Official 9/11 debate!

This has been a major topic since September 11th, 2001. There has been so many news stories, videos from youtube, and other stuff as well as too why it all happen. Maybe it was bin laden, or maybe Bush really did set the entire thing up. I want too hear your opinions about 9/11 and how you think it all unfolded.

Firstly, I want too start off with a actual youtube video I watched a couple months ago.


If you watch the video, you notice that the plane that it was showing around 2:15 had some kind of strange thing on the bottom side. Also, at the beginning of the first video with the first plane, same thing. Boeing even seemed too try and hide the fact that something was there. Too me, it still looked like a missile of something of the kind. It's hard too think that there has too be some type of connection between that plane, and Bush not really reacting very much too the actual event itself.

Big huge buildings like those just don't come down. If you ever google other buildings around the world in decades past, it's nearly impossible. The only thing that can bring something that large down has too be a bomb of some kind. Watch as well how the actual buildings fall. Almost completely 100% vertically down.

snoopy500 said:

Firstly, I want too start off with a actual youtube video I watched a couple months ago.

If you watch the video, you notice that the plane that it was showing around 2:15 had some kind of strange thing on the bottom side. Also, at the beginning of the first video with the first plane, same thing. Boeing even seemed too try and hide the fact that something was there. Too me, it still looked like a missile of something of the kind. It's hard too think that there has too be some type of connection between that plane, and Bush not really reacting very much too the actual event itself.

Big huge buildings like those just don't come down. If you ever google other buildings around the world in decades past, it's nearly impossible. The only thing that can bring something that large down has too be a bomb of some kind. Watch as well how the actual buildings fall. Almost completely 100% vertically down.

Click to expand...

The fact that the videos are blurry and incredibly few is a type of conspiracy in itself, in my opinion.

I was at work in NYC Midtown Manhattan on that day. IT, 8-4 shift.
After the FOX News showed the nose of the plane coming out the other side of the building our VP told us to change the TV stations in the conference rooms to CNN.

A regular plane simply cannot penetrate such a building with wings and all and make a perfect cookie cutter hole. Engines might be able to bust through, but not the wings.
It had to be helped by either some explosives tech under the plane or inside the building ... and the plane had to be guided remotely to hit the precise spot.

Edial said:

The fact that the videos are blurry and incredibly few is a type of conspiracy in itself, in my opinion.

I was at work in NYC Midtown Manhattan on that day. IT, 8-4 shift.
After the FOX News showed the nose of the plane coming out the other side of the building our VP told us to change the TV stations in the conference rooms to CNN.

A regular plane simply cannot penetrate such a building with wings and all and make a perfect cookie cutter hole. Engines might be able to bust through, but not the wings.
It had to be helped by either some explosives tech under the plane or inside the building ... and the plane had to be guided remotely to hit the precise spot.

Click to expand...

Take a look at this building collapsing. Notice how it's literally falling on a angle.

Listen too the immediate impact this has on the WTC. It sound's like there is a immediate sound of something blowing up or exploding.

snoopy500 said:

Take a look at this building collapsing. Notice how it's literally falling on a angle.

Listen too the immediate impact this has on the WTC. It sound's like there is a immediate sound of something blowing up or exploding.

Click to expand...

There had to be a reason why these building were brought down.
Clearly there was no pancake effect, and the fire cannot do it.

To bring these down there had to be at least two things working at the same time -
- demolish the floors with explosives
- pulverize the building by using energy (all this ash and practically no debris)

Man Snoops beat me to it was going to start a thread on this issue here

As far as it's a conspiracy I have to say I don't know but if it ever turned out to be one it wouldn't shock me the bit least.

Edial said:

There had to be a reason why these building were brought down.
Clearly there was no pancake effect, and the fire cannot do it.

To bring these down there had to be at least two things working at the same time -
- demolish the floors with explosives
- pulverize the building by using energy (all this ash and practically no debris)

Click to expand...

There was a another video I was watching stating that someone may have been actually caught with a bus or van that was full of explosives. But if someone from the inside really did set this up (by inside were going white house here only) this would have taken quite a lot of planning and such. Did bush possibly try and do this too gain attention of other world leaders?

James Is Back said:

Man Snoops beat me to it was going to start a thread on this issue here

As far as it's a conspiracy I have to say I don't know but if it ever turned out to be one it wouldn't shock me the bit least.

Click to expand...

try looking at it from this point of view, before 9/11, I don't think bin laden was actually heard of that much back then. I can't see someone with his stature planning this on his own with his own men. I will go out on a limb too say it was probably impossible. There has too be some hidden story connecting Bin Laden and Bush. There was even a video of when Bush was sitting next too his wife he almost said something along the lines of "9/11 was se.." and his wife started at him hard and he stopped.

snoopy500 said:

There was a another video I was watching stating that someone may have been actually caught with a bus or van that was full of explosives. But if someone from the inside really did set this up (by inside were going white house here only) this would have taken quite a lot of planning and such. Did bush possibly try and do this too gain attention of other world leaders?

