Thread: The lid is OFF 9/11/01!!!

The only valid reason I could think of for the government to do such a thing, would be to keep any and all documents out of the hands of the enemy. But I would tend to believe that there wasn’t enough time to put that plan in to work.

And we didn’t really even do much of that in Pearl Harbor. Or did we?

I don't think I've stated an opinion as to what happened on that day. My questions come from the obvious attempt by the government to stifle ANY questioning about it.

I don't know what exactly brought down those 3 buildings, but I do know that the steel was shipped to China before anyone could get a good look at it.

That makes me want to ask, "Why?"

I don't know exactly what hit the Pentagon that day, I didn't see it. Many people say it was an airplane. Could be they're right. All I know is that the video tape from security cameras in the area were confiscated and have never been shown publicly, while some stills from an ATM that show nothing are trotted out as proof of something.

I know you can't fit that airplane through that hole without taking off the wings, but the wings are nowhere in sight, nor are there corresponding holes in the Pentagon wall where those wings passed through to the inside of the building.

That makes me want to ask, "Why?"

And after asking why for all this time and failing to find an answer that DOESN'T scream 'Conspiracy', I now start to ask "Who?"

Did you watch 'The Matrix'?

Who wants steak??

Originally Posted by PinestrawGuys

I don't think I've stated an opinion as to what happened on that day. My questions come from the obvious attempt by the government to stifle ANY questioning about it.

I don't know what exactly brought down those 3 buildings, but I do know that the steel was shipped to China before anyone could get a good look at it.

That makes me want to ask, "Why?"

I don't know exactly what hit the Pentagon that day, I didn't see it. Many people say it was an airplane. Could be they're right. All I know is that the video tape from security cameras in the area were confiscated and have never been shown publicly, while some stills from an ATM that show nothing are trotted out as proof of something.

I know you can't fit that airplane through that hole without taking off the wings, but the wings are nowhere in sight, nor are there corresponding holes in the Pentagon wall where those wings passed through to the inside of the building.

That makes me want to ask, "Why?"

And after asking why for all this time and failing to find an answer that DOESN'T scream 'Conspiracy', I now start to ask "Who?"

Did you watch 'The Matrix'?

Who wants steak??

On the question of the steel being shipped out, my best guess is easy to guess, isn't it? Hint: Geiger counter.

On the question of the hole in the Pentagon and the question of whether a plane was seen, consider that the airplane was reportedly moving somewhere between 450 and 550 MPH. We are simply not used to seeing something moving that fast a ground level. It's hard to wrap your head around how fast something as large as a jet airliner comes into and out of view at that speed. Furthermore, I have seen jet crashes up close. You have to remember how little actual metal there is in an airframe and that wings are hollow. I saw a Phantom jet go down 1/4 mile from my house when I was a kid, and we raced on our bikes to the crash site before emergency teams got there. I couldn't believe how little wreckage there actually was. There was just one big hole in the ground and little bits of twisted metal strewn around. Now, consider an airliner slamming into a hardened concrete structure designed during the Cold War to survive direct attack. The fuselage punches a hole because of its sectional density, but the wings would disintegrate at that speed.

What you have to realize is that people with vested interests are paying their gamers to throw out disinformation. It is designed to sound credible to people without the expertise to recognize fallacies, like the idea that an airplane travelling close to the speed of sound and slamming into a concrete and steel structure would leave any wreckage to speak of.

Crocket said:

I also already explained that there would have been no need to plant multiple implosive charges in order to implode the buildings

Sorry. I forgot about those "suitcase nukes" the NYFD just happened to have laying around. How silly of me, and all this time we were worried that the terrorist had them.

UB

Originally Posted by UB

Crocket said:

I also already explained that there would have been no need to plant multiple implosive charges in order to implode the buildings

Sorry. I forgot about those "suitcase nukes" the NYFD just happened to have laying around. How silly of me, and all this time we were worried that the terrorist had them.

UB

Don't be absurd, UB. No one, yourself included, is saying that the FDNY (not NYFD) was responsible for the demolition. To my knowledge, everyone is saying that the administration had a hand in whatever happened. You're just being buttheaded with that comment, which indicates that you don't want to understand what happened, but rather that you have an entrenched position that neither Hell nor high water will move you from. But then we already know that when you made your declaration of fact with that first post of yours.

