9/11 Conspiracy Revealed

[crims]

And how do you explain this:

- pools of molten steel found at the base of the collapsed twin towers and WTC7 weeks after

- seismometers recorded huge bursts of energy, caused unexplained seismic "spikes" at the beginning of each collapse

There must've been explosives in the basements.

[Michael Hardner]

Crims:

Much of what you have posted is wrong, some is nonsense, and some of it is dishonest.

Some examples:

If you would allow an architect to make a building with that attitude, or an investigator to research the death of thousands of people, there has to be something mentally wrong with you.

There are limits to what humans can do.

An architect can only foresee so much happening to a building. An organization can't anticipate every type of security breach. Investigators will not examine every single piece of evidence when they have enough evidence to come to the proper conclusion.

By Ockham's Razor, Laws of Physics, and Common Sense, it must be a missile.

I find it strange that 9-11 conspiracy types continually cite Ockham's Razor when Ockham's Razor dictates that the simplest explanation is the reason.

Needless to say, the supposed plot is anything but simple. The terrorists used well known holes in security to execute a low-cost high-impact attack that had never been tried before and that is what happened.

For no reason, FBI then confiscate all 4 known tapes of the Pentagon crash.

For no reason ? I could see how tapes of the crash would have significance for security and why they wouldn't want that in the public domain.

South Tower was hit last and only by its corner but collapsed FIRST,

while North Tower was hit first and directly at centre but collapsed SECOND.

The second tower was hit worse than the first, so what happened makes sense.

7 of 8 blackboxes (made of stainless steel and high-temp-insulated silica) are destroyed,

BUT one of the terrorist's passports (made of paper) somehow flew out of his pocket,

out of the burning inferno, on to the streets below, where it was found somehow by FBI amidst all the panic.

Flying a plane into a building doesn't cause a homogeneous amount of damage through and through. There were also some severed human hands recovererd from the roof of a building.

Steel leftovers are then rushed out of the country and to the smelters (FEMA got only a little time).

Out of the country ? Is there a source for that ?

I thought FEMA was supposed to be in on this ?

I also thought that some wreckage was kept around for months. How could anybody separate the debris into evidence-bearing and non-evidence-bearing debris ?

All this was authorized by Marvin Bush (Dubya's brother).

He owned Securacom, which provided security for WTC.

He was on the board of directors for awhile, and left long before the attacks.

This is the type of intentionally misleading quote that is strewn in with unexplained facts in order to spread rumours and misinformation.

Holy crap... if you so blindly believe everything they say, then there's really no point in me trying.

I have weighed the evidence and found that the official explanation is mostly correct. Yes, there are some unexplained events that happened but the reasons for what happened are obvious.

You, on the other hand, will believe anybody who has anything to say regarding a conspiracy.

Who is the blind one ?

[Black Dog]

Doesn't matter how much fuel there is, it still burns at the same temperature.

It's unlikely, if not impossible, that ANY hydrocarbon there could burn hot enough to cause collapse.

Uh, you are aware, of course that there wa smor ethan just desel burning: think furniture, paper, drywall, carpet etc etc. Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F; steel loses its strength at high temperatures (50 per cent at its strength at 1100°F"); pockets of fire in the WTC hit 1832°F, more than hot enough to weaken steel.

seismometers recorded huge bursts of energy, caused unexplained seismic "spikes" at the beginning of each collapse

Actually the spikes weret part of a brief but sustained burts of seismic energy that starts small and builds as the buildings fall to the ground. The collapse only apears as a sharp spike when you compress the readings for the 8-10 second collapse into a short time frame.

These are just a couple tidbits that don't stand up to scrutiny. Like most conspiracy theories, the WTC "inside job" theory collapses once you take a serious look at the cliams.

[scribblet]

I'm not talking about scrutiny here. I'm talking about spreading rumours, discrediting institutions and making scandalous statements accusing people of murder.

