For preview only. Get it at

9/11 Conspiracy Road Trip

Ratings: 4.34/10 from 50 users.

9/11 Conspiracy Road TripThis September marks the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, one of the biggest terrorist atrocities of the 21st Century. Nineteen hijackers, all members of Al Qaeda, crashed four planes on American soil, leading to the deaths of 2,973 innocent people.

This horrific event has generated a multitude of conspiracy theories that contradict the official findings of the US government’s investigation into the events of that day.

Andrew Maxwell, a comedian, believes in the findings of the official investigation, which claim the responsibility for the attack lies with Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.

He thinks the conspiracies theories are unsubstantiated nonsense. So in this film he offers to take five young Brits, who believe some of these conspiracy theories, on a road-trip from New York to Washington.

They visit Ground Zero where two planes hit the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, home of vast American defence HQ and Shanksville in Pennsylvania where United 93 crashed.

More great documentaries

235 Comments / User Reviews

  1. Andrew Maxwell, watch the Toronto Hearings on YT. If you have any integrity they will change your mind.

  2. What a load of crap! Id love to hear both sides to any story, but this is just complete garbage.

  3. this documentary is now part of a lawsuit because of its disinfornation. another bbc propaganda piece. hope they lose

  4. Its an insult to put a stand up comedian making this documentary. After this coverage operation of BBC i am sure the London Subway were, also fake. Europe is into Middle East too.. New World Order as arrived.

  5. This is not a documentary it is a reality show. This guy should stick to comedy, at which he is not that good either. I got nothing out of this at all.

  6. fake ass mom bad actress nobody says their full name to their mother no matter what fake made-up job MARK had. ////IN THE COCKPIT X3//// it is clear to me she ran out of dialogue.

  7. Propaganda with bad actors!!! everything on tv is faked, believe that!!! i dont waste time with crap.

  8. This is like a programme made about the Bilderberg Group, which at the end of it asked whether or not it was a problem that all these powerful and influential people met in secret and answered the question by saying "no that's fine" or words to that effect.
    Many people would then be programmed to believe that it was indeed ok.
    Here we have a comic Irishman ....a kind of apolitical cool dude to constantly refer to science and the official story in an obviously biased way.
    It answers no questions really, maybe even asks a few more.
    Why did the BBC want to make this show anyway? It is like the show about Bilderberg made by Channel 4 10 years ago or so (can't find it anywhere now),made not because they thought it would be cracking entertainment but because too many people are asking too many questions.

    The best way address these questions is with a show like this, programming people to reach the right answer - having 1 guy change his mind was all that was needed switching his view to stand with the hip compere, the public will follow him (Charlie) as he is depicted as cool and hip like the comedian, whilst the others are shown as hysterical and irrational.

    As for the BBC.....what did you report about Building 7????????

    1. it was made by BBC because london attacks were also an hoax. Afterwards we still have nato haven't we?

      F*** this nazi invisible government. F*** this NWO.

  9. No mention of WTC 7, and only showing the exit hole of pentagon. What a bias scam production. Incredibly BS from BBC.

  10. Damn I wrote a much better, more coherent comment (that was deleted when the power cord for my lap top got unplugged, turning the damn thing off immediately because my battery is toast) - I still didn't agree with your "it's not absurd to consider the possibility they did such a thing as a back up plan" comment - and even properly took notice that you made it clear there is more than enough proof showing that you guys really went to the moon. Yes I said "you guys", I am not American. Well as my son says I am American, I am North American. That comment of his is generally followed by me picking up the nearest object and hurling it at him, he has been saying that for years now and for whatever reason it gets on my nerves.

    I also made note of todays date and it being the 11th anniversary of 9/11, saying that my opinion (whatever it is) need not be mentioned. Someone says they think - insert opinion on what you believe is the truth here - blah blah and next thing you know someone will argue it with you, then others will join in. And I think that today is not the day to be fighting about this, it is a day to remember those who lost their lives and those who are still suffering the ill affects from the dust (no I am not getting in a remark about what was in the dust) and everything else that has caused them to suffer.

  11. Pouting, throwing temper tantrums like little children, hiding from your mom about where you are when you're a full grown man and all the other childish behavior doesn't help their arguments either. If they were so smart and so keen on what was up, where were the logical arguments, where was their science, where was their evidence. They had none, not one stitch. They get evidence to the contrary and proven wrong, they pout, get angry, throw temper tantrums, then on to the next theory. Not to mention they take everything out of context and only hear what they want. Not very credible at all.

  12. I don't know what happened that day. I'm not an expert on explosives, science or anything else for that matter. However I can think critically about the situation. If the government was responsible for the attacks. It would take hundreds if not thousands of people to plan, orchestrate and cover up what happened. Everyone from the president down to the airlines would be involved. It just doesn't make sense that if so many people were involved that no one has said anything about being responsible for the decisions made that day. Another thing that bugs me is the people that doubt the events don't offer a concrete explanation of what happened, just random facts and theories. I don't know the truth about what happened that day, I don't believe everything about the official story and I don't believe all the skeptics either. Some of what the government said is pretty sketchy at best and some of the theories put out by the truthers are pretty far flung as well. The people who blindly believe the governments story of the day are just as ******** as the people who blindly believe every conspiracy theory. All I saw from the supposed truthers was basically a word for word repetition of loose change. Not one of them had an original thought, just the same as the people who blindly believe the governments version of events just spout off all the crap the government told them. I don't think well ever know what really happened that day, I don't believe the official story or the truthers, I think the real explanation is somewhere in between.

  13. This just proves there are many of my fellow citizens here in the US that have their heads planted firmly in their asses.

  14. 1) I am appalled that a person wanting to prove there is no conspiracy would take his guest to the people who work for the government accused of the conspiracy. That is like asking the wolf with wool sticking out of his mouth if he ate the sheep and then believing him when he says no. 2) Have none of these people ever heard of satellite phones? Before retiring in the 1990's my mother worked for one of the companies that made them. Several times her boss called her from a plane. They do not use regular cell phone towers. 3) Even for the guy that did the demo to prove you can't melt steel - how do you know that he doesn't have government contracts and he is not about to bite the hand that feeds him. It would be all too easy to put something else in that container (or dilute the powder) with something else that is the same color and has the same flash point but does not burn as hot.

    What about the over 100 AIA Certified architects that it could not have happened as claimed, along with the hundreds of other experts who also do NOT work for the government. What about the videos taken (especially by the movie producer) taken that morning that show explosions just before the buildings pancaked. What about building 7 that was not even hit. How did it catch on fire when none of the other buildings around there did? Are you aware there were some very very important tenants in that building that might want certain things or documents destroyed?

    I believe there were terrorist, but that our government took advantage of the situation and added to it. Why? Most common reason - money (greed) & power.

    The host seems like a nice person but I think he should stick to his comedy and leave investigations like this to people who can be more thorough in their analysis.

    1. It might be said it's not up to anyone to prove there is no conspiracy.
      As for your 100 architects, according to the AIA there are over 100,000 of said architects in the country. .1% is what is considered "fringe" and it's not at all scientific to reject the overwhelming consensus and grasp fringe theory- even then those 100 cannot come up with a complete alternative hypothesis. They just have "doubts".
      It's beyond silly.

    2. Spinning batvette with the false binary again. batvette's doing cognitive infiltration work in the comments section of a whole pile of these docs. .01% of architects holding the belief that the official story is fraudulent after examining the official story, does not constitute 99.9% consensus for accepting the official story. NIST offers no explanation for the global collapse after the collapse of the upper sections onto the damaged sections of the twin towers. Read the NIST report, the assertions claimed by batvette are not there.

  15. Pointless exercise - If someone is wed to a conspiracy theory, logic, science, and any other information that subverts their religious belief in the conspiracy will simply be discounted (as in many religions).

    Any testimony or evidence that does not fit the theory is simply lumped in with the evil forces driving events and discounted. Why? because the smug superiority of "being in on the secret" is intoxicating and addictive and a clearly identified villain is comforting. In their minds, its them standing bravely against "the man," while the foolish masses go blindly about their business.

    Conspiracies exist, there are abundant historical examples - the rate at which conspiracies are revealed, however, should give us pause. The more people involved, the more likely there will be leaks. The kind of high level, multi-national, illuminati BS put out by truthers, requires a laughable belief in the competency of world leaders (they could not even manage to plant WMDs in Iraq).

    1. Nice. You own the thread.

    2. I agree batvette, now everyone can STFU and get back to what's really important. Proving the moon landing and the one small step for mankind etc. was filmed on a sound stage.

    3. It's not absurd to consider the possibility they did such a thing as a back up plan. So I would never disrespect anyone for "asking questions" with that in mind. However I hope they would recognize the mountain of evidence which compels one accept the conclusion we did in fact go there.
      (Given the Soviets' disastrous efforts with their own moon launch rocket I think we didn't even need the propaganda boost of a faked landing being filmed. We were still doing better than they were)

    4. While it may seem like it, i really am not being a d1ck to you batvette. I am just having fun with all of this. With the odd serious point thrown in.
      lol I love when I leave a totally sarcastic comment and it gets a serious response.

      I think it is absurd to consider the possibility they did such a thing as a backup plan. I bet some people at NASA would take great offense to it.
      You put down realitygirl for her belief in a 9/11 conspiracy theory then you say the moon landing could have been faked? Not sure if you are trolling or not. You take both sides of the conspiracy arguement saying 9/11 truthers are fools and yet you made that comment about the moon landing (even though you said there is a mountain of evidence proving they went there and you believe it like most sane people do), we all know some of the conspiracies are actually true as it has been proven which is why some people have no trust in the American Government. But the moon landing? Even with the race against the Soviets they wouldnt have tried that hoax.

      I agree everyone has the right to ask questions, but you insinuated I disrespect people by not allowing them to do so. That is false, I may not give a crap what others have to say lol, but they can say and ask whatever they want. God knows I have and do ask my fair share of stupid questions.

      I just re read this and while it barely makes sense to me, and I wrote it, I am so tired I am rambling. I hope it makes sense and dont go attacking me too hard because I did not properly made my point.

      Ahhh what the hell tired and out of it or not, I am posting it and that alone leaves me open to be questioned, abused, yelled at and made fun of lol. But I may be awake tonight when I get home from work and give you a sensible response to whatever you post back. Although awake does not equal smart lol so you may get the same crap in my next post lol.

    5. You've misconstrued my position. If I say it is reasonable to assume they may have filmed something at the time in case the mission failed, as a back up plan, that is not the same as now believing the moon landing may have been a hoax.
      It would simply be covering their bases and having another option available to them at the time. It is NOT at all saying they actually went through with it.

  16. Yeah right, all these bloody experts won't say anything against the US will they! What a bloody waste of time doing a documentry, 'No that didn't happen sir'

  17. Now Maxwell tackles 'creationism'. Oh, he's really putting the world to rights with his unique brand of scientific insight. From a world-changing and horrific event to myth and metaphor. Religion is indeed a conspiracy - at least that much is true.

    9/11 was an inside job - the only "evidence" to the contrary is the word of government and corporate media. Evidence that clearly points to wholesale terrorism - if only you can be bothered to look - brings down the 'official story' quicker than the towers themselves. Wakey wakey people, time has run out...

  18. Proud makes a good point about Engineers not having a clue. Take them out of the office, put them on a job site to see the real world application of their blueprints and they are lost. I have the unfortunate pleasure of dealing with them on a daily basis, and they really have no common sense, people skills or a basic clue (ok some are good, a few are really good but most are m*rons).

    But that's about all I can agree with him on, he said something along the lines of "I am an expert and smarter than everybody else, if you don't believe me just ask me and I will tell you" which really was the end of me being able to read his post. I would argue some of his points but he already said he is right and everyone else is wrong, so I see no point in wasting my time.

    Oh yeah, plus I don't care!!

  19. Sorry pal, this was a set up, and Israel was involved, 9/11 WAS A MOSSAD JOB!!!

    This is a nice dis-info piece, probably provided by this illegal, immoral system thats the US Gov..for every piece of "evidence" you produce, I can produce 4 others that say your wrong...Building 7 alone is the evidence that this was planned by Israel and the US Gov, sorry? your confused

  20. I met this guy in the documentary who takes everyone around in the bus and tries to convince them of the official story. He's just the biggest douchebag you would ever meet. He won't shut up and never lets anyone talk and just goes on and on and on about nothing relevant. Also the guy who changes his mind in this documentary and starts believing the official story has got to be the worst actor I have ever seen. An obvious shill. The Flight 93 part in this doc is a must see because I burst out laughing at how utterly ret*rded they must think we are.

    1. Yeah you're right, everyone who believes in the official story is in on the conspiracy. It's this huge theatre piece filled with actors and they just haven't found the right amount to buy you out yet.

    2. When did I say "Everyone who believes the official story is in on the conspiracy"? My only point is the comic who made this film is a douchebag. I met the guy in person and did a radio show with him. And the tall English guy who changes his mind in this documentary is an obvious shill. Watch it yourself. I'm not saying the whole documentary is utterly unbelievable. They do make some good points with most of it. It's just the part about Flight 93 is so over the top ludicrous it stretches credulity.

  21. He isn't even funny. I would say stop making films and stick to comedy but he isn't good at either.

  22. Andrew Maxwell is an idiot. I'm 13 mintues into the movie, the first point......He puts a woman in a tiny airplane and says it's no different than a jumbo jet. Next, he interviews a pilot who blatantly lies. I've never seen the cockpit doors open on a jumbo jet. I've never been to an airport and went to the gate without going through metal detectors, and we are talking some of the biggest airports in the US. One more isn't's NANO-thermite. There is a differnce, BTW......ever seen Mythbusters? They cut through a car and they didn't need hundreds of pounds of thermite.

    1. Did mythbusters take on the NIST report?

      umm.... no.

      Love how twoofers selectively pick their sources in attempts to imply widespread support.

      Maxwell may be an id**t but consider he's just playing down to his audience here.

  23. So much character assassination. I'm not sure why people can't have a civilized discussion about anything now a days, whether it be science, religion, or even a preferred television series! If I state an opinion that does not conform to the masses, it's hunting season on my personality, family, intelligence, background. Nothing's off limits. Have some respect for a fellow human being.

  24. This is such Bullsh*t! Obviously this "comedian" bloak just walked down one of his streets overthere across the pond and asked random srtrangers if they thought 9/11 was an inside job and why they felt that way. And as soon as he found five that said something along the lines of "well yeah, I beleive it was an inside job 'casue of the way the building fell" or something along those lines. And that is all they said to get on the show. I say this 'cause these people have very little information pertaining to 9/11 and it is quite apparent that they may have, at the most, watched one youtube video or read an article online somewhere if that and not much more. As soon as they are shown something that contraindicates there "belief" on the idea they flip and become non-truthers, just like that, in the blink of an eye. As for the fact that they just accept the things these "experts" claim without questioning them in the least points to this ten fold. Not that I feel they have anything they could question towards these "experts" because they have so little knowledge, if any, on thier "beliefs" that the have to accept it. It is very dangerous when you are getting your knowledge from one "expert", especially when they are hired by the show that you are on. This is a horrible example of ignorance and belief. If you are gonna believe in something, research it. How can you "know" something when you "know" nothing about it.

  25. Regarding the thermite, it was never said that thermite was used, rather THERMATE, which is a different compound that has sulfur, making it burn higher than the temperature at which steel melts

  26. I could not buy the conclusion until that dramatic and shocking demonstration of the water balloons. A real clincher. Now who can argue with that?

  27. Dear batvette,
    So much anger child. Take your meds and go back to bed. Us adults were having a civil intelligent discussion.
    If you want Santa to bring you anything this year you need to be a good boy.
    You sleep well in your dream world where logic and reason aren't needed and you can be the big man terrorizing all those conspiracy theorists that have caused so much pain and destruction in the world. How dare they question your role models and want the constitution and laws to be followed.
    We both know that they are to blame for everything and you can sleep well now.
    We were all hoping that your labotomy was a success.
    Nighty night

    1. Any time you want to address actual talking points such the "inconsistency/omissions" that as described are your own ignorance, let me know.
      If the likes of you doesn't approve of me I'm doing something right.

    2. I tried to disguss real inconsistacies and omissions. But you act as if they do not exist.
      Go back to bed now. Afterall, Your friend Joe Walsh is right about your sick mind and I will not argue with you anymore.

    3. Right, because blindly believing what a bunch of bloggers, crackpots, and amateur documentarians makes you so much more tuned in to what's *really* going on in the world.

      Do you know what anomaly hunting is, and why it amounts to really shitty evidence?

      Do you have a good grasp of logical fallacies, use extra care to avoid them, and retract your argument when you inevitably use one (everyone does now and then)?

      Do you have a strong understanding of the scientific method, and what truly constitutes evidence and proof? Do you have experience with research, and know how to gauge the trustworthiness of sources?

      If not, you probably don't have the skills necessary to avoid being suckered in by poor and inadequate arguments.

    4. Ian, I am no crackpot, I do look at all sides of a dispute. You seem to just want to argue and insult.
      I am an old man, I have a very good understanding of physics and have been a steel worker and in construction for 30 years. I was also alive when Kennedy was assasinated and always believed the fatal shot came from in front. Just another in your face, don't believe the physics, or your own eyes, believe the Warren Comission's BS story.
      I am in good company with many experts in many fields who dispute the official 9/11 conspiracy theory. If you don't have any doubts about all the impossible physics involved in their story, fine. But don't think your insults will sway me boy.
      Have a nice day son.

    5. Here in Europe, we cant believe what some Americans are capable of believing about their own country.."An inside job". It hurts so much when you think thats the case, mostly because a lot of muslims now can say that it was not muslims, just ask the americans.
      I feel sad when i see innocent people with dignity (unlike the muslims that was responsible), being forced to jump to their certain deaths because of islamic terrorism. You have democrazy. You even had a civil war. Now TAKE CARE OF IT for God sake. Millions of people still depend on you to do the right thing. Pass a law where ignorance displayed all over is a crime.

    6. See, here's the rub. The **** that boggles the mind about that nonsense you just excreted is not the fact that you had those low grade thoughts run through your head. It's that you actually typed them into a comment box, then you looked at it and said to yourself "that seems good". Or did you drop a cup full of marbles on the keyboard? Ok, on your knees slave!

    7. Your ignorance should be honored by your own imprisonment from the truth of 9/11 which is that insiders from within our country carried out the "attacks", not muslims.

    8. "I am in good company with many experts in many fields who dispute the official 9/11 conspiracy theory."

      Sure. Just not many in any relevant fields to qualify them in structural failure analysis. The actual number of degreed civil engineers and licensed architects in Gage's group don't even add up to 1/10 of 1 percent in their fields.

    9. Go back to watching fox news and endorsing other idiots to not think for themselves. I have already told you that I only disguss matters with intelligent adults.

      You son, do not Qualify as either.

    10. Batvette,
      You're assessment of the 1/10 percentage does not stand as an accurate readout of what architects actually believe concerning 9/11. You would have to ask all 100,000 architects and get their answer before making up statistics like you're doing there. There are over 1000 architects in Richard Gage's group who have publicly announced their positions voluntarily however this does not prove to be the final amount of experts on that side of the fence.

    11. "There are over 1000 architects in Richard Gage's group"

      And here is where we start pulling facts out of our behinds. There are nowhere near that many.

      The fact is his group represents less than 1/10th of 1 percent in their profession. That is FRINGE. Deal with it.

    12. #1 Gage's group is diluted and not many are actually qualified to analyze this. He accepted anyone who works at an architectural firm (including file clerks etc) AND anyone with an engineering degree- not just civil engineering but electrical, computer, biotech, etc. Truth told probably less than 100 are professionals with any capacity to do anything resembling structural analysis. And of those, can they offer a research paper to a peer review professional journal with an alternative hypothesis? Nope. Almost all just say the government report is wrong or they "have questions".
      From a POV adhering to the scientific method which demands a hypothesis held by overwhelming consensus stand unless an alternative is presented- and not simply mock or doubt consensus- and reject fringe, there is no rational reason to take AE911truth seriously from any kind of professional aspect.
      As to the others in that profession, I also have to assume anyone not stepping forward as a truther must approve the NIST report.
      I cannot fathom anyone who does this as a profession, with the effects this event has had on all our lives, seeing a conspiracy but remaining silent.
      Many truthers posit they would but that is a component of the mental condition some suffer from. Everyone else is afraid of the bogeyman they are destined to confront. Their morals and courage and enlightenment are superior to the rest of us "sheeple".
      That is not meant as a personal slight, though if those beliefs are yours you may want to review the basis of them. They aren't rational.

    13. All that " I'm intelligent" type b.s. you spewed, but your not intelligent enough to go over your comment before you post it. You say... " retract your argument when you inevitably use one".... I'll tell you what smart guy, if you look at building 7 and don't see a're just a very small insignificant part in a big machine that truly is the problem.

  28. I don't even need to watch this after reading the Bull Sh*t "heading." Who wrote this "debunker" Arnold ?

  29. white van with bomb found under towers, white van stopped in NJ with bomb by police, israel
    source = Fox News

  30. Laughable at best. Dont bother watching this If you are looking for real answers. I wish someone would take me on a trip like that. At least I would know the right Questions to ask that would make a mockery of this dockery. Sad that sheeple our so brainwashed by the real conspiracy theorists that penned the 911 report, that they deem logic and physics to be stupid theory. Conspiracies do exist, that is no theory. They exist at work, at home, and anywhere there is more than one person working together to mislead, cheat, steal or take advantage of others. Human nature, lol. Bring me answers not rubbish like this..and what about bldg 7? LOL To believe the governments' story you have to be brain dead.

    1. ".and what about bldg 7? "

      LOL, this is the kind of clownery that makes CT's so contemptuously easy to ridicule.
      After a rant which makes you out to be the man with all the answers, the only point you can make is that you don't know anything about bldg 7.
      Bldg 7's collapse is well documented. If something about it is fishy well publish a research paper on it. Officially ROFLMAOing.
      Bldg 7 a controlled demolition?

      "Well what about firefighters on the scene saying the building was making groaning and creaking noises all day, and several hours before its collapse city bldg engineers held a transit up to it and noted a pronounced lean and bulging in outer columns on critical lower floors"

      That's how you make a point with a question, sir.

    2. You really have shown your lack of research. For me it is a waste of my time explaining to you that my comment refering to bldg 7 was meant to indicate with humor, the lack of any mention of that collapse in the 9/11 report. As far as my mention of not knowing what really happened, I really meant, that I know what didn't happen.
      I am not surprised that someone like you would respond and show their support for mainstream babble as opposed to doing any serious reseach for themself. Wach the video of it's collapse. No plane hit it, minimal fire damage, and it collapses in the center of the bldg first, not near any damage, then falls at close to freefall speed, onto it's own footprint? lol
      Well you aready know how I feel about people who believe the 9/11 report as truth, so I will not repeat my previous ending comment.
      Instead, I will say, before you attempt to insult someone who has researched a subject to great extent, You should know what you are talking about. Otherwise you sound very foolish and childish.

    3. "No plane hit it,"

      But a large chunk of the towers DID, opening up a hole feeding oxygen for the fires.

      "minimal fire damage,"

      A complete lie, fires fueled with diesel fuel and chemical filled transformers burned unfought all day. Numerous videos exist on youtube depicting raging infernos engulfing entire floors at once. Obviously you'd like to pretend they don't exist.

      "and it collapses in the center of the bldg first, not near any damage,"

      As the report explains- oh but what is this "not near any damage?" You just said "no plane hit it". So there WAS damage, it was a factor you knew about, but you tried to first pretend there wasn't. How typical.

      " then falls at close to freefall speed, onto it's own footprint? lol "

      You would like gravity to have changed direction for one day?

      You may now address the talking points provided about the building's condition being reported as worsening. How does the building being seen as leaning and columns bulging hours before collapse, not directly refute the idea of a controlled demolition?

      Your position on bldg 7 is no more than expressing complete ignorance of the official report on the mechanics of its collapse, which is why you are left expressing these doubts on the level of grade school science class on internet message boards, instead of publishing a serious research paper in a peer review civil engineering journal just to have it knocked down in a New York Nanosecond.

      Just as in the towers, the report on WTC7 is thorough and exhaustive, yet quite authoritative. Nobody of note in the civil engineering or architectural fields are publishing alternative theories, and for that matter neither is anyone in Richard Gage's little group.

      They wouldn't last a New York... well you get it. Or not. I don't care. People like you think you speak of science, of evidence. The very foundation of science involves publishing your research for your colleagues to scrutinize, and if it were to fall, they cannot simply mock it or poke random holes in it as you are doing. They must publish an alternative hypotheses which will withstand similar scrutiny.

      You are mocking and poking random holes, nothing more, nothing less. The only audience you will impress will similarly lack any grasp of the scientific method.

    4. Your ignorance of facts makes me laugh. There are plenty of videos of bldg 7 falling straight down at free fall speed. The fire damage was no where near the lower structure. It could be understandable for part of the bldg to collapse near the damage, but not the whole structure. With no resitance, straght down into it own footprint. Your version as well as the official one is as full of holes as your knowledge of psysics and facts.
      There have never been any towers ever fall due to fire in history.
      Kerosene or jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel.
      To fall at free fall speed you need to remove lower support collums to remove resistance.
      There are hundreds of mechenical engineers who dispute the report as well as ones involved in building the towers. They were designed to withstand an aircraft hit.
      I see that you have all the answers, without ever questioning, researching or listening to mountains of credible wittness reports that mention many explosions in lower parts of the bldgs.
      But then, you were probably also one who was flag waving all the way to Iraq when it was Saudi's flying the planes.
      Misdirection of aggression. I bet you don't even know that no official charges were ever brought up against Osama.
      Your insults to me are like that of an ignorant child.
      Do some real research and then you may be able to convince me that the 9/11 report was anything but propaganda. What? That's the only thing you have read, isn't it? lol
      I have been a steel worker, I have worked construction. I do understand psysics. I do not proclaim to know what happened. But I am telling you the report that you so passionately defend is full of holes. Missing wittness testimonies, missing evidence, and most of all missing real answers. I bet you can explain the molten steel found at the base of the towers days, weeks, after the collapses too.
      Odd, since jet fuel only burns around 800 degrees, and steel won't liquify until closer to two thousand degrees.
      Have a great day and don't bother replying untill you have researched futher than fox news son.
      I really wish more people like you would look at the facts and help all of us get real answers. The 9/11 report only gives answers that raise bigger questions if you are not ignorant of psyics and history.
      But then, as Mark Twain said, considering the average inteligence of man, you must realize, that half are below that.

    5. " It could be understandable for part of the bldg to collapse near the damage, but not the whole structure."

      You have no concept of architectural engineering. It stands as a whole or falls as a whole. .

      "Kerosene or jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel."

      Polly want a cracker?

      " But I am telling you the report that you so passionately defend is full of holes. "

      You or anyone else are free to publish, in any professional journal, an alternative hypotheses. Instead you're ranting on an internet message board. Why is that?

    6. Ok..since you're accusing my nation of self infliction, I think I'll have a say. I have been a structual welder for 18 yrs. I fit and weld on beams and trusses exactly like the ones in the twin towers. From your last comment which you wrote "No plane hit it" illustrates your either a troll or a flat out liar. Jet fuel kindled by the towers fuel..desks..chairs..ceilings..papers could easily contain enough heat to warp a truss,beam..(girder???) It only needed a heat of about 6 to 650*f to twist the metal like rubber under pressure. The core beams( which would not be one solid beam from top to bottom were pivitod up to down and I would guess the trusses itself would be weldeed to the outside core posts. Now when the core posts began to topple down in a zig-zag motional fall, it brought the weakened trusses and outer beams with it. Which is why the towers fell the way they did. I know it's short and breif, but it's in plain english and easy to understand. Our US bridges are required to have their welds inspected every 15 to 20 yrs. Do you know why that is. It's because of seasonal changes in temp the bridge metal and welds endures. If there near the sea, the salt air is a major factor.

      Why are you people coming on here with absolutly no knowledge..proof..credible research..or common sense?Can you imagine a multi thousand ton truss slaming into another one 3 stories down would sound like?.....BOOM!.....BOOM!....BOOM! take into consideration the surrounding buildings that would've produced one h*ll of an echo. Wouldn't you agree? I know I'm just skimming through it but I don't want to waste my time if you don't think I am qualified to school you on steel. I can read any blueprint for ya if you want? nd might I suggest stop using the people you follows vocabulary such as..'sheeple'...what about bld 7...warcrimes on Bush...physically impossible( that one cracked me up) Well I'm considered an expert on metal and welds.....prove me wrong! You see batvette, they have a person like me and you right here to answer how the towers fell or educated theory and they still see stars during the light of

      And before you clowns say I'm just a structual fitter/welder, let me make a few facts clear. I am more qualified then any f--kin' engineer or architect YOU claim as having knowledge on steel. Them f--kin' engineers do not work..touch..weld..construct..inspect..or over see any part of the fitting or welding process! They are not qualified to tell you wha metal can and can not do. They only scribble down the basic design and then outline it in a blueprint work a office!

      Goodday sir.

    7. He parrots every bad talking point he's heard others make (thus the polly want comment) and asks the same dumb questions which have all been answered by one of the NIST's FAQ pages or in a hundred other places on the internet.
      When you give him the answers he's not going to want to hear them, and when points he makes are refuted he'll simply move on to another bad talking point.
      Note he insists on taking eyewitness accounts at great value yet twice I have raised the issue of firefighters on the scene giving testimony about bldg 7's decaying condition that day and he ignores it.

      "Well what about firefighters on the scene saying the building was making groaning and creaking noises all day, (and saying the bldg "didn't look right") and several hours before its collapse city bldg engineers held a transit up to it and noted a pronounced lean and bulging in outer columns on critical lower floors"

      How is this not inconsistent with the controlled demolition theory and not completely refute points about the BBC's preknowledge, Silverstein's "pull it" comment, etc?

      In conclusion: EVERY one of these useless claims made by "twoofers" has been addressed and answered by experts at the NIST or in the private sector over and over again, they just don't want to hear them. Anyone qualified in these fields who held similar views has already been marginalized by their colleagues for their ideology motivated stupidity, and like their laymen fellow twoofers, are left to dwell on internet forums as the lowest denominator. Yet they will laughably say others need to "do the research".

      The only research that needs doing is for them to find a competent mental health professional and stay in therapy, and stop pursuing these ridiculous notions that only allow what corruption IS going on to go on unchecked. Rational, reasonable people are completely turned off when asked to look at the incompetent nature of the government's preventive actions, weak response on Sept. 11, and standard corrupt practices in contracting, etc, when they see the kind of company they'll be keeping in doing so.

    8. There were many eyewittnesses, including firemen that have disputed the official accounts! They were not included in the report.
      You keep putting words in my mouth. I have never once accused anyone. I have never stated to know anything more than it not making rational sense.
      I have watched and listened to all there is on both sides of this debate. Yet the official story does not answer many valid questions. And niether do you.
      You also ignore the fact that untill that day, not once has a fire ever collapsed a tower. Then boom, three drop on the same day and you accept that as normal?
      There were many firemen who were aware of that statistic who fearlessly entered to save lives who didn't make it out. Many of them who did make it out did report other explosions.
      No, I am not irrational, and I am not going to let a loud mouth like you change my views that are based on all the evidence that is available, not just the evidence that you endorse.
      I am so glad you know everything and question nothing. I am so happy you have so much faith in the government that loves you and protects you from the boogieman.
      I still want answers. I want to know what really happened. It is obvious that you don't know either.
      You know what you call someone who questions their government and stands up in favor of it's people? A patriot.
      Wave your flag elsewhere.

    9. "You also ignore the fact that untill that day, not once has a fire ever collapsed a tower. "

      If that's the kind of question you think is worth asking I'm not surprised you didn't find any answers.
      Is that what you think happened to the towers? A simple fire broke out, just like any other? A carelessly discarded cigarette, or an electrical problem?
      IT'S A WORTHLESS EVEN DISHONEST TALKING POINT. Just plain dumb, if you attended one of the NIST Q & A conferences and asked that you'd be laughed out of there by even the truthers! What "statistics" were you talking about was in firefighters' minds? You mean the hundreds of fires in skyscrapers caused by jumbo jets punching holes deep into their structures at 580mph, igniting the entire contents of several entire floors instantly and completely with 10,000 gallons of jet fuel that burned unfought all around structural steel components with most of their fireproofing now missing?
      Oh that's right this is UNPRECEDENTED. Nothing even close, EVER, even the WW2 Empire State Bldg incident cannot be compared. Smaller plane, one fifth the speed, almost no fuel, and the structure had concrete covered columns to absorb impact and remain as fireproofing.

      For the what, third, fourth time?

      "Well what about firefighters on the scene saying the building was making groaning and creaking noises all day, (and saying the bldg "didn't look right") and several hours before its collapse city bldg engineers held a transit up to it and noted a pronounced lean and bulging in outer columns on critical lower floors"

      How is this not inconsistent with the controlled demolition theory and not completely refute points about the BBC's preknowledge, Silverstein's "pull it" comment, etc?

      "I am so glad you know everything and question nothing. I am so happy you have so much faith in the government..."

      Ah, straight from the truther indoctrination manual. Your position is hopelessly silly and devoid of any factual basis to pursue, when that is pointed out, reply in some fashion that the other person is a "sheeple" with blind trust in gov't or feverish patriotism, implying some bizarre enlightenment and superior moral compass of your own.
      As you help the world kick America to the curb by telling it we did this to ourselves to seize nations for their resources.

    10. You sir, are an id**t.
      Yes, I do think that is exactly the kind of question that should be asked. History has shown fire has never brought down any sky scraper, ever. And, the towers were designed to withstand an impact from an aircraft! One very comparable in size and fuel capacity to the ones that did! LOOK IT UP! You claim to know it all.
      You continue to put words in my mouth, Insult me, and pretend to know it all.
      I was referring to bldg 7 when I said no plane hit it. I was pointing out other firemen reporting explosions in that bldg. Yet you insist on going off and spouting **** from your mouth.
      Of all the questions that come to mind, the most obvious one is how so many id**ts like you can't see the inconsistancies and ommissions in the official story.
      For the last time you m*ron,I have not ever said that I know what happened!!!! I have only said that when one looks at ALL the evidence that there are many valid questions left unanswered!
      You choose to believe the official story, fine, so be it.
      But your attempt to take your anger for CT's out on me is futile.
      I laugh at your lack of adult logic and your attempt to rattle me.
      I retain the right to have logical questions, and am not phased by your bombardment of irrational insults.
      To learn, you must ask questions. Once you think you know, you close your mind to any other possibilities.
      I have always been open to facts, however when idiots like you attack me for only asking legitimate questions, without answering any of them or just ignoring them, and ranting on like they know it all, all I can say is, Grow the hell up!
      You know, I wrote my opinion on this mocumentary over a month ago. You must have been searching for someone to bully or rattle. LOL Thanks for the laugh, you really should grow up and get a life. I am way to old to lose any sleep over your childishly disrespectful nonsense.

    11. Yeah most of your "inconsistencies and omissions" are not by the NIST but by you and yours, example:
      The design parameters did study the effects of an aircraft collision by a 707 into a a tower, HOWEVER the study factored an aircraft empty on fuel and travelling at loiter speed, lost in the fog, low on fuel like the WW2 B-25 incident. 911 saw the aircraft moving over 3x that speed, a tremendous increase in kinetic energy, and 10,000 gallons of fuel light all the contents of affected floors afire.
      Surely you've been told this before but no doubt pretend it's not relevant.
      I'm not insulted by the irony of all your derogatory remarks accompanying your post where your talking point is just.... so.... wrong, because as Joe Walsh said, "you can't argue with a sick mind".
      I do pity you and hope you find the professional help and medications you and most other "twoofers" need to get on the road to recovery and someday lead a productive life, not burdened by the effects of whatever mental illness causes you to believe your foolish beliefs supported by ignorance of actual facts make you enlightened and folks grounded in reality are "sheeple".

    12. Nano-Thermite paint EVERYWHERE. You've seen what that stuff is capable of. Do you believe that kerosine can SLICE THROUGH STEEL BEAMS? You musta seen that beam that was sliced right through!? Fire SURE AS HELL didn't do that! They probably painted MOST of the Towers with that stuff, and STILL used a laser to "gain complete entrance" into the building with those planes.THAT'S WHAT CAUSED THE POWDERED REFUSE. People that were on-fire DISAPPEARED! I mean, not even a single wing came off THOSE PLANES! ! HOW on earth is that even possible? Not without "Lasered entrance" and Nano-Thermite planted everywhere. When "flight 93" got lost, the South Dakota National Gaurd SHOT IT DOWN. I saw a general ADMIT IT on National TV! That was a VERY POOR JOB of a hole in the ground with a little smoke in Pennsylvania! Not even a Cessna could have fit into that little hole in the front of the Pentagon! Those planes were GUIDED MISSILES! All three. The only difference was the Pentagon was hit by a missile and not a laser-guided 767 like the towers.

    13. As long as "man" like Lee Hamilton remain alive, we'll never get an HONEST "report. They used the same kiss-a**es they used for the so-called "Warren report." Attorneys are real good with TALK, TALK, Talk! I don't believe a word of it. But then, I don't have 7 houses (like McCain) or have BILLIONS in the off shore banks.

    14. The Mayo Clinic just called, they'd like to know if you would donate your brain for research in an ongoing study about the long term effects of drug abuse and repeated self inflicted hammer wounds to the head. That IS how you came about believing these things, no?

    15. You hit it on the nail. I wish I could explain what I really want spit out sometimes. this is the way 9/11 should be researched in my opinion:

      1. veiw all video coverage from 9/11..impact..smoke..responders..falling debris..ect
      2. research the planes used to commit the attack..wing span from tip to tip = 40m.......weight...fuel log ..pilot ratings
      3.signal frequincies and internet useages for the whole eastern part of the US. cell phone records for every muslim registered foreign exchange student.
      4. Retrieve blueprint of the towers..mark where beams or trusses were pivoted or welded with a full pen.(this is the most important thing in your research) Barrette, I noticed you wrote buildings are one solid connected piece of metal. I don't think that sounds right. Have you ever seen a major bridge like S.F Golden State bridge. Have you ever seen photos of the beams underneith?..the cables up above..24/7 weld inspector on site. Do you know the beams that were being put in there were or never would be put in there straight. The fitters had to of put a rainbow size camber for the bridges frame. These are put in there for the sole purepose of giving a structure a natural movement in case of an earthquake..high wind..tornado....and what ever. If you errect a high rise the size of the towers with perfectly strait trusses, core beams and nothing but fully welded cross lasings, what do you think each added floor will be doing to the previous? Granted, the core beams would and are for the sole purpose of keeping it errect, but you got to give it a way to "roll with flow" so to speak. other words the trusses of the lower half of the building would be grossly sagged. pivots...structual 'hindges'..cambers.
      5. get weld codes for 68-74'...see how many DIFFERENT weld shops were sub contracted out....weld inspecters reports( their should've been a complete log of every full pen weld on the towers....were they given ample time to properly constuct each truss. When my crew of 4 at work start a truss, cut the bevels, set it's legs..put in the lacing members..and finish it's welds, it averages out to be around 45 to 50 hrs per man....200 man many trusses were in the towers????.....deadline of 2yr????? I garauntee there were corners being cut to make that does happen.

    16. Wow you are angry!!!! and a know it all lovely.......

    17. blding 7 is the third tall building to collapse from a fire, the first two were the twin towers.

    18. yes even a five year old knows this. do you have a cognizant point to share? was the collapse of the towers just a fire? any old fire? do we start with dishonest ignorance and go from there? (trying to grasp the twoofer mindset, maybe that's impossible with more than a five year old's knowledge?)

    19. well thats all great and dandy but, accusing me of making an ignorant point says nothing about the ignorance until you share some the reason its ignorant, and yes the fires in blding 7 were normal fires, why wouldn't they be. The point was simple, whats the problem...

      And supposedly the 3 tall buildings collapsed due to fire, and they are the only 3 that I know of in history. While a lot of people have shown that it was because of explosives set in the buildings. which is more likely.
      Theres so much evidence, people hearing explosions all morning, the fact that the gov was conducting a drill for airplane hijackings at the same time?! and a lot more.

  31. Fact: The official story is physically impossible and could not happen.

    Everything else is speculation based on sometimes tangible, and sometimes intangible "evidence". I hear George Bush, Israel, NWO, Saudi Arabia, Illuminati a lot. Personally to me, it doesn't matter much anymore but by now it should be clear by now that regardless of who actually did this, 9/11 was not just some terror attack by radicals who hated our western lifestyle. This 'documentary" if you can even call it that, debunks nothing. It merely plays on the credulity of the deniers who somehow still think building 7 was destroyed by a proxy fire....sigh

    1. "9/11 was not just some terror attack by radicals who hated our western lifestyle."

      You're right, read Al Qaeda's 1998 fatwa.
      You don't even know why they did it.

  32. Israel is U.S & U.K Black Op's base, created after the cold war as their main propaganda headquaters!

  33. If there was any doubt that the BBC is a treasonous organisation. This is an absolute insult. One of these guys since made a fool of himself on RT, that was almost as funny.

  34. Yeah! like Ian says "worry about your own country ya brits". Follow the example the American Gov. is setting, you never see them sticking their noses into the business of other countries uninvited.

  35. This guy should stick to comedy......wait!......He has!......This doc is his best joke! :D

  36. worry about your own country ya brits!

  37. To all conspiracy nuts:

    Ooookay, so they ran planes into buildings, and set off explosives at the same time, thousands of KG of explosives that they managed to get in there without anyone noticing, thousands of kg of thermite attached to walls in a building that has thousands of people going in and out all day.

    And then just for shits and giggles they decide to fire missiles at the Pentagon and a missile at a plane in the middle of nowhere.

    All this while keeping it totally top secret, and these idiots can't get the NATIONALITY of the terrorists right? Why use Saudi terrorists if you want to attack Iraq?!

    1. @Balaji Narasimhan,

      In the folowing PDF file, you'll see that nanothermite didn't need to be "Wired" since the fuel of the Jets would play that role:

      1) Type the usual H T T P and then that string of characters:

      It's only peoples who works on this topic as thousands do all over the world. May you remember that as it happened, many witnesses though that the explosives were planted by the extremist?

      The other detail is that the thermite (Or the new nano's one) is not there to demolish anything on its own.
      Rather, just to weaken the structure at a very few sensible places.
      It still needed to be triggered by something else like the Jet fuel coming down the building for instance...

      2) The novel nanothernite or the regular one?
      Who knows since they took great care to get rid of the all debris?

      Anyhow, nanothernite thechnic gotten a heck of a thrust forward since 9/11 because of obvious reasons. And it's thus now easier to find informations about the strenght it has compared to the strandard "TNT". A huge step forward. The regular thermite reduced the required charge (Load) but for the nano one, it becomes incredible! And on top of that, it give "Clean" & very precise detonations!

      I was gonna give a link sort of briefing pamphlet about the latest updates on the strenght of nanothermite but the name of the company is on that advertisement pamphlet...
      Cannot do that. Find it yourself!
      However, you don't sound like someone who wants to get solid references but who rather rely on slogan?


    2. Too funny. What's the point, dodging that no detonation devices were found or were necessary because nanothermite could be ignited by the fires caused by the planes?
      Well then only the nanothermite that was on the floors that were in the immediate area of the planes's impact was ignited. Was that the only nanothermite planted? That makes the hijacker pilots incredibly great aim now, doesn't it!
      Well we'll assume that is absurd now and the villains must have planted nanothermite all over the building and figured whatever the fires caused by the planes' impact ignited would be enough to cuase the building to collapse.
      Yet that leaves us with a building full of columns with nanothermite applied to them. Which upon inspection of the thousands of photographs of the wreckage at ground zero, you don't see anything of the sort.

      All of which leads me to conclude the maker of this doc should have added one more stop to his little field trip.

      A mental institution. That's the only place with all the answers for conspiracy theorists.

      BTW Pierre completely misrepresents the characteristics of this bull huckey substance "nanothermite". Clean and precise detonations. Really? Can you source that with a legitimate link?

    3. @batvette,

      Nah! Cannot cite the source. It's a technical data sheet that combine the specifications for 3 types of nano's. A PDF file i stumbled on while seaching for either nano's (OR) simple thermite.
      The HTML link was direct to the PDF file.
      After saving the PDF file on my HD, I deleted the sub-folders in the HTLM address of my browser and went to that website.
      Thermite & it's nano version exist for many specialties...

      It's sort of a private company who produce warfares...
      I am not to modify their PDF file to hide the tradenames, the company's name and so on...
      Anyhow, their products dates in now days and not ~20 years ago.

      For the least, not for you since you ain't worth it.


    4. Because dumb people like you will believe them no matter what, lol. Israel attacked you, end of story. Just like they attacked the USS Liberty

    5. oh stop making sense now, you're spoiling all the fun!
      It was a giant collosumus energy beam, teh towers dey was teh dustified! Derrrr....

  38. I really can't for the life of me, understand why people are unable to accept that thier Gov't is corrupt and was clearly involved in the 911 tradgedy. Experts, schmetsperts. Follow the money and it leads to all corrupt alpha bit agencies in the US, that worked with the ISI. Whistle blowers are constantly villified in this country. They go to jail and the power elite are NEVER prosecuted. It's a two tier justice system that serves the powerful. The gold that was under the towers was and is owned by the Chinese Gov't. Get ready to speak it, because they're pissed off at the US . Only returning a fractional amount back to China, when tested revealed it was Gold plated Tungesten! We've been hoodwinked folks. The reason we invaded the Middle East was to position ourselves against the Chineese.

    1. Your right about that,I just wish everybody else would wake up.

    2. Your right about that,hopefully everybody else wakes up before it's to late.

    3. all you are doing is giving evidence 911 conspiracy theories are belief and not substance driven. you believe the government is corrupt (of course it is) and would go to any means no matter how ridiculous to further allow their corruption to be continued.
      Your belief goes so far to allow huge leaps of logical faith in assuming they must possess materials and humint capabilities of the most amazing ability to be able to bring those towers down before people's eyes.
      You've overlooked there was an evil responsible for this, corrupt to the core. That would be the United Nations that namby pamby President Bill Clinton allowed to handle our policy in the middle east for him because he lacked the fortitude to take any risks. He stood by unflinching while sanctions killed over one million Iraqis, mostly children, while being so ineffective at harming Saddam he was able to stash away $13 billion in a Paris bank from the skimmed profits of oil for food. Many UN officials and leaders of participant nations, including those most vociferously opposed to the Iraq war (Russia and France) were found to have similarly profited while by the time of the invasion 2/3 of Iraq's population was humiliated, living hand to mouth on UN rations.
      Read Al Qaeda's 1998 fatwa. That was the primary reason they said they wanted to attack us.
      911 caused us to review those policies and it was a necessity we remove Saddam since trusting him to live in peace with his neighbors without sanctions and a full blockade would be insanity.
      Congress knew that which is why 3/4 voted for America, not George W. Bush, to invade Iraq.

    4. @batvette,

      I went to the website you cited that was supposed to bare what you qualified as Al Qaeda's 1998 fatwa and I seen it was a haox.
      At most, sending some-1 on a wild goose as you mentioned in another post elsewhere on TDF.
      You made another standing proof that you take such ordeals as a joke. Cynical froof of your childish endoctrinement into abusal.

      (Quote) : -"He (Clinton) stood by unflinching while sanctions killed over one million Iraqis, mostly children...".

      -Sanctions regarding the "So-called" Weapons of Mass Descructions that is! USA army is getting out of Iran at present time...
      WHERE ARE THOSE WMD? Cumon! Tell us?
      Aside the one that were sold to Saddam to attack Iran, Hum?
      Among which, the most numerous one where "Made in USA"!
      I mean the one sold by Rumsfeld to Sadam.

      Not dating back to the CIA-Iran-Contrat drug deal as Colonel North explained in detail to the whole world.
      Where were you at that time, on Planet Kinglon visiting Spock maybe?
      The whole world knows about war mongerers since it's that well documented.

      Clinton was dropped in there in a parachute.
      He's been there to make business, more than anything else.
      You're out of context. One need to bare in mind that once selected, one ought to me his boss and leaders.

      Your misleading is typical to an endoctined individual.
      No need of a cave in Afghanistan to .


    5. LOL, PBS posts "hoax" documents? Is that the best you got?

      Look, Al Qaeda published a fatwa in 1998 detailing their grievances and thus their war on America. FInd it somewhere else, I don't care! If you haven't read it you have no business feigning knowledgeable commentary on this issue.
      As to US selling Sadda WMD, sorry, didn't happen.
      The US never sold Saddam any weaponizable Bio Agents, Chemical Agent, OR Nerve Agents, NOR any delivery systems for same.
      The nerve agent bombs that were dropped on Halajba were dropped by Mig and Mirage fighter/attack planes- no surprise it was the Russians and French most vociferously opposed to the war. They were Saddam's number one and number two arms suppliers.

  39. @Rolands Jaunzems,

    And what is a "Scientist" according to you?
    If you viewed the movie until the end, you woud have seen that a good majority of scientists working in a specialty concerned by this, are extremely sceptic about the butched NIST official 9/11 report.

    What does (20-30) years of practice in controled demolition means to you? A gross analysis maybe?
    -Talking 'bout this foreing man in this docu who view the fall for the 1st time on a video cassette and who wasn't told that it was one of the WTC.

    Bare in mind that this docu did had a pure technical approach to pinpoint technical details of the 3 WTC crashes. All of them within their exact footprints and crashing down at the speed around free fall.

    Not even one of of the 3 titled or broked apart during its crash, or a temporary stop, visible slowing down or any sort are detectable by anyone and any mean!

    It was a day of mirable equivalent to rolling 3 dices 3 times and getting the exact same 3 dice values.

    Understandingly, everything had to be clean up swiftly under close scrutiny and sent oversea as soon as possible before anybody could investigate the remains.

    How clever it was.
    Wait, there's more to come in less than 20 years, maybe 10 at most. They like it, let them have it.
    Frankly, I just couldn't care less.


    1. I am not getting your point. I joked sarcastically about 'great movie'. Movie is poor, experts in the movie talking and explaining THINGS POORLY! I do not believe comparison egg, water-balloon and flour to air-plain crash. Debris in pentagon and in the field were not burning and melting anything, so why i did not see anything or read/watched like big airliner engines that are in weigh of several tons and inner details made from titanium alloy. 3287°C is temperature when titanium boils (and so possibly could evaporate). So pleas answer me, where are any evidence of aircraft engines? (i just heard about one found engine).

    2. @Rolands,

      Whopsy Roland. I though that your comment was on another docu comment's list. The one about the 15 something scientists expressing their doubts about the "Details" of 9/11.
      But even in the that other 9/11 docu, those scientists do not discuss the technical issues they brought in context before coming to their conclusion that 9/11 was a false flag operation.

      In short, at first sight, I though you were a "Denier" on the contrary of the conspiratism if I may say so. It wasn't clear to me.

      I guess I'd need to view that "Conspiracy Road Trip" once aqain since it been a while. A far as I now, there is only one purely technical docu on TDF where pure technical matters, issues and approaches is faced.
      It's the one in which one of the technogist who was in a semi-public standard organisation lost his job because f his denials of NIST peudo-report on the intensity of the fire up the TWC and the potential of that fire to trigger the downfall of those 2 WTC.
      As we all know by now, NIST refused to inquire on the 3thrd one (WTC7) because no death was officially reported over there.

      In any instances, I personnally don't beleive in an "All Out" USA Gov. false flag operation but as usual,as we seen so often in the past, opportunists who had real good "Connections" with the authorities whithin a few USA Gov. agencies. "Business" as usual.
      Too bad that everyone jumps on the FalseFlag option.
      It's misleading...

      Why? How come would Donald Rumsfeld went public about the few trillions of USA$ a little while before 9/11?
      That doesn't fit an "All Out" USA Gov. false flag operation.

      It ought to be something else. A litte more of a "Private" subsidee but with a restrained few keymen.
      If one lives long enough, some (30-50) years, he of she might have a good idea after that a few came out of the darkness as it was the case for a few precedents.


  40. :D Why there are conspiracy? Science does not believe in something (like it was done by that or that ) but says that looking on evidence we can assume or verify.
    I trust engineers and architects with degree and experience, I trust chemical engineers. Building 7 did not received impact of plain, and crushed like piece of pooo. Great movie, thats why there needs an other real investigation! 9/11 osama bin laden :D how about Pentagon? where did 4ton titanium engines go? :D This movie, ROFL copter.

    1. I wish he would invite real architects, engineers, chemists , physicists to this trip to show them :D. They just took some 5 random dudes and could not convince them, even less me, and i actually became more skeptical about this crap.
      p.s. he looks at egs, water baloon and assign it to airplane :D are you kidding me? water =/= steel. where are engines? have they ever seen a crash sight of plain? :D such a bulls*it.

  41. I haven't even bothered to watch this, but from what I judge by the description and the comments below its simply a brain wash job, and a poor one at that. Keep yourself educated people, 'they' know we're on to them!

  42. the mother's comments about wild west internet, few credentials, fewer brains --- says it all. thanks to the lucid host for this doc.. some little beam of reason in the murk of bad milk misanthrope conspiracy delusion docs going around. The level of literal-minded inverse-blinkeredness in the participants is hilarious as it is fkkn scary. thanks again the comedic host for this laugh a minute production and an ovation for the girl who brought that plane down without a blink. v.inspiring.

  43. All one needs to look at is WTC building 7 collapsing. You don't need to debate any of the hundreds of "coincidences" or unanswered phenomenon. Look at it and compare it to a demolition. There is no other way for that building to come down. Professional Architects and Engineers on (1,500+) can give you validity if needed, but it is plain and simple. Put aside any implications and view objectively.

  44. Just finished the show, painstackingly almost to the end. Honestly I thought it was a joke at first; it seems to be scripted. Not worth watching at all. If you are seeking the truth there are many more documentaries with much more comprehensive, reasonable and useful information.

  45. A comedian hmmm? I am physicist with a masters degree in structural engineering and I am saying along with many other more qualified engineers that those buildings came down from explosives (thermite) and not because of planes hitting them. There is no other possible way. I challenge anyone to prove me otherwise and bet a million bucks no one can prove otherwise. What more can we say folks? If you believe a comedian and not the experts, what can I say about your judgement? You simply are not qualified to tell the truth.

    1. why not bet a million bucks thats you can prove they were demolished, no one has that evidence, every theory is based only on what people dont understand which means it is all bunk. The kennedy assasination is another example of this crazy conspiracy behaviour, except that that has been proved to be entirely plausible i.e. it was shots fired from the book depository only which killed kennedy. In this case what is so hard to believe that flying an aeroplane into a building can knock it down.

    2. Jordo mate,

      I appreciate your educational view point, BUT:

      In what world do professionals not get s*** wrong? Masters degrees and PHD's don't make people correct, just like that.

      Was the Titanic not unsinkable?

      Was Goldman Sachs not too big a bank to fail? (Those CEO's have some pretty solid qualifications also)

      Airbus aeronautical engineers said the A380 was the most advanced and therefore safest commercial airliner ever built, despite QF32 nearly exploding over Batam on November 4th last year.

      The biggest problems we face in humanity are caused by guys with PHD' spare us pal...

      Those building were 30 years old and just got rammed by ******* commercial jets loaded with fuel, and we are meant to believe that this is not the reason that they fell...... because you have a Masters degree??????.....c'mon champ....pull ya head out....


    3. Goldman Sachs failed?

  46. Something odd here. The tall guy with the beard and blonde spot in his hair is a well known activist. He is in the documentary "Into the Fire" about the G8 protests in Toronto. Great documentary BTW. He seems to be almost "acting" in this road trip doc.

    1. @Myk Lab,

      I support! -"Something odd here!" (Quote).

      Left alone the extent to which Bush, Cheyney and especially Powell are known and worldwide recognized liars as we all know by now? It became a standard proceedure to treat the US population as deficients.

