15 years of deception; 9/11 reviewed

[JollyMon]

I love these threads. It brings out the loons.

 

[HoughMade]

They all seem to think more words make a better argument.

Oh well, some people like to think they have special wisom and knowledge that others are just too dull to understand....kinda like the vaccination thing.

 

[Alpo]

And....here we go! As if the Vitamin K thread wasn't bad enough.

 

[ATM]

Why all the immediate dismissal, folks? Have you answered any of those questions? Have you asked any of those questions?

Truth is usually found in the last place you look for it. Why is it that most here seem to have stopped at the first place they looked for it (original government/media narrative)?

Are you afraid that the 'official 'hypothesis would crumble under scrutiny or examination? That's how the scientific method is supposed to work. If it doesn't crumble, it gets to remain and be further tested.

What about 'unofficial' hypotheses, don't at least some competing hypotheses deserve your examination and scrutiny, too? The fact that you adopted the earliest hypothesis offered should not preclude comparative analysis, should it?

What if you lived outside America, as with many from the video in the OP, would you feel less inclined to cling to one and only one possible theory? Would the 'official' narrative for this event still be beyond the realm of scientific discovery, beyond the realm of scrutiny or doubt. Would you still dismiss and deride others who didn't cling to it as exclusively as you?

And why on earth didn't you adopt "truther" for adherents of the government sanctioned explanations rather than assigning it to those who continue to investigate and scrutinize beyond merely what they were told?

I love it!

Now, who wants to talk about the failed single-prop pilot in training that flew a jumbo jet in a 270 degree high-speed descending approach right into the only spot the pentagon really needed to be hit? Yes, yes, we can all play "find the jumbo jet" and "my, that's a tiny little hole" later, let's just begin by examining the plausibility of the theory the government stuck with.

Do we have any jumbo jet pilots in the house? Any willing to claim they could have done it as described by our government?

Any mediocre to poor Cessna pilots willing to give it a whirl?

I'll go on record here and say that I think this part of the story was more cover-up.

 

[ATM]

Thank you for your insightful comments ... to continue

Thick skin, my man, thick skin.

The emotional comfort of a narrative, which at least seemed plausible at the time, can not easily be wrestled away from most Americans, their defensive mechanisms are very powerful.

They must be coaxed away, weaned from it, encouraged to explore and discover a few steps at a time. Many will refuse if overwhelmed and retreat. Baby steps.

 

["Username"]

I expect there are some who believe the attack of December 7 was a "surprise" attack.

 

[ATM]

I expect there are some who believe the attack of December 7 was a "surprise" attack.

I'm not sure what to believe, let me go ask my government/media.

 

[digitalmonster]

Say this was a government program that did exactly what it was supposed to do, does it change anything? What is at stake? Now what?

This is one where we agree to disagree.

 

[Dan35]

One more and then I'm going for ice cream. This is where I started some time ago. I put these out there because I owe it to you vets.

Take or leave it, investigate further or not, I've done my part.
Like millions of Americans, Iwatched the events of 9/11 on TV and listened to the news reports over the nextfew days. It was an open and shut case as far as I was concerned. All of thepeople that were there and those in the know said the same things. What wasthere to question? The official story made sense based on what I had seen and beentold. End of story.
A few years later, after the 9/11commission report was published, I heard complaints about the accuracy and eventhe truth of the report. Out of curiosity I began to investigate online as towhy there was any controversy. From what I remembered of the news that had beenreported, everything checked out. However, the more I read the more I found anddifferent reports, from different people, at different points in time, all seemedto conflict with the official report.
The long list of unlikely events on9/11 seems to defy reason and certainly defy the odds. Many things that hadnever happened before all converged to happen on the same day, at the sameevent, despite all sorts of proactive safeguards to prevent them. Processes andprocedures were systematically not followed, thereby allowing the carnage to proceed.Evidence was intentionally destroyed in numerous instances and what remains isstill being withheld today. Instead of accountability for all of the failuresthat occurred that day, we are given excuses, and explanations that do notexplain, or our questions are simply ignored. Those in positions of authority on9/11 were promoted, not reprimanded.
In response to the lack ofreasonable/credible information, professionals from many disciplines took itupon themselves to form their own groups to apply their specific training tothe many mysteries that persist. Pilots examinethe improbable piloting aspects of 9/11. Architects and Engineers research the causefor collapse of steel frame buildings. Firemen/Investigators do as muchforensic work as they can with what little evidence remains. Academics look atthe geo=political aspects and what happened since 9/11. Scientists examine moltensteel and mid-air dustification of the twin towers. Even military officersspeak out about their concern over the numerous unlikely anomalous events. Eachof these group’s findings (available online) is amazingly different from theofficial story & the findings are deeply troubling. Unfortunately, the onesource for information that we should be able to rely on has done a less thanpoor job of informing us. Mainstream media (MSM) long ago fell in line with theofficial story and even criticized those “Truthers” who dared to question theunbelievable.
I have found a number of Web siteswhere different individuals have taken 3 or 4 of the items mentioned in thesepages and elaborated on them, subsequently saying that they have proven 911 wasan inside job. Well if 3 or 4 issues prove that, what do all of these pageswith very long lists of anomalies tell you?
So …. I am (still) surfing the Web,trying to sift through what is likely VS what is someone’s fantasy VSintentional disinformation. Who actually had the means to orchestrate all thathappened? Who benefitted from 9/11? Why didn’t a real investigation take placepost 9/11? Why were so many reasonable questions ignored and still remainunanswered? Why is there no accountability for all that happened? Perhaps the answer tothat question is the key to all the others.
I don’t pretend to have all of theanswers, but I do have questions, lots and lots of questions. Hopefully you nowhave some questions as well.
Personal note:When I was in Hawaii many years ago, my wife and I took the tour of the harborwhere our ships were ambushed right before WWII was declared. As we wereleaving I mentioned to one of our young tour guides how sad it was that theU.S. had advance knowledge of the attack, but did nothing to prevent it. Hesaid he also knew, but we should now just forget about it and go on with ourlives, because the event was in the past and it couldn’t be changed. Was hecorrect?

Thanks for reading.

 

[ATM]

Say this was a government program that did exactly what it was supposed to do, does it change anything?

Yes.

What is at stake?

The consent of the governed, perpetual war, Liberty, etc.

Now what?

Advance or retreat, same as always.

This is one where we agree to disagree.

I can't agree to that until you define how we disagree.

 

[ATM]

Look back. I have proclaimed incompetence since my first post in this thread. Maybe you should read what is said and not what you think you want it to say.

If you don't start trying harder, I'm going to be insulted. Right now you're just embarrassing yourself.

Oh, and fuses are often not faster than breakers. You have to look at the design. You haven't refuted the contribution of electricity, except maybe in your own mind.

It was not my intention to insult you. You have my respect even in disagreement.

 

[david890]

"...military grade Thermite..."

We have vets here from every branch of the Armed Forces, and probably most MOS/ratings. Anyone ever deal with, or hear about, "military grade Thermite"? What makes this thermite different from what I could cook up from stuff I could get at Walmart (3 dozen "Etch-A'Sketch" screens for the powdered aluminum oxide; a dozen or so 0000-grade very fine steel wool pads for the raw iron)?

 

[ATM]

"...military grade Thermite..."

We have vets here from every branch of the Armed Forces, and probably most MOS/ratings. Anyone ever deal with, or hear about, "military grade Thermite"? What makes this thermite different from what I could cook up from stuff I could get at Walmart (3 dozen "Etch-A'Sketch" screens for the powdered aluminum oxide; a dozen or so 0000-grade very fine steel wool pads for the raw iron)?

You do realize that you can google this for yourself, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nano-thermite

This happened to be the top hit, but there are plenty more.


ETA: Also explained in this video @ 10:50:

[video=youtube;q3v4QUQpYjc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3v4QUQpYjc [/video]

The whole first half of the video is pretty reasonable and informative, but definitely skip the second half if you're a Bush fan.


Here's one for my 'Physics!' friends to reference and point out any fundamental errors as they were applied to shred and expose NISTs 'analysis' and true role in supporting the cover-up, since I don't understand enough to ask good questions. Indeed, Alpo could probably command a very tidy sum if he can truly provide a scientific explanation of the "collapses" we witnessed that can survive the fundamental scrutiny of a high school teacher and doesn't require controlled demolition. NIST couldn't.

[video=youtube;x-jWUzhtTIY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-jWUzhtTIY[/video]


And, finally, another one just for david. A little something to watch as you collect those several million tons of steel and concrete for your own experiments:

[video=youtube;TJNzaMRsN00]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJNzaMRsN00[/video]

 

[Dan35]

They all seem to think more words make a better argument.

Oh well, some people like to think they have special wisom and knowledge that others are just too dull to understand....kinda like the vaccination thing.

None of us knows everything, but each of us know something. That is why we become much stronger by sharing/communicating.

 

[rob63]

Here's one for my 'Physics!' friends to reference and point out any fundamental errors as they were applied to shred and expose NISTs 'analysis' and true role in supporting the cover-up, since I don't understand enough to ask good questions. Indeed, Alpo could probably command a very tidy sum if he can truly provide a scientific explanation of the "collapses" we witnessed that can survive the fundamental scrutiny of a high school teacher and doesn't require controlled demolition. NIST couldn't.

You recognize that you don't really understand any of this, yet you keep insisting that all of the engineers that keep telling you what happened are wrong?

 

[ATM]

You recognize that you don't really understand any of this, yet you keep insisting that all of the engineers that keep telling you what happened are wrong?

Not really, it was just a wink at a previous exchange:

You don't understand physics or construction, so you don't recognize that your question is nonsense.

NIST avoided it too, don't feel bad. Those questions have one easy answer BTW. You're just not willing to admit it.

I can keep up with the fundamentals which shouldn't need to be violated, as the professionals at NIST attempted, to explain this away. Check out that video when you have time.

 

[ATM]

Stay calm. The men in the white coats are on their way.

​

They're coming to take me away ha ha
They're coming to take me away ho ho he he ha ha
to the funny farm where life is beautiful all the time, and I'll be happy to see those nice young men in their clean white coats
and they're coming to take me away ha ha

 

[JollyMon]

You do realize that you can google this for yourself, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nano-thermite

This happened to be the top hit, but there are plenty more.

So lets get this right..... you feel a limited supply of "nano thermite" was secretly placed and installed in numerous key locations inside the two twin towers with no one seeing or questioning what these workers were doing or how they had access to these locations just so they could place this nano thermite in enough key structural locations to do a controlled demolition..... even though, they could not be certain that these key locations would still be viable after a plane has crashed into the building , as the structural integrity of the building would have changed, and based on the structural integrity of a building is how the timing of explosives are used (in controlled demolitions)..... but thermite doesn't explode, but it burns, so they were able to accurately burn through steel beams to cause what.... the top floors to collapse onto the ones below it so that it collapsed on its self.... but I thought you said that there wasn't enough weight to cause the floors below to collapse..... so then they must have used explosives to do the rest of the floors, so they had to have hundreds of tons of explosives in more key structural locations (that no one saw them install or transport) in an active building with miles upon miles of death cord running (which no one saw them run), which would be a massive undertaking (normal controlled explosions take months to prep and execute) and no one saw it..... got it, sounds plausible

In 2002, the production of nano-sized aluminium particles required considerable effort, and commercial sources for the material were limited.[SUP][3][/SUP] Current production levels are now beyond 100 kg/month.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

.

 

[foszoe]

If the planes never hit, would the explosives have went off anyway or were they placed there ahead of time and detonated remotely?

Would the vertical location of the demo charges have been critical in regards to the aircraft impact or were the aircraft and demo charges only temporally related? Or is the claim that the explosives were on the plane?

Is the claim that there is zero possibility that the airplanes alone could have achieved total demolition?

Is the claim that its a 100% possibility that only demolition charges could have achieved total demolition?