Where Were You When You First Heard A 9/11 Conspiracy Theory?

Sheen 9/11Jeremy Stahl shares his first time, writing for Slate:

I remember precisely where I was and what I was doing when I heard: I was about three weeks into my first year at Emory University in Atlanta, and I was sharing a meal with my new dorm-mates in the DUC dining hall. In the manner of college freshmen everywhere, we were discussing current events. It was Sept. 12, 2001, less than 28 hours after the attacks, when I heard my first 9/11 conspiracy theory.

A friend was arguing that the plane that had crashed in Pennsylvania the previous day had been shot down by the U.S. military. His theory was not that the jet had been destroyed as part of some larger nefarious government plot, as some would later claim, but that it had been shot down to prevent another target from being hit. Furthermore, he argued, the Bush administration would never be able to admit this, because the public would never accept that the American government would order an American plane, over American airspace, with American passengers, to be shot from the sky.

To me, the government not only would have been justified, the American people would have very easily understood that it had been justified, not to mention the fact that such a secret would be impossible to keep. We had a friendly debate for about half an hour. The next day actual details of what happened on Flight 93 began to emerge, and my friend and I didn’t broach the subject again.

Now that 10 years have passed, I found myself wondering: Whatever became of my friend’s odd conspiracy theory? (For that matter, whatever became of him?) More generally, what has happened to the 9/11 conspiracy theory, in all its various and outrageous permutations, in the last decade? By tracing its history, and its responses to news events such as the Iraqi surge or the 2008 election or the death of Osama Bin Laden, would it be possible to show how and why conspiracy theories in general — or at least this one in particular — wax and wane?

Conspiracy theories thrive by appealing to existing hatred, paranoia, and uncertainty. The hatred can wither. The paranoia can crack. And the uncertainty can disappear. But the conspiracy theory lives or dies, prospers or fades, for reasons almost entirely unrelated to its actual content…

[continues at Slate]

,

  • quartz99

    The first conspiracy I heard after the fact? That afternoon, just after lunch. A hardcore christian conservative (the sort of person who lives and dies by the words that Bachmann and Palin spew now, who at the time taped Rush so he could listen to him again in his office) said he was sure that it would come out that it was really a plot by liberals to make W look bad. Even weeks later when more information came out about the hijackers, he insisted they’d been brought to the country and paid by “liberals.”

    • Tuna Ghost

      You can’t prove it wasn’t liberals trying to make W look bad.  I WIN I WIN THIS ARGUMENT I WIN

      • Honu

        Tuna, you AND Rush win. Yay!

        The wtc towers still fell from controlled demo though.

        • Tuna Ghost

          I like how you slip that in at the end.  You won’t drag me back in, sir!  

  • Anonymous

    The first conspiracy I heard after the fact? That afternoon, just after lunch. A hardcore christian conservative (the sort of person who lives and dies by the words that Bachmann and Palin spew now, who at the time taped Rush so he could listen to him again in his office) said he was sure that it would come out that it was really a plot by liberals to make W look bad. Even weeks later when more information came out about the hijackers, he insisted they’d been brought to the country and paid by “liberals.”

  • Shark

    Man i am only 19 but i swear too you i didn’t buy in to it when i was 9 nor do i buy it now i just never believed it played out like they said i let those thoughts lay dormant until like i was like 16-17 & started just checking out what others had to say about it and i was right it was a false flag. BTW it WAS a controlled demolition & a missile hit the pentagon     

    • Tuna Ghost

      Controlled demo aside (that’s been done to death here), the missle theory is complete garbage for a number of reasons. Aside from the debris found (yes, debris was found, even though most of the plane disintegrated. The disintegration is not at all strange or unexpected, you canfind numerous videos of jets disintegrating on impact online. I’ll provide one if you like), and aside from the fact that you’d have to make a couple hundred people disappear off the face of the earth, aside from the phone calls from passengers to their families, and aside from the fact that not even the most dyed-in-the-wool conspiracy theorists here think anything but a plane hit the pentagon, there were dozens of witnesses at the scene that saw a goddam jet hit the pentagon. It’s hard to mistake a huge fucking jet for anything else when it’s thirty feet over your head knocking a lamppost onto the hood of your car.

    • Tuna Ghost

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

      F4 Phantom slamming into a concrete wall. Note that everything except the tips of the wings, which extended beyond the wall, completely disintegrated. Aluminum burns pretty easily. If you look around online, you can find photos of commercial jets that have burned away to almost nothing just by skidding on the ground at hundreds of miles per hour. They didn’t even hit anything; fire from friction can take care of aluminum very easily.

  • Shark

    Man i am only 19 but i swear too you i didn’t buy in to it when i was 9 nor do i buy it now i just never believed it played out like they said i let those thoughts lay dormant until like i was like 16-17 & started just checking out what others had to say about it and i was right it was a false flag. BTW it WAS a controlled demolition & a missile hit the pentagon     

  • Anarchy Pony

    I wouldn’t be surprised if the Let It Happen On Purpose theory turned out to be true.

    • RepulsedNinja

      I think that is the most plausible one. 

      The Bush administration is guilty of that, but the ISI and CIA pulled off the demolitions IMHO.

      • Anarchy Pony

        I dunno, I just don’t really see the evidence for it, I mean, I am open to just about any explanation but I just don’t see any proof for it.

        • RepulsedNinja

          Your only going to see it if you look for it.. Don’t be like NIST; “Did you test for explosives?” “NIST: No, we are not going to test for something that isn’t there” And most unscientific comment of the year goes too…. NIST. 

          I agree, if you don’t see evidence or proof to back up a particular theory then rule it out. It takes a lot of effort and digging to find out what really happened that day.   

          • Slammon Salmon

            They did test for explosives… Watch Loose Change. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E3oIbO0AWE&feature=related

        • Tuna Ghost

          What puzzles me is that, if the main thrust of the conspiracy theories are true (controlled demo to give the US an excuse to invade Iraq, among other things), then why wouldn’t the conspirators leave evidence that pointed to Iraq?  Why leave evidence that points to the Saudis, our supposed “friends”, evidence that the US went to great pains to cover up and not mention to anyone?  

          • Deep7

            Because the drug trade and oil pipeline via Afghanistan were the prime concern. Since the ra-ra Americanism was going so well, they knew they could push for Iraq on pure rhetoric.

        • Tuna Ghost

          What puzzles me is that, if the main thrust of the conspiracy theories are true (controlled demo to give the US an excuse to invade Iraq, among other things), then why wouldn’t the conspirators leave evidence that pointed to Iraq?  Why leave evidence that points to the Saudis, our supposed “friends”, evidence that the US went to great pains to cover up and not mention to anyone?  

    • E.B. Wolf

      Seems the most likely given the U.S. Govt’s behavior patterns leading up to major wars through most of the 20th century.

    • Tuna Ghost

      Same here. It’s blatantly obvious the US government doesn’t give a flying fuck about terror attacks, and it would have been cheaper, easier, and a hundred times safer from a deniability perspective to simply let one of the dozens of groups that desperately want to do it succeed. It’s how they operate overseas, why change tactics to something infinitely more dangerous Ina place where everyone is going to looking that much closer? It doesn’t make any damn sense.

  • Wanooski

    I wouldn’t be surprised if the Let It Happen On Purpose theory turned out to be true.

  • Dreams

    I was in my first year of college. September 14th, 2001 A fellow student sent me an email that contained a flash video (.FLV) It showed the pentagon lawn untouched and began to explain how a missile had hit the pentagon, not a plane. At the time I didn’t believe it because I was still waiting for the government to release tapes showing a plane hitting the pentagon. That tape never surfaced, so now I’m not so sure now… 

    I did hear some years back an Air Force General confessed about giving the order to shoot flight 93 down.. Can’t remember much more than that though. 

    The best conspiracy therory thus far has to be the one where 19 hijackers took control of commercial airliners armed with only box cutters. 

    • RockSolid

      Yup, the craziest conspiracy theory is the official one.

      Maybe people just don’t want to accept it but its very obvious 9/11 wasn’t pulled off by a bunch of radical Muslims. You needed a highly trained highly skilled group of experts to pull that off. The planes needed to be remote controlled as it would be impossible to pull off those maneuvers as a pilot. The buildings needed to be rigged and charges set up. The cover story would need to be set up in advance and so on. Plus every single shred of REAL evidence is in direct opposition with the official theory. And how do you think they found those passports so quick? Because they were planted there! Use common sense people.. 

      I’m sorry but I’m very passionate about this topic. I put over 1200 hours studying 9/11 and from what I researched nothing in the official story checks out. And to lend some credibility to one of the commenters here; Yes its true the ISI was seen around the WTC buildings on 9/11…    

    • Tuna Ghost

      I won’t get into the controlled demo issue, but the idea of a missile hitting the pentagon is completely ridiculous.  Aside from the fact that debris was found (there are pictures, if you’re interested), and the fact that it would leave hundreds of people disappearing off the face of the earth, there were dozens of witnesses that saw a jet slam into the pentagon.  Like I noted earlier, its hard to mistake an enormous jet for anything else when its 30 feet over your head knocking down lampposts onto the hood of your taxi.  

      Check out this video of an F4 Phantom slamming into a concrete wall.  The only thing left is the tips of the wings that, like in a cartoon, kept going after the body was disintegrated.  

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

      • Dueyv9

        For Christ’s sake Tuna, a F4 phantom isn’t what hit the pentagon…it was a huge fucking 747…IF you believe the official story. There are pictures of the pentagon where the “plane” hit BEFORE the wall collapsed…look at those….the lawn is still fresh. A professional couldn’t have pulled off what these flight school grads pulled off.

        Also, take a bunch of footage of controlled demolitions and throw the 2 towers into the mix anywhere in the video and tell me if you can spot a difference. A building falling on its own wouldn’t completely fall straight down in 7 seconds. Play a couple games of Jenga and figure it out.

        • JAG

          Hes hopeless.. Let it go..  I think he has his head so far up the mainstream asshole he can’t see through the shit in his eyes. 

          Tuna you seriously FAIL at debunking. The debunkers are probably embarrassed reading your post. 

        • Tuna Ghost

          For Christ’s sake Tuna, a F4 phantom isn’t what hit the pentagon…it was a huge fucking 747…
          Which means more mass heading into the collision and more fuel.  Like I said, commercial jet liners will burn away to almost nothing just by skidding along the ground for a few miles without crashing into anything.  The size of the plane is unimportant.  

          Given the amount of doctored photographs I have been provided by Truthers, I doubt your photos are very incriminating, but I’m willing to take a look.  

        • Tuna Ghost

          A professional couldn’t have pulled off what these flight school grads pulled off.

          Yeah I’ve been hearing a lot of people who aren’t pilots say this.  

