+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 40 12345611 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 598

Thread: What Really Happened on 9/11?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Third base
    Posts
    11,322

    Default What Really Happened on 9/11?

    Tuesday, October 16 The 11 Most Compelling 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Sep 11, 2012 By NewsOne Staff Many 9/11 conspiracy theories surfaced shortly after the September 11th attacks, some bringing compelling arguments, and some not holding up at all. Theorists believe that the World Trade Center buildings were demolished by bombs, phone calls from the planes were made up, and the former President George W. Bush secretly profited from the attacks. I have compiled a list of the 11 most compelling 9 11 conspiracy theories that exist:

    1. Inside Traders Knew About Attacks Before They Happened Right before the September 11th attacks some fishy business happened within the stock market and insurance firms. An “extraordinary” amount of put options were placed on United Airlines and American Airlines stocks, the same airlines that were hijacked during the attacks. Many speculate that traders were tipped off about the attacks, and profited from the tragedy. The Securities and Exchange Commission launched an insider trading investigation in which Osama Bin Laden was a suspect after receiving information from at least one Wall Street Firm

    . 2. Air Defense Was Told To “Stand Down” In the event that a airplane were to be hijacked, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), is prepared to send out fighter jets which can debilitate or shoot down an airplane. On 9/11/01, NORAD generals said they learned of the hijackings in time to scramble fighter jets. Some skeptics believe NORAD commanded defense systems to “Stand-down”, because of their lack of presence during the attacks.

    3. Planes Didn’t Make Twin Towers Collapse, Bombs Did The World Trade Center collapse appeared similar to a controlled demolition. Many speculate that the towers were in fact blown down with explosives placed in selected locations. Some witnesses accounted hearing explosions inside the building as they attempted to escape. Many architects and scientists even maintain that a planes fuel cannot produce enough heat to melt the steel frame of the two buildings that collapsed.

    4. The Pentagon Attack Scientifically Doesn’t Hold Up The Pentagon crash may be the most puzzling event of the day. Theorists maintain that the impact holes in the pentagon were much smaller then a commercial American Airlines plane. They also question why the plane was not shot down prior to impact, as well as why the plane impacted into a section of the Pentagon that was vacant due to renovations.

    5. Flight 93 Was Completely Staged
    The fourth hijacked plane, Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. It is believed that the passengers fought back, and crashed the plane into a field. Skeptics believe that Flight 93 landed safely, while a substitute plane was shot out of the sky. Other theorists believe that the passengers were murdered or relocated, and will never be found.

    6. Hijackers Are Alive. How Did Their Passports Survive Explosion? After the September 11th attacks, the “Loose Change” documentary stated that all of the hijackers were in fact alive in other countries. Rather presumptuous since it is possible for two different people to have identical names. But they did raise a good point; how did the passports of the terrorists survive the explosion? In the aftermath of the attacks, passports and identification were found as evidence. Many skeptics question how identification made out of paper survived an explosion, which destroyed buildings.

    7. Cell Phone Calls Made From Plane Were Faked
    In flight calls were made from cell phones in hi-jacked airplanes. Scientists and skeptics maintain that cell phones could not receive reception from the altitude the planes typically fly. Other skeptics questioned a phone call from a son to his mother, in which he referred to himself by his own first and last name.

    8. Jewish People Knew Attack Was Going To Happen, Took Off Work On September 11th Theorists noticed that 4,000 Jewish employees took off from work on September 11th 2001. Some of the first people to record the attacks on camera were Jewish also. Many became suspicious of there actions, and put them on the radar as suspects in the wake of the attack.

    9. Black Boxes Found By Search Crew Kept Secret During the ensuing weeks after the attacks, the Black boxes were one of the most important items to find. They were the only evidence into what happened inside the cockpits of the plane. 3 of 4 black boxes were found, and only one was in good enough condition to listen to. The tape was not initially released, but was shared with the families in 2002. Skeptics believe the tapes were not disclosed in order to support the secret scheme.

