If 9/11 was a inside job, How many people were involved?

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: seanm
This is one of the dirty little secrets 9/11 Truthers are unable to address. Not only would it require a substantial number of people to be involved in all of the pre-event activities required for a plan to be pulled off, e.g., planting explosives in the WTC towers, getting NORAD to "stand-down", planning what to do with aircraft and their passengers that "didn't" hit the Pentagon, there would be a far greater number of people having no prior knowledge of the plan who would have known that the explanations of what happened AFTER the events didn't jive with what they knew.

Add to that the many hundreds of non-government investigators and forensic scientists who would have had to either lie or be threatened to put out what would have to be false reports from NIST, FEMA, and ASCE.

Necessarily, thousands of people would know of either the plan in advance and/ or that the the explanations post-event didn't jive with what they personally knew.

The peculiar notion by 9/11 conspiracy buffs that such an event could be planned, executed successfully, and covered-up is far beyond absurd and irrational.

That's why the 9/11 Truth Movement is known by its proper name: the The 9/11 Denial Movement.

Absolute hogwash.

Do you know a single thing about black ops? No you don't

ONE WORD: Compartmented Top Secret information or TS SCI
This is how ALL black ops are carried out, and those within only know enough about what is going on with just their own particular duties, and they know nothing else about it! They don't ask, and they don't say a single thing about what they are doing to anyone.

This is all common knowledge, but when the government is to blame, they use the full power of counterintelligence and the media to provide a smokescreen just like when Bush Jr. felt compelled to go on the air and condemn all the crazy conspiracies that shined a bright light on him. He was afraid at the thought of being pursued by the public, even though he should have just kept silent. Guilt goads people to start saying junk like he did.

See how that works?

exactly. It's damage control. If you don't know the other parts of a plan or who is responsible for them you can't leak that information. It's why SF operators don't know what other patrols etc are doing because of the risk of capture. It compromises other men on the ground.

a reply to: sg1642

And, as someone whose former profession involved targeting at times, diving on the target would have been an idiotic choice. He chose an approach that was most likely going to result in the most damage. And, diving into the roof also opened it up to a conflict with an aircraft taking off from Reagan National.

a reply to: sg1642

So.....the cast of hundreds that would have been needed to wire WTC 1,2, and 7 would not have known what they were doing. Riiiiiiiiiight.

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: sg1642

So.....the cast of hundreds that would have been needed to wire WTC 1,2, and 7 would not have known what they were doing. Riiiiiiiiiight.

tell me where you get cast of hundreds? And I'm quite sure if anyone had placed explosives they would know fine well what they were doing. And I'm quite sure this group more than any other would have the most reason to not leak information. My current profession and last two involve targeting at their very core. The surface area he had to aim at by diving at the roof. Approx 929000 squared ft. The surface area of the facade approx.71000 sq ft. Not to mention the ground obstacles. So explain why that would have been an idiotic choice?

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

More to the point explain why a terrorist who had managed to hijack an airliner and get it on target would bank away when presented with such a target rich environment? If you are telling me he wouldn't have slammed it straight in to such a juicy target then I'm quite sure you haven't dealt with that kind of person.

a reply to: sg1642

Putting himself directly over the Pentagon, would have put him at risk to a midair collision with an aircraft taking off out of Reagan National. I do not care if the roof is 1,000,000 squared feet, because he would be aiming for the roof of one ring. Not all five at the same time. One good crosswind and he ends up in the center courtyard and the Pentagon gets a new coat of paint. The other four sides of the building, had interference from the Airport, the parking lots, the main entrance. No, he picked exactly the right area to target.

a reply to: sg1642

Then you would be quite wrong.


To the mods...a one line response was the only answer to his faulty assumptions about me.

a reply to: NoOneSpecialHere

911 was a secret NATO staybehind operation conducted from Turkey.

NATOs staybehind (Gladio 2 or B) is the Wests Secret government. You should read up on it.

In an aircraft going between 300 and 500mph he would be aiming at the roof as a whole. The aircraft is hardly going to fit in one of the light wells in between the rings and not cause massive damage on either side. If he was going to take the time in flight to be logical about his targeting, he would aim for the roof. The lower altitude side on impact is much higher risk. More risk of grounding, more risk of obstacles and more risk of missing the target all together. The FBI could clear the whole argument up and put it to bed. All they have to do is release the other CCTV videos they have of the impact (and not the same video they doctored and released as two separate pieces of footage either that doesn't show anything clear anyway). But they won't. Why the reluctance?

a reply to: sg1642

Read the court materials from KSH. He does not agree with you...and since he helped planned the attack....................

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: sg1642

Read the court materials from KSH. He does not agree with you...and since he helped planned the attack....................

Where does it say anything about him targeting the facade and not the roof? He has also pointed to there being a Saudi involvement in the attacks (and I don't just mean the nationality of the hijackers). That opens up many questions that demand answers. Much more interesting are the words of another man of Mddle Eastern stock, Ali Soufan. An FBI agent who had this to say about the hijackers "We were looking for them overseas. They were here. People in our government knew that they were here. We were not told." That at the very least points to incompetence from people who could have stopped this happening or liability for allowing it to happen. I can't state for a fact that the US government was involved in the attacks but I can state for a fact that there are so many unanswered questions and problems with the official version of events that it should be subject to an independent and thorough investigation. That will never happen because (involvement or not) it would most likely open up a bottomless can of worms.