      It ain't no religious war, no racism war or what ever one could jump on, it's a simple money matter. Why did the USA governnment brought drugs and cocain to sell in the USA throught the army and its CIA?
      For money, what else?
      Where on earth is there the most concentrated amount of cash flow?
      Please, don't tell me that it's in Vietnam?

      No! Find a way, any way to seize weath in the USA (Like houses), the end-prize is much better.
      Too much problems with the Viets.
      Beside, if they'd knew about the war crimes, more gullyble must be around?


  47. ahem... building 7. "..maybe we should just pull it." Nuff said.

    1. @Myk Lab

      Pull it you said?
      Like down to Florida would have been far enough?


    2. ? Not sure what you mean about Florida? I was quoting the guy who owned WTC. He said on the news that he advised to "pull it" referring to demo the building and minutes later WTC7 collapsed.

    3. @Myk Lab

      Bwarff! Just a bad joke taken from another language.
      Meaning pulling the building "Down to Florida" since south pole is at the bottom of all maps.

      Sorry. Make's me think of another one I tried lately.
      My co-worker undertood it but it took a while, figuring the word "Calvaire" often used as swearing.
      From now on, I'll refrain:-) Promessed! :-)

      About "That guy" Silverstein, yeah he should have simply posponed that interview and take time to think everything over.
      Especially for building #7 which was known to be re-enforced because of the US agencies that occupied a few floors in there.

      He had a whole lot of money invested into this.
      I don't see why he commented.
      And how that specific expression became part of his everyday language.
      No doubt, being a business man, there ain't no reason for him to be familiar with this trade nor that expression spefically.
      Listening back to the recording, the context of what he's saying obviously refer to the crash of that building.
      Therefore if indeed, he not familiar with the slang & those expressions within that trade, where else did it pop-up?

      Finally, who had incentive toward the demolition of that building?
      Who had authority on who and when someone goes in & out of these buildings? But obviously, that it just can't be done alone.
      And it can't be an "All out" Gov. inside job neither.

      Take Rumsfeld when he announced that the Pantagon lost track of a couple of trillions USD just a little while before 9/11...
      He would have known that all documents were to be lost during 9/11?
      Nah! This just can't be! He would have told his close staff that the announcement is to be posponed until who knowns when...

      It's someting else. But anyhow, it just ought to be one of these things humankind will never, ever resolves.
      They now have the money, the guns and the authority to shut up anyone. And detention centers if needed.
      Else, lose one job and be eternally harassed.


    4. they did pulled it. Loll

  48. One do not need to ask some hard hitting questions in order to determine or reach a conclusion. We can ask very simple question about 911 and that will do it. Simple questions like how it is possible that NORAD just did not do any thing? Where are the videos of those so called 19 terrorist boarding the jets? Why there was only a tiny hole on the bottom of the pentagon is the plane which hit the Pentagon was a domestic plane carrying over 200 passengers? What happen to those people on board? etc.
    911 was an inside job, no one an deny it.

    1. only someone who has not taken the time to look carefully at the facts and has relied on the mainstream press for their information of this subject could, through ignorance, deny it.

      Other than that, the strongest evidence for the demolition of wtc 1 2 & 7 is so massive, so well documented; and deriving from such a broad variety of sources that all corroborate one another, that it is simply irrefutable.

    2. Now, the time is nearing for a massive revolution which may bring down the tyrants on there knees. 911 provided those warmongers what they needed, now the new event of Iran is mounting too, and it may be the matter of time when tyrants of the world decide to kill another thousands of innocents in a massive attack. UN and all the other internation body is puppet of US and once again these bodies will just stand as useless piece of crap and do nothing. Shame on Human race. Even the beasts do not behave in such ways.

    3. No one can deny it? Your a donkey fool.

      NORAD did scramble jets, but there was alot of confusion due to a training exercise due the same day. In addition, as you can imagine, there was alot of confusion as to what was going on...and they were too late. Not hard to understand.

      I have seen videos of the hijackers going through security..but boarding the jets?? Whats the difference?

      If you pay attention, the tiny hole is not where the plan went in, but where it came out, the whole front of the building was smashed in at the original impact zone...

      And finally, the are many eyewitnesses who saw bodies, the others were burnt, which is what happens when your in a plane crash...

      you didn't do well in school did you buddy....

  49. Andrew, you are wrong from the beggining

    1. @Christian
      I don't know if what you said is true or not because I do not know who Andrew is lol

  50. The video missed the two most important bits of evidence (in my opinion) that suggest it was not how the government did it.

    First of all: the pentagon hole. It should have been larger. If you super impose a proportional picture of the plane over the pentagon, it is clear that such a much larger hole should have came from its impact.

    Second: I understand the physics of how the twin towers could have fallen down. Once they start falling like that it will continue. I understand that no steel buildings had ever fallen down from fires, but airplanes full of jet fuel hit them. It was a different circumstance. The perpetrators did not need to demolish the twin towers.
    THE PROBLEM IS, what about ---World Trade Center Seven--- little known, a third Trade Center building fell. The footage of it falling shows explosions in the windows row by row as it falls as though explosives are going off. There was no steel building to collaps from fire before 9/11 and it was supposedly caused by a fire, SPREAD BY DEBRIS!?!?!?! BULL SH*T. Larry Silverstein admitted in an interview that he decided to pull the building. And industrial term meaning to demolish. As they rightly pointed out in the video, it takes weeks of preparations to organize a demolition, NOT HOURS.

    Watch the footage.

    And it is definitely possible that explosive material was carried on the bottom of the planes that hit the trade center. Witnesses reported seeing a strange black object attached to the bottom of the plane and also the footage shows one though I fully admit that it is inconclusive.

    Lastly I might point out that just because there was a coverup it does not mean the U.S. government did it. It is possible that the U.S. screwed up so badly that they tried to hide how much foreknowledge they did have because they were so bad at preventing it.

    1. @Cohenski
      The Larry Silverstein interview always seemed to me to be one of those moments when you say something and regret it right away, after the interview was over I bet he said to himself "why the F##k did I say that?" Whether or not he actually meant pull it as in set off the explosives to demolish it (not sure what else he would have meant, this isn't some dumb athlete using a technical term the wrong way in an interview and being able to claim ignorance, this is an educated man who while obviously stressed out as anyone in his shoes would have been but out of all the words or phrases he could have used to choose that particular one is a little suspicious) or just let it burn itself to nothing that choice of words was a poor decision.

      I have seen the doc where they talk about and show (?) something on the bottom of the second plane as it fly's towards the building, it is one of those cases where if you want to believe there is something there then you will see it and if you don't then you wont. But like you said it is inconclusive, which is how I see it too as i stradle the fence not wanting to take any particular stance lol. In that doc they (if it is the same one I saw) also show a bright light flash at the nose of the plane just before it hits the building claiming it to be a bomb going off or a detonator igniting or something like that.

      Your last point is an interesting one, true or not they could pull (theres that word again lol) that excuse out now and maybe put an end to a lot of speculation. I mean George Bush claiming to be incompetent isn't even something they would have to sell to the public it is pretty much everyones opinion already.

  51. Few points i need to put forth , science has always been my spectacle to judge the pattern of events in and around the world ...

    1) If you can fly a 2 seater glider around Manhattan downtown for an hour with an efficient trainer pilot and your job is to just fly around an unspecified track and land you can surely fly a boeing 767 JETliner on a specified path at high speed without any air traffic assistance , GPS and RADAR and hit some high rise building at a specific location "bull's eye" ....lolz :D

    2) If 2 kilograms of uncompressed THERMITE substance kept "ON" a steel bar and not drilled inside this bar is not able to cleave apart this metal bar , u will surely need a thermonuclear device to bring down a building in a controlled demolition to make it fall on its footprint at nearly free-fall speed ... but wait kerosene seems more devastating than THERMITE and NUCLEAR DEVICES :p :D ROFL

    3)If a close associate of alleged conspirers (supposedly the govt officials) makes an ASSERTION (verbal) to you that he/she saw the plane hitting the pentagon then all other evidences should be rendered as simple "crap" ....WTF :p

    4) If play school science is correct (off-course every form of science is correct) the water baloons and fistful of flour shares equal momentum and mechanics as a JETLINER would normally do ... infact a RAT falling on the ground from a dining table will be equivalent to an elephant falling from a 15 story building both the scenarios , they both will survive :P or both will get killed RAFLMAO :D OR a Rat of the size of an elephant will survive a great fall from empire state .... ;)

    5) You can simulate an entire LUNAR environment on TV in 1960s but u cant dub and mimic a voice on a phone call in early 21st century ...;) and Yes i always introduce myself to my DAD with my full name (doctor as prefix) whenever I call my dad , although he can identify my voice among hundreds on a phone call ...and in a state of emergency I prefer to call on landline phone rather than calling on mobile phone so that the chances are high that my call is being received :P :) :D ;) hahahahaha

    6) and tell me this REALITY SHOW was as real as BIG BOSS and BIG BROTHER ....not scripted at all ........

    But m still searching for "SCIENCE" in this entire documentary :(

    1. @Saad Aslam Khan
      1. Yes, its actually easier to pilot an airliner due to all of the automation. Trust me I've done the simulator myself. After take off all you have to do is point the airplane towards the direction of New York find where the towers are exactly and hit the towers.
      2. Nuclear Devices? Where did they compare this to nuclear devices? Why do you mention Kerosene? Are you talking about Jet Fuel because Jet Fuel isn't kerosene, it may have contain kerosene but its not kerosene.
      3. What other evidence? Are you talking about the lack of evidence due to confiscated videos?
      4. The reason why the elephant would die is because it's so massive whereas the rat itself has relatively little mass. An elephant accelerating due to gravity at the same rate as the rate will generate a momentum of velocity*mass, a much much more bigger number for the elephant. These are anecdotal explanations meant for the lay public and use rudimentary models to express the mechanics.
      Try to google science, you might actually learn something.

  52. now we need a comedian to refute the claims made by architects , civil engineers , physicists and chemists .... this documentary holds NOTHING substantial to deny 9/11 conspiracy ....

    1. Good point Saad, they needed to use a comedian for the George Bush Doc.

  53. A recent PBS doc 'The Interrogator' contains another account by a former FBI interrogator who was many times prevented from sharing intel with the CIA on what turned out to be the funding for the 9-11 plot. You can watch it on their website.

    1. Thank RileyRampant. I simply wasn't aware of this docu source (PBS online). I viewed that "The interrogator" docu. Teachs a lot.
      Then, I recalled the detention of quite a few high ranking either NAZI officers or social leaders in this UK based sort of "Heavenly" hotel prison the during the preparation of the Numember trial.
      The allied weren't much in a hurry while taking over the power in Gemany.

      As CIA officer "Ali Soufan" mentioned, insuring the rules of law for these criminals is a gamble that sinks them into the belief that they can get away clean.
      BUT! But it doesn't change much as it was the case for those NAZI. They began to talk and arguing each others some (2-3) weeks after detention.
      It's the nature of the beast and the Brits sure knew it!
      Whatever torture can bring on top of this is for the least useless. Useless to behave as sub-humans as these criminals did.

      Peoples may think that these NAZI had their way with the rules of laws but the fact is that the common individuals gave their outmost interest to the NAZI's stars while most of the detained one in UK did get the death penalty or lifetime sentence.

      Left aside the ones who were offered safe heaven by the USA Gov. who recognised their ability for creating the CIA a little after the Nurember trial.
      - "Operation Paperclip".
      - That is where the NAZI was implanted to fight against the USA demoniac chimera, the Communists.


  54. Have you guys checked out " the man that new". Its a recent Pbs documentary about John O'Neill. It shows that the great evil of the bush admin. was that they didnt plan 911 but completely ignored the overwelming evidence of an impending attack. And yes they should be held responsible for that and all their other major f--k ups.

    But I think what depresses me the most about the 9/11 conspiracys, is that so many good natured, intellegent people spend so much time on them when there are so many other truly dangerous actions being commited by our world leaders that we have ample evidence of.

    Please spend your time on things that will truely make a change.

    Good luck.

    And God speed.

    1. Yes Xtronob, many know who was John O'Neill since he was either a FBI or a CIA a few months before 9/11. There's a 9/11 documentary on this TDF website that mentions him quite a few times.
      As he began to dig into an islamic extremist case (Related to the 9/11 highjackers), he was demoted by his bosses.
      But he didn't had much at that time.
      Either his FBI or CIA bosses who were not glad that he was looking into files of the "Other US Org." Those 2 orgs. always had a hard time working together. Known fact...
      Not exactly an ideal condition. State patrols are better partners!

      Finally James O'Neill later got tranfered to the security services of the WTC and he died over there­. Maybe his body was never found, same for so many peoples.
      Based on 2 docu I seen, he was quite experienced and serious.
      I mean, no bargain with this guy...

      NB: I don't remember which documentary it was.
      There are so many but I'm pretty sure that he died as 1 of the WTC crashed.


  55. It's so cute to actually see people so misinformed they think they have a chance of defending the credibility of this poorly made propaganda piece.

    Sad sad times for the uneducated.

    Hilariously funny times for the cynical minded though :D

    1. Thanking for supporting the Miley Cyrus theory

  56. It is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that 9/11 was a DEMOLITION. If you connect the dots you will come to the conclusion that Bush/Cheney were the criminals leading the terrorists, who were all American. The plane "thing" was only a slight of hand parlor trick like One Card Monty. 9/11 marked "full steam ahead" to bring down America to its knees, and I believe govt/fed/banksters are winning this war against Americans, although in the long run they will lose too - if we go down they go down.

    We must rise up now to restore America. These cancer spreading criminals in the White House have been debasing our economic, education, and health system in America for years. It is NOW time to take back our country.
    Occupy Wall Street is a good start. Occupy the Fed is better. Occupy the White House is best as far as I'm concerned, because Obama regime is at the helm of this crisis and a traitor to the United States. Impeach Obama!

    Ron Paul is the best Republican candidate to take on Obama. He is truly a man for the People. He speaks of the merits of the U.S. Constitution at every turn. Spread the word. Ron Paul in 2012, the only candidate that stands by the Constitution 100%.

    Once Ron Paul is President and the country is up and running again within six months I would think, we can re-investigate 9/11 and get Bush/Cheney and their entire cabinet and hang 'em all at the same time.

