digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.

See the original image at search.japantimes.co.jp —

Japanese Lawmaker Says 9/11 Was Inside Job

search.japantimes.co.jp — . Fujita, along with a growing number of individuals — including European and American politicians — are leading a charge to conduct a thorough, independent investigation of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • FrankHope, on 06/18/2008, -188/+1119/11 was an inside job done by Israel and her agents in the United States.
    http://digg.com/politics/The_Truth_about_9_11_Isra ...
    • Herkimer56, on 06/18/2008, -45/+55Proof?
      • dkapuchino, on 06/18/2008, -35/+61The aliens stole the proof.
        • monsieurginger, on 06/18/2008, -25/+47Damn aliens. They must be working with Mossad. It was probably UFOs that blew up the WTCs under orders from Mossad. They did it Independence Day style. And it was because of the Windows monopoly controlled by Jewish Shylock bankers that they couldn't send a virus from a Mac to destroy the UFOs.

          Now everyone knows the true evil. Aliens and Mossad. Everybody put on your tinfoil hats and you'll see the truth.
      • CryRightardCry, on 06/18/2008, -28/+11LOL
        Since when do rightards care about proof?
        Does the crap on LGF ever show proof of ANY of it?
        Ladies and gentlemen, I give you rightard hypocrisy.
        Observe the ***** on LGF and WND and be amazed that some right wing dumbass would have the total lack of integrity to try some moronic comment like that.
        Yep, just pretend the ridiculous crap you normally spew is backed by facts, sure.
        This behavior is what you are supporting when you vote GOP.
        • masterm1nd, on 06/18/2008, -5/+14In other words, you don't have any proof.
        • Brownds, on 06/18/2008, -6/+17@CryRightardCry
          Wow you are a total ***** vacuum. Far left wingers are just as stupid and ignorant as far right wingers, same coin different side. If the majority of leftists were like you HRC would be the nominee. I am just tired of far left and right people like you that think they know what is best for me and all Americans. You are just a ***** dolt.
        • TheSabre, on 06/18/2008, -3/+7What? Why would the people on the far-right come out and say 9/11 was a conspiracy and then use 9/11 as a way to go to war with Iraq? Not EVERYTHING is the result of right-wingers, as much as you hate them.

          Most of the "9/11 was an inside job" comments come from people that are rabidly anti-Bush, not right-wingers.
        • benecere, on 06/18/2008, -2/+8I have spent months talking about the inane use of such terms as "libtard" employed by the neocon breed. No, please don't saddle the left with "rightard"

          I'm begging here.
        • ssn697, on 06/19/2008, -5/+3@benecere:

          ---"No, please don't saddle the left with "rightard"---

          you would be best served by putting "cryrighttardcry" on ignore. This is his third Id that I know of. I have already decided he is actually a right winger pretending to by far left. There is no WAY anyone is as daft as he is. It has to be a put on.

          In either case, he is either a hard core right winger trying to make the left look bad, of a completely off his rocker left winger. Neither is worth the time.
      • jamdogg, on 06/18/2008, -3/+13Proof is in the pudding.
        • benecere, on 06/18/2008, -3/+7What in the heck does "The proof is in the pudding: mean, anyway?

          Try this: "The proof of the pudding is in the eating." There now, doesn't that make a little more sense?

      • slimshady, on 06/18/2008, -2/+17Proof, you want proof. You can't handle the proof.
      • alf86, on 06/19/2008, -6/+7Who needs proof when you have crazy?
      • viggooo, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2The proof missing is that of the OfficialStory™.
      • viggooo, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3The proof missing is that of the Official Story™.
    • Vigilo, on 06/18/2008, -27/+64Mossad Israeli secret service may have been involved but not the state of Israel or its people they like us don't have any say in what their government does.

      9/11 was a false flag operation like was described in OPERATION NORTHWOODS. Here is the wiki link
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods and here is the most incriminating portion of Northwoods:

      3. A "Remember the Maine" incident could be arranged in several forms:
      a. We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba.
      b. We could blow up a drone (unmanned) vessel anywhere in the Cuban waters. We could arrange to cause such incident in the vicinity of Havana or Santiago as a spectacular result of Cuban attack from the air or sea, or both. The presence of Cuban planes or ships merely investigating the intent of the vessel could be fairly compelling evidence that the ship was taken under attack. The nearness to Havana or Santiago would add credibility especially to those people that might have heard the blast or have seen the fire. The US could follow up with an air/sea rescue operation covered by US fighters to "evacuate" remaining members of the non-existent crew. Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation.

      The "Israel did it" angle is very simple minded and intended to divide people. Corrupt elite and military industrial complex world wide had a hand in it and even more countries governments continue to aid in the cover-up.
      • GuacamoleSan, on 06/18/2008, -21/+8Its just another attempt to strip Israelis of the only home they have. Why can't they have one small country. One. Tiny. Tiny. Country.
        • BallJoint, on 06/18/2008, -9/+25Because Palestine wants one too
        • CryRightardCry, on 06/18/2008, -16/+9You mean Palestine?
          I understand ignorant rightards, but I don't understand how stupid and one sided you can be.
        • wpi97, on 06/18/2008, -11/+18"Because Palestine wants one too"
          And they could have had a country. In 1937. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peel_Commission
          And in 1948. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947_UN_Partition_Pla ...
          And in 2000. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summi ...
          All they had to do is agree that Jews get a country too, and stop trying to kill them.
        • sodade, on 06/19/2008, -3/+6I honestly don't understand why they don't just buy a South American country and GTFO of the ME.
        • wpi97, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2"I honestly don't understand why they don't just buy a South American country and GTFO of the ME."
          Is there one for sale? Then why don't the Saudis buy it for the Palestinians?

          Seriously, though, Israel is the ancient homeland of the Jewish people, where Jews have lived continuously for 3000 years. Israel is a country, a member of UN, which has existed for the past 60 years, which is about as long or even longer than other ME countries.

          Either one of these arguments should be sufficient to demonstrate how ridiculous it is to suggest that the Israelis buy themselves another country and get out. Many countries have territorial disputes, but for some reason only Israel's legitimacy is questioned. Why is that, when it is the only country in the world (AFAIK) which got the consent of the UN before it declared independence?
        • sodade, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1America is the homeland of the native americans - why don't they rule it? Israel's legitimacy is questioned because the state was created by the Allies in their extreme stupidity.

          If all of my neighbors hated my ***** guts, I would move. I'm sure that Paraguay will sell them tons of land - they sold 100,000 acres to Bush.
        • wpi97, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2So, why is the legitimacy of the US not questioned? Remind me, which UN resolution created the US? Or is it because the US is over 200 years old, while Israel is only 60? Will Israel suddenly become legitimate in another 140 years, in your opinion?

          And Israel was not created by the Allies. The partition plan approved by the UN, not the Allies, allocated those areas to Israel where Jews were already a majority, i. e. it simply recognized the facts on the ground.

          By the way, the Balfour Declaration is dated 1917. Israel should have become a state after WWI, which could have saved millions of Jews from the Holocaust.

          "If all of my neighbors hated my ***** guts, I would move."
          The Jews have been doing just that for the past 2000 years. Time to stop running. And last I checked Egypt has had a peace treaty with Israel for 30 years, and Jordan for 14. So no, not all the neighbors.
      • warsongs7, on 06/19/2008, -5/+3The reason they cant have a country is because they planned and are still planning to displace a lot of innocent people in the process.
    • elhaf, on 06/18/2008, -24/+10I don't know, for sure, but I suspect that jihadist muslims and other anti-zionists and anti-semites might say exactly the same thing. Probably. Possibly. And rely upon the gullible to spread the word.
    • Rusticles, on 06/18/2008, -2/+14Golly, Gee,...Thanks for clearing that up... I thought it was the Norwegians!
    • lazerus9, on 06/18/2008, -7/+13They think that by digging you down that somehow prevents the truth from coming out! .....Fools!
    • Hemloch, on 06/19/2008, -11/+5LOL JEWS DID WTC
    • Hangly, on 06/19/2008, -10/+11It's not nearly that simple.

      Did the government of Israel have a hand in it? Very possibly.
      Could they have pulled it off by themselves? Not a chance.

      The "Jews did 9/11" conspiracy is almost as stupid as the "Al Qaeda did 9/11" conspiracy.
    • JoeRW, on 06/19/2008, -7/+7Well people just say this stuff since there were dancing mossad agents when the attack happened and trucks caught with bombs inside driven by mossad dressed as arabs going over the bridges in New York that day.
      So you could then speculate that a secret building demolitions team was mossad see. But you couldnt find out for sure since they were let go quietly.
  • Herkimer56, on 06/18/2008, -175/+60This has been posted about 200 times now. Buried as duplicate. Find some new spam, people.
    • dracostimpy, on 06/18/2008, -22/+17Good thing we have you to remind us to bury it EVERY FRIGGIN TIME someone posts any 9/11 inside-job related stories. At times you seem almost as obsessed with denying 9/11 conspiracy theories as the 9/11 truthers themselves are with exposing it.

