# 9/11 wreckage **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 16, 2009, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567 "2009-01-16T05:42:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/101 "2009-01-17T04:14:44Z")
And **Tom** , none of that steel would be red-hot after 5 weeks, no matter how good the insulation was. A day? Pretty hot. Three days? Pretty not. Five weeks? No way outside of Hell. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/102 "2009-01-17T04:14:51Z")
I will also point out that most of your concerns have been addressed in the previous threads on the topic. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/103 "2009-01-17T04:17:38Z")
> [@dropzone](#): > > And **Tom** , none of that steel would be red-hot after 5 weeks, no matter how good the insulation was. A day? Pretty hot. Three days? Pretty not. Five weeks? No way outside of Hell. That was part of the problem with the “witnesses.” The two who had actually seen something were there just a couple of days after the attack while the two who were reporting things they had never seen were not providing an actual time line for the events; they were reporting, weeks after the fact, on rumors heard at some undetermined earlier time. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/104 "2009-01-17T04:19:01Z")
> [@jessesheeran](#): > > If the steel really did bend or fail halfway up the tower, the building would collapse, but wouldn’t more of the steel beams stay together? No. This appears to be the fundamental weakness of most of your arguments. Your understanding of physics is so weak, when you conclude it could not have happened the way the experts say it happened, it just lacks all credibility. You seem to think concrete and steel should behave in ways that they simply don’t in real life. It’s as if you get all your knowledge of physics from watching explosions in movies or something. When millions of tons of steel and concrete plunge over a quarter of a mile, the energy released is so much greater than any previous reference, comparisons to smaller scale implosions or building collapses simply don’t hold up any more. It’s like comparing the shuttle Columbia disaster to a fender bender on the interstate. Things happen differently under those conditions, and pointing to those differences and saying, “Ah-HA!!!” does not imply a conspiracy. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/105 "2009-01-17T04:23:04Z")
> [@](#): > > So, Is there a dark government, or an underworld mafia element that “owns” and controls much of US government? Most likely. The thing I think is most telling is the complete lack of ionized rubidium in the resulting debris. By most estimates there should have been either large amounts, or it’s corollary ununtrium should have been found in trace amounts on or near any heated surface. 2 explanations: 1. The heat exchange process during early burn was not within 1 or 2 standard deviations of a typical heat-expand-melt thermal process or 1. Alternate reactive substances existed in quantities large enough to interact with the previously listed elements at their grain boundary (this point is critical) Either way, this is basic physics, the conclusion is pretty apparent. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/106 "2009-01-17T04:29:26Z")
> [@jessesheeran](#): > > But then the owner of WTC couldn’t have cashed out his insurance policy. Maybe justifying aggression in the middle east wasn’t the **only** reason. Its all just friends taking care of friends. The insurance policy was the first trip to the bank. Then came the halliburton contracts. It all worked out. The insurance money Larry Silverstein got from the destruction of the WTC has to go back into rebuilding the complex - and it only covers slightly more than half the costs of new construction. [Cite.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDXNDZDATLg) Silverstein lost _billions_ due to the attack. Meanwhile, he’s lost (to date) seven years of income on one of the most valuable pieces of real estate in the world. The WTC had full occupancy at the time of the attacks, was home to one of the most successful shopping centers in the country, and was home to the highest grossing restaurant in the US. The place was a gold mine - and there’s no guarantee that the structure that replaces it (whenever that’s going to be finished) will ever be as profitable as the original, particularly considering what happened to the first one. > [@](#): > > look, I am outsmarted in this thread. i haven’t done enough research, and all those arguing their side have demonstrated a better understanding of physics itself, and of historical reality of the events of 911. but… I’m not really convinced. you may have made the better argument FWIW, but it you didn’t win **me** over. So, you admit that you don’t know what you’re talking about, and that everyone else in the thread is better informed and better educated on the subject than you are… but you still think you’re right. Can you explain how that works, exactly? > [@](#): > > **Steel doesn’t have to melt, it is weakened beyond structural stability at 1800 degrees** If the steel really did bend or fail halfway up the tower, the building would collapse, but wouldn’t more of the steel beams stay together? Why did only 10 stories or so remain standing after the dust cleared? The steel frame collapsed, but wouldn’t the beams hold themselves together in all areas what weren’t directly touching heat? (the area around the plane’s impact). I would expect to find beams intact above and below its point of failure. Where is the 40 story steel beam that could be erected as monument? Because the amount of force generated by seventy stories