Invitation for Java Man to discuss his 9/11 theory

Java Man said:
The OP invites me to express my theory, but proposes a theory of its own as mine. Odd isn't it?

Will you allow me to express my theory? I mean my theory as a whole, not just the part about the building collapse. Will you?
Click to expand...
All you've ever had to do is post your theory. Do so now, if you will.
 
ProBonoShill said:
Why do truthers always assume the U.S is immune to attack?

Was the Oklahoma bombing an inside job?

How about the attack on the U.S.S Cole?

The London subway attack?

The Columbine shootings?

Jeffery Dahmer?

If someone wants to kill in a free society, people are going to die, especially if the person doing the killing doesn't care about living himself.

If someone wanted me dead, I'd be dead, my local police dept could quadruple their budget, I'm still going to die.

We all know why the planes weren't shot down (well most of us with a brain do). They couldn't be located in time and due to budget cuts NORAD's focus was on potential attacks coming from the perimeter. What's never discussed (at least by truthers) is the extraordinary nature of these hijackings.

A normal hijacking usually consists of the perpetrator making demands and holding the plane hostage.

In the meantime the pilots are relaying information to the tower, security forces start making preparations on the ground, the process usually lasts for hours, giving authorities time to assess the situation and make decisions.

On 9/11 the hijackers actually wanted to fly the plane and were prepared to die, so the pilots were killed, transponders turned off and no one was notified anything was wrong.

Now eventually the hijackings were discovered but how are you supposed to shoot down something you can't locate, don't know is in trouble and if you do manage to find them why would you shoot them down? You have no idea these planes are about to be crashed into buildings momentarily.

How was anyone to know these sadistic cowards planned to actually fly a large passenger plane into a building and kill themselves too?

How do you negotiate when the other side is hell bent on being a martyr and won't talk?

Various government agencies should've been more co operative and proactive to possibly prevent what happened that day but truther hindsight doesn't change reality.

Evil smart men hatched a plot to kill thousands and were successful.
Click to expand...


Let me put this another way.

For 30 years, the UK state allocated vast resources to fighting Irish Reblican terrorism; it was, on the whole, unsuccessful despite using what we now know to be some fairly ruthless tactics. What reason is there to believe that that the US could in any way prevent similar attacks using a fraction of the resources?
 
Java Man said:
The OP invites me to express my theory, but proposes a theory of its own as mine. Odd isn't it?

Will you allow me to express my theory? I mean my theory as a whole, not just the part about the building collapse. Will you?
Click to expand...

Will we allow you? No one's stopping you. For pete's sake, man, that was question 1 from the beginning. You are the one who's derailing. For 3 pages now, too.
 
Ok getting down to the theory.

After listening to many of the debunker positions and a few truther positions I believe the most solid theory would center around the use of thermite and the minimal use (if any of explosives).
 
We'll I was hoping folks would support my incomplete posts as much as they support NIST's incomplete report. It would only be fair.

Should I post in FAQ format?
 
Java Man said:
We'll I was hoping folks would support my incomplete posts as much as they support NIST's incomplete report. It would only be fair.

Should I post in FAQ format?
Click to expand...

Don't care how you support it, as long as it's complete. You complain about the NIST report, so I am expecting a detailed report that discusses how your theory was accomplished. This should include things like who planned it, carried it out, quantities of thermite and explosives, how the collapse occurred from initiation to completion, how the DNA was faked, all the people who helped in the cover up, etc.
 
Well for starters there is clear evidence of something like thermite or thermite like reactions occurring. From the bright molten fluid dripping from the tower to the molten metal found days later within the rubble.
 
Java Man said:
And the buildings collapse, obviously!
Click to expand...

facepalm.gif


Java Man said:
We'll I was hoping folks would support my incomplete posts as much as they support NIST's incomplete report. It would only be fair.

Should I post in FAQ format?
Click to expand...

That's not even clever. First of all, NIST has a comprehensive explanation of the collapse initiation. Even if we grant your claim that the report is incorrect simply because it did not iterate all the repetitive and expected failures post initiation, then you still fall short because you have not given positive evidence for thermite's presence in the towers, nor have you even given a framework for how it would've installed, let alone collapsed the towers. And that's not even close to the point where discussion elsewhere in this forum has been on thermite; that's just the kindergarten, entry-level point for introducing a thermite hypothesis.

My post above is the minimum level of explanation you should give. Minimum. Fail to achive even that, and you're not even coming close to the level you need to achieve to participate here, let alone effectively participate.
 
Last edited:
Java Man said:
Well for starters there is clear evidence of something like thermite or thermite like reactions occurring. From the bright molten fluid dripping from the tower to the molten metal found days later within the rubble.
Click to expand...

Molten metal is correct. Now, identify the metal using pictures and other research to defend the molten metal claim.
 
What would explain the molten fluid pouring out of the tower then? What explains molten metal in the "pile" days after the incident?
 
triforcharity said:
Molten metal is correct. Now, identify the metal using pictures and other research to defend the molten metal claim.
Click to expand...

Don't let him distract you with this stuff, as that is what he wants. Just ask for more detail as opposed to his one or two sentence responses. I would hope he would be able to flesh out his theory more than he has so far.
 
Java Man said:
What would explain the molten fluid pouring out of the tower then? What explains molten metal in the "pile" days after the incident?
Click to expand...

There are quite a few different metals that would have been found in ABUNDANCE in the towers that melt at or below 1000 deg. F.

Could this molten metal be one of those? Absolutely. Now, the scientific thing to do, would be to rule these out one by one using facts and evidence.

Now, this is where you come to a complete stop there, because you cannot rule them out.

ETA: Now, what would be the significance of this molten metal?
 
Last edited:
Java Man said:
One of the main implications is the use of thermite or similar components to melt metal.
Click to expand...

Thermite is a very quick reaction. To be able to keep metal molten for an extended period of time, there would need to be tons and tons of this stuff. How much do you propose was there, and how did it get there. Cite your sources, and also provide evidence.
 
Well evidence for sulfidation was found both on WTC 7 and WTC 1. So that begins to clear the way for a thermite theory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom