Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distorti, DR.David Ray Griffin Video speech

click on the first one: DR Griffin Santa Rosa, Oct '04

http://www.911busters.com/911_new_video_productions/index.html

thats what ive been tryin to say to people..this guys got it spot on
most people say on here that fire melted the steel in the towers
the south tower collapsed in 10 seconds..how can fire melt steel in 10 seconds?
controlled demolition is what happened most probably...and this guy gives good evidence
good listen

most people still dont believe.

thats up to them..it probably helps them sleep better at night

yea

http://www.ukrweekly.com/Archive/2001/460116.shtml

http://www.public-action.com/911/jmcm/sciam/

one tower stood for 100+ minutes, the other for 45+ minutes. Once the structure becomes a mechanism the collapse process would be brief. Like an apple falling from a tree, it would succumb to the force of gravity. The south tower fell first cos it got hit lower down, so there was more weight pressing down on the melting steel so it failed quicker.

but didn't it get only hit on one side? why did it come falling straight down...

more people should respond to this. interesting discussion.

anymore thoughts...

yeah, its a load of crap.
i really have nothing more to add to that,
since what is there really to say about crap
other than "its crap"?

why is it?

why is it crap? because it is.
its a massive brainfart concieved by pathetic conspiracy theorists
who cant accept that there just may be a simple answer to such an event.
terrorists hijacked planes and slammed them into the WTC. the jet fuel and the buildings own combustable materials turned it into a giant furnace. all that smouldering material got hotter and hotter and melted all that steel like it was butter. those "demolition charges" are simply flames from red hot steel steel buckling. why does that seem so unbelievable and worthy of this xfiles nonesense?

its not crap....you choose to look for the easy answer
have u listened to the guy on the link?

Why did it come falling straight down? Because the Architect who designed those things and the engineers and workers who built those buildings did their job so F*CKIN well that they should each receive a hero biscuit everyday for the rest of their lives!

That is the way those buildings were designed to fail if such an incident were to occur in order that they don't take out all of Manhattan Island!

My first thought when I saw that happen was HOLY SH*T! My second thought was, "the designer of that building knew what he was doing and saved tens of thousands of lives because of it". A couple of days after it happened I talked to an architect who was a client of mine at the time. All he could say is, "if they had to fall, at least they fell perfectly".

no, i choose to look for the logical answer.
you choose to look for conspiracy where there is none.
you want conspiracy? how about rice's ignoring of repeated warnings
of an attack by bin laden, basically commiting the crime of not doing her job.
there's a conspiracy for you.

what you are peddling is utter nonesense.

its not utter nonsense
you choose to believe the official version of events that are fed to the world
its easier for you to believe what most the world believes...no one can accept any other version of events...its too much for them to take in

no i choose to believe what happened.
you choose to believe a fairy tale, with absolutely NO evidence.
ive seen their 'evidence' and its all bullshit. just a bunch of idiots
trying to put their own spin on physics.

really though, can no disaster be above this nonsense?
it seems every major world event has a conspiracy theory attached to it.
what keeps them alive is gullible people.

well you just said..'you want conspiracy? how about rice's ignoring of repeated warnings'

so you are saying he ignored the warnings...in other words he allowed the planes to crash in to the buildings..thats what it sounds like

i find it strange that the planes could bring down the buildings

you bring up evidence...where is your evidence to prove the conspiracy wrong?

"the moon is made out of green cheese"
prove that wrong first. and i want solid evidence,
not doctored images.

if you knew anything about architectural structures you dont have any beef about the official version at all.

thats a stupid comment....why do people always bring silliness into the argument
oh and i want solid evidence that the planes made the buildings fall

they didnt fall they collapsed

fell, collapse..whateva..jeez

Well I dunno.. he has some good points but alot of it is bs. The part about how the terrorist made that u-turn is a pretty good point.. that seems like it'd be hard to do. And also why they didn't attack the nuclear power plant. But that isn't really proving anything, just raises some interesting questions.

Most of the time there is a "point" behind terrorist plots. The aim is often more than just a high body count. Each target has a reason.

