Mainstream media now questioning the official 9/11 narrative

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Al Qaeda attacked various buildings in the US using planes.

But because there is still somewhat of a grey area over exactly how many people may have known about those attacks within Saudi Arabia, where 15 of the hijackers were from, you are using that as a springboard..

a gigantic springboard

... to launch yourself into cuckoo land, a self-created land where you believe men secretly planted silent explosives and blew up the trade towers with Mossad, and the President and all that zany stuff, without a shred of credible evidence

It's a technique of exploiting any modicum of doubt in order to insert an entirely false and silly narrative that has nothing to do with it

"Hold on, there's a lapse in info about one of the attackers whereabouts for a period prior to the attacks.. theeerefore the CIA blew up the towers!"

See now trying to downplay the significance of Saudi Arabia’s involvement in helping the hijackers. What not getting is these people had to have known about the 9/11 plot ahead of time. These people implicated by FBI agents are Saudi princes and government officials, and they conspired with Al Qeada to kill American citizens on 9/11. The 9/11 hijackers were met when they arrived at the airport. They were provided housing, bank accounts, transport, flying lessons. The entire Al Qeada operation was dependent on reaching support inside the United States. They are not meeting an Al Qeada support network. The network is Saudi Intelligence and Pakistan ISI. 

Why are you downplaying CIA allowing Al Qeada terrorists inside the United States? The CIA has never told the American public why they were allowed to come in freely and operate inside the United States. You don't seem all that curious about it. They were on a terrorist watch list and Al Qeada was previously bombing Embassies in Africa and attacking a US Warship in Yemen pre 9/11. Both these men were linked to the attacks. 

Lost them how? Care to explain how that's possible when they were using their real names? These men were meeting the others 9/11 cells throughout their time in America. Different Countries were warning the United States Al Qaeda was planning an operation inside the United States early 2001 and here you have the CIA recovering information two high level operatives had already entered the country. Anyone with a brain would have known they only there to carry out an attack. The White House repeated lies that nobody could have known an attack was coming, that completely false. Look back at the history and you see the received numerous warning planes would be used to attack buildings.

I don't use it as a Springboard. I look at the evidence. Repeated claims made by people there they saw molten steel. I also look at the history of structural engineering and never in history has a steel beamed skyscraper collapsed due to fire. They're not a single reference you have that shows an entire building would come down during a fire. You one outline in Iran and basically a building that Iranian reports said had gas canisters and oil tanks inside the building. Plus, the building was structurally unsound for decades. When WTC7 came down like a controlled demolition, and history doesn't support a fire collapse hypothesis, it's not Odd question the official 9/11 story.

Even NIST had to go to ridiculous scenario to get their global model to collapse due to fire. You find they cheated to get the building fall due to fire, most sane people don't accept their theory. They have never shown how fire would cause the building to collapse with its structural components in place as they were when the building was constructed. They removed construction elements throughout the floors to have the columns buckle and girders fail in a fire condition.

All the lies and distortions lead me to the conclusion they covering up the building was demolished by explosives. NIST fire scenario did not work, they cheated, and still refuse to release their building seven computer data for others verify it.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Indeed, and add time to that equation - the more time that passes, the more likely that the real information will come out. Deathbed confessions, leaks, admissions, anonymous whistle-blowers.

Especially so in a "false flag" involving hundreds of co-conspirators to treasonously murder thousands of their countrymen for no other reason than to start unpopular wars that cost thousands more lives

Whistleblowers have come forward. You don't follow conspiracy sites so you don't see these people videos. Many people in the military and FBI have come out and said there was a coverup. Even the 9/11 commission council admitted they were set up to fail. Two commisoners even resigned over not receiving documentation and materials from the agencies involved in investigating 9/11.

I agree to this.
What's missing is a whistleblower who admits the blew up buildings on 9/11.  
What's missing is a high level whistleblower who admits the US allowed the attacks to take place and helped it succeed.

I don't understand why there needs two be hundreds or thousands of people involved in planting explosives or helping the hijackers complete the mission. Skeptics have never explained this for 9/11 conspiracy theorists to understand. Planting explosives is something achieved pre 9/11 in secret and only a number of people need to know or be told.

Scrummyscrammy wrote: »

Taking you up on your challenge 'to go and read about it using proper sources and credible sites'

Probably the most widely read 9/11 debunker book was produced by the guys behind Popular Mechanics - Debunking 9/11 Myths - Why 9/11 Conspiracy Theories can't stand up to the facts.

So one would imagine it would be instructive to hear a radio interview with Davin Coburn whose job was to fact-check the material in the book. Mr Coburn was interviewed on the Phoenix, Arizona radio station Independent Talk 1100 KFNX, by Radio host Charles Goye shortly after the release of the Popular Mechanics, in Aug 2006

This really makes for very, very interesting listening.

Three questions remain from this 13 year old interview:

1.Why did Mr. Coburn claim that there were DNA tests proving the identity of the 9/11 hijackers when he could offer no proof of this when challenged.

2. Why did Mr. Coburn contend that he had pictorial proof that a third of the south side of Building 7 was, to use his term, 'scooped out' which made the building structurally unsound when no pictures of this have since emerged and NIST made no mention of this when they released their official findings on Building 7's collapse in 2007.

3. Why did Mr. Coburn contend that the only CCTV image that was released to the public from the Pentagon crash site was from a camera that ran at a frame rate of 1 frame a second. The minimum ips (image per second ) "frame rate" of any CCTV system built in the last 20 years in about 60 ips. We are to believe that the most secure building in the world had one antiquated camera shooting at a frame rate that equalled an 8mm camera from the 60s. Pathetic.

You said: 'In the case of 911 conspiracy theories, hundreds of videos have been uploaded over the years, these are carefully crafted collections of "anomalies" designed to cause the viewer to doubt the event. The creators of these videos deliberately leave out explanations, context, counter-information, and so on because their aim is to convince the viewer that something was awry (without ever actually explaining the conspiracy theory itself)'

This is not one of those videos. This is an unedited live recording of a radio interview.

Looking forward, as ever to your response, this time in debunking the debunker who helped write the ultimate debunking book.

And you guys wonder why we have doubts?

Good watch. The host gave him a hard time and rightly so.

Identifying the hijacker DNA. What DNA was the comparison to? Hijackers Families would likely have to give DNA samples to carry out a comparison check. Since the bodies were burned to ash that likely never happened. You may find scraps of bones and human tissue, maybe?

I have seen photographs of damage on the southwest side of building seven. There are images that appear to show a long hole down the side of building seven, but the image is blurry and obscured by smoke. All engineering studies agree the final collapse started on the eastside of the building whereas the damage is on the opposite side south side corner. The building stood for another 6 hours- so most people think the damage caused by the towers falling had very little impact on the structure stability.

I was given an official document recently explaining what happened to the cameras around the building. Just say discovered some new things about the event. I leave it for another thread.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You literally wrote the below a few posts ago

"Whistleblowers have come forward."



There have been at least four separate investigations which came to the conclusion that fire caused the collapse.

There have been none that point to explosives, whatsoever

So in your mind it must be explosives. Silent ones, that make explosive sounds sometimes, or not, when it suits.

Whistleblower has not come forward to date he planted explosives. Personally, not expecting someone to come forward, when highly likely this was military-style operation that involves compartmentalization. My opinion only a handful of people are read in and are aware of this operation.

Whistleblowers have come out and spoken about different topics related to 9/11 attacks.  I see Richard Clarke as a whistleblower who revealed he was kept out of the loop about Al Qeada terrorists entering the country. Richard Clarke was employed by the White House Chief Counter Terrorism Advisor to George Bush. Yet he only learned after 9/11 that the CIA had tracked 9/11 terrorists inside the United States and kept this information secret from the FBI and local enforcement agencies.  

There Coleen Rowley an FBI agent who passed information to FBI headquarters that she suspected there was Muslim men in her area training to hijack planes. A flight instructor in her area Minnesota, suspected Muslim men there were up to know good and phoned the local FBI office in August 2001.  The local FBI agents tried to get a warrant to look into it and this can only be issued by FBI headquarters when it was about terrorism. The FBI agents were denied the warrant and still an open question who was denying the request to monitor them suspected of being terrorists? Many more people who pointed out the US government had all the information needed to arrest and capture the 9/11 cells.

Engineering WTC7 fire research
Arup and Partners and Guy Nordenson and Sons were hired by Aegis Insurance to find defects in the structural design of the building. They were as a conflict of interest when you hired to stop paying out a large sum. They reached a very different conclusion to NIST and claimed sagging beams pulled the girder of its seat at column 79. NIST said it beams thermally expanded. They totally dismissed the thermal expansion theory NIST came up with.

None of these groups claimed fire brought down the building on a different floor, they just disagree about where it started.

Engineering study that disagrees with all three studies
Weidlinger engineering group was hired by World Trade center company. They claimed the failure started on 9th and 10th floor. The girder unseated would not come through the floors below like the other Engineering firms stated. They claim the floors just collapsed due to extreme heat.  
None of these groups agree with each other about how it all started- the only agree fire was the cause correct. Hulsey has looked at these theories and none of them making sense.

Silent explosives:
There was a noise bang heard on CBS video. NIST states no noise was heard at all before collapse on any video. Skeptics often make the mistake thinking this a masonry building being taken down. It was a steel framed building, therefore only a number of floors needed to be loaded with cutter charge explosives. There not blowing up the whole building. They're taking out columns on a specific number of floors. Hulsey computer model dropped the building when eight floors of core and exterior columns got removed. It's false when people claim 47 floors need to the loaded with explosives. It curious you always claim silent explosives rules out demolition, yet 47 floors internally coming down crashing silently you never question? I would think 47 floors collapsing would make more noise than explosives causing damage to steel in the building on eight floors? It not bomb going off. Demolitions can be muffled for sound if needed ( CDI demolition expert said so on video) and wireless radio demolitions can be used. Wireless it not used commercially as it very expensive. US Military was a setting of demolitions for decades by wireless methods.