Hello JREF, I bring you "Tin Foil"!

[babazaroni]

1) The "squibs" at the sky-lobby level preceding the collapse by several floors... there are lots of explanations for these anomalies, but if you've ever been in the sky lobbies, the air-pressure explanation doesn't make sense... especially as the collapse is happening above.

What makes you think that there was not an internal collapse preceding by a few floors the visible external collapse?

2) The speed of the collapse... while not as fast as free fall, it's not much slower either.

The amount of energy dissipated to hold up a collapse from 9 seconds to 14+ seconds is enormous.

Or did you want it to go clunkity-clunk for each floor?

If you are concerned that the collapse will halt at some point, then you had better time the explosives so the building does fall at free fall speeds. If not, then you risk having the collapse overrun your explosives and the collapse stopping.

If you are not concerned about the collapse halting, then free fall time does not matter either way.

And why does the building need to collapse anyway? Four airliners hijacked, 1000 dead and 3 smoking icons would have been enough to incite war.

 

[beachnut]

Yes, but before Woodward and Bernstein put the nails in the coffin, they were considered "conspiracy theorists" and took a great deal of heat for being so. I'm by no means attempting to compare any contemporary posters on ATS to these excellent journalists, only show how perception changes as the facts bear out.

Never heard this one before. Never heard Woodward and Bernstein as CTers. Not once. They gathered and verified evidence on Watergate.

That is the real truth. They found information to prove something. They got a Pulitzer Prize.

9/11 CTers are void of facts and any capability to research.

Do you agree? You have produced no facts yet, just CT fake ideas. No facts. You are no Woodward or Bernstein! Woodward and Bernstein did not open their mouths until they had verified data. You present information with no verified data. Why?

 

[Brainache]

Originally Posted by Brainache
So these people in shadows pulling invisible strings to make the puppet men dance, who are they?

Now you're either just being silly, or trying to poke sticks at the latest caged rate. The line at the top of your forum contains: "a place to discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly and lively way".


Originally Posted by Brainache

Does it make more sense to think that everything is under control,

Hrm... it seemed like a lot of people thought it made sense to believe the administration's original reasons for invading Iraq. As it turns out, there were plans to focus on Iraq before 9/11 and the rationale sold to the UN and US people was certainly not under control. If something as important and far-reach as that was manipulated for the benefit of the "military industrial complex", what else is? How deep does it go? When did it start? What else is being manipulated? These reactions to falsehoods from our government are born of skepticism.

I wasn't being silly. I'm curious as to who you think is behind the conspiracy. To say that there are people in shadows manouvering events is not good enough.

Your answer to the second point of mine doesn't seem to make much sense. I never believed the Bush administration's stated reasons for war in Iraq. I don't personally know anyone who did. Maybe Bush believed it, maybe the diehard republicans believed it, maybe all the Americans who wanted revenge believed it. Nobody working in the SBS newsroom with me at the time believed it.

So they had this plan to benefit the military industrial complex by creating even more terrorists? By creating a market for more munitions? By using up all their weapons before the expiry dates? Is that what you mean by control?

The control I was referring to was the idea that everything that happens is the result of some conspiracy and not just people doing what they do best; ie making mistakes.

 

[ktesibios]

It was spotted by British airmen flying an American-made Catalina flying boat sent to Britain under the Lend-Lease program. I just saw a show about the Bsmarck a few weeks ago!

eta: as usual in these things, gumboot beat me to it.

The pilot of that Catalina was an American Navy officer, Ensign Leonard B. Smith.

It was not until 1010 on 26 May that British luck changed. A British Catalina aircraft of No. 209 Squadron, piloted by US Navy observer Ensign Leonard B. Smith, USNR (US Naval Reserve), spotted Bismarck at a range of about eight miles. While Ensign Smith flew the aircraft and evaded accurate German antiaircraft fire, his British copilot radioed a report of the enemy warship's location

http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq118-1.htm

There's a link to Smith's report on that page as well.

Ludovic Kennedy also covers this in his book Pursuit: The Sinking of the Bismarck.

 

[SkepticGuy]

To say that there are people in shadows manouvering events is not good enough.