If the AA plane didn't hit the pentagon, then where is that plane and it's passengers?? Secondly, the 4th plane was supposedly headed to Washington, targeting the Capitol or the White House. Would Bush destroy the government and his own house?? However, I could see that the plot might have been uncovered and lid was kept on it, for whatever reasons. Yet, keeping anything in Washington covered up seems like an impossibility.

Once again I'll say this, and I'll say it S L O W L Y so people can understand it.

I have yet to state my opinion on this subject.

I will however, state my opinion of some of the responses.

1. Anyone that ridicules anyone else for asking questions about the issue is doing a disservice to the asker and to themselves. The search for truth should be afforded great latitude, and reasonable people should be allowed to explore ALL avenues and express ALL opinions without fear or favor.

2. Given our government's history of corruption, collusion and concealment, it is NOT unreasonable to question it's motives or doubt it's responses.

3. Re: The Pentagon. While glued to the television that day, it was easy to see the impact areas on WTC 1 & 2. The outline of an airplane, wings and all, is clearly visible on both buildings. Why is there no such outline on the Pentagon? If the reinforcement of that building was strong enough to prevent the wings from penetrating the structure, where is the debris? As hard as I've looked I can't seem to locate it.

4. Some responders have said that burning jet fuel caused the collapse of WTC 1 & 2, yet we all saw that jet fuel explode on impact. I don't think I've ever seen a bigger fireball, have you? How much jet fuel do you think remained in liquid form after the initial impact? If any, how did it remain in liquid form, un-ignited, as it poured through a burning building?

5. Assuming that somehow this highly flammable liquid was not completely consumed by the initial explosion, and assuming that it did in fact pour down stairwells and elevator shafts, how did it manage to burn hot enough to weaken the building's structural integrity to the point of collapse? The maximum temperature of burning kerosene is still several hundred degrees colder than the temperature required to cause such damage.

6.

Would Bush destroy the government and his own house??

This is one question I'd like to address. Given the history of the Bush family, is it not conceivable? Prescott Bush was in bed with the Nazi's from the start. What event led to the rise of the National Socialist Party in Germany? What event solidified Hitler's control over the populace?

Can you say 'Reichstag Fire'?

And how many other Bush family members have been engaged in less than reputable pursuits?

George H.W., CIA spook (in Dallas?) when Kennedy was killed. Head of the CIA 12 years later.

Neil, Silverado Savings and Loan.

Marvin, head of security at WTC.

W, admitted drug and alcohol abuser, lost his N.G. flight status when he failed to take his physical. What was it he was afraid the physicians would find, more cocaine?

Also, a bit of research into W.'s business exploits might do you some good.

Arbusto, Harken Energy, Texas Rangers, etc.

Read about his Saudi investors and their relationship with BCCI. The book 'The Outlaw Bank' tells a rather interesting story.

I either don't believe it or can't bring myself to believe it. All I know is that on Thanksgiving Day 2005 I had to work. My co-worker that day was a guy from India on a visa. He spent the whole day trying to convince me that George Bush purposely caused 9/11.

It was very aggravating to be an American citizen and listen to someone who is here on a work visa insist that the president of my own country is a mass murderer. It was very disturbing. I let him go on because I wanted to hear how far he would take it. He took it far. He was getting more and more confident in his argument when I did not rebuke his comments and he said that everyone in India believes this to be true.

At the end when I was sure that he had gone as far as he was going to go, I told him that I did not believe that to be true. I told him that radical Islamic terrorists caused 9/11 and our conversation ended there.

It's not much, but that's my .02.

In thinking back to that day, I've wondered a few times, who exactly would be motivated to try to convince people of this. I am not blaming my fellow Americans who are asking questions and looking for answers, which is only right and prudent, but who would be the first people in the world to want to spread this theory?

I suppose there are just many who would. But could there be some specific ones who would most benefit from it, besides our enemies in general?

Are these theories growing and gaining much ground?

Where did the plane and passengers go?....that's where I hit a dead end.