Real 9-11 Research

[Wild Cobra]

Maybe our new conspiracy theorist out of the closet will read the thread.

[RandomGuy]

Maybe our new conspiracy theorist out of the closet will read the thread.

Doubtful.

Conspiracy theorists that buy into twooferdom, as you may have noticed, are some of the lazy-est people on the planet.

[Nbadan]

I urge everyone who is interested in making an informed decision on 911 to watch explosive evidence and ask RG and other duck-and-coverers why NIST won't release its data into tbe collapse of WTC7

lw-jzCfa4eQ

Classic.......12 years later and NIST still won't release its WTC7 data for peer review and RG is alright with that...

[Nbadan]

The Truthers and the debunkers have points. They both fall over in some cases. The Truthers can come up with some pretty outrageous theories and the debunkers try to explain things with insane science that just doesn't work. Before you ask the debunkers actually have a ridiculous equation that attempts to explain the molten steel by kinetic energy. Please..... Even if you do their own equation you come up with a maximum of 1376 degrees. Which at best would make the steel hot and nowhere near molten.

win

[Nbadan]

Well, as a licensed mechanical engineer in the state of Texas, I can make an informed decision. There is no evidence.

:lol

[Nbadan]

Hedo's playing pretty well.

:lol

[ChumpDumper]

Classic.......12 years later and NIST still won't release its WTC7 data for peer review and RG is alright with that...Classic.......12 years later and dan still doesn't hasn't posted what he thinks really happened on 9/11.

[mouse]

12 years later Chump still has his head in the sand.

[ChumpDumper]

12 years later Chump still has his head in the sand.At least I can say what I believe really happened on 9/11.

None of you conspiracy theorist wannabes ever did.

In 12 years. You've had enough time. It's obvious you don't believe any other theory than the official one.

Posers.

[Nbadan]

Chumpy logic..

The burden of proof is on the Commission report skeptics...

Applying Chumpy logic to the religion thread...the burden of proof that God does not exist rests with atheists!

[ChumpDumper]

No the proof is already there -- you can't believe the events of 9/11 didn't happen. They did.

It's merely a matter of what you think caused it.

Apply that to religion, and you have something like creationism versus evolution -- competing theories, each with its own evidence, however dubious one might think that evidence is.

With 9/11, we already have one theory with a substantial amount of evidence to back it up

What is your competing theory, dan?

[Nbadan]

Anyway....the final NIST report on wTC7 is much like religion....neither has passed the scientific method...

[ChumpDumper]

What is your competing theory, dan?

Is yours based on the scientific method?

Are any?

Is there even one competing theory that has been developed to the point of providing a narrative explanation of the events of 9/11?

It's been 12 years.

[Nbadan]

What is your competing theory, dan?

The 911 Commission report and the NIST report are wrong...there is my theory...

[ChumpDumper]

The 911 Commission report and the NIST report are wrong...there is my theory...My theory is you actually believe the accepted narrative.

The proof is in every post you make about 9/11.

[Nbadan]

The report determines that the actual culprit in the collapse was the combustion of ordinary building furnishings:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/engineering/architecture/4278874

:lol

[ChumpDumper]

What do you think was the actual culprit, dan?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/engineering/architecture/4278874

:lol

I don't see why that is so funny.

[Nbadan]

I don't see why that is so funny.

You don't think that burning office furniture collapsing a steel frame building in funny? Have you no sense of humor!

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You don't think that burning office furniture collapsing a steel frame building in funny? Have you no sense of humor!

So you don't think the burning paper, plastic, wood, and whatever else flammable materials you find on multiple stories of humongous building contributed to the destruction of the building?

[Nbadan]

So you don't think the burning paper, plastic, wood, and whatever else flammable materials you find on multiple stories of humongous building contributed to the destruction of the building?

Never seen it happen before....have you?

[Nbadan]

Never seen it happen before....have you?

Nope. me either...in fact, it was the first steel framed building to collapse because of fire...another 911 coincidink....

[ChumpDumper]

Nope. me either...in fact, it was the first steel framed building to collapse because of fire...another 911 coincidink....They were also the first buildings to be struck by 767s and a World Trade Center tower.

Also, you're wrong.

_MRSr1MnFuk

[Nbadan]

hey were also the first buildings to be struck by 767s and a World Trade Center tower.

Read the report Chumpy....NIST themselves said that the building did not collapse because of debris damage from towers one or two....

[ChumpDumper]

Read the report Chumpy....NIST themselves said that the building did not collapse because of debris damage from towers one or two....Read the post, danny. No one said it did.

[Nbadan]

So what? WTC 7 fell because it was having loss issues after 1 and 2 fell?

[ChumpDumper]

So what? WTC 7 fell because it was having loss issues after 1 and 2 fell?So your claim was false.

Sloppy work, dan.

After all those years of your research....

[mouse]

At least I can say what I believe really happened on 9/11.

None of you conspiracy theorist wannabes ever did.

In 12 years. You've had enough time. It's obvious you don't believe any other theory than the official one.

Posers.

Why would anyone make a conclusion on a event that hasn't been properly investigated on?

Unlike you I seek the facts before I spew unproven scenarios.

[ChumpDumper]

Why would anyone make a conclusion on a event that hasn't been properly investigated on?Why wouldn't they?

You aren't a lawyer in court.


Unlike you I seek the facts before I spew unproven scenarios.You never looked up any of the facts that are already out there. Otherwise you'd know how full of shit your YouTubes are.

[mouse]

This ChumpDumper seems a tad bit hostile so I may return later after you get relived from the shared cubicle.
I would rather debate with another ChumpDumper shill.

With that said did anyone ever explain why WTC7 came down so fast?

[ChumpDumper]

This ChumpDumper seems a tad bit hostile so I may return later after you get relived from the shared cubicle.
I would rather debate with another ChumpDumper shill.Won't matter, you'll never say anything different from the accepted narrative happened because you know it's true.


With that said did anyone ever explain why WTC7 came down so fast?Yes. Anyone actually searching for the truth would have known that.

[johnsmith]

93 pages of a thread where chump has asked the same question to you clowns hundreds of times and we haven't seen a single one of you answer it....my theory is that none of you are intelligent enough to come up with what you think happened. In fact, conspiracy theories lend themselves to stupid people because it allows you to never have to learn actual facts, you just make up stuff in your head and accept it as truth....sort of like my 4 year old.

[Nbadan]

You write like a 4 year old...Chumpy might as well be asking if God really exists....90% of Americans will say yes, but have no proof....ask a wing-nut if Obama is Kenyan, a socialist, or after your guns and most will say yes....again no proof...

I'm more interested how the status quo on 911 became so anti scientific-method...It's OK to be anti-science if it works in your favor...is that the new status quo?

[ChumpDumper]

You write like a 4 year old...Chumpy might as well be asking if God really exists....Huh?

I'm asking you what you think really happened on 9/11.

It's a simple question.

You've "researched" it for 12 years.

[mouse]

Huh?
what you think really happened on 9/11.


FUUoDMWXjyY

[mouse]

rnbMjAN7Bws

[SA210]

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/945342_394627197312988_2010176429_n.png

[ChumpDumper]

If I wanted a stupid YouTube or an idiotic meme, I would have asked for that.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

lol the 9/11 truthers thinking that their youtube videos and infowars reports are objective research is a hilarious display of confirmation bias

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/945342_394627197312988_2010176429_n.png

http://fitzinfo.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/alex-jones-judas-goat.jpg

[ChumpDumper]

None of the YouTube memers here have done any research.

[RandomGuy]

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/945342_394627197312988_2010176429_n.png

You post that as if you actually have any evidence.

You don't.

[RandomGuy]

(Begin EDIT)
FOR THOSE OF YOU READING THIS FOR THE FIRST TIME, SEE PAGES 3 AND 4 for the NIST FAQ that answers the biggest "truther" questions.(end EDIT)

Since the 9-11 CTers like to copy and paste ad inifinitum, let's see if we can get some good stuff here.

It might surprise you CTers but there is a whole cottage industry built up around your bullshit.

They don't sell T-shirts, mugs, or crappy videos.

http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr/

http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6243624912447824934

http://www.911mysteriesguide.com/

http://www.911myths.com/WTC7_Lies.pdf

Here is a gem: The 9-11 "truthers" in their own "like, words". Icky.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7216643725166640147&hl=en

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/

http://wtc.nist.gov/

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

http://www.911myths.com/

Best one out of all the lot so far:
http://www.debunking911.com/

Mike Walter talking about the plane hitting the pentagon, and how irritated he is with the 9-11 "truth" movement for lying about what he said.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycPUDktZpCU

Link to a TON of debunking links:
http://www.debunking911.com/links.htm

Here ARE SOME REALLY PRECIOUS LINKS.

9-11 "truth" scholars turning on each other. You thought they were unstable and kooky when they talk about the government, wait until they start talking about each other.

http://www.911myths.com/html/911_infighting_links.html


A whole page of youtube debunking videos (http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=RKOwens4&p=r)

A whole page of decent debunking links and one of the best ones so far. (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home)

Interesting point:
http://www.bautforum.com/conspiracy-theories/48507-911-pentagon.html

bam

[mouse]

None of the YouTube memers here have done any research.

Isn't that the whole idea?

[ChumpDumper]

Isn't that the whole idea?Your whole idea is to not do research and just post YouTubes you haven't even watched, yes.

[Blake]

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/945342_394627197312988_2010176429_n.png

you concluded that 9/11 was an inside job and stopped there.

If it was an inside job, someone needs to go to prison/chair.

Who in your opinion should that someone (s) be?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

you concluded that 9/11 was an inside job and stopped there.

If it was an inside job, someone needs to go to prison/chair.

Who in your opinion should that someone (s) be?

Obama!

[Woo Bum-kon]

:lol at SA210 pretending like he didn't come to the conclusion that the Boston Bombings were set up by the government, then work his way back from there. His desperate attempts to find anything that supported his asinine, paranoid beliefs were embarrassing.

[mouse]

Your whole idea is to not do research and just post YouTubes you haven't even watched, yes.

The YouTube videos are just to show we are not alone in questioning what "really" went on durring 9/11

Most of the YouTube videos you and your narrow minded pals in here seem to dislike are never debunked or addressed.

When you and your misguided tea party clan decide to post some real evidence that I am off base only then can we move forward in this discussion.

[ChumpDumper]

The YouTube videos are just to show we are not alone in questioning what "really" went on durring 9/11

Most of the YouTube videos you and your narrow minded pals in here seem to dislike are never debunked or addressed.

When you and your misguided tea party clan decide to post some real evidence that I am off base only then can we move forward in this discussion.Um, mouse -- that is the whole point of this thread. Read all the links and watch all the videos in the OP. Then tell us what you think really happened on 9/11.

The ball has always been in your court.

Do some real research for a change.

None of you wannabe conspiracy theorist have done even the most basic research

[ChumpDumper]

FUUoDMWXjyYHundreds of eyewitnesses say the south tower was hit by a passenger airplane. There was passenger airplane debris found as late as a couple of weeks ago. Therefore this video that claims the south tower was beaned by a giant ball of oil is debunked.


rnbMjAN7BwsThe WTC towers had express elevators that went from the ground floor to the 78th floor sky lobby and the top floor. Therefore this video that claims an explosion could not travel 80 floors down to the ground lobby is debunked.

All the information needed to debunk these rather stupid videos can be found using the links in the OP, which again is the entire point.

Were any of you truly interested in the truth, you would have spent quite a bit of time taking in a lot of that information that is easily available to you.

Not one of you have -- not mouse, not dan, not SA210. You are not interested in the truth at all.

[SA210]

:lol at SA210 pretending like he didn't come to the conclusion that the Boston Bombings were set up by the government, .


Pussy boy, when did I ever say they weren't? lol Moron

[RandomGuy]

Your whole idea is to not do research and just post YouTubes you haven't even watched, yes.