Click to expand...

It is impossible for Bush to instigate anything like that.
The only thing he really did (in my opinion) is to cover up what really happened and provide support to what he was told will happen.
Many key people knew this would happen. And some even made a lot of money on stock market.

Time to put on the tin foil hat.

There is conspiracy and there is conspiracy. Was there a conspiracy on 9/11, yes, it involved the the 19 terrorists, and those who backed them, ie. bin-laden.

The argument that planes could not bring the towers, is an argument from incredulity. The fact is two large passenger planes loaded with fuel hit the towers, this caused a chain reaction that lead to the towers falling.

Were there explosives? Extremely unlikely, since it would have taken months to prepare said explosives, including tearing Down walls within the towers, laying miles of fuses etc, without anybody noticing in 2 of the busiest buildings in the world. Simply if you are going to hit the towers with planes, there is no need to do this.

Why did the towers fall straight down? One simple explanation is that is how they were designed. The structure of the building was designed to bear it's weight straight down, so that when the building went, it fell down, not horizontally.


Enough for now.

Goonie said:

Why did the towers fall straight down? One simple explanation is that is how they were designed. The structure of the building was designed to bear it's weight straight down, so that when the building went, it fell down, not horizontally.


Enough for now.

Click to expand...

Well, it does look like the fall of a building set with demolition explosives. But I suppose an architect could design the building to fall straight down in case of a terror attack . . . so it would not topple over on other buildings.

People in shock can act very casual, in catastrophic situations; so President Bush's reaction and behavior could have been some sort of psychological inappropriateness, due to him being stunned . . . I suppose. It was reported that he said he did not want to panic the children, by leaving a reading session.

Condoleezza Rice said the intel community was not functioning well for sharing information; in fact, she said, they had enough pieces of info to expose the 9/11 plans, but they did not share the pieces of the puzzle they had, so they could see the picture.

Also, as they approached the time of 9/11, what were people busy with? Wasn't there that sex scandal thing, about Bill Clinton? It seems a lot of resources were going to dealing with that > the media was not doing a major exposure of how intel was such a dysfunctional family. I suppose, that there were both Democrats and Republicans who would have been responsible, during President Clinton's time of office, for overseeing intel. But neither the Republicans nor the Democrats were taking care of how intel had become such a national security threat.

We ourselves, can be our main danger, by letting our attention get us away from dealing with what we need to take care of.

But where did much attention go? To a sex scandal. And the media gets money from advertising. So, "of course", what might they show in order to get the public's attention to advertising? Not months of investigative reporting which could have put the spotlight on intel's problems. Some number of Americans would prefer to watch a sex scandal; so this would get the advertising money. And so, I can see, because it is the character of some number of Americans to want to watch a sex scandal thing, and not watch months of reporting on an intel investigation . . .

the character of money seeking people and seekers of sensationalism helped cause the situation which helped to cover up Al Qaeda's preparation which Condoleezza said had been going on for ten years before the 9/11 attack.

So, because of the character of sinners being able to have their attention decoyed away from what they need to be attentive to . . . this is what can happen.

We need to make sure, then, that we do not let conspiracy ideas keep our attention away from how we ourselves need correction and need to take care of what God has for us to be concerned about.

Even so . . . Satan's kingdom, I am sure, has conspiracies. So, what else is new? They tried to arrange to kill Jesus > that was a conspiracy. But we in Jesus need to obey how our Father rules us according to all He knows in true, including what He knows we can do for good, with Him

The official story has way too many holes to be legit. There is so much research out there today that points to the fact that the world is being run by an elite group who are attempting to create a "New World Order" and September 11th was one of the big steps in that direction. It resulted in the Patriot Act and it got the American people to support a Middle Eastern war. The truth is that the Federal Reserve is the true owners of the U.S. Ever since Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act we have been financed and indebted to International bankers (the shareholders of the Fed) who are truly calling the shots. They own the media, the banks, the politicians, etc. They finance both sides of every war and manipulate countries and pull political strings. Just look at the occult symbols on the one dollar bill. There is a reason for the pyramid and the all-seeing eye to be printed on each dollar bill. There is no left vs. right, Republican vs. Democrat, etc. They are all part of the same establishment. The American people are just pawns in the game. This used to sound absolutely unbelievable to me but as I follow the research I find that it is undeniably the truth. It also makes Biblical sense as well as the Book of Revelation describes a one world government being in existence when the Anti-Christ is revealed. Also, look up Operation Northwoods and you will see that the US had plans to stage a similar false flag to get the US involved in a war with Cuba.
Wt

Goonie said:

Time to put on the tin foil hat.

