bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
I's a bit early to be converting poor Michael Jackson into the new Elvis for the use of debunkers.
Split Thread WTC7 is a problem for the 9/11 official story
- Thread starter bill smith
- Start date
I's a bit early to be converting poor Michael Jackson into the new Elvis for the use of debunkers.
JohnG
Pedantic Bore
Bill, when you get a chance, I'd appreciate it if you could address my last post (352) in this thread. I know there's some snarkiness in there, but at the heart of it I have a sincere question for you. Tear it apart if you want to, but I'd be really interested to see how you address it.
If you don't respond to this message I'll assume you either have me on ignore or are for whatever reason choosing not to respond and I won't pursue it any further.
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
The official story of 9/11 is such a tissue of lies that there are literally hundreds of areas of dispute. I challenge in these areas where I can.
9/11 or a similar event had been in the planning for decades. Read the Northwoods documents for a rough outline of the modus opperandi . Listen to the lawyer Stanley Hilton who attended the university of Chicago in the early 60's and was a contemporary and friend of Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith. They used to brainstorm ways of bringing about political change in America. Hilton's own final thesis was 'How to create a Presidential Dictatorship in America by anufacturing a bogus Pearl Harbour event'. Considering that what later became known as the 'Wolfowitz Doctrine' was in effect on 9/11 and with Paul Wolfowitz as Secretary for Defence the coincidence is just too great to ignore.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uT7kcAu4i8 PNAC
9/11 was anything but flawless. For instance I believe that WTC7 was intended to have been struck by flight 93. This fell through when flight 93 got held up for an hour on the runway at Newark which in turn culminated in the event in shanksville. So both the obvious CD of WTC7 amd the so -called crash in Shanksville were connected forced errors that they have somehow survived up till now.
Putting the explosives and incendiaries in the three buildings was child's play. they simply pumped nanothermite inside the core columns and ignited them by remote. Nobody in the building would hv looked twice at engineers drilling a hole at the top of a column and inserting a tube or the nozzle of a spraygun. A different and explosive type of nanothermite as used higher in the building. Like in the top 13 floors of WTC1 for instance which essentially blew up throwing chunks as large as four tons 600 feet or the length of two football fields
It only takes the guys at the top and their immediate underlings to direct an operation even of this size. Tthe rest perform their function nd just do as they are ordered Even if they had their suspicions afterards it was a simple matter to gag them or intimidate them. Between 2003 and 2006 the FBI handed down more than 200,000 gag orders. How many in 2001-2002 is classified from what I understand. Even with this there are literally hundreds of whistleblowers.
A compliant media was also an essential. No problems there...
So you see where WTC7 fit into the picture ?I could go on and on about the rest...
Last edited:
JohnG
Pedantic Bore
Uh huh, uh huh...but wouldn't it have been easier to just fly planes into buildings?
Again, imagine yourself for a moment as one of the conspirators in your scenario. Yes, the plan is sufficiently "Mua! Ha! Ha!" EVIL, but is it an intelligent plan? Is it a plan you would have agreed to?
Again, imagine yourself for a moment as one of the conspirators in your scenario. Yes, the plan is sufficiently "Mua! Ha! Ha!" EVIL, but is it an intelligent plan? Is it a plan you would have agreed to?
Last edited:
The conspirators thought of everything, except they didn't account for those damn airport delays.
Of course, with those nano pumps we've all seen before.
Of course, thermite usually is ignited remotely, as we've all seen before done countless times.
Damn, do you even read your own posts?
triforcharity
Banned
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 13,961
Here is the only flaw in Bill's BS idea I will point out.
How was this remote used?? Was it wireless?? because if it was, we have a problem, as it wouldn't have worked. If it was a wired remote, how did nobody notice a giant wire coming out of the building, down the street, and in through the 3rd floor window of a guy in a ninja suit??
How was this remote used?? Was it wireless?? because if it was, we have a problem, as it wouldn't have worked. If it was a wired remote, how did nobody notice a giant wire coming out of the building, down the street, and in through the 3rd floor window of a guy in a ninja suit??
Of cource he would, Murpheys Law does not apply in trutherland.
lapman
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 1,717
And you've failed 100% of the time. But I digress.
Yet you cannot come up with even a plausible reason to use WTC7 instead of something more prominent like the stock exchange which would have fit completely into your "shock and awe" scenario where WTC 7 would have not. That still does not explain why they would have demolished it anyway. Your fictitious destruction of unknown evidence for unknown investigation that may or may not have been going on is absolute lunacy. The fire alone would have been enough to cover the documents "disappearing." Not only that, WTC does not look like any CD that has ever been done in history. The only thing that is remotely similar is the walls collapsing. Other than that, there is nothing. The east penthouse is the first thing that is nothing like any CD that has been done. The lack of sound is another. The lack of anything even resembling explosive detonations is visible.
Shows that you haven't a clue about human psychology. A bunch of guys drilling around your office would have been noticed and remembered.
Here is your heap load of failure. For the explosives to have done that, they would have made a big, huge SOUND that would have been recorded on 100% of all recording devices for MILES. Without that SOUND, your fictitious scenario is not even plausible, let alone believable by any reasonable person over the age of 2.
Yet the "most gagged person in history" is anything but silent.
Just ask Nixon about that.
Yep, it completely destroys your fantasy, but if you want to spew forth a bunch more lies, go ahead. BTW, Northwoods went to great pains to insure no American citizens would die, so anything based on it would do the same. Nice try, but you fail again.
lapman
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 1,717
Especially since they did not have a backup aircraft to use just incase something like this happened. Then again, we all know that delays never occure.The conspirators thought of everything, except they didn't account for those damn airport delays.
Especially since they did not have a backup aircraft to use just incase something like this happened. Then again, we all know that delays never occure.
Backup airplanes? Now you're pushing it, even Bill Smith isn't that gullible!
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
No....they needed a huge media spectacular to 'shock and awe' the American public into a kind of catatonic state that they could continually reinforce with wall-to-wall media broadcasting of the fireballs and so on. Combined with GW talking himself hoarse on TV about 'Osama bin Laden' and terror,terror terror. Any fool can see the sychological manipulation at work.
The intention was to turn the collective American mind into a putty like state in which you would allow them to do anything at all that they wanted including voting your own shackles into existence. I can tell you....they were 100% sucessful in this regard.
Last edited:
Last edited:
bill smith
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 8,408
lol
So far, all you've done is to show how convinced you are of your conclusion, the "why they did it", and you've tried to fit everything else, the "how", into it, no matter how clumsy and idiotic it sounds.
Got to hand it to you, you have gusto, anyone with an once of self respect wouldn't spout such inanities out loud.
LOL indeed.
lapman
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 1,717
Just trying to understand the mind set. Really. It was was definitely NOT in a NWO memo about contingency plans. Honest. I would not lie about that.Backup airplanes? Now you're pushing it, even Bill Smith isn't that gullible!
JohnG
Pedantic Bore
Here's another point to consider when weighing the "Official Story" against the, uh, unofficial story...or stories (all 836 of them); For Al Qaeda'a plan to work, all they have to to is convince a small, determined group of men to sacrifice themselves for what is perceived by them to be a noble cause, train them to fly planes, hijack four jets and crash them into preselected targets. As long as most, if not all of the targets are hit and there is at least some loss of life, their plan is a success. Certainly not a trivially easy plan to orchestrate and carry out (thankfully), but many orders of magnitude easier than the "inside job" theories, for three reasons:
1. No matter how much you and other Truthers try to hand wave away the incredible amount of complexity involved in your theories, I'm sure even you must concede that the decades long scheming with hundreds, if not thousands of co-conspirators using exotic materials and/or remote controlled devices and/or holograms and/or missiles and/or smoke pots and all around split second timing to pull off this "illusion" would be much harder to execute than the Al Qaeda scenario I outlined above?
2. Even if you can't concede that last point, consider this; as far as Al Qaeda is concerned, as long as the planes crash into something and there is some loss of life, they can claim success. If the buildings stay standing, fine, if they collapse, better still. I seem to recall in one of the early Bin Laden tapes released following the attacks, Bin Laden and his number two expressing their amazement that both towers collapsed. For them it was an unexpected bonus, not their original aim. Your theory, Bill and the theories of all the other CTists demand that the twin towers (at least) must be utterly destroyed. Both for the shock and awe factor and to help conceal the devices and materials used in the demolition. If such devices and materials are found, the jig is up, which leads me to...
3. Even if you can't concede either of the preceding, there's one other minor point that makes your theories much more unwieldy and nonsensical; for the "Inside Job" scheme to work, the conspiracy must go undetected at least until Iraq has been invaded and Saddam toppled, but from the perps point of view, they'd no doubt hope they'd go undetected basically forever. If compelling evidence really had presented itself in the weeks and months following 9/11 that something didn't quite add up, the blowback on the perpetrators would have been enormous and they certainly wouldn't have gotten their war in Iraq and cheap oil like they wanted.
If Al Qaeda kill some people and scare some others, then they have a success. They stuck it to the man, they humbled the great satan. That's it. They don't care if they get discovered after that, on the contrary, that only leads to further glory. If the "Inside Job" perps get discovered, the murder of thousands of their fellow countrymen have been entirely in vain and they go down in history as some of the most detestable villains and traitors the world has ever known.
I'm tempted to invoke Occam's Razor, but it is actually much more simple than that. It isn't just that one scenario contains fewer assumptions than the other, it is that one of the competing theories in question has absolutely no evidence to back it up. I'll give you two guesses, but I'll bet you still manage to guess incorrectly.
What gives you the perverse arrogance to assume that you and your rapidly dwindling cadre of fellow travellers are the only ones with the brains and the courage to see and admit to "The Truth", while 99% of everyone else, many of whom are experts in the very fields you presume to lecture on disagree with you?
1. No matter how much you and other Truthers try to hand wave away the incredible amount of complexity involved in your theories, I'm sure even you must concede that the decades long scheming with hundreds, if not thousands of co-conspirators using exotic materials and/or remote controlled devices and/or holograms and/or missiles and/or smoke pots and all around split second timing to pull off this "illusion" would be much harder to execute than the Al Qaeda scenario I outlined above?
2. Even if you can't concede that last point, consider this; as far as Al Qaeda is concerned, as long as the planes crash into something and there is some loss of life, they can claim success. If the buildings stay standing, fine, if they collapse, better still. I seem to recall in one of the early Bin Laden tapes released following the attacks, Bin Laden and his number two expressing their amazement that both towers collapsed. For them it was an unexpected bonus, not their original aim. Your theory, Bill and the theories of all the other CTists demand that the twin towers (at least) must be utterly destroyed. Both for the shock and awe factor and to help conceal the devices and materials used in the demolition. If such devices and materials are found, the jig is up, which leads me to...
3. Even if you can't concede either of the preceding, there's one other minor point that makes your theories much more unwieldy and nonsensical; for the "Inside Job" scheme to work, the conspiracy must go undetected at least until Iraq has been invaded and Saddam toppled, but from the perps point of view, they'd no doubt hope they'd go undetected basically forever. If compelling evidence really had presented itself in the weeks and months following 9/11 that something didn't quite add up, the blowback on the perpetrators would have been enormous and they certainly wouldn't have gotten their war in Iraq and cheap oil like they wanted.
If Al Qaeda kill some people and scare some others, then they have a success. They stuck it to the man, they humbled the great satan. That's it. They don't care if they get discovered after that, on the contrary, that only leads to further glory. If the "Inside Job" perps get discovered, the murder of thousands of their fellow countrymen have been entirely in vain and they go down in history as some of the most detestable villains and traitors the world has ever known.
I'm tempted to invoke Occam's Razor, but it is actually much more simple than that. It isn't just that one scenario contains fewer assumptions than the other, it is that one of the competing theories in question has absolutely no evidence to back it up. I'll give you two guesses, but I'll bet you still manage to guess incorrectly.
What gives you the perverse arrogance to assume that you and your rapidly dwindling cadre of fellow travellers are the only ones with the brains and the courage to see and admit to "The Truth", while 99% of everyone else, many of whom are experts in the very fields you presume to lecture on disagree with you?
Last edited:
nicepants
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2007
- Messages
- 1,723
So...you believe NIST when they say that this did not play a role in the collapse, but you don't believe nist when they state what DID cause the collapse. Is that right?