9/11: 9 years have passed... STILL NO TRUTH !

[ReeferMadness]

It sure is a lot easier to lie to a society when it's as steeped in supernatural ignorance as our's.

I think that it's easy to lie to gullible people who trust whatever the government tells them.

A lot of the theories (or maybe elements of all of them) are clearly outrageous. But because they're wrong doesn't necessarily mean that the government's story is completely factual.

[ReeferMadness]

"All the damage" wasn't caused by the impact, but the fires fed by jet fuel and pulverized aluminum that created a super hot, near explosive fire, that resulted in structural steel being weakened, then collapsing under its own weight........

Maybe. I still find it hard to believe that aircraft aluminum (weighted down with fuel) moving at that speed isn't going to leave some sort of impact.

[eyeball]

I think that it's easy to lie to gullible people who trust whatever the government tells them.

Clearly.

All in all the odds seem to be badly stacked against rational awareness hence my reference to the Crazy Years.

[On Guard for Thee]

The fire isn't relevant here. I was referring to an apparent lack of impact mark where the wings would have hit. Aluminum may not be as strong as steel but if you hit a building with an aluminum wing at 200+ mph, it's going to leave a dent of some sort.

The fuselage appears to have gone clear through the building.

Based on the approach profile the a/c had to take to hit the Pentagon where it did, it is quite likely the engines could have been ripped off prior to impact (the stbd. engine did hit the generator on the way in) and could simply have rolled up in a ball near the building without leaving much of a footprint on the building. There are numerous photo's showing engine parts in the rubble. And if you talking the twin towers, those jets went in a lot faster than 200 MPH. Try closer to 600, which is far beyond what the towers were designed to withstand.

[Wilber]

I do understand that. It just appeared that there should be some impact mark where the wings hit, even if they don't penetrate. Aluminum is still pretty strong. The other interesting feature is the nice round hole on the inside wall. Was that caused by the fuselage? Not likely, given your description. One of the engines? If so, what happened to the other engine? I'm just saying it looks odd.

The aircraft hit at a angle and in a bank. There was plenty of evidence and many witnesses, they just aren't saying what some people want to hear and never will, so there really is no point to this discussion.

[ReeferMadness]

The aircraft hit at a angle and in a bank. There was plenty of evidence and many witnesses, they just aren't saying what some people want to hear and never will, so there really is no point to this discussion.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I agree that the theory that a missile hit is outlandish (for a whole bunch of reasons). Still, you have to admit that the impact strike (a collapsed outer wall with a single hole punched through the inside wall) seems to be more consistent with a missile than a plane.

[bush_cheney2004]

The aircraft hit at a angle and in a bank. There was plenty of evidence and many witnesses, they just aren't saying what some people want to hear and never will, so there really is no point to this discussion.

Agreed....another year...same nonsense. Maybe it was aliens that did it !

[ReeferMadness]

Agreed....another year...same nonsense. Maybe it was aliens that did it !

Yeah, let's forget all about 9/11. After all a Republican president would never lie to the people right?

:lol:

[The_Squid]

Yeah, let's forget all about 9/11. After all a Republican president would never lie to the people right?

:lol:

No one can accuse Americans of "forgetting about 9/11"... most just choose not to give the nutbars the time of day. There's no need to rehash the same crazy conspiracy nonsense. It actually makes it more difficult to learn from what actually occurred with the noise from the irrational fringe.

And it is irrational to believe that this was a gov't conspiracy of some sort, given the evidence.

Do you also believe in sasquatch?

[Wilber]

I'm just playing devil's advocate here. I agree that the theory that a missile hit is outlandish (for a whole bunch of reasons). Still, you have to admit that the impact strike (a collapsed outer wall with a single hole punched through the inside wall) seems to be more consistent with a missile than a plane.

Play whatever you want. Some folks think there is a conspiracy behind everything and plotters behind every bush. There was a conspiracy, by Al Qaeda. What happened is clear to me, all the reasons why are less clear. I checked out on the B767 about three months before 9/11. I'd just started a week off but was back flying them a few days after. This has always been deadly serious for me and I respond to these topics trying to inject some reality into them. Clearly it is a waste of time.

[ReeferMadness]

No one can accuse Americans of "forgetting about 9/11"... most just choose not to give the nutbars the time of day. There's no need to rehash the same crazy conspiracy nonsense. It actually makes it more difficult to learn from what actually occurred with the noise from the irrational fringe.

And sometimes today's irrational fringe turns into tomorrow's accepted narrative. I keep an open mind on all things and look at the world in terms of available evidence. Sure, lots of the theories are simply implausible but I think there are lots of legitimate questions. And you have to remember that the American government really needed a nice pat answer to give the people. Maybe there were elements that were made up to fill the gaps.

