With the stupid, stupid, and even more stupid thread/conspiracy theory about the Sandy Hook tragedy, I feel obliged to make this thread about 911. 11 years later people still strongly believe it wasn't a terrorist attack. Meanwhile I've had 11 years to research it and disprove this crazy theory. So basically there are three outcomes of this thread. The first is you will present evidence that can't be disproved in which case I'll admit 911 was probably faked. The second outcome is me discrediting ALL of your evidence and you admitting it wasn't faked. The third and most likely outcome is people will use shady tactics and not actually care about logic sending this thread in a downward spiral of doom. So go ahead, try and convince me 911 is more than meets the eye. I don't want you just posting videos, I want your own thoughts and words.
Fellow members that agree it wasn't an inside job can feel free to help prove my point.
While I wouldn't feel comfortable saying with certainty that it was an inside job, there are a lot of things about the attack that just feel unanswered and wrong to me. The two primary ones that come to mind are
1) the extremely low ("impossibly" low) flight path of the plane heading towards the pentagon and subsequent lack of remains.
2) The quickness and ease of which the towers fell, when only their upper floors were hit and on fire. From what I've read, the fire couldn't have even burnt hot enough to melt the material the cores of the building were made out of, let alone let the buildings collapse perfectly straight down within themselves. If you look at other buildings that have exploded and were on fire, they collapse entirely differently (or, most of the time, never collapse). These towers instead collapsed in a fashion that looked identical to planned demolitions.
There's just a lot about it that doesn't make sense to me. I'm not really going to go back and forth arguing about it, though. I will be keeping an eye on this thread.
Well your OP is flawed. What does "faked" mean? You seem to be trying to set up a straw man argument./
Start at Project For A New American Century from 2000. It was chaired by Dick Cheney. The project stated they needed a new Pearl Harbor to convince the American people to be in favor of aggressive military actions overseas to forward the agenda of maintaining military dominance for the next (current) century. 9/11 certainly fits the bill of a "new Pearl Harbor", and they have used it as motivation just as outlined in Project For A New American Century.
So in other words they wanted something like that to happen so they could forward their agenda. Did they do it themselves or simply ignore warnings and allow it to happen? It doesn't really matter which of the two it is since they wanted it to happen and used it to their advantage.
Dont think there was an inside job but I do think the govt let it happen/ignored the threat and covered up any knowledge they had to hide their incompetence. To be honest it wouldnt surprise me if the govt knew about it and wanted the attacks to happen so they could pass freedom infringing legislation but didnt expect the massive damage that occured.