http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/co...

I know there are a ton of conspiracy docs out there, I just really liked this one, it goes into greater detail and everything does seem to fit. While I'm still not convinced it was a complete "inside job", there are a lot of very "eyebrow raising" points.

so if you can wrap your head around this one, what do you think? it seems like it involved so many countries and people involved in the planning of the attack, that its very suspicious how this was even able to be pulled off.

Thanks! I found a torrent of it so I can watch it later. I can't wait.
I finally got around to watching Fahrenheit 9/11 last year too.
I'm not one for conspiracies, but after watching F911 it seems so obvious.

If you're supposing that something was so complicated that it was suspicious how it could even be pulled off, the rest assured that the government would be in no way capable of keeping it under wraps, or even executing it in the first place.

Conspiracy theories are generally preposterous, and in this case, especially so.

im guessing you didnt watch the documentary...

just try watching it before commenting on it, in no way am i supposing that it was suspicious because it was complicated. There are many facts that prove this to be suspicious. the documentary falls short of making any unfactual claims, 99% of what they argue are based on solid facts and expert opinions. if nothing else, its an interesting watch.

I'm not going to waste 2 and half hours of my life listening to conspiracy theorists drivel on about how the twin towers couldn't have collapsed naturally, about how it wasn't an airplane that hit the Pentagon, or about the aircraft that crashed in Pennsylvania was a drone.

If you can assure me that the documentary wastes no breath on any of those points, then I might consider it. Otherwise, they're full of shit.

do they talk about how the twin towers could not of collapsed naturally? yes, they spend half an hour max on that. they rarely mention the pentagon and the pennsylvania aircraft.

am i saying you have to watch it? no, by all means go do something else, im not going to try and sell you this documentary, watch it if you like, or don't.  it also means you really have no ground to comment on the validity of their arguments.

I do think it's funny that he didn't have to watch it to know their key points of attack

I have watched several 9/11 videos I I must say, I tend to lean on the side of the Conspiracy Theorists. Don't you find it weird that the government didn't know anything about the "plot", yet less than 2 hours after the 1st plane hit they had a wrap sheet a mile long on 30 different people and were pretty sure who piloted all the flights. It took them almost three weeks to figure out the passengers on all those flights.

We're talking about a government that has screwed up everything that is possible to screw up...yet they can pull of an inside terrorist attack? Unlikely.

I gotta say arch 8ngel summed it up perfectly. Conspiracy theorists are full of shit. When I see cars with bumper stickers that say "911 was an inside job" I can't help but laugh at these idiots. Sure ok 911 was an inside job, Kurt Cobain was murdered, Elvis is alive and the goverment covered up a UFO crash. Yup ok bud..

I won't say the government master-minded everything.
But having a disaster like this happen definitely got people to enlist.
And then going to Afghanistan, but getting sucked into Iraq?
Things that shouldn't fit, seem to fit well if you think for yourself.

All this talk aside, how did that Tower #7 fall anyway? No planes hit it...

No things "seem to fit well" when you are willing to ignore the most likely scenarios in favor of convoluted theories that either suit political views or a lack of understanding of society in general from the disenfranchised.

Did you see the street level video of the main towers collapsing?  There was a significant shock wave and blast of debris that did a considerable amount of structural damage to the surrounding area.

http://www.thebestpageintheuniver...

wtc7 collapsed 7 hours after the twin towers fell, wtc 3-6 were closer to the twin towers than wtc7 and had considerably more trauma to its structure, yet they were still standing.

the odd thing is a few news stations actually reported the collapse of wtc7 before it actually collapsed. the collapse of wtc7 took 6 seconds.

Their tune never changes, so it's easy to keep up.

It's not odd at all.  I was watching live coverage that day, and it was absolute bedlam in NYC that day.  It's very easy to have somebody misspeak in the heat of the moment.

Also, just because they were closer to the main towers does not mean they actually suffered more damage without collapsing.  Similarly, there would be other differences in the structures, whether it's the height of the building, or the foot print.  It's pretty obvious, to even the most casual observer, that tower 7 suffered more damage than any other tower that didn't collapse, just by virtue of the fact that it collapsed.


I'm going to let you in on a secret...any "expert" testimony that these guys have in their documentary are going to be people well outside the mainstream that are looking for recognition or attention.  Their motivations are NOT above board or beyond reproach.  I don't know any engineers or structural experts that I take seriously that agree with the conspiracy theorists, and that's because the handful of people providing the "science" behind the explanations are not people who are respected in their respective fields.

i've always found it interesting that the people who are screaming about government ineptitude (ala the last Bush) also think the government is somehow able to pull off an elaborate hoax.

i also love the idiots who say we have to fix the economy and want government spend until it throws up.

Also, there really is no reasoning with conspiracy theorists; they have their belief, and no fact(s) will dissuade them.

Anyway, that's what I believe.

so you're telling me that at least two different news stations who reported the collapse of wtc7 literally less than a minute before it actually collapsed is just a mistake in the heat of the moment?

Before tower 7 collapsed only damage was that parts of it was on fire. tower 3-6 had a lot more structural trauma, parts of the building collapsed and caved without the entire building falling.

Tower 7 had 24 pillars that held up the structure of the building. in order for the building to collapse the way it did (middle caved in a bit, causing the sides to push in, much like a planned demolition), all 24 of those pillars had to collapse virtually at the same time.

therefore 7 hours after the twin towers were hit, all 24 pillars just gave out almost simultaneously without reason? The chances of that is virtually impossible. That's without regarding the fact that there were explosions heard from the building before it collapsed.

I do agree with you that the "experts" might all have an ulterior motive (whether it be fame or fortune), however no claim gets taken seriously unless there is sufficient reasoning and hard evidence behind it. The claims and evidence provided from witnesses and experts all fit. That's the dis-concerning fact behind it, it all fits too well.

Edit: by no means do I believe the conspiracy theory to be the right one, however i do believe there is a fair amount of truth behind it.

Also see 911 Loose Change. Very interesting debate. We could go on for days.

Actually it's things like facts, logic, etc. that make me believe.
As an atheist, (formerly catholic), I can say facts dissuaded me.

None of their claims ARE taken seriously, so I agree with that sentence.


As for the comments about explosions, etc.  Have you ever witnessed a destructive structural test?  There is a significant release of energy, and a lot of that is translated into sound waves.

Think of snapping a rubber band, or breaking a pencil.  Now amplify that a couple million fold, and reduce the pitch since larger structures have a lower fundamental frequency.  To the untrained ear it will sound like any other explosion they've heard in the movies.


Personally, I would never trust first hand recollection of people subjected to such a traumatic event, since your short term memory gets majorly interfered with in situations involving large amounts of adrenaline and generally traumatic circumstances.

That leaves video and structural analysis as reliable resources.

The stuff only fits well with the conspiracy theory because it's being made to fit well.  When you tell a lie, you can make it say whatever you like.  But the fact of the matter, is the only people who believe the conspiracy theorists regarding the structural collapses, don't have a solid understanding of the underlying principles, and have simply heard the conspiracy theorists spin a false explanation that sounds convincing due to that lack of understanding.

Never trust a politically motivated documentary to teach you science or engineering.

it's facts that make you believe? hmmm. if you have facts then what's with the proselytizing?

I'll try.  I'll try really hard. 

While I may seem prideful in my apparent need to rebut things...I really just don't like the dissemination of inaccurate information and falsehoods.