The five biggest issues with the 'Official Story'

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   
The 911 forums have become quite stagnant of late, both mods and users have expressed their dislike for the current fashion of arguing, with threads taking huge detours and often resorting to petty bickering. I feel that I have been responsible for some of this, and I have previously attempted to come up with better ways of discussing 911 that don't lead to this conclusion.

To that end, I think a productive discussion would be to select five issues which are universally agreed to be the biggest areas of doubt, denial, contradiction or anything else which would disprove the 'official story'. Once this is done, we could perhaps petition the mods to unsticky some of the older and less useful threads, and sticky 5 specific discussion topics that are strictly for single topic discussion.

I wonder what people think of this, and whether anyone has a suitable list of 5 topics already prepared. I think it would be quite an improvement to stick to a single topic in each thread and the mods could take significant action to ensure it remains topical.

Here is my suggested list of topics of discussion. Please only post your thoughts on the list of topics, rather than any debate over a specific topic. I really don't want this thread to become bickering as well

  • How hot were the fires?
  • Was the fireproofing damaged or defective?
  • Could the fires have affected the steel?
  • What would heating the steel have resulted in?
  • Can trusses cause the exterior colum bowing?


Obviously these focus primarily on WTC1 and 2, I'm not sure whether I would include WTC7 in there directly or save it for its own special topic. It seems that there are questions that are shared, and some that would be unique:

  • Can beams walk off columns?
  • What would happen to columns left unsupported?
  • Could the core braced frame of WTC7 fail?
  • What would be the failure mode post horizontal progression?


Your thoughts?




posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
What other buildingd have ever unintentionally pancaked? This requires floors beneath the falling floors to be blown out of the way.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by phroziac
 


Could you repeat that in the form of a list of the 5 biggest questions you'd like to see answered?



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
reply to post by phroziac
 


Could you repeat that in the form of a list of the 5 biggest questions you'd like to see answered?


1 what other buildings in the history of concrete/steel towers have ever pancaked by accident?
2 pancaking at freefall speed requires floors below the collapsing floors to be blown out of the way entirely, how did this occur?
3 how can a passport fall out of the wreckage intact, yet the rest of the plane was totally unrecognizable and burning with intense heat, and even then, how do you know its a hijackers passport and not an innocent victim? Also no desks, chairs, filing cabinets fell out
4 why do terrorists only come from countries with oil?
5 why do rothschild operated central banks always pop up immediately after occupation of evil countries?



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Are you asking people to post any 5 topics they doubt about the OS but then not to be able to discuss anything specific about those topics?

Seems pointless if people cannot go into more detail about their chosen topics. Why such limitations?

I notice you have added some further topics, so that is 9 in total from you, can we chose 9 like you, or does it have to be 5?

I'm sure if anyone does post their 5 or 9 topics, that others will discuss elements about those topics, so there will be some specific discussions, that just cannot be avoided, and they should not have limitations.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegameisup
Are you asking people to post any 5 topics they doubt about the OS but then not to be able to discuss anything specific about those topics?

Seems pointless if people cannot go into more detail about their chosen topics. Why such limitations?

To avoid this thread descending into bickering.


I notice you have added some further topics, so that is 9 in total from you, can we chose 9 like you, or does it have to be 5?

I'm putting no specific strict requirements in place. I'd just like to be able to have a few separate mod-curated topics that would let us discuss specific sections


I'm sure if anyone does post their 5 or 9 topics, that others will discuss elements about those topics, so there will be some specific discussions, that just cannot be avoided, and they should not have limitations.

On the contrary, every free-form thread tends to dengerate into back and forth and bickering. Take the "pull it" thread for example. The very first posts were completely off topic and it hit 84 pages of wildly varying debate.

I'd like to see something a little more structured, and we have sticky topics that haven't seen a post in half a decade. I think it's time for them to be refreshed with actual discussion topics.

