9/11 conspiracy movie

[Kakdiesel]

I'll begin with the Pentagon Hole Theory, great Moonbattery to say the least.

You can't discount 100's of eyewitnesses who saw the 757 hit the Pentagon. Take first, Steve Anderson of USA Today

...At that moment we all knew what had happened. Terrorists had struck hard in New York. We all felt vulnerable in our own "Twin Towers" that overlook Washington, D.C. We have had several bomb threats over the years, but we never dreamed that something like this would happen.

Shortly after watching the second tragedy, I heard jet engines pass our building, which, being so close to the airport is very common. But I thought the airport was closed. I figured it was a plane coming in for landing. A few moments later, as I was looking down at my desk, the plane caught my eye.

It didn't register at first. I thought to myself that I couldn't believe the pilot was flying so low. Then it dawned on me what was about to happen. I watched in horror as the plane flew at treetop level, banked slightly to the left, drug it's wing along the ground and slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon exploding into a giant orange fireball. Then black smoke. Then white smoke... ​

c. Popular Mechanics did a large piece debunking 9-11 myths. In regards to the hole in the pentagon, they write:

When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.

Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."

The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide--not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage.​

how does an entire 757 disintegrate? no pieces of the plane left behind at the scene of the crash?

i mean nothing dude. cmon.

 

[Zuperman]

So, how do you guys feel about and moddle east and arabs in general after seeing that video???

 

[mountain muscle]

Moved to the conspiracy forum.


WTF you crazy people?

 

[redguru]

how does an entire 757 disintegrate? no pieces of the plane left behind at the scene of the crash?

i mean nothing dude. cmon.

Again from Popular Mechanics

CLAIM: Conspiracy theorists insist there was no plane wreckage at the Pentagon. "In reality, a Boeing 757 was never found," claims pentagonstrike.co.uk, which asks the question, "What hit the Pentagon on 9/11?"

FACT: Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"

 

[Kakdiesel]

i disagree with your "evidence" but i'll accept it as a counterpoint. ok now with the rest of my list

 

[mountain muscle]

i disagree with your "evidence" but i'll accept it as a counterpoint. ok now with the rest of my list

How so? How many planes crashing into a building at several hundreds of mile per hour, laden with fuel, are you familiar with?

 

[redguru]

CLAIM: As each tower collapsed, clearly visible puffs of dust and debris were ejected from the sides of the buildings. An advertisement in The New York Times for the book Painful Questions: An Analysis Of The September 11th Attack made this claim: "The concrete clouds shooting out of the buildings are not possible from a mere collapse. They do occur from explosions." Numerous conspiracy theorists cite Van Romero, an explosives expert and vice president of the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, who was quoted on 9/11 by the Albuquerque Journal as saying "there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse." The article continues, "Romero said the collapse of the structures resembled those of controlled implosions used to demolish old structures."

FACT: Once each tower began to collapse, the weight of all the floors above the collapsed zone bore down with pulverizing force on the highest intact floor. Unable to absorb the massive energy, that floor would fail, transmitting the forces to the floor below, allowing the collapse to progress downward through the building in a chain reaction. Engineers call the process "pancaking," and it does not require an explosion to begin, according to David Biggs, a structural engineer at Ryan-Biggs Associates and a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) team that worked on the FEMA report.

Like all office buildings, the WTC towers contained a huge volume of air. As they pancaked, all that air--along with the concrete and other debris pulverized by the force of the collapse--was ejected with enormous energy. "When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it's going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder tells PM. Those clouds of dust may create the impression of a controlled demolition, Sunder adds, "but it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception."

Demolition expert Romero regrets that his comments to the Albuquerque Journal became fodder for conspiracy theorists. "I was misquoted in saying that I thought it was explosives that brought down the building," he tells PM. "I only said that that's what it looked like."

Romero, who agrees with the scientific conclusion that fire triggered the collapses, demanded a retraction from the Journal. It was printed Sept. 22, 2001. "I felt like my scientific reputation was on the line." But emperors-clothes.com saw something else: "The paymaster of Romero's research institute is the Pentagon. Directly or indirectly, pressure was brought to bear, forcing Romero to retract his original statement." Romero responds: "Conspiracy theorists came out saying that the government got to me. That is the farthest thing from the truth. This has been an albatross around my neck for three years."

