First hour of 9/11, how does this guy know?

[Mac53]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwq04_KhCeI&feature=related

I apologize that this guy needs to rewind the clips like 2-3 times.

Basically the mystery here is that witnesses in the video are very calm and seem to pinpoint the problem etc when everyone else could not figure it out until the investigation or what ever.

Word for word he says exactly 100% official story.

Coincidence or is this just a intelligent guy who isn't afraid of them terrorists?

I don't think this is proof of anything really, i think it more of a interesting aspect that this guy is so calm and knows the whole story within an hour of the collapse.

Thoughts on this? Has this been debunked yet?

[Sam.I.Am]

I thought the same thing that day. I don't know why some people have such a hard time with the idea that an airliner plowing into a structure is probably not a good thing structurally speaking. Hell I guess Howard Stern was in on it too, no more than 5 minutes after the second hit he was saying it had to be Bin Laden behind it.

[Stellafane]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwq04_KhCeI&feature=related

I apologize that this guy needs to rewind the clips like 2-3 times.

Basically the mystery here is that witnesses in the video are very calm and seem to pinpoint the problem etc when everyone else could not figure it out until the investigation or what ever.

Word for word he says exactly 100% official story.

Coincidence or is this just a intelligent guy who isn't afraid of them terrorists?

I don't think this is proof of anything really, i think it more of a interesting aspect that this guy is so calm and knows the whole story within an hour of the collapse.

Thoughts on this? Has this been debunked yet?

Not sure what it is here that's supposed to be debunked. Is the claim that the person in the video had advance knowledge of 9/11, and through some incredible act of stupidity gave the game away prematurely? If so, it might be helpful to explicitly state what it is that we're supposed to be commenting upon.

[Dumb All Over]

I'm with Sam.I.Am. I had many of the same thoughts well within the first hour and as the day progressed.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Basically the mystery here is that witnesses in the video are very calm [...]


It's up to an hour after the collapses. Civilians are at a safe distance. A lot of people were relatively calm at that point.

If the first guy is indeed an actor as is claimed by the bubble comment, he may have switched gears in front of a camera.

"[P]roduction company"... "Ace Baker"? Ace Baker is a musician and a relatively unstable truther that believes the planes themselves were faked using CGI. Eerie coincidence... or is it? :tinfoil

[...] and seem to pinpoint the problem etc when everyone else could not figure it out until the investigation or what ever.


Claiming no one had any clue what actually happened until the investigation was finished and released is a blatant mis-characterization of the situation, or completely ignorant.

And claiming "structural failure" is hardly a professional observation.

Word for word he says exactly 100% official story.


Umm... He said he saw the planes hit. Lots of other people saw the planes hit, too. He said he saw the buildings collapse. Even more people saw the buildings collapse. He claimed it was due to the fire, which was also observed by the people at the scene.

I think you and the paranoid loon who made this video are put off by his confidence. He's an actor. He can probably turn that confidence on and off at will. And I'd be willing to bet you could find a lot more videos of people making confident statements about the situation that ended up not being correct.

And for the love of crap... it's just one guy!

[T.A.M.]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwq04_KhCeI&feature=related

I apologize that this guy needs to rewind the clips like 2-3 times.

Basically the mystery here is that witnesses in the video are very calm and seem to pinpoint the problem etc when everyone else could not figure it out until the investigation or what ever.

Word for word he says exactly 100% official story.

Coincidence or is this just a intelligent guy who isn't afraid of them terrorists?

I don't think this is proof of anything really, i think it more of a interesting aspect that this guy is so calm and knows the whole story within an hour of the collapse.

Thoughts on this? Has this been debunked yet?

He is jesus, and therefore god. All knowing, this is why he knows.

TAM:)

[Mac53]

It's up to an hour after the collapses. Civilians are at a safe distance. A lot of people were relatively calm at that point.

If the first guy is indeed an actor as is claimed by the bubble comment, he may have switched gears in front of a camera.

"[P]roduction company"... "Ace Baker"? Ace Baker is a musician and a relatively unstable truther that believes the planes themselves were faked using CGI. Eerie coincidence... or is it? :tinfoil




Claiming no one had any clue what actually happened until the investigation was finished and released is a blatant mis-characterization of the situation, or completely ignorant.

And claiming "structural failure" is hardly a professional observation.




Umm... He said he saw the planes hit. Lots of other people saw the planes hit, too. He said he saw the buildings collapse. Even more people saw the buildings collapse. He claimed it was due to the fire, which was also observed by the people at the scene.

I think you and the paranoid loon who made this video are put off by his confidence. He's an actor. He can probably turn that confidence on and off at will. And I'd be willing to bet you could find a lot more videos of people making confident statements about the situation that ended up not being correct.

And for the love of crap... it's just one guy!

Standard response. Attack the guy who presents somthing he wants more info on. Assume he is crazy for thinking somthing. Even though in other threads talks about how 9/11 is nto an inside job.

I don't know what it is with the internet and peopel trash talking, insulting could it be that they don't have ot back it up. they don't pay any conciquences, their identity is hidden? They are hidden, behind a computer?

You can say, whatever you want about me behind a computer, try to do so in real life please. Or are you just a loser like that?

Anyways, i suppose i should elaborates n the claim here.

I suppose it looks like "foreknowledge" because you just are not that calm when you hear about your country under attack by terrorists.

If everyone was calm after the 1st hour why did they evacuate the white house??

I just found it interesting how calm he was, and how much he knew about it.

Meh, i suppose i should just drop the argument here. Doesn't prove nothing jsut suspicion..

[AJM8125]

Hell I guess Howard Stern was in on it too, no more than 5 minutes after the second hit he was saying it had to be Bin Laden behind it.

Erm, isn't that also proof the joos did it? ;)

[T.A.M.]

Standard response. Attack the guy who presents somthing he wants more info on. Assume he is crazy for thinking somthing. Even though in other threads talks about how 9/11 is nto an inside job.

I don't know what it is with the internet and peopel trash talking, insulting could it be that they don't have ot back it up. they don't pay any conciquences, their identity is hidden? They are hidden, behind a computer?

You can say, whatever you want about me behind a computer, try to do so in real life please. Or are you just a loser like that?

Anyways, i suppose i should elaborates n the claim here.

I suppose it looks like "foreknowledge" because you just are not that calm when you hear about your country under attack by terrorists.

If everyone was calm after the 1st hour why did they evacuate the white house??

I just found it interesting how calm he was, and how much he knew about it.

Meh, i suppose i should just drop the argument here. Doesn't prove nothing jsut suspicion..

come on man...it is a lucky guess, with perhaps a little intuition kicked in.

What the **** do YOU think it is?

TAM:)

[Hokulele]

Standard response. Attack the guy who presents somthing he wants more info on. Assume he is crazy for thinking somthing. Even though in other threads talks about how 9/11 is nto an inside job.


Cl1mh4224rd was calling Ace a loon, not you*.

And yes, Ace is definitely a loon.



* - Unless you happen to be Ace.

[Sabrina]

Why would you assume people wouldn't be calm by that point?

The human body is not built to maintain an adrenaline response (i.e. crying, screaming, running, fearful behavior) for more than fifteen, twenty minutes, AFAIK. Eventually the adrenaline ebbs and the body resumes natural functions, i.e. the person calms themselves down and begins to resume rational thought. At that point, conclusions can be drawn based on observations made earlier ("terrorists did it"; "the towers were doomed from the start"; etc.).

