now before i show u guys this, i would like to note that i'm not a liberal, im not a conservative, i do not favor kerry's ideals over bush's ideals (they both serve the same people, doesnt matter who won that staged election because they'd both send the country down the shitter, they're both skull & bones members etc.). now i will prolly step on a lot of toes with this post. ive played in mob server a long while back, and ive made sort of friends here(remember Little_Dude, or TheGreatEqualizer?). i respect you all, but there is something that needs to get out. you guys will ferociously deny what i post here, but if u do the research, ull find out that what i m about to tell u is true. ive devoted the last 6 months of my life to the 9/11 Truth movement and ive spent countless days analyzing the events of 9/11, photos, footage, etc. I'm really good in physics, and i am a very smart person, most of all, i always keep an open mind. now after seeing fahrenheit 9/11, i did not cheer. michael moore is a fat liberal piece of shit out to try to get money from the liberals by taking small territory from the truth movement. f911 was liberal propaganda, nothing more, and i know that as well as u know that, and it probably did more to hurt the movement than help it. the truth goes beyond fahrenheit 9/11's anti-bush propaganda about bush and bin laden being friends. now that's not a lie that they were friends, and about the oil pipeline and all that, but f911 was bullshit propaganda because it focused more on bashing bush than the truth. please, keep an open mind when reading this, your first reaction will be undoubtedly that im a conspiracy nutjob who believes whatever the media tells me. i do not. i do not hear this from the mainstream media. the mainstream media is controlled, and i do not believe a word of it, whether it's what u guys call liberal or conservative. i take no part in it. now, i present to you, the truth of 9/11.

one more note, please look up anything and everything i say. dont believe it from my mouth, look it up urself. research everything i say so that u know it's fact and that im not just making it up.

before i present the truth, i'd like to try to open ur minds a little bit with some historical examples of governments attacking their people for political gain. on february 27th, 1933, hitler burned down his own reichstag building and blamed the communists. he was able to obtain full dictatorial powers, and just like from 9/11, the people were more than willing to give up their rights for security from the internal threat of the communists, which were eliminated shortly after the reichstag fire. after this, the people were enslaved. you all know how the rest of WW II played out.

on another post someone mentioned pearl harbor being roosevelt's fault. not necessarily, but popular to contrary belief, even the history channel has no admitted that roosevelt knew of pearl harbor ahead of time. the american navy cracked the japanese naval codes and intercepted messages months ahead of time stating details about the attack.

possibly the most incriminating piece of historical evidence is a document called Operation Northwoods. It was thought up in 1962 and it detailed hijacking/blowing up American aircraft, killing marines at guantanomo bay, even a "Remember the Maine" incident on american ships, all as a pretext to go to war with cuba. if u do not believe this document exists, u can look it up in the government archives by the following steps:
1. go to http://www.archives.gov/research_room/arc/
2. click on the yellow "Search" button torwards the upper left side
3. search for "Northwoods" and hit go
4. click on the first hit, "Northwoods, U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba"
5. click on all images
6. jump to page 23
7. read pages 138-142 of the document

next, bill clinton was a douchebag as stated in a previous thread, because WTC bombing in 1993 and OKC bombing in 95 were both inside jobs as well. OKC bombing was more clear cut than 9/11. there were local news reports and eye witness reports of 2 unexploded devices inside the building that were removed by the ATF. not to mention an analysis of the damage shows it was blown OUTWARDS and not INWARDS, and amonium nitrate is NOT a powerful explosive, not powerful enough to do that much damage from across the street. you can look this one up too, you'll find tons of info about this.

one more thing in the few months prior to 9/11, bush signed Executive Order W199i telling the FBI to "back off" the bin ladens. i wonder y. the man who blew the whistle on this, John O'neil resigned from the CIA after going public. unfortunately, he was hired a few weeks after that to work in the twin towers, and he died on his first day on the job, september 11th, 2001. look this one up because this sounds something to strange to be true, but it is.

now, onto 9/11.

When a crime is committed, any TRUE investigator will look at who has the motive. now on 9/11, we were TOLD the criminals who committed the crime were arab terrorists. when you search arab/muslim terrorists, you find no real motive. you find the bs motive that the media fed us of "they're jealous of our freedom... they dont like america...". well let's not forget that al-CIAeda was founded, funded, and trained by our government. why the hell would they attack people that founded them, funded, and trained them? answer: they wouldnt. bin laden was a CIA asset. he's not gonna attack his long time business partner and friend. that notion is absurd. now let's look at possible motives for the government: to get more profits from war, to further the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) and Wolfowitz Doctrine (you can look them both up online) policies that clearly state we need a war in iraq and afghanistan and this would be sped up by a "pearl harbor" event... to get MORE control over us (PATRIOT ACT![1 and 2]), to further the police state, bring us one step closer to a dictatorship... the motives for an attack by the government are endless.

now let's focus on the actual events of that day. to be successful without the government's help, the terrorists would have to find some way to get into the country unnoticed, train to be master pilots unnoticed, and find some way to defeat NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense). See NORAD is a system of radars throughout the country whose headquarters are in Cheyenne Mountain in Colorado. they track EVERY plane in the sky on radar. they KNOW if a plane goes off course, in which case they would send fighters within minutes to investigate. what we have here on 9/11 is 2 planes simultaneously wandering off course, and yet, no fighters. the first plane was off course (COMPLETELY) for 40 minutes, the next one was off course for 70 minutes, then the pentagon plane was off course for about 40 mins as well. no fighters sent for these 3 planes. now we have examples such as payne stewart (remember, the golfer guy whose plane got off course a few years ago?) whose plane was off course for only about 15-20 mins when fighters arrived. that's a small cessna plane. these are huge boeing 757/767 jet passenger liners off course for 40-70 minutes. no fighters. those terrorists must've been something to defeat the american airspace, eh?

next we have the planes hit the towers. after only 56 (i think) minutes, the south tower magically collapses. we're told that the fire was so hot that it weakened the steel enough to cause the building to collapse. now, again, to this lie, i will turn to historical (and scientific) evidence. in 1970 (i think), there was a fire in the south tower that consumed floors 9-19 and burned for i think 19 hours. that was at the bottom of the tower. no collapse. just these past few days, a 32 story steel and concrete skyscraper in madrid spain was fully ENGULFED in flames for 17 hours, and that was days ago. no collapse. look this one up to see how major that fire was. the pictures say a thousand words. no steel-framed building had EVER collapsed due to fire in history, yet we have 3 on september 11th. coincidence? i think not. what we have here is the clear LIE stating that fire burning for only 56 minutes at 3/4 the way up the tower was enough to weaken the steel enough. jet fuel only burns at about 1000 degrees fahrenheit, yet steel has a melting point of 2800 degrees fahrenheit. the jet fuel(most of it) burned up in that giant fireball you saw. the jet fuel didnt burn much inside, and by the end there were only a few smoldering oxygen starved fires. the steel was freezing compared to what it would need to melt! in other words, those towers would not have collapsed had they not had the help of something: DEMOLITION CHARGES.

your first reaction is "how the hell can they put demolition charges into the tower without anyone noticing?" answer: easily. on the weekend of september 8-9, there was a powerdown in the WTC and engineers were seen walking in and out of the towers all weekend long. what better time to put demolition charges in? there is none. if you watch different videos of the towers collapsing, you can SEE the demolition charges. you can see... just watch the towers collapse it looks like they explode outward, and u can see in certain places the buildings popping out floor by floor, along with testimony from firefighters saying that they saw the towers start poppin out floor by floor. ill link up to a webpage with good video clearly showing the demo charges

