I Was A Deluded 9/11 Truther

Originally posted by AGWskeptic
Explain to all of us how 2 freeway overpasses collapsed from fires alone?

Yes the rubber mounts between the steel melted and the steel deformed.

Nothing melted, and nothing was destroyed other than the rubber. The original steel was re-used to re-build the bridge.

Originally posted by galdur
post removed by staff

Ad hominem and a complete avoidance of the question. I think you're making it up. Post your sources, or as the internet say, GTFO.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

reply to post by Joey Canoli


Knock your socks off - try it.

CJ

Attention!!!

For those who have forgotten:

This forum is dedicated to the discussion and speculation of cover-ups, scandals, and other conspiracies surrounding the events of 9/11/2001. Participants should be aware that this forum is under close staff scrutiny due to general rudeness by some. Discussion topics and follow-up responses in this forum will likely tend to lean in favor of conspiracies, scandals, and cover-ups. Members who would seek to refute such theories should be mindful of AboveTopSecret.com's tradition of focusing on conspiracy theory, cover-ups, and scandals.

There will be an immediate end to bickering, personal attacks and off-topic posts.
If continued, these posts can and will be warned and removed. Members may temporarily lose posting privileges and/or the thread will be closed.

Originally posted by ColoradoJens


Knock your socks off - try it.

CJ

Try what?

Drop a 10 lb weight onto a 1" x 2" piece of wood that is supported @ 4' centers?

And see if it breaks?

So I'm allowed to drop it from any distance I want?

reply to post by Joey Canoli


sure - the higher the better - the point will actually be better illustrated.

CJ

Originally posted by ColoradoJens
reply to post by Joey Canoli

 

sure - the higher the better - the point will actually be better illustrated.

CJ

It's kind of funny. Anyone who has ever had a glass table break probably knows the story. You have something heavy, and you set it down on the glass. It holds it up and resists the weight. Then, you decide to pick it up again, but this time, when you set it down, you drop it from an inch or two up. Suddenly, the glass table shatters. Why? The heavy object had potential energy before it was dropped, which translated into kinetic energy based on the density of the object, and then transferred that energy into the glass, overcoming the glass's resistance and causing it to break.

reply to post by Observor


Its not that were afraid of what they believe its just fun to argue with people that are wrong. HOWEVER!!! I'll admit that I'm not sold at all on what went down with the anthrax attacks thats just to weird and shaky.

reply to post by cripmeister


Nay. However, I am curious what inspired you to make the statement. Do you subscribe to a theistic belief system?

Originally posted by Mcupobob
reply to post by Observor

 

Its not that were afraid of what they believe its just fun to argue with people that are wrong.

I guessed as much. However, I did see some posts imploring the "truthers" to accept the "truth" about the day and even employing emotional blackmail tactics like how not doing so is insulting to memories of the dead etc. They evidently are afraid of the "truthers". What about, I am not sure. But you certainly don't seem to be one of them.

HOWEVER!!! I'll admit that I'm not sold at all on what went down with the anthrax attacks thats just to weird and shaky.

That is really funny and clever, I must admit. I never really believed the accusations of the "truthers" that those peddling the US government position on the events of the day are shills, sheeple etc. I know most of you guys are clever, even if completely lacking some other qualities.

reply to post by Mcupobob


Trust me, there is nothing you can do to change anyone's mind about this. I looked into all the 9/11 claims, and made several threads back in 2004-2007 alongside some other members, and all we gained was to be called "government goons" "paid disinformation agents" etc, etc.

Apart from that you might/or will get branded as such and a lot of members would simply decide not to give you any stars and flags on any, or all your subsequent threads simply because you don't agree with them on this conspiracy theory.

I actually believe there are some real government conspiracies, but imo 9/11 wasn't one of them, at least not how the 9/11 truthers make it to be.

There is right now a very popular thread about 9/11 where the member even states "no other steel frame building has fallen down due to fire", which has been repeated back and forth over the years. Yet, he/she forgets the fact that a passenger plane crashed into both buildings WTC1 and 2, and also much of the debris that collapsed from tower one, if I remember well, fell on WTC 7 and opened a big hole on WTC7, which alongside the fires, and the shock from the tons, upon tons of debris falling on WTC7 and the ground causing an earthquake from the falling debris, the shock waves from the plane crash explosions, all adds up to more stress on already weakened structural frames.

ALL OF IT, not just the fires, and not just the plane crashes, caused the towers to collapse.

Back in the day I saw the video of WTC7 collapsing, where you can clearly see the roof and Penthouse of WTC7 falling, and I pointed this out that it took 8 seconds in between that collapse and the final collapse which proved it was not a controlled demolition, yet nothing other members or I showed could convince those members that wanted to believe the government was behind 9/11.

I do believe however that 9/11 and the REAL threat of Islamic extremism are being used to circumvent the Constitution of the United States to bring to fruition the One World Order.

A lot of members are not aware to the fact that the first two big wars which the United States fought right after we became a free nation was against Islamic pirate nations.

These wars are called the Barbary Wars, the first one was fought from 1801-1805, and the second one in 1815.

