9-11 An Inside Job? No way!

If you start telling someone about 9-11, there are three possibilities. Of course, it depends on which version you are talking about. For those of us who have tried to explain that 9-11 is more than the official story, we get to sentence number two, if we are lucky.
- NO WAY!! Are you totally out of your mind?!”
- But why do you think that…
- No! I don’t want to hear about it. It`s sick.
- Have you seen 9-11…
- Yes. I have seen it, read about it and I know what happened.
- …Press For Truth, I ment
- What is that?
- It’s a film about 9-11 and…
- Yeah, right! Conspiracy shit.

And that’s usually the end of discussion. The next possibility is a softer experience, but maybe more demoralizing.
- Oh, really? You think so? (looks confused and raising an eyebrow)
- Well, listen……………………….

Your selling your story about put-options, PDB on 6tf of August, controlled demolitions, steel-framed high-rise buildings, Mohamed Atta`s passport (maybe interrupted by “Who`s Atta?”), trillion dollar military systems not working, cell phone calls in high altitude, Hani Hanjour`s Top Gun maneuver, and the Pentagon videos.
You feel excited and the list could go on forever. But a yawn tells you its time to extinguish the fuse before the rocket lifts off.
They don’t care what happened, and they are totally uninterested.

There is a lot about 9-11 that seems weird. Everyone who have looked at it knows a lot of this, but still it needs to be told, even though it sounds like a CD on repeat.

There are also two questions that I constantly receive.

1) How can Bush & Co be so stupid and make all these mistakes, if they managed to arrange all of this in the first place?
But the same people also say “no” if you ask them about they have seen "9-11: Press For Truth". They are not even interested to have a look and still stick to the official explanation.

2) Why did they have to make it so complicated? Couldn’t they just fly the airplanes into the buildings and stop there? Why did they have to take them down, when they should have foreseen that there might be questions about controlled demolitions?

There are also two other groups of people:
Those who have seen a lot and read a lot about 9-11 and have their own understanding of what happened:
- the conspiracy theorists
- those who fully believe that the official story is (close to) 100% correct

Many, including myself, are tired of that word; conspiracy theories.
And I am not talking about remote controlled airplanes, or some passengers from Flight 77 still alive, or if some of them ever existed, etc.
Unfortunately, theories like that are often linked to those who doubt the official story, and ridiculed as conspiracy theories.

It may well be that something, or even someone, was under remote control that day, but instead there are a lot of facts to look at, which makes it hard to believe the official version.

A) Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice. All of them said that they never could have predicted something like that to happen.
Still there were emergency drills that looked pretty much the same as the actual events. At the same time as the ongoing hijackings.
A coincidence?

B) FEMA arrived in New York the day before the attacks. They set up all their equipments and prepared for a big disaster.
Just by coincidence?

C) All 19 hijackers were identified 3 days after the attack, even “no one” knew they were around, and therefore we must assume they were not suspected terrorists. Otherwise, they would have been arrested and examined. And at least, they would not have been able to board those planes at the same time.
Even for the FBI, a 3 day investigation resulting in all the 19 identities, must be one of their best results. Especially when we have in mind the condition of the bodies after the impact and fire.
Just a coincidence? Or brilliant investigation and a little bit of luck?

D) The put-options on American Airlines and United Airlines. The two airlines used in the attacks.
Financial transactions in the days before the attack suggest that certain individuals used foreknowledge of the attack to reap huge profits.
Who did this? And why at this certain time?
Another coincidence and pure luck?

E) Many experts have expressed themselves about the WTC collapses. Still, the fact is that no building has been even close to collapse like that, and at that speed.
At that day, it happened to 3 buildings.
We all know the story about fire proof materials were damaged when the aircraft crashed into the buildings. And, obviously this was enough for the high-rise steel-frame buildings to collapse in free fall speed. But for that to happen, the buildings must have lost all its supportive elements simultaneously.
Could that happen because of some fire proof missing up in the higher floors?
Or just another coincidence and bad luck that day?

F) The remains of the two buildings were removed very quickly. And further investigation was impossible.
Why? Another slip and bad judgement by the authorities?
One should believe that finding the reason why the buildings collapsed, would be of great value for future constructions. If for no other reason.

G) The Pentagon.
Never has there been smaller damage made by a plane like a Boeing 757, crashing nearly at full speed. And a top security building like the Pentagon should be able to secure better evidences from their surveillance cameras.
Not only was it poor quality, they also refused to show them publicly. Lets assume they had nothing to hide, why don’t show them to the public and say it like it is; “that’s all the evidence there is”, instead of hiding them and create all this mystery.
The hijackers also made a top gun maneuver, only to hit the section of the Pentagon containing fewer people and an under-construction-part of the Pentagon.
Maybe the only coincidence this day that didn’t favourise the hijackers.

