Was 9/11 an inside job?

Great Debates
21

Read the links.

You know who almost always disagrees with these claims? People who know anything about demolitions. Debris rained down all over the area and destroyed another building or two. That’s the exact opposite of what you want in a demolition.

Maybe, but the FBI didn’t need the evidence to sit there for a year while they sifted through every single piece of it. We all saw planes hit the buildings.

That’s where the arguments are. If you’re that interested, go read them.

There’s nothing funny about the attacks. The conspiracy theories, however, are so ludicrous that they can be funny.

22

9/11 Debate: Loose Change Filmmakers vs. Popular Mechanics Editors of “Debunking 9/11 Myths”

23

…and you don’t appear to need any facts, either!

If you did, you’d, ya know, click the links and read the reports. :rolleyes:

24

Gravity pulls downward. When a building fails its going to fall basically straight down, whether it is from a controlled demolition, or from losing structural integrity from the fire caused by tons of burning jet fuel. Your intuition of seeing towers of blocks topple over sideways is not applicable in the larger scale of buildings in which the forces involved are much greater than the lateral structural integrity of its materials. In order for a building to fall sideways there would have to be a huge amount of lateral force, that in this case didn’t exist.

25

And debris was sifted through while it sat in that landfill.

26

Define “quickly”. There was moldering rubble for months after the towers fell.

Debris removal wasn’t completed until the following May: 8 months after the attack. While that’s pretty quick for moving that much debris, it’s hardly indicative of a rush to hide evidence, either. It’s rather the opposite.

And it’s not like the debris was immediately destroyed, either. Much of it was moved off site and examined later.

27

It took 8 months - thats not exactly ‘quick’ - nor was it ‘destroyed’ as soon as it was ‘shipped off’ - they went thru the debris for another 3 years (atleast in the case of looking for human remains).

You need to simply research this and you can find this info easily -

28

Thanks for all the info.

i’m not sure about this though:

So i’ll go ask some folks about it. Thanks everyone.

29

Grrr. A group calling itself “ReThink 911” has started to advertise on BART trains.

30

This is what a controlled demolition looks like.

This is what the WTC collapse looked like.

How many controlled demolitions have you seen that started mid-span and produced a dust cloud that spread for several square miles, and were not preceded by the sound of explosions?

None?

I thought as much.

(Oh, and by the way, God damn you for making me look a video of that up on Youtube and watch it again. It was bad enough seeing it happen the first time.)

31

It was moved. It was not destroyed. The debris was moved to Fresh Kills site where NIST went through it, finding the pieces that were relevant to their investigation. Once they were done much of the pieces were used in various 9/11 memorials around the US, and some was used in the Carrier Ronald Reagan.

The idea that the scene needed to be treated as a ‘crime scene’ and left to fallow while agents sifted through the pieces with bodies rotting in the debris and chemicals spilling into the water system is obscene.

32

Not that I agree at all with the OP or his friend, but it’s ironic that you linked to a conspiracy theory YouTube. The guy that posted that video thinks the WTC (but only the North Tower) was brought down by an underground nuclear explosion. Which is a new CT to me. His “evidence” is some shaking of the camera 12 seconds before the explosion.

33

I’m not going to click on 50 different videos of an event that I didn’t want to see happen once in order to vet the identities of the people posting them. The point is that anyone who says the WTC collapse looked like a controlled demolition has either never seen a controlled demolition or seen the WTC collapse.

34

I could maybe believe that Cheney really was the sort of Dr Evil figure he was portrayed as, with Bush as his grinning lackey.
But then how did Obama win? Cheney/Bush pull off this huge worldchanging event, then their team loses to some dumbass newbie Senator.
The only way that can happen is if they all work for the same team, that there really are a secret group that runs the world, Illuminati style.

35

These cunts have advertised on buses in Ottawa!

36

Well, if I had to pick just one, it would be the fact that the filmmaker, Dylan Avery, originally created the film as an explicit work of fiction, and tried repeatedly to market it as such to investors. Until noted conspiracy crank Philip Jayhan offered to finance and distribute the film, provided Avery agreed to re-edit and promote it as non-fiction.

But the real problem with the film is that it’s so filled with lies and distortions, it’s really hard to pick just one. Here’s an idea: you pick out the parts of the movie that you think are particularly convincing, and we’ll tell you why its bullshit.

Oh my God, it is so easy. You have no idea how easy it is to debunk Truther conspiracies.

Really? This looks like a “neat” collapse? I’m hardly an expert on controlled demolition, but I’ve never seen one where it ejected a massive cloud of debris like that.

If you don’t trust my observations, though, you could ask an actual expert in controlled demolition. Doesn’t really matter which one, they’ll pretty much all tell you the same thing: there’s no way the WTC was destroyed by controlled demolition.

So, how long should it have taken before that started? What similar event are you comparing it with, to determine how long would have been “normal?”

Well, yes, that is a thing that has happened before in history. Of course, generally such schemes target strategically unimportant, but emotionally resonant, structures. The WTC was kind of the opposite of that. It was not, generally speaking, a very popular landmark. But it was extremely vital to the economy of the US. Likewise with the Pentagon. If you want to stage a fake terrorist attack to drum up national sentiment for military action, here’s a much better idea. Blow up a bunch of schools. People will freak the fuck out, way more than they would over the destruction of a overgrown office building, and back just about any military action you care to name. And you don’t do vast damage to the nation’s infrastructure, right before you start a major military operation.

You did miss the debunkings. They were in the links you didn’t bother to click on earlier in this thread.

37

Imagine a toothpick stuck in an orange. If you hold the toothpick upright, it can support the orange, because all of the force if pressing straight down on the pick. But if you rotate the toothpick, even just a little bit, the weight is no longer pressing straight down on the pick, but is acting as a shear force - and the toothpick snaps.

When the upper levels of the WTC started to cant, the structures that had been designed to support weight that pushed straight down on them. One they were at an angle, that weight became a shear force, and the columns were not designed to support a load in that manner, so they failed, and the whole structure disintegrated.

38

You know, the other thing about false flag operations is that people generally find out they are false flag operations within a few years.

And Al Qaeda has left no doubt they were responsible. They’re actually quite proud of it.

Worse yet, for a false flag operation, we didn’t have anything like military readiness to embark on a series of wars halfway across the world. Quite the opposite.

The idea it was a false flag operation would involve impeccable secrecy and planning setting things up in NYC while completely screwing those very things up everywhere else. It’s hard to mesh that combination of utter, precise professionalism and boneheaded bumbling.

39

How much do you know about controlled demolitions?

It did not look like a controlled demolition at all, to my eyes. Indeed, to my view, a controlled demolition appeared impossible. The point of collapse of the towers was the part where the towers were struck by airplanes. I do not understand how a controlled demolition would work in an area devastated by an airplane strike; the impact would wreck the demolition setup.

What’s “quick” to you? It took eight months.

This doesn’t serve as evidence 9/11 was an inside job.

Of course it is true false flagging is a tried and tested tactic. But it’s also true that terrorism is a tried and tested tactic, so why should I not believe it was simply terrorism?

40

Its basically Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth under a different name. Gage has found his income stream running dry.