Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
9/11 (TV3 - September 2015)
Options
Comments
-
So what's the theory then??
Someone in the weeks leading up to the attack, under the guise of a elevator upgrade, planted Thermate charges on the steel frames the entire length of both towers?
Then flew two planes, drones, missiles (take your pick) into the towers to create a scapegoat and then after a period of time remotely detonated the charges on isolated floors - cause the videos suggest that the collapse happened from top to bottom, expertly demolishing both towers vertically to reduce damage to surrounding infrastructure - TWICE???
Then in another building (Building 7) did the same thing?
Even if there were plans to execute this plan in secret, it would take thousands of people years to plan, and even then there would be no guarantee of success let alone the ability to cover it up. No one on the planet could plan this. It is without precedence and the theory suggests using techniques that have never been put into practice - especially on building this tall.
Sometimes things are just what they are.
Even NIST cannot explain what happened without using a computer model they designed but no one else can use to verify their findings
So you're not alone
0 -
-
-
-
So what's the theory then??
Someone in the weeks leading up to the attack, under the guise of a elevator upgrade, planted Thermate charges on the steel frames the entire length of both towers?
Then flew two planes, drones, missiles (take your pick) into the towers to create a scapegoat and then after a period of time remotely detonated the charges on isolated floors - cause the videos suggest that the collapse happened from top to bottom, expertly demolishing both towers vertically to reduce damage to surrounding infrastructure - TWICE???
Then in another building (Building 7) did the same thing?
Even if there were plans to execute this plan in secret, it would take thousands of people years to plan, and even then there would be no guarantee of success let alone the ability to cover it up. No one on the planet could plan this. It is without precedence and the theory suggests using techniques that have never been put into practice - especially on building this tall.
Sometimes things are just what they are.
Raised the exact same points on a different thread; you won't get a reply because no one likes poking holes in their own theories.Even NIST cannot explain what happened without using a computer model they designed but no one else can use to verify their findings
So you're not alone
As your fellow truther points out building models is expensive, what would you suggest? Are you saying that the simulations used to prove why they fell, are incorrect because they can't be used to prove that airplane impacts couldn't have brought down the towers?
DamagedTrax wrote: »an exact model would be cost prohibitive to the point that its a pointless suggestion.
Computer simulations have been used in lieu of building actual models, although some doubt their ability to prove a point.0 -
Advertisement
-
Raised the exact same points on a different thread; you won't get a reply because no one likes poking holes in their own theories.
What do you expect ??? Even the official story is based on assumptions and unverifiable computer models they keep guessing and revising their report from day one when pointed out to flaws in it ... And these are the people with access and funds, although a pathetic amount considering the impact and scale of this tragedyAs your fellow truther points out building models is expensive, what would you suggest? Are you saying that the simulations used to prove why they fell, are incorrect because they can't be used to prove that airplane impacts couldn't have brought down the towers?
One line your fellow (pseudo) skeptics keep pointing out to me over the years posting here is to use a scientific approach or to produce any kind of evidence in support of claims, But when I do that all of a sudden they stop replying .. latest example 8 posts back in this thread
The part in bold is the crux ... they came to that conclusion ... but didn't proof anything and when asked how and if they would share their calculation methods to fellow engineers etc they refused using to the good aul national security excuse .. Its not proof period... Good example is the WTC7 model which not even closely represented what was clearly visible on video
http://cryptome.org/nist070709.pdfComputer simulations have been used in lieu of building actual models, although some doubt their ability to prove a point.
Do you believe the data used to run these simulations should be available for peer review ?0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Honestly, that's a ridiculous comparison. The Nazis didnt need to cover anything up - they had fear as an ally to ensure no one spoke. They may not have publicly communicated what they were doing but they hardly put any effort into keeping it hidden.
9/11 was somewhat unique in that the events over the course of the day were broadcast and viewed by millions as they happened. 21st century reporting. Not discovered at the end of a conflict.
If an inside job was unfolding, it wouldn't take much more than an anonymous call to CNN to unearth the truth. A little more detached from a German citizen standing up to the Nazi's in an occupied country with no support.
An an anonymous call to CNN, seriously? And you think CNN would report it? I might try that. I will make an anonymous call to CNN and tell them it was an inside job and I was involved. It will be all over the news tomorrow
And that assumes that CNN isn't already intricately tied to the US government. Just do even some preliminary research into the dubious practices of CNN, for example, faking footage in the first Iraq war.
And as much as you might like to think the German people were oppressed by evil Nazis, you might find that a large section of the German public supported the Nazis but at the same time did not believe that they were capable of mass extermination. Perhaps today though, they are less willing to admit they did support them. When everything was going well and you had just defeated poland and france, hell, Germany, f*%k yeah!
And by the way, the Nazis did a lot to keep it hidden, probably the reason why some people even deny it happened. Lack of documented evidence. Certainly you can find intention in the documentation, but references to things like 'the final solution' were hardly documented statements saying here is our three step plan to mass murder. If you want to find intention for 911, just read the project for the new american century.
As for fear, just google Barry Jennings. He went on camera and said he was stepping over dead bodies in building seven and witnessed a 'big explosion'. After that he went quiet and wouldn't respond to requests for interviews. Two days before the 911 commission released its report on building seven, he killed himself. He must have been really upset he made the mistake about dead bodies and an explosion, right!? because nothing about what he said turned up in the 911 report.
Or what about Deborah Jeane Palfrey, she said “There’s information that they have that would have been very important for the 9/11 Commission to know having to do with intelligence they picked up about 9/11 before it happened.” Unfortunately, before she got a chance to testify in court and even after she went on the air saying she would not commit suicide, she went and hanged herself in her garage.
There are more, should I go on? So if you had evidence that contradicted the official reporting of 911 and you knew you could go on air and say you would not commit suicide and still you might be found hanging in your garage, might you not think twice about coming out and saying anything? So, when you talk about fear, even if there deaths are totally innocent, you might certainly suspect the worse. Who knows, maybe there is some money in it too if you just shut your mouth.0 -
-
-
Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »Lack of documented evidence seriously? Even though the Nazis destroyed a lot of their documentation as the war was ending a hell of a lot of it survived and what did survive showed exactly how meticulously they recorded everything even down to the colour, quality and weight of a victims hair. It's also well known the German population surrounding the camps knew full well what was happening (you couldn't mask the smell) but the German propaganda machine showed the population at large completely different videos such as jews playing in playgrounds in the camp and having picnics and do not forget dissenters where often arrested and executed for even mentioning a tiny doubt in the "final victory".
Oh actually while I'm at it, the term "final solution" appeared plenty in German official documents as well. A simple Google will show you the first result of a url a letter from the German ambassador asking for help towards the final solution, Im fair certain you can't get much more official than that but if you did you could always read the reams of letters between Himmler, Heydrich and Goring (kind of high ranking people in the National socialist party) discussing preparation of submitting the plans for the final solution.
Then there are the well documented speeches from Himmler where he openly spoke of the final solution during these speeches or how about the officially named army operation called Operation Reinhard (extermination of the Polish jews and liquidation of the ghettos) which again is well documented in correspondence and orders between Globocnik, Höfle, Thomalla, Lambert, Wirth, Himmler and Stangl to name but a few.
If you are going to try and put down or counter peoples points at least try to know what you are talking about and come up with points and facts that are not so easily disproved in all of 5 seconds :rolleyes:
Firstly, you need to read what I said. I said "but references to things like 'the final solution' were hardly documented statements saying here is our three step plan to mass murder", in other words they did reference the 'final solution' but they did not specifically say they were setting out to commit mass extermination. That was the point.
As for the Nazis recording everything meticulously, again, that doesn't point to mass murder. The NSA are apparently (although they have lied to congress about it) recording everything we do online, what does that mean? So I don't see your point. My point was that they didn't explicitly spell out their plan to exterminate the Jews, but of course if you read what they were saying, it becomes patently obvious that the intention to rid the world of Jews was there.
If you are going to try and put down or counter peoples points at least try to understand what they say before you embarrass yourself 0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
Rudiger Glique wrote: »Were you the guy who warned me about become a back seat moderator? But point taken, I wont respond in kind to childish taunts.
Oh, I see, you are a moderator...must have been someone else. No harm so 0 -
-
So what's the theory then??
Someone in the weeks leading up to the attack, under the guise of a elevator upgrade, planted Thermate charges on the steel frames the entire length of both towers?
Then flew two planes, drones, missiles (take your pick) into the towers to create a scapegoat and then after a period of time remotely detonated the charges on isolated floors - cause the videos suggest that the collapse happened from top to bottom, expertly demolishing both towers vertically to reduce damage to surrounding infrastructure - TWICE???
Then in another building (Building 7) did the same thing?
Even if there were plans to execute this plan in secret, it would take thousands of people years to plan, and even then there would be no guarantee of success let alone the ability to cover it up. No one on the planet could plan this. It is without precedence and the theory suggests using techniques that have never been put into practice - especially on building this tall.
Sometimes things are just what they are.
Just watch this short video, then make up your mind what happened
0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ySUrEiVFIM
Advertisement