9/11 conspiracy what do you think ??

Is 9/11 a conspiracy

  • Yes I think so

    Votes: 10 43.5%
  • No I don't think so

    Votes: 11 47.8%
  • I need more evidence

    Votes: 2 8.7%

  • Total voters


Major Contributor
The cell phone aspect has always bothered me.

What bothers me more is the clear shot of the underside of the second strike. It shows a dark underbelly, with a 'pod'. Domestic flights would not have such a feature.

As far as I am aware one of the main reasons why a black box is in the tail is for the very reason that in the main they survive a crash. So, at the Pentagon, where is the tail? No other aeroplane parts were seen at the site, not even a personal bag. The Pentgon only release a video of the attack after legal pressures and then after the passage of 5 years. Security reasons? After an attack, they are worried about security? They should have worried before and prevented it from happening in the first place.

I have tried to visualise the impact of the first and second strikes in terms which does not include some kind of 'battering ram' missile, because of assertions the buildings were designed to withstand aeroplane impact. Having seen the structural assessment, I can see that the verticals of box steel were designed as a cage, the plane was travelling at 550 mph. Would that be sufficient to penetrate the external cage with enough retained velocity to project the portions of the plane (engines etc) through the other external cage. I suspect that something would have to have been cut first. Otherwise the plane would be shredded like a boiled egg in a slicer. The plane was of 'aluminum' (aluminium). Impact force or no, what went through the outer 'wall' was shredded, and passed through the space as pieces. The aerofuel burned up in around ten minute, lighting the internal finishes and furnishings. The incendiary does not in my view fit with a clean entry and exit. In any event, the 'flash' is seen in front of the nose in the glass cage. To look at this without any 'missile' the 'lash' could be explained as some reflection form the nose of the aircraft. But that would only happen if concentrating the morning sunlight off the parabola of the nose, which would mean that one side of the 'flash' would be dark, being from the shaded side. There is also a reflection on the aircraft fusilage from that flash. For all I know, all the footage that I have seen has been doctored to show this. Did the perpetrators steal military aircraft and transfer the passengers from domestic flights. Is that something the brass would / could admit? Remember that at the time there was another unidentified white aircraft in the sky in the area.


Major Contributor
At the time cell phones were in use, the plane was at 5,000 feet, that is 2,500 feet above local ground level, in which location are celltowers and masts near 2,500 feet height above local ground. Shanksville crash site is at 2,200 feet above sea level. The land on which the masts are positioned is between 2,100 up to 2,700 feet above sea level. Very much in the realms of probability as reality.


Major Contributor
Right, I have spent a lot more time watching the video footage; it is all a collection of video that has been clipped and managed neatly (or rather visually poorly) to suit whatever point they wish to make. There are pathetic broadcasts (abc), there are conspiracy theorists that insist there were no planes, there are those that compare images without considering perspective, there are those that amplify an effect, there are those that point out digital variations that could not possibly have been made at the time of the attacks. Some videos have been compiled using already doctored footage made for DVDs to be sold. Basically there is nothing out there that is anything but doctored. I have watched however a number of shots of the second attack where the nose of the plane exits apparently the other wall, appearing almost intact, on stop frame. In others it is enveloped in a ball of flame and smoke. There is only one film showing any form of 'flash' before entry of the plane.
The position directly in front of the nose, would mean the 'missile' would have to fly upwards from that suspended nacelle, at no time was there a sign of a firing of any 'missile'. That is the one that insists it some kind of military plane. It does have what appears to be a 'shadow' on the underside of the fuselage, but maybe that is 'an addition' is anyone's guess, however, it does not show on any other video. The underside of the aircraft was blue, however it shows in that video as black. Having seen pictures of the building during construction and knowing its specification, the idea of the the fuselage constructed of aluminium and plastics passing through the cage wall, across the internal space and out the other wall, remaining intact is quite preposterous. The films all show disintegration upon impact.
[Fuel poured down shafts taking fires with it to other floors.]
Therefore the 'exiting fuselage' is either an illusion or it has been supplanted into video to give the idea that 'official' footage is a fake. The angle of entry and exit would require an angular trajectory without distortion to the fuselage. Out of the question. To place any trust in footage on the Net or on DVD is futile.
Incidentally, have you explored ....


Major Contributor
On what I have seen, read and heard. I believe that the balance of probablity is that there was no concerted plan on the part of Politicians or of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to have 'masterminded this most heinous of crimes against their own people, particularly in view of the power which is gives each participant over each of the others, bearing in mind the limited time which each member would be in power. The balance of probability, given earlier scenarios in world politics and in the areas of conflict, indicate to me that internal communication stinks, that details can and do get exposed, that in general the schemes are (with the exception of the men on the ground) less ably handled than the average episode of 24 would indicate happens. In the field it all comes out, why should it be any different on their home soil.

I cannot see the premise on which such a crime would be committed, perhaps on the basis of discrediting the terrorist cells and groups; if it was to score Brownie points for action against the terrorists, where are the culprits and their punishment, the apparent inadequacies in that are having the opposite effect.

It is not directly affecting the world economic sitauation, it has not altered widely held perceptions of the US that have always voiced opinion against military, political and business oppression and interference. The fact of in the passage of time since has not appeared to have shown the elimination in suspect circumstances of any high ranking official.

I can see, like an item of artistic merit, evidence in a court of law relies upon the chain of purity, its provenance; remove that continuance, and the evidence is suspect. Keep it sealed and it is not suspect, until released and then it is viewed by many as tampered evidence. That is the choice to be made. In any trial, it makes no sense in releasing information pre-trial, as it will bias the courts and juries. Therefore the whole matter is 'hushed'.

In amongst any participants in collusion there would be those with reservations, there would be those that quietly save files for self protection and those that openly say, you go down, we all go down. Neither can I accept that the need to know was limited. Any department in order to arrange or give instruction would have to use all channels of communication, or were they all using specially configured untraceable mobile phone aligned through a single secret satellite... this is 2001 remember.

Any paper files or digital files require personnel to type and to collate. We are beginning to reach the thousands of those 'that knew'. How can that be contained? The US is neither Nazi Germany or under Stalinist CHEKA rule.

I still believe is is a catalogue of bungling and incompetence, hence under litigation and accountability it results in a wall of silence from separate bureacratic agencies. As time progresses, the agencies become entities of themselves and the office is passed on from personnel to personnel, each stage with less accountability than the last. It is no different from going in to any office in Britain, 'nothing to do with me mate, I only started here last year'.

Assertions that it is an 'inside job' seem to be more appropriate in Lexx where Prince masterminds the evil plot to install the greasing idiot Priest as President. All we need now is for Mantrid to arrive, having come here to convert the lizard people into drone droids and take us into the Dark Zone.
Last edited:


Senior Member
Laws of Physics and the official 9/11 cover up

Cynicism and sarcasm don't blaze any trails when it comes to exploring the truth. Treeve states that the 'alleged planes' disintegrated on impact. Well from the footage I've seen, the planes apparently disappear into the building without so much as a bent wingtip or bending of fuselage before the firestorm. If the US gov't has nothing to hide I say once again, how come the Pentagon, HQ of the massive US war machine, could only muster five still frames obviously edited from live footage, none of which shows an airliner yet exhaust can be seen which doesn't happen to come out of airliner jet engines at ground level?
Why withhold the footage, let alone confiscate cctv footage from establishments within view of the Pentagon unless there's something you don't want Joe Public to know? Pearl Harbour took the US into the second world war and the US knew about it in advance ! The Gulf of Tonkin incident which took the US into the Vietnam war was a farce. WMD ha ha ha. So even if we forget all the footage, the laws of physics come into play. Pilots for 911 Truth agree that airliners couldn't perform in the manner portrayed on TV. Where were CSI 911? The forensic evidence was removed fom the site pronto. Freefall speed compared to the time it took the buildings to be disintegrated suggests little or no resistance through the alleged path of greatest resistance. Consider the witness reports of explosions from the basement of the WTC. Recommended viewing includes: Zero, the Loose Change series and In Plane Sight. Take a closer peek down the rabbit hole and you'll see the corporate connections between the Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney gang and the Iraq, Aghanistan occupations. The Bin Ladens and Bush family are on each other's Christmas card list.
Don't take my word for it. I recommend starting with the documentary called ZERO on this site:
I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm just broad minded enough to question and research facts that don't add up.


Major Contributor
Did I say that I do not have questions, or concerns as to the actual events? Any so called video-evidence is highy suspect. The footage that I have seen however, in one form or another shows clear disintigration of the planes as they hit the cage structure, with the passage of plane parts through the exit wall of the trajectory. An engine in particular. Whatever is shown as happening in the various TV shows of forensics has little to do with reality. My question for example relates to the biggest war machine in the world, and yet its surveillance cameras are barely as good as the average home pack that can be bought from the ads in a newspaper. The footage that was eventually released after legal pressures is indeed fuzzy; unless the Pentagon are ashamed of the cost cutting results, or that they had no idea that such a thing could happen - highly unlikely, but, human nature being what it is not everyone has the perception of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle - I have no doubt that most of them simply are there to earn a crust and get home to their burger and fries in front of the latest episode of V. :)
Everyone is feeling ashamed and guilty that they had a part in the biggest disaster that hit the States, and not one of the agencies in official power was anything but found wanting. Their whole system was not a system at all. What they are desperately trying to withold is that they are just as vulnerable as any other country when it comes to it, and that they could not or were not able to prevent the events, because they were not prepared, or that they were ill equipped, or that they were too proud to accept that they could possibly be targets.
I will look through the site you suggest, as I have been doing; if you know me at all, I explore avenues of thought.


