9/11 [split topic]

[Mr_Simnock]

this is one of those folk Neil rather naively calls 'an alternative voice' and not some bored cunt to be rid of at the first sight

[Wolf8312]

Wolf seems nice enough.  Like my brother who won't shut his geggy about the New World Order (which must be getting on a bit by this point).  A lot of consp---- um, events philosophers tend to get co-opted by dodgy racial beliefs, though.  What's your theory on the idea that higher-up Jews were told to stay at home that day?

Thanks for your patronizing support! As for Jewish complicity I honestly suspect that stuff (dancing israelis etc) is just bait. But honestly I have no idea either way.

[chveik]

But honestly I have no idea either way.

this forum doesn't owe you any explanations.

[Mister Six]

I could sort of believe that elements within the government and CIA, variously thinking of financial gain, a boost to military/intelligence spending, and/or annihilating troublesome elements in the Middle East, might deliberately allow an existing terrorist plot to take place in a Pearl Harbor-type way.

But the idea that the whole thing was coordinated by the government just seems laughable. And the idea that the towers were deliberately destroyed even dumber.

On the last point, I always think: why? Two planes - shit, one plane -  hitting the twin Towers would be more than enough justification to go stomping about on Afghan farmers' heads. The towers don't need to collapse. So think about how risky it is to plant explosive charges at strategic points in the structure of two of New York's most heavily populated buildings - and you can't just pile some bombs up against a wall, that shit needs to be drilled into the concrete - wire them up to detonate correctly, then wait for the planes to hit without anyone discovering all the tampering. It's mad. Just obviously fucking stupid on the absolute face of it.

EDIT: no offence, wolf, if you believe that. I didn't bother reading that first post. But come on.

[Wolf8312]

Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse: So what you're saying is the missing passengers are all in Poland?

Say wut?

I watched the disaster live on television. I tuned in shortly before the second plane hit after my little sister texted me from school wanting to know if something had happened in New York. Let me tell you, both Hamas and Hezbollah tried to claim responsibility before it was clarified that Al Queda (sp?) had done it. You don't think a bunch of Middle Eastern men could learn just enough about flying to disengage the autopilot, point a plane at a building and gun the engines?

Er?

the German people certainly knew the Jews were going bye-bye. They may have chosen to believe they were simply being relocated rather than being mass exterminated but they knew about concentration camps.

I agree.

[Wolf8312]

this forum doesn't owe you any explanations.

I wasn't saying that it did.

[Cold Meat Platter]

We didn't need any planes to justify war here, we just concocted some bullshit intelligence that was transparently lies even at the time and was proved so after we'd killed hundreds of thousands of people and smashed up their gaffs good and proper. Why would you kill thousands of your own citizens and fuck up the centre of your financial district causing millions of quidsworth of damage and tanking stocks if the shadowy elites are so money hungry? Was the previous attempt to blow up the WTC also a government job?

I'm "just asking questions," of course. I will not take in or do anything with the answers I get though.

[idunnosomename]

what the fuck is going on here

[Wolf8312]

this is one of those folk Neil rather naively calls 'an alternative voice' and not some bored cunt to be rid of at the first sight

Any debator or debating society would tell you that when one side starts resorting to name calling (while refusing to actually engage in any meaningful way with the other sides arguments) they lose.

I mean you imply that I am a clown and yet it is you who is purposefully attempting to derail the thread with irrelevant and trollish behaviour! I mean if what I am saying is so damned ridiculous then why do you persist in being here? Simply to show off how great you are, while bullying and abusing a stupid idiot because everyone else happens to be doing the same?

If you want to genuinely engage with me then answer the questions I posed earlier which have all been steadfastly ignored.

Again, this is a fire induced collapse

    Slow onset with large visible deformations
    Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)
    Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
    High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never collapsed

This is explosives

       Rapid onset of collapse
    Sounds of explosions
    Symmetrical structural failure
    Free-fall acceleration through the path of what was greatest resistance
    Imploded, collapsing completely, landing almost in its own footprint
    Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds

Do you disagree with the general outline of both catagories?

When you watch the buidlings come down-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HiuFpuOsksc (and yes this is only an example of one building)

Which catagory do you think the 3 WTC buildings fall under? Do they seem to conform more to the fire induced collapse, or the 'explosives' induced collapse?

So...

Do you agree that the buildings came down at close to free fall speed, and that building seven attained free fall for a little more than 3 seconds?

Do you agree the buildings fell straight down into their own footprints, symmetrically?

Do you agree/disagree that the buildings were pulverized in mid air?

Do you agree or disagree that the twin towers were 'blown out' laterally or do you claim that the buildings simply fell straight down?

Do you disagree with the claim that molten iron burned under the towers for months?

I mean we could go on and on, with this....

This is obviously becoming increasingly hostile, and aggressive (ad hominem) but again that too, is sadly par for the course whenever anyone poses questions about 911 online and on public forums...

[Wolf8312]

We didn't need any planes to justify war here, we just concocted some bullshit intelligence that was transparently lies even at the time and was proved so after we'd killed hundreds of thousands of people and smashed up their gaffs good and proper. Why would you kill thousands of your own citizens and fuck up the centre of your financial district causing millions of quidsworth of damage and tanking stocks if the shadowy elites are so money hungry? Was the previous attempt to blow up the WTC also a government job?

I'm "just asking questions," of course. I will not take in or do anything with the answers I get though.

I was talking about hard evidence. Not what you or I happen to think. I have done my best to answer every question other people have posed within reason.

[Jim Bob]

Any debator or debating society would tell you that when one side starts resorting to name calling (while refusing to actually engage in any meaningful way with the other sides arguments) they lose.

Horseshit.  People don't need to humour you and engage in debate, taking the time to talk you through point by point just why your theory is bollocks, not when the position that you're coming from is one of utter stupidity and willful ignorance.  The majority of people calling flat earthers 'morons' and 'idiots' are not on the losing side, just as the people insulting you and your absurd 9/11 theories are not losing the argument (an argument for a theory which you have concocted within your own mind, based upon a lack of understanding and basic logic, along with all the other conspiracy theorists).

[Cold Meat Platter]

what the fuck is going on here

sealioning

[Endicott]

Do you agree that the buildings came down at close to free fall speed, and that building seven attained free fall for a little more than 3 seconds?

All things fall because of acceleration due to gravity, which is a fixed rate. Do you start to see why I question your basic understanding of physics?

Do you agree the buildings fell straight down into their own footprints, symmetrically?

This, too, is not unusual.

I'm just trying to help, really. Try these videos. It's a long watch but I really do think you might benefit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWnfJ0-xXRE&list=PLyQSN7X0ro203puVhQsmCj9qhlFQ-As8e

[Wolf8312]

Horseshit.  People don't need to humour you and engage in debate, taking the time to talk you through point by point just why your theory is bollocks, not when the position that you're coming from is one of utter stupidity and willful ignorance.  The majority of people calling flat earthers 'morons' and 'idiots' are not on the losing side, just as the people insulting you and your absurd 9/11 theories are not losing the argument (an argument for a theory which you have concocted within your own mind, based upon a lack of understanding and basic logic, along with all the other conspiracy theorists).

And on that bombshell!

I am honestly not trying to convince people like yourself buddy, as I can obviously see from your whole attitude it would be a waste of time. It's not as if I will convince anyone (nor them me) by going round in circles like this.

Hopefully though some people out there will be willing to keep an open mind, and do their own research. I think this is as far as I am willing to go for now.

Like I said in the OP this book by doctor David Ray Griffin provides the best overview of the evidence. 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/New-Pearl-Harbor-Disturbing-Administration/dp/1844370364/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=david+ray+griffin&qid=1589575502&sr=8-3

https://www.ae911truth.org/

Oh and this is a link to Dr. J. Leroy Hulseys (Professor of Civil Engineering, University of Alaska Fairbanks) study of building 7 which concluded that building 7 could not have collapsed due to fire. You may attack the motives, integrity and competency of the good professor at your leisure...

Take care!

[Wolf8312]

All things fall because of acceleration due to gravity, which is a fixed rate. Do you start to see why I question your basic understanding of physics?

This, too, is not unusual.

I'm just trying to help, really. Try these videos. It's a long watch but I really do think you might benefit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWnfJ0-xXRE&list=PLyQSN7X0ro203puVhQsmCj9qhlFQ-As8e

Thanks I'll give them a look.

[Zetetic]

Not a single answer to my posts.

Fear?

Cowardice?

Fear?

[Wolf8312]

Not a single answer to my posts.

Fear?

Cowardice?

Fear?

You mean that picture of a pixie? :)

[chveik]

the only way to resolve this would to be fly two planes into two similar towers and see what happens.

[Cold Meat Platter]

Like I said in the OP this book by doctor David Ray Griffin provides the best overview of the evidence. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ray_Griffin

Not exactly writing within his domain of expertise, is he?

[idunnosomename]

the only way to resolve this would to be fly two planes into two similar towers and see what happens.

next dave gorman vehicle sorted

[jobotic]

Does "have an open mind" mean "agree with me" now?

Why did they do it Wolf9312? So they could do what they could have done anyway? Is the why not important?

I hate memes except this one

[Jim Bob]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ray_Griffin

Not exactly writing within his domain of expertise, is he?

Hahaha.  Classic.

"But, but, but... he's a professional" ~ Wolfy

Yeah, a qualified plumber is also a professional.  Doesn't mean I'm gonna give extra credence to the cunt, waffling on about the faked moon landings.  Just fix my tripping tap and fuck off out of it.

[Chollis]

can't believe it's been nearly 20 years since them slags smashed into the twin towers still freaks my nut out to this day

[Jim Bob]

Does "have an open mind" mean "agree with me" now?

It always does with this lot.  They think that they're "open minded" because they're on the fringes of society and hold unconventional views which go against the views of not only the masses but also the relevant experts within their fields.

He's no better, nor more credible, than the cunts who think that leprechauns, werewolves and Count Chocula are real.

Still, keep an open mind, yeah?

[Chollis]

which is the most credible conspiracy theory?

JFK
9/11
Moon Landing

[bgmnts]

JFK.

[chveik]

cryptozoology is great. the rest can fuck off, it's so tedious

[PlanktonSideburns]

No one's going to even reply to my druid theory then?

[Jim Bob]

which is the most credible conspiracy theory?

JFK
9/11
Moon Landing

I don't think this question would really fly on The Chase to be honest.  Ofcom would be inundated with complaints.

[Chollis]

JFK.

ye. purely because it would be a lot less work to cover-up than the other two.

settled then. JFK didn't happen. cheers all