 

[anthrax]

Redguru,

A few questions:

Why isn't there a single photo of the Boing 757 which supposedly crashed on the Pentagon?

How come the passengers of flight 93 were able to use their cell phones?

What is the explanation for Building 7?

What about the put options and other insider trades just before 9/11?
This can be easily verified or debunked....

I'm not saying that the conspiracy theory is valid but hiding some vital piece of information doesn't help ...

 

[beefcake28]

CLAIM: As each tower collapsed, clearly visible puffs of dust and debris were ejected from the sides of the buildings. An advertisement in The New York Times for the book Painful Questions: An Analysis Of The September 11th Attack made this claim: "The concrete clouds shooting out of the buildings are not possible from a mere collapse. They do occur from explosions." Numerous conspiracy theorists cite Van Romero, an explosives expert and vice president of the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, who was quoted on 9/11 by the Albuquerque Journal as saying "there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse." The article continues, "Romero said the collapse of the structures resembled those of controlled implosions used to demolish old structures."

FACT: Once each tower began to collapse, the weight of all the floors above the collapsed zone bore down with pulverizing force on the highest intact floor. Unable to absorb the massive energy, that floor would fail, transmitting the forces to the floor below, allowing the collapse to progress downward through the building in a chain reaction. Engineers call the process "pancaking," and it does not require an explosion to begin, according to David Biggs, a structural engineer at Ryan-Biggs Associates and a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) team that worked on the FEMA report.

Like all office buildings, the WTC towers contained a huge volume of air. As they pancaked, all that air--along with the concrete and other debris pulverized by the force of the collapse--was ejected with enormous energy. "When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it's going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder tells PM. Those clouds of dust may create the impression of a controlled demolition, Sunder adds, "but it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception."

Demolition expert Romero regrets that his comments to the Albuquerque Journal became fodder for conspiracy theorists. "I was misquoted in saying that I thought it was explosives that brought down the building," he tells PM. "I only said that that's what it looked like."

Romero, who agrees with the scientific conclusion that fire triggered the collapses, demanded a retraction from the Journal. It was printed Sept. 22, 2001. "I felt like my scientific reputation was on the line." But emperors-clothes.com saw something else: "The paymaster of Romero's research institute is the Pentagon. Directly or indirectly, pressure was brought to bear, forcing Romero to retract his original statement." Romero responds: "Conspiracy theorists came out saying that the government got to me. That is the farthest thing from the truth. This has been an albatross around my neck for three years."

Seismic graphs show the fingerprints of a controlled demolition on the twin towers...

What about the recordings of radio transmissions from firefighters that were inside the building right before it collapsed saying that there were bombs going off all around them? Almost all of those recordings were destroyed, but not all.

What about the admission of the owner of the WTC admitting they pulled building 7 ( i.e. controlled demolition) in a PBS special?? How do you demolition a practically undamaged 47 story building in a matter of a couple hours, without prior knowledge? A 47 story building would take months of preparation and calculations for that type of precision demolition, yet they do it in a matter of hours? And why did they demo a practically undamaged building? What was in there that needed to be hidden? CIA headquarters, the mayors reinforced emergency command bunker, etc...

What about the numberous phone calls, e-mails, etc to people of importance telling them not to fly on 9-11, or not to go into work at the WTC that day. They got those notices well in advance of the events...

Why did Gov. Jeb Bush declare martial law in florida 2 days before 9-11, without any reason?? Unless he knew what was about to happen...
Check the florida website, here's a link to the executive order itself:
http://www.myflorida.com/eog_new/eog/orders/2001/september/eo2001-261-09-07-01.html

I could write a damn book with all the evidence I have (several gigabytes of documents, news articles, and scientific analysis reports), but... I need to get back to my mid-term that is due tomorrow. Maybe later I'll get into this more.

 

[Lestat]

this is pretty damn good!