  57. About the demolitions:

    They try to use the logic in this documentary that since it's so hard to get in and do demolitions that they couldn't understand how that would be plausible.

    However, weeks before 9/11 there was a documented security check in the building, when a team was "looking for bombs"

    And, the New York City Demolition Chief says it was controlled demolition, along with the evidence of molten steel on the beams of ground-zero.

    Fun film though.

    But, if one does not know the truth of 9/11 yet they may never will.

    All love, the world will indeed change.


  58. I am sooo pleased this 'doc' appears on here so I could log-in and state what I thought of it when I saw it on the telly!

    Here goes...

    Background Info: "I'm a totally emotionless individual. Facts are all that float my boat. If there's a 'World Conspiracy' then I say 'Yah Boo', but to be frank I'm not too bothered. My family will never rise to the top under any system, and I hope they'd not be the sort to want to!. So as long as we can have our country walks and do "what's right" in our own little bubble... What more can we ask for? I know this will inflame many on here... but 'Hey Ho'!!

    So what about this 'doc'?: I was utterly incredulous as to the inept, low-quality, attempt to de-bunk 9/11 'Truthers'. No mention of WTC7 says it all. I've never doubted a plane may have hit 'The Big P'; I've never doubted people made calls from 'how-ever-many-feet-high', I've never doubted people could have got through inland security.

    The 'Biggies' for me that were totally ignored in this debacle of a 'show' are: That steel skyscrapers don't collapse; The proven multiple explosions; WTC7's collapse; The ridiculous notion that a passport of one of the stoog...err...'hijackers' survived and was found; The seismic evidence regarding 'Oklahoma'; The proven FBI involvement in the earlier WTC bomb attack; etc. etc. I really can't be bothered to go on!!

    At least in the European Dark Ages the 'ruling class' did what they liked and the masses just carried on in ignorant enslavement!! Why don't we just say to our 'Western Governments', (I use the term loosely, as we're as far from a democracy as you can get!), "Just get on with it and forget the charade"?

    We're doped up to the eyeballs on Asparteme and 'dumb culture' anyway... So let's all just chill!!!!

    1. You are SO right on, W D !!!

      The poorest arguments, ever. No one in this doc with any real credibility, or substance.

      No one really asks real questions.

      If I didn't already strongly tend to believe in the "Conspiracy", (and I've NEVER been one for Conspiracy Theories!), this idiotic documentary would have made me topple over the edge.

      If I didn't know better, I would have the distinct feeling the whole thing was paid by George's Gang Advisery Committee.

      Thank you, W D.

      Let's keep an eye open, and the other one looking.

      Francine Dozois, Montreal

  59. google mcnamara admits gulf of tonkin false flag and you can watch him say it

  60. This is propaganda. The features that reveal the use of explosives are, among others: speed and symmetry in the destruction of World Trade Ctr 1,2 & 7, the explosiveness of 1 & 2 which blasted apart the entire buildings and their core structures, blasting them laterally for hundreds of feet in every direction creating 1200' debris fields and massive pyroclastic clouds, pulverized most of the concrete in the Towers, and left 1100 missing bodies,,- all in about 12-13 seconds.
    Fires burned for 100 days w with temperatures recorded by the ASSE as high as 2800f underground in the sub-basements of the Towers and despite continuous efforts to put them out, neither water nor special fire suppressants could extinguish them for over 3 months, molten metal, explosions, sham investigations which ignored evidence, the rapid disposal of most of the structural steel, the FEMA BPAT Appendix C which documents molten structural steel, the iron micro-spheres, and so on.. are all indicators of powerful additional energy sources and a cover-up by investigators which did not even test for explosive residues.

    1. You are propaganda. Everyone knows that Miley Cyrus was behind 9/11.

    2. But she's getting to be of an age where she erects things, not crashes them down.

    3. You are totally correct, and I have watch a few debunking TV shows, and the examples they do like weaken steel in a completely uncontrolled enviroment don't even come close to proving that theory right. I have also listened to pilots say that there is a huge difference in flying and navigating with jetliners compared to a little aviation plane.

  61. The responsibility lay totally with the government of the day.

  62. Anyone here ever get access to the site itself for some serious investigating? I rest my case!

  63. I think this doc makes the mistake of belittling truthers intelligence. They are not dumb people. they have theories that they can't test. and a different source of trusted authority. But we can see the amateur pilot theory fail, as a first timer lands a plane. The demolition expert makes perfect sense, as the thrumite theory fall flat on it's face.

    You can't really call yourselves "truthers" if you actively ignore evidence that leads to the truth. It is not easy to believe that couple of guys with box cutters and bearly passed flying school can kill thousand of people and change US politics forever. This is hard to believe.

    But it is harder to believe US government hire a secret demolition crew of 100 people, work for 100 hours to blow up two of the most expensive and iconic building in US. And Hired the best sound engineer in the world to place fake phonecalls to families held in live conversation. Fired a ballistic missile into their own building killing their own workers.

    Wars are not hard to start. First world war started with one assassination. The Vietnam war started with one sunk battleship. The government would not have to work so hard to start a war. One plane into one WT and does not bring down the building would easily start a war. It does not take 4 planes and 3 key iconic building to start a war.

    If I was Bush and I wanted to start a war with Iraq. I can set one (maybe two) bomb(s) off and destroy a building in a military base (it does not even have to be on US soil). Trace it back to Iraq and to war we go. This is cheap, and simple. The people are easy to control. and we save about 3000 lives and couple hundred billion dollar in budget planning this much simpler operation and the clean up.

    1. vietnam was a false flag admitted by secretary of war at the time,Robert Mcnamara in a documentary its on you tube,punch in robert mcnamara false flag

    2. this just in...the secretary of war at the time of the vietnam war admitted in a documentary that the gulf of tonkin incident never was a false flag, he says it with his own mouth dont know what youre saying im sorry to break the news...911 inside job all the way

  64. Not a good documentary for either extreme of the 9/11 debate.

    The "truthers" are just a bunch of young people, who would never be chosen to represent their cause solely. One of which, is either very weak minded, that he changes his opinion very quickly and easily, or just another reality show plant.

    The patronising comedian, who seems unable to realise that his own views are extremist, states that his subjects, "...have an end goal, and then they fit their silly jigsaw to make it fit." This sums up the goal of the program = make the conspirators look inept so the audience thinks questioning the official story is silly.

    The sheep will believe it, but viewers seeking intelligent debate, will cringe at both the comedian, and the subjects, for assuming their meaningless reality show squabbles have any bearing on a search for truth.

    1. Thats because all of them are wrong. Miley Cyrus was responsible for 9/11. She was only person capable of planting Thermite Bombs at the WTC towers and building 7. Just look at the evidence.

  65. one of the worst programmes ive seen, when i saw there was a programme on with a title suggesting an honest look at the events i should have known there was a greater force behind it! this is the type of misinformed trash that we see in the mainstream media...the scary part is the lemmings swallow it!

    1. This documentary is terrible, during the entire show they never even mention Miley Cyrus.

    2. Not at all! It was a "Kinglon", close friend of Dr. Spock.
      And any events, he has his US civil servant ID card.
      He can not and wil not be charge of any wrong doing!


  66. this is like watching a reality show , it is never real, this sucks ! i am a truther but this makes truthers look ridiculous!! The members should be embarrassed to call themsleves truthers....their acting sucks , so does the hosts, this reminds me of the way some fiction books are formatted , you got your friendships, your dramas, blablabbla..

    bhaaaa lego blocks and water balloons and flour and pebbles against all the amazing evidence out there. What a bad excuse for an "eye-candied" tv show.

  67. the wtc 7 is irrefutable proof that airplanes are not responsible for the collapse. The building is evacuated and demolished with explosives (along with documents) and it is not a job that could have been done in 5 hours...

  68. this proved nothing too many questions un answered its fake

  69. did you notice he said an independent commission investigated it,but failed to mention that 4 of them complained about being denied access to certain evidence and it was a sham.once again an example of someone either not doing his research or being brainwashed by the corporate media into buying the story it still does not prove it was not an inside job.also no metal detectors,did not say whether they were not operating them in the airports where the hi-jackers took off. what a waste of time. im very suspicious about this person.dodgy irish accent

  70. 1st time I see this one. For the least, it is a real documentary that doesn't suggest the producer opinion. Refreshing.
    To me, it just can't be a straight forward conspiracy as too many peoples take for granted. Facing the facts afterward is something else.

    Bottom line, many lost their lifes in there.
    There is no hard proof left. All in smoke or shipped to China.

    As seen in "ThePowerOfNightmares" (Part 2 or 3 if I remember well), the allies (Including the USA) should have taken action against the Afgani taliban regime as soon as they proclaimed war against the occidental world.
    The talibans done that on live tapes in front of journalists.
    More over, with the USA embassy bombing that could have been pointed at, that was enough for action. And Boing Ladda was standing right beside the taliban leaders when they made that declaration.

    Understandingly, Afghanistan was and still is quite a bit of a small country in many considerations, that may not deserved much attention.
    What the world would think of a severe allied retaliation, considering the USA involvement in foreign countries since the md-50's?
    I, just like many others would have done same mistake as well.
    -Wouldn't want to be branded as a bully once more.
    -But already, Boing Ladder had bombed the USA embassy at the time the taliban leaders made their "War to the Occident" declaration.
    -Comes a time where one wonder: -What's to do?

    Seems like it was a dillema. Or was there any reason why the USA Gov. didn't request his extradition? Boing had the money to defend himself?

    The core of the whole problem in this is that every Al Queada cells are sort of autonomous. Boing Lada may well have learn 'bout the 911 like anybody else; -When it happened on some remote TV.
    We later learned that some Sheik cabled some money to these guys.

    The only conclusion is that there was quite a few casualities on the USA side and whole lot on the other sides within the wars that followed.
    The rest is basic opportunism, the nature of all human beings.

    Keep away from big cities.


  71. @to all,

    The point is, not to get too much emotional.

    I was in situations when I had to delete 200-300 comments from a thread. Conversation going off the trail rapidly.

    Also I had to close the comments section on some of the documentaries in the past.

    When sensitive questions arise (9/11, Holocaust, Srebrenica, etc.) the flame war is inevitable. Simply some topics are way too sensitive for some people.

    TDF endured many storms, flame wars, awkward situations, etc. and is still here. In fact it is in prime condition.

    So I'll put a prominent link on every thread to the commenting policy.

    1. Point Taken.. I'm going to stay Low key from this point on... I don't like alot of confrontations... if there is a debate with KnowledgeIzpower she is going to have 3 Rebuttals 3 strikes and I'm out lol and then I'm moving on to keep the peace :)

    2. If there are more than two people there will always be politics and confrontations. I don't think that Vlatko wants you to stay low key and and be a wallflower. And am sure he does not want you to move on. Just be like me, always a good guy (LOL)

    3. In my view the best way to approach a fight is with a mirror.

    4. @ Achems Lol yeah...But if I may say you are One Tough Good Guy lol thats what i like :)

    5. @Az okay i'll keep your advice in mind lol...I just don't like alot of negative energy and fussing and fighting it gets to my nerves I grew up around alot of that for real.. I like to be positive its a learning process with me you know...I admit if someone says something to me i will defend myself you know... I'm still working on that turn the other other cheek lol but its hard...Thats what I like about you Az you are like this fairy godmother that sprinkles her good fairy dust and brightens the day with poems and stuff lol...

    6. Good call re: linking commenting policy, won't end the flame wars but at least it'll be there to point out when things begin to ramp up.
      On that note, on to the next documentary.

  72. can someone explain how an 'inside job' would work?

  73. The only thing more dangerous then a self-serving government is a group of ignorant citizens willing to empower them.

  74. Well, this BBC creation (government funded) has made it's case. Case closed. 9/11 was not an inside job after all, it WAS all real! That Comedian really knows his physics, must have a degree in it, whatever....

    "Never Forget!" Shriek the flag-wavers and cheerleaders of empire, the mindless repetition, the fear to question or think too deeply, because “9/11 changed everything!” Hurray for Charlie Veitch the 911 Truther coming to his senses, after he visited the Pentagon and all.

    Switch the channel, click! Boring doc anyway and...

    Enter David Letterman: "First, we would like to say that 9/11 was a horrible event and really isn’t a joking matter. That being said, there are a few jokes... what do you think Paul? Is it too soon to laugh?

    Top 10 Good Things About The WTC Attack:
    10. There are now 18 fewer Arab taxi drivers terrorizing the streets.
    9. Flight training schools proved that they are expensive but worth it.
    8. People are learning how to spell “Afghanistan” correctly.
    7. Plenty of parking available at airports now.
    6. Jerry Springer Show was off the air for a whole week.
    5. Sales for U.S. flags are way up.
    4. Several new job openings now at NYPD and NYFD.
    3. Much lower electric bills for Manhattan.
    2. Home videos of the WTC attack more spectacular than Arnold Schwarzenegger’s last 5 movies.

    Drum roll...

    And the number one 10 Good Things About The WTC Attack…
    1. Some great new unobstructed views of Manhattan!!!

    WAIT, TV SCREEN TWITCHES AND CHANGES... IT'S A MAN IN A WHITE ANONYMOUS MASK FILLING THE TV AIRWAVES: "Propaganda, into Theology, into unquestioning Dogma about the official fable of 911. No questions asked, no effective movement against the wars, no real interest at all in grasping the long range consequences of the actions of your government. Nothing, really, beyond the throwaway line, “How much will it cost so we can feel safe again..?” The answer is everything.... so go back to sleep America, cosy up to that big ole' flat screen TV and watch late night with Dave letterman to tuck you in to bed at night. Close your lying eyes to the truth right in front of your face."

    Hey Pysmythe, your good for something, you inspired me to post this. Note on creation of the post: Came from or inspired by a movie, four articles I read, and one pathetic online 911 jokes site. I rewrote most, paraphrased some, appropriated the jokes outright.

  75. I find this doc bullshit, dont want to offend anyone, but it reminds more about reality show were goal is clear- will anyone change his mind at the end or not. And the manner of speech mew mew mew... and some specific replics like- will they get a portion of reality?... (as he is sure right), realise that it was a real sufering in here...(like u should feel guilty for something).

