Your belief about September, 11th, 2001

[Jets4Life]

My beliefs:

19 hijackers from the Middle East hijacked four commercial airlines with the sole purpose of crashing them into strategic US landmarks (WTC, Pentagon, White House(?)). They slipped through the radar, and their plan was carried off with great success.

-No Israeli agents had knowledge of 9/11 before the hijackings
-No buildings were deliberately brought down
-Palestineans were dancing in the streets upon hearing the news

Just like the Kennedy assassination, some people just can't comprehend that the plan was simple, and not assisted by the CIA, Mossod, or any other intelligence agency.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Muta

I'd like to also be more reassured that there were more cameras filming arguably the most important military installation in the world. I also find it really skeptical that more footage hasn't been released, if there were more cameras.

I've also heard that the Marriott Hotel had a camera facing that exact part of the Pentagon, which was promptly confiscated and never released publicly.

Simply showing footage that clearly shows a plane smacking into the Pentagon would alleviate all concerns - without question.

In the age of technology, I just find it strange that the best footage we have of the most devastaing terrorist attack in the history of America on the most prolific military installation in the world is grainy, choppy, unrecognizable footage from a gas station.

Yes, you would think they would have learnt from New York and how thousands of films taken of the planes hitting WTC 2 completely alliviated any questions about that event!

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

I bought the whole thing hook, line and sinker. I didn't question 9-11 at all at the time it happened.

It wasn't until a few years later when I saw the Zeitgeist movie where my curiosity was piqued....

one moment

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Muta

I'm not suggesting it was a missile. I just want to know why more footage hasn't been released from other cameras, if it was recorded.

If you don't think it was a missile, if you believe it was flight 77 then logically you should also believe there isn't any other footage.
This question or doubt makes even less sense than the WTC 7 questions to be honest

Its flight path in the seconds before hitting the building took it over the Arlington National Cemetary and a highway then the car park of the Pentagon itself, not to many cameras in any of these.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Yes, you would think they would have learnt from New York and how thousands of films taken of the planes hitting WTC 2 completely alliviated any questions about that event!

I agree with Muta. Video of a plane hitting is better than a video assuming that a plane hit.

If the same evidence was used in court, which one is going to hold up? I'll take the stronger evidence than the weaker evidence 10 times out of 10.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

I bought the whole thing hook, line and sinker. I didn't question 9-11 at all at the time it happened.

It wasn't until a few years later when I saw the Zeitgeist movie where my curiosity was piqued....

Here is the passenger list for AA77 that crashed into the pentagon. If it didn't, where are these people? why do their family members think they are dead? Are they part of the conspiracy?

Can you give me some answers?

[opendoor]

I don't know, it's not like the Pentagon is in the middle of a city. I've driven by it several times and it's more or less a big building surrounded by parking lots and freeways which is bordered by a cemetery on one side and a river on the other. I'm nor surprised in the slightest that there weren't random cameras at other businesses that picked up the crash and I imagine at the Pentagon itself they rely more on people to guard the perimeter rather than cameras.

How many plane crashes are actually caught on video? Even when they happen at airports which have cameras everywhere they're not necessarily caught on tape.

[Kybosh]

I can think of few movements in my lifetime that I would classify as stupid. I consider many ideas and conspiracies misguided, but the truth movement for 9/11 is out right stupid.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Do you have any understanding of physics and or structural engineering at all? The weight and inertia of at least 15 floors falling would overload the design load AND the safety factors by what? At least a factor of 100, IMO. The floors would instantly be sheared off of the columns, with virtually no resistance. There's no building contents even remotely strong enough to have any significant effect on that.

It's clear that no one had ever considered planes being used as weapons, as they were. Thus, the results of what happened when a plane intentionally hit the buildings were never considered. It's not that hard to understand is it? All the talk around the accident was that the engineers had considered the possibility of a 707 accidentally hitting a tower in some fog on final approach. The 707 is a much smaller plane, and a plane on final approach would not have had a huge quantity of fuel on board, and would have been going 1/3 of the speed.

I understand that the weight and inertia of the tops of the towers are substantial. Of course it is.....Do you undertsand the symmetry required for the caps to plunge straight downward with little deviation? Even with classical implosion demolition (like WTC-7), you will often see the top section tilt somewhat on the way down. The planes did not impact perfectly on center of the buildings, and therefore did not destroy all the core columns, if any. Yeah, yeah I know one of the tops tilted slightly, but like I said, the path of greatest resistance was taken, and the time it took to collapse (about 10 seconds) is the smoking gun.

The structure below definately would have slowed down the collapse due to the "pancaking" effect........that never happened because everything was blown out of the way. There were no pancakes. However there were multi-ton beam sections imbedded into neighboring buildings for crying out loud....like they were shot from a cross bow. That requires huge lateral force.

Frank DeMartini, part of the WTC design/management team, said that the twin towers could absorb and survive "multiple" impacts from a 707 plane. Perhaps the government never considered planes being used as weapons, but the WTC design team saw an accidental impact as a possibility. I have demonstrated before that the 757 is not alot heavier than the 707 despite being larger in size. They use lighter designs/materials nowadays.

Here is Frank's statement.
http://youtu.be/IRoONuSQgGE

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Kybosh

I can think of few movements in my lifetime that I would classify as stupid. I consider many ideas and conspiracies misguided, but the truth movement for 9/11 is out right stupid.

Are 6 out of the 10 Commission members "stupid"?

Is John Farmer stupid?

Is Bob Graham stupid?
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/...stigation.html

Are all the firefighters, engineers, scholars, military pilots stupid also?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Frank DeMartini, part of the WTC design/management team, said that the twin towers could absorb and survive "multiple" impacts from a 707 plane.

I don't even know why I'm bothering to respond, but "impacts" does not equal "impact + an hour of burning jet fuel softening support columns"

This has been discussed several times, but of course you'll ignore it while you just eat the conspiracy theories up like a shark on chum.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by opendoor

I don't know, it's not like the Pentagon is in the middle of a city. I've driven by it several times and it's more or less a big building surrounded by parking lots and freeways which is bordered by a cemetery on one side and a river on the other. I'm nor surprised in the slightest that there weren't random cameras at other businesses that picked up the crash and I imagine at the Pentagon itself they rely more on people to guard the perimeter rather than cameras.

How many plane crashes are actually caught on video? Even when they happen at airports which have cameras everywhere they're not necessarily caught on tape.

Not only that but camera technology wasn't what it is now in 2001. They didn't have cheap and high quality digital cameras like they do now. The ability to cover extremely large areas by camera using non-digital cameras is really limited.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

Here is the passenger list for AA77 that crashed into the pentagon. If it didn't, where are these people? why do their family members think they are dead? Are they part of the conspiracy?

Can you give me some answers?

No I cannot. That is what a new investigation is for.

The Pentagon is just one aspect of the whole event.

I would like to know how Hani Hanjour pulled off a near impossible maneuver with a 757 after flunking out of flight school in Florida. The guy couldn't fly a Cessna....

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by nik-

I don't even know why I'm bothering to respond, but "impacts" does not equal "impact + an hour of burning jet fuel softening support columns"

This has been discussed several times, but of course you'll ignore it while you just eat the conspiracy theories up like a shark on chum.

Jet fuel does not burn very hot, besides, the vast majority of it burned up in the big fireball upon impact.

I have acknowledged that fire can soften steel, everybody know that. It doesn't melt it and cause it to suddenly fail however.

[mikey_the_redneck]

If you guys want to go ahead and believe that there is no footage of the miracle pilot Hani Hanjour slamming into the Pentagon, ....well go ahead I guess.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Are 6 out of the 10 Commission members "stupid"?

Is John Farmer stupid?

Is Bob Graham stupid?
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/...stigation.html

Are all the firefighters, engineers, scholars, military pilots stupid also?

Those guys are arguing that the government lied about what happened on 9/11 in order to make itself look better and cover up its failings. That is a tenable position and about a million miles away from arguing that the government planted explosives in the WTC and shot a missile into the Pentagon.

You're trying to bolster your arguments by appealing to the authority of people who are arguing vastly different things than you are. Respectable people questioning parts of the government's story doesn't mean your argument that the government staged a controlled demolition of the World Trade Center is the any more plausible.

[Kybosh]

Originally Posted by opendoor

.....

I was just about the post the exact same thing. Thanks.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by troutman

Source?

I didn't hear one family member during the wall-to-wall coverage on the weekend, say they are "for 9-11 truth".

And, even if this were true, again it is a logical fallacy to suggest that it means anything.

You're right, it doesn't necessarily mean anything. I'm just tired of hearing the "you're insulting the families" bullcrap excuse. That line is lifted directly from Bill O'Reilly.

A guy named Bill Doyle heads one of the, if not the largest 9-11 family support group with about 7,000 members. He has said on numerous occasions that about half of his group feels that the truth has not been heard.

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?...60709040719187

Jones: With your 7,000 members [..] what percentage, just guesstimation, would you say believe that 9/11 was an inside job to some extent.

Doyle: Maybe half, maybe. It's probably 50-50. You know, a lot of people themselves are probably trying to move on in life, and a lot of them are seeking mental health organizations [..] they don't even want to look back to 9/11 because they just can't believe that our government failed them so badly.

There is also the rememberbuilding7 group that has made commercials about supporting a new investigation.

I may be a bit off on the 70% figure. I think it was Luke Rudkowski who said that. He is active with the families of 9-11....

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Those guys are arguing that the government lied about what happened on 9/11 in order to make itself look better and cover up its failings. That is a tenable position and about a million miles away from arguing that the government planted explosives in the WTC and shot a missile into the Pentagon.

You're trying to bolster your arguments by appealing to the authority of people who are arguing vastly different things than you are. Respectable people questioning parts of the government's story doesn't mean your argument that the government staged a controlled demolition of the World Trade Center is the any more plausible.

Right....

I could find credible people who support the demolition theory too, but I am too lazy and it won't change your mind anyhow, now would it?

I could get into the other issues if you'd like. The hijackers are a whole other topic in this complex event.

My suspicion of 9-11 is not based on the collapse observations alone.

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Right....

I could find credible people who support the demolition theory too, but I am too lazy and it won't change your mind anyhow, now would it?

I could get into the other issues if you'd like. The hijackers are a whole other topic in this complex event.

My suspicion of 9-11 is not based on the collapse observations alone.

Seriously, one of you knuckleheads answer this:

HOW HAS IT BEEN POSSIBLE, IF YOU ACCEPT THE CONSPIRACY B.S., FOR ALL THOSE INVOLVED TO KEEP IT A SECRET??!!!!!

Not one person involved in the conspiracy has divulged this secret to anyone???!!! You really believe that would be possible?