the cold hard scientific facts: 9/11 was an inside job

POSTED BY: antimason
UPDATED: Sunday, January 14, 2007 09:17
VIEWED: 15211
PAGE 1 of 2

1 2 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE

ANTIMASON

Tuesday, January 9, 2007 11:24 PM (P)

this here is basically the video that removes all speculation and debate (

although certainly not the first and only)
and i challenge everybody to watch this video and still affirm (if not completely dissassociate)your allegience with the "establishment"

its no longer up for debate.. the governments account, as summarized by the 9/11 commission report, is SCIENTIFICALLY AND PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE! the only conclusion to be drawn from the evidence is that it was not arab "terrorists" with 'alqaeda'

if you want to debate me on this issue... specifically the events of that day, bring it on! Hero, Auraptor, Geezer...and those of you on the fence:

i want it to be clear by the end of this thread that only elements within the US government could have orchestrated 9/11. the relevence of this subject is so great that it alters all that is generally accepted among corporate mainstream media and popular history. unless you include the coverup of 9/11 as a premise to your worldview, along with its subsequent ramifications.. you will forever be stuck within the controlled paradigm of corporate media and its banking slavemasters

CITIZEN

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:05 AM (P)

I've seen no evidence that compels me to believe that the buildings collapsed from anything but by being hit by two fucking great big flying bombs.

I've seen plenty of evidence that requires the people masterminding and carrying off the various conspiracies to be super human.

Maybe satan is behind it, he's about the only guy who could, Bush sure as hell couldn't.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

KANEMAN

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:19 AM (P)

Antimason, how could 9/11 possibly have been a covered up inside job? I have an easier time believing in the sandman or tooth-fairy. The video does nothing to change my opinion that the buildings came down from anything other than, as citz put it, to big fucking flying bombs. You're better off hanging around some grassy knolls.

GLADIATOR32

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:26 AM (P)

I never believed 9/11 to be any kind of inside job. I found this website rather interesting:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html

It's heavy going, takes friggin ages to read, but pretty much destroys any conspiracy theorist's arguments...

-------------------------------

www.myspace.com/32dan32

HKCAVALIER

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:34 AM (P)

So, none of you three even bothered to watch the video, right?

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

RUE

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:42 AM (P)

This has nothing to do with anything except the photo - I like how they can use one toe-thumb to pick the other toe-thumb.

GLADIATOR32

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:49 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
So, none of you three even bothered to watch the video, right?

Nope, I didn't!

I just wanted to give my opinion regardless. I'm an idiot like that!

-------------------------------

www.myspace.com/32dan32

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:56 AM (P)

i notice that none of you are willing to debate me on the statistics.. you are still relying solely on your initial, emotional responses to the events and the immediate impressions implanted by the CIA and FBI- in collusion with the mainstream media networks

how about i toss out this one simple nugget for you to debate me on:

-the 9/11 commission report states that both towers collapsed to the ground in approximately 10 sec- or in other words the equivelant to FREE FALL speeds(ie in a vuccuum absent resistance). these buildings were 110 stories, and overengineered... with 47 steel collumns.. NOT HOLLOW like the 9/11 commission claims; thats lie #1. in order for the pancake theory to be true, fire alone would have had to compromise 80+ stories, symetrically in a matter of 10 seconds! if we were to estimate that it took half a second for each individual floor to fail..it should have taken 40 seconds to collapse... not 10! the other floors were perfectly intact guys... there is no possible explanation for this amount of energy to have been released from a minimal amount of jet fuel. that is just rediculous... and Bushs bro Marvin was the head of Securacom, the company in CHARGE of the Towers security!(convenient to strategically prewire the thermate that brought the towers down)

should we talk about FAA and Norad mysteriously loosing track of the airplanes?? i guess these 19 hijackers.. some of whom are still alive today, somehow made this happen by combining their box cutters and chanting allah or seomthing. they also were able to fly a 757 10 ft off the ground at 200 mph without any training, and make it entierly dissapear inside a newly renovated portion of the pentagon.. the most highly protected building in the country.

think about it and quit being so damn foolish

JONGSSTRAW

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:59 AM (P)

All these freakin' conspiracy assholes are farging insane..they're also fargin' traitors to America.

To even suggest such an absurd concept is quite an admission of their utter lack of reality, outright hatred of America, and an open testimonial to their pea-brained intellect...how fucking sad & pathetic!

GLADIATOR32

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 1:02 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
quit being so damn foolish

Awww, but being foolish is so damned fun!

Oh, in case y'all didn't realise, I'm way out of my intellectual depth here (at least I'm honest, right??), hence my resorting to sillyness. It's too late for this deep a discussion. I'm off to be bed, night guys, happy debating!

-------------------------------

www.myspace.com/32dan32

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 1:08 AM (P)

jongsstraw- so debate me on the facts?

youre the traitor.. you support the same terrorists who caused the murders of 9/11.. and you fearmonger and use those lies as an excuse to destroy american liberties and plunge us into global conlfict. keep goosestepping along with your neo Nazi idol Bush and his plan for a global government... youll soon be revealed for the traitors to AMerica that YOU are

KANEMAN

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 1:18 AM (P)

If the 9/11 commission report is wrong on the facts (how long it took the buildings to come down etc.) that would not surprise me, it is after all a government report and they are always full of inaccuracies. But to take the fact the the report has inaccuracies and say it must be an inside top run conspiracy is bull shit. The videos of the planes going into the buildings, videos of the buildings collapse, coupled with testimony from the people that were in the building is much greater evidence than what this clown says. Hey, just watch the videos... there are plenty out there. Or are the videos fake? The thousands of eye witnesses hypnotized? They are all incorrect as to what they saw and lived through because someone sees perceived natural law violations in a GOVERNMENT report? Duh!

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 1:20 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Gladiator32:
I never believed 9/11 to be any kind of inside job. I found this website rather interesting:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html

It's heavy going, takes friggin ages to read, but pretty much destroys any conspiracy theorist's arguments...

oh... you mean the article written by Benjamin Chertoff, Homeland security secretary Michael Chertoffs brother????

talk about a conflict of interests... get real!! why dont you just ask the CIA what they want you to believe; but while youre at it, research MKULTRA and other CIA black ops projects created to condition and propogate the masses through deliberate disinformation

GEEZER

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 1:27 AM (P)

Don't really have the hour to invest in watching the video right now, and the time to formulate an opinion and response. Maybe tomorrow.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 1:29 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by kaneman:
If the 9/11 commission report is wrong on the facts (how long it took the buildings to come down etc.) that would not surprise me, it is after all a government report and they are always full of inaccuracies.

like the warren commission for example... but inaccuracies is an understatement. more like "ommissions and distortions"

Quote:
But to take the fact the the report has inaccuracies and say it must be an inside top run conspiracy is bull shit.

no.. its not just the report- its the evidence that the report conveniently withheld.. or basically every peice of data those of us in the 9/11 truth movement seize onto, like the molten steel at the base of the towers weeks after the attacks(which is impossible from fire)- that kind of information contradicts the official claims, so you never heard about it! thats how deep this coverup goes

Quote:
The videos of the planes going into the buildings, videos of the buildings collapse, coupled with testimony from the people that were in the building is much greater evidence than what this clown says.

like the firemen who heard explosions in the towers, and their testimonies which were put under gag order from the DOD...or like the eye witnesses who saw something other then a commercial airliner hit the pentagon? those are accounts that you didnt hear for a reason!

Quote:
Hey, just watch the videos... there are plenty out there. Or are the videos fake? The thousands of eye witnesses hypnotized? They are all incorrect as to what they saw and lived through because someone sees perceived natural law violations in a GOVERNMENT report? Duh!

the government has not released ANY FILM OF THE PENTAGON CRASH; they even went as far as confiscating local servelience cameras... now why?? because witnesses never saw the claimed 757.... period

its a matter of details.. it really all comes down to the evidence, and whether you will actually measure it objectively or not

CITIZEN

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 1:32 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
So, none of you three even bothered to watch the video, right?

Yes, did you?

It's poorly reasoned and nothing I've not heard before.

"The WTC was designed to withstand plane strikes". Yeah from smaller aircraft taking off/landing, not larger aircraft travelling at maximum speed. I could go on and on, but there's nothing new here that hasn't been debunked a hundred times.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

BUFFALOPHIL

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 1:36 AM (P)

All you conspiracy theorists are looking for is attention.

I'll be honest, I have no opinion on how it happened, as I'm still in high school, but I do know it was a tragedy, and I do know that if Americans do the right thing it won't happen again.

That said, Americans hardly ever do the right thing, and this tragedy will likely repeat itself. I think anyone is foolish for arguing about it at all.

Bush's power will be gone shortly, Republicans have lost their power in congress, and soon we'll all be complaining about how dumb the democrats are (just like right now we're complaining about how dumb the republicans are).

So why do you conspiracy theorists continue the argument? To become famous, to have your voices heard, and the foolish American public will eat up anything that is fed to them.

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 1:38 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Citizen-

I've seen no evidence that compels me to believe that the buildings collapsed from anything but by being hit by two fucking great big flying bombs.

I've seen plenty of evidence that requires the people masterminding and carrying off the various conspiracies to be super human.

youre right... 19 hijackers, whos names werent on the flight manifests.. turned off all four flight data recorders and tracking systems, seized control with box cutters, and put COMMERCIAL AIRLINERS through maneuvers that trained airforce veterans would struggle with.. and hit 75% of their targets, *causing the first 3 highrises to fall in history due to fire- and an entire 757 to dissapear within the pentagon (without leaving a mark)

now that sounds super human! i guess if 19 cave dwelling disinfranchised muslims can do it, anythings possible right???????????????????

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 1:56 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by BuffaloPhil:

All you conspiracy theorists are looking for is attention.

exactly ... we're trying to wake people up to the truth! otherwise you will go on living your life believing that government is GOOD*- it is not, its purpose is control, and goverments will create terror if it leads to that end. you would never know this otherwise, because corporate media was long ago coopted by these same forces who have hijacked government.. so understand it is the common worldview and paradigm that we are resisting

Quote:
I'll be honest, I have no opinion on how it happened, as I'm still in high school, but I do know it was a tragedy, and I do know that if Americans do the right thing it won't happen again.

the "right thing" is exposing the true purpetrators behind 9/11.. otherwise it certainly will happen again. the "war on terror" will NEVER EVER EVER PREVENT TERRORISM... it is a front to implement every servelience method under the son, so that one day no one can do anything without being monitored. it wont be evil "islamofascists" behind this afront to freedom, it will be OUR OWN GOVERNMENT- if only we had the wisdom to recognize it as its happening in the present

Quote:
That said, Americans hardly ever do the right thing, and this tragedy will likely repeat itself. I think anyone is foolish for arguing about it at all.

i am not arguing, i am debating... a debate is an dialogue to uncover truth. those who wish to stifle debate, those in the "if your not with us your with the terrorists" crowd are the most anti- american people i can think of.. dont allow yourself to be conditioned like these neonazis

Quote:
Bush's power will be gone shortly, Republicans have lost their power in congress, and soon we'll all be complaining about how dumb the democrats are (just like right now we're complaining about how dumb the republicans are).

exactly.. because both arms are controlled by the same body of Bankers and elitist money runners. the whole system is flawed, and it must be exposed to the lights of public scrutiny before the status quo can be broken

Quote:
So why do you conspiracy theorists continue the argument? To become famous, to have your voices heard, and the foolish American public will eat up anything that is fed to them.

no, because protecting the liberties of innocent people is the right thing to do, and because avioding war and conflict is the right thing to do. these days its rare, but more vital than ever to put your name and life on the line for truth

6IXSTRINGJACK

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 2:04 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
All these freakin' conspiracy assholes are farging insane..they're also fargin' traitors to America.

To even suggest such an absurd concept is quite an admission of their utter lack of reality, outright hatred of America, and an open testimonial to their pea-brained intellect...how fucking sad & pathetic!

I don't think they're traitors. Our forefathers said that a public that believes whatever its government tells them diserve to be slaves. It is every American's patriotic duty to question things like this and not just believe what the media says.

I haven't made up my mind about 9/11. I want to give our Government the benefit of the doubt here, but there is compelling evidence against what we have been led to believe.

Perhaps, there were explosives rigged in the building at the time it was erected, for the very purpose of destroying the building in the fashion they went down. For the simple reason that towers that big would kill countless more people if they fell like a tree a lumberjack just cut down.

I think it's possible that the red button to self destruct the towers was pushed, even with people still trapped inside. That would be a tough call to make, but in that instance, whoever had to make that call had to balance the lives of the people still trapped in the building that may fall over at any minute and the lives of any of the people in the buildings nearby that may have toppled like dominoes.