I'm still skeptical, for example, of how much evidence they really had that bin Laden was behind it. How long did it take for them to accuse him? Days? I don't recall but it seemed like they had the culprit awfully fast. Most people, it seems, accept the video of him as proof but it could have been faked. Or his claiming responsibility could have been a lie (it made him famous and a celebrity among a lot of people in the world). And when the Taliban offered to turn him over to a neutral third party for trial, it wasn't even considered.

Somebody fabricated evidence of WMD. So, when those same people say other things that can't be independently verified, I'm skeptical.

And it is irrational to believe that this was a gov't conspiracy of some sort, given the evidence.

You talk like there are only 2 possible narratives: the story the US government told and some vast government conspiracy that involved thousands of people. In reality, the possibilities are endless. Just because some or even most of what the US said is true, it doesn't mean it all is.

And BTW, there was a government conspiracy to fabricate evidence of WMD to justify the Iraq invasion. Or do you think that's nutty too?

Do you also believe in sasquatch?

I treat sasquatch the same way I treat alien civilizations or the lost city of Atlantis or alternate universes or the afterlife. I'm interested in possibilities but there isn't compelling evidence to support any of them.

Literally billions of people believe in a supernatural being who sits in a magical kingdom, judging heaven and earth. Lots of them believe that if you mentally asking him for things, he'll grant wishes or smite enemies. Do you thing they are all nutbars?

Edited February 27, 2016 by ReeferMadness

[taxme]

What happened on 9/11 was a conspiracy - that is not in doubt. The only question is - which conspiracy is right. Is it the theory advanced by the government - that a bunch of mad Arabs, funded and organized by somebody living in a primitive camp in Afghanistan pulled this off? Is it one of the various other theories floated by various and sundry? Or is it something else entirely?

I would submit the following:

• Governments around the world (the US government included) have been known to lie to their citizens so it isn't logical to just accept their version of events
• The US government was under huge pressure following the incident to explain what happened. It's quite possible that even if no Americans were involved in any way, bin Laden was a convenient fall guy
• Jet fuel doesn't burn that hot and it would burn off very quickly. So it was actually other materials inside the tower that were responsible for the heat of the inferno. If towers can collapse after a fire burns for a couple of hours, perhaps someone should be reviewing building standards
• There were a lot of odd things that happened on 9/11 but that doesn't necessarily mean an inside job
• If it were an inside job, it's extremely unlikely that the people in charge would have informed George Bush. Maybe all we can hope for is a deathbed confession from Cheney

I just want someone to show me as to where are all the airplane parts? No one so far can produce a picture from the Pentagon showing airplane parts. Surely there should be a few big parts lying around? It cannot have all burned up. Parts of the tail end must have survived the so-called theory of being burnt to a crisp. It is impossible to not have some parts around.

There is just no way that an 80 story building can come tumbling down from an airplane hitting the 70th floor. The planes would disintigrate upon impact and turn up into a million pieces as soon as it hit the building. The building was suppose to be built and prepared for just the possibility of a plane flying into the towers. And with many Firefighters that were close enough to the towers said that they had what sounded like explosives sounds coming from the basement area of one of the twin towers. Are we going to call firefighters liars? I think not. There would be no reason for them to lie.

The most interesting thing about all of this is that Silverstein, the owner of the twin towers, just six months before the big event happened had taken out insurance against such an incident happening. Interesting, isn't it? The conspiracy appears to be there but there are too many people ready to believe the government version of what happened, and not willing to listen to other groups and people and the alternative media who have other versions of what happened. AE911 is a website that should be looked at if anyone wants to get the other side of the story.

An old saying goes like this: "To know only one side of the story, is to know nothing at all". Too many people believe and will only listen to the government side of the story, and refuse to listen to the other side of the story that is being presented to them.My gain, their loss.

[taxme]

And sometimes today's irrational fringe turns into tomorrow's accepted narrative. I keep an open mind on all things and look at the world in terms of available evidence. Sure, lots of the theories are simply implausible but I think there are lots of legitimate questions. And you have to remember that the American government really needed a nice pat answer to give the people. Maybe there were elements that were made up to fill the gaps.

I'm still skeptical, for example, of how much evidence they really had that bin Laden was behind it. How long did it take for them to accuse him? Days? I don't recall but it seemed like they had the culprit awfully fast. Most people, it seems, accept the video of him as proof but it could have been faked. Or his claiming responsibility could have been a lie (it made him famous and a celebrity among a lot of people in the world). And when the Taliban offered to turn him over to a neutral third party for trial, it wasn't even considered.

Somebody fabricated evidence of WMD. So, when those same people say other things that can't be independently verified, I'm skeptical.

You talk like there are only 2 possible narratives: the story the US government told and some vast government conspiracy that involved thousands of people. In reality, the possibilities are endless. Just because some or even most of what the US said is true, it doesn't mean it all is.

And BTW, there was a government conspiracy to fabricate evidence of WMD to justify the Iraq invasion. Or do you think that's nutty too?

I treat sasquatch the same way I treat alien civilizations or the lost city of Atlantis or alternate universes or the afterlife. I'm interested in possibilities but there isn't compelling evidence to support any of them.

Literally billions of people believe in a supernatural being who sits in a magical kingdom, judging heaven and earth. Lots of them believe that if you mentally asking him for things, he'll grant wishes or smite enemies. Do you thing they are all nutbars?

(X)The loony TV programs that are produced in regards to UFO'S, sasquatch and alien civilizations is so laughable. I had been watching those kinds of shows and never really questioning what I was watching. Then one day, bingo, I started to wonder as to all these stories about UFO's and their coming to earth for centuries. So, I asked myself, if these UFO's have been coming here for centuries than why haven't they set up an office somewhere in the world? And if they did why can't I find one and go to one of their travel agencies and book a space flight to wherever? I probably wouldn't be able to afford it, but no harm asking. LOL.

Aliens could not be coming to earth for all these centuries, and have not made their presence noticed to us earthlings by now. Just like the God theory, where is he staying way out in space? Is he living on some planet somewhere? I know the universe is big, and it takes a lot or work to keep it up and running so how does one so-called God able to do all that? Does he breathe or eat or drink water to survive? Did he ever have sex?

The Universe is endless. And every time I think about the Universe and where does it come to an end my brain wants to explode. Try really hard thinking about that and see what happens in your head. It's like the brain cannot accept such a possibility that there can be an end to the universe. And if I could ever come to the end of the Universe, what is on the other side of that end? There just can't be nothing? Try also about thinking as to how the universe all started? How does something start from nothing? I cannot create anything when there is nothing there? I am baffled by it all. Life and the universe being around makes no sense to me. We should not be here but we are. Anybody know how to explain all of this to me? I need help.

[Hoser360]

Getting a little off topic..?

(X)The loony TV programs that are produced in regards to UFO'S, sasquatch and alien civilizations is so laughable. I had been watching those kinds of shows and never really questioning what I was watching. Then one day, bingo, I started to wonder as to all these stories about UFO's and their coming to earth for centuries. So, I asked myself, if these UFO's have been coming here for centuries than why haven't they set up an office somewhere in the world? And if they did why can't I find one and go to one of their travel agencies and book a space flight to wherever? I probably wouldn't be able to afford it, but no harm asking. LOL.

Aliens could not be coming to earth for all these centuries, and have not made their presence noticed to us earthlings by now. Just like the God theory, where is he staying way out in space? Is he living on some planet somewhere? I know the universe is big, and it takes a lot or work to keep it up and running so how does one so-called God able to do all that? Does he breathe or eat or drink water to survive? Did he ever have sex?

The Universe is endless. And every time I think about the Universe and where does it come to an end my brain wants to explode. Try really hard thinking about that and see what happens in your head. It's like the brain cannot accept such a possibility that there can be an end to the universe. And if I could ever come to the end of the Universe, what is on the other side of that end? There just can't be nothing? Try also about thinking as to how the universe all started? How does something start from nothing? I cannot create anything when there is nothing there? I am baffled by it all. Life and the universe being around makes no sense to me. We should not be here but we are. Anybody know how to explain all of this to me? I need help.

Getting a little off topic..?

[taxme]

Getting a little off topic..?

Getting a little off topic..?

I guess so but I was just wanting to reply to what reefer had to say about UFO's. But I am still waiting for someone to produce some pictures of airplane parts being scattered all over the Pentagon lawn. No one has offered up any yet. So, how is that for getting back on to the topic?

[bush_cheney2004]

I guess so but I was just wanting to reply to what reefer had to say about UFO's. But I am still waiting for someone to produce some pictures of airplane parts being scattered all over the Pentagon lawn. No one has offered up any yet. So, how is that for getting back on to the topic?

There are plenty of readily available photos for "airplane parts" on the Pentagon lawn and building interior.

https://www.google.com/search?q=9/11+pentagon+lawn+attack+debris&biw=1258&bih=691&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjb7-z9spzLAhVFeT4KHSi3CdMQsAQILA&dpr=1.25

[taxme]

There are plenty of readily available photos for "airplane parts" on the Pentagon lawn and building interior.

https://www.google.com/search?q=9/11+pentagon+lawn+attack+debris&biw=1258&bih=691&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjb7-z9spzLAhVFeT4KHSi3CdMQsAQILA&dpr=1.25

(X)I want to see parts of the plane in front of the Pentagon building sticking out of the wall. Not parts of something lying on the field over half a mile from the building. Some of those pictures of supposed plane parts could have been taken anywhere. They are not proof that they are from the real plane parts that hit the Pentagon. I went thru them all as best I could and nothing there has convinced me that a plane hit the wall.

