Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

[ComsatAngel2017]

Have you read about these hijackers? Hardly cold-blooded killer types according to their flight instructors. And they used these box cutters to open up jugulars did they?

A bigot? Getting desperate?

British Army training of the pre-1914 era emphasised that a fatal bayonet wound would result from inflicting a penetrating injury of four inches - you do not need to run a person through with a 24" sword bayonet to kill them. Given this, a man armed with a 4" blade could easily inflict fatal wounds on a static target, especially if said target had only limited mobility.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

I don't buy that argument either frankly, the BTK killer (or the BTK strangler) killed about 10 people between 1974 and 1991. Do you know what he was at the time of his arrest in 2005? He was a city employee, a cub scout leader, and an active member of his church.

Imagine that... the cub scout leader and church boy was actually a serial killer that evaded police for 30 years...

 

[ElMondoHummus]

The flight instructors characterizations of the hijackers is far from being the final word. In fact, it's only a small part of each flight-trained hijacker's life story. The fact remains that many of the hijackers - not only the ones who took flying lessons, but also much of the "muscle" - were known to have been at Al-Qaeda training camps at some point in their lives. As one example, Khalid Sheik Mohamed told interrogators that Hani Hanjour was identified in the al Faruq camp in Afghanistan.

Furthermore, other traces of their movements clearly indicates either association with known radicals, if not outright participation in radical groups before being trained in terrorism. Again, Hanjour is an example of this (the former, actually).

The evidence, not limited to the multiple flight instructors' recollections, clearly indicates radicalized personalities. In a way, Tempestra is right: They weren't "cold blooded" killers. On the contrary, when you consider radical islamicist rhetoric, it's rather hot-blooded emotionalism which drives them. Regardless, the attempt to portray them as something other than murderous is clearly false when the entirety of the known evidence is considered.

 

[000063]

A bunch of weaklings overpowering 4 commercial airliners with exacto knives seems less likely to me.

Emotive language. A bunch of determined men driven by religious fanaticism surprised several pilots and overpowered them. Also, they didn't do so well on Flight 93.

The US military and US intelligence agencies, however, specialize in compartmentalizing information, subverting security, and just generally being brutal. So for some to think this is "impossible" is just ridiculous. And no, I'm not interested in coming up with a narrative. I'm not a storyteller, nor am I claiming that the conspiracy was less than complex. Someone claimed to know how many people it would take and I wanted more information about that.

Even the most conservative estimate, assuming the scheme was even possible, requires the involvement of thousands. And that's just the bombs and cleanup.

Wires in building debris? Stop the presses.

Miles of unusual wiring not commonly found in buildings in a debris field pored over by thousands of detectives, FBI agents, and, oh yes, construction workers, many of whom would know what demo wiring should look like.

Frankly, we don't know what type of explosives would have been used. It's commonly believed that the US military has the most advanced technology on the planet, so comparing this type of job with a commercial one is valueless.

Except that if you don't know what explosives were used, or even whether they exist, you can't make an affirmative claim that they were used. It's like my niece saying she rides to school with a gigantic purple dinosaur every day, and then I ask her how the dinosaur fits on the bus, and she says she doesn't know but insists he still does.

Your entire argument is predicated on conjecture.

Said the guy who just argued that the US may have some sort of top-secret explosive that we don't know about which is what they used on 9/11. This is a skeptics' forum. Evidence, not conjecture, T29.

 

[chrismohr]

What is it much like then? A collapse due to debris damage? Find me one video of a large building damaged on one side that did anything but topple in that direction.

Hi Tempesta,

Looks like there are two you can look at: the YouTube link on this page to the nonexplosive horizontal CD which still fell mostly straight down, and the YouTube of the Delft University 2008 collapse of a tall steel-framed concrete reinforced building built up to code in the Netherlands which fell very fast and almost straight down after a seven-hour coffee machine fire 3/5 of the way up the building. Happy watching!

 

[tempesta29]

Emotive language. A bunch of determined men driven by religious fanaticism surprised several pilots and overpowered them. Also, they didn't do so well on Flight 93.

Except they didn't quite align with your language according to those who actually came in contact with them.

And no, in fact, they at least took control of flight 93's cockpit. Thankfully they were shot down.

