Such as? On what basis did these co-workers of yours allegedly predict their collapse? Could it be because the towers were constructed deliberately such that they would sway so that they could sustain hurricane force winds? Wind effects The tube frame design using steel core and perimeter columns protected with sprayed-on fire resistant material created a relatively lightweight structure that would sway more in response to the wind, compared to traditional structures such as the Empire State Building that have thick, heavy masonry for fireproofing of steel structural elements.[59] During the design process, wind tunnel tests were done at Colorado State University and at the National Physical Laboratory in the United Kingdom to establish design wind pressures that the World Trade Center towers could be subjected to and structural response to those forces.[60] Experiments were also done to evaluate how much sway occupants could tolerate. Subjects were recruited for "free eye exams," while the real purpose of the experiment was to subject them to simulated building sway and find out how much they could comfortably tolerate.[61] Many subjects did not respond well, experiencing dizziness and other ill effects. One of the chief engineers Leslie Robertson worked with Canadian engineer Alan G. Davenport to develop viscoelastic dampers to absorb some of the sway. These viscoelastic dampers, used throughout the structures at the joints between floor trusses and perimeter columns, along with some other structural modifications reduced the building sway to an acceptable level.[62] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center
Do you really need to lie? What is your point exactly? You claim you don't want to be "slightly be associated with folks like me" yet you keep responding to my posts and feel the need to lie to try to support your position. Besides the fact that I posted 29 facts about the 9/11 Commission and their report, which perhaps you might be able to try to successfully dispute one or two, certainly not all of them, I also posted this just recently: There is nothing above that's not factual. And those are only two examples of facts I've posted relative to 9/11. This thread is for posters who have changed their minds about 9/11, it isn't meant for posters to ridicule or lie about other posters. Stick to the topic or quit posting in this thread.
1. Of that's the case then quit spreading lies about me. Iv told no lies and you can't prove that. 2. Iv been on topic to the letter with this thread. You asked a question I answered it. I used to be open to the idea that things could have been questionable about what really happened on 9/11. But the more I interacted with folks like you with your crazy nonsense conspiracies and general hatered for the US I was able to realize the truther movement was just full of ****. That is on point to the topic of the thread exactly.
If one believes the original story as two hijacked airplanes flew into the the WTC and another into the pentagon, that I believe. I don't think there is a conspiracy theory out that can debunk that fact. I also believe the very low trust in our own government by the public at large leads to a bunch of conspiracy theories. http://www.gallup.com/poll/5392/trust-government.aspx When only 19% of Americans have trust in their own government, I'm not a bit surprised that conspiracy theories arise. That somehow it has to be the government behind this or that. The fact our government has taken part in numerous covert operations and constantly lies to the public about almost everything also breeds a fertile ground for conspiracy theories. Keeping the most mundane things classified also leads to more conspiracy theories. I don't think 9-11 is a lie. Too many camera and video footage for it to be so.
Well that's also a lie because I proved it in the post you responded to. If I hadn't posted any facts, you would be able to show that all the facts I posted are not facts. You haven't made a single attempt for even one fact, who are you fooling? True but you also posted a bald faced lie about me. Not exactly. In the first place your post (following the first sentence) is filled with more lies and in the second place you're attempting to ridicule me and "folks like [me]" which have nothing to do with the topic of this thread. Facts are not mine nor are they "crazy nonsense conspiracies", they are just facts and don't belong to anyone. Whether the facts suggest or reveal conspiracies is another matter, they are still facts nonetheless. I've never posted anywhere that I have a "general hatered (sic) for the US". That is just another bald faced lie. I actually love this country and I try to do what I can to educate as many as I can about those who are attempting to destroy our Republic. The destruction of our Republic is not being conducted by outside forces despite the propaganda spewed by those who are destroying it. "The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." - Thomas Jefferson "America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." - Abraham Lincoln Repeating a lie as often as you want does not make it true.
So you never changed your mind then because that was the official story from day 1. Unfortunately it's not a fact (as you wrote it). It's not up to any "conspiracy theory" to debunk it, it's up to the US government to prove it. The burden of proof always rests with the claimant. I agree but the US government has published an unsupported conspiracy theory of its own. To trust it is to have faith in a pathological lying entity, which is illogical, at least for most intelligent people. I can't disagree with the above. I assume you mean you don't believe the official narrative of 9/11 is a lie. There is no video footage of any plane crashing into the Pentagon though, just 4 frames that don't actually show what impacted the Pentagon. For me the video footage of the destruction of the 3 towers on 9/11 alone proves the official narrative is a lie. Unfortunately there's a ton of other evidence that proves the official story about the towers a lie. I created 2 threads on the subject that contradict the official narrative. They both use the official reports and quotes and other claims from officials responsible for the 9/11 narrative as the focus of reference. http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/the-nist-9-11-scam-exposed-in-all-its-glory.458597/ http://www.politicalforum.com/index...mission-scam-exposed-in-all-its-glory.495859/ It isn't just about watching planes on video slam into towers and later watching 3 towers being destroyed, there's so much more to it than just the videos. Most of that aspect is never officially explained or even addressed in some cases. But don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to get you to change your mind, I'm just posting facts and my personal opinion in response to your post. If you've never changed your mind about 9/11, I sincerely doubt you ever will.
