9/11 was an inside job?

Question

how could the towers fall at free fall speed. this is impossible. and why did the 3rd tower that fell "tower 7" fall? it wasnt hit by a plane. And a fire cant melt steal.

Benjamin Chertoff, the senior researcher at Popular Mechanics who is behind the article? American Free Press har learned that he is none other than a cousin of Michael Chertoff, the new Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. This means that Hearst paid Benjamin Chertoff to write an article supporting the seriously flawed explanation that is based on a practically non-existent investigation of the terror event that directly led to the creation of the massive national security department his cousin now heads. This is exactly the kind of journalism one would expect to find in a dictatorship like that of Saddam Hussein's Iraq."

Answer 1

Another 9/11 conspiracy idiot? Haven't you dopes learned anything yet.

All of your "theories" have been debunked.

BTW. How is it impossible for something to fall at "free fall speed"? You do know that gravity is constant? If not, learn some high school science before you rant on the Net.

Answer 2

Hi, there are 3 theories and here they are.
1. The US government did it
2. The terrorists did it
3. Both did it

Anybody with eyeballs in their head saw the planes on t.v. crash into the buildings.

Also Osama Bin Laden even admits that they did it.

However there are also shots of video footage of helicopters dropping something on the building. This was not the media however and was "Citizen filmed."

This causes it to lose credibility as we all have seen the ufo by the buildings and that was proved a hoax.

My theory is this and I don't think it's far fetched.

The terrorists flew the planes into the building and as the fires raged in the building the goverment of ours new they couldn't get in there to save the people and the people would die a horrible death slowly and it would be very terrifying.

Is it far fetched to think that maybe the us goverment did a mercy kill rather than let them smolder slowly?

But to me its always funny how conspiracy buffs never bring up the planes crashing into the buildings. They always talk about how the buildings fell and yada yada. But they seem kinda bias how they don't want to talk about the planes.

The reason why they don't want to talk about the planes is that ruins their whole conspiracy. The only thing they could say is what I have said here.

Answer 3

Here are the answers to your questions:

THE BUILDINGS DID NOT FALL AT FREE FALL SPEEDS.

The fall time was analyzed by NIST (National Institute of Science & Technology) , which used seismic recorders & other techniques to measure the fall time. Their results:

1. The exterior panels took 9-11 seconds. They fell this fast because they were not impeded by anything & this is perfectly normal.

2. The inner parts of WTC 1&2 (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse. This is far slower than a free-fall.

You can read this in NIST’s own words at Point 6 at http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

THE COLLAPSE OF WTC7 WAS NOT SURPRISING

Even though they were NOT hit by the jets, numerous buildings over a wide area were hit by debris from the collapsing towers and were destroyed.

This includes: The Marriott World Trade Center , 6 World Trade Center, 5 World Trade Center, 4 World Trade Center, and St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church (which wasn’t even in the WTC complex). The Deutsche Bank Building was also outside the WTC complex & was massively damaged, and was declared a total loss in 2004.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_attack#Damage

As for WTC 7:
According to NIST "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom — approximately 10 stories — about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." See http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=5#wtc7

WTC7 was only 400 feet from WTC1. Since WTC1 is over 1300 feet tall, as they pealed away, the large perimeter columns from WTC1 struck WTC7 & many other buildings with terrific force due to their high starting position. Archival photos shows perimeter columns lying on the ground up to WTC7. http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

In addition, WTC7 was built straddling a Con-Edison substation. This meant that its walls had to carry a tremendous amount of force and were vulnerable to impact. In addition, WT7 contained numerous fuel tanks for generators, some holding 6000 gallons of fuel, & this contributed to its destruction.

WHETHER OR NOT FIRE CAN MELT STEEL IS NOT RELEVENT.

The towers did not fall because steel melted, nor is anyone claiming that.

The towers mainly collapsed due to the large number of supports being knocked out by the jets.

As NIST (National Institute of Science & Technology) says:
"About 60% of the 60 columns of the impacted face of framed-tube were severed, and many more were significantly deflected. “

The remaining supports had to hold up about 200,000 tons and were near the failure point. Meanwhile, the raging fire started weakening these remaining supports. (Steel loses half its strength at 600 deg C. Melting is not necessary nor did it occur)

The horizontal supports sagged downward & slowly pulled in the perimeter columns.

Many photographs of the towers show the exterior columns bending inward, a sign that the towers were doomed & also excellent proof that, without question, the jets alone caused the collapse.

The exterior columns then snapped inward & collapse ensued.

See the lead investigator from NIST explain how the buildings collapsed at
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/
(Click on “Impact to collapse” )

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO IS IN CHARGE OF POPULAR MECHANICS.