Pentagon staff also went to their neighbourhood to confiscate video evidence from cameras which might have captured the attack. Those tapes were also classified as Top Secret and not shown public. Until resently.
One can imagine how proud the owners of the gas station and the hotel must have been, maybe helping Pentagon look after their multi-billion property….
After all, what do we have good neighbours for?

Ps! An interesting statement in Le Monde by Alexander Cockburn, one of the most eager opponents to conspiracy theories;
- Some photos of the impact of the “object” — the Boeing 757, flight 77, which hit the Pentagon — seem to show the sort of hole a missile might make. Ergo, 757 didn’t hit the Pentagon. A missile did. And in some photographs, that wasn’t smoke obscuring a larger rupture in the fortified Pentagon wall.

Per definition, a theory must be supported by at least two people to be called a conspiracy. Anyway, Cockburn`s theory at least sounds like one.

H) 9-11 Commission Report.
At first, President Bush allocated $3mill for the Commissions investigation. Later, he increased it to $8mill (If I got the numbers right on this one?).
But, in the first place he resisted to have an investigation at all. After lot of pressure from the public and the families left behind, he approved it and placed Henry Kissinger with his bad records from i.e Nixon administration as chairman of the commission. Later he was removed because of close connection to the Bush administration and facing questions about potential conflicts of interest.

The executive director of the 9/11 Commission, Phillip Zelikow, also made a lot of noise from the public.
His close connection to both Bush and Condoleezza Rice created a lot of displeasures, but he remained the director until the final report was released.
He later got a job in Dept. Of State, as:
- a principal officer who serves the Secretary as a special advisor and consultant on major problems of foreign policy and who provides guidance to the appropriate bureaus with respect to such matters.".

- Zelikow joined the National Security Council in the George Herbert Walker Bush administration, at the same time as Condoleezza Rice. He has co-authored many books. Among them, "Germany Unified" and "Europe Transformed" with Condoleezza Rice. Philip Zelikow served on President Bush's transition team in 2000-2001. After George W. Bush took office, Zelikow was named to a position on the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, and worked on other task forces and commissions as well, including the National Commission on Federal Election Reform.

It seems like the Bush Administration found “the right man” for the job for an investigation they never wanted in the first place.

It also proved to be difficult to get Rice to testify. Finally she raised her right hand and took place at the hearing. Maybe because she actually did raises her right hand, she found it hard to answer Ben Veniste`s questions.

Bush and Cheney refused to give their testimony in public hearings under oath, and insisted to answer questions in private, and together.

Just another strange behaviour from a Government which have no secrets (their own words). At this point, it can not be called a coincidence anymore.

I) Usually the NTSB put together aircrafts which has been in accidents to investigate what caused the accident. Of course, this was impossible with Flight 11 and Flight 175. But either Flight 77 or Flight 93 where investigated like normal air crashes. They probably “had all the answers already”, and therefore further actions were not necessary.
Also; the “investigation” reports are classified for all four flights.

- The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Safety Board provided requested technical assistance to the FBI, and any material generated by the NTSB is under the control of the FBI. The Safety Board does not plan to issue a report or open a public docket. -

Another coincidence of secrecy?

There are no names responsible for the reports, or what they (didn’t) find out. What is the reason for keeping this secret? They went public 3 days after the attacks with the hijackers names and origin. They did not intend to start an investigation at that point since they already had all the answers. And still they keep silent due to National security reasons. What does the accident reports hide since it is so classified? Or was the NTSB involved at all?

J) Compared to the attacks in Madrid and London, where the terrorists “only” had to put on their rucksack, get to the station and inside the trains, and detonate the explosives, the 19 hijackers on 9-11 had to overcome both the FAA, FBI, CIA, NORAD, the US Air Force etc. And they did.

Only because of coincidences and pure luck?

Or maybe USA is not as superior anyway, despite their billion dollar budget on surveillance, military and high-tech equipment?

Based on this, and a lot more, people are still asking questions about what really happened on 9-11.
From my point of view, that is quite legitimate, without being called a conspiracy theorist. But if so, where is the conspiracy here?
These are simple questions which should be easy to answer for those who claim to know the truth, and nothing but the truth. Instead, they keep it secret for all its worth.

Back to question number 1) at the top: How can the Bush administration be so stupid and make all these mistakes, if they managed to arrange all of this in the first place?
Answer: Good question. If I had the answer, I guess I would have been highly recommended for several positions.

Back to question number 2) at the top: Why did they have to make it so complicated? Couldn’t they just fly the airplanes into the buildings and stop there? Why did they have to take them down, when they should have foreseen that there might be questions about controlled demolitions?
Answer: Good question. And again, I don’t know.

As mentioned earlier, there are lots of facts and strange happenings that need to be investigated. By demanding answers from the conspiracy theorists, the whole case is turned up-side-down. We demand answers, and ask questions.
And without a proper investigation, all the questions will be forever unanswered.


