Yeah, 9/11 conspiracy did a pretty good job at drawing me into it. I also got pretty spooked by the “Chemtrails” conspiracy thing. But then, at the time I was very prone to such shit. Took me long enough to figure out how I was being misled by circular logic and superstitious tendencies. Shoulda known better, having had a scientific education and all… 
The funniest imo are 9/11 and the moon landing.
I’m not saying the Government did it or anything like that, but it is kind of strange how they collapsed.
I think the most pathetic argument the 9/11 truthers use is that thr term “pull” was heard. "Hurr hurr it’s used by people that demolish buildings so it must have been destroyed with bombs daahh :B "
There was an early cut of “Loose Change” that claimed the 4 planes were landed somewhere and all the people were herded off and sent… um… somewhere else. 
WTC 7 collapse footage does look like a controlled demolition.
EDIT: …but i’m not saying it was a controlled demolition. Just to clarify.
G.W. Bush totally did not make up 9/11
I thought that was due to poor design and super-hot…ness?
And no, I’m not referring to the attractiveness of the aeroplanes.
I think, however, that your post touches on a good point. While its always good to investigate things that don’t quite add up, its going too far (and I’m not saying you went there at all) when you start throwing barely-lucid accusations about vague government plots to take over the world.
You say it has no holes, yet it fails to even mention several key points. Namely: The speed of the towers falling (they fell at free fall speed with a very small tolerance). It also fails to mention the failure of NORAD (which prior to 9/11 had 100% success rate), which failed multiple times in the course of a single day. Now if you can prove a scientific reason why a tower would fall like that without mass being moved out of the way (which would require explosions of some sort), and a justification to the extreme failure of NORAD in that day, then I will be more than happy to re-read the 9/11 report with a new state of mind. Since then, I will unfortunately have unanswered questions which point to deliberate disruption and the government not telling the whole truth, either because of deliberate fabrication or because they don’t know the truth.
Actually, the towers fell at slower than free fall speeds and is consistent with the type and area of damage dealt to the building. In fact, the citation debunks the “free fall” myth.
I never claimed that they fell at Free fall speeds, I said that the tolerances were much too low to have been without mass being moved. And can you please link to the citation you are referencing. 
:facepalm:
It’s available right from the quote you posted! Did you read the entire citation?
If I remember correctly, Sky Scrapers are supposed to swing around a little bit, because they are so tall. If they didn’t, the whole thing would’ve fallen apart already because of the highwind up there. So there you have the moving mass I think. But that’s just if I remember correctly.
Moon landings. haha what a joke.
“Astronauts to the moon. Ah ah ah ah ah ah ah!”
Why does that head remind me of humpty dumpty?
I prefer Bob Lazar’s interview, but why is Mr. X in this video (and not threatening Mulder to discontinue his investigations)?
EDIT: Oh, never mind, ol’ Lazzy’s actually in this first one (I’d skipped ahead). That being said, he’s not really to be trusted, what with not actually having the degrees he said he does.
While I understand that the attack ITSELF wasn’t an inside job, there’s still way too many suspicious things.
-
Did the buildings collapse by themselves, or did someone “help them”? Please note: I would understand someone saying “Sorry, guys, we HAD to pull the buildings down, because there was a significant risk of them falling to the side and damaging buildings in 500 meter radius” – fine. What I don’t like is that they find chemicals that shouldn’t be there, they find columns clearly cut instead of “broken”, plus the whole structure falls down like in controlled demolition, and still officials claim that it was “accidental collapse”.
-
Why haven’t the videotapes from private and public cameras around Pentagon made public? If they show an airplane hitting Pentagon, why make them “national security” topic? How could showing an airplane hit a building endanger the national security, since everyone in the world already knows the plane supposedly hit Pentagon?
========
This is why I find some conspiracy theories around 9/11 (and I repeat: SOME of them) plausible.
MysticJ, please read the whole website under the already posted link, before you repeat the same questions that have already been answered (and their suspicious value been neutralized) by scientists and others who are constantly fighting against the mass stupification done by conspiracy theorists.
All of your questions have already been answered on said website (and elsewhere). The videotabe showing what hit the pentagon was released. It was filmed too slowly to show exactly what type of airplane hit the building. Until its release, it was held back by the government because it had to be part of the investigation. It was evidence in a case of mass murder and international terrorism. Of course it had to be confiscated. People look at the footage of the camera showing that blurred slo-mo of an impact on the pentagon and say: “Oh noes, that can’t be it! There has to be more! They’re hiding something from us! You cannot see anything!”
Only the last sentence is right. Yes, you cannot see anything. But that doesn’t mean there is more to it. And I think it is pretty likely that the investigators were as upset about the low quality of this video as were the American people when it finally went public.
Don’t let yourself be deceived. Only because a number of coincidences appear to you to be extremely unlikely, that doesn’t mean they aren’t just coincidences. The human brain is designed to search its environment, its world of experiences for patterns. This design can even lead to humans seeing patterns where there aren’t any. It’s an evolutionary safety mechanism: “If you see something in the high grass that looks like a lion, run for your life! Even if it isn’t really a lion. Don’t bother to double-check! It’s not worth it!”
Conspiracy theorists are known for their habit to even edit their evidence so it backs up their claims, when, for instance, the original footage of WTC columns with cuts in them was merely taken days after the attack, in the course of clean-up and rescue operations. The remains of the columns had been cut days later, in order to remove the rubble from ground zero.
So a lot of things that seem to you “suspicious” are merely made so by others who want them to look suspicious to you. As I said: Don’t let yourself be deceived. And, if you really want to believe in a conspiracy, how about this: There could be a conspiracy of people wanting to discredit the American government by spreading conspiracy theories about it. There are plenty of people in the world (even governments - lots of them) who would have an interest in destabilizing the USA from the inside.
The one is as likely as the other. The other may even appear to be more likely.
Do you really want to bother with that shit? It’ll eat you up from the inside, and all for nothing. Shadows and dust. Boogeymen and leprechauns.
Educate yourself on that matter, if you need to. But do it thoroughly. And on both sides of the table.
Do you have any idea how ridiculously hard (impossible) it would be to execute a “controlled demolition” of a building after you’ve flown a plane into it?
Like this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaPoD_7TmNc
Luckily, this doesn’t mean they actually are plausible.