Not to mention the money aspect of such a tragedy. New York would shut down for years if 20 or 30 buildings were destroyed.

If this were the case, do you think anybody would honestly tell the American people that the building had been destroyed in this fashion for this reason? They would have to hang somebody by their balls to appease the wrath of a people who do things like take great joy in watching Saddam hang on YouTube.

Don't go calling people questioning the "facts" traitors. Maybe you need to keep a more open mind and realize that in a world that's all about the bottom line above the people, maybe the big companies and big Government aren't always looking out for you. And perhaps, our Government isn't the same Government your grandparents grew up with and loved.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

SEVENPERCENT

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 2:17 AM (P)

A child could argue against the claim you made in this post.

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:

youre right... 19 hijackers, whos names werent on the flight manifests..

I haven't seen evidence that this was the case. But are last minute ticket purchases always on flight manifests?

Quote:
turned off all four flight data recorders and tracking systems, seized control with box cutters,

Flight personnel had up until this point been trained NOT TO RESIST hijackers, idiot. Normally they land in Cuba, no one is hurt, and everyone goes home. No one had done this before.

Quote:
and put COMMERCIAL AIRLINERS through maneuvers that trained airforce veterans would struggle with..

Since when did turning a plane become a complex maneuver? I'll bet 99% of this board could "turn joystick to the right" on a plane. It's not like they were doing loops in the air. I'd like to know what maneuvers were complex, since they weren't evading any attack aircraft. The plane was already in the air, and - if you had forgotten - the terrorists were trained pilots.

Quote:
and hit 75% of their targets,

They hit 2 110 story buildings and the pentagon. Have you been to NY? Or Washington? I have, both. I got lost in Washington near the pentagon once - it takes you 20 minutes to drive around it. It's not like they were aiming at a human target; it was like hitting barns with bb's.

Quote:
*causing the first 3 highrises to fall in history due to fire- and an entire 757 to dissapear within the pentagon (without leaving a mark)

They were hit by PLANES! Filled with FUEL! No shit they fell. It's like saying you saw someone shot with a cannon and were surprised it blew them in half. Why is it so hard to believe? And there are pics of debris outside the pentagon, which you seem to ignore (one of which has an engine and a wing in it).

Quote:
now that sounds super human! i guess if 19 cave dwelling disinfranchised muslims can do it, anythings possible right???????????????????

What of any of that sounds superhuman? It all sounds logical, to any rational person. To say though, that a crack team of agents infiltrated the towers on government order; planted explosives which would take down the towers; created a national disaster in plain sight; (some theorists believe) that some of the other passengers are still alive somewhere; no one involved has ever spoken out (they found all these people willling to betray their own country (i.e., everyone followed orders - what happened to those who said no, I won't do this - were they all killed?); scientists at reputable mags are in on it; video and pics have been altered; yet only a crack team of two people living in a basement looking on the web could figure it out?

What are you smoking?

------------------------------------------
"A revolution without dancing is no revolution at all." - V

Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.

BUFFALOPHIL

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 2:31 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:

exactly ... we're trying to wake people up to the truth! otherwise you will go on living your life believing that government is GOOD*-

Funny, I don't recall endorsing the statement that the government was "good". Although I can hardly stand the status quo, that doesn't mean I believe the government would be so foolish as to attack their own country.

However, the idea you are endorsing could hardly be considered "truth". Sevenpercent gives a good argument, I'll just go with what he said.

Quote:
the "right thing" is exposing the true purpetrators behind 9/11.. otherwise it certainly will happen again. the "war on terror" will NEVER EVER EVER PREVENT TERRORISM... it is a front to implement every servelience method under the son, so that one day no one can do anything without being monitored. it wont be evil "islamofascists" behind this afront to freedom, it will be OUR OWN GOVERNMENT- if only we had the wisdom to recognize it as its happening in the present

We shouldn't be in the middle-east, that much I agree on, and we certainly aren't helping to prevent terrorism by accidentally killing of thousands of innocents. We should go back to the isolationist days before WWI, at least then we couldn't be blamed for everything under the sun.

Quote:

i am not arguing, i am debating... a debate is an dialogue to uncover truth. those who wish to stifle debate, those in the "if your not with us your with the terrorists" crowd are the most anti- american people i can think of.. don't allow yourself to be conditioned like these neonazis

I'm just fine with debate. You're absolutely right on that, debate should not be stifled.

Quote:
exactly.. because both arms are controlled by the same body of Bankers and elitist money runners. the whole system is flawed, and it must be exposed to the lights of public scrutiny before the status quo can be broken

Agreed. The system is majorly flawed.

Quote:
no, because protecting the liberties of innocent people is the right thing to do, and because avioding war and conflict is the right thing to do. these days its rare, but more vital than ever to put your name and life on the line for truth

That, I can agree with. All by itself, that statement rules. Rights are important.

And I agree completely with Sevenpercent.

SEVENPERCENT

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:54 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by BuffaloPhil:

However, the idea you are endorsing could hardly be considered "truth". Sevenpercent gives a good argument, I'll just go with what he said.

Thanks for the compliment.

Look, Antimason, take a look at what you're asking anyone to believe-

If it was (as most people believe) as the news media says, you would need:

*1 Leader Type (to come up with the plan, or to organize)
*1 Lieutenant type (or contact type, to give direction)
*19 volunteers with a creative plan, which only included: Taking advantage of a weak airline system with lax security and policies, flight training with no oversight available to anyone with money, and finding a (huge) target (gigantic buildings).

It's not overly complex, or unimaginable.

To have a conspiracy of the magnitude you suggest, you need:

*A leader type capable of plotting the deaths of his own citizens
*A cabal of behind the scenes men with the same goals capable of getting that man into power
*A number of men to contact the people you'd need to carry out that type of mission (CIA chief, FBI chief, ATF chief, NSA chief, Homeland Sec chief)
*A number of specially trained personnel capable of laying the foundation (demolition experts, intelligence people, etc.), all willing to murder innocent people and say nothing
*A number of people paid off to not notice what those specialists are doing (building security, police, witnesses), all willing to murder innocents and say nothing
*Enough funds, persuasion, people to pay off scientists to "agree" to reports that the buildings could fall if they really couldn't; and to stay secret, basically covering up the murder of innocents and remaining silent
*Enough cash to bribe photographers to alter pictures of the aftereffects of the disasters; and to stay secret, basically covering up the murder of innocents and remaining silent
**(two stars for this one) Some survivors of the planes paid off enough to remain on a desert island somewhere, complicit in the murder of innocents (as some of the more radical have suggested)
**Logically, a number of people who could murder people who chose not to be complicit, thereby threatening the secrecy of the operation.

Yet, all of this able to be figured out by a couple guys using grainy video footage, posted to a website or two? And, after all the behind the scenes work needed to get that conspiracy off, them able to get that info out without being killed and that info vanishing?

What is suggested by the conspiracy theorists is so complex and improbable as to be ludicrous.

------------------------------------------
"A revolution without dancing is no revolution at all." - V

Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:37 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
i want it to be clear by the end of this thread that only elements within the US government could have orchestrated 9/11. the relevence of this subject is so great that it alters all that is generally accepted among corporate mainstream media and popular history. unless you include the coverup of 9/11 as a premise to your worldview, along with its subsequent ramifications.. you will forever be stuck within the controlled paradigm of corporate media and its banking slavemasters

Good. Unless we agree with Dr. Fetzer’s unsupported interpretation of events we are slaves? The typical argument of cultism. In order to free our minds, we must stop thinking for ourselves and let Dr. Fetzer think for us. For godsakes don’t drink the Kool-Aid, kids!!!

Dr. Fetzer is entitled to his opinion, but he doesn’t know what he’s talking about and he’s not even qualified to speculate on the topic. He’s a history professor, not a scientist. Few of the arguments he’s made are cogent or supportable and most of them are refuted by real scientists.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

AURAPTOR

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:46 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
So, none of you three even bothered to watch the video, right?

HKCavalier
.

After y2k, I made a vow to stop wasting my time on conspiracy theories and nut case claims. A brief list of claims that I won't bother even wasting my time 'looking into' -

The Earth is flat.

The Earth is only 6,000 - 10,000 yrs old. ( The timeline of the Bible is 100% accurate )

9/11 was an inside job

The Lochness Monster is a long lost Plesiosaur type sea lizard from the Mesozic era.

The 'face' on Mars was made by an ancient civilization.

The Holocaust didn't happen, or was vastly exaggerated.

We've been 'visited' by aliens from outter space.

There was more than 1 gunman that murdered JFK

Global warming is 'man made' , or even remotely influenced by mankind.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

HKCAVALIER

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:49 AM (P)

Hey 7%,

I mean no disrespect to Antimason, but I think the video he posted makes a much more troubling argument for conspiracy than his posts here do. I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts on the video, particularly the twenty minute clip from the documentary at the end.

I think what's needed for the kind of conspiracy Antimason is suggesting is true believers. People who think human survival against the international muslim conspiracy is worth taking extraordinary risks and suffering extraordinary loss of life to combat. People convinced that the smoking gun is gonna be a mushroom cloud, for instance. What you need is a central hub of corrupt folk willing to manipulate the hell out of these true believers.

I guess what you need is some kind of "secret society" or "secret government" made up of fanatics who think they alone know "what's really going on." Keepers of "secret knowledge," dangerous knowledge that would drive ordinary people mad if they were to grasp "the truth." Yes, elitists who think that ordinary people are inferior, irredemably confused, sheeple.

Look at the Final Solution. Corrupt cabal at it's center (Hitler and his inner circle had nothing but contempt for ordinary Germans), true believers doing a lot of the dirty work (propagandizing the general populace so their proper "masters" can go about the great business of history undisturbed), and still a huge number of "orders followers" who simply trusted their government. Did the Nazis have to pay off vast numbers of people to keep the destruction of the jews quiet?

We have a media that voluntarily censors itself where "national security" is at stake. And an "opposition party" who's interests are so vested in the status quo that the kind of governemental upheaval needed to deal with a Nazi-esque conspiracy in their midst is "unthinkable."

And we have no end of people who simply refuse to believe that such a thing is even possible. When such people are scientists, they come up with their best explanation for what "must have happened," free of charge. When they're in the media, they dismiss the "tin foil hat brigade" out of hand, free of charge. When they are members of the government, they keep any "wild supposition" they may have to themselves out of loyalty or the need for job security, free of charge. They just keep telling themselves, "It couldn't have happened, it couldn't have happened, it couldn't have happened."

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 5:12 AM (P)

For those people who would like to see what the experts have to say on the topic: here is the FAQ on the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) website which refutes every claim made in Dr. Fetzer’s interpretation.

NIST investigated the collapse, using actual science.

"In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the view."
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

HKCAVALIER

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 7:00 AM (P)

Hey Finn,

That is the best analysis of the WTC catastrophy that I have read. Thank you.

I'm so glad NIST does not endorse the "pancake theory," for instance. I thought Fetzer's debunking of that theory was one of his strongest points. It's also very gratifying to see an analysis of the calapse of the buildings which accounts specifically for the seismic record, and the "plumes of smoke." The only thing they missed from Fetzer's video (maybe I missed it) was the concrete "ash" in the lobbies "consistent with high explosives."

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

ANTHONYT

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 7:11 AM (P)

THE CONSPIRACY THEORISTS
------------------------------

Something has always bothered me about conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories generally follow a simple pattern.

1) Something happens. (Well, the theory has to be about something.)

2) Someone benefits from something happening/someone benefits from something happening but remaining secret.

3) A super-complex series of events is set in motion by the party referenced in #2 above which either caused #1, caused #1 to remain a secret, or caused #1 to be blamed on a third party.

Now, I'm not naive or a fool. I believe that things happen. Things happen every day. These things sometimes benefit someone, and sometimes knowledge about them would hurt someone. Sometimes people take steps to make things happen, sometimes people take staps to keep those things secret, and sometimes they take steps to see that someone else is blamed for it.

I'm with you so far, conspiracy theorists. In fact, most premeditated murders fall into the conspiracy formula rather nicely.

But why does #3 universally include a super-complex series of events? Why do the conspirators in these theories always use 999 mirrors and smoke machines when 1 will do quite adequately?

Let's take 9/11 as an example.

Supposedly we're dealing not with terrorists, but with highly trained operatives (or sometimes specially converted robot planes under military control.)

Sometimes, we're not dealing with passenger liners, but rather with special military airplanes.

Sometimes, we're not dealing with military airplanes, but rather with cruise missiles.

Sometimes, they add hundreds of specially made and secretly planted demolitions charges into the mix.

Now, this all seems needlessly complex to me. Rediculously so. Wouldn't it be easier to use intelligence sources to fund real terrorist cells to provide real terrorists to a real terrorist plot to steal and crash airliners? I mean, why the fuss? These people don't even need to know who they are working for.

And why would the conspirators need demolition charges or missiles or any of that nonsense? If airliners plummet into buildings, you've got stark raving terror and a cessation of air travel and all the disruption you could ask for. Whether the buildings collapse or not is immaterial. At least hundreds and possibly thousands of people will die anyway. All the disruption will happen anyway. No demolitions? No problem. We're still disrupted.

Just for once I'd like to hear a reasonable, plausible conspiracy theory. One that's simple and straightforward. You know... the kind that actually might happen.

Conspiracy theorists actually remind me of the Men In Black as they appeared in the television show The X-Files. In that show, when people saw real extra-terrestrial craft, they were visited by mysterious Men In Black. These men would drive up in mysterious black cars and wear mysterious black suits and black glasses and then they would tell the witness ominously, "What you saw was swamp gas reflecting light from the planet Venus!" And then they'd drive away. The story of the Men In Black was so rediculous that when the witness told the story about what he saw, and the following encounter with the Man In Black, he was laughed at. The addition of the rediculous detail of the Men In Black made the sighting unreasonably strange and stupid.

That's what Conspiracy Theorists do. They take a situation that might be believable, and then cock it up with rediculous complexity. Thus making the situation unbelievable.

Maybe they work for the government?

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

HKCAVALIER

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 7:30 AM (P)

Anthony, I'm with you on the general obsession of the avid conspiracy theorists to get pretty baroque with their explanations. And certainly, part of it has to do with serious oedipal weirdness about authority and evil--I mean, it can be much easier for the psyche to deal with a specific evil enemy than it is to deal with ambiguity and happenstance, incompetance and failure. People want explanations and they want romance.

But part of the wacky extravagance of some theories is due to the official stories just not holding water and having nothing else to go on. They know the official story is crap, but they have nothing solid with which to counter it. So, they let their imaginations go...where they go.

You lost me here though:

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Just for once I'd like to hear a reasonable, plausible conspiracy theory. One that's simple and straightforward. You know... the kind that actually might happen.

Okay, let's take a real conspiracy, a real doozie that did happen, like the Final Solution. By your reasoning, it would be acceptible that the Nazis made laws restricting jews' movement, maybe ghettoizing them. But roaving bands of killers in trucks rounding them up and shooting them in the back of the skull and throwing the bodies into mass graves? C'mon! But the conspiracy theorists don't stop there, oh no, the Nazis shipped jews--get this--to "extermination camps," gassed them in gas chambers disguised as showers and burned the evindence in giant ovens! That kind of thing would require a vast beaurocracy, hundreds if not thousands of people would have to be kept silent--it's just not possible.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

6IXSTRINGJACK

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 9:43 AM (P)

I find it quite amusing that nobody has responded to my previous post.......

You got a point Anthonyt. I look at some of the people who post here, and although I agree with much of what they say, I realize that if I take an extremeist and fanatical approach to it, I will be ignored, laughed at, ripped on, etc....

Unfortunately, I've been at work all night and I haven't been able to watch the video because we don't have audio here. I'm well aware of the many conspiracy theories regarding this and other similar incidents, such as Pearl Harbor.

A lot of it is hard to grasp, but being a person who has absolutely no faith in our Government's desire to protect its people, or at least no more faith that they do than they don't, I am inclined to stay somewhere in the middle on issues such as these, leaning more twoards the "Our Government is out to fuck us, or at least lies when it says it gives a shit" point of view. There are eleventy billion different things that could have happened that day. They could be reported and witheld many different ways. I won't pretend to know all of them or even attempt to discuss all of them.

Government is a business, like any other. The only difference is, America's Government is the biggest business in the world. Presidents and other PR people come and go, but the gears in the Pentagon and beyond never stop turning. For the many reasons that HKCAVALIER said and more, it would be very plausable for manevolent intentions stateside to be the root cause of 9/11, and I don't believe that it would have been all that difficult to cover up. I think the way things are run today just lend to things getting covered up almost by themselves.

The very fact that these ideas are scary are enough to turn 80% of the population away from them because, to tell you the truth, I wish I didn't ever think them myself. Sometimes I just want the blue pill. I find no enjoyment swimming against the tide, and there is no way in hell that I would ever want to be famous. I feel terrible for celebritys and the shit they put up with everyday.
---------------------------------------------

Anyways, you asked for it, so here's my theory:

As I stated above, perhaps there were explosives rigged in the building at the time it was erected, as a last resort self destruct mechanism created to minimize any impact any tragic event may have caused if the towers were to fall over and cause a dominoe effect thruought the city of New York. Think about how long it took just to clean a couple of wrecked buildings up. Now imagine 10, or 20 or 30 or more. Imagine all of those lives from the other buildings that could have been saved if proper safety measures, such as tactically placed and well hidden charges of C4 that would explode when certain conditions were met under the most dire of circumstances, had been put into place.

This may seem far fetched, but think about the buildings we're talking about. This wasn't your local McDonalds and Burger King. Look at the Skyline of New York and see how different it looks now. They were both very prominant and easy targets. Not only that, but we're talking two of the strongest symbols of Capitalism the world has ever known, if not the strongest. I'm going to go as far as to say that those towers were begging to be destroyed by outside forces with an agenda. Somebody had to know this, or at least be wary of the possibility of it, before the towers were built and business was conducted there. Higher ups in Big Gov didn't get where they were at because they were stupid or were severly lacking in foresight.

I've worked in small unmarked buildings in the middle of nowhere, or in industrial parks whose purposes are to do things that may or may not make them a target for outsiders. The people who chose these buildings had the foresight to pick small, inconspicuous and unmarked buildings that blend into the American landscape. I just can't swallow that the creators of the Towers and the people behind the curtain didn't have the same sage foresight.

Ye

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:50 AM (P)

Jack, i'm beginning to suspect we're related somehow - those exact thoughts occured to me when I saw em freefall.

My own take on it is the usual mishmash of what happens when you have a government involved at all - some folk caught wind of the plot, helped it along, some folk were just plain incompetent, some folk were playing petty power games instead of doin the job, and most of them never took it seriously, and some of those folk sandbagged the hell out of folk who woulda brought it up via the usual round of office politics, and a couple folk played on it for their own benefit and financial gain, before and after the fact.

I don't think we're lookin at one grand all-encompassing conspiracy, I think we're lookin at a whole crapload of nasty, petty little ones on top of each other due to the greedy, corrupt, self-serving nature of government officals.

This thing likely came to be in the same fashion an avalanche does, some pebble dropped somewhere, and it kept hittin other pebbles and whammo.

Did some folks "know" ?
Hell yes.
Did some folks "not know" ?
Of course.
Did some folks just out and out fumble the ball ?
Obviously.

A true FUBAR isn't usually the work of a great grand conspiracy, but rather more often a crapload of little petty ones playing off each other, and I really think that's what we should be looking for here.

You wanna find the folks who "knew" - find out who the shortsellers of airline stock were that day.. notice how quickly THAT investigation was buried, for example.

Malice, stupidity, incompetence, office politics, and good old fashioned beauracracy are the prime suspects - matching those to specific individuals isn't too hard once you break it down.

You think about it from that aspect, review the evidence, and you'll probably be able to figure out who was where in that chain of events.

Human nature betrayed us, is what it is.

-Frem

TATHRASEVENTEEN

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:50 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
this here is basically the video that removes all speculation and debate (
although certainly not the first and only)
and i challenge everybody to watch this video and still affirm (if not completely dissassociate)your allegience with the "establishment"

its no longer up for debate.. the governments account, as summarized by the 9/11 commission report, is SCIENTIFICALLY AND PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE! the only conclusion to be drawn from the evidence is that it was not arab "terrorists" with 'alqaeda'

if you want to debate me on this issue... specifically the events of that day, bring it on! Hero, Auraptor, Geezer...and those of you on the fence:

i want it to be clear by the end of this thread that only elements within the US government could have orchestrated 9/11. the relevence of this subject is so great that it alters all that is generally accepted among corporate mainstream media and popular history. unless you include the coverup of 9/11 as a premise to your worldview, along with its subsequent ramifications.. you will forever be stuck within the controlled paradigm of corporate media and its banking slavemasters

I'll make this quick: we'll never know. In fact, we'll be better off not knowing. Imagine what would happen if it were proved - ie actual government documents, not someone giving his opinion on YouTube (I know it was a recording of an actual speech) - what would happen next? I'm not saying the War On Terror is a good thing (far from it), but what do you think would happen to the world if it were known that the United States Government had some hand in orchestrating the events of that day?

CANTTAKESKY

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 2:15 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
That kind of thing would require a vast beaurocracy, hundreds if not thousands of people would have to be kept silent--it's just not possible.

That's a very good point, HK.

I spent a couple of weeks talking to an octogenarian dad of a high school classmate. A German citizen, he was drafted to serve in the German army during WWII. He said that during his service, there were rumors, here and there, that there were concentration camps killing Jews. But he and fellow soldiers just dismissed those rumors, even from purported eyewitnesses, as impossible conspiracy theories devised by people who want attention or were drunk or can't stand authority, etc. He explained that nobody believed that their own government would be capable of such extremes, until post-war exposure of those camps.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

----------
Disbelief in magic can force a poor soul into believing in government and business.
--Tom Robbins (1936 - )

CAUSAL

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 2:51 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
this here is basically the video that removes all speculation and debate (
although certainly not the first and only)
and i challenge everybody to watch this video and still affirm (if not completely dissassociate)your allegience with the "establishment"

its no longer up for debate.. the governments account, as summarized by the 9/11 commission report, is SCIENTIFICALLY AND PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE! the only conclusion to be drawn from the evidence is that it was not arab "terrorists" with 'alqaeda'

if you want to debate me on this issue... specifically the events of that day, bring it on! Hero, Auraptor, Geezer...and those of you on the fence:

i want it to be clear by the end of this thread that only elements within the US government could have orchestrated 9/11. the relevence of this subject is so great that it alters all that is generally accepted among corporate mainstream media and popular history. unless you include the coverup of 9/11 as a premise to your worldview, along with its subsequent ramifications.. you will forever be stuck within the controlled paradigm of corporate media and its banking slavemasters

I'd be interested to see what info you have on the faked Apollo moon landings.

And the Kennedy assassination.

And the UFO landings at Roswell.

And that the earth is flat.

And how Santa can drive that sleigh around the Earth in 24 hours.

Fascinating stuff, all.

________________________________________________________________________
Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets

I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.

Vote Firefly! http://www.richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

GEEZER

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:23 PM (P)

Well, I watched the video up until the point at which he started talking about "...the temperature at which steel melts...", and then I knew it was a waste of time. The temperature at which steel melts is of no consequence to the argument.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

GEEZER

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:25 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
I've seen no evidence that compels me to believe that the buildings collapsed from anything but by being hit by two fucking great big flying bombs.

I've seen plenty of evidence that requires the people masterminding and carrying off the various conspiracies to be super human.

Maybe satan is behind it, he's about the only guy who could, Bush sure as hell couldn't.

Stop the presses! Alert the media! Citizen and I agree 100% on something.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

HERO

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:55 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
i want it to be clear by the end of this thread that only elements within the US government could have orchestrated 9/11.

Damn! There goes my Canadian-Micronesia Cabal theory.

I think that you are ignoring the possibility that Islamic Terrorists infiltrated the WTC and set it to implode, then hyjacked the planes and crashed them into the WTC to cover up their real plot.

Or the really outside chance that superheated steel and damaged structural supports caused the upper floors to collapse and start a chain reaction that resulted in the complete destruction of both buildings.

I think the one thing we can all agree on is that, if it was an inside job...Nicholas Cage would make a good villian for the movie. Now I watched World Trade Center the movie and Cage's character does not "appear" to be involved. Maybe the director's cut will show it.

H

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:03 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Well, I watched the video up until the point at which he started talking about "...the temperature at which steel melts...", and then I knew it was a waste of time. The temperature at which steel melts is of no consequence to the argument.

Yep, classic ‘magic bullet’ bullshit. Ignore the details and force the issue to fit a single shallow intolerant argument in order to compel a preconceived notion. It’s a card trick. And Dr. Fetzer thinks we’re stupid enough to buy it. I actually watched the whole thing from beginning to end, and it just got more stupid as it when it along. I am now dumber for having wasted an hour of my life watching that nonsense.

For anyone else who wants to watch it, be my guess, but you would be better off reading the NIST FAQ, which will give you actual honest answers, not card tricks. (Or if you have time, you may read the NIST Final Report on the WTC collapse, which is very technical reading, but much more detailed.)

