to collect any samples, so I would take the origin with a grain of salt. I do have this one though that suggest otherwise, and it is by a professor that has published over 450 papers!

    I don't claim to be an expert or anything, I just believe more in peer reviewed stuff, you know, stuff looked at by unrelated people with no competing interests. A lot of people here say that anyone is against the idea are either paid by CIA or it's all propaganda, but I think that is going overboard.

  • charles1957b

    I love the one about Superblock. Born on Krypton. Superblock able to destroy buildings in a single bound. When it is finished, politely self destructs, because nothing else could destroy Superblock.

  • Greg_Mc

    I clicked on your link and opened the PDF to give it a try, I didnt figure on understanding any of it to be honest as I have no background in physics or structural engineering. I have read the first two pages and so far it isnt to hard to follow.

    I only have one thing that kind of jumped out at me that I could comment on as being possibly hypocritical (if that is not to strong a word or even the right word lol maybe I could coin a new phrase "Ironically hypocritical") but I think I will leave it for now. Because I not only want to think about how I will phrase my comment but I also want to see if any of the what so many of "you" people call "conspiracy theorists" notice it as well or even bother reading the paper. ( yes I am labeling the "the buildings fell on their own" people as "you" or maybe I may expand it to "you people" lol. Now don't be like others and take everything I say so bloody serious, we can have discussions and involve humour and general light heartedness without the world ending). I do wonder if this paper or report is going to start getting beyond my level of understanding soon but I will read it until I am totally lost (I am guessing that will happen by page 5 tops lol).

    I guess I should tell you (in very few words) where I stand in this whole debate/discussion/argument/circus so that you can put my comments into perspective if I happen to have something to say about the paper. There is far to much to get into in any detail because while some people may think this is broken into 2 sides and everyone is on one side or the other, that is obviously not the case. I am after 10 years still trying to figure it all out, I have seen all the videos etc and read many a discussion but I will keep on topic and just say that I personally believe the buildings did not come down on their own. So reading this paper (hopefully understanding enough of it to see their point) should be interesting.

  • C_Crom

    I appreciate the kind words, Yi Wen Qian and, no, I won't accuse you of being in the CIA. ;)
    My main concern is that the NIST, in it's final report, does not deny that the buildings fell at free-fall speeds yet they don't say how or why. Also, the fact that there was molten iron, thermite, and thermate in the rubble and ash is extremely troubling. There is no reason as to why thermite and thermate should be there and the official explanation of firing melting the iron and steel is incredibly implausible do the lack of high-temperature fires. I too don't claim to know exactly what happened or how it happened but I strongly believe there is enough hard evidence to warrant a new, independent investigation.

  • Guest

    Thanks for hearing me out. I suppose the most forthright problem I have with these engineers is that one said that the debris from the collapse could not have been thrown outward. I just could not believe an engineer would say that. I have no idea why an engineer would say such a thing. I'm baffled by his statement. Hence the "spoof of science" comment.

  • Guest

    Also, I gave a perfectly acceptable reason why thermite would be found at the site.

  • Guest

    Thermite place in safes? HiHiHi! Refreshing comment after crude discussions! In any instances, there was enough rubble over there the day after, no one can figure out from which building did the thermite traces came from.

    Let's make it simpler, how about it was used in previous infrastructure works? A few years before?

    Oh! BTW, the USA Gov. couldn't have simply plant WMD in Iraq because others countries (Secrete services & journalists) already knew about that the african thing was false.
    And about a few other false things.

    The problem in such a case is that the officials of these Gov. or (And) private (Free Lanced) do not know who could later be a whistle blower. 2 Years later at most, the French had to public ally disclose what they already knew at that time.
    Reason why the UN voted against Iraq invasion and that the Iraq invasion was not a UN coalition.

    It rather was a matter of interested nations.
    Maybe the "If U're not with us, you're..." had a bit of weight at that time, but this remain unknown.

    Getting to know someone real good just can't be too expensive. This ought to be reason why history exists?

    Pierre.

  • C_Crom

    I must have missed the explanation of thermite, is it on this page?
    The engineers, I believe, weren't saying that debris couldn't have been thrown out laterally, just the extent to which it was and the speeds recorded. If the buildings were simply pancaking their way down it would seem highly improbable that it would eject heavy steel I-beams out laterally at 60 or 70 miles per hour. If all the force was being applied downward in order to make the buildings collapse vertically where does the energy come to throw the material hundreds of feet laterally?

  • Guest

    Yes thermite in safes. Wished I had a dollar for each one I dealt with. As for the rest of your comment - I'm lost. Could be the absinthe I'm sucking down at the moment.

  • C_Crom

    Lakhotason, I just saw your response vis a vis the thermite in safes. I'm trying to find some documentation on this, can you provide some? Also, what about the nano-thermite and the thermate? Surely those two are not used in linings of safes, especially the former due to it's explosive properties.

  • Guest

    C_crom - I don't know where you can find documentation on this and you are certainly correct for asking. I'll try to find something for you. Thermite is not an explosive, it is an incendiary. However you are correct in assuming that an incendiary can explode given the right conditions.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    This is not empirical evidence. The scientific method was not involved in any way or form for this documentary. The positions given by these so called experts was based on hypothesis and speculation. If they were so inclined to present real findings they would present them to actual peer-reviewed journals.

    Though-out this documentary, I noticed a few things: a lot of short responses are given to things that may be taken out of context. This is speculation and generalization on my part and I'll give that I could be wrong.

    No raw data was given. Ever. A real think tank speaks with data and forms charts/graphs from that data.

    Its conclusion is really warped and misleading. Start a new investigation? Under what guise? What stops them from conducting their own investigation? Would they want the government to conduct another one themselves?

  • Guest

    I hear you Thang Tran.

  • Guest

    My favorite is at one time they say that no fire has ever caused a building to collapse then later saying a fire damaged building wouldn't collapse in that manner. The obvious question is - if you've never seen a fire damaged building collapse, how in God's name can you say it wouldn't collapse that way.

  • Guest

    C_Crom I like your attitude. If a person wishes to believe something, regardless of which way the wind blows, I admire that. And though I disagree completely, I will not call any one stupid for their honestly held beliefs (note the word honestly).

    You cite the 1500 professionals that deserved to be heard. well this doc is prima facia that they are being heard. But I ask you, what of those hundreds and hundreds of thousands which say something different? Those engineers, architects, and others that understand and acknowledge that 9/11 was "what you see is what you get"? Why is it these people have no purchase in influencing your thoughts?

  • Greg_Mc

    A sheet of thermite is often installed in a safe that secures documents and hard drives containing sensitive information. In the case of the government that would be classified information and in the commercial world it would be proprietary information. Any unauthorized attempt to breach the safe ignites the thermite and destroys the information thus keeping the information secure.

    I have never heard that before, it is a very interesting thing to now know. Makes me curious as to the type of job you had, I assume if you were let that close to information important enough to warrent that type of security you would need to have passed a relatively strict background check.

    One thing has just crossed my mind and it may be a stupid question but hey you dont ask you dont learn, if thermite burns through steel as easily as the docs say it does would it not burn through the cast iron safe? Or should I just assume the safe cant be burned through or the thermite is at a level that wont burn through it (if it is possible to regulate how strong the thermite is). Obviously there is some safegaurd in place.

  • Guest

    So thermite and thermate can be made to explode. I can make wheat flour explode. I fail to see your point.

  • Guest

    Greg_mac - That's the thing about thermite. It's a pretty weak sister.

  • Guest

    Cumon Greg_Mc. Are you serious? Go try to buy thermite anywhere... You'll be asked a few questions... :-)
    And it ain't gonna be your mama who's ask you.

    We wouldn't see you post here for a heck of a while!
    Ask Jeremy. He should know how easy thermite or thermate is easy to source. Ot should I say, was easy to source?

    He also made a comment on how some pieces of beams had the perfect 45 degree angle cut. Isn't it?
    But you must go back some 2 pages back in the comments.

    Puzzling, I'll say.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    Pierre - ease up a little. You don't have to buy thermite, you can make it as easily as you'd make sweet tea.

  • Greg_Mc

    They make it sound like it more than that, guess thats why you have to take everything you hear with a grain of salt. Although I am far from naive enough to blindly believe whatever I am told or that I read, especially on the internet. The thing with me is as a whole everything that went down that day just doesn't feel right. I am not what everyone refers to as a conspiracy theorist seeing the boogie man wearing a George Bush mask hiding around every corner but I just can't wrap my head around 12 or 13 or whatever the number is Terrorists pulling this off, especially the way they say it happened. There are specific things that bug me (some of which like most others I stubbornly and maybe irrationally refuse to want to even consider could be wrong, lol I have invested to many years believing them to be right) but I have come to the conclusion we are never going to find out the truth about what went on, no matter which version it is (lets say there are 2 versions to keep it simple) and it doesn't help that the majority of the people can't even seem to get along well enough to say lets just agree to disagree. We all need to be right lol

  • Greg_Mc

    why you crawling up my a** about it Pierre? In my daily life thermite isn't something I have ever come into contact with. And without watching various docs i would never have even known the word (let alone the actual stuff) even existed.
    I am a non violent suburban Canadian, purchasing explosives or insendiaries isn't something that would ever cross our minds.

  • Guest

    I understand what you believe. It is a hard thing to acknowledge that America could be wounded like that. But it was. Yet to say the attack was anything other than it was is lessens the sorrow.

  • Greg_Mc

    I am sorry but I dont think the fact something about it doesnt sit right with me lessons the sorrow. Some of the victims families fully believe in a conspiracy and I doubt their sorrow is lessened.

    Listen I dont want this to turn into anything argumentative. I don't think the sorrow the friends, families, citizens or the civilized world feels could be lessoned. What happened no matter anyones view was horrible and the last thing I would want is my or anyone elses opinion having anything to do with or affecting the sorrow, I would feel horrible if a comment of mine on an internet site (again no matter which views I held) ever caused a loved one of a victim from that day any more grief than they already feel or to have my comment come across (which would obviously be totally unintentional) as marginalizing anyones death. We lost some good Canadian people that day too, but even though we feel that grief and grief for everyone killed it happened in your country so you obviously take it a million times more personal than people in other countries could.

    Hope that made sense. If it didnt take my word for it everything I said was meant in a sympathetic and good way,

    anyway I have to go to bed. Have a good night people and keep the noise down will ya lol

  • Guest

    Please believe me when i say that I respect your thoughts. You and I happen to have different points of view.

  • Guest

    Regarding Lakhotason sweet tea. I often heard and seen many who claimed things alike. Never set a foot in a lab.
    As seen on "I don't recall" which video where a bunch of dudes tried to prepared some, and lucku enough for them, it failed. Above all, the particles need to be miconized.

    I see that at least once a month of at most 3 months.
    But coming up with something that works is much more than boasting. It also requires techical instruments.

    This I know for a fact. I have the background.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @ pierre- Are you as fuc2ed as I am? I certainly hope so.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Crom, first you must disregard the paper that I have offered, and say that it is false. It is fine to see the research, but when there are competing arguments, shouldn't you see both sides? In the world of science, unless it is published, it holds no weight. Einstein was wrong once too.

    The molten metal was confusing, first them claim there is none, cause there was no fire, then they claim there is molten metal, cause if there is an explosion so there must molten metal... Huh?? When they said there was no fire, they were basing it on the fact that they found no molten metal. You are not dumb Crom, what do you make of this?

    lakhotason explained the thermite, so I won't go into it.

    There was claims that well, this had never happened before, collapsing with just one floor crumbling. It has happened but not widely known because it was usually due to fault engineering (add a slab that was too heavy), or stuff like gas leak, or earthquakes. It happens really fast usually caused many death, a tragedy that people would rather forget. There is a list from the paper that I have posted. A plane crushing into a building is a first, and a building just isn't made to foresee such as an event. Four times the weight yes, but I believed that it ended up being something like 8.4x just with the calculated kinetic energy, and the collapse must in fact accelerate. There was nothing wrong with the research at all, the force was simply a lot higher.

    I am not against calling for another investigation, I don't see how that would hurt, I just hope that if there is one, and it give the conclusion that it just collapsed, that people would see the evidence and move on, but I have a feeling that anything that doesn't agree with them will cause them to call 'cover up'.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    @Greg_Mc, There is nothing wrong in feeling that the event isn't right. It's a sad event, and no matter what happened, it will not bring the deceased back.

    What will another investigation change? Sure, we might know more, but then what? We don't need to prove that the government started a war with no bases, they've done it before and openly said so. We don't need to prove that there are large companies that just want profit, Enron is a good example. Will there be an social change? With all that has happened... nope.

    All I wanted is to express my views and for people to see both side of the argument, as this doc only included theirs. We may never know exactly what happened, as with many events. It just doesn't make it right to randomly point fingers.

  • Greg_Mc

    If everyone had the same point of view on everything it would make life pretty boring, it is just how those views are expressed and how you respond to others (I appreciate that even though we differ in opinion you still, as I do with you, respect the others thoughts). So far I have found with you that because I see some things different than you do and you seem to have more knowledge about some of the technical things you don't get immediately confrontational over it like far to many people on here do. I asked you a question and instead of trying to degrade me and make yourself look superior because you know more on a certain topic than I do (people do that on here because I guess it makes them feel good or gives them an ego boost to put people down that know less on a certain topic, so by putting the person down they must feel others will see them as a better person or whatever it is that goes through these peoples heads) you just answered my question. So now I know that if I notice you seem to know something I may have a question on that I can ask you and I will get an answer not a condecending reply. Now if you toss in the odd smart ass reply that is good too because god knows this place could use a little humour.

  • Guest

    To Greg_Mc who'd seeking a little humour. Didn't God once told us that we all came from dust and will all go back as dust?
    :-)
    But for the rest, no one (Or almost) are not permited to know. Forbidden. Security matters.
    That's where it's end.

    I gotten a good a docu from the usenets about Jenin, D/L'ed it and go view it. Bases on the NFO file, it's looks crude.
    It must be a little underground...
    I love the usenets!

    If the DVD's NFO is right and real, a lot worst than 911.
    I hope that the events of the "Arab sprimg" will come out soon. But it takes a while before the dust falls back so that peoples can figure things out.

    Pierre.

  • Greg_Mc

    @ Yi
    In the email I got showing your comment there was a line in it that I wanted to reply to but I can't see it when I read it here on the site. so I don't know what to make of it, maybe it was taken out for some reason but since I came on to reply to it I will paste it on here then comment on it. Lol and it is nothing earth shattering but I wanted to comment anyway.

    I think even the people at AE911Truth have competing interests
    Do you remember writing this? I just wanted to add this ....
    In my opinion most people who go on TV or in a doc or whatever are there to support the cause of their group or organization (like the people in this doc) but being a cynic I feel that (as you said but in different words, so I agree with you) a certain number of them probably have a hidden agenda.

    I am not against calling for another investigation, I don't see how that would hurt, I just hope that if there is one, and it give the conclusion that it just collapsed, that people would see the evidence and move on, but I have a feeling that anything that doesn't agree with them will cause them to call 'cover up'.

    I have to say that while I don't want to I sort of have to agree with your last statement.
    Having said that do you think if a new investigation proved the buildings came down because of explosives and therefore was proven to be a controled demolition that the people who think the buildings came down on their own would simply accept the decision and either move on with their lives or demand those responsible be found and arrested?

  • aConceptualist

    Great doc! I appreciate the courage of these individuals who would risk their professional reputation just to deliver this important message to people. Comment section so far have been totally confusing. Apparently complicated issues don't tolerate layman discussions. Scientist requires a scientist to be proven wrong.

  • Guest

    Yes. "Risk their reputation". Especially the ones having a carreer in the USA. Except the ones for which their carreers reached its peek or who already retired.

    Pierre.

  • Greg_Mc

    @Yi
    In regards to your reply to me about the worth of another investigation. Again I agree with what you are saying (your ability to make sense when replying to me/people is getting annoying lol as I find myself agreeing with you most of the time. It is amazing how responding to people in a polite civilized well thought out manner instead of insulting them or trying to put them down for reasons I can only guess are to somehow give those people some sort of misguided self affirmation to help fill some void they may feel in their lives. Sorry I went on a bit of a rant there, lol but again I blame it on you for always having sensible comments) as we already know all those things you said have been proven..... well have been proven and it wont bring back the dead or change any of the things you mentioned. But to those who believe something conspiratorial went on a new investigation may prove them right.

    Yes this doc only gives one side as they pretty much all do, the people putting up the money and time to make the doc are doing so in order to promote their opinons and show proof they are right in the hopes their evidence will change minds or have some sort of effect that may in this case bring about an investigation that will this time agree with them.

    Steven Jones did say that Livermoore National Lab fabricated (produced, manufactured not fabricated as in made up a story or faked an experiment) some nano thermite also called super thermite that was the same or similar to the active material found in the red and grey steel that was found around ground zero. He says he mentioned it (not sure how you just "mention" something in a scientific journal) in a paper he wrote that was published in Open Chemical Physics Journal in April 2009 (it is at the 1hour 35 minute mark of the doc, so if you want to listen to his explanation) and nobody has yet scientifically refuted it nor has it been scientifically challenged. So there is one published paper mentioned in this doc, how reputable this journal is I do not know. I do know that from watching him on many docs that I like Steven Jones, he is apparently a well respected Physicist who quit his job as a professor (not sure which university it was) to devote his time to this which at least shows how strongly he believes the building didnt come down on their own. Maybe it is his demeanor that I like and caught my eye, the calm, confident yet friendly way he talks and presents himself reminds me a lot of how my Dad was so that may have something to do with it too. I hope I have made some sense here because as usual while trying to write a comment I am constantly having to stop and deal with the things that make up my life. The easiest yet possibly most frustrating is trying to get a 13 year old boy to sit down and do what seems to me to be a never ending pile of homework.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Haha, they are not risking their reputation unless they say something that's untrue. Mm, you are right in that a scientist should require a scientist to be wrong. I appreciate that you have read the comment section though. I would point to other sources but it looks you have made up your mind.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Welcome to the internetz where anyone can say anything.

    Miley Cyrus was behind 9/11 and I have evidence to prove it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    If it was found to be the case, I would fully support the research and move on, also I would like the people responsible to pay. As I am sure of a lot of people I know who agrees with me would say the same. I'm also a 'swinger' in my political votes also much to the despair of a lot of people I know lol. I hold not power other than my opinion, and I am happy at least I live in a democratic countries where my opinion actually matter. I came from China and I am very happy to see that I can express my opinion somewhere and have people hear it before deleting it.

    Also, I don't think America has paid even for Iraq War, I am not an American, I am Australian. The Iraq War involved the death of many Australians. We are in no political position to refuse America when they ask, because we have a very small population and little military force. I don't think Americans understand the weight of their decisions to go to war.

    I'll also reply to your comment below cause I can't be stuffed finding where I should stick my reply. I have checked out your source, sadly the journal is not that high ranking. They have only published 17 journal to date. Also, I am usually weary of open journals because peer review etc are not free, but of course there are some very good open journals like Blood. It is however stated that the paper is peer review and I will accept that it is. I will read it in a sec.

    I formulate my opinion not on a gut instinct (/sarcasm: like, it can't be right!! cause... er, I'm no professorial and I can't really find a basis to my beliefs, but other people thinks so too therefore it's ok!!) I always try to see both of the arguments and formulate my views on an argument that makes sense to me. I mean, if my views makes sense to me, it must make sense for other people right? Well, you have heard my views and arguments, and I am happy that you have considered it. I mean the theorists claimed here there is no doubt, there is no doubt, but I have enough doubt.

    P.S. I'm not a parent but, what helped me to do my work was to set a time limit for the work to be finished and of acceptable quality, then get given rewards in the form of pocket money/TV time if these 2 criteria are met. It make the homework go by faster since you have a time limit, also there is a reward.

  • Guest

    To Yeung Xiao once again: "But you just dodge the question":=>
    "Why would these super planner take the energy to bring down building 7?"

    Open your eyes wide eung Xiao! => Read and use brain:=>

    "Do you expect that this would have been a great foreing policy for the USA? Does the USA Elite loves to tell to the rest of the occidental world: -We don't care and you can go to hell"?
    -"French secret service was already aware".
    (And a freelance journalist). Along with proof).
    That was telivised by non-USA based medias.
    The USA needed a new reply. The same as you're doing.

    In short, the USA is part of a community that ~99.999999 % of humakind call the world on planet earth. They have an international "Standing".
    Because they must take care of international businesses and exchanges.
    This has a great influence on international relations as much as the world already know that the USA is one of the country who has the poorest respect in international war crimes regulation, close behind China among others.
    "Yeung Xiao" may have remances of such totalitarian lifestyle but it ain't the case of every human being.

    Just to tell you, I brought down the amount of raw material import from the USA by some 71% these past 3 years. We source elsewhere.
    Why would the world make business with peoples who always have to justify that type of behavior? I mean trouble makers.
    This hasn't started necessarely with 9/11.
    One after the other during these past some 40 past years.

    Have you ever heard the expression: "Benefice of doubt"?
    By ignoring what is described in the latter and playing "Simple Mind", you lost the last drop of intellectual intergrity I'd allow you. You got it made.

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Er guys calm down, Yeung didn't mean that US isn't evil, just that they are so evil that they could do it by making them look like the good guys. Blowing up the buildings hours after the plane crush isn't cool, but right after the plane does into the building is. Or alternatively just blow up the building. Or even better, evacuate the people in the buildings before this all this happens. This is all opinions of course, and it can't really be proven till some 50 years later and all the documents get released.

    We can argue about it till the cows come home, just wait another 40 years, not long now... Can't believe it's been 10 years already.

  • Greg_Mc

    @Yi
    You found the paper I was talking about online? I just looked and haven't been able to find it, and to be honest even if I found it I probably wouldn't understand most of it like you are able to. Even your comment which I think you dumbed down a bit for me was difficult for me to follow. You agree the method of proving there is thermite is good but the amounts and how the specs looked were not in the shape they should have been. I hope I am getting that little bit right and that you think maybe what they looked at may not have been too close to the explosion. I am not going to easily change my mind but when it comes to the science I am going to trust you as I believe you to be an honest person and I know you wont steer me wrong.

    The contact for the paper was a gmail account? That is not reassuring. If you sent an email to that account it would obviously be to discuss the paper or ask a question or two, since you read the paper and I havent I have to ask you something. By writing an email to that account would you be under the impression that you were contacting Steven Jones (or an assistant of his)? If so I can understand the gmail address because he doesn't work at BYU anymore (I thought he quit but apparently he was, because of his 9/11 views and work on it, asked to leave) so he would just get a regular one like us and use "hardevidence" instead of his name. Now if you are not contacting him then a gmail account could be seen as some sort of issue. But a lot of organizations and companies use gmail accounts, I know I have but we were smart enough to take the gmail part out and replace it with the business name even if we had to access it through gmail.

    EDIT: Yi I did find this interesting page while searching for the paper, it is short and will take 5 minutes to read. Just remember if in the future anyone questions my character, open mindedness or honesty you have to back me up ok lol because this link strengthens your views, at least where this paper is concerned, and our conversations have been good, open and polite even if we dont see eye to eye on everything.

  • Greg_Mc

    @ Yi
    I will reply to your other comment later I don't want you to think I am ignoring it (or comments on here from other people too), but you put time and effort into it and deserve the same in a response and I can't give it that time at the moment. My son is telling me I am spending to much time on here and ignoring him, as I mentioned somewhere before it takes me a while to write my replies. I get interupted a lot, my son and I are very close and he is used to getting most of my attention (as he should). Plus due to other circumstances of my home life (lol I am trying to say something without actually giving any information out, this is not the place for discussing private personal matters. Mentioning my son is one thing as knowing a little about the people you talk to is to me a good thing, others may prefer to keep their lives totally private which is cool too and should be respected) I don't get to sit around doing nothing often or for long periods of time. Just as you and everyone else on this site have a life of your own and plenty of other things that you quite often should be doing instead of watching docs and talking to people

  • Jack1952

    C_Crom has decided which experts are to be respected and which ones are not. You asked him why the experts who do not believe in the demolition carry no weight and he ignores you. He then says, in a follow-up post, that you have to respect the expertise of the 1500 experts and says nothing about the ones who disagree with him. It is as if he feels that the links posted that show that the towers had fallen well within scientific parameters, were irrelevant.

    @ C_Crom

    Your experts do not have subpoena power either. Yet you feel that their investigation was thorough enough to draw the conclusions that they did. Miss Qian has given links that dispute the findings of your experts but if you have looked at them you must have dismissed them. This could be because you have found them to be boring.

    I will, once again, visit the site that you have suggested that gives the empirical data that is there and see if it makes more sense after the 4th or 5th reading.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    @Greg_Mc
    No worries, my long and awesomely weekend has just ended :( So I need to go back to my life soon as well.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    I apologise for the boringness of the posts, but sadly hard science is boring, and empirical stuff is boring. It is just unfortunate that you can't claim anything without going through the boring stuff. I tend to go to the source, because data is very subjected to interpretation, so much so that with the same data, 2 scientist can come up with very different conclusions. There are scientists that puts up a fight at both end of the argument, in the end it is which one you would rather believe.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Oh just to add, yes Jones was dismissed, but only after the publication, so he had a email back then. However he wasn't really required to put his email up because he isn't first or last author. He wasn't dismiss based on his views as much as the contribution to a paper that was publish illegally so to speak. It's one of these things that will get you dismissed, along with fabrication of false data and improper conduct.

    He had his views for a long time, I think he also wrote a letter to a journal somewhere saying that he believed nuclear bomb was responsible for the collapse. It was rebutted and I don't think published, but he didn't lose his job over that, and it was ages ago.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    @Pierre

    Again you are just dodging the question. I asked a simple direct question and you need dancing around it.

    I understand there is a whole theory out there, and I know that the USA and capitalism has not really been a force for good in the world. I am a Marxist, I get it. Naomi Klein's Shock doctrine is sitting on my shelf right now. Great read if you want to see what real evidence of evil of capitalism looks like. How evil capitalism can be is something I understand very well. I am doing an entire degree on it. I am sure I know the details of neoliberal movement over the last 40 years better then you. That is not the point. that is not my question.

    And I can give either side the benefit of doubt. And you know for every expert you find that thinks building 7 is the smoking gun, I can find at least one that think the official report makes sense. And since I am not a demolition expert, I don't know. I have no reason to trust or distrust either side.

    but a unplanned collapse of a building after it sustained damage from falling steel and fire make some sense. Deliberately rigging a random building for demolition to destroy paper files inside make no sense. The conspirators demolishing a building for the hell of it, just so they have one more thing to cover up makes no sense. This is the answer i have been given, I am not setting up straw man target here, truthers said this. I am just appealing to simple logic here.

    Now some people say it does not matter how building 7 fell, and they would be right. WTC 1&2 can be a control demolition and WTC 7 can fall for what ever reason because that is not apart of the justification for the war. Building 7 made no impact on the larger picture.

    But the truther movement made building 7 matter. They called it their smoking gun. They say it had to be control demolition and proves everything was control demolishing. The entire control demolition theory hinges on building 7. So now you need to defends building 7. So I am just asking this simple questions, Why would the conspirators bring down another building that adds nothing to the justification of war. The conspirators rigged building 1 and 2 for demolition as justification for war. Why did they rig building 7.

    It is a Simple question and you have no problem answering it for building 1 and 2. You can't ask for benefit of doubt when there is a hole that big at the fundamental part of your theory.

  • Achems_Razor

    "Perhaps" WTC7 was also targeted for an airplane attack from flight 93, instead flight 93 supposedly crashed in Shanksville and made a 14 ft hole with no airplane wreckage or bodies, and even the mayor of Shanksville said no airplane crashed there.

    And since WTC7 was already rigged and had damage to it, as Silverstein said, they "decided" to pull it.

  • Greg_Mc

    @yi
    First off thank you for explaining all those things to me I do appreciate the time you put into informing me of things that to academics are basic knowledge but to a big dummy like me are new information I can use to help me understand various sections of published papers. The link I gave you (which I can no longer see in that comment, but I am having trouble with things like that. I get emails saying there is a new post so I open it and read the comment or as much of it that fits in the email but when I click the "link to comment" part it will open a new window and load this page but far to often the comment is no where to be found in here. I have noticed that comments I wrote are no longer on here either. I don't know what to think of it, have the comments been taken off or is my computer screwed up? It is a little annoying) was to a web page that basically said the paper we were talking about that was mentioned in the doc was published in that journal without the knowledge of the editor in chief, I think she does this job on a voluntary basis. Here is just one part of what she said.

    PRINTED WITHOUT PERMISSION
    A telephone call reveals that editor in chief Marie-Paule Pileni had never been informed that the article was going to be published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal, which is published by the journal giant Bentham Science Publishers.

    “They have printed the article without my permission, so when you wrote to me, I did not know that the article had appeared. I cannot accept this, and therefore I have written to Bentham that I resign from all activities with them”, explains Marie Paule Pileni, who is professor with a specialty in nanomaterials at the renowned Universite Pierre et Marie Curie in France.

    When something like this happens it gives off the impression that certain factions of the truth movement are sneaky. I know it is one thing but it is one thing that was mentioned in the doc and by Steven Jones who I have put my trust into (his involvement in this fiasco is hopefully zero) so at the very least the optics of it are not good.

    Had more to say but I have to go, I have some things I need to do.

  • Guest

    For a critical analysis of whether WTC 1,2,and 7 were brought down by explosives, google "implosion demolition" then go to "A critical analysis of the collapse....". It will be a PDF document on page three.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    This is interesting, but it does not answer the question why rig building 7? It's a 47 floor building in downtown new york, which is unremarkable in every way possible. it bearly peak above the skyline, and the empire state building is next door. It does nothing to add to the justification of war. Why would the planners plan for flight 93 to head there? Why not not rig it and let it fall or stand as it pleases, how would that change anything, why rig it just to cover it up.

    And I am not sure why you bring up the fact that there is no wreckage of flight 93? how does that help the theory around building 7 anyway?

    You know you are in trouble when at the core of your theory there is perhaps in quotation marks.

    I am just applying Achem's razor here. Either building 7 sustained serious damage from falling steel and fire, which requires no other agents.

    Or a government team of people rigged a building for demolition using secret military grade "nano-thermite" without anyone noticing. and another team planed to fly a jet into it, but somehow the jet missed (or disappeared or I don't know) and they demolished it anyways just as a way to get rid of paper files and give them one more thing to cover up. even though if they left it standing it probibly will be demolished like building other WTC buildings anyways.

    Common man, I have seen you post in other docs in religion and you apply Achem's Razor well. you definitely know what it is. Which is the one requiring less agents.

    This does not say building 1 & 2 is not control demolition, because there is somewhat of a reason to bring those down (to justify the war). but if you want to building 7 to be the smoking gun which proves all three building are Control demolitions, then building 7 needs to make sense by itself.

    and I am not sure it can.

  • Guest

    @Yeung Xiao - I have cited an unbiased analysis concerning WTC 1,2, and seven. It is at the top of the page. Should answer any questions you have.

  • C_Crom

    When you say the hundreds of thousands of scientists that say different, of whom are you speaking? Are you talking about, for example, NIST? If so, a major reason I take what they say with a grain of salt is because they do things like admit to free-fall speeds but fail to explain how that could be possible. They admit to not even looking for explosive residue despite the hundreds of eye-witnesses.
    Jack1952, just because I'm not responding right away does not mean I'm ignoring the question, I do get away from my computer every now and then. That being said, I've spoke a bit about the scientists that I disagree with. NIST is the biggest example. The point of it all is that there are enough inconsistencies to warrant a new investigation. An independent investigation. It is insulting to those who died on that day not to look into all these question. First and foremost is who ordered the material, the hard evidence, to be trucked away and melted before forensics could even look at it. That is a crime and it is the first in a long list of unanswered questions about that day. I don't pretend to know what happened exactly but I think it incredibly important to find out. When you have the president and the vice president who oversaw the largest attack on US soil ever not testifying under oath or alone or having the testimony recorded it stinks to high hell, doesn't it? Don't the American people deserve to know what their leaders were doing, what they knew, and when they knew it?
    We've launched multiple wars, spied on our own citizens, tortured, etc, all because of these attacks. To not know exactly what happened is a travesty.

  • Guest

    I did not say NIST. I've cited an unbiased report which should be at the top of the page. Please read it and we can discuss further.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    Very good read and pretty definitive. actually all you have to do is google a "A critical analysis of the collapse...." and it's the first one that comes up. It just goes to show, for every one expert that is suspicious, I can at least find another (if not more) that believes the official account.

    But the truthers faced this before. Watch, they will attack the groups that did the research. Say it is biased, make new assertions about "nano-thermite" and do no research to back it up and wait to be proven wrong. Continue to assert (based on no expertise besides gut instinct) that it looks like a control demolition.

    What really is sad that so many people have such a miss understanding of the scientific method. It's not our job to prove your wrong, when you make an assertion, it is your job to prove it right. The fact that this paper had to come out and prove random assertions wrong can already be considered a serious problem for society.

  • Guest

    They can attack all they wish. These are the experts who bring down buildings for a living. They know what they are talking about.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Silverstein is a business man. If a house wife said 'pulled the plug', I would expect that she meant pull the plug in the sink. Silverstein meant abandon the building i.e. stop the firefighting. If he did admit to the demolition, it would be easier since the families that lost members due to building collapsing can seek compensation. However that's not the case. There are no court cases etc since it is generally accepted that he meant abandon.

    Most truther believe that the government is the one that rig the building because the current super thermite thing, so please at least leave Silverstein out of it.

    Also, there was no need to demo a building that is already damaged before the survivors/firefighters got out. I know no one died in WC7, but you can't say that I blew up this one and not the others.

    Flight 93 isn't really that related to the buildings, they already got one plane in each so I assume it would be a different target like another one in pentagon or better yet white house. I have seen the photos of these plane bits though, so not sure about the no body. This is really sensitive issue because there are people that have loved ones in that plane.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Thanks, I have read it, interesting. I wish it could be peer reviewed though, but it isn't a scientific journal type things so I will believe in the company.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Well, I work in a lab, the scientific method is so hard to explain to people. You don't really come in contact with it till you get to uni.

  • WTC7

    No, Yeung Xiao, we don't "have a misunderstanding of the scientific method". There are enough scientists and experts in relevant fields who disagree with the official explanations of the events that took place on 911. The fact that some of you don't take opinions of those experts into account is something that can be discussed. But don't bring the "scientific method" cliché as your ownership, that's hardly an argument that proves anything in this specific case and presenting it as such is rather unsupported.

  • Guest

    @WTC7 - Let us take this documentary for example. Each person interviewed, after giving name and nomenclature, begins with the statement to the effect of "As I was watching the buildings come down I knew...". That is the antithesis of the scientific method. One doesn't "know" something when one is using the scientific method. Each of these people was starting with a biased opinion. That is not science.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Ack, scientific methods is very difficult to explain. It's case by case and you can write an essay on it. I remember the methods as entire courses. No only do you have to do A&B, you have to do it many times, then say it's statistically significant. Then you have to repeat with a different set of experiment that would give the same expected result and say that it is statistically significant. There's about a million control you need to do, because you have to prove that the instrument works, the reagent you use isn't giving false positives, and sometimes replacing whatever you are looking at with something that you know isn't going to work to prove that it is working because of something you added. Then you have to list all the limitation, and possibilities, and address these possibilities. It's not as easy as just doing something and say it works.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    @ WTC7
    If you believe the scientific method is cliche, then you have a miss understanding of the scientific method. If you make assertions about some aspect of reality, it's your job to prove it right. Not everyone else job to prove your wrong.

    for example, Truther's can't just assert it might be thermite and wait for us to prove it is not. It's the truther's job, as the one making the assertion, to go and demonstrate cutting a vertical support beam with thermite. or at least crunch the numbers to show it is possible. Before you do, you can't assert it to be true or even possible. It's not possible until you, the one making the assertions, prove that it is possible. that is the scientific method.

    Experts can have all the suspicions in the world. I don't care if Newton give back from the dead and says it "might be" thermite, it is not science until they prove that it is possible. It's called the Null Assumption. you assume it is wrong until you prove that it is right.

    Truthers sits on their butts and wait for the rest of the world to prove them wrong, and when we do (which has happened many times already) They either ignore it, or make new assertions and sit on their butts again. It's not our job to chase your assertions, it your job to prove them right. That is the scientific method.

    Any Questions?

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    @C_Crom, well they didn't actually say the building went into free fall, just the top bit, and then added that it was a calculation and actually it's probably a lot slower. And they also gave the reason since thermite is made of magnesium, rust, and aluminium oxide, which are all very common in paint among other things, so even if they found it, it wouldn't prove anything. You can visit their site if you want to look at what they are really saying.

    There was an independent inquiry as lakhotason said, also I posted somewhere here about the published paper on thermites found, I felt there was a lack of evidence that it was set off.

    You are right in that the initial investigation could do a lot better, but what if they didn't find explosives, or anything that would indicate anything more than the building collapse?

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    @Greg_Mc
    I am aware of this, it's because the of the nature of the publication that Jones was dismissed. Like I said he was the 3rd author so he wasn't the main contributor, probably just there to add weight. Well, it didn't look peer reviewed to me because of the lack of some controls, also it wasn't really something you put in a journal because it didn't add to the current chemical/physical pool of knowledge. I would said he got mixed up with bad company but he seems quite strong in his views so maybe not...

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Apparently when people call you Doctor or Professor you are infallible. Ph. D.'s aren't look upon as professors of knowledge because they inevitably speak the truth and nothing but the truth but rather they are experts in extrapolating evidence through means like science/math to support an assertion or position. Because most of us can barely read scientific papers, Ph. D's tend to give off infallibility because we do not have the knowledge or know to dispute their evidence hidden in the academic world.

    The difference here is the a documentary cannot legitimately claim a different position from the mainstream unless it uses the avenues of peer-reviewed journals like any other whacko idea. Please, don't feel insulted when a your position is considered a whacko idea there are a lot of concepts refered to as whacko ideas which would later on be accepted after much rigorous experimentation and disputation. Things like Quantum Mechanics, Radio Waves, and General Relativity were probably less believable then this position but they panned out because they used the correct avenue of discussion. Ph. D's provide evidence for theories in papers and then talk about them in documentaries once it has been proven or at least supported mathematics.

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @To All,

    I've deleted lots of comments (here and on the other 9/11 doc), and a dozen of people are already banned. I promise to do the same again and again when discussion deteriorates. In fact I've done this in the past quite often.

    Everyone, no matter how different his opinion is, is welcomed to comment in a civilized manner, without name calling, trolling, flaming etc.

    Before commenting count to ten, read the policy and say what you want to say.

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @To All,

    Also the comments are not threaded anymore. It was hard to see and follow who is replying to whom. Now every comment will appear on top (when sorted by "newest first"). When you reply to someone at the bottom of your comment it is stated "in reply to ..." If you click that link the comment in context will appear.

    Also for the sake of clarity if you you're replying to someone include his name at the beginning of your comment.

  • Greg_Mc

    @Yi
    I put @Yi because Vlatko said it might be a good idea even if I am replying right below your original comment but if a few people want to reply then it is a good idea for as he said clarification.

    To quote him ..... Also for the sake of clarity if you you're replying to someone include his name at the beginning of your comment.

    Vlatko you said "include HIS name" tsk tsk that's a very sexist thing to say considering Yi (who I personally speak to the most) is female. Lol I am just teasing you, well she is a girl so not teasing about that I am just doing it in general.

    Anyway back to my comment to Yi, your last line "I would said he got mixed up with bad company but he seems quite strong in his views so maybe not... " I would like to believe the first part about getting mixed with bad company but the second part I have to agree with you which takes away any chance he had to disassociate himself from the others and claim any ignorance as to their intentions or at least would make it harder for him to give a reasonable explanation of how he didn't know or at least have an idea of what they were up to.

    His involvement with these guy's who in hindsight do come across as pretty shady suprises me. I have been watching him in docs and even one quite long video taped physics lecture he gave on the collapse of the buildings and you are correct he is quite strong in his views. From what I have read online over the years he is a pretty respected and knowledgeable guy so how he got mixed up with these people like he did I dont know

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @Greg_Mc,

    Vlatko you said "include HIS name" tsk tsk that's a very sexist thing to say considering Yi (who I personally speak to the most) is female. Lol I am just teasing you...

    I thought I've put his/her. My bad.

  • Greg_Mc

    @Vlatko
    It's cool, I was just having fun with ya. Always a fun time when you catch the boss making an error.

    BTW good job cleaning up the site, glad I made the cut.

  • Guest

    A suggestion. As I have slowly learned there are many different nationalities of people commenting here. It would be a help if the replier(?) had a sense of what culture to which he was trying to converse with. I am an American. I have no idea that I'm debating with a Brit. Although as a Southerner I speak the true English, those Brits are pretty good at mimicry.

    In all seriousness, I believe some sort of national indentifier would be helpful. On the other side I perfectly understand some peoples of some nations cannot be identified for more than obvious reasons.

  • Greg_Mc

    This room is sort of like the TV show "The Big Bang Theory" and I feel like an older, less attractive looking male version of Penny

  • Greg_Mc

    @lakhotason
    For the record I am Canadian so typing shouldn't be a problem, but if we were talking in person then you would probably have to talk slower for me lol

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    @Greg_Mc

    Hey, sorry buddy, but by standing by these guys got him fired. If he was to withdraw association and tried to reach the public another way, he would have kept his job. Opinions are fine but ninja publish is not the right way to go. Seriously, even the NIST have more pride.

    My nationality is Australia, the country that hosts the festival of dangerous ideas at the opera house, made a drama series for the private life of our prime minister, and have live Q&A sessions where you can ask questions via facebook and twitter. With all that and we are still trying kill the carbon tax because not enough people believing in global warming and fought in all of American's mid-east wars.

    Also I am Chinese and migrated when I was 10. I know more about China than most westerners since I visit regularly, but I don't really identify myself as Chinese because I migrated when I was very little.

  • Guest

    Yeah, I finally deduced that. Yet Azilda is Canadian also. She's french and you're english.

    And we should discuss the subject at hand. I believe we still disagree or agree to disagree on this doc.

  • Guest

    So you are an Australian.

  • Guest

    Sorry Yi, You are Australian.

  • Guest

    Ok! Agreed. But on my job, it did happend more than once that I stopped explaining a chemical formulation (To a tech-sales reps who has a new chemical to sell for instance) because I bared in mind the good of my company...

    In short, I'd never lie to another specialist but I stop where I'm pleased to. That's why some peoples says "The whole truth" I guess?
    And it always keeps me womder, suspicious a little.
    A bit wacko until I tried it in my lab.
    It's a way of living, what can I say!

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    I've been there for 2 days and yet, I'm not done.
    I moved from one webpage of this website to another.

    Plus quite a few interesting other websites popped up on the original keyword search.
    I'm going there tonight.
    - (OT), Seems like I missed something during those 2 days that went by, Huh?

    Pierre.

  • Jack1952

    @ C_Crom

    I've been busy myself so point taken.

    I would think that at the time almost everyone believed the buildings fell because they had been hit by planes. This would include the peripheral damage to the other buildings caused by the falling debris. I had not even heard of conspiracy till some years later. NIST may well have been under the same impression and explosive devices were not seriously suspected. Also, why consider the rubble as evidence when the perpetrators were thought to be Muslim extremists. When the passenger lists, on the 4 hi-jacked planes, showed known associates of Osama Bin Laden, a wanted terrorist, who had openly declared his intentions of harm to American citizens, it would have appeared to have been a no brainer.

    The so called free fall speed is explained in the links provided by others in this comment section.

    I went through the website of those that are speaking in this site and I still have a few problems with the thermite issue. They stated that there were four samples that were tested that found thermite residue. They even had some pictures showing what they found. Assuming that everything was legit this does not mean that their work is done as far as the explosives go. Thermite is made up of many common elements so they now have to demonstrate that what they found is indeed an explosive and not something that resembles thermite. They should set up a vertical steel column and try to cut through it using the methods that they believed were used on 9/11. If successful, they should take the residue and match it up with their samples. They should even do more tests so that no matter what some self appointed know-it-all (like me) might say, they will have an answer for it.

    I, also, believe that they understated the damage done to the buildings and the intensity of the fires. The holes caused by the planes appeared to extremely extensive and the fires seemed to burn for hours and were not loosing any intensity. I have also seen a few pictures that show a lot of damage to WTC7 and fires burning out of control.

    It is still my position that 1500 experts from the hundreds of thousands around the world is not very many. This is a number one could expect from almost any issue that is presented. Even the most outlandish ideas will have their adherents who have outstanding credentials.

  • Greg_Mc

    @Yi
    Standing by those guy's, beside costing him his job was just morally and ethically the wrong thing to do. I have to say that my respect for him is lessening.

    Ok time to ask you some protocol questions on publishing a paper.
    Lets go with as you said that Jones was a third or whatever term it was you used, so he for whatever his reasons put his name on the paper (he had to have at the very least read it and agreed with it's findings), after whatever the process for him to do this was done would he basically be done with it and the guy who wrote the paper? What I am getting at is, is it very likely that after he added his name he would not be involved and have no knowledge of how (WARNING I just started watching Dr. Who with my son now so typing during commercials I may/will lose my train of thought) the rest of the process went on, well he knows the process he is no rookie but would he just assume it was being done right and no longer be involved and wait till it was all done? It was published without the editor in chief's knowledge which p1$$ed her off so much she quit so do you think Jones knew it was happening this way? Or did he find out about it after the journal was published and the poop hit the fan and she quit?

    Lets give him the benefit of the doubt and say one day he found out she quit because a paper he put his name on was published without the chain of command being followed or the proper procedures taking place and they somehow for some reason bypassed her and just printed it. Would he at that point be able to say "whoa hold on boys what are you trying to pull here?" And have the journal recalled or do a reprint with the paper taken out acknowledging the error?

    When did he find out the paper was published without the editor in chief okaying it? Or when did he find out they broke the rules? Something I am sure he didn't make a habit of doing. When he did find out what did he say or do? Did he even care? In the doc when he mentioned the paper was published in the journal and it had not been scientifically refuted in any way he seemed very proud of it, I am sure at that point he was long aware of what happened and at least on film he didn't seem to show any shame about it.

    After he found out the paper was published (not sure what word to use) .... dishonestly, dishonorably, unscrupulously , crookedly, deceivingly, deceptively (HAHA yes I found the online thesaurous lol) did he even have anything to say? Sorry Yi I kind of asked a lot of questions lol, just curious what your thoughts are. Considering you are a scientist how does it all sit with you?

    Out of curiosity what is your field of expertise? If that is not to personal a question for me to ask (you did call me buddy in your last comment and while that doesn't make us BFF's it is a clear and obvious sign of your growing tolerance of me lol) or if you don't want to say in a public forum or you can't say

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    @Greg_Mc
    Ah it didn't go reply...

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    @Greg_Mc
    That is a lot of questions. I think you answered many of your own question by saying that he was quite proud of the paper that he has published. I don't know if he could recall the paper, but he can dissociate himself if he wants later on by claiming he has no knowledge of this. He was given 6 weeks paid leave before he is dismissed, this is usually a grace period to allow some thinking time. Look I don't want to upset you by saying this but, he did do a lot of good work, but with his recent action a lot of his colleagues think he has lost it.

    There are truthers that say the editor was blackmailed or something similar but seriously it's a journal that only have about 7 papers in it? I don't really buy it because the editor is respectable in her own right and the paper doesn't look peer reviewed, or in fact is publishable in a journal.

    I don't really like to say what I do on public forum, my name is linked to facebook if you really want to talk. I'll say that I don't have a PhD under my name but hopefully I will get one soon. :P Also I work in a hospital lab at the moment.

  • Greg_Mc

    @Yi
    Not to worry this didn't upset me nobody enjoys hearing that someone you thought highly of for years for various reasons, one of which was that he was a decent honest person turns out to ... well lets just say apparently not be who you thought he was. It isn't enough for me to change my opinion but he was the one guy who to me brought the scientific respectability I used to to back up my thoughts on the buildings. Seems from what you say (I am going to see what I can find online about what his colleagues have to say about him and his actions) that he has either lost it or he believes in the CD theory so much he is willing to throw away everything he worked his whole life to build over it. Admirable actions or considering the reason he lost his job the actions of a man who as you say has lost it?

    I wouldn't expect that you would say anything to personal on a public forum and thats why it was one of the reasons I mentioned in my last paragraph in the other comment that you may not feel comfortable talking about it. I gave 2 reasons (lol or gave you 2 outs from having to talk about it) why you may not want to talk about it but you only said one was an obstacle, so I will take you up on talking to you on facebook soon as I am curious about it. I will send you a friend request and my name will start the same way my user name on here does.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    He doesn't need to throw anything away, all he needed to do was dissociate from the people that printed this, and try another legit way. He had his views for years, and he only got fired after this publication. The university just didn't want be to associated with someone that was involved in ninja publishing. Whether he has his job or not he can still go on TV, shoot documentaries, and have free speech.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XK55KZP6LRFATXXA6ET5L3GZTM Catman99

    "Conspiracy Theories" and government infiltration

    Sunstein co-authored a 2008 paper with Adrian Vermeule, titled "Conspiracy Theories," dealing with the risks and possible government responses to false conspiracy theories resulting from "cascades" of faulty information within groups that may ultimately lead to violence. In this article they wrote, "The existence of both domestic and foreign conspiracy theories, we suggest, is no trivial matter, posing real risks to the government’s antiterrorism policies, whatever the latter may be." They go on to propose that, "the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups", where they suggest, among other tactics, "Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action." They refer, several times, to groups that promote the view that the US Government was responsible or complicit in the September 11 attacks as "extremist groups."

