- Joined
- Jan 14, 2002
- Messages
- 28,982
So, it spread to a few threads, and I'm saving Ballistics time. This is where anything related to 9/11 Truther Movement goes.
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
In case you missed it.Before you go any further, watch these links.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXvUt2NE7ro&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMvz3taoMnU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QilSHm0Luj4&feature=related
I'm all for healthy discourse, but the 9/11 truth movement doesn't exactly have a whole lot to be debated. Hence it's closing of threads many a time on this site.
Fixed for you.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E3oIbO0AWE
Loose change, an hour long mockumentary, While I will not be involved in this debate, i'm just posting the link.
No need to belittle the facts. It is a good film that really does open the eyes.Fixed for you.
Loose Change is literally the most bogus footage of the last 50 years, and I am including The Good Son, And The Passion of the Christ
I agree. However my big long shpeal post will be using the evidence and data assembled by the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth to prevent people from pulling the no credentials card.No need to belittle the facts. It is a good film that really does open the eyes.
Also, fixed ur post.
Not to mention this is the same Administration that handled FEMA.Well there are no "facts" in the film. It takes a college student's (who created it mind you) opinion on his cursory knowledge of engineering and structure design to create a MASSIVE conspiracy that would be the most airtight in human history. Seriously, this scheme would have to operate under the guise that NO ONE speaks about it ever. And humans can't commit to that.
Not ONE fact in the entire film? hmm... (somewhat jk)Well there are no "facts" in the film.
To this post, I have to mention Wikileaks.The 9/11 Truth Movement definitely has an appearance of legitimacy to it. I, like most people, was pretty frightened when I saw movies like Loose Change. The bias was apparent, but when they present "facts", which seem pretty concrete, it still does incite emotion and fear.
Still, it seems pretty clear by now that 9/11 was not a government conspiracy or anything like that. Without using any science or anything (since that generally won't do in those scenarios, where a small group of scientists go against the majority), certain huge gaps in the conspiracy theory can be seen.
1. If 9/11 was in fact a conspiracy, then it would be fair to say that at least 1000 people (actually far more) were involved. Thousands more were murdered, meaning clearly the government wouldn't be opposed to killing or even torturing others.
If this is the case, why hasn't the government tortured/coerced the scientists/activists working for the 9/11 Truth group? The government would benefit greatly from the leaders of the 9/11 Truth movement and lead scientists saying that they were in fact wrong to say that the government was involved. They could do many things such as torture the individuals themselves, torture family members, threaten murder, threaten murder of family members, or in much simpler cases, just offer money. They would have no opposition to this, since they are apparently fine with murder and torture, and they have nothing to fear from the conspiracy theorists "telling on them" to the public, since nobody is REALLY going to believe them if they make that claim.
2. Again, if 9/11 was a conspiracy, then more than 1000 people (at least) were involved in the mass illusion which was placed on everyone. Presumably many of those people are in the army, FBI, or any other top government agencies. Those people all enrolled in those positions because they had a desire to serve their country. True, it is possible that certain people in those groups can be corrupted to do terrible things, but to say that such a large group of people can all be contacted for this task (helping with 9/11) with no leaks is making a huge statement about the morality of people in army/military (or whatever it's called), FBI/The rest of them, and government positions.
Even if they were able to assemble such a large group of people and have them participate in 9/11, it is extremely unlikely that none of those people will leak the information they have to the public. While those thousands of people have supposedly been corrupted, they all initially joined their positions to serve their country, and they would be the first people who would stand up against people who try to harm their country (that specifically is referring to the military).
To sum up,
1. The government could have just tortured the 9/11 truthers to do what they want.
2. That over 1000, who are dedicated to serving their country, ALL would be corrupted to completely, is very unlikely.
Phew, my first ever wall of text, in my first ever post in the PG. Hi everybody!
