Thread: Zero Evidence that 9/11 Was an Inside Job

Originally Posted by NetworkCitizen

but 1,500+ architectural and engineering experts have put their names on the line to say that the collapses of the buildings were physically impossible.

.

I would need to see their names, their credential and their underlying political beliefs before I believe that or give any credence to it.

Originally Posted by Woogs

I know we were not told the truth about 9/11.

To me, the best evidence is with the Pentagon and the plane that supposedly hit it. Take a look at the 2 videos. In the first one, explain how it could be that a 757 loaded with fuel could have done so little damage. And where's the rest of the plane? Did it get swallowed up by the building? There's no wreckage on the grounds outside, either.

In the second video, I challenge anyone to look at that security tape and show me a jet airliner hitting the building. Look at it it as many times as you want, frame by frame. There isn't one!! What you see is something much smaller than a 757 hitting the building and it comes into view at the 24 second mark. Go ahead...look.

The pentagon was not hit by a airliner. See for yourself - YouTube

Pentagon Security Camera video from 9/11 (2) - YouTube

I personally know people in my industry that helped to rebuild the Pentagon, they received a plaque when it was done that included a piece of the aircraft.
The Pentagon is built like a fort.
True the aircraft pieces could be from any aircraft, but I doubt it.
I find the possibility that the US trained the "terrorists" to commit the crime a more plausible explanation (especially since the public evidence suggests they trained in the US).

Originally Posted by Woogs

I
In the second video, I challenge anyone to look at that security tape and show me a jet airliner hitting the building. Look at it it as many times as you want, frame by frame. There isn't one!! What you see is something much smaller than a 757 hitting the building and it comes into view at the 24 second mark. Go ahead...look.

Pentagon Security Camera video from 9/11 (2) - YouTube

Ok - you challenged me. I'll take the plunge, just for the hell of it.

The Pentagon is called "The Pentagon" because of...? Right - it is an polygon containing five sides. You are the smart one! That means that there are 5 angled exterior walls where each adjacent pair forms an interior angle at each corner of...? Right again - 360/5 = 72 degrees. That means that the exterior wall angle at each of the 5 corners must be...? Yep - you got it! It must be 360-72=288 degrees WOW! I am impressed! That means that a security camera looking parallel along any one of the walls cannot "see" the vast majority of anything coming directly toward the adjacent wall, around that 288 degree angled corner! In other words, the plane came into the adjacent exterior wall to which the camera was looking - duhh.

Come on people - knock it off! This ain't kindergarten - or is it???

.

Originally Posted by darckriver

Ok - you challenged me. I'll take the plunge, just for the hell of it.

The Pentagon is called "The Pentagon" because of...? Right - it is an polygon containing five sides. You are the smart one! That means that there are 5 angled exterior walls where each adjacent pair forms an interior angle at each corner of...? Right again - 360/5 = 72 degrees. That means that the exterior wall angle at each of the 5 corners must be...? Yep - you got it! It must be 360-72=288 degrees WOW! I am impressed! That means that a security camera looking parallel along any one of the walls cannot "see" the vast majority of anything coming directly toward the adjacent wall, around that 288 degree angled corner! In other words, the plane came into the adjacent exterior wall to which the camera was looking - duhh.

Come on people - knock it off! This ain't kindergarten - or is it???

.

When there's a cover-up, there will be a lot of theories that come about, right? What are we left with other than theories?

C'mon, your kindergarten teacher lied to you.

9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”; “This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”

Originally Posted by Dr. Righteous

I don't claim to have any insight. I just claim to have intuatively known that the FBI was behind the "capitol bombing". And I was right.

Forgive me if I am splitting hairs, but I find your choice of words interesting. In the article that I read http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MN9P1N9M0B.DTL I see the FBI involved in a sting operation after receiving a tip. The phrase "behind the Capitol bombing" seems to imply that the FBI planned the entire thing from the start.

I think this . . .

Originally Posted by NetworkCitizen

9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”; “This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”

has more to do with this . . .

Originally Posted by Dr. Righteous

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the US government had reasons to cover up botched security compromises and its inefficient disregard for evidence that could have been used to prevent the attacks.

than some sinister plot actually plan and execute the events of 9/11.

Originally Posted by DDave

I think this . . .



has more to do with this . . .



than some sinister plot actually plan and execute the events of 9/11.

Maybe so, but we still don't know. Therefore, it is ridiculous the attacks from the mainstains media in the way they've treated "truthers".

Yeah, we want the entire truth of their security failures if that is the only thing they were hiding. But...they're hiding.

Originally Posted by NetworkCitizen

Maybe so, but we still don't know. Therefore, it is ridiculous the attacks from the mainstains media in the way they've treated "truthers".

Well, you've got to admit some of the truther theories are WAY OUT there. Dr. Judy Woods directed energy weapons . . . no planes actually hit the towers (ALL the videos of planes were faked), drones laden with explosives took them out, no plane at the Pentagon, Flight 77 was flown somewhere else and the crew and passengers were killed and the DNA was "said to be" recovered at the Pentagon. Val McClatchy's photo of the 93 crash was faked because the smoke plume isn't the right shape or size.

I'm sure you've heard a few of these. Of course no one can offer any PROOF, just opinion, conjecture, and innuendo.

That's part of the problem, they can't even agree on what they think happened. There battle cry seems to be "We don't know what happened but we KNOW it didn't happen the way "the government" said it did.

Originally Posted by DDave

Well, you've got to admit some of the truther theories are WAY OUT there. Dr. Judy Woods directed energy weapons . . . no planes actually hit the towers (ALL the videos of planes were faked), drones laden with explosives took them out, no plane at the Pentagon, Flight 77 was flown somewhere else and the crew and passengers were killed and the DNA was "said to be" recovered at the Pentagon. Val McClatchy's photo of the 93 crash was faked because the smoke plume isn't the right shape or size.

I'm sure you've heard a few of these. Of course no one can offer any PROOF, just opinion, conjecture, and innuendo.

That's part of the problem, they can't even agree on what they think happened. There battle cry seems to be "We don't know what happened but we KNOW it didn't happen the way "the government" said it did.

Well yes, there are ridiculous theories, but as I said, theories will flourish when the absolute truth is being whitewashed.

I know exactly what they are hiding. But this thread is in the opinion-lite section, so I won't divulge.

Originally Posted by NetworkCitizen

When there's a cover-up, there will be a lot of theories that come about, right? What are we left with other than theories?

C'mon, your kindergarten teacher lied to you.

9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”; “This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”

I admire decent theories. The crap thinking and lack of objectivity behind the usual politically based non-sense isn't even close to being able to be regarded as "respectable theories" (or, for that matter, "respectable beliefs"). If all the objectively rational people did was attend to debunking all the stupid bs that morons come up with and other morons latch onto, they wouldn't have time to do anything else.

.

Originally Posted by NetworkCitizen

I know exactly what they are hiding. But this thread is in the opinion-lite section, so I won't divulge.

Forgive me if this sounds confrontational, I don't mean for it to be but hop on over to the 9/11 sub forum with all the other people who seem to "know" exactly what "they" are hiding.

Especially if you have some proof or evidence to back up what you know. That seems to be the part most people lack.