Something VERY fishy about 9/11 2001...

[Daggers]

Discombobulated, what flew into the pentagon? i think it was a plane, but not the boeing 757 that the emerican government would like us to think hit it. The crash scene is 73ft high, 65ft wide, a boeing 757 is 44ft high, 124ft wide. DO THE MATH PEOPLE.

IF the american government are lieing about that, then WMD's, then they can lie about anything.

Have an opened mind to the possibility that what the government and their media friends tell us, is not the real deal.

Were being softened up for attack on Iran (iraq ring a bell?), SwissFox mentioned the "new world order", its a happening.

I have no intention of prolonging this fatuous debate.

[shen]

I can only assume that you are unaware that the lateral torsional buckling capacity of steel is significantly reduced when put under high temperatures, even ones much lower than its melting point. Gues what kids, before things melt, they go soft!!!

I forgot to mention that the firemen found melted steel in the basement, yet the recorded temperature of the fire incident didn't reach steel's melting point. Why is it so unthinkable that the perpetrators for example placed explosives within the building to coincide with the plane crash?

Really?!? You dont recall the B&Q fire in Leicester then? Also why do we bother with a Part B in the building regulations?? If fire is not an issue why do clients have to spend thousands of pounds on every new build protecting the steel?? Why do steel buildings adjacent to other properties have to been designed to collapse in a particular way under fire conditions??

Or maybe these morsals of information are not factual enough for you?

And no, I don't recall that, as I don't live in Leicestershire, nor in England, so it hasn't been covered over here, sorry. My point was that the Twin Towers were famous for their solid construction. Many sky skrapers have survived huge fires for a much more prolonged period than the very short fires in the Towers.

I'm not contesting that the fire obviously contributed to a collapse, I'm just sceptical about the fact it didn't even take an hour for both buildings to collapse. It makes sense that no official sources want to reveal whether or not there were any explosives planted in the building as everyone would get a hissy fit and blame the security forces for the whole thing..

[kenny]

But did the fireman find heavily warped steel that looked 'melted' or pools of steel that had 'actually' melted, steel goes soft long before it melts. The other issue with the twin towers is that thier strength comes from a relatively small number of heavily loaded columns, thus a 20% reduction in strength would have a significant impact on the other ones. In this day and age the rules surtrounding 'disproportionate collapse' mean that the removal of one or two major elements would not have the same effect as it had on the twin towers. Rest assured IMO the collapse of the towers was entirely reasonable considering the impact of a fully loaded aircraft, but the same effect would be unlikely if the same impact were to happen to the Petronas Towers as an example.

[Gamesmaster]

no steel construction has ever collapsed because of a fire. So what did cause a collapse of the buildings? The official explanations just don't hold water! All I'm saying with this is that it's clear to even the most dim idiots out there that the US Government or Intelligence are withholding critical information. It's only bloody natural that people are going to ask questions and be sceptical.

Steel buildings have been known to collapse, but not until they've been on fire for 19 hours. Twin towers, 30mins? Firefighter witnesses describe the towers collapsing, "as if they we being blown up". Something VERY fishy about 9/11...

[Gamesmaster]

I have no intention of prolonging this fatuous debate.

what you mean is, you have a point Gamemaster, i now realise you have a good point worthy of discussion.

[Suffolk_fox]

Weeeelll, did anyone see the TV Prog last night about the 'consipracy theories'?

I know this topic has been done to death, and to be honest after seeing the film Loose Change (mentioned somewhere earlier in this topic) I was convinced that the whole 9/11 thing seemed very fishy and dodgy, but after last night's programme....

The guy behind 'Loose Change' is a self confessed drop out of a geek, prob late teens early 20's with his equally drop out mates, who constructed the whole thing on paraphrasing and misquoting people who, in the aftermath of 9/11 were at the time trying to figure out what was going on.

Many of the cohorts of the aforementioned Geek are hopping aboard the bandwagon and obviously making a few quid in appearances at seminars etc, and have their own political agenda too.

To say the theorists have stretched the truth would be akin to saying that Peter Taylor was a bit poor at Leicester and spent a bit too much money.

I haven't got the time, inclination or energy to list through everything here, but did anyone else watch this programme? What did you all think? Has your opinion changed/been strengthened?

[Flynny]

I never quite believed it all but thought something didn't quite add up. I could believe that they found out about it and allowed it to happen, perhaps, but not that they set it up themselves. And I don't 'believe' this, it just wouldn't suprise me.

But last nights program was indeed very good.

I notice that melting point of steel arguement was being bandied about in here long before I joined. Can't quite believe no-one told him it didn't have to melt to get weak.

Also this is worth a giggle.

[shen]

I never quite believed it all but thought something didn't quite add up. I could believe that they found out about it and allowed it to happen, perhaps, but not that they set it up themselves. And I don't 'believe' this, it just wouldn't suprise me.

But last nights program was indeed very good.

I notice that melting point of steel arguement was being bandied about in here long before I joined. Can't quite believe no-one told him it didn't have to melt to get weak.

Also this is worth a giggle.

