Screw 911 Mysteries - debunker video...

"Screw 911 Mysteries"

Post your thoughts...

This is not an endorsement of the video, but I think it's fair to air out both sides of an argument.

as if

I'm tired of delineating the evidence for controlled demolition, so all I will say about this typical piece of "debunking" is that its most desperate moment is probably when they say that multiple expert eyewitness accounts of massive secondary explosions in the towers can be dismissed because some of the firefighters use the expression "as if," as in, "as if they had planned to detonate [the towers]."

That's the most pathetic piece of debunking I've seen. These guys are willing to dismiss dozens of expert witnesses and reporters who saw, heard, and felt MASSIVE secondary explosions in the towers because some of them seem to be using figurative language? C'mon. These debunking idiots are the ones living in denial. If someone said about a concentration camp, "It was as if the Nazis were trying to exterminate the Jews," would these debunking morons interpret that as not an eyewitness account of genocide, but a comparison of something else _with_ genocide? Please.

Most of their "debunking" is either taking issue with the imprecise phrasing of the film's script, or simply providing plausible alternative scenarios; that is, they aren't proving 9/11 Truth wrong, they're just positing another possibility for an individual scenario. Taken together, however, the evidence does not support a gravity-driven collapse.


it was "as if" they were attempting to use logic.

“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."

I didn't watch the debunking video

This only serves to prove how effective and persuasive the 9/11 Mysteries film has become. Its greatest weapon is that it breaks through the layers of propaganda, stirs the viewer's thoughts, and introduces new ideas. That presents a formidable threat to the government's obfuscation of reality. These feeble attempts at debunking cannot stop the truth from spreading exponentially.


...........When all our justifiable questions are answered
in the open, on all the major media stations, then we can look at the word fair.

when I say fair I mean here....

the rest of the world, well, I hope they catch on.

America at least.

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

Inward Bowing

Let's make this perfectly clear..... the clips which hold the floor trusses were primarily designed to hold those trusses up and were not designed to withstand horizontal stresses.

Therefore the clips would of failed as the floor trusses collapsed. the floor trusses would have seperated from the clips long before the collapsing floors would have pulled the structural columns inward making them bow and fail.

And if you consider that the clips were under the same heat conditions as the structural columns it would seal the above argument.

In reality the clips would be experiencing much more heatr than the structural columns because heat rises and these clips were at the highest point supporting the floors. The structural columns had many more advantages than the floor truss clips. The structural columns were thicker and a higher grade steel. The Columns were a heat sink nd would pull the heat away from the heat source distributing the total heat.
The structural coulmns were far less affected because the heat was coming from the interior of the structure leaving the outer face of the column virtually un affected by the heat giving it added protection from failure.

I could probably go on but it is uneccessary because it is obvious to anyone with sense or knowledge about the construction of this structure that the clips were far more likely to fail than the large structural columns.

This film will be fun to break off.... I will try to find the time... not even five minutes in.
Ignorance is NOT Bliss

this is an extremely half

this is an extremely half assed debunking video. i halfway expected it to be better than the screw loose change video but shit this is poor quality work. im kind of relieved that it sucks this bad.


"there is a difference between a 'skyscraper crash' involving a misguided 707 and a terrorist slamming a plane into the building at over 550mhp"


In fact

there isn't a significant difference between the 707 and 767. The debunkers resort to this tired mantra, even though NIST has already stated the impact of the aircraft was NOT the reason (they believe) the towers collapsed. So, if these debunkers are Official Conspiracy Theorists, they should be siding with NIST.

4 Engines

A 707 would probably have done more damage in the simple fact that the 707 has 4 engines instead of 2.

This would have caused more damage as well as more wide spread damage.
Ignorance is NOT Bliss

Key 707 vs 767 stats...

From 911 Mysteries.

You can note the the Max take-off weight of the 707 is 10% larger than a 767 and the top speed is 20% faster on the 707.

Best wishes

half assed attempt

OK- We know who made 9/11 Mysteries, who made this one? While there are doubtless a few individuals with an axe to grind about 'conspiracies', I doubt the same motivation exists that drives 9/11 Truth, that is to get to the root of who did this to 3000 New Yorkers. Those who spend time running these anti-9/11 websites are being funded by some source- just who shouldn't be that hard.