All that matters is, are they correct, or not?

All Pop Mech does in its articles is quote the most respected experts in the world. There's no way this can be wrong unless the experts are wrong or they are misquoted.

Example:

Pop Mechanics says that Professor Bazant (Northwestern Dept of Civil Engineering) is one of only 14 people to win the Prager Award in engineering.

He first described the collapse mechanism as follows: http://www.debunking911.com/ProgressiveCollapseWTC-6-23-2006.pdf

This article says the towers collapsed from jets alone (impact & fire). There is zero need to have “thermite” or “bombs.”

Now, what part of this is wrong?

NO "SCHOLARS" THINK THE COLLAPSE WAS AN IMPLOSION

Actually, every single expert, on the face of the earth, who has published a journal article on 9/11, has said the tower collapse was NOT consistent with an implosion or controlled demolition.

I can provide a huge list of such articles

On the other hand, there isn't a journal article ANYWHERE in support of an "implosion." This stunning fact puts an end to the implosion claim. You can't argue with all these experts

Answer 4

lol i think of the interior job is the funniset maximum unrealistc consipracy I even have ever heard of. by means of fact one million. i'm confident that on an identical time as they have been construction the worldwide commerce centers, what lower back in the 60s or 70s? That they by some skill purposly confident every person in contact to lead them to susceptible so as that years later the government ought to apply it as an exuse to invade Iraq? ya innovations-blowing. 2. If it became into an interior job, then it does no longer be a consiracy it may be actuality. by means of tens of millions of greenbacks that interior human beings could gets a commission to formally say that. lol that's like the dumb people who belive that we did no longer truly land on the moon. 3. there are countless tests and balences in the yank governmnet. no one could get away with that. only verify out the open problems with the democrats as against republicans over even much less significant subject concerns? particular i'm confident this could stay below the wraps, truly. 4. If the government paid Osama or different terroists to attrack us, then why does no longer Osama tell the yank human beings? What extra useful oppertinity to show the rustic he hates maximum against their very own government? only in Hollywood. in spite of the undeniable fact that that's an inventive conspiracy. only no longer a actual one. I consider what you pronounced, exceptionally appropriate to the youngster wearing that shirt.

Answer 5

The majority of reports of that day conclude that the falling of the building was more consistent with that of an imploding as when old buildings are blown up. Most scholars state that its impossible for fire to melt sheet metal. I have never proclaimed to be the smartest, however at the same time I know im not the most ignorant either, so I think that many of us have relied on those in authority far to long that when a situation arises that we believe what they tell us as being fact instead of seeking the truth for ourselves. Just like telling us how good GPS systems are for us, huh. We are already in the system enough times without having a device track our every move. Every new car already has that system in place for us. We have long given up democracy and dont realize it. 9/11 was the icing on the cake for taking what little freedom had left. So if you know like I know then youd get ready to fight for what you have left or be led to the camp like lost sheep. Yes 9/11 was an inside job and those who we think knew knew. There obligations, and affiliations are more important than those whom they openly vowed to serve and protect.

Answer 6

How about doing some research?!?!?

You know, from independent sources, not the 9/11 Truth Movement propaganda?

I know its more fun to believe the Bush administration did it, but trust me, they're evil enough without having to do something that stupid. In fact, if anything, people like you are SERVING the interests of the Bush administration.

But don't take it from me. Visit your local library. Keep an open mind. Apply the scientific method to your research.

Hell, how about providing some evidence (as flimsy as it might be) to back up your assertion? You can't even do that because you're not really interested in the pursuit of the truth ... just validation for your FAITH.

Answer 7

You're very reasonable. There's a great probability that 9/11 was in fact an inside job. The planes were not passenger planes, but rather cargo ones. I don't think that Al-Qaeda had the capabilities to execute such a task.

BTW, Bin Laden is known to be a straunch CIA agent; so were the Taliban leadres. This is why none of them are on the "most wanted" list of the CIA; plain and simple.

Answer 8

How do you think steel is made ? WITH HEAT AND FIRE !!!

You conspironuts need to be tasered and educated...the drivel you put out is a slap in the face of all the dead from 9-11...

Try spewing your BS at a NYFD station and see what happens...better have your health insurance and will up to date !

Answer 9

I'll take Osama's word and my lying eyes over the fever dreams of several dozen numbnuts.

Answer 10

And who was that hiding on the grassy knoll? How could one shooter shoot from two directions? Did the CIA really blow up the Hindenberg? Is it true that Elvis is really alive and having alien babies? Inquiring minds want to know!