Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello All, This is just a friendly reminder to read the Forum Charter where you wish to post before posting in it. :)
Hi all, The AutoSave Draft feature is now disabled across the site. The decision to disable the feature was made via a poll last year. The delay in putting it in place was due to a bug/update issue. This should serve as a reminder to manually save your drafts if you wish to keep them. Thanks, The Boards Team.
Hello all! This is just a quick reminder to 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.

Why some people think 9/11 was an inside job

  • 14-01-2020 3:28pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 16,221 ✭✭✭✭ Dohnjoe


    A user post elaborating why some people tend towards more fantastical and fringe conspiracies (in this case it's directly referencing flat-earth theories), is relevant to 9/11 and similar beliefs
    No, it stems from an emotional need. People turn to these kinds of fringe conspiracy beliefs because they’ve been told that they’re stupid all their lives. In order to get “revenge” on people who’ve told them that they’re stupid, the flat earth types embrace beliefs that undermine the authority of those people. If they have been told that they’re stupid because they don’t understand science, the flat earth types will embrace some ideology or belief that says the entire body of knowledge that comprises “science” is illegitimate.

    This behavior stems from the emotional need to feel smart and important in a world that constantly tells you that you are dumb and insignificant. The fringe communities these people join give them the emotional security most people feel talking to family, friends, and people who share popular opinions and beliefs among themselves.

    Now that there are giant, vocal, prominent online communities dedicated to fringe conspiracy beliefs that they can join, people like this don’t feel the need to censor themselves when talking about these subjects now; they don’t fear ostracism from the public and their real life communities because they don’t HAVE to live a lot of their lives in real life meat-space. They can believe what they want to believe and lob endless potshots at that larger public that had made them feel so small before they joined the fringe public.

    And unfortunately our culture in the US and much of the West loves David and Goliath narratives and “Chosen one” narratives and narratives in which fringe beliefs come to occupy the whole world after an early period where those beliefs are persecuted by authorities and the public (ie Christianity). Psychologically, THESE particular inputs subconsciously drive much of the fringe believers, since they teach the believer that the world is against them, but if they just believe hard enough and stick to their guns that they will be able to shut up the naysayers and change the world in their own image. They have a lot of anger at said naysayers, so they will continue in their fringe belief so long as there is vocal opposition to that belief. Instead of dissuading the believer, intense vocal opposition from a majority of the public only reinforces the believer's resolve in sticking to their guns. Again, because those David and Goliath revenge narratives they've been conditioned with their whole lives emphasize that it's always the little guy, the underdog, the outnumbered who will triumph in their quest to get revenge against the powers that be.

    It’s the same emotional need to get revenge on people who have made the believer feel stupid that drives people who embrace Nazism, Stalinism, all kinds of weird fringe conspiracy theories, etc. For example, when questioning why certain people hold far right beliefs, sometimes the believers let the mask slip a bit and admit that they started getting into those beliefs because they had been told they were stupid all their lives and they hate “elites” who have made them feel that way. Embracing knowledge gained outside the classroom is a form of emotional revenge against academic "elites" who have scorned them. Groups like incels and MGTOWs have been unusually honest about those drives to get revenge against those people who have made them feel bad, sadly; but flat earthers, even more sadly, are rarely honest about that emotional need and their drive to fulfill it. Instead they try to pretend to be scientific experts whose existence nullifies the need for expertise itself. But rest assured, it’s all an elaborate cover for the terror and insecurity and emotional stress they feel about being singled out as stupid. They just frame it as an intellectual belief instead of an unfulfilled emotional need.

    EDIT: And also, people like this love to be able to lord over other people by showing off that they know more than other people, or are privy to secret knowledge that other people are not privy to. For instance, when arguing with someone who doesn't share their beliefs, flat earth types and fringe conspiracy types will often say things like, "Oh, and you believe everything the news tells you?" As if to try and draw a parallel between "the mainstream media" and the fringe community they belong to in terms of trustworthiness, indicating that the only difference between the two is scale. Or they hint that what THEY believe is secretly what all the experts believe, but the experts have been frightened into silence by some giant sinister conspiracy. Creating this kind of spooky, vague narrative around their belief gives that belief the aura of the forbidden, as well the aura that one holds much more valuable cards than the other players in the game. Nothing seems to make these kinds of guys happier than being able to, in confidence, give out little hints that they own the secrets to the universe to people they see as vulnerable to their propaganda.

    EDIT 2: Thanks everyone for the kind words and the awards
    https://np.reddit.com/r/MurderedByWords/comments/ecwap7/classic_flat_earther/fbe73tp/


«1345

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 24,331 ✭✭✭✭ King Mob


    I think this is the reason why conspiracy theorists REALLY hate answering direct questions.
    It kinda exposes this core issue again. If they run into a problem that can't be addressed by parroting something from a youtube video, then they have to apply their own critical thoughts to the theory. This leads either to them realising there's a gaping hole in their theory. Or realising that they can't answer it, ruining the fun of pretending to be an expert. Or they try and explain it, leading to even more ridiculous theories that they know are just silly.

    When people are putting forward conspiracy theories, they are partly hoping that someone will dismiss them (rightly) as patently silly, or perhaps insult them, calling them stupid/crazy etc.
    This way, they get to play at being persecuted. And then perhaps even fire back with some factoids from the internet that the average punter on the internet wouldn't know how to address off hand.
    (For example, a lot of the claims from flat earthers are actually harder to debunk and correct than people might expect if they don't have a good grasp of astronomy, physics and geometry.)

    So when someone doesn't just laugh the idea off and actually tries to get the theory expanded or detailed under a critical lens, the theory doesn't work as a security blanket.
    Hence all the dodging and name calling.
    And hence it's rare to see the odd "I don't know."


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,044 ✭✭✭✭ banie01


    There is a lad who looked at, and then reposted a video of the 2nd missile impact on Ukrainian Airways.

    And said it clearly wasn't a missile, he said it proved Iran didn't shoot it down...
    Despite clear video to the contrary, that he fúcking posted!

    Now that Iran has admitted culpability, he has dropped that claim.

    He has the cognitive capacity of a goldfish and is a complete timesink.
    Repetition and parroting of debunked claptrap, that he sometimes adds further imagined BS to.

    Wonder who I mean? :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭ Cheerful Spring2


    banie01 wrote: »
    There is a lad who looked at, and then reposted a video of the 2nd missile impact on Ukrainian Airways.

    And said it clearly wasn't a missile, he said it proved Iran didn't shoot it down...
    Despite clear video to the contrary, that he fúcking posted!

    Now that Iran has admitted culpability, he has dropped that claim.

    He has the cognitive capacity of a goldfish and is a complete timesink.
    Repetition and parroting of debunked claptrap, that he sometimes adds further imagined BS to.

    Wonder who I mean? :)

    You read my posts! 

    My theory about lights and transponder not working is seriously been looked at by crash investigators now.. There may have even been three missiles fired.

    I was one out forwarded the idea in the thread the plane lost its transponder and lights., before was even talked about online. The video is showing different events at different stages of the crash. 

    There working theory is one of the missiles missed- that explains the first video. It went up and expoded.
    The second video is plane exploding, but missile impacted near the plane before this was not caught on video.. (no missile shown on video)

    Based on second video, did make sense to me there was a missile hitting it there.

    You claim I was totally off the mark, but i put forward a new theory, that nobody thought off.

    Fact at that time i made that claim there only a report of one missile fired. New York times thinks there was 2 or 3.


  • Registered Users Posts: 901 ✭✭✭ Cheerful S


    Steel molten has not been reported by any individual, according to NIST. It boggles my mind to allow people to lie like this. A list of credible people and names is provided in the link, but is ignored by the official; study.,

    It's stuff like this that makes me question the official narrative. The fact that no one spoke with any of these people proves that the official narrative is untrue. 




  • Registered Users Posts: 901 ✭✭✭ Cheerful S


    In October 2006, John Gross replied to a question about reports of molten steel at Ground Zero, after the 9/11 attacks:

    “First of all, let’s go back to your basic premise that there was a pool of molten steel. I know of absolutely nobody, no eyewitness, who has said so.

    Clearly, John Gross misunderstood or deluded himself as to the full extent of the damage. Melted steel poses a very serious problem for the official story that the buildings collapsed as a result of fire damage. Melted steel should not be happening at all. Seeing steel that was warped, twisted, and melted in some areas strongly suggests that something else raised the temperatures inside the buildings. 



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,221 ✭✭✭✭ Dohnjoe


    Lots of people thought they saw "molten steel" when in fact it was "molten metal". People also make mistakes, even experts.



  • Registered Users Posts: 901 ✭✭✭ Cheerful S



    “A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, but that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures” – Jonathan Barnett, PhD, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, about World Trade Center 7

    While mainstream thought melting was very odd, you claim that it's normal in fires. Melting is highly suspicious, and the fact it's ignored allows the conspirators to get away with it. 


    “I saw melting of girders in World Trade Center.” – Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, Structural Engineer

    He noted the way steel from the WTC had bent at several connection points that had joined the floors to the vertical columns. He described the connections as being smoothly warped, saying, “If you remember the Salvador Dali paintings with the clocks that are kind of melted–it’s kind of like that.” He added, “That could only happen if you get steel yellow hot or white hot–perhaps around 2,000 degrees.” – “Scholars Work to Rebuild the World Trade Center Virtually”, By Jeffrey R. Young, The Chronicle, Dec 7, 2001

    In buildings used for banking, that kind of heat won't happen. You should research how hot fires got here as per the official narrative then you might have been able to face a moment of realisation?



