911 Truth - Somebody Please Give It To Me!

Originally posted by grapesofraft
Well can we at least reach an agreement of who is behind 911? If it was not Muslim extremists then who commited the heinous acts of 911?

Starting a thread like this seems like a troll job to me because if you really want to know what happened on 9/11 you would do research yourself or even get knee deep in the extensive threads on the issue already on this site. You wouldn't just ask "so guys what happenned who dun it?"

You obviously have the internet and can do a google search and if you can't find info on the topic both for and against then your not going to get all your answers in one thread.

Excuse me for being blunt but i think your mind is made up about 9/11 and you are just having some forum fun. Either way ATS has extensive info on this topic and feel free to look them up and read them.

reply to post by Wally Hope


I remember watching the towers fall live on TV and thinking it was somewhat odd that they fell vertically and did not topple over.

Later though, I watched an old documentary of the designer of the building describing how he had designed it with a set of inner "poles" holding it together. Then it made sense how they could pancake like that.

The way that building was designed was pretty amazing for its time.

reply to post by grapesofraft

So if you say you know what the lies were could you please define what lies are proven to be lies?

I can only say what I think are the lies though and the best evidence. The only way for you to come to a conclusion that will satisfy you is to research the information on your own. There are plenty of threads to read if you're interesting in others opinions and not making up your own.

reply to post by Beefcake


I have read many threads on ATS and other websites regarding 911. I am not "trolling". I am simply asking if we could come to a general consensus of what the facts of 911 actually are.

I always love how people get spooked by someone seeking the truth and then start screaming "TROLL!"

reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage


See this is my whole point. TRUTH is not individual. Something is either TRUTH or it is mere speculation. A guess. A theory. A wild speculation or worse.

Lets say we were debating whether or not the Earth was flat. If some of us said that it was flat and others said it was round, and we just let everyone accept whatever answer we came up with, without choosing a side and making a case for either... we would have proved nothing.

We know it to be true that the earth is round because their is a general consensus backed up by several methods of proving it was round.

See my point?

[edit on 11-6-2009 by grapesofraft]

Originally posted by grapesofraft
Later though, I watched an old documentary of the designer of the building describing how he had designed it with a set of inner "poles" holding it together. Then it made sense how they could pancake like that.

You'd better do more research than that mate.

If you think they 'pancaked' you better go talk to NIST, they disagree with you.

I guess Beefcake was right then?

[edit on 11-6-2009 by Wally Hope]

reply to post by Wally Hope


Well maybe I did not use the correct term, but what I meant was there is an explanable reason why the towers collapsed vertically.

You know if I thought I had the truth about such an important topic, I would run around sharing it with people. I would take the opportunity to make my case of why it is the truth and give lots of details to back it up.

I would also answer any questions that the person had after I explained so that they would feel satisfied that I had given them enough info to make a good decision of what the TRUTH is.

[edit on 11-6-2009 by grapesofraft]

Originally posted by grapesofraft
You know if I thought I had the truth about such an important topic, I would run around sharing it with people. I would take the opportunity to make my case of why it is the truth and give lots of details to back it up.

Many have and Are doing just that ... trying to sort fact from fiction, if you will. Fruitless on both sides thus far, for the most part ... (?)

I would also answer any questions that the person had after I explained so that they would feel satisfied that I had given them enough info to make a good decision of what the TRUTH is.

Same as above... neither "side" seems to answer, unequivocally, the requests made with regards specific discrepencies and/or relevant omissions.

odd. that.



divide - conquer - rinse - repeat

Bin Laden= double agent
Radicals in the Mid east would be easy for such a hero to recruit.
The planes hit the buildings.
Some real heros brought down plane #4.
The explosives were planted prior to the event.
The firefighters said they heard explosions, the man in the basement was injured prior to collapse he claims explosion. Hes now convienently dead as are many others ala jfk.
Building 7 held many many secrets and is key to it being false flag as no plane hit it.
I'll never believe the official story,ever.
At the least there was collusion. Black ops cia spooks whatever you want to call them it was more than planes imo.
Thats my take on the matter anyhow,may the truth come out soon, please, so I can begin to heal after justice is carried out.