I never said any such thing (as far as I can recall). Are you finding that in some of my old posts on ATS? If so a link would help.

I never believed the Bush administration's stated reasons for war in Iraq.

Good. So then, do you wonder if there was a conspiracy within the administration to concoct a fabricated rationale to invade Iraq?

So they had this plan to benefit the military industrial complex by creating even more terrorists?

That is the crux of a commonly discussed contemporary conspiracy theory (and a recent HBO special... damn, there see, you made me mention HBO twice). Our massive military industrial complex needs a reason for being and for growing.

The control I was referring to was the idea that everything that happens is the result of some conspiracy and not just people doing what they do best; ie making mistakes.

Are you just assuming I believe this?


Well folks, for the most part it's been an enlightening day. I can honestly say I didn't expect the rapid-fire pile-on here, but I've enjoyed the exchange with the majority here. I can't promise the same amount of involvement tomorrow but I will indeed be stopping by as much as I can.

I'll try to get to the other 9/11-related questions, but really, as I've said, I'm not the best expert for some of these questions... not because I lack the experience, but because my recent focus is on running the site... and when I let my tin foil hat cock sideways too much, like I did today, the mind-control waves get in and I get a little fuzzy and can't concentrate just right and I have an urge to go by "Catcher in The Rye" and each tapioca pudding.

g'night

 

[David Wong]

Getting this guy to admit he is MIPHOP was like pulling teeth. I've never seen somebody dance so desperately around what they believe.

How many posts did that take? So the buildings were wired to blow, a project that had to have started at least a year ahead of time. Nobody uncovered it, either before or after. A project and a coverup that would include thousands of people, and nobody came forward.

Thank you. I don't see what's different from this guy and the dozens of other 9/11 deniers out there. Only that he's chosen a middle ground (terrorists flew planes into the towers... AND they were wired to blow?!) that's even more absurd than the conspiracy theory.

 

[beachnut]

I never said any such thing (as far as I can recall). Are you finding that in some of my old posts on ATS? If so a link would help.

Well folks, for the most part it's been an enlightening day. I can honestly say I didn't expect the rapid-fire pile-on here, but I've enjoyed the exchange with the majority here. I can't promise the same amount of involvement tomorrow but I will indeed be stopping by as much as I can.

I'll try to get to the other 9/11-related questions, but really, as I've said, I'm not the best expert for some of these questions... not because I lack the experience, but because my recent focus is on running the site... and when I let my tin foil hat cock sideways too much, like I did today, the mind-control waves get in and I get a little fuzzy and can't concentrate just right and I have an urge to go by "Catcher in The Rye" and each tapioca pudding.

g'night

Too many movies have you seen
Reality is not your thing

 

[Brainache]

<snip>. What most skeptics of conspiracy theory, and 9/11 Truthers, both don't understand... is that it's possible for the events to have occurred, to have been perpetrated by fundamentalist terrorists, to actually involve passenger aircraft, yet still be guided to happen by subtle covert maneuverings by a limited circle of people in dark corners of mysterious government agencies. Some people derive entertainment value from assuming a grainy bit of a low-res photo is a bomb-pod under a passenger aircraft... I don't go there. (I'm not saying such a think is impossible, but my focus has been on connecting how this compares with other conspiracy events... leaving the bombs, pods, and missiles to others.)

This was the quote of yours to which I was referring. From this very thread.

 

[SkepticGuy]

Never heard Woodward and Bernstein as CTers. Not once.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0206/S00092.htm

The point of the Woodward/Bernstein illustration is that a person can draw rational conclusions from circumstantial evidence using inductive, instead of deductive, reasoning. It wasn't until late in their investigation that Woodward and Bernstein were able to connect all the Watergate dots, but at the time no Ivory Tower leftists suggested their use of inductive reasoning and their early explorations of mere circumstantial evidence amounted to a "crazy conspiracy theory."

http://www.whoscounting.net/ConspiracyTheorists.htm

There was no other option at this point as the tapes themselves revealed that Nixon was behind the break-in, and that he and his staff were steeped in other related illegal activities. Nixon resigned in August 1974 and Conspiracy Theorists Woodward & Bernstein were vindicated.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/be03ab8a-ff19-11d9-94b4-00000e2511c8.html

Conspiracy theories are age-old, but the form they now take in democratic states owes much to the Watergate scandal, which led to President Richard Nixon’s resignation in 1974. Its extraordinary potency as a modern myth was recently re-emphasised when the confirmation that Mark Felt of the FBI was the “deep throat” who steered reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein to the senior levels of the administration received front page attention round the world.