There is conspiracy and there is conspiracy. Was there a conspiracy on 9/11, yes, it involved the the 19 terrorists, and those who backed them, ie. bin-laden.

The argument that planes could not bring the towers, is an argument from incredulity. The fact is two large passenger planes loaded with fuel hit the towers, this caused a chain reaction that lead to the towers falling.

Were there explosives? Extremely unlikely, since it would have taken months to prepare said explosives, including tearing Down walls within the towers, laying miles of fuses etc, without anybody noticing in 2 of the busiest buildings in the world. Simply if you are going to hit the towers with planes, there is no need to do this.

Why did the towers fall straight down? One simple explanation is that is how they were designed. The structure of the building was designed to bear it's weight straight down, so that when the building went, it fell down, not horizontally.


Enough for now.

Click to expand...

OK, but what you just said is repeated exactly what the general public is told while saying there indeed are conspiracies in the world.
Very short video addressing your every point.
It is called 911 for Dummies. (The name is not directed at you as an insult, you understand)

Edial said:

It is impossible for Bush to instigate anything like that.
The only thing he really did (in my opinion) is to cover up what really happened and provide support to what he was told will happen.
Many key people knew this would happen. And some even made a lot of money on stock market.

Click to expand...

Do you or anyone else know who would have possibly cashed out? quite curious

com7fy8 said:

Well, it does look like the fall of a building set with demolition explosives. But I suppose an architect could design the building to fall straight down in case of a terror attack . . . so it would not topple over on other buildings.

Click to expand...

Now, this is actually a interesting point. Let's say that maybe they did design them just for that purpose, nobody could have predicted this would happen except once again the inside people. I will add in that, we do know there was a ton of steel and such inside those buildings, but as well when the planes did hit, it would have of course weakened the in infrastructure. But I can't see just that being enough too make a nearly 100 story building fall. Something within the building had too set off[

But the buildings turned to dust.
I was in NYC on that day and traveled on foot together with many New Yorkers to leave Manhattan.
There was an INCREDIBLE amount of fine dust.
75% of the buildings turned to dust ... magically.
Cars across the street were seared.

When there is a regular demolition there is no such an amount of dust and plenty of debris.

Building 7 which was 47 stories had only a couple of stories of debris. Rest is dust.
110 story Twins had very little debris. Rest is dust.

Was there also other types of explosions? Of course, there is always a back up plan. And they did find termite. But that is secondary.

Nuclear demolition is how the skyscrapers are taken down.

It has to be an underground nuclear demolition to generate so much energy ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Smallman12q/Nuclear_Demolition

Edial said:

But the buildings turned to dust.
I was in NYC on that day and traveled on foot together with many New Yorkers to leave Manhattan.
There was an INCREDIBLE amount of fine dust.
75% of the buildings turned to dust ... magically.
Cars across the street were seared.

When there is a regular demolition there is no such an amount of dust and plenty of debris.

Building 7 which was 47 stories had only a couple of stories of debris. Rest is dust.
110 story Twins had very little debris. Rest is dust.

Was there also other types of explosions? Of course, there is always a back up plan. And they did find termite. But that is secondary.

Nuclear demolition is how the skyscrapers are taken down.

It has to be an underground nuclear demolition to generate so much energy ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Smallman12q/Nuclear_Demolition

Click to expand...

Pass me the geiger counter! Sorry but this theory is a bit wacky, any such event would likely collapse far more than just the towers, any such conspirators could not count on such a limited impact. And once again the question rears its head which is why go to this absurd amount of trouble, when 2 large fuel packed planes are going to hit?

Goonie said:

Pass me the geiger counter! Sorry but this theory is a bit wacky, any such event would likely collapse far more than just the towers, any such conspirators could not count on such a limited impact. And once again the question rears its head which is why go to this absurd amount of trouble, when 2 large fuel packed planes are going to hit?

Click to expand...

It's not wacky at all. Read the Wikipedia article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:....E2.80.9D_and_.E2.80.9Ccrashed.E2.80.9D_zones

We are not allowed to build skyscrapers without having the means to take it down.
This is how skyscrapers are taken down.
Nuclear charge is planted under it (specific distance, depth and power) and it pushes the energy where there is least resistance (upwards through the building) and it pulverizes everything. Steel, everything turns to dust. Once you plant it at a certain angle the side of a building core remains yet the other side is gone into dust.
This is quiet safe for population in the context of radiation.

Everything in Blue turns to dust (building turns into a sand castle up to 325 meters), in Green about 80 meters of it are damaged into pieces and the solid top pushed everything down and it falls with no resistance and most of the building disappears into dust.

