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.

  • SerLava [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    Iiiii dunno here, I've played a lot of very realistic flight sims. Airliners are really not that hard to fly. Airplanes are not that hard to fly in general... when I was a kid I got to fly a small plane a couple times, it's really not hard. The only reason they require a lot of training, especially airliners, is because flying correctly only 99.0% of the time means a 1% crash rate which is uh, bad. If the hijackers spent like an hour with a joystick playing X-Plane 5.0 they'd have like an 80% chance of being able to hit a building.

    I mean when I was 12, I literally read some instructions for 15 minutes and landed a realistically simulated Space Shuttle from 135,000 feet, and I ended up rolling about 20 feet off the end of the runway into the dirt at 10mph, clearly surviving and only doing light damage to the thing. First try, minutes of training, and I popped the goddamn tires on the Space Shuttle. It's really not that fuckin hard.

    Also are you aware that the Pentagon is fucking massive, literally the largest office building in the entire world. They literally just landed the plane at high speed but into a wall. Literally just a "lol whoops" thing you can do in a flight sim and then lift back off and circle around and try to slow down next time.

    All this physical shit is bogus. It's JFK bullet trajectory shit - Oswald was a CIA asset and you got people obsessing over whether a second CIA asset also shot a guy - wow, so different. It's a distraction. The only conspiracy you should be looking for is within the communication between Bush and his intelligence services prior to the attacks - was it really extreme incompetence, or was it willing participation, or did they see bin Laden planning the attacks and going "ok, let him cook".