The 9/11 Discussion.

[BillyB]

Are you serious? A federal grand jury of our peers will finally be looking at all the evidence? Thank you Confederate for showing us the light. I've been blind and I apologize for it. Not.

Read the article carefully. This is not the first time the conspiracy theorists filed a petition. Filing a petition doesn't mean a grand jury will be formed to review the evidence. Me thinks they will file petitions for the next hundreds years and remain unsuccessful.

Read that site where you say thousands of experts signed onto the conspiracy theory. Many "experts" are not located in this country and are Muslim. Who's verifying those people if they have education or even a job. Maybe I'll sign my name on that site so Confederate will believe I'm an expert and listen to what I have to say.

[Contrarian]

Judging by the response so far to my posts it seems that it's best I end my presentation.
I had barely begun, barely scratched the surface with the evidence I have.

I mentioned that if I opened the eyes of even one member here to what actually occurred on 9/11 I will have been successful.
It appears that I have done so.

There are many here who do not have open minds and will never allow themselves to peer over the edge, to investigate, to do some research etc. I will not try to change these people's minds.

Where did this gent go off to?

[Contrarian]

Actually, speaking absolutely as a layman, it'd seem unlikely that a structural defect would be uniform in all supporting structures at the same time and thus we would see, in a collapse of a building where there was a structural fault 'just waiting to happen' a twisting effect and the building NOT falling into its own footprint because the failure would not be uniform - is my layman's understanding about right?

Correct

Speaking, again, as a layman: is a squib some kind of explosive device (as it is in the UK where it is the name for a small firework) used to effect structural failure and thus collapse of a tall structure in a uniform manner so that the collapsing building rapidly falls into its own footprint minimising damage to adjacent buildings and nearby people?

Yes, squibs are used by the military, in mining, and for various other reasons, even in the film world for special effects etc, but they are  also used for controlled demolitions of structures and buildings, especially for as you say, collapsing buildings into their own footprint.

Modern squibs are extremely reliable, but it was not so a hundred or so years ago and therefore one that did not perform (usually because they had got wet) became known as a 'damp squib!' a term still used extensively today.

Chris,
Are you agreeing with these conspiracy buffs that 9/11 was an inside job because of the presence of squibs?  Please elaborate on your comments made up thread.

As I said UT, I have done no research on 9/11 and apart from watching it live at the time have really not had much of an interest in it, mainly because based on many years of research on becoming a PT in the late 80's I know, that not all is exactly as it seems in this World.

It doesn't really matter what I think, I am not trying to convince anyone here one way or the other, I have my own thoughts  and are basing my presumptions on the limited information I know of how buildings and materials react under certain conditions, however, let me pose a few questions to you and then make up your own mind.

Q1. If the puffs of smoke etc seen in many photos and videos are in fact squibs, how did they get there? they wouldn't have been incorporated into the buildings when they were built, or would they? so really there is no reason at all they should be present, unless of course, they were there for a specific reason, the only reason being IMHO, for use as a controlled demolition.

Q2. Buildings of only a few stories high, may, in certain instances collapse more or less within their own foot print, but there would also still be an amount of debris falling outside that footprint, even use of the Vérinage method, debris falls outside the building footprint, and BTW, I doubt the Vérinage method has ever been used for anything above maybe 10 stories high.

Buildings of multiple stories certainly don't collapse within their own footprint, naturally!  buildings 100+ stories and over 1000ft high would never fall within their own footprint under their own weight, the only way I can see this actually happening is if they had been given help on their way down, so we come back to squibs.

Q3. Even if the top few stories of the towers had collapsed under their own weight, due to them being hit by a plane and the resultant damage to the structure, the heat, the volumes of air being pushed around  and so on, I seriously doubt that the whole tower would have fallen right down to ground level, they are not designed to do that for obvious reasons, they are designed to withstand a plane hit, and a massive amount of redundancy and safety factor  is/are built in, also when was the last time this ever happened with a steel framed building? to have two do so at the same time? I have  no idea what the odds are, but it has to be extremely high.   

As explained UT, the steel structure is of a far greater density the lower it is to ground level, (it has to be to support the weight of the upper floors/structure) so it is much stronger at ground level than say at the 100th floor level, while the top 20-30% of a tower may well collapse under the conditions these encountered, even allowing for inbuilt safety nets, I doubt that the rest of the tower would have followed, especially in the way it did and so accurately down more or less within it's own foundations.

Q4. One question Jeffrey posed early on, how far would you expect  30-50Tonne beams to fall from the base of the tower?  maybe a few metres, maybe even further because they could have been deflected on the way down, doubtful though,  but 200 yards/metres away, not in your wildest dreams, unless of course they were pushed by, let's say, an explosion!

You don't have to have much technical knowledge to answer these questions, basic common sense will give you a good indication of what the actual answer is likely to be.

Was it an inside job? make your own mind up.

For Shakespear, a discussion about squibs.

[BillyB]

Nucking Futs. Confederate, when you find a woman, I hope you don't educate your woman the same way you educate us or your world is going to be lonely.

[Contrarian]

[Contrarian]

[BillyB]

If each floor is one foot thick and between floors there's 10 feet of space and there's 47 floors, how tall you think the rubble will be after collapsing? The voids in the basement will act as storage for the rubble too.

[AvHdB]

Nucking Futs. Confederate, when you find a woman, I hope you don't educate your woman the same way you educate us or your world is going to be lonely.

To continue along the line of BillyB. . .

Please truckle your bousers, we would not want any rittle Conflakes lunning around.

[andrewfi]

In my opinion, the story that we have been told about 9/11 is a pack of lies. It is not hard to see the inconsistencies, those of us watching the BBC saw the announcement of the collapse of building 7 before it happened. We can see that the manner in which the buildings fell does not look right. The evidence (or lack thereof) of the planes, the removal of surveillance video at the Pentagon; all of this tells us that we have been lied to.

In my opinion, it is very unlikely that we will ever know what actually happened, even if some of the major stakeholders were to get on their hind legs and tell us it was a conspiracy, we will not know the details, in part at least, because those stakeholders do not know the whole story, it will have been compartmentalized to ensure that the whole story never gets out.

I think that the manner in which various factions have sprung up each with a different narrative, most of which are absurd, is a part of the ongoing cover-up. I think that if 'believers' were to look at what happened with a somewhat open mind they'd agree that we have been lied to.

The reality is that all we need to know and understand is that we have been lied to. Much as with the Skripal case in the UK. A rational observer knows that the tale(s) we have been told are untrue to a greater or lesser extent.

Arguing about minutiae serves those who wish to keep us in the dark because they can point to the hypothesizers and, with justification, say that they are promulgating nutty stories and that the government line is the truth. These arguments simply serve to destroy the credibility of those who know that we have been lied to. This is not an accident, it is a consistent strategy.

To disprove a story we do not need to provide an accurate alternative story, all that we need to do is to show that the story told was a lie in at least one respect because a true story will be true in all respects, there's no need to lie about elements of it.

We do not need therefore to know exactly how the buildings came down, all we need to understand is that they did not come down in the manner that we were told. Once we understand that, then we know that the narrative is false. Taking it further, we do not even need to know that the buildings were demolished, the narrative surrounding the amazing disappearing aircraft in the field, or at the Pentagon, or any other element of the tale from beginning to end. Just one lie based inconsistency is all that is required and there's plenty of inconsistencies.

Of course, if we come to understand that we have been lied to, what next? What changes? In truth, almost nothing. The arguers are not going to take up arms and man barricades. All those people want to do is argue over minutiae, to be distracted by the irrelevancies rather than deal with the much bigger, much more serious issues about what 9/11 means for USAians and the rest of the world.

[Contrarian]

If each floor is one foot thick and between floors there's 10 feet of space and there's 47 floors, how tall you think the rubble will be after collapsing? The voids in the basement will act as storage for the rubble too.

Billy Bob proving once again that the average 5th grader is smarter than he is! 

Where do you think the exterior walls and all of the interior walls are going to go Billy Bob?

You still haven't answered how it is that residue from high-grade military explosives was found in all three buildings

and you won't.  Like others too lazy to do the real research you rely on what your puppet-masters tell you.

**********The NIST report which lemmings like Av and BillyB believe is dissected here********** 

(WARNING:  Must be capable of reading and understanding big words and technical jargon related to physics, etc)

Fantasy, Fiction and Fraud

https://www.911tap.org/evidence/what-about-building-7/811-what-about-building-7/639-nist-s-wtc-7-reports-filled-with-fantasy-fiction-and-fraud-part-4


Side by side comparison: Building 7 free fall collapse and video of a controlled demolition.

and a 30 second video of Building 7 free fall controlled demolition from a few angles.

[Contrarian]

In my opinion, the story that we have been told about 9/11 is a pack of lies. It is not hard to see the inconsistencies, those of us watching the BBC saw the announcement of the collapse of building 7 before it happened. We can see that the manner in which the buildings fell does not look right. The evidence (or lack thereof) of the planes, the removal of surveillance video at the Pentagon; all of this tells us that we have been lied to.

In my opinion, it is very unlikely that we will ever know what actually happened, even if some of the major stakeholders were to get on their hind legs and tell us it was a conspiracy, we will not know the details, in part at least, because those stakeholders do not know the whole story, it will have been compartmentalized to ensure that the whole story never gets out.

Thank you for engaging in some actual critical thinking which is becoming rarer and rarer.  Looked at as a whole the official narrative is indeed a pack of lies and the governments version of events defies all known laws of physics.  The best work so far on solving this enigma has been done by investigative journalist Christopher Bollyn who handles exactly how they did it, why they did it and who did it; his research is meticulous. Here's a link to a 265 page pdf.  I haven't yet compared it word for word to the book however I believe it's all there.

http://www.bollyn.com/public/Solving_9-11_-_The_Deception_That_Changed_The_World.pdf



Finally I hope that you and Markje and anyone else who would like a real investigation into this event to be done will sign the petition.  We've got a long way to reach 100,000 people and it would be even better to have 2 Million or more signatures.  Anyone from around the World who doubts the official story can sign it.


https://www.911tap.org/join-us/sign-the-petition/

[BillyB]

Where do you think the exterior walls and all of the interior walls are going to go Billy Bob?

Most of the exterior walls fall outside the building footprint and most interior walls aren't structural and don't take up much room. Lots of voids in a building. Since you're the demolition expert, how tall must a 47 story be after falling?

Thank you for engaging in some actual critical thinking which is becoming rarer and rarer.

Anybody who agrees with you is a critical thinker. Andrew thinks he's been lied to. The guy who says the glass is half empty think the guy who says the glass is half full is lying. Critical thinkers like you are extremely rare. Think about why is that.

[Contrarian]

Where do you think the exterior walls and all of the interior walls are going to go Billy Bob?

Most of the exterior walls fall outside the building footprint and most interior walls aren't structural and don't take up much room. Lots of voids in a building. Since you're the demolition expert, how tall must a 47 story be after falling?

Did I claim that I personally was a demolitions expert? No I did not. I stated that residue of nano thermites was found in all three buildings.

You continue to ignore that and all the other mountains of evidence because your purpose here is clear: you have no intentions of reading or considering any of the evidence, you’re only here in an attempt at clever word games to distract potential readers from all of the evidence which has been posted.

If as you say each floor was 1 foot thick it’s easy math that it’s down to 47’ tall plus a bit extra for the internal walls. You claim there was 10 feet floor to ceiling so that’s about right: five stories of rubble.

It’s not scientific it’s only a visual meme to assist learning impaired persons such as those who refuse to actually read the stuff I posted about the characteristics of a controlled demolition. Who could that be? 

Now however this man really was a demolitions expert but sadly he met an untimely death.

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Danny_Jowenko

[BillyB]

Did I claim that I personally was a demolitions expert? No I did not.

Then don't get made at me when I dismiss everything you said about demolition and your "Experts". You are not qualified to judge who is an expert in demo.

Now however this man really was a demolitions expert but sadly he met an untimely death.

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Danny_Jowenko

That "Expert" was stumped on how demo can happen during a fire at the end of the video in your link. Watch it. Of course you can't control demolition during a fire that can prematurely set off one charge and botching an intended controlled demo.

[Contrarian]

Dick Cheney, War Profiteer.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.commondreams.org/views05/1117-22.htm%3famp

There is no doubt that D. Cheney is a low life. His disregard for all things American are legion.

Yeah he and Bush Jr. pretty much wiped their asses with the United States Constitution and yet he admitted this little gem:


Unfortunately, such evidence didn’t exist as Cheney remarked in a rare moment of transparency: “So we’ve never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming.” Even Bin Laden’s profile on the FBI most wanted list, until his laughably fake execution in May 2011, never mentioned 9/11 as one of his dastardly deeds.

Billy you’re not qualified to be in this thread. You’re a troll. You evade all questions and cherry pick how you frame things. Upthread you claimed that Osama bin Laden did this crime.

Osama was actually a CIA asset known as Tim Osman who visited the USA and worked with the CIA to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. He didn’t have the extensive knowledge and financial assets needed to wire the Twin Towers for demolition. Israeli Mossad did.

Dick Cheney later admitted that they never made the case it was Bin Ladin after originally claiming it was.

Controlled demolitions

[Contrarian]

KEY EVIDENCE
Rapid onset of destruction,
Constant acceleration at or near free-fall through what should have been the path of greatest resistance,
Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions including 118 FDNY personnel,
Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members distances of 600 feet at more than 60 mph,
Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding pyroclastic-like dust clouds,
Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the “crush zone,”
Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors each an acre in size missing from the Twin Towers’ debris pile,
Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles,
Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams,
Nanothermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples


https://www.ae911truth.org/

[BillyB]

Billy you’re not qualified to be in this thread. You’re a troll.

Go to page one, post one and see who started this thread back in 2007. If you don't like my trolling thread, you shouldn't participate in it.

[Manny]

Billy you’re not qualified to be in this thread. You’re a troll.

Go to page one, post one and see who started this thread back in 2007. If you don't like my trolling thread, you shouldn't participate in it.

Post of the week by Billy to Cornfed there. Bloody classic! 

[Contrarian]

Billy you’re not qualified to be in this thread. You’re a troll.

Go to page one, post one and see who started this thread back in 2007. If you don't like my trolling thread, you shouldn't participate in it.

Post of the week by Billy to Confederate there. Bloody classic!

You’re the guy who’s always going on about American hegemony in the Middle East and elsewhere yet here you are lauding a pro-regime change war hawk based on the false flag event of the millennium; I’d say that’s even more bloody classic. 

[Contrarian]

In my opinion, the story that we have been told about 9/11 is a pack of lies. It is not hard to see the inconsistencies, those of us watching the BBC saw the announcement of the collapse of building 7 before it happened. We can see that the manner in which the buildings fell does not look right. The evidence (or lack thereof) of the planes, the removal of surveillance video at the Pentagon; all of this tells us that we have been lied to.

In my opinion, it is very unlikely that we will ever know what actually happened, even if some of the major stakeholders were to get on their hind legs and tell us it was a conspiracy, we will not know the details, in part at least, because those stakeholders do not know the whole story, it will have been compartmentalized to ensure that the whole story never gets out.

I think that the manner in which various factions have sprung up each with a different narrative, most of which are absurd, is a part of the ongoing cover-up. I think that if 'believers' were to look at what happened with a somewhat open mind they'd agree that we have been lied to.

The reality is that all we need to know and understand is that we have been lied to. Much as with the Skripal case in the UK. A rational observer knows that the tale(s) we have been told are untrue to a greater or lesser extent.

Arguing about minutiae serves those who wish to keep us in the dark because they can point to the hypothesizers and, with justification, say that they are promulgating nutty stories and that the government line is the truth. These arguments simply serve to destroy the credibility of those who know that we have been lied to. This is not an accident, it is a consistent strategy.

To disprove a story we do not need to provide an accurate alternative story, all that we need to do is to show that the story told was a lie in at least one respect because a true story will be true in all respects, there's no need to lie about elements of it.

We do not need therefore to know exactly how the buildings came down, all we need to understand is that they did not come down in the manner that we were told. Once we understand that, then we know that the narrative is false. Taking it further, we do not even need to know that the buildings were demolished, the narrative surrounding the amazing disappearing aircraft in the field, or at the Pentagon, or any other element of the tale from beginning to end. Just one lie based inconsistency is all that is required and there's plenty of inconsistencies.

Of course, if we come to understand that we have been lied to, what next? What changes? In truth, almost nothing. The arguers are not going to take up arms and man barricades. All those people want to do is argue over minutiae, to be distracted by the irrelevancies rather than deal with the much bigger, much more serious issues about what 9/11 means for USAians and the rest of the world.

I'm not sure if you've ever seen this, however the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission agrees with you: it was all a pack of lies and the insiders who were ordered to do a complete whitewash know it.


‘In the course of our investigation into the national response to the attacks, the 9/11 Commission staff discovered that the official version of what had occurred [the morning of September 11, 2001] — that is, what government and military officials had told Congress, the Commission, the media, and the public about who knew what when— was almost entirely, and inexplicably, untrue.’


http://goldenageofgaia.com/2010/09/17/senior-911-counsel-calls-government-version-untrue/

[Tom Cat]

Some might find this documentary interesting.

[Contrarian]

Some might find this documentary interesting.

Thanks for posting. I haven't made it thru the entire video yet but so far it has been interesting.

[Contrarian]

KEY EVIDENCE
Rapid onset of destruction,
Constant acceleration at or near free-fall through what should have been the path of greatest resistance,
Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions including 118 FDNY personnel,
Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members distances of 600 feet at more than 60 mph,
Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding pyroclastic-like dust clouds,
Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the “crush zone,”
Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors each an acre in size missing from the Twin Towers’ debris pile,
Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles,
Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams,
Nanothermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples.


https://www.ae911truth.org/

This is the only part I do believe in. I think they were afraid the top of the tower would fall off and take other buildings with it, so someone made a conscious choice of demolishing the tower so it would fall in a straight down line. Also funny how this happened when everyone below the fire was evacuated.

Everyone was not evacuated and in fact many firefighters were lost on that day as they were rushing up the stairs in stairwells in an attempt to see if they could save anyone.  The Twin Towers were prewired for demolition, this is easy to understand if you're willing to do the research or carefully read someone who has done it for you such as Christopher Bollyn who wrote: Solving 9/11 The Deception That Changed the World.

There is in fact a precedence, the Empire State Building was struck by a Bomber back in 1945. As you can see from the photo it did the type of damage which is to be expected.  It was struck on the 79th floor.  The Empire State building was built many decades before the Twin Towers, which were built to withstand a commercial jetliner crashing into them.  The notion that jets could take these buildings down is absurd and shows how easy it is to deceive sheep like BillyB into believing the governments changing conspiracy theories.





WTC Building 7 was not struck by anything and yet the sheep continue to believe the shifting conspiracy theories offered up by the government.

                                 

[Contrarian]

Immediate eyewitness testimony versus the actual scientific evidence.

                             

[Contrarian]

Posting this one especially for Markje as it was a speech given at TU Delft.