[Closed] 9/11 documentary

I'll get the Bourbons..

[img] [/img]

Have you been to the museum?

Brought to you by the same film makers who faked the moon landings.

Those fonts scream class.

I thought it was hit by some aeroplanes, stacked with jet fuel and then disintegrated.

I thought it was hit by some aeroplanes, stacked with jet fuel and then disintegrated.

Oh bollocks, the steel didn't melt. Must not get drawn in. Go and heat up plastic to a low level (so it doesn't melt) and watch how it's structural properties change. The steel did not turn to liquid, it started to creep when the temperatures went over roughly 300oC. It's not a difficult concept to wrap your head around, the heat makes it expand (add heat to anything and thermal expansion is a given), this impacts greater forces into the connections, the steel deflects beyond it's elastic limits, the combination of all this meant the connections failed and the building collapsed in on itself, any 'exploding' member say have been a sudden release in energy when the connections failed.

Stop spreading this shite. Leslie E Robinson designed an amazing structure that performed incredibly well under the fire loads and damage imparted to them by planes flown into them by psychotic murderers. The biggest mistake on the day was sending people back to their desks at the start of the attacks.

Conspiracy theories are all well and good but when they can be disproved so easily but the facts ignored I can understand why the world is in such a crap place led by a bunch of muppets.

Grrrrrr.

I'd like to see a list of those experts and see how many of them are working, and as what.

Pass the tin foil

The overwhelmingly by argument for a non-conspiracy is that there's never been a whilstleblower from the inside. A conspiracy such as this would of involved hundreds, if not thousands of people. Not one person has come forward and said "I was on th inside" 15+ years later. In the era of wiki leaks and social media the ex prime minister can't even keep it quiet that he likes felatio from a dead pig, let alone thousands of people conspiring together to kill thousands of their countrymen. See also Kennedy assignation, moon landings and climate change. Ps vapour trails are not real either. I have no doubt that governments have done some truly evils nefarious things that you only ever find out a small part of it if your lucky, but the tr scale of collusion that would of had to be involved in 9/11 makes it impossible to to keep secret

So a fire from office furnishings was hot enough to cause wtc 7 to perfectly drop at free fall speeds?

There's an awful lot of buildings at risk around the world then.

There's also a lot of very qualified people on the film seriously questioning how they came down.

Creeping steel does not come down perfectly like that, with all the floors collapsing away to allow free fall speeds.

And also a section on how people just don't want to accept things like this as it makes them feel unsafe.

I'd like to see a list of those experts and see how many of them are working, and as what.

Petition is here, 2945 architects and engineers have signed it and are listed

http://www.ae911truth.org/signatures/ae.html

A driver losing control of an Audi TT managed to half demolish a house near me, and yet a ginormous passenger aircraft packed full of fuel isn't enough to topple a building by itself? Right you are.

Petition is here, 2945 architects and engineers have signed it and are listed

A petition for investigation is not proof.

Mate I'm a chartered structural engineer with over twenty years experience. On the day the planes hit I watched it unfold like many others and my first thought was get everyone out. When the first tower dropped it had been stood up after the impact with aviation fuel for over an hour. The structure was designed in such a way that it had a clear footprint and that the columns were all on the external elevations and central cores. It collapsed in a manner not unexpected for the damage it had received.

Please I've read up on this a number of times, but not for the best part of a decade so may be a little rusty. If you are seriously interested there are a number of reputable articles, by you know, real experts, about the collapse mechanisms of the towers, go knock yourself out. I know we're not meant to listen to experts in our post truth world, but try, please. Otherwise come to me when you're sick, I have some magic water, only & £100 for 10ml, cures everything, trust me I have no medical background apart from watching casualty in the 90s...

Wtc 7 was not hit by a plane.

The nist investigator said there were no explosions, whereas countless witnesses said that there were. Whatever the truth the nist investigation was very poor, which is one reason so many people have signed the petition.

Don't watch the documentary then, just ignore all the knowledgeable people on it, because the expertise on this forum far outweighs them.

I just said that it was compelling, and interesting.

A bit like the Sand Wars one.

There are some proper dohtards on this thread, a house is not designed or built like a high rise tower... The wind loads the wtc was designed for would probably catch a plane.

I'm out of here, racing in the morning....

It’s been done to death for 16 years, never seen any compelling evidence yet.

The structure was designed in such a way that it had a clear footprint and that the columns were all on the external elevations and central cores. It collapsed in a manner not unexpected for the damage it had received.

I remember seeing a documentary a really long time ago, way before 9/11, about how the construction meant it could collapse, and how laden had targeted it before.

The key issues brought up were the speed of collapse, free fall and no resistence from any floors below, and why did wtc 7 also come down like that, from one failed beam which was at the side.

There's a lot of people with similar levels of qualification to you that are commenting on it on the film.

It’s been done to death for 16 years, never seen any compelling evidence yet

2945 architects and engineers are unhappy enough about it to want a proper investigation...

And there was no jet fuel at the wtc 7 site, only burning office furnishings, which should not bring down a steel supported building.

the steel didn't melt

Quite a few eye witness report running steel, like a foundry.

Yaaaaawn.

@turnerguty - I refer you to my previous point - why, in what would be the biggest conspiracy in history, have we not had one "insider" come forward in 16 years when information and channels to the great unwashed are more available than then they've ever been at any point in history??? Not one credible insider??? Lots of people picking at threads externally, but no idea be to my knowledge has come forward has come forward and said "it was a conspiracy and I was in the inside and here's the proof" - they would make millions, so why haven't they done it???

They couldn't even keep watergate secret in the 60's, wihich involved a handful of people, pre mass channels of communication. How are hundreds if not thousands of people going to keep this underwraps - they paper trail alone would be devastating! Of course you could consider me one of the "sheeple", but if Donald trump can't even bury his recordings taliking about groping women when he's president, how would you co-ordinate this mass silence?

1) Isnt it impossible to fly a big aeroplane at such a low speed/altitude?

2) where did all the millions of tonnes of rubble go?

Afaik, they were hauling IN rubble to dampen down the 'fires'

I haven't read Judy woods book, just gleaned over some observations on YouTube.

TurnerGuy, If you want people to think you're an idiot, just say you like Donald Trump. Saves all that nonsense you posted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#9.2F11_and_collapse

As the North Tower collapsed on September 11, 2001, heavy debris hit 7 World Trade Center, damaging the south face of the building[30]:18 (PDF p. 22) and starting fires that continued to burn throughout the afternoon.[6]:16, 18 The collapse also caused damage to the southwest corner between Floors 7 and 17 and on the south face between Floor 44 and the roof; other possible structural damage included a large vertical gash near the center of the south face between Floors 24 and 41.[6]:17 The building was equipped with a sprinkler system, but had many single-point vulnerabilities for failure: the sprinkler system required manual initiation of the electrical fire pumps, rather than being a fully automatic system; the floor-level controls had a single connection to the sprinkler water riser; and the sprinkler system required some power for the fire pump to deliver water.[31]:11 Additionally, water pressure was low, with little or no water to feed sprinklers.[32]:23–30

After the North Tower collapsed, some firefighters entered 7 World Trade Center to search the building. They attempted to extinguish small pockets of fire, but low water pressure hindered their efforts.[33] Over the course of the day, fires burned out of control on several floors of 7 World Trade Center, the flames visible on the east side of the building.[34] During the afternoon, the fire was also seen on floors 6–10, 13–14, 19–22, and 29–30.[30]:24 (PDF p. 28) In particular, the fires on floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 continued to burn out of control during the afternoon.[7]

At approximately 2:00 pm, firefighters noticed a bulge in the southwest corner of 7 World Trade Center between the 10th and 13th floors, a sign that the building was unstable and might collapse.[35] During the afternoon, firefighters also heard creaking sounds coming from the building.[36] Around 3:30 pm, FDNY Chief Daniel A. Nigro decided to halt rescue operations, surface removal, and searches along the surface of the debris near 7 World Trade Center and evacuate the area due to concerns for the safety of personnel.[37] The fire expanded the girders of the building, causing some to lose their structural integrity. This led column number 79, a critical column supporting a large part of the 13th floor, to buckle, causing the floors above it to collapse to the fifth floor; however, this could not be seen from outside the building. The structure also developed cracks in the facade just before the entire building started to fall.[6]:21[38] According to FEMA, this collapse started at 5:20:33 pm EDT when the east mechanical penthouse started crumbling.[5]:23[39] Differing times are given as to what time the building completely collapsed:[39] at 5:21:10 pm EDT according to FEMA,[5]:23 and at 5:20:52 pm EDT according to NIST.[6]:19, 21, 50–51 There were no casualties associated with the collapse.[38] NIST found no evidence to support conspiracy theories such as the collapse being the result of explosives; it found that a combination of factors including physical damage, fire and the building's unusual construction set off a chain-reaction collapse.[40]

That seems pretty believable to me with multiple references and citations, rather than some delusions posted on youtube by '911experts'.

I think that you have to be out of your mind to think that there is a conspiracy that has withheld under the scrutiny that this event has received.

