If 9/11 was a inside job, How many people were involved?

originally posted by: sg1642
Explosive charges can be fired remotely using several methods

care to list these "several methods"?

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

What? No no, much longer than that. He signed the lease 6 weeks before. Obviously it would be more than Silverstein involved, but he would have been able to place people and give access prior to signing the lease, and he was involved with building seven from the start.

Not impossible at all.

originally posted by: seanm
This is one of the dirty little secrets 9/11 Truthers are unable to address. Not only would it require a substantial number of people to be involved in all of the pre-event activities required for a plan to be pulled off, e.g., planting explosives in the WTC towers, getting NORAD to "stand-down", planning what to do with aircraft and their passengers that "didn't" hit the Pentagon, there would be a far greater number of people having no prior knowledge of the plan who would have known that the explanations of what happened AFTER the events didn't jive with what they knew.

Add to that the many hundreds of non-government investigators and forensic scientists who would have had to either lie or be threatened to put out what would have to be false reports from NIST, FEMA, and ASCE.

Necessarily, thousands of people would know of either the plan in advance and/ or that the the explanations post-event didn't jive with what they personally knew.

The peculiar notion by 9/11 conspiracy buffs that such an event could be planned, executed successfully, and covered-up is far beyond absurd and irrational.

That's why the 9/11 Truth Movement is known by its proper name: the The 9/11 Denial Movement.

Government = Mafia. Ask yourself what would the Mafia do? People would be killed and just disappear. Do you doubt that the latter is beyond the capabilities of government? Cheney took control of NORAD. The military just follow orders like automatons.

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

That said, if demo explosives were used, how hard would it be for building service men and elevator service men to plant them over a year or however long it was owned by the latest owner before it went down (and paid out huge insurance)?

And the wires?
Do you expect the regular employees to step over wires for a few months?
Insurance:
Silverstein didn't get the amount he wanted.
He wanted it classified as two attacks. ie two planes and two buildings.
The insurance company said it was one attack.
He got $4.5 B not the $7.1 he wanted.
He has been paying $10 million per month rent to the Port Authority since the day he inked the deal.
So please tell us how he made out like a bandit on his deal ?????

4.5 billion is making out like a bandit. 10 million a month for ten years and ge atill made out like a bandit.

Wires? The comment suggesting anyone would be stepping over them shows you dont know anything about skyscrapers. They are like citiea there are aervice corridors, elevator and building repair accesses you would never see. It's like a city.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

They would have been absolutely easy to hide. Of course it could be rigged to blow without a wire. Demo riggers sont have access to the same type of explosives and tech that a gov or intelligence agency would have.

You seem to imply they would use the same method for a scret op that a company would use for a licenses demo. Not to mention the cheapest method also like a licensed demo.

You havent thought through what you are saying.

I never said I believed in this theory, but use a little critical thinking.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: sg1642
Explosive charges can be fired remotely using several methods

care to list these "several methods"?

Radio controlled demolition charges? Charges are in use that are coded to pick up a specific signal that stops them being detonated because of background interference. Each detonator within the charge (which is all one complete unit) also has its own identification that separates it from any other charges being used in the SME sequence. It can all be timed and controlled by computer which allows for highly accurate timing when the charges are fired. Some remote firing controls come in briefcases. Some are military. The mk186 is an example.

a reply to: sg1642

Tens of thousands of charges which all managed to go off in the precise sequence needed with no issues....in the RF hell that was the Twin Towers with no premature detonations or duds. Right. Sorry, but it would be impossible.

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

So, Silverstein signed a lease for buildings he knew were going to be demolished and that the insurance was not going to be enough to rebuild? You seriously believe that?

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

Lets see.....1.5 billion in rent payments made since 9/11/01. Over five billion to rebuild....just now starting to see income coming back.....

So....he has spent roughly 7 billion and the insurance was 4.5 billion.....leaves a 2.5 billion dollar deficit. And that is "making out like a bandit"??

Question...... are you a US Government accountant?

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: sg1642

Tens of thousands of charges which all managed to go off in the precise sequence needed with no issues....in the RF hell that was the Twin Towers with no premature detonations or duds. Right. Sorry, but it would be impossible.

the rf hell that you could easily amplify the signal throughout.

a reply to: sg1642


And, with that sentence, you fatally shoot your theory all to hell. Amplify the signal....and set off charges out of order or prematurely.

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: sg1642


And, with that sentence, you fatally shoot your theory all to hell. Amplify the signal....and set off charges out of order or prematurely.

how do you come to that conclusion?

You don’t need thousands of people.


You need a liaison with the perpetrators (Jihadi Lunatics, Pakistani ISI, Israel Mossad, US intel elements, and Zionists in) and a small cadre of gov and semi government traitors in high positions.

You take this case just like a regular murder case:

Who benefits?

US NEOCONS AND ZIONISTS

Israel/ US Military Industrial OIL Intelligence complex

Jihadi lunatics who want apocalyptic events

Pakistani government ISI who wants a lot of money from US for terrorism


Opportunity:

Cadres in Intelligence of the US/ISRAEL/PAKISTAN/SAUDI ARABIA/NATO/UK
Cheney/Bush and a few close to them and top brass in US military

(They have been doing black ops for decades this is just another( A BIG ONE)
They already have infrastructure in place to do this)

Jihadi useful idiots

That’s not thousands of people

a reply to: sg1642

Knowledge of the systems and experience.

Some peripheral people in this black op could have been told of an intelligence operation on this day so back off

When the op happened they go back and say:

It went wrong
Could have been worst
we almost stopped it

People then aren’t going to come out and say a dam thing

If they did they would
Be killed
Implicate themselves
Be called a lunatic and conspiracy nut or crazy

The will keep quiet

This was planed likely for years all the way back to the first WTC bombing

This one they decided to go all out because the first one didn’t do enough on the Pearl Harbor angle

Just going to edit this post out. It's a waste of time debating, discussing, arguing or whatever you want to call it about something over and over when it won't change anything and nobody is learning anything from it.

a reply to: sg1642

It does get frustrating when you continue to poke holes in the 9/11 conspiracy theories about demolitions only to see the theorists add yet another layer of "stuff" to make their theories remain plausible in their minds.


It generally goes like this...

Theorist " Those buildings came down in a controlled demolition"

Me "How did they plant the charges without anyone noticing walls being torn apart to access structural members?"

Theorist " They did it at night....they did it on weekends...they used access points for the structure...it was powered down for 12 hours (my favorite)"

Me "How did they hide the thousands of wires?"

Theorist "They used remote detonators"

Me "How did they ensure that a random RF signal did not set things off prematurely?"

Theorist "They used coded signals"

Me " So, each charge, of the thousands of charges used, had a receiver and descrambler, and no one found what was left of that?" (bombs ALWAYS leave something of themselves)

........ we will set that one aside for now.....

Me " With a building over 1,000 feet tall, there is a delay in between the signal being sent and received that grows longer with each story, especially with thousands of other RF signals in the air, granted its nanoseconds, but with demolitions...nanoseconds do come into play. With all that, HOW did you manage to trigger a signal that fired the charges at the impact point first, then other stories later?"

Theorist "Don't you think they have access to things that normal people do not?"

Me "So, they used tippy top secret technology not in use by demolition companies, and yet those same folks knew how to implode three skyscrapers of sizes that the PROFESSIONALS have never attempted and did it right three times?"

Theorist "............."

Different Theorist " Dr. Judy Wood used her miraculous Star Wars weaponry to bring down the buildings"

Me " So.........who was this cast of thousands who did this, and yet no one has talked?"

Theorist "They were all killed in accidents"

Me " So....who killed the killers of those who planted the charges"

Theorist "They were killed too."

Me " So who killed the killers of the killers?"



Yes it does get frustrating when people get so attached to their conspiracy theories that they refuse to see reality.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

I think you're not far off some of the examples where people are already set it in their ways and only ask questions to try and stump someone else instead of actually digesting the answer and considering it even if it might not be what they want to hear. I also think your statement of having "the government" use very rare techniques and get it perfectly three times is something to think about. I will ask you to consider what statement the other side is required to accept that could possibly be seen as equally implausible. One of the arguments used all the time and that you hinted at yourself is that controlled demolitions have to be correctly timed to the nanosecond. It would take too much planning and coordination. Yet people are told to accept that for the first time in history, fire could pretty precisely take down three different buildings with three different damage points. Not just short buildings that could fall some minor distance without tipping or anything, but 47 stories and an incredible 110 stories on some of the tallest buildings in the world fallong down one at a time on top of each other. I know fires have technically caused partial collapses on other buildings but not nearly close to on this scale. I also know that you could argue there was massive damage to nearby buildings, especially building 7, but relatively speaking it was pretty minimal. Even with the statement that these buildings were uniquely designed doesn't explain why in 1975 a fire in tower 2(I think)on the 16th floor that burned longer than the ones on 9/11, and before fireproofing was applied to the steel, that would have had the weight of most of the building resting on it failed to cause a collapse when on 9/11 a fire much higher up on the towers and of shorter duration was enough to bring the entire complex down on not one occasion but two.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying it's not possible, and I'm also not saying my next sentence completely applies to you, but to believe fire could accomplish this not out of the question but rather spectacular feat based on the fact that it seems improbable to impossible to ridiculous that anyone could secretly rig the buildings and detonate them in a proper sequence is kind of illogical.

a reply to: TheBolt
Damage and fire. Why is it that everyone forgets that each Tower had some spectacular damage done to it?

a reply to: TheBolt

explain why in 1975 a fire in tower 2(I think)on the 16th floor that burned longer than the ones on 9/11, and before fireproofing was applied to the steel, that would have had the weight of most of the building resting on it failed to cause a collapse when on 9/11

How many of the exterior columns were severed in 1975?
Did they ad the weight of a 757 to the floors in 1975?