Why were they reporting that a car bomb had gone off at the

File: 1467837737198.jpg (73KB, 876x493px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 876x493px

Also at 16:00 they report again there is a fire at the Department of Sate.

you fucking mong. atleast give a time on vid for the first report

>>19005995
I did, dumbass

yo mention at 16;00 they report 'again'. But i guess you want me to watch the entire 28 minute vid to find the main report you're talking about. Fuck off and be specific. Didn't you even think before you posted this that people aren't gonna watch the entire 28 mins for one measley clip about a car bomb. Terrible thread, not properly done.

>>19006006
no you mentioned 16;00 and typed 'they report again'....as if there's two reports of it in this vid. One mentioning a car bomb, the other mentioning a fire.

ok i played the 16 part. I heard them mention the fire. So where's the part they mention a 'car bomb at the state department building'.

>>19006021
They are reporting the same event at 12:50 and 16:00

>>19006029
look at the headline in ops pic

>>19006034
Thanks, that clears this shit up. Interesting. Car bomb mentioned at 13;06. That's all i was saying my friend. Couldn't play the entire vid hunting for the car bomb part. Yeah it mattered.

Anyways, this is actually pretty damn interesting. Never heard of this before.

Wonder if other vids from this time on other MSM networks also mentioned a car bomb at SD. Maybe they got the same reports.

File: 1488485758082.jpg (35KB, 542x616px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 542x616px

These are the only video on youtube I can find about this subject....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D290n9pvUsE

So we got CNN, and ABC that reported this so far. I think a quick mention by FOX.

CNN also reported a fire at Washington mall, behind the old executive office building. Is that near the State Department Building?

>>19006095
Yea

File: Screenshot_1.jpg (226KB, 984x558px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 984x558px

Not sure if i missed anything, but i think these are the locations. I'm a bit iffy on the state department building and which one they may have been referring to. The State Department has multiple buildings, but all seem to be in the same general location.

File: 9-11.jpg (335KB, 1212x615px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 1212x615px

This is satellite imagery of the area on 9-11

File: 9-12.jpg (331KB, 1193x621px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1193x621px

and imagery on 9-12, the day after.

File: Untitled.png (680KB, 958x541px) Image search: [Google]

680KB, 958x541px

>>19006168
I think they are referring to the State Departement building because they say "There's a fire on the Mall." And thats the closest one. to the Mall.

We need to find out where this video from this screenshot is being taken so we can determine where the smoke is coming from. It may be the Pentagon with that much smoke, but the Pentagon is right onside the city, not near The Mall.

>>19006202

The building in that image should be easy enough to find on google street view.

It's a very distinct building, should be easy to find somewhere around the Pentagon, but i don't see it. Strange.

Unless ABC got their shots mixed up and posted a shot from New York?

>>19006293
No thats definitely not New York.

Im searching google earth now for it

i found the fucking thing then accidentally deleted my placemarker, lost the bastard. Somewhere north of the whitehouse, not sure exactly. Having issues finding it again. It was pure luck i found it to begin with me thinks.

bout to give up. i had the fucking thing right in front of me. Ready to kill something.

>>19006389
Im still looking
dont give up
what general area was it in?

File: Screenshot_2.jpg (155KB, 1060x592px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 1060x592px

found it. i think this is it. West of the whitehouse, practically right by it.

Bumping for interest. Never heard of this and I've "researched" (watched youtube) 911 stuff for years.

i meant the building east of the whitehouse. fuck.

>>19006408
address?

File: Screenshot_3.jpg (3KB, 122x53px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 122x53px

>>19006418

File: Screenshot_4.jpg (102KB, 506x569px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 506x569px

looking SE toward the Pentagon, i guess it's possible it's smoke coming from Pentagon, but i haven't really analyzed where the ABC cams were in relation.

SW excuse me. WTF is wrong with my ass today. Swear i'm not high. Maybe that's the problem.

File: 1483772272527.jpg (36KB, 334x411px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 334x411px

>>19006432
What in the actual fuck...

the smoke in the picture is in the TOTAL OPPOSITE direction of the Pentagon.

What the hell is going on?

File: Screenshot_5.jpg (98KB, 484x640px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 484x640px

For that to work, the cam would have to be positioned NE of the building in question. But we also don't know how far back the cam was and how much it was in zoom. It could be even further/

File: Untitled.png (1MB, 1211x640px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1211x640px

>>19006448
Actually it looks like it is the back of the bulding

Department of Sate is still in the line of sight. The smoke looks like its closer then the Pentagon.

>>19006478
Nice anon, and you're probably right. Smoke from pentagon.

i meant you're right about the smoke looking closer. But that can often be deceiving. But it really does look closer. It would do us good to look at satellite imagery from 9-11 and the days after to see if certain buildings look damaged at all.

>>19005932
Just bad tips. Also, that part is randomly cut in there, without any context. Just bad news, or it's a mistake of the editor.

>>19006527
But everyone is reporting the white planes, which may have been the drones used to pull this off. There were dozens of reports of strange unmarked planes. White planes, that may have been jets fitted with drone capabilities. The FAA tested one, and it took off and landed by itself over a dozen times.

Yup, one bad piece of info could have went to multiple news outlets. After investigating this, at least in context of the visuals, i'm pretty certain it was smoke from the pentagon coupled with misleading info. I gave it the benefit of the doubt, and that's my conclusion. Cheers.

File: IMG_3040.gif (1023KB, 852x568px) Image search: [Google]

1023KB, 852x568px

>>19006548
That and this weird clip. Found it on /pol/.

>>19006444
trips checked.

>>19006557
clearly faked. Edited into the footage.

File: IMG_2024.jpg (69KB, 656x472px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 656x472px

>>19006566
Yeah, it's a good example(if it is), of how far people will go to be right.

>>19006577
I guess my question is, why was it so difficult to even see this footage? Why is it not on YouTube if it's fake?

File: IMG_0256.jpg (205KB, 768x767px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 768x767px

>>19006583

File: IMG_0255.jpg (148KB, 758x757px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 758x757px

I didn't make these. A lot of stuff doesn't add up.

People make these meme's with no knowledge of physics or any knowledge of anything for that matter, Can't believe people take them seriously. Like the jet fuel comparison to the wtc. I mean holy fuck, how stupid is that.

Many of these truther meme's operate under the assumption that no other factors contributed, besides what's seen in the meme. It's absolutely fucking retarded shit.

>>19006616
Also, this class of building is supposed to be able to withstand a ten year hurricane or something similar. Class A.

>>19006646
so a building built to withstand a hurricane is suddenly terrorist proof as well. Ummmk

Whatever. Just examples of the fervor. At least you know your a dick.

>>19006648
Hurr Durr. Go samefag someone who cares dipshit.

File: 1494401397194tower7.webm (856KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

856KB, 1280x720px

controlled demolition

You got quiet high school. They were made by engineers. Part of a campaign.

File: 1494401481482moltmetal.webm (2MB, 550x310px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 550x310px

the fuck would cause this molten shit to spew out of a building just moments before what looks similar to a controlled demolition?

>>19006645
>>19006636
What are you hinting at? Project much?

Sorry, don't react well to transparent bullies.

>>19006657
I'm not even saying there's no conspiracy and i buy the official story. Fuck no, i'm pretty sure we don't know all. But the truthers have made this look so damned retarded, that seeking answers for 9-11 makes everyone else, serious investigators, look stupid. Truthers have destroyed any credibility this had. Just so much bullshit, so many wacky theories, it's just too damn much. What serious investigator is gonna touch this considering the crazies have polluted the subject with the dumbest conspiracy theories known to mankind to have ever existed.

You're one of the crazies. Fuck off cuck.

>>19006686
Whoever the truthers are. Get out more, chief.

>>19006672

This is the thing that has always perplexed me most. I'm not saying it was definitely thermite (or something else like it) but what else could have caused that? I do have pretty limited knowledge on the subject, though, so I'm at a loss for an alternate explanation.

>>19006605
Also, this points to a huge training exercise for all the interceptors assigned to the east in its entirety. September 11th.

>>19006784
They found pools of molten steel all around ground zero. Only thermite could cause those pools of molten metal, for a long time afterwards.

>>19006805
I remember the firemen talking about it.

It's pointless to even try, with this one. You'll never get anywhere. Those of us that were there in the east. It was not just a sound bite on the news.

File: IMG_7703.jpg (122KB, 504x219px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 504x219px

Bumperino

>>19006805
Incorrect, just for a handful of reasons:
-the heat in the area was indeed enough to cause less dense bits of steel to melt
-most of the damage wasn't done by heat, most was done by gravity
-when you braze metal to a weakening point, it doesn't need to melt

A lot of the molten material was created when the fires inside the building hit peak temperatures and started destroying exterior steel that wasn't structural. There's also another reason why thermite couldn't have been used: they recovered an equal amount of debris as there was material used in the construction of the building. Large quantities of thermite would actually cause the clean-up crews to find more material, significantly more. Thermite would require introducing a huge, inordinate amount of aluminum and oxidized iron, which they didn't find traces of.

The most suspicious things about 9/11 are obvious ones: the photo op with the taxi driver at the pentagon (even though the light pole he had go through his car was not in the jet path) and the knowledge of a credible threat being ignored by intelligence community.

>>19006881
>they recovered an equal amount of debris as there was material used in the construction of the building

Just curious, in calculating, did they include the weight of assets contained within the bldg. Or include an estimation?(file cabinets, IT equip, furniture etc)

>>19006202
Still the question remains..

Why did they report about a car bomb in the first place? Where did they get this information from?

>>19005932
Because in 2001 news wasn't as lightning fast as it is today. It's easy to forget how much of the terror of 9/11 came from the fact that no one knew what was happening. Shit, I lived near Ft. Bragg at the time and people were convinced a plane was headed for there, too.

It's also why 9/11 conspiracy theories took hold so easily: in the confusion during and directly after the attacks there were a lot of conflicting reports about who did what and why.

>>19006881
Thanks for the alternate explanation, friend. Like I said, I have pretty limited knowledge on this subject. I'm this anon btw.
>>19006784

>>19007509
I'd like to point out too rhat it wasn't just jet fuel burning in the towers.

Paper, carpet, drapes, mousepads, clothing...all of these contributed to the fire, making it burn hotter, raising the temperature.

I don't think 9/11 involved the government in any way, though. I think they had intelligence they ignored, but it's easy to forget that before 9/11 we just didn't think something like this would ever happen.

It's the ultimate black swan event: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory?wprov=sfla1

One major point that I am not reading about is the fact that the towers did not sway at all when the ""planes"" crushed into them.

They tell us, that aluminium """planes""" crushed so hard and with such a force that they ripped plane holes to the steel beams, and all that force just disappeared.

Normally if you push a building hard enough to punch a hole in it, it should swing back and forth for a bit. Like an earthquake.

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HB2jgJJG2is

What I am saying, the explosions came from inside, not the outside