Credible critics of the official account of 9/11

Users who are viewing this thread

  • 167
    Replies
  • 3K
    Views
  • 0
    Participant count
    Participants list

retro

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,886
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
I actually think that the "birther" movement has more credibility than the 9/11 conspiracy theorists... and believe me, I'm all for a good government conspiracy. I'm of the opinion that Roswell was an actual UFO crash, and that Area 51 was used for reverse-engineering research, that there might be secret underground bases, etc., etc., etc. I think all of those things have more credibility than this.
 

Accountable

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,962
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
it's from building 7, there are more offices though, those were just some of the government ones.
Oh. I'm trying to find out who has a dog in this hunt, not simply finding reasons to blame the government. Do you have the site you found that list on so I can be thorough?
 

GuesSAngel

Well-Known Member
Messages
17,434
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
just google 7 world trade center and do the search, it's no secret to what offices were in there....i only mentioned the government ones b/c someone asked if there were government offices in there.
 

Tim

Having way too much fun
Valued Contributor
Messages
13,518
Reaction score
43
Tokenz
111.11z
A few gallons? Stop being dishonest with yourself. Also it was jet fuel, not mere gasoline.

You do realize that "jet fuel" is nothing more than kerosene, right? which is less dangerous/volatile than gasoline any day of the week.
And the fires in WTC7 were not started by jet fuel... do you even know what you are talking about? No plane hit building 7, building 7 was not close enough to towers 1 or 2 to have the "jet fuel" rain down on them and start the fires...

And my point is my last post was to point out the fact that you are saying fire brought down WTC7 and I could start a fire with just a few gallons of gas. So that must mean that I could have brought down that building with fire.
 

MoonOwl

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,573
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.01z
For those who like to answer questions, here's a bunch for ya:


All In One Chunk - 9/11 Basic Questions-WRH 9/11 Index-Questions for Michael Moore


Don't mind me if I don't hang around and wait on those concrete answers :)

Accountable, I used to have a listing way back in 2002 or 03. The NSA had offices in 7 as did a couple of other initial agencies. If I remember correctly, Rudy moved offices there that year too... It's been so long ago and all the links I had died w/the board they were posted on.

As the link I posted shows there are many real questions on a range of topics that remain unanswered to this day. Perhaps if real answers were given to most of them, thinking people's curiosity would be satisfied?

What's interesting is just how many people still don't realize Building 7 even came down... Where did these people get their news? The corporate media?

hehehehehehehehehehehe..... why am I not surprised no one tried to answer any of the questions at the link above?

Not even the Put Options??? Come on, there has to be a rational explanation to all those many, many questions listed..... :cool
 

All Else Failed

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,205
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
You do realize that "jet fuel" is nothing more than kerosene, right? which is less dangerous/volatile than gasoline any day of the week.
And the fires in WTC7 were not started by jet fuel... do you even know what you are talking about? No plane hit building 7, building 7 was not close enough to towers 1 or 2 to have the "jet fuel" rain down on them and start the fires...

And my point is my last post was to point out the fact that you are saying fire brought down WTC7 and I could start a fire with just a few gallons of gas. So that must mean that I could have brought down that building with fire.
You forget that Kerosene burns hotter than gasoline.


I'm not talking about WTC7. I'm talking about jet fuel in general.



hehehehehehehehehehehe..... why am I not surprised no one tried to answer any of the questions at the link above?

Not even the Put Options??? Come on, there has to be a rational explanation to all those many, many questions listed..... :cool
Refer to the two websites I posted a few pages back, the vast majority of those questions are answred by professionals.

You can put away your sunglasses, you're not impressing anyone.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MoonOwl

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,573
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.01z
Refer to the two websites I posted a few pages back, the vast majority of those questions are answred by professionals.

You can put away your sunglasses, you're not impressing anyone.


I'm certainly not trying to impress you...... You have us all beat don't ya? :cool
 

All Else Failed

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,205
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.00z
I'm certainly not trying to impress you...... You have us all beat don't ya? :cool
Yes, I do.



