9/11 Conspiracy, 7 years later...

[rob_just_rob]

So... history proves that smaller, lighter planes hitting harder structures at slower speeds CAN penetrate.

I'm sure you meant to say "demonstrates" here, right?

 

[marleyisalegend]

I think Britney Spears did it.

 

[suprdave]

i was working in the area where flight 93 went down. i was on the roof of a 10 story building about ten minutes before that happened so i didnt see anything, if i was i would have been able to see it all. the next day i was spotted on the roof and ordered down by what appeared to be FBI agents and questioned heavily as to what i saw. i told them i was inside when it happened and they didnt believe me. i really dont know what went on that day, flight 93 and the pentagon dont seem right to me but i believe someone in our government knew 100% about this and let it happen, that is the hard part.

our government is doing things against us and we cant do anything about it, when you get thru with this theory i have some more for you:
cloud seeding causing global warming with proof
what are those planes spraying? it isnt exhaust
and more.

 

[D_N Flay Table]

A building here in los angeles burned for over 15 hours and didn't fall..
Sky Scrapers typically do no crumble do to fire..
I dont claim to know what really happened on 911, but I don't buy the official story.

 

[marleyisalegend]

Sky Scrapers typically do no crumble do to fire..

Skyscrapers aren't typically lampooned by airplanes either.:biggrin1:

 

[bobabooey69]

Get with the times man, the Citgo and Sheraton videos were released some time ago.

Really? You have a link? I would love to see them.

A building here in los angeles burned for over 15 hours and didn't fall..
Sky Scrapers typically do no crumble do to fire..
I dont claim to know what really happened on 911, but I don't buy the official story.

Well to be fair a regular fire and a friggin' airplane impact/structural destruction/ jetfuel fire is a bit different. :tongue:

 

[D_Marazion Analdouche]

A building here in los angeles burned for over 15 hours and didn't fall..
Sky Scrapers typically do no crumble do to fire..
I dont claim to know what really happened on 911, but I don't buy the official story.

What Marley said......I can't believe I said that.

Skyscrapers aren't typically lampooned by airplanes either.:biggrin1: Call me crazy but a jet full of GASOLINE flying into a building, that's bound to cause a few sparks.

Yeah what Marley said, again I can't believe I said that.

Really? You have a link? I would love to see them.

Not much to see but here they are.

Citgo

YouTube - Judicial Watch September 11 Pentagon Citgo Video

Sheraton

YouTube - Pentagon Hotel Video - Flight 77 Crash

 

[marleyisalegend]

^Why do people always apologize or feel weird about agreeing with me? I told you bitches, I'm the Messiah!

 

[D_Marazion Analdouche]

^Why do people always apologize or feel weird about agreeing with me? I told you bitches, I'm the Messiah!

I feel very dirty.

 

[marleyisalegend]

^Come here, let me clean you up.

 

[suprdave]

it was clearly planes that flew into the towers, you clearly see the plane hit, then the windows and paper fly out from the impact, that was no cardboard cutout. then with all that fuel burning and the material in the building it would be super hot in there. when the tower finally collapsed, there was no second explosion, it was just the steel melting/warping that brought them down. once one floor collapsed it kept increasing weight as it went down. if you look at the design of the towers, it wasnt designed like your average high rise.
i believe the pentagon is where people should focus. its the strongest building in our government, its a symbol of our power, its fortified and well protected. why did it get hit? why didnt the jet fighters get off the ground to protect it? why if the pentagon is our symbol of the power of our military and government was there only one camera that got any pics.? i have more security on my house. there are too many unanswered questions concerning the pentagon

 

[D_Marazion Analdouche]

^Come here, let me clean you up.

Only if I can bring my Scooby Doo bubble bath.

 

[bobabooey69]

Citgo

YouTube - Judicial Watch September 11 Pentagon Citgo Video

Sheraton

YouTube - Pentagon Hotel Video - Flight 77 Crash

Hmmm how come all video from the Pentagon incident suck ass?

 

[faceking]

There is noooooo way that an Aluminum plane would disappear into a Steel building like a knife through butter. Planes that have no crash ratings like commercial airliners crash against buildings, not into them.

I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE. Because if you look at the 47 other times this has happened, it's never been anything close to this. [rollseyes]

A Boeing 767 has a maximum cruise speed of 568 miles per hour at 35,000 feet (cruise altitude).

MIT had clocked Flight 175 as going around 580 miles per hour at SEA LEVEL... the Boeing 767s ABSOLUTELY CANNOT GO THIS FAST AT SEA LEVEL.

They can, they just exposed to structural risk. Besides, I know 2 ppl personally who saw the plane go in. Whether it went in at 55MPH or 580MPH... I don't think sound effects and a hologram image of a Boeing 767 going into a building in the morning are capable by the government. Much less the hundreds o...

Oh wait!!!!!!!!!! Rosie O'Donnell, who knew you were into big scholongs!!!! Oh wait, you wish you had a schlong, that's right. Welcome to LPSG dude. Sorry about The View thing.

 

[D_Marazion Analdouche]

Hmmm how come all video from the Pentagon incident suck ass?

Not sure, but why isn't there one person, just one saying it was anything other than a Boeing? There were a lot of people on the road that day, civilians, cops etc and all said airliner.

The FAA would also have to be in on it, meaning if 77 landed and unloaded, that would have been tracked.

And then the C130 pilot that was in the air that also watch it go in.

Clinton couldn't keep a blowjob quite, all the people covering this up and not one person comes forward?

 

[B_Austin Blue]

I approve of everyone's thoughts here, even when they are thoughtless. How is my advice condescending? So are you saying as a moderator I am not allowed to have my voice heard here? BTW where were you exactly on 9/11? Did you loose anyone?

Nudenewyorker you are very condescending in suggesting that unless we were in NYC or lost someone to 911, we have no valid opinion.

Perhaps it is time for you to go?

 

[tripod]

No, I don't agree the wreckage photos could be faked... TOO many photographers took too many pictures with too many cameras in the minutes and hours immediately after the explosion.

Then why do I only see the same images over and over on the internet... they could have EASILY been taken by a single cameraman.

Your "conspirators'' would have had to Produce an ACTUAL 757's worth of violently torn apart plane wreckage and carefully stage the scene before photographers arrived.

Once again... TOO many people need to keep too many secrets and too many witnesses need to have stories that match the evidence for the 'theory to hold up.

I wonder how many actual witnesses there were?

The SIMPLEST way to cause that much damage to the pentagon, AND provide believable plane wreckage in time for arriving spectators with cameras would be the CRASH A PLANE INTO THE PENTAGON.

I totally agree.

Actually, there are photos from that camera BEFORE the event and, when compared, you can clearly see the TAIL of the aircraft, visible in the event picture is NOT vivible in any other previous shot from that camera.
The Tailfin shape seen is ONLY present in that frame of video from that day... Plus you can see the swirling cloud of smoke trailing the damaged engine ( which was reported by eyewitnesses )

There is no fucking tailfin in that video and you are dreaming if you say that you see one... there is NO PLANE in the video. Throw it up in photoshop and circle the tailfin for me if you can, so that I may see what you see.

You do not see the plane in the next frame because the security camera only takes ONE FRAME PER SECOND.

At 500 miles per hour, a 757 travels enough distance to go from the position seen, to impact with the building in less than one second.

Thanks for the second grade science lesson.

Nudenewyorker you are very condescending in suggesting that unless we were in NYC or lost someone to 911, we have no valid opinion.

Perhaps it is time for you to go?

He is a victim of that tragedy like the rest of us but only much more so because he had some direct involvement in the horror. I pressed his buttons inadvertently with my flippant and insensitive introductory post... I have apologized to him and he accepted graciously.

 

[tripod]

Okay... I am gonna start linking to the videos that I have seen that sewed the seeds of my suspicion.

All of this talk about fake planes and such must really be pissing people off and I sincerely apologize for anyone's raised blood pressure over this thread.

The first round of videos starts with a close look into some network shots that reveal some striking errors. One of the first errors shows a plane that just appears in the sky out of nowhere on a clear and cloudless day. It then goes on to show you that a network camera had digitally enhanced or created smoke from the second tower. The last bit of it shows what looks to be a bit of the explosion coming from the wrong side of the screen... an artifact of the explosion graphic is mirrored to the left of the building in the middle of the sky.

The short version is here and the longer more explanatory video is here.

The second video shows that CNN during the Gulf War faked a majority of their supposed on location footage taken in Saudi Arabia. CNN had NO qualms about faking the news and were quite celebratory and filled with hubris.

The third video shows that the second plane just appeared out of thin air again and was NOT in the wide shots that the networks displayed, but only visible when they quickly zoomed in. The plane should have been clearly visible in the wide angle shot towards the right hand side of the screen and it is not.

The fourth video is the scariest... it shows a man in real time doing the same special effects that I am thinking that I have been seeing in the network and first person amateur footage... he shows just how easy it is.

This is the shit that has been keeping me up at night and I am curious as to other's thoughts.

I just want to say that I have NEVER seen the movie "Loose Change" and I have only been getting into this in the past month or so. I spent over seven years not questioning what I saw.

 

[marleyisalegend]

There are a few unanswered questions that I don't understand.

From what I can tell, there isn't a single security-cam shot of any of the hijackers. Did they sneak in through the airports' air-conditioning systems?

Plus, why was so much intelligence that warned of these attacks ignored? I can think of lesser threats, some that seemed frivolous, that were treated like the gospel truth.

 

[Phil Ayesho]

Then why do I only see the same images over and over on the internet... they could have EASILY been taken by a single cameraman.

But they WEREN'T.
You can tell by who gets PAID for use of the images.

I wonder how many actual witnesses there were?

For WTC? MILLIONS.
For the Pentagon? 40 plus people ON the road SAW the plane go barely overhead and strike the building.
About 30 air traffic controllers saw the radar track.
2 dozen firefiighters on the scene testify to tripping over airplane every where they went.

And Hundreds of Pentagon and govenrment personnel were involved in the immediate aftermath and clean up... ALL of who testify to the presence of actual airplane, body parts, luggage, clothing, etc...


ALL of the "conspiracy" stories come exclusively from people who were NEVER on the site.

There is no fucking tailfin in that video and you are dreaming if you say that you see one... there is NO PLANE in the video. Throw it up in photoshop and circle the tailfin for me if you can, so that I may see what you see.

Typical. You simply claim you can't SEE what every qualified photo analyst says is proof of the plane.

Try this link
gif image


Or- I have attached the highest res photo I could find of the area in interest.
I unsharp masked the image to reduce motion blur and OUTLINED the structures that are Visible in this ONE frame, that do not appear on any other frame before or after.
I posted both the outlined and unmarked image for you to compare.

Also note the spiraling cloud of smoke trailing the plane- and visible BEHIND the tail structure as its from the far side engine.

In the next frame of video, the nose and tail fin are gone.... and the smoke trail extends past the ticket box, all the way to the impact.

Sorry, but no cruise missile made could leave a smoke trail that low, and the outline of a tail fin that high from this camera.

Analysis of the image knowing the focal length of the lens shows that the distance from the top of the visible fin, to the centerline of the smoke spiral agrees with the vertical distance from engine center to top of the tail fin on the model airliner that went missing... IF the object's distance from the camera is right over the flightpath that expalins the damage to the streetlights.


The simulation created accurate models of plane, building, and, particularly the location, orientation and focal length of the surveillance camera.
And the image rendered from that camera, with the plane in that position is identical to the image captured on 9/11

Add eyewitnesses. Radar tracks, Missing passengers, Identified passenger remains, and an airplane's worth of wreckage matching the part identifications numbers for THAT particular airplane...

This, Tripod, constitutes absolute and irrefutable proof of what occurred.
It is a mass of evidence.

You, on the other hand, have NOTHING. Not one questionable image or refuting bit of wreckage that disagrees.

You have no eyewitness who claims to have seen a cruise missile. And no explanation for why literally a thousand people would hold to some concocted story when revealing the conspiracy you allude to would make them RICH with book offers and appearance fees.


As far as can be determined thru evidence... the real conspiracy is the one to cash in on books, web advertising fees, videos and personal appearances trying to convince rubes that all the real evidence is faked.

The only conspiracy, ( other than the Al Queda conspiracy ) is the efforts by charlatans to make money off of people who don't understand evidentiary argument.

Thanks for the second grade science lesson.

Well, what do you expect when you demonstrate a first grade science understanding?
If you understand science, why don't you APPLY it to these ridiculous notions?

Evidence beats ZERO evidence everytime.

The idea that the BUSH administration could coordinate such a perfect coverup, involving thousands of conspirators, in a world where blowing the whistle can make you rich, is plainly laughable.

Trust me, conspiracies DO exist. But they, like all other real phenomena, leave evidence.

The falsified iraq intelligence came to light... the Halliburton overcharging came to light, Bush hiring a failed horse show promoter to head FEMA came to light... the Gonzalez politicization of the justice department came to light... the Plame treason came to light.

No matter how important it is to HIDE a conspiracy... real conspiracies STILL leave evidence that should be discoverable.

Explain the planes going missing... the passengers disappearing... explain HOW the critical wiring of demolition munitions could have survived the impact and fire from the aircraft.

Come up with SOMETHING to back the lunatic suppositions.

Don't tell me there's a POD under the plane's wing, when every photo every shot of that model plane shows the same exact bulge where the wheels go up inside during flight....

Stop repeating crap that was made up.
Investigate the origins of the story.
EVERY worthless conspiracy story originates from some jackass who wasn't there and doesn't know the first thing about what he's talking about.

Every one of them takes snippets of sentences out of context and tries to imply that their manipulations of shit someone said are 'evidence'...

But sit down with any source they 'quote' and ASK them... and the story is not at all what the conspiracy nits make it out to be.

Show some skepticism... some critical thinking skills and demand actual EVIDENCE...