There's a lot more... and in their book, they comment on how they were labeled as such.

 

[SkepticGuy]

(not off to bed yet, miles to go before I sleep it seems)

So the buildings were wired to blow

I never said that. Perhaps by my saying "I also feel there is compelling information related to some degree of "assistance" that ensured total structural failure" you extended that to "wired to blow". Maybe I wasn't clear... let me be clear now, I think it remains a possibility, but is an avenue of pursuit that is fruitless and fraught a mountain of highly distracting crap data (in favor of "wired to blow") online.

 

[David Wong]

But while I'm certain two passenger aircraft impacted the buildings and the resulting kinetic energy caused a great deal of structural damage, I also feel there is compelling information related to some degree of "assistance" that ensured total structural failure.

Ah, look how casually and elegantly he accuses thousands of innocent people of mass murder, and by necessity implies that the HUNDREDS of experts who have written about the subject are all complicit in covering up mass murder, often of people they knew.

Tell me, SkepticGuy, was the FDNY in on it?

Let's get down to brass tacks. Who's all guilty of murder? What about the Port Authority police, and the bomb-sniffing dogs who went through the towers, presumably intentionally ignoring the thousands of charges that had been planted in the building to provide "assitance" as you call it. Were they all in on it? Building security who let the bomb crews in, were they in on it? The researchers at NIST who found NO evidence of bombs, were they in on it? The clean-up crews who somehow didn't come across evidence of explosives, were they in on it?

Come on. Don't throw out a coy little phrase like saying the buildings had "assistance" when what you mean is that Americans planted bombs in buildings full of innocent civillians, blew them up, killing thousands, and then said nothing afterward. It's not "assistance," it's cold-blooded mass murder. Make your accusation. Name names.

 

[SkepticGuy]

This was the quote of yours to which I was referring. From this very thread.

Okay, got it, thanks.

I was speculating on how a small covert group could guide terrorist groups into planning an attack. That's very different than the "global puppet master" idea you seemed to think that extended to.

 

[David Wong]

(not off to bed yet, miles to go before I sleep it seems)


I never said that. Perhaps by my saying "I also feel there is compelling information related to some degree of "assistance" that ensured total structural failure" you extended that to "wired to blow". Maybe I wasn't clear... let me be clear now, I think it remains a possibility, but is an avenue of pursuit that is fruitless and fraught a mountain of highly distracting crap data (in favor of "wired to blow") online.

But you saw "squibs." What else could cause that?

So, how was it done, if not pre-planted explosives? A laser from a satellite? A suitcase nuke? Tell me. You've found evidence it was done. So what are we talking about? A missile on the plane?

You're throwing out accusations of mass murder here. Let's see what you've got to back it up.

 

[SkepticGuy]

Ah, look how casually and elegantly he accuses thousands of innocent people of mass murder,

Okay... I did no such thing.

Your knee-jerk conclusion-jumping is unbecoming of the critical thinking motto of this group.

 

[ConspiRaider]

Getting this guy to admit he is MIPHOP was like pulling teeth. I've never seen somebody dance so desperately around what they believe.

How many posts did that take? So the buildings were wired to blow, a project that had to have started at least a year ahead of time. Nobody uncovered it, either before or after. A project and a coverup that would include thousands of people, and nobody came forward.

Thank you. I don't see what's different from this guy and the dozens of other 9/11 deniers out there. Only that he's chosen a middle ground (terrorists flew planes into the towers... AND they were wired to blow?!) that's even more absurd than the conspiracy theory.

Exactly my sentiments. Dance, bob and weave and we FINALLY get to MIHOP for the care and feeding of the ravenous military industrial complex.