Well, I think in this case, the evidence against a conspiracy by high ranking government agencies to perpatrate a crime and cover up on 9-11 is thin enough that people can see through it. For a "scandalous statement" to gain enough traction to do serious harm to the reputation of an org, it has to be plausible. Which brings me back to the incompetence thesis... I don't think 9-11 was planned by the government, but I do think the people in charge of preventing such an event were too incompotent to do the job, which basically amounts to criminal stupidity. I've seen little in the past 5 years to put that theory to rest.

Conspiracy theories are just that, theories which gain momentum over time, replacing facts with fiction. IMO they are started simply to discredit an organization for malicious and specious reasona.

As far as I'm concerned most people believe simply that a group of Islamist terrorists hijacked four planes destroying the towers killing thousands. ... Too bad that what happened is being hijacked by groups of armchair conspiracy mongers who only denigrate the people who died.

[Michael Hardner]

You are correct, Scriblett. It denigrates people in the worst way.

Rumours like this:

One plane crashes into the Pentagon, dissappearing completely, making a tiny hole.

The implication is that there was no plane, and that none of the people aboard ever existed.

[Black Dog]

Conspiracy theories are just that, theories which gain momentum over time, replacing facts with fiction. IMO they are started simply to discredit an organization for malicious and specious reasona.

I disagree about intent. Basic psychology says that people overwhelmingly seek out information that confirms or validate stheir own beliefs: it stands to reason, then, that some would try to re-interpret new information to conform to their rigid belief structures. Thus, someone pre-disposed to hating Bush will re-interpret events to conform to that preexisting world view (such as assigning blame for the Twin Towers destruction to him); conversely, someone predisposed to supporting Bush at all costs will seek out information that would vindicate the man's policies (ie. Saddam hiding WMD in Syria). The quality of the information is less important thatn the conclusions. No malice required.

[GostHacked]

Alot of the evidence that Crims is using is from Loose Change 2nd Edition. He could use more sources, but it looks like he is dependant on this one. Which is being narrow minded.

The Pentagon.

Ok let's say a plane actually hit the Pentagon. At the angle it came at, I think it would have bounced off the wall (not bouncing off the lawn THEN into the Pentagon). There should be sizable sections of the wings. People have explained to me that the wings folded into the fuselage and was dragged into the hole, then vaporized. If the plane hit straight on, I may expect it to clear all 3 rings, but on the angle it was at and hitting the side of the Pentagon that was upgraded/reinforced before. IN any case those wings would have snapped off. Something would have been left behind. I know that fuel is stored in the wings as well.

The wings on large aircraft are built much stonger compared to the rest of the aircraft, these are the things keeping it up in the air, and need to handle the force thrown at them. I still say that there should be big enough sections of the wings laying around.

Micheal Hardner : Metal was shipped off to China. And according to this, India as well (first time I heard of India, but China was mentoned before)

http://www.china.org.cn/english/2002/Jan/25776.htm

This is all I get from CNN

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf...teel/index.html

CBS says it is going overseas

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/04/16/...C-SearchStories

I could use alot of other sites, but then the credibility of them would be shredded by most of you here. So I will try to use SMS articles to show it. If you would accept another news source, then something may be learned.

[Michael Hardner]

From the CBS article:

He pointed to a wavy section, where the steel buckled. “The metallurgist will be able to tell how hot it got,” he said.

DePaola, a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers, looks for clues in the scrapyard that will shed light on why the twin towers collapsed after they were struck by the airliners. The report by his group and the Federal Emergency Management Agency is due by the end of the month.

It all sounds pretty innocuous to me.

Ok let's say a plane actually hit the Pentagon. At the angle it came at, I think it would have bounced off the wall (not bouncing off the lawn THEN into the Pentagon). There should be sizable sections of the wings. People have explained to me that the wings folded into the fuselage and was dragged into the hole, then vaporized. If the plane hit straight on, I may expect it to clear all 3 rings, but on the angle it was at and hitting the side of the Pentagon that was upgraded/reinforced before. IN any case those wings would have snapped off.

