9/11 - The Third Tower

[JTrader]

As they say opinions are like a'holes - everybody has one.

What's important are facts and evidence All I've seen so far to support the conspiracy lobby are a collection of fanciful and flimsy claims.

This goes back to the imperial hubris I mentioned earlier - basically there are many still in denial that their great country was the victim of a terrorist attack.

I don't se how anyone who has thoroughly read the documents, and watched the video clips, from the links provided in this thread, and still say that there is no solid evidence.

I imagine that anyone who claims such things, has at best, skim-read the documents, and/or watched a small section of the videos, and then come to this opinion? else how could they not have been convinced by the MASS of evidence that supports the 911 Truth Movement?

Just looking at WTC7 - how could it not have been a controlled demolition

Can you not see the lies, deceipt, and flimsiness of the "evidence" that supports the official story?

Can you not see how easily the official story falls apart?

Can you not see how the 911 Truth Movement can always counter and nullify the claims of the official story and its supporters, who try to debunk the 911 Truthers?

Are you so strongly convinced by the official story that you don't have any doubts that you may have been lied to?

I'm just curious to understand the thought process of people who have been presented with a MASS WEALTH of contradictory evidence, yet still don't seem to be swayed.

Perhaps a few such people have not done nearly enough reviewing of the posted sources, before joining the debate and expressing their opinion/non-opininon, (i'm not talking just about this debate per se, but this type of debate in general)?

Perhaps you are scared to express your opinion on a public bulletin board, for fear the the CIA might have you IP address, and if you say that you believe 911 was an inside job, you'll be carried off to camp x-ray?


I'm just trying to explore the mass psychology at play I guess.

 

[JTrader]

Are you seriously suggesting the world's super-power is run by "satanists."

What worries me is that you would rather believe the improbable than the plausible. A sad reflection of a young person's view of the world and his place in it.

This science fiction is one step away from David Icke and his theory that the world is run by alien lizards who harvest human beings for food.

Again, just look at some of the links provided, before you say what isnt so.

Perhaps you are the sad reflection. A person living in fear and denial, unwilling and afraid to form rational views based on rational evidence, for fear that they are "socially unnacceptable". Therefore, you go along with what you believe is the more acceptable view, whether or not you believe it to be correct or not.

BTW. Rols, not that this discussion was meant to, or should have become personal. But my place in this world is and always has been pretty good. I've had a fun and interesting existence up to now, ups and downs, but mainly steady away. so i think you've got the wrong impression dude!

 

[trendie]

Trendie, Rols, splitlink and other fence sitters. Your input into this debate is most welcome, but as yet, it seems you have yet to express any kind of opinion one way or the other.

If i can ask one question, to you as apparent neutrals. Based on the evidence that has been posted so far in support of the "911 Truth Movement" and which you have hopefully read, has your opinion been swayed one way or the other? i.e. Do you believe 911 was an inside job?
Forgive me if this sounds blunt, but your input has been plentiful, but yet it seems you have yet to express your opinion . Perhaps you don't have an opinion.

Thanks.

do not confuse fence-sitting with balance, or that there is insufficient evidence to prove a claim.
juries are expected to be "fence-sitters" rather than convicting people "because their eyes are too close together".

my opinion is: if it was a demolition job, the logistics required would be as great as the number of NASA people needed to keep secret that the americans didnt go to the moon.
(thats a joke by the way)

you are getting tied up in detail, and not seeing the bigger picture.

what was the purpose of demolishing the 3 towers? what did it achieve?
if the purpose was to start a war, then as I have said before, simply allowing planes to fly into buildings would be sufficient. even if the fires didnt bring down the building, they would probably been demolished for safety reasons.

I think you are allowing yourself to be distracted, much as a magician would apply sleight of hand. While you are busy finding conspiracies in New York, you are being distracted from seeing what is happening in Iraq, and the sabre-rattling towards Iran.

so, my opinion is to apply Occams Razor, and ask;
What purpose would be served by demolishing the towers?
If demolishing the towers was the objective, there are simpler and less intrusive ways to achieve it. (as I have already pointed out)

we live in a world where many people cant accept the concept of "randomness" or simple incompetence on the part of humans, and try to see meaning in events, when meaning does not exist.
(the number of conspiracy theories about the Titanic (was swapped for damaged sister-ship and allowed to sink for insurance, for example rather than simple bad-luck in hitting an iceberg.)
The simple car-crash where MI6 supposedly assassinated the Princess of Wales, where we are lead to believe that the sophisticated weaponry of highly trained secret agents could have been rendered impotent by the simple expedient of the woman wearing a seat-belt, etc).

bear in mind, we see patterns and sequences after the event, not as they are occurring.
and also the selectivity of data to reinforce an opinion, rather than seeing if it has any objective validity. (examples are the apparent "11" significances that arent.)

whats the simplest explanation?
complex plots, or incompetent and lax security?

while I am at it, how many people in america die of heart-disease every year? whay isnt that deemed an attack on the US citizenry by its own food-producers?

Cardiovascular Disease Statistics
"Coronary heart disease caused 451,326 deaths in 2004 and is the single leading cause of death in America today."

for every 1 innocent person killed in 2001 on Sep-11, more than 100 are killed every year by life-style choices.
Perspective.

 

[trendie]

I don't se how anyone who has thoroughly read the documents, and watched the video clips, from the links provided in this thread, and still say that there is no solid evidence.

I imagine that anyone who claims such things, has at best, skim-read the documents, and/or watched a small section of the videos, and then come to this opinion? else how could they not have been convinced by the MASS of evidence that supports the 911 Truth Movement?

Just looking at WTC7 - how could it not have been a controlled demolition

Can you not see the lies, deceipt, and flimsiness of the "evidence" that supports the official story?

Can you not see how easily the official story falls apart?

Can you not see how the 911 Truth Movement can always counter and nullify the claims of the official story and its supporters, who try to debunk the 911 Truthers?

Are you so strongly convinced by the official story that you don't have any doubts that you may have been lied to?

I'm just curious to understand the thought process of people who have been presented with a MASS WEALTH of contradictory evidence, yet still don't seem to be swayed.

Perhaps a few such people have not done nearly enough reviewing of the posted sources, before joining the debate and expressing their opinion/non-opininon, (i'm not talking just about this debate per se, but this type of debate in general)?

Perhaps you are scared to express your opinion on a public bulletin board, for fear the the CIA might have you IP address, and if you say that you believe 911 was an inside job, you'll be carried off to camp x-ray?


I'm just trying to explore the mass psychology at play I guess.

what purpose does a controlled demolition serve?

 

[dcraig1]

This goes back to the imperial hubris I mentioned earlier - basically there are many still in denial that their great country was the victim of a terrorist attack.

And one by "ayrabs" no less.

As I said before, all this is a circus that is just a distraction for anybody trying to get a grip on the reality of what is going on in the world. Instead of the big questions of the US wars of agression in the middle east, the increasing militarism of american culture, the quite valid question - "Is is all about the Oil ?", why does the US military have bases in over 170 countries and a host of others, it is a dicussion of basically trivial issues - how do skyscrapers collapse when they are on fire, what sort of hole is made in a pentagon shaped bulding when something bangs into it and last by no means least numerology and the secret elities plotting away for a single world government.

Single world government no less! If anything characterises the post cold war period, it is the unilateralism of the US and determination of the neocons to enforce empire by military force.

A lot of this conspiracy twaddle is peddled by web sites with a very right wing agenda. Buyer beware.

 

[JTrader]

what purpose does a controlled demolition serve?

HUGE dramatic effect. The memory of which will live for a long time in people. People have these images engrained in their brains, and instantly can recall why the war in Iraq is still raging 30 years on, why there is a need for the continued erosion of our civil liberties. Terrorists are to blame, and the government just wants to keep us safe from them!

Also, without the contolled demolitions, a lot less people would have died. Just the people on the planes, and the floors of the towers that were hit. So, the demolition made the diusaster a lot bigger and more dramtic an event.

 

[rols]

Again, just look at some of the links provided, before you say what isnt so.

Perhaps you are the sad reflection. A person living in fear and denial, unwilling and afraid to form rational views based on rational evidence, for fear that they are "socially unnacceptable". Therefore, you go along with what you believe is the more acceptable view, whether or not you believe it to be correct or not.

I have seen the 'evidence' and watched the 2 hour movie on Youtube etc

And before you continue with any more personal insults I suggest we all take a look at the depth of your 4000 schoolboy posts which pervade these boards. Akin to an immature teenager who changes his opinions on a whim, a slave of his adolescent emotions, a person who does not know his own mind. And you dare to accuse me of not being able to form a rational opinion? How many farewells has it been so far JT?

Has it ever occurred to you that you may be the victim of anarchist propaganda? Look at the Nazis for example. In fact Holocaust doubters still exist, sadly.

As was previously mentioned. This whole charade that you are promoting leaves a very bad taste in my and I'm sure many other's mouths. Especially in relation to the 3,000 people who died that day.

