Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie 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 hello@boards.ie

Recommend me a great 9/11 online documentary. What is the very best 9/11 documentary?

Options
2456711

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Welcome to Terrorland 9/11 is good. Investigate journalist talks with Americans in Florida who saw Atta and other terrorists just before 9/11... A lot of what you hear contradictory to FBI findings of the Terrorists final days.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    A new one out from the Corbett report. Watch this came out just yesterday excellent research done by this guy lot of new stuff I had even known till today myself. How they get away with this is beyond me? A guy on Youtube can dismantle this easily, but no journalist in official media can?



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    A new one out from the Corbett report. Watch this came out just yesterday excellent research done by this guy lot of new stuff I had even known till today myself. How they get away with this is beyond me? A guy on Youtube can dismantle this easily, but no journalist in official media can?


    To save someone from watching this type of nonsense

    To sum up after watching a few minutes. It's another clickbait video aimed at the Alex Jones style audience that tries to draw a "sinister" link between a terrorist attack, e.g. 7/7 and coincidental terrorist drills that were happening on the same day

    10 minutes in and it uses the exact same cookie-cutter crap that every conspiracy video does of suggesting something sinister without explaining a single detail or giving a real-world example


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    To save someone from watching this type of nonsense

    To sum up after watching a few minutes. It's another clickbait video aimed at the Alex Jones style audience that tries to draw a "sinister" link between a terrorist attack, e.g. 7/7 and coincidental terrorist drills that were happening on the same day

    10 minutes in and it uses the exact same cookie-cutter crap that every conspiracy video does of suggesting something sinister without explaining a single detail or giving a real-world example

    Why don't you watch it all and then have an opinion? You stopped it too early because the best stuff happens in the middle and the end.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Interesting new thread on Metabunk. Some French guy noticed a different fire on 9/11 videos. Really weird looks like smoking rising from another building far away from the Twin Towers?

    https://www.metabunk.org/goldman-sachs-plume-of-smoke-during-wtc2s-collapse.t9977/


    Video here.



  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Metabunk has also a new thread about the molten steel image AE911Truth has on its site. Mike found a new image and for some reason, Mike West thinks that's just burning paper?

    461123.png


    Mike new image.
    461126.png

    You find better-enlarged pictures on his site.

    Yes, there is burned paper but looks like steel box column on fire. The slit hole and colour of the metal made me think that?

    https://www.metabunk.org/a-molten-metal-photo-%E2%80%94-just-paper.t9982/

    My best guess right now it's this column and it has got bent and mangled?

    461128.png


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Why don't you watch it all and then have an opinion? You stopped it too early because the best stuff happens in the middle and the end.

    It's horse****. It starts with a narrative, then selectively uses information (and disinformation) to support that narrative, discards anything that doesn't

    If you were so inclined you could make a similar video highlighting the suspiciously high number of *spins wheel* "ginger" people at terrorist attacks (the narrative) - simply by adding in all the footage with gingers (the evidence), and leaving out all the footage without (context)

    The only reason these types of videos exist is because a market exists for them


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    It's horse****. It starts with a narrative, then selectively uses information (and disinformation) to support that narrative, discards anything that doesn't

    If you were so inclined you could make a similar video highlighting the suspiciously high number of *spins wheel* "ginger" people at terrorist attacks (the narrative) - simply by adding in all the footage with gingers (the evidence), and leaving out all the footage without (context)

    The only reason these types of videos exist is because a market exists for them

    Well, I do agree his supporting a narrative that you disagree with. Still, you have ignored the evidence presented in this video.

    Wargames continued on till past 10am nearly 2 hours after the attacks. Corbett showed that NEADS (Northeast Air Defense Sector) was unable to verify what planes were real-world planes from planes involved in the wargame exercise! Fake blips were appearing on their screens leading to confusion and mistakes. The generals in charge on 9/11 told the 9/11 commission the wargames helped them respond faster to the 9/11 attacks? Corbett showed that was a lie and you can prove that by just by listening to Norad tapes that were released. Corbett also showed video testimonies by the generals to the 9/11 commission were they were confronted about their lying. They made false statements about what happened that day.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Joe Rogan from a few months ago


    What Joe Rogan said there is untrue. We know where the collapse started that was never the issue.

    NIST formulated a theory based on one girder coming off its seat at column 79 on the east side and the concrete and floors collapsing beneath. Then the top floors on the east side started collapsing and the rest of the floors in the middle started dropping.

    If it was that easy all you need to do is controlled demolition one column and the entire building falls down because that basically what NIST is claiming occurred.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Mike West is also lying they do not sync up the collapse of WTC7 and NIST model of WTC7 collapse.


    Skeptics they are not sceptical they are debunkers.


    But the ignore when the Penthouse falls the NIST model shows a time of 20 seconds for the floors to collapse inside the building and right corner west corner start moving down.

    The actual collapse videos show this all occurred in 6 to 7 seconds a third of the time NIST claims.

    It very easy to debunk their time just compare their model to the actual collapse!

    You count the time the Penthouse collapsed and for floors to collapse and right wall to start moving down. NIST has a 20-second timer.


    Well, in reality, it took only 6 to 7 seconds for the right wall to start moving.



  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Regarding the twin tower. The antenna falls first in the building you clearly see that in this video.


    NIST claims it was floor trusses that fell first dragging in the perimeter walls. That not what the actual video is showing. The antenna sits on the central core called the hat truss that collapses down, then the floors pull in the walls, as it falling



    This image explains it better for the layperson

    The floors are level before the collapse. When the central core starts to collapse, the floors that are attached to the central core hat truss started to get pulled in that bowing in. They pull in the walls also.
    6034073


    That's what you seeing is the bowing in of perimeter walls and box columns at 1 minute 20 seconds


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    I have also have isolated the loud noise that NIST claims nobody hears or was picked up on audio.

    I made an MP3 of the loud bang. This was a noise picked up just a second before the Penthouse fell in

    https://vocaroo.com/i/s04ad7QJTj8g


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Found a new video of demolition with just one loud bang heard. The building resembles WTC7 in appearance except it's not as long width wise. Why this video is important Skeptics have always claimed you have to see squibs and hear multiples of explosions going off across the building. When in fact it might only take 1 or 2 bangs to initiate collapse.



    You compare to WTC7


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    A reminder to people, these are videos made by conspiracy theorists for the gullible

    They contain a lot of distortion, disinformation, outright lies, manipulation of information and so on - anything to trick the viewer into subscribing to the conspiracy (that they never explain)


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,576 ✭✭✭Dr. Bre


    The problem with the conspiracies is they try to out do each other . The official story doesn’t match up tho. Probably US Israel Saudi involvement in 9/11


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Dr. Bre wrote: »
    The problem with the conspiracies is they try to out do each other . The official story doesn’t match up tho. Probably US Israel Saudi involvement in 9/11

    You admit the videos are contradictory, but their message has convinced you of something you can't even articulate


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    You admit the videos are contradictory, but their message has convinced you of something you can't even articulate
    Basic outline of every conspiracy.
    "We don't know something, therefore I know exactly what it is."


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,667 ✭✭✭Hector Bellend


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    FYI 2.3 trillion dollars never went missing, Rumsfeld was complaining that the DOD systems were out-of-date and needed upgrading.

    "The technology revolution has transformed organizations across the private sector, but not ours, not fully, not yet. We are, as they say, tangled in our anchor chain. Our financial systems are decades old. According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible."

    TLDR: The cash was not missing, just improperly tracked, like an aging company that's running DOS accounts software on one system and Windows 95 accounts software on another.

    As a matter of interest have they found any of this money in the intervening or has the deficit increased?


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    As a matter of interest have they found any of this money in the intervening or has the deficit increased?

    Well, as mentioned the money was never missing. It's accounted for. It's just that the accounting was done over numerous systems (some fairly antiquated) instead of one, which fails an audit and qualifies as not "properly accounted for"

    Dunno if they have upgraded their systems in the meanwhile

    It's a good example of how context changes a story entirely


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,667 ✭✭✭Hector Bellend


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    A reminder to people, these are videos made by conspiracy theorists for the gullible

    They contain a lot of distortion, disinformation, outright lies, manipulation of information and so on - anything to trick the viewer into subscribing to the conspiracy (that they never explain)

    But the 19 hijackers with box cutters story is perfectly believable.

    My bad.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,667 ✭✭✭Hector Bellend


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Well, as mentioned the money was never missing. It's accounted for. It's just that the accounting was done over numerous systems (some fairly antiquated) instead of one, which fails an audit and qualifies as not "properly accounted for"

    Dunno if they have upgraded their systems in the meanwhile

    It's a good example of how context changes a story entirely

    Which begs a very simple question. Why didnt they update their systems? Its not like their budget didnt cover it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    But the 19 hijackers with box cutters story is perfectly believable.

    My bad.

    Oh right, so this is so unbelievable, but a massively risky inside job is believable?

    You gonna try and pull that spiel?


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Which begs a very simple question. Why didnt they update their systems? Its not like there budget didnt cover it.

    Largest employer in the world, I suspect it costs a large amount of money - hence Rumsfeld was lobbying for funds for the upgrade


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    But the 19 hijackers with box cutters story is perfectly believable.

    My bad.
    As opposed to...?
    The government planting secret sci fi explosives in skyscapers they plan to ram planes into?
    The idea of holographic planes?
    Space lasers?


  • Registered Users Posts: 975 ✭✭✭decky1


    go to 'Documentary Heaven.com they have loads, you might see something you have'nt seen berfore.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,667 ✭✭✭Hector Bellend


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Oh right, so this is so unbelievable, but a massively risky inside job is believable?

    You gonna try and pull that spiel?

    I didnt. I believe it's more likely a mixture of incompetence and criminal negligence rather than any great degree of pre-planning but it's also reasonable to be sceptical of the official story.

    There are definite anomalies, inconsistencies and gaps in the official story. A lot of it doesn't make sense.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,667 ✭✭✭Hector Bellend


    King Mob wrote: »
    As opposed to...?
    The government planting secret sci fi explosives in skyscapers they plan to ram planes into?
    The idea of holographic planes?
    Space lasers?

    I didnt mention any of this stuff.

    You did.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    I didnt. I believe it's more likely a mixture of incompetence and criminal negligence rather than any great degree of pre-planning and that it's rasonable to be sceptical of the official story.

    There are definite anomalies and inconsistencies about the official story. A lot of it doesn't make sense.

    It doesn't "make sense" to you. Personally. That's fine, that's your opinion.

    Then tell us what really happened with credible evidence

    Failing that, then I will obviously have to go with the findings of multiple investigations on the issue, as well as the consensus of experts over that of one incredulous person on the internet


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,667 ✭✭✭Hector Bellend


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Well, as mentioned the money was never missing. It's accounted for. It's just that the accounting was done over numerous systems (some fairly antiquated) instead of one, which fails an audit and qualifies as not "properly accounted for"

    Dunno if they have upgraded their systems in the meanwhile

    It's a good example of how context changes a story entirely

    Where is it accounted for?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Where is it accounted for?

    On their accounting software.


Advertisement