911 Truth Movement

[Harry]

There's tens of thousands of eyewitnesses there Evo but the theorist don't look for them, they look for the "crackpot" who says "I didn't see a plane".

my point exactly. anyone sceptical and has an opposing view is labelled a crackpot. why would people bother?

 

[Harry]

Say no more. I'll take the experts' opinion on this one.

the same experts that put together the commision report which was labelled a farce by most of the people involved? we calling them crackpots also?

 

[Harry]

The Pentagon
At 9:37 am on 9/11, 51 minutes after the first plane hit the World Trade Center, the Pentagon was similarly attacked. Though dozens of witnesses saw a Boeing 757 hit the building, conspiracy advocates insist there is evidence that a missile or a different type of plane smashed into the Pentagon.

Big Plane, Small Holes

Claim: Two holes were visible in the Pentagon immediately after the attack: a 75-ft.-wide entry hole in the building's exterior wall, and a 16-ft.-wide hole in Ring C, the Pentagon's middle ring. Conspiracy theorists claim both holes are far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757. "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. across?" asks reopen911.org, a Web site "dedicated to discovering the bottom line truth to what really occurred on September 11, 2001."

The truth is of even less importance to French author Thierry Meyssan, whose baseless assertions are fodder for even mainstream European and Middle Eastern media. In his book The Big Lie, Meyssan concludes that the Pentagon was struck by a satellite-guided missile—part of an elaborate U.S. military coup. "This attack," he writes, "could only be committed by United States military personnel against other U.S. military personnel."



FACT: When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.

Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."

The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide—not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage.


Read more: 9/11 Conspiracy Theories - Debunking the Myths - Pentagon - Popular Mechanics

This debunk has been debunked. couldn't be effed looking it up but it's out there.

 

[Harry]

glad you're enjoying them Haryy. Yes there are a lot of paranoid conspiracy theorists out there aren't there. It's quite amazing just how much governments are invested in cover ups.

haven't looked into any of them tbh, but heaps of people believe the kennedy one. crackpots.

 

[tigersnake]

I would hazard a guess that it would be impossible. and that's the thing - we are being told to believe too many things that logic tells you could not and should not happen like 3 steel framed buildings collapsing from fire when no other steel framed building has collapsed ever, 2 planes disintegrating into nothing, a plane causing a piercing hole you'd expect from a bunker buster missile, 86 cameras at the pentagon not being able to capture one vision of the plane, most heavily guarded airspace in the world not intercepting 4 hijacked planes, the biggest terrorist act perpetrated by 19 middle class arabs and on and on. did the parallel universe open up on 911 and the impossible became possible for one day?

we can stand here all week, throwing up arguments, standing at the urinal arguing who's is bigger, but the facts remain that there are alot of unanswered questions and alot of evidence to warrant a proper independent investigation, not some circus act of which 6 of the 10 people involved with the OR said it was a farce.

Don't belittle opposition argument with swinging *smile* metaphors. Its about data, Harry, proof. There is none. New evidence is what triggers further investigations. 'Logic tells you' but it does not tell me. You would 'hazard a guess', Disco has 'watched a lot of episodes of Air Crash Investigations'? Come on, fair dinkum.

For me its totally concievable that 4 simultaneously hijacked planes could wreak havoc, even in heavily protected air. Responses cannot be instantaneous. It might not be the same now. What has 'middle class' got to do with it? That makes it more plausable, better educated to execute complex plans and actions.

 

[tigersnake]

This debunk has been debunked. couldn't be effed looking it up but it's out there.

Thats a doozy

 

[tigertim]

It also opens a massive can of worms. How do you begin to apologise for killing so many civilians during a war based on a lie?

Of course not, but it's yet another oddity and contradiction.

Sorry, so the opposition, Obama and any others won't out Bush because they don't want to apologise for killing so many civilians and going to war?

Seriously? Obama and many others wouldn't want to uncover the biggest cover up in history because its too hard and embarrassing and might put himself in a pickle?

Wouldn't ant potential president want to uncover this cover up and guarantee himself presidency?

 

[tigersnake]

my point exactly. anyone sceptical and has an opposing view is labelled a crackpot. why would people bother?

If it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck...

or

If the cap fits...

 

[tigertim]

Thats a doozy

yeah, considering that's all the theorist does (throw out unanswered questions to which the realist has to research and debunk!)

 

[KnightersRevenge]

So you don't support the OR?

You, Tim and KR have never so much as acknowledged that a curious fact or coincidence might have greater meaning. You've also routinely tried to discredit eyewitness testimony or expert opinion which contradicts the OR rather than take it at face value. I've taken that to mean you must accept it, at least for the most part.

In the particular case of architects and engineers for 9/11 it's about 2%. I actually think that's a good rate given it's not a survey but a petition that needs seeking out.

