Thread: 9/11 was an inside job

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

It's not true, so you can stop doing it now.

Science, as used by Palisades observatory, states that there's no seismic evidence to support the contention that an airliner crashed at the Pentagon on 9/11/2001.

Wake up Hazz.

Lack of evidence is not proof that anything else happened.


Bugger off, ENT. You don't even have any cabbages, whereas I have one, and Harry is a three-cabbage general.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

That's the Bush, Cheney Rumsfeld tactic.

The trouble is, you can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but not all the people all the time.

So the official 9/11 story slowly crumbles and more people are waking up to the horrible truth that the US government will happily bump off its own citizens for money.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Lack of evidence is not proof that anything else happened.

Eh? Make sense!
Wanker.

Tell that to a court.

You've got to be a believer to have come out with that!
Seen any hungry ghosts lately? Or do you pray to sky fairies?

Lack of evidence means nothing there, chappy, no plane at the Pentagon, as a plane crash would generate a huge signal, as seen on the WTC and Shanksville seismograph readings.

There'd also be a lot more airliner debris around.

Funny how there wasn't much found at any of the so called airliner crash sites that day.

The Shanksville plane crashed after it disintegrated in smoke and bits while in the air, giving a wide scatter of debris before crashing and generating such a bang that the resonance was picked up by seismographs, as one would expect from a plane crash.

Same as at the WTC, both towers 1 and 2, when impacted, gave off massive resonances at the times of impact.

Bush lied when asked by reporters for definite evidence of the plane, declaring that there wasn't any as the airliner just vapourized.

Rumsfeld said that a missile hit the Pentagon and that UA93 was shot down over Pennsylvania.

Which story are you gonna believe, the Bush version or the Rumsfeld one?

Or scientific evidence from a national seismic observatory?

Or maybe cherry pick the bits you want, mix n' match to suite your belief in the goodness of powers that be?

Ya daft believer.

Originally Posted by ENT

The Shanksville plane crashed after it disintegrated in smoke and bits while in the air, giving a wide scatter of debris before crashing and generating such a bang that the resonance was picked up by seismographs, as one would expect from a plane crash.

You really are quite dim.

If a plane disintegrates in the air, giving a wide scatter of debris, there is no mass left in a concentrated area to smash into the ground......at least not enough to give a seismographic reading consistent with a plane crash.


You can't have it both ways, ENT.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Originally Posted by ENT

The Shanksville plane crashed after it disintegrated in smoke and bits while in the air, giving a wide scatter of debris before crashing and generating such a bang that the resonance was picked up by seismographs, as one would expect from a plane crash.

If a plane disintegrates in the air, giving a wide scatter of debris, there is no mass left in a concentrated area to smash into the ground......at least not enough to give a seismographic reading consistent with a plane crash.

Take it in slowly, dopey.

You're assuming that the alleged plane completely disintegrated in mid air, which it did not.
A wide scatter of debris means that the alleged plane disintegrated as it travelled over a distance, the remaining bulk allegedly crashing into an open cast mine area.

The big bang picked up by the seismographs was not necessarily from a plane crashing.
A ground based explosion there could give readings of the same amplitude.

The official story is that one of its engines was found buried deep at the crash site, that'd give a fairly large impact noise.

Not consistent with a whole plane crashing though.


Oh...sorry. I forgot you had no sense of proportion.

Disappearing plane,...

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Not consistent with a whole plane crashing though

That's right.

Originally Posted by ENT

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

That's the Bush, Cheney Rumsfeld tactic.

The trouble is, you can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but not all the people all the time.

So the official 9/11 story slowly crumbles and more people are waking up to the horrible truth that the US government will happily bump off its own citizens for money.

Nothing is "crumbling".

You just keep repeating the same stupid fairy stories, and intelligent, sane people keep pointing out that they're a load of fucking rubbish.

Just for Harry, Ld and Hazz et al,

Another, which plane?

Instead of showing stupid grainy video, why don't you go back at look at the ample multiple videos that showed the crashes and all of which are posted in this thread.

You're just repeating your stupid bollocks again.

FFS mods, this thread is just looping, just DH the fucker.

Or at least creatively re-name it .

Originally Posted by ENT

The big bang picked up by the seismographs was not necessarily from a plane crashing.
A ground based explosion there could give readings of the same amplitude.

So "they" buried a whole lot of aircraft parts (including engines) and cadavers shallowly in a field at Shanksville one dark night, put some explosives on top, and detonated the fucker, driving those bits far into the ground, and giving a seismographic signature consistent with a plane crash.


Sorry sir, you can't come in here......you appear to be of unsound mind.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Instead of showing stupid grainy video, why don't you go back at look at the ample multiple videos that showed the crashes and all of which are posted in this thread.

C.mon Harry, post those videos you're on about, vids that actually show the aircraft hitting the towers.

Then explain them logically, if you can.

Same as the jumpers and trapped people waving for help at WTC, all bullshit, all the product of
Gelatin.
Thoughts on the WTC Artists

who occupied the floors 91 and 92 of the North tower for four years, where the supposed airliner crashed into , just below the floors above from which dummies were hurled and seemingly trapped people waved from windows.

Jumpers? Windows full of waving people? Impossible! Why?

Because, according to;

Multi-Storey Buildings in Steel, Godfrey, GB (Editor); Second Edition; Collins, London, England, 1985

WORLD TRADE CENTER, NEW YORK, USA; Pages 162-4.
Architectural design: M. Yamasaki and Associates, Troy, Michigan; E. Roth and Sons, New York.
Structural design: Skilling, Helle, Jackson, Seattle.
Built: 1966/1973.

"The window openings are 1.98 x 0.48 m, are infilled with bronze-tinted solar-heat rejecting glass fitted into aluminium frames and sealed with Neoprene gaskets."
Because the windows are only 2ft wide and only one adult to stand in front of and just over 6 ft high, sealed and bolted into place and can NOT be opened.

There were NO openable half windows there.

Look at the video below, and you'll see the impossible, people crowded up to two at a time leaning out of the wall length windows, some of which are shown half open.




Some of the limbs shown waving are gigantic compared to human body size.
The dummies used the same repetitive movements and rarely changed position or action, mechanical.



Note also that bodies of jumpers coming from towers don't even twitch, no flapping and flailing of arms and legs, all seemingly quite composed as they fell.
Some seem capable of making super jumps waay out into space, catapulted.

And that's it, the job was well composed.

The windows were oo narrow for two people to fit in the opening, and..
All the windows of this fully airconditioned tower were sealed shut.

Nobody could lean out and wave from them or jump from them without unfastening them and removing them in their entirety from the walls.

Not a quick job, and smashing them would create so much jagged glass stuck in the frames that easy egress would be impossible.

So no show, no jumpers, no people trapped and waving for help from the top of North tower WTC 9/11.

^^ Yes, how about the "TD tinfoil nutjobs repeatedly posting the same old bullshit conspiracy nonsense about 9/11 ad nauseam".

I think it has a ring to it.

Originally Posted by ENT

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Instead of showing stupid grainy video, why don't you go back at look at the ample multiple videos that showed the crashes and all of which are posted in this thread.

C.mon Harry, post those videos you're on about, vids that actually show the aircraft hitting the towers.

Stop being a c u n t ENT, you know damn well this thread is full of them.

Come up with something new you boring bastard.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Originally Posted by ENT

The big bang picked up by the seismographs was not necessarily from a plane crashing.
A ground based explosion there could give readings of the same amplitude.

So "they" buried a whole lot of aircraft parts (including engines) and cadavers shallowly in a field at Shanksville one dark night, put some explosives on top, and detonated the fucker, driving those bits far into the ground, and giving a seismographic signature consistent with a plane crash.

You need your head read if you think that'd work, skippy.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by ENT

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Instead of showing stupid grainy video, why don't you go back at look at the ample multiple videos that showed the crashes and all of which are posted in this thread.

C.mon Harry, post those videos you're on about, vids that actually show the aircraft hitting the towers.

Stop being a c u n t ENT, you know damn well this thread is full of them.

Come up with something new you boring bastard.

Harry, you mental midget, just post the vids if you say they exist.

They don't though, beancounter.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

^^ Yes, how about the "TD tinfoil nutjobs repeatedly posting the same old bullshit conspiracy nonsense about 9/11 ad nauseam".

I think it has a ring to it.

The only ring is the one in yer head, sandcrab.

Sun been getin to ya lately, ya poor little thingy?

I imagine many of the windows were blown out from the force of the crashes on the buildings and the building reacting to the crashes. I'm sure some were deliberately broken by desperate people too.


The windows in the World Trade Center were 22" wide. They were designed to be wide enough that the average person's shoulders would just touch the edges when he stood in the wondow. This gave the person a feeling that there was some support, something other than a pane of glass, between him and a 60 story fall if he pressed himself upon the glass. It was designed to accomadate people uncomfortable with heights.

The panes are held in place with mastic. This is a strip of glue. It flexes, but when it bonds to glass and aluminum, it is incredibly strong. You can body slam it at full force and it won't come off the glass or the metal. The glass is also tempered and laminated. You can smack it with furniture all you want. It won't break.

You have to cut the mastic in order to remove the glass, You force a glazer's knife in between the glass and the mastic in a space about 1/8" long. The knife is sharpened so you can cut the mastic from the glass as you push the knife. When you break a significant portion of the mastic, you can force the loose area and the rest of the mastic will peel away. But if you try to push the whole thing at once, you'll just hurt yourself.

The exterior walls of the World Trade Center were load bearing. They were not there for decoration, or just to hold the glass. When the planes struck, the loads on the exterior walls shifted and some of the glass separated. Some of it was loosened and could be pushed away. And some of it was attacked by people with metal objects, like fire extinguishers, that were able to eventually break the glass.

When you look at those pictures of the people in the windows, look also at how much of the glass is still there. Those buildings were remarkably strong.