ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 8th January 2017, 05:53 PM   #1
Axxman300
Graduate Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 1,976
Convince Me 9-11 Was an Inside Job

I will be 100% convinced that 9/11 WAS an inside job if these questions are answered:

How were the three buildings prepped and wired with explosives, something that would have taken months to do, without anyone seeing anything?

Why isn't the ability to secretly wire a high-rise office building with explosives not considered to be much more frightening than hijacking a commercial jetliner, and crashing it into a building?

Why not set off the explosive charges in WTC1 & WTC2 a second after impact and kill 35,000 or more people instead of waiting?

Why destroy WTC7 eight hours later when nobody is in the building?

Why destroy WTC7 at all?

If the goal was to invade Iraq, why no planted evidence (passports, money transfers, etc) to directly implicate Iraq?

If the goal was to invade Iraq, and WMDs would be our main justification then why not attack Manhattan and Washington with chemical weapons linked to Iraq instead?

Where are the suddenly wealthy NYPD and FDNY employees who must have killed and suppressed evidence?

Why has nobody from 9-11 Truth filed a FOIA to get the FBI's full investigation and related documents released (and did you guys even know the FBI's 9-11 investigation is still classified)?

I've asked these questions before in countless threads and never receive answers. It's not enough to say that 9-11 was an inside job, you have to show how it was pulled off dealing with the real world mechanics involved at every step.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2017, 06:23 PM   #2
Elind
Philosopher
 
Elind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: S.E. USA. Sometimes bible country
Posts: 7,779
Oh for god's sake, not again. Please take this crap to an official nutcase blog like Breitbart or many others like it.

Last edited by Elind; 8th January 2017 at 06:24 PM.
Elind is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2017, 09:04 PM   #3
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,108
You forgot,...

Why not just put the explosives in the (switched) planes? So much simpler and infinitely less risky.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2017, 09:32 PM   #4
Axxman300
Graduate Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 1,976
Originally Posted by Mark F View Post
You forgot,...

Why not just put the explosives in the (switched) planes? So much simpler and infinitely less risky.
But that would also make sense.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2017, 07:48 AM   #5
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,808
Quote:
If the goal was to invade Iraq, why no planted evidence (passports, money transfers, etc) to directly implicate Iraq?
I too have noted this many times. If this was a false flag to garner an invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, then why were none of the hijackers Iraqi of Afghani? Instead they were largely Saudis, a country that was a nominal ally of the USA.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2017, 12:48 PM   #6
Monza
Alta Viro
 
Monza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,896
Axxman300, it's really simple.

Of course if the US wanted to invade Iraq the government could have planted normal bombs in the WTC and then planted evidence of Iraqi involvement. But it is much better to hide the super secret nano-thermite explosives inside the buildings, then fly planes into them so that it looks like the plane crashes destroyed the buildings. Of course, we all know that planes crashing into buildings cannot destroy them because planes are made from aluminum and buildings from steel (#physics). And the building will fall at Free Fall Speed (TM), which everyone knows can't happen without a controlled demolition. But the sheeple won't pick up on this. Then they plant passports from Saudi terrorists to throw people off the scent. The government also had to get permission from Larry Silverstein to destroy his buildings, but he wanted the insurance money anyway. Too bad he almost gave up the whole plot when he said, "pull it." I almost forgot about shooting a missile into the Pentagon and hoping no one films it so that they can claim it was plane. It's genius really.

Remember, this is same government that killed a sitting US president. To make it look like a shot from behind they didn't go the obvious route and shoot him from behind. They shot him from the front with a different rifle, then planted a Carcano bullet on a stretcher, then doctored a film of the assassination, and pinned it on guy who they had killed by the mob.

Convinced?
Monza is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2017, 02:39 PM   #7
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,225
Originally Posted by Monza View Post
Axxman300, it's really simple.

Of course if the US wanted to invade Iraq the government could have planted normal bombs in the WTC and then planted evidence of Iraqi involvement.

Bombs don't work very well against steel-framed buildings and I can show you a few examples as well. if the US wanted an excuse, they could have used Iraq's violations of 16 UN resolutions and other violations that ended the Gulf War. In other words, you break a contract, you face the consequences.


Quote:
... But it is much better to hide the super secret nano-thermite explosives inside the buildings,...

First of all, thermite is not an explosive, and secondly, thermite is not effective in bringing down steel-framed buildings and another reason why thermite is not used by the demolition industry to bring down tall steel-framed buildings.


Quote:
... then fly planes into them so that it looks like the plane crashes destroyed the buildings. Of course, we all know that planes crashing into buildings cannot destroy them because planes are made from aluminum and buildings from steel (#physics).

But, airplane crashes can start fires, and fires are well-known for dropping steel-framed buildings and weakening steel structures of highway overpasses.


Quote:
Case #1

Private jet crashes into hangar at California airport, sparks inferno

A multimillion dollar private jet crashed into a hangar at a California airport creating an “unsurvivable” inferno on the ground, a fire official said.

Santa Monica Fire Department Captain John Nevandro told NBC Los Angeles that the crash was "unsurvivable.” He added: "The building actually collapsed and wrapped itself around the plane."

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/other/pr...no-f8C11292403


Case #2

Tanker Truck Fire Collapses Bay Area Overpass

A fiery predawn tanker truck accident caused the collapse of a heavily trafficked freeway overpass near downtown on Sunday, sending hundreds of feet of concrete crashing onto a highway below and hobbling a vital Bay Area interchange.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/30/us/30collapse.html

Quote:
...And the building will fall at Free Fall Speed (TM), which everyone knows can't happen without a controlled demolition.

None of the WTC buildings collapsed at free fall speed as evident in the following video.


9/11 Debunked: World Trade Center - No Free-Fall Speed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLShZOvxVe4



Quote:
... Then they plant passports from Saudi terrorists to throw people off the scent.
Just to let you know that passports have been known to survive fiery airplane crashes. Case in point:


DOWNED FLIGHT MH17 - Recovered PASSPORTS in PERFECT CONDITION Also Expired Passport Video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkIEpuy4VV8


Quote:
... The government also had to get permission from Larry Silverstein to destroy his buildings,...

False! Larry Silverstein had no such authority.


Quote:
...but he wanted the insurance money anyway.

Larry Silverstein lost billions of dollars, thanks to 9/11. Another case in point:

Quote:
Silverstein Loses Battle Over 9/11 Payouts

Developer Sought Billions of Dollars From Airlines for Rebuilding of World Trade Center

A federal judge on Thursday rejected developer Larry Silverstein's bid to recover billions of dollars from two airlines whose planes were used in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, a significant setback in his nearly decade long fight for more money to rebuild the World Trade Center.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014...14292502152144

Quote:
...Too bad he almost gave up the whole plot when he said, "pull it."

The term; "Pull It" does not apply to demolition implosions of steel-framed buildings. If you don't believe me, just call any demolition company.

It doesn't take much to check that Silverstein was referring to pulling out of firefighters from WTC 7, which had nothing to do with CD.


Quote:
..I almost forgot about shooting a missile into the Pentagon and hoping no one films it so that they can claim it was plane. It's genius really.

Just to let you know that no one reported seeing a missile strike the Pentagon. In addition, I have identified a B-757 in the background on one of the videos at the Pentagon, and have identified B-757 wreckage inside and outside the Pentagon from photos. To further add, my Wing Commander was at the Pentagon when American 77 struck the building.

If you check out the radar flight path data, the altitude profile data chart and ATC communication tape for American 77, you would have additional confirmation that American 77 was the aircraft that struck the Pentagon. Actually, you wouldn't have to go that far, just ask American Airlines.


9/11: American Airlines CONFIRMS that ITS Aircraft were hijacked and crashed on 9/11

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCluYrlCtIs


Furthermore, the conversion formulas released by American Airlines and the Boeing Aircraft Company applied only to the FDR of American 77!

.

Last edited by skyeagle409; 9th January 2017 at 03:02 PM.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2017, 02:52 PM   #8
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 15,280
Woosh.
__________________
"Realize deeply that the present moment is all you ever have." (Eckhart Tolle, 2004)
LSSBB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2017, 03:02 PM   #9
pgimeno
Illuminator
 
pgimeno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Spain
Posts: 3,241
Poe's law has such anticlimactic effects sometimes...
__________________
Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.
pgimeno is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2017, 06:16 PM   #10
Axxman300
Graduate Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 1,976
Originally Posted by Monza View Post
Axxman300, it's really simple.

Of course if the US wanted to invade Iraq the government could have planted normal bombs in the WTC and then planted evidence of Iraqi involvement. But it is much better to hide the super secret nano-thermite explosives inside the buildings, then fly planes into them so that it looks like the plane crashes destroyed the buildings. Of course, we all know that planes crashing into buildings cannot destroy them because planes are made from aluminum and buildings from steel (#physics). And the building will fall at Free Fall Speed (TM), which everyone knows can't happen without a controlled demolition. But the sheeple won't pick up on this. Then they plant passports from Saudi terrorists to throw people off the scent. The government also had to get permission from Larry Silverstein to destroy his buildings, but he wanted the insurance money anyway. Too bad he almost gave up the whole plot when he said, "pull it." I almost forgot about shooting a missile into the Pentagon and hoping no one films it so that they can claim it was plane. It's genius really.

Remember, this is same government that killed a sitting US president. To make it look like a shot from behind they didn't go the obvious route and shoot him from behind. They shot him from the front with a different rifle, then planted a Carcano bullet on a stretcher, then doctored a film of the assassination, and pinned it on guy who they had killed by the mob.

Convinced?
Heh...needs more Israeli links though.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2017, 06:21 PM   #11
Norman Alexander
Master Poster
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,101
If the USA had wanted to invade Iraq...why didn't they just forget all this complicated, convoluted 9-11 false-flag nonsense and invade Iraq like a grown-up country should?!
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th January 2017, 08:34 PM   #12
MrFliop
Scholar
 
MrFliop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 101
And there's even more holes in the "inside job" theory:

Quote:
1) How did they get Barbara Olson onto the missle that hit the Pentagon?

2) 1100 people worked the shanksville site doing various reclamation duties. Some were feds. Some local, some volunteers, and some United Airlines people. How did they get all of those 1100 people to lie and say 93 crashed there if it was diverted to Cleveland instead?

3) Some say a missle hit the pentagon, and not AA77. Assuming it was an inside job, why would the govt NEED to fake 77 hitting the pentagon, and use a missle? Air Force has dozens of 757's. A govt capable of "insiding" a 911 attack certainly would have no problem secretly obtaining a 757, and repainting it with AA's livery. So, after all the trouble of diverting 77 to some secret location, why use a missle when its equally as easy to use a real, repainted 757?

4) Twoofer claim the planes were remotely flow into the buildings. If so, why did they hit the top 20% of the building? tactically, its much better to hit as low in the buildings as you can (traps more people above the fires, and increases the likelyhood of toppling the building instantly). The could have just as easily hit the 30th floor, as they did tne 80th. Yet they didnt.

5) Regarding the pentagon "missle:" there is no missle in the world that would need to fly over the pentagon at 7k feet, then make a 330 degree descending turn to come back to the target. Any remotely flown, or computer controlled guidance would not need the descending turn. It would just fly straight in. So, who added the "turn" and why?

6) How did they fake the phone calls? Even if we accept the claim of voice sythesizers, you would still need to obtain a sample of the voices ahead of time, in order to know the "synth-voice" sounded correctly. Some of the people were last minute bookings. Reportedly, one AA flight attendant traded out of that flight a few days before, and someone else worked for her. How would they be able to get all the relevent voice samples?

7) How did they fake the personal information in the phone calls? Even assuming the nonsense about "faking" the voices, in one phone call, a passenger gave her correct combination to her safe.

8) Also, they would need not only voice samples of every passenger and crew, they would also need extensive backgrounds on every soul on board, because there is no way to know ahead of time what questions or comments might be made between the family members and the "actors" pretending to be the passengers. How was all this intel gathered, and who gathered it?

9) We were told those were not the "real" airplanes. Then where, SPECIFICALLY did the real airplanes go? Where did they actually land?

10) We are told that UA 175 and AA11 "shot a missle" just before impact. We are told about the (mythical) extra equipment "pod" underneath UA175. If it was the "real" planes that hit the WTC, then the flight crew would have noticed the "pod" during their pre-flight walk-around inspection. The fuelers and ramp workers would also have noticed. And remember, this "pod" is something twoofers tell us is sooooo obviously unusual. So, how can it be that the pilots saw the pod during their walk around and said "Hey, look! Its a missle pod on my airplane. Lets not ask any questions, and just go flying anyway."

11) If those were not the real planes, and substitute planes, why would you NEED a missle, or an extra Pod? If its not the real airplane, you could pack the whole cargo area, and every seat, with tons and tons of C4. Why would you need to shoot a missles, when you could pack much higher explosives withing the airframe?
http://edgemanll-wwwtruthersaremoron...tions.html?m=1
MrFliop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 12:49 AM   #13
Cosmic Yak
Graduate Poster
 
Cosmic Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Where there's never a road broader than the back of your hand.
Posts: 1,775
With regard to the BBC "reporting the demolition of WTC7 ahead of schedule":
If you want to keep your conspiracy a secret, why inform every news agency on the planet about exactly what you are going to do, and when?

Also: why make a controlled demolition that looks like a controlled demolition? Eg. "4 corners collapsing at the same time", "in its own footprint", "at freefall". Why not rig the explosives so it doesn't collapse symetrically, or into its own footprint?
__________________
Fortuna Faveat Fatuis
Cosmic Yak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 06:01 AM   #14
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,108
Originally Posted by Cosmic Yak View Post
With regard to the BBC "reporting the demolition of WTC7 ahead of schedule":
If you want to keep your conspiracy a secret, why inform every news agency on the planet about exactly what you are going to do, and when?
Because the BBC might not notice the collapse of a 47 story building and if they don't report it, then nobody would know this unimportant building they had never heard of or gave a rats left testicle about had collapsed and the entire plot would fail.

Quote:
Also: why make a controlled demolition that looks like a controlled demolition? Eg. "4 corners collapsing at the same time", "in its own footprint", "at freefall". Why not rig the explosives so it doesn't collapse symetrically, or into its own footprint?
Heck why not do what an actual terrorist would do and just park a McViegh bomb at the front door.

But then, 7 WTC wasn't a target and was not important.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 06:14 AM   #15
heymatto70
Scholar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 61
I will be convinced when someone explains the importance of WTC 7 in that day's events that makes it more important thant WTC 3-6, which were also pretty much destroyed that day.
heymatto70 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 10:46 AM   #16
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 18,862
It was an inside job. The planes flew inside the buildings or at least some parts of it did.
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon
Spindrift is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th January 2017, 10:51 AM   #17
Monza
Alta Viro
 
Monza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,896
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
Woosh.
Originally Posted by pgimeno View Post
Poe's law has such anticlimactic effects sometimes...

Yes, I thought I was being absurd enough. It just shows the sad state of truther-ism that such a post can be taken seriously. Skyeagle409 did a nice job of refuting these claims.
Monza is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th January 2017, 12:06 PM   #18
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,108
I think it is interesting to note that in just the last 5-6 days have seen an avalanche of memo leaks, whistle blowing and roque Twitter postings from within the federal government and especially the White House.

Yet not a single conspirator has spilled the beans on 9/11 in 15 years.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:55 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.