Editor's Note: The Huffington Post's editorial policy, laid out in our blogger guidelines, prohibits the promotion and promulgation of conspiracy theories -- including those about 9/11. As such, we have removed this post.
911 happened, that is 2 planes hit 2 towers, 1 plane hit the Pentagon, and 1 plane went down in Pennsylvania.
The White House claimed it had no intelligence, even though that was false.
The white House used those planes as reasons to start a war in Afghanistan and Iraq.
It used those planes as the reason for it's "war on terror," and for numerous illegal policies of going around the Constitution, like spying, rendition, denying habeas corpus and torture.
The 911 families pressured the Congress and administration for an official investigation, thus 911 commission.
The commission was stacked with insiders, with its executive director himself a Bush loyalist.
The Commission produced a sham of a report and sold it to the public.
The result of those planes:
Thousands of dead Americans
Two misguided wars, some say illegal
$ Trillions spent on war.
Wrecked economy and constitution
Divided country
and a whole lot of unanswered questions.
Poboy: Let's look at this rationally and logically. 911 happened, that
Jesse, thanks! All of you adherents of the official bs, have a look of WTC7 collapse. The eyes don't lie - it's clearly a demo - as admitted by the leaseholder on TV (and reported by the BBC a full 20 minutes before it actually happened). Since it takes quite some time (many days) to set up a demo, the charges were already there. You figure out the rest.
dim: Jesse, thanks! All of you adherents of the official bs,
Popular Mechanics is not a much of source to debunk anything and that article has been de-debunked many times. The NIST line keeps changing as each bogus explanation is picked apart, from the "pancake theory" to the "playdough theory", so we've heard from Aunt Jemima and Gumby as experts: who's next?
ghostpigeon: Popular Mechanics is not a much of source to debunk
Our own government wouldn't sacrifice thousands of Americans with billions of dollars of profits and a chance to strengthen their grip on people of the United States and he world on the line? Remember the Lusitania and Pearl Harbor? Familiar ring? We were amply warned about both of those incidents and let them happen to get us into World Wars. Eventually hundreds of thousands of Americans paid the price. The latter was a needed involvement; the former wasn't, but both helped enrich American military industrial enterprises. The Cold War nearly sealed the deal and it appears 911 is the final ascendancy of military/industrial power - a power that that well-known "conspiracy theorist", Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us against. It's time to start assigning C. Wright Mils, The Power Elite, in every high school social studies class. We need an electorate that is brave enough to question power and informed enough to see how it works. We are sold, people and its because we learn and teach that conspiracies don't exist; it's all about "lone nuts". To claim that people who hold power and wealth get there by pure merit and not careful planning is what is truly absurd. Wake up.
ghostpigeon: Our own government wouldn't sacrifice thousands of Americans with billions
I heard a report some time ago that during the construction back in the 1970s, the type of coating put on the steel to resist fire was changed because of environmental concerns. The result was that from about half way up the buildings, a less effective coating was applied up to the top of the structures. The jets hit in the upper part of both buildings, where the less effective coating was. This allowed the structural steel to fail quicker than it would have if the older type of coating had been used.
Anyone else remember this report?
alex61: I heard a report some time ago that during the
The strongest part of an airplane is the wing across the fuselage. This is where all the stresses merge. The wings get lighter and weaker towards the tips. The fuselage gets weaker and lighter towards the ends. The nose of the airplane is quite weak compared to the rest of the plane.
So where did the wings go? The airplane theory says they bent back and curled up, including the engines, around the fuselage, to travel through the hole in the concrete walls that the front fuselage made.
TakeSake: In regards to the Pentagon incident... The strongest part of
Here are the problems with that theory:
1) The wings are stronger than the nose. If the nose could pop a hole in the walls, the wings should have been able to, and certainly the engines should have.
2) The wings and engines extend well beyond the hole. For them to sweep back, it would require that the wings pivot about approximately the center of the plane, with a lever arm ratio of (wingspan) / (hole diameter). Suppose this ratio is 4 to 1. Then, at 500 MPH, the when it starts to pivot the wingtip will have to now go backwards at 1500 MPH. The two collapsing wings would meet at the fuselage, complete with engines moving backwards at 500 MPH (due to being about 1/3 of the way out) which are then smashed together, into a nice cylinder, in order to travel through the hole popped in by the soft nose of the plane. As the wings account for a large percentage of the airplanes weight, suppose 50%, then the energy required (which comes only from the kinetic energy of the plane) to accelerate the wings from 500 MPH forward to 1500 MPH backward at the tips, would basically bring the fuselage to a halt (assuming everything held together) while also being weak enough to be crushed. Specious, to say the least.
TakeSake: Here are the problems with that theory: 1) The wings
3) Compare the crash to any other airplane crash. Panels of aluminum are spread over a large area - because they are held on with rivets spread over the perimeter of the panel with a few rows inbetween. They are not welded to the frame. Example: the crash in PA. It hit into relatively soft ground. If it behaved like the Pentagon crash, it should have simply buried itself intact in the ground. Instead, it broke apart, leaving identifiable debris like engines, seats, and suitcases all over.
4) If the materials used to construct the airplane were really behaved that way, you should have found a cylindrically-shaped airplane quite intact within the building. They would have needed to cut it apart to get it out.
5) You get one or the other, but not both. You can't have the nose of the place pop a clean, round hole in a strong concrete building without the engines doing the same. There should either be an airplane-shaped hole in the building, or there should be a smashed airplane on the outside.
TakeSake: 3) Compare the crash to any other airplane crash. Panels
Huh? The plane hit the building, its mass and momentum punching through the outside wall. As the plane continued on its path, it simply disintegrated along the way. The wreckage, and the bodies of the passengers were recovered-in pieces.
alex61: Huh? The plane hit the building, its mass and momentum
There are a couple things here that everyone can agree on.
- 3 floors of hot (not molten) steel can't take down 50 floors of steel let alone the WTC building.
- No building in the history of steel buildings has every gone up in flames (WTC Building 7).
I'm not conspiracy theorist I don't know if I fully believe the government played a part but someone's lying.
sacbeme: There are a couple things here that everyone can agree
You're forgetting a couple of things. Most building fires are fought by firefighters. The fires are not allowed to rage unchecked until the building collapses. Bldg. 7 had been completely evacuated because of the WTC attacks. Most firefighters at the scene were either dead or injurred. The whole area had been evacuated completely, even by emergency personnel. There was no one to fight the fires that were fed by back-up generators' fuel tanks.
Also, this fire was at the very bottom of the building. There was the weight of about 45 floors of mostly undamaged building above the weakened zone. Physics did this. Why is that so hard to accept?
alex61: You're forgetting a couple of things. Most building fires are
What ever the truth is Bush ignored threats and left 3,000 people die for the sake of planning to invade Iraq because without hysteria there would have been no Iraq war. Maybe while there investigating the towers falling someone should go back and learn why deals where struck with the oil companies and what relationship the Bush family had with the Bin Laden family. I can still remember that look W had on his face as he sat there and did not react to what was being told to him it was just not a normal reaction.
den1953: What ever the truth is Bush ignored threats and left
I would be very interested to hear what the firefighters have to say about it. You know, the people who are trained to understand the effects that fire has on buildings, the people who were IN the towers before they came down.
I'm sure they have a lot to say, but probably are unable to tell us. Unfortunately.
AnneOlivia: I would be very interested to hear what the firefighters
There's a major logical flaw in Ventura's case. First he says the buildings were made to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707. Then he says that no other such building has been known to collapse as the result of fire (of course there were no other buildings that large that had caught on fire). What's missing in his story is what actually happened, the impact of a large jet combined with horrific fire. Presumably, the combination was synergistic. I'm not saying there wasn't a conspiracy. No one knows for sure (or even whether we actually put guys on the moon), just that his case is logically flawed from the get-go.
Rubyfoo: There's a major logical flaw in Ventura's case. First he
Thank you... hostility by the government and corporate media to an actual investigation into this mass murder has overwhelming and has nearly succeeded. The fact that the debris, including the steel, where were evidence of the crime was disposed of quickly, with the steel shipped off to China is a criminal act in itself, as far as I am concerned. It was purposeful obstruction of a criminal investigation and justice.
Thank you. Please keep it up... and don't fly on small planes.
indc: Thank you... hostility by the government and corporate media to
This is really stupid. No other high rise was ever brought down by fire? Well, no other high rise ever had its guts ripped out by a gigantic, high speed "cruise missile" filled with explosive jet fuel. Duh.
The super hot flames eventually overwhelmed the fire resistant coating on the steel( which is only designed to last for a period of time anyway) and then began to melt the structural steel. Eventually, the steel failed, allowing the collapse to begin, the momentum of which gathered speed and strength with each floor. What we saw was a horrific terrorist attack coupled with the laws of physics, nothing more.
"Truthers" really need to get real.
alex61: This is really stupid. No other high rise was ever
It is very telling that nothing about this conference was reported in the mainstream media
and if not for the internet most of us would know nothing about it.
nikanj: It is very telling that nothing about this conference was
Aside from his typo, on building height, Jesse Ventura brings out only a few, but very cogent points on the inconsistencies in the official story. Mainstream media, including the HuffPost writers have engaged in an assault on 9/11 investigators with an intensity that resembles the attack on so called "communists" in the McCarthy Era. Jesse is a brave man to step into this debate. He is not the only one questioning the official line with impeccable credentials as a patriot, however, and presenting "Truthers" as potential "suicide warriors", as has been done since the actions of Joe Stack and John Bedell were used to paint people who question the government line,
"Truthers" are not Birthers, however, and all conspiracy claims are not equally absurd on their face. The question is why are people so afraid to even the questions that might reveal the truth?
ghostpigeon: Aside from his typo, on building height, Jesse Ventura brings
Because the implications of the truth are staggering. A closed mind offers psychological comfort and those impinging on the delusion with facts must be stopped at all costs.
dim: Because the implications of the truth are staggering. A closed
56 warnings. That's how many Bush received. 56 warnings that terrorists were going to fly planes into buildings. It is indisputable that HE KNEW AN ATTACK WAS IMMENINT and did nothing. He had to have known the target also. Bottom line: Bush let the attack happen. That he would assist is not that far a leap. That Obama would continue to cover for him is not that far a leap also. America is over. Long live The Corporate Police States of America-where everybody is guilty until proven otherwise.
Bloviator88: 56 warnings. That's how many Bush received. 56 warnings that
Loading comments…
911 happened, that is 2 planes hit 2 towers, 1 plane hit the Pentagon, and 1 plane went down in Pennsylvan
The White House claimed it had no intelligen
The white House used those planes as reasons to start a war in Afghanista
It used those planes as the reason for it's "war on terror," and for numerous illegal policies of going around the Constituti
The 911 families pressured the Congress and administra
The commission was stacked with insiders, with its executive director himself a Bush loyalist.
The Commission produced a sham of a report and sold it to the public.
The result of those planes:
Thousands of dead Americans
Two misguided wars, some say illegal
$ Trillions spent on war.
Wrecked economy and constituti
Divided country
and a whole lot of unanswered questions.
http://www
Anyone else remember this report?
The strongest part of an airplane is the wing across the fuselage. This is where all the stresses merge. The wings get lighter and weaker towards the tips. The fuselage gets weaker and lighter towards the ends. The nose of the airplane is quite weak compared to the rest of the plane.
So where did the wings go? The airplane theory says they bent back and curled up, including the engines, around the fuselage, to travel through the hole in the concrete walls that the front fuselage made.
1) The wings are stronger than the nose. If the nose could pop a hole in the walls, the wings should have been able to, and certainly the engines should have.
2) The wings and engines extend well beyond the hole. For them to sweep back, it would require that the wings pivot about approximat
4) If the materials used to construct the airplane were really behaved that way, you should have found a cylindrica
5) You get one or the other, but not both. You can't have the nose of the place pop a clean, round hole in a strong concrete building without the engines doing the same. There should either be an airplane-s
- 3 floors of hot (not molten) steel can't take down 50 floors of steel let alone the WTC building.
- No building in the history of steel buildings has every gone up in flames (WTC Building 7).
I'm not conspiracy theorist I don't know if I fully believe the government played a part but someone's lying.
Also, this fire was at the very bottom of the building. There was the weight of about 45 floors of mostly undamaged building above the weakened zone. Physics did this. Why is that so hard to accept?
I'm sure they have a lot to say, but probably are unable to tell us. Unfortunat
Thank you. Please keep it up... and don't fly on small planes.
The super hot flames eventually overwhelme
"Truthers" really need to get real.
and if not for the internet most of us would know nothing about it.
"Truthers" are not Birthers, however, and all conspiracy claims are not equally absurd on their face. The question is why are people so afraid to even the questions that might reveal the truth?
These corporate whores are rarely guilty, even if it could be proven in a court of law.
So what we have is a dual system of justice, one for them and one for everybody else.