of steel and concrete at rest is not nearly as large as the amount of force generated by those same seventy stories in free fall. Once the building started to fall apart, even the undamaged supports couldn’t possibly cope with the stresses they were under, and they were torn apart by the force of the collapsing debris. Basically, once the structure failed, everything above the failure point acted like an immense hammer, pounding everything below the failure point into pieces. > [@](#): > > what do you make of reports of pools of molten steel that were found up to five weeks after sept. 11? it seems like something did melt the steel anyway. A government agency of geology took geothermic pictures that showed an unexplainable heat source at the foot of the towers. There were no reports of molten steel in the ruins of the WTC. There were reports of molten _metal_, but there is no evidence to support the claim that these pools were steel. Far more likely, they were pools of molten aluminum, which had covered the external facade of the building. Aluminum has a much lower melting point than steel, and the conditions in the rubble pile were more than sufficient to keep the aluminum in a liquid state long after the collapse. > [@](#): > > **the conspiracy is so big that it could never be organized without a whistleblower, were all the investigators in on the theory?** Well, if you were for the CIA and sometime in June you put a suitcase in a specific room of WTC, you are not exactly “in on the conspiracy.” It make have taken literally thousands of people to execute, but no-one knows where to draw the line between conspirators and those following orders **(so don’t take this point for granted)** First of all, if the WTC was a controlled demolition, you’re going to need to do more than just leave a suitcase in a room. You need to attach the charges directly to the steel girders. This is especially true if you argue that thermite was used to drop the building, as thermite isn’t going to burn anything that its not directly touching. Consider also that, in 1993, a truck packed full of explosives was detonated in the garage of the WTC, and failed to cause significant structural damage. You’re going to need a hell of a lot more explosives than you can pack in a suitcase to bring that thing down. Lastly, the WTC had 98% occupancy. You’re going to have a heck of a time finding a spare room where you can keep an unattended briefcase for three months. Let alone more than a dozen of them, if you want to guarantee that the building will collapse. And you’re still left with the basic idiocy of planting bombs in the building, and then crashing an airplane into it to cover up the existence of the bombs. Why not just detonate the bombs, and blame that on the terrorists? Surely, sneaking one guy with a suitcase into a busy office building is no more difficult than sneaking a dozen guys onto four different planes with boxcutters. > [@](#): > > as for the investigators, it does not follow that they were all in one the conspiracy. even though many experts were part of the teams that investigated WTC collapse, still these experts were following orders as well and there is no saying that any single area of expertise will be crucial enough to uncover the truth. everyone in the investigation had a task. unless somebody found a note from cheney that said, “fuck NYC, long live rock n roll”, i doubt any single person is going to break the whole case You’ve been arguing in this very thread that a single person, Steve Jones, who was not even directly involved in the investigation, has already broken the case. If one guy with no forensics background can figure it out by watching newsfeeds and stealing material from a crime scene at night, how the fuck are you going to keep thousands of trained investigators with full access to the site in the dark? > [@](#): > > and there is a question about who was allowed to investigate. clearly the FBI. FEMA? we know it wasn’t a tornado. and from wikipedia: > how reassuring. yeah, i’ll believe whatever _they_ say Why would you disbelieve them in particular? > [@](#): > > **if it was a controlled demolition, how come there were no bombs? why weren’t there bombs at lower levels? why didn’t the firemen report explosions** it was, there were, there were, and they did. I already said that I am not going to post links in this post… Yes, god forbid you should back up anything you say with something that might be mistaken as a fact. > [@](#): > > I have seen news reports standing near the towers stop their reports and look back at the building where you can clearly hear there was an explosion before the collapse. I have seen documents that said that the radio communication with firemen in the upper levels of the towers indicated many explosions and **injuries** _before_ the collapse. I have also seen interviews with the sub-basement janitor who had worked his job for **many** years who felt and heard explosions and that is why he got the fuck outta there. > **So one side or the other here is spouting mis-truths and hearsay.** I’m going to go ahead and say right now that you’ve never seen any of that. Prove me wrong. > [@](#): > > And do not think there won’t be a thread coming just on the anecdotal or witness accounts evidence, which by the way appeal to my rational mind much more than any of this physics nonsense. So, you’re saying that you trust eyewitness accounts, which are notoriously unreliable, over the unyielding laws which govern the very functioning of the universe. Sure, that’s fair. I mean, who wouldn’t? :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > I was going to leave you with one question. do you those of you that are arguing here against me believe that there is a rouge force in international politics (and power)? There is in my town for example. actually a huge drug-war going on here between san diego and tijuana. some of the most powerful people involved in the drug trade are in the government itself and are exploiting their positions of power to advance their drug-trade careers. some are working outside the government completely (and against it too). there is crime at every level of politics. **do you think that in international politics, everyone is playing by the rules?** i wager that there has been enough disappearing CIA money over the years to build a tight-knit network of criminal power, and with their influence they have been become capable of, for instance, destroying the WTC. like i said, cashing in the insurance was just the first trip to the bank. i’m sure this organization’s point of view is that when bush and cheney actually became president and vp, it was the culmination of the greatest opportunity of their lives, to > > 1. take money > 2. keep themselves entrenched in power > **So, Is there a dark government, or an underworld mafia element that “owns” and controls much of US government? so entrenched in US government that they can control the elements around them that would otherwise bring them to justice?** if bush/cheney weren’t working for themselves, what other explanation can you give for fucking over the country so royally? I think that corruption is widespread in government and in law enforcement. I think that the Bush administration has been the perfect storm of cronyism, opportunism, and incompetence. I have no problem at all with the idea that George Bush would be willing to kill three thousand innocent civilians if he thought he could make a buck off the deal. But none of that comes close to being any kind of proof that he, or anyone else in the US government, was directly responsible for the attacks on 9/11, or that the destruction of the WTC didn’t go down exactly as we all saw it on television. The evidence presented for such a conspiracy is far more easily explained by the official theory than it is by the conspiracy theory, and the reasoning behind such a conspiracy doesn’t make any sense. It’s the second\* most retarded conspiracy theory ever hatched from minds of men. [sub]\*Pride of place, as always, goes to the moon hoaxers.[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/107 "2009-01-17T04:32:50Z")
> [@jessesheeran](#): > > But then the owner of WTC couldn’t have cashed out his insurance policy. Maybe justifying aggression in the middle east wasn’t the **only** reason. Its all just friends taking care of friends. The insurance policy was the first trip to the bank. Then came the halliburton contracts. It all worked out. Why do you think they needed 9/11 to get rich quick ? Enron and Halliburton fucked people over long before the war. Hell, Bernie Madoff made millions, did \*he \*organize a vast conspiracy to murder random people ? It’s easy to make money if you don’t give a good goddamn about the victims of your schemes. And the WTC insurance money is spit in the rain compared to your average white collar embezzlement. Note also that the war in Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 - while Bush and his propaganda team tried very very hard to make them synonymous, many people of the non-drooling-moron kind called shenanigans. At which point it became “well, ok, they didn’t do 9/11… but he gassed the Kurds ! And there’s WMDs all over the place ! And he tried to kill my daddy ! And… well shit, I don’t know. Don’t they need Freedom and Democracy ? Do you hate freedom too ? 'Cause they hate us for our freedom, you know.”. If invading Iraq and seizing the oil contracts was the operative plan behind the supposed conspiracy, why make the fake terrorists Saudis & Afghanis ? And why make them Islamic fundies, when Iraq is one (if not the) secular state in the Arab world ? Wouldn’t a clear “this is for bombing Baghdad, you imperialist pigdogs !” have done a better job ? > [@](#): > > look, I am outsmarted in this thread. i haven’t done enough research, and all those arguing their side have demonstrated a better understanding of physics itself, and of historical reality of the events of 911. but… I’m not really convinced. you may have made the better argument FWIW, but it you didn’t win me over. So essentialy, what you’re saying is “all right, so maybe my opinion is based on a bunch of shit… I still stand by it.” ? What’s the point of debating then ? What would win \*\*you \*\*over ? ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/108 "2009-01-17T04:35:29Z")
> [@jessesheeran](#): > > you may have made the better argument FWIW, but it you didn’t win **me** over. You can’t use reason to argue a man out of a position that he didn’t reason himself into. > [@](#): > > what do you make of reports of pools of molten steel that were found up to five weeks after sept. 11? it seems like something did melt the steel anyway. A government agency of geology took geothermic pictures that showed an unexplainable heat source at the foot of the towers. Yes, underground temperatures remained high for weeks. There is only one possible explanation: underground fires, which burn hot but slowly (they consume their fuel slowly because they’re oxygen-starved, but stay hot because they’re insulated). There was no “unexplainable” heat source - there were fires. I’ve seen some nitwits suggest that thermite could explain it, but a proper understanding of the thermite reaction actually rules it out as a candidate. Thermite requires no external oxygen source (it has all the elements needed for its chemical reaction built-in), so it reacts very quickly. So maybe you could explain high temperatures for a few minutes; after that, underground fires are the only explanation. ---
