Has anyone been able to convince their parents that 9/11 was an Inside Job ?

Question

If so, how did you do it ?

Most everyone I know already knew it was. The only one that was not convinced, only became so after examining each piece of evidence for himself. Boy was he SHOCKED ! Six months later, he's still shaken up.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AhR8a1NHSS7Kv_FKpxotSvHty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20070831150623AAwL0jH&show=7#profile-info-x97ktCqwaa

"Maxwell...": Aren't you the one that got suckered into believing that the jet engine part found at the Pentagon crash site matched that of a Roll's Royce jet engine? Don't just take someone's word for it, dig into it with everything you have: It's there to be used. Your nation and maybe the world is depending on you to do so.

"Roadkill": IF you really are an Engineer, Perhaps you can explain how a building can collapse at Free Fall speed (32 feet per second per second) while being supported from underneath: That is without having it's under structure blown out. If you can't, consider yourself a "wanna-be" Engineer, because one does not achieve that status by flunking Basic Physics.

"Dave R": I have seen the Crop Circles those UK pranksters made, they looked like crap. Maybe they should have taken lessons from whomever made the ones all around the world.

*freedom*: I used the following items to try to convince someone, after they saw them they were not convinced, but at least it lead them to do their own research. In the end they new, but it left them believing their government had completely betrayed them.

I made a copy of the "Osama" that supposedly confessed to 9/11 and place in next to a picture of the real Osama; most anyone should be able to tell they are not the same person: The nose gives it away.
http://911blimp.net/vid_fakeOsamaVideo.shtml

I also found a clear picture of a sliced core beam; if it was cut by an Iron workers torch, the slag should be dripping all along the inside of the cut. Explosive gases from a demolition cutting charge cause the slag to shoot outward.
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml

My personal favorite is a picture of the smaller 727 jet engine found at the Pentagon crash site.
http://www.rense.com/general63/ident.htm
http://physics911.net/pdf/schwarz.pdf

Answer 1

Yes, I started with the Pentagon, how there was no wreckage (aside from tiny, easily carried metallic parts and false engines, and no bodies, luggage etc), and then moved on to WTC 7- sure the world trade centre towers may be the first 2 steel reinforced buildings to collapse by fire (due to the planes) EVER, but there is NO good reason for WTC 7 to have collapsed, even the shards of debris couldn't have affected the central core columns which supported the entire frame & structure of the building.

The Larry Silverstein "pull it" talk after comparing WTC 7 with a controlled demolition did it for my mum:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100
http://youtube.com/watch?v=D3k0sj8nIyk

However there are TONNES more video clips, films etc which prove the WTC was a controlled demolition, and have you ever seen a picture of a PLANE hitting the Pentagon??

I mean, one of the most powerful strategic centres in the world... And NO CCTV footage showing a clear shot of a plane?? BULLS**T!

Answer 2

I have had no luck with this. In fact, I went to lunch with my mom a couple of days ago and the subject of 9/11 came up. She thought I was insane for believing that it's an inside job. She's been brainwashed by the powerful media entirely too long. My dad is now deceased, but I think he would have believed it. He didn't know first-hand about the Illuminati or their plans, but when he was alive I remember how he always sensed a shadow government was at work and he felt elections were rigged. I think I must have gotten my ability to "see" what's going on from my dad because my mom is clearly one of the sheeple. She's usually intelligent and open-minded, but she simply cannot see any foul play concerning 9/11 regardless of the evidence I show her.

But I honestly feel that it takes a person of exceptional intelligence to look beyond the "group-think" mentality and analyze the facts concerning 9/11. And that's why I had to laugh at most of the respondents of this question. I think it's pretty obvious that you are brilliant and your best answer rating definitely reflects that.

Keep up the good work! :)

Answer 3

Two guys from the UK successfully pulled off a brilliant prank on millions of people and kept it a secret for many years. They created crop circles using two pieces of rope, a wood plank and some basic math calculations.

They decided to go public several years back and show the world how it was done.

My point is this. These guys come out and demonstrate how they created these crop circles yet there are plenty of folks who refuse to believe they were done by humans.

Nuf said

Answer 4

Want you like to get instant access to over 16,000 woodworking plans?
Check it out https://tr.im/c7b6d
Along with stone, mud and animal parts, wood was one of the first materials worked by early humans. Microwear analysis of the Mousterian stone tools used by the Neanderthals show that many were used to work wood. The development of civilization was closely tied to the development of increasingly greater degrees of skill in working these materials.

Answer 5

I couldn't.

Why?

How do you convince someone that something is true when you don't believe in it yourself? I can't tell my parents that it is true when I don't think it is at all.

All of the "theories" have been debunked by someone. And they will continue to be. Anyone can find something and try to make it appear true. The only true facts we have are it happened and lots of Americans died. Everything else is nothing but theory.

And by the way - if you care. . .

The 25 miles of plane reckage has been shown to be false - even those that believe the conspiracy have changed their statements of that "factoid". What someone did was "mapquest" (or something of the like) two locations, and since mapquest is for road travel, it measured the road distance. In actuality, the wreckage was spread over a reasonable area if you look at land area - not road distance.

Answer 6

No, and I have to admit I haven't tried. I'm an Engineer and its pretty clear to me what happened. Terrorist crashed a planes into 3 buildings.

I'd be surprised if there are that many parents ignorant enough to fall for nonsense like "fire can't melt steel". Need to tell that to some iron age people since they used wood fires to make steel.

Answer 7

Its easy for the so called "9/11 Truthers" to convince their parents. They all live in their parents basements, and mommy can't bear to disagree with cute little fuzzywuzzy bear 30 year old man with a tin foil hat.

White flame, there are multiple books, and if common sense hasn't refuted it already, I don't know what will. I would recommend The terrorist watch by Ronald Kessler, it gives some info on 9/11 and since you quesiton that, you likely question other things about terrorism, and this would be a good book for you.

Answer 8

Neither I nor my parents nor anyone I know would ever believe in the conspiracy nonsense. That's proablably because most of my friends and associates are intelligent.

Here are some points to support our beliefs
=========================
CLAIM: No plane wreckage was found at the Pentagon
FACT: Clear wreckage of a plane was found & photographs were printed in all the papers. Here's a nice photo from 9/11 that clearly shows plane wreckage:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technolo...
(scroll down after clicking).

In addition the “American Society of Civil Engineers” (they’re non-governmental) investigated the Pentagon crash & issued this report:
http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf

The report contains abundant references to plane debris & body parts found in the Pentagon. For example, on page 26 it says:

“The remains of most of the passengers on the aircraft were found near the end of the travel of the aircraft debris. The front landing gear (a relatively solid and heavy object) and the flight data recorder (which had been located near the rear of the aircraft) were also found nearly 300 ft into the structure. By contrast, the remains of a few individuals (the hijacking suspects), who most likely were near the front of the aircraft, were found relatively close to the aircraft’s point of impact with the building."
=======================
CLAIM: There’s no reason WTC7 collapsed
FACT: SIX buildings next to the towers were hit by debris & were destroyed. One of these was WTC7. They are:

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

None of these buildings were hit by a jet.

The specifics for WTC7 are:
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 was over 1300 feet tall, as they peeled 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.
=====================
CLAIM: Silverstein "ordered" WTC7 to be "pulled" down (demolished)
FACT: "Pull" is not a demolition term for bringing down a building. SIlverstein merely said to "pull" the firemen out, since the building was obviously going to collapse.

On 9/11 there was a long conversation between Silverman, the Fire Commander, & others, about pulling the firemen out. Here is most of the conversation:
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
(scroll way down after clicking)

EVERYONE in this conversation has confirmed that they were talking about pulling firemen out. That’s what the conversation was about, from beginning to end. There isn't a person on the planet who will say that SIlverstein told him to "pull" the building down. That's how you know what he was talking about. Any other interpretation is fantasy that didn't exist in the minds of the listeners.
=================
CLAIM: The engine at the Pentagon was from a 727
FACT: Aerospace engineers have disproven the 727 engine theory (at the Pentagon).

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml

The engineers in the above website did consider the Pratt & Whitney JT8 engine, the P&W J57 engine, and the Rolls Royce engine. They say, “This analysis indicates that all three of these engines are too small to match the engine component photographed at the Pentagon.”

That pretty much ends the 727 engine theory. It’s right from the mouths of engineers in the field. And most importantly, if Flight 77 didn’t hit the Pentagon, then where did it go?
========================
THE TWIN TOWERS DIDN'T FALL AT "FREE FALL"

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

Answer 9

Lol why would I wanna do that? Unlike some people I actually think rationally and don't think everything is a conspiracy.

Did you ever find out what was the motive of the attack? I mean that is just the first question police investigators ask whenever a crime is committed.

Answer 10

Hah, fun to hear the first answer on here, its great to see he doesn't spend any time actually refuting what you say. I've been confused about 9/11, but I'm not at the point of saying it was an inside job. The most I can say right now is that people in Washington let it happen with a large amount of knowledge on it. It's only slightly less depressing to think, but it's the only thing that could possibly fit all the stuff that happened without taking it several steps further.
Oh, and no need to convince, my parents have taken it further than I have.
Oh one more thing. With this crowd, I'll probably get all thumbs down. No big surprise there. But would any of you, just one, actually care to argue how it couldn't possibly have been an inside job? I just want a scrap of proof, something.