Humour Video : 9/11 conspiracy theories ridiculous. Al qaeda says.

The conspiracy theories surrounding the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings should address who they feel is responsable for a conspiracy rather than leave it open.

How many people and who would be involved?

Lets think about it.

How many people would have been responsable for planting explosives in these buildings. We are speaking of approximately 250 floors of buildings wherein explosives would have been placed throughout the buildings. The conspiracy reports specifically indicated explosions occuring on the uppermost floors of the 2 taller buildings and additionally state that most demolition occurs with more explosives used for demolition being established on lower floors.

That would have necessitated hundreds of explosive experts covering 250 floors of building. The amount of manpower and time involved would have been extraordinary. It would have taken a huge amount of manpower.

Would not one person ever speak up? Its hard to imagine. The conspiracy theories suggest the Bush administration as possibly involved, Giulani (someone who made his name prosecuting illegal actions), the owner of the buildings, referenced that Bush's family members were involved in building security from 1993 to 2000, and endless others.

Its hard to imagine that not a single person would act or speak up in a conspiracy that had to involve thousands of people.

Who was involved? Point the finger. The scope of such a set of actions to lay explosives on 250 floors would involve an enormous amount of people. It is hard to conceive of that many people that would not speak to such an action if it indeed had occurred.

I also find it strange that in discussing the destruction of the building 7 there is no mention of the structure carrying 3 times the weight over the footprint of the site, that sat over an old Con Ed structure and then was supported by a significant artificially built foundation that was designed to accomodate 600,000 square feet and yet was built to accomodate 1.8 million squre feet.

That would immediately point me to a methodology of support that had to be unique and subject to any kind of serious stress beyond the ordinary.

The NIST report and the conspiracy report actually report different data on the building 7 situation. Who is one to believe.

finally I find it hard to take in Guerilla's countless claims about no plane phones on flight 93 when there are numerous reports of family members from the forty or so passengers and crew on the plane that report usage of cell and plane phones during the flight.

As incredulous as some may feel the NIST reports are, I similarly find the conspiracy theories deeply lacking.

I suppose if one hates any aspect of government one finds conspiracy all the time.

There are people willing to speak the truth all the time. The conspiracy theories imply that thousands were involved and not one would speak the truth. Its rather astonishing. In so many cases we see people within the Bush administration representing far tinier groups of people, regularly disagreeing with administration claims and producing a far different reality.

I just don't see it. But then, as much as I distrust this particular administration, as much distaste as I have for the process of government, I always see people who reveal truths.

So conspiracy believers are there none amongst thousands willing to acknowledge this.....I doubt it.

 

We're not talking about flight 93. Flight 77.

American Airlines has confirmed. That model of plane does not come with seat back phones.

 

I've posted the list of people who had to have been involved before. Here it is again, just to clarify how many people HAD to have known about it for it to happen. Yet no one, not a single person with a conscience has come forth. Stunning isn't it?

The list!

More narcissism and false proof. It all continues again.

Actually, I believe I've been doing just that. You've given up on: flight passenger data, the PA plane, the WTC "construction manager", what else? You completely ignore posts and points that contradict your point of view and pretend they never happened. It's all so typical and boring.

He claims they took it into account but when you look at reality. During the construction time of this building (the late 60's early 70's), there was no way to account for it properly. No simulations could be run; no impact, fuel simulations. It's all theoretical, and thus again - one guy's opinion. Nothing more. It's stunning that you look at the crash footage of the planes, see parts of the plane explode out the other side and wonder "hmm, why did that thing collapse?"

Yeah. And everything you've brought up is completely indefensible. What's the point of continuing? You wanna start whining about Rothstein or whatever his name is. Wanna talk about "pull it" or whatever retarded thing is hot on the truther hit list these days.

I'll happily feed your narcissistic need for attention. I don't care, either way. It's you looking like the buffoon, not me. So whatever helps ya get laid at the next Ron Paul rally, go for it.

Guerilla is crying You sound like you are 10 years old here. Seriously, dude.

 

Two calls were made from that flight. Barbara Olson called her husband with a cell phone. He's said this many times. A stewardess made the other call, probably from a cell phone as well.

