9/11 [split topic]

[idunnosomename]

the twin towers would've made an excellent pair of beehives if america needed to house a huge amount of bees

[Mr_Simnock]

That is not hard evidence. It does not disprove the official narrative.

yep, this

[Wolf8312]

Fair enough, but that was an awful lot of text to shoot off to the choir. People shouldn't be insulting or abusing you. That said, your have avoided answering questions (such as why the wording of the "characteristics of destruction by fire" etc. only seems to lead to conspiratorially-minded sources, etc.) which may have wound people up a bit.

The same Media Lens who had one of their two staff go down to part-time hours, and had to send begging emails cos they could no longer afford access to LexisNexis or whatever it's called?

That said, your have avoided answering questions (such as why the wording of the "characteristics of destruction by fire" etc. only seems to lead to conspiratorially-minded sources, etc.) which may have wound people up a bit.

I personally believe the 'characteristics of destruction by fire' provided (by honest to god architects and engineers not myself) in earlier posts are logical and scientifically sound. I also honestly do believe that any open-minded person having watched the video provided below could not fail to at least recognize that the people therein (qualified engineers) are certainly not kooks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TL9oOdbBcEY

I did notice that some posters scoffed at the two scientific categories (fire induced collapse vs controlled demolition) presented, but I was not aware that anyone seriously attempted to refute what was said, point by point, or provide an alternative hypothesis.

In fact in earlier posts I tried strenuously to have people address this evidence (video evidence of the collapses themselves) though all such questions were ridiculed and steadfastly ignored, so I eventually just gave up.

I may have missed a post or two, but as by and large, I was reading a wall of unrelenting abuse, I think its understandable that I only skimmed such posts and choose not to engage with people whom I considered to be abusive and deeply unpleasant.

If I did receive any serious questions I soon found these were invariably just teeing up some other form of personal attack, and so quickly learned to avoid such people altogether and just present the evidence. Don't feed the trolls in other words...

Most posts ran along the lines of "YOU'RE A FUCKING IDIOT, BUT WHY DID THEY DO X, Y, OR Z HUH, HUH?..." and so frankly I didn't think such people deserved a response. After all I wouldn't engage with such people in real life (and for the most part very few would behave like that in person) either, if they spoke to me like that.

I don't follow media lens so much. But I can well imagine they have no other option but to send begging emails (as The Guardian does) as it must be especially difficult for them to stay afloat, what with the heretical position they take (which I applaud) in opposing the insidious propaganda spewing from the MSM. They have no doubt made a lot of enemies...

I will return to this thread periodically in future (when feeling machioistic!) mate, so will be happy to answer any further questions or debate this topic with you.

For now though I'm going to take a little rest!

Take care.

[thugler]

I personally believe the 'characteristics of destruction by fire' provided (by honest to god architects and engineers not myself) in earlier posts are logical and scientifically sound. I also honestly do believe that any open-minded person having watched the video provided below could not fail to at least recognize that the people therein (qualified engineers) are certainly not kooks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TL9oOdbBcEY

I did notice that some posters scoffed at the two scientific categories (fire induced collapse vs controlled demolition) presented, but I was not aware that anyone seriously attempted to refute what was said, point by point, or provide an alternative hypothesis.

In fact in earlier posts I tried strenuously to have people address this evidence (video evidence of the collapses themselves) though all such questions were ridiculed and steadfastly ignored, so I eventually just gave up.

I may have missed a post or two, but as by and large, I was reading a wall of unrelenting abuse, I think its understandable that I only skimmed such posts and choose not to engage with people whom I considered to be abusive and deeply unpleasant.

If I did receive any serious questions I soon found these were invariably just teeing up some other form of personal attack, and so quickly learned to avoid such people altogether and just present the evidence. Don't feed the trolls in other words...

Most posts ran along the lines of "YOU'RE A FUCKING IDIOT, BUT WHY DID THEY DO X, Y, OR Z HUH, HUH?..." and so frankly I didn't think such people deserved a response. After all I wouldn't engage with such people in real life (and for the most part very few would behave like that in person) either, if they spoke to me like that.

I don't follow media lens so much. But I can well imagine they have no other option but to send begging emails (as The Guardian does) as it must be especially difficult for them to stay afloat, what with the heretical position they take (which I applaud) in opposing the insidious propaganda spewing from the MSM. They have no doubt made a lot of enemies...

I will return to this thread periodically in future (when feeling machioistic!) mate, so will be happy to answer any further questions or debate this topic with you.

For now though I'm going to take a little rest!

Take care.

Don't think you understood the point at all.

If your 'characteristics of destruction by fire' / 'the two scientific categories' stuff only appears in conspiracy videos, then it's not worth anything as evidence. Surely if this is something generally agreed on by engineers as being the characteristics they would appear elsewhere. If you only provide conspiracy videos as evidence that you believe the people invoved are not kooks and in fact plenty legitimate we have nothing to work with. You have done no research outside of conspiracy videos. If this stuff was true it would be surely be available elsewhere and you could refer to it with legitimacy and no direct connection to the conspiracy stuff, it would then have far more credence.

This is why you got personal attacks, it's just very dumb to expect us to believe the stuff in videos we've all seen/read before for years. You've done none of the work for yourself and have just decided this is legitimate despite the vast majority of engineers etc having made it clear they don't believe this stuff as well as having gone into plenty of detail why it's not true (i believe some have made videos too). Now i think it's pretty doubtful that all or even many of these are paid shills in fear for their lives.

[NoSleep]

I'm more surprised that not a single person has broken ranks and confessed to participating in a supposedly massive covert operation.

There must have been quite some noise and disturbance installing explosives throughout the buildings for possibly months beforehand.

[sambwel]

Bloody hell. I leave the forum for a mere day and this thread has already expanded from 9 pages to 11

[FredNurke]

Someone crashed 2 pages into it... or did they???

[Chairman Yang]

I'm more surprised that not a single person has broken ranks and confessed to participating in a supposedly massive covert operation.

Maybe CIA accidentally knocked down the towers by leaning on them too hard and the embarrassment is what's keeping them quiet

[Captain Z]

Bloody hell. I leave the forum for a mere day and this thread has already expanded from 9 pages to 11

And me quoting this is post #9 on page 11. That's one hell of a coincidence...

[Shit Good Nose]

And me quoting this is post #9 on page 11. That's one hell of a coincidence...

So it was you all along.  Knew it.

[jobotic]

Bye Happy Sea lion. See you in a couple of weeks!

[steve98]

If I was siting in my open-plan office, high up in the WTC, and a guy started drilling into the main I-Beams beams supporting the building, I'd be concerned. Especially as he started working his way around all the I-Beams. I might not say anything at first cos, well, you don't like to, but eventually as the weeks go by and they start demolishing partition walls, wrapping the beams in that black plastic sheeting and wiring it all together, cat's cradle style, you'd say something "Excuse me, I'm no expert in building demolition but it looks to me as if you're affixing explosive charges to the buildings structure - you're not are you? I mean haha I know you're not, but what are you doing?"

[jobotic]

THEY DID IT AT NIGHT

[Dex Sawash]

They could have had a lot of  people run inside with bomb vests morning of

[TheBrownBottle]

They could have had a lot of  people run inside with bomb vests morning of

'Synchronise watches!  We have to blow up these vests at precisely the moment that the plane hits the building!'

[Cold Meat Platter]

Upside down post-mortem? 7,6

[sambwel]

Jokes aside, the real 9/11 conspiracy is that all the leading figures in the 9/11 truther community are linked to US military/intelligence bodies. Alex Jones for instance comes from a CIA family by his own admission. By spreading a bunch of sensational bullshit about jet fuel and steel beams and The Jews they distract those dissatisfied with the official 9/11 story from concerning themselves with the obvious, genuine issues around who directed the attacks (

Spoiler alert

the Saudis

[close]

) and why the attackers were left to go about their business unmolested (

Spoiler alert

the CIA protected them for... reasons?? this part left as an exercise for the reader

[close]

). In the intervening years enough information has come out for the public to be able to piece together a rather disturbing story but the damage is already done, conversations can no longer be had without the Infowars taint lingering, and anyway it was a long time ago shouldn't we just move on already?

[Operty1]

If I was siting in my open-plan office, high up in the WTC, and a guy started drilling into the main I-Beams beams supporting the building, I'd be concerned. Especially as he started working his way around all the I-Beams. I might not say anything at first cos, well, you don't like to, but eventually as the weeks go by and they start demolishing partition walls, wrapping the beams in that black plastic sheeting and wiring it all together, cat's cradle style, you'd say something "Excuse me, I'm no expert in building demolition but it looks to me as if you're affixing explosive charges to the buildings structure - you're not are you? I mean haha I know you're not, but what are you doing?"

Quite, let alone the miles of detonation chord needed, which I assume would have been plastered(?) into the walls. Considering the tragedy that happened at Didcot power station (where demolition precautions were made) it would almost seem absurd to believe that 50,000 workers and 200,000 daily visitors in a fully functioning, fully powered set of 3 buildings didn't accidentally set off any of the explosives, due to the nature of their volatility. But these were special explosives that themselves could somehow withstand a plane impact and sustained fire without self detonating.

Imagine being the person pressing the buttons to bring down the buildings. I wonder who that was? Sat in front of their team (I would imagine it wasn't just one person that did this?) watching people screaming, running from the buildings, and fire crews running in to help, and remorselessly blowing them all to pieces with his plunger 3 times. Now that's a stiff upper lip!

[steve98]

"We'll give it another 5 minutes, see if any more want to jump."

[Shit Good Nose]

(

Spoiler alert

the CIA protected them for... reasons?? this part left as an exercise for the reader

[close]

)

I thought it had already been well established and pretty much proven that the intelligence community had all of the heads-ups for some major attack happening months ahead of time, but departments didn't bother speaking to each other or share intel (because they never did) so you just had a load of idiots shrugging their shoulders and scratching their heads because they should have known better?

[sambwel]

That's the official story, as memorialised in rather naff teleseries The Looming Tower, and hey, I don't doubt that incompetence and lack of interagency communication was a factor, but even that story involves higher ups preventing intervention at various points, and the supposed reasons for that don't fully stack up for me (they just wanted to keep watching them and left it too long, plus some political complications?). In any case, the "they just did a big whoopsie" explanation doesn't cut it I think.

[Shit Good Nose]

That's the official story, as memorialised in rather naff teleseries The Looming Tower, and hey, I don't doubt that incompetence and lack of interagency communication was a factor, but even that story involves higher ups preventing intervention at various points, and the supposed reasons for that don't fully stack up for me (they just wanted to keep watching them and left it too long, plus some political complications?). In any case, the "they just did a big whoopsie" explanation doesn't cut it I think.

Dunno - I've worked in the civil service and whilst I obviously wasn't part of missing a massive terrorist attack on the Western world, I can totally believe a "big whoopsie" at that level happened just because too many people were too proud and egotistical.  That, personally, rings truer to me than any kind of calculated conspiracy.

[sambwel]

Well I should be very clear about this (particularly about the present topic) - I don't think of it so much as a calculated conspiracy. I think it was opportunism. It's a gut feeling that I obviously can't prove, and I also don't think it's of much import compared to what the powers that be definitely did do after 9/11 in terms of exploiting the opportunity to establish excessive national security powers, fuck around more than ever with the middle east, etc. But I do feel that someone in a high position of power smelled what Bin Laden et al were cooking and said to themselves 'well hang on now, this could be interesting, let's just wait and see how this plays out', and threw up a couple of strategic and readily deniable roadblocks for anyone wanting to jump in and stop them. Not a scenario that really requires a large group of people acting in concert and keeping it a secret or anything. But yeah, nothing I can prove either. I dunno.

[Glyn]

Dunno - I've worked in the civil service and whilst I obviously wasn't part of missing a massive terrorist attack on the Western world, I can totally believe a "big whoopsie" at that level happened just because too many people were too proud and egotistical.  That, personally, rings truer to me than any kind of calculated conspiracy.

Yep, don't forget 'too stupid' as well. I've only vaguely been involved in that area and it's a point I've mentioned a few times but it strikes me that if governments are so good at perfectly organising atrocities in complete silence then couldn't they use some of those skills in other areas like trying to get the odd IT or infrastructure project completed on time and under budget ?