9/11 Alternative theories resulting in Conspiracy theories

weisses · 01-09-2013 12:26pm #1

As the other thread was locked because it was gone off-topic i will continue here

FEMA did the first investigation but somehow NIST didn't look into it further, resulting into the thermite/sulfur CT

http://issuu.com/larrylandon/docs/is...562185/1857970

FEMA secured a a piece of steel recovered from Building 7 that had experienced a “severe high temperature corrosion attack ...

http://rememberbuilding7.org/sulfidated-steel/

Where does NIST dismiss/debunk this fact ?

Where does NIST give their explanation or analysis on this recovered piece of steel

And why is a CT regarding these facts so far fetched?

weisses · 03-09-2013 11:43am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_fp5kaVYhk

Nice video with an alternative view on 9/11

Nice piece of reading that makes sense

http://www.libertariannews.org/2013/01/18/architects-and-engineers-question-the-official-911-story/

I was asked to provide an example of a viable, supported alternate explanation for any of the inconsistencies exist in the official story.

Well there are a few to chew on here now

weisses · 04-09-2013 4:55pm

http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/WhyIndeedDidtheWorldTradeCenterBuildingsCompletelyCollapse.pdf

Another interesting alternative

And some reading regarding

Hypotheses: Principal Alternative Theories of the Attack

http://stj911.org/hypotheses/alternative.html

claypigeon777 · 11-09-2013 1:38pm

Or maybe just maybe the planes driven into the buildings caused the fires which weakened the steel structures and brought them down?

You expect any sane person to believe that the entire buildings were rigged with explosives without the thousands of people working there from noticing anything out of the ordinary?

How many hundreds or indeed thousands of people would have been involved in rigging the buildings to blow them up and NONE of them have come forward in the past 12 years?

How dumb or insane would you have to be to believe this utter utter crap from conspiracy nuts?

Mod: Banned

Davdee1 · 11-09-2013 1:40pm

9?11 explained
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2FWtELWUS0&feature=youtube_gdata_player?

mufflets2 · 15-09-2013 9:22am

As far as I am concerned the real conspiracy surrounding 9/11 is the subsequent cover up of reasons why Al-Qaeda said they did it

1, That the US supports the Illegal antics of Israel and illegally supply them arms.

2, That the US supports evil dictatorships across the middle east (particularly in Saudia Arabia) as well as their military bases there.

ask any Americans and they will tell you its because "they hate freedom" or "they want to spread extremism"

why oh why do people not ask questions.

DamagedTrax · 17-09-2013 11:18am

You expect any sane person to believe that the entire buildings were rigged with explosives without the thousands of people working there from noticing anything out of the ordinary?

Why not? There's people working on the lift shafts of my apt complex at the moment. I have no idea nor interest i what they're doing in that shaft, they could be rigging it for anything.

How many hundreds or indeed thousands of people would have been involved in rigging the buildings to blow them up and NONE of them have come forward in the past 12 years?

It doesnt have to be hundreds. It could be a select team over a few months. The WTC security logs showed an unusually high level of maintenance work going on over the months leading up to 9/11.

Also, nano-thermite rigging is a completely different thing to normal rigging. It works has a cutter rather than an explosive, resulting in an almost bright lava flow, giving of a white vapour smoke exactly like is seen falling from WTC. Sceptics have tried to claim this as AV fuel but AV fuel is a fairly fast burn and certainly doesnt result in a thick 'flow' as witnessed on 9/11.

How dumb or insane would you have to be to believe this utter utter crap from conspiracy nuts?

How dumb or insane do you have to be to believe the official story, told to you by a commision that was hand picked by a government with Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush (well, maybe not Bush) at the controls?

Until there is actual irrefutable evidence, everything we talk about is just theory. But if it means getting us any closer to the truth, i'd rather we go through thousands of crackpot theories, than not question and let the official story coverup go down in history as truth.

claypigeon777 · 22-09-2013 9:56pm

DamagedTrax wrote: »

Why not? There's people working on the lift shafts of my apt complex at the moment. I have no idea nor interest i what they're doing in that shaft, they could be rigging it for anything.

