Zeitgeist, 9/11 Coincidences, 7/7 Ripple Effect, etc.

[coineineagh]

I've been watching a number of these informative (though admittedly opinionated) films on YouTube, and I was wondering what you guys think about what is said in them.
Zeitgeist was made to inform americans, so it's more intended for many of you than it is for me. Unfortunately it's becomme bogged down with criticisms about the first chapter, which takes on the mammoth challenge of religion. The makers were clever to leave it out in the first release. I'm really not interested in discussing this chapter, though. A discussion of belief vs proof is pointless and endless. Follow the links at the end of the vid to get to the other 11 parts. Or just search youtube directly.

7/7 ripple effect was made by a passionate person who speaks slowly to get his points across clearly. And it's for the British public. Follow the links at the end of the vid to get to the other 6 parts. Or just search youtube directly.

911 coincidences is a sequence of videos meant to disprove the government's claims about the terror attack. Follow the links at the end of the vid to get to the other 18 parts. Or just search youtube directly.


In essence, these videos paint a very convincing picture of governments sacrificing the lives of their own citizens in order to create a fictive story about muslim terrorists out to destroy them.
The motivations are obvious, though some may be less obvious:
*- Improve public opinion for war. Create a reason to go to war, and an enemy. A "new Pearl Harbour".
*- It is uncertain how much gold was actually stored in the WTC vaults (or whether it was all found again), but it was significant, and the whole affair raised the price of gold considerably, great for traders in gold.
*- Strike fear into the population, enabling the government to take away civil liberties.
*- Get rid of some expensive buildings, which also needed to be renovated to remove asbestos, which would cost billions.
*- Make countless stockbrokers a bundle of money on airlines put-options.
*- Destroy court evidence for numerous fraud cases, preventing a stock market crash. The Enron guys may have been convicted, but you can't blame them for trying.
*- Allow an oil-producing country to be occupied, also raising the price of oil. Great for traders in oil, such as Bush and his Bin Laden trade partners.
*- Create a steady demand for war materials. Great for traders in war, such as Bush and his Bin Laden trade partners.
*- Air defense blunders, showing the ineffectiveness of the department of defense, further justifying an increase in defense budget.
*- Raise the popularity of the administration, they become war heroes.
*- Give US & NATO troops field experience.
*- Increased military spending, borrowed directly from the Federal Reserve, enriching its owners. Federal Reserve has owners, it's not state run.
*- This devalues the dollar, causing bankruptcies and mortgage crisis, allowing the rich to buy up companies and real estate.
*- Namecalling: Whoever the government calls "Believed-to-be-linked-to-al-qaida" is fair game. A perpetual "War on Terror".
*- Polarization: Increased loyalty from the more radical christians. More christians become radical. More people become christians.
*- Nationalization: Increased loyalty and trust in the government, as people feel the need to work together and help their country in a time of trouble.
*- Less crime and unemployment, as people are encouraged to join the army.
*- Anti-American sentiment in the Middle-East creates the perfect patsy, who by their own opinions, incriminate themselves. Criticism of the USA worldwide becomes associated with terrorism.

To be fair, I suspect my own (dutch) government is involved in the murder of a public figure who spoke out against muslims. Theo van Gogh was murdered on the streets by Mohammed B., who stuffed a list of targets into Theo's throat. After the public outrage it became apparent that Mohammed B. was in the employ of the AIVD (dutch secret services). The AIVD claimed he was counterspying in their midst, and was in fact part of a terrorist cell. I think it's similar to how the CIA claims that Al Qaida went rogue on them.

I'm curious what people think about this. I was stupid enough to show Zeitgeist to my mother, and she broke out in tears: suspecting is better than knowing the grim truth, apparently.
Many people i've told it to, come up with all kinds of rationalizations:
1) The sources of information are dubious. This questions the entirety of evidence presented in the films, and no-one cares to actually check on it.
2) If it's not discussed in regular media, it must be anarchist propaganda.
3) It is simply too preposterous to be true. Politicians can't be that evil.

So I'm asking:
-Would you watch the videos? Why (not)?
-Do you dismiss them, and why?
-Why do(n't) you believe them?
-Does this change the way you think about things?
-Would you have preferred not to know?
-If you DO believe this scenario, and also approve of the actions the governments take, I'd love to hear your rationalization. Why is state terrorism a good thing?

If I've contributed in opening even one person's eyes, I'd be glad to hear it!

[Morgoroth]

If I chose to believe every conspiracy theory that had some explanation why it might make sense I'd be wearing a folio hat to shield myself from government mind control. I personally choose to believe in the more likely option. Conspiracy theories usually require a lot of people involved and when it includes something like hundereds if not thousands of people the odds are that there will be a leak that will soon burst out to the massmedia and expose the whole thing most likely even before the said "thing" has taken place. So since the conspiracies are in my opinion a lot less likely than the "official" truth I choose to dismiss most of them on sight. This is really not an exception.

