9/11 an inside job? (long)

[suzzer99]

Someone who is one of my most respected friends and smartest people I know (although now...), sent me this which is guess is all based on a book and video by the same dude. Her and her husband are all hyped up about it. At first I just ignored them. She kept bugging me and finally hooked me into refuting this whole stupid thing. Below is a transcript of that. I have 2 questions:

1) Should I even be bothering with this?

2) Anyone here want to try to defend this theory? If not, then why does one of my most respected, albeit maniacally liberal friends, believe this is possible? It disturbs me for some reason.


<<< first email >>>

I barely have time to wipe my ass these days. Didn't you say it was 45 min. long
or something? I watch it, I'm gonna have to spend the next 8 hours picking it
apart for you, then another 8 hours on your rebuttal, etc. All right, I'll
watch the damn video when I get time, just for you. But I'm not spending all
day researching and picking it apart, I just don't have the time right now.

Our guys did not blow up those buildings. Period. Just think about it, reason
through how it could have actually happened and what justiification the
1000s-10000s of people involved could have given themselves for doing horrific
things to their own people. How is joe-six-pack demolition expert not going to
warn one of his friends who happens to work in the building? Then that friend's
just gonna not show up and let all his coworkers die? Or did they bring in a
bunch of day-laborers from China? GIVE ME A BREAK. Killing one president is one
thing. 3000 innocent Americans? No way. Very few people are that evil (even
republicans!) unless they think the fate of the world is at stake or something.
Pre-911 you'd be real hard pressed to convince 1000 people to kill 3000 fellow
Americans for the sake of oil or terrorism or something. No way. And not one of
them has come forward yet? Right.

If you want to believe something, it's easy to find all kinds of suspicious
evidence, just like the Holocaust-hoax people. I'm sure they have plenty of
great evidence on it's face. But one look at the big picture and you
immediately realize it's impossible, just like this. I don't need to spend a
week listening to their whole argument and picking it apart piece by piece to
know they're wrong. And I'm not going to convince them of anything anyway.

Here's a speech I picture by W: "They say we fabricated the whole WMD thing. heh
heh. Some of em are even saying 911 was an inside job. heh heh. People say all
kinds of crazy things." If this weren't planted by Karl Rove, I'm sure he's
doing everything he can to nurture it along.


Quoting Crazy Friend:


[Hide Quoted Text]

Dude, I don't think you actually watched the video I
sent you by David Ray Griffin before claiming it's all
a bunch of crap. May I favor you with this link? Yes
indeed we're all entitled to our opinions.



<<< second email >>>

Great, now you've sucked me in. I am pissed and I'm not going to get any work
done. See my responses to the question below (suzzer. If these are his planks,
this is way way more ridiculous than I thought it would be. None of them holds
1/1000 the amount of water in my mind as the "how the hell could you have
motivated 1000 people to pull this off and cover it up?" question. Just [censored]
ridiculous. I don't care if they are supposed "experts", these people are morons
of the highest order with absolutely zero critical thinking skills.

(from the Yahoo aritcle, which I'm assuming sums up the main points of the 45
min video)

They have discovered that The 9/11 Commission Report is replete with omissions,
distortions, and factual errors, which David Ray Griffin has documented in his
book, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions. The official
report, for example, entirely ignores the collapse of WTC7, a 47-story
building, which was hit by no airplanes, was only damaged by a few small fires,
and fell seven hours after the attack.

suzzer: there are theories on this mostly centered around the boiler, it's a little
weird yes. But how in the [censored] can you hold this up as your most damning piece
of evidence. How much extra outrage did building 7 add to the equation?
.0000000000001%? Why go out of your way to blow it up? Or are they saying the
Bush guys are so freaking competent to pull this off, but incompetent enough to
acidentally blow up a 47-story bulding? You can't have it both ways. Ridiculous.
For that matter, why blow up both buildings? You think one wasn't enough to get
us to go to war with Iraq?

Here are some of the kinds of considerations that these experts and scholar find
profoundly troubling:

* In the history of structural engineering, steel-frame high-rise buildings have
never been brought down due to fires either before or since 9/11, so how can
fires have brought down three in one day? How is this possible?

suzzer: How many times have exoskeleton steel high-rises been hit by planes full of fuel? This is so [censored] stupid I'm about to quit now.

* The BBC has reported that at least five of the nineteen alleged "hijackers"
have turned up alive and well living in Saudi Arabia, yet according to the FBI, they
were among those killed in the attacks. How is this possible?

suzzer: Prove this. They get those arabic names mixed up all the time. If this is true it would be the biggest story since Saddam's capture.

* Frank DeMartini, a project manager for the WTC, said the buildings were
designed with load redistribution capabilities to withstand the impact of
airliners, whose effects would be like "puncturing mosquito netting with a
pencil." Yet they completely collapsed. How is this possible?

suzzer: The impact didn't collapse them. This argument doesn't even make sense. He's
saying a plane wouldn't knock them over, it didn't. They collpased because of
the fire. This is a horrible horrible argument that can only work when you're
preaching to a nutty choir.

* Since the melting point of steel is about 2,700*F, the temperature of jet fuel
fires does not exceed 1,800*F under optimal conditions, and UL certified the
steel used to 2,000*F for six hours, the buildings cannot have collapsed due to
heat from the fires. How is this possible?

suzzer: The initial explosion blew off the insulation, the jet fuel fires started a bigger secondary fire, which over SEVERAL HOURS, finally melted the beams. I don't know but I'm gonna guess that certification was WITH insulation.

* Flight 77, which allegedly hit the building, left the radar screen in the
vicinity of the Ohio/Kentucky border, only to "reappear" in very close
proximity to the Pentagon shortly before impact. How is this possible?

suzzer: Obviously the bush administration has a teleporter. Or they are wired into the entire air traffic control system. Shouldn't the burden of proof be on the CLAIMANTS here to provide some reasonable explanation for how/why their supposed discrepancy was perpetrated? You can't just throw odd things out there that make no sense and not try to weave them into some kind of theory.

* Foreign "terrorists" who were clever enough to coordinate hijacking four
commercial airliners seemingly did not know that the least damage to the
Pentagon would be done by hitting its west wing. How is this possible?

suzzer: Oh my god. I really don't think they gave 2 [censored] as long as they hit the thing. I think they were blown away that they managed to pull this off with ONE plane, much less 3. You might be able to say something here like "Hmmm, I wonder if the terrorists ever did any recon on the pentagon?" But hold it up as EVIDENCE of a conspiracy. Jesus.

* Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, in an underground bunker at the
White House, watched Vice President Cheney castigate a young officer for asking,
as the plane drew closer and closer to the Pentagon, "Do the orders still
stand?" The order cannot have been to shoot it down, but must have been the
opposite. How is this possible?

suzzer: What was he going to shoot it down with? They scrambled planes. I don't
think they had some kind of anti-aircraft gun sitting there ready to shoot the
plane as it hit the pentagon.

* A former Inspector General for the Air Force has observed that Flight 93,
which allegedly crashed in Pennsylvania, should have left debris scattered over
an area less than the size of a city block; but it is scattered over an area of
about eight square miles. How is this possible?

suzzer: Why does this matter? At least give me a wild-ass theory of how this fits into the conspiracy.

* A tape recording of interviews with air traffic controllers on duty on 9/11
was deliberately crushed, cut into very small pieces, and distributed in
assorted places to insure its total destruction. How is this possible?

suzzer: Probably because they said "oh [censored] oh [censored] oh [censored]" 8 million times or did something otherwise stupid and/or made a big mistake.

* The Pentagon conducted a training exercise called "MASCAL" simulating the
crash of a Boeing 757 into the building on 24 October 2000, and yet Condoleezza
Rice, among others, has repeatedly asserted that "no one ever imagined" a
domestic airplane could be used as a weapon. How is this possible?

suzzer: She's covering her ass?

Their own physics research has established that only controlled demolitions are
consistent with the near-gravity speed of fall and virtually symmetrical
collapse of all three of the WTC buildings. While turning concrete into very
fine dust, they fell straight-down into their own footprints.

suzzer: Yes, and these controlled demolitions take months of planning, tons of
expertise and manpower. Now answer my question about how 1000 evil demolition
experts could have pulled this off w/o saying or word to anyone or anyone
noticing them running around rigging up dynamite in 10,000 places. You need
access to the girders themselves and have to clear away all the drywall,
boliers and everything else first. Lemme see an interview with 5 real
mega-demolotion crews where one of them doesn't shoot this down with thousands
of FACTS withing 30 seconds. But I suppose they're all in on it. All demolition
crews are inherently evil.

These experts and scholars have found themselves obliged to conclude that the
9/11 atrocity represents an instance of the approach--which has been identified
by Karl Rove, the President's closest adviser--of "creating our own reality."

suzzer: I conclude it's a lot more likely Karl Rove created this ridiculous [censored].

[FYYFF]

[ QUOTE ]
) Should I even be bothering with this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Christ no. I didnt even read it, but I know its full of propaganda crap that you copied from some other buttsecks loving hippie.

[Mike Jett]

I'd file conspiracy theories under politics.

[suzzer99]

Duh, I didn't even think of that. Sorry Maybe one of the mods can move it?

[Kneel B4 Zod]

I heard that we planted nerve gas on a tanker bound for Central Asia, to create a "smoking gun", guaranteeing us a military presence in the region for years to come

[namknils]

You shouldn't even be bothering with this, it wasn't an inside job. However, if you post this in Politics they will point you to past threads they've had about it. Some nuts in that forum do believe that Bush was behind the whole thing.

[FYYFF]

[ QUOTE ]
I heard that we planted nerve gas on a tanker bound for Central Asia, to create a "smoking gun", guaranteeing us a military presence in the region for years to come

[/ QUOTE ]

I heard that Hitler was a robot created by the US government. It was supposed to be a joke but it kinda got out of control.

[4_2_it]

[ QUOTE ]
maniacally liberal friends

[/ QUOTE ]

That explains everything.

Just ask them to comment on this if you want to have some fun.

[Sponger.]

tl;dr

[bicyclekick]

the whole case they made on yahoo is about the stupidest thing i've ever seen. Your friend is a moron too.