9/11 questions

[Big A]

I would like some answers to these questions, because to my mind, the official answers don't make sense logically.

1. why on the home videos made by people on the ground, the planes that hit the towers did not have windows?

2. on the same home videos, if the frames are slowed down, it can clearly be seen before the plane hit the tower, a flash/explosion under it's belly, at the front, as if a rocket was fired, and then how come that the building wall exploded just before the nose of the plane hit it?

3. a plane is made out of very light materials. How can those light materials, regardless of the speed they were travelling at, penetrate instantly an entire building made out of concrete, so the other side of the bulding blows up?

5. supposedly the towers went down because the fire at the crash point was so intense, they melted the steel rods holing the building up. Obviously, this means extreme heat. If it was so hot there, then how come people could be seen at the crash point, waving at the cameras?

4. how can a plane of light materials (see point 3) penetrate bunker quality walls at the Pentagon?

5. why was there no plane debris at the pentagon?

6. it takes a mobile phone 45 seconds to be recognised by a communications tower and for it to lock onto the tower, so it can make a call. A plane travels at a speed where it covers the distance between towers every 30 seconds, so a mobile phone would never have a chance to lock on to a tower, never mind hold a conversation. So, how did the people on flight 93 call their families on their mobiles?

I wonder about a ton more issues with the 9/11 disaster, but these would do for now.

[Big A]

Noone cares to comment? :(

[Conan21]

I'm glad to see you also recognize the unanswered questions reguarding 9/11.

You want those questions answered? well so do alot of other people. All I can say, is that it sure as hell doesn't add up. Theres ALOT more questions to be answered than you posted. THe answer is that it was all staged.

This was just used as a pretext to invade foreign lands. This, along with the london bombings and others.

People think it sounds rediculous and it really does unless you look at all the facts. Truth is definately stranger than fiction. This was just another chain of events to help the Illuminati take one step closer to achieving the New World Order and take away more Freedom via the Patriot Act in America.

[Big A]

I'm glad to see you also recognize the unanswered questions reguarding 9/11.

You want those questions answered? well so do alot of other people. All I can say, is that it sure as hell doesn't add up. Theres ALOT more questions to be answered than you posted. THe answer is that it was all staged.

This was just used as a pretext to invade foreign lands. This, along with the london bombings and others.

People think it sounds rediculous and it really does unless you look at all the facts. Truth is definately stranger than fiction. This was just another chain of events to help the Illuminati take one step closer to achieving the New World Order and take away more Freedom via the Patriot Act in America.

That is exactly what I believe as well. While all that you wrote is considered 'conspiracy' in the US, the rest of the world that has free media sees it as fact.

The reason why I asked the above questions, which I know the answer to, is to see if any supporter's of Bush, etc, can answer them.

[Conan21]

are you aware of how the London Gov't was running the exact same Terrorist "Drills" the same time as the real bombs went off. all by coincidence?

and the the Pentagon was also running drills about the Terrorists hijacking planes on the morning of September 11th?

oh and also the same with the Oklahoma City bombings?

the real events took place at the exact time and exact location and exact scenario of how the pre-arranged drills were?

This whole Video is great. Its called Terrorstorm by Alex Jones.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4757274759497686216&q=terror+storm

if you fast forward to 36 minutes into it. it talks about what i stated above.

[Vander_V]

You both gotta hook me up with that crack you been smoking.

[littlemack]

These are good questions BigA. I don't know the answers to them either, but I commend you for exposing this. Those are really hard answers to answer.
This raises a few questions of my own. All of the people on these planes died. Correct? Were any of them ever identified or did the remains of these people incinerate? The reason I'm asking is, I still cannot believe that these so called terrorists were not taken care of by ALL of the passengers on these planes. I would have DIED trying to save everyone on these planes if I had to. To protect the people on board. Were these passengers in shock? Did they think that maybe the plane was being hijacked but would land at some point? Maybe they didn't know the planes were being flown into buildings? OR...
Maybe everyone on the planes were gassed, poisened, or made to believe everything was going to be alright. Maybe they were gassed, and the people who gassed them, had to ventilate the plane afterwards so they busted out the windows? As for the explosion. Maybe the plane had a bomb placed on it. By our country or by the terrorists. To maximize the damage inflicted. Placed it in the nose of the plane.
Just more fuel to add to the fire. Good questions though BigA. Good questions.

[Rhandhular]

I am guessing you got most of this information from the video loose change. Lets take a look at your first question.

1. Why on the home videos made by people on the ground, the planes that hit the towers did not have windows?

I have never seen a clear video that conclusively shows that the planes that hit the towers did not have windows. These claims are usually associated with reports that the planes where cargo planes. Where did this information come from then? The man who makes these claims in the loose change video, Marc Birnbach, was over two miles away from the towers and did not have a good view of the airplanes. Here is the excerpt from the popular mechanics article that debunks this story...

Flight 175's Windows
CLAIM: On Sept. 11, FOX News broadcast a live phone interview with FOX employee Marc Birnbach. 911inplanesite.com states that "Bernback" saw the plane "crash into the South Tower." "It definitely did not look like a commercial plane," Birnbach said on air. "I didn't see any windows on the sides."

Coupled with photographs and videos of Flight 175 that lack the resolution to show windows, Birnbach's statement has fueled one of the most widely referenced 9/11 conspiracy theories--specifically, that the South Tower was struck by a military cargo plane or a fuel tanker.

FACT: Birnbach, who was a freelance videographer with FOX News at the time, tells PM that he was more than 2 miles southeast of the WTC, in Brooklyn, when he briefly saw a plane fly over. He says that, in fact, he did not see the plane strike the South Tower; he says he only heard the explosion.

While heading a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) probe into the collapse of the towers, W. Gene Corley studied the airplane wreckage. A licensed structural engineer with Construction Technology Laboratories, a consulting firm based in Skokie, Ill., Corley and his team photographed aircraft debris on the roof of WTC 5, including a chunk of fuselage that clearly had passenger windows. "It's ... from the United Airlines plane that hit Tower 2," Corley states flatly. In reviewing crash footage taken by an ABC news crew, Corley was able to track the trajectory of the fragments he studied--including a section of the landing gear and part of an engine--as they tore through the South Tower, exited from the building's north side and fell from the sky.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=3

Question 1 has been answered if anyone who care to hear more debunking I can continue...

[Rhandhular]

I'll do another claim that can quickly be debunked..

5. why was there no plane debris at the pentagon?

Answer...

Numerous pieces of the plane, including the bodies of the passengers, and the black boxes were found. You can see if for yourself here...

http://www.911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.html

[Conan21]

Nothing has been dubunked. The people doing this "debunking" are basing what they say A LOT more on theory and weak information than their counter parts.

But since you are an expert I would like you to dubunk or state you opinion on a few things for me:

1) Why Did the 9/11 Commision's report not show the correct design of the WTC buildings when then were doing their dubunking? They completely left out the MANY Internal Support beams that ran through the center of the building that were a key component in the buildings safety design.

2) Why did the 9/11 Commision's report not indicate what happened to building 7?

3) Why was the building going through such extreme "renovations" weeks leading up to 9/11?

4) Why were the dogs that sniff for bombs pulled from the building weeks before the attack?

5) What are your thoughts about the Manifesto that was created by the gov't that listed foreign policies they wished to achieve but stated in 2000, that these aspirations would most likely not be realized withouth a "catastrophic and catalyzing event....like a new Pearl Harbor"

6)What is your thought on the Massive amount of Put Options placed on United and American Airline STOCK prior to the attack (The exact airlines involved with 9/11). A put option is projection that the stock will drastically decline in the short term.

7) What is your Opinion on Larry Silverstein (owner of WTC) taking out a huge insurance policy on his building's that included acts of terrorism shortly before 9/11?

8) What is your thoughts on Bin Laden being a CIA asset and agent who has worked with the U.S for years?

9) Why was the Bin Laden family flown out of the country on a private Jet right after 9/11 when planes were not allowed to be in the air?

10) what is your thought on the declasified gov't Document. "Operation Northwood" where they had detailed plans to carry out fake terrorism on U.S soil and then blame in on foreign enemies? these plans included hijacking jets, etc. How do you feel about the US gov't even writing these documents up? whether they were carried out or not.

11) WHat is your thoughts on MANY public officials being warned not to fly on September 11th? Mayor Willie Brown from San Fran, Jon Ashcroft, author S. Raushdee, and others were told not to fly to New York. The Joint Cheif of Staff had a metting in New York on Sept 11th but were told to cancell their flight? how do you explain that?

12) Whey did Norad (North American Aerospace Defense) stand down and not intercept the hijacked planes?



I have a ton of questions and issues for you to debunk or clarrify for me but I'd like you to answer these for now.

[Conan21]

your pictures are nothing new bro. The wreckage is inconsistant with the plane that supposedly hit it and quit frankly there is not a lot of it. alot of tin scraps and fragments. No one is denying "something" hit the building. I didn't see any pictures of bodies either that you claim are in the photos.

The Pentagon is a very protected building. Do you really think they didn't have cameras every where from multiple angles? The only one they released was this, a year after the fact, and it sure doesn't look like a commerical air liner to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imQqMuYEo38

The one link you posted was an investigation by FEMA. haha
Give me a break.

[Rhandhular]

Nothing has been dubunked. The people doing this "debunking" are basing what they say A LOT more on theory and weak information than their counter parts.

But since you are an expert I would like you to dubunk or state you opinion on a few things for me:

1) Why Did the 9/11 Commision's report not show the correct design of the WTC buildings when then were doing their dubunking? They completely left out the MANY Internal Support beams that ran through the center of the building that were a key component in the buildings safety design.

