9/11 coverup?

~~Ben123~~ · 12-30-2006, 09:38 PM

I have been hearing this nonesense for months, and I have heard it from 2 people in person, and 1 on my blog, and 1 on a forum; and that is just one night, so I will post some links that popped up when I Google "9/11 conspiracy" these all come from the first page of the search.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n2299341.shtml
http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...w/1227842.html
http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/refute.htm

I was talking to a girl at work tonite, and it was hard to remain polite when she was being dare I say? So stupid. Anyways enjoy, get informed, and use the facts that 9/11 obviously was not some deep conspiracy.

Here are my two favorite ways to debunk 9/11 moonbats.

If it was such a big conspiracy, there would surely be a whistleblower, this is much bigger than Watergate.

If the government could plan an attack like this to get us into Iraq, could they not plant WMDs in Iraq easily?

I know that reading this doesn't benefit most of you who are not crazy, but you will undoubtably run into someone who will shout in your face and tell that America planned 9/11 and you must be able to pwn them with the facts, or they will get you.

"Never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience."

Good night,

B

~~Wozer~~ · 12-30-2006, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben123

"Never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience."

my my my...that last sentence surely gives you away now doesn't it?

that was used by me as my sig for a while and was borrowed (with permission) from another moderator at my forum...just how would you, a new member of this forum, know about that?

refute away...I never needed any movies like Loose Change and such as from the day it happened it didn't add up...

you have any idea of how much money it would have cost to legally take down the twin towers? consider they were half completed when asbestos was outlawed..and consider the underground damages that occured in the real terrorist attack years before...they say they fixed that...ummm....yeah....can you explain the elevated tritium levels in New York?...can you explain away the images of upwards trajectory expelled debris during the fall of the towers? can you use physics to explain how the towers 'collapsed' faster than a piano would have fallen from the top floor? can you explain the fact that the hole (as it originally appeard in the first videos) in the pentagon was smaller than the airliner? can you justify an untrained pilot took a massive airliner from 10,000+ feet, made a spiral and actually directly hit the structure at ground level?...can you justify why all the file and cameras from the surrounding area were taken and never returned? can you explain how cell phone calls were made from an airliner before the technology existed to do so? can you explain how when it crashed it left just a hole in the ground with no wreckage?...have you actually ever seen the pictures of an airliner crash (like the one that went straight down in the Andes years back and left a mass of wreckage?)...are you truly aware of just how hard it is to destroy a jet engine of the size used in airliners? and are you aware of how hot of a fire is needed to melt titanium?

I realize we live in an infinite universe with infinite possibilities, but really...the odds of the ID of one of the pilots who hit the towers having been ejected from the fireball and floating to the ground and being found is just too absurd to believe...they are about the same as the untouched bullet being found my Kennedy in '63...

do you believe JFK was taken out by a lone shooter with a magical bullet?

I don't..and I don't believe 9/11 was real either...

~~Ben123~~ · 12-31-2006, 06:20 AM

Just Google what I said, and you will see that its actually a pretty common expression, here's the first link I found.

http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=2903774

And all those things you said have been debunked over and over again... You pretty much listed a point-by-point of Loose Change...

Any other thoughts?

~~Wozer~~ · 12-31-2006, 09:10 AM

then why don't you debunk them yourself?

as noted, I have never seen Loose Change and the above thoughts are from my own head...

how about this...why don't you yourself shoot down a major conspiracy theory flaw re: the pentagon...maybe do the math to prove how they are being morons about how they state the impossibility of it all...I prefer to look at that 'crash' in the simple light of the difficulty of even a military pilot pulling off the manuever...some theorists on the other hand state a majorly flawed figure to back up their claims...

what is their figure and why is it wrong?

~~Ben123~~ · 12-31-2006, 11:35 AM

This is from Popular Science... since the theorists are inventing facts, it is hard for me to refute, so those smarter than me can.

