Thread: 9/11 Truth

This is a pretty long thread, so sorry for not going all the way through it, but about the jet fuel weakening the structure... Wouldn't the high winds help the fire get a lot hotter?

Anyway, theres pretty much only one thing that has really struck me as odd.

Sorry if this was posted before , but here it is.

How the hell did people with box cutters kill or disable the pilots? If I was a pilot, there is no chance in hell I would let a few guys with box cutters take over my plane. Also, how the hell did they get into the cockpit? Wouldn't the stewardess or whoever start screaming? Or the pilot scream for help? Is it really that hard for a plane full of people to subdue a few guys with box cutters?

Have you heard of other hijackings where the pilot or passengers subdued the hijackers? There are such cases. I don't understand how people with box cutters could overpower all those people.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Your incorrect. Metal does not weaken from jetfuel fire. Most of it burns up in an instant. The tempreature is no where near high enough for it to weaken. Metal steel doesn't just give up when some fire appears.

False.

Wouldn't the high winds help the fire get a lot hotter?

No, high winds contribute little. There was no wind beyond normal. Certainly none that would increase the heat of any fire. Unless you have a wild imagination I guess you could say a flying pink swordfish with a sharp beak weakened the steel and increased the heat to amazing temperatures, with some boxcutters in it's claws and a spare change of underpants, it was only a matter of time before building 7 fell down by the wind resistence of it's beak.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

No, high winds contribute little. There was no wind beyond normal. Certainly none that would increase the heat of any fire. Unless you have a wild imagination I guess you could say a flying pink swordfish with a sharp beak weakened the steel and increased the heat to amazing temperatures, with some boxcutters in it's claws and a spare change of underpants, it was only a matter of time before building 7 fell down by the wind resistence of it's beak.

uhhh.... ok? well blacksmiths use bellows to greatly increase the heat of the fire... which contributes a lot. So why wouldn't it be the same? And at that height even if the wind wasn't beyond normal, it would still be a lot since it's so high up. which is why skyscrapers have air conditioning, since they cant open the windows because of the high winds. I'm pretty sure they use huge bellows to get the fire hot enough to make steel too.

well you make up whichever excuse suits your needs.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

well you make up whichever excuse suits your needs.

are you saying that about what you said about the flying pink swordfish? or the wind contributing to the heat of the fire?

I'm guessing the flying pink swordfish because I thought my statement was pretty valid... It's a known fact.

Your not thinking straight. So I reponded in some equally unbalanced thinking for you to meddle with. I was also kidding. Lighten up.

These empirically verifiable data are what we know. We do not know who planted the explosives or why. All individuals are innocent until proven guilty and an extensive trial putting many key players on the stand would have to occur before we were able to even begin to put the pieces together for every single motive and event of that day.

Also, see the thread in the philosophy forum for an analysis of the thermate evidence.

We also know that Sibel Edmonds and at least a dozen other FBI whistleblowers have indicated that the FBI has been infiltrated by criminal elements who aided the 9/11 terrorists. Sibel Edmonds who claims to have documented evidence of this fact has been gagged by the highest authority - The Attorney General's Office, even after her claims were substantiated by a preliminary by the Justice Department. Since that time gags orders have been repeatedly placed on Edmonds, and even the U.S. Congress form hearing her testimony. What in the world are they hiding? Why is Congress allowing Executive Privilege to override congressional oversight? Ill outline the legal arguments if you cant see them.

This appeal to executive privilege has also been used in the NSA spying scandal to exempt testimony and evidence. It has also been used in the Riggs Bank case where Bush's uncle was found to have allowed money laundering to two Saudi terrorists responsible for the 9/11 hijackings. Do you think it is suspicious that the brother of the President (who is already under fire for not going after the Saudi source of funding for the 9./11 terrorists), is now found guilty of laundering money to the 9/11 terrorists?

There are hundreds of coincidences that nearly prove a conspiracy. They simply need more investigation before a full chronological picture of the events can emerge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by memeticverb
I never said anything about remote controlled planes, missiles, fake cell phones, nor anything else you built up to knock down.

Each of us who have actually admitted there are discrepancies in the official account have been sticking to the facts of what happened, and looking for the best possible explanation that accommodates them. We understand parsimony in scientific and logical investigation.

ONE fact accommodates all of this evidence:

"1. Extremely rapid onset of “collapse”
2. Sounds of explosions (heard by 118 first responders as well as by media reporters)
3. Observations of flashes
4. Squibs, or “mistimed” explosions, 40 floors below the “collapsing” building seen in all the videos
5. Mid-air pulverization of all the 90,000 tons of concrete and steel decking, filing cabinets & 1000 people – mostly to dust
6. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds
7. Vertical progression of full building perimeter demolition waves
8. Symmetrical collapse – through the path of greatestno resistance – at free-fall speed — the columns gave resistance
9. 1,400 foot diameter field of equally distributed debris – outside of building footprint
10. Blast waves blew out windows in buildings 400 feet away
11. Lateral ejection of thousands of individual 20 - 50 ton steel beams up to 500 feet
12. Total destruction of the building down to individual structural steel elements – obliterating the steel core structure.
13. Tons of molten Metal found by FDNY under all 3 high-rises (no other possible source other than an incendiary cutting charge such as Thermate)
14. Chemical signature of Thermate (high tech incendiary)dust samples by Physics professor Steven Jones, PhD. found in slag, solidified molten metal, and
15. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
16. More than 1000 Bodies are unaccounted for — 700 tiny bone fragments found on top of nearby buildings
And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.
1. Slow onset with large visible deformations
2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)
3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never “collapsed”

Taken from Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth.

Ill also add, basement explosions.

And WTC7 as compared to a controlled demolition.

Again, one fact can easily explain all of these occurrences, which are not explained by the official story.

None of this even touching on the all of the facts surrounding the attempts by the U.S. government to cover-up everything from the 118 testimonies of explosions posted above, to ex-FBI agents who claim there are people in the FBI who are aided the terrorists, and are still doing so.

Why did John Ashcroft place gag orders on Sibel Edmonds who claims to have evidence of FBI complicit in 9/11? Why did he also gag congress from even hearing her evidence when Congress had called her in to testify and present evidence?

Why did the City of New York's government force the 911 Families to court 3 times before being forced to release the first responders testimony, which detailed explosions?

None of these facts or questions have been explained or answered (but instead covered-up) by any official source.

. . .

oh, please stop. It's only a joke.

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

Who else doesnt care anymore?

The people who are destined to see it again.

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

The truth is that smarter people than you and me know that highly tactical terrorists, under control by educated architect Osama bin Laden, decided to start a war with us.

shhhh, there, there. back to sleep. your governments going to get it all sorted out for you.

Originally Posted by awoke

shhhh, there, there. back to sleep. your governments going to get it all sorted out for you.

...nice. Its ironic, since I got off my ass to stand up for my beliefs on the subject. What have you done to stand up for yours? ....except internet posting...

And you're right, it will happen again. I'm sure terrorism will show its ugly face agian. But fear not, child. I will take care of them for you.

Great. You're back to grace the stage with your condescending unfounded ignorance again? Just when I thought you were gone for good.

Only from a facist mentality would you consider yourself enlisting as somehow putting you in higher regard or status by somehow magically being able to help out more than a regular joe schmoe could.





Don't you think, you'd have to fully comprehend the difference between insurgents and terrorists before you could start taking care of anything...?

HA HA!!! Good movie!!!

You made reference to my unfounded ignorance. Are you saying that Osama bin Laden didn't confess to the attacks. I know I dumbed down your theory, but aren't you saying that Osama bin Laden and George Bush were both in on it? There's no getting around that.

You're right though. I'm not better than anyone else. Especially Solskye. If I remember, you were present at the time of the Pentagon attack. You said you witnessed no plane his the building. Just as an interesting point, I know know someone who saw the plane from a mile away.

Btw, hows the music?

Meh, I'm not going to step down this pointless path to argue logic with the illogical.

I have too much stuff to do before my show this weekend. You know... being productive, and what not.

Humor me, man!! Do you feel that Osama was in on the plan? In our brief, but hate filled history you have yet to answer that question.

Congratualtions on your gig. Get some tail for me, alright?

SolSkye is that a breeze blowing or am I just half/dreaming. I thought I saw some nice scenery.

He'll never answer that question. Neither will anyone else who believes it was an inside job.

I am through arguing about whether 9/11 was an inside job, but I want to mention something interesting that surprised me. I just saw Ron Paul on Glenn Beck's show, and Glenn asked Ron about the 9/11 conspiracy claims. He asked Ron what he thinks about the idea that it was actually a missile fired by the U.S. government that hit the Pentagon. Ron had a funny look on his face and said, "Preposterous." Then Glenn asked him what he thinks about the claim that the airplanes that hit the World Trade Center were remotely controlled. Ron said that too is ridiculous and said such questions are so stupid he shouldn't even have to answer them. He also said he had not heard those claims before. I was kind of shocked by that because every Ron Paul supporter I have come across believes in the 9/11 conspiracy, and every 9/11 conspiracist I have come across has been a Ron Paul supporter.

EDIT: It turns out that the show was a rerun, so the video is already on Youtube. Here it is.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=JQUwlxReJ8E

No no, Universal Mind, 9/11 conspiracists are smarter than Ron Paul, not to mention the classified material they have access to.

Universal Mind. It's a secret. Expecially when they harp on him for associating with alex jones.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Universal Mind. It's a secret. Expecially when they harp on him for associating with alex jones.

What's a secret?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

So far, you have only asserted that there are peculiar things about the big bang theory. You have yet to explain why you leap to the conclusion that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is real, and you have not even told me how it could be real in light of the issues I have raised. Again, the burden of proof is on you. Thanks.

These threads all kind of blend together, don't they?

Originally Posted by Mark75

These threads all kind of blend together, don't they?

Religion and politics often call for the same arguments.