Question for the 9/11 conspiracy theorists...?
814033
You hit it right on the head with those kooks who believe that the government was behind 9/11. If they were so smart to do 9/11, which would have involved over 2000 people, plus the 3000 who died that day, to be complicit and part of the entire conspiracy. Taht is everyone in the NY Pd. The FDNY, the Port Authority, the employees of United and American (all 3000 of them), the fire fighters and police at the Pentagon, the CIA and FBI...which would mean it would have taken a considerable amoutn of difficult EFFORT to pull off,\n\nyet our government can't "plant" one nuclear device in a country as big as Iraq.
69110
I never thought I'd be one of "those people" who believed in who believed in some far-out "conspiracy theory."  Yet, here I am ... on the other side.  And now it is so frustrating.  No "mainstream" media or establishment will touch or entertain the thought that it wasn't terrorists who orchestrated the destruction on 9/11.  And as I now write and can imagine others who read this and "dis" this idea as one of those idotic conspiracy theories, I can only think, "been there, done that."  Yeh, I've "dissed" all those people as loonies.  So, for right now it seems quite lonely because it's hard to hang one's hat on anything tangible ... there's no place to go with these new thoughts in my head.\nOkay, I'm a democrat, but people, this goes beyond politics.  This is about being mislead by some organization within our own borders!  Sure, like everyone else, on 9/11 it was obvious that it was us Americans against some foreign enemy.  We were all united.  Why can't everyone be convinced that our real enemy is not across the sea, but operates within our own country, and for some reason created 9/11 in order to obtain their greedy and misguided objectives?
1166933
This video is very compelling evidence that there's a lot more to the events of 9/11 than most people know.  A few of the things in the Loose Change video are inaccurate, but it compiles enough accurate information to lead to further questions.  \n\nTo the people who say things like "this has all been disproven" or "it's just conspiracy theories" you are fooling yourselves.  The famous philospher Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) said “All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident”.  People will believe any lie either because they want it to be true, or because they fear it is true.  The lie you are believing is that the official story of how the events of 9/11 occurred are true.  When you OBJECTIVELY analysis the scientific evidence -- as a detective or scientist would -- without injecting false patriatism into the equation -- you realize that it is simply physically impossible that things happened as we've been led to believe.\nAnd  as a side note, questioning the events of 9/11 is NOT unpatriotic.  On the contrary, it's about the most patriotic thing you can do.  We have a duty to defend this great nation of ours against ALL threats, foriegn AND DOMESTIC.  And the families of the victims of 9/11 have a right to know the TRUTH of how and why their loved ones died.  In that spirit, I present the following very small bits of information concerning the events of 9/11.\n\nYou can’t collapse a skyscraper with jet fuel.\nMany engineers have come forward and said that there’s no way those buildings fell from fire.  Steel doesn’t weaken until almost 2000 degrees F, and it doesn’t melt until almost 3000 degrees F.  Jet fuel doesn’t burn hot enough to do it.\nThe official NIST report states “The initial jet fuel fires themselves lasted at most a few minutes” and office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in a given location. (NIST, 2005; p. 179, emphasis added.)   The final NIST report on the Towers admits:  \n"Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250ºC… Only two core column specimens had sufficient paint remaining to make such an analysis, and their temperatures did not reach 250 ºC. ... Using metallographic analysis, NIST determined that there was no evidence that any of the samples had reached temperatures above 600 ºC."  (NIST, 2005, pp. 176-177) \nKevin Ryan, the engineer from the company that underwrote the towers, said it was impossible that a jet fuel fire brought the towers down.  The architect who designed the twin towers has repeatedly said that he designed them to take not 1, but 2, massive passenger airliner impacts and not fall.  \nPools of molten steel were found in the basements of the towers (including tower 7) weeks after 9/11.  Steel melts at 2777 degrees F.  Jet fuel burns at only 1577 degrees F.  It is literally impossible for jet fuel fires to get hot enough to melt steel into molten pools.  Something else must have done it.\n\nFirefighters and survivors said repeatedly that bombs were going off throughout the towers, on many different floors. Firefighters gave very specific descriptions of seeing flashes of light and explosions going off on the lower levels.   If you watch the news from that morning, you'll even see Fox news reporting a "4th explosion" going off in tower 1.   For instance, at the start of the collapse of the South Tower a Fox  News anchor reported:   “There is an explosion at the base of the building… white smoke from the bottom… something happened at the base of the building!  Then another explosion.”\nFirefighter Edward Cachia independently reported:  \n“[We] thought there was like an internal detonation, explosives, because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came
471878
Take 9-11. You believe in a conspiracy theory one way or another.\nEither\nA. 19 guys from the Middle East conspired to hijack airplanes and use them as weapons\nB. The government blew up the buildings and then used that as an excuse to start a "war on terror"\nEither way, someone conspired to do something.
649228
I have not seen this but i can only imagine the theory behind 9/11.  I know that it was not by accident that the twin towers came a tumblin down...but i also know that it would never have happened if the gov't wasn't in on it. It is just to tragic and too big of a game for it to happen on American soil.
602004
Find out the truth for yourself.  Watch the video in the link below.  It also has stuff about the WTC and about the Pentagon.  Its really interesting and gives us all insight on what could be a possible truth to 9/11 and Osama Bin Laden.  Tell me what you think about it after you watch it!
867292
I am just curious.  \n\nWhat's it like being a paranoid delusional conspiracy theorist?\n\nDo the voices ever get too loud?\nDo tin foil hats really work?\nDo you think that Oliver Stone is beacon of truth and light?\nDo you think the Illuminati, Opus Dei, Heart Publishing and Legion of Doom are shaking in their boots now that you have blown their cover (and they would have gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for those meddling kids)?
447447
They are nutters 9/11 did happen. Im just uncertain about some of the fact surrounding the Pentagon (no one seen a plane, no one heard one, no debris, was it a bomb or just a poor excuse for the  the U.S. Government to not shoot the planes down that crashed into the towers? After all they did know the planes where hijacked shortly after take off, and U.S. security is the best in the world... so what happened? Confused consiracy but every thing was so well orcastrated! Thats my opinion. Love Heidi
837913
I'm getting chummy with the Ken Lay is still alive one.  9/11--there are so many that seem plausible, some not so.  I have been entertaining my theory too (btw, thanks for asking):  the cheney shooting--I wonder if the old buddy of his that got "peppered" was not the only victim.  I'm just asking.  There are probably websites already dedicated to that one--about cheney killing someone "by accident".   I feel better-thanks.
987836
I read parts of the Scientific American cover story debunking 9/11 myths; it was some time ago but it seemed to thoroughly refute all the conspiracy theories it covered.\n\nMany conspiracy theories seem convincing on their face; it's only when you dig deeper that the inherent flaws are revealed.\n\nThe biggest flaw with this and other conspiracy theories is the sheer number of people who would have to be involved in the cover-up.  Hard to believe that so many people could be coerced, bribed, manipulated or forced into this and not one of them would spill the beans -- some secrets are just too good not to tell!
657180
I've been to ground zero.  It happened.  Whether Osama, Israel, or the US was  responsible ---is all guesswork at this point.   The US has defiantly staged events like this in the past to justify a war---The sinking of the Maine, Gulf of Tonkin, etc...  But 9/11?   We saw Osama admit it in the videos.  I wouldn't want to think that our country is so evil we could ever do this, although in my heart I know there is a chance we could have.
1163400
considering that one of the first things i saw on the page said, "Proof Blue Screen Technology Faked 2nd Plane "  i know its crap.\ni'm tired of writing about the 911 conspiracy stuff and these conspiracy ideas floating around right now are just getting more and more outrageous.  are there some questions that need to be answered about 911? yes probably are a few....but these questions have NOTHING to do with: now blue screened planes, planes swapped secretly for missiles and drones, faked plane crashes, secret voice sampled passengers to fake phone calls home, secret landing fields, breakaway light poles, hundreds to thousands of planted "witnesses" and fake work crews planting explosives.\nthis stuff is either some strange disinformation campaign, or someone trying to make a buck off people who don't trust the government and can't think.
702065
I think of it as more of a Government cover-up than a Government Conspiracy.\n\nMost likely some employees of the Government knew or suspected the day was at hand but very few and obviously secretive.\n\nHave you looked at the Marvin Bush Conspiracy concept.\n\nMarvin Bush brother of george bush. Had the security contract for the WTC. his contract ended on September 10 one day before the attack. \n\nMarvin Bush's Huston based Insurance Company was owned by Saudi Investors. The insurance for the WTC was covered by 3 major Insurance Company's. Why was there a major sell off of stocks and bonds in these Insurance companies just before the WTC attack. Even Bin Ladin's Carlyle Group sold off Insurance and Air transportation stocks before the attack. \n\nIf rich Arabs knew to dump their stocks before the attack why didn't the CIA know. Don't we pay those lazy idiots to find out secret information?\n\nI would like to know what did Marvin and George know and when did they know it.\n\nGo big Red Go
410150
If my cat OK'd the use of her litter box....maybe. If Bush came to my house I would love to ask him some questions about 911 - why won't the FBI release the various security cam tapes from along the flight path of the "plane" that hit the pentagon (gas station, hotel, VA dept of transportion and others all had video confiscated by FBI on 9/11/01) - there's at least 4 of them out there - what are they hiding?  also - what were the details of the military training exercise that was taking place on 9/11 where Cheney was given command of FEMA, NORAD, and FAA for the purposes of the exercise - where planes were supposed to be hijacked and flown into WTC - sort of a strange coincidence - care to talk about it? Maybe it was just all manufactured and allowed to happen....the "new pearl harbor" written about in 1999 by the PNAC - the radical D.C. think tank whose members include Cheney, Jeb Bush, Wolfowitz, and Rumsfeld...hmmmmmm....
799563
Another conspiracy nut, Get a life, the 9/11 attacks were conducted by terrorists, but why do i tell you idiots this every time.  I should just ignore you, yet im still typing.
627907
I'm very weary of the conspiracy theories. As one of the people who watched the plane go into the Pentagon (literally watched it hit), it makes me very annoyed to see how many people think so many other people could be wrong, imaging things, or a part of a conspiracy. Maybe the theory would be credible if no one was around to watch.  But between NYC and DC/Arlington, both in the tail end of rush hour commuter traffic, you'd have to get about 50,000 people to agree to this conspiracy. I find it insulting and I am immediately annoyed by anyone who actually thinks these web sites are reporting the truth.
460707
ok i've watched loose change four times or so now, and spent way too much time reading on various websites, they make some convincing points...but then they ignore alot of stuff as well...like common sense.\n\ncould there be some conspiracy behind 911? yes there could be. is it these theories that are popularly being advanced currently on the web...no\n\nstart at the end and work your way forward: the point of 911 was to destroy some buildings.  there are easier ways for the government to pull this off than to.\nsecretly swap planes in the air for non-passenger drone places, fly two of them into buildings, which they already rigged with additional explosives, secretly land the planes, secretly kill the passengers, fake a plane crash at one location, get voice samples from passengers to load into a computer to produce fake phone calls to loved ones with, then swap one plane for a missle (never mind that some claim this was a smaller drone plane) fire it into the pentagon, get 100 or so people to claim they saw a plane(this is ignored by loose change which uses two of the four people that claimed to not have seen a plane) then run around real fast knocking over the light poles etc...loose change claims a plane couldn't knock over those lamp poles that way, but never tries to explain how they were knocked over, if we assume that not all 100+ witnesses were cia plants, then we have to wonder why no one went, "and there these guys ran around loosening all the bolts on those lamps and pushed them over and ran off! dam kids!"\n\nloose change and other sources also use alot of broadcasts from very early after the attacks took place during which there was alot of confusion about what happened, live news especially while something is happening doesn't always get things 100% correct and uses alot of speculation to fill in time while they figure things out.\n\nloud thuds of things like, say upper floors falling into lower ones, could no doubt sound very much like other explosions going off.\n\nthe list goes on and on, but this post is getting rather long.\n\nok so lets face it, thats one complicated plan to bring down some buildings.  you could just blow them up, blame who ever you wanted to, say you are investigating how security could have been breached to such an extent, and leave it at that.\n\nits just too complicated of a conspiracy, that would take way way too many people to keep their mouths shut.