Just recently watched 9/11 the new pearl harbor and a lot of the points were honestly pretty convincing.
Prior to the doc, I absolutely felt like 9/11 was just kind of a "chickens coming home to roost" type deal for the US with some likely saudi involvement and believed the U.S was aware it was probably going to happen (considering this is basically proven via legit documents) but did not put much effort in to stopping it as justification for imperialist war and whatnot. But i typically believed the rest of the "official" story with the building collapse and the hijackers. Now after seeing the doc I am honestly kind of convinced of much higher level involvement by some entity whatever it is.
For example, they do a pretty good job of pointing out how there should be doubt that the accused terrorists actually committed the attacks considering how there is no visual information anywhere of any of the hijackers being at the airport despite airport cameras basically capturing every person by at least one of the hundreds of cameras all throughout the building. What was really convincing though was when they pointed out all the hijackers were absolutely piss poor pilots with no relevant experience to fly commercial airliners. The "they just use autopilot" argument isnt valid either because the way the planes were flown required like extreme skill at the speeds they were going at to even hit the target. They especially talk about how the maneuver on the pentagon hit is like borderline impossible from the perspective of the many professional pilots who have raised this.
Genuinely kind of hard to believe there was not some type of planted explosives in the towers considering structural engineers state that no building of that caliber has ever been brought down simply by fires and how that is essentially structurally impossible. Also the way the building collapses in near free fall they similarly do a very decent job explaining how fishy that is if again the supports throughout the building were only weakened by fires. They even at one point bring up original architect's statement on the building (obviously way before 9/11 happened) where he specifically states the building could withstand commercial airliner collisions. This was an important thing to consider due to the height of the buildings and relative proximity to major airports.
The most unsettling part to me was when they talk about the phone calls and how some definitely came from cell phones but there would have been no way to make the cell calls from the plane considering the height and speed it would not have been able to connect long enough to any tower. I did find some of the details on this whole section kinda shaky so I don't really know what I believe here but if this is true it is pretty creepy to me cause then the question of where were the passengers that called located and what happened to them is kinda freaky. But again this part didn't seem as robustly discussed as others.
There were absolutely some things in the doc that I wasn't super convinced by like the plane swap stuff I'm not totally sure of in general. There is also a pretty silly moment where they try to say one of the callers from the plane says "It's a frame" before hanging up but like... it is a bit of stretch lmao.
But still was a pretty informative doc all things considered. It is a shame whenever stuff like this is talked about it is usually among whacked out right wingers cause there are absolutely a lot of valid questions.
Curious if you've seen it and what your thoughts on it were
Here is the whole documentary btw for people who want to watch it: https://old.luogocomune.net/site/modules/sections/index.php?op=viewarticle&artid=167 It's 3 parts and very long.
I watched that documentary awhile ago on Youtube, and it honestly made me less convinced that it was a controlled demolition:
The video claimed that the hijackers' identities were all fake and the passport found at the wreckage being completely planted. But there's one huge problem if you zoom out: if the whole purpose of 9/11 was to be a false flag that galvanizes the US public to want to bomb the Middle East, then why did the US not invade a single country that the hijackers came from? Seriously, why? Dubya wanted to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, so he faked a terrorist attack where none of the fake terrorists came from the countries he wanted to invade. Instead, he picked a country that the US has the least intentions of ever invading, until recently an extremely loyal US ally. The other countries (the UAE, Egypt, Lebanon) are also US allies within the region. In the decades since 9/11, the US waged economic, information, and kinetic warfare in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and Iran, so you would think that the fake terrorists would come from those 6 countries instead of 4 countries the US is allied with. This would be like if Biden ordered the destruction of the Empire State Building and concocted fake identities of Indonesian and Filipino terrorists in order to convince the US public to invade China.
Their discussions on being able to hear cellphone calls was absolutely poorly argued and was the part where the video lost me. Why would they fake cellphone calls when they could just say, "the plane was too high, so we couldn't receive cellphone calls?" It's the perfect cover story (and according to the video, scientifically accurate anyways). If you examine the MO of how the US operates, they tend to destroy evidence of wrongdoing rather than fabricate false evidence. This is an extremely long read of the MS Estonia, but the part I want to emphasize was the part where they sealed off the shipwreck with concrete, literally covering up the wreckage so independent investigators can't conduct their own investigation that goes against the official narrative. This is not getting into the fact that people tend to be poor and unconvincing actors.
The idea that every 10 or so floors be rigged with explosives with nobody finding out is absolutely ludicrous. I originally thought controlled demolition involved just rigging the basement with explosives, but every 10 floors? Cmon. We're talking about people stashing multiple floors that face heavy foot traffic daily with tons of explosives. There's that joke among truthers of two planes needing to destroy three buildings, but the collapse of Building 7 doesn't make that much sense from the perspective of controlled demolition. People were stashing explosives in this random building with the public not noticing people were moving around tons of explosives and the conspirators not noticing only 2 planes would be involved. So not only was the public completely stupid in not noticing these weirdos moving around these mystery carts, but the conspirators were stupid as well, but only slightly less stupid than the already stupid public, meaning they could get away carting around tons of explosives. Did they not pay attention in their secret cabal meeting and thought 3 planes would be involved instead of 2? Why couldn't the conspirators, on discovering the fact that there would only be 2 planes, just cancel the controlled demolition of Building 7? Like, they could just fake any reason to quarantine off Building 7 or even just roll with it by blaming the planted explosives on al Qaeda. Kinda of a big oopsy daisy to accidentally rig a building with explosives and blow the building up.
To zoom out even more, controlled demolition is actually 3 different parallel conspiracies: the attack on NYC, the attack on the Pentagon, and Flight 93, meaning there's essentially 3 different team of conspirators each planning their own unique conspiracy. Why couldn't the Pentagon also be controlled demolition? At bare minimum, they could reuse the mastermind behind the controlled demolition of NYC instead getting a totally different mastermind who's good at faking a missile attack as a plane crash. And for that matter, why have 3 different conspiracies instead of just one? Was the public not willing to go to war until the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and a random field in Pennsylvania were attacked? Like the whole false flag completely hinged on those exact 3 sites and if any one was missing, the US public would shrug their shoulders and go back to listening to Britney Spears?