Museum scours world for new videos of 9/11 attacks

Thursday 10th September, 03:34 PM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 41 Total Comments Show All

Damien15 at 10:42 AM JST - 11th September

skipthesong, I'm glad we have someone here that has first hand experience. How big would you say the biggest pieces of the rubble was, when they were being transferred to the barges? How many floors fo the building was still standing?
skipthesong at 11:55 AM JST - 11th September

Oh, they were big but I didn't take a camera. I did not take a look at how they were placed on the barges, but when taking a ferry to Jersey I think I saw a few that took several barges. But I don't see how that helps you case.

Do you really believe GWB was able to come up with such an idea? I don't.
Damien15 at 04:29 PM JST - 11th September

I don't think GWB had anything to do with it either. Not even sure if he was involved. Surely I have more questions than answers. I don't like conspiracy theorist, neither anarchists. But when I saw the top of the building is falling with an angle, I was sure it didn't receive any resistance from the floors below. That fact itself is a proof enough. I'm not engineer or arhitect, but I know bit of physics to understand that's not how buildings fall.
seijichuudo9sha at 05:53 PM JST - 11th September

Trutherism is so 2006.
skipthesong at 06:14 PM JST - 11th September

Damien: the helecopter is said to defy physics. I can believe the gov did it. I can however believe they may have let it happen. That at least is reasonable and believable. I am not saying they did though. I really don't believe the US has had such an intelligent person to pull off such a thing amongst our elected officials.
SuperLib at 09:00 PM JST - 11th September

Damien15.....

OK. So this was all planned. Can you fill us in on the theories about how all of it was carried out?

I'm guessing you have the opinion that not only #7 was taken down, but the twin towers as well. That means a construction crews would have to go into buildings to plant the charges. How many people would it take? We're talking about two of the largest buildings in the world. More people = less time, less people = more time. But also, more people means more people are involved which means the odds of being exposed are exponential since one person would be able to provide proof of the entire operation.

So they'd have to get a pretty sizable crew together in order to have the project completed, and said crew would have to do this without being caught. Are there any records from maintenance/cleaning crews which says they were forbidden from entering certain floors during certain times of the night? Are there any logs by the security guards showing construction crews going into the building at night? That would be a small crew for a long time or a very large crew for a short time.

Any idea where they would recruit such a large amount of people who were 1) qualified to do the work and 2) agreed to secretly blow up two of the tallest buildings in the world (plus a 3rd building?) and kill Americans in the process?

Any work would have to be hidden, so they'd have to rip out walls overnight, plant the charges in the right places, then have it all covered up by morning. This would have to happen on every important structural part of the building. Any reports of anyone in any office seeing anything suspicious? Did any manager walk into his office and see a fresh coat of paint anywhere and decide to ask questions about what was going on?

Then, all of the charges would have to be linked together in a way that no one could see them. It's not the standard gutted out structure being collapsed, it's a fully stocked office. They'd have to have all of the wiring perfect in what would be the most complicated demolition even undertaken, done without anyone noticing anything at all, and completed by a group of men who knew what they were doing. Plus, it would have to be done in a way that no one would be able to see any of the charges going off....no domino of explosions down to the bottom like we usually see. They'd have to invent a new technique for that, correct?

But that's just the building. The entire plan would depend on getting planes to hit them, which means that would have to be set up by the government as well. Let's say they're able to find a group of terrorists willing to do that just for the sake of killing Americans. And also for the sake of keeping this post to under 10,000 words.

So now we have the charges in place and the people to fly the planes into the building. Enter Osama. He has to be contacted and agree to take the blame for the crime before any of this happens. He has to be made privy of the situation and agree to release videos after taking responsibility for the attacks. Osama does this despite being able to simple wait for the towers to fall, then show in detail how the US government contacted him to take the blame for it, thereby destroying any and all credibility that the US government could have in any war against him. But instead of goes along with it, refuses to be captured (as per the plan), then watched Afghanistan fall. He agrees to essentially lose his freedom and have his centralized structure destroyed. I'm assuming there's some benefit to him, but it would have to be a pretty large benefit in order to offset what he's giving up. Any idea of what he was promised?

And from top to bottom, everyone from the men who planted the explosives, the people who planned it, to the terrorists themselves, everyone would have to take a vow of silence that they've kept to this day, and successfully take steps that no hard evidence could be found except for questions people ask when watching a video.

Now I know you don't believe the official story, but you expect me to believe the above instead? If I have any information wrong, please point it out. I'm more than happy to hear your theories about how the worlds most complicated demo job could have been pulled off in secret. And as you may have noticed, I like details. I don't want to hear that the buildings were taken down on purpose. I want you to tell me how it could have been done. Go ahead and give it your best guess. That's what I've done above.
Dilbert14 at 01:49 AM JST - 12th September

Superlib,

Please try to keep it short, at least try not to repeat yourself.

