Conspiracy Theory 9-11 Controlled demolition: Scientists confirm active nano-thermite in WTC 9-11 dust.

Remove this Banner Ad

EasternTiger said:
Great post. So essentially you're saying the terrorists chose the easier route of hijacking the planes and flying them into the building, rather than the (in your words) much more devastating effect of wiring up and demolishing the buildings.

Although I'm not sure people felt more terrorised by WTC 7 falling without being hit by a plane.

I think the visual of planes flying into the buildings, broadcast for all the world to see and instantly signaling a terrorist attack, following by the horror of seeing people jump to their death, and then seeing the smoldering buildings crumbling to the ground, was much more horrifying.

I mean you don't see people reeling in horror when they are sitting at home watching a casino in Vegas get demolished. I think the way it was done was designed for maximum psychological impact. If it was just wired up and demolished, we wouldn't have had those 2 hours of footage for our brains to accept what was happening, before seeing the buildings collapse.
Click to expand...

If it was wired up and demolished it would have been more terrifying. People would be asking, is this building wired to go? is this one? is that one?
 
vealesy said:
same is said about those that swallow everything the MSM spews out.

But hey if the msm don't tell us about the Bilderberg Group, then they don't really exist right?
Click to expand...

What on earth are you talking about and how is it relevant here ?
 
Nick85 said:
If it was wired up and demolished it would have been more terrifying. People would be asking, is this building wired to go? is this one? is that one?
Click to expand...

Correct. Also

ITS PRETTY F**KING DIFFICULT TO SMUGGLE 100 TONNES OF EXPLOSIVES AND THEN WIRE UP ONE OF THE MOST VISIBLE BUILDINGS IN THE WORLD WITHOUT ANYBODY NOTICING.......

It never ceases to amaze me the stupidity of some of our fellow human beings.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Nick85 said:
If it was wired up and demolished it would have been more terrifying. People would be asking, is this building wired to go? is this one? is that one?
Click to expand...

Yeah but if you don't work in a skyscraper would it be an issue? The way it was done means every plane traveler in the free world would have, at one stage or another after 9/11, asked themselves "is this plane gonna get slammed into a building, is it that one?"
 
vealesy said:
Exactly.

Simpleton.
Click to expand...

Thats not exactly an answer. How is what you posted before relevant ?

I mean you post a couple of 'spooky' sounding names and think thats all there is to it.

Is there any logic behind it at all or just something you picked up off the interwebs in a drug induced coma one night that appealed to your paranoid mind set.
 
Daytripper said:
Thats because for the most part, they are.
Either that or they are smoking too much drugs.

People who believe these lunatic CT theories are generally simpletons - grasping onto anything to make their own squalid little fantasies seem real.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Most learned and intelligent people agree that Osama bin Laden, head of Al Qaeda, sitting in a cave with his laptop orchestrated the attacks, directing a bunch of pissed off Muslims (probaby using Skype) to expertly maneuver planes into two skyscrapers. That's exactly how it was reported in the news for crying out loud.

That's why the US invaded Afghanistan to capture Osama bin Laden (even though they never actually ended up capturing him).

And since Iraq had ties with Al Qaeda and the proven capability to develop weapons of mass destruction (as shown by Colin Powell's demonstration to the UN and Tony Blair's report), the US then invaded Iraq because Iraq was also linked with 9/11.

Everything is so clear and easy to understand and yet these simpletons still question the official story. :thumbsdown:

"OSAMA BIN LADEN DID THIS IN A CAVE!!! ... WITH A BOX OF SCRAPS!!!!"
 
EasternTiger said:
Yeah but if you don't work in a skyscraper would it be an issue? The way it was done means everyone plane traveler in the free world would have, at one stage or another after 9/11, asked themselves "is this plane gonna get slammed into a building, is it that one?"
Click to expand...

The difference being that the plane needs to be hijacked on the day of the attack.

Now security was stepped up after 911 and it's now far more difficult to hijack a plane.

Most people could comfortably go back to work knowing that
A) it was unlikely that terrorists could hijack a plane... again
B) A hijack would immediately trigger terrorist alert in likely targets
C) Planes entering restricted airspace would be shot down more readily.

In other words the surprise is blown, it's a once off attack.

Had they just wired the building up and blown it then there is always the possibility that 10's or 100's of other buildings had already been wired up.

It would be an attack they could plan and then execute repeatedly.
 
Daytripper said:
Thats not exactly an answer. How is what you posted before relevant ?

I mean you post a couple of 'spooky' sounding names and think thats all there is to it.

Is there any logic behind it at all or just something you picked up off the interwebs in a drug induced coma one night that appealed to your paranoid mind set.
Click to expand...

Look into what you're trying to discredit, you only show ignorance otherwise.

Theres a lot of logic to it, i just don't need to push ideas onto people who are not ready to hear them.

And if you're not paranoid in life, you're not paying attention.
 
vealesy said:
Look into what you're trying to discredit, you only show ignorance otherwise.

Theres a lot of logic to it, i just don't need to push ideas onto people who are not ready to hear them.

And if you're not paranoid in life, you're not paying attention.
Click to expand...

No - humour me.
Explain it all logically. Step by step. How it all happened.

I could do with a laugh.
 
You know what the most frustrating thing about the whole 911 thing is? It's the fact that both sides are as thick as each other.

Most of the facts we will probably never know, so all that matters is what we do know.

The only real important thing IMO is this. For approx 90 mins between the first and last plane hits, the US did not scramble a single jet. I find this totally ridiculous and impossible. It is not possible that the US could go 90 minutes (and I've heard their explanations) without having a dozen planes up there.

It is not possible. Therefore we know that they let it happen. The likelihood of them being actively involved is highly unlikely. But they let it happen.
 
So let me get this straight; the guys who are claiming that 9/11 was a controlled demolition believe that no planes hit the building?

I saw a video on youtube the other day that was a close-up of the impact zone as it collapsed.

It clearly caved in - there was no debris flying outwards from an explosion.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

EasternTiger said:
So the 'conspiracy theorists' would have us believe that a group of men broke into the twin towers, and carried a ton of equipment up to the top...without being detected.

Who in their right mind would believe such a thing? Is this even possible? You'd have to be walking on the tightrope of insanity to believe such foolishness. Only a lunatic, magician or David Copperfield would attempt such a break-in.

I call BS, unless someone can prove it is possible.
Click to expand...

No, but weeks prior to septemder 11, new internet cables were installed in the World Trade Centre by a company owned by George Bush's brother.
 
stickman11 said:
No, but weeks prior to septemder 11, new internet cables were installed in the World Trade Centre by a company owned by George Bush's brother.
Click to expand...

And?

First you'll need proof that there was anything suspicious about that.
Second, if you're implying that they managed to plant demolition equipment whilst installing internet cables, that still doesn't explain how the tons of demolition material required was not noticed.
 
Don't waste your energy on here FWB - I've given up trying to sell reality to the brainwashed.

The easiest place to hide something is right in front of you so you refuse to see it.
 
Hodge2Franklin said:
You know what the most frustrating thing about the whole 911 thing is? It's the fact that both sides are as thick as each other.

Most of the facts we will probably never know, so all that matters is what we do know.

The only real important thing IMO is this. For approx 90 mins between the first and last plane hits, the US did not scramble a single jet. I find this totally ridiculous and impossible. It is not possible that the US could go 90 minutes (and I've heard their explanations) without having a dozen planes up there.

It is not possible. Therefore we know that they let it happen. The likelihood of them being actively involved is highly unlikely. But they let it happen.
Click to expand...

Despite the US's military might, there's a lot of territory to cover. The reason NORAD didn't have a clue is that they are defending from outside attack, they weren't looking inwards.

Their strike force is one of attack from outside threats. It's perfectly feasible that the wouldn't have a jet able to reach New York in time. Not only that, no one was aware that more than one jet was hijacked, until the second one hit it was assumed that it could be a terrible accident.
 
FIGJAM said:
Always playing the man, instead of the fall! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

So, you're saying that those who totally agree with the 'official' version of events never play the man instead of sticking to a logical discussion the facts? Never call people 'conspiracy theorists', 'wackos' or other derogatory terms?

Pot, kettle, black :rolleyes:
 
First of all, I'm not suggesting that the 'truthers' have gotten their theories completely right as many people, quite gleefully, have pointed out the many flaws and holes in their claims.

Having said that, is it really more plausible that a bunch of foreigners from third-world nations with inferior technology and communications were able to infiltrate and bypass every form of security, military and intelligence systems from a supposedly developed country like the United States?

As opposed to this being an act carried out by a government with a history of questionable ethics using its authority, influence and vast amounts of resources at its disposal to trigger an act that would justify its long-planned invasion of targeted sovereign nations for its own political and economic purposes?

Ask yourself. Who has benefited the most from 9/11? Not the Muslims, that's for sure.

I'm not saying I know what really happened on that day because I don't. Someone, somewhere out there does. And he ain't talking. I know for a fact though, that the 9/11 commission report was nothing more than an exercise in the obfuscation of facts.

At least the 'truthers', as ludicrous as some of their claims may be, arrived at their theories based on their own research. Those who believe some mysterious cleric living in a cave conducted the attacks simply made up their mind after watching CNN.
 
Great post jmorg1 ^.

It amazes me to this day how with it's dismal record how people can trust the word of it's Government without question, without asking - just blindly accepting what it tells them.
 
http://www.historycommons.org/ is a good archive. It is not a 9/11 site.

Seems the Israelis, Russians, and Brits knew something was going down, plus the FBI and CIA had more evidence than just "chatter". But no coordination to bring it together. Those Mossad graduates of NY University of Furniture Moving knew it was gonna hit.

Incompetency writ large? Occam's...
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Conspiracy Theory 9-11 Controlled demolition: Scientists confirm active nano-thermite in WTC 9-11 dust.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top