• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

9/11 Was an Inside Job

Scott

Banned
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
934
Reaction score
80
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
These videos do a pretty good job of proving that the US government planned and carried out 9/11 so they would have a pretext to start wars in order to get control of oil in the Middle East.

This link has documenteries on a lot of topics.
Downloads

The ones on 9/11 are--

Painful Deceptions
Loose Change
In Plane Sight
The Great Conspiracy
Steven Jones

These were made a little later than the first ones and they cover a few points that the others don't cover.
911 Mysteries - Demolitions (Full) - Google Video
What's The Truth?: How Indeed Did The Twin Towers Collapse - Google Video
Steven E Jones Nov 11 06 Lifting the Fog Lecture UC Berkeley Campus 911Truth.org - Google Video
Crash of Flight 77 - 911 Witnesses at the Pentagon on September 11th - Google Video
YouTube - 9/11 Debate: Loose Change vs. Popular Mechanics pt. 1
YouTube - 9/11 Truth: Dr. David Griffin & David Shayler Interviewed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgRTS_6MNng&mode=related&search=
YouTube - Here's the video that Google Video pulled down!

http://www.wtc7.net/articles/WhyIndeed09.pdf
 
These videos do a pretty good job of proving that the US government planned and carried out 9/11 so they would have a pretext to start wars in order to get control of oil in the Middle East.

If only the US had actually gone to the moon, they could have stolen the oil there. Of course if the pretext for war was simply to get control of oil in the Middle East, they sure did do a bad job of it.

I've seen many of these videos and conspiracy theories outlining this sort of nonsense, as I'm sure anyone with an internet connection has. There are an even greater number of reputable sources that debunk them. You have of course analyzed those as well. I'm sure links will be posted shortly by those with more patience than I.
 
Everyone should be aluminated. :rofl
afdbhead.jpg
 
Dear god :roll:

Look, I know our government has done terrible things. I know they aren't perfect. I know they don't tell the public everything. (Yes, I think they were hiding something at Area 51 ;) )

But 9/11 conspiracy theories do not get much respect from me. Primarily because I was *there* near the Pentagon. I had a friend who DID witness the plane. I witnessed the immediate aftermath. I had friends in there, acquaintances of mine died in there. Close friends and family of my own friends/co-workers died that day. I know what I saw. I know what my friend saw. I also know that security was stepped up in my government operated building in the weeks prior to the attacks. Significantly. Adding up all the things I heard myself while in that building, all the things that happened while in that building, the new procedures put into place prior to the attacks... it all adds up to the government knowing that there was a threat but they didn't exactly know from where it would come, where it would hit, and how it would hit. If the government themselves were the ones behind it, it would have been unnecessary for them to have trained us in the usage of gas masks and given them out to all the employees, and done drill after drill with us, and trained us all repeatedly on how to spot "suspicious" packages and people, and to constantly sweep the building with dogs. If they were the ones behind it, and thus knew exactly what was going to happen and when, then why bother increasing the security and safety of the people in government buildings that wouldn't be a part of the event?

Eh... I just don't buy it. I think our government is capable of a lot of things, and I think GWB is an *** and an idiot, but I cannot - CANNOT - fathom that our government would blatantly kill so many innocent people in our own country. Not only that, but that they would be able to keep it covered up. Clinton couldn't even get a damn blow job without the world knowing and you expect me to believe that the government, 100s of agencies, 1000s of people (including the media) are involved with 9/11 and not ONE person has leaked evidence of it? Pahlease.
 
"9/11 Was an Inside Job", whoever makes a bold statement like that, should be brought out back and shot.....
That being said I do know of one man who did predict 9/11 and his name was Rick Rescorla.

Rick Rescorla - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

known as Rick Rescorla, was a retired United States Army officer of British birth who served with distinction in Rhodesia as a British soldier and the Vietnam War as an American officer. As the World Trade Center security chief for the financial services firm Morgan Stanley, Rescorla anticipated both attacks on the towers and implemented evacuation procedures that are credited with saving many lives. He died in the September 11, 2001 attacks while leading the evacuation efforts.

I have watched his documentary on A&E and if any one ever gets a chance, I reccommend watching it. He is a true American hero....
Rick Rescorla.com
 
When I look at the evidence, all I can think is that it was an inside job.

Look at this frame of the video of the plane that hit the Pentagon.
http://www.hongpong.com/lib/images/plane77_contrast_adj.jpg

The nose is too pointed to be the nose of a 757. The shadow line is visible on the underside and it's consistent with the shadow of the Pentagon.

Stop this video at the 21 second mark. It's the same picture but a little sharper.
CNN.com - First video of Pentagon 9/11 attack released - May 16, 2006

In the second post on this page there is a picture.
Loose Change Forum -> A 757 Does Not Fit
(Sometimes the picture takes a while to appear during peak internet use)

The hole in the Pentagon looks too small to have been made by a 757.
This analysis is consistent with the evidence.
Physics911, by Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven, 9/11/2001

There's a big debate going on about this.

Loose Change Forum
Loose Change Website - Version 2.0
911 Truth Seekers-9/11 Blog

I think the picture of the nose of the craft that hit the Pentagon and the picture of the hole in the Pentagon before the collapse close the whole case.
 
Your "friend" is obviously either a CIA operative or secretly working for the JOOOOOOS.

I hear they were warned to vacate the buildings :roll:
 
I hear they were warned to vacate the buildings :roll:

I heard that they actually told them NOT to vacate and then sent MORE jews in, because that way they'd get more insurance money and sympathy. Least that's what my grandpappy told me.
 
I heard that they actually told them NOT to vacate and then sent MORE jews in, because that way they'd get more insurance money and sympathy. Least that's what my grandpappy told me.


A learned man,he. I bet his copy of Norman Finklestein's "The Holocaust Industry" is well worn.

Not every grandpappy is up on world events to such a degree.
 
Originally Posted by Scott
The hole in the Pentagon looks too small to have been made by a 757.

Having stood outside the Pentagon, looking at the smoking hole personally.... I beg to differ.
Were you there before the collapse? This picture was taken before the collapse. What you said is not consistent with this picture. Please go into some detail.
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=4223&st=30

Also--what do you think of the shape of the nose of the craft that hit the Pentagon? I think the only thing about that picture worth debating is whether or not it was doctored. It a clear picture of the nose of a craft that is too pointed to be the nose of a 757.
The links are in post #7 of this thread.
 
I'm still chuckling at this whole "U.S. Government did it" thing. Our government can't keep a covert wiretapping program without NY Times finding out. What makes you guys think they could pull off the murder of 3000 and the destruction of 3-4 buildings secret without anybody snitching. Come on guys. Wake up and smell the NYC sewage.
 
I'm still chuckling at this whole "U.S. Government did it" thing. Our government can't keep a covert wiretapping program without NY Times finding out. What makes you guys think they could pull off the murder of 3000 and the destruction of 3-4 buildings secret without anybody snitching. Come on guys. Wake up and smell the NYC sewage.

Exactly. Think for a minute about the massive undertaking your suggesting. All the people who would be involved from soup to nuts in this project. All of them are such perfect operatives that no word would leak out. Nobody outside of this ominous smoke filled room of men with faces obscured in shadow that would raise a question. Yet somehow, the truth ends up on YouTube?

Clinton couldn't get a blowjob without everyone knowing about it. Somehow killing 3000+ civilians is capable of being achieved with only a couple of sole dissenters with videos edited in their parent's basement.
 
I'm still chuckling at this whole "U.S. Government did it" thing. Our government can't keep a covert wiretapping program without NY Times finding out. What makes you guys think they could pull off the murder of 3000 and the destruction of 3-4 buildings secret without anybody snitching. Come on guys. Wake up and smell the NYC sewage.

You're ignoring the evidence I posted. I'd like to hear your analysis of the pictures I posted.
Here are some frames from the footage taken by the other camera.
http://0911.site.voila.fr/index3.htm

The tail of the craft that hit the Pentagon is visible. The craft is too small to be a 757.

If you want to actually impress me and the viewers, you have to debunk the evidence.
 
If you want to actually impress me and the viewers, you have to debunk the evidence.

Scott, for the position that you're taking on this issue, the burden of proof is really on you. Quit posting links to make people wade through crap, especially long videos. Say what you think and make a coherent argument. If you say something insightful and new, people will take you more seriously.
 
Were you there before the collapse? This picture was taken before the collapse. What you said is not consistent with this picture. Please go into some detail.
Loose Change Forum -> A 757 Does Not Fit

Also--what do you think of the shape of the nose of the craft that hit the Pentagon? I think the only thing about that picture worth debating is whether or not it was doctored. It a clear picture of the nose of a craft that is too pointed to be the nose of a 757.
The links are in post #7 of this thread.

The evidence that a 757 hit the pentagon is undeniable:



web_010911-N-6157F-001.jpg


camera1b.gif


Damage9.jpg


Eye Witness Testimony

Lets look at some eye witness testimony sticking only to people who saw a plane hit the building, and not look at people who saw an airliner, but didn't see an airplane hit the building because they looked away or were too far away (behind a hill, behind a building, etc) to see it actually hit the building.


"Aydan Kizildrgli, an English language student who is a native of Turkey, saw the jetliner bank slightly then strike a western wall of the huge five-sided building that is the headquarters of the nation's military. 'There was a big boom,' he said. 'Everybody was in shock. I turned around to the car behind me and yelled "Did you see that?" Nobody could believe it.'"
- "Bush Vows Retaliation for 'Evil Acts'." USA Today, 11 Sep 2001

"Frank Probst, an information management specialist for the Pentagon Renovation Program, left his office trailer near the Pentagon's south parking lot at 9:36 a.m. Sept. 11. Walking north beside Route 27, he suddenly saw a commercial airliner crest the hilltop Navy Annex. American Airlines Flight 77 reached him so fast and flew so low that Probst dropped to the ground, fearing he'd lose his head to its right engine."
- "A Defiant Recovery." The Retired Officer Magazine, January 2002

"Omar Campo, a Salvadorean, was cutting the grass on the other side of the road when the plane flew over his head. 'It was a passenger plane. I think an American Airways plane,' Mr Campo said. 'I was cutting the grass and it came in screaming over my head. I felt the impact. The whole ground shook and the whole area was full of fire. I could never imagine I would see anything like that here.'"
- "Pentagon Eyewitness Accounts." The Guardian, 12 Sep 2001

"Afework Hagos, a computer programmer, was on his way to work but stuck in a traffic jam near the Pentagon when the plane flew over. 'There was a huge screaming noise and I got out of the car as the plane came over. Everybody was running away in different directions. It was tilting its wings up and down like it was trying to balance. It hit some lampposts on the way in.'"
- "Pentagon Eyewitness Accounts." The Guardian, 12 Sep 2001

"Henry Ticknor, intern minister at the Unitarian Universalist Church of Arlington, Virginia, was driving to church that Tuesday morning when American Airlines Flight 77 came in fast and low over his car and struck the Pentagon. 'There was a puff of white smoke and then a huge billowing black cloud,' he said."
- "Hell on Earth." UU World, Jan/Feb 20

"We were the only people, we think, who saw it live," Dan Creed said. He and two colleagues from Oracle software were stopped in a car near the Naval Annex, next to the Pentagon, when they saw the plane dive down and level off. "It was no more than 30 feet off the ground, and it was screaming. It was just screaming. It was nothing more than a guided missile at that point," Creed said. "I can still see the plane. I can still see it right now. It's just the most frightening thing in the world, going full speed, going full throttle, its wheels up," - Ahwatukee Foothill News

Gary Bauer former Presidential candidate, "I looked at the woman sitting in the car next to me. She had this startled look on her face. We were all thinking the same thing. We looked out the front of our windows to try to see the plane, and it wasn�t until a few seconds later that we realized the jet was coming up behind us on that major highway. And it veered to the right into the Pentagon. The blast literally rocked all of our cars. It was an incredible moment." Massachusetts News

Sean Boger, Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower chief - "I just looked up and I saw the big nose and the wings of the aircraft coming right at us and I just watched it hit the building," Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower chief Sean Boger said. "It exploded. I fell to the ground and covered my head. I could actually hear the metal going through the building." dcmilitary.com November 16, 2001

"The only way you could tell that an aircraft was inside was that we saw pieces of the nose gear. The devastation was horrific. It was obvious that some of the victims we found had no time to react. The distance the firefighters had to travel down corridors to reach the fires was a problem. With only a good 25 minutes of air in their SCBA bottles, to save air they left off their face pieces as they walked and took in a lot of smoke," Captain Defina said. Captain Defina was the shift commander [of an aircraft rescue firefighters crew.] NFPA Journal November 1, 2001

That's just a small smattering of people who have gone on record as seeing the plane, and the plane hit the Pentagon. I could have included the dozens of people who saw the plane, but didn't see it hit (because it went behind a bridge, a hill, or some trees), but I choose only to post the ones that sounded the most valid and actually saw the plane hit the building. (I included the one firechief who states he saw some plane wreckage during firefighting/rescue attempts.) There are most likely twenty times more that either haven't been publicly recorded as seeing the crash, or simply don't want the attention. You can't honeslty sit there and deny the witnesses, the photographs, the facts, the science, and the reality that there was a terrorist attack on the Pentagon if you look at everything available and not one single tidbit of information at a time.

911 Tape of EMV responding to the Pentagon - includes video outside and inside the building in some areas. (Real Audio Required)

Review the facts

  • Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)
  • Rims found in building match those of a 757
  • Small turbine engine outside is an APU
  • Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine
  • Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos
  • Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo
  • Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211
  • Structural components photographed in wreckage match Boeing paint primer schemes
  • Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object
  • Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion
  • Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner
  • Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon
  • 60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage
9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon 9/11 Conspiracies - Single Post

WTC 1 and 2 conspiracy theories are to easy to disprove, and have already been thoroughly debunked all over this site, but pretty please bring up WTC 7 so I can shred your as$.
 
The evidence that a 757 hit the pentagon is undeniable:

You people are acting like stereotype disinfo agents.
Opposing Digits - Health & Awareness Community :: View topic - Rules of Disinformation
(excerpt)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can "argue" with you over the new topic and polarise the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at the nose of the plane that hit the Pentagon. If you say that's the nose of a 757, you're playing dumb.

CNN.com - First video of Pentagon 9/11 attack released - May 16, 2006
Stop the video at the 21 second mark.

Here's what the nose of a 757 looks like.
http://www.aeronautics.ru/img/img006/boeing757-200_dhl_002.jpg

It's much less pointed than the nose of the plane that hit the Pentagon.

Footage of a 757 hitting the Pentago would look something like this.
http://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/gif/video-pentagon-boeing.gif
I know the scale isn't right but it would look very similar to this.

It wouldn't look like this either.
Flight 77 3d sim test
If you look at the first frame of this sequence, you can get a good idea of the length of the craft that hit the Pentagon. If you compare it to the height of the Pentagon at the same distance from the camera, you'll see that it's not long enough to be a 757. A 757 is about 150 feet long and the Pentagon is about 77 feet high.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon
Airliners.net: Boeing 757-200
If it had been a 757, the nose of the craft would not have been hidden behind the brown object; it would have been visible extending further out in front. The tail of the craft is visible but not the nose.

The damage to the Pentagon before the collapse wouldn't look like this either.
Loose Change Forum -> A 757 Does Not Fit

Witnesses are plantable. Watch this video.
Crash of Flight 77 - 911 Witnesses at the Pentagon on September 11th - Google Video

Engine parts are plantable. If there wee any 757 engine parts found, they could have been easily planted in the building before the crash.
 
You people are acting like stereotype disinfo agents.

Your links are bullshit like I said the facts are plain as day and it is you who are spreading disinformation:

Review the facts

  • Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)
  • Rims found in building match those of a 757
  • Small turbine engine outside is an APU
  • Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine
  • Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos
  • Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo
  • Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211
  • Structural components photographed in wreckage match Boeing paint primer schemes
  • Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object
  • Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion
  • Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner
  • Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon
  • 60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage

Now explain how all of that is possible if a 757 didn't hit the pentagon?
 
HTML:
Now explain how all of that is possible if a 757 didn't hit the pentagon?

You're ignoring what I posted.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/16/pentagon.video/index.html
(Stop this video at the 21 second mark)

The nose of the craft that hit the Pentagon was too pointed to be the nose of a 757. This settles the whole issue. The only thing worth debating about that picture of the nose of the plane is whether the picture was doctored.

There are multiple explanations for everything you posted.

Three posts back I posted a video that gave a theory about the witnesses and your response is to say, "What about the witnesses?". You're supposed to give an anlysis of my response to your question. You're not supposed to reiterate the question.

Plane parts and witnesses can be planted. There is the theory that a 757 flew over the Pentagon just before a smaller plane came in at a different angle and hit it.

For a theory about the passengers, watch the last five minutes of part one of "Painful Deceptions".

Part one
Question911.com Downloads

Part two
Question911.com Downloads

Part three
Question911.com Downloads

There's more here.
Downloads

Please comment on the nose of the craft that hit the Pentagon. It's not too blurry to make out. It's a very clear picture. The shadow area can be seen on the underside.

Please watch the last five minutes of "Painful Deceptions" and give your analysis of what is says about the Passengers.
 
Back
Top Bottom