We'll all REALLY know when we die, so when we truely know we can rank on each other in the other world instead of over a internet forum.

Would it be funny if our own government did this to their own people to fill their pockets? Hell yea, But either way it's still a fucked up situation.

Personally the Zionist theory is perhaps the best conspiracy out there.

You guys are really making this not fun to read. Calling someone brainwashed is no better than that someone calling another, trained professional, a crackpot.

Does anyone remember thee, "Arabs" having anthrax? Or what about the reports that were published that were outright lies saying we had CIA information that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction?

In my opinion, at the very least, these buildings were demo'd and that means someone is a murdered. Now if that is the government or a couple people that are vested in those buildings is still up in thee air, but thee evidence points to those buildings being brought down manually and not naturally so something is wrong here.

Our government has lied to us about many, MANY things surrounding this whole issue. From thee anthrax to the WMD's to which country to invade to doing absolutely nothing about North Korea and why...

I do not know who exactly to blame but if 15 of the plane highjackers were Saudi's, why did we invade three countries that have absolutely nothing in common (politically or economically) with Saudi Arabia? Hmmm

As far as 9/11 goes, just ask questions and look for logical answers. Do not discredit people simply because you think they are crazy. People thought the world was round and they were considered crazy. People also thought there were these micro-organisms that get into your body and cause you to get sick. They were also considered crazy. The reason these theories are still around today, almost 10 years later stands to mean there may be something to them. Writing thee other side off and cherrypicking facts that best suit your needs does nothing for the growth of our country or race as a whole. I mean this to both sides, the theorist and the debunkers; calling each other and members of those sides names gives you no footing with thee other side. You disagree, I think you can find a better way to get through than calling people crackpots, or brainwashed. Step it up guys. The government are people and should be trusted just as much as anybody else.

OMG I can't believe over half of this forum has donned tin foil hats. Guys, the Wiki-leaks documents proved, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that 9/11 was a terrorist attack, and not some great governmental conspiracy. But let me just ask you who believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy, have you ever heard of thermite plasma?, do you know how it is formed? Do you know what it does to structures? If not, I suggest you research it, and if so, why do you still believe the conspiracy crap?

Agreed. It's just sad how much maintstream media can influence public opinion. I'm 100% convinced that if, theoretically, there WAS no "official" story about 9/11 and everyone just saw the footage of the towers and left to use their own intuition, most people would agree there were explosives. It's painfully obvious. But since the government says there isn't, well that's it for them. Their mind is made up.

I truly believe if the government told people there was a tooth fairy, people would believe that as well. Blind faith in nationalism and government can really be a scary thing, and 9/11 has certainly taught me this lesson.

I think that there is a conspiracy. I believe that the government showed extreme incompetence at the time of the attacks. I think the US could have stopped the 911 attacks but did not due to some sort of bureaucracy. I dont necessarily blame the President but I feel someone or some group high in the chain of command fucked up. The administration of the time wanted to save face and they made up a bunch of shit which would explain some of the suspect things.

This is kind of how I feel as well.

Because seeing footage of the towers is enough for a layman to get the correct answer from is it? The people we should really listen to on this are the people who are experts in the field - structural engineering.

So, I'm going to stop arguing with people here, or at least tone it down, because obviously their mind is made up, as mine is, and continuing to talk in circles like this would eventually being to drive me nuts, as I'm sure it would many of you. But I just have one question for the supporters of the official conspiracy theory. I'm genuinely curious about this...

When you look at this footage here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A

Do you HONESTLY believe that this building imploding was a result of a few office fires and debris damage on on side? And here are a few fun facts to keep in mind:

- NO steel building has EVER collapsed from fire... in the history of the world, let alone at freefall acceleration.

- NO plane hit this building. This building was also the farthest away from WTC 1 and 2, yet the other WTC buildings, positioned MUCH closer, DID NOT collapse.

- This footage was NOT sped up. This 47 story building REALLY came down as rapidly as you witness it; in its own footprint, barely damaging surrounding structures, in... get this... SEVEN SECONDS. Near freefall acceleration, which is impossible unless there is NO resistance from the floors below.

- One of the two people trapped in this building, WTC 7, went on record saying their were explosions in the building, causing the floors below him to cave in. He also claimed to be stepping over bodies. Guess what? He mysteriously died just DAYS before the final NIST report of this building's collapse.

- Molten metal was found at the bottom of this tower - not possible with fire. And remember, no plane hit it.

- This building housed many important government documents, including cases on insider trading and the unethical practices of companies like Enron.

- Larry Silverstein owned this building, along with WTC 1 and 2, which were coincidentally the only WTC buildings that collapsed. He set up a massive insurance policy covering acts of terrorism, just weeks before 9/11. He did not own the other WTC towers, which again, were positioned CLOSER to the main towers that fell practically on them. And guess what? The other towers did not collapse.

- Like WTC 1 and 2, this building had dozens of thick steel beams running from the basement to the roof. This building couldn't implode symmetrically without ALL beams failing simultaneously.

- And remember, this is only one of literally a THOUSAND pieces of evidence. This is just one of the biggest smoking guns for me, so I was curious as to what you official conspiracy theory supporters think.

Did this building fall organically from fires and debris pelting one side, or not? Not trying to be a smart ass or anything, just honestly curious as to what you think.

Ok a quick bit of a reply to Metalli's last post

All of three, four and six world trade center collapsed almost entirely during 9/11.



That there is 3WTC, which was 22 stories before the attacks.



Also if you want a rebuttal to pretty much all your points on 7WTC
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm

Rath said: Ok a quick bit of a reply to Metalli's last post All of three, four and six world trade center collapsed almost entirely during 9/11. That there is 3WTC, which was 22 stories before the attacks. Also if you want a rebuttal to pretty much all your points on 7WTC http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm

I appalud you for attempting to tackle at least one of my points, which is probably more than most will atempt, but it's still unfortunately flawed. Notice that while the top portion is ripped to shred from the rain of debris, the building itself is still standing. No other building suffered complete collapse. That pic you posted was the closest one to reach total collapse, but there's still a good portion standing. One of the buildings suffered a gouge in its roof. But again, no other WTC building suffered complete collapse, except building 7, which was the farthest away, and even had a building between it and the main towers blocking the path of debris.

It took NIST litterally YEARS to come out with their report, and even when it was finally released, it is full of speculation and weak theories. This quote officially discreded the report for me:

"The failure of this structural column initiated a fire-induced progressive collapse of the entire building."

progressive collapse would take FAR longer than 7 seconds, as each floor would apply resistance. Also, fire is insufficient to weaken steel columns to the point of collapse.  An organic fire is asymetrical in nature, and thus would initiate an asymetric collapse. Yet the building imploded completely symetrically, in freefall acceleration.