Who still thinks the WTC and pentagon were hit by passenger planes?

Question

Check out 9/11 loose change...

Check out 9/11 loose change...
...it explains the demolition theory and also the theory of how the planes could have been military refueling planes. Sure video can be doctored up, but can our gov't be trusted. I love this country and all a great deal, but I just like to make people think...

Answer 1

I've seen Loose Change, and the second edition of Loose Change. There are a legion of truck sized holes in the version of events advocated by those films. For example....There are 11 eye witnesses, including a news reporter who was stuck in traffic near the Pentegon who all indicate a plane struck the building. Loose Change just ignores these 11 eye witnesses. It offers the typical, pat 'men in black' explaination, where nebulous government agents just appear and threaten people so they all say the same thing.

Never mind the fact these accounts were in many cases taken MINUTES after the attack, never mind that the LONE example of a conflicting testimony offered by Loose Change came from a woman who was Inside the Pentegon and no where near a window when the attacks occured. Loose Change just skips over these details. Somehow, Wil Smith and Tommy Lee Jones 'got' to all 11 of the eye witnesses with their 'flashy thing' and made them give similar accounts.

As for the damage and debris, a plane that size hitting a reinforced concrete and steel structure doesn't leave a cartoon silloette of itself in the side of the building. Nor do the wings simple 'sheer off' when smashing into said reinforced concrete and steel at over 400 mph, and land pristinely on the lawn.

A collision such as occured at the Pentagon would obliterate the thin sheetmetal and lightweight aluminum of a commercial airliner. As expected, there was debris found all over, especially inside the building....debris consistant with what what would expect to find (at least per the experts...and not uneducated laymen shilling books)....metal confetti. If you doubt that is what you'd find.....consult the experts. Popular Mechanics has an excellent article on the topic quoting experts in their respective fields.....not uneducated laymen who insist that their accusations can be the 'only explaination'.

And another example of the silliness I'm talking about? The explaination for the WTC given by Loose Change is comical....with Building 7 being especially funny. Larry Silverstein, the man who holds the leases on the 3 buildings that initially destroyed, including Building 7. He is quoted in a 2002 documentary as saying

'I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'You know, we've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is. . .is pull it.' Ah, and they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse.'

According to Mr. Silverstein, he was referring to pulling the firefighters. Per 'Loose Change', he was referring to 'pulling the buildiing.'..actually destroying it.. Per this logic, Mr. Silverstein intentionally demolished Building 7 on September 11, 2001. Here are a few holes in that theory.

1) Mr. Silverstein denies every demolishing the building, indicating that shortly after pulling the firefighters out, the building collapsed of its own accord. That's the testimony of the man they are quoting. We have to acknowledge and ignore the same source, according to Loose Change.

2) Per demolitions experts, it would take about 3 months to wire a building the size of WTC 7. This would include no less than 3500 individual charges, about 12 miles of wiring, and massive cutting on the superstructure of the building. Per Loose Change, this was done in less than 2 hours.....and WHILE the building was engulfed in flames.

3) Per another insinuated theory offered by Loose Change, the building was 'prewired'. That means that the 3500 charges, 12 miles of wire, massive cutting on the superstructure of the buildling, was done...over at least months...in an occupied building, and NO ONE NOTICED. Not a single blasting cap. Not a single primer cord. Not a single cut to the super structure EVER found.

So....we have 2 opposing 'versions' of events.

One...that Larry Silverstein was referring to fire fighters when he used the term 'pulled'.

Two...that Larry Silverstein knowing allowed an occupied building to be wired over at least 3 months (without permits, or city oversite of any kind), with thousands of charges set into the primary supports of the building, miles of primer cord wired in complete secret and with no one noticing...then, with the building wired to explode, destroyed his own building in direct violation of the law and in an enormous act of Insurance Fraud, that would result in decades of prison time if convicted (at worst), or invalidate his insurance policy on the site (at best).....

...and after doing all of this, ADMITTED to it on national television.

C'mon. There is suspending disbelief, and then there's plain old gullibility. The LC version is simply too freakin complicated, self contradictory, and convuluted....while the 'official version' is elegantly simple...and matches the facts.

Loose Change, like so many other conspiracy shilling videos (Alex Jones, anyone?), is based on simple conjecture and willful ignorance of the facts. Laymen, with virtually NO education, training or experience in the fields they are commenting on expect their opinion (which they offer as 'indisputable and incontravertable fact') to be MORE credibile than experts - who in many cases, were actually on site during or immedicately after the disaster. Experts, I might add...with collective centuries of relevant experience in their respective fields (fields like...oh, I don't know...demolitions, structural engineering, architecture, aviation and materials testing? )

I'm rationally minded......meaning I find a legion of relevant experts more credible than guy in his 20s who's figured out how to use video editing software claiming there 'can be no other explaination'.

Answer 2

Everyone should believe the World Trade Center was hit by passenger planes... because they were. That's not what Loose Change tries to argue - they try to argue that the government allowed the hijackers or other gov. agents to fly said planes into the WTC and then the government exploded bombs in the WTC.

As for the Pentagon, I really don't know about that one. Most everyone I have spoken to about it, especially after seeing Loose Change, have reconsidered. Many people mention the fact there is no plane wreckage and cite that the footage available was taken away but for a few released slides. But many and most Americans and other international peoples do not question the 9/11 attacks, even though these conspiracies and perhaps truths are arising.

Answer 3

I don't know what they say I was watvhing the news and saw the second plane hit the tower. If your are stupid enough to believe some anti American or anti semetic conspiracy theory hack then maybe you need to open your eyes a grow up. Don't belive anyything Micheal Moore says either he is just like a ambulance chasing hack lawyer but was to dumb to get into law school, he tries to profit off of other peoples misfortunes. Sorry not impress with the web site put up about 9/11 loose change just a bunch of conspiracy wackos bad mouthing the US government, Same old thing, hell I bet they are still debating if Roosevelt knew Pearl Harbor was coming and sat on his hands. And I bet you think all the Jews that worked at the World Trade Center all stayed home that day too.

Answer 4

Let the Conspiracies FLOW !!!
That s right, those aircraft were not passenger aircraft and were commissioned by the Military, flight 93 landed earlier with it's passengers and was then taken somewhere else...the pentagon was actually hit by a retired jet F 107 and ironic that at all these crash sights there is no evidence of the aircraft or occupants.
Cherish Free Speech!!

Answer 5

I cant believe more people aren't questioning what really happened on 9/11. In all honesty, for four years I really thought that terrorists had hijacked american planes & hit the wtc and pentagon. After researching, I wish more people would go out and learn the truth about what our government is hiding from us.

Answer 6

Since I saw it on national TV live, yes I believe it was planes. On the pentagon I think I'll take the word of the thousands who saw a plane over that of some kook with wild speculation.

Answer 7

Cannot speak on behalf of the Pentagon, but I believe it has been proven that planes hit the WTC. Many American citizens saw the event take place right in front of them.

Answer 8

The WTC were, the Pentagon wasn't. There were no plane remains in the Pentagons. Planes that big leave something behind. There was nothing.

Answer 9

STILL THINKS? I SEEN IT ON LIVE TV AS I LEFT FOR SCHOOL it was a passenger pland i seen the 2nd one fly right into the building and if it wasnt a passenger plane then it muast have been some great specioal effects

Answer 10

All normal people think that the WTC was hit by passdenger planes. The exceptions are you, and any other person who posts here in agreement with you.

Answer 11

Didn't we see live video of the 2nd trade center get hit by a pasanger plane....so i think the WTC centers were, but the pentagon....who knows