Originally posted by grapesofraft
Well maybe I did not use the correct term, but what I meant was there is an explanable reason why the towers collapsed vertically.

No, it's not about terms, it's about understanding basic physics and why a building simply cannot globally collapse into the path of most resistance.

And the fact that you don't have a clue as to how the towers, and building seven, were constructed. You were probably shown an extremely simplified version of the construction in that vid you saw.

The towers were unique for their time, but in a good way. Technology rarely goes backwards. We have had thousands of years of construction experience. Do you really think a team of engineers would design and build a tower that was potentially flawed due to a common occurrence, fire? Do you think they wouldn't know their design might have a problem if it was damaged? Do you think they just construct these buildings and just hope they stay standing?

Nah, it's only the official story believers who work on faith mate.

reply to post by Wally Hope


I am pretty sure I understand a good deal of physics. The way it is feasible to collapse vertically is because of the design and gravity.

One floor gets weak and collapses on the next, and then its like a chain reaction following the line of gravity. Obviously, the builing was built to prevent sway, because you are going to get a lot of sway in a building that size due to wind.

The guy who designed it said that he built it to withstand a direct hit from a plane, but did not properly account for a plane with a fuel load of fuel.

Not that I am saying I am right. Just saying there is a feasible explanation out there.

You still have to explain not only the firefighters reporting explosions but explain the big glob of molten steel and there is always building #7. Also see the nano-thermite thread,remember the truth will out.

reply to post by nickoli


What proof do you have of molten steel. Here is something to debunk that.
Molten Steel?

I have not ever heard any stories of firefirghters hearing explosions, but I wouldnt be suprised if they did. There was a bunch of fires going on in the building and some stuff is going to explode when it gets hot enough.

What I do know is there is no proof of massive explosions.

But I digress, I think we should be focused on building a step by step case on what actually happened that day. How else will we get our day in court?



[edit on 11-6-2009 by grapesofraft]

When I first came to ATS, I also tried to get clarification on what the truth is.

Amongst the Truthers, there is not 100% agreement except for the fact that the "Official" story is not true.

I also have doubts about the "Official" story but most part, I believe many parts of the official story.

reply to post by Wildbob77


Well I am kind of with you. I kind of believe the official story, but only because they are the only ones that have really made a real case.

I mean you could not take a case to court with what the 911 truther side has as evidence. That would be like having 10 lawyers all giving 10 different reasons why their client is not guilty of the crime.

I'm not a big 9/11 truther because I'm not needed. There are many many very intelligent people argueing this debate who are much more qualified than I to answer your questions. Seek and you shall find,when the student is ready the master appears. Start here and if you need more links just let me know.

www.wearechange.org...

reply to post by nickoli


Thanks for your help. I appreciate it.

reply to post by grapesofraft


www.youtube.com...

There is a video I like.. They had a longer version but I can't find it..

The things to come after 9/11 came out of Washington. All the legislation that had to pass so fast.. Every piece took away more & more of OUR rights. They needed the attack for WAR so they could over throw the Iraq Gov't & replace with folks they found right... Of course they gave them the right to vote, But again same as here,vote for people pre-selected. They also wanted the MONEY that came from it, and the oil...More importantly they needed to kill most of the people so the new Gov't could have control over them and land.. Another was to get rid of our men and women.. They are overthere thinking they are saving our freedom and rights. But right now our first Amendment is being raped. When is it enough??We NEED our soldiers home...Iraq's people did just as we would of, fought for thiers. they aren't wrong over there
I'm not saying they didn't have SOME GROUP of people do it,,, but they did fund it and make it happen... 9/11 was an inside Job...

Along with the Bailouts,,, and the Swine flu... All part of a bigger picture..


9/11 nearly 3000 people
soldiers lost in war, it is about 4,500
Our boys took orders with out question cause they think EVERYTHING the Pres. says goes. Which caused a genocide in Iraq. Not their fault they took orders, but they should have stood as strong as they are when Commander over stepped bounds... And said NO
I ask how is the war justified?? When they weren't even the ones to fly those planes...AND THERE WAS NEVER WMD....

sorry but i'm starting to think that your just stirring the pot a bit..From what I remember seeing the architect saying the towers were built to withstand two impacts..I may be wrong..