Members of the public would see that there were people working in your building. The people working in your building were hired to do the job weren't they? They didn't sneak in without anyone permission and how could they? The WTC was clearly a much larger building and thousands of people worked there and the chances of someone finding out that workmen were sabotaging the building would obviously be far higher wouldn't they?

It doesnt have to be hundreds. It could be a select team over a few months. The WTC security logs showed an unusually high level of maintenance work going on over the months leading up to 9/11.

The WTC security logs also track who was doing the maintenance work. We know who these people are. None of them were planting explosives.
If a select team were planting explosives over many months they would have to have had access to every floor to set the bombs and blow out all the support columns and they would have to had cables and wires throughout the whole structure. That would take many people in a building the size of the WTC and the tons of explosives involved would have been noticed in advance and the residue of explosives would have been immediately obvious to rescue workers.

Also, nano-thermite rigging is a completely different thing to normal rigging. It works has a cutter rather than an explosive, resulting in an almost bright lava flow, giving of a white vapour smoke exactly like is seen falling from WTC. Sceptics have tried to claim this as AV fuel but AV fuel is a fairly fast burn and certainly doesnt result in a thick 'flow' as witnessed on 9/11.

Enormous quantities would have had to have been planted. By whom? Why did nobody see it being planted? And if it was planted why wouldn't the termite be ignited by the impacts and explosions and fires caused by the impacts of the airliners?

How dumb or insane do you have to be to believe the official story, told to you by a commision that was hand picked by a government with Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush (well, maybe not Bush) at the controls?

Why wouldn't the U.S. political enemies of the Bush administration have gone to the press and exposed them if they were involved in the 9/11 attacks?
John Kerry went head to head with Bush over the Iraq War in 2004 and lost.
Why didn't he let the cat out of the bag and expose Bush if there was any truth to the 9/11 conspiracy?
The United States has a free press and there is nothing stopping anyone from leaking a 9/11 conspiracy.
Why wouldn't any of the supposed bombers who planted the supposed explosive not have gone public?
It makes no sense whatsoever.

Until there is actual irrefutable evidence, everything we talk about is just theory.

The collapse of the WTC is the most intensively studied building collapse in world history. It is obvious what happened. Two fuel laden airliners smashed into the buildings, weakening the structure before the fires softened the steel and the structure failed and collapsed.

But if it means getting us any closer to the truth, i'd rather we go through thousands of crackpot theories, than not question and let the official story coverup go down in history as truth.

There is no evidence of any cover up whatsoever.

A cursory glance at the conspiracy theories would tell anybody who has the faculties of logic and reason that they were complete and utter nonsense.

DamagedTrax · 23-09-2013 2:06pm

Members of the public would see that there were people working in your building. The people working in your building were hired to do the job weren't they? They didn't sneak in without anyone permission and how could they? The WTC was clearly a much larger building and thousands of people worked there and the chances of someone finding out that workmen were sabotaging the building would obviously be far higher wouldn't they?

People dont question workers. And what if they have security passes already. Lets not forget who was sitting at the very top when it happened - Larry Silverman. No one is saying he organised it but lets face it, he's not exactly squeeky clean either way so im just using him as an example of the people that were running the WTC at board level.

The WTC security logs also track who was doing the maintenance work. We know who these people are. None of them were planting explosives.
If a select team were planting explosives over many months they would have to have had access to every floor to set the bombs and blow out all the support columns and they would have to had cables and wires throughout the whole structure. That would take many people in a building the size of the WTC and the tons of explosives involved would have been noticed in advance

The work would have been carried out on the internal structures. Why would everyday workers be concerned with what maintenance are at?

and the residue of explosives would have been immediately obvious to rescue workers.

Thermite residue WAS found in the rubble. Unfortunately the official cover-up stops at the point of building colapse.. conveniently.

if it was planted why wouldn't the termite be ignited by the impacts and explosions and fires caused by the impacts of the airliners?

There's a clear flow of something that strongly resembles a thermite flow, falling from just below one of the entry holes.

Why wouldn't the U.S. political enemies of the Bush administration have gone to the press and exposed them if they were involved in the 9/11 attacks?
John Kerry went head to head with Bush over the Iraq War in 2004 and lost.
Why didn't he let the cat out of the bag and expose Bush if there was any truth to the 9/11 conspiracy?

I guess its down to whether you believe they are political enemies or just different sides of the same coin.

The United States has a free press and there is nothing stopping anyone from leaking a 9/11 conspiracy.

Thats debatable. Nothing is stopping anyone from leaking anything... but everytime some notion of anything besides the official cover-up comes out, it gets shot down as a conspiracy without being investigated.

Why wouldn't any of the supposed bombers who planted the supposed explosive not have gone public?

Why would they. would you whistle blow on an organisation that could have you dead in the blink of an eye?

The collapse of the WTC is the most intensively studied building collapse in world history. It is obvious what happened. Two fuel laden airliners smashed into the buildings, weakening the structure before the fires softened the steel and the structure failed and collapsed.

and 2000 architects and engineers who signed a petition to congress would disagree with you. I chose to believe them.

There is no evidence of any cover up whatsoever.

Theres plenty. at the moment it is largely circumstantial but that could change.

A cursory glance at the conspiracy theories would tell anybody who has the faculties of logic and reason that they were complete and utter nonsense.

So why hasnt an independent commision been set up to prove the official cover-up, once and for all. If an independent commision came to the same findings as the 9/11 commision then i'll gladly believe. Until then i wont.

King Mob · 23-09-2013 3:16pm

DamagedTrax wrote: »

Thermite residue WAS found in the rubble. Unfortunately the official cover-up stops at the point of building colapse.. conveniently.

Why would they. would you whistle blow on an organisation that could have you dead in the blink of an eye?

and 2000 architects and engineers who signed a petition to congress would disagree with you. I chose to believe them.

How do you gel these facts together? If the conspirators are capable of killing people and keeping them silent, why did they not kill these architects or the people who supposedly discovered the thermite?

There's a clear flow of something that strongly resembles a thermite flow, falling from just below one of the entry holes.

This is not an answer to the question that was posed.
How were they able to plant thermite demolition charges (which don't exist) in a way that they wouldn't be set off prematurely by a plane crashing into them?

DamagedTrax · 23-09-2013 4:48pm

How do you gel these facts together? If the conspirators are capable of killing people and keeping them silent, why did they not kill these architects or the people who supposedly discovered the thermite?

its easier to dub them conspiracists than kill them, whereas the people that would have been used to plant the thermite there wouldnt exactly be (excuse the pun) straight flying, above the ground types. Plenty of intel agents go missing all the time.

This is not an answer to the question that was posed.
How were they able to plant thermite demolition charges (which don't exist) in a way that they wouldn't be set off prematurely by a plane crashing into them?

I did answer your question. that flow was possbily a thermite charge going off after a plane or fire got to it. Its flowing from a corner that was damaged and the official (aluminum) story has been proven wrong time and again.

Anyway, these are all just collected ideas that could explain it all. Now that ive answered your questions (and lets face it, this back and forth wont change either of our minds), how about you answer one for me.

Why has the american government not allowed an independent investigation?

Thats all i want to see. Someone besides neo-con cronnies giving us answers because this entire thing boils down to trust. And i dont trust their version of events at all.

claypigeon777 · 23-09-2013 4:49pm

DamagedTrax wrote: »

People dont question workers. And what if they have security passes already. Lets not forget who was sitting at the very top when it happened - Larry Silverman.

Nobody asked any worker any question? Not one of thousands of people would ask a single worker a single question about who they are and what they are doing in the buildings?
Who would have issued them with security passes?
Are they all in on the plot too?
How many layers are there to this conspiracy?
So the elite hired Larry Silverman is giving the orders right? Who is he giving the orders to? That person or persons are probably conveying the orders to the lower level people and they are giving orders to the low level conspirators.
That's a lot of people who are in on the plot.
And NOBODY talked?:rolleyes:

The work would have been carried out on the internal structures.

