99% Undeniable Conclusive Evidence That 9/11 Was An Inside Job

Originally posted by jessejamesxx
but there were definitely many things wrong with the official story, right?

The first thing wrong is assuming that there is an "official story".

The second thing is assuming that everything related to several massively chaotic events should be orderly and according to some procedure.

But if someone levies a charge of conspiracy or inside job it takes more than questioning. For that you need solid, positive, tangible evidence confirming it.

Excellent post, but you forgot what i consider THE smoking gun...

The inaction of the Secret Service once they knew an 'unknown' amount of planes had been hijacked and were being run into American assets.

It is their job, and the only reason for their existence, to remove the President from all security threats.

It would not be the President's call, they follow protocol regardless.

So why, then, did they allow the POTUS to sit in that very public classroom for ten minutes without carding him away?

reply to post by TupacShakur


You don't need a a lawyer.

reply to post by GoodOlDave

The minute I discovered that mysterious blue tarp covered object they were claiming was being carried out of the Pentagon was really a triage tent being brought into the Pentagon, I knew these characters were a bunch of snake oil peddlers tryign to push abject paranoia to make a quick buck. Their claim that flight 93 actually landed in Ohio is just plain laughable.

Neither of those claims were made in either the movie that I posted or the summary of it. Maybe it was in the earlier versions, but not in the one I posted.

And what does him selling drugs have to do with the evidence presented in that film? Attacking him for things that he does in his spare-time has nothing to do with the film, and that makes no difference whatsoever to me. My excuse for my "paranoid hallucinations" is the massive amounts of evidence which I posted and like most OSers you failed to address in your post, but you instead chose to go in the direction of an ad hominem attack towards the producer.

Actually having prior knowledge and saying that it was an inside job is a stretch.

I know that the San Andreas fault will quake at some point in the next 20 years but if I don't get everyone evacuated at the sign of even the smallest earthquake does that make me guilty?

This is the problem in a nutshell - the CIA, MI5 etc. are following up leads all the time, some are serious, some will be "pub" talk [okay not for Moslems] - they have to assess and react only when they think the threat is real and imminent. For 9/11 - they got the intelligence woefully wrong, but this is a million miles away from instigating the act themselves.

Originally posted by iamaperson

Originally posted by TupacShakur
Prior Knowledge:
-- Our government had knowledge prior of the attacks and knew that airplanes would be hi-jacked, but they took no measure to prevent such an event from happenning. Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Shaffer worked with a military intelligence program "Able Danger" in 2000, and they identified 4 of the hi-jackers as possible Al Qaeda members. Beginning in September 2000, three meetings set up with the FBI by him were each canceled by military lawyers. Shaffer lost his security clearance to view classified information after going public. This prior knowledge blatantly contradicts George Bush's and Condoleezza Rice's statements that nobody could have predicted terrorists to fly airplanes into those buildings.

If they had prior knowledge, doesn't that mean it was not an inside job. What sort of prior knowledge did they have, if they only knew that there could be a terrorist attack involving planes, what should they have done about it? Put in the scanners that people (especially on ATS), are completely against, how would people have reacted to such a move pre911? Would people have been happy with it in 2000, more then they are now? I don't think so.

Didn't the hijackers that flew the planes have commercial pilots licenses, if so I would suspect they can fly planes. Perhaps the quote from the instructor was one of the earlier instructors, not the one who gave the license to fly.

Rest of it I probably cannot reply to, since I have no knowledge in this area, but will say that there have been heaps of these Undeniable Conclusive Evidence threads, and yet I haven't noticed anything major.

That means it was an Inside - inside job.....so inside that even those who thought they were insiders were still out of the loop.....

That is my thought though

reply to post by LucidDreamer85


Such things do not exist. Someone always gets a guilty conscious, someone makes a mistake, someone screws up. One way or another, nothing secret has ever been secret for long.

Here you go=> www.popularmechanics.com...

If this LooseChanger guy is such a nuisance, uncovering massive government conspiracies, why don't they just have him assasinated, the government already killed thousands of its own citizens on 9/11, why not kill one more?

reply to post by TupacShakur


I've actually begun noticing that once anyone actually does show you wrong, you call them baseless and stop replying. So really, you are just ignorant by choice.

reply to post by TupacShakur


Wow great job. I usually only skim the massive threads but I read every word of your OP and even read some paragraphs twice in order to really absorb this information.

This is one of the best comprehensive summaries I've ever seen on here. I've been looking for a '9/11 guide 101' and this thread really helps.

I was turned off of the 9/11 conspiracy movement very early due to some absolute crackpots and tended to lean towards the OS. However, after OBL's alleged recent death and all the obvious BS that story was, it inspired me to go back and look into 9/11 once again.

You did an excellent job breaking all that down. I really appreciate the work you did. Really loved the points about the controlled demo. I have felt it in my gut for years that the collapse wasn't due to mere fire, oxygen, and jet fuel and the evidence you laid out really gave me more reason to feel there is something fishy going on.

Thanks for putting it together like you did.

I have seen this evidence before but lets look at the evidence for these as moslem extremists:
- Did these people leave any clues that they were going to do such act, willingly and on their own - YES:

BBC Death Wish - Please try to trarck the handwriting on the internet to get a match to Mohammed Atta

Were there other people who wanted to be hijackers? -YES
Another hijacker
Another Hijacker

Even my favourite and probably best net on the TV/Web - Al jazeera claims mess up by CIA/FBI but does not implicate them:
Mistakes by the CIA
US let slip hijacker

And this is the problem with this kind of thread, supporters want to deny that it was done by extremists - but at the same time - get angry and want to do it themselves

down right amazing! seriously awesome summery!

Originally posted by jessejamesxx
So many screwy things happened that day, and so many 'coincidences', that even if you don't believe it was an inside job, you have to think something was strange/covered up, right? Even if it's not what "Truthers" are implying, there was something that was lied about that day?

Maybe the hijackers had bombs in the planes, and the GOV didn't want you to know? Maybe Israel or some other entity, ally, that we can't go to war with did this, and the US gov had nothing to do with it? Those are just 'top of the noggin' ideas - maybe it's not as sinister as what Truthers suggest - but there were definitely many things wrong with the official story, right? Can there be some sort of concession here, with skeptics?

It's funny but Tupak and Gorman are arguing over the difference between LIHOP and MIHOP. What they have in common are that both of them are saying the OS is a lie. And that's what the main thrust of the truth movement should be...the OS is a lie and therefore we should have a new, independent investigation with subpeona powers etc.
Go onto architects for 9/11 truth. You'll see in their Mission Statement that that is what they are pushing for. Same with the other 9/11 truth sites. We need a new and honest investigation so that we can find out exactly how it went down.
That's why I don't push a particular theory; because I don't know exactly how it went down just that it didn't happen the way it's projected.

Originally posted by Wotcher
99% undeniable and conclusive????

I don't understand.

I'm not saying I disagree with you but....

How can it be undeniable and conclusive if it is only 99%?

100% is absolutely conclusive and undeniable.

Is there still an element of doubt here?

Because it is completely dangerous and unwise to EVER believe 100%in anything. There is always a margin for error. That is where the phrase "reasonable doubt" came from

reply to post by TupacShakur


any intelligent, SANE person should know that 9/11 was an inside job, a false flag attack. We should be worried about the people who do not think this, as they are a severe threat to this world.

As for 7/7 being a false flag, please watch:

7/7 Documentary

I have seen so much speculation from arm chair "experts" on 7/7 but please watch the documentary - there are far more survivors from 7/7 who tell their story. Look inot the eyes of these survivors - are they lieing?

Originally posted by templar knight
I have seen this evidence before but lets look at the evidence for these as moslem extremists:
- Did these people leave any clues that they were going to do such act, willingly and on their own - YES:

BBC Death Wish - Please try to trarck the handwriting on the internet to get a match to Mohammed Atta

Were there other people who wanted to be hijackers? -YES
Another hijacker
Another Hijacker

Even my favourite and probably best net on the TV/Web - Al jazeera claims mess up by CIA/FBI but does not implicate them:
Mistakes by the CIA
US let slip hijacker

And this is the problem with this kind of thread, supporters want to deny that it was done by extremists - but at the same time - get angry and want to do it themselves

So if that's the case, why was no one ever reprimanded or fired? Why did the Bush admin. say that everyone did their job as they were supposed to and yet 3000 people died? Why did a few of the people responsible for the security of the US get promoted?
Why did FBI agents testify that they were told to back off trailing the hijackers and AG Ashcroft testify that he never said any such thing? Why are not either Ashcroft or the FBI agents indicted for perjury?
Why have 13 nations intelligence agencies come forward and said they warned the US of impending attacks and the CIA/FBI did nothing? Again, if the CIA/FBI had all this info and did nothing or screwed up what it meant then why were they not fired?

And we pick only the quotes that we want to hear. One person intimating that there were hundreds of explosions. How many other people heard this - Let's check:

9/11 Survivor Stories

Funny how no-one else mentions hearing this?

So do we believe the truth of one man or the truth of many accounts?

Apologies if I am giving a hard time here, I see this selective truths all the time. - ignore the masses evidence and hone in on the individual evidence [who may have tinnitus] that supports my theory

reply to post by TupacShakur


Very interesting. I have seen a video shortly after the event that more or less has said the same things, but the new information that I gleaned from this article was about the pilot who supposedly took American Airlines into the Pentagon. I would love to know how that is described as happening...I do not believe for one minute that the man mentioned actually piloted that plane. The description of the turns was interesting. I have knowledge of both American Airline planes that is personal and extremely private to me ( since I saw the entire episode psychically as I also saw Flight 800 the same way). No way did a man who could not even pilot a plane perform the feat that occurred at the Pentagon. The American Airline plane went down in a kind of spiral means so that I believe that a commander of the aircraft had to have been American Airline personnel. I am inclined to believe that perhaps the White House may have been the intended target but the pilot changed course. It is conjecture of course.

I loved the way the WTC is described as falling in such short time. That is extremely interesting that a building can stand for so long and then in a few seconds collapse upon itself.

People will believe what they want to believe more than anything else. I know for a fact that both American Airline planes were involved at the WTC and the Pentagon. I believe in my psychic mystical powers and I am a kind of eyewitness to those two planes going into the buildings. However, I also realize none of that is admissible in a court of law.

Such is life!

That is the heart of the conspiracy - how poor the secret service were for what is the most powerful nation.
The fact that a plane could hit the Pentagon so easily and could have been a much greater disaster
No-one that we knew got sacked when the small plane flew into red square - thus exposing the frailty of the Russian defence system - but behind closed doors - someone would have got a rollocking.

I do accept that there was some dodgy goings on to let the Bin Ladens go.