2) Why did the 9/11 Commision's report not indicate what happened to building 7?

3) Why was the building going through such extreme "renovations" weeks leading up to 9/11?

4) Why were the dogs that sniff for bombs pulled from the building weeks before the attack?

5) What are your thoughts about the Manifesto that was created by the gov't that listed foreign policies they wished to achieve but stated in 2000, that these aspirations would most likely not be realized withouth a "catastrophic and catalyzing event....like a new Pearl Harbor"

6)What is your thought on the Massive amount of Put Options placed on United and American Airline STOCK prior to the attack (The exact airlines involved with 9/11). A put option is projection that the stock will drastically decline in the short term.

7) What is your Opinion on Larry Silverstein (owner of WTC) taking out a huge insurance policy on his building's that included acts of terrorism shortly before 9/11?

8) What is your thoughts on Bin Laden being a CIA asset and agent who has worked with the U.S for years?

9) Why was the Bin Laden family flown out of the country on a private Jet right after 9/11 when planes were not allowed to be in the air?

10) what is your thought on the declasified gov't Document. "Operation Northwood" where they had detailed plans to carry out fake terrorism on U.S soil and then blame in on foreign enemies? these plans included hijacking jets, etc. How do you feel about the US gov't even writing these documents up? whether they were carried out or not.

11) WHat is your thoughts on MANY public officials being warned not to fly on September 11th? Mayor Willie Brown from San Fran, Jon Ashcroft, author S. Raushdee, and others were told not to fly to New York. The Joint Cheif of Staff had a metting in New York on Sept 11th but were told to cancell their flight? how do you explain that?

12) Whey did Norad (North American Aerospace Defense) stand down and not intercept the hijacked planes?



I have a ton of questions and issues for you to debunk or clarrify for me but I'd like you to answer these for now.

When did I say I was an expert? Nothing has been debunked because they are basing their theories on weak information? Yet you will believe videos full off mis information and downright lies. I am heading out of town right now but I will be back monday, I will see you then.

[Rhandhular]

your pictures are nothing new bro. The wreckage is inconsistant with the plane that supposedly hit it and quit frankly there is not a lot of it. alot of tin scraps and fragments. No one is denying "something" hit the building. I didn't see any pictures of bodies either that you claim are in the photos.

The Pentagon is a very protected building. Do you really think they didn't have cameras every where from multiple angles? The only one they released was this, a year after the fact, and it sure doesn't look like a commerical air liner to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imQqMuYEo38

The one link you posted was an investigation by FEMA. haha
Give me a break.

You call that proof? lol

[Rhandhular]

Nothing has been dubunked. The people doing this "debunking" are basing what they say A LOT more on theory and weak information than their counter parts.

But since you are an expert I would like you to dubunk or state you opinion on a few things for me:

1) Why Did the 9/11 Commision's report not show the correct design of the WTC buildings when then were doing their dubunking? They completely left out the MANY Internal Support beams that ran through the center of the building that were a key component in the buildings safety design.

2) Why did the 9/11 Commision's report not indicate what happened to building 7?

3) Why was the building going through such extreme "renovations" weeks leading up to 9/11?

4) Why were the dogs that sniff for bombs pulled from the building weeks before the attack?



1.) The 9/11 commission report was not intended to debunk any of the 9/11 conspiracy theories. The intent of the report was to provide the fullest possible account of the events the transpired on 9/11 and was compiled by a team of five democrats and five republicans. Are you telling me that these individuals were also in on the conspiracy?

2.) Again the 9/11 commission report was not designed to eliminate conspiracy theories. Have you even read it?

3.) Prove this was happening and use a reputable source. Alex Jones is not a reputable source. lol

4.) Not sure that they were pulled away but I do know that if you want to blow up the world trade center with a controlled demolition you dont need to hit it with aircraft. By the way where are these people who set these devices? Lets add them to the number of people involved in this grand conspiracy.

[Conan21]

1)Yes, The 9/11 commision report was just a normal investigation into what happened to the buildings. But I'm sure it was also done in light of all the conspiracy talk going around. Never the less They completely lied about the the design of the building so that their pan cake theory looked more plausable. How can they state a theory, withouth accurately portraying the proper design of the building?

2) If your doing an investigation into the collapse of WTC buildings, why leave out WTC 7? That was the most suspicious of them all.

side note1: I do not have the numbers in front of me but they spend very very little money on their 9/11 investigation and spent about 10x as much on Clintons Sex Scandal.

Side note 2: When a building collapses like this, Its is federal Law that a team of experts go in and examine the debris to determine what went wrong so that things like this can be avoided in future designs. They Gov't did not do this. They Broke the law. Instead, they immediately started cleaning up the debris and then shipped it over to China to be burried. They were in such a rush that they sent people in to help with the clean up when the air was unfit to breath and now many of them are dead or dying from lung disease.

3) Prove the renovations were happening? There are are many WTC employees who worked in the buildings that have stated on camera this was going on for weeks and even during the night. What exactly would you consider proof??

4) You didn't answer the question about the dogs bro, If you want to dubunk rumors, you better have answers. I find it very strange that renovations were taking place in the building and during that time the dogs were removed. Were the dogs sick? were the pregnant? were they not house broken and were peeing too much in the building?

As far as my video clip I posted. WHere did you read that I said "HERE IS MY PROOF" . I simply stated that the Petagon is a highly secured building with many survelance cameras yet the only one released is from the shittiest angle possilbe and it does not look like an air plane. Don't try to twist my words to argue your case.

Now please properly respond to statements 1-4 and then continue to the other ones and please point out any " lie " you are referring to as well. So far have have done a pretty pathetic job.

[Rhandhular]

1)Yes, The 9/11 commision report was just a normal investigation into what happened to the buildings. But I'm sure it was also done in light of all the conspiracy talk going around. Never the less They completely lied about the the design of the building so that their pan cake theory looked more plausable. How can they state a theory, withouth accurately portraying the proper design of the building?

2) If your doing an investigation into the collapse of WTC buildings, why leave out WTC 7? That was the most suspicious of them all.

side note1: I do not have the numbers in front of me but they spend very very little money on their 9/11 investigation and spent about 10x as much on Clintons Sex Scandal.

Side note 2: When a building collapses like this, Its is federal Law that a team of experts go in and examine the debris to determine what went wrong so that things like this can be avoided in future designs. They Gov't did not do this. They Broke the law. Instead, they immediately started cleaning up the debris and then shipped it over to China to be burried. They were in such a rush that they sent people in to help with the clean up when the air was unfit to breath and now many of them are dead or dying from lung disease.

3) Prove the renovations were happening? There are are many WTC employees who worked in the buildings that have stated on camera this was going on for weeks and even during the night. What exactly would you consider proof??

4) You didn't answer the question about the dogs bro, If you want to dubunk rumors, you better have answers. I find it very strange that renovations were taking place in the building and during that time the dogs were removed. Were the dogs sick? were the pregnant? were they not house broken and were peeing too much in the building?

As far as my video clip I posted. WHere did you read that I said "HERE IS MY PROOF" . I simply stated that the Petagon is a highly secured building with many survelance cameras yet the only one released is from the shittiest angle possilbe and it does not look like an air plane. Don't try to twist my words to argue your case.

Now please properly respond to statements 1-4 and then continue to the other ones and please point out any " lie " you are referring to as well. So far have have done a pretty pathetic job.

You seem to have limited information about the 9/11 commission report and what its purpose was. I suggest you read it for yourself. Please show me the page that has faulty wtc designs.

It took very little research to find that dogs were NOT pulled from the buildings prior to 9/11. They were not pulled so this is another bit of misinformation you conspiracy guys throw around.

There were bodies found at the pentagon. This is not disputed.

Please come up with some valid points and I will answer them. Your arguments are weak and shallow. While I cannot say what exactly happened on 9/11, I can say the towers were brought down from the resulting inferno that followed impact which weakened the steel structure and caused the buildings to collapse.
Take care and be well

[Conan21]

I’m aware of the purpose of the 9/11 commission report. I have read a lot of it via PDF format online. What I meant was that many people had questions about what happened on 9/11 and this commission report did nothing but white wash the events and does nothing to debunk any information in the 9/11 Truth movement. I think it should be called the the Ommission Report simply b/c it lacks so much information and uses false information. They do not include any information that goes against the story they wish to portray and flat out lie about things as well. The Commission report is basically the upper levels of Gov't investigating itself.

The building was comprised of 47 MASSIVE support columns that ran through the Internal Core of the building. The 9/11 commision report completely leaves these columns out of the report!!! They say that the core of each building was a hollow shapt for elevators and stair ways. Regardless if the Jet Fuel, which burned off immediately (as Big A was illustrating with people waving from impact site), caused steel to weaken and hence cause a pan cake collapse at free fall speed I may add (silly theory anyway but whatever). Even if this happened, these massive columns should have remained and the CR does not touch this!!!

Show me an article in which the dogs were not pulled. Multiple WTC security personal said this is true. Here is an article right from a regular news site where it says the dogs were pulled.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-nyaler122362178sep12,0,1255660.story

You asked for proof of renovations. Many WTC employees have spoken out about the noisy renovations going on for weeks before 9/11. Scott Forbes who was the Senior Database Administrator at WTC said that the weekend prior to 9/11, they were told to shut down all equipment. He said he found this very odd and that it never happened before and that nothing really needed renovated. During this time all security cameras were turned off and the workers worked vigorously all weekend. Scott contacted the 9/11 commission board about this after the attack b/c he felt it was suspicious but was ignored completely. William Rodriguez, Senior maintenance manger of the building also has spoken out about the mysterious workers and shut down of security cameras. A large amount of 9/11 wtc survivors have gone on record to statiing this.