I'm not sure where you're getting these assumptions from, but anyway if what you're saying is true and a plane didn't hit the pentagon then what are we left with ? A plane that never existed full of non-people.

Given the assumption that they were able to fell the twin towers without detection, doesn't it seem strange that they would have botched this part of the plan ?

[KrustyKidd]

So I will try to use SMS articles to show it. If you would accept another news source, then something may be learned.

Or, a lot of time and energy wasted. When things happen, they don't always happen as per a textbook theory. Lots of unexplained stuff that doesn't add up to conspiracies. Here at the Pentagon, you have a building and such that is pretty much in the open. One guy with a camera recording a missile and he comes forth a week after the government says it was an aircraft and the whole government falls. Executions take place of leading politicians and so on and forth. The entire USA is put into lockdown at this attempted sabotage.

So, just on that risk factor alone, I would say the conspiracy theorists don't have much to stand on. Multiply that risk factor by four (irregularities in the other aircraft) and, you have a conspiracy that stands a better than 99% chance of being detected and exposed. One random guy with a camera, a credible witness seeing something real, not imagined and conincidental and the entire plot comes out.

Speaking of plots, there isn't one that is remotely plausible.

[Black Dog]

Kind of in relation to KK's post above, how is it that people can't expect government to fill in a pot hole correctly, yet we're supposed to believe they were able to pull something like 9-11 off?

[GostHacked]

M Hardner

I was just giving information relating to shipping steel off to China, You made the assumtion, I just gave the article. You did not know that steel was shipped to China and Inda, now you know. Why would it be shipped to China when the US could clearly use that now scrap metal to build stuff?

At the Pentagon, I can say that a large Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon. What hit it? I do not know. If you take a look at those 5 frames they released from the Pentagon camera, you should be able to see a large blurred aircraft, instead you get a small tail behind the toll booth. If you see the plane hit, it would make sense you would see wings on each side outside of the explosion.

I just don't see any solid hard evidence it was hit by a Boeing 757.

KK

One guy with a camera recording a missile and he comes forth a week after the government says it was an aircraft and the whole government falls

Given the visual evidence presented by the government so far is a little lacking for the Pentagon.

[KrustyKidd]

Kind of in relation to KK's post above, how is it that people can't expect government to fill in a pot hole correctly, yet we're supposed to believe they were able to pull something like 9-11 off?

And, with all the variables going on - airspeed, wind direction, millions of potential witnesses any one of them might actually see something that is telling. A lot of moving parts in public going on, so many that I upgrade my failure rate to 99.999999999% or, a sucess rate of less than one in a billion. Yes, everything is there but risk assisment and a purpose that makes that risk worthwhile.

Given the visual evidence presented by the government so far is a little lacking for the Pentagon.

The purpose of the US defense department is not to provide Canadian or US internet posters refuting proof for their fantasies. As Chomsky observed, conspiracy theories are on big time waster.

[Michael Hardner]

M Hardner

I was just giving information relating to shipping steel off to China, You made the assumtion, I just gave the article. You did not know that steel was shipped to China and Inda, now you know. Why would it be shipped to China when the US could clearly use that now scrap metal to build stuff?

Why wouldn't they ship it to China ?

If someone from China bought the scrap then off it goes.

At the Pentagon, I can say that a large Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon. What hit it? I do not know. If you take a look at those 5 frames they released from the Pentagon camera, you should be able to see a large blurred aircraft, instead you get a small tail behind the toll booth. If you see the plane hit, it would make sense you would see wings on each side outside of the explosion.

I just don't see any solid hard evidence it was hit by a Boeing 757.

So do you think that a different sized jet hit, or that it wasn't a jet at all ?

If it's the latter, what did the government do with the many people who disappeared that day ?

[GostHacked]

M Hardner

A small jet is very plausible, more than the 757. I have seen stuff that says it was a small commuter plane, like learjet or something similar, others say it was an F-16 or an A3 Skywarrior. It sill could have been a jet, just not a 757. IMHO.

[KrustyKidd]

A small jet is very plausible, more than the 757. I have seen stuff that says it was a small commuter plane, like learjet or something similar, others say it was an F-16 or an A3 Skywarrior. It sill could have been a jet, just not a 757. IMHO.

People on flight dead, family in contact on cell phones, airline missing a large aircraft, witnesses on ground during and in aftermath, reason for faking, what was done with passengers, relatives and any and all possible witnesses. Provide rationale for risk vs payoff please.

[GostHacked]

A small jet is very plausible, more than the 757. I have seen stuff that says it was a small commuter plane, like learjet or something similar, others say it was an F-16 or an A3 Skywarrior. It sill could have been a jet, just not a 757. IMHO.

People on flight dead, family in contact on cell phones, airline missing a large aircraft, witnesses on ground during and in aftermath, reason for faking, what was done with passengers, relatives and any and all possible witnesses. Provide rationale for risk vs payoff please.

Rational Vs risk is not my specialty.

But I will hazard a guess for your entertainment. Get your tin foil hat on folks! (tin foil hats actually improve the chance of 'reading your mind' so you may want to leave it behind)

I will just say that 9/11 was allowed to happen for the reason of invading the middle east to secure energy resources for the future. How many oil/energy projects are slated in that region? You have Karzai (former Unocal member) leader of Afghanistan, and a new oil/gas pipleline deal. We know the former Taleban government did not support the pipeline. In Iraq, you have deals in place to make the pipleline from Afghanistan to connect up to the Iraqi infrastructure.

http://www.pipewire.net/default.cfm?categoryid=5 ... this is just to show how many projects are going on in the Middle East. and alot of it looks 'polarized' (Iran - syria joint operations, Turkey - Egypt.)

I am sure if I mention Project for a New American Century, people will throw mud at me. But if you look at it and compare it with everyday news events from the Middle East, it is scary how much of it is actually accomplished at this point. The US has built a permanent base in Northern Iraq, showing that the US is in no hurry to leave Iraq. The US did not ever have an exit strategy for Iraq. Nor did they require one. Rifts in the newly formed government are apparent, (kurds, sunnis, shiites) and evenrually Iraq will become 2 seperate entities, with the US settling down in the oil rich regions.

The US is there purely for it's own gain. Not for 'freedom and democraxy'. The Industrial Military Complex is the entity that would use alot of oil to accomplish their goals. Without oil or another substitute, the Military would come to a screeching halt. Israel is part of the overall plan as well. I would say the invasion of Iraq benefited more for Israeli security than the US's.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/ED04Ak01.html

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0319/csmimg/0319p10b.jpg

[KrustyKidd]

I will just say that 9/11 was allowed to happen for the reason of invading the middle east to secure energy resources for the future. How many oil/energy projects are slated in that region? You have Karzai (former Unocal member) leader of Afghanistan, and a new oil/gas pipleline deal. We know the former Taleban government did not support the pipeline. In Iraq, you have deals in place to make the pipleline from Afghanistan to connect up to the Iraqi infrastructure.

The US gets less than thirty percent of it's ol from the ME, Europe gets far more. If the US wanted oil, they would have found it a lot cheaper and more politically expedient to simply make a deal with Saddam or, simply issue well hats to the two hundred wthousand troops staging in Kuwait and take oil from there. Saddam certainly would have gone along with any deal that made him money and preserved his pride - even to the extent of allowing his entire oil infastructure to be built back up by Haliburton. The fact that this was not entertained by the US tells a great deal of thier intent. Why rebuild an entire country from the bottom up to get expensive oil when you only had to do back door bargining to get cheap oil through the top down?

Sure nobody is foolish to think the US did this to be nice guys however, Saudi Arabia was the key and they could not be invaded without aggrevating the situation even more. Hence, the second best (or less worse of a bad lot of options) was to invade Iraq.

[crims]

People on flight dead, family in contact on cell phones, airline missing a large aircraft, witnesses on ground during and in aftermath, reason for faking, what was done with passengers, relatives and any and all possible witnesses. Provide rationale for risk vs payoff please.

Cash? Power? Support? Fame? All the things that come with it? Everybody had their own reasons.

July 24, 2001 - Larry A. Silverstein, who already owned WTC7,

signed a $3.2-billion 99-year lease on the entire WTC complex - 6 weeks before 9/11.

Included in the lease was a $3.5-billion insurance policy specifically covering acts of terrorism.

Sept 6, 2001 - 3150 put-options are put on United Airlines stock.

(Put-option is a bet that a stock will fall.)

That day, put options were more than 4 times the daily average.

Sept 7, 2001 - 27294 put-options are put on Boeing stock.

That's more than 5 times the daily average.

Sept 10, 2001 - 4516 put-options are put on American Airlines stock.

Almost 11 times the daily average.

WTC7 housed CIA, IRS, Secret Service, Dept. of Defense; and the SEC stored 3000-4000 records of active wall street investigations.

No other buildings around it collapsed. Likely they were getting rid of unwanted information.

Appendix C from FEMA report ( http://www.civil.columbia.edu/ce4210/FEMA_...D/html/open.htm ):

Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation, with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible...

A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel. This sulfur-rich liquid penetrated preferentially down grain boundaries of the steel, severly weakening the beam...

The unusual thinning of the member is most likely due to an attack of the steel by grain boundary penetration of sulfur forming sulfides that contain both iron and copper...

The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and Samples 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.

TRANSLATION:

Severe high temperature corrosion attack = EXPLOSION

Iron Oxide + Sulfur = EXPLOSIVES

Grain boundary penetration of sulfur = BOOM!

Very unusual event = COVERUP

No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur = BOMB

[GostHacked]

Crims. Thanks for that post.

Note the disclaimer at the bottom of the website. This is a FEMA report, HOWEVER ....

Please Note: The statements and recommendations in this report are those of the individual team members and do not necessarily represent the views of the organizations they belong to, the U.S. Government in general, or FEMA or other Federal agencies in particular. The U.S. Government, FEMA, and other Federal agencies assume no responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the information herein. Copyrighted photographs that appear in this report are clearly labeled. Copyrighted material cannot be used or reprinted without the express permission of the copyright holder.

WHA?

People wonder why I discredit the Official report.

FEMA - ok we hired a bunch of people to invesitage the events of 9/11, but their conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of FEMA. We will accept your report, but we claim no responsibility in that report.

Good job FEMA. You guys SHOULD know better of what happened, since you guys were in New York the night before.

[Minimus Maximus]

Severe high temperature corrosion attack = EXPLOSION

Iron Oxide + Sulfur = EXPLOSIVES

Grain boundary penetration of sulfur = BOOM!

Very unusual event = COVERUP

No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur = BOMB

Iron oxide+sulfur (and many other elements)=steel

Sulfur found in grain boundries=naturally occuring phenomenon

Clear explanation for source of sulfur=natural ocurring impurity which is often added to steel to increase machinability.

http://mdmetric.com/tech/chempropi.htm

[GostHacked]

Severe high temperature corrosion attack = EXPLOSION

Iron Oxide + Sulfur = EXPLOSIVES

Grain boundary penetration of sulfur = BOOM!

Very unusual event = COVERUP

No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur = BOMB

Iron oxide+sulfur (and many other elements)=steel

Sulfur found in grain boundries=naturally occuring phenomenon

Clear explanation for source of sulfur=natural ocurring impurity which is often added to steel to increase machinability.

http://mdmetric.com/tech/chempropi.htm

This man is correct. Sulphur is part of the process and make up of steel. Now what he should have done was some kind of comparison to sulpher in a normal peice of steel compared to a fire damaged one, and one damanged from explosives.