Any idea where they would recruit such a large amount of people who were 1) qualified to do the work and 2) agreed to secretly blow up two of the tallest buildings in the world (plus a 3rd building?) and kill Americans in the process?

http://www.controlled-demolition.com/

I'm not going to make up any stories about what happened. Instead, please see this video and let's have a healthy discussion after. http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=loose+change&emb=0#
ANOTSUSAGAMI at 04:12 AM JST - 12th September

SuperLib - fantastic post. For people who seem to enjoy speculating, one wonders why it escapes them to try and play the devil's advocate and attempt to poke holes in thier own theories to test thier plausibility. One would think the holes are obvious. They admit to not being engineers, then in the same breath claim to be experts on how buildings fall. They cite other building collapses throughout history, conveniently ignoring the fact that neither before nor since has this exact situation been duplicated. True men and women of science will admit to the myriad of things that there are no explaination for, yet these untrained laymen know better. The Tower's "freefall" was outlined in the magazine Popular Science and btw is far more plausible than a secret command center in building #7. Quick question. If in fact building #7 was the command post, why would they have picked such a close building from which point inside the building the plane strikes could not be seen? On top of that had there been an error in judgement, debris from the towers could have fallen on the building (it did BTW) injuring the command crew? Proffessionals would not make that mistake.
Dilbert14 at 12:53 PM JST - 12th September

ANOTSUSAGAMI,

They admit to not being engineers, then in the same breath claim to be experts on how buildings fall. They cite other building collapses throughout history, conveniently ignoring the fact that neither before nor since has this exact situation been duplicated. True men and women of science will admit to the myriad of things that there are no explaination for, yet these untrained laymen know better

Our knowledge is fed by architects and engineers. http://www.youtube.com/user/ae911truth Real problem is, neither superlib nor you are interested in the subject enough to research it on your own. See what are the arguments and present your counter opinions.

Quick question. If in fact building #7 was the command post, why would they have picked such a close building from which point inside the building the plane strikes could not be seen?

One of the reason that #7 thought as command center, it's windows was changed couple months before the event to bolleproof glasses. Videos I posted up there, or just a quick search on youtube will expose this and many more points.
SuperLib at 03:25 PM JST - 12th September

I watched your little video, and the host basically presented my argument for me, which is the argument that all conspiracy theorists ignore. It would take a large team of men to place thousands of charges in order to have Gage's theory be correct. That, to me, is more outlandish than any evidence that he could ever present about the dynamics of metal, especially in a completely unique situation that is unlike any of the fires in a skyscraper before it (ie no planes crashing into it first).

Why not just park a truck in front of the towers with enough TNT to cause a catastrophic event? Wouldn't that be a little easier than a grand plan with possibly hundreds of men planting thousands of charges? Just the planes crashing into the towers alone would be a stark enough image that would warrant military action in Afghanistan. And that could be done with just a handful of people in the loop.

But no....they decided to plant thousands of charges and include hundreds of people into their plan just so the towers could fall anyway?

And this entire operation was pulled off without a single shred of proof being left behind, no evidence of planning, meetings, missing amounts of the supposedly "military grade" charges that would be required, no tapes phone calls, not even a piece of paper showing the twin towers with explosives drawn onto it?

The sheer size of the project that you're claiming increases the likelihood of it being discovered.....yet you have absolutely no proof whatsoever. The motives to start a war can be done without involving possibly hundreds of people that would need to be silenced.

What's your saying is completely and utterly illogical.
Dilbert14 at 10:28 PM JST - 14th September

Superlib,

Why is it so hard to believe they were able to place thousands of charges in right places for both of the buildings? Nightwork for months is the answer. Did you see the web site of controlled demolutions? Aren't they what they proud of doing for some 60 years? The picture in their site, look at the dust clouds coming off of that building, doesn't it look familiar?
What about all those architects and engineers, had balls big enough to come forward and say it's impossible for those buildings to go down the way they did?
I know you'll believe what you want to believe. Your little world would be crushed if you had to believe this is not the artwork of couptle guys with boxcutters.
ANOTSUSAGAMI at 11:33 PM JST - 14th September

Because your scenario is full of holes. The biggest verifiable one is your claim to building #7 being a command post. You say bulletproof glass was installed in the building before the attack. Certainly this has nothing at all to do with the well documented near hurricane force winds that passed through the towers due to their height and size. You imply that it was installed to protect the command post, because everyone knows bulletproof glass can stop a falling building. A professional demo team would NOT setup so close to an implosion in case they miscalculated and the building didn't fall straight down. Again, a large part of one of the towers FELL ON building #7, killing your theory. As for those with the "balls" to come forward, surely they couldn't possibly be lying to get their names in the paper. Who would do such a thing, lie about such a tragedy for personal gain?
Damien15 at 04:24 PM JST - 15th September

ANOTSUSAGAMI,

I don't think you understand me correctly. Please watch this video, it has it all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNbH4OLyXt4

And what personal gain are you talking about? None of these people earn a single cent out of this.
ANOTSUSAGAMI at 11:52 PM JST - 18th September

How simplistic to think that just because they might not be directly getting money, there is nothing to gain. Apparently it doesn't occur to you that these people may just want attention. You still haven't addressed my question as to what significance bulletproof glass could be when dealing with tons of falling building. Nor have you yourself provided any reason why a professional demo crew would be set up so close to ground zero. None of it makes any sense.
Damien15 at 02:27 PM JST - 25th September

"None of it makes any sense."

So what makes sense to you, couple guys with box cutters causing that much damamge? Buildings coming apart in freefall speeds? Most protected building in the world, not having any video of airliner hitting it? #7 building misteriously falling? Owner of the WTC doubling his investment within couple months after purchasing the buildings? I can go on.