10 years on from 9/11.

[bossy]

I'm afraid the conspiracy theorists will never let go of this. Nothing will convince them that it wasn't all a dastardly plot by the Americans. And there are plenty of people happy to peddle books and films to a gullible audience who are determined to believe it was an inside job.

 

There are people out there who think Elvis is still alive, the moon landings were filmed in a studio, Shergar was kidnapped by a UFO, you name it.

 

This'll be the same.

 

Hi again mr righty

[Cardie]

No you dont see the plane on the footage, just an explosion.

 

 

And a broken plane.

[Skidfingers McGonical]

[YOUTUBE]7_E4N5YIycI[/YOUTUBE]

 

[YOUTUBE]ECMJ2LBK90Q[/YOUTUBE]

 

[YOUTUBE]OSW1x_h4Kfo[/YOUTUBE]

 

[YOUTUBE]UeSDOb7NcgE[/YOUTUBE]

 

Quite an interesting series of clips I thought.

 

Also the Zeitgeist Final edition, which focuses on the New Word Order, is a good watch too, the crazy American paranoia is irritating at times, however get past that and it links in some real good thought provoking conspiracies, and debates (well it did for me and Cliff The Beast after a few smokes) about how society is and has been since the 'apparent' creation of The New World Order.

[BatChainPuller]

In October 1943 pirates stormed the Philidelphia naval shipyard and captured the USS Eldridge. They turned on it's prototype invisibility cloak device, which, powered by unstable particle accelerators, malfunctioned and transported the ship on a sort of elastic band in time, where it appeared in the wall of the Pentagon on 9/11/2001, demolishing a significant portion of the Pentagon. Almost instantaneously the ship was catapulted back to it's own time, whereupon the pirates hoisted the colours and got the fuck out of there.

 

It was only there for 0.003 of a second. That's why there was no footage or wreckage.

 

These people know the truth :

 

[Arl arse]

And a broken plane.

 

Wrong, there were a few pieces of aluminium strewn across the lawn nothing that resembled an aircraft at all. (no engines, seats or black box, nothing)

 

Then the FBI went to the neighbouring hotels, filling stations etc. and confiscated cctv tapes that could have proven a plane hit the building.

[Section_31]

George Bush

 

[WaltonRed]

Wrong, there were a few pieces of aluminium strewn across the lawn nothing that resembled an aircraft at all. (no engines, seats or black box, nothing)

 

Then the FBI went to the neighbouring hotels, filling stations etc. and confiscated cctv tapes that could have proven a plane hit the building.

 

Exactly.

 

When United 93 came down, hardly any wreckage there either.

 

Look at most plane crash pics and there's always bits of plane, chairs and stuff about.

[Cardie]

Wrong, there were a few pieces of aluminium strewn across the lawn nothing that resembled an aircraft at all. (no engines, seats or black box, nothing)

 

Then the FBI went to the neighbouring hotels, filling stations etc. and confiscated cctv tapes that could have proven a plane hit the building.

 

Oh right, here I was thinking they found lots of wreckage (mainly the big heavy shit that doesn't just effectively disintegrate) and first person accounts from firefighters at the scene.

 

I must have been wrong*

 

*I'm not.

[Cardie]

Look at most plane crash pics and there's always bits of plane, chairs and stuff about.

 

The fire fighters at the scene agree and found your wreckage (specifically seats). Not to mention various wheels, parts of landing gears engine etc etc. No doubt all placed their by those perpetuating the conspiracy.

 

Ultimately I'm pissing in the wind because crackpot conspiracy theorists are exactly that and will not accept anything as evidence. Fire fighters, eye witnesses, experts in that paticular field will all be dismissed yet show them a fella who agrees with their opinion and he'll be carried above their heads as a hero and lauded as an expert (which he usually is just, unfortunately for conspiracy theorists, rarely an expert in the field needed).

[Section_31]

People who think the yanks could have pulled this conspiracy off have got too monolithic a view of their state apparatus. The yanks have roughly 18 intelligence agencies, all of which pretty much hate each other. They've got countless law enforcement agencies, state, county, city, FBI, DEA etc which again, all pretty much hate each other, undermine each other, and compete with each other. Not to mention the various factions of Government, both left and right, in each party, the Senate, Congress etc.

 

In the aftermath of the attacks the NYPD were so pissed off with the CIA's shitness that they set up their own intelligence division. In the aftermath of the Madrid bombings the NYPD and CIA both sent agents to Spain on fact-finding missions, and no intelligence was shared between the two whatsoever.

 

There are just too many diverging agendas, too many unwieldy departments and too many powerful individuals in the USA for something of that scale to have gone on undetected.

[Arl arse]

That is the biggest load of bullshit i've ever watched.

 

 

Really???

