Can I have your opinion on these last two 9/11 conspiracy myths that I can't understand?

Question

Ive heard both sides of the stories, got really interested in the conspiracy theories, but I realize that most are debunked, or overbunked, whatever you would consider it. There are only 2 other things about that day that I dont understand,

im watching the show on the History channel about this and they didnt mention this other thing i heard that the area of The PEntagon that was hit was a recently renovated area where they were testing reinforced walls and things of that nature, and of course no critical area of the Pentagon was damaged necessarily on 9.11, so if you want to read into that, you could accuse that if something was set up, that they aimed the plane at that section on purpose, in order to test the reinforced area where not many casualties would occur, is this story true? if it is, is the charge valid or just coincidence?

the 2nd part is not really an accusation but just a question that causes me confusion. CONT_

why did the hijackers hit the WTC where they did? I had read that they figured the first tower would topple into the other and have them crash down like that, which owuld explain why it was hit so high up on the building, then when it didnt afterward and the 2nd tower was hit, it was hit much lower, which subsequently sent it down faster, now heres the issue, was this just a messup on the terrorists part, them not figuring the physics of the situation, because if they had crashed the first plane as low or lower than the 2nd one, imagine how many more people would have died, that owuld mean the tower would crash sooner AND more people would haeve been trapped above the impact zone, i mean, thank god it didnt happen this way, but why was that? just terrorist incompetance like the first wtc attaack where they thought the WTC would cave in from the basement bomb? and what is the deal witht he angled impact, was that done on purpose as the history channel says? CONT_

because if they were smart enough to do that, (crash the planes at an angle to accelerate the momentum of fuel in the wings) then they would have been smart enough to aim lower on the towers, and not think that one would just crash into the other,

please help me with this, thank for you reading

proud marine - this guy on history channel just said mohammad atta had a degree in engineering or something and knew how to attack a building, so why then wouldnt they maximize the attack? here is the thing about that, why havent there been attacks since 911 the likes of it? iDK but they say because they want to go bigger and more horrific than 911, so if thats the mentality, then why wouldnt they ttry to kill as many as humanly possible?

and they would want to test the walls as a secondary act, like killing 2 birds with one stone i suppose, to see if the materials would hold up in the future usages, while adding another level of anger to america and more strength to the 911 attacks, now i dont necessarily believe that, but if i was a conspiracist, thats what i would believe.

idb - i dont doubt a plane hit the pentagon, like i say, i only really doubt these 2 points and the lack of explanation on them makes me skeptical again because even some holes, can grow into bigger ones

wendy - part of me agrees with your mindset, and part also disagrees, because while you do mean well, if indeed there is even a single shady part of what happened that day, to ignore it without looking for closure (which im sure no one can blame anyone for) is an act of submission and i think its a privilege to be able to doubt what the media shows us so we should use it at every turn

siempre - would yo ucare to elaborate on your answer? it didnt seem too clear to me, why was that part of the pentagon more apt to attack? and why would common sense tell you the 2nd tower should be hit lower but not the first? thats what i was asking, and i believe the reason the 2nd fell faster was because there was more weight on the fire zone

poparf - i believe on the history channels comp simulation they showed the plane hitting the pentagon on its side as if it were turned almost on a 90 degree angle which i think would explain why the hole wasnt so wide, but again the whole pentagon aspect is a fuzzy topic for me

superbaler - thank you for mentioning the WTC site, i had forgotten about the compounds they found there, and the liquid steel or whatever it was, I agree the HC show was totally biased and seemed like another attempt to devalue rather than disprove conspiracy accusations, but i will agree that the fact there are so many false accusations it makes the theories seem like spagetti strands getting thrown against a wall, still i do agree with about 95% of the 'official' story but that 5% left is really unsettling

Answer 1

I also watched that show just now on the history channel, which was said to be unbiased presenting both sides but all they did is make the "conspiracy" people (the people that are asking questions and raising points that go against the "official story") look EVIL and WRONG and that they DON'T RESPECT THE LOSS OF LIVES ON THAT DAY. WHICH IS TOTALLY BOGUS!

My 1st link below is to the article which explains how the history channel is back-pedaling from it's description (but not changing the bias).

They left out MANY of good points that are in Loose Change as well as Zeitgeist. They also presented everything with a CONSPIRACY Response: followed by EXPERT'S Response..... With the footage they used basically it made it seem like: Here's what the WRONG people say, Here's what the RIGHT people say....

What they should've done, is established an unbiased Side A proposal then a Side B proposal.

They didn't say anything about the sub-level explosions that went on in the basements of the trade center towers. They try to explain that FALLING DEBRI from the trade center towers FLEW across the way and hit trade center 7 starting fires! They also claimed that Silverstein (the owner of the trade center buildings) said that he decided to "pull it" and by that meaning pull out the people and firefighters (who says pull it? maybe evacuate? get everyone out?.... demolitionists say pull it is a well used phrase for initiating a demolition).

(3rd link below is the Loose Change video which raises many questions behind 9/11)

They didn't reveal ANYTHING about the smell of Thermite (used in explosives) at ground zero, NOR did they say anything about the perfect straight cuts in the steal beams of the building (which demolitionists explain is exactly how you take down a building, by cutting it diagonally). My 2nd link below shows a picture of exactly what I'm talking about.

AND THEY DIDN'T SAY A SINGLE THING ABOUT THE VIDEOS TAKEN BY CAMERAS AT THE GAS-STATION / HOTEL ACROSS THE HIGHWAY LOOKING DIRECTLY AT THE SIDE THAT WAS HIT BY THE PENTAGON: WHICH WERE TAKEN AWAY BY GOVERNMENT SECRET SERVICE AGENTS! (which display much more than 1 frame per second which was what the government did release)

The history channel's show 9/11 conspiracy theories was originally debunking 9/11 myths.