  76. Have you guys checked out " the man that new". Its a recent Pbs documentary about John O'Neill. It shows that the great evil of the bush admin. was that they didnt plan 911 but completely ignored the overwelming evidence of an impending attack. And yes they should be held responsible for that and all their other major f--k ups.

    But I think what depresses me the most about the 9/11 conspiracys, is that so many good natured, intellegent people spend so much time on them when there are so many other truly dangerous actions being commited by our world leaders that we have ample evidence of.

    Please spend your time on things that will truely make a change.

    Good luck.

    And God speed.

    1. You make a good point.

  77. if every one who thinks it might have been an inside job put a dollar in a pot, we would have enought money to buy an island, buy the blue prints to and build the world trace center as it was, AND fly remote controlled jumbo jets into them, juuuust to see if they would crumble the way they did.

    i do believe there were satelites back in 2001 though. (unlike she says at 43:52)

  78. On the morning of September 11, 2001, 19 men armed with boxcutters directed by a man on dialysis in a cave fortress halfway around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop directed the most sophisticated penetration of the most heavily-defended airspace in the world, overpowering the passengers and the military combat-trained pilots on 4 commercial aircraft before flying those planes wildly off course for over an hour without being molested by a single fighter interceptor.

    These 19 hijackers, devout religious fundamentalists who liked to drink alcohol, snort cocaine, and live with pink-haired strippers, managed to knock down 3 buildings with 2 planes in New York, while in Washington a pilot who couldn’t handle a single engine Cessna was able to fly a 757 in an 8,000 foot descending 270 degree corskscrew turn to come exactly level with the ground, hitting the Pentagon in the budget analyst office where DoD staffers were working on the mystery of the 2.3 trillion dollars that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had announced “missing” from the Pentagon’s coffers in a press conference the day before, on September 10, 2001.

    Luckily, the news anchors knew who did it within minutes, the pundits knew within hours, the Administration knew within the day, and the evidence literally fell into the FBI’s lap. But for some reason a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists demanded an investigation into the greatest attack on American soil in history.

    The investigation was delayed, underfunded, set up to fail, a conflict of interest and a cover up from start to finish. It was based on testimony extracted through torture, the records of which were destroyed. It failed to mention the existence of WTC7, Able Danger, Ptech, Sibel Edmonds, OBL and the CIA, and the drills of hijacked aircraft being flown into buildings that were being simulated at the precise same time that those events were actually happening. It was lied to by the Pentagon, the CIA, the Bush Administration and as for Bush and Cheney…well, no one knows what they told it because they testified in secret, off the record, not under oath and behind closed doors. It didn’t bother to look at who funded the attacks because that question is of “little practical significance“. Still, the 9/11 Commission did brilliantly, answering all of the questions the public had (except most of the victims’ family members’ questions) and pinned blame on all the people responsible (although no one so much as lost their job), determining the attacks were “a failure of imagination” because “I don’t think anyone could envision flying airplanes into buildings ” except the Pentagon and FEMA and NORAD and the NRO.

    This is the story of 9/11, brought to you by the media which told you the hard truths about JFK and incubator babies and mobile production facilities and the rescue of Jessica Lynch.

    If you have any questions about this story…you are a bats***, paranoid, tinfoil, dog-abusing baby-hater and will be reviled by everyone. If you love your country and/or freedom, happiness, rainbows, rock and roll, puppy dogs, apple pie and your grandma, you will never ever express doubts about any part of this story to anyone. Ever.

    This has been a public service announcement by: the Friends of the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, SEC, MSM, White House, NIST, and the 9/11 Commission. Because Ignorance is Strength.


    1. Hahaha, probably the best summary of "conspiracy theory" regarding 9/11 I've ever read.

    2. Oh my word! If I were wearing a hat right now, I would certainly take it off to you.


    3. Way to go! if that does not get the sheeple to sit up and take notice, well then, that is what they are, "SHEEPLE"!

    4. There are two ways to look at this.
      Either the American people do nothing and the LIES remain for ever to be written in history books as facts or they DEMAND the truth and their courage shine to the world now.

    5. I have copied this brilliant piece and will be sending it out to my friends. People need to hear exactly what we are expected to believe about this catastrophe. Put in the way that you have done, is more than thought provoking.

    6. Very Very well put. That pretty much sums it up.

    7. Credit should go to James Corbett for this as it is from a short video he put out recently ... and yes it is quite humorous :)

    8. Yeah I got the impression it was a paraphrase of some sort, most people with a measure of literary ability don't spend their time vindicating their beliefs on anonymous comment threads.
      I simply thought it was a fairly amusing and succinct (if not entirely accurate) synopsis of the truthers perspective, hence my comment, and brazen click of the "like" icon.

      Your vitriol is duly noted however. Clearly this is a sore point for you and I assume you feel you have been personally attacked in relation to this topic. Hence the degree of antagonism present in every comment you've made on this thread.

      For the record, "what we're expected to believe" is the official story.

    9. I just put the post up over Coffee that morning.

    10. @Pysmythe

      I agree with you entirely that there have been many instances of the misappropriation of information by conspiracy theorists regarding events leading up to, during and following 9/11.
      Admittedly however I also know the same can be said of the various agencies and individuals who maintain the official version of events, as you say sometimes dishonestly or without being aware.
      Without actually going THERE, in terms of detailing the various inconsistencies and anomalies that have yet to be debunked (adequately or at all), I don't dispute for a moment that large tracts of 9/11 CT theory have been sufficiently "put to bed", rightly or wrongly to the extent that I no longer see enough justification to consider them valid, as I have spent time not only familiarising myself with the official story, but also with individual rebuttals of many of the CT theories themselves (I do not claim however to be an expert on the subject in anyway at all).
      What I believe is of fundamental importance is the ability to a, maintain as much objectivity as I can and b, refrain from criticising the individuals who disagree with my view, and rather focus my critiques on why they disagree. All too often people cannot distinguish their emotional beliefs from their own logic and as such any accusation of willful ignorance, deceit, manipulation of information, lack of education, weak or close mindedness, belittlement and provocation fall equally on both sides.
      This is what transforms discussion to argument, opinion to dogma and belief to zealotry and is the real enemy of truth. I'd be an enormous hypocrite if I said I was above it; I do my best however to remain aware, as you said people do see what they want to see, it's when I can admit I see what I don't want to that I know at least, I approach a subject with my "right" mind.

      Ok, stepping down from pulpit now...

    11. Sometimes it's just better to admit that oneself got caught in a fishy net. The article was great, it was super that you found it and copied it here. Then people started giving you credit and applauses and you did not say a word. You were on the net several times, and i have to suspect, rolling in ego juice. Your personal note is an edit you added after Randy's comment, and i think even that keeps changing in order to save your image.
      It's not like it cancels the many smart comments you have made in the past but attacking Pysmythe shows that you are not willing to say: i was wrong.
      Not a very good thing while discussing the subject of 9/11.
      I for myself take my like off...just for that for the article i went and read the real one. Still great in my mind!
      I also noticed that you gave a thumbs up to everyone who commented on this bit but not to Randy who deserve it in my mind.
      We all get caught in fishy net at one time, it is a great opportunity to be humble.

    12. I will go along with you on that AZ. I myself was duped in by his plagiarizing of someone else"s work.

      I know that @Pysmythe, has a different perspective than I on 9/11 but I personally do not give him any gears on that.

    13. oh my god, just through it up over coffee in the morning because I liked it. Cut it down, too long in original transcript form, just put it up. No dripping in ego juice. Really surprised to take a look and see such a massive "like " response.

      Thats it in a nut shell. Randy pointed it out, and that Pysmythe went into a fit. I added the accreditation. Actually sent James Corbett an email showing a screen capture.

      Jesus, what a tempest in a tea cup. I'm sorry I am finding this all quite amusing.

      All right, like your posts. It will be interesting to see how much milage Pysmythe idiot will try to milk from this little puddle... GOTCHA YA!, give me a break lol.

    14. @Py
      let's see what doc comes out tomorrow....
      brush the dust off your was just a strong wind.
      Your numbers are growing (if that means anything). You can't have those kinds of conversation in the street, people punch each other for less than that. Here we're free, the only thing is that many are looking.

    15. I posted to you earlier, but it went up for "approval by admin". I just wanted to respond to you.

      I agree I need to be more careful. I don't want a hijacking of a thread to happen because I was sloppy with accrediting.

      Just through up the post, after editing it down, over my coffee in the morning, that sums it up. Thoughtless actually in hind sight, usually so meticulous with my references or quotes.

      Don't want to give fuel to distractions, or fuel to people who fight for 911 fairy tale validation. What a tempest in a tea cup. I'm leaving the post up, regardless.

  79. Our enemies have made the mistake that America’s enemies always make. They saw liberty and thought they saw weakness. And now, they see defeat.

    Every nation in every region now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.
    George W. Bush, (ex)President of the United States

    not sure what to make of that!

  80. Which is "theory" and which is fact?

    In the absence of a full confession, this can only be decided by a preponderance of evidence, and it would be silly to come to a conclusion on any matter without looking at all the evidence available. This is only common sense, just as it is safe to assume some degree of guilt or complicity on the part of anyone who lies about an event, or tries to hide, plant, or destroy any type of evidence.

    Conspiracy theories arise from evidence. After the government releases an explanation of a particular event, a conspiracy theory is only born because evidence exists to disprove their explanation, or at least call it into question. There's nothing insane about it, unless you define sanity as believing whatever the government tells you. In light of the fact that our government lies to us regularly, I would define believing everything they tell you as utter stupidity.

    The common perception is that someone who is labeled a "conspiracy theorist" is suffering from some type of psychological disorder, and that label is usually applied to people by our government, and our news media.

    The next thing to consider, is that the label is applied to anyone who questions our government's version of events in any matter.

    Doesn't it logically follow that the media are teaching us to assume that anyone who questions the government is insane?

    When that label is applied to a person, doesn't it become easy to dismiss everything they say without even hearing it?

    How convenient for them..

    -- Jolly Roger


    using the term conspiracy theorists to label those u disagree with is a cowardly act which places you in the category of other brainwashed "patriots" who just repeat what they hear cos it sounds cool ... u lose the debate by using news media talking points as a means to insult those u disagree with.

  81. What a sick video. Why could I not have been one of the five people....

  82. Apart from the BBC reporter who reported that it had collapsed while it was in the background, and then lost her job. Scientists, structural engineers, aviation experts... All have argued for and against, you can take your pick on which side to believe. But to me, fore-knowledge on coming events SCREAMS conspiracy.

    Personally I can't see where most of the conspiracy theorists are coming from, some even believe the first two planes that actually struck the towers weren't real. It would be far too difficult to fake. But we know of the connections between the Bush's and the Bin Laden families, so how hard is it to believe that ALL of what happened was real but sanctioned.

    Gaddafi claims Al-Qaeda was behind the uprisings in Libya, unless he stayed clued up on current conspiracy theories to exploit a possible weakness I'm inclined to at least heed that. We (I'm assuming your American) we the British and the Americans did exactly the same thing against the Russians during the cold war. We trained the Mushahadeen (however that's spelled)now that's who we're mostly fighting in Afghanistan as Al-Qaeda are mostly Saudi and find the winter too cold there. Its not too far fetched that Al-Qaeda are the wests private Arab army... Either that or westerners are insanely lucky and everything that plays out is in our favor.

  83. I am so sorry that I have to disagree with you on this one Pysmythe (I really am, you do know that :)).

    The destruction of WTC7 is what made me (from truly believing, at the very start, that the whole thing was brought up by terrorist Arabs) begin to research on the 911 issue. As many of us, I didn't know for a while that there was a third building that collapsed in that tragic event. In the beginning, I only knew about the two towers that were hit by the planes. To some extent, the collapse of these two towers made some sense to an unsuspicious mind. But when I learned of the third building, that was not hit by a plane, that collapsed in virtually the same manner as the other two which were hit by planes, the equation didn't seem to be right any more.

    My advantage in this respect is that I don't live in the States and that the information available is not biased by the notion of patriotism or affiliation with either the US or the Muslim world (quite the contrary in the case of the latter). It's just another issue with global consequences that comes from the US. It's not viewed as conspiracy or anything similar, it's just another US policy move to advance their global control, plain and simple.

    I don't mean any disrespect to your views, I want to assure you of that, it's just that we have a disagreement here. But the gravity of the known facts on this issue is so overwhelmingly on the side of what some Americans would deem a conspiracy theory.

    xx :)

  84. the other people in this doc prove why we should bash charlie veitch.. no one else seemed to change their mind because it was all one sided emotional bs with no hard data... i mean lego blocks... lmfao.. charlie fell too fast.. even the other guests were amazed by this quick change..,.. . this was a fail.. check out 911 taboo

  85. lmao... charlotte is epic... she aint buy into none of it.

  86. What about WTC 7 collapsing by admitted demolition? I hate it when folks attempt to convince those half educated. What was his motivation for this doc? So many points were not addressed.

  87. you don't need to have all the answers, to know you've been lied to. Any theory about what happened is at best a guess - because the truth has been withheld from us. The official investigation was so grudging, so reluctant - 2 years after the event, under funded, Kissinger initially put in charge, evidence destroyed & shipped away, no mention of WTC7... the only thing I can really say I know, is that we really don't know.
    I found this whole project incredibly ill conceived. And the bad energy Charlie Veitch spoke of? This guy hosting the whole show just oozed it ("I'm going to break you!"). Why should everyone else be open minded, when he is absolutely fixed & unwilling to consider anyone else's view?

  88. No amount of logic or reason will ever change the mind of a conspiracy theorist. If you present logic and reason, if you scientifically disprove their point of view, if you bring God almighty down from Heaven they will not change their minds. Intelligent people are able to change their minds, that is basically active thinking, these conspiracy theorist are not really interested in the truth, they are more interested in trying to prove their point of view.

    It is pointless to give them a platform, this is another form of mental illness.

    I could understand if there were real intelligent questions being raised, if there were not these amateurs raising questions but real professionals that have an opposing view and where able to rationally and intelligently make a case but all we see with this collection of nit-wits are emotional outburst, a dedication to chaos, in other words a bunch of sound and fiery signify nothing.

    They name call in response to someone having a different view, they demean their intelligence just because a person does not agree with them, how can that be intelligent? It is childish and they need to grow up.

    What an insult to the memory of those who had their lives taken from them,

    1. In almost the very same breath you denounce them for name calling, and then you call them childish and unintelligent..
      The point of the 9/11 Truth movement is not to propose that 'The Government Did It!', by any means.. Some people have taken that route, but some people always will....
      The point is that the story that we were fed is rubbish, plain and simple. I spent years not only disbelieving the 'truther' crap, but actively getting in the faces of people who espoused it. I thought it an insult to the memory of lives lost, and completely missing the point of a tragedy...
      Here's the problem, though. The REAL insult to those poor people is to just accept the nonsense explanation of their deaths without so much as a second guess.

    2. The people who buy the official story, are the conspiracy theorists.

      19 cave dwelling muslims, were somehow able to hijack 4 planes simultaneously... were then able to fly them, unobstructed, into buildings using expert maneuvers?!? No that is the most ridiculous conspiracy I have ever heard.

  89. I watched this just to find out what changed Charlie Veitch's mind. And I found nothing that would change the mind of an intelligent person.

    Charlie is intelligent, so, I ask, was he coerced in some way or did he not change his mind at all?

    If he did change his mind:
    1. He was convinced by the 'evidence.
    2. He was bought off.
    3. He was threatened.
    4. He was victim of some form of mind control.

    If he didn't change his mind:
    5. He was a government plant from the beginning, his "Love Police" being a front to gain him respect and followers so that when he appeared to change his mind his followers would follow suit.

    6. In a couple of days he will release a video laughing about how he fooled everyone and took part in the documentary just to wake folks up as to how easy it is to mislead folks who do not think for themselves.

    The most likely option, I think, is #5 though the one I most like is #6 as it appeals to my sense of humour.

  90. No, you really must watch this - it's a hoot!

  91. Pathetic Propaganda! Not worth your time.

  92. 1. Why didn't jets intercept the airliners since they had numerous warnings of terrorist attacks?
    2. Why did Ashcroft stop flying commercial, citing an unidentified "threat" in July 2001?
    3. Why were there no photos or videos of the Pentagon plane?
    4. Why didn't the Secret Service hustle Dubya out of the classroom?
    5. Where was George H. W. Bush at the time of the attacks?
    6. Why did passengers or crew members on three of the flights all use the term boxcutters?
    7. Where are the flight recorders?
    8. Why were the FISA warrants discontinued?
    9. How did Bush see the first plane crash on live camera?
    10. Why was security meeting scheduled for 9/11cancelled by WTC management on 9/10?
    11. How did they come up with the "culprits" so quickly?
    12. How did they find the terrorist's cars at the airports so quickly?
    13. Why did Shrub dissolve the Bin Laden Task Force?
    14. Why the strange pattern of debris from Flight 93?
    15. Why was no plane seen at the Pentagon?
    16. How extensive was the relationship between the Taliban, the ISI and the CIA?
    17. What exactly was the role of Henry Kissinger at UNOCAL?
    18. When was it decided to cancel building a pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Pakistan?
    19. When was the decision made to send the FEMA to New York?
    20. Why did FEMA spokesman Tom Kenney tell Dan Rather he was in New York on Sept. 10?
    21. Why did the FBI in 1996 close the files to investigate Osama bin Laden's relatives in Washington?
    22. Why did .Bush stop inquiries into terrorist connections of the Bin Laden family in early 2001?
    23. Who made the decision to have John O'Neill stop investigating Al-qeada accounts?
    24. Who gave the decision to give him a security job at the World Trade Center?
    25. Did John O'Neill meet anyone of the FEMA in the night of September 10th?
    26. What about media reports that hijackers bought tickets for flights scheduled after Sept. 11?
    27. Why did none of the 19 hijackers appeared on the passenger lists?
    28. Why would devout Muslims frequent bars, drink alcoholic beverages and leave their bibles?
    29. Why would the hijackers use credit cards and allow drivers licenses with photos to be zeroxed?
    30. Why did the hijackers force passengers to call relatives?
    31. How did the hijackers change the flight plan without law enforcement or the military try to stop them?
    32. Which hijacker's passport was found in the WTC rubble? Who found it and what time?
    33. How could the FBI distinguish between "regular" Muslims and hijacker Muslims on those flights?
    34. Why was there not one "innocent" Muslim on board any of these flights?
    35. Did someone go through the passenger lists looking for Muslim names and label them as hijackers?

    1. Where in the world are you getting your information, or should I say disinformation? Wow.

    2. Can you dispute even one point? No? didnt think so.

  93. tell me when to stop: dis-dis-dis-dis-dis-dis-dis-dis.....information.

  94. I wonder how they were able to get Charlie Veitch( the bearded fellow) into the USA. He's a peaceful protester and full time activist who's been labelled a terrorist by both the Canadian and UK governments. He was treated terribly in Canada by the fascist tactics at the Toronto G20(see Into the Fire and Toronto G20 Exposed on this site) and unlawfully detained at this disgusting billion dollar show of fascism there.
    More recently he was unlawfully detained for several days in the UK so he wouldn't disrupt the "wonderful" royal wedding.
    His biggest crime is he likes to use a megaphone.

    1. Now that I've watched the video I'm very surprised and disappointed in Charlie. This video is poorly made propaganda. The egg shell demonstration did prove one thing-that there were sizable chunks of easily recognizable egg shells. I'm not surprised that someone from the Pentagon so close to Bush and Cheney would tow the line. Interestingly the computer re-enactment showed the wings and engines of the plane going through the Pentagon and yet they left no entry hole where they entered

    2. Charlie Veitch is a creep or what?

  95. "I'm as sure as sure can be that the attack was ordered by osama in laden." At least the host of this "documentary" doesn't try to pretend he is unbiased. He comes right out and says that he is going to try to persuade, or even charm, the participants into changing their opinion. I'm only a little way through this movie right now, but it already looks like they are trying to use ad hominem attacks against the participants and portray them as fringe lunatics. The MSM just hopes that if they repeat the same ridiculous fairy tale enough we will believe it. They want to take attention away from the real issues for the sake of entertainment, rather than have an intelligent, unbiased dialogiue.

  96. The most uninformed people you could ever put into a group.

    None of them knew more than 1 fact. One person was convinced when he saw the falling top of the tower "crush" the bottom half. Come on. Make this documentary again with more informed people. Nobody questioned what happened to building 7. Nobody questioned the fact that the twin towers were shutdown shortly before the attacks and nobody was allowed in except employees of a company owned by bushs' brother.

    Nobody question why a couple of weeks before the attacks the rules to combat stray jets was changed to the slow procedure. Why all the pentagons anti air defenses were not switched on.

    God so many questions these people didn't ask. I think they were actors and the whole thing was just a further attempt to cover up the truth.

    Does anyone watching this really beleive that flight 93 was buried in the ground!?!?!?

    What a load of tosh

    1. Slyverstein, the guy who owned the twin tower insured the towers against terrorist attacks just few months before the attacks, especially in case a jumbo jet hits any of the towers. He never thought of doing this in the first place !!!
      He made freakin billions out of it !!!!

    2. What insurance company would pay off on a policy when the owner caused the destruction. They wouldn't even pay off a 1400 dollar claim on my car that was legit. When they were finally forced to pay, they refused to renew my policy without explanation. Yet, they quite quickly paid out billions to Silverstein. Doesn't sound like any insurance company I've dealt with. If they had believed that Silverstein had any involvement in a plot to destroy his building, he would never get a cent. Insurance companies are just as greedy as anyone else.

    3. Could there have been many deep pockets standing around the insurance halls? Goes out of one hand and comes back in the other?
      3 days is a little fishy. The top has many tricks, don't they?

    4. I think an excavation is in order. That would answer your last question.

  97. I don't think we will ever know the complete truth but it seems less and less like a conspiracy and more like the governments intelligence dropped the ball due to poor communication between agencies.

  98. wow no acountablilty at all sad your lookin a a goverment that doesnt give a rats ass for its ppl in nam and other wars and you think they care for a few in a tower and planes come do you care for a few lost pennies dropped under the sofa ...

  99. This is ridiculous, I am sorry. They couldn't find worse actors for this sad propaganda?
    At least they should put more money into this to make it belivable, if they have money to crash 747 in the buildings, then they should at least make this better. bah...
    Whats even more ridiculous is that this pathetic excuse for a documentary will be show on all tv stations time after time, again and again...
    None of those that make conspiracy more than obvious will ever see the light of day on any tv station of nato/coalition of the willing country...
    Doesn't already this proove the fact?

    1. Yet, they allow any film which advocates a conspiracy on the INTERNET. Why?

    2. Interesting, I'm far from an expert on the topic and don't have a line to tow but I do find an organisation like A&E for 911 truth (architects & engineers) compelling to lend weight to the argument there are serious questions left unanswered re: the official events. Specifically with the collapse of WTC7 and to a lesser extent the twin towers themselves (lesser in the sense that being hit by planes made the plausibility of their collapse into roughly their own foot print more substantial, whereas WTC7, according to footage was struck by debris at best ). Granted there are only approximately 1500 members to the organisation and probably hundreds of thousands of architects & engineers in the states as a whole, but I doubt many career minded professionals would want to have any kind of overt association with a "fringe" group that questioned the official events. You're probably aware of them though I'm sure.

    3. @ Kain Blake

      You are correct when you say that 1500 members to this organization is not very many considering the number of engineers and architects in the United States. The number 1500 does not reflect their area of expertise, either. An architect who can design a three bedroom bungalow is hardly an expert in structural design of the magnitude of the twin towers. I would think that if their evidence was as compelling as they claim, it would be easy to convince more professionals than only 1500.

      Why would anyone join a fringe group? I don't know. That would be a question that may be better answered by someone who has expertise in the workings of the human mind. The most unlikely people join fringe organizations all the time. I am sure that you know someone who has, inexplicably, done things that sabotaged his own career, family or financial stability. Sometimes people do strange things. I would think that for these A&E's to form an organization would be a way to validate their personal opinions. "See, I'm not crazy. There are others just like me."

    4. Indeed, without doubt a percentage of their numbers are made up of individuals whose qualified opinions bear little more weight than you or I. Conversely, a percentage would also be made up of highly educated professionals, with ample experience and knowledge in fields specific to the subject.

      I don't think the strength of their evidence (or lack thereof) is necessarily the deciding factor in the size of their organisation. I would say it relates more to what was inferred in your last paragraph- anything even vaguely related to "conspiracy theory" is so readily and easily stigmatized that it prevents many (with something to lose and not just anonymous, unqualified contributors to online forums) from becoming actively involved. Those that do cross the rubicon as you referred to, do so for their own reasons, strange as they may appear. Without doubt many of which are based on their certainty of the truth and their conviction to uphold it, and others no doubt more obtuse.

      It's an interesting topic to consider and one I do not believe can be easily dismissed, it's too easy in my opinion for well informed, intelligent people to fall into habits of casual generalisation. Those that support the concept that the official story of 9/11 does not reflect the evidence (largely or partially) are condemned with the label conspiracy theorist much the same way those that question the domestic and foreign policy of the Israeli's are at risk of being called antisemitic, or those that are critical of the validity of the war in Iraq are anti patriotic etc, I'm sure you you can think of other allegorical examples both contemporary and historic that reflect the gist of what I'm indicating. Fundamentally to question the official story is not by default an allegiance to all of the myriad 9/11 theories (just because an engineer doesn't think NIST's explanation of WTC7's collapse is legitimate does not by consequence mean he believes that later on Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and satan all took turns high fiving each other at Bohemian Grove in celebration of bringing to the NWO one step closer to realisation).

      Regardless, there's some interesting information on their site- also some very interesting information on the 911 myths site Justin Drake referred to earlier (he referred to a google search, I found a site 911myths which I assume he meant, I've discovered with some chagrin posting URL's automatically requires moderator approval so I won't write it verbatim), that definitely undermines an array of the truthers diaspora of theories. Others are not addressed however and remain pernicious to debunk.

    5. All it cost the highjackers to crash those planes was the price of the tickets and some basic (very basic) flight training. It doesn't need to be a multimillion dollar operation. Flight security was lax at that point in time, the pilots had already done the hard part (taxiing and take-off), all that was needed was a bit of fanaticism and a willingness to die for a belief. The only mystery about 911 is why people still believe these nonsense conspiracy theories. I would highly recommend googling "911 myths website". You know how all of those conspiracy theories say "Don't believe us, do the research." ? Well, do the research my friend. Look at some information other than what conspiracy theorists put together in their videos.

    6. He will do the research....but not on any site that does not validate his ideas. If he does go to those sites, it is only to find fault with their evidence or call them all liars. I have a friend who will not read, watch or discuss anything that does not support a conspiracy surrounding 9/11. He will watch, read or discuss anything that supports his conspiracy theory. He calls this objective research. He calls me a brainwashed sheep even though I have accessed both sides of the question, weighed all the information and just don't see the evidence for their conspiracy. I wanted to be objective because if the American government did commit this crime, I would want to know. Upon very close inspection I could not see any American duplicity.

    7. I am unable to find any concincing evidence to support the official story.

    8. Hehe, thank you! You just prooved 2 things.. Or that u get payed by usa goverment.... or that u have very little between your ears. You know.... not everyone has 120IQ or less althou even people with less then 100 I think could see what the truth is.
      Sorry but DID YOU EVER HEAR ABOUT BUILDING 7?? I mean... If you still can't see difference between 9-11 controled demolition and controled demolition - YOU NEVER WILL SEE IT!! Coz there is NONE!!
      Explain the building 7 then?? Its like saying... It fell down because cleaner dropped his burning cigarette on the floor and the flames damaged its structural steal!! Why were the cops around building 7 saying before it fell... "they are thinking about pullin' it down!"
      Because of a hunch???
      Choose... or ur IQ is sub zero... or u are getting money to debunk thinking people on the internet!!!!

    9. Well said!

      ...and I recall watching the live BBC report saying that WTC7 had collapsed due to 'structural damage and fire weakening the supports'... whilst it was still standing!!

      After it 'actually' collapsed, 20mins later whilst I was actually on the phone to a N.Y. friend, we both realised something was "A Bit Jolly Well Iffy" !!

  100. Charlie Veitch sucks