Was 911 an Inside Job

Was 911 an Inside Job

Created by inquiring minds on Jan 4, 2013

17,795 votes

Click on an option to vote

YES

No

Don't know

Possibly

Epic Glottus

San Rafael, CA

#4597 May 20, 2013
AIRLINES PARTICIPATING IN A CRIMINAL COVER-UP?
.
As mentioned already in the previous section, part of the public relations efforts carried out by Weber Shandwick, at the request of American Airlines, was to “subtly steer[.,.] reporters away from rumors and leaked information”. What type of “leaked information” was AA concerned with?
.
It is argued here that the information AA did not want to “leak” to the public was the same information that AA refuses to reveal to the families of the victims and to the public in general since 9/11. Such information includes:
.
(a) Names of ground personnel who saw off the passengers and crew at the departure gate on 9/11 and could testify on what they saw;
.
(b) Authentified copies of the flight manifests, which would show the names of the alleged hijackers and of the passengers;
.
(c) Copies of boarding cards, which would show the names of the alleged hijackers and of the passengers and confirm their seat numbers;
.
(d) Computer listing of the boarding times of individual passengers and hijackers;
.
(e) Positive evidence that the aircraft which left the airport was indeed the aircraft which later crashed into the known target (aircraft serial number, tail number, engine serial numbers, black boxes, etc.);
.
(f) Names and contacts of AA personnel who reportedly communicated by cellphones with crew or passengers on the hijacked aircraft and could publicly testify on these conversations.
.
The present author asked both American and United Airlines to provide some of the above information..
Both airlines declined to provide the information and referred the author to the FBI for all such data.
.
The last attempt to obtain information from American Airlines (a letter to AA spokesman Marty Heires of October 6, 2004) did not elicit any response at all.
.
Neither airline, however, justified in its answer its refusal on a legal restraining order or on the need to protect the privacy of the families of the victims or of its personnel.
.
The author has not come across any Justice Department order, or any legal ruling, that prohibits airlines from releasing the above information and airline personnel to communicate freely with the media on matters relating to 9/11..
However, Tim Doke, in his email to the present author claimed that the FBI “limited what we could say publicly through the media” and that “employees who were in contact with the terrorists on the ground... could not talk to reporters... under the FBI's restrictions.”
.
A spokesperson of the FBI, asked why the agency has not publicized the original flight manifests in support of its allegation against 19 named hijackers, did not maintain that the FBI or the airlines were legally prohibited from disclosing the original flight manifest.
.
She simply referred the present author to the airlines for such information.
.
The airlines’ apparently uncoerced refusal to produce the above information suggests that this refusal is prompted by their interest to prevent their employees, the families of victims and the public from knowing the full truth on the events of 9/11.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#4598 May 21, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
So really, your happy being a part of a likeminded group of idiots who engage in smears, use circular reasoning, can't debate, and use fallacious arguments like "big chunks fall faster" when describing falling bodies in the WTC collapses?
No wonder you dishonestly pose the question is free fall "a" speed, to suggest these mythical "twoofers" that you describe in cartoon, actually believe the speed is constant in free fall.
Yes, I'm quite content with being associated with posters who point out that the dislodged chunks falling at free fall fell faster than the the tower which fell slower than free fall.

And whine, snivel and twist all you want. The reality is that twoofers generally don't give a crap that the ignorance they spew has no scientific validity because, like you, most twoofers are completely scientifically illiterate. And your continued attempts to justify idiotic phrases like "they fell at free fall speed" instead of working to correct the average twoofers understanding of physics do nothing for your argument but reiterate the validity of my previous claim regarding scientific illiteracy.

Thanks for that!
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
You do it because understanding of a building collapse, that attains free fall acceleration through multiple floors of resistance means that resistance has been sequentially removed or completely removed all at once; and only explosive force can account for this.
My car accelerates, does that mean my speedometer never works?
All anyone needs to know about free fall is an object falls without resistance, and a building collapsing without explosives or incendiaries naturally resists.
You've been asked many, many times to prove, using science, that the structural integrity of a building can't be removed by the failure of load bearing supports by fire (and lets not forget the planes).

You've continuously failed to do so and just spew idiotic twoofer memes where your opportunity to put your money where your mouth is by validating your claim with real science presents itself. Then you go on to whine that NIST didn't follow the scientific method.

The irony is so thick even thermite couldn't cut it!
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
An example and analysis of gravity driven collapse.
http://youtu.be/NiHeCjZlkr8
Heres a good video for you to ignore that discusses the free fall of Building 7.
http://youtu.be/e8N6V68jotg
Right, yourube videos rather than supporting your position...and you can't even summarize what your dumb little videos say.

Perfect example of why twoofers fail at everything.

Your understanding is so poor that you can't explain in your own words what you believe so you mindlessly allow someone else to say it for you.
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
NIST never had physical evidence to examine anything about building 7, and had a few hundred pieces out of the countless debris from WTC 1 & 2 to study, and against basic investigative protocol, failed to check for their presence.
And of course they ignored witness testimony.
http://youtu.be/ERhoNYj9_fg
I made multiple posts regarding the collection of materials and why it would be extremely difficult to find examples that weren't damaged by subsequent fires to a point where they couldn't be used for discovery.

You ignored everyone of those posts because you can't argue from a position of knowledge, all you can do is mindlessly shill twoofer memes as if they had validity...which they don't.

You also posted NIST explanation that they couldn't conclusively say what pieces came from WTC 7 and this had to do with the type of markings used by the fabricators at the point of construction.

The reality is you still have no valid argument and just spew the same old tired twoofer memes.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#4599 May 21, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
So you just be quite comfortable on the team that can't think, debate, or understand anything more than you are told. And I'll stay on the team that has known since I was seven years old that "big chunks free fall the same rate as little chunks".
Compared to Newton,
Insults Are Easier
And there's a perfect example of the dishonesty you claim others are exhibiting.

It's been pointed out that the big chunks which were free of the building (dislodged) fell faster than the collapse front which proves the towers fell slower than free fall...yet in the absence of a valid argument, you lie because,

[Your] Ignorance is [Your] Bliss

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#4600 May 21, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
There is ample evidence, from both witnesses and recordings, of explosions associated with the destruction of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7).
.
NIST sidestepped investigating explosions and explosives by setting up an artificially high threshold of interest.
.
They swept aside any testimony or recordings of explosions that would not register 130-140 dB one kilometer away.
.
They established this criterion using RDX (one of the loudest explosives) in a scenario that produced a far higher sound level than other possible uses of explosives to bring down the building.
.
Then they turned around and used sound level as the sole criterion for deciding whether the use of explosives was a credible hypothesis.
.
By this maneuver, they sidestepped investigating the testimony of explosives or possible evidence of explosive residues.
.
This is just one more instance of fraudulent behavior on the part of the NIST investigation of the World Trade Center disaster.
.
Deceptive wasn't it? Kinda like Magik Huh Eh !
And once again, in elevator boy form, oh elevator boy-sheep 20 pilots STREET CORNER JEEBUS uses someone else's opinion which fails utterly on the basis of simple physics.

Yet in his sheep like manner, he completely misses it!

The audible signature of an explosion depends mainly on two criteria.

1) The rate of energy release.

2) The amount used.

What oh elevator boy-sheep 20 pilots STREET CORNER JEEBUS obviously doesn't understand is that estimated decibels were based not on a type of explosive, but on what twooferdumb claims happened and that even if an explosive used had a slower release rate, more would have to be used to achieve the same effect.

And again we see the real attempts at deception by claiming reports of secondary explosions must mean the use of explosives even though its been shown time and again that these reports are very common in many types of fires because *GASP* there are many things in buildings that explode when subjected to fire.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#4601 May 21, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Ever notice how wasted water never cites sources for his evidunce.
.
Most of time he just says proposterous, it never happened that way, with no citations of how he knows it didn't happen that way.
.
Just a hunch I suppose.
.
That don't cut it anymore!?!?!?
Ever notice how even after oh elevator boy-sheep 20 pilots STREET CORNER JERBUS' are proven wrong, he continues to trust and mindlessly accept the opinions of those sources?

Oh elevator boy-sheep 20 pilots STREET CORNER JEEBUS!

“Turn left at pub Number 42”

Since: Dec 08

Homehill,QLD

#4602 May 21, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>And there's a perfect example of the dishonesty you claim others are exhibiting.
It's been pointed out that the big chunks which were free of the building (dislodged) fell faster than the collapse front which proves the towers fell slower than free fall...yet in the absence of a valid argument, you lie because,
[Your] Ignorance is [Your] Bliss
Like this
http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/images/ph...
Epic Glottus

San Rafael, CA

#4603 May 21, 2013
LOL How do you take anyone seriously who calls himself Street Corner Jeebus?
Epic Glottus

San Rafael, CA

#4604 May 21, 2013
And who cares about free-fall acceleration or not.
How does a second or two either way make any difference?
Epic Glottus

San Rafael, CA

#4605 May 21, 2013
Arguing about free-fall acceleration or not, a couple of seconds here or there, or whether this chunk of debris fell faster than that chunk only serves to obstruct and obfuscate what is really important.

What's really important is that the government created and orchestrated 9/11, and they were allowed to investigate themselves. And it was found they did NOTHING wrong.

The CIA was running guns to Syrian rebels at Benghazi when our embassy was attacked and Americans killed, and no one got fired.

People are getting fired at the IRS for doing their jobs incorrectly.

Who got fired at the various government defensive agencies for not doing their jobs on 9/11 not defending this country from allegedly hi-jacked aircraft, resulting in the needless deaths of many Americans?

NO ONE !?!?!?

Oh they were just doing what they were told eh !
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#4606 May 21, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Ever notice how wasted water never cites sources for his evidunce.
Have any sources for those 20 pilots?

Since: May 13

Willow Springs, IL

#4607 May 21, 2013
There's way tooo much evidence for it not be an inside job. I would atleast like to see someone argue agains the experts/scientists who arguably know more than most of you.

AlexJones has some stuff you can look at.

Don't trust your government. Mainstream media, food industry, and the education.

You'll realize so many flaws in each area.
Mainstream media- false fear mongering media, even CNN attempted to fail in blue screening back in the 30s.
Food Industry - Oh god, this is so fucking bad. You guys need to realize that the only thing you just should stop eating is Hydrogenated man made fats and refined sugar. I've spent years on this area.
Saturated fats like coconut oil and butter are probably the healthiest fat for humans. Clearly too much studies show this yet our education lies.

GMO cancer/tumor trigging corns and soys, triggers for many health problems. Then there's Fluoride, which according to actual studies are known to dumb you down mentally, as well as tumor/cancer growth.
Charlie Sheen

Lansing, MI

#4609 May 21, 2013
Come get me topix mods I dare ya.

I was mistaken about those 20 pilots I won't mention it again. On my honor if I have any left, I promise!?!?!?
Charlie Sheen

Lansing, MI

#4611 May 21, 2013
Oops # 4609

Musta forgot about #4608 eh !?!?!?
Charlie Sheen

San Rafael, CA

#4613 May 21, 2013
Charlie Sheen gets around!?!?!?
Charlie Sheen Sucks

San Rafael, CA

#4614 May 21, 2013
Sorry Charlie and his topix butt buddies SUCK
Jones is Gman

East Brunswick, NJ

#4615 May 21, 2013
MongolSpirit wrote:
There's way tooo much evidence for it not be an inside job. I would atleast like to see someone argue agains the experts/scientists who arguably know more than most of you.
AlexJones has some stuff you can look at.
Don't trust your government. Mainstream media, food industry, and the education.
You'll realize so many flaws in each area.
Mainstream media- false fear mongering media, even CNN attempted to fail in blue screening back in the 30s.
Food Industry - Oh god, this is so fucking bad. You guys need to realize that the only thing you just should stop eating is Hydrogenated man made fats and refined sugar. I've spent years on this area.
Saturated fats like coconut oil and butter are probably the healthiest fat for humans. Clearly too much studies show this yet our education lies.
GMO cancer/tumor trigging corns and soys, triggers for many health problems. Then there's Fluoride, which according to actual studies are known to dumb you down mentally, as well as tumor/cancer growth.

A for effort but no Jones doesnt have any info up about 9/11. The alternative media is controlled too. Jones is a gatekeeper & controlled opposition. Jones claims there were hijackers on 9/11. He seldom even talks about it. When he does it is disinfo. 95% of conspiracy theories are put out by the govt to obfuscate truth.
There are big problems tho. The food and education are all used against us.
But Jones only tells us what we know to control that message then point the wrong direction and datamine his listeners like all militias are controlled, he is no different.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#4616 May 21, 2013
Epic Glottus wrote:
AIRLINES PARTICIPATING IN A CRIMINAL COVER-UP?
.
As mentioned already in the previous section, part of the public relations efforts carried out by Weber Shandwick, at the request of American Airlines, was to “subtly steer[.,.] reporters away from rumors and leaked information”. What type of “leaked information” was AA concerned with?
.
It is argued here that the information AA did not want to “leak” to the public was the same information that AA refuses to reveal to the families of the victims and to the public in general since 9/11. Such information includes:
.
(a) Names of ground personnel who saw off the passengers and crew at the departure gate on 9/11 and could testify on what they saw;
.
(b) Authentified copies of the flight manifests, which would show the names of the alleged hijackers and of the passengers;
.
(c) Copies of boarding cards, which would show the names of the alleged hijackers and of the passengers and confirm their seat numbers;
.
(d) Computer listing of the boarding times of individual passengers and hijackers;
.
(e) Positive evidence that the aircraft which left the airport was indeed the aircraft which later crashed into the known target (aircraft serial number, tail number, engine serial numbers, black boxes, etc.);
.
(f) Names and contacts of AA personnel who reportedly communicated by cellphones with crew or passengers on the hijacked aircraft and could publicly testify on these conversations.
.
The present author asked both American and United Airlines to provide some of the above information..
Both airlines declined to provide the information and referred the author to the FBI for all such data.
.
The last attempt to obtain information from American Airlines (a letter to AA spokesman Marty Heires of October 6, 2004) did not elicit any response at all.
.
Neither airline, however, justified in its answer its refusal on a legal restraining order or on the need to protect the privacy of the families of the victims or of its personnel.
.
The author has not come across any Justice Department order, or any legal ruling, that prohibits airlines from releasing the above information and airline personnel to communicate freely with the media on matters relating to 9/11..
However, Tim Doke, in his email to the present author claimed that the FBI “limited what we could say publicly through the media” and that “employees who were in contact with the terrorists on the ground... could not talk to reporters... under the FBI's restrictions.”
.
A spokesperson of the FBI, asked why the agency has not publicized the original flight manifests in support of its allegation against 19 named hijackers, did not maintain that the FBI or the airlines were legally prohibited from disclosing the original flight manifest.
.
She simply referred the present author to the airlines for such information.
.
The airlines’ apparently uncoerced refusal to produce the above information suggests that this refusal is prompted by their interest to prevent their employees, the families of victims and the public from knowing the full truth on the events of 9/11.
Indeed!

“Trolls are Clueless”

Since: Dec 07

Aptos, California

#4617 May 21, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text> Yes, I'm quite content with being associated with posters who point out that the dislodged chunks falling at free fall fell faster than the the tower which fell slower than free fall.
And whine, snivel and twist all you want. The reality is that twoofers generally don't give a crap that the ignorance they spew has no scientific validity because, like you, most twoofers are completely scientifically illiterate. And your continued attempts to justify idiotic phrases like "they fell at free fall speed" instead of working to correct the average twoofers understanding of physics do nothing for your argument but reiterate the validity of my previous claim regarding scientific illiteracy.
Thanks for that!
<quoted text> You've been asked many, many times to prove, using science, that the structural integrity of a building can't be removed by the failure of load bearing supports by fire (and lets not forget the planes).
You've continuously failed to do so and just spew idiotic twoofer memes where your opportunity to put your money where your mouth is by validating your claim with real science presents itself. Then you go on to whine that NIST didn't follow the scientific method.
The irony is so thick even thermite couldn't cut it!
<quoted text>Right, yourube videos rather than supporting your position...and you can't even summarize what your dumb little videos say.
Perfect example of why twoofers fail at everything.
Your understanding is so poor that you can't explain in your own words what you believe so you mindlessly allow someone else to say it for you.
<quoted text>I made multiple posts regarding the collection of materials and why it would be extremely difficult to find examples that weren't damaged by subsequent fires to a point where they couldn't be used for discovery.
You ignored everyone of those posts because you can't argue from a position of knowledge, all you can do is mindlessly shill twoofer memes as if they had validity...which they don't.
You also posted NIST explanation that they couldn't conclusively say what pieces came from WTC 7 and this had to do with the type of markings used by the fabricators at the point of construction.
The reality is you still have no valid argument and just spew the same old tired twoofer memes.
Well said.

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#4618 May 21, 2013
Haha look at whats above me?

Dumb and dumber.

Insults Are Easier

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#4619 May 21, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
Haha look at whats above me?
Dumb and dumber.
Insults Are Easier
Yea, insults are easier when you have no facts and evidence.

What a Jackass!!!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 2 min TrumpTheRetard 41,596
Bring the jobs back to the USA! 44 min Paul is dead 539
Sometimes I like Louis Farrakhan's "sermons"...... 1 hr Paul is dead 97
God......do You enjoy wacthing me SUFFER?? 1 hr Doctor REALITY 15
Would the world have been better off...without ... 1 hr Doctor REALITY 1
Why it's high time to get rid of billionaires 3 hr Paul is dead 53
Trump's "Russia Worries" louder than the noon sun 5 hr Johnny 9
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 6 hr Tellthetruth 989,669
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 10 hr guest 690,311
More from around the web