The World Trade Centre - Represents the West's Financial Power
The Pentagon - Represents the U.S.' Military Power
The plane that went down in Penn. was headed for Washington (perhaps the White House) - Represents the seat of American political power

The only conspiracy that I buy into about 9/11 is that :

1. It could have been stopped at many levels and many different times and there was a glactic display of incompetence by so many people it makes one's head spin (notsomuch a conspiracey as a statement)

2. That the Penn. crash was not a result of passengers rebelling but was shot down by the american military.

its not silliness, and not stupid. you asked for proof of something i cannot prove, THAT is silly. i was only matching your impossible request with yet another impossible request, and it was not a smartass comment. im dead serious, prove to me that the moon is not made of green cheese. you cant.

all you are doing is posting a link to some attention whore conspiracy junkie, and saying that is your proof. there is no proof, only a wacked out explanation for an event which followed every law of physics. why not just say aliens shot the buildings with invisible lasers from outer space? add some spice to it ffs.

1-definately

2- i've always suspected this.

1. always time to be wise after events, but there were signs that should have been picked up for sure

2. could very well be the case

hh posted the link..its his thread
comparing the moon with the 9'11 event is stupid
saying the buildings was laced with explosions isnt that far fetched

it is stupid

PLEASE!!! the only reason hh posted it is because he beat you to it.

you obviously have not read my post.
clear your mind of hostility and read it again.

Dean: do you not consider the educated, expert opinions of many Structural Engineers as proof that fires caused the towers to fall?

If the buildings were "laced with explosives," why bother flying planes into them?

and what is far more laughable is that they knew exactly where the hole was going to be so they can place charges. what a freaking joke. it just shows you that anyone can type a bullshit article on ANYTHING and someone will believe it.

thats the kind of comments i expect to hear
why is it a bullshit article?..its your opinion i suppose...but dont act as if you are 100% right

believe what you want.
its your right as a citizen of the free world
to be gullible and buy this nonesense.

hey, ever consider purchasing the brooklyn bridge?

yeah ive considered it
have you?

Well if the building was laced with explosives, the point for ramming a plane into them is to cover up the reason for the towers to have explosives in them.

But, this isnt me saying that I believe that article or video. I dont think he is entirely correct but... he does have some good ideas that could be questioned because thier is some conincidents and cover up that I feel is suspect.

But I dont think its a conspirecy or any of that.

fair point..you havent dismissed the conspiracy entirely like most people do
thats what annoys me about some people

anymore thoughts?

So lemme get this straight......

Some extremely skilled and brilliantly undetected terrorists somehow managed to rig the two most famous buildings in the world with explosive charges in order to collapse them in such a way that they didn't fall onto the rest of manhattan (how considerate for them to kill only a few thousand instead of 10s of thousands).

Then, to cover up the fact that they had used explosives to destroy the buildings, they hi-jack 2 commercial airliners and fly them into exactly the right floor of each building. Having done this they then delay the explosions for long enough to allow most of the workers to save themselves (again, very considerate) just to make it look like it was the 800 degrees centigrade (1500 degrees in yank) aviation fuel fires that melted enough of the remaining intact steel structure and so caused collapse.

They went to all this trouble to hide the fact they used explosives. Wow, you know what? That really makes sense. No, honestly, I'm being serious.

If you're a terrorist you don't want to cripple the American economy even more by making the towers fall in such a way that both sets of 110 storeys collapse on surrounding buildings, you work that extra bit harder to save lives. Here was me thinking they wanted to cause as much destuction as possible. But really they're just fluffy kittens who want to put across their hatred of America in a violent, but not too violent way, I mean they don't want an R rating, PG-13 will do nicely.

Maybe the other terrorists were bullying them for being the smartest terrorists in the class and the so they wanted to dumb-down the most sophisticated act of terrorism in the history of mankind to become "one of the lads" at terrorist school?

What about the Pentagon? Was there not enough explosives and super-talented pilots to pull the same thing off? Did they send the work-experience kid to be pilot? Or was it cincidence that a plane flew into that? Maybe that was job of the Bully terrorists?

Yup, I'm sold.

couldn't have said it better

Not exactly stupid, if you even read his post.

Plus, there is that silly conspiracy that we've actually never been to the Moon and that it was all filmed in a desert with a black backdrop...where, of course, they made sure all of those fuzzie little animals living out there were held captive until it was done...

And then there was the conspiracy theory that the United States disguised a couple of ballistic missiles as airplanes and THAT was what hit the Pentagon and the Towers...

And then... *killed by an assassin to make him shut up*

Well, I appreciate sarcasm. I'm not saying I believe this at all, I'm just saying.

I think the guy's point was that the building's came down from controlled explosives that was planted by somebody in the US government and then crashed planes into the Tower to look like the planes actually did the dirty work and not controlled explosives. To prove his point, he used evidence saying that the person in control of security was the cousin of Bush, some sort of insurance/stock option was used the day before the attack from major companies inside the WTC and that the building when it fell down, look like a controlled explosion.
The coincidence's are suspect but I still believe that this isn't true. But considering this tactic was believed to be used by Churchill in the WW1 (believed to have sunk the Lusitania to give reasons for US to join of WW1) I don't see this completely far fetched.
Some of the ideas that this guy is presenting are not too far fetched, but it could be that he is over-analyzing something for sake of finding something to use.
Alot of the evidence he is providing does allow for questions to be asked and I hope somebody we can actually find out what happened instead of just hearing from the White House Press Room because if you believe what they say, well the opposition should be able to believe Micheal Moore/ this dude in the article. Both are extremely biased.

What's the bloke's evidence for controlled explosions? I aint downloading an hour long film onto my already overstuffed computer.

This is complete non-sense. I watched the video of the planes going into the tower the morning of september 11th. It happened. Hijackers drove 747 into the north tower, south tower and pentagon.

End of story.

As did I. No need for this over-analyzing and conspiracy-theorizing.

coudnt of said it better

of course the planes crashed in to the buildings...no one is saying otherwise

wow you posted all that without even listening to the guy in the link....that is what this thread is about
a plane crashed into the pentagon...and the pentagon didnt see this comin? its that easy huh?

you dont have to download it..just click on the link..and it will open onto quick time
what gets me is you are writing loads of stuff down arguing with people and you havent even listened to the guy on the link!!
*sigh*

baracustastic if u have time or space in ur comp, i recommend watching the clip. you dont have to believe it, but its interesting to see other points of views.

you dont even have to download the friggin thing...even if you did its not that big of a file

Yes, yes it is. Normally you don't expect a 747 to crash into your work office (which just happens to be the Pentagon or the WTC)...

thats bull...dont the pentagon have radar???it probably wasnt even a plane that crashed into the pentagon
http://tritarget.com/article.php/20041017011728840
http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm
suspicious if u ask me

the radar wont prevent an attack only warn about one, and for what they knew the plane could have multiple targets in DC besides the pentagon. And due to the fact of the news from New York must have had a paralyzing affect on them them

But you find everything suspicious Dean, and I find that very suspicious that you are so suspicious about everything.

i dont find everything suspicious

Finally watched the damn video, (me and techno-guff have hate-hate relations).

Still seems like guff to me.

"the radar wont prevent an attack only warn about one, and for what they knew the plane could have multiple targets in DC besides the pentagon. And due to the fact of the news from New York must have had a paralyzing affect on them them"

But the Pentagon is the most important military building in the most powerful country in the world. So your saying is that they are more important buildins other than the White House and the Pentagon?
Thier the military and the people who make decisions, no matter what happens to thier country, they shouldnt get fazed at all.

And the pictures ive seen, there isnt a plane at all. So its somewhat supicous but people still need more evidence.

The Capitol is just as important. White House is so small it would have been very difficult to hit, they even missed the Pentagon. The Capitol would have been my obvious choice if I was to pick a target

no matter how trained you are you can fazed. It is a matter of responstime to a treath and at that point their attention was toward New York and the events there. They relied to much on a safety system that didnt work.

it was probably a missile

I think the Pentagon is the most important building. It would of been defended pretty heavily if they found out somebody was going to crash a plane into them.

True, but your talking about the leaders of the country. If somebody drops a bomb on me, and Im the leader, Im suppose to act quick to the threat. But in the Pentagon, somebody does a direct attact on your soil and your in the most important military building in your country, you dont think they will react by thinking thier going to be the next target?

If they dont, then I hope the leaders of my country arnt as dumb as the ones in the US.

the attack was allowed to happen more like it
cos it doesnt look like a plane that crashed in to the pentagon
so what was it? a missile?
i believe the whole 9/11 plan was orchestrated in the usa by the goverment
hard to believe? i dont think so

http://www.threeworldwars.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=18
look at this

very interesting^

Why they cause deaths to unarmed citizens?

To start a war for oil and money?
To get rid of Sadam and establish democracy in the middle east?

I dont think they would do that, there is other ways to accomplish thier mission.

funny?
yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

utter crcok of ****

of course it is
it always is isnt it?

i also believe it was orchestrated.

http://www.rense.com/general63/9911skep.htm
read this....info on 9/11 provin the 9/11 attacks was orchestrated

yeah, nothing says 'proof' like rense.com

i guess if its online it MUST be true right?

here's some more reaing material for you:
http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/

well maybe you should create a website..telling people you have all the answers...id love to see that

i can tell by the way you desperately cling to this fool's notion that you kind of want this to be true. keep in mind i'm not saying you would find any happiness in such a tragedy...but you just seem to be bored with the way it really happened, so now its time to throw a new spin on it.
but the fact stands that you have ZERO proof besides whatever crackpot websites you can dig up...its a big hot steaming pile of bullshit.
face it.

don't get me wrong, there ARE genuine conspiracies in our government and in big business, but people who buy thoeries such as this would find the real conspiracies...boring.

i dont want it to be true....why would i? silly thing to say really
ok so u say i have zero proof...neither do u..i want u to explain why u think it is bullshit...step by step tell me why think it is

i already did, as did many others.
you chose to ignore the obvious so why shall i state it again?
talk to architects about how the towers were built and why they
were built that way. ask a welder what happens when red hot steel
buckles, and why its not outrageous to see fire at the point in which
it breaks. there are many people who's opinions you can trust, but
you wont hear them, as you havent.

its not a silly thing to say because i sense unconditional trust in this theory
from you. you seem to see it as fact and will not take a second to think
"what if its wrong". its not an attack on you, for all i know you may indeed
be a very bright chap, but this thread makes you seem quite dim and gullable.

learn to question all possabilities and not just the ones that seem more big and exciting.
THAT is keeping an open mind.

that whole pentagon attack theory has had my interest for some time now. not the idea that our own government orchestrated it, but that it may have been a cruise missile. i dont believe or reject it, i just accept it as a possability.

as far as the WTC, if you did the proper research like many have asked, you would know that it was not a typical steel structure to say the least. the support for the towers was not in its inner structure, but in the outside structure. it was built to withstand the impact of a large plane, and in fact was capable of withstanding a full puncture from one side to the other.

anyway, the point im making is you cant use old fashion steel structures as a reference. its apples and oranges.

eh who care's, believe what you want.

so if it was a cruise missle? who could of done that?
and if it was terrorists who done this..then why would the goverment lie and say it was a plane?
not everything is what they seem

perhaps to not cause panic?
do you think that people would rather hear that terrorists successfully
penetrated our defenses and hit the pentagon with a missile? hell no.

if that was to be true, whats to stop then from attaching a nuclear warhead?

thats crap to be honest..id rather hear the truth..so would everyone else i would imagine
how could the terrorists launch such an attack? woudnt happen

the point is americans are supposed to believe that america is impervious to missile attacks. really though, our defenses against such attacks are weak. sure we can see them coming...but how to stop them.

yeah, id rather hear the truth too...whats your point? i dont get it. how is it that you think that what YOU want is relevant?. anyway, those in power and 'in the know' would rather us not know. thats the point. what we want means nothing. get it?

believe what u want
i believe the whole 9/11 was orchestrated by the goverment
and i dont care what anyone else says

^^very objective.

You moan at others for dismissing evidence then you do the same.

THANK YOU for simplifying what i was trying to say.

what evidence is that then

oh FFS let it be. there's one born every minute

i was happy to let it be
then baracustastic and you followed with some pointless comments
so i reacted
anyway...george bush..what a nice man

Actually, the plane did not fly directly into the Pentagon. It fell just short and kind of hit from the side.

course it did

no it didnt. it pierced the front and went through every building.

thats what has people like myself skeptical of what hit it. it was perfectly cylindrical and little debris was found. they claimed it dragged on the ground before hitting, but the grass was untouched. its odd and certainly worth questioning.

yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah

but this government sabotage conspiracy theory is bullshit concocted by people who get off on being the ultimate devils advocate and taking everyone for a ride. i think that many questions about 9-11 need to be aswered, and bullshit theories kinda trivialise the issue and make the rest of us who want answers...look like paranoid fools who need to get away from the tv.but whatever...its not like those questions will be answered anyway.

This is wrong.....I dont care who believes it but my father was on the beltway when the plane flew overhead. Try convincing him it was a cruise missile.

the truth is out there....some people cant handle the truth
u think that it might be a missle that went into the pentagon..try explaining that to someone in the street...what reaction would u get? and what would u be thinking? u would be thinking..well this person hasnt looked at all the facts but that person is quick to laugh off any conspiracy theory...
well thats life

a lie gets half way around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/PVS/aerial_precollapse11.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/PVS/debris_large1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/PVS/debris_large_21.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v499/PVS/exit_wound1.jpg

it was a direct hit. wtf dude?

look at the massive hole this plane caused

Actually if you look at the pics it suggests that the plane hit on top. There was some documentary that said it hit a few feet before and "flopped" over on the top and through.

and yet there is no wreckage of a plane...no wings..no nothin

there was no flopping. it was a DIRECT HIT

The second pic down doesnt look like it was hit from above? The section of floor should have been pushed in, not down. A direct hit shouldnt have caused that large pile of rubble right at the base of the hole. The debrit would have gone in and to the sides, not pancaked down and out as the pics suggest.

it maintained full velocity or it wouldnt have penetrated straight through multiple buildings like a syringe. there was no flopping. it went in a straight line and was full throttle

O.K.

you are both talkin about a plane that doesnt exist

i never said 'plane' did i. nor did i say 'missile'.

i refer to it as 'whatever is was'

Oh yea, Bin Laden sat in a row boat in the Atlantic, fired off the cruise missile and paddled home laughing all the way.

who said it was bin laden

a cruise missile could be smuggled. there are bigass cargo containers entering u.s. and neighboring ports which go unchecked. yet another unaddressed problem.

im sure it doesnt take a rocket scientist to learn to punch in coordinates and launch it. they learned to fly planes didnt they? why is this laughed off as science fiction? i see no impossibilities. it may be incorrect, i dont cling to it, but i think its possible.

because it sounds stupid to people..and no matter how hard you try to convince them..they will always say u are crazy
you believe that it could be a missile that crashed into the pentagon
but u dont belive explosives in the twin towers..u laugh at me for believing that...but people would laugh at you for saying that stuff about the pentagon...see this is what annoys me...its not crazy or bullshit at all
if all this conspiracy crap is bullshit then i'll hold up my hands and admit i was a fool....but we will probably never know the real answer....im just gonna say that nothing is impossible in this world...ive looked at both sides of the story and im standing by my opinion..
both supposedly conspiracys have decent enough evidence convince people...its just that people refuse to accept it...they are scared of the truth

But the truth could be something different altogether.......

the difference dean is that explosives have to be planted. they would have to be planted in every room facing a window on however many floors were initially hit by the planes. you really believe nobody would
noticed? and not only that, but they would line explosives EXACTLY on the impact points. its freaking batshit dude. im sorry but it is

conspiracy theory only. And there is no way the planes that hit WTC had target floors to hit. They hit the tower randomly, at the speed the planes hit the towers the terrorist should be "glad" they were able to ram the towers at all

http://judicial-inc.biz/Madrid_skyscraper.htm

this building has the same kind of structure as the twin towers
it was on fire for two days and it was still standing

Interesting but yet very suspenise.JM

WTC and Windsor Tower in Madrid are NOT the same kind of structure. The Madrid tower's structure had thick CONCRETE supports. The WTC was made of STEEL. Concrete is waaaaaaaay better than steel in a fire, in fact it is common for steel members to be encased in concrete to increase fire resistance.

Any fire-proofing in the Madrid tower would not have been blasted off/dislodged like the WTC as a result of the planes hitting them.

bombs are really small nowadays and still cause enormous amounts of damage ..they would be hidden and hard to spot...its not as if workers in the towers would say..' before we work shall we just check for some bombs lying about the place''...they would be concealed and people woudnt know they are even there
and i dont think they would have to be planted in every room
there would bea small amount of explosives placed in strategic points,"
i find it hard to believe that the planes alone could of caused the towers to collapse
there were even witnesses saying they heard explosions going off all over the place within the towers....maybe it was somethin else..,maybe not..we will probably never know

well at least you acknowledge that it MIGHT be bullshit.

so do u still think it is utter bullshit?

yeah

that dont surprise me

yeah dean, i think its utter bullshit.
the very same people tried destroying the towers the first time like 10 years before. if it was a government conspiracy the job would have been done the first time around. plus, in the first attack, the terrorists attacked it from the base and wanted to topple one building sideways into another, which could have been faaaaaaaar more disasterous. the terrorists didnt care that it collapsed perfectly and were most likely a bit disappointed that they did.

if the government wanted to destroy the towers in 2001, then they wanted to in the first attack. so why would they care to have a controlled demolition in order to save surrounding property and people? why would they not just do the same style attack, pack 3 times more explosives, and be done with it.

it makes no sense. so yes, i call it bullshit

in times of government coverups, i believe the answer is not necessarily the official one or that of the conspiracy theorist...but the one that makes sense. this theory makes absolutely no sense.

what?

ya head ay bloody screwed on!

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2005/300305newrevelations.htm

Sgt. Matthew Tartaglia was a rescue worker at 9/11. He joined Alex to discuss how rescuers were prevented from doing their jobs properly, were not protected from harmful asbestos, and how explosives, possibly tactical nukes, brought down the towers..

"possibly tactical nukes", now that is just retarded! So what does he think? It was just a few "small" nuclear bombs?

click the link

its interesting what he has to say

I'm new, so this forum won't let me post a link.

There is overwhelming evidence that the official story is BS. Spend some time researching and you will be amazed.

Google terms like:

911 cell phone calls
911 Controlled Demolition
911 ananswered questions
Kean commision conflicts of interest
911 families who refused to take the US payoff

It takes a while, but the truth is important!

well...lord knows if its on the internet it MUST be true!!!

Originally posted by PVS
well...lord knows if its on the internet it MUST be true!!!

So does it feel to be pure evil?

Please, follow my suggested search topics, or are you afraid of the evil truth you might find??

Originally posted by PVS
well...lord knows if its on the internet it MUST be true!!!

and if it comes from the goverment and papers it MUST be true also!!

look. It is these wacked out conspiracy theories that lost us democrats the election in 2004. So if people want to peddle these than fine!

wacked out??
do some research...t think u'll find they are not as wacked out as u claim

How long before the forum let's newbie's post links?

hey deano...i dont believe the official report.
never said i did. i just dont believe this either

bad deduction

what link do u wanna post?
i'll post it for u..pm me if ya want

Originally posted by PVS
hey deano...i dont believe the official report.
never said i did. i just dont believe this either

bad deduction

u dont belive the official event..nor do u believe the conspiracy

whats the truth then? IYO?

i believe one of the two has to be the truth

i think the so called conspiracy theorys have some valid points..sue me

Originally posted by Deano
what link do u wanna post?
i'll post it for u..pm me if ya want

Thanks,

I had to send an e-mail 'cause the PM does't allow links either

honestly, every single person who says these are nothing more than conspiracy theories kind of piss me off.

ive seen all these videos. Im not just agreeing with them so i can "find things" and nitpick at obvious answers. It just doesnt make sense that terrorists did this.

Phone calls are extremely awkward. who the hell talks to there parents and says there own name like that?

where the hell did the plane go that HIT the pentagon?? where? your telling me that "conspiracy theorists" are the only people that can open there eyes? and before you say that the plane got "vaporized" (which was THEIR excuse) it would be impossible for that to happen. planes dont get vaporized by crashing. they just erupt into flames.

also, why the hell is the hole that the plane made when it hit the pentagon so small? have you even seen it? its not that hard to watch a video... a plane of regular size would have made a WAY bigger hole than that. including the fact that it would have ****ed up the grass on crash landing. and the grass was pretty much untouched. sounds like stupid "conspiracies" to me

there are so many more problems of why this looks rigged... an easy way to make war and get a titter grip on this pathetic excuse for a country anyway.

Well done for resurrecting a 5 and a half year old thread.

Kudos to you.

I could absolutely rape your post to death with photographic evidence proving you wrong but I've done it to that many idiots in the conspiracy forum now it's actually getting tedious.

Originally posted by jaden101
Well done for resurrecting a 5 and a half year old thread.

Kudos to you.

well, did you look, they're making fresh and new arguments that have never before been shown errorous, like new evidence, not just repeating the same old bullshit from 9 years ago

Originally posted by Sappho
ive seen all these videos. Im not just agreeing with them so i can "find things" and nitpick at obvious answers. It just doesnt make sense that terrorists did this.

It doesn't make sense that violent people who dislike America and have the resources to plan and carry out attacks might attack America?

Originally posted by Sappho
where the hell did the plane go that HIT the pentagon?? where? your telling me that "conspiracy theorists" are the only people that can open there eyes? and before you say that the plane got "vaporized" (which was THEIR excuse) it would be impossible for that to happen. planes dont get vaporized by crashing. they just erupt into flames.

Most of it went into the Pentagon. The only people who claimed it was vaporized were conspiracy theorists.

Originally posted by jaden101
Well done for resurrecting a 5 and a half year old thread.

Kudos to you.

I could absolutely rape your post to death with photographic evidence proving you wrong but I've done it to that many idiots in the conspiracy forum now it's actually getting tedious.
honestly, your just an *******. debate it if you want, but i honestly doubt anyone would like to debate or even talk with you when you remind me of some chick on her period. people like you are the reason why i wrote the first sentence of my last post in the first place.

i just started looking into it/hearing about it recently, which is why i posted it.

and im not subject to change, prove me wrong and ill concede.

Originally posted by Sappho
and im not subject to change, prove me wrong and ill concede.

Parapraxis alert! Parapraxis alert!

Originally posted by Sappho
and im not subject to change, prove me wrong and ill concede.

http://www.cracked.com/article_15740_was-911-inside-job.html

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Parapraxis alert! Parapraxis alert!
lol i didnt mean that, which you probably knew.

and loose change wasnt specifically what i was talking about, but i have seen it. and inimalist, your smart, do you believe what was said in the link you shown me? i think you probably do, i just want clarification.

Originally posted by Sappho
honestly, your just an *******. debate it if you want, but i honestly doubt anyone would like to debate or even talk with you when you remind me of some chick on her period. people like you are the reason why i wrote the first sentence of my last post in the first place.

i just started looking into it/hearing about it recently, which is why i posted it.

and im not subject to change, prove me wrong and ill concede.

http://www.historycommons.org/events-images/a853_pentagon_debris_2050081722-21381.jpg

Plane debris on the lawn of the Pentagon.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/pentagon/pentagon-engine3.jpg

Plane engine inside the Pentagon.


http://www.rense.com/general32/aedrive6.jpg

Plane wheel from inside the Pentagon.

Do you want to put your brain into gear and think about some basic differences between this crash and a normal accidental plane crash and why there is more debris at those than at the Pentagon?...Here's some help.

In a normal crash, the pilot is actually trying to PREVENT the plane from crashing....Therefor the plane is going slowly so as to prevent damage and give people the best chance of survival...In this case the pilot WANTED to crash the plane and actually accelerated to around 500mph before hitting the Pentagon...That's about 4 times faster than a plane during a typical crash. If you double the speed of something you quadruple the force with which is carries...In this case it hit with 16 times the force of a plane in a normal crash.

Now...Onto the Pentagon itself...The Pentagon is a building designed to withstand direct bomb blasts. A plane is a thin tube of aluminuim. Generally quite easy to see which would come off worse in this situation.

As for the lawn question...It didn't skid along the long...It was in the air...I notice you conveniently left out the fact that there was a trail of destroyed street light all the way up to the Pentagon where the plane's wings took them out as it flew toward the building.

So...While you might be right about me being an a*****e...I'm the one who's right about the subject.