FACT: 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.
 

dt3

Back By Unpopular Demand
Messages
24,161
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.21z
hehehehehehehehehehehe..... why am I not surprised no one tried to answer any of the questions at the link above?

Not even the Put Options??? Come on, there has to be a rational explanation to all those many, many questions listed..... :cool
Well Moonie, I wasn't going to waste my time, but screw it I'll bite.

That site is beyond pathetic. It's barely written in passable English, it doesn't source a SINGLE piece of it's information, and it repeatedly answers questions already listed. How is anybody even supposed to take it seriously? For example:

7. Where are the flight recorders?
42. Why were the Black Boxes never recovered ?
44. Why did the FBI not release the Flight Data Recorder info?
Well...if the Flight Date Recorder (aka Black Box) wasn't recovered, how could they expect the info to be released???

I don't have much time before dinner, but here's a few more absurdities:
2. Why did Ashcroft stop flying commercial airlines, citing an unidentified "threat" in July 2001?
IF this is true (again, they don't source any of their claims), it single-handedly proves the government had no direct hand in it. If the government caused 9/11, then they wouldn't be worried about taking a flight months before, would they?

25. Why would devout Muslims frequent bars, drink alcoholic beverages and leave their bibles?
26. Why would the hijackers use credit cards and allow drivers licenses with photos to be zeroxed?
Maybe they weren't very devout? Maybe they were fitting in? Maybe they wanted to see the heathen culture they're bent on destroying? Maybe they allowed their drivers licenses to be xeroxed because they KNEW they were going to die? How is this even a valid question? Does somebody want to ask them?


106. Why did it take 48 hours to inform Bob Stevens that he had anthrax?
107. Why were envelopes never found near Bob Stevens, Amelie Lundgren and Mia Nguyen?
If Bob Stevens was alive at least 48 hours after exposure, but had never opened an envelope...don't you think he would have said something?

1. Was Global Hawk technology able to remotelycontrol unmanned planes in 1999 for 27 hours?
2. Did Northrop-Grumman use Global Hawk technology in the war in Afghanistan since October 2001?
3. What is the purpose of unmanned technology?
4. Is Northrup in contact with any engineers of Boeing?
What is the purpose of unmanned technology? How is this a pressing unresolved question of 9/11??? Is Northrup in contact with Boeing? OF COURSE, they collaborate on tons of projects...

THOMAS WHITE
1. Is Thomas White still in contact with ENRON?
3. Does he still own ENRON stocks?
Does ANYBODY still own ENRON stocks???

GEORGE W. BUSH
6. Why didn't he interrupt his school meeting as soon as he learned of the first plane crash?
Because one plane crash isn't a national emergency?

25. Why was the series of recommendations Al Gore also put together in 1996 on airport security called by Republican congress "paranoid" and too harsh. Why did the airline industry, lobbying against it, consider it too expensive and impractical.
Easy answer: Gore's solutions required the AIRLINES to pay for every bit of the increased security. Now, it's all done and paid for by Uncle Sam.


24. Why no investigative reporting of the Pentagon scene? The photos do not show much, but then photographers were not allowed, initially, to photograph the scene, if I remember correctly.
Do I even have to explain why military officials might not want a lot of pictures taken inside the Pentagon???


Sorry Moonie, it's time for dinner. The site may raise a few good points, but they're lost in the sea of absurdity and nonsense.
 

MoonOwl

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,573
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.01z
Tell us, what can you dig up on the Put Options? Or any of the numerous other questions in the link I provided that have nothing to do with the towers themselves?

Pardon me if I don't wait on ya....
 

MoonOwl

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,573
Reaction score
1
Tokenz
0.01z
Well Moonie, I wasn't going to waste my time, but screw it I'll bite.

That site is beyond pathetic. It's barely written in passable English, it doesn't source a SINGLE piece of it's information, and it repeatedly answers questions already listed. How is anybody even supposed to take it seriously? For example:

Well...if the Flight Date Recorder (aka Black Box) wasn't recovered, how could they expect the info to be released???

I don't have much time before dinner, but here's a few more absurdities:
IF this is true (again, they don't source any of their claims), it single-handedly proves the government had no direct hand in it. If the government caused 9/11, then they wouldn't be worried about taking a flight months before, would they?

Maybe they weren't very devout? Maybe they were fitting in? Maybe they wanted to see the heathen culture they're bent on destroying? Maybe they allowed their drivers licenses to be xeroxed because they KNEW they were going to die? How is this even a valid question? Does somebody want to ask them?


If Bob Stevens was alive at least 48 hours after exposure, but had never opened an envelope...don't you think he would have said something?

What is the purpose of unmanned technology? How is this a pressing unresolved question of 9/11??? Is Northrup in contact with Boeing? OF COURSE, they collaborate on tons of projects...

Does ANYBODY still own ENRON stocks???

Because one plane crash isn't a national emergency?

Easy answer: Gore's solutions required the AIRLINES to pay for every bit of the increased security. Now, it's all done and paid for by Uncle Sam.


Do I even have to explain why military officials might not want a lot of pictures taken inside the Pentagon???


Sorry Moonie, it's time for dinner. The site may raise a few good points, but they're lost in the sea of absurdity and nonsense.


Thank you for at least looking Donnie... :cool

Once again, it has indeed been reported that the black boxes were recovered and covered up. I wonder why???
 

nova

Active Member
Messages
799
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
And my point is my last post was to point out the fact that you are saying fire brought down WTC7 and I could start a fire with just a few gallons of gas. So that must mean that I could have brought down that building with fire.

Why yes, yes you could. If said fire was allowed to grow large enough and burn long enough, especially when the building is ALREADY STRUCTURALLY COMPROMISED.


hehehehehehehehehehehe..... why am I not surprised no one tried to answer any of the questions at the link above?

Not even the Put Options??? Come on, there has to be a rational explanation to all those many, many questions listed..... :cool

They're ridiculously stupid questions so I'm not surprised no one has tried to answer them either.

Hey guys, why will no one admit to gov't mind control when I ask? :24:

Why can't I find bigfoot when I go hunting?:24: :24:

Here let me try a few easy one's just so you'll drop it...

1. Why didn't jets intercept the airliners since they had numerous warnings of terrorist attacks?

Because after the cold war, it stopped being SOP to keep interceptors on the flight line on Alert status because it costs a lot of money and eats up a lot of manpower. Firing up an F-15 involves a little more than walking out and turning the key, especially when its a mission that needs armament. In other words, it takes a long fucking time to put a jet in the air from cold status.

4. Why didn't the Secret Service hustle Dubya out of the classroom?

WTF would they? Up until the 2nd plane hit it wasn't obvious just WTF was going on. It it had been an accident, it would not have been the first time an aircraft had hitten a skycraper. Not knowing whats happening and having POTUS in a relatively secure location, you stay put.

23. What about media reports that hijackers bought tickets for flights scheduled after Sept. 11?

Ever hear of a backup plan? They were a lot of things, but stupid enough to believe that nothing could go wrong to delay their plan wasn't among them...

25. Why would devout Muslims frequent bars, drink alcoholic beverages and leave their bibles?

Its called a cover. If you're trying for a sneak attack, you try and blend in and not be noticed as much as possible...

26. Why would the hijackers use credit cards and allow drivers licenses with photos to be zeroxed?

WTF do they care? IIRC the documents were under aliases and even if they weren't, their plan was to be dead in short order anyway. Why do you care who has a copy of your DL when you're DOA?

28. How did the hijackers change the flight plan without law enforcement or the military try to stop them?

Firstly see my explanation for interceptors above. Then realize that on top of that up until 9/11 it was not SOP to scramble fighters to intercept airliners that lost contact with ATC. Secondly what law enforcment agency is going to stop them once in the air? Neither the local PD nor the FBI have jet fighters in inventory that I know of.

And thats just the extremely easy ones...
 

nova

Active Member
Messages
799
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
There are no fucking hard ones, just one's that would take more time than I have to either find the built in contradiction or find the relevent information.

Its typical conspiracy theory garbage. Ask enough abjectly stupid questions and out of the godawful shitty mess, there will probably be a question or two that nobody can answer, but in the grand scheme of things really aren't relevent.
 

retro

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,886
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
hehehehehehehehehehehe..... why am I not surprised no one tried to answer any of the questions at the link above?

Not even the Put Options??? Come on, there has to be a rational explanation to all those many, many questions listed..... :cool

There are

1. Why didn't jets intercept the airliners since they had numerous warnings of terrorist attacks?
Up until 9/11, it wasn't commonplace to keep military jets on standby to the point where the pilots just had to get in and leave. There was prep work that needed to be done prior to making the plane ready to fly.


4. Why didn't the Secret Service hustle Dubya out of the classroom?
He did leave, after the second plane hit if I'm remembering correctly. Up until the second plane hit, there was no proof that it was a deliberate act. Had he gotten up and left right then and there, it would've lent more credence to the conspiracy theory that the Bush administration was aware of the impending attacks and let them happen anyway.


9. How did Bush see the first plane crash on live camera?
A simple mis-speak? We all do it all the time.

11. How did they come up with the "culprits" so quickly?
It was probably relatively easy to search the passenger manifests for each of the four flights and look for possible terrorist ties

12. How did they find the terrorist's cars at the airports so quickly?
Again, once they searched the manifests, it's a matter of looking into public records and finding information about the vehicles, and then making searches of the airport parking lots.

23. What about media reports that hijackers bought tickets for flights scheduled after Sept. 11?
Perhaps they did as a way to try and keep their actual date of attack from being known. Or maybe it was a mistake by the media, I remember sitting in one of my college classes that day hearing reports that there were planes on their way to San Francisco and Los Angeles, and a whole host of other rumors that the media was reporting as fact

25. Why would devout Muslims frequent bars, drink alcoholic beverages and leave their bibles?
It's called fitting in. They were trying to avoid attracting attention to themselves, and what better way to attract attention than to make it obvious that they were devout practicing Muslims

26. Why would the hijackers use credit cards and allow drivers licenses with photos to be zeroxed?
Again, fitting in, and they probably weren't under any serious surveillance either. Plus, technology today is far beyond what technology was almost 10 years ago. So there wasn't extensive facial recognition or pictures/copies/scans being flagged at that point in time.

28. How did the hijackers change the flight plan without law enforcement or the military try to stop them?
Change what flight plan? Once the plane is in the air, any flight plan that it put into the autopilot system can be manually overridden. Law Enforcement and/or military has no control over what's happening in a plane.

30. How could the FBI distinguish between "regular" Muslims and hijacker Muslims on those flights?
31. Why was there not one "innocent" Muslim on board any of these flights?
32. Did someone go through the passenger lists looking for Muslim names and label them as hijackers?
Pretty simple to backtrack someone and find whether or not they have terrorist ties. There may have been non-Arabic Muslims on those flights.

47. Where did the photos of all 19 hijackers come from?
Passports, Visas, Drivers Licenses, any number of different sources that are readily accessible once you have a name.

51. How could the hijackers disable the defense systems?
What defense systems? Onboard the plane? There weren't any. In a pre-9/11 world, there weren't near the security protocols on airplanes as there are now because of those attacks.



That's about all that I have time for right now, but there are legit explanations for a lot of those. Other items aren't actually issues but simple misconceptions on the part of Michael Moore. Others are simply red herrings and have no relevance whatsoever.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BadBoy@TheWheel

DT3's Twinkie
Messages
20,999
Reaction score
2
Tokenz
0.06z
Add this one to the list:

Why didn't we invade Egypt, and Saudi Arabia? Seeing as how that is where the majority of the hijackers came from.

And we already know those bastards have WMD.....Cause they bought 'em from us.
 

cam elle toe

Banned BY User's Request
Messages
17,794
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Add this one to the list:

Why didn't we invade Egypt, and Saudi Arabia? Seeing as how that is where the majority of the hijackers came from.

And we already know those bastards have WMD.....Cause they bought 'em from us.


Because Bush Snr had no quarrel with them.....he wanted Osama...and couldnt get him while HE was pres, so left it to sonny.....even helping to rig elections to make sure he got into power.
 
78,875Threads
2,185,391Messages
4,959Members
Back
Top