Enough with the dishonest behaviour Truthers - I'm calling you out.

reply to post by tristaneldritch


WTC 7

If you scroll down they give a list of tenants housed their. Seems like many of them could have their reasons.

All of your points are well taken, but I have a request of my own. We already know that you are basing your belief on the "Official Story". That's okay, it's what you have to go on, but here's my request: Pretend you are unaware of the OS. Clear your mind for a minute, be a scientist who seeks facts and Truth rather than a professional debater. Now, you're a scientist, unaffected by bias, beliefs and presumptions. Answer these questions:

1) How did the twin towers and building fall very near the speed and acceleration of gravity? Why did the lower floors not offer any significant resistance to slow the falling/acceleration?

2) What caused the line of smoke puffs to blow out of building 7 on the opposite corner of where the building was burning, in a nice, straight line?

3) How did debris from flight 93 end up miles from the crash site?

4) Flight 103 over Scotland was blown up at flight altitude and plummeted from about 35,000 ft. to earth, yet there were visibly large pieces of that plane found everywhere, including the entire nose section/cockpit. Why was there nothing but confetti in Shanksville?

5) The Pentagon is the one of most fortified buildings in the world since it is command and control for our military. How did a jetliner (aka a flying tin can), burrow through 6 -18" (9 feet total) sections of steel/kevlar reinforced concrete and leave a nice, round, 14' hole on the inner 3rd ring yet there is absolutely no indication of what caused that hole. Logic would tell us that if there was enough inertia to blow a hole that size in the inner wall of the 3rd ring, there should be enough debris, inertia and energy to do some kind of damage to the outer wall of the next ring, yet there was none. Look at it this way: The airliner had already gone through 7-1/2 feet of steel-reinforced concrete when it got to that last wall. How could it possibly have enough integrity left to make a nice, clean hole in that final wall? Visualize that in your head. The black radar nose cone on those aircraft are lightweight plastic. Behind that is aluminum. Not steel; aluminum.

6) How is it that there is not ONE clear picture of a jetliner approaching the Pentagon? The only footage available is one of a nondescript, white blur with the next frame being an explosion. Is the pentagon not riddled with surveillance cameras?

7) Being a scientist (you), how is it that this chain of random events caused 3 high-rise building to fall in a perfectly symmetrical fashion, into their own footprint? Would that really happen in nature? Don't things take the path of least resistance? Wouldn't the upper sections of the twin towers continue falling sideways due to the resistance of the 80 or so floors beneath them? Wouldn't the only explanation for that be the fact that the resistance below them was "removed"? (Important Detail: Remember, in all video accounts, the upper sections of the buildings began fall "off", to the side, not straight down. The result of this tilt is that there was virtually NO FORCE on the lower floors from the upper, intact section except perhaps for a slight amount on that one edge. At that very instant, the upper section would take the path of least resistance. straight down? Nope, there are 80 intact floors beneath it. It would continue to tip sideways and fall down the side of the building. Unless all of the resistance directly beneath it were removed.)

8) Do you not find it the least bit suspicious that building 7 was not addressed in the 9/11 report? For what purpose would they ignore that?

9) There are videos floating around including one of what appears to be a steel beam "vaporizing" right before your eyes. This video has been highlighted numerous times. How did that happen? It turned to dust right before your eyes. If you just accept in and move on, continuing to be an "OS'er", you are ignoring critical facts.

My point in all of this is to forget about what you know and what you believe and focus on the things that don't make any sense. You can't discount numerous accounts of suspicious, questionable events and circumstances and then discount "truthers" with any level of integrity. These are valid questions by critically thinking people.

For me, I'm not speculating anything. I'm not suggesting GW commissioned this event. I'm not suggesting the administration knew anything about it. What I am suggestion is that there are too many valid unanswered questions.

I was an "OS'er" for the first 8 years. Only when I opened my closed mind, put aside my bias and partisanship and considered the facts did I begin to think independently and objectively question certain events and circumstances.

Originally posted by spw184

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by BigBruddah

 

Sorry, but if you wanna disprove me use google. You can't though, but go on and try.

You asking others to use google but you couldn't use google in your OP to show any type of evidence at all to what you claim? Personally I do not think debating with you is worth the effort, after all you couldn't put much effort into your own OP.

Good Luck.

And personally, I think that your picking at details here, also, so what if he says that? Its not like he's saying " #4 Cats have 3 heads - I dont have a link but look on google, you'll find it." Hes not being lazy at all, he's just saying that there is no evidence on the internet to debunk his debunking.

Yes asking for someone to provide evidence of their claims, while asking others to do the same thing, is called "picking at details".

As far as not being able to provide evidence on the internet that refutes the Op's claim, you and I both know that is not the case. There are countless videos on the internet of secondary explosions. There are plenty of transcripts of fire fighter communications which show they spoke of secondary explosions. There are plenty of news clips which are reporting secondary explosions. But you feel free to say there were no explosions, and no evidence of explosions if it makes you feel better.