the next event on 9/11 was the attack on the pentagon... which is a completely ridiculous claim. first of all, the official story states that the plane flew inches above the cars on I-395 to slam into the pentagon, leaving barely any wreckage at all, because most of the ALUMINUM wreckage "burnt up". gimme a freakin break. burnt up? metal doesnt "burn up". metal melts (not to mention that jet fuel doesnt even reach a temperature high enough to melt aluminum) but it doesnt burn up. yet if u look at pictures of the pentagon... you see no wreckage... and the way it collapsed (that section), if u look at the adjacent section, it looks like a CROSS-SECTION, perfectly cut like a hot knife through butter. now to disect the lie about flying inches above the cars: if you flew a boeing 757 inches above a highway, it would rip all the cars off the highway and throw them like a leaf in wind. and even with all of that, the "plane" still managed to puch neatly through 9 feet of steel reinforced concrete and 3 rings of the pentagon going in a complete straight line... without the wings being found anywhere (there was only a 12x14 foot hole made by the plane that struck the pentagon, where are the wings?). the only thing that can punch that neatly throught that much steel reinforced concrete is depleted uranium, or in english, a missile.

the next event was the plane crashing in shanksville pennsylvania. remember that todd beamer story about "let's roll!" and how they heroically wrestled the terrorists and brought the plane down? well, quoth donald rumsfeld while talking to the soldiers in Iraq on december 25th, 2004: "I think all of us have a sense if we imagine the kind of world we would face if the people who bombed the mess hall in Mosul, or the people who did the bombing in Spain, or the people who attacked the United States in New York, -> SHOT DOWN THE PLANE OVER PENNSYLVANIA <- and attacked the Pentagon, the people who cut off peoples' heads on television to intimidate, to frighten – indeed the word 'terrorized' is just that. Its purpose is to terrorize, to alter behavior, to make people be something other than that which they want to be." mis-spoke/slipped my ass. he wouldn't have said that if it didnt happen. now y the cover up? who knows. but that's a clear lie.

the last event on 9/11 occured at 5:20 PM, and that was the collapse of the WTC building 7, a 47 story building about 200 yards from from the towers. question: how does a building with only a few minor scattered fires collapse at the rate of a free-falling body in a vacum? answer: demolition charges. we KNOW this for a fact. the main reason is because of Larry Silverstein's (landlord of the WTC) admission that the firefighters said they couldn't contain the fires so they had to "pull it", controlled demolition terms for "pulling" the thing that starts the demolition. demo charges need to be put in place ahead of time, days ahead of time. controlled demolitions take WEEKS of planning, so those charges had to be in place prior to that day. now also, the building falls as if it's not even hitting the ground... it falls only .2 of a second slower than a FREE-FALLING OBJECT IN A VACUM, that is, without air resistance. now think, when this thing comes down it has a lot of resistance. all of those steel beams... air resistance. .2 slower. you cannot have a collapse of that speed without demolition charges.

there's plenty of evidence right there. here are some
sites:
www.prisonplanet.com/911.html <-- best archival source
www.infowars.com
www.propagandamatrix.com
www.letsroll911.org
www.reopen911.org (go to the bottom and get ur free 4
hour DVD about 9/11)
www.911busters.com

dont forget guys, PLEASE LOOK THIS STUFF UP. i hope you are all open-minded people, and i hope you will all look this up before telling me it's completely ridiculous and that im just a conspiracy nut. the truth is out there... look it up. i dont want to here anyone saying it is completely ridiculous if they havent looked up everything ive said with the sources ive given. thanx for all being open-minded!

You spout off a lot of crap, but you never back it up with anything.  Why not give me a site that tells me what hte temp is that aluminum burns or melts or whatever the hell it does.  I'm not talking some site like www.holyshittheusgovsucksOMGLOL.ze or anything like that either.

he did read the article blk put up.  the plane does not have enough force to blow anything off the road, just a good rocking...

o lemme guess, nasa's riddled with conspiracy theories too?

Prof. Ted Kranthammer of Pennsylvania State University estimates jet fuel temperatures ranged from 1,000-3,000°F. At 1,000°F steel loses up to half of its tensile strength and starts to buckle and deform, and at 1,400°F it retains only 10-20% of its overall strength.