I will send this to Norwegian newspapers, but I doubt it will be published. As usual.
Anyone feel free to comment and help getting the article better. And yes, I know theres a lot missing, but I cant send them a book :)

Why They Demolished The Towers

some answers to your questions

To question 1:
The bush administration did not plan this event. This came from joint chiefs involved with the drills (which is also how so few people have to be in on the attack, and govt resources can be bootlegged), and the intelligence agencies. Bush didn't know, because the attacking group threatened him in the "Angel is Next" phone call. This call came through in a series of top secret code words changed daily throughout a multitude intelligence agencies. The group issuing the threats also conveyed that they had nuclear launch codes. This is why Bush had to go run around to the two main Air Force bases where the nukes are and tell the soldiers at the bases, if you hear an order to launch, it is not me Bush, it is the attacking group, the rogue network. Why would they tell Bush? He's a stooge and a puppet. Bush is simply forced to go along. Cheney obviously had a role to play, but certainly doesn't have the physical mental capacity to coordinate the attacks. Multiple heart attacks and pace makers make Cheney an unworthy candidate for the managing and arranging of such a wide ranging attack.
The drills are also the key to the complexity, but with minimal knowledge. They are done to keep the attack known to as few people as possible.
The attack has to be on as large a scale as it was to scare the people to the core. It had to be so massive as to paralyze the public with fear. Certainly there is a deep imagery to the destruction of the buildings. It was assumed there would be minimal questions, because the answers are so regularly provided through the mass media.
If people only talk about the physics and warnings (actually emanating from George Tenet at the CIA), they do not directly break down the official 9/11 myth. When Americans believe that any tiny group in a cave can carry out coordinated attacks on such a massive scale, they will support the agenda for war, even if they don't like the Iraq situation. Attack the official myth directly, and the truth will out.

Pondering the thought

So you reckon Marvin Bushie helped wire the WTC with explosives, but brother Georgie was kept in the dark?

I just fine Tarpley suggestion that Dubya was in totally in the dark hard to swallow.
“it is possible to fool all the people all the time—when government and press cooperate.” George Seldes - "legendary investigative reporter"


I do think Georgie Boy was kept in the dark to some point.... he knew that something big was going to happen... but he wasn't informed of exactly what that something would be.

When he heard the news..... he knew what was up and he knew he was supposed to let it play out..... thus leading to the "I just shit myself" look on his face.

I think that they wanted him to not have to act very much.... they were hoping for an honest reaction.... instead they got the "deer in the headlights"

Georgie was not involved very deeply in the planning of this crime.... but his guilt is by association.... and his guilt is in the cover-up.... and his guilt is in the fore-knowledge

Georige knew but he didn't know.... I would look a bit deeper....

Poppy...was having his little stock holders meeting in New York

Wolfowitz.... Clark.... were having some interesting meetings that day

Cheney... doing his part running things from his bunker

Kissinger and Rumsfeld..... always guilty of something
don't know where to begin with those two

Silverstein.... stinks to high heaven on many fronts

There was a hell of alot of things going wrong at all levels of the FBI and CIA before and after 9/11

Rice knew enough to warn her friends

and the countless lies and the skirting of issues and any real answers to any real questions.... thank you to the puppy dog press.... "Roll over"

Let's take this to court..... and if you want to alter the Constitution in any way..... start hanging people for pleading the 5th

should we hang you for having fore-knowledge or for lying about the fact that you did have that knowledge and did nothing to stop this attack taking place.

TREASON ..... SEDITION..... LYING UNDER OATH..... VIOLATING THE GENEVA CONVENTION (torture of prisoners)..... DESTRUCTION OF THE CONSTITUTION of which they swore to protect....FIGHTING A WAR OF AGRESSION (didn't we make that one up to go after Nazi Germany).... GENOCIDE the killing of your own citizens without provocation

Ignorance is NOT Bliss

Show "Coward When One on One" by 911truthiness

Then let's see who shifts ground first.

How did World Trade Center Building number 7 succumb to fire alone, in such a manner that it appears EXACTLY like an intentional pre-planned demolition?

If you want to talk about back-up generators, and on-site fuel storage, and a critical keystone-like support member... then you will also need to continue on, by addressing statistically improbable symmetry and the rate of total collapse into a very neat pile.

Help me find your brilliant facts and logic, so that I can stop paying attention to "them" any longer.

If you can guide me into the light, I will be forever in your debt. Thanks in advance.


Show "For one thing it did NOT" by 911truthiness

Yes Sir

The building did begin to crumble.... I wonder why?

I wonder what caused some of the steel to evaporate as well.... I wonder what could cause the steel to reach temperatures hot enough to VAPORIZE the structural steel.

5,000+ degrees

Hydrocarbon fires as those caused by diesel fuel do no create temps anywhere near these temps.

Thermite / thermate on ther other hand.... DOES!!!

and if this was planted in strategic locations around the building would cause the structure to begin to fail... making all kinds of pretty creaking noises for all around to hear.

The fires you describe were not raging.. at least not to the point of creating a catastrophic structural failure which would trigger a symmetrical collapse.

