Was 9/11 an inside job?

[Sneeze]

I'm lead to believe it was a inside job, certain things just don't add up. You think it's just a coincidence that the only plane that didn't make it's destination was the one headed for the white house? That the side of the pentagon the "plane" hit was completely empty dude to it being evacuated for a meeting (iirc), not to mention one engine was completely missing from said plane. Needless to say, engines to not vanish in thin air. Also, how much surveillance is the pentagon going to be under? (Alot, is the answer to that rhetorical question) yet they only release like 5 frames, which include a dark grey blur and a fire. Plus, the fact the owner of the Twin Towers (who's name escapes me) took out insurance mere days before the attack *specifically covering terrorism*. There's also been reports of thermite found at ground zero and it's been caught on film as well which, doesn't have any reason to have been there... And, for the record Bush =/= The Government, Bush didn't do it, it wasn't his idea, loads of people will have worked together and come up with this whole elaborate scheme, Bush would have had it presented to him using brightly coloured sock puppets and possibly skittles, signed a few papers and jobs a good 'un.

It was either a huge conspiracy by the government or it was terrorists but they are still hiding ALOT for what ever reasons they see fit.

To all you skeptics that dismiss it without a second thought I strongly advise looking over some of the evidence in play here because there's just way to many holes for my liking and until proven otherwise I'm convinced there's something highly amiss.

 

[Esper]

Like you would have acted any differently as the pilot had in that situation. He doesn't know he's going to die. He does know he'll die if he doesn't do as the guy says.

This makes sense. The pilots probably thought the hijackers wanted to fly to Cuba or something. Since it was before 9/11 they wouldn't automatically assume that hijack = suicide-plane-crash like we do now.

I still wonder why we've never seen video of the crash into the Pentagon.

 

[shookie]

I still wonder why we've never seen video of the crash into the Pentagon.

There isn't video for the PA crash, either.
That's mostly because it's not like there were people hanging out around the Pentagon/Shanksville with video cameras waiting for planes to crash. You also don't see much footage of the first plane that hit the WTC, but barely minutes after impact. NYC is obviously more populated, and the second people heard things going on, cameras started rolling.

 

[Glitchfinder]

I'm lead to believe it was a inside job, certain things just don't add up. You think it's just a coincidence that the only plane that didn't make it's destination was the one headed for the white house? That the side of the pentagon the "plane" hit was completely empty dude to it being evacuated for a meeting (iirc), not to mention one engine was completely missing from said plane. Needless to say, engines to not vanish in thin air. Also, how much surveillance is the pentagon going to be under? (Alot, is the answer to that rhetorical question) yet they only release like 5 frames, which include a dark grey blur and a fire. Plus, the fact the owner of the Twin Towers (who's name escapes me) took out insurance mere days before the attack *specifically covering terrorism*. There's also been reports of thermite found at ground zero and it's been caught on film as well which, doesn't have any reason to have been there... And, for the record Bush =/= The Government, Bush didn't do it, it wasn't his idea, loads of people will have worked together and come up with this whole elaborate scheme, Bush would have had it presented to him using brightly coloured sock puppets and possibly skittles, signed a few papers and jobs a good 'un.

It was either a huge conspiracy by the government or it was terrorists but they are still hiding ALOT for what ever reasons they see fit.

To all you skeptics that dismiss it without a second thought I strongly advise looking over some of the evidence in play here because there's just way to many holes for my liking and until proven otherwise I'm convinced there's something highly amiss.

This post is patently ridiculous. First, the pentagon didn't release much film because there is quite a bit in that building is top secret, and releasing much in the way of film produces far more security risks than they were willing to deal with at the time. The fact that the only plane that didn't reach its destination is merely a coincidence as well. They don't even know for certain that it was headed to the white house, only that it was headed in that general direction when it crashed. The section of the pentagon that the plane his was NOT empty, but it was not at full capacity, either. They were in the midst of a building-wide renovation, and part of that section was under construction at the time. (As were other parts of the building)

As for the insurance policy, I would like proof. Not just hearsay, but cold, hard, legally binding proof that not only were those buildings covered for terrorism, but that the insurance policy was taken out in the last few days, and not simply renewed.

Thermite is another thing that needs proof. It is a rocket fuel, and, while it should not have been there, there are conceivable situations where it could be there without actually having been put there. For example, the Hindenburg was literally painted in thermite, because of an unforeseen chemical reaction that occurred within the surface covering they applied to it.

Also, I would like to see these films you claim to have seen. I'd love to show you what they really are.

As for holes, I think you'll find that with any highly controversial event, there are far more "holes" created by the media and conspiracy theorist than actually exist, often in conjunction with fake evidence or misinterpretation of real evidence. (Look up the reason the USA has a military base in Cuba, and you'll find that it's because we sent the military there after a few papers that amounted to today's tabloids stirred up the public to the point where the government had to do something or face a rebellious base.)

