I Was A Deluded 9/11 Truther

Wow. ATS is ruined.

Just effin' ruined.

reply to post by joerobo


i just have to say it again, mods please check accounts and IPs for this thread.

In case no one else noticed there are a plethora of new users defending the "Official Fable" with a list of talking points.

I signed up for the sole reason of pointing this out. So that makes me a new user too, so you don't have to believe me, just go back and smell the thread. It's OBVIOUS.

I have not seen one building 7 video on truther sites that showed the inner collapse of the structure so clearly.

And I know the reason why.


My main beef with the truthers is they repeat debunked "facts", the airspace one being my least favorite.

There are no active AA guns or missle defense systems in service in America, and pre 9/11 there were very few alert fighters. I'd be shocked if the USA was even in the top 20 for air defense.

Looks like someone got a better offer from some men in dark suits.

Originally posted by OccamAssassin
reply to post by rival

 

They didn't plant bombs. They planted thermate. Thousands of explosive charges weren't needed
to induce destruction of the buildings. The towers, already compromised from airliner impacts, were
weakened strategically with thermate to aid the total collapse. The evidence of thermate burning
would have been concealed by the already burning building and the general hysteria.

Why did the Thermite take so long to ignite? I have personally worked with Thermite and know how easy it is to ignite.

"It was ignited by remote. It ignites immediately. All you need is an RC device and an incendiary capable of
igniting thermite/thermate. It was ignited precisely when it was needed to be."

Wouldn't there have to be Thermite on every floor for the eventuality of the plane hitting at a different height? Why wasn't there A)Heaps of leftover powder, or B)A pool of molten rubble? Surely the rescue effort immediately after the towers collapsed would have been hampered by the intense heat?

"You only need the substance at key points to weaken the steel structure. No powder residue because powder
is/was not used. It is likely a chemical emulsion of a thermite type substance applied as a spray, binding to
the steel. A pool of molten steel? answer: The is ample evidence of molten metal and temperatures above
what would be expected of of normal office fires...FAR ABOVE normal office fires.The rescue effort was
hindered by the intense heat. Rescuers reported the soles of
their flame retardant boots melting is one example.

Why weren't there heaps of metallic leftovers from the Thermite? As stated, I have worked with Thermite before and know for a fact that it leaves a distinct residue & molten metal.

"Molten metal was present. Have you researched to arrive at your POV?
It seems as though you may have missed some information that is
READILY available thru your own indepent research."

Fire-fighters are trained in how to deal with Thermite due to the fact that it is used extensively in the commercial sector - most notably, joining rail-road tracks. How is it possible that the Thermite theory didn't surface until long after 911? Surely the fire-fighters would have noticed the powdery chemical and its inherent danger to the rescue effort?

An answer here would be pure conjecture. Hence your question is
rhetorical, though you point is noted, however useless.

Do't be naive. We pour trillions of dollars into the military industrial complex, and the MIC returns
to us new technologies in the form of new armaments, ordinance, and other types of weaponry.
We've no clue as to the type or size or detectability of any classified weapon, so assuming that
massive amounts of explosives or huge teams of men were needed is naive, The comparison
made to other buildings purposefully imploded by the private sector is bogus. Those companies
MUST use every available asset to implode buildings EXACTLY as the designed implosion dictates.
Overkill is a descriptive word. These companies would be liable for incomplete demolitions gone
wrong. When you are an unidentified entity, you have no liability and overkill is not needed.

So, are you saying that a demolitions contractor was brought in to demolish the three buildings and would be liable if they didn't demolish them completely?

No...LOL at your own strawman. I type exactly what I mean. There
is no need to put words in my mouth and then laugh at the words you created unless you are very bored.

As to building seven, Edward Currant's assertion that no other building in history has burned
uncontrolled for sevens hours is, incorrect, misleading, and/or a lie. Building seven is THE ONLY
building in history to completely suffer global collapse due to fire alone...PERIOD.

Show me evidence of a building structured like the 1 & 2 WT buildings that has been subjected to a fire like they have and not collapsed.

NO...the evidence is out there. Do your own research.

This is where a lot of truthers lose me as the WT buildings were of a unique design. Sure, other buildings have been built like them since, but none have been subject to the same chain of events.

As to building seven, the truthers seem to ignore the fact that ....

1. Shock waves from WT 1 & 2 seriously damaged the structural integrity of WT7.

2. The whole WTC complex is built on swampy ground.

3. It's common knowledge amongst engineers that shock waves travel faster and dissipate over a greater distance when travelling through a liquid medium(swampy ground).

I have never ever commented in a 9/11 thread and I am wondering why my fingers are currently clicking over the keyboard.
For me, the idea that the Govt or the so called ' NWO' planned 9/11 is totally laughable. The best joke I have ever heard!
To think that some of you obviously believe that 100's of people ( and it would need to have been) all agreed to go along with this plan of laying explosives etc and any other dastardly thing you believe would have had to have taken place to bring these buildings down....well I am gobsmacked. Then there is the recruiting of those kamikaze style pilots who were willing to go to their deaths for the USA. And so so much more that would have occurred leading up to those events IF they were planned by your Govt. All those people, willing to murder fellow Americans so that there is a way for GWB to go into other countries to kill people, or all the other ridiculous reasons some insane peeps have come up with. Really?????
Like REALLY???
And out of all those people involved, none of them has ' talked' or broken their silence in some way? Not one?
Gee...I guess cuddling up with your wife and kids at night with a contented smile must be easy for someone responsible for aiding and abetting in the deaths of over 3000 people. A real American!!
Very very sad that so many deluded souls actually believe this scenario took place.
I believe those are the people who are dangerous.

reply to post by ErtaiNaGia


OK, I understand.

Well, I doubt that even one believer in the official story believes this staggeringly dumb bunk from 9/11 commission co-chair

Lee Hamilton

that """the super-heated jet fuel melted the steel super-structure of these buildings and caused their collapse."""

Monday, August 21 2006 - 9/11 Commission
Truth, Lies and Conspiracy - Interview with Lee Hamilton

www.911truth.org...

And as for the "Why didn't they plant WMDs" comment - why bother? Seriously. By that point they had already invaded, there were ZERO consequences for not finding WMDs and still they didn't pull out of Iraq after that was disclosed.

As far as conspiracies go, I would rate smuggling out WMDs to Iraq as harder than pulling off 9/11, but then I know that sort of stuff happens as well so who knows.

reply to post by Rabbit281


The ATS population are more than well enough informed to not equate Zionism with Anti-Semitism. Please pick a better strawman.

You are trolling among smarter people than yourself.

Originally posted by joerobo
reply to post by joerobo

 

i just have to say it again, mods please check accounts and IPs for this thread.

In case no one else noticed there are a plethora of new users defending the "Official Fable" with a list of talking points.

I signed up for the sole reason of pointing this out. So that makes me a new user too, so you don't have to believe me, just go back and smell the thread. It's OBVIOUS.

*Face palm*

Wow, so either we have to have your view/opinion of events or we're dis-info agents, shills or trolls?

Build a bridge & get over it!

reply to post by rival


If you were trying to stun me with your intellectual prowess.....You failed miserably.

To you I give two words of advice.....

[ quote ] [ /quote ]

reply to post by galdur


I've lurked on a lot of these threads and I think what it comes down to for me is this: I simply cannot come to terms with either side of the story. BOTH explanations just hurt my brain. I cannot conceive of a government that would plot and execute such an elaborate hoax to kill it's own people in order to declare war, or whatever other agenda in play, nor can I believe that those building fell down the way that they did, or that any plane at all hit the Pentagon.

Here's some questions for both sides

1) If the government did indeed plan the whole thing, did they actually fly the AA planes into the buildings or were they military planes. If they were military planes, where the hell are the people on those flights??
2) If the government planned this event, how many people did it take to execute the whole thing, where are they and how have they kept quiet about their roles this whole time?
3) If the 3 buildings were "pulled" how is it possible that all of that work was done preparing the buildings without a single person noticing anything odd, out of sorts or otherwise fishy?

On the other hand
1) How could those skyscrapers, that were built to withstand a plane crash, among other things, disintegrate into itself at what looked to me like a free fall into the relatively tiny pile of rubble that they did?
2) Why did SO MANY people being interviewed on the streets talk about hearing explosions prior to and/or during the falling of the towers and why weren't there any tests for explosives to rule out that possibility?
3) Why is it assumed that anybody asking any questions about it are dishonoring the dead, un-American, and/or freaks who don't have anything better to do than sit at their computers all day watching youtube videos?

Imho. both sides leave unanswered questions. And for me, the bottom line really is what the heck could I ever do about it anyway whatever or whoever is to blame?

reply to post by OccamAssassin

Best you can do? You really are terrible at this.

Again OBVIOUS! C'mon give us someone who can actually lie, or even make an argument without reading it off a list of approved talking points that have already been debunked.

The whole bunch of you (bunch of usernames) are embarrassing yoursel(f)ves.

OBVIOUS

reply to post by SteveR


But many steel structured buildings have been on fire MUCH larger and more un-'controlled' than building 7, as can be seen at this link When you look at the damage done, and the pictures of the flames it's quite obvious that these fires were much worse than building 7....though I'm sure you'll imagine they were somehow 'controled' fires and that's why they didn't fall.....what exactly is you definition of "control" because you will be lying to yourself if you can't see these fires, which in some cases lasted for as long as 17 hours were not under much 'control'.

Also a bridge collapsing is not a very good comparison to a building.....it's simply apples and oranges.

Bravo. If only the other truthers would actually research things for real and then add a little common sense the world would be a better place.

Sorry I shouldn't have said "other truthers" because that implies that you are one but you're not now and you're better off for it.

reply to post by annella



I think you are overlooking the facts by letting your personal belief that a "certain amount of people had to be behind the orchestrating of 911" for it to happen. And yes it is hard to believe and it is a hard pill to swallow, but there are in fact a huge number of sociopaths in our society we are learning more and more about each day. The world is not all sunshine and rainbows. You would be surprised how easy it is to corrupt and buy people. I think things are much more autonomous and compartmentalized then we think. The left hand does not know what the right hand does. Look at the confusion going on between the FDNY and NYPD as an example. Larry Silverstien and company gained trillions from this. He would have had the asbestos renovated from the towers and it would have cost him much unwanted money and resources/ So what does he do he takes out terrorist insurance months before 911 and ... ZING problem solved just turned a profit. Heck better demolish WTC7 and make more off this while he was ahead. Had demolitions planted during renovations weeks before. You see you have to look at both sides of the fence.

edit: Hitler got thousands of Germans to exterminate millions of Jews

Hundreds is peanuts

reply to post by lazydaisy67


It isn´t up to me to produce a credible story for the govt., it´s up to them to come up with something that is in touch with physical reality to replace their impossible nonsense. If you read the interview I linked to, Mr. Hamilton practically admits the obvious, that the official story is bunk.

Originally posted by OccamAssassin
reply to post by rival

 

If you were trying to stun me with your intellectual prowess.....You failed miserably.

To you I give two words of advice.....

[ quote ] [ /quote ]

Cute, you've pointed out my lack of HTML skills. I also didn't finish eighth grade AND have an overbite
(in case you need more ammunition to assail me when you have no other counter point.)
Oh, I suck at punctuation, too. OOps was that a dangling participle I dunno, >;]p

reply to post by joerobo


You really can't accept that someone could possibly have a different opinion to your own.



To quote Jeremy Clarkson......."Typical Septic".