Could 9/11 have been an inside job?

This is a seven minute long video, explaining that it was NOT a commercial airliner plane that had hit the World Trade Center, but a JSTARS-EC10 Millitary airliner. Surprisingly enough, the EC-10 shoots off a missle right before it hits the WTC, as you can clearly see in the video.

It is argued that the explosion you see right before the plane hits, is actually the ferring for the landing gear making contact, but as you notice in the video, the explosion takes place before the plane makes contact with the tower(notice the shadow of the plane). And, this explosion takes place further to the right of the aircraft, clearly proving that these are two sepperate events.

Here is the Link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVzbQMT7PVE

Discus.

It might have been, I mean you have to think logically.

...just like my grandpa is an alien, he's got LAZERS PEWPEWPEW

You should know, that if a missile had actually hit the WTC, it would have done a hell of a lot more damage. Probably would have taken out three times as much, and the building probably would have collapsed immediatly.Tolwan

I don't think so. Click here or here. They pretty much debunked everything.

Sooo what about the people that died on those flights?Franken_Berry

They live in Atlantis now. It's trueI saw it on the nterweb.

****, I just had a radical new idea!

What if, well how do i say this...

Well, there's 2 planes you see. And there's these terrorists by Osama, you see. Well, these guys sneak onto planes with knives and guns and *gasp* HIJACK it. And, like, everyone's screaming and dialing their cellphones to call friends and family. And, like, this one plane hits one of hte towers. And, like, the OTHER plane actually hits the tower too!

I know, I know, its so new and radical and hard to believe!

Well, first we have to agree on what an "inside job" would be.BranKetra

something dirty, no doubt.

shame on u!

no. I will never believe that BS about it being an inside job untill i hear is directly from the president, and the entire government. until then no video or comment by any uninformed self proclamed demolition and airline expert, physics majors, can make me believe other wise.SaintLeonidas

Except if it was a giant conspiracy, the president would have been in on it. You came to the right conclusion, but by the wrong way...

But yep, it's very obvious that everything happened as the official story goes. I wasn't there, but I'm sure the people there knew what they saw, not to mention the families of all those who died on the planes probably drove them to the airport. I have to say that all these people who can be fooled into believing stuff like this is way scarier than Al Qaeda can ever hope to be.

Why would the government want to do that though?whos_next000

you should wacth the south park ep about it

Yes it COULDhave been an inside job but in all likeliness no, and these threads are really getting annoying. There should be a subforum dedicated to conspiracy theories...Fetechini

No, it happened exactly how the president said it did. Why would he ever lie?SpaceMoose

It isn't just the President who is telling the same story,in fact, other than internet quacks this is a done deal. Why is it so hard to accept what happened?

No, it happened exactly how the president said it did. Why would he ever lie?SpaceMoose

FYI and because one should get FACTS straight before stating opinions...the report wasn't made by the president. :roll:

It isn't just the President who is telling the same story,in fact, other than internet quacks this is a done deal. Why is it so hard to accept what happened?

dicpunch

I'm not saying that I believe those conspiracy theories. It's just that I have little particular reason to believe the government's version either. I'm in the "who knows" category. Also, for the life of me, I never could figure out why Bush tried to prevent the 9/11 commission from happening...

Anyway, people rising from the dead to forgive my sins (whatever sense that even makes) seems more fantastical than any conspiracy my imagination could conjure up, so we clearly have a difference in what constitutes "proof."

This is a seven minute long video, explaining that it was NOT a commercial airliner plane that had hit the World Trade Center, but a JSTARS-EC10 Millitary airliner. Surprisingly enough, the EC-10 shoots off a missle right before it hits the WTC, as you can clearly see in the video.

It is argued that the explosion you see right before the plane hits, is actually the ferring for the landing gear making contact, but as you notice in the video, the explosion takes place before the plane makes contact with the tower(notice the shadow of the plane). And, this explosion takes place further to the right of the aircraft, clearly proving that these are two sepperate events.

Here is the Link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVzbQMT7PVE

Discus.

kniLLinkkniL

first of all no it wasn't an inside job....people who think it is should stop watching the X-files...2nd if you expect the world to believe, and dyslexic C student Texan president had a part in the worst terrorist attack in the world to date than you need some help

[QUOTE="SpaceMoose"]No, it happened exactly how the president said it did. Why would he ever lie?LJS9502_basic

FYI and because one should get FACTS straight before stating opinions...the report wasn't made by the president. :roll:

I assume you are talking about the 9/11 Commission's Report?

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (9/11 Comission)

• Jamie Gorelick, while serving in the Department of Justice under the Clinton administration, developed the policy that prevented communication between various government law enforcement and intelligence agencies, specifically the FBI and CIA. (the "wall memo").[4] She also is on the board of United Technologies. Gorelick's firm has agreed to represent Prince Mohammed al Faisal in the suit by the 9/11 families. The families contend that al Faisal has legal responsibility for the 9/11 attacks.
• Thomas Kean has a history of investments that link him to Saudi Arabian investors who have financially supported both George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden in the past. One example is his former business connections to Khalid bin Mahfouz, an alleged terrorist financier. He was also at one point or still is on the board of Pepsi Bottling, Amerada Hess, UnitedHealth Group, CIT Group and Aramark.
• Fred F. Fielding has done legal work for two of Bush's leading "Pioneer" fund-raisers. Fielding also works for a law firm lobbying for Spirit Airlines and United Airlines.
• Slade Gorton has close ties to Boeing, which built all the planes destroyed on 9/11, and his law firm represents several major airlines, including Delta Air Lines.
• James Thompson is the head of a law firm that lobbies for American Airlines, and he has previously represented United Airlines.
• Richard Ben-Veniste has represented Democratic National Chairman Terry McAuliffe, and continues to represent Boeing and United Airlines.
• Max Cleland, former U.S. Senator, has received $300,000 from the airline industry. He publicly complained about the White House's refusal to cooperate, then was appointed head of the U.S. Export/Import Bank by the president and resigned from the Commission.
• Lee Hamilton sits on many advisory boards, including those to the CIA, the President's Homeland Security Advisory Council, The United States Commission on National Security, and the US Army.
• Tim Roemer represents Boeing and Lockheed Martin.

Yes, they seem like a nice and impartial group.

[QUOTE="dicpunch"]

It isn't just the President who is telling the same story,in fact, other than internet quacks this is a done deal. Why is it so hard to accept what happened?

SpaceMoose

Well, as a member of the Christian union, I can infer that you are already more than willing to believe things without a ton of evidence, so I see little point in having this argument. And I'm not saying that I believe those conspiracy theories. It's just that I have little particular reason to believe the government's version either. I'm in the "who knows" category. Also, for the life of me, I never could figure out why Bush tried to prevent the 9/11 commission from happening...

Anyway, people rising from the dead to forgive my sins (whatever sense that even makes) seems more fantastical than any conspiracy my imagination could conjure up.

There have been countless organizations independent of the administration that have debunked the photos, videos and other 'evidence'. Click herefor a start.Let me know when you're back.

As far as the inferring about me because I'm a Christian, you are just flat out wrong about it but I'll remain on topic no reason to confuse the issue with prejudices and assumptions.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="SpaceMoose"]No, it happened exactly how the president said it did. Why would he ever lie?SpaceMoose

FYI and because one should get FACTS straight before stating opinions...the report wasn't made by the president. :roll:

I assume you are talking about the 9/11 Commission's Report?

Yes, they seem like a nice and impartial group.

Got to love how in OT someone makes a false statement of fact and when called on it....instead of saying...oops they dig up arbitrary links to something that has no actual bearing on the statement at hand as though that makes them right.

Exhibit One....I bolded your initial statement. Which was not factual.

Exhibit Two...obviously you know you were wrong as you switched the report to a group.

There have been countless organizations independent of the administration that have debunked the photos, videos and other 'evidence'. Click herefor a start.Let me know when you're back.

As far as the inferring about me because I'm a Christian, you are just flat out wrong about it but I'll remain on topic no reason to confuse the issue with prejudices and assumptions.

dicpunch

I already read that article a long time ago. And what part of "not saying I believe those conspiracy theories" didn't you get? I doubted the official version of events long before all of those conspiracy sites popped up, so what makes you think that I believe those?

Also, flat out wrong about what? About you believing in things without evidence? Isn't that the definition of religion?

Got to love how in OT someone makes a false statement of fact and when called on it....instead of saying...oops they dig up arbitrary links to something that has no actual bearing on the statement at hand as though that makes them right.

Exhibit One....I bolded your initial statement. Which was not factual.

Exhibit Two...obviously you know you were wrong as you switched the report to a group.

LJS9502_basic

No, you are the one who brought up the "report" (which you weren't specific about) as opposed to the president's speeches in the days following 9/11. Those speeches are, I'm fairly certain, what cemented the official version of 9/11 for most people.

[QUOTE="dicpunch"]

There have been countless organizations independent of the administration that have debunked the photos, videos and other 'evidence'. Click herefor a start.Let me know when you're back.

As far as the inferring about me because I'm a Christian, you are just flat out wrong about it but I'll remain on topic no reason to confuse the issue with prejudices and assumptions.

SpaceMoose

I already read that article a long time ago. And what part of "not saying I believe those conspiracy theories" didn't you get? I doubted the official version of events long before all of those conspiracy sites popped up, so what makes you think that I believe those?

Also, flat out wrong about what? About you believing in things without evidence? Isn't that the definition of religion?

Actually there is plenty of evidence for religion it's all about how you interpret it. Anyway, I'm late for work. later

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Got to love how in OT someone makes a false statement of fact and when called on it....instead of saying...oops they dig up arbitrary links to something that has no actual bearing on the statement at hand as though that makes them right.

Exhibit One....I bolded your initial statement. Which was not factual.

Exhibit Two...obviously you know you were wrong as you switched the report to a group.

SpaceMoose

No, you are the one who brought up the "report" (which you weren't specific about) as opposed to the president's speeches in the days following 9/11. Those speeches are, I'm fairly certain, what cemented the official version of 9/11 for most people.

Ah now the play on semantics....you said the president was responsible for saying exactly what happened. He was not. You were wrong. Deal.

Ah now the play on semantics....you said the president was responsible for saying exactly what happened. He was not. You were wrong. Deal.

LJS9502_basic

Okay, how did you first learn who was behind 9/11?