Seems like the whole idea is to be as lazy as possible about it. I haven't seen any of them bother defending their stupid theories in years. I guess even they know how dumb they are at some level.

[Woo Bum-kon]

Pussy boy, when did I ever say they weren't? lol Moron

Good job erasing the rest of my sentence, thereby completely removing the context of it, dumbass.

[SA210]

lol pussy boy

[Woo Bum-kon]

Maybe if you call me a pussy boy again, everybody who read the last few posts will forget your complete reading comprehension failure and deceitful tactics.

[mouse]

Hundreds of eyewitnesses say the south tower was hit by a passenger airplane. There was passenger airplane debris found as late as a couple of weeks ago. Therefore this video that claims the south tower was beaned by a giant ball of oil is debunked.

The WTC towers had express elevators that went from the ground floor to the 78th floor sky lobby and the top floor. Therefore this video that claims an explosion could not travel 80 floors down to the ground lobby is debunked.

All the information needed to debunk these rather stupid videos can be found using the links in the OP, which again is the entire point.

Were any of you truly interested in the truth, you would have spent quite a bit of time taking in a lot of that information that is easily available to you.

Not one of you have -- not mouse, not dan, not SA210. You are not interested in the truth at all.


I will look at this post tonight and examine it thoroughly and give you a reply by Friday if not sooner.

[RandomGuy]

Maybe if you call me a pussy boy again, everybody who read the last few posts will forget your complete reading comprehension failure and deceitful tactics.

Donning Kruger

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RQw6zNaZ89Y/T4xlHr1F8YI/AAAAAAAAAAs/P06pGfkn22c/s1600/Dunning-Kruger.png

That right there says all one needs to know.

It doesn't take much to figure out which poster is in which quartile here. I would guess SA210 thinks he is above average.

/thread

[RandomGuy]

A Critical Analysis of the Collapse of WTC Towers 1,2&7 From a Conventional Explosives and Demolitions Industry Viewpoint (http://www.jod911.com/WTC%20COLLAPSE%20STUDY%20BBlanchard%208-8-06.pdf)Brent Blanchard

Says all you need to know about the "controlled demolition" theory.

[TeyshaBlue]

A Critical Analysis of the Collapse of WTC Towers 1,2&7 From a Conventional Explosives and Demolitions Industry Viewpoint (http://www.jod911.com/WTC%20COLLAPSE%20STUDY%20BBlanchard%208-8-06.pdf)Brent Blanchard

Says all you need to know about the "controlled demolition" theory.

Please rephrase your response in the form of a meme' or youtube. Preferably, both.

Thx.

[Blake]

^lol

[Nbadan]

bam

NIST :lol

Release the data...If NIST is so sure that they finally got WTC7 right, then why not release the data they used to make their assumptions in their catastrophic collapse model...instead NIST ask you to take a leap of faith....as a mathematician, I don't do that except in rare cases...although it does not surprise me that Chumpy, Blake and JohnSmith...all probably the same poster...do...

[Nbadan]

A Critical Analysis of the Collapse of WTC Towers 1,2&7 From a Conventional Explosives and Demolitions Industry Viewpoint (http://www.jod911.com/WTC%20COLLAPSE%20STUDY%20BBlanchard%208-8-06.pdf)Brent Blanchard

Says all you need to know about the "controlled demolition" theory.

One "expert" :lol

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/911-explosive-evidence-experts-speak-out/

Several experts with Ph.D’s – including National Medal of Science awardee Lynn Margulis.

Bam!

[ChumpDumper]

One "expert" :lol

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/911-explosive-evidence-experts-speak-out/

Several experts with Ph.D’s – including National Medal of Science awardee Lynn Margulis.

Bam!This is their most highly budgeted demonstration of their scientific method to date:

https://sites.google.com/site/911guide/Gagebox-full-full.jpg

I think he is actually saying "Bam!" in this still frame.

[ChumpDumper]

And dan, I'm curious: what did Lynn Margulis get her PhD in?

And who said the words contained in this quote? "Our claim is that there’s no evidence that HIV is an infectious virus, or even an entity at all."

Thanks in advance for answering these questions quickly and thoroughly.

[Nbadan]

typical Chumpy...throwing red herrings here...red herrings there...meanwhile, no data...I said it over 12 years ago....the key to 9/11 rests with the collapse of WTC7...Chumpy and his forum aliases are scared shit-less of a new investigation because they know it will prove the 9/11 Commission report a complete fabrication...Ive already proven it time and time again with all the sad coincidinks which occurred that day...the cell phone calls on planes....the mysterious blips on the radar...the missing NORAD...the impossible maneuvers made by 'amateur' pilots who weeks before couldn't even fly single engine plans in most cases...three steel frame building collapsing from fire, never happened before.....another plane making an incredible move to strike the Pentagon...another completely collapsing...burying itself...into the ground..something which I have proven has never happened even to planes which crashed at higher speeds and steeper impacts...the sad part is people buy this crap....Chumpy buys this crap and his best reasoning for buying it is because 'it's all that's out there' ....fuck that shit...

[ChumpDumper]

It's not a red herring, dan -- and it certainly wasn't an attempt the make you meltdown like that.

"Truthers" like you just can't seem to answer simple questions truthfully.

I'll ask again. You brought up the subject by name and of your own volition, so let's flesh this one out before moving on, shall we?
And dan, I'm curious: what did Lynn Margulis get her PhD in?

And who said the words contained in this quote? "Our claim is that there’s no evidence that HIV is an infectious virus, or even an entity at all."

Thanks in advance for answering these questions quickly and thoroughly.

[Nbadan]

Lynn Margulis attended the University of Chicago, earned a master's degree from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1960, and received her Ph.D. in 1963 from UC Berkeley. In 1966, as a young faculty member at Boston University, she wrote a theoretical paper entitled The Origin of Mitosing Eukaryotic Cells.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynn_Margulis

Where did you get your PHD from again Chumpy?

[ChumpDumper]

You didn't quite answer the first question, and didn't even try to answer the second.

I'll ask again. I think we're making real progress here.
And dan, I'm curious: what did Lynn Margulis get her PhD in?

And who said the words contained in this quote? "Our claim is that there’s no evidence that HIV is an infectious virus, or even an entity at all."

Thanks in advance for answering these questions quickly and thoroughly.

[Nbadan]

nd who said the words contained in this quote? "Our claim is that there’s no evidence that HIV is an infectious virus, or even an entity at all."

Quit lowering yourself to WC standards and read the discovery article yourself...

http://discover.coverleaf.com/discovermagazine/201104?pg=68#pg72

[ChumpDumper]

Getting closer, dan -- but you just can bring yourself to giving a simple answer to a simple question.

Once more.
And dan, I'm curious: what did Lynn Margulis get her PhD in?

And who said the words contained in this quote? "Our claim is that there’s no evidence that HIV is an infectious virus, or even an entity at all."

Thanks in advance for answering these questions quickly and thoroughly.

[ChumpDumper]

Here's how it's done, dan.

Take notes. This is a big problem area for you.

And dan, I'm curious: what did Lynn Margulis get her PhD in?

Genetics

And who said the words contained in this quote? "Our claim is that there’s no evidence that HIV is an infectious virus, or even an entity at all."

Lynn Margulis.

See? Now everyone can make his or her own judgment regarding the wisdom of your dropping her particular name in a thread titled Real 9-11 Research.

There's no reason to hide such information if one is truly interested in the truth.

[Nbadan]

See? Now everyone can make his or her own judgment regarding the wisdom of your dropping her particular name in a thread titled Real 9-11 Research.

Yeah, everyone can see that she is a respected author of several peer reviewed articles with a PHD in genetics and your an asshat....thanks for the informed decision...

[ChumpDumper]

Yeah, everyone can see that she is a respected author of several peer reviewed articles with a PHD in genetics and your an asshat....thanks for the informed decision...There's no reason to get so angry.

She's your 9/11 genetics expert. Tell us how you feel her research in genetics and HIV denial contribute to your personal search for the truth.

[RandomGuy]

One "expert" :lol

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/911-explosive-evidence-experts-speak-out/

Several experts with Ph.D’s – including National Medal of Science awardee Lynn Margulis.

Bam!

One expert, yes, in conjunction with several others at a company that does this for a living.


This report is authored by Brent Blanchard, Senior Editor for Implosionworld.com and Director of Field Operations at Protec Documentation Services, Inc. (www.protecservices.com), Rancocas, New Jersey. Additional contributions and research assistance was provided by Protec employees Earl Gardner, Gary McGeever, Michael Golden and John Golden.

Protec is one of the world’s most knowledgeable independent authorities on explosive demolition, having performed engineering studies, structure analysis, vibration/air overpressure monitoring and photographic services on well over 1,000 structure blasting events in more than 30 countries. These include the current world record-holders for largest, tallest and most buildings demolished with explosives. Protec regularly documents the work of more than 20 explosives contractors who perform structure blasting as a primary source of revenue (including extensive experience with every American company) as well as dozens more who blast structures in a part-time capacity.

Beyond the above, Protec possesses several additional types of data and experience that place the firm in a unique position to analyze and comment on this event:

Protec technicians were operating portable field seismographs at several construction sites in Manhattan on 9/11. These seismographs recorded the events at Ground Zero, including the collapse of all three structures. These measurements, combined with seismic and airblast data recorded by other independent entities, provide an unfiltered, purely scientific view of each event.

In the weeks following 9/11, several Protec building inspectors and staff photographers, including this author, were contracted by demolition teams to document the deconstruction and debris removal processes at Ground Zero. These processes included the mechanical pull-down of the remains of the U.S. Customs Building (WTC 6) and various other activities occurring simultaneously throughout the site. Our teams took thousands of photographs and personally examined untold amounts of debris, including countless structural elements from WTC 1 and 2. While these photographs and video recordings were not originally intended to specifically prove or disprove evidence of explosive demolition, they do provide substantial visual evidence that relates directly to this analysis and place us in a position to speak first-hand of conditions on site rather than relying on outside testimony or hearsay.

Protec has been given access to thousands of personal photographs taken by laborers and site foremen employed by the demolition companies responsible for deconstructing the Ground Zero site. The companies include Tully Construction, D.H. Griffin Wrecking, Mazzocchi Wrecking, Yannuzzi Demolition, Gateway Demolition and Manafort Brothers. (Any other demolition company claiming to have worked on the Ground Zero site either worked under the supervision of one of these firms or is misrepresenting their participation.) In addition, Protec documented the only public discussion of the 9/11 clean-up attended by all of the demolition teams (National Demolition Association Convention, Orlando, Florida, 4/22/03). While the original intent of Protec’s two-hour video was to archive the unprecedented challenges faced by these teams, various questions and commentary from the speakers are relevant to this analysis.

Because building implosions are often promoted as live news events, Protec’s offices are equipped to record multiple television broadcasts at all times. Our company’s archived recordings of original news broadcasts from the morning of 9/11 begin well prior to the collapse of the first tower and continue uninterrupted beyond the collapse of WTC 7. These original unedited recordings have allowed us to compare and scrutinize the collapse of all three structures free from any possibility of image tampering or modification. In addition, we have examined dozens of freelance and amateur video recordings incorporated into various documentary programs chronicling 9/11 and studied countless ground-based and aerial images captured by private, press and government-contracted photographers.

Sooooo, you copied and pasted the quote from your link. Lazy.

I would assume that the gal there did not really opine on the controlled demolition theory, and if she did, her PhD means less than this guys real world, first hand experience.

What exactly did she say that supports it?

'cause I am not watching a two-hour video to find out.

[mouse]

NIST :lol

Release the data...If NIST is so sure that they finally got WTC7 right, then why not release the data they used to make their assumptions.

Chump?

[ChumpDumper]

Chump?
My best guess is they don't want to distribute a blueprint on how to destroy a similar building before everyone gets a chance to retrofit. Feel free to post the assumptions and data for your theory.

I will wait.