Were other building damaged when this structure fell? not at all like they should have been..... the building was 47 stories tall..... that building was taller than the tallest building in over half the states in our country.....

You are trying to contend that when you look at the collapse of WTC building 7 you do not see what appears to be a near perfect implosion???? Keep playing like you are educated my friend.... because nobody with any sense at all is picking up what you are putting down.

There may not have been any firefighters in that building but there was a fire suppression system.... aka Sprinklers in that building and when one goes they all go..... the interior of that building was getting one hell of a soaking..... the fires could have burned all night and that building should have withstood the heat from those fires..... if those fires were raging like you claim.... they would have been shooting flames out of the windows which would have been several stories high.... even then a hydrocarbon fire still wouldn't burn hot enough to affect every single structural member equally to symmetrically bring that building down.

I'm BONING UP.... can you feel me yet?

a building may naturally fall straight down... but they are most likely to find the path of least resistance..... to fall straight down like they did they all three chose the path of most resistance.... yet they somehow fell at speeds which resembled the path of no resistance.

I'm pretty sure that we have explained the only way in which those speeds could be reached and it's in a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!

No person who would crack a book would come to any other conclusion inless they were smoking crack

So my advice to you would be to lay off the pipe...and lose Whitney Houston's number

Peace OUT!!!!!

Ignorance is NOT Bliss

Show "And your proof for this" by 911truthiness



Hope you enjoy this.

""The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure. A detailed study into the mechanisms of this phenomenon is needed to determine what risk, if any, is presented to existing steel structures exposed to severe and long-burning fires. ""

Very unusual...... I wonder what caused those pools of molten metal found under all three structures debris fields months after the collapse..... after months of a continual fire hose down?

Could it be the result of a reaction..... a chemical reaction which could not be controlled by water?

What in the world could cause these things to happen?


Have you done any research as to who occupied WTC 7? Glory be! It's the same damn people we are questioning here.... your government.... hmmmmm?

so when a building creaks you should start the timer for collapse? You are trying to say that our view of the building collapse was blocked by the side of the building where the collapse was being filmed? You are trying to say that one side bagan to fall and then the other?

OK??? but the side we all saw fall still fell at virtually free fall speed....

You say that explosives would not affect the rate of fall of a structure?.... you'd be very wrong about that as well.

The use of explosives allows you to virtually pull the rug out from beneath the falling debris.... eliminating resistance.... the explosive force creates a vacuum ... allowing the structure to fall.

You say I don't know what I am talking about but yet you do not explain this to me...... You are still trying to say that three steel structures which had never in the past fallen due to fire.... three steel structures which each had unique structural damage..... three buildings with completely different fire damage and fire locations.... ALL THREE for the first time in history.... had catastrophic symmetrical structural FAILURE..... Each falling virtually into their own footprint at near freefall speeds????????

ALL THREE BUILDINGS DEFYING PHYSICS!!! there were no jety engines attached to the structure pushing it down....YES... they can only fall so fast due to gravity...... and that's only possible without resistance

RESISTANCE..... say it slowly now

the buildings fell at near maximum velocity due to gravity.... are you getting what even you are saying.

Buildings can not fall through themselves without resistance...... explosives remove resistance..... CD brings buildings down with-uin their own footprints at virtually free fall speeds



Should I even speak to all the eyewitness testimony and news reports which report explosions???????

Ignorance is NOT Bliss

Show "The Free Fall Speed Lie" by 911truthiness

Am I the only one

Am I the only one laughing???

Big buildings cause a vortex in the physical universe??

The air is thinner???

Are you trying to break out the Chaos theory??

Well with-in what would be expected?? The only steel structures to ever fall from from fires??? What should we be expecting again?

You are speaking out your ass and it's starting to stink.

this line of excuses almost takes the cake... you are dillusional.... LOL

It's people like you that give me hope because I know that there are people out there who have brains that work.... when and if they actually choose to use them..

Keep drinking the Kool-Aid

OOoooooooooohhhhh Yeah!

Ignorance is NOT Bliss

User 911truthiness brings tears to both of my eyes.

One eye cries tears of laughter and joy. Joy, for after five solid years of study and effort, we must be having an effect if "The Thin-Air Hypothesis" is an indication of where the popular narrative will be heading. "The Thin-Air Hypothesis".... never before has a truthiness original been so accurate at summing up the official narrative.

The other eye cries tears of sorrow. For as I sit here jaw-dropped over the irony above, hundreds of thousands of once living/breathing people are now dead for the sake of lying and deceptive jerks such as "911truthiness". Thanks for nothing, you fucking bastard.

Erin S. Myers

"The truth shall make you free." Why not make the truth free? We live on a priceless blue pearl, awash in a universe of fire and ice. Cut the crap.

Free Fall Lie

I notice you guys completely ignore the simple observation I made about the truthers free fall lie.