 

[Feign]

Of course there was a reason. The whole point of a terrorist attack is to strike terror into the hearts of those it affects, and to make a damaging point against whoever it targets. In the case of 9/11, the attack was wildly successful on both counts, and launched a series of international wars that extremists the world over have exploited as an opportunity to label the West in general, and the USA in particular, as evil, against God, heretics, and a variety of other unsavory things.

It would seem the media and government have taken over the job of spreading fear mind you... Turn on the TV... Hear about the latest security measure...

The security was fine before 9/11, people were just not watching the bags close enough. I don't feel any safer than I did back then than I do now.

I don't think the terrorist's reasons of carrying out terror was the whole reason... I mean it was led by Bin Laden... He must have had a personal reason... Not to mention his family being cleared to fly.

There is so many variables that it's quite difficult to put something like this in an inquiry... At the same time, there is classified material... People are too hooked on nationalism and power to realize how stupid they've become...

 

[Ho-Oh]

I don't think the terrorist's reasons of carrying out terror was the whole reason... I mean it was led by Bin Laden... He must have had a personal reason... Not to mention his family being cleared to fly.

Terrorists have to have reason to kill now?

 

[Feign]

Terrorists have to have reason to kill now?

I don't really like using wikipedia, but in terms of these kinds of things, there's almost no reason not to. Dealing with fact is so much easier... ugh, that'll be another 20 something years minimum.

But:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden

And yes, there is always a reason behind things... Even if the person is chemically imbalanced in the head, that is reason enough.

 

[Ho-Oh]

I don't really like using wikipedia, but in terms of these kinds of things, there's almost no reason not to. Dealing with fact is so much easier... ugh, that'll be another 20 something years minimum.

But:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden

And yes, there is always a reason behind things... Even if the person is chemically imbalanced in the head, that is reason enough.

Why are you linking wiki? It's not really.. giving much insight.

Um, that doesn't count as a personal agenda though..

 

[Feign]

When you brainwash people to follow you, then it is a bit of a different story, in this case they were using religion as that tool... (Extremists as in cultists).

I linked it, because it gives a history of his life. As a tldr however, he was trained in some CIA funded thing (US) to combat against the USSR's occupation of Afghanistan.

Skip ahead several decades, and he appears to have a deep seated hate against America for god knows what reason...

 

[Ho-Oh]

Or Bush could've just paid him to do it and his hate for America wasn't relative.

 

[Feign]

Bush had his own company to worry about though, so I doubt that XD :P

 

[Ho-Oh]

But that's what Michael Moore thinks, so it must be true.

 

[Feign]

Michael Moore is crazy however... Had I been an American citizen with time and money, I would probably got through the government's declassified publicly available documents and decipher it from there...

9/11 is a culmination of about 30 years (if not longer) history though...

 

[Melody]

I think this is an insane idea, an insane thread, and an insane way to villify Bush. Honestly, I do agree that he was a total idiot in office, but he did the best he could.

If the blame is to be placed on anyone, it should be placed squarely on the shoulders of the congresses that supported him throughout his term. It is as much, their fault as it is the fault of George H.W. Bush's fault

With all that being said, I fully believe that it was all done by religious islamic extremists.

I dont think less of islamic people for it, even us christians have crackpot extremists who twist religious doctrine to justify their actions. X3 (I wont point fingers at any specific denomination)

 

[Ho-Oh]

I think this is an insane idea, an insane thread, and an insane way to villify Bush. Honestly, I do agree that he was a total idiot in office, but he did the best he could.

If the blame is to be placed on anyone, it should be placed squarely on the shoulders of the congresses that supported him throughout his term. It is as much, their fault as it is the fault of George H.W. Bush's fault

With all that being said, I fully believe that it was all done by religious islamic extremists.

I dont think less of islamic people for it, even us christians have crackpot extremists who twist religious doctrine to justify their actions. X3 (I wont point fingers at any specific denomination)

Is it just me or does the first and second lines contradict each other? You're saying that the idea is insane, yet you're willing to put the blame on the government at the time. Then you state that it isn't done by them? o_o

 

[Gary the Magic Fairy]

I personally believe it was the first act in an extremely complicated 35-year plot orchestrated by the NWO. I won't go into details, since you all obviously don't care, but it's pretty convincing and makes much more sense than the public story.

I don't believe Bush specifically was involved in 9/11. He was involved in the larger plot, being one of the many puppets of the NWO, and he plays a role in the plan, but this was way above him. He was probably aware, but not actively participating. So yes, it would have happened if he wasn't in power. And no, I don't trust the government... but I never did.

 

[KingCharizard]

I personally believe it was the first act in an extremely complicated 35-year plot orchestrated by the NWO. I won't go into details, since you all obviously don't care, but it's pretty convincing and makes much more sense than the public story.

I don't believe Bush specifically was involved in 9/11. He was involved in the larger plot, being one of the many puppets of the NWO, and he plays a role in the plan, but this was way above him. He was probably aware, but not actively participating. So yes, it would have happened if he wasn't in power. And no, I don't trust the government... but I never did.

ppl actually believe the NWO(New World Order)? Wow...

One world one rule one peace, yeah maybe on mars...

 

[Guillermo]

No one here knows, so don't pretend you really do and calling everyone else wrong.

As for the thread, it may have been. There's really not enough evidence to prove either of the two arguments right or wrong.

 

[Percy Thrillington]

Speaking purely as a representative of my own person, and no one else, I'm going to have to say that what I think happened on 9/11 was the same as what Wikipedia tells us; what the American government tells us and what Al-Quada tells us. I've watched videos; documentaries; survivors being interviewed; bias accounts on both sides of the spectrum. Earlier this year, I took part in a discussion with my history class, and he mentioned a video named 'Loose change' on Youtube. The discussion we had was most though-provoking, so I searched it up later that night and the next week consisted of me finding out whatever I could about the theories.

There are several reasons I believe that the story we've been told is the real story. Firstly and foremost, I couldn't live in a world in which I knew a corrupt government organised the killing of nearly four thousand people, and it could've been a lot more. The thought terrifies me. There's little that terrifies me but if people placed all their hope in a democracy system that promised to bring out the best in America, and this was what happened... How anyone could so senselessly kill thousands of people for, as most people believing in the conspiracy say, oil from the middle east, just to get a profit and fix up the economy a bit.

Secondly, if you look for a conspiracy, you're gonna find one. I've looked at all the 'proof' to claim 9/11 was an inside job and all though it all fits together, there's very little pieces of evidence that should make you turn your head from the official story (the government refusing to show the recovered footage of the plane hitting the Pentagon being one of them).

Another thing that ticks me off is that a lot of people have no idea of what 'an inside job' means. Lots of people claim it's an attack from the government to (as I said before) invade the Middle East to get more oil. Others say it's what JFK warned us of; the corporate government take over.

Errr, ranting there. My bad.

Thirdly; if this was an actual stunt orchestrated by the American government, do you not think we would have found out by now? You can't hide secrets forever; especially not one of this scale.

As for people believing the One World Order was behind this, or that there were no planes; they were holograms; and that missiles were fired into the twin towers instead... Yeah, I just think that's crazy.

Or Bush could've just paid him to do it and his hate for America wasn't relative.

And suddenly it was clear that you have no idea of what you're talking about. Even people believing in an inside job would argue with that.

 

[Sneeze]

This post is patently ridiculous. First, the pentagon didn't release much film because there is quite a bit in that building is top secret, and releasing much in the way of film produces far more security risks than they were willing to deal with at the time. The fact that the only plane that didn't reach its destination is merely a coincidence as well. They don't even know for certain that it was headed to the white house, only that it was headed in that general direction when it crashed. The section of the pentagon that the plane his was NOT empty, but it was not at full capacity, either. They were in the midst of a building-wide renovation, and part of that section was under construction at the time. (As were other parts of the building)

As for the insurance policy, I would like proof. Not just hearsay, but cold, hard, legally binding proof that not only were those buildings covered for terrorism, but that the insurance policy was taken out in the last few days, and not simply renewed.

Thermite is another thing that needs proof. It is a rocket fuel, and, while it should not have been there, there are conceivable situations where it could be there without actually having been put there. For example, the Hindenburg was literally painted in thermite, because of an unforeseen chemical reaction that occurred within the surface covering they applied to it.

Also, I would like to see these films you claim to have seen. I'd love to show you what they really are.

As for holes, I think you'll find that with any highly controversial event, there are far more "holes" created by the media and conspiracy theorist than actually exist, often in conjunction with fake evidence or misinterpretation of real evidence. (Look up the reason the USA has a military base in Cuba, and you'll find that it's because we sent the military there after a few papers that amounted to today's tabloids stirred up the public to the point where the government had to do something or face a rebellious base.)

If they wanted, they could debunk loads of theories by releasing a short video of what did happen at the Pentagon, but they choose not to because its "top secret" how many secrets would actually get out by releasing a video of the OUTSIDE of the pentagon taken nearly 10 years ago?

Insurance is hard to gather proof on, financial records of the government aren't open to the public so I'm afraid I can't help you there.

In regards to thermite: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=henRQymtt5M check out related videos if you wish for videos of it actually melting through the tower.