50 Questions They Can’t Answer About 9/11 [Part 1 Of 3]

Submitted by: monkwarrior 1 month ago in News & Politics


The first of a three-part investigation, over the next three days leading up to the 16-year anniversary of 9/11, raising 50 questions they can’t answer about 9/11.

9/11/2001 is a sensitive topic for some people, so viewers discretion is advised for this video and/or the comments. 

This new investigative documentary, about the events on September 11th 2001, is an eye-opening and straightforward factual examination into the specifics surrounding what has become known as 9/11.

Part one of this investigation starts out by pointing out the similarities between Pearl Harbor and 9/11. It then introduces the ‘debunkers’ who speak out and defend the 9/11 Commission Report (the ‘official report’). Then goes into examining a complete breakdown in high office on the morning of September 11th, 2001, raising suspicion of a deep corruption in high office. 

The investigation examines evidence presented in the ‘official report’, and what the ‘debunkers’ have to say to support it, and then compares them to the facts and evidence, raising many questions. Perhaps questions which may better aid in a re-investigation into the events of that day.

It’s a timely investigation, as we continue to see growing corruption in high places, as it exposes corruption, and strengthens a case for an overhaul of governance; the duty of citizens. I think if you take the time to watch these 3 episodes and consider what it presents, you will learn quite a bit about what exactly happened on 9/11, and glimpse the problems plaguing governance today.

So check it out! If this episode doesn’t convince you that 9/11 is worth a re-investigation, then definitely stick around for the explosive part 2, tomorrow!
There are 49 comments:
Male 3,648
What I want to know is this:
Though I don't really care for the voting system on i-am-bored, how can this link have (currently) a positive rating of 21 when:
1. Most of the people in the thread are calling this link bullshit
2. I don't think that there are 21 active users on i-am-bored, or at least 21 who actively use the voting system
and 3. The next highest vote count is 12, but most are around the 5 range.

Maybe fancylad can shed a little light on this when he has some spare time?
0
Reply
Male 6,153
DuckBoy87  I am up voting your post :-), These are good questions
0
Reply
Male 3,648
thezigrat Actually, another user cracked the code.
All comment votes and post votes get lumped together in the post vote.
So every upvote you give, gives an upvote to the OP....
0
Reply
Male 1,078
DuckBoy87 I was wondering the same thing.  I suspect monkwarrior has made a bunch of fake accounts to up vote it.  It would have to be more than 21 as I'm sure a number of people down voted it.
0
Reply
Male 3,648
lockner01 I guarantee it's higher than 21. (I know I've downvoted this link)
0
Reply
Male 6,153
DuckBoy87 I thought it was Sock Puppet's Sock puppets. You know the one who always cries "Sock Puppets!"
0
Reply
Male 1,078
DuckBoy87 it's interesting that the only post in the past couple of days that has more than 12 up votes is the last 9/11 conspiracy theory post, by Boredhuman; it has 48.
0
Reply
Male 3,648
lockner01 I also noticed that a link that 5cats had posted has -negative- 108 votes. This was about a month ago.
0
Reply
Male 3,410
same shit different day. i dropped a 3 part turd in my toilet and its got more credibility than this.
2
Reply
Male 318
Consider how hard it is to actually keep a secret and then consider how many people would have to be involved in this conspiracy. Now what are the odds?
3
Reply
Male 273
Two hours?  www.i-am-not-that-bored.com
5
Reply
Male 40,764
Beaverfever :-) This was a terrific comment :-)
-1
Reply
80
Whats with iab suddenly bringing up 9/11
0
Reply
Male 569
bill_watson "Whats with iab suddenly bringing up 9/11"
Check the calendar.  What's next Monday's date?  Conspiracy theories are going to pop up every year for decades to come.
0
Reply
80
if you know whats good for you you will stop before we send people j/k

1
Reply
Male 1,798
As I figured, a bunch of circumstantial "evidence", with little to nothing to back it up. The majority of what I saw (I'll admit, I didn't watch all the way through, I just skimmed parts of it. The stupid is too strong to watch in its entirety, and I feel stupider myself for the parts that I did watch) wasn't even about who actually committed the acts (isn't that supposed to be the question?), but about why America failed to act to stop it. Is this really the best the conspiracy theorists can do?
2
Reply
Male 1,078
whosaidwhat Don't worry there's another 3 hours on it's way.
2
Reply
Male 941
I certainly don't think we got the whole truth about what happened on 9/11, but I also don't think the American government was behind the whole thing.  
1
Reply
Male 9,766
Let me get this straight.

People in the American government wanted badly to take out sadam husein so they planned September 11th so that the American people would be OK going after iraq?

1. Hitler was murdering millions of people, occupying countries, and actively trying to take over the world. Sadam husein was a dime a dozen asshole dictator. He was in no way a parallel to hitler.

2. You think instead of just sending an assassin squad to kill him and then blaming it on rebels in his own country Americans decided to kill 3,000+ Americans, cripple the economy, and destroy the most iconic buildings in the country?

3. Do you not think that's a bit overkill? Americans would have gotten pissed off and ready for war had they flown 1 plane into the white house on a day when the president was gone killing a dozen people. Or just the pentagon. They needed the towers, AND the pentagon, OH, AND THAT'S NOT ENOUGH THEY ALSO NEED THE CRASH IN PENNSYLVANIA?
0
Reply
Male 6,153
holygod Odd thing is The Pilot Episode of Lone Gunmen (I believed it was never shown on TV) Dealt with people planning to fly a plane into the WTC and by coincidence was scheduled to be shown on Sept 11 2001
0
Reply
Male 40,764
thezigrat Not correct at all. I watched it myself.
The first episode (the pilot for the series) was entirely about some evil person(s) (possibly US government connected, I honestly forget) remote-control flying a fully loaded passenger aircraft into one of the Twin Towers.

But the 'official story' after 9/11 was that 'no one could have imagined' flying passenger aircraft into a building like that...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lone_Gunmen_(TV_series)
-1
Reply
Male 6,153

"But the 'official story' after 9/11 was that 'no one could have imagined' flying passenger aircraft into a building like that...Was the reason Tom Clancy's Then latest novel was rejected the year before  Get your facts straight and stop relying on sites that are inherently wrong.
0
Reply
Male 40,764
thezigrat What? Are you claiming that in 2000 Tom Clancy had a novel rejected because it was about flying planes into the Towers? STFU.

And what does that have to do with the FACT that scores of US officials all started saying 'no one could have imagined...' in spite of a TV show which did exactly that? NOT ME I'm not the one saying that, I'm saying that they said it.

Lay off the drugs boy, they make you stupid... stupider that is.
-2
Reply
Male 6,153
5cats According to the Writer and the Director it was as I said the Episode was originally to Air on the night of September 11 but was pulled due to the fact it would have been considered poor judgement and was never aired during the series run . As described by the Director and series writer on their series bonus documentary disk. I would tend to put more stock in the creators than Wikipedia or Breitbart . Yes the plane was radio controled (BY  PEOPLE) and Yes the Target was the WTC In order to increase defense funding and to act as a False Flag situation by the Military industrial Complex. So what part is completely wrong?
0
Reply
Male 40,764
thezigrat I saw it on TV, I watched the entire series. So it was aired, at least in Canada. I thought it was the season finale though (it wasn't).

"The program originally aired from March 4, 2001 (2001-03-04), to June 1, 2001 (2001-06-01)"

Last time I checked? March and June happened BEFORE September, so that is where you are wrong. Maybe where YOU live it was that way? Or some sort of other release or re-showing, but there is NO way the series was supposed to premier on Sept.11/01.

I listened to a radio interview with one of them, and he said on 9/11 he waited by the phone for the security agencies to call because of that episode... they never did. And to his shock? The official "No one imagined..." started being said by dozens of 'security experts'... who apparently didn't watch the show :p

Release Date: March 4 2001:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0243069/

Watch it yourself:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjbQ-BDh4PU&list=PLW59049I8pltF5SnYhqlSWpmsDMPnz5vr

You put your stock where you like, the FACTS remain unchanged.
-2
Reply
Male 3,212
holygod 
I do not buy in to the complete conspiracy thing, but when I look at what the fed gov has benefited from 9/11, I have to wonder if maybe something untoward was known or helped along by some grouping of individuals in the fed gov and or military hierarchy.
Maybe something similar to Pearl Harbor, where advanced knowledge was suppressed, or even a 'look the other way', hands off policy on the actors.
Viewed in those terms, I don't think a conspiracy of that nature or to that degree is beyond credulity. Not from a government that once tried to poison Castro's cigars, train dolphins to carry mines, or tap telekinetic abilities to assassinate people.
1
Reply
Female 8,056
captkangaroo - I suspect thats the extent of it- but also I reckon the conspiracy angle suits a fair few people too- not just utter loons but people profit from it. 
2
Reply
Male 3,212
madduck 
Agreed. Folks can claim whatever ideology they please, it all comes down to money and power. 
2
Reply
Male 3,480
holygod 

1. there is no comparison between hitler and saddam

2. Well why is kim jon un still alive?  We didn't kill ghadafi either?  Why didn't we take out any soviet premier?

3. I think terrorism is all about being over the top, had they ACTUALLY tried to cripple the country, i can think of several more effective (but significantly less flashy) ways to go about it.
0
Reply
Male 40,764
daegog 
1. yup, none at all.

2. There is an international treaty that forbids the assassination of ANY national leader, no matter who or what they do.
One of the top US Generals in Desert Storm referred to sending a team in to kill Saddam, he was replaced within days...

3. Blowing up some of the bridges over the Mississippi river, car or train ones, would be devastating and comparatively easy (if you had a shit-ton of explosives and lots of scuba gear, lolz!) Might take a few dozen, I forget how many there are in total... but it would be years and countless billions to replace them...

The bridges and tunnels linking Manhattan...
-3
Reply
Male 5,024
I'll save you the five hours with a fifteen-minute read. Here is a short and precise 12 page analysis from explosives and demolition experts: A Critical Analysis of the Collapse of WTC Towers 1, 2 & 7 From an Explosives and Conventional Demolition Industry Viewpoint. 

The authors spent a great deal of energy simplifying the verbiage and technical vernacular as much as possible so that it is easy to read and understand. These experts blow up (pun intended) the assertion that explosives brought down the buildings. Their explanations disproving Assertion 1 is their mic drop. In one and a half pages the main assertion of the Truthers is demolished (pun intended again). 
1
Reply
Male 4,242
ha  ha
1
Reply
Male 5,024
Yeah, I'm not going to watch five hours of this crap. I love how you call the people who speak out and defend the official report as debunkers. That's debonkers.
1
Reply
Male 626
Tilting at twin windmills.
3
Reply
Male 3,480
Yeah this one is a tad long, have to put it on the todo list.
1
Reply
Male 1,078
Sorry I'm not spending 2 hours watching a conspiracy theory video.  And it's only part 1.  So can we expect that there's 6 hours of video?  Could you at least summarize what the 50 questions are?
2
Reply
Male 40,764
lockner01 I heartily agree, a text list of the 50 questions would be more than enough...

Note: Searching "50 questions 9/11" brings up this IAB post as the second hit :-)

This seems to look at this video and break down the questions:
https://steemit.com/truth/@/911-the-only-post-that-you-ever-need-to-read-truth

Here's 50 questions, a few he's offered answers to, it's from 2009:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread500468/pg1
-1
Reply
Male 40,764
5cats I get downvoted for this comment where I provided the materials that should have been in the original post.

And the trolls and hate-mongers claim it (downvoting) has meaning... 

And IAB Liberals wonder why I don't take them seriously.
-1
Reply
Male 367
5cats I am among the IAB liberals, but I agree downvoting you for being helpful is ridiculous.  I've done what I can to help correct that by giving you an up vote on both of these comments.
1
Reply
Male 40,764
skeeter01 Thanks! I know for sure it isn't ALL the IAB Liberals, just a few who are active hate-mongers and have puppets (at least a couple of them do).

It doesn't concern me, but occasionally someone says something dumb (or uninformed) like "your posts have low scores" and I have to explain it... again :-p
0
Reply
Male 1,078
5cats Thanks 5cats:

So looking at a ransom selection of those questions:

12) How could Bush have seen the first plane crashing on WTC live - as he admitted? Did he have previous knowledge - or is he psychic? 

13) Bush said that he and Andrew Card initially thought the first hit on the WTC was an accident with a small plane. How is that possible when the FAA as well as NORAD already knew this was about a hijacked plane?  

15) Could defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld explain why initial media reports said that there were no fighter jets available at Andrews Air Force Base and then change the reports that there were, but not on high alert? 

And using the Merriam-Webster definition of the term Conspiracy Theorist:  a person who holds a theory that explains an event or situation as the result of a secret plan by usually powerful people or groups 

Can we not say that this video was made by a Conspiracy Theorist. OR in other words is a conspicay theorist video?
1
Reply
Male 40,764
lockner01 Some questions are legit, I think. Most are not however, and some are just plain nutz...

There are things unanswered about 9/11, how could we possibly know ALL the answers about EVERYTHING that happened? But we know most of it, and sorting out the truth from the fiction (and deliberate misdirection, if some theories are true) gets harder over the decades, not easier.

Until there's a 'big reveal' that confirms some of the theories? Like with the Lusitania? There will continue to be arguments.
-1
Reply
Male 1,078
lockner01 This is in response to Monkwarrior to a response he made to me in another thread:

monkwarrior 2 hours ago
lockner01 Well, as you can already see in the post that i posted, there are already people denying the facts, using their propaganda war term 'conspiracy theorist', and failing to accept facts due to their indoctrination by the lies of the media.  And who was the first to do that?  Well surprise, surprise! none other than lockner01 

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest that you were played like a fiddle, and quite skilfully i might add :D.

I asked him why he would have made this comment in this post but he didn't answer.
0
Reply
Male 2,632
lockner01 
True, and a text summary would make discussion far easier than constantly going over video.
-1
Reply
Female 1,605
lockner01 6 hours of this would honestly kill me.
3
Reply
Male 3,446
3
Reply
Female 1,605
kalron27 Bahaha! Seriously!  Pass me the eye drops. lol
1
Reply
Male 40,764
littlemissqt It would rot your brain I think, mine for sure!

I put a link above to some kind of summary of the questions.
-1
Reply
Male 9,766
5cats This isn't all that much dumber than when you posted how hillary wasn't actually at an event because the flag in the background wasn't as big because you don't understand how depth of field focusing works.
2
Reply