One conspiracy theory which I've read somewhat more about is holocaust denial and the arguments can indeed be very convincing. The nazis blew up the gas chambers when they fled and all sort of evidence was destroyed and so it gives a lot of room to make speculative arguments. Often the sheer amount of arguments made are too much to ever verify from other sources unless you really want to dedicate months of research time to the issue. Again though the dice roll in my head and prove to me that the amount of people that would have to be involved in such a conspiracy is so huge that it makes the odds very very slim. I can't outright dismiss it as false but I sure as hell can ignore it as very unlikely.

[coineineagh]

Originally Posted by Morgoroth

Conspiracy theories usually require a lot of people involved and when it includes something like hundereds if not thousands of people the odds are that there will be a leak that will soon burst out to the massmedia and expose the whole thing most likely even before the said "thing" has taken place. So since the conspiracies are in my opinion a lot less likely than the "official" truth I choose to dismiss most of them on sight. This is really not an exception.

You have an unwavering trust in the desire of the media to inform the public. Unfortunately the government has a lot of control over the media. Even if (un)intentional mistakes are made, and the damning truth IS reported, the media can quicky cover it up, by simply not discussing it.
Here's an example of the BBC (not as trustworthy as I first thought) reporting the collapse of WTC building 7, 20 minutes before it happened, and CIA or FBI scrambling the satellite signal just in time, before the collape itself is also televised...

If you refuse to inform yourself, you are worthy of the contempt your leaders have for you.

The conspiracies mentioned were full of leaks, but the media is relied upon to expose them, and the media isn't trustworthy.

[Morgoroth]

The media is not some individual organisation making collective decisions it's huge vareity consisting of thousands if not millions of individual outlets globally. Curious that none of them seem to have gotten this right and that no foreign powers have seen benefits of spying this out and blowing it out in the open causing a serious political crisis in America. I'm sorry but there's nothing in this individual theory that can't be seen the holocaust denial example that I mentioned. All the evidence and its sources are dubious as are their signifigance to the case itself. Of course you are free to believe as you wish, I'll know who to ask next time I feel the need for a foilhat.

[Montresor]

I'm wondering what the US government would get out of such a stunt. A conspiracy to destroy the World Trade Center and parts of the Pentagon using civilian airplanes would involve thousands of people, any of which might speak out.

It wouldn't exactly be the first time in history that a government killed a few thousand of its own citizens and/or tried to use a convenient crisis to seize "emergency powers" for itself but the risk of getting caught in the act is simply too great, and the consequences to the government too dire.

As Morgoroth points out, what if a foreign power (Russia or Iran for example - I reckon both would just love catching the US Government in a huge scandal and announcing it to the world) discovered a discrepancy such as the BBC reporting a building's collapse before it actually happened? And decided to play this to their own advantage by bringing down the Bush administration, with nobody really knowing who should take over.

Bush may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer (and I personally suspect he is smarter than usually given credit for) but he has smart advisors who would tell him that the risk was too great, the gains not worth the risk, and the possible losses unbearable.

[The Great Snook]

All the 9/11 conspiracy stuff is probably the stupidest thing I have ever seen. I seriously question the mental stability and capability of people who believe the government destroyed the towers and killed all those people.

Forget all you have seen in the videos. They are made by people who are trying to promulgate their theories by looking at grainy videos made on cellphones. Anyone who knows anything about video will tell you that at the distances and magnifications involved you can convince yourself that you are seeing whatever you want.

The only evidence you need that it is all a crock of **** is human nature and an understanding of demolition work.

1. Human nature- the potential of a secret being revealed increases dramatically by the number of people who know it.

2. Demolition work- Blowing up a building doesn't involve placing a couple of charges and running like hell. It is a science and professionals will take days if not weeks to properly wire a building for demolition. They also do a lot of advance work to weaken the structure of the building to make the job of the explosives easier. These were buildings that were full of people all the time. I do not find it feasible that people wouldn't notice wires and explosives hanging all over the place.

3. Considering the complexity of point 2 the possibility of point 1 surviving more than a day is almost zero.

I agree with Morgoroth. You should stop posting things on the internet, build your tinfoil hat, and focus your time on avoiding the "black helicopters" and the government "death squads" that will obviously be coming for you.

[coineineagh]

In Jesus Camp they also say: "If you look at the evidence, evolution just doesn't make sense."
But they don't look at the evidence, do they?
What's so likely about a story in which:
-3 massive steel-frame buildings collapse to dust.
-Collapse in 10 seconds.
-Steel-frame buildings brought down by a fire, for the first time in human history.
-No core spindle of columns remains standing, despite the fact that the plane only heated the top portion of the building.
-Jet fuel burns quickly and not nearly hot enough to melt steel (jet engines are made of steel, and they don't melt), at 1500 F, and the pools of molten metal at the WTC ground zero were 2000 F, even up to 6 weeks later.
-Evil terrorists did this, since they want to harm you more than they care for their own lives, and that of their families and countrymen. Apparently they didn't foresee that the USA would retaliate, they're either that stupid, or you're so important to them.

So, mr. 'more likely option', what on earth makes this plausible?
You believe it because it's the story in the media, and you trust the media implicitly. But this assumption is flawed, the media isn't immune to a government's influence. USgovt know exactly where to find every journalist on the planet. The free press is an idyllic dream.
An example: Americans doubt whether evolution is real, because over half of the popular articles on the subject are in favour of creationism. But there are no credible scientific journals that publish anything on creationism. So the non-scientific media makes americans believe in creationism. In this way, the american media makes you believe your government is honest and innocent.