**Author:** ![SCSimmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e495f1/32.png) [@SCSimmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SCSimmons)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/109 "2009-01-17T04:38:35Z")
> [@RaftPeople](#): > > The thing I think is most telling is the complete lack of ionized rubidium in the resulting debris. By most estimates there should have been either large amounts, or it’s corollary ununtrium should have been found in trace amounts on or near any heated surface. > > 2 explanations: > > 1. The heat exchange process during early burn was not within 1 or 2 standard deviations of a typical heat-expand-melt thermal process > > or > > 1. Alternate reactive substances existed in quantities large enough to interact with the previously listed elements at their grain boundary (this point is critical) > Either way, this is basic physics, the conclusion is pretty apparent. Suddenly, everything makes sense!!! 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/110 "2009-01-17T05:15:48Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > In terms of pure sentimentality, a bunch of bankers in a pair of giant shoe boxes isn’t that great a target. I have to admit, I still get kinda choked up when I remember one announcer observing that the Empire State Building was now the tallest building in New York. It upset me because it represented a loss of progress; a regression. It frankly made me want to see the entire Arab world bankrupted and leveled for daring to destroy a wonder of engineering that their primitive culture could never have produced. I’ve since calmed down, but a lingering echo of those emotions stay with me. ---
**Author:** ![reef\_shark](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bbe5ce/32.png) [@reef\_shark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/reef_shark)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/111 "2009-01-17T05:33:26Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I have to admit, I still get kinda choked up when I remember one announcer observing that the Empire State Building was now the tallest building in New York. It upset me because it represented a loss of progress; a regression. It frankly made me want to see the entire Arab world bankrupted and leveled for daring to destroy a wonder of engineering that their primitive culture could never have produced. > > I’ve since calmed down, but a lingering echo of those emotions stay with me. the reason i started this thread (which has probably beaten the proverbial horse several times here now) is bc ive also been upset at how we, the public, can be lied to so easily. and the people who know the truth usually get paid off or are “suicided” bc we should never know. i guess the streets would flood, we would all start breaking everything, and the whole industrial market would collapse. but let us all agree on something: if we can (and should) see a tape found in an abandoned shack in afghanistan (or wherever it was) w/ bin laden on it, shouldnt we be able to see a gas station video of a plane flying over D.C. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/112 "2009-01-17T05:36:20Z")
Well, you see… the camera was pointed at bin Laden. That’s why he’s on the tape. ---
**Author:** ![reef\_shark](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bbe5ce/32.png) [@reef\_shark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/reef_shark)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/113 "2009-01-17T05:43:35Z")
> [@CurtC](#): > > I’ll try to clear up some of this wreckage… > You may want to check what you actually saw. There are photos of little tents with blue tarp roofs on the Pentagon lawn, to provide some shelter for the workers. I haven’t seen any trucks with blue tarps, nor anything being hauled away under blue tarps. > > Yes, please post any photos of plane parts that don’t match a 757. All the ones I’ve seen (wheels, tires, gear struts, engine parts) do match a 757. > > It was _not_ vaporized, and anyone who says that it was is an idiot. > > There was a crash and a fire. Nothing was vaporized, so human remains could be identified by DNA matching. This matching was done by samples of hair etc. provided by the victims’ family members. I don’t think the FBI tried to get samples from family members of the hijackers, but there was some matching done to samples taken from the hijackers’ hotel rooms and rental cars. > > The FBI seized security camera videos from all around the area, hoping to find something that showed the plane. \*\*Almost all of what they confiscated didn’t show anything interesting, presumably the parking lots and entrance doors of businesses around the Pentagon, things that security cameras of private facilities normally are aimed at. \*\*Two of the videos from the Pentagon parking lot have been released, and what they show is consistent with a 757. Video from the gas station near the end of its flight show a reflection of the explosion, and a video from the Doubletree hotel across the freeway show the fireball, but the approach path is blocked by a freeway bridge. An FOIA request was filed for any videos that showed the plane or the crash, and a person was assigned to watch them all. These four are all we have. > > **No, only the strong outer wall, then the pretty weak brick wall at the inside of ring C was breached by still-moving debris**. Other than that, it was just office partitions and some drywall kind of interior office walls. > > The Pentagon’s exterior walls were reinforced to help protect against bomb blasts, not against 100-ton jetliners flying 500 mph. > > The Pentagon is a giant office building - it didn’t have a military defense system, other than security guards with guns. how can we assume that what the fbi seized and refused to show us wasnt “interesting”… when we havent seen these tapes and i believe the walls were reinforced after the crash, if the walls were that solid the body of the plane couldnt have cut through 3 walls, leaving almost a human sized hole at ring C what is most troubling to me is how a plane could deviate from a flight path for more than 40 mins, and be allowed to threaten the DC area (white house, pentagon, etc) - there is an AF/norad establishment less than 15 mins away from the pentagon, plus a navy base too if im not mistaken. i would think that a commercial plane should be intercepted before being allowed to land on the white house front lawn. i have now deviated from the original thread but its all related i mean how do you think the plane in shanksville crashed, 4 people retook control of it? i hope so for our sakes ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/114 "2009-01-17T05:53:47Z")
> [@reef\_shark](#): > > the reason i started this thread (which has probably beaten the proverbial horse several times here now) is bc ive also been upset at how we, the public, can be lied to so easily. and the people who know the truth usually get paid off or are “suicided” bc we should never know. i guess the streets would flood, we would all start breaking everything, and the whole industrial market would collapse. > > but let us all agree on something: > > if we can (and should) see a tape found in an abandoned shack in afghanistan (or wherever it was) w/ bin laden on it, > > shouldnt we be able to see a gas station video of a plane flying over D.C. Bullshit. Don’t attempt to link my reaction to whatever determinedly ignorant crap you’re simply parroting from conspiracy websites. ---
**Author:** ![reef\_shark](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bbe5ce/32.png) [@reef\_shark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/reef_shark)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/115 "2009-01-17T05:55:06Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Bullshit. Don’t attempt to link my reaction to whatever determinedly ignorant crap you’re simply parroting from conspiracy websites. i guess you conveniently missed the rest of the post eh? ---
**Author:** ![reef\_shark](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bbe5ce/32.png) [@reef\_shark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/reef_shark)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/116 "2009-01-17T06:02:07Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > Well, you see… the camera was pointed at bin Laden. That’s why he’s on the tape. > **[The Fake 2001 Osama bin Laden Video Tape](https://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/osamatape.html?q=osamatape.html)** the 4 pics at the bottom show there is an odd man out ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/117 "2009-01-17T06:04:09Z")
> [@reef\_shark](#): > > [The Fake 2001 Osama bin Laden Video Tape](http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/osamatape.html?q=osamatape.html) > > the 4 pics at the bottom show there is an odd man out You’re missing the point. You asked why we can’t see gas station video of the aircraft flying over DC. If the camera isn’t pointed at the aircraft, you won’t have footage of it. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/118 "2009-01-17T06:09:12Z")
> [@reef\_shark](#): > > i guess you conveniently missed the rest of the post eh? I read it and I stand by my assessment of Bullshit. Your argument completely depends on _not_ having evidence. ---
**Author:** ![reef\_shark](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bbe5ce/32.png) [@reef\_shark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/reef_shark)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/119 "2009-01-17T06:10:22Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#): > > You’re missing the point. You asked why we can’t see gas station video of the aircraft flying over DC. If the camera isn’t pointed at the aircraft, you won’t have footage of it. no dude. you will never have footage of something if you dont have the tape. agent johnson stuck his grubby hand into the vhs deck and took the tape out. thats the point but there was no fed interfering with a tape from halfway across the world being broadcast on national tv… that is the point ---
**Author:** ![Erdosain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/erdosain/32/7284_2.png) [@Erdosain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Erdosain)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2009, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567/120 "2009-01-17T06:10:52Z")
> [@jessesheeran](#): > > I was going to leave you with one question. do you those of you that are arguing here against me believe that there is a rouge force in international politics (and power)? I, for one, do believe there is a rouge force at work in this country, obsessed with trying to make us all apple-cheeked. They already took over Kampuchea, people! Right now, they’re busy rigging the rest of our skyscrapers with explosives and high-grade cosmetics, waiting for other airliners to collide with them. That’s why they stole both of the Hudson River US Airways engines! They were packed with Revlon and intended for Chrysler Building. Meanwhile, I guess they’d better hope that no one notices all that wiring and tons of explosives just sitting next to the freight elevators on every floor. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/9-11-wreckage/481567.md?page=7)