What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
$52 and Up—Airlines Slash Fares On Peak Holiday Flights. view!
travelzoo.com - This year, waiting until the last minute is NOT the best strategy. See why.
366 Comments
- nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -49/+114Every time someone brings up the 9/11 "conspiracy" I get this sinking feeling that people with valid issues against the Bush administration just got knocked down a peg. For the love of god people, just because everything can't be explained doesn't mean the explanation is a complex conspiracy. I mean, two GIANT planes flew into two GIANT buildings. Unexpected crap is bound to happen. Molten metal? Explosions? Yeah, that's not so unusual. I mean, if ice had started flying out the windows you might think something odd was happening, but I think heat, fire, explosions, and general mayhem go hand in hand with a 767 slamming into a skyscraper.
- dshPls, on 10/12/2007, -42/+89Every, Every, EVERY single time someone mentions "9/11" and "truth" somehwere, there's always an ***** who posts 40 links to hardcore whackjob websites, that also claim The New World Order has taken control of the earth and is exploiting us all for its gain.
"Hey! How do I stop these people!"
You buy my book.
Don't you ignorant fools get it? Alex Jones and people of his type are the ones tricking you. They're being sensational to sell their books, to get their name out, and to get you to post 40 links to hardcore whackjob websites. - Retsudo, on 10/12/2007, -23/+64You are a ***** moron. There's no point in being civil about this, because you have no sense of reality. You imagine this enormous conspiracy because you can't think this through properly. The US government couldn't cover up a break in in a hotel or a blowjob in the oval office. But you think it can manage a conspiracy of tens of thousands of people, planned by some sort of evil geniuses ...who are also so incredibly stupid that a couple of ***** can poke holes in their story?
The loonies are anomaly-hunting, that's all. All this ***** about 'omg it must have been a bomb because buildings dont fall like that' - HOW MANY SKYSCRAPERS HAVE YOU SEEN BEING DESTROYED BY JETS LIKE? - ProximaC, on 10/12/2007, -23/+60There's no way in hell, and I mean no way that anyone could have surreptitiously planted enough explosives in those buildings to bring them down like that without someone seeing. It takes a demolitions team months to prep a building, and they tear it to ***** to get to the support beams and plant literally hundreds of pounds of explosives. And they supposedly did this while people were working there every day and night? puh-lease.
There's no way in hell that as many people as it would have taken to pull off something like this, that NONE of them would come forward and say something.
One fact we DO know about 9/11 is that 4 planes vanished. if it was a missile that hit the pentagon, and the government used holographic projectors to make it look like planes were hitting the towers, then where the hell are those planes? Where are those people? Do you think the government had them "dissapeared" too? What was all that airplane wreckage that fell out of the towers then?
How did an incoming missile chop all the light poles in half across the street from the pentagon?
The people blaming Bush for masterminding the conspiracy are the same people who say he's too dumb to pick his own nose. You can't have it both ways. Either he's a complete moron, or the most evilest evil mastermind we've ever seen. He can't be both.
Quit focusing on the conspiracy theories, and focus on the known facts, and 9/11 makes more sense. - Retsudo, on 10/12/2007, -34/+63There is a plausible explanation for molten metal at ground zero, which is infinitely more plausible than 'TEH GOVERNMENTS ARE KILLED PEOPLES!!!!1!"
http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm
You are so full of *****. Read this.
http://www.debunking911.com
And this.
http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/refute.htm - igibson, on 10/12/2007, -16/+40its kinda funny how a documentary by an accredited news agency suddenly becomes a "hit piece" just because it points out blatant flaws in an ignorant conspiracy theory
- crysys, on 10/12/2007, -8/+32Wow, now the FDR theory has found a home in the 9/11 conspiracies? For those that are unaware, one theory explaining the 'unusual' success of the Japanese raid on Pearl Harbor was that FDR knew it was going to happen and specifically allowed it to happen so that the US would have a reason to enter WWII. It's funny that such a similar scenario would play out all these years later.
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -12/+33"If the building fell at freefall speed, which the videos and evidence confirms, it would be physically impossible for the passport to somehow fly out of the pocket of the exploding terrorist, out of the exploding plane, through the crumbling building, and land completely unharmed in the street to be conveniently picked up before the building hit the ground."
lol, what? So many things wrong with that...
1) The videos do not confirm a "freefall speed" collapse. Watch them again, but pay attention to the debris. You'll notice (I hope) that the debris is falling faster than collapse front is propagating down the tower. How is it that debris, according to your claim, is falling *faster* than the laws of physics allow for object in freefall?
2) A lot of things survive plenty of situations you wouldn't expect them to. http://www.orlandosentinel.com/media/photo/2003-02/6472139.jpg Do you know what that is? Do you know what it went through and, yet, still survived? - fuzzmeister, on 10/12/2007, -13/+32Humans have a need for conspiracy theories, as the prospect of random death is too scary to process. It is actually much more comforting for people to believe in a massive, unseen conspiracy than it is for them to accept that 9/11 really was a random act of terrorism, and only 19 people were directly involved. Just look back at history (JFK, etc) and you will see that almost any event of random, unexpected death has an accompanying conspiracy theory. It happens every time.
- Prysorra, on 10/12/2007, -18/+36@ checkmate0
Why bother trying? They are. - Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -7/+25"This is the first time in the history of the world that fire brought down a steel structure. The ONLY time in history..."
False.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/hereford/worcs/6105942.stm
"[A spokesman] added: "Intense heat buckled the steel girders holding the roof."
That's just one. There are at least two more examples that I'm personally aware of. Do some research.
Q: If fire can't take out steel structures, why are there strict fire codes requiring the fireproofing of steel members? - FearlessFreep, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20"Bush lovers here ...."
First time I've ever heard Digg described like that - ProximaC, on 10/12/2007, -6/+23nixonrichard
Ok, you just seriously creeped me the ***** out. I need to buy some tinfoil now. - Protean1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20Faith is an overrated concept. Reason and Logic work much better.
- fuzzmeister, on 10/12/2007, -14/+30@checkmate0
Any video proof of these statements?
"1. Bush saw the 1st plane hit.
2. Rumsfeld said a missle hit the pentagon
3. Rumsfeld said Flight 93 was shot down
4. Silverstein admitted WTC-7 Was demolished.
5. NYC Mayor said WTC 1 & 2 Coming down 20 minutes before implossion."
Sounds like generic, unprovable bullsh*t if you ask me. - Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -20/+36"When an FBI agent finds one of the terrorist's passport without a scratch in the rubble 5 days after, where they couldn't even find fragments of things that were inside the planes, then I'm sure something fishy is going on...."
Raada, that's a lie. The passport was found in the street after the impact, but before the collapse, and *not* by an FBI agent: http://911myths.com/html/passport_recovered.html
Why does the "Truth" Movement have such a problem with telling the truth? Seriously... - kcpwnsgman, on 10/12/2007, -12/+26I used to be a consopracy theroy guy, but after the 2nd loose change video was out, I started looking parts of the film up, and realized how far fetched it was
- dshPls, on 10/12/2007, -15/+29Yes, because Governments have killed their people before IT'S HAPPENING NOW.
Look at this image.
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/images/4/44/Wtc7_collapse_damage.jpg
I want you to explain to me how it's possible for a building to survive that. A huge scoop was taken out from its side, causing it to slowing but surely come down. - ChileanGoD, on 10/12/2007, -9/+22I aint no 911 wako... but can someone explain to me what happened to building 7... please.
- nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -8/+21It's a joke yo.
- CheapBastard, on 10/12/2007, -14/+27In response to Checkmate0:
1. Bush saw first plane- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgFibjRFfvU
YES -- he did see the first plane hit, this is not a coverup, everyone knows that. But everyone thought it was an accident. Then in the famous footage in the classroom he is told that the second plane hit and that we are under attack. No conspiracy here.
2. Rumsfeld tells Parade Magizine Missle hit Pentagon - http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/Missile-Not-Flight-77.html
That article itself in that very quote says that it is "Inaudible". So you are reading someone's interpretation of an inaudible recording? Thats pretty shaky.
3. Rumsfeld said 93 shot down - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6Xoxaf1Al0
Rumsfeld often (like bush) stumbles over his words. He clearly meant "brought down" not "shot down". Again, making something huge out of a single word.
4. Silvertstein admits wtc -7 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100
The quote is that the fire fighters said they were not going to be able to contain the fire on building 7 and he and the fire fighters agreed to "pull it". By "pull it" he meant withdraw from building 7 and let it burn since it would be a waste of time and effort (and lives) to try to put the fire out. After they withdrew from the building, it collapsed. They didn't blow it up
5. NYC Mayor Slips- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hNmf76GUCw
I am sure several people knew that it was going to collapse. That much burning and impact someone just told the mayor, you shouldn't be here, this building might fall. He didn't know ahead of time.
Sheesh. This is really digging into things that people said after the fact and dwelling on one word here or there. None of it is a slip of a coverup. - Hoodwinker, on 10/12/2007, -6/+19What the hell is a hit piece?
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -8/+21Missed this part: ". . .through the crumbling building, and land completely unharmed in the street to be conveniently picked up before the building hit the ground."
You seem to be implying the building collapsed almost immediately after the plane impacted. Seriously, are you retarded? - Tr33fiddy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+17Wings are light enough to flex in flight and where the fuel is stored.
The Pentagon is one of toughest buildings ever built (for obvious reasons).
How does that add up to a freekin missile?!
Come on man! Use that pile of ***** in your head, please! - Tweekster, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16did you expect the wings to not sheer off or something? LOL
and it doesnt matter if i did spend the effort to post the link to the photos that show plane wreckage..you will just claim it was planted like a good little conspiracy sheep - Waiting2awake, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13 I love it! When something or someone goes against the feelings of the US they immediately become leftist, or anti-american. First it was the Atomic inspectors when they said there was no proof that Saddam had WMD's, then it was the UN itself when they said to wait for the inspectors to finish their jobs, then it was anyone who pointed out that what the Americans were doing was illegal, and now it is the BBC for having the audacity to air a film?
I can only imagine what you guys thought when you all saw "The power of nightmares"... Who has actually seen this? - SecondGuesser, on 10/12/2007, -7/+19It is well-documented that the 9/11 hijackers began taking flight lessons in 2000, before Bush didn't win the election. Seems to me that 9/11 ain't a Bush conspiracy.
Having worked in a statistical capacity for many years, I can tell you that people will believe what they want to believe and not necessarily what the facts tell them. Forget that Ted Olson's wife was on board the plane that hit the Pentagon. Forget the James Woods took a flight one month before September 11th and noticed the hijackers acting suspicious (one of whom was on the manifest for Flight 77 which hit the Pentagon).
Forget how logical and obvious the facts are against a conspiracy. The conspiracy theories themselves, despite being so far fetched and requiring huge leaps of faith, are so compelling to those that want to believe them that no amount of actual facts will convince them otherwise. The conspiracy theorists' commitment to this alternate reality is almost religious in nature, and definitely zealous in their motivation to advance their nonsensical position.
"Fact" number one in the conspiracy theorist's case is the notion of a Bush conspiracy. Never mind that Osama was attacking American interests before Bush ever ran for governor. And never mind that the 9/11 hijackers began taking flight lessons a year before Bush was ever elected. And never mind that rational, disinterested people offer eyewitness testimony asserting no conspiracy.
The REAL truth simply doesn't matter when you have a political agenda to advance. - davewashere, on 10/12/2007, -6/+17Wow, I bet it was real difficult to make a hit piece about the 9/11 Truth movement. It's not like misquotes, inaccurate scientific data, and questionable news sources are easy to uncover.
/about to be dugg down because I'm clearly an agent of the US government - fsjonsey, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14"Bush lovers here ..."
WTF? Where the hell have you been for the last two years? - fsjonsey, on 10/12/2007, -10/+20Thank god, there ARE still some rational people commenting on digg. After the last two 9/11 conspiracy stories that hit the front page, and all of the truthers started coming out of the woodwork, I almost lost my faith in Humanity.
- HappyScrappy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14If by hit piece, you mean it shows the 9/11 conspiracy theorists as wackos, then I'm all for it.
- andyrobo60, on 10/12/2007, -8/+18"questions surrounding the death of Princess Diana, an event that the overwhelming majority of the British public now believe was an assassination." I live in the UK and I don't know anyone who thinks that it was an assassination.
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -9/+18"Obviously debris with no resistance is going to hit the ground slightly faster than the rest of the building which is imploding onto itself."
Wtf? You don't even understand your own argument and you clearly have no idea what the definition of "freefall" is: http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?s=free+fall
The debris is in freefall. You admit, then, that the building collapse actually *wasn't* at freefall speeds. You've fallen prey to your own ignorance.
"The point is that a building falling from the impact of a plane could not fall like that."
And just how *should* it fall?
"A plane striking the side of the building doesn't cause the supports of the building to miraculously collapse at the same time allowing the entire building to fall straight down."
Here you can see the perimeter of one of the towers bow inward as it begins to collapse. Don't explosive blow things outward? http://www.kolumbus.fi/av.caesar/wtc/WTC2_collapse2.jpg
Straight down just happens to be the only way gravity is going to pull them. Still, the top portion of one of the towers, when collapse initiated, showed a significant tilt. Obviously the supports didn't fail at the same time.
http://www.lonelantern.org/images/0305911-collapse-lg.jpg
It's almost as if you've seen an entirely different event from the one everyone else saw. - Waiting2awake, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9 Very true. But is it not also true that many people have a need to feel their government will protect them, won't hurt them. What was the first reaction most people have when they hear the government was behind it? "Silly, the government wouldn't kill their own citizens" - yet it is a matter of historical fact that they have in the past. It is just that it isn't a very nice thought, and so people chose to ignore it despite what the evidense says..
Look above. One guy claims that they wouldn't do it. The next guy says they have pretty much admitted it. The first comes back and challanges the seconds accusations, and after proof is given, the first drops to "they wouldn't do that, they couldn't do that" - despite the clearly did do something(why fight the 911 commission? Why hedge the comissions apointee's, why refuse to testify under oath). People just don't want to think their government could be part of something like that. Not saying they were, merely pointing out human nature.
- EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11Why would you ask such a basic question, implying it is some deep mystery, without doing a simple google search for the well-documented answers?
- rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13Uh huh. And,
The moon landing was staged by Henry Kissinger who was informed by Xenu that little fairies from Arthur Conan Doyle's backyard would one day be on the grassy knoll where they trained Elvis to fly thermite into the twin trade towers so that Princess Di could live again. - Muyoso, on 10/12/2007, -7/+15Two of the largest buildings in the world collapsed within a hundred meters of it. It fell.
BTW, there also is no official explanation as to how 3 Arabs who had very limited flight training were able to aim for and hit their targets exactly (something that is no easy). Doesn't mean it didnt happen. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13those theories do a good job keeping people way from the otherwise blatantly obvious reality: usa attacked iraq as part for a plan for strategic control of the region richest in oil.
- lettruthout, on 10/12/2007, -11/+18@dshpls
Sorry, how does the linked picture show "A huge scoop was taken out from its side"? Where's that picture? - EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I'm pretty sure I know enough about engineering to know that the official answers to how the buildings could have fallen from the impact of two planes are plausible and reasonable. They could be wrong, but they at least do make technical sense.
I don't understand why people focus so much on that. There's no good reason for anyone to go through the trouble to rig the buildings only to slam planes into them. Terrorists bombed the WTC before. If Bush wanted the towers down, all he had to do was put a big enough bomb in the basement and blame it on them. No planes needed. No thermite. No questions asked, except the only ones we should be asking -- why didn't the government use what it knew to stop the plot? - Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12"The PNAC has been planning the war in Iraq/Iran since the 90's. They've said it would need to be accomplished through a "New Pearl Harbor" and a "noble lie" necessary to pacify the American people. That isn't stuff that was just made up, that's stuff that's been around for almost 20 years."
Let's see here... They were so dead-set on invading *Iraq* that they planned this 20 years in advance. And yet, when the time came, they fumbled the ball and blamed it on mostly-Saudis who belonged to an organization headquartered in Afghanistan. Then went ahead an invaded Iraq anyway, but only after invading Afghanistan, because they ***** up and have to cover their ass.
Oh, and then they forgot to covertly plant WMDs in Iraq, despite pulling off covert placement of explosives in 3 WTC towers.
Yeah, that makes *perfect* sense... *cough* - fuzzmeister, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9@dukeeeey
This piece is not "reporting", its speculation. The BBC isn't saying "these people are alive", its just part of the documentary, along with the extreme-Zionist conspiracy theories and whatnot. - mandarin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7You're hired to work for the Sun!
- EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Nothing wrong with asking questions. Something very wrong with asking the same question over and over again after it's been competently answered in a way you happen to deny.
At the very least, every one of these "911 mystery" sites has an obligation to present the scientific evidence, even if they disagree with it. Too many pretend that they're out there asking questions that don't have answers when a simple google search would correct that impression.
I haven't attacked anyone here, but I can understand why some people could even believe there was a conspiracy and still want to attack some of the truthers for not owning up to the rational evidence that contradicts their immutable theories. Show me a truther that is swayed by real evidence in either direction and I'm happy to listen. - ZombieFlanders, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Well the 'truthers' are basically a hit piece on 9/11, so...
- fleischner, on 10/12/2007, -14/+20Conspiracy morons: stick to something on a bit smaller scale, such as the existence of Big Foot and ETs, or perhaps that we didn't land on the moon. This one's too big for your tiny little brains.
- mandarin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9South Park : Hardy Boys
"I'm getting a clue." "I'm getting raging clue too." - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -16/+21@chileangod
The "official story" has no explanation as to why building 7 collapsed in the same manner as the towers, why an order was given to "pull it", or why firefighters and a CNN reporter can clearly be seen running out of the building yelling that it was "about to blow up". Get ready to be dugg down as a conspiracy theorist for even bringing it up. - dukeeeey, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9why are you so afraid to look at the facts ?
The drill was 10 months or so before 911.
Google Mascal drill. - fasda, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6You know since that picture is in black and white I'm going to have to say that those photos are pretty dam old. And secondly the military tries to be prepared for every situation possible for instance soldiers have to bring their cold weather gear to Iraq in July.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 366 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