First hand witness statements count as evidence in court. Why are the numerous reports of explosions in the towers ignored or explained away? If anyone knows what an explosion in a burning building sounds and looks like it's going to be firefighters. If anyone should be listened to it's the people who were there. Are they all conspiracy nuts? Why haven't the thousands of New Yorkers who have breathed in asbestos after been told the dust was safe to breath been vindicated? Why haven't the correct people been found liable? A compensation payout when you are on your death bed does not do them justice. It wasn't just a terrorist attack it was an event that changed the world and started wars that thousands more have died in. Why don't people care anymore?

a reply to: sg1642

Why haven't the correct people been found liable?

Name one guilty party and present your evidence.

originally posted by: sg1642

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: sg1642

Read the court materials from KSH. He does not agree with you...and since he helped planned the attack....................

First hand witness statements count as evidence in court. Why are the numerous reports of explosions in the towers ignored or explained away? If anyone knows what an explosion in a burning building sounds and looks like it's going to be firefighters. If anyone should be listened to it's the people who were there. Are they all conspiracy nuts? Why haven't the thousands of New Yorkers who have breathed in asbestos after been told the dust was safe to breath been vindicated? Why haven't the correct people been found liable? A compensation payout when you are on your death bed does not do them justice. It wasn't just a terrorist attack it was an event that changed the world and started wars that thousands more have died in. Why don't people care anymore?

Have you ever attended a firefighting school? Or, God forbid, found yourself fighting a large fire? Do you have ANY clue how many things in a building will blow up in a fire? And NONE of them are bombs. Every, last, firefighter statement made, is on record, and in the aftermath, NONE of those firefighters think there were bombs that day.

The judge who ruled that the EPA and namely Christine Whitman had misled the public and first responders?

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596

originally posted by: sg1642

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: sg1642

Read the court materials from KSH. He does not agree with you...and since he helped planned the attack....................

First hand witness statements count as evidence in court. Why are the numerous reports of explosions in the towers ignored or explained away? If anyone knows what an explosion in a burning building sounds and looks like it's going to be firefighters. If anyone should be listened to it's the people who were there. Are they all conspiracy nuts? Why haven't the thousands of New Yorkers who have breathed in asbestos after been told the dust was safe to breath been vindicated? Why haven't the correct people been found liable? A compensation payout when you are on your death bed does not do them justice. It wasn't just a terrorist attack it was an event that changed the world and started wars that thousands more have died in. Why don't people care anymore?

Have you ever attended a firefighting school? Or, God forbid, found yourself fighting a large fire? Do you have ANY clue how many things in a building will blow up in a fire? And NONE of them are bombs. Every, last, firefighter statement made, is on record, and in the aftermath, NONE of those firefighters think there were bombs that day.

yes I have undertaken fire training and fought fires if that answers your question enough.

“there was just an explosion [in the south tower]. It seemed like on television [when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions.”

–Firefighter Richard Banaciski

“I saw a flash flash flash [at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building?”

–Assistant Fire Commissioner Stephen Gregory

“[I]t was [like a] professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear ‘Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop’.”

–Paramedic Daniel Rivera

A story in the Guardian said that “police and fire officials were carrying out the first wave of evacuations when the first of the World Trade Centre towers collapsed. Some eyewitnesses reported hearing another explosion just before the structure crumbled. Police said that it looked almost like a ‘planned implosion.'”

What you just said isn't even close to the truth.

Firefighter Schroeder recollects in great detail how he was one of the first firefighters to rush to the complex. ... As they were making there way up the floors, Firefighter Schroeder heard a huge explosion. “The elevators just blew right out. We couldn’t believe it. The plane hits 80 floors up but the elevators explode at least five minutes later? It was unreal.”

If you take the time to work out the amount of fuel the plane was carrying, the amount that was likely to have burned up and take in to account there were only a couple of elevator shafts that actually ran the entire height of the building, the story about jet fuel cascading down the shafts becomes rather flawed. If it was down the bottom of the building how could it have been at the top weakening steel? Yet to see any evidence the initial impact and explosion dislodged the fire proofing from the structure.

It's also quite insulting that you are implying fire fighters with years of experience don't know the difference between regular furnishings burning out and explosions.

a reply to: sg1642

Here is Gregory's full interview.

www.nytimes.com...

And here is the part you leave out....

"I don't know if that means anything. I mean, I equate it to the building cowing down and pushing things down, it could have been electrical explosions, it could have been whatever. But it's just strange that two people sort of say the same thing and neither one of us talked to each other about it. I mean, I don't know this guy from a hole in the wall. I was just standing next to him. i never met the man before in my lite. He knew who was I guess by my name on my coat and he called me"

You should actually read the full testimonies. Most of them are equating the noises of the buildings collapsing as "like explosions" Better yet, you should ASK them Richard is on Twitter actually.

a reply to: sg1642

How many of them have you actually talked to in person? What THEY hate, is people like yourself who use part of their words to push conspiracy theories.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

If I'm going to put entire interviews on here of people stating they have seen or heard explosions it would take days because the list is very long. The bold segment does explain the quite I gave it doesn't explain all the others that are out there.