If the building fell at free fall speed as the hype goes, then explain the fact a lot of debris and columns can be seen fall faster? How can that be?





**Words inserted into mouth**

If you read closely you will se this word prior to any free fall reference:


Virtually free fall speeds

and yes the cloud of dust did appear to fall at a slower rate then some of the beams which were also somehow thrown horizontally by the forces of GRAVITY???

Some things did fall a bit slower but when you consider the time of the overall collapse..... you will see that RESISTANCE had been VERY minimal.

Don't hurt your brain on this one buddy

Ignorance is NOT Bliss

911truthiness is no longer talking about #7.

Granted, that was a very smooth ground-shift.

So I take it you did not

So I take it you did not read F.R. Greenings Report

If you did he clearly shows the collapse DID NOT require explosives and that the tremendous amount of kinetic energy stored in the building completely jives with the time it took to collapse.


You can ignore it if your wish, I know its not light reading. This is real science not truther YouTube, show me some pictures, physics.

Oh and beams which were also thrown horizontally, Ah, you do know the towers were aluminum sided? Clad in very light 30 foot sections of aluminum. I think even you can figure out what was thrown now.




Sears DIY, Light Weight Aluminum Siding...

Please stop this. Please, for the sake of all that humanity has to offer... please stop this absurd thing you are doing.


"The truth shall make you free." Why not make the truth free? We live on a priceless blue pearl, awash in a universe of fire and ice. Cut the crap.

You've been dupped

Yes..... I read his report on the Pulverization of Concrete

The man is very smart.... he knew exactly how to manipulate his formulas in order to derive the desired result.

When you know the math.... then you know how to manipulate it..... I have taken several hours of physics.... one of my classes was based on conceptual physics... and a major part of that class involved the manipulation of numbers.... what would happen if you changed this number or that number... how would it change the result of the problem.

Mr. Greening did just that.... in his initial calculation he removed all resistance and said that the upper floors had 20 feet of free fall which increased the Kinetic energy substantially..... then he used that calculation to carry that same energy down through the entire structure.

This in essence caused the energy to multiply instead of being hampered by RESISTANCE.

He not only eliminated resistance but he used a skewed calc for the amount of Kinetic energy which absolutely altered the calculation to meet the visual circumstances.

You've been dupped

and Dr. Frank Greening needs to check himself

Ignorance is NOT Bliss

They all do this

Garcia, Zhou and Bazant, etc.

They assume what they purport to prove.

Didn't Ross find that even using Greening's initial unrealistic assumption, a gravity-drive collapse would have been arrested? Just my recollection.


Not sure? That was my analysis... I hadn't read any others response... but if you remove resistance to create the initial kinetic energy then he removed it throughout his calculation

Which basicly amplified the amount of energy as the debris drove itself through the structure when the momentum should have been lessened as it proceeded through the path of most resistance.

MATH NO GOOD.... and I didn't even need my abacus

Ignorance is NOT Bliss

His math jives with observed fact

You are just pissed cause his math jives with observed fact. Exterior column did hit the ground at he 9 to 11 second range, Conspiracy theorist being dishonest say that is where the collapse stops. BUT NO!... the bulk of the buildings were still in collapse AFTER 11 seconds including the core that can be seen in some videos.

I use the low NIST number of 15 seconds for COMPLETE collapse, they say it was 15 to 25 seconds, hard to say exactly due to the dust cloud.

This can be corroborated by simply viewing and video with a stop watch. Sorry if this does not enforce your delusion but facts is facts.


Show "Perhaps you are to stupid to" by 911truthiness

Dear 911truthiness:

You've been had. Look behind you, that's actually Philip "Big Red Shoes" Zelikow piping you in the rears, bobbing his head back and forth screaming, "YES YES YES!"

there is only ONE thing

that needs to be understood.

The buildings, ALL 3 of them fell within 1 second of Free fall speed and the so called reason is because a low Heat, short duration fire somewhat weakened a floor near the top of the buildings.
A reason that has NEVER happened in recorded history, yet magically happens 3 times on 9/11.

and all 3 times defy the Laws of Physics.

it was not just "improbable" that these buildings collapsed, it was IMPOSSIBLE.

and that doesn't even take into account the numerous other bits of evidence that make the case irrefutable.

Again read F.R. Greenings

Again read F.R. Greenings Report

If you did he clearly shows the collapse DID NOT require explosives and that the tremendous amount of kinetic energy stored in the building completely jives with the time it took to collapse. Just reiterating the old "defy the Laws of Physics" lie does not stop the fact what happened is backed up by real science not hype.



The building didn't fall it all

How did that debris get expelled so far out from the buildings?

Those buildings would not have fallen at all unless massive energy was added.

There's nothing on top but a cloud of smoke early in the process. What has destroyed the top and how does it pile-drive the building down if it is gone?

The "free-fall" speed argument is simply that it was destroyed down to the ground in a time not much longer than free-fall speed.

NIST does not say 15 seconds, it says 9 or 10. Regardless, 15 seconds is incredibly fast to "fall" through so much resistance. The resistance was removed.

Free Fall Lie Part 2

Perhaps your should re-read the NIST report.

They report that some of the exterior column did hit the ground at he 9 to 11 second range, in the conspiracy theorist I guess they feel this was the end of the collapse. BUT the bulk of the buildings were still in collapse AFTER 11 seconds including the core that can be seen in some videos.

I use the low NIST number of 15 seconds for COMPLETE collapse, they say it was 15 to 25 seconds, hard to say exactly due to the dust cloud.

Go ahead watch a video and count 15 to 25. You can not stop this fact by repeating the truther lie over and over.


Are you srill talking?

Did it ever occur to you that the remaining building and core that you claim are taking longer to fall is the part of the buiulding which was still connected to the ground.

part of the building not being imploded but simply allowing the falling debris to crush it.

it was this part of the building... likely the lower ten floors which also acted like a cushion for the falling debris.

which also altered the seismic signature. The only resistance experienced in the entire fall was near the bottom.

It's amazing to me that you think you know so much.

These buildings were IMPLODED.... Demolition Style.... almost perfectly executed. What don't you get?

What is your roadblock? Do you not think your government would do something like this?

Ignorance is NOT Bliss

And what you don't get is

And what you don't get is the building fell NOT from the bottom which IS demolition style, but from the middle which is NOT demolition style. This is why the people who actually do demolitions DO NOT support the conspiracy theorist. Why no major builder of these types of building also don't buy the conspiracy theorist crap.

EXACTLY the floors that were hit started the fall, EXACTLY where the fires were hottest. Fire that would destroy any planted charges and detonation cords.

What you fail to understand is the incredible amount of kinetic energy storied in those buildings, Energy just waiting to be released, every pound of steel, every pound of cement, office furniture, computers and people were stored energy. The bottom floors were crushed by all this energy offering little in the way of resistance, simple enough physics, simple science, energy can not be destroyed.


A B C's

Perhaps you should stop hanging out aroung grade schools and put on your Big Boy Pants...

Tell us how you defeated your friend..... then maybe you can beat us all with the same logic

Ignorance is NOT Bliss

Show "Lesson in Logic" by 911truthiness

Blah blah blah. That's the best you can do?

"Yes, we did demolish 7 -- it was just too damaged to save. Fortunately we knew well in advance of 9/11 that we might have to pull it so we were able to have it rigged by one of the world's leading CD firms, ummm, well in advance. 'Cause it takes quite a while to set up."

"Yes, we did demolish 7 -- it was just too damaged to save. Fortunately, all modern skyscrapers have been built with pre-placed explosives to facilitate spur-of-the-moment controlled demolition."

You know, we could actually use a logical devil's advocate around here -- but you've made it amply clear that YOU AIN'T HIM.

Show "Exactly my point, no" by 911truthiness

REAL Engineers?

The very same REAL Engineers who analyzed the damage at Oklahoma City

Guessing the same who analyzed Waco

and the Atlanta Olympic bombing

Ignorance is NOT Bliss

Show "So in your world what is NOT" by 911truthiness

The Conspiracy Theory I fully reject...

... as rationality, logic and humanity must, is that knee slapper about Swarthy Freedom Haters "acting alone" on September 11, 2001.


Your question was:

"If indeed this building was imploded why wouldn't the perpetrators simply defuse the whole implosion question by saying 'Yes..We did imploded WTC 7 because it was too damaged by the collapse of the towers and we need to take it down so rescue operations could continue.'"

My answer was above.

Gosh, maybe those engineers could have helped FEMA out a little -- because they couldn't model "a fire-induced collapse pure and simple" that had more than the proverbial "low probability of occurrence." I'm not holding out a lot of hope for NIST, either, being as their report grows ever tardier.

I used "pull" because I knew you just wouldn't be able to let it slide. And I was right! Tsk tsk, assumptions, assumptions. (I really don't give a fork about Silverstein and his use of the word as he was talking out of his ass in an attempt to cover it.)

Anyway, buddy, no hard feelings. We're looking for someone a little more qualified to be our resident debunker. Best of luck.

Show ""I'm not holding out a lot" by 911truthiness

You inhabit a fantasy world.

Truth and justice are completely foreign to you, thus words like mine and countless good people from around the world will always sound like gibberish to people like yourself.

Might you propose a solution to bridge the divide between our language? Mind you, the so called "Thin Air Hypothesis" won't help much. Please offer another one.

If Smell A Disappearing ACT

“it is possible to fool all the people all the time—when government and press cooperate.” George Seldes - "legendary investigative reporter"




LOOK at the thin air at work

Ignorance is NOT Bliss

Show "Free Fall Lie" by 911truthiness

But being the truther type

But being the truther type you guys don't think, you believe.

Please refrain from this type of rhetoric if you don't mind, it does nothing but facilitate flame wars - which are obviously not getting anyone anywhere.