The fact is, I cold rewrite the OP's post and just switch the stance being taken, asking others to refute my claims while providing no evidence at all in support of my position. Doing so would make me pretty lazy and any way you want to slice it, the OP is asking people to do something that he/she is not willing to do him/herself.

Why would I want to have an intelligent conversation with someone who has no intention of having a civil discussion? From what I have read in this thread, it is nothing more than baiting people to speak up so they can be told how wrong they are.

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious


Woop, they still admittedly knew the attacks were coming. What is really at issue is the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan for 10 years, a million+ dead and the loss of liberties that we held dear for 200 years+. I think a tomahawk or two and a few clandestine operations would have been much more effective anyhow. Also the number of US dead has exceeded the dead in Vietnam.

reply to post by Revealation


If you've got a good argument, I'm all ears and genuinely open-minded. Care to elaborate?

reply to post by freedom12

The ESB was constructed using "traditional" means, interior load bearing walls and stonework. In many ways.a.mich sturdier building than the Towers were. In addition, it was hit by a B-25, not a 767. Roughly, a sparrow being compared to a adult Condor. In terms of impact forces, the two do not even compare to each other.

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious


LOL.

Let me get this straight; you are using videoclips of demolitions to PROVE that 9/11 conspiracy theories hold no water?

I was going to suggest at first that these structures with pancakes collapses HAD to be occurring in countries that had no building codes -- but then I read a little more of your "calling us out" article and then I realized;

I have no CLUE what you are trying to say as your logic escapes me.

>> Usually, I can understand most scientific papers, puzzles, and the odd financial report ...

Concrete to Fine particle dust with no bombs = Captain Ignorant
WTC 7 and no planes = Captain Ignorant
Pentagon and no airliner, no wings, no engine, no flight path = Captain Ignorant

There I answered but I still fear there's a tightly sealed box around some peoples head that they will never see beyond.

reply to post by tristaneldritch


Just looks like many there could have plenty of reasons, but to me, I would assume that (as with most people) this is corporate America and everything revolves around $$$$$$. It says that Silverstein was taking a beating also and had to lower the rent. How many millions or possibly billions he must have lost in doing so, don''t ya think?.

I personally never did any studying on the topic but you have to admit that our government is one of the most secretive, corrupt,organized, terrorist crime syndicates ever. they have they're hands in everything. Why do you think they're all over the world? You don't honestly believe that it's humanitarian do you?

reply to post by MrWendal


For ME, the most "damning evidence" is the dripping orange steel from the structure seen in the videos.

SOMETHING was hot enough to melt steel. It was NOT possible that it was Aluminum -- as that is silver-white when molten. No special physics is going to change the color of molten metals.

There is NOTHING in Jet Fuel that gets that hot.

Just add it to all the other "let's ignore these things" list.

I don't need to say anything because this thread rips all your arguements to little peices - www.abovetopsecret.com... - Read it and then try and refute it if you can.

Where's the planes wreckage evidence? Cuz their is none, their maybe "was none", meaning the event could have been done with thermite, explosives, cartoons (holograms) and a sound system. Its said that the passengers (from the towers explosion only) were taken to a private location and killed. Its my understanding through all the research that, their was only one considered high jacked plane, two hologram planes, and one bonefied missle.
With a mess of actors and actresses.
Theirs your movie!

Well it looks to be deushbag believer Captainnotsological is a troll after reading the last few pages and it appears he was the one that really got called out but most of all a troll. thread = FAIL

Originally posted by spav5
And what is it that you wish to accomplish?

Peace

Uh,.. how about spread the real truth? That there was not a clandestine group of "mole-men" explosive assassins that somehow laid explosives throughout BOTH towers, and building 7, without being caught and blew up the Pentagon too!?
I think the person as had enough of sitting quite and reading all the outrageous stories about some government group destroying the Trade Center.
Did our Government know about the potential for an attack! Absolutely. Did they do enough to stop it? Absolutely NOT!
But, our government DIDN'T DO IT!

reply to post by Revealation


Well, fair enough, but I find that very difficult to swallow. Are you suggesting that Larry Silverstein knew about the 9 11 Conspiracy in advance, and said "Say fellas, do you mind if I knock 7 as well, 'cause I'm really taking a bath on the rents?" I believe that if a 9 11 cabal existed, they would hardly be letting civilian business men in on the loop as well - that would just be crazy.

Originally posted by TrowaBarton

Originally posted by spw184
Also.. How would the goverment keep all the firefighters, Police, FBI, CIA, Congress, Demolitionists,ect ect ect quiet? yeah...

Man this is my favorite argument used by Osers. Ben Franklin is quoted as saying "Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead." Well quote me as saying that "3,000 people can keep a conspiracy secret if 2,990 of them have no idea whats going on." For anyone to think that all who participated in 9/11 had knowledge of it is ridiculous. Common sense my friend. We all posses it i suggest you try using it.

If I sound harsh whatever. One of the main reason I came to ATS was because of my interest in 9/11. However it is so impossibly hard to have any kind of rational discussion in these section of the board that probably less than 20 of my 800+ posts have been in here.

Like I mentioned before my friend if you think that everyone who was a player in 9/11 that day, Big brother, The alphabet boys, Police, EMTs, fire departments etc was aware of what was happening then please by all means come talk to me because I have a bridge, building, private island and country I would like to sell you.

Also there is an "n" in government if you stand by them so wholeheartedly learn how to spell their name. I usually don't spell nazi on here, but practice what you preach my friend.

Trowa

P.S I originally deleted this post however someone starred it so I rewrote it to the best of my ability. I'm going back to the sidelines and letting the more skilled fighters handle this.

edit on 12/9/11 by TrowaBarton because: (no reason given)

Good points.

I don't think we'd have such a huge "9/11 was an inside job" Conspiracy theory group these days if the Bush administration had DONE a better job covering it up. They merely got the media shills and attack dogs to call anyone who questioned them an idiot. After 4 years of pressure, they FINALLY set up their "Warren Commission" -- only they didn't vet them well enough with the usual stooges and gophers -- as the 9/11 Commission was criticized by the 9/11 Commssion -- another instance of real life being stranger than fiction; LINK


I note that there were over 5,000 testimonies that the 9/11 Commission threw out -- because they didn't fit the Government Story. So, all those; "eyewitnesses who had to be lying" -- or in on it -- well, there are even MORE people who refute what they said -- so is their a huge "inside job conspiracy" going on?


>> The thing is; if the Bush administration had been transparent, and provided everything up front -- their story would be OBVIOUS. Only -- we KNOW they confiscated at least 24 if not 80 tapes around the Pentagon. We KNOW that NORAD had war games going on. We KNOW that the head of the FAA destroyed radar tapes that would have proven the Government stories of the flight paths -- but OOPS, we don't have them.

Then we've got COINCIDENCES that if you had ONE OR TWO might occur in real life -- but I counted at least 100 "coincidences" -- here are a few gems:

Back in 1998 a rules change for response to hijackings the purview of a civilian went into effect for July 2001 -- making Donald Rumsfeld in charge of deciding of you could shoot down planes. Two weeks later -- that ended.

The video cameras at the WTC quit working that morning.

None of the terrorists names appeared on the flight manifests -- EXCEPT a flight manifest with their names was FAX'd in to the Moussoui trial -- and was thrown out of court (original documents are the only thing allowed). A lot of people KEEP repeating the myth that there was a flight manifest -- but MAGICALLY their names were never found as well as their bodies. Quite a few of the alleged hijackers are discovered to be alive and not in the USA at the time.

The FBI does not have Osama Bin Laden on it's wanted list concerning 9/11 due to "lack of evidence."

>> I don't know, it's been a long time since I rattled off a bunch of these -- I used to be able to do two dozen off the top of my head.


Anyway -- it's such an obvious farce and a con job. And we are still engaged in war crimes and running this country into the gutter which 9/11 enabled. The idea that we CARE so much for 3,000 people when we willfully kill more than that due to inadequate health care, using coal for fuel, and many other "unnecessary deaths" -- it's like believing that Drugs are illegal due to health concerns...

Though many different camera angles were on the pentagon all video was classified the exception of 3 frames showing absolutly nothing- true

The taxi driver that originally claimed he saw a plane hit the pentagon and one of the poles struck his vehicle admited he lied- true

Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel let alone one that's made to resist high temperatures- true

No documented building on fire has ever collapsed in demolition style before or after this event- true

Building 7 didn't even receive significant damage to collapse- true

Even yesterday on all the news chaneles as they replayed footage from those reporting on scene you still heard people talking about explosions heard at the base before the collapse- truth


And we all know how well our government has gave us the "thruth" in the past- true

Finally, the fact that you have presented no evidence to back up any of your statements other than to insight an arguement- true

I could continue but its not worth the headache to argue with someone that quite obviously has not looked at any of the evidence you claim to support...

This thread is just more of the same old "you're wrong, I'm right" mode of argument which results in nothing more than everyone just pointlessly spinning their wheels and going nowhere. Something substantive needs to be done before the perps spend all their money and die after having lived the high life funded by their misdeeds and the pervasive misery they have visited upon hundreds of millions of others.

reply to post by TattooedWarrior


You know what is quite comical...he was in there was given every oppurtunity to tear it to shreds and he was otherwise shown the evidence quite politely with discussions...and it don't not work so he came out of there and created this thread in agumentive retaliation....

But that is just my polite opinion on the issue.....but even here in his own thread he is not presenting facts in a deciet well ordered amnner...and i think that is what would help him in his cause.

but then i am not sure what his cause is.