Do you have any evidence that anything like government intervention was needed? You make the assumption that the people who planned the attacks were stupid. Airport security is not good.I don't buy the conspiracy. I wanted to.. I really hated the fact that this happened, I found it to be a terrible tragedy and a real slap in the nads for the US. I've no doubt the Bush Administration let 9/11 happen. They were clearly warned, of an impending attack, involving hijacked planes, to be used as projectiles, to topple the WTC, the Pentagon, and the White House.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/16/attack/main509294.shtml
But to think that Bush went a step further, and MADE it happen, not just "let" it happen through ignorance, or whatever ... no. I can't buy that. It's just too easy to write it off that way. Just like with JFK, is it really so hard to believe that it was the act of one crazy dude? For many, yes there just HAS to be some huge conspiracy at play for such a terrible act to take place.
If 9/11 was perpetrated by the government, that isolated incident of murder clearly shows that the government not only has willingness to torture/interrogate others, but also that they have the means. If they can take out 3000 people with so many people believing it was an accident(EDIT: Sorry, I meant terrorist plot), they can definitely make certain people 'disappear" for a while, under the guise of a "business trip' or something like that. I don't think it's logical to say that the government is capable of orchestrating 9/11, but not capable of getting rid of a few leaks which are present in the 9/11 truth group.1. This was an isolated incident of murder, with lagging events of cover up. The coverage has been denied through the media and various organizations that plan to keep the established view. This isn't Stalin's Regime where you can just be lead out of your home and shot in front of your family for dissenting. However they have been ignoring, and quietly resisting the 9/11 truth movement. For instance: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h2Ck_40MNUekB-uO5iH0KfJ1ZYeQD9IDSQ380
I'm not sure 1000 is the right number, but it would definitely be something very high around there. Many people in the following groups would have to be lying for things to have gone the way they have: The Pentagon, the 9/11 commission, hundreds of scientists, many architects, SO SO many people in the media (as is often claimed), certain people in the Air Force, certain Fire Fighters, certain Police Officers, and many people in the FBI and other organizations like them (I don't know the names).2. Why do you think 1,000 individuals would have to know the deep dark circumstances of a planned attack? Hundreds of FEMA personnel were in New York monday night, having just arrived to conduct their biological terrorism attack drill scheduled for the next day: September 11th 2001, how convenient that they were there with 400 trucks ready to take debris away from the buildings and help injured victims from the towers. Just because they were there, doesn't mean all the FEMA workers are part of the controlled demolition. It just means they were doing their job, and higher up individuals are to blame. Perhaps you should look towards all the whistle blowers that lost their jobs stepped out of commissions on the grounds that they discovered too much information to keep quiet about it. http://www.corbettreport.com/articles/20100305_911_whistleblowers.htm
@ Ballistics.Who are you talking to, me?
In response to the questions raised about WTC7's collapse:Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength—and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."
"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.
But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, 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.
"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."
Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom—approximately 10 stories—about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.
NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.
According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."
There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation: First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.
Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time."
WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors—along with the building's unusual construction—were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse.
Lol. Only means you wasted 5 more minutes of time!I too watched the first 30 minutes of "9/11 Blueprint for Truth". Actually, I watched 35 minutes, so in your face KrazyGlue.
In terms of people here personally debunking the evidence presented by those scientists, the fact is that it's extremely unlikely that anybody here has the scientific credentials to debunk the information presented by both sides. The only thing we CAN do is look at each side from a logical standpoint and see which one is more likely to be true.The debate hall sounds like a cool place but its not my objective to get in. All I wanted to do was present this subject in the only place that I thought you were allowed to post any subject, in the pool room, but my thread was locked because the mods didn't want... Actually I have no idea why they locked the thread. So CK told me to post here.
I am trying to help you guys because this is a really important matter. I understand its hard to think about your government doing something awful but truthfully it happens all the time and not just in our country. I find it amusing that everyone disagreeing with me has only skimmed my video. I know you guys are busy but the death of your fellow 3,000 citizens deserves 2 hours of your time.
I am not going to debate your debunking theories because you cannot debunk the scientific evidence presented by the Architects and Engineers that are part of this movement. If you will not give me the decency to look at the AE911Truth.org evidence on their website, or watch this video, I feel no need to argue with you, because you have already made up your mind and I cannot change it. If you look scientific evidence in the face and then google theories to debunk it, you are justifying your own theories and not observing with a clean slate.
I used to think as the majority do, that there is no way the Bush Administration would lie to its own people. But I saw the evidence and I do not play with facts.
I am not going to list all the evidence that a 2 hour presentation presents, little pieces at a time so that you can use my inexperience of talking about this subject to justify your theories. I am letting you know that this organization has the evidence, presents the evidence in the video, if you care about your fellow citizens that have been murdered, you will watch the video, if you don't care, don't watch it, and I will not care about you either.
I will try and write out the evidence in the thread that CK has designated for the 9/11 truth movement, but all at once.
I know this is hard guys but please take me seriously. I am not your enemy I am your friend. =)
I did provide links and specific slide numbers to my written case. You have only provided links to the same site with no written arguments. You want a fully researched post? Fine. I can only address 1 link so I'll do the first you posted:and I'm fairly certain he was talking about controlled demolition. This is why you people are so infuriating, I'm not going to sit here for hours on end reading a whole website. If you want to debate it then construct your argument in written form, you're just begging for condescending responses with out that. (this is one of the reasons why I like dre, he actually researches topics and provides links. I may think his research practices are bit odd and the links to evidence a bit out there, but none the less he constructs an argument that can't be brushed aside.) So with that in mind, I'll just keep posting links until someone gives me a fully researched post, I think that's fair. Minimal work for minimal work.
This is why I posted the popular mechanics article as it countered this claims.
here's everything you'll ever want to know about steel and it's properties when exposed to fire. (Includes the authors rebuttal to Jones.) and the thermate argument
http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm
http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm
Here's also building seven info, along with the free fall speeds.
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm
I did say it was a two way street. Why are you defending any condescending?Perhaps, but you have to realize the context. This is an online forum. People here aren't paragons of virtue. Condensation will be responded to with more condensation. Unfortunately, that's just the way it works. And Ballistics was definitely being condescending. To quote: "Maybe you should take me seriously and not show me garbage".
Same deal as above. And EE did actually have a point here. Ballistics shouldn't be posting in the center stage, and he is, in fact, posting the same link over and over while brushing off Aesir's link by calling it "garbage".
This isn't about conspiracy so please don't associate the two. The debate is 'how the towers in the 9/11 tragedy were brought down. I have provided evidence beyond reasonable scientific doubt that it was controlled demolition.Along with watching arguments for the 9/11 conspiracy, I have also watched videos and read pieces backing up the official story. Reading both sides is intellectual honesty, and it is something that far too many people from both sides don't do. It's the reason why so many people believe Obama wasn't born in America, or that George Bush is evil.
This brings up a good point. I encourage everyone to watch a video of the towers falling. Ask yourself 'does this look like it was caused by the plane crash or fire?'. Or as stated in my last post, 'simply name anything, ever, that has fallen strait down due to fire or a side impact'.1. Which makes logical sense.
2. Which is generally accepted by people who know MUCH MUCH more about this than me.
To me the answer is the same for both, so I have an easy time with it.
Do you mean, what do the experts gain from creating conspiracy?I have a question. Supposing this wasn't a Government job, and these experts are just creating a "conspiracy", what exactly would be the motive behind doing this be? Is there some sort of money to be made from this?
uh, well yeah. The attacks of 9/11. ? I guess I'm not following your question...Do you have any evidence that anything like government intervention was needed?
I see nothing of this in my previous post. I made no assumptions or even references to airport security. I was saying that the Bush Administration dropped the ball essentially. Condi Rice literally had a report in her hands before the attacks, a page or two of which saying words to the effect of "Osama bin Laden is planning to attack the US with hijacked plans by flying them into the WTC, Pentagon, and White House." How much more warning can you get? LOLYou make the assumption that the people who planned the attacks were stupid. Airport security is not good.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1130731388742388243#I have a question. Supposing this wasn't a Government job, and these experts are just creating a "conspiracy", what exactly would be the motive behind doing this be? Is there some sort of money to be made from this?
