Did 9/11 actually happen? I've seen it on TV but you can fake a thing

Attached: 1533454787847.jpg (1235x972, 234K)

Attached: 1533365393096.jpg (1281x726, 119K)

did you see the bombs detonate as well? This is a key event.

“Using the Towers’ central steel cores as a “chimney” for vaporizing them within 8 and 10 seconds. ‘…exploded violently and ejected pulverised concrete and rubble in all directions, followed by a pyroclastic flow of hot dust following the same pattern as the base surge of an underground nuclear explosion…. [An estimated 90,000 [tones of concrete in each tower was literally pulverised into dust, sand or grit-sized particles—an absolutely unprecedented event.”

Attached: 1524973979525.jpg (1122x1771, 84K)

“Add to all these signs, the molten metal in the footprints of WTC 1, 2, and 7 that for three months could not be extinguished by water or daily soil changes as it consumed concrete, steel, glass, office combustibles. The increasing incidence of radiation-only cancers from residents is another tell-tale sign of a nuclear “event.” There were also aerial photographs of steam “upwellings” that were pouring out of street gratings two and three blocks south of the WTC, or Ground Zero.

“Then there is the extraordinary high temperatures (800-1,300º F) of the WTC’s surface heat after 9/11. It was recorded on September 16, 2001 by NASA’s thermal-sensitive cameras in aerial photographs shot at 6,500 feet. Those data were reflected in the unusually lengthy period—September 11 to December 19—it took for extinguishing the pools of molten metals in basement levels of all three skyscrapers. In fact, the hottest surface places recorded on the “Pile” by September 16 were WTC 1 (1,376º F), WTC 2 (1,1340º F), and WTC 7 (1160ºF).”

Attached: 1528501143563.jpg (933x933, 225K)

“Instead of heat subsiding within a week, as is generally the case for major fires, the astronomically elevated heat levels remained for three months. Cleanup vendor Bechtel Corporation—with 40 employees at the Pile—issued this comment about working conditions:

“The debris pile at Ground Zero was always tremendously hot. Thermal measurements taken by helicopter each day showed underground temperatures ranging from 400ºF to more than 2,800ºF. The surface was so hot that standing too long in one spot softened (and even melted) the soles of our safety shoes.”

Attached: 1513269069660.jpg (963x1441, 88K)

What do you mean by fake? I can confirm there used to be towers there and then they went away, seeminly mostly into dust.

How exactly that happened I don't know for sure, but the official story is a crazy conspiracy theory as far as I'm concerned.

Sadly no it did not. Some magician fucking made them disappear and was murdered by an angry mob before he could make them reappear. Society is to blame for 9/11

Obviously it happened, but it sure wasn't planes, given how fast they were able to rustle up fighter jets for an EMPTY plane flown by the Sky King compared to an entire lack of fighter planes for PASSENGER FILLED planes on 9/11.

the Towers fell.
You can't fake that, you shouldn't fake that from a conspirators perspective.
How is the question, not IF

Attached: V4QL1ru.jpg (710x823, 126K)

planes definitely hit the buildings

its just nobody knows who was really behind it

I'm pretty convinced there was a controlled demo.

No way there were planes. They hustled fighter jets in two seconds when Sky King Russell took an empty plane, but couldn't be buggered to hustle out any fighter planes when "passenger filled planes were hijacked and flown into the Twin Towers."

I heard the jewish owner happened to stay home that day because of a cancelled doctors appointment after taking out an insurance policy on the place. What a lucky guy.

The towers went down and Jews were happy. How it exactly happened is debatable but it doesn't really matter. What matters is who profited.

shit, I didn't even notice that (shut up, I was young when 9/11 happened)
did they really not have fighter jets in the air to take the planes down?

They were running all sorts of drills that morning (IIRC Webster Tarpley counted 43 of them) which seems to usually happen when there's a big wild terrorist attack.

I watched one plane/missle/whatever hit on live tv. It was pretty fucked

What you are putting out is a batshit conspiracy theory that is created by the government to distract from real issues.

>Hey goy if you think Tower 7 is bad imagine mini-nukes!

>Forget Caspian Sea Oil and let's look into holographic planes.

