9/11 Conspiracy Thread (There can be only one!)
- Thread starter Stryder
- Start date
- Status
I understand and respect your position.
A lot of things. Google this:
"changing story" 9/11
And yes, I'm aware that they say William Rodriguez has changed his story as well, but I've already discredited that in this thread (good luck finding where though).
Personally, I like this story, although it's related to the anthrax attacks, not 9/11:
http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=8622
I only argued that they control the official story. Clearly, there are other stories out there.
Indeed. But a lot of those people aren't telling the official story:
http://www.911docs.net/911_chronicles_1_truth_rising.php
I may check it out later..
I sincerely doubt it. But as I said, I may check it out.
I will admit to one thing. In many ways, I liked debating in sciforums. Why? Because in forums that go for the official story, or forums that go for the inside job approach, most people are on side; the debating is generally tepid. In this forum, it seems we had a strong dose of both sides, even though, due to the fact that the moderators don't seem to take the 9/11 inside job idea seriously, it's clearly slanted the other way.
However, I must admit that in the loose change forums, the amount of headway made is, I believe, considerably stronger. I believe this is in large part due to the way it separates different topics. I am not saying that this phenomenon is exclusive to inside jobers; in the debunker site that you showed me, I also saw that they organized different parts of 9/11 seperately.
It's for this reason that I find it unfortunate to find a place where there were strong views from both sides, but it was all shoved into a 'mighty tangle'.
Well, at least here you will strong views from one side - they come from the more experienced people who have actually studied some of the principles involved in the failure of the buildings.
Seriously - why not do yourself (and some of us) a big favor? Go an pick up a couple of books on structural design and the WTC in particular. Ones that were written PRIOR!! to 9/11 and therfore won't contain any bias at all toward anyone's version of what happened. That's the only way you'll ever be able to reach a sound conclusion.
Besides learning a LOT about this particular issue, you'll also find a good deal of other interesting things as well.
I want to hear it from you... I don't want to browse truther websites to find what you may be talking about.
They wouldn't be so successful if their "story" was indeed a lie. Demolition teams and engineers worldwide would refute it. They don't. Thus the findings of NIST and non-government experts alike, stand strong.
Are you not capable of giving me a summary of your sources?
I sincerely doubt it also. You are dishonest. Nothing will change your mind.
Answer me this though... because when I watched Loose Change, amongst other things, this was the one thing that caught my attention with regards to showing how dishonest truthers are. They always showed the same picture of the Pentagon damage, they deliberately chose a picture were the damage was obscured by a fire truck and gallons of spraying water, then Avery says "Where is the damage?"
Why didn't they use any other the dozens of pictures were the damage wasn't obscructed by by trucks and spraying water?
Actually, I think it may be more that the loose change forums have so much info that whether or not it was an inside job is no longer much of a debate there; they're busy figuring out the inside job details.
Actually as unlikely as it sounds once a building of certain construction methods gets to a certain size there is only one way it collapses, in';t own footprint. Several groups have done countless simulations and everytime the building collapsed in on themselves.
And so you choose to completely ignore and not even comment on my suggestion that you read some REAL engineering textbooks in order to better understand the truth?????
Wow - you just dropped DOZENS of levels in my opinion of you!!!!! To borrow a phrase, "You can't handle the truth!" You are much, much more happier believing rumors and some outright lies.
Pity - what a waste of a human mind!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That is without doubt, the most dumbfuck thing you have ever said on these forums.
The experts on the Loose Change forum have proven that all of science, all demolition and civil engineering experts got it wrong?
I've given up on him, Kenny, and suggest you do the same. It's just not worth the effort of typing to try and change the mind of an individual who prefers the lies and fantasies of others over the truth. What a waste!!:bugeye:
Ganymede
Valued Senior Member
Kenny is a spook, he will pontificate the official story until infinity and beyond.
Ganymede
Valued Senior Member
Source please, thank you in advance.
People are going to search for conspiracies every time something controversial happens. From JFK to 9/11, you are going to have your "kooks" that claim to see an inside job no matter what. What is most ironic about them is that they will dismiss evidences contrary to their beliefs, no matter the source! So we get to a point with these people where, using 9/11 as an example, they would not believe that the buildings collapsed due to the planes even if the most respected engineer in the world told them so.
Here is what Truthers need to know.
1) The wreckage from the sites was studied by independent groups, not simply governmental "spooks". They came to the same conclusion as the government did.
2) The Loose Change folks have demonstrated their fundamental lack of knowledge on the technical issues of 9/11. One of their biggest "Gotcha!" plays was how one of the major airlines added cellphone "towers" to their planes. The LC people claimed that this was roundabout proof that the phone calls made on 9/11 from the planes to the ground were not possible. Unfortunately, they didn't do any research into the field before making this claim, because cellphones have always worked during flights, and the addition of the towers was so the signal was more reliable, not to make calls possible.
3) Just because there were safeguards in the elevator systems does not mean they were perfect, and none of them were built to maintain their safeguards following such a catastrophic impact. The elevator shafts were destroyed on multiple floors, so a fireball making its way from the impact site to the basement is not a stretch. Also, it fits in perfectly with what was reported by folks in the basement.
4) Just because the buildings were built to withstand the direct impact of Boeing 727, it does not mean that they actually would. Also worth noting is that the planes that hit the towers were much larger, taking the tower's safeguarding again out of the picture.
5) Who and How? Those are the two questions you must ask yourself if you honestly believe that the towers (including 7) were dropped by planted explosives. There is only one account of a building being shut down for the weekend prior to 9/11, and despite how the Truthers have spun it, the shutdown was only for the top half (or maybe it was a third) of one building. There simply was no time for any crews to plant explosives in the building. Second, Who? Who the hell would have done this work? You can't get government operatives to do this kind of work--it requires skilled craftsmen. Who, exactly, would have done such a thing?
6) Conspiracies are hard to keep secret. Let's assume that it all was a government set-up, OK? How in the name of God did this manage to remain a secret? Like I just said, the demolition would have required hours of preparation by a demolition crew, so we're talking about a lot of people here...how did they all keep it such a well-guarded secret? Truth is, they didn't. Because there is no secret. You're actually willing to believe that dozens--maybe hundreds--of people managed to stay silent on what would be the biggest crime in the history of the nation...? C'mon. Someone would have gotten a case of the Guilties, and confessed. People rob a bank, they can't help but tell somebody; people commit a murder, they can't help but tell somebody. And yet here, in what you are proposing to be the biggest cover-up in history, nobody's talking?
If there was a crime of 9/11, it was that our government ignored the warnings, failed to sure-up our defenses, and failed to act in a timely manner when we knew there were more hijacked planes in the air. The fact that we never took the threat of terrorism seriously is the crime.
Here is what Truthers need to know.
1) The wreckage from the sites was studied by independent groups, not simply governmental "spooks". They came to the same conclusion as the government did.
2) The Loose Change folks have demonstrated their fundamental lack of knowledge on the technical issues of 9/11. One of their biggest "Gotcha!" plays was how one of the major airlines added cellphone "towers" to their planes. The LC people claimed that this was roundabout proof that the phone calls made on 9/11 from the planes to the ground were not possible. Unfortunately, they didn't do any research into the field before making this claim, because cellphones have always worked during flights, and the addition of the towers was so the signal was more reliable, not to make calls possible.
3) Just because there were safeguards in the elevator systems does not mean they were perfect, and none of them were built to maintain their safeguards following such a catastrophic impact. The elevator shafts were destroyed on multiple floors, so a fireball making its way from the impact site to the basement is not a stretch. Also, it fits in perfectly with what was reported by folks in the basement.
4) Just because the buildings were built to withstand the direct impact of Boeing 727, it does not mean that they actually would. Also worth noting is that the planes that hit the towers were much larger, taking the tower's safeguarding again out of the picture.
5) Who and How? Those are the two questions you must ask yourself if you honestly believe that the towers (including 7) were dropped by planted explosives. There is only one account of a building being shut down for the weekend prior to 9/11, and despite how the Truthers have spun it, the shutdown was only for the top half (or maybe it was a third) of one building. There simply was no time for any crews to plant explosives in the building. Second, Who? Who the hell would have done this work? You can't get government operatives to do this kind of work--it requires skilled craftsmen. Who, exactly, would have done such a thing?
6) Conspiracies are hard to keep secret. Let's assume that it all was a government set-up, OK? How in the name of God did this manage to remain a secret? Like I just said, the demolition would have required hours of preparation by a demolition crew, so we're talking about a lot of people here...how did they all keep it such a well-guarded secret? Truth is, they didn't. Because there is no secret. You're actually willing to believe that dozens--maybe hundreds--of people managed to stay silent on what would be the biggest crime in the history of the nation...? C'mon. Someone would have gotten a case of the Guilties, and confessed. People rob a bank, they can't help but tell somebody; people commit a murder, they can't help but tell somebody. And yet here, in what you are proposing to be the biggest cover-up in history, nobody's talking?
If there was a crime of 9/11, it was that our government ignored the warnings, failed to sure-up our defenses, and failed to act in a timely manner when we knew there were more hijacked planes in the air. The fact that we never took the threat of terrorism seriously is the crime.
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
This is the central and most important point of 911. scott3x and others do their nation and the world a great disservice by pretending anything else.
Ganymede
Valued Senior Member
Wow, you're not looking at the facts objectively. Norad executed 67 intercepts in the year of 2001 prior to 911. To say they were unprepared or incompetent isn't consistent with the facts.
Ganymede
Valued Senior Member
What a crock of shit, please provide the source of these independent investigations done on the wreckage.
Obviously you haven't, if you did, you know that American Airlines has invested millions of dollars into in-flight cellphone technology. 3 years after 911.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/biztravel/2004-07-19-aircells_x.htm
Also, can you please explain why the former Solicitor General Ted Olsen lied about receiving call from his wife Barabara Olson. Here's the official record of all phone calls that were made from Flight 93.
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/flights/P200055.html
The basement workers said they heard the explosions before the plane hit. Please learn the facts before you continue to make a fool of yourself.
At first he thought it was a generator that had exploded. But the cement walls in the office cracked from the explosion. "When I heard the sound of the explosion, the floor beneath my feet vibrated, the walls started cracking and everything started shaking." said Rodriguez, who was crowded together with fourteen other people in the office including Anthony Saltamachia, supervisor for the American Maintenance Company.
Just seconds later there was another explosion way above which made the building oscillate momentarily. This, he was later told, was a plane hitting the 90th floor
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/articles/article.html?id=7762
Wrong again, a 727 would of hit the the WTC with more kenetic force then a 757 by it being lighter and traveling faster.
6
It's easy to keep a secret actually. If it wasn't, then every other competing country would have the same Military weapon systems that America has.
"Five months before the September 11 attacks, US military planners suggested a war game to practise a response to a terrorist attack using a commercial airliner flown into the Pentagon, but senior officers rejected the scenario as "too unrealistic".
http://tinyurl.com/6cptaf
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
Based upon the information I have available in the public domain and upon analyses by parties in whom I have a high level of confidence in I believe I bring a good level of objectivity to the issue.
I have absolutely no idea what you mean to convey by your second sentence. I know of no word 'executed', the word 'executed' does not sit well in the context, so perhaps you would like to clarify.
Moreover, NORAD could have got a nice big Gold Star for their work and it would have damn all to do with my charge of US government incompetence. I am talking of a three way failure: of succesive administrations to recognise the importance of human intel; of a failure of the intelligence agencies to properly collect and assess available intelligence; of a failure of the government to act properly on such intelligence as was available.
When Rodriguez is your main source for this false claim, you are in trouble. Rodriguez only started making the claim that bombs were used in the basement since 2005. Four years after the fact.
Rodriguez has exploited 9/11 and been able to earn a living out of it, and the only way he has been able to do so is because he changed his story and lied.
Here is a list of Rodriguez's lies as detailed by Mark Roberts:
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2675200&postcount=76
Haven't we already discussed your cartoon physics before? If it is lighter, even if it travels a little bit faster, how does that increase it's kinetic energy? A 767 has a slightly lower top speed but is significantly larger and heavier. So if anything the 767 would have more kinetic energy, or much the same.
This is not the first time you state 757's hit the WTC when it was in fact two 767's. I don't know if this is an honest mistake on your part, or yet more deliberate deception.
Probably because they are in top secret facilities. To carry out demolition operations in 267 floors of busy public office space is a completely different story.
"Five months before the September 11 attacks, US military planners suggested a war game to practise a response to a terrorist attack using a commercial airliner flown into the Pentagon, but senior officers rejected the scenario as "too unrealistic".
http://tinyurl.com/6cptaf
Wow, you never tire of being a deceitful prick, do you?
An accidental plane crash was just one of many drills carried out. Why would they need a drill for an accidental plane crash in or near the Pentagon? Simple... because the Pentagon is in the flightpath of the Reagan National Airport which is less than a mile away. And I'm pretty sure it was 11 months prior to 9/11 rather than 5 months.
Ganymede
Valued Senior Member
No, you just said that the only explanation you'll accept is incompetence. Like I said, zero objectivity.
Ganymede
Valued Senior Member
Here's an disputable fact about you official story subscribers. You can't allow the evidence to make you insults for you, you have to use everything but the evidence to insult someone. When I'm debating, I allow the evidence to insult people. Example: what proof do you have that Ted Olson received a call from his wife Barbara, besides his omission? You're on the clock, this should be easy for you to prove with the phone records that are available.
- Status