Now personally, I think it was aliens who hired Bigfoot to shoot the towers with the magic bullet.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

HERO

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 4:09 PM (P)

Hey! Its the Table of Contents to the 'Hitchhikers Guide to Crazy Talk'

Introduction by Barbara Steisand
Chapter 1: Moon Landings...Yeah Right
Chapter 2: Kennedy Really Killed by _________
Chapter 3: Elvis has not left the Building
Chapter 4: No Holocaust, All those Jews are still alive and secretly running the world from an underground bunker in Hollywood.
Chapter 5: 9/11...Not only did it never really happen, but the US Govt. is Responsible
Chapter 6: Fixed Elections since 1872
Chapter 7: Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton
Chapter 8: Reality TV and You
Chapter 9: They want your guns
Chapter 10: 101 Uses for Tin Foil
Chapter 11: Aliens from Space
Chapter 12: Aliens from Mexico
Chapter 14: Aliens from NAFTA (With a special analysis of Ross Perot's ears)
Chapter 15: What really happened to Chapter 13
Chapter 16: The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
Chapter 17: The Even Vaster Left Wing Conspiracy
Chapter 18: The Really Really Vast Centrist Conspiracy
Chapter 19: Contrails
Chapter 20: DUI Laws and PirateNews

Its goes on...its a long book, but doesn't really say anything.

H

ANTHONYT

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 5:21 PM (P)

"Okay, let's take a real conspiracy, a real doozie that did happen, like the Final Solution. By your reasoning, it would be acceptible that the Nazis made laws restricting jews' movement, maybe ghettoizing them. But roaving bands of killers in trucks rounding them up and shooting them in the back of the skull and throwing the bodies into mass graves? C'mon! But the conspiracy theorists don't stop there, oh no, the Nazis shipped jews--get this--to "extermination camps," gassed them in gas chambers disguised as showers and burned the evindence in giant ovens! That kind of thing would require a vast beaurocracy, hundreds if not thousands of people would have to be kept silent--it's just not possible.

HKCavalier"

Not that much of a conspiracy there, Cavalier. The general population had been told by the administration that the jews were a menace that needed to be erradicated. The jews were rounded up, placed into ghettos, then trucked or trained away, never to return. What happened next didn't take a large imagination or a leap of faith. The holocaust worked so well, not because the government lied to the people, but rather because the people were ready, able, and willing to lie to themselves.

Anyway, if a modern conspiracy theorist observed the holocaust story, it would go much differently.

"You see all those jews being taken away? I bet you think the government is getting rid of them. Not so. That would be the obvious impression, but in reality, they are being taken to a secret Semetic base in the Black Forest. They have seized control of the government, and are consolidating their power base. Meanwhile, we think the Jewish threat is ended. Hitler? He's in on it! You've seen his spirited posturing, you don't think that's serious, do you? He's so bombastic it's an obvious lie. He's working with them. He keeps the German citizens in the city, subject to firebombings, while the Jews are safe in their secret compound. While we think the jews are gone, they are really controlling everything... it's probably already too late."

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

CAUSAL

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 5:25 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Hey! Its the Table of Contents to the 'Hitchhikers Guide to Crazy Talk'

Introduction by Barbara Steisand
Chapter 1: Moon Landings...Yeah Right
Chapter 2: Kennedy Really Killed by _________
Chapter 3: Elvis has not left the Building
Chapter 4: No Holocaust, All those Jews are still alive and secretly running the world from an underground bunker in Hollywood.
Chapter 5: 9/11...Not only did it never really happen, but the US Govt. is Responsible
Chapter 6: Fixed Elections since 1872
Chapter 7: Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton
Chapter 8: Reality TV and You
Chapter 9: They want your guns
Chapter 10: 101 Uses for Tin Foil
Chapter 11: Aliens from Space
Chapter 12: Aliens from Mexico
Chapter 14: Aliens from NAFTA (With a special analysis of Ross Perot's ears)
Chapter 15: What really happened to Chapter 13
Chapter 16: The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
Chapter 17: The Even Vaster Left Wing Conspiracy
Chapter 18: The Really Really Vast Centrist Conspiracy
Chapter 19: Contrails
Chapter 20: DUI Laws and PirateNews

Its goes on...its a long book, but doesn't really say anything.

H

Personally, I'm not sure I approve of posts which cause people to snort Pepsi out their noses, then choke on triscuit crackers whilst pounding the table trying to get air back in lungs evacuated by hysterical laughter.

Seriously, Hero--I think I need to see a doctor!

________________________________________________________________________
Grand High Poobah of the Mythical Land of Iowa, and Keeper of State Secrets

I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.

Vote Firefly! http://www.richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

FLETCH2

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 6:04 PM (P)

This is magical thinking. When you look at a skyscraper it seems massive and extremely solid, it doesn't seem reasonable that a plane could damage it enough to bring it down. Once you decide that can't happen you have to find some explanation as to why it DID happen and from there things get screwy.

The problem with any structure is that it has to be able to support its own weight. For the kinds of buildings most of us live or work in, 2 or 3 story buildings, this is not an issue because the strength of the materials used greatly exceeds the forces being applied to it.

For high rise buildings though there is a problem. Usually strong means heavy, so the stronger you make a structure the heavier it is, the heavier it is the stronger it needs to be to support the extra weight. To build high you have to manage the weight and build a structure just strong enough to deal with the forces you expect to encounter. Over engineer too much and the weight/strength paradox escallates. In addition the stronger you build something the more space the structure takes up, space that you could be renting for profit.

So despite bing huge and solid looking the WTC was not massively stong, just as strong as it needed to be much like the airliner that hit it (aviation being another area where weight/stength is a tradeoff.) So despite appearences what you saw was what you got. You are right in thinking that a single plane could not destroy the WTC, but the weight of the WTC was more than capable of pulverising most of the materials used to construct it. All that was needed was something to greatly upset the ballence between the forces trying to tear the building appart and the structure holding it together.

MAVOURNEEN

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 6:04 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Causal:

And how Santa can drive that sleigh around the Earth in 24 hours.

Hate to break it to you, Causal...but if Santa starts his journey on the other side of the world, due to time zones he actually has 48 hours to complete his journey. Actually, very do-able considering his magical powers.

Side note to Hero - Your list is wonderful, but now my monitor has Fresca all over it.

Quote:
Chapter 20: DUI Laws and PirateNews

Classic stuff. Classic.

*wishes she could play a .wav file of Mr Burns saying "Excellent" in this place.

I'm sorry, what was the topic?

oh, yeah. September 11th.

Is there any way I can charge someone back for the hour of my time I just wasted? Where would I send the bill?

FIVVER

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 6:25 PM (P)

Antimason, this is for you...

Well I just got back from Roswell,
where the aliens have been.
And if you ask the feds the cause well,
they'll only lie again.

Now I'm hunted by the gumshoes
and I'm wanted by the cops.
Cause they think that I may be the guy
Making circles in the crops.

And I know that there's a conspiracy,
from the voices in my head.
Elvis lives it's clear to me
it's McCartney who is dead.

And if the Mars men
should come again,
and take me, I will go.
I will take a trip
on their rocket ship.
God bless the UFO.

Wish I could take credit for that but I'm not sure where I heard it.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 8:12 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Not that much of a conspiracy there, Cavalier. The general population had been told by the administration that the jews were a menace that needed to be erradicated. The jews were rounded up, placed into ghettos, then trucked or trained away, never to return. What happened next didn't take a large imagination or a leap of faith. The holocaust worked so well, not because the government lied to the people, but rather because the people were ready, able, and willing to lie to themselves.

Exactly. The Holocaust worked, because of conspiratorial thinking about the Jews. The Jew was always at the center of the ills that plagued the world, sitting in his big office in his big bank, conspiring with other wealthy Jews to steal the wealth and the livelihood of the German people. The Holocaust is, in fact, a perfect example of the damage that conspiracy theories can cause when taken to their natural extreme. And the reason why we need to avoid them, particularly when they're used to generalize groups of people.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

HERO

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 8:20 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
The Holocaust is, in fact, a perfect example of the damage that conspiracy theories can cause when taken to their natural extreme. And the reason why we need to avoid them, particularly when they're used to generalize groups of people.

Wow, thats extremely well stated and an excellent point and we, if not all mankind, are enriched by having it stated so well. Thus it has no place on this board.

Didn't you read the disclaimer...

"Abandon all thought ye who post here."

H

RUE

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 9:00 PM (P)

Back to WTC - until given solid evidence I tend toward LIHOP.

Though, I've changed my mind about Bush's potential involvement. I used to think Bush didn't know - he was so effin clueless in the class and scared spitless during his WH speech. OTOH it could be that the ones in the know told him something was going to happen, got him out of the way and clearly forgot to give him instructions. Maybe they didn't realize quite how brainless he was. And maybe they didn't tell him how BIG it was going to be and that's why he was so scaredy. So I've reversed my thinking to believe perhaps he did know something.

Many of the hijackers were Saudis. And the Bushes had close relations to the Saudi royal family and their intelligence sources. A word on the QT could easily have spread among a select group. It never came to light why Bush said he 'knew' it was bin Laden within days of the attack. But then why the US had to spend months combing through millions of papers and video tapes in Afghanistan trying to find proof.

At the same time the US was already plotting to invade Iraq because Iraq was breaking OPEC and the Saudi fortune. So the US was welcoming to the idea of an excuse to invade Iraq.

Like the Iraq war, I see 9/11 as the perfect storm of mendacity.

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 9:06 PM (P)

Quote:
originally posted by SevenPercent-

A child could argue against the claim you made in this post. I haven't seen evidence that this was the case. But are last minute ticket purchases always on flight manifests?

right... Alqaeda needed "years of planning" to fool the FAA, NORAD, take flight training, learn the ins-and outs of commercial airline systems... and then wait till the LAST MINUTE, the very morning, to buy the tickets? get real. Mohammed Atta even coincidentally left luggage behind in Boston with a conveneint list of all his accomplices and a terror "training manual".. what an F-cken JOKE! you believe that? you probably also believe that they really did find ATTAS passport, which somehow miraculously survived the intense fireball of the crash, that supposedly caused a 110 story building to melt and EXPLODE into its footprint in 10 sec.

i mean.. whos the conspiracy theorist? you believe an outright fantasy handed to you by the CIA and FBI.. the same people who created the problem to begin with

Quote:
Flight personnel had up until this point been trained NOT TO RESIST hijackers, idiot. Normally they land in Cuba, no one is hurt, and everyone goes home. No one had done this before.

yah.. and NORAD HAS NEVER BEFORE FAILED TO RESPOND TO 4 SEPERATE altered flights or hijackings either; so which is more relevant? what happened on the plane, or how the planes completely altered their courses, for over 45-60min, without being noticed! that takes government complicity, the hijackers ALONE COULD NOT HAVE PULLED IT OFF! unless your one of those who belief Osama, back in afghanistan in a cave, by computer uplink- shut off the transponders lol! what kind of sheep would have played it cool and let some alleged "hijacker" compromise the lives of an entire plane, equipped solely with some *box cutters? the more i say it out loud, the more utterly incredibly it sounds

Quote:
Since when did turning a plane become a complex maneuver? I'll bet 99% of this board could "turn joystick to the right" on a plane. It's not like they were doing loops in the air. I'd like to know what maneuvers were complex, since they weren't evading any attack aircraft. The plane was already in the air, and - if you had forgotten - the terrorists were trained pilots.

youve said all you need to say. hey.. go fly a 757 will ya!? just take a guess and engage any number of levers and guages and switches you see..and try to fly that at 200-300 mph and hit 75% of your targets.. blindly. its that easy??? the plane that hit the pentagon, in order for it to punch a whole in it like it did, would have had to fly 10ft off the ground, with an incredible descent angel, at a claimed 200+ mph! you think a hijacker with box cutters pulled this off.. when their own flight school instructors HERE IN AMERICA said they couldnt fly Cesnas. for a 757 thats almost phsyically impossible, with air resistance and turbulance, to do that.. and the first pictures of the impact show no damage to the pentagon lawn.. so it never 'skid'. theres just no way... and for a 50ton plane to nearly dissappear within the building, to the extent that the first firemen on scene admitted on camera that he 'didnt see any signs of a plane crash'... thats worth noting, ok

all im asking, is..lets actually investigate the evidence, shall we? thats normally what happens with a crime scene! the thing is with most of you the government and mass media very cleverly bipassed any investigation, and told you what the FBI and CIA and Whitehouse already knew and wanted you to believe; and you didnt question a bit of it

Quote:
They hit 2 110 story buildings and the pentagon.

and the buildings didnt collapse after they were hit... they just burned; AND NOT AT STEEL MELTING TEMPERATURES EITHER! their were people standing outside the impact marks.. how much more 'proof' do you need. all those other floors that were perfectly intact pulvarized in a matter of seconds.. that has NEVER happened before.

where was the

FLETCH2

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 9:21 PM (P)

Just a note.

about 20 years ago the BBC had a show called something like "you have control" where teams consisting of a random celeb and a member of the public where given control of vaious types of vehicle. The show finished every week with the teams on BA's Concorde simulator where they simulated the famous disaster movie scenario "the crew is taken sick, you must land the plane." Not one of these teams, who had never flown before, ever crashed in normal fight. A couple completely screwed the landing but most actually landed ok just overshot the runway. IIRC two teams made perfect landings.

The secret? The automatic pilot can fly the plane solo, all you need to do is give it a heading and it will take you where you want to go. Even Concordes flight landing aids, though not state of the art at that time, were good enough to help bring her down. All you needed to do was know what lines to keep the various pointers between, kids raised on modern video games would have no problems.

So flying a plane is not biggie. The difficult paty is getting airborne and landing, neither of which was a problem in this case.

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 9:33 PM (P)

this is really sad... im the only one who see's through this bull shit??

i suppose the patriot act was just a spontaneous response to 9/11... and homeland security, the Iraq war... i mean, granted it was all foretold in the 1997/2000 PNAC documents by the neonazis in office... but what a convenient tragedy to bring these plans out of the drawer and into fruition?? i mean.. Rice said we had no idea this could happen(even though they got a memo 5 days before)

and i guess Bush really is concerned about terrorism, and has as his first order of business to seal the borders huh?? right? i suppose this whole SPPA agenda to create a pan American union is a conspiracy?

open your eyes!

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 9:37 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
Just a note.

about 20 years ago the BBC had a show called something like "you have control" where teams consisting of a random celeb and a member of the public where given control of vaious types of vehicle. The show finished every week with the teams on BA's Concorde simulator where they simulated the famous disaster movie scenario "the crew is taken sick, you must land the plane." Not one of these teams, who had never flown before, ever crashed in normal fight. A couple completely screwed the landing but most actually landed ok just overshot the runway. IIRC two teams made perfect landings.

The secret? The automatic pilot can fly the plane solo, all you need to do is give it a heading and it will take you where you want to go. Even Concordes flight landing aids, though not state of the art at that time, were good enough to help bring her down. All you needed to do was know what lines to keep the various pointers between, kids raised on modern video games would have no problems.

So flying a plane is not biggie. The difficult paty is getting airborne and landing, neither of which was a problem in this case.

hmm.. well thats interesting!! i wish someone had said something before..

im gonna have to head on down to my local airport and apply for a Pilot position; ill list "Ace Combat" for SEGA Genesis as my work experience...

DJTOES

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 9:55 PM (P)

I watched the "Loose Change" video. really interesting. Rasies some questions about the crash at the Pentagon. If a plane crashed into it, then were are the impact marks from the wings? It also shows tiny explosions inside the two towers, which look like a controlled explosion for a demolistion. Now, don't get me wrong. 9/11 was a terrible tradgey. All those lives lost...horrible. And the real question is. Why would it be done on purpose?
But here's another tidbit to think about. My best friend, who's enlisted in the (U.S.) Air Force said that he was told that the military shot down flight 93. That the passengers did not take over and crash the plane. That is a very distrubing thought.

They ain't cuddly like me.

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:36 PM (P)

thats a good documentary... and all it does it raise questions, based on the evidence, that entirely contradicts the official story. apparently they sent search teams over an 8 mile radius looking for passengers and wreckage.. they were covering their tracks most likely.

the fact of the matter is, and no one here has any explanation for it otherwise, but Norman Minetta, secretary of the transportation, testified that CHeney refused to shoot down the aircraft headed towards the pentagon! see mr. Minettas testimony yourselves

SEVENPERCENT

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:40 PM (P)

I can't BELIEVE I'm responding to this. I was probably confused by the massive storm of agreement that happened when Geez agreed with 'Zen. Sigh.

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
right... Alqaeda needed "years of planning" to fool the FAA, NORAD, take flight training, learn the ins-and outs of commercial airline systems... and then wait till the LAST MINUTE, the very morning, to buy the tickets?

Let's go through this slowly. Maybe you aren't breathing when you read or post, and it's causing oxygen deprivation. They didn't have to "fool" anyone to do what they did. They took advantage of the system.
1. Poor baggage/carry-on screening let them slip knives on a plane.
2. Flight training was available to anyone in this country, with no oversight.
3. Buying a ticket ahead of time would get them placed on the manifest. Buying a ticket early might flag them on a watch list. After coming up with a plan, why would you chance ruining it by getting your name placed on a list before the last minute? You really are that dense, aren't you?

Quote:
get real. Mohammed Atta even coincidentally left luggage behind in Boston with a conveneint list of all his accomplices and a terror "training manual".. what an F-cken JOKE!

Why wouldn't he? Use your brain. If his mission was successful, would he ever NEED that luggage again? "Yes, let's remove all luggage and evidence so no one can find out that I've martyred myself against the great enemy! Who needs to know, besides, I may want that luggage in the afterlife!"

Quote:
which somehow miraculously survived the intense fireball of the crash, that supposedly caused a 110 story building to melt and EXPLODE into its footprint in 10 sec.

Light things tend to survive flaming impacts. They are blown out of the impact site. It's a fact of physics.

Quote:
i mean.. whos the conspiracy theorist?

Still you.

Quote:
yah.. and NORAD HAS NEVER BEFORE FAILED TO RESPOND TO 4 SEPERATE altered flights or hijackings either;

Uhhh...when had it happened before?

Quote:
that takes government complicity, the hijackers ALONE COULD NOT HAVE PULLED IT OFF!

It takes complacency. "Hey Dave - where's flight 93? I dunno Bill, I was getting a cup of coffee. Maybe the radar's broken. Give it 15 mins. or so, and try to call them."

Quote:
what kind of sheep would have played it cool and let some alleged "hijacker" compromise the lives of an entire plane, equipped solely with some *box cutters?

Ones that are trained to. Dear Christ, you just aren't getting it. They told pilots and stewardesses to comply with the requests of hijackers so no one would get hurt. It was standard policy. And, if you've never seen a razor cutter, they aren't toys. You can open someone up from top to bottom with a good slice - they're dangerous. The hijacker pulled a knife, said do what we tell you. The staff, as they were trained to, complied, thinking they would land in a foreign country and be safe. Who the fuck knew they were going to unload into a building?

Quote:
engage any number of levers and guages and switches you see..and try to fly that at 200-300 mph and hit 75% of your targets

THEY WERE TRAINED PILOTS! They had attended flight school! How hard is turning a plane for a trained pilot? You said they performed maneuvers an airforce vet couldn't have. How the fuck couldn't an airforce vet turn a plane? Turn stick to right, turn stick straight, decscend, aim at building. Where is the complex loop-de-loops you are suggesting they performed?

Quote:
when their own flight school instructors HERE IN AMERICA said they couldnt fly Cesnas.

Said they couldn't LAND cessnas worth a damn. Big difference. They didn't need to land them well.

Quote:
for a 757 thats almost phsyically impossible, with air resistance and turbulance,

If it's impossible, genius, how do planes even land? They come down at airspeeds of over 200 mph, at steep angles, and aim at runways smaller tha

SIMONWHO

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:43 PM (P)

As it hasn't been directly clarified in this thread - the reason why the terrorist's names (as well as a few others) aren't listed in the passenger manifold lists was due to the FAA not being able to contact their families (unsurprisingly) and therefore they couldn't be released. You can read the BBC's clarification here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.
html

I have no problem with people who believe conspiracy theories except for those who keep propogating that which they know to be untrue or irrelevant in the name of "creating a counter-myth". Yup, the fire wouldn't reach the temperature to melt steel. But it far surpassed the temperature at which steel loses its strength. And if I see that inaccurate mock-up of the plane's wingspan one more time...

What does it say about a person that they'd rather believe, in the face of overwhelming evidence, that it was the government of a country that committed mass murder rather than an organisation which identifies itself as being hellbent on destroying and killing Western nations?

FLETCH2

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:47 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:

hmm.. well thats interesting!! i wish someone had said something before..

im gonna have to head on down to my local airport and apply for a Pilot position; ill list "Ace Combat" for SEGA Genesis as my work experience...

Sarcasm just makes you look like a loser and does nothing to advance your case.

Fact is that most of the work done on airliners in the past 30 years has been to make them easier to fly. Why? because the easier it is the safer it is. People make mistakes when they are stressed and tired and most plane crashes are the result of pilot error. The easier and less stressfull it is the less risk of pilot error.

The reason you spend a lot of time and expense training pilots is not hand/eye co-ordination but the ability to effectively multitask and respond appropriately in crisis situations. Theoretically you can learn all you need to learn about the mechanics of flight with MS flight simulator the experience and training to deal with the bad situations is what a professional brings to the table.

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:06 PM (P)

you guys are all hopelessly lost.. but go on! keep believing in your the myth of alqaeda, let Bush erect concentration camps and patriot act 5 and 6, engage in ww3 in the middle east, destroy and bankrupt our nation... and tell me how many lives you saved from "terrorists" in the meantime?

if you believe that temperatures from fire weakened the structures, show me ONE OTHER INSTANCE IN HISTORY! show me any building thats ever collapsed other than a demolition, and lets see how IT FALLS! for the towers to fall at FREE FALL SPEEDS, your telling me that 10 stories collapsed, vanished, EVERY SECOND! every floor would have had to buckle and fail simultanously and symetrically... and not to mention explode!

believe what you want.. theres no stopping the American Nazi party anyway and all of you who want ww3 with the middle east and an end to American sovereignty

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:10 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:

Sarcasm just makes you look like a loser and does nothing to advance your case.

i wish i knew a commercial airline pilot.. id ask him why they bother going through flight school at all.. apparently its a complete waste of time aye?

their is so much historical evidence that points to a conspiracy by the world central banks(to financially enslave everyone), and ive told you all again and again.. but at the end of the day, youll take what Sean Hannity spews out as GOSPEL FACT! when theyll NEVER TOUCH on the subject(because they ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM NOW)

DJTOES

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:12 PM (P)

Look, I'm not saying the government did this. I don't want to believe in an evil government. there's no doubt in my mind that there are threats by terrorists againist my country or anyone elses. I'm not saying that 9/11 was an inside job. I was just saying that the Loose Change video gives intresting, yet very distrubing ideas. I don't know if what they say is true and there is no proof to back it up. I'm just pointing out that idea and what my friend said.

They ain't cuddly like me.

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:19 PM (P)

wake up.. it was a conspiracy, there is no conceivable way that alqaeda, acting alone, caused all the damage that day.. its simply not possible. Norman Minettas testimony, along with tons of pre9/11 intelligence make it clear that the intelligence agencies had prior knowledge of the attacks, and at the very least abetted the attacks to futher the damage and remove remaining evidence.

how did building 7 collapse?

why was the CIA running a drill, of the exact same scenario of flying hijacked planes into buildings, the VERY MORNING OF 9/11?? what are the odds? but more importanly .. what was the purpose? to confuse FAA NORAD MAYBE?? where are the damn tapes if we're being told the truth.. video tapes, flight recordings, EVERYTHING?? its hidden away, classified, because THEY DONT WANT US TO KNOW WHAT REALLY HAPPENED!

RUE

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:25 PM (P)

I agree with this critique: i suppose the patriot act was just a spontaneous response to 9/11...
I agree with this critique: and homeland security
I agree with this critique: the Iraq war...
I don't know about this critique: i mean, granted it was all foretold in the 1997/2000 PNAC documents by the neonazis in office...
I don't know about this critique: but what a convenient tragedy to bring these plans out of the drawer and into fruition??
I agree with this critique: i mean.. Rice said we had no idea this could happen(even though they got a memo 5 days before)

I agree with this critique: and i guess Bush really is concerned about terrorism
I agree with this critique: and has as his first order of business to seal the borders huh?? right?
I DISagree with this critique: i suppose this whole SPPA agenda to create a pan American union is a conspiracy?

I don't see where the Bush administration has to be in the middle of the plot to knowingly take advantage of it.

FLETCH2

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:25 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:

Sarcasm just makes you look like a loser and does nothing to advance your case.

i wish i knew a commercial airline pilot.. id ask him why he bothers going through flight school at all.. apparently its a complete waste of time aye?

If you continue to hang out with other losers then no, you wont get to meet interesting people. It's not my job to tell you how to increase your circle of friends but I believe taht if you stopped being a nutcase that would help.

