“The 9/11 Drug is Wearing Off”

In the run-up to the 7th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, I’ll be dissecting the biggest conspiracy theories out there that claim the terrorist act to be a creation of the US government.  As time goes on more and more of these idiotic “theories” comes out, usually disseminated in the form of a YouTube video claiming that there’s new smoking-gun evidence to prove that it was all a farce.  They say they want to open dialogue about it, they want to discuss it, they want to have new investigations opened into the questions that have been raised about the veracity of the government’s claims about what really happened on 9/11.

But have you ever gotten into a “discussion” with one of these people?  Anyone who has will correct me: you don’t get into it with just one, you get into it with the whole tribe.  They’ll call you over and say, “hey, we just wanna talk about it!  C’mon, we have evidence, what’ve you got?”  And as soon as you start to answer their questions with hard facts, they shout you down.  It’s the idiot’s way to win an argument–gang up on a guy and shout until you drown him out, then he’ll just walk away and you haven’t been proven wrong.

Gag me.

I’ll be starting with this claim, the claim that the crash site near shanksville is really a “bomb crater” and that the “wing scars” were already part of the landscape:

At 2:01 into the clip, the producer asks, “ready for this?”  I sure am, skippy.  I don’t think you are, though.

The first thing he says is that the video is “smoking gun evidence that flight 93 did not crash in shanksville.”  That is either wishful thinking or pure delusion.  The entire video is unbelievable.  He says, “I’m no scientist…”  Well, we can certainly tell by his poor spelling and punctuation. 

Then he goes on to show footage of the difference between what a real plane crash looks like as opposed to bomb craters.  The crash sites he shows have wreckage littered about and flaming parts of the plane being put out by firefighters.  The bomb craters, obviously, show holes in the ground that show where the bombs were dropped and detonated, leaving little wreckage of the device used.  The maker of the video says, “where’s the wreckage?  Where are the bodies?”

“Godspeed2012” could answer his own questions with the “evidence” he presents.

When a plane is about to crash, the pilot tries desperately to keep the craft level with the ground in an effort to save lives.  Consequently, when a plane crashes, normally it skids into the ground at a high rate of speed and breaks apart.  Laws of physics, right?  When a bomb is dropped, it is designed to explode on impact and falls nose-first into the ground.  Flight 93 was no ordinary plane crash.  The hijackers knew they were losing control of their “mission” and had decided to take the plane down–nose-first.  The passengers were unable to recover from the extreme descent; it was too late.  Flight 93 went practically nose-first into the ground that day.

Ready for this?

The producer then shows a satellite image from the US Geological Survey from 1994.  The image shows a dark ditch or tree cluster near the crash site, possibly a trench dug by large equipment.  He claims this to be the pre-existing hole that makes up the “wing scars,” thus proving that all the government did was drop a bomb to make it look like a crash site.

If you look closely, the crash site itself is very close to the tree line–NOT WHERE THE USGS SURVEY PHOTO SHOWS THE TRENCH.  They’re in two different areas.  And it wouldn’t have taken long for a trench like that (if it wasn’t made up in the first place, photoshopped to look real) to be worn away by the elements.

The argument here is a remarkably poor one, hacked to pieces by sound logic.  Try again.

Advertisements

22 thoughts on ““The 9/11 Drug is Wearing Off”

  1. Oh, please tell me you’re not defending this tripe.

    Where did most of the plane go? How often have we ever seen a plane nose-dive into the ground at more than 500 miles an hour?

    And do you really think the nose of the plane is going to survive that sort of thing? The biggest part of the plane to survive was a six-foot section of siding with windows, and that wasn’t the first part of the plane to hit the ground.

  2. Rosie O’Donnell called to say this video proves what she has been saying all along…

    Now, there’s an endorsement!

  3. melmaguire, it was a simple question. Where did the nose section go? I’m not saying it should have survived. Do be so reactionary.

  4. Noname, if you ask that kind of question without clarifying, I and other readers are apt to take it exactly as I did–as a person asking a question in an attempt to defend the belief that 9/11 was an inside job.

    And I did give you a simple answer. The question was already answered by the blog itself, in fact, which is why I made the remark I made. Much of the plane was torn to tiny pieces upon impact. Plenty of it was found, including a 6-foot section of siding that included a few windows.

    Out of curiosity, why would you ask such a question after what I wrote in the blog?

  5. “Flight 93 went practically nose-first into the ground that day.”

    If that is what you are referring to, that doesn’t tell me where 93’s nose section went after it crashed.

    So for the 3rd time, where did the nose of the plane go after it hit the ground?

  6. This video is wrong, I agree, but the true evidence that Flight 93 never crashed in Shanksville remains.

    -Lack of credible identifiable plane wreckage

    -Lack of jet fuel

    -Lack of significant fire (The grass growing up against the rim of the crater is still unburnt. C’mon!)

    -Lack of remains/blood

    Also, Susan McElwain and several others interviewed by researcher Dominick Dimaggio reported a small UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle), not a plane.

    In addition to this, numerous earwitnesses, including a Vietnam veteran, report hearing the sound of a missile.

  7. “I’ll be starting with this claim, the claim that the crash site near shanksville is really a “bomb crater” and that the “wing scars” were already part of the landscape”

    Umm…I am from the San Francisco area and people from SF were on Flight 93. They are dead. Just ask their families.

    There was a United flight 93. The people on that plane died. They died somewhere. If not in Shanksville then where?

  8. Noname–you keep asking the same question even though it has been answered. You sound like a parrot. “Where’d the nose go? Where’d the nose go?” It went where everything else went–the Purdue recovery team said that in a crash of this nature, there would be “extreme fragmentation.” The black box was found buried 12 feet below ground.

    Simon, you’re giving arguments that have been laid to rest. Tonight, when I get home, I’ll be posting another blog about Flight 93 and the evidence, but plenty of evidence was recovered, including an engine, seat cushions, clothing, and human remains.

    John–I’m waiting for the argument that they were beamed up. Watch, we’ll hear it within the year.

  9. The conspiracy theories on Flight 93 get stranger and stranger and sadder and sadder. People lost loved ones and friends on that plane that day and it’s pathetic and sad to see how people have no regards to the feelings of these families.
    As for “where did the plane go.. They found chunks and pieces, from windows and seats to engine parts to yes..pieces of the cockpit.. where the nose was. They also found pieces of bodies as sad as it was. DNA test were taken and each and every one of the 44 on that plane were identified. So please, when speaking so rudely about your fantasies of Flight 93, please remember that many of us had people we loved and cared about on that plane.

  10. “In addition to this, numerous earwitnesses, including a Vietnam veteran, report hearing the sound of a missile.”

    Simon

    They heard missle fire but saw nothing? Do these people hear things and forget to look?

  11. There were war games taking place over Shankvsville on 911.

    Multiple eye witnesses such as Susan McIlwain here in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsCh_UGKvSc didnt not see a boeing 757 but a very small craft, possible a cruise missile.

    I advise you people before you listen to this ignorance put forth by this pseudo writer to investigate this yourself.

    Here is another link. http://killtown.911review.org/flight93.html

    And to the author. I denied your comments on youtube because they were childish, ignorant and pointless.

  12. Translation: I denied your comments because you disagreed and I don’t like it when people disagree. I could do the same to you here, because I think you’re a couple of french fries short of a happy meal, but I don’t. Any thoughts (short of outright threats) are welcome, regardless of how “childish, ignorant and pointless” anyone thinks they are. That’s what makes us tolerant and YOU a moron.

    As for Susan McIlwain, I’ve already addressed her here. I can unequivocally say she did NOT see a cruise missile. Those don’t have wings, bucko. What she described was a plane.

  13. I’M uneducated? You can’t even use proper spelling and punctuation. Your point, in fact, does NOT stand. If she saw a cruise missile, then it stands to reason that a lot of other people out on a BRIGHT, CLEAR DAY would have seen the same thing, right? Nobody did. And since I know the specs of a cruise missile and know that they have short fins, not wings, I’m going to just stop here and laugh my arse off.

  14. Atleast we can both agree that a boeing 757 DID NOT crash in Shanksville on 911 as all the evidence points to.

    BTW, Susan did not see a Boeing 757 for she said that it was as big as her van and did not describe wings http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsCh_UGKvSc.

    Update your computer if you are unable to play youtube videos.

  15. I’ve seen three separate videos of Susan McIlwain, and not only does her story vary, but in the last one I clearly and distinctly remember she described WINGS. We apparently cannot agree about anything, because I’ve seen some of the evidence, and you still cannot come up with any valid argument to certain things.

    Namely, what happened to all the people? Were they a part of the conspiracy, too?

    And if Bush is such an idiot, then how did he supposedly pull off the biggest conspiracy of all time? Good God, man, the President can’t even get a blowjob from a two-bit intern in the Oval Office without the whole of the country finding out about it. How on Earth was anyone supposed to cover up more than three thousand deaths without some witnesses eventually coming forward to admit they helped cover it up?

    Occam’s razor is getting very dull.

  16. Wow, Mel…and I though Palin posts attracted some interesting comments. The nutjobs are out in full force here!

    Beam me up!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s