That's why I posted this, so we can all come to a conclusion on what topics should be discussed in that manner.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by phroziac
 


Thanks! I don't quite think #4 and #5 have direct relevance to 911 but the first 3 are definitely questions to be put in place. Hopefully people will back you up. Thanks for participating properly



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
reply to post by phroziac
 


Thanks! I don't quite think #4 and #5 have direct relevance to 911 but the first 3 are definitely questions to be put in place. Hopefully people will back you up. Thanks for participating properly

They dont but theyre damn good questions!! :p



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 08:10 PM
link   
Where on Earth does it say anywhere that "fires melted the steel" is part of the "official story"? To my knowledge there is no "official story" on the precise reason why the towers fell. That's why there are a number of reports and they more or less contradict each other. Even the NIST report said in the first page that their report was an educated guess and shouldn't be relied upon as an official report.

This is what annoys me about the conspiracy theorists relying on propaganda like this. They keep throwing around buzzwords they've picked up like "official story" and yet the things they insist are part of the "official story" isn't remotely "official" by any means except by their own imagination. So why are YOU calling it "the official story" when the people who created these reports aren't even saying they're "official reports"?
edit on 7-7-2012 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by phroziac

Originally posted by exponent
reply to post by phroziac
 


Could you repeat that in the form of a list of the 5 biggest questions you'd like to see answered?


1 what other buildings in the history of concrete/steel towers have ever pancaked by accident?
2 pancaking at freefall speed requires floors below the collapsing floors to be blown out of the way entirely, how did this occur?
3 how can a passport fall out of the wreckage intact, yet the rest of the plane was totally unrecognizable and burning with intense heat, and even then, how do you know its a hijackers passport and not an innocent victim? Also no desks, chairs, filing cabinets fell out
4 why do terrorists only come from countries with oil?
5 why do rothschild operated central banks always pop up immediately after occupation of evil countries?


Thats some DAMN GOOD QUESTIONS!!!!


Damn good.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   
I would like to have a sticky thread where the Truthers take all the evidence they present in little bits and pieces. And put it all together into one big picture for us.

I think that would be entertaining.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by phroziac
 


well i do think personally the last question is of the utmost importance to 9/11....

'As of the year 2000, there were seven countries without a Rothschild-owned Central Bank:

Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Cuba, North Korea, Iran

NOw look at the list...It is extremely important as it shows that a questionable criminal element may have been involved in the attacks other than 19 muslim hijackers...It also shows that there may have been unlimited funding in order to carry out the attacks...therefore it shows that there could have been a mass manipulation of everything that was presented on the day.

Amsel (Amschel) Bauer Mayer Rothschild, 1838:

"Let me issue and control a Nation's money and I care not who makes its laws".

does this make sense....in these current times...I think more so than ever now.

so i will back up phrozaic without even a seconds moment to think about it....Motive is everything when looking into any criminal investigation...and that is where 9/11 fell apart from the start...it was never ever treated as a crime scene ...it was sold to the American people as a terrorist attack only.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   
I see no mention of the TIME it took for a tower to be completely destroyed even if we assume it could start.

Suppose we had the north tower intact and then removed 5 stories, 91 through 95. That would leave a 60 foot gap with 15 stories in the air without support. They would fall. They would take 1.9 seconds to hit the top of the lower 90 stories and be traveling at 42 mph or 62 ft/sec.

Those 90 stories would be about 1080 feet tall. If the falling 15 stories could maintain a constant velocity while crushing six times as many stories as themselves even though they had to be stronger and heavier than the falling 15 stories then it would take 17.4 seconds to destroy 90 stories. This would yield a total of 19.3 seconds to destroy the north tower.

But Dr. Sunder of the NIST told NPR in a podcast the the north tower collapse in 11 seconds. Meeting that time would mean accelerating while destroying greater mass.

The fall of The Spire makes the maximum time 25 seconds. Even that is not much longer than 19.3 seconds and considering what was left of the core most of the building's mass came down in significantly less time than 25 seconds. Probably less than 20.

So how is that explained?

psik
edit on 7-7-2012 by psikeyhackr because: gram err



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 08:30 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by phroziac

4 why do terrorists only come from countries with oil?