[taxme]

There are plenty of readily available photos for "airplane parts" on the Pentagon lawn and building interior.

https://www.google.com/search?q=9/11+pentagon+lawn+attack+debris&biw=1258&bih=691&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjb7-z9spzLAhVFeT4KHSi3CdMQsAQILA&dpr=1.25

PS: In one of those pictures also it showed a big hole in the wall like a missile went thru it. And there was no damage done on either side of the hole. Why is that? Surely the wings would have left some damage? Surely the tail end of the plane should be still intact and sitting there? Sorry, but those pictures have not convinced me of anything as yet. The twin towers and building 7 stories make no sense at all. And that goes also for the Pentagon.

[bush_cheney2004]

PS: In one of those pictures also it showed a big hole in the wall like a missile went thru it. And there was no damage done on either side of the hole. Why is that? Surely the wings would have left some damage? Surely the tail end of the plane should be still intact and sitting there? Sorry, but those pictures have not convinced me of anything as yet. The twin towers and building 7 stories make no sense at all. And that goes also for the Pentagon.

Already discussed many, many times here.....no photos of any aircraft parts, debris, or human remains will ever convince anybody who only wishes to believe something else. That's the game being played by Truthers for years.

[On Guard for Thee]

PS: In one of those pictures also it showed a big hole in the wall like a missile went thru it. And there was no damage done on either side of the hole. Why is that? Surely the wings would have left some damage? Surely the tail end of the plane should be still intact and sitting there? Sorry, but those pictures have not convinced me of anything as yet. The twin towers and building 7 stories make no sense at all. And that goes also for the Pentagon.

And just what makes you think the tail of a plane would still be intact after it flew into a building, let alone the wings, which would fold back and burn, especially since that is where the fuel is carried? And what makes you think a fuel laden, 400k pound airplane slamming into a building might not knock it down? A little science may help you.

[GostHacked]

And just what makes you think the tail of a plane would still be intact after it flew into a building, let alone the wings, which would fold back and burn, especially since that is where the fuel is carried? And what makes you think a fuel laden, 400k pound airplane slamming into a building might not knock it down? A little science may help you.

What kind of physics allows the wings at the pentagon to fold in, and the wings that hit the towers to penetrate? More like the wings blew up on impact and never made it into the Pentagon. And then one engine on one wing got folded back sucked into the Pentagon with part of the engine laying near the exit hole. That's some funky physics.

[On Guard for Thee]

What kind of physics allows the wings at the pentagon to fold in, and the wings that hit the towers to penetrate? More like the wings blew up on impact and never made it into the Pentagon. And then one engine on one wing got folded back sucked into the Pentagon with part of the engine laying near the exit hole. That's some funky physics.

One part of physics that allows for that is speed. (Force =mass X acceleration). The planes that hit the towers went in at full speed. I don't know if there is any calculation of speed of the Pentagon impact but since you are maneuvering for a smaller "target" i.e. hitting that close to the ground, you may very well reduce speed.

[segnosaur]

What kind of physics allows the wings at the pentagon to fold in, and the wings that hit the towers to penetrate? More like the wings blew up on impact and never made it into the Pentagon. And then one engine on one wing got folded back sucked into the Pentagon with part of the engine laying near the exit hole. That's some funky physics.

The Twin Towers were largely glass-and-steel. Designed to allow a little sway in high winds.

The pentagon was designed for security... strongly enforced outer and inner walls. Because of that, you will get a different set of circumstances for the impact.

Far from being 'funky physics', its what you'd expect in circumstances like that.

[taxme]

And just what makes you think the tail of a plane would still be intact after it flew into a building, let alone the wings, which would fold back and burn, especially since that is where the fuel is carried? And what makes you think a fuel laden, 400k pound airplane slamming into a building might not knock it down? A little science may help you.

Wings on an airplane hitting anything will leave some trace of it hitting whatever. Every time I see the results of an airplane crash, the tail end always seems to survive and is left sitting on the ground pretty much in one piece. A closer look may help you.

[taxme]

Already discussed many, many times here.....no photos of any aircraft parts, debris, or human remains will ever convince anybody who only wishes to believe something else. That's the game being played by Truthers for years.

And I have to ask one question. Why cannot people see a conspiracy when it is flashed in front of them? AE911 website pretty well comes up with many conclusions as to what may have really happened but with most people what the media and politicians tell them has to be the gospel truth.