So the wiring of the WTC complex was done - during the Clinton Administration - and then the Feddies patiently waited for some nutball terrorist group to slam passenger jets into the Twin Towers so they could detonate the preset explosives. At the point of plane impact.

Holy friggin' Toledo.

 

[David Wong]

Okay... I did no such thing.

Your knee-jerk conclusion-jumping is unbecoming of the critical thinking motto of this group.

You didn't complete your post. See, the logical next thing would be to say what you DO believe.

Instead we've got about a dozen posts from you saying, "I didn't say that" and then saying NOTHING else. You're good at telling us what you didn't say, but terrible at coming out and saying what you believe.

Who else could have planted "assistance" in the buildings to make them come down? Are you saying the terrorists did it? Or are you saying it was an inside job? Who planted the things that made the squibs?

Why are you so afraid to describe what you think happened, if you don't believe the official story?

 

[Brainache]

Okay, got it, thanks.

I was speculating on how a small covert group could guide terrorist groups into planning an attack. That's very different than the "global puppet master" idea you seemed to think that extended to.

No worries.

So the other conspiracy events are all of a similar US domestic nature?

That's where I got my global puppet master thing from, I thought you were talking about international conspiracies like the UN etc.

 

[David Wong]

The 9/11 straddler: A Play

_____________________________________

"I'm so sorry to hear about your sister."

"Yes, it was a terrible accident."

"Accident? Is that what you think?"

"What?!?! You think she was MURDERED?!?"

"I didn't say that."

"Well... you implied it wasn't an accident..."

"Oh, I'm not one to make accusations. Let me just say that I think she had some 'assistance' in her death."

"WHAT?! WHO!!? I'LL KILL THE S.O.B!!! I CAN'T BELIEVE THIS! MY SISTER WAS MURDERED!"

"I didn't say that."

"THEN WHAT ARE YOU SAYING!?!? You just accused someone of MURDER! Who was it? Was it Tommy?"

"I didn't say that. Your attitude is very unbecoming. You should be a critical thinker in these situations. All I'm saying is that the accident report had some inconsistencies, and I think she had some 'assistance' in dying."

"THAT'S THE SAME AS SAYING SHE WAS MURDERED!!! DO YOU EVEN REALIZE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING!?? You're saying someone killed her, AND IS WALKING AROUND RIGHT NOW, FREE! TELL ME WHO! I'LL GO TO THE COPS!"

"I said no such thing."

______________________________


Kind of like a game to them, I guess. It would be funny, if it wasn't for all the murderous lies and horrific unfounded accusations.

 

[ConspiRaider]

There's a lot more... and in their book, they comment on how they were labeled as such.

Not really. I have both their books - All The President's Men and The Final Days - and there is no overriding theme at all that they were conspiracy theorists. Of course there was tremendous resistance and pressure from the Nixon Administration and their enablers (for obvious reasons). Who called W and B and the Washington Post every name in the book. Deny, deny, deny. But even that was short-lived. 18 months after Watergate, Nixon's handlers advised him rather strongly to resign.

We're 65 months from 9/11 and no proof of Bush Administration complicity in that event has been uncovered. And there is a tremendous amount of scrutiny being aimed at them - exceeding the Watergate scandal by any order of magnitude you wish to dial in.

And it's not primarily the Feddies referring to you as conspiracy theorists. It's the American and world citizenry.

 

[beachnut]

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0206/S00092.htm


http://www.whoscounting.net/ConspiracyTheorists.htm


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/be03ab8a-ff19-11d9-94b4-00000e2511c8.html


There's a lot more... and in their book, they comment on how they were labeled as such.

Do you ever think about what you say and then forget you did not read their books. The only CT about Watergate is a CT about deep throat. Everyone's favorite CT was that there was no "deep throat". Your post list Mark Felt as DT, thus that CT was false as are 9/11 CTs. Which points to the fact most CTers debunk themselves as you just did! Neat how CTers do that with every post and CT statement.

NO W&B were not CTers, I was around during Watergate and normal folk did not label them CTers. The fact being they pulled it off in less than 2 years. You are a CTer you have no facts and have made a leap towards ignorance and not doing too well after 5 years.