How do you think he should have reacted more than an hour after the collapses? There was no hint, at that point, of any imminent danger that would have spurred an adrenaline and endorphin rush, so why do you think he would not be (relatively) calm?

I'm asking legitimately; not trying to make fun or snark. Merely curious.

[Pardalis]

It could also be a fake interview made by truthers.

It's not very hard to film a guy on a street and add the Fox News graphics on the recording.

One would need to ask Fox if they really have that interview.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwq04_KhCeI&feature=related

I apologize that this guy needs to rewind the clips like 2-3 times.

Basically the mystery here is that witnesses in the video are very calm and seem to pinpoint the problem etc when everyone else could not figure it out until the investigation or what ever.

Word for word he says exactly 100% official story.

Coincidence or is this just a intelligent guy who isn't afraid of them terrorists?

I don't think this is proof of anything really, i think it more of a interesting aspect that this guy is so calm and knows the whole story within an hour of the collapse.

Thoughts on this? Has this been debunked yet?

I found the problem with your video, it's at 16 seconds in. The maker assumes that just because he doesn't know something, that no one else does either.

The effects of fire on steel have been known since the dawn of the Iron Age, which was more than three thousand years ago. The temperatures and behaviors of indoor fires have been well established for the better of a century.

Many experienced engineers knew the towers were going to collapse well before they did. This is why Mayor Giulianis command center in WTC7 was evacuated well before the first collapse.

The guy interviewed in the video comes of as a discovery channel junkie wanting to impress the world with his knowledge, but he does manage to guess right.

[Horatius]

Basically the mystery here is that witnesses in the video are very calm and seem to pinpoint the problem etc when everyone else could not figure it out until the investigation or what ever.

Word for word he says exactly 100% official story.




You're equivocating on what "100%" of the "Official Story" is. It's not hard to realize that Plane Impact + Fire + Steel == Bad Result, particularly after you've seen that bad result first hand. What took the years of data collection and analysis was quantifying exactly what that bad result was.

That is, no one of any consequence doubted that it was the impact and fire that did in the Towers. What they wondered about was exactly why and how they did in the Towers, because they were hoping to learn some way to prevent future such failures.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Standard response. Attack the guy who presents somthing he wants more info on. Assume he is crazy for thinking somthing. Even though in other threads talks about how 9/11 is nto an inside job.


Are You Ace Baker? Are you the creator of this video clip? If the answer to both of those questions is "no", then I wasn't calling you crazy.

[...] their identity is hidden? They are hidden, behind a computer?


My identity is easy enough to find.

Or are you just a loser like that?


I think the more pertinent question here is, "Do you want to retain your posting privileges at this forum?" That sentence of yours is likely a violation of Rule 12 of your Membership Agreement.

I suppose it looks like "foreknowledge" because you just are not that calm when you hear about your country under attack by terrorists.


How long should people be in panic? As others have pointed out, at some point you regain your composure. I mean, hell... of all the people in all of the videos of the collapses, how many screams and signs of outright panic do you actually see? (Especially when the film is shot from some distance away.) Not many, relative to the number of people visible.

If everyone was calm after the 1st hour why did they evacuate the white house??


Because the White House isn't in Manhattan? Oh, and because the White House was actually evacuated 16 minutes before the first tower collapsed, not an hour after the second collapse.

Yeesh...

[MarkyX]

It's really pathetic 9/11 deniers will just latch onto anything. First of all, who is this guy? I never even heard of him until now, and I doubt many people even remember or heard of him either. How the hell is he a factor to the "OFFICIAL STORY" (ooooooooh) ?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

It's really pathetic 9/11 deniers will just latch onto anything. First of all, who is this guy? I never even heard of him until now, and I doubt many people even remember or heard of him either. How the hell is he a factor to the "OFFICIAL STORY" (ooooooooh) ?


He's actually come up before, a year or more ago. I do remember that someone (Dylan Avery, maybe?) suspected that the guy was actually Mark Roberts.

[TokenMac]

He's actually come up before, a year or more ago. I do remember that someone (Dylan Avery, maybe?) suspected that the guy was actually Mark Roberts.

The Truthers even went and made a website just for him.

Actor Mark Humphrey is the 911 Harley Shirt Guy (http://911-harley-shirt-guy.blogspot.com/2009/05/mark-adrian-humphrey-actor-is-harley.html)

[16.5]

Thats the Harley Guy.

Typical example of the truthers argument from incredulity.

Oh they can't believe it!

Complete waste of time.

[Carll68]

It could also be a fake interview made by truthers.

It's not very hard to film a guy on a street and add the Fox News graphics on the recording.

One would need to ask Fox if they really have that interview.


You have replicated my thoughts. First, I would be very interested to see the original source film, as this video seems heavily doctored to me. In fact, the voice does not line up with the mouth motions at all in the version on YT. Silly me, always skeptical of anything I see, especially when the source is twoofy twoofs.

I look forward to some well versed and astute twoofer providing the source film for us to review.

Until then I am calling fraud on this film, just like I called fraud on that 'well disguised' twoofer who was writing a debunking book without a title but with a publisher. :confused:

I assume I will receive the source film right about the time I am sitting down for a breakfast of egss & flying ham

[Lupie]

At ATS they seem to think this "Harley Guy" is a fellow named Rob Riggle from "The Daily Show"-

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread457348/pg3

And at The Harley Guy site that Token Mac linked to above, they seem to have convinced themselves that the Canadian actor Token mentioned named Mark Adrian Humphrey, is the guy in the video being interviewed by Fox News reporter Rick Leventhal. They have all sorts of hokey idiotic "facial comparisons" there showing that this actor only vaguely looks like The Harley Guy. But hey, if you're a truther, you can't let minor things like facts get in your way,

The paranoid insanity in both sites is just mind numbing. There was a truther saying that The Harley Man is under some sort of mystical spell that he received in some Bohemian Grove ritual. LCF also has the usual bunch of nuts who have jumped on this Harley Man bandwagon. Be forewarned, if you are going to read any of this stuff be prepared to put your head in the freezer immediately after lest your brain explode from the collective idiocy and insanity. These people really are off the deep end crazy.

L.

[~enigma~]

Even though in other threads talks about how 9/11 is nto an inside job.
Link please.

[portlandatheist]

I'm with Sam.I.Am. I had many of the same thoughts well within the first hour and as the day progressed.

I think a few of my coworkers must have been in on it too because by the time the second plane hit, they were saying "This must be Al-Queda"

[A W Smith]

I think a few of my coworkers must have been in on it too because by the time the second plane hit, they were saying "This must be Al-Queda"


I had pulled up to a contractor friends house. I had the radio on and was aware of the north tower hit. I had asked him if he knew that a plane had hit the world trade center? As he approached my truck the second plane hit. Instantly I said out loud to him. Bin Laden.

[Stellafane]

I think a few of my coworkers must have been in on it too because by the time the second plane hit, they were saying "This must be Al-Queda"

My boss at the time must be in on it too. On September 11, 2001, he and I had just begun our weekly 9:00 AM Monday morning 1/1 meeting, when his AA called and said a plane had just hit the WTC. He hung up the phone, turned to me and said "terrorists have just flown a plane into the World Trade Center!" Imagine that: a mid-level manager at a software company was in on the conspiracy!

[Cl1mh4224rd]

At ATS they seem to think this "Harley Guy" is a fellow named Rob Riggle from "The Daily Show"

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread457348/pg3


lol! Only in the oxygen-starved brain of a truther does it seem "logical" to put a man live on nationwide television to "shill" and then, 5 years later, put the same man on a very popular parody news show...

My boss at the time must be in on it too. On September 11, 2001, he and I had just begun our weekly 9:00 AM Monday morning 1/1 meeting, when his AA called and said a plane had just hit the WTC. He hung up the phone, turned to me and said "terrorists have just flown a plane into the World Trade Center!" Imagine that: a mid-level manager at a software company was in on the conspiracy!


I wonder... Maybe the truthers are only angry because they were the only ones not in on it...

[sylvan8798]

This has to be one of the dumbest truther arguments going. I mean really. Planes. Fires. Structural failures. Collapses. How hard was it to make these connections? Maybe it's because I'm an engineer, but it seemed pretty obvious to me. Were other people wandering around thinking "golly gee, I wonder what could have made those buildings fall down? maybe beams from space...."???

Why would the makers of this video want to demonstrate to the world just how ignorant THEY were that they couldn't put 2 and 2 together?

And anyone who thinks this is 100% of the "official story" obviously hasn't read the NIST or FEMA reports or any of the peer reviewed papers about it.

[Brainster]

Yeah, I figured this would be Harley guy. How stupid do you have to be to believe that Americans would have accepted immediately the controlled demolition narrative had it not been for the guy pontificating in the Harley tee-shirt, whom everybody immediately accepted as an expert in structural engineering, because after all, those guys all ride Harleys.

There are dumb arguments and there are crazy arguments raised by the Troofers. This is both.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

The first best proof that truthers are mentally retarded is that they are the only ones who don't know it.

[Bad_Doggie]

Basically the mystery here is that witnesses in the video are very calm and seem to pinpoint the problem etc when everyone else could not figure it out until the investigation or what ever.



I can only speak for myself but.........I watched the second plane hit on TV and my initial reaction, that lasted sometime, was JESUS H *********** CHRIST it’s still standing! It must be an intentional terrorist attack. Not, as was possible directly after the first impact an accident.

Later they were showing the fires and damage, from a helicopter shot I think, and I thought OMG it’s coming down. A short time later it did.

OMG I’m in on it too!!!!

So who is ‘everyone’ who couldn’t figure it out until after an investigation?

Woof!

[Travis]

It's a good thing no one had a camera in my College History of Philosophy class that day because I speculated, in class, the very same things and I suppose I would now be accused of being someone from The Onion.

[KDLarsen]

One thing I find amusing is, even if it was an actor by profession, so (rule 10)ing what? New York City is home to a MAJOR showbusiness industry, wouldn't it be natural for actors to, you know, live there?

[Travis]

One thing I find amusing is, even if it was an actor by profession, so (rule 10)ing what? New York City is home to a MAJOR showbusiness industry, wouldn't it be natural for actors to, you know, live there?

All actors are assumed to be in on it unless, of course, they say something that might, in some way, be construed as a positive reference to the Conspiraloons in which case the actor becomes a soldier of freedom fighting the good fight.

[Dave Rogers]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwq04_KhCeI&feature=related

I apologize that this guy needs to rewind the clips like 2-3 times.

Basically the mystery here is that witnesses in the video are very calm and seem to pinpoint the problem etc when everyone else could not figure it out until the investigation or what ever.

Word for word he says exactly 100% official story.

Coincidence or is this just a intelligent guy who isn't afraid of them terrorists?

I don't think this is proof of anything really, i think it more of a interesting aspect that this guy is so calm and knows the whole story within an hour of the collapse.

Thoughts on this? Has this been debunked yet?

A few thoughts.

Firstly, the two questions posed at the beginning have very simple answers.

(1) Was this story prepared in advance? There's no reason to believe it was a priori, and the arguments presented over and over by the truth movement are without exception utterly specious.

(2) Who would have the resources to get the story out so quickly? The news media, of course, a network of organisations that has evolved over centuries towards the sole end of disemminating news as widely and quickly as is technologically possible.

So, nothing to see there. Next, the demeanour of the interviewee: as has been said elsewhere, he's been watching events for, at the very least, a couple of hours, and he's then had time before the interviewer rolls the cameras to calm down and consider what he's going to say; really, how long does that take? Five minutes would be enough. He says that the towers fell due to structural failure; that's actually, if you think about it at all, a tautology. Collapse is, by definition, a structural failure. He speculates that the collapse was due to the fires and presents his speculation as fact, possibly because that's what normal people do in an informal setting; he's not writing a peer-reviewed scientific paper. And finally, he bases his conclusions on the fact that the towers didn't collapse when the airliners hit them, but collapsed after burning for a while, so the event immediately antecedent to the collapse - i.e. the fire - is naturally assumed (not necessarily validly) to be the cause.

Finally, the video asks, why didn't he think it was bombs? Well, I can suggest two reasons. One, an intuitive application of Accam's razor; he's seen a big fire, everyone but a truther knows that buildings on fire can sometimes fall down, so he doesn't need to imagineer a different reason because he's basically sane. Two, maybe he was listening when the buildings collapsed, and maybe he didn't hear an incredibly loud bang just before they fell.

In short, the whole first segment is simple and explicitly defined confirmation bias. His account is rejected for no other reason than that it doesn't support the preferred interpretation. The rest is just window-dressing.

At that point the video exceeded my boredom threshold.

Dave

[T.A.M.]

It's really pathetic 9/11 deniers will just latch onto anything. First of all, who is this guy? I never even heard of him until now, and I doubt many people even remember or heard of him either. How the hell is he a factor to the "OFFICIAL STORY" (ooooooooh) ?

Well he is an NWO plant silly. Come on, you know that. I assigned him to GZ shortly after our plan went into effect.

TAM;)

[leftysergeant]

The idiot who put up the video identifies the Harley guy by name, but Irecall seeing that debunked here somewhere. The twoofers keep asking "Who but an actor would talk this way?"

How about a cop, a military pilot, a fire fighter, an aircraft worker, a construction worker or a lawyer?

Anybody who has been around fire fighting operations knows that steel fails frequently in fires. No bloody great surprise. You learn that in the first week of fire fighting school.

That he is, at that popint, so calm, is neither here nor there. He apears not to be too emotionally invested in what he just saw. He is probably thinking more about what an adventure he just had.

I remember once responding to an accident in front of the house where I lived with a bunch of other students, after getting out of the Air Force and going back to college.

Only two of us knew what we were doing or had any experienc with a burning vehicle, but we all five dashed across the street to get a victim out of the buirning vehicle. When the incident was all over, we all went back and sat around talking about what we had just done. A few of us joked about how close one or the other of us had come to eating this piece of a blown-out window, or that strip of rubber from an exploding tire, and how hot the fire already was when we got there, and how much hair some of us had lost and...
We eventually decided that we all needed a good drink...

[AJM8125]

Thoughts? Well...

For one, I see nothing too terribly suspicious about Fox News finding a blowhard in NYC to point a camera at. Furthermore, that he actually got it right isn't surprising either, as others have stated.

Next up, Jerome Hauer. I have questions about this myself, like why would anyone be concerned that CBS News interviewed an expert on terrorism soon after an apparent act of terrorism had been committed? What is so suspicious about him naming bin Laden, who had been attacking Americans and American assets many years before 9/11?

And the MSNBC reporter, Brian Williams I believe, is probably speaking from his experience of reporting on bin Laden's prior activities and made a spot on analysis. That's what good reporters do.

The video does serve a useful purpose though. It clearly demonstrates what a paranoid delusion looks like, for those who don't suffer from them. It must be a terrible thing, to think like that all the time.

[Stellafane]

My boss at the time must be in on it too. On September 11, 2001, he and I had just begun our weekly 9:00 AM Monday morning 1/1 meeting, when his AA called and said a plane had just hit the WTC. He hung up the phone, turned to me and said "terrorists have just flown a plane into the World Trade Center!" Imagine that: a mid-level manager at a software company was in on the conspiracy!

You want to know something truly pathetic? The Truthers can't even pick up clues, even when they're spoonfed to them! For example, look at the above post -- could I have made my involvement in 9/11 any clearer? You see, as has been kindly pointed out to me, September 11 was a Tuesday, not a Monday as I stated above. This can only mean...my boss knew about the attacks a whole day beforehand!!!! And by telling me, who promptly did nothing, he made me complicit in the attacks!

What, you think it's just a simple little mistake, the kind that everyone makes all the time? Come on -- that never happens in Trutherland, not if it supports whatever it is they believe.

[Crazytimes]

How do we know when the interview of the Harley guy took place ? It could have been the next day. The video shows the building collapse but everyone in the background is relaxed and just kind of roaming around.

[Crazytimes]

Then the interview Dan Rather is doing is obviously with an expert and not just a janitor. This video is pathetic.

[catsmate1]

[/delurk]
I too must be "in on it"....... But I have to de-lurk and mention this.
When the first WTC plane strike occurred I was at work, in a rather tedious meeting about some problems with a data centre that was to house a project we were then working on; one of the people present was a structural engineer. This was in the early afternoon where we were, five hours ahead of New York time.

I received an SMS from a friend notifying me about the crash and that, in his opinion, it was a deliberate attack; he's a former commercial pilot so I took this seriously. After a spot of web research I told the others about this and we went to an open plan office space nearby which had a TV/projector setup to see what the television news was saying. We saw the impact of the second plane on one of the news channels, CNN *I think*.

We were all a little stunned, most of us he been in the towers at one time or another (we worked for a US multi-national at the time). It was then that the structural engineer stated "those towers are going to come down". This started me, in my limited experience with them the towers seemed so very solid, so I asked her why she was so certain. It turned out that in college she'd studied the design of the towers in detail as part of a project and was familiar with them and their structural peculiarities.

Anyway by this time a group had gathered, one of the managers was passing and asked what was going on. After we told him about the attacks, his first reaction was that Bin Laden had finally done it, taken down the towers.

All this was probably around 09:30 NY time, certainly before 10:00 (3PM our time). So intelligent, knowledgeable people figuring things out? Or part of a giant conspiracy?

[/lurk]

[Travis]

This entire issue is predicated on the idea that no one would have thought it was a terrorist attack unless the media (at the behest of the government) planted the idea. It also supposes that the idea of it being a collapse brought on by the fires was also something no one would have thought of until it was planted by FEMA and then NIST. This, of course, is exactly what the Truthers thought (or should I say "didn't think of") and they seem to assume that if they didn't think of it then no one would.

[Horatius]

This entire issue is predicated on the idea that no one would have thought it was a terrorist attack unless the media (at the behest of the government) planted the idea.



In actual fact, when I first turned on the TV that morning, the talking head on the news channel was going on about how it could still be an accident, even after the 2nd plane crash. I got annoyed with his stupidity in the face of an obvious terrorist attack.

So, if anything, the "mainstream media", at least briefly, was trying to tell me it wasn't a terrorist attack.

[T.A.M.]

come on guys...sheeple.

Are you all too blind, too obedient to the official theory to see that he was clearly an NWO plant.

INSIDE JOB!!!!

TAM:D

[Sam.I.Am]

In actual fact, when I first turned on the TV that morning, the talking head on the news channel was going on about how it could still be an accident, even after the 2nd plane crash. I got annoyed with his stupidity in the face of an obvious terrorist attack.

So, if anything, the "mainstream media", at least briefly, was trying to tell me it wasn't a terrorist attack.

I recall initial speculation about it being a failure of air traffic control that might be aiming the planes into buildings on one of the networks. You know, because pilots blindly follow orders to go exactly where directed and all...

[TruthersLie]

I must be in on it too...
I was just getting up on the west coast when the first jet hit. We were watching when the second jet hit.

I looked at my wife and said, "its only a matter of time before they collapse. It must be terrorists, who else would fly a jet into a building."

[DavidJames]

You know, because pilots blindly follow orders to go exactly where directed and all...Remember where the 9/11 CTists get most their knowledge. Now, with that in mind, have you see Die Hard 2. :)

Edit - yeah, I now, the instruments were "recalibrated", but still :)

[Sam.I.Am]

Remember where the 9/11 CTists get most their knowledge. Now, with that in mind, have you see Die Hard 2. :)

Edit - yeah, I now, the instruments were "recalibrated", but still :)

To be fair it was IFR conditions in that movie but IFR wasn't a consideration on that day. I just shook my head when I heard that comment. Maybe if it was an Airbus...

[carlitos]

First second I read this topic, I knew. Here's how:

The bad grammar and spelling coupled with "just asking questions" tells me everything I need to know. A well thought-out, well-written post tells me that one is able to reason and that his argument might be a good one. This sort of thing, not so much. Just my 2 cents.

[Bobert]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwq04_KhCeI&feature=related

I apologize that this guy needs to rewind the clips like 2-3 times.

Basically the mystery here is that witnesses in the video are very calm and seem to pinpoint the problem etc when everyone else could not figure it out until the investigation or what ever.

Word for word he says exactly 100% official story.

Coincidence or is this just a intelligent guy who isn't afraid of them terrorists?

I don't think this is proof of anything really, i think it more of a interesting aspect that this guy is so calm and knows the whole story within an hour of the collapse.

Thoughts on this? Has this been debunked yet?
You want something to be debunked that as you put it, "I don't think this is proof of anything really"?

[Alt+F4]

It could also be a fake interview made by truthers.

It's not very hard to film a guy on a street and add the Fox News graphics on the recording.

One would need to ask Fox if they really have that interview.

That's my take. The dialogue doesn't match his mouth movements. Notice no "truther" has bothered to verify this with Fox.

[jaydeehess]

I suppose the notion that needs to be debunked here(although it is never aticulated in the OP) is that someone, a man on the street, could 'know' all this so soon after the attacks.

I know that watching the first tower burning I had two thoughts;
-That there is no way an airliner hits that building on a clear day simply by pilot error.
-I wondered if the impact damaged structure can withstand that fires that were raging.

The second impact which I saw occur live on TV confirmed to me that these were deliberate acts and although I did not recall the name 'Bin Laden' at the time I immediatly thought that this was likely the same group which blew up the African embassies and the USS Cole.

My second thought was answered when the south tower went down. No, the impact damaged structures could not withstand the large area, multifloor fires. I understood that the fuel had started large multi floor fires immediatly after impact. A situation that never occurs in 'normal' office fires.
As the tower started down I had a quick thought that maybe it would arrest but I did not know at the time that the structures were long span, tube-in-tube designs with little or no diagonal bracing.

Once the first tower went down I was only hoping that everyone on the north tower could get out before it too went down.

So, by the time 1 hour had passed from initial impact I too had every thought that this man-on-the-street had except for the name Bin Laden and the detail of the long span, large open space, construction of the towers.

Once the Pentagon was hit it was patently obvious they were going after highly visible targets that symbolize American wealth and power.