>If you think the hijackers working for US intelligence in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Chechnya is bad imagine how bad the planes magically disappearing is.

>If you think insider trading on the advance knowledge of the plot is bad just imagine what the Jesuits have to do with this one.

Attached: Uncontrolled Demolition Inside-Out Job.png (640x626, 619K)

the world (truth) is over. we are in post-truth time. 9/11 was the gate into purgatory.

I've never seen two planes and the twin towers in the same room at the same time so I don't think it could have been real. Now who was the one who fakesd it? Beats me!

I think it was opening dialogue regarding the the bombs that were discovered in the base of the towers days before the attack rather than diverting attention from things like corexit etc, dont you?

i was standing on a rooftop in brooklyn tripping sack on this shit called dragonfly, i turn around just as the first plane hits. many other people saw it too, and the second plane as well.

Maybe. The thing is some conspiracy theories are good information and others are disinfo. It's important to realize that everyone might be full of shit and/or stupid. The bombs make some sense, especially in tower 7. It's too bad nobody bothered testing for explosive residue.

I believe you.

Yes it did, but not as told by MM.

Staten Island '01 masterrace reporting.

Fuck Brooklyn

there is a video of trump himself saying it was likely explosives (the next day he changed his story) after the event. The point I make is that while OP may be a bot (1 post) meant to spread disinfo, it is really a matter of which direction we choose to take things.

>convienient witness jews who show up in every 9/11 thread to convince you of planes

NO PLANES

1

Sometimes people ask me "why would they use missiles or whatever and run the risk of being caught out ? If they're going to sell a story about planes, why not make it as convincing as possible and use real planes" ? It's a silly question, because in the face of direct visual and forensic proof that they didn't use planes (mostly supported by what little witness evidence we have), speculations about their thinking and planning are meaningless. Nevertheless, since we live in extremely silly times, I'm going to address this question on its own terms. Put yourself in the position of the perps. You have to think through what could go wrong in each possible scenario and then decide which scenario poses the smallest risk. You want to sell a story about hijacked planes. At the first level of decision making, you have two choices. 1) Actually use planes. 2) Use missiles or whatever the blobs 11 thing is, and convince people that they were planes. Lets first look at the second scenario. You have the media on your side to tell the story. What could go wrong? 1) Witnesses might see that they were not planes and report it. Well this has actually happened, but it seems that nobody takes any notice. The myth of "thousands of witnesses" to a big plane strike keeps getting trotted out on the basis of a circular assumption. "Because big jets were there, then people must have seen them - because people saw them, that proves they were there."

2

Clearly the perps thought about how to minimize the problem of contrary witness reports, and came up with a simple but effective plan. This problem is easy to minimize. The first strike happens, and because the object is small and fast and unexpected, no-one is too sure what it is, or whether they saw it correctly. A few witness reports go to air reporting missiles or small planes or no craft at all, but there is only an 18 minute window for this to occur before the whole world sees a big jet live on TV - using commercially available real time animation technology. This distracts the media from interviewing many witnesses to the second strike, because everyone is fixated on the video replay. Those few witnesses who might get a moment with the media, then lack confidence in what they saw, because once again, the object was small, fast and unexpected. Seeing the TV replay - which was instantly available - would make most people think that they just didn't see it properly. The few who remain unshakable in their belief that it was not a large plane are easily shouted down and drowned out by the endless replays. In addition the airlines release a statement saying that they've lost two big jets and any witness dissent is *instantly* - the moment the second strike happens - marginalized almost to the point of oblivion.

There is absolutely no proof the twin towers actually existed, other than easily faked photos.

Donald Trump did 9/11

3

This is not speculation. Read through the transcripts of broadcasts as they unfolded between about 8.47 and 9.30 and you will see that this is *exactly* what happened. From the moment the second strike occurred, anyone who tried to say that it was not a large jet immediately had a TV replay shoved in their face. What little witness evidence was gathered in the brief time available between the two strikes was not enough to do any real damage, and everything after that was corrupted by everybody having TV replays of the second jet shoved in their face as soon as they opened their mouths. In that brief period between the two strikes, there was only one witness who said a large jet - and that just happened to be the vice prez of CNN, which of course is a major player in the scam - just as pivotal as the govt. So we can see that the problem of contrary witnesses, while a minor inconvenience is easily overcome with some good planning. Again, this is not speculation. The successful execution of this plan has been tested ion the real world - and it works. The scenario I have outlined exactly fits with the documented record of the events. Once the sheeple factor sets in, everyone is chanting "what about the people who saw it ? " without ever bothering to check what those people actually did report. And if they do check, the numbers of reports are not high enough to inflict major damage on the official story. What little there is overwhelmingly supports something other than a big jet, but there wasn't enough time to gather enough numbers for this to be a significant evidence factor. And as for the ordinary person on the street - most of them would be easily convinced that they just didn't see it properly.

4

Some might have lingering doubts or suspicions, but would be quickly silenced by ridicule and denial from the overwhelming pressure of the TV footage, and the whole world trying to convince them that they just didn't see it properly. Most would eventually come to believe that themselves. So - that problem is easily dealt with. No cover story solves everything, and doubtless there are still some mutterings of doubt and suspicion amongst some people who were there, but it isn't enough to cause a serious problem. Now to the other problem. Someone might look at the videos and see what's really there. Which is exactly what Rosalee has done. And people just go into mind controlled denial. The alternative media is flooded with endless debunkers. The perps knew our collective psychology well. They certainly wouldn't be happy with the groundswell of awareness which Rosalee has kick-started, but it looks very manageable compared to the problems I'm about to outline with the strategy of using real jets. Again, this is not speculation. The way that both of these problems have been handled has been tested in the real world, fits exactly with the documented record, and the fact that I am even needing to write this, 3 years after Rosalee first busted the video evidence, is testimony to how wisely the perps judged the choice of strategy. Now lets look at the other choice - using real jets.

It was fake, but fake in a way that little goyim minds can't comprehend.
youtube.com/watch?v=E7u-rUq-6nE&

i'm italian

5

This immediately splits into two sub-choices 1) Pilot them with suicide pilots 2) Remote control them. The problem with the first choice is obvious and I think most people on this list have already accepted the absurdity and the monstrous difficulties of such a scenario, so I won't go into them here. Remote control. Before addressing the problems with that, the scenario splits into more - sub-choices. 1) Hijack a real flight with real passengers aboard. 2) Launch a plane from somewhere else and pass it off as a real flight. Basically, the choices here split into the option of crashing a plane with passengers aboard or with no passengers aboard. Both possibilities create potentially insurmountable problems in the cover up - and a reduced likelihood of the crash being successfully targeted to begin with. Let's look at the latter problem. While it's certainly feasible to remote control a large jet into the towers, it's a high precision targeting job for an aircraft with very limited maneuverability. There's a significant risk that the plane won't hit its target properly. That it will hit some other building, just clip its wing on the tower and crash into the streets or cause a cascade of damage on other non targeted buildings, miss altogether and finish up in the Hudson, still reasonably intact - all kinds of risks. Whatever the calculated likelyhood of a successfully targeted crash, it would have to be significantly lower than that of a missile or blobs- thing, which is specifically engineered for such precision strikes. Even the smallest increase in risk of the target not being hit properly would be completely unacceptable, given the easily manageable nature of any problems associated with the alternative scenario. And missing the target is only the beginning of the problem. What about the aftermath ?

6

Once it misses the target, there's a significant risk that the aircraft may crash in such a manner that it's reasonably intact. Rescue workers and emergency services who are completely innocent of the scam, and ordinary people wanting to help out are going to reach the wreckage before any perpsters, given that where it crashed couldn't be foreseen. And what are they going to find ? Two choices. A plane with no -one in it. How are the perps going to explain that, huh ? Or a plane with passengers. This raises even more problems. Using a plane with passengers creates two more sub-choices. 1) Hope that all the passengers get killed in the crash, so there's no survivors to talk or hope that the perps can get to them first and knock them off before they do talk. 2) Kill them before the crash with a timed release of gas into the aircon system. Which of course leaves more forensic evidence to cover up, when the bodies are examined. Imagine the massive operation needed to get enough perps swarming over the wreckage quickly enough to control what the media,innocent rescue workers or survivors would start blabbing before the spin sets in. Far worse than anything a few witnesses could say in the 18 minutes between the two tower strikes. These problems are not limited to the scenario of the aircraft not crashing as they were meant to. If the planes were successfully crashed into the towers, its still possible - although not very likely - that there could be survivors.

I assume he is referring to the faking of the planes, which was done using "live" CGI (similar to how they create the digital "first down" line in football broadcasts: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_&_Ten_(graphics_system), with the various news agencies synchronizing their feeds beforehand (all of the supposed "bystander" footage was released much later, allowing them plenty of time to insert the plane imagery.

It is not possible for a hollow aluminum and fiberglass jet to melt through a steel-and-reinforced concrete tower without even slowing down on impact, or having a wing sheared off. Both of the WTC "planes," in addition to the Pentagon and Shanksville ones, disappeared completely into the crash site, such that no part of them was visible from the outside. Does that seem credible to you? In the Hezarkhani shot of the crash into the South tower, you can actually see the building "heal itself" after the wing has already penetrated it.

Simon Shack's September Clues is a good introduction to this theory:
youtube.com/watch?v=cF0-nslm3j0

Attached: image-27.jpg (382x398, 40K)

i feel like only people who werent alive when 9/11 happened could think it didnt happen.

7

Nevertheless, even assuming that everyone was killed, real crashes with real people leave real bodies, they don't just vapourize like in the S11 cartoon. So you have hundreds of retrievable bodies to worry about. If they were killed with gas prior to the crash, then you have the same forensic cover up nightmare as in the scenario where the plane misses its target. And if you avoid this problem by hoping that everyone is killed in the crash, you face the horrible risk that there will be dozens of survivors to try to shut up - unlikely if the plane hits the target properly - but you don't know that for sure. In addition, real planes leave real wreckage - unlike the S11 cartoon - which means real flight recorder boxes to be found and more stuff to hush up, involving more innocent officials to pressure. Of course, enormous pressure can be brought to bear, but the problem is how much would spill out before the spin gets into action. All of this is far worse than what a few witnesses could say in the 18 minutes between the strikes, and what a marginalized researcher can post on her website, hoping that people take notice. As you can see, the scenario of using real planes creates a logistical nightmare compared to the piddling problem of a few witnesses to the craft, and easily marginalized conspiracy nuts analyzing video - easily suppressed by a compliant media. In committing a crime, the idea is to leave as little mess as possible, because every bit of mess is a potential clue. Even in the event of a successfully targeted crash, real aircraft, scattering wreckage and bodies everywhere creates an enormous amount of mess to cover up compared to the relatively neat problem of a few witnesses and a few conspiracy nuts trying to tell people what the video shows.

Unfortunately I'm out of contact with a few people I know who saw at least part of the whole thing up close and personal, and I never thought to ask them at the time if they saw planes or not. Best I can say is one of them snapped pictures of some bits and pieces of airplane on the ground, but I don't know why there wouldn't be a lot more bits and pieces of airplane on the ground.

September Clues- 9/11 TV Fakery

This documentary will answer your question.

youtube.com/watch?v=5QlWZQMYdfA&frags=pl,wn

Attached: Screen Shot 2018-08-30 at 10.52.45 PM.png (1620x1278, 1.41M)

I was in JROTC when it happened. I saw the second plane coming in on TV. It disappeared behind the tower, and a split second later, there was an explosion.

That's what I remember seeing. Do what you will with it.

glow harder, nigger

In all the footage, the planes completely disappear into the buildings. In the case of the United 93 crash site in Shanksville, since there is no visible plane debris, they actually claimed that it crashed into an abandoned mine.

This.

It happened, zoomers.

Attached: LarrySilverstein.jpg (2048x1536, 373K)

I've looked into it and you literally can't even prove nuclear bombs exist. I don't think the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki ever happened.

And North Korea... its a country full of paid actors. Look into it.

CGI doesn't exist. Totally made up concept. You probably think space is fake too, and that's all CGI. It's a tool for brainlets to explain things they can't understand.

The EPA said the air was safe to breathe. MFn LIARS

Cancer was really the best thing those first respondents could hope for. They just get to enjoy the rewards for their actions that much sooner.