I guess that information is a lie, weak, and shallow??

You said you posted photos of bodies of individuals from the plane crash at the Petagon. Attach those photos to this thread because I did not see them

[Conan21]

1) Commision reports did not discuss the collapse of the 47 internal columns. Furthermore, they went as far as to say the internal core was basically "hallow".
Rhandhular claims that this is a lie and that the building did not contain 47 massive inner columns.

2) What caused WTC #7 to collapse in and upon itself at free fall speed and why was it not addressed AT ALL in the 9/11 CR?
Rhandhular has no answer for this question.

3) Mysterious building renovations prior to attack.
Rhandhular says this as a complete lie despite Testimony of many WTC employees and security personal.

4) Dogs were pulled from buildings prior to attack.
Rhandhular says this as a lie used by conspiracy theorists despite Testimony of WTC security personal and news reports

[agentsmith]

I have to laugh everytime I see one of these things rear its ugly head on the net. The first and most obvious thing that stands out is the blatant attempt to smear the current administration being that almost all of these conspiracys originate from the extreme left. Secondly, the simple fact that a conspiracy of this size and magnitude requires thousands of people and flawless timing without rehersal. Nevermind the fact that all the people involved weither by accident or not would have to be completely silent to keep a secret like this a secret. the same people who think we never landed on the moon, ect. ect.. are the same people who think Black helicopters are following them. the real conspirracy is beliving that if we ignore or simply leave Islamic facaist alone (modern day nazi) that they will abandon the quest to rule and convert the world to Islam, which is not a religon of peace OR FREEDOM!:mad:

[Conan21]

I think it’s great how you copied your same response from the other thread and brought it over to this one. Thank you for sharing your in depth perspective on the issues involved in this thread Agent Smith.

The real Conspiracy is that the Islamic Nation provided a haven for S.S Nazi leaders after WWII and are planning to take over the world and impose a fascist government with Islam as the New World Religion....

Interesting concept!! Thanks for sharing!!

[Rhandhular]

Rhandhular claims that this is a lie and that the building did not contain 47 massive inner columns.

2

Where did I make this claim? lol

[Rhandhular]

I have to laugh everytime I see one of these things rear its ugly head on the net. The first and most obvious thing that stands out is the blatant attempt to smear the current administration being that almost all of these conspiracys originate from the extreme left. Secondly, the simple fact that a conspiracy of this size and magnitude requires thousands of people and flawless timing without rehersal. Nevermind the fact that all the people involved weither by accident or not would have to be completely silent to keep a secret like this a secret. the same people who think we never landed on the moon, ect. ect.. are the same people who think Black helicopters are following them. the real conspirracy is beliving that if we ignore or simply leave Islamic facaist alone (modern day nazi) that they will abandon the quest to rule and convert the world to Islam, which is not a religon of peace OR FREEDOM!:mad:

Good post Smith!!

[Rhandhular]

6. it takes a mobile phone 45 seconds to be recognised by a communications tower and for it to lock onto the tower, so it can make a call. A plane travels at a speed where it covers the distance between towers every 30 seconds, so a mobile phone would never have a chance to lock on to a tower, never mind hold a conversation. So, how did the people on flight 93 call their families on their mobiles?

. This is another 9/11 fallacy that the conspiracy buffs portray as fact. In 2001 cellular phones would work at an altitude of 35,000 feet at cruising speeds. Dropped calls were common at that speed and altitude but it was possible and cell phone records bear this out.

[Conan21]

Your implication that the Commission Report accurately portrayed the correct design of WTC and calling me out about my claims implies that your are denying the existance of the the 47 columns. Again, It's a lot easier to plead a case when you manipulate the information.

Please address the rest of MY conspiracy theories.

[pdogg7]

Check this one out.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003&q=911&hl=en

[Rhandhular]

Check this one out.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003&q=911&hl=en

The guy is a demolition hobbyist. WTF? lol

[Conan21]

I composed a short list of just a few of the many issues that shows there was prior knowledge of the 9/11 attack, they not addressing all evidence, and even lieing. So Far Rhandhular has either flat out denied them or has no comment to every issue.

1) Commision reports did not discuss the collapse of the 47 internal columns. Furthermore, they went as far as to say the internal core was basically "hallow".
Rhandhular claims that this is a lie and that the building did not contain 47 massive inner columns.

2) What caused WTC #7 to collapse in and upon itself at free fall speed and why was it not addressed AT ALL in the 9/11 CR?
Rhandhular has no answer for this question.

3) Mysterious building renovations prior to attack.
Rhandhular says this as a complete lie despite Testimony of many WTC employees and security personal.

4) Dogs were pulled from buildings prior to attack.
Rhandhular says this as a lie used by conspiracy theorists despite Testimony of WTC security personal and news reports

5) What are your thoughts about the Manifesto of (Project for a New American Century) that was created by the gov't that listed foreign policies they wished to achieve but stated in 2000, that these aspirations would most likely not be realized withouth a "catastrophic and catalyzing event....like a new Pearl Harbor".
Rhandhular has no comment

6)Do you think it was suspicious that Massive amounts (Record breaking) of Put Options were placed on United and American Airline stock prior to the attack (The exact airlines involved with 9/11). A put option is projection that the stock will drastically decline in the short term.
Rhandhular has no comment

7) What is your opinion of Larry Silverstein (owner of WTC) taking out a huge insurance policy on his building's that specifically dealt with acts of terrorism shortly before 9/11?
Rhandhular has no comment

8) What is your thoughts on Bin Laden being a CIA asset and agent who has worked with the U.S for years?
Rhandhular has no comment

9) Why was the Bin Laden family flown out of the country on a private Jet right after 9/11 when planes were not allowed to be in the air?
Rhandhular has no comment

10) what is your thought on the declasified gov't Document. "Operation Northwood" where they had detailed plans to carry out fake terrorism and then blame in on foreign enemies? these plans included hijacking jets, etc. How do you feel about the US gov't even writing these documents up? whether they were carried out or not.
Rhandhular has no comment

11) WHat is your thoughts on MANY public officials being warned not to fly on September 11th? Mayor Willie Brown from San Fran, Jon Ashcroft, author S. Raushdee, and others were told not to fly to New York. The Joint Cheif of Staff had a metting in New York on Sept 11th but were told to cancell their flight? how do you explain that?
Rhandhular has no comment

12) Why did Norad (North American Aerospace Defense) stand down and not intercept the hijacked planes, why was there so much confussion on that day?
Rhandhular has no comment

Issues that Rhandhular has supposedly debunked:

Big A says there are no plane scraps. In actuality, there was very little plane debris and the scraps that are there are heavily debated as being inconsistant with a Boeing 757. On top of this, anyone joe off the street would have doubt that a plane hit the building going by the unique damnage done to the building. Futhermore, The pentagon released 1 video of 84 total 1year after the fact and seized survelance of buildings/businesses that caught the attack on tape. The footage released looks nothing like an air plane.

Rhandhular posts a link showing a few plane scraps in which popular mechanics said that their experts decided this was enough proof and he also lies about the photos containing bodies.

Big A said that cell phones did not work at 35,000 feet at such speeds.

Rhandhular states that although cell phones did not work well at 35,000 feet in 2001, it still was possible. There still was a .06% chance of them working which is enough evidence for Popular Mechanic's experts to label this debunked.

Pdog posts a video called 9/11 Mysteries. The intro has a clip of a guy who has nothing to do with the information in the video or even the making of the video.

Rhandhular addresses no issues with in the 1 hour and 30 minute video but laughs at the guy in opening clip who was shown for 40 seconds and posts 'lol' and 'WTF'

[Rhandhular]

I composed a short list of just a few of the many issues that shows there was prior knowledge of the 9/11 attack, they not addressing all evidence, and even lieing. So Far Rhandhular has either flat out denied them or has no comment to every issue.

1) Commision reports did not discuss the collapse of the 47 internal columns. Furthermore, they went as far as to say the internal core was basically "hallow".
Rhandhular claims that this is a lie and that the building did not contain 47 massive inner columns.


I don't have time to go through all this all at once but it appears you are taking the approach of calling me a liar. How juvenile is that? again please show me where i stated anything about how many internal column are located in the world trade center.

[Rhandhular]

2) What caused WTC #7 to collapse in and upon itself at free fall speed and why was it not addressed AT ALL in the 9/11 CR?
Rhandhular has no answer for this question.


Conspiracy theorist like to supress this shot of wtc7 shortly before it collapsed. Note the significant damage it had sustained in the lower right corner...

see below
http://www.911myths.com/assets/images/WTC7Corner.jpg


Captain Chris Boyle, Engine 94 - 18 years on the nyfd had this to say about wtc7...

Boyle: ...on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.

Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?

Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.

Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?

Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.

Deputy fire chief Peter Hayden had this to say...


...also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?
Hayden: No, not right away, and that’s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn’t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety.

Do a google search on the firemen listed and you will find these to be reputable sources. Wtc7 was damaged significantly by falling debri from the towers and this caused the building to collapse.


Picture not working go here to see the damage wtc7 sustained... second picture down.

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_damage.html

[Rhandhular]

3) Mysterious building renovations prior to attack.
Rhandhular says this as a complete lie despite Testimony of many WTC employees and security personal.

4) Dogs were pulled from buildings prior to attack.
Rhandhular says this as a lie used by conspiracy theorists despite Testimony of WTC security personal and news reports


These two just make you laugh. The source is these statements are "Many wtc employees and security personnel". Who are they? Where are they? Do they even exist? This is proof of nothing. Many people say these are fabrications.lol

[Rhandhular]

6)Do you think it was suspicious that Massive amounts (Record breaking) of Put Options were placed on United and American Airline stock prior to the attack (The exact airlines involved with 9/11). A put option is projection that the stock will drastically decline in the short term.
Rhandhular has no comment



Sure its suspicious but what does it have to do with a government cover up of 9/11?