As much as conspiracy theorists can be annoying, they do exist for a reason. If some suspicious questions are left unanswered they will come to the fore. I agree that a ton of conspiracies are a load of bull, but when it's published what the US Government costs were for the Lewisnky and the 9/11 investigations respectively, I for one ask myself serious questions about the morality of these people. And to be honest, some of the explanations given from officials concerning the 9/11 attacks must raise a few eyebrows. Some of them are just as far fetched as some presented by conspiracy theorists.

[Suffolk_fox]

I never quite believed it all but thought something didn't quite add up. I could believe that they found out about it and allowed it to happen, perhaps, but not that they set it up themselves. And I don't 'believe' this, it just wouldn't suprise me.

But last nights program was indeed very good.

I notice that melting point of steel arguement was being bandied about in here long before I joined. Can't quite believe no-one told him it didn't have to melt to get weak.

Also this is worth a giggle.

After last night, that is my mindset too.

Like the link, by the way. "Like being bukkaked with stupid" - classic!

[MC Prussian]

I never quite believed it all but thought something didn't quite add up. I could believe that they found out about it and allowed it to happen, perhaps, but not that they set it up themselves. And I don't 'believe' this, it just wouldn't suprise me.

But last nights program was indeed very good.

I notice that melting point of steel arguement was being bandied about in here long before I joined. Can't quite believe no-one told him it didn't have to melt to get weak.

Also this is worth a giggle.

Hehehe...

My kingdom has come back to me.

I do agree that a part of the conspiracy theories that came up in connection with 9/11 were - to say the least - very creative.

However, the abovementioned link does not provide total assurance that "Loose Change" is a complete hoax. Sure, it's hard to make connections when there are none , but I appreciate the gathering of information surrounding those extreme events. Not all of it is fake, and not all of it could've been faked by a then 20-year-old.

As for the melting steel debate, it still stands as a fact that steel is not to melt instantly at the temperature raised that day. And in no way could the towers have come down that easily (e.g. that fast).

The quest for truth continues...

[Suffolk_fox]

Hehehe...

My kingdom has come back to me.

I do agree that a part of the conspiracy theories that came up in connection with 9/11 were - to say the least - very creative.

However, the abovementioned link does not provide total assurance that "Loose Change" is a complete hoax. Sure, it's hard to make connections when there are none , but I appreciate the gathering of information surrounding those extreme events. Not all of it is fake, and not all of it could've been faked by a then 20-year-old.

As for the melting steel debate, it still stands as a fact that steel is not to melt instantly at the temperature raised that day. And in no way could the towers have come down that easily (e.g. that fast).

The quest for truth continues...

But the temperatures reached were sufficient to weaken the steel by up to 50%, so it wouldn't have to melt - and take a look at any building being demolished, and they do go down that quickly!

And the Indian Lake debate on the 4th Aircraft - weckage was found '6 miles away from the main crash scene' - in truth, it was light debris, found 6 miles BY ROAD, which in actual fact is about 1 mile away as the crow flies. Oh, and the wind was blowing in that direction too. Wind plus light debris - work it out for yourself.

There were alot of lies and 'stretched truthedness' spouted by the theorists, this being a case in point.

As I was taught as an RAF Copper - never let the truth stand in the way of a good rumour

[Alexikokopops]

I never quite believed it all but thought something didn't quite add up. I could believe that they found out about it and allowed it to happen, perhaps, but not that they set it up themselves. And I don't 'believe' this, it just wouldn't suprise me.

But last nights program was indeed very good.

I notice that melting point of steel arguement was being bandied about in here long before I joined. Can't quite believe no-one told him it didn't have to melt to get weak.

Also this is worth a giggle.

Bah, I was about to post the Maddox link.

[Bloomer]

So that;s as clear as s**t then? Its difficult isn't it, on the one hand there is the official eveidence, on the other the unofficial evidence. Its would be just as easy to frig either? Video is no evidence anymore, it can be very skillfully changed or amended.

Just for the record the height of the aircraft here is irrelevant as the height quoted is clearly with its undercarriage down. Or am I missing the extra 20 odd foot of headroom when I fly on me hols?

[Sooper Steve's shin]

Either we believe that the World's most powerful, technologically-advanced nation was undermined by a gang of fanatics masterminded from a mountain cave or that the World's most powerful, technologically-advanced nation screwed its own citizens and has perpetuated a myth for who knows how long.

Personally, neither choice is very appealing to me.

While I am not necessarily one for the conspiracy theory, I do struggle to understand how all three "terrorists" who made it to their targets managed direct hits on the buildings they were aiming for. These guys had never flown commercial airliners as far as I am aware, although I accept they were trained pilots. But could you look out of a plane window as it's coming into land and pinpoint a precise trajectory to hit a building head-on? OK, the WTC was a major landmark but there are lots of tall buildings in Lower Manhattan - is it not remarkable that neither of the two planes even clipped anything else.

As for the Pentagon, that's not even a high-rise - to hit that building smack in the middle of the outer wall seems an extraordinary feat to me.