Forgive my match, dz.

I was unable to resist the gravity of vetting 911trutiness.


"The truth shall make you free." Why not make the truth free? We live on a priceless blue pearl, awash in a universe of fire and ice. Cut the crap.

Yes we believe

We believe.... One morning we woke up and decided that we would accuse our government of GENOCIDE...... I know that this assumption is completely unfounded but we really hate the President.... This is purely a political ploy to try and get him out of office.

I know this is a very serious claim but as Americans we have that right to make things up without reason.

You have got to be F'n kidding me man..... do you think that we would make a claim like this without serious questions.....

Get lost!

You make me sick

And tell your friend to think for himself..... and let him know that if he is looking for insight into this matter he should look further than your brilliance...**THUMBS UP**

Ignorance is NOT Bliss

I believe you let you hate

I believe you let you hate for GWB color your sense of fair play. You were conned by a bunch of scam artist selling 911 truth snake oil. Get the book, DVDs only $19.95.

No REAL liberal accuses anyone of murder because it suits their political agenda. And believe me being a liberal atheist myself I despise Bush, but I am also keenly aware of the bull that a strident political view can induce.

Fair is fair Bush did not do this but there are plenty of things we can do to get him out of office. So why waist time on a bunch of loony conspiracy theorist crap that make all liberal look like a bunch of mindless kooks?

As for my friend he feels stupid for having been so easily conned by the truthers, he was just not skeptical enough and had no education in science, I simply was able to explain some concepts that showed the lies and distortions in the 911 truth movement.


Blow it out your ass,

When I get reimbursed for the thousands of hours I've donated to the pursuit of truth and justice... ONLY THEN can you charge me and hundreds of thousands of others having done the same thing... with perpetrating a con against your friend for a measly fucking "$19.95".


"The truth shall make you free." Why not make the truth free? We live on a priceless blue pearl, awash in a universe of fire and ice. Cut the crap.


and you friend is a bigger idiot for allowing himself to believe that you have any knowledge of a scientific nature....

I voted for Georgie in 2004..... and I woke up to his lies in January 05.... I didn't think he was a good President but I beleived that you can not change a President in a time of war if you have a choice on the matter.....

You act as if I heard this and went.... OK!

I studied this intently for several months.... I read six books on the subject..... books from both sides.... I spent countless hours double checking references.... researching intently.... before I would accept that my government would do something like this.

But after all that research.... I KNEW... without a doubt that they would do this.... and all indicators point to the fact that they did do this.... and if they didn't there would be absolutely no need to not answer our questions on this matter..... there is absolutely no need to not show us all the videos from the Pentagon or to doctor the ones that they do show us.

I know exactly what you are doing here but for some reason I feel compelled to answer you for the sake of all those who are coming to this site to gain perspective on this subject.

Is that you Ronnie?

Ignorance is NOT Bliss

Two time sucker

So you are telling me you got suckered twice? once by Bush and now by the truthers?

Maybe some books on critical thinking would help.


truthiness has alot more reading to do

Hey you active debunker you....let's drop the physics a second, cause we seem to have covered that....

How do you explain.....
10+ war games on Sept. 11th simulating a multitude of scenario's including hijacked jets, fake radar blips, and attacking buildings

Norad Tape: "is this real time? or a drill?"

-Dan Rather reporting that Osama Bin Laden checked into a PAKISTANI MILITARY hospital in Rawalpindi on Sept. 10th. Did he just run off to the cave the next day? How about the CIA's frequent connections with Pakistan's ISI? The Pakistani military officers in the Rawalpindi Hospital knew there was a handsome reward for the arrest of Osama Bin Laden.
Oh yea, and how about the Pakistani General labeled as the Money Man Behind Atta visiting with numerous U.S. intelligence officials the day of the attack?

Or read my previous post.

The above facts alone prove that elements within the U.S. government had to have played a key role in the attacks. Hard to refute cause all of the above is confirmed in the mainstream. Maybe the drills are just a coincidence...What does your logic say about this one?

Show ""Hey you active debunker" by 911truthiness

"what the military does when there is nothing else to do."

You have summed up this affair on so many levels, I can't even begin to thank you for those words.

I will use them the rest of my days. I'm so NOT kidding.


"The truth shall make you free." Why not make the truth free? We live on a priceless blue pearl, awash in a universe of fire and ice. Cut the crap.


Was this comment the nail in Truthiness's coffin?
Ignorance is NOT Bliss

Well being a competent

Well being a competent skilled person, my services are in demand and so I find it good to do some REAL work once in awhile.

Unlike most truthers who sit in moms basement watching YouTube.

I think you mom is calling you.



It's your Mom who is calling.... and I told her that they discovered that smoking crack while pregnant IS NOT good.

