Thread: What really happened on 9/11

I don't understand- the planes that hit the WTC were intended to by the US government? Not too farfetched for me..

I didn't know you were into prison planet's Alex Jones material seismosaur.

Great evidence...[/sarc] How about something more concrete than drawing huge conclusions from grainy footage next time?

As for the pentagon footage, even at 230mph the plane's going at over 100m/s. If the frame rate on the camera is low then not getting a good shotn of the plane is perfectly plausible. (besides which, why do you believe the data in the black box if you think missiles hit)

I totally agree with the Pentagon footage - however, why on earth would the American Government, if they knew they were going to be killing thousands, be bothered to save a couple of measly civilian flights. Surely they could just allow terrorists onto the planes, possibly load the planes with high explosives too, and let the terrorists do the work.

Also, the 'bulge' on the underside of the aircraft is very possibly it's landing gear bays.

Originally Posted by BLUELINE976

MORE conspiracy theories? Ugh...

Not really a conspiracy theory... Just telling you what I see.

Have you seen the Fireman's Video? They get called to some supposed gas leak, in a vent that just happens to have a perfect view of the south tower, and then, you can see, when they are done they just... Stand around. Then, when they hear a motherfucking Boeing 767 rocketing over Manhattan, one fireman just casually looks up, and the camera man immediately afterwards points directly at the South tower.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

What do you say to the people who have friends and family members that were on the flights that supposedly never existed? I know some of them personally. Should I tell them that their family members weren't real?

I think there are much more plausible possibilities. If I were operating under the assumption that our government definitely had some hand in these events, the most likely explanation to me would be that they had foreknowledge and let it happen. I think the fact that dozens of training exercises happened to have been scheduled for the same day, many of which involved planes crashing into buildings so that the people involved could not distinguish between reality and the drills is enough evidence.

I didn't say they weren't real... It's just a possibility to me as I have never met anyone or known anyone who was connected to anyone who was on the WTC planes or Flight 93.

I mean, what happened to the pentagon? A plane full of people hits, and nothing gets said about it except several dozen photos of a tiny impact hole, with no wreckage to be found.

Originally Posted by Sybot

Great evidence...[/sarc] How about something more concrete than drawing huge conclusions from grainy footage next time?

As for the pentagon footage, even at 230mph the plane's going at over 100m/s. If the frame rate on the camera is low then not getting a good shotn of the plane is perfectly plausible. (besides which, why do you believe the data in the black box if you think missiles hit)

I don't see how I am drawing "huge conclusions" by pointing some basic things out?

And you aren't looking at it right. The first frame is the plane entering the Pentagon, so we should see SOME of it.

And I do think missiles hit it, because of the impact holes:



How does a single Boeging 767 manage to completely destroy one of the largest buildings in New York, yet a Boeing 757 (Which is near the same specifications as a 767) do only minor damage to a considerably smaller building?

It makes NO sense.

Originally Posted by Pensive Patrick

I totally agree with the Pentagon footage - however, why on earth would the American Government, if they knew they were going to be killing thousands, be bothered to save a couple of measly civilian flights. Surely they could just allow terrorists onto the planes, possibly load the planes with high explosives too, and let the terrorists do the work.

Also, the 'bulge' on the underside of the aircraft is very possibly it's landing gear bays.

That's entirely possible. But I'm only working with what I know.

Which is all the photos and videos I've seen, plus eyewitness accounts (Which aren't usually very relibable, but they still have to be taken into account)

As for the buldge... Well, If you look at a picture of a Boeing 767...



... You'll see the landing gear doors are too far inward and aren't sphereical.

So what does that make the buldge?

I don't see how I am drawing "huge conclusions" by pointing some basic things out?

You post that ridiculous conspiracy theory at the beginning of the OP, then offer up those pictures as 'evidence'. I'd call that drawing a huge conclusion.

And you aren't looking at it right. The first frame is the plane entering the Pentagon, so we should see SOME of it.

In the first frame I see what looks like a cockpit on the right side of the picture. On the second frame I see what looks like the tail of a plane, with the front obscured by the explosion.

And I do think missiles hit it, because of the impact holes:

Those look like they could have been made by the fuselage and two engines. And as other evidence (ie witness statements, physical evidence) points to planes rather than missiles...

How does a single Boeging 767 manage to completely destroy one of the largest buildings in New York, yet a Boeing 757 (Which is near the same specifications as a 767) do only minor damage to a considerably smaller building?

Maybe because the buildings are completely different in design? It's a bit useless to compare skyscrapers with a much lower, flatter building.

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

That's entirely possible. But I'm only working with what I know.

Which is all the photos and videos I've seen, plus eyewitness accounts (Which aren't usually very relibable, but they still have to be taken into account)

As for the buldge... Well, If you look at a picture of a Boeing 767...



... You'll see the landing gear doors are too far inward and aren't sphereical.

OK, fair enough. I just think there is more conclusive and important evidence to be investigated than the bulges.

Still, it's nice to see you're going about this in an intelligent way, unlike a lot of people.

I really don't think this is what happened, but the government definetly had prior knowledge, and the CIA was involved.

If your going to talk about 9-11, you shouldn't focus on the planes and the buildings, this usually just makes people mad and then they won't even listen to what you have to say. The best thing to talk about is government involvement/knowledge of the event. Theres plenty of evidence that what the 9-11 commission says happened is false/leaves a lot of shit out.