This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Debunking 9/11

Jump to new
I’ve seen both, bad guys padding themselves on a back for doing a great job and denying that they have had anything to do with it.

Maybe messenger should take some responsibility for accuracy and above all sensitivity of some of the so called messages.
 
I have a feeling you'd do better here by offering people some ways to profit from 9/11 being an inside job. With the amount of evidence that exists, few people are willing to do serious research, and most just give up and assume it's a conspiracy theory without truth.
 
I can't accept that the three buildings just collapsed in a neat vertical pile without a helping demolition hand.

But putting aside my opinions I have to say I'm impressed with the depth and breadth of military officers, engineers, intelligence offers ect who have serious reservations about the 9/11 inquiry and are demanding a re examination.

IMO it's worth a read.


http://patriotsquestion911.com/#Deets
 
I feel bad for giving that post enough respect to respond, but anyway...

Why 'can't you accept' that two buildings collapsed vertically? (Which is the third anyway?) How many times have aeroplanes flown into massive skyscrapers and knocked them over sideways to make you think this one is so unusual? If you flew a few more into a few more buildings with different styles of architecture and engineering and all went sideways, then sure, it would start to seem odd. If it routinely happened and they never came down vertically then sure, it would look very suspicious, but if it happens once (and both towers were made the same so you'd expect similar results) and you 'can not accept' something which has never before happened didn't go the way you retrospectively predicted, clearly you are not being objective and just believing what you want to, stubbornly, rather than looking for evidence with an open, rational mind. Are you a civil engineer? No, I didn't think so.

Some people have strange methods for choosing what to believe.
 
There are a number of ad hominem comments in this thread.

Let's keep this discussion based on facts, logic, physics, engineering or whatever, and refrain from argumentative fallacies, particularly those used to insult individuals.
 
Sdajii said:
Why 'can't you accept' that two buildings collapsed vertically? (Which is the third anyway?)
Click to expand...
To start with your second question: The World Trade Center consisted of seven buildings. The other five are rarely referred to as they were smaller than the two landmarks.
Tower #7 was the third one to collapse, about 7 hours after the two big ones fell. It was "only" 47 storeys high, but because the brunt of debris from #1 and 2 fell on it, it was evacuated in time before more lives were lost when it finally crumbled.

see http://architecture.about.com/od/worldtradecenter/ss/twintowers_8.htm

As to the two landmarks collapsing vertically, anything else would be the real surprise. Consider this: Modern high-rise buildings are almost universally constructed around a central core that houses lifts and stairwells. The individual floors are hung out like branches off a tree trunk. That kind of construction gives the building considerable lateral strength, which absorbs even the strongest sideways impact and makes anything but vertical collapse practically impossible.
Think about it: The planes slammed into the towers at high velocity, yet the core withstood the impact easily. After the first impact, no lateral force applied; it must therefore be considered impossible that any later collapse should be anything but vertical. The only forces strong enough to cause the eventual collapse consisted of the sheer weight of those upper storeys dropping down vertically on the gap that had been created by the burning-out section where the planes had hit.

R.I.P. all who perished there; hopefully undisturbed by any further conspiracy theories.
 
Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.
Why have only '5 frames' of footage been released after all these years from the Pentagon cameras and why would such a multi billion-dollar, high value terrorist target have such crappy cameras with poor recordable frame rates?



http://www.judicialwatch.org/Flight77
 
There are a lot of conspiracy theorists on this forum aren't there..

basilio said:
I can't accept that the three buildings just collapsed in a neat vertical pile without a helping demolition hand.
Click to expand...

Have a look at Youtube, I have seen videos which explain and show how the building fell. It has to do with the way the building was built and the heat which weakened the supporting structures. One has a choice, they can believe this proposal (which is based on sound engineering principles), or they can believe a bomb was planted by the US government! I know whcih one is more fun and interesting (and therefore tempting) to believe, but fun and interesting doesn't necessarily coexist with truth! It's the boring explanation based on physics and engineering that's more likely to be truthful, because it's backed by some sound scientific principles!
 
basilio said:
I can't accept that the three buildings just collapsed in a neat vertical pile without a helping demolition hand.
Click to expand...

But, basilio, you must then accept that there was a conspiracy that would have required the cooperation and involvement of thousands of people, doing activities that would have required months of not just planning, but physical preparation (preparing a building for professional demolition).

Not only that, but you had to ensure that each and every person involved executed to perfection. Each and every person involved had to be completely in agreement with the motives of the organisers and would need to be sure that none of their loved ones or anyone else that they cared about were likely to be injured by the plan. Each and every person was to be informed of their task without any leak whatsoever to anyone not involved. No one in any of the 3 NY buildings not involved were to be in any way suspicious of people drilling holes in concrete supports to effect a professional demolition. The whole plan was to be contingent on twenty or so extremists first hijacking and slamming planes into those buildings, meaning they also had to be on board with the plan even though they were avowed enemies of the US government at the time.

You have to come up with a motive for the proponents of the plan that makes the slightest bit of sense. Remember, if anything were to go wrong, or any bit of this were to come out either before or after the deed, then everyone involved would at the least face life in prison if not the death penalty. All of these people had to be motivated so much by what they were to do, that you could be sure none of them would subsequently leak to the media some definitive proof that it was a conspiracy (surely that would be worth payments of millions alone).

Since the conspiracy theorists point the finger at the Bush administration or people within it, you also have to accept that possibly the most inept administration in the history of the US pulled of the most complex operation of all time with perfect precision.

I think it is far more reasonable to accept that a group of US hating extremists hijacked planes (plenty of evidence for this) and flew them into the NY building and the pentagon (which is seen on camera) and that the subsequent collapse of the building are completely in accordance with the laws of physics and principles of engineering (corroborated by many highly accredited engineers from all ver the world, with diverse political backgrounds).
 
just my own input in the conspiracy:
not sure if anyone blew up the towers but I recently listened to a podcast by the last person found alive after the collapse;
(as a surprising info, while in the first struck building, below the plane impact, she (and her coworkers) waited 1.5h before starting evacuating via the stairs, no alarm ever rang, and power was still on in half the floor!)
my "something is wrong there" comes here;
1) witnesses speak of an atrocious small (just after the collapse, what was that?
2) it is admitted around 2700 persons died (500 of them police/fire services/etc and only 1600 identified);
none of the floors above the impacts were able to be fully evacuated;
the two towers being 110 storeys high and the planes having hit at 93 and 77 levels; we have had the destruction of at least 17+33=50 storeys and "only" 2200 (max) office workers killed;
An average of 44 person per storey (max based on released figures); I do not know about you but this is extremely low as per the sardine standard we are used to here in Australia, for a mid morning full working week, and this is a max including ;

I will not discuss the pentagon "attack" as I believe this one is completely rigged: IE the attack might have happen but i doubt it was caused by a plane (US defense is afraid to admit the truth so what was it: missile, own weapon, we might never know)
anyway, this came at a good time for the weapon lobby and we have been (in Oz as well) pumping $ billions to bomb stone walls in Afghanistan since;
Some very happy consequences for the war mongers
The only thing we can be sure off, some poor guys died in the towers and many more are dying on both side since while we are all being brainwashed.
my 2 c worth or less
 

So the several eyewitness who saw a plane with United markings flying very low over Washington in the direction of the Pentagon were all lying? The plane which I believe took off from Boston, was known to be highjacked, just vanished without a trace with all its passengers? The video captured by the car park camera of something flying in to the Pentagon in the same direction as the eyewitnesses saw the plane heading was all rigged? No body saw any missile flying over Washington.

This was all done by the weapons lobby. They reckoned they could sell more weapons by killing hundreds of employees of their biggest customer, the Pentagon. And the top brass in the military were all ok with this. It was fine to have some of their friends and work colleagues massacred, so that the weapons lobby could sell more weapons.

(US defense is afraid to admit the truth so what was it: missile, own weapon, we might never know)
Click to expand...

They have already admitted what it was and we do know what it was. An identified hijacked airplane flown by identified islamic extremists, whose organisation admitted to the atrocity.
 

There is photography of debris from the pentagon crash site - there are debris with the Airline logo in these photos, and the bits piece together like a jigsaw puzzle...so there's ample evidence that this was a plane crash, unless you believe the photos are photoshopped etc.
 
Billyb said:
There are a lot of conspiracy theorists on this forum aren't there..
Have a look at Youtube,
Click to expand...

Have any of the people on this forum who call "conspiracy theory" watched the videos posted up?

Bellenuit your first post shows you have not bothered to watch the videos posted up. Otherwise you might have an idea as to why it seems so suss.

Billyb said:
I have seen videos which explain and show how the building fell
Click to expand...

Did you also watch the videos in the first three posts?

bellenuit said:
They have already admitted what it was and we do know what it was. An identified hijacked airplane flown by identified islamic extremists, whose organisation admitted to the atrocity.
Click to expand...

To this day I have not seen a quote by Al Qaeda admitting to the events. It's actually a question to this day, I believe, why hasn't any terrorist group claimed the event?


Where is your source? I haven't seen a photo of anything remotely showing a plane crash.

Here is a source for your convenience. Start at 16 seconds showing the scene.


Here's some pics for convenience.



 
Last edited by a moderator:
It looks like some on this forum are stuck to their views. I was wrong in my first post.

You should at least watch the videos before you comment.
 
Chris: It's difficult finding words to respond with other than "What the?"

You post pictures of columns having been cut with thermite? <deleted provocative remark>

You might notice that the pictures weren't taken immediately after the attack. The fact that there are large vehicles removing the rubble tells me that the picture was taken after a lot of work on clearing the site (including, say, cutting the columns) had been done. The fact that there are work crews operating might suggest, maybe, that the picture doesn't show the aftermath immediately after the collapse, and it might, maybe, have been taken some time after rescue and cleanup operations had been operating. Just maybe.
 
chrislp said:
Have any of the people on this forum who call "conspiracy theory" watched the videos posted up?

Bellenuit your first post shows you have not bothered to watch the videos posted up. Otherwise you might have an idea as to why it seems so suss.
Click to expand...

The thing is I have and spent hours and hours following the conspiracy theory particularly when it was a hot topic a few years back and there were many TV programs devoted to it.

But I spent much time checking out what scientists and engineers had to say on the allegations and in each and every case they gave convincing rebutals of the allegation. The conspiracy theorists rely on the fact that they only need make an allegation and couch it in some semi-scientific cloak and there will be thousands who will believe them. Some of the conspiracy proponents are in it to make money, some are politically or religiously motivated (Islamists and Right Wing Nutters who try to blame it all on the Jews and Islamists who are in complete denial that a muslim could be involved in such an atrocity - e.g. Malaysia's Mahathir) and many on the left who think everything must be some plan of Big Oil, Weapons Manufacturers, US Government in general (choose your pet hate).

I also found that even though the scientists and engineers addressed every one of the issues raised by the conspiracy proponents, the opposite was not true. Where there was one malevolent and many benign explanations, they CPs ignored the benign explanations and continued to suggest that their whacko theory was the only possible explanation.

In the end one has to choose between the several competing explanations and in my case it was a simple choice. The CPs explanation was in general pseudo science (in the sense that they ignored all facts that didn't support their case) and utterly implausible from both a motive for the conspiracy and the ability of it to be so meticulously carried out to perfection by what would have required thousands of people, including avowed enemies of those who were supposedly behind the conspiracy. On the other hand we saw the planes hit the towers, we know who flew them and where they had been trained, their organisations admitted responsibility and their motives were quiet consistent with everything those organisations proclaim as their goals.

Where is your source? I haven't seen a photo of anything remotely showing a plane crash.
Click to expand...

I know that wasn't addressed to me, but I just did a simple Google search on "Pentagon debris" and this is the very first hit on my list.

http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

FTX Crypto Fraud & Collapse
2
Replies
21
Views
4K
noirua
A Spanish investor looking for advice on Australian stocks
Replies
3
Views
2K
qldfrog
R
Best Books I Read Last Year
Replies
18
Views
4K
MDWake
All trading needs to cease for 14 days prior to Monday open in Sydney
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
11K
divs4ever
R
9 Rules for Superforecasting
Replies
2
Views
2K
RickyY
R
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...