All 9/11 ideas welcomed here

[gumboot]

I am not saying the CIA or anyone else needs magic or mind readers to disolve future terrorist attack, but based on numerous articles and intel the agencies likely had prior to 911, the attacks should have been predicted within a few months...alex jones even predicted it in july...or he hinted at a possible event.

Um... Alex Jones did nothing of the sort. Alex Jones said IF a terrorist attack occurred he would blame it on the government.

As to your other point... As to the other matter, you seem to be having some trouble grasping the concept of "actionable intelligence". It is not enough to know "someone wants to attack us". You have to have verifiable specific information about a very specific attack, otherwise there's nothing you can do to prevent it.

So, by one of your comments, in order for us to prevent most attacks we must get lucky and have good intel? gee thanks, but you are right in the fact that if someone really wants to hurt you, you can't do much (if anything) about it, I aint that dumb.

That's pretty much the reality. National Security and counter terrorism is not like taking a car to the mechanic to get it fixed. Sometimes you stop them, sometimes you don't. Sometimes you end up chasing dead ends. Such is the shady world of intelligence.

I guess my feeling is, where do we draw the line and say, Frank you're fired for not getting the correct intel and capturing that guy before he blew up the nuclear plant? Do we hire people into intel communities to give them a free pass? If they get it right (lucky like you say often times) then they get a raise or just a high five, but if they get it wrong do we just pat them on the back and say you'll get 'em next time ole chap?

You know, they used to use the methodology you propose in the military. Soldiers who failed to achieve objectives would get shot. It doesn't work very well. You end up shooting more and more soldiers, and morale plummets.

As I said, this is not like fixing a car. If your mechanic screws up fixing your car, sure, he should get in trouble for that.

Counterterrorism is a very difficult and chaotic, uncontrolled environment. You simply cannot expect intelligence agencies to prevent every attack. What you're proposing would be like firing a detective every time a murder was committed.

Why is it you cannot accept that the FBI and CIA did everything they could to prevent a terrorist attack, given the laws and resources that had to work with, and it simply wasn't enough? Why does someone have to be blamed?

If you want to blame someone, blame the terrorists.

They are the ones that made the decision to bring mass murder to your doorstep. Take up the issue with them.

All you will achieve by attacking the people trying to protect you is drive them from their jobs, leaving you open to more attacks.

-Gumboot

 

[israelside]

Easy: it didn't. It damaged nearby buildings. If it fell within its own footprint, no other building would've been damaged as they cannot, by definition, share the same footprint.

It did not fall straight down. It was leaning.

How can you say that ? Are you an expert in building collapses ? I am really looking for experts here not just speculators.

wtc 7, from video evidence (4 angles that I know of) show the building falling in a pretty much straight down fashion, some of the siding could have struct nearby buildings, but at no measure can anyone say it was a total lopsided collapse, because the bulk of the rubble is on top of itself (in it's own footprint). I am no expert, but I have eyes and sense of a smart person, to some degree atleast!

Anyone, get me detailed pictures of the rubble pile (little smoke or none) and video of the building collapse that shows it leaning to one side...I can not find it anywhere! Obviously, everyone of you know it leaned on one side, so you must have the evidence somewhere, bookmarked or whatnot!

 

[Corsair 115]

wtc 7, from video evidence (4 angles that I know of) show the building falling in a pretty much straight down fashion, some of the siding could have struct nearby buildings, but at no measure can anyone say it was a total lopsided collapse, because the bulk of the rubble is on top of itself (in it's own footprint). I am no expert, but I have eyes and sense of a smart person, to some degree atleast!

Search these forums. The photos demonstrating that the building did not fall neatly into its own footpring are around here, I remember seeing them not all that long ago.

Anyone, get me detailed pictures of the rubble pile (little smoke or none) and video of the building collapse that shows it leaning to one side...I can not find it anywhere! Obviously, everyone of you know it leaned on one side, so you must have the evidence somewhere, bookmarked or whatnot!

See above.

 

[stateofgrace]

I guess my feeling is, where do we draw the line and say, Frank you're fired for not getting the correct intel and capturing that guy before he blew up the nuclear plant? Do we hire people into intel communities to give them a free pass? If they get it right (lucky like you say often times) then they get a raise or just a high five, but if they get it wrong do we just pat them on the back and say you'll get 'em next time ole chap? Where is the line drawn? I guess you can't tell if an intel agent really ISN'T doing his job unless you know something that he should, and then you see him screw up at it? How do we know if the guy is failing at his job, or just not getting enough info to do his job? People should always be held accountable, and more people should take actions for the correct thing!

You are asking the impossible of the security services, that being they provide you with 100% security night and day. That they arrest the bad guy before he commits whatever act of violence he is planning and they do so knowing they will get the right bad guy and not some innocent bystander.