 

[JTrader]

do not confuse fence-sitting with balance, or that there is insufficient evidence to prove a claim.
juries are expected to be "fence-sitters" rather than convicting people "because their eyes are too close together".

my opinion is: if it was a demolition job, the logistics required would be as great as the number of NASA people needed to keep secret that the americans didnt go to the moon.
(thats a joke by the way)

you are getting tied up in detail, and not seeing the bigger picture.

what was the purpose of demolishing the 3 towers? what did it achieve?
if the purpose was to start a war, then as I have said before, simply allowing planes to fly into buildings would be sufficient. even if the fires didnt bring down the building, they would probably been demolished for safety reasons.

I think you are allowing yourself to be distracted, much as a magician would apply sleight of hand. While you are busy finding conspiracies in New York, you are being distracted from seeing what is happening in Iraq, and the sabre-rattling towards Iran.

so, my opinion is to apply Occams Razor, and ask;
What purpose would be served by demolishing the towers?
If demolishing the towers was the objective, there are simpler and less intrusive ways to achieve it. (as I have already pointed out)

we live in a world where many people cant accept the concept of "randomness" or simple incompetence on the part of humans, and try to see meaning in events, when meaning does not exist.
(the number of conspiracy theories about the Titanic (was swapped for damaged sister-ship and allowed to sink for insurance, for example rather than simple bad-luck in hitting an iceberg.)
The simple car-crash where MI6 supposedly assassinated the Princess of Wales, where we are lead to believe that the sophisticated weaponry of highly trained secret agents could have been rendered impotent by the simple expedient of the woman wearing a seat-belt, etc).

bear in mind, we see patterns and sequences after the event, not as they are occurring.
and also the selectivity of data to reinforce an opinion, rather than seeing if it has any objective validity. (examples are the apparent "11" significances that arent.)

whats the simplest explanation?
complex plots, or incompetent and lax security?

while I am at it, how many people in america die of heart-disease every year? whay isnt that deemed an attack on the US citizenry by its own food-producers?

Cardiovascular Disease Statistics
"Coronary heart disease caused 451,326 deaths in 2004 and is the single leading cause of death in America today."

for every 1 innocent person killed in 2001 on Sep-11, more than 100 are killed every year by life-style choices.
Perspective.

Exactly, these terrorist events are very rare. People are far more likely to die in a car wreck etc. So why the need for the continued tightening of terror legislation, end of free speech around parliament, continued erosion of civil liberties, growing spying on citizens by govt. etc. and where does the justification for it all come from? - 9/11.

 

[JTrader]

I have seen the 'evidence' and watched the 2 hour movie on Youtube etc

And before you continue with any more personal insults I suggest we all take a look at the depth of your 4000 schoolboy posts which pervade these boards. Akin to an immature teenager who changes his opinions on a whim, a slave of his adolescent emotions, a person who does not know his own mind. And you dare to accuse me of not being able to form a rational opinion? How many farewells has it been so far JT?

Has it ever occurred to you that you may be the victim of anarchist propaganda? Look at the Nazis for example. In fact Holocaust doubters still exist, sadly.

As was previously mentioned. This whole charade that you are promoting leaves a very bad taste in my and I'm sure many other's mouths. Especially in relation to the 3,000 people who died that day.

You have made it personal not me. I have not insulted you, you have insulted me. Dude, calm down, relax, start breathing!
As for this idea of a lost adolescent who doesn't know his own mind that you have and are trying to promote in the way of a personal attack. I can honestly say I wouldn't swap being me for anyone else in the world, and i sinceraly mean this. You do not know me in th slightest, don't pretend otherwise.

 

[Crap Buddist]

Also this is a discussion board, of sorts, people are not required to stump up evidence a la court o law stylie. But Anything that pops up , I'd say is open to discsussion.

But if the US wanted to prove their case why not just relase all that video from the pentagon of the approach jetliners ?

Of all the camera in that area does the world accept 5 frames released of the entire neighbourhood. ?

OK OK , I could understand, after all the pentagon is not of significance to warrant security covering a what 10 mile grid ?

That seems funny. It really does. Ive not allocated time to see how many camera they have going 24 hours a day and how many square miles they cover but.......

 

[JTrader]

dcraig - Single world government no less! If anything characterises the post cold war period, it is the unilateralism of the US and determination of the neocons to enforce empire by military force.

Exactly. The new world order master plan.

 

[JTrader]

Anyway guys, I've pretty much posted all the links that i can think of, and with the help of Atilla, Fibonelli, and Crap Buddhist, we have managed to create a wide ranging and comprehensive selction of sources, that are here for all to see, review and form an opinion based on that, if they want to.

I

 

[rols]

I can honestly say I wouldn't swap being me for anyone else in the world, and i sinceraly mean this..