Did you completely ignore my statement above? There are still greedy people in Non-Profits.http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1130731388742388243#
Oil
Oh wait I misread that. There is no motive for the Architects and Engineers of 9/11 truth to be making this fuss other than educating the American People. They are a non-profit organization.
Good post man.1. If 9/11 was in fact a conspiracy, then it would be fair to say that at least 1000 people (actually far more) were involved. Thousands more were murdered, meaning clearly the government wouldn't be opposed to killing or even torturing others.
If this is the case, why hasn't the government tortured/coerced the scientists/activists working for the 9/11 Truth group? The government would benefit greatly from the leaders of the 9/11 Truth movement and lead scientists saying that they were in fact wrong to say that the government was involved. They could do many things such as torture the individuals themselves, torture family members, threaten murder, threaten murder of family members, or in much simpler cases, just offer money. They would have no opposition to this, since they are apparently fine with murder and torture, and they have nothing to fear from the conspiracy theorists "telling on them" to the public, since nobody is REALLY going to believe them if they make that claim.
2. Again, if 9/11 was a conspiracy, then more than 1000 people (at least) were involved in the mass illusion which was placed on everyone. Presumably many of those people are in the army, FBI, or any other top government agencies. Those people all enrolled in those positions because they had a desire to serve their country. True, it is possible that certain people in those groups can be corrupted to do terrible things, but to say that such a large group of people can all be contacted for this task (helping with 9/11) with no leaks is making a huge statement about the morality of people in army/military (or whatever it's called), FBI/The rest of them, and government positions.
Even if they were able to assemble such a large group of people and have them participate in 9/11, it is extremely unlikely that none of those people will leak the information they have to the public. While those thousands of people have supposedly been corrupted, they all initially joined their positions to serve their country, and they would be the first people who would stand up against people who try to harm their country (that specifically is referring to the military).
To sum up,
1. The government could have just tortured the 9/11 truthers to do what they want.
2. That over 1000, who are dedicated to serving their country, ALL would be corrupted to completely, is very unlikely.
Phew, my first ever wall of text, in my first ever post in the PG. Hi everybody!
Again, we cannot discuss the science of this issue, we are not scientists. All we can discuss is who we should logically agree with when picking a side.This isn't about conspiracy so please don't associate the two. The debate is 'how the towers in the 9/11 tragedy were brought down. I have provided evidence beyond reasonable scientific doubt that it was controlled demolition.
This brings up a good point. I encourage everyone to watch a video of the towers falling. Ask yourself 'does this look like it was caused by the plane crash or fire?'. Or as stated in my last post, 'simply name anything, ever, that has fallen strait down due to fire or a side impact'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There. I thoroughly examined and disproved a link by written form through scientific methods. No one addressed the well organized scientific points in my last post and few people have presented a case other than links and questioning method and/or credibility. That is exactly what I mean when I said I hate when people can't answer a question or support their position. If you disagree, prove me wrong with on topic facts, not opinions.
Thanks! I notice you're also a Ness main. Wooo DJC.Good post man.
Here's my responses:
1) If there is in fact a conspiracy, the government wouldn't NEED to torture anyone involved with the truth movement. The quick mobilization of media outlet as well as the days upon days of repeated footage burned the image into the collective eye of the world long before any truth movement arose. Due to the quick mobilization of media, the collective Patriotic Spirit of America gave rise to those who will not question any action the government may then on take. If you want a couple examples, take the PATRIOT Act (cleverly named if I do say so myself) and the mobilization of troops to fight the threat of terror.
By the time any sort of truth movement arose, the government would have already fed the public enough information and propaganda that there are few that would believe it by this time. They wouldn't need to silence them, because the majority would do it for them.
2) Not every single person involved would need to be directly aware of the situation, only those in charge. The workers would simply be doing their jobs.