    Hmmmmmm......whomever is managing this comment board should filter these people out!

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    ... Did you just say that this conspiracy is false, and resulted from 'cascades' of faulty information which will lead the truthers to violence? Then call a stop to freedom of speech?

  • Guest

    I have studied the abstract which you are citing. You are quoting it a little out of context but that cannot be helped in this venue I suppose. I believe three alternatives were given to respond to conspiracy theories. The cognitive infiltration response was judged to be the most effective of the three. The abstract never stated that it was in any way a response that should be used. Also, I believe, the abstract stated that "infiltration" through social media would be mostly ineffective.

    Finally, the method of cognitive infiltration would be used not to combat conspiracy theories but rather the "crippled epistemology" (think of it roughly as a distorted knowledge of knowledge) of the theorist.

  • Guest

    One other thing. Very interesting paper. Glad to be able to discuss it with someone such as you who takes the time to read these things.

  • Guest

    Morning (my time zone) Yi. They are called "conspiracy cascades". It is a mechanism by which theories are spread, broadly speaking. All sorts of of interesting things at play.

  • Greg_Mc

    @Yi
    by throw everything away I meant in relation to his job. I just assume that by his age (going just from appearance he is in his 50's) he would have been at the Uni (memory is gone today, cant remember which Uni he worked at) for quite a while and built up seniority or if he had become a Dept head or was close to getting Tenure (where in the US I think that means you have a job for life) or whatever benefits he may have received if he had been there as a Professor that gets papers published or has done so in the past etc. If he had made a solid carreer for himself there with whatever perks that came with it, then that is what he would have thrown away by leaving (with a less than gentle nudge) over this.

    I don't blame the university for not wanting to be associated with someone involved in a paper that was published the way it was (you said Ninja so i figure that means sneaky, not out in the open and not conventional. Or just plain morally and professionally wrong) it is a knock against their credibility. Yes all he has to do is or needed to do was disassociate himself from these people but for reasons only he knows he didnt do that, and his reasons for it are something I would be very interested in hearing from him.

    Yes he can still do Doc's (if that pays enough, or maybe he has enough money already so that isnt an issue for him) and have free speech which he best use now because the way things are going in the US freedom of speech isnt what it used to be i dont think. The Patriot act has changed a few things but I think in general Americans can still say what they want but they are being watched and monitored more. I think they have always been watched and monitored to a certain degree but governments all over the world have been doing that too, just look at all the cameras (CCTV) in the UK it is crazy. But is it necessary?

  • Greg_Mc

    @Catman, Yi & lakhotason
    This is the first time I have seen this topic brought up in any comment type forum I have been in, admittedly that is not many. We all know the Government watches what is said online and I thought it an obvious assumption that they would have people come into these chat type rooms or more likely into ones that are totally pro conspiracy (like they do when searching for pedophiles, although to use that comparison sickens me and I do apologize for using it but it is the first thing I thought of, gotta stop watching so much tv) to at the very least see whats being said. Getting involved in the chat seemed a logical next step so they could as you said cause some doubt or at least plant the seed of doubt, or possibly cause people in these forums to start to argue with each other thereby having the people spend more time fighting each other than organizing any sort of trouble or getting more people to hear what they have to say or whatever it is they as a group want to accomplish. It is so easy to go into a group of people (whether in person or in an online forum) who all have the same views on something (it helps if they are by nature paranoid people to begin with) and join in and slowly start either casting doubt or start to cause a little friction in the group. No matter what group it is and how strongly they all seem to have the same beliefs there are still going to be cliques with in it, so getting one clique to start to look at one of the others as maybe not totally being on board with them or getting people in the same clique to start wondering if their friends may not be 100% with the group as they say they are is easy enough to do. Just take something somebody said a little out of context and quietly mention it to someone else, being careful not to bring any attention to yourself, and then back away and possibly do the same with the other person or a different clique and human nature will take over and you can get people distrusting each other. It may not last as cooler heads may prevail or you could keep fanning the fire at times and the arguements could get worse. But no matter how it ends my point is you can easily disrupt pretty much any group of people with a little effort and obviously some knowledge of their cause and group dynamic helps.

    Where did you find this paper? I would be interested in adding it to the pile of things I want to get online and read, lol and then asking Yi to explain them to me as she often has to do.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    it says right in the report that those tactics would be used to counter cascades of FAULTY information within groups that may ultimately lead to violence" emphasis is mine.

    so what do you have against that? would you want faulty information to continue?

  • Guest

    Google Sunstien Vermuel. The paper you want will be listed as a pdf file titled Conspiracy theories and Public Policy.

  • Guest

    About that blog....Always be skeptical.

  • Greg_Mc

    I am skeptical or cynical about anything on the net lol or most things in general, but thanks for the heads up on that particular site. Most of what is on the part I read seemed to be just quotes from the paper but seemed interesting and probably, as they were just one sentence quotes, are out of context anyway.

    Well I am going to download that paper and try to read it, my son has friends over for the night so piece and quiet isn't on the agenda for the next 5 or 6 hours lol

  • Mário Silvério

    I have seen this Doc a few days ago, and i remember to have seen several fundamental errors in this Documentary.

    1- First one was in the actual bending of the steel structure, they compare the results to a test made in a four or five four storeys high building, when in reality the buildings had a lot more weight over the burning steel. My opinion, is that the weight over the burning section of the building was too great for the steel to support. After all the steel had bended due to extremely high temperatures.

    2 - It is my knowledge that the facts regarding the temperatures are misleading and sometimes simply wrong. How could a fire in such a high place be oxygen starving, when the winds and the massive openings could provide all the oxygen needed? The color of the smoke is also mentioned and its simply wrong, a quick search in the Google images, will show the difference between a fire in a forest and one in a "unnatural" place.

    3- It has been shown many times already, that the buildings did not fall in free fall, that is wrong, misleading and, not to mention a pure lie. Again, search the Internet for well placed facts and videos showing the building falling.

    4 - As someone that already worked very close to construction builders, i know that almost every building in the world is a misrepresentation of the architect work. Not in the exterior but in the inner parts of the construction. If you ask around, you will find someone wiling enough to show you how to make some additional money...

    5 - The lack of will from the professionals to challenge their own knowledge is almost anti-science. If there were facts contradicting the science, the first thing to do is to review the science against the new facts. Its not science if you are not willing to change it for better.

    I find this documentary extremely poor. Lacks objectivity, science, and above all Truth. This group has already been debunked several times , and most of the times with hard evidence.

  • Greg_Mc

    @lakhotason
    On page 3 of the paper they use the phrase "sober minded Canadians" lol while some of the stereotypes about Canadians have a basis of truth in them, there has to be some truth to stereotypes because without some examples of a certain behaviour, way of dressing or looking where would the stereotype come from in the first place. I just find it amusing how people in other countries view us, while being considered sober-minded (which I take it means thoughtful and rational. Not prone to over reacting or jumping to conclusions) is a good thing I guess I just think it is funny when I see the words sober and Canadian in the same sentence. I personally dont drink but I used to drink and party quite a bit, I didnt stop for any specific reason other than I just lost my taste for it. I have a large group of friends I have known since we were teenagers plus new friends and they vary in a lot of ways, some are well educated while others are not or are tradesmen and some are middle class while others are upper middle class to just plain rich (we all know a variety of people, what I mention is nothing unique) but the vast majority have one thing in common. And that is that they drink a lot, while every Canadian doesnt drink or drink a lot I would say that more do drink and drink to excess at times than do not drink. I am not proud or embarrassed about this, it just is what it is.

  • Greg_Mc

    Hmmm every comment I post now has to go through the moderator before it gets posted. Am I on the TDF watch list? If so I would like to know this and why.

  • Achems_Razor

    @Greg_Mc:

    No you are not on any watch list, and you are not being moderated, it is just the way it has to be done temporarily, be patient and please bear with us.

  • Greg_Mc

    @Achems

    That thought crossed my mind after I posted my comment but hey you never know if you have pissed someone off somehow and they complained about it. To be honest while I am sure it is a pain for you guys it is something I half expected to start happening last week after the "changes" were made. And no worries, whatever you guys feel needs to be done to keep things running smooth in here will be accepted with no problems by everyone who regularily posts comments. I doubt anyone wants a repeat of the behaviour we experienced in here a little while ago.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    The cameras in UK is a serious issue and all the UK people are complaining about it, I saw a few doc of that too. Seriously, I swear that's one of the reasons for the riot. In that case it's not even government regulated, it's just in every shop, with the shop owner that owns the tapes. However if you don't like it, I think it is legal to ask for the custody of the tapes just by asking nicely. I'm pretty busy this weekend so I won't be reading any papers soon, so sadly you are on your own :P. Also, there's usually no such thing as permanent job in stuff like research (which is grant based, so if you can't generate research/results, the money is always better off with someone that can, regardless of how long you have been working there) and it's not like he wouldn't get pensions (US people get these right...?). I agree with you the US is very hypocritical about the freedom of speech, I know a few that lost speaking rights and came to Australia.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    @lakhotason
    Mm, I was sleeping when you woke up lol. I haven't had time to read the paper and I usually try to make an effort before commenting, I'll get around to it somewhere in the next week.

  • Greg_Mc

    I have a question and while I know the answer in a generalized way I was hoping someone had a more exact definition of the phrase "self sealing conspiracy theory" or it is "self sealing". It is mentioned quite a bit so far in this paper I am reading and while as I said I generally get it's meaning and it is not stopping me from understanding and following what is being said every damned time it is mentioned instead of just carrying on reading it is like someone is standing behind me poking me in the back of the head with their forefinger. It is silly I know but it is also annoying as hell, ie because of there self sealing quality POKE, or as a function of there self sealing quality POKE

  • Guest

    Although I really need to read the paper again (it has been a while) I'll attempt to explain that to you in broad terms.

    Self-sealing is the mechanism used by CTs to resist facts getting in the way of their conspiracy. The ways that this is done are 1) ejecting disproved parts of their theory from their theory 2) Folding the facts which disprove portions of the theory back into the theory. By using the self-sealing mechanism the theory once again regains its "air-tightness"(my word).

    An example of the first: Remember once upon a time when part of the theory was that Cheney ordered the interceptors not to interfere with the hijacked planes. The CTs had witnesses to this order and it was as sure as the sun comes up in the east. Small problem was there were no interceptors to have give that order to and the CTs dropped it and acted as if they never claimed such a thing and many will deny to this day that was ever part of their "pure" theory.

    An example of the second: Folding disproving facts into the theory. A very good example, and it really jumps out at you, can been seen occurring in the doc 9/11 Road Trip. The portion of the doc concerning the phone call from the son on the plane made to his mother bears watching. The theorist is being told by a leading expert that the call was not faked. Also, the world's foremost expert on the son, his mother of course, told the theorist there was no doubt she had spoken to her son. Watch how the theorists folds these facts into his theory. Listen to what he says and it is almost unbelievable he could draw his conclusions from the facts presented.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    1. Having a plane hit the building and thereby removing some of the support structure also really helps.

  • Mário Silvério

    lol, i cant forgive my self, how could i forget that... xD

  • Greg_Mc

    Thanks lakhotason, my general idea was pretty much right but I knew there was more to it.

    I totally forgot about the Cheney thing, I remember (I have a lousy memory for names and titles so I always have to spend 10 minutes on google trying to find the name of the person or the event I am talking about lol) the 9/11 commision questioned Norman Mineta about what he saw and heard and that he said Cheney yelled at some young guy who came into the room a couple of times saying the plane is getting closer and asking if the stand down order is still in effect and Cheney yelling at him asking if he had heard anything to the contrary (totally paraphrasing this from memory) and then never hearing anything about it again.

    I know there was a lack of fighter jets available because they were running training excercises that day, whether it is normal to use so many of them at the same time for training (although it does make sense if you are training for something to involve all the people who would be used in the event whatever you are training for ever took place) leaving that area of the country a little bit vulnerable in case something big happened is something I do not know, yes it is easy to look back and knit pick at things. But wouldn't the lack of air protection because of training excercises be something the CT's would still bring up because of the coincidence of it all happening on the same day? I heard the training was about what to do if planes crashed into buildings, or was that wrong and something else that was never mentioned again?

    I will have a look for the doc you mentioned in your second example and find the part about the phone call. Did they not say at the time the technology wasn't available to make phone calls from a plane? Although I don't remember how the calls were made if it was on a cell or another phone on the plane. I also saw something where they did tests to prove at that altitude a cell phone wouldn't work, but also heard someone else say that it could be hit and miss trying to get one to work. Was the reported phrasing of the conversation where it is said the guy called his mother and said to her hi mom it is "then gave his full name" your son, you believe it is me don't you? was that part right because it is a bizzare way for someone to talk and pretty hard to believe they guy would talk like that. But you are right, who better to know if it was her son on the phone than the mother. There was one doc I saw where they said they faked the voice (which contradicts the "cell phones don't work from airplanes" theory lol so which is it could the call not be made or did they fake the voice?) but I wont get into that because there are so many holes in that statement you could fly a plane through it.

    Ok gotta get back and read more of that paper while I still have 45 minutes or so of relative peace in the house.

    Not going to read what I typed so ignore any sentences that seem really odd, I tend to change how I word things on the go and have been known to only delete half of the old sentence so the new sentence may run into the old one making it beyond confusing to read.

  • Greg_Mc

    @Yi
    I left you a message and friend request on facebook a few days ago, but I haven't logged back on yet to see if you replied. I don't tend to go on there much but I will go on tonight and see if you replied.

    I remember the riot they had going on but have no clue when it stopped or whats going on with the whole thing now.

    So if you walk into a store in England and they have video cameras set up and you don't want to be on their tape you have the legal right to ask for the tape? Hmm not saying you are wrong because I don't know if you are or aren't but I find it hard to believe the owner of the store is just going to hand over the tape, or that many people who go into a store care that much if they are on tape while in the store. I am sure some of the people in here are English and could shed some light one the subject. But as I said i have seen in some docs the cameras on a light pole or whatever and some of them have like 7 or 8 cameras on it which is just crazy. Now that could be an extreme example they showed just for the doc, lol it was an Alex Jones doc so with that guy anything is possible. He to me is (well lol he is a lot of things) pretty hypocritical, he is the king of hyperbole always screaming and yelling just being obnoxious. But he is a hypocrite because after all his bitching and moaning about 9/11 and how certain people are financially gaining from it I don't see him complaining that because of it and his views and the docs he has made or been in, his radio show, speaking engagements I am sure he does plus all the merchandise he sells, including his DVD's he has made millions off of it.

    Have to give this PC to my son so I will respond to the university thing later if I have anything to say about it that will add to the conversation.

  • Guest

    Everything one would expect from a sober-minded Canadian.

  • Greg_Mc

    @Yi
    Do not know what he was saying about the first part of your reply, not going to guess either I will let him answer it himself but so far it doesnt seem he has or maybe I just have missed it.

    But it sure seems to me like he was calling for a stop of free speech by saying that Vlatko should filter out anyone who believes there is a conspiracy and ended the statement with an exclamation mark for emphasis. I don't claim to be buddies with Vlatko or anything remotely close to that but I am pretty sure he isn't going to ban people for being CT or people who have questions about the official story or people who may just question certain aspects, for example those who question how the buildings came down.

  • tomregit

    @ Vlatko
    Good job deleting the many comments you did, mine included. I was guilty of some poor judgement after reading some things I thought were bullying and unfair. However I stooped to the same level in trying to point out and fight against a perceived wrong. No amount of "wrongs" make a "right". I was wrong.

  • Greg_Mc

    @lak
    I was hoping the expectations of me were low allowing me to reach them easily

  • Greg_Mc

    @tomregit

    I am comfortable in saying that when it comes to online interaction some of us (although I do not think that those of us still here acted too poorly) would not call what went on a few weeks ago our finest hour.

    I don't have any recollection of you standing out during it but good on you for taking responsibility for your own actions and lets just hope the whole thing is in the past and we need not think about it again.

    We do need more people commenting here though, looking down far to many of the posts are from me so the intellectual level of this forum clearly needs to be raised lol

  • Greg_Mc

    excellent definition of epistemology

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    @Greg_Mc
    The London riot is kinda off the topic, but I think no one really knows what happened, even the people that participated. As for Alex Jones, he is making a lot of money off documentaries and I think he is exploiting the anti-authority mentality. I wonder if he even believes what he says, it could just be the money that's doing the talking. I don't like him at all and therefore don't watch any of his documentaries.

    The supposed fighter jets thing was really confusing, from what I hear there were 14 jets over US that does this but they are no where close to the buildings, and the warning came around 15mins before the first plane crushed into the WC or something. To me that was never an issue because these jets never did anything more than drills.... nope, never, for tens of years. I'd be surprised that they even know what to do. There were supposedly 2 jets near the buildings, but they were unarms so the only way that they can prevent the planes going into the buildings was to do a suicide and crush into them... which as far as I am concern will still be over the NY city and kill people elsewhere. Anyway, the hijacking happened 1-2hrs before the crush, and I think once it is in the air it is already too late.

    There were some controversies though, surrounding the story by FAA who seems to know that the planes were hijacked a lot earlier, I need to look it up... but apparently some documents and tapes was destroyed because the government accused them of lying about the timeline and in fact they had all the tools/time to prevent the attack but they lacked organisation/communication. Haven't really heard anymore since. Either way, I don't understand why people place so much faith in these very last minute preventative measure that sat there for tens of years doing drills, they probably assigned all the crappy people that no one wants there.

    As for the phone call, if the plane is low enough you can get reception, and this guy, according to his mother, says his whole name under stress. Also, there's no real point in faking one, because silence in this case is the most believable.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jerry-Donnell/1460392036 Jerry Donnell

    The truth and facts are all here. Why is the justice department not doing any investigations? Why was all the evidence illegally removed and shipped to China for recycle. This is a treasonous act.

  • AJ Farrar

    These documentaries almost uniformly say fire has never caused a "steel framed building" to collapse, not that fire has never caused any building to collapse. Sorry to ruin your favorite part of the movie =/

  • AJ Farrar

    I think it's fairly obvious that a "new investigation" means one sanctioned and recognized by our government, that is actually conducted fairly and ethically. This new investigation and its results would reach all of the American public and not just those of us who have the personality and time to sit and watch conspiracy docs. As far as your other question, obviously some of these people in the 9/11 Truth movement HAVE attempted to conduct their own investigations, but they are summarily dismissed and/or laughed at by mainstream groups before even sharing their findings. These scientists also do not have anywhere near the same access to resources that a government-sanctioned team would/should have. These are oddly naive questions coming from someone who seems very critical of others' logic

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    You mean Miley Cyrus Inc.?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    You mean: There is nothing that they can explain about WTC7 being a controlled demolition, it is all in black and white.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    There's been at least 3 investigations into event conduct by various groups. None of whom has concluded anything but what has already been collaborated.

    You understand this doc actually never mentions anything about the government right since they don't have any evidence to blame the government?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    What does this doc have anything to do about the government?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Which is why people still believe in this conspiracy theory.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    It's the same way for conspiracy theorist.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    You know a group of people lack any real notion of skepticism when you pick banner called "Truther." So you ignored her question, ignored her argument, then ask her a question rhetorically for an argument. Did you miss the part where the whole building fell at once? Sorry, seeing an building fall at once isn't evidence for CD's hence why these Ph DeeDees have no backing. Hence why you are watching a documentary instead of reading a academic paper.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Why blow a completely separate building?
    Why blow the other 2 buildings? You know the other two buildings besides the 2 towers that collapsed?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Are you aware you still have no evidence that Larry Silver-stein linking him to 9/11 either involved or linked?
    Iraq was in the news since the Clinton Era, apparently people forgot what "Bombs over Baghdad" meant.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Nothing worth blowing up when all cameras and news outlets were point towards the skyline.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Legit agenda? No, the group is related to the 911truth movement and the paper presented in this doc has names that belong to such a group. The bias is quite clear.

    Well made? Perhaps? I'm not convinced. It was a bunch of Ph. D.s making visual observations like eye witness and still makign the same arguments other CTs have been making without any data or evidence to supplement (something you would respect a Ph. D. for).

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    The 9/11 debate has been over and settled for a long time in favor of the real story.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Since this doc is part of a media I would agree with you. You also realize that most of the CT's use the big media as evidence in their videos right that includes interviews and eye witnesses on camera too right? I think this one might have used a clip or two also.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    First up, this documentary does not ever mention the government. If the only information you are using (which it seems people think this is some kind of a smoking gun doc or something) then you must hold your urges to speculate and re-frame from blaming the government, at least for now.

    Additionally, here are the problems in this documentary:
    1. Experts talking outside of their field. Architects aren't experts on how a building can collapse or the mechanic workings of a building.( Hence why we don't call them Civil or Structural Engineers) Obviously, most of the individuals questioned are experts talking in their field. You could argue that there is no such thing as a real expert on Jet Airliner related building fires, but I won't go that far.
    2. Experts talking about a unique situation. People were comparing a normal office fires to a jet airliner plane crash which isn't the case.
    3. None of the experts had data to back up their conclusions. IE scientific peer-reviewed papers. Of course, I could be wrong and be willing to look into any that someone here would like to present me.
    4. Still 1 sided. There is no dissenting opinion presented, no attempt at a rebuttal, none of other points presented as to the official explanation to the building 7 collapse. No refutation was given to any of the explanations given by other investigations such as Pop. Mechanic's. Documentaries like this paint a straw-man or fail to prove that it doesn't paint a straw-man.
    5. An emotional ending which does not lend credibility and does not add arguments.
    6. Thermite scientific paper was discredited and the journal is not peer reviewed.
    7. Someone of the responses in the video could have been taken of context or misunderstood then presented to misconstrued opinions.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Who are these people you speak of? I want names.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    What facts? You mean opinions? Loose Change actually has more facts (tho none of which were true or done so honestly)

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Who are these conspirators you are talking about and how does that relate to the doc which does not mention any suspect yet?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Who is this they? What are "they" names?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Why are my post being deleted? Is there a rule I broke that I am not aware of?

  • Greg_Mc

    @Yi
    I am using my son's apple notebook which is very annoying because I don't know how to do anything on it lol and the bloody window for the web page is so small I may have to get binoculars to read the writing. He is playing a game on the other lap top and god forbid I interrupt him.

    I read somewhere that Alex Jones is actually not a CT but a plant for the other side, as usual it was a few years ago and I didn't pay much attention to it. Just shows you how there are so many theories out there that when one is true it can easily be lost in the mix or just ignored because of the volume of them they are almost all just ignored. See now a paranoid person would say the Gov put that story out there to just add another CT to the list to minimize the validity of other more serious ones (possibly hoping to cause a disruption within his followers), to me it just shows how you can go nuts going in circles with all the CT out there.

    The fighter jet thing always bothered me even if you take the whole CT out of it and pretend we are talking about an entirely different day. What info I have is that they were (the fighter jets) all over the place doing training even as far away as Alaska, and that on top of any confusion that could arise from finding out if a call into them was real or part of the training mission were there in fact not enough jets available to do their job protecting the country or flying out to check up on a commercial plane that has gone off course and isnt responding. I also wonder how often a plane goes off course and doesnt respond, off course I can see happening a lot for many normal reasons but the not responding to the FAA contacting them probably doesnt happen very often. Plus you are right in that if they had jets get to the planes over NYC what were they going to do? Shooting down a commercial plane (even if they knew it was hijacked) over downtown NYC A) would have killed a whole bunch of people on the ground and B) The $h1t they would have taken for it would have been incredible so it would have been a no win situation.

    Cannot reply to the rest because my son and I are going out for Thanksgiving dinner at his Aunts and have to get ready plus make someone else here dinner so they can heat it up and eat it later and as usual I have left myself half an hour to get an hours worth of things done lol. I used to be so organized, must be old age kicking in.

  • Greg_Mc

    I dont know if my MacBook is acting up but I checked my mail and there were tons of DISQUS emails from this page. I got here and an email I sent days ago I guess didnt get sent but was still sitting here so I clicked post and it is on now. But all I see below it are posts from Thang tran.

    Oops never mind there are about 18 posts in a row from Than but below that are other peoples. Still doesnt seem right to me lol because it looks like he is having a conversation with someone. So he is either talking to himself or I cant see the comments from the other person or people.

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @Thang Tran,

    Your posts are not being deleted. As far as I can see all of your comments are up.

    However I see there is some glitch in the thread. It seems you're replying to someone (as Greg_Mc pointed out) but I see your comments as if you're having a conversation with yourself.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Who is they?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Who are these men and women? What are their names?

  • Guest

    I'm sorry, let me correct that. Yep just as I thought. Still true, still funny, and still my favorite.

  • Greg_Mc

    Lol now I can't see comments I posted this morning. Something odd is going on. Other people are replying to comments but I can't see the comment just they replies.

    There is as I said something odd going on, either that or I am having a stroke lol

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WLBNEV2QH2R5SWTEELOXOJQPEM N B

    @Jack1952 - There is very good evidence that the Tonkin Gulf Incident did indeed happen and that it was a false flag operation. And since that was the event the US used to justify the Vietnam War, I have to disagree that there were no casualties:
    Vietnamese civilian casualties: 2,000,000
    North Vietnam military casualties: 1,100,000
    South Vietnam military casualties: 260,000
    United States casualties: 59,000
    Laos & Cambodia casualties: 30,000
    Others (Korea, China, Australia, …): ~6,000

    Similarly, the 911 attacks have been used to justify the ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Whereas casualty estimates vary widely, there is little doubt that there have been at least hundreds of thousands and probably run into the millions.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WLBNEV2QH2R5SWTEELOXOJQPEM N B

    @Thang Tran - I don't consider Jones' paper to be a true scientific publication, and it is my impression that he never intended it to be. I reference him because I agree with his stated objective, which was to point out inconsistencies in NIST's report (which was put forward as a scientific work) and to call for a re-opening of the investigation. He doesn't claim have drawn any firm conclusions and he makes the valid point that such conclusions will remain impossible as long as most of the scientific evidence remains hidden from the general scientific community. In fact, I suspect that one of the biggest reasons there are so few peer reviewed sources available (on both sides of the debate) is that most of the evidence was confiscated and has not made available for open scientific review. If NIST's official story is correct, then there is no reason the evidence upon which it was based shouldn't be released (what's left of it anyway).

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    @Greg_Mc

    Well, I think there is enough CT without government's help. I see no reason why people shouldn't be angry about the jets issue. There were many but they were cut back, the radar for detecting planes was a donut shape, which mean it only covers planes outside of US (cause they thought a hijack couldn't possibly happen inside US border). Also, a lot of plane do go off track, but they usually go back on track after a little nudge over the phone. Either way, the hijack was detected too late.

    I like how you refer to Alex Jones as a plant.

  • wpsmithjr

    All this is pretty simple to explain...

    One of the planes hit around the 95th floor. (93-97th to be exact.) If ALL of those floors supports were suddenly removed instantaneously at the same time, causing the top 15 or so floors to fall on the remainder of the building... symmetrically... it still would not cause a complete and total collapse of the remaining 90+ floors.

    IMPOSSIBLE.

    For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

    No way 15 floors can destroy 90+ floors of support.

    If this happened in real life, the top 15 or so floors of the bottom part of the building might be damaged...and then the top of the building would be resting on the remaining 75+ floors which would support it. This is an oversimplification, but you get the idea. In real life there is no way the collapse would be symmetrical... so what would really happen is that the top portion of the building would fall over to one side or the other.. which ever is the path of least resistance. (Not straight through the building.)

  • Greg_Mc

    @Yi
    I have such a distrust of Governments, especially the American one, that I would have no problem believing they would plant a CT in order to cause any little havoc they could or disrupt in anyway a specific CT group or site if they thought it was gaining to much momentum (yeah I sound a little paranoid I know) or factions of it were looking like they might cause trouble. Its a stretch i know but hey I need something to think about when I am bored lol.

    I get that if an airplane was to get hijacked it would more than likely be an international flight but for them to think a hijacking couldnt possibly happen inside the USA borders on a domestic flight is just incompetence. Look at the amount of domestic flights within the US everyday, multiply that by whatever amount of time you think is long enough to make a valid conclusion then divide that by (this part is a guess) the amount of people who may be crazy enough or fit a profile of someone who has the potential to be a hijacker and I bet the number you get is more than zero. So the idea it could happen has to be a consideration they at least acknowledge as a possibility and therefore it would be negligence not to have some sort of plan in place for it.

    In my previous comment I already said I am sure there are planes going off their planned route everyday, it has to happen now and then. But as you say they get back on track after a little nudge from a phone call and even though they got either no reply from the planes or some guy speaking arabic or whatever they spoke, by time they finally say they knew what was going on it was to late to do anything. There are suspicions or stories the plane that went down in Shanksville was shot down by a fighter jet so maybe they got to that one in time (or the story of what the passengers did was true but I keep getting the Jessica Lynch story in my mind when I think of that) and they dont want to admit it for some reason. That reason may even be a valid one that for National security reasons they cant tell us or they could use that as an excuse for not saying anything. I dont want to think they used the passengers attacking the hijackers to bring the plane down as a moral boosting story for the country (I think the plane was shot down because of all the plane parts that were found so far away kind of support that a bit) if it isnt true.

    Glad you liked my Alex Jones is a plant story, I found it kind of funny because the guy is so annoying

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Firstly, repeating Newton's 3rd Law doesn't make it applicable to your argument, especially if you don't understand it. Secondly, 1 simple kinetic law does not account for the real physics that occurs in real life events like these where things like:
    1. Is the object rigid? Definitely not.
    2. Tensile strength of the material
    3. You didn't mention momentum...
    4. You don't understand what F=ma where a can equal gravitation acceleration and how the force of the top building is applied to floors underneath as it fell.

    In real life a collapse can't ever be symmetrical? Citation please. What laws of engineering or physics dictate this? What do you mean by symmetrical? Almost symmetrical? How did you know it was symmetrical?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    1. What do you mean by evidence? Raw data?
    2. He concludes that NIST is wrong, he doesn't prove it, and that his hypothesis has enough of a basis for. Yet, he has no explanation for why, how, and who would plan or orchestrate a CD after a plane crashes into the building. Not a shred of real evidence that would allow anyone to say that DC's a s a legitimate hypothesis to use up millions of dollars to conduct another investigation. Furthermore, outside of this text you understand his position and how he fells about the government. His hypothesis, without an investigation that he calls for, has already led him to conclude with no basis (even if you accept that CD was used) that the government was behind it (of whom benefited financially little and of whom are no longer in power to keep such a conspiracy under-wraps).

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Nah I think the passengers story is more true because I think the jets are too incompetent to shoot it down. People gave them too much credit. I think the idea that you can be in a rich country, have one of the most advanced technology in the world, and can't protect yourself is too scary for most people to handle. People need to realise that these things don't matter if you have incompetent people operating behind them. It doesn't help that patriotic propaganda that sprouts how great America is is all over the place and give a feeling of false security. CSI and related shows were very popular after 9/11, because it gave people the security they need, that there are actually really smart people working hard to save the country. In reality, there clearly, is a lack of competence.

    Some distrust of the government is healthy, but at least trust the government you elect (I suppose you don't elect the American government so I understand the distrust). I'm however more distrustful of CIA/FBI. We can elect the government, but all these operations etc didn't come from the government. They are all CIA files. The government changes every few years, but people that run CIA can be there for years on end, no one elects them, no one knows who they are, I don't think there is even any self policing. The whistle blowers usually worked in CIA, they also get sacked if they say anything. There is no protection for these people. CIA/FBI got the money and the man power, this needs to be fixed, not the government. Presidents can't keep who they sleep with a secret, CIA is doing very well at keeping secrets.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Well, maybe the jets can shoot it down, but it has to find the plane first lol. I think they are too incompetent to do that.

    225 is kinda asking for it...

    I just read the news article... ew... good thing he didn't get away with it. We had that in Australian army as well where female cadets were raped, but they don't usually come forward because the higher ups never believe their story, and in fact they can get fired for suggesting such things. There was a lot of media about it and I hope now at least now there is a safety net. There is still on going debate in Australia because women are not allowed into special forces. The reasons listed: they are a distraction, they are not as strong and dependable, all of it is just sexist really. There will be fewer women that would meet the conditions for entering such forces but it doesn't mean you should ban it based on assumptions.

    The army seems like an all boy's club.

  • Greg_Mc

    @Yi
    Lol sounds like you don't have much confidence in the American self defense system or well the people in it at the least.

    I am not a car racing fan so I don't know a lot about it but the type of car they were using was built for street courses and this race was on an oval course. You know those exciting races where the winner is the guy who can turn left a thousand times faster than the other people. The cars they were in I don't think have much in the way of a roof (which I dont think would have helped much anyway) if there was any but they use roll bars for protection anyway.

    The news article subject matter was a little unsettling (the pic of the guy in bra and panties was something I could have done without) and they only printed the less sick details (what the guy did, they found a tape of him torturing the one girl who he knew from the army for somewhere around 6 to 8 hours, that they couldn't print or report in any way was as sick as what Paul Bernardo and his crazy bitch, and now out of jail, wife Karla Homalka, not sure of the spelling on her name, did) because for the trial they have to hold back on what they report plus you have to have some respect for the families and not tell all the really gruesome stuff.

    Thinking about it I am not sure if the news papers would hold back details for the sake of the families, most dont have that kind of class they just want sales

    What you said about the girls in your army is pretty sad. They can get fired for even reporting they got raped? Thats a law suit waiting to happen if they did that and the girl went to the police (if they can go onto an army bases and do an investigation) and the guy got aressted and found guilty.

    Women are not allowed in your Special Forces because they might be a distraction? Do you want guys in your special forces that get distracted that easily? These are supposed to be the best of the best, the elite of the army and their mental focus is questionable to the point that the brass are worried having women around would distract them? What does that say about the standards they have for who gets in lol.

  • Philippe Bitton

    Thank you for those documentaries...To be informed, to look at evidence from both sides, to evaluate the proposed positions, without falling into rational fallacy such as attacking the persons, their title, is what intelligent being do...so they can reach their own conclusions.
    Thank you
    Peace and Love

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Geoffrey-MacMillan/1356540871 Geoffrey MacMillan

    @ Thang Tran

    Newtonian physics definitely IS the "real physics" of "real life events". What does this mean: "Is the object rigid? Definitely not."

    This collapse deals with compression force, not tensile force!

    Momentum is moot when asking, "is this object in free-fall?"

    Can you further explain what you are trying to explain with this statement: "You don't understand what F=ma where a can equal gravitation acceleration and how the force of the top building is applied to floors underneath as it fell."

    "In real life a collapse can't ever be symmetrical?". If you are implying that collapse can be symmetrical in real life, then cite your source(s).

    In asking wpsmithjr, "How did you know it was symmetrical?", are you implying that it was NOT symmetrical? When you ask, "Almost symmetrical?", are you implying that the collapse was not symmetrical, and was "almost symmetrical"?

    If you were implying that collapse can be symmetrical in real life, why? If you were also stating that the collapse was not symmetrical, why?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_4ZXJL5AW2RHOW2WSAH25MSQYX4 stephan

    @Yi
    About the jets. It is true that it would be difficult to not only be the pilot to have the order to shoot down planes filled with your own people. Innocent people. But, the reports show, and again this is only the reports, they can be given one thing but could be a false document, that the jets were not armed. And one of the Female pilots was briefed in that she would have to either force the plane to land (Unlikely) or ram her jet into the plane, killing herself as well as everyone on the passenger liner in order to save what ever she was to be saving. Not only that, but the amount of planes (Two) were to protect all of eastern America, yeah its a bit hard so calling the pilots of the jets "incompetent" doesn't fit. Its the people who sent unarmed jets to do suicide runs who are incompetent.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    "If you are implying that collapse can be symmetrical in real life, then cite your source(s)." I am implying that there is no law implying that a collapse can never be symmetrical.

    Newtonian physics definitely IS the "real physics" of "real life events".
    1 Misunderstood 3rd Newtonian law isn't Newtonian physics. (I was attacking someone who cited 1 physics law as a reason why the tower shouldn't have collapsed that way as if 1 law could account for the entirety of what occurred.) Real physics isn't in an empty vacuum with negligible mass and point particles.

    What does this mean: "Is the object rigid? Definitely not."
    Exactly, I was expecting a no answer. Basic Newtonian physics deals with rigid bodies because rigid bodies never break up like they did here and because rigid bodies a constant volume which they don't ever in real life.

    "This collapse deals with compression force, not tensile force!"
    In most cases yes, but a collapse does lead to metals and other supporting structures to become stretched. If the object is not rigid as you agreed the a horizontal support structure could be stretched in the vertical direction and vice versa.

    "Momentum is moot when asking, "is this object in free-fall?"
    There is no such thing as "free-fall" when you take into consideration air resistance. Momentum is not moot when you have something hit something else. In this case the top of the building hitting the rest of the buildings even if you consider this as a CD you would still have to take into account the momentum (P=mv) as an object is hitting another object somewhere in that smoke.

    "Can you further explain what you are trying to explain with this statement: "You don't understand what F=ma where a can equal gravitation acceleration and how the force of the top building is applied to floors underneath as it fell." When the top of the building falls down on top of itself you have a object falling on top of an object inducing a push force on top of the bottom object and therefore leading that object to also fall along with it. So as the build crashes the total mass of the object increases thereby increasing the force and momentum it applies to the next object. Obviously, this is purely basic, elementary, "perfect" physics I speak off so the details could be wrong.

    "In asking wpsmithjr, "How did you know it was symmetrical?", are you implying that it was NOT symmetrical? When you ask, "Almost symmetrical?", are you implying that the collapse was not symmetrical, and was "almost symmetrical"?"
    I'm asking him what he meant by symmetrical. Perhaps, I misunderstood what he said by symmetrical. I ask questions to clarify. Yes, I am implying that it was not symmetrical.

    "If you were implying that collapse can be symmetrical in real life, why?" There is no law that says collapses cannot be symmetrical. I am not stating that it was symmetrical in this case or neither any observable case ever but that does stop such an event from happen given lottery winning factors. As you can't say symmetrical therefore CDs.

    If you were also stating that the collapse was not symmetrical, why? Because it wasn't? How do you observe or collect data for a collapse (outside of modeling that was done) that is covered by debris most of the time spent falling? This is partly why I asked those questions regarding symmetry and wanted to know if he meant perfect symmetry or some other paradigm's definition of symmetry.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    It's commonly cited as 14 Jets around the Eastern Seaboard. The US also didn't have any potential threat from invasions from other nations.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_RFLFWWEU2RDIL5ZO4WJVAIZD3M Shruthi

    my head spins when i read all these comments.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_RFLFWWEU2RDIL5ZO4WJVAIZD3M Shruthi

    tags: newton's law, free fall,osama bin laden,thermite or thermate,707,767,steel structure,firefighters,1750F,controlled implosion,media,oil reserves,war on terrorism,indurance....and the list goes on and on and on...

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    The jets you were referring to was the ones near WC, they were on a drill and so wasn't armed. They were not the ones sent to intervene the planes but just happen to be in the area. The ones sent there only got the call 15 min before the plane crushed in WC, and headed in the wrong direction... Greg_Mc and I was talking about the plane over in Shankville, and some say that it was shot down rather than it crushed down. I believe with the crappy organisation, the jets would not even be directed to the right position.

    Also, it is true that no one would of order the pilots to crush into the plane even if they are right next to the planes, that's just unethical and everyone in the plane will die, along with the pilots and who ever that's under the planes. The all jet protection thing is serious incompetent from ground 0. What's the point of having the program at all if: there isn't enough jets, the awesome radar only sees outside of US, they can't do anything when they get there because it would mean shooting down a plane full of people (with no prior knowledge of the suicide mission). This system is only usable to counter a foreign plane flying off course from outside of US.

  • Greg_Mc

    @Yi and Stephen
    Not only would nobody order a pilot to crash into one of the planes (or any planes really) but I don't think any pilot would do it anyway. I just don't see an American pilot doing the Kamikaze thing, you may in a war under the right circumstances with the right pilot see it happen but even then I bet the ones who would do it are few and far between

  • Greg_Mc

    @Shruthi
    What is it about the comments that causes you this trouble? While it isn't a pleasant topic it is one that is discussed a lot and it should be discussed a lot.

  • Guest

    your comment made me wonder: Can't the tower take over and do whatever the "controller" see fit? That sure wouldn't surprise me.
    az

  • Greg_Mc

    @az

    Do you mean the controller at the airport (The air traffic controller) or the air force or whatever the official name of them is lol I am having a major mental block (I have them so often I really should only mention it when I am not having one lol) ? What did you mean by take over? You dont mean physically take over the planes do you like by remote control? I don't think that is possible although if they could do that a disgruntled employee who was a little mentally off the rails could cause some real havoc. It would be a good safety feature in case the pilot and co-pilot became incapacitated for some reason (other than terrorists, and I am typing as I think, lol so if it seems like I am having a conversation with myself lol I guess I kind of am), but you dont hear of that happening often or really ever do you? I know if the crew is given dinner or some sort of meal they do not have the same meal in case one of the dishes causes food poisoning.

  • Guest

    Yes that is what i meant, and i do believe air traffic controllers can and have taken over commercial plane in situation of urgency. Not sure how it all works but they must already have that covered...so much technologies out there.
    az

  • Greg_Mc

    @az
    The planes can do so many things on their own without the pilots like I think take off and landing that (auto-pilot has been around since the Flintstones) for there to be technology in place to fly them remotely isnt hard to believe.

    I just googled "can large passenger planes be remote control flown from the ground" and the first result was from a 9/11 myth site and that site says (remember it is what the site is saying not me) that there have been tests going on for decades. On the home page of the site there is a banner that says 911 Myths .... Reading Between the lines. So just from the title it could make for a fun read.

    "The Boeing 757 and 767 are equipped with fully autonomous flight capability, they are the only two Boeing commuter aircraft capable of fully autonomous flight. They can be programmed to take off, fly to a destination and land, completely without a pilot at the controls.

    This last part was copied right from the web site. There are software limits pre set into the planes to the pilots can't do really stupid things that could cause passenger injury. The Predator and Global Hawk are remote control planes but their purpose is not to be passenger planes. There is a ton of other stuff too but I am not going to sit here and just re type what someone on some web site said, I will take some things from a site and quote them but not too much.

    I just went to see what other links showed up under my search to see if there was anything usefull i could read but the whole first page on google is 9/11 sites or wikipedia so you know any info I find will more than likely be slanted or just someones opinion. Ok there could be some good ones on there or other pages but I am not in the mood nor do I have the time to sift through page after page to find something that is reputable.

    We know the Gov does things they don't let people know about like new technology and weapons etc but that is understandable for obvious reasons, so they may be able to fly more planes than they let on by remote control but if they had passenger planes set up to do it we would probably have heard about it as it couldnt be kept a secret if they in fact wanted to.

    I am willing to bet that one of the sites I came across will say or show on a video that the planes that hit the buildings were actually cargo planes that had bombs strapped to the bottom of them that you can see. They are the same videos that show a spark at the front of the plane just before it hits the building, I have seen those and admittedly if they havent been tampered with they are interesting to watch and try to figure out what the spark is (They show a shadow on the building that they say proves it isnt the sun reflecting off the front of the plane).

    I used to go to a web site called Stage 6 and on there you got your own page and you could upload videos to it and there were a few people who would put up 911 videos so between all the people I probably saw almost every 911 doc there was available at that time. The BBC took the site owners to court over copywrite issues so the day before the court date they closed the site which sucked huge and I was without a good doc site till I found this one. It was a close call there for a while, I was almost left with no other choice but to go out and get a life.

  • Guest

    For a change, a docu summary:-)
    It is an assembly of specialized scientists who give their opinions about the crashind of the 3 WCT. They obviously were selected for specialties in which they practice.
    Which various specialties are obviously are concerned within 9/11 details.
    All have direct professionnal expertise into either ones of the details discussed within the docu.

    I short, it's not a docu where some tests are carried out discussions on how should some tests be carried out.
    At best on this, a few comment that they were puzzled that the authorities managing the aftermath did not respect the various USA or other well recognised legal regulations that need to be applied when such an even take place.

    Also, there's a few comment by some specialists regarding the extent to which the 9/11 public inquiry ingnored the numerous witness and diverses facts up to a point where Buikding #7 case was simply thrown out of the inquiry.
    As well, one of the comissionner reply lying that he or the commission were never made aware of the presence of molten iron.

    Based on the behavior of that 9/11 pseudo-commission, they sure proved that they were biased and were not looking for the truth. Not at all. In all instance of that "Farce".
    It is the expected behavior of a crook.
    The basic usual behavior the whole world observerd through the 45-some years from the USA government except that this time, they inflicted the burden on the USA citzens as they once intent to do if JFK would'd have been watchfull enough.

    Next thing at stake: - The greatest danger for the USA comes from the USA. Stay away or in the rural regions.
    There are very dangerous fanatics over there.

    Pierre.

  • daddychiefs

    No, that cannot happen. If a pilot just turns off their Transponder, ATC can only track the plane by basic radar. Having said that, the Transponder doesn't allow a tower to fly the plane, either. It is just a system that keeps status updates between the flightdeck and the ground. There have been prototype auto-land systems, but conventional wisdom is, it is better to have a trained professional, with thousands of flight hours of experience to set the bird down the best way under given conditions.
    Anyone could be a pilot if a plane could be taken over remotely at any given time. There are so many operations taking place as the plane enters the Glide Slope and descends past the blocks, using the speed brakes, flaps and throttle in concert to get the final nose-up flare to set the back wheels down first, and let gravity ease the front wheel down (in a nice landing).

    If you want to see just how amazingly professional these guys that fly for the airlines are, go on you tube and search 10 toughest airports, or toughest airports to land at, etc...There are some spooky runways that are served by major airlines, and some of them will give you the willies just to watch.

  • AllysKat

    wpsmithjr ... You're absolutely right (though I've no knowledge of the whole symmetrical/non-symmetrical part). People seem to be so quick & eager to accept the whole "jet-fuel-on-impact(s)-generated-hot-fireball-weakening-supports/columns-causing-total-building-collapse". It's unbelievable, scary, and utterly exhaustive to just read most of these comments, let alone posting any comments myself. The three most telling things to support you comment above (in my opinion) is really about logic.

    1. After the planes hit the towers and after the jet-fuel induced fireball/explosion people could be plainly seen looking out of broken windows located just above & below the site of the fire(s). Also, the many shattered windows made it possible for us all, via live news feeds, to witness & easily identify pieces of some of the office furnishings on floors close to the impact site(s). So, I'm supposed to buy that this supposed extreme heat blast caused steel to soften, stretch, weaken and ultimately FAIL over the span of 90+ floors, but it was insufficient to completely incinerate the flesh & bones of your average everyday mortal standing within a couple floors from the impact? Ha! Honestly, I could be in the final stages of dementia and still not be delusional enough to believe such cr@p.

    2. During the immediate days/weeks afterward, I remember seeing & hearing multiple firsthand reports & interviews from Search and Rescue, first responder and FDNY personnel who commented (over and over, again) on how the molten steel still flowing beneath the sub-basement floor(s) was so hot that the bottom of their shoes kept melting. Amazing, isn't it, how common sense seems to be less & less "common", these days?

    3. Each tower was comprised of 3-separate, independent buildings that, essentially, were joined to one another by "sky" lobbies, with an incredibly strong center core. Yet every single floor of both towers was virtually pulverized into dust? And that the tens of hundreds of highly trained firefighters, EMTs, police officers, and first responders (who reported hearing and/or witnessing repeated explosions occurring at the sub- basement levels of the buildings, have suddenly become delusional whack-jobs? Yeah, well, I don't see that happening any time soon either.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Well, I just think the more powerful a nation feels, the less competent they are at defending it. It's like the dodo birds on an island with no predators. It's the natural cycle of things I suppose, kingdoms always rise and fall.

    I don't really watch car races either, I think it is dangerous and needs to be done in a controlled environment (medic on hand). Street racing isn't really that controlled and things happen, but I guess there's no helping that.

    The girls did get justice in the end, but still, such things shouldn't really happen to start with. While I find that most Australian's are not sexist/racist, there are some places like the army/police, where this happens. I'm also thinking the same thing about the distraction thing, but seriously, it's just a sexist excuse.

  • Jack1952

    The speculation that the planes were controlled by an outside source overlooks the fact that these airplanes took off with a flight crew assigned to them. Airline employees would know right away if one of their planes had taken off without any of their fellow employees on board. It would have been the first topic of discussion among them. It would have been natural for these employees to want to know which of their friends and fellow workers had died. That is how any one of us would react if a fellow employee was killed on the job. Any cursory investigation would turn up any employees who had worked closely on these planes and with their flight crews who had grave doubts about the official story. It doesn't seem possible that a passenger plane with its detailed mechanical checklists could be compromised so completely.

  • Jack1952

    @ AllysKat

    The heat was only at the floors where the planes struck the buildings and the fires started. Support beams were compromised, placing an extra burden on the remaining supports at the level the planes had struck. When the heat of the fires warped the beams enough it could no longer support the floors above it. It would give way so much and then suddenly snap causing the top floors to plummet in one piece at almost free fall speed until it hit the remaining floors below where the planes struck. This impact would have made an incredible sound. Subsequent steel beams breaking may have made explosive sounds because of the release of pressure. Similar to the sound when one snaps a twig. Larger structural steel would be expected to make a more explosive sound. Those who claim that they heard explosions were not delusional but may have misinterpreted the nature of what they heard. The top floors continued to fall as one unit crushing everything in it path. Since it remained one unit that would imply that the planes hit the exact spot where the explosives ended since the top floors did not disintegrate until it hit the ground.

    Fires buried under debris will smolder for weeks or months. One of the biggest problems fire fighters have battling forest fires is just that. They think the fire is out and suddenly it reemerges because it lay smoldering underground.