You do realize what an impossible request you are making of these people. On one hand you would be the first to moan and groan that your civil liberties are being removed because of new laws designed specifically to target would be terrorists and on the other hand you demand to know why the counter terrorist organizations are unable to stop every single terrorist action. They cannot offer you 100% protection 24/7, they cannot get the bad guy every time, it is impossible. If it was possible then there would never be another single terrorist action again.

Maybe, just maybe you should stop and ask yourself a few soul searching questions before your continue to run down those who try to protect you.

Would you prefer they were not there? Would you prefer that every time they missed something, or got it wrong, those they employed were jailed?

It is very easy to criticize those whose job it is to counter the threat of terrorism, it is oh so easy to get on ones moral high horse and call for blood when they get it wrong. Hey why not even accuses them of being part of it while you are at it?

You ask where the line is drawn; it is drawn between providing you and your family with an adequate level of security without encroaching onto your civil liberties. You cannot expect to be protected from terrorist actions unless you provide those who do the protecting with power to protect you. It is this simple and it is you call.

You either give the counter terrorist organizations the strength and power to do their jobs, free of fear of reprisals and blame if they get it wrong or you remove their powers and say ¨Hey who needs you guys, after all you didn’t stop every single terrorist action ¨. Again your call.

 

[gumboot]

wtc 7, from video evidence (4 angles that I know of) show the building falling in a pretty much straight down fashion, some of the siding could have struct nearby buildings, but at no measure can anyone say it was a total lopsided collapse, because the bulk of the rubble is on top of itself (in it's own footprint). I am no expert, but I have eyes and sense of a smart person, to some degree atleast!

How many times must you be told this is false before it finally registers? WTC7 fell across a four lane road and hit 30 West Broadway severely enough that it had to be demolished. That is not "straight down" by any measure I am aware of.

Are you aware that a number of demolition experts were on site at Ground Zero from 3pm onwards, and witnessed WTC7 collapse? Are you aware that they state they knew the building was going to collapse, and that they deny seeing any evidence whatsoever of an explosive demolition?

You said yourself that you're not an expert. These people ARE experts, and moreso, THEY WERE THERE.

-Gumboot

 

[israelside]

Um... Alex Jones did nothing of the sort. Alex Jones said IF a terrorist attack occurred he would blame it on the government.

As to your other point... As to the other matter, you seem to be having some trouble grasping the concept of "actionable intelligence". It is not enough to know "someone wants to attack us". You have to have verifiable specific information about a very specific attack, otherwise there's nothing you can do to prevent it.

That's pretty much the reality. National Security and counter terrorism is not like taking a car to the mechanic to get it fixed. Sometimes you stop them, sometimes you don't. Sometimes you end up chasing dead ends. Such is the shady world of intelligence.

Counterterrorism is a very difficult and chaotic, uncontrolled environment. You simply cannot expect intelligence agencies to prevent every attack. What you're proposing would be like firing a detective every time a murder was committed.

Why is it you cannot accept that the FBI and CIA did everything they could to prevent a terrorist attack, given the laws and resources that had to work with, and it simply wasn't enough? Why does someone have to be blamed?

If you want to blame someone, blame the terrorists.
They are the ones that made the decision to bring mass murder to your doorstep. Take up the issue with them.

All you will achieve by attacking the people trying to protect you is drive them from their jobs, leaving you open to more attacks.

-Gumboot

there was alot of general threats, but how much do we not know of that is classified, that's the thing...we hear about the broad range issues, no details for the public remember...taking that into account what did the agencies know prior 911? No one really knows, not even you gumboot...heaven forbid!

I realize, counterterroism is a hit in miss game sometimes, i never said it wasn't, but my point was...when do you draw the line and say, ok enough, you had your chance, you're fired??

We shouldn't fire a detective after a murder, we fire a detective because after he gathered all the evidence, he missed a crucial piece that could have solved the case! Often times he still isn't fired...but when would you fire him in that case then? After he messed up 10 times, 20, 100? It often times is a judgement call that is tough to make....I think in those cases, it is a sign of consistent bad behavior and not being able to do the most basic duties.

The terrorists are the global elite, the ones who pull the strings in this world, the ones who did 911...that's who is to blame, and I will always believe that!
Local agencies are not at fault often times, they are just used just like the terrorists (on the large scale attacks), not to say OBL is a good guy, he should be arrested of course, he is just being used.

 

[gumboot]

You are asking the impossible of the security services, that being they provide you with 100% security night and day. That they arrest the bad guy before he commits whatever act of violence he is planning and they do so knowing they will get the right bad guy and not some innocent bystander.

You do realize what an impossible request you are making of these people. On one hand you would be the first to moan and groan that your civil liberties are being removed because of new laws designed specifically to target would be terrorists and on the other hand you demand to know why the counter terrorist organizations are unable to stop every single terrorist action. They cannot offer you 100% protection 24/7, they cannot get the bad guy every time, it is impossible. If it was possible then there would never be another single terrorist action again.

Maybe, just maybe you should stop and ask yourself a few soul searching questions before your continue to run down those who try to protect you.

Would you prefer they were not there? Would you prefer that every time they missed something, or got it wrong, those they employed were jailed?

It is very easy to criticize those whose job it is to counter the threat of terrorism, it is oh so easy to get on ones moral high horse and call for blood when they get it wrong. Hey why not even accuses them of being part of it while you are at it?

You ask where the line is drawn; it is drawn between providing you and your family with an adequate level of security without encroaching onto your civil liberties. You cannot expect to be protected from terrorist actions unless you provide those who do the protecting with power to protect you. It is this simple and it is you call.

You either give the counter terrorist organizations the strength and power to do their jobs, free of fear of reprisals and blame if they get it wrong or you remove their powers and say ¨Hey who needs you guys, after all you didn’t stop every single terrorist action ¨. Again your call.

In my experience the best way to destroy this argument is to point out that Nazi Germany had no problem with terrorists once they took power.

Likewise, China, North Korea, and Iran don't have terrorism problems.

Something to think about.

-Gumboot

 

[gumboot]

The terrorists are the global elite, the ones who pull the strings in this world, the ones who did 911...that's who is to blame, and I will always believe that!

Simple question.

What would it take to convince you that you were wrong?

-Gumboot

 

[israelside]

You are asking the impossible of the security services, that being they provide you with 100% security night and day. That they arrest the bad guy before he commits whatever act of violence he is planning and they do so knowing they will get the right bad guy and not some innocent bystander.

You do realize what an impossible request you are making of these people. On one hand you would be the first to moan and groan that your civil liberties are being removed because of new laws designed specifically to target would be terrorists and on the other hand you demand to know why the counter terrorist organizations are unable to stop every single terrorist action. They cannot offer you 100% protection 24/7, they cannot get the bad guy every time, it is impossible. If it was possible then there would never be another single terrorist action again.

Maybe, just maybe you should stop and ask yourself a few soul searching questions before your continue to run down those who try to protect you.

Would you prefer they were not there? Would you prefer that every time they missed something, or got it wrong, those they employed were jailed?

It is very easy to criticize those whose job it is to counter the threat of terrorism, it is oh so easy to get on ones moral high horse and call for blood when they get it wrong. Hey why not even accuses them of being part of it while you are at it?

You ask where the line is drawn; it is drawn between providing you and your family with an adequate level of security without encroaching onto your civil liberties. You cannot expect to be protected from terrorist actions unless you provide those who do the protecting with power to protect you. It is this simple and it is you call.

You either give the counter terrorist organizations the strength and power to do their jobs, free of fear of reprisals and blame if they get it wrong or you remove their powers and say ¨Hey who needs you guys, after all you didn’t stop every single terrorist action ¨. Again your call.

State, you did not address one point in my post, I never said that i expect 100% security, nor a perfect system, nor was I talking about the line being draw between civil liberties and protection under the law...THE TOPIC WAS, where do we draw the line on a specific intel agent...where do we say, Ok enough of your actions sir...now you are fired for not getting the bad guy? Does it take another 911? Does it take multiple mishaps? Stop spewing that evil neo con garbage out, that stinks!

 

[gumboot]

How old did you say you were?

-Gumboot

 

[israelside]

How many times must you be told this is false before it finally registers? WTC7 fell across a four lane road and hit 30 West Broadway severely enough that it had to be demolished. That is not "straight down" by any measure I am aware of.

Are you aware that a number of demolition experts were on site at Ground Zero from 3pm onwards, and witnessed WTC7 collapse? Are you aware that they state they knew the building was going to collapse, and that they deny seeing any evidence whatsoever of an explosive demolition?

You said yourself that you're not an expert. These people ARE experts, and moreso, THEY WERE THERE.

-Gumboot

Ya, well there are so called "experts" everywhere, some prove it was a CD, some prove is wasn't...some swear nothing happend, other swear it was a CD...As far as I know, NIST is doing the most research on it, I havn't read all their work, but I plan on it. It's really pointless arguing these issues because we don't have overwhelming evidence to prove it one way or another, that's why we get these wild conspiracy theories...obviously because we don't know enough about the situation! Why don't any of you mention these things? Could it be because you yourself don't have enough information? From the images i see, 30 west broadway's corner was hit and some debris in in the street, but the entire building was not destroyed by the building leaning over onto it!

 

[israelside]

Simple question.

What would it take to convince you that you were wrong?

-Gumboot

more evidence, conclusive evidence, unbiased 100% proof!!!!...are you toto's friend? lol

I have told toto this multiple times, problem is he doesn't accept it as a good answer, because it's the only answer that's right!

 

[israelside]

How old did you say you were?

-Gumboot

Why? So you can cut me down to more without facing more real issues? I have told you numerous times my info, look it up...why don't you tell us yours? Chicken?

 

[gumboot]

Ya, well there are so called "experts" everywhere, some prove it was a CD, some prove is wasn't...some swear nothing happend, other swear it was a CD...As far as I know, NIST is doing the most research on it, I havn't read all their work, but I plan on it. It's really pointless arguing these issues because we don't have overwhelming evidence to prove it one way or another, that's why we get these wild conspiracy theories...obviously because we don't know enough about the situation! Why don't any of you mention these things? Could it be because you yourself don't have enough information? From the images i see, 30 west broadway's corner was hit and some debris in in the street, but the entire building was not destroyed by the building leaning over onto it!

From the Environmental Protection Agency:

The building at 30 West Broadway, known as Fiterman Hall, was used as a classroom building by the City University of New York (CUNY) Borough of Manhattan Community College (BMCC) classroom building prior to September 11, 2001. The building was undergoing a gut-rehab that was nearly complete on September 11, 2001. It is a 1950s-era 370,000 square foot, fifteen story steel and concrete structure. The building is currently vacant.

It is the intent of CUNY and the Dormitory Authority of the State of New York to first abate and decontaminate the building and then demolish it.

The page has a number of pdfs relating to the planned work, including a work plan for decontaminating the building and pulling it down.

-Gumboot

 

[gumboot]

more evidence, conclusive evidence, unbiased 100% proof!!!!...are you toto's friend? lol

I have told toto this multiple times, problem is he doesn't accept it as a good answer, because it's the only answer that's right!

So nothing, basically? Your beliefs are unfalsifiable.

Thank you for clarifying that for me.

-Gumboot

 

[CptColumbo]

more evidence, conclusive evidence, unbiased 100% proof!!!!...are you toto's friend? lol

I have told toto this multiple times, problem is he doesn't accept it as a good answer, because it's the only answer that's right!

As a point of philosophy, there are only two things that you can be 100% sure of. That you exist and that you have senses. Everything else is based on past experiences.

Will the sun rise tomorrow? You only now it will because it always has in the past, but tomorrow may be different.

So I find your desire for "100% proof" to be unreasonable, especially since those who don't believe the generally accepted account have yet to make me doubt the GAA.

If you wish to continue the philosophical end of this, I suggest you make your way to the Religion and Philosophy sub-forum.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=4

 

[israelside]

From the Environmental Protection Agency:

The page has a number of pdfs relating to the planned work, including a work plan for decontaminating the building and pulling it down.

-Gumboot

Well the building was next to wtc 7, alot of aspestos or whatnot probably got in it and it was hit on the corner and likely it was hit in other places that left it vulnerable. Where does it say how much of a direct impact it took from the wtc 7 collapse itself and not just debris from the towers? You got that handy?

 

[stateofgrace]

State, you did not address one point in my post, I never said that i expect 100% security, nor a perfect system, nor was I talking about the line being draw between civil liberties and protection under the law...THE TOPIC WAS, where do we draw the line on a specific intel agent...where do we say, Ok enough of your actions sir...now you are fired for not getting the bad guy? Does it take another 911? Does it take multiple mishaps? Stop spewing that evil neo con garbage out, that stinks!

What on earth are you talking about? Evil neocon garbage?

It’s actually called reality my friend, reality being there really are people who have answered the calling of Al Qaeda and really do subscribe to this ideology. Something you appear unwilling or unable to grasp. You seem it be living in a twilight world where Al Qaeda is a black op with UBL as the puppet head of the said black op.

You are completely and utterly wrong.

You may not have noticed but your country is at war with this ideology, whether you agree with this war or not is irrelevant, but you had better get you head around the fact that it is very real and very dangerous. Or maybe it is better to stick you fingers in your ears and sing as loudly as possible LALALAL, I’m not listening

 

[israelside]

thanks columbo, but not today...maybe 100% evidence is too high, but atleast overwhelming evidence...why didn't you mention this?

 

[gumboot]

Well the building was next to wtc 7, alot of aspestos or whatnot probably got in it and it was hit on the corner and likely it was hit in other places that left it vulnerable. Where does it say how much of a direct impact it took from the wtc 7 collapse itself and not just debris from the towers? You got that handy?

There's a four lane road between WTC7 and 30 West Broadway. As I have told you repeatedly. Answer me honestly, do you ever read any of the replies people provide you with?

-Gumboot