This would have been noticed by the companies and their workers in the building. They would have noticed guys coming and going rigging the building with explosives and wiring the explosives.

Why would everyday workers be concerned with what maintenance are at?

Curiosity?

Thermite residue WAS found in the rubble. Unfortunately the official cover-up stops at the point of building colapse.. conveniently.

The paper "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?" by Professor Steve E. Jones has been scientifically discredited. The so-called traces of thermite he claimed to have found in dust was not proven to be thermite.

There's a clear flow of something that strongly resembles a thermite flow, falling from just below one of the entry holes.

The flow of molten metal is likely to be liquid aluminium originating from the aluminium air frame of the jet that struck the building.

I guess its down to whether you believe they are political enemies or just different sides of the same coin.

So no proof of a conspiracy is proof of a conspiracy?

Thats debatable. Nothing is stopping anyone from leaking anything... but everytime some notion of anything besides the official cover-up comes out, it gets shot down as a conspiracy without being investigated.

If there isn't any evidence for conspiracy claims they get shot down.
If there was any evidence they would be believed.
Conspiracy theorists have not provided any evidence whatsoever.

Why would they. would you whistle blow on an organisation that could have you dead in the blink of an eye?

So hitmen are on stand by to kill any conspirators who talk?
Who silences the hitmen if they talk?
Who silences this second set of hitmen who silence the first set of hitmen?
Surely this would require endless sets of hitmen to keep people quiet?
Thousands of people would have to be involved and none of them talked?
It defies common sense and is simply not believable.

and 2000 architects and engineers who signed a petition to congress would disagree with you. I chose to believe them.

Show me the list and give me their credentials?

Theres plenty. at the moment it is largely circumstantial but that could change.

Nonsensical theorizing is not evidence.

So why hasnt an independent commision been set up to prove the official cover-up, once and for all. If an independent commision came to the same findings as the 9/11 commision then i'll gladly believe. Until then i wont.

I don't think any evidence by an independent commission would ever satisfy you.

weisses · 23-09-2013 5:25pm

claypigeon777 wrote: »

Show me the list and give me their credentials?

http://patriotsquestion911.com/

Just to get you going

DamagedTrax · 23-09-2013 5:28pm

ive updated the silverman thing a little for you.

Anyway, for every argument there's a rebuff on both sides and all are out there in the public so i couldnt be arsed typing to answer all that when king mob's post was basically the same thing.

you believe what you want, ill believe what i want and we're all happy

if you want info on the architects and engineers that signed the petition, its all on this site somewhere http://www.ae911truth.org/

King Mob · 24-09-2013 2:48am

DamagedTrax wrote: »

its easier to dub them conspiracists than kill them, whereas the people that would have been used to plant the thermite there wouldnt exactly be (excuse the pun) straight flying, above the ground types. Plenty of intel agents go missing all the time.

But this doesn't follow. Surely the people who discovered the thermite have solid proof that would blow the whole operation. It certainly would be more damning than some random guy coming forward and just making an unverifiable claim.
So it doesn't make a whole bunch of sense as to why they would spend all the time and resources to kill one lot, but discredit the other when doing the reverse would be more effective.

DamagedTrax wrote: »

I did answer your question. that flow was possbily a thermite charge going off after a plane or fire got to it. Its flowing from a corner that was damaged and the official (aluminum) story has been proven wrong time and again.

So you are saying that they did set thermite charges that could easily be set off prematurely and result in the failure of the demolition?
Bit risky, no?

DamagedTrax wrote: »

Anyway, these are all just collected ideas that could explain it all. Now that ive answered your questions (and lets face it, this back and forth wont change either of our minds), how about you answer one for me.

Why has the american government not allowed an independent investigation?