Wikipedia kind of leaves out the fact that these pirates were Islamic extremists, with the backing of their Islamic nations, who were attacking merchant and passenger ships from Europe and the U.S.A.

Wikipedia even edited out a portion of the history they had regarding these wars, in which Thomas Jefferson narrated the response he got from the Islamic diplomat which sounds like something an Islamic extremist of today would say almost word for word.

I excerpted and linked that narration from Thomas Jefferson, and which was in wikipedia and now it is gone, in the original threads years ago trying to inform members that we have been at war with Islamic extremism for hundreds of years, yet all I gained was to be called what you are being called by members now.

BTW, doesn't the following part also sound familiar?

When the United States military efforts of the early 19th century were successful against the pirates, partisans of the Democratic-Republicans contrasted their presidents' refusals to buy off the pirates by paying tribute with the failure of the preceding federalist administration to suppress the piracy. The Federalist Party had adopted the slogan, "Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute," but had failed to end the attacks on merchant ships. The phrase was attributed to Charles C. Pinckney in the course of the XYZ Affair. Historians have found the sentence originated with Sen. Robert Goodloe Harper

en.wikipedia.org...

People will believe what they want to believe, no matter how much evidence you can provide that refutes their belief.

There is another more real conspiracy which i also pointed out years ago in which I showed how a U.S. government official was fired because he went public with information showing that the Russian government was behind the dissapearance of the WMD.

The dissapearance of the WMD was even predicted by former high ranking Russian defectors who said the Russian government had such plans in place such as the "Sarindar" plan in case the west got too close to discovering the WMD and where they came from.

I do think however, like I already mentioned, that 9/11 and the threat of terrorism are really being used as excuses to take away rights, and liberties which should never have been taken away.

If we give up rights, and liberties in order to feel some measure of safety the Islamic terrorists, alongside the elites who do want a One World Government win.

Actually I found the wikepedia narration, so I was wrong about them editing it out.

Here it is and tell me it doesn't sound like something ISlamic extremists today would say.

In March 1785, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to London to negotiate with Tripoli's envoy, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman (or Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). Upon inquiring "concerning the ground of the pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury", the ambassador replied:

It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemys ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once.
...

en.wikipedia.org...

People also seem to forget history, and how who USED to be allies could turn into your worst enemies.

Members point out the fact that at first Bin Laden was used by the CIA to fight against the Russians as a sign that Bin Laden was a CIA asset to the end, but this is not necessarily true.

Just because he WAS an asset during the war against the Russians doesn't mean he continued to be an asset for 9/11.

The world history is full of allies turning against their allies and becoming enemies for one reason or another, but suddenly after 9/11 this fact dissapeared along others.

BTW, here is part of the information of the U.S. government official who was fired for going public with secret information on how the Russians were behind the WMD dissapearance.

...
Russia and Iraq

Shaw was responsible for tracking Saddam Husseins weapons programs before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He stated in October 2004, March 2005, and again in February 2006 that it was the Russians who helped Saddam Hussein to "clean up" his weapons of mass destruction stockpiles "to prevent the United States from discovering them." [2]

In particular, on February 18, 2006, Shaw told a conference at The Intelligence Summit in Alexandria, Virginia, that "The short answer to the question of where the WMD Saddam bought from the Russians went was that they went" to Syria and the Beqaa Valley in Lebanon, Kenneth R. Timmerman reported February 19, 2006, in NewsMax. "They were moved by Russian Spetsnaz (special forces) units out of uniform, that were specifically sent to Iraq to move the weaponry and eradicate any evidence of its existence," Shaw said.

After accusing Russian GRU of helping Saddam to remove his WMD, Shaw was asked to resign for "exceeding his authority" in disclosing the information, a charge he called "specious." Shaw was forced out of office when his position was eliminated on December 10, 2004
...

en.wikipedia.org...

There were reports from allies that it is true and large Russian convoys entered Iraq and left in a hurry, and in some occassions our allies even exchanged fire with them as the Russian convoys were trying to escape from Iraq.

We have the reports from even the second in command of Saddam's Air Force saying how he saw some of the WDM being moved by airplanes, yet a lot of members don't want to believe these facts.

And let's not forget...

2 Russian generals given awards in Iraq on war eve

Two Russian generals were photographed receiving awards from Saddam Husseins government for helping Iraqi military forces less than 10 days before the U.S.-led invasion.

The two retired officers were identified by the newspaper Gazeta.ru as Col. Gen. Vladimir Achalov and Col. Gen. Igor Maltsev, both former high-ranking officers involved in Soviet rapid-reaction and air defense forces.

Both generals were photographed receiving awards from Iraqi Defense Minister Sultan Hashim Ahmed in early March 2003, only days before the war began on March 20, 2003. The photographs were taken in a building that was bombed by U.S. cruise missiles during the first air raids on Baghdad, the newspaper stated.

The mission and the reason the generals received the awards were not disclosed in the April 2, 2003, report. However, Gen. Achalov told the newspaper that he “didn’t fly to Baghdad to drink coffee.”

The comment bolsters the claims of Pentagon officials who say Russian military advisers and special forces units were helping Iraq’s military and intelligence services before the Iraq war.
...

www.washingtontimes.com...

