One of the hundreds or thousands of people who would have been needed to be in on the conspiracy has talked? Do tell!
Originally posted by: manowar821
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
I can debunk these conspiracy theories in one sentence. Our government can not keep a secret, if it was a conspiracy it would have to have been a massive one and somebody would have talked about it by now.
Hurr durr. They already have, you just don't believe any of them because you're an asshole.
That's awesome.Originally posted by: alchemize
Oh man that is the best link EVER! I've got to paste the "planning session"Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Jessie Ventura of wrestling fame is an idiot.
fixed.
The top architechts/demolition experts in the country are sick and tired of fielding calls from people on this issue. You check with the top 10 guys in the country and they tell you it was not a controlled demolition. If someone doesn't believe them, you have to ask exactly who are they going to believe? Apparently Jessie Ventura.
Matt Taibbi's hysterical diatribe against the 9/11 truth movement:
http://www.alternet.org/column...ory/42181/?page=entire
He incorporates and greatly expands this bit in his recent book "The Great Derangement" which is a pretty even handed denouncement of, oh, everybody.
snipped
Originally posted by: Arkaign
Originally posted by: TheVrolok
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
I can debunk these conspiracy theories in one sentence. Our government can not keep a secret, if it was a conspiracy it would have to have been a massive one and somebody would have talked about it by now.
This is exactly what I say to governmental conspiracy theorists. Clinton couldn't keep something as simple as a BJ a secret; how would it even be remotely possibly for the government to keep something like a 9/11 cover-up a secret with the amount of people that would be involved? Short answer, it's not.
*sigh*
I don't have any specific beliefs as to what happened or did not happen on 9/11, other than a bunch of people were needlessly murdered.
But as to government being able to keep secrets :
Manhattan Project
RS-71 (and any number of Skunkworks projects)
MKULTRA
etc
Read 'SpyCatcher', it's an interesting view of intelligence agencies, written by a former British senior MI5/MI6 career officer.
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: manowar821
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
I can debunk these conspiracy theories in one sentence. Our government can not keep a secret, if it was a conspiracy it would have to have been a massive one and somebody would have talked about it by now.
Hurr durr. They already have, you just don't believe any of them because you're an asshole.
One of the hundreds or thousands of people who would have been needed to be in on the conspiracy has talked? Do tell!
Originally posted by: Toastedlightly
I personally liked the video of the guy claiming the buildings accelerated faster than 32ft/s^2. Sign me up for supergravity!
Originally posted by: TheVrolok
That's awesome.Originally posted by: alchemize
Oh man that is the best link EVER! I've got to paste the "planning session"Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Jessie Ventura of wrestling fame is an idiot.
fixed.
The top architechts/demolition experts in the country are sick and tired of fielding calls from people on this issue. You check with the top 10 guys in the country and they tell you it was not a controlled demolition. If someone doesn't believe them, you have to ask exactly who are they going to believe? Apparently Jessie Ventura.
Matt Taibbi's hysterical diatribe against the 9/11 truth movement:
http://www.alternet.org/column...ory/42181/?page=entire
He incorporates and greatly expands this bit in his recent book "The Great Derangement" which is a pretty even handed denouncement of, oh, everybody.
snipped
Wow, good stuff. :laugh:Originally posted by: alchemize
Oh man that is the best link EVER! I've got to paste the "planning session"Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Jessie Ventura of wrestling fame is an idiot.
fixed.
The top architechts/demolition experts in the country are sick and tired of fielding calls from people on this issue. You check with the top 10 guys in the country and they tell you it was not a controlled demolition. If someone doesn't believe them, you have to ask exactly who are they going to believe? Apparently Jessie Ventura.
Matt Taibbi's hysterical diatribe against the 9/11 truth movement:
http://www.alternet.org/column...ory/42181/?page=entire
He incorporates and greatly expands this bit in his recent book "The Great Derangement" which is a pretty even handed denouncement of, oh, everybody.
BUSH: So, what's the plan again?
CHENEY: Well, we need to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. So what we've decided to do is crash a whole bunch of remote-controlled planes into Wall Street and the Pentagon, say they're real hijacked commercial planes, and blame it on the towelheads; then we'll just blow up the buildings ourselves to make sure they actually fall down.
RUMSFELD: Right! And we'll make sure that some of the hijackers are agents of Saddam Hussein! That way we'll have no problem getting the public to buy the invasion.
CHENEY: No, Don, we won't.
RUMSFELD: We won't?
CHENEY: No, that's too obvious. We'll make the hijackers al-Qaeda and then just imply a connection to Iraq.
RUMSFELD: But if we're just making up the whole thing, why not just put Saddam's fingerprints on the attack?
CHENEY: (sighing) It just has to be this way, Don. Ups the ante, as it were. This way, we're not insulated if things go wrong in Iraq. Gives us incentive to get the invasion right the first time around.
BUSH: I'm a total idiot who can barely read, so I'll buy that. But I've got a question. Why do we need to crash planes into the Towers at all? Since everyone knows terrorists already tried to blow up that building complex from the ground up once, why don't we just blow it up like we plan to anyway, and blame the bombs on the terrorists?
RUMSFELD: Mr. President, you don't understand. It's much better to sneak into the buildings ourselves in the days before the attacks, plant the bombs, and then make it look like it was exploding planes that brought the buildings down. That way, we involve more people in the plot, stand a much greater chance of being exposed, and needlessly complicate everything!
CHENEY: Of course, just toppling the Twin Towers will never be enough. No one would give us the war mandate we need if we just blow up the Towers. Clearly, we also need to shoot a missile at a small corner of the Pentagon to create a mightily underpublicized additional symbol of international terrorism -- and then, obviously, we need to fake a plane crash in the middle of fucking nowhere somewhere in rural Pennsylvania.
RUMSFELD: Yeah, it goes without saying that the level of public outrage will not be sufficient without that crash in the middle of fucking nowhere.
CHENEY: And the Pentagon crash -- we'll have to do it in broad daylight and say it was a plane, even though it'll really be a cruise missile.
BUSH: Wait, why do we have to use a missile?
CHENEY: Because it's much easier to shoot a missile and say it was a plane. It's not easy to steer a real passenger plane into the Pentagon. Planes are hard to come by.
BUSH: But aren't we using two planes for the Twin Towers?
CHENEY: Mr. President, you're missing the point. With the Pentagon, we use a missile, and say it was a plane.
BUSH: Right, but I'm saying, why don't we just use a plane and say it was a plane? We'll be doing that with the Twin Towers, right?
CHENEY: Right, but in this case, we use a missile. (Throws hands up in frustration) Don, can you help me out here?
RUMSFELD: Mr. President, in Washington, we use a missile because it's sneakier that way. Using an actual plane would be too obvious, even though we'll be doing just that in New York.
BUSH: Oh, okay.
RUMSFELD: The other good thing about saying that it was a passenger jet is that that way, we have to invent a few hundred fictional victims and account for a nonexistent missing crew and plane. It's always better when you leave more cover story to invent, more legwork to do, and more possible holes to investigate. Doubt, legwork, and possible exposure -- you can't pull off any good conspiracy without them.
BUSH: You guys are brilliant! Because if there's one thing about Americans -- they won't let a president go to war without a damn good reason. How could we ever get the media, the corporate world, and our military to endorse an invasion of a secular Iraqi state unless we faked an attack against New York at the hands of a bunch of Saudi religious radicals? Why, they'd never buy it. Look at how hard it was to get us into Vietnam, Iraq the last time, Kosovo?
CHENEY: Like pulling teeth!
RUMSFELD: Well, I'm sold on the idea. Let's call the Joint Chiefs, the FAA, the New York and Washington DC fire departments, Rudy Giuliani, all three networks, the families of a thousand fictional airline victims, MI-5, the FBI, FEMA, the NYPD, Larry Eagleburger, Osama bin Laden, Noam Chomsky and the fifty thousand other people we'll need to pull this off. There isn't a moment to lose!
BUSH: Don't forget to call all of those Wall Street hotshots who donated $100 million to our last campaign. They'll be thrilled to know that we'll be targeting them for execution as part of our thousand-tentacled modern-day bonehead Reichstag scheme! After all, if we're going to make martyrs -- why not make them out of our campaign paymasters? Shit, didn't the Merrill Lynch guys say they needed a refurbishing in their New York offices?
RUMSFELD: Oh, they'll get a refurbishing, all right. Just in time for the "Big Wedding"!
