Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fr3shmang0)
    That is not an unanswered question. It has been answered. You say that no plane crashed into 7 WTC as though that is proof of a conspiracy. No one ever claimed a plane crashed into it. NIST did an investigation into it. They concluded that the building collapsed due to the effects of the fires which burned for almost seven hours, and it also caused the 13 floor to collapse which weakened supports in the building. Extreme heat caused some steel beams to melt further. The nearby towers that had collapsed earlier broke the water main which meant the sprinklers in 7 WTC didn't work in the bottom half of the building leading to the build up of extreme heat.

    At least do some ******* research before you take the blame away from those who were actually responsible for this horrible event and blame the US government for the death of hundreds of their own citizens you ****.
    Your mum's a **** how you gonna be talking like you're some expert on the matter. Are you joking me, the WTC 7 collapsed because of fires? If you had any comprehension of physics you would know that typical aviation fuel burns at about 1000 degrees Farenheit, whilst steel needs more than 2000 degrees to BEGIN to give way.

    Blud go back to watching your CNN news reports and reading yourself bed time stories before you come on here and talk like your some expert person.

    As for your accusation that I'm tryna take the blame from those responsible, clearly I'm not as I haven't mentioned anything about Al-Qaeda or any organisation as such. The bigger the lie the more fools that will believe it. Wisen up you kid.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Straightpath)
    Your mum's a **** how you gonna be talking like you're some expert on the matter. Are you joking me, the WTC 7 collapsed because of fires? If you had any comprehension of physics you would know that typical aviation fuel burns at about 1000 degrees Farenheit, whilst steel needs more than 2000 degrees to BEGIN to give way.

    Blud go back to watching your CNN news reports and reading yourself bed time stories before you come on here and talk like your some expert person.

    As for your accusation that I'm tryna take the blame from those responsible, clearly I'm not as I haven't mentioned anything about Al-Qaeda or any organisation as such. The bigger the lie the more fools that will believe it. Wisen up you kid.
    http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...42.html?page=5
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fox_the_fix)
    No, and I think anyone who does is a moron.
    Couldn't have put this better myself.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    False flag.

    That's all I've got to say about it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I lie. I've got this to say too.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mn8X...eature=related

    Can you say CONTROLLED DEMOLITION?
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by A is for Awesome)
    Seconded.
    epic, EPIC sig link
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Unknown?)
    It was Obama. :rolleyes:
    I knew it! :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Straightpath)
    Your mum's a **** how you gonna be talking like you're some expert on the matter. Are you joking me, the WTC 7 collapsed because of fires? If you had any comprehension of physics you would know that typical aviation fuel burns at about 1000 degrees Farenheit, whilst steel needs more than 2000 degrees to BEGIN to give way.

    Blud go back to watching your CNN news reports and reading yourself bed time stories before you come on here and talk like your some expert person.

    As for your accusation that I'm tryna take the blame from those responsible, clearly I'm not as I haven't mentioned anything about Al-Qaeda or any organisation as such. The bigger the lie the more fools that will believe it. Wisen up you kid.
    *you're
    *trying to

    .... 'Steel needs more than 2000 degrees to BEGIN to give way'...

    You really have no idea do you, you absolute pleb? Did you even bother to see if that claim is true or did you swallow it because some knobhead on the internet with a Mac Book made a video that goes against the establishment?

    The temperatures you quoted for jet fuel is true and within range. The figure you quoted for steel isn't quite true. The melting point of steel is 2750 degrees (F). To 'give way' it doesn't have to be this high.

    If you had any comprehension of not being an anti-intellectual fool who bothered to research properly you would know that steel loses about 50% of its strength at 1100 degrees F. At 1800 degrees it is at less than 10%. This is more than enough to cause collapse.

    And jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning. Jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, an ignition source, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

    But then again I'm not an 'expert person' like your esteemed self. I appear to have fallen for the conspiracy like a sheep while you have seen the truth. You know the experts are full of ****, you are illuminated while engineers and the rest of us are in the dark.

    Please read through this and show the world how and where it is incorrect, O great seer of the truth.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Depends how people want to define the government, as most should know CIA isn't really part of the government for a start. There is very little evidence it was al quaeda, if it was them then one must understand that Bin Laden and Al Quaeda were CIA assets beforehand.

    Someone mentioned popular mechanics article, thats been debunked heavily as has the official story. Now add to the fact they are trying to prevent supposed terrorists who were involved in the planning from having a trial in the US, with the excuse that its a waste of tax payers money + security risk. WTC 7 is extremely suspect, Pentagon has many unanswered questions on top of the fact out of all the CCTV camera's facing the incident only 5 frames have been released. The time it took to get an investigation, the fact 6 of the 10 people involved in the 9/11 commission said it was fraudalent and the US government constantly impeded the investigation.

    Could go on, 9/11 is almost all questions and no answers. Considering the subsequent actions that were taken by the US and UK against Afghanistan and then Iraq, should we not know exactly what went on with an open investigation. Also not many people would need to know for 9/11 to be carried out, just individuals in key positions along with distractions (Wargames). I have an open view on the incident, however I agree that its highly suspicious...didn't occur the way the Government tries to make out it did although I don't believe the likes of Bush etc knew about the incident beforehand, there is something more powerful than the government.

    Those people who believe they follow the educated and thoughtful individuals by believing the official story, then calling those who don't agree with it morons...are themselves complete and utter morons. The official story has been discredited and so have many conspiracy theories, but not all can be debunked. I think people need to start taking notice of things and dig a bit deeper with an open but sceptical mind, 9/11 resulted in many of our liberties being stripped and systems that are beginning to essentially destroy free speech and privacy. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars are secondary to that.

    'Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both' Benjamin Franklin <<<There are many different paraphrases of the quote, but the content remains the same.

    The liberty of all, rests on the few that scrutinizes everything and continues to ask questions. Most people know absolutely nothing and are happy to live like that, yet they think they have a right to attack people looking for the truth (who incidently are the type of people that won them their rights and try to maintain them). The true events of 9/11 are as of now unknown, which is where the governments want it to remain... I would like to know the truth and I am happy for both sides to continue to study the events and debate with each other, no one who is trying to find the truth either way should be subject to ad hoc attacks, Belief is all one can have on the truth which gives credence to the conspiracy theory side.

    One more thing, the government is likely not as incompetent as most think. It can be used as an excuse for making unpopular and destructive policies, which might be intended. The truth is not found in the media, only partial truths and plenty of bs, Mainstream media more so.

    Good luck with the project, don't get affected by any bias and ensure to study carefully claims by either side
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by payday5950)
    why are people soooo trusworthy of the government? As if they can't put a foot wrong - or they won't tell us lies. What exactly makes you so sure that your government have your best interests at heart? The answer is they don't...they are human after all and are looking after themselves and themselves only. The 9/11 conspiracy is perfectly plausible - the only reason there isn't more circumstantial evidence is because the government obviously doesn't want the public to know about it (if its actually true). You don't think they would cover their tracks? These are professionals and we've seen how the CIA and FBI throughout history have been controversially surreptitious in their operations. Furthermore, If propaganda was alive and well in the world war two era and before, why could it not happen now? It does...but people fail to recognise the supreme influence the media has at controlling the mindset of the masses.

    You are not told what you don't need to know...end of. Anyone who lives in a bubble of perfection oblivious to the motives and methods of authority figures needs to think more critically whenever they next watch the news (if indeed they do).
    If the US government (or whoever you think is behind 9/11) is so good at staging conspiracies and suppressing the truth why are you still alive? Surely you and people who share your beliefs are a danger to them and if they're as dangerous as you say they are they would think nothing about killing your?

    (Original post by death_on_the_stairs)
    If it was an innocent mistake then why have both copies of the video (stored in different locations) gone missing without a good explanation?
    Mistakes happen.

    Government departments have lost literally 1000s of laptops, flash drives, satellite funds, credit cards, etc over the last couple of years - how difficult is it to lose 2 tapes?

    (Original post by Rucklo)
    1:27, that is no aircraft, explain.
    You can't tell anything from that tape given the framerate, quality, distance from the site, etc.

    You're seeing what you want to see, not what is actually there.

    (Original post by death_on_the_stairs)
    It wasn't obvious at first. The only people in the vicinity were the emergency services, many of whom died. The survivors all gave statements saying they heard explosions. The fact that the buldings came down just seconds after the explosions means people were in a state of shock and thought they merely imagined it. But when you look at the videos again you can clearly see explosions.
    Stressful events are disorientating, people struggle to remember what they saw/heard and/or struggle to interpret what they saw/heard, etc. For example, it was discovered that people would often mistake when a warning was issued in relation to a shooting (ie; if you shot someone then shouted a warning afterwards witnesses often wrongly said that the warning was issued before the shooting).

    You've looked at these 'explosions' carefull right? Why are they occurring sometimes at vast distances from the top of the collapse and after a significant delay? Why is it that only one window at a time blows out and it has no influence on the collapse? It isn't a controlled explosion.

    A building collapsing in on itself creates vast amounts of pressure, it literally compresses the air trapped within the building - the air can't escape quickly enough. This air escapes by the path of least resistance, blowing out windows and/or air vents, hence you get a random assortment of windows blowing out across the building as it collapses.

    (Original post by death_on_the_stairs)
    Add to this the steel melting theory being disproved
    By keyboard heroes maybe, but not by experienced structural engineers.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fr3shmang0)
    *you're
    *trying to

    .... 'Steel needs more than 2000 degrees to BEGIN to give way'...

    You really have no idea do you, you absolute pleb? Did you even bother to see if that claim is true or did you swallow it because some knobhead on the internet with a Mac Book made a video that goes against the establishment?

    The temperatures you quoted for jet fuel is true and within range. The figure you quoted for steel isn't quite true. The melting point of steel is 2750 degrees (F). To 'give way' it doesn't have to be this high.

    If you had any comprehension of not being an anti-intellectual fool who bothered to research properly you would know that steel loses about 50% of its strength at 1100 degrees F. At 1800 degrees it is at less than 10%. This is more than enough to cause collapse.

    And jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning. Jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, an ignition source, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

    But then again I'm not an 'expert person' like your esteemed self. I appear to have fallen for the conspiracy like a sheep while you have seen the truth. You know the experts are full of ****, you are illuminated while engineers and the rest of us are in the dark.

    Please read through this and show the world how and where it is incorrect, O great seer of the truth.
    Popular mechanics has been discredited, that particular article. 'Experts' are on both sides btw, although supporting the conspiracy side does destroy their careers.

    Use research papers etc, if you wish to abuse someone not popular mechanics.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fidel69)
    I don't think we'll ever know... one thing I'm saying is there's conspiracy in everything that happens.... But I don't know theres something not right about certain things in the world... I believe the love of money is the root of all evil... The world seems to be striving for wealth...hence I see a certain underlying evil with everyone to certainly turn a blind eye for the sake of money and simplicity... Whethe that's the ordinary masses or the people who we think are in power

    WELL SAID. =)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DustyM)
    There is one very compelling theory that does not suggest the White House killed it's own but since I read it a few years ago has become more convincing as each new fact slots neatly into place.
    In 2000 Iraq started to deal it's oil in euros. Syria looked likely to follow suit.
    To understand the threat to America you have to understand the financial state of the US. A simplified explanation 'I promise to pay the bearer on demand' means that the govt will exchange your paper money for 'real money'. Theoretically the Gov't must hold bullion stocks to match the number of promissary notes but of course they don't. The reality is the 'notes' stay in circulation and the govt's have a deficit. America has a massive deficit.
    What happens if the billions of dollars circulating in the oil industry were to come home to roost? First sign of the banks having a problem and everyone would take their money out of dollars.
    America supports 100s of countries through trade etc. If it went bust the worldwide effect would be catastrophic. Potentially worse than any disaster we have ever known.
    Who else would be panicked? The Saudis definitely. Who did Bush spend the night with on 10/11?
    Who was flown out of USA when all other planes were grounded? Into what family was Osama Bin Laden born?
    The real question is why did Bush use 9/11 to justify the invasion of Iraq.
    Bush had every reason to go to war. He may well have prevented worldwide disaster but it had nothing to do with 9/11 and terrorism. In fact the connection is so tenuous it's hardly likely Bush would have blown up the towers as a means to that end.
    So you have a motive for war (and a good one) but one that the public would not have supported.
    The Saudis bring an awful lot of money into the US as the biggest arms customer (remind me again what is it Bush's father sells?)
    The article suggested that if...the Saudis had wanted the US to invade Iraq, and if...Bush had said 'not possible' then the Saudi's may have used a more persuasive argument. They certainly had the resources and the connections with the people who did blow up the towers.
    You have to admit it's a good theory and over time it gets consolidated. I read today that people are suing the US govt for preventing them from killing Osama Bin Laden. Do we really believe he could have stayed hidden if the US had wanted to find him?
    Perhaps..He is after all a Saudi prince. His family may have helped. His family may have had influence.
    I'm not saying any of this is true, just that if you want to write this thesis, you need to look at a much wider political spectrum and assume that whatever was done was done by people who felt 100% justified in doing what they did.

    Watch that bit of film where Bush gets the news.
    That's where I start to believe the theory. Suddenly his inexplicable behaviour and body language make sense. He knows... and it's not what we know.

    What do I believe? I believe that conspiracy theories are neccessary. We must question everything and more importantly we must be allowed the freedom to question everything.
    No. All the conspiracy theories haven't been disproved. Half of them haven't been invented yet.
    can i just say, thankyou for that, this is exactly the type of answer i was looking for, i wanted to see what other people think and where it is from their point of view. I understand that there is so much to talk about, my project is on a certain aspect , i just wanted to see the overall perspective from other people. thanks once again..
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by acedei)
    Popular mechanics has been discredited, that particular article. 'Experts' are on both sides btw, although supporting the conspiracy side does destroy their careers.

    Use research papers etc, if you wish to abuse someone not popular mechanics.
    How has it been discredited? You have given no explanation or any sources. Clarify please.

    Also don't lower this argument by appealing to authority. That is a logical fallacy. I only accept the use of ad hominems as an invalid argumentative technique. I don't care about so called experts, I care about the scientific basis of the 9/11 truther claims and whether they stand up to scrutiny.

    If you want a paper: Here you go.

    I hope you learn something from reading it.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    I honestly hope that September 11th wasn't aided in any way by the Government, but the conspiracy 'tards keep making me uncertain. Here, I will give my unbiased opinion.

    Don't get me wrong, it's obvious that al Qaeida carried out the attrocities, but just how much did the American security agencies know about it?

    Firstly, the "controlled demolition" of WTC 7 is a load of rubbish. The WTCs were among the world's tallest buildings. The force of their impact as they fell would have been enough to weaken the structure of No. 7.

    A couple of aspects that strike me as odd is how fighter jets were scrambled literally minutes before the planes impacted, yet they ended up flying over the Atlantic, in the opposite direction to the hijacked planes. The US has always claimed to have the best military in the world, but why couldn't they defend their homeland when they were needed most?

    Second, how could the hijackers have made it aboard the planes, carrying mace and knives, without being questioned? One of them was searched using a handheld metal detector, and a knife is celarly visible sticking out from the top of his trousers from CCTV - how was this missed?

    Please, don't take this the wrong way. I'm almost certain the Government had nothing to do with it, but without addressing these issues comprehensively, how can we be 100% sure? OP, I hope this has helped you consider both sides of the argument.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Ok, I will begin with Popular Mechanics containing claims that most theorists don't even use, aka strawmen. Making many of the claims it says it discredits, unimportant. Then other claims are deeply flawed, on top of that it doesn't provide reference to any evidence they have. Its a media article that has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

    That NIST article is interesting, but since I don't have the time to read it in its entirety I skipped to the WTC 7 part. At best its the method of argument thats used between evolutionists and creationists, picking bits that supports their point of view mixed with a bit of story telling. I will read it in its entirety sometime in the next week.

    A useful critique of the popular mechanics feature piece is http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pm/

    http://www.ae911truth.org/

    This is the only site I have really used due to the lesser bias in comparison to many conspiracy sites, many of the contributors have the credentials to put weight behind their claims. I'd suggest the OP stick to using that site for the most accurate claims made from the 9/11 truth movement side, and using non-governmental research on the incident such as those from engineers etc based in other countries or independent scientists. University based research on the incident although fairly accurate always has a single conclusion they must come too (for this incident), so the actual science is good but the interpretation can be suspect.

    9/11 theories are a difficult thing to analyse, with claims heavily disputed from both sides (such as thermitic material being found etc). Disinfo, bias, bad science etc. Lots of stories with limited evidence supporting them on both sides, and I think thats the way it will stay unfortunately. Geopolitics is an interesting thing though, which does add some support for 9/11 conspiracy theories albeit circumstancial.

    I don't wish involve myself in a debate, I'm just trying to state that neither side has been disproven and thus attacking those who believe 9/11 was an inside job, or elements within the government allowed for it to happen etc, is just not justified. Just as attacking people that do believe the official story can't be justified.

    PS. To OP, both sides of the argument are based on conspiracy theories, much evidence is interpreted differently depending on bias. Good luck
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cowleya)
    I honestly hope that September 11th wasn't aided in any way by the Government, but the conspiracy 'tards keep making me uncertain. Here, I will give my unbiased opinion.

    Don't get me wrong, it's obvious that al Qaeida carried out the attrocities, but just how much did the American security agencies know about it?

    Firstly, the "controlled demolition" of WTC 7 is a load of rubbish. The WTCs were among the world's tallest buildings. The force of their impact as they fell would have been enough to weaken the structure of No. 7.

    A couple of aspects that strike me as odd is how fighter jets were scrambled literally minutes before the planes impacted, yet they ended up flying over the Atlantic, in the opposite direction to the hijacked planes. The US has always claimed to have the best military in the world, but why couldn't they defend their homeland when they were needed most?

    Second, how could the hijackers have made it aboard the planes, carrying mace and knives, without being questioned? One of them was searched using a handheld metal detector, and a knife is celarly visible sticking out from the top of his trousers from CCTV - how was this missed?

    Please, don't take this the wrong way. I'm almost certain the Government had nothing to do with it, but without addressing these issues comprehensively, how can we be 100% sure? OP, I hope this has helped you consider both sides of the argument.

    Try looking into the december 'potential terrorist attack', that has resulted in body scanners being put into airports among other things. He got on the plane with no passport as well as him being on the terrorist watch list, so in normal circumstances he would never of been allowed on the plane. Explanations include things like he was being watched to allow him to lead them to bigger terrorists etc.

    So their logic is that, because someone on the terrorist watch list with no passport was allowed to get on a plane and may of attempted to blow it up....that we need even more security and a loss of liberties, even though under normal circumstances he wouldn't of been allowed on lol.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Can I just clarify for the two people who thought I was implying Bush knew in advance, I wasn't.
    I was implying that when he heard the news he knew why. The premise on that part of the theory is that the attack was a 'demonstration' of power used as a persuasive tool. If he'd known what was going to happen he obviously could have prevented it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Incidentally...why all this focus on explosions. Why wouldn't the terrorists have planted bombs to ensure that the towers came down?
    The planes were visually symbolic but may not have done the job by themselves.
    More interesting then is why the Govt denied there were explosives prior to the investigators report.
 
 
 
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.