Granted, people believe what they do. Some seem to have the need to change others beliefs and ideas to suit their own. I have never been one of those folks. Now we all have seen the footage of the two planes crashing into the WTC. Was the resulting fire, jet fuel etc. enough to weaken the structure to bring it down. I think so. It wasn't that long ago just north of Atlanta a tanker truck carrying gasoline was in an accident under a bridge and the resulting fire was enough to weaken the bridge, concrete and steel, that it was closed down for a month or longer to make repairs. The Georgia DOT was afraid driving over it would cause the bridge to collapse. Jet fuel burns much hotter and those planes were fully loaded. Proof enough, I don't know. It's up to each to decide that themselves. What caused the WTC to collapse upon itself which it did really wasn't what I was worried about at the time and not since. It was more about finding out who and getting those responsible. It turned out to be AQ with UBL behind it. I was working at Ft. McPherson as a Department of the Army Civilian. I'm satisfied and for me that is all that counts. I didn't particularly care for the nation building, I thought that was wrong, but that is a different subject for another day on another thread.
Agreed. In my case, all I can do is post the facts and add my opinion. I do that because I want to inform those who want to know, discuss the issues and hopefully share information in the process. You can take a horse to the water but you can't make him drink it. You're one of the rare posters who believes the official story but is not here to ridicule those who don't or even just question it. There is an enormous amount of research conducted by experts that contradicts that, especially for WTC7. It's strictly your call to examine it or not. I've posted quite a bit of it in this section of the forum. That very same event was brought up in post #29 in this thread and I responded in post #31. Absolutely. Well that's the official explanation. IMO, besides that the buildings did not collapse (as a natural consequence of planes/damage/fire or fire alone in the case of WTC7) it makes no sense that Al Qaeda under the direction of Bin Laden could have pulled that off without lots of help even if the buildings did naturally "collapse". If you're also satisfied that you've done all the proper research and your conclusion is still the same or even if you didn't and you don't care to and you're comfortable with yourself then it certainly is all that counts. It is a different subject but 9/11 is and continues to be used as the pretext for the endless fake war on terror and the hegemonic agenda of those in the highest positions of authority within the US government. Getting at the truth about 9/11 is critically important to try to end this war on humanity.
The United States is always getting involved in other nations or countries business, for what purpose I don't know. It like we, the United States always wants to tell other countries what's best for them. Even if they don't want what we say or offer. What is important to each of us differ. As a military man all my life, after 9-11 it was getting those responsible. Granted UBL and AQ could have pulled off what they did without a lot of help. Help probably coming from countries and people who say they are allies of ours. Maybe not the leadership involved, but people, wealthy and high ranking individuals. There has been a lot kept classified by the government pertaining to 9-11. It's a lot like the assassination of JFK. So much was kept classified and out of public knowledge a lot of conspiracy theories evolved. There still is a lot that is still classified. One reason was LBJ was worried if the finger pointed toward Cuba the American people would demand war against Cuba and thus might lead to WWIII against then the USSR. So Oswald's trip to Mexico and his meetings at the Soviet Embassy there were kept hushed up, classified for a while. There's much more. The Warren Commission didn't get half the stuff the government had on Oswald, but made an honest effort with what they had. I really find it ironic that the government expects the people to trust it, but the government doesn't trust the people. Who's president or what party is in power, that doesn't change.
According to the official story, 3 out of 4 planes hit their targets perfectly and conveniently without one iota of interference from the most powerful military defense apparatus second to none on the planet. The 4th plane was also unmolested. It was a "failure of imagination" they said. In other words, they built this $trillion military defense apparatus that they admitted (not in so many words) was absurdly incompetent and rendered impotent as a result. And this is coming from a pathological lying entity that hides everything under pretext of national security and does everything it can to coverup the 9/11 event. I know you believe the story and I'm no military man but if I were in charge of that military, an awful lot of heads would roll. But instead, the leadership was promoted and not one person was ever sanctioned in the slightest for such insanely gross incompetence. And the 9/11 Commission actually published in their own words in the Preface of the 9/11 Commission Report "their aim has not been to assign individual blame". I'm one of those 89% or whatever who trusts NOTHING about what the US government says. For me this was an obvious STAND DOWN. For me 3 steel frame high rises whose cores could hold up 10 buildings of the same weight or more each did not naturally "collapse" as a result of planes/damage/fire, they were blown apart in the case of WTC1 and WTC2 as graphically captured on video and WTC7 was taken down just any successful controlled demolition. There is only one way a building can come down just like a controlled demolition, it's by controlled demolition as also captured on video. Planes, damage, fire, earthquakes cannot make a building come down so it looks almost exactly like a successful controlled demolition. And for me the US government would have to prove that small fires or any fires in WTC7 could take down the entire building such that it looks exactly like a successful controlled demolition. And the NIST report not only didn't even come close, it's full of lies and deceptions. It's a complete insult to one's intelligence even if one is not an engineer and knows zero about physics. This to me is a sick and pathetic joke: Bin Laden and his gang could not possibly do all that on their own or maybe not even at all. Foreign entities could not do that to those buildings. None of this makes sense. But that's just me.
Shooting down civilian airliners is forbidden. The U.S. military doesn't want another KAL 007 incident. Once the planes were hijacked, the standard operating procedure is to negotiate with the hijackers. No thought of shooting down a passenger filled Jet was ever complemented. No one ever dreamed in 2001 any hijacker would crash his hijacked plane into buildings. That was beyond comprehension. It was probably assumed they would want money or some release of prisoners as was the case up and until 2001. Sure, the military could have easily shot them down, but what an uproar that would have caused. If you think there are a ton of conspiracy theories now, think about shooting down an unarmed civilian jetliner even if it had been hijacked. The military and those in the towers had no idea whatsoever the plan of the hijackers was to ram the planes into buildings. Shooting them down back then wasn't an option. It may or may not be now, but how do you read the mind of a hijacker? How to you explain to the families of those on the plane that we just shot it down because another 9-11 might be in progress. There is just no way to know.
The bottom line is that the proof that it was an inside job is crushing. http://www.politicalforum.com/index...orted-9-11-terrorists.456423/#post-1066183060 You can't make it go away by talking about why they planes didn't get shot down.
It's not about shooting down the planes even though what you're saying is arguable. There wasn't any reasonable attempt to intercept any of the planes in accordance with standard hijacking protocol. Furthermore, there were 12! military exercises in progress scheduled specifically on 9/11 all conveniently severely reducing air defense resources along the Eastern corridor. Yes, they said it was a "failure of imagination" despite that they had conducted exercises just for that very same scenario. Yet another insult to one's intelligence. Had they intercepted any of those planes within a reasonable amount of time and the "hijackings" were known quite early on, they could have easily figured out where those planes were headed. But all is moot when the objective was to make sure it all went according to script. Our $multi-trillion military defense apparatus in action defending the nation on 9/11. If the official story is 100% true, then the incompetence level at the highest levels in our untrustworthy government and military is beyond astounding. Sorry I'm not that gullible.
Bob, you have a very Hollywood understanding of how air traffic control procedures and military procedures work in the real world.
Someone who has a Hollywood understanding of 9/11 should not be criticizing anyone else's understanding of anything.
The facts are numerous, and have been available for many years now. In 2017, if a person is unaware of those facts he is either morbidly incurious or in a state of denial. Yes, those facts are often suppressed by the mainstream media, but there is alternative media. That they are suppressed shows that the elements suppressing them are somehow threatened by the truth.
You know, I was serving on active duty in the Navy when 9/11 went down. Not only had I been stationed on surface ships, but I had also been stationed with an aviation squadron for 4 years. One of the things that I learned is that aviation gas burns a hell of a lot hotter than regular gas. Another thing that I learned is that there are lots of airplane parts that are made out of magnesium, and magnesium is a metal that can catch fire, and will burn until it's gone (even underwater) because it makes it's own fuel and oxygen when it burns, and it burns at several thousand degrees. If an aircraft caught fire and we saw grey/whitish smoke coming out of the wreck, standard policy was to push it off the side. Why? grey/white smoke indicates a metal fire and it will burn all the way through the ship. So yeah, considering that you saw the outline of the aircraft on the building, and it looked like the wings (which store the fuel for the aircraft) went all the way into the building, meaning you have a lot of aviation gas and magnesium parts that can catch on fire and burn through the steel of the building. I also had actually been in the WTC back in the 80's, and it was an impressive building. One of the interesting parts is that the high speed elevator shaft is in the center of each of the buildings and is made out of reinforced concrete, as well as provides a strong spine for the buildings. When the top 30 floors collapsed because of the weak steel the thing that made the buildings drop straight down was the elevator shafts. Do I think that 9/11 was a false flag? No. I think 9/11 was done by terrorists, and the greater number of them were from Saudi Arabia, and not Iraq. Bin Laden had everything to do with 9/11, but Saddam didn't. Jr. attacked the wrong person when he went after Saddam and ignored Bin Laden. And, it was actually the removal of Saddam in Iraq that gave rise to ISIL.
http://www.ranker.com/list/all-911-movies-or-list-of-911-movies/all-genre-movies-lists This one wasn't made in Hollywood: Neither was this one:
