[Vote] Who did 911?

[Spendulus]

Well, to answer one part of your question, my approach is critical and scientific.  What that means is that if someone claims 9/11 had to have been explosives because a four ton chunk of steel was tossed 500 feet, then I simply compute that matter.

That should read: "... my approach is critical and rational.  What that means is that if someone claims 9/11 ___________________________, then I simply compute that matter." In other words, it shouldn't matter what the "claim" is or who is claiming it.

It has nothing to do with who tells who what to think.   It is a simple examination of a claim using math and physics.

Which is missing the point completely. You're looking at "claims" (symbols) rather than the event itself (reality)... and more importantly, you've assumed from the beginning that the "claims" of your perceived "authority" figures are true by default, just because they happen to have greater media access -- i.e. greater capability to manipulate you into believing. Notice I said "believing", without qualifiers. A real skeptic believes nothing but/ergo entertains all ideas.

That's one form of "seeking answers."  It's also a way of examining the greatest fucking mysteries that could be, quite opposite to listening to babble from bobble-heads.

So you're saying that you are not a mystery?

See bolded above.  When you misrepresent what others say, as you have here regarding my statements and approach, you lose all perceived attempt at holding the higher ground, which is what you are doing by asserting a metaphysical view.  

But to do that, you have to not engage in transparent, obvious falsehoods.   When you do that, you enter the ocean of baboons, and are just one more voice of babble from thebobble-heads.

<<lecture mode off>>

[Spendulus]

Given that high school math and physics is for high school, and that the much higher math and physics involved in the 9/11 building destructions, coupled with the way the rest of the things went down that day, AND the probability involved, shows that you should probably go back to high school where you belong, and get out of something as complex and detailed as the 9/11 conspiracy.

The problem with this method of thinking is that your presentations of those "more complex and detailed" destructions has been thoroughly debunked, by me, with high school level math and physics.

And again I invite you to go get all those "engineers" and bring there here where they can debate with their higher skills.  

One thing I can't fathom about the "controlled demolition" theories is how exactly they were done.  Could one of you guys that believe this stuff please explain it, because it literally appears to make no sense.

Here's the problem I have.

Somehow demolition charges were placed on certain floors of the towers without anyone seeing the charges being placed.   And we're talking here a large number of charges, in a lot of places.  But they were placed on the floors the jets were going to hit.  Then these guys driving the jets flew them into those exact places.

Those guys flying the jets would have been performing at a very high level of proficiency to maintain altitude plus or minus 50 feet, and that would have been a variation of about six to eight stories in their impact.  Most likely they maintained altitude within 200-500 feet and just aimed at the midpoint of the buildings.

But the "controlled demolition" somehow was at exactly where the planes hit?

And so supposedly the planes hitting was intended to be a coverup for the actual demolition?

Please explain this.





Let me show you a much more plausible conspiracy theory, just for kicks and grins.

Kennedy was killed  by two or more assassins, and the government covered it up.

FAR MORE PLAUSIBLE.

[btcusury]

^ So you're a JFK conspiracy theorist but not a 9/11 conspiracy theorist?? Hahaha, how bizarre.

So somehow somebody was able to pull of a coverup of the JFK assassination in 1962... but it's inconceivable that that same somebody, whom you presumably imagine "took over" control by murdering JFK, couldn't possibly have pulled off the "catastrophic and catalyzing event" that they wrote would be what would be needed to usher in "the new American century" they desired? LOL.

(It's also funny how your silly argument about the how ignores WTC7... not to mention completely bypasses the what!)

(Also, "the government" covered it up... what?? What bizarre thinking! Surely you must mean the media covered it up? The "government" can't even cover up minor things... without the media covering it up for them.)

[Spendulus]

^ So you're a JFK conspiracy theorist but not a 9/11 conspiracy theorist?? Hahaha, how bizarre.

So somehow somebody was able to pull of a coverup of the JFK assassination in 1962... but it's inconceivable that that same somebody, whom you presumably imagine "took over" control by murdering JFK, couldn't possibly have pulled off the "catastrophic and catalyzing event" that they wrote would be what would be needed to usher in "the new American century" they desired? LOL.

(It's also funny how your silly argument about the how ignores WTC7... not to mention completely bypasses the what!)

(Also, "the government" covered it up... what?? What bizarre thinking! Surely you must mean the media covered it up? The "government" can't even cover up minor things... without the media covering it up for them.)

Again, please don't misrepresent things other people say.  

"More plausible" does not mean "I support" or "I believe."  I have said nothing about what I believe.  

"More plausible" re JFK because a conspiracy by two or three people (JFK) is more plausible than one which would involve hundreds or thousands of people (911).  Anyway, my post was simply to ask believers in the 911 conspiracy to explain a part of it which seems to make no sense.

RE WTC7, you are bringing up an unrelated subject as evidence.  If we discuss the physics of tower 1 dropping, and I show that there is nothing complicated about that, a defense to the position is not "Yeah but how about WTC7?"

This is a common tactic though of 911 conspiracy theorists.  When they are forced into a position where their errors are clear on one subject, they, umm, change the subject.  Please, let's stick with my simple questions, can we?  Repeating...

...the "controlled demolition" somehow was at exactly where the planes hit?

And so supposedly the planes hitting was intended to be a coverup for the actual demolition?

Please explain this.

[btcusury]

You're ignoring the what and wondering about the how. If a murder is committed, an investigator does not ignore what happened if he first can't figure out how it happened.

The idea would be, in the nanothermite scenario (which seems to me like the most plausible scenario), that the remote detonation could be, by design, started from any floor number as part of the covert demolition plan, yes. Why that would be hard to imagine to you is kind of relevant... wouldn't you agree?

As for WTC7, the point is that, were you an honest investigator rather than a believer, you would want to start there, not on the twin towers (which, you know, did actually have airplanes smash into them!).

[Benjig]

US GOVERNMENT 
Of course, there are those characters who run Facebook pages and Twitter accounts who are paid government agents or corporate shills with a vested interest in making sure that 9/11 truth never sees the light of day. Then there are the simple folks who refuse to believe 9/11 truth because of a bad case of lifelong cognitive dissonance, or an unshakable faith in ‘trustworthy’ government, or a serial neglect of the facts, or an adulthood addiction to the mainstream media, or just plain ignorance and fuzzy thinking.

Those who deny the existence of a US Government conspiracy which planned, financed, coordinated, executed, and covered up the 9/11 false flag operation are either willfully ignorant or dangerously arrogant, or both.

[Spendulus]

US GOVERNMENT  <<blah blah blah>>

Those who deny the existence of a US Government conspiracy which planned, financed, coordinated, executed, and covered up the 9/11 false flag operation are either willfully ignorant or dangerously arrogant, or both.

There is no EVIDENCE of ... a US Government conspiracy which planned, financed, coordinated, executed, and covered up the 9/11 false flag operation

Because of this fact, your statement is ridiculous.   

You could answer, an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.  But you've put yourself on a limb in accusing the US Government, haven't you?

How can you prove it wasn't the Mexican Government?

[Spendulus]

You're ignoring the what and wondering about the how. If a murder is committed, an investigator does not ignore what happened if he first can't figure out how it happened.

The idea would be, in the nanothermite scenario (which seems to me like the most plausible scenario), that the remote detonation could be, by design, started from any floor number as part of the covert demolition plan, yes. Why that would be hard to imagine to you is kind of relevant... wouldn't you agree?

As for WTC7, the point is that, were you an honest investigator rather than a believer, you would want to start there, not on the twin towers (which, you know, did actually have airplanes smash into them!).

Oh, so you would conceive of this conspiracy as follows -

1.  Secret covert invisible agents wire a whole bunch of floors of WT1 and WT2 with a mystery secret research grade compound known as "nano thermite."  Then they sit back and drink beers until the planes slam into the buildings, and then, figure out about what floor the planes hit at, and go find the right detonator, and punch the button?

So the detonators are labeled like 001 to 100 or something like that?  And there's two boxes of them, one for each building?  

Now for the second part of your comment - the "Nano Thermite."  If I understand this correctly, there exists a powerful explosive, which common people do not know much about because it is highly classified, and therefore ONLY secret government agents with access to "Nano Thermite" could have done the 911 job.

But there is a little problem.

 On May 1, 2011, chemical engineer Mark Hightower published, “The Nanothermite Challenge”

The challenge comes to this:

“Find and document peer-reviewed scientific research [publications] that demonstrate that a gas-generating nano-thermite (GGNT) based upon iron (III) oxide (Fe2O3) and aluminum (Al), where the gas-generating chemical added to the nano-thermite is not itself a high explosive, can be made to be a high explosive with at least a detonation velocity of 2000 m/s. The author of this paper will donate [to AE911Truth] $100 for every 1000 m/s of detonation velocity that can be documented, the donation not to exceed $1,000.”

The deadline date of June 20, 2011 passed with not even one entry to this contest. ‎Not even one entry for the Nanothermite Challenge was received. This is significant, because nano-thermite is commonly believed to be a high explosive within the 9/11 truth community.

But I would like to have your response.  Let's hear about what you know about nanothermite.  You see, none of the thermite I have ever seen or considered using for projects had any behavior like an explosive.  It was really, really slow stuff.  And I'm not convinced that going to the nano scale would change that behavior.  If it was a good explosive, it would be a bad metal cutting compound, and vica versa.  So either I am just ignorant, and guys like you know stuff about NanoThermite, or guys like you have invented a fantasy material that doesn't exist.  Which is it?

Go!  Please try to explain this 911 conspiracy thing in a way that simply makes sense.  That's all I am requesting.

[btcusury]

You are making such a barrage of assumptions, I'm not sure where you'd want me to start... No, it's not secret, nor is it a high explosive; the thermite would've been used to cut the core columns, and would explain the orange liquid pouring out and the pools of molten steel and high temperatures days/weeks later. Nanothermite does not exclude the use of high explosives; it's just that the evidence of high explosives is limited to video clips of explosion-type sounds.

How about you "please try to explain this 911 ["official"] conspiracy thing in a way that simply makes sense"?

Perhaps more relevantly, though, the real question here would be: why would you believe anything these people (politicans and the media's "news reports" about their actions) say about any subject whatsoever? What is it that makes you believe that they are benevolent "leaders" guiding you/us to a reasonable future?

Those who deny the existence of a US Government conspiracy which planned, financed, coordinated, executed, and covered up the 9/11 false flag operation are either willfully ignorant or dangerously arrogant, or both.

The truth is that you have scarce evidence of "a US Government conspiracy which planned, financed, coordinated, executed, and covered up the 9/11 false flag operation". I'd say there's slightly more evidence of a "Muslim group conspiracy" doing it (except covering it up, of course). Are you "willfully ignorant" of who it was that was actually arrested as suspects on the very day of the events, in multiple locations? (hint: it wasn't Muslims)

[HarHarHar9965]

I don't think it was only muslims but also the USA government helped those organizations.

I wouldn't call it assistance but rather, disregard their actions or act uninformed when the project was taking course. U.S is something projected as a beautiful nation but what makes the land a mine hole is the secrets it has hidden, and the smile they sport.

[ifightformerkel]

I don't know but would like to know.
I can bet that it is dont like we hear it on the tv.

Why there are until now NO MOVIES OF THE CRASH IN THE PENTAGON?
Where was the plan when it crashed in the pentagon? The biggest part was only 2 meters big? where are the wings, the engine and everything else?


but my biggest question is, what happend in pennsylvania? there is only a little whole with black gras, there never go down a plan in my opinion, it was everything very suspicious.
I think that we will never know what really happened on that day.

[btcusury]

I think that we will never know what really happened on that day.

You won't ever know if you sit and wait for somebody else to tell you what happened. There are much, much bigger secrets than 9/11 though, that "they" don't want you to know. Is German your first language?

[ifightformerkel]

I think that we will never know what really happened on that day.

You won't ever know if you sit and wait for somebody else to tell you what happened. There are much, much bigger secrets than 9/11 though, that "they" don't want you to know. Is German your first language?

Yes german is my first language. 
I read that in a few years every file of 9/11 will be made public.
I cant believe that we will see the real true, because then we will see that nearly everything was a lie.

[btcusury]

You missed my point, which is that if you want to know you have to investigate for yourself, not sit and wait for someone to tell you "the truth". This applies to any and all "truths" ever presented to you (by someone else), including, of course, the second world war. The precision/meticulousness characteristic of German minds can be used to your advantage, were you to decide to embark on such a "truth journey"... unless you really do "fight for [Angela] Merkel".