[Suffolk_fox]

As for the Pentagon, that's not even a high-rise - to hit that building smack in the middle of the outer wall seems an extraordinary feat to me.

I think that is the only thing that for me still doesn't add up. The hole in the wall, well that would be due to the fact that the aircraft being the softer of the two, would crumple into a smaller aperture. But it would be a fantastic pilot who could hit such a low building without even leaving scrapes on the lawn!

[MC Prussian]

Yes, the 9/11 Centennial is coming up shortly and we're going to celebrate this odd day in history with some more news.

CNN and CBS are all over a new video that has recently emerged, shot straight after United 93 went down in a field in rural Pennsylvania:

It's a great video.

You see exactly.... nothing. Only a bit of smoke in the background. But that could be anything.

The CBS anchorman then points out that Berkebile lived "nearby", when in fact he was 15 miles away (well, that's probably "nearby" in American terms).

Many things about 9/11 still don't add up until this day and I doubt we'll ever hear the truth.

EDIT: The remembrance site near the field where UA 93 crashed is going to cost... 62 million $! That's 62 million $ for a few trees, a marble passageway and a memorial.

[Webbo]

Couldn't this have gone in the current thread?

[Dr The Singh]

Couldn't this have gone in the current thread?

What type of stupid question is that!!!

[Darkon84]

Wow! What a vid!

[Jackirius]

Yes, the 9/11 Centennial is coming up shortly and we're going to celebrate this odd day in history with some more news.

CNN and CBS are all over a new video that has recently emerged, shot straight after United 93 went down in a field in rural Pennsylvania:

It's a great video.

The guy which filmed that was killed in a car crash a few years ago after getting deeply involved in the 9/11 conspiracy, and the other car in the crash was never found and the accident was hardly investigated.

[Saxondale]

There was an interesting programme on the other week explaining why all of these conspiracy theories are nonsense.

It even had the structural engineer who worked on the twin towers on, who explained why the buildings collapsed.

The thing to remember is that most of these theories are authored by people who weren't actually there.

The 'no plane ever flew into the Pentagon' one is a classic example. There were bits of plane debris found. Some conspiracy nutter has tried to get round this by saying that a USAF Hercules flying nearby was instructed to drop these out of his plane to make it look like a plane crash. Ridiculous! Not to mention the fact that the plane struck several lamp-posts before it hit the building. I could go on.

The only way that this could have been a conspiracy is if tens of thousands of government workers and media personnel were all in on it without anybody else knowing or anybody leaking. Errr... I don't think so.

It's all very interesting but, frankly, ill-founded, poorly researched and non-sensical.

[MC Prussian]

There was an interesting programme on the other week explaining why all of these conspiracy theories are nonsense.

It even had the structural engineer who worked on the twin towers on, who explained why the buildings collapsed.

The thing to remember is that most of these theories are authored by people who weren't actually there.

The 'no plane ever flew into the Pentagon' one is a classic example. There were bits of plane debris found. Some conspiracy nutter has tried to get round this by saying that a USAF Hercules flying nearby was instructed to drop these out of his plane to make it look like a plane crash. Ridiculous! Not to mention the fact that the plane struck several lamp-posts before it hit the building. I could go on.

The only way that this could have been a conspiracy is if tens of thousands of government workers and media personnel were all in on it without anybody else knowing or anybody leaking. Errr... I don't think so.

It's all very interesting but, frankly, ill-founded, poorly researched and non-sensical.

But that's the thing: The people who're trying to debunk the claims as conspiracy theories weren't actually there, either.

Besides, up to this day, the video footage of the plane that allegedly flew into the Pentagon remains nowhere to be seen - it's been confiscated by the U.S. secret services.

[Saxondale]

But that's the thing: The people who're trying to debunk the claims as conspiracy theories weren't actually there, either.

Besides, up to this day, the video footage of the plane that allegedly flew into the Pentagon remains nowhere to be seen - it's been confiscated by the U.S. secret services.

Fair point.

Is there any footage? The plane will have been flying at over 500mph - what camera will catch that except a specialised super slow-mo?

[MC Prussian]

Fair point.

Is there any footage? The plane will have been flying at over 500mph - what camera will catch that except a specialised super slow-mo?

I don't remember exactly what they were saying in some of these documentaries, but as for the hit on the Pentagon, there were several CCTV cameras in the nearby surroundings (gas stations, hotels, aso) that must've recorded something.

None of that material has ever been released.

Why?

The TV footage that is available, however, cannot explain whether it really was an airline jet that hit the building (in a tract that had been pretty much made devoid of personnel just days earlier).

[ajthefox]

I don't remember exactly what they were saying in some of these documentaries, but as for the hit on the Pentagon, there were several CCTV cameras in the nearby surroundings (gas stations, hotels, aso) that must've recorded something.

None of that material has ever been released.

Why?

The TV footage that is available, however, cannot explain whether it really was an airline jet that hit the building (in a tract that had been pretty much made devoid of personnel just days earlier).

Erm yes, some of it has actually. Not much, but a few camera angles none the less.

Watch the BBC doc from last week on iPlayer and you will see it.