[Rhandhular]

9) Why was the Bin Laden family flown out of the country on a private Jet right after 9/11 when planes were not allowed to be in the air?
Rhandhular has no comment



It was for their safety. They had no ties with him anymore but they were moved to safety so no one could retaliate against them. They were not involved in the events of 9/11.

[Rhandhular]

10) what is your thought on the declasified gov't Document. "Operation Northwood" where they had detailed plans to carry out fake terrorism and then blame in on foreign enemies? these plans included hijacking jets, etc. How do you feel about the US gov't even writing these documents up? whether they were carried out or not.
Rhandhular has no comment



It should also be pointed out that Operation Northwoods was rejected by the president of the United States. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Of Staff that presented this proposal was denied another term as chairman for bringing up such a foolish idea. Why would you use this as evidence of anything? This actually proves the United States would actually not resort to such an evil tactic because the idea was never ever even close to being executed. It was denied and put to death. End of story.

[kawasaki1]

Nice thread, really makes you think. The govt. is so corrupt, I wouldn't doubt anything.........

[Rhandhular]

11) WHat is your thoughts on MANY public officials being warned not to fly on September 11th? Mayor Willie Brown from San Fran, Jon Ashcroft, author S. Raushdee, and others were told not to fly to New York. The Joint Cheif of Staff had a metting in New York on Sept 11th but were told to cancell their flight? how do you explain that?
Rhandhular has no comment


How do you know they were warned not to fly? What exactly was the warning they received? You should title this one many people have heard that many public officials were warned not to fly? You make a grand statement but with no documentation to back it up it means nothing.

I submit Jon Ashcroft own statement on this subject...
BEN-VENISTE: ...At some point in the spring or summer of 2001, around the time of this heightened threat alert, you apparently began to use a private chartered jet plane, changing from your use of commercial aircraft on grounds, our staff is informed, of an FBI threat assessment. And, indeed, as you told us, on September 11th itself you were on a chartered jet at the time of the attack.

Can you supply the details, sir, regarding the threat which caused you to change from commercial to private leased jet?

ASHCROFT: ...Let me indicate to you that I never ceased to use commercial aircraft for my personal travel.

ASHCROFT: My wife traveled to Germany and back in August. My wife and I traveled to Washington, D.C., on the 3rd of September before the 17th -- before the 11th attack on commercial aircraft.

I have exclusively traveled on commercial aircraft for my personal travel; continued through the year 2000, through the entirety of the threat period to the nation.

The assessment made by the security team and the Department of Justice was made early in the year. It was not related to a terrorism threat as a threat to the nation. It was related to an assessment of the security for the attorney general, given his responsibilities and the job that he undertakes. And it related to the maintenance of arms and other things by individuals who travel with the attorney general. And it was their assessment that we would be best served to use government aircraft.

These were not private chartered jet aircraft. These were aircraft of the United States government. And it was on such an aircraft that I was on my way to an event in Milwaukee on the morning of September the 11th.
http://www.nj.com/war/ledger/index.ssf?/news/ledger/stories/20040414_ashcroft.html

Another one debunked.

[Rhandhular]

I7) What is your opinion of Larry Silverstein (owner of WTC) taking out a huge insurance policy on his building's that specifically dealt with acts of terrorism shortly before 9/11?
Rhandhular has no comment

8

The story...

The WTC did not have insurance coverage for terrorism. Silverstein took out the policy for terrorism with a double indemnity clause. The ink was not dry on the contract when the towers fell.
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/reply_to_popular_mechanics.htm

Our take...

Some people have suggested that terrorism cover was unusual at the time, and therefore having the WTC explicitly covered against terrorist acts was suspicious. Especially as it happened just before the attacks. But is this claim supported by the facts?

Well, the first problem with it is that we already know the towers were covered against terrorism in 1993, because the bombing of that year cost insurers so much:

Insurers paid out $510 million after militants bombed the World Trade Center in 1993...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34211,00.html

But did the insurance industry then apply specific terrorist exclusions? Apparently not.

"Even after the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 and the
Oklahoma City bombing in 1995, insurers in the United States did not view either
international or domestic terrorism as a risk that should be explicitly considered
when pricing their commercial insurance policy, principally because losses from
terrorism had historically been small and, to a large degree, uncorrelated. Thus,
prior to September 11, 2001, terrorism coverage in the United States was an
unnamed peril covered in most standard all-risk commercial and homeowners’
policies covering damage to property and contents"
http://grace.wharton.upenn.edu/risk/downloads/05-03-HK.pdf

Other articles tell the same story.

"Some leading U.S. and European insurers say that the destruction of the World Trade Center was not an act of war, and therefore covered under most insurance policies. If other insurers
take the same view, that means insurance companies around the world will have to pay out the $30 billion or so in claims expected by industry experts from the attack...

Claims would not likely be disallowed under terrorism exclusions either, Porro said. ``Terror damage has to be covered because insurance polices, especially in the United States, do not mention this as a rule,'' he said"
http://www.sure-net.com/board/messages/480.html

So it seems terrorism cover was the norm, not the exception. Without more information it's hard to see why cover for the towers was at all suspect.

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_insurance.html

[Rhandhular]

12) Why did Norad (North American Aerospace Defense) stand down and not intercept the hijacked planes, why was there so much confussion on that day?
Rhandhular has no comment


At the time hijacking of a commercial aircraft was a law enforcement issue not a defense issue and by the time the threat was assessed and law enforcement asked norad for help it was to late.

...hijacking is a law enforcement issue as is everything that takes off from within the United States. And only law enforcement can request assistance from the military, which they did, in this particular case. The route, if you follow the book, is that they go to the duty officer of the national military command center, who in turn makes an inquiry to NORAD for the availability of fighters, who then gets permission from someone representing the Sec. of Defense. Once that’s approved, then we scramble aircraft.
http://www.billstclair.com/911timeline/2003/noradtestimony052303.html

It is fairly obvious wht there was confusion on that day.

[Rhandhular]

Issues that Rhandhular has supposedly debunked:

Big A says there are no plane scraps. In actuality, there was very little plane debris and the scraps that are there are heavily debated as being inconsistant with a Boeing 757. On top of this, anyone joe off the street would have doubt that a plane hit the building going by the unique damnage done to the building. Futhermore, The pentagon released 1 video of 84 total 1year after the fact and seized survelance of buildings/businesses that caught the attack on tape. The footage released looks nothing like an air plane.

Rhandhular posts a link showing a few plane scraps in which popular mechanics said that their experts decided this was enough proof and he also lies about the photos containing bodies.
]

Where did I say the pictures contained bodies? I said bodies were found that day. Read what I wrote.

You know you are winning the argument when the other guy starts calling you a liar. lol. Why would I have to lie?

The fact remains that substantial wreckage was found. bodies were found and the planes two scorched black boxes were retrieved.

[Rhandhular]

[

Big A said that cell phones did not work at 35,000 feet at such speeds.

Rhandhular states that although cell phones did not work well at 35,000 feet in 2001, it still was possible. There still was a .06% chance of them working which is enough evidence for Popular Mechanic's experts to label this debunked.



Now you are making up numbers. .06% chance of working? Where did you pull this number from? Another piece of "made up" evidence. The phone records clearly show that calls were made from flight 93 and it clearly shows that some of them were dropped calls.

[Rhandhular]

Rhandhular addresses no issues with in the 1 hour and 30 minute video but laughs at the guy in opening clip who was shown for 40 seconds and posts 'lol' and 'WTF'

LOL. The guy at the beginning of the video is the guy who made the video. If the best set of credentials he can provide is that he is a demolition enthusiast I don't give his ideas much credence. WTF is a demolition enthusiast anyway?

Hi, I am a demolition enthusiast and I wanna tell you what I think... You are scrapping the bottom of the barrel with this video. lol

[Conan21]

I am almost at a loss for words for how to respond here.

Point1 :You said I was wrong when I said the commissions report did not show the correct design and called me out on it. I don’t know what else to say. Yes you were lying.
Here is huge full detail of the design of the building. Simply running a google search will give you hundreds of results.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center

Point 2: WTC7 has no pictures of this massive damage. Even if there was so damaged, it would not fall straight down in under 7 seconds. It was Left out of the commission report. The only possibility they claim is structural damage and fire and even they say this is unlikely but the only possibility they can think of.

Testimony of people on the scene said it was going to be brought down. They have been on talk shows, etc. there is hard evidence. Here is one link. They have hyperlinks on this page in which you can listen to the actual talk shows.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/090207broughtdown.htm

Theres a lot more information on this. But I’m not going to try to search around and find every tid bit of information regarding 9/11. I’d be here all day. If think i'm lieing run a google search and you will get tons of hits.

Here is a video of police casually telling people to get back. The building is going to blow up. He speaks in a very casual tone as if he knows what is going to happen. How did he know? and if so how did he know when?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwjmqkjwnvQ

Video of Silverstein saying we decided to pull the building and watch the building collapse
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100

And the most recent, Kerry says it was his understand that they brought building 7 down in a controlled fashion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLnaogsm60A

Point 3: Building Renovations (These make him laugh):D I posted who they were in previous posts so I will not repeat myself. If you watch any of the 9/11 truth films they are on camera stating who they are, what their job was at the WTC, and what they experienced.

Point 4: Dogs pulled from the building. I already posted news articles on this. Again a basic google search will give you the results.

LETS NOT FORGET: Marvin P. Bush, the president's younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport.

Point 5: You agree that the record breaking put options on stock of the exact airlines involved in the attack is suspicious. What does it prove? It highly indicates that there was prior knowledge to 9/11. This is bigger than the U.S gov’t. Futhermore, I doubt that most of the gov’t is in on this. It is group of members who happen to be a part of the government who belong to secret organizations with hidden agendas. There are powerful people that have power in this world who are part of no government.

Point 6: Operation Northwood. It is an example of false flag terrorism being thought up by our own Government. It shows that things like this are in fact conspired so to think that they are not is incorrect. I was just like to add that it was JFK who was the president who did not agree with this plan and we know what happened to him. Declassified documents and phone records shows that president LBJ used false flag attacks to advance his war in SE Asia. So things like this have officially been planned, and carried out by Gov’t officials, ON THE RECORD.

Point 7: you ask say I’m Twisting your words and to go back and read what you wrote.
Here is your exact post:

“I'll do another claim that can quickly be debunked..

5. why was there no plane debris at the pentagon?

Answer...

Numerous pieces of the plane, including the bodies of the passengers, and the black boxes were found. You can see if for yourself here...

http://www.911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.html “

You State that bodies were found and post a link with pictures and say “see for yourself” but i do not see any bodies. Furthermore , if the black box was found why was it not released to the public along with the 83 other surv. Cameras and local business cameras that caught the attack on tape and were seized.

Point 8: Bin Laden family was flow to safety so they would not be retaliated against, and they did not have ties to him anymore???
Retaliation by whom?
How many Americans know who Bin Laden’s family is or looks like?
How did they know they were not tied to him?
Were they investigated? After all their the family of the number suspect.
Why were they here in the first place?

Point 9: Mayor Willie Brown warned not to fly to New York. Again a basic google search will prove this but here is a link. If you search the other ones you’ll find news articles as well. The least incrimination one was Jon Ashcroft which you chose to reply about.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/12/MN229389.DTL

Point 10: Silverstein took on an insurance policy on the buildings 2 months before 9/11 and profited from the attack.

Point 11: why was there so much Chaos with Norad Defense on 9/11? The gov’t was running multiple terrorist drills of planes slamming into buildings on this day. They also had drills going on that had fighter jets scrambled half way across the country and globe. When they received first word they were not sure if it was part of a drill and they had no planes in the vicinity to dispatch.

This same thing happened in the London Bombings. They were running drills of bombs going off in the exact same location, at the exact same time as the real event took place.

I’m not sure if I missed any topics. It was hard to respond with your individual posts.

I can sit here all day long and list TONS of points that don’t add up or look highly suspicious. I agree that one little thing that is out of place does not prove conspiracy. But when you add up point after point after point it definitely indicates foul play.

[Rhandhular]

I am almost at a loss for words for how to respond here.

Point1 :You said I was wrong when I said the commissions report did not show the correct design and called me out on it. I don’t know what else to say. Yes you were lying.
.

Show me where I made this statement. I believe I even asked for the page this faulty diagram was on but as usual you didn't show me its location. If you take that as me calling you wrong then so be it.

[Rhandhular]

I am almost at a loss for words for how to respond here.

Point1 :
Point 2: WTC7 has no pictures of this massive damage. Even if there was so damaged, it would not fall straight down in under 7 seconds. It was Left out of the commission report. The only possibility they claim is structural damage and fire and even they say this is unlikely but the only possibility they can think of.

Testimony of people on the scene said it was going to be brought down. They have been on talk shows, etc. there is hard evidence. Here is one link. They have hyperlinks on this page in which you can listen to the actual talk shows.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/090207broughtdown.htm

See how these conspiracy theories change. I gave a link with a photo of wtc7 with significant damage to the lower right corner of the building and he won't address it.

You show a link to prison planet. Alex Jones is the biggest goof ball nutcase out there. Art Bell doesn't even believe what this guy says. Find something from a reputable source.

[Rhandhular]

Sllverstein was referring to pulling the firefighters from the building. He is describing a conversation he had with the fire chief. If you would watch the entire video( kinda convenient how the conspiracy guys only show you the part of the story that seems to fit into their claims isn't it) you would know this.

[Rhandhular]

And the most recent, Kerry says it was his understand that they brought building 7 down in a controlled fashion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLnaogsm60A



Try again. John Kerry does not suggest that wtc7 was a controlled demolition. He was obviously caught off guard by the question and stated it came down in a controlled fashion. Do you honestly think if John Kerry believed in a 9/11 conspiracy perpetuated by the Bush administration he would remain silent. Hell no, every democrat in the country would be on this issue and on it hard.

[Rhandhular]

Point 9: Mayor Willie Brown warned not to fly to New York. Again a basic google search will prove this but here is a link. If you search the other ones you’ll find news articles as well. The least incrimination one was Jon Ashcroft which you chose to reply about.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/12/MN229389.DTL



Ok. Lets do Willie Brown buts lets gets his own words from an interview with the paper you use as a factual source. Willie Brown calls this a MYTH!! It never happened as suggested by conspiracy theorists. Here the excerpt and then the link.



The "myth" has its origins in the night before the attacks, when Brown called "my security people at the airport'' to check on his flight to New York the next morning.

What the mayor got from his source was a warning that Americans should be concerned about traveling.

Willie being Willie, he paid no attention -- and was actually waiting for his ride to the airport when he turned on the TV and, like millions of other Americans, watched as the World Trade Center crumbled.

Exactly how the warning popped up remains a mystery to this day.

It might have had something to do with a little-noticed State Department memo issued a week before that went out in a routine press briefing -- and that former Secretary of State George Shultz himself received -- warning that Americans may be the target of an attack from extremist groups "with links to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda organization."

The warning, however, dealt primarily with U.S. military bases in Japan and South Korea -- clearly the wrong targets.

You must scroll to the bottom of the page...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/09/13/BAGG9L4KI81.DTL


Case closed on Willie Brown!!

[Rhandhular]

I am almost at a loss for words for how to respond here.

Point1 :You said I was wrong when I said the commissions report did not show the correct design and called me out on it. I don’t know what else to say. Yes you were lying.
Here is huge full detail of the design of the building. Simply running a google search will give you hundreds of results.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center



The fact is the 9/11 commission report does not show the design of the world trade center anywhere. I just looked at every illustration it contains and did not find what you suggest is there.I found the layout of where the building were located but nothing else. What page is this on and why do you not want to produce this info. Remember you were the one who wanted me to respond to your theories.

[Conan21]

Willie Brown warning

I urge anyone following this thread to read both news articles. Mine is the original news article and the one Rhandhular posted isn't much different. It just tries to play it down and not make look as suspicious to having prior knowledge.

my article. the first one presented to the public.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...2/MN229389.DTL

Rhandhular article
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...AGG9L4KI81.DTL

Directly from the article Rhandhular posted

What the mayor got from his source was a warning that Americans should be concerned about traveling.

Willie being Willie, he paid no attention -- and was actually waiting for his ride to the airport when he turned on the TV and, like millions of other Americans, watched as the World Trade Center crumbled.

Exactly how the warning popped up remains a mystery to this day.

It might have had something to do with a little-noticed State Department memo issued a week before that went out in a routine press briefing -- and that former Secretary of State George Shultz himself received -- warning that Americans may be the target of an attack from extremist groups "with links to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda organization."

The warning, however, dealt primarily with U.S. military bases in Japan and South Korea -- clearly the wrong targets.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The only warning they could think of without down right accusing the Gov't of prior knowledge to 9/11 was to say this might have been in regard to a memo from last week that dealt with military bases in in Janp and S.K. Mayor Willie brown was set to travel to NYC not JAPAN and South Korea.

Rhandhular says case closed???????????????????
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

WTC7.
are you telling me this picture http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_damage.html is the smoking gun as to why the building fell at free fall speed straight down??? It seems kind of weird that such Massive peices of steel and concrete were projected such long ranges at such high speeds to be able to cause such damage in the first place. It wasn't too long ago that they were still finding Bone fragments of Victims on near by roof tops. floors simply colapsing? or indications of explosive devices?

Even if there is damage like I said, that doesn't mean it would fall and this damage would make the building topple if anything. NOT fall straight down in 7 seconds. This is why "popular mechanics experts" can't even come up with a fake plausible explanation to the manner in which it fell and why it was also left out of the 9/11 commision report.

again, watch all the videos I posted. watch the fire fighters casually telling people to get back the building is going to ""blow"". Not Collapse but "blow".

Watch Silverstein say they MADE THE DECISION TO PULL IT AND WATCH THE BUILDING COLLAPSE". Please Post the whole video of Silverstein and see if the implication is different. He later tried to clarify after the fact when eye brows were being raised and he realized the magnitude of his statement. He then said that he meant to Pull fire fighters out. It sure sounded to me like he said "pull it" not "pull them out".

Kerry's exact words from the clip

"I do know that that wall, I remember, was in danger and I think they made the decision based on the danger that it had in destroying other things-- that they did it in a controlled fashion."

Kerry would blow the whistle on bush? LOL are you kidding Me? They are both members of Skull and bones and cousins to the Royal blood line. You obviously have no understanding of Secret Societies, Occult knowledge, and Occult history of this World.

as far as Alex Jones, It is Ok for you to post information from Popular Mechanics and say its credible but I can use no links from Prison Planet or alex jones? The information on this page was statements made by Firefighters and had links to interviews done inNYC on a Talk Show straight out the witenesses mouths (AUDIO), which had nothing to do with Alex Jones. What makes him so uncredible anyway? Are the hundreds of engineers,pilots and scientists who are part of the Scholars for 911 truth unworthey too?