There is video footage of what actually happened.

I feel like I am taking crazy pills.

1) Isnt it impossible to fly a big aeroplane at such a low speed/altitude?

2) where did all the millions of tonnes of rubble go?

1) no - how do you think pilots land planes???

2) predominantly New Jersey under contract from the New York port authority. All the the talk of the steel and debris being removed off site quickly before anyone could forensically test it is some what nuffilied by the fact it sat in New Jersey (all of 80 miles away) for years

@sofaboy

1) I mean flying at a constant altitude (not dropping!) over a sustained period of time

2) in the aftermath, the story was that one of bush's cronies had bulk purchased the rubble and hauled it out to Texas.

But there should have been waaaay more rubble at the site, (1/4 of a million tonnes?)
Where did it go?

Bear in mind that the other wtc buildings were destroyed too.

1) It's not impossible to fly low, any more than it's impossible to fly high.
2) how much rubble was at the site, and what do you think happened to the rubble you think should have been there?

1) I mean flying at a constant altitude (not dropping!) over a sustained period of time

2) in the aftermath, the story was that one of bush's cronies had bulk purchased the rubble and hauled it out to Texas

1) as above, if a plane can fly constant and level at 40,000 ft (the average height of a long haul flight), it can fly constant and level at 1000ft (the rough height it the the towers). once a plane is up, it can fly at whatever height it likes (with mitigating factors of fuel, airspace etc).

2) it took over 3 months to put the fires out on site. It took over 8 months To fully clear the site with hundreds of people working day and night. Why would one of bushes cronies buy the rubble?? As aggregate there's no value in it as it's so mixed in composition and it clearly wasn't a cover up to get it off site as it took 8 months???

8 months of site clearance is a lot of rubble. A shit ton of tubble. Kind of like two sky scrapers of rubble

There's no conspiracy- put down the tin foil hat

8 months of site clearance is a lot of rubble.

I highly doubt anyone would be rushing to buy any of it.

The insurance and more importantly the re-insurance market has been preparing since the the event for the mesothelioma claims that will flood in within the next 15-20 years. At some point someone will bring a class action which will make Grenfell (which will break all previous awards in PL & PI claims) look like peanuts

I like the tin foil hat area of you tube, it's fun "the grey pixel in this 240p photo from 1993 is proof of the next space weapon". They must be posted by our lizard overlord as a distraction.

Apparently "They live" was a documentry. Ronny pipers wrestling carrer was a fake out distraction technique.

I enjoy reading about the conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks, for one main reason is that there is a lot of footage and eye witness reports about it. Probably one of the more “filmed” events in recent history, which gives the opportunity to view with either open or sceptical eyes.
Plenty of tin foil hatters berating the governments sources for evidence and expert opinion, but there are some credible sources who have been silenced by either government influence or pure journalists ridicule.

If you read and watch with an open mind sure you can come up with a myriad of excuses and theories, yet the overwhelming evidence suggests the TV footage wasn’t faked nor manipulated.

But we’re at that time of year when the subject matter repeats itself, for those conspiracy theorists it’s now ingrained in the calendar and for them needs commemorating.

[url= https://www.google.co.uk/amp/amp.timeinc.net/time/4965093/conspiracy-theories-beliefs ]Seems like conspiracy theorists like to be special and noticed [/url]

...but we shouldn’t tell them that

Apparently "They live" was a documentry. Ronny pipers wrestling carrer was a fake out distraction technique.

Ronnie piper, he was roddy piper’s carer.

If the world was round as they say, why didn't the towers fall off sideways? Hmmmm. Isn't that the real conspiracy here? Kennedy knew about this, and look what happened to him. Princess Diana was also an elite head of state loved by millions, also murdered ....two world leaders murdered by their own governments? What did they both know? What were they about to tell us?

Look into that.

Do your own research.

Proof.

1) Isnt it impossible to fly a big aeroplane at such a low speed/altitude?

So a fire from office furnishings was hot enough to cause wtc 7 to perfectly drop at free fall speeds?

the fire was from hundreds of tonnes of jet fuel and the building did not fall at freefall speed. If you look at the recordings and time them its clear it was not freefall speed.

http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm

did you know gullible is not in the dictionary?

The planes were not being flown at low speed, this is more myth. The first plane was between 429 and 494mph, the second 537 and 586mph at impact, which "exceeded even the emergency dive speed," for that type of aircraft.

I always like the traces of products found in thermite were found claims, as there is no other possible explanation of why there would be iron oxide and aluminium in a sky scraper struck by a commercial airplane.

The overwhelmingly by argument for a non-conspiracy is that there's never been a whilstleblower from the inside. A conspiracy such as this would of involved hundreds, if not thousands of people. Not one person has come forward and said "I was on the inside" 15+ years later.

For me this is the key arguement against the conspiracy theorists

anyone ever met a conspiracist who only believe one conspiracy?
We all know our govt lies to us as at various times but these folk always pick the least likely things as their examples

Junkyard - lazarus

anyone ever met a conspiracist who only believe one conspiracy?

Nope. Because it's not the individual conspiracy that holds them in thrall - it's the satisfaction they get from mining secret knowledge others are blind to.

The problem is, this sort of "theory" and i use the word carefully, is generally taken up by not very intelligent minority.

The sort of people who say things like "but planes can't fly at low altitudes" or similar.....

There is no point trying to have a logical and rational discussion with these morons, they've made there minds up already, nothing that can be said and no evidence or science that can be explained can change there blinkered mind. Unfortunately, the sort of people who believe this sort of thing often do so because there own lives are so dull and un-eventful they find it exciting and interesting to actually create some attention from claiming ridiculous theories etc.

Consider the following scientific facts:

1) the WTC towers each weighed, according to most sources, around 500,000 tonnes

2) the towers stood around 400m tall

Science tells us that the potential energy in each of those towers was (PE=mgh) 9.81E+11 joules, the same energy as that contained in 235 tonnes of TNT!!

here's what just 2.2 tonnes of a basic ammonium nitrate (fertiliser) explosive (a lot lower velocity blast than TNT, in fact it is rated at just 42%) does to a building:

[img] [/img]

This is why pretty much nothing but small pieces and molten metal were found. The energy in the collapse is absolutely massive, enough to actually melt steel.

Also people say "but the building collapsed as if in freefall"??

Duh, how else would you expect a building to collapse under the force of gravity, especially a build that is characteristically tall and thin, ie, who's CofG is effectively very high off the ground. (ignoring the fact that i haven't actually seen any analysis on the speed of the collapse. Enough video evidence exists that the acceleration profile of the collapse could be calculated, and the forces calculated etc)

And finally, and here the killer blow to all conspiracy theorists:

SO WHAT?

lets say the WTC was blown up by the american government, what are you going to do about ?? The answer of course is nothing. Tomorrow the sun will rise just like it did today regardless of the "truth", and you'll have to go to work to earn money, like you did today, and the world will continue to spin on it's axis. Events of massive magnitude on a human scale (like the WTC attack) are, in the grand scheme of things, utterly irrelevant.......

Interestingly I have a friend who is a top notch engineer and well above average intelligence who whilst not believing all the tin foil hat stuff about the twin towers does believe that there was more to it than plane hits tower, tower falls down and will not be shifted from this beief

WT7 was a controlled demolition,.... please look into it. This means that the other two towers were too.

The second plane's nose emerged intact out the other side of the building? I'm afraid that is impossible.

And yes, many experts have said that a commercial plane could not fly at the high speed, altitude, flight path to impact quoted in the report.

Unfortunately the vast majority of people would rather live with the untruth, it's more comfortable that way.

say a demolition expert had a call to say do this job and we'll pay you a couple of million dollars for a weeks work, but never mention it to anyone or you will die,....there would be some takers.

False flag events are not new, The Nazi's did one and blamed the Polish - Reichstag fire.

and why all the name calling and berating? It is possible that people have different opinions, and they might be right and you might be wrong or vis a vis.

^^ Donald is that you?? 😉

WT7 was a controlled demolition,....

Have you seen the preparation required for a controlled demolition?

How was all that work performed and nobody in the building noticed?

Utterly brilliant loon fest

e'll pay you a couple of million dollars for a weeks work, but never mention it to anyone or you will die,....there would be some

The second plane's nose emerged intact out the other side of the building? I'm afraid that is impossible.

And yes, many experts have said that a commercial plane could not fly at the high speed, altitude, flight path to impact quoted in the report.

say a demolition expert had a call to say do this job and we'll pay you a couple of million dollars for a weeks work, but never mention it to anyone or you will die,....there would be some takers.

FWIW i do agree a demolition expert could demolish this, or any other, building - who has denied this and what do you think that just proved?

maxtorque - Member

The problem is, this sort of "theory" and i use the word carefully, is generally taken up by [b]not very intelligent minority[/b].

The sort of people who say things like "but planes can't fly at low altitudes" or similar.....

Unfortunately, you're wrong. I have a friend who's certainly above average intelligence and a brilliant designer, and he buys into all of this. I shared an office with another guy for four years who is a legitimate genius imo and he also went deep into these conspiracies.

It only takes about three "facts". Steel melts at C. Jets can't fly at Y. The building fell like Z...and you have the fuel for a conspiracy. And unless these "facts" happen to be in your area of professional expertise it requires a lot of study and energy to understand and disprove them. This is the part they don't do.

This is a phenomenon that's not going to go away and it'll probably get a whole lot worse as we go further and further down the rabbit whole of internet life.

Unfortunately the vast majority of people would rather live with the untruth, it's more comfortable that way.

No. Some people like to believe rubbish like this because it makes them feel superior. They like to think they're 'special' because they know the truth.
Any amount of facts isn't going to change their minds.

9:48 .... this policeman appears to have a crystal ball...

9:48 .... this policeman appears to have a crystal ball...

Or maybe he'd been speaking to the firefighters...

As posted on the previous page:

At approximately 2:00 pm, firefighters noticed a bulge in the southwest corner of 7 World Trade Center between the 10th and 13th floors, a sign that the building was unstable and might collapse.[35] During the afternoon, firefighters also heard creaking sounds coming from the building.[36] Around 3:30 pm, FDNY Chief Daniel A. Nigro decided to halt rescue operations, surface removal, and searches along the surface of the debris near 7 World Trade Center and evacuate the area due to concerns for the safety of personnel.

the ex prime minister can't even keep it quiet that he likes felatio from a dead pig,

And yes, many experts have said that a commercial plane could not fly at the high speed, altitude, flight path to impact quoted in the report.

Or maybe he'd been speaking to the firefighters...

As posted on the previous page:

it's going to fall down now.... is he a structural engineer? Were the firefighters.

Buildings do not freefall collapse due to a few office fires.

I would suggest the report you quote is BS. Like the whole commission report, so it's of little use to me.

9:48 .... this policeman appears to have a crystal ball...

So a policeman who could probably be readily identified from his badge, is in on the conspiracy?

it's going to fall down now.... is he a structural engineer? Were the firefighters.

No, but the firefighters are probably quite experienced at observing structural failure from fire damage.

errmmm - does every aircraft not fly in a controlled manner at slow speed near to the ground when landing?

9/11 flight speed video.

what I thought TJ clearly they can fly at low levels and speed or they cannot take off.

An old American political ‘fact’ designed and spread to discredit the opposition, just like Trump does every day of the week.

Dave did not sue - this does not make it true but it is interesting.

No, but the firefighters are probably quite experienced at observing structural failure from fire damage

experienced enough to know exactly when it's going to collapse? Very doubtful.

experienced enough to know exactly when it's going to collapse? Very doubtful.

So the police and firefighters were in on it as well?

Is that what you are saying?

drop at free fall speeds?

Anyone willing to repeat this most basic of myths/lies isn’t worth listening to.

I’ve not watched the documentary, but I’d bet my house that this lie is repeated over and over and over.

None of the buildings fell at “free fall” speeds, or even close.

So the police and firefighters were in on it as well?

Is that what you are saying?

no.

I've been riding my bike.

So the police and firefighters were in on it as well?
Is that what you are saying?

no.

So what is significance of the responders predicting it was about to fall?

I remember seeing a programme on telly a while back about the causes of the trade towers collapse, can’t remember which channel, but it went into exhaustive detail, including computer simulations and analysis of the construction, materials and the effects on them by the impact of a large passenger jet traveling at several hundred knots with tons of highly flammable avgas onboard.
Not sure if this is connected to it, but it does explain certain things.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2001/worldtradecenter.shtml
http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/NationalGeographic/cache/9-11-science-and-conspiracy-4067.html

Anyone willing to repeat this most basic of myths/lies isn’t worth listening to.

I’ve not watched the documentary, but I’d bet my house that this lie is repeated over and over and over.

None of the buildings fell at “free fall” speeds, or even close.

Anyone willing to repeat this most basic of myths/lies isn’t worth listening to.

I’ve not watched the documentary, but I’d bet my house that this lie is repeated over and over and over.

something for you.

https://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/911NutPhysics.HTM

Something for you.

Apologies that it’s all in actual written words, no easy to digest video with comic sans text overlays.

So what is significance of the responders predicting it was about to fall?

If someone higher up than you tells you something you take it as truth, especially in a situation like this. So someone new it was going to collapse. Given the timescale, the ability to properly diagnose the damage would I have thought been nigh on impossible. This was no small building.

This only leads to the reality,...someone higher up the chain new WC7 was rigged to be demolished.