9/11 conspiracy theories, Do they hold any water?

[glasseye]

By not accepting the official explanation this implies you think that there was some kind of conspiracy.

Not true. "Not accepting the official explanation" means not accepting the official explanation.

To think there was some kind of conspiracy means that something would have to been done to the buildings in advance to help them fall. This would involve many people and according my knowledge of human nature it's impossible to keep a sensational secret this long.

How many people? You say "many", but how many, really? Do you have any information on "how many"?

Besides how could anyone do something in advance to the buildings and then make the planes crash into those same places? Far to complicated to have happened.

Why would the planes have to crash into a specific location on the building? They'd need to hit the building, yes. But as evidenced by the imagery we saw, the buildings collapsed from above the locations, far away from the impact site.

[glasseye]

Here's a letter from UL (who certified the WTC steel) to NIST, who said that the UL-certified steel failed.

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?sto ... 2144051451

"The truth is out there", said the TV series. Only by asking questions can we ascertain the truth. Fingers-in-ears posturing and proclaiming merely displays ignorance and prejudice.

[Lanval]

Here's a letter from UL (who certified the WTC steel) to NIST, who said that the UL-certified steel failed.

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?sto ... 2144051451

"The truth is out there", said the TV series. Only by asking questions can we ascertain the truth. Fingers-in-ears posturing and proclaiming merely displays ignorance and prejudice.

Not nearly as much as ignoring obvious evidence to the contrary of your belief. Why do you think the engineers who argued for steel failure are out-and-out liars, while the guys who made the steel, and who clearly have both a financial and psychological statement in proclaiming their steel isn't at fault, are telling the truth.

If you're going to claim that you're being insightful and critical, questioning motives and meanings, you have to do it every time to every source, whether it supports or contravenes your argument. Otherwise, you're just being intellectually dishonest as you pursue your own ends, regardless of fact.



Mike

[steve74baywin]

If there ever was a real good time to say "take ones own advise", or "five fingers pointing back at you", or "pot calling the kettle black", or "it takes one to know one", I think now is the time.
I wonder if some have a mirror in front of them?
I wanted to say that a month ago, but didn't. But it has crossed my mind too many times now.
I sometimes wonder if it isn't a joke, and the joke is on me.
Lanval, all pun intended, but you seem to be great at accusing people of the very thing I think you need to be accused of. This isn't the first time I noticed this, I've avoided saying it at least four times already. I couldn't resist this time, and I hope I don't regret it.
On a good note, for myself anyway, at least I avoided saying it to anyone many times.
Please try to take it as objective advise.

[Randy in Maine]

Too bad nobody ever listened to this....

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tech/debun ... ories.html

[Spezialist]

I have a statement/question for this thread,

In relation to the pancake theory of the collapse.

On a typical workday 25,000 people worked in a tower
That's alot of weight
Much much more than the weight of a fully loaded airplane.

Considering most high rise buildings built since the 60's are of this type of construction it must be considered fairly robust.

Another point I'd like to make.
The elevator shafts would only "work" as a blow torch if they were not plugged with an elevator.

Another point that I've learned in logical discussion, if you keep the other side arguing they can't focus on logic.

I feel the reason this subject has been off limits is because if the truth comes out too fast, it could start a real on the streets rebellion.

Hi, to the folks that understand my viewpoints, sorry to those who don't .
PS I have never been or am a troll.
Aloha

[glasseye]

Not that all of this stuff is true, but there is certainly a rising tide of productions by a variety of media sources available for those not afraid to ask difficult questions.

http://documentaryheaven.com/category/911/

[fred]

watch the latest architects and engineers for 9/11 truth movie explosive evidence, discusss....

[glasseye]

Lanval, anyone interested in this topic, watch this: Please. It's barely 15 minutes long.

http://documentaryheaven.com/architects ... -of-wtc-7/

[Amskeptic]

Lanval, anyone interested in this topic, watch this: Please. It's barely 15 minutes long.

http://documentaryheaven.com/architects ... -of-wtc-7/

How can anyone deny this????
Colin

[Velokid1]

So what are the theories about who did it and what their motivation would have been? Owner of the bldg wanting to collect insurance money? The Bush Oil Cartel looking for even MORE reason to go to war over their oil profits? What?

[dingo]

How about the military-industrial triangle ? 5.5 trillion $. Spent so far on Iraq/Stan

Peacetime aint good for business...

[steve74baywin]

How about the group that has funded both sides of most wars since before our revolution?
The International Banking Cartel.

[Velokid1]

They would have easily accomplished all of those things by allowing the planes to fly into the WTC towers. "Why WTC7?" is what I'm asking.

[steve74baywin]

They would have easily accomplished all of those things by allowing the planes to fly into the WTC towers. "Why WTC7?" is what I'm asking.

Perhaps a third plane was supposed to hit that building, and the explosives were already in place, the building suffered some damage, they already was counting on the insurance and plans to do something different with the land. There is a whole bunch about the changing of the insurance company and security company in the year prior to 911.

Lanval, anyone interested in this topic, watch this: Please. It's barely 15 minutes long.

http://documentaryheaven.com/architects ... -of-wtc-7/

How can anyone deny this????
Colin

Most don't watch it.
Those that do, well. I could go on with a long post about conditioning, and how people can be trained to ignore things, etc, etc. But I won't ATT.