They also try to associate Loose Change believers and "conspiracy theorists" with people that don't care about the lives lost on that day. They bring up some lady saying that says "Whenever people bring up these conspiracies... it's like a knife being stabbed into my heart because they have no concern for the people that lost someone that day, or those that died" WHICH IS TOTALLY BOGUS. They do believe those people died, they do mourn their deaths, BUT they do not believe that it happened the way that we are being told!

Bottom line, they keep associating Loose Change believers and "conspiracy theory" believers with not caring about the people that died, or the people that lost someone....

Basically, they do reveal a lot of information but in the end, they try to say that all of the evidence brought to the attention by Loose Change, Webster Tarpley, and many many other professors and demolitionists is wrong, which it isn't.

This is just the most recent and official version of government propaganda trying to say that the "official story"(original claim of how/why 9/11 happened) is correct.

Edit:

Also see 4th link about the molten steel / thermite!

Answer 2

I like how the history channel kept showing the Pentagon collapse photos of the damaged area that did not collapse till 30 minutes later. They showed no photos of the initial 15 to 17 feet wide hole caused by the crash.
http://911lies.org/911_pentagon_attack_damage.jpg

Nor did they show the correct flight pattern of the airplane:
http://911lies.org/images2/fligh_path_pentagon_911.jpg

In the above link you will see:
The pilot passed up a clear direct frontal assault on his target.

He then passed through the air space of Reagan International. During this maneuver they dropped 7000 feet and by all reports did it like an ace fighter pilot.

Amazingly, the pilot managed maneuver the 757, through obstacles, attaining a flight level of 20 feet , in distance of about 1/4 mile, in order to strike the only wall of the entire Pentagon to be reinforced to withstand such an attack.


Popular Mechanics was pretty good at saying things were not true, just because they weren't true.

Anyone that has researched 9/11 and the events would easily see how corporate tried to skew the view.

Answer 3

Should you believe everything your government tells you. They nuked Japan 2ice, why, its was war. They used tactical nuke in afganistan, why , cuz it was war and they had to give a reason to start it. You think that the terrorist are so smart that they would figure out the flaw of the WTC just by sitting in their own country and looking at the documentary(Discovery Channel) on WTC that was shown one year ago before the real 9/11 attack. Right who wants to give out their own secret to others specialy terrorist, unless you benefit from it. Oey!! do you know that each of the tower had a balancing unit totaly computerized to contorl the buildings movenet agaistn the winds. And they had huge metal plates weighing 60 tons in total. Now imagine if you can make one of these masive heay objects fally, what will be the result once they start to accelerate, is there anything to stop them from falling. Watch the videos again, you will notice something caving in inside the buildings, look at the smokes behaviour. I am a muslim, i never want people to die like they way they did on 9/11. I was furious to see what happened. And i was angry that even your own people would do such things. Hey have you ever wonder why the genrals of US ariforce in the party didnt, care much when they were told mass groups of unknow planes were heading towards pearl harbour. Of and why there was no debry of a plane near pentagon when it was show upclose on TV. Hmm Strange^_^. Nobody ever said the americans as citizen are bad, they just don't care what their governments do after they have finished voting them. If i could tell the sheeps, don't always trust the dog, you forget his kind came from the wolves lol.....i dont know what that means...but surly someone would understand.

Answer 4

911 was an inside job.. instead of just hearing the official story, do some research yourselves. i read 9/11 myths debunked the popular science wrote. and it was a bunch of bull. i took the time to sit down and read through the 911 commission report, and there are only a few sections if that about 9 11 01. everything else was about back rounds and stuff that had nothing to do with 911.

they were supposed to explain the days events, and how the building fell... and that "pancake" collapse is complete bull crap. a 5th grader cant look at the physics and know that mass can only fall at an accelerated speed if there is no resistance.

watch the videos.. look at the pictures. think for yourself for just a moment

Answer 5

The terrorists just wanted to cause damage and kill people, both of which they did. I don't think they cared where they hit the towers, they hit where the fancy struck. It still caused the towers to collapse did it not? They killed people in the Pentagon, I don't think it had anything to do with the fact that it had been newly renovated. What person is going to want to test their walls by crashing a plane into it? That idea is false.

Answer 6

The terrorists planned the whole thing out. They had blueprints of the towers but not of the Pentagon. They specifically reinforced that side first because it was more apt to attack. Common sense tells you that hitting the second tower lower will cause it to fall faster, since heat rises, and jet gas gets really hot when it burns, hot enough to melt beams. They all got student visas and studied how to fly professionally first here in the US to make sure they could hit their mark. It was also a way to undermine homeland security making them look stupid for giving terrorists a free ticket into the country. All works together to make the government look bad, still part of the plan. You've been duped!

Answer 7

That show was a joke. They are very good at manipulating the facts and making it seem as if you must be crazy if you question authority.

I learned from the show, listen and don't ask questions cause it is just rude and insensitive too!

This just gives people more proof to look into the official conspiracy!

Answer 8

What's really interesting is that the various security cameras from buildings and gas stations in the area that show what hit the Pentagon were all confiscated immediately. Multiple bystanders claimed it was a missile.

Find me irrefutable evidence, anywhere, that what hit the Pentagon was a plane. I dare ya.

Answer 9

Did you already forget what the media and the Democrats did to Richard Nixon just for Watergate???? We need to be very stupid to believe that the media and the Democrats will stay quiet after something like that!....grow up!

Answer 10

Bottom line is it was a tragic event. So often, we want to avoid the heart of the matter and we preoccupy ourselves with conspiracy theories and other things, in order to avoid confronting what really happened. It is much easier to delve and surmise, rather than accept. It was flat out an act of hatred. Cut and dry, no need to analyze.