The Psychology of Mass Denial: 9/11 Truth and Cognitive Dissonance

“Explosive Evidence:  Experts Speak Out” by the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

Join 23-year architect Richard Gage, AIA, in this feature length documentary with cutting-edge 9/11 evidence from more than 50 top experts in their fields — high-rise architects, structural engineers, physicists, chemical engineers, firefighters, metallurgists, explosives experts, controlled demolition technicians, and more. Each is highly qualified in his/her respective fields. Several have Ph.D’s — including National Medal of Science awardee Lynn Margulis. She, along with the other experts, exposes the fraud of NIST and discusses how the scientific method should have been applied and acknowledges the “overwhelming” evidence of high temperature incendiaries in all dust samples of the WTC. High-rise architects and structural engineers layout the evidence in the features of the destruction of these three high-rises that point inevitably to explosive controlled demolition.

161 Comments on "The Psychology of Mass Denial: 9/11 Truth and Cognitive Dissonance"

  1. I have seen so much evidence now to prove what really happened on 9/11. Why anyone disputes it amazes me. Obama should hold a full investigation about it. And G Bush should be held accountable.

    • Camron Wiltshire | Sep 3, 2012 at 8:34 am |

       I agree but don’t expect the puppets to bite the hand that feeds/controls them.

  2. Eleana Winter-Irving | Sep 3, 2012 at 12:42 am |

    Also I heard Osama bin Laden say that he had nothing to do with 9/11, but decided to take the qudos for it, as that was what was being bandied around. The pilots were all known to US Gov. b4 hand. And some had been on secret payroll.

  3. 911 is now one of a long list of government cover-ups
    but it’s also pretty clear that the herd doesn’t care
    the herd’s not in denial, they just don’t friggin care
    the herd can only care about what its told to care about
    they ain’t waking-up folks, no matter how much noise is made
    911 simply continues to suck energy & time from the few remaining who can still think

    • Camron Wiltshire | Sep 3, 2012 at 6:24 am |

      In the words of the great Lebowski, “well…that’s just like your opinion man.”
      I understand your sentiment but disagree with your statement,

       “911 simply continues to suck energy & time from the few remaining who can still think.”

      What 9/11 can do is help those who can still think but are still cloudy, make the break away from the complete indoctrination and submission they have been force fed masqueraded as the “American dream.”

      Also we have to remember it’s going to take time for any of this to sink in on a level where it leads to direct action and adjustment in one’s personal life.  We can plant seeds and hopefully in time they will bear fruit.  Some of us are well ahead and knew the scam intuitively if not explicitly on various levels, now more than ever even the crustiest of third eyes is vibrating more intently

      9/11 is a mighty Excalibur when wielded properly.  I guess it depends on whether the were with all exists to wield this sword of reason or not in the initiate.

      Take care Buzz 🙂

      • Monkey See Monkey Do | Sep 3, 2012 at 8:13 am |

        Lets just say hypothetically that Islamic extremists were mostly behind 9-11 and any american involvement was mostly negligible. Say hypothetically the extremists were centered in Afghanistan.  Would you think that might make invasion of Aghanistan valid? I think thats always an interesting question to put towards people.

        • Camron Wiltshire | Sep 3, 2012 at 8:32 am |

           Not really into abstract hypothesis that are not born out by the massive amount of available evidence. 

          • correct me if i’m wrong but i think he was trying to ask if the war in afganistan was justified even IF the standard 9/11 story was true.

          • Camron Wiltshire | Sep 3, 2012 at 10:48 am |

            In a sense but as I stated below I don’t have time to venture down that particular cul de sac of “reason”.

          • there’s nothing wrong with a little thought experimentation, but at the same time I also have a little distaste for hypotheticals

          • Monkey See Monkey Do | Sep 4, 2012 at 4:44 am |

            Pretty much. It certainly shows another side to the plight of many 9-11 truthers. There not necessarily anti-war (I’m sure Camron is anti-war) but many are just anti-government and are looking for a really direct and simple way of showing how corrupt it is.

        • Why hypothesize? We know for a fact that most of the 9/11 hijackers hailed from Saudi Arabia. Why didn’t we attack there? Oh right..politics.

          • Camron Wiltshire | Sep 3, 2012 at 10:45 am |

             Your assuming that we know they were the hijackers.  How are we so sure of this supposed fact? 

          • BrianApocalypse | Sep 3, 2012 at 10:51 am |

            If the official story about the hijackers is a fiction then why did the ‘writers’ decide to make them mostly from Saudi Arabia?

          • Jesus Borg | Sep 3, 2012 at 6:13 pm |

            Who gives a shit. It was a controlled demolition. Controlled demolitiopn means it was from the inside.

          • OneOfMany | Sep 3, 2012 at 10:15 pm |

             It is about opportunism, taking advantage of what is available. They are names and faces that could be shown and that is all that is needed for most people especially when you play on emotions, maybe send a signal or two along the way to others… I mean really the potential motives for “how” or “why” it was these people is huge and a job for the real investigation.

        • Riz Lacroix | Sep 3, 2012 at 3:01 pm |

          it’s a moot point, considering the Taliban offered to negotiate OBL’s extradition in exchange for any evidence of his guilt.  Colin Powell promised to do so, then reneged, then the invasion began.

          “Anyone who is responsible for this act, Osama or not, we will not side with him. We told [the Pakistan delegation] to give us proof that he did it, because without that how can we give him up?” Taliban Information Minister, Qudrutullah Jamal (Independent, 19 Sept. 2001, p. 1)

          UN Charter, Article 33:
          The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.

        •  Let’s look at it the other way. The majority of the terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, it was funded out of Saudi Arabia and Saudi Arabian financial firms were linked to the shorting of US Airline stocks.
          What did the US do against Saudi Arabia, ‘er’, nothing at all. Now something well and truly stinks about that.

    • Jesus Borg | Sep 3, 2012 at 8:31 am |

      I think the biggest energy suck and misdirection is party politics, Democrat vs. Republican.

      When a person comes to the realization that 9/11 was a false flag, inside, controlled demolition, etc. What happens is an extreme disillusionment with the establishment as a whole, Republicans and Democrats included and all the Major Institutional Organizations, like Banks, Big Corporations, Military Intelligence, etc.

      As Far as an alternative, nothing has really gelled. So then what happens is you get sucked back into conformity sort of like playing dumb in order not too stand out too much and be ostracized.

      But anyway once you wake up to the situation you can’t go back.

      But partly its a False Flag that is kind of like an IQ test. It tests how much you trust your own mind vs. the establishment. Anyone who can’t see through it is kind of a dumb fuck at this point. So as far as a broad scale populist movement it probably won’t happen, because the average person is probably not intelligent enough to see it without authority figures telling them, which will never happen unless all the Institional authority is over turned in favor of a new order.

      So basically its a wake up call to intelligent people to realize how much agency they have given up. So ten years late its still a big “Oh shit!” moment and not much more.

      Its good to remember though. Its like “Oh, that’s right. I forgot. I’m nearly completely powerless and none of these institutions really have my best interests in mind”

      But, hey, the alternative is to be a dumb fuck living in a fairy tale.

      • charlieprimero | Sep 3, 2012 at 9:33 am |

         Well said JB. 

        • Jesus Borg | Sep 3, 2012 at 1:45 pm |

          Thanks, man. What gives me some hope is that most people in their 20’s are pretty much onto it. Eventually the baby Boomers will all be retired or dead and at some point people will realize they aren’t as fringe as they thought they were. I know its happened to me a lot, running into people talking about it I wouldn’t have suspected.

      • That was very well said indeed, JB.  The “IQ test” part is so fitting. The only part I would tweak is not that ” 9/11 was a false flag, inside, controlled demolition, etc.” but that it was all a “made-for-TV-horror-movie” wrapped around the high-tech demolition of the WTC complex.  None of it was real except the demolitions themselves, or at least that’s all there’s evidence for.

  4. feint_ruled | Sep 3, 2012 at 8:46 am |

    The thing is, all these points have been rebutted by other experts in the same field. See for example.

    Now it comes down to which expert you believe. So why believe these guys over the the skeptics? Some gut feeling that there “must” be a conspiracy?

    • Camron Wiltshire | Sep 3, 2012 at 9:28 am |

       Actually it comes down to whether or not you believe the laws of physics are indifferent or not to the ideology of those considering them.  How do you explain Building 7’s obvious controlled demolition?  Do you believe the government’s “official” fairy tale version?  What mechanism fells a 610 foot building in such a manner in your opinion since you are presuming that your favored “sceptics” are somehow inherently correct because they abide by the government’s version of events.  Do tell….

      • feint_ruled | Sep 3, 2012 at 12:05 pm |

        You see, that’s just what I mean. Obviously I can’t explain the fall of Building 7 as I am no expert! But I can find plenty of experts who claim to be able to, just as plausibly as those who claim an explosive explanation. Example:

        So, which experts do I choose to believe?

        • BrianApocalypse | Sep 3, 2012 at 12:38 pm |

           For most people this comes down to which version of reality you want to believe in. I still have questions about what happened on 9/11, but I’m not as sure it’s all a conspiracy as I used to be.

          During the height of my interest in 9/11 truth, when I was convinced without doubt it was a conspiracy, I watched a documentary that debunked the conspiracy theories and I remember feeling this sense of unease and cognitive dissonance as my logical mind came in to conflict with my belief system.

          I had to admit that I *wanted* the conspiracy theories to be true, because I had invested a great deal of time and belief not only into 9/11 theories, but also into the wider arena of the “conspiracy world” (you know, Illuminati, NWO, all that stuff). In pretty much all cases, you find that the most ardent believers in 9/11 truth also buy into this wider arena, and this in turn gives them plenty of avenues for denial even in the face of their favorite theories being credibly and alternatively explained. For example, it’s a lot easier to invest belief into grandiose conspiracy theories like the 9/11 ones if you already accept concepts like the Illuminati controlling the world, because there already exists in your mind a mechanism by which something this complicated could be achieved. And debunkers? Obviously paid shills! etc etc…

          There are still elements to the whole 9/11 scenario that I have questions about, but now I’m basically agnostic about the subject.

          • Jesus Borg | Sep 3, 2012 at 1:55 pm |

            Its called learned helplessness. You have dissociated agency, will and aggression. You are probably easily gas lighted. You probably don’t even really like most of the shit you buy.

            So, I mean it probably sounds insulting, but that’s what would cause somebody to remain “agnostic” on it at this point in time after lots of “research”. (btw Science does not argue from an epistemology of “from authority” everything is supposed to be reproducible.) So its  Mental passivity. Minorities and outcast groups have an easier time accepting it, because they don’t have any expectation of there being anyone to tell them what to think that will actually be in their best interest. They are used to being conned.

            Stay away from pan handlers, and vacuum salesmen.

          • Or perhaps he’s been to Chapel Perilous.

          • BrianApocalypse | Sep 3, 2012 at 3:17 pm |

             I’ve seen the master who makes the grass green.

          • BrianApocalypse | Sep 3, 2012 at 2:58 pm |

            Well, you’re completely wrong about me. Being agnostic about something doesn’t mean you’re passive, it simply means you are not sure enough to commit belief. I used to believe, now I don’t, but I haven’t switched to the other side either. If I was presented with solid evidence on either side of the argument I’d be happy to accept it without the hindrance of invested belief on one side or the other. I’m perfectly ok with existing in an uncertain state about it (although at this stage I’m probably leaning more towards most of the conspiracy theories not being true, and that is based on considering both sides of the argument without prejudice.)

            I’ve noticed that most 9/11 truthers have a real hard time accepting that it’s possible for someone to go from belief to disbelief. They usually try and “explain” this seemingly incomprehensible state via some convoluted route, which is kind of what you’ve just done.

          • charlieprimero | Sep 3, 2012 at 3:12 pm |

             This is good reasonable, rational thinking.

          • Jesus Borg | Sep 3, 2012 at 6:11 pm |

            Its not convoluted at all. You seriously don’t know what a controlled demolition looks like? Seriously dude? You can’t look at clips of Casinos being demolished and make that judgement call?

            You know it really comes down to two choices. Did the building burn down or was it a controlled demolition. Jews, arabs, elites yada yada yada, that’s the who.

            I am talking about what. Its a no brainer. Steel Sky scrapers don’t burn down. What are all your examples of Steel skyscrapers that have burned down?

            The burden of proof is not on any alternative to the official story all are conspiracies, even the official one.

          • Jesus Borg | Sep 4, 2012 at 6:15 pm |

             OK so explain this if you are so “rational”


            If a bird shits on you do you have to be an ornithologist to comment on it?

            Its was a controlled demolition. No honest rational person can fail to see it.

          • Calypso_1 | Sep 5, 2012 at 1:21 am |

            It really depends on what level of commentary you want to engage in.

          • BrianApocalypse | Sep 5, 2012 at 10:22 am |

             Yeah, wtc7 does look like a demolition when you watch it, but the conspiracy theories always focus on the side that looks the least damaged, they stay away from discussing the other side with the massive damage.

            Also you have to wonder why the east penthouse collapsed before the rest of the building if it was a controlled demolition, as you can see here:


            That was the start of the global collapse and failure of structural integrity.

            And then you gotta ask yourself other questions like; if it was a controlled demolition, why did they wait so long to trigger it? Surely it would have been a much better plan to bring it down while the whole area was shrouded in dust from the collapse of the towers? That way an investigation into the causes would have been so much more difficult. We know the explosives MUST have been in there already if it was a demolition, because there’s no way anyone could have set that up so quickly, especially in the middle of all that chaos. So, why the wait?

            This is quite a good site about the matter as it addresses both sides of the argument:


            And this site is also good for some critical analysis of some of the wider 9/11 conspiracy concepts:

          • Jesus Borg | Sep 5, 2012 at 4:02 pm |

             People make a lot of money demolishing buildings in such a way that they collapse into their own footprint. Its doesn’t just naturally happen that way. Plus it was announced by the media before it happened.

            I can’t convince you against your Will not to love Big Brother, Winston.

          • Calypso_1 | Sep 5, 2012 at 1:15 am |

            And you, you should stick with the psychoanalysis.  Keep practicing. Next time I expect you might progress, and pass muster as ‘vague amusement’.

          • Jason Quackenbush | Sep 3, 2012 at 10:35 pm |

            Dude. You have a book to write. THis is one of the most startlingly honest and forthright confessions of an open mind I have ever seen. Kudos.

          • Calypso_1 | Sep 5, 2012 at 12:22 pm |

             I found 9/11 to be an interesting transition for those who were already steeped in conspiracy culture and those who were brought to it by the event.  As one raised upon tales of the apocalypse, the NWO, and having devoted many an insomnia driven night to  the nebulous world of print and radio conspiracy subculture prior to the age of the internet, 9/11 just didn’t seem that big of a surprise.
            The resulting draconian laws were inevitable – something was going to happen to put them in place, same with the ensuing wars in the Middle East and central Asia.  All geopolitical realities that needed a precipitating event and the moment I saw the attacks these scenarios began to unfold in my mind – along with an increased primacy of the conspiracy subculture.  Frankly, I thought it was going to be far worse than it’s turned out.
            I know people that went off grid after 9/ll and I paralled this world for a while.  I also wove in and out of the emerging fear-based conspiracy culture and followed it into militia and military circles.  The more I met new converts and disciples to ‘conspiracy theory’ it became obvious that this was just one more tool of both self-deception and the powers that be and perhaps it always has been. 
            There is always the unknown, deception and conspiracy.  We all conspire, it is human nature: this need for and limited capability to perceive, arrange, attract and manage resources to varying degrees of exclusive yet mutual benefit is what generates the various power structures that exist all around us.  And these structures themselves behave as emergent phenomenon, fueling their own existence, cellular automata whose complexity becomes so immense to the perceptions of individuals that attributions of agency become all too easy to make when in fact, there may be none – not in the sense that most are willing to ascribe.
            My biggest conclusion, post-9/11?  Life goes on.  Tides rise and fall, as do empires, nations and the all the workings of men.  Patterns are everywhere.  Patterns emerge, unfold, consume, and evolve.  To carry within your core anything other than fascination and wonder and the sheer annihilatory terror that time and the universe itself holds is to give up within you an alter to mankind and all our little ziggurats.  Even for that there is a time as long as long as you remember to wipe your feet before you enter into the places of your own making.

          • Jin The Ninja | Sep 5, 2012 at 1:33 pm |

            This^. amazing.

          • BrianApocalypse | Sep 5, 2012 at 7:26 pm |

             Your descriptions ring very true with me. I was also a pre-web conspiracist, getting info off BBS’s (even running a conspiracy BBS at one time). Conspiracy culture has always been very intimately linked to computer/internet culture, and I wonder if there is some deeper, more esoteric connection to be made there?

            I sure disappeared down some paranoid rabbit holes in the past. I thought strangers I met and even friends were Illuminati agents. Obviously they would single ME out for knowing the hidden truth! And, ridiculously, as a teenager went though a period of keeping weaponry by my bed in case of alien abduction in the night!

            Thinking about it now, it was almost like being in some ongoing roleplaying game or something.

            9/11 didn’t seem like a surprise to me either. In fact, within the context of conspiracy culture, it made total sense. But like you, I thought the ramifications would be a lot worse than they were. I thought we’d be living in something like a theocratic police state by now with implanted ID chips etc… But we’re not, and despite the continued rantings of Alex Jones and his ilk, I really don’t think that’s the world we’re headed for. Yes, there are more oppressive laws in existence since and because of 9/11, but they fall well short of the conspiracist projections. The central mantras of conspiricism are starting to sound very stale.

            Your description of the self-propagating nature of phenomena that can be erroneously ascribed to organized conspiracy is very well put. This is a concept I began to realize a couple of years ago, and one it clicked it really made sense. So much of what is described as vast, shadowy conspiracy can also be explained far more simply as the action of greed within the framework of global culture/economy. And these complex nexuses of human civilization (like corporations, governments etc) become anthropomorphized into living, breathing myths. And that, essentially, is what I think conspiracy theory has become: a memetic/mythological ‘glamor’ we can hang upon the scaffolding of the vast, almost alien, technological edifice we have collectively created. Like the stars we once made gods out of, none of us truly understands how it all works. And that’s what myths are for.

          • TruthOver911Lies | Sep 10, 2012 at 3:00 pm |

             The issue with many of the 9/11 “Liars” (opposite of truth is a lie, right?) is they do not ever factor in their minds that any type of “inside assistance” could have occurred. Even when faced with brutal amounts of evidence that people in the US Government had prior knowledge, they refuse to even consider it.

            Firefighter Engineering is the oldest engineering publication in the US, and they point out several factors that should cause any 9/11 Liar to reconsider.
            First, clean-up directly violated codes of conduct for an investigation; moving, shipping away, destroying and otherwise denying access to the wreckage so that no true and proper investigation could be performed. That fact alone should raise many questions!

            FBI confiscating evidence and failing to release it after the completion of the investigation.

            Absolutely ZERO proof Osama Bin Laden had any involvement whatsoever.

            Going to war with a country that promised extradition of OBL upon presentation of hard evidence.

            Failing to investigate for thermitic or explosives residue by NIST, simply because it would have been difficult to plant.

            Blatant doctoring of facts by NIST in order to create the desired outcome. When they couldn’t make it work as it was, they changed input data until the desired outcome was achieved (look at the report yourself and educate yourself on the actual facts, you will see where NIST changed data many, many times).

            And my favorite, Implosion World’s analysis of the collapses. They fail to make any consideration that WTC 1&2 could have been brought down in a manner to make it appear to the majority as a collapse. They also don’t do any testing for explosives or thermitic residue, nor do they explain why molten metal at apprx. 2800*F was being found 6 weeks after collapse.

            I worked in CD. My boss has over 20 years of CD experience. Neither of us buy their explanation. Nor do many others in the business. Many of the largest firms in the world do not buy IW’s explanation.

            Mass media only reports what supports their agenda. They are heavily tied into government in many cases (you need to be to gain access to exclusive meetings, interviews, etc), and don’t want to be shunned by the Government, as that could have a negative affect on content, and in turn ratings and income.

            I’m not saying I buy every conspiracy aspect of this, but WTC7 and the Pentagon are two smoking guns that have yet to be explained.

            My point: How was an aircraft able to penetrate restricted airspace, circle the building (which has air to ground defense missiles, as do the Capitol and White House, I saw them with my own eyes in DC) and then impact it in a manner many pilots call near impossible?

        •  Learn to think for yourself >><<
          Regarding 9/11.  Study Building 7 from all sides and then email me with your studied opinion.

    • charlieprimero | Sep 3, 2012 at 9:52 am |

       No gut feeling.  You must apply Occam’s Razor and accept whichever explanation rationally accounts for *all* the evidence.

       9/11 denial is based upon either ignoring certain evidence, or building wild, implausible explanations to account for it.

      • feint_ruled | Sep 3, 2012 at 12:13 pm |

        And that explanation, the one that accounts for all the evidence. That is…?
        I guess I just want a smoking gun (and the moon on a stick). Imagine if you lined up all these same experts beforehand and said “what if we were to fly two jet planes into two skyscrapers, what would happen?”
        Don’t you think we would have got the same wild range of opinions? Of course! No one could know what the hell what exactly was going to happen! Maybe what we are saw IS what happens when you fly planes into massive structures. A whole load of weird shit!

        • charlieprimero | Sep 3, 2012 at 12:19 pm |

           Everybody wants a smoking gun.  My supervisor found lipstick on her husband’s underwear.  She suspected an affair.  She desperately wanted to catch him “in the act”.  She never did.  Thus, no affair occurred.  She’s happy now.

          • feint_ruled | Sep 3, 2012 at 1:00 pm |

             It’s a cute parable, but to be representative you could say she also suspected him as being an international jewel thief, and took the diamonds stashed in the wardrobe as both proof of the affair and the thievery, and the lipstick on the penis as proof of both also.

            That is to say – multiple different conspiracies are inferred from the same evidence.

        • Jesus Borg | Sep 3, 2012 at 1:58 pm |

          Do you know what an actuary is?

          • Ted Heistman | Sep 5, 2012 at 8:42 am |

            That’s a serious question. Do you know what an actuary is? Because its not a bunch of guys making wild guesses about stuff.

      • mahajohn | Sep 3, 2012 at 6:45 pm |

         Occam’s Razor is just a pattern of thought. It is not a law of life or the universe.

    • TruthOver911Lies | Sep 10, 2012 at 2:36 pm |

       I’ve read (a significant portion of) the NIST report, and some of the progress reports. They doctored the facts when testing to create the result they desired.

      Like setting the rating the thermal expansion of concrete as being zero, when it is actually near identical to that of steel. Lying about shear studs on the girders in WTC7, when a 1985 paper blatantly states they exist.

      NIST, contrary to popular belief, never tested anything for explosives or thermitic material. Nothing. They “examined” eyewitness reports of explosions, and determined it would have been difficult to plant them, so they never bothered to test this. This is NIST’s statement, not mine.

      They also give a very poor explanation for the “molten metal” dripping from the corner of WTC2. NIST states it is molten aluminum (melt point of 1200*F). One problem, it doesn’t glow bright yellow at 1200*F. It only does so at the same temperature as steel, between apprx. 2600-3000*F. In rebuttal, NIST states this “glowing” is due to “office materials being mixed in with the molten aluminum”.
      However, this also creates issue, as it directly conflicts Wien’s Law of Displacement, as well as Correlated Color Temperature. Basically, everything on earth emits that same color radiation when heated to a specific temperature. Nothing will glow bright yellow when heated to 1200*F, or 1500*F either.

      I have tried to reproduce their “aluminum and non-metallic material alloy”, and was unsuccessful. And I mean completely unsuccessful.

      Here is a quote from Mark Loizeauxof Controlled Demolition Inc.:
      “Yes, hot spots of molten steel in the basements,” he said, “at the
      bottom of the elevator shafts of the main towers, down seven levels.”
      The molten steel was found “three, four, and five weeks later, when the
      rubble was being removed,” he said. He confirmed that molten steel was
      also found at WTC 7, which mysteriously collapsed in the late afternoon.

  5. charlieprimero | Sep 3, 2012 at 9:45 am |

    Sometimes we forget how painful Cognitive Dissonance is.  Humans will build great castles of denial to avoid that pain.

    I ridiculed 9/11 Troofers with great enthusiasm until 2008 when I ran out of rational arguments against the Molyneuxvians and accepted that government is indeed inherently immoral.  Accepting the truth about 9/11 was almost impossible until then.

  6. Frankblack_conspiracy | Sep 3, 2012 at 12:18 pm |

    Wow this psychotherapist in the beginning is blowing my mind.  She personally cried for weeks after 9/11?  I didn’t even bat an eye lash when I heard it happen live.  People act like this was the only time in history when 3000 people died at once or some craziness.  We carpet bombed 3000+ civilians in Panama in their residential area.  Anyone cry about that?  of course not, why the fuck would you cry about 911?  This country is full of mentally disturbed people who somehow have unbelievable levels of empty for Americans they don’t even know, but could care less if we drone strike another wedding.

    • Perhaps the mental illness is not people crying about 9/11, but people not crying about Panama.

  7. Anarchy Pony | Sep 3, 2012 at 12:48 pm |

    And they (these masterminded conspirators) didn’t fake actually finding WMDs in Iraq because? They don’t occasionally IED a mall in middle America because? They don’t facilitate an occasional jihadist gunman attack on a busy public street in a major US city because? They could easily maintain fear based control by continuing simple small false flags on US targets. But where are they, why don’t they? You could say that the fear still works, but it could be so much more powerful, grant so much more control if they just kept up the facade. Sure you’ve got these occasional “terrorists” that get set up to take a fall by the FBI. But clearly they could take it much farther. If they are willing to kill thousands of people, what’s a couple dozen every year or so, in order to keep the people truly and deeply afraid? 

    •  it’s unnecessary for them. they have control already and nobody is a threat to them. everyone is passive & apathetic enough as it is so they don’t need to keep us in deep fear. they god what they wanted (infinite new wars on terror & the patriot act mainly but there were other reasons too like control of opium and resources in afghanistan, destruction of pentagon audit files & other important documents in building 7, plus the insurance money they received, etc.)

    • BrianApocalypse | Sep 4, 2012 at 9:05 am |


      • Is rolling around in your brain right now. 

      • Jesus Borg | Sep 4, 2012 at 5:42 pm |

         All my comments got deleted where I asked you why you can’t simply look at clips of controlled demolitions and watch a clip of wtc and make the obvious judgement call that many many fairly intelligent people made as it happened. I mean its just so friggin’ obvious. Its not convoluted at all. It was a controlled demolition. That implies  it was an inside job and not the result of the planes, vaporizing the support collumns.

        It doesn’t take a genius.

        • Jesus Borg | Sep 4, 2012 at 5:45 pm |


        • A Sane Person | Sep 5, 2012 at 12:56 pm |

          Seriously. People just need to watch the buildings blow up in mid-air as there falling. Oh look, the floor below the one I’m looking at is going to slow down the collapse.  Nope, (Chuck Testa) the floors below are blown to pieces right before the debris from the floors above reach them. One by one, floor by floor, the towers are pulverized. Gravity my ass.  

  8. Jesus Borg | Sep 3, 2012 at 6:17 pm |

    For the “agnostics” :

    Examples of steel skyscrapers that have burned down, please, if you have them.

  9. Jesus Borg | Sep 3, 2012 at 6:34 pm |

    I just had two comments deleted.

  10. Jesus Borg | Sep 3, 2012 at 6:35 pm |

    For the Agnostics. Now give me examples of Steel skyscrapers that have burned down.

  11. mahajohn | Sep 3, 2012 at 6:44 pm |

    Anyone who doesn’t believe in the “official story” must come to grips with an inescapable truth: they have no DIRECT evidence for their beliefs, just a great deal of circumstantial information that they filter through the lens of their paradigm, nor will they ever have evidence without credible whistle-blowers. Responsibility for 9/11 means a great deal to me, and I’ve spent a great deal of time since it took place digesting the information presented by conventional voices and dissenting/conspiracy-minded voices. I have no inherent trust in the institutions of government, especially in terms of the national security/military state, so there’s no love lost if it turns out that those kind of folks are the culprit. However, literally every single contention made by the 9/11 Truth Movement can be answered – reasonably and rationally – by folks who disagree, or through the same sort of rationalizing that takes place in order to form the belief in the first place. 

    For those of you who want/like/need to believe that there was indeed official complicity in the plot, but that recognize the unlikeliness of controlled demolitions, huge psy-ops, etc., I submit to you the following information. Richard Clarke claims that he – then White House counterterrorism czar – was purposely kept uninformed of the CIA’s knowledge and domestic/international surveillance of 9/11 hijackers, and that had normal flow of information not been impeded, he too would have known that al Qaeda members were moving about the United States, knowledge that would have mobilized the FBI to hunt down these men. He came to this realization when he learned that *50* CIA employees were privy to this knowledge before 9/11, yet this information was kept from him. He suggests that a decision like that would have to have been made at the director level. His speculation is that perhaps the CIA considered one of the hijackers to be an asset, and was perhaps working FOR the CIA, and the CIA would then keep this covered up at all costs. How untoward it would look that the CIA was working with a dastardly terrorist, or worse yet, that they’d been fooled by a triple agent (since that indeed happened again years later in Afghanistan, and the CIA paid dearly for that mistake).

    Now, Clarke admits that this is just speculation, but then he also admits that he’s implicitly accusing one of his former buddies of betraying him and the people of the United States. I suggest that one could just as easily speculate that if indeed a decision was made at the director level of the CIA to hide information from folks who could use that information to foil the 9/11 plot, then that director would just need to have a conversation with a very few people in the White House and DOD to agree to conveniently look the other way or suppress information while the final days of the plot unfolded, knowing full well that their strategic plan for the next 100 years could be implemented when this inevitable, major attack took place.

  12. Zoidberg | Sep 3, 2012 at 6:57 pm |

    Bush’s seven minutes of silence at the school made me very, very suspicious.  Seven minutes is an eternity in such cases.  Can you imagine SITTING for an entire seven minutes after hearing such news?  Nope, neither can I.  The only explanation that makes any sense to me is that G.W. knew of the impending disaster… or worse, was involved. 

    I’m not usually a conspiracy theorist type of person, but this just screamed so loudly in my head, that I could not get it out of my mind and it still haunts me to this day… because if this is true, than anything is possible.  Our nation is a much scarier place today because of those seven minutes.

  13. 2016 opens the next gates to the Akausal voyd. The black sunn wyll ryze and 3d wyll be 5d. I have been drE3myng you.

  14. believein1 | Sep 4, 2012 at 12:24 am |

    There is simply too much evidence showing 9/11 to be a product of something other than what the media portrays it to be. Whether it be Zionists or the government or both, for building 7 to come down like that almost guarantees demolition also in the twin towers. Depending on where the towers were hit meant that the explosives had to be detonated in a particular order for it to look “natural” so that says how planned the whole thing actually was. Look at the evidence, scholars, engineers, and architects, the leaders of their field have said 9/11 was planned. I could look at debunking sites all day but they aren’t the work of top of their field specialists, only lay speculators or hack jobs. Once again, look at the videos of 9/11 for yourself and you will be able to see that something not normal was happening.

  15. Would anyone care to explain to me the difference between this video of comments by people who know nothing about structural engineering, commercial building construction, or controlled demolition, and ~15 minutes of pure ad hominem?

    • Charlie Prime | Sep 4, 2012 at 12:52 pm |

       This video is about psychology.  If you want technical analysis, watch the video from the 1,000 architects and engineers here:

      • Albury Smith | Apr 7, 2013 at 8:58 pm |

        If I want technical analysis, Charlie, I read the NIST reports. If I want nonsense about “pyroclastic” clouds that leave paper trails, “experts” who marvel over the fact that collapses all look pretty much like C/Ds, cause divining building collapses by analyzing acceleration, and molten metal months after 9/11 being evidence of explosives or incendiaries, I watch Box Boy’s ridiculous dog-and-pony show.

  16. Wow, I posted on this yesterday and today my post is nowhere to be found… conspiracy??

  17. EveryoneisStupid | Sep 4, 2012 at 10:15 am |

    People have to “think” to understand that 9/11 was a fraud. In Amerika, people do not like to “think” because that’s the governments job. Most of the people I talk to about 9/11 just say; “I don’t really care either way because I can’t do anything about it.” Which makes me think we are already too far down shit’s creek without a paddle. I can’t even tell my friends about 9/11 because they are all too dumb. During a conversation in which we were debating the reasons for extraterrestrial life. One of my friends actually thought that if aliens were to evade they would come for our wood. WOOD! An extremely advance species that can move at superluminal speeds is going to come to earth for wood? And we expect them to understand the complexity of something like 9/11? Yea, not going to happen…   

  18. Albury Smith | Sep 4, 2012 at 2:04 pm |

    If I want technical analysis, Charlie P, I read the NIST reports, not junk science peddled by serial liars.

    • Expensive Thoughts | Sep 4, 2012 at 3:47 pm |

      Your logic makes no sense. The NIST reports ARE junk science, peddled by serial liars. Go ahead and read them. I encourage everyone to read them so they can realize how much NIST circumvented scientific method to get the results they wanted. Personally I think it makes NIST look less credible after you read their reports. If you can’t see that, your lost. 

      •  Thanks for setting the record straight.  Albury is trolling again I see, thankfully he is outnumbered and outsmarted again.

      • Albury Smith | Sep 4, 2012 at 4:54 pm |

        Your ignorance regarding forensic structural engineering investigations conducted by qualified professionals sounds like a personal problem.

      • CosmicAmazing | Sep 5, 2012 at 12:22 pm |

        Don’t even bother replying to Albury. He/She is just a shill. Looking at that users activity has shown me that the logic portion of their brain is not functioning correctly. Or he/she is just an agent of disinfo. -Cheers 

  19. I’ll repost as well as I can remember:

    The thing that scared the hell out of me on 9/11 was GW’s seven minutes of silence.  Of all the things that are suspicious about that fateful day, this strikes me as the most important of all.  Seven minutes can be an eternity in situations such as this.  I can’t stop wondering what the hell was going through his mind during those seven minutes.  It seems to me that any normal person would have reacted instantly…shock, outrage, anything other than just sitting there.  I could possibly understand 30 seconds- even a full minute, but SEVEN full minutes?  It blows me away!

    On the other hand, if he had any knowledge of the events at all, if he were in any way involved, I would understand his silence. Perhaps he was stunned with the realization that plans that were made with his knowledge, and maybe even his cooperation were actually coming to fruition.  I think he was absolutely stunned at the consequences of his (alleged) actions, like a child that finally makes the connection between  cause and effect.

    I’m not normally a conspiracy theorist type of person, but this was damn, damn scary to me… and it still is.  The implications are enormous, unthinkable nearly.  If there is any shred of truth in this, any at all, then this changes everything I was ever taught to believe about this country.  I’m not a praying person, but I hope beyond hope that this is not true.

  20. Expensive Thoughts | Sep 4, 2012 at 4:11 pm |

    Glad to see a lot of awake critically thinking individuals here. It’s about time that 9/11 becomes commonly known as a horrific but obvious false flag operation and cover up. 9/11 denial, I like that. 

    • A Sane Person | Sep 5, 2012 at 12:46 pm |

      Just give up, you guys lost. We know it was a false flag and soon the masses will too. We are all way past the point of conjecture. Go use your energy on something other than frivolous debunking.    

      • Albury Smith | Sep 6, 2012 at 7:32 am |

        Define “soon.” Troofers have been saying the same thing for the last 6 years or more, and sane people still ignore them.

  21. I posted twice on the 9/11 conspiracy story and both times my posts were deleted.  I did not use profanity. Can you please tell me what I am doing wrong?

    When I tried sending a message to you, the message ‘failed’.

    • Matt Staggs | Sep 4, 2012 at 8:11 pm |

       You’ve done nothing wrong at all. It’s the #$%^&^%$ comment moderation system.

  22. Yea!  My posts are back…thank you!

  23. Jason Quackenbush | Sep 5, 2012 at 12:21 am |

    “Whether it be Zionists or the government or both,” 

    For the record, you are not helping your case by speculating that it might have been the Jews behind 911.

  24. Ted Heistman | Sep 5, 2012 at 8:39 am |

    Or maybe they didn’t get exactly what they were looking for. If you read Leo Strauss, you get the impression of a powerful intellect that nonetheless far underestimates the respective intellect of the average person. I think they expected to fool a lot more people than they did. In the PNAC mindset there is this supposed huge divide in intellect between the ruling class and the “vulgar masses” which is more or less simply narcissism on their part.  

    What would come next would not be a false flag operation but a more or less naked display of power. I don’t think they are ready for that yet.

  25. Ted Heistman | Sep 5, 2012 at 8:43 am |

    Ha ha ha ha ha! Where did all the comments reappear from!

  26. reality_filter | Sep 5, 2012 at 10:05 am |

    Maybe we should all step back a bit and look for an explanation that takes into account all the “knowns” here. No one will dispute that a plane hit the building. A growing body of evidence suggests that the building collapsed due to controlled demolition. Why go ahead and make the leap to full on false flag attack? The WTC was inflitrated by jihadists before. We know that security in large buildings is anything but absolute. We damn sure didn’t see the plane side of the attack coming so is it too hard to believe that the same group orchestrating the plane attack could also lay explosives in a couple of key points in the building in a “belt-and-suspenders” effort to ensure the tower’s collapse? If there is a cover up, and I’m sure the official report is anything but comprehensive, it might be simply a face saving measure for the agencies that were ignoring blatant warning signs before the attack. Can you imagine the director of the FBI saying in a press conference, after everyone had heard the story about how badly they missed the plane based plot, “…oh, and by the way, in addition to allowing one of the worst acts of domestic terrorism to occur since Pearl Harbor due to simple negligence, we also missed a bunch of “cable guys” wiring the WTC building with C4 during the months of July and August”??? 

  27. BrianApocalypse | Sep 5, 2012 at 10:40 am |

     I have considered writing something about it actually. The process of deconstructing and rejecting a belief system does amazing things for one’s strength of mind!

    • Jesus Borg | Sep 5, 2012 at 3:57 pm |

       true, but you are going the wrong way. Its good to deconstruct stupid shit not obvious facts in favor of brain washing.

      You are like Winston Smith at the end of the Book.

  28. Albury Smith | Sep 5, 2012 at 10:43 am |

    Here’s what real controlled demolitions look and sound like compared to the imaginary ones at the WTC:

  29. BrianApocalypse | Sep 5, 2012 at 10:54 am |

    Give some other examples of skyscrapers that have been hit by 300,000lb 767’s flying  at around 500mph first.

  30.  “However, literally every single contention made by the 9/11 Truth
    Movement can be answered – reasonably and rationally – by folks who
    disagree, or through the same sort of rationalizing that takes place in
    order to form the belief in the first place. ” 

    Oh really?  Ok, explain to me how Building 7 managed to fall through itself at speeds indistinguishable from free fall for 2.5 seconds?   Please provide your sources for your argumentation.

  31. We have quite a bit in common regarding our media diets.
    I will check out the few I’ve not seen before.

    Thanks for the links!


  32. Albury Smith | Sep 6, 2012 at 10:08 am |

    GeeDubya’s little brother had been a board member of one of several companies that furnished and installed electronic surveillance equipment in WTC buildings under PANYNJ contract after the 1993 bombing, but left his position ~15 months before 9/11. Board members don’t run day-to-day operations in real life, and the PAPD ran security at the WTC.
    Building maintenance and the NYC elevator unions weren’t “in on” your alleged plot, and both towers very obviously failed at the perimeter, not the core. What’s especially dumb about the elevator yarn is that there were only 10 working elevators above the 78th floor sky lobbies in each tower, and ~4 core columns were even vaguely accessible from them. Of those, some were severed or badly damaged by the planes, making your imaginary explosives plane-proof and/or redundant. Since ~40 stories of core framing in each one stood for 15 or more seconds after the main collapses ended, and then toppled sideways, they must also have been the new time-delayed kind of redundant explosives.

  33. Albury Smith | Sep 6, 2012 at 10:48 am |

    It’s unfortunate that facts distress you, Rachel79, but I’m sure you don’t speak for everyone.

  34. Albury Smith | Sep 6, 2012 at 11:35 am |

    I’ve already explained to you why the elevator “theory” makes no sense, as the floor plans of the cores above the 78th floor in each tower and the WTC tower collapse videos will confirm. Assuming that your documents aren’t bogus, and Monaghan requested to the right DoB department what he claims he did, BIS doesn’t have 10 to 20 year-old records from buildings that no longer exist, and that’s as far as he went. What has he gotten back from IUEC Local 1, IBEW Local 3, Ace Elevator, and PANYNJ maintenance, or were they all in on the plot too?

    • Check the link and the FOIA request.  Obviously not bogus. 
      I didn’t supply any theory.  I simply said there was a massive operation involving modernization of the elevators up until 9/11/01.  You can attack strawmen all you like but I am just offering evidence that in fact people would have had access to the core columns.  I see no sourcing on your part just the same shrill belly aching and avoidance of the obvious. < Didn't blow itself up and if you think so, why doesn't the government release their computer models for independent review??  Lemme guess, because of "National Security"  I guess someone might figure out how to get one beam to slide off it's station (didn't happen that way, shear studs and all and of course completely unheard of and implausible) and bring down a 600 foot tall building with office fires….

      Look dude you can rail all you want, everyone sees the truth now, your a vestigial organ of denial. 

      • Michael Kingston | Sep 6, 2012 at 3:14 pm |

        I don’t know if this matters or not but I’ll say it anyways. I went to NYC on 9/7/01 and left on 9/10/01. During my tour of the city that weekend, we wanted to go to the top of the WTC towers. For some strange reason, they wouldn’t let us into the building that day. Don’t quote me on it but I believe the port authority official said there was a power outage. Just thought it’s slightly coincidental. Now because we didn’t get to go to the top of the WTC towers, we shot over to the Empire State building and got some great pictures of the WTC towers with a sweet sunset in the background. Those pictures were taken on 9/9/01. When I took them, I thought to myself; “damn, next time I’ll have to take a picture from the top of the WTC towers of the Empire State building”. I realize that’s not possible anymore. 🙁 

        I wanted to thank you Camron, for trying to keep this 9/11 subject alive. No matter how hard it is for some to accept, this world is full of liars. Government is the worst of them.   This planet needs more people like you.   

        •  Thank you Michael 🙂
          I appreciate you sharing your story (it definitely matters).
          I will keep fighting and am very happy to see how many others see the truth, know the real facts and are speaking out.  We are a few days away from the 11th anniversary and I say let’s make as much noise as possible to rouse our sleeping familia.

          Best wishes.

  35. Albury Smith | Sep 6, 2012 at 2:42 pm |

    As I explained to you previously, only a few of the towers’ core columns were accessible from elevators above the 78th floor sky lobbies, and both buildings very obviously began collapsing at their perimeters, with no disturbance of the smoke clouds prior to the downward movement of the upper sections. Your imaginary explosives planted in the cores didn’t cause perimeter columns 60 or more feet away to bow inward slowly for a half hour or more: 7 didn’t “blow itself up” or get blown up, and all of the NIST data has been released for public review. Considering the reams of information in NCSTAR 1A and 1-9, if Box Boy’s “800 engineers” still need to see someone else’s COMPLETE input and results FILES in order to do their own modeling, they wouldn’t know what to do with the files even if they had been PUBLICLY released, and it’s doubtful that they’re very interested in seeing them anyway. The shear studs began failing at ~103C beam temperatures east of Col.79 for reasons that are very obvious just from looking at the structural drawings and applying a little common sense, i.e. the 44-79 girder was asymmetrically loaded with 5 beams east of it opposed by one intersecting at less than 20 degrees west of it, and in-plane stiffness and thermal inertia prevented the much larger mass of slab concrete from expanding with the steel. This is only “unheard of” to people with no understanding at all of structural engineering or physics.Here’s the letter from Dr. Gallagher regarding the National Construction SAFETY Team Act of 2002: it doesn’t even mention “National Security,” you didn’t make a very good guess.  

  36. Albury Smith | Sep 6, 2012 at 2:43 pm |

    As I explained to you previously, only a few of the towers’ core
    columns were accessible from elevators above the 78th floor sky lobbies, and
    both buildings very obviously began collapsing at their perimeters, with no
    disturbance of the smoke clouds prior to the downward movement of the upper
    sections. Your imaginary explosives planted in the cores didn’t cause perimeter
    columns 60 or more feet away to bow inward slowly for a half hour or

    WTC 7 didn’t “blow itself up” or get blown up, and all of the NIST
    data has been released for public review. Considering the reams of information
    in NCSTAR 1A and 1-9, if Box Boy’s “800 engineers” still need to see someone
    else’s COMPLETE input and results FILES in order to do their own modeling, they
    wouldn’t know what to do with the files even if they had been PUBLICLY released,
    and it’s doubtful that they’re very interested in seeing them anyway. The shear
    studs began failing at ~103C beam temperatures east of Col.79 for reasons that
    are very obvious just from looking at the structural drawings and applying a
    little common sense, i.e. the 44-79 girder was asymmetrically loaded with 5
    beams east of it opposed by one intersecting at less than 20 degrees west of it,
    and in-plane stiffness and thermal inertia prevented the much larger mass of
    slab concrete from expanding with the steel. This is only “unheard of” to people
    with no understanding at all of structural engineering or physics.
    Here’s the letter from Dr. Gallagher regarding the National
    Construction SAFETY Team Act of 2002:

    Since it doesn’t even mention “National Security,” you didn’t make a
    very good guess.  

    • “As I explained to you previously, only a few of the towers’ core
      columns were accessible from elevators above the 78th floor sky lobbies, and
      both buildings very obviously began collapsing at their perimeters, with no
      disturbance of the smoke clouds prior to the downward movement of the upper
      sections. Your imaginary explosives planted in the cores didn’t cause perimeter
      columns 60 or more feet away to bow inward slowly for a half hour or

      You didn’t “explain” anything, you did use a composition fallacy.  Just because you say some of the columns are inaccessible via elevator shafts, (which I am very skeptical of given your propensity to avoid facts that counter your presumptions entirely), does not mean all of the core columns were accessed in this manner nor that they would have to be.

      It does give precedence for people to be working inside of the structure of the towers all the way up until 9/11/2001 and this would serve as a means to enter into most of the buildings core columns even if you’re supposed “facts” were true (which again I highly doubt)

      The fact that all of the records of the elevator modernization miraculously have gone missing afterwards is not surprising to anyone who has asked for transparency and equal access to evidence and information regarding 9/11. 

      Here again for the record

      The New York City Department of Buildings (DoB) has reported within a June 6, 2011 Freedom of Information (FOI) response, that no records could be located regarding the following request for information pertaining to the massive elevator modernization project underway at World Trade Center buildings 1 and 2 until the very morning of September 11, 2001, one of the largest ever [1]. The DoB governs elevator construction and use within New York City.

      “the massive elevator modernization project underway at World Trade Center buildings 1 and 2 until the very morning of September 11, 2001”

  37. Albury Smith | Sep 6, 2012 at 5:56 pm |

    Great yarn, Mike. This world is definitely full of liars.

  38. Albury Smith | Sep 6, 2012 at 8:25 pm |

    You’ve just added NYC’s DoB, IUEC Local 1, IBEW Local 3, the PANYNJ tower maintenance crews, Ace Elevator, Wile E. Coyote and many others to the growing list of conspirators, Camron, and apparently aren’t bright enough to read and interpret the architectural floor plans above the 78th floors in each tower, the elevator riser diagrams, or even tower collapse videos. The plans make it very clear that only a few of the core columns were anywhere near a working elevator shaft, and the videos show that the perimeter columns failed before the cores did. It’s a tough break for your 9/11 “truth movement,” but 236 of the 283 columns in each WTC tower were IN PLAIN SIGHT, and somehow managed to bow inward slowly and then buckle without your invisible, silent, redundant explosives.

    •  Strawman alert.  I did no such thing.  I simply presented facts and the results of a well documented FOIA request. The rest of your psychobabble really doesn’t interest me as it is dishonest on it’s face.  You’ve not addressed any of the evidence I have brought forward so I won’t go out of my way to indulge your hyperbolic fantasies.

  39. Albury Smith | Sep 7, 2012 at 9:15 am |

    Reality alert, Camron:

    The 24 core columns in WTC 7 were all W14 X 730s like the one shown
    here being cut in ~7-1/2 minutes with a large band saw and loads of

    The ones in the lower floor levels where the collapse initiated
    were either reinforced with heavy steel plates welded across their flanges, or
    with even heavier steel plates welded between them. A W14 X 730 with no
    continuous reinforcing plates weighs 730#/lineal foot, measures 22.42″ in depth,
    has a 215 sq. in. cross-sectional area, a web thickness of 3.070″, and 2 flanges
    that are 4.91″ thick by 17.89″ wide.

    Box Boy’s “hyperbolic fantasy” is that all 24 of these steel
    columns were secretly cut multiple times with explosives in a second or so in
    Manhattan at ~5:21 PM on 9/11, along with 57 others weighing a mere 500# per
    lineal foot and having only a 147 sq. in. cross-sectional area. Since I’m as big
    a fan of the truth as you are, I hope you’ll join me in urging him and his ~1600
    “experts,” backed by Hollywood celebrity/structural engineering experts like Ed,
    Rosie, Charlie, etc., and with the aid of a top demolition guy like Jesse
    Ventura, to get some of these columns and show us on video with sound how it was
    done. Please do your part in getting us a new and independent investigation. 

  40. Albury Smith | Sep 7, 2012 at 9:31 am |

    OK, Camron; get Anthony Lawson to help you with the demonstration I suggested.

  41. Albury Smith | Sep 7, 2012 at 10:24 am |

    David Topete’s an SE and he’s GUESSING at the dimensions of Col. 79? Add him to the list of Box Boy’s “experts” who need to show us how steel columns are secretly cut.

  42. JasonFillenbak | Sep 7, 2012 at 1:15 pm |

    Has anyone ever looked into who actually took these building down? Like the saying, “Follow the money”. Has anyone investigated who had the funds and the connections to pull off something like this? I know the government benefited greatly, but lets not bunch all the government employees together on this. It had to be elements within the government cooperating with both private interests and clandestine organizations. I want to know if anyone has any leads as to who these people and/or groups could be. 

    Please let me know. 

  43. Albury Smith | Sep 7, 2012 at 3:05 pm |

    The 12 different insurance companies that paid out a total of ~$4.68 BILLION didn’t benefit, Jason, nor did the owner/lessee, who still lost billions on 9/11 even after the insurance settlements, so why don’t they know as much about the WTC collapses as you do? How did the government benefit at all from any of them, but especially a non-fatal one at ~5:21 PM?


    • JasonFillenbak | Sep 7, 2012 at 3:55 pm |

      Hi Albury,

      I have no idea what your trying to say, or argue. I think you interpreted my comment the completely wrong way. Like another commenter said, “we are all (I am) way past the point of conjecture”. I don’t “believe” it was an inside job, I “KNOW” it was an inside job. I’m just trying to go further and connect the dots. This article with 140+ comments looked like a great place to find some valuable information. If your still skeptical about the inside job aspect of 9/11 I suggest you watch the towers come down again. At some point your mind will realize you’re seeing a demolition and not a gravity driven collapse. You can even see pieces of the towers accelerating past G because of the explosive material still igniting as the pieces fall, causing an even greater acceleration of those pieces. There is no question, at all, that the official story is a horse shit conspiracy theory. I suggest you open your mind, and view the amazing video Camron posted in this article. It explains how your mind can be tricked by the establishment, MSM and skeptics. I think your problem might be that you delve to much into the technicality’s of everything and just don’t trust your instincts. Don’t take anyone’s word for it, just watch the towers as they’re demolished. Good Luck. 

  44. Albury Smith | Sep 7, 2012 at 5:10 pm |

    You should watch the towers come down again too:

  45. Albury Smith | Sep 7, 2012 at 5:34 pm |

    Were Swiss Re, Copenhagen Re, Lloyd’s, Zurich Financial, and the 8 other insurance companies that  paid Larry Silverstein a total of $4.68 BILLION all in on the plot too, or just not as bright as a 9/11 troofer? Every one of them contested his “2 plane crashes equals 2 incidents” claim, and at least one of them lost in court, but none of them has ever questioned why any of the WTC hi-rises collapsed.
    If you knew anything about NYC construction costs and rents, you’d know that he didn’t “make out like a bandit”; even with the insurance settlements, he lost billions of dollars in mandatory rebuilding costs and cash flow from tenants in the last decade and counting.

  46. Albury Smith | Sep 8, 2012 at 6:16 am |

    I was there on 9/11 too, Michael, and I saw Elvis coming in with a big wheelbarrow full of nanothermite right after all the lights went out and PAPD security left for the day. Marvin Bush was right behind him with another one. Highly suspicious…

  47. Why had NORAD bootless to assure the accepted agitator targets, the
    World Trade Center and the Pentagon? Why did the World Trade Center
    Towers, including Building 7, absolutely collapse if no added
    steel-framed building had anytime ahead absolutely burst due to fire?
    Why did George W Bush break in a Florida classroom for over 10 account
    afterwards he had been told that the additional Tower had been hit?

  48. Albury Smith | Sep 10, 2012 at 7:48 am |

    Numerous steel-framed buildings have collapsed solely from fire:

    How many of them have been hit by 767s going 440 or 540 mph and carrying ~10,000 gallons of fuel? How would no hi-rise collapses on 9/11 have affected US foreign policy?

    NORAD simply didn’t have enough time, and 4 armed fighters on standby – 2 in MA and 2 in VA – couldn’t be everywhere at once:

    When would you have decided to shoot down airliners over populated areas in the US? As soon as they went off course?

  49. paul_pjl | Apr 8, 2013 at 1:08 pm |

    I don’t know why I just got an email telling me there were updated comments here. There doesn’t seem to be. Nevertheless, I enjoyed reading through all of the comments again (many which I missed).

    Also, I wanted to give all you guys a little gift (for those who have not seen it) that will add a whole new dimension to your thinking regarding how the public opinion was shaped on the matter of 9/11. And, it will take a few days to absorb it…you are so lucky to be able to read this for the first time.

    We can discuss with the “liars” (I like that) back and forth about gravity pancakes or controlled demolition all day it seems. But this piece approaches the entire 9/11 cover-up through an analysis of the media from about 1/2001 through 9/2004. It was written in 2004, itself being a culmination of a series of articles by the same author who had been following the actions of the government, the Western media presstitutes, and the non-Western media. You definitely get the impression that the elite around the globe had first hand knowledge that this was a sham.

    “There’s Something About Omar”

    If my link gets vacuumed by Disqus, just do a search on the title. The website is global research(dot).ca

    Intricately detailed and thorough, I think you will like it.

Comments are closed.