Or...

Pentagon: Russia fed U.S. war plans to Iraq

As U.S. troops moved toward Iraq in 2003, Saddam Hussein received intelligence about their battle strategy and troop movements from a Russian ambassador, according to a Pentagon report.

The Russians claimed they obtained the information from sources inside the U.S. Central Command headquarters in Doha, Qatar, and conveyed it to Hussein via the Russian ambassador to Iraq, the report said.

Russia dismissed the report on Saturday. "Such unfounded accusations have been voiced regularly," said a Russian spokesman. "We do not see fit to comment on these insinuations."

articles.cnn.com...:WORLD

We found this out from documents which were captured by our troops in Iraq.

The Russians were the biggest arms dealers that Saddam had after the early 1990s, and he owed them billions of dollars on mostly banned weaponry, banned equipment and yes including WMD.

The Germans alongside other nations, including other European nations, were the main contributors that provided Saddam with the WMD, in the form of chemical agents, that were used by Saddam against the Kurds, by gasing them to death, and before and during the deals with the Russians, European and other UN nations were Saddam's biggest arm dealers, and including WMD in the 1980s. There were dozens of other European nations which also sold Saddam WMD material and WMD.

Watch this video which shows how Saddam murdered and gased not only Kurds, but at one time or another and for some reason tortured and murdered every ethnic group living in Iraq at the time.

WARNING, IT CONTAINS GRAPHIC MATTERIAL!



But all of this, and more is being blamed on the U.S.

The U.S. did give samples of some biological viruses which were sent to Iraqi labs and Universities and were supposedly to be used for research and for vaccines back in the 1980s. This shouldn't have happened, but unfortunately it did.

reply to post by Observor


To be fair, both sides were trying to drag the families of 9/11 into. The "deniers" or whatever they call us, did start it but it should have never been done. We don't know how all of them feel about it and using them for debate proposes is nothing but emotionally targeting and well I feel wrong. Even though people argue that we won't get any traction on this forum for debating against the Truthers, hopefully they might think twice about the event. As much as the Conspiracy theorist hate the skeptics, you need us guys! It helps the deconstruction of disinformation form both sides, so we can can to the sweet, sweet nugget of truth in the center of lies, deceit and emotion.

Now I want people to know I don't trust the Government, but not everything is a conspiracy.

"I too was a convinced conspiracist. I studied the peculiarities and technicalities of these claims for five years. In an exhaustive search of sources, way beyond those supplied on the typical truth sites and threads, I can finally say nothing has truly stood up to critical analysis. It is true that people simply believe what they want to believe. "

You can beleive what you want to beleive but science and maths does not work that way and both point towards a cover-up from the highest levels.

The only people i know that would appose a full and open investigation into 9/11 are people that are guilty and have something to hide and with so many people not buying the offical fairy story then if they were inocent then they would let a new investigation go ahead to clear their names.

Turkeys do not vote for christmas and politicans won't vote when they know the powers that be have dirt on them else they would not had been allowed to reach top level of goverment, it's gang mentality at it's best.

Originally posted by Mcupobob
reply to post by Observor

 

To be fair, both sides were trying to drag the families of 9/11 into. The "deniers" or whatever they call us, did start it but it should have never been done. We don't know how all of them feel about it and using them for debate proposes is nothing but emotionally targeting and well I feel wrong.

Regardless of who does it, it is emotional blackmail and shows desperation. But the "truthers" getting desperate is understandable since their version is not the version on whose basis actions are being taken by the government. What is not understandable is why the "debunkers" resort to it, when their version is the basis for the actions of the government and there is not even the remotest possibility that the official version will change significantly from what it is now.

As much as the Conspiracy theorist hate the skeptics, you need us guys! It helps the deconstruction of disinformation form both sides, so we can can to the sweet, sweet nugget of truth in the center of lies, deceit and emotion.

I personally don't believe any claims merely because they are in conformity with an explanation I believe. I am more of a sceptic than any "debunkers", so don't really need any help there. I am not interested in playing the detective pretending to identify the perpetrators citing "evidence" from anyone who claims to have it and "experts" who declare what is possible and what is not. I go strictly by officially confirmed information, my own personal knowledge of what is possible and what is not and logic.

Now I want people to know I don't trust the Government, but not everything is a conspiracy.

Sure, everything is not a conspiracy, but the trick is to be able to tell which is and which is not.

I doubt the honesty of anyone who claims to be agnostic/ignorant and confortable about one set of terrorist attacks (the anthrax attacks), but knows what happened with regard to another (WTC and Pentagon attacks) sufficiently enough to actively peddle it to others when both happened around the same time and under the same administration. That, as is evident, includes not just the "debunkers", but all the "truthers" on here as well.

"What is not understandable is why the "debunkers" resort to it, when their version is the basis for the actions of the government and there is not even the remotest possibility that the official version will change significantly from what it is now"

Well we are not about ready to throw in the towel and our numbers have been growing over the past ten years so it's only a matter of time before we get some justice.

You can not un-learn the laws of physics and given our day in court even if it takes 100 years then we will blow the offical fariy tale out the water once and for all.