 

Olsen's testimony before the 9/11 Commission was...???

And the FBI had a record of a call lasting how long???

Thanks for playing.

 

You haven't defended the architect of the WTC claiming that it was designed with fuel dumping included.

But you said that wasn't factored in. And I'm still waiting for a source.

Also, you can't defend Olsen's testimony. Or the omission of WTC 7 from the Commission Report. Or the omission of the melted metal from the NIST reports. Or the tapes the CIA withheld from subpoena and later destroyed. Or the missing black boxes at the WTC. Or the stock transactions that occurred prior to the attacks.

Should I go on?

I missed you.

I think you mean Silverstein. Nah, I'm not really into that. Even if he said "pull it", that's insignificant to the other questions. The possibility that he is complicit in an insurance scam, is overshadowed by the sheer amount of credit fraud conducted at the WTC.

You keep making personal attacks, but I'm happy to read that you are in this for the long haul.

We have so much to talk about.

I'm not crying. Well, except these big old tears of joy because you are back and want to discuss the need for a new 9/11 investigation! That's so awesome!

 

I believe he said it was about a minute. FBI has a call length recorded of 0 minutes or something. This is where Occam's Razor kicks in, Guerilla. There are 3 choices here:

1-The call didn't happen. Everyone in the FBI is lying. Ted Olson is lying (I dare you to tell that to him!). They made up records of other calls, but in their stupidly typical black helicopter way, left that call data out - so as to arise suspicion from clever college kids. This despite the fact that Olson talked about the call after 9/11.
2-The other call took place, but not hers. But Ted Olson decided to lie about it.
3-All of the calls took place, but some sort of data error corrupted the data. Or since it was collect call, the call length was not recorded properly.

Now, Guerilla ask yourself. Of these options. Which is most likely?

If it's anything but #3, did Ted Olson murder his wife the morning of 9/11 and luckily (!) get the chance to cover it up by saying she was on the plane. Or is she still alive someplace?

Seriously, present me with alternatives if you believe in option 1 or 2. Just saying "I haven't thought about it" will really just expose your intellectual dishonesty here.

 

I believe I just posted about that. Sorry if you can't read

More of your epic research could have deduced the problem here:
http://www.thestreet.com/newsanalysis/optionsfutures/10377063.html

I, too, am stunned that concept that the black boxes being destroyed after having a 500,000 tons of steel (molten steel nonetheless) fall upon them! You'd think it impossible. This is pretty sad, really.

What omission? I've linked to the NIST that mentions melted metal. Did you not read that? Oh. Never mind, you probably didn't

Commision report focused on WTC 1 and 2 and the Pentagon. You know this.

Need to do more epic research?

 

In his Commission testimony, did he say it was on a cellphone or an airphone?

Actually, there are load of choices, except the one which has been given as an explanation by Olsen. Pandora's box so to speak.

Scholars for 911 Truth and Justice, as well as Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth are not college kids. In many cases, they are professionals, highly skilled/educated, politically active if not politicians. The "angry white male" model is actually guys like you reading LGF and Hot Air. You're actually the people you claim to loathe.

I have no idea. I don't think you have an idea either. That's why I think we need a new investigation.

I don't know. Ted Olsen might be the only person who knows the truth.

It's not intellectual dishonesty. The call he claims to have received, doesn't appear to have been made. By any measure.

That's worthy of investigation IMO. So, we should add this to the list of things that need to be investigated further/again/etc.

 

Who knows. Who cares. I remember immediately after the attacks he said cell phone. I remember watching him on the news about that call. Watch the tape of that and you tell me he's lying.

The rest is blather filled with negative proof. Which is all you are engaging in here. As usual. Do you have anything else -besides- negative proof, Guerilla?

"X is true because there is no proof that X is false."

Once you leave this illogical construct, you'll be able to think for yourself. Give it a shot.

Argument from ignorance.

 

That link is totally irrelevant to what I was referring to.

I'll have to go back and read it again.

So you're saying they weren't retrieved? And you think it's rational the the hijackers' paper passports survived? lmao

Aluminum? Gimme a break. I know enough about basic metallurgy to know that aluminum wouldn't stay in liquid metal form for 2 weeks without an external heat source. And the NIST doesn't address the numerous mentions from cleanup crews of steel melting off of girders.

Right. The WTC 7 wasn't investigated. It should have been (another reason to have a new, independent and transparent investigation)

I mean, a 3rd tower not struck by a plane falls down, and there is zero investigation of this. Do you know how many skyscrapers have fallen down due to fire, not counting the WTCs?

 

Well, we care lorien, you silly sleestack! That's why you are helping me make the case for a new 911 investigation!

That's not the issue though. I'm talking specifically about his testimony to the 911 Commission. This is all about the Commission and investigation, remember? Stay focused pal!

I'm not saying anything is true due to lack of proof. I am specifically challenging the proof, not the conclusions. Logically, if the proof fails, then the conclusion comes under question.

If he testified and it was not possible for his story to be correct, than that strikes an important portion of the official story. And it appears that his testimony was not honest.

Now what does this mean beyond his testimony being false? I don't know. I'm not drawing a conclusion from this, except that we should investigate to confirm or improve the report findings.

I'll tell you what pal! I didn't even go near that filthy, sleazy, dirty construct! I'm gunna think for both of us, don't you worry!

 

Yep, again. It's totally mind boggling (!!) that passports would be carried by inertia and blow away with the force while the bigger parts of the plane were destroyed in the towers. Parts of the cockpit and bound stewardesses survived too. Remember?

Aluminum and other material. Don't paraphrase the sources.

We've gone over this, remember? Much of its face was ripped off by the falling WTC tower. Did you forget about that already?

But it really wasn't just a fire was it, Guerilla?

 

Of course it is. It's about reality. Face it. She called him. Unless you can prove she's alive or that she didn't call. She did.

Argument from personal incredulity

It's your entire argument. You can't get away from it. Face it.

Negative Proof. And Arguments from Ignorance. It's all you got.

 

Have you ever heard of a black box being destroyed?

How about black boxes that were recovered?

Right. Aluminum and the really melty stuff.

Well, we don't know that because (1) the 911 Commission did not investigate it, and (2) the NIST has not yet released it's report.

I sure hope not! It'd be hard to understand how the building caught fire in a way that is so different from every other skyscraper fire, because no skyscraper has ever burnt down!

 

Now who is using negative proof?

I only have questions. Questions neither of us can answer.

Which is why we should have a new investigation!

 

I hear that there is a NIST report coming out this summer about Building 7, should be interesting what is in that, as Building 7 is the biggest giveaway that the original 9/11 story was a massive pack of lies. I doubt it will contain much.

 

Lorien:

I was pleased to see the article by Structure magazine that addressed with research the point I brought up about building 7.

One only needs to know a little about buildings and construction to identify that building 7 was designed in a way that could create catastrophe such as what happened on 9/11.

The building was essentially 3 times the size that its foundation could handle. As such it was constructed with a gerrymandered support system that shifted support weights through a critical group of trusses and columns.

The Structure analysis suggested that a single critical column could have caused the destruction of the building which easily could have occurred from either debris or fires or both during a day in which unprecedented destruction occurred.

The conspiracy theorists have loads of questions, all of which suggest that thousands, or tens of thousands of people are all involved in a cover up. Many of those people have to hate Bush. On top of that it occurred in NYC, a place where he is less than popular.

Its inconceivable that such a large number of people from different backgrounds, experiences, etc would have joined together to create a conspiracy about the deaths of thousands including friends, family, coworkers and loved ones.

I suppose if someone wants to question everything about the federal govt. one can come up with endless questions. Regardless it is inconceivable that 10's of thousands of disconnected people, all with some involvement would join together to hide some hideous conspiracy theory that a relatively few have decided to pursue.

 

I think both sides (People who believe it was a terroristic attack and an american planned attack) would be plain ignorant to state that there is no proof supporting the other side. I think only time will tell. And by time, i mean when most of us are already dead.

 

Y'all remember the Jersey Girls? This brave politician does.

Arizona State Senator Karen Johnson - Truth Seeker
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhXBDtuSv0U


--

Btw, lorien and crew, anyone remember the names of the Chair and Vice-Chair of the 9/11 Commission?