[Nbadan]

My best guess is they don't want to distribute a blueprint on how to destroy a similar building before everyone gets a chance to retrofit. Feel free to post the assumptions and data for your theory.

I will wait.

:lmao

[mouse]

5H2wr0khnJA

[ChumpDumper]

:lmaoYeah, that's my reaction when you post anything about 9/11 since you haven't posted any theory that could contradict the accepted course of events after eleven years of your so called "research."

You have nothing, dan.

Nade y pues nada y pues nada.

[ChumpDumper]

5H2wr0khnJAGreat.

In the very likely event you didn't actually watch the video, it said to "Use these facts to decide for yourself what really happened on
September 11th 2001."

Using those facts from that YouTube and all your other surely extensive research over the past 11+ years, what did you decide for yourself happened on September 11th 2001?

[mouse]

Chump stop trying to be mayor Giuliani of the politics forum and show some respect for the dead.

ye5SNvToB74

[mouse]

1FhM2NrsaaA

[ChumpDumper]

Chump stop trying to be mayor Giuliani of the politics forum and show some respect for the dead.Straw man.

You posted a video that said "Use these facts to decide for yourself what really happened on September 11th 2001."

So what did you decide for yourself what really happened on 9/11?

[mouse]

Straw man.



your safety word?

[ChumpDumper]

your safety word?
Stop making them and I will stop calling you out on them.

[SA210]

:lol 75,518 post and no pussy

[ChumpDumper]

SA210 will never post about 9/11 again.

He would rather spend all his time posting about me.

[SA210]

:lol you still didn't get no pussy

[RandomGuy]

11,129 posts and no theory.

[SA210]

11,129 posts and no theory.


I gave my theory. The govt did it, in the same way they planned Operation Northwoods. But still, he got no pussy :lol

[ChumpDumper]

I gave my theory. The govt did it, in the same way they planned Operation Northwoods.OK, how? Let's discuss 9/11 and not me for a change.
But still, he got no pussy :lolSee? Bet you could never do it.

[Big Empty]

The crash into the Pentagon is the one that makes me scratch my head. The one video of it happens so fast yet the plane that crashed into it seems so small.

[Nbadan]

Yeah, that's my reaction when you post anything about 9/11 since you haven't posted any theory that could contradict the accepted course of events after eleven years of your so called "research."

You have nothing, dan.

Nade y pues nada y pues nada.

We're winning...

http://exopermaculture.com/2013/08/23/re-those-supposedly-crazy-conspiracy-theorists-guess-what/


Recent studies by psychologists and social scientists in the US and UK suggest that contrary to mainstream media stereotypes, those labeled “conspiracy theorists” appear to be saner than those who accept the official versions of contested events.


The authors were surprised to discover that it is now more conventional to leave so-called conspiracist comments than conventionalist ones: “Of the 2174 comments collected, 1459 were coded as conspiracist and 715 as conventionalist.” In other words, among people who comment on news articles, those who disbelieve government accounts of such events as 9/11 and the JFK assassination outnumber believers by more than two to one. That means it is the pro-conspiracy commenters who are expressing what is now the conventional wisdom, while the anti-conspiracy commenters are becoming a small, beleaguered minority.

Perhaps because their supposedly mainstream views no longer represent the majority, the anti-conspiracy commenters often displayed anger and hostility: “The research… showed that people who favoured the official account of 9/11 were generally more hostile when trying to persuade their rivals.”

Additionally, it turned out that the anti-conspiracy people were not only hostile, but fanatically attached to their own conspiracy theories as well. According to them, their own theory of 9/11 – a conspiracy theory holding that 19 Arabs, none of whom could fly planes with any proficiency, pulled off the crime of the century under the direction of a guy on dialysis in a cave in Afghanistan – was indisputably true. The so-called conspiracists, on the other hand, did not pretend to have a theory that completely explained the events of 9/11: “For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account.”

Our government has been releasing a lot of information in the last week or two to keep ahead of Snowden and Greenwald. They are attempting to beat them to the punch. They believe it is better to release it with their own spin than to wait for Greenwald or someone else to release it. The UK has threatened or may already have destroyed some of the hard drive information, as reported a couple of days ago....If the UK government can control the Guardian, they can work with our intelligence to release the information they want to release before Greenwald has a chance...

There is a lot of information that neither government wants to be released. They are attempting to stop the information at the source. It will be interesting to see what the NYTimes does with their new accessibility....

[ChumpDumper]

You can't be winning when you can't even say what you think really happened on 9/11.

Twelve years, dan.

Twelve.

[Nbadan]

You can't be winning when you can't even say what you think really happened on 9/11.

Twelve years, dan.

Twelve.


Additionally, it turned out that the anti-conspiracy people were not only hostile, but fanatically attached to their own conspiracy theories as well. According to them, their own theory of 9/11 – a conspiracy theory holding that 19 Arabs, none of whom could fly planes with any proficiency, pulled off the crime of the century under the direction of a guy on dialysis in a cave in Afghanistan – was indisputably true. The so-called conspiracists, on the other hand, did not pretend to have a theory that completely explained the events of 9/11: “For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account.”

[ChumpDumper]

Yes, that's the standard cop out you adopted years ago.

What has changed?

lol internet comments

[FuzzyLumpkins]

:lol

The 'I know you are but what am I' defense. THEY HAVE THEIR OWN CONSPIRACY THEORY.

[RandomGuy]

I gave my theory. The govt did it, in the same way they planned Operation Northwoods. But still, he got no pussy :lol


"You know they did it" is less a theory than a vacuous platitude.

If it were so blindingly obvious and concrete, you asshats wouldn't have quite as much trouble putting forth things that go into theories, like, you know, evidence 'n' stuff.

What evidence do you have of this platitude?

[angrydude]

It would seem to follow that if the government is lying about the facts of 911, then it would be involved, since if it was another third party they would let us know what country they lived in so we could invade it.

[ChumpDumper]

Well if dan and the others feel they have so thoroughly disproved the official story -- it took them twelve years to do it -- what do they positively believe?

Anything?

Nothing?

[Nbadan]

"You know they did it" is less a theory than a vacuous platitude.

If it were so blindingly obvious and concrete, you asshats wouldn't have quite as much trouble putting forth things that go into theories, like, you know, evidence 'n' stuff.

What evidence do you have of this platitude?

Additionally, it turned out that the anti-conspiracy people were not only hostile, but fanatically attached to their own conspiracy theories as well.

:lol

[Nbadan]

It would seem to follow that if the government is lying about the facts of 911, then it would be involved, since if it was another third party they would let us know what country they lived in so we could invade it.

:wtf

You live under a rock or something?

FBI: Knew About Saudi 9/11 Hijacker Ties—But Lied to Protect “National Security” (Russ Baker)


The FBI apparently has known for a decade about links between powerful Saudi interests and the alleged 9/11 hijackers, and has been forced to tacitly admit that it lied about it for all of these years.

***

In court filings seeking to stave off a media Freedom of Information request, the FBI has stated that releasing documents relating to this issue will harm “national security.” As proof of the sensitivity of the matter, the FBI gave the judge a document dated April 4, 2002, in which the FBI states that its own inquiries “revealed many connections” between a well-connected Saudi family with a house in South Florida and “individuals associated with the terrorist attacks on 9/11/2001.”

The Freedom of Information request that prompted these reluctant admissions was filed by the Broward Bulldog, a South Florida nonprofit investigative site which first covered the Saudi connection in 2011.

The Bulldog’s reporting explained how a family living in an exclusive gated community outside Sarasota, on Florida’s West Coast, had apparently vanished suddenly some 10 days before the 9/11 attacks. Investigators, including a swarm of FBI agents, found that the family’s departure was clearly so sudden that they left almost their entire household intact, down to cars, clothing, and food in the refrigerator. Most significant, though, investigators had established that several of the men publicly identified as among the 9/11 hijackers, including purported ringleader Mohammed Atta, had visited the house and/or been linked to it through a web of telephone communications.

The FBI told none of this to Congress, and it was not mentioned in the original 9/11 Commission report released in 2004...The Sarasota story...shows that the US government came upon what may have been a command or control center for the men we are told hijacked the planes... it is almost impossible not to conclude some kind of awareness, either before or after the act, on the part of Saudi Prince Sultan bin Salman bin Abdul Aziz Al-Saud and the powerful clique he represents within the royal clan. Again, for more on this, please read the entire story, which continues over three pages on our site...
]
http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/06/05/fbi...onal-security/



According to a counterterrorism officer and Prestancia’s former administrator Larry Berberich, gatehouse log books and photographs of license tags were later used by the FBI to determine that vehicles used by the hijackers had visited the al-Hijji home.

The FBI later confirmed the existence of the probe, but said it found no evidence connecting the Ghazzawis or the al-Hijjis to the hijackers or the 9/11 plot.

The newly released FBI records contradict the FBI’s public denials. One report dated April 4, 2002, says the investigation “revealed many connections” between the Saudis who fled Sarasota and “individuals associated with the terrorist attacks on 9/11/2001.”

The report goes on to list three of those individuals and connect them to the Venice, Florida, flight school where suicide hijackers Mohamed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi trained. The names of those individuals were not made public.

The FBI removed additional information in the report, citing a pair of national security exemptions to the Freedom of Information Act.

In his declaration to U.S. District Judge William J. Zloch, the FBI’s Hardy sought to explain those deletions and others. He said information was withheld “to protect an intelligence method utilized by the FBI for gathering intelligence data.” Such methods include confidential informants.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/06/0...#storylink=cpy

They'll continue to try to ignore it until a whistleblower from Cofer Black's CIA-CTC unit comes outIt was a CIA-CounterTerrorism Center operation that tracked al-Midhar and al-Hazmi, the Flt. 77 hijackers, and let these 9/11 hijackers into the US on January 15, 2000 after they met with several other 9/11 cell members in Kuala Lumpur, a meeting that was surveilled by the same unit and several other allied services. Black briefed Tenet several times about it. Afterwards, the pair and two others traveled to Bangkok and from there entered the U.S. at LAX. A warning cable was drafted by the FBI liaison at CTC, but the Assistant Director ordered it withheld.


The pair were met at the airport by an attache at the Saudi consulate who worked for Dallah Avco, and were then moved onward to San Diego where they came under the care and feeding of an Imam at a local mosque named Anwar al-Awlaki who installed the pair in an apartment. One of the pair stayed with Awlaki for many months and they moved east to the DC area. Awlaki was allowed to leave the US a few months after 9/11 and was detained and again released after he returned in 2002. That much has been known since the 2002 Joint Congressional hearings chaired by Senator Bob Graham

[mouse]

Did Chump ever "properly" explain world trade center 7?

[ChumpDumper]

Did Chump ever "properly" explain world trade center 7?Did mouse ever "read" the NIST report in its entirety?

[mouse]

Did mouse ever "read" the NIST report in its entirety?

Actually I did....and I wish I could get any of that pathetic part of my life back?
I would Google a better reply.

[ChumpDumper]

Actually I did....and I wish I could get any of that pathetic part of my life back?
I would Google a better reply.OK, in your own words, what was their explanation?

[SA210]

Did Chump ever "properly" explain world trade center 7?


No, he's too busy wiping the egg off his face after his messiah Obama has gone too far for even Chump to try to defend his war criminal, nsa spying, war on whistleblowing ass :lmao

Obama aiding Al Qaeda :lmao I called it long ago when Chump lied and said it wasn't true, now the 9/11 thread is all Chump has to grasp for straws.

rofl

[ChumpDumper]

The AQ moniker has lost all meaning thanks to George bush and Alex Jones.

SA210 doesn't even know what the NIST is.

[Blake]

No, he's too busy wiping the egg off his face after his messiah Obama has gone too far for even Chump to try to defend his war criminal, nsa spying, war on whistleblowing ass :lmao

Obama aiding Al Qaeda :lmao I called it long ago when Chump lied and said it wasn't true, now the 9/11 thread is all Chump has to grasp for straws.

rofl

what a mess of a post

[SA210]

what a mess of a post



http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=221610&page=2&p=6818358#post6818358


:lmao:rollin

[AntiChrist]

I think the "no planers" are still my favorite sect of 9/11 twoofers retards.