 

[tempesta29]

Wrong. You're the one making the positive claim here - that structural steel must always present resistance to a collapse - and I'm pointing out that your claim is invalid because inelastic buckling and plastic hinge fracture can completely remove any resistance to collapse by a steel column, and that it's reasonable to infer from the dynamics of the collapse that this was the actual process that led to a near free-fall phase. If you want to address that argument, I suggest you learn a few of the basic concepts behind the theory you're trying to put forward, because all you're doing at the moment is highlighting your total ignorance of the subject.

Dave

No Dave.

Telling an individual whom you don't know to learn something has no bearing on the argument presented. Basic physics demonstrate your fallacies. Steel resists more than air, all the time. WTC 7 didn't come down piece by piece, in a haphazard fashion that would be associated with its haphazard damage.

It came down in very uniform fashion. Its biggest facade damage was on its southwest corner, yet its collapse still began with a central bowing. Its north side was virtually unscathed in all regards, yet its steel components were still measured at free fall.

So if the north face's structure reached free fall for 2.25 seconds, what is the estimate of debunkers as per the amount of free fall the heavily damaged south face experienced?

 

[triforcharity]

No Dave.
Words words words.......

My edit.

Hey Tempe, how much resistance should a buckled column provide? Just a simple question for you......

 

[Christopher7]

In Building Seven, smoke was pouring out of most of the side of the building facing the now-destroyed WTC Towers.

Incorrect. I have posted this before so why do you keep making that blatantly false statement?

NCSTAR 1-9 Vol.1 pg 196
Due to the wind direction, it was common for smoke to “bank up” against the south face. For this reason, it was usually not possible to differentiate different types of smoke or to identify smoke source locations on the south face.

Here is the same phenomenon at the NE corner:
http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/1710/figure5135.jpg


The fires on floors 19, 22, 29 and 30 had burned out by 1:00 p.m. - NCSTAR 1A pg 29

At 1:30 p.m., the only known fires were; floor 7 on the west face, and floor 12 on the south face. - NCSTAR 1-9 pg 243 - WTC Part IIC pg 21

NIST says the building was eventually no match for the flames that raged out of control for several hours after the firefighters were unable to pour any more water on it.

Incorrect
They had water and plenty of pressure at 1:30 p.m.
[FONT=&quot]http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/7650/fig548130pm.jpg[/FONT]

 

[TruthersLie]

Bump for Tempest... Something about box cutters not being dangerous...

You are soooo right. Box cutters (not to metnion 4 inch folding blades) are completely harmless...
ETA
OOPS... wrong URLS. Fixed.

http://www.beta.cjonline.com/news/state/2010-11-18/trial_set_in_box_cutter_murder
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/bo...ning-tram-attack/story-e6frf7jo-1225842322389
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/local-breaking-news/virginia/snowball-leads-to-cut-throat-p.html
http://www.kansascity.com/2011/06/13/2948429/police-arrest-man-suspected-of.html
http://slumz.boxden.com/f5/oct-17-mans-throat-slit-box-cutter-over-color-bandana-orlando-778479/

Yup... perfectly safe.... I can post images of the damages a box cutter can do to a person... they are rather gross and NSFW....

 

[TruthersLie]

Bump for Tempest...

you seem to be dodging this.

UNless you come up with a plausible narrative, no one can come up with an estimate.



Wowsers... ignorance and incredulity. cool.
weaklings?

Have you bothered to read the 9/11 CR, or the other fantastic references like Looming Tower, Perfect Soldiers, spying blind?

The four muscle terrorists on each flight were anything but weaklings.

overpowering 4 commercial airliners...
Did they fight EACH and every person? nope. They sat in first class and business which were very sparsely populated. They used mace/pepper spray as per betty ong, they grabbed someone and stabbed them (as per betty ong) and then (now it is supposition) used a very simple technique "open the door or I'll kill her/him" or even better, just probably opened the doors themselves.

Or are you saying the "top gun pilots" would be able to overcome 5 hijackers iwth knives? Can you fight someone if you are strapped into a seat and cannot stand?

what were the procedures for hijackings pre 9/11... you might want to look them up.

xacto knives? Oh... yes... box cutters, and four inch folding knives... Your ignorance and incredulity are amazing. Have you ever seen the kind of damage a boxcutter can do in a fight? especailly if you are strapped into a seat and can't stand up? especially if prior to 9/11 no one had ever killed the pilots by slicing their throats....

