Members banned from this thread: Frank


Page 1 of 28 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 276
Thanks Tree82Thanks

Thread: 9-11….. Startling New Evidence of a Conspiracy

  1. #1
    Voice of Reason ProgressivePatriot's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,713
    Thanks
    1082

    From
    The liberal commie infested, queer loving north east USA

    Exclamation 9-11….. Startling New Evidence of a Conspiracy

    Note: I am aware of the fact that there is a least one other open treads on 9-11 on this forum. However, it had no responses and has long been dormant since shortly after it was started earlier this year. In addition, it does not feature the film that I recently discovered. This is different. This is compelling and worth a look!

    This is an amazing, and eye opening film that may well change everything that you thought you knew or that you believed about what happened on 9.11.01.


    15 Years Later, Physics Journal Concludes: All 3 WTC Towers Collapsed Due to Controlled Demolition

    It is long. Over an hour. But if you just watch the first 10 or 15 minutes, you will certainly get the idea.
    Now let me be clear, I was never a conspiracy theorists. I did not consider myself a 9-11 truther and I’m yet 100% convinced that we have been lied to. However, I am leaning in that direction.

    The basic premise of the film is that the two planes alone did not bring the three building, WTC 1,2, and 7 down – that the collapses were caused, at least aided, by “controlled demolitions. Indeed, no plane had hit WTC 7! It is alleged that there was deliberate destruction of evidence, explosions not caused by the planes, and a symmetrical collapse of all three buildings consistent with a controlled demolition.

    The film is narrated by Richard Gaga of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, an organization of 2,300 professionals who are demanding an independent investigation, and features a long succession of architects, engineers, various other scientists all of whom are quite credible. It also features eye witnesses who saw and heard things that are not explained and can’t be explained by the official version of what happened.

    There is no dirt to be found on this organization. They are credible.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archit...for_9/11_Truth

    Here is the official site: #2 of 6: NIST's WTC 7 Reports: Filled with Fantasy, Fiction, and Fraud

    It is interesting to note that while it’s alleged that the plot was much wider than the hijackers, the report specifically avoids pointing any fingers or speculating on motive so as not to distract from the forensic evidence.

    The film that you are about to see was published in the Free Thought Project Homepage - The Free Thought Project
    You will see that while the stories that they publish are provocative and under-reported in the main stream media, it is not “fake news” or conspiracy theories from the fringes of reality

    Now to be fair, I am not without my doubts. We know that planes actually did hit the towers and that they were controlled by terrorists. But were there additional terrorists on the ground who planted explosives in all three building? Would that have even been possible? And, if they were expert enough to plant the bombs so strategically as to bring the buildings down, why did they bother to hijack planes?

    Another possibility that some entity other than the terrorists- such as the Bush Administration- planted the bombs. Did they know about the plot ( as some have previously alleged ) and, rather than stopping it, planted to explosives to make certain of the outcome. Farfetched? I don’t know.

    That brings me to the authors and publishers of the study and documentary. As I said Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, appear to be highly credible. However, here is a site that says that it is all bunk. You can decide for yourself.
    Debunking 911 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition Homepage

    Now not being a scientist, I will not attempt to argue the conflicting scientific theories (although I do find the evidence for a controlled demolition very compelling) . However, they also attack the credibility and credentials of the chief author of the study

    Professor Steven E. Jones:

    To be clear, let me restate the test which makes a real scientific paper. It has to be published in a respected scientific journal. As an example, The Journal of Engineering Mechanics is a well respected scientific journal. The peer review process is tough and precise. The reviewers are well respected in their fields of expertise. The Journal of the American Chemical Society is another which Jones can submit his papers. There are many well respected journals which have an impact in the scientific community. Bentham, where Jones has submitted his latest paper, is the Wiki of Journals. They have been criticized in the past for passing "gibberish".
    One editor resigned after learning Jones paper passed their review. It seems the reviewers are told of the paper AFTER they are passed! Amazing!

    Though Jones may have found the perfect home for his latest attempt at peer-review, it is far from a respected scientific journal. Will Jones ever publish in a "respected scientific journal"? Do they want legitimacy or a talking points?
    So where does that leave us? Deep into more uncertainty. Jones was published in Europhysics News which appears to be highly credible and widely respected:

    https://billlawrenceonline.com/europ...ws-trutherism/

    Europhysics News Trutherism — Trutherism, the belief that Al-Qaeda terrorists were not entirely behind the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, received a boost, Aug. 24, in the latest issue of Europhysics News which carries an article claiming that the World Trade Center was brought down by controlled demolition.

    The magazine is published by the prestigious European Physical Society.
    The authors of the piece are Steven Jones, a former full professor of physics at Brigham Young University; Robert Korol, a professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada; Anthony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer; and Ted Walter, who holds master of public policy degree from the University of California, Berkeley.

    The authors cite, among other things, the lack of heat to melt, or adequately weaken, the girders to cause the collapse.
    Melted girders was widely reported as a reason immediately after the attack. This was quickly understood to be impossible, however. In fact, it was even being noted that things didn’t get hot enough to cause enough loss of structural strength.
    This paper from the December 2001 issue of JOM, — the member journal of The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society , — is in full agreement with the Jones group on this point.
    However, even here there is dissention:

    The authors Thomas W. Eagar and Christopher Musso, however, don’t feel the need to deny what was before everyone’s eyes. Their article points out that temperature along the 18-meter long joists was certainly not uniform and that given the thermal expansion of steel, a 300 F temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses hence causing distortions resulting in buckling failures

    Jones et al makes the point that fire never collapsed a skyscraper before 9/11 and has yet to bring one down since.
    The rebuttal to this is that jet aircraft have never been flown into skyscrapers before or since. Further, a fire, while not collapsing a skyscraper, did make One Meridan Plaza in Philadelphia unstable enough to cause its demolition.
    Again, I’m not going to attempt to evaluate the science. I am just presenting what has been said. I’m not trying to sell anything here. My intention is to stimulate discussion, elicit opinions, and to get a sense of how people, in general are leaning.
    Finally, the is https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/0...911/#more-4482

    This is apparently an Atheistic leaning site and as such, I, an atheist, give a certain amount of credibility to. They support the “conventional or main stream explanation for 9-11 and reject the conspiracy- controlled demolition theory and provide a link to the aforementioned . Debunking 911 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition Homepage. I'm just not completely convinced, but as I said, leaning towards a conspiracy.

    That’s it folks! Have at it .Don’t troll me bro. I’m just the messenger!
    Thanks from chaos

  2. #2
    Galactic Ruler Spookycolt's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    54,519
    Thanks
    9941

    From
    By the wall
    The idea of controlled demolitions has been widely covered already.

    Hell, 10 years ago there were films showing the sound of charges going off.

    Here is the gist of it. If you wanted to create a false flag you are not going to go with a plan that is so extremely complicated with so many people involved and with such a high degree of being caught. Hell if they wanted to create this agenda they could have sent one guy with a dirty bomb into downtown Manhattan and detonated and received the same results.
    Thanks from Puzzling Evidence and Snikitz

  3. #3
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    18,831
    Thanks
    5240

    From
    midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    The idea of controlled demolitions has been widely covered already.

    Hell, 10 years ago there were films showing the sound of charges going off.

    Here is the gist of it. If you wanted to create a false flag you are not going to go with a plan that is so extremely complicated with so many people involved and with such a high degree of being caught. Hell if they wanted to create this agenda they could have sent one guy with a dirty bomb into downtown Manhattan and detonated and received the same results.
    Wonder if anyone has gotten their hands on those photos of GWB and Cheney planting the explosives in the towers?

    No?

    Oh well, I'm sure someone is busy "manufacturing" them as we speak.

    Then they can produce proof of the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot, UFO's, and who REALLY killed JFK! (It was the gubmint, I tells ya!)

    Conspiracy theories, the really nutty ones, make money. (Just ask Alex Jones)

    THAT'S what they are all about.

    M O N E Y
    Thanks from Blues63

  4. #4
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    53,185
    Thanks
    18906

    From
    america
    Such a Conspiracy would involve hundreds, if not thousands of individuals.

    Why has not a single one of them "talked?" (They could make MILLIONS if not BILLIONS of dollars for such a story....)

    Why was not a single shred of evidence left? (Such a massive operation would leave evidence, somewhere: emails, eye witnesses, video surveilance, maintenance records, etc.)

    What were those two planes we saw flying into the WTC, on a CLEAR day?

    What flew in to the Pentagon?

    And, most importantly: WHY go to such lengths, when a nice little terror attack on another American Naval vessel could have been enough?


    And, all for....WHAT, exactly?

    --Starting a war for shits n giggles?

    --Taking all of their oil? (IF so, where the fuck is it?)
    Thanks from Blues63

  5. #5
    Swamper chaos's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    3,204
    Thanks
    1428

    From
    Cyberia
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    The idea of controlled demolitions has been widely covered already.

    Hell, 10 years ago there were films showing the sound of charges going off.

    Here is the gist of it. If you wanted to create a false flag you are not going to go with a plan that is so extremely complicated with so many people involved and with such a high degree of being caught. Hell if they wanted to create this agenda they could have sent one guy with a dirty bomb into downtown Manhattan and detonated and received the same results.
    When you control the top level of government there is zero chance of being caught. Controlled demolition of 3 buildings on 911 is an indisputable fact. The who, how, and why has been laid out in great detail but America is filled with sheeple who don't care about evidence or facts.
    Thanks from Thx1138

  6. #6
    Voice of Reason ProgressivePatriot's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,713
    Thanks
    1082

    From
    The liberal commie infested, queer loving north east USA
    Quote Originally Posted by chaos View Post
    When you control the top level of government there is zero chance of being caught. Controlled demolition of 3 buildings on 911 is an indisputable fact. The who, how, and why has been laid out in great detail but America is filled with sheeple who don't care about evidence or facts.
    I don't know why it is necessary for just about everyone to rigidly cling to one side or the other. I have seen many compelling arguments -concerning various aspects of this- on both sides.

    There are things that do not make sense. While it has been established that Europhysics News is in fact not a peer reviewed publication and relies on speculation to a degree, the magazine is published by the prestigious European Physical Society

    While professor Jones’ analysis can be called into question, his work is being used by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth which, as I pointed out earlier, appears to be legitimate and credible.

    In addition, this paper from the December 2001 issue of JOM, — the member journal of The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society , — is in full agreement with the Jones group on this point. ( That the fire alone was insufficient to melt of weaken the structure to the point of failure) They too appear to be legitimate and highly credible.

    Yet questions persist. To summaries:

    On the official version’s side……..
    Yes there is room for criticism of Steven Jones and his study was not peer reviewed.

    It seems farfetched that the buildings could have been rigged with explosive without the perpetrators being seen or the explosives being detected.
    How could an attack from the ground be coordinated with the hijackings, especially if it was an entity apart from Al Qaeda ?

    On the truther’s side……
    Steven Jones assertion that the fire could not have been hot enough to melt or cause failure of the steel was backed up by the unimpeachable Minerals, Metals & Materials Society.

    Europhysics News is published by the prestigious European Physical Society

    Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth consists of 2,300 professionals and there is no indication that this is a fringe group of nutters and conspiracy buffs.

    Then there is this…. A work of art that challenges the official account of 9/11 has been accepted into the permanent collection of the 9/11 Museum in New York City. And surprisingly, the piece was created by an artist who is best known for his illustrations in the mainstream media. World Trade Center Building 7 Demolished on 9/11? | AE911Truth

    Destruction of evidence was reported and documented

    No one can explain away the eye witness reports of explosions and molten steel

    Building 7 was not hit by aircraft yet it was supposedly so seriously damaged and in the precise manner necessary to cause a symmetrical implosion
    Thanks from chaos

  7. #7
    Veteran Member GordonGecko's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    29,973
    Thanks
    22628

    From
    VA
    Trump said Dubya knew about 9/11 ahead of time....


    who are we, mere mortals, to doubt The Beloved Tangerine-colored Leader???

    Thanks from labrea, Friday13 and HadEnough2

  8. #8
    Voice of Reason ProgressivePatriot's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,713
    Thanks
    1082

    From
    The liberal commie infested, queer loving north east USA
    Quote Originally Posted by GordonGecko View Post
    Trump said Dubya knew about 9/11 ahead of time....


    who are we, mere mortals, to doubt The Beloved Tangerine-colored Leader???

    I wish we could get that from a credible source


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Thanks from Friday13

  9. #9
    The Republican Agenda HadEnough2's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    12,184
    Thanks
    8675

    From
    Washington State
    I agree that something fishy is going on. The fact is steel buildings don't just collapse this way. To admit this is a conspiracy by our Government would be admitting it is corrupt.

    ..... and Building 7 is the Smoking Gun. That's just foolish.


  10. #10
    Veteran Member GordonGecko's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    29,973
    Thanks
    22628

    From
    VA
    Quote Originally Posted by ProgressivePatriot View Post
    I wish we could get that from a credible source

    Sorry, but I'm not a 9/11 Truther. I've seen "equally credible" evidence for the "Alien crash at Roswell".


    I just think it's funny that El Trumpo ...a sucker for conspiracy theorism....is contradicting the old Bush-loving Right.

Page 1 of 28 12311 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 24th August 2012, 07:37 AM
  2. Conspiracy Theories are just a Conspiracy Theory
    By Illuminutty in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12th August 2012, 03:16 AM
  3. The Startling Plight of China's Leftover Ladies
    By Red Eft in forum Asia & Middle East
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 9th May 2012, 05:13 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 27th September 2011, 05:58 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 19th April 2010, 08:16 AM

Search tags for this page

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed