So, uhh.. was 9/11 an inside job or nah?
Options
Comments
-
Nope, it was bin laden/taliban/terroristsSeeing how the world works... I'm saying no. The government does everything in your face. Most just have too much going on or are too distracted to care.
-
@Vibe have you ever seen the video of cnn report on the Pentagon that day
Reporter said the floors were still intact and didn't collapse until 45 mins later -
Yup, our gov'ment did itstackmaster 313 wrote: »Anybody who thinks other wise is a idiot. Just look at the owner of the world Trade center Ws good friend larry whatever . And how much money he made off the attacks. This man brought a condemned building complex for like tripple the asking price. Who does that unless they have inside knowledge of a pre planned event. Man I admire the Bush's they are something special if you read up on them.
That insurance money went to rebuilding the new trade centers, not pocketing the money.
Mostly incorrect.
Only about $1billion of that insurance money went towards the construction... meaning Silverstein made a profit.
About a quarter bill came from NYS and the rest came from Port Authority doubling bridge and tunnel tolls. Meaning the public paid for most of it via taxes.The WTC is made up of a number of different projects, and the financial situation is different for each.
One World Trade Center, the tallest tower, is being paid for partly by a portion of Silverstein Properties insurance settlement that under the 2005 Master Agreement, he had to hand over to the Port Authority, which owns the site. One WTC is also being financed by the issuance of Liberty Bonds, which were created for the purpose of rebuilding downtown. Investors buy them, therefore providing capital for the project and they are paid back over time with interest. The PA has also gotten a private investor, Durst Companies, to buy an interest in the building for $100 million.
The Memorial and Museum is being paid for by donations from both public and private resources.
The underground PATH train station is being rebuilt under an FTA (Federal Transportation Administration) grant.
Towers Two, Three and Four are being built by Silverstein Properties, Inc., in accordance with his original lease and the Master Agreement. Some of that is being financed by his insurance settlement, but the insurance was not enough to rebuild. He has to get private financing from banks.
Other parts of the project, such as the North Projection connecting the underground PATH station with the World Financial Center under West Street, the Vehicular Security Center beneath the south end of the site where trucks and deliveries will be made, and the installation of the streets are being paid for by the Port Authority, which collects no taxes but makes money from tolls, airport fees, port fees, and rents from stores, etc., at its airports and other facilities.
He's definitely paying for it. Of course he's pocketing some money, but not the full amount. That doesn't mean he was involved in any way.
Lol wow so he pocketing cash even though his insurance didnt cover the rebuild that doesn't make sense to me -
My responsibilty? You have a responsibility as well my son. And this is why you have absolutely no credibility. You in this thread shooting down all the evidence of every so called "conspiracy", but AS SOON as someone ask Vibe for evidence that supports his fabricated government story, he's "done with the back & forth" lol. You have no evidence bro, outside of "the government said it, it must be true".blackamerica wrote: »
Aight dumb ? . Give me YOUR evidence the hijackers really crashed the plane into towers & Pentagon, besides the government told you it happened. I wanna know how you're so sure a conspiracy isn't possibleRegardless, I will believe the government didn't bring down the towers.
Regardless, you will believe the government brought down the towers.
I believe in evidence.
You believe in making randomness connections that support your argument.
At the end of the day, who gives a ? . Believe what you want. It changes nothing. It does nothing.
lol
I'm done with the back and forth, but it's hilarious you make the outrageous claim that bombs, missiles, fake planes etc were used yet you're asking me for evidence that didn't happen.
wut? lol
It's your responsibility to support your claims and prove without a doubt it's true. Has to be easy. Find those bomb. Find the missle. Find the missing plane. Find the people who are alive. I'll wait.
? like yourself are the worst. How you ridicule other theories for not providing evidence up to your expectations, but can't provide evidence yo damn self? ? sole purpose in here is too shoot down every possible theory, even if he isn't fully educated on the subject. Just leave -
And yall respond to that sarcasm and coincidence, but please, again, explain something that is more concrete: the names of the victims of who hit the Pentagon. @cain @(ob)scene You have no conspiracy without accounting for that. Nothing in that video is a deal breaker. The names ofmvictims, faces and all, is
Like I said previously. I don't care for this topic. But for me it's not whether it was really a passenger plane or not. It's about whether or not government officials had the information necessary, and ability, to prevent the attacks. Just because George W Bush himself wasn't behind the controls of any of the hijacked planes doesn't make it any better.
Bush and just about everyone within his cabinet are all on record lying about the information they were privy to prior to the attacks. That's bad enough.
And discounting the questionable facts presented to the public at the end of the video is just as naive as a lot of the truther talk.
You cant have it both ways bruh.
You cant in the same breath look at atcual evidence of dead bodies in Pentagon plane wreckage, but then point at politician's lies (as if thats new or noteworthy) and treat THAT as the ? glove and call me naive. No sir. Foh
Just leave it at you don't care about the topic.
Bro, what in the unholy ? are you talking about? What do the bodies at the Pentagon have anything to do with what I said. Lying about knowledge of the 9/11 attacks can't be written off as some regular ol' lie from a politician. I clearly stated that them having knowledge of the planned attacks before hand, not following up on the information and then lying about ever having that information is just as bad as if they organized it themselves.And yall respond to that sarcasm and coincidence, but please, again, explain something that is more concrete: the names of the victims of who hit the Pentagon. @cain @(ob)scene You have no conspiracy without accounting for that. Nothing in that video is a deal breaker. The names ofmvictims, faces and all, is
Like I said previously. I don't care for this topic. But for me it's not whether it was really a passenger plane or not. It's about whether or not government officials had the information necessary, and ability, to prevent the attacks. Just because George W Bush himself wasn't behind the controls of any of the hijacked planes doesn't make it any better.
Bush and just about everyone within his cabinet are all on record lying about the information they were privy to prior to the attacks. That's bad enough.
Please read that again and then tell me what the hell is it that you're talking about...
My point is that people turn this into a debate about whether or not higher ups in the US government orchestrated or collaborated with outside entities in the planning of the attacks. That's a stupid discussion because them just having knowledge of the attacks and then lying about possessing that intel afterwards (an indisputable fact) is just as bad as the prescribed conspiracy theory.
Smh Hence the absurdity of this debate, bc it places your ilk in a position where, debate wise, you cant lose! Bc you dont need any proof!
I think we would all agree the US missed the boat on capturing Bin Laden during Clinton's admin, and the summer 2001 memo about Al Queda is proof they didnt take head on warnings. But both of those type things HAPPEN in poltics. "What did you know and when" , the most important phrase when any scandal hits. There's ALWAYS gonna be a stone unturned.
But for people like you, it takes ZERO proof to turn that negligence into 'they knew it was gonna happen and let it happen'. Its reaching. THATS the true naivete, assuming this could never happen here.
What part of that negligence being just as bad as them "knowing it would happen" don't you understand. And how do you even say they didn't know it would happen when the intel was available beforehand? Who was it that collected the intelligence that circulated within the United States government that made it so nobody within the United States government was aware? Jesus of Nazareth? You might be genuinely ? .
I'm talking about the administrative negligence within the executive branch and the intelligence community that made it so four planes could be hijacked, three of them striking their targets, despite the fact that documents detailing those very plans were sitting in the offices of those officials weeks & months prior.
http://youtu.be/5-vKA6hLUxU
Finally we're getting somewhere.
You're younger and/or farther removed from the knowledge than i thought if you think EVERY threat the US receives it 100% assumes 100% will happen just as scripted. You have no idea how the intelligence comunity works, how intellgence collection works
Cmon bruh you CANT be that dumb. Do you know how many false threats the US receives daily. How many wolf tickets they get. Do you know how many threats they actually ? out on the daily keeping YOUR silly ass safe? U got some nerve fam lol smh
They chase down all leads and do due diligence, but NO ONE BATS 100.
I want you to google something that I personally was made aware of thru my previous job: Joint Terrorism Task Force.
You know what that is? It was created after 9-11 to help get all agencies get on the same page as far as relaying info amongst agencies. 9/11 was a breakdown of intra-government communication between FBI, CIA, Clinton admin and Bush admin, military, etc. Bc, you know, "the government " is not 1 singular entity all working in the same building
But damn, they missed so now they must be just as bad as the terrorists? !?! Cmon man, thats a child- like mind
So you mean to tell me that:
- The government gathered intel (their own intel mind you) that one of the worlds most notorious terrorists (whom has succesfully attacked in the past) was planning and organizing an attack on US soil.
- According to the gathered intelligence, the attack would likely be by way of hijacked airliners.
- Multiple agencies were actually tracking some of the hijackers going back to their enrollment in flight school.
- And they wrote it all off because they receive dozens of false threats daily?
You really believe that stupid ? ? And if you do believe it, do you actually think that it is acceptable? ? , isn't national security like the primary purpose of the United States intelligence agencies? 1st of all the insinuation that they didn't take the threats seriously makes no sense because the several reports drafted prior to the day say otherwise.
But you're trying to tell me that there's nothing wrong with them disregarding the intelligence that they assembled themselves AND THEN BOLD FACE LIED about ever even possessing. Nevermind the fact that the information couldn't have been more credible if Bin Laden himself purchased commercial time during the super bowl to declare it.
And miss me with the ? hyperbole because no where did I insinuate that those officials are any worse or better than the actual terrorists. That's besides the point entirely. -
Nope, it was bin laden/taliban/terroristsIm a simple man.
There are certain questions that if not answred can cause suspicion, but dont rule out an event
Then there are questions that if answered and confirmed, they completely eliminate any other question related to it. It trumps the need to be "suspicious"
Meaning:
A) Questions: Why cant we see footage of the plane hitting the Pentagon? How did the body of the plane seemingly disappear? I dont think its possible for a plane to engulf the Pentgaon and not be on the lawn. ..etc
B)Point: Flight 77 has 66 recorded deaths, real people, who's families all confirm their loved ones are DEAD
Point B makes all those other questions IRRELEVANT! Why is that so hard to understand? Why are u still asking about the Pentagon? Lol
CAN SOMEONE PLEASE ADDRESS THIS -
Nope, it was bin laden/taliban/terroristsAnother elephant in the room:
Its hard to combat 5-10 minute creative videos
People will watch those and run with it, meanwhile the facts one would need to be convinced otherwise are LONG, lengthy documents. Primarily bc the govt is not in the business of cliffnotes and digestable, microwave facts
Ie the Moussaoui trial evidence i happily led nigas to, ie the flight recordings that were released:
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/
If you call yourself educated and rail on 'sheep' and naive people, READ THIS. If you a true thinker your source wouldn't be a video with special affects and words across the screen, narrated by Dax Sheppard wannabes -
Yup, our gov'ment did itvvv Logical Ether vvv
The buildings fell at speed of free-fall meaning that each floor fell completely unobstructed by anything below it... We can talk about jet fuel all day but all three buildings fell at free-fall which can only mean that the subsequent level below was already falling before the floor above it could fall onto it i.e. it had been cleared. In the case of sandwiching (the phenomenon that supposedly justifies the collapses), the failing floor must hit the one beneath it, dislodge it, then hit the next, dislodge it (and so on): a process which slows the rate of falling. Buildings in controlled demolitions fall in the same manner as those that did during 9/11, NOT buildings that suffer from structural failure. The buildings should have also leaned if the collapses were due to heat, as the buildings' metal structures would distort with the heat. This would undoubtedly prohibit absolutely vertical collapses of the buildings as this would have made the buildings top-heavy, pulling to whichever side the greater damage would have existed (I'd assume the location of impact). Physics and mathematics don't lie. Humans do. The buildings were demolished. This is without even mentioning the fact that thermite jet fuel simply cannot cut base supports in a straight line, nor questioning the hilariously incredible finding of intact and full-proof evidence within moments of the disaster. There are many, many experts in their chosen fields who see the event as an inside job, highly distinguished physicists, engineers, avionics, professors, high ranking military personal, plus many more. Are they also ‘? ’? (Not to mention the opinion of the supposed perpetrator himself, Osama Bin Laden, who surely should have claimed immediate responsibility after he had pulled off the most spectacular and successful terrorist attack in human history?) 2+2 does not equal 5; at least not for me. It's a disgusting shame that so many innocent people died as a result of this event, but it is more insulting to them, in my opinion, to believe the lies that we are fed and keep their deaths in vain. -
Maybe our gov knew about it but they didnt orchestrate itBruh, all my argument is within the first couple of pages. This thread is a year old. What more am I supposed to give?
Everyone here has claimed, on suspicion only, that it's an inside job WITH NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE CLAIMS!
Not one bomb
Not one missile
Not one explanation as to what the debris is on the Pentagon lawn
Not one explanation as to where the planes went
Nope, NOTHING.
I've provided pictures and video. I've suggested a documentary that gives a good explanation as to why the 3 trade centers fell. (9/11: The Towers and The Pentagon)
But it's ignored.
Any evidence here is nothing but "this group did this" "this man did that" "they have ties" "? did you see that plume" "hey they were doing construction"
SPECULATION!
Nah, ? YOU. Your claims are highly ridiculous, therefore, require YOU to PROVIDE the EVIDENCE. Which you can't because it doesn't exist, doesn't exist because it didn't happen like that!
I don't need to provide anything further. Want it, head back to the first pages.
-
Maybe our gov knew about it but they didnt orchestrate it@Vibe have you ever seen the video of cnn report on the Pentagon that day
Reporter said the floors were still intact and didn't collapse until 45 mins later
Yes.
Why?
It was on fire for 7 hours.
Firemen said it was going to collapse and moved everyone back. It collapsed 2 hours later. They could hear the structure weakening; groaning, moaning, creaking, breaking glass etc
Word got around it was going to collapse. BBC jumped the gun.
But nah, BBC is in on it, as well as the firemen.
-
Maybe our gov knew about it but they didnt orchestrate itI keep saying I'm done then my ? keeps coming back. smh
-
You should stay done. You can't claim victory while ducking & dodging ppl post you don't know how to respond too smhI keep saying I'm done then my ? keeps coming back. smh
At the end of the day, you have a responsibility too provide irrefutable evidence that proves 100% there isn't a conspiracy. Go back & hide now -
@Vibe have you ever seen the video of cnn report on the Pentagon that day
Reporter said the floors were still intact and didn't collapse until 45 mins later
Yes.
Why?
It was on fire for 7 hours.
Firemen said it was going to collapse and moved everyone back. It collapsed 2 hours later. They could hear the structure weakening; groaning, moaning, creaking, breaking glass etc
Word got around it was going to collapse. BBC jumped the gun.
But nah, BBC is in on it, as well as the firemen.
bro so do you believe the plane never went through the walls and disintegrated on contact -
Yup, our gov'ment did itWhy we never saw bin laden body? They gave him a respectable burial according to his religion supposedly but we talkin about a man who supposed to be responsible for all this ? .
Exactly. They showed Saddam get hanged on tv. They showed Ghadaffi getting killed.....but the #1 enemy of the state, the #1 most wanted mf in the world was given a respectable burial at sea? And aint NO pictures or videos of it??? ? , i don't buy it.. -
Our country has a long history of sacrificing American lives for various personal, financial and political reasons. I don't see this moment in History as anything other then America following it's script.
-
Yup, our gov'ment did itvvv Logical Ether vvv
The buildings fell at speed of free-fall meaning that each floor fell completely unobstructed by anything below it... We can talk about jet fuel all day but all three buildings fell at free-fall which can only mean that the subsequent level below was already falling before the floor above it could fall onto it i.e. it had been cleared. In the case of sandwiching (the phenomenon that supposedly justifies the collapses), the failing floor must hit the one beneath it, dislodge it, then hit the next, dislodge it (and so on): a process which slows the rate of falling. Buildings in controlled demolitions fall in the same manner as those that did during 9/11, NOT buildings that suffer from structural failure. The buildings should have also leaned if the collapses were due to heat, as the buildings' metal structures would distort with the heat. This would undoubtedly prohibit absolutely vertical collapses of the buildings as this would have made the buildings top-heavy, pulling to whichever side the greater damage would have existed (I'd assume the location of impact). Physics and mathematics don't lie. Humans do. The buildings were demolished. This is without even mentioning the fact that thermite jet fuel simply cannot cut base supports in a straight line, nor questioning the hilariously incredible finding of intact and full-proof evidence within moments of the disaster. There are many, many experts in their chosen fields who see the event as an inside job, highly distinguished physicists, engineers, avionics, professors, high ranking military personal, plus many more. Are they also ‘? ’? (Not to mention the opinion of the supposed perpetrator himself, Osama Bin Laden, who surely should have claimed immediate responsibility after he had pulled off the most spectacular and successful terrorist attack in human history?) 2+2 does not equal 5; at least not for me. It's a disgusting shame that so many innocent people died as a result of this event, but it is more insulting to them, in my opinion, to believe the lies that we are fed and keep their deaths in vain.
Word, that's what confuses me. If a steel building is collapsing from heat it would start to lean and wobble back and forth first. Steel beams don't automatically just snap and break from heat. WTC 7 fell within 7 seconds. The only logical educated guess is controlled demolition. -
Why we never saw bin laden body? They gave him a respectable burial according to his religion supposedly but we talkin about a man who supposed to be responsible for all this ? .
Exactly. They showed Saddam get hanged on tv. They showed Ghadaffi getting killed.....but the #1 enemy of the state, the #1 most wanted mf in the world was given a respectable burial at sea? And aint NO pictures or videos of it??? ? , i don't buy it..
that entire story was on the level of a hollywood blockbuster, probably the biggest ever. this is the first time that the media and communication technology has been on this level throughout history and every medium of it was used to promote and propagate this. Bin Laden just like ? was a creation, (not saying the men did not exist)
but their image was created, I dont doubt that they themselves played a hand in the fabrications either, but this happen to maintain and enforce more control, control over your mind by you believing this ? , control over your "freedoms" by the laws enforced to prevent "terrorists" and control over a portion of the world per natural resources as well. checkmate. -
Yup, our gov'ment did itvvv Logical Ether vvv
The buildings fell at speed of free-fall meaning that each floor fell completely unobstructed by anything below it... We can talk about jet fuel all day but all three buildings fell at free-fall which can only mean that the subsequent level below was already falling before the floor above it could fall onto it i.e. it had been cleared. In the case of sandwiching (the phenomenon that supposedly justifies the collapses), the failing floor must hit the one beneath it, dislodge it, then hit the next, dislodge it (and so on): a process which slows the rate of falling. Buildings in controlled demolitions fall in the same manner as those that did during 9/11, NOT buildings that suffer from structural failure. The buildings should have also leaned if the collapses were due to heat, as the buildings' metal structures would distort with the heat. This would undoubtedly prohibit absolutely vertical collapses of the buildings as this would have made the buildings top-heavy, pulling to whichever side the greater damage would have existed (I'd assume the location of impact). Physics and mathematics don't lie. Humans do. The buildings were demolished. This is without even mentioning the fact that thermite jet fuel simply cannot cut base supports in a straight line, nor questioning the hilariously incredible finding of intact and full-proof evidence within moments of the disaster. There are many, many experts in their chosen fields who see the event as an inside job, highly distinguished physicists, engineers, avionics, professors, high ranking military personal, plus many more. Are they also ‘? ’? (Not to mention the opinion of the supposed perpetrator himself, Osama Bin Laden, who surely should have claimed immediate responsibility after he had pulled off the most spectacular and successful terrorist attack in human history?) 2+2 does not equal 5; at least not for me. It's a disgusting shame that so many innocent people died as a result of this event, but it is more insulting to them, in my opinion, to believe the lies that we are fed and keep their deaths in vain.
Word, that's what confuses me. If a steel building is collapsing from heat it would start to lean and wobble back and forth first. Steel beams don't automatically just snap and break from heat. WTC 7 fell within 7 seconds. The only logical educated guess is controlled demolition.
Right. For the building to collapse like it did, then the support beams at the bottom would all have to blow. -
Why we never saw bin laden body? They gave him a respectable burial according to his religion supposedly but we talkin about a man who supposed to be responsible for all this ? .
Exactly. They showed Saddam get hanged on tv. They showed Ghadaffi getting killed.....but the #1 enemy of the state, the #1 most wanted mf in the world was given a respectable burial at sea? And aint NO pictures or videos of it??? ? , i don't buy it..
When you say they, you fail to mention that both men were killed by their own people. There is also the fact that Pakistan was highly upset over the incursion to get him, and they jailed the doctor that aided in his capture.
http://www.ndtv.com/world-news/osama-bin-laden-doctor-languishes-in-pakistan-prison-as-appeal-lingers-1216171 -
Nope, it was bin laden/taliban/terroristsVery weird how all 3 buildings fell.
But then i balance that with, how in the ENTIRE ? would they pull of a controlled demolition?
Also, follow me on this. For the most part, we've never seen a plane purposely fly into a skyscraper, yet you're comfortable saying what that SHOULD look like. Ok
On the flip, most of us HAVE seen controlled demolitions on tv or YouTube whatever. It comes with specific sounds, the flashes of the igntion, etc. It does not happen quietly.
Soooooo if the towers falling does not look like it "should" and that makes you skeptical. ...Shouldn't the towers going down in a QUIET low key controlled demolition on live tv cause more suspicion? Isnt that JUST as and actually MORE far fetched? ??
@vibe Am i goin crazy or does that not make perfect sense? Like is it me? Lls -
Very weird how all 3 buildings fell.
But then i balance that with, how in the ENTIRE ? would they pull of a controlled demolition?
Also, follow me on this. For the most part, we've never seen a plane purposely fly into a skyscraper, yet you're comfortable saying what that SHOULD look like. Ok
On the flip, most of us HAVE seen controlled demolitions on tv or YouTube whatever. It comes with specific sounds, the flashes of the igntion, etc. It does not happen quietly.
Soooooo if the towers falling does not look like it "should" and that makes you skeptical. ...Shouldn't the towers going down in a QUIET low key controlled demolition on live tv cause more suspicion? Isnt that JUST as and actually MORE far fetched? ??
@vibe Am i goin crazy or does that not make perfect sense? Like is it me? Lls
Family controlled demo or not that building didn't fall quietly.
I am no expert here but every floor didn't need to be wired for explosives for it collapse the way it did. Considering the building was over 100 stories perhaps it's difficult to hear detonations past a certain height.
-
Yup, our gov'ment did itVery weird how all 3 buildings fell.
But then i balance that with, how in the ENTIRE ? would they pull of a controlled demolition?
Also, follow me on this. For the most part, we've never seen a plane purposely fly into a skyscraper, yet you're comfortable saying what that SHOULD look like. Ok
On the flip, most of us HAVE seen controlled demolitions on tv or YouTube whatever. It comes with specific sounds, the flashes of the igntion, etc. It does not happen quietly.
Soooooo if the towers falling does not look like it "should" and that makes you skeptical. ...Shouldn't the towers going down in a QUIET low key controlled demolition on live tv cause more suspicion? Isnt that JUST as and actually MORE far fetched? ??
@vibe Am i goin crazy or does that not make perfect sense? Like is it me? Lls
The towers would be closed off weeks before 9/11 to treat for asbestos.
So you saying a controlled demolition is more far fetched than amateur pilots flying big ass commercial planes into giant buildings and hitting both of them perfectly? -
Yup, our gov'ment did itThe thing is witnesses heard explosives.
-
Nope, it was bin laden/taliban/terroristsThe thing is witnesses heard explosives.
*Explosions. There's a difference.
And I have no problem with that part causing doubt. There's PLENTY of doubt
But when it comes to the dealbreakers and irrefutable ? , its not there.
Doesnt add up. Too biased
For example, let yall tell it i shouldn't believe these planes could do that amount of damage, but i SHOULD believe an amount of explosive to blow the building was also small enough to be covertly transported INTO he building in midtown Manhattan AND easily concealed once in the building lol
Im not asking for folk to eliminate doubt, all im asking for is consistency. Call it both ways! If what I or the govt is saying is SO BIZARRE, dont in the same breath act like the misjointed, unconneced, "It took 20 people to pull this off" ? yall sayin ain't
-
Maybe our gov knew about it but they didnt orchestrate it@Vibe have you ever seen the video of cnn report on the Pentagon that day
Reporter said the floors were still intact and didn't collapse until 45 mins later
Yes.
Why?
It was on fire for 7 hours.
Firemen said it was going to collapse and moved everyone back. It collapsed 2 hours later. They could hear the structure weakening; groaning, moaning, creaking, breaking glass etc
Word got around it was going to collapse. BBC jumped the gun.
But nah, BBC is in on it, as well as the firemen.
bro so do you believe the plane never went through the walls and disintegrated on contact
Through the towers, yes. Not desinagrate on contact, though. The plane some what remained in the buildings, which is the "molten" stuff you see dripping from the towers.