      • Dreams

        WTF? I never said anything about any controlled demo..  The missile wasn’t my idea either.. I just said there was no tape that ever surfaced showing a plane hitting the pentagon. Which makes me skeptical of the official story. Which I also think sounds dumber than a bad movie plot.

        I think you were to quick to jump the gun. Do you have something against truthers or something? I’m not one of them!  

        FYI- That F4 Phantom video is mad cool, but it has nothing to do with 9/11. ;-)

        • Tuna Ghost

          Yeah I looked at your post, and you’re correct.  I think I meant to respond to someone else, my bad. 

          It is pretty rad, isn’t it.  

    • Tuna Ghost

      I won’t get into the controlled demo issue, but the idea of a missile hitting the pentagon is completely ridiculous.  Aside from the fact that debris was found (there are pictures, if you’re interested), and the fact that it would leave hundreds of people disappearing off the face of the earth, there were dozens of witnesses that saw a jet slam into the pentagon.  Like I noted earlier, its hard to mistake an enormous jet for anything else when its 30 feet over your head knocking down lampposts onto the hood of your taxi.  

      Check out this video of an F4 Phantom slamming into a concrete wall.  The only thing left is the tips of the wings that, like in a cartoon, kept going after the body was disintegrated.  

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

  • Dreams

    I was in my first year of college. September 14th, 2001 A fellow student sent me an email that contained a flash video (.FLV) It showed the pentagon lawn untouched and began to explain how a missile had hit the pentagon, not a plane. At the time I didn’t believe it because I was still waiting for the government to release tapes showing a plane hitting the pentagon. That tape never surfaced, so now I’m not so sure now… 

    I did hear some years back an Air Force General confessed about giving the order to shoot flight 93 down.. Can’t remember much more than that though. 

    The best conspiracy therory thus far has to be the one where 19 hijackers took control of commercial airliners armed with only box cutters. 

  • RepulsedNinja

    I think that is the most plausible one. 

    The Bush administration is guilty of that, but the ISI and CIA pulled off the demolitions IMHO.

  • Wanooski

    I dunno, I just don’t really see the evidence for it, I mean, I am open to just about any explanation but I just don’t see any proof for it.

  • Wanooski

    I dunno, I just don’t really see the evidence for it, I mean, I am open to just about any explanation but I just don’t see any proof for it.

  • Tuna Ghost

    I was 19 and planes had just flew into the World Trade Center.  It was, honestly, my very first thought regarding the cause of the attacks.  Later, I grew up.

    • StapleMe

      More like you started to fall for the propaganda. 

    • EvolutionSolutionCushion

      Later I lost my ability to make decisions on my own.

  • Tuna Ghost

    I was 19 and planes had just flew into the World Trade Center.  It was, honestly, my very first thought regarding the cause of the attacks.  Later, I grew up.

  • Tuna Ghost

    You can’t prove it wasn’t liberals trying to make W look bad.  I WIN I WIN THIS ARGUMENT I WIN

  • RepulsedNinja

    Your only going to see it if you look for it.. Don’t be like NIST; “Did you test for explosives?” “NIST: No, we are not going to test for something that isn’t there” And most unscientific comment of the year goes too…. NIST. 

    I agree, if you don’t see evidence or proof to back up a particular theory then rule it out. It takes a lot of effort and digging to find out what really happened that day.   

  • StapleMe

    More like you started to fall for the propaganda. 

  • DeepCough

    What kind of question is that? I was on the internet, duh!

  • DeepCough

    What kind of question is that? I was on the internet, duh!

  • RockSolid

    Yup, the craziest conspiracy theory is the official one.

    Maybe people just don’t want to accept it but its very obvious 9/11 wasn’t pulled off by a bunch of radical Muslims. You needed a highly trained highly skilled group of experts to pull that off. The planes needed to be remote controlled as it would be impossible to pull off those maneuvers as a pilot. The buildings needed to be rigged and charges set up. The cover story would need to be set up in advance and so on. Plus every single shred of REAL evidence is in direct opposition with the official theory. And how do you think they found those passports so quick? Because they were planted there! Use common sense people.. 

    I’m sorry but I’m very passionate about this topic. I put over 1200 hours studying 9/11 and from what I researched nothing in the official story checks out. And to lend some credibility to one of the commenters here; Yes its true the ISI was seen around the WTC buildings on 9/11…    

  • Count the bodies like sheep

    I can’t believe another crap article like this is on disinfo. Anybody with any intelligence that has actually researched all the evidence & anomalies knows the truth. There’s a reason why there are so many architects & engineers that have gotten together to dispute the propoganda. But what do they know right? They’re only experts. The airplane at the pentagon just completely disentegrated huh? Building 7…no other building in the world had ever had to be brought down from a fire before. It’s absolutely rediculous. And what about the words straight from the first responders? And the cancer they have? Just using common sense & looking at what happened after the event (unjustified middle east wars & our rights being taken away) it’s obvious how it fit into their plan, just like all the other false flag events that came before and since. IDIOTS!

    • PeopleAreSheep

      I agree, it’s blatantly obvious we were lied to and the truth was covered up for some geopolitical agenda. I don’t understand these misguided people that believe scientists, engineers, and fire experts are all tin-foil-hat wearing conspiracy nuts just because they disagree with the mainstream. 

      The experts say 9/11 was a series of controlled demolitions. The media says is was a bunch of Muslims with box cutters. So who’s really the nut job here? 

      Word of advice: If the media or government says something happened a certain way. Your first thought should be; “This is a lie” and then you should investigate to see if it isn’t.    

  • Count the bodies like sheep

    I can’t believe another crap article like this is on disinfo. Anybody with any intelligence that has actually researched all the evidence & anomalies knows the truth. There’s a reason why there are so many architects & engineers that have gotten together to dispute the propoganda. But what do they know right? They’re only experts. The airplane at the pentagon just completely disentegrated huh? Building 7…no other building in the world had ever had to be brought down from a fire before. It’s absolutely rediculous. And what about the words straight from the first responders? And the cancer they have? Just using common sense & looking at what happened after the event (unjustified middle east wars & our rights being taken away) it’s obvious how it fit into their plan, just like all the other false flag events that came before and since. IDIOTS!

  • Drinky McGee

    I can’t pinpoint the exact moment.  I don’t hang out with many delusional assholes, so I’m sure it was quite a while after the fact.

    • JAG

      You’re the only “delusional asshole” here, sorry to break it to you.

    • Tuna Ghost

      “I dont hang out with many delusional assholes”

      You really expect us to believe that, don’t you. Adorable.

      • ….

        especially with the name drinky mcgee

  • Drinky McGee

    I can’t pinpoint the exact moment.  I don’t hang out with many delusional assholes, so I’m sure it was quite a while after the fact.

  • JAG

    You’re the only “delusional asshole” here, sorry to break it to you.

  • CosmicAmazing

    Yay another article on 9/11, lets all argue about the obvious lies we were told. 

  • CosmicAmazing

    Yay another article on 9/11, lets all argue about the obvious lies we were told. 

  • Pbechard

    I am hearing more often, “that such a secret would be hard/impossible to keep.” I disagree. I am have no position on Flight 93. You only need to appeal to the majority. Emotional pain will cause us to take the easy route. 

  • Pbechard

    I am hearing more often, “that such a secret would be hard/impossible to keep.” I disagree. I am have no position on Flight 93. You only need to appeal to the majority. Emotional pain will cause us to take the easy route. 

  • Pbechard

    I am hearing more often, “that such a secret would be hard/impossible to keep.” I disagree. I am have no position on Flight 93. You only need to appeal to the majority. Emotional pain will cause us to take the easy route. 

  • PeopleAreSheep

    I agree, it’s blatantly obvious we were lied to and the truth was covered up for some geopolitical agenda. I don’t understand these misguided people that believe scientists, engineers, and fire experts are all tin-foil-hat wearing conspiracy nuts just because they disagree with the mainstream. 

    The experts say 9/11 was a series of controlled demolitions. The media says is was a bunch of Muslims with box cutters. So who’s really the nut job here? 

    Word of advice: If the media or government says something happened a certain way. Your first thought should be; “This is a lie” and then you should investigate to see if it isn’t.    

  • Honu

    Tuna, you AND Rush win. Yay!

    The wtc towers still fell from controlled demo though.

  • Rooti

    The whole subject has become a litmus test. You can tell when a person can think for themselves or if they rely on others to form their opinions based on their 9/11 belief. In this case, we now know that Slate is nothing but another source of professional gate keeping as opposed to real journalism. 

  • Rooti

    The whole subject has become a litmus test. You can tell when a person can think for themselves or if they rely on others to form their opinions based on their 9/11 belief. In this case, we now know that Slate is nothing but another source of professional gate keeping as opposed to real journalism. 

  • Length&Width

    Majestic knows if he puts out an article on anything 9/11 related its going to have 50 comments in the first few hours. This must be entertaining for him.. ;-) 

  • Length&Width

    Majestic knows if he puts out an article on anything 9/11 related its going to have 50 comments in the first few hours. This must be entertaining for him.. ;-) 

  • EvolutionSolutionCushion

    Later I lost my ability to make decisions on my own.

  • Non-buyer

    Disinfo, I love ya, but you blew this one.   The first conspiracy theory we heard was the live reporting, watching buildings implode into their own footprints and being told that planes driven by untrained pilots did it without help.

  • Non-buyer

    Disinfo, I love ya, but you blew this one.   The first conspiracy theory we heard was the live reporting, watching buildings implode into their own footprints and being told that planes driven by untrained pilots did it without help.

    • Anarchy Pony

      Except they didn’t fall into their own footprints and the hijackers did receive flight training.

      • SundayAfternoon

        Wanooski, your correct about WTC buildings 1 & 2, but not 7. Measuring the south west corner of WTC Building 7 when it begins it’s steady fall: WTC building 7 falls in ~ 6.5 seconds straight down into its own footprint. Barely damaging the adjacent Verizon building. WTC 1 & 2 were pulverized into dust which in some cases streamed out laterally at ~ 100 Mph as the they came down.

        The hijackers did received flight training. However, instructors claim there pilot skills where inadequate even while operating a single engine cessna, never mind a 150 ton Boeing 767 traveling at ~ 500 Mph.. 

        You tend to have healthy skepticism, and I respect that.      

        • Tuna Ghost

          What if I told you I could provide you with a lucid, detailed, comprehensive explanation, complete with diagrams and backed up by quotes from first responders, explaining how WTC 7 could have easily collapsed from the massive unfought fires raging inside and a great goddam hole knocked in the side of the building from debris? Would you be interested in taking a look?

          • RazorT33th

             I’d rather you stuck to shitty articles about hipsters or maybe just kept your opinions to yourself until you actually grow up.

          • Tuna Ghost

            Hate to break it to you, but you’re going to be disappointed. 

            Although I should clarify: if I were to learn that a small number of people high up in the Bush administration knew the attacks were planned and allowed them to happen, even going so far as to surreptitiously make sure none of the jets were shot down, I would not be surprised.  “The US doesn’t give a shit about terror attacks” is not even a controversial statement anymore (they don’t even try to hide this fact), so I’m not sure if this scenario counts as a “conspiracy theory”.  

          • Tuna Ghost

            Hate to break it to you, but you’re going to be disappointed. 

            Although I should clarify: if I were to learn that a small number of people high up in the Bush administration knew the attacks were planned and allowed them to happen, even going so far as to surreptitiously make sure none of the jets were shot down, I would not be surprised.  “The US doesn’t give a shit about terror attacks” is not even a controversial statement anymore (they don’t even try to hide this fact), so I’m not sure if this scenario counts as a “conspiracy theory”.  

          • Tuna Ghost

            also: They’re not my opinions, genius.  They’re published in an engineering/architecture publication.  If you want to see it, I’ll be happy to provide it. But I’m gathering that you aren’t interested in a lucid, detailed, comprehensive explanation, complete with diagrams and backed up by quotes from first responders, explaining how WTC 7 could have easily collapsed from the massive unfought fires raging inside and a great goddam hole knocked in the side of the building from debris. Now why would someone interested in 9/11 and the WTC 7 collapse not be interested in that?

          • Tuna Ghost

            also: They’re not my opinions, genius.  They’re published in an engineering/architecture publication.  If you want to see it, I’ll be happy to provide it. But I’m gathering that you aren’t interested in a lucid, detailed, comprehensive explanation, complete with diagrams and backed up by quotes from first responders, explaining how WTC 7 could have easily collapsed from the massive unfought fires raging inside and a great goddam hole knocked in the side of the building from debris. Now why would someone interested in 9/11 and the WTC 7 collapse not be interested in that?

          • Mysophobe

            In the WTC7 collapse videos I’ve seen, it sure looks like a simultaneous, catastrophic bottom-up structural failure. That said, I’m willing to entertain the possibility that the fascade peeling away from the structure created that effect. I’d like to see that link.

          • Tuna Ghost

            No problem.

            http://www.structuremag.org/article.aspx?articleID=284

            The article points out that no one expected a single point of failure to be so catastrophic, but also that the damage caused by debris is something no one could have predicted when designing a building.  

          • Mysophobe

            Thanks for the info! I accidentally posted my reply yonder downthread.

          • SundayAfternoon

            I am always interested in new information, but chances are, I’ve already seen it and moved on. Will you include the first responders that said they heard the countdown before the building came down? Maybe the audio of explosions just prior to the collapse? Or the news women that was told by firemen that they were going to bring the building down? You know, because of the “great goddam hole knocked in the side.” I agree, the building might have come down one way or another due to the massive damage done by the falling towers. Falling symmetrically at near-free-fall into its own footprint though, would not have happened in an asymmetrical gravity driven collapse. Thus the OBVIOUS demolition. 

            I think scientifically, we are past the point of conjecture. We are now looking for the “why it was demolished” and “how it was demolished” NOT “was it demolished, yes or no?” It’s beyond me why people try and refute the demolition of building 7. The building suffered from tremendous damage yes, but isn’t that another reason why they would have wanted it demolished? Take a look at WTC building 6 and see all the damage it suffered from, yet, it never collapsed… Steel-reinforced concrete buildings are built much stronger than you think. They DO NOT just collapse because of fire and a few damaged columns. It takes massive energy to bring a building down, sometimes more than the entire potential energy stored in the building itself. 

            Send me the link though. I’m sure I can find ‘some’ valid information there. 

          • You Weren’t There so STFU

            Or the news women that was told by firemen that they were going to bring the building down?

            She wasn’t a “news women”.
            Get the CNN – or any NY radio tapes- for 9/13.
            At 12-1pm you will hear them say that 1 Liberty which had been damaged, and leaning, had come down.

          • JAG

            How do you know he/she wasn’t there? 

            And what the hell point are you trying to make anyways? 

          • Tuna Ghost

            For the record, people were very worried that WTC 6 would collapse, which is why they pulled it down with cables.  They were going to do the same with WTC 7 (hence the confusion around the orders to “pull it”) except it collapsed first.  There are several quotes from emergency personnel about how they knew WTC 7 was going to fall just by looking at it, which is why they pulled everyone out as quickly as they could.  

            Here’s the link:

            http://www.structuremag.org/article.aspx?articleID=284

            It explains in clear and lucid terms, complete with diagrams, how unfought fires combined with a huge goddam hole knocked in the wall (taking out a very important column) by debris could cause the building to collapse.  It’s not something anyone could have predicted, but then again 9/11 and the damage the debris caused is not something anyone could have expected.  The article ends with a recommendation that future building design take the lessons WTC 7 offers to mind when they build.  

            What problems are you seeing in the explanation?  I ask Truthers this but none of them can point to something they disagree with, they simply repeat the same questions that are in fact answered in the article.  

  • Deep7

    This article is Ad Hominem garbage

  • Deep7

    This article is Ad Hominem garbage

  • E.B. Wolf

    Seems the most likely given the U.S. Govt’s behavior patterns leading up to major wars through most of the 20th century.

  • Jugglyhead

    Come on, this is a mainstream BS article

  • Jugglyhead

    Come on, this is a mainstream BS article

  • Wanooski

    Except they didn’t fall into their own footprints and the hijackers did receive flight training.

  • dogbeardbirdbeer

    “The next day actual details of what happened on Flight 93 began to emerge”
    i still can’t this guy actually wrote “actual details began to emerge”. 

  • dogbeardbirdbeer

    “The next day actual details of what happened on Flight 93 began to emerge”
    i still can’t this guy actually wrote “actual details began to emerge”. 

  • ReadMoreIntoIt

    I was watching the news on September 11th 2001. Some guy named Paul Bremer said it was carried out by Osama Bin Laden. That’s the first conspiracy theory I heard. Then I found out Mr Bremer ran an insurance brokerage company Marsh & McLennan and was also the CEO of Marsh Crisis, a devision of Marsh & McLennan. Paul Bremer had an office in the south tower and Marsh & McLennan was a tenant in the north tower. Marsh & McLennan was in control of all eight floors in the north tower where the plane had impacted. Marsh & McLennan also had a subsidiary in the south tower impact zone, where Paul Bremer’s office was. The eight floors in the north tower were the only floors that had fire proofing upgrades prior to 9/11. Paul Bremer was also the director of a company named Komatsu. Komatsu manufactures thermite detonation devices such as this one here: US Patent 5532449 – Using plasma ARC and thermite to demolish concrete. So this alone makes Mr Bremer more of a suspect than Mr Bin Laden IMO.

    It goes much deeper than that though. 

    Here is the REAL list of 9/11 suspects: 

    Wirt Walker III 
    Marvin Bush  
    Jim Pierce  
    L Paul Bremer  
    Barry McDaniel  
    Joseph Kasputys 
    Jerome Hauer  
    Stephan Friedman  
    Craig Stapleton  
    William Clark  
    Preston Rahe Jr. 
    Michael Daniel (SAIC)
    Frank Carlucci 
    Rudy Giuliani 
    Bernard Kerik

    Plus – Nanothermite & Science Experts complicit in cover-up of 9/11:

    Hratch Semerjian Shyam Sundar  John Gross  Richard Gann Andrzej MiziolekProfessor Steve SonDr. Michael Zachariah

  • ReadMoreIntoIt

    I was watching the news on September 11th 2001. Some guy named Paul Bremer said it was carried out by Osama Bin Laden. That’s the first conspiracy theory I heard. Then I found out Mr Bremer ran an insurance brokerage company Marsh & McLennan and was also the CEO of Marsh Crisis, a devision of Marsh & McLennan. Paul Bremer had an office in the south tower and Marsh & McLennan was a tenant in the north tower. Marsh & McLennan was in control of all eight floors in the north tower where the plane had impacted. Marsh & McLennan also had a subsidiary in the south tower impact zone, where Paul Bremer’s office was. The eight floors in the north tower were the only floors that had fire proofing upgrades prior to 9/11. Paul Bremer was also the director of a company named Komatsu. Komatsu manufactures thermite detonation devices such as this one here: US Patent 5532449 – Using plasma ARC and thermite to demolish concrete. So this alone makes Mr Bremer more of a suspect than Mr Bin Laden IMO.

    It goes much deeper than that though. 

    Here is the REAL list of 9/11 suspects: 

    Wirt Walker III 
    Marvin Bush  
    Jim Pierce  
    L Paul Bremer  
    Barry McDaniel  
    Joseph Kasputys 
    Jerome Hauer  
    Stephan Friedman  
    Craig Stapleton  
    William Clark  
    Preston Rahe Jr. 
    Michael Daniel (SAIC)
    Frank Carlucci 
    Rudy Giuliani 
    Bernard Kerik

    Plus – Nanothermite & Science Experts complicit in cover-up of 9/11:

    Hratch Semerjian Shyam Sundar  John Gross  Richard Gann Andrzej MiziolekProfessor Steve SonDr. Michael Zachariah

  • Lbcz3k

    A more interesting question is “when did you first hear the official story of Osama Bin Laden being the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks?” For me it was about a half hour after it happened and newscasters were already talking about it on calble tv.

    • Anarchy Pony

      Yeah, that was a bit om the odd side. 

  • Lbcz3k

    A more interesting question is “when did you first hear the official story of Osama Bin Laden being the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks?” For me it was about a half hour after it happened and newscasters were already talking about it on calble tv.

  • mole_face

    The first time I heard 911 conspiracy theories was in underground hip hop. Mr Lif’s song “Home of the Brave” in 2002 was the first I remember explicitly stating that 911 was staged. It’s extremely common in underground hip hop lyrics now – a large chunk of the records in that genre I’ve listened to over the last few years are rife with references to 911 demolition theories, “The Illuminati” etc. Underground avant hip hop legend EL-P released “I’ll Sleep When You’re Dead” in 2007, a mindfuck psychedelic 911 truth concept album with multiple references to 911 demolition theories, FEMA camps, etc. It figures that the most forward thinking genre of music also has the most forward thinking politics.

  • fuzzgun

    The first time I heard 911 conspiracy theories was in underground hip hop. Mr Lif’s song “Home of the Brave” in 2002 was the first I remember explicitly stating that 911 was staged. It’s extremely common in underground hip hop lyrics now – a large chunk of the records in that genre I’ve listened to over the last few years are rife with references to 911 demolition theories, “The Illuminati” etc. Underground avant hip hop legend EL-P released “I’ll Sleep When You’re Dead” in 2007, a mindfuck psychedelic 911 truth concept album with multiple references to 911 demolition theories, FEMA camps, etc. It figures that the most forward thinking genre of music also has the most forward thinking politics.

  • Wanooski

    Yeah, that was a bit om the odd side. 

  • SundayAfternoon

    Wanooski, your correct about WTC buildings 1 & 2, but not 7. Measuring the south west corner of WTC Building 7 when it begins it’s steady fall: WTC building 7 falls in ~ 6.5 seconds straight down into its own footprint. Barely damaging the adjacent Verizon building. WTC 1 & 2 were pulverized into dust which in some cases streamed out laterally at ~ 100 Mph as the they came down.

    The hijackers did received flight training. However, instructors claim there pilot skills where inadequate even while operating a single engine cessna, never mind a 150 ton Boeing 767 traveling at ~ 500 Mph.. 

    You tend to have healthy skepticism, and I respect that.      

  • Dmsthneez

    well if the comments section is any indicator, 9/11 truth will prevail within the decade. i can’t wait! i didn’t know this site was called disinfo because that’s what the produce. what an honest title! i wish fox and msnbc would do the same..

    • Tuna Ghost

      “if the comments section is any indicator…”

      Yeah there’s the problem right there. Don’t be fooled, the conspiracy theories are, for good or ill, still very much a minority opinion. Don’t expect that to change as even more time passes.

  • Dmsthneez

    well if the comments section is any indicator, 9/11 truth will prevail within the decade. i can’t wait! i didn’t know this site was called disinfo because that’s what the produce. what an honest title! i wish fox and msnbc would do the same..

  • Godozo

    It took me a few years to learn about the “conspiracy theories (translation: non-governmentally accepted theories)” of 9-11. But when I ran across them, they actually seemed to explain things a little bit better than the “official” story did.

    My thinking has, of course, changed over the years. Here’s my thoughts:

    Hijacked planes? Yes…by people who lived charmed lives up until the date they found themselves as additional passengers even though they were in the cockpit (yes, even the ones who sat in with the pilot in the four planes. Don’t nobody remember that nowadays…) when their planes were taken over on the ground.

    Explosives within the Twin Towers (and #7)? Of course. The twin towers had outlived their usefulness as buildings, and were going to cost billions to tear down (yes, they even had the plans…), and building 7 fell too neatly, even with the gouging in the building (should have fallen into the gouge, not straight down).

    The Pentagon? A missile…to cover for the plane that was shot down over the Kentucky/West Virginia/Ohio area (remember that detail? I do.).

    Flight 93? Shot down by a patriotic pilot under orders that were checked and rechecked, as he was trained to do in the case of a passenger plane. Wouldn’t surprise me if the passengers had started their rebellion, but there was no way for the pilot to know that.

    And…is this of any use? No, the time for the truth to have had an effect has passed. It will end up being picked on like the Kennedy and Lincoln Assassinations – fun and intellectually absorbing, but in the end a distraction from the present.

    • Tuna Ghost

      Dude.  Dozens of people, possibly hundreds, saw a goddam jet hit the pentagon.  Pieces of a commercial jet were found.  There are pictures of them.  As I’m getting tired of repeating, there’s no missile that can be mistaken for a commercial jet from 30 feet overhead.  

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

      It’s no surprise that most of the jet disintegrated on impact, just like the F4 Phantom in the video.  That’s a pretty common phenomenon.  Aluminum burns pretty easily.  Jets burn up just from the friction of skidding along the ground.  

      • JAG

        Tuna Ghost, you are such a noob on 9/11…

        THE PIECES OF PLANE FOUND AT THE PENTAGON WERE PLACED THERE LATER ON! THERE WAS NO DIBRIS FOUND DIRECTLY AFTER THE PLANE HIT! 
        You have to repeat yourself because your spouting complete fucking bullshit. 

        They used a special type of cruise missile (like the Taurius Systems one) launched from the Atlantic. It looks just like a plane, especially traveling at a high rate of speed. That’s what the witnesses saw…  

        There is a plethora of counters for all the crap theories you’re posting. 

        • Tuna Ghost

          THE PIECES OF PLANE FOUND AT THE PENTAGON WERE PLACED THERE LATER ON! THERE WAS NO DIBRIS FOUND DIRECTLY AFTER THE PLANE HIT!

          Rrright.  So they went and doctored some random pieces of a commercial jet (to look exactly like they would have had there been a crash) and scattered them liberally around the crash site?  In front of all the people watching?  And you know this how, exactly?  This is a prime example of using your conclusion to prove your argument.  

          “There was no plane crash!”
          “How do you know?”
          “There’s no debris!”  
          “Actually, yes there is.”
          “Well, then they brought it there after the crash!”
          “How do you know?”
          “Because there was no plane crash, so they must have!”

          The Taurius Systems missile looks nothing like a plane and doesn’t have the wingspan.  It’s not something that dozens of people, from multiple angles, from multiple distances, would have mistaken for a commercial jet, no matter how fast it was traveling (which everyone estimates was 300-400 mph).   

          There’s a reason why the most seasoned and well-spoken 9/11 Truthers have abandoned the missile theory.  Why don’t you look ask Cameron or Nano_Thermite why they don’t bother with it?  They’re rabid truthers, and not even they try to argue this.

      • Godozo

        There’s hundreds of cameras aimed at the Pentagon, and the only pictures we’ve gotten are fuzzy pictures from a guardhouse that shows no plane, a dodgy explosion and a shifting set of water droplets in a corner.

        Also, there were plenty of people who said they saw something that looked – and sounded – nothing like a commercial plane. More like a missile.

        Then there’s the amazing amateur pilot who was supposedly able to turn 360 degrees at the tightest radius possible (not likely, possible) while also dropping thousands of feet, then magically level off mere feet off the ground without disturbing the cars when it flew over the highway and hitting the exact spot where the fewest casualties would happen. And just so you think I’m talking out of my backside on this, here’s an example of what Jets can do:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTY2MG-AgKQ&feature=related

        Should we get some of the other angles AND they show a PLANE flying into the pentagon (and not just five iffy snaps, I want to see some motion), then I shall change my mind. Until then, I stand by the “missile hit the pentagon” theory.

        • Tuna Ghost

          Also, there were plenty of people who said they saw something that looked – and sounded – nothing like a commercial plane. More like a missile.

          Yeah, I hear people mention these witnesses, but I haven’t seen any statements from them.  Where are you getting this?  And how would they know what a missile sounds like?  And how do you explain the knocked-down lamp posts that describe the wingspan of a commercial jet?  

    • Tuna Ghost

      Dude.  Dozens of people, possibly hundreds, saw a goddam jet hit the pentagon.  Pieces of a commercial jet were found.  There are pictures of them.  As I’m getting tired of repeating, there’s no missile that can be mistaken for a commercial jet from 30 feet overhead.  

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

      It’s no surprise that most of the jet disintegrated on impact, just like the F4 Phantom in the video.  That’s a pretty common phenomenon.  Aluminum burns pretty easily.  Jets burn up just from the friction of skidding along the ground.  

  • Godozo

    It took me a few years to learn about the “conspiracy theories (translation: non-governmentally accepted theories)” of 9-11. But when I ran across them, they actually seemed to explain things a little bit better than the “official” story did.

    My thinking has, of course, changed over the years. Here’s my thoughts:

    Hijacked planes? Yes…by people who lived charmed lives up until the date they found themselves as additional passengers even though they were in the cockpit (yes, even the ones who sat in with the pilot in the four planes. Don’t nobody remember that nowadays…) when their planes were taken over on the ground.

    Explosives within the Twin Towers (and #7)? Of course. The twin towers had outlived their usefulness as buildings, and were going to cost billions to tear down (yes, they even had the plans…), and building 7 fell too neatly, even with the gouging in the building (should have fallen into the gouge, not straight down).

    The Pentagon? A missile…to cover for the plane that was shot down over the Kentucky/West Virginia/Ohio area (remember that detail? I do.).

    Flight 93? Shot down by a patriotic pilot under orders that were checked and rechecked, as he was trained to do in the case of a passenger plane. Wouldn’t surprise me if the passengers had started their rebellion, but there was no way for the pilot to know that.

    And…is this of any use? No, the time for the truth to have had an effect has passed. It will end up being picked on like the Kennedy and Lincoln Assassinations – fun and intellectually absorbing, but in the end a distraction from the present.

  • Tuna Ghost

    Same here. It’s blatantly obvious the US government doesn’t give a flying fuck about terror attacks, and it would have been cheaper, easier, and a hundred times safer from a deniability perspective to simply let one of the dozens of groups that desperately want to do it succeed. It’s how they operate overseas, why change tactics to something infinitely more dangerous Ina place where everyone is going to looking that much closer? It doesn’t make any damn sense.

  • Tuna Ghost

    Same here. It’s blatantly obvious the US government doesn’t give a flying fuck about terror attacks, and it would have been cheaper, easier, and a hundred times safer from a deniability perspective to simply let one of the dozens of groups that desperately want to do it succeed. It’s how they operate overseas, why change tactics to something infinitely more dangerous Ina place where everyone is going to looking that much closer? It doesn’t make any damn sense.

  • ArgosyJones

    Talking to a d-bag, obviously….

  • ArgosyJones

    Talking to a d-bag, obviously….

  • Tuna Ghost

    Controlled demo aside (that’s been done to death here), the middle theory is complete garbage for a number of reasons. Aside from the debris found (yes, debris was found, even though most of the plane disintegrated. The disintegration is not at all strange or unexpected, you canfind numerous videos of jets disintegrating on impact online. I’ll provide one if you like), and aside from the fact that you’d have to make a couple hundred people disappear off the face of the earth, aside from the phone calls from passengers to their families, and aside from the fact that not evn the most dyed-in-the-wool conspiracy theorists here think anything but a plane hit the pentagon, there were dozens of witnesses at the scene that saw a goddam jet hit the pentagon. It’s hard to mistake a huge fucking jet for anything else when it’s thirty feet over your head knocking a lamppost onto the hood of your car.

  • Tuna Ghost

    “if the comments section is any indicator…”

    Yeah there’s the problem right there. Don’t be fooled, the conspiracy theories are, for good or ill, still very much a minority opinion. Don’t expect that to change as even more time passes.

  • Tuna Ghost

    “I dont hang out with many delusional assholes”

    You really expect us to believe that, don’t you. Adorable.

  • Tuna Ghost

    “I dont hang out with many delusional assholes”

    You really expect us to believe that, don’t you. Adorable.

  • Tuna Ghost

    *missle theory

  • Tuna Ghost

    *missle theory

  • Tuna Ghost

    What if I told you I could provide you with a lucid, detailed, comprehensive explanation, complete with diagrams and backed up by quotes from first responders, explaining how WTC 7 could have easily collapsed from the massive inflight fires raging inside and a great goddam hole knocked in the side of the building from debris? Would you be interested in taking a look?

  • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

    I was on my easy chair after a long shift in the days after 9-11…when the official story kept changing hour by hour and details that had been apparent and accepted as factual days before were suddenly dropped and never discussed on air again despite the live footage from the initial chaos contradicting the later analysis.

    And I thought to myself…thats some conspiratorial bullshit right there. Amazing how they get every channel to follow the same script in the space of a week…or is that entirely coincidental? Conspiracy theorist my ass…I’d just settle for legitimate straight answers instead of lame dodges and pathetic slurs.

  • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

    I was on my easy chair after a long shift in the days after 9-11…when the official story kept changing hour by hour and details that had been apparent and accepted as factual days before were suddenly dropped and never discussed on air again despite the live footage from the initial chaos contradicting the later analysis.

    And I thought to myself…thats some conspiratorial bullshit right there. Amazing how they get every channel to follow the same script in the space of a week…or is that entirely coincidental? Conspiracy theorist my ass…I’d just settle for legitimate straight answers instead of lame dodges and pathetic slurs.

  • Tiger Russell

    I just couldn’t believe BOTH buildings fell straight down. Other than that and trade center three I think thought the story was and is mostly true. The best way to create a good lie is with a lot of truth involved.

  • Tiger Russell

    I just couldn’t believe BOTH buildings fell straight down. Other than that and trade center three I think thought the story was and is mostly true. The best way to create a good lie is with a lot of truth involved.

  • One Nation Under Surveillance

    the first time i heard a 911 conspiracy theory was when i watched the movie zeitgeist.  Im sure everyone interested in this topic understands what movie im referring to. It definitely opened my eyes.  So much so it changed how I viewed everything essentially.  But in a family where my dad is fuckin in counter terrorism for nsa I find it extraordinarily hard not being able to yell out liar every single time I hear the name George Bush on my tv.  So from me and the eager voices who are not being heard loud enough wake up and smell the lies AMERICA.  You have no idea that you are all being psychologically attacked by our government and I hope you see it before its too late.  

  • One Nation Under Surveillance

    the first time i heard a 911 conspiracy theory was when i watched the movie zeitgeist.  Im sure everyone interested in this topic understands what movie im referring to. It definitely opened my eyes.  So much so it changed how I viewed everything essentially.  But in a family where my dad is fuckin in counter terrorism for nsa I find it extraordinarily hard not being able to yell out liar every single time I hear the name George Bush on my tv.  So from me and the eager voices who are not being heard loud enough wake up and smell the lies AMERICA.  You have no idea that you are all being psychologically attacked by our government and I hope you see it before its too late.  

  • Skyshadow26

    Watch Loose Change now on netflix. Conspiracy theory has such a nasty stigma to it. Why don’t you just review the evidence before you say everything that is “labeled” as a conspiracy theory is idiocy, or speculation born out of hatred and paranoia. Just because you haven’t heard about it in a while doesn’t really mean shit. I this is a very important issue, (I realize that is redundant but here’s my point) unlike JFK or Pearl Harbor, we have some very serious evidence pointing to fowl play that can easily sway the public if they are simply informed. I sincerely hope Wikileaks cover’s the issue and does a good job, maybe that will get the public’s attention via the media.

    • Tuna Ghost

      I think the fact that no one has come to Wikileaks thus far argues against the likelihood of a controlled demolition.  Wikileaks is exactly why “The Government Knew About The Attacks And Allowed Them To Happen” is an infinitely more likely scenario.  

  • Skyshadow26

    Watch Loose Change now on netflix. Conspiracy theory has such a nasty stigma to it. Why don’t you just review the evidence before you say everything that is “labeled” as a conspiracy theory is idiocy, or speculation born out of hatred and paranoia. Just because you haven’t heard about it in a while doesn’t really mean shit. I this is a very important issue, (I realize that is redundant but here’s my point) unlike JFK or Pearl Harbor, we have some very serious evidence pointing to fowl play that can easily sway the public if they are simply informed. I sincerely hope Wikileaks cover’s the issue and does a good job, maybe that will get the public’s attention via the media.

  • Slammon Salmon

    They did test for explosives… Watch Loose Change. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E3oIbO0AWE&feature=related

  • Skyshadow26

    “In the History of Building fires only 3 have ever collapsed… All three happened on 9/11″
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uo7TOvHlk28WHAT ABOUT the THIRD BUILDING that “caught fire” and fell to the ground with out a plane even hitting it?
    -lots of buildings were impacted that were closer to the trade centers when they fell however none fully collapsed.
    WHAT ABOUT the other plane that was meant to hit the whitehouse? It was identified only as a hole in the ground.
    WHAT ABOUT the other plane that hit the pentagon? There was very little wreckage of that as well. There were video cameras filming it (security cameras) from across the street. They have only released a few frames?
    WHAT ABOUT the supposed highjacker who flew that plane and executed an impossible manuever when he could hardly fly a crop duster?
    WHAT ABOUT the message sent out that day to airtraffic controllers telling them about the wargame going on? The message said that they were simulating a situation in which planes would be run into buildings… 
    This message confused people into thinking it was only a simulation and not really happening? 
    I am not an expert but this is some troubling shit

  • Skyshadow26

    “In the History of Building fires only 3 have ever collapsed… All three happened on 9/11″
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uo7TOvHlk28WHAT ABOUT the THIRD BUILDING that “caught fire” and fell to the ground with out a plane even hitting it?
    -lots of buildings were impacted that were closer to the trade centers when they fell however none fully collapsed.
    WHAT ABOUT the other plane that was meant to hit the whitehouse? It was identified only as a hole in the ground.
    WHAT ABOUT the other plane that hit the pentagon? There was very little wreckage of that as well. There were video cameras filming it (security cameras) from across the street. They have only released a few frames?
    WHAT ABOUT the supposed highjacker who flew that plane and executed an impossible manuever when he could hardly fly a crop duster?
    WHAT ABOUT the message sent out that day to airtraffic controllers telling them about the wargame going on? The message said that they were simulating a situation in which planes would be run into buildings… 
    This message confused people into thinking it was only a simulation and not really happening? 
    I am not an expert but this is some troubling shit

  • Tuna Ghost

    I like how you slip that in at the end.  You won’t drag me back in, sir!  

  • RazorT33th

     I’d rather you stuck to shitty articles about hipsters or maybe just kept your opinions to yourself until you actually grow up.

  • Tuna Ghost

    I won’t get into the controlled demo issue, but the idea of a missile hitting the pentagon is completely ridiculous.  Aside from the fact that debris was found (there are pictures, if you’re interested), and the fact that it would leave hundreds of people disappearing off the face of the earth, there were dozens of witnesses that saw a jet slam into the pentagon.  Like I noted earlier, its hard to mistake an enormous jet for anything else when its 30 feet over your head knocking down lampposts onto the hood of your taxi.  

    Check out this video of an F4 Phantom slamming into a concrete wall.  The only thing left is the tips of the wings that, like in a cartoon, kept going after the body was disintegrated.  

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

  • Tuna Ghost

    I think the fact that no one has come to Wikileaks thus far argues against the likelihood of a controlled demolition.  Wikileaks is exactly why “The Government Knew About The Attacks And Allowed Them To Happen” is an infinitely more likely scenario.  

  • Tuna Ghost

    Dude.  Dozens of people, possibly hundreds, saw a goddam jet hit the pentagon.  Pieces of a commercial jet were found.  There are pictures of them.  As I’m getting tired of repeating, there’s no missile that can be mistaken for a commercial jet from 30 feet overhead.  

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

    It’s no surprise that most of the jet disintegrated on impact, just like the F4 Phantom in the video.  That’s a pretty common phenomenon.  Aluminum burns pretty easily.  Jets burn up just from the friction of skidding along the ground.  

  • Tuna Ghost

    Hate to break it to you, but you’re going to be disappointed. 

    Although I should clarify: if I were to learn that a small number of people high up in the Bush administration knew the attacks were planned and allowed them to happen, even going so far as to surreptitiously make sure none of the jets were shot down, I would not be surprised.  “The US doesn’t give a shit about terror attacks” is not even a controversial statement anymore (they don’t even try to hide this fact), so I’m not sure if this scenario counts as a “conspiracy theory”.  

  • Tuna Ghost

    What puzzles me is that, if the main thrust of the conspiracy theories are true (controlled demo to give the US an excuse to invade Iraq, among other things), then why wouldn’t the conspirators leave evidence that pointed to Iraq?  Why leave evidence that points to the Saudis, our supposed “friends”, evidence that the US went to great pains to cover up and not mention to anyone?  

  • Tuna Ghost

    also: They’re not my opinions, genius.  They’re published in an engineering/architecture publication.  If you want to see it, I’ll be happy to provide it. But I’m gathering that you aren’t interested in a lucid, detailed, comprehensive explanation, complete with diagrams and backed up by quotes from first responders, explaining how WTC 7 could have easily collapsed from the massive unfought fires raging inside and a great goddam hole knocked in the side of the building from debris. Now why would someone interested in 9/11 and the WTC 7 collapse not be interested in that?

  • 5by5

    Where was I? 

    I was standing in my living room watching the first tower going down and thinking to myself, “Reichtags Fire”, that’s where.

  • 5by5

    Where was I? 

    I was standing in my living room watching the first tower going down and thinking to myself, “Reichtags Fire”, that’s where.

  • 5by5

    And frankly, anyone who DIDN’T think that right off the top, either simply wasn’t paying attention, or didn’t live in the larger world outside of the Amerikan bubble.

    But if you’d seen the previous 20 years worth of terrorism in Europe, you’d have known that an attack of some sort on American soil was LONG overdue. And if you’d paid even moderate attention to the politics of the previous 40 years, you would have know that you had an illegitimate President-select in office who had some of the worst approval ratings, had been on vacation 40% of the time already and who was well on his way to being a one-termer prior to this little even, and you would have known that he has a psychotic nutbag with no boundaries as a Vice President who was leading him by the nose along with the rest of the NeoCon cabal who were desperate to get back in to the Middle East to start another war for oil, and that the Bush family itself has been up to its neck in enough coups to choke a horse, so thinking that they WOULDN’T at the very least exploit that day for political purposes or even help it along if they thought it would help their political objectives?

    That’s simply EVIAN spelled backwards.

    When you have a bunch of natural-born conspirators running the government, expecting a conspiracy of some sort or another to occur is simply INTELLIGENT.

    • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

      It only made things more suspect when people grasp that neo-cons who studied Leo Strauss’ Machiavellianism for a new century (complete with noble lie apologetics) are inclined to believe that the ends justifies any means. At that point…understanding their influences and political philosophy…if anyone still has warm trusty feelings about them…that person is beyond help.

  • 5by5

    And frankly, anyone who DIDN’T think that right off the top, either simply wasn’t paying attention, or didn’t live in the larger world outside of the Amerikan bubble.

    But if you’d seen the previous 20 years worth of terrorism in Europe, you’d have known that an attack of some sort on American soil was LONG overdue. And if you’d paid even moderate attention to the politics of the previous 40 years, you would have know that you had an illegitimate President-select in office who had some of the worst approval ratings, had been on vacation 40% of the time already and who was well on his way to being a one-termer prior to this little even, and you would have known that he has a psychotic nutbag with no boundaries as a Vice President who was leading him by the nose along with the rest of the NeoCon cabal who were desperate to get back in to the Middle East to start another war for oil, and that the Bush family itself has been up to its neck in enough coups to choke a horse, so thinking that they WOULDN’T at the very least exploit that day for political purposes or even help it along if they thought it would help their political objectives?

    That’s simply EVIAN spelled backwards.

    When you have a bunch of natural-born conspirators running the government, expecting a conspiracy of some sort or another to occur is simply INTELLIGENT.

  • Morgan

    Gotta say all these conspiracy theories are pretty ridiculous. Controlled demolitions, missile launches but have to say the best of all is the one about the planes being piloted Islamic extremists. Classic  

  • Morgan

    Gotta say all these conspiracy theories are pretty ridiculous. Controlled demolitions, missile launches but have to say the best of all is the one about the planes being piloted Islamic extremists. Classic  

  • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

    It only made things more suspect when people grasp that neo-cons who studied Leo Strauss’ Machiavellianism for a new century (complete with noble lie apologetics) are inclined to believe that the ends justifies any means. At that point…understanding their influences and political philosophy…if anyone still has warm trusty feelings about them…that person is beyond help.

  • Mysophobe

    In the WTC7 collapse videos I’ve seen, it sure looks like a simultaneous, catastrophic bottom-up structural failure. That said, I’m willing to entertain the possibility that the fascade peeling away from the structure created that effect. I’d like to see that link.

  • SundayAfternoon

    I am always interested in new information, but chances are, I’ve already seen it and moved on. Will you include the first responders that said they heard the countdown before the building came down? Maybe the audio of explosions just prior to the collapse? Or the news women that was told by firemen that they were going to bring the building down? You know, because of the “great goddam hole knocked in the side.” I agree, the building might have come down one way or another due to the massive damage done by the falling towers. Falling symmetrically at near-free-fall into its own footprint though, would not have happened in an asymmetrical gravity driven collapse. Thus the OBVIOUS demolition. 

    I think scientifically, we are past the point of conjecture. We are now looking for the “why it was demolished” and “how it was demolished” NOT “was it demolished, yes or no?” It’s beyond me why people try and refute the demolition of building 7. The building suffered from tremendous damage yes, but isn’t that another reason why they would have wanted it demolished? Take a look at WTC building 6 and see all the damage it suffered from, yet, it never collapsed… Steel-reinforced concrete buildings are built much stronger than you think. They DO NOT just collapse because of fire and a few damaged columns. It takes massive energy to bring a building down, sometimes more than the entire potential energy stored in the building itself. 

    Send me the link though. I’m sure I can find ‘some’ valid information there. 

  • Dueyv9

    For Christ’s sake Tuna, a F4 phantom isn’t what hit the pentagon…it was a huge fucking 747…IF you believe the official story. There are pictures of the pentagon where the “plane” hit BEFORE the wall collapsed…look at those….the lawn is still fresh. A professional couldn’t have pulled off what these flight school grads pulled off.

    Also, take a bunch of footage of controlled demolitions and throw the 2 towers into the mix anywhere in the video and tell me if you can spot a difference. A building falling on its own wouldn’t completely fall straight down in 7 seconds. Play a couple games of Jenga and figure it out.

  • Dueyv9

    For Christ’s sake Tuna, a F4 phantom isn’t what hit the pentagon…it was a huge fucking 747…IF you believe the official story. There are pictures of the pentagon where the “plane” hit BEFORE the wall collapsed…look at those….the lawn is still fresh. A professional couldn’t have pulled off what these flight school grads pulled off.

    Also, take a bunch of footage of controlled demolitions and throw the 2 towers into the mix anywhere in the video and tell me if you can spot a difference. A building falling on its own wouldn’t completely fall straight down in 7 seconds. Play a couple games of Jenga and figure it out.

  • Dueyv9

    For Christ’s sake Tuna, a F4 phantom isn’t what hit the
    pentagon…it was a huge fucking 747…IF you believe the official
    story. There are pictures of the pentagon where the “plane” hit BEFORE
    the wall collapsed…look at those….the lawn is still fresh. A
    professional couldn’t have pulled off what these flight school grads
    pulled off.Also, take a bunch of footage of controlled
    demolitions and throw the 2 towers into the mix anywhere in the video
    and tell me if you can spot a difference. A building falling on its own
    wouldn’t completely fall straight down in 7 seconds. Play a couple games
    of Jenga and figure it out.

    • Anarchy Pony

      Do you ever watch the vids? The fucking tops of the towers cascade down like a rubble waterfall, it looks nothing like a controlled demolition.

      • Godozo

        If the twin towers were exploded like a classic “controlled demolition,” it would have been a bit too obvious.

        Still, the twin towers fell a bit too quickly for it to be a mere “pancake collapse.” The way everything fell (atomized, falling all around) points to some help on the inside. If I were some of the companies and saw that, even with the planes flying into it, I would have looked into sueing for possible negligence against the city of New York and the Port Authority (especially for building seven, what was supposedly a structurally hardened building turned out to bee one that floated on three substandard post supports).

        • Tuna Ghost

          If the twin towers were exploded like a classic “controlled demolition,” it would have been a bit too obvious.

          So now the fact that it doesn’t look like a controlled demolition is proof that it was a controlled demolition.  Right.  I’m done with this.  

  • Dueyv9

    For Christ’s sake Tuna, a F4 phantom isn’t what hit the
    pentagon…it was a huge fucking 747…IF you believe the official
    story. There are pictures of the pentagon where the “plane” hit BEFORE
    the wall collapsed…look at those….the lawn is still fresh. A
    professional couldn’t have pulled off what these flight school grads
    pulled off.Also, take a bunch of footage of controlled
    demolitions and throw the 2 towers into the mix anywhere in the video
    and tell me if you can spot a difference. A building falling on its own
    wouldn’t completely fall straight down in 7 seconds. Play a couple games
    of Jenga and figure it out.

  • JAG

    Tuna Ghost, you are such a noob on 9/11…

    THE PIECES OF PLANE FOUND AT THE PENTAGON WERE PLACED THERE LATER ON! THERE WAS NO DIBRIS FOUND DIRECTLY AFTER THE PLANE HIT! 
    You have to repeat yourself because your spouting complete fucking bullshit. 

    They used a special type of cruise missile (like the Taurius Systems one) launched from the Atlantic. It looks just like a plane, especially traveling at a high rate of speed. That’s what the witnesses saw…  

    There is a plethora of counters for all the crap theories you’re posting. 

  • JAG

    Tuna Ghost, you are such a noob on 9/11…

    THE PIECES OF PLANE FOUND AT THE PENTAGON WERE PLACED THERE LATER ON! THERE WAS NO DIBRIS FOUND DIRECTLY AFTER THE PLANE HIT! 
    You have to repeat yourself because your spouting complete fucking bullshit. 

    They used a special type of cruise missile (like the Taurius Systems one) launched from the Atlantic. It looks just like a plane, especially traveling at a high rate of speed. That’s what the witnesses saw…  

    There is a plethora of counters for all the crap theories you’re posting. 

  • JAG

    Hes hopeless.. Let it go..  I think he has his head so far up the mainstream asshole he can’t see through the shit in his eyes. 

    Tuna you seriously FAIL at debunking. The debunkers are probably embarrassed reading your post. 

  • JZR

    In the end, it’s the WaPo trying to push their political agenda via Slate. On the backs of those who died in 9/11.

    Because of that, this outdoes WaPo’s most recent embrassment, the bizarre defending of Murdoch’s phone hacking crimes (long has it been rumored Murdoch “owns” WaPo) – and now this one…Murdoch has his US    elements hacking 9/11 victims phones, families, survivors, and anyone who figured out anything about GZ by just being there. In some cases, we know first hand who Murdoh’s  “elements” sent to NY were (at least in 2001 and 2002) and their connecitons with WaPo and Murdoc’s empire are solid.

    Now this interesting Slate ploy about “conspiracy”. Everyone who seriously follows “our shit” especially the insiders, knows the US Intel disinformation machine was called into action ca. July 2001.So we have US government sponsored disinfo, and through MSM and other foundations on both sides of the aisle, privately funded disinfo. Through articles like this in Slate, there’s no knowing which is which, and in fact, big business/government keeps it that way.

    And yet, Jones and Ruppert were (and still are, for some things) paid by various “interests” at times to do what they do so well. With so much disinfo chaff in the air, the truth is not just completely hidden from “we the people”, it sets us against each other. Just the way the criminals who pulled  of 9/11 want it.

    The strawman fallacy so cleverly played by Slate is that everything these two  write about is false… the old ploy where “definitive books” are paid to be written about big US crimes, 99.9% is true and the critical last page has the whopper of a lie. Jones and Ruppert have done a lot of disservice in that respect, but they have also put very good material out there. How does  the avg person know what is what? In the end, they also divide. Game.

    The most laughable thing about Slate paying  Stahl to write on this subject, is one word: Dickerson. Dickerson is Chief Editor of Slate and best buds with Joe Wilson. Wilson, bedroom friends with the likes of the most heinous “conspiracy author in DC”, (and I quote MSM, ex-owner of Slate!)  Madsen… and fed him all sorts of stuff…as did LaRouche-  now we find that Dickerson was the one who was told by Libby about Plame, and inside sources say he was the one who leaked the name, then went on to make money off books and movies about how dastardly everyone else was in leaking Plame’s name.

    Whatever.

    When you see Slate jump into the fray, it is indeed time to put your tin foil spectacles on while reading.

    9/11 was never just about murdering 3,000 innocents, or starting wars, or oil, or food, or water, or China: it was about starting a process that would have “America fall from within” – so we can all thank Slate for helping those that would see America fail along this milestone. It is exactly insidioous disinfo articles like Stahl’s that push us inexorably down this road: another inside terrorist attack on the truth.

  • JZR

    In the end, it’s the WaPo trying to push their political agenda via Slate. On the backs of those who died in 9/11.

    Because of that, this outdoes WaPo’s most recent embrassment, the bizarre defending of Murdoch’s phone hacking crimes (long has it been rumored Murdoch “owns” WaPo) – and now this one…Murdoch has his US    elements hacking 9/11 victims phones, families, survivors, and anyone who figured out anything about GZ by just being there. In some cases, we know first hand who Murdoh’s  “elements” sent to NY were (at least in 2001 and 2002) and their connecitons with WaPo and Murdoc’s empire are solid.

    Now this interesting Slate ploy about “conspiracy”. Everyone who seriously follows “our shit” especially the insiders, knows the US Intel disinformation machine was called into action ca. July 2001.So we have US government sponsored disinfo, and through MSM and other foundations on both sides of the aisle, privately funded disinfo. Through articles like this in Slate, there’s no knowing which is which, and in fact, big business/government keeps it that way.

    And yet, Jones and Ruppert were (and still are, for some things) paid by various “interests” at times to do what they do so well. With so much disinfo chaff in the air, the truth is not just completely hidden from “we the people”, it sets us against each other. Just the way the criminals who pulled  of 9/11 want it.

    The strawman fallacy so cleverly played by Slate is that everything these two  write about is false… the old ploy where “definitive books” are paid to be written about big US crimes, 99.9% is true and the critical last page has the whopper of a lie. Jones and Ruppert have done a lot of disservice in that respect, but they have also put very good material out there. How does  the avg person know what is what? In the end, they also divide. Game.

    The most laughable thing about Slate paying  Stahl to write on this subject, is one word: Dickerson. Dickerson is Chief Editor of Slate and best buds with Joe Wilson. Wilson, bedroom friends with the likes of the most heinous “conspiracy author in DC”, (and I quote MSM, ex-owner of Slate!)  Madsen… and fed him all sorts of stuff…as did LaRouche-  now we find that Dickerson was the one who was told by Libby about Plame, and inside sources say he was the one who leaked the name, then went on to make money off books and movies about how dastardly everyone else was in leaking Plame’s name.

    Whatever.

    When you see Slate jump into the fray, it is indeed time to put your tin foil spectacles on while reading.

    9/11 was never just about murdering 3,000 innocents, or starting wars, or oil, or food, or water, or China: it was about starting a process that would have “America fall from within” – so we can all thank Slate for helping those that would see America fail along this milestone. It is exactly insidioous disinfo articles like Stahl’s that push us inexorably down this road: another inside terrorist attack on the truth.

  • Wanooski

    Do you ever watch the vids? The fucking tops of the towers cascade down like a rubble waterfall, it looks nothing like a controlled demolition.

  • JZR

    (That should have been MSN – the ex-owner of Slate ).

    PS Want the names of those in WaPo who worked for Murdoch and came to GZ to sit outside people’s windows and listen in, and hack phones – look at who their and WSJ’s MidEast correspondents were… that’s what jacks like Slate writers should be doing, if they were true Americans. But hey, Stahl must slurp his $10 a cup Latte as he twitters his crap,  and he could care less about his coffee bought with 9/11 blood money.

    What Slate writers should be doing is showing the connection between Dickerson’s boy, Joe Wilson, and the MidEast/Scandinavian countries big-oil money – his Directorship on companies that owned oil fields in Libya on 9/11 for Chrissakes. And then his wife is CIA so what, they all are connected and corrupt that way, so what was their game?  To create an artificial international embroglio – to muddy the waters on investigations specifically getting underway for 9/11 again at the time, and specifcally shut down – thanks to Dickerson’s of Slate antics….

    … and now this wet-behind-the-ears twit writes this stuff. Lawd, what I wouldn’t give for a 10 year time machine to take that skunk Stahl to the top of one of the Towers and ask him if 10 years later he would pull off an information terrorist job in the names of those dying before his eyes.

  • JZR

    (That should have been MSN – the ex-owner of Slate ).

    PS Want the names of those in WaPo who worked for Murdoch and came to GZ to sit outside people’s windows and listen in, and hack phones – look at who their and WSJ’s MidEast correspondents were… that’s what jacks like Slate writers should be doing, if they were true Americans. But hey, Stahl must slurp his $10 a cup Latte as he twitters his crap,  and he could care less about his coffee bought with 9/11 blood money.

    What Slate writers should be doing is showing the connection between Dickerson’s boy, Joe Wilson, and the MidEast/Scandinavian countries big-oil money – his Directorship on companies that owned oil fields in Libya on 9/11 for Chrissakes. And then his wife is CIA so what, they all are connected and corrupt that way, so what was their game?  To create an artificial international embroglio – to muddy the waters on investigations specifically getting underway for 9/11 again at the time, and specifcally shut down – thanks to Dickerson’s of Slate antics….

    … and now this wet-behind-the-ears twit writes this stuff. Lawd, what I wouldn’t give for a 10 year time machine to take that skunk Stahl to the top of one of the Towers and ask him if 10 years later he would pull off an information terrorist job in the names of those dying before his eyes.

  • Tyler Durden

    “Conspiracy theories thrive by appealing to existing hatred, paranoia, and uncertainty.” That straw man reveals the true purpose of this piece. Can’t have the ten year anniversary bringing to surface the doubts that discerning thinkers have about the events of that day now, can we?

  • Tyler Durden

    “Conspiracy theories thrive by appealing to existing hatred, paranoia, and uncertainty.” That straw man reveals the true purpose of this piece. Can’t have the ten year anniversary bringing to surface the doubts that discerning thinkers have about the events of that day now, can we?

  • Dreams

    WTF? I never said anything about any controlled demo..  The missile wasn’t my idea either.. I just said there was no tape that ever surfaced showing a plane hitting the pentagon. Which makes me skeptical of the official story. Which I also think sounds dumber than a bad movie plot.

    I think you were to quick to jump the gun. Do you have something against truthers or something? I’m not one of them!  

    FYI- That F4 Phantom video is mad cool, but it has nothing to do with 9/11. ;-)

  • You Weren’t There so STFU

    Or the news women that was told by firemen that they were going to bring the building down?

    She wasn’t a “news women”.
    Get the CNN – or any NY radio tapes- for 9/13.
    At 12-1pm you will hear them say that 1 Liberty which had been damaged, and leaning, had come down.

  • JAG

    How do you know he/she wasn’t there? 

    And what the hell point are you trying to make anyways? 

  • Yer Mom

    Well, this won’t count for anything, except to myself, BUT…

    Prior to September, 2001 I had been saying for at least a decade
    that there would be an attack on U.S. soil, that was domestic in origin.
    It would be used to undo constitutional rights, diminish personal freedoms,
    and allow for greater surveillancemonitoring, invasion of privacy etc.

    On that September day, 2001, as soon as I heard the news I thought to
    myself “Well, it finally happened.” The friends and family I had been preaching it
    to were all a little freaked in light of the prediction I had been so insistent
    upon. No one said it, but we all knew everyone was thinking it – “He was right”

    I would have rather been wrong

  • Yer Mom

    Well, this won’t count for anything, except to myself, BUT…

    Prior to September, 2001 I had been saying for at least a decade
    that there would be an attack on U.S. soil, that was domestic in origin.
    It would be used to undo constitutional rights, diminish personal freedoms,
    and allow for greater surveillancemonitoring, invasion of privacy etc.

    On that September day, 2001, as soon as I heard the news I thought to
    myself “Well, it finally happened.” The friends and family I had been preaching it
    to were all a little freaked in light of the prediction I had been so insistent
    upon. No one said it, but we all knew everyone was thinking it – “He was right”

    I would have rather been wrong

  • Yer Mom

    Well, this won’t count for anything, except to myself, BUT…

    Prior to September, 2001 I had been saying for at least a decade
    that there would be an attack on U.S. soil, that was domestic in origin.
    It would be used to undo constitutional rights, diminish personal freedoms,
    and allow for greater surveillancemonitoring, invasion of privacy etc.

    On that September day, 2001, as soon as I heard the news I thought to
    myself “Well, it finally happened.” The friends and family I had been preaching it
    to were all a little freaked in light of the prediction I had been so insistent
    upon. No one said it, but we all knew everyone was thinking it – “He was right”

    I would have rather been wrong

  • Yer Mom

    Well, this won’t count for anything, except to myself, BUT…

    Prior to September, 2001 I had been saying for at least a decade
    that there would be an attack on U.S. soil, that was domestic in origin.
    It would be used to undo constitutional rights, diminish personal freedoms,
    and allow for greater surveillancemonitoring, invasion of privacy etc.

    On that September day, 2001, as soon as I heard the news I thought to
    myself “Well, it finally happened.” The friends and family I had been preaching it
    to were all a little freaked in light of the prediction I had been so insistent
    upon. No one said it, but we all knew everyone was thinking it – “He was right”

    I would have rather been wrong

  • Yer Mom

    Oh, Majestic –

    Where was I when I first read one of your crap articles?

  • Yer Mom

    Oh, Majestic –

    Where was I when I first read one of your crap articles?

  • Yer Mom

    Oh, Majestic –

    Where was I when I first read one of your crap articles?

  • Yer Mom

    Oh, Majestic –

    Where was I when I first read one of your crap articles?

  • Godozo

    There’s hundreds of cameras aimed at the Pentagon, and the only pictures we’ve gotten are fuzzy pictures from a guardhouse that shows no plane, a dodgy explosion and a shifting set of water droplets in a corner.

    Also, there were plenty of people who said they saw something that looked – and sounded – nothing like a commercial plane. More like a missile.

    Then there’s the amazing amateur pilot who was supposedly able to turn 360 degrees at the tightest radius possible (not likely, possible) while also dropping thousands of feet, then magically level off mere feet off the ground without disturbing the cars when it flew over the highway and hitting the exact spot where the fewest casualties would happen. And just so you think I’m talking out of my backside on this, here’s an example of what Jets can do:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTY2MG-AgKQ&feature=related

    Should we get some of the other angles AND they show a PLANE flying into the pentagon (and not just five iffy snaps, I want to see some motion), then I shall change my mind. Until then, I stand by the “missile hit the pentagon” theory.

  • Godozo

    If the twin towers were exploded like a classic “controlled demolition,” it would have been a bit too obvious.

    Still, the twin towers fell a bit too quickly for it to be a mere “pancake collapse.” The way everything fell (atomized, falling all around) points to some help on the inside. If I were some of the companies and saw that, even with the planes flying into it, I would have looked into sueing for possible negligence against the city of New York and the Port Authority (especially for building seven, what was supposedly a structurally hardened building turned out to bee one that floated on three substandard post supports).

  • Tuna Ghost

    Also, there were plenty of people who said they saw something that looked – and sounded – nothing like a commercial plane. More like a missile.

    Yeah, I hear people mention these witnesses, but I haven’t seen any statements from them.  Where are you getting this?  And how would they know what a missile sounds like?  And how do you explain the knocked-down lamp posts that describe the wingspan of a commercial jet?  

  • Tuna Ghost

    THE PIECES OF PLANE FOUND AT THE PENTAGON WERE PLACED THERE LATER ON! THERE WAS NO DIBRIS FOUND DIRECTLY AFTER THE PLANE HIT!

    Rrright.  So they went and doctored some random pieces of a commercial jet (to look exactly like they would have had there been a crash) and scattered them liberally around the crash site?  In front of all the people watching?  And you know this how, exactly?  This is a prime example of using your conclusion to prove your argument.  

    “There was no plane crash!”
    “How do you know?”
    “There’s no debris!”  
    “Actually, yes there is.”
    “Well, then they brought it there after the crash!”
    “How do you know?”
    “Because there was no plane crash, so they must have!”

    The Taurius Systems missile looks nothing like a plane and doesn’t have the wingspan.  It’s not something that dozens of people, from multiple angles, from multiple distances, would have mistaken for a commercial jet, no matter how fast it was traveling (which everyone estimates was 300-400 mph).   

    There’s a reason why the most seasoned and well-spoken 9/11 Truthers have abandoned the missile theory.  Why don’t you look ask Cameron or Nano_Thermite why they don’t bother with it?  They’re rabid truthers, and not even they try to argue this.

  • Tuna Ghost

    For Christ’s sake Tuna, a F4 phantom isn’t what hit the pentagon…it was a huge fucking 747…
    Which means more mass heading into the collision and more fuel.  Like I said, commercial jet liners will burn away to almost nothing just by skidding along the ground for a few miles without crashing into anything.  The size of the plane is unimportant.  

    Given the amount of doctored photographs I have been provided by Truthers, I doubt your photos are very incriminating, but I’m willing to take a look.  

  • Tuna Ghost

    A professional couldn’t have pulled off what these flight school grads pulled off.

    Yeah I’ve been hearing a lot of people who aren’t pilots say this.  

  • Tuna Ghost

    Yeah I looked at your post, and you’re correct.  I think I meant to respond to someone else, my bad. 

    It is pretty rad, isn’t it.  

  • Tuna Ghost

    If the twin towers were exploded like a classic “controlled demolition,” it would have been a bit too obvious.

    So now the fact that it doesn’t look like a controlled demolition is proof that it was a controlled demolition.  Right.  I’m done with this.  

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Faceless-Anarkest/100001973641169 Faceless Anarkest

    disinfo is disinfo.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Faceless-Anarkest/100001973641169 Faceless Anarkest

    disinfo is disinfo.

  • ….

    especially with the name drinky mcgee

  • ….

    One thing is wonder about is how did the terrorists get the box-cutters on the plane, I’m pretty sure knifes weren’t allowed on planes and metal detectors exists. And isn’t there an air-marshal on every plane with at least a taser, and if there were 3-4 guys with small knifes vs. 100+ people I’m pretty sure they would do something. a razor blade with a handle isn’t a very significant weapon. Plus to not sacrifice yourself, knowing you will die if these guys succeed, shows that the planes were filled with outrageously cowardly people. But i don’t have all the facts or the time to go searching for the truth about something which has so many sides its just become a circle of lies.

  • ….

    One thing is wonder about is how did the terrorists get the box-cutters on the plane, I’m pretty sure knifes weren’t allowed on planes and metal detectors exists. And isn’t there an air-marshal on every plane with at least a taser, and if there were 3-4 guys with small knifes vs. 100+ people I’m pretty sure they would do something. a razor blade with a handle isn’t a very significant weapon. Plus to not sacrifice yourself, knowing you will die if these guys succeed, shows that the planes were filled with outrageously cowardly people. But i don’t have all the facts or the time to go searching for the truth about something which has so many sides its just become a circle of lies.

    • Tuna Ghost

      Actually, pre-9/11 I had brought knives on planes in my carry-on luggage or on my person with relative ease.  Half the time it was on accident, I didn’t even know I had it with me until I had landed and was already unpacking.  

      Plus to not sacrifice yourself, knowing you will die if these guys succeed, shows that the planes were filled with outrageously cowardly people.

      In their defense, it wasn’t as if a dude was brandishing a box cutter and saying “nobody move, we’re gonna crash this thing into a building so you all just stay in your seats”.  They likely had the blade to someone’s throat and threatened to kill them if anyone so much as stood up.  Also, the passengers were not aware that it was a suicide mission, they probably figured that if they kept quiet the plane would eventually land safely and they’d be released.  

  • Tuna Ghost

    Actually, pre-9/11 I had brought knives on planes in my carry-on luggage or on my person with relative ease.  Half the time it was on accident, I didn’t even know I had it with me until I had landed and was already unpacking.  

    Plus to not sacrifice yourself, knowing you will die if these guys succeed, shows that the planes were filled with outrageously cowardly people.

    In their defense, it wasn’t as if a dude was brandishing a box cutter and saying “nobody move, we’re gonna crash this thing into a building so you all just stay in your seats”.  They likely had the blade to someone’s throat and threatened to kill them if anyone so much as stood up.  Also, the passengers were not aware that it was a suicide mission, they probably figured that if they kept quiet the plane would eventually land safely and they’d be released.  

  • Tuna Ghost

    For the record, people were very worried that WTC 6 would collapse, which is why they pulled it down with cables.  They were going to do the same with WTC 7 (hence the confusion around the orders to “pull it”) except it collapsed first.  There are several quotes from emergency personnel about how they knew WTC 7 was going to fall just by looking at it, which is why they pulled everyone out as quickly as they could.  

    Here’s the link:

    http://www.structuremag.org/article.aspx?articleID=284

    It explains in clear and lucid terms, complete with diagrams, how unfought fires combined with a huge goddam hole knocked in the wall (taking out a very important column) by debris could cause the building to collapse.  It’s not something anyone could have predicted, but then again 9/11 and the damage the debris caused is not something anyone could have expected.  The article ends with a recommendation that future building design take the lessons WTC 7 offers to mind when they build.  

    What problems are you seeing in the explanation?  I ask Truthers this but none of them can point to something they disagree with, they simply repeat the same questions that are in fact answered in the article.  

  • Tuna Ghost

    No problem.

    http://www.structuremag.org/article.aspx?articleID=284

    The article points out that no one expected a single point of failure to be so catastrophic, but also that the damage caused by debris is something no one could have predicted when designing a building.  

  • Mysophobe

    Thanks for the link. I by no means claim to be anything resembling an expert, but I’m having some trouble with the author’s theory of what led to the global collapse. If I understand correctly, a single column that was not initially damaged by falling debris was later compromised by fire. This column failed completely, initiating a chain reaction that resulted in global collapse of the partially compromised building. I’m not contesting that this column was a single point of failure, but rather that it failed at all. The column was most certainly over-engineered by a factor of 2 and sporting a fire protection barrier rated for at least 2 hours. The fire was presumably fueled by mostly paper, plastic and other office type material, so not a steel-melting blast furnace by any means. Even if this column were completely surrounded by a long-burning, 1000 degree+ fire, I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t lose anything close to 50% of it’s strength, remaining well within design limits. Recall that the twin tower collapses were supposedly initiated by weakening by fire of horizontal members. A vertical member, even when horribly weakened, simply does not have the same forces acting on it. Apples and oranges here, but I have been amazed by how compromised a wooden column can become before it stops doing it’s job. I’m talking 90% compromised or more. I became convinced when the author stated that he was able to replicate the videotaped event by COMPLETELY REMOVING the suspect column from his model. Also, who designs a modern building with a single point of failure that could lead to at least partial collapse like that? I think the author has correctly identified what is happening in the videos after the failure, but I’m still stuck on what exactly caused the complete failure of that particular column. Thoughts?

  • Mysophobe

    Thanks for the link. I by no means claim to be anything resembling an expert, but I’m having some trouble with the author’s theory of what led to the global collapse. If I understand correctly, a single column that was not initially damaged by falling debris was later compromised by fire. This column failed completely, initiating a chain reaction that resulted in global collapse of the partially compromised building. I’m not contesting that this column was a single point of failure, but rather that it failed at all. The column was most certainly over-engineered by a factor of 2 and sporting a fire protection barrier rated for at least 2 hours. The fire was presumably fueled by mostly paper, plastic and other office type material, so not a steel-melting blast furnace by any means. Even if this column were completely surrounded by a long-burning, 1000 degree+ fire, I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t lose anything close to 50% of it’s strength, remaining well within design limits. Recall that the twin tower collapses were supposedly initiated by weakening by fire of horizontal members. A vertical member, even when horribly weakened, simply does not have the same forces acting on it. Apples and oranges here, but I have been amazed by how compromised a wooden column can become before it stops doing it’s job. I’m talking 90% compromised or more. I became convinced when the author stated that he was able to replicate the videotaped event by COMPLETELY REMOVING the suspect column from his model. Also, who designs a modern building with a single point of failure that could lead to at least partial collapse like that? I think the author has correctly identified what is happening in the videos after the failure, but I’m still stuck on what exactly caused the complete failure of that particular column. Thoughts?

  • Mysophobe

    Thanks for the info! I accidentally posted my reply yonder downthread.

  • pepe le pue

    1) Fact: Dubya stole the election. Gore was the winner in the popular and electoral college tallies. He inherited a multi billion dollar surplus upon assuming his bought and paid for office.

    2) Fact: The more the neocons attack the truth movement,the more right wing shills attack each and every truth oriented post on this website,the more any thinking rational person would connect the dots.What are they so afraid of?

    3) The CIA false flag ‘Operation Northwoods’ plan put forth in the vietnam era is so eerily identical to the ‘911 attacks’ it is nauseating.

    4) From the horse’s mouth: “If the American people really knew
    what we had done, we would be chased down the street and lynched.” —
    President George H.W.Bush to White House correspondent Sara McClendon,
    1992  someone care to step up and wave the flag and hum some Lee Greenwood at me after THAT little gem?

  • pepe le pue

    1) Fact: Dubya stole the election. Gore was the winner in the popular and electoral college tallies. He inherited a multi billion dollar surplus upon assuming his bought and paid for office.

    2) Fact: The more the neocons attack the truth movement,the more right wing shills attack each and every truth oriented post on this website,the more any thinking rational person would connect the dots.What are they so afraid of?

    3) The CIA false flag ‘Operation Northwoods’ plan put forth in the vietnam era is so eerily identical to the ‘911 attacks’ it is nauseating.

    4) From the horse’s mouth: “If the American people really knew
    what we had done, we would be chased down the street and lynched.” —
    President George H.W.Bush to White House correspondent Sara McClendon,
    1992  someone care to step up and wave the flag and hum some Lee Greenwood at me after THAT little gem?

  • Deep7

    Because the drug trade and oil pipeline via Afghanistan were the prime concern. Since the ra-ra Americanism was going so well, they knew they could push for Iraq on pure rhetoric.

  • Deep7

    Because the drug trade and oil pipeline via Afghanistan were the prime concern. Since the ra-ra Americanism was going so well, they knew they could push for Iraq on pure rhetoric.

21