My reply to: The Top September 11 Conspiracy Theories

This is a reply that I wrote to them....

I encourage everyone to do something similar.

This article is really a farce!!!

I can tear it appart peice by peice.... Here.... Alow me!

1) The World Trade Center (WTC) twin towers were destroyed by controlled demolitions.

This is how the collapses may have appeared to non-experts, but demolition experts point out many differences:

* Demolition professionals always blow the bottom floors of a structure first, but the WTC tower collapses began at the upper levels, where the planes hit the buildings.

- Sure, but that does not mean that a building CANNOT be destroyed in this fashion. In fact, there are SEVERAL instances where DEMOLITIONS have destroyed the top part first and then blew the bottom part.

* Non-experts claim that debris seen blowing out of windows was evidence of explosive charges, but experts identify this as air and light office contents (paper, pulverized concrete, etc.) being forced out of windows as floors collapsed on each other.

- Please provide EVIDENCE that the building has that much ENERGY available to BLOW concrete in mid air into fine TINY particles. The building did NOT have that much KENETIC energy to do this on its own.

* Demolition firms had very sensitive seismographs operating at other sites in Manhattan on September 11. None recorded any explosions during the tower collapses.

- Could that be because perhaps the cores were taken out by THERMATE????? There is EVIDENCE that this happened. There were pictures of peices of the CORE standing in the middle of a pile of rubble with a 45 degree cut made to it. Your gonna try and tell me that the resuce workers worked their way through all that rubble just to cut a beam?

* Clean-up crews found none of the telltale signs of controlled demolitions that would have existed if explosive charges had been used.

- You mean like EVERYTHING being destroyed??? You mean like the concrete being pulverized into fine particles IN MID AIR??? You mean like not any substantial part of the building, of 3 buildings, not even still standing???? You mean like that type of sign??

* Cutting away walls, insulation, plumbing, and electrical conduits to place numerous charges on the towers’ structural columns in advance would not have gone unnoticed.

- You have to be kidding!!!! Thats what stairs and service elevators are for. Thats why several tenents heard unusual sounds coming from above them when there were no residents in that part of the floor??? You mean the fact that several tenents were shifted around just weeks before 9/11????

* For more information, see ImplosionWorld’s article on the WTC collapses, the National Institute of Science and Technology’s “Answers to Frequently Asked Questions,” and Popular Mechanics, parts 4 and 5.

- Popular Mechanics??? PLEASE! They are such a wite wash that they should call them selfs the 9/11 Commission Continued.

2) No plane hit the Pentagon on September 11. Instead, it was a missile fired by elements “from inside the American state apparatus.”

Conspiracy theorists making this claim ignore several facts:

* The remains of the bodies of the crew and passengers of American Airlines flight 77 were found at the Pentagon crash site, and positively identified by DNA.

- Sure! Let's see..... The government can't produce one strand of evidence that the plane hit the building, with the 80 plus video's, but you want the people to believe that they identified all of the victims???

* The flight’s black boxes were also recovered at the site.

- Yeah, and the pilots for 911 truth have analyzed the data and found the plane to be to the left and 400 ft above where YOU say it was. NTSB refuses to address this discrepency and will not talk about it.

* Numerous eyewitnesses saw the plane strike the Pentagon. Some saw passengers through the plane’s windows. Missiles don’t have windows or carry passengers.

- PLEASE! If the plane was going 560 MPH, as we are told, there is NO WAY ANYONE would be able to see people. They would have to of been watching the plane miles out, and most of the witnesses say they saw it fly over their vehicle. Nice try, next time try and make up something a little more believeable.

* Numerous photographs show airplane debris at the crash site, as was also witnessed by survivors and rescue personnel. See sections 4:57 to 6:00 of the “911 Case Study: Pentagon Flight 77” video for pictures of airliner debris.

- Most of the 911 truth movement people do not deny that "A" plane hit the Pentagon. Just not flight 77. The belief is that the plane fired a missle, which makes more sense by the destruction and holes left, just before the impact. Debris was not, has not, been 100% IDENTIFIED as being flight 77. The NTSB DID NOT identify the MANY traceable parts from the plane. There was ONLY ONE engine found, from a TWO engine plane.

* For more information, see “Did a Plane Hit the Pentagon?” and Popular Mechanics, part 6.

- See my previous comment on Popular Mechanics.

3) The planes that hit the World Trade Center towers were remotely controlled.

* Boeing, which manufactured the planes that struck the towers, stated that all its commercial jet transports are configured so that they can only be controlled from the flight deck of the aircraft.

- Notice how it says "configured".... This means that the plane can also be "configured" to be controlled from another source. It is software and software can be uploaded in a matter of minutes.

* Passengers onboard the flights made several phone calls. All reported that hijackers had commandeered the planes.

- And there is also voice morphing software that can simulate a persons voice. In a condition such as 9/11, people are going to ignore innomalies in a persons voice and contribute it to stress or distress.

* For more information, see “Did a Plane Hit the Pentagon?”

4) United Airlines flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania, was shot down by a missile.

* The cockpit voice recorder of this flight was recovered and showed that the passenger revolt caused the hijackers to deliberately crash the plane. The hijackers controlled the plane until its impact. See full transcript.

- The trasncript is MISSING 3 minutes of the recording. The plane is said to have crashed at 10:06, but the recording stops at 10:03. Again, the pilots for 911 truth have analyzed the data from the NTSB and prove that the debris feild is INCORRECT for a plane traveling at this speed and angle.

* The U.S. military did not learn that flight 93 had been hijacked until four minutes after it crashed, as recently released tapes demonstrate.

- I have to hold off on this, but I do recal reading that they were in fact informed.

* The military never gave interceptor pilots authorization to shoot down United flight 93. See article on tapes.

- Acording to one place I read, a high ranking military official states this is not the case!

* Listen to the 45-second message left by flight attendant CeeCee Lyles on her home answering machine. Click on the “Lyles” file or the phone icon in the bottom left corner of the flight 93 page.

- Nobody said that she did not leave a message.

* For more information, see The 9/11 Commission Report chapter 1, “We Have Some Planes,”pages 13-14.

- There is NO WAY that a pilot is going to give up control of his plane to someone who says they can fly. PERIOD!

5) World Trade Center building 7 was destroyed by a controlled demolition.

* This allegation was fueled by a comment by the WTC owner that, after WTC 7 was judged to be unstable, he recommended pulling a group of firefighters out of the building, using the phrase “pull it” in reference to the contingent of firefighters. For more details, see 9/11 Revealed?

- Sure...... Like Larry is in charge of the Firefighters!!! Like he gives the word as to whether or not the firemen should continue fighting a building fire. Like he does not know what the "term" means??? His whole life has been in realestate, and I am sure that in that time he has been witness to one and the termanology used in one.

* Conspiracy theorists have interpreted the “pull it” remark as slang for demolishing the building with explosives. But demolition experts say “pulling” a building means attaching long cables to a weakened structure and literally pulling it down with bulldozers and other powerful machinery – not using explosives.

- So now your stating that Larry does in fact know that the word "pull it" means to destroy a building!!! It does not matter the means to do it by! The word basically means to destroy the building.

* Seismographs recorded no telltale spikes or anomalies that would have indicated the use of explosives.

- There would not be any with THERMATE would there?

* For more information, see ImplosionWorld article, the National Institute of Science and Technology’s “Answers to Frequently Asked Questions,” and Popular Mechanics, part 5.

6) Insider trading in the stocks of United Airlines and American Airlines just before September 11 is evidence of advance knowledge of the plot.

* The 9/11 Commission investigated this issue in detail, concluding, “Some unusual trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an innocuous explanation.”

- BULL!!! There was NEVER a detailed investigation into this! They stated that "there is no need to follow the money", so what investigation did they do?

* For example, it stated, “much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American [Airlines stock] on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades.”

- Sure! What about those options that were placed Anonymously??? It cannot happen without being an "INSIDE SOURCE".

* For other examples, see The 9/11 Commission Report, “Notes” section, page 499, footnote 130.

- You mean the 911 Ommission Commission Report?

7) Four thousand Jews failed to show up for work at the World Trade Center on September 11.

* It appears from media reports that some 10-15% of WTC victims were Jewish, indicating there were no mass absences.

- No info here so no comment.

* The “4,000” figure apparently came from an early statement by the Israeli Foreign Ministry that some “4,000 Israelis” were believed to be in the New York and Washington areas, where the attacks occurred. This figure was apparently seized upon by conspiracy theorists, in an attempt to bolster the false rumor.

- Right, just like there were no text warnings to stay away from the building on 9/11?

* For more information, see “The 4,000 Jews Rumor.”

8) Al Qaida is not responsible for the September 11 attacks.

* Al Qaida leaders, including Osama bin Laden, have repeatedly confirmed that they planned and carried out the September 11 attacks.

- Sure, the "FATTY" OBL did. However, the real OBL stated just after the attacks that he had no part in it. This was the last CLEAR video from OBL. All other video's are grainy and distorted, HMMMMM.

* In an audiotape released on May 23, 2006, bin Laden stated, “I was responsible for entrusting the 19 brothers … with those raids ….”

- Like I believe an audio tape from this LYING administration.

* In a November 2001 tape, bin Laden said, “We calculated in advance the number of casualties … who would be killed …. I was the most optimistic of them all. … Due to my experience in this field, I was thinking that the fire from the gas in the plane would melt the iron structure of the building and collapse the area where the plane hit and all the floors above it only.”

- RIGHT! Here is where your story falls all apart! If their intentions are to kill as many as possible, then why not take a flight later in the day when the buildings would be completely full??? Instead of killing just 3,000 it could have been over 10,000. Very kind of the terrorists to be so concerned about keeping the death tolls to a minimum. You know what??? Only the government worries about death tolls and keeping destruction to a minimum, not terrorists.

* For more information, see “Al Qaeda and September 11th.”

- Being a VET, I know that there are planes fueled and waiting on a tarmac in many bases through out the US, and can be in the air in a minutes notice. The only way they would not be is if they were prevented by someone higher up.

Pretty strange how on this one day the government was performing so many of the samy types of exercises that were taking place that very day??? Odd that Cheney had one of the games moved from October to September 11th. HMMMMM.

Odd how that NOT ONE of the military protocals worked that day???

Odd how NO ONE was fired or demoted for the worst attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor.

Odd how the Secret Service did NOTHING that day for the president!!! It is SS protocal to remove the president from ANY possible threat. I would say that having planes in the air and not knowing how many or where they were is a threat! Oh and this "he did not want to scare the kids" is crap! If that was the case he would not have told the world on live TV that we were under attack in front of those kids. This surely scared them more then if he would have just gotten up and dealt with the situation.

Next time train your puppets better!

The truth is on the march and you people will be shot soon for TREASON!

Yes, you did tear that propaganda to pieces, thanks. Let me

comment relating to your fine handle, "R e m o v e B u s h," with these rhetorical questions:

What the hell is going on with the impeachment movements & the end-the-war movements??? They seem to have totally fallen apart! They are going absolutely nowhere as of late. Little if any mainstream media coverage whatsoever! Bush & the NeoCons are running as amock as ever! It is really sickening!

Laws won't set us free, only the truth.

Laws are spider webs through which the big flies pass and the little ones get caught. - Honore de Balzac

Show "Magic Jet Plane" by Anonymous (not verified)
Show "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus" by Concrete man (not verified)

Gov't mentioning the top conspiracy about Flight 93

as being the shoot-down theory and NOT the no-plane crash theory just tells me that THE GOVERNMENT were the ones who started the shoot-down rumors to DISTRACT us from no-plane crashing in Shanksville and to focus any thought of conspiracy with Flight 93 as just being it was shot down.

One of the VERY FIRST 9/11 conspiracy sites to start up after the attacks was soley about perpetuating the shoot-down myth.


Focus on the botched crash scene at Shanksville.


Plane parts

But weren't they found, some far away from the alleged main crash site? A heavy motor part quite a distance away and some debris as far as 12 km away...

An engine was said to be found in 3 different places

1) in the pond 300yds away from the fake crater

2) near the pond

3) 600yds away

Have we ever seen photos of this engine? In fact, have we ever seen photos of any plane debris far from the fake crater?


Focus on the botched crash scene at Shanksville.

sometime in the first half of 2002, a friend of a family member

who is in the FBI, tells my family member that Flight 93 was shot down...

Why would he say this?

///////////////////// - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

My Response To USINFO

"Demolition professionals always blow the bottom floors of a structure first, but the WTC tower collapses began at the upper levels, where the planes hit the buildings."

Please explain the white smoke emerging from the base of both towers just moments before their collapses. This photographic evidence strongly supports the thermite hypothesis (white aluminum oxide dust)

See the images at my website visited by 50+ new visitors daily:





"Boeing, which manufactured the planes that struck the towers, stated that all its commercial jet transports are configured so that they can only be controlled from the flight deck of the aircraft."

I welcome you to refute my following hypothesis:

Wow, even on Christmas day

Wow, even on Christmas day Killtown (the guy who claims to think no planes hit the World Trade Center) spreads his disinformation. Don't you have a family (besides the Cheney administration and the CIA)?

Don't you have a family?

See, I can play your immature game too.

Btw, what "disinfo" am I "spreading" in this thread?

Btw, what's some of your other ID's you use on forums?


Focus on the botched crash scene at Shanksville.

Ho ho ho

Even on Christmas Day, some anonymous must come out of the woodwork to harass a registered user here. Bah humbug.

All I want from Santa is an end to unregistered posting.


Have we all voted?

Just say NO to Trolls for the Holidays!!

I will share a suspicion

I will share a suspicion after looking at the poll numbers so far; there may be trolls registering JUST to vote to allow anonymous posts.

Yesterday the "no" votes skyrocketed over hours while the undecideds and yes votes remained the same. Now the "yes"s are creeping up. I do not think this can be said too strongly:

IT WILL BE A GREAT INCONVIENCE TO TROLLS TO HAVE TO REGISTER. Even if said person does nothing except use anonymous sock-puppets, they risk the IP's being traced right back to them.

Now most people who care about 911Blogger understand the problems we've been having, even if they're not sure banning annoying-mouses is the solution. I understand an undecided vote. But I have to wonder what motivates a "yes" vote.

Just saying.

BTW: I first thought of trolls registering to vote when I saw Mark Roberts, the king of debunkers, had joined us. What's with that? Assuming it IS him...

I'm not sure you have to be registered to vote.

I guess there's a way to check this out.

Nope, seems like you have to

Nope, seems like you have to be logged in--then again it looks like no new votes are being taken, or does it just look like that BECAUSE I've voted? It would be smart to prevent multiple votes...

the voting app probably

the voting app probably stores a cookie in your browser, so being logged in or not should not make a difference as the site would have to be sharing autherntication with 911blogger... doubtful.. easier to just store a cookie and identify you that way... if you identify the cookie then delete, it allows for multiple voting - no need to register multiple accounts...

i used to be a phreak in my younger days (phone hacker) so I am always looking for exploits in any system.

the No's out number the Yes's 6:1 - w/ 10% undecided... 

minimum 4 weeks membership

or a minimum number of made posts should be required to vote IMO.

Well, cass. was right;

Well, cass. was right; USAPatriot voted just before registering. Not the way I would have set it up:

POLL: should we continue to allow anonymous posts?
Anonymous: Yes! And I have NOTHING to gain from this vote!

While I appreciate dissent and debate...

What's so hard about registering? If you have something substantive to say, say it loud and proud.

The Anonymice should be exterminated...

///////////////////// - $1 DVDs shipped - email for info

That's is funny! Killtown, most all your other stuff is good, so

why the cartoon planes at the WTC bullshit?

Where did I talk about cartoon planes in this thread

Mr. Anonymous?


Focus on the botched crash scene at Shanksville.

Able Danger enters twilight zone

Pat Roberts and Jay Rock rule Philpot, Schaffer and Weldon liars.,0,3149...

Do they think they can pull it off...

... by debunking "pull it"?

I'm not sure if S's "pull it" comment is more helpful than damaging (probably the latter). It allows the defenders of the OT to concentrate on it and bypass the far more important issues, such as the symmetrical freefall total collapse of a skyscraper.

In this article they only deal with the "pull it" comment. It is important to challenge them on the more important issues that can be proven (what S "really meant" cannot), like the fact that the fall of WTC 7 accelerated corresponding to free fall (see Frank Legge's article at the Scholars' site). So whenever someone tries to start a debate on what S meant, please point to the important physical facts. Let's not allow them to frame the issue around "pull it"!

Air "Ejections"

Plus that these explosions of "air" burst out MANY floors beneath the collapse. In at least two cases, I have seen squibs seperated from the collapse at the top by *two* of the re-enforced floors that seemed to divide the towers into three when you looked at them - in other words A VERY LONG WAY from the collapse. How does this "explanation" work for those?

Eh? It doesn't! We need an INTERNATIONAL criminal investigation into what happened, with the power to bring people to account!

Show ""Btw, what "disinfo" am I" by anti-killtown (not verified)

"Do I really have to repeat it?"


"You are joking, right? Do you really think I'd trust you with that information?"

No. I'm just curious what your other posting ID's are. I don't need your real name.


Focus on the botched crash scene at Shanksville.

I Find You Offensive

I am probably one of the ONLY people here to use my real name.

Further, I have only posted under my name.

Lastly, since you disbelieve what I am saying, you clearly are implying that I have made up what I wrote - ie you are calling me a liar.

I have no intention of repeating anything. I have seen squibs a LONG way below the collapses, even as they were starting at the top - on several of the publically available videos.

There must be many here who have too. I have no connections with this webfairy you talk about either, and if you had any doubts about who I am you could just find my blog here on 911 Blogger - where on one of my scribblings I even tell you where I live.

I write under my real name, and 9/11 is no joking matter. You insult me.

Okay, lads, I've just read

Okay, lads, I've just read over this mini thread and it's confusing.

It looks like anti-killtown is responding to killtown from above--but for some reason posted in reply to YOU. Which, if true, makes these last three comments a manufactured fight.

Confusion like this is deliberate--and if you and killtown have kept it straight, great, but to an outside reader all three of you look crazed.

Just saying.

9/11 truth gets a little to physical

Even though the physical abnormalities and inconsistancies to the buildings and planes is an essential part of understanding the events of the day. Physical arguments can all to often be discredited by claiming that both arguers generally are unqualified authorites in the specific scientific areas. That's why when Dylan Avery and the other Loose Change gentlemen get on TV, the attempt by the interviewer is generally to stick to the physical arguments rather than drills or political arguments. Even though these guys hold their own quite well, they can easilly be written off by the uninformed as simply "not qualified authorties in the field."
I think the most important facts of the event are the POLITICAL facts. The "Angel is Next" threat came to Bush and the administration through a series of TOP SECRET code words that are CHANGED DAILY throughout various intelligence agencies. This threat (now denied) was initially confirmed by..........
--New York Times
--Condoleezza Rice
--Dick Cheny
--Bob Woodward
and many more sources including intelligence sources around the world like debka, who attempted to blame the threat on iraq at one point.

The denial for this threat has been silly, only saying that the story was from some annonymous leak, and that it turns out the threat wasn't credible. This is silly because this threat was taken as so credible, that it was confirmed by all the sources above, and to cause Bush to run all over the place like a scared pet goat on the day of 9/11.

How about the drills. These are more powerful than the physical evidence. They are confirmed by to many high level officials. The cover-up artists can only claim that this was some bizarre coincidence. Thus logical thinking individuals will see right such a silly excuse.

Let's stick to the facts which one does not have to feel qualified in a specific area of physics to understand. Then no one can simply write us off.

You don't have to be a scientist to see that WTC-7 was "pulled"

in a controlled demolition!

I agree

So... let's stick with thing's like silverstein's quote and let the physics experts stick to the hard physcial evidence. I am speaking of course as to what the 9/11 truth movement should present to the general uninformed public...especially the mass media. The opportunities to get on TV should be utalized in a fashion of presenting direct evidence of criminality within the power structure. Silverstein's quote cannot be dicounted by some sad attempt to spin the interpetation of "pull it." The meaning of "pull it" as I'm sure most of you know is confirmed later in America Rebuilding (the movie that Silverstein says this on). So let's force the pundits and radio talk show host's to have to use some recycled and silly attempt at misdirecting the audience. Once they see the clip, let's let the truth be told. Better to get this clip on, then have them throwing government agency scientific reports at you. Don't let the media catch us in the physics.

"Pull it" revisited

"let's stick with thing's like silverstein's quote"

Please don't. See my above comment.

"The meaning of "pull it" as I'm sure most of you know is confirmed later in America Rebuilding (the movie that Silverstein says this on)."

It is confirmed that "pulling" means taking down a building the way Building 6 was taken down, and that was not by means of explosives. Debunkers have argued that "pulling"" is not used in the context of explosive controlled demolition.

Besides, Silverstein's spokesman has "clarified" that S meant "pulling the contingent of firefighters (="it")from the building".

Concentrating on "pull it" will NOT get us anywhere.

Showing the best videos can make a difference. My 12-year-old nephew could see that WTC 7 was a CD. Actually, he was persuaded by the freefall argument. :-)

The "debunkers" WANT to talk about "pull it". They do NOT want to talk about the total lack of structural resistance in the collapse. One more reason to address THAT issue.

I suspect NIST will not cover that aspect either (cf. their Twin Tower report). Again, we should keep thematizing the issue so that they have no alternative but to try to come up with some fantastic explanation for resistanceless total collapse.


When I speak about firefighters... and policemen for that matter.... I always refer to them as "IT"

IT pulled me over last night and gave me a ticket

I had a fire in my back yard this fall and IT came over in IT's firetuck and IT put out the fire with IT's hose....then IT gave me a citation for burning in my back yard...IT pissed me off! But IT was doing IT's job.

Did any of you have trouble understanding what IT was in my references?

Several IT's lost their lives on 9/11 and I for one am fighting the fight that they can't fight for themselves.

Remember IT!!!!

Dissecting the quote

I think this is where you are wrong. Silverstein's quotes are a direct damnation from one of the conspirators.
There are SO many things wrong with the comments, we can go over them here.

#1: Why in the world would a fire chief be calling the owner of a building for the removal of his firemen?

#2: Why does the 9/11 Omission report say there was no firefighting in building 7?

#3: Why would anyone, let alone a college educated billionaire, refer to firefighters as 'IT'.

#4: The official quote is:
"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, "We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

Why would Silverstein be referring to the fires in the building and then in the VERY NEXT SENTENCE reference the firefighters by "IT"? Wouldn't "IT" be something that he was just referring to? He doesn't mention anything about firefighters and then all of a sudden acknowledges them as "IT" for the first time in the interview?

#5: Reread the official quote. Why would the VERY NEXT SENTENCE after saying "pull it" did he say "And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."
Why would pulling firefighters make a building collapse afterwards?
OK. So maybe it was a coincidence that they pulled the firefighters just in time to prevent them from being trapped in the building when it collapsed.
So, WHY IN THE WORLD would firefighters be inside a building that is so damaged by fire and debris that numerous firefighters (and mayor Guiliani himself) "knew" that it was going to come down very shortly?

#6: Why would they be fighting fires in an empty building on the day of the attacks when mass rescue efforts are taking place?

#7: "Pull it" is used in the EXACT same documentary in which Larry makes his infamous comments. Are you telling me that the surviving buildings in the complex were pulled down with cranes? Show me videos of the machines pulling down Building 6. Seems to me like they imploded them.

#8: Why does he just look and sound like he is very nervous discussing this?

I think this quote is damning and good ole Larry would do anything to take back his words.
How many times have Cheney, Rumsfield and Bush misspoke about the events of that day as well?
These guys are lying to our faces and laughing to the bank.


I mostly agree with your analysis. The problem with "pull it" is that the "debunkers" can just say that S later specified what he meant, and detailed semantic dissection of a colloquial expression is not likely to convince many people. Meanwhile, concentrating on "ull it"means that a lot of important things can be left out of discussion -- such as the fact that regardless of what S said, a 47-storey building cannot totally and symmetrically collapse at freefall speed except as a result of demolition.

Debunkers have pointed out that WTC 6 was pulled not by explosives, but by cranes etc. I see no reason why it (what remained of it) could not have been taken down that way, ie why explosives would have been needed.

watch it!

But the video shows building 6 falling and it isn't hooked up to any machines.
Watch the video.
Damning proof.

I did...

... on a video clip, apparently from the "America Rebuilds" documentary (see "9/11 Mysteries" for the clip).

One can see cables attached to Bld 6, drawing it when it is "pulled". I could see or hear no explosions.

I'm not saying that "pull a building" could not *also* refer to the use of explosives. However, "debunkers" say it is not used that way.

Show "Scientists do not agree with your fantasy." by Anonymous (not verified)

Would that be because NO ONE

Would that be because NO ONE is allowed to analyze the steel?

Would it be because the government is keeping this information from being validated???

Would it be because after 5 years the government can't even produce one video of flight 77 slaming into the Pentagon with the 80+ video's that were filming that day?????

Would it be because if they alowed the investigation that tools like you would still discredit the science?

Could that be why?

Why are you so stupid?

After all these years, you are still repeating debunked nonsense. To claim the steel was not analyzed is to deliberately lie or to admit that you are incredibly naive and stupid.

And to claim that anyone needs videos to know that AA 77 hit the Pentagon is to deny all the evidence that it did.

Tell us, RemoveBush, why do and your fellow 9/11 Truth Kiddies feel compelled to utter such blatant nonsense? Do you hate the truth so much that you will go to any lengths to cover it up?

Look who's talking!!! A

Look who's talking!!!

A person who is so scared to accept the truth, that you can't us a registered name.

A person who CAN'T defend yourself with ANY evidence!

Allow me to show you the ignorance of your ways.....

"To claim the steel was not analyzed is to deliberately lie or to admit that you are incredibly naive and stupid."

It was not anylized! I know your gonna say that the few days that some VOLUNTEERS looked a the steel is considered ANYALYZING, but it is not! To analyze something, you need to take it into a lab..... You need to perform DETAILED analysis of the metal.


"And to claim that anyone needs videos to know that AA 77 hit the Pentagon is to deny all the evidence that it did"

Fine!!! Show me the NTSB report that identifies the 100's of traceable parts for that plane! Show me the SECOND engine, since one ONE was found. This is the hardes metal on the plane, yet only ONE survives? MORON.

"Do you hate the truth so much that you will go to any lengths to cover it up?"

It is you JR. that "hates the truth"! You are the one with your head burried so far up GW's ass that a search and rescue team could not recover you. You fail to look at the information.

I bet you believe JFK was killed only by Oswald???? Despite the fact that ballistics PROVES that more than one person had to be involved. Small hole in JFK's forehead, half the back of his head blown out.

Keep living in your fantasy world!!! Let the adults protect little dribbling mental midgets like you.

Explosive evidence

William Rodriguez, former janitor at the WTC for 20 years and holder of one of only 5 master keys to the WTC. He subsequently saved hundreds of lives on 9/11. He is a worldwide recognized hero and continues to provide his amazing testimony about witnessing explosives, even BEFORE the first plane hit.

Please visit his website:

Many others, including several on the famous firefighters' emergency phone calls, testify to hearing/feeling/seeing/experiencing explosions going off in the buildings.

You can also see them. Just open your eyes.

Show "William Rodriguez did not see or hear explosives." by Anonymous (not verified)


The more the trolls whine about getting rid of the CD argument, the more "resistance" they will receive- just like the steel in a building working against gravity.

again, trying to evade the criminal implications

Your just trying to redirect to the physical argument to evade the criminal act which silverstein ADMITTED he was aware of.

Silverstein is not guilty

That canard was debunked years ago.

! Can't Agree More...

! Can't Agree More...

Yeah, and "you don't need a

Yeah, and "you don't need a plumber to know you've got a busted pipe".

Everyone forgets "experts" are there to explain, prevent or fix problems--most of the time we don't need them to know we have a problem. If I'm standing in a foot of water in my basement and there's no flood or rainstorm, I don't need a NIST report to tell me a pipe's gone. "Terrorists" did not flood the basement.

My observations on the squibs...

I agree with Hoffman on the squibs that the air would've squeezed out of the building before the concrete was pulverized if it was a gravity collapse. He is referring to the squibs. My observations are that since matter goes to the point of least resistence, why did the squibs go down the elevator, make a turn in the room and go out a window instead of going all the way down to the lobby where the window were blown out? Secondly, how did all the squibs become so compact? I say compact because it blew out one window instead of all of them on the face of the building. How does it tunnel out like that in such a high concentrated funnel? Finally, if you look at the squibs, the order of one of them is wrong. How can a squib occur 20 floors lower, then another squib one second later occurs about 5 floors from the crash zone. If the squibs are following the path of least resistence, the squib closest to the blast zone would've occurred first, then the squib lower down. I wish the 911 truthers would really look at that final point of mine and put it in their arsenal to prove that squibs existed.

There were no squibs

Squibs refer to signs of explosives. Explosives initiate collapse.

There is no evidence of explosives.

What you falsely call squibs came after collapses began. So, knowing this years after the fact was revealed, why do you think you can get away with lying about it.

Or do you think 9/11 Truth Kiddies are dumber than you?

Please provide us, oh great

Please provide us, oh great one, with your QUALIFICATIONS regarding this matter????

What scientific background do you have??? How many years have you been a Engineer???

If you can't answer any of these questions...... Then why don't you stop with TRYING to sound so absolute???

I can tell you from my 10 year background that evidence, provable with science, is that those buildings did not come down due to structural damage and fire! PERIOD!

Show "Easy" by Anonymous (not verified)

Still waiting for what makes

Still waiting for what makes your know more than ENGINEERS and Military personnel??

So far you have provided NOTHING, except the same old rhetoric.

Provide use with your QUALIFICATIONS!!!

I have been a Engineer probably longer than you have been an adult.

I have served in the military and know what it is capable of and what the responses would be like without prevention of them doing their duty.

What do you have????

Don't be shy to just say "I have no experience"!

This is the first hurdle to acknowledging that you don't know what the hell your talking about!

Jr. did you know that PHYSICS PROVES that the buildings could not have fallen the way they did??? PHYSICS is that math thing, which you obviously don't have, that everything can be proved or disproved.

It does not matter if a Structural Engineer stands there and says that this can happen. Math proves that it CANNOT! I can tell my boss that the product can't break, but without testing it and using math I cannot be sure! I am only relying on my EXPERIENCE, but that does not mean I am RIGHT.

Go ask your mommy what EXPERIENCE means.....

Oi, RB, I think you're doing

Oi, RB, I think you're doing a bang up job of reasoning with this anonymous git--just remember it's not about reason for him-it's about power and disruption.

This twat HATES me because I don't even try to debate him/her--unless I've got an angle. For instance anon. could not show WHERE IN THE NIST REPORT it explains the mechanism of collapse for the towers. He tried to save face by tacking outside references to excerpts from the NIST report, but, as my point was that the NIST report is flawed and incomplete, as they say "that dog don't bark". Once it was clear the NIST report was lacking the information I asked for, I could just declare victory and move on.

Didn't like that, no, he didn't.

So if you're going to debate them, have an angle and KNOW you will never get them to admit jack. NEVER let them think you're angry--unless, again, you have an angle. Anger is weakness to trolls.

Yeah, they're reading this, but what can the prats do? Their days are numbered...if dz's poll is any indication. 82 votes--77% of which are "no" to anonymous posts.

You did vote, right?

Thanks Col. Jenny Sparks, I

Thanks Col. Jenny Sparks,

I agree to all of what you have said....

I do get angry, and I know this is what they want but when they sit there and question my patriotism that makes me the maddest. I think you can relate?

I have read your questions to this bozo..... I have rarely found one of these types of people who was able to support their stance. I can provide multiple sources and provide reduced math to show my case, but they still refuse to accept it.

I did vote, but to be honest I don't think someone should be required to register. I do think that a poll should not allow multiple votes and it seems from the posts so far that this is possible.

Keep up the good work! too! too!

RB - Don't let IT get to you. You know that basic physics

PROVES that the Towers and WTC 7 could not have been anything other than controlled demolitions. It's almost as simply as 2+2=4, once you break it down.

The shills and trolls make me angry sometimes, too, I just go paint more WTC 7 signs and put them up or do some other positive activity to get the truth out. Remember, they are trying to do two things:

1) Waste time and sew discord among Truthers, and

2) Confuse newbies who cruise in here looking for answers.

As long as they stick to their magical non-science don't waste much time debating them, because they have no real interest in honestly debating you. All they do is employ rhetorical gimmicks and stand logic on its head.

Everyone I've every showed the video of WTC 7 being destroyed immediately recognizes that it is a classic controlled demolition. This is why the MSM will not show it.

When you then inform them of all the relevant political information that the MSM also ignores, they realize the truth and at this point you usually have to console them and let them know that there are millions of people working to end this tyranny. Hopefully, they will ask how they can help.

I hope that you and yours are well.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

"those who know what they

"those who know what they are talking about."
"whose conclusions you like "


No squibs

All 3 buildings had squibs. That would be WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7. I've seen several on all 3 buildings.

No squibs.

There was absolutely NO evidence of explosives ever found at the WTC site.

Give up such nonsense, CDbeliever. You cannot sell it.

You blew it again, RB.

The truth still wins:

Once again, a 9/11 Truth Kiddy shows hows 9/11 Truth Movement members are determined to discredit the movement.

Quite remarkable.

"No. I'm just curious what

"No. I'm just curious what your other posting ID's are. I don't need your real name."

You don't need to know anything about me. I don't trust you with ANY personal info of mine.

"The truth still

"The truth still wins:"

Correct!!!! The truth movement is winning!

We are spreading the truth, unlike YOU! You are JUST like the Nazi's.......

"The fact that these guys prattle about treason trials and executions for ordinary folks who accept the various reports on 9/11 is something that bothers me."

This is just the type of MISINFORMATION that YOU people put out!!!

First..... I guess this person has a reading comprehension of a 1st grader!!!! The email was written to the US GOVERNMENT, and not to any "ordanary folk" as this extremely ignorant person states.

Second.... The people responding on this site is so childish and idiotic that I now understand how Bush still has a 37% support for all he does.

Finally.... Not ONE of them made ANY arguements against the information I argued. TYPICAL!!! When you don't have the mental ability beyond a kid, what else are you going to say???

How about providing some evidence???? Where are the traceable parts for those planes??? Where are the videos???? Where is the steel????? Where was the secret service????

How about answering some questions rather than making idiotic statements?????

As the saying goes..... Put up or shut up!

Oh... Yeah, I forgot to

Oh... Yeah, I forgot to mention....

This is what "pomeroo" had to say....

"A long post on by a deranged, semi-literate loon. It's fascinating that he gets NOTHING right. These are the people who want to change the world, who brand as "sheeple" others whose reasoning abilities are vastly superior. How can such an incredibly stupid person pontificate about subjects he can't begin to comprehend??"

Now allow me to SHRED his statement appart one by one.....

" It's fascinating that he gets NOTHING right"

It's facinating that pomeroo can't even point out what was wrong! There was NOTHING in my reply to the government that was wrong. There is MORE evidence to a CD then one being of a "progressive collapse".

"These are the people who want to change the world, who brand as "sheeple" others whose reasoning abilities are vastly superior. "

This person thinks he is "vastly superior", but provides NOTHING to counter anything I stated...... It is just too damn easy for me to show how he has the mental ability of Forrest Gump!

"How can such an incredibly stupid person pontificate about subjects he can't begin to comprehend??"

This coming from a person who does not even provide ONE piece of counter arguement!!! Yet, he claims that "I" can't comprehend!!!!

This guy could not even win a debate with Forrest. I have not seen him post one thing that provides ANY evidence to anything he states... Just a bunch of student, wannabe, statements.

If this is what our educational system is turning out, then I am going to home school my children. My dog is more capable of providing a debate this this guy is!

Hey pomeroo, how about providing some FACTS to your "looney" comments???? Or are you just a drive by commenter with absolutely no mental ability to do more than that???

Oh, Yeah, you forgot to provide evidence

RB, it is time for you to join the real world.

You have never provided any evidence that was not already refuted and you continue to lie about real evidence daily.

You are a parody of yourself. You do not rely on any qualified person for the assertions you make. You ignore the evidence you do not like.

You are an immature 9/11 Truth Kiddy who should go back to school, get a proper education, and learn how to think. Most of all, you should realize that we are tired of your lies and nonsense. It is pathetic.

Your 9/11 Truth Movement is steadily dying. 2006 is the year it reached its peak and it is dying steadily already. Give up the nonsense, RB.

What happened to th false flag article?

2 articles have been taken off the front page over the last couple days. Why?

Don't even bother debating

Don't even bother debating this asshole. He's hiding his head in the sand so he
keep keep his comfy suburban lifestyle and not have to face the TRUTH.

Answer these questions you stupid fuck.

1. How is it they found MOLTEN IRON under the rubble months
after the buildings so-called "collapse"? Where did that come from?
Office fires? Or did the kerosene(jet fuel) from the aircraft melt that iron?

If that's the case, be carefull when you BBQ, it will melt the grill.

2. How did building 7 come crashing down since it was not hit by
any planes? It had 2 small fires. Oh yeah, that will cause EVERY

We all saw it with our OWN EYES. It fell NEATLY IN ITS OWN FOOTPRINT.

Not everybody is as stupid as you are. We are NOT BUYING the OFFICIAL BULLSHIT STORY.