That seems like an unnecessarily rude thing to say, even for a leaf.

>t. person who has no understanding of physics or structural engineering

Attached: 93897FA6-9BA1-4F33-A4C1-C4F63CA40105.jpg (640x400, 134K)

nono, I am genuinely saying they deserve paradise. Sorry, I am becoming more and more christian lately.

What do you idiots get out of starting this same retarded thread hundreds of times every day ?

all my cousins were in the towers and told me it all true

Attached: ehh.gif (500x369, 482K)

We do it just to bait bongs into posting.

kikes did 911. Just look into it.

Read this page if you're not a pretty clear cut as to (((Who))) orchestrated this event

whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisraelis.html

Mike Rivero doesn't get enough love from Jow Forums.

>Mike Rivero
Based pineapple nigger?

i was in australia when it happened, even though australia is a place that does not exist.

>peacefully
you have never been to NYC

He's actually a Sephardic Jew from New Hampshire (or maybe half Jew -- I forget).

-9/11 official story violates fundamental physics
youtube.com/watch?v=xSVHWiZu8NM

-Molten steel, far beyond temperatures of jet fuel + office fires found in WTC
youtube.com/watch?v=Xy_jMrJGF9M

-Molten iron and active thermite found in all WTC dust
benthamopen.com/ABSTRACT/TOCPJ-2-7
youtube.com/watch?v=0lU-vu2JvZY
youtube.com/watch?v=wkaX5n3pfZE

-3000+ Architects and Engineers Demand a new investigation
ae911truth.org/signatures/#/AE
youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg

-University of Alaska Study modeling WTC7 collapse concludes that the official story is impossible
youtube.com/watch?v=fRkgIV8U9f0

-AE911, new debunking of official collapse theories
youtube.com/watch?v=d14lc-Eizk0

Attached: 1534904695077.jpg (700x467, 133K)

>Sept 11 2018
>Tuesday
>17th anniversary
It's happening, 11 more days, mark your shit and get away from potential danger zones.

>17
Did Q predict this?

Sometimes i wonder just how many Burgers know the significance of that date to Islam.
I've actually heard a conspiracy fuckwit say that the attacks were arranged to be on 9/11 because 911 is the emergency number in Dumbfuckistan and it would stay in the public mind due to that.

>the official story is a crazy conspiracy theory
those are two different things.

The official story is literally an elaborate conspiracy. And it's not even one that makes sense, so that makes it a crazy conspiracy theory.

>peacefully

Your impression of NYC is from Friends

yeah well youre canadian

so many disinfo faggots you will all hang

Attached: 1525201444862.webm (920x615, 425K)

911 probably was an inside job but there were no nukes you fucking glow nigger

thats what a fire ball looks like
what do you think a plane full of fuel slamming into a building like this is supposed to look like?

really?
do you see a plane hitting that tower when it explodes?
Go ahead and post the unedited sauce video bitch.
I'm gonna go all Qanon and predict you'll never post it.

>implying 9/11 happened

Yes saw it with my own eyes
Everyone ignores each other 99% of the time

EXCEPT FOR THOSE GOD DAMNED NIGGERS WHO TRY TO SELL YOU FLOWERS OR WASH YOUR WINDSHIELD WITHOUT ASKING WHEN YOU'RE STUCK IN TRAFFIC

FUCK NIGGERS

im pretty sure it was a false flag.

has anyone even seen "survivor" footage? its all clearly crisis actors, hell this is where a bunch of them got their big break (some of the kids in sandy hook got their start here)

Well, the towers were there and now they aren't so, something happened.

What you're seeing is not what's happening

Attached: AEBBD94B-A725-409C-9C7A-2073A61E05CB-42677-00002DEA02E567F4.jpg (484x474, 37K)

>did 9/11 actually happen

Holy fuck, were you not born before 9/11? Jesus I’m old...

Are you retarded of course it happen you conspiracy theories dumbass

I guarantee this user is underage. Also there is virtually no one nowadays who does not agree at the very least that bush did 911. Anyone who looks into it knows it was Israel. Just look into it. Takes 1 minute.