I'm sorry if you find conspiracy theory unentertaining, but this theory is about as shaky as the theory of evolution. And for all you americans who are taught creationism: the evolution theorem is as close to science fact as an intangible process can get. Creationism has no place in science, it can't even be considered a hypothesis, since it's already been disproven. You can throw the gameboard in the air because you don't like the outcome, but it doesn't change facts.

The media is not some individual organisation making collective decisions it's huge vareity consisting of thousands if not millions of individual outlets globally. Curious that none of them seem to have gotten this right and that no foreign powers have seen benefits of spying this out and blowing it out in the open causing a serious political crisis in America.

The media with the ability to investigate this deeply are first of all privately owned by bankers and powerful businessmen, who have a vested interest in misleading the population. If you watch the final chapter of Zeitgeist, you'll see a quote from the creator of the Federal Reserve, thanking the media for its secrecy, which helped him to proceed with his plan.
Secondly, you also underestimate the other 'persuasive powers' the UGgovt has at its disposal, to convince anyone in the media to shut up.
Finally, the willingness of the american public to believe and trust their government and swallow any tripe they are handed, is a force in itself. This is encouraged by cries for nationalism/patriottism, so even those that instinctively know there's something fishy going on, are pressured into conforming.

As for your point of foreign spies exposing the truth: even america is capable of blocking out foreign influences. if spies were to go to the media, they'd simply be ridiculed/disproven with false evidence/threatened/assassinated/etc. the list of protections is extensive.

I should mention for you, since you won't watch the vids anyway, that the official story is full of holes, and that many witnesses and evidence has come up, too much to list. These many blunders even make it through to the media, but if a story isn't followed up, people forget.

I'm hoping that americans out there simply don't realize what's going on, and when they see the evidence for themselves, will change their minds. What I'm worried about is that americans DO realize what's going on, and are happy to change their society into one with a strange 'militarized morality', because they are unwilling to face their gradual decline.

PLEASE, don't be stubborn, don't keep denying it because you hate to be wrong, or are too proud of your country to even consider the possibility.
I'm handing you the evidence on a platter, all you need to do is watch it.

Don't be a mind-flayer thrall

[The Great Snook]

Go here to disprove all this nonsense.

If you are willing to believe Youtube videos you should be willing to read the debunking by experts.

[coineineagh]

Originally Posted by Montresor

I'm wondering what the US government would get out of such a stunt.

Well:
1) WTC contained asbestos, and needed to be renovated, costing billions.
2) Much of the world's gold was stored in vaults in the basements, none of it was retrieved. Apparently gold can vaporize.
3) The oil war, hello? Gimme da money.
4) Scaring citizens so much, that they consent to getting their civil liberties taken away "for safety"
5) sharpening the teeth of the military

There's no risk of getting caught in the act, because the american government has a huge gun pointed at every government/media outlet/leader figure that could possibly speak out. If you watched the reactions of other governments and that of america, you should be able to see that the USA is threatening its allies too. If there was a real terrorist threat, don't you think the entire NATO alliance would rush to defend their ally? They didn't because there was no attack. Muslims are normal balanced people like everyone else in this world, granted they have some distasteful habits, but that's looking at it from our cultural perspective.

The USA was caught in the act, and confronted by governments, journalists and civilians alike. But they denied, delayed, distorted, distracted, destroyed, demonized, declared etcetc. Eventually all dissenting voices were tired, scared, dead, bribed.

[Montresor]

Originally Posted by coineineagh

As for your point of foreign spies exposing the truth: even america is capable of blocking out foreign influences. if spies were to go to the media, they'd simply be ridiculed/disproven with false evidence/threatened/assassinated/etc. the list of protections is extensive.

Foreign governments, including such hostile governments as Iran, Russia and China, have access to the exact same evidence as you. They have NOT spoken out, and this speaks volumes by itself. If the Chinese government noticed that something was terribly amiss and decided to expose it, there's really not a lot the US government could do about it. What would they do, invade the People's Republic of China in retaliation?

Not to mention that with the story exposed that the government had deliberately murdered nearly 3,000 of its own citizens plus a few hundred foreigners who happened to be caught up in the planes and the wreckage on ground, the government would probably have to impose martial law in the United States if it wanted to keep some semblance of authority (I suppose the people would be slightly miffed at the government for pulling such a stunt) and could hardly spare any soldiers for an invasion of China.

China could easily expose the story if they had a case - the US government may hold some control over media in the US but I don't believe they could prevent European media from printing the story that the US government has orchestrated 9/11.

EDIT: Just thought of something:

IF the US government orchestrated 9/11, how could they expect to keep it a secret and get away with it once a new administration took office? Bush came close to losing to John Kerry in 2004. Once the new administration learned, would John Kerry and/or his administration keep secret about what Bush and his goons had done? I don't think so. Neither do I think that either John McCain or Barack Obama will keep silent if they learn, on taking office in January, that the previous administration orchestrated a mass murder.

[coineineagh]

Originally Posted by Montresor

Foreign governments, including such hostile governments as Iran, Russia and China, have access to the exact same evidence as you. They have NOT spoken out, and this speaks volumes by itself.

China could easily expose the story if they had a case - the US government may hold some control over media in the US but I don't believe they could prevent European media from printing the story that the US government has orchestrated 9/11.

Hmm, I forgot to mention the economic tools at america's disposal to persuade other nations to comply. European nations would be betraying an ally by speaking out, and stand to lose an important trading partner, and source of military protection (no one wants the american hordes guns pointed AT them). It's mafia-protection, though: Protection from the USA.
China has a very fragile, developing economy. For every million people that enter the job market, China needs 1% economic growth to compensate. If America chose to boycot them, their prosperity would be stunted. USgovt won't find it hard to convince China to mind their own business. Staying out of the american sphere-of-influence is part of the understanding the two countries have.

EDIT: good point about the regime-change thing. The outrage caused by uncovering this truth would be extremely damaging to USA morale, and probably the next president could be convinced that secrecy is in the best interest if the people. It could be one of those declassified cases in 100+ years, but that's too late for me to say "I told you so."
Perhaps Obama has already agreed to keep quiet in exchange for an easy election... have you thought of that? He's a sneaky one. letting his minister say what certain voters want to hear, while he remains politically correct, he's probably knee-deep in the *ahem* deals already.

The Great Snook, thanks for the link. I'll try to disprove the claims on one of their pages randomly, to humour you.
But you understand that I'm just one person, and I can't take on the entire 911conspiracy single handedly,
or even dual-wielding bastard swords, for thay matter.

The World Trade Center
The collapse of both World Trade Center towers — and the smaller WTC 7 a few hours later — initially surprised even some experts. But subsequent studies have shown that the WTC's structural integrity was destroyed by intense fire as well as the severe damage inflicted by the planes. That explanation hasn't swayed conspiracy theorists, who contend that all three buildings were wired with explosives in advance and razed in a series of controlled demolitions.

Widespread Damage
Claim: The first hijacked plane crashed through the 94th to the 98th floors of the World Trade Center's 110-story North Tower; the second jet slammed into the 78th to the 84th floors of the 110-story South Tower. The impact and ensuing fires disrupted elevator service in both buildings. Plus, the lobbies of both buildings were visibly damaged before the towers collapsed. "There is NO WAY the impact of the jet caused such widespread damage 80 stories below," claims a posting on the San Diego Independent Media Center Web site (sandiego.indymedia.org). "It is OBVIOUS and irrefutable that OTHER EXPLOSIVES (... such as concussion bombs) HAD ALREADY BEEN DETONATED in the lower levels of tower one at the same time as the plane crash."

FACT: Following up on a May 2002 preliminary report by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a major study will be released in spring 2005 by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a branch of the U.S. Department of Commerce. NIST shared its initial findings with PM and made its lead researcher available to our team of reporters.

The NIST investigation revealed that plane debris sliced through the utility shafts at the North Tower's core, creating a conduit for burning jet fuel — and fiery destruction throughout the building. "It's very hard to document where the fuel went," says Forman Williams, a NIST adviser and a combustion expert, "but if it's atomized and combustible and gets to an ignition source, it'll go off."

Burning fuel traveling down the elevator shafts would have disrupted the elevator systems and caused extensive damage to the lobbies. NIST heard first-person testimony that "some elevators slammed right down" to the ground floor. "The doors cracked open on the lobby floor and flames came out and people died," says James Quintiere, an engineering professor at the University of Maryland and a NIST adviser. A similar observation was made in the French documentary "9/11," by Jules and Gedeon Naudet. As Jules Naudet entered the North Tower lobby, minutes after the first aircraft struck, he saw victims on fire, a scene he found too horrific to film.

Yes, it's hard to document where all that jet fuel went, but there certainly wasn't enough to superheat all 100 floors below it, and make a building designed to withstand the impact of an airplane disintegrate into dust.
The elevator thing is a nice touch, but the planes didn't make it through the core spindle to cut all the triple backuped reinforced steel cables. And heating them to 50% capacity would make them stretch a little, but not break.

"Melted" Steel
Claim: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."

FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength — and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."

Try to understand that kerosine burning in optimal conditions won't go over 1500°F, so if 1800°F was reported, that proves already that something else was burning. A sub-optimal kerosine fire, like one that burns after an impact, will undoubtedly burn much lower temperature, not likely to reach the 1100°F threshold, and even if the steel was at that 50% strength, the building could withstand that. Any idea how long those steel columns would have to be heated to actually become 1100°F themselves? A watercooker doesn't boil instantly whe you turn it on... only thermate could have done that. If you look at chapter 2 of Zeitgeist, you'll SEE core columns wich were *cut* diagonally, like in a controlled demolition. See for yourself, don't take my word for it.

Puffs Of Dust
Claim: As each tower collapsed, clearly visible puffs of dust and debris were ejected from the sides of the buildings. An advertisement in The New York Times for the book Painful Questions: An Analysis Of The September 11th Attack made this claim: "The concrete clouds shooting out of the buildings are not possible from a mere collapse. They do occur from explosions." Numerous conspiracy theorists cite Van Romero, an explosives expert and vice president of the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, who was quoted on 9/11 by the Albuquerque Journal as saying "there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse." The article continues, "Romero said the collapse of the structures resembled those of controlled implosions used to demolish old structures."

Violent Collapse: Pancaking floors — not controlled demolition — expel debris and smoke out South Tower windows. (Photograph by AP/Wide World Photos)

FACT: Once each tower began to collapse, the weight of all the floors above the collapsed zone bore down with pulverizing force on the highest intact floor. Unable to absorb the massive energy, that floor would fail, transmitting the forces to the floor below, allowing the collapse to progress downward through the building in a chain reaction. Engineers call the process "pancaking," and it does not require an explosion to begin, according to David Biggs, a structural engineer at Ryan-Biggs Associates and a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) team that worked on the FEMA report.

Like all office buildings, the WTC towers contained a huge volume of air. As they pancaked, all that air — along with the concrete and other debris pulverized by the force of the collapse — was ejected with enormous energy. "When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it's going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder tells PM. Those clouds of dust may create the impression of a controlled demolition, Sunder adds, "but it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception."

Demolition expert Romero regrets that his comments to the Albuquerque Journal became fodder for conspiracy theorists. "I was misquoted in saying that I thought it was explosives that brought down the building," he tells PM. "I only said that that's what it looked like."

Romero, who agrees with the scientific conclusion that fire triggered the collapses, demanded a retraction from the Journal. It was printed Sept. 22, 2001. "I felt like my scientific reputation was on the line." But emperors-clothes.com saw something else: "The paymaster of Romero's research institute is the Pentagon. Directly or indirectly, pressure was brought to bear, forcing Romero to retract his original statement." Romero responds: "Conspiracy theorists came out saying that the government got to me. That is the farthest thing from the truth. This has been an albatross around my neck for three years."

There are many many points not discussed here atall, but it's getting better than the government story, I'll give them that much. They've had more time to flex their imaginations.
So they claim that pulverized concrete was enough to cause the dust? Well it's anyone's guess as to whether that's true. BUT, after the sheer force causes a few floors to allegedly pulverize to dust, wouldn't the impacts following that become cushioned by the dust, making the next floors crumble instead of pulverize? The pulverization is caused by rapid heating in the core of the towers by thermate, as the cold concrete is exposed to extreme heat in a shock, it expands so quickly that it falls apart. Like when you pour cold water on a rock that you've had in a fire for half an hour - the rock breaks.
The pancake fashion collapse is implausible for two reasons, which are near undeniable when combined:
The steel-reinforced concrete floors were also designed to withstand impacts, and even if the concrete crumbled/pulverized, the steel would serve as a net, to slow down the force of the collapsing floors.
I remember the exact figures, if you dropped a billiard ball from the top of the WTC, it would take 8-10 seconds to travel to the ground, encountering only resistance from air. The WTC buildings came down in 10:28 and 09:59 seconds, as if there was no resistance atall. But it was a building, with a hundred floors slamming on top of eachother... Now that simply defies the law of gravity. Unless the thermate chopped the steel columns into hundreds or even thousands of little chunks, effectively making the builing's backbone disappear.
Which brings me to another point that the debunking site conveniently forgot to debunk:
Where was the core column? The 47 steel columns that housed the elevator shaft? Shouldn't they have still been standing upright? Or slightly bent, if you insist that kerosine weakens iron (again: why doesn't it weaken the iron in a jet engine then?)? They were nowhere to be seen, chopped into little bits among the rubble. It took the FBI/CIA six weeks to melt down that evidence, as documented by the pools of molten iron.

This is much more fun than the religious discussion. Come on, I'm ready, hit me with anything you've got! I'll break those walls of denial down for you, yeah!!!

[Montresor]

What you're saying is essentially, that the US government:

- Got several thousand people to conspire to commit mass murder by crashing aeroplanes into buildings, and then keep silent about it.
- After the airplanes hit, destroyed the buildings through controlled demolition, which had to be planned carefully in advance by placing explosives in a building about to be hit by an airplane, killing even more people.
- Murdered several thousand of its own citizens (see the first two items).
- Browbeat the entire Western press into keeping silent about it.
- Browbeat hostile governments of countries such as China, Russia and Iran into keeping their mouths shut about it, or else!
- Bribed future Presidential candidates to keep silent about it.

... and yet had to set up this entire stunt because they needed more power.

... and all of this had to be planned and coordinated in less than nine months, from Bush took office in January 2001 to the execution of the plan on 9/11. Unless of course planning began under the Clinton administration.

Not to mention that if one single link in this chain fails, they stand to lose everything. Remember - there are thousands of conspirators, and every government on the planet has access to the same evidence that you have, and much better analysts to tell them whether the evidence holds. Some governments, like that of Iran, would love to bring down the US government, and care little for the consequences to themselves (or rather, to the Iranian people).

If the truth came out and was widely believed, what would be the position of the US government? They would have to live in a bunker, protected by soldiers, and pray that none of the soldiers assigned to their security details had lost friends or relatives on 9/11.

The US government would be betting on terribly long ODDS, for little gain which they didn't need in the first place.

Yes, it's hard to document where all that jet fuel went, but there certainly wasn't enough to superheat all 100 floors below it, and make a building designed to withstand the impact of an airplane disintegrate into dust.
The elevator thing is a nice touch, but the planes didn't make it through the core spindle to cut all the triple backuped reinforced steel cables. And heating them to 50% capacity would make them stretch a little, but not break.

The fuel didn't need to heat up more than the few stories where the planes hit. When the steel structure was weakened, the top of the building crashed down on the parts below it, destroying them.

[coineineagh]

Originally Posted by The Great Snook

The only evidence you need that it is all a crock of **** is human nature and an understanding of demolition work.
1. Human nature- the potential of a secret being revealed increases dramatically by the number of people who know it.

Human nature is being researched like a mathematical formula. The power of fear and group behaviour is being harnessed by those that know how to use it for their own goals. This 'secret being revealed' didn't have the effect you portrayed it to, the few people that saw the evidence are powerless to do anything, if the masses refuse to even consider the possibility. Your claiming it's all a bunch of hogwash and grainy videos will perhaps encourage more to not waste their time, I'm sure. If you know anything about Youtube, You'll know most the videos are grainy, to enhance data transfer. I downloaded the films too, and they're not grainy. If grainy Youtube videos don't reach your entertainment-threshhold, you could download them...

Originally Posted by The Great Snook

2. Demolition work- Blowing up a building doesn't involve placing a couple of charges and running like hell. It is a science and professionals will take days if not weeks to properly wire a building for demolition. They also do a lot of advance work to weaken the structure of the building to make the job of the explosives easier. These were buildings that were full of people all the time. I do not find it feasible that people wouldn't notice wires and explosives hanging all over the place.

The WTC was a cash slurper: half the floors were empty, plenty of room for demolition experts to plant explosives. Entire offices were moved to other floors for 'maintenance', the bomb-sniffing dogs were removed, countless witnesses heard loud noises from empty floors, etcetc. watch the videos.

Originally Posted by The Great Snook

I agree with Morgoroth. You should stop posting things on the internet, build your tinfoil hat, and focus your time on avoiding the "black helicopters" and the government "death squads" that will obviously be coming for you.

Pffffft, a punch below the belt. You can't come up with more decent counterarguments, so you call me crazy. It's so obvious, aren't you ashamed you pulled that card? If you don't like what's being said, and are unwilling to discuss it reasonably, you can just block me, dude! But I should take into consideration that I might be touching a sensitive issue for you, so I understand your passionate reaction.
Hey, I'm pretty eloquent for a crazy guy. Or maybe I'm a russian counterintelligence agent, out to spread dissent and anarchy among the american population. I should shut up now, this is going nowhere.

Programs like the X-Files seek to ridicule conspiracy theorists, but it's you who insult the memory of those who die in the States, Afghanistan and Iraq, by not even taking the time to look at evidence.

[The Great Snook]

@coineineagh

I'm sorry. I just don't see a shred of evidence. I see a lot of theory.

How many experts have the knowledge to plan this?
How many other people would you need to pull of the expert's plan?
How many additional people would you need to get the supplies and equipment to the people to pull it off?
How many of these people have spouses and friends that they may have told the story to?

Then you make the claim that the "power" of the US government forced our free press into silence. How many more people had to be involved in this?

Then the government silences our allies. Allies that also have free press and are not totaltarian governments. That means there is constant elections and turnover of government officials. So we have to keep silencing them.

Then we have to silence the free press of our allies

Then we have to silence the governments and press of our enemies.

How many people are we up to now. Would you be able to live with a conservative estimate of 1,000 people? What would a more realistic number be? Maybe 10,000

In addition can you imagine the paper trail of this conspiracy. Where did all of your thermite and explosives come from? How about the trucks that delivered it or drove the vaporized gold out of the towers to finance the Iraq war? Is it just one person who has to personally fly everywhere to silence all of these reporters, media outlets, governments, etc. In this day and age wouldn't there be a paper or electronic trail?

So with all these potential people who could ruin the "show" and all the money and paperwork that would have to be involved with the planning and then the coverup; all the "truthers" still can't find a single person or a single shred of evidence. All you can provide is theory and that the government must be "at fault" and I'm supposed to believe it. I'm sorry, but all you have proven to me is that there is no point in trying to reason with the unreasonable.

As they say in tennis. Game Set Match. Go back to surfing the internet.

[coineineagh]

Originally Posted by Montresor

What you're saying is essentially, that the US government:
..............
... and yet had to set up this entire stunt because they needed more power.

I thought for a moment I'd got through to you. The USA is an army with a country, not the other way around. The massive economic growth in China and India, and the rest of the world, is harming the american economy, because it's so high strung (eh, 5 times bankrupt to Japan ring a bell?) that it is weak against change. Of course, it remains a question whether economic decline isn't a planned occurrence, so that bankers can exploit you further by forcing banks to borrow more money from the federal reserve.

... and all of this had to be planned and coordinated in less than nine months, from Bush took office in January 2001 to the execution of the plan on 9/11. Unless of course planning began under the Clinton administration.
Not to mention that if one single link in this chain fails, they stand to lose everything. Remember - there are thousands of conspirators, and every government on the planet has access to the same evidence that you have, and much better analysts to tell them whether the evidence holds. Some governments, like that of Iran, would love to bring down the US government, and care little for the consequences to themselves (or rather, to the Iranian people).

USA calls the Iranian government crazy, and you believe it. You actually think they care more about harming you than keeping their own citizens safe.
As for the planning, if you watch Zeitgeist you'll understand that bankers are behind it all: they have been doing this since world war 1, and are getting better at it. Bush is simply a member of one of those ruthless families.
Get rid of this 'unleash the dragon' concept you have of the conspiracy secret coming out: It can and was denied, obscured, ignored, etcetc.
I don't believe this secret can be made public in that way. All that can be done, is make people aware of what's going on.

If the truth came out and was widely believed, what would be the position of the US government? They would have to live in a bunker, protected by soldiers, and pray that none of the soldiers assigned to their security details had lost friends or relatives on 9/11.
The US government would be betting on terribly long ODDS, for little gain which they didn't need in the first place.

The rich are already protected 24/7. And there's no danger of the american public revolting in that way. Layers upon layers of protections have been concieved, which haven't even been used yet. The public is easily confused. Even if Obama were to present the evidence (not likely) as president of the people, and all goes as planned (he isn't assassinated in mid-sentence by 'al qaida'), the culprits would be able to confuse the issue long enough to retreat to a tropical South-American paradise.

The fuel didn't need to heat up more than the few stories where the planes hit. When the steel structure was weakened, the top of the building crashed down on the parts below it, destroying them.

A frame of 47 interlinked steel columns is just to strong to be brought down by that. And it should've taken much longer. And building 7 didn't even have kerosine fires. And so on.

---------- Added 0 hours, 11 minutes and 27 seconds later... ----------
@TGSnook
You see a lot of theory because you haven't looked at the evidence.

Originally Posted by The Great Snook

How many people are we up to now. Would you be able to live with a conservative estimate of 1,000 people? What would a more realistic number be? Maybe 10,000

I take it you've never heard of the CIA, or FBI, or the Pentagon, or those other agencies USA created. Seriously, how many agencies does a government really need?

As they say in tennis. Game Set Match. Go back to surfing the internet.

Please stop with the 'signing statements', emulating Bush is just nasty. Nothing you've said is any less opinionated than my words, so you haven't proven anything.

And the 'truthers' can find plenty of shreds of evidence. If I thought it was all rubbish, I wouldn't have made this thread.

Here's an idea: why don't you comment on the videos? I asked for a judgement, not a pre-judgement.

[Montresor]

Originally Posted by coineineagh

I thought for a moment I'd got through to you. The USA is an army with a country, not the other way around. The massive economic growth in China and India, and the rest of the world, is harming the american economy, because it's so high strung (eh, 5 times bankrupt to Japan ring a bell?) that it is weak against change. Of course, it remains a question whether economic decline isn't a planned occurrence, so that bankers can exploit you further by forcing banks to borrow more money from the federal reserve.

So the USA gambles its own power on a massive hoax, hoping that China and India will not seize the opportunity to do away with the American economy once & for all.

You're not going to "get through" to me with what amounts to a very fragile house of cards.

USA calls the Iranian government crazy, and you believe it. You actually think they care more about harming you than keeping their own citizens safe.

I'm supposed to believe the Iranian government to be benevolent, while the US government is next to insane? And yet the Iranians wouldn't expose a massive fraud by the US government and mass-murder of that government's own citizens?

As for the planning, if you watch Zeitgeist you'll understand that bankers are behind it all:

Ruining the economy for their own profit? If anyone, bankers should know that if they destroy the economy, they themselves will suffer, like anyone else!

The rich are already protected 24/7. And there's no danger of the american public revolting in that way. Layers upon layers of protections have been concieved, which haven't even been used yet. The public is easily confused. Even if Obama were to present the evidence (not likely) as president of the people, and all goes as planned (he isn't assassinated in mid-sentence by 'al qaida'), the culprits would be able to confuse the issue long enough to retreat to a tropical South-American paradise.

Protection based on members of the people they have deceived, and of whom they have killed nearly 3,000. Once the truth was out, they'd have to convert the USA to a military dictatorship to remain even reasonably protected. And cancel all future elections.

Yes, the US public WOULD revolt, if they found that their own government had orchestrated 9/11. I'm sure of that.

If they escaped to some tropical paradise, they would have pray they were safe from the people they have deceived, and whom they have now left in control of the country they had to flee, along with that country's armed forces.

[ChickenIsGood]

Try to understand that kerosine burning in optimal conditions won't go over 1500°F, so if 1800°F was reported, that proves already that something else was burning.

It was never said that the fire was 1800 degrees, in fact they clearly stated Kerosine doesn't burn at over 1500. All the man said was that at 1800 steel loses 90% of it's strength to add more perspective to his comment about it losing 50% of the strength at 1100 degrees (which is well in the projected burning range). Most buildings of that stature, upon losing 50% (or more!) of their strength probably will have problems.

I'm done talking though, it is as clear as could be that there will be no convincing you that you are wrong...

So all praise coineineagh, the Eradicator of Ignorance!

[Rawgrim]

Not sure if al this is evidence though, but alot of things don`t add up. But I remember watching the whole deal on TV when it happened. And I remember the lack of footage from the pentagon incident. And the few shots we did see, didn`t show any plane wreckage at all. I also remember the feds finding one of the hickackers passport in the ruins. That last bit was abit odd. Should have been melted competely.

Anyway, I am sure most of that stuff in the movie can be expained. Problem is though, nobody has explained it properly, as far as I know. So no wonder people lean towards theories like that.

[coineineagh]

Originally Posted by Montresor

So the USA gambles its own power on a massive hoax, hoping that China and India will not seize the opportunity to do away with the American economy once & for all.
I'm supposed to believe the Iranian government to be benevolent, while the US government is next to insane? And yet the Iranians wouldn't expose a massive fraud by the US government and mass-murder of that government's own citizens?

How do you propose your evil enemies do away with the USeconomy? For USgovt it was no gamble, merely a piece of poorly performed theater designed to distract/shock the world while they oil their war machine, and take some of the world's gold stored in the WTCvaults.
I never said Iran was benevolent, given the power, the Irani govt might even do worse.

Originally Posted by Montresor

If they escaped to some tropical paradise, they would have pray they were safe from the people they have deceived, and whom they have now left in control of the country they had to flee, along with that country's armed forces.

Like in many countries, the armed forces are loyal to these people, not the elected president. If the president opposes them, bye bye president.
Actually, there would probably never be a need for these people to ever flee. They are entreched within the system, and impossible to pry out. A simple resignation, some minor convictions, a few patsies executed, justice is served, and business as usual.

The thing is, neoconservatives in america believe what they're doing is in america's best interest. Like the mongol hordes, they think the public needs an enemy image, or society will fall apart. And they probably think war is the best way to alleviate population growth. I'm curious how many on this sit are actually sharing this perspective.

Originally Posted by ChickenIsGood

It was never said that the fire was 1800 degrees, in fact they clearly stated Kerosine doesn't burn at over 1500.

Originally Posted by Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report

NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

So all praise coineineagh, the Eradicator of Ignorance!

Please stop with the insulting 'signing statements' at the end, let's try and keep it civilized. Please?

[Rawgrim]

Since he went after his oposition`s person, he lost the discussion actually. If one can`t stick to the topic, and sinks to going after the opponent, one loses the discussion. By turning it into an "argument". Not that I am taking sides here, of course.

[coineineagh]

Originally Posted by Rawgrim

Since he went after his oposition`s person, he lost the discussion actually. If one can`t stick to the topic, and sinks to going after the opponent, one loses the discussion. By turning it into an "argument". Not that I am taking sides here, of course.

Thanks for pointing that out. In holland we call it 'drogreden' (drug-reason), meaning a fallacy.
But to be fair, it's hard to avoid fallacies when trying to convince someone.
I'm only interested in a constructive discussion, and of course I expected to encounter some walls of resistance. But the evidence is in my favour, so it's a downhill battle for me. I'm no expert by any means, but I'm not having a hard time arguing the rationalizations so far.
Anyway, i hope to have piqued your interest, perhaps you'll watch the vids?

[Rawgrim]

I have seen the vids before. 2 times I think. It didn`t convince me though, but it did make me think, of course. The religion bit, I allready knew about, and I had seen most of the same stuff about 9/11 in other vids as well. But they don`t contain hard, solid, evidence though. Its speculation, and a few very convincing theories. But without evidence, they will remain a theory, for better or worse. But one is allways innocent untill PROVEN guilty.

But I do agree that alot of stuff mentioned in the vids, do put some cracks in official explanations etc.

[Harbourboy]

Actually, I don't believe anything that any of you say. Are any of you actually experts in any of the matters being discussed? How many of you have conducted scientific experiments involving tonnes of jet fuel and large buildings?

But if I had to go with anyone, The Great Snook's logic seems infinitely more, well, logical.

The flaw, to me, in all this conspiracy stuff, is that it is based on the fundamental premise the someone like George W. Bush is more intelligent than everyone else, and that is something that seems very doubtful to me.

[joacqin]

Although I do not buy these old conspiracy theories I find it kinda creepy that I and apparently many others wouldn't hold it above Bush administration to be a part of smoething like that. Thankfully they are incompetent as well as eeeeeeeevil.

[coineineagh]

Originally Posted by Harbourboy

Actually, I don't believe anything that any of you say. Are any of you actually experts in any of the matters being discussed? How many of you have conducted scientific experiments involving tonnes of jet fuel and large buildings?

Here you go, as you requested, a case study by experts.

notice the limited damage to core columns.
notice that the researchers aren't interested in conclusions about 9/11, just testing their simulation.

Originally Posted by Harbourboy

The flaw, to me, in all this conspiracy stuff, is that it is based on the fundamental premise the someone like George W. Bush is more intelligent than everyone else, and that is something that seems very doubtful to me.

Conspiracies don't require much more than average intelligence. They've been at it for years, and are in fact quite slow in figuring out the equation.