[Blake]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=221610&page=2&p=6818358#post6818358


:lmao:rollin

smh.

You don't even try to discuss the topic any more. You've resorted to melting down and going full clown as soon as you enter this forum.

[AntiChrist]

Ever notice how people who are "in" on these grand conspiracies never drop a dime? EVER?

[SA210]

My bf was owned so i tried defending him, now I'm melting down

[cheguevara]

http://www.spongobongo.com/em/nm/nm9826.jpg

http://www.mestrategicperspectives.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Prince-Bandar.jpg

http://www.fourwinds10.net/resources/uploads/images/c2qgIh.jpg

http://socioecohistory.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/2004_osama_compared_to_2007_getting_younger.jpg?w= 320&h=240

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Sections/Newsweek/Components/Photos/050426_050502/050427_FinemanBush_wide.hlarge.jpg

[cheguevara]

"At the meeting, the Saudi intelligence chief briefed Sawers on Riyadh's latest moves on Syria, including the supply of over 400 tons of weapons to the militants in Syria via Turkey," an informed source, who asked to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of his information, told FNA.

“ … we have made the Syrian army engage in a civil war and of course this strategic mission could not be accomplished without your (MI6) cooperation,” the source quoted Prince Bandar as saying during the meeting.

"At the meeting, Prince Bandar underlined that Britain, Israel and their allies should be thankful to his country's efforts and plans in Syria," the source said.

"The Prince also reminded the different advantages of the Saudi plan in Syria, saying that extremist groups, including the Salafis, have been engaged in the war in Syria and killed in there, while the Lebanese Hezbollah movement has also been pushed into direct confrontation with radical Sunni Muslims," he added.

Asked by Sawers if Riyadh is concerned over the backfiring of the extremist groups who have been armed and sent to Syria, Prince Bandar said all his country's efforts are aimed at "providing security for us and our allies and I assure (you) that I have the power to harness these reinforced streams, given my over 30-year-long experience in controlling and directing these Jihadi groups”.

http://media.farsnews.com/media/Uploaded/Files/Images/1392/06/03/13920603000498_PhotoI.jpg

[Jacob1983]

So people that have questions about 9/11 are mentally retarded?

[Blake]

So people that have questions about 9/11 are mentally retarded?

You might be retarded if you can't find answers to those questions by now.

[ChumpDumper]

So people that have questions about 9/11 are mentally retarded?You're a lazy idiot because you never tried to answer even one of your own questions -- just like all the rest.

[Nbadan]

:lol Chump butthurt...

[ChumpDumper]

:lol dan's been butthurt ever since I asked him what he thinks really happened on 9/11....

[RandomGuy]

Additionally, it turned out that the anti-conspiracy people were not only hostile, but fanatically attached to their own conspiracy theories as well.

:lol

That's not really a testable theory. It looks more like you were simply whining about people who complain you don't have a theory.

I would, despite what you think, be happy to entertain alternative explanations. The problem with that is that you don't have one. None. zip. nada.

Not you, not mouse, not SA210.

You have various claims about what other people said or events, and those claims pretty much all were debunked years ago.

All you dipshits have are retreaded yootoobs, and mindless copy and paste bullshit that not even your fucking stupid asses believe in.

Its like you all fell in a pit of stupid, and got covered in it, but can't even see how the stupid is soaked into your clothes and running down your face.

Everyone else is trying to point out to you that you are covered in stupid, but you all reject the existence of stupid, and think of yourselves as too smart to be covered in stupid.

So y'all stand there, slobbering on about various things that you don't even believe, lying to me, and worse, lying to yourselves. I can live with you lying to me about this shit, but that you lie to yourselves about this, even after being shown the truth, is just.. pitiable.

[Nbadan]

That's not really a testable theory. It looks more like you were simply whining about people who complain you don't have a theory.

I would, despite what you think, be happy to entertain alternative explanations. The problem with that is that you don't have one. None. zip. nada.

Not you, not mouse, not SA210.

You have various claims about what other people said or events, and those claims pretty much all were debunked years ago.

Ah, but we have the 9/11 Commission report and we are slowly deconstructing the evidence there is in the report....there doesn't have to be an alternative theory to point out that there may have been state involvement in the attack, nor that the Bush administration probably withheld evidence, or intimidated, the commission that it itself appointed to investigate it's own possible negligence in the attack...

[Nbadan]

You have various claims about what other people said or events, and those claims pretty much all were debunked years ago.

Really? where did you disbunk this?


One report dated April 4, 2002, says the investigation “revealed many connections” between the Saudis who fled Sarasota and “individuals associated with the terrorist attacks on 9/11/2001.”

Saying something is true doesn't make it true RG...

[ChumpDumper]

Ah, but we have the 9/11 Commission report and we are slowly deconstructing the evidence there is in the report....there doesn't have to be an alternative theory to point out that there may have been state involvement in the attack, nor that the Bush administration probably withheld evidence, or intimidated, the commission that it itself appointed to investigate it's own possible negligence in the attack...Wait, now you believe the Bush administration was only negligent?

[Nbadan]

So y'all stand there, slobbering on about various things that you don't even believe, lying to me, and worse, lying to yourselves. I can live with you lying to me about this shit, but that you lie to yourselves about this, even after being shown the truth, is just.. pitiable.


Additionally, it turned out that the anti-conspiracy people were not only hostile, but fanatically attached to their own conspiracy theories as well.


:lol

[ChumpDumper]

To what theory are you attached, dan?

[Nbadan]

“. . . mainstream views no longer represent the majority.”

....some people don't get it...

[ChumpDumper]

....some people don't get it...Where is the proof of that claim, dan?

[SA210]

RG and CD sitting in a tree... B-U-T-T-H-U-R-T

:rollin

[mouse]

RG and CD sitting in a tree... B-U-T-T-H-U-R-T

:rollin


^ has "Scoreboard!

[Jacob1983]

So how is a person retarded because they have questions about 9/11?

[ChumpDumper]

RG and CD sitting in a tree... B-U-T-T-H-U-R-T

:rollinSorry, no one has been more butthurt than you after you melted down when asked what you think really happened on 9/11.


So how is a person retarded because they have questions about 9/11?You are retarded because you didn't do one thing to answer your questions.

You are lazy.

[SA210]

I love chumps meltdowns, especially when he tries lying about them :lmao

[ChumpDumper]

I love SA210's lying and hypocrisy and the fact he doesn't have a 9/11 theory.

[Jacob1983]

So if I have questions about 9/11, that means that my IQ is lower than 80? Amazing logic. :lol

[ChumpDumper]

So if I have questions about 9/11, that means that my IQ is lower than 80? Amazing logic. :lolActually, the questions I have seen from you were answered 12 years ago. That means you are either stupid or lazy.

Which is it?

[Jacob1983]

Lazy but I still have questions about 9/11. Did The Emperor order fighter pilots to shoot down United 93?

[ChumpDumper]

Lazy but I still have questions about 9/11. Did The Emperor order fighter pilots to shoot down United 93?Did you ever look anything about that up?

No.

[Blake]

Lazy but I still have questions about 9/11. Did The Emperor order fighter pilots to shoot down United 93?

I'd say there's a 99.9% the answer is in this forum.

Probably this thread.

That's how ridiculously lazy you are.

[SA210]

So if I have questions about 9/11, that means that my IQ is lower than 80? Amazing logic. :lol

No, it just means that chump's love for his messiah Obama has blown up in his face and can't defend the war criminal anymore..so he keeps grasping for straws with his butthurt in the 9/11 threads :lmao

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Someone disagrees with SA210 and he calls them an Obama lover and starts the butthurt/meltdown routine.

I have seen defense mechanisms aplenty but that one has to be the saddest of them all.

[SA210]

:cry I'm a sad crybaby little bitch and a liar, and my butthurt stings badly, just look how I follow sa210 around like the other butthurt trolls do :cry

[ChumpDumper]

No, it just means that chump's love for his messiah Obama has blown up in his face and can't defend the war criminal anymore..so he keeps grasping for straws with his butthurt in the 9/11 threads :lmaoNever defended him. Never had to. I was just ridiculing you and your nonstop meltdown over 9/11 and eternal e-grudge against me.

[SA210]

:lol The meltdown queen still attempts to lie

[ChumpDumper]

I broke you. You completely stopped posting stupid 9/11 conspiracy shit after I called you on it.

[Jacob1983]

Dumper of chumps, why do you get so pissy about 9/11 truthers? I mean seriously, why the fuck do you care if people question 9/11 or have questions in general about it?

[Blake]

Someone disagrees with SA210 and he calls them an Obama lover and starts the butthurt/meltdown routine.

I have seen defense mechanisms aplenty but that one has to be the saddest of them all.

The ":cry if you're not with me you love Obama :cry" conclusion is about as unintelligent as SBM's conclusion that everyone that makes fun of him is part of the same e-clique

[SA210]

I broke you. You completely stopped posting stupid 9/11 conspiracy shit after I called you on it.

Nah, your lies can't help you anymore. You've just become a broken soul and little whiny bitch. You and your ignorant bitch troll bff's have been owned royally so hard now on a umber of issues it's actually quite sad and pathetic :lmao

:lol sheeple

[ChumpDumper]

Dumper of chumps, why do you get so pissy about 9/11 truthers? I mean seriously, why the fuck do you care if people question 9/11 or have questions in general about it?All the answers are out there. You are being willfully ignorant and whining about it.

[mouse]

ChumpDumper is only one of three people who share the same cubicle for the Government.

But never the less he and the two others can have they're theories also.

[AchillesHeel]

Nah, your lies can't help you anymore. You've just become a broken soul and little whiny bitch. You and your ignorant bitch troll bff's have been owned royally so hard now on a umber of issues it's actually quite sad and pathetic :lmao

:lol sheeple

So, what do you think really happened on 9/11?

[RandomGuy]

Dumper of chumps, why do you get so pissy about 9/11 truthers? I mean seriously, why the fuck do you care if people question 9/11 or have questions in general about it?

You don't have "questions", you have willful ignorance. All of the questions you have posed have been answered, repeatedly. The assertions they make have been debunked to anyone with any sense.

Doesn't it bother you that the assumed facts underlying these questions tend to be misleading or dishonest?

[Nbadan]

:lol

To RG every question that could be answered has been answered...

...nevermind the recently exposed connections between well-connected Saudi, flown out of the country and leaving everything behind after the attacks, and some of the terrorists....

Those don't fit into RG world...

[ChumpDumper]

Some Saudis may have supported al Qaeda?

Wow.

[Nbadan]

Some Saudis may have supported al Qaeda?

Wow.

Your an idiot.

[ChumpDumper]

So they didn't support al Qaeda?

Wow.

You'll have to tell me how this fits in with all the rest of the stuff you post and pretend to believe.

[mookie2001]

Ahahaha

you're supposed to read all these non 9/11 commission report books and blogs and articles and peep these debunker videos and NTSB reports. How does anyone ever learn about anything right?

[RandomGuy]

:lol

To RG every question that could be answered has been answered...

...nevermind the recently exposed connections between well-connected Saudi, flown out of the country and leaving everything behind after the attacks, and some of the terrorists....

Those don't fit into RG world...

That isn't really a question. That is more like a badly disjointed, semi-lucid statement.

You will have to spell it out in a bit more detail.

[RandomGuy]

Here is what I think happened:

http://www.csicop.org/uploads/images/si/thomas-figure-small.png

This guy fleshed out some of the calculations done waaaay back on about page 40 of the thread.


How could the buildings fall so quickly? It’s been explained very well in the technical literature by Northwestern’s Zdenek Bazant, PhD, and others (see, for example, Bazant 2008). I’ve developed a simpler physics model of the progressive collapses that agrees quite well with the main points of Bazant’s more rigorous results (Thomas 2010b). Here are some of my findings:

Each floor of the towers contained over two million kilograms of mass. The gravitational potential energy of a standing tower with twelve-foot floors extending upward 110 stories can be calculated straightforwardly; it comes to over 420 billion joules of energy, or the equivalent of 100 tons of TNT per tower. This energy, which was released completely during the collapses, is more than the energy of some of the smaller nuclear weapons in the U.S. arsenal, such as the W-48 (72 tons TNT) (Sublette 2006). This is where the energy required to break columns, pulverize concrete, and expel debris through windows came from. (Truthers often compare such expulsions of air and debris, visible several floors below the collapse fronts, to “squibs,” explosive devices often used in demolitions. However, they are readily explained by pressure changes as the towers, acting like a gigantic bicycle pump being compressed, collapsed.)

The Twin Towers used a “tube within a tube” architectural design, which provided considerable open office space in the interiors of the Towers. Much of the structural support was provided by a dense grouping of thick central core columns in the interior and the perimeter walls on the outside. When the towers began to collapse, large parts of the inner cores (called “the Spires” in 9/11 Truth circles) were actually left standing, briefly, before they, too, toppled over. The perimeter walls were largely forced to peel outward in large sections, producing the iconic images of Ground Zero with which we’re all familiar. Between the outer perimeter and the inner core, the weight of the upper sections plowed through one floor after another, breaking the floor connection brackets and support columns, pulverizing concrete decks, and gaining momentum and mass with each additional floor failure. Had the buildings been constructed differently (the Port Authority was allowed to circumvent some existing New York buildings requirements for the Towers), the collapses might not have even happened (Young 2007).

Even the 9/11 Truth movement’s most eminent physicists are confused about the basic principle of the difference between static and dynamic forces. A piece of paper, taped across a jar’s opening, will support a heavy coin such as a quarter indefinitely (static load). However, if the coin is dropped from just a few inches up, it will tear right through the paper (dynamic load). Given the information at hand—for example, the mass of the upper section of the north tower (fifty-eight million kilograms), the distance it fell (3.8 meters, about twelve feet), and the stiffness/rigidity of the lower structure itself, the dynamic force imparted on the lower section can be estimated as some thirty times the upper portion’s weight. This is many times the lower structure’s safety margin, which explains why it was quickly overwhelmed.

Once progressive collapse began, there were decreasing time intervals of free fall (between floors), punctuated by very brief, incredibly violent collisions—decelerations—of the upper mass, for each floor in turn. There was resistance at every step of the collapse, as the upper section collided with and incorporated each floor below. Conservation of momentum shows that the reductions in falling speed were slight as each floor was impacted, going as the ratio of floors before to floors after (e.g. 14/15, or about 94 percent, for the first impact). Accordingly, the upper section fell from rest to about 19 mph, was slowed down to 18 mph by the first impact, continued to fall until a speed of 26 mph was reached, was then slowed down to 24 mph by another impact, and so on. While the first plunge lasted about nine-tenths of a second, the upper section took only four-tenths of a second to fall through the next floor, three-tenths of a second for the next one, and so on until the bottom floors, which were crushed at a rate of just seven-hundredths of a second each, at speeds of over 100 mph. Yes, there was resistance at every step, as many tons of structural steel was demolished; yet the entire process, like an avalanche, lasted only fifteen to twenty seconds, about 50 to 100 percent longer than true “free fall” would have lasted.
Physics teacher David Chandler’s measurements of the first seconds of the collapse of the North Tower (WTC 1) showed that it fell with increasing speed but at only two-thirds of gravitational acceleration (g) (Chandler 2010). Chandler argues that this means the bottom section exerted a constant upward force of one-third of the upper section’s weight upon its mass, and he declares that this force should have been much larger, indicating that “some sort of controlled demolition was at work.”

Second, Chandler argues that being a Newtonian action/reaction pair, the impact force of the upper section on the lower section was only a third of the upper part’s weight. However, I’ve found that his estimate of the downward impact force was too low by a factor of one hundred. In addition, I found that the actual process—a series of twelve-foot free falls punctuated by violent and brief collisions with each floor—would have resulted in an average acceleration of precisely what Chandler measured for the start of the collapse of WTC 1, namely 2/3 g. (By the end of the collapse, my calculations indicate an average acceleration of only 1/3 g, but this can’t be measured in dust-obscured videos.)

The 9/11 Truth Movement: The Top Conspiracy Theory, a Decade Later (http://www.csicop.org/si/show/the_9_11_truth_movement_the_top_conspiracy_theory_ a_decade_later/)

[RandomGuy]

Did you just accept, on a assumption of faith, the official story even though there has never been any documentation released to support the FeMA pancake theory, now officially debunked, nor the official explaination by NiST, whose results could not be duplicated under the scrutiny of the scientific method?

Who's the real hypocrite here RG?

Funny you should ask.

If you actually read the NIST website, on their FAQ, they say that they didn't consider explosives because they did some initial modeling of the collapse that proved that there was enough simple mechanical/kinetic energy to completely collapse the building.

Being a curious sort, I decided to try and figure out how they did that.

Care to guess what I found by doing my own research?


PE = m x g x h

Consider the mass of just the top floor of the building.

PE= m *9.8*413= 4073m

Mass is, by definition, simply a measurement of how much force a given amount of material will exert AT REST on an object that is resisting gravity.

SOOOO

The top floor would hit the ground with the same force as a 4073 story building, if that fall was unimpeded.

Now let's consider the fall of the top 30 stories.

They fell through the 3-5 floors of damaged sections and impacted the building below with some amount of force.

Let's call the distance accelerated as 3 floors and be generous. This is 11 meters.

Acceration of an object for 11 meters at 70% of gravity(dan's figure), would yeild an ending velocity of:


v^2= 2ad=2*9.8*.7*11=150=v^2, find the square root of 150, and bada bing, you get 12 meters per second

Substitute this into the kinetic energy equation:
ke= 150*.5*m=ke=75m

This means the 30 foot section impacts the undamaged portion with the kinetic energy of SEVENTY FIVE TIMES ITS MASS.

Think about this for a moment.

The lower section of the building is designed to hold that 30 stories stationary plus a safety margin of 10 or 20%. So the maximum force that the underlying structure could apply to that falling section is 1.2 times its mass.

Further:
That falling section having as much kinetic energy as 75 times its mass means that it is effectively applying the same amount of force at the impact point that a 2270 story building would. if you held it stationary. (simple math: 30*75)
For the statement "the building would not have collapsed without explosives" implies that the building could have been TWENTY TWO TIMES TALLER THAN IT ACTUALLY WAS without collapsing. :rolleyes

STILL FURTHER

Your calculations seem to imply that the building structure below could absorb 30% of the falling energy.

IN JUST THE FIRST 11 METERS OF A 400 METER COLLAPSE THERE IS 62 TIMES THE AMOUNT OF FORCE REQUIRED TO COLLAPSE THE BUILDING.

Your assumption of about 1/3 the energy used to collapse the building is about 20 times what is reasonable. (1/62*20= 1/3) (more actually, if you consider the further distance and mass)

What happens, then when MORE mass is added AND accelerated?

Even if half the mass falls away or off to the side, there is still FAR more force and energy than would be needed to collapse the building WITHOUT ANY EXPLOSIVES.

LOOK FAMILIAR?

I gave it 3 floors worth of acceleration, the guy above broke it down a lot more and fleshed it out pretty well, albeit in different units.

Yay physics.

[Nbadan]

Much clearer view of WTC7 collapse...squib lines?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQeQi5XXfz0#t=57

[ChumpDumper]

Much clearer view of WTC7 collapse...squib lines?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQeQi5XXfz0#t=57Couple of questions.

1) Why bring down WTC 7 in the first place?

2) Why bring down WTC 7 about seven hours after it got hit by debris from the north tower collapse? Why not just play it off as immediate collateral damage once it got hit?

3) Why use squibs in the upper floors when conspiracy theorists tout the explosive loaders' contention that only the bottom third of the building need be wired for detonation?

[Nbadan]

I gave it 3 floors worth of acceleration, the guy above broke it down a lot more and fleshed it out pretty well, albeit in different units.

Yay physics.

Calm down RG... your no Zdenek P. Bazan...

[ChumpDumper]

Calm down RG... your no Zdenek P. Bazan...Pretty ad hoiminish if you ask me.

[RandomGuy]

Much clearer view of WTC7 collapse...squib lines?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQeQi5XXfz0#t=57

Do bicycle pumps exist?

If so, please explain how they work.

Here is a picture of the alleged item:

http://www.northerntool.com/images/product/2000x2000/150/150436_2000x2000.jpg

It is relevant to understanding this subject.

[Nbadan]

Investigating the Saudi Government's 9/11 Connection and the Path to Disilliusionment - Sen. Graham


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E18zaVc3U_s

Here's the key quote:

GRAHAM: There were 28 pages in the final report, out of over 800 total, which were totally censored from--that were one to the end of that chapter. That was the chapter that largely dealt with the financing of 9/11, who paid for these very complex and in many instances expensive activities that were the predicate for 9/11. I was stunned that the intelligence community would feel that it was a threat to national security for the American people to know who had made 9/11 financially possible. And I am sad to report that today, some 12 years after we submitted our report, that those 28 pages continue to be withheld from the public.

JAY: Now, it's fairly clear from your book what's in the 28 pages, I mean, in general terms. The L.A. Times did a report on those 28 pages. A journalist for The L.A. Times spoke with someone who'd actually seen the 28 pages--didn't reveal the name. But apparently it's the actual names of the people in the Saudi government and Saudi royal family that are in on financing 9/11 conspirators. And your book makes it pretty clear that that's what it's about.

First of all, who ordered the redaction, that you weren't allowed to say this?

GRAHAM: First, I'm going to have to withhold my comment on what you have just said. I am under the strictures of classification. I have--although it was written in 2002, I still have a reasonably good remembrance of what was in those 28 pages, but I'm frustrated because I can't talk about it.

Nothing to see here folks move along....I said move along...

[Nbadan]

9/11 Link To Saudi Arabia Is Topic Of 28 Redacted Pages In Government Report; Congressmen Push For R
Source: International Business Times

9/11 Link To Saudi Arabia Is Topic Of 28 Redacted Pages In Government Report; Congressmen Push For Release


Since terrorists attacked the United States on Sept. 11, 2001, victims’ loved ones, injured survivors, and members of the media have all tried without much success to discover the true nature of the relationship between the 19 hijackers – 15 of them Saudi nationals – and the Saudi Arabian government. Many news organizations reported that some of the terrorists were linked to the Saudi royals and that they even may have received financial support from them as well as from several mysterious, moneyed Saudi men living in San Diego.

Saudi Arabia has repeatedly denied any connection, and neither President George W. Bush nor President Obama has been forthcoming on this issue.

But earlier this year, Reps. Walter B. Jones, R-N.C., and Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., were given access to the 28 redacted pages of the Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry (JICI) of 9/11 issued in late 2002, which have been thought to hold some answers about the Saudi connection to the attack.

"I was absolutely shocked by what I read," Jones told International Business Times. "What was so surprising was that those whom we thought we could trust really disappointed me. I cannot go into it any more than that. I had to sign an oath that what I read had to remain confidential. But the information I read disappointed me greatly."...

http://www.ibtimes.com/911-link-saudi-arabia-topic-28-redacted-pages-government-report-congressmen-push-release-1501202

Don't question authority. We have the official story. There is no need for further investigation. There is no need to re-hash what our elected officials have told us. They have our best interests in mind. They would not deceive us. Belief in any theory that varies from the official account is discouraged; the thinking has already been done for you. Just believe. Trust. Obey.

[Nbadan]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bush-wont-reveal-saudi-9-11-info-30-07-2003/


Sources tell CBS the redacted section lays out a money trail between Saudi Arabia and supporters of al Qaeda, reports CBS White House Chief Correspondent John Roberts.

Among others, it singles out Omar al-Bayoumi, who gave financial assistance to 9-11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Midhar.

The FBI charges al-Bayoumi, an official of the Saudi civil aviation authority, never lacked for money and is believed to have received funds from a charitable trust run by the wife of the Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. The Saudis, for all their protestations of cooperating in the war on terror, still refuse to allow the FBI access to al-Bayoumi.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bush-wont-reveal-saudi-9-11-info-30-07-2003/

[Nbadan]

President Obama assured the 9/11 Families shortly after taking office in 2009 that he would release the pages. To learn the truth and prevent future terrorist attacks, the group asks him to keep his promise.

“The transparency begins with the 28 pages, but it extends much further,” the letter states. “For example, we are closely monitoring a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit in which plaintiffs are suing the U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI in U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, regarding an investigation involving a Saudi family, former residents of Sarasota, FL, who may have provided aid or assistance to the 9/11 hijackers. We understand that plaintiffs in that case have also requested Part Four of the report of the Joint Inquiry.”

Former Senator Bob Graham, co-chair of the 9/11 Joint Congressional Investigation, has provided declarations that the investigation of the Sarasota family was not disclosed to him or his co-chair, Porter Goss. He also states that, when he learned of the investigation in 2011, he asked the same question of the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, and they confirmed that they had not been aware of the FBI’s investigation either.


http://www.motleyrice.com/news/view/911-families-call-upon-president-obama-to-release-28-redacted-pages-1028

[Nbadan]

Bin Laden Reported to have Met with Saudi Intelligence Chief 2 Months Before 9/11

(Note Prince Turki al Faisal would later become Ambassador to the USA, replacing the former Ambassador known as "Bandar Bush")



Bin Laden is reported to have arrived in Dubai on July 4 from Quetta in Pakistan with his own personal doctor, nurse and four bodyguards, to be treated in the urology department. While there he was visited by several members of his family and Saudi personalities . . . . Bin Laden was also visited by Prince Turki al Faisal, then head of Saudi intelligence, who had long had links with the Taliban, and Bin Laden.


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/nov/01/afghanistan.terrorism

[ChumpDumper]

Why would the Saudi government want to attack the US, dan?

[Nbadan]

Why would the Saudi government want to attack the US, dan?

Ask the 9/11 Commission....oh that's right, you can't.... because they didn't bother going there and then buried this evidence for decades under the 'cloak of national security"....still loving that report?

[ChumpDumper]

Ask the 9/11 Commission....oh that's right, you can't.... because they didn't bother going there and then buried this evidence for decades under the 'cloak of national security"....still loving that report?dan, I am asking you a direct question.

Please answer.

Why would the Saudi government want to attack the US, dan?

[Nbadan]

dan, I am asking you a direct question.

Please answer.

Why would the Saudi government want to attack the US, dan?


Because they are freedom-hating Muslims...

[ChumpDumper]

Because they are freedom-hating Muslims...Seriously?

This is your thesis after 12 years?

lol

[mouse]

FOtoPJ4zAqU

[mouse]

kpiVv8tQdmY

[Nbadan]

Saudi Arabia Ordered to Face Claims Over Sept. 11 Attacks
Source: Bloomberg


Lawsuits claiming Saudi Arabia aided al-Qaeda and should be held liable for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks were revived by a U.S. appeals court.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in Manhattan today said a lower-court judge “rested on an error of law” in rejecting a request to reopen the cases against the country’s government and an affiliated charity.

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Saudi High Commission for Relief of Bosnia and Herzegovina won a ruling dismissing them from the lawsuits on the grounds that a foreign government is immune from suit. Subsequently, the appeals court made inconsistent rulings on whether the terrorism claims made in the case fall under sovereign-immunity rule, according to today’s opinion.

The lower-court judge should have granted a request to re-open the cases in order to allow the inconsistency to be addressed, the appeals court said.

Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-19/saudi-arabia-ordered-to-face-claims-over-sept-11-attacks.html

http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k196/DeSwiss/TheDayBushGotArrested4WarCrimes.jpg

This will go nowhere...but I would love to see the discovery process in this case...Condi lied under oath when she claimed that the "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US" memo... was "not a warning".

I guess you weren't paying attention. The memo warned of preparations for hijackings and planned attacks inside the US.

Dr. Philip Zelikow, Condi's buddy and the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, was overheard telephoning the CIA authors of the memo and asking them to corroborate Condi's statement. (See Shenon, p. 374) They refused.

There were warnings from `13 foreign countries, and 4 FBI offices. The CIA briefed Condi on 5/30 and 7/10 about the dire nature of the al Qaeda threat. Tenet and Blee agreed that had she acted on their warnings, 9/11 might have been prevented. Cofer Black said they did everything but pull the trigger to the gun they were holding to her head....

[Nbadan]

Despite refusing to release these incriminating documents... We already know Banshire Bush's wife was writing checks for benefactors of known al Qaeda agents inside the USA--Nawaf al Hazmi and Khalid al Mihdhar.

Al Mihdhar was here in the USA, then he went to Yemen and lived for a year in a known al Qaeda communications hub that was monitored both by the NSA and the CIA and also by audio bugs.

Then he returned to the USA, no problem, and he and al Hazmi were both known by the CIA and the FBI to be in the country. There was a debate within the FBI about whether they should open an intel investigation or a full-scale criminal investigation. They decided on an intel investigation and assigned one rookie to the job. Within a few days he was asking if he could run a credit-card check on them to see what they were up to, but his superior, Dina Corsi, discouraged him. Bob Woodward said that if this credit card check had been run it would have revealed that al Mihdhar and al Hazmi together bought ten airline tickets dated 9/11/01 under their own real names.

The only explanation (former counterterrorism czar) Richard Clarke could offer for this cockup was that CIA had a hands-off policy on these two because they were hoping to recruit them as double agents.

Senator Bob Graham is on the edge of telling America the real story and where to look to find out more. Snowden likely does have enough metadata files to not only connect high level political business people but military with deep foreign participation. As Bush and Cheney profiteered it is very compelling from an insider view as being too big to fail with good reason to get in the action. It is now easy to see from an outside view that minimally the whole Iraq war was a lie. It is even reported by many in the media as a lie. However, no one in the media has the courage or can openly be honest because of the media muzzle.

It is all tied together with very prominent high level very well liked senior members of Congress, the Senate, Judiciary, Military, Business, Banking, Wall Street, and especially Mainstream Media. Did I leave anything out? Yes, those secret mercenary types, or even former CIA, FBI, NSA, you name it for any American, foreign agency, if the money is there and it is someone will fill the job.

This was long time to formulate it did not happen over-night. Too big to fail penetrates the banking system it is loaded with the real reason America failed the electorate because of foreign influence with Congress and Senate people getting rich while America suffers decline.

[Nbadan]

Saudi-Sized Cracks in the 9/11 Wall of Silence - redacted Bush report.


The Saudis deny any role in 9/11, but the CIA in one memo reportedly found “incontrovertible evidence” that Saudi government officials — not just wealthy Saudi hardliners, but high-level diplomats and intelligence officers employed by the kingdom — helped the hijackers both financially and logistically. The intelligence files cited in the report directly implicate the Saudi embassy in Washington and consulate in Los Angeles in the attacks, making 9/11 not just an act of terrorism, but an act of war.


More...
http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/12/19/saudi-sized-cracks-in-the-911-wall-of-silence/

So....I guess if Al Queda was heavily invested in the US stock market the way the Kingdom is 911 would have been an 'inconvenience"

[ChumpDumper]

So is this your actual angle now?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yay MOAR YOUTUBES!!!!!!

Have to love it when even after all these years, cosmo is still incapable of articulating a meaningful argument on this subject.

If that bullshit is a tribunal then so are we because they are sanctioned by nobody but hey they fit the confirmation bias so trot them out anyway! Am I right or what?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The case was closed a long time ago. You shills just won't recognize it.

"September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor" - Full version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1GCeuSr3Mk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7mDXHn_byA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DegLpgJmFL8

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=architects+and+engineers+for+ 911+truth&sm=1

The craft that hit the Pentagon was too short to be a 757.
http://0911.voila.net/index4.htm
(5th picture from top)


This documentary explains the motives.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/new-american-century/

So you double down on the stupidity. NICE!!!

I have no interest in being spoonfed my takes by anonymous youtubes and blogs. :lol topdocumentaryfilms

What I find particularly entertaining is how you try this tact and then call other people shills. Beat them to that punch and maybe they will be distracted, eh?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

So Cosmo, are you affiliated with any of these youtube, documentary, and/or blogs that you spam for us?

[ChumpDumper]

The case was closed a long time ago. You shills just won't recognize it.

"September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor" - Full version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1GCeuSr3Mk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7mDXHn_byA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DegLpgJmFL8

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=architects+and+engineers+for+ 911+truth&sm=1

The craft that hit the Pentagon was too short to be a 757.
http://0911.voila.net/index4.htm
(5th picture from top)


This documentary explains the motives.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/new-american-century/Why don't you explain it all in your own words and save us the time?

[mouse]

I have no interest in being spoonfed my takes by anonymous youtubes and blogs. :lol topdocumentaryfilms


That's right you prefer fox news to stay misinformed.

[mouse]

Obviously on the core column and trusses on the lower floors....

I84-_hcbtyU

I thought dealing with the misguided in here was bad you should see the bozos on YouTube.

[ChumpDumper]

Much clearer view of WTC7 collapse...squib lines?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQeQi5XXfz0#t=57So do you think they are "squib lines"?

Yes or no.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

That's right you prefer fox news to stay misinformed.

Homie, I don't even watch TV outside of sports much less that shizzee.

[Nbadan]

Yeah, nobody ever comes forward to challenge the official story...

:rolleyes

NSA Insiders Reveal What Went Wrong on and before/after "9/11"

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) is a group of current and former officials of the United States Intelligence Community, including some from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the U.S. State Department's Intelligence Bureau (INR), and the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). It was formed in January 2003 as a "coast-to-coast enterprise" to protest the use of faulty intelligence "upon which the US/UK invasion of Iraq was based." The group issued a letter before the 2003 invasion of Iraq stating that intelligence analysts were not being listened to by policy makers.


by Former NSA Senior Executives & Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity


In a memo to President Obama, former National Security Agency insiders explain how NSA leaders botched intelligence collection and analysis before 9/11, covered up the mistakes, and violated the constitutional rights of the American people, all while wasting billions of dollars and misleading the public.


We were there; we know what happened. And we know how what happened has been successfully covered up – until now. Calamities like this tend to happen again if there is no accountability for what happened before. You need the unvarnished truth. The flood of revelations now in the public domain frees us to address facts and events formerly hidden behind a convenient, cover-up classification regime. We feel bound by the solemn oath we took to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, to make truths known to you that you may find as unconscionable as we do.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/01/08-0

[ChumpDumper]

So what do they say really happened on 9/11?

[TDMVPDPOY]

dont know why the govt decide to take out 4000 t axpayers....

certainly they couldve flown the planes into prisons, does everyone a favor....gets rid of menaces of society, and people wont give 2 shits about it....

[Nbadan]

Chumpy won't watch it, but you should...

The Al Qaeda and the Saudi Agenda


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKBU5rdGLwA#t=69

Toby Jones tells Paul Jay that the Saudis use of terrorism is driven by a fear of democracy and a desire to be the regional and oil hegemony.

[ChumpDumper]

Nbadan won't tell you what he thinks really happened on 9/11 because he is afraid.

[Nbadan]

There is alot of bullshit in the 911 Commission report, but one of the saddest is the theory that a pilot who couldn't fly a single engine plane just a few months before and another who got his pilot license suspended because he was such a poor pilot,on 911 all of the sudden could fly a much more complicated multi-jet plane plus, hit targets on the ground to boot.....what bullshit...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dacuFbAG0ak#t=99

[ChumpDumper]

Just how good a pilot does one need to be to crash a plane, dan?

