Erie coincidence

The government was behind 9/11. Why? To make billions of dollars really quickly.
How did they make so much money? Well, it would take a really long post to tell you.
What proof do I have? Loads.

You.

You spelt his name wrong, Crate lol. Yeah lets get into this.

[crait]

Okay, firstly, the buildings both fell at free-fall speed using this equation: http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/gbssci/P ... U1L6a1.gif
Why did the buildings fall at free-fall speeds? The only way possible; The base of the buildings were bombed from under ground. The proof? Melted bowls of steel underneath the buildings, underground out from under them. Why would this even happen? The special metal that the buildings are made out of (can't remember the name) can resist really hot flames that little fires can't produce. Oh, right. Why would there be fire down underneath the buildings?
Check out the last video at the bottom when you finish reading this post.
Also, you can clearly see bombs detonating from the sides of the building whenever the planes fly into them. A few of the bombs explode too early too before the planes touch the buildings.
Want a video of the multiple explosions inside the building? Here's a short clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cD6ibU8DaFw
(A side note, there were people calling from inside the buildings and people that got out in time, and people who were outside that stated they could here multiple bombs going off. One of the news crew people even said from a helicopter that's what it looked like like right after it happened.)

But what about Osama Bin Laden saying he did it on videos? C'mon. That's garbage. Many videos showed him writing in the videos with his right hand. He's left handed. It's even stated on the CIA website. He was also wearing a gold right in one video, which, in the Islamic faith, is a one-way shot to hell. He also looks very different from video to video. More on this in the video at the bottom.

But why would the government do this?
To make billions of dollars. Check the video at the bottom too for more on this one.

There's soooo much more evidence such as the missile that hits pentagon instead of the plane, how the fuel magically dissolved the entire plane to leave no evidence in the Washington field.....
Everything you need to know and more, here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 3501&hl=en
It's a must watch by all Americans.

[crait]

How wide are a plane's wingspan?

The planes wingspan would be roughly 125 feel wide and it would have left a mark that wide only if the plane hit precisely perpendicular to the Pentagon which I assume it did not. The hole does not appear to be wide enough to account for much of a wingspan at all how wide is the hole? Anyone?

[crait]

I think they said 16 meters?

I completely agree, i build houses myself and know that everything has to be built to bear loads as you build up, each floor must support the one above it. So a building that high with high wind velocity will not fall straight unless its weight bearing points are all demolished simultaneously. only way to do that would be with explosives, and im pretty sure there wasnt any kind of taliban running around planting thousands of explosives undetected.

By the way crait, theyre called steel girters

im pretty sure there wasnt any kind of taliban running around planting thousands of explosives undetected.

Yea it is very improbable that someone, ANYONE in a cave command center could have orchestrated the events of September 11.

I point to the Vice President for shifting shoot down authority form an Airforce Colonel to either the President Vice President or the Secretary of Defense. That action, that shift in authority ensured that 4 civilian aircraft could be hijacked and that they could fly wherever they wanted without being impeded or shot down. if all 4 planed were shot down that day we may have lost less than 100 people instead of 3000.

A shift like that had NEVER occurred in history and if Cheney left things as they were then the system that has been in place for 50+ years would have operated like it has so many times in the past.

Cheney may not be completely responsible but, I bet he can point to someone that knows who was really responsible.

[crait]

By the way crait, theyre called steel girters

No, I know what girters are..
I was talking about the specific type of metal they used. Some metals have different melting points than others.

here guys. 9/11 is no conspiracy you crazy folks

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technol ... 27842.html
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html

Anyone that thinks there is no 9/11 conspiracy has to take into consideration lots of factors:

WTC7 was not hit by planes. How did it catch on fire and collapse when buildings closer to the towers remained standing weeks afterward?

Why didn't the 1975 fire that burned for 3 hours on the 11th floor of the North Tower bring it down?

Why didn't the 32-story Windsor Tower in Madrid collapse? http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/02 ... index.html Here is another building fire that did not result in collapse http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bally%27s_Las_Vegas There are more, many more, find some yourself.

The planes that hit the towers disintegrated but why is there no trace of a commercial airliner or even luggage in Pennsylvania or The Pentagon?

Why did the FBI hide video evidence of the plane smashing into the Pentagon? How come the public footage shows no plane? Why do witness accounts not agree on what hit The Pentagon?

Most importantly

Why was shootdown authority transferred from NORAD to the President, VP and Secretary of Defense ONLY by Dick Cheney weeks prior to 911?

How did Marvin Bush get to be in charge of security at the WTC complex?

Why did FEMA handle the investigation for WTC instead of a more qualified department like Department of Transportation?

Why was ground zero cleaned up before ANY investigation was completed?

Why was the 911 commission not performed by independent investigators?

When Kennedy was shot the Warren commission began a week later and we "knew" Oswad did it. The 911 commission began over a year later despite opposition from the The White House. Why?

The above links do not answer any of these questions, neither does the 911 commission report. Are there any links that do?

Allistor, nothing changes the fact that a building of that magnitude fell straight down which is virtually impossible without the weight bearing points being demolished simultaneously. If the plane smashed a couple when it hit, that would bring the floor above it down at an angle and that angle would become greater as it fell.

The links do a non convincing job of explaining that. Also 3 buildings fell in their foot print on the same day?
Why do we need controlled demolition teams to set explosives if this is naturally occurring phenomenon?

[DarkPacMan77]

This is bullox.

Ever seen the movie 23?

If you look for 23, you will find it. Next we'll see a youtube video of how much our public school systems have in common with the attacks on 9/11 because teachers were having children solve equations of 9 + 11 =

Besides that though, the idea of crashing planes into the WTC wasn't a new idea on 9/11. It's been thought about very extensively - even as much to be part of the reason they built the towers the way they did - to withstand a strike from an even larger and more optimally fueled jetliner than those used on 9/11. I don't know how the towers fell, but it didn't look natural - and I'll leave that right there for now.

But yea, ever since the conceptualization of skyscrapers and airplanes were invented/ developed, there's been talk of planes flying into buildings. The WTC just stands as one of the most obvious targets because it was built partially for the intent of showing America's engineering capabilities. Antenna and all, the total height of the towers were 1776 feet tall - couple that number with the beginning of America and you can clearly begin putting together the obvious reasons why the WTC would be an obvious target for terror, as well as an expected one - if not merely for the work that they did.

-DarkPacMan77-

[crait]

Okay, here's the low-down on these links, Alistor...
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm actually did not answer any questions. Read 7. It was halarious. They just restated the question. Also, none of these questions were the major factors making people believe 9/11 was an inside job.
On http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm , the first question answered only responded by a single picture. We all know how easily pictures can be manipulated. I'm part of gfxBrew, C'mon. If it was a military plane with a pod or not, that wouldn't change people's opinion that 911 was an inside job. On their claim that the metal within the towers did not melt and didn't need to melt for a plane to take it down is completely stupid. They said it could dislodge the girters. Check out this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvaKyxXU ... re=related Yes, melting steel. And when they said why the WTC 7 fell hours after the two World Trade Centers fell is because of debri?! Lolzerz. What? And their answer to the question, "Why was the hole in the pentagon 16 feet wide when the plane was 125 feet wide?" was that one wing hit the ground and broke off and the other broke off once hitting the building. Please refer to this image: http://www.travelinlibrarian.info/911/W ... ntagon.jpg Where are said wings?
As for this site: http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html I couldn't understand what it was of. How do I use it? Haha.

Where do any of these sites say anything about the plane that supposedly crashed in a meadow? There was just a dent in the ground. No wreckage or anything. Where do these sites say anything about Osama not doing it?
Just because something has a lot of words in it, doesn't make it a correct. Answers from sites like these like to include a lot of extra words and stuff about absolutely nothing to try to get you to believe nonsense.

What I think is funny is how the government lies all the time. Watch this super, super short clip for a second...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm73wOuP ... re=related

@DPM If you look for something, you can find it. If I wanted to see a retard hump a camel, I could find it online.
But, if you don't look at something at all, you'll be lied to and used.