:cheesy:

 

[JTrader]

Also this is a discussion board, of sorts, people are not required to stump up evidence a la court o law stylie. But Anything that pops up , I'd say is open to discsussion.

But if the US wanted to prove their case why not just relase all that video from the pentagon of the approach jetliners ?

Of all the camera in that area does the world accept 5 frames released of the entire neighbourhood. ?

OK OK , I could understand, after all the pentagon is not of significance to warrant security covering a what 10 mile grid ?

That seems funny. It really does. Ive not allocated time to see how many camera they have going 24 hours a day and how many square miles they cover but.......

Yes, you are right CB. As an open discussion, contribution to this thread is non-obligatory, and mods depending, the thread will remain here for all to see. people should be free to contribute however they want to. For me, It's been an interesting place to dump links to what i consider relevant and interesting sources, that others may want to look at (or not).

Even if none of us wanted to post anything regarding our own opininons regarding 911, and just pasted links to interesting sources, without saying anything else, the thread would still be worthwhile IMO.

Yes, isn't the Pentagon one of the, if not - the most secure building in the world?
It does seem awfully strange that no video footage would exist from any of the MANY security cameras that are plantred around the building.

FBI Withholding 84 More Tapes of Pentagon on 9/11

 

[Crap Buddist]

What caused the pyroclastic flows ? I mean when the planes struck and all that jet fuel blew bits up, the smoke and dust clouds drift mainly sideways and upwards in the breeze like a normal heated fire.

Now when the top 30 floors explode later we then start to see the pyroclastic dense flows whack in. These dense superheated clouds are different becuase they accelerate downwards, not drifting merrily ,like the jet fuel explosion dust clouds. No. these are much more supercharged , so what causes that?

Well , explosives do . So these Pyroclastic clouds that are evident, is that evidence , well yes, but of what ?

Lets crack that one please. Maybe it was natural dust falling ?

 

[A Dashing Blade]

. . . Just looking at WTC7 - how could it not have been a controlled demolition
. . .

Well, these guys here do controlled demolitions.

Check out ge prep-work, literally kms of cabelling and super-sensitive equipment that is used.

How come not a living soul saw these mysterious suicide bombers coming in and wandering around the building with what would must have been absolutely enormous bags of explosives and how come no one's taken the credit for their devilishly cunning, perfectly timed, explosive-tastic actions?


Needless to say, the thermite "thoery" is comprehensively dismissed here
I'll just post an example as the molecular maths get's a bit boring . . .

"Assume 3000 lbs of aluminum fell from the towers. If it had been molten iron produced by thermite, then 6*3000 = 18,000 lbs of thermite reactants would have been required to produce that same volume of falling mass."


(took approx 1 min of googling to find that out)

 

[JTrader]

Well, these guys here do controlled demolitions.

Check out ge prep-work, literally kms of cabelling and super-sensitive equipment that is used.

How come not a living soul saw these mysterious suicide bombers coming in and wandering around the building with what would must have been absolutely enormous bags of explosives and how come no one's taken the credit for their devilishly cunning, perfectly timed, explosive-tastic actions?



(took approx 1 min of googling to find that out)

Ar, yes, Controlled Demolition Inc. This is the demolition comany with government contracts, who was also hired to remove all the rubble after the WTC collapses after 911. They were put in charge of destroying the evidence of a crime scene. How convenient.....


WTC7.net the hidden story of Building 7: Controlled Demolition

 

[A Dashing Blade]

Ar, yes, Controlled Demolition Inc. This is the demolition comany with government contracts, who was also hired to remove all the rubble after the WTC collapses after 911. They were put in charge of destroying the evidence of a crime scene. How convenient.....

OK JT, get googling and come up with your estimation of the amount of explosives, cabling etc required to support your "theory"

Mwah ha ha ha ha ha . . . just seen that the one citation in your link is from howstuffworks.com

these are the cited peer-reviewed paper used in the links I use . . .

Engineers Explain WTC Collapse
architectureweek[/B].com/2002/0529/news_3-1.html]ArchitectureWeek - News - Engineers Explain WTC Collapse - 2002.0529

Report Ties WTC Collapses to Column Failures
construction[/B].com/news/buildings/archives/040119.asp]McGraw-Hill Construction | ENR - Research May Never Pinpoint Sequence of Events on 9/11

IT WAS THE FIRE, CAUSED THE TWIN TOWER COLLAPSE - icivilengineer.com
Vincent Dunn,

Simulation for the collapse of WTC after aeroplane impact - Lu XZ., Yang N., Jiang JJ. Structure Engineer, 66(sup.). 2003, 18-22

Bazant, Z.P., & Zhou, Y.
"Addendum to 'Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? - Simple Analysis" (pdf)
Journal of Engineering Mechanics v. 128, no. 3, (2002): 369-370.

Brannigan, F.L.
"WTC: Lightweight Steel and High-Rise Buildings"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 4, (2002): 145-150.

Clifton, Charles G.
Elaboration on Aspects of the Postulated Collapse of the World Trade Centre Twin Towers
HERA: Innovation in Metals. 2001. 13 December 2001.

"Construction and Collapse Factors"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002): 106-108.

Corbett, G.P.
"Learning and Applying the Lessons of the WTC Disaster"
Fire Engineering v.155, no. 10, (2002.): 133-135.

"Dissecting the Collapses"
Civil Engineering ASCE v. 72, no. 5, (2002): 36-46.

Eagar, T.W., & Musso, C.
"Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation"
JOM v. 53, no. 12, (2001): 8-12.

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Therese McAllister, report editor.
World Trade Center Building Performance Study: Data Collection, Preliminary Observations, and Recommendations
(also available on-line)

Gabrielson, T.B., Poese, M.E., & Atchley, A.A.
"Acoustic and Vibration Background Noise in the Collapsed Structure of the World Trade Center"
The Journal of Acoustical Society of America v. 113, no. 1, (2003): 45-48.

Glover, N.J.
"Collapse Lessons"
Fire Engineering v. 155, no. 10, (2002): 97-103

Marechaux, T.G.
"TMS Hot Topic Symposium Examines WTC Collapse and Building Engineering"
JOM, v. 54, no. 4, (2002): 13-17.

Monahan, B.
"World Trade Center Collapse-Civil Engineering Considerations"
Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction v. 7, no. 3, (2002): 134-135.

Newland, D.E., & Cebon, D.
"Could the World Trade Center Have Been Modified to Prevent Its Collapse?"
Journal of Engineering Mechanics v. 128, no. 7, (2002):795-800.

National Instititue of Stamdards and Technology: Congressional and Legislative Affairs
“Learning from 9/11: Understanding the Collapse of the World Trade Center”
Statement of Dr. Arden L. Bement, Jr., before Committee of Science House of Representatives, United States Congress on March 6, 2002.

Pinsker, Lisa, M.
"Applying Geology at the World Trade Center Site"
Geotimes v. 46, no. 11, (2001).
The print copy has 3-D images.

Public Broadcasting Station (PBS)
Why the Towers Fell: A Companion Website to the Television Documentary.
NOVA (Science Programming On Air and Online)

Post, N.M.
"No Code Changes Recommended in World Trade Center Report"
ENR v. 248, no. 14, (2002): 14.

Post, N.M.
"Study Absolves Twin Tower Trusses, Fireproofing"
ENR v. 249, no. 19, (2002): 12-14.

The University of Sydney, Department of Civil Engineering
World Trade Center - Some Engineering Aspects
A resource site.

"WTC Engineers Credit Design in Saving Thousands of Lives"
ENR v. 247, no. 16, (2001): 12.

The Towers Lost and Beyond
The Towers Lost and Beyond
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Eduardo Kausel, John E. Fernandez, Tomasz Wierzbicki, Liang Xue, Meg Hendry-Brogan, Ahmed F. Ghoniem, Oral Buyukozturk, Franz-Josef Ulm, Yossi Sheffi

 

[JTrader]

:cheesy:

:idea:

Psychological projection - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

According to Sigmund Freud, projection is a psychological defense mechanism whereby one "projects" one's own undesirable thoughts, motivations, desires, and feelings onto someone else. It is a common process that every person uses to some degree.[3]

To understand the process, consider a person in a couple who has thoughts of infidelity. Instead of dealing with these undesirable thoughts consciously, he or she subconsciously projects these feelings onto the other person, and begins to think that the other has thoughts of infidelity and may be having an affair. In this sense, projection is related to denial, arguably the only defense mechanism that is more primitive than projection. Those who project deny a part of themselves that may otherwise come to the surface. In this case, they cannot face their own feelings of infidelity and therefore project them onto the other person.

 

[Crap Buddist]

Ive provided video testimony of a demo expert stating it is the work of experts, he has no doubt in that. If that demolition guy is lying for a fat pay check, good for him.......

Case open, becasue of the way the building falls, implodes, and the pyroclastic flows and the demolition guys testimony ohh and the safety officers tesimony of numerous explosions, ohh and the physics that the steel was certified to 2000 + degrees without failing, and no diesel fire burns hot enough to melt steel.

Unless the physics guys have got it wrong ?