[Spendulus]

You are making such a barrage of assumptions, I'm not sure where you'd want me to start... No, it's not secret, nor is it a high explosive; the thermite would've been used to cut the core columns, and would explain the orange liquid pouring out and the pools of molten steel and high temperatures days/weeks later. Nanothermite does not exclude the use of high explosives; it's just that the evidence of high explosives is limited to video clips of explosion-type sounds.

How about you "please try to explain this 911 ["official"] conspiracy thing in a way that simply makes sense"?

Perhaps more relevantly, though, the real question here would be: why would you believe anything these people (politicans and the media's "news reports" about their actions) say about any subject whatsoever? What is it that makes you believe that they are benevolent "leaders" guiding you/us to a reasonable future?
...

Please look at what I bolded.  I didn't say anything like that.  Ever.

What I did is simply note that the magical mystery "nanothermite" does not even make sense in this context.  It does NOT cement a good conspiracy theory.  That was the reason for what I said.  It's very, very simple.

I am saying "This conspiracy theory makes NO SENSE!  Please show me one that does, at least in part."

Nothing complicated.

There isn't anything complicated about explaining pools of molten metal days later.  There isn't anything complicated about "orange liquid," either. 

You can't blow off valid criticism of half bunked theories by snapping to a decision that the skeptic of the theory is a gullible fool who bought into the government story - that's called not addressing the point raised.

[popcorn1]

You are making such a barrage of assumptions, I'm not sure where you'd want me to start... No, it's not secret, nor is it a high explosive; the thermite would've been used to cut the core columns, and would explain the orange liquid pouring out and the pools of molten steel and high temperatures days/weeks later. Nanothermite does not exclude the use of high explosives; it's just that the evidence of high explosives is limited to video clips of explosion-type sounds.

How about you "please try to explain this 911 ["official"] conspiracy thing in a way that simply makes sense"?

Perhaps more relevantly, though, the real question here would be: why would you believe anything these people (politicans and the media's "news reports" about their actions) say about any subject whatsoever? What is it that makes you believe that they are benevolent "leaders" guiding you/us to a reasonable future?
...

Please look at what I bolded.  I didn't say anything like that.  Ever.

What I did is simply note that the magical mystery "nanothermite" does not even make sense in this context.  It does NOT cement a good conspiracy theory.  That was the reason for what I said.  It's very, very simple.

I am saying "This conspiracy theory makes NO SENSE!  Please show me one that does, at least in part."

Nothing complicated.

There isn't anything complicated about explaining pools of molten metal days later.  There isn't anything complicated about "orange liquid," either.  

You can't blow off valid criticism of half bunked theories by snapping to a decision that the skeptic of the theory is a gullible fool who bought into the government story - that's called not addressing the point raised.

so check this out wheres the plane and the building not collapsed yet as you can see

i don,t see 1 can you
www.youtube.com/watch?v=JviINUDevZU

then listen to the reporter who is at the scene

www.youtube.com/watch?v=07Bn_CC_mrg

make up your own mind up
plus if you did find out the truth nothing you can do about it done and dusted

[BADecker]

17 More Shocking 9/11 Facts Most Don't Know

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70Ce_mbY5cc

[HarHarHar9965]

So many people doubting the US govt itself. Makes everybody question the authenticity if freedom and protection we truly share. I think the other group did it with not assistance, but without resistance of the uS govt.

[Salman Anjum]

   
What Really Happened on 9-11?
The events of 9-11 are seared into the collective psyche of this generation. We have all been affected by the catastrophes of that fateful day, but what really happened on 9-11?

Some people believe an outlandish conspiracy theory involving 19 Arab hijackers who allegedly: commandeered four commercial jets with nothing more than their cunning, wit, resolve, hatred of America, and some box cutters; then proceed to fly these aircraft around US airspace unfettered for a total lapsed time of over an hour; on three of the planes, pulled stunning flight maneuvers beyond the capability of even expert pilots; and, managed to cause damage to their targets — one of which just happens to have been the most heavily defended building in the world — so extreme as to be in clear violation of several well understood laws of Physics, Chemistry, and Thermodynamics. This amazing conspiracy theory is even more suspicious and bizarre in that it is the one proffered by the United States Government (USG) and the 9-11 Cover-Up Omission Commission. In the 9-11 Truth Movement we call it the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT).

Thankfully, despite the best efforts of the corporate-controlled media and virtually the entire US Congress, there are literally millions of people in this country and millions more around the world who do not believe that these 19 Arabs, as clever as they purportedly were, could have somehow suspended the laws of Physics on 9-11.

Are There Competing Conspiracy Theories?
We just observed that the official story of 9-11 is in fact a “conspiracy theory”… and a wacky one at that, one that happens to be physically impossible!

There must be another explanation, one that doesn’t require us to rewrite most of Newtonian Physics. There is, in fact, another explanation that is supported by the empirical evidence, the observed events of the day. It is more than a “conspiracy theory” at this point. It has been sufficiently verified, tested, and refined to be rightly called a “conspiracy reality”.

True, there are competing conspiracy “theories”, but they only compete with the OCT not the conspiracy reality, as they all have anomalies, inconsistencies, improbabilities, and out right impossibilities that will keep them forever in the realm of “theory” unsupported by fact. These conspiracy “theories” that eschew the OCT only to embrace other utter nonsense (like: planes didn’t hit the WTC, holograms and “video trickery” were used instead; the three WTC skyscrapers demolished on 9-11 were destroyed by exotic, space-based, directed energy beam weapons; a commercial jet really did hit the Pentagon) are in reality all part of a concerted COINTELPRO-style USG disinformation campaign designed to splinter and marginalize those of us who have solved the Rubik’s Cube of 9-11. These “theories” don’t compete with what is known to be true by the vast majority of the 9-11 Truth Movement, they are deliberate and elaborate disinformation campaigns designed to make those of us who do know the truth look foolish by association.

Visit the given site http://www.whodidit.org/

[BADecker]

   
What Really Happened on 9-11?
The events of 9-11 are seared into the collective psyche of this generation. We have all been affected by the catastrophes of that fateful day, but what really happened on 9-11?

Some people believe an outlandish conspiracy theory involving 19 Arab hijackers who allegedly: commandeered four commercial jets with nothing more than their cunning, wit, resolve, hatred of America, and some box cutters; then proceed to fly these aircraft around US airspace unfettered for a total lapsed time of over an hour; on three of the planes, pulled stunning flight maneuvers beyond the capability of even expert pilots; and, managed to cause damage to their targets — one of which just happens to have been the most heavily defended building in the world — so extreme as to be in clear violation of several well understood laws of Physics, Chemistry, and Thermodynamics. This amazing conspiracy theory is even more suspicious and bizarre in that it is the one proffered by the United States Government (USG) and the 9-11 Cover-Up Omission Commission. In the 9-11 Truth Movement we call it the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT).

Thankfully, despite the best efforts of the corporate-controlled media and virtually the entire US Congress, there are literally millions of people in this country and millions more around the world who do not believe that these 19 Arabs, as clever as they purportedly were, could have somehow suspended the laws of Physics on 9-11.

Are There Competing Conspiracy Theories?
We just observed that the official story of 9-11 is in fact a “conspiracy theory”… and a wacky one at that, one that happens to be physically impossible!

There must be another explanation, one that doesn’t require us to rewrite most of Newtonian Physics. There is, in fact, another explanation that is supported by the empirical evidence, the observed events of the day. It is more than a “conspiracy theory” at this point. It has been sufficiently verified, tested, and refined to be rightly called a “conspiracy reality”.

True, there are competing conspiracy “theories”, but they only compete with the OCT not the conspiracy reality, as they all have anomalies, inconsistencies, improbabilities, and out right impossibilities that will keep them forever in the realm of “theory” unsupported by fact. These conspiracy “theories” that eschew the OCT only to embrace other utter nonsense (like: planes didn’t hit the WTC, holograms and “video trickery” were used instead; the three WTC skyscrapers demolished on 9-11 were destroyed by exotic, space-based, directed energy beam weapons; a commercial jet really did hit the Pentagon) are in reality all part of a concerted COINTELPRO-style USG disinformation campaign designed to splinter and marginalize those of us who have solved the Rubik’s Cube of 9-11. These “theories” don’t compete with what is known to be true by the vast majority of the 9-11 Truth Movement, they are deliberate and elaborate disinformation campaigns designed to make those of us who do know the truth look foolish by association.

Visit the given site http://www.whodidit.org/

This ^^.