The US Government Planned and Carried Out the 9/11 Attacks

[Blake]

Witnesses can be planted and real witnesses can be ignored.

what witnesses were planted? what real witnesses were ignored?

You'd get laughed out of the debating hall for that one. If the nose of the plane is shaped differently from the nose of a 757, it wasn't a 757.

you apparently don't realize you've already been laughed out of the debating hall. My (and pretty much everyone else's) responses to you are for entertainment purposes only.

What expert is saying the shape of the nose is different from a 757? You?

But has he sold out? Lot's of experts sell out and lie.

At around the 30 minute mark of this video a scientist alleges that science fraud is rampant in the US.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3626298989248030643#

Has this particular expert sold out? Please provide evidence of such instead of propping up a straw man.

Now please discuss the size of the craft that hit the Pentagon.
http://www.bcrevolution.ca/911_part_iii.htm

It's the size of a 757.

[ChumpDumper]

It's not a blur. It a very clear picture of the nose of a craft that's too pointed to be that of a 757.
http://www.g7welcomingcommittee.com/...gon1_plane.jpg

Your link failed as badly as your theory.

Witnesses can be planted and real witnesses can be ignored.

So show us the witnesses that say it was a fighter jet. There must be scores of them.

You'd get laughed out of the debating hall for that one. If the nose of the plane is shaped differently from the nose of a 757, it wasn't a 757.

So anything that looks like a blur is, in fact, shaped exactly like that blur? That's a good one.

If you're not an expert, how can you say it makes no sense at all?

Because flying a fighter jet into the Pentagon when you have already hijacked an airliner makes no sense at all.

But has he sold out? Lot's of experts sell out and lie.

I have found that truthers are the biggest liars in these matters.

Watch these videos.

Only if you watch a similar amount of debunking videos. Anyone truly interested in the truth would want to see both sides of the argument.

[ChumpDumper]

Again?

dan, do you believe bombs were planed in the towers?

[RandomGuy]

I'm sorry, but you cant disagree with a fact. It is a fact that at the distance your "fighter" is from the camera the resolution is 2 feet per pixel. It is a fact that there is not enough information in the image to determine "pointy noses" or "shadow lines".

[RandomGuy]

Originally Posted by David C
I've said before that I was using the part that was perpendicular to where the plane was in this picture.
http://0911.site.voila.fr/index3.htm
You can see where it is in the first picture in this link.
http://0911.site.voila.fr/index1.htm
You can also see it here.
http://www.students.ipfw.edu/~lambdl...20Pentagon.jpg
I can't see why you're having problems finding it.


Look at the height of the Pentagon at the point where it's perpendicular to where the craft was. Double the height which is about the length of a 757. Now put that distance between the tail and the front of the box in this picture.
http://0911.site.voila.fr/index3.htm
It's about twice as long. It doesn't fit. If you allow for the angle of the 757 it still doesn't fit.

Using the height of the Pentagon perpendicular is wrong as the plane was approaching at an angle and would be farther away. Thus you would need to use a part of the Pentagon farther away and smaller.

[RandomGuy]

Parts are plantable, DNA can be lied about, witness can be planted, bodies can be planted, but these 2 frames of fuzzy video are 100% rock solid irrefutable completely accurate unfakeable conclusive beyond a shadow of a doubt evidence that it wasnt a 757.

[Yonivore]

Parts are plantable, DNA can be lied about, witness can be planted, bodies can be planted, but these 2 frames of fuzzy video are 100% rock solid irrefutable completely accurate unfakeable conclusive beyond a shadow of a doubt evidence that it wasnt a 757.

Nevermind all the eye witnesses, in the vicinity of the Pentagon that day, that said it was an American Airlines passenger jet that crashed into the Pentagon.

[The_Worlds_finest]

you barking up the wrong tree. the evidence is eye gouging but honestly. wtf do you think is going to be the outcome? A utopia? People need war its as natural to our species as breathing.

[Cosmored]

Has everybody seen this footage of the representative from NIST playing dumb about the pools of molten steel?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAS4TIYF68A
(6:50 to 8:50)

Here's a 6 part video about group of arquitects that think 9/11 was in inside job.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhPlV99AVQE

[Winehole23]

Molten steel proves what, again? In your own words, please...

[Winehole23]

If you can't explain it in your own words, you don't really know what you're talking about cosmored.

[ChumpDumper]

How does anyone know that the molten material was steel?

[Winehole23]

What was it?

[Cosmored]

If you can't explain it in your own words, you don't really know what you're talking about cosmored.

I'm just a layman who found some experts who think it was a controlled demolition. Why are you so concerned with what I might think?
Listen to the experts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAS4TIYF68A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhPlV99AVQE

My not summarizing what those experts say doesn't discredit what they say. If you want to discredit them, listen to what they say and comment on what they say.

[Winehole23]

That you are unable to recap their arguments in your own words is enough for me to disregard you.

[Cosmored]

That you are unable to recap their arguments in your own words is enough for me to disregard you.

I could take the time to do it, but what would the point be? I found something interesting and I wanted to share it with the viewers. They don't need a summary from me. All you're doing is cluttering up the thread with trash posts.

If you want to contribute, listen to what those experts say and comment on that.

[Winehole23]

I could take the time to do it, but what would the point be?

To establish your own cred.

They don't need a summary from me

Too hard for you? Not surprising.

All you're doing is cluttering up the thread with trash posts.

Trash post smack in 9/11 threads is like handing out tickets for littering at the dump.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm just a layman who found some experts who think it was a controlled demolition. Why are you so concerned with what I might think?
Listen to the experts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAS4TIYF68A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhPlV99AVQE

My not summarizing what those experts say doesn't discredit what they say. If you want to discredit them, listen to what they say and comment on what they say.

You just called the guys who made Loose Change "experts."

[RandomGuy]

What was it?

Most likely it was molten aluminum, since aluminum has a much lower melting point.

Aluminium — Melting Point: 933.47 K (about 600 decgrees centigrade)

Iron, out of the ground, melts at around 1510 degrees C (2750°F). Steel often melts at around 1370 degrees C (2500°F).

The wider point is that you can't really say for certain what it was from either the eyewitness accounts or the pictures.

This is yet another logically flawed, well-worn, and easily debunked bit that ol' Cosmo has fallen for.

Cue mouse in 3, 2, 1...

[Nbadan]

Logic fail. If you can't rule for sure that it was molten aluminum then your argument makes as much sense as those who say it was molten steel

[Nbadan]

How does anyone know that the molten material was steel?

How do you know that it wasn't?

[ChumpDumper]

How do you know that it wasn't?

I never said it wasn't. I have said and will continue to say it's more than likely not steel.

There are plenty of people who insist it was steel.

Do you have any proof it was steel?

[whottt]

Good god, you guys are still fucking arguing about the girders? I last clicked on one of these 9/11 thread in Nov of 95 and it was the exact same fucking argument.


This has to take the record for the longest running ST argument ever.

[Nbadan]

So, in other words, it could be steel....

[Nbadan]

Good god, you guys are still fucking arguing about the girders? I last clicked on one of these 9/11 thread in Nov of 95 and it was the exact same fucking argument.


This has to take the record for the longest running ST argument ever.

Nah, that's WTC7...

[ChumpDumper]

So, in other words, it could be steel....

Prove it.

[Nbadan]

Prove it.

I said 'could'.....

[ChumpDumper]

I said 'could'.....

But you can't prove it....

[Nbadan]

..it could be tapioca, but I'm fairly certain it wasn't...I'm not certain it wasn't steel, but you seem convinced, so show me the proof..

[ChumpDumper]

..it could be tapioca, but I'm fairly certain it wasn't...I'm not certain it wasn't steel, but you seem convinced, so show me the proof..

I'm fairly certain it wasn't steel, for reasons that have already been made very clear. You'd have to be a real idiot not to be able to figure it out.