Major Contributor
OK, I have just watched 90 minutes of evidence in my kind of language. Clear concise and powerful.
Architects and Engineers clearly addressing my own concerns that the outer cage collapsed at the same rate as the interior and the slabs.
Impossible without controlled demolition.
It also clearly demonstrates complicity at some level; the immediate clearance of steel for re-cycling of primary evidence from the biggest crime on US soil is more than compelling evidence, most of all because it defies primary fire investigation ruling.
It is clear that Sunder is either inadequate, or lying, or 'got at'.
Knowledge of controlled demolition calls into question EVERYTHING.


Major Contributor
I have been pushing hard to get someone to postulate a plausible scenario as to why. No replies, but, thanks to ibrowzwe, I have now watched 102 minutes of the most damning evidence and pointers.
It also explains reasons and details which, outside of video footage, give undeniable connections with the attack. The explanation of the 'white aircraft', and the lies and cover ups are much more succinct.
Along with which is the deliberate destruction of the evidence that was lost in Building 7. A carefully planned piece of 'intelligence' work.


Senior Member
Why would US citizens plan 9/11?

I don't know exactly why but two interesting bits of information are the insurance cover taken out on the buildings against terrorist attack by the owner Larry Silverstein only months beforehand coupled with the fact that there was a massive and costly asbestos issue needed to be taken care of.
My wild imagination pictures Larry's mouthing off about his asbestos issues and being overheard by the Cheney gang in some VIP exclusive NY restaurant. So they sit round a table and work it all out. Hey presto, no asbestos removal bills for Larry as he provides the arena for the New Pearl Harbour giving the Cheney gang the war they so desperately require to keep their plans for global domination rolling.
Oh yes, can anybody name any other multi storey buildings that have collapsed purely as the result of fire? There are examples of towering infernos that didn't collapse.
Aaron Russo had a lot to say about it before his untimely death. Tony Blair..Middle East peace envoy.....don't get me started..peace out.


Major Contributor
I have had experience with five storey buildings that have been severely damaged by fire. Stone and brick buildings, with steel girders and columns, It was extraordinary to see steel beams draped over the older timber beams, like christmas festoons. The massive timber baulks were charred, producing their own fire protection. The fireproofing to the girders had popped off, reducing the protection with which they had been constructed. One thing I do know from structural works that I have handled is that box girders/columns requires a considerable amount of force and heat to distort. It is one thing for reinforced concrete work to split from fire, exposing the reinforcement, and allowing failure, allowing the upper floors to descend at a rate of knots. Quite another for the outer cage to react in the same way. Seam welding forms a unified structure. It has to be broken into sections, otherwise the floors collapse, leaving the structure intact as a complete frame. That is what worried me. A point that came out of the film that I had not noticed before was the upper section tilting and descending free fall beyond its equilibrium without toppling. The controlled demolition must have taken two or three weeks to set up and wire. Detonations require perfect timing to ensure collapse within 'footprint'. Perhaps a series of radio fused timers, either way it must have been seen. The mind boggles. It has to have been triggered. In many ways this is bizarre, it advertises a glaring 'interference' in the laws of nature. However it is the precursor for Building 7's collapse, destroying most of the incriminating eveidence. The TV announcement and spiel as to the collapse of this building 20 minutes before it actually did (with the building still plainly in view behind the reporter) unveils a media collusion, which places all media coverage and media footage as suspect in itself.
Fabled Enemies was made in 2008. It makes so many points clear and makes so many connections that if able to be proven as defamatory or libellous, as fabrications they would have been removed by litigation within a few weeks. They are still online after over two years.


Senior Member
Fear of the Unkown

Controlled demolition of the WTC buildings on 911 is a safe alternative suggestion to the official rag mag produced by NIST. There are however some unexplained anomalies recorded on camera that are downright bizarre. U shaped girders and cars that from the rear appear to have just been waxed yet the front part is crozzled toast. Burning vehicles surrounded by swathes of unlit sheets of paper. I have no scientific or technical experience so find it difficult but not impossible to see what this following link is trying to explain. You'll need to strap yourself in for this lot:
The information on Dr Judy Wood's website helps to bring into focus the initial disbelief one might naturally feel whilst watching the documentary called 'September Clues' which can be found via a link on one of my previous posts on this subject. It's a tough one but if no planes were involved that would explain why no jets were scrambled or why the onboard transponders didn't alert air traffic control to a possible hijack scenario not to mention the cell phone query.