      That begs the question: what's your monumental stake in all this that you devote such energy to downplaying the truther movement? Do you own several shares of a major defense contractor and are thus anxious to keep your profit stream alive lest 9/11 truth shatter support for the war on terror? Are you a rapturist, hoping that this is the start of the biblical Armageddon that brings back Jesus? Are you a zionist, driven by a relentless compulsion for rebuilding the kingdom of Israel at the expense of America, Palestine, and anyone else who gets in the way? Are you Osama bin Laden, hiding in your cave and fuming that anyone might try to steal credit from you since you masterminded the whole thing from the hospital in Dubai that you stayed at 2 months before 9/11 for dialysis whilst being visited by a CIA agent (who obviously must have upset you with America)?

      Wait, I know... you just REALLY want to help the 9/11 truthers to get past all the nonsense and get on with their lives. Is that it?
      • sugarazor, on 06/19/2008, -13/+10Because 9/11 Truthers distract from getting any actual progress on the real story. They sit around and scream ignorant ***** like "INSIDE JOB YOU IDIOTS!!!!!!!!!" or "WTC7!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" without a single shred of credible evidence. Every piece of "evidence" the Truthers have thrown out has been debunked dozens upon dozens of times by reputable scientists, engineers, firefighters, and people who know what is actually going on in the world and not just sitting in a dark room with their tinfoil hat firmly in place.

        Are there unanswered questions about 9/11? Of course, but it's not some 24-esque conspiracy and the Troofers are not a bunch of Lil Jack Bauers here to save the day. They're childlike simpletons who have seen one too many movies and can't wrap their feeble minds around anything but the reality they've created for themselves.
        • viggooo, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3Please show me some evidence of the Official Story™.
      • grinchdec23, on 06/19/2008, -7/+4Boring, and heard a thousand times,, better get onto something else.
        • kittnerrules, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3booo-bop-bahh-doooo-wappppp-ahhhh deeeeeeeeeeeeee
    • reastydirtstar, on 06/19/2008, -12/+0The entire world trade center could fit inside the jungle of pubes found on any jap. Perhaps under such cover, the smelly arabs wouldn't have found the towers.
    • CoolHandLuke70, on 06/19/2008, -2/+4Herkhimer56 -- then go read and troll somewhere else douche bag!
  • dkapuchino, on 06/18/2008, -131/+45This Japanese lawmaker doesn't even exist. They just photoshopped a picture of a Japanese guy and put him in a suit.
  • Silvbird, on 06/18/2008, -147/+169There's a poll on that site saying 95% don't agree with the official version of events.

    9/11 Initiative.org feels it would be counter productive to create any impression of competition in what has been in essence the common goal of virtually every 9/11 researcher and activist for over 5 years: An honest and thorough investigation into the laundry list of anomalies related to the attacks of September 11, 2001.

    Take a few minutes to visit their site. If you are a New York City registered voter, download the petition and begin collecting signatures. If you are a resident of New York City, and have not registered to vote, this is a time when your vote really does count. Register now. If you are not a resident of New York City, help spread the word and consider making a donation to support the effort. http://www.911initiative.org/
    • dkapuchino, on 06/18/2008, -34/+27There's also a poll that says most Americans believe in the Devil more than they believe in Darwin,
      Another that says the Majority of Americans Believe in Angels,
      A third of Americans believe in ghosts,
      70% of Americans believe in aliens
      18 percent believe the sun revolves around the Earth.
      80% of americans believe that an old man who lives on a cloud impregnanted an earth virgin who gave birth to a magic carpenter who performed tons of nifty tricks until 'the man' killed him, but that he came back to life and floated up to the cloud to visit his dad.
      • card51short, on 06/18/2008, -12/+18point?
        • Cryptocracy, on 08/17/2008, -9/+16the point is they saw it all live on fox news.
        • rikkdbomb, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3he is making the point that most, if not all polls, are lies and bs.
      • Harabeck, on 06/18/2008, -5/+12The imagery you use here, "old man", "lives in the clouds" etc. are purely from the imagination of the Catholic church. Nowhere in the bible does it describe heaven as a place, nor God as a "he" (it says "his" but this is because of the translation to english). Any reference to heaven simply means the sky. So and so was drawn up into the sky, or the voice came from the sky. Never does it say it is a dwelling place. What your saying could just easily means that God lives in a burning bush because he spoke to Moses through one.

        Im not saying you dont have a point, but using ignorant drabble is counter productive.
        • floorman56, on 06/18/2008, -2/+7Nowhere in the bible does it describe heaven as a place, nor God as a "he

          "Our Father which art in heaven" ? I saw that in the Bible
        • honthraj, on 06/18/2008, -1/+3I think you are preaching to the choir.

          His "point" is, that it is ignorant drabble.
        • trippinlikegod, on 06/18/2008, -1/+3Yeah and I'm pretty sure it goes "Our Father WHO art in heaven"
        • TheCasablancan, on 06/18/2008, -4/+2Floorman56

          It's important to remember that the Bible was not written in english. For instance, the word Hell. Did you know that "Hell" replaces the 4 words. "Sheol" in hebrew, and "Tartaroo/Tartarus', "Hades", and "Gehenna" in Greek.

          Definitions:
          Sheol/Hades - The Underworld. Good, Evil, Just, Unjust, it doesn't matter. If you're dead, you're here.
          Tartarus- A pit, below Hades. The place where sinners are sent.
          Gehenna - A burning garbage dump near Jerusalem.

          Interesting, isn't it? How many misunderstandings do you think people could have made in 2 millennium?
        • BobOki, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1I would like people to go reread the bible sometime.
          Pick out everything that sounds magical, then apply a tad of science to it.
          Burning bush that was not hot... well they didn't have a word for it back then, but it sounds a lot like it was glowing, perhaps a hologram?
          Chariot of fire, sounds a lot like a plane or rocket.
          etcetc... there are lots of them, and the bible becomes a much more interesting "what if" book in that light. Just my fun two cents.... not downing religion or anything.
      • BobOki, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Well, I guess until proven false, people will believe in the fantastical. In that light, is it really that offensive to question things that make no sense from a president proven to be a liar? How many times can Bush tell you one thing, and it be completely false, before you start to question the other things?
        I personally have been labeled a conspiracy theorist on digg now for a good while, and other sites before it becuase I refuse to believe that fire not hot enough to melt steel melted steel, or that a plane crash that is singularly different from any other crash in recorded history is true over the obvious missile hole shown.
        Yeah, you can go on and on and on about discrepancies, lies, and outright "WTF govt I can even lie better than that"s found in that report.
        So, that all in mind, is someone calling for a investigation to find out the truth, done by independent, ie not on the books, researchers, really all that "bad" of a thing? Paraphrased, if they did nothing wrong, why is Bush Co. so trying to hide it?
    • sugarazor, on 06/18/2008, -21/+30Well what does that mean? 95% "don't agree" with the "official version." That could mean all sorts of things, I don't think we have been given every fact available, but I also think people who believe it was an "inside job" are out of their goddamn minds.

      Just disagreeing with the official story doesn't automatically make someone a Truther. For instance, Saudi Arabia's involvement was concealed as much as possible in the 9/11 Report because they're our "ally" and we can't accuse them of anything despite the evidence due to our dependence on their black gold.

      That's a far more believable story than "OMG THE GOVT DID IT FOR THE ILLUMINATI! WTC7! WTC7! WTC7!!!!!!!!!!"
      • JonGalt, on 06/19/2008, -2/+4Reality isn't consensus. And polls are consensus.
        • TBoneFever, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2The reality is that by not seeking out the truth, millions of Americans are consenting to the deaths of 2752 human beings. (source: http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/10/29/wtc.dea ...
          Well, I for one will no longer be a part of the consensus. I NEED ANSWERS, AND I NEED THEM NOW!

          Note: I am strongly against genocide.
        • Archer007, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1"Reality is a commodity" - Stephen Colbert
      • JensenSteve, on 06/19/2008, -2/+5Oh yeah? Well what did happen to building 7 then? Fire has never brought down a building of that size, and there is solid proof that there were molten pools of steel below the building moments after its collapse. go ahead, explain that one.
        • Phil1ip123, on 06/19/2008, -5/+4It's been explained:

          http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/militar ...

        • SatansSpatula, on 06/19/2008, -8/+2"Fire has never brought down a building of that size..."

          What kind of meaningless statement is *that*? How many buildings are there on the entire ***** planet the size of the WTC? And how many of those have been "brought down" by *any* means?!

          That statement lends zero credence to the following statement, which itself is nothing more than conjecture.
        • digitalhair, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3Larry Silverstein slipped up and told PBS he gave the order to "pull it." I don't believe this made it into the 9/11 commission report.

          how convenient...

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100
        • digitalhair, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3has anybody else investigated the circumstances surrounding the purchase of the WTC complex months before the attacks and how Vornado backed out of it's huge overbid at the last minute? hmmm...

          Oh yeah, Silverstein tried to claim a net 3+ billion dollar profit via insurance payments by trying to categorize the attacks as 2 seperate incidences, but the insurance companies ain't buyin it.

          watch him try to stick to the script when he's asked to answer something unrelated here:

          http://www.calgary911truth.org/my_weblog/2008/03/w ...

        • helpfulcorn, on 06/19/2008, -4/+0Silverstein did say "pull it", but there's no evidence what so ever that means "blow up the building".

          He did make that money in insurance but ended up paying more than twice that back to the city of New York, so much for profits:

          http://www.conspiracyscience.com/articles/911/buil ...
      • TBoneFever, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1"OMG THE GOVT DID IT FOR THE ILLUMINATI! WTC7! WTC7! WTC7!!!!!!!!!!"

        Any why is this not a valid explanation? It's not valid because it's hard to believe? Well millions of people believe in Jesus, and that's not stopping them. Ignorance is bliss, I understand.

        After researching (and being a good american ...the forefathers of this country actually used to read), "OMG THE GOVT DID IT FOR THE ILLUMINATI! WTC7! WTC7! WTC7!!!!!!!!!!" really does make more sense than the official story.

        Are you afraid of the truth? Why wouldn't you want to research "OMG THE GOVT DID IT FOR THE ILLUMINATI! WTC7! WTC7! WTC7!!!!!!!!!!" to verify its accuracy?

        The ignorance in this country is sickening.
        • sugarazor, on 06/19/2008, -2/+4It's not a valid explanation because there is no evidence to support it? And I mean actual evidence... not just theories.

          WTC7 conspiracies have been debunked time and time again.

          But go ahead and believe your reality. I'm just over here being a good American and reading things from scientists and engineers that debunk every single Truther claim EVER. But of course, they're all in the pocket of the New World Order too, so I guess you have a point.

          We're all being lied to.

          In fact, I am actually an NWO operative sent to disrupt Digg... their resistance is beginning to worry us.

          The ignorance in this country is sickening!
        • card51short, on 06/20/2008, -1/+3"WTC7 conspiracies have been debunked time and time again. "

          NIST still has no answer for why the building fell. They promised us a report years ago.
          How did you find out the information and please forward it to NIST.
          Thanks!
    • michaelb1, on 06/19/2008, -1/+11I'm not saying there was a conspiracy. I just want some questions answered and the science of it explained better. Especially with regards to the Pentagon crash site, the PA crash site and the explosions sounds prior to the WTC collapse.

    • cheesehead, on 06/19/2008, -2/+2Apparently Bush doesn't buy the official version either,

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USnxe7hxP4I&feature ...
    • HotSaucePanCake, on 06/19/2008, -6/+2This coming from a country that tried to ***** invade us, but ultimately failed, and we nuked... twice....
      • EbowUK, on 06/20/2008, -2/+1The same country that your government allowed to attack Pearl Harbor to get the the US into WW2.
        etc.
    • tiberone, on 06/19/2008, -1/+4Maybe 95% should listen to what Maddox has to say

      http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=91 ...
    • Lavarock, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1If you say "I'm sane" and I say "I need a thorough investigation of the facts before I can agree" I've just called you insane.
    • nickert0n, on 06/19/2008, -3/+2For those who think this is bat ***** crazy,

      Youd rather live in the Matrix then look at reality.

      To those who would want the truth no matter how horrible it is.

      Watch this film.

      http://digg.com/world_news/Zeitgeist_A_movie_all_A ...
      • sugarazor, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1See? This is what I mean when I say Truthers are have seen one too many films. They think watching Zeitgeist or Loose Change is like "taking the red pill." They're all gonna wake up together and then be the super heroes that save the world.

        The Matrix... isn't... real.
        • card51short, on 06/20/2008, -0/+2while sugarazor thinks that billionaires on TV are the authority and they certainly can never be lying.
          We're the insane ones. He knows the truth without having to search. He knows!
        • sugarazor, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Once again, reaching conclusions based on no facts whatsoever. You just say I believe whatever I hear on TV and then refuse to hear any other side of an argument. It's rather typical.
  • BohicaTwentyTwo, on 06/18/2008, -154/+402Has the truth movement done ANYTHING new in the past few years? New evidence? New test? New witnesses? New whistleblowers? Every month or so they find some new Hollyweird wackjob that believes them, but other than that, they really haven't found anything new.
    • Jrogan, on 06/18/2008, -71/+51Once you have completely proven the official fable to be a joke....What else is there to do?

      Except try to wake up morons like yourself.
      • BohicaTwentyTwo, on 06/18/2008, -20/+42I'll play along for the moment. To answer your question, I would think the next step would be to come up with your own theory of events and then find evidence to prove it.
        • aliengoods, on 06/18/2008, -9/+8That's the method of creationists. Find evidence that supports your theory, and disregard other evidence.

          The problem with anyone researching 9/11 is that they have been continuously blocked by the government. So looking for a smoking gun will be all but impossible. If there was one, they destroyed it long ago.

          And as for a whistleblower, I seriously doubt anyone will do that, no matter what they know or how bad they feel about their actions. If anyone admitted complicity in 9/11 they would be branded a terrorist and thrown in Gitmo, with no contact with the outside world. They would be lucky if a handful of people would hear their story before they were detained for the rest of their lives. Oh, but I forgot. The US government would never throw people in jail indefinitely without a trial, would they?
        • sugarazor, on 06/19/2008, -8/+8Again... the government couldn't cover up a lousy hotel break in. You mean to tell me that they could cover THIS up? Please... it's like people that say the moon landing was fake.
      • ssn697, on 06/18/2008, -31/+81Can you share your proof with us? 7 years, and still nothing, but WE are the morons?

        If you have completely proven it, where is the proof? Why not trial? Why no arrests? Is EVERYBODY in on it?

        I have actually scientific proof of the cause of the collapse, from MIT, USCE, etc. Where, or where, is your proof?
        • aliengoods, on 06/18/2008, -15/+6It doesn't matter how much proof there is. There are plenty of sites with independent analysis of those attacks, and how things could not have possibly happened in the manner the government reported. All you have to do is look and read. You can even read rebuttals, and rebuttals to the rebuttals. This is how the flow of information should work, but in America, it doesn't.

          The problem is the American people don't want to believe it was anything other than terrorists. They are afraid of their government. They are afraid of truth. They have become pussies.
        • Herkimer56, on 06/18/2008, -9/+19Plenty of sites but how many peer reviewed papers have you seen that support the truther movement? I can answer that for you, none. Every proper scientific investigation in to the events of 9/11 have clearly demonstrated that the truther movement has it completely wrong and the towers did collapse as a result of the impact of the jets combined with the fires. Your truther web sites are nothing more than speculation, exaggeration, outright lies and junk science. It's been nearly seven years now and no one in the truther movement has yet to produce even one piece of credible, verifiable evidence that supports any aspect of their theories.

          Your problem is that you made up your mind before you even started reading about this that the government was guilty and you're not about to let the truth get in the way of that belief. If anyone is afraid of the truth, it's you.
        • JoeRW, on 06/19/2008, -10/+2And where was your mind before you started reading about it Herkimer? I believe it was wayyy up Bushs ass.
        • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -4/+7Well, that's because you're an idiot. Obviously you're not intellectually capable of carrying on a debate so you just dropped a stupid comment and ran away. This makes you a troll. Now vanish, troll.
        • sugarazor, on 06/19/2008, -3/+9JoeRW - the perfect example of the truth movement. Someone points out the numerous debunkings of these insane theories and a Truther responds with something to the effect of "your head is up Bush's ass," "fascist bootlicker," or "***** YOU YOU STUPID IDIOT *****!!!"
        • nzhamstar, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1Scientific proof? Or doctored evidence?
        • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3Scientific proof. Not the crap you've been getting from the Cult of 9/11.
      • 911cartoon, on 06/18/2008, -25/+26cuz people are too pussy to even talk about 9/11 in politics (except when fearmongering) much less investigate it
      • Herkimer56, on 06/18/2008, -17/+25Is that your new excuse for your complete failure to do anything?
        • Falldog, on 06/18/2008, -4/+13Nah, secret government agents did it.
        • JoeRW, on 06/19/2008, -6/+1Isn't this pathetic. Is patriotic, gives pathetic national security a pass, and is very glad to.
        • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -3/+8You know nothing about patriotism you moron. You're too far gone in paranoid delusions.
      • ssn697, on 06/18/2008, -20/+56Too pussy? There have been more than a dozen investigations, by reputable, peer reviewed scientific organizations. They all came to the same conclusion.

        But, because you don't LIKE the conclusion, you ignore them, or pretend hundreds of thousands of people are "in on it".

        What does politics have to do with you having ZERO verifiable, scientific or forensic proof at ANY LEVEL, of your theories about an inside job, controlled demolition, etc.?

        If someone from the "it was an inside job/controlled demolition" gang produced ANY proof in the last 7 years, I would be all over it. The fact is there has been MUCH proof to the contrary, and nothing but bitching and whining from the CD/IJ crowd, like your post above.
        • seraph582, on 06/18/2008, -17/+10i love the "controlled demolition theory" LOL

          why the ***** would they worry about collateral damage if they want it to appear like a terrorist attack!

          ROFL
        • elhaf, on 06/18/2008, -12/+4seraph582, you have no imagination. I'm not suggesting that this is what happened, but if you wanted to rationalize it, you just say that the terrorists did the attack, and then some felt that the towers were in danger of collapsing and falling sideways for half a mile or so through Manhattan, so pre-existing controlled demolition charges were set off to take the buildings down straight. However, this had the unfortunate side-effect of killing hundreds of first responders and whoever was still stuck in the buildings, but it saved a bunch of prime New York real estate, so what the hell. Having done something like this, you can then see the incentive to want to cover it up. Again, I don't think this is what happened, I'm just playing the devil's advocate here.
        • gkwillie, on 06/19/2008, -2/+7Steel doesn't melt at the temperature of burning jet fuel, but it does lose most of its strength and becomes more ductile. The fact is, in the vicinity of burning jet fuel, the main cross-beams couldn't support the weight of the floor and they began to sag. Unfortunately, the design of the WTC had these cross beams spanning the main central column to the edge, without any other vertical support, so as these heated metals lost contact with the edge, they collapsed onto the floors below, causing an almost instantaneous cascading effect that brought the towers down.

          I've worked in real demolition. The idea that this was a pre-existing controlled demolition is ludicrous, not only because the facts are completely contrary to that theory, but because of the sheer requirements that have to go into bringing down a building of that size. We are talking about hundreds of thousands of pounds of high explosive charges, without A SINGLE person noticing and reporting the hundreds of people that would be required to demolish the interior of the building to get to the supporting column. And no, no one builds buildings with pre-existing demolition charges in them, just in case.

          And I also know that you are just playing devils advocate. It just irks me to no end that these theories are given any credence. Frankly, I find that level of disrespect and delusion repulsive.
        • sugarazor, on 06/19/2008, -2/+4Why the hell would there be pre-existing controlled demolition charges? Wouldn't these be installed in every major building in every major metropolitan area? Wouldn't someone blown the whistle on something so dangerous and completely unnecessary?

          Ignore the fact that there were 18 diesel tanks powering generators at the site, clearly the government has installed controlled demolition charges in the even that the WTC would be struck by a plane. Seriously, dude?
      • PolishLogic, on 06/18/2008, -0/+6You're using the word "prove" in it's loosest sense, I take it.
    • Falldog, on 06/18/2008, -14/+51I think they may have been able to muster a movie night here or there.
    • sugarazor, on 06/18/2008, -36/+172New evidence? You say that like they have old evidence.
      • oderdigg, on 06/18/2008, -28/+14There sure is. Just go to the landfill in China where the remains are and you're certain to find bodies, papers, explosives etc etc.

        Largest attack in US history and the Government buries the evidence. Classic.
        • PolishLogic, on 06/18/2008, -5/+31Will you? Will you really?

          I suppose you've seen it with your own eyes, then? Or did prisonplanet.com tell you so?
        • sugarazor, on 06/19/2008, -4/+16Proof, perhaps?

          I could also claim that the Roswell Crash evidence is buried on an ancient Indian burial ground and it's going to eventually melt together causing an American Indian Alien Zombie outbreak, but that doesn't necessarily make it true.

          Classic!
        • GliTCH82, on 06/19/2008, -6/+4In the plethora of photos that were taken of the rubble in the aftermath of 9/11 it is evident that many of the WTC's steel beams had diagonal slices. I'm not dismissing that 9/11 was an attack by some terrorist organization, all I'm saying is those towers were not brought down the way we all witnessed as a result of jet fuel burning.

          Diagonal cuts in steel beams of towers is one way professionals bring them down, using thermate. There were molten pools of metal underneath the rubble for weeks after the attack, and that has absolutely nothing to do with jet fuel.
        • sugarazor, on 06/19/2008, -0/+7On the thermate myth:

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWpC_1WP8do
        • JohnReb, on 06/19/2008, -2/+5Would that be the debris that my commute took me past twice a day for most of a year? Perhaps you think theChinese bought Great Kills Landfill here on Staten Island?
        • viggooo, on 06/19/2008, -3/+3http://www.china.org.cn/english/2002/Jan/25776.htm
    • jamesdew, on 06/18/2008, -14/+13Yes but this would be an investigation not solely controlled by America by credible individuals. The results of such an investigation could not be ignored.
      • wigginz, on 06/18/2008, -7/+9Look how well America ignores the recent impeachment push, sure they could ignore something like this. Something that's considered conspiracy theory == will always be ignore by the main stream until someone of importance gets prosecuted.
        • GreyICE, on 06/18/2008, -9/+10Something that has no credible evidence, nothing but crackpots and crazies arguing for it, and carries less water than Scientology isn't getting any mainstream attention?

          Say it ain't so!
      • jabberwolf, on 06/18/2008, -7/+9Yeah physics professors, city engineers of NYC Department of Design and Construction.

        Not really credible, everything they say, they were bought off and government stooges.

        And physics itself... ha we cant just look at facts of physics - we NEED the conspiracy talk!
      • Herkimer56, on 06/18/2008, -4/+18How about Cambridge University? They did their own investigation in to the events of 9/11 and they said that the towers collapsed from the impact of the jets combined with fire damage. In other words, they said that your theories are completely without merit.
        • wackyronpauI, on 06/18/2008, -13/+2http://digg.com/politics/Ron_Paul_Reaches_Halfway_ ...
          COME ON HERK - GET IT DONE - we NEED to get rid of the Paultards!!!!!
        • JoeRW, on 06/19/2008, -5/+7Ironically here Mark Seffen, the self proclaimed originator of a 'mathematical model' and 'peer reviewed paper' has tried to publish this unseen paper but not succeeded at all. So all there was was a press release and lots of noise from people like Herk who wil take any non-peer reviewed crock that merely purports to appeal to authority so long as it agrees with their cloudy ass thinking. Then they can accuse their perceived enemy of doing exactly what they did and worse. Haha.
          Here read the whole sordid story. "http://winterpatriot.blogspot.com/2007/11/seffens- ..."

        • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -5/+6You're either lying or hopelessly stupid, Joe, because Seffen's paper was published months ago.

          http://winterpatriot.pbwiki.com/f/seffen_simple_an ...

          If you should happen to make an attempt to read it, let us know if you have trouble with the big words.
        • zeex, on 06/19/2008, -4/+1that's not the link of the published article...
          that's the link of the UNPUBLISHED article on the website the hopelessly stupid JoeRW (as you call him) showed to you!

          have you ever seen how the published article looks like?
          don't bother searching, here is the official journal(you need a valid login), date: February 2008 :

          http://ascelibrary.aip.org/dbt/dbt.jsp?KEY=JENMDT& ...

          So, if your reference is the same as Joe's.....
          .....
          .....WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT, MORON?!?!

          Sincerely, zeex.
        • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -4/+4Ninety seconds on Google you idiot.

          http://ascelibrary.aip.org/vsearch/servlet/VerityS ...

          The link I posted is to the article on that page. You don't have to join anything so you can stop lying now.
        • zeex, on 06/19/2008, -1/+0so, you had to search for it anyway right? because you had no idea of what you were talking about!

          and oh...I'm so sorry for lying to you about a valid login requirement....oh I'm such an idiot for that...even though your link is on the same ***** website as my link....and oh...THAT'S THE F*CKIN ABSTRACT! If you didn't notice the full text in pdf is still available only for people with a valid login!

          And guess what, after the login, you get the same article I pointed!

          But you don't know it, because you don't have a valid login! and so, you've never seen the real and published article talking about the falling twin towers that in fact doesn't prove anything pecause it doesn't explain de falling of the wtc7 and de not-falling of all the other buildings around..

          Oh little Herkimer you naughty stubborn lying brat!

          I'm very, very sorry for being rude, but you sir, deserve it for the sake of those you insulted here on digg (or just for the sake of my own peace of mind, I don't really care).
    • YogiWanKenobi, on 06/18/2008, -15/+9All the evidence points one way,
      but I'm like Charlie Sheen and Gloria Estefan:
      I need to know what really happened
      on 9/11
    • bmcnally, on 06/18/2008, -10/+221"Here in Japan, the mere idea of a man crashing a plane, voluntarily killing himself in order to kill many others, is preposterous."
      • aukxsona, on 06/18/2008, -42/+69Dugg for ironic subtle reference to WWII and the kamakaze pilots.
      • mathcreative, on 06/22/2008, -0/+1How could you make fun of such things!
    • Innagadadavida, on 06/18/2008, -45/+50Actually, there is tons of evidence, eye witness reports, and video footage. Have you been following at all?

      http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/main.htm
      That's not the most credible source, but they have some interesting footage and interviews with people in WTC when it happened. And video footage of WTC Building 7 collapsing, the one that wasn't even hit by a plane. Skip to about 40 minutes into the movie to get to the part about the 9/11 attacks.
      • Mikhail101, on 06/18/2008, -14/+19that movie is insane recommended to everyone.
      • CrazedLeper, on 06/18/2008, -4/+18Clearly, he has not been following anything but the crowd.
      • Yakovzoya, on 06/18/2008, -3/+27"That's not the most credible source"

        Then why post it? What source do you have that IS the most credible?
        • Herkimer56, on 06/18/2008, -9/+25There is no such thing as a credible source when it comes from the Cult of 9/11.
        • GliTCH82, on 06/19/2008, -8/+3Just because a source isn't 100% credible doesn't mean you can't form your own opinion from the photos, videos and interviews they present. You can watch a movie like that from an objective point of view and ignore the subjective references when the narrator tries to tie events together to reach conclusions. But seriously, just watching enough of the 9/11 footage with audio and hearing enough interviews by the firefighters and people who witnessed it will clearly change your mind about what we have on official record as being accurate. Regardless of government conspiracy or not, the bottom line is that we still really don't have an accurate account of what happened on 9/11.
        • Lavarock, on 06/19/2008, -11/+2This may not be credible, but you may form your own opinions from it: GliTCH82 ***** HIS MOTHER IN HELL BECAUSE HES A RAGING PISSCUNT MURDERER DIE DIE DIE DIE
        • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -3/+10I'm not interested in opinions. I'm interested in facts. That's the difference between people like me and the truthers like you.
      • Innagadadavida, on 06/18/2008, -5/+7He asked if there were any evidence and I posted it. I said it's not the MOST credible. I meant that certain parts of the documentary is a little questionable. The segment I was talking about is fine, it's the end of the documentary that gets a little kooky.

        There is evidence for these attacks and not just these but countless other attacks that got us into war so the world banks could fund both sides and profit. War is profit.
        • Herkimer56, on 06/18/2008, -8/+9And it's also not evidence. It's a video put together by a bunch of conspiracy theorists and it's nothing more than truther propaganda and junk science.
        • SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/18/2008, -7/+7There is NO evidence presented in that movie to prove anything, really.

          If you don't understand that you should look up what the word evidence means. Hint: It's more than something someone says.
        • GliTCH82, on 06/19/2008, -5/+2What exactly do you think is in this video? They don't tape their own acne ridden faces and try to force you to accept their version of what happened, the video is all the footage from 9/11 that was taken by everyone and you're free to interpret it however you want. Evidence is presented in the form of photos and videos, you're not buying into the narrator's version of events based on faith. You can't have a documentary without presenting some factual information, how much of it is fact and how much is ***** is up to you to decide.
        • zeex, on 06/19/2008, -3/+4aaanndd what about this one:

          http://www.loosechange911.com/finalcut/

          that's the third and last remake of the documentary. I've seen the 1st and 2nd releases, which were something like zeitgeist, a little bit far fetched and inaccurate. But this one does have some really good interviews and arguments.

          it's not just a video put together by a bunch of conspiracy theorist.

          (Coolest part: when the British news announce the wtc7 fall 10 minutes
          before the real fall with a video footage of a journalist in NY talking about it with wtc7 still intact behind her)
      • david76, on 06/18/2008, -4/+22Did you ever see the side of WTC 7 facing into the plaza? Guess not. It was pretty much destroyed. And having a bunch of diesel fuel on site to power generators probably didn't help.

        I have seen a lot of the "evidence". The conclusions are easily dismissed because alternate explanations are much more reasonable.
        • willskillz, on 06/18/2008, -16/+6OH, whatever noob! There hasn't been any photos showing this destruction of the side of wtc7 you're speaking of (just that fag James Meigs from PM claiming to have seen them). In fact, there's still some 80+ videos from the pentagon that would show flight 77 hitting the pentagon perfectly, but of course those haven't been released either. Why won't they release them? What are they hiding? Why am I crazy for thinking something shadys going on?? I want answers, NOW.
        • SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/18/2008, -3/+14willskillz:

          http://www.wtc7.net/docs/June2004WTC7_Page_16_crop ...

          You know, Google isn't THAT hard to use.

          And I wonder why the military wouldn't release a video showing how effective an attack on their center of operations was... hmmm. You're right, must be a conspiracy. /sarcasm
        • willskillz, on 06/19/2008, -13/+3@speeds

          I've seen that before. There's so much thick, black smoke right where that arrow is pointing you can't see very much "damage". Even if you invert the colors and zoom in it's still fuzzy and indeterminable what damage is there. And besides that's the pic from the NYPD not the one Jim Meigs (the 9/11 anti-truth, non expert, know-it-all from PM) was talking about.

          "And I wonder why the military wouldn't release a video showing how effective an attack on their center of operations was..."

          If that's the best thing you can come up with then there's just no sense in me replying. We clearly don't think alike.

          I can't see a reason WHY the Pentagon wouldn't show all the video tapes of flight 77 hitting it. You know, Google isn't THAT hard for you to use either. It's not like someone can't get on google and find out everything they want to know about the Pentagon inside and out. The Pentagon even had drills of the same exact scenarios that took place on 9/11 a year prior!!! That's in public record. If you think I'm gonna go along with your pathetic "they don't show the videos because of National Security reasons" forget it! You're the conspiracy.







          /sarcasm
      • joeyjj, on 06/18/2008, -2/+11Yeah, it definitely is not a credible source:
        http://www.conspiracyscience.com/articles/zeitgeis ...
      • WESTEE, on 06/19/2008, -5/+2http://digg.com/odd_stuff/The_Zeitgeist_9_11_Consp ...
        digg it man its the youtube version lets get this for lots of ppl to see
    • Mikhail101, on 06/18/2008, -13/+4If it were an inside job do you think they would show on CNN or FOX as we all know they are controlled media.
    • CrazedLeper, on 06/18/2008, -12/+1Here's some evidence for you:

      http://digg.com/political_opinion/The_Most_Expensi ...
      • Herkimer56, on 06/18/2008, -2/+6Thanks, I hadn't seen that. Buried as inaccurate.
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/18/2008, -1/+5That's not evidence. That's more conspiracy theorist speculation. It's not even new speculation.
    • lisajohnson55, on 06/18/2008, -16/+43The one reason that I don't believe in 9/11 conspiracies is the most obvious reason:
      People LOVE to talk. Whether they are against something or they just want to get the spotlight, they love to talk. To pull off something as big as the 9/11 conspiracy, you would need a huge amount of people, and without a doubt at least one person would talk sooner or later. Heck, even if they each were paid an extremely large amount of money or their lives were threatened, in the end, someone would come out and talk. So far...........NOTHING!
      I have not heard of a single person coming forward and saying that they were part of the conspiracy, or a person who had an inside document or serious piece of evidence. And until one does, I don't consider the conspiracy to be anything other than what it is, just a conspiracy.
      • Buddhaismybuddy, on 06/18/2008, -16/+12Dead men tell no tales.
      • startzpe, on 06/18/2008, -12/+11Parsons was Winston's fellow-employee at the Ministry of Truth. He was a fattish but active man of paralysing stupidity, a mass of imbecile enthusiasms -- one of those completely unquestioning, devoted drudges on whom, more even than on the Thought Police, the stability of the Party depended. At thirty-five he had just been unwillingly evicted from the Youth League, and before graduating into the Youth League he had managed to stay on in the Spies for a year beyond the statutory age. At the Ministry he was employed in some subordinate post for which intelligence was not required, but on the other hand he was a leading figure on the Sports Committee and all the other committees engaged in organizing community hikes, spontaneous demonstrations, savings campaigns, and voluntary activities generally. He would inform you with quiet pride, between whiffs of his pipe, that he had put in an appearance at the Community Centre every evening for the past four years. An overpowering smell of sweat, a sort of unconscious testimony to the strenuousness of his life, followed him about wherever he went, and even remained behind him after he had gone.

        http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/1.html
      • Brain1, on 06/18/2008, -9/+5Here's the Pay-off money to keep all involved quet, and happy....
        http://benfrank.net/patriots/news/national/pentago ...
        • sodade, on 06/19/2008, -4/+1How can people not think that there is some kind of "conspiracy" behind this money?
        • Brain1, on 06/19/2008, -3/+1 It could the fact It was a staged False Flag Attack,so multifaceted, and complex. So much happened in one day,that it was Incomprehensible to a lot of People.
          Then you have Denial that the Government that we trust, could ever commit Mass Murder on its own People.
          And then there's Fear of being Ostracized by others calling you a Traitor for Questioning our Government.There was, and still is "debunker's" using "Fake" Patriotism as an intimidation tactic against "truther's.
        • theright, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4Brain1, if you're genuinely interested in researching the matter and viewing all the evidence available: http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Missing_Trillion ...