  • AllysKat

    You're not really going to try to compare forest fires with a fire that would need to be so hot it can literally melt steel are you? Sometimes (or rather, very often) you can find the truth by thinking outside the norm. If you visited the Discovery Store (found in malls across the U.S.), as I did, and asked to see the various periodic charts & resource materials they had for sale, as I did, you would find that the heat generated from the fires in the twin towers was nowhere near hot enough to melt steel. Even the extreme heat from the jet fuel infused blast, which would be a lot hotter than your pine tree example, was insufficient to melt steel AT THE SITE OF THE FIRE! Were talking about molten STEEL at the sub-basement level a friggin' week after the fact. This is the same math problem that we all had in 1st or 2nd grade: 1+1=2 You can fight the numbers if you want but persistence won't get you any closer to where you ought to have been back when you were 7yrs old. You are right about one thing, though.... Those who claim that they heard explosions were not delusional. When a few of them were blown off their feet, their bodies thrown crashing against walls, at almost the exact same time they heard the sound of a blast, they called it like it was. Oh, and your explanation of the mythological one-piece tower starts off faulty, because the tower were created in 3-separate parts, not one unit.

  • Jack1952

    @ AllysKat

    You posted that there was molten metal in the debris that was hot enough to melt the soles of those walking on the surface. I responded by saying that smoldering fires buried under debris is not uncommon in a fire and gave an example to demonstrate where this does happen. Why a smoldering fire is possible at a forest fire but is absolutely impossible at the Twin Towers is illogical. A smoldering fire is a smoldering fire and is not location specific.

    You ask why there is molten steel. The simple answer is I don't know and neither do you. If molten steel exists there is a reason out of many possible reasons. One reason may be the presence of a planted substance but that is only one scenario and not the only one possible.

    If you watch any video of the fall of both towers you will see that the tops fell into the remaining structure below. The areas above where the planes struck the towers is what I described as one unit...that is, the floor directly above the impact point to the top floor is the one unit that I alluded to. The support structure at the impact point weakens and finally gives out causing the top as one unit to come crashing down onto the remaining structure still standing which is the part of the building below the impact point. As the top unit begins to fall, find a spot on the tower below the impact point and watch it carefully. You will find that this spot does not move or begin to fall until the top floors make contact with it at which time it is obliterated. Do this repeatably, using different points below the impact point and the results will be the same. This would indicate that it is quite likely that the tops, the area that I refer to as one unit, crashing down, caused the destruction of the towers below the impact point.

    I have never heard that the explosions blew people off their feet and would need to see documentation of this allegation. Not that I disbelieve you but proof is required.

    What I am offering in my arguments are the issues that a defense would offer in a court trial. Court trials involve both prosecution and defense. Prosecution must prove beyond a shadow of doubt. The defense must provide that shadow of doubt. My arguments are my flimsy attempts to show how those doubts would be presented. A more competent defense could and would present a more comprehensive defense based on in depth research and a carefully constructed presentation. A jury will have a hard time ignoring the case of any defense team. That is why no prosecutor has even attempted to charge any American government official as a conspirator surrounding 9/11.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    If you want to discuss something, don't go and tell someone they are 7 year old who can't add, that's just plain insults and you don't need that if you can prove a point.

    No one ever said the fire is hot enough to melt steel. Even NIST said the fire wasn't hot enough. It's just to say that the steel is weakened by 10%. No one found molten steel at the site. Besides, the firefighter didn't really know why their shoes were melting because they didn't go down stairs to see what is going on. The heat of steel would have melt more than shoes I would imagine. I did read that hot jet fuel went down the elevator shaft. Perhaps that's where the heat is from? The shoes melting doesn't prove that explosives are used either, because that's like saying explosives already went off way before the building collapsed and caused the steel to melt, but did not cause the building to collapse and allowed firefighter to walk in, with no explosive boom.

    As for exploding sound, if say a building collapses, do you expect it to go down soft as a feather and make no sounds? The centre core is strong but it was only made to support 4 times the force imposed by the levels above. Take away 3/4 of the supports and you are screwed.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5FZ3DPSUC4JM4VCX5PQVOGGBY4 jj

    I smell a rat.

  • Greg_Mc

    @Jack
    Another possible reason there have never been any charges against a Gov official (not that yours by itself isnt at this point in time a more than good enough reason) is that obtaining enough good evidence is near impossible, there already was an inquiry that the Government put together and they complained (well some of them did) that their investigation was hindered in various ways that I know you are aware of so there is no need for me to list them. So just think of a non government run inquiry trying to get access to people etc, there would be so much red tape thrown their way they would have trouble getting anything done. Plus just think of the defense team that would be put together for any official charged lol it would make the team OJ had look like first year law students. I wonder if it ever happened if they would come up with a good catch phrase for the case like OJ had. If the glove don't fit you must acquit. I am trying to think of one for the 9/11 trial but I am coming up empty.

  • Greg_Mc

    David this is not a site for people to advertise their personal web sites. I am amazed your post is still even on here.

    I have a reply to "Maybe you should just read daveswildcamping dot com" but it would get censored so much there would be very little left to read lol

  • Guest

    I don't see why the fires couldn't have been hot enough to melt steel, even a crude kiln can reach 1400 oC.

  • Jack1952

    @ Greg_Mc

    There are many reasons that a person may not be co-operative in an investigation. Individuals may feel that an investigator may uncover incompetence, laziness, deceit or even fraud if their activities were placed under scrutiny. These fears may have nothing to do with the investigation at hand but the individuals just do not want anyone finding out about how they operate on a day to day basis. People become cozy in their environment and treat any outside intrusion with suspicion, even from in house questioning. This is true of people no matter where they work.

    If conspiracy allegations were true and could be proved, I would suspect that there would be certain individuals who would be thrown under the bus to save the hides of others. Iran-contra is an example of where a president may have allowed Oliver North to take the blame for the wrong doing of the administration.

    How about "No thermite...no indict".

    Apparently a glib defense would not be my best strategy.

  • Jack1952

    @ Greg

    Maybe he should read the comment policy before suggesting what we should read.

    He should get the message loud and clear by your explanation of why you didn't reply. Well said (or not said).

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    The temperature of fires from say fuel is usually low. It also depends on how much oxygen is available. I don't think you can compare a building to a kiln, since a kiln is thermally insulated. you will be hard pressed to get a bone fire from wood to get to the temperature that hot. Either way speculating how hot a fire in another system is not scientific, you need to go to the site and see the damage, then estimate how hot the flame is. The temperature was estimated to be ~600 degrees C.

  • Guest

    @ jj

    If you're lucky enough to see one with you eye, it's just ought to be because they're all over the place!
    It's like Deers.
    One sole lost one will not be seen but...

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    A bronze age mud kiln using wood as fuel will easily reach 900 - 1000 oC. I've built them and fired pots.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Yes, but it's a kiln, not a fire, and steel melts at 1370 degrees C. That's why during bronze age, you can melt iron but not make steel.

    Edit: I mean copper! Not iron >.<

  • Guest

    @Yi Wen Qian,

    "No one found molten steel at the site"...
    You are right! They didn't find it, they only filmed it with cell phone cameras and some other cameras even though the site was garded with the best means.
    Regarding the firefighters who seen the melted orange melted steel during the following days, they should have taken time off if they where that tired and began hallucinating.

    Following that highly specialized account backed by an extensive practical experience within those specialties, it is only normal that the towers didn't even began to show a bending of its structure what so ever while going straight down.

    It is the normal & usual way buildings goes goes down except that as some specialists once stated on this comment list, they often have to correct the fall as it goes down by subsequent explosions, that are not the explosions that thousands seen & heard later one.

    Just as FEMAm NIST and all tells us!
    The USA would have a lot to learn from their primed business partners, the communists: -When a Gov. organisatiun tells y'a one thing, it just can't be otherwise, Ok?
    Else, it could well happen that you'd lose your job, be ostracised and will have a heck of a problem to earn your living.

    It didn't cost me much to know you real good!

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    The building was tiling 20 min before the collapse, are you suggesting that they changed the distribution of bombs to correct the tilt in 20 min?

  • Guest

    @Jack1952

    As Capone would say: -"Not seen, not caught, not guilty".
    -Too bad that Saddam wasn't living in the USA under the american laws, regarding the WMD, isn't it?

    Anyhow, the US Gov. must have keept their sales receipt from the chemical wafares they sold to Saddam to mass murder the Iraqi natives in nothern Iraq during the Iraq VS Iran war?

    Jack? Tell me with whom you hang 'round going back at least some 45 years & I tell you who you are.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    Steel is not a simple blend of iron metal with other metals.
    Rather, and exact ratio of the (2-4) metals where there is a certain amount of carbon.
    The ratio of each component is optimised to reach a point within what's known as "Phase Diagram" and that all components of that phase (Melted mixture) will melt at one sole intrinsec temperature.
    And pretty high temperature that is, for steel serving for bridges or buildings such as the WTC.

    In short, even in the beginning of the 20th century, humankind didn't know yet which phase diagram would afford such performing steel.

    In addition, when such steel come closer to its melting point, it acquire "Elongation & Tensile". A plasticity that allows bending and forming.

    If for instance, 1 of the WTC would have shown a little deformation within its straighness, then you could have claimed that it was only normal and that this just can't be the effect of any explosion!

    As you appear to be much aware, every phenomenon can be explained!

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    But deformation with no sound of explosion, and 600 degrees is enough to weaken steel, that's only about 1/2 way to melting point. If something is possibly true, it might actually be true...

    And yeah, I agree with you about the steel, you can't make it during bronze age with a kiln.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Flagged it! :D

  • Guest

    Not saying they made steel in the BRONZE age, just that those temperatures are not that difficult to achieve.

  • Guest

    Can't believe I let myself comment on this. I'm out.

  • Guest

    @Yi Wen Qian.

    Right. And that just ought to be the reason why some had other things in mind, other than the deformation of all of the 3 buildings before they began their descent downward.
    In most humansapien languages, deformation means a phenomenon that looks like "Melting", bendings, etc...

    I didn't examine the crashes enough because I just couldn't care less that the americans goes on a vengeange rampage in Iraq or Afghanistan. Coze the time they're busy other there, they're not busy at abusing other "G8" democracies like mine.

    By the way, that type of steel (Technically registered) at 800C, still do show any sign of melting at some 850C.
    NIST has proven in their lab that the 3 building structures could have sustained that type of fire for many hours.
    The range at which steel(S) melt is rather narrow, much more narrow than one could expect.
    Those phase diagrams are archived an easy to refer to.
    Anyone who seen the fires before the crashes and knows that this type of fire choked that the lack of oxygen doesn't reach 600C.

    Since that I once read (If I recall well) that you work in a technical field, I wonder what your boss would say as you use the expression "If something is possibly true, it might actually be true".

    My boss doesn't want a product that "Might be" or either "Possibly be" but prefer factual assertions.

    All these guys that were part of that docu deserve much more trust than an unknown figure.

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    I thought NIST did originally said temperature of 800, but corrected later to 600, so all of these things you said is true. I don't think you can just say the fire looks like it's under 600, any lower and it wouldn't be a fire with paper/wood as fuel. I always say 'possibly', or 'might', because I am not at the site, doing these investigations, and I feel that I can't say yes, that's what has happened because I was there. I also feel that the people in this documentary shouldn't say 'I have no doubt', because I also feel that they were not at the site, or did the investigations, and so all their views should fall under 'might'.

    Your boss obviously don't want 'might', because you are the one doing these experiments lol. My boss would want the same.

    Also, I don't really put these people above the trust of unknown people, because I have read from other sources that the fire alone can bring down the buildings. That's not NIST but by someone in Britain. I have thought about it and looked at the video, and I disagree with the present of explosives because of all the reasons I have listed down the posts. When I say 'deformation', I meant tilting/warping in another homo sapiens language. I don't give a crap about US either on 9/11 lol, the problem is I do care about what happens in US because their action impacts a lot more than themselves. I don't understand though, with all the people that US have griefed over the years, can't they band together and make a come back? You can't expect to always bully and everything will be ok.

    With all that said though, I remember you said the only thing that swayed you was that the building tilted, and a demolition expert told you that you can correct the tilt so that it would fall correctly. The tilt slowly happened about 20 mins before the collapse, so you would need to 'rig' the building in 20 mins in a different way for it to fall properly.

    To me, the tilt was because the supports were giving way, so one side of the support was weaker than the other, so more stress was put on to the remainder of the supports. Since the only force acting on the building is gravity, when the supports give way the building must collapse downwards. That's how I understood it.

    There is nothing wrong with questioning what the governments do, I just feel getting stuck on 9/11 is silly, US government did a lot of things but this seems to just be a karma back-loop. I think people are missing the big picture, like healthcare, welfare, Arnold Schwarzenegger as governor of California, hurricane Katrina (still a ruin there people), cause if you want the miss doings of the US government there is already a list. How about offering solutions for a change.

    Also, communist and sheep following remarks already? I'm Australian with Chinese background. China isn't communist, it's capitalist, and the only thing they taught me is to separate propaganda from information, also to use proxies to leap over fire walls.

  • Jack1952

    @ Pierre

    Actually, it wasn't the American government that sold Saddam the chemicals. It was private American, German and Dutch chemical companies that sold the different chemicals that allowed Saddam to mix the poison that he used on the Iraqi natives of northern Iraq. The Bush administration knew this and used this knowledge as a reason to invade Iraq. This was not what motivated the invasion. Their motivation was many and varied. Greed, ideology, unrealistic expectations and more, all contributed to the reasoning when this group decided that an invasion was necessary. Personally, I think that the invasion was a mistake although Saddam did have to go.

    Although the invasion of Iraq came after 9/11, it doesn't necessarily mean that the Bush administration planned 9/11 as a false flag operation. That link is tenuous and there is no solid evidence that this is what happened. To use your analogy, over the last 45 years I have hung out with a lot of individuals. Some have been constant friends throughout and others I could care less if I ever see them again.

    If your best friend runs off with your wife, is he still your best friend? Not every relationship is written in stone.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Lol, sorry, I do like you, in fact I like anyone has that has a Totoro like creature as their profile. I don't mean it as an attack >.>

  • Guest

    No worries Yi, I didn't take it personally :) If we all thought the same there would be no discussion. Hope you didn't think I was mad at you.

  • Guest

    @Jack1952.

    Now I understand.
    Any entity on planet earth can buy that sort of what is qualified as "WMD" or chemical weaponry apparatus from a US autority and resell to any comic on planet earth?

    It appears that you didn't gave much thought on this commercial deal, isn't it?
    Each and every private corporate or country that anyone can dream of, who possess that type of technology must declare their sales to not only their own governement but also to the UN & NATO.
    That is part of worldwide laws as the one that regulates what is torture & war crime.
    -For the ones who recognize that they are not the sole homosapiens on planet earth.

    Moreover, I seen the movie in which some chemical weaponries were piled up in an Iraqi stock room aside a smaller number of other nationality (Among which, the German seal) chemical weaponries.
    All those chemical weapons were ready to be used = "Finished products" ready to use.
    All witnessed by international inspector(S) third parties from foreign democratic countries, not hoaxed ones.

    You may well think that it is the US who gave up the friendship with the Chili citizens, or the Guatemala citizens, the Panama citizens or the Vietnameses just to name a few, but I'll tell you very friendly that I wonder who's has the merit in the end.
    You have any idea how the USA is perceived everywhere?

    Whenever I can find a new unknown raw materials producer not based in the USA, I jump on it!
    He's got my preference because I prefer peoples who show intellectual integrity & justice.
    I'm aware that my mood will not change much, but as time goes by, we'll see...

    Pierre.

  • Greg_Mc

    @jack
    It just may have been the smartest thing I never said

  • Guest

    @fifty4fourty
    And have a great day!

    Pierre.

  • Greg_Mc

    I flagged the guy too Yi and today I see that comment is gone. I had left a comment for him too because just flagging the comment would not have been fun enough for me there has to be a semi smart ass comment added to it. Lol thats my area of expertise being a smart ass, I have been reading all the coments in here and there is one to jack I need to reply to but as usual most of them I can't reply to because to many of you people are way to out of my knowledge level to do anything but read what you say and try and learn from it.

    I see you have been having a nicely spirited debate with my buddy Pierre and you are more than holding your own which few people are able to do so keep on him lol. I am sure you already know it but Pierre is a good guy lol but that doesn't mean you should not keep debating him hard. Lol someone has to beat him on here one day, maybe it has hapened but I just havent seen it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Mm, you make him sound like moby d*ck. :P

  • Greg_Mc

    I have a question for all you scientist type people in here, I am breaking the TOS rules with this i know but I am hoping the powers that be let me away with it because it is about product I bought and after a little online reading about it I have some concerns about my families health if I do use it. Does anyone know anything about Diatomaceous Earth? I have 2 cats one is 14 years old and the other is 6 and they have fleas which is something that I have never had to deal with before, I am using colloidal Silver which I know is safe but those DE stuff scares the crap out of me after reading horrer stories about it online. I know basically what it is from reading the pamphlet and some stuff online and the pet store said to use it on my carpets and bedding etc to stop the fleas from moving around. So any health information on it would be greatly appreciated.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    just make sure you get the pet grade stuff and you will be fine. the only real problem is when it is in flux-calcined form which is very very fine and can lead to health complications if you breath it in.

  • Greg_Mc

    @ Epic
    My comment seems to have been taken off which is ok I guess since it wasn't about the doc or there is a glitch that makes it so I cant see it, either way it is what it is.

    EDIT: I refreshed the page and my original post is now here.

    Thanks for replying Epic, I got it at the pet store and the lady said to mix it with their water and spread it around the floorboards and carpets and beds. She said I should wear a mask when I do it and to check the web site before I use it but thats not working so maybe I will go back and see if someone else there has more info. What you said is what bothers me, the fine dust but what I have should be pet grade. It is a powder so maybe either way as you say breathing it in is my concern. Thanks again

  • Guest

    Greg_Mc...

    Diatomaceous Earth are what used to (Thousands if not millions years ago) be shells of microscopic animals.
    Chemically taking, the molecular structure should be compared to porcelain. (Natural one, of course).

    It lays in banks by thousands of cubic miles where these tiny beasts used to live. (Ocean shores)
    Chemically, it is one of those absoletly amorphous product just like sea shell except that they are microscopics.
    Since your question found its way on this "9/11: Explosive Evidence" comment list, I can reassure you that it wasn't the cause of the WTC collapse, take note!

    The problem we seldom have with that "Raw Material" is it average size(S). Depending upon the industrial equipement one use to wash them before reselling them.
    Because they are indeed like mini sea shell and break apart easily. (In paint manufacturing for instance).
    You may well imagine that because of their physical conformations, they can hold a certain amount of liquid and other pseudo-fluid chemicals?
    They serves also in water filtration as you can imagine.
    Filter cartridges for instance.

    For your(S) cat(S), I'd rather suggest that you'd use the "911" method...
    1) First take your cat(S) for a country ride out of town.
    2) Then stop by a river and spray a gallon of gazoline on the cat(S).
    3) Take a good step back, crack up a match and through it on the cat(S).
    Your prob'm is solve!
    We call this "Advanced Technology".

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    He is getting the matches out and calling the cats as we speak. lol

  • Jack1952

    @ Pierre

    I agree that the United States has quite often been the bad guy in international relations. It seems that there are those who are ready to find fault with everything that they are involved with. This is hardly fair. Each incident should be viewed in isolation as well as in its larger context. I could write pages of material in criticism of the United States. Criticism that is well deserved. However, in the case of 9/11, I just don't see enough evidence to convince me that the American government was involved. This time it would appear that a group of individuals were angry enough at the United States to strike back quite effectively. I do not think that it is that hard to believe that there could be people who would have that big a grudge against America. The United States have been the most hated country in the world for a long time...long before 9/11.

    Since it against the Geneva Convention to produce or stockpile chemical weapons, one would never report to the U.N. or anyone else of their intentions to sell them. What can be done is to purchase individual chemicals, ostensibly for other legal purposes, and then use those chemicals to manufacture the weapons after the sale. It would be like the terrorists who buy separate ingredients from different vendors so they can use those ingredients to assemble a bomb in their garage.

  • Guest

    @Jack1952

    Hum... I remember vividly the days were the technical community surrounding me was seeing the USA as one if not "The" leaders.
    I remember the "NL Chem", Reichhold but now lurk toward the German "BYK Chemie" & "Clariant" for instance.
    You may know that there are written "Norms", standards on how to carry on tests on common manufactured goods? Many are international ones.
    Well, we even begun to drop USA ones and reorient toward Germans ones when we buy in Asia for instance.
    Germans are very busy in Asia when it comes to high technology. Considering the profusion of raw material over there. Just take "Clariant" for instance regarding the Chinese waxes in mines.

    Why would one ask since it's none of our business what happened on 9/11? We're foreign!
    Because pure applied technology has no political relation while in the USA, it appears that it really does.

    May you note that I never, ever said as such that there was physical proof that the USA Gov. or one of its entity (See Agencies) was involved in giving a break or worst collaborating with these psycho’s but by overseeing the methods and the decrees that strangled the 9/11 commission, beliefs into the USA authorities within technical matter have dropped low enough that staying aloof is a wise thing.

    And that is important to humankind!
    -Keep away 'coze the USA politic manipulates at will norms and standards in their jurisdiction.
    If a USA politic wants to hide something dubious, they'll get rid of evidences, or "Samples" for instance and thus omit a standard test within an international norm. Up to a point where a biased politician will public ally claim that there were no fire at thousands of degrees centigrade detected by infrared satellite devices. What the worth of referring to a USA based sky scraper fire prevention specialist, really?

    Which country needs hoaxers?
    One of the reasons why I'm here to see the reactions of the USA common citizens.
    Not more than at most 20 years back, it took years and generations to get know these things since news took for ever to reach the worldwide public but things have changed a little as we see.

    Now, regarding the chemical warfares found & destroyed by the UN inspector in Iraq before the war, I didn't mentioned as such, but the most numerous one were the one baring the USA army tags.
    Yes, there were other countries tags aside the USA one.

    You may well tell me what ever you feel like regarding the "Source" or these weapons as they were seized by not only the a USA citizen inspector but also French and others nationalities.
    But I now wonder if you realize that far from helping your cause, you now lost your "Credits" since that just before Colon Powell made his public speech at the UN, the French’s government tried to put some sense into the mind of your war criminals that the USA harbors. They told your Colon about the South African hoaxed nuclear aluminum parts.

    Historically talking, it ain't a first left alone all pretexts that could be claim! Keep it for yourself.
    It may well has gotten to be an American way of life.

    Elsewhere, there are governments and there are the others human being who gets business going.
    I work where the smell is sweet.
    Beside, my company buys at most 1.5MG/year of foreign goods. The USA sure doesn't need that!
    Only one beside so many, next...

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @Jack1952
    Thinking of all this, let's just make everything simple, Ok Jack?...

    Let's take the Gov's official 9/11 report as "The truth, the whole truth and only the thruth".

    This breaks down to one reality...
    If a "Team" of USA architechs, engineers with their USA civil engineering techologists are just unfits and unable to build a highrise in a proper fashion so that it doesn't even come close to resist as the other blazing we seen elsewhere on planet within the last ~ 50 years or so, obviously, the USA is a place where one meets mostly mor*ns.
    => Don't do business with mor*ns!

    I remember this Chinese chemical specialist asking me where in the world he'll find the phosphonate I introduced in one of my formulation...
    -I told him that there was a chinese manufacturer a 100's miles north of his plant! HiHiHi!
    I noticed that the peoples over there had this expectation that someone else will tell them what, where & ...

    In short, what's democracy for?
    Anything's, but do it & don't ignore.

    Pierre

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    to Pierre

    "it doesn't even come close to resist as the other blazing we seen elsewhere on planet within the last ~ 50 years or so"
    In what other case have you seen 2 Jetliners each crashing into an adjacent building at a substantial speed?

    Let's take the so called Truther's "report" as "Truth, the whole truth and only the thruth."

    This breaks down to one reality...
    A group of people within the government seek to gain tremendous profits by attempting to implicate a country in an attack that would persuade the American People into be willing to commit a war against that country. So they orchestrated 4 airliners to:
    1. Crash randomly in Penn.
    2. Fired a missile to the Pentagon and redirected the airliner to military bases
    3. Crash into each WTC tower 1 and 2.
    4. Then after an some time detonate demolition charges placed there and planned for months ahead of time at ground zero. This includes not only WTC 1, 2, 7 but several other buildings that collapsed around ground zero also. The demolition was done discreetly by a demolition company that doesn't exist using state of the art stealth technology.
    This was done for no reason what so ever, the conspirators are evil not smart. They didn't know that all you had to do was crash airplanes into a tower, blame it on terrorists from other countries and then invade those countries.

    Because of the nationality of the so called terrorists, after the successful false flag operation the United States declared war on Saudi Arabia, Iran, and other countries in which their effigy terrorists had ties to. Americans, compelled by the urge for vengeance due to the false flag operation, gleefully sign up for military enlistment and no one dissents. Now that the United States has successfully annexed all of the oil-rich middle eastern countries that attacked the United States the conspirators some how gain control of the oil and sell it for personal profit themselves. The conspirators now sleep on their mountains of cash next to beautiful (men or women) and none of the skeptics ever found out. Truthers are killed off one by one in a string of accidents and naturally causing cancer whenever they arise to suppress any attempt to ascertain the truth.

  • Guest

    @Thang Tran

    It appears that you didn't went through the factual 9/11 commission report much. The team of inquirers came to the official conclusion that the fire made the steel trusts bend a little and that these bendings permitted the floors to pancake. It is the fire that caused the bending of the trusts.
    The Gov. inquirers wouldn't have felt into that aberration because of the "Live" movies captures of these buildings before they began to crash. Not brilliant at all!

    Therefore, you have no point in claiming: -"In what other case have you seen 2 Jetliners each crashing into an adjacent building at a substantial speed?"
    I just donno your competency that would allow you to claim other events because of obvious reasons on the Internet. It is thus fundamental to stick to the official 9/11 inquiry report.

    You obviously make fun out of taking the 9/11 report as the official truth and come up with a string or insane theories with missiles or "Drones" and the USA Gov. who would have been involved in the planning of the 9/11?

    I never, ever suggested anything alike or anything close to that. This is "Rantling" and when one think to the number of persons who lost their lives in there...
    It just ought to be that you lost control over yourself and began to mumble swearing. That is poor, so very poor!

    In any events, what objection can be claimed as one foreigner base himself on that 9/11 inquiry report to have serious doubts on the technology which is practiced in the USA?

    Just think that building #7 have been re-enforced not so long ago because it was housing a few USA-Gov. agencies like the CIA & the IRS. It wasn't a 100's something tall you know?
    40's something and crashed down anyhow.
    And build within the USA based norms!
    BTW, at my company, I backup my formulations every nights on a remote server while I'm away and the admins do the same with the financial matters.
    Anyone could set the plant on fire, we'd be operating on the next following week, Ok?
    Am I to delve into USA emitted norms & standards?
    Once a report is published, it ain't time to skate over it.
    Case's closed, I got other things to mind.

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=538806070 Dario Sartor

    The truth is here to see. And I don't see anyone with any decent arguments against this.

  • Greg_Mc

    @ Pierre
    If using the 9/11 method should I not drop one of the cats on top of the other with toy airplanes jammed into an orifice or two? The Diatomaceous Earth I have is in a powder form and safe to mix with water for the cats to drink to avoid worms from eating the fleas.

    You mean DE had nothing to do with the cause of the buildings collapse? The powder form looks like thermite dust so I thought I was on to something like maybe pi$$ed off fleas may have been responsible.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    @Pierre Perhaps this is a linguistically related misunderstand here. This part is directed at you:

    "it doesn't even come close to resist as the other blazing we seen elsewhere on planet within the last ~ 50 years or so"
    In what other case have you seen 2 Jetliners each crashing into an adjacent building at a substantial speed?

    The next part is more over directed at the clinging conspiracy theories developed by various groups calling themselves "truthers." If that isn't your position or hypothesis for what happen then it does not apply to you.

    "It appears that you didn't went through the factual 9/11 commission report much. The team of inquirers came to the official conclusion that the fire made the steel trusts bend a little and that these bending permitted the floors to pancake. It is the fire that caused the bending of the trusts.
    The Gov. inquirers wouldn't have felt into that aberration because of the "Live" movies captures of these buildings before they began to crash. Not brilliant at all!"

    Are you stating that a fire coincidentally broke out at the same exact time a jet liner crashed or rather that the fire and the jet liner crashing are exclusive events where one event did not lead to another event? So the jet liner's crashing into the building did not cause the fire that led to the collapse? Are you saying that a collapse of a building is due solely thermodynamics on steel and does not concern the removal of support columns based on statics?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    @Dario Sartor Are you blind?

  • Guest

    @Thang Tran,
    No I stated that according to the 9/11 inquiry report, the crashes were caused by the weakening and bending of the so-called "Support Columns" and that these bendings of the trusts got them to "Slip out" of the seatings where they where lying.
    Exactly as described within the 9/11 inquiry report.

    Moreover, it is know that the team supervising (Architecs & engineers) who had the responsability to build these sky scrapers had to evaluate the possibility that the biggest airplane at that time could be used to attack the buildings.

    Alas, as I mentioned before,the whole based on the USA protocol of carrying technical analysis!
    You may have bought a car lately?
    Look in its maintenance booklet and you'll see that most cars need their timing belts to be replace sometime after 100,000 miles.

    Thus, as jumbo jets get that big, maybe its time to have a look in its NSF, ASTM or NFS maintenace booklet to see how often the the structure needs to be revised?
    However, once the building is down and remelted for reprocess, this becomes a little useless.

    I don't know about who and for what reason, the 9/11 report and its protocols speaks much louder.

    Next? Cause my opinion is set, understood?

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Can I just confirm something Pierre? Are you saying that the WC buildings are so badly made that in fact unable to stay up to the plane crush, or the fire afterwards? Or that because there were such claims suggesting that they could not of collapsed? I'm trying to understand your train of thought because it is not very clear.

  • Guest

    @Yi Wen Qian
    Weird conclusion that is!

    In order to state such a thing, one needs the tools to analyze the facts. Among which tools, there are the standards methods of testing and the specialized workers who are trained to carry on these numerous types of analysis.
    The "Type" or "Method" depends on the chosen language one uses to refer to the written protocol.
    All protocols are quite stiff, severe. Such as "Dry the aliquot in the oven a 105C all night to dry if off". Then, keep on going...

    Ok! As I looked at the studies, factual experimentation that some US recognized standard organization has done & described in the 9/11 inquiry report, one must consider the newly "Fired" scientist who factually carried out that analysis and this stick a huge interrogation point on the various USA standards organizations.
    If the guys state that the test doesn't meet the targeted goal which would support this or that or an chain of event that lead to the crash, why use any coercitive mean toward the guy?
    The laboratory boss only needs to tell whoever is asking questions: -"We cannot provide any ultimate proof"!
    -"Don't drag my organization into this".
    A docu on TDF features him. He speaks using photos, videos and diagrams. For the least, the ones he's permitted to use, otherwise, he'd already be incarcerated.

    In short, very nice thing to set a standard but it's the protocol that makes a standard worthy?
    And that is where "Intellectual Integrity" sets the pace.
    There quite a few "Standard" procedure in the US regarding suspect fires in all US States and its "Protocol" state to preserve or "Seize" the material exhibits.

    Who's above the law over there? No one knows really.
    I don't want to go through all the "Weird" aberrations there could be in all single events, I simply see that scientific standards and technical protocols are easily overrun in the US by very weird unknown means.
    So, the suggestion you made about these 3 buildings being as you say: -Are so badly made" cannot be answered because no one including you, don't have the proper standards to determine this because the concerned standards can easily bended if need be, thus rendering them useless.

    And I stated that taking its shed doubts upon the intellectual integrity of many US standards organizations.
    I prefer to use the German ones, translated since they are active in Asia. This is it.
    You just can't have it both ways, either the 9/11 inquiry report is right (Which for now, was not proven otherwise) or else it ain't and someone needs to work on it.

    Going though my mind as I write this, I'm thinking of these widows to whom names like "Whores" where shouted by the US Elite. This, tells a lot! No one should be baring this!

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    I'm asking for you opinion, not whether your opinion has backings, because neither NIST or the people in this video have proof of exactly what happened. Since the building materials are no longer here, and even if it is, no one stood in the building measuring the fire temperature, or seen the thermite lighting up, or the steel bending. Therefore all speculation is just that, speculation. It all ends up being what you consider is probable. This is the exact reason why I want use words like 'I believe'. 'I think', 'possibly' or 'might' as you so pointed out. So rather than saying NIST is right or wrong, because let's face it, they didn't release their research data, and even if they did, it's speculation. More research currently will still be speculation. Both can argue that they do not have concrete proof. I'm all for another investigation if there will be one, but again I feel that there will just be more speculations because we no long have any of the building material here.

    By fired do you mean Jones? He wasn't on the investigation team.

    I never stated that NIST investigation was absolute, rather that from all possibilities presented by various people, I believe that the fire caused the building to pancake, which is actually not in the exactly word of NIST. To me though, saying 'there is no doubt' that there are explosives based on 'information' like it went down in freefall (no it didn't), or there was a loud sound (what building makes no sound when it falls), or I found thermite in some dust (the normal kind can't melt steel, the science for the super thermite didn't use normal thermite as control, and you can't superimpose data because different machines are different, also the thermite showed no signs of been set off). I would rather believe that the build was a fire hazard than it was set off by thermite.

    Also, you did say that what swayed you was that the building tilted and using different explosives can correct the tilt. Well, do you think it can be done in 20 minutes? Also, if the fire/impact isn't great enough, why was there tilting be beginning with? Do you believe that the buildings went down because of explosives, or that you don't know what to believe, and both sides need more evidence?

  • http://www.facebook.com/benclarkson Benjamin Clarkson

    Engineers are sadly not physicists, and not scientists. If you watch this and the skeptic magazine, national geographic debunking specials back to back it's relatively clear that planes took down the towers.

  • http://www.facebook.com/benclarkson Benjamin Clarkson

    clear to someone who has a strong grasp of calculus (go learn calculus before you start saying things you should understand but don't).

  • Guest

    @Yi Wen Qian

    Nope! I don't take any position.

    The guy I'm talking 'bout is not Jones who identified the thermite, whatever thermite it can be.
    And as such, he ain't a NIST neither I think but rather an employee of some US national standard organization.
    At most, an organization under contract with NIST from what I understood.

    Listen a lit'le Yi Wen Qian:=>
    It just doesn't make any sense that the "Highest Ranking" US officials would have been involved into the planning of the 9/11 conspiration since the 9/11 is a "Plan to commit a crime".
    Why, one’s asking? :=>

    One should remember that shortly before 9/11, D. Rumsfeld publicly mentioned that a "Few" trillions of USD went missing from the Pentagon budget!
    Everyone knows that there are only a very few leaders at the head of the US government...
    Therefore, if any "Illuminatie" is part the US government, he or they knew that they'd get away with the trillions on 9/11.
    Question" Why not postpone that public declaration to a "Later time" when all the documents will be flown to China?

    I found that sort of childish not taking this into account when peoples talk about straight forward "False Flag" operation". I repeat what I mentioned earlier: "I" and from what I can see, everyone ignore what happened exactly.

    But it sure was not Saddam, too busy to control his thugs over there, & the cave man had an organization known and well recognized to act into segregated so-called "Cells" that wheren't even aware of what each others where planning.
    This doesn't change the fact that Boing Lada did planned 2 African terrorism attacks against the occidental world.
    He gotten what he deserved.

    As far as I am concerned, the problem in all this is the obvious behavior of the various US authorities and Elite. And for instance, the indidividual(S) who insisted to make a standing proof that the steel columns swayed under the some 600C heat.
    Why not stand up to reality and simply state to who ever's requesting that: -"No, were're not into that".
    -"Find another way 'round, from what I seen in TV, there could have been explosive. Ask the army to seize the boat on route to China".

    BUT! But you omitted to consider that I am not a US citizen.
    I'm only one individual out of 7 billions, by now???
    The only thing I done 'round is to watch how the US Elite handle the whole. That was the opportunity to show "Intellectual Integrity".

    Not only from the politicians & legal system but as one scrap the technical and scientific assets, it just can't be any worst.
    Would you like to have a list of the various US standard organizations on which the foreigns need to rely on?

    So, no I wont take part of it coze I am not concerned.
    Yourself, you stated that you'd be for a second investigation even if it's too late.
    There are obvious "Others" tracks to investigate but I'll leave that to you & wish you good luck!

    Everything considered, who the heck you think you are, imposing yourself as you do?
    Is Yi Wen Qian your real name or a "Hired" disguised nickname?
    You can go tell your whiner's stories to the fire chief.

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Ah I see, you have a general distrust of the US government. I know you are not an US citizen (French correct?) and neither am I. I didn't change my name because it means 'artistic clouds at sunset' and no english name stands up to it. Hey you worked with people in China don't you, they are not exactly a reflection of either US or Chinese government. Still I do not wish to place unfounded blame, even on the evil US secret agents and government.

    Lol, I'm accused to be a CIA again, the name is a facebook link, so it pretty much have to be my real name, unlike a lot of other unlinked names. Get with the new social tech. :P Sorry I'm just a nobody in Australia, and if I really want to fool you I would have used an obscure name like Mary. So is Pierre your real name? :P And what do you mean by ' who the heck you think you are, imposing yourself as you do?', I am not aware of a caste system in the world of commenting. My comments are not rude or condescending as far as I can see.

    If the CIA planned this then I have no doubt that the missing money wasn't released to the public, since it's obviously spent as a part of the plan. I wouldn't be surprised though if that money is used to create a story of how there are weapons of mass destruction in Iran, or information was stored in the part of the pentagon that the plane crushed into. This is obviously speculation.

    All I did was asking you about your views, geez.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    @Pierre Perhaps my reading comprehension skills aren't up to par with other readers but I cannot follow your reasoning,.I'm not saying that it is valid or invalid. I am saying that I cannot understand you.

  • Guest

    Well! if Pierre is in France, it was 4am in the morning when he wrote his comment. At that time most French man (who are still up) have either been consuming red wine in large quantity or they're in full action with a beauty. Sounds like he was alone.
    I am aware i may get in trouble for this...it is mainly as a joke with a little little sarcasm.
    az

  • Greg_Mc

    @ Pierre
    az mentioned the possibility that you wrote this reply to Yi while under the influence, maybe you did maybe you didnt. To me it doesn't matter.

    What matters is the condescending and often rude way you have taken to replying to her (and to certain others as well) lately. I have read some of the conversation going on between the two of you and what I see is her taking the facts that she has come across and along with her own personal knowledge and I assume some of her own personal opinion (this is a comment section on a web site not a science class so people adding in their own personal opinion is a big part of what this site is here for) and in a generally polite way stating her views, opinions and conclusions. And what I am seeing from you Pierre is anger that in my view is bordering on hatred towards her. She even mentioned at one point that she was just plain and simple asking for your opinion and you reply "Nope! I don't take any position." But you must have one because nobody types as much as you do about a subject without having one, you may not openly state "this is my opinion/position" but you are attacking other peoples opinions and to me anyone who does that as harshly and strongly as you have been doing lately obviously does not agree with their opinion/position and I don't know how you disagree with someones opinion when you don't have your own. If you don't have your own how or why would you care so much about someone elses? But I am just being nit picky here the point of this comment to you is that I do not like the way you are talking to some people these days. Anyone who doesn't fully go along with what you have to say (mostly Yi) gets verbally attacked and bullied to the point of it being so noticeable that I have found that I cannot sit silently and read it day after day anymore without saying something about it to you.

    Everything considered, who the heck you think you are, imposing yourself as you do?
    Is Yi Wen Qian your real name or a "Hired" disguised nickname?
    You can go tell your whiner's stories to the fire chief.

    I cannot comment on this further than saying I think you should retract this and fully apologize because I find this comment so far out of line that if I tell you how much the language and other content of my reply would get me kicked off the site.

    I do not know what is going on with you outside of this site but you are not the Pierre I first met on here, he was a nice guy who instead of attacking people helped them when they had questions and properly following the TOS and basic civility and debated people. The way you go about attacking certain people on here is to me very out of line and I am politely asking you to refrain from continuing this behaviour so we can all go back to enjoying the site and talking about the docs without worry of having not only what we say attacked but having to endure personal attacks.

  • Guest

    @Yi Wen Qian,

    Ok Yi Wen Qian, I may have gone a little too far, running away but along the diverse replies you made on TDF, I took good note that you and Thang Tran go along well enough to be aware of the replies either one does on a given topic, this one in particular.

    Here, I mean that you either did read in my previous replies that I already refused to take position. And there are reasons for that.
    Because the "False Flag" thing drew most if not all the attention from what really happened on that day.
    Worst, specialists and organizations working with NIST were obviously compelled to take side during their analysis.
    That was the point I objected so much.
    I tried to speak it out as diplomatically as possible, buffing the edges as much as possible for Thang Tran but obviously made it harder to grasp. Let's just say that the whole in far from helping any US based standard organizations that remain mute.

    Therefore, as you meant to say: -"A general distrust of the US government" that splashed not so much the US politicians but the many other scientific and technology US organizations.
    To me, the question if the US Gov. was involved into the planning of the 9/11 is of a lesser issue. That doesn't help, not at all.
    It just can't be that D. Rumsfeld (And the whole gang) wouldn't have been greedy enough to spill the beans just before 9/11.
    But the bad thing is that this doesn't means that none of the WTC came down only because of the side effect of the fires.
    -There's got to be a third party involved and at one time, there were peoples in the USA that lead their doubts toward this option.

    But the false flag option VS the NIST one put a shunt on it.
    And we're since stucked with this.
    There was someone I knew that went down in the WTC.
    An old man, someone who brought me training in technical field.
    I wasn't seeing him much often anymore but to me, he was that sort person we identify as "Model figures". You know, after realizing that after the parents, there is a whole world of there...?
    I know, that man to be severe enough in technology to refuse all of that 9/11 NIST report. Goes directly to the garbage bin!

    There is another reason but since we'll never ever know, I rather remain mute.
    Here, you got it all but I don't take side, none.

    Just to tell you since you appear to have Asian roots, the place where I'm active in China is Nantong.
    But we also plan (Try) to open operations in Guangzhou.
    Pretty different peoples, aside the number of peoples in that city!
    Nothing done yet, I'll be there soon.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @Greg

    Greg, I never drink. I wonder why peoples try all sort of tastes to make ethanol easier to swollow!

    In regard to Yi Wen Qian, please do not tell me that when it come to 9/11 topic, you never noticed that were Yi Wen Qian is, Thang Tran follows and vice-versa. Secondary matter...
    But being so, let then consider that as Yi Wen Qian took over to obtain an strict opintion, my pass refusal to state an opinion made to Thang Tran was already read. See?...

    I once heard that : -When a woman says "No", it means what it means? The least that one could agree with is that it should become a line of conduct.

    It did happended to me in the past that peoples wanted me to make statements for which I just didn't know what could be the issues.
    Like: "Does a silane once hydrolyzed remain reactive so that we can store a 500 gallon batch for the next month that we'll treat a mineratl oxide pigment". We going in production next week and need to know.
    I dunno, batch a drum size silane every time, that's the way to be sure without the shadow of a doubt! We'll see later on!

    I'm not for that, simply. Apologize? I do not expect Yi Wen Qian to reconized being a little aware before hand that I didn't want to state a position? How many times should I have mention it?

    Speaking of "that Pierre", have you noticed the reply I made in another docu comment about: "The 1st christians were never fed to the lions"? I don't have much tolerance toward a straight forward aberration, as for when anyone sends a suggestion that the NAZI concentration camps never existed.
    I wouldn't use a garbage language over it but still do not let that go by.

    BTW, I'm sometimes not home even though I can connect home through PC Anywere. Was on PBS site for a while.
    If I didn't reply your jokes about the cats, it's just that I didn't nothing on the top of my head.

    Gotta go.

    Pierre.

  • Greg_Mc

    @ Pierre
    The alcohol comment was just me carrying on someone elses light hearted comment about the time of night when you posted your comment.

    Believe it or not I don't read all the comments on here especially really long ones that are likely to involve (as your conversations often do) a lot of heavy science or physics and while I am all for (and often do) learning from what a lot of you have to say many of the comments are as I said to heavy into subjects that are not things I studied at your level so I can't say I have noticed what you claim about Yi and Thang until just now and I only read some of what he was saying in order to check out your theory. I know they are not the same person and there are two things I can point out that don't 100% prove it but I think they are enough to make my point. First off go to each of their profiles on here and check out their links to facebook, they both have profiles and while Yi's is not open for anyone to look at there is enough info that backs up what she says of her being a female who lives in Australia and went to school there. Thang's on the other hand is open so you can see pictures one of which is a school trip to a University and Thang I have to add that in that pic there are two very attractive young ladies in the front row. Now for someone to make 2 accounts on TDF is not unheard of, but to follow it up with two facebook accounts using the same name's as on TDF could mean a couple of things. The first is that the person has some sort of scam or game going on where being two people is an advantage, how it would be an advantage on TDF I don't know. It would have to be for a reason where the person somehow gains something while online by doing so because to make two profiles on facebook with names, jobs, education, pics and hundreds of different friends would be a lot of work. An other reason would be that the person is just plain crazy, I do not know Thang but he seems like a nice guy who is in control of his faculties and isn't on here ranting and raving like a lunatic. Yi I can just guarantee you isn't crazy and is who she says she is.
    One other way to tell they are not the same person is by just reading their posts, they not only talk in two different ways as in styles and grammar.

    So an apology is out of the quesion eh? You honestly expect people to read all your comments to other people so that they will know about you before they say something? This is just going to go no place I already feel like I am going in circles. Even if Yi should have known not to ask for your opinion which I still say is information you can't expect her to have for reasons I stated above you were way out of line with your comments to her. There is no need to talk to anyone on here like that (you do it to Thang as well, you need to get some patience dude) and there is definetly never a reason to talk to a girl like that. I would be interested in finding out why those two have been picked out to receive your special kind of attention.

    Honestly Pierre you have surprised me, as I mentioned before your behaviour towards some people has been out of line. It is not what people have come to expect from you, I can't speak for others but I personally expected more from you than this.

    Maybe it is me, I just don't see the need to treat people as badly as you treated Yi and if you do I would expect to have a h3ll of a better reason. And the fact that this is now the way you treat her everytime you reply to her, it has been going on for a while and getting worse and worse. Not to mention Thang is getting it from you too. I give up on it, you made it clear you feel your behaviour is ok and nobody else in here seems to have a problem with it (so they must think it is alright to talk to a young lady like that) because I am the only one who has said anything.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    @ Pierre

    I want to start by saying I am truely sorry that you have lost such an important figure in your life.

    If you want to say that we are the same person, then sorry to disappoint you. You are wrong. I fail to see though, why I should not follow other people's train of thought, considering we stands at the same side of the debate. At this rate, you might argue that NAND, me, Thang, Greg_Mc, Jack, and who ever else are all me because they interacted closely with me. Still, I do believe that way you worded last few sentence to my post was particularly rude.

    I have had problems understanding your views from the beginning, because you seemed to jump on everyone, and string 10 different parts of what is suppose to but did not seem to convey one particular view, but none the less shows that you are against the view of the poster. Now I'm trying to put this as politely as possible. It did not seem that you were for or against bombs but rather had a general anger that I could not put my fingers on. However if you make something too hard to understand, expect people to not understand it. To say 'when a woman says "No", it means what it means? The least that one could agree with is that it should become a line of conduct', cannot be clearly understood, among other things.

    Therefore, no, even after reading your posts, I did not understand your views. I did not read all of your posts, or indeed any posts to other topics, as you probably never read all of mine. It probably didn't help that a lot of posts got deleted, so a response with nothing to respond to is in itself meaningless.

    I would have no doubt that there are factions within NIST that argued about the outcome, considering they were under funded and the results are all speculations, and speculations will differ between parties. Sometimes, things cannot always be explained, because no one can turn back time yet. I simply find the alternative more ridiculous. Now, you are considering that there is a 3rd party involved, and all I can say is that well, there is no proof against that, and I believe Thang would agree with that point.

    The fire thing I got from an UK source, which is hiding somewhere down there I which don't have time to find, but it is a theoretical but detailed model of how the fire could have cause the collapse. It's not NIST.

    I came from Shanghai, so Nantong is close but I don't know much about it. Guangzhou is much further and yes, they are very different. I know it is the place to get a cheap Gucci bag because that's where, and many other things, are made. However, because this is the case, there are a lot of fakes being sold.

  • http://www.facebook.com/mmdillon1 Martin Micheal Dillon

    The american government sacrificed its own people for money, lol

  • Guest

    @Yi Wen Qian: No, no! It's Greg who jumped to the conclusion that you & Thang are the same TDF user.
    Must be because I stated "Where Thang is, Yi Wen Qian follow". But since the NAND's thing, Vlatco keep his things clean. I think, found.
    BTW, when I take the time to read someone (Not everyone), I read them from "A" to Z".

    Now, about that "Oldy" formulator who went down with the WTC crash, I should say that I learned 'bout it much later one. And it's been months at that time, since I heard of him. So, no sobbing really.
    It's just that I liked the man, simply.

    By stating "When a woman say no", I meant that it's the same for man in other paths of life.

    And yes, I admit that my idea of a third party (Other then the 2 ones already known) is for the least obscure but it would also mean that the buildings didn't went down only because of the jet crashes.
    Which imply that quite a few were aware including peoples having authority within the buildings.
    Along with a few explosive planting.
    Have you noticed that Jones never said straight forward that he blames the US high ranking politicians?
    I seen a few interverviews with this guy and he didn't shout it out but rather remain prudent.

    There was a good documentary that could have brough light on this option but I didn't want to be the one who's carry this concept here on this docu comment list.
    Anyhow, peoples are so hooked on the "All out" conspirarcy VS the NIST protection that I felf it was and remains pointless.
    Anyhow, nobody will ever obtain a reopening of the 9/11 inquiry and at most, it'll be a 2nd JFK.

    Summing it all, there are very dangerous terrorists, yes but also very dangerous indivuals in the USA as well.

    Remember that my comment that started this was: -If scientific organisations like the ones who worked under contract with NST, are ready to bend their testing protocols (Test methods), it is only normal that one becomes doubfull 'bout their intellectual integrety.
    I earn my living with this!

    And yes once more, I am too often particularly rude.
    But sure did told Thang more than once that I didn't want to take position and I know that you read him.
    More often, I prefer not saying a word and read peoples but as one says things such as the Christians were never fed to the lions by the romans or the the WWII concentration camps were a hoax...
    I am not friendly toward that.

    I have a few schedules one waiting...

    Pierre.

  • Greg_Mc

    it isn't like it would be the first time

  • http://www.facebook.com/mmdillon1 Martin Micheal Dillon

    this time its cold blooded murder.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    @ Pierre

    Well, NIST was never given the task of being scientific, but rather to give an answer. Science never works well when politics or religion is involved. I think it is pretty clear that it isn't scientific when they withhold their analysis data for political reasons. I wonder if that has a 50 year expire date.

    I don't think the 3rd party idea is a reason to claim that the building is blown up at all. The evidence and science associated with the thermite claim is much more unscientific. To claim super thermite was use might as well as point the fingers to the US, since at the time it was US that had the technology. I can see how there wouldn't be a direct proof against someone else setting up the plane crush, but not for why the buildings went down as it did.

  • Guest

    @Yi Wen Qian

    It's been more than a while that I noticed that your remained an emule of an abusive dictatoriat.
    And that it your line of conduct in life.

    SIC: -"I wonder if that has a 50 year expire date".
    Decision to hide the thruth and ignore.
    Humankind can count itself lucky that almost no such dictators are unable to abuse their fellow citizens.

    Whatever science pre-school training you show to have received just ought to be from the remanances of the abusing totalitarian society that spreads that aberration.
    EG: -"I can see how there wouldn't be a direct proof against someone...".
    What competence have you got to claim this?
    Years of endoctrinements instill within your education?
    This is not the typical occidental concept of democracy.
    And you sure need to revise your concepts!

    Or is it the fact that you're a woman who has the authority to act in a totalitarian way, shouting to a man that he didn't went on his knees while "She" exhale her obvious total incompetency?

    I'll tell y'a, why don't go see Greg and sing him your complaints to him?
    I don't want to hear about totalitarian dictatorhip concepts. Have you got this now?

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    Huh?

  • Bunny Omelette

    Many thanks to Vlatko for setting up such a wonderful website.

    This is one of the most heart-wrenching documentary I ever watched. Really hope there will be thorough investigation. The families deserve to know the truth. No one ever really gets through the death of a loved one.

  • Greg_Mc

    everytime you write something you just add to the list of reasons why everyone thinks your an A$$. You don't even have the slightest clue how to treat people, no matter what your response is to this or anyone else's comments I will just bypass anything you have to say in the future on any subject. I almost feel bad for you that you are so angry at the world, and a little hint ... read what you write before you post it. I know English is not your first language but 80% of what you write makes no sense to anybody

  • Greg_Mc

    Ignore him Lak, he is a bitter old man who seems to hate women and other possible things about Yi and Thang (draw your own conclusions as to why because I can't say that I can't think of anything. well I can but i would prefer to not think it is true.

    Anyway I am unsubscribing from this page because we seem to have another Nand on our hands and I am not going to participate in it anymore. I will go to docs where people have conversations and debates that don't turn into what we have going on here.

    I am sure we will run into each other on here soon Lak but until then be good

  • http://www.facebook.com/cchristiankg Christian Klinckwort Guerrero

    My compliments. Now, ... can I raise a sue against Georgre and Silverstein to put them on the electric chair in Texas?

  • http://www.facebook.com/cchristiankg Christian Klinckwort Guerrero

    George Bush, I am glad, very glad.
    After this doc I know, you will be persecuted and Silverstein aswell

  • http://www.facebook.com/cchristiankg Christian Klinckwort Guerrero

    Is there some one to make a claim? Is there a Lawyer to back me up once I pretend sewing George Bush and Silvertein in the name of Humanity?

  • Colin Doran

    This video is difficult to watch - supposedly educated intelligent people making fools of themselves and buying into an absurd myth. The least that would be expected from people with degrees and PhDs etc would be just the basics of critical thinking. It just shows that the most important degree you can have is a degree of common sense.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    I'm neither abusive or totalitarian, nor do I need to hide behind Greg. In US, government file kept secret must be released after 50 years, that's what I was eluding to. There is no current proof of a third party, also no proof that there is definitely no third party. It's a comment, nothing to do with democracy.

    If all you can do is type insults then don't expect a reply.

  • TBurkhart

    I've always been suspicious of the way the Towers collapsed, but what I don't understand is why someone would blow up a building after a plane just crashed in to it. If you have the capabilities to blow up a building, then why would you go through all the trouble of hijacking a plane and committing suicide by crashing the plane in to the building?

  • PeSO821

    I agree If there is a conspiracy, it should concentrate on airplane hijacking. So what if building would collapse in different way? The impact would be similar… It would produce shock among public in any case. And that is supposed to be objective, right?
    Imagine the risk American government would have to go take. You need a team of tens or hundreds of professionals to put explosives in. And if only one gets a second thought and sells the story to some news agency. Imagine them finding explosives set up in the building – you thing you can keep something like that quiet? You would need to bribe or intimidate thousands of people if it gets to this point. And what if airplanes would miss? And then they find explosives?

    Imagine what that would mean to republicans. They would lose elections for next hundred years – and for what? For the building to collapse in one way and not the other?

    And for the end – Why did Wiki leaks not released any proof of conspiracy. You think so many people can be quiet about something so big.
    This is like one thousand perfect criminals with no consciousness, cold blooded and efficient.
    If anything, I think you are giving government way too much credit. Life is quite the opposiote: messy, full of silly mishaps and misunderstandings…

  • TommyLjungberg

    @PeSO821, TBurkhart

    Those are very good questions, and i agree, it's very difficult to see how all this could be possible to execute...
    However, the facts are still there.
    We HAVE all the videos, pictures and testimonies of secondary explosions, molten metal, free-fall collapses and so on. And that has nothing to do with planes hitting buildings. And if you have done even more research in other areas, there are even more holes in the official story that simply doesn't add up...

    I come from Sweden, so it's easier for me to just look at whatever evidence there is, without having a trauma and/or the typical "american type of world view" standing in my way. And that is NOT an insult to americans. You are ordinary people, just like me... But over here, most people in my age know that most americans have a very different view of the world, their own government (and other governments all over the world for that matter), and their role in this world, that isn't what we can see from here. And I think most poor countries in the world would say the same. But that doesn't show in your mainstream media... Often quite the opposite.

    You would probably ask yourself "Why would people in our own government, institutions, people at wall street, and some big corporations together plan an attack like this?"
    Well... I could think of several reasons why, and they all have something to do with money, power, resources and ultimately your country's "survival".
    Think about what changes that have been made since that day in the name of terrorism. And ask yourself, don't you have to really upset people in other countries to make them angry with america? Could that be a reason to point fingers, and tell you who to blame?
    What is, and what has always been americas role in this world for the last 150 years?

    America isn't nearly as free as Sweden, yet we would both say we live in a democracy. Do that word really mean something? As long as you think you live in a democracy, a free country, the best country in the world... yes, I can see why all this information is difficult to handle.

    FINALY... i just want to make it clear, that when I see all the information, videos, testimonies and so on about the incredible work all the firefighters, volunteers and police did that day, I get very sad, because I SEE all that wonderful american spirit and willingness to help others, that actually swedes maybe have less of. And all that work... for what!? You get nothing in return! No answers, no facts, no healthcare, only more surveillance and a deeper financial crisis... And did it really have to happen in order for america to survive and keep it's position in the world!?
    I think you are capable of so much more good in the world than going into wars for power and resources, just to make other countries angry...
    Please open your eyes a little bit more, and don't be afraid of the truth!

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/alronvitis norlavine

    Obviously, this was a call for 'the cleaners'. The reason will be made public when they can eventually think tank a good enough one....

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5HUS2EQLZP35NMJTCKIGXANABU Jamie

    The government lied so much about 9/11 a kid could see through the lies just like 7/7 in London.So people that now the fact definetly no the government deserves no credit but jail for life.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5HUS2EQLZP35NMJTCKIGXANABU Jamie

    They are inteligent and right on most things there is about 20 thousand experts that refute the official story.It was an inside job by stupid people.You need to see much more to open your eyes,look at Idian point nucular plants that one plane flew derectly over and another was within 6 minutes of them.If these so called terrorists wanted to do the most damage possible they would have hit them,leaving Boston to New York a wast land for thousands of years and killed upwards of 20 million people.You have lots to learn or just can't face the facts.Not being rude just telling the truth.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5HUS2EQLZP35NMJTCKIGXANABU Jamie

    Aside from all the facts it was an inside job when that worm Bill got blowed by that pig in the oval office 350 million was spent to investigate it and the impeachment.9/11 started with 3 million and ended up useing 15 on the biggest attack on American soil in history.I can't belive people are dumb and think it was OBL and some terrorists.They most defended air space in any country and the most defended in America.Wake up.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    I'm not American, but the thing is there are so much information it is hard to separate the truth from fiction. There's not recordings of 2nd or 3rd distinct explosions, no photos of molten metal or an evidence that the building was in free fall. America did a lot of things but I don't think this is yet.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    I believe it is about 15 to 20 hundred experts. The idea is that the trade centre and pentagon is a symbol of greed and corruption, and that's why they are targeted. The terrorists didn't care about killing many Americans, they what to target what they see as corrupted American values, not the Americans themselves.

  • TommyLjungberg

    I'm sorry, but I don't find much substance in your answers.. And you are not alone in that.

    Actually it is as if YOU are the one who have a clear picture of what happened.
    When you say things like "The terrorists didn't care about killing many Americans...", that way of just forming a sentence, to me, sounds like some random opinion without any facts from an angry columnist or something.
    And when you start of by saying "I BELIEVE it is about 15 to 20 hundred experts", that is just lack of knowledge and simply NOT true.
    Why would you even say that, if you clearly don't know for sure?

    When you're talking about "no evidence"... There are lots of photos of molten metal, recordings of explosions, so I don't really understand what all that is coming from. But remember, this is as I said before just a VERY few pieces of evidence concerning only the buildings that contradict to the official story. There are so many other important aspects to all this.
    Could it be that you simply refuse to absorb all the available information, because you don't like what you see?

    Only the simplest thing in the world, to actually put forward a credible and physically possible report of the investigation concerning these events is obviously not something that the officials are willing to do. I mean, no one is even allowed to ASK about certain questions... Doesn't a bell ring here?

    I think it's you, my friend(and you are not alone), who cannot separate truth from fiction (or should I say facts/what little we actually KNOW for sure, and official statements), which is very important.
    There are many of us who doesn't care about anything else than a new independent investigation, together with as many experts as possible. That is an investigation where theories that cannot be backed up by science and simple laws of physics would be allowed... which is what we don't have today...

    The words "terrorism" and "conspiracy theories" are not relevant. Only knowledge. Remember that "the truth movement" and "... for 9/11 truth" does not stand for "We have the truth and the real version of what happened, and you don't!". It means that we WANT to know the truth and we want to see credible facts be presented to the public - to show respects to all the people who died that day, and in the name of the word "terrorism".

  • Guest

    @TommyLjungberg

    You heard (Read) Tommy? (Quote) : "There's not recordings of 2nd or 3rd distinct explosions, no photos of molten metal or an evidence that the building was in free fall".

    The Spanish janitor touring the USA who states that he"Distinctively" heard some was not even called as a witness because NIST since this became irrelevant to the case.
    Same as for all other ignored witnesses, which include hundreds of firefighters. All things considered, did any of these thousands firefighters ever heard any explosion before?
    -So, they just can't be reliable witnesses!

    About that obviously high ranking janitor who later insisted that heard the same type of "Boom" as when the 1st WTC occured a few years back, have you seen how he look? His lying eyes?
    He's been janitor over there for ever and never got better!
    He knew everything about his building maybe better than Silverstein who knew everything about the WTC and better yet, was in a position to monitor every move and maintenance within the WTC. Being the owner, he's legally the one who knows who comes in buildings, by planes, by strechers or by wheelchairs!

    -Not a spanish janintor job that it!
    -Poor Silverstein! He lost his buildings & now has to rebuild now!
    -Let's just hope that the USA Jewish lobby (APEC?) can do something to help?
    As we all know, isn't it or with the exception of only a very few behind a puter away, elsewhere far away on planet earth.

    What credibility one should allow to that spanish guy?
    He deserves his jobless situation just as all the other ones who went against NIST. Which totals up too many including any engineer who'd just say the tiniest word against the NIST's TRUTH.
    :=>Barred from appearing at the NIST inquiry just as for the other civilians who ran out of there covered with white dust, shouting out loud "It's an inside job"!

    The reason why all the widow of the 9/11 were called "Whores" by the USA politicians is now sure well understood since they where manifesting to get the 9/11 inquiry commission while George had to cope with the planned retaliation.

    I'll tell you more. The so-called "Molten steel" (Not "MOLEN METAL" as some biased ones just love to smooth out), just ought to be nothing more than a hoax captured by foreign (Not USA) satellites that are not much more reliable than the USA Gov. that captured the WMD in Iraq. It must be "Left overs" communists!

    And that all the firefighers who seen the flowing steel were simply colluding with the non reliable engineers that knew there would be a whole lot of money to get out of their declaration.
    Left aside that since many lost their jobs, in some cares careers, they knew they could go home and sit on the USA public security grants while enjoying a life without the need to work!
    -Beside, they are all incompetents, simply ask Popular Mechanic!
    -Better listen to renown but anonymous authorities here on this website.

    It’s a bunch of terrorists who don't like the Americans because they don't have beards. For once, a Chinese group abroad got itself a heck of a good deal with the scrapped steel from the WTCs, everyone should be happy.

    BTW: Have you seen the "Coco Schrijber - First Kill (2001) [VIETNAM WAR]" that just came out lately?
    It tells a lot as to when one's own life experience is only war.

    Pierre.

    Pierre.

  • TommyLjungberg

    You started off by quoting me wrong, and the rest was mostly emotions and some thin and irrelevant arguments.

    Imagine that there was a heavy fire in your apartment...

    Would you immediately be concerned that the fire could make the whole building to collapse? Well, according to NIST that could be possible.
    Don't know what incompetent structural engineers who might have build your apartment building, right?

    As soon as you read that last sentence I just wrote, some people seem to take their blindfolds on and think to themselves "Yeah, maybe a couple of office fires are capable of such a thing. After all, very important people told us so about the twin towers and building 7..."

    Are you telling me that you would be the one, running around at the street below, telling everyone to back away because the building might come down symmetrically without or with little resistance on it's own footprint, if the fire is not gone in the next hour or so?
    "- And while you're at it... You should move your cars as well, because there will be a number huge trucks here in a minute to take all the ruble and steel frames away, and ship it off to china as soon as possible because they need the money(!?)"

    I would say people on the street would think you're crazy...

    Or maybe I'm crazy. Maybe that's why some salesman came to my one room apartment the other day, and so desperately wanted me to buy a fire distinguisher and three smoke detectors...

    My point is... You don't have to be an architect or structural engineer to see that the official explanation of how the twin towers and building 7 collapsed, doesn't make sense at all.
    I mean, are skyscrapers really this vulnerable, or does this phenomena only occur in New York?
    If this was true, millions of people all over the world risk their lives every day, just by having an apartment, or working in an office building.

    Remember, it has always been very easy for independent experts around the globe to explain these collapses, because it's part of their education and job to know how it works. And they don't limit themselves to simple office fires, because that's not how science works.
    And it has always been VERY HARD for NIST and other institutions and important people to explain their theory, so they've had to change their story several times.
    Still it makes no sense, if you ask the laws of physics.

    This is what this is all about.

  • Guest

    @TommyLjungberg

    Tommy... I wasn't quoting you at all. You never said (Wrote): -"There's not recordings of 2nd or 3rd distinct explosions, no photos of molten metal or an evidence that the building was in free fall"."?
    Quotations are quotation.Words for words, isn't it?
    As far as I know, for the least.

    I guess that I should also express how sorry I am that you didn't understood readily that my comment here below was a tiny bit of a sacarsm. Here, I mean that you & me are not alone on this docu comment list? There may be a third party?.............

    Well! My sarcasm appeared to trigger your reply.
    As one should not be "Too agressive" within text and prefer to go for a low profile move, sacasm is often the only way to go.
    If you read back, you'll see the obvious for sure:-)
    :-)

    Pierre.

  • a_no_n

    yeah, they somehow managed to sneak tons and tons of explosives into a building in the middle of the city, wire it up, and detonate it, completely unnoticed, even with the rest of said city in an absolute blind panic...stands to reason.
    Then they managed to keep it quiet for a decade too.
    Totally believable...*sigh*

    The reason people have trouble explaining it (not that they can't, it has been explained plenty of times) is because nothing like that has ever happened before.

  • a_no_n

    How do you think Steel is forged?
    I'll give you a hint...it involves heating it.
    When you heat metal, it loses it's structural strength, it doesn't have to melt to lose it's strength, it doesn't even have to be glowing hot!

    The jet fuel might not have heated the structure, but all the paper, computers, carpet, electrics, furniture, corpses etc would have easily provided enough heat.

    Computers for example have quite a high heat output when they burn, and they burn for quite a while...more than long enough to weaken metal if there's enough of them.

    If you think controlled explosives are more likely to have damaged the towers than the fires caused by the crash, i advise you take a basic metalworking class...

    FFS even the Romans knew heat weakened metal...otherwise they wouldn't have been able to make swords or Armour! why have 21st century people forgotten this all of a sudden?

  • a_no_n

    educated people who want their well-founded questions asked.

    And then go on to ignore the answer when it's presented.

  • a_no_n

    i think it's preposterous that the Bush government had the intelligence to set up something like this...the man couldn't get through a speech without fuc*ing up, never mind a conspiracy of this size and scale! That's the real improbability. None of the conspiracy theorists take governments colossal incompetence into consideration

  • Guest

    @a_no_n?

    Have you ever seen a "Phase diagram"of a given alloy under heat like steel? If so, do you have any idea at what temperature does "That specific type of steel" change its tensile and elongation value?
    So, I would like to know what's the "Slope" of curve of the tensile as that steel begins to weaken? In short, does it happen all in a sudden of gradually? -The slope of the graph,what is it, tell me?

    I'm talking 'bout the graphical phase diagram VS heat for that specific type of steel. Not the one sent to china but as it is noted within the original buildings archictural design.
    And obviously, for that specific type of alloyed steel, hum?
    Let me take for granted that you know the serial number of that alloy steel that served for these buildings?
    Do you have your handbook of alloyed steels at hand?

    Coze we've been through a few technical developpements since the romans and I wonder if the romans knew how to study alloys as we do in now days. For instance, reading the datas of a manual " Instron " tensile intrument.

    I bet that the romans had to do all the calulations by hand once the tests were done through a somewhat old fashioned " Intron", hum?
    In my case, I wouldn't even be able to callucate it anymore.
    It's been too long. Thanks God, Instron company now offer not only the detectors but also the computorized attachement.

    I feel that those calculations and graphic charts take too long to calculate by hand!
    But Hey ! What's a few months for someone who really wants to get his way with a task? I remember one R&D project that took close to 2 years before it became a reality even though we were 4 individuals on it.

    Next, regarding the inciendiary potential of all the computers present in that building, that just ought to be the answer!
    The answer to the raging yellowish orange wild open flames we all seen in every reports and movies just before the towers collapsed!

    Thinking of this, everybody should recycle their computer's corpses so that armies would then load their bomb shells with it!
    For the least, it would be better than producing bomb shells out of depleted uranium since uranium bomb shells are strictly forbidden by most if not all international human rights organisations.
    and "La Hague" war crime court.
    Whoupsy! I forgot that we're talking 'bout USA Gov. who just couldn't care less about the rest of the wold with its human rights, unless otherwise specified.

    Whooh! Never thought of this: -Manufacturing inciendiary bombs with scrapped computers!
    Good idea I'll say but I rather work on other things franlky!

    Pierre.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_SYJV4PJ4O2A7XEQ33CNHHI3A44 Toni

    um his father is a billionaire?, who actually was the first to mention NWO on LIVE TV!. i havent watched the video, i skim thru the comments first. bush jr was the first person in AMERICAN history that had a father son presidency, in other countries, its a tradition. but here, its RARE. an with all the countries capabilities at their disposal. i say WHY NOT?

  • Guest

    One gets the Government that he deserves.
    What are alike go along.

    Pierre.

  • miyamoto65

    WAR=MONEY It all goes back through history, in order for the money "controllers" to make MORE money they need the best money maker history ever created. Start with the Rothchilds/histories wars and how they all fit neatly together, when you get to the start of this country(USA) our forefathers talked about it and were dead against it, but the all mighty dollar prevails yada yada war after war lets get to the cold war after that never panned out into actual battle and things cooled down(no money made with this) what better than the never ending (war on terror) get that baby going and money will never stop being made b/c its a war that never ends. History, greed , federal reserve, and the few who call worldly shots. Makes sense to me.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Well, considering the state US is in right now, the plan seems to be failing.

  • Jmaxmuzik

    9/11 was very obviously an inside job. When you have experts with Ph.d's confirming that the buildings came down by controlled demolition then it's game over. Take a look at what was inside building 7 and that will answer why they collapsed it. This was planned for a long time by a very serious team of professionals. Im guessing the planes were flown by remote control as my father thinks as well. Ovioua RED FLAG. Poor Americans just understand why this was done because they watch to much FOX news lol. What scares me is what they have in store next for the U.S because they got away with this.

  • Jmaxmuzik

    It's working actually. The people that did this have all the money already they just want control and power through fear.

  • http://www.facebook.com/tim.gale1 Tim Gale

    What about all those with Phds that say it's not a controlled demolition? Who is your father and what does his opinion got to do with the price of fish? How do you know this was planned for a very long time by a very serious team of professionals, and not done on the spare of the moment by semi-professionals? Where do you get your information from? It concerns me when people have no grasp between what is possible opposed to what is probable.

  • luis mdahuar

    you do not have thinking caopacities, you should hire a specialist

  • luis mdahuar

    go buy an apple pie

  • oracle2012

    This film was extradonarily produced and shed light on so many incidents that took place 9/1. I think this film is incredubly important and it is critical for all Americans to see this film. The lost of life has to be respeccted and as stated on the film we respect their lives by further investigating and exposing the truth about what happened that day. I woukld like to think the film maker, the experts and the families that shared their stories of pain with us. And I would like to think topdocumentary for allowing us to view this important work.

  • PeSO821

    There are as many phd's saying opposite... But who knows?
    It is very hard to say anything about demolition of large scale objects. The intuition on this scale completely breaks down. Materials behave very differently in different scales: look at the legs of mosquito and legs of elephant – they have totally different proportion. Generally, the bigger the things, the more fragile they are. Let’s admit it. All of us are relying on reasons somebody made for us: being a “truther” or official engineer.

    The reasoning Shermer (The Believeng Brain) puts forward is not proof at all – it is probability assessment:
    What he thinks is difficult to achieve is the amount of people that are involved and have to be absolutely quiet. To date nobody has come forward and testified how they put explosives in, or even how they saw suspicous people in the building. That is, if you know anything about human nature, extremely IMPROBABLE.
    Add to this what Noam Chomsky has to say: if it is inside job, why blame Saudis? and then go through all the loops to blame it on Saddam. Why not just blame it on Saddam in first place? Again, it is POSSIBLE it is like this, but does not make much sense... Than, what would happen if planes would miss, which is a real danger, and than explosives would be discovered in buildings... and so on...

    The reason that 9/11 helped America get to oil fields COULD ALSO BE COINCIDENCE. Weird things happen all the time. This is not a movie, where every scene has to mean something. It is REAL life – full of stupid mishaps.

  • Colin Doran

    The question I would ask is , if 911 was actually a terrorist attack how would the US Government have reacted to it? What would be the plausible reaction of the US Government to nearly 3000 people being killed in one day. Would they just shrug their shoulders and do nothing about it? Whether 911 was an actual terrorist attack or a false flag attack, the reaction to it would have plausibly been the same- that is the whole idea of a false flag attack - that you react plausibly to an attack on you. How the US Government reacted to 911 doesn't tell you one way or the other whether it was a real attack or a flase flag attack -by definition.

  • Getagrippse

    oh dear, u really need to check your facts. There were audio recordings of further 'explosions', there was a countdown heard on radios prior to WTC 7 collapsing and guess what it starts to fall when it hits '1', the emergency centre moves 12 minutes prior to the collapse of one of the towers, there are videos of molten metal dripping from WTC1 half way up, and pictures of excavators moving molten metal weeks after the event, and of course the heat signatures taken from a variety of different countries satellites showing extreme temperature, oh and pictures of the main beams with diagonal 'cuts', traces of military thermite in the dust, the list goes on and on, The Pentagon, no evidence of a plane having crashed into it - plane engines are made of titanium, and they didn't survive but a passport did? Over 80 video cameras were pointing toward the Pentagon all videos confiscated. Inside job? no idea, purely terrorists - doubtful. Oh and terrorists, trained at army bases in the US, given express Visas without checks in Saudi [the only country in which this was allowed], the FBI obstructing several individual FBI officers investigations of possible AQ cells in New York and some of the individual terrorists. Check your FACTS the last US president to be genuinely elected was Kennedy, the rest are basically puppets. WGB could barely articulate a sentence - wake up FFS the US is going to pot, the Constitution is slowly being eroded by the Patriot Act, the removal of Habeus Corpus and Homeland Security. Afganistan, Iraq, Iran? possibly. Check out where all the US military bases are in the Middle East, surprise surprise dotted around the oil pipeline running North to South - its all about MONEY and its not the US Goverment pulling the strings, its the guys who run it. ps: I'm British, not US so I have no axe to grind, but your country is going to s**t so you best wake up and start to get your acts together

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    I would love to know how many of you here making these comments are properly qualified to do so? You guys in general look quite silly! Study the subjects of physics, materials and chemistry before making such stupid comments and do everyone the favor. The reason for getting away with something so big is that most of you have a downgraded education and lack of critical thinking. Good luck to you all!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    Couldn't have said it better myself! The truth is that there isn't a truth just yet. That’s what this documentary is all about. Open a new investigation and follow the rules of engagement. Take new evidence into account and make a new official report. The old one is obviously not right! The evidence speaks for its self (or the lack of it).

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    What power and control did they get?

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    The trace thermite was illegitimately published, and the paper just showed dust that just contained unused thermite (I would expect some used thermite if the dust was legit), also the science proving it is super thermite is shaky. The plane crushed into the Pentagon, the pics always show the exit site. The wings and insides of the plane was mostly left within the building.

    The recordings, molten metal and pics of excavators are all rumours, since no one was allowed into the vicinity or have the authority to take these. As for confiscating tapes, do you want the building plan responsible for national security on youtube? As for army bases and patriot act, I agree there was definitely money involved, but there was war in mid-east before 9/11, so US don't really need much excuse to start another war in these places.

    About the fact that the last true president is Kennedy, there isn't anything in wikileak about that.

    Also, I stated that I'm not American either at the beginning of my post. Seriously though, if US goes tomorrow, I don't think many people other than the US citizens will miss it. There is definitely a lot wrong with the country, but even so it is better than a lot of other countries in the world. If I am an American citizen, I would start to protest about the government internet filter that's coming in place.

  • Jmaxmuzik

    Seriously? what power and control did they get?

    Well lets see, they invaded IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN for starters! They invaded Afghanistan on the basis of 9/11. But those towers came down through controlled demolition with explosives. So that was a complete lie!
    Let's get to Iraq, they LIED about WMD which don't exist in Iraq so another lie.
    The U.S. now controls it's people through FEAR. The words terror, terrorist. terrorism, believe to be linked to Al Qaeda. This is highly used in mainstream media everyday, and printed everywhere.
    It's a way of allowing the powers behind the scenes to call the shots and impose new rules. E.g. The Patriot Act..
    Hopefully you get it now Yi..

  • Jmaxmuzik

    Is that why multiple experts and PhD's are saying it was controlled demolition? So I guess there all wrong and your right. Please, Christopher go back to school.
    Please explain to us, how the CORES of both WTC are not still standing? Did the jet fuel melt them too? lol

  • Jmaxmuzik

    Exactly! well said.

  • goldensilence

    You filthy uncouth peasants. Even now you still refuse to believe it. You are pathetically weak minded. Dependant on us due to your own ignorance and laziness. You lap up all we give you like starving dogs. You would believe anything we tell you because at first you wanted to be entertained by things like TV and you knew it was not real and indeed that is how it started. But you became lazy and complacent. Now your beginning to believe all the Bullshit we feed you. TV has been instrumental in your own downfall just as your own laziness has. Expecting to be handed truth by someone other than yourselves? You lazy dogs you deserve eternal slavery. Just as we eroded your confidence in mankind with violence both real and on screen we tore at the threads of the family through soap operas. You miserable fools. You all claim to love peace yet you allow your kids to play video games depicting war and violence. You allow the killing of millions because of the loss of 5,000. Yet you do not see even now that you have been duped. Even after Bush became president there were those who said "no way this is too much even for the sheeple" Bush laughed at you during his televised speeches. STILL no one picks up because you are blind. SPIRITUALLY blind!

    Well you had better open your eyes and quickly because we are not through yet. Not by a long shot.

    Signed

    Henry Kissenger

  • Guest

    Here's the problem you're having Yi. If a person didn't use reason to get into a position, reason won't get him out of it. You'll never get through to them.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    I'm not sure what you’re talking about. I support the controlled demolition theory. I myself have studied structural design! It is impossible to get a building to collapse into its own footprint by random damage. The symmetry of the collapse gives away how they did it. Unfortunately we don’t have the evidence to show for this hypothesis because it was all destroyed (WTC 7 gives it away though). I was referring to the people who support the “official explanation” that I do not agree with. The likeliness of the buildings falling the way they did without any “help” is in my opinion zero.
    The whole argument of this documentary is that the evidence shown by governmentally controlled institutions is flawed and conducted in an illegal manner. Therefore needing a new independent forensic investigation of the collapse.
    I hope this clears things up.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    I would like to see those photos (better yet the video footage they withheld from the public) showing the pentagon and the plains remains. From what I could see on the news. There just wasn’t any! First time in the history of aviation if you ask me. :)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    You have some issues that need attention my friend!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    I'm not sure where you want to get with this....Are you implying that it doesn't matter if it was the US government or terrorists because the result would be the same? I think the difference is huge and disturbing to say the least.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    You see, this guy is not a critical thinker!

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    very good point.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    no that is not what he was saying.

    he was saying that when people use the argument that the government performed this as a false flag and the proof is the fact that we went to war, is NOT a good argument.

    because whether it was the government or not the result would have been the same THUS the conclusion does not follow the premise making it an unsound argument.

    actually it was a very good point that im glad he pointed out.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    I can only laugh after reading your comment.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    why??

    and while you are explaining that perhaps you would like to explain why a truther such as yourself seems to have such a hard time having a civil discussion with someone without resorting to insults?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    Oh dear, I must laugh once again. I don't see any insult in my last comments. I laugh because it seems to me that you think it to be more probable for a passport to survive a voyage through hell than (if I remember correctly) a 4 metric ton titanium Rolls Royce engine surviving a crash. No need for video evidence to know that it’s not possible. Retaining evidence after 3000 deaths is just mind-boggling. You believe that the engine evaporated into thin air (let me emphasize on the TITANIUM engine that doesn’t even melt at the burning temperature of kerosene yet alone evaporate)? I want my passport to be made of the same material as that terrorist!

  • goldensilence

    No I just practice theatrics :O

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    the engine stayed in the building, the passport went flying out.

    you are creating an entire straw man to argue with. have fun with that.

    "I can only laugh after reading your comment."
    is a passive aggressive insult.

    "You see, this guy is not a critical thinker!"

    "You guys in general look quite silly!"

    "The reason for getting away with something so big is that most of you have a downgraded education and lack of critical thinking."

    all these have been said by you without you providing any evidence for the claims you made.

    actually a simple search will show you that they did find a part of the engine from the towers. where do you get your information? and when you get it do you look it up to make sure it is correct or do you just repeat it?

  • Guest

    @Epicurus

    No explosion what so ever before the collapse, Huh?

    Well, if anybody has lost any credibility at anytime, that makes it!
    Just as if someone never viewed the all the very numerius tapes over & over!
    Else, another one that state that state that it was illegal to run tests if whatever thermite was present within the little dust that wasn't "ILLEGALLY" sent abroad by an unfit "Boss". (Unfit to say the least).

    Speaking of the illegal shipment of buildings remains plus the farce of the public inquiry, this underlines a typical criminal behavior now known to everyone on planet earth which brands the "Made in America" logo.

    And this, dating back to before JFK as you mentioned before.
    No need to be "Curious" on the surroundings here (Epi-Curious blind eyes)!

    One thing the world now knows for a fact is that whatever the USA Elite says to the world, it first need to be taken as a vague "Blah-Blah" cheap talk.
    'Coze they had all the necessary tools to know but took measures to ignore.

    Ignore is the USA rule of the thumb and that is what is what happened on 9/11.
    In a land of law & order, we call that criminal negligence.
    About the same thing as destroying exhibit proofs on a crime scene.
    The ones who harbors and give safe-heaven to criminal is as much a criminal as its author.
    And the ones who support them as the NAZI once were, become part of the wave.

    Yes, a great number of the USA Elites would readily murder their innocent citizens since some once proposed it to John F. Kennedy.
    Bare in mind that G. H. Bush was around in those years?

    Not much to add to the whole.
    No one will ever know...
    Good thing that they began to pray on their own lately instead of ultra-poor peoples like the Viets.
    They finnally understood that the money always been in next-door houses.

    All is fair!

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    Oh man, you really do make me laugh. I’m not going to dignify your useless comments with any more answers; you obviously don't know what you’re talking about.
    PS I was referring to the pentagon plain. I admit that I might have not been specific enough.

  • PeSO821

    Did you see movie "Beautiful mind"? Remember how John Nash was completely engulfed in conspiracies...
    Just how do you separate fact from paranoia?
    If the most brilliant mathematician got lost in it? How can we - ordinary people crazed by television and internet madness - tell the difference?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    This is my professional opinion and it's based on the knowhow acquired from designing metal structures. I've worked with titanium and structural steel.

    Read a bit about elastic and plastic deformation in metals and how they affect structures when they fail. Read a bit about metal deformation when under stress and high temperatures.

    I agree with the architects in this documentary as they are “quoting” facts well documented in physics literature. They’re not just making it up.

    Until now this has been the most comprehensive documentary I’ve seen on the subject.
    Personally I would like to see more detail and data.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    "No explosion what so ever before the collapse, Huh?

    Well, if anybody has lost any credibility at anytime, that makes it!"

    do you have evidence of this mysterious explosion...and not people saying they heard bangs...i linked the seismic records. you linked NOTHING. you have no evidence so i dont know why you would bother responding. without evidence you are making empty claims.

    "No need to be "Curious" on the surroundings here (Epi-Curious blind eyes)!"

    once again, passive aggressive insults directed at any person who disagrees with a truther....ALSO my name is epiCURUS. not CURIOUS. why do people always screw that up??????

    I get it. you think the government was behind 9/11....well present some evidence.

  • PeSO821

    I actually do know a bit about this stuff. We have done some simple computer models while I was studying architecture.
    But my knowledge is nowhere near understanding demolition - that is like 100x more complex than ordinary structural analysis. There is so much unpredictable stuff, whole thing becomes dynamic…
    It is not possible to know anything without proper computer model... That is why I do not trust any quick opinion: “I think this should behave like this or that”. Human intuition simply does not work on this scale.
    My mind is open on this point - I never claimed I understand what happened. My reasoning did not include any proof – only some extremely improbable factors: Like people keeping quiet about such a big thing, risk if planes would miss and explosive would be discovered… and so on...
    So, if you made your own computer model? Please share it with us, we would like to know.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    I agree with you on some points. The computer model isn't one of them. You don't need a model to know that some kind of resistance should have been found. It has been proven (you can try it yourself with videos from CNN, Fox...etc and plot the frames into single images per second and measure distance vs time) that there was a moment of free fall and the official explanation supports this but doesn’t explain why and how. This isn't consistent with asymmetric damage to a building. Again as I said before. We can't know for sure now exactly how it happened (even less make an accurate computer model) because the remains were removed and not forensically examined. Therefore abolishing any chance of using proper data to create a simulation model.

    I would open my mind a bit more if this only happened to one of the twin towers assuming that this is an unusual occurrence. Even so I would have trouble. But 3...This is too much coincidence! The building that concludes what happened for me is the 7th tower.
    You shouldn't trust opinions but facts based on physics, chemistry and material behavior.

    I'm not focusing on conspiracy theories claiming to know who did it and for what reasons. I'm merely focusing my attention to the technical facts of the 9/11 crashes.

    I hope this makes some sense. Best regards.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    "The absence of large pieces of aircraft in photographs stikes many observers as incongruous with the crash of a large jetliner such as the 757 that Flight 77 was. Many people have seen photographs of jetliner crashes in which large sections of the planes remain intact. However, a high-speed crash into a hardened target such as a building is not comparable to typical crash incidents. Furthermore, even crashes into terrain, most of them at much slower speeds than the crashes on 9/11/01, often leave very little in the way of recognizable aircraft parts”.

    I’m sorry but this is simply not true and totally false. This was the first crash of its kind in the history of aviation. Every other plane crash in history has left lots and lots of debris (except for obvious reasons crashes at sea). Check your facts. It’s not the speed of impact. That alone could only influence the size of the debris and the distance of separation between them not the amount left over. Since the fuel used doesn’t reach the temperature needed to make metal components melt yet alone disappear. There should have been much more debris like any other crash in history.

    As for the 3 photos of a plain that’s a fraction the size of the one that hit the pentagon and disappears into a wall (only they know the material used to build it). I think it’s a poor and very unscientific way to prove your point. I’m sure the engine that is a great lump of steel and titanium survived the crash in this test and corresponds to the actual engine of the F4. The Rotor section found on the pentagon sight is but a fraction the size of a real Rolls Roice rotor. This tiny rotor was shown on CNN news!

    The second one is as bogus as the first one if you ask me. Not to mention that it’s on a sight supporting the official story. Not very objective research. Find one from independent sights that have nothing to do with 9/11 crashes and I might just consider looking into it.

    I would suggest you take some more time to investigate.

    Best regards.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    Oh I must laugh again! This is fun! I love the way you react. Little children do this as well.

    If laughing is an insult to you; I'm sorry for finding you funny.

    You’re saying that the video footage with the clear recordings of explosions seen on the CNN and FOX news with the pedestrians reactions is a lie?

    I've never actually said the government did it. Not the goal of my argument or the goal of the documentary.

    You are right. I should provide more evidence. Unfortunately I don’t have time to look for the things I’ve seen in the past. I’ve spent too much time explaining myself to you already.

    No offence intended.

    Best regards.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    I take back this comment. My apologies to anyone offended by it. Very childish of me to say what I did.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    You know I can understand the difficulty to accept the evidence. I sympathies with the Americans they have gone through a lot! I'm sorry if my comments have seemed harsh. I only want truth and a new independent legal investigation. It would make me very happy. No matter the outcome.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    "I’m sorry but this is simply not true and totally false. This was the first crash of its kind in the history of aviation. Every other plane crash in history has left lots and lots of debris (except for obvious reasons crashes at sea)."

    i backed up everything that was said with links showing evidence for those claims. your inability to actually look at the other sides evidence and continue to spout misinformation is incredulous at best.

    the speed of impact and the object that is being impacted is a HUGE factor. if something hits an object hard enough it can disintegrate. once again, how about checking the links i left?

    "The Rotor section found on the pentagon sight is but a fraction the size of a real Rolls Roice rotor. This tiny rotor was shown on CNN news!"

    that is the inside of the engine. what you are talking about is the entire engine when it isnt in pieces. that piece there is one of the components that are in the rotor. i understand that you have questions but stop pretending that there are no answers when there are and you just refuse to accept them.

    "The second one is as bogus as the first one if you ask me. Not to mention that it’s on a sight supporting the official story. Not very objective research. Find one from independent sights that have nothing to do with 9/11 crashes and I might just consider looking into it."

    that IS an independent website. it is not funded by the government or any organization. you just want to disregard any evidence that refutes your conspiracy belief.

    I have "investigated" this since it happened. i once believed just like you except i seem to have actually looked at the answers to my questions.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    link me to these videos of explosions.

    you and i both know they dont exist and you are just using this to keep your view.

    If anything is funny it is your inability to form a coherent argument that includes premises that are backed up with evidence that all support a conclusion.

    and you tell other people here that THEY are incapable of critical thinking??? please!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1028550295 Christopher Matyjasek

    I think we should just agree to disagree.

    Best regards

  • Guest

    Epicurus,

    Seismic records?
    It becomes obvious that the "Seismic records" is a ducking strategy as anyone only needs to watch the, once again, so numerous tape(S).

    If I'd take a few comments from the "Religious Docus) we have on TDF, the most important vector always remains faith since any event just couldn't be taped on film.

    No machine, as much of high advanced technology as it can be, can beat the live sight that all human beings have.
    For thousands of reasons, including the strenght of any explosion, a given machine can or cannot feel, detect it.
    Your approach of getting hooked on seismic recordings of those rather medium explosions is damageable to itself.

    If we'd still be in prehistoric time, we'd complain not having any live tapes, and only blah-blah from biased individuals.
    But it ain't so. It's on tape.

    BTW, I never consider individuals as a "Thruter" or a debunker.
    I just look at facts such as peoples (And not only a few weirdos...) running away from the crashes as well as right after the aftermath. Among a few other incongrity.

    Since there is an obviously irreconconciable desagreement, I shall say that I for myself, do not believe in a "All out" government false flag operation.
    -Just thinking 'bout Rumsfeld who mentioned the few $Trillions that desapeared a little before 9/11.
    As usual, it just ought to be a "Here Now" immediate money matter.

    The only problem is that since there was (Were) a few other ones that preceded this 9/11 thing, peoples (Thruters) jumped onto the case and drown the fish!

    But hey! It was a heck of a goof to send the whole garbages in China.
    And I repeat, such a thing is already a crime according to the laws supposed to be enforced over there.

    Already, this action is a crime for which a sentence should be served.
    Who ever it can be, if no one is above the law. Or course, that would be in a land of law & order. Which...

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @Epicurus

    Behind any machine, there's ought to be a human being.
    Is my judgement clear enough about 9/11?
    No Standford's psychanalist can change facts. As the temperature at which that somewhat special steel melts.

    Among other things, not mentioning the total lack of intellectual integregity of the USA Elite generation after generations since some some 50 years.
    It's a heck of a good thing to remain wary when one has such poor credential in his file.

    Nah! Rejected.
    This is it.

    Pierre.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    you keep moving the goal posts.

    i know no one and nothing will ever change what you think you know.

    the steel didnt need to melt it just needed to weaken enough for the joints to bend under the weight and break.

  • a_no_n

    500 million...really?

    You think all this was set up, for 500Million.

    who's the culprit dr Evil?

    Does your 'maths' take into account all the money lost in revenue, compensation, etc?
    That 500Million number you pulled out of your *** starts getting a hell of a lot smaller when you take all that from the equasion.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Well, I doubt the government control the US with fear. Seriously no one is currently afraid of the US government. Right now the US government is quivering against China's might, the extra military in Australia didn't go un-noticed. If people are afraid, then they let themselves be afraid. I get that US people like to complain.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Mm, but the other way is to unreasonably swear at people, call them stupid, and tell them to get an education. >.> I guess I never will, oh well, I gave it a shot.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yi.w.qian Yi Wen Qian

    Well, I haven't checked back to the thread for a while but Epicurus has already linked the links, if you still doubts about this then you are blinding yourself to evidence. I can see why people want further investigation, or want the current analysis of the building collapse to be released, but it is another thing saying stuff like there is no plane, or there is bombs because there is even less evidence supporting these claims. It's like saying I don't believe that god created the world, but I believe that aliens did.

  • PeSO821

    It just struck me - it is so obvious nobody ask itself anymore.

    Has anyone question the REASONS for demolishing building 7 ???
    OK, planes hit, twins collapse, we are all in shock! Objective ACHIEVED!, done, finnished...

    And then government goes through tremendous trouble to bring down relatively minor building, risk it ALL for something that has almost no impact on the news? WHY would somebody do that ?!

    I think answering this question is crucial if somebody wants to seriously believe in conspiracy. Otherwise you are just lost on confusion...

  • PeSO821

    OK, as an architect I have to think: Was there an urban planning motive? Did building 7 stand in a view of statue of liberty? Maybe mayor did not like the color of building :)))

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    conspiracy theorists will tell you there were files and other items in the building that the government wanted destroyed.

    but of course the obvious question then arises....have they never heard of a paper shredder or fire place????

    its just so ridiculous. you have to reason that no matter how many logical retorts you make to the truthers they will always make something else up. they ideas are all unfalsifiable. meaning illogical and unscientific.

  • http://twitter.com/cannabistwit Chelsey 99Percent

    yea but you know how much money the private sector (i.e Haliburton and our VICE PRESIDENT at the time of 9/11) has profited in the 10 years since 9/11 .. haha its just like the "bankrupt" corporations spending millions lobbying for the big 700 billion dollar TARP bailout... its called an investment.. greedy bastards..

  • Guest

    Epicurus,

    Wrong. The tech. who done the test with the same type of steel had to carry his test something like 3 times 'coze it "Fail to fail".
    It didn't bend enough to slip of its bed.

    Since you give such a special care to the 9/11 topic, there's got to be reason why you don't mention that guy got fired and went public, disclosing documentation on those (2-3) tests.
    I seen his documentary. It easily can be found all over the Internet.
    He's now part of the gang for which you get a thrill to qualify as "Thruters".

    Again, there just ought to be a reason why you kept this "Incognito".
    You're aware.

    Once again, this is not help to your cause.
    For the least, I wouldn't consider this as the standard behavior of a third party.
    Rather, a NIST inquirer opinon as the one that state that no one ever seen molten steel in the aftermath.

    That is why no benefice of doubt is deserved. It may not be a government coverup but it sure came to this as time went by.

    Speaking of "Denefice of doubt", it is a good sure good thing that you finally realised that you now "Know no one and nothing will ever change what you think you know".

    Just one thing though, just like everybody including you, I don't know what, who and how it happened, but sure is something fishy. This without any shawdow of a doubt.

    I'd rather stop here.
    Don't ask for more.

    Pierre.

  • http://www.topdocumentaryfilms.com Epicurus

    could you link the documentary...

    if its the person i think it is then he never actually carried out the experiments.

    If anything, his QUESTIONS (not experiments) only showed what he is quoted as saying here:

    "Alternatively, the contention that this steel did fail at temperatures around (500 degrees) suggests that the majority of deaths on 9/11 were due to a safety-related failure. That suggestion should be of great concern to my company."

    he couldnt get proper answers from the company that claimed to have provided the steel so he suggested that there was a cover up perhaps due to safety regulations being avoided by the steel company. but nothing as nefarious as bombs in the towers.

    and he was fired because his letters implemented his work as agreeing with his views, which they clearly did not, nor would any company want to be dragged into something like that unknowingly.

  • Guest

    @Epicurus,

    Whenever I stumble on it. I am sort of busy D/L'ing "The Decade of Destruction" produced by Adrian Cowel. Posted on the usenets.
    Sort of a litle huge. It's in its original VOD mpeg2 format as a DVD. Quite poignant, especially the murder of Chico Mendez.

    That docu 'bout where that tech. was featured, I remember that at the end of his talk (Quite technical), someone asked him what's his plan now that he lost his job.
    While the one you described didn't carry the tests himself.

    The thing I know for sure is that I don't have that docu on my hard disk. I seen it either here or at YouTube quite a while back. The only other place I go is sort of an exact copy of TDF. Same features, webpage design.

    Maybe on next weekend, I'll browse YouTube. There's got to be small exerpts of that whole docu.
    Then, I'll get the name of that guy.
    In any events, he's jobless by now but even more busy than ever wished for.

    Going back to this Brasilian saga.
    Serious killers over there...
    Only 2 hours disks viewed out of 5.
    It span on a little more than (10-15) years.
    And friday is here by now.
    Going for the 3thrd one.

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/25chris25 Chris du Plessis

    I found this documentary very very interesting.Especially the last part.The only thing I want to say is that it seems like the American people has entered a new stage in their psychological aspect of their culture and society.I'm from South Africa,and I'm a born again Christian too.The Bible (The book of Revelation) combined with a lot of these conspiracy theory documentaries is able to shed allot of light and understanding of where the world as a whole is in this point of it's excistanse.Americans need to open their eye's,and stop being so consumed by everything they fill their lives with and realize that the American government (mainly) together with other groups of people are the forerunners for the New World Order of which the Bible teach.Which will ultimately be led by the anti-christ to enslave mankind and wage war against God.Aswell as one currency,living cost...all of it is plainly taught in the Bible.Things are happening much faster than people realize.By combining Bible knowledge,revelation knowledge through a personal relationship with Christ,and just realizing whats happening in the world will shed light on all these questions people (American and the world) have.It's not actually that complicated,though it seems that way cause its kept in the dark.When the time comes when things are going start going really bad,America is most probably the country which will be hit first and the hardest,cause it's one of the main places that world domination is being orcastrated...by none other than 'him that works in the world'...'the accuser' and the 'father of lies'...'the deceiver'...Satan himself.DO NOT BE DECEIVED. Chris

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    It's good to see that certain Truthers of that post in this thread still make illogical fools of themselves.

    Thank you for fighting the good Epicurus.

  • jilted_generation

    I see a lot of people getting caught up in details over the tragical events, and there are a lot of them to support both sides (controled demolition vs free-fall pancake effect ?)

    Beeing an engineer myself,I highly doubt that 3 buildings can go down in such similar-almoust-identical manner without planning.

    You see, any engineer who actually applies what he learnt in school (actually builds not draws) will know that each building is diffrent.The twin towers make no exception to this. Regardless of how much you want to make 2 buildings identical you can't do it, for several reasons, main one beeing human imperfection, could expand this ideea but I see no need.

    A good analogy would be human twins. Might look the same, but they're not if you scrutinize them.

    Well there are many witnesses who claimed they heard explosions, but can't really prove they came from a controled demolition.

    All one can do is speculate on the resulted rubble (like analyzing a body to determine the cause of death). From this analysis the conspiracy ideea seems to be reinforced (45 degrees cuts noticed, no melted steel, and a whole world watching their actual free fall which is absurd given the circumstances)

    But for the sake of debate, let's say there were no explosives present in the building, and only the planes did this (highly unlikely). Does that automatically imply it was indeed a terrorist attack ? No it doesnt.

    Now let's assume it was indeed a false flag operation set into motion by the gov. Is that really shocking considering it would not be their first ? Declassified documents prove such operations have been attempted (or simply planned) atleast several times in order to provoke the required reaction from the masses.

    I tend to believe the so called conspiracy nuts, tho I'm still leaving room for the so called terrorists, just so I can say I have an open mind :)

    When anything is possible, add probabilities into the ecuation.

    Here's several ideeas which can not be debated:

    1. The world is facing an oil crysis.
    2. The united states is famous for their brutal external policies (beeing nice here)
    3. The countries attacked (or in internal turmoil) have plenty of oil and from a military tactical and financial angle they are positioned on just the right spot on the globe.
    4. The building of the missile "defense program" in ex soviet block countries in eastern europe.

    List can go on, but those who can connect 2 dots already have.

    P.S: Epicurus, in regards to your links of plane crashes and rubble resulted, the fact that a C-130 Hercules plane didnt bring down a 10 floor tall old concrete iranian building should make you wonder.

  • oddsrhuge

    @jilted_generation

    “Here's several ideeas which can not be debated:”

    This sounded like a challenge… so here goes

    1. The world is facing an oil crysis. "

    Really? Who told you this? In the news this is all the rage. However, there is NO evidence that we are short or even close to what people are calling “peak oil”.

    2. The united states is famous for their brutal external policies (beeing nice here)

    The US are just the current “Bad Guy”. The agendas of the Government/military throughout history was usually dictated by money. (See Scarface, theres a lot of truth in Tony Montana's statement)

    3. The countries attacked (or in internal turmoil) have plenty of oil and from a military tactical and financial angle they are positioned on just the right spot on the globe.

    You win, no debate.

    4. The building of the missile "defense program" in ex soviet block countries in eastern europe.

    Well my rebuttal here is…so what? In Reagan’s era, they planned and started (well supposedly during this time. I personally think that it was much earlier) The Star Wars project . Quite simply…somebody or some bodies, want to control the Earth by Land Sea Sky and even Space… But whatever…the UN won’t even declare water as an essential need of life….Talk about a military advantage? Try saying to your opponents that they will die of thirst cause your army controls it ALL....Keep your missiles...WE WIN!

    Summary

    So if you think this Global Conspiracy is a US invention? I recommend that when you graduate high school, you continue on to college...and when you realize that you could have learned 10 times as much for 100,000 dollars or euros plus inflation less....and with a PHD you get to say the memorable line..."Would you like fries with that?" We'll talk again.

  • oddsrhuge

    He sure told you a thing or thwo...I must now no go dowb to the achives to re reSearch the tooth.

    Not quite sure what your position is...are you defending this person's post ...

    or telling him that he is full of poop?

  • oddsrhuge

    Wow....people are are still actually arguing about how this day happened...

    This day was the climax...I urge anyone with a curious mind, to research the days, months and years preceding 911, just use the mainstream, Gov't and archived material and data...(don't ask the actual news agencies to provide videos, as their records are curiously hard to find or actually lost destroyed or...add title here))...If you can still give any credibility to 19 Arab hijackers, (none, from Iraq or Afganistan) fooling us all...controlled by a vicious madman in a cave in bekibekiganistan (a Herman Cain) paraphrased.

    Like really? ( I was a Valley girl in a previous life)...

    thats the best story they could come up with? I for one, would be very pissed off with the waste of my tax dollars..... Hell! they should have hired Hill & Knowlton, to write the story, they rock!

  • jilted_generation

    First of all, let me be honest and tell you I find it hard to respond to both your arrogant and uneducated reply without the use of insults, tho I will do what I can.

    I do not believe the US is in charge of a global conspiracy, and i'm not so sure such a thing truly exists. There are many countries on this earth, all with their faults recorded in history, the reason they were not mentioned is becouse unlike you, I try to stay on topic.

    Judging objectively however, I do believe the US is a young country, which showed a lot of promise (and perhaps still does to some extent to some people) and then after some praises it became too sure of itself and somewhat fascist.

    I'll put it this way, becouse you lack the 100k dollars education you so much long for and feel cheated without.

    It's a new kid on the block (compared to vets like Iraq, China etc.), a spoiled kid, which got fat becouse some hard working parents and distant relatives poured a lot of sweat and blood in it's raising. It showed promise at first, like any kid does, but then the brat became egocentrical and naively thinks it can bully other older brothers without consequence, brothers who have enough problems on their own, without external interference to make things worse.

    But why does he do that ? He's not beeing fed chocolate anymore.

    It amuses me you blame the state for your education and good beeing, becouse that's all I understood from your summary.

    You see, you are the only one responsible for your intellectual level and education, and no amount of money or some honey lipped teacher can imprint information in your head on your behalf.

    I did graduate highschool, and let me tell you, I do not come from a financially bright country. To spell it out for you, there were years dating back even to primary school when I had to walk km to the school, only to freeze there inside the classroom with other kids while some low payed frustrated and comunist teacher tried to make all the effort worth it.

    In regards to the oil crysis, I suggest you watch the doc intitled "Arithmetic, Population and Energy" which can be found on this site (might come as a shock to you, but it's free !) and memorize the analogy the proffesor made with the bottles and bacteria, and know we are indeed in the minute 57. Some facts which you think do not exist are also presented there.

    It's never too late to educate YOURSELF you know, but untill you do,
    "I want some ketchup with those fries, and make it quick".

  • Guest

    @jilted_generation,

    Thank for the hint "Arithmetic, Population and Energy".
    I didn't follow the comments in here.
    But it's a good thing that the name of that docu gives its description. I'll add to my list.
    For now, busy D/L'ng from the usenet...

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Yeung-Xiao/630927097 Yeung Xiao

    hahaha I asked that so many times. no good answer. Some people even tried to claim that it was to destroy files that exists in building 7.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y446FTF4SDPIPIQVLXUVER3EGE LuLu

    Your a very wise man. You truly know the truth, sir !! I look forward to meeting you when the Elect are delivered up and we have the chance to let the holy spirit talk through us and then putting on our holy armor and taking our place next to Jesus and kick some unholy butts !!

  • Guest

    @LuLu

    Madly sick! Have you ever though of consulting a doctor?
    Understanding that it just can't be cured, but maybe it could be soothed?

    Pierre.

  • Achems_Razor

    Hey, Lulu and gang, get the h*ll off of this un-religious doc, and you and the happy-clappy gang stay on a religious doc on TDF where you will be decimated by us big boys, as little children that you are, spouting your childish fairy-tales.

  • John Russell

    why will no body come foreword to come clean about there involvement in this massacre???

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Erik-Lawrence/508624101 Erik Lawrence

    It is funny seeing people opposed to the 9/11 truth movement ignoring very VERY clear truths that were CLEARLY SHOWN in this movie.

    1.) The rate at which all 3 WTC towers fell were at free fall speed, meaning the structural support beneath it would have had to been severed, for if they were not there would have been AT LEAST some resistance against the falling top part of the buildings.

    2.) There were VIVID pictures and videos of melted steel when the trade centres were still standing as well as when they were on the ground. This means that jet fuel and office fires could have not been the only thing "weakening" the steel.

    3.) The complete removal of all steel from the collapse site BEFORE anyone was allowed to investigate. Any logical person would find that very suspicious.

    4.) The countless videos, audio recordings, AND eye witnesses (Credible eye witnesses: police men, fireman, EMS........) show that there were explosions at the bottom of the trade centres.

    And as for my opinion, something I cannot prove but have strong reason to believe, it was an inside job by the U.S. government, driven and backed by the REAL people in power in America, that is the Rockefeller's, the Federeal Reserve etc. This is not a new method used by the US, i.e., the vietnam war which was started based off of a lie the US government fabricated (accusing vietnam of attacking US destroyers). If they were willing to sacrifice thousands of innocent vietnamese lives, along with thousands of US soldiers in order to profit from a war, how can one think that they would not have the heart to kill 3000 people in their own country to gain access to the middle east and carry out their private agendas. Of course there is much more to this then what I just explained but I don't have time to elaborate.

    The reason I am so driven on disproving you people who try and devalue the raw evidence that these scientists are showing us is not because its personal but instead its because I get very sad and angry that the government is getting away with murder, and fooling the US population, the very people who give them their power.

    It is "truly" a mad world.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y446FTF4SDPIPIQVLXUVER3EGE LuLu

    Cough Cough , Oh, I'm sorry I couldn't here you over my sudden illness. It causes me to have a deaf ear to the weak minded.:)

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_Y446FTF4SDPIPIQVLXUVER3EGE LuLu

    How did you know I have gang? Wow you truly are sharp there Mr. Razor. I'll try and tell the rest of the voices to quit posting in the wrong forums. Sometimes they are just so darn hard to control. I hope you understand. Instead of spouting fairy-tales maybe I could interest you in a dirty joke? Hey ! I thought I told you guys to back off !!! I tell you what it's hard having multiple personalities !! It's even worse when none of them are even good personalities !!:)

  • PeSO821

    Why didn't any of this come out in Wiki leaks? Would America give away so many of its dirty secrets just to divert attention? Is there an even deeper conspiracy going on? Is Julian Assange C.I.A. agent?

  • bygdaddiesstee

    you just hit the nail on the head PeSO821,

  • oddsrhuge

    did you actually read what I wrote? Maybe try to follow basic debate rules.

    At what point did I suggest that the US were a part of a global conspiracy? I will tell you and the world that even though, I believe that 911 did NOT occur according to the 911 commission report, I still don't think that it was in any way done by the American Government!

    also

    "America is a young country"...and this applies to your original post, or indeed, my reply...because?

    A. I don't know
    B. I needed a point here
    C. I'm having problems at home
    D. All of the above

    Firstly the reply wasn't an attack on you and secondly, try addressing what was written instead of Troting to lookk smrt.

    And apparantly Onlgish is your first language?

  • oddsrhuge

    And this is actually good....let's follow that madness wherever it leads us.

  • Guest

    Interesting comments oddsr...

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Robert-Casey/531966125 Robert Casey

    My ex-wife and i were in a pub in newcastle when i saw the first building collaps on 911. I told her then and there that a building hit by a plane, on fire (not a very hot fire i.e thick black smoke) for an hour or so could not bring the building down. You don't need to be a scientist to work that out its common sence! I don't understand all the ruckus ..... people in power have always used problem reaction solution to get what they want. There is nothing anyone of us can do about it ..... you depose a despot and another shall take his place so get on with your lives people, as best you can.

    peace out.

  • oddsrhuge

    In an attempt to offer the “olive branch”…It was your first point that disturbed me the most.

    We have been lead to believe that the world’s supply of oil is extremely low. Right here, you need to look at a company (originally called Standard Oil), Now called Exxon, Conoco, Shell, etc, etc. Specifically look at the primary shareholder.

    So in the “news” we hear about tidal waves on offshore rigs, and low yields, conflict in oil producing areas…and again etc, etc.

    However, if you look at this from a purely economic level...it would make sense for a company to increase profits, if they could control your perception of the issue. Again, once you have this shareholder’s name look at what he controls.

    Sorry if you thought I was trying to make you look bad or wrong, I agreed with a lot of your post. I just took the request for a debate to heart.

    Cheers

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Robert-Casey/531966125 Robert Casey

    I have read through quite a few of the posts on this thread now, and it amazes me to think that so many of you Epicurus etc have not actually watched the documentary and you are posting on this thread! Please watch it then post.

    Not only were there eyewitness accounts of explosions but it was taped, recorded on film! Firefighter testimonials NYPD etc!! I know it sucks that the truth is being covered up but please don't try and debunk the blatantly obvious. Debunking this argument gets so intricate and yet the truth is so plain, watch the documentary the people therein are all experts in their respective fields. I haven't got a PhD, have you?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001225563246 James Irvine

    why did they get rid of the evidence if they were not part in it, if it happened like they say in video its an inside job no question and I believed the government until watching this

  • brian rose

    Global oil production has been stagnant since 2005. In fact, global conventional crude production peaked in 2006, and is now declining. Oil prices are high because a growing world economy = growing oil demand, but supply has been stagnant for nearly 7 years.

    A gallon of gas costs more than a gallon of milk at the moment. Put a gallon of gas in your vehicle, drive it until it stalls, and push it back to the gas station. You'll have a much better appreciation for the energy contained in a single gallon of gas. Oil powers 95% of land transport, and virtually 100% of air and sea transport for a reason. Its also IS asphalt, tar, plastics, synthetics (nylon, ethylene glycol [refrigerant/antifreeze], polyester, polypropylene, plexane, polyurethane and latex based paint, etc.), petrochemicals (pesticide, herbicide, insecticide, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals (including the vitamins you take in the morning). Oil is intricately embedded into every aspect of our civilization, but is an inherently finite resource. The need for infinite growth in our monetary and economic system will soon (is already?) bump up against the reality that nothing can grow exponentially forever.

    Oil is expensive compared to historical prices, but not compared to its intrinsic value. As demand outstrips supply (this requires a growing world economy) prices will go up, and we will all pay that price. If someone offered you $20.00 to push their Toyota Camry 30 miles would you do it? How much would they have to pay you to physically push their Camry 30 miles? Have you ever walked 30 miles much less pushed a 1,500 lb vehicle that far? A gallon of gas contains several tons of organic matter (stored sunlight) compacted down and cooked into an incredibly dense, easily stored, and portable energy source (coal is not dense in terms of energy content, natural gas requires high pressure storage, electricity IS coal, hydrogen isn't an energy SOURCE only a storage medium).

  • PeSO821

    Few days ago I commented Julian Assange is CIA agent. Nobody seemed to comment against that. So we all agree rape case is just a trick to make believe government is after him? Wow!
    Is nobody shocked about presumption like that?

    Anyway life without conspiracy is sooooo boring. Who wants that?
    We are generation of movies and games, we want life to be at least as exciting as that. There has to be shadow government, there has to be a cause to fight against. There has to be a solution!

    It would simply be too depressing if life would be nothing but confusion, misinterpretations, wrong presumptions… a run-away train that nobody really understands or can control anymore…
    Personally I think this is much scarier than any conspiracy. I WANT to believe! I just find it hard to do.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001225563246 James Irvine

    there is all sorts of new energies emerging to replace oil at the moment including designing micro organisms to produce fuel which I think is going to be the star performer hopefully, there is no doubt that some people are trying to make as much money as they can from oil in the meantime, these people need removed the world is corrupt as fu*k and going downhill rapidly, an atom bomb might be the best solution compared to allowing these assholes to keep us on our present course, what a fu*ked up sh*thole

  • Guest

    @PeSO821,

    Nah! It's just that everyone knows how Wikileak was born and how they operate.
    I mean that anyone can see that their primary source is (Was) average common army personnal.
    They publish what they were transfered.

    And the rape cause is something that doesn't concern Wikileaks but rather Assange himself because there's no doubt it did happened. The question is rather "How" did it happened?
    -Which will make him guilty of not.
    -Next time, don't by stuff made in China!

    That specific law in Sweeden is very clear: -Whenever one (Or many, many...:-) :-) of either one(S) of any sexual activities realise that the a condom (Or mechanical) anticonception device broke, he should take proper measures to correct the mishap!

    Which may be something more or less "Hard" to achieve?
    I'll quote you on this: -"I just find it hard to do" (SIC).
    And how hard was it on scale of 1 to 10?

    I rather to widraw from such a topic:-)

    Pierre.

  • PeSO821

    Information that came in Wiki leaks out was not a kind of information somebody would like to share with the world. Reaction of American government was genuine embarrassment.
    At same time, it is also very difficult to believe nobody mention 9/11 conspiracy in confidential conversations (considering the things they were talking about, I am sure it would slip out)

    So either conspiracy goes so much deeper than anybody can even imagine, or simply there is not there.
    Just imagine how many people would have to be absolutely quiet – and how fast people like to give away secrets in real everyday life…
    My scale of hard to believe is 10.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_ES5YFURR5VOTKTGHD4PIVYXPVI John

    In an operation such as this, only a handful of people would know the full score. Dozens of individual operatives would each have his own task to do and each operative would be unaware of all the other tasks being completed.
    Except for a few at the top, no one would realize the full scope of the operation. Afterwards, a few FO's might suspect, but they only have their tiny piece of the puzzle. Even if they decide to bark, no one can prove anything, only make accusations that they can't provide much evidence for. And any barking dog would be quickly painted as a loon, as anti-patriotic, as aiding the terrorists, etc. Careers ruined, families destroyed, etc. While this type of operation is rarely conducted at such a large scale, the method itself is almost routine in various operations around the world, including here in the U.S. With a few powerful people pulling the right strings, the scale of such an operation as the WTC/911 would not be that hard to pull off. All it takes is a few devious, determined men with power and a public that is willfully reluctant to believe such a thing about its own beloved country.

  • Nicknadian

    I am a Canadian and was very grateful our Prime Minister at the time of the Iraq invasion Mr. Chretien told Bush to forget it we would not be participating in his war on evil I believe we had already got sucked into Afghanastan. What I don't understand is why the treason charges have not been brought on your political elite i.e the bush family, Chenney, Rice etc.

    I was pleased to see that Bush and Blair were recently found guilty of war crimes I believe in Malayshia but in absentia, but prosecuted by an American prosecutor. I believe you guys are doing no better with Obama a pigeon of the machine as well.... We have our issues here in Canada as well but one thing I think assists us in our approach is we have three political parties in which two are constantly keeping an eye on the one party in power and results in a lesser chance of corruption.

    I think the United States is (was) an awesome country and I loved visiting the states. I have not returned there not even for a Nascar race since 9/11 because, although I have no criminal record or anything like that, I would be afraid of saying something wrong and dis-appearing, sounds paranoid but true.

    I think you guys should look at Ron Paul as an honest leader as well as different congress reps. or maybe a three party system would be in the best interest. Although we struggle to keep two of our three from merging lol.

    Good Luck to all the smart and want to be free americans.. Alex Jones and the others who pull back the veil are doing an awesome job and keep up the good work.... I will spread the word!

    Thanks

  • oddsrhuge

    Once again...you are quoting what is "known" by we the lay persons, as related by media. What "insider" knowledge do you have to support your claim that:

    "Global oil production has been stagnant since 2005. In fact, global conventional crude production peaked in 2006, and is now declining. Oil prices are high because a growing world economy = growing oil demand, but supply has been stagnant for nearly 7 years. "

    My point is that we DON'T know whether oil supplies are dwindling, because oil corporations are "in essence" still all controlled by one monopoly in the US. (the Brand names of Oil and Gas companies are one of the biggest deceptions in this (ha ha) Shell game)

    I'm not suggesting that the world has "unlimited supplies" just that we the general population have NO IDEA what the supplies are. This fact alone is the reason that we accept those higher and higher prices, as just part of life.

  • jilted_generation

    "So if you think this Global Conspiracy is a US invention? I recommend that when you graduate high school, you continue on to college...and when you realize that you could have learned 10 times as much for 100,000 dollars or euros plus inflation less....and with a PHD you get to say the memorable line..."Would you like fries with that?" We'll talk again. "

    This was your summary on which my reply was based, reply which cleary caused some emotional reaction.

    I suggest that you actually read both my previous posts concerning this topic, and, in the future, the posts others have made regarding a certain topic just to make sure you do no repeat certain ideeas already underlined earlier by other persons, if you truly want to not only participate but also be constructive, and "follow certain debate rules".

    Also, if one was to count and read our total posts made on both this site in general and this doc alone, one would realise who is actually "Troting to lookk smrt."

    I don't know why I bother with you,but consider this - There is a fine line betwen not taking everything for granted and doubting everyone but yourself, just as there is a fine line betwen critical thinking and paranoia, open mindness and arrogance etc.

    As for the oil "debate", which seems to annoy you so much, regardless if the amount of oil portrayed in the media and other not-so-mainstream people is true or false, a crysis does exist (either it's real or engineered).

    Don't bother with another reply, becouse I won't.

  • oddsrhuge

    "So if you think this Global Conspiracy is a US invention? I recommend that when you graduate high school, you continue on to college...and when you realize that you could have learned 10 times as much for 100,000 dollars or euros plus inflation less....and with a PHD you get to say the memorable line..."Would you like fries with that?" We'll talk again. "

    That was from my own experience...so I didn't bother reading the rest of your recent post. Thanks for the reply, now I will leave you alone.

    I also told you that I agreed with most of your post.

    Thank you for showing me the "accord" that all people should try to adopt.

  • oddsrhuge

    Oh and by the way, Accord, does in no way, imply the Honda Motor Corporation.

    Just in case you wanted to ramble more.

    Also: Don't ask for a debate if you are going to be offended by the reply.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_M6F3RJVEWJ24QKMCHFNVK7ADVE Winston Smith

    I'm sure those 'FO's' would be very eager to come out and say, 'yeah I was paid a lot of money to do this or that nefarious act that I now realize was part of this terrible atrocity.' You would keep your mouth shut and console yourself with your payment and the fact that you didnt know ahead of time.
    Some people did know apparently though...as the fore-warnings, Odigo texts, and insider trading strongly indicate/ Still, that the events happened is not in question. Finding satisfactory explanations for what we know occurred is. All the evidence points to explosives.

  • oddsrhuge

    Apparently logic can't win, anything within the secrecy of the Associations, like the CIA,NSA, HLS etc, etc...are the "conspiracy theorists" being paranoid.

    Wow...I've said it before...I have a "big screen" so I will just wait for the movie.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_M6F3RJVEWJ24QKMCHFNVK7ADVE Winston Smith

    perhaps the planes were flown remote control to their targets. Whoever did this wanted it to look like radical muslims did it (so we could invade Afghanistan and Iraq in short order, as we did) and make billions for corporations and reposition our military to the middle east. Remember the terror color codes and anthrax attacks (later traced to a US military lab). Constant talk of terror on the news.. (and military/security spending increases of 3 trillion dollars in the last decade) -Watch the docs:
    Iraq For Sale & Why We Fight -plus oil and natural gas. The whole thing is a manufactured farce. treason on a mass scale and we need the truth to come out.

    Read about PNAC and the document Rebuilding America's Defenses issued by this Neocon think tank in Sept 2010 and what a coincidence that they wrote, 'absent some 'catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new pearl harbor.' This 'transformation' will be difficult and gradual. That the events occurred is not in question. What we need is a real investigation.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_M6F3RJVEWJ24QKMCHFNVK7ADVE Winston Smith

    Steven E Jones is a scientist. Kevin Ryan a chemist but you dont need to be either to learn the truth about 9-11. Just look at the facts/
    No one has explained the 100 day fires, 2800f temp a week later, wtc 7 in freefall, the iron microspheres, pulverized concrete, the molten structural steel shown in the fema bpat appendix C, the 1100 missing bodies...!!You think gravity did that?
    No plane hit WTC 7. It fell in a manner completely consistent with and only ever seen during controlled demolitions, why would it be anything else this one time??
    Look again. The North Tower was hit just 13 floors from the roof..that is the lightest part of the building! No way gravity could convert the rest of it to dust and broken columns! And I have read every debunking ever published! and the ones you mention could only impress someone not well versed in the subject. None of them can explain away these facts without the use of explosives.
    Some people know just enough to know nothing.

  • oddsrhuge

    The Canadian Broadcasting Company did a "Fifth Estate" show ( I forget the name of the episode) and in that show, the NIST "computer model" of the actual collapse was revealed. In this model, you see the collapse of WTC 7, from start to finish.

    My eyes watching the actual news reel, from several different angles, shows the immediate collapse of the penthouse section, prior to the complete global failure of every support column. However, NIST shows the penthouse only falling into building at the very end of the sequence.

    "Proof, by computer model." Awesome science.

  • Guest

    @oddsr,

    You mean the "NIST computer model" for which the software's datas & parameters were held back by the USA government and never made public? Where the heck they gotten that softy with its parameters?

    Only one technologist went public about the testings and results.
    Hang him, destroy his carreer!

    I hate that when other countries gets something forbidden all over the world!
    I'll bet you that those darned canadian just as much as the french knew that the "Hidden" WMD were a joke?
    At least the french stated publically that they know and simply ignored. They are "Polite".

    In hope that it'll come out only when I'll be on my death bed, till then...

    Pierre.

  • brutalsea

    They didn't need to keep the steel because they already knew what happened so.... there was nothing to investigate.

  • brutalsea

    Maybe it wasn't the fire that brought them down, maybe it was the after effects of the impact.... maybe there was a flaw in the design or maybe they overestimated it's ability to withstand an impact. There could be literally millions of explanations.

    All these experts and 'truthers' do is prove that what happened was strange.... they do not prove or even hint at what did happen.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000014216447 Cherokee Charlie

    even hint? did you even watch this video? 911-explosive-evidence-experts-speak-out- you could not have or perhaps english is a second language to you?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Markarov was behind this... it was a Russian Insider job

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_URDOXNBXNHCDMHP77PBHHDV73Q Arnie

    This is a great documentary featuring high rise engineering experts with 25,000 years of experience that World Trade Center Building 7 and the twin World Trade Center Towers were professionally demolished.

    The experts are also stunned that the evidence was destroyed as quickly as possible.

    “Why do you think that is?” They wonder.

    “It's illegal! It's unethical!”

    That is what you officially call a US government, “False Flag” event.

    The evidence of the collapsed buildings has to be destroyed as quickly as possible, because if it is not the evidence will go against the official Republican government story issued and controlled by the Bush-Cheney Administration.

    A very good documentary on this site that explains many of the reasons behind the 911 domestic terrorists is called "Loose Change Final Edition".

    As many people in the United States are now aware, the 911 domestic terrorist attacks, were a “False Flag” United States government operation. This is why the White House did not want the 911 events thoroughly investigated. The demolition of the twin World Trade Center Towers had been planned for many years to accomplish several monetary, energy and political objectives.

    When former Republican President Bush makes the statement that he will go after the terrorists and the country that harbours them, he already knew that his administration was the perpetrator and that the domestic terrorists were being harboured by the United States.

    World Trade Center Tower 7 and the twin World Trade Center Towers fell so quickly because they were a planned demolition event. The experts in this documentary confirm this.

    World Trade Center Tower 7 that was not hit by a plane was also a planned demolition event, because it contained incriminating evidence against numerous Wall Street Bankers, CEO's and Firms that had manipulated the Wall Street run-up from 1998 to 2000. This evidence had to be destroyed in order to stop the criminal investigations.

    Why would the United States government and the Bush Administration want to create a “False Flag” event that would enrage the American people and others around the world?

    The destruction of the Twin World Trade Center Towers, World Trade Building 7 and the US Cruise Missile attack on the Pentagon satisfied several practical, monetary, energy, and political objectives.

    Practical objectives for the 911 events:

    The twin World Trade Center towers were old and obsolete.

    The Twin World Trade Towers had a know asbestos problem.

    The asbestos problem was too expensive too fix.

    Demolition requests from the city of New York had been refused.

    In the aftermath of 911, now we know why. 2,500 poisonous chemicals were introduced into the air in New York City on 911 that would sicken and kill 8,000 and 10,000 first responder emergency workers and New Yorkers.

    Monetary objectives:

    The stock market was manipulated on 911 with put options against the airlines involved. Millions of dollars were involved. Those involved with the put options were never identified. Why?

    Other stocks may also have been manipulated to make millions of dollars from this disaster.

    Larry Silverstein had recently purchased the twin World Trade Center towers and insured them specifically against terrorism by George Bush's brother.

    Tons of gold bullion disappeared from underneath the twin World Trade Center towers on 911.

    Energy Objective for the 911 events:

    From a Peak Oil Perspective the United States government needed to secure oil and natural gas energy supplies for the United States and western oil companies to sell.

    Enron had been negotiating with the Taliban for a safe and secure land route through Afghanistan for an oil and natural gas pipeline. Negotiations with the Taliban had failed to secure a safe route and so military action would be required. The oil and natural gas pipeline would transport oil and natural gas from Turkmenistan on the Caspian Sea, through Afghanistan, through Pakistan to the Arabian Sea where it would be loaded onto freighters headed to the United States.

    Iraq was also falsely accused of being part of 911 and a whole stage show was presented about the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. The military objective in Iraq was to attack, invade and seize the oil fields and return their control back to western oil companies.

    Political objectives:

    To destroy World Trade Center Building 7 that contained incriminating evidence on numerous Wall Street Bankers, Investment Firms and Investment Bankers with regards to the manipulation of the Wall Street run up from 1998 to 2000.

    To anger and enrage the American people and those around the world to such a degree that it would be easy to get permission to launch military campaigns against both Afghanistan and Iraq.

    ----

    The False Flag operation was a complete success. The military objective to secure a land route through Afghanistan for the oil and gas pipeline was a success and the oil reserves in Iraq were seized and returned to western control also a success.

    Unfortunately the price in human lives was very high for the events of 911.

    The 911 domestic terrorist attacks not only took the 2,923 lives in the World Trade Center Towers, but their collapse poisoned the air in New York City with 2,500 dangerous substances and chemicals that would then sicken between 8,000 and 10,000 first responder emergency workers and New Yorkers. Many became very ill and began dying a few years after the event. This tragedy is documented in the video “Dust to Dust” also on this site. It is tragic and very sad to watch.

    What makes this tragedy even worse is that the Bush Administration was aware of the toxic air and completely failed to warn the people of New York City. New York City should have been evacuated after the towers collapsed. What was more important to the Bush Administration and the City of New York was getting Wall Street operating again. Making money was more important than the people's lives in New York City.

    4,500 American soldiers died fighting the pre-planned wars in Afghanistan and Iraq for an oil pipeline route and securing Iraq's oil fields for western oil company control.

    Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghanistan people were killed.

    The Republican administration of Bush-Cheney clearly showed that there was no concern or care for the American people in anyway what-so-ever. The people and 1st responders were slaughtered in the twin World Trade Center towers when they were destroyed in the planned demolition, the 1st responders and New York citizens were then poisoned by the air in New York City with no warning of the danger, the evidence from the destroyed World Trade Center Towers and World Trade Center Building 7 was removed as quickly as was humanly possibly to avoid analyzing it to find out the truth.

    Ironically the workers of New York City eagerly helped to destroy this evidence.

    Clearly the Republican administration of Bush-Cheney worked for themselves and not the American people in order to profit and benefit from these events.

    It is therefore no surprise that everything about the events of 911 is illegal as it is a domestic terrorist attack on the American people. And yes former President Bush and former President Dick Cheney and their administration have NOT been held accountable for their crimes against their own people that took over 17,500 American lives, and hundreds of thousands of foreign lives.

    Why? Because it is corruption at the highest levels of the American government.

    $1 million was spent investigating the destruction of the World Trade Center Towers. If investigators tried to tell the truth they were fired from the investigation.

    $1.2 billion was spent a month waging the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

    Where was the focus of the Bush-Cheney administration? Isn't it obvious.

    The attack and destruction of the “World Trade Center Towers” was a deliberate “False Flag” event organized and executed by the Republican Bush-Cheney administration. It is unfortunate but true based on all of the evidence that has come to light.

  • oddsrhuge

    Yeah. its sad to me, that rational people can continue to deny that we need at least another commission to look for the evidence, that they didn't test for the first time.

    If nothing else, we should be able to address these issues, without having to apologize to the people who will act as our jailers, in the New World Odor. (if that really IS what we are trying to prevent)

    They watch the news, and hear statements like: "Sources say" or "reliable sources",or even "sources close to..." What sources? Who did they talk to? In semi-legal terms, the dry-cleaner , or first grade teacher, could be considered reliable.

    No, thats accepted. Try getting that by, on this site. Lies are demonstrable on "mainstream news". But, keep on believing them.

    If you are religious, pray for humanity, alternately, pray for common sense to prevail.

    Otherwise, we might as well stop pretending that we in the "Ally of Goodness" vs "Axis of Evil". Are even paying attention. People are homeless and starving in our own country (ies) But rather than feeding and clothing them, we bomb other people (lots of goat farmers, I hear).

    It warms my heart when I hear that mass killing of a previously "unknown threat" cost the taxpayer's $3 trillion and counting.

    Sigh....

  • oddsrhuge

    Yeah thats plausible..."they were designed badly".

    Just go back to slepp.....

  • Guest

    @oddsr,

    Oh Gosh! Getting U're TDF reply through email, it reminded me that I didn't mentioned that the "Other" docu essentially technical (Not a sum of comments as "Experts Speak Out" was on a website baring the name "Archive . ORG". A large part of it is dedicated to documentaries.

    But the darn problem is that I didn't downloaded it and lost it, since then. It wasn't the commercial type of docu that hits hard as the other 9/11 ones. Because it was that much technical, boring for most, I guess.

    There was a user here (Moderator as well) who once asked me exactly where he could find that docu but obviously couldn't answer.
    Archive . ORG has a very weak search engine.
    Very hard to track back one of its docu if one doesn't bookmark it.
    My bookmark is for its main bookmark.
    I'll spot it, someday.

    Meanwhile, I keep on going for other movies, docus.
    The world still spin 'round...
    ... Its just that as generations go by, the cost of all this began to attack the very fabric of a nation. Not to mention its credibility.

    I feel real lucky to watch from abroad.
    To whom will we sell our things?
    The new consumers chineses?
    Gosh, one needs to produce in a tenfold, rather hundred fold output!

    Pierre.

  • Colin Doran

    If the WTC buildings were brought down by controlled demolition, what evidence would there be afterwards?

  • Guest

    @Colin Doran,

    None! Once the place was cleaned and all debris were swiftly sent elsewhere.

    Beside, if anyone would ever had any inconvenient thoughts, just put him out of work or destroy his carrer.

    Pierre.

  • a_no_n

    dude...how do you think they shaped that steel in the first place? with heat!
    Jet fuel may not burn hot enough to do it, but a sh1t load of computers, papers, carpets and people will!

    methinks you probably came to your conclusions before you did any study on the subject whatsoever.

    I like the way everybody is an engineering expert all of a sudden.

  • a_no_n

    Erik there is a conspiracy to make money! But it's a conspiracy on the part of Alex Jones et al to sell books!

    Everything you truthers claim relies on one simple impossibility.

    It relies on George W Bush not being an under evolved inbred m*ron.

    Since that's precisely what he is, the possibility of him being able to keep a conspiracy under wraps dwindles instantly.

    ffs Nixon couldn't bug a room without getting caught, yet you muppets think Monkey boy Bush could pull this off?

    get your heads out of the clouds!

  • Colin Doran

    If the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition then all the structural steel would have had big diagonal molten cuts at each each caused by the explosives that were used to cut them. The evidence would be plain to see by anyone and everyone at ground zero - the hundreds of first responders, firefighters, rescue and demolition crews. Every length of steel that would be lifted by a crane and put on the back of lorries to be driven through the streets would show the unmistakable sign of being severed by cutter charges. I haven't heard anyone of the hundreds and hundreds of people involved every say anything of the kind.

  • Guest

    @Colin Doran,

    I guess that it never occurred to you to see the photos these remnants of these steel beams baring exactly the some ~45 deg. angle melted cuts on a few steel beams?
    Bizarre, 'coze the photos are all over the Internet. You must be pretty busy on your everyday life.

    I wont write any longer 'coze my mind is quite made up regarding that ordeal.
    For instance, it just can't be what could identified as an "All Out" USA Gov. conspiracy.
    Just take Donald Rumsfeld who a little before 9/11, made public the fact that there was a few missing USD trillions missing in the Pentagon budget. If the USA Gov. (Politicians Elite), would had been aware of the fore coming 9/11 ordeal & the destruction of the WTC #7, why not simply postpone the public disclosure?

    There are a few things like that.
    Aside a few other things that point out to a rather "Strictly Business as Usual" hints.

    However, the public in general became that suspicious toward the US Elite because of so numerous hoaxes that I prefer not mentioning here; That the darned "Out all" USA Gov. lead conspiration took over the whole scene.
    And that is bad. Bad enough to make it impossible to sort the whole thing out.

    Anyhow, I cannot state that I'm much concerned with all this since I ain't no US citizen.
    Just that an old chemist who once trained me some 30 years ago, died in there.
    Sort of guy like a proff. role figure for a youngster that I once was.
    The family didn't even got a body.

    It is quite bad as one lost credibility.
    Take long to build but is swiftly lost.
    And once it's lost, it becomes a nagging thing.

    Pierre.

  • Colin Doran

    I am not an american either. The photos of the 45 degree cut beams were of beams cut by the demolition crews during the clean up, not found afterwards. They were the remaining steel columns from the external walls of the WTC towers. There are videos of workers cutting them. If they were found in the immediate aftermath everyone who was there would have seen them. And every steel beam at the site would have shown the unmistakable signs of cutter charges.
    Donald Rumsfeld spoke about the $2.3 trillion the day before 911. He also spoke about it in interviews 2 or 3 times previously during the year. It was brought up in debates on TV on a number of occasions. It was in the public domain as it had come up in an audit of Pentagon accounts about a year before. He was questioned about it earlier in the year in the Senate hearings to approve his appointment as Defence Secretary.

  • Guest

    @Colin Doran,

    Wrong. Thoses melted beam cuts were not done by during the clean up by the cleaning crew.

    And I'm well aware that Rumsfeld made public the "Evaporation" of $trillions before 9/11 while he could have posponed it over & over.

    Still, there are too many unfit things in the whole 9/11. Beside, if one knows that he has done nothing crooked, why so many "Play Games" and ignorance in the inquiry?
    -Ignorance: In the sense of pretending to ignore.

    Backing the heavy doubt, is the ~(40-50) years of involvment of the USA political Elite and various agencies in criminal wrong doings that ought to be considered.
    They are known and a well recognized war criminal harbor since the Paperclip affair.
    Not to mention every Vietnamese war crimes, going against international laws and also against USA congress laws in covert operations.

    For the Iran Contrat, the CIA-Iran overthrow and the Chilian murder, I guess that it's better if we let them get away with this.
    Otherwise, they could get mad and begin to have thoughts of invading other autonomous democratic countries like ours to get some thills in torturing and murdering peoples who are different to themselves.
    Let them have the justice that they deserve.

    Else, destroy all histrory books and all movies that reports these facts and begin a new world order since the true Germans once made a mess even though a certain guy named "Bush" made its best to help those. Meanwhile, history remains what it is.

    This is it.
    Pierre.

  • slpsa

    keep telling yourself this. Your obviously ignorant and uninformed. As are the people you mentioned debunk this doc and others. These people are experts, your sources are nothing more than paid mouthpieces of the Government. Take your stupidity and ignorance of facts and enjoy it. I would take the word of every one of these people in this doc before all the schill,lying mouthpieces you listed. Seen them all and call them all uniformed, less than expert opinions and models. The experts in this doc are beyond reproach, sorry pal, back to the drawing board for your side.

  • Colin Doran

    I'm taking the word of all the people who were at ground zero doing the clean-up , removing all the steel. I have never heard one of them come forward to say that every piece of structural steel was severed at both ends with diagonal molten cuts as it would be with a controlled demolition. The experts in this documentry are saying the building was brought down by controlled demolition. If it was the evidence for it would be obvious on every piece of steel. It wouldn't have to tested by experts, it would be obvious to anyone who just looked at it. Unless you think all the firefighters and rescue workers are covering up the deaths of hundreds of their colleagues.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Something is startling to me, why assert that investigations need to be done when this same documentary also makes claims that have already come to a certain conclusion.

  • http://www.facebook.com/saadasl Saad Aslam Khan

    documentaries like this one may infer certain facts but may never bring the culprits to any justice .... a thorough legal investigation shall do that .... thats it

  • roygbynum

    All I got to say is how come there is no docs backing the govt side.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Thang-Tran/100000684251561 Thang Tran

    Because documentaries aren't a legitimate or thorough way to address an issue or topic, but mostly for anecdotal or entertainment purposes. The convincing has citations, discernible points brought forth by written (transcript basically), graphs, charts, data, which documentaries rarely have or be able to have.

  • slpsa

    like I said, enjoy your ignorance. Anyone with a shred if intellect knows what happened on 9/11 and why. It was written about and put on a website. They laid out the plans for the Middle East and bing bang boom. Look at what transpired. PNAC is no joke and neither are the people that wrote it. They ran the Country for 8 years. That document is a blueprint for everything that has happened there and is still happening, You can believe in coincidences, I choose not to. That and the fact the rules of physics cannot be changed for you, for the neo cons or anyone else, for one day. Basic knowledge of physics is all that is required to label 9/11 as a setup. You can be afraid of your Government and defend it all you wish. The real criminals thank you for your ignorance I am sure. They need you types to keep the lie going. Sad to know and be told you are being deceived and used and yet, somehow many are able to ignore it. Find peace and security in your delusions, the rest of us with real critical thinking skills are not going to stop being intelligent. The online experts, like some of these Government pap-fed posts I read want us to dumb down and take the party line and lies wholesale. Sorry, a lot of our brains do not process nonsense and lies, people with education and knowledge of physics. Most people these days understand what has been done and is being done to them, never mind the science that proves beyond a doubt those buildings were blown up.. The rest of you can stick your head in the sand and enjoy it.

  • slpsa

    oh and Colin, those ******* beams were not cut during clean up. Do some investigation then get back to us with proper information. Not conjecture or misinformation. You want to be taken seriously, come armed with facts, not guesses. You want your questions answered, spend more than a day looking at it.

  • Guest

    @slpsa,

    Hummmm????

    Didn't Daniel Ellsberg once explained how important & fruitful for a career it is to collaborate with the reigning power & how hard it was to say no to the leaders? Something like 40 years ago?

    But he may have done that comment through a different media after, much after all the incident.
    As well, maybe after the main documentary.

    As one remember well, Ellsberg was that New York Times journalist who made the pentagon documents public about the Vietnam war? Refer to the 2 documentaries that can be found on the web.

    There is at most, one such dedicated individual per nation per generation on average.
    I mean, someone who has the enough guts toward the betterment of humankind, to disclose such things!
    Disclose such things, since Daniel Ellsberg happened to be a former journalist who served under McNamara as his military analyst workhorse in Vietnam, as a tour of duty.

    Within all the comments in here, not once did I see someone remembering how much any american would suffer if he doesn’t support and defend his leading Gov. liars.

    Check these Engineers in “ Explosive Evidence” again and you'll see that the USA Elite has either fired or destroy the careers, family lives or done everything for that to these black sheeps.

    What was most important within Daniel Ellsberg wordsis how the collusion go hand in hand the USA media channels and the USA Gov. Elite is entrenched into the USA way of life.

    There was no “Non Biased” inquiry in 9/11 and there wont be any.
    The USA shadowy “We the Corporates” elected government learned a lot through that Vietnam war generation.

    Since a shadow never talk, I just don’t see how anybody could get an answer. Memory is the worst thing to lose.

    Pierre.

  • mike nico

    Why does everyone miss the damm point, everyone in this film same what we all know, and that is " it was a controlled demolition" the question one should be asking is "why" and for what. Its like the damm missile in the petagon we all know there was no plane that hit it, so the question should be" if it was not
    what happend to the plane that was supose to have? : it seems we asking the wrong questions,

  • http://www.facebook.com/jimmy.noodle Jimmy Noodle

    probably lots people guessed who could possibly intended to cover this up but for whatever reason i believe all those people who died - families, firefighters, police and soldiers in war etc deserve the real detailed truth. it could be that the reason was for the common good? who knows.

    The sad thing is noone could possibly done anything about it even if we know the truth. This is the society we live in today - money power and greed in any country at any time USA or Afgan. Who is right or who is wrong depends on who has more money who has more power and who is more greedy. Noone can escape "the survival of the fittest" a "natural selection process".

    Guys don't find out the truth but be the truth :)

  • Mike Howell

    The official bulls**t story is the REAL conspiracy theory...er, lie !!
    These people in government need to be brought to justice and incarcerated !

  • Charlie_PenDragon

    I think this is a great film, solid example of not just "taking Dick Cheney" & Co.'s word for it. The Science is persuasive.

  • Charlie_PenDragon

    Well said, I also only listen to Fox News. We don't like documentaries either, they have to be hollywood dramatizations or CNN's Wolf Blitzer or.... it is just lies. I agree with you.

  • http://www.blogger.com/home?pli=1 DeathbyInflation

    very interesting video, these videos get better every few years.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Colin-Wiley/502060630 Colin Wiley

    the reason this film aims at the point it does rather than addressing the questions for why and for what is because it is attempting to bring about doubt for an academic arguement. When film speculate on the questions you want addressed they lose their creditiblity because they are looking at questions that are outside of their areas of knowledge. By creating a very focused issue and having a strong group against one point they are able to be percieved as more academic and less like a conspiracist. This is the method that needs to be adopted to create answers, not the wild method of asking too many questions, that creates an opening for rebutals against the weakest points of the arguements and is counterintuitive to the demand for answers

  • ResearchYourself

    There's plenty of pictures of the diagonal cuts you're talking about. Just Google it. Many of the firefighters, and rescue crews said they heard multiple explosions. Watch some of the 9/11 docs and you'll see them talking about it.

  • oddsrhuge

    Are you joking? In the first EVER "non Mainstream" video I saw...

    Clear indications of a "chevron" cut, show on a steel beam at ground level (with indications of molten steel at the cut). This picture has been displayed on several "conspiracy" sites, never even mentioned in the mainstream.

    Firefighters talked about molten metal (on the mainstream news) pouring down the steel members like they were "in a foundry" (actual quote)

    One of the first (explanation) videos was PBS "how the Towers Fell." Why is it that after they show convenient "computer model" proof of pancake collapse, the graphic still reveals all steel columns intact? To me that showed that they used an Auto-CAD program, which will eliminate the impossible scenarios, like the melting and or failure of massive structures, designed to prevent the failure that we watched.

  • oddsrhuge

    Based upon the specious arguments made by the "brainy" posters here, I will BET dollars to donuts, that 99.99% haven't read that novel called "The 911 Commission Report".

    You can all now claim that I'm wrong, but ANYONE with even the slightest inclination toward scientific method, HAS to REJECT it's conclusions! It studies ONE scenario and ignores any OTHER possibility!

    Where did you all study science? In a cave in Afganistan?

  • oddsrhuge

    I thought I should just mention, I like your handle. So many of the people who have an "argument" want us to provide our "proof". It's all over the place, folks. If you choose to have others research for you, you might as well go back to watching, Bill O'Reilly.

    It's the same thing when people create debunking videos...they don't write and produce their own. They just play the original in the background while refuting (with bad spelling, in many cases) points and questions raised by the evidence.

    No one will debate this from an official stance. Why not? They all LOVE supporting democracy, as long as they never really address it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=688870959 Yen Il Sun

    The beams are cut at 45 degree by thermite, combine with the explosive blast concrete columns into dust ( literally ) . So there is virtually no resistance for the building to collapse .
    There ARE photos of beams cut at 45 d at both twin tower base , they were never been cut by workers ( why would the cut them ?) And they are not cut by charge ( no explosive ) . AT 1'35'00 they talk about it .

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=688870959 Yen Il Sun

    Come forward to you ? Who could you be to make those guys to report to you ?

  • Guest

    @Yen Il Sun,

    Yeah. Coze those photos were taken the very day after.
    Later, the security guards woldn't allow anybody into the place.
    Security matter. There could have been wounded peoples in there.

    Oh! BTW, every beam had these 45o cuts.
    Second, the cut beams were short enough to be crushed with the debris by gigantic machineries.
    Still, only a very few beam shown those cuts.
    And no, I ain't no specialist to weight figure out how many needed to be cut to get what we all seen.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @Yen Il Sun,

    So... I guess that it just happens that you're not aware that the 9/11 Gov. Commission refused to hear many important witnesses.
    So, these peoples who saw the 45o cut beam, were ignored as for so many other ones for other topics.
    And guys who have the same biased rules of conduct as you, went againts the law and sent the debris away in China so that you that you can feel free to state you just did.

    As for the commission, you are biaised.

    Pierre.

  • Colin Doran

    The demolition crews spent months at the WTC site removing steel and rubble. During that time they cut steel columns that were left standing after the collapse. There are photographs of them doing the cutting. There are videos of them doing it. There are photos of steel columns with 45 degree cuts in them. If you are saying these columns had these 45 degree cuts immediately after the buildings fell then you have to know when the photos were taken. When were they taken? Citing photos of columns with 45 cuts in them means nothing unless you can prove when the photos were taken. We know there were columns at the site cut at 45 degrees.
    If these columns were like that immediately afterwards why have you not heard any one of the hundreds of people who were involved in the clear-up mention it? They are as plain as day, there are photos of people standing beside them. What possible reason would these columns be cut during a controlled demolition in the first place? A huge 110 storey building collapsing and here are columns down at ground level, someone thinks ,lets go to the trouble of cutting these last ground level columns. And of course no one will notice them, with the big 45 degree molten cuts in them for everyone to see. Let's do that. And where is the evidence in the form of the hundreds of people who were there during the rescue and clear-up operation putting chains around every piece of structural steel at the site and loading them onto trucks to be removed from the site through the streets of NY, and the thousands and thousands of people photographing and spectating around the site- both ends of all those steel columns have big diagonal molten cuts at each end but no one notices. Thousands of tons of steel were stored in a hanger at JFK for people to examine and photograph.

  • Colin Doran

    How many 911 conspiracy websites, blogs, forums, organisations,researchers, writers of books, host of radio shows, truth conferences etc. are there ? Are you saying that you and I and countless thousands of other people can be posting views and comments in places like this but that people with genuine first-hand evidence are somehow unable to find a way to communicate it?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_CYCTMUO3IHBJYRNSHGRSDQ3F6E Michael Isaac

    I am brazilian and I feel so sorry for what happened to the american people and consequently to the afeghan and iraque people because of 9/11, in the end we all seem to be disposable pieces of an unknown game with unhuman rules. I am a college student, my goal is to become a diplomat for my country, I think through doing so I will have my opportunitty of a making a small contribuition to a better world. It`s time for us to realize humanity has been suffering as a whole, we either face our problems together, or we will end up dying together!
    Michael Isaac

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7A7Y6WAJ2O25VIQ65BOBWCBV7Y Bob

    ok i give u the fact that the building might have been taken down with exploisvies but can someone explain to me y did the government want to building 7 down what was inside the building

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YCMVYTNKYCUX7BS4JRATO7CWCA ThisIs

    More conspiracy crap? Geez there's a bit of it on this site - though I hasten to add I love the good stuff.

    Quick summary:

    * No there weren't any incendiaries, the buildings fell down because a 100 ton aircraft flew through each of them, dumping most of 90 thousand litres of Jet-A1 along the way, which burns at 2000 Celsius. Its really quite an extraordinary tribute to the engineering of the towers, particularly given their age, that they stayed up so long under such an onslaught.

    * Building 7 was a bit of a mystery, but we knew it had caught fire from falling burning debris early on in the event. The mystery was why it had burned down so quickly and the Port Authority and fire department studied its ruins at length. The conclusion? The simplest of all - it was really craply built! The top floor was one chamber and pretty much the only thing stopping the fire rising was the set of acoustic ceilings - it should not have been a safe certified building in the first place.

    * The overwhelming evidence - yes by HUNDREDS in fact THOUSANDS of engineers and other experts in their fields - is that the buildings were hit by two airliners and then burned down. The End.

    * Parting shot - it takes weeks to rig a building for demolition. How did they do it in secret? :) Answer: they didnt.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YCMVYTNKYCUX7BS4JRATO7CWCA ThisIs

    Yeah it doesnt really add up does it.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YCMVYTNKYCUX7BS4JRATO7CWCA ThisIs

    I agree Michael, and I'd like to say what I find so offensive about these pseudo-documentaries is that they grievously insult the people who were actually involved in the real world event. I think these gimps have been allowed to get away with this for too long, its time we started hounding and even jailing some of them.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YCMVYTNKYCUX7BS4JRATO7CWCA ThisIs

    Colin - thank you. (Thisis bows).

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YCMVYTNKYCUX7BS4JRATO7CWCA ThisIs

    Pierre. No, they didn't, everything you just said is crap. Don't base an argument on crap, it just muddies things more.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YCMVYTNKYCUX7BS4JRATO7CWCA ThisIs

    Wounded people? Um, anyone unlucky enough to be caught in that maelstrom of falling metal, concrete and burning jet fuel would have been soup by the time the debris arrived at the ground. The security guards kept people out for a very good reason - the place was poison. Due to the remaining burning fuel and the heat of compression as the tower fell, the entire area was red hot for days. A multitude of poisonous gasses were produced by the combustion, and the dust was a gigantic hazard - in fact we are only beginning to realize just how dangerous the dust was.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YCMVYTNKYCUX7BS4JRATO7CWCA ThisIs

    Common misconception. Thermite burns hot but not that hot - 2500 Celsius. It takes a finite time to burn through steel. It is also brighter than the sun. Little difficult to hide.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YCMVYTNKYCUX7BS4JRATO7CWCA ThisIs

    Er, because its a computer model and this event was almost unprecedented? Yes there should have been molten metal - carbon steel melts to a liquid at 1400 C, particularly the old grades those buildings were made with. Jet-A1 burns at 2000 C. Ring up Shell Aviation and get some datasheets if you like, they are nice and helpful folk.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YCMVYTNKYCUX7BS4JRATO7CWCA ThisIs

    Yes, because, as an earlier poster said, correctly, they had to cut lots of beams after the structure fell. Even on the ground the debris was towering and posed a continuing hazard to the surroundings. The reason Ground Zero is so 'neat' now is due to the good work of those engineers. And yes you would hear multiple explosions, in fact it would sound like a continuous roar or thunder at times. For a reference, read up on the experiences of naval personnel caught in ships that get torpedoed.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YCMVYTNKYCUX7BS4JRATO7CWCA ThisIs

    I would have to say: because it wasn't a controlled demolition. It was, however, a very embarassing military attack against civilians that was allowed to occur on US soil, tut tut.

    God these 'documentaries' just make me cry - all of the people who died, the firefighters who saved and/or died, the poor terrified victims on the planes, the police, everybody. No they're not allowed to just be remembered, they must become the subject of morons making up childhood stories as well.

    Grow up. You're insulting the dead.

  • Guest

    @ThisIs,

    Speaking of "Dombass" : "Jet-A1 along the way, which burns at 2000 Celsius".
    & "Building 7 was a bit of a mystery"...

    You just made a perfect proof that you were turned down from graduating pre-school and never went any futher.

    * Parting shot: If you had any sort of Intellectual Integrity and browsed the web, you would have found that both thertmite or nanothermite ignite when encontering the temperature at which the Jet fuel burns (Some 600-800) & not 2000C.

    You are thus a mislead misleader baring crooked ideas as much as Bush's criminal gang.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @ThisIs,

    Oh! Then, my 25 years in advance techno is all wrong according to a deuce of spade who did graduate from pre-school?

    Why whouldn't go whine your aberration to some christian evangelists extremists in "Remote" south central USA?

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-DiBari/1626054367 Michael DiBari

    WTC7 housed all 16 of our intelligence agencies. It housed the Mayors emergency bunker on the 23rd floor. If you listen to the case of Barry Jennings, 21-yrs as head of emergency security, as he entered WTC7 and found it empty. Upon leaving the floors below him were blown-out. He had to be rescued by the NYFD. He died a year ago under mysterious circumstances, mainly because he would not change his story to match the "official version."

    Speculation is that WTC7 was the command center for the attacks. It was taken down to hide the evidence.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-DiBari/1626054367 Michael DiBari

    Facts are facts. The laws of physics cannot be changed to suit ones beliefs. The facts dictate that 9/11 was an inside job. And until we come to grips with this truth and deal with it we will continue to suffer and fall into the grip of tyranny.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-DiBari/1626054367 Michael DiBari

    You try way too hard to expound your nonsensical ramblings. But keep doing so. Moronic postings such as yours gives more credence to the fact that 9/11 was an inside job.

  • Mark Anthony Nunez

    The only thing that can convinced the whole world that the 9/11 attack is not a staged event is to clearly explain that Building 7 collapsed because of the terrorist attack. If not then you're the one who can't provide enough facts to support your claims.

  • Guest

    @Michael DiBari,

    Still. I think that bringing down WTC#7 rather was an opportunity as a few "US Officials" happened to learn about the Pakistanies extremists.

    Bare in mind that Donald Rumsfeld made public the hole of a few "Trillons $USD" in the Pentagon budget a little while before 9/11.

    For the least, it wasn't the typical "All Out" false flag or conspiracy.
    Otherwise, one of the thousands converted liars woulld come forward.
    Nah! It's gotta be commercial matter that some opportunists took advantage of.

    Who? Not Rumsfeld even though he's at the same level as WWII war criminal.

    And the peoples really died in this because of these extremists.
    No need to wire the thermite or nanothermite with the fuel aboard the Jets. Try it in your bathtub or in your back sheed.
    You'll see!

    Pierre.

  • Craigzz

    I guess it would cost quite a bit of money, but i see only one way to prove what really happened. Create scale models of the buildings, and the plane, and lets see what will happen to the building.

  • tom mac

    If we are going to get to the bottom of this the first thing we have to do after getting another investigation to begin is give Larry Silverstien immunity from insurance fraud and all other crimes associated with 911 that he commited.

  • dks2012

    After initial interest I've definitely moved over to the debunking 9/11 conspiracy camp. i recommend it.

  • Guest

    @tom mac,

    Enlighten comment.
    It wasn't a USA Gov. false flag or conspiracy as such.
    At best, just a few "Well connected" dudes that stumbled in a gold mine. Not that many individuals were aware.
    Thus, not anb "All Out" conspiracy fantazy.

    I wonder why some specialists didn't yet mentioned that either themite or nanothermite can ignite at the temperature fuel burns?

    But today, there's no reason to ever hope for anything alike.
    It's over, they closed the case and voted a law for which no-one can be prosecuted. Humankind has lived through harsher things in the past 5,000 years.

    Case is closed.

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Marlayne-Madison/1041561646 Marlayne Madison

    I agree with you on the part that Silverman knew about what was going to happen and had everything in order for insurance company at the exact minute his building fell. Convenient, calm and cool. We do need not a re-investigation, but a unbiased international collective scientific investigation. One that no one had any loyalty to anyone, only the truth.

  • joe31

    now the want to control the internet and free speech,the real war is the war and freedom for truth,the are terrorist who want to shut that down....I remember my great grand father who told me,when ever you point the finger at some some ,you have three pointing back at you.if your not standing on the platform of innocence and truth ,and you accuse others,then you are really guilty of what your accusing,when wrong right,then right has become wrong,then were in a false war for the wrong reason...if they were standing on solid evidance they could prove it with all our resourses,and nothing to fear,but since there not standing on coctrete evidence and much goes against logic,they want to silence those who know,the fact that want to controll and suppress information out there, shows there not respecting the publics right to get information and share that info and the trail it leads to .. as if .critical thinking is not allowed nor,can we be trusted to decipher was true and whats not,and others have to decide and controls us.its funny ,what happen to a free and open society,the more were express it the more the government is going around,not with are consent to change that,whats going on,who are they working for ,the people did not request this,is is not a campaine issue,so who dictating this,certain people are acting panicked because if the contol there loosing over the situation,people are being sepearted and pertinent news is kept away so information cant flow,since mainstream media wont give us the facts or bring up proffesional opinions,we have to seek ourselves,and now they want to controll what new can seek and not seek,they want stop what they say any false information,by whos truth,as if we can beilieve right now have of the main stream media as it is,why isnt there any frpffessional that can counter reacte to the information give about 9/11,been waiting.most people felt something wrong with the whole thing but cant put there finger on it,they haved now assured no one,except those with blind faith,its not just the victim and there family,who all might be involved in this,its all of us,if there any internal dark forces working with in our government then any of us can be asected as sacraficial lambs,what can be allowd to be done to any people can be done to all,

  • Sam Haslam

    Never, unfortunately, because the omnipotent global puppeteers, who operate in the shadows, will not allow there to be a truly objective investigation.

    Expanding on that point, we are all being controlled by the hands of the aforementioned puppet masters. The strings to our own puppet-like existence is the endless paperwork each and every citizen has to their name.

    Check out that documentary (probably on here, but can't be bothered to find it - sorry!) about the near impossible struggle that man had to delete the 'paper chain' he'd unknowingly created just living a normal life. Scary stuff.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/5I2H2EQCVT65JJGJO6QFGV5N6E idontlikeem

    This man is a genius

  • Bilbo Baggins

    This is the same ol' **** from another 911 doc.

    Don't waste your time on this rehash.

  • batvette

    "I wonder why some specialists didn't yet mentioned that either themite or nanothermite can ignite at the temperature fuel burns?"

    So what? It's the premise by conspiracy theorists that the NIST's theory that one floor failed as a result of fire, and a momentum driven collapse of the structures due to the sheer mass of the upper structure occurred, is false.
    They claim "nanothermite" was planted throughout the towers in a similar fashion to explosives use in controlled demolition- at all floors.
    Your claim is pointless.

    Typical conspiracy theorist, seize upon a tiny anomaly as if it were the holy grail of proof.

  • batvette

    So if they are crying about the "scientific method" not being applied how come none of them has written a serious research paper detailing a viable alternative theory for the collapse of the towers and had it published in a peer review journal?
    How come they had to create their own journal when the papers they WERE writing on matters of a smaller scope were laughed out of established journals?
    How come the one paper they DID publish (on nanothermite) saw the managing editor of the paper resign, saying the person who inserted it for printing did so without her knowledge?

    These people are a bad joke. What drives this nonsense? Outside of reasons best left for psychiatric diagnosis, some experts believe it is individuals of such a strong anti-war belief they feel if they can prove it was not Islamic militants who attacked us they can discredit all justifications for the two wars of the last decade.
    Our (Iraq) policy in the middle east in the 90's killed over a million muslims, mostly children. Al Qaeda specifies this is the main reason they attacked us (in their 1998 fatwa). Why is this so hard to believe it would piss them off? Oh maybe it's because it was Clinton's policy. Trust the UN to do it, what could go wrong there.....

  • Guest

    "batvette,

    (Quote) : -"one paper they DID publish (on nanothermite) "

    But you wrote that there was no publications not so long ago!
    On this this discussion board or another 9/11 docu.
    In less than a day, you gone back on your own comment.
    .... Back & forth, back & forth again & again...
    Instead of getting all the facts before commenting.

    How come specialists remained aloof from publising about 9/11 aberrations. The same reason why so many "On the spot" witness were bared from telling the facts at the 9/11 hoxed public commission if they'd tell the truth instead of the what the comissionners wanted to hear.
    get infom on what Jones went though after he published his findings about thermite. Lucky for him, he just couldn't care less considering his level of specialisation.

    (Quote) : -"Our (Iraq) policy in the middle east in the 90's killed over a million muslims, mostly children".
    - Brilliant! And do you get an erection when seeing child dismembered on television?

    (Quote) : -"Al Qaeda specifies this is the main reason they attacked us (in their 1998 fatwa)".

    Once more, I'll ask for a proof about that lie.
    Either as a link to a YouTube clip or any other site that bare a clip in which this can be assess.
    Because such a declaration would have made the headline on an international, no doubt about that.
    And I watch that type of news.
    You are as bad as any endocrined NAZI ever was.
    Are you sure you ain't the son of one of the "Paperclip" war criminals who found refuge in the USA in the 50's?

    Go take a pill, it ain't curable.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @Marlayne Madison,

    I didn't say Silverman specifically?
    But a good candidate.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    Nope! You are wrong.

    Planted thermite or nanothermite didn't need to be "Wired" as they say in demolition tecnics.
    As long as someone knows that a fire (Blaze that is) would brings up the temperature high enough, it'll go off because of that temperature.

    The fact that if one doesn;'t need to wire the explosives...
    Makes it easier...

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    Another assupmotion from this obsessed fool, and I quote:=>

    (Quote) -"They (The conspiracy theorists) claim "nanothermite" was planted throughout the towers in a similar fashion to explosives use in controlled demolition- at all floors.".

    Find that exact quote in a given conspiration theory where the author gives the details on how the explosives were planted.

    No one can make or done a public statement on how in details because there was not and there will never be any serious enquiry on that topic.

    Even Jones who published his work on thermite or nanothermite trace analysis is much carefull about using the expression of "Planted Explosives" or US Gov. conspiration.
    This, from what I seen in 2 docus in which his attitude is to simply state that it just can't be the way that NIST concluded.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    Meanwhille, have you found the type of steel alloy these beams where made of? I mean the allow serial number.

    Since it is the proper way to determine the (Elongation/Tensile) data of that alloy at given temperature.
    If you don't know how to determine that, I'll teach you.

    It may be simpler to read the 9/11 report.
    It may be in it? Hum?

    Pierre.

  • batvette

    1. My statement in the other docu comments was that no scientific paper detailing an ALTERNATE THEORY FOR THE TOWERS' COLLAPSE had ever been published in a peer reviewed journal.
    The paper I refer to now was not nearly of such wide scope.
    2. The reason this has not happened is that no such theory would ever hold water and anyone trying to do so would be laughed out of their profession.
    This is significant as 911 CT's think that poking a hole or two in some detail of the NIST report is enough to debunk it, yet if their vague speculation were put together for similar scrutiny there would be holes big enough to sail ocean liners through.
    Science deems that the consensus should be accepted unless a viable alternative is offered for scrutiny by the colleagues of a given field.
    3. It's a lie? Sure it is. Google "1998 Al Qaeda Fatwa PBS" the first hit is it. (I'd furnish the link outright but they hold your comments for moderation)

    If you don't even know why Al Qaeda declared war on the US which led to this attack you have no business commenting.

    I don't know where you were raised or who was responsible for such a botched job to have produced the kind of rude boorishness for you to say that was a lie and launch into a tirade about me being a nazi without expending the efforts of 60 seconds on google to see if I was right or not. Out of complete ignorance you'd rather spend that time on insults.

    I won't hold my breath for an apology and a thank you for educating you about something you didn't know.

  • batvette

    you make my argument for me.

    In science, simply doubting the consensus without a viable theory in full, is not a viable alternative position.

    there was a serious inquiry, you yahoos didn't like the conclusion so you have this bizarre delusion that the entire US congress and all the scientists in a government agency are all part of an elaborate criminal conspiracy, which if you really consider what it would take to pull off and how many people you'd have to keep quiet, is so absurd anyone believing this really should be treated with utter contempt and marginalized from any political voice on policy.

    As we really can't do that I guess we'll have to be content poking fun at your silly BS on the internet. Let's look at just how silly your BS really is:

    "No one can make or done a public statement on how in details because there was not and there will never be any serious enquiry on that topic."

    So A&E for 911 truth, who claims to have all these experts in their fields, can't put together a peer reviewed scientific paper detailing how the towers were destroyed (if not by hijacked planes) why? Because there never was a serious inquiry? I thought they had all the answers. What do they need to do so? I guess it would be actual evidence, right?

    OH YEAH THAT'S RIGHT NO ALTERNATIVE THEORY IS POSSIBLE BECAUSE THERE IS NOT A WHIFF OF EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT IT.

    Of course you'll claim it was all whisked off "abroad" but the fact is the bulk of it is spitting distance from ground zero at Fresh Kills- and since it took months and months to have trucked away and the the pile was photographed by hundreds, you'd think they'd have found something, right?

    Oh I guess all the emergency responders and construction workers at the pile were all in on it too, right.

    (this is vaguely reminiscent of the way everyone insists Bush is a war criminal... but can't be bothered to extend due process and actually convict him of a crime, saying they WOULD file charges but the system is so corrupt why bother?)

    So you WOULD put your evidence together to prove this conspiracy that unnamed entities were really responsible for 9/11, only any evidence that could exist for that was all destroyed or taken away.

    Everyone is in on the conspiracy but you conspiracy theorists. When you get a chance, google "paranoid/persecutory delusions" and see your health care professional for some Klozapine. You really can lead a normal life with treatment!

  • batvette

    why do I need to know this? Is this some mystical structural steel alloy which does not lose significant amounts of its strength when heated to 1800 degrees fahrenheit?
    A wise man does not clutter his mind with useless details, the NIST report concluded the fire weakened the steel beams, the report is public and has been scrutinized by enough metallurgical specialists that if that were not factual, it would have been brought to light.
    Pointless questioning like this is considered trolling.

    If you had a serious point in there surely you'd produce it directly instead of pointing me off on some wild goose chase, for which I'd return and say "Okay I just took two days off of work and pored through that report, every page of it, and couldn't find any relevant discrepencies..."

    Produce documentation of what steel this was and how the fire as described did not affect it again as described or scram.

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    The 1800 degrees again? At last here, you figured out that there may be a slight difference between 1800 centigrade and 1800 fahrenheit. You can say that you finally learn one thing in your lifetime!

    I didn't say a word to start with because, that is the best way peoples who visit in here can figure out how uneducated & stupid you are. In the data tables that you may have looked at, take a second look at the temperature units, fool...

    (Quote): -"A wise man does not clutter his mind with useless details, the NIST report concluded the fire weakened the steel beams, the report is public and has been scrutinized by enough metallurgical specialists"...

    The 9/11 inquiry concluded that those beams couldn't have bend enough to cause the crash of floors as tested by a private US national laboratory. (Where one of the tech. leader has published a documentary found here on TDF).

    Nah! What the report came to is the fact the beam seating on which the beams were laying simply slipped and gave way to the beams, thus crashing onto the floor below.
    That is what the official 9/11 inquires concluded and published in their report.

    Humm... Let me read you once more: -"Pointless questioning like this is considered trolling."...
    Pointless to read the 9/11 official report as well, not knowing about the NIST "Beam Seating" explanation , obviously.
    Not only but NIST laboratory contractor had to repeat the tests trying to answer NIST inquires hopes accordingly to the "Pancake" theory. But they couldn't and thus went for the "Beam Seating" to the dismay of the senior technologists over there.

    But again, the problem isn't really either WTC#1 & 2, but rather WTC#7. Who ever it was, they pushed their opportunity to far.
    Imagine if they wouldn't have touched to WTC#7...
    Nobody would have said a word, not even me!

    Your behavior of "I don't see, I don't hear and I don't smell" is of an outmost indoctrination equal to a baboon.

    Pierre.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Phil-Mirzoev/100001977303983 Phil Mirzoev

    All those speculation about controlled demolitions serve only one purpose: to shift the focus of the public discussion from the main RATIONAL question: what did the US government (and its agencies) really know about the terrorist acts in preparation, and what did the government NOT do to prevent it from what it obviously COULD do in this respect? You cannot get inside the head of Bush or Chaney (or Hitler) to look at intentions, but you can establish the objective degree of knowledge and weather or not some measures that ought to have been taken to prevent the apocalypse were taken by the government... No presumption of innocence in this case, cos the Bush administration was an interested party: there's a preponderance of evidence to believe that the political consequences for the Bush/Chaney team from the 911 attack were highly positive. They were hawks they never hid it, they always liked playing the war card, and one doesn't need be Einstein to predict, that the 911 even gave almost infinite freedom and a public all-clear to starting any wars (that could be physically possible without immediate disruption of the economic fabric of the US).
    So in my view, if they KNEW about these things being prepared and they didn't do enough to prevent it, it already gives enough grounds to accuse the government in HELPING the attackers and attacks. Together with additional 5000 American boys and girls sent to their death to Iraq and Afghanistan 'meat grinder' such accusations would more than suffice to make it sensible to organize a nation wide criminal process - something like a 21th century Nuremberg - against the crimes of the US government committed AT LEAST against its own people.

  • Guest

    @Phil Mirzoev,

    Come on Phil. They voted a law for which no one can bring any Gov. official to court in relation of the 9/11 event.

    It's just that it's a heck f a good lesson remember.
    They got rid of all debris, made their own inquiry on those debris that they sent abroad and muffled the witnesses that they knew to be non favorable.

    Just imagine if the well recognized war criminal Kissinger would have been the head of the inquiry as first wished by Bush...
    That sort of guys can and did destroy or for the least tried to destroy the life (Career among other plagues) of peoples having any valuable "On the spot" testimony that wouldn't fit their expectations.

    Logically, there wont be no any other investigation.
    Just think if anyone proves that the "Ex-Bush" gang had a sharp idea that the whole so called "Hidden WMD" thing was doubtful.
    The whole world knows that for a fact but since it was thrown forward at the UN, you cannot do that.

    At best, the USA can only shelter its own war criminals.
    Anyhow, the USA rejected the Geneva war laws a long time ago.
    First time that we heard of was in Chili in the mid 50's with the well documented and Ex-CIA corroborated murder of Alliende, democratically elected president.
    After then, the illegal bombing in South Eastern Asia under Kissinger tricks and lies to the US Congress.

    Bwarff! We ain't gonna go through the list, Hum?
    At Pointdexter trial, Reagan himself said that he was aware about the CIA/Drug VS arms deal.
    History teaches us that a USA Pres. could be brought in an witness box. Reagan or any other one.

    It's just that this time around, there were some 3,000 US civilians killed? Understandingly this is rather uncomfortable.
    But then, how many suffered in Vietnam?
    For what reason or oil well?
    How many widows were left behind at the hands of the totalitarian Perron on Chili after getting rid of Alliende?

    Better keep a low profile in order to be judged as nationalist when nothing can really be done in reality.

    Pierre.

  • WTC7

    @ batvette

    With regard to your statement:

    "If you don't even know why Al Qaeda declared war on the US which led to this attack you have no business commenting."

    Could you please elaborate on why Al-Qaeda declared war on the US? It would be highly appreciated. Thank you.

  • batvette

    as offered:

    " Google "1998 Al Qaeda Fatwa PBS" the first hit is it. (I'd furnish the link outright but they hold your comments for moderation)"

  • batvette

    "They got rid of all debris, made their own inquiry on those debris that they sent abroad and muffled the witnesses that they knew to be non favorable."

    Gotta love this guy. What are you, French or Quebec Canadian... or? If it ever comes to a popular vote we need to bomb a particular block of your country back to the stone age, I'm casting my vote they set the GPS guidance to your location. Absurd? I think not! You've been told the factual truth THREE times now that the debris from ground zero was sent to Fresh Kills landfill and remains buried there. It was picked over with a fine tooth comb and while some steel was sent to china, you continue to assault the reputation of the United States in a public forum using willful, intentional LIES. In a sense the pen is as mighty as the sword you are our enemy.

    Your behavior is reprehensible and disgusting, you are no friend of peace or justice but that of seething, bitter hatred.

    Why would someone willfully lie to cause disrepute and ill will to another country 's people?

    You are a reprobate and a festering pustular dermatitis eruption on the posterior of all humanity.

    (as for Chile perhaps you should ask the KGB what happened, Allende was their puppet, too bad we spoiled their little party- perhaps the Soviet Union is more your hero? Do you prefer the siberian gulags or duty at Chernobyl perpetually filling in the entombment at the "peoples failed reactor"? Or perhaps a vacation in East Berlin, visiting the museum of all that is oppression, AKA the Stasi? Most of the "dissident Chilean citizens killed and tortured by General Pinochet's forces" (not Perron, you ignoramus) were in all likelyhood the KGB operatives from East Germany and Cuba sent in 1970 as "election observers" to strong arm and stuff ballots at the polls. Wouldn't want to be caught there without a plane ticket when their boy went nuts and killed himself, eh? Most accounts BTW ID the suicide weapon as an AK-47 presented to him by his good friend Fidel Castro. Kudos to him for sparing the people of Chile an expensive trial. Summary, before we had a role in the coup, the Soviets had a role outright fixing the elections that put him there- leftists as well as bitter enemies of America as seen here conveniently forget all this)

    Substantiated in the wiki article on Salvador Allende, referencing directly the files of the Mitrokhin Archives of KGB files and other reputable sources.

  • WTC7

    batvette,

    You're really funny, but how about answering my question first :)?

    If your answer is the reflection of your ability to focus, I must say that I doubt your ability to, generally, reach any kind of sensible deduction, about anything :).

  • batvette

    the lengthy reply below yours is not for you.

    When I say "WTC 7" this is because he raised the issue. Thus the danger of you assuming a pseudonym which is the topic of discussion. If my pseudonym is "controlled demolition" and someone walks in and says "controlled demolition.... silly!" I would hope to have the perceptive abilities to know he didn't mean me.

    Then again there's that "in reply to Pierre" thing at the bottom.

    You are however free to comment on the firefighters' statements.

    As for your question?

    for the third time

    google 1998 al qaeda fatwa pbs

    it is your first hit.

  • WTC7

    Sorry, if I wanted to google something I would have done it. I asked you to give me an answer. Of course, you don't have to do that, but if you want to make statements you should be able to answer them yourself. It's a discussion, not a google-search exercise. I am truly interested to hear from you, in your own words, why did Al Qaeda declare war on US. Your own understanding of it.

  • WTC7

    .... and, just so you take everything into account, I am using my iPad which doesn't give me the "this is a reply to" option :)

  • batvette

    why would you care what I think about it, and do you think everyone should be eager to write an essay for your benefit? Al Qaeda sure didn't care what my take on their motivations was, they declared them outright in that fatwa.
    I raised the point because some people seem to think it's absurd, the whole notion that muslim militants would attack us, and instead want to look into the evil of george bush for an answer to all this.
    they attacked us primarily because of our Iraq policy which killed over one million muslims, mostly children. I think that is more than reason enough and would damn well say there is every reason to consider those 19 hijackers are treated as heroes in that part of the world.
    with that in mind you also have to concede that is why 9/11 necessitated the invasion of Iraq, it is outrageous to think we should have continued the sanctions and blockade on Iraq after 9/11 when we knew what angered them- yet disingenuous to believe we should have walked away and trusted Saddam would have changed on his own.
    curious, no comment on the firefighters' accounts on the condition of WTC7? Don't their statements discount the idea of a controlled demolition and support the conclusions that severe, ongoing fires and the initial damage saw a progressive collapse that was not a surprise to anyone on the scene?

  • WTC7

    You would be wrong to think that I don't acknowledge the existence of militant islamists. Osama bin Laden, a former asset of the CIA, has certainly turned to become a terrorist, weather he really believed in the Islamist revolution against the great "Satan" or because he was instructed to do so by those who enrolled him into the undercover business. But you can't say that with more certainty than me unless you have insight into the relevant CIA files.

    The 19 hypothetical hijackers did not attack the US because of its Iraq policy, to understand that you should follow your own advice & check google, if nothing else but for the timeline of events. I think you are a bit confused about that.

    Despite your long posts, you still haven't answered my original question
    though. Still waiting for your answer about why did Al Qaeda declare war on US. If I'm not mistaken, you told Pierre that if he didn't understand that, he should not engage in this discussion, or? How about you explaining it?

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    1) The WTC site was not formally declared as a murder scene.
    -When the NIST inquirers where publicly asked if the "Standard" procedures were taken to analyze if explosives material was or were used, they replied "No" while all the debris were already on route oversea. It was NIST who selected what analysis should be done and distributed the technical analysis to specialized laboratories.

    2) To begin with, Pinochet or Perron came from the same mould.
    About the wiki article to which you refer, I read the following:=>
    "Allegations based on the handwritten notes of Mitrokhin have been made that Allende was connected [CLARIFICATION NEEDED...] to the KGB".
    -What's that subscript for?
    -(Wiki's quote): -The aim of this article is to describe ways to clarify text. "There are tags to flag wording that is likely to be confusing to the average reader."

    Because, it does happen that an "Average User" underestimate that Allende was president from 1970 until 1973 when he was shot.
    The CIA was already very active in Chile before he was elected.

    Underestimate or rather ignore that: -(Wiki's quote): -Allende's government was disappointed that it received far less economic assistance from Russia than it hoped for. Trade between the two countries did not significantly increase and the credits were mainly linked to the purchase of Soviet equipment".
    A wise reader should bare in mind that Mitrokhin words were an excerpt of what he once said to have noted in his spy notebook.
    Useless to mention that Mitrokhin was a soviet spy at that time.
    That wouldn't be of help?

    (Wiki's quote): "Allende's government was disappointed that it received far less economic assistance from Russia than it hoped for.
    Russia were much less than those provided by China and countries of Eastern Europe. When Allende visited Soviet Union in late 1972 in search of more aid and additional lines of credit, he was turned down".

    This clearly means that Allende wasn't enough of a marxist to the Soviets. Obviously bared the concepts of the socialist China but still faithful to a democratic regime. Not a totalitarian as the Russian wanted.
    Understood that: -(Wiki's quote) : "The previous government of Eduardo Frei had already partly nationalized copper by acquiring a 51 percent share in foreign owned mines. Allende expropriated the remaining percentage without compensating the U.S. companies that owned the mines".

    -It's known that Chile didn't pay back the "Nationalized" as expected.
    But when one doesn't pay his mortgage or his car payments "As contracted" what are legal resorts all over planet earth? Allende faith?
    Once the USA told him: Hey, you already owe us too much, we stop that here; What's a guy to do aside looking elsewhere?
    We saw that before as Ho Chi Minh was turned down in Paris by the French and the USA. Ho Chi Minh made a heck of a goof dreaming that the USA would help him in the Vietnamese emancipation toward democracy.
    Here again, what's the man to do when cornered to the wall?
    Do you have any idea what other option(s) he was left with?

    But I understand your opinion about these facts even though you typically conclude that there could be only one opinion, yours.
    As you meant to say in the threat you made ("bomb a particular block of your country back to the stone age"): -It wouldn't it be so much better in one sole worldwide country, one sole government?
    You could impose Wiki to rid their [CLARIFICATION NEEDED] or else destroy their career, life or simply nuke them.
    Nevertheless, the Allende murder was thoroughly documented years ago in a documentary for which late Elizabeth Montgomery was the speaker. No Mitrokhin documentation of that sort.

    As for you comment (Quote): -"You've been told the factual truth THREE times now that the debris from ground zero was sent to Fresh Kills landfill and remains buried there".

    I'll repeat calmly: When some official of the 9/11 inquiry got publicly asked if there were tests done on the presence of any types of explosives, they replied no. Of course, that question was asked while the commission came close to an end. At that time, the remains and debris were long gone. Plus a few other details, I don't have on the top of my head for now. Because, I am not that much preoccupied by that as much as you appear to be. One more thing, you appear to be of an aging generation once qualified as McCarthyism.

    Oh! One more thing... There is no doubt in my mind (Though only an opinion) that it was Muslim fanatics who crashed the jets in the 2 towers.
    The fantasies of the remotely guided airplanes remain a fantasy.

    The only thing I added was that there were opportunists within the whole ordeal. And it shocked me quite a bit to hear that some US Elite had shouted names to the 9/11 widows.
    Even in turmoil, one should show such a behavior.
    Same thing for threats. That is poorly minded.
    I take good note of these.

    Pierre.

  • batvette

    Still waiting? WTF was this?

    "they attacked us primarily because of our Iraq policy which killed over one million muslims, mostly children. I think that is more than reason enough and would damn well say there is every reason to consider those 19 hijackers are treated as heroes in that part of the world. "

    That is MY EXPLANATION of what I interpret of their fatwa as they wrote it.

    If you cannot read plain English and refuse to accept substantiating proof (the PBS published Al Qaeda fatwa) do not bother responding to my posts. I'm not into playing games with "truthers" who in fact have no interest in that at all.
    Read the fatwa. Distort at will.

    I suspect your games are because you've never seen the fatwa and are completely ignorant on this issue and refuse to let facts get in the way of your opinion.

    Your opinion is irrelevant. My opinion is irrelevant, The fatwa is in black and white and it's their stated reason. Accept it or move along.

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    In your reply "1800 degrees... no point".
    I understand that 1800 centigrade or 1800 fahrenheit is somewhere the same thing. Ok! I acknowledge that I understood this is your belief. No problem with your freedom of choice. Let set that aside and move on...

    Ok, WTC#7 Building #7 as some call it...

    Have a look in the official Gov. report to see what was debated or talk about what happened with it...
    How many time (In terms of hours or days they inquired on that building during the Gov. 9/11 inquiry?
    Better yet, what was the scheduled topics, either regarding the WTC#1 or WTC#2 or the crash in the Pentagon?
    How many hours where dedicated to say each of the latter?

    How many death & injured were there in WTC#1 alone?
    How many death & injured were there in WTC#1 alone?
    How many death & injured were there in the Pentagon?

    How many death & injured were there in WTC#7 alone?

    Were there any reasons to scrutinize the details of what happened to the WTC#7 in a public court?

    Therefore, I dismiss all of what you just wrote in your previous " "1800 degrees... no point" post because there is no doubt that you've been "Cherry Picking".

    It's getting hard to differentiate between you, the "Elected" Communist Party Assembly and the Congress.
    Seating members of the Party in China are elected indeed.
    -If they are "Suited". A slight difference the russian communists.

    And Oh! I wouldn't worry so much 'about Bush, mean Bush.
    Same for Ronald Rumsfeld...
    Peoples jump too quickly, much too quickly to conclusions.
    It ain't that simple.
    Just by figuring out a few facts, it's easy to rule them out.
    Just take note that the Muslim extremists were real.
    The jets did hit the buildings.
    AND, there could well have been modern high explosives planted in some buildings, not necessarily by the Moslem extremists.
    However, it's too late at present time!

    Anyhow, as you may say, it ain't my country and I just pass by.
    I already went too far in all this.

    I will not comment any further to peoples who use death threats.
    You, yourself, you are an extremist by all means.

    Pierre.

  • WTC7

    Batvette,

    You are a sack full of it. There's nothing in you that would be even remotely intellectually challenging

  • batvette

    Why, suddenly has your reply style so matured?

    Briefly:

    What's wrong with the worldview on Chile 1973 is you hear of all the evils America was up to because we had freedom of the press and a US journalist muckraking for american ill deeds would get a pulitzer prize for his efforts.
    His soviet counterpart, a guaranteed trip to the siberian gulags. Only years later is information trickling out about the KGB's activities, and in the form of accounts like Mitrokhin.
    They must be given the weight of perspective considering all that.

    On debris: you have no evidence ALL THE DEBRIS WAS SENT OVERSEAS, that is nonsense. It is buried at Fresh Kills landfill, sans some steel sent to china.

    Nobody looked at traces of explosives because there were no explosions. It's that simple. If anyone seriously thought otherwise there is plenty of debris at Fresh Kills landfill to dig up someday.

    Opportunists in the whole ordeal? Is that your position? Then why are you trolling with these arguments which seem to defend controlled demolition believers, who really have a screw loose.

    Everyone agrees opportunists abound in this.

    They knew something was coming but could not have stopped it if they tried. They exploited numerous opportunities it brought.

    Common sense.

  • batvette

    Oh gee a conspiracy theorist does not approve of me, what WILL I ever do? I must go- and have myself a good cry.
    Conspiracy Theorist: Marginalized. You have your beliefs, never to allow facts get in the way.
    What's the matter, is Google broke for you and you didn't find Al Qaeda's fatwa? I gave you your answer of my take on it even.
    Seems you didn't want to know the answer at all.
    Facts are your friends! Pity you are so anti-social.

  • batvette

    Pierre were those firefighters paid by Bush to lie about what they saw that day?

    Answer the question or I'm calling my friends at the Pentagon and a B-52 will be on the runway en route to your house by daybreak.

    (death threats, LOL. )

  • Guest

    @WTC7,

    Oh my Gosh!

    "Sack full of it".

    It it that apparent? :-)

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    As usual: To begin with, there are many, many firefighters who believe into an "All Out" USA Gov. false flag operation.
    But they were bared from the 9/11 inquiry.
    Again, you are ill informed and biased.

    (Quote) : - "Then why are you trolling with these arguments which seem to defend controlled demolition believers, who really have a screw loose".

    If you'd have been here longer, you'd have seen and read that damned huge "Conspiracy" fantasies never been my things.

    When I talked with a retired demolition specialist (40 years experience), I held my opinion anyhow.

    Finally, it's true that the Chilean affair is something of the past.
    Understood and I recognize that.

    But you lost a notion somewhere...
    One that I tried to confer not so long ago.
    Maybe not directly to you but that remains a secondary matter.

    And it is what peoples call : - The benefice of doubt".
    Within that principle, the Chilean affair is indeed of a secondary matter but anyone needs to assessed what is known about one individual or a nation for that matter, once such a thing as the 9/11 ordeal take place.
    Meaning that if one get arrested on an highway for speeding or anything alike, its sure doesn't mean much but as the officer gets the file on that specific individual and found out that the file is lengthy as hell, what's more natural than asking the trunk to be opened?
    In the case of the incorporated "United States of America", I don't want to list all the other events like the Chilean one since it would make the present reply too long.

    In short, the problem you may claim to have with me is not at all "Only Me" as we see on this board.
    I'm doubtful that you can understand that considering your zealot behavior.
    I think that you should keep your opinion coze what I suggested about "External" influences that just gotten an opportunity also meant that there were indeed some american elite involved in the 9/11 thing. It requires a few once the Muslim imbeciles are on board.
    Having to cope with the facts are they were, guys like Rumfeld or the inquirers simply had to follow the wave.
    They never knew why this or that should be ignored!

    But still, there is no doubt that the whole is much to fishy.
    Too many of these fishy things.
    No one will ever know in this life.

    Also, have you noticed that Jones (Not the conspiracist but rather the scientist) has that much difficulty to state that it just ought to be the US Gov. as such who planted the explosives.
    In quite a few documentaries. In an old one I seen, he squarely refused.

    Nah, alas I think that it'll remain as it is right now.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    Nope! Just bared from being heard at the 9/11 commission.
    We seen them on tapes whining about being turned down by the 9/11 commission as they expected that they would finally give their testimony on the red hot flowing steel they all saw underneath the 9/11 remains.
    And a whole buch of them, on tape...
    I wonder how they succeeded to keep their job after such an unpatriotic gesture?

    Just as this 20 years+ latino WTC janitor was.
    Plus all the other ones...

    Listen Bavette, reading all your ludicrous comments, it is just as if you never read and never seen other documementaries on 9/11 except the extreme right wing nut ones ones about debunking.

    And worst, try to figure out what anyone will conclude about your delirium tremens you posted on this board!
    I understand that you are a one sided mind but Lenine was a much better fool than you'll ever be.

    Stating "1800 degrees... no point"!
    No point for a machine gun operator, isn't it?
    I now wonder if it was you in the chopper who was shooting on the Wikileak graphic cap.

    Sick dude.

  • Guest

    @WTC7

    WTC7? I seen what was on Bavette's link.. Goes like this:
    "Fatwa was signed by Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and others". Whom others? Who knows...

    Futher down, I read: -"NOTE: This the sentence from the 1998 fatwa that George Tenet, Director of the CIA, refers to in his written statement of October 17, 2002. BUT HE LEAVES OUT THE WHY BY NOT QUOTING THIS FULL SENTENCE".
    Blah-Blah that state that this George Tenet manipulated the text before releasing it.

    As one look over that webpage, the logo identified as followed can be seen. I clicked on it... :=>

    "Look how ABC's movie "The Path to 9-11" resorted to FABRICATING a fatwa quote!".

    Now... Who at ABC could have ever fabricated any Boing Lada Fatwa using any of his tapes?

    Not Bavette after all?

    Pierre.

  • batvette

    You refuse any comment of substance on the quotes of firefighters who said:
    ---------------------

    So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.

    But they had a hoseline operating. Like I said, it was hitting the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled back too. Then we received an order from Fellini, we’re going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn’t really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I’m standing next to said...

    ...that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right...

    ...He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped...

    ...Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors....

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

    All of that hours before the collapse and completely vindicating the theory of progressive collapse caused by damage from a falling tower and ongoing fires throughout the day that were left unfought.

    I know better than to continue discussion with a conspiracy theorist. I am not a mental health professional, their expertise is required to get through that kind of fog.

    I just want it established that the point you chose to stand on, WTC7, is something in which truth is like poison to you. You run from it, it imperils your very soul.

    Spend the rest of your life as a conspiracy theorist. Enjoy your years of being marginalized, people laughing behind your back at your feigned "enlightenment" as if you know things the "sheeple" do not.

    They will laugh the hardest if you call yourself a "truther".

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    Considering many of previous posts, I dismiss this present one.
    Not only because what you quoted here below was never verified in any sort of court (9/11 inquiry dismissed WTC#7 because nobody died in there), but most because you are typical fanatic and biased individual who'd do anything to mislead anyone of good will.

    Logic calls that: Benefice of doubt. You sure don't deserve any.

    BTW, have did you began to blast all US citizens who are according to you too much on the "truther" side?
    To me, it's a good thing to first clean the house and then, see what can be done for the surrounding forests.

    In that sense, you have a lot to do from what I see.

    Pierre.

  • batvette

    oh good lord, what claim of any truther has ever been verified in any court?
    These firefighters were identified by name and the statements
    I provided appeared in print in "Firehouse" magazine. You reject it because it destroys your position.
    Benefit of doubt towards ME? Typical internet troll. You haven't demonstrated any form of dishonesty on my part despite all of your own, including claiming research papers had been published detailing alternate theories for the towers' collapse and continuing to claim "all of the debris was sent abroad" which is absurd.

    You have not even proven me wrong on a single issue, including attempting to make some point about me meaning 1800 degrees in F or C. In the United States NOBODY uses that stupid
    Centigrade scale, this topic is about an event that happened here, why would anyone have to wonder that? Has any building fire EVER reached 1800 degrees Centigrade? COULD IT? Doubtful!!!!

    You never had a point at all with that. Your silly trolling is the kind of thing that foments hatred between people in this world. You are not right about anything you've been posting about, not in detail nor substance, so merely attempt to be a PITA and annoy with personal attacks and have no interest in "good will".

    Don't post on me again until you learn to honestly engage in progressive discourse.

  • Colin Doran

    I don't know about anyone else , but listening to all of these people with degrees and Phds , qualified engineers architects and psychologists etc talking about 911 and then listening to the evidence they put forward to support their views, makes me think that the most important degree to have in life is a degree of common sense. It seems to me that if you are trying to come to a conclusion about something that happened in the past you only have two things, you have the evidence and then you have the assessment of that evidence. It's the assessment of the evidence that is the most important part, weighing up the plausibility of one piece against another , comparing and evaluating all of the evidence and trying to arrive at some conclusion about what happened. When you have done that you still don't know what happened. All you have done is reached some kind of balanced assessment about what you think is the most plausible explanation of what happened. It's why they have juries in courtrooms, to assess the evidence. When I see some of these people on this video talking about the 'information' as if it was some kind of immutable fact that didn't have to be assessed, or could only be assessed in one way- their way- it just shows a lack of perception of what evidence assessment is all about.
    What I see in the 911 Truth movement are people who have been thinking about this thing for so long, immersed in the one-sided and biased internet world of 911 truth, contemplating more and more implausible scenarios until no scenario seems implausible to them. When no scenario seems implausible then they have lost the ability to judge the plausibility of evidence. And of course the most useful aspect of this 911 'inside job' idea is that it would be a big deception and cover-up so therefore any evidence that suggests it wasn't can be dismissed as a deception and cover-up. Whole swathes of evidence can be eliminated and disregarded , leaving only the evidence that supports it.
    The fact that someone like myself writes comments like this, is of course more evidence that they are right.

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    Oh yes I'll reply. It's a good thing that you deny that many firefighters believe in an conspiracy because everyone who read the board will see how much of fool you are.

    In the NSCT report, they note both centigrade units.
    Anyone can find that in the Internet.
    Thus, where you proven that your read with biased eyes left alone that as one read your delirium tremens, it shows that you are in an perpetual nervous crisis. You cannot control yourself when you realize that you were wrong in your previous posts.

    Read NIST carefully and you'll see that they use both temperature units. Because of specific technical reasons, not by choice.
    There are mathematical engineering equations that need the SI units to be fitted in data bases.
    Another proof that you are totally unfit to discuss science or even technology.

    In addition, NIST made a standing proof that the blaze in any WTC including especially WTC#7 reached at most some 800F, not centigrade. I had time to verify all this in details.

    That ludicrous idea that the fires could have reach such a temperature 1,800F and caused the pancake phenomenon had to be set aside after the UL Laboratory tests.
    Something that caused a controversy between the UL laboratory specialists and their boss who wanted to please the expectations of their customer. I think there is one or 2 documentaries about these 2 guys here on TDF. Or elsewhere.

    Obviously, you are that much endoctrined that you did not view the "Other side of the medal" in which many firefighters already became extremely doubtful soon after the aftermath.

    It is just as if you be no one else but one of the guys who's been involved in this whole ordeal and you have a heck of a thrill laughing at anyone who figure that there are too many things that just do not add up.

    Your frantic behavior is one of a of a neurotic.

    Pierre.

  • batvette

    Stephen Jones' own confused and reaching report at the "journal of 911 studies" about "WTC and high temperatures"

    Specifically and multiplitiously states 1800 degrees F is the claim by the NIST of temperatures reached.

    On substance of the larger issue I am correct.

    You now argue that the NIST report uses both temperature scales, which is correct. Splendid! Again referring to Dr. Jones' above mentioned report when he cites the NIST report, what are the figures?

    1000 degrees Centigrade 1832 Degrees F (for rounding purposes Jones and most others use 1800)

    So why should I have to say whether 1800 was F or C? It's F for Americans and C for the rest of the world.

    At no point in any discussion of 911 has anyone to my knowledge ever claimed the fires reached 1800 Centigrade. If you were confused or left wondering that's not my problem!

    Your complaint is that an American when discussing an event in America, which uses the Farenheit scale, investigated by an American Government agency, stated 1800 degrees, the well known and accepted temperature in F in a discussion yet failed to note whether 1800 meant F or C for the benefit of a foreign observer- even though 1800 C has never been part of any discussion and could never be reached in any building fire unless the building was used for storing oxy acetelene welding tanks or similar exotic fuels.

    Well excuse the **** out of me. I am an American, When you're in a discussion about events happening in MY country you do things OUR way. You should assume OUR forms of measurement are being used and certainly not make a PITA of yourself for us not holding your hand on such matters.

    If I end up in a discussion about how pathetic French cars are because they're assembled by fromage eating surrender monkeys, (poor John DeLorean's gravest mistake, French powerplants) or how come Quebec is such a backwater refuse bin because it's populated by Frenchmen too dimwitted to get out of the cold and the offspring of American cowards of the 60's who fathered children and left their homely promiscuous mothers when they scurried back home, I will not only express any such figures in Centigrade I would probably be using Google translator anyway as speaking in that silly mouth full of marbles tongue is the only way to get any respect out of you people.

    The only untrue stereotype is that your women have poor hygiene.

    I'd rather have a woman who uses a bidet than toilet paper any day. On that we've got it all wrong here.

    Badgering me about such a trivial issue when it's obvious what was meant and could not be anything other than 1800F is TROLLING. I am responding in kind. You are a real ambassador.

    I'm going to go listen to Sammy Hagar sing "I can't drive 55" and let Pierre whine about why "I can't drive 88.51" doesn't make sense to him. On second thought no, I hate Sammy Hagar, he's the heavy metal equal to Cheez-Whiz.

    That's Fromage Whiz, Pierre.

  • Guest

    @Colin Doran,

    You are quite right Colin. Especially about this specific docu.
    To sum it up, it is a bunch of highly specialised individuals who obviosly studied the 9/11 case as deep as anyone else could go but in the end, the whole movie is based on a fact that a bunch of specialists tell t the public: Believe me, it just ought to something else than only what NIST reported it to be.

    I hate that! Because to me they could have presented the facts, tests, calulations and all of their work that we know they done.

    As one of at the maximum 2 other technical docus I seen.
    Even though they show an Enginering Hanbook on the cam, giving the types of alloy used for the steel beams or anything alike, you and me could have seen those datas at last.

    I'm technically specialised but only oversaw many of these topic within my experience. The only difference with you is that I need to seach the datas.

    A heck of a difference with the other "Technical" docus I seen.
    The speaker had a projector so the viewer could see what he talking 'bout!

    NIST publshed such a thick heavy report that it become inaccessible to common people!

    Why do these specialists wouln't just give us the major points?
    I don't want it in word but in written figures.
    Side by side to handbooks.
    Like the 2 other techhnical docus who treated only 2 topics on the 9/11 affair.

    The rest of it? Who knows really?

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    Whooh! The neurotic loose control when proven to be a troll!
    So? "NIST report uses both temperature scales, which is correct"
    Get a gallon of beer over this, get drunk and it'll pass away.

    As for the quebec chicks, I heard quite a bit 'bout them and they have the same habits as the frenchies who just happened to invented the so-called "Bidet".
    Much better than being a "Sack full of it"!
    They are as french over there as anyone can be.
    But it ain't a french who talked to you.

    It was Pierre!

    Pierre.

  • batvette

    so should I brush up on my belgium or swiss insults, or are you just going to be dodgey and bash America from the comfort of not saying where you are from>

  • quiv240sxse

    like i said ...maybe those buildings wer so wired BEFORE the planes hit BY terrorists that the American gov is happy to let you play with conspiracy theory
    rather than you to know just how vulnerable you are...

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    Nope! There were days when I begun in technology, all the raw materials there could on the international market came from the USA.
    Everything considered, no one can guarantee that he wouldn't drink to a given creek.

    Beside, no one know what next for the 10-20 coming years.
    It wouldn't take that much to make the USA the model figure we once knew. But I feel that changes in human concepts take so long...
    Longer than technology for the least.

    But other times, it goes fast.
    I'd rather not get into this since my principles tells me that the best is let peoples do it their way. The only way to go.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @quiv240sxse,

    Meaning this idea that the admins already knew that the cost of stripping absestos off the building may lead to ruin the owners?

    But then, if that would be so, I guess that they cannot wire before a minimal amount of agreements are set forward.
    And this would have been known afterward.

    Nah! If anyone knew beforehand about the Muslim extremists, he also knew that the fire would ignite the charge.
    Don't lose time at wiring! Who knows with guys like the Pakistanee who wired the money to the extremists?

    Or anything else for that matter...
    Bwarff! Too complicated anyhow...
    I mean that the 3 buildings were differents.
    Mean there WTC1 & 2 are of the same engineering but the WTC7 is of another. I seen the type of alloys they were made of.

    That is why I say, too late. No one will ever know.

    Pierre.

  • batvette

    The "asbestos in the towers" is a non issue.
    Fact is asbestos isn't dangerous at all unless it's in dust form and even then not for everyone, just like mold. Some people will get sick others won't. Most of the people in that Johns-Manville class action suit were in occupations like auto mechanics who worked on brakes- typically using compressed air to blow out drum housings. Many also smoked.
    What a formula for your lungs, blow baked asbestos out of brake drums all day then smoke cigarettes on breaks in between.
    Name a skyscraper in any city in the world that was ordered to be torn down solely because it contained asbestos. To my knowledge that's never happened. For some years there were asbestos abatement projects going on that removed asbestos from buildings but those were largely special cases like asbestos ceiling tiles, where their deterioration caused dust to be emitted to the atmosphere inside.
    Now common sense is prevailing and there is no hysteria based drive to remove any asbestos in any form from buildings just because it's there. Causes more danger than prevents, for sure.

    Bottom line there was no order for the buildings to be torn down and the owners faced no special liability for any asbestos that was in them.

  • dks2012

    u tell 'em man, i envy your endurance, u making him look like a fool, hang on, no he is making himself look like a fool, despite his "carreer"

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    I recall that it was you who brought up the topic of abestos.
    It down here below. You omited to specify that the insulation compound did contain an unacceptable content of abestos.

    But since you are back at it, no one is real concerned if it's a fact that abestos is that dangerous or not because the USA authorites in matters of health issues decided to banned any products that contains any amount of it. One of the most extensive study congtributing to the ban was in Australia because Australia has enormous abestos natural abestos ressources.

    In short, if if was that much of a challenge and took years to prove the high risk of abestos, I could peoples like you or me discuss what your USA Gov. health agency decided years ago in concertation with other worldwide Gov. agencies or ministers?

    However, the fact that you bring up that topic becomes an ideal opportunity to mention here on this board that the company who took over the security matters (Who has access for instance) right after 9/11 and who also happened to get close all of the 9/11 clean-up was AMEC a UK own company.
    This until FEMA (Or any official Gov. as polices or anything alike) took over much, much later.

    AMEC, own by Burton T. Fried and denied that is company had done extensive asbestos abatement work in the twin towers as reported in ENR. saying that another company called AASI had, but he added that they had gone out of business.
    (NB -- One of the branch offices of LVI is named ASI.)
    More than a few are presently inquiring on these facts.

    What we do know and is documented is that a million-dollar contract for asbestos abatement in the twin towers had been put up for bids by contractors in the fall of 2000, exactly one year before 9-11:
    Contract WTC-115.310 - The World Trade Center Removal and Disposal of Vinyl Asbestos Floor Tiles and Other Incidental Asbestos-Containing Building Materials Via Work Order Estimate Range: $1,000,000 annually Bids due Tuesday, October 17, 2000. (advertised by the PA on September 12, 2000).

    That is well documented and tracable!
    Therefore, your previous post was one more misleading and biaised on a propagandist purpose. Because you alread proven that you hold back information that you are aware of.
    Here, I'm talking about that group of 9/11 firefighters who claim all sort of 9/11 conspiracies. The site is out there on the Web.

    Read your post about firefighters, it is obvious that you ignore it.
    You cannot non aware of that. You are a crooked mind.
    Who knows, a child of anyone of the peoples who filled their pockets during the 9/11 aftermath.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    About firefighters... I quote:=>

    -"The independent commission probing the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington decided not to hear from the worker group that lost more lives than anyone else to the terrorists:
    Quoted by: "The Fire Fighters".

    [Firefighter Louie] Cacchioli was called to testify privately [before the 9/11 Commission], but walked out on several members of the committee before they finished, feeling like he was being interrogated and cross-examined rather than simply allowed to tell the truth about what occurred in the north tower on 9/11.

    -"My story was never mentioned in the final report [PDF download] and I felt like I was being put on trial in a court room," said Cacchioli. "I finally walked out. They were trying to twist my words and make the story fit only what they wanted to hear. All I wanted to do was tell the truth and when they wouldn't let me do that, I walked out. ... It was a disgrace to everyone, the victims and the family members who lost loved ones. I don't agree with the 9/11 Commission. The whole experience was terrible."

    Other eyes witnesses:=>

    Edmund McNally phoned his wife Liz twice following the
    [WTC 2] aircraft impact. Mr McNally said in his second phone call "Liz, this was a terrorist attack.
    "- I can hear explosions below me." [NY Times]

    Tom Elliott, WTC 2 survivor: "They saw only two firemen going up. They told them there had been an explosion near the 60th floor".[csmonitor]

    Kim White, WTC 1 survivor: "We got down as far as the 74th floor ... Then there was another explosion, so we left again by the stairwell."

    I cannot post here the rest of what the 9/11 ignored.
    There are too many.

    The only one I'd add if the comment of an US renowned US firefighing autorithy in the US if I ever track it back.
    A retired California specialist, top rank.
    I forgot where I stumbled on it.
    I'm not gonna save all this to my HD.

    Meanwhile, have fun discriting all those peoples.

    Pierre.

  • batvette

    I don't have to discredit anyone, it's well known that the exploding jet fuel poured down elevator shafts.
    You people try to make the biggest mountains out of inconsequential molehills.

  • batvette

    The key word in that contract is "incidental". That surely means materials dislodged or removed in the course of other projects.
    Like when a space is renovated for new tenants, they replace the floor tiles. It's asbestos so needs special handling.
    Dismissed!
    How do you know what I am aware of and what I am not? Are you a mind reader? I didn't know anything about that contract, because obviously it's irrelevant.
    You keep going out of your way to prove I am dishonest, which of course is what liars do. (you lied about the debris and the research papers!) The only hope for a liar to gain credibility is to try and bring his opponent down to his level. Not happening!

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    Ok, maybe things that you didn't know.
    But in regard to "research papers", I'll tell you that I have a heck of a hard time to select the ones where I can find what I'm looking for, there are so many.

    Lately, I stumbled on a paper of an engineer who done (Supervised, was present) at the very last WTC insulation inspection.

    Notably, he stated that it was bad. Not in shape...
    Too bad that you just said here below that it wasn't a vector that could have weaken up the steel beams considering a temperature of the burning jet fuel of some 1,000F :-)

    He also tells about the previous repairs before the US national building regulation banned abestos.
    Then, another upgrading with material that do not contain abestos and again, another one where only certain type of insulating material as US regulations required.

    But all in all, excepted for the upper floor the buildings where the asbestos light weight was favored, the lower floors where in bad shape. There was photos on that website.

    Anyhow, when one search technical publications about 9/11, there's an excess.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    As you just said: "Exploding jet fuel poured down elevator shafts".

    Yes you're right here, I remember seeing a man (A firefigher if I remember well) on a live 9/11 docu telling that as the doors of an elevator opended, there a guy was standing in it with his skin dangling down. Uggly sight.

    As well, in the improvised first aid clinic, responders telling that had that sort of burn caused by the fuel.
    It burn out quickly but sounds as an explosion.

    I wonder if that was in the case of WTC#1 or WTC#2.
    Or any other one...?
    Wonder.

    Pierre.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/EJNON2RXAH2U4AZAX3X6G6OUYA Charlie

    Well Pierre,

    You make so much sense. What can I say, you have permanently influenced me on this matter.

    The more that any half thinking individual looks at the fable of 9/11 as sold by the White House would obviously take pause too look at the science. What we are being fed as the general public is questionable, particularly sold by the Main Stream Media (MSM).

    Really we are faced with Truth or Bullshit!

    Vote Ron Paul 2012

  • Guest

    @Charlie,

    Still, one should not take for granted that it was what I call an "All Out" USA Gov. false flag OP. This mislead peoples.
    But just think of this: The American nation, not smart enough to take over the security issues the day after 9/11 until FEMA took over?
    What the heck is this? No police forces over there? Cumon!

    One man, could have had one good word while on a plane> -"Send a few army battalions over there, I want them there tomorrow morning with the heavy equipment, we have the air superiority anyhow".
    "If they're not there early tomorrow morning, rest assure, you're bound to find yourself a job in the afternoon".
    -"Get the whole place sealed, it's a crime scene".
    There's a heck of a difference between public security and commercial privatization. A public isn't a business here, rather a nation.

    No! Rather been a reason why it needed to be given to a UK own demolition company? Hey! Who you think sells the equipment & machinery to AMEC, UK? -America!
    Worst, I didn't want to be too blunt in my past comments but AMEC have been found guilty of fraud(S) before. It's all document in the Web.

    I mentioned that the USA is one of the best worldwide "Blueprint" for democracy even though there a few other ones?
    I still think so but there's a lot to be done, changing habits like smocking is far from being an easy task. Takes time...

    And for Ron Paul, I watched him quite a bit on Internet.
    I receive email news about his struggle.
    But hey! Look at his age, doesn't really have time for the whole task.

    You may find the following to be of an "Old fashioned principle" but I had time (In my career) to realize the importance of "Old Monkeys" who trained me as I began science & techno...
    Up to a point where I'd like some of them by my sides in times of hardship. I mean that the USA nation sure have the peoples they need to turn things around! It's just that: -Who talks the loudness?
    UK's Murdoch medias though congress.
    See? Another thing to look after, keep the lobbies from becoming the "We the Corporates".

    One of the sickness democracy suffer from.
    If only worldwide democracy would acquire gain something from those 3,000 deaths. Which includes one of those "Monkeys" who once taught me fundamentals at my beginning.

    Pierre.

  • 69r

    Sorry,I watched this live as it unfoalded on T.V from when the 1st plane into the tower was reported and I have seen alot of these videos since, although the USA intel may have failed to see this attack coming or just didn't believe it would happen in the size it turned out to be,I do not and will not believe in 911 conspiracies,that actually think the US Government would kill 3000 of its own people and take down two of its most prestigious buildings,all to start a war in the middle east? If you truely believe that then get out of the USA !Most of the people killed were USA Local Government Emergency Workers trying to rescue the trapped.This incident is 1 of the most horrific things I have ever seen and has affected me for the rest of my life as it is etched in my mind forever.Yes their are conspiracies involving the Government but as for 911, I truely believe it was a real attack that just caught America by surprise or they just didn't think it could happen on that large scale by a handful of people they may of known about.Without trying to give any credit to the scum that did it,it was a well planned,truely simple attack that would have involved engineers to find out the best way to bring down those buildings and avgas/aviation fuel was the weapon of choice.They were all caught off guard just like Pearl Harbour,lets not make it a 3rd time in the future,remember to expect the unexpected,history has shown you this.

  • 69r

    If any planes were shot down,obviously they did it as an act to prevent anymore target strikes by the terrorists and although they did not report that they had shot down any planes they did say to the public that they had been prepared to,should it had been neccasary at the time,they said this.
    The mobile phone calls made onboard to loved ones of the flight that crashed in Pennsylvania telling them what they had planned to do and saying their good-byes was what had happened even the family members who got the calls knew what was about to happen,go ask them.Even if the plane was shot down before the passengers rushed the terrorists,what did you expect the Government to do? wait til another plane hit another target? at that stage it was defend at all cost or die.
    Like I said before ,most of the time when things like this happen the people are either caught off guard and taken by surprise or just didn't think it would happen to them and if it does you will find failures everywhere because everyone would have been caught by surprise from the very highest authority down to the people in the street,you can't prepare for something you know nothing about thats why the element of surprise is used by alot of Armed Forces and Law Enforcement Agencies.My prediction for number 3 is a nuclear strike somewhere in the world,make sure you don't get slack and allow the 3rd incident to happen and catch you or whoever off guard next time.
    Pearl Harbour / 911 (The element of surprise) Whats next and where ?

  • 69r

    One thing I do know is after the 911 attack,America's enemies were now waiting to see what the world number 1 super power that was just attacked by an act of war,was going to do about it cause at that moment every enemy counrty was waiting to see what the response would be,it now turned into psychological warfare/fight or flight and the enemies were waiting to see if America could walk the walk as well as talk the talk.In the end had they not responded aggressively towards the attackers and the countries involved,they would have shown weakness and to other coutries watching and waiting for a response would have seen this as an opportunity to attack the so called super power that is all talk and no action,a no response of aggression towards the attackers/countries involved of 911 could itself had started ww3.Its like the toughest guy at school everyones scared of getting attacked and beat up by a weakling,everyone waits and expects the weaking to now be crushed and if his not crushed the people will no-longer be scared of the toughest guy in school and he will be pushed down the ranks,till he finds a place near the bottom,in the mean time the other toughest guys are now fighting each other to be number 1, so on, so on,this is how it works.
    So if you talk tough be prepared to back up your talk with actions cause 1 day someone will challenge you and everyone will be waiting and watching to see what you do and how well you do it.
    Fight or Flight !

  • Guest

    @Charlie,

    The Pres. of the USA busy at other mundane things?
    -I have o problem with that. Beside, look closely to the guy...
    Doesn't he have the familiar face of "Mad", the comic strip?
    All the "Top level" guys you mentioned, it's the same as in huge corporate companies: They're hired because of their competencies but rather because of their social & political relations. If they'd ever be confronted with real actions, they simply sh*t in their pants. Especially the one who founds ways not going in Vietnam. I'm sure you know what I mean.

    Also important is the fact that Donald Rumsfeld made public the hole of money in the Pentagon budget a little while before 9/11.
    Too often, too many peoples omit that little detail...
    If he would have known, he could have postponed his public show.
    Just as politicians always do. While WTC#7 had to crash anyhow.
    Hey! We're talking 'bout trillions here, that the US citizens have to pay back. Left alone that they now have to pay the bankrupted banks... Look at their national debt, they ain't out of the hole this generation of even the next unborn one!

    But bottom line is that in any crimes, there's a motive.
    And not a gain that'd come years and years after the event.
    Who gotten "Revenues" from that event?
    The war machines and a few $0.01 cents sprinkled over the place.
    And not in (20-25) years from the event.

    Anyhow, humankind history has taught us that late or soon, things come out. It sometimes takes (20-50) years but it always come out. And that is the point, they knew that...
    Thus knew that they couldn't go for an "All Out" US Gov. conspiracy at large. Just take what's comes along easily.
    You could take most if not all tricks alike and you'll see that it is impossible in most cases historically known, to identify, judge and sentence all involved individuals.

    Look at what we know 'bout Kissinger...
    Bwaff... It's a different case here.
    The USA sometime shelter and protect war crime offenders.
    Did the guy who shot the Iraqi children in the Wikileak tapes ever got bothered by the US Army authority ?
    Not exactly. On the contrary, Assange may be extradited to the USA for treason. Or anything that'll suitable.

    In short no. To me it was a rather small group of persons who just happened to be aware of project of these Muslim extremists. 1st try to indict the easiest one first.
    Once one is cornered, a few will soon follow.

    Oh! It should be emphasized that "Al Queda" is composed of many cells acting on their own. Meaning "Secluded".
    This, to protect the organization as a whole.
    So, Boing Lada was merely a logo.

    Reason why we later learned that those Muslim extremists (Who ever they can be or impersonated) were financially backed up by a Pakistani.

    That is what I had in mind.
    Not that simple. No one will ever clear the cloud.

    Pierre.

    Pierre.

  • brian rose

    I must say that due to the 9/11 theories and the increased security apparatus in this country I was certain that Bush would find a way to maintain power. In 2008 when everything was falling apart (remember when the Dow dropped 777 points on 9/29/08?) just two months before the election I thought "Oh perfect, what an opportunity to cancel an election." Indeed it was a perfect opportunity... yet it never happened. Everyone who accepts the 9/11 conspiracy must surely admit they had that moment as well.

    Of course, many will simply say the presidency is a sham anyway, and its those behind the scenes that run things, but I strongly believe many here thought at one point we'd see a Third Bush Term. Shoot its even happened before with FDR! I just wanted to reflect on that a bit. I'm not trying to hark on anyone because lets face it WTC 7 didn't collapse on its own, and if it didn't that opens up the whole can of worms.

  • batvette

    "Blaring facts"? We know what Bush was doing, attending a reading of my pet goat that was no surprise to anyone.
    Norad and air defense did what it was supposed to and planes were in the air at the time the first aircraft impacted the WTC. The hijackers turned off the transponders and the tower personnel were as good as blind as to where to send those F-15's. Do you have any comprehension of how many civil and commercial aircraft were in the air in that area at that time?
    In any case there was no allowance for shooting down a plane full of people, end of story.
    Making issues out of non issues is not evidence for crackpot theories.

  • batvette

    Yep, I was watching one of those morning talk shows a few months ago and they had a lady on who is finally done with all the reconstructive surgeries and met the man who grabbed her as she got off an elevator in the lobby, engulfed in flames and ran to a nearby grassy area with her and rolled her on the ground to put them out.
    Any talk about witnesses hearing explosions before the towers collapsed should be taken with the obvious consideration a building was on fire after a quarter million pounds of airplane and fuel slammed into it. Like duh,
    WHAT A SURPRISE.

  • batvette

    There are research papers on 9/11, published by conspiracy theory believers. A few in actual scientific journals, even. Many more in a journal created by them because established journals refused to publish their work.
    However the key point here is that not one paper has been published which attempts to offer a detailed theory on how the towers were collapsed in a way other than planes hitting them, damaging them, then they burned and collapsed.
    This is why there really isn't any reason to take this seriously, you must realize science has specific demands in its inherent philosophy- it's not good enough to just stand back and mock a prevailing theory accepted by consensus of the vast majority of your colleagues- or poke a hole or two in some of its details. Put up your theory for similar scrutiny by peer review.
    The research papers that exist are simply poking holes in this detail or that. Most aren't even credibly accomplishing that.

    I think you and I actually are somewhat on the same page here, if not, in the same book. I readily acknowledge government corruption, incompetence, that they used this to seize power, abolish civil rights, accomplish imperialistic international goals.

    Most reasonable people are now turned off from serious inquiry into those matters seeing the company they'd have to keep in the form of "truthers" insisting what happened was other than what we all saw happen that day.

    Note that almost everyone who seriously pushes this controlled demolition absurdity ultimately rests on talk of "Operation Northwoods" or "that evil Bush/Cheney cabal". These are not logical thoughts backed with empirical evidence, they are emotional responses driven by beliefs. Yet we all know that politicians have greed for money and power, we all know our government can do evil things- most of us are just not so ****ing paranoid and ignorant to have such stubborn beliefs that they'd go this far, at least we wouldn't consider it without hard evidence.

    Not that they'd follow this advice but I truly believe some of the hard core CT's on this should find some form of therapy or professional help or at least honestly self reflect on what has caused you to throw logic and need for evidence out the window. This is not healthy for you or collectively, for the country. Especially if you think your beliefs make you more enlightened and everyone else are just "sheeple". There's a word for that- Delusions.

  • batvette

    "the fable of 9/11 as sold by the white house"

    LOL, conspiracy theory is SO much easier when you can reduce the participants to a small handful of dimwitted leaders, isn't it?

    We'll just forget all the network news people there that day, the NYFD, NYPD, all the state and federal officials at the scene, the tens of thousands of people involved with removing the wreckage, the NIST and all the related federal and civilian employees involved with their report- and Congress, who had its own inquiry.

    Media? We can just dismiss everything that contradicts our beliefs in one sweep, we'll say MSM! Surely all the networks and newspapers are completely staffed with villains so cold hearted they could watch the deaths of thousands and remain silent because George W. Bush and his White House said so!

    To be a true believer is actually quite easy. Reduce the amount of knowledge on the subject in your head to almost nothing at all- and everyone else on the planet who doesn't have your strange mix of beliefs, they are all in on it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/saadasl Saad Aslam Khan

    But where is "SCIENCE" in whole of your essay on conspiracy theorists ?????

  • batvette

    LOL, I concur with the scientific consensus which stands behind the conclusions within the NIST report. Until a viable alternative theory is published for peer review, to grasp incomplete fringe theories is just plain unscientific.
    Most 9/11 controlled demolition belief seems to center on arguments of ignorance, like "we don't understand how the towers could collapse and reject the official report because the government is corrupt, so Bush must have used some magic dust called nanothermite".
    Where's the science? Okay there is none. George W. Bush pays me to write this stuff. Everyone's in on it but YOU.
    Chemtrails!
    Microchips!
    FEMA concentration camps!
    Bird Flu vaccines! We're all gonna die and the New World Order did it!
    Did I miss anything?

  • conbustion

    Im surprised that anyone could watch this and still believe the "Official" story!
    and try to find holes in this, people simply looking for answers to pertenant questions. Why didnt the sprinkler system put out the fire? is one of mine.
    How on earth could an aircraft not emitting fof get near the pentagone?
    why did Chaney change the rules of highjack engagment earlier that year?

    I suppose batvette has a phd in sfa unlike the people appearing in this doc.
    Or can you explain why the crime scene was cleaned up before the pro's could get in there and do the normal thing? INVESTIGATE with sience. Look at the ssteel.

  • Guest

    @brian rose,

    To tell you frankly, whenever you say the word "Dow", what come to my mind is "Dow Chemicals" or "Dow Corning" cause I work with these chemical raw materials on an everyday basis.
    HiHiHi ! :-)

    I must tell you, I'm very specialized in pure & applied sciences.
    I don't know a thing 'bout business.
    I just know that they're maniac about merging, splitting companies apart, shutting plants, building new ones....
    Companies disappear one day, pop up elsewhere the next day.
    I often have a sample in my lab who'd have a different label if up to date.

    In any events, I was going to say that most if not all "Gov. Conspiracists" are jumping on too many "Leads" like this "Dow Jone" thing. Why do I say this in the case of "Dow"?
    -Tell me, wasn't it "Trillions" of $USD or millions that Donald Rumfeld mentioned not long before 9/11?
    For one... Do I need to repeat that any crook anybody can ever dream of would have taken a little 0.025% of these "Evaporated" trillions in consideration as a "Bonus" and would have found millions of reason for not going public about those missing trillions. No doubt in anyone mind 'bout that.
    Let conclude that It is not Donald Rumsfeld cup of tea.

    Bush pumping muscles in front of youngsters as one teen girl asked him what he thought when the 1st jet crashed into the building, replying that he seen it on TV before it was ever televised? Nah!
    After all the years that went by during the 2 mandates, don't tell me that you never noticed his resemblance with "Mad" in the comic strip? Pardon him, he doesn't know what he does or speak about when he ain't breach.
    This only tells that he felt uncomfortable when he had to speak of the ordeal.
    The question thus become, why being uncomfortable?

    For now, I think that he learned 'bout the jet crashes as it happened. More over, his father (Sr.) wouldn't have shown up at the conference where the Booing Lada's family was during the 9/11 event. Bush Sr. had "The weight" to get that conference postponed or anything alike. If he knew before hand.
    Instead, they got red handed with those peoples on USA grounds and had to let tem fly away while all other commercial flights were grounded in the USA.

    I think that US peoples who really want to know about the main aberration (WTC#7) that triggered the opening of the worm can as you said, need to start where they can really do something.

    I mean that as Bavette said, once the mulsim extremists took over the jets, there ain't much anyone can do.
    Who ever they can be, disguised under any stolen identities or not. This could be discriminated later on anyhow.
    They acted on their own. Al Queda is merely a circle of wealthy individuals subsidizing extremists that organize themselves on their own. The Pakistanis money source was caught as we now know. (Forgot his name, who care...)?

    Instead of trying to resolve the whole thing by digging at the top of the pyramid, digging at the bottom appear to be more fruitful. Not withstanding that the Pakistani needed to be arrested.

    I noticed that after all the years that went by, some NYCF (Ex. retired, etc) are seriously looking at the contracts that were given to private enterprises the day (Or few days) after the event. There's leads in these, real serious leads.
    That is the pyramid bottom & since it has a bigger surface/volume, it take even more patience but that is where the "Meat is".

    Listen for a moment: Does anybody on planet earth would ever think that either NY or USA nation need any foreign own private company to tale charge of security on the 9/11 location once the building's down?

    There was only one US own company and it gotten only the smallest part of the 9/11 area to take care of.
    Once the buildings are down the day after a war act on the USA nation, where's the army with it's heavy duty equipment?
    They don't have only tanks and warfare, y'a know?
    They have all of what the main demolition contractor could provide and much more: "Intellectual Integrity" toward the USA nation.

    I understand that the whole world is sort of shifting toward the political right wing in the present era, but there are things like public security and laws that only government should be in charge.

    If anybody wants to pick the pieces, don't start at the top of the pyramid but rather at the its bottom.

    I now go back to my Kosovo docu movie.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    In a way, you're right Bavette.
    I always had in mind all the noise there was around the place on that day and that lead me to the conclusion that whatever anyone could say, the sound or sight is no lead, useless.

    Look, why one user (Mature woman) took the name of WTC7?

    Brian Rose expressed pretty well how come all these 9/11 docus and weird suspicion came from by stating : -"Opens up the whole can of worms". Sorry but it did happened.

    It's just that I hate it when peoples shout out all sort of aberrations just as it is at a ball game in the bleachers.

    As I mentioned to Brian Rose, it might be a extremely laborious task to disentangle the whle thing by starting at its bottom, but a few NYFD workers already done a lot on this.
    In regard to the private demolition companies who took over the security on location after the event. I mean the guys who where cleaning the place the few days after.

    Just as if the USA nation would be too of a child to take its responsabilties. There are a few factual things like that which are left lingerjng around just because many individuals wants "The USA Gov. Conspiracy".
    Because, it's been a while that the USA Elite has lost what we know as "Benefice of doubt" to the eyes of the international community.
    Just as if this would be sort of punishement.
    If one does this while training a golden retriever at duck hunting, the dog'll get crazy like hell and will never perform.

    Ba-aad! Anyhow, I think that laws where installed to ban any other 9/11 inquiry? Or the Elite has legal protection, I omce read.

    Gotta go to my Kosovo movie now.

    Pierre.

  • batvette

    I think it's amusing you expect your questions to be taken seriously when you imply I must have a PHD to be a credible voice in a discussion on an internet forum. How about if I had the credentials you demand I sure wouldn't be wasting them here answering questions from rubes who have done so little of their own easily available research they don't know that WTC 1 and 2 were not equipped with fire sprinkler systems because they weren't required by code at the time?
    Why didn't the sprinklers put out the fires?'
    Don't you know? George W. Bush sent his brother in there the weekend before in the dead of night and removed them all, at the same time they installed the mini nukes and nanothermite!
    Everyone who saw them doesn't dare say anything because they are afraid of being sent to secret CIA prisons. Only you and your fellow "twoofers" have the unerring moral compass to tell the world the truth.
    How am I doing, am I enlightened yet? When do we get our thorazine?
    The comedy opportunities really are endless with the wealth of material you people provide:
    "Or can you explain why the crime scene was cleaned up before the pro's could get in there and do the normal thing?"
    Do tell! What IS the normal thing they do with 220 acre size stories that slam into a hole in the ground in seconds? Cleaned up? You mean the cleanup that took 8 months and involved tens of thousands of workers? Or is there another one that went on in the alternate dimension you must exist in?
    I guess Bush's cleaning fairies whisked through all that wreckage and sprinkled magic sanitizing powder on everything, removing the evidence you'd need to make these crazy beliefs legitimate. So we can convict him in the court of public opinion instead since IT'S BUSH'S FAULT WE DON'T HAVE A SHRED OF EVIDENCE FOR ANY OF THIS! THE SOB CLEANED IT ALL UP BEFORE THE PROS GOT THERE!
    Do I get extra thorazine for that?

    This was a fun rant! Seriously though....

    The next time you see a young American who is missing a leg and appears to be a veteran, go ahead and kick his crutches out and laugh as he tumbles to the ground. If he's a veteran of Afghanistan or any associated operations, it will be a cakewalk after having to fight overseas with you people at home telling the world we did this to ourselves, which provides priceless moral support for the Taliban and Al Qaeda they're over there fighting. If you were an Afghani deciding on siding with the Taliban or a new Democratic Gov't, who would you pick after being bombarded with all this stuff winning your hearts and minds for the Taliban better than any US propaganda could?

  • batvette

    The word Pierre in many languages translates literally to douchebag.

  • ProudinUS

    @Pierre

    I take it you dont care for the US gov that much, huh? Or is it you just dont care for the US as a whole? I havent made a comment on the main tdf comment board for 10 months until now. Ive read the comments from time to time but thats about it.
    Im a structual welder. I build trusses for high rises every day. Why dont you go into detail about steel, heat, early 70s weld inspections, explosives put in during construction of buildings that were 40 stories or higher. Of course I cant prove it. But its true. I love my country for what it is. I love my country because it looks after its own first. The way it should be.

  • Guest

    @batvette & Conbustion,

    1) The 1968 New York City building codes did not require sprinklers for high-rise buildings, except for underground spaces. In accordance with building codes, sprinklers were originally installed only in the underground parking structures of the World Trade Center.
    Following a major fire in February 1975, the Port Authority decided to start installing sprinklers throughout the buildings.
    By 1993, nearly all of 2 WTC had sprinklers installed and the entire complex was retrofitted by 2001.

    - The facts are they are. thorazine appear to have weird side-effects.
    - Speaking of the fore coming "Afghanistan veterans"...

    May we remember that one citizen of Saudi Arabia did provided funds to the Muslim extremists? His name is Mustafa al-Hawsawi.
    While on one of his numerous business trip in Pakistan, he funded the 9/11 terrorists with some $100,000.00 through diverse means such as credit cards among others.
    He's known to have many alias and the documented electronic money transfers (Wire transfers) will bring challenge to his lawyer, Salim Ahmed Hamdan.

    With the cooperation of some foreign Intelligence organizations, Hawsawi was captured on March 1, 2003 in Pakistan and was transferred from the Salt Pit to Guantanamo on September 23, 2003.
    In short, the 9/11 operation was financed by a Saudi who had traveled a few times in Afghanistan and is known to not only make a lot of business in Pakistan but who also sent money while being in Pakistan, into the USA to the Muslim extremists who had first submitted their plan to Mustafa al-Hawsawi.

    Considering Bavette's jokes, I will add the "Bush's Family" since "The times" of Sr., had a rather good business relation with the Saudis, particularly with Boing Lada’s family.
    Not so much of a "Protocolar" relation as politicians have, rather a good enough relation to take arrangements that permitted the Laden family's jet to take off from the USA ground and go back home while there was a legal no-fly zone over the whole USA territory.
    None, what so ever in exception of the Laden's private jet.

    Conbustion? Right click on Bavette icon and select "Open" in a new window.
    Have a close look on most of his comments.
    Just as if he’d be some ear of the White House walls.
    Rather sounds as the gibberish from delirium.
    For sure, someone at the upper stair of a watchtower in "Remote" USA who looks at the world in a microscope.

    Indoctrinated extremists? They exist, always existed and will eternally exist in all makes. Up to a point where anybody who rather keep a lid on 9/11 for any interest that can be, will act with such a behavior.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    -: "I apologize for some of the over the top rhetoric expressed in some of my posts.

    Just a minute dear!
    Think twice :-)

    You can modify this last port of your's by clicking on the HTML link "Edit", Ok?
    I'd undertand and have no prob'm with this.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @batvette,

    You just can't imagine!
    There were a couple of "Arabs" who shown up as a lab assistant for a job opening at my comp...
    Along with a slave women and a few undergraduate in chemical engineering...
    I wanted a good one. So, submitted them to a little test of my own.
    Gosh! Nothing that mysterious like useless calculus or theoretical things like that, but a 2 unknown variants/2equations that we meet on an everyday basis in industrial formulations.
    This is it!
    Ah, maybe with some 5-10 questions about organic molecular structures like from what are the reactants that afford a fatty ester, an amide, an aldhehyde, what is secondary alcohol, why and how it can behave as an acid or how goes the HLB system of surfactants and so forth...

    Anyhow.. The 2 Arabs who worked in petroleum chemistry within their former oil producing countries didn't do better as most of the "Native" citizens around the place here.
    I was sort of stunned. -Organic chemistry in petrol... Ahum...
    I didn't say a word but I had in mind this weird thing of "Islam," even though I didn't need to consider it. This makes me paranoid.

    How could I say... I was glad that I didn't had to weight that out.
    They're weird with their carpet need may I say?

    And any event, only candidate answered all these rather simple questions at some +90% and it was a Colombian chemical engineer of some 42 Y/O. But he already had some 10 years of experience in Colombia in colloid surface physical chemistry.

    All in all, I guess that anyone who's really dedicated to a specialty can and do performs as long as someone practice.

    Pierre.

  • Guest

    @ProudinUS,

    On the contrary. Look at my age...
    In what year/decade did I got trained in technology?
    The "Good days" where at least some (50-60)% of our raw material was manufactured by the USA nation.

    Ah... Ahum, do we need to mention that in those years, there was no Internet? So, no TDF obviously.
    However, I have to say that I seen the Elizabeth Montgomery’s docu on the Chile affair way before the Internet came to be.
    Oh! Same for the Colonel North Iran/Contrat affair that I watched in cable TV.

    You just can't imagine how glad I was when an american specialist (Ind. Chem. technology) flew in here to bring us the goods and lab samples. Years ago.
    One f my retired "ex-boss" as I once was a rookie went down in one of the WTC. He was at time some 84 Y/O.
    Seeing him at most once a year.
    Only a role model in memory, but still...

    I dunno how to throw it out forward but, all this came as a deception. And when I say "All", I mean too many.
    If you see what I mean... Too many cases through a few decades.

    Look... Would Lybia have gone toward some sort of democracy if there wouldn't be the telecommunications we have in now days? Plus a "Few" other countries?

    Tell me of any "Allied" soldier who would have aggressed anybody in WWII? None. Even the ones who were present and who arrested those beasts.
    None of the arrested were physically aggressed.
    I was educated by the generation of these "Allied".

    To be straight forward, since it did happen once that some weirdo's machine gunned some "Obvious" civilian as we seen on tape, there are no reason for any other cases alike.
    Before of after that event, no reason under no consideration what so ever.

    In regard to foreign lobbies that subsidize US Elite (Congress) to use the US military US assets, let me just keep a lid over it.
    That problem is of an internal affair one.
    But it is a known and fully documented fact.
    Not of a good will ideology.

    Within all the G8 we can point to, or rather the UK commonwealth, or anything alike (Keeping China in the list), have we heard that much about Australia, New Zealand, India, Canada and the rest?

    Yes, I'm a little less comfortable toward the USA than what I used to be.

    Pierre.

  • ahmed saciid mohamed

    you sound like you are fishing , no facts , Israel and US killed Americans, and than innocent people over seas seeking a boogy man. America exports two things , Fear, Hate. So how will you get out of recession when neither are hiring lmao.

  • Guest

    @ahmed saciid mohamed,

    1) Error Ahmed. I'm no US citizen & never been.
    Now.. May I IMAO?

    It's been, hum... some 25 yeas since I went over there.
    Peoples have change a lot since.
    One needs to bare in mind that if he travels over there, he needs to listed in some "Big Bro" engine.
    I wouldn't mind but I don't need it.

    2) In regard to recession, it is quite smoother here.
    I rather not give details coze it ain't a good thing to identify oneself on Internet.

    3) Israel? I know, I know...
    But what anyone can do?
    The Palestinian ordeal can't last for ever.
    Last a heck of a long time still but what can it be in the eyes of eternity?
    It is known that the US senate is under the spell of the APAC.
    Getting to know that fact is trivial but for the peoples of good will in the USA, finding a mean to protect the nation from being taken over is far from trivial.
    Remember always, that nation went through a heck of an ordeal not so long ago. ~400 years for a nation is childhood.
    Beside, as long as the average citizen has a decent living...

    4) Finally, "Fishing" and exporting hatred...
    Have you read any historical books on homosapien?
    As far as anyone can go back in history, left aside the NAZI era, the most common thing we hear of is ...?
    So? What's the big fuss here?

    Fishing? Because I conclude that there are facts that just do make senses or are kept from being rendered public?

    In science, when such circumstances are met, parameters obviously withdrawals, totalitarian denials, what's the best thing to do?
    Throw the case to garbage.
    They're ready to live with it? Let them have it.

    And keep away, that what's mama used to say.

    Pierre.

  • ProudinUS

    @Pierre

    So then tell me, what exactly is the US guilty or? Looking out for its own first? Showing a little muscle so we don't have to worry about ever being under foreign rule? So tell me Pierre, what exactly is the role of a nations government?
    I'll tell ya what the role is. Its to protect its citizens at all costs. Whether big or small. Their job is to also secure future resources for its people but more importantly for its children and their children. Don't you put your family and countrymen first? Would you?
    We don't kill our own. That title belongs to the muslim world. We have good people here for the most part. Some are pricks, but in general dam good people. So are we gonna talk steel or what? How about tempature? Like I said before I've been a structual welder a long time and am far from being able to predict what it will do under enormous pressure, but I do know a little about what heat and welding codes can do if there's a deadline to meet.
    I've seen a lot of your posts. Everyone of them is trashing the US. And that's your right. But in the long run the a

  • Guest

    @ProudinUS,

    Understood ProudinUS.

    I'm sorry for all I wrote. I just realized that I whatever you seen I wrote is wrong.

    1) All WTC went down on their own.

    2) The USA was absolutely right to topple Iraq since Saddam was a threat to the whole world. If no WMD were found, it's ought to be that they were destroyed a little while before the invasion or anything alike.

    3) And the whole world should be greatful that the USA took care of the Vietcom since they'd sure have have infested South East Asia with communist rulers.

    Since In see that it become more than a pointer or an advice, I'll refrain in the future.
    Meanwhile, keep up the good work America!

    PS: I will not see new replies in my mailbox.

    Pierre.

  • ProudinUS

    First off...ah Pierre is it? Don't even talk about the US in Vietnam since we were originally there to help the French protect there colonies. France. Was fighting them since '45 or so. The US sent top military heads to advise the French around 1950 or so. Its true the US was in fear of a Communist world view though. But France started that whole Vietnam sh!t. And when things got a little hairy they pulled out around 54' or so. Leaving the US to clean up their mess. France is the one who wanted Vietnam under rule.

    This is off topic so Ill stop here. I wish you no ill will and respect your views.

  • oddsrhuge

    To me. This just shows all your other responses as complete BS.

    If you disagree with a person, you should refrain from this "hate ad" rhetoric. I am watching it everyday on TV News.

    Some of your arguments carry weight. This comment, however, makes you small and insignificant. Ironically, just like TV news.

  • batvette

    Ah, regrettable.

    Notice his post where he starts with what was originally posted in that comment you now reply to:
    ----------------------------------------

    @batvette,

    -: "I apologize for some of the over the top rhetoric expressed in some of my posts.
    ------------------------------------------

    I had apologized to him for, as I said, some harsh words toward his person. His two replies after were one with blatant insults, another that invite to edit my apology should I choose to do so.
    After seeing the insults I did in fact retract the apology and replace it with the douchebag remark, intentionally so immature as I didn't want to expend further energy on the matter. He didn't want to accept the olive branch I extended, how sad.

    Noting curiously all of Pierre's comments are now titled as "guest".
    Was he banned, or did he close his discus account? He did seem to enjoy playing the part of a troll, intentionally inflaming people.
    It worked on me.

  • Craigzz

    I think its probable most of the steel bolts were removed from WTC 7 steel structure, and replaced with explosive bolts, ie: the connections all failed simultaneously as explosive bolts went off, such bolts would be less evident than explosives, and could be rigged to all explode by sending high voltage through the entire steel structure, thus no need for detonation cords.

    Something is very wrong with the official report.

  • Lumixian

    History can be viewed from many perspectives. It's always funny when someone makes a claim about the primary motive for a particular war when if you do research you will see many, many reasons.

    *Yes this is completely off-topic.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QFGBOKJDLPXLXA2F7CGJSMQE4U js

    The millions they spent on the "operations bunker" for the mayor in building 7 were actually used to prep it for the demolition.

  • James Campbell

    The Problem with all this, is its too late.
    The damage is done, the rights and freedoms of the western people are lost.
    I think the truth is too scary to think.
    What if Israeli Mossad did the false flag Op to get the US into a middle east war?
    Just as scary if the US government was to blame.
    Just way to scary a truth to accept..How would the world react, how could we live with this?
    It would be like finding out Aliens came to earth and created Man and not God..
    This truth is too heart breaking to know and so it will never be known.
    We dont want to know.

  • James Campbell

    The truth is heart breaking

  • batvette

    something is very wrong with the official report which details the collapse of building 7? Explain what, please?
    Admit it, you've never even seen it.
    Something is very wrong with the thought processes of people positing such crazy ideas as all the bolts in a building switched around for some magical exploding bolts to explain a collapse of a structure that has a plausible explanation given by experts.
    These "bolts" are buried behind walls, suspended ceilings, painted over many times, encapsulated by fireproofing materials, and such construction techniques find as much of the structural components joined by welds as they are fasteners.
    Occam's Razor Failure. Why is there not a shred of evidence of such bolts found?
    Lemme guess. George W. Bush sent his cleanup fairies into the rubble pile and removed every trace of them, and then they packed up every scrap of wreckage and sent it to a foreign country. Am I close?

  • batvette

    Vietnam was a French Colony and they asked for our assistance as they were losing control of it, That's how we came about having people there.
    What is inaccurate about that?
    Among those many reasons, did you happen to catch the one about JFK becoming deeply criticized internationally after leadership failures in Berlin and Bay of Pigs, so decided Vietnam was the place he'd make a stand, with communism his raison d'etre, to save his vanity and gain political capital for the 1964 election?
    While his supporters paint JFK as a tempered pacifist who only rattled sabers and would never use them, the fact is JFK only pursued a policy of escalation in Vietnam. Worse, it doesn't appear that it was ever timed in a manner which indicated successful policy implementation, but to actions where he would gain political capital by not appearing weak. The same way he almost started WW3 by needlessly instigating the Soviets in the missile crisis. With Jupiter missiles in Turkey and the Polaris system operational in US subs in the north pacific and atlantic, we already held substantial strategic advantage and Kruschev sending missiles to Cuba was merely him doing what he had to.
    The result of the crisis was the replacement of the more even tempered Nikita Kruschev with the hardliner Leonid Brezhnev, a leadership change that was a setback for the progress of the Russian people and US-Soviet relations.
    In June 1963 Kennedy delivered a landmark speech at American University detailing the intentions for a nuclear test ban. This stand down from the tense relations prior has been widely pointed at as a result of JFK's "backbone" in needlessly taking the world to the brink of nuclear disaster which was diffused by the humility of Kruschev and the wise diplomacy of his brother Bobby.
    If you'd posit the reason we were in Vietnam was political maneuvering you'd be right, but probably not for the obvious reasons. We had a very dangerous man in the White House at the time.

  • Craigzz

    Conspiracy theory often has the misfortune to travel a road of ever expanding fantastical explanations, all the time becoming more and more elaborate, this serves only to distract from the real issue, and give the very notion of conspiracy a bad name. Clearly there is conspiracy in government departments, countless factual documents from decades past, show it is a very real concept to assasinate and replace leaders of countries, and to initiate war with countries based on some perceived non-existent threat, the Iraq war being a recent prime example.

    It is a stretch of the imagination however, to believe 9/11 was a staged incident to initiate war with middle east countries.

    I do not believe planes did not hit these buildings, clearly, they did, i do not believe those on the planes are alive and well, clearly they are not.

    There is however, something wrong about 9/11, one can find as much information to suggest wrong as can be found to support the official account, without delving into the realms of fantasy. Veteran airline pilots with huge experience on flying the planes which hit these buildings, cannot perform the same manouevres in flight simulators, they conclude, these terrorists, with no experience on such planes, could not have performed this, they also conclude the jumbo jets were not capable of massively exceeding there design specs, without becoming totally uncontrollable, and even breaking apart in mid air. It is rare indeed for such experienced pilots to speak out like this. An example of a plane which exceeded its design specs is the China airways flight 006, which was badly damaged and very fortunate to have survived, i believe this plane fell at about 350 mph through thin air, yet the official 9/11 report concludes the planes which hit buildings were travelling far faster than this in dense air, which is clearly impossible.

    On 9/11, i was like the rest of the world, stunned and speechless as i watched events live on tv. I think what fanatical conspiracy theorists fail to realise is that if this was a deliberate act to instigate a war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the act of crashing these planes into these buildings was probably enough to justify such a war, but the reality it seems was not, the coalition of the willing, was almost laughable, it was clearly only an Anglo-American force. The question is, pre 9/11, how could it have been known what amount of damage and loss of life was worthy of a declaration of war ? Little was required by Bush senior, to invade Iraq in the gulf war, and it would have to be assumed, this was something of a yard stick, to gauge public oppinion and support, a dummy run if you will.

    The so called 'smoking gun' of 9/11, has been WTC 7. There is no doubt whatsoever, it looks like a classic demolition, but is it ? I think the jury's still out, as indeed they are still out regarding JFk and his brother. It 'appears' unlikely fire and fire alone, as the report suggests, brought down this massive structure, yet the report concludes the building was sound, was not badly damaged by the fall of the towers, and had fires on only certain floors. It is interesting to note a comment made by the owner Larry Silverstein many years earlier, upon him leasing many floors to new tenants, in which he said, 'floors can be removed to accomodate new tenants, without affecting the structural integrity of the building, it was designed this way'. This remarkable comment by him many years earlier, suggests entire floors can be removed, without affecting the integrity of the building, and indeed entire floors were removed to accomodate his new tenants, and the building did not collapse.

    To believe the NIST report is a giant leap of faith in anyone's book, seasoned architects have come forward to express 'real' doubt, as to how such a building could collapse so catastrophically as a result of isolated fires, and i have to agree. I have on and off over the years, looked at all the available information on both sides, with an unbiased approach, what i have found of interest to me, is how desperately my mind 'wants' to believe the official story, and yet, the body of evidence on the other side is quite overwhelming, once of course, you filter out that which is quite simply ludicrous.

    I have merely tried to put forward an explanation of how WTC 7 could collapse so dramatically, i am not such a believer of 'exotic thermite' or explosives, however, it is odd to say the least, how there was such high temperatures as recorded even by NASA's flyover of the site in the weeks post 9/11, and of course the iron spheres in the dust. It simply seems to me, that the steel structure of this building must have been compromised, even giving the NIST report the benefit of the doubt, its conclusions only warrant a partial collapse of the building. There has been much talk of freefall, and it is remarkable how fast and complete the destruction of these buildings were, especially when one looks at the surrounding buildings, which all had fires, were hit with much more debris from the towers collapse, and showed results which were typical and expected, ie: partial collapse and fire damage.

    It would be good to be able to believe NISTS report, but it makes no logical sense. Questions have been asked by learned people of high status in there chosen fields, and professionals in other industry, this is quite unprecedented in conspiracy theory, never before have such people spoken out, and the reason is simple, it does not make sense, and when something cannot be understood, science quite rightly, wants to find the answers.

    There are clear laws in physics, and when these laws are seemingly broken, science always instigates an investigation to find out why, one example would be the gamma ray bursts, which initially seemed to be defying known laws. It's entirely possible there is a logical explanation of the collapse of these buildings, and why they collapsed as they did, but at the present time there is not, even NIST, failed to recreate the conditions in there own experiements.

  • ProfessorMark

    I am a scientist at a research University, and one thing that I don't see in the explanations of the structural engineers is the presentation of possible scenarios for which they cannot account. Regarding building 7, they do not acknowledge one obvious possible cause affecting the collapse of this building and that is the structural integrity of the ground beneath the structure. The collapse of buildings 2 and 1 released seismic forces in the area and how those forces were absorbed, focused, amplified or affected other underground structures surrounding WTC 1 and 2 is not really explored. This could explain why WTC 7 failed from the central supports inward, in an apparently controlled implosion.

    Similarly, the older electrical engineer gave insight into the possible implosion of WTC 1 and 2 when he states that the radio towers began to collapse downward prior the catastrophic failure of the building. When the planes hit the building, much of their fuel actually went down the central elevator shafts. We know this because of the burn victims that were engulfed in flames in the lobbies of the buildings. Could the fuel that dumped into these shafts, fed by oxygen sucked up through the underground complex and subway tunnels, reached temperatures capable of causing central support failure? I don't know, but as a researcher, I am constantly reminded of that which I do not know. I find it somewhat bothersome that the engineers shown never acknowledge that there could be factors which they have not considered.

    There are many examples where structural engineers have learned from catastrophic failures of large buildings and bridges. I am equally willing to examine data suggesting government conspiracy as a possible cause. Although, given the Bush administration's subsequent performance (and incompetency on many fronts), and the lack of any corroborating evidence or suggestions in the volume of data released by Wikileaks, it seems implausible that the US government could have orchestrated 9/11 and covered their tracks so completely. I guess time will tell. I just wish I heard a little less certainty among all of the engineers and a little more acknowledgement of what is not known about this horrible day.

  • roache5456

    Clearly Craigzz is sorely afraid his whole paradigm of belief about the world is about to come crashing down. And then what will he do? There is nothing to believe in or against the presence of thermite as this substance has been objectively found in the ruins. Therefore it is a fact to be explained not a hypothesis to be believed in. The idea is to construct a theory that fits the evidence not to find evidence that fits our theory. This requires courage to consider what we might not want to hear. Do you want truth or do you want comfortable lies. Which is it? You decide.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jim-Bunion/100003342731120 Jim Bunion

    I can tell you are not an Engineer or Scientist. New York has bedrock underneath. Soil samples are taken before any skyscraper is designed.

  • batvette

    "To believe the NIST report is a giant leap of faith in anyone's book, seasoned architects have come forward to express 'real' doubt, as to how such a building could collapse so catastrophically as a result of isolated fires,"

    LOL, "seasoned"? Were we preparing them for thanksgiving dinner? If you're talking about A & E for 9/11 truth the number of "seasoned" professionals in their given fields amount to perhaps 1/10 of one percent- well within the established statistics for the prevalence of mental illness within the general population, which would explain their deviance from consensus in their profession.
    The fires were not "isolated" and they were fueled by thousands of gallons of diesel fuel and transformer oil, and left unfought for most of the day.
    A gash was torn into its face twenty stories high and 1/4 of the way into the structure by a huge section of one of the towers.
    The fact that firefighters on the scene described the building as "not right" and making groaning noises all day- as well as city engineers sighting it with a transit and observing a pronounced lean and bulging in the outer columns of critical lower floors hours before its collapse, completely contradict every posited scenario of it being a controlled demolition.
    Our Iraq policy in the '90's cruelly starved a million Iraqis, mostly children, to their deaths, and allowed Saddam Hussein to skim oil for food to the tune of $13 billion. Why look for anything other than that for motivation for this?

  • indieisin

    I am so ashamed that I ever believed 9/11 could be a hoax, it just goes to prove that everyone needs to hear both sides of the story before making or speaking out about an opinion. I watched various conspiracy documentaries about 9/11 and thought they made perfect sense, the arguments they brought up seemed valid and I though I had a right to some answers. Then I watched the 3 hours 'screw loose change' documentary, and I realized how terribly mistaken I was for thinking those answers had long ago been offered to the public and they were sitting right in front of my face. The problem is that I made the incredibly wrong assumption that the people who made loose change and other videos actually wanted the truth and not to hold on to some irrational beliefs. I assumed that if there was a reasonable explanation to the objections presented, the writers of such documentaries would feel happy that their call for the truth led to the release of such information and they could sleep well at night knowing they made a difference in the world.

    I learned the hard way. Not until I actively went looking for answers outside conspiracy sites, on neutral 3rd party sites and websites aimed directly at explaining what happened, did I finally get the truth that the conspiracy sites claim we never got. How ignorant do the majority of 9/11 deniers have to be that they can't go out of their way to read some REAL peer reviewed papers and see that every objection has a rational explanation?! .. don't answer that. The purpose of real peer review is for people who don't necessarily share your views on a topic read your argument and then, from a neutral standpoint, determine whether the research and logic behind it is structurally sound. In order for this to be the cover up deniers claim it is, there would need to be a conspiracy that injects idiocy into 90% of scientists, engineers, and people who are generally regarded as smart in order to make them blind to the truth. No, it seems like the 10% of people who may have at one point been smart have become confused and unable to accept the truth of the matter: this conspiracy has become way too big for it to be even remotely plausible.

    What pisses me off the most, the reason I am taking the time to type this instead of rolling my eyes and moving on, is the incredible hatred I feel towards those 'deniers' after re-examining Loose Change.. or watching the new version of it, really. You disrespectful, ignorant sheep have absolutely no respect for the families of those people who died in the planes on September 11th. What pisses me off even more is that those people, regardless of if this was a conspiracy or not, could have died regardless, but deniers still have the audacity to drag the families of those that were lost into this and claim that they are living in a beach off Tahiti enjoying the profits of however much they were paid off. Do you ever stop and think that regardless of if this was a conspiracy or not, those people were still victims? Because you have a hunch..those were REAL people, put yourself in the shoes of those people who lost their husbands, wives, and children. Those terrorists could have been paid off by our government, for all you know, WHY would you drag those poor souls people who died into this circus you call a conspiracy?

    This documentary, by the way, is a sham. Any person can get a degree offline, anyone can say they are smart, but it takes a lot more to prove it -- like REAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE. All of the 'critical questions' of this video has been addressed, yet the responses to these questions have received no attention or rebuttal from these 1,500 "professionals".. Do you realize how small of a margin 1,500 people represents? And out of those, 1/4 at best hold any positions of respect in their fields.. directly in proportion to the rate of paranoid schizophrenics in a given population.

    Unless you examine both sides of an argument, you don't get to call yourself smart. Unless you are able to change your opinions based on new information presented, you are ignorant. If you think you are doing the world a favor by ignoring evidence and disrespecting the brave people who lost their lives that day, go crawl back up the birth canal you came out of because we have enough ignorance in this world.

  • indieisin

    As a footnote to my rather heated statement, I do want to say that it could be possible we do not know the whole truth about what happened that day, and even I still have my doubts about certain smaller issues, but I am not an engineer or architect..I have no evidence to put forward except what I have read from people who hold REAL positions of respect in their fields. So far, all the credible sources have been been the ones that examine 9/11 objections closely and address them successfully. I am open to changing my mind about some issues if new information is presented.

    I am not, and will never be, open to discussion about the people on those planes still being alive. Ever. And anyone who believe the opposite..well.. read my comment below.

  • robocop1954

    one thing, out off line:
    why where those hijakked planes not shot down by us airforce, seemed they had plenty of time?

  • http://www.facebook.com/fookslynn Lynn Fooks

    James,

    Here is a quick rundown of the strategic situation: Republicans are boosting the incumbent president's chances for re-election everytime either Romney, Santorum, and Ginrich, open their mouth. The remedy to a increasingly demoralized U.S. population, is to impeach President Obama, for violating the U.S. Constitution nine times: And, we must urge Ron Paul, to wipe out his rivals, by calling for a return back to Glass-Steagall, in his campaign, and in future public debates: The Federal Reserve system, is hopelessly bankrupt, which is why President Obama must be impeached now, to restore the 1933 Glass-Steagall standard of banking to put the federal reserve system through Chapter 11 bankruptcy re-organization: The re-organization process begins with a contingency of U.S. Marines moving the books of the Federal Reserve to the U.S Department of the Treasury. Followed by an act of Congress, to create a [clearinghouse] of U.S. public credit through a semi-private Federal facility.

    The first bank of the United States, that Founding Father Alexander Hamilton created, did not function as a bank. Hamilton's design of National banking, formed state banks and commercial banks as auxiliaries to form a National banking system to steer public credit financing of 50 year overdue advance infrastructure, designed to withstand extreme weather events of space weather from our Sun acting up.

    As the Sun did in 2011, when the Sun triggered the earthquake Tsunami that struck Japan, and continues to act-up 2012 in the recent strike by Tornadoes that swept through the Midwest on March 1 2012, as precursors of an eminent geomagnetic storm , which will hit the United States as early as 2013, to knockout the U.S. power grid to 180 million Americans along way to a mini-Ice-Age.

    The issues with Ron Paul's Republican rivals, and the incumbent president, must be moved to the side for now, to instead focus on the impeachment of President Obama. Or, risk the lost of your United States this year to bankruptcy, and world war. Your republic survived the 2008 global financial meltdown, but not this time, and I do not exaggerate. The culmination of the unconstitutional Libya war, Super Congress, and NDAA. Removed the separation of powers from the Article I, II, and III branches of your republic, after non-stop interference of the Article I and III branches by President Obama since the illegal war in Libya.

    A war that Congress did not authorize. President Obama, in not seeking authorization, and to date has not been impeached for committing a political crime, a crime that opened the door to more secret wars that Dubya Bush started. And the political crimes continued with the assassinations of U.S. citizens abroad, and abolishing your Bill of Rights under the National Defense Authorization Act, which in 2012 opened U.S. civilian airspace to 30,000 or more aerial drones.

  • joedsavage

    Professor Mark?? You're a scientist at some university? Are you visually impaired or just jaded to commen sense? All one has to do is look at BUILDING 7's collapse--THE WAY IT CAME DOWN. Seismic vibrations caused it's destruction?? I'm laughing so hard Prof!! If that was the case why didn't some of the OTHER buildings around the WTC crumble?? Bldg 7 was imploded--NOT by fire(lol) NOT by planes but by carefully placed explosives.ALL ABOUT MONEY PROF--pure and simple.BY the way--ever been in an earthquake? I was and I can tell you this: Buildings DO NOT DROP DOWN NICE AND EVEN IN THEIR OWN "FOOTPRINT." You sure you're a Prof??? I'm still laughing--only harder.

  • Kelly Smith

    When I watch any documentaries dealing with 911, I can`t believe that there is such incontrovertible evidence of controlled demolition. It is astounding that the world just keeps revolving around this subject, the world unable to see its true cogitations. We all "know" the official story, but what about the true story; the truthful explanation of the sequence of events that unfolded before all our eyes on Sept 11. As I thought about what that would mean for the average American?. To do this I had to put myself in their shoes (personification) and being that I'm from Niagara Falls Canada it wasn't that hard to imagine lol, all I had to do was change the health system and bango! there I was sitting in America. As an American I would feel completely abandoned and somehow, even though nothing really changed in my little corner of the world; something significant happened to me as an individual. Post 911 I was a functioning member of society, now I am an expendable commodity. I say commodity for the simple reason that it was money that fueled this disgrace. There is no doubt in my mind, you just have to follow the money and I think we have successfully done this.
    Post 911 I had morals and values, I saw my government as we should, it was erected for the people and by the people, but now I look to see only Tierney and the unjust forces that command. I have to remember that these were professional people that were slaughtered in the name of evil, these weren't criminals, or people set lower among societies standards, they were people with families at work one day and then gone the next. Somehow all their lives didn't matter, didn't count for anything in "someones" eyes (I'm using quotations but we all know who committed this offense) and what does that mean for me?; Is my life counted as valuable, or am I expendable like those poor people of 911?. I feel lost, scared and my entire belief system is ruined, paranoia runs my existence for the reason that if it can happen to them it can happen to me.. So what am I left with? NOTHING. The system as a whole has been distorted and fed upon by savages, it was merely a veil that the powers that be installed, there was no government for the people and by the people, it was all and act and therefore since nothing changed, my life didn't have to change.

    And that is my personification of the American. It has to be correct and precise because nothing significant is being done about this travesty of justice. The world just keeps on revolving like nothing ever happened, but I highly doubt that the families of the 911 victims or the people of Afghanistan and Iraq feel the same do you?
    No one's life changed!!
    I'm telling you as a personified American I am so pleased to have the right to bear arms because I now see ,that it is I, that will protect my family and not the government, we are expendable in their eyes and I will not stand for that!

    Thank God I'm Canadian and that the Anti Terrorism bill doesn't affect me. People have been taken and never heard from again for less than what I imply here, which requires full scale anarchy and an eventual upheaval of the government as it stands today, it's proven itself due for and overhaul. but that's just a personified American's views lol.
    %1

  • Kelly Smith

    I agree that there is two sides to every story. You have a relevant argument if in fact your summations were correct but they aren't. You must be an American, am I correct?? I can't stress enough that I empathize with you. It is much easier on your mind if you just dismiss it and go on with your life. I understand, I do, more than you know. I was sexually assaulted by a special constable in ----------- Ontario Canada and sub sequentially sued the region, police board that hired him and the city that the station resided in. I won said lawsuit but before I knew it I was literally being hunted and harassed night and day, it was almost like my van had a bull's eye on it, for whenever I went out, I was being pulled over for no reason, charged for no reason (even though all charges resulted in acquittal every time) and at a later date my life was threatened (lawsuit #2). I had a crash course in governmental rule, regional and federal. I know what it is to feel left outside in the proverbial cold with no help with a realization that the one's that are "supposed" to protect me are now against me.
    That is what you must feel; lost and expendable, that your life doesn't count.. I GET IT! but it doesn't give you the right to seep into a state of denial. You see I didn't have the opportunity to deny, deny, deny at all costs like most of American's must be doing, I "had" to see the truth of what was in front of me as ugly as it was, I was slapped in the face with it. Please do "more" of your homework and follow like you stated: from a third party point of view and I guarantee that you will land at the very same conclusion every time. it's only common sense.
    An interesting comment may be needed here, to understand what may be most of the population. It is as follows: Common sense is a God given gift and when operating outside or separate from God it makes perfect sense that it is not something a lot of people have...

  • Kelly Smith

    An interesting note is that the professionals you are seeking to hear from do not want to commit career suicide. These people are literally questioning the status quot which others may not have the gumption to do so. The people that speak out are ostracized and some have been targeted federally/charged and had to relocate to a Country with no extradition treaty!. It is questionable that people of general intellect can still above all odds lower themselves beyond belief, well below operating standards of intellectuality. Most of these comments with the gift of graphology indicates that these aren't just unintelligent individuals but are educated, which suggests a type of disinformation maybe on a paid scale corporation style ~who knows~.
    So what I'm saying is either your very stupid or very,very smart.

  • Kelly Smith

    I completely agree.. People want the comfortable lie because it means that they do not have to change, we as a human race fight against change at every opportunity, in our lives and globally.
    What these documentaries do, is show you without doubt, what the government is doing, have been doing and continues to do to this very day. It's been 10 years since I sat comfortable in that 911 commission lie; I hated Osama Bin laden as much as the next but then the veil was taken off I saw what lay underneath.
    Government is shockingly like the movie "Alice in wonderland" in the fact that we are supposed to "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain".

  • Kelly Smith

    What fuel? are you talking about the fuel that was burnt up on impact?? another disinformation scenario I surmise..

  • Kelly Smith

    When examining something like this you really have to go the rule: When all else has been eliminated no matter how implausible it seems, it "must" be the truth. The simply ludicrous is included in this theory...

  • ProfessorMark

    The fuel from the fully-fueled jets that hit WT1 and WT2. The fuel that went down the elevator shafts burning people in the lobbys of both buildings, including a friend of mine, who worked there. Not all of the thousands of gallons burned upon impact, despite the "expert" testimony.

  • Colin Doran

    What happens when you first eliminate the truth?

  • batvette

    Explosives that left not an iota of forensic evidence. Got it.

  • Balthazars Rebellion

    The "world" knows it was a controlled demolition. It's the Americans who were brain washed in the days following the false flag attack that can't see it.

  • batvette

    You CT's never break out of the self important/righteous mold, do you?
    1. The reason virtually an entire industry and profession has not come forward to complain about obvious glaring problems in a hypothesis CT's are not at all qualified to, is because they lack "gumption".
    Which of course you think you have the market cornered on.
    Sure! 250,000 building industry professionals all remain silent and watch 3,000 die, our country changed forever, rights taken away, wars waged at a cost of billions, because they lack "courage and initiative" as Websters define gumption.
    NO how about it's GUMPTION that motivates debunkers like me to get online and try to knock some sense into you people who are telling the world we did this to ourselves to wage wars for profit! Do you know how this makes us look? What it does to our image, and over time, our economic strength?
    2. People who oppose you, like me, do so because we are either "very stupid" or on the payroll of the criminals.

    Now I have to tell you this is where it becomes obvious that psychologists have it right about this . This whole movement is about 1 thing: People suffering from various forms of paranoid and or persecutory delusions. How else could individuals be so delusional to assume that making baseless allegations against government officials without a shred of evidence and declaring them guilty without a trial, amounts to them having superior morals or "gumption" others lack?
    A trait of persecutory delusions is that everyone around you is evil and conspiring to get you, and that you have inside knowledge of things others do not.

    That fits what you think about me. You think you have far more knowledge about this than I or I''m just plain evil.
    Never mind what level of delusions are required to imply I am paid to spread disinformation while at the same time you're posting:

    "The people that speak out are ostracized and some have been targeted federally/charged and had to relocate to a Country with no extradition treaty!."

    Complete disinformation

    If you take nothing from this but one thing let it be this: Most debunkers, like me, are motivated by two things:
    First and foremost, we're tired of you shooting the country and all of us in the foot telling the world we did this to ourselves.
    Secondly it's hard to walk away and not want to beat some rhetorical sense into the heads of anyone who is so wrong but yet insists how right they are.

  • http://www.facebook.com/karak.r.morrison Brian Richard Morrison

    You're obviously an *****. Ever heard of cognitive dissonance; gestalt theory.

  • http://www.facebook.com/karak.r.morrison Brian Richard Morrison

    Don't you know that we see you as an obvious troll, saturated with the koolaid. Gulf of Tonkin; Kennedy, Jack and Robert; MLK; Malcolm X; the Federal govt has been getting us into messes for a helluva long time, for insidious reasons. Do you really think that we live in a just and free society. Wake up!

  • joedsavage

    Easy there champ---believe what you want! Personally I don't give a **** what you or ANYONE else thinks--GOT IT? I came to MY OWN conclusion. All the EYEWITNESSES saw and heard--that includes cops and Firemen--are you calling them liar's?? This is the same **** that was pulled when JFK was killed--THE WITNESSES ARE WRONG! Hell,Jackie Kennedy even stated "what was in the Warren Commission report wasn't what I said." So who's BS'n who? Get a grip Bat.Just cause people are government officials doesn't mean they're angels.There's criminal bastards in gov just like anyother business.Doesn't mean they're ALL rats.Ask yourself this: Who stands to gain from a war or "conflict?" the average citizen or BIG BUSINESS INTERESTS?? By the way do you know that the scrap iron and steel was SHIPPED TO CHINA? Do you know what THERMITE is and how it works? Do some investigating before you slam doors.Take a REAL close look at Building 7 coming down(no planes,no raging fire) and tell yourself an "earthquake" brought it down.Silverstein collected SEVEN BILLION BUCKS on those buildings coming down. By the way,the city of New York told him BEFORE 9/11 they needed 1.5 billion in renovation because of the asbestos insulation.He leased those buildings 6 months before 9/11 and TWO WEEKS BEFORE the attack he had them insured for terrorist attacks.Go figure huh?

  • batvette

    Very well put. I don't know what to say about people who keep asking the same pointless questions and asserting they amount to evidence, when the questions were long ago given satisfactory answers. Right now we have another user claiming all the jet fuel burned up on impact.
    Utterly absurd and countered by reams of evidence. Why would people pursue asserting lies like that as factual to try and convince people the gov't is lying?
    Delusions.

  • tonkinbay2

    most discussed documentaries. this doc is not treated fairly(in the order it should be) have a look.anything that debunks U.S religion is going to have a lot of comments and upset a lot of nuts. didnt watch this one but richard Gage and barry zwicker should have recived the noble peace prize for their work and guts. obama is a bigger false cheat than tiger woods.

  • tonkinbay2

    should be in the science catogory

  • joedsavage

    Read another of BATVETTES comments WAY DOWN the page here about JFK being a very dangerous man in the White House in 1963. Really? Dangerous to who?? Seems to me and probably others who read that statement BATVETTE is a real Capital Hill boy all the way down to his bloomers.Reads like he's condoning JFK'S demise--SO...who's "side" is he on?? I'd say in all likelyhood BATVETTE is a hired disinformation artist trying to spread more BS for the sake of...????? lol

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_DS7TB7H57HI2724UWYNX36OL3A Kill

    The evidence is overwhelming it was an inside-job. Only low-IQ Americans still believe the government fables.

  • ProudinUS

    Excuse me, what's the evidence again?......just wondering.

  • tonkinbay2

    pooprodinUS did not like your comment. why does the fool even read the comments let alone watch the doc(i dought he does) it is just the idea he finds hard to live with. a new comer to reality.

  • Froozles

    It makes me so angry thinking tabout 9/11. i wish i didnt even watch this ,if it was true that it was an inside job can you begin to relalise the spider web of evil organisations that orchaestrated something like this, how tightly knit it must be and how unbelievably evil it is?

    It isn't something i would like to manifest within me knowing people like this exist in the world we live in, i find it hard to wonder how you can do such a thing.

    another thing If it was actually an inside job can you begin to imagine the state of the world when it was officailly revealed?

    How would it be revealed? Where would these tyrants be? Imagine the panic throughout the world it would be deeply unsettling for a longtime, however i think then we can start to see the rest of the truths.

    Anyhow i wish all the people involved in the truth movement the best of luck!

    RIP to all those that lost their lives that day

    peace

  • joedsavage

    You say "only low I.Q. Americans believe the government fables." I don't know what country you're in but I assure you there's people there by you who still believe the "Official investigation." Don't pidgeon hole people in one country.There's morons in every country--that's why governments continue to try and pull the wool over citizens eyes. The shit that was pulled in America on 9/11 is yet another sickening deed--fortified with lie's,BS and blatant cover ups.I can tell you this: Many,many Americans are fed up with the state of things in general--economy,inflation,wars and ridiculously inept,loser politicians who've infested Washington FOR YEARS.The "System" is shot--PERIOD. I see where people from other countries constantly take shots at Americans in general--WRONG! Ridicule the Washington machine and all it's big business interests--NOT the average citizen.Make sense? By the way,the United Nations is nothing but a sham--take a look at your government in whatever country you live in--are they not part of the grand scheme of deceit? Take care.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Matthew-Beason/11823434 Matthew Beason

    Let me guess, you must be a republican, right?.... The evidence is overwhelming! No plane debris at the pentagon, the hole left by the impact of the supposed 747 was not big enough to be made by an aircraft of that size, and we never saw any closeup footage of that site nor of the plane actually hitting the building. Think about it, its the PENTAGON, which is located in our capital and there are cameras every where, but somehow there's not footage of a plane striking the building!?! Also, in the case of flight 93, there was no evidence of plane debris to be found and our governments excuse was that the plane was vaporized on impact. Anyways, those are just a few examples of evidence and i'm not even going to waste my time talking about the controlled demolitions at the Trade Centers. I'm not trying to make you look stupid because has the right to their own opinions and that should be respected. All I ask of you is for you to watch Loose Change/911 and 911 In Plane Sight. Maybe this will give you the evidence that you need and possibly change your outlook about this tragic event.

  • mashy67

    i know how ya feel.watch the fog of war with robert mcnamara if you can get it whole. the mind set he admitted to,clearly demonstrates his regrets and how this corruption has got 100 times worst than his day. in his words, WE LUCKED OUT,it was luck that the idiots,him icluded didn`t start nuclear war.

  • Colin Doran

    Of the 4 planes hijacked on 911 , flight 93 and flight 77 are the two that had almost all the wreakage recovered and all of the passengers identified. There is video of flight 77 hitting the Pentagon but you don't need video evidence when there are scores of first-hand eyewitnesses who watched it hitting the building.

  • Rick Lees

    does anyone have seismograph data from these events.looking at some of the evidence it looks like thermite or more probably thermate oblique cuts on main members followed by a couple of small dets.

  • Rick Lees

    styrofoam support columns.most plausable answer.these builders are always cutting corners. it couldnt be the government involved or mossad because they said it wasnt them and they always tell the truth.a president got great kudos from admitting he felled a tree.imagine if one admitted he felled three buildings, it might be a paradoxic election winner.pax

  • said18

    You Americans should put George Bush on trial for this crime. You owe it to the people who died.

  • Colin Doran

    Hi, I have watched National Security Alert,( I've seen it before), and I'm afraid it's an example of people being unable to make a logical and rational assessment of the evidence of an event. I think the flaws in it are fairly obvious and I have to say it surprises me that the people who made it - although in general I don't dispute their sincerity - have been unable , even after years to recognise those flaws. They think anyone who points them out has some sinister agenda because they couldn't actually have arrived at a flawed conclusion , or used a flawed method to arrive at it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Barbara-OConnor/1713428397 Barbara OConnor

    We never got a independent investigation on the Kennedy assassination, nor Martin L King's, Watergate was halted as soon as Nixon stepped down and Ford took over though he was never elected by the people but selected by Nixon he pardoned him and ended the investigation. Iran Contra affair was investigated but it was hindered by the White House with holding evidence, if we had done that we would have be charged with obstruction of justice. Still Bush Sr. pardoned all those who were involved with his December surprise. The first bombings of World Trade Centers had FBI involvement, believed they had their informant to build the bomb! Then there was Ruby Ridge which the government had to settle out of court to the Weaver family. Waco was another crime scene that was bulldozed over in three days. Still haven't seen the weapons they were suppose to have stocked piled. Let us not forget Oklahoma city bombings, which they again did not investigate properly either mostly cause the ATF was housing explosives in a public building. Need I not remind those who fail to realize that the Vietnam war was another war started on a lie. Our economy is in a shambles and soon we will be facing hyper inflation. Dwight D Eisenhower warned the American public of the Military Industrial Complex. Our government has not earned the right to be trust worthy. They do not act in the best interest of the citizens, they fail miserably at upholding their oaths of office to uphold, defend and preserve the Constitution of the United States against all enemies both foreign and domestic. The 2000 and 2004 elections were awful with all the underhanded tricks that occurred. What I do know is the hard laws of science have remained true throughout history for more than a 100 yrs. Gravity has not changed. The hard laws of physics has not changed. This film talks about those laws. Based upon those laws the murders that took place could not have happened as told to the American public. Nano termite does not occur in nature naturally. Jet fuel burns at a temp to low to melt steel. Molten steel was found in the rubble so how did that happen. Anthrax scare went off the radar and out of the media as soon as it was discovered to be military grade. Do you really think congress wrote thousands of pages of law known as patriot act I and II in six weeks, those laws where wrote well before 911. We do not have the government that we are suppose to have according to the Constitution. What we have is the best damn democracy money can buy and the working man don't have enough money to buy it, only big insurance, oil, and weapon manufactures have that kind of money. They pour money into our elected officials runs for office and they expect a good return on their money.
    In a true republic form of government descent is welcome the citizens are not pushed aside and told they are unpatriotic. Government officials don't hide their crimes behind the veil of national security. We are involved in two wars and have been for a decade based upon what. Where is the government's evidence that Bin Laden did this for I have not seen it and don't believe anyone else has either. As a matter of fact the FBI did not even mention 911 on his wanted poster stating they had no evidence to tie him too 911. Let us not forget that he was recruited by the CIA, trained by the CIA and funded by the CIA all under Bush Sr. We owe the victims of 911 a real investigation to get to the truth otherwise their deaths were for what????

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Barbara-OConnor/1713428397 Barbara OConnor

    So explain the nano termite? Explain how jet fuel melted steel when it does not burn hot enough to do that? Explain the reports of explosions reported by CNN and Fox news on 09/11/2001 on the air. Explain how building seven which sets over a foot ball field away from the twin towers, not hit by any plane, reported by the BBC as having fell 20 minutes before it fell later that day? Explain the power outages the week before. Explain William Rodriguez's testimony that he was in the basement on B level and heard an explosion that pushed him upward prior to the building being hit by the plane. Read the transcripts of the fire fighters. If the building was so hot as to melt steel why is it there are photographs showing people standing on the edge, jumping from where the plane when through the building. I am sorry you want to believe that your government is going to take care of you. Truth is they didn't take care of the victims on 911 and nor did they take care to the victims of Katrina. If you wait on them you will be very disappointed. Really and truly you should research things before you comment. It would make you look less pitiful.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Barbara-OConnor/1713428397 Barbara OConnor

    Donald Rumsfeld the day before 911 stated they had a trillion dollars or more they could not account for, yet the terrorist hit the accounting dept in the pentagon. Building 7 housed the CIA, FBI and the SEC along with all the Enron documents and World dot com documents. Watch the film the New American Century. In 2000 the big players in George W Bush's cabinet signed this document and in this document they stated the process would be long and slow not with standing a new pearl harbor. 911 gave them their new pearl harbor. It is not like George W and Dick entered office with integrity they threw the election in 2000 and again in 2008. Voter fraud was rampant in Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2008. He had the Enron scandal and the world dot com scandal both which strongly implicated him yet the American public will never know the full truth since all the records vanished with building 7 on 911. There were no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq but even if there had been they would have most likely been made in the USA, after all during Regan's yrs as president Donald Rumsfeld was over there kissing Sadam's *** and selling him weapons.

  • dewflirt

    Nano termite ? :)

  • Colin Doran

    Willie Rodriguez interview with CNN on 911

    BROWN: Tell me where you were when -- which of those two buildings were you in?

    RODRIGUEZ: I work in building one. The one that got hit the first time.

    BROWN: Tell me what happened.

    RODRIGUEZ: I was in the basement, which is the support floor for the maintenance company, and we hear like a big rumble. Not like an impact, like a rumble, like moving furniture in a massive way. And all of sudden we hear another rumble, and a guy comes running, running into our office, and all of skin was off his body. All of the skin. "
    --------------------
    The $2.3 trillion dollars that Rumsfeld spoke about on Sept 10th was in the public domain for about a year before 911,was discussed in the media , Rumsfeld spoke about it on a number of occassions in media interviews and was even brought up in the hearings to approve his appointment.

    The quote from the PNAC document is the only quote I have ever heard any 911 truth person quote, and it's a quote that is always taken out of context. It's never quoted accurately in the context in which it was written, about the transformation of military programs to include more technological advances like advanced communications, but is paraphrased and misquoted to put it the most suspicious light possible.

    The BBC reported that building 7 had collapsed because Reuters put out a report that it had collapsed because they picked up a report from a local NY station that it had collapsed. The local news outlet thought it had collapsed because the downtown area was cordoned off and the firechiefs were expecting the building to collapse for hours. About an hour before it did collapse they could see it wasn't going to last much longer and they stopped all rescue work and pulled everyone further back from the building to wait for it to fall. This message that it was about to collapse or was collapsing , got taken up as a collapse and if someone said a building was collapsing a half and hour ago you might be forgiven for thinking that it had collapsed by now. You might be fogiven except that on 911 no one is forgiven for making mistakes in probably the most confusing chaotic day that the media and everyone else had to cope with.

  • ProudinUS

    First of all Mathew what's your evidence again? Flight 93 had debris scattered all over the place for quite some distance. The makers of that Loose change sh*t did it for $ at the expense of the 9/11 victums.

    Like I asked before, what evidence? You show no examples of nothing except your follow -the leader CT mentality. If you want to talk about how easy steel can warp at only 600*f then come talk to me. Other then that you really havie nothing of importance.

  • batvette

    " Explain how jet fuel melted steel when it does not burn hot enough to do that?"
    "Explain how building seven which sets over a foot ball field away from the twin towers, not hit by any plane..."
    "If the building was so hot as to melt steel "

    These comments indicate either extreme ignorance of this issue or complete dishonesty, be it willful or otherwise these are not personal qualities I would expect to change in the course of a discussion with you, so I respectfully decline.
    Especially the comment about bldg 7, not hit by a plane, a football field away... these indicate you have purposely obfuscated pertinent details about that which contradicted your beliefs.
    Why some of you call yourselves "truther's" is puzzling.

  • batvette

    No raging fire in bldg 7? Nonsense, a number of clips on youtube show just that.
    The scrap iron and steel shipped to China? Not all of it, there is plenty left at Fresh Kills landfill if you'd like to finally show the evidence of any explosives or other outside influences. The NIST kept plenty too.
    As for insuring them from terrorist attacks, gee, after 1993, why would he do that?
    The FACT remains there is not a whiff of actual evidence to support any of these insane conspiracy theories, they are driven by ideology first and anecdotal points are assembled to reinforce your beliefs.
    When you finally concede the faulty logic behind this and are in therapy you'll have a good laugh over it all.

  • batvette

    A personal attack on me is not evidence supporting your conspiracy theory, positing another reader here is a "hired disinformation artist" merely for having opposing views IS evidence of my own theory 9/11 CT's are usually suffering from persecutory delusions combined with a general feeling of powerlessness over the world around them. As if omnipotent, unknown villains from Washington DC wait for you to comment on the internet and try to silence the message only you, Joe the trutherboy, have been ordained to deliver to the world!
    As for my comments about JFK, well I don't fall for the dopey belief that if only JFK had lived the world would be such a great place. Those that do seem to have distorted the history behind several key events to make him look like the hero when the events only arose because of his reckless pursuit of vanity and lecherous personal behavior.
    He purposely tanked Bay of Pigs out of fear of the political backlash from within his own party, yet didn't have the backbone to call it off entirely and look weak to top leaders in his cabinet and the chiefs of staff. He started the missile crisis that only his brother got him out of before he started WW3. Sorry the facts make your hero out to be a zero.

  • joedsavage

    Logic?? I'm laughing already--AT YOU AND YOUR RAGING FIRE BS lol Not a wiff of evidence?? lol Go keep your BATBOY head in the sand. LIke I said batty--I don't care what you believe--tell it to the cops and fireman--see how long they listen to your ridiculous BS.By the way,who said the WTC cite was safe and NO chance of illness?? Answer that one.lol Make sure you tell the surviving first reponders and families of the ones who died it was all safe for them to breathe that f-----g air.Yea tell them it was just their imagination that caused it. Seems to me the only one needing therapy is some batboy/girl.

  • joedsavage

    JFK?? You know EVERYTHING ABOUT JFK---what is it you DON'T know??lol So we can assume you rooted for his demise?? Uh-huh. You're THE man/girl ! At first I thought you were delusional but now in all honesty,it's safe to say YOU REALLY ARE DELUSIONAL.SEEK HELP ASAP lol

  • joedsavage

    Excellent comment. Don't waste your time responding to batvette or the other looney tune.Those buildings could have fallen on their collective heads and they'd say they didn't fall. The only conspiracy theorists are the people who believe the "official" investigation. The rest of us are realists with common sense. I still laugh at the excuses for building 7 coming down--raging fire or earthquake from 1 and 2 crashing--incredible. What about Silverstein stating on camera that they decided to "pull" it. That's a term demolision crews say to IMPLODE a structure--which anyone with eyesight could see that happen to building 7--a PERFECT example of a structure coming down in it's own "footprint." Bet Silverstein wishes he never did that interview.I'm sure he found out later that to "pull" a building takes time to place the charges. By the way he has duel citizenship--US and Israel.That's supposed to be against the law--isn't it? lol

  • ProudinUS

    Barbara, jet fuel is hot enough to warp the steel on a naked truss.whith the coating gone, metal begins to warp like rubber at only ONE HALF its melting point under pressure! I've been a structual welder many yrs and I work on trusses like the world trade center on a regular basis. With the added fuel in te buildings like..desks..chairs..ceilings. There was enough heat to warp and even camber the buildings structure. It would have been impossible for them to have planted explosives in the buildings. they would of had to rip out walls bring in 1000s of pds of explosives...rig the core trusses.....ah wait for a big a$$ airplane...ah put a bulls eye on the building. Plus the building was dam near 30 years old. did you bother to look up welding codes,procedures, weld UTs, interveiws wit weld inspectors, welders!, rod or wire used to weld?....ect.
    Engineers are not the ones working with the metal so their opinion is pointless. I suggest you look into why cambers are now put on structual trusses now. I can put a camber into a I-beam with 3in flanges with a 2in web in a short period of time with a single rose bud on my torch. Metal is of a different breed!

  • ProudinUS

    You just sound like a good person........runaway.

  • batvette

    So where in all the above nonsense is the evidence the towers were dropped by controlled demolition? Didn't see that.
    " There were no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq but even if there had been they would have most likely been made in the USA, after all during Regan's yrs as president Donald Rumsfeld was over there kissing Sadam's *** and selling him weapons."

    He was? What weapons companies did Donald Rumsfeld own that would have made him able to do that?
    Look up the SIPRI report on weapons transfers to Iraq during Saddam's reign, where is the US on that list? 1/2 of 1 percent! We're behind the Netherlands even! Most notable, look at the wiki page on Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction. Who did he get his weapons from? Not us!

  • ProudinUS

    Haha ha haha..Hi Mathew. First of all Matt, I seriously doubt you can make me look stupid in anyting pertaining to 9/11. Now that being said let me hurry up and correct your post.

    1.) The hole left in the pentagon was 30m wide(not 5). A wing span of a 747 (from wing tip to wing tip) is 40m wide. the reason why the hole is a little small is because when the plane hit both wings were wacked off on a generator and a external vent. THERE are photos of a fraction of the planes boost out there. Plus 200 witnesses saw the dam thing!

    2.) There was plenty of wreckage of Fl 93 found. So I don't really know where you came up with that.

    3.) Controlled demolition? Do you have any clue what your saying? Like I said before, I have been a structual welder for a long time and if you want I can go into detail how they collapsed from my own perspective. For them to have rigged the towers with explosives it would have taken at least 60 or 70 dudes 2months to pack in 1000slbs of explos...tuck them around each bearing column and rip out at least 1/4 of the walls to get to them...not likely. On a side note: I have heard from old welders that it was standard procedure to plant explosives during construction for buildings that were 40 floors and bigger. But I can't confirm this.

  • KarpKomet

    "Explain how jet fuel melted steel when it does not burn hot enough to do that?"

    Barbara this is a very common question....in fact bin laden is quoted himself as saying he was really surprised the jet fuel did that much damage and took the building down. Its hard to imagine a large steel girder getting weak in anyway due to heat, but just try going to your kitchen and rubbing a spoon. That is grade 3 science 101.Barbra u cant just google the melting point of steel and the heat of jet fuel burn and go ah ha!.....think about that spoon getting soft and bendy when u rub it. Exactly what happened on 9/11. Steel gets real soft when its heated and the girders spray on fire protection got blown off by the plane so the weight of the building made the steel give way...simple. There is a long, well documented history of this happening in fires to steel structures.

    (One really good example is the exocet missle that sunk a british ship in the falklands war, not many people know the explosives on the missle failed....it was just that missles leftover bit of jet fuel that doomed the ship! Now imagine an airliner with hundreds of thousands of pounds of jet fuel aboard.)

  • ProudinUS

    The only thing I would ad is......ah f**k it. I think my Barbara Bush was in on it too. I so admire her.

  • batvette

    " Do you know what THERMITE is and how it works? "
    Yep, it's not an explosive and would take several minutes to burn through a column like in the WTC, and that is not what we witnessed that day. What we witnessed is thoroughly supported in expert analysis in the NIST report, which offers detailed images taken that day showing how the collapse initiated in the floors affected by the impact. You can see the columns bowing only at those floors, as they became weakened by the fire. All the photographic and video evidence completely contradict any theory of controlled demolition using thermite.

  • ProudinUS

    Also....f*ck it. these pr*cks are just going to bash the US and turn it around to where my posts are the ignorant ones. Their right ,my nation killed its own and we all laughed that day. As a matter of fact we should make a f**king holiday of it. Nothing funnier then seeing our own jumping out the tower windows. They made nice splatter stains that covered up the pigeon sh*t very nicely.. ..cool

  • batvette

    LOL, If I don't drink the "JFK was the second coming of Christ" koolaid I'm a hired disinformation artist? Get outta here! Despite the efforts by his supporters to alter historical accounts, most people recognize his lecherous behavior and reckless leadership for what it was. His brother Bobby was the real deal, the other two, not so.
    Our involvement in Vietnam only escalated in his administration and there are no indications had he lived the war would not have proceeded.
    He started a countdown to WW3 over Kruschev putting missiles in Cuba, even though we had huge strategic advantage with the sub launched Poseidon missile system and we had already put Jupiter missiles in Turkey, which is the same distance to Moscow as Cuba was to Washington DC.
    It was stupid and dangerous and only done because he felt he needed to prove he was tough after failures at Bay of Pigs and Berlin. Bobby and Nikita worked out a compromise which made it look like only Nikita backed down that allowed John to save his vanity, which secretly removed the Jupiter missiles from turkey 6 months later.
    Those are the historical facts, spin at will.
    Oh and it's estimated he hit it with about 50 women(wild estimate, could even be twice that) besides Jackie in the three years he was in the White House, I know that's good for extra points from you lefties. I'm no fundie but I will point out that leads to a terrible situation of leadership in the workplace when the boss behaves like a little boy in a candy store.

  • batvette

    One thing about the explosives thing is they keep claiming there is no evidence they can show because ALL the steel was carted off to China. That's absurd on every level.

    Wouldn't there be plenty of people in China willing to test these materials and help prove we did this to ourselves just to wage war on Iraq, an event which denied them lucrative contracts to drill Iraq's oil?

    Please explain that!

    If explosives were used what detonated them? These "squibs" which are insisted to be explosions, wouldn't they have propelled blasting caps and remote detonators outward to be found all over Manhatten?

    George W. Bush's cleanup fairies could not have contained the people walking all around that day and weeks later from picking up the forensic evidence that would have been spread all over, yet not a single explosive related device was ever found.

    Please explain that!

  • batvette

    Joedsavage said:

    "By the way he has duel citizenship--US and Israel.That's supposed to be against the law--isn't it? lol"

    Your ideology is now revealed.

    Nazis suck.

  • WTC7

    Hmmm, this is interesting, I didn't hear the stuff being shipped off to China, but I do know that Chinese have got quite a few oil contracts in Iraq. Thank you @ batvette.

  • batvette

    The temperature jet fuel burns at isn't important, as jet fuel was not the lone combustible. Jet fuel acted as an accelerant for the existing combustibles on each floor, igniting whole floors' contents immediately. These common office building contents, including large amounts of paper, furnishings, computers, and banks of batteries for uninteruptible power supplies, burn at 1800 degrees F or more. This (instant ignition of entire floors' contents) is unprecedented in any modern building fire, especially in conjunction with the fireproofing being removed from columns and truss assemblies by the impact. The buildings didn't stand a chance with those kinds of fires left unfought, don't let anyone misportray this as a jet fuel fire.

    If fires from common office building contents were not hot enough to jeopardize their steel structures, why does code require fireproofing?

    Is it really disputed by anyone that planes that big travelling 5-600 mph dislodged most of the fireproofing on affected floors' columns and trusses? Not to my knowledge.

    Code requires fireproofing or the buildings are endangered in fire. We saw the impacts. We saw the fire.

    Where is the logic claiming the steel should not be affected?

  • ProudinUS

    Bush sr raged war in Iraq because Hussein was stealing the weapons we were giving the Islam regimes to. We were storing it in Saudi for the start of the Taliban which formed in 94' to kick a$$ on the Russians..... Oil????? If we wanted oil we would be in Venezuala!

    Its been told to me that Explosives were a standard practice during CONSTRUCTION of buildings 40 stories and higher. Its not something people wouldn't admit to obviously. It's just something I heard.
    I build structual trusses and weld on them for a living and can put a camber in one with a dinky rose bud on my torch in know time. Steel with the thickness I weld with warps at around 600*f. ALL steel turn to rubber at half its melting point under pressure.
    The core trusses had to of folded in, bringing the weaker outer beams with it. I believe there was one floor that had cross braces going diagnally but I have to go back and look at the towers blueprint.

    As for that thermite sh*t doesn't tha stuff only cut sideways? Kind of like a plasma cutter?

  • ProudinUS

    Ive already commented what you just wrote almost word for word but deleted it because posters on here started to get an attitude . By code a welder is not allowed to weld on any metal hotter then 550*f. especially for full pen welds. Sometime if the metal becomes crystalized it will become brittel. Actually only one spot of a beam needs to be melted for (center) it to fold in. Rises then falls.

  • ProudinUS

    Didn't we just build an entire war ship made out of the towers metal?

  • batvette

    The comment about oil was concerning Saddam about to get out of sanctions and allow the French, Chinese and Russians unfettered drilling rights to Iraq's oil.
    Saddam was trying to use oil as a weapon against us, to devalue the dollar and destabilize our economy, he couldn't put all that oil on the market himself fast enough but with the combined petroleum industry assets of those three countries and the petroleum-to-goods-and-cash pipeline he'd established to Paris under oil for food, there was a real danger a dollar crash was being engineered by him.
    Google "Saddam use oil as a weapon".
    Why do you think Chirac acted so pissed in the run up to the war? France and all Europe stood to gain a windfall- note the British are not in the EU and they were our only strong allies.
    If there is an untold reason, that's it. Google "petrodollars".
    With a dollar crash would also come the overthrow of the Royal Saudi family, as their whole economy is heavily dollar vested. The public discontent would be enormous. This was one of the ultimate goals of both Saddam and Bin Laden. Saddam regains his honor, can walk into Saudi Arabia if he likes OR let Bin Laden have it, who cares. The US influence in the region is reduced to almost nil, Saddam holds the world hostage over Persian Gulf oil exports....
    We could not allow that to happen, so yes, this was IMO about oil, WMD would not be unrelated.
    After 9/11 Saddam goes on TV to boost his terrorist rewards for Palestinians. He was asking to be attacked.
    We used Iraq as a trap for all the Al Qaeda rats that fled Afghanistan. Invited them to the cheese of the prize of having their own country if they defeated us. Since a terrorist is almost unidentifiable until he straps on a bomb, you can only control where that happens and I believe that's what we were doing in allowing the insurgency to go on. Better there than here.
    Pick your reason. The invasion of Iraq had so many good ones, it's puzzling why Americans are so stupid they think they were lied to. All the above can be found if you look, you won't see it on CNN. You might have had hints dropped on Meet the Press. (TIm Russert, RIP- you were the best!)

  • ProudinUS

    I agree with everything your saying only it would've made more sense to invade Iran as well. All the muslim/islamic nations are tied and they can't say their not. The ISI breeds regimes like the Haggi network in every country over there( mainly Pak) Iran breeds more terror groups then all of them. They have since before the 70s.

  • batvette

    Iran has more terrorists within but there really was nothing to gain with invading them. (in fact the Al Qaeda members that fled Afghanistan when we went in were in Iran for awhile) The Saddam problem was its own issue.
    He took that Arab Male Honor thing to an extreme and would try and get under our skin until the day he died.

  • batvette

    I think I heard something about that, not sure. The point truthers make about "we can't show you any evidence explosives were used because all the steel got carted off to China" is not only wrong (some did, plenty remained for testing if anyone was dumb enough to think they should) but it shows the lack of critical thinking skills going on, that they would say anything that they think supports their conspiracy story, not realizing it only makes it more absurd.
    When we went into Iraq we denied China all their oil contracts with Saddam, if they could prove we did so on dishonest grounds after doing 9/11 to ourselves, why wouldn't they help truthers tell the world?
    There is plenty of material at Fresh Kills.The NIST reta