Jeez it does not take a degree in rocket surgery to come to these conclusions. It does take research though to confirm such on-the-spot assumptions. That is what the investigation did.

[sylvan8798]

Rocket surgery? I love the sound of that. "And what do you do, Sylvan?" "Oh, I'm a rocket surgeon."

[Grizzly Bear]

I must be in on it too...
I was just getting up on the west coast when the first jet hit. We were watching when the second jet hit.

I looked at my wife and said, "its only a matter of time before they collapse. It must be terrorists, who else would fly a jet into a building."

When you consider my age at the time, I might well be one of the youngest to be 'in on it' according to the TM mantra.;Well on this forum anyway, I was high school freshman at 14, and had barely started my first design course... Can't clearly recall what I thought about the first crash, but there are two thoughts I remember vividly:

- The structural integrity was severely compromised, and it would collapse
- Second impact was a no-brainer... and I recall predicting it would also fall.
- And of course I personally was surprised they were still standing

I understood most of the basic fundamentals of the collapse but not really the details until much later... but a lot of it was hard to miss with the teachers continually flipping through the news channels that day...

[portlandatheist]

When you consider my age at the time, I might well be one of the youngest to be 'in on it' according to the TM mantra.;Well on this forum anyway, I was high school freshman at 14, and had barely started my first design course... Can't clearly recall what I thought about the first crash, but there are two thoughts I remember vividly:

- The structural integrity was severely compromised, and it would collapse
- Second impact was a no-brainer... and I recall predicting it would also fall.
- And of course I personally was surprised they were still standing

I understood most of the basic fundamentals of the collapse but not really the details until much later...
When the truthers are in charge, which is inevitable due to their growing numbers and the righteousness of their cause, I can only hope they show you some mercy due to your young age at the time. Perhaps just a few years of reeducation and hard labor when year zero is achieved. Good luck to you.

[Lupie]

First second I read this topic, I knew. Here's how:

The bad grammar and spelling coupled with "just asking questions" tells me everything I need to know. A well thought-out, well-written post tells me that one is able to reason and that his argument might be a good one. This sort of thing, not so much. Just my 2 cents.

Yep,

When the post sounds like a Dyslexic Chatty Kathy Doll, that's a pretty reliable indicator that it's just more of the same stale truther garbage. I don't know how they can keep parroting the same stupid buzzwords over and over again. I'm so tired of hearing the words "freefall" and "pancake" that I don't think I'll be able to go skydiving or eat at IHOP ever again.

L.

[Klimax]

When you consider my age at the time, I might well be one of the youngest to be 'in on it' according to the TM mantra.;Well on this forum anyway, I was high school freshman at 14, and had barely started my first design course... Can't clearly recall what I thought about the first crash, but there are two thoughts I remember vividly:

- The structural integrity was severely compromised, and it would collapse
- Second impact was a no-brainer... and I recall predicting it would also fall.
- And of course I personally was surprised they were still standing

I understood most of the basic fundamentals of the collapse but not really the details until much later... but a lot of it was hard to miss with the teachers continually flipping through the news channels that day...

I was 13... (But I didn't assume much,but since there were homeworks,you cannot spare that much more time...)

ETA: I however tried to watch TV as much as as possible, even recorded it! (And once first collapse,it was clear that second will follow...)

[Monketey Ghost]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwq04_KhCeI&feature=related

I apologize that this guy needs to rewind the clips like 2-3 times.

Basically the mystery here is that witnesses in the video are very calm and seem to pinpoint the problem etc when everyone else could not figure it out until the investigation or what ever.

Word for word he says exactly 100% official story.

Coincidence or is this just a intelligent guy who isn't afraid of them terrorists?

I don't think this is proof of anything really, i think it more of a interesting aspect that this guy is so calm and knows the whole story within an hour of the collapse.

Thoughts on this? Has this been debunked yet?

For the life of me, I cannot understand why people were so shocked. Flying planes into other things to destroy them was hardly a new concept, and within the first twenty minutes I figured it was OBL...

(maybe because the idea that less-resourced and capable terrorists could carry it off, Joe DingleTerror, was actually what scared me)

[Carll68]

Where is the original footage?

This is another twoofer doctored hoax a la the lamp Stevie Jones presented as 'molten steel'.

I do not buy that this is a real response for a second.

I urge any and all twoofy twoofs to back up their claim and provide the ORIGINAL SOURCE video.

Of course, they will not

[Thunder]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwq04_KhCeI&feature=related

I apologize that this guy needs to rewind the clips like 2-3 times.

Basically the mystery here is that witnesses in the video are very calm and seem to pinpoint the problem etc when everyone else could not figure it out until the investigation or what ever.

Word for word he says exactly 100% official story.

Coincidence or is this just a intelligent guy who isn't afraid of them terrorists?

I don't think this is proof of anything really, i think it more of a interesting aspect that this guy is so calm and knows the whole story within an hour of the collapse.

Thoughts on this? Has this been debunked yet?

I was in Hong Kong on 9-11. One of the guys I was vacationing with suggested that Bin Laden may have been behind the attack.

I guess my friend must have been a NWO agent huh?

[CORed]

Oh, I don't know, could it be that when a large plane crashes into a building at high speed, starting a massive fire, followed by the collapse of the building, any sane, rational person of normal intelligence would conclude that the plane crash and fire caused a structural failure?

Or could it be that government tipped off the news media ahead of time, so they could stage a fake "man in the street" interview, because when you're plotting the murder of three thousand of your own people, you obviously want to maximize the number of people who know about the conspiracy?

I love truthers: When a normal person hears hoofbeats, he thinks of horses. If he's in Africa, he might think of zebras. When truthers hear hoofbeats they think of invisible pink unicorns.

[leftysergeant]

I got out of bed just in time to hear that the second plane had hit. My wife and I watched the reports on the TV for a while. She had no idea what was going on, or of the importance of the WTC. I had to explain to her that there had been earlier attempts to destroy one of the buildings. I speculated at that time that it was Middle Eastern terrorists and that it may have had something to do with their hostility toward us over our policies toward Israel.

I fully expected at least a partial collapse above the fire line, but I was not too surprised when the collapse was total.

I was scheduled to work that afternoon at the Ft Lewis Commissary, but was unable to get through the massive traffic jam at the gates.

I don't recall being too totally distraught about the whole attack. I just figured that it would be the start of a lot of ineptly-planned military reprisals.

I got home in time to see the report of WTC 7 collapsing, and the explanation that it was damaged and on fire did not puzzle me a bit. It was consistant with my training and experience as a fire fighter.

When I finally got internet service again, the wild speculation that I heard did get to me. The conspiracy theories were downright scary. People who believe wierd stuff tend to do wierd stuff down the road.

[Longfellow]

You can add my architect brother and I to the ever-growing list of people 'in the know'.

We were chatting on the phone and he was saying something along the lines of*: "The first tower (hit) is going to come down -- it's just a question of when. But at least the other tower..."

At that exact moment, the second plane hit the second tower. I kid you not.

After a long moment of silence (while we both watched, agog, the replays of the second plane hitting), he said something along the lines of*: "Holy shiznit! Now they're both coming down! And the second tower (hit) is going to come down first.

Me: "African embassies to the Cole to the Twin Towers; bin Laden really has it in for us."
Architect brother: "Religion sucks!"

And this was before we heard about the Pentagon and Flight 93 (may the passengers always be remembered as heroes). There was the whole plot in a nutshell. We had Osama bin Laden fingered as the perp and knew not only that the towers were going to fall but in what order they eventually fell.

I guess you could say we were in the know.

A lot of '9/11 truthers' point at World Trade Seven as some kind of smoking gun of. . .something. There's no doubt in my mind that bin Laden clapped his hands in glee when he heard about Seven falling. I'm quite sure the events of the day exceeded even his expectations. Once the hijackers (and yes, 'truthers', the evidence for the hijackers and their deeds is incontrovertible) had control of their respective aircraft everything after that was the proverbial icing on the cake.


-* any error in the recollected dialog is mine and mine alone.

[Spektator]

Add me, too. I was teaching that morning and heard about the first plane not long after my class ended (8:50 A.M.). A group of teachers congregated in the teachers' lounge, watching the news on TV. Almost at once they announced that a second plane had hit the South Tower. One of the teachers said, "It's Islamic terrorists." We talked about the failed '93 truck bombing. When we saw footage of the flames and smoke, another teacher said, "They can't save those buildings. They're both going to come down."

I was concerned because I knew people who worked very close to the WTC and couldn't reach them by phone. However, we did not cancel classes, and the rest of the college day went on with classes as usual. I remember in one of my classes a girl asked, "Are we at war with the Arabs?" I told her no, we didn't know which group was responsible, but it was probably a terrorist organization and not a national government.

[BigAl]

Anyone that was up on current events knew it was most probably Islamic terrorists. Prior to 2001, bin Laden had been mentioned about 90 times in the New York Times for his hatred of the US Government.

The disruption of the Islamist "Project Bojinka" (1995) was well publicized except possibly on American TV news.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bojinka_plot

[Gravy]

Hi, Mac. You've received many excellent responses here. I'll add my two bits and try to point out a few things that I think need more exposure. This truther "oddity" is a good example to use for improving critical thinking skills, because it's so simple.

First hour of 9/11,
Obviously, no.

how does this guy know?First, let's look at what he actually says: "And then I witnessed both towers collapse: one first, and then the second, mostly due to structural failure because the fire was just too intense."

You've started with a flawed premise, Mac53, which has led you astray. The witness doesn't know how the buildings collapsed. He's making a rational, educated guess based on what he saw. While it's certainly possible that he's a firefighter or a structural or fire protection engineer, or that he spoke to professionals in those fields about the fires and collapses, there's nothing in his brief statement that indicates expert knowledge. Anyone who was on the scene and who knew the meaning of the words "structural," "failure," and "fire," could have made the same statement.

Please keep in mind why this witness makes truthers so furious: because his statement corresponds to the visible (and audible) evidence – i.e. reality – and not to their fantasies. Here's what they think he should have said:

"...mostly due to the enormous demolitions explosions that tore the building apart but somehow went unheard and unseen and didn't blast shrapnel over lower Manhattan."

"...mostly due to the massive subterranean detonations that occurred before the planes hit the building, then took effect much later."

"...mostly due to the Acme Thermate Company, which for months has had trucks going in and out of the complex and workers painting advanced thermitic materials on every piece of steel, because a one-millimeter coating of that stuff will wipe out any skyscraper. Mark my words: the wreckage will be filled with thermate-melted columns, unless it's spirited away to China to make guillotines."

"...mostly due to small nuclear weapons installed in the towers. Is anyone else feeling woozy from the radiation?"

"...mostly due to destructo-rays beamed from the Chase Building, the Hubble Space Telescope, and the Vatican, in a project being run by HAARP and the AARP. On the plus side, the ionization of the atmosphere has given the air that refreshing, after-thunderstorm feeling."

He didn't say any of those things because none of them remotely match what he, or anyone else, experienced. Had he said any of those things, we all would have judged him to be a complete kook. And that's the truthers' big problem: their claims are completely kooky.

Here's an example that I think will help you. Firefighter Miller of FDNY Engine 15 confidently predicts that WTC 7 will collapse (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2873871255585611926#24m05s): "See where the white smoke is? See the thing leaning like this? It's definitely coming down. There's no way to stop it. 'Cause you have to go up there to put it out, and it's already, the structural integrity is not there anymore."

Does Miller know that WTC 7 will fall, or is he making a reasonable assumption based on the evidence at hand?


Basically the mystery here is that witnesses in the video are very calmIf you didn't detect excitement in that witness's voice and manner, I suggest you watch the video again. But what do you think New Yorkers should have been doing, running around screaming all day?

and seem to pinpoint the problem etc...Pinpoint? No, he used the most general terms. He saw an airliner "cream" a tower, and the resulting enormous fires, so it's hardly a stretch to do an Adam Savage and say, "Well, there's yer problem."

...when everyone else could not figure it out until the investigation or what ever.No, virtually everyone but a handful of kooks suspected that damage and fires brought down the Twin Towers.

Word for word he says exactly 100% official story.Which "official story" do you believe he parrots? The conclusion of the FEMA/ASCE investigators that failure of floor-to-column connections, leading to "pancaking" of floors, caused the collapses, or the conclusion of the NIST investigators that refuted FEMA's hypothesis? Why do you think that those groups of investigators arrived at those disparate conclusions?

To encourage you to be more exact in your language, I will remind you that this: "mostly due to structural failure because the fire was just too intense" is not "word for word" and "exactly 100%" this:
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/87904a6ce8c18c194.jpg

For more info, see question 2 of NIST's August, 2006 FAQ (http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm). While you're at it, I recommend reading all of the NIST WTC FAQs. If you don't know how the investigations worked and what their results were, you can easily be led astray by truthers.

Coincidence or is this just a intelligent guy who isn't afraid of them terrorists?This question makes no sense to me.

I don't think this is proof of anything really, i think it more of a interesting aspect that this guy is so calm and knows the whole story within an hour of the collapse.As I've indicated, he wasn't and he didn't.

Thoughts on this? Has this been debunked yet?You have it backwards. Here we try to encourage rational, evidence-based statements. It's the truthers who try to "debunk" them. :)

Oh, speaking of which, as someone mentioned above, a truther did accuse me of being the guy in the video, despite the facts that I look and sound nothing like him and I was in Italy on 9/11. The funny thing is that the truther is Rick Siegel, creator of the "9/11 Eyewitness" videos, which purport to contain his accurate video analysis.
"This interview is to allow you to hear the government story by a slick professional, true cointelpro, Roberts. ...Roberts, who is famous (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=71344) for allegedly being the agent in the beginning of the 911 Mysteries video compilation. [er, no] ...While I have no sympathy with his story at all I will applaud his performance and this man deserves his paycheck. ...Roberts admits several times that he, as he uses “we” when speaking of government held evidence, is part of the government."

[VespaGuy]

I've seen the "Harley Davidson Guy" video a few times before. I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist myself, but something just doesn't feel right about that video. I agree with the truthers that the dialogue seems a bit strange. But, in addition to that though, the voice doesn't seem to match the mouth or hand movements, as if it was dubbed over.

Given just a few of the possible options for the strange dialogue:

- Video/audio is real. HDG is a paid actor to cover up the fact that 9/11 is an inside job.
- Video/audio is real. HDG is an eyewitness who calmly (yet, oddly) said exactly what a truther would expect a (dumb) government plant to say.
- Video is real. Audio is created by a truther to say exactly what a truther would expect a dumb government plant to say.

The last option makes the most sense to me. Truthers have been proven to doctor videos/photos in the past. Doctoring a video and putting it on Youtube seems like the simplest explaination. Until this video is verified, I say "shenanigans".

[~enigma~]

Truthers have been proven to doctor videos/photos in the pastBoy is that true. Just watch Doc's video Screw 9/11 Mysteries and you will be amazed.

[Gravy]

I've seen the "Harley Davidson Guy" video a few times before. I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist myself, but something just doesn't feel right about that video. I agree with the truthers that the dialogue seems a bit strange. But, in addition to that though, the voice doesn't seem to match the mouth or hand movements, as if it was dubbed over.

Given just a few of the possible options for the strange dialogue:

- Video/audio is real. HDG is a paid actor to cover up the fact that 9/11 is an inside job.
- Video/audio is real. HDG is an eyewitness who calmly (yet, oddly) said exactly what a truther would expect a (dumb) government plant to say.
- Video is real. Audio is created by a truther to say exactly what a truther would expect a dumb government plant to say.

The last option makes the most sense to me. Truthers have been proven to doctor videos/photos in the past. Doctoring a video and putting it on Youtube seems like the simplest explaination. Until this video is verified, I say "shenanigans".Do you think the witness draws a reasonable conclusion, based on the evidence available to him?

[VespaGuy]

Do you think the witness draws a reasonable conclusion, based on the evidence available to him?

Sure.

But the last line, "mostly due to structural failure because the fire was too intense" seems oddly out of place. Sorry, but it just seems odd to me for several reasons.

- As I said earlier, although it's hard to tell from the compression and grainyness of YouTube, it doesn't look like his hands and mouth sync with his dialogue. Something seems off.

- It's not what HDG says, so much as how he says it. People just don't talk that way. It seems tacked on to me.

- I also find it odd that this is EXACTLY the kind of thing that Truthers would expect a government plant to say. If the average Truther were to purposely doctor audio to resemble a plant, I imagine this is exactly what they would make their fake plant say. Truthers aren't very subtle.

- Truthers are desperate, attention-seeking, liars. They've faked videos before. I don't feel like it's a stretch to claim that a Truther video with no link to an original source is fake/doctored.

Of course none of this means anything. As I said above, I hate sounding like a conspiracist, myself. It's extremely possible that the video is 100% authentic (which still doesn't help the conspiracy theorists). However, I still find the audio to be a bit odd. I have no problem accepting that the video is real, but I personally think it's been edited.

I'd love to see a longer version, or a different source.

[leftysergeant]

I think we need to find the original of that clip and see if the audio is out of synch on that. Transcribing and capturing and trascribing for re-use can damage even the bewst video, especially if it is filtered through YouTube.

If HDG is a fire fighter or a cop, there is nothing at all unusual about the way he described it, based on my experience.

You have to be somewhat in control of your emotions in that sort of situation.

Did you see the way the fire fighters acted when they got back to the station in the Naudet film? Some of them were quite animated but matter-of-fact about the fear they felt when they had to run from the collapse of the north tower.

One of them went straight to a trash can and heaved his innards out. (That's fine with me, if he can at least hold it long enough to be sure he has properly secured from the operation. It's the ones that do it before the compost all hits the wall that bother me.)

So HDG's manner is not even evidence, if it is the original sound track.

His knowledge of why the towers fell is not evidence, if he has had fire fighting or arson investigations training, or training in any ofseveral military specialties.

I still talk like that sometimes when describing an emergency situation in which I am still arm-pit-deep. But that is mostly a matter of my training and experience, plus the fact that I am, like most veteran fire fighters, a bit strange.

[Gravy]

Sure.

But the last line, "mostly due to structural failure because the fire was too intense" seems oddly out of place. Sorry, but it just seems odd to me for several reasons.I understand that, but I think it's important to keep in mind that the guy is amped up on 9/11, when probably millions of people said things at the spur of the moment that they might have phrased differently at another time.

- As I said earlier, although it's hard to tell from the compression and grainyness of YouTube, it doesn't look like his hands and mouth sync with his dialogue. Something seems off.Agreed, but I find nothing odd about a multi-generation copy that's posted on YouTube being out of synch. Some of my own YouTube videos have been badly out of audio synch and had to be re-uploaded multiple times to get it right.

- It's not what HDG says, so much as how he says it. People just don't talk that way.Wow, that's a sweeping opinion.

- I also find it odd that this is EXACTLY the kind of thing that Truthers would expect a government plant to say. If the average Truther were to purposely doctor audio to resemble a plant, I imagine this is exactly what they would make their fake plant say. Truthers aren't very subtle.

- Truthers are desperate, attention-seeking, liars. They've faked videos before. I don't feel like it's a stretch to claim that a Truther video with no link to an original source is fake/doctored.

Of course none of this means anything. As I said above, I hate sounding like a conspiracist, myself. It's extremely possible that the video is 100% authentic (which still doesn't help the conspiracy theorists). However, I still find the audio to be a bit odd. I have no problem accepting that the video is real, but I personally think it's been edited.

I'd love to see a longer version, or a different source.I just don't get what the big deal is. If a truther faked a witness saying things that require no expertise to surmise and that match observable events, that just makes for another dumb truther, and another "nothing to see here" moment.

[A W Smith]

I haven't even clicked on the link because from the comments in this thread I see that it was the Harley guy video I saw over two years ago. I shrugged "so what" then. I'm shrugging "so what" now. What was the point of this thread again?

[T.A.M.]

I think the sticking point, what people are finding hard to accept or get their heads around, is hearing from someone who appears (from his dress and demeanor) to be an "ordinary joe", a well articulated, very astute observation/speculation of what happened to make the towers collapse.

He uses words one would not expect in the heat of the moments after the attacks, from someone who appears as he does...it may seem to some to be odd...a little jarring.

For me I would have to know who this guy is. What is he like? For all we know this guy could be a mensa member who simply likes Harley Davidson.

People find it odd, because what came out of his mouth was not what we expected, both in terms of content, and how said content was articulated.

TAM:)

[carlitos]

When the 9/11 attacks occurred, I was on vacation. My reading at the time included a Nelson Demille novel (The Lion's Game), which featured a terrorist flying into the US, and it reminded me of a Tom Clancy novel from the early 90's (Debt of Honor), which featured a jet flying into a joint session of Congress. Seriously, this wasn't a new idea.

[Hokulele]

<snipped reasonable stuff>

People find it odd, because what came out of his mouth was not what we expected, both in terms of content, and how said content was articulated.


Don't forget, it may also seem odd 8 years on, after all of the kookery regarding videos, foreknowledge, etc., brought on by the CTists. If I had seen this same video that morning, it most likely would have had a far different impact than seeing it today.

Much like the incredulity expressed by various CTists when I mention the fact that I used to bring a machete aboard commercial flights before the events of 9/11.

[triforcharity]

Wow, you guys wouldn't BELIEVE the check I should be getting!! Heck, I have been working for the NWO since 9/11, about 8:47 or so.

How much back-pay should I get??

Anyway, its just a stupid claim.

Caan we get some new material!??!!??!!

Its sad, I have only been here a few months, and I have seen just about every claim from the "Truthers" debunked. You guys who have been doing this for years must have the patience of saints.

[Horatius]

Its sad, I have only been here a few months, and I have seen just about every claim from the "Truthers" debunked. You guys who have been doing this for years must have the patience of saints.


Using them as fodder for humourous comic strips helps.

[Hokulele]

Using them as fodder for humourous comic strips helps.


Oy! I resemble that remark. :mad:

[Horatius]

Oy! I resemble that remark. :mad:



If the shoe fits....