[Nbadan]

Just how good a pilot does one need to be to crash a plane, dan?

Crash a plane into a target on the ground? Pretty damn good...

[Nbadan]

This is a must-watch.....Very thoughtful, provocative interview, and Sen. Graham is very straight forward. Here's an exchange:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFYobbt-Pvs


GRAHAM: Well, I think there was some of that. We had a situation during our investigation, which was also conducted during the year 2002, in which we became aware (not because the FBI had told us; in fact, they had specifically withheld this information) that there were two of the earliest hijackers to enter the United States who were living in San Diego, and in their files in San Diego they had information about these people, but the FBI claimed they didn't have the information at the central office in Washington. Over the objection of the FBI, we sent staff to San Diego, and they came up with a trove of information about these people and the close ties between individuals, in some cases, who were employees of the government of Saudi Arabia; in other cases, they were nationals of Saudi Arabia and had suspicious affiliations.

One of those in particular was a retired university professor. He happened not to be a Saudi. He actually was an Indian of Muslim profession who operated a boarding house, and two of his residents were these two future hijackers. At the same time, he was on the payroll of the FBI as an asset to collect information about what were these students that he had formally had in his classroom and that were living in San Diego, attending various universities there, what were they up to.

JAY: Right.

GRAHAM: You have this anomaly that two of the people who are going to be involved in killing more than 3,000 people on September 11 were living in the home of a person who was also being paid by the FBI.

JAY: Right. Senator, we're going to link—when we show this story, we are going to link to our interview series we did with you where we go into quite a bit of detail about all of that.

[ChumpDumper]

Crash a plane into a target on the ground? Pretty damn good...How good?

How many hours and what certifications do you claim a pilot needs to crash a plane?

[ChumpDumper]

bMCFo8IwSEs

12 minute mark.

Seriously dan, is your contention that they were all, in fact, expert pilots hired by some shadowy organization in the US government to still kill themselves while looking like shitty pilots who didn't even know how to work the intercom on the plane?

Explain your theory.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It's been a month so cosmored the shitty shill is back to spam the same shit and pretend like it was not refuted. Mock his stupidity and move on.

[ChumpDumper]

It's been a month so cosmored the shitty shill is back to spam the same shit and pretend like it was not refuted. Mock his stupidity and move on.Yeah, it's easy. None of the tinfoil crowd can say what his theory is. They all just vomit up YouTube after YouTube and strike a pose.

[Nbadan]

Yeah, it's easy. None of the tinfoil crowd can say what his theory is. They all just vomit up YouTube after YouTube and strike a pose.

:lol Chumpy deflecting again because his beloved 911 Commission report is crumbling to the piece of crap it is...

[ChumpDumper]

:lol Chumpy deflecting again because his beloved 911 Commission report is crumbling to the piece of crap it is...

I am not deflecting at all. If you want to see some deflecting watch what happens when I do this.

Dan, in your own words, tell us in as much detail as would befit someone who researched this for 12 years what you think really happened on 9/11.

I eagerly await your reply.

[Nbadan]

That's not the topic of this thread...this thread is about 911 and consequently the official government report of the attacks, not to speculate about alternative theories....see who's deflecting....

[ChumpDumper]

That's not the topic of this thread...this thread is about 911 and consequently the official government report of the attacks, not to speculate about alternative theories....see who's deflecting....I see you are deflecting.

The thread is about real 9-11 research. That's why it is called real 9-11 research.

You claim to have done over a decade of real 9-11 research, so tell us what you've think really happened on 9-11 based on your decade plus of real 9-11 research.

Or just try to deflect more. Whatever.

[Nbadan]

Do you even read my posts in this thread? I mean to stay here till we get the political will to re investigate 911, especially with all the new revelations about possible state involvement in the attacks....although honestly, i think I'll be dead before anyone convinces a congress to buy one less warship we don't need and investigate the single largest terror event on American soil...

[ChumpDumper]

Do you even read my posts in this thread? I mean to stay here till we get the political will to re investigate 911, especially with all the new revelations about possible state involvement in the attacks....although honestly, i think I'll be dead before anyone convinces a congress to buy one less warship we don't need and investigate the single largest terror event on American soil...
The problem with that is you and the others whining about a new investigation don't know anything about the multiple investigations that have already taken place. This thread is here to give you that information.

You never read any of it.

Not one link.

Since you refuse to know what has already been investigated, you are in no position to demand a new one.

[Nbadan]

The problem with that is you and the others whining about a new investigation don't know anything about the multiple investigations that have already taken place. This thread is here to give you that information.

You never read any of it.

Not one link.

Since you refuse to know what has already been investigated, you are in no position to demand a new one.

STFU you know those investigations had limited budgets and no subpena powers...

[ChumpDumper]

STFU you know those investigations had limited budgets and no subpena powers...
See? You're only talking about one committee.

Nothing else.

The twoof movement did nothing to actually investigate anything. They put all their money into spooky YouTube music and self-fellating websites and circle jerk meetups.

That's who you want to cast your lot with.

[Nbadan]

Paul is a little late to the party, but...

Rand Paul: Dick Cheney used 9/11 as excuse to invade Iraq for the benefit of Halliburton
By Tom Boggioni
Monday, April 7, 2014 7:53 EDT

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/07/rand-paul-dick-cheney-used-911-as-excuse-to-invade-iraq-for-the-benefit-of-halliburton/


In a videotaped 2009 speech before student Republicans at Western Kentucky University, Rand Paul — who was just beginning his run for the Senate seat he eventually won — explained that former Vice President Dick Cheney, who counseled against war in Iraq in 1995, pushed for war following 9/11 to benefit his former employers at military contractor Halliburton.

In the video, discovered by David Corn at Mother Jones, Paul can be seen standing at a lectern describing Cheney’s opinion in 1995, when he said that invading Iraq would be, “a disaster, it would be vastly expensive, it’d be civil war, we would have no exit strategy.”

Paul said:

There’s a great YouTube of Dick Cheney in 1995 defending Bush Number One , and he goes on for about five minutes. He’s being interviewed, I think, by the American Enterprise Institute, and and he says it would be a disaster, it would be vastly expensive, it’d be civil war, we would have no exit strategy. He goes on and on for five minutes. Dick Cheney saying it would be a bad idea. And that’s why the first Bush didn’t go into Baghdad. Dick Cheney then goes to work for Halliburton. Makes hundreds of millions of dollars, their CEO. Next thing you know, he’s back in government and it’s a good idea to go into Iraq.

<snip>

The day after 9/11, George Tenet is going in the House and Richard Perle is coming out of the White House. And George Tenet should know more about intelligence than anybody in the world, and the first thing Richard Perle says to him on the way out is, ‘We’ve got it, now we can go into Iraq.’ And George Tenet, who supposedly knows as much intelligence as anybody in the White House says, ‘Well, don’t we need to know that they have some connection to 9/11?’ And, he says, ‘It doesn’t matter.’ It became an excuse. 9/11 became an excuse for a war they already wanted in Iraq.

<snip>

It’s Dick Cheney in 1995 being interviewed on why they didn’t go into Baghdad the first time under the first George Bush. And his arguments are exactly mirroring my dad’s arguments for why we shouldn’t have gone in this time. It would be chaos. There’d be a civil war. There’d be no exit strategy. And cost a blue bloody fortune in both lives and treasure. And this is Dick Cheney saying this. But, you know, a couple hundred million dollars later Dick Cheney earns from Halliburton, he comes back into government. Now Halliburton’s got a billion-dollar no-bid contract in Iraq. You know, you hate to be so cynical that you think some of these corporations are able to influence policy, but I think sometimes they are. Most of the people on these committees have a million dollars in their bank account all from different military industrial contractors. We don’t want our defense to be defined by people who make money off of the weapons.

<snip>

Watch the Western Kentucky video below:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/07/rand-paul-dick-cheney-used-911-as-excuse-to-invade-iraq-for-the-benefit-of-halliburton/

Maybe the WH has a better understanding of what is going on in Florida, but refuses to act...

[ChumpDumper]

lol all that will do is fuck over Rand's presidential hopes.

[RandomGuy]

Looks like I need to drag this one up.

[RandomGuy]

http://www.debunk911myths.org/

http://www.jod911.com/


PE= m *9.8*413= 4073m

Mass is, by definition, simply a measurement of how much force a given amount of material will exert AT REST on an object that is resisting gravity.

SOOOO

The top floor would hit the ground with the same force as a 4073 story building, if that fall was unimpeded.

Now let's consider the fall of the top 30 stories.

They fell through the 3-5 floors of damaged sections and impacted the building below with some amount of force.

Let's call the distance accelerated as 3 floors and be generous. This is 11 meters.

Acceration of an object for 11 meters at 70% of gravity(dan's figure), would yeild an ending velocity of:


v^2= 2ad=2*9.8*.7*11=150=v^2, find the square root of 150, and bada bing, you get 12 meters per second

Substitute this into the kinetic energy equation:
ke= 150*.5*m=ke=75m

This means the 30 floor section impacts the undamaged portion with the kinetic energy of SEVENTY FIVE TIMES ITS MASS.

Think about this for a moment.

The lower section of the building is designed to hold that 30 stories stationary plus a safety margin of 10 or 20%. So the maximum force that the underlying structure could apply to that falling section is 1.2 times its mass.

Further:
That falling section having as much kinetic energy as 75 times its mass means that it is effectively applying the same amount of force at the impact point that a 2270 story building would. if you held it stationary. (simple math: 30*75)
For the statement "the building would not have collapsed without explosives" implies that the building could have been TWENTY TWO TIMES TALLER THAN IT ACTUALLY WAS without collapsing. :rolleyes

STILL FURTHER

Your calculations seem to imply that the building structure below could absorb 30% of the falling energy.

IN JUST THE FIRST 11 METERS OF A 400 METER COLLAPSE THERE IS 62 TIMES THE AMOUNT OF FORCE REQUIRED TO COLLAPSE THE BUILDING.

Your assumption of about 1/3 the energy used to collapse the building is about 20 times what is reasonable. (1/62*20= 1/3) (more actually, if you consider the further distance and mass)

What happens, then when MORE mass is added AND accelerated?

Even if half the mass falls away or off to the side, there is still FAR more force and energy than would be needed to collapse the building WITHOUT ANY EXPLOSIVES.

Scary maths.

[Agloco]

Just how good a pilot does one need to be to crash a plane, dan?

:lol

Years of training if you ask Dan.

[Agloco]

Scary maths.

So scary, in fact, that they will likely be ignored.

[TeyshaBlue]

'Sup Ag?

[Agloco]

'Sup Ag?

Back from under my rock. Been quite busy. When I get back to SA, we should grab a beer.

[TeyshaBlue]

Absolutely...say the word amigo.

[Nbadan]

http://www.debunk911myths.org/


lol

[Nbadan]

:lol

Years of training if you ask Dan.

Bet u couldn't do it...

[ChumpDumper]

Bet u couldn't do it...Bet u can.

Get a plane and try.

[pgardn]

Paul is a little late to the party, but...

Rand Paul: Dick Cheney used 9/11 as excuse to invade Iraq for the benefit of Halliburton
By Tom Boggioni
Monday, April 7, 2014 7:53 EDT

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/07/rand-paul-dick-cheney-used-911-as-excuse-to-invade-iraq-for-the-benefit-of-halliburton/


Watch the Western Kentucky video below:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/07/rand-paul-dick-cheney-used-911-as-excuse-to-invade-iraq-for-the-benefit-of-halliburton/

Maybe the WH has a better understanding of what is going on in Florida, but refuses to act...

Jesus Christ how many different theories do you like?

You guys just pick up anything and post it.

So it's Cheney because of Haliburton. Is this the one you want to stick with? What's next? How many GD people are you going to blame? This is an endless mindless charade.

[Nbadan]

Bet u can.

Get a plane and try.

Nope...nobody could....


Much controversy has surrounded the speeds reported for the World Trade Center attack aircraft. However, none of the arguments for either side of the debate have been properly based on actual data, until now. Pilots For 9/11 Truth have recently analyzed data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board in terms of a "Radar Data Impact Speed Study" in which the NTSB concludes 510 knots and 430 knots for United 175 (South Tower) and American 11 (North Tower), respectively. A benchmark has been set by the October 1999 crash of Egypt Air 990, a 767 which exceeded it's maximum operating limits causing in-flight structural failure, of which data is available to compare to the WTC Attack Aircraft.

Egypt Air 990 (EA990) is a 767 which was reported to have entered a dive and accelerated to a peak speed of .99 Mach at 22,000 feet. Boeing sets maximum operating speeds for the 767 as 360 Knots and .86 Mach. The reason for two airspeed limitations is due to air density at lower vs. higher altitudes. To understand equivalent dynamic pressures on an airframe of low vs. high altitude, there is an airspeed appropriately titled "Equivalent Airspeed" or EAS[1]. EAS is defined as the airspeed at sea level which produces the same dynamic pressure acting on the airframe as the true airspeed at high altitudes.[2]

Pilots For 9/11 Truth have calculated the Equivalent Airspeed for EA990 peak speed of .99 Mach at 22,000 feet as the equivalent dynamic effects of 425 knots at or near sea level. This airspeed is 65 knots over max operating for a 767, 85 knots less than the alleged United 175, and 5 knots less than the alleged American 11. Although it may be probable for the alleged American 11 to achieve such speed as 430 knots is only 5 knots over that of EA990 peak speed, It is impossible for the alleged United 175 to achieve the speeds reported by the NTSB using EA990 as a benchmark.

Pilots For 9/11 Truth have further studied if a 767 could continue controlled flight at such reported speeds. According to the NTSB, EA990 wreckage was found in two distinct debris fields, indicating in-flight structural failure which has been determined to have occurred a few seconds after recording peak speed. Based on EA990, it is impossible for the alleged United 175 to have continued controlled flight at more than 85 knots over the speed which failed the structure of EA990.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=20178

[ChumpDumper]

lol pilots for twoof

Is your theory now that neither 757s nor 767s were used in any of the 9/11 attacks, dan?

Yes or no.

[ErnestLynch]

I was behind 911. Mystery solved.

[Nbadan]

Pilots For 9/11 Truth have calculated the Equivalent Airspeed for EA990 peak speed of .99 Mach at 22,000 feet as the equivalent dynamic effects of 425 knots at or near sea level. This airspeed is 65 knots over max operating for a 767, 85 knots less than the alleged United 175, and 5 knots less than the alleged American 11.

Now Chumpy knows better than licensed pilots too...

Maybe the plane was one of the lucky ones and survived the rapid (world-record breaking quite honestly) death plunge from rapid decent, would such an inexperienced pilot been capable of correcting the death plunge and still maintain (almost flawless) heading? ....things to think about....

[Nbadan]

I was behind 911. Mystery solved.

I knew it.

[ChumpDumper]

Now Chumpy knows better than licensed pilots too...

Maybe the plane was one of the lucky ones and survived the rapid (world-record breaking quite honestly) death plunge from rapid decent, would such an inexperienced pilot been capable of correcting the death plunge and still maintain (almost flawless) heading? ....things to think about....dan, the thing to think about is the theory you probably don't know you are now trying to sell here.

You are now saying that no 757s or 767s were used in the attacks.

What are you now saying was used in the attacks, dan?

[ChumpDumper]

Now Chumpy knows better than licensed pilots too...I know that the NTSB never suggested that EA990 broke up at 22,000 feet -- so yes, I do know better than these "licensed pilots."

[ChumpDumper]

A benchmark has been set by the October 1999 crash of Egypt Air 990, a 767 which exceeded it's maximum operating limits causing in-flight structural failure, of which data is available to compare to the WTC Attack Aircraft.This is a whopper of a lie, dan.


At 0150:08, as the airplane passed through about 30,800 feet msl, the airplane
exceeded its maximum operating airspeed (0.86 Mach), and the Master
Warning alarm sounded. The maximum rate of descent recorded during the
dive was about 39,000 fpm at 0150:19, as the airplane descended through
about 24,600 feet msl. At 0150:23, the airspeed reached its peak calculated
value of 0.99 Mach, as the airplane descended through about 22,200 feet msl.

At 0150:15 and about 27,300 feet msl, the left and right elevator surfaces
started to move slowly (about 0.6º per second) in the trailing-edge-up (TEU)
direction, back toward their neutral position. The pitch angle, angle of attack,
and load factor also started to increase at this point, so that when the FDR
recorded the last data for the accident flight at 0150:36.64, the pitch angle had
increased to about 8º nose down, and the airplane was experiencing about
2.4 Gs....

....Performance calculations based on primary radar returns indicated that the
airplaneís rapid descent stopped at an altitude of about 16,000 feet msl. The
primary radar returns indicated that the airplane then began to climb, reaching
about 25,000 feet msl about 0151:15. During this climb, the airplane's heading
changed from about 80º to about 140º.
ï After 0151:15, the data indicated that the airplane began a second rapid descent
that continued until it impacted the ocean.The flight data recorder stopped receiving data when the suicidal flight officer turned off the engines.

The plane was able to climb 9000 feet after the FDR recorded the highest speed (Mach 0.99) and G-forces (2.4) without any power. Obviously, the plane didn't break up during this time. If it broke up -- the debris fields aren't totally conclusive -- that happened during the final descent when the engines were off and no data was being recorded by the FDR.

Did you even try to vet this, dan? I mean, this was especially easy to destroy. You just saw it and took it as gospel?

[Nbadan]

As Boutons would say....why you lie?


I know that the NTSB never suggested that EA990 broke up at 22,000 feet -- so yes, I do know better than these "licensed pilots."


From the presence of a western debris field about 1,200 feet (370 m) from the eastern debris field, the NTSB concluded that the left engine and some small pieces of wreckage separated from the airplane at some point before water impact.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt_Air_990

:rolleyes

For those of us who live in the real world, the plane was compromised before it hit the water....

[ChumpDumper]

As Boutons would say....why you lie?





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt_Air_990

:rolleyes

For those of us who live in the real world, the plane was compromised before it hit the water....Right, not at any time the FDR was functioning, since the plane climbed 9000 feet after it stopped functioning.

What part of that do you not understand, dan?

[ChumpDumper]

If it broke up -- the debris fields aren't totally conclusive -- that happened during the final descent when the engines were off and no data was being recorded by the FDR.Seriously, dan -- I want to help you out here.

What part are you not understanding?

[Nbadan]

The flight data recorder stopped receiving data when the suicidal flight officer turned off the engines

:lol

http://vimeo.com/7340833

[ChumpDumper]

:lol

http://vimeo.com/7340833This does nothing to disprove the fact that the flight data recorder stopped receiving data when the suicidal flight officer turned off the engines. In fact is uses the graph that shows the engines' being turned off. It's the same graph in your wiki article.

Are you drunk?

[Nbadan]

This does nothing to disprove the fact that the flight data recorder stopped receiving data when the suicidal flight officer turned off the engines. In fact is uses the graph that shows the engines' being turned off. It's the same graph in your wiki article.

Are you drunk?

:lol

Go back and watch the presentation again...hell, it disproves your bullshit....there are redundant systems that kept recording flight data....the ATC Transponder would not have stopped because of a power-down of the engines....the transponder failed because the plane was structurally compromised by exceeding the max speed set by Boeing...

[Nbadan]

The FDR and CDR do not shut down when you power down the engines....

[ChumpDumper]

:lol

Go back and watch the presentation again...hell, it disproves your bullshit....there are redundant systems that kept recording flight data....the ATC Transponder would not have stopped because of a power-down of the engines....the transponder failed because the plane was structurally compromised by exceeding the max speed set by Boeing...Apparently p4t didn't know that backup power to FDRs was not required in 1999.

2.2.1 Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and Flight Data Recorder (FDR) Improvements
Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM). In February 2005, the FAA released an NPRM that if
adopted, would make several improvements to the quality, quantity and reliability of the current flight
recorder system’s data. The rulemaking is a result of technical assessments of accidents, such as Alaska
Airlines Flight 261, SwissAir Flight 111, Egypt Air Flight 990, and American Airlines 587 and in
response to National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) safety recommendations. The rule would
require that two years after the effective date of the rule, operators and aircraft manufacturers must
accomplish the following:
• All airplanes that are required to carry a CVR must retrofit their airplanes to install a
two-hour, solid-state recorder. This eliminates the use of magnetic tape and 30
minute solid state recorders which were raised as a concern in A35-WP/144. Also all
newly manufactured airplanes and rotorcraft that are required to carry a CVR, must
install a two hour, solid-state recorder.
• All newly manufactured aircraft that are required to carry a CVR, must install an
independent power supply capable of providing 10 minutes of back-up power to the
CVR in the event that normal aircraft power is lost
• All newly manufactured aircraft that are required to carry a CVR or FDR, must
incorporate design changes to ensure that no single aircraft electrical power failure
will remove power to both the CVR and FDR.t
http://www.icao.int/Meetings/AMC/MA/Assembly%2036th%20Session/wp300_en.pdf

Man, I know so much more than these guys!

[ChumpDumper]

The FDR and CDR do not shut down when you power down the engines....After 2007 they don't.

Back in 1999, they certainly could -- otherwise, there would have been no reason to write a rule requiring backup power in 2005.

[ChumpDumper]

Also, EA990 wasn't registered in the US, so it wasn't subject to the same regulations even if backup power was required by the FAA back then -- which it wasn't.

[ChumpDumper]

Any further comment, dan?

[Nbadan]

I'm still here, just bored....It is your theory that the FDR stopped because of engine stop, I don't think so, ...my theory is that the FDR stopped recording because the plane started falling apart, the multiple debris field seems to support my theory, that just like in wind tunnel tests, when you push a plane pasts its limits, the wings and engine peel off...none of this takes away from my initial argument that it would have been very difficult for an inexperienced pilot to control this death fall and still maintain heading...

[ChumpDumper]

I'm still here, just bored....It is your theory that the FDR stopped because of engine stop, I don't think so, ...my theory is that the FDR stopped recording because the plane started falling apart, the multiple debris field seems supports my theory, that just like in wind tunnel tests, when you push a plane pasts its limits the wings and engine peel off...none of this takes away from my argument that it would have been very difficult for an inexperienced pilot to control this death fall and still maintain heading...

How do you explain the plane's pulling out of its dive and climbing thousands of feet after you claim it broke up?

The hijackers only clew at those speeds for a few seconds and almost misses the buildings. They were not good pilots but one doesn't have to be a good pilot to crash a plane.

[Nbadan]

How do you explain the plane's pulling out of its dive and climbing thousands of feet after you claim it broke up?

Which plane are you talking about? EA990 or United 175?

[Nbadan]

he hijackers only clew at those speeds for a few seconds and almost misses the buildings. They were not good pilots but one doesn't have to be a good pilot to crash a plane.

False, the hijackers actually flew the planes for hundreds of miles, navigated themselves without GPS, although there has been speculation that they possessed held-held GPS, no proof exists, flew at 'sometimes' incredible speeds for inexperienced pilots, made accuratecourse corrections ......and then managed to hit a target on land...

[ChumpDumper]

Which plane are you talking about? EA990 or United 175?the former.

[ChumpDumper]

False, the hijackers actually flew the planes for hundreds of miles, navigated themselves without GPS, although there has been speculation that they possessed held-held GPS, no proof exists, flew at 'sometimes' incredible speeds for inexperienced pilots, made accuratecourse corrections ......and then managed to hit a target on land...
What part of "they only flew at those speeds for a few seconds" is wrong? I am talking about the speeds outside the regular operational limits.

Be specific.