jump to last post 1-28 of 28 discussions (188 posts)

Why do so many Americans bury their heads on the subject of 9/11?

  1. lone77star profile image90
    lone77starposted 3 years ago

    I've corresponded and chatted with a number of Americans who think the 9/11 Truth movement has been thoroughly "debunked." But when pressed for details on the source of their belief, they can't provide any. One gentleman said that he didn't have time to investigate such things. My big question is, why do you so willingly believe something is debunked if you never investigated?

    Why is this topic important? After all, it's now nearly 12 years after 9/11. Isn't it "old news?"

    If a fire continues to burn, destroying homes and killing people, it remains current news, even if that fire is a dozen or even a hundred years old. The facts of 9/11 are more important today than ever.

    Here's a quote from the group of scientists, engineers and architects who have spearheaded the 9/11 Truth movement, AE911Truth.org:

    =======/// QUOTE: ////==========================
    Why revisit 9/11?

    Our world changed that day...
    2744 lives lost in New York...and counting
    1 million lives lost in Afghanistan and Iraq...and counting
    6,000 US troops lost in the War on Terror... and counting
    $4.5 Trillion - War on Terror cost to US taxpayers... and counting
    Precious civil liberties removed by the
    * Patriot Act
    * Military Commissions Act
    * Department of Homeland Security
    * Transportation Security Administration (TSA)
    * National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA 2012)

    Today, Americans ca be...
    subject to search and seizure without a warrant...
    detained or imprisoned indefinitely...
    ...without charge
    ...without evidence
    ...without a lawyer
    ...without a trial
    ...or even tortured
    ...or assassinated
    ...merely by being accused of being associated with terrorism.

    Ignoring the World Trade Center evidence is no longer an option.

    =======/// END: Quote ////=======================

    One of the big lies of 9/11 was the government's "conspiracy theory" about 19 hijackers. The FBI knew about them, but agents were told to leave them alone in the weeks before 9/11. The real terrorists needed their patsies to be in position on the fateful day, to take the heat for them. Another lie was that the buildings came down by damage, and office fires alone.

    Highly suspicious are the facts that Mayor Giuliani committed a felony by destroying crime scene evidence, cleaning up the largest crime scene in American history before a proper investigation could be carried out. So far, no arrest warrants have been issued.

    Also highly suspicious is the fact that the military officers responsible for the massive security failures on 9/11 were all given promotions instead of courts martial. This alone smells like cover up.

    But 9/11 was an inside job. Ignoring that fact won't solve anything. In fact, it contributes to the treason attacking our country right now. Burying one's head is in effect an act of treason, because it allows treason.

    Here are a small number of the videos which prove 9/11 was an inside job and prove the government scientists were fraudulent in their official report and in the process of reaching their conclusions.

    Downward Acceleration of the North Tower
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjSd9wB55zk

    WTC 7 Sound Evidence for Explosions by David Chandler - Portuguese
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lo-HZH5W_U

    Acceleration + Serendipity by David Chandler - Teks Bahasa Indonesia
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMEK0uLf5vI

    9/11: NIST engineer John Gross denies WTC molten steel (extended)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SLIzSCt_cg

    NIST Report on WTC7 debunked and exposed!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFpbZ-aLDLY

    WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part I)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDvNS9iMjzA

    WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part II)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXTlaqXsm4k

    WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part III)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3mudruFzNw

    9/11 Science vs. Conspiracy Theories Part 1 of 2
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PawC4u1U7k

    9/11 Science vs. Conspiracy Theories Part 2 of 2
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LG6i6WBHM3U

    Steven Jones & Kevin Ryan Debunk the NIST Report part 1 of 2
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IACdhpfZjk

    Steven Jones & Kevin Ryan Debunk the NIST Report part 2 of 2
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VJGILSOr2k

    What a Gravity-Driven Demolition Looks Like (smoking gun in death of government's "pile driver" theory)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiHeCjZlkr8

    THEY LIED!! Drone 767 9/11? Remote Controlled! Must See!!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=belm78njlm0

    These prove that the 3 WTC buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. The fact that controlled demolition was used proves that 9/11 was an inside job, because the Bush-run security company which oversaw the WTC and the CIA a major tenant of the WTC would have been aware of the massive project to prepare all 3 buildings -- a project which would've taken months.

    As "incompetent" as we are made to believe our government was, especially with the bumbling leader, George W. Bush, I still don't believe all those government agencies would know nothing about the preparation of those buildings. In fact, I suspect Bush was chosen by the Corporate Party elite for that very reason -- plausible deniability -- to make stupid Americans think that a government "conspiracy" was impossible. And yet, the government wants us to believe that a rag-tag group of former CIA agents was capable of penetrating the most sophisticated military barrier on the planet. I suppose the government can make some people believe anything. Gullible!

    Some Americans want the New World Order and that is in itself treason, for it would eliminate America as a sovereign nation. Those who want the NWO, but who are not a billionaire, could very easily become a victim of the planned pandemic or the planned martial law. Non-military and non-police government agencies buying billions of rounds of ammunition is highly suspicious.

    Obama, besides helping to shred the Constitution and Bill of Rights (and make it seem sweet), has already starting culling the military of all officers who would obey the Constitution and the law, rather than an illegal order from the President to fire upon Americans. One retired general fears that we're headed for a dictatorship and that this is one of the many steps to clear the way for a take-over. Having agents help "mad gunmen" commit mass murder is another method; get rid of the 2nd Amendment so people have no way to fight back. Australians found out the hard way that banning guns only allows the criminals to attack defenseless civilians with relatively little resistance.

    Kind of takes your breath away to see America being raped this way. Those who stand by and pretend it isn't happening are as guilty as the ones who do it. Just like the Germans 80 years ago. Normalcy bias dulls the eyes and the ears.

    1. aguasilver profile image88
      aguasilverposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      It seems to be a 'can't see the woods from the trees' blindness for those Americans who are trying to persuade themselves that everything is OK, which I guess was what the Germans were trying to do when they were dictated to.

      The fact is that acceptance and understanding of what is happening raises too many personal security and future happiness problems with most folk.

      Let's face it, most Americans have never seen the rest of the world, except through biased media representation and outright propaganda issued by those who are perpetrating this takeover.

      America MAY rise to fight for freedom when the crunch happens and nobody can ignore the facts, which is presumably why the 'conspirators' are stockpiling millions of rounds of hollow point bullets , building drones for US use and preparing FEMA camps for 'detainees'.

      Ask any older Japanese American what that means.....

      1. lone77star profile image90
        lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Thanks, John.

        Seeing the rest of the world certainly helps in taking the blinders off. But it also helps to have guys like yourself to keep dangling the truth out there for the lucky few who are willing to look. It took me 10 years to wake up to the 9/11 lies. Your passionate persistence helped me break through my own Normalcy Bias and my own judging of "conspiracy theorists."

    2. alexabda profile image61
      alexabdaposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      It is late to throw one's fists after 10 years. If noone cared at first, why should anyone now? Those deaths cannot be recovered. The government has paid enough in compensations to ensure everyone keeps his mouth shut and his arsehole satisfied. Shouting are those who have not received any reimbursement.

      1. lone77star profile image90
        lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        If the damage from 9/11 stopped that day, then you'd only be a callous arse for not caring.

        But the damage from 9/11 continues even today and into the future. More wars are created in its name, liberties destroyed and hundreds of billions of dollars spent, all because of lies of 9/11.

        9/11 is an ongoing crime. And the original "terrorists" have never been caught or punished. And they weren't Arabs.

        1. alexabda profile image61
          alexabdaposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Then gather evidence, engage a lawyer, and file a suit with an international court. US courts will not hear to your case anyway.
          Call me whatever you want, but many Muslims in Kazakhstan were glad to hear someone punished the USA for their shitty politics. They thought they would learn a good lesson.

          1. lone77star profile image90
            lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            @alexabda, you're likely right that it'll take much more than a lawyer. And the US effectively owns the international court.

            Should the 3000+ who died on 9/11 have paid for America's shitty politics? Wouldn't it be far better for the real culprits to pay for their crimes? Or are you really so callous, you don't care who pays for it?

            But that's the real twist. If the power elite of America and Western Europe did it to gain more money and power, then the Muslims in Kazakhstan are cheering for the same people they hate. And that's really, really dumb!

            1. alexabda profile image61
              alexabdaposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I am sorry shit happened to those thousands. Shit happens to hundreds of thousands of people every single day. As asked by Jesus, do you think they were the most sinful people in Judea that the tower fell on them and cracked them?
              People in Kazakhstan have discussed as to who really is behind all these events. Now, they are worried who will come to our borders once the US troops are out of Afghanistan. Smaller states decide nothing - they are either arse lickers or arse kickers. The former are dogs seeking to eat crumbles the masters drop from their tables, the latter are in the axis of evil seeking to destroy the US in an nuclear explosion.
              This is not the first event in history when the guilty have escaped punishment while taking benefit. This is how the life is. You are the one crying in the wilderness, alas.

              1. lone77star profile image90
                lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Crying in the wilderness? Perhaps.

                Some people don't know, so I try to help them by making the knowledge available. I appreciate that someone did the same for me. If enough people took responsibility, they could do something about it.

                Atahualpa could've destroyed Pizzaro and his forces, if he had not been so awed by their guns, armor and horses. The Spaniard's small forces could've been overrun by the Incas in moments, if he had given the order.

                There are an elite few who want to enslave us all -- all those who remain after the "great culling," as one European leader called it. Wholesale slaughter of 6+ billion people.

                May you and your family survive the coming storm.

        2. alexabda profile image61
          alexabdaposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          The 9/11 was not aimed at waging wars. Dismissing regimes that otherwise had been selling resources at low prices and in huge amounts is unreasonable. The target was global financial flows. The money laundering and the financing of terrorism they called that. All banks around the world are now required to submit forms and report on any minor amounts processed by them. But is this bad to ordinary people? Less frauds and abuses.

          1. lone77star profile image90
            lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I think you're wrong with your "theory."

            Bush and the Neocons wanted war and 9/11 gave it to them.

            The abusive legislation that came after 9/11, I wouldn't wish on even the evil perpetrators.

            1. alexabda profile image61
              alexabdaposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Perhaps they did. I am not granted access to their files.

              1. lone77star profile image90
                lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                But if you look at the videos, above, you will know much more than the power elite want you to know.

                Spread the word. Let your friends know that information is available on this.

                Evil works best in the dark.

                Giving up and saying that this is the way it's always been doesn't help a bit. America started out in the right direction, toward freedom and opportunity. It was troubled by compromise, but it was a big improvement and now that progress is being eroded.

                Many will die in the coming storm. But you can help prepare the world for those few who survive.

        3. alexabda profile image61
          alexabdaposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          By the way, much more lives have been destroyed and much more billions spent and much more wars began - all because of the lies of Christian or Muslim religions. Shall we do aything about those?

          1. lone77star profile image90
            lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            @alexabda, why change the subject?

            All evil comes from ego (the heart of selfishness). Ego perverts religions, governments, sciences and more. Never blame it on religion, because you'd be missing the real target.

            You can't fix your flat tire by kicking the dog. Attacking the wrong target always leads to frustration.

            1. alexabda profile image61
              alexabdaposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              God said 'Kill not'. The same god said 'Stone to death'.

              1. lone77star profile image90
                lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                And those who look at the letter of the Book will not find understanding, but those who find the spirit of the Book will know great wisdom.

                You can find an infinite number of ways to make something NOT work. That's not very bright. It takes humility and hard work to understand what is really meant.

                Take for instance the ludicrous testing done by National Geographic to prove that thermite could not have been used to bring down the 3 WTC buildings on 9/11. They were not motivated to make it work, so it didn't. They started with a preconceived notion and proved that.

                And yet, an engineer (Jonathan Cole), in his own back yard, created an experiment that proved National Geographic wrong. Not only did he sever a steel beam like the ones used in WTC, and with ordinary thermite, but he was able to cut the beams both horizontally and vertically.

                If he had been able to use nano-thermate (a high-tech and expensive version of thermite), the cutting likely would've been done in a thousandth of a second, instead of 2-3 seconds.

                Truth isn't so easily found, if you start with a full cup.

  2. rhamson profile image76
    rhamsonposted 3 years ago

    FDR was chomping at the bit to enter the war in Europe before Pearl Harbor happened. There are reports that his administration ignored the intelligence which was very persuasive with the Japanese fleet missing from many activity reports leading up to the surprise attack. FDR knew that a common cause could draw the country together and lead us out of the Great Depression.
    I don't think Bush had any great grandiose ideas the same as FDR but he might have seen an opportunity to occupy Arab soil and a very prosperous oil source in completing his fathers invasion. It would also give us a foothold unfettered by Iraeli politics.

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      They were planning this when his Daddy gushed about the New World Order on 9/11/1990 -- exactly 11 years before the big NWO event.

      Bush Jr. was just a "pretty" figurehead -- a bumbling klutz to keep Americans thinking that the government was too incompetent to do such a thing. That's why Cheney had to chaperone Bush when he appeared before the 9/11 Commission.

      1. Marquis profile image60
        Marquisposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Typical anti Bush responses do not help your argument.

    2. American View profile image61
      American Viewposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      I don't think Bush had any great grandiose ideas the same as FDR but he might have seen an opportunity to occupy Arab soil and a very prosperous oil source in completing his fathers invasion. It would also give us a foothold unfettered by Iraeli politics.

      Could you point out to us which Arab countries we occupy and control, Also could you point out all those oil wells we now control.

  3. innersmiff profile image79
    innersmiffposted 3 years ago

    1. Accepting the possibility of conspiracy means rejecting engrained beliefs about their government, and the subsequent wars and legislation.
    2. Addressing this issue comes at great personal cost, i.e being called a 'conspiracy theorist', and upsetting people who do not question the official story

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Which costs more?

      Losing liberty to gain a safe Nanny state like Soviet Russia,

      or

      A bruised ego to save what millions of American soldiers have fought to protect in the last two centuries?

  4. Greekgeek profile image98
    Greekgeekposted 3 years ago

    1. Because I saw the second plane hit.
    2. Because I saw a blinking jet engine from one of the planes on the ground below during the live broadcast. It was so mangled and unrecognizable that the newscasters didn't know what they were seeing.
    3. Because my father deals with rocket fuels, so I know that that much jet fuel WOULD do exactly what it did.

    Since I know there was at least one real plane, I see absolutely no reason to invent elaborate schemes... How could the government come up with all that and time it to happen when some terrorists they were too incompetent to catch were planning to steal and crash planes?

    Mind you, I think Bush and Cheney then seized on the excuse to go to war. The New American Century thinktank of which they and most of Bush's administration were a part had been pushing for a rematch with Iraq since the Clinton administration, saying it would restore American hegemony. The document they prmulgated in 1996 even advocated a war on two fronts, God knows why.

    So I think their response was to use the tragedy for their own ends. But I don't think they were competent enough to pull off a conspiracy on that magnitude. Somebody would've leaked something. Plus, again, the planes were real -- that much I know -- so all the talk of other causes makes no sense.

    1. innersmiff profile image79
      innersmiffposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Firstly, nobody here is questioning that planes hit the building, only that the impacts were enough to bring down the towers. Even if we accept that it is possible that jet fuel could affect the steel to a point where it could break, there are still 80% of untouched floors propping up the top of the building that would have had to experience instantaneous destruction for it to collapse like it did. Check 'Downward acceleration of the North Tower'.

      Once you realise that, scientifically, the official story can not be true, questions to the nature of 'how could they possibly pull it off ?' are arbitrary. Also, nobody is saying that Bush and Cheney were the masterminds of the plot. That assumes they have real power.

    2. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Of course there was an airplane, @Greekgeek. There were two of them in New York. I don't question that.

      If you were trying to cover up a crime this big, and you had Trillions of dollars at your disposal, wouldn't you hire someone to start crazy "conspiracy theories" to make all questioners seem crazy? Guilt by association is easy when you have so many non-critical thinkers in America.

      The idea that the government was incompetent is what they were trying to sell us. So many Corporations funded Bush's campaign.

      Secrets? Please! Don't make me laugh about whether or not people can keep secrets. Operation Northwoods was a well-kept secret for more than 30 years.

      The CIA keeps lots of them. And leaking some secrets would be a perfect way to make people think the government is leaky. Give up your little crimes to hide a big one.

      Check out this interesting video:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCvqXXnxLZw

      The collapse of 3 buildings in New York was an inside job. You can't take months to prepare 3 such large buildings without the CIA (a tenant of one of those buildings) and the Bush-family-run security company from finding out.

      Bush Jr. was a klutz for all his life. That's why he was pushed to be president -- plausible deniability.

  5. Zelkiiro profile image84
    Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago

    Foreign people actually managed to slap America on its own turf?

    MUST BE A CONSPIRACY.

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      You can believe the Bush "conspiracy theory" that 19 hijackers led by a man on dialysis in a cave halfway around the world to overpower the most formidable military force on the planet and take 4 planes wildly off course without one fighter interceptor stopping them.

      In the meantime, we continue to lose liberties, spend Trillions, and kill hundreds of thousands of innocents all in the name of 9/11.

      You can either help stop the madness or continue your treason against humanity.

      Your choice.

      1. Zelkiiro profile image84
        Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Crazy people doing crazy things by going to crazy lengths? Doesn't sound crazy to me.

        Also, you greatly overestimate the ability of fighter interceptors and underestimate the sheer size of the planet if you think there's a military jet just hangin' around every 5 miles.

      2. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        1) A man on dialysis didn't lead them; he planned and ordered the attack.

        2) No one overpowered the most formidable military force on earth; they never even come into contact with them.

        3)  Fighters were not scrambled; had the military done so and shot down those planes the death toll would likely have tripled.  Not all the military are idiots.  Not even the commander in chief.

        4) You can continue to spread the madness of conspiracy or sit back, listen to reason and relax.

        1. lone77star profile image90
          lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          1) And your proof? Or do you just believe the government? How nice!

          2) "They even come into contact with them." Do you mean "never?" I call that a leaky defense. And all those alert military officers responsible for the massive security failures on 9/11 received promotions instead of courts martial. What compassion! Usually, I'd think such rewarding of incompetence is an act of cover-up, not being nice-nice. But that's only a theory. But if you think such policies are okay, then you're not as intelligent as I thought. And after your poor show on the subject of gravity and physics, that's not saying much.

          3) Then why did the president issue a "shoot down" order just after 10am on 9/11? You can make up all the lies you want, but it doesn't change the facts. You can call "facts" "conspiracy" but that just shows your lack of logic and possibly lack of intelligence. Oops!

          4) Investigating a crime that the government lied about is not "madness of conspiracy." The only madness is believing the lies and refusing to look at the facts.

          Facts like:

          1) Some (many, most, all?) bills in Congress are not even read before they vote. Senator Rand Paul recently berated his fellow senators for allowing this to happen -- for not even following their own rules. How can they run the country if they don't even know what they're voting on? That's like driving a car wearing a blindfold and earmuffs. I suppose you think that's okay? SOP?

          2) The Constitution has and continues to be eroded as justified by 9/11.

          3) Senator McCain saying it's okay that indefinite detention without trial or due process is the new law of the land. It's okay if it happens to someone else, right? That's just what the Germans said under Nazi tyranny, 80 years ago. These are facts, not "theory." If there is a conspiracy behind this, wouldn't it be nice to know about it, or do you just love to wait until a problem gets too big to fix? Senator McCain's statement is a problem. Thomas Jefferson and friends would be outraged, I'm sure. If you can't see the evil in McCain's statement, then you are hopelessly deluded.

          4) Senator Rand Paul's need to filibuster to get an important, Constitutional question answered, after a month and a half of avoidance from the White House. Simple question; simple answer, but it took far too long and too much weasel wording on the part of the Administration.

          And about 9/11 itself, more facts:
          5) Mayor Giuliani committed a felony by cleaning up the crime scene just after 9/11. The "official" investigation didn't begin until after over a year of waiting. Burning question: Why would anyone clean up a crime scene before an investigation could be conducted. He broke a lot of laws by doing that, and also broke with standard procedures for Fire Safety and Building Safety codes.

          6) Asymmetric damage never, ever leads to symmetrical collapse, unless there is an additional force involved. All 3 buildings collapsed symmetrically, straight down through the path of greatest resistance. The building structure offered almost no resistance, and in the case of 7WTC zero resistance for 8 floors. And, trust me, solid steel never, ever offers zero resistance. I'd like to see you put your fist through a steel beam. Don't be stupid. Don't ignore the facts.

          7) Steel frame skyscrapers never, ever collapse at free fall acceleration unless there is controlled demolition involved. 7WTC went into perfect free fall for 8 floors! This is a fact that even NIST scientists were forced to admit, but then they glossed over it as if it wasn't a startling revelation. Their blatant and obvious scientific fraud is also a fact, and thousands of scientists, engineers and architects have called them on it.

          8) Fact: every sample of 9/11 concrete dust contained between 0.2 and 5.47% iron microspheres. Considering the thousands of tons of concrete pulverized by the WTC events, there were at least several tons of iron microspheres. Samples held by USGS, RJ Lee and Co., and others were originally found all over Lower Manhattan. The only way to create so many iron microspheres is to aerosolize (forceful ejection) molten iron -- a major byproduct of thermitic reactions (for controlled demolition).

          @wilderness, even if you ignore all of these facts, as you so blithely seem to want to do, you should not ignore the fact that America's foundations (Constitution and Bill of Rights) are being destroyed.

          Not only that, the massive overspending of the government is unsustainable. You don't have to be a math genius like me to appreciate the fact that spending Trillions of dollars more than you make, and every year, will soon lead to bankruptcy! Is it that the government is so perfectly incompetent, or is there a hidden motive behind this madness? That's a question? Are you afraid to answer it?

          I dare say, if you make $100,000 per year and spend $150,000, getting $50,000/year deeper into debt, you wouldn't last very long. America has lasted this long only because the private Federal Reserve bank keeps adding billions of dollars out of nothing. And then fractional reserve lending practices allow each private bank which receives these funds to loan out 10x the amount they receive, further inflating the currency with dollars created out of nothing. When that balloon pops, I estimate that Earth will be toast and America Ground Zero in the biggest economic meltdown in human history. With nearly 99% of Earth's currencies tied to the dollar, the effect will be worldwide. And you, @wilderness, and the rest of your fellow Americans, will be left holding the debt ($17+ Trillion) with a worthless dollar incapable of ever paying it back. And that's a "theory" (no conspiracy) based on hard, mathematical facts.

  6. Gemini Fox profile image95
    Gemini Foxposted 3 years ago

    Because American Idol is on . . .

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Fiddling while Rome burns? You mean that kind of madness?

      1. Gemini Fox profile image95
        Gemini Foxposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        More like the sheeples don't even know / don't want to know / won't admit Rome is burning . . . and one of these days they're going to wake up in a pile of ashes and wonder what happened.

        1. lone77star profile image90
          lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Oh, that kind of "Rome burning." You're absolutely right.

          One historian called it Normalcy Bias, like what the Germans went through when they thought it couldn't happen to them. When the erosion of liberty struck the Jews, it couldn't happen to the them. When it did, it was too late to stop Hitler and his madmen.

          It's sad to see one of my senators say such nasty things about Rand Paul for his filibuster. Senator McCain of Arizona is deluded into thinking that shredding the Constitution will make us safer. It didn't make the Germans any safer when they tore up their own constitution 80 years ago.

          All in the name of 9/11.

      2. Marquis profile image60
        Marquisposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Over-used example of Nero now?

        Nero was out with other Romans trying to smother the flames.

        1. lone77star profile image90
          lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I'm glad someone was there to report the truth to us. You must be -- what -- 2000 years old, now?

  7. psycheskinner profile image81
    psycheskinnerposted 3 years ago

    I think the Popular Mechanics debunking was pretty comprehensive.

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      No, @psycheskinner. Popular Mechanics (PM) arguments were full of holes and debunked nothing, except perhaps a few wild theories that even I find no evidence for.

      PM said, amongst other things, that thermite could never bring down a steel structure, but in their own publication of more than 80 years ago, they had an article of a steel beam tower being brought down by just that -- thermite. Dumb!

      PM like all "debunkers" sometimes gives interesting alternative theories, which could be true when viewed all by themselves, but never debunk anything.

      Did you view any of the videos?

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Any alternative theory is just as good as the conspiracy theory with no proof.  Either one would seem to need debunked.

        However, I would say that a science magazine aimed at consumers writing an article 80 years ago is going to be pretty much worthless for that purpose.

        I would, however, hazard a guess that thermite could bring down any building.  Of course the amounts and triggers necessary could never be spread throughout an occupied building without someone beginning to question the massive construction project going on in their office.

  8. sannyasinman profile image85
    sannyasinmanposted 3 years ago

    Cognitive dissonance.

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Yes, and Normalcy Bias.

      Sad.

      If we weren't still continuing to suffer from this 12-year-old "forest fire," this wouldn't be so urgent.

  9. wilderness profile image96
    wildernessposted 3 years ago

    Why do Americans bury their heads over this stuff?

    It is symbolic of burying all the conspiracy theories that are thoroughly debugged over and over, only to spring up once again like any other useless weed.  Bury them deep, please, and at the very bottom.

    1. Gemini Fox profile image95
      Gemini Foxposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Some conspiracy theories are ridiculous but it's very hard to keep saying this one is . . . especially when you have an organization of 1,500 (and growing) engineers, architects, demo experts, former military members and scientists (some with two or three Phds) from around the world saying that what our government claims to have happened on 9/11 is physically impossible!

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Yes, I've looked at some of them.  Psychologists explaining how there is aluminum powder in the area.  Testimony from "experts" that can't do simply acceleration equations.  I've seen them.  I just haven't seen even one that proves anything but that the speaker thinks there is a conspiracy - something evident before (s)he said a thing.

        1. Gemini Fox profile image95
          Gemini Foxposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Psychologists?!  Explaining how there is 'aluminum' powder in the area?! Guess I haven't seen that one!

          No, I'm referring to the physicists (who I'm pretty sure can do 'simple acceleration equations'!) and chemists with several Phds explaining how there is enough evidence that the government's version of events is phony enough to warrant an actual and real investigation of the event by an independent party.

          You've apparently been watching the wrong videos . . .

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Oh, there were investigations, all right.  Real ones, even.  That you claim they were not real doesn't make it so, unfortunately.  It's to the point that the only "real" investigation will be the one indicting the US government because the whole world "knows" they did it.

            Sorry, it's just not going to happen.

            1. Gemini Fox profile image95
              Gemini Foxposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Real ones like the 9/11 Commission?  Get real.
              Real ones like Popular Mechanics? Again, get real.
              If there weren't legitimate questions regarding the government's version of events, I seriously doubt that these scientists would be putting their reputations on the line to state otherwise.

    2. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      @wilderness, "conspiracy theories?"

      Well, stick with facts, and don't call "facts" as "conspiracy theories." That's just plain dumb on your part!

      Facts are not theories.

      You said, "Testimony from 'experts' that can't do simply acceleration equations." Don't you mean "simple" instead of "simply?" Which specific "expert" are you talking about?

      Did you look at David Chandler's work? His lifelong career was physics.

      All 3 buildings came down without the expected bump at each floor, to slow in its downward acceleration while it broke or bent the next floor's steel beams. There was no slow down. Explain that to me, Mr. Expert.

      And why did asymmetric damage lead to symmetrical collapse? That never happens in reality -- only in cartoons and government reports -- unless controlled demolition is involved.

      And explain how 7WTC could collapse at perfect free fall for 8 floors. Even NIST was finally forced to admit this startling fact, but glossed over it. Their report was scientifically fraudulent.

      Now, if the damage from 9/11 was over, this might not be so urgent, but too many evils continue to be done in  its name.

  10. sannyasinman profile image85
    sannyasinmanposted 3 years ago

    My favourite conspiracy theory is that a bearded guy, holed up in a cave in the mountains far away, masterminded a most complex operation, with the help of a few amateur pilots who could not even fly a Cessna.  .
    If you will believe that, you will believe anything.

    1. Uninvited Writer profile image83
      Uninvited Writerposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      A guy who had a lot of money, who wasn't always holed up in a cave, who was the head of an international terrorist organization...

      1. innersmiff profile image79
        innersmiffposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Al Qaeda is not a formal organisation, but a name given by the West to represent a wide range of terrorist groups (or 'freedom fighters', depending on what you want to portray to the public) under the watch of the CIA. It translates literally to 'the Database'. To suggest that this small band of people with rudimentary technology could infiltrate the most advanced security in the world, with minions armed with box cutters, is patently absurd. And the story that they're leaving Korans, flying manuals and identification everywhere would be rejected from a Hollywood movie for being too far-fetched (they were doing last minute revision before flying a plane? Come on.). The idea that Osama Bin Laden was responsible is simply a meme propagated by an unquestioning media to an emotionally scarred people. It has rarely been analysed.

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          "The most advanced security in the world"?  You mean the metal detectors you used to walk through with a pound of metal in your clothes?

          1. Uninvited Writer profile image83
            Uninvited Writerposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            And not to mention all the videos Osama made. They were not as technologically ignorant as some seem to think.

            1. innersmiff profile image79
              innersmiffposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Anybody with two brain cells to rub together can stream video, but personally, if I wanted to attack the US I wouldn't know where to start.

              1. Uninvited Writer profile image83
                Uninvited Writerposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                The Middle East is not as backward as you seem to think.

                1. innersmiff profile image79
                  innersmiffposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Yeah - where is the evidence?

              2. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Possibilities:
                1) Begin by learning to fly a jumbo jet.
                2) Begin by learning how to build a nuke and start buying materials.
                3) Begin by learning to scuba dive, and build a bomb in your free time.  Hoover dam is the target
                4)  Begin by learning how to make anthrax.  Buy a boat. Lake Mead is the target; the water supply for Vegas and California.
                5)  But there is no need to go on...

                1. Gemini Fox profile image95
                  Gemini Foxposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Thanks for bringing the jumbo jet up . . . because if you'd watched the right videos you would have seen ex-military members, with decades of experience, say that there is absolutely no way that the 'terrorist' that the government claims flew the jet into the Pentagon could have done it - considering he couldn't even fly a Cessna.  Pilots with decades of experience would have had trouble doing that maneuver . . .

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    " ex-military members, with decades of experience" - experience in what?  Not flying passenger jets.  Another red herring?

                    "considering he couldn't even fly a Cessna" - and you know this how?  Because the conspiracy theorists dogged their footsteps for the prior 20 years, making sure they never took lessons?

                    "Pilots with decades of experience would have had trouble doing that maneuver" - and yet a pilot with zero experience can set it down on a narrow runway, with altitude within a narrow range of possibilities.  There's a first time for everyone, you know.

            2. wilderness profile image96
              wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Presumably made by the CIA.  Or was it the MI6?

          2. innersmiff profile image79
            innersmiffposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            The US, aside from being the biggest military and intelligence force in the world, was one of the few countries that had in place comprehensive terrorist attack prevention measures, they were even performing a drill that would simulate such a scenario on the same day if you believe that.

            1. wilderness profile image96
              wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Unfortunately, the drill didn't take care of the attack that came hours later in mid-air, did it?  (Nor do I believe that the drill was to control a plane captured by pilots armed with boxcutters).

              1. innersmiff profile image79
                innersmiffposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                No, and you can understand why the pilots would get confused. One of them even asked "is this a drill?". I draw attention to it to highlight the implausibility of the story. What are the chances that they would experience an identical terrorist attack to the drill they are currently running?

                1. wilderness profile image96
                  wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Seems that that kind of attitude and complete failure to leap to the defense would make it pretty easy to take over that plane.  No?

                  I have to say, you're ruining the conspiracy theory quite well.  An almost total lack of that vaunted US security you mentioned makes it pretty plausible, seems to me.

                  1. innersmiff profile image79
                    innersmiffposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    You're missing the point completely. Why on Earth would there be an identical drill on the same day if not to intentionally confuse the pilots?

                  2. lone77star profile image90
                    lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    @wilderness, you are funny. "The" conspiracy theory? Is there only one?

                    And you call "fact" "conspiracy theory," too. You are confused.

                    Discussing fact is never a "theory." And fact is never a "conspiracy."

                    Amazing that I have to explain such simple things to you. You may very well be otherwise very intelligent, but I can't tell from your arguments on this topic. So far, you've been sloppy about word usage and your lack of understanding of physics. (see my reply to your "physics," below)

      2. sannyasinman profile image85
        sannyasinmanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Please take the time to watch this video. It is less than 5 minutes long, so it won't take up much of your time
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SFkGLzmEic
        . . . afterwards please let me know what you think.

        1. lone77star profile image90
          lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          That video is one of my favorites. James Corbett has a real talent for the tongue-in-cheek zaniness of the corporate-government (fascist) "conspiracy theory" of 9/11.

          I also like the one with Bush acting like he got caught with his hand in the proverbial "cookie jar."

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCvqXXnxLZw

      3. lone77star profile image90
        lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Osama worked for the CIA. He had the deep pockets of America to back him up. Did he still work for the CIA on 9/11? Interesting question. Apparently he was visited by a CIA exec just weeks before 9/11.

        If you're going to discuss this without watching any of the videos, then you're just wasting your time and mine.

        1. Marquis profile image60
          Marquisposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Videos can be falsified and bias.

    2. Gemini Fox profile image95
      Gemini Foxposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Think you're referring to this video?  Love it!  When you look at the evidence, it's pretty  hard to see how anyone believes the government's version . . . why this video is so funny!

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SFkGLzmEic

      1. innersmiff profile image79
        innersmiffposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Brilliant video.

      2. sannyasinman profile image85
        sannyasinmanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        I was unaware of this video, but as you say, it sums up the whole farce quite succinctly. Thanks for the heads up.

      3. lone77star profile image90
        lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Yes, James Corbett was inspirational in this video.

        It makes the Bush "conspiracy theory" seem less likely.

  11. Kangaroo_Jase profile image79
    Kangaroo_Jaseposted 3 years ago

    Well, I will have to be excused if these conspiracies just came up and ended the life of the 373  international citizens during the event of 9/11 including 11 Australians.

    Yes, dang it, must have been a US government based well crafted, thought out, brilliantly conceived plan to kill over 2,000 US nationals, but hey lets take out 300+ International foreigners on US soil as well, of what do ya call it COLLATERAL DAMAGE.

    Why do people need to continue to go on and on about garbage that does nothing but insult the memories of THOUSANDS of families across the world, who are still to this day, just trying to move on with their lives and STILL think about those they unnecessarily lost.

    Spare a thought for them before spouting crap.

    1. innersmiff profile image79
      innersmiffposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Speculating who the perpetrators of a crime were does not disrespect the victims of that crime. What is disrespectful is refusing to investigate in the face of scientific evidence.

      1. Kangaroo_Jase profile image79
        Kangaroo_Jaseposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Are you serious? What evidence is needed to know that you had several men with a hatred of a nation take control of 4 planes and crash them directly into buildings containing either hundreds or thousands of people.

        1. innersmiff profile image79
          innersmiffposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Um . . . as much evidence as one would need to prove any other theory.

          1. Kangaroo_Jase profile image79
            Kangaroo_Jaseposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Hmmm,

            Four planes;

            One crashed

            Two hit the WTC

            One hit The Pentagon

            All factual

            No theories

            1. innersmiff profile image79
              innersmiffposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              All that is fine, but insufficient evidence to explain the collapse of the buildings. We witnessed three unprecedented structural failures all in one day - the impact of the planes and subsequent burning of jet fuel was not enough force to cause complete collapses at free-fall acceleration.

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Actually, yes it is.  Quite sufficient.

                But the conspiracy video linked by the OP says the building fell too slow!  Now you say it fell to fast.  You guys need to get your act in order and collaborate a bit.

                1. innersmiff profile image79
                  innersmiffposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  I'm not sure anybody is claiming that the buildings fell too slow. The key thing to recognise with all three collapses is the constant rate of acceleration, that would have required extremely fast sequential destruction of all structural supports to have occurred. The fact that it occurred in this manner disproves the jet fuel theory.

                  The official theory of 9/11 states that if your neck breaks, your head will then drop and crush the rest of your body into smithereens.

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Sure they do.  First link by the OP

                    G, the force of gravity on earth, results in a rate of acceleration of 32.2 ft/sec^2.  It doesn't matter where you are, it doesn't matter how long you've been falling - it's constant at 32.2ft/sec^2.

                    True, in the buildings there were other forces involved, acting in the "up" direction.  The strength of the steel, wood and glass supporting structures.  The force of the uprushing air due to the fire.  Air being displaced by falling debris also moves up to some degree.  With the exception of the force exerted by building structure, all are fairly minor, but do exist.

                    If the structure is destroyed first, the "up" force goes to near zero.  The upper floors were destroyed; virtually no opposing forces to the fall of debris.  Lower floors were not so badly damaged (although no one knows exactly how much) but also had to contend with the velocity of falling debris and thus were unable to slow the fall much.  A measurable amount, yes, but not as much as if the debris did not already have a high velocity.

                    And all that can give rise to a fairly constant rate of acceleration.  The "up" force increases with lower floors, but so does the velocity of falling objects, at least partially negating it. 

                    That's the biggest problem with the conspiracy theories; so few are able to understand the simply physics involved, but want badly to believe that big bad government did it, that they'll swallow anything.  Add in a few vocal people that DO understand physics and it's easy to make a conspiracy.

                2. lone77star profile image90
                  lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  "Conspiracy" video?

                  Now, I know you're cracked, @wilderness.

                  A presentation of fact is never a "conspiracy." Apparently, you have no idea what "conspiracy" means. And apparently, you have no idea what "theory" means, either. Fact is not theory. A video of exploring the facts is not theory, though some of the videos may contain theories along with the facts, but David Chandler is pretty good and labeling such musings as "theory" to separate them from the fact he presents.

                  Such distortions on your part are unethical at best.

            2. lone77star profile image90
              lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Such a simple set of facts, but you said nothing about the facts I presented.

              You simply call it all "conspiracy theory" as if the facts were somehow magically irrelevant.

    2. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      @Kangaroo_Jase, I could say the same thing about you, spouting crap.

      If stupid people call "facts," "conspiracy theories," then there's really not much to talk about, is there? They can simply stick their heads back in the sand and go on being stupid.

      Did you know that thousands of American troops and hundreds of international troops have lost their lives all because of 9/11 and the lies of the government (particularly WMDs)? Did you know that George Bush gave a speech about the non-existent WMDs and laughed about the lie, while our troops continued to die? Did you know the Bush family and Bin Laden family stood to gain Billions of dollars because of the Carlysle Group profits off of the Iraq War?

      Did you know that hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children have died and continue to die EVEN TODAY, because of the lies of 9/11? You, sir, are insulting their deaths!

      Did you know that America is burning through Trillions of dollars, threatening the economy of the entire planet, all because of 9/11? Wake up, or it'll be too late to do anything about it.

      Did you know that Americans are losing their liberties with each new piece of legislation because of 9/11? I've heard that similar things are happening in Australia, too.

      Did you know that legislators in America are not able to read the bills they vote on, because they are introduced only hours before the vote? Most bills are hundreds of pages long and refer to statutes running into the hundreds of thousands of pages.

      Did you know that Mayor Giuliani committed a felony by destroying crime scene evidence more than a year before the official investigation was started?

      Did you know that the military officers responsible for the massive security failures on 9/11 were given promotions instead of courts martial?

      You, sir, are insulting all of us and those who have died. Don't be callous. Wake up and look at the facts.

      Look at the videos listed above and learn something.

      1. Kangaroo_Jase profile image79
        Kangaroo_Jaseposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Sudan, March–June 1885
        South African War (Boer War), 1899-1902
        China (Boxer Rebellion), 1900-01
        First World War, 1914-18
        Second World War, 1939-45
        Occupation of Japan, 1946-51
        Korean War, 1950-53
        Malayan Emergency, 1950-60
        Indonesian Confrontation, 1963-66
        Vietnam War, 1962-75
        Iraq: the First Gulf War, 1990-91
        Afghanistan, 2001–present
        Iraq: the Second Gulf War, 2003–09

        Peacekeeping, 1947–present

        Yes this highlights every conflict or peacekeeping force Australians have served in internationally since 1885. We also know what is is like to lose our men, woman and children before there time.

        We are still today in Iraq and Afghanistan alongside international & US troops serving.

        Suggesting watching a few videos on Youtube does not create facts indesputable.

        There are events and people involved on that fateful day we will never know about no matter how well intentioned people beleive otherwise.

        We look at agreeing to disagree on those issues.

        I feel I have said enough on this issue and most likely will not respond further to this debate/discussion.

        1. lone77star profile image90
          lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          "Suggesting watching a few videos on Youtube does not create facts indesputable."

          No, but ignoring the facts they present is why I brought up this topic. Too many people ignoring facts, like buildings don't collapse at free fall acceleration through undamaged steel beams without controlled demolition being involved.

          But you're free to ignore away.

          Thanks for commenting.

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            True.  But making up answers from your imagination doesn't find truth, either.

            You claim that microspheres show thermite reactions; find the receipts for the ingredients.  Find the tons of material brought into the buildings, find the trucks that brought them in, find the hundreds of workers tearing the building apart to place the thermite, find the triggers that set it off.

            NOW, you have some proof.  To declare that the microspheres show that government killed the people just doesn't make it.  Find some proof, not just indications that it could have happened; not just questions with no answers.  God knows there has been sufficient time; where is the proof?

            1. lone77star profile image90
              lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Find the receipts for the ingredients? Wow. I used to think you had some modicum of intelligence. You're the one making up things -- calling "facts" "conspiracy theory." And all those replies I made to your comments that you either didn't find or were too afraid to answer.

              First, you stick your foot in your mouth about gravity and physics (and didn't reply to my comments; too tough for you?), and now you expect criminals to hand over the receipts for their materials? I really don't think you're that naive.

              You want extraordinary evidence, but ignore existing evidence. You call facts, conspiracy theory. Such muddy thinking will never solve a crime.

              There have been plenty of answers, but you either don't want to look or mangle the physics and logic.

              Enough time? Sure, we've had enough time, if someone in government took the investigation seriously. The 9/11 Commission leaders said that the White House dragged their feet, didn't reply to a large number of their questions and blocked their investigation -- that it was "set up to fail."

              Bush dragged his feet and didn't allow independent investigators to look into it. Hiding something? More money was spent and the investigation proceeded much faster on Clinton's sexual indiscretions than for 9/11.

              =======================================

              Since too many details seems to be too tough for you to handle, let's start simple. Take gravity and structure.

              Does steel resist compression? Does it take energy to bend or break steel beams? You seem to think that magic did it. Good luck with that theory.

              When 7WTC collapsed at perfect free fall for 8 floors, it did the impossible, if only office fires and asymmetrical damage was involved. Free fall acceleration uses 100% of the original Potential Energy (PE), leaving zero for bending or breaking the steel beams on any of those 8 floors. Now, do you get it. We're not talking theory or conspiracies, here. We're talking facts.

              How could a building go into free fall?

              Controlled demolition.

              Now, here's where it gets interesting. Controlled demolition takes months to prepare for.

              The only way for all of those deliveries to be made to the 3 buildings is for the security company in charge of the WTC to be involved. Wirt Walker III and Marvin Bush were on the board of directors of that security company. So far, we're only talking facts.

              Making outrageous demands for extraordinary proof when the existing evidence is sufficient to call the official "conspiracy theory" into question, is your own version of lunacy.

              I pity you. Your normalcy bias has blinded you completely.

              Thanks for commenting, but it makes a really lousy discussion to have you avoid all the tough issues and the holes pointed out in your arguments.

      2. Marquis profile image60
        Marquisposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        77, please stick to the facts. You are getting owned here. Bush lied about nothing. Stop believing in left-wing propaganda so much.

        1. Moderndayslave profile image59
          Moderndayslaveposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Bush lied the second he spit out the "Official" version of  who did 911. Same thing with "Mission Accomplished" . Yeah, mission accomplished,,,,,,They fell for it..... Testify with Cheney's hand up his back , off the record and behind closed doors. Your kidding right?

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Your proof?  Not questions, understand, but actual proof that he lied?

            1. Moderndayslave profile image59
              Moderndayslaveposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              My proof he lied is the same as yours he didn't. I am going by my understanding and what I have read. You are going by what you were told,unless you just happen to be a Retired Air force pilot who is also a structural engineer. Too many problems with the "Official " version kinda puts the ball in my court. Or your still in the 19 Arabs with box cutters thing. The buildings were demoed ,in  Shanksville the plane vaporized and a near impossible flying maneuver for a well skilled air force pilot in DC. What a job for a guy who couldln't fly a Cessna. Let's not forget NORAD was just coincidentally turned off. Or none of that happened? Lot's of firsts that day

              1. wilderness profile image96
                wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Unlike you, I didn't make a claim about his honesty at all.  You claim he lied but have no evidence of such.

                You claim the buildings were demoed; where is the evidence?  Again, not questions or protestations that your ignorance precludes your understanding of the forces, but actual evidence of the demolition?  Receipts for materials (thermite?) used, trucks used, workmen that spent months tearing down an occupied building - what actual evidence do you present? 

                You claim NORAD was turned off, for example, but that doesn't indicate demo; even if true (no evidence) it still doesn't have anything to do with demoing a building.

                1. Moderndayslave profile image59
                  Moderndayslaveposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  . Why are you so afraid to study this?  Your using what the media told you.
                  Receipts OK  Your kidding right ?
                  I would actually like to see you melt a 4 inch thick ( Each web ) I beam with refined kerosene , plastic and carpet.
                  http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysi … overdesign
                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1zED8dy63w
                  They don't know what they witnessed right ?
                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A 
                  when else do you see this ? 
                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73qK4j32iuo
                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaBQ3AkRetI
                  I put real time video up and you ask for receipts lol

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    No, I asked for proof.  You don't know how the beams melted, so govt. murdered the victims.  You don't know anything (except that terrorists were on board with knives) so you declare it a govt. plot.

                    I'm sorry, you don't seem to understand what evidence consists of.  It's not questions, it's not declared ignorance of how something happened and it's not unconnected actions (NORAD); it's solid evidence such as receipts and delivery tickets.  It's interviews with the people tearing the building apart.  It's rental records of the trucks used to transport tons of thermite ingredients, with samples retrieved from those trucks. 

                    It's just not the questions you present as rock solid evidence the president is a murderer.

  12. Moderndayslave profile image59
    Moderndayslaveposted 3 years ago

    Kinda puts it all in perspective, doesn't it?  roll 
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl … _4mGTs98#!

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      That video is a perennial favorite. More "debunkers" need to see it.

  13. Moderndayslave profile image59
    Moderndayslaveposted 3 years ago
    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Interesting article. Sounds about right.

      The government uses just enough truth to protect their lies and to keep the masses lulled to sleep.

      They know the power of Normalcy Bias (laziness) and Ego (selfishness and self-importance) that will keep most people from looking.

      They know the importance of character assassination, calling anyone who questions the official "conspiracy theory" with facts a "conspiracy theorist." The tendency of humans to protect their egos will help self-police the populace. Anything that is "different" is an "enemy." It's sad to see fellow Americans twist in the wind like this, distorting facts to make their own worldview seem "right."

  14. Marquis profile image60
    Marquisposted 3 years ago

    The same reason why Americans keep blaming Bush for everything that is wrong with America still today.

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      @Marquis, you speak in generalities. Not all Americans. Some are divided along party lines, and some blame Obama or Clinton. Some realize the lie of the 2-party system and see only 2 heads of the same monster.

      At the 2 presidential conventions last year, both parties ended voting as a practice. Instead, they opted for the script. Here's 2 videos (2 sources for each, because sometimes videos are taken down), that show you what I mean.

      RNC Scripted:
      http://www.fox19.com/category/240225/vi … Id=7673872
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2O248VaDpA

      DNC Scripted:
      http://www.fox19.com/category/240225/vi … Id=7698022
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxNg3u70FnY

    2. Moderndayslave profile image59
      Moderndayslaveposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Has anyone actually researched what the Bush family was / is up to? From Prescott to present day..  I don't think people have.

      1. Marquis profile image60
        Marquisposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Did you research what the Kerry family was/is up to? From when Massachusetts was founded to how the Chinese War on Opium ended with the British opening up an opium trade thanks to the famous Forbes family.

        I don't think people have. The Kerry family, like the Kennedys are nothing more than bloodsuckers.

        1. Moderndayslave profile image59
          Moderndayslaveposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I don't get it, are you calling me a democrat or defending Bushco ?  Get off the "Party" thing and put the best person for this country in. Not the Tax cut candidate or the welfare candidate.

  15. ocbill profile image75
    ocbillposted 3 years ago

    great comments that I was unaware of. I have read other theories (or facts?) on 9/11 as well. I don't like hindsight but I had an interview for a job (like many others)  in one of the towers in 2000. Glad I wasn't burnt or crushed to death by Cheney's greed & cruelty.

    1. Marquis profile image60
      Marquisposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      You act like Democrats are not capable of greed of cruelty. Obama is not exactly a breath of fresh air either. Neither is that loser named Kerry.

      1. Moderndayslave profile image59
        Moderndayslaveposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        You are 100% right. I don't think a president has been in control since '64
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdMbmdFOvTs
        This was interesting also
        http://www.hermes-press.com/BushSaud.htm

      2. lone77star profile image90
        lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Certainly both sides of the Corporate Party are capable of such greed and cruelty, but just because he names a Republican doesn't mean he is so naive about Democrats.

        http://s4.hubimg.com/u/7777675_f1024.jpg

        Nobel Peace Prize winning, President Obama, went to war against a country that hadn't attacked us and without getting the required declaration from Congress, first. In fact, his administration said they "may" notify Congress in the future. Obama has betrayed his Oath of Office more times than I can count. He even said Gitmo prisoners should stay there indefinitely, even if found innocent!

        And Bush laughed about the missing WMDs, when the lie was found out -- laughed while our troops were still dying because of the lie, while he and his Daddy raked up lots of profits through the Carlyle Group. I don't mind people getting filthy rich, but not over the dead bodies of fellow Americans.

        1. Marquis profile image60
          Marquisposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          So is this hope and change? lol

          Liberals are mental midgets.

        2. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          You do, of course, have a recording of Bush laughing, clearly indicating it was over the missing WMD's?  And can show a financial accounting of their profits gained directly from the war?  Or just more baseless claims promoting a conspiracy that never happened?

          1. Marquis profile image60
            Marquisposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I have heard no such thing. As far as I am concerned, these are nothing more than baseless claims promoting a conspiracy that never happened.

            1. wilderness profile image96
              wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              That's kind of the point.  Lots and lots of claims, lots of questions and insinuations, lots of spin but no proof. 

              Of course, it IS rather difficult to prove that a jumbo jet didn't run into it when it was captured on film doing just that.  The best that can be done is to claim it wasn't enough damage to bring the building down, hoping that people will swallow the claim without asking for facts.

              1. lone77star profile image90
                lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Yes, an airplane struck the building.

                But you ignore all the tough discussions when your arguments are found full of holes. You make lots of claims and run away when they are found wanting.

                1. Gemini Fox profile image95
                  Gemini Foxposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  They're playing dumb (or maybe not), lone77, just to get a rise out of you.  If they can't even look at the videos (as I'm sure wilderness hasn't even viewed a one by his nonsensical comments . . . "receipts and delivery tickets"?! . . . wow!) then you just have to ignore them . . .

                  1. wilderness profile image96
                    wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Just one more time and I give up as a lost cause.  What proof can you offer?  I suggested receipts showing tons of rust and powdered aluminum for thermite - you laugh as if that would be something impossible to do. 

                    What can you offer?  Just empty claims so far, that and innuendo that your own ignorance of how it happened proves the president did it.  Just not good enough, sorry.

                2. wilderness profile image96
                  wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  I've watched at least a dozen of these conspiracy theory videos.  Not a single one has any proof that the president, or any other govt official, ordered that 3,000 Americans be murdered. 

                  What they do have is lots of questions, questions without any answers.  Supply the answers (with proof of veracity, not a guess or baseless claim) and they would mean something.  But they never do, and all the discussion in the world isn't going to find an answer with proof to back it.

                  Nor can they even agree.  You claim the building is in free fall - your first link says it is falling too slow, with a decreasing acceleration.

                  1. Marquis profile image60
                    Marquisposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    I know and I have met nut cases who swear up and down that Bush was behind the whole thing. If you refute their baseless claims, they get all upset and call you names.

                  2. lone77star profile image90
                    lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    @wilderness, you continue to stick your foot in your mouth, claiming these videos (in OP) are "conspiracy theory." Dumb! They are not "conspiracy theory." Some mention "conspiracy theories" in passing, but focus on science and fact.

                    You keep focusing on someone else's "conspiracy theory." (Who's, I don't know.) That's not the main discussion, here. Yes, there is NO proof that Bush or any other government official committed the crimes on 9/11. But there is also no proof that 19 hijackers did it either. Even the head of the FBI admitted that there was not enough evidence to claim that Osama Bin Laden had anything to do with 9/11; that's why his file online did not mention 9/11 as one of his crimes.

                    There's a lot of half-baked, circumstantial evidence and the government sold it to the American people. I bought it for 10 years. And you've bought it for even longer.

                    What we do have is factual evidence that makes it highly unlikely that Al Qaeda could've brought down the buildings, because we have strong evidence that they were brought down by controlled demolition.

                    Controlled demolition requires opportunity. Al Qaeda would not have had the opportunity, unless the Bush-family run security company and the CIA were Elmer Fudd incompetent (kind of like you on the subject of physics and gravity).

                    And you pull out another dumb remark (a real talent you have there). You said, "You claim the building is in free fall - your first link says it is falling too slow, with a decreasing acceleration."

                    Wow, did you stick your foot in your mouth! The first video is on 1WTC. I said 7WTC went into perfect free fall for more than 2 seconds. What are you drinking? Must be strong stuff to muddle your thinking like that.

                    I watched the video again to see if I could find what you are talking about.

                    David Chandler starts by saying that the building started its collapse with near-constant acceleration (not decreasing, as you claim). He also says that if the building were to collapse at the same rate all the way down, it would finish in about 11.5 seconds. And he says this is close to the observed collapse time. Conclusion: little or no change in the rate of downward acceleration. Where do you get your "decreasing acceleration." Looks like you're the one making up things to cover their lack of understanding.

                    I thought I understood physics pretty good, but even I learned something from this video. The evidence proves that the upper block of 1WTC (not the 7WTC that went into perfect free fall) could not have been responsible for the destruction of the lower portion of the building, simply because there was NO decreasing acceleration. That was a key point, and you got it reversed!

                    @wilderness, not only do you NOT understand physics, but you also seem not to be able to listen very well, either.

              2. Marquis profile image60
                Marquisposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Lone, let us ask Sean Hannity. We will put this to rest once and for all.

                1. 0
                  Sooner28posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  LOL.

  16. 0
    Dan Bristolposted 3 years ago

    Our response to 9/11 was totally inappropriate. When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, we went to war, liberated the territories they had seized, and we did not flinch when it came time to take a decisive step toward ending the war, even though that step was more horrible than we could have known beforehand. What I'm saying is, instead of going into the melee with clearly designated priorities and mission profiles, we allowed it to become a floundering side-show and failed attempt for George W. to gain political capital. Had we simply found Bin Laden and killed him immediately, there would have been a healing and a catharsis. Don't tell me we couldn't find him. If Law Enforcement can spot 5-foot tall marijuana plants from space they can DAMNED well find a six-foot-tall terrorist. They just didn't have the political will to do so. Boils down to this: Whether it's Republicans or Democrats, it's EVERYTHING to suit the Elite, NOTHING to serve the interests of the American People.

    1. Marquis profile image60
      Marquisposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      You sound ridiculous.

      1. lone77star profile image90
        lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Pure ad hominem. Empty of substance.

        You define yourself, @Marquis.

  17. 0
    Sooner28posted 3 years ago

    People seem to be ignoring the physicist from Brigham Young that immediately spoke out, along with the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth.  There's also the video from all the major news networks that appears to show a bomb exploding at the bottom of the towers.

    Eyewitness testimony from people on the ground also corroborate a loud boom that sounded like a bomb.

    The buildings all fell the same way one destroyed by controlled demolition does.

    Liberals trust their government too much, and conservatives are too jingoistic to even consider the possibility that the official story is a farce.  Both sides should reconsider.

    1. Marquis profile image60
      Marquisposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      I agree with the Liberals part but the conservative part is sheer nonsense.

    2. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      A big bang, huh?  You mean like the sound of a 2' water main might make if it was suddenly broken off 80 floors above by an explosion pressurizing it to 10 or 100 times its design capacity at the bottom end?

      Or Same thing with a gas main?

      Or the concrete top of an elevator shaft, falling 80 floors?

      Or the sound a transformer makes when the secondaries are shorted out?  And it blows a multi ton transformer into the air and fills the area with fire, sparks and molten metal?  Trust me on this one - I've had it happen, and yes, it's a bomb without explosives involved.

      Or do we just assume it was a bomb, because bystanders heard a bang.  And we know the president ordered a bomb placed there because a bomb went off so it had to be at the presidents orders?

      1. 0
        Sooner28posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPyf25iq_Ho

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBSueewHs9s

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxFDENbo5uc

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXLBDNL-ZNg

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnionTrklxI  Secondary device...This one is the most clear

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaBQ3AkRetI  Here is a video of what a controlled demolition looks like.

        Even if you don't like all the video evidence that the networks picked up without even trying, that doesn't address Stephen Jones or the Architects. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E._Jones

        And, if you don't like wikipedia, here is Jones giving an interview to MSNBC. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayYXNo0i_Cs  Building 7 wasn't even hit, yet it went down just like a controlled demolition...

        Tucker also refuses to engage at all, a complete  inability to psychologically deal with the reality he is facing.  Why did building 7 fall?

        1. wilderness profile image96
          wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I asked you why a loud noise was declared to be a bomb set by the president and you give me a video of a controlled demolition?

          I confess, I'm not seeing the connection...

          1. 0
            Sooner28posted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I gave you a lot of videos that showed witnesses hearing the bomb go off, and then the towers coming down.  Multiple independent witnesses from multiple sources, along with the video!

            The controlled demolition was so you had direct evidence of what one actually looked like, in case you had never seen one before.  I didn't know if you had or not, so I threw that one in just to be safe.

            1. wilderness profile image96
              wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              No, you gave videos of witnesses hearing a loud noise, that you interpret as a bomb.  I then gave 3 (slim) possibilities for the source of that noise and one that was almost certain to occur.  And believe me, a shorted transformer looks and sounds just like a bomb to anyone not looking directly at it when it goes off.  So where is the evidence there was a bomb?  Just that loud noise?  Any incendiary device (bomb) leaves traces of the explosive; was any found, where and how much?

              I've seen many videos of controlled demolition - they're fascinating.  I've also watched videos of the work necessary to produce that beautiful, clean demo.  It takes weeks to months of work and half the building is demolished before the charges are ever set off. Not possible in an occupied building.

              1. 0
                Sooner28posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                There was not only fragments of a bomb, but if you had watched the interview with Jones, you'd know there was also thermite found at the foundation of the building.

                Your explanations also don't coincide with the facts.  The buildings fell right after the loud booms.  A water line busting isn't going to line up so neatly.

                1. wilderness profile image96
                  wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  A water line won't line up?  When a plane cuts it off and the explosion pressurizes it?  Nearly instantaneous with the crash is all...

                  Thermite takes rust and aluminum - I bet there was some found, too, but it doesn't make a bomb - it doesn't blow up but burns very hot instead. 

                  I'm sure those bomb fragments were analyzed and traced - that's what they always do - where did they come from and what were they?

                  1. 0
                    Sooner28posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    The official 9/11 report refused to consider alternative hypotheses, like Jones said in the interview.

                  2. lone77star profile image90
                    lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Ah, Wilderness. Speaking without knowledge, again.

                    Nano-thermate is an explosive AND incendiary. And unreacted nano-thermate was found in the 9/11 concrete dust. Some of it was even found partially reacted.

                    NIST said they did not consider explosives, despite dozens of eyewitnesses who talked of explosives, including a few who mentioned explosives BEFORE the plane struck -- explosives in the basement. They didn't consider explosives, even though code demands they consider it in a catastrophic collapse of a building. And they didn't consider it even though the "terrorist" (FBI-supplied) attack in 1993 used explosives.

                    Refusing to consider an obvious possibility, especially one mandated by code, is not a smart policy. At best, it would be more incompetence. At worst, a thinly veiled attempt at cover up.

      2. lone77star profile image90
        lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        @wilderness, like the bomb that went off 6 seconds before the FIRST plane hit the North Tower, pushing the basement floor upward from the sub-basement. William Rodriguez and several others witnessed this. And one poor bloke came up from the sub-basement with his skin hanging from his fingertips.

        You give some interesting alternative "theories" yourself, @wilderness, but none of what you say is proof. You're good at creating your own theories and bashing "fact" as "theory." Very creative on your part, but deluded.

  18. Barefootfae profile image60
    Barefootfaeposted 3 years ago

    How can it be that George Bush was supposed to have been the stupidest human alive yet masterminded all this?

    When in reality it was Dick Cheney....from his secret moon base.

    How long did it take for this business to start after the event?

    An hour?

    1. 0
      Sooner28posted 3 years ago in reply to this

      No.  If this was truly a cover up, and not the biggest lapse in security of all time, George Bush and Dick Cheney were not the only ones involved.  It ceases to be a Republican criticism and turns into a government one.

      1. Barefootfae profile image60
        Barefootfaeposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        And who was President before George Bush??????

        1. 0
          Sooner28posted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Obama was a Senator.  As much as Congress was involved, so was he.

  19. Uninvited Writer profile image83
    Uninvited Writerposted 3 years ago

    I am no fan of G.W. Bush but I do not for a moment believe he would have done something this evil to his own people.

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      I'm no fan of G.W., either, but he's the kind of guy who would send our boys to a war based on a lie, and then laugh to his cronies about that lie, when it became public knowledge that it was a lie. No apologies to Iraq and the hundreds of thousands of innocents killed there. No pulling out saying, "Oops, we were mistaken." In a fight between 2 humans, the attacker would go to jail, not only for the unprovoked attack, but for the fraud in telling everyone else a lie to justify the attack.

      I don't know if Bush had any role in 9/11, but don't assume that he didn't because he was an American president.

      Can American president's be evil?

      What about Obama trashing the Constitution repeatedly, betraying his Oath of Office, effectively committing treason on multiple counts? Take for instance, signing into law indefinite detention of American citizens without due process (NDAA). Take for instance signing into law making it a felony to protest the government, abridging free speech, contrary to the Constitution of the United States (HR 347). Take for instance stating on the record that prisoners in Gitmo should remain there indefinitely, even if found innocent! And one of the more shocking developments in recent weeks, one top military officer, retired, concerned that many of his proteges have been forced to resign because they would follow the Constitution instead of the president on orders to fire upon peaceful American citizens.

      Why would a president cull the military of officers who love the Constitution more than the President? Why would law enforcement agencies be given new definitions of potential terrorists that include those who love the Constitution?

      Bush didn't do us any favors by rushing through the unPatriot Act. Obama said he would not renew it, but he did. And recently I find out that congressmen rarely, if ever, read the bills they vote on. Kind of like driving with a blindfold and earmuffs.

  20. 0
    Beth37posted 3 years ago

    Im American, let me just get right on that for ya.

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Cute, Beth37. And your "check" is in the mail.

  21. ahorseback profile image50
    ahorsebackposted 3 years ago

    The  OP"why do Americansbury there heads?"....As in conspiracy theorist burying there heads in the clouds !?

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Well, @ahorseback. Looks like you're another one of those who sees someone questioning the official "conspiracy theory" and automatically calls it "conspiracy theory." Why the knee-jerk reaction?

      Some say that such reactions are merely ego trying to suck up to peers so they can distance themselves from perceived "crackpots." When has asking questions ever been defined as "crackpot" or "conspiracy theory?"

      Not very logical.

      And that's not very bright, especially when we're talking about facts that don't match the official conspiracy theory. Dumb, @ahorseback. Dumb.

    2. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Perhaps the biggest concern is all of the erosions to the Constitution in the name of "9/11."

      I guess some Americans are cool with the idea of living in a police state like Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia.

      If that's what you're willing for America to turn into, I want no part of it. I happen to love the Constitution, even if it is imperfect, because it established something humanity had never had -- a land of the free and home of the brave.

      Now, we have whimpering cowards who want Nanny government to protect them with more slavery -- TSA, HR347, NDAA, Patriot Act and more.

      Dumb!

  22. lone77star profile image90
    lone77starposted 3 years ago

    @wilderness, you may have degree in chemistry and almost a degree in both physics and math, but that doesn't seem to prevent you from being ignorant.

    I went for a degree in computer science. Earned mine, summa cum laude. Math was my forte, but I've studied physics most of my life. I keep learning. I studied electronic engineering back in the 70s, learning about semi-conductor doping and computer programming logic. Because I had already been studying astrophysics, I knew of absorption and emission spectra which astronomers use in determining the chemistry of distant stars and the intervening dust clouds. And when I read of tank circuits in my engineering studies, I instantly realized that I was surrounded by trillions of tank circuits. None of my fellow students likely ever twigged on that understanding.

    You may be able to detect BS, except your own. I responded to your so-called pronouncements about physics, but you didn't respond to me. Check out my comment at "Your woozy understanding of physics" about 4 days ago.

    You keep persisting in claiming that this is all "conspiracy theory." You keep harping about claims that the "president did it." Let's back off from that, because we're talking facts here -- not the government's "conspiracy theory" about 19 hijackers, 5 of whom were found to be alive after 9/11! And then the FBI admitted that they really didn't know for certain the identity of the hijackers.

    With your superior knowledge of chemistry, tell me how likely it is that the titanium steel black boxes were destroyed in the crash of the two planes, but the passport of one of the hijackers made it through the fireball intact.

    And the key thrust of this discussion is the erosion of the Constitution as a result of 9/11. The damage from 9/11 continues even today with every abusive piece of legislation passed through Congress. After you answer my questions about physics and chemistry, please tell me how well you like the idea that America will no longer use the Constitution as its basis in law. Frankly, the legislation they've already passed makes me angry at our leaders -- leaders who seem more concerned for the well being of their corporate lobbyists than they are for their constituents.

    1. wilderness profile image96
      wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Ignorance, is it?  When you post a video plainly stating that the building fell too slow, that the acceleration of top floors was decreasing all the time, with a graph showing that either acceleration was zero or negative (I can't see the axis labels) you might want to think twice before you claim it is in a free fall.

      Your physics study let you down just a bit there, Lonestar - things with a negative or zero acceleration aren't in free fall and anyone not totally ignorant of physics understands that all too well.

      And no, the key thrust of this discussion isn't about the constitution - it's about people making claims that our government murdered 3,000 people for some unstated but undoubtedly nefarious reasons.  And making those claims with absolutely no proof whatsoever, just silly questions, and finger pointing to coincidental and/or irrelevant facts in the hopes of convincing an unthinking or ignorant audience they have all the answers.  Facts like the one given (I'll assume it's true) that there 5 training sessions somewhere in the country on the day of the hijacking as if that proves there was no actual hijacking.  Completely irrelevant, but to someone that won't bother to ask for a connection it sounds really, really good.  Obviously training for a hijacking means it cannot happen, after all.

      Doesn't work with people that actually think for themselves - you should try it someday.  It's fine to ask questions, as you have done, but when there aren't any answers forthcoming then the idea needs trashed or another tack taken to find truth.

      1. lone77star profile image90
        lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Yes, ignorance. You said that the first video talked about the building falling too slow. I watched it again, just to see if I could see what you were talking about. Busted! Nothing in there talking about traveling too slow.

        Here's the link, again:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjSd9wB55zk

        Nothing in that video talks about accelerating too slowly or even undergoing negative acceleration.

        Yes, negative acceleration does mean slowing down. Bravo!

        But clearly, if you can't even get your video reference right, then you're not paying much attention. (You didn't mention the specific video in the comment immediately above, but you mentioned it in another one further up.)

        Before you go making claims about the wrong video, please double-check your reference and tell me which video you're referring to. To go making claims about the wrong video is just plain sloppy. (And dumb!)

        No, my physics study is okay. And likely yours wasn't too bad, either. But you've gotten sloppy with your logic and your references. (Possibly even your memory.) Would you care to let me know the video to which you are referring?

        I seem to remember David Chandler mentioning in one of those videos negative acceleration in a NON-WTC building as a comparison. If that's the reference you mean, you blew it big time, because you obviously didn't pay enough attention to see that it wasn't WTC! David Chandler did compare real gravitational collapse with WTC controlled demolition to show that NO negative acceleration occurred throughout most of the collapse of each of the 3 WTC buildings.

        Seriously, wilderness. If you can't even keep simple facts like this straight in your argument, then you need to take a break.

        As for the key thrust of the discussion, if you had created the OP, then you might have a say in what it was. Since I originated it, I should know why I posted it. Reread the AE911Truth.org QUOTE (in blue, so even someone like you won't have much trouble finding it).

        As for finding truth, your sloppiness in making unfounded arguments speaks volumes.

        Yes, negative acceleration means slowing down. And that didn't happen in any of the 3 buildings until the bottom of the collapse (last few floors). That means zero resistance, and steel never offers zero resistance, except perhaps in your imagination, unless controlled demolition was involved.

        If you would care to investigate more carefully (instead of sloppily, as you have done) you will find that even NIST admitted perfect free fall acceleration for 8 floors in 7WTC (and please don't go using a reference to one of the other buildings as you have already so sloppily done). The government couldn't avoid that FACT, but they skipped right over the obvious implications of it, proving their fraudulent approach to the investigation.

  23. Barefootfae profile image60
    Barefootfaeposted 3 years ago

    I have asked this before....

    I wonder if this would be debated at all had Bill Clinton or Al Gore been president when 9/11 occurred.
    Somehow I doubt it.

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      @Barefootfae, thanks for asking it again. I didn't see your earlier post.

      For partisans, likely not. But for citizens who are Americans first, and partisan or independent next, I think they would have. If the government had behaved the same way, rushing through legislation before anyone had a chance to read it! We're losing the Constitution, piece-by-piece. Generalized language that you could drive a truck through, allowing all manner of tyrannical interpretation so that law enforcement can strip you of your rights.... legally (by unconstitutional laws). Right now, they can take you to jail, without charges, and throw away the key. When you have two conflicting laws (the Constitution and NDAA), the police are, for the most part, following the more recent law. The Constitution is becoming less and less popular and the media is helping to sell this attitude. Loving the Constitution isn't sexy. It isn't cool. It's so "last year."

      I take it you're pretty partisan yourself, otherwise you likely wouldn't have asked such a question. Every president since Kennedy has enacted tyrannical legislation, eroding our rights under the Constitution. And many presidents before, also.

      The big turn was with Wilson's betrayal, allowing private bankers to take over the finances of the government -- just what the Rothschilds have been hungering for ever since America's founding. The First central bank wasn't renewed, and Mayer Rothschild demanded its renewal or America would suffer another war. The following year, Rothschild financed the War of 1812. That put America deep in debt.

      When America finally climbed back to solvency under Jackson, that president vowed not to renew the Second central bank, and he was almost assassinated because of it.

      Then Lincoln put the fear of freedom in the hearts of bankers when he created his "greenback" currency, free of their debt-based machinations. Banker's documents now show that they wanted Lincoln removed. Lincoln was assassinated and they phased out the greenbacks that people loved so much.

      Then Wilson sold his soul to the devil banker, and later regretted betraying his country just so he could get into the White House.

      @Barefootfae, don't be so partisan. Your prejudice is not pretty.

      1. Barefootfae profile image60
        Barefootfaeposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        It's not that I am partisan. It's that anything negative happens and the fingers always get pointed one direction.

        Always.  The press helps that out in every case.

        You are very adamant that it must have been a controlled demolition but you aren't thinking about the realities and logistics of making that happen. That's why I quit asking what and start asking who.
        It must have been quite a task to rig that place. It must have taken quite a bit of time. That's why I say I very seriously doubt that started in the Bush administration.

        Eventually who has to become the question doesn't it?

    2. Uninvited Writer profile image83
      Uninvited Writerposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Oh please, enough of that. The majority of those in favor of this conspiracy theory would argue it regardless of who was president. Most of the people I see who are against this are on the left if you have to make it right versus left like you do every single single thing you ever mention.

      1. Barefootfae profile image60
        Barefootfaeposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Funny what few documentaries i have give to the Truther side of things have been produced or featured some of the biggest Bush haters I can imagine seeing.

        No one is even discussing the concept this didn't get planned and executed in nine months. There is no way. So it would have to stretch back further but you will never.......ever......hear a name but Bush.

        So you are the expert. You tell me.
        Who had the brainstorm. Couldn't have been GW because we all know he is stupid right?

        1. Uninvited Writer profile image83
          Uninvited Writerposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          As I said on this thread, I don't believe a US government would do that to their own people. And, not only liberals "hated" Bush. People on all sides of the political spectrum fall for conspiracy theories.

          1. Barefootfae profile image60
            Barefootfaeposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            But you never hear the Clinton Administration mentioned as being an extension of what might have occurred. Only Bush.

            1. Uninvited Writer profile image83
              Uninvited Writerposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I don't listen to any of it because I don't believe it...

              1. Barefootfae profile image60
                Barefootfaeposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Oh I don't either.

          2. lone77star profile image90
            lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            @Uninvited Writer, please answer me this:

            Does steel ever offer zero resistance?

            That's what it would take for all 3 buildings to collapse in the manner they did -- smoothly accelerating at a near-perfectly constant rate.

            The video I think @wilderness was referring to so erroneously, had a controlled demolition in the middle which let gravity finish the job, but there was negative acceleration when the upper half "hit" the lower half. This was as expected. When all 3 WTC buildings collapsed, there was no negative acceleration until the collapse neared the growing debris pile at the ground. This means steel offered zero resistance. The only way this is possible is for the steel to have been cut by controlled demolition, with perfectly-timed explosives or thermitic charges.

            Forget for a moment WHO did it.

            What are the implications of this?

            And no, the tooth fairy didn't make the steel disappear. Let's keep it real.

        2. lone77star profile image90
          lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Instead of talking about GW, Clinton or Obama, could we talk about the facts?

          Perfect free fall acceleration in 7WTC for 8 floors is not a "theory" or a "conspiracy." Steel beams don't conspire!

          Honestly! You don't pay much attention to anything but your own preconceived notions on this topic.

          Steel beams NEVER offer zero resistance, but the evidence shows that all 3 buildings collapsed at near-perfect constant acceleration and no negative acceleration until each got near the ground and collided with the debris pile.

          What are the implications of this?

          Simple: Controlled demolition!

          Lopsided (asymmetrical) damage NEVER leads to symmetrical collapse. Ever! If you chop a tree on the side, it topples over. It never comes down straight through the trunk into a pile of sawdust!

          This is real simple stuff, and it's so amazing that you and several others simply are not getting it. You're living in a cartoon world with logic supplied by the Corporate Party news media.

          Snap out of it. Start talking about facts.

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjSd9wB55zk

            Your very first link, in the OP.  The tower did NOT free fall as you claim here, although the narrator uses that as "proof" of demolition just as you use the "free fall" that happened as proof.

            You theorists really need to communicate between each other a little better.

  24. 85
    Education Answerposted 3 years ago

    What I see is a bunch of Americans who feel like 9-11 was our fault.  They want to blame America for an attack on America.  It's pretty sick.  We were attacked.  Innocent lives, some children, were lost on that day.  We had every right to defend ourselves; we were not the problem.  Terrorists caused 9-11, not Americans.

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      @Education Answer, said with great passion. Two years ago, I would've agreed with you. It sounds as though you love America. Me too. But why are you letting our government trash the Constitution? Why are you letting all that millions have fought for over the last 200 years be thrown away?

      Can we please stick with the facts?

      Does steel ever offer zero resistance?

      Rigorous analysis in the videos above shows that there was no negative acceleration throughout most of the collapse of all 3 WTC buildings, unlike other known gravitational collapses. What does this mean? It means controlled demolition! And each building would've required MONTHS of preparation. Because all 3 buildings were highly secure (Bush-family-run security company for the entire complex, and CIA and other government agencies tenants of 7WTC), this would have to have been an inside job -- or the craziest instance of "Elmer Fudd" incompetence in the history of humanity. Take your pick. If you examine means, motive and opportunity, you'll find some in government and in corporate America highly motivated to make money overseas.

      But if you really must talk about Americans, answer me this:

      * Why have our last several presidents been trashing the Constitution with increasingly tyrannical legislation?

      * Why did Mayor Giuliani commit a felony by destroying crime scene evidence, before an investigation could be started.

      * Why did the highest military officers responsible for the security failures on 9/11 all get promotions instead of courts martial?

      * Why did NIST scientists ignore the painfully obvious implications of perfect free fall acceleration for 8 floors in 7WTC?

      These are not proof of anything but individual crimes and fraud, but they do raise important questions, especially WHY?

      1. 85
        Education Answerposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        lone77star,

        I don't believe there was a conspiracy behind the 9-11 attack.  I do, however, agree with your analysis of our Constitution.  Politicians are definitely trashing it.

  25. lorddraven2000 profile image88
    lorddraven2000posted 3 years ago

    I think most Americans are content thinking some other country did this to us and thinking we resolved the issue with even more acts of terror. I guess for those individuals not knowing is what gets them through the day

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      @lorddraven2000, thank you.

      It seems that too many Americans are wrapped in the flag so tightly they cannot see the tyranny being committed.

      Attacking countries that have not attacked them is a sure sign of an "Evil Empire." The fact that Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize was an early indication that something was not right. Then when he goes to war against Libya, we have to realize that the lies are thick.

      The first step to correcting a problem is waking up to the fact that there is a problem.

      As the wise man once said, "know the truth and the truth will set you free."

      Too many Americans want to hide in blissful ignorance.

      On the subject of "ignorance" being "bliss,"
      http://www.and-the-pursuit-of-happiness … awareness/

  26. ahorseback profile image50
    ahorsebackposted 3 years ago

    9-11 like conspiracies don't happen in America , The government didn't kill Kennedy[s], Lincoln , or  Elvis , Uncle sam didn't  do Oklahoma city ! If you want to find a government that kills it's own children , blows up its own schools and neighborhoods , you'll have to go to Iran , Iraq , Syria or Africa !  Please  ! Conspiracy nuts  should evolve AWAY from thier disney world understanding of truths ,fantasies and cartoon-like   mentality! I mean come on ,Man up !

    1. lone77star profile image90
      lone77starposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Okay, cartoon man, explain to me this (and lets keep things factual):

      * Does steel ever offer zero resistance?

      If you think so, then you're living in a cartoon world. All manner of breaking the laws of physics happens when Tom chases Jerry, or Popeye chases Bluto. But in the real world, steel always offers resistance, unless controlled demolition is involved.

      * Why do you "ostriches" always like calling facts "conspiracy?"

      Steel does not conspire to give way. Calling this topic a conspiracy is not only non-sequitur, it's just plain stupid.

      Once you've answered those 2 questions, answer these:

      * When does asymmetric damage ever lead to symmetrical collapse as it did in all 3 WTC buildings? How would it be possible?

      * When does a building ever go into perfect free fall acceleration for at least 8 floors as did 7WTC? How is this possible?

      Can you come out of your fantasy world long enough to talk facts, or is that too tough for you?

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        *Zero?  Never.  Get it hot enough, though, and it will offer near zero resistance. 

        *Facts?  No "facts" yet, just questions and silly, irrelevant things that sound reasonable and connected but are at best only circumstantial. 

        *When a jumbo jet smashes into it.  Watch the videos do see if it is possible.

        *Never, as is plainly shown at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjSd9wB55zk (thanks for the link).  The video claims an acceleration of about 6 m/sec^2 rather than the 9.8 from gravity while showing a zero acceleration, but either way it's not free fall.  Question answered.

  27. ahorseback profile image50
    ahorsebackposted 3 years ago

    Lonestar , Have you ever watched the documentary on How the buildings actually collapsed ?  You can stack a thousand floors one on  top of each other , but totally destroy just one that far up and watch the pancake effect  begin , The cross sections of I- beams joining onto the end walls simply pulled away from thier  ledges !  Jet fuel , carpeting ,  furniture ,  get real man , Where in the world do conspirists come up with that stuff !   The entire world watched jet airliners hit the buildings - remember ?

  28. ahorseback profile image50
    ahorsebackposted 3 years ago

    Conspiracy theorists fanatics  get lost in small amounts of engineering  facts and figures never quite able to put together enough lineal know how to explain an entire scenario !  Simply put -Take all the latest architectual engineering  in the world stack it up 100 floors high and pour two plane loads of jet fuel on it , about half way up !,  Ignite  it , And sit back and watch all that engineering melt away to a pile of rubble .  Simple isn't it   But not here , not in this world of disney land  intellectuals !

 
working