[Minimus Maximus]

Severe high temperature corrosion attack = EXPLOSION

Iron Oxide + Sulfur = EXPLOSIVES

Grain boundary penetration of sulfur = BOOM!

Very unusual event = COVERUP

No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur = BOMB

Iron oxide+sulfur (and many other elements)=steel

Sulfur found in grain boundries=naturally occuring phenomenon

Clear explanation for source of sulfur=natural ocurring impurity which is often added to steel to increase machinability.

http://mdmetric.com/tech/chempropi.htm

This man is correct. Sulphur is part of the process and make up of steel. Now what he should have done was some kind of comparison to sulpher in a normal peice of steel compared to a fire damaged one, and one damanged from explosives.

This is very basic metallurgy Gosthacked, I'm amazed at the willingness of people to accept false information and then basturdize it fit their beliefs.

I should also add that the burning contents of the building, diesel fuel in particular, would result in an increase in the sulfur content found in test samples taken from the area at and below the impact site.

[KrustyKidd]

Cash? Power? Support? Fame? All the things that come with it? Everybody had their own reasons.

And how many people do you have to bring into the scheme to pull it off? How much of your profit do you have to pay to have their complete loyalty for the rest of their lives that they won't ever utter a peep?

From the evidence you are trying to show, it seems there is a mountain of things that have to all be covered 100% soi would need some pretty specialized people in the numbers of thousands, all wanting to be paid.

And, what happens if one of them, just one develops a concsience?

You get injection. As does every one of them. A pretty flimsy conspiracy for not much money.

Hey, guy I used to know (he's doing time now) found out some guy was doing his wife. So, he arranges to meet him for a drink at his place and has a couple friends present. Idea is to beat the tar out of him with friends there to help if he proved too tough. So, things get a bit out of control and he actually over does it a bit. Thinking he's killed him, he panics, gets his buddies to swear silence and then takes the body to a dam and throws it over. Well, the guy's lungs were filled with water so now he's doing time for murder. Anyhow,the conspiracy lasted about an hour or so before one of them went to the cops. So much for coverups with three. Try it with thousands.

[newbie]

KrustyKidd, Watergate and the Iran/contra business were well on their way to becoming unsolved history until the press uncovered them. Strange too how the republicans were in power during these affairs.

[crims]

Minimus Maximus:

Iron oxide+sulfur (and many other elements)=steel

Then the FEMA report WOULD HAVE SAID THAT.

Clear explanation for source of sulfur=natural ocurring impurity which is often added to steel to increase machinability.

Sure... machines, ships, tubes, pipes, coils... NOT IN INERT STEEL COLUMNS.

I should also add that the burning contents of the building, diesel fuel in particular, would result in an increase in the sulfur content found in test samples taken from the area at and below the impact site.

How did WTC7 collapse? It wasn't hit by planes.

http://commieware.myftp.org/pfm/wtc-7-small.gif

KrustyKidd:

And how many people do you have to bring into the scheme to pull it off? How much of your profit do you have to pay to have their complete loyalty for the rest of their lives that they won't ever utter a peep?

Very credible people:

Former Bush Team Member Says WTC Collapse Likely A Controlled Demolition And 'Inside Job'

http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=6470

http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20...02755-6408r.htm

Former Asst. Sec. Of Treasury Under Reagan Doubts Official 9/11 Story

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=99739

Former MI5 Agent Says 9/11 An Inside Job

Attack Was 'Coup de'tat,' Buildings Were Demolished By Controlled Demolitions

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/june2005/...05insidejob.htm

It's very rare that someone from the government itself voices conspiracy theories... how much more obvious does it have to be?

From the evidence you are trying to show, it seems there is a mountain of things that have to all be covered 100% soi would need some pretty specialized people in the numbers of thousands, all wanting to be paid.

Paid by WHO? They made this decision THEMSELVES. If they go public and admit it:

- they are criminals for being involved (automatic death sentence)

- they cross the paths people who have already murdered thousands