New Article Knocking Self-Proclaimed 9/11 "Truthers"

Yea, this lost me when it stated that we should assume that all major news outlets report for our benefit.

I think back to a court hearing (i cant reference it, but im sure someone will know about it?) where some Fox investigative reporters were fired for trying to release information they had discovered.

The court claimed that because Fox was a privately owned organisation, and therefore had no insentive to report solely for the benefit of the public.

In other words, the article is trash. The guy wants to write an article knocking down on 'conspiracy theorists?!'. Then why doesn't the author focus on the actual crack pots out there.

Pft..

Bigmoose

Originally posted by Mr.x211 This article is just another denounce to all of us truthers and of course the puppets and sheep will listen and believe it. I would too if i didn't know how to think for myself.

What is with you people? You are so arrogant. Because non-"Truthers" don't believe a very unlikely conspiracy theory you call them sheep who can't think for themselves? Trust me buddy, we are just as open minded only we've looked at the facts on both sides and chose the side that we see as the truth, just how you've chosen the other side.

Try to avoid making personal attacks, it doesn't further validate your theory.

reply to post by justamomma


There were witnesses alright though not what one would think.
www.blackagendareport.com...

Witnesses to 9/11?
Here are some who couldn't wait for the inevitable?
How did they know?
Why didn't they warn US?
Why were they allowed a free pass to leave the US without investigation?
These are a few of 1000 questions that remained unanswered and the 9/11 coverup investigaton was run by dual Israeli/American citizens.
I've posted endlessly on this topic though don't want rehash here.
I havn't posted this link to date though just another one of the 1000s of pages of proof found all over the web.
www.blackagendareport.com...
Demand a new unbiased 9/11 investigation or don't complain when it happens again.

Originally posted by Lightworth
I think you're missing my angle. I'm saying that there are no normal conditions, like a kerosene fire, that can account for the extreme force required to bend solid steel like it was a piece of rubber.

I'm aware of your position, but do you have any proof? You've stated that a fire can't do this, how do you know it can't? Fires can heat steel to well past the point at which it loses the majority of its strength. What makes you think that this column being bent is impossible?

Disregard the racial overtones of the article posted above. That is off topic of the 9/11 scenario. I posted this link for the purposes of examining the evidence of 9/11 not to forward a prejudiced race agenda.

benfrank.net...

9/11 conspiracy doubters read this:
whatreallyhappened.com...

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by italkyoulisten
According to the laws of physics, you would have seen the top part of the tower impact something (the rest of the tower), and then falling off over to the side as it was at an angle.

Can you show your maths behind this?

Ok so you get some jenga blocks. You build up a tower, then you drop a block at an angle, and see if it falls straight. All you are saying is prove it. It takes a little bit of common sense to see that if something is falling at an angle, and strikes another object, it will fall to the side.

Also, what happened to it? It just pulverized into dust... how does this happen WITHOUT explosives?

Can you show any evidence that it was 'pulverized into dust'? How do explosives pulverize concrete when they are attached to columns and not floors?

Because if you watch the towers fall, the top 40 or so floors just disappear. If it remained intact, you would see it falling off over the side, as it were falling at an angle, at about the same rate of the tower, since it was near free fall speed. When a building is demolished, you don't just take out the core columns, you also have to have timed explosives to move material out of the way. Without core columns, the building can still stand, just not very stably, and when it falls it won't be so neat and into its own footprint. None of this stuff requires expert evidence man, this is just common sense. When when a ball rolls out of view, I don't need experts to tell me it still exists.

But do tell me what happened to the top part of the tower? It wasn't on fire, and it couldn't have collapsed, why don't we see a huge chunk of the top of the tower??

reply to post by InterestedObserver


And this is what needed to be said.

I've looked at both sides, the so-called 'truthers' and the official story. I've approached both with an open mind, and even keep my mind open when supposed 'new' evidence shows up proving one side or another. And I have seen this tendency of poorly coined words like sheeple used against those that actually ARE the open minded ones out of it. Ironically, those same people have made their careers and popularity out of the 911 tragedy.

As other posters have pointed out, most of these 'truther' websites or youtube videos are a cut and paste job, produced to point to their conclusion -- not the conclusion of the evidence. With a little digging to see the raw data, most of these claims are eliminated, quotes are put back into context, and guided misinformation is clarified. I too am in that boat, as I actually research what I'm told now and do NOT believe everything some video tells me.

Sure, these type of 'documentaries' are very well produced to claim sensational items of interest -- when really it's just that -- sensational claims.

What I see from 'my truth'? People not so friendly to the US, took years to plan this attack. They had a mission, a motive, and the financial backing to boot. They hijacked planes, smashed them into buildings, and a lot of people including them died that day.

More truth? To pretend that peoples memories during a stressful situation are perfect is a mockery to the truth. I had a friend who was a camera man that ran for his life from the first WTC collapsing. All he remembered after was the roar of the building, running involuntarily, all the while thinking he was going to die. Yet you can get some guy in that same situation to hear a supposed explosion, know it's an explosion, and nonchalantly look at his watch to see that it's 10 seconds psychically before the building collapses and stand there watching hundreds of tons of debris coming at them without so much as a muscle twitch?

A tad bit more? How many reporters jumped the gun saying more planes were hijacked than their actually were? How about the reports that LA had a hijacked airliner on it's way? Anyone remember Chicago and Sears Tower reportedly hit also with a plane and on fire? People should look at forum posts from that day and time (for websites that had some bandwidth remaining) -- and not after the fact as to how much confusion and mistaken information was circling around that day. You might get a giant eye opening experience of what fluff, assumptions, over the top reporting, garbage, and outright lies floated around the net that day.

How about a real issue of that day that seems more realistic. That the actions of the FFA, Radar Centers, Flight Controllers, Military, etc before and during shows incompetence on all levels. How about maybe the building design and construction might be flawed structurally including hasty fireproofing and NOT optimum construction putting the building at risk? No -- seriously. Thats your 'conspiracy', the conspiracy of covering ones buttocks that each and every job I've ever been to when salaries are at stake.

People involved that really messed up before, during and after the event had retirement, pensions, families, potential lawsuits, careers, reputations, image, and other things to think about. Showing incompetency in the 911 attacks that caused mass death and destruction on your resume is not exactly something you want to explain at a job interview regardless of position. Everything I've read about this smacks of the CYA principal -- not some inside job. They all pointed the fingers at each other, so the individual would not take the blame.

Sorry for the rant, but after hearing this garbage for 7 years and filtering through this filth, I've had enough. What's happened to common sense?

[edit on 10-9-2008 by Not Authorized]

Originally posted by thefreepatriotbut have you seen the wreckage and the damage?

Your post is funny considering that you obviously haven't looked into it too hard yourself. Had you done so, you would have known more of the answers to your own questions.

Here's a link that may help ya understand. oh, and this was created by REAL experts, not crackpot wannabies.


www.cs.purdue.edu...

another interesting link:

www.icivilengineer.com...



[edit on 10-9-2008 by justamomma]

Originally posted by tomfrusso
What about building 7 ?????

wtc.nist.gov... I would have to say that it is pretty much summed up nice and tightly in the above report. Sorry boys and gals, but it really doesn't leave much room to be argued with. VERY DETAILED report with pictures included that seem to be lacking from all the conspiracy theory websites

I have to go with the explanation that contains more facts and all around better logic


EDITED TO ADD: Found this in one of the oral accounts (copied word for word) of an eye witness.. one of nyc brave firefighters, Richard Banaciski:

"They told us to get out of there because they
were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right
behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors
of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just
see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone.
We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers
were because we were that high up. Looking over the
smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous,
tremendous fires going on.
Finally they pulled us out. They said all
right, get out of that building because that 7, they
were really worried about. They pulled us out of there
and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street,
between the water and West Street. They put everybody
back in there.
Finally it did come down..."

NOTE THE "whole bottom corner of the building was gone.."

source... PDF link

[edit on 10-9-2008 by justamomma]

reply to post by InterestedObserver


The article you refer to, is incredibly insulting and I metaphorically spit on it and its author. The whole piece is (1) elitist (2) bullying and (3) condescending. Whoever thinks this article is well-written is an elitist condescending bully who pretends that evidence is not evidence.

It takes a HORRIBLE PERSON to star or flag an article that is about "pissing" on people. People have an absolute right to believe whatever they want without being pissed on or otherwise violated.

[edit on 10-9-2008 by truthquest]

reply to post by InterestedObserver


The latest compilation of 'conspiracy theories' all boil down to the source:
The international banksters of whom throughout history have proven to do anything to achieve their ends. Human beings are simply viewed as pawns or expendable or disposable to achieve these ends.
Review the latest below and piece it all together yourself if one still has any doubts.
Dissolve the Fed Reserve of which is unconstitutional and designed to achieve a perpetual state of financial slavery to ensure they remain in power while playing God with your lives.
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by truthquest


'Pissing' is a just a crude metaphor for taking a strong jab at them. He could have used better, more polite word choice but I actually applaud him for not editing his sentiments.

Why should he when you "Truthers" are calling us Sheeple and close minded left and right?

[edit on 9/10/2008 by InterestedObserver]

Originally posted by italkyoulisten
Ok so you get some jenga blocks. You build up a tower, then you drop a block at an angle, and see if it falls straight. All you are saying is prove it. It takes a little bit of common sense to see that if something is falling at an angle, and strikes another object, it will fall to the side.

Is this a joke? Do you really think the towers were constructed like jenga blocks? They were not at all, and in fact the outer perimeter walls held 50% of the gravity loads, with a large gap inbetween them and the core. This gap was filled with lightweight trusses and only a few inches of lightweight concrete. If any area of the tower were to be preferentially destroyed, it's going to be the floors.

Also, I advise you not to use the words "common sense" when talking about structures. Why do you think there are long and demanding courses involving construction and building mechanics? Because things often do not behave as you would expect, and it's important to know exactly how they behave.

Because if you watch the towers fall, the top 40 or so floors just disappear. If it remained intact, you would see it falling off over the side, as it were falling at an angle, at about the same rate of the tower, since it was near free fall speed.

Except it was not near freefall speed, and there's a big difference between you losing sight of the upper block and it being pulverized into dust. I was hoping you'd present evidence of the latter.

When a building is demolished, you don't just take out the core columns, you also have to have timed explosives to move material out of the way. Without core columns, the building can still stand, just not very stably,

No, if you take out the core columns of the WTC the buildings cannot stand. How would they?

None of this stuff requires expert evidence man, this is just common sense. When when a ball rolls out of view, I don't need experts to tell me it still exists.

So when a ball rolls out of view it does still exist, but when a building collapses and you are unable to see through the debris, it doesn't exist?

But do tell me what happened to the top part of the tower? It wasn't on fire, and it couldn't have collapsed, why don't we see a huge chunk of the top of the tower??

Why couldn't it collapse? It's subject to some pretty significant forces being imparted from the lower part of the tower, and when it reaches the ground these forces will increase by a large amount. This is the basis of Bazant's crush down, crush up model and while it isn't perfectly accurate it fits what we saw that day quite accurately.

"Common sense" is not a good argument, and if you're claiming that the towers could stand without core columns then you know very little of its construction.

What happened at 9/11?
What happened afterwards:

- The owner of the towers earned 7 billion dollars from it.
- USA had another pearl harbor incident to control energy.
- USA people became more patriotic.
- World stood with USA against terrorist countries which have energy (petrol, n. gas)

Rich became richer.

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
What happened at 9/11?
What happened afterwards:

- The owner of the towers earned 7 billion dollars from it.
- USA had another pearl harbor incident to control energy.
- USA people became more patriotic.
- World stood with USA against terrorist countries which have energy (petrol, n. gas)

Rich became richer.

Sorry I completely disagree with this assessment. This is not some Oliver Stone movie.

1.) The owner could have been anyone including me, with any large skyscraper, and would have gotten a large sum of insurance monies just the same. The truth is the WTC and Pentagon (along with other targets) are/were both considered symbolic of American culture and achievement to outside world forces and are prime targets.

2.) What new Pearl Harbor? I don't see anyone from my generation that are aged 18-25 at the time that continually speak of 9-11 in a patriotic sense or call it Pearl Harbor. In fact, most have already forgotten what it was like that day and they pretend it never happened. However, my remaining grand parents continually speak of Pearl Harbor as if it happened yesterday. I think the only reason it's remembered is that police emergency # is 911.

3.) As far as controlling energy, why has the price of gas gone from $1.70 pre 911, to over $4.50 cents this summer? I don't see any energy control here, and if there is, they aren't doing a very good job with all that oil they liberated. Also my electric bill has nearly quadrupled over that same time period. How is that controlling energy? So much for the war for oil/energy crowd.

4.) More Patriotic USA? I saw 2 flags flying yesterday in my neighborhood yesterday. I don't see any patriotic increase, nor do I hear about it on the radio. If you want patriotism, take a gander at WW2 radio broadcasts, posters, and propaganda. Theres no increase in patriotism from what I can see. If anything, there's even less post 911 after the initial spike of new recruits. If they wanted that 'Pearl Harbor' effect like in WW2, they failed dramatically. I see more polarization and us vs them of dems/reps.

5.) World Standing with the USA? Are we reading the same news? America got an 'invade one nation for free' card after 911, and that was Afghanistan. The other war in Iraq from the beginning has been a seething cauldron of trouble, disagreement, disdain, etc with other nations, including supposed allies and the other superpowers of China and Russia. We're the big bully on the block to the majority of the world because of Iraq, and to convince ourselves otherwise is foolish.

So what happened on 911? A radical group of Islamic Fundamentalists got exactly what they wanted. They became martyrs for Allah to guarantee themselves and a family member into paradise. Since Allah is pretentious, very little is guaranteed to allow them into paradise (one exception being a martyr) what do you think they'd do?

What's more plausible.

A.) A huge cover-up and plot at multiple government organizations, military complexes, civilian based flight operations, flight controllers, and the very workers at the WTC, etc got together to destroy the WTC for Silverstein and Big Oil. On top of that, those working at the WTC not involved in said plot, completely ignore said preparations (including alleged thermite and cabling), and those working on this plot knowing that on 911 they would die, arrived to work on time anyway.

B.) Indoctrinated Muslims convinced of eternity in paradise by martyrdom and striving for that goal, brainwashed, with the financial backing to do so, do it. They can indulge in any sin since they know being a Martyr forgives ALL sins a the first drop of blood, and do so. Their families celebrate by a wedding feast instead of wake, knowing one of them is now going to paradise too. On a side note, they also finally get their wish of bombing the WTC and hitting America (the devil's nation) hard.

Gee, I wonder.. B

Well..The thing that keeps popping up in my head is there are so many whistle blowers out there have been over the years over things that would look pretty small in comparison. And yes many are done anonymously. I just don't see so many keeping a lid on such big pot.

I wont say it can't be. Anything can be possible It just don't sound like a realistic scenario.

At one point in time the majority of people who didn't think but "believed" due to what they had been told that the world was flat. Those that understood otherwise were the conspiracy theorists of their time.

All of the disputed evidence aside, someone had prior knowledge to the 9/11 event due to the unusually high number of stock put options purchased on the airlines involved mainly United and American AirlInes. Mysteriously the originators of these stock option purchases were lost when the SEC records of these transactions were conveniently lost in the SEC offices in WTC building 7.

Was it Mossad carrying out a mission for the US ?

Mossad has used the muslim scapegoats in the past. Just research the Lavon affair where in Egypt in 1954 US and British embassy buildings were bombed and blamed on muslim terrorists only to be found to be a false flag operation tied to Israeli Intelligence agency Mossad to direct war towards islamic fundamentalists.

It does make sense from the Israeli perspective. Let the Big USA fight your battles for you.

My friend is a hard believer in the 911 comspiracy, but I think it's a bunch of balony. I did my own research and was able to debunk everything he threw at me, and he sure as hell look stupid when me and our other friends were laughing at him.

People are so gullible, it's laughable. Anything the truthers say can b easily debunk if only someone took the time to do the research on both sides of the story, instead of just listenig to what ever people say coming from their a5s, which is a bunch of lies n exageration.