My students in china almost all carried box cutters for protection... they are cheap, easy to use, and have multiple purposes (like for cutting thing) but they are not illegal. Do some searches for box cutter fight pictures... they aren't pretty.

arguments from incredulity rejected...
I'll make you a deal... meet me in Dubai, we can rent a small room, I can strap you into a chair like the pilots seat and I can show you exactly how much damage an xacto knife, and a box cutter can do.... mkay? (of course you will have to sign a waiver for insurance purposes)


Ah yes... the appeal to magic.
Even if they are masters of compartmentalizing... some people would be able to piece it together... There would be leaks.

of course now the US military are part of it too... I love the belief by folks that the military are mindless automotons who blindly follow orders, and of course US intelligence is black hearted spys who would order the deaths of their fellow citizens...

Your theory... who is involved, then we'll be happy to tell you an estimate.

Of course it also means anyone involved in the clean up is either a in on it b ignorant and stupid c completely clueless...


You are right. It isn't "impossible." Do you know what else isn't impossible? It is fully possible for you to flip a coin 50 times straight and have them all land as heads. It is fully possible. the probability of it happening are soooooooo remote that for all intents and purposes it is "impossible." (ask any statistician). It isn't impossible to be struck by lightening. twice.... or thrice... or even seven times. (which has happened to one man) but for all intents and purposes it is so remote that it is "impossible" that you would be struck by lightening more than 2x. Many things are possible that are so remote.

The purpose isn't to find any possibility. But to find one that a. fits the evidence we have b. that has any possibility of occuring c. that explains the events in a simpler manner... nothing any truther has ever come up with does that. why not?



ah yes... the no claimer... a rare bird. Unfortunately the burden of proof is on the claimant. That would be YOU and the truth movement. The common narrative explains the events of the day very well, it follows the KISS rule of military operations and it flows logically...

So give us a theory, and I'll happily give you a rough estimate of the number of people who would HAVE to be involved in some direct way, and others who would have to be involved indirectly.



Since the wires used for detonating explosives are VERY specific... yes... stop the presses. They don't just "blend in." That leaves out all of the wrappings, the left over explosives, the residue of explosives, the tell tale damage to the columns.....

argument from ignorance (do you have any other type of arguments?)




Appeal to magic fallacy... yet again.
Explosives follow certain chemical rules... feel free to find an explosive that is capable of cutting steel that doesn't... I'm sure the Nobel committee would love to hear about it.

And back to the mindless automotons in the military with no conscious... Yup... they would willingly murder 3000 civilians... (your ignorance and incredulity are showing again)



Not at all..

but if I conjecture
1. you have never served in the military and don't know much about it.
2. you have no idea about construction or more importantly demolitions
3. you are terrified that some random individual would be willing to murder you just because you are different.
4. that you feel that it is easier to blame "them" "da gubmint" for all the problems in your own life instead of taking responsibility for your own actions and failings.
5. that you hate the US (or maybe it was GWB) so much that instead of using any type of thought processes which starts with the simpliest explaination, you have to construct massive fantasies filled with mindless automotons who would murder you because they follow orders, with a set of ruthless blackhearted individuals above them... What a terrifying world you must live in....

 

[TruthersLie]

Except they didn't quite align with your language according to those who actually came in contact with them.

And no, in fact, they at least took control of flight 93's cockpit. Thankfully they were shot down.

More appeals to magic...

EVIDENCE?

Oh wait.. ignorance and incredulity... got it.

 

[Oystein]

...Basic physics demonstrate your fallacies.

You have not used basics physics ever on this forum.

Steel resists more than air, all the time.

This is so obviously wrong, it is hard to come up with an idea how to make it even more obvious to you, who can't grasp the simple concept that buckked steel becomes a liability, not a support, to a structure. Remember, we are talking about stage 2, which is AFTER the strructural steel in question has buckled inelastically and completely.

WTC 7 didn't come down piece by piece, in a haphazard fashion that would be associated with its haphazard damage.

It came down in very uniform fashion. Its biggest facade damage was on its southwest corner, yet its collapse still began with a central bowing. Its north side was virtually unscathed in all regards,

Except that it lost its lateral bracing when the core collapsed seconds earlier.
Did you not know that the core was already in the process of failing and falling when the north face started to visibly collapse?

yet its steel components were still measured at free fall.

Yes, AFTER it buckled.

So if the north face's structure reached free fall for 2.25 seconds, what is the estimate of debunkers as per the amount of free fall the heavily damaged south face experienced?

