If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact

Why some people think 9/11 was an inside job



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S

    According to part 2, NIST predicts 5.4 seconds based on the video. David analyzes each frame of the video, as NIST does as well, and he does not find the 5.4 seconds that NIST says. The only conclusion I can draw is that NIST picked some fake time in building collapse and started a timer to match their collapse simulation of 5.4 seconds.

    The real time videos are always catching NIST not showing what they claim. 

  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe

    I don't see any "fakery" by the NIST, only silly stuff by conspiracy theorists

    A bit like dredging through all the technical details of an air-crash investigation, finding one issue or one erroneous error and then claiming it's all a lie. That's the level we are dealing with here. These are people, like you, who think a news mistake is a giant conspiracy they can't explain. Thinking a building owner saying "pull it" is someone actually admitting to destroying their own building for insurance fraud, on national TV.

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S

    Don't let your eyes mislead you. You'll always be in denial, cant be helped.

    Clearly, the second tower was melting, as evidenced by liquid dripping from it.

    Another sign of thermite is a white flashing behind the windows. Watching this video, I noticed a white deep flash directly in the area where the liquid is pouring out.  There is a lot more brightness in the white flash than can be captured by the gif. When thermite ignites, a white flash is seen. It's interesting to see a white flash in the background. 

  • Registered Users Posts: 9,556 ✭✭✭DublinWriter

    "I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm a conspiracy analyst" - Gore Vidal.

    This is probably the best five-minute primer on all the loose ends:

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S

    It shows how ridiculous the official narrative is, but people still defend it. 

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe

    Very likely that's molten aluminum with impurities. Alu melts at around 600c. This has been explained countless times.

  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe

    I watched a minute of it, it's conspiracy garbage. The usual fare that distorts and mis-frames information in order to make the audience incredulous.

    For example it mentions a hijacker barely being able to handle a Cessna. Nah, he had a commercial license and a private license.

    It mentions the 2.3 trillion missing from the Pentagon to create innuendo. The funds weren't missing, they weren't accounted for on proper software (the DoD was a bloated government organization which was using lots of different ancient software for accounting and Rumsfeld was campaigning for funds to upgrade the system)

    Then I switched it off.

    Using my random 9/11 knowledge a part of me thinks I could make videos like this and rake in some money off it, but then I remember I have principles and basic integrity.

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S

    Aluminum with impurities - what does that even mean?

    The windows with aluminum coverings are outside, not inside, if aluminum melts. There is no evidence in the video that this is aluminum.

    The steel trusses and box steel columns pictured here are behind that.

    Based on the location, there is some melting of steel in the corner of the building.

    Although debunkers claim it is aluminum they never do any experiments to show mixing aluminum with materials they suggest can produce the same color. Truthers are unable to produce the same color mixing aluminum with materials they suggest. 

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S

    Apparently Hani Hanjour had trouble maneuvering a Cessna plane, according to one of his instructors. There no lie there.

    FBI claims he was a pilot. How do they know that? Do they have visual evidence of that? A few men showed up at the airport without a time stamp or date, and the plane disappeared after taking off from the airport. There was no information about where the plane was for a long time.

    Then the alleged flight 77 reappeared on radar moving towards Washington close to the White House. It averted its course and returned to the Pentagon and crashed.

    It is impossible to find any evidence of how the 2.3 trillion dollar budget was ever accounted for again. The money at the Pentagon was going missing anyway. There was evidently a lot of corruption in the military industrial complex. It's unclear whether the object or plane deliberately struck that account office. Thats speculation. 

  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe

    He was a pilot, with licenses. All of this has been explained to you multiple times.

    2 trillion wasn't "missing". This has been explained countless times also.

    It's amazing, you are just on some bizarre loop, rehashing everything, then playing dumb with it all over again. Reliving the denial.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe

    Deny and attack everything.

    Alu can melt in an office fire, certainly would have melted in the temps experienced in the twin towers, along with a lot of other stuff.

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S

    We are seeing people with the name Hani Hanjour show up at an airport in Maryland in August 2001 to rent a Cessna, but he was refused. Demonstrated difficulty controlling the plane in the air and landing it. Based on his skill set, told him no way.

    Despite having a commercial pilot's license and years of experience, the experienced Hani wasn't the same person who showed up in August 2001. I don't know if there were two people using the same name or what reports are all over the place about his skills handling a plane.

    It's clear that if flight 77 hit the Pentagon, that guy was an experienced pilot. He was guiding the plane to edge at very low levels, flying at 400 mph over houses and roads ( official report by the way) then pushing as far it can go to 530 mph near the end.

    In the eye view, buildings zip past, and leveling off a plane at this speed requires unique skill. Pilots always slow down when approaching an airport runway to avoid overrunning the tarmac and crash. Considering that the pilot's engines were only twenty feet above the grass, that was pretty crazy-flying. 

    Rumsfield says they were unable to track spending, which means the money could have ended up anywhere in a bloated system of private companies and arms dealers already overflowing with money. According to the claim, the office had been tracking it for weeks and months already, but the plane deliberately attacked the accounts office to get people to stop looking for it. 

  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe

    If it wasn't Hani, who flew the plane into the Pentagon?

    Name of suspect and motive.

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S

    There's no doubt it can, but what evidence do you have? When you point to alternative theories, you have to test them. Debunkers never do. They throw things out there and then dont experiment. Truthers test the debunker theories more thoroughly.

    Despite mixing aluminum and building materials, silver dominates the experiment. The color of the liquids clearly indicates that it has melted steel in it.

    Obviously, dismissal is nonsense. It ignores the fact that engineers and architects reported seeing melted girders and that FEMA found some steel melted came from the ground zero site. 

  • Registered Users Posts: 3,196 ✭✭✭TomSweeney

    Building 7 never sits well with me.

    That building was falling in free fall ... , no resistance, only way I can see that happening is controlled demolition...

  • Registered Users Posts: 25,232 ✭✭✭✭King Mob

    Terrible video and completely dishonest at every point.

    Dohnjoe has already pointed out the flaws with the first 3 claims.

    Next, the video says and "they knew in hours who did it" but then only produces out of context sound bites rather than full sentences. It also of course seems to forget that the WTC was attacked before by Bin Laden.

    Then it repeats the notion that there's something suspicious about finding a hijackers passport. Does not explain the alternative or address any of the logical plot holes this entails.

    Next it talks about the 9/11 commission and just rapidfire spews out falsehoods and misrepresentations.

    Then it goes on to make some silly silly claims about Bin Laden getting younger and younger.

    Basically just a surface level parroting of various conspiracy claims with zero depth. These kind of lists where they dump a pile of claims all at once might seem impressive if you just accept what you are told without question. But if you think about them for any length, or ask any questions about them, they start to fall apart.

    The makers of that video are trusting that their target audience will not ask too many of these or think too hard. Or heaven forbid actually verify any of the claims. All of which is very funny given their cute little rant about people being shunned for asking questions about 9/11.

    I notice however it seems to avoid actually discussing how the towers fell which suggests to me they are fully aware of how ridiculous those claims can be, and didn't bring them up to make their video more appealing to a wider audience.

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S

    Our only information from the US government is a minute or so clip of a terrorist group allegedly passing a security gate with no time stamp, date, or identification mark. The FAA reports that a plane took off.

    The tracking system went dark for about half an hour and no one knew where it was in the air. Traffic controllers said an object appeared on FAA radar blip and Norad again and was moving toward the White House, like a fighter plane. Did a u turn and came around and hit the Pentagon.

    That all we know about the flight of 77.

    Could it have been flight 77 that reappeared? It's not really something that I rule out since two other planes hit the towers. The main problem with a plane hitting the Pentagon at 530mph is how they managed to do it.

    It makes more sense now that the plane slowed down and the pilot gave him time to set up the target. Not the official story.;

    No one knows if Hani was in the cockpit personally, but it is clear that someone with experience was in that seat or some kind of drone technology was used to guide the plane in without making a mistake.  

  • Registered Users Posts: 25,232 ✭✭✭✭King Mob

    But it didn't fall at free fall and it did experience resistance.

    It can't have been a controlled demolition as for what you are describing, it would require explosives on every support on every floor, yet we can't hear any explosions.

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S

    People don't understand things like this. Just let your car keys go out of your hands and let them fall to the ground ( thats freefall)

    No way there would be no resistance in that building across its entire width over 8 stories unless the steel was removed by controlled demolition. It is roughly the length of a football pitch from one corner of building seven to the next.

    Fact the building came down level at freefall over 8 floors is impossible naturally. Motion of building right out in view on real video. 

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S

    A partial collapse appears to be occurring here, as light is visible through the East end windows.

    Unfortunately, we don't have a south viewpoint to see what's really happening. The collapse seems to stop a number of stories down on east side. An opening has taken place there and the Penthouse has dropped down.

    This second building on the roof is how we know NIST is lying. If that building were to start to fall to the west and collapse, then the steel supporting the second building would be no longer able to support it.

    In the video, there is no indication of structural failure occurring in the rest of the building (NIST says it is happening). windows all unbroken.

    During the 10 second mark, the building begins to free fall, its load falling through the 8 floors of structural support steel that has been removed from the bottom. Cracks in the windows finally appear running up the west wall.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S

    It seems that NIST stimulation has been turned off without any explanation End of the video.

    . You don't see a full collapse. You just see the windows cracking and it coming down for second or two Both images match.It's a real problem that this west side of the building not collapsed at all. It makes no sense how that section collapsed at the bottom at free fall?

    A freefall object would be similar to dropping your car keys out of your hand and falling to the ground without anything in the way.,

  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe

    It's gravity. The internals fail, then the outer facade goes. It just happens to "look" like a controlled demolition so some think it is, without giving it much thought. There's a dedicated group of internet conspiracy theorists who believe it was blown up but none can explain how or why or by whom.

    It's similar to the moon landing hoaxers, a gaggle of people who can't comprehend 60's technology took man to the moon, so therefore it "didn't happen". Incredulity is a powerful thing for some.

  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe

    We know who exactly who was on the plane, there is no mystery.

    You are a 9/11 conspiracy theorist so naturally you attack the facts to hint at some conspiracy. Once which you can't explain. Note how Alex Jones and all CTers do that, with everything.

  • Registered Users Posts: 12,663 ✭✭✭✭The Nal

    Heres what it wouldve looked like when the secret nazis placed the explosives in the buildings, undetected. All of the columns paired back and exposed, countless tonnes of deris removed. All from one of the most secure buikldings ever in one of the busiest places on earth

    What a silly theory.

  • Registered Users Posts: 25,232 ✭✭✭✭King Mob

    What truthers don't understand about controlled demolitions is that this is the bare minimum that's required to demolish the building. They only rig enough to start a collapse and then let the building's own weight bring itself down. Buildings demolished by explosives don't actually fall at free fall speed. That's something invented by 9/11 truthers.

    If what truthers say is true then every single column and support in the building would all have to look like the pictures you posted.

    And this is of course ignoring the fact that thermite can't be used in the same way as explosives and no controlled demolition has ever used thermite or nanomagicthermite.

  • Registered Users Posts: 13,330 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose

    Damn. Now I have to return my nanomagicthermite to that seller on Aliexpress. Had some tree stumps that needed to go..

  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe

    It doesn't. Alu with impurities (e.g. from an office fire) would be that colour.

    You're the only one claiming that secret Nazi's blew up the twin towers, the onos is on you to prove your claim.

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S

    NIST claims that there was all kinds of carnage going on inside the area but there is not evidence for it because the building on westside was unaffected for more than 6 to 7 seconds prior to the final collapse. There are 18 stories of unbroken windows at the top displayed here. 

    There were 6 to 7 seconds of waiting on 9/11. 

    You claim that all the materials, floors, furniture, roof fittings, girders, beams, columns, elevators, and whatever else in the mix crashed to the ground at this point second image. There is no difference in time between the first and second screenshots. 

    Neither NIST nor yourself can be right because the roof structure, walls and outer surface of the building remain undamaged. Anything crazy like you described would start crumbling the building and there would be obvious dust plumes emanating from the building. 

    What actually happened is shown here number 4 screenshot. After the Penthouse left the roof, the second structure begins to move and drop approximately 6 to 7 seconds later. When the load from the top comes through an 8-floor gap at the end, the building jolts or presses. Something happening at the bottom of the building is responsible for this and the building collapses. 

    In response to the internal collapse (your words), cracks have begun to appear in the westside windows!! Until that point, nothing had happened at all at all.

    It is only now that the building's internal structures are collapsing. 

  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe

    All three skyscrapers fell due to fire.

    You're making some zany claim they were "blown up", still waiting for a shred of credible evidence for that.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,663 ✭✭✭✭The Nal

    What about the towers? How were they rigged with explosives?