ALL THREE: (cackling) Mwah-hah-hah!
Pretty much anywhere in the world, you can make an affadavit in front of a notary public and recorder. This would then become a document that could be used in a court of law.Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: manowar821
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
I can debunk these conspiracy theories in one sentence. Our government can not keep a secret, if it was a conspiracy it would have to have been a massive one and somebody would have talked about it by now.
Hurr durr. They already have, you just don't believe any of them because you're an asshole.
One of the hundreds or thousands of people who would have been needed to be in on the conspiracy has talked? Do tell!
There have been hundreds that have come forward speaking of inside knowledge of conspiracy in both private and public sectors. However, it's pretty easy to make them look like goofballs esp. when those with the same inside knowledge are doing it.
I don't know why people have such a hard time believeing that things are kept from us everyday.
Why aren't military secrets just sold to all the newspapers daily?
Originally posted by: AstroManLuca
The thing about 9/11 is that everyone seems to have taken a position of either the whole thing is exactly as it seems, or the whole thing was a giant government conspiracy. If you watch the footage of the towers collapsing, something seems off. They seem to fall too quickly and perfectly. Yet if you start to think that maybe things aren't exactly as has been presented, the hardcore tinfoil-hat-wearing conspiracy theorists try to suck you in and make you believe a million other improbable things. This, of course, leads to the characterization of anyone who doesn't 100% agree with the official story as a nut-job.
I, for one, do not think everything happened exactly as it appeared. I'm not speculating as to what did happen, but I do think the official story is wrong. But there's almost no way of further investigating it, and no way of convincing anyone with access to the right information to do a serious inquiry.
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Why aren't military secrets just sold to all the newspapers daily?
Why aren't military secrets just sold to all the newspapers daily?
Originally posted by: jemcam
Why aren't military secrets just sold to all the newspapers daily?
Because it's TREASON?
Originally posted by: Jessica69
Originally posted by: AstroManLuca
The thing about 9/11 is that everyone seems to have taken a position of either the whole thing is exactly as it seems, or the whole thing was a giant government conspiracy. If you watch the footage of the towers collapsing, something seems off. They seem to fall too quickly and perfectly. Yet if you start to think that maybe things aren't exactly as has been presented, the hardcore tinfoil-hat-wearing conspiracy theorists try to suck you in and make you believe a million other improbable things. This, of course, leads to the characterization of anyone who doesn't 100% agree with the official story as a nut-job.
I, for one, do not think everything happened exactly as it appeared. I'm not speculating as to what did happen, but I do think the official story is wrong. But there's almost no way of further investigating it, and no way of convincing anyone with access to the right information to do a serious inquiry.
Right, and all the workers in both towers just ignored the thousands and thousands of pounds of explosives being wired throughout the two buildings over weeks and weeks.....thought nothing of it, never questioned why dynamite was being put into drilled holes all over the building...thought it was just a normal few weeks of maintenance on the building.
Yep, getting rid of all the vermin and cockroaches....that's the ticket. We're just having to use explosives all over the building because the rats are golden retriever sized and the roaches are B-52 bomber sized.
Geeez.....think about it. How did all the explosives get planted in a day without anyone asking "Why are you wiring dynamite to the building?"
Nope, not one question like that has ever surfaced. Oh, I know.....everyone that wasn't "In the know" was killed that day....solved that problem.
Damn people......use your brains.....building demolition takes weeks and weeks of planning, stringing wiring all over the place, hundreds and hundreds of pounds of explosives all over the place, yet no one in any of the demolished buildings ever saw any of that happening in the couple of months leading up to 9/11.
Answer me that riddle..............
Originally posted by: Jessica69
Originally posted by: AstroManLuca
The thing about 9/11 is that everyone seems to have taken a position of either the whole thing is exactly as it seems, or the whole thing was a giant government conspiracy. If you watch the footage of the towers collapsing, something seems off. They seem to fall too quickly and perfectly. Yet if you start to think that maybe things aren't exactly as has been presented, the hardcore tinfoil-hat-wearing conspiracy theorists try to suck you in and make you believe a million other improbable things. This, of course, leads to the characterization of anyone who doesn't 100% agree with the official story as a nut-job.
I, for one, do not think everything happened exactly as it appeared. I'm not speculating as to what did happen, but I do think the official story is wrong. But there's almost no way of further investigating it, and no way of convincing anyone with access to the right information to do a serious inquiry.
Right, and all the workers in both towers just ignored the thousands and thousands of pounds of explosives being wired throughout the two buildings over weeks and weeks.....thought nothing of it, never questioned why dynamite was being put into drilled holes all over the building...thought it was just a normal few weeks of maintenance on the building.
Yep, getting rid of all the vermin and cockroaches....that's the ticket. We're just having to use explosives all over the building because the rats are golden retriever sized and the roaches are B-52 bomber sized.
Geeez.....think about it. How did all the explosives get planted in a day without anyone asking "Why are you wiring dynamite to the building?"
Nope, not one question like that has ever surfaced. Oh, I know.....everyone that wasn't "In the know" was killed that day....solved that problem.
Damn people......use your brains.....building demolition takes weeks and weeks of planning, stringing wiring all over the place, hundreds and hundreds of pounds of explosives all over the place, yet no one in any of the demolished buildings ever saw any of that happening in the couple of months leading up to 9/11.
Answer me that riddle..............
Originally posted by: Codewiz
Every one of his ideas has been completely debunked by academics(and real engineers).
Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
your ridiculous. You come off as being an expert on this topic but its quite obvious to everyone that when planning a demolition your not going to rigging bombs to someones cubicle during business hours. It requires specific strategic placement that isn't lugging explosives through the conference room. Utility closets, service elevators etc etc etc etc etc etc
Originally posted by: SirStev0
The fact that a bunch of farmers from Saudi Arabi were able to precisely attack all those buildings unaided is pretty amazing as well.
Originally posted by: SirStev0
Originally posted by: Codewiz
Every one of his ideas has been completely debunked by academics(and real engineers).
who have been debunked by others. There have been plenty of experts who have questioned how they fell.
I don't know how much I buy of either side... and there are quite a few things that don't make sense.
I find it funny that the immediate reaction is tinfoil. I doubt our government could pull off something like this and keep it this quiet. I def agree with that. The fact that a bunch of farmers from Saudi Arabi were able to precisely attack all those buildings unaided is pretty amazing as well.
Originally posted by: Jessica69
Originally posted by: jemcam
Why aren't military secrets just sold to all the newspapers daily?
Because it's TREASON?
There is that........and newspapers don't pay worth squat. If anyone is going to sell military secrets, it won't be to the newspapers, it'll be to a foreign government......they pay a LOT better, and our history is littered with people who've done just that, even quite recently.
If you're going to commit treason, why not go for all the money you can......forget a newspaper....Russia, China, Israel.....and a lot more countries are more than willing to pay a fortune for secrets, and there are always Americans willing to accept that risk and sell secrets.
Here you go, alkemyst:
For sale: West?s deadly nuclear secrets
The FBI has been accused of covering up a file detailing government dealings with a network stealing nuclear secrets
Spies Caught Selling Shuttle Secrets to the Chinese
Gregg William Bergersen Charged with Selling U.S. Secrets
FBI arrests NRI engineer for selling B-52 secrets
Iran-Contra Affair anyone?
U.S. Official Charged With Selling Secrets
U.S. charges top CIA official with selling secrets to Russians - Harold Nicholson
Is that enough for now, alkemyst? Seems that in less than 10 seconds of searching on Google, I found quite a few recent (like 2008 and a little earlier) examples of secrets of the U.S. Govt being sold to the highest bidder.........need more?
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
Very true CEO's don't know everything below them, but do you honestly believe that something of this magnitude could be organized without at least SOME high level officers?
You cannot compare crime families to a government conspiracy. Apples and oranges.
Why not? also why does this have to be 'government'?
Ok so you don't know what "controlled" means do you? A pallet of explosives would be anything BUT controlled. Thank you for shooting your own theory down though.Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
Yes in WTC there were a lot of people coming and going, but lets examine this a bit. You have two options explosives in hidden areas (less chance at them being seen, but harder to get into), or explosives out in the open (high chance at being discovered, but very easy access). For this we will assume they got the explosives in easily without being discovered and are using wireless detonators (which if you have seen controlled demos they use wired). Controlled demolitions are very well planned and thought out. They are methodical in their planning. Most likely they would need a combination of explosives in both restricted access areas, and in the open which would make it high chance of discovery. The amounts of damage needed to be caused would require either a lot of small explosives or fewer large ones. So we will go with medium size and quantities. Also lets say they just did 5 floors near the top of the building (once again controlled demo usually does not just do a few floors and does charges up the whole building on vertical towers). The odds of something being discovered in one of the two buildings are just way too high.
The explosives they could have used could have been easily put into simple cardboard bankers boxes...a simple pallet of them would probably be enough.
There is plenty of utility area outside of the common eye where they'd put these explosives.
Well I don't know about who you think would dismantle a bomb, but my first choice is the bomb squad. Also an explosive that size wouldn't have had enough of an effect to bring down the towers unless you placed a TON of them.Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
For your "plain box with lights" deal, don't you think somebody would go "hey what is this box I've never noticed before with blinking lights?" If not a person working there at the offices what about maitnence?
Yeah, but who is going to dismantle it...not to mention I said make it look like an emergency light.
Really they are? Proof please. I am pretty sure that people worth a lot of money diversify their funds, and invest in foreign funds. Maybe I am just an idiot though.Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
Money for who? The guy that leases the building? Since he is making oh so much money on that lease right now. The government? Really? Last I checked we are further in debt, and our economy is in the crapper. So who else?
Keyword 'our' economy...the ultra rich are making a killing on this war and had already invested overseas prior to 9/11.
Okay so you can read blueprints and structrual diagrams. Welcome to ATOT most of us can here as well. All that means is you have a little more knowledge of the subject then say CasioTech. Want a cookie? That still doesn't give your agreement of Jessi Ventura any more credability.Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
Okay Mechanical Engineering background doing HVAC != building engineer. HVAC design and fire suppression does NOT deal with load bearing structures. Sorry to tell ya, but they are different. Also just being an intern doing it with the head engineer "signing off without making changes" is great and all, it is still not building design.
Right...but it does mean I can READ the stuff posted and hash it out as just a bunch of crap or reasonable.
How many other 110 story square buildings built like this hit by planes have you seen come down? I have not seen one thing YET that says steel melted. If you find something credible that shows it melted please let me know, because nothing has said that I have seen. All of it says the fires ranged between 800-1500 with spikes up to 1800 degrees F. Steel loses a lot of integrity the hotter it gets. If you have done any kind of first hand structural experiments you would see that almost any material loses strength the hotter it gets. Unless you mean the Unobtanium they mixed in with that specific steel.Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
Controlled demolition isn't common? Really? Are you that ignorant? I didn't think you were that blind, but maybe I am wrong. Both planes impacted the towers in the upper 1/3 of the tower. Both planes impacted and did the same damage to them, just in different spots on the towers. Both towers cores were damaged though along with the floors of 5+ floors. Look at the reports, NIST shows that the 3rd building had severe damage plus fires fed by diesel fuel.
A building to fall like these did is extremely rare...pretty much doesn't happen. The whole diesel fire thing is laughable....we are talking melting steel, diesel is not inherently explosive which is why it was developed.
Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
I am thinking in mathmatic and scientific terms using logic to explain the findings from math and science. Do you understand what a "pancake collapse" is? It means that the floors stack on top of each other during it. Do you really expect "the bottom few stories to remain" from 100+ stories falling on top of it? As for the 3rd building if the damage is at the bottom then no I would not expect anything to be intact. Or if it was a pancake collapse, like it was.
I don't buy the pancake deal at all, especially not leveling the buildings like they did.
Originally posted by: TheVrolok
Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
Originally posted by: TheVrolok
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
I can debunk these conspiracy theories in one sentence. Our government can not keep a secret, if it was a conspiracy it would have to have been a massive one and somebody would have talked about it by now.
This is exactly what I say to governmental conspiracy theorists. Clinton couldn't keep something as simple as a BJ a secret; how would it even be remotely possibly for the government to keep something like a 9/11 cover-up a secret with the amount of people that would be involved? Short answer, it's not.
Who said the u.s. government had to be involved for it to be a conspiracy? There are private interest groups that wield enough power and influence to pull this off.
And you think THEY could be just as silent? Replace government with "large entity" if it suits you. Scandals come out for a reason, people can't shut up.