However --

1) The hijackers attended flight school and tried to get time on a Boeing simulator. They had flight manuals for various kinds of commercial aircraft. So the idea that they walked into a cockpit with zero experience is bogus.

2) The difficult part of flying is takeoffs and landings something they didn't have to do.

3) It has been proved, on TV no less, that a complete novice with access to the autopilot can make a commercial jet go where he wants ONCE THE PLANE IS IN THE AIR.

4) Up until 9/11 aircraft crews where trained not to resist or antagonise hijackers. Prior to 9/11 most hijackers would have landed the plane somewhere. It was accepted that any action was better taken on the ground by trained forces than in the air by a flight crew principly trained in customer service.

5) You are an idiot.

ANTIMASON

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:38 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:

I have no problem with people who believe conspiracy theories except for those who keep propogating that which they know to be untrue or irrelevant in the name of "creating a counter-myth".

there are two theories about what happened on 9/11: one includes a rebel group of muslims, under the orchestration of alqaeda, and the other envolves members of the American military industrial complext. you have one variable, the terrorists... and then you have FAA, NORAD, Cheney in the underground bunker, the NYFD, the PENTAGON SECURITY SYSTEMS... youre theory cannot account for the massive failures on behalf of the governemnt; ours does. and our theory also gives a better explanation for the lies of Iraq, WMDs and 'democracy'

Quote:
Yup, the fire wouldn't reach the temperature to melt steel. But it far surpassed the temperature at which steel loses its strength. And if I see that inaccurate mock-up of the plane's wingspan one more time...

thats silly. your saying a few floors of fires caused 80+ stories to implode! im saying prove it? show me the physics.. its impossible. the plane alone damaged a few floors, not the entire structure; it would have caused a fragmented collapse, not a perfect controlled demolition

Quote:
What does it say about a person that they'd rather believe, in the face of overwhelming evidence, that it was the government of a country that committed mass murder rather than an organisation which identifies itself as being hellbent on destroying and killing Western nations?

it was Hitler and his Nazi henchmen who burned their Reichstag building, and blamed it on a political enemy, so that later he might become chancellor, enable fatherland security and all the other anti-terror like laws.. and galvanized his masses into one of the bloodiest wars ever. governments through out history have done this.. what makes you think now is any different, when the stakes are so high??

FLETCH2

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:46 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:

I don't see where the Bush administration has to be in the middle of the plot to knowingly take advantage of it.

It doesn't and that's where the theory falls apart. Huge conspiracies are hard to keep, the more people involved the greater the risk. This theory looks at the end result, is unable to believe that the actions taken on 9/11 could ahve brought about that result and then tries to construct a hypothasis that is a more "satisfactory answer."

Since the starting point is that something several orders of magnitude more distructive than a jet needed to be involved you have to introduce a huge conspiracy to explain it.

That is the point where most people turn off.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:52 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
the fact of the matter is, and no one here has any explanation for it otherwise, but Norman Minetta, secretary of the transportation, testified that CHeney refused to shoot down the aircraft headed towards the pentagon! see mr. Minettas testimony yourselves

So you have testimony that Cheney was reluctant to shoot down a plane full of innocent people. And that’s your evidence that Cheney wanted to kill thousands of other innocent people? You really have to be a true believer to think that this is convincing evidence for your case.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

AURAPTOR

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:56 PM (P)

I know, I'm breaking my own rule here, but it's a slow day.....

Quote:
antimason wrote:
Wednesday, January 10, 2007 13:19
wake up.. it was a conspiracy, there is no conceivable way that alqaeda, acting alone, caused all the damage that day.. its simply not possible

Why don't you just come out and say ...It's INCONCEIVABLE.!!. That way, we could respond in Inigo Montoya like fashion, - " You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." Fact is, despite your incredulity, that is EXACTLY what happened. 19 highly motivated, well financed and trained men took advantage of us in a way that most of the general populace thought never could happen. Which is EXACTLY why they did it. Because we weren't looking.

Quote:
how did building 7 collapse?

That's been addressed, time and time again. Only you ignore the facts.

Quote:
why was the CIA running a drill, of the exact same scenario of flying hijacked planes into buildings, the VERY MORNING OF 9/11??

You presume this is true ? Why ? Kooky internet web sites that offer nothing more than specious 'evidence'? What's so sad about dupes like you is that it diverts our attention away from what really DID happen. It allows you to ignore the evil that was committed against your country and to members of practically every nation on the planet.

Shame on you. Shame for your gullibility and ignorance.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

FLETCH2

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:58 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
thats silly. your saying a few floors of fires caused 80+ stories to implode! im saying prove it? show me the physics.. its impossible. the plane alone damaged a few floors, not the entire structure; it would have caused a fragmented collapse, not a perfect controlled demolition

This right here is your problem. You are unable to equate cause and effect so you feel the need to come up with a more "satisfying" answer.

For the sake of argument lets take an idealised version of your world view. Lets say that in each case only one floor half way up the building fails. What then happens to all of the structure above it? Where does it go? Where does it's weight and force bear? That's the problem. As I stated before and you ignored high rise buildings are not massively strong, they are only as strong as they need to be, there is little of any over engineering. The thing can stay up only if every structural element does it's job. If some of it fails and forces are transfered to neighbors that are not designed to carry that type of loading then they too will fail and the result is a catastrophic failure.

It looks like a demolition because it is a demolition. How do you think they destroy buildings commercially? Think they place a huge bomb in the middle and blow it up? They do it by using explosives in key points to take out enough structure that the building collapses under its own weight. That's exactly what the plane did in this case.

RAZZA

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:59 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
if you believe that temperatures from fire weakened the structures, show me ONE OTHER INSTANCE IN HISTORY!

Antimason:

Here is a link to a fire report from a high rise building fire in Philadelphia in 1991.

http://www.interfire.org/res_file/pdf/Tr-049.pdf

If you look at page 19 of the report you will see this:

Quote:
"Structural Conditions Observed

Prior to deciding to evacuate the building, firefighters noticed significant structural displacement occurring in the stair enclosures. A command officer indicated that cracks large enough to place a man’s fist through developed at one point. One of the granite exterior wall panels on the east stair enclosure was dislodged by the thermal expansion of the steel framing behind it. After the fire, there was evident significant structural damage to horizontal steel members and floor sections on most of the fire damaged floors. Beams and girders sagged and twisted -- some as much as three feet -- under severe fire exposures, and fissures developed in the reinforced concrete floor assemblies in many places. Despite this extraordinary exposure, the columns continued to support their loads without obvious damage."

There are also some good pictures of the sagging beams at the end of the report. Now, I'll grant you that this builing did not collapse, but it's steel beams were also not exposed to direct impact from a airplane traveling at 200+ miles per hour and a subsequent explosion and fire of much higher temperatures. Despite these facts, the builing's steel beams managed to sag up to 3 feet in some cases. By the way, this builing was eventually demolished because the city could not sell it to anyone willing to renovate the bottom part, then rebuild a new top half. I ask you, why would they have to rebuild a new top half? Could it be because it was structurally unstable? I'm not even going to get into the structural differences between the two buildings as I'm sure you would easily get bored and quickly dismiss whatever I have to say about it.

-----------------
"There is not such a cradle of democracy upon the earth as the Free Public Library, this republic of letters, where neither rank, office, nor wealth receives the slightest consideration."
---Andrew Carnegie

"Doing research on the Web is like using a library assembled piecemeal by pack rats and vandalized nightly."
---Roger Ebert

RAZZA

Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:59 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
if you believe that temperatures from fire weakened the structures, show me ONE OTHER INSTANCE IN HISTORY!

Antimason:

Here is a link to a fire report from a high rise building fire in Philadelphia in 1991.

http://www.interfire.org/res_file/pdf/Tr-049.pdf

If you look at page 19 of the report you will see this:

Quote:
"Structural Conditions Observed

Prior to deciding to evacuate the building, firefighters noticed significant structural displacement occurring in the stair enclosures. A command officer indicated that cracks large enough to place a man’s fist through developed at one point. One of the granite exterior wall panels on the east stair enclosure was dislodged by the thermal expansion of the steel framing behind it. After the fire, there was evident significant structural damage to horizontal steel members and floor sections on most of the fire damaged floors. Beams and girders sagged and twisted -- some as much as three feet -- under severe fire exposures, and fissures developed in the reinforced concrete floor assemblies in many places. Despite this extraordinary exposure, the columns continued to support their loads without obvious damage."

There are also some good pictures of the sagging beams at the end of the report. Now, I'll grant you that this building did not collapse, but it's steel beams were also not exposed to direct impact from a airplane traveling at 200+ miles per hour and a subsequent explosion and fire of much higher temperatures. Despite these facts, the building's steel beams managed to sag up to 3 feet in some cases. By the way, this builing was eventually demolished because the city could not sell it to anyone willing to renovate the bottom part, then rebuild a new top half. I ask you, why would they have to rebuild a new top half? Could it be because it was structurally unstable? I'm not even going to get into the structural differences between the two buildings as I'm sure you would easily get bored and quickly dismiss whatever I have to say about it.

-----------------
"There is not such a cradle of democracy upon the earth as the Free Public Library, this republic of letters, where neither rank, office, nor wealth receives the slightest consideration."
---Andrew Carnegie

"Doing research on the Web is like using a library assembled piecemeal by pack rats and vandalized nightly."
---Roger Ebert

AURAPTOR

Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:12 AM (P)

I know it's been said to death, and if not, it should have been, but the WTC Towers 1 and 2 were built in a radically different manner than previous sky scrapers. Using examples of other tall buildings doesn't translate to what happened on 9/11. But of course, anyone who had taken the time to study this primary factor would have never posted a silly thread about conspiracy theories on fff.net in the first place.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

BUFFALOPHIL

Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:18 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:

thats silly. your saying a few floors of fires caused 80+ stories to implode! im saying prove it? show me the physics.. its impossible. the plane alone damaged a few floors, not the entire structure; it would have caused a fragmented collapse, not a perfect controlled demolition

You idiot. All they had to do was hit the building near the middle. Then, the steel would soften, causing bending. The bending would increase, until the upper floors were forced to fall down on their center of gravity (i.e. straight down, jackhole); the top thirty to forty stories were falling down into the bottom sixty! Of course the damn building fell in less than twenty seconds! Dear God, why are you still propagating this crap?

"I cannot abide useless people."

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:20 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
thats silly. your saying a few floors of fires caused 80+ stories to implode! im saying prove it? show me the physics.. its impossible. the plane alone damaged a few floors, not the entire structure; it would have caused a fragmented collapse, not a perfect controlled demolition

“The structural analyses of this study on components, subsystem, isolated exterior walls and cores, and global models of the WTC1 and WTC2, as well as observations from photos and videos taken during events, showed that the tower collapses were caused by combined effects of the structural and thermal insulation damage from aircraft impact and the subsequent intense fires. [[]emphasis mine[]]”
-- Global Structural Analysis of the Response of the World Trade Center Towers to Impact Damage and fire, National Institute of Standards and Technology
http://wtc.nist.gov/oct05NCSTAR1-6index.htm

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

RAZZA

Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:20 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
how did building 7 collapse?

I assume you believe that WTC7 did not sustain significant damage and therefore, there was no reason for it to collapse. I submit that your assumptions of the damage are incorrect, and eyewitness accounts from firemen on the scene support my submission.

Quote:
Battalion Chief John Norman
Special Operations Command - 22 years

From there, we looked out at 7 World Trade Center again. You could see smoke, but no visible fire, and some damage to the south face. You couldn’t really see from where we were on the west face of the building, but at the edge of the south face you could see that it was very heavily damaged.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/norman.html

Quote:
Captain Chris Boyle
Engine 94 - 18 years

Boyle: ...on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.

Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?

Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.

Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?

Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/boyle.html

Quote:
...Captain Varriale told Chief Coloe and myself that 7 World Trade Center was badly damaged on the south side and definitely in danger of collapse. Chief Coloe said we were going to evacuate the collapse zone around 7 World Trade Center, which we did.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHI
C/9110462.PDF

Quote:
The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC Building 7]. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-634

Quote:
Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
Division 1 - 33 years

...also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?
Hayden: No, not right away, and that’s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn’t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html

So, I guess now your conspiracy theory also includes members of the NYFD who would be complicit in the loss of hundreds of their brethren! The scope of your conspiracy is truly broad, and any good conspiracist knows that the fewer people who know, the better!

-----------------
"There is not

RUE

Thursday, January 11, 2007 2:22 AM (P)

What I wonder about is how the Royal House of Saud got this information to Cheney, Rice et al while at the same time bypassing dubya on the exact details.

ANTHONYT

Thursday, January 11, 2007 2:35 AM (P)

"I don't see where the Bush administration has to be in the middle of the plot to knowingly take advantage of it."

Amen, brother. The #1 Political response to any event: "How can we spin this to our advantage?"

--Anthony

Edited to add: Also the #1 response of conspiracy theorists, apparently...

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

YINYANG

Thursday, January 11, 2007 4:47 AM (P)

Quote:
the cold hard scientific facts: 9/11 was an inside job

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 5:29 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2-

It doesn't and that's where the theory falls apart. Huge conspiracies are hard to keep, the more people involved the greater the risk.

sure buddy.. the US government has no secrets?? wheres your proof.. as its the crux of your arguement?? (i guess you wouldnt have proof.. because it there are secrets, theyd be SECRET!) get real

Quote:
This theory looks at the end result, is unable to believe that the actions taken on 9/11 could ahve brought about that result and then tries to construct a hypothasis that is a more "satisfactory answer."

no.. you were told it was Osama bin laden and 19 hijackers, when OSAMA HIMSELF admits, along with the FBIS OWN PAGE, that he had nothing to do with 9/11! you obviously havent seen the work of Peter Lance, who uncovered MASSIVE FBI and CIA coverups envolving members of alqaeda, and the connections with OUR OWN ESTABLISHMENT prior to 9/11. you can deny that evidence all day long.. it only furthers our theory and punches another whole in yours

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 5:34 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
So you have testimony that Cheney was reluctant to shoot down a plane full of innocent people. And that’s your evidence that Cheney wanted to kill thousands of other innocent people? You really have to be a true believer to think that this is convincing evidence for your case.

this is why you werent in charge: shoot down the plane and lose the passengers, or LOSE THE PLANE ANYWAY and lose the targeted impact zone aswell! think about it... it hurts the official rediculous theory because Cheney is shown allowing the terror attack to occur! just as their political motives dictated

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 5:43 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Why don't you just come out and say ...It's INCONCEIVABLE.!!. That way, we could respond in Inigo Montoya like fashion, - " You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." Fact is, despite your incredulity, that is EXACTLY what happened. 19 highly motivated, well financed and trained men took advantage of us in a way that most of the general populace thought never could happen. Which is EXACTLY why they did it. Because we weren't looking.

why dont you say what you really mean.. that the muslim world is a greater threat than communism and fascism ever was! you want me to believe that? show me the # of terrorist attacks, and prove to me that the RISK is proportionate with the TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS being spent right now in washington. your the fool for believing that radical Islam will ever convert the western world, thats the conspiracy theory

Quote:
That's been addressed, time and time again. Only you ignore the facts.

how then? lets debate it... since no plane hit it, why was it the FIRST EVER BUILDING TO implode into itself from fire, in a matter of hrs no less. maybe if a number of government offices werent located their, with specific intelligence records.. OH NEVER MIND! youre right... the terrorists magically brought that one down too!

Quote:
You presume this is true ? Why ? Kooky internet web sites that offer nothing more than specious 'evidence'? What's so sad about dupes like you is that it diverts our attention away from what really DID happen.

yah.. takes the attention off of this creation of alqaeda, and forces Bush and his Nazis to patroll the internet, tap domestic phone lines and remove habeaus corpus. you sheep... you stand their proudly, giving hail to your fascist leaders as they steal everything away from you- and you beg for more, while driveling your homages to them. one day, you all will learn the hard way that these men could give a f=ck less about you all

Quote:
It allows you to ignore the evil that was committed against your country and to members of practically every nation on the planet.

no.. it allows you to burry your head in the sand here in AMerica, and rest assured each night that big brother government will protect you; as it systematically removes every God given freedom allowed by the constitution. your such a socialist, you dont want a rule of law, you want mob rule..

Quote:
Shame on you. Shame for your gullibility and ignorance.

shame on you, for giving the Nazis in power the go ahead to rape the hell out of American traditions and place us in a never ending war.

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 5:58 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by BuffaloPhil:

You idiot. All they had to do was hit the building near the middle. Then, the steel would soften, causing bending. The bending would increase, until the upper floors were forced to fall down on their center of gravity (i.e. straight down, jackhole);

have you seen that happen personally?? no, thats what the government theorizes; i am no engineer, i doubt you are either.. but there are hundreds if not thousands of professionals in the field who have come out against the official story, so its not as cut and dry as you think. of course.. it eases your mind from actually being vigilante against government and protecting peoples rights the world over. out of sight out of mind! lets blame the muslims and be done with it.. ww3 here we come

Quote:
the top thirty to forty stories were falling down into the bottom sixty! Of course the damn building fell in less than twenty seconds! Dear God, why are you still propagating this crap?

if that helps you sleep better at night... in the meantime we'll just keep murdering Iraqis by the thousands and over turn ever last civil liberty until nothing happens without the government knowing about it. when you accept the '08 REAL ID act, and permantly have a RFID locator attached to your person.. you come back here and tell me that taking our liberties is for our own good. in 2010, when the NAFTA superhighway is completed and mexicans and canadians have free travel into the AMericas, you come back here and tell me that Bush cared about national security. youre the joke, you accept political events in a vacuum, as if they happen randomly- when some people, like Roosevelt for example, knew that NOTHING HAPPENS BY ACCIDENT IN POLITICS- that its all driven by a pre-existing agenda or motive. by the time you realize this, it will be too late for you to make a change

"I cannot abide useless people."

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 6:02 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by AnthonyT:
"I don't see where the Bush administration has to be in the middle of the plot to knowingly take advantage of it."

Amen, brother. The #1 Political response to any event: "How can we spin this to our advantage?"

--Anthony

you guys are sick.. do you think that makes you patriotic, because you defend the Bush family?? did you know they imbezzled money for HItler? or that they had business connections with the Bin Laden family? you simply do not understand the game! Bush didnt need to know anymore then to keep pushing the PNAC agenda

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 6:06 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by yinyang:

Quote:
antimason- the cold hard scientific facts: 9/11 was an inside job

you dont actually believe what the government tells you... do you? read Operation Northwoods documents from the 60's, where our own DoD PLANNED TO ATTACK AMERICANS AND STAGE IT AS A CUBAN TERROR EVENT to justify military action. they planned to murder INNOCENT AMERICANS! straight from the governments mouth.. but youll come on here and tell me im crazy, because I ACTUALLY LOOKED INTO IT! what a bunch of sheeple- Hitler would have loved people like you all

FLETCH2

Thursday, January 11, 2007 6:09 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
So you have testimony that Cheney was reluctant to shoot down a plane full of innocent people. And that’s your evidence that Cheney wanted to kill thousands of other innocent people? You really have to be a true believer to think that this is convincing evidence for your case.

this is why you werent in charge: shoot down the plane and lose the passengers, or LOSE THE PLANE ANYWAY and lose the targeted impact zone aswell! think about it... it hurts the official rediculous theory because Cheney is shown allowing the terror attack to occur! just as their political motives dictated

So you would just kill them without hesitation? Glad you'll never be in charge of anything important. It would scare me if it was an easy decison.

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 6:15 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
thats silly. your saying a few floors of fires caused 80+ stories to implode! im saying prove it? show me the physics.. its impossible. the plane alone damaged a few floors, not the entire structure; it would have caused a fragmented collapse, not a perfect controlled demolition
“The structural analyses of this study on components, subsystem, isolated exterior walls and cores, and global models of the WTC1 and WTC2, as well as observations from photos and videos taken during events, showed that the tower collapses were caused by combined effects of the structural and thermal insulation damage from aircraft impact and the subsequent intense fires. [[]emphasis mine[]]”
-- Global Structural Analysis of the Response of the World Trade Center Towers to Impact Damage and fire, National Institute of Standards and Technology
http://wtc.nist.gov/oct05NCSTAR1-6index.htm

thats what the national institute for propoganda and disinformation claims.. that doesnt make it proven. you can plead to me all day that the impact from the jet, followed by some MINIMAL JET FIRES that burned at most 1000degrees, for 1 hr, to have caused 110 stories to collapse at freefall speeds... but it would never have fallen that way. see your ignoring what even the designers of the building said, which is that they designed it so that a plane crash would MERELY PUNCTURE THE BUILDING! it never would have collapsed controllable into its own footprint- the odds are slim to nil. i suggest you read what the actual engineers have to say... but then no one has talked to the designers since 9.11, since the lead engineer died IN THE TOWERS THAT DAY.. conveniently!

FLETCH2

Thursday, January 11, 2007 6:17 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2-

It doesn't and that's where the theory falls apart. Huge conspiracies are hard to keep, the more people involved the greater the risk.

sure buddy.. the US government has no secrets?? wheres your proof.. and is the crux of your arguement?? get real

So what you are saying is that because it's imposible to prove a negative it must be true? Don't be an idiot.

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 6:19 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:

So you would just kill them without hesitation? Glad you'll never be in charge of anything important. It would scare me if it was an easy decison.

if Cheney cant stand the heat.. why was he suddenly given control over the emergency bunker(months before) to begin with??

you all are so consumed by your emotional feelings of that day and your initital preconceptions that you are blinded by any peice of evidence that suggests that, suprisingly, those attacks didnt catch every westerner in the world by suprise! you think it was out of the blue, when the facts are so clear as to be painfull.

FLETCH2

Thursday, January 11, 2007 6:21 AM (P)

The building was designed to take a hit from a 707 fluing at low speed lost in fog not a 757 with an almost full fuel load traveling at over 400mph.

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 6:22 AM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
The building was designed to take a hit from a 707 fluing at low speed lost in fog not a 757 with an almost full fuel load traveling at over 400mph.

full of fuel? apparently it was coasting when it almost landed at its intended destination, and turned completely around? i guess the people at FAA and NORAD were getting coffee too huh...

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 6:39 AM (P)

if there was NNOOOO PRIOR KNOWLEDGE, like Condi Rice and the President, and the whole of mass media mouthpieces claimed at the time, then explain why the CIA director george Tenet, and associated members were exposed as having committed insider trading the morning of 9.11 selling AA and united stocks short. why were their rumors in NY, literally ask NYers this, that something bad would happen down town- and to skip work at the towers that day. their are persistant reports of this prior knowledge, its all factual, google it... and it all points to prior knowlendge, yet its information that has no place in your official story, where "no one could possibly have imagined a plane being flown into a building"... when the CIA was running an IDENTICAL DRILL THE MORNING OF.

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 6:52 AM (P)

do you all understand why the declassified OPERATION NORTHWOODS documents are so important?/

it seems that most of you cannot seem to comprehend how American born leaders would commit criminal negligence and the indirect murder of other Americans, for any reason whatsover; so that creates a stumbling block between you and reality. the fact of the matter is, unless you are completely oblivious to prior history, THATS ALL WE'VE EVER KNOWN! and NORTHWOODS is the most obvious evidence of a prior attempt by our US governemnt, just 40 years ago, to kill AMericans under false flag terror events and blame it on cuban nationals; everything the CIA is known for in other countries, espionage and political coups and propoganda. if thats too vague for you, understand that the Pentagon joint cheifs approved it IN WRITING! look it up please.. because i cannot possibly cover(uncover) every lie and untruth propogated by the establishment; but i know it happens, im certainly not naive to that

FLETCH2

Thursday, January 11, 2007 7:26 AM (P)

You may be an idiot but I love the hat, is that real tinfoil? Glad to see you are a traditionalist.

Let's wind this back a little. You claim that the towers could not have fallen just through the impact of planes. Consequently you create an elaborate conspiracy that operates in order to demolish the towers. This in turn results in hundreds of co-conspiritors with the problems associated with such a large operation.

Even ignoring the fact that 1) it is possible to knock down a building with a plane and 2) the unlikelyhood that such a conspiracy could be maintained your theory has a far bigger problem. That problem is that according to your theory the ultimate objective of the attack is not to destroy the building but to create a political environment that could be used to inact legislation like the patriot act and start the Iraq war. I would contend that crashing the planes into the buildings alone would have achieved that objective, even if the buildings hadn't fallen the result would have been hundreds of deaths and millions of dollars of infrastructure damage. In many ways having the towers still standing would have served as a even better advertisement for the administrations policies since they would have been an even more visable symbol that America had been attacked. If we believe as you do that the majority of the added conspiritors are involved in some way with demolishing the buildings then why bother? You can acheive the same effect without demolition and the risk of discovery is less.

If you proposed the theory that members of the administration with the help of Saudi Intelligence organised an attack on the WTC using hijacked airliners that INADVERTANTLY destroyed the building, that would be a plausable theory because it involves less than 50 people. However, you can't propose that theory or even consider it even though it is more reasonable because you come to this argument unable to conceive that 19 people who are willing to die for a cause could destroy 2 enormous buildings. It is your inability to deal with that reality that causes you to imagine the huge conspiracy you see. It's magic thinking.

Let me tell you what's going on. If the accepted theory is accurate, if 19 determined well financed guys drawn from a group with less than 10,000 members could cause that much devistation then YOU can never ever feel safe again. Most professional sports clubs have more than 10,000 fans you could find 19 fanatics for almost any cause. It's unnerving, it's scarey and you don't want to live with those consequences. If on the other hand it is YOUR theory, if this kind of operation can only be done by the president of the US of A with the assistance of thousands of flunkies that actually makes you feel safer. You reason that it's hard to amass and use that level of force, the administration would have to use it sparingly as a result and thus your personal safety is assured. Further if it could be proved and Bush and Cheney end up in orange jumpsuits in some Federal stockade then you are shiny. After all if only the President can do this then it's easy to stop.

So that's the problem. Culture shock, the inability to deal with the idea that 19 random none entities could kill you and 2000 of your neighbours. The horrid realisation that the biggest military in the world can't nescessarily protect you from a determined enemy if he is willing to die to get you.

I can see why living a delusion is preferable.

RUE

Thursday, January 11, 2007 11:43 AM (P)

AM

I don't think I'm a dupe of the administration. And I tend towards thinking some people in the administration had at a minimum a general warning and kept silent for their own purposes.

As was mentioned earlier it would be very instructive to see who profited from pre-9/11 trading and who very specifically avoided airlines the week previous.

What I don't get is how whole organizations could have been in on it for a long time.

ARCLIGHT

Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:02 PM (P)

what a jack off.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Thursday, January 11, 2007 3:09 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
thats what the national institute for propoganda and disinformation claims.. that doesnt make it proven. you can plead to me all day that the impact from the jet, followed by some MINIMAL JET FIRES that burned at most 1000degrees, for 1 hr, to have caused 110 stories to collapse at freefall speeds... but it would never have fallen that way. see your ignoring what even the designers of the building said, which is that they designed it so that a plane crash would MERELY PUNCTURE THE BUILDING! it never would have collapsed controllable into its own footprint- the odds are slim to nil. i suggest you read what the actual engineers have to say... but then no one has talked to the designers since 9.11, since the lead engineer died IN THE TOWERS THAT DAY.. conveniently!

There is no “national institute for propaganda(sic) and disinformation.” That’s a product of your delusional fantasies. The agency in question is the National Institute of Standards and Technology. And the document I cited, the one you ignored, contains a detailed scientific structural analysis and computer simulation results that demonstrates conclusively that the accepted process of the collapse is not only possible, but probable. You’re obviously very committed to your fantasy.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 7:38 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
You may be an idiot but I love the hat, is that real tinfoil? Glad to see you are a traditionalist.

it sure is... its not as gaudy as your corporate media goggles.. but it works

Quote:
Let's wind this back a little. You claim that the towers could not have fallen just through the impact of planes. Consequently you create an elaborate conspiracy that operates in order to demolish the towers. This in turn results in hundreds of co-conspiritors with the problems associated with such a large operation.

first of all, you seem to aviod the evidence of prior knowledge, like executive order 199i, where Bush told the FBI to BACK OFF BIN LADENS TRAIL. why is this important? because our claim is that these 19 hijackers were patsies, trained at AMerican bases, with American visas.. but most importantly with federal protection. and of course... you neglect the significance of OPERATION NORTHWOODS< where our government IN WRITING PROPOSED TO ATTACK AMERICANS THEMSELVES! their are too many variables to consider, that simply giving 19 hijackers the credit for changing America forever is just too gullible and unrealistic - when after 9/11, our federal government received untold TRILLIONS in money to do whatever the f-ck they pleased, carte blanche... because Americans bought the lie hook -line and sinker

Quote:
Even ignoring the fact that 1) it is possible to knock down a building with a plane

sure, 4 planes(3 hits), 4 buildings, 75% of their targets, all completely destroyed but the pentagon... it may be possible, but WHAT ARE THE ODDS??? seriously..

Quote:
2) the unlikelyhood that such a conspiracy could be maintained your theory has a far bigger problem.

alqaeda can pull off conspiracies, but intelligence agencies with their multi=billion dollar budgets and compartmentalized security clearances cant.. right

Quote:
That problem is that according to your theory the ultimate objective of the attack is not to destroy the building but to create a political environment that could be used to inact legislation like the patriot act and start the Iraq war. I would contend that crashing the planes into the buildings alone would have achieved that objective, even if the buildings hadn't fallen the result would have been hundreds of deaths and millions of dollars of infrastructure damage.

if the buildings hadnt collapsed, you think we'd be where we are today?? 9/11 barely works for the "war on terror", and has almost no relevance to Iraq... if the buildings hadnt collapsed and shocked the hell out of americans, it would have been just another oklahoma city bombing. besides.. they needed to destroy the evidence.. like the plane reconstructions. (since we might find out they were military craft)

Quote:
In many ways having the towers still standing would have served as a even better advertisement for the administrations policies since they would have been an even more visable symbol that America had been attacked. If we believe as you do that the majority of the added conspiritors are involved in some way with demolishing the buildings then why bother?

to remove the evidence.. and as Hitler said 'it is much easier to believe a big lie than a small one'

Quote:
You can acheive the same effect without demolition and the risk of discovery is less.

no, the risk of uncovering the evidence would have been greater, without 2 110 story buildings nearly vaporizing. the bottome line is Bushs bro Marvin and his company Securacom put those incendiary devices in the building, since mainstream news accounts even claim that scheduled 'maintance' closed down many of the floors prior to 9/11

Quote:
If you proposed the theory that members of the administration with the help of Saudi Intelligence organised an attack on the WTC using hijacked airliners that INADVERTANTLY destroyed the building, that would be a plausable theory because it involves less than 50 people.

saudis, israelis.. the bin laden family

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 7:44 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:
thats what the national institute for propoganda and disinformation claims.. that doesnt make it proven. you can plead to me all day that the impact from the jet, followed by some MINIMAL JET FIRES that burned at most 1000degrees, for 1 hr, to have caused 110 stories to collapse at freefall speeds... but it would never have fallen that way. see your ignoring what even the designers of the building said, which is that they designed it so that a plane crash would MERELY PUNCTURE THE BUILDING! it never would have collapsed controllable into its own footprint- the odds are slim to nil. i suggest you read what the actual engineers have to say... but then no one has talked to the designers since 9.11, since the lead engineer died IN THE TOWERS THAT DAY.. conveniently!
There is no “national institute for propaganda(sic) and disinformation.” That’s a product of your delusional fantasies. The agency in question is the National Institute of Standards and Technology. And the document I cited, the one you ignored, contains a detailed scientific structural analysis and computer simulation results that demonstrates conclusively that the accepted process of the collapse is not only possible, but probable. You’re obviously very committed to your fantasy.

yah.. my fantasy keeps me vigilante against lies that you are all too willing to endulge. what happened to the pentagon then friend?? wheres the plane? whers the footage? show it too me.. since WE ALL KNOW WHAT HAPPENED? im sure you can find clips of the impact, maybe some that the FBI stole from surrounding locations? theyve got to give them back sometime right?

i mean, if it was just a commercial airliner, what are they hiding that we havent seen before?? maybe something other than a 757... thats the joke: relying on scripted propoganda from the Pentagon, when they wont even show us the evidence themselves. some republic you arrogantly defend.. the same ones who lie to your face and steal your wealth

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 8:06 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
AM

I don't think I'm a dupe of the administration. And I tend towards thinking some people in the administration had at a minimum a general warning and kept silent for their own purposes.

friend whats the difference? if they knew, and allowed it to happen, then they are complicit, negligent, and exhibited criminal intent. there is probably an incredibly fine line between passively allowing something to occur, and taking part or profittting from it, and the fact that we have the whitehouses own game plan pre-9/11, the PNAC documents, which foretell everything that has happened the last 6 years, that says it all. to think that absolutely no one in government saw this coming.. well thats the fantasy and dillusion. we've been lied to yr after yr from this administration, about SS, the borders, WMDs and Iraq and domestic servelience... i am honostly baffled that people would STILL trust anything that the white house says, ESPECIALLY about 9/11 prior knowledge. these people are traitorous scum, and do not deserve any allegience whatsoever from anyone; theyve done nothing but destroy America

Quote:
As was mentioned earlier it would be very instructive to see who profited from pre-9/11 trading and who very specifically avoided airlines the week previous.

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/12_06_01_death_profits_pt1.h
tml
this is just one of many links that cover the same news event. this alone should blow any notion that our intelligence agencies were caught off guard with the attacks; when they knew full well, and actuall profitted, by receiving bloated budgets and increased authority. if that is all that is needed to gain more money and power, why not just skip the middle man and attack yourself..? believe me... its more common than anyone realizes

Quote:
What I don't get is how whole organizations could have been in on it for a long time.

because the CIA is an illegal creation to begin with... just like the Fed, and its front groups the CFR and Tri-Lateral commission. study the history of any one of these groups, and it should become clear to you that it is the mindset of the individual that initiates their selection into the conspiracy(if they were not already born into it via an elite family)

FLETCH2

Thursday, January 11, 2007 8:33 PM (P)

Quote:
Originally posted by antimason:

Quote:
Even ignoring the fact that 1) it is possible to knock down a building with a plane

sure, 3 planes, 4 buildings, 75% of their targets, all completely destroyed but the pentagon... it may be possible, but WHAT ARE THE ODDS??? seriously..

1) The Pentagon is a low rise building. The forces that tore the WTC apart were therefore not present.

2) When it was built the Pentagon was seriously over engineered because it was a military command center and a war was comming.

3) The Pentagon is MASSIVE, so large that it is one of only 2 buildings in the US to have it's own postal code.

Quote:

Quote:
2) the unlikelyhood that such a conspiracy could be maintained your theory has a far bigger problem.

alqaeda can pull off conspiracies, but intelligence agencies with their multi=billion dollar budgets and compartmentalized security clearances cant.. right

Exactly. There is a reason that terrorist units work in small cells because it is easier to keep a secret if fewer people know. The conspiracy you propose needs hundreds if not thousands of people to be involved that is a lot harder to do.

Quote:

Quote:
That problem is that according to your theory the ultimate objective of the attack is not to destroy the building but to create a political environment that could be used to inact legislation like the patriot act and start the Iraq war. I would contend that crashing the planes into the buildings alone would have achieved that objective, even if the buildings hadn't fallen the result would have been hundreds of deaths and millions of dollars of infrastructure damage.

if the buildings hadnt collapsed, you think we'd be where we are today?? 9/11 barely works for the "war on terror", and has almost no relevance to Iraq... if the buildings hadnt collapsed and shocked the hell out of americans, it would have been just another oklahoma city bombing. besides.. they needed to destroy the evidence.. like the plane reconstructions. (since we might find out they were military craft)

When were they military craft?

You see again where you over complicate things. If you crash jet airliners into buildings then you don't need the building to collapse to "cover up the evidence" because the evidence would support the established facts. What I think you are saying here is that you crash disguised military planes into the WTC to ensure their total destruction. That total destruction being nescessary to cover up the fact that they were hit by military planes? Man that is so stupid and redundant I don't know where to start.

Aw forget it.

Quote:

Quote:
In many ways having the towers still standing would have served as a even better advertisement for the administrations policies since they would have been an even more visable symbol that America had been attacked. If we believe as you do that the majority of the added conspiritors are involved in some way with demolishing the buildings then why bother?

to remove the evidence.. and as Hitler said "it is much easier to believe a big lie than a small one"

But if you really did crash an airliner into a building what evidence are you covering up?

Quote:

willing to die for what? Allah? id sure like to see Atta explain himself in the afterlife, when he is asked why he was seen at a strip club, wearing gold and drinking hard liquor just days prior to the attacks; im sure thats how a TRUE devout muslim becomes a martyr for his god

Part of the principle of Jihad is that Martyrs are absolved from sin. They have to be if you think about it since the killing of women and children even in war is expressly forbidden by the Koran. The very act of 9/11 is illegal in most interpretations of the religion. If your interpretation of Muslim ideology gives you a pass for mass murder then a couple of beers are hardly an issue.

ANTIMASON

Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:29 PM (P)

why havent we been attacked since 9/11? was it because the patriot act, or homeland security, or just the overall outstanding job BUsh has done securing our ports of entry.. like say THE BORDERS??!! let me get this straight.. lets tap all phone calls, remove habeas corpus, wage an unconstitutional preemptive war in Iraq... all because of terror, right, cause its this unprecedented threat.. only lets leave the nations borders wide open

theres nothing consistant about that.. because their is nothing genuine about the threat of terror; it is and always has been a political creation, to rally people to ask for their own enslavement, for the protection of big brother against these bad boogeymen who 'hate america' and want global jihad

1 2 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE