Win Prizes The Essendon Board Talks 9/11
- Thread starter BrunoV
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Or office fires can fell building 7 into its own footprint at near free-fall speed when jet fuel wasn’t even a factor? But we could go on…
Despite what you think about how it happened, lives were lost and that should be respected.
- Thread starter
- #4
And every rubbish official claim about why and how it happened should be mocked until they can be honoured with the truth.
Last edited:
- Apr 23, 2016
- 35,071
- 50,657
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Bruno please.
And Larry Silverstein happened to be absent that morning along with his son and daughter even though they all worked there every day.
But yeah nothing to see...
- Thread starter
- #7
Definitely don't look into that insurance scenario either.
There is a less told story about Marsh (i.e. the insurance company) which is just as alarming. It called a meeting the morning of. I think it was about 200 employees and they were going to address a number of issues relating to billing large scale billing anomalies, insider trading and a stack of other problems which likely placed billions of dollars on the line. The executive who ran the meeting just happened to dial in, another Silversetein story. One of the planes struck the levels occupied by Marsh.
There is a guy called Richard Grove, who happens to have an amazing podcast, Grand Theft World, which is a 6 to 8 hour long wrap of the weeks news placed into historical context, who became a whistle blower (and who was widely ignored) because the Marsh meeting had been called to address a number of issues he raised. He was on his way to that meeting when he got stuck in traffic. He wasn't from Marsh, he was employed by a software company that was developing a system he believes could be used to manipulate stock trading and which was likely used to transfer assets from Marsh clients as 9/11 happened or in the aftermath. And we do know that there was a lot of ****ery that happened with global stock markets immediately prior to, during and after 9/11, that is not in dispute.
His story is fascinating. Why do I believe him, that he is not another Silverstein, and not the version the Marsh executive has never been asked to give? Grove, who I believe is something close to a genius level intellect, was on the path to being a corporate high flyer, he came across billing anomalies that put him on a path to enquiry because he personally stood to gain a $1m commission from the work being done and he wanted his commission. He gave his pre-9/11 life up to become an amateur historian, 'conspiracy theorist' and is now basically a prepper and teaches prepping (he calls it his autonomy courses). He has a profile of someone I find believable because he has gained nothing from the occurrence unlike the, what was it, $5b Silverstein gained from the event.
By the way, I don't know exactly what to make of the planes basically flying into the Marsh meeting room. That may well just be a coincidental part of the whole story. Or Operation Northwoods may provide an insight into what really happened. I genuinely don't have an opinion either way.
Last edited:
There are a lot of odd coincidences that happened at that time, including the trillion dollar debt announced by Rumsfeld a couple of months before records at the Pentagon and building 7 were wiped from history, but I don’t want to get caught up in the world of conspiracy nutters who have sabotaged the whole re-look into events on that day. They are as much of a hindrance as the powers that rushed an investigation at the time and conveniently overlooked or botched important aspects of the case. There are a lot of experts in engineering, architecture, demolition etc who are bewildered by the official story and who should be genuinely listened to. The truth is it’s not going to ever fully come to light. I just find it a fascinating subplot to read about from time to time.
- Thread starter
- #9
I am getting to the point that I don't even know where the nutters line is for 9/11 anymore. It's a bit easier with JKF because there have been claims made about who was present on the day (e.g. GHR Bush, EH Hunt) that appear to be entirely disprovable which do seem to detract from where the focus still needs to be: that there is simply no way Oswald could have been acting alone and that he had to have institutional support, if it was even him that pulled one of the triggers that were clearly present (though honestly, I don't think he was even in the Book Depository).
I used to just stick with the engineering evidence, tower 7 in particular. There is clearly no way the official narrative is real - which is a conspiracy in and of itself. But the more I read and listen to the less likely even the most basic facts about the events on the day becomes less certain. If certain institutions had not been working out how to fake air line disasters, which is what the proposed Operation Northwoods was about, I would likely never have gotten past the idea that planes must have been involved. I am open to the possibility that there were no planes or that at least what we see in the video recordings does not reflect exactly what happened.
The biggest issue has always been that it’s impossible to keep everyone quiet. No whistleblowers, for over 20 years? That’s always going to be the breaker for me.
However, people should not be labelled conspiracy theorists when they want to hold those in power accountable either. That’s an easy narrative to spin for those who never want to be found out.
And Northwoods is the perfect example, and is something everyone who goes the conspiracy theorist angle should know about.
Last edited:
TheGreatBarryB
Hall of Famer
Of course 9/11 was real..some of you blokes can’t be serious with this shit.
I hope you can interpret that I don’t think that way, but am intrigued and recognise many inconstancies in the official story. I would’ve thought that’s a sensible angle to take if you’ve had an interest in the story over many years. Or do we just happily accept all the murkiness and shrug it off?
Out of interest, how much have you looked into the non-official story and the background murkiness taking place at that time?
- Thread starter
- #13
What do you mean by real? I interpret not being real as it didn't happen.
3 massive towers, one of which was not struck by a plane, definitely fell to the ground at freefall speed, as though all structural resistance was removed. And thousands of innocent people died. No doubt.
But the story gets incredibly complicated from that point by a number of objectively provable facts.
James Corbett has produced a number of great documentaries on the subject. One of his best lines is that '9/11 was a crime'. And yet none of the principles that apply to the investigation of a crime were ever really applied. Where was the dogged investigation into 'the money'? Why did a renowned lawyer like Giuliani ship the entire crime scene to China where it was salvaged?
Unfortunately we are stuck in a computer simulation and Essendon being shit is stuck on loop.
Nothing is real.
- Jan 17, 2016
- 1,917
- 6,305
- AFL Club
- Essendon
The thing that makes me suspicious about 9/11 is that it happened to occur on the 11th day in the 9th month.
That’s too much of a coincidence for me.
That’s too much of a coincidence for me.
ant555
The Oracle
- May 4, 2004
- 36,087
- 55,995
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Penrith Panthers
Some of you people are not down a rabbit hole. You are lost in the burrow.
- Apr 23, 2016
- 35,071
- 50,657
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Impressive flying really. Landing a hijacked passenger aircraft on a specific level of a massive high rise building without any external labelling of levels.
Old Campaigner
Brownlow Medallist
Veteran
10k Posts
Essendon Player Sponsor 2021 - Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti and Archie Perkins
Essendon Player Sponsor 2020 - Orazio Fantasia, Anthony McDonald Tipungwuti, Shaun McKernan
Essendon Player Sponsor 2019 - Orazio Fantasia, Anthony McDonald Tipungwuti, Shaun McKernan
Essendon Player Sponsor 2017
Essendon Player Sponsor 2014
Essendon Player Sponsor 2013
- Nov 22, 2012
- 13,533
- 18,140
- AFL Club
- Essendon
The whole jet fuel can’t melt steel beams thing demonstrates a genuinely impressive lack of understanding of engineering
jmoo wan
Formally, Mr Jmoo Wan
the dumbest think about 9-11 is the US convention of putting the month before the day. 9-11 is the 9th November and i don’t care what any of you conspiracy theorists try to say about it happening in September
- Thread starter
- #20
Go and find the official explanation for how the fuel created a fire hot enough to undermine the structural integrity of the beams, not so that the integrity was slightly undermined but so that these same columns provided no resistance, allowing the buildings to fall at something close to free fall speed, and then come back to me with your understanding of engineering.
Then go and read the explanation for how building 7 collapsed at free fall speed...and come back to me with your understanding of engineering.
ant555
The Oracle
- May 4, 2004
- 36,087
- 55,995
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Penrith Panthers
I really have no opinion either way . You are a qualified engineer ?
Nicholas61
Club Legend
- Sep 21, 2020
- 1,403
- 1,954
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Frank Lloyd Wright (architect) was not an engineer but engineered one of the only buildings in a notorious Japanese earthquake zone that survived when one hit and all other buildings went down.
- Thread starter
- #23
No. But I don't need to be an engineer to read, analyze and compare competing engineering opinions and to decide which one I think is bullshit. Just like I don't need to have been a coach or an AFL insider to have recognized very early on that Brad Scott had no clear plan for Essendon.
Expertise is a valuable thing. But whenever expertise is being applied to explain away common sense we should be skeptical, not just assume that experts know what they are talking about, that they are correct or that their opinions are not corrupted/biased in some way.
If anyone has an honest look at any of the 9/11 engineering stuff they will be confronted with the undeniable reality that all 3 buildings fell at a speed which was virtually freefall (i.e. the speed at which gravity pulls something to the ground) and that everything else is noise. The speed of the fall must be explained.
Do you need to be an engineer to recognize that for a building to fall at freefall it has no structural support? Where did that structural support go? Was it the minute quantity of jet fuel (relative to the size of the structure) that melted the beams on the 90th floor that created the pancake effect (i.e. that one stack falls and crushes the other)? The fuel doesn't burn hot enough, but even if it did, where is the visual evidence of pancaking? How is that consistent with freefall? Did that tiny amount of fuel leak down the elevator shaft and weaken the beams in a fire? It didn't, and it couldn't, but even if it did you still have the freefall problem. We are not dealing with weakened columns. We are dealing with columns that may as well have vanished.
Believe your eyes. And believe the experts when what they say is consistent with what your eyes show you.
Last edited:
Nicholas61
Club Legend
- Sep 21, 2020
- 1,403
- 1,954
- AFL Club
- Essendon
At 47 min Barry Jennings (Deputy Director of Emergency Services NY City) testimony on the explosions taking place within WT7
Jennings' testimony on the day when he emerged from the building
Jennings' testimony on the day when he emerged from the building
- Thread starter
- #25
Tactical error, my friend.
The path to conspiracy acceptance starts with the objective. It's too easy to dismiss subjective accounts.
Let the speed of the collapse speak for itself.