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,331 ✭✭✭✭ King Mob


    Controlled demolitions don't produce molten anything.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,221 ✭✭✭✭ Dohnjoe


    I see Cheerful has discovered a new truther blog.

    "If you remember the Salvador Dali paintings with the clocks that are kind of melted–it’s kind of like that.”

    He also said parts of WTC 7 looked like they'd be vaporised. He doesn't mean that literally, it's just hyperbole, but guess who will take it literally.

    He concluded the buildings fell due to fire.



  • Registered Users Posts: 901 ✭✭✭ Cheerful S


    Although I've known for a long time that NIST lies about what people say, I am glad to find a site that offers the whole story about molten steel, complete with footnotes. As a matter of fact, it shows a pattern of avoiding evidence that disputes NIST's claims.

    It was apparent to other agencies, cleaning workers, engineers and architects, and firemen that what they saw was melted steel. The only agency that doesn't seem to understand what was said is NIST. Considering what they did with NIST study of building seven, there is clearly a pattern of deceit 



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,221 ✭✭✭✭ Dohnjoe


    It's a conspiracy blog that quote-mines people to hint some conspiracy took place that it doesn't detail. Sound familiar?

    Nah it's unlikely they saw "molten steel". Make a stand, melt impure aluminum or some other metal, ask a 100 people if they see "molten steel", I am pretty sure over 90% will say yes.

    The investigations into 9/11 found the buildings fell due to fire. People who believe the planes were holograms, or that there was a mini-nuke, or that the towers were destroyed by energy weapons, or "magic explosives" all attack those investigations in exactly the same way for the same reasons. The same way Sandy Hook truthers attack that investigation and call them liars. The same way Boston marathon bombing truthers attack that investigation. And so on.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,744 ✭✭✭✭ The Nal


    Still waiting to hear how they managed to rig the buildings with explosives...........



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,331 ✭✭✭✭ King Mob


    Well cheerful is claiming that it's not just explosives as explosives especially those for demolition cannot cause things to melt.


    So we're waiting to hear how the explosives and the other stuff was planted and how they kept those things from interfering with each other. And still waiting to hear why they did it that way.


    Cheerful will never answer though



  • Registered Users Posts: 901 ✭✭✭ Cheerful S


    FEMA and a major contractor's architect photographed the melted steel on 9/11. There is ample evidence in mainstream media that this occurred.

    FEMA examined a few strange steel pieces that started melting. This is what you would expect if nanothermite composites were used to melt steel.

    Presented here as a mainstream explanation.https://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf

    In their explanation, they suggest a high concentration of sulfur causing this. Steel melting in a fire situation would have been impossible even on 9/11.

    Elemental sulfur, found in explosives and nanothermites, lowers the melting point of steel. However, how the sulfur in elementary form reached the steel and melted it remains a mystery. Here, FEMA admits not having a source explanation for sulfur. Ask it to be further investigated. Of course, NIST ignored the fact that anyone mentioned steel melting.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,331 ✭✭✭✭ King Mob


    But it's been shown, by a study you posted that it's not possible for there to have been a thermite reaction, as there are no byproducts of a thermite reaction present.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 44,493 CMod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder



    the fourth podcast down on that list is an interesting listen, about Charlie Veitch, who was a hardcore conspiracy theorist who changed his mind about 9/11. goes into the whole aspect of being welcomed into a community, and peer pressure, being a major factor in people becoming conspiracy theorists.



  • Registered Users Posts: 901 ✭✭✭ Cheerful S


    Security was managed by PNAC-linked firms at all WTC buildings. Cheney and Rumsfield's ties to the bank occupied WTC7 isn't a coincidence. Despite being on the board of Soloman Investment Bank before becoming defense secretary, Rumsfield claimed he didn't know what building seven was. Rumsfield went missing from duty for over half an hour and was unable to be found before he reappeared for a photo on the Pentagon lawn when the United States was under terrorist attack. The last thing you should do on 9/11 is hang out on the lawn of the Pentagon as the leader of the military. As a ring leader, Rumsfield probably played a key role in all of this. He has a history of doing illegal stuff and criminal activities he was giving Saddam chemical weapons to gas Iranians.

    There would be no problem entering the buildings since the suspects are fanatics of PNAC and some Muslim friends in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia assisted them with plane hijackings guys.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,221 ✭✭✭✭ Dohnjoe


    There wasn't "melted steel" from the one hour of WTC 1 and 2 burning (nor several hours of WTC 7 burning). It's just endless quackery and pseudo-science babble to hint that magic explosives were used. That there was some sort of vague "inside job", but don't ask questions about it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,744 ✭✭✭✭ The Nal


    OK, so how did they do it? You know how many companies worked in those buildings?

    Lay it out for us. They drive up to security at the WTC North Tower and.... go. What happened?



  • Registered Users Posts: 901 ✭✭✭ Cheerful S


    Can you please explain how alleged Israeli students filled rooms with huge boxes from floor to ceiling? How did they get them inside (go as you suggest)?

    Nobody ever reported truckloads of boxes being unloaded at site and moved through the WTC lobbies? Not knowing how something done is irrelevent. No one would be aware of this if they were not online.

    Some PNAC people some some hired intelligence criminals inside the towers to plant some chemical composites on steel and leave is not hard as you think. If security working under the assumption they are genuine and no reason to doubt this pre 9/11 anything possible.

    Personally the chemical nanothermite is best explantaion for what happened at towers. The controlled demolition chemical type of work requires less manpower and less time. A laboratory-produced type of nanothermite was deployed here, based on all the signatures left behind in dust. 



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 44,493 CMod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder




  • Registered Users Posts: 10,744 ✭✭✭✭ The Nal


    Because its fascinating that people believe the buildings were rigged with explosives. 270 floors, 10 million sq feet of office space across 430 different companies from 28 countries "they" had to navigate through undetected.

    http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade.center/tenants1.html#:~:text=Built%20in%201970%2C%20the%20World,and%20representatives%20of%20foreign%20governments.

    Say, floor 45 was rigged to explode. How did the evil doers explain their actions to all of these companies. All with their own doors, locks, security staff, cameras, alarms, office staff, receptions etc.


    Maybe they were all part of the plot too? Yet decided to go to work that morning.......

    Thats one floor from 1 building. Cheerful has still to explain how many floors would have to be rigged to bring down the buildings but more importantly, how.



  • Registered Users Posts: 901 ✭✭✭ Cheerful S


    Your logic suggests they were operating heavy machinery and moving workers through multiple positions to rig the building up for weeks and weeks.

    It's not necessary. The evidence shows the chemical composites were transported to site already in their form, moved to key points, and then attached to the steel. No heavy work, no machinery, no cutting down walls nothing. Just in and out job with a day work maybe two.

    The nanothermite just needed to be attached to the steel at the key points. All that was needed was a trigger. The planes arrived and fires started. There your trigger event to set of the nanothermite.

    Due to its power and energy, nanothermite isn't standard thermite, but military grade explosive since it ignites at lower temperatures. When the fires started the nanothermite started to go to work on making the steel weak and collapse and melt key stuff holding up the stuff in the buildings.

    In the Harrit study, nanothermite chips in dust at the WTC were found. The chips released gas after ignition, which might explain why the top half peeled open like a banana when high pressure built inside the towers. The pressure inside was enormous at the beginning of collapse, which turned everything to dust finally broke apart.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,744 ✭✭✭✭ The Nal


    OK, so how did they get to the key points? Where were they? Who did "they" need to bypss to get there?



  • Registered Users Posts: 901 ✭✭✭ Cheerful S


    Several days before 9/11, we know there was a power outage, based on the accounts of workers. We know that something was going on then. Probably came in then as part of work up crew and went to work on steel. With all security cameras offline there be no footage of them entering the building or inside. I think was all done on weekend since this when power went off and all workers and offices are closed. Two days later 9/11 happened. 



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 44,493 CMod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    or else maybe someone flew jetliners into the buildings which is not really good for building health.



  • Registered Users Posts: 901 ✭✭✭ Cheerful S


    Among the three buildings that collapsed on 9/11, one was not hit by a plane at all.

    You can believe anything you want about the towers. WTC7 did not collapse due to a fire. The fact that this event was covered up too and not given an honest explanation means that nobody should believe fires at towers collapsed that building either. 



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,744 ✭✭✭✭ The Nal


    This isnt true.

    There was no power cut of that magnitude.

    You cant explain it. You cant even begin to explain it. Your theory is silly.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,221 ✭✭✭✭ Dohnjoe


    Innuendo.

    There were multiple power outages in the high-rise I used to work in, doesn't mean they were "planting secret explosives".

    You can't believe a building can collapse as a result of fire, but you think it's plausible that a "handful" of people rigged two 110 story skyscrapers and a 47 story skyscraper with magic silent explosives that the demo industry doesn't use, all in perfect secrecy, with no one noticing, with no leaks and pulled it all off without a hitch. All of which was perfectly timed with airliners crashing into the buildings, in broad daylight, in the middle of New York, with no one noticing, not a single foreign intelligence agency, not a single hostile country..



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,221 ✭✭✭✭ Dohnjoe


    Multiple buildings were destroyed on 9/11. WTC 3, WTC 4, WTC 5, WTC 6. Others were damaged and had to be either restored or torn down.

    That is what happens when two skyscrapers, hit by planes, collapse. It's not a mystery.



Advertisement