Look at this video several times of the WTC7 colapse. Does this really look like something that happened from Fire? or damaged corner that was scoped out?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5101488991907845273&q=WTC7+collapse&hl=en

video comparison of a building that stood a blaze for 17 hours.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEPjOi2dQSM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
47 internal columns. Lets not play word games here about who is calling who a liar.
FACT: WTC had 47 massive internal support columns that ran through the core of the building and the Commision Report does not even mention them, let alone state how they fell.

Here is another Good Vidoe:
Chief NIST engineer John Gross denies the existence of molten steel at Ground Zero despite testimony of ground zero workers, video footage of the lava like substance, and Nasa Thermal Imaging. Workers say some of these pools burned until December. Did Jet Fuel cause this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR7_9QgAb-I

[Rhandhular]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
47 internal columns. Lets not play word games here about who is calling who a liar.
FACT: WTC had 47 massive internal support columns that ran through the core of the building and the Commision Report does not even mention them, let alone state how they fell.


Now you say they never mentioned the 47 columns and before you said that they showed the incorrect design of the buildings. The fact is it is never mentioned in the report. Once again the theory changes when confronted with facts.

Here is another Good Vidoe:
Chief NIST engineer John Gross denies the existence of molten steel at Ground Zero despite testimony of ground zero workers, video footage of the lava like substance, and Nasa Thermal Imaging. Workers say some of these pools burned until December. Did Jet Fuel cause this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR7_9QgAb-I

Add John Gross and the Nist to the list of conspriators:D


Kerry's exact words from the clip

"I do know that that wall, I remember, was in danger and I think they made the decision based on the danger that it had in destroying other things-- that they did it in a controlled fashion."

Kerry would blow the whistle on bush? LOL are you kidding Me? They are both members of Skull and bones and cousins to the Royal blood line. You obviously have no understanding of Secret Societies, Occult knowledge, and Occult history of this World.



Add John Kerry and the skull and Bones to the list of conspirators:D

Willie Brown warning

I urge anyone following this thread to read both news articles. Mine is the original news article and the one Rhandhular posted isn't much different. It just tries to play it down and not make look as suspicious to having prior knowledge.

my article. the first one presented to the public.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...2/MN229389.DTL

Rhandhular article
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...AGG9L4KI81.DTL

Directly from the article Rhandhular posted

What the mayor got from his source was a warning that Americans should be concerned about traveling.

Willie being Willie, he paid no attention -- and was actually waiting for his ride to the airport when he turned on the TV and, like millions of other Americans, watched as the World Trade Center crumbled.

Exactly how the warning popped up remains a mystery to this day.

It might have had something to do with a little-noticed State Department memo issued a week before that went out in a routine press briefing -- and that former Secretary of State George Shultz himself received -- warning that Americans may be the target of an attack from extremist groups "with links to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda organization."

The warning, however, dealt primarily with U.S. military bases in Japan and South Korea -- clearly the wrong targets.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The only warning they could think of without down right accusing the Gov't of prior knowledge to 9/11 was to say this might have been in regard to a memo from last week that dealt with military bases in in Janp and S.K. Mayor Willie brown was set to travel to NYC not JAPAN and South Korea.

Rhandhular says case closed???????????????????
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


Add Willie brown, The San Fransisco Gate, The State Department and George Shultz to the list of conspirators


again, watch all the videos I posted. watch the fire fighters casually telling people to get back the building is going to ""blow"". Not Collapse but "blow".



Add this group of firefighters to the list of conspirators:D



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
47 internal columns. Lets not play word games here about who is calling who a liar.
FACT: WTC had 47 massive internal support columns that ran through the core of the building and the Commision Report does not even mention them, let alone state how they fell.



Add those who compiled the commission report to the list of conspirators.:D

It is Ok for you to post information from Popular Mechanics

Yep you guessed it. Add the editors from popular mechanics and the scientists they used to the list of conspirators:D

The list keeps getting larger and larger:D

[Conan21]

Do you see the cockiness and arrogance of Rhandhular? Do you see him playing word games about the 47 columns? how many times did I say they left the 47 columns completely out of the report. Do you see how he picks an chooses on which topics to debate with me and neglects are great majority of them? Yet I address all of his.

They have things on video tape just as Ground Zero workers talking about molten steel at ground zero. They have pictures and video of it along with Nasa Themal imaging photos which show extreme temperaturs. but guys like Nist just say Nope not true. That is pretty much how most of this dubunking has been done. THey simply say.. "Not True, dubunked. Next question."

Obviously Willie Brown is not part of the conspiracy.
I never implicated NYPD or NYFD was in on.

Nist, kerry, bush, etc. Yes.

I do not think bush planned this. He along with others are just puppets for the world, front men to be in the public eye. This is not george bush conspiracy. There are hidden hands behind society and even people who are "in" on the conspiracy are on a need to know basis and do what they are told. One thing that I think is hilarious is to think that George W. Bush is running the fate of America and the world.

To deny the existance of hidden agendas and secret societies is burying your head in the sand. Laugh all you want but this entire world and world history is one big conspiracy. People have been manipulated for a long time through the use of religion and goverment and various forms of mind control.

Do you really believe groups like Free masons, Knights Templar, Golden Dawn, Knights of Malta, Rosicrucians, Order of death head, etc. are just a bunch of powerful people who sit around and drink beer and have secret handshakes?? Is that what you think?

Where did the royal blood lines come from? and why are they so fanatical about preserving the bloodline by only intermarrying with other royalty? WHat is that all about? just something for you to consider. I'm not going to start discussing this on here.

Simply learn what the basic symbol of freemasonry really stands for and you realize that everything you thought about open religion and God is a complete Lie and conspiracy. Find that basic tid bit of information, and you'll begin to realize conspiracies on a global scale are in fact real.

[Rhandhular]

Obviously Willie Brown is not part of the conspiracy.
I never implicated NYPD or NYFD was in on.

Nist, kerry, bush, etc. Yes.



Willie Brown and the SF Gate must be apart of the conspiracy if they are providing information that Willie sez its a myth that he was warned. If its not a myth and he is lying he and the paper must be guilty of a cover up making them a part of the conspiracy.

Don't forget I all ready debunked Conans claims about Ashcroft being warned not to fly on 9/11.


You most certainty implicated the involvement of the fire department and the with this statement


again, watch all the videos I posted. watch the fire fighters casually telling people to get back the building is going to ""blow"". Not Collapse but "blow".



You are implying the firemen are saying the building is going to blow up. If they mean it is going to blow up then they must have knowledge of the explosives that you say were planted for a controlled demolition. If they KNOW its going to blow up they would have to know about the conspiracy. If they are not in on the conspiracy how do they know its going to blow up?

This is where you implicate the NYPD. Again if they know its going to blow up then they must be aware that explosives were planted.



Here is a video of police casually telling people to get back. The building is going to blow up. He speaks in a very casual tone as if he knows what is going to happen. How did he know? and if so how did he know when?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwjmqkjwnvQ




By stating how did he know you are implying that he knew it was going to blow up. If he knew it was going to blow up he MUST be a part of the conspiracy!!




I do not think bush planned this. He along with others are just puppets for the world, front men to be in the public eye. This is not george bush conspiracy. There are hidden hands behind society and even people who are "in" on the conspiracy are on a need to know basis and do what they are told. One thing that I think is hilarious is to think that George W. Bush is running the fate of America and the world.

To deny the existance of hidden agendas and secret societies is burying your head in the sand. Laugh all you want but this entire world and world history is one big conspiracy. People have been manipulated for a long time through the use of religion and goverment and various forms of mind control.

Do you really believe groups like Free masons, Knights Templar, Golden Dawn, Knights of Malta, Rosicrucians, Order of death head, etc. are just a bunch of powerful people who sit around and drink beer and have secret handshakes?? Is that what you think?

Where did the royal blood lines come from? and why are they so fanatical about preserving the bloodline by only intermarrying with other royalty? WHat is that all about? just something for you to consider. I'm not going to start discussing this on here.

Simply learn what the basic symbol of freemasonry really stands for and you realize that everything you thought about open religion and God is a complete Lie and conspiracy. Find that basic tid bit of information, and you'll begin to realize conspiracies on a global scale are in fact real.

Ah The New World Order is behind 9/11. The Illuminati are responsible.


PLEASE Show me the theories I have missed I would love to address them.

[Rhandhular]

Do you see the cockiness and arrogance of Rhandhular? Do you see him playing word games about the 47 columns? how many times did I say they left the 47 columns completely out of the report. Do you see how he picks an chooses on which topics to debate with me and neglects are great majority of them? Yet I address all of his.


Word games. Who is playing word games? Here is your original statement about the 47 columns



1) Why Did the 9/11 Commision's report not show the correct design of the WTC buildings when then were doing their dubunking? They completely left out the MANY Internal Support beams that ran through the center of the building that were a key component in the buildings safety design.



They didn't show any designs that I could find. None. Zero. Zilch. I asked what page these were on but Conan could not provide an answer. There is no reference to any of this in the 9/11 commission report and yet he maintains omissions were made. How can you omit something you don't cover? Note how the theory has changed from the original one.

He also states they were debunking conspiracy theories. I have clearly pointed out several times they made no attempt to debunk anything. It was not their intent to debunk anything.

Who is trying to mislead who?

[Conan21]

I reclarified that statement several times b/c of all your bickering.

I'll do it one more time to clarify your trivial non sense.

To Ommit,not Cover,not discuss, leav out,deny, what every words you want to use.... the existance of 47 Huge Interal Core columns and not indicate how they fell is mind boggling. If they wanted to make it atleast look atleast some what honest they could have stated that were there but were uncertain how the fell. The Also just completed OMMITTED building 7 from the report.

However you want to look at it without playing word games-- They did an absolutely Horrible Job at addressing the events of 9/11 and do not address tons of evidence that was available to them.