          The claim that the Pentagon "lost" (read: could not account for without significant effort due to a large number of archaic and incompatible accounting systems) trillions (the majority of which has since been accounted for with consolidation of accounting systems at the Pentagon) of dollars, and Rumsfeld announced this news the day before the 9/11 attacks (read: the figure was discovered during a 1999 audit, was public knowledge and had been announced in the media countless times before 9/10/2001) is yet another lie from the 9/11 "truth movement".
      • zhavah, on 06/18/2008, -12/+8yeah people love to talk, but when was the last time you heard a CIA operative confess to a crime of this magnitude? never.
        • mathcreative, on 06/22/2008, -0/+1Since when has a CIA operative been allowed to talk about anything
      • Hangly, on 06/19/2008, -7/+7So far... nothing? And you know this because none of them were interviewed on CNN?

        People all over are talking. Former Naval Intelligence officer Mike Vreeland warned the Canadian government very specifically about 9/11 in advance.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delmart_Vreeland
      • GliTCH82, on 06/19/2008, -3/+2Exactly, just watch any news station nowadays and you will see how much pundits and reporters love to talk. Most of it is *****.
      • HumanCattle, on 06/19/2008, -10/+11"To pull off something as big as the 9/11 conspiracy, you would need a huge amount of people"

        Actually, according to the US Government, you would only need 19 suicidal muslims armed with deadly boxcutters, a penchant for boozing and whoring, flameproof passports and a few hours of flight school training.

        "and without a doubt at least one person would talk sooner or later."

        Agreed. There has been very little "talk" by those accused of being involved in this conspiracy, apart from a few suspicious Bin Laden videos and some pathetic manifestos on Jihadi websites. And apart from all the devout muslim hijackers who spent a few nights at bars and strip clubs bragging about how they were going to attack the United States. Apparently.

        "Heck, even if they each were paid an extremely large amount of money or their lives were threatened, in the end, someone would come out and talk. So far...........NOTHING!"

        TS:SCI stands for Top Secret: Special Compartmentalized Information. And this is a fairly pedestrian classification. Do you know what compartmentalized means?

        All intelligent, educated people know that the 9/11 Conspiracy was carried out by 19 super muslims armed with small blades and pirated copies of Microsoft Flight Simulator. No intelligence agency had ANY involvement whatsoever, and it's well known that false flag attacks have never been used by the western elites in order to manipulate the public. NEVER. They would NEVER do such a thing. There is no precedent for this!

        Get a brain, troofers! LOL Tinfoil!
        • lisajohnson55, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4Yes, it would only take 19 suicidal muslims to pull off 9/11, but it would take far more people to pull off the "conspiracy." For example, you would need people to take down the planes, you would need people to destroy evidence (both physical and electronic), you would need people to explode the "bombs." So, with a conspiracy, it would likely take far more than only 19 people.
      • Ignignokt01, on 06/19/2008, -7/+8Occam's razor...

        Conspiracy theories like these are absolutely ridiculous.
        • Hangly, on 06/19/2008, -4/+2"The variety of beings should not rashly be diminished." -- Immanuel Kant

          Crabtree's Bludgeon, the Plenitude Principle and the Zero-One Law also oppose Occam's Razor as being unnecessarily reductionist.

          Simplifying things merely for the sake of simplifying them is irrational. If the simple answer does not accurately describe the facts, then the answer must be made more complex until it is accurate.
        • digitalhair, on 06/19/2008, -5/+2the easiest way to get away with a crime of this magnitude is to recognize that Occam's Razor is repeated like a mantra by idiots who are too lazy to have enough skepticism necessary to investigate the most obvious circumstances for themselves when an event like 9/11 occurs.

          Occam's razor became obsolete as soon as it became forever buried in conventional wisdom... All you have to do is make the crime so complex that people will resort to Occam's razor and forfeit any resolve toward discovering the truth via investigation.

          another phrase that functions in the same way is "tinfoil hats" which is better explained by my submission here: (digg it up please)
          http://digg.com/world_news/Truth_Freedom_Justice_f ...




      • DiggMasterJ, on 06/19/2008, -3/+5Everyone knows how much criminals love to turn themselves in. But wouldn't the smart thing to do be to listen to the evidence the "truthers" are presenting and decide for yourself if it is bunk? Admit it, you're just too lazy. Wouldn't it be ironic if you did noting because you were too lazy, and then it lead to huge inflation; which in turn lead to you having to work harder to afford the same lifestyle. LOL, wouldn't it just be ironic.
      • alecks, on 06/19/2008, -4/+2Someone did talk...

        One of the alleged terrorist on one of the planes. They showed pictures on the news of the terrorists, and he saw himself on tv.

        This is documented in the zeitgeist movie as well.

    • Naieve, on 06/18/2008, -8/+8Bush is idiotic evil genius.

      /sarcasm
      • Slackdragon, on 06/19/2008, -1/+12Seriously, which is he?

        Peoples definition shift with the wind. One minute, he can't string a sentence, read a book and is dumb as a brick. The next, he's a criminal mastermind, a Machiavellian super-genius that sits atop a cabal that runs as deep as any fictional criminal organization.

        Which is he? Chimpy McChimp-Chimp? Or Keyser Söze?
        • zinc6471, on 06/19/2008, -3/+6well the best trick keyser soze did was to convince the world that he didn't exist



    • ferkranus, on 06/18/2008, -11/+36I prefer Bill Maher's reasoning for why 9/11 wasn't an inside job --- it required PLANNING and it WORKED!
      • DiggMasterJ, on 06/19/2008, -9/+4It's just funny how the Pentagon was blindsided with a huge plane, and they were able to clean up the mess almost instantaneously without anybody seeing the pieces. And yet they are all such idiots. Perhaps you can explain it me.
        • darkciti2, on 06/19/2008, -7/+4Exactly. How the ***** was the Pentagon of all places hit by a [relatively] slow moving 747?

          No one knows.

          Why weren't the 2 Rolls Royce titanium engines not found (or seen) anywhere in the wreckage at the Pentagon?

          Ad nausem...
        • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3You idiot, there are pictures of the engines in the debris at the Pentagon. Check out what you post before posting and you won't look like such a complete moron.

          http://rense.com/general32/phot.htm
      • shig, on 06/19/2008, -4/+1Hmm, 3 out of 5 targets destroyed... If it was a government job then I guess that counts as a success.

        Personally, I'm surprised they haven't asked for a budget increase to pay for an investigation into why Flight 93 failed to hit it's intended target, which we're told was the Capital Building and not the White House.

        The al-CIAda cell tasked to destroy the White House failed to make it to their plane. Langley runs on UTC not EST. Simple mistake. Memos have been sent.
    • jabberwolf, on 06/18/2008, -16/+27www.debunbking911.com

      They have just about every conspiracy theory answered.
      And not with a lot of BS and hypotheticals but actual people and facts.

      For instance the "pull it" comment about building 9.
      Luis Mendes, from the NYC Department of Design and Construction and Dan Nigro
      Chief of Department FDNY !
      • Hangly, on 06/19/2008, -10/+9Regarding the molten steel (from the site)

        "They suggest the above glow is steel which is being cut by a thermite cutter charge reaction. They show photos of a thermite reaction burning a hole downward through a metal plate. Let's forget for a moment that thermite doesn't explode so the claims of hearing explosions become meaningless. The argument that there was thermite and explosives seems to be rationalization of this dilemma. Why would they use thermite which cuts steel without announcing it, then switch to explosives? To tip people off? No theory exist to explain this but the faithful simply say "We're still working on it". I'm sure they are. Let's also give ourselves selective amnesia and pretend thermite can burn sideways to melt vertical columns. Maybe with some device but no working device has been proven to me to work. While there are relatively large canisters which can burn small holes sideways, I have yet to see this elusive steel cutting technique used to cut a vertical column. "

        Oh my ***** Christ, are you serious? That's *exactly* what thermite/thermate is for, and that's precisely how it's used.

        Unreacted thermite was found in the WTC debris and in the surrounding dust already. The thermite, at least, is fact.

        Also you spelled the url wrong.
        • DiggMasterJ, on 06/19/2008, -9/+4I love you.

          Very few people actually pay attention to what the debunkers are saying. They just assume that if it has been debunked; "well then that's that" it's back to grazing on the pasture for me. It frustrates me to no end that intelligent people will point to these sits and say, there's the answer. Then I read it and it is complete *****.
        • shig, on 06/19/2008, -3/+1A linear shaped charge (LSC) has a liner with V-shaped profile and varying length. The liner is surrounded with explosive, the explosive then encased within a suitable material that serves to protect the explosive and to confine (tamp) it on detonation. The charge is detonated at some point in the explosive above the liner apex. The detonation projects the liner to form a continuous, knife-like (planar) jet. The jet cuts any material in its path, to a depth depending on the size and materials used in the charge. For the cutting of complex geometries, there are also flexible versions of the linear shaped charge, these with a lead or high-density foam sheathing and a ductile/flexible liner material, which also is often lead. LSCs are commonly used in the cutting of rolled steel joists (RSJ) and other structural targets, such as in the controlled demolition of buildings. LSCs are also used to separate the stages of multi-stage rockets.

          Here's what they look like
          http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/4/4e ...

          Here's some being placed on a verticle steel beam
          http://www.piratenews.org/historychannel-wreckingb ...
        • pckbeta, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4"Unreacted" thermite? That is aluminum metal and conceivably ANY metal oxide. Seriously if you powder aluminum foil and RUST congratulations you have thermite.

          But you're right. There is no WAY someone found aluminum AND RUST in the rubble of a collapsed building. That's impossible.

          Idiot.



      • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -3/+11"Unreacted thermite was found in the WTC debris"

        Cite your source for this or be labeled as a liar.
        • HumanCattle, on 06/19/2008, -10/+2Keep it up Herkimer56. You're doing great!
        • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -2/+9Better than you you disingenuous idiot.
      • GliTCH82, on 06/19/2008, -9/+4http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5458864598 ...

        Molten steel ejected from the side of the WTC. Can jet fuel do this? Let's find out.

        According to a 9/11 debunking article by popular mechanics:

        FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength — and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

        That article is here:

        http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/militar ...

        You can ignore everything after the first sentence of that paragraph because clearly, in that video on google videos you ARE witnessing molten steel.
      • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -2/+10How do you know that it's steel? Were you there collecting samples or are you just pulling this out of your ass? It was never hot enough in the towers to melt steel but it was hot enough to melt aluminum and it's far more likely to have been aluminum.
        • YogiWanKenobi, on 06/19/2008, -0/+5Or lead. Think of all the data centers (not to mention PCs, CRTs, and UPSs) in the WTC towers. Lead has a much lower melting point than aluminum.
    • AngelBunny, on 06/18/2008, -10/+5in the last year the only new evidence I've seen is someone from ground zero cleaned up some of the melting steel, stored it away, then saw the movement, and offered the samples up to some of the top professors at many different universities in this country.
      • Hangly, on 06/19/2008, -7/+11Then the steel was analyzed, found to have been completely liquefied in some cases by extreme temperatures, and significant amounts of thermite and thermate (reacted and unreacted) were found as well. The results were posted, and a scientific paper was drafted and published.

        http://tinyurl.com/6eldbb
      • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -8/+11You're offering a "Letter to the Editor" from a vanity journal that Steven Jones had to pay to have published as a source for your *****? That's just insane. That piece of crap offers exactly zero scientific evidence of any kind. It's just the ramblings of a bunch of dumb-ass truthers who have no idea what they're talking about. That is NOT a peer reviewed scientific paper by any description. You are either deluded or deliberately lying.
        • HumanCattle, on 06/19/2008, -7/+2blah blah proof? blah blah you are insane blah blah you are a liar blah blah no evidence blah blah big words are hard for truthers blah blah stop spreading propaganda blah blah arab loving blah blah muslim loving blah blah islam is a gutter religion blah blah you are giving aid and comfort to the enemy blah blah begone troll. -- herkimer56
        • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -0/+6Looks like Card51 is going to have a run for his money as the stupidest poster on Digg.
    • WESTEE, on 06/18/2008, -10/+2http://digg.com/odd_stuff/The_Zeitgeist_9_11_Consp ...

      goo to it digg it
    • startzpe, on 06/18/2008, -13/+29'You're a traitor!' yelled the boy. 'You're a thought-criminal! You're a Eurasian spy! I'll shoot you, I'll vaporize you, I'll send you to the salt mines!'

      Suddenly they were both leaping round him, shouting 'Traitor!' and 'Thought-criminal!' the little girl imitating her brother in every movement. It was somehow slightly frightening, like the gambolling of tiger cubs which will soon grow up into man-eaters. There was a sort of calculating ferocity in the boy's eye, a quite evident desire to hit or kick Winston and a consciousness of being very nearly big enough to do so. It was a good job it was not a real pistol he was holding, Winston thought.

      http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/1.html
      • darkciti2, on 06/19/2008, -7/+3Most teenagers these days don't have the desire to read 1984.

        Teenagers:
        Rent the movie 1984 (or pull the torrent / audiobook) and prepare yourselves for your future (or more importantly, see what will happen if you don't).
        • thellamafarm, on 06/19/2008, -1/+7dont watch the movie. Read the book. much more detailed
      • helpfulcorn, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2I love how people quote 1984 when it was about a Socialist dictatorship in Europe, and a man who was an outer-party member. It was not about normal people, as they were considered vermin by the party members, i.e. Winston and his friends. Making a comparison of 1984 to anything other than the USSR under Stalin (which it was a commentary of) is to completely miss the entire point of the book, and proves that you 1) didn't read it, or 2) are incapable of thinking for yourself and realizing the fact that EngSoc means "English Socialism", not "America under the evil George W Bush".
    • Yage2006, on 06/18/2008, -8/+10No they keep saying the same party line nothing new.
      #1 sign of *****.
      • NachoBusiness, on 06/19/2008, -3/+10"9/11 truth" always been mostly about proving they know something important that everyone else is too dumb or corrupt to accept... as with most conspiracy theories. The actual accuracy or documentation of the theory isn't really important, it's all about how superior it can make them feel to believe in it. They need to be the slim majority who know "the truth".
    • Sep11insidejob, on 06/18/2008, -12/+16How about the official report? NIST was debunked by its former chief of the fires division. So, in otherwords there is NO official story!
      • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -4/+8That is totally untrue. He had questions about the way that some of the testing was conducted but he in no way disagreed with the findings. You, sir, are a liar.
        • Sep11insidejob, on 06/19/2008, -5/+3Questions? ahahaha there was no debate . He was blocked by lawyers.
          That study was flawed and it was controlled in every aspect. No questions were allowed by the chief of the fires division. The ***** CHIEF.

          So Herk, again you have no credibility. If you did, you would agree with the former chief that the NIST study was a scientific farce.
    • Hangly, on 06/19/2008, -16/+14Why, yes. Something very important happened recently. In April Steven E. Jones published a peer-reviewed paper in the Open Civil Engineering Journal titled "Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the
      World Trade Center Destruction" in which he takes FEMA and NIST's findings apart piece by piece.

      http://tinyurl.com/6eldbb

      It's not just a theory anymore, folks. It's science.
      • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -5/+10Sorry, it's still *****.

        That was not a peer-reviewed paper. That was a letter to the editor that Steven Jones had to pay to have published in a vanity journal. It presents absolutely no original scientific research and it was not submitted to anyone for review prior to publication. To call it a peer-reviewed paper is an absolute lie.
        • Hangly, on 06/19/2008, -7/+2I know you shills never respond to criticism, but here goes.

          I find your allegation intriguing and would like to read more about it. Can you perchance provide me with a source of some kind?
        • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -2/+7You already did. Just read the damn thing. Then go look up the "journal" it was published in.
      • Ignignokt01, on 06/19/2008, -2/+4No , I guarantee you, it will always remain a theory.
    • hockeysmurf, on 06/19/2008, -24/+24WTF so how does BohicaTwentyTwo get +132 Diggs for throwing an insult at the 911 truth movement? I can't stand how Digg has so many pro-government pawns bumping up such ***** comments like that.

      Most of us know that elements within the US government were behind the attacks and these guys aren't fooling anyone.

      • Herkimer56, on 06/19/2008, -9/+17He gets that many Diggs because he posts the truth which can be verified while you people post garbage that has no basis in fact.
      • Gudeldar, on 06/19/2008, -8/+21You're pissed because not everyone at Digg is an irrational nutjob who wears a tinfoil hat to bed because the government might be reading your mind. I'm relieve to see there are some rational people still left on Digg. I just wish there was an easy way to block you all other than reading the comments.
        • Marijuana, on 06/19/2008, -8/+1Expand your mind. Smoke Marijuana.
        • Gudeldar, on 06/19/2008, -2/+14Been there, done that. Still don't believe 9/11 conspiracy theory *****.
        • hockeysmurf, on 06/19/2008, -7/+4Are you calling me an irrational nutjob because I believe that Building 7 was brought down by controlled demolitions? It wasn't hit by a plane jackass.
        • RussellDovey, on 06/19/2008, -1/+9It wasn't hit by a plane; IT WAS HIT BY A BUILDING.
      • JustinPM, on 06/19/2008, -4/+5Like "most" of the world believes there is a God? If you "know" something then you have the evidence to back up your claim. Otherwise, using "know" means you know jack.
        • hockeysmurf, on 06/19/2008, -4/+2Good point, my mistake, I just assumed that the fact that most people can see 911 is an inside job based on logic alone. For example, 2 planes somehow destroy 3 sky-scrapers? And only 3 sky-scrapers have ever collapsed from fire and all of them happened on 911?

          You're right though, it is important to have evidence. Here is some, please take a moment to review the following videos and feel free to post back with your comments, thanks.

          Evidence that thermite was used on 911
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wVLeKwSkXA

          Eyewitness reports of secondary & multiple explosions before the collapse:
          http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3249714675 ...
        • helpfulcorn, on 06/19/2008, -2/+3hockeysmurf:

          No thermite, no explosions. You're right, it wasn't hit by a plane, it was hit by two falling sky-scrapers:

          http://www.conspiracyscience.com/articles/911/buil ...
      • jascination, on 06/19/2008, -0/+6Not believing in the "911 truth movement" ≠ Pro US government
    • diggystardust, on 06/19/2008, -7/+3Where's the Busted Tee's girl to lead a massive distraction when you need her?
    • alsiddiq, on 06/19/2008, -10/+4DUH! So what's new? Doesn't everybody in the world already know this?
      • SeveredDigit, on 06/19/2008, -3/+1Exactly...Pretty much every country in the world at least has the brains to see that there are obvious questions that were either not answered at all (why building 7 collapsed) or the answers that were given were highly suspect based if only on scientific merit.

        It has nothing to do with being a conspiracy nut. It has everything to do with demanding answers from your officials. Which obviously the majority of the American people on here aren't interested in.

        I mean DO you guys still think there are WMD's in Iraq? thats not even a conspiracy...it was an obvious lie that you all bought to invade a country. So at least you guys should maybe have a little spark of curiosity in you? right??? I mean if they were wrong about that then there must be at least a little chance they missed a few things in the 9/11 investigation.

    • pleiadianagenda, on 06/19/2008, -13/+9You are such an uneducated fool. So are the 160+ people who dugg you up. If you had followed the truth movement for 7 years, you'd realize there are top officials and military officials and agents coming out questioning the official story and questioning more evidence all the time.

      You don't see it because you don't want to see it. You are so much more comfortable in your official version of reality that the truth is something you are completely unable to even comprehend or cope with.

      Quite frankly, sheep like you deserve to be controlled. You are unable to control or think for yourself.
    • carlosglz, on 06/19/2008, -9/+3BohicaTwentyTwo believes Climate Change is a fabrication of "junk science" check out his comment here:
      http://digg.com/political_opinion/Tackling_Five_Mo ...

      I rest my case.
      • nateking1, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2Lame, try not to criticize other people. Unrelated!
    • kosser, on 06/19/2008, -11/+6anyone who does minor research on 911 will always come to the same conclusion. 911 was an inside job period. There is no real debate. There has been new developments every day. This guy coming out is a new development, because the subject is in such a media shutdown it's very hard to have people come out or any mainstream coverage of new events. I mean how can anyone look at the documentary loose change, zeitgeist, etc etc and not see the truth. How come thousands of intellectuals in academia, scientists, engineers, architects, politicians, parliament members of different countries, cia officials, say it's an inside job and there be any debate? NIST (national institute of standards and technology) still can't prove the official story to this day. people are like an ostrich when it gets scared, just stick your ***** head in the sand and just hopes it never happened.
      • JohnReb, on 06/19/2008, -1/+7And anyone who doesn't stop at "minor research" but actually follows up on all the claims and speculation of the "trruth" movement will come to the conclusion that there is simply nothing there.
      • tiberone, on 06/19/2008, -1/+8i suppose you have done some "minor research" yourself?

        like, watching a 5 minute video full of lies made up by insane nutjobs in tinfoil hats?
      • helpfulcorn, on 06/19/2008, -1/+5Maybe because movies like Loose Change:

        http://www.conspiracyscience.com/articles/911/

        and Zeitgeist:

        http://www.conspiracyscience.com/articles/zeitgeis ...

        Are *****?
      • kosser, on 06/19/2008, -3/+1yes i bet you guys are scientists, architects, and engineers on digg.com and you can analyze the science and physics behind 911...i trust you more than the thousands other qualified people i said in my other article...you have no weight in this. keep hiding behind the curtains. man how typical is tinfoil hat and koolaid comment....there's a lot of 1 trick ponies.
      • kosser, on 06/19/2008, -3/+1If you believe the official story you believe that the twin towers fell at free fall speed despite the airplane hitting somewhere around the 100th floor w/ 15 more floors above the blast radius...We're told that this 15 story section of the buildings drove the rest of the building down and pancaked the building, and then it fell into it's own footprint, at free fall speed.(lol) Lets think about this.Now i'm going to break this down in an analogy too see if your small heads can capture the simplicity of it all.
        Lets take 15 stories of a building and hold it up w/ a crane w/ nothing below it NEXT to another building that's 100 stories tall. Hold another 15 stories above the 100 story building and let the two fall at the same time. What all you ***** nuts are telling me, is that when you let them both go, they will fall and hit the floor at the same time. So, even though one has to crush 80,000 tons of structural steel, and one doesn't have anything below it, they hit at the same time. YOU ARE THE CONSPIRACY THEORISTS!
        • theright, on 06/19/2008, -2/+31. The Twin Towers did not fall at free fall speed. They fell at "near free fall", demonstrating that the floors bellow the impact zone provided almost insignificant resistance to the enormous mass of the floors above bearing down on them

          2. There were not 115 stories. Each tower had 110 stories. The North tower was impacted at around the 95th floor, the South tower around the 79th floor. In the latter case, that meant there were approx. 30 floors, or a quarter of the building above the impact zone.

          3. Yes, once the collapse initiated, total collapse was inevitable. The majority of the structure below was air, not structural steel or concrete. We are talking about tens of thousands of tons of dynamic mass that those buildings were simply not designed to handle.

          4. The Twin Towers did not fall into their own footprint. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:World_Trade_Cen ...

          It's all well and good calling those of us who support the conclusions of every official investigation and every single peer-reviewed scientific or engineering paper on the collapse of the buildings "conspiracy theorists". Get back to us when you have more than disgraced, intellectually dishonest whackjobs on your side of the argument.
      • JohnReb, on 06/19/2008, -3/+3Nope, not an engineer, which is why when someone makes a claim, I go looking for real engineers to see if it's correct. MIT says the official story is the most accurate one presented. I would like to know who you regard as a significantly more reliable source of engineering critique thatn they?

        When you accept that the towers fell at free-fall or within their own footprint it becomes obvious that you are relying on what you are told and not going that extra step to make sure what you are told is correct. Since it is obvious on viewing of the collapse that the level of collapse is above much of the falling debris that the collapse is not happening at "free-fall" if it was, the debris and the level of collapse would be at the same level as the tower collapsed. If the towers fell in their own footprint what damaged the Deutshe Bank building, WTC7, WTC5, and WTC6 among others?
      • kosser, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1you guys are laughable...so 80,000 tons of structural steel made it drop only "nearly free fall speed" lol...and i said about 100 floors as an example i knew i was close but it was just an approximation, and another laughable idea is that MIT says official story the most accurate???? what official story, because the 911 commission report doesnt go into detail about how the tower fell after the plane. NIST was supposed to provide that and they have come up w/ 5 different stories, each disproven by "whack jobs" w/ Nobel prizes in science...this is my last talk to such base individuals. lol some people just really love their government.
      • JohnReb, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1So you reject MIT but offer no other supporting evidence?

        So you refuse to address the fact that the towers didn't fall in their own footprint despite the obvious damage to numerous other buildings around them??

        So you continue to cling to this "free-fall" claim despite the evidence of other debris falling significantly faster than the collapse itself?

        The last two specific observable proof your two claims were wrong.

        But you believe you're the one who has done the real research?
    • pieceofred, on 06/19/2008, -6/+3Umm...why don't you actually research this question you bring up before proclaiming that "there's nothing new added". If you bothered to do any research at all, you would see that there has been exciting, damning new evidence added all the time. I guess if you're so biased and closed-ass minded that you've already decided that this "theory" is just too far out anyway, then you wouldn't bother to actually research it first anyway. I'm sorry, but you're a serious dumbass, no matter how many ***** diggs this stupid "comment" gets.
    • TBoneFever, on 06/19/2008, -6/+5No, the real question to ask is:

      What are you so afraid to find out? Because obviously you haven't looked at anything relevant. Please don't confuse the truthmovement with Michael Moore - he's a fraud. http://youtube.com/watch?v=Yy2QYoT4LWw

      Please watch Zeitgeist: http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/main.htm
    • blipblopblip, on 06/19/2008, -1/+4When does the old evi