Questioning what happened on 9/11

[PoisonPete2]

jimmoyer, MMMike.
I have enough experience to know that causing a 47 story bldg to fall into it's own footprint is the result of the placing and sequential detonation of explosives with careful planning and knowledge of the particular structure of a given building. The few isolated fires in that building could not have caused the perfect implosion that we saw in the video.

Answer - and to have one of the buildings collapse in 8 seconds without reaching the temperatures required for metal fatique to the support structure -- phenominal. To have 4 regularily scheduled commercial aircraft veering from flight plans within two hours of each other and not have a military response --incredible. To have a number of FBI reports indicating suspicious behaviour of foreign nationals seeking flight training not under follow-up investigation -- inexusable. Countless other aspects that deserve truthful answers.

 

[#juan]

is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.

Well, you know, that is great, but the top quarter of one of the towers did break off and fall outside the footprint. There are certainly anomalies to question. Like I've said before on this thread, " the only evidence we have is that video", and the video alone leaves questions. Questions like, "why did that penthouse collapse before the rest of the building?"

 

[Alberta'sfinest]

RE: Questioning what happ

One thing that I am almost an expert in is airplanes. When I was a kid I used to design my own R/C planes, and one of my fascinations was with crashes. When you guys explain how someone with limited flying experience flew a 727 at 400mph only a few feet off the ground through a gauntlet of street lights and other obstacles without a single camera catching it, is beyond me. And when a plane like that crashes, large chunks of tail assembly, wings, and fuselage are usually everywhere, but the damage was more consistent of a guided missle, and no plane debris could be seen. Also, nobody said they heard an airplane but rather they said they heard a missle. These are people in the military, and I even know the difference between the two. It just sounds like a load of crap, and since they did a poor job of investigating it, people can say whatever they want because they didn't follow procedure and dumped the evidence into the river. We have the right to voice our theories, because they didn't do their job to ensure that every procedure was followed. It's like they threw the procedure manual out the window right from flight control, to norad, down to the clean-up and investigation. They didn't do their job and they deserve our criticism for not satisfying us with a propper investigation.

 

[moghrabi]

RE: Questioning what happ

You must be Alberta's Finest. Thank you for the post. I hope the believers in Bush's theory can see the light. But i doubt it. A blind person can't see even if they try.

 

[mrmom2]

8) 8) 8)

 

[jimmoyer]

A lot of questions.

A lot of conjecture.

A lot of theories.

Wow !!

Must be something to it, eh?

Real questions remain real questions, but the questions are poseurs in this thread, behaving as proof of warranted suspicion.

Yet nothing proven.

I know you guys have been digging hard, googling for articles, but you can't find anything beyond conjecture, beyond suspicion, beyond theory.

Once you move beyond that point, I'll listen.

But Colpy and MMMike have very valid things to say here but it can't fight the dominant culture that has a righteous proclivity towards suspicion and conspiracy.

The procedures for proof are much more rigorous than all this innuendo and insinuation.

At some point all these questions are used more as a rhetorical device to insinuate something rather than motivate a real search for proof or disproof.

 

[PoisonPete2]

Re: RE: Questioning what happened on 9/11

A lot of questions.

A lot of conjecture. A lot of theories. Wow !!
Must be something to it, eh?
Real questions remain real questions, but the questions are poseurs in this thread, behaving as proof of warranted suspicion.
Yet nothing proven.

ANSWER - the reason there are questions is that answers have not been provided. Even common folk can recognize a whitewash when they see one. To vilify the questioner and mock the question is just cheap theatrics by a person who has no answers. Aren't you the least bit curious?? After all the official reaction has been an endless war. Without "procedures for proof" there remains only "innuendo and insinuation" and many, many unanswered questions.

And who the hell are you to say what is a worthy question?

 

[jimmoyer]

LOL !!

Question all you want.

When questions are not sincere as a starting point to explore but rather used as a poor substitute for proof that a conspiracy exists, then I got every right to characterize it as such.

The fact that you're motivated and interested and others have the same suspicions you do is just fabulous. Maybe something will come out of it. Maybe not. But your proclivity to believe something was hidden has not found the test of proof yet.

 

[PoisonPete2]

Re: RE: Questioning what happened on 9/11

LOL !!

Question all you want.

When questions are not sincere as a starting point to explore but rather used as a poor substitute for proof that a conspiracy exists, then I got every right to characterize it as such.

The fact that you're motivated and interested and others have the same suspicions you do is just fabulous. Maybe something will come out of it. Maybe not. But your proclivity to believe something was hidden has not found the test of proof yet.

---------------------------------------
Answer - there is where your logic falls so flat as it often does with you. A question is not a proof, it is a plea for understanding, a request for clarity, a craving for fact. Sincerity has nothing to do with a question. A question is an interogative statement calling for an answer. Vilifying the question is a slimy way of not responding with an answer. :evil:

When questions are not addressed, then something IS being hidden, and your "test of proof" is being withheld :twisted: . I would want to know 'by who?' and 'for what ends?'. These are questions that an independent board of inquiry would address.

 

[jimmoyer]

I stand sincerely on how questions can be asked in a way that are not as pure as you contend.

You know this too.

Indictment, accusations are often done in the form of questions, and often used rhetorically to cast a shadow of doubt that can never be proven or disproven.

I thank you for editing out your earlier version of ad hominen love.

 

[Alberta'sfinest]

RE: Questioning what happ

Claiming that we're just a bunch of conspiracy theorists jumping on the band wagon to piss off Americans, upset people, or whatever, is just a cop out cause you know that they dumped and conceiled the evidence that we would need to prove ourselves making your arguement meaningless. We're claiming it was a coverup, but we can't prove it because, wait for it, they covered it up. Tell me why they didn't release the evidence and why they illegally destroyed most of the evidence if it would have supported their conclusion leaving no questions? I expect atleast that much from any government. They had the motive, the means, and they destroyed all the evidence that would be needed to disprove their story.

 

[jimmoyer]

You can believe what you want to believe.

I'm sorry that your belief in a coverup prevents you from proving or disproving your own suspicions.

American policy has certainly been the culprit instrumental in creating your extreme suspicion, and so like any ordinary mortal you would conclude that if the American government committed sin "A" there is no doubt that they would have committed sin "B".

I tend towards the belief that the government is quite incompetent, inefficient, incapable, stupid and full of bureaucratic inefficiency staffed by an amazing array of people all with their own opinions who would certainly leak out any information without getting caught, or finding a benefactor in the press or in Congress to blow the whistle.

Demolition of a skyscraper is certainly for the experts and it probably would take too many people to collude to do such an operation correctly to keep a secret.

There are few perfect crimes, but a perfect crime only has to happen once for everybody to believe it can happen all the time.

Also the motivation anyone in government to have been behind the demolition of the World Trade Tower is too convoluted and twisted and too full of a chance for something to go wrong or the secret outted defies my believe in the KISS method.

Keep it Simple Stupid is often the best way to succeed in any technical adventure.

Most American Presidents despite the hate they inspire, they're more multi-dimensional than the cartoon images the politics in the news displays. Most Presidents like to brag on a good economy and hitting the World Trade Center is certainly antithetical to that motivation, but since Bush is quite the cartoon, everyone has lost the ability of imputing a more nuanced view of the world and how it works.


The evil men you despise are not superhuman, powerful yes, but certainly fallible, and certainly not assured of keeping all their secrets --- or of being able to accomplish what they set out to do.


Go out there and try to commit a perfect secret (I cannot tell you to commit a perfect crime) and see how hard, how difficult that is.

 

[PoisonPete2]

One of the great weapons of a conspirator is 'plausable denial'. If that fails, they can use ridicule of the conspiracy proponents as being 'conspiracy kooks'. They usually have a 'fall guy' or 'patsy' to take the heat just in case. The greatest power of those who conspire within the government is that they often control the information, control the process of inquiry, and have the power to silence detractors who get too close. Isn't it strange that the Warren Commission accepted an edited version of the Zebruder (?) tape. They would not sopeana (?) the original tape because "It is in private hands" (Ford). Why was Reagan not impeached for the 'Abscam'? Why was a door replaced at the site of Bob Kennedy's killing? Why was a sign replaced in Dealey Plaza on the Saturday morning after JFK was killed? Nixon would have gotten away with High Crimes if not for the bungled burglary of some highly trained co-conspirators. Why was there no military response to 4 commercial jets on scheduled routes veering from their flight plans????? There are many questions that deserve answers, not platitudes or ridicule. There are answers to all of these questions, and people who do not want the truth to be known.

 

[jimmoyer]

There are abuses by both conspiracy deniers and conspiracy believers.

I tend towards the belief that most conspiracies fail because I believe in the ultimate incompetence of every project ever tried.

The same conspiracy theorists rail mightily against the clumsiness of government, yet paradoxically believe how competent they are in any nefarious deed.

I find this amazingly inconsistent.

 

[PoisonPete2]

Re: RE: Questioning what happened on 9/11

There are abuses by both conspiracy deniers and conspiracy believers.

Answer - subverting the truth and failing to uncover the truth are not moral equivilants.
-------------------------------------

I tend towards the belief that most conspiracies fail because I believe in the ultimate incompetence of every project ever tried.

Answer - ??? mankind is one of the most successful species on earth. We explore the oceans deep, the mysteries of the cell, harness the power of the atom and reach our senses deep into space. Come on, you can do better than that.

------------------------------------

The same conspiracy theorists rail mightily against the clumsiness of government, yet paradoxically believe how competent they are in any nefarious deed.

Answer - you obviously have not met many 'conspiracy theorists' nor read many sources counter to government explanations with an open mind. You are setting up false notions for destruction while ignoring real gaps of information.

 

[Alberta'sfinest]

RE: Questioning what happ

"I'm sorry that your belief in a coverup prevents you from proving or disproving your own suspicions."
It's not a belief, they really won't give me the evidence I need, they really did destroy all of the building materials illegally so that I couldn't get it if I wanted. This is a fact, not a belief, or fictional accuasation, this is reality. I could have proved this whole thing was a farce from just a piece of the steel structure, but it was all taken away and destroyed before they did any tests on the metal for stresses that would be present if explosives were used. All I ask is to be allowed to see the evidence that I would require to prove or disprove my theory. The fact that they have either destroyed the evidence or won't release it, is a sign that they fear what I may find. I'm a very rational person, and all I want is information that should support their conclusion if they aren't lieing.

 

[jimmoyer]

Let's assume for the sake of bypassing argument on the point, that demolition explosives were set on each floor of the Twin Towers.

Why would the govt. cover up the planting of demolition explosives for the terrorists, if the terrorists did the deed?

And if it was the government, why would they plant explosives in the World Trade Center?

Just discussing POSSIBLE MOTIVE and POSSIBLE SUSPECT, should get quite an interesting theory here.

 

[PoisonPete2]

Re: RE: Questioning what happened on 9/11

Let's assume for the sake of bypassing argument on the point, that demolition explosives were set on each floor of the Twin Towers.

Why would the govt. cover up the planting of demolition explosives for the terrorists, if the terrorists did the deed?

And if it was the government, why would they plant explosives in the World Trade Center?

Just discussing POSSIBLE MOTIVE and POSSIBLE SUSPECT, should get quite an interesting theory here.

--------------------------------------
Answer - I don't have the answers, that is why I ask the questions. In the scenerio you outline, I would assume you would be asking those who set the explosives what their motivation was and the motivation of their political handlers.

I would much rather have honest answers than conjecture. I would rather have 'hard evidence' than theory.

 

[jimmoyer]

"I would much rather have honest answers than conjecture. I would rather have 'hard evidence' than theory."

--------------------------------PoisonPete2------------------------

Well then, we're in agreement.

What a circle.

 

[#juan]

jimmoyer

Why would the govt. cover up the planting of demolition explosives for the terrorists, if the terrorists did the deed?

Are you really that naive? The suggestion is that the U.S. government is covering up their own involvement in 9/11. I admit that the evidence right now for the conspiracy is pretty scarce but so is any kind of evidence. The thing is that this same government has knowingly caused the deaths of a hundred thousand innocent Iraqis. (you can call it 70 thousand or 80 thousand if you want but the hundred thousand is accepted by most. A government that would do that, would do anything.