    10. The Bin Laden Tapes Are Fake Initially, Osama Bid Laden denied any responsibility or involvement with the attacks. Soon afterwards, numerous tapes came out claiming that he took full responsibility on the attacks. Many skeptics believe that Bin Laden was targeted because of his stakes in the stocks as well as former President George W. Bush’s personal business ventures in the Middle East.

    11. Aluminum Planes Can’t Penetrate Steel Structure Of World Trade Center Commercial airplanes’ frames are constructed with a very light aluminum material, in order to make it easier to fly. Theorists maintain that there is no possible way an airplane can do as much damage as it did to the Twin Towers as it did. Theorists believe that missiles or explosives were used to ensure the buildings collapsed. END 10 years after the attack we may never know the entire story, but will always remember the people who we lost on this tragic day. “The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign that the conspiracy is working” Take a look at photos of the WTC site 9 years after the attacks:


    Videos at SOURCE: http://newsone.com/742485/the-11-mos...racy-theories/
    Dogma schmogma

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Third base
    Posts
    11,322

    Default

    How is it possible for aluminum-constructed airliner nose to penetrate WTC2 and emerge the other side? Sure looks like a much-harder metal (missile?) emerging to me...

    Dogma schmogma

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Third base
    Posts
    11,322

    Default Lucky Larry Says PULL IT

    Dogma schmogma

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    952

    Default

    The term pull a building refers to demolishing smaller structures of usually less than 4 stories or structures already damaged that can't be approached safely for other means of destruction. The structure is pulled down using mechanical advantage such as hydraulic equipment, cranes, excavators, wrecking balls or bull dozers etcetera. This is when the building is physically pulled down not imploded.

    WTC 7 didn't last long enough to be pulled. Once the side that was damaged collapsed the rest of the building followed over the next 3 or 4 seconds. If you look closely at the videos of the top of the building as it collapsed you can watch it happen. The truthers never include that video in their evidence as it disproves the controlled implosion theory. I guess they chose "truthers" as an ironic name because the evidence is presented by them in a way to prevent the truth from being discovered.

    Another method of destruction is implosion which uses different methods such as explosives to create a vacuum and weaken the structure in order to create a controlled collapse into the middle of the footprint of the building.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Third base
    Posts
    11,322

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shred View Post
    The term pull a building refers to demolishing smaller structures of usually less than 4 stories or structures already damaged that can't be approached safely for other means of destruction. The structure is pulled down using mechanical advantage such as hydraulic equipment, cranes, excavators, wrecking balls or bull dozers etcetera. This is when the building is physically pulled down not imploded.

    WTC 7 didn't last long enough to be pulled. Once the side that was damaged collapsed the rest of the building followed over the next 3 or 4 seconds. If you look closely at the videos of the top of the building as it collapsed you can watch it happen. The truthers never include that video in their evidence as it disproves the controlled implosion theory. I guess they chose "truthers" as an ironic name because the evidence is presented by them in a way to prevent the truth from being discovered.

    Another method of destruction is implosion which uses different methods such as explosives to create a vacuum and weaken the structure in order to create a controlled collapse into the middle of the footprint of the building.
    It's obvious you haven't read much, or watched even some of the many excellent videos right here on the ZZ regarding WTC7; (and the others) otherwise you would not state such nonsense. WTC7 - a steel-framed building - had only superficial damage and a few small office fires. Compare that with at least 3 other nearby buildings which suffered extensive damage from falling debris, AND THEY WERE ALL LEFT STANDING.

    And WTC7 'collapsed' MANY HOURS after the tall towers came down, so I note more nonsense from you claiming it didn't last long enough or something.

    More than one demolition expert here on the ZZ give their professional reasons why 7 was a controlled demolition. You give your amateur opinion... Um, many witnesses reported hearing loud explosions. I guess you have another amateur opinion for that as well...

    As for Lucky Larry's infamous "Pull it", as you can see on some of the many videos here, Lucky said it, and later tries to get out of it by claiming he was referring to pulling out the emergency crews from 7. (A likely story seeing as at the time he said it, THERE WERE NO EMERGENCY PERSONNEL IN THAT BUILDING.) Larry holds the smoking cannon as he bet $15M of his own money, for a windfall return of $7BILLION, for the insurance double-whammy of both tall towers. I suppose you'd heard about that, and that they were out of date, with repairs and removal of asbestos to cost more than they were worth at the time.
    Last edited by Katweezel; October 16th, 2012 at 06:50 PM.
    Dogma schmogma

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    952

    Default

    I went to demolition manuels and terminology pre 911. Anytime you investigate 911 your research should go pre 911 to avoid publishing s with an agenda. It wasn't easy filtering away the tons of agenda driven biased reports on terminology to get what the terms meant before the building collapse redefined them.

    I also viewed all the damage photos of WTC7. Anyone that calls what I saw superficial damage loses all credibility in my book. On corner and most of the two adjacent sides had extreme structural damage to the bottom of the building. That wall was going to collapse it was just a matter of when. Every main structural member of the wall was severed at the worst place possible, ground level. The video at roof level showed no surprise that that wall collapsed and dragged the rest of the building down with it within a few seconds of its collapse. I can bet when everything gave way it was a very loud event. Anyone that thinks it wouldn't be is a total idiot.

    A multiyear study on the effect of fires on the types of structures constructed like the WTC buildings was published right before the planning for the 911 attacks was started years before the tragedy. Obviously one of the planners was a structural engineer and would have read the report which predicted the failure of the members in the towers to occur right when they did after a sustained fire of that duration. Again no agenda pre 911 facts published well before the event. It is not easy trying to dig past all the propaganda that both sides have flooded the internet with after 911. All that information is tainted garbage. Read the facts before this tainting and you would not be so easily duped. A famous quote from the engineer that designed the WTCs was he was proud how long the took to collapse. He would have been one of the first to read the report on what fires like the ones that day would do to the towers. He knew they lasted as long as could be hoped for given their age. In your own post you said they were out of date and needed many repairs.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shred View Post
    Obviously one of the planners was a structural engineer and would have read the report which predicted the failure of the members in the towers to occur right when they did after a sustained fire of that duration.
    There was no fire of sustained duration - most of the fuel ignited and was blownout on impact.

    Questions that are difficult to answer -

    1. Why did molten steel persist for several days in the ground?
    2. Why is there so much radiation in the aftermath?
    3. What caused the flash siesmic spikes just prior to each tower collapse?

    Shred: Aside from the above, just for posterity, do you believe the OFFICIAL 9/11 Commission Report? Or do you see it as just another bad conspiracy theory?
    "The dogs bark but the caravan moves on."
    .....................The Zengrifter Interview (PDF) |
    The Zengrifter / James Grosjean Reputation Debate
    -----------------------------------------
    “Truth, like gold, is obtained not by growth, but by washing away all that is not gold.” — Leo Tolstoy........
    "Is everything a conspiracy? No, just the important stuff." ZG

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Third base
    Posts
    11,322

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zengrifter View Post
    There was no fire of sustained duration - most of the fuel ignited and was blownout on impact.

    Questions that are difficult to answer -

    1. Why did molten steel persist for several days in the ground?
    2. Why is there so much radiation in the aftermath?
    3. What caused the flash siesmic spikes just prior to each tower collapse?

    Shred: Aside from the above, just for posterity, do you believe the OFFICIAL 9/11 Commission Report? Or do you see it as just another bad conspiracy theory?
    Shred seems reluctant to reply, so knowing something of how he thinks, I'll reply for him...

    1... It wasn't molten steel. They made that up. What you think you saw was fireworks left over from somebody's lunch box that caught on fire.
    2... What radiation? You conspiracy freaks take the cake! If there was a wee bit, it obviously came from microwave ovens warming office-workers' coffee. Wake up to the truth, brother.
    3... Seismic spikes? Oh ferchrissakes! Any fool knows there are earth tremors all the time. One of those happened to coincide with the time and place in question. Geeeez, you conspiracy people really should go live on another planet.

    Summary: How dare you cast aspersions on beloved Dub Bush administration. Dub was all I wanted in a President: Christian, patriot, intelligent, loved his Mom, loved Dick Cheney and the rest, and wore those super-patriot badges. And what's wrong with Zionism? It's great for the US and the world, and the sooner we take their advice and save Israel by attacking Iran and starting a few more wars the better. Really, you need to wake up to yourself what's good for you and your country.

    Name:  bush_bookupsidedown.jpg
Views: 311
Size:  25.6 KBName:  aa death racce.jpg
Views: 275
Size:  85.9 KBName:  aa sam.jpg
Views: 277
Size:  20.7 KBName:  arnold1.jpg
Views: 311
Size:  8.5 KBName:  FALLING-FOR-IT-AGAIN.jpg
Views: 275
Size:  32.9 KB
    Dogma schmogma

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    952

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zengrifter View Post
    There was no fire of sustained duration - most of the fuel ignited and was blownout on impact.

    Questions that are difficult to answer -

    1. Why did molten steel persist for several days in the ground?
    2. Why is there so much radiation in the aftermath?
    3. What caused the flash siesmic spikes just prior to each tower collapse?

    Shred: Aside from the above, just for posterity, do you believe the OFFICIAL 9/11 Commission Report? Or do you see it as just another bad conspiracy theory?

    The seismic flash is easy. When the structure fails due to the load being to much for the remnant of the weakened structure the columns all fail in rapid succession. This is a noisy event that sends out a shock wave. Combine that with the change in load on the earths crust and viola a seismic event. Just trucks driving around the streets of a coastal city causes the shaking of structures for blocks around in some cases. This is due to the change in weight on the various part of the road and the rock it is on due to the weight of the truck and its load moving along (we had to deactivate security devices because trucks driving down a street over a block away kept setting them off by shaking the structure of the building). Multiply that by thousands and you get the effect of the load shift when 1/3 of the building goes into free fall. When that load accelerates and comes to an abrupt stop when it lands seconds later how much more the spike. Does the spike really surprise you? What do you think would happen when the columns all break and the weight of the top third of the structure is suddenly released and the hits the structure and falls away accelerating until it smashes into what is below seconds later?

    I have posted before what I think from the evidence and its not the official report. The funny thing is right after I posted it the CT nut jobs started to say I believed the official report because what I believed didn't conform to their whacked out theories. Well it doesn't conform with the official report either and they had just read it. I really don't care if people think the way I do so I really don't keep repeating myself. I put it out there for them to digest they can believe what they want.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    952

    Default

    As for 1 and 2 I have addressed them before in great detail. I am not going to repeat myself. As for the fire we watched it burn until the collapse. They can try to reinvent history but the world was watching it burn and the fire that fell with the building as it collapsed ignited other fires in other buildings. If it all burned up on impact how are these facts explained. Obviously the reports that it all burned are wrong and those that propagate them are tarnishing their reputation for the truth and you should be very suspect of anything else they say.

  11. #11

    Default What Really Happened on 9/11?

    Quote Originally Posted by Katz View Post
    This one amazing video should convince many that the building didn't simply weaken and collapse.
    One can see clearly the blocks and girders disintegrating to dust.
    "The dogs bark but the caravan moves on."
    .....................The Zengrifter Interview (PDF) |
    The Zengrifter / James Grosjean Reputation Debate
    -----------------------------------------
    “Truth, like gold, is obtained not by growth, but by washing away all that is not gold.” — Leo Tolstoy........
    "Is everything a conspiracy? No, just the important stuff." ZG

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    posting from Bethesda, MD
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zengrifter View Post
    This one amazing video should convince many that the building didn't simply weaken and collapse.
    One can see clearly the blocks and girders disintegrating to dust.
    Actually it looks like any other building collapsing. He sees explosions. I guess if you look hard enough you'll see St. Peter holding a lily. I don't get it. You smart people are so gullible. But I guess some of you have a different reason for believing, like to support some other agenda of yours. Which are you, the gullible or the pretender?
    Aslan 11/1/90 - 6/15/10 Stormy 1/22/95 -8/23/10
    “There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church,
    but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”
    Bishop Fulton J. Sheen

    “It takes a very long time to become young.” Pablo Picasso

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aslan View Post
    Actually it looks like any other building collapsing.
    No, it absolutely does NOT look like any other -

    A. You have never-ever seen ANY building collapse free-fall into footprint without a precision-planned demolition BECAUSE it has never-ever happened before 911 anywhere ever. So you cannot rightly say it looks like "any other.

    B. It is visibly conclusive that there is a high-powered explosive force present - visual cues I will show are only present in high-powered explosion.

    Trust me for a moment when I tell you that this is a singular-unique moment for YOU to look beyond your own gloss and realize it is staring you in the face, and I will later locate some image evidence that demos the similarity with VERY high-powered explosion.
    Last edited by zengrifter; February 17th, 2014 at 01:58 PM.
    "The dogs bark but the caravan moves on."
    .....................The Zengrifter Interview (PDF) |
    The Zengrifter / James Grosjean Reputation Debate
    -----------------------------------------
    “Truth, like gold, is obtained not by growth, but by washing away all that is not gold.” — Leo Tolstoy........
    "Is everything a conspiracy? No, just the important stuff." ZG

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    posting from Bethesda, MD
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zengrifter View Post
    No, it absolutely does NOT look like any other -

    A. You have never-ever seen ANY building collapse free-fall into footprint without a precision-planned demolition BECAUSE it has never-ever happened before 911 anywhere ever. So you cannot rightly say it looks like "any other.

    B. It is visibly conclusive that there is a high-powered explosive force present - visual cues I will show are only present in high-powered explosion.

    Trust me for a moment when I tell you that this is a singular-unique moment for YOU to look beyond your own gloss and realize it is staring you in the face, and I will later locate some image evidence that demos the similarity with VERY high-powered explosion.
    Spare me the decidedly biased manipulations. First, I have never seen a building the height and size of the WTC buildings collapse, but the pictures look to me a lot like other building collapses I have seen, of course they were demolitions, but that fact alone does not persuade me it could not happen apart from demolition. All the building collapses I have seen appear to fall into a footprint; no one has proven this cannot happen with a non-demolition building. Not knowing the dynamics of super-skyscraper collapses, any visible cues you show me will fall on blind eyes; as far as I am concerned, it would look like any other, or at least, like some other skyscraper collapse.
    Aslan 11/1/90 - 6/15/10 Stormy 1/22/95 -8/23/10
    “There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church,
    but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”
    Bishop Fulton J. Sheen

    “It takes a very long time to become young.” Pablo Picasso

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aslan View Post
    I have never seen a building the height and size of the WTC buildings collapse, but the pictures look to me a lot like other building collapses I have seen...
    WTC-2 in video is not collapsing, it's disintegrating with all of the tell-tale signs of incredible explosive force.
    The controlled demolitions you've seen are more akin to WTC-7, appearing below to be a classic collapse of the conventional sort. Some alt-theorists speculate that WTC-7 was a command post for the operation. But here is the familiar-looking type (Vegas style) collapse. Compare the two videos, WTC-2 had 100 stories to WTC7's 50 -
    - WTC2 is visibly disintegrating from the start while gushing outward with tremendous force. Look carefully at the huge chunks disintegrating as they fall in the first video.

    Last edited by zengrifter; February 18th, 2014 at 02:13 AM.
    "The dogs bark but the caravan moves on."
    .....................The Zengrifter Interview (PDF) |
    The Zengrifter / James Grosjean Reputation Debate
    -----------------------------------------
    “Truth, like gold, is obtained not by growth, but by washing away all that is not gold.” — Leo Tolstoy........
    "Is everything a conspiracy? No, just the important stuff." ZG

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. What if god really happened to be one of us?
    By Arkham Knight in forum ZenZone General Discussion
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: November 21st, 2014, 04:22 PM
  2. 911: What Really Happened
    By Katweezel in forum ZenZone General Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: May 13th, 2013, 11:49 PM
  3. WTF Happened?
    By Katweezel in forum Anything Else But
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 13th, 2012, 10:30 PM
  4. What Happened To The GOP?
    By Katweezel in forum Anything Else But
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: June 29th, 2012, 08:59 PM
  5. How much did the USA government know about 9/11 before it happened
    By SilentBob420BMFJ in forum ZenZone General Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: September 10th, 2007, 05:51 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts