i have watched like 40 hours of programmes about 9/11 and i saw in some of them that there were matienence on the elevator shafts for 2months 6 months before it happened

Decagon wrote okay now listen. Gravity acts on all objects. thats why they hit the top of the towers. hitting the top of the towers weakens the rooms inside (the structure) and eventually it gave out and collapsed now building architects dont count on 1000+lbs falling on the floor at a given velocity on a weakened structure. now go out side and find some sand or loose dirt. Got it? good. now take a tennis ball and drop it. see how the dirt/sand shoots out from under it when it hits that gave the building the "expolding" effect and did you see some fire while that was happening? WELL NO SH*T! a jet just flew into a building and that jet was most likely on fire and you know how they make jets fly? something called JET FUEL. JET FUEL IS EXTREMLY FLAMMABLE AND EXPLOSIVE! so sherlock of course theyre'd be another explosion itd be a miracle if it didnt explode again. Men and women died on that day while you prabably didnt even know what had happened. they faced death while you sat there like a dumbf*ck trying to figure out what shirt to wear that day. Show some D*mn respect! God Bless

:O Someone who's sensible and knows something about physics on the internet, well done sir.

Mimz wrote I know that barely anyone will listen to reason on this thread, but here we go.
The Jet Fuel could cause an explosion.... Or if the terrorists had bombs on the planes as well.
Think about it, plane crashes into tower, gas leaks and touches any fire or spark, then there's your explosion.
Obviously, there would be a massive amount of fuel in the tank and that would amplify the explosion along with any other combustible parts in an airplane.

Also, you know that plenty of structures have collapsed.. An example is a radio tower that was hundreds of feet up built out of solid metal. It randomly collapsed. if half of the towers support was gone from fire or explosion, that would certainly cause the rest of the building to collapse and add more wait onto the towers.

True, but not the way it collapsed. It was brought down in it's own footprint without any resistance. Those are the main two reasons of why this doesn't add up. It hit the top, which would have left the middle and down still stable, at least for the most part. The lower floors would have caused at least some resistance, but there was zero. It would have potentially have fell over as well. The top should have just collapsed into the streets and surrounding buildings if it wasn't a demo. There is no way an explosion at the top would destroy the beams at the bottom and middle (which is the only way it could have fell the way it did.) That is just physics.

Mimz wrote

Decagon wrote okay now listen. Gravity acts on all objects. thats why they hit the top of the towers. hitting the top of the towers weakens the rooms inside (the structure) and eventually it gave out and collapsed now building architects dont count on 1000+lbs falling on the floor at a given velocity on a weakened structure. now go out side and find some sand or loose dirt. Got it? good. now take a tennis ball and drop it. see how the dirt/sand shoots out from under it when it hits that gave the building the "expolding" effect and did you see some fire while that was happening? WELL NO SH*T! a jet just flew into a building and that jet was most likely on fire and you know how they make jets fly? something called JET FUEL. JET FUEL IS EXTREMLY FLAMMABLE AND EXPLOSIVE! so sherlock of course theyre'd be another explosion itd be a miracle if it didnt explode again. Men and women died on that day while you prabably didnt even know what had happened. they faced death while you sat there like a dumbf*ck trying to figure out what shirt to wear that day. Show some D*mn respect! God Bless

:O Someone who's sensible and knows something about physics on the internet, well done sir.

thank you sir, and all you idiots that think this was our goverment, i ask you what section do you think would do this and what whould be their motive?

I really think the goverment did it. Bush could of did 9/11 so he could attack Iraq.

Here is my take on your questions



1. Why is our emergency number 911? It was chosen before 9/11 about 40 years ago.

I would say that it is just coincidental. All community services have "1-1" after a 4 or a 5 or 9, for instance.

2. Why are there blasts before the ripples in videos of the towers collapsing?

It was believed to be the floors giving away since the one floor "pancaked" on top of the other, but still plenty of people believed it was a bomb.

3. Why wasn't there a big investigation?

There was (9/11 Commission Report) but they don't want to release too much to the public, so accusations and different conspiracies, just like this one, won't stir up and cause too much trouble.

4. Why was there a bombing in the Level B Parking Garage in 1993?

Prior to 9/11, Al-Qaeda had already been targeting the World Trade Center, and this was their first, unsuccessful attack.

5. Prior to the above, did they rebuild/restrengthen the structure?
(That could be a possible reason of it collapsing)

They added fire-retardent to all of the main infrastructure of the building, but when the planes hit, they had so much force that the forward movement of the building caused the retardent to fly off of the pillars, which is why the building collapsed.

6. Why was there some form of Flowing Molten after the plane/s hit?

It was a mixture of fire, steel, and jet fuel.