 

Ok then Steven Hawking, explain Building 7 to me, how can a building fall into its own footprint in 6.5 seconds (Freefall speed) due to a small fire, then tell me why the owner of that building then admitted he 'pulled it' in a televised interview a couple of years later?

Why was it reported to have fallen by the BBC a full 20 minutes before it actually did?

 

While your at it explain why there were fragments of Nano thermite found in the dust all around lower Manhatten, Also explain to me how Jet fuel managed to weaken a solid steel structure enough for it to collapse when Jet fuel has a maximum burning temp lower than that needed to weaken the steel used in the construction of the WTC?

 

Or explain the numerous eyewitnesses who reported explosions in WTC 1&2's basements and lobbies before the planes even hit?

 

I could go on, but I'll let you enlighten me with the answers to the above first.

[Cardie]

People who think the yanks could have pulled this conspiracy off have got too monolithic a view of their state apparatus. The yanks have roughly 18 intelligence agencies, all of which pretty much hate each other. They've got countless law enforcement agencies, state, county, city, FBI, DEA etc which again, all pretty much hate each other, undermine each other, and compete with each other. Not to mention the various factions of Government, both left and right, in each party, the Senate, Congress etc.

 

In the aftermath of the attacks the NYPD were so pissed off with the CIA's shitness that they set up their own intelligence division. In the aftermath of the Madrid bombings the NYPD and CIA both sent agents to Spain on fact-finding missions, and no intelligence was shared between the two whatsoever.

 

There are just too many diverging agendas, too many unwieldy departments and too many powerful individuals in the USA for something of that scale to have gone on undetected.

 

They couldn't even fake evidence of WMD's in Iraq, how people think they can pull this off is astonishing.

[Cardie]

Really???

 

Ok then Steven Hawking, explain Building 7 to me, how can a building fall into its own footprint in 6.5 seconds (Freefall speed) due to a small fire, then tell me why the owner of that building then admitted he 'pulled it' in a televised interview a couple of years later?

Why was it reported to have fallen by the BBC a full 20 minutes before it actually did?

 

While your at it explain why there were fragments of Nano thermite found in the dust all around lower Manhatten, Also explain to me how Jet fuel managed to weaken a solid steel structure enough for it to collapse when Jet fuel has a maximum burning temp lower than that needed to weaken the steel used in the construction of the WTC?

 

Or explain the numerous eyewitnesses who reported explosions in WTC 1&2's basements and lobbies before the planes even hit?

 

I could go on, but I'll let you enlighten me with the answers to the above first.

 

You need to stop watching Loose Change, you're also mixing up your conspiracies.

[Guest TesticleOReilly]

Really???

 

Ok then Steven Hawking, explain Building 7 to me, how can a building fall into its own footprint in 6.5 seconds (Freefall speed) due to a small fire, then tell me why the owner of that building then admitted he 'pulled it' in a televised interview a couple of years later?

Why was it reported to have fallen by the BBC a full 20 minutes before it actually did?

 

While your at it explain why there were fragments of Nano thermite found in the dust all around lower Manhatten, Also explain to me how Jet fuel managed to weaken a solid steel structure enough for it to collapse when Jet fuel has a maximum burning temp lower than that needed to weaken the steel used in the construction of the WTC?

 

Or explain the numerous eyewitnesses who reported explosions in WTC 1&2's basements and lobbies before the planes even hit?

 

I could go on, but I'll let you enlighten me with the answers to the above first.

 

These things have all been explained and replicated where necessary. The problem now is whether you believe the credibility of those people as 'neutrals', and why it took so long to get the answers.

[Arl arse]

Oh right, here I was thinking they found lots of wreckage (mainly the big heavy shit that doesn't just effectively disintegrate) and first person accounts from firefighters at the scene.

 

I must have been wrong*

 

*I'm not.

 

Oh righty o thats ok then, you do have pictures to back this up I presume?

[Cardie]

Oh righty o thats ok then, you do have pictures to back this up I presume?

 

Plenty of them about.

[Arl arse]

These things have all been explained and replicated where necessary. The problem now is whether you believe the credibility of those people as 'neutrals', and why it took so long to get the answers.

 

Show me anyone who has ever gave a rational explanation for Building 7?

[Cardie]

Show me anyone who has ever gave a rational explanation for Building 7?

 

Big building hits little building, little building fall down.

[Juan Galonso]

I am totally open-minded about all of this but why would they want to bring down WTC7 a full eight hours later? The building was empty for a start.

 

I am no building expert but wouldn't the ground foundations have possibly had something to do with the collapse of the WTC7 after the collapse of so many thousands of tons of steel and concrete a few hours earlier?

[Guest TesticleOReilly]

Show me anyone who has ever gave a rational explanation for Building 7?

 

Untwist yer knickers, AA, I haven't had a pop. I'm with you, I think it's highly unlikely that out of all the buildings around that area on that day at that time the only one that suffered catastrophic failure was the one containing several government departments that have engaged in 'under the counter' activities.

 

That doesn't change the fact that the collapse of building 7 has been explained, the mechanics of it collapsing have been duplicated, and it appears to be legit (note the usage of the word 'appears'). As have all the other points you raised. Such as airplane fuel not burning at the required temperature, and it isn't needed to, since the melting point of the metal used in the towers isn't important, it's the failure point, which (iirc) is at a far lower temperature.

 

Nothing wrong with dismissing things as rubbish, but you need both sides of the argument before you can make a judgment.

[Joe Le Taxi]

I have no idea what has happened to any of the buildings, or any of the other crashes other than a shitload of explosions and casualties. Anyone got good links to read? Everything I have read states that it was planes and both carried out and funded by people in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.

[Arl arse]

Building 7 fell at FREEFALL speed, meaning no resistance, that has never happened before or after 9/11.

[Cardie]

I am totally open-minded about all of this but why would they want to bring down WTC7 a full eight hours later? The building was empty for a start.

 

I am no building expert but wouldn't the ground foundations have possibly had something to do with the collapse of the WTC7 after the collapse of so many thousands of tons of steel and concrete a few hours earlier?

 

A side of the building had been gouged out by the collapse of towers 1 and 2, popular conspiracies seem to suggest their was minimal damage and small fires but it was pulled because it hid secrets.

 

People actually there seem to suggest otherwise.

 

"They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street. - Richard Banaciski

 

"The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse (Of the WTC towers) had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely" - Daniel Nigro, Chief of Department

 

"Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area -- (Q. A collapse zone?) -- Yeah -- be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn't have people working in it. There was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolants and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed." - Chief Cruthers

 

"Then we found out, I guess around 3:00 [o'clock], that they thought 7 was going to collapse. So, of course, [we've] got guys all in this pile over here and the main concern was get everybody out, and I guess it took us over an hour and a half, two hours to get everybody out of there. (Q. Initially when you were there, you had said you heard a few Maydays?) Oh, yes. We had Maydays like crazy.... The heat must have been tremendous. There was so much [expletive] fire there. This whole pile was burning like crazy. Just the heat and the smoke from all the other buildings on fire, you [couldn't] see anything. So it took us a while and we ended up backing everybody out, and [that's] when 7 collapsed.... Basically, we fell back for 7 to collapse, and then we waited a while and it got a lot more organized, I would guess." - Lieutenant William Ryan

 

"Firehouse: Did that chief give an assignment to go to building 7?

 

Boyle: He gave out an assignment. I didn’t know exactly what it was, but he told the chief that we were heading down to the site.

 

Firehouse: How many companies?

 

Boyle: There were four engines and at least three trucks. So we’re heading east on Vesey, we couldn’t see much past Broadway. We couldn’t see Church Street. We couldn’t see what was down there. It was really smoky and dusty."

 

"A little north of Vesey I said, we’ll go down, let’s see what’s going on. A couple of the other officers and I were going to see what was going on. We were told to go to Greenwich and Vesey and see what’s going on. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.

 

But they had a hoseline operating. Like I said, it was hitting the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled back too. Then we received an order from Fellini, we’re going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn’t really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see.

 

So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.

 

Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?

 

Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.

 

Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?

 

Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.

 

I guess the question is we know what conspiracy theorists (especially the prominent ones) have to gain from making things up (mainly increased sales of books and films). But what do Firefighters who lost lots of colleagues and still suffer pretty horrendous issues because of what happened have to gain from helping the government if it was a cover up.

Edited September 13, 2010 by Cardie

[Juan Galonso]

Building 7 fell at FREEFALL speed, meaning no resistance, that has never happened before or after 9/11.

 

It did, you are right mate but what would have been the purpose for bringing it down eight hours later after the main devastation had been caused when the area was sealed off?

 

I totally agree with you about the speed the building came down but I don't understand the purpose for whoever bringing it down.

 

EDIT: Just seen Cardies post and that explains a hell of a lot. BUT what was that whole BBC clip about then?

[Arl arse]

Untwist yer knickers, AA, I haven't had a pop. I'm with you, I think it's highly unlikely that out of all the buildings around that area on that day at that time the only one that suffered catastrophic failure was the one containing several government departments that have engaged in 'under the counter' activities.

 

That doesn't change the fact that the collapse of building 7 has been explained, the mechanics of it collapsing have been duplicated, and it appears to be legit (note the usage of the word 'appears'). As have all the other points you raised. Such as airplane fuel not burning at the required temperature, and it isn't needed to, since the melting point of the metal used in the towers isn't important, it's the failure point, which (iirc) is at a far lower temperature.

 

Nothing wrong with dismissing things as rubbish, but you need both sides of the argument before you can make a judgment.

 

 

No problem TO, but I've worked in the construction industry since I left school in the 70's and those explanations just don't add up.