The warning came a few years too late for you though Truthiness
Ignorance is NOT Bliss

"The rest is just

"The rest is just unsubstantiated claims and all of it has been wrong or fake. "

You bring up some excellent points, 911truthiness, this being the best: these unsubstantiated claims are wrong, or worse, fake--which, when one gets through with verbal math means they're ACTUALLY substansiated, or at worse, NOT fake.

Just ignore that. My point is YOU WORK HARD debunking the twoof, and I should know, as I, too, hunt down the twoof wherever it lurks, attempting to undermine our faith is the basic infallable goodness of our glorious leader, George W. Bush.

It is only with the efforts of debunkers like us that the Bush administration will be exonerated from the enroaching twoof that attempts destroy all the good W. is trying to accomplish.

Stay strong, brother! Or sister! The twoof is out there!

So you can't argue the facts

So you can't argue the facts of what I say so you call me a Bush lover.

Yep.. Typical truther stuff, ignore the message, smear the messenger.

Go ahead give me more negative points, can't have our conspiracy theorist delusion threatened.



almost funnier than Bush calling other people terrorists..... speading their ideaologies with bullets... killing innocent people.... 9/11...9/11... 9/11.... Dekembe Motumbo

keep spinning this and playing the frail believer

"Typical Truther behavior" Wahhhhhh!

nobody's buying your act...OK?
Ignorance is NOT Bliss

So once again you can't

So once again you can't argue facts and logic but play the. If you hate Bush you HAVE to buy the 911 truther kool aid card. Sorry never been a sucker, don't intend to start now.

My friend use to drink that stuff too, and I set him straight, it's what friends do

And when a thinking liberal progressive like myself comes along and calls you on your conspiracy theorist bull, your only OUT is to call me a Bush lovers. Well sticks and stones.... Well let talk facts and science now.

You sure you don't work for the RNC making liberals look stupid with this stuff?


You got me

I work for RNC?? and I am here to make those people who place labels on themselves and others, in order to make judgement calls about what people beleive or don't believe, look stupid in the eyes of people who have chosen to judge people by labeling them.

People are placed in categories every day by people who have been brainwashed by people like Rush Limbaugh. Instead of actually listening to their argument they are busy trying to place judgement on them in order to place them within a group which they can thus chose to listen to or not based on their percieved "group" affiliation.

You all need to communicate and stop placing people in their determined boxes. We are people with opinions do we really need designations in order to communicate. Your minds are being diverted by this constant predjudicial process.

I have no label and I'm here to fight for the future of this country and the world. Call me what you will but you will be missing the argument. Using these labels to sheild yourself from actually thinking. Don't put me in a box because you will find that you can not contain me. I am a Patriot like many others who have seen beyond your beliefs and junk science. Patriots who will not be swayed by your confounded stance.

Call yourself what you will but you can not assume that I am here to discredit your "label". For all I know you are African American, Handicapped and Homosexual with a hairlip and a lisp. How many labels am I here to discredit?

Whatever you are... Whatever group that you adhere.... as long as you continue to speak to things of which you are clearly speaking out your ass .... I will gladly do my best to expose and discredit.
Ignorance is NOT Bliss

"So you can't argue the

"So you can't argue the facts of what I say so you call me a Bush lover."

No I didn't. Show me where in my post I said you were a Bush lover. And how that would be a BAD thing. That would be a GOOD thing for all of us waiting for TOTAL DEMOCRACY. You want Total Democracy, don't you? Are you a Bush lover?

I am. Some of my favorites are azalazes, blueberrys--but I'm drifting. My point is not only do YOU WORK HARD, but you've worked too hard. You're reading things that aren't there. Take a break--the twoof will still be out there when you get back.

So this is NOT to imply

So this is NOT to imply debunkers of the truth movement (like me) ARE NOT trying to help Bush? in a rather satirical way?

Your Quote: Just ignore that. My point is YOU WORK HARD debunking the twoof, and I should know, as I, too, hunt down the twoof wherever it lurks, attempting to undermine our faith is the basic infallable goodness of our glorious leader, George W. Bush.

It is only with the efforts of debunkers like us that the Bush administration will be exonerated from the enroaching twoof that attempts destroy all the good W. is trying to accomplish. End Quote

Yeah Right. My debunking of the so call "truth" is because I hate to see good people be conned by a bunch of charlatans spreading pseudoscience as fact. They do it for a political agenda and more often for $$$$$$$. I hope you don't actually spend money on this stuff.

It's nothing new, it happened with JFK, UFOs and ESP, Etc. etc. Find a rube, tell him what he want to hear, sell the snake oil or the DVD, Book......


So you don't support George

So you don't support George W. Bush? Then I have only one question for you:

Why do you hate America?

Yes, you try to hide behind a crusade of saving people people from being conned out of money---Hang about! There's MONEY to be made in the twoof movement? Where? Nobody told me this when I was a twoofer! Shifty little buggers, trying to keep it to theirselves!

Thank you brother! Or sister! Almost had a crisis of skeptic faith there, but your words set me straight! Though it's tempting to go back, just to pick up a little of that cash, you understand...