Again, You have people who say "how can you believe that conspiracy stuff?... it was proven in 9/11 commission report how that day went down" . I was simply stating that this shitty report dubunks no evidence in the 9/11 truth movement but it definately adds more fuel to the fire. That is what I meant by it debunks nothing.

Who is trying to mislead who? You are trying to mislead people by denying evidence, playing word games, simply typing "lol" and smilely faces as your response to undeniable evidence and picking and choosing which points to argue.

[Rhandhular]

picking and choosing which points to argue.

Once again I will say show me the items I didn't address and I will address them.

[Rhandhular]

To Ommit,not Cover,not discuss, leav out,deny, what every words you want to use.... the existance of 47 Huge Interal Core columns and not indicate how they fell is mind boggling. If they wanted to make it atleast look atleast some what honest they could have stated that were there but were uncertain how the fell. The Also just completed OMMITTED building 7 from the report.


I will also say this again. It was not the intent of the 9/11 commission report scientifically address how the towers fell.

The report also didn't address the temperature that day. Is this significant? Does this indicate another cover up?

Here is the bottom line. On Sept. 11 2001 two aircraft traveling at speeds of greater than 500 mph hit the towers. The impact and the resulting inferno weakened the structure and caused them to collapse upon themselves floor by floor. This is how it happened. Science backs this up. To suggest otherwise is disrespectful to those who lost their lives on that day.

Take care and be well

[Conan21]

"The intent of the report was to provide the fullest possible account of the events the transpired on 9/11 and was compiled by a team of five democrats and five republicans."

They clearly did not provide the fullest possible account of the Events. They didn't even address all of the events that took place that day let alone the fullest account possilbe.

We can sit all here all day and argue back and forth about the science of how the buildings fell. Lets just say you are right. Planes alone brought them down. Scientifically proven. There is still a plathora of evidence that shows there was prior knowledge of the event. I haven't even addressed alot of points and I don't care to address anymore because I see how you are handling this debate and I don't think many people are reading this anyway.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Without sifting through this whole thread and pointing out every single issue that you did not address directly or indirectly; I'll just use the most recent one as an example.

I posted A video of Chief NIST engineer John Gross, who flat out denies the existence of molten steel at Ground Zero despite testimony on Film of ground zero workers talking about this Molten Steel Lava. Despite video footage and pictures of the firey sumbstance, and despite Nasa Thermal Imaging photos indicating exteme temperatures. He claims he was there and It didn't exist. I stated that Ground zero workers say some of these pools burned until December and then raised the question how did Jet Fuel cause this? or what caused this?

Link to the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JR7_9QgAb-I

Your witty response to this Issue was this...

"Add John Gross and the Nist to the list of conspriators:D "

[Conan21]

I didn't even see all of your responses b/c you do it in such a sloppy fashion.

First off you dubunked nothing about warnings not to fly:
Here was my original question

11) WHat is your thoughts on MANY public officials being warned not to fly on September 11th? Mayor Willie Brown from San Fran, Jon Ashcroft, author S. Raushdee, and others were told not to fly to New York. The Joint Cheif of Staff had a metting in New York on Sept 11th but were told to cancell their flight? how do you explain that?

The only one with weak evidence on this is Ascroft. You did not debunk it but it is just not a strong case. However, You were completely wrong about Willie Brownas I clearly pointed out that he recieved a warning about american air travel for 9/10 as he was getting ready to fly to NYC. Thy "MYTH" that you keep quoting is is that he was personally warned by Condeleeza Rice but states he did he recieve a warning on 9/10. And you also failed to address the others who recieved warnings. One more example of picking and choosing pieces to argue.

I did not implicate they they NYPD. They were told the building was gonna be brought down/pulled..period, not part of the conspiracy. They have spoken out about it. Made public statements, etc. I posted links and Audio interview and you didn't address that either b/c it was on a prison planet link.

See the problem is that Main streem media will not allow this stuff to be put on TV. Occasionaly guys like Bill OReilly will have 9/ll movement people on their shows and tell them to plead their case in 3 minutes and yell over them the whole time telling them that they hate their country. It is absurd. Give these guys an hour or 2 hours. And let the public watch it and decide for themselves. It sure is a big debate in america. Why not properly cover it? I think these issues need to be thoroughly presented to american. Will this happen? I doubt it!! Almost 40% of Americans believe this was a Gov't cover up and as far as Im concerned MOST americans aren't even aware of the hidden information surrounding 9/11

article showing 36% of Amercians believe there is a conpiracy. This was even brought up by Bill OReily himself on his show to make fun of.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304,00.html

This is also what happens when people speak out and get right to the point. They get cut off right away.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=novsn0xlioI

He was addressing the following issues.

The Phoenix Memo was a warning from the FBI sent to Washington DC in July 2001 saying that Bin Laden operatives were training at Phoenix flights school and at risk of hijacking airliners.

Zacarious Moussaoui was training in MN when his teachers noticed he wasn't interested in taking off or landing and sent out another warning. He was arrested in August of 2001 but the FBI was denied access to his laptop which had the 9/11 plot inside it.

(feel free to address these two points)

[agentsmith]

In any catasrophe of this type there are strange or unexplainable events leading up to and after the fact. Bits and peices of information from credible and non-credible sourses woven together to portray a set of events to appear a certain way or give the impression that more sinister forces were at work. It makes for subpar entertainment but nothing more. What Rhandhular has proved is that there just isn't enough credible evidence to warrant such fantasy and insult to those who have died and there familys that are left behind to deal with the aftermath. Much along the lines of Cindy sheite giving a cold slap in the face to Vets and and boots on the ground, these theorys are nothing more than malicious and intended division of an America in the throes of Islamic terrorism. The only people who belive this crap are listening to Art late at night while smoking some type of illegal substance, problably crack! LOL! sorry Conan you lose this one.....

[Rhandhular]

" Lets just say you are right. Planes alone brought them down. Scientifically proven. "

Good! End of debate!!

[Rhandhular]

In any catasrophe of this type there are strange or unexplainable events leading up to and after the fact. Bits and peices of information from credible and non-credible sourses woven together to portray a set of events to appear a certain way or give the impression that more sinister forces were at work. It makes for subpar entertainment but nothing more. What Rhandhular has proved is that there just isn't enough credible evidence to warrant such fantasy and insult to those who have died and there familys that are left behind to deal with the aftermath. Much along the lines of Cindy sheite giving a cold slap in the face to Vets and and boots on the ground, these theorys are nothing more than malicious and intended division of an America in the throes of Islamic terrorism. The only people who belive this crap are listening to Art late at night while smoking some type of illegal substance, problably crack! LOL! sorry Conan you lose this one.....

Good post Agent Smith! You have posted the absolute truth on the subject. I would like to point out though that this conspiracy is so far from being believable that Art Bell doesn't even believe it:D :D

[Conan21]

Readers of this thread:

As you can see Rhandhular once again skipped over points. This time he asked me to point out to him specifically what he did not respond to and I showed him a few and he had no response once again. He did this through this Entire thread. And then made a silly little post about what I said regarding the buildings.

I will finish my discussion in this thread by stating that a great deal of 9/11 family victims are either part of the 9/11 truth movement or are not satisfied with the official story and want a brand new investigation. The Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Independent Commission, is one such group that believes in a cover up. It is is an independent, nonpartisan group of individuals who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001.

AgentSmith says anyone who believes this stuff or even has possible doubt of a conspiracy to some degree must be “smoking Crack” and it is being disrespectful to those who died and their family. Considering many of these organizations are made of 9/11 family victims who want answers, It is clear to see comments like his are the disrespectful ones.

How do Americans feel about this issue?

36 % believe in a conspiracy
MOST are not even aware of any information concerning 9/11 beyond what they saw on TV and their local Newspaper so one could only imagine how fast this percentage would increase.

A Zogby poll interviewing New Yorkers about the 9/11 Official story came up with these findings
----------------
50 % of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and “Consciously Failed” To Act;

66% Call For New Probe of Unanswered Questions by Congress or New York’s Attorney General, New Zogby International Poll Reveals

[Rhandhular]

I didn't even see all of your responses b/c you do it in such a sloppy fashion.

First off you dubunked nothing about warnings not to fly:
Here was my original question

11) WHat is your thoughts on MANY public officials being warned not to fly on September 11th? Mayor Willie Brown from San Fran, Jon Ashcroft, author S. Raushdee, and others were told not to fly to New York. The Joint Cheif of Staff had a metting in New York on Sept 11th but were told to cancell their flight? how do you explain that?



How many times do I have to cover it before it sinks in? Here is the information from Ashcroft Himself. Its is clear he did not change any flight plans and he was on a flight the morning of 9/11!!

How do you know they were warned not to fly? What exactly was the warning they received? You should title this one many people have heard that many public officials were warned not to fly? You make a grand statement but with no documentation to back it up it means nothing.

I submit Jon Ashcroft own statement on this subject...
BEN-VENISTE: ...At some point in the spring or summer of 2001, around the time of this heightened threat alert, you apparently began to use a private chartered jet plane, changing from your use of commercial aircraft on grounds, our staff is informed, of an FBI threat assessment. And, indeed, as you told us, on September 11th itself you were on a chartered jet at the time of the attack.

Can you supply the details, sir, regarding the threat which caused you to change from commercial to private leased jet?

ASHCROFT: ...Let me indicate to you that I never ceased to use commercial aircraft for my personal travel.

ASHCROFT: My wife traveled to Germany and back in August. My wife and I traveled to Washington, D.C., on the 3rd of September before the 17th -- before the 11th attack on commercial aircraft.

I have exclusively traveled on commercial aircraft for my personal travel; continued through the year 2000, through the entirety of the threat period to the nation.

The assessment made by the security team and the Department of Justice was made early in the year. It was not related to a terrorism threat as a threat to the nation. It was related to an assessment of the security for the attorney general, given his responsibilities and the job that he undertakes. And it related to the maintenance of arms and other things by individuals who travel with the attorney general. And it was their assessment that we would be best served to use government aircraft.

These were not private chartered jet aircraft. These were aircraft of the United States government. And it was on such an aircraft that I was on my way to an event in Milwaukee on the morning of September the 11th.
http://www.nj.com/war/ledger/index.ssf?/news/ledger/stories/20040414_ashcroft.html

Another one debunked.

Here Willie Brown is quoted as saying that warnings that he recieved info not to fly specifically on 9/11 are a myth. It is from the same the same news paper that Conan uses as a reference.

Ok. Lets do Willie Brown buts lets gets his own words from an interview with the paper you use as a factual source. Willie Brown calls this a MYTH!! It never happened as suggested by conspiracy theorists. Here the excerpt and then the link.



The "myth" has its origins in the night before the attacks, when Brown called "my security people at the airport'' to check on his flight to New York the next morning.

What the mayor got from his source was a warning that Americans should be concerned about traveling.

Willie being Willie, he paid no attention -- and was actually waiting for his ride to the airport when he turned on the TV and, like millions of other Americans, watched as the World Trade Center crumbled.

Exactly how the warning popped up remains a mystery to this day.

It might have had something to do with a little-noticed State Department memo issued a week before that went out in a routine press briefing -- and that former Secretary of State George Shultz himself received -- warning that Americans may be the target of an attack from extremist groups "with links to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda organization."

The warning, however, dealt primarily with U.S. military bases in Japan and South Korea -- clearly the wrong targets.

You must scroll to the bottom of the page...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/09/13/BAGG9L4KI81.DTL


Case closed on Willie Brown!!

He was waiting for a ride to the airport when he heard the towers had been struck!! lol

The facts are on my side in this case he can argue till he is red in the face but it wont change the fact that NO ONE recieved specific information not to fly on Sept. 11 2001

[Rhandhular]

I will finish my discussion in this thread by stating that a great deal of 9/11 family victims are either part of the 9/11 truth movement or are not satisfied with the official story and want a brand new investigation. The Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Independent Commission, is one such group that believes in a cover up. It is is an independent, nonpartisan group of individuals who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001.



Bullshit. A great deal of the victims families are not screaming conspiracy. Here Conan is either repeating bad information or he is blatantly making things up to give his version of events credibility.

[Conan21]

Hey Rhand, I was just looking at Big A's Questions.

You didn't answer any of them? :confused:

you only posted a link of pictures of tin scraps and paper mache as proof that a plane hit the pentagon. :(

[Rhandhular]

Hey Rhand, I was just looking at Big A's Questions.

You didn't answer any of them? :confused:

you only posted a link of pictures of tin scraps and paper mache as proof that a plane hit the pentagon. :(

I answered question #1 and question #5 and #6. I could address them all if anyone really wants me to. The truth is no one with any intelligence really believes there was a controlled demolition that brought down the towers or wtc7.

[Rhandhular]

4) Why were the dogs that sniff for bombs pulled from the building weeks before the attack?



After fully researching this I found that bomb sniffing dogs were pulled from the towers on September 6th. What the CTers don't tell you is that the dogs arrived a few days before and were not permanently assigned to the towers. They were only there because of a bomb threat and were removed when no bombs were found and no new threats were issued.

This is a perfect example of the type of misleading info you get from these tin hat wearing fools. Dogs are brought on the scene for a few days to check the area and when they finish their task they leave. The conspiracy guys don't like to tell you that these dogs were not supposed to stay at the towers they simple tell you that they left. Very sneaky and deliberately misleading.

[Conan21]

no links/articles to back up that statement? :confused:

I said you didn't answer Big A's questions

I would like some answers to these questions, because to my mind, the official answers don't make sense logically.

1. why on the home videos made by people on the ground, the planes that hit the towers did not have windows?

2. on the same home videos, if the frames are slowed down, it can clearly be seen before the plane hit the tower, a flash/explosion under it's belly, at the front, as if a rocket was fired, and then how come that the building wall exploded just before the nose of the plane hit it?

3. a plane is made out of very light materials. How can those light materials, regardless of the speed they were travelling at, penetrate instantly an entire building made out of concrete, so the other side of the bulding blows up?

5. supposedly the towers went down because the fire at the crash point was so intense, they melted the steel rods holing the building up. Obviously, this means extreme heat. If it was so hot there, then how come people could be seen at the crash point, waving at the cameras?

4. how can a plane of light materials (see point 3) penetrate bunker quality walls at the Pentagon?

.

[Rhandhular]

no links/articles to back up that statement? :confused:

I said you didn't answer Big A's questions

I said I answered Question 1,5 and 6 but since you do not know how to go to the first page I will repost those for you.

Question 1 was answered here...
I am guessing you got most of this information from the video loose change. Lets take a look at your first question.

1. Why on the home videos made by people on the ground, the planes that hit the towers did not have windows?

I have never seen a clear video that conclusively shows that the planes that hit the towers did not have windows. These claims are usually associated with reports that the planes where cargo planes. Where did this information come from then? The man who makes these claims in the loose change video, Marc Birnbach, was over two miles away from the towers and did not have a good view of the airplanes. Here is the excerpt from the popular mechanics article that debunks this story...

Flight 175's Windows
CLAIM: On Sept. 11, FOX News broadcast a live phone interview with FOX employee Marc Birnbach. 911inplanesite.com states that "Bernback" saw the plane "crash into the South Tower." "It definitely did not look like a commercial plane," Birnbach said on air. "I didn't see any windows on the sides."

Coupled with photographs and videos of Flight 175 that lack the resolution to show windows, Birnbach's statement has fueled one of the most widely referenced 9/11 conspiracy theories--specifically, that the South Tower was struck by a military cargo plane or a fuel tanker.

FACT: Birnbach, who was a freelance videographer with FOX News at the time, tells PM that he was more than 2 miles southeast of the WTC, in Brooklyn, when he briefly saw a plane fly over. He says that, in fact, he did not see the plane strike the South Tower; he says he only heard the explosion.

While heading a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) probe into the collapse of the towers, W. Gene Corley studied the airplane wreckage. A licensed structural engineer with Construction Technology Laboratories, a consulting firm based in Skokie, Ill., Corley and his team photographed aircraft debris on the roof of WTC 5, including a chunk of fuselage that clearly had passenger windows. "It's ... from the United Airlines plane that hit Tower 2," Corley states flatly. In reviewing crash footage taken by an ABC news crew, Corley was able to track the trajectory of the fragments he studied--including a section of the landing gear and part of an engine--as they tore through the South Tower, exited from the building's north side and fell from the sky.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=3

Question 1 has been answered if anyone who care to hear more debunking I can continue...

Question 6 was answered here...
This is another 9/11 fallacy that the conspiracy buffs portray as fact. In 2001 cellular phones would work at an altitude of 35,000 feet at cruising speeds. Dropped calls were common at that speed and altitude but it was possible and cell phone records bear this out.

Question 5 is here...
I'll do another claim that can quickly be debunked..

5. why was there no plane debris at the pentagon?

Answer...

Numerous pieces of the plane, including the bodies of the passengers, and the black boxes were found. You can see if for yourself here...

http://www.911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.html

If you read my previous post I said I could answer others if anyone would like me to.

[Conan21]

Rhandular

I was referring to the questions you didn't answer.

as far as the the strange looking planes. They have videos on the morning of 9/11 of quit a few witnesses who were saying to news reports that the plane looked nothing like a commercial air liner. I have never seen a conclusive home video either that Big A speaks of either. I'm not sure were he saw this at?? but the fact that many people stated this should atleast be noted. I know this is not something you can really comment so I don't expect you to try to disprove anything.
P.S Marc Birnbach said alot more than what your two sentence "claim" made. Here are his words
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mq7ZYeKuQcE

here are the other questions BIG A proposed that I didn't think you answered.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. on the same home videos, if the frames are slowed down, it can clearly be seen before the plane hit the tower, a flash/explosion under it's belly, at the front, as if a rocket was fired, and then how come that the building wall exploded just before the nose of the plane hit it?

3. a plane is made out of very light materials. How can those light materials, regardless of the speed they were travelling at, penetrate instantly an entire building made out of concrete, so the other side of the bulding blows up?

5. supposedly the towers went down because the fire at the crash point was so intense, they melted the steel rods holing the building up. Obviously, this means extreme heat. If it was so hot there, then how come people could be seen at the crash point, waving at the cameras?

4. how can a plane of light materials (see point 3) penetrate bunker quality walls at the Pentagon?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another thing that I do not understand is, how did the wings of the planes at WTC buidlings leave huge wing spread gashes in the buiding composed of reinforced steel but the wings of the plane at the pentagon some how folded up and did no external damage to the building were the wings and engines should have hit?

[Big A]

I have never seen a conclusive home video either that Big A speaks of either.

That was shown and discussed in a TV documentary here in Aust.

[Conan21]

That was shown and discussed in a TV documentary here in Aust.

Can you elaborate on what the Aust. documentary discussed and what conclusions it came up with or hypothesized?

Did it say anything about remote control planes?

[Big A]

Can you elaborate on what the Aust. documentary discussed and what conclusions it came up with or hypothesized?

Did it say anything about remote control planes?

Basically it brought up all the unanswered questions. It put forward all different answers that could explain the events, leaving it all open for the viewers to draw their own conclusions.

It was aired on ABC which is the Government owned TV channel here.