So you're saying the Red Army Faction didn't murder capitalists and bankers in Germany? That the Communist Shining Path aren't murdering peasants in Peru? That the Japanese doomsday cult din't release Sarin gas in a Tokyo subway? That the IRA wasn't murdering British soldiers and North Irish gov't officials for decades? That separtists in Kashmir aren't murdering people in hotels in India? That the PLO out of Palestine aren't blowing up Israeli buses and reataurants?

What say you you rethink your "absolute truth" and get back to us, 'cause it sounds like you've making up whatever truth that sounds pretty to you and you're pushing it as if it was fact. Like that NEVER happens in conspiracy truther world.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by waypastvne
 


I would like the OS to put everything into one cohesive scenario that does not fall apart....

they said it was pancaking...FEMA
They said it wasn't pancaking...NIST.
The Commissions own people said..."it was setup to fail"
Bazant says it was crush down....
They said it was IRAQ...now it is Saudi Arabia....both being Al Qaeda
They said WTC7 came down before it came down...

I mean would like the OS to be conclusive in some fashion....It might help people to want to believe.

They said Iraq had WMD....then it did not have WMD

they said within 30mins it was Al Qaeda....
They said the FBI did not have fore knowledge....
But the newly released CIA docs says they had fore knowledge of possible attacks by Al Qaeda.

I could go into more...but could you please enlighten us to the truth.....since you Believe the OS...which OS aforementioned Is the true OS.
edit on 083131p://f40Saturday by plube because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


Dave, please don't start this in this thread. Nobody has said 'melt' other than you so far, and I really want to keep this thread soley dedicated to finding the best questions to focus on.

Whether or not you disagree with the ideas put across, the discussion of them should stick to a specific thread. It's pointless me going to the moderators and suggesting a format change unless we have a good list of questions to focus on.

That's what I want to do here. No offence intended.



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by HangTheTraitors
Gotta love how "GoodOlDave" and his clan of followers here dont have even so much as a "pulse" or any life-existence here at all until a 911 thread comes up.


There could be a thread about the sky truly falling in on us, or a thread involving an epic massive worldly event or world war 3 starting thread, or a thread with GOD ALMIGHTY himself speaking to us via LIVE ATS FOOTAGE and there wont be a PEEP out of him ... unless it involves defending the 911 official story... :lol;


Paid shills, gotta love'em.


Yeah, fine. Go ahead and enjoy drinking your Alex Jones Kool Aid, and you might as well ask for seconds for all I care. How about answering the question- why are you calling the NIST report "the official story" when even NIST says it's only an educated guess and isn't remotely an offical verdict?

The OP is saying it's such a big issue with the "official story" when it isn't even remotely any "official story". How about offering a rational answer in your own words. Do you even have a rational answer or are you simply being a gadfly posting childish things for kicks?



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by plube
I would like the OS to put everything into one cohesive scenario that does not fall apart....


We do have story that is easy to follow and the facts to back it up.

You do not.

Why don't you take your favourite jews from the list in your signature and tell us how they pulled off 911 ?



posted on Jul, 7 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by phroziac

4 why do terrorists only come from countries with oil?


So you're saying the Red Army Faction didn't murder capitalists and bankers in Germany? That the Communist Shining Path aren't murdering peasants in Peru? That the Japanese doomsday cult din't release Sarin gas in a Tokyo subway? That the IRA wasn't murdering British soldiers and North Irish gov't officials for decades? That separtists in Kashmir aren't murdering people in hotels in India? That the PLO out of Palestine aren't blowing up Israeli buses and reataurants?

What say you you rethink your "absolute truth" and get back to us, 'cause it sounds like you've making up whatever truth that sounds pretty to you and you're pushing it as if it was fact. Like that NEVER happens in conspiracy truther world.

Nice way to put words in my mouth man. First of all, I'm talking about "terrorism" after 9/11. You know, the BS kind. The Red Army Faction, the japanese doomsday cult, way before 9/11. IRA started way before 9/11, but i know they're still around.

There's oil in peru.

There's oil in palestine.

Theres oil in india.

I also have not been force-fed lies about peruvian terrorists, palestinian terrorists, or indian terrorists constantly since 9/11....
edit on 7-7-2012 by phroziac because: (no reason given)





new topics
 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join