Official Jim Fetzer 9/11 theory thread

[ChumpDumper]

Proposing a Better Explanation

Today, we don’t have an alternative to the official conspiracy that spells out how the events of 9/11 are explained as a result of a conspiracy among insiders. Yet, at the same time, we know it is impossible that those within the popular version of al Qaeda could have shut down the U.S. air defenses for two hours on 9/11, or destroyed the WTC buildings.

Is it possible to propose a compelling alternative conspiracy based on the involvement of insiders? Could certain corporations, government representatives, and other covert operatives have been involved? Requirements for such an alternative conspiracy to be compelling would include that it address more of the evidence and answer more of the questions about what happened, while not overly complicating the conspiracy.

If we examine the events of 9/11 in terms of what should have happened that did not, and what did not happen that should have, we can focus a little better on who might have been involved. At a minimum, the following statements of fact must be addressed by any alternative conspiracy.

• The many opportunities for U.S. intelligence agencies to track down and stop the alleged hijackers should have resulted in the attacks being stopped before 9/11.

• The four planes should not have been hijacked because the systems in place to prevent hijackings should have been effective.

• The U.S. chain of command should have responded to the attacks immediately but it did not.

• The U.S. national air defense should have responded effectively and some, if not all, of the hijacked aircraft should have been intercepted by military jets.

• The three WTC buildings should not have fallen through the path of what should have been the path of most resistance.

In addition to addressing these problems, an effective alternative version of 9/11 would better explain facts related to Flight 77 and the Pentagon, Flight 93, and ancillary issues like 9/11 insider trading.

For simplicity, this alternative conspiracy should accept as much of the official account as possible, including that the alleged hijackers were on the planes. However, it should also pay attention to the question of who benefited from the attacks, which the official investigations did not cover well. The benefits realized by al Qaeda should be compared to the benefits realized by those within an alternative conspiracy.

http://911blogger.com/news/2012-05-3...spiracy-theory

Of course, this guy doesn't have a theory either.

[Nbadan]

How are your physics classes coming along Dan?

Any more news from Fetzer on Todd Beamer?

Yeah, the Bush-got-one-right crowd is winning this debate...You've got Chumpy of all people posting the possibility of 'alternative' 9/11 theories...I'm not sure if there is anything to the Tod Beamer anomolies, maybe there is, maybe there isn't, but until we are ready to talk about these types of 'alternative theory possibilities' without people needing a handful of zanex, relying on group-think, and without really factually proving anything themselves..

...where is the incentive to keep posting about this?

[ChumpDumper]

Yeah, the Bush-got-one-right crowd is winning this debate...You've got Chumpy of all people posting the possibility of 'alternative' 9/11 theories...I'm not sure if there is anything to the Tod Beamer anomolies, maybe there is, maybe there isn't, but until we are ready to talk about these types of 'alternative theory possibilities' without people needing a handful of zanex, relying on group-think, and without really factually proving anything themselves..

...where is the incentive to keep posting about this?

So you were never interested in the truth.

Figures. You lied your ass off about knowing Jim Fetzer for no reason at all.

[Agloco]

......but until we are ready to talk about these types of 'alternative theory possibilities' without people needing a handful of zanex, relying on group-think, and without really factually proving anything themselves..

A big part of your problem is that there is no alternative theory possibility. This is especially true from a physical standpoint, despite your claims.

If you want to indulge in alternatives, you may begin by explaining the alternatives to known classical mechanics theory you proposed earlier in this thread.

[Nbadan]

So you were never interested in the truth.

Figures. You lied your ass off about knowing Jim Fetzer for no reason at all.

Where did I post that I didn't want to know the truth? Who doesn't want to know the truth? Given your own doubts about some of the 'theories' outline in the 9/11 Commission report ....reasonable accusations of possible state involvement, evidence that the Bush administration knew more about the 9/11 plots than simply misinterpreting a CIA memo with Able Danger.....we could go on and on, aren't we really just debating the degree of conspiracy and possible negligence which was covered up in the 9/11 Commission report versus whether it was completely accurate or not.....

..Of course we are...

[Nbadan]

A big part of your problem is that there is no alternative theory possibility. This is especially true from a physical standpoint, despite your claims.

Of course there are....some are even actively supported by members of the original commission....and the Congressional Select committee...

....AND I haven't seen you disprove any of the theories I have posted in this thread...

[Nbadan]

You claim to have already done the research, but you've left out at least one important example of a crash similar to United 93.

There are only two reasons you could have done that: plain ignorance or deliberate omission.

I'm calling you out to tell me which one it is.

Why don't you post your theory and quit beating around the Bush....

...you think the plane buried itself into the ground and disintegrated into almost nothing..

[Nbadan]

If you want to indulge in alternatives, you may begin by explaining the alternatives to known classical mechanics theory you proposed earlier in this thread.

I stand by my point...the plane flipped at least once, all the (possible) KE energy was not expended in the original impact... meanwhile, RG's implication that at a 40 degree impact angle, at his KE, the plane would bury itself into the ground and disintegrated into nothing has never been proven...

......I posted pictures of planes which have crashed at much steeper angle into a swamp...plane didn't bury itself...chunks of plane recovered....and I posted pictures of a plane which crashed at supersonic speed....plenty of identifiable plane wreckage on the ground...

Where is your proof? Why do your implications get to be unsupported?

[ChumpDumper]

Why don't you post your theory and quit beating around the Bush....

...you think the plane buried itself into the ground and disintegrated into almost nothing..

Yep, the crash most similar to it that you somehow missed in all your years of research proves that is a very likely outcome.

I have a theory why you never brought it up.

[ChumpDumper]

Where did I post that I didn't want to know the truth? Who doesn't want to know the truth? Given your own doubts about some of the 'theories' outline in the 9/11 Commission report ....reasonable accusations of possible state involvement, evidence that the Bush administration knew more about the 9/11 plots than simply misinterpreting a CIA memo with Able Danger.....we could go on and on, aren't we really just debating the degree of conspiracy and possible negligence which was covered up in the 9/11 Commission report versus whether it was completely accurate or not.....

..Of course we are...

The point I'm debating is that you and every other "truther" out there hasn't come up with an alternative theory that could even possibly be true. In over a decade. That's how intellectually bankrupt you are.

[Useruser666]

I stand by my point...the plane flipped at least once, all the (possible) KE energy was not expended in the original impact... meanwhile, RG's implication that at a 40 degree impact angle, at his KE, the plane would bury itself into the ground and disintegrated into nothing has never been proven...

......I posted pictures of planes which have crashed at much steeper angle into a swamp...plane didn't bury itself...chunks of plane recovered....and I posted pictures of a plane which crashed at supersonic speed....plenty of identifiable plane wreckage on the ground...

Where is your proof? Why do your implications get to be unsupported?

First off, it seems you are insinuating that a commercial airliner with passengers didn’t crash there. If that is accurate of the scenario you’re painting here, then I have no need to even read another post from you. I am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but it seems you are not being honest with yourself about this. You need to be honest with yourself before you can objectively form an opinion on this or anything really.

Secondly, there are several flaws in the stream of your logic that leave you with tainted results. You seem to have no idea how physics work in regard to the transfer of energy, how variables such as mass and velocity affect it, or how the scale of such variables work in the real world. From what you have stated, I get the impression that you think the plane should have stuck into the ground like a lawn dart or bounced around like in a cartoon or a movie. Well this is real life, not a cartoon. You can’t base what “you believe to be odd” from your experiences, because you don’t have any experience with a plane colliding with the ground at 500mph at 40 degrees. Trying to reaffirm this with a few cases pulled from the internet that loosely correlate is not a subs ution for the knowledge of physics or experience of studying a similar event. You do this time and again with referencing a few pictures or the crash site and then making broad statements from such little evidence. You also misrepresent what others here are saying, either intentionally or subconsciously in an attempt to make it seem that you are somehow using logic or common sense in your argument.

Example: “the plane would bury itself into the ground and disintegrated into nothing has never been proven”

Who said this? Was it here? Where?

I would expect the plane to bury itself in the ground. It would not disintegrate into nothingness (duh!). Some of it would be burned away. Some would be unrecognizable, or fused with either itself or the ground. And other parts of it would be scattered about. In some way or another all of the plane could be accounted for. Again, to the layman this may seem amazing, but it’s really not.

Lastly, I have no idea why anyone whether being honest or dishonest would want to stretch reality so far into fantasy as the no plane argument does. I can’t understand why you want to push such a theory that is so full of holes and can be so easily dismissed when much easier and much harder to disprove alternatives exist. I would say that from what happened on 9/11 that the general feeling is that the US government either didn’t know anything about the terrorist plot, or knew too little do stop it. Now why couldn’t the issue of not being properly prepared be the criticism? Why do some need to develop complex conspiracy theories without any proof to back them up? You could have a good argument if you made any of the following statements:

1. US government was ill prepared to catch an attack plan because it was incompetent.

2. US government was ill prepared to catch an attack plan because the intelligence agencies responsible were under budgeted.

3. US government was ill prepared to catch an attack plan because an official ignored the warning or was too stupid to act appropriately.

The problem for anyone disputing those allegations is that they are hard to prove/disprove because it comes down to a judgment call. These are the easy answers and probably the most likely to have been the true underlying issue with the event. There is no need to think up some grandiose scheme involving energy weapons and magical technology that doesn’t exist. The use of common sense is lacking.

[Nbadan]

The point I'm debating is that you and every other "truther" out there hasn't come up with an alternative theory that could even possibly be true. In over a decade. That's how intellectually bankrupt you are.

There are many theories on 9/11 with great resources for you to research and debate the finer points such as the effect of KE on an airplane impact, I'll admit that some are nuttery than others, for all we know some of these could be disinformation spread by the very perpetrators to make the truth movement appear kookier than they really are..who knows? the way they manipulate the M$M it wouldn't surprise me...

.....but your being disingenuous if you really think there are no 'good' alternative 9/11 theories out there that deserve looks....

[Nbadan]

First off, it seems you are insinuating that a commercial airliner with passengers didn’t crash there.

Where did I insinuate this? I haven't insinuated anything like this...

[ChumpDumper]

There are many theories on 9/11 with great resources for you to research and debate the finer points such as the effect of KE on an airplane impact, I'll admit that some are nuttery than others, for all we know some of these could be disinformation spread by the very perpetrators to make the truth movement appear kookier than they really are..who knows? the way they manipulate the M$M it wouldn't surprise me...

.....but your being disingenuous if you really think there are no 'good' alternative 9/11 theories out there that deserve looks....

OK then -- post the alternative theories you think deserve looks.

[Nbadan]

You need to be honest with yourself before you can objectively form an opinion on this or anything really.

Who is not being honest here? Someone who thinks that intimidation of witnesses, lack of resources and subpena power, states secrets and bogus classifications, a loaded commission complete with government stooges, and a unwavering deadline is the way to run an investigation into the death of 3000 Americans...

[Nbadan]

Trying to reaffirm this with a few cases pulled from the internet that loosely correlate is not a subs ution for the knowledge of physics or experience of studying a similar event.

That's what I'm saying...by the way, that came from the crash report from the NTSB genius.....

[Useruser666]

Where did I insinuate this? I haven't insinuated anything like this...

You have insinuated that it wasn’t a plane that crashed there. You can’t be serious about this. See your own quotes below:

An (real) eyewitness who says first of all that this was no passenger plane that crashed in Shanksville, but also that the plane could not have been possibly been flying as fast as eyewitness Chumpy claims it was flying when it slammed into the ground...

Unless planes can go from almost nothing to over 500mph there is something wrong with the official Chumpy theory... and it gets worse...

Yes, the crater that officials claim was made by the crash of United 93 was already there before the crash according to a geological survey...

so, now your claiming that the plane reached a velocity of 563 MPH at an al ude of between 5000-10000 feet.....your an asshat..

I'm not the one making conjectures about airplane crashes...show me the proof

HAHAHAHAHA!!!

Did it? Did you personally see it crash?

A real look over the pdf's for UA93 FDR via NTSB website shows UA93 at 40 degrees pitch down and -5 degrees Angle of Attack at impact.

If that was the case, no matter the math, UA93 would be making a long ditch along the flight path while impacting the ground and spreading wreckage at close to a 40 degree pitch down angle. The pictures you posted of the UAL93 impact crater shows a vertical, straight down crater (~90 degrees vertical), not a 40 degree impact with a long ditch spreading wreckage as the FDR suggests.....

The pitch angle would create a horizontal wreckage crater...

I think that the pictures I posted already are a reasonable possibility that even at speeds higher than 568mph, your going to have quite a bit of debris, especially larger debris and at a 40 degree angle, that debris is going to be scattered over a much larger area than the pictures trollumpy has posted over and over again....
Why would these assumptions be wrong?

Sure it does. All other things being equal, if you drop something at a 90 degree angle it will have a more significant impact than of you drop something at a 40 degree, 30 degree, or 10 degree angle. Moreso, your going to have larger amounts of debris scattered across a larger area than you would have with a direct impact. We can debate this all we want but the impact crater does not look like an impact crater for a plane that hit the ground at a 40'degree angle. Even more, some witnesses have reported that the plane struck on a wing which would have led to debris being scattered over an even larger area.

These were just a small sample of your insinuations about there being no plane or *not the plane in question involved in the crash (* don’t even try and go there). By the way:

Insinuation [n]

1. an indirect or devious hint or suggestion
2. the act or practice of insinuating

If you can’t come to terms with this then I will know for sure you are not being honest in this discussion.

[Useruser666]

Who is not being honest here? Someone who thinks that intimidation of witnesses, lack of resources and subpena power, states secrets and bogus classifications, a loaded commission complete with government stooges, and a unwavering deadline is the way to run an investigation into the death of 3000 Americans...

I am not someone who thinks anything about witness intimidation because I have never talked about it. That also applies to , lack of resources, subpoena power, state secrets, bogus classifications, a loaded commission, stooges....little green men, physic powers, and finally... Chupacabra attacks. Please keep your convoluted points to things I actually said when addressing me.

That's what I'm saying...by the way, that came from the crash report from the NTSB genius.....

Again you missed the point. First, I don't care if you read a report from the official site or if you stayed at a Holiday Inn last night. It doesn't make you any more of an expert than the next person. Even if you were there in the field minutes after the crash, you still don't know what you are talking about.

I also find it funny that you swear by the NTSB report to back your claims when it suits you, while disparaging any "official" sources otherwise. Don't be a hypocrite too.

[Nbadan]

An (real) eyewitness who says first of all that this was no passenger plane that crashed in Shanksville, but also that the plane could not have been possibly been flying as fast as eyewitness Chumpy claims it was flying when it slammed into the ground...

maybe there were multiple planes, a drone and a plane, a drone and missile and plane...the possibilities are endless and eye-witness testimony supports this...

[Nbadan]

Unless planes can go from almost nothing to over 500mph there is something wrong with the official Chumpy theory... and it gets worse...

Can a plane accelerate from nothing to 568MPH at such a low al ude were the air is thicker? where is your proof?

[Nbadan]

I am not someone who thinks anything about witness intimidation because I have never talked about it. That also applies to , lack of resources, subpoena power, state secrets, bogus classifications, a loaded commission, stooges....little green men, physic powers, and finally... Chupacabra attacks.

Mainly because unlike your chupacabra attacks and little green men my conjectures are based on actual facts...I know that means so little to you FAUX News watchers....facts...ever hear of them?

[Nbadan]

I also find it funny that you swear by the NTSB report to back your claims when it suits you, while disparaging any "official" sources otherwise. Don't be a hypocrite too.

Until there is another investigation, it's the only facts we have...

[ChumpDumper]

There are many theories on 9/11 with great resources for you to research and debate the finer points such as the effect of KE on an airplane impact, I'll admit that some are nuttery than others, for all we know some of these could be disinformation spread by the very perpetrators to make the truth movement appear kookier than they really are..who knows? the way they manipulate the M$M it wouldn't surprise me...

.....but your being disingenuous if you really think there are no 'good' alternative 9/11 theories out there that deserve looks....

OK then -- post the alternative theories you think deserve looks.

Well?

Should I start another thread for this?

[ChumpDumper]

Can a plane accelerate from nothing to 568MPH at such a low al ude were the air is thicker? where is your proof?

Where the is this stupidity coming from?

That chick inside her minivan?

[Nbadan]

Well?

Should I start another thread for this?

We nee a whole nother forum for this...but no...