You are still trying to set up a false dichotomy here. For and against, them and us. It's simplistic to try to frame everything as black and white. It might suit your purposes but it doesn't describe reality. I don't find anything substantive in the "eyewitness" testimony you claim (source?) or the "experts" (in what exactly?). The fact that so many of the things you have used as proof have been discredited by me, and Baloo and others is now on record. That is simply done to make sure that informed debate can happen without the use of falsehoods and conjecture. I have not advocated for the OR, you have advocated against it so I have tested your evidence. If you wish to continue to believe something after many of its postulates have been disproved is your prerogative.

Sure a coincidence might have greater meaning, but it might not. And nothing you have presented has lifted it above the realm of supposition IMO.

 

[Rosy]

This debunk has been debunked. couldn't be effed looking it up but it's out there.

Says volumes. A few seconds on a search engine is too much effort yet you question others on here.

There are claims and there are counter claims. I don't pretend to know what's the truth and what's not,and it seems to me the majority on this thread are the same way. Conspiracy theorists conveniently cherry pick to suit their agenda when they're probably not the least bit qualified to know the actual facts. I haven't seen one claim on here that doesn't have an explanation or photos to the contrary.

 

[Harry]

Thats a doozy

This is what you don't get. It's a circular argument. for every theory there's an explanation - from both sides. For every piece of evidence there's an explanation - from both sides. and around and around we go. so the swinging *smile* metaphor is appropriate because until a proper independant investigation occurs we will be comparing who's is bigger. no doubt there is fact and fabrication from both sides but this needs to be investigated and filtered through a proper investigation. and don't say it has already been done.

 

[Baloo]

This is what you don't get. It's a circular argument. for every theory there's an explanation - from both sides. For every piece of evidence there's an explanation - from both sides. and around and around we go.

And then I'm constantly told to stop using the ID comparison beause ths debate is nothing like it.

 

[Harry]

Says volumes. A few seconds on a search engine is too much effort yet you question others on here.

There are claims and there are counter claims. I don't pretend to know what's the truth and what's not,and it seems to me the majority on this thread are the same way. Conspiracy theorists conveniently cherry pick to suit their agenda when they're probably not the least bit qualified to know the actual facts. I haven't seen one claim on here that doesn't have an explanation or photos to the contrary.

does it sit comfortably in your mind that a plane crashed into the pentagon (hitting the ground first by reports) and went through 6 layers of concrete walls to create a neat circular exit hole at the end? With no vision of significant wreckage and no vision of the plane when there were many cameras around and the FBI confiscated the vision from hotels accross the road? How can there be no vision? If it does then fine, but I can understand why it doesn't with some.

 

[Harry]

Sorry, so the opposition, Obama and any others won't out Bush because they don't want to apologise for killing so many civilians and going to war?

Seriously? Obama and many others wouldn't want to uncover the biggest cover up in history because its too hard and embarrassing and might put himself in a pickle?

Wouldn't ant potential president want to uncover this cover up and guarantee himself presidency?

any chance that there are levels of power above the presidency?

 

[tigersnake]

This is what you don't get. It's a circular argument. for every theory there's an explanation - from both sides. For every piece of evidence there's an explanation - from both sides. and around and around we go. so the swinging *smile* metaphor is appropriate because until a proper independant investigation occurs we will be comparing who's is bigger. no doubt there is fact and fabrication from both sides but this needs to be investigated and filtered through a proper investigation. and don't say it has already been done.

I get it. What you don't get is that one side doesn't have any evidence. This thread has been an interesting insight into the mind of a conspiracy theorist. Like I said, back in the mid to late 00s I thought there was questions to answer, a conspiracy was an interesting talking point, I'm naturally suspcious of the US govt. Then I did a little reading and research and concluded it wasn't possible.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

does it sit comfortably in your mind that a plane crashed into the pentagon (hitting the ground first by reports) and went through 6 layers of concrete walls to create a neat circular exit hole at the end? With no vision of significant wreckage and no vision of the plane when there were many cameras around and the FBI confiscated the vision from hotels accross the road? How can there be no vision? If it does then fine, but I can understand why it doesn't with some.

Does it bother me? A little, but just because I'm curious. Am I surprised that the home of the US Defence Department and military secrets have been reluctant to have video of where its weaknesses are open to the public? Not a bit.

 

[Harry]

If it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck...

or

If the cap fits...

or if it looks like a controlled demolition and walks like a controlled demolition.........

again, too many anomalies that need a proper independant investigation.

 

[Rosy]

does it sit comfortably in your mind that a plane crashed into the pentagon (hitting the ground first by reports) and went through 6 layers of concrete walls to create a neat circular exit hole at the end? With no vision of significant wreckage and no vision of the plane when there were many cameras around and the FBI confiscated the vision from hotels accross the road? How can there be no vision? If it does then fine, but I can understand why it doesn't with some.

Are you implying there wasn't a plane involved?

Are these images FBI photoshopping?

 

[Harry]

I get it. What you don't get is that one side doesn't have any evidence. This thread has been an interesting insight into the mind of a conspiracy theorist. Like I said, back in the mid to late 00s I thought there was questions to answer, a conspiracy was an interesting talking point, I'm naturally suspcious of the US govt. Then I did a little reading and research and concluded it wasn't possible.

that's your conclusion and that's fine.