[Hokulele]

If the shoe fits....


... walk through a pile of dog poo and then cram it down the throats of your enemies.

[SmartyPants]

I just want to add my two cents on to why the basic cause of the attack and the collapse of the building was relatively clear, if not obvious within the first couple hours. Here's a brief recollection of my initial thoughts:

I was twenty, in college, and still a political science student.

8:20 am (CST): I wake up, shower, get dressed. By this time, both buildings have been hit, but I wasn't aware of it because I, for some reason, didn't turn the TV on like I usually did. If had, I probably would have stayed inside and watched most of the day.

9:00 am: I get to my geography class, and the professor is a little late. He comes in and announces the news the news to us. We don't have class, but instead have a discussion about why this happened, what to do, etc. Having not seen anything on TV, what he's saying to us doesn't quite register because I hadn't seen anything on TV. I'm thinking "Oh, some pilot must have had a heart attack or something, then maybe a rescue plane or something accidentally crashed into other tower." I think this for about one second, realizing how ridiculous it is even though I want desperately to think that it must be a horrible accident. On top of that, the Pentagon doesn't get hit either. Clearly, as everyone in the lecture (about 75 of us) appeared to agree it was terrorism, and this is what the class discussion is focused on. It was obvious.

10:00 am: I go to my geography lab class. Nothing new, except that someone mentions that both buildings had collapsed, which also surprised no one. I even heard someone in the back mutter "I knew it." At least half of us probably hadn't seen any footage crash or collapse. Yet no one protests, because what happened was of no surprise. When a jet filled with gasoline hits a tower at 500 mph, it's probably (sarcasm) bring a building down.

11:00: I head to my international relations lecture. Clearly, this was a good opportunity for our professor to lecture us on "what this means for the international community," etc. Indeed, for the rest of the semester, terrorism was the focal point of almost all our lectures. Backing up to August and beyond, our lab (broken up into a smaller group for discussions led by a T.A.), OFTEN discussed the Taliban, the role of terror, and Osama bin Laden in particular. By the end class, around 11:20, me and just about everyone else I talked to thought that it would be a big surprise if he weren't somehow in on it.

After eating lunch, I'm back in my dorm and calling my mom, then my grandpa. I, at 20 years old, not knowing much of anything in general (but maybe knowing a little something about this as a result of being a poly sci major and news junkie), actually told my grandpa "I think it was Osama bin Laden."

*****

Having seen little footage by noon, my conclusions were:

a.) Not an accident or bomb

b.) Osama bin Laden or some other terrorist organization planned the attack (possibly state funded) and brought down those buildings to "finish the job."

c.) The buildings came down because, duh, that's what happens when massive fires meet massive structural damage. Using "terminology" like "structural damage" isn't "out of place," even for semiliterate people.


Most of these points were without much debate (except for some arcane details). The only thing that seemed truly incredible was the coordination. Beyond that, how hard could it be crash some planes? Regarding the collapse, there was ZERO controversy about that.


If I had been an eyewitness, I can only imagine how much more there would've been to add.

[triforcharity]

Using them as fodder for humourous comic strips helps.

Believe me, I have reaad EVERY SINGLE page of that thread, and it is HYSTERICAL!! I even participated a little, but I am not that talented.

You however, have me in tears at LEAST once a week.

[Information Analyst]

I was in my office in Northern England (where I lived at the time) when a colleague told me that a plane had flown into one of the WTC towers, and a lot of us (15+) ended up in the chief executive's office watching the live BBC coverage. Although a few were "hoping" it was an accident, most of us pretty much accepted that it was almost certainly terrrorism, even before the second plane hit, and Bin Laden's name was certainly mentioned (possibly by me, since I was aware of his past actions). After that I said I wouldn't be surprised if there was some sort of collapse of at least one of the towers.

Yes, folks, the conspiracy goes all the way to Europe, as well...

Of course, we get the same thing over the 7/7 bombings, with our home-grown truthers declaring that anyone who called the explosions as terrorism "too early" as being "in on it." I guess that includes a friend of mine who rang me as I walking home, having failed to get a train into central London about 45 minutes after the epxlosions, asking if I was OK, "what with all these bombs going off."

[Monketey Ghost]

No one could have anticipated this.

[VespaGuy]

I understand that, but I think it's important to keep in mind that the guy is amped up on 9/11, when probably millions of people said things at the spur of the moment that they might have phrased differently at another time.

Agreed.

Agreed, but I find nothing odd about a multi-generation copy that's posted on YouTube being out of synch. Some of my own YouTube videos have been badly out of audio synch and had to be re-uploaded multiple times to get it right.

Right. And without an original it's impossible to say that the audio doesn't match.

Wow, that's a sweeping opinion.

That's all it is. My opinion. I've been wrong plenty of times before, and I could very easily be wrong again.

I just don't get what the big deal is. If a truther faked a witness saying things that require no expertise to surmise and that match observable events, that just makes for another dumb truther, and another "nothing to see here" moment.

It isn't a big deal at all. It's my personal opinion that there is something odd about the audio. I simply find it more plausible that the video was simply edited by a dishonest truther.

Sorry for the derail.

[Grizzly Bear]

It isn't a big deal at all. It's my personal opinion that there is something odd about the audio. I simply find it more plausible that the video was simply edited by a dishonest truther.

Sorry for the derail.

Don't take my response to this the wrong way or anything... it's not really intended to perpetuate the matter...
But I think it's worth noting that the comment you're referring to wasn't the first of it's kind... I brought one up from one from the archive news footage websites ---- http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4750477&postcount=3327 --- In case it clarifies anything...
The reporter I quoted has been used in the past for statements, although he was specifically used to support the CD claims as opposed to foreknowledge or what have you. In either case they might sound a bit odd, but under the same circumstances I could see myself having said something similar... one of my first thoughts when I was at school that day was that the towers would collapse with such heavy damage and fire... back then I didn't understand much about structures or how fire impacts the building materials... it was more an educated guess than anything else at the time.

I won't really comment much else on this... but I figured that the context would be useful....

[Horatius]

Of course, we get the same thing over the 7/7 bombings, with our home-grown truthers declaring that anyone who called the explosions as terrorism "too early" as being "in on it." I guess that includes a friend of mine who rang me as I walking home, having failed to get a train into central London about 45 minutes after the epxlosions, asking if I was OK, "what with all these bombs going off."


Now this, I don't get. With 9/11, you could conceive of it being an accident, at least for the first plane. Planes do crash, and every now and then, they crash into buildings. But explosions? How often do trains and buses just explode? A derailment, sure, that'd be an accident, but an explosion, let alone several explosions, realistically would usually be terrorism.

Which terrorists it was might be an open question, but not the fact of terrorism itself.

[Makalu G]

That's my take. The dialogue doesn't match his mouth movements. Notice no "truther" has bothered to verify this with Fox.

The audio is very clean. More like a recording studio mock-up than a "man on the street" scenario...

[DGM]

I remember commenting that morning on my surprise that the towers took that kind of hit. I also was not (overly) surprised when they did finally did come down. Personally, I don't think many in the building trade were.

[SmartyPants]

I remember commenting that morning on my surprise that the towers took that kind of hit. I also was not (overly) surprised when they did finally did come down. Personally, I don't think many in the building trade were.

Same here. In fact, my initial reaction was "wow, those buildings are huge," meaning if something can sustain a direct hit from passenger aircraft, then it must big and powerful.

As I wrote in my post, I don't think anybody was surprised when they finally came down.