9/11Posted

Independent Harry wrote:

Big Slick wrote:

Independent Harry wrote:

catch-22 wrote:

Independent Harry wrote:

Big Slick wrote:Right and all the bullshit conspiracy theories are air tight right. I said it was a good place to start, numnuts, not the end all be all, write it in blood, scripture.

I've looked at both sides, NIST ignored all other outcomes but the ones they were pre-determined to examine. The same with popular mechanics. There are aspects to this that were completely ignored. Interesting how you get so emotional and have to resort to personal attacks so quickly...

So, they both did their job! You're not criticizing them for that, surely?

Yes, I'm criticizing them for not taking into account all possibilities and examining all evidence to extrapolate the probabilities. They simply put together a poor model to explain the collapse when the evidence doesn't even match the model they used...

The problem with that is you can have 100 different "experts" extrapolating probabilities and end up with 100 different conclusions. Bottom line is nobody knows. If we really knew there wouldn't be a discussion. The best people can do is theorize. What bothers me is everytime something tragic happens there is always someone who wants to scream 'conspiracy'. Sometimes shit just happens and there is no way you will ever get all of the answers.

Harry, I would hardly call my response to you emotional. But if you want to put words in my mouth and not actually read what I wrote then you can expect me to correct you when you make false assumptions. I never said the PM article was the best nor the only source on the matter, but they do address some of the conspiracy junkies' claims. And they do a good job explaining away the bullshit. Did they address every possible theory? Of course not, they'd still be writing the article to this day if they did. Nobody is going to be able to address every single possibility and theory and answer every single question, that's just not realistic.

I have looked at both sides as well and I don't buy into the conspiracy side of this one. Sure the government covered some of the evidence but that doesn't mean the government launched a missle at the Pentagon or whatever other crazy story is out there. Police keep some of the evidence from the public in a crime investigation but that doesn't mean the police are out commiting these crimes. People expect full disclosure of investigations at the time of the investigation, but it doesn't work that way, so what do people do? They take that and say, "oooh, they must be hiding something."

It doesn't really matter what I say at this point because you've made up your mind. I'm saying that the government fought the entire way to have the 911 incident investigated. They dragged their feet on the commission. Initially the allotment of money was 4 million dollars for the 911 commision. That's it, NIST came up with theories critized by their own. It's been a huge quagmire, and no one it seems was really interested in trying to explain the truth.

Independent Harry wrote:
It doesn't really matter what I say at this point because you've made up your mind. I'm saying that the government fought the entire way to have the 911 incident investigated. They dragged their feet on the commission. Initially the allotment of money was 4 million dollars for the 911 commision. That's it, NIST came up with theories critized by their own. It's been a huge quagmire, and no one it seems was really interested in trying to explain the truth.

Big Slick wrote:

Independent Harry wrote:
It doesn't really matter what I say at this point because you've made up your mind. I'm saying that the government fought the entire way to have the 911 incident investigated. They dragged their feet on the commission. Initially the allotment of money was 4 million dollars for the 911 commision. That's it, NIST came up with theories critized by their own. It's been a huge quagmire, and no one it seems was really interested in trying to explain the truth.

Of course they fought investigating it. At the time it appeared to be an open and shut case. Some terrorists hijacked some planes, flew them into some buildings. Al-quada claimed responsibility, the surviving suspects who plotted it were in custody. What more was there to investigate? How much money was spent to investigate the bombing of the USS Cole? How much money was spent to investigate the bombing of the US Embassy in Yemen? How much should they have spent to investigate 911? 5 million? 10 million? It really doesn't matter. There's always going to be somebody out there who thinks it's not enough.

"They only spent 20 million to investigate? They must be covering something up"

I don't really think dragging their feet is evidence of anything. The government dragged their feet during the relief aid of Katrina. Does that mean they were involved or caused the hurricane? The government drags their feet with everything. That's how government works. I'm not saying that's good, it's just the way it is.

And please don't hold your tounge on the matter. If you have something to say about the topic that's relevant, please by all means share. I have an open mind about the topic and I don't believe for a second that the US would never conspire to do something shady. I could give you lots of examples of slimy shit our government has been involved in. All I'm saying is, in this case, I have yet to see anything that would convince me that the government was involved in the attack on 9/11.

Independent Harry wrote:
Al Qaeda didn't claim responsibility until 2004. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137095,00.html long after we attacked afghanistan and other places. It wasn't an open and shut case. Afghanistan was willing to turn Bin Laden over if we could provide proof. We invaded their country instead.

What suspects? All the suspects were supposedly dead. We didnt' have anyone in connection to the attacks until 3 or more years afterwards... We found a money trail, that led back to Pakistan, but we ignored that.

You seem to have bought into a revisionist history that never actually happened. 7 of the hijackers are still alive and well, yet that is completely ignored.

Heres a comparison, the Republicans spent over 100 million investigating the Clinton BJ. Intial 911 investigation gets 4 million. Yeah, there's nothing lopsided or no one is trying to hide anything...

Big Slick wrote:

Independent Harry wrote:
Al Qaeda didn't claim responsibility until 2004. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137095,00.html long after we attacked afghanistan and other places. It wasn't an open and shut case. Afghanistan was willing to turn Bin Laden over if we could provide proof. We invaded their country instead.

What suspects? All the suspects were supposedly dead. We didnt' have anyone in connection to the attacks until 3 or more years afterwards... We found a money trail, that led back to Pakistan, but we ignored that.

You seem to have bought into a revisionist history that never actually happened. 7 of the hijackers are still alive and well, yet that is completely ignored.

Heres a comparison, the Republicans spent over 100 million investigating the Clinton BJ. Intial 911 investigation gets 4 million. Yeah, there's nothing lopsided or no one is trying to hide anything...

Ok, you're right Bin Laden didn't "officially" come out on tape until 2004 but the FBI had clear conections days after the incident.

And yes I'm sorry that Clinton's BJ got more money than 911, but how exactly does that prove government involvement? Looks like it proves frivolous spending more than anything else. So again I'll ask, how much did they spend investigating the USS Cole, Embassy in Yemen? How much would have been the right amount on 911?

coontie wrote:It all happened as stated. Only one Terrorist lived, because he misssed his flight connection. He's in Guntanamo Prison Camp now.
Both buildings were hit by aircraft. They collapsed because the steel support structure super-heated,, melted and led to the collapse. That's why the building collapsed down into theirself and not out to one side or the other.

Independent Harry wrote:

coontie wrote:It all happened as stated. Only one Terrorist lived, because he misssed his flight connection. He's in Guntanamo Prison Camp now.
Both buildings were hit by aircraft. They collapsed because the steel support structure super-heated,, melted and led to the collapse. That's why the building collapsed down into theirself and not out to one side or the other.

Wow, you shouldn't post if you have no idea what you are talking about...the NISt report contradicts everything you just said, and multiple reports from all over the world contradict only one of the terrorists being alive...

catch-22 wrote:

Independent Harry wrote:

coontie wrote:It all happened as stated. Only one Terrorist lived, because he misssed his flight connection. He's in Guntanamo Prison Camp now.
Both buildings were hit by aircraft. They collapsed because the steel support structure super-heated,, melted and led to the collapse. That's why the building collapsed down into theirself and not out to one side or the other.

Wow, you shouldn't post if you have no idea what you are talking about...the NISt report contradicts everything you just said, and multiple reports from all over the world contradict only one of the terrorists being alive...

The NIST report confirms everything Coontie wrote except the part about the steel melting, so if you're going to quote what the NIST report states you better read it first so you know what you're talking about.

You'd be naive in the extreme if you believed that all of the people involved in 9/11 were on the planes. None of the hijackers who were on the planes survived and if you have proof of anything different, please post it here.

Independent Harry wrote:

catch-22 wrote:

Independent Harry wrote:

coontie wrote:It all happened as stated. Only one Terrorist lived, because he misssed his flight connection. He's in Guntanamo Prison Camp now.
Both buildings were hit by aircraft. They collapsed because the steel support structure super-heated,, melted and led to the collapse. That's why the building collapsed down into theirself and not out to one side or the other.

Wow, you shouldn't post if you have no idea what you are talking about...the NISt report contradicts everything you just said, and multiple reports from all over the world contradict only one of the terrorists being alive...

The NIST report confirms everything Coontie wrote except the part about the steel melting, so if you're going to quote what the NIST report states you better read it first so you know what you're talking about.

You'd be naive in the extreme if you believed that all of the people involved in 9/11 were on the planes. None of the hijackers who were on the planes survived and if you have proof of anything different, please post it here.

You are retarded, the superstructure didn't fail, the beams didn't melt, and the reasons for the building collapsing onto itself had nothing to do with the above two premises. So no, he was not correct in any of those points. I'm telling you the people whose DNA they extracted and said were on the planes, weren't on th eplanes, that's what I meant by surviving hijackers...

http://www.infowars.com/government-claims-it-has-found-dna-of-alleged-911-hijackers/

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/hijackers_flt_11.html

catch-22 wrote:

Independent Harry wrote:

catch-22 wrote:

Independent Harry wrote:

coontie wrote:It all happened as stated. Only one Terrorist lived, because he misssed his flight connection. He's in Guntanamo Prison Camp now.
Both buildings were hit by aircraft. They collapsed because the steel support structure super-heated,, melted and led to the collapse. That's why the building collapsed down into theirself and not out to one side or the other.

Wow, you shouldn't post if you have no idea what you are talking about...the NISt report contradicts everything you just said, and multiple reports from all over the world contradict only one of the terrorists being alive...

The NIST report confirms everything Coontie wrote except the part about the steel melting, so if you're going to quote what the NIST report states you better read it first so you know what you're talking about.

You'd be naive in the extreme if you believed that all of the people involved in 9/11 were on the planes. None of the hijackers who were on the planes survived and if you have proof of anything different, please post it here.

You are retarded, the superstructure didn't fail, the beams didn't melt, and the reasons for the building collapsing onto itself had nothing to do with the above two premises. So no, he was not correct in any of those points. I'm telling you the people whose DNA they extracted and said were on the planes, weren't on th eplanes, that's what I meant by surviving hijackers...

http://www.infowars.com/government-claims-it-has-found-dna-of-alleged-911-hijackers/

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/hijackers_flt_11.html

I would advise very strongly against attacking me, personally, dolt.
For a start, I did not claim that the beams/steel melted. In fact I said they did not.
Second, the superstructure DID fail. Or don't you believe your own eyes?
And thirdly, If you think you can convince me (or anyone else for that matter) that the crap you read on CT sites can be believed, you are even more gullible than I originally thought.

People like you are a poison on the internet.

Independent Harry wrote:So, no the superstructure didn't fail in the events leading up to the collapse...

Independent Harry wrote:People like you that don't know what the fuck they are talking about, need to do some research so they can sound like they are halfway knowledgeable on a subject...

catch-22 wrote:

Independent Harry wrote:So, no the superstructure didn't fail in the events leading up to the collapse...

Point out to me where I stated that the superstucture failed "leading up to the collapse", idot. The failure of the superstructure WAS the collapse.

Independent Harry wrote:People like you that don't know what the fuck they are talking about, need to do some research so they can sound like they are halfway knowledgeable on a subject...

What are you? A fucking 10 year old? I know more about the NIST reports than you could ever imagine and if you want to take up the challenge to see how much I know just say the word.

Or you could wait until your balls fall into your nutsack and you grow some brains.

Independent Harry wrote:

Wow you really turn into a douche bag about this huh...

Independent Harry wrote:So tell me, in the NIST report, what was the mex temperature reached by the steel and in what places? If you'll look, you will find the termperature variances they found weren't even enough to support there theory...