[ot] CONFRONTING THE EVIDENCE

[mrweasel]

So, you are telling me that it exists a worldwide conspiration against Bush dynasty? Shocked
OK, I can accept your theory but the question is still open. Bush has to explain where these scientists and FBI witnesses (the ones still living) are mistaking. He have to tell us "you are mistaking because...". Are you not curious to understand?

Come on Get real.
Why would he bother taking this on board?

Even being anti Bush I don't buy it

Actually, I know who did it, it's Elvis Presley. He actually owned the building and had insured his stocks of peanut butter just in case...

[Dave Dub]

i believe the tops would crumble off those towers, sure. but i do not buy that the whole damn things came down in a free fall motion due to that. especially with all the accounts from fire department workers of secondry explosions and the fact the the first 6 stories of each tower, the lobby, was blown to pieces when they went into the towers.

.

So here we have a bunch of electronic musicians who are now engineers and physicists. Obviously we're not getting the whole story, but to think that the towers were felled by explosives and the like are simply falling into the trap set buy those who do not want us to know the truth.

Same thing with Area 51. The government purposelyu encouraged the whole alien UFO myth to distract from the real situation there which was military airplane testing, So all those that think they are subverting the giovernment are actually serving there purposes.

Let's focus on what really happened and not play into the plan of the man.

[subterFUSE]

These conspiracy theories are being promoted by people with political agendas. Not only that, but most of those documentaries are selectively displaying evidence, and deliberately quoting witnesses out-of-context to alter their testimony.


http://www.debunking911.com

So, you are telling me that it exists a worldwide conspiration against Bush dynasty?
OK, I can accept your theory but the question is still open. Bush has to explain where these scientists and FBI witnesses (the ones still living) are mistaking. He have to tell us "you are mistaking because...". Are you not curious to understand?

Scube

What are you talking about? George Bush doesn't need to explain anything about what these "scientists" say. That's like asking a Lawyer to tell me if I have Kidney disease. I wouldn't want to hear President Bush explaining the technical details of a building collapse. Fucking hell, the guy can't even pronouce the word Nuclear properly.

Take a look through the link I posted above. You'll see a serious response to each of these major 911 Conspiracy claims.

People like you are crying out, asking for someone to prove there wasn't a conspiracy. But that's not how our justice system works. You have to prove there WAS a conspiracy. Anyone can sit there and continue asking WHY like a 4 year old child, and eventually there won't be an answer. This proves nothing, however. If someone accuses you of murder, then they have to prove that you did it. They don't just say "Mr. X is dead. Now prove that you didn't do it." But that's exactly how you are treating this situation.

But putting that aside, let's actually consider if 911 truly was all staged. That the buildings were toppled by controlled explosives. That the Pentagon was hit by a missile....

How on Earth could all the parties involved keep silent? I simply can't fathom how such a huge operation could possibly be kept secret. There's just no possible way so many people could be colluding together and remain silent.

Who fired the missile? Someone would have to do it. Who would have planted the explosives? It would have taken a large-scale team of workers to plant enough explosives to bring those buildings down. Or else, it would have taken a small team a VERY long time. And these people planting explosives would have to be in on the secret.... How else could you explain it?

The US government is lousy at keeping secrets. They couldn't keep our terrorist surveilance programs a secret. They couldn't keep the Swift international terror funds tracking a secret. But you expect us to believe they could keep a secret this big, with so many players involved?

I'm sorry, but you and all of these proponents of the 911 Conspiracy Theories are going to have to do a lot better to convince me, and many other fair-minded people, than just asking for more evidence that there wasn't a conspiracy.

[mrweasel]

I totally agree.

I don't think there is such a thing as

those who do not want us to know the truth

and achieve it.

Whichever way some people will alsways want to create conspiracy theories or believe in them.

Just think about that one: If afighterjet had been able to take one of the 9/11 planes down, what would conspiracy theorists have said?
Ta ta ta.............
The US government took them down on purpose, it was all planned.

Anyways, every one is free to amuse themselves the way they want.

[mrweasel]

Acutally, I got a feature request for Live 6: TRUTH WARPING

[subterFUSE]

Acutally, I got a feature request for Live 6: TRUTH WARPING

Plug-In Written by Michael Moore Studios.

[Machinesworking]

Take a look through the link I posted above. You'll see a serious response to each of these major 911 Conspiracy claims.

Popular Mechanics, the only civilians allowed to see photos of building 7 that 'prove' it had enough damage to fall.
I think the inconsistency of logic in that 'fact' alone weighs them down.

People like you are crying out, asking for someone to prove there wasn't a conspiracy. But that's not how our justice system works. You have to prove there WAS a conspiracy.

You have to prove there is enough circumstantial evidence for a trial in the first place. I think there is.

Back to your point about the government being lousy at keeping secrets. The CIA and the other branches of the NSA do a fine job of it. there are plenty of things that we learn about 25 years later etc. Sure, basic military or lower level government officials get involved, and the news spreads, but a single operation involving the implicit knowledge of only a few dozen people? We do just fine with that sort of secrecy, and why shouldn't we?

For the record, I think some people in our government used the event to further their own agenda. I don't think that they masterminded the whole thing, but there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that points towards insider involvement, or at least knowledge.
Building 7 still remains fallen, and I still haven't heard anything from the 'non believers' that makes any sense.

[subterFUSE]

Take a look through the link I posted above. You'll see a serious response to each of these major 911 Conspiracy claims.

Popular Mechanics, the only civilians allowed to see photos of building 7 that 'prove' it had enough damage to fall.
I think the inconsistency of logic in that 'fact' alone weighs them down.

People like you are crying out, asking for someone to prove there wasn't a conspiracy. But that's not how our justice system works. You have to prove there WAS a conspiracy.

You have to prove there is enough circumstantial evidence for a trial in the first place. I think there is.

Back to your point about the government being lousy at keeping secrets. The CIA and the other branches of the NSA do a fine job of it. there are plenty of things that we learn about 25 years later etc. Sure, basic military or lower level government officials get involved, and the news spreads, but a single operation involving the implicit knowledge of only a few dozen people? We do just fine with that sort of secrecy, and why shouldn't we?

For the record, I think some people in our government used the event to further their own agenda. I don't think that they masterminded the whole thing, but there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that points towards insider involvement, or at least knowledge.
Building 7 still remains fallen, and I still haven't heard anything from the 'non believers' that makes any sense.

What about the other link I posted?

[Scube]

So here we have a bunch of electronic musicians who are now engineers and physicists. Obviously we're not getting the whole story, but to think that the towers were felled by explosives and the like are simply falling into the trap set buy those who do not want us to know the truth.

Same thing with Area 51. The government purposelyu encouraged the whole alien UFO myth to distract from the real situation there which was military airplane testing, So all those that think they are subverting the giovernment are actually serving there purposes.

Let's focus on what really happened and not play into the plan of the man.

People heard explosions. Firemen and policemen heard explosions. Scientists consider "really unusual" the collapses. Lost FBI agents. Dead witnesses. No fighter airctarts for 30 minutes. A third building collapsed without reasons. 6 of 19 terrorist pilots are still alive. The hole in the pentagon is 2 meters large. Arn more and more and more.. Surely I'm not anti-american but it's also sure that I'm not stupid.

AND

Area51 question is nothing. We are speaking of thousands of deaths (civilians and soldiers) and of the next world war.

Scube

[jeskola]

So here we have a bunch of electronic musicians who are now engineers and physicists. Obviously we're not getting the whole story, but to think that the towers were felled by explosives and the like are simply falling into the trap set buy those who do not want us to know the truth.

Same thing with Area 51. The government purposelyu encouraged the whole alien UFO myth to distract from the real situation there which was military airplane testing, So all those that think they are subverting the giovernment are actually serving there purposes.

Let's focus on what really happened and not play into the plan of the man.

People heard explosions. Firemen and policemen heard explosions. Scientists consider "really unusual" the collapses. Lost FBI agents. Dead witnesses. No fighter airctarts for 30 minutes. A third building collapsed without reasons. 6 of 19 terrorist pilots are still alive. The hole in the pentagon is 2 meters large. Arn more and more and more.. Surely I'm not anti-american but it's also sure that I'm not stupid.

AND

Area51 question is nothing. We are speaking of thousands of deaths (civilians and soldiers) and of the next world war.

Scube

Dead witnesses it was televised across the globe to billions of "witnesses"! live!! If you mean witnesses at the scene - well im not suprised seeing as 2 huge buildings fell on them.

the hole in the pentagon, i may be wrong... but its slightly bigger than 2 metres:



6 of the 19 terrorists still alive???? did they parachute out before impact?

[Sales Dude McBoob]

the only three buildings to fall that day were the only buildings in the history of the world to fall due to structure fires

Can you prove this?



I'm on the fence. I think it's healthy that people are asking questions. All the more healthy if the people who are asking questions are level minded.

I was in Manhattan that morning and even when I was staring at the towers in their most dire state, I never thought they would collapse. So, my basic gut reaction as a witness is that what I saw and what unfolded do not match up.

But, as twisted as our administration is, I cannot see them following through with a covert operation like this. Our administation is too sloppy. They didn't even have the forsight to see beyond the "Shock and Awe" stage of the Iraq war.

That said, I cannot look at footage of WT7 imploding without feeling profoundly troubled. It reminds me of my initial gut reaction to the event. So the more unbiased, even keeled scientists that want to put the attack under their microscopes the better.

[jeskola]

the only three buildings to fall that day were the only buildings in the history of the world to fall due to structure fires

Can you prove this?



I'm on the fence. I think it's healthy that people are asking questions. All the more healthy if the people who are asking questions are level minded.

I was in Manhattan that morning and even when I was staring at the towers in their most dire state, I never thought they would collapse. So, my basic gut reaction as a witness is that what I saw and what unfolded do not match up.

But, as twisted as our administration is, I cannot see them following through with a covert operation like this. Our administation is too sloppy. They didn't even have the forsight to see beyond the "Shock and Awe" stage of the Iraq war.

That said, I cannot look at footage of WT7 imploding without feeling profoundly troubled. It reminds me of my initial gut reaction to the event. So the more unbiased, even keeled scientists that want to put the attack under their microscopes the better.

well this may interest you - written by structural engineers

http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.shtml

The way the building collapsed must have been caused by explosions
One demolition expert on the day of the collapse said it looked like implosion but this is not very strong evidence. Implosion firstly requires a lot of explosives placed in strategic areas all around the building. When and how was this explosive placed in the building without anyone knowing about it. Second, implosion required more than just explosives. Demolition experts spend weeks inside a derelict building planning an event. Many of the beams are cut through by about 90% so that the explosion only has to break a small bit of steel. In this state the building is highly dangerous, and there is no way such a prepared building could still be running day to day like WTC was.

Why did the building fall so quickly?
The buildings did fall quickly - almost (but not exactly) at the same speed as if there was no resistance. Shouldn't the floors below have slowed it down? The huge dynamic loads due to the very large momentum of the upper floors falling were so great that they smashed through the lower floors very quickly. The columns were not designed to carry these huge loads and they provided little resistance.

What about World Trade Center 7?
I have not studied WTC in any great detail and cannot offer any theories on its collapse mechanism. In the chaos of the day, little attention was paid to WTC7, so there is less evidence available on the damage it sustained before it collapsed. However, some questions that you may want to ponder ...
* While it did not receive any direct impact form the planes, how much debris hit at as the main towers collapsed and what damage did it cause?
* To what extent (if any) did the shock or vibrations caused by the collapse of WTC1 & 2 affect the integrity of WTC7?
* Did any unseen damage to the WTC7 foundations occur in the collapse of WTC 1 & 2?
* Did any of the fire suppression systems in WTC7 function?

[/b]

[subterFUSE]

the only three buildings to fall that day were the only buildings in the history of the world to fall due to structure fires

Can you prove this?



I'm on the fence. I think it's healthy that people are asking questions. All the more healthy if the people who are asking questions are level minded.

I was in Manhattan that morning and even when I was staring at the towers in their most dire state, I never thought they would collapse. So, my basic gut reaction as a witness is that what I saw and what unfolded do not match up.

But, as twisted as our administration is, I cannot see them following through with a covert operation like this. Our administation is too sloppy. They didn't even have the forsight to see beyond the "Shock and Awe" stage of the Iraq war.

That said, I cannot look at footage of WT7 imploding without feeling profoundly troubled. It reminds me of my initial gut reaction to the event. So the more unbiased, even keeled scientists that want to put the attack under their microscopes the better.

When my mom woke me up in bed on the morning of 9/11, it was moments after the second plane hit the towers.

I said to my mom right then and there..... "both those towers are going to fall within the hour." I also said that the tower which was hit lower would fall first.

I majored in Physics in college.... but that really wasn't much of a factor in my reasoning. It was more common sense, really. It's not just the fire.... but the severe damage caused by the plane crashing.... and then the huge weight of the structure above the compromised portion.

[andydes]

What about the other link I posted?

Yep, read that. Does quite a good job of qestioning the building colapse thing, but does nothing to addess the more conventional theory that it was allowed to happen. There's a hell of a lot of circumstantial evidence to support this, which I sadly don't have time to post at the moment.

In fact it even talks about how the US and UK governments exploited the attacks and doctored evidence in the run up to war.

[dj superflat]

you should google the force created by 500 mph jets loaded with fuel crashing into a building -- those were small nuclear explosions (btw, george pronounces nuculer just like jimmy carter did, and jimmy worked on a nuclear sub -- point it, it's an established southernish pronounciation, even if contrary to how the word's spelled (english ignores spelling all the time)).

as for the response, check the vanity fair article with tapes inside norad, etc. the US was just completely unprepared for something like 9/11 (jets scrambled out to sea to counter soviet sneak attack as though it were still 1984 or something).