Quote:

ig Plane, Small Holes
CLAIM: Two holes were visible in the Pentagon immediately after the attack: a 75-ft.-wide entry hole in the building's exterior wall, and a 16-ft.-wide hole in Ring C, the Pentagon's middle ring. Conspiracy theorists claim both holes are far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757. "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. across?" asks reopen911.org, a Web site "dedicated to discovering the bottom line truth to what really occurred on September 11, 2001."

The truth is of even less importance to French author Thierry Meyssan, whose baseless assertions are fodder for even mainstream European and Middle Eastern media. In his book The Big Lie, Meyssan concludes that the Pentagon was struck by a satellite-guided missile--part of an elaborate U.S. military coup. "This attack," he writes, "could only be committed by United States military personnel against other U.S. military personnel."

FACT: When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.

Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."

The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide--not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage.

~~Wozer~~ · 12-31-2006, 12:44 PM

nope...wrong theory...that one is definitely arguable, and I disagree with the 'official facts'....

try again...hint: think of a roller coaster and the effects it has that make it an 'enjoyable' ride (secondary hint: I'm too old to find that enjoyable..too much risk of causing a stroke or heart attack)..tertiary hint: it involves mathematical computation..

~~Wozer~~ · 01-01-2007, 10:18 AM

not up to it eh?

well the answer is the 5+G figure many conspiracy theorists state for the forces placed upon that plane as it made a 270º turn before it flew into the Pentagon...

for one thing, the figure of 5G's is way above the limits on the supposed airliner, making that figure really attractive to use to state it was not an airliner that hit the Pentagon...bleh...I ran the numbers myself..using an acceptable speed of the airplane and using the 'official' story of the radius of the turn I come up with 1.5G's...even jogging the speed up and reducing the radius to a real tight turn I can only reasonably get the figure to around 3 G's, which is within the specs of that reported airliner...i.e. it was possible...the grossly over exaggerated figure used by conspiracists just detracts from their cause and makes them look stupid...

as noted I take other information as a basis for my questioning of the Pentagon story...angular momentum equations prove the G force was probably within specs for an airliner (though if it was around 3 G's I argue that an untrained civilian would have had a hell of a problem for various reasons)

~~Girderman~~ · 01-01-2007, 11:42 AM

Quote:

"Never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience."

LOVE this quote. But it's common, Kimosabe. You don't own it and can't control it. It's free, like the wind. Fly, up, up in the air ! Be FREE !! !

Myth-UK · 01-01-2007, 02:32 PM

What about the fact that no steel framed building has ever fallen because of fire? What happened to tower 7 again? and which offices were in that building?

BTW, i'm structual engineer and i have worked on steel fabricated buildings my entire life.

~~Ben123~~ · 01-01-2007, 03:17 PM

How many 110 storey buildings of been hit by airplanes full of jet fuel?

I'm no engineer, but I think that the stress caused by fire, and the stress caused by a jet are different. The stress of both is massive.

Again I ask if we managed to somehow fill the WTC's with explosives, to shoot an airplane down, to launch a military grade missile into the military headquarter, why has no one come forward as a whistleblower?

If we did this to justify a war in Iraq and the government is so "incompetent" how did they plan the largest attack on American soil?

Why has Osama bin Laden and several al Qaeda leaders claimed responsability?

Just let the facts speak for themselves. I am really curious - and this is a real question because it is far past me as to why one would believe that 9-11 was somehow setup. Is it hatred for the government? Simple distrust of? I really don't even see the plausibily the claim that this could possibly be true, simply because the "scientific" data is junk.

~~Girderman~~ · 01-01-2007, 03:20 PM

At one time there was an organization of people that disbelieved that the earth was round. Referred to as "flat-earthers". This was only 20 years ago, they may still be around.

Others doubt that there was an actual landing on the moon.

Some dispute that the holocaust occured.

There is a point where a healthy sense of skepticism transitions into ego-masturbation and self-aggrandizment, at the very least.

"Hey, Look at ME! I think and say these controversial ideas ! Not because I possess any particular skill, talent or any other noteworthy quality, but only becase I'm SAYING IT ! PAY attention TO ME ! ME! ME!"

(Cause it's always "Marsha, Marsha, Marsha", and some people can only take so much before they crack.)

In it's most extreme form, it's diagnosable as straight-up mental illness, IMHO.

~~Ben123~~ · 01-01-2007, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Girderman

"Hey, Look at ME! I think and say these controversial ideas ! Not because I possess any particular skill, talent or any other noteworthy quality, but only becase I'm SAYING IT ! PAY attention TO ME ! ME! ME!"

[...]

In it's most extreme form, it's diagnosable as straight-up mental illness, IMHO.

I was trying to think of a tactful way to say that.

Myth-UK · 01-01-2007, 04:17 PM

Quote:

How many 110 storey buildings of been hit by airplanes full of jet fuel?.

Didnt i point out that Tower 7 fell without any damage of a plane flying into it?

Quote:

Again I ask if we managed to somehow fill the WTC's with explosives, to shoot an airplane down, to launch a military grade missile into the military headquarter, why has no one come forward as a whistleblower?

Tbh, there was work being done on the WTC before 9/11. It was cheaper to do it this way in the fact that both buildings were insured, many people have made a lot of money because of the wars that we are now involved in.

Quote:

If we did this to justify a war in Iraq and the government is so "incompetent" how did they plan the largest attack on American soil?

How else did we manage to invade Iraq and Afganistan? I never said they were "incompetent", i pointed out that some things just dont add up.

Quote:

Why has Osama bin Laden and several al Qaeda leaders claimed responsability?

Bin Laden never claimed anything to start with. There has been video proof this.

Quote:

Just let the facts speak for themselves. I am really curious - and this is a real question because it is far past me as to why one would believe that 9-11 was somehow setup. Is it hatred for the government? Simple distrust of? I really don't even see the plausibily the claim that this could possibly be true, simply because the "scientific" data is junk.

You trust a goverment that lies to you everyday, a goverment that has made the rich richer while those on welfare state are often over looked. You believe a goverment that took us to war based on a lie? You believe a goverment that has made many of its personal friends (even daddy bush) a lot richer?

12-30-2006, 09:38 PM	#1 (permalink)
~~Ben123~~ Register user Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Springville, NY Posts: 81 OS: Windows Vista/ Windows XP/ OS X 10.4.8	9/11 coverup? I have been hearing this nonesense for months, and I have heard it from 2 people in person, and 1 on my blog, and 1 on a forum; and that is just one night, so I will post some links that popped up when I Google "9/11 conspiracy" these all come from the first page of the search. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n2299341.shtml http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...w/1227842.html http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/refute.htm I was talking to a girl at work tonite, and it was hard to remain polite when she was being dare I say? So stupid. Anyways enjoy, get informed, and use the facts that 9/11 obviously was not some deep conspiracy. Here are my two favorite ways to debunk 9/11 moonbats. If it was such a big conspiracy, there would surely be a whistleblower, this is much bigger than Watergate. If the government could plan an attack like this to get us into Iraq, could they not plant WMDs in Iraq easily? I know that reading this doesn't benefit most of you who are not crazy, but you will undoubtably run into someone who will shout in your face and tell that America planned 9/11 and you must be able to pwn them with the facts, or they will get you. "Never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience." Good night, B Last edited by Ben123; 12-30-2006 at 09:41 PM.

01-01-2007, 10:18 AM	#7 (permalink)
~~Wozer~~ Troubled Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 1,038 OS: 2kpro/XP pro/MCE	not up to it eh? well the answer is the 5+G figure many conspiracy theorists state for the forces placed upon that plane as it made a 270º turn before it flew into the Pentagon... for one thing, the figure of 5G's is way above the limits on the supposed airliner, making that figure really attractive to use to state it was not an airliner that hit the Pentagon...bleh...I ran the numbers myself..using an acceptable speed of the airplane and using the 'official' story of the radius of the turn I come up with 1.5G's...even jogging the speed up and reducing the radius to a real tight turn I can only reasonably get the figure to around 3 G's, which is within the specs of that reported airliner...i.e. it was possible...the grossly over exaggerated figure used by conspiracists just detracts from their cause and makes them look stupid... as noted I take other information as a basis for my questioning of the Pentagon story...angular momentum equations prove the G force was probably within specs for an airliner (though if it was around 3 G's I argue that an untrained civilian would have had a hell of a problem for various reasons) Last edited by Wozer; 01-01-2007 at 10:19 AM.

