Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About The 911 Conspiracy Theory In Under 5 Minutes

[eots]

And of course the fires started by the planes would have set off this thermite immediately. Oh wait, there were no planes...I forgot.

Carry on.

Fuel fires don't burn hot enough to set them off. It takes something hotter, like magnesium. But you already knew that and are just hoping that no one else does.

Apparently not.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdCsbZf1_Ng&feature=related]Thermite vs. Car - YouTube[/ame]

Feel free to explain all of the other things your theory ignores. Or not. Nobody cares. You're an idiot.

Stop being a retard thats like pouring gun powder all over a rock and lighting it and then saying gunpowder cant blow up rock...FKN stupid

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNOM_U5UM6Q]THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Wroberson]

I can do this in as little as 7 words during a meeting about removing Saddam from power.

"Find me a way to do this." - President G.W. Bush 10th day in office.

 

[eots]

Hey all! I'm new here! This is my first real post.
The one in the "Introduce Yourself" board doesn't really count.
I'm shocked the 9/11 board is only 38 pages long! LOL Here are my thoughts on the issue:
1st - I know denialists think you're evil for wanting to ask questions about 9/11. I talked to someone on YouTube who said that I was a truther because I thought the 9/11 Commission Report left many questions and further investigation was warranted.
He also said that truthers specifically think Cheney did it and no amount of evidence is something they'll accept. This is similar to many debates I have with Denialists. They seem incapable of assimilating information and are rigorously hateful of any rational thought which leads one to question things further. I have no idea why they are like this.
2nd - So ... those lovely folks aside, I wanted to know where everyone ELSE stood.
Are you a "Cheney did it" kind of person?
Do you subscribe to LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose)?
Do you think something else, like Israeli Nationalists were behind it?
There's a Spy vs Spy theory (CIA vs. DHS).
Another good one is that it was the Military Industrial complex as a whole.
One guy thinks it was Russian Mind Probes used by the Illuminati! (Now that's a REAL conspiracy theorist!)
I myself am a Detective of the matter. I want to draw up a list of potential suspects and explore the evidence to see what really happened. Further, I also want proper justice done. I'm more action oriented about it ... but not until I have all the facts.
So ... if you're not denying that 9/11 required SOME form of inside support (not necessarily a truther but a non-denialist), what do you think!?!?
Thanks!

I think the very kindest thing that we can say about George W. Bush and all the people in the U.S. Government that have been involved in this massive cover-up, the very kindest thing we can say is that they were aware of impending attacks and let them happen. Now some people will say that’s much too kind, however even that is high treason and conspiracy to commit murder." http://video.go

Who gained from 9/11? Who covered up crucial information about 9/11? And who put out the patently false stories about 9/11 in the first place? When you take those three things together, I think the case is pretty clear that it’s highly placed individuals in the administration with all roads passing through Dick Cheney.

Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter. U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. (PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Cal Tech). Former Head of the Department of Aeronautical Engineering and Assistant Dean at the U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology. 22-year Air Force career. Also taught Mathematics and English at the University of Southern California, the University of Maryland, and Phillips University
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

 

[eots]

Endorsement of 9/11 and American Empire (Vol I) – Intellectuals Speak Out:

"It has long been clear that the Bush-Cheney administration cynically exploited the attacks of 9/11 to promote its imperial designs. But the present volume confronts us with compelling evidence for an even more disturbing conclusion: that the 9/11 attacks were themselves orchestrated by this administration precisely so they could be thus exploited. If this is true, it is not merely the case, as the Downing Street memos show, that the stated reason for attacking Iraq was a lie. It is also the case that the whole 'war on terror' was based on a prior deception. This book hence confronts the American people---indeed the people of the world as a whole---with an issue second to none in importance and urgency. I give this book, which in no way can be dismissed as the ravings of ‘paranoid conspiracy theorists,’ my highest possible recommendation."

Raymond L. McGovern – 27-year CIA veteran. Former Chairman, National Intelligence Estimates (NIE), the consensus reports of all U.S. intelligence agencies. According to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, NIE's "are the Intelligence Community’s most authoritative written judgments on national security issues." Responsible for preparing and presenting the President’ Daily Brief (PDB) to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and for providing intelligence briefing to their Vice Presidents, Secretaries of State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials. Upon retirement in 1990, McGovern was awarded the CIA’s Intelligence Commendation Medallion and received a letter of appreciation from then-President George H. W. Bush. Former U.S. Army Intelligence Officer.

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

 

[candycorn]

Hey all! I'm new here! This is my first real post.
The one in the "Introduce Yourself" board doesn't really count.
I'm shocked the 9/11 board is only 38 pages long! LOL Here are my thoughts on the issue:
1st - I know denialists think you're evil for wanting to ask questions about 9/11. I talked to someone on YouTube who said that I was a truther because I thought the 9/11 Commission Report left many questions and further investigation was warranted.
He also said that truthers specifically think Cheney did it and no amount of evidence is something they'll accept. This is similar to many debates I have with Denialists. They seem incapable of assimilating information and are rigorously hateful of any rational thought which leads one to question things further. I have no idea why they are like this.
2nd - So ... those lovely folks aside, I wanted to know where everyone ELSE stood.
Are you a "Cheney did it" kind of person?
Do you subscribe to LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose)?
Do you think something else, like Israeli Nationalists were behind it?
There's a Spy vs Spy theory (CIA vs. DHS).
Another good one is that it was the Military Industrial complex as a whole.
One guy thinks it was Russian Mind Probes used by the Illuminati! (Now that's a REAL conspiracy theorist!)
I myself am a Detective of the matter. I want to draw up a list of potential suspects and explore the evidence to see what really happened. Further, I also want proper justice done. I'm more action oriented about it ... but not until I have all the facts.
So ... if you're not denying that 9/11 required SOME form of inside support (not necessarily a truther but a non-denialist), what do you think!?!?
Thanks!

Hello and welcome.

I'll take issue with one thing you said. In no way do I (or any one I know) think that 9/11 questioners are evil.

But when you're given plausible answers to sensible questions and you deny the proof you're offered, you go beyond having questions and you now have an agenda. Most do that.

But some here (most here) attribute evil motives to men who exhibited no such motivation in the past...what are you supposed to think?

 

[GuyPinestra]

Hey all! I'm new here! This is my first real post.
The one in the "Introduce Yourself" board doesn't really count.
I'm shocked the 9/11 board is only 38 pages long! LOL Here are my thoughts on the issue:
1st - I know denialists think you're evil for wanting to ask questions about 9/11. I talked to someone on YouTube who said that I was a truther because I thought the 9/11 Commission Report left many questions and further investigation was warranted.
He also said that truthers specifically think Cheney did it and no amount of evidence is something they'll accept. This is similar to many debates I have with Denialists. They seem incapable of assimilating information and are rigorously hateful of any rational thought which leads one to question things further. I have no idea why they are like this.
2nd - So ... those lovely folks aside, I wanted to know where everyone ELSE stood.
Are you a "Cheney did it" kind of person?
Do you subscribe to LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose)?
Do you think something else, like Israeli Nationalists were behind it?
There's a Spy vs Spy theory (CIA vs. DHS).
Another good one is that it was the Military Industrial complex as a whole.
One guy thinks it was Russian Mind Probes used by the Illuminati! (Now that's a REAL conspiracy theorist!)
I myself am a Detective of the matter. I want to draw up a list of potential suspects and explore the evidence to see what really happened. Further, I also want proper justice done. I'm more action oriented about it ... but not until I have all the facts.
So ... if you're not denying that 9/11 required SOME form of inside support (not necessarily a truther but a non-denialist), what do you think!?!?
Thanks!

Hello and welcome.

I'll take issue with one thing you said. In no way do I (or any one I know) think that 9/11 questioners are evil.

But when you're given plausible answers to sensible questions and you deny the proof you're offered, you go beyond having questions and you now have an agenda. Most do that.

But some here (most here) attribute evil motives to men who exhibited no such motivation in the past...what are you supposed to think?

Plausible answers? You mean answers that require one to suspend their common sense and ignore facts to the contrary, don't you?

 

[candycorn]

Hey all! I'm new here! This is my first real post.
The one in the "Introduce Yourself" board doesn't really count.
I'm shocked the 9/11 board is only 38 pages long! LOL Here are my thoughts on the issue:
1st - I know denialists think you're evil for wanting to ask questions about 9/11. I talked to someone on YouTube who said that I was a truther because I thought the 9/11 Commission Report left many questions and further investigation was warranted.
He also said that truthers specifically think Cheney did it and no amount of evidence is something they'll accept. This is similar to many debates I have with Denialists. They seem incapable of assimilating information and are rigorously hateful of any rational thought which leads one to question things further. I have no idea why they are like this.
2nd - So ... those lovely folks aside, I wanted to know where everyone ELSE stood.
Are you a "Cheney did it" kind of person?
Do you subscribe to LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose)?
Do you think something else, like Israeli Nationalists were behind it?
There's a Spy vs Spy theory (CIA vs. DHS).
Another good one is that it was the Military Industrial complex as a whole.
One guy thinks it was Russian Mind Probes used by the Illuminati! (Now that's a REAL conspiracy theorist!)
I myself am a Detective of the matter. I want to draw up a list of potential suspects and explore the evidence to see what really happened. Further, I also want proper justice done. I'm more action oriented about it ... but not until I have all the facts.
So ... if you're not denying that 9/11 required SOME form of inside support (not necessarily a truther but a non-denialist), what do you think!?!?
Thanks!

Hello and welcome.

I'll take issue with one thing you said. In no way do I (or any one I know) think that 9/11 questioners are evil.

But when you're given plausible answers to sensible questions and you deny the proof you're offered, you go beyond having questions and you now have an agenda. Most do that.

But some here (most here) attribute evil motives to men who exhibited no such motivation in the past...what are you supposed to think?

Plausible answers? You mean answers that require one to suspend their common sense and ignore facts to the contrary, don't you?

No...like when jet engines from Boeing aircraft are found at the crash scenes and people like you still use the word "allegedly" to describe the crash.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Hello and welcome.

I'll take issue with one thing you said. In no way do I (or any one I know) think that 9/11 questioners are evil.

But when you're given plausible answers to sensible questions and you deny the proof you're offered, you go beyond having questions and you now have an agenda. Most do that.

But some here (most here) attribute evil motives to men who exhibited no such motivation in the past...what are you supposed to think?

Plausible answers? You mean answers that require one to suspend their common sense and ignore facts to the contrary, don't you?

No...like when jet engines from Boeing aircraft are found at the crash scenes and people like you still use the word "allegedly" to describe the crash.

You obviously have me confused with someone else. I've never disputed that planes hit the towers, EVER.

I doubt I've ever used the word 'allegedly' when discussing this subject, either.

 

[candycorn]

Plausible answers? You mean answers that require one to suspend their common sense and ignore facts to the contrary, don't you?

No...like when jet engines from Boeing aircraft are found at the crash scenes and people like you still use the word "allegedly" to describe the crash.

You obviously have me confused with someone else. I've never disputed that planes hit the towers, EVER.

I doubt I've ever used the word 'allegedly' when discussing this subject, either.

Perhaps I do. Did a Boeing hit the Pentagon? That is an easy enough question.

 

[GuyPinestra]

No...like when jet engines from Boeing aircraft are found at the crash scenes and people like you still use the word "allegedly" to describe the crash.

You obviously have me confused with someone else. I've never disputed that planes hit the towers, EVER.

I doubt I've ever used the word 'allegedly' when discussing this subject, either.

Perhaps I do. Did a Boeing hit the Pentagon? That is an easy enough question.

I don't know, I wasn't there. Several experienced pilots have said that the 'flight path' of that particular plane would be beyond the limitations of the airframe, and that an inexperienced pilot, such as a Saudi hijacker, would never be able to pull it off.

Others with more knowledge than I have said that the 'engine' recovered from the Pentagon didn't belong to the type of airplane that 'hit' it, and others have questioned the lack of wings and tail section in the rubble.

 

[candycorn]

You obviously have me confused with someone else. I've never disputed that planes hit the towers, EVER.

I doubt I've ever used the word 'allegedly' when discussing this subject, either.

Perhaps I do. Did a Boeing hit the Pentagon? That is an easy enough question.

I don't know, I wasn't there. Several experienced pilots have said that the 'flight path' of that particular plane would be beyond the limitations of the airframe, and that an inexperienced pilot, such as a Saudi hijacker, would never be able to pull it off.

Others with more knowledge than I have said that the 'engine' recovered from the Pentagon didn't belong to the type of airplane that 'hit' it, and others have questioned the lack of wings and tail section in the rubble.

So, the 100+ eye witnesses mean what to you exactly?

So, the alternative is that some engine had to be planted into one of the more secure office structures in the world.

You're reasoning skills are incredibly weak or you're just being an idiot on purpose.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Perhaps I do. Did a Boeing hit the Pentagon? That is an easy enough question.

I don't know, I wasn't there. Several experienced pilots have said that the 'flight path' of that particular plane would be beyond the limitations of the airframe, and that an inexperienced pilot, such as a Saudi hijacker, would never be able to pull it off.

Others with more knowledge than I have said that the 'engine' recovered from the Pentagon didn't belong to the type of airplane that 'hit' it, and others have questioned the lack of wings and tail section in the rubble.

So, the 100+ eye witnesses mean what to you exactly?

So, the alternative is that some engine had to be planted into one of the more secure office structures in the world.

You're reasoning skills are incredibly weak or you're just being an idiot on purpose.

Sorry, I'm not familiar with the "100+ eyewitnesses", I've only seen an interview with ONE, and his credibility was quite weak.

Planted? Where did I say that? From what I've gathered there was only one engine recovered, and it didn't belong to a Boeing airplane.

I still don't understand how a plane can hit a building and not leave wings or tail section to be found, or even the mark of their impact on the facade. Can you explain that to me?

 

[Obamerican]

The freeway next to the Pentagon was bumper to bumper with morning rush hour traffic. There were a lot of people that SAW WITH THEIR OWN EYES a commercial airliner fly low over them and hit the façade of the Pentagon. I doubt they are going to mistake a commercial jet for a "missile". Missiles don't knock down light poles either.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

So, someone posts a video of who knows what and you consider it to be factual? Are you really that gullible, or is it confirmation bias?

Usually when someone dumps a black granular substance from a rifle cartridge you can assume it to be gunpowder, no?

And where is this goofy bar b q boy going to get a thermate grenade, anyway?

Your 'videos' prove nothing other than you are unwillingness to address the question I've asked.

What handheld cutting device can cut through 5 inch thick steel at a temperature so high that it leaves massive amounts of slag visible at the cut?

Tell me how much therm?te it would take to burn through 5 inches of steel considering Nat Geo couldn't even damage 1/2 steel with 175 pounds of it.

Then tell me how they concealed the massive amount of therm?te so that none of the office workers or maintenance crews saw it.

Did you not watch the video that showed how to FOCUS the thermate to accomplish the task?

It's only 15 minutes and highly educational...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNOM_U5UM6Q]THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED - YouTube[/ame]

[/QUOTE]

Yes, I have watched the YouTube of the Rube Goldberg 'only cuts vertically' device. Where is a YouTube of one of these gizmos cutting horizontally? If you find a YouTube of this, post it, after posting it you have to look for a YouTube of one cutting diagonally. Then you can post that YouTube too.

And since your video shows them vertically cutting a beam that is either 3/8" or 1/2" think, it still does not answer the question of how much therm?te it would take to cut through a 5" thick column. Maybe you can get the inventor of the 'vertical only' device to scale it up and make a YouTube. That would be cool.

And finally, maybe someone could make a YouTube showing how they would conceal the massive YouTube device so that the everyday occupants wouldn't see them.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Hey all! I'm new here! This is my first real post.
The one in the "Introduce Yourself" board doesn't really count.
I'm shocked the 9/11 board is only 38 pages long! LOL Here are my thoughts on the issue:
1st - I know denialists think you're evil for wanting to ask questions about 9/11. I talked to someone on YouTube who said that I was a truther because I thought the 9/11 Commission Report left many questions and further investigation was warranted.
He also said that truthers specifically think Cheney did it and no amount of evidence is something they'll accept. This is similar to many debates I have with Denialists. They seem incapable of assimilating information and are rigorously hateful of any rational thought which leads one to question things further. I have no idea why they are like this.
2nd - So ... those lovely folks aside, I wanted to know where everyone ELSE stood.
Are you a "Cheney did it" kind of person?
Do you subscribe to LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose)?
Do you think something else, like Israeli Nationalists were behind it?
There's a Spy vs Spy theory (CIA vs. DHS).
Another good one is that it was the Military Industrial complex as a whole.
One guy thinks it was Russian Mind Probes used by the Illuminati! (Now that's a REAL conspiracy theorist!)
I myself am a Detective of the matter. I want to draw up a list of potential suspects and explore the evidence to see what really happened. Further, I also want proper justice done. I'm more action oriented about it ... but not until I have all the facts.
So ... if you're not denying that 9/11 required SOME form of inside support (not necessarily a truther but a non-denialist), what do you think!?!?
Thanks!

I think the very kindest thing that we can say about George W. Bush and all the people in the U.S. Government that have been involved in this massive cover-up, the very kindest thing we can say is that they were aware of impending attacks and let them happen. Now some people will say that’s much too kind, however even that is high treason and conspiracy to commit murder." http://video.go

Who gained from 9/11? Who covered up crucial information about 9/11? And who put out the patently false stories about 9/11 in the first place? When you take those three things together, I think the case is pretty clear that it’s highly placed individuals in the administration with all roads passing through Dick Cheney.

Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter. U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. (PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Cal Tech). Former Head of the Department of Aeronautical Engineering and Assistant Dean at the U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology. 22-year Air Force career. Also taught Mathematics and English at the University of Southern California, the University of Maryland, and Phillips University
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

all roads passing through Dick Cheney.

So let me get this straight. You think Dick Cheney was smart enough to plan, organize, staff and fund a massive inside job, and make sure no one talked for over 11 years?



This is the same Dick Cheney who couldn't plant WMD's in Iraq to justify the war he supposedly started, couldn't keep his interests in Haliburton secret while he was in office, and shot his hunting partner in the face because he thought he was a bird.

Or are you talking about a different Dick Cheney than I'm thinking about?

 

[GuyPinestra]

Tell me how much therm?te it would take to burn through 5 inches of steel considering Nat Geo couldn't even damage 1/2 steel with 175 pounds of it.

Then tell me how they concealed the massive amount of therm?te so that none of the office workers or maintenance crews saw it.

Did you not watch the video that showed how to FOCUS the thermate to accomplish the task?

It's only 15 minutes and highly educational...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNOM_U5UM6Q]THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED - YouTube[/ame]

Yes, I have watched the YouTube of the Rube Goldberg 'only cuts vertically' device. Where is a YouTube of one of these gizmos cutting horizontally? If you find a YouTube of this, post it, after posting it you have to look for a YouTube of one cutting diagonally. Then you can post that YouTube too.

And since your video shows them vertically cutting a beam that is either 3/8" or 1/2" think, it still does not answer the question of how much therm?te it would take to cut through a 5" thick column. Maybe you can get the inventor of the 'vertical only' device to scale it up and make a YouTube. That would be cool.

And finally, maybe someone could make a YouTube showing how they would conceal the massive YouTube device so that the everyday occupants wouldn't see them.[/QUOTE]

Funny how you claim the video shows a "Rube Goldberg 'only cuts vertically' device" when just past the 8 minute mark the video shows the cutting of a vertical column. I guess you didn't watch it after all, did you?

And you do realize that the structural steel was not exposed to the people who worked in the towers, don't you? "Every day occupants" would never have a reason to see anything other than the finish of their offices.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Did you not watch the video that showed how to FOCUS the thermate to accomplish the task?

It's only 15 minutes and highly educational...

THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED - YouTube

Yes, I have watched the YouTube of the Rube Goldberg 'only cuts vertically' device. Where is a YouTube of one of these gizmos cutting horizontally? If you find a YouTube of this, post it, after posting it you have to look for a YouTube of one cutting diagonally. Then you can post that YouTube too.

And since your video shows them vertically cutting a beam that is either 3/8" or 1/2" think, it still does not answer the question of how much therm?te it would take to cut through a 5" thick column. Maybe you can get the inventor of the 'vertical only' device to scale it up and make a YouTube. That would be cool.

And finally, maybe someone could make a YouTube showing how they would conceal the massive YouTube device so that the everyday occupants wouldn't see them.

Funny how you claim the video shows a "Rube Goldberg 'only cuts vertically' device" when just past the 8 minute mark the video shows the cutting of a vertical column. I guess you didn't watch it after all, did you?

And you do realize that the structural steel was not exposed to the people who worked in the towers, don't you? "Every day occupants" would never have a reason to see anything other than the finish of their offices.

Yes I did see the vertical cut made in the vertical column. Now show a device making a horizontal cut in a vertical column.

The elevator maintenance people count as "everyday occupants". How did they not see the cutters while they were doing routine maintenance & repairs? Or were they in on it?

And did you know that above the 78th floor some of the core columns were inside the occupied space because they didn't need as many elevators? How would they put the cutting devices on these without being seen?

For example, here is the core plan for the 87th floor of the north tower. Notice that 12 of the core columns are separated from the elevator banks.

 

[eots]

without being seen...oh ...there you go case closed...lol

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJy7lhVK2xE]Richard Humenn P.E. - WTC Chief Electrical Design Engineer - AE911Truth.org - YouTube[/ame]

 

[candycorn]

I don't know, I wasn't there. Several experienced pilots have said that the 'flight path' of that particular plane would be beyond the limitations of the airframe, and that an inexperienced pilot, such as a Saudi hijacker, would never be able to pull it off.

Others with more knowledge than I have said that the 'engine' recovered from the Pentagon didn't belong to the type of airplane that 'hit' it, and others have questioned the lack of wings and tail section in the rubble.

So, the 100+ eye witnesses mean what to you exactly?

So, the alternative is that some engine had to be planted into one of the more secure office structures in the world.

You're reasoning skills are incredibly weak or you're just being an idiot on purpose.

Sorry, I'm not familiar with the "100+ eyewitnesses", I've only seen an interview with ONE, and his credibility was quite weak.

Here are about twenty plus some commentary about the personal effects found in the wreckage:

American Airlines Flight 77 Crash Evidence - 911myths

Planted? Where did I say that? From what I've gathered there was only one engine recovered, and it didn't belong to a Boeing airplane.

So two planes crashed? Or I guess you're supposing that something happened to AA77 besides' it crashing into the Pentagon ?

You ruled out the missile--with a plane engine being planted and all....will you at the very least rule out a missile or is that a bridge too far for you?

I still don't understand how a plane can hit a building and not leave wings or tail section to be found, or even the mark of their impact on the facade. Can you explain that to me?

Here are the plane wings leaving a mark.

You could find it too by Googline "wing marks on the Pentagon".