Pick Your 2 Most Glaring Points of Questions For 9/11?

reply to post by Fabless


We let them get away with it. They are not going to punish them selves. We let them kill us and just watch it on tv then talk about how they did it on the internet. It makes me sick how cowerdly we are.

1) Why were the collapses accelerating?
Why have scientist and physisists been silent on this issue?
NIST admitted 8 floors of freefall which is physically impossible without explosives, even in the hottest fire.
buildingwhat.org...

2) why were the buildings completely destroyed?
where are the top floors that crushed the rest into the basement?

3) why no real investigations, and why did they destory evidence?
buildingwhat.org...


How much evidence is needed for a real investigation to start?

Free Fall


Thermite in dust


Explosion witnesses


warnings...


Abel Danger


etc

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by captiva
. Why are Bush, Cheney etc not sitting on death row as I write?

Well, despite what you think or want "innocent until proven guilty" still occurs in the USA, thus they are innocent.

You also needs things like a trial, a court, some evidence - oh, you also need something to charge them with, despite what you think!

Refusing to testify under oath is a crime, unless you plead the 5th there genius, and that's exactly what they both did. Both of them should be on trial for treason. Any of you OSer's that don't understand this, can not be taken seriously about anything when it comes to 911.

Talk about timing.

Since we are held to two questions, allow me to post them as:

1) WTC 1

2) WTC 2

www.abc.net.au...

THe news calls this a " TOWERING INFERNO " , I can't help but wonder why it hasn't fallen yet.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by wcitizen

'The Truthers' - come on Dave, you know that's a gross over generalisation. You pick up other people on their lack of accuracy - yet you don't apply the same exacting standards to yourself. SOME truthers would be more honest and accurate.

MOST truthers, in MY experience, have no problem with the fact that there were fires. It's just the temperature and the effect of the fires which are in dispute.

Ahem. I am quoting the OP's original post:

"Firemen get up there and say they can knock down minimal fires with two lines. There is woman standing in the spot where the plane crashed, if the fire was so bad she could not be there and live. The South tower early collapse is very suspicious. "

Every information source on Edna Cintron reports she had to jump to her death to escape the fires, which makes it blatantly obvious the OP did zero actual research into the material being posted. The way these damned fool conspiracy web sites are making it out, Edna Cintron was relaxing with a cup of coffee and waving hello to the TV helicopters, and this in turn is used to drop innuendo that "the south tower collapse was very suspicious".

Everyone makes simple mistakes, but this isn't a simple mistake. This is a deliberate attempt at using the tragedy of Edna Cintron as an opportunity to pass off misinformation to get people to believe something they normally wouldn't believe. This IS disgusting and self serving, regardless of whatever other pretty word you want to use to describe what's going on.

And then we have this: "It's one thing to think it's funny to accuse everyone and their hampster of being secret gov't agents, but THIS is crossing the line IMHO." = Pure and simple disinfo tactic. Intention: Make them look stupid, that will stop people from giving their argument an honest, unbiased appraisal.

I have yet to meet any truther who does not accuse someone or another of being some secret gov't agent based upon nothing but their own blind zealotry. Accusing the NIST and FEMA engineers of being actively involved in some form of coverup is the entire cornerstone of your whole movement, and slandering even more people becomes more and more easy for you, the more you do it.

Let's prove the statement right nere and now. Deputy NYFD fire chief Peter Hayden was at the WTC 7 site and he reported the fires were burning out of control in WTC 7 and were causing a three story tall bulge in the side of the structure, proving the fires were doing at least something detrimental to the building. Will you accept his eyewitness account and therefore accept there's at least some credibility to the possibility the towers really were brought down by the fires, or are you going to accuse Deputy fire chief Hayden of lying and covering up the murder of 343 of his brother firefighters?

You can't have it both ways..

Yes, but once again you're evading the point I made - ie: your statement that 'truthers' believe there were no fires as opposed to the factual, honest, 'some' truthers believe this, and that whilst you use bully type tactics to attack others for their lack of accuracy, you don't feel the need to remain accurate yourself. I also pointed out this was a disinfo technique.

I'm not interested in discussing the details about the fires with you - that wasn't the intention of my post and you are very well aware of that. You are trying to drag me into that discussion, which is another known disinfo technique. So, thanks for the offer, but no thanks, I'm not playing into your disinfo/disrupt the thread game.

I repeat, the post of yours which I initially referred to was NOT based on fact, and it is full of well known disinfo techniques.

Now, I know you could try to prolong this exchange for obvious reasons, so just to let you know, this is my last post in this exchange. Feel free to spew whatever insults and scorns you can come up with.

1. WTC 7 had minor fires and minor damage
2. WTC 7 remained standing for 8 hours after the towers collapsed
3. Buildings next to WTC 7 with more damage to them did not collapse in free fall acceleration.

Originally posted by tezzajw
A glaring point that always leaves me puzzled:

A few people (here on ATS) have admitted that we have not been told the 100% truth about 9/11. They admit that governments have lied and will lie to suit their agenda.

Yet - these very same people are seen here, day after day, ritualistically 'debunking' and attempting to quash the truth about 9/11 from being discovered.

Contradiction much?

Where's there any contradiction? The falsehoods you truthers are spreading to sucker people into believing these preposterous conspiracy claims (I.E. no interceptors were scrambled, all the bomb dogs were withdrawn from the WTC, no Arab names were on the passenger manifests, noone saw what hit the Pentagon, the fires were almost out in WTC 7, etc etc etc) aren't off limits any more than the falsehoods the gov't is putting out to cover up their incompetence.

Right on this board I'm seeing people trying to claim Cheney issued a shoot down order when it was already reported in the 9/11 commission report years ago that Bush gave the shoot down order and Cheney was just passing it along. Heck, 75% of you didn't even know Bush issued a shoot down order. Bad information is still bad information regardless of who's passing it around, isn't it?

reply to post by harrytuttle

1) Why were the air traffic control tapes which recorded conversations with the hijacked planes DESTROYED?? FAA Managers Destroyed 9/11 Tape

AYFKM?!



That's just rich...guess they didn't think it was important. It was just another day, right?

Do they think we're all idiots?

Maybe there is something to this "Truther" movement after all

Originally posted by loveguy
This is just an observation I'd like to make about this thread...

The OP was asking members to "Pick Your 2 Most Glaring Points of Questions For 9/11?"

We find some individuals (the usual "on the spot Johnny's") not participating according to the original topic. Instead, participating in arguing about matters devoted to other threads...

A few pages into it and the thread dies down because who wants to sit here and argue with people who are not participating in the thread according to the OP?

I find that this thread is a good example of forum infiltration, and the leniency given to those who aim to knock it off course.

All right, it's a fair statement. My two glaring points of questions for 9/11 are...

a) the immense amount of innuendo, manipulation of the facts, and outright false information the truther movement is pushing to sucker people into believing what they themselves believe. If they have suspicions of complicity, that's one thing, but when they try to pass off outright BAD information like "no interceptors were scrambled" when even a 30 second google search and even the 9/11 commission report said fighters were scrambled out of Massachussets and Virginia, it's a sign of either atrocious research, or intentional dishonesty

b) the penchant for the truthers to slander any and every person who says something that refutes what they want to believe. The NIST and FEMA engineers are all disinformation agents, firefighters are lying to cover up the murder of 343 of their brother firefighters, family members are lying about receiving calls from their relatives on the planes, and even a taxi driver out by the Pentagon is some clandestine FBI agent lying about a street light hitting his cab. And of course, those experienced steel workers clearing out the wreckage at ground zero are all as thoroughly as stupid as a bag of hammers for not seeing the "blatant" signs of thermite damage right next to them. Making up an accusation to justify another accusation you made up isn't proof. It's circular logic in that you're just repeating the original claim in different terms in an attempt to prove itself.

Everyone has their own methodology of how to seriously proceed with researching the events of 9/11...but I'd have thought these would be prime examples of how *not* to proceed with any investigation.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


If the government was so incompetent then why was noone fired or demoted? I believe even some people were Promoted after 911. As far as the firefighters of course you do have firefighters for 911 truth. Not all are silent.

reply to post by Riffrafter


Riffrafter, your righteous indignation might be warranted....IF what "harrytuttle" wrote was factual. It isn't. Here are the exchanges between you two:

Originally posted by Riffrafter
reply to post by harrytuttle

 

1) Why were the air traffic control tapes which recorded conversations with the hijacked planes DESTROYED?? FAA Managers Destroyed 9/11 Tape

AYFKM?!

That's just rich...guess they didn't think it was important. It was just another day, right?

Do they think we're all idiots?

Maybe there is something to this "Truther" movement after all.

"harrytuttle" has fed you BAD information. Likely, just repeating the same crap heard, but not researched before it was regurgitated as "fact".

The only "tapes" that were destroyed were made that afternoon. A group of controllers from ONE facility (I forget, atm, WHICH one....four ARTCCs were involved ---New York, Boston, Cleveland and Washington).

The controllers, at the end of the day, before they went home, decided to sit down and record their thoughts and recollections, while the memories were fresh.

Problem is, in the culture of the FAA, IF any single little mistake, anything that was not EXACTLY "by-the-book" precisely, was revealed in those off-the-cuff comments, it could have been used later, i disciplinary and punitive ways, by OTHER FAA personnel, who were in positions up the "food chain" (and might harbor personal grudges, of sorts...this is very, very commonplace. Anyone who's worked in any office or corporate environment knows this, correct???)

The Controller's Union (Association) "steward" (chapter leader, whatever their terms are to describe that position) saw the possible jeopardy, and told them to WRITE out their reports instead. HE destroyed THAT tape.

It was NOT an official FAA recording. It was NOT a recording of any radio or land-line conversations.

IT IS YET ANOTHER of the "truthers" lies and distortions, though. That sort of garbage is endemic to the "movement"...and is disgusting.

Originally posted by psikeyhackr

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
The way the truthers are raping the tragedy of Edna Cintron is literally dancing in the blood of a victim of 9/11 for their sick conspiracy claims and I find this offensive and self serving, not to mention ghoulish. It's one thing to think it's funny to accuse everyone and their hampster of being secret gov't agents, but THIS is crossing the line IMHO

What temperatures are required to be life threatening to a human being?

What temperatures are required to weaken steel? Is there a significant difference?

What the flip difference does it make? Edna Cintron was trapped and she was forced to jump out of the building becuase of the fires, which is the exact opposite of everything you truthers are attempting to claim about the condition of the building. You *know* this is the exact opposite of everything you truthers are trying to claim becuase you truthers religiously conceal the fact that she had to jump.

Why are you even arguing the point?

Talk about RAPING science and dishing out a bunch of emotional bull#.

Well, someone has to keep the respect of the memory of the victims of 9/11 intact, as you truthers are obviously not interested in doing it. How many people here are insisting Ted Olsen is lying about his phone call from his wife on AA77, again?

reply to post by GoodOlDave



So are you in complete agreement with all of the official story?

Are you saying that your only outstanding - glaring - points are
the 'truthers' and their conspiracy to slander?

You suggest that you have researched 911 so perhaps you could add
something to the discussion in the way of your take on the actual
events, not just zero in on those people who you disagree with.

What I'd like to know, in all of your investigations (as per the
original topic) are there two stand-out things that you do have
trouble swallowing?

Originally posted by mayabong
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

If the government was so incompetent then why was noone fired or demoted? I believe even some people were Promoted after 911.

FINALLY! Someone is asking the right questions. I'm giving you a star for your post.

Why WAS noone fired or demoted? The most obvious answer is the people whose incompetence allowed the 9/11 attack to succeed are hiding their incompetence becuase they know bad things are going to happen to them once they're outed. Instead of trying to find out where the short comings were, what are we doing now? Demanding investigations into lasers from outer space and arguing over whether a taxi driver out by the Pentagon is some secret gov't agent. It's the absence of information that's instigating all these crackpot conspiracy claims, not some sinister Rube Goldberg plot to take over the world.

As far as the firefighters of course you do have firefighters for 911 truth. Not all are silent.

This guy may not be silent, but neither is he adding any more information nor is he showing why any of the current information is incorrect. He's simply repeating the exact same drivel all these damned fool conspiracy web sites are pushing out. How does any of this even remotely refute NYFD deputy fire chief Peter Hayden reporting the fires were burning out of control in WTC 7 and were causing bulges in the side of the structure, as well as NYPD helicopter pilots reporting the support columns in the WTC were glowing red from the fires and looked like they were about to collapse.

Originally posted by Fabless
What I'd like to know, in all of your investigations (as per the
original topic) are there two stand-out things that you do have
trouble swallowing?

In all honesty...

a) After the interceptors were launched, they were ordered to fly in circles out over the Atlantic until "ground controlelrs located which way the hijacked planes were going." Whose bright idea was it to give THAT order? With supersonic aircraft they would have been able to intercept the hijacked aircraft if they had at least been let loose in the general direction of where they were reported last.

b) We were getting warnings from overseas intelligence agencies saying to watch these guys as they were coming into the country, but the myriad agencies were set up with almost outright animosity toward each other so that the CIA wouldn't share information with the FBI who wouldn't share information with INS who wouldn't share information with the NTSB who wouldn't share information with the FAA. Whose bright idea was it to set things up like THAT? Saying, "I worked tirelessly to find this critical information but I'm not going to tell anyone what it is" is equally as bad as not bothering to go get the information to begin with.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Wow, first Geraldo and now goodoldave, who'd thunk it?!? And your reading and comprehension skills have improved over the last few days too, you answered the topic of the OP!!!

I'm putting you firmly in the truther camp now, because all truthers want is the truth and some honest answers for a change, now don't deny it dave, truthers are a spectrum of opinion and you fit perfectly into that spectrum. It takes guts to man up and start to use your brain for a change.

And in defense of ATS user goodoldave, I do see a lot of stupid posts about non-sense topics, his views clearly mimic mine from a few years ago and who here cannot say they were (initially) duped by this elaborate piece of mis-direction that is called 9/11.

I'm in agreement with the majority of the crew here. There are just too many "glaring points" to pick 2. But if I had to I'll choose:

1) No wreckage in PA
2) Pentagon

Bill

The first thing that really made me stop and think where the pre collapse photo's of the Pentagon, where the hell did that plane actually hit? WTC 7 is a real mystery, and I think the current campaign that concentrates on that subject is a very prudent one.
As the years have passed though, I must admit to adjusting my beliefs on the subject. I do think there's a good argument for the terrorists to have had some inside help. But I really don't think there is the evidence for a Government wide conspiracy.
I have a friend that goes with the 'cock up' (for want of a better phrase) theory of 9-11. There was massive incompetence on all levels it seems to me. I'm sure most of us have covered up a mistake at work etc, and hoped to get away with it. Just imagine a set of people whose mistakes led to this awful tragedy. They'd cover it up as if their life depended on it.
There are many questions to answer of course, and as long as these questions aren't answered wilder and wilder theories will keep appearing.

reply to post by GoodOlDave

And they're your top two?

Interceptors - if they existed - could have either waggled
their wings menacingly, or shot down passenger jets 'just
in case' they were heading for skyscrapers. Doesn't sound
any less fictional than the rest of the 911 story to me,
and I doubt that would be seen later as a 'bright idea'.

How do you know what the alphabet soup agencies knew? Did
all of it come out during the 911 Commission, or is it just
something you understand to be true? You've mentioned 5 and
there are probably a dozen more - what are the chances that
none of the agencies had a clue, or suspected but didn't act?


Sounds like you are completely OK with all of the official story.

I would think that as soon as anyone was certain that any
aspect of 911 was covered up, not properly investigated or
just completely inconceivable, the whole package is suspect.

Unless there was something else that blinkered them, such as
blind patriotism or party politics.

1) the fact that before this day not one steel framed office building had collapsed in the history of modern construction, sept. 11 three did, one without being struck by an airplane.

2) What happened to all the vans with explosives? www.infowars.net...

A side note to the few responses who believe the official story, this thread was for people who have legitimate questions about that day and subsequent investigation. If you believe the official story, you have no questions so move on and find a thread you are interested in.