01-01-2007, 02:32 PM	#9 (permalink)
Myth-UK Registered User Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Leeds, UK Posts: 107 OS: XP My System	What about the fact that no steel framed building has ever fallen because of fire? What happened to tower 7 again? and which offices were in that building? BTW, i'm structual engineer and i have worked on steel fabricated buildings my entire life. __________________ "An eye for an eye will leave us all blind...."

12-31-2006, 06:20 AM	#3 (permalink)
~~Ben123~~ Register user Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Springville, NY Posts: 81 OS: Windows Vista/ Windows XP/ OS X 10.4.8	Just Google what I said, and you will see that its actually a pretty common expression, here's the first link I found. http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=2903774 And all those things you said have been debunked over and over again... You pretty much listed a point-by-point of Loose Change... Any other thoughts?

12-31-2006, 09:10 AM	#4 (permalink)
~~Wozer~~ Troubled Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 1,038 OS: 2kpro/XP pro/MCE	then why don't you debunk them yourself? as noted, I have never seen Loose Change and the above thoughts are from my own head... how about this...why don't you yourself shoot down a major conspiracy theory flaw re: the pentagon...maybe do the math to prove how they are being morons about how they state the impossibility of it all...I prefer to look at that 'crash' in the simple light of the difficulty of even a military pilot pulling off the manuever...some theorists on the other hand state a majorly flawed figure to back up their claims... what is their figure and why is it wrong?

12-31-2006, 12:44 PM	#6 (permalink)
~~Wozer~~ Troubled Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 1,038 OS: 2kpro/XP pro/MCE	nope...wrong theory...that one is definitely arguable, and I disagree with the 'official facts'.... try again...hint: think of a roller coaster and the effects it has that make it an 'enjoyable' ride (secondary hint: I'm too old to find that enjoyable..too much risk of causing a stroke or heart attack)..tertiary hint: it involves mathematical computation..

01-01-2007, 03:17 PM	#10 (permalink)
~~Ben123~~ Register user Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Springville, NY Posts: 81 OS: Windows Vista/ Windows XP/ OS X 10.4.8	How many 110 storey buildings of been hit by airplanes full of jet fuel? I'm no engineer, but I think that the stress caused by fire, and the stress caused by a jet are different. The stress of both is massive. Again I ask if we managed to somehow fill the WTC's with explosives, to shoot an airplane down, to launch a military grade missile into the military headquarter, why has no one come forward as a whistleblower? If we did this to justify a war in Iraq and the government is so "incompetent" how did they plan the largest attack on American soil? Why has Osama bin Laden and several al Qaeda leaders claimed responsability? Just let the facts speak for themselves. I am really curious - and this is a real question because it is far past me as to why one would believe that 9-11 was somehow setup. Is it hatred for the government? Simple distrust of? I really don't even see the plausibily the claim that this could possibly be true, simply because the "scientific" data is junk.

01-01-2007, 03:20 PM	#11 (permalink)
~~Girderman~~ Troubled Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 2,096 OS: XP Pro	At one time there was an organization of people that disbelieved that the earth was round. Referred to as "flat-earthers". This was only 20 years ago, they may still be around. Others doubt that there was an actual landing on the moon. Some dispute that the holocaust occured. There is a point where a healthy sense of skepticism transitions into ego-masturbation and self-aggrandizment, at the very least. "Hey, Look at ME! I think and say these controversial ideas ! Not because I possess any particular skill, talent or any other noteworthy quality, but only becase I'm SAYING IT ! PAY attention TO ME ! ME! ME!" (Cause it's always "Marsha, Marsha, Marsha", and some people can only take so much before they crack.) In it's most extreme form, it's diagnosable as straight-up mental illness, IMHO.