9/11 Conspiracy Won't Go Away

[Sir Smoke aLot]

Just now, bee said:

 

getting very off topic aren't we chaps...?

 

A bit yes, i am sorry for that as it wasn't intentional and essential message i wrote here, which kinda induced off topic talk was really on topic.

[bee]

37 minutes ago, mrbusdriver said:

So I assume that a close inspection of the skyscrapers in NYC will reveal vast amounts of explosives in the foundation/structure of each, should they need to be "pulled" due to an unforeseen situation?? I just don't see that as credible...

 

I wouldn't assume that vast amounts of explosives will be lurking beneath all the sky scrapers (although this would necessitate
high classification if it were so ---) --- we don't know what method of controlled demolition is planned in the case of emergency -

But when the skyscrapers are designed and the designs put forward for approval -- there has to be included how the buildings
would be demolished  when it becomes necessary - be that in an emergency situation or just a normal situation - 

The Twin Towers and Building 7 would have to have had plans on how they would be brought down into their own footprint if it
became necessary - if they didn't they would not get approval to be built - 

Now  --- perhaps the method of the controlled demolition is why controlled demolition is denied - some kind of laser technology
perhaps that can cause molecular disassociation - or something along these lines - perhaps explosives aren't necessary any more -
and some kind of advanced technology can do the job --- if and when it becomes necessary -

and I am speculating that it became necessary when getting on for half (a third?) of the South Tower was on the point of toppling over
and causing untold death and damage to the surrounding area - then maybe the method that was used weakened the North Tower
and Building 7 -- so they had to be brought down as well -- using the same classified method...???

What is planned for all the other sky scrapers, as we speak.... I don't know ... but there will be something -

 

 

[Space Commander Travis]

1 hour ago, RoofGardener said:

Yeah... right... OK. 

 

You really question that? Look what happens when anywhere does try to question the right of Washington to tell them what they should do; they're straight on the list for Regime Change. 

[mrbusdriver]

Interesting speculation, but that's all it is.

I'd be interested in what sort of "end of life" plans are created during the design of today's megastructures around the world...they won't/can't last forever...

[Space Commander Travis]

1 hour ago, RoofGardener said:

What a CURIOUS map. 

Can you explain why the USA is given the same colour as Brazil, Libya and China ? 

And why Canada is the same colour as Chili, India and South America ? 

And why Mexico is the same colour as Australia and Mongolia ? 

And Russia the same colour as Algeria and Madagascar ? 

 

(amongst many others). 

Keep laughing ? Yes, I think I will  ) 

 

(late edit)

I notice that the map shows the Falkland Islands as "Los Malvines"

I am not laughing anymore, Sir SmokeALot. I'm British !

Who drew this map, and where did you find it ? 

I can't seem to zoom in on it. How can you see that it says Malvinas? I don't think the colouring is meant to signify any kind of political affiliation; it's a common convention to colour in countries on maps just to tell them apart. I've got a map, for instance, in which the UK is the same colour as Austria, Ukraine, Morocco and Saudi Arabia. 

[bee]

2 minutes ago, mrbusdriver said:

Interesting speculation, but that's all it is.

 

I do my best -  - 

 

 

 

[Space Commander Travis]

I must admit it does seem logical that these kind of buildings would be designed to be able to demolish them in their own footprint, but whether they'd come with demolition charges ready plumbed in is another question entirely, of course. 

[bee]

Just now, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

I must admit it does seem logical that these kind of buildings would be designed to be able to demolish them in their own footprint, but whether they'd come with demolition charges ready plumbed in is another question entirely, of course. 

 

like I said --- some kind of (highly classified) advanced technology could be ''''on hand'''' if necessary -- in an emergency..?

 

 

[mrbusdriver]

5 minutes ago, bee said:

 

like I said --- some kind of (highly classified) advanced technology could be ''''on hand'''' if necessary -- in an emergency..?

 

 

falling back on to imaginary/speculative weaponry (there are some real bