9/11 documentary now

  • Thread starter Thread starter worsleyweb
  • Start date Start date
west didsblue said:
The event has been investigated in great detail and the account of what happened that day is not full of holes. All the legitimate and most of the stupid questions that have been raised have been answered and the reports have been updated as more information has become available. Try googling "truther" and you'll find that the definition is Are you denying that?
Click to expand...

The conspiracy theories have more holes in them than the actual true events.
 
We all know 9/11 happened because Bush wanted to invade Iraq. Look it up, his administration was drawing up plans for an excuse to invade Iraq from Day 1. Some members of his administration who also worked for his dad held a grudge against his dad for not finishing off Hussein. I'm not saying 9/11 was an inside job, but wouldn't be surprised if some crook in the higher echelons helped the terrorists out. You can't tell me a bunch of cavemen managed to hit 3 targets perfectly with a plane all alone.

And don't get me started on those numpties who still believe we went to Iraq to give their people democracy!
 
Guardiola's Disciple said:
We all know 9/11 happened because Bush wanted to invade Iraq. Look it up, his administration was drawing up plans for an excuse to invade Iraq from Day 1. Some members of his administration who also worked for his dad held a grudge against his dad for not finishing off Hussein. I'm not saying 9/11 was an inside job, but wouldn't be surprised if some crook in the higher echelons helped the terrorists out. You can't tell me a bunch of cavemen managed to hit 3 targets perfectly with a plane all alone.

And don't get me started on those numpties who still believe we went to Iraq to give their people democracy!
Click to expand...
Yes. 9/11 was used as an excuse for Iraq but if someone was going to set up a real conspiracy for it they'd have gone for something Iraq related.
 
jay_mcfc said:
WTC 7 is the elephant in the room in all of this but for those that are convinced it was a demolition job, watch a video on YouTube about debunking WTC 7. It's pretty convincing that it may not have been a demolition. Basically, conspiracies only ever show the building from the north and west side where it looks like it's in a relatively good condition. However, the South side, where the damage was caused from the collapse of the towers, was a mess. There was one corner where the damage affected about 20 floors and when you see it you will understand why it collapsed. Also, the building was a much more open structure without the steel beams running through the inside of the building, hence the collapsing within itself.

In terms of the fire, again it looks a lot worse from the south side and it was blazing for 7/8 hours quite high up in the building. On the debunk video there are videos and photos that show just how bad the fire was.

Click to expand...

That's a great, really informative video (some good tunes as well).

I must admit I had some suspicions about the official version of events for WTC7 after watching some conspiracy documentaries but that video has cleared it all up for me.
 
Dubai Blue said:
That's a great, really informative video (some good tunes as well).

I must admit I had some suspicions about the official version of events for WTC7 after watching some conspiracy documentaries but that video has cleared it all up for me.
Click to expand...

I know people have claimed there was loud bangs before the collapse of both towers, but what I find puzzling is you can't hear the distinctive bangs you get from controlled explosions. They would of been clear as day on some of the videos captured.
 
Manchester_lalala said:
I know people have claimed there was loud bangs before the collapse of both towers, but what I find puzzling is you can't hear the distinctive bangs you get from controlled explosions. They would of been clear as day on some of the videos captured.
Click to expand...
It's not puzzling at all. There wasn't a controlled demolition (as I'm sure you're aware). The loud bangs were probably large steel girders snapping.
 
west didsblue said:
A few quite significant differences.

Neither the Address Hotel or the Beijing Television Cultural Center (the building containing the Mandarin Oriental Hotel) sustained serious structural damage by being hit by a large passenger aircraft or by a large part of an adjacent building prior to the fires.
Click to expand...

The official version is that fires caused WTC 7 to collapse, not structural damage.

Secondly both these buildings were a predominantly concrete construction which is more resistant to fire.
https://structurae.net/structures/the-address-downtown-dubai
Click to expand...

Yeah - resistant. Not immune.

Thirdly, the fire brigades of Dubai and Beijing fought those fires.
Click to expand...

Fire-fighters fought the fires in building 7. It still collapsed.

Finally, these fires were mostly at the outer surface of the buildings...
Click to expand...

Like Building 7, you mean - the one that collapsed?

unlike the fires at the WTC which were at the core of the buildings.
Click to expand...

Evidence of fires within the buildings' cores is scant. NIST found only two core column specimens in a condition allowing paint-analysis inferences about temperatures reached.

Finally, these fires were mostly at the outer surface of the buildings unlike the fires at the WTC which were at the core of the buildings.
Click to expand...

Unlike building 7 - which still collapsed.
 
Last edited:
Why when you question something are you a conspiracy theorist. Do people honestly believe everything the government is telling them is the truth? The same government that lied about saddam having weapons of mass destruction told us 911 was conceived and executed by a man in a cave in Afganistan.
 
Dubai Blue said:
Because that's not how controlled demolitions work. And they are isolated one-off bangs in that they are not occurring in sequence, which is what happens in controlled demolitions.
Click to expand...

Im glad someone explained it. Them bangs on that video Jim posted sound nothing like a controlled explosion. There isn't one video where continuous bangs are heard just before the collapse of either tower. Neither tower collapses are from a controlled explosion, I can't see why people think it is.
 
Dubai Blue said:
Because that's not how controlled demolitions work.
Click to expand...

Who said those particular explosions are initiating a demolition?

There is countless eyewitness testimony of explosions and flashes just before the building collapsed:



A demolition expert says these reports are consistent with controlled demolition:

 
Jim Tolmie's Underpants said:
Who said those particular explosions are initiating a demolition?

There is countless eyewitness testimony of explosions and flashes just before the building collapsed:



A demolition expert says these reports are consistent with controlled demolition:

Click to expand...

So the experts they wheeled out were an explosives loader (a guy who places explosives where he's told), a fire fighter (from Seattle) and a Maths teacher (with a grey beard to add credibility).
Of course there were loads of explosions from when the aircraft hit to the start of the collapse. Obviously nothing to do with aviation fuel gushing down liftshafts, electrical substations shorting out, steel beams snapping etc. etc. Clearly they were all part of a controlled demolition!

Those experts were nearly as good as your whistle blowers on the other page.
A disgruntled former CIA employee spouting her mouth off on Russia Today with a big smirk on her face.
A documentary made by a well known conspiracy theorist about a dead guy.
Best of all, a retired general who watched it on TV and did his own investigation using a few photos.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top