Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

55,132 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#261034 Oct 20, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
I never saw any sign of a 757 jet.
The photos are phony, yes there were an engine but not big enough for a 757, there were landing gear but again not big enough for a 757. My questions are:
How does a pile of rubble (or an aluminum hollow structure) destroy a building that is made to withstand missile attacks??? How does a unidentified jet get near the most protected building in the world???
Is our air defense system that in-confident???
Who told you the Pentagon was made to withstand missile attacks?
That isn't so, it was made from concrete forms, while it is pretty strong it isn't missile proof. 160,000 lbs = 72575 kg / mass
12,977,571.2 m kg / s = 93,866,952.25 ft/ s lbs of energy.

A 30.06 is 3,000 ft lbs at the muzzle so the impact was equal to about 31,290 30.06 blasts a second for 5-10 seconds duration.
or 156,500 - 313,000 30.06 bullets fired at once.
Indeed how could that bust through those concrete wall?
F = ma is how.

To put this into perspective, this is a ammo can with 192 rounds
in it.

http://browningmgs.com/AmmoCans/T-Chial/AmmoB...

Imagine 815 - 1,630 cans fired at once.
That about the equivalent of all the US army, at the height of the surge in Iraq all firing at once at a single target.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#261035 Oct 20, 2013
Doctor REALITY wrote:
<quoted text>Look, STOOPID, T-H-I-S is NOT American Airlines Boeing 757!!!!!: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =lsWZHKIg3CsXX
1. How can you even tell by that grainy low res frame.
2. Looks sorta like the nose of a plane to me, but again it's grainy so i'ts hard to tell wtf it looks like.
3. Prove it isn't.

What do the witnesses say?

oop....you lose.

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

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#261036 Oct 20, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
What science? The planes hit the buildings causing enough damage to collapse them. You have nothing but unsubstantiated opinions. You have no facts or evidence to support those worthless opinions.
Your links are equally worthless.
I know you have made up Your mind and You don't want any more information, whatever the implications, and no matter how it implicates your masters who call the shots in this world.

I am reminded of something Leo Tolstoy once said.

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them beforehand; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if in his mind he is firmly persuaded that he already knows, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.”

I am not trying to convince you of anything waste of water. I don't care what you think. You are most welcome to your own individual worthless opinions with their astonishing lack of links to any credible sources.

So you waste of water and I (and all the sources I cite) will just have to agree to disagree.

Huh Eh !

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#261037 Oct 20, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
1. The aircraft severed “a number of columns”
2. Loads were redistributed (from -20% to +25%)
3. Insulation fireproofing was widely dislodged
4. High temperatures softened columns and floors
5. Some floors began to sag
6. Sagging floors pulled exterior columns inward causing them to buckle
7. Instability spread around entire building[11]
NIST consistently uses “Bush science” to compromise all of their arguments.
http://911blogger.com/node/4324
Huh Eh !
1) This isn't even in dispute. Load bearing components that were destroyed can be seen in any video or picture and the fact that the energy of impact severed columns further into the building out of the ability to see isn't a leap of faith by any stretch of the imagination.

"Aircraft Impact Damage"

http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/PDFfiles/Chapte...

(I know moron, it's science and you young earth creationist types don't get it!)

2) This isn't in dispute either. Load redistribution wasn't something invented to explain the towers collapse dummy. It's a well known, well understood concept taught to all structural engineers.

http://scholar.google.ca/scholar...

3) If twoofers can't understand how fire resistant foam can't be removed by the impact of a passenger jet, they should just bow out of any argument containing science AND/OR common sense.

(Hey, you're the poster child for that comment!)

It's actually funny that morons who probably never used the stuff would infer the above claim. In my 30 years of fabricating steel structures and related piping/vessel systems, I've many times had to remove some or all SFRM from a structure. It only required a steel bar with a piece of flat bar welded to it to act as a scraper.

4) Again, twoofers still can't even understand the basic argument for the collapse of the towers. Temperatures sufficient to weaken steel were all that were required. Those temperatures were as low as 250F and combined with impact damage causing redistribution of loads created local failures which caused additional load redistribution in a system with finite ability to resist global collapse.

http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/baza...

5) Again, that's a no brainer...you have even less than no brain, you're also a birfer so it's understandable why you wouldn't get it.

http://www.debunking911.com/sag.ht2.jpg

http://www.debunking911.com/sag.ht3.jpg

http://www.debunking911.com/pullin2.jpg

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/08/...

6) See #5.

7) Everything above proves global instability was inherent to the given conditions.

The science behind the collapses has nothing to do with Bush and that straw man is utterly ridiculous and ignorant.

As always, reality trumps twoofer fiziks and young earth creationists pretending they understand science better than scientists.

Oh elevator boy-sheep 20 pilots YOUNG EARTH CREATIONIST STREET CORNER JEEBUS!

Will you ever regurgitate anything that's correct?

At your current rate, nope.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#261038 Oct 20, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Concerning the alleged Barbara Olsen phone call from flight 77.
Ted Olsen at the time claimed he had been called by his wife twice on 9/11, thus establishing the fact that American Airlines 77 was in fact hijacked by men with Middle Eastern looks.
First he claimed it was a cell phone call. Later he changed his story to seatback phone. But when a German journalist got Boeing to confirm that on this type of flight there were no seatback phones, Olsen changed his story back to call phone.
Now, you might think ‘oh, so he got it right the first time’, but… At the Moussaoui trial an FBI-report showed that there was never any connection between Barbara Olsen and her husband.
No cell phone calls were ever made from that flight (Dr Griffin gave three more examples, contradiction with regards to the whereabouts of General Meyers, the highest ranking military officer on 9/11, the timeline of Dick Cheney’s activities and the question about why the Pentagon was not evacuated when the Doomsday plane, an Air Force 747 E4B, shown on CNN, was actually in the air over Washington – ed. note)
If one alleged phone call from an allegedly hijacked aircraft was in question or proved to be contrived, then all of the alleged phone calls are simply more govie bullshit.
http://911blogger.com/node/14103
An E4B has the capability to jam all electronic communications at will, wherever they want. On the morning of 9/11 all wireless and plugged in electronics stopped working. The live TV feed shown on all major channels came from the same source. The shots of the WTC towers being hit and falling were all from the same specially shielded cameras.
http://www.septemberclues.info/visual_control...
Huh Eh !
Twoof: A lie defended by more lies all told by liars.

(See above for example)

http://911myths.com/index.php/Barbara_Olson_c...

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Okotoks, Canada

#261039 Oct 20, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
If the rabbit hole was on the backside like you claim... where was the part of the plane that was big enough to make such a hole??? Was the part ridge enough to make such a hole and then just crumble in little bits after it was through? What you are claiming makes no sense and you wonder why people don't take you serious. But I have to hand it to ya, you are good at insults.
Lets see, a plane with a 125' wing span moving at around 450mph hitting a solid object and breaking into little pieces.

And your incredulous about that but BLEEV everything twoof tells you.

Go back to sleep you dumb sht.

“"Tanners Flat" U dummy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#261040 Oct 20, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Who told you the Pentagon was made to withstand missile attacks?
That isn't so, it was made from concrete forms, while it is pretty strong it isn't missile proof. 160,000 lbs = 72575 kg / mass
12,977,571.2 m kg / s = 93,866,952.25 ft/ s lbs of energy.
A 30.06 is 3,000 ft lbs at the muzzle so the impact was equal to about 31,290 30.06 blasts a second for 5-10 seconds duration.
or 156,500 - 313,000 30.06 bullets fired at once.
Indeed how could that bust through those concrete wall?
F = ma is how.
To put this into perspective, this is a ammo can with 192 rounds
in it.
http://browningmgs.com/AmmoCans/T-Chial/AmmoB...
Imagine 815 - 1,630 cans fired at once.
That about the equivalent of all the US army, at the height of the surge in Iraq all firing at once at a single target.
Pretty technical there, I'm not so sure it wasn't by design.

Please convert the ft/lbs of force to pounds/square inch of force for me, if you can.

The strength of concrete is always relayed in PSI. I routinely work with concrete with a compressive strength of 11,000 PSI+, the flexural and tensile strength is low in concrete relative to it's compressive strength but that is where steel reinforcment comes in, it dramatically increases flexural and tensile strengths and load bearing capabilities.

I'm not sure what the compressive strength of the pentagon walls were, how thick they were, and how much and what type of steel reinforcement was used, so I won't make any leaps like you just did
Doctor REALITY

United States

#261042 Oct 20, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
1. How can you even tell by that grainy low res frame.
2. Looks sorta like the nose of a plane to me, but again it's grainy so i'ts hard to tell wtf it looks like.
3. Prove it isn't.
What do the witnesses say?
oop....you lose.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =JEjtnz5pwboXX
Why do you need witnesses when there are CAMERAS ALL OVER THE MOST PROTECTED BUILDING IN THE WORLD WITH VIDEO-TAPES FROM SEPTEMBER 11,2001 THAT THEY REFUSE TO LET THE WORLD SEE???! If you only had a BRAIN!!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#261043 Oct 20, 2013
Yellow Star Seed is Back wrote:
<quoted text>I see. Yeah, I'm still around and kicking...like a mule, I'm a survivor.

- My son just graduated high school and has a part-time job and attends a school program called "Focus beyond"(He has learning disabilities due to a mild form of autism so I couldn't be any prouder of the kid), my daughters are doing great too, the older attends a creative arts school where she is studying for a career in the arts and the youngest is sharp as a razor, she needs a challenge or she gets bored and screws around.....just like her pops, she's a chip off the old block...so look out! I'm working a lot, doing the work of two people and not getting compensated accordingly, seriously. They take me for granted...because of how well I perform my duties and the area(s) I can cover. I'm not feeling good about it right now, it simply isn't right. Talent is a mixed bag, that is for sure. I'll decide whether to continue here or go elsewhere after the 1st of the year, I'll know what I want to know by that time and decide what direction to take then. I'm a wild card tho.....I've been known to walk out when I'm not feeling right about something, and I always keep my word. They have already made some accommodations after I made good on my word and walked a few months back, they were definately surprised by my actions, we had meetings before I came back. They still haven't come far enough and they have made promises that they need to honor. We'll see what happens

BTW- Thanks for asking, hope you and your's are safe, I ain't got time to hate on anyone. It ain't personal even when it appears to be, it's business.
Oddly I can't see what you wrote but can respond.

I'm at the skating rink right now so I'll have to check back from home computer.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#261044 Oct 20, 2013
Yellow Star Seed is Back wrote:
<quoted text>
Pretty technical there, I'm not so sure it wasn't by design.
Please convert the ft/lbs of force to pounds/square inch of force for me, if you can.
The strength of concrete is always relayed in PSI. I routinely work with concrete with a compressive strength of 11,000 PSI+, the flexural and tensile strength is low in concrete relative to it's compressive strength but that is where steel reinforcment comes in, it dramatically increases flexural and tensile strengths and load bearing capabilities.
I'm not sure what the compressive strength of the pentagon walls were, how thick they were, and how much and what type of steel reinforcement was used, so I won't make any leaps like you just did
Pretty complicated to calculate the whole plane , because I can't honestly figure the impact area correctly but I can for an engine.

Engine is 7,000 lbs and has about an 8 foot square dimension, a little less in reality so figure will be a little lower than actual force.

7,000 lbs x 400 mph =

575 966.336 m kg / s =
4,165,972.5 ft lbs

8' x 8'= 64 sf

4,165,972.5 divided by 64 = 65,093.3203125 ft lbs per/sf

65,093.3203125 x 12 = 781,119.8 lbs per square inch

About 781,120 psi on impact.
Doctor REALITY

United States

#261045 Oct 20, 2013
Doctor REALITY wrote:
<quoted text>Why do you need witnesses when there are CAMERAS ALL OVER THE MOST PROTECTED BUILDING IN THE WORLD WITH VIDEO-TAPES FROM SEPTEMBER 11,2001 THAT THEY REFUSE TO LET THE WORLD SEE???! If you only had a BRAIN!!
Look there three things that will never be admitted in THIS world: O.J. Simpson admitting that he killed Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman, and the U.S. Military admitting that it shot down American Airlines flight 77 and United Airlines flight 93 to stop those sick, deranged islamic cowards from using those jumbo jets to murder thousands of innocent people on the ground.

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#261046 Oct 20, 2013
Doctor REALITY wrote:
<quoted text>Look there three things that will never be admitted in THIS world: O.J. Simpson admitting that he killed Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman, and the U.S. Military admitting that it shot down American Airlines flight 77 and United Airlines flight 93 to stop those sick, deranged islamic cowards from using those jumbo jets to murder thousands of innocent people on the ground.
Did you just make that up all by yourself? and Do you have any sources or links to corroborate your claims?

It has since been removed from the Internet but in a video interview I saw and heard Cheney say he gave the order to shoot down Flight 93. I suppose it could have been faked like anything you find on the Internet.

Huh Eh !

“"Tanners Flat" U dummy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#261047 Oct 20, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Pretty complicated to calculate the whole plane , because I can't honestly figure the impact area correctly but I can for an engine.
Engine is 7,000 lbs and has about an 8 foot square dimension, a little less in reality so figure will be a little lower than actual force.
7,000 lbs x 400 mph =
575 966.336 m kg / s =
4,165,972.5 ft lbs
8' x 8'= 64 sf
4,165,972.5 divided by 64 = 65,093.3203125 ft lbs per/sf
65,093.3203125 x 12 = 781,119.8 lbs per square inch
About 781,120 psi on impact.
Thanks, I'll need a little time to chew on that and make real sense of it. My initial review tells me that "about 8' square" is a little sloppy when it comes to surface area measurements for determining psi of force, tho. I'll see what I come up with.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#261048 Oct 20, 2013
AussieBobby wrote:
<quoted text>
Not all of the link was worthless
<quoted text>
Sums up twoofism
Indeed it does. lol

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#261049 Oct 20, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
The question still remains... why did Ted Olson lie about the death of his wife??? If he has nothing to hide, why did he lie about it???
What did he lie about? She was killed wasn't she? That isn't a lie.

“"Tanners Flat" U dummy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#261050 Oct 20, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Pretty complicated to calculate the whole plane , because I can't honestly figure the impact area correctly but I can for an engine.
Engine is 7,000 lbs and has about an 8 foot square dimension, a little less in reality so figure will be a little lower than actual force.
7,000 lbs x 400 mph =
575 966.336 m kg / s =
4,165,972.5 ft lbs
8' x 8'= 64 sf
4,165,972.5 divided by 64 = 65,093.3203125 ft lbs per/sf
65,093.3203125 x 12 = 781,119.8 lbs per square inch
About 781,120 psi on impact.
Here is all I am saying right now, I have to make stressing calculations for the tendons in prestressed concrete and the difference between hundredths and thousandths of an inch can change the load calculation by hundreds and thousands of lbs of force depending on the load requirement, the area is measured down to thousandths of an inch for this reason.
Pork Fried Rice

Chico, CA

#261051 Oct 20, 2013
Mainstream journalists expose 9/11 hoax
Posted on October 20, 2013 by Greg Bacon

The aftermath of the 9/11 attackPress TV

Several leading American mainstream journalists say that the US government is lying about 9/11 and the so-called war on terror. Unfortunately, media owners and editors won’t let them report their findings.

Recently, Seymour Hersh, America’s top mainstream investigative reporter, broke the news that the US government’s claim to have killed Osama Bin Laden on May 2nd, 2011 is “a big lie. There is not one word of truth in it.”

Hersh went on to harshly criticize his long-time employer, the New York Times, and other big media outlets:“We lie about everything, lying has become the staple.” He said all big US media outlets should be shut down for lying to the American people.

Other mainstream journalists agree that the US government’s story of Osama Bin Laden and 9/11 is a big lie. Sherwood Ross, an award-winning journalist who has worked for the City News Bureau of Chicago, the Chicago Daily News, and for Reuters and other wire services, told me in a recent radio interview:

“It’s very doubtful that Muslims were behind 9/11. Think about this for one minute: That President Bush’s family had done business with the family of the man who allegedly made the terrorist attack, Osama Bin Laden. The Bin Laden family was actually on the board of Bush’s oil company. How is it possible that of all the billions of families in the world, the one family that makes the attack on A
merica has done business with the President of America. That sounds more like a favor than anything else. I don’t think 9/11 was an Arab conspiracy or a Muslim conspiracy. I think it’s an American conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States and install what is becoming a police state, and also to advance the imperial ambitions of the United States, to swindle the Middle East out of their energy resources.”

Ross explained that American journalists are no longer free to expose even the most outrageous official falsehoods and fabrications:

http://www.fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/mai...

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#261053 Oct 20, 2013
Pork Fried Rice wrote:
Mainstream journalists expose 9/11 hoax
Posted on October 20, 2013 by Greg Bacon
The aftermath of the 9/11 attackPress TV
Several leading American mainstream journalists say that the US government is lying about 9/11 and the so-called war on terror. Unfortunately, media owners and editors won’t let them report their findings.
Recently, Seymour Hersh, America’s top mainstream investigative reporter, broke the news that the US government’s claim to have killed Osama Bin Laden on May 2nd, 2011 is “a big lie. There is not one word of truth in it.”
Hersh went on to harshly criticize his long-time employer, the New York Times, and other big media outlets:“We lie about everything, lying has become the staple.” He said all big US media outlets should be shut down for lying to the American people.
Other mainstream journalists agree that the US government’s story of Osama Bin Laden and 9/11 is a big lie. Sherwood Ross, an award-winning journalist who has worked for the City News Bureau of Chicago, the Chicago Daily News, and for Reuters and other wire services, told me in a recent radio interview:
“It’s very doubtful that Muslims were behind 9/11. Think about this for one minute: That President Bush’s family had done business with the family of the man who allegedly made the terrorist attack, Osama Bin Laden. The Bin Laden family was actually on the board of Bush’s oil company. How is it possible that of all the billions of families in the world, the one family that makes the attack on A
merica has done business with the President of America. That sounds more like a favor than anything else. I don’t think 9/11 was an Arab conspiracy or a Muslim conspiracy. I think it’s an American conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States and install what is becoming a police state, and also to advance the imperial ambitions of the United States, to swindle the Middle East out of their energy resources.”
Ross explained that American journalists are no longer free to expose even the most outrageous official falsehoods and fabrications:
http://www.fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/mai...
It isn't reported because it lacks facts and evidence.

Lunatic fringe making false claims.

Of course radial Muslims were behind the attack. Why else would they hijack airplanes and crash them into buildings? I have no doubt about that.

The Bin Laden family is very wealthy and influential. They are also architects who would know that flying planes into the towers would destroy them. I'm sure most had no involvement in the attack. Why would they be involved?

Bush's invasion failed to get control. I'm sure the Bin Laden family knew very well that Bush would fail. Therefore the Bin Laden family involvement makes no sense. Why would they be involved?

Are you kidding me?

“"Tanners Flat" U dummy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#261054 Oct 20, 2013
I don't know who judged my last post "nuts"...., but YOU can chew on these nuts.......

An 8'x8' jet turbine is likely circular in design rather than square so if you wanted to estimate the surface area you would use the Pi formula......reducing the surface area estimate from 64 sq ft to 50 1/4 sq ft, or 22% less surface area if you will. That is significant and way outside the boundaries of tolerances I deal with which are set by professional engineers, that's nearly twice the factor of safety calculated into structural concrete in building designs.

The information about the planes, angle of deflection at impact, air speed from flight data, etc, etc, along with the design of the pentagon walls(thickness, reinforcing, design strength, etc) along with testing and inspection data can be used to run a "scientific" mathematical calculation to determine whether or not A(plane) caused B(damage to pentagon), I haven't seen anyone even attempt to seriously answer that question.

Now that would certainly answer some questions, but where is it???

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#261055 Oct 20, 2013
Yellow Star Seed is Back wrote:
<quoted text>Here is all I am saying right now, I have to make stressing calculations for the tendons in prestressed concrete and the difference between hundredths and thousandths of an inch can change the load calculation by hundreds and thousands of lbs of force depending on the load requirement, the area is measured down to thousandths of an inch for this reason.
I'm sure there's also an allotted tolerance on thickness as well.

Steel used in the fabrication of pressure vessels must be acceptable to the applicable codes and standard which includes thickness to thousandths of an inch as well but there is an acceptable +/-.

Given the nature of castables I'm sure the same applies with more allowable variation.

With steel plate/fittings/pipe we use a thickness mike to measure by way of ultrasonics. How do you measure a castable as cured?

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 ffj 56,266
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 6 min RoSesz 649,853
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 30 min brandy trujillo 972,403
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 1 hr Aussie Kev 106,056
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 1 hr Aussie Kev 2,299
Israel End is Near (Feb '15) 2 hr Brian_G 428
Massage for ladies in Muscat 2 hr rahul 2
my cousin touches me when i am asleep and i kin... (Mar '14) 5 hr Jesus 47
Moms having sex with their sons (Aug '12) Fri Noname 69
More from around the web