Major Contributor
The 9/11 conspiracy: What do I think?
It's a good topic for a discussion; it's thought-provoking; it's frightening; it's possible; it's unlikely to my mind but that's probably because it's such a mind-blowing proposition; globalistic plots could well be the new communism; I'm too fick to judge the truth as the wood is too complicated to see for the trees; I'm disinclined to think man could be so devious ::13:but I'm probably too naive to make a judgement!

Thank God, there's a superior intelligence and more to eternity than this earthly existence, and it doesn't really matter anyway as we're saved in spite of the worst this world can throw at us - that is, unless Jesus was a charlatan designed to mislead us in a beneficial way (I can't see much evil inherent in his guidelines personally). That he was a charlatan takes some swallowing. I'd be less prepared to believe that than the depths which Man can plumb! ::6:


Major Contributor
Thank you @ibrowze, I will explore the site, particularly as it is obviously a very wide look, and explores many possibilities, and it is my language. It will take a lot of reading and thought. My immediate worry is that as far as I know a Directed Energy Weapon has not been 'reported' as ever being used on a sky scraper and the outcome may not have been in accordance with plans (but then, who are we to be told of such things?) but in any case there would have been some doubt as to the efficacy in such a case, and the all important destruction of the CIA office. But, I will read it all and watch the Architects and Engineers video again. Either way, for the record, it was necessary for me to look at each query in isolation as a reponse, in order to frame the big question. The surrounding events are clear enough indication of complicity and/or a self directed hit. Including your point about insurance, though it would have had to have been insured prior to that date as a responsibilty toward the occupants of the building.
There would be many reasons as to why no jets were scrambled, the answer would have been simply to stop the planes dead, but they were not.
The point as I say is that a) videos from most sources are poor and doctored. b) the media was in on it. hence any 'official video' is also suspect. I trust a still picture more, as it is better definition and the shadows and other features are measurable. A video is a collection of poor quality stills in sequence with images morphing into each other. In general although a still can be manipulated, the evidence of such is reasonably able to be seen. If you are familiar with digital images.


Dev Team
I do apologize for being somewhat quiet these couple of nights I've been busy looking through all the links and publications that have been published by all of you, and what a set of links they are they are very interesting well worth a look thats for sure. Thank you Treeve and Ibrowze ::7:

I'm so pleased at everyones posts and interaction and as i'm sure many can see there are simply more questions than answers after a little bit of research and time things do not quite appear as what is first thought.

Ibrowze i love the last link it is certainly a straight to the point one thats for sure. And keep up the links I'm finding them very interesting especially when they see things in a different light than a previous one I've seen on the same subject.

I'll be posting up some of my own questions and thoughts on some of the less thought about things that simply did not add up on 9/11 later and I would very much appreciate everyones own opinions on them.

Keep up the discussion people this is very quickly becoming the most active topic on PP and try involving others in the discussions we host to help broaden our horizons on subjects, its always nice to hear other peoples opinions.


Senior Member
Just in case you believe the official 911 story..>>>

Have I got news for you....Here's a link to my fave icebreaker for anyone who believes what the network tv news reported as facts surrounding the destruction of the three WTC buildings, 1,2 and 7.
It's on a website that is choc a bloc full of downloadable videos oozing with wisdom. 'My Stroke Of Insight' for instance is a brilliant first hand description of what happens when someone has a stroke. Truth seekers, just go there and fill yer boots.


Major Contributor
An enthralling, magnificent and emotional film. The term 'theory' should be omitted. It is a fact with no documentary evidence. Even Osama as an image is a fake. I have never been a fan of the US government, though not 'anti', but when the Bush administration continued over two (and I use the term very loosely) men, the whole bunch, ate into my thinking, as being highly suspect and devious.
They did not even follow the basic rule, if you tell a lie, tell a good one. The minute the evidence is examined, the whole pack falls.
Though not of itself a controlled demolition. ::6:


Senior Member
Inconclusive outcome

Until a genuine and thorough independent investigation is held I don't believe we'll ever get to know but thanks to all those who ask pertinent questions and present irrefutable observations based on scientific facts it becomes insulting to be expected to accept the official FEMA and NIST reports.​
Top Bottom