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

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#1974 Feb 19, 2013
NIST:
.
Therefore, while a thermite reaction can cut through large steel columns, many thousands of pounds of thermite would need to have been placed inconspicuously ahead of time, remotely ignited, and somehow held in direct contact with the surface of hundreds of massive structural components to weaken the building.
.
This makes it an unlikely substance for achieving a controlled demolition.
.
NIST:
.
While not testing for the residue of thermite, did manage to calculate that it would take "many thousands of pounds."
.
This logic is remarkable.
.
An assisted collapse would require many thousands of pounds, yet their preferred explanation of a gravity only collapse would require none.
.
If an assisted collapse requires thermite charges to be placed on hundreds of massive structural components to weaken the building, how would a gravity only collapse be able to perform that same task? How was the bottom two thirds of the building weakened so the top third could come crashing down to the ground?
.
Straight down directly through the line of most resistance to any falling object?
.
Oh so many questions, so few brain-dead bwunking believers left here to answer all of them.
.
First they try to refute. Then when that fails, they try to dismiss the source and demand incontrovertible proof. When that fails they rely in desperation on the Ad Hominem "ridicule the messenger" attack and call it bwunked.
.
Jet Fuel ha ha ha ha
.
That's Funny HUH Eh !

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#1975 Feb 19, 2013
Timesten wrote:
RJ Lee: The Deutsche Bank building, right next to the Twin Towers, was heavily contaminated by dust produced by the collapse. But Deutsche Bank’s insurance company refused to pay for the clean-up, claiming that this dust had not resulted from the destruction of the WTC. So Deutsche Bank hired the RJ Lee Group to do a study, which showed that the dust in the Deutsche Bank was WTC dust, which had a unique signature. Part of this signature was “Spherical iron ... particles.” This meant, the RJ Lee Group said, that iron had “melted during the WTC Event, producing spherical metallic particles.” The study even showed that, whereas iron particles constitute only 0.04 percent of normal [demolished] building dust, they constituted almost 6 percent of WTC Dust – meaning almost 150 times as much as normal.
The RJ Lee study also found that temperatures had been reached “at which lead would have undergone vaporization”– meaning 1,749°C (3,180°F).
“The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing.”– The 9/11 Commission Report
.
John Gross’s reply, October 2006:
“First of all, let’s go back to your basic premise that there was a pool of molten steel. I know of absolutely nobody, no eyewitness, who has said so.”— John Gross, lead structural engineer for the NIST investigation, at the University of Texas, Austin
So what does any of this prove? The fires were really hot. So what?
Charlie Sheen

Seward, NE

#1976 Feb 19, 2013
Forgotten faith wrote:
<quoted text>
A fireman or paramedic mentions something about explosions on this one...
But not actual sight of them, just the sounds of them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =5fH7c8H6SNwXX&feature=you tube_gdata_player
That's Paul Issac and the key word is "like".

The article written by randy lavello is also slander as he has me saying that woolsey former CIA Director Woolsey was passing a gag order down the rank and file of the FDNY. That statement was never made in that context, It was said in humor ,and as a matter of fact that so-called reporter was fired by Alex Jones for making **** up on alot of people. The only reason I didn't go through the legal channels is because lawyers cost to damn much.

So the true statement was that I heard Explosions not bombs as I couldn't tell what the sounds were as I was blocks away and can not confirm what the noise was. As I was aproaching City Hall the North Tower began the collapse I heard what sounded like thunder just prior to the collapse then the Popping as the tower fell. I had my radio scanner and there were reports of explsions within the conplex over the PD and PAPD frequencies. As I made my way closer I could pick up on the FD Handie Talkie frequencies and it sounded like hell. No one new what the was going to happen next but when the second tower began its fall there were what sounded like loud popping coming from the tower as well as a sucking sound like reveres air pressure.

Its seems the people at 911Truth have some problems with credibility as I had approached them on this issue for clarification. No need to say they never returned my messages.

They are tools of the trade.

It's floors smacking together, if it was a controlled demolition half of NYC would have heard this and there we be no doubt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#1977 Feb 19, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
The obvious thing about the official story is NIST was never a real investigation to determine what caused the complete destruction of those buildings. It's job was simply to make official the official narrative put forth the first few days of the event.
http://youtu.be/-5y8PtfKA14
Had the government intended NIST to investigate scientifically, it would have carefully saved the evidence until all investigations were complete, and would never have been in a hurry to sell off the steel for recycling.
Who needs evidence when computers can say whatever we want? Paraphrased from Mayor Bloomberg when he responded to 9/11 victim families complaints about the destruction of evidence.
NIST had 236 individual pieces from WTC 1 & 2 to evaluate, none from building 7. So now you know why the government was so worried about trying terrorists in the court system, because courts require evidence, as does credible science. NIST WTC Final Report was not scientific, because it can never be peer reviewed thanks to the destruction of the evidence.
But lets not let NIST tolerate, or investigate, outrageous conspiracy theories.
http://youtu.be/6K5M0xtxQVQ
Canadian liars without character have no problem repeating debunking propaganda that steel melting in fires is common. Steel does not melt by office fires, and it isn't seen flowing like liquid by firemen who are trained to determine what is melting in fires.
http://youtu.be/wcqf5tL887o
You can always tell the brainwashed by the labels they use, so it is no mystery why they disbelieve information that they have already labeled as "twoofer" info. They have no ability to determine truth, other then trusting the authorities that educated them in the first place.
For the indoctrinated who believe they are educated,
Insults Are Easier
Steel melts in office fires started by airplanes fully loaded with fuel crashing high up in a tower.

It's obvious that is exactly what happened.

What a Jackass.

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#1978 Feb 19, 2013
RADEKT wrote:
<quoted text>Did you actually read this Bull Shit somewhere or did you juust make it up !!?!?!?!?!

because being CLUELESS is so much easier
Its called analysis, catfish, and it is based on reading the NIST Report itself.

Remember TWA Flight 800? That aircraft exploded over the ocean and it was almost completely recovered. Yet a building collapses and only .5 percent was recovered for the investigation, and no physical evidence was recovered from WTC 7.

I repeat, no physical evidence was investigated from building 7.

Thats called a cover-up, catfish, similar to you claiming your "girlfriend" or "Wall Street job" is real.

But for those not prone to heavy drooling, you can read the cover-up for yourself at:

http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/wt...

NIST NCSTAR 1-3B
Steel Inventory and Identification

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Upon arrival at NIST, the samples were catalogued, documented, and when possible, identified as to their precise, as-built location within the buildings. The vast majority of the structural components are from WTC 1 and WTC 2. It is estimated that roughly 0.25 percent to 0.5 percent of the 200,000 tons of steel used in the construction of the two towers was recovered. The following lists the recovered structural steel elements:

• Out of the 90 exterior panels recovered, the as-built location of 42 distinct sections was unambiguously identified within WTC 1 and WTC 2:
− 26 panels from WTC 1: 22 from or near the impact floors, 4 hit directly by the airplane,
− 16 panels from WTC 2: 4 near the impact floors.

• Out of the 55 wide flange sections and built-up box sections recovered, 12 core columns were
positively identified from WTC 1 and WTC 2, including:
− Two columns from the fire floors of WTC 1,− Two columns from the impact zone of WTC 2.

• 23 pieces of floor truss material from WTC 1 and WTC 2 were recovered; however, the as- built location of the trusses within the buildings could not be identified.

• 25 pieces of channel material that connected the floor trusses to the core columns in WTC 1 and WTC 2 were recovered; however, the as-built location of the channels within the buildings could not be identified.
• One piece of floor framing from outside the core of the 107th floor of WTC 1.
• Seven coupons from WTC 5 were removed in the field and sent to NIST.

• No pieces could be unambiguously identified as being from WTC 7.

Insults Are Easier

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#1979 Feb 19, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>Steel melts in office fires started by airplanes fully loaded with fuel crashing high up in a tower.

It's obvious that is exactly what happened.

What a Jackass.
Does it? Unfortunately, you are just making stuff up, again, because nowhere in the NIST report does it claim steel melted at all, and it even went so far to ignore reports of melted steel, because NIST at least understood the consequences of finding melted steel would point to controlled demolition.

How do you avoid finding melted steel? Start with selective recovery of evidence that shows only what you want to find, then destroy the rest.

Thats why it never tested for incendiaries, explosives, while refusing to follow basic scientific method.

Thats why officials destroyed the evidence before the investigation.

Thats why NIST WTC Final report was unscientific, and that in itself proves the crime was a government ran conspiracy.

That's why you are the Jackass, but you will always be the last to know.

And why,

Insults Are Easier

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#1980 Feb 19, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
Does it? Unfortunately, you are just making stuff up, again, because nowhere in the NIST report does it claim steel melted at all, and it even went so far to ignore reports of melted steel, because NIST at least understood the consequences of finding melted steel would point to controlled demolition.
How do you avoid finding melted steel? Start with selective recovery of evidence that shows only what you want to find, then destroy the rest.
Thats why it never tested for incendiaries, explosives, while refusing to follow basic scientific method.
Thats why officials destroyed the evidence before the investigation.
Thats why NIST WTC Final report was unscientific, and that in itself proves the crime was a government ran conspiracy.
That's why you are the Jackass, but you will always be the last to know.
And why,
Insults Are Easier
The planes hit the buildings and they fell down. There was no evidence of your imaginary demolitions or need to investigate such nonsense.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#1981 Feb 19, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
Does it? Unfortunately, you are just making stuff up, again, because nowhere in the NIST report does it claim steel melted at all, and it even went so far to ignore reports of melted steel, because NIST at least understood the consequences of finding melted steel would point to controlled demolition.
How do you avoid finding melted steel? Start with selective recovery of evidence that shows only what you want to find, then destroy the rest.
Thats why it never tested for incendiaries, explosives, while refusing to follow basic scientific method.
Thats why officials destroyed the evidence before the investigation.
Thats why NIST WTC Final report was unscientific, and that in itself proves the crime was a government ran conspiracy.
That's why you are the Jackass, but you will always be the last to know.
And why,
Insults Are Easier
There was melted steel. What are you talking about? Anyone can see that the fire burned for over two hours. Science is based upon observation, theory and proof. You are the one who is unscientific.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#1982 Feb 19, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
Does it? Unfortunately, you are just making stuff up, again, because nowhere in the NIST report does it claim steel melted at all, and it even went so far to ignore reports of melted steel, because NIST at least understood the consequences of finding melted steel would point to controlled demolition.
How do you avoid finding melted steel? Start with selective recovery of evidence that shows only what you want to find, then destroy the rest.
Thats why it never tested for incendiaries, explosives, while refusing to follow basic scientific method.
Thats why officials destroyed the evidence before the investigation.
Thats why NIST WTC Final report was unscientific, and that in itself proves the crime was a government ran conspiracy.
That's why you are the Jackass, but you will always be the last to know.
And why,
Insults Are Easier
It proves nothing except the obvious, that hijackers flew fully fueled planes into the buildings at a high rate of speed which resulted in significant damage and collapse.
no need

Winchester, KY

#1983 Feb 19, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
The planes hit the buildings and they fell down. There was no evidence of your imaginary demolitions or need to investigate such nonsense.
of course there is no need to investigate any further because whatever we were told by the government and the mainstream media is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Always remember, Big Brother is lookin' out for you ; ]
boxcutters

Winchester, KY

#1984 Feb 19, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
It proves nothing except the obvious, that hijackers flew fully fueled planes into the buildings at a high rate of speed which resulted in significant damage and collapse.
and don't forget to tell 'em about the boxcutters they used to subdue the entire crew and passengers

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#1985 Feb 19, 2013
no need wrote:
<quoted text>
of course there is no need to investigate any further because whatever we were told by the government and the mainstream media is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Always remember, Big Brother is lookin' out for you ; ]
There is such a thing as evidence. Evidence was collected by various government agencies who are the ones who are charged with such responsibilities. They have strict procedures which they follow. Are you saying all these agencies and individuals all colluded?
what if

Winchester, KY

#1986 Feb 19, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
There is such a thing as evidence. Evidence was collected by various government agencies who are the ones who are charged with such responsibilities. They have strict procedures which they follow. Are you saying all these agencies and individuals all colluded?
what if the perpetrators of the crime were also the ones responsible for hiring the investigators, what do you think the conclusions of the investigations would be? Of course, for you this is nonsense and completely out of the realm of possibility, right?

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#1987 Feb 19, 2013
Timesten wrote:
You might want to look at photos from the 1993 explosion which took place in that same parking garage. They didn't have thermetic shape charges and took out more than 3 or 4.

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#1988 Feb 19, 2013

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#1989 Feb 19, 2013
yuri wrote:
yes it was a inside job by usa goverment
Agreed yuri
https://sites.google.com/site/911whatyoumight...

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#1990 Feb 19, 2013
9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out
High-rise architects, structural engineers, scientists, physicists, chemists, scholars, educators, firefighters, forensic fire engineers, demolition experts and others have put together a ground-breaking scientific assessment of the events at the World Trade Center.

The sudden, complete collapse of the third skyscraper on 9/11, WTC Building 7 at 5:20pm, is now being seen around the world as “the smoking gun” which disproves the official story about 9/11.

These experts also introduce additional “overwhelming evidence” for a controlled demolition hypothesis at WTC which is disturbing to say the least.

.
https://sites.google.com/site/911whatyoumight...

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Didsbury, Canada

#1991 Feb 20, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
The obvious thing about the official story is NIST was never a real investigation to determine what caused the complete destruction of those buildings. It's job was simply to make official the official narrative put forth the first few days of the event.

http://youtu.be/-5y8PtfKA14

Had the government intended NIST to investigate scientifically, it would have carefully saved the evidence until all investigations were complete, and would never have been in a hurry to sell off the steel for recycling.

Who needs evidence when computers can say whatever we want? Paraphrased from Mayor Bloomberg when he responded to 9/11 victim families complaints about the destruction of evidence.

NIST had 236 individual pieces from WTC 1 & 2 to evaluate, none from building 7. So now you know why the government was so worried about trying terrorists in the court system, because courts require evidence, as does credible science. NIST WTC Final Report was not scientific, because it can never be peer reviewed thanks to the destruction of the evidence.

But lets not let NIST tolerate, or investigate, outrageous conspiracy theories.

http://youtu.be/6K5M0xtxQVQ

Canadian liars without character have no problem repeating debunking propaganda that steel melting in fires is common. Steel does not melt by office fires, and it isn't seen flowing like liquid by firemen who are trained to determine what is melting in fires.

http://youtu.be/wcqf5tL887o

You can always tell the brainwashed by the labels they use, so it is no mystery why they disbelieve information that they have already labeled as "twoofer" info. They have no ability to determine truth, other then trusting the authorities that educated them in the first place.

For the indoctrinated who believe they are educated,

Insults Are Easier
Steel plating?

Funny how your dumb rants never include anything to support them Ignorance.
A Soul

London, UK

#1992 Feb 20, 2013
Obviously there is something wrong with the out-come investigation of 9/11.
It would be wrong for a new investigation to take place because all the history books would have to be changed.
And so sadly we have to go along with the "Offical" story.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Didsbury, Canada

#1993 Feb 20, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text><Irrelevant lies and bs snipped for brevity>
NIST NCSTAR 1-3B
Steel Inventory and Identification

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Upon arrival at NIST, the samples were catalogued, documented, and when possible, identified as to their precise, as-built location within the buildings. The vast majority of the structural components are from WTC 1 and WTC 2. It is estimated that roughly 0.25 percent to 0.5 percent of the 200,000 tons of steel used in the construction of the two towers was recovered. The following lists the recovered structural steel elements:

• Out of the 90 exterior panels recovered, the as-built location of 42 distinct sections was unambiguously identified within WTC 1 and WTC 2:
− 26 panels from WTC 1: 22 from or near the impact floors, 4 hit directly by the airplane,
− 16 panels from WTC 2: 4 near the impact floors.

• Out of the 55 wide flange sections and built-up box sections recovered, 12 core columns were
positively identified from WTC 1 and WTC 2, including:
− Two columns from the fire floors of WTC 1,− Two columns from the impact zone of WTC 2.

• 23 pieces of floor truss material from WTC 1 and WTC 2 were recovered; however, the as- built location of the trusses within the buildings could not be identified.

• 25 pieces of channel material that connected the floor trusses to the core columns in WTC 1 and WTC 2 were recovered; however, the as-built location of the channels within the buildings could not be identified.
• One piece of floor framing from outside the core of the 107th floor of WTC 1.
• Seven coupons from WTC 5 were removed in the field and sent to NIST.

• No pieces could be unambiguously identified as being from WTC 7.

Insults Are Easier
"unambiguously identified"

Any clue what that means lil twoofer?

It means some pieces could be identified to a built locations and some could not.

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
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 2 min Rosa_Winkel 56,492
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 5 min onemale 281,487
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 8 min Catcher1 971,901
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 17 min bad bob 183,001
topix drops human sexuality forum.......this be... 28 min patsy the shared ... 42
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 44 min andet1987 2,366
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 45 min WasteWater 45,016
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr confrinting with ... 650,847
More from around the web