Irrelevant.

 

[sylvan8798]

Except they didn't quite align with your language according to those who actually came in contact with them.

And no, in fact, they at least took control of flight 93's cockpit. Thankfully they were shot down.

Wait a minute...I thought truthers didn't believe there were terrorist hijackers? Now you are saying we shot down a plane with some on it in the middle of our false flag attack?

I'm so confused...

 

[triforcharity]

Incorrect

They had water and plenty of pressure at 1:30 p.m.
[FONT=&quot]http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/7650/fig548130pm.jpg[/FONT]

They had what appears to be one (possibly 2" or 1 1/2") handline. What they are spraying is unclear.

I can assure you that there would never had been enough pressure to get a hose to the 7th floor or above in 7WTC. Too much hose would have had to be stretched into an unstable structure, further endangering firefighters' lives unnecessarily.

Stop pretending you know the first thing about fire or firefighting, because it's obvious that you do not.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Expecting the building to fall toward the corner damage is a non-sequitor. If that on its own were sufficient to initiate the collapse it would have happened much earlier in the day. This reminds me of all the assumptions that get thrown around about the fires. Apparently what you can't see inside the building does not exist, seems to be a favorite among the TM group

 

[chrismohr]

Incorrect. I have posted this before so why do you keep making that blatantly false statement?



Here is the same phenomenon at the NE corner:
http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/1710/figure5135.jpg


The fires on floors 19, 22, 29 and 30 had burned out by 1:00 p.m. - NCSTAR 1A pg 29

At 1:30 p.m., the only known fires were; floor 7 on the west face, and floor 12 on the south face. - NCSTAR 1-9 pg 243 - WTC Part IIC pg 21

Incorrect
They had water and plenty of pressure at 1:30 p.m.
[FONT=&quot]http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/7650/fig548130pm.jpg[/FONT]

Hi Chris7,

A couple things: A real answer to your rhetorical question... sometimes I have to see things twice before it sinks in. Ask Oystein or Ryan Mackey. I try their patience too. Correction accepted and made, just in time (final recording Monday). I have the ABC video and another video of smoke POURING out of multiple floors from Building 7 late in the afternoon, clearly not just smoke hanging onto the side of the building due to wind. It was a BIG fire, unless you don't believe the videos and multiple firefighter reports.

Water at 1:30? Is this true Tri? Even so, that leaves several hours till 5:20. And at what time did chief Nigro pull his firefighters away? At that point firefighting efforts ceased, water or no water.

 

[Oystein]

...
Water at 1:30? Is this true Tri? Even so, that leaves several hours till 5:20. And at what time did chief Nigro pull his firefighters away? At that point firefighting efforts ceased, water or no water.

The image C7 posted shows a hose that has water. There is no telling where that water came from - hauled in in a tank? It is by no stretch of the imagination proof that WTC7 had water.

 

[beachnut]

No Dave.

Telling an individual whom you don't know to learn something has no bearing on the argument presented. Basic physics demonstrate your fallacies. Steel resists more than air, all the time. WTC 7 didn't come down piece by piece, in a haphazard fashion that would be associated with its haphazard damage.

It came down in very uniform fashion. Its biggest facade damage was on its southwest corner, yet its collapse still began with a central bowing. Its north side was virtually unscathed in all regards, yet its steel components were still measured at free fall.

So if the north face's structure reached free fall for 2.25 seconds, what is the estimate of debunkers as per the amount of free fall the heavily damaged south face experienced?

The inside of the building was collapse for over 10 seconds before the facade fell. And, you are ignoring the rest of the building, from the other side of WTC 7 the collapse did not look nearly as uniform.

911 truth fails on this argument, failing to present the whole story, failed to see the video of the other side. 911 truth, failed for 10 years, no more than a typing tutor practical. Zero evidence, zero knowledge and a lot of failure. Where is your Pulitzer? Watergate got one in less than 2 years; 911 truth should have 5 by now if they had evidence. 911 truth needs to see if the Wizard has some evidence for them, or other essentials.

My suggestion is to study Watergate, and figure out what evidence is, and how to use it to make rational conclusions based on reality.

911 truth has no idea what evidence is, what it means to have evidence, and 911 truth does not care. Who would believe what 911 truth believes for so long and be incapable of doing something about it? What is the word for that?

 

[tempesta29]

The inside of the building was collapse for over 10 seconds before the facade fell.

This is measurably false.