So, terrorists?

**619summon** · 09-09-11, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by Thorsen

This is sort of off topic and not related to 9/11 at all. But of COURSE the government keeps things from the public. All kinds of things are highly classified.

But in terms of wide reaching conspiracy hypotheses, I have never seen any evidence presented to adequately support them.

well someone said we need to start at the beginning and not pick facts and work backwords. so I thought id start with a credibility base and start from there.

**deathgodusmc** · 09-09-11, 07:39 PM

Originally Posted by 619summon

its really one simple question. has/is the united states goverment is/has ever kept anyting secret from its citizens.

yes / no

for me its seems kinda guileless, to believe the goverment has never withheld data from the public. they are and always willl in some capacity. And im not talking military secrets, or anything of that sort. just real clandestine-surreptitious goverment actions and intell.

Yes they have. The things you could know if you were privy to them.

**deathgodusmc** · 09-09-11, 08:11 PM

I can add a bit to this but the usual people will disagree on my experience. I've been in construction for 15 years and my knowledge of explosives is pretty extensive on how they are made and what the effects of them are.

Let me start by saying thorsen is 100% correct on what it takes to bring the building down. That being said the temp in that building could have easily broke the melting point of steel in areas. Everyone is concerned with what jet fuel burns at. Well has anyone thought about what jet fuel burns at when you add any form of styrofoam? Welcome to the 2 main componants of napalm.

You need and im going from memory here 1500 degrees to melt steel. Jet fuel burns at roughly 550 degrees on its own. Add something to it and you can quadruple its temp. Im not going to sit here and tell you guys how to make a weapon but there were plenty of items in those building that could have easily increased the temp of the fire to melt metal.

Now ignoring that and going with it didn't get hot enough to melt steel. Any mechanic will tell you 2 tricks to weaken metal and alter its ability to hold together.

1. freeze it
2. heat it

Then all it takes is a tap and the object comes apart. Now say that object is up holding 1 million tons. How hard of a tap would you need if any?

It was never about having to melt steel and the only people that thought that were 1 of 2 things. They were either looking for a way to blame this on someone or something. Secondly have no idea on how explosives or explotions and fire effect buildings. No engineer worth his check would even try to say that the fire that engulfed that floor shouldn't have caused that damage. The only way they could is to ignore every factor other then plane, building, fire.

**Fovezer** · 09-09-11, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by BrockSamson

I decided to edit out the very unkind words I had for you and your statement. Be assured the feeling hasn't left me.

Thankfully the reality is that evil like that is so rare and far between human beings. Not only that, the government couldn't cover up Watergate, it can be certain things like the JFK assassination, faked moon landing, and this 9/11 conspiracy dog shit that people spew from their mouths is nothing more than a bunch of bullshit.

Now this is something I can agree with you on 100%.

Originally Posted by Warprosper

So if I believe that that the government could have prevented those attacks I would also be labeled a 9/11 conspiracy believer?

Does me believing that the government had possible intel about these attacks make me believe in all the other dumb shit conspiracy theories?

Was the Bush administration warned about possible terrorist attacks involving hijacking planes? Yes, but could they really have prevented them without very specific evidence about their plans? Doubtful. Never before had hijacked planes been used in such a manner. I'm far more concerned with how the Bush administration used 9/11 as a tool to justify pointless and costly wars.

Originally Posted by Xavsnipe

ae911truth.org

concrete claims of 1,500 + experts...not mine.

And then there are other sites discrediting the NIST report and 9/11 Commission report page by page. It's a never-ending story.

Nice argumentum ad populum. Too bad it doesn't mean anything. I think Bill Maher puts it best.

As for the laughable belief that 9/11 was a controlled demolition or something stupid like that, I ask you to look at Occam's Razor. What's more likely: A) Two planes hit the towers flying 500mph+ igniting fires that burned for over an hour. That fire weakened the steel, which led to a pancaking of the floors leading to collapse. B) Some super secret government agents were working for months, if not over a year, to secretly prep the building for demolition. Not only that, but they managed to leave no trace whatsoever of any demolition. The government also managed to keep all this shit secret somehow. A) is clearly the simpler explanation.

As for a full debunking of the nutty conspiracy theories, I will leave you with this documentary:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvPS5uG4AmE

**CivilWars** · 09-10-11, 09:08 AM

I agree 100%.

**Xavsnipe** · 09-10-11, 11:10 AM

Hahah, man...there are WAY better rebuttals than the ones shown in that documentary...weak....too weak. Haha and the way they label the people that are interviewed... on the non official story side they label them “nurse, passerby..” and for the official story side they show a screen that says “expert” and then the interview “refuting” the non official story. Hahah wow.

**deathgodusmc** · 09-10-11, 12:19 PM

My favorite part was how the government did this "so we could go to war and make billions and trillions of dollars." They must not have been watching the debt clock over the past decade.

**Xavsnipe** · 09-10-11, 12:46 PM

Consider the source gentlemen...consider the source. Pick and choose the information, don’t take it at face value from EITHER side.

So like Thorsen said, before we go figuring out WHY these things happened, lets understand HOW they happened to begin with. After we understand how it happened, then we can start from there and start tying up loose ends. Like I said, first understand WHAT happened that day...then we can start asking who and why.

**SapiensErus** · 09-10-11, 01:10 PM

I find myself agreeing with many people I often argue with in this thread; it's good to know y'all ain't a bunch of total whack-jobs!

Everything has been covered, I don't need to add anything.

**CivilWars** · 09-10-11, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by Xavsnipe

Consider the source gentlemen...consider the source. Pick and choose the information, don’t take it at face value from EITHER side.

So like Thorsen said, before we go figuring out WHY these things happened, lets understand HOW they happened to begin with. After we understand how it happened, then we can start from there and start tying up loose ends. Like I said, first understand WHAT happened that day...then we can start asking who and why.

So your claim of WHAT happened is a controlled explosion. I am guessing that to take down 2 buildings the size of the twin towers you would need quite a bit of explosives. How, and when, exactly were these explosives moved in and setup without ANYONE knowing? I have worked in large office buildings, and there are people there virtually 24/7. One of those people would have seen something strange BEFORE the shit went down, right? But I guess now we can add all the employees that either died, or saw friends/family die, to the list of co-conspirators?