OtherGround Forum >> One fact that proves 9/11 was a conspiracy?

if the government went to all this trouble to conduct one of the most vast and perfect conspiracies ever so that they could attack Iraq, why did they not go a small step further and try to connect the people who were to fly the planes to Iraq? They were willing to spend the time, effort and risk to secretly set up the demolition of massive structures full of people, but they couldn't spare 5 minutes to think of a way to make it seem like Iraq had anything to do with it?

UGCTT_TrevGore - Anyone who thinks it's laughable that the U.S. government, or elements therein, would be involved with 9/11, really need to look into things like the Gulf of Tonkin and Operation Northwoods.

Jason - Conspiracy theories are a little crazy,
But is there one single even remotely plausible explanation of why the third tower fell?

TryhardNobody - The WTCs were built to take an impact from a fully loaded 747. The architect said it would be like poking a pencil through a screen door. It wouldnt affect structural integrity. And if WTCs had collapsed from plane impact, they dont collapse into dust where every piece of concrete explodes into dust before it hits the ground and covers the whole city. Watch the WTCs collapse. The entire building explodes to dust in midair. Go watch it. It doesnt hit the ground and turn to dust (which is still impossible), it turns to dust in midair. Which doesnt happen without explosives

Tiresias -

Gullivers Travels - For the conspiracy theorists: Consider the incredible amount of personnel, planning and resources that it would take to successfully pull off 9/11 as an inside job. Now, do you honestly believe that, with current technology and surveillance, there would be no leaks or conclusive evidence against any government official or involved party? Do you honestly believe that not a single individual would come forward and admit wrongdoing? I don't mean anecdotal evidence or firemen/officers becoming suspicious and demanding answers.

This is the most compelling argument to me.  I have been on both sides of this question.  I have found many of the arguments about the strangeness of the way the buildings fell compelling.  However, I am absolutely certain that it would be impossible, considering the large number of people that would have been necessarily involved, to not have anyone come forth under the weight of what would have been an overwhelming sense of guilt at the enormity of the evil perpetrated, and admit the crime.  People are, in general, way too eager to talk about stuff!

Tiresias - 

Gullivers Travels - For the conspiracy theorists: Consider the incredible amount of personnel, planning and resources that it would take to successfully pull off 9/11 as an inside job. Now, do you honestly believe that, with current technology and surveillance, there would be no leaks or conclusive evidence against any government official or involved party? Do you honestly believe that not a single individual would come forward and admit wrongdoing? I don't mean anecdotal evidence or firemen/officers becoming suspicious and demanding answers.

This is the most compelling argument to me.  I have been on both sides of this question.  I have found many of the arguments about the strangeness of the way the buildings fell compelling.  However, I am absolutely certain that it would be impossible, considering the large number of people that would have been necessarily involved, to not have anyone come forth under the weight of what would have been an overwhelming sense of guilt at the enormity of the evil perpetrated, and admit the crime.  People are, in general, way too eager to talk about stuff!

So "Common Sense"  is the reason it went down as we are told.

How long before a whistleblower with evidence gets thrown in a jail under the NDAA?

Anybody with firsthand knowledge would know the extreme consequences of speaking out.

Science does not need witnesses.

The problem is that "Common Sense" is favored over Science. 

TryhardNobody - 9/11 commission report didnt even mention Building 7 collapsing or give any reason for it happening.

That alone is huge reason to suspect something is wrong.

I could come up with 100 reasons just as good as that one but that is pretty huge.

As if a 47 story steel frame building can collapse into dust in the middle of a major city, looks just like a demolition, they dont test for explosives (which is against regulations) and then dont even mention the collapse in their huge report about 9/11 or come up w any theory as to why it collapsed in their report. Be more obvious youre covering something up

Do not continue in this thread if you have not educated yourself with a simple search of the following subjects.

Operation Northwoods              Gulf of Tonkin    

You owe it to yourself.             

Tiresias -

Gullivers Travels - For the conspiracy theorists: Consider the incredible amount of personnel, planning and resources that it would take to successfully pull off 9/11 as an inside job. Now, do you honestly believe that, with current technology and surveillance, there would be no leaks or conclusive evidence against any government official or involved party? Do you honestly believe that not a single individual would come forward and admit wrongdoing? I don't mean anecdotal evidence or firemen/officers becoming suspicious and demanding answers.

This is the most compelling argument to me.  I have been on both sides of this question.  I have found many of the arguments about the strangeness of the way the buildings fell compelling.  However, I am absolutely certain that it would be impossible, considering the large number of people that would have been necessarily involved, to not have anyone come forth under the weight of what would have been an overwhelming sense of guilt at the enormity of the evil perpetrated, and admit the crime.  People are, in general, way too eager to talk about stuff!