7. Why did WTC 7 collapse, with steel frame & fall straight down similar to a controlled demo?

WTC 7 was the closest of all buildings surrounding the Twin Towers, and took the most damage from the collapses. Since it took so much damage, it caused fires inside of the building and damaged its support structure (from the top, down) and caused it to collapse just as straight as the other two towers.

8. Why did people in the lobby say they heard a blast and many people were effected in the lobby?
(Also, why did it look like a "BOMB" went off inside?)

With all of the things inside of the buildings crunching together at such high force, I assume that large amount of metal and steel colliding would sound somewhat similar to an explosion.

9. Why did many people say it sounded like explosions?

Same as the above answer,

10. The pentagon, there wasn't any sign of a plane and the damage was to small to be a plane.
(Rumored to be shot by a missle or hit by a drone)

It had to be a plane. Witnesses that saw the plane knew what company OWNED the plane before it hit. And even if it was a missile, what would've happened to Flight 77? It's not like it crashed into the middle of nowhere, and nobody found it or something.

11. What do you think the truth of 9/11 is?

I think it was a controlled terrorist attack against the United States. There is definitely enough evidence to prove all conspiracy theories wrong. You know what they say...a camera never lies. Plus, with audio recordings, witness reports, and other pieces of physical evidence, I am certain the United States had nothing to do with 9/11 besides trying to defend our country. Besides, why would we brutally murder 3,000 of our own people, and then go to war with multiple countries in the Middle East killing even more innocent people?


But that's just how I see it.



*LeBron-James

Decagon wrote

Straight-Edge wrote

Mimz wrote I know that barely anyone will listen to reason on this thread, but here we go.
The Jet Fuel could cause an explosion.... Or if the terrorists had bombs on the planes as well.
Think about it, plane crashes into tower, gas leaks and touches any fire or spark, then there's your explosion.
Obviously, there would be a massive amount of fuel in the tank and that would amplify the explosion along with any other combustible parts in an airplane.

Also, you know that plenty of structures have collapsed.. An example is a radio tower that was hundreds of feet up built out of solid metal. It randomly collapsed. if half of the towers support was gone from fire or explosion, that would certainly cause the rest of the building to collapse and add more wait onto the towers.

True, but not the way it collapsed. It was brought down in it's own footprint without any resistance. Those are the main two reasons of why this doesn't add up. It hit the top, which would have left the middle and down still stable, at least for the most part. The lower floors would have caused at least some resistance, but there was zero. It would have potentially have fell over as well. The top should have just collapsed into the streets and surrounding buildings if it wasn't a demo. There is no way an explosion at the top would destroy the beams at the bottom and middle (which is the only way it could have fell the way it did.) That is just physics.

another idiot of course....okay listen up you dumbf*ck get well rested and at 100% tip top shape now get a ladder and ill drop 1000lbs on you and if your right you shouldnt be squashed and be able to catch this on your back cause your legs (beams/Sturcture) are perfectly fine. or i could be right and it doesnt matter how strong something is if one floor falls and breaks the next floor then those 2 floors breaks the 3rd floor and then the 4th etc. keep gaining momentum and soon you got half a building of metal and concrete falling on the bottom half which is perfectly fine. but doesnt matter cause once the falling floors breaks the halfway mark they just keep getting heavier and faster as they fall until they hit the ground

And you even said it yourself, lol. It will "keep gaining momentum." That is implying there should be resistance when there was zero. Your argument is now void. In order to gain momentum, something had to have resisted originally. Look up some videos of failed demos where the whole bottom of a building was destroyed out from under it causing the whole building to land on the second or third story. Do you know what that building did? It toppled over like physics stated it should. If a 25-30 story building fell full weight on one of it's storys and remained intact, how does a couple of floors falling on multiple fall as fast as gravity could push it? Makes no sense. The problem is not about the towers falling in their own footprint as it is how fast they did it. No resistance is a problem. Only in a perfect demo would that be possible. Explosions also had to occur near the bottom as well because most (a great majority) of the concrete of the building got obliterated to dust. Chunks should have fell from the building, but of course we have more evidence of a demo. I don't just blame someone (even our government) for everything I can. I look at the evidence given to me. I'm not saying it was them, but they did cover up the truth. We got into the Vietnam War because of one of their lies, which was proven. They didn't tell Pearl Harbor that the Japanese were coming even though they got the warnings that they were. NOTHING about the JFK assassination adds up. I think I have every right to believe they had something to do with this as well. The science proves it wasn't just the planes that caused it, and the government has a very dirty record with lying to it's people.

I really refuse to believe that the US Government is that despicable as to brutally kill 3,000 people for oil. (the main reason all conspiracy theorists believe we planned this attack)

Don't forget Bush was reading to kids when this all happened and the book was upside down when one of the security men told him what happened and he continued to read and looked like he didn't gave a sh*t

i think they didnt care about the safety but when they got caught they acted like they did