That is clear.
The questions is - why did they rush the collapse of the Twins?
WTC7 was taken down with no casualties. But there was a rush to take down the Twins.
There has to be a reason for it that is not necessarily evil.

Edial said:

It's not wacky at all. Read the Wikipedia article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:....E2.80.9D_and_.E2.80.9Ccrashed.E2.80.9D_zones

We are not allowed to build skyscrapers without having the means to take it down.
This is how skyscrapers are taken down.
Nuclear charge is planted under it (specific distance, depth and power) and it pushes the energy where there is least resistance (upwards through the building) and it pulverizes everything. Steel, everything turns to dust. Once you plant it at a certain angle the side of a building core remains yet the other side is gone into dust.
This is quiet safe for population in the context of radiation.

Everything in Blue turns to dust (building turns into a sand castle up to 325 meters), in Green about 80 meters of it are damaged into pieces and the solid top pushed everything down and it falls with no resistance and most of the building disappears into dust.

That is clear.
The questions is - why did they rush the collapse of the Twins?
WTC7 was taken down with no casualties. But there was a rush to take down the Twins.
There has to be a reason for it that is not necessarily evil.

Click to expand...

I did read the article, I just gave it the credence it deserved. Please present evidence that skyscrspers are built with explosives already on board, because a self published wikipedia article is not it.

snoopy500 said:

try looking at it from this point of view, before 9/11, I don't think bin laden was actually heard of that much back then.

Click to expand...

I was a high school student back then, but I was well aware of the existence of Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. I distinctly recall watching the news reports in school showing 9/11 happening live and figuring that this was going to lead to the Afghan War before anyone even took credit for it.

Then again, I was pretty well up on my current events and world affairs back then, and so it could be that I was a bit more alert to what was going on in the Middle East than most other people.

com7fy8 said:

Well, it does look like the fall of a building set with demolition explosives. But I suppose an architect could design the building to fall straight down in case of a terror attack . . . so it would not topple over on other buildings.

Click to expand...

IIRC, it was The History Channel who was working on a show about the World Trade Center at the time of the attacks. When they did air it some time later, they had to have a host during the intros and outtros to help discuss matters with people, and notes were appended to interviews to reflect those workers who were missing or had been confirmed as killed.

What happened was that the World Trade Center was designed in what - at the time - was a radical fashion meant to improve the amount of open floor space. Because of this, the place didn't have the kind of construction you'd normally see in towers that huge.

This, IIRC, was a key part in what happened. The design was put in place before passenger aircraft got as big or as fast as they were now, and so the building wasn't meant to handle an impact with something as large and as fast as a 747. The structural steel, as near as anyone can figure, was stressed enough as it was just holding the towers up due to their unusual construction; the combination of the impact and the raw heat inside the building weakened the supports enough that individual columns could no longer support the weight load.

People in shock can act very casual, in catastrophic situations; so President Bush's reaction and behavior could have been some sort of psychological inappropriateness, due to him being stunned . . . I suppose. It was reported that he said he did not want to panic the children, by leaving a reading session.

Click to expand...

I've seen a lot of people argue that Bush should have thrown the book down and rushed out of the room.

These people do not understand human psychology.

If leaders or key public figures panic during a situation, then that sends a psychological signal which tells everyone to panic. But if a leader or key public figure can project an air of calm and professionalism, then the average person won't think about it all that much.

In this case, Bush' staffers knew only that a plane had crashed into a skyscraper. A tragedy to be sure, but the facts were not yet in order. Thus, Bush - not understanding the severity of the issue - chose to take a few seconds, process the news, and maintain his composure until the end of the scheduled appearance, at which point he'd be free to handle matters directly.

Condoleezza Rice said the intel community was not functioning well for sharing information; in fact, she said, they had enough pieces of info to expose the 9/11 plans, but they did not share the pieces of the puzzle they had, so they could see the picture.

Click to expand...

From what I heard, before 9/11 there was a rather strict wall of separation between intelligence operations. For example, the FBI had sole jurisdiction on domestic issues while the CIA had sole jurisdiction on foreign issues; the two couldn't share data because doing so was prohibited. Why? It'd give the impression that the CIA was spying on Americans, et cetra.

Wasn't there that sex scandal thing, about Bill Clinton?

Click to expand...

The Lewinsky scandal (et al) had largely died down.

In its place we had:

1. Allegations that the Clintons tried to take government property with them when they left in the belief that it was their personal property.

2. Allegations that Clinton staffers had vandalized and sabotaged various portions of the White House when they left, resulting in a fairly considerable amount of damage and lost time.

3. Allegations that Bill had received bribes for a number of the pardons that he issued during his final days as president.

Pundit Barbara Olson went into these allegations (and more) in her book "Final Days". Ironically, Olson herself was among the dead on 9/11, as she was on one of the hijacked planes; the book in question was released posthumously.