I believe they did set up a fair and conclusive investigation that met with resistance from ass covering for the various failures that led to the attacks and during the panic, but eventually got to the truth of what happened that day.

But again, your question leads to another question for you. Why didn't they set up an "independent" investigation. If they could have the power to monitor and kill thousands of people and extort anyone, why couldn't they have set up an investigation that appeared to be independent?
If you think that a lack of one proves that there is a conspiracy, wouldn't it be the first priority to fake?

DamagedTrax · 24-09-2013 10:00am

ive no idea why any of it happened the way it happened.

why were explosives heard a few seconds before a plane hit? light travels quicker than sound so that just doesnt make sense.

why were explosions heard below street level when the plane hit nearly 80 stories above? these were confirmed, on video, by rescue workers.

why is there video evidence of WTC1 lobby blown apart by an explosion before either tower fell? (initially i thought something came down thru the lift shafts... until a rescue worker clearly stated that the lift doors were intact at this stage)

why did the 9/11 commision stop the investigation from when the planes hit? why didnt they continue the investigation to the point where the buildings had totally collapsed?

why wasnt building 7 investigated? (even the most sceptical amongst people i know admit that building 7 is a strange one).

why did the commision consist of members that would benefit financially from the ensuing invasions in the middle east?

i dont believe these theories or think they prove anything. i have no proof of any of them but i dont believe the official line either. the reason im leaning towards them is due to history and how governments worldwide have been openly involved in terror tactics on their own people in the past, coupled with too many strange coincidences on the day.

i'd rather that 9/11 was just terrorism. as bad as it is, the idea that a government in modern times could be tied up in this (even if it was just to ignore warnings given) is even more abhorrent to me... but something stinks about it all.

King Mob · 24-09-2013 10:06am

DamagedTrax wrote: »

ive no idea why any of it happened the way it happened.

But you are rejecting the official story based on "unanswered" questions like the ones below.

DamagedTrax wrote: »

why were explosives heard a few seconds before a plane hit? light is quicker than sound so that just doesnt make sense?

why were explosions heard below street level when the plane hit nearly 80 stories above?

why did the 9/11 commision stop the investigation from when the planes hit? why didnt they continue the investigation to the point where the buildings fell?

why wasnt building 7 investigated? (even the most scpetical amongst people i know admit that building 7 is a strange one).

But each of these just open yet more unanswerable questions about the conspiracy, many highlighting much larger and damning holes than you think exist in the official story. Yet you give the conspiracy theories less scrutiny because of the bias you outline here:

DamagedTrax wrote: »

i dont believe these theories or think they prove anything. i have no proof of any of them but i dont believe the official line either. the reason im leaning towards them is due to history and how governments worldwide have been openly involved in terror tactics on their own people in the past.

And as we all know, conspiracy theorists have a perfect track record and never ever make claims based on poor research....

weisses · 24-09-2013 10:07am

King Mob wrote: »

I believe they did set up a fair and conclusive investigation that met with resistance from ass covering for the various failures that led to the attacks and during the panic, but eventually got to the truth of what happened that day.

Just because NIST said so ?? .... Why do you believe NIST, when they don't want peers looking into their method's/data.

note that NIST has not given full disclosure of the data it input, which would allow the data to be tested by others. One engineering magazine reported that NIST has refused to show computer visualizations of the collapse despite a call from fire and building engineers to see the data. NIST has also refused to submit its finding to an independent panel or journal for peer review, relying instead on a form of review from outside contractors it has hired, most of whom have Defense Dept. contracts.

This has nothing to do with proper peer reviewed scientific studies.

Apparently peer reviewed is necessary in one thread but when such approach is inconvenient its unnecessary to apply the same standard in other threads

I don't think the NIST report qualifies as well supported peer reviewed research

Hence all the protests from other scientists

King Mob wrote: »

why couldn't they have set up an investigation that appeared to be independent?

They tried .....NIST

DamagedTrax · 24-09-2013 10:11am

King Mob wrote: »

But you are rejecting the official story based on "unanswered" questions like the ones below.

But each of these just open yet more unanswerable questions about the conspiracy, many highlighting much larger and damning holes than you think exist in the official story. Yet you give the conspiracy theories less scrutiny because of the bias you outline here:

And as we all know, conspiracy theorists have a perfect track record and never ever make claims based on poor research....

as ive said before, for every answer on one side, theirs a rebuttal on the other... and vice cersa.

why do you give such credence to what many believe is a total whitewash? your questions to me are just as valid when asked back on yourself and i suspect you dont have the answers to them either but you choose to follow the official line because you interpret the evidence that way. as humans we like to take sides and thats ok, after all this is a place to discuss these things.

no minds will be changed in here on either side.

King Mob · 24-09-2013 10:17am

DamagedTrax wrote: »

as ive said before, for every answer on one side, theirs a rebuttal on the other... and vice cersa.

why do you give such credence to what many believe is a total whitewash?

Because the many who believe it's a whitewash do so because they are misinformed.
Many don't believe it's a whitewash.
And I have yet to see anyone point to parts in the official reports and show that they are conclusively wrong or have been manipulated.

I don't but credence in people who just claim it was a whitewash.

DamagedTrax wrote: »

your questions to me are just as valid when asked back on yourself and i suspect you dont have the answers to them either but you choose to follow the official line.

But I can answer them. That's the difference.
Most of them are based on misinformation and poor research.

DamagedTrax wrote: »

like i said, no minds will be changed in here on either side.

Mine can be changed given good evidence and a rational argument.

DamagedTrax · 24-09-2013 10:33am

Because the many who believe it's a whitewash do so because they are misinformed.
Many don't believe it's a whitewash.
And I have yet to see anyone point to parts in the official reports and show that they are conclusively wrong or have been manipulated.

I don't but credence in people who just claim it was a whitewash.

But I can answer them. That's the difference.
Most of them are based on misinformation and poor research.

Mine can be changed given good evidence and a rational argument.

so everyone that doesnt toe the official line is wrong? every expert in their field that questions the official line is wrong?

c'mon buddy, me and you are just sitting here shooting the sh*t but there are real experts on both sides with valid arguments. we choose to believe the side we identify with most, the side that puts forward the most interesting/believable theories, in our heads.

my studies included some physics and i have a hdip in my field. while its of no real relevence to the 9/11 situation, it does give me a starting point to question the official line. ive seen madcap theories and laughed them off (hologram planes, missiles etc) but the line i choose to believe isnt really that unbelievable. yes it has a few holes in it that i cant explain but if i had all the answers i wouldnt be shouting them out on boards, thats for sure

King Mob · 24-09-2013 10:44am

DamagedTrax wrote: »

so everyone that doesnt toe the official line is wrong? every expert in their field that questions the official line is wrong?

And all the experts who do tow the line are wrong or in on it?

DamagedTrax wrote: »

c'mon buddy, me and you are just sitting here shooting the sh*t but there are real experts on both sides with valid arguments. we choose to believe the side we identify with most, the side that puts forward the most interesting/believable theories, in our heads.

Nope, sorry that's not the case with me.
I check claims and research them. Every single time the conspiracy theorists have started off from wrong information or a wrong conclusion, including all of the questions you believe poke holes in the official story.

Like this one for instance:

why were explosives heard a few seconds before a plane hit? light is quicker than sound so that just doesnt make sense?

Where did you get the idea that this is the case? How do you know it's true?

DamagedTrax wrote: »

my studies included some physics and i have a hdip in my field. while its of no real relevence to the 9/11 situation, it does give me a starting point to question the official line. ive seen madcap theories and laughed them off (hologram planes, missiles etc) but the line i choose to believe isnt really that unbelievable. yes it has a few holes in it that i cant explain but if i had all the answers i wouldnt be shouting them out on boards, thats for sure

How can it be believable when you agree that there are giant gaping holes in the explanation?

DamagedTrax · 24-09-2013 10:57am

And all the experts who do tow the line are wrong or in on it?

thats not what i said.

Nope, sorry that's not the case with me.
I check claims and research them. Every single time the conspiracy theorists have started off from wrong information or a wrong conclusion, including all of the questions you believe poke holes in the official story.

instead of looking for holes in conspiracy theories (we all know there's plenty of them), it would be better to research why the theories appear in the first place.

there's no smoke without fire and there's a list the length of your arm of false flag and black ops. the american government has publicly released intel on many of them thru the data protection act (or whatever its called in the US).

all of the people linked below are educated and mist likely not crack pots (although you never know!). they are asking questions and not believing the official story, is their education and qualifications some how sub standard to those that believe the official line?

http://www.wanttoknow.info/070618professorsquestion911
http://patriotsquestion911.com/
http://www.ae911truth.org/

Where did you get the idea that this is the case? How do you know it's true?

there's video footage all over the net of rescue workers hearing lower level explosions before the collapse. there's even a guy who's kid was killed on the lower levels by what was described by medics as blast injuries. the guy is screaming for an enquiry into how his son was killed in an explosion... of course he's getting stonewalled.

(i cant remember his name but im sure someone here could provide the link to his story)

How can it be believable when you agree that there are giant gaping holes in the explanation?

because there's even greater holes in the offical cover-up, so im playing the odds... i'd be happy if i was wrong.

weisses · 24-09-2013 11:07am

King Mob wrote: »

Nope, sorry that's not the case with me.
I check claims and research them. Every single time the conspiracy theorists have started off from wrong information or a wrong conclusion, including all of the questions you believe poke holes in the official story.

Why are you not researching the NIST report ... it is official but not peer reviewed (because they are not allowing peers to research their data/conclusion) so it could be flawed from page 1

King Mob · 24-09-2013 11:20am

DamagedTrax wrote: »

thats not what i said.

It's not what I said either, yet you try to pretend as though it was.

DamagedTrax wrote: »

instead of looking for holes in conspiracy theories (we all know there's plenty of them), it would be better to research why the theories appear in the first place.

there's no smoke without fire and there's a list the length of your arm of false flag and black ops. the american government has publicly released intel on many of them thru the data protection act (or whatever its called in the US).

I do research these reasons. They are the result of people making faulty conclusions based on bad information.

There's a very very long list of conspiracy theories and a very very short list of ones that turn out to be true.

DamagedTrax wrote: »

all of the people linked below are educated and mist likely not crack pots (although you never know!). they are asking questions and not believing the official story, is their education and qualifications some how sub standard to those that believe the official line?

And? Those experts represent a tiny fraction of the total experts in the world.
There are thousands of experts who do not believe the conspiracy theories.

Are all of these experts somehow all in on it?

Or could it be that experts can be fooled and misled and be dishonest like everyone else?

DamagedTrax wrote: »

there's video footage all over the net of rescue workers hearing lower level explosions before the collapse. there's even a guy who's kid was killed on the lower levels by what was described by medics as blast injuries. the guy is screaming for an enquiry into how his son was killed in an explosion... of course he's getting stonewalled.

(i cant remember his name but im sure someone here could provide the link to his story)

First I've heard of this.
Can you provide any of this evidence?

The fact you can't remember the details or aren't able to provide it kinda illustrates my point.

Which is more likely: you just misremembering some fact to make appear more convincing and backed up than it actually was, or a vast government conspiracy you can't actually make sense of?

DamagedTrax · 24-09-2013 11:25am

King Mob wrote: »

First I've heard of this.
Can you provide any of this evidence?

The fact you can't remember the details or aren't able to provide it kinda illustrates my point.

Which is more likely: you just misremembering some fact to make appear more convincing and backed up than it actually was, or a vast government conspiracy you can't actually make sense of?

no need to act the asshole dude. i asked for someone else to post the link as it was in this very forum that i found it. and it was yesterday that i watched it so it definitely exists. so try not get your panties in a bunch until i can find it.

Mod: Banned