"Common Sense" is favored over Science. 

Private Joker - 

Invisible Lats Syndrome - We're supposed to believe that high temperatures from burning fuel can weaken steel? Fucking lol. What sort of public school educated sheeple buy that nonsense?

As an industrial firefighter I can assure you that high temperatures from fire can melt steel. We had a Derrick on a Coker unit get so hot it pretty much melted and collapsed.

Since you are not a public school product, please list your qualifications for making that statement.

Rambo John J - 

Tiresias - 

Gullivers Travels - For the conspiracy theorists: Consider the incredible amount of personnel, planning and resources that it would take to successfully pull off 9/11 as an inside job. Now, do you honestly believe that, with current technology and surveillance, there would be no leaks or conclusive evidence against any government official or involved party? Do you honestly believe that not a single individual would come forward and admit wrongdoing? I don't mean anecdotal evidence or firemen/officers becoming suspicious and demanding answers.

 

This is the most compelling argument to me.  I have been on both sides of this question.  I have found many of the arguments about the strangeness of the way the buildings fell compelling.  However, I am absolutely certain that it would be impossible, considering the large number of people that would have been necessarily involved, to not have anyone come forth under the weight of what would have been an overwhelming sense of guilt at the enormity of the evil perpetrated, and admit the crime.  People are, in general, way too eager to talk about stuff!

So "Common Sense"  is the reason it went down as we are told.

How long before a whistleblower with evidence gets thrown in a jail under the NDAA?

Anybody with firsthand knowledge would know the extreme consequences of speaking out.

 

Science does not need witnesses.

 

The problem is that "Common Sense" is favored over Science. 

I didn't say anything about "commonsense", nor did I say that "everything happened the way we are told".  That is a strawman.  I am saying that if the number of people that would seem to be necessary for the controlled demolition of three enormous buildings were in fact involved, then general patterns of human social/psychological tendencies dictate that at least some would be compelled by guilt (and simple loquaciousness) to talk about it.  Now if you can make a compelling case that a much smaller number of people than would appear to be necessary for the demolition could have done it, then it would change things.  But my own understanding of psychology as it relates to my point is one of the few things I can feel absolute confidence in when looking at all the claims.

And I have heard a lot of arguments on both sides of the debate that invoke science, so to act like it is clearly on one side or the other is nonsense.  And that is one of the things that makes it so hard for laymen to know what to make of the evidence.  There are lots of people making compelling-sounding arguments, invoking scientific facts, on both sides.  How do you know who is right and who is wrong?  Do you simply believe whatever conforms to your broader beliefs about the government?  Is that science?

ArthurKnoqOut -

Private Joker - 

Invisible Lats Syndrome - We're supposed to believe that high temperatures from burning fuel can weaken steel? Fucking lol. What sort of public school educated sheeple buy that nonsense?

As an industrial firefighter I can assure you that high temperatures from fire can melt steel. We had a Derrick on a Coker unit get so hot it pretty much melted and collapsed.

Since you are not a public school product, please list your qualifications for making that statement.

This. Also, I don't understand people questioning the 747's impact. My girlfriend's close family friend is an architect and has worked on some massive projects here and in Japan and Brazil and he says people don't know WTF they are talking about when they mention structural integrity and collapse mechanisms.

Nitecrawler -

Another thing that gets me scratching my head is why there were so many videos of the first plane hitting. How many people are hanging out in new York city taking videos of an inanimate building in perfect timing to catch the impact?

Dude, not that hard to believe. On a nice day in NYC there are tons of tourists and locals alike just recording random shit. Even before the ease of use of cell phone cams there was always people snapping pictures and recording around the city.

The same government that is in one breath completely incompetent is, in another breath, capable of suppressing a conspiracy involving thousands of people.

LOL, yup.

Private Joker -

Invisible Lats Syndrome - We're supposed to believe that high temperatures from burning fuel can weaken steel? Fucking lol. What sort of public school educated sheeple buy that nonsense?

As an industrial firefighter I can assure you that high temperatures from fire can melt steel. We had a Derrick on a Coker unit get so hot it pretty much melted and collapsed.

Since you are not a public school product, please list your qualifications for making that statement.

 Tiresias- "But my own understanding of psychology as it relates to my point is one of the few things I can feel absolute confidence in when looking at all the claims."       

That sounds like the "Common Sense" angle I was talking about.  Completely void of any science.

Almost a religious way of thinking.

Engineers and Demo experts agree on the Science pointing to a clear Demo

Looking back on History, Motive drives all pivotal events.  Motive, Motive, Motive

Science + Motive=???????