Yes, but with common sense you have to ask yourself. Can a plane strike the ground, then send parts of its self flying for six miles after hitting the ground? That's a long way when such an impact was concentrated in just a small zone.

 

That was kind of the point. The debri traveled 2 miles, and yes I think it's possible.

 

The plane was approaching mach 1 when it hit the ground.

I've always felt a little unsure about the way the buildings fell.... I mean, if you look at how high the impact zones of the planes were on those buildings, IMO there is no way that takes down those entire buildings, I just dont see it as possible. Also, I've heard before that jet fuel doesnt even burn hot enough to melt steel.

 

Well you heard wrong.

It is an interesting topic. Though, most of it is rubbish I've found the most confounding part of the story of that day the crash into the Pentagon.

 

An enormous jet, flying as fast as it was claimed to have been, crashed into the Pentagon, caused minimal damage, yet disappeared. There is a small hole in the Pentagon, but nothing consistent with the holes left in the twin towers. No compelling piece of wreckage was found, let alone one that would prove that a plane had hit. Even the government has the story mixed up, claiming it has found a wheel, nothing, pieces of the wing, and the black box. Additionally, after the crash, a large, covered object was removed from the crash site. The government has yet to release what this covered object was. On top of this, there were cameras in position to see the plane hit the Pentagon. Yet the government had them confiscated, releasing only one that was of such poor quality nothing could be seen.

 

The government provided a very detailed, scientific explanation of the attack in New York, routing most all of the conspiracy theories with very legitimate explanations. In the case of the Pentagon, however, nothing near that level was approached by the government's explanation which leads me to believe something odd happened at the Pentagon, and the government knows something that the public doesn’t.

 

Of course, the government is also poor at handling rather mundane, daily business-type tasks. To keep a cover up of this proportion and magnitude hidden would be a feat unprecedented.

 

The Pentagon was designed to withstand this type of attack. The WTC was not.

 

As for your last paragraph, again I'll say this. There's not one person that wants to sell a book?

I've always felt a little unsure about the way the buildings fell.... I mean, if you look at how high the impact zones of the planes were on those buildings, IMO there is no way that takes down those entire buildings, I just dont see it as possible. Also, I've heard before that jet fuel doesnt even burn hot enough to melt steel.

 

It doesn't. But, it burns hot enough to completely compromise its structural integrity. Also, things like wood (desks, drywall) do burn quite hot.

The Pentagon was designed to withstand this type of attack. The WTC was not.

 

That was the official explanation. But, then, why did the hole into the building go so deeply? Why was it so small in circumference? If the structural integrity of the Pentagon stopped the wings, the tail, and most of the fuselage from leaving a mark, where are those things? The plane that crashed in Pennsylvania hit the ground quite a bit faster and still some of the wreckage was discernible.

 

As for your last paragraph, again I'll say this. There's not one person that wants to sell a book?

 

As for my last paragraph, I agreed with you. But, some things don't add up and I'm not one who thinks it wrong to ask questions.

I don't belive the 9/11 conspiracies at all.

 

I have an easier time beliving that JFK was killed by a conspiracy(not neccecarilly the government is responsible) I qualified on a M-16 as a sharpshooter while in the military, and having been to Dealy Plaza, I just don't feel confident that a single shooter in the Depository could have done it.

 

I also watched both the JFK and 9/11 shows last night. One thing that always bothered me about the official version of the JFK assasination, is that the "magic" bullet, while not pristine, is intact and in evidence. Where are the other two (or more) bullets. I especially want to know where the bullet that struck the President in the head went. Was it, or any other evidence collected from the limo? I would think that there would be at least a trace of ballistics evidence there.

Yes, but with common sense you have to ask yourself. Can a plane strike the ground, then send parts of its self flying for six miles after hitting the ground? That's a long way when such an impact was concentrated in just a small zone.

 

What he's saying is that the debris didn't have to travel six miles. It is six miles to the furthest site at which debris was found if you travel to it by road from the crash site. I'm pretty sure that the debris didn't use the road to move from point A to point B. As the crow flies the distance is less than 2 miles.

There was a documentary made by too french film makers (I believe they were brothers). They happen to be making a doc. about one particular fire house when the attacks happened. I am sure some or most of you have seen this. One of the brothers was in the tower where the fire department setup their command center. The only noise anyone said they heard was the sound of bodies hitting the awning outside. No one said anything about hearing bombs going off. Nor did they say anything about having the fire under control.

 

The plain and simple fact is some people just aren't satisfied with the truth. They always think the everything is a government cover up. Can anyone say for sure what would happen if a fully fueled commercial airliner hit a skyscaper? Does anyone think the engineers that designed the twin towers figured that into their plans? If the government wanted the public to support going to war wouldn't sending a dozen or so suicide bombers into Starbucks across the country achieve the same thing? Be alot simplier and you wouldn't have to kill 5000 people to do it.

If all this was a conspiracy pulled off by our own government, I think it was awfully nice of Osama Bin Laden and his lieutenants to take the blame and even offer details of the plan.

History channel just had a program on that shot down every conspiracy listed in this thread. They had experts/scientists break down the theories and explain why they were wrong. The most sickening one was the cell phone theory(basically saying cell phone technology at the time wasnt advanced enough for them to make calls from the plane and that those poor family members werent really talking to their loved ones )

I have the same feeling about JFK. You're telling me that not ONE person wants to sell a book?

 

That's the thing with me as well. There's too many people that would have had to know about this...we would have heard something by now.

 

Also, why would they use a controlled detonation of the WTC if they wanted the buildings to fall? I mean heck, they would have already been murdering thousands of people, why would they worry about the few hundred standing around the outside of the towers?

 

Also, how would they get a remote controlled plane? Did the pilot just get up and let someone else take over? Was their no pilot in the first place? Wouldn't someone notice (like a flight attendant?) that there was no pilot? :lol:

 

The videos are put together really well and make you think, but I simply can not believe any of these conspiracies at this point. I could be wrong though.

Stupid question maybe, but I've always wondered how you play something backwards?

 

There are all kinds of programs on the internet that you can download to reverse audio files.

I have never heard anything like this til now. Thanks HC now I'm going to spend the rest of my day reading all these theories and what not. Even though there is many many theories of all this, it is still a very tragic day in our history. I can remember everything about that day and Im sure that most of you do as well. I was in 7th grade drinking a chocolate milk and eating pizza when my friends told me. All we did the rest of the day was watch news on it. Very very sad day

[/b]

 

Well you heard wrong.

 

:laugh::laugh:

I'm not big on conspiracy theories but I also don't automatically assume something happened the way it did because I was told it did.

 

Stuff like this is always worth looking into, and to be honest, I'm one of those types of people that really doesn't trust the government all that much.

 

While we're on the topic of conspiracy theories, anyone read into or believe any of the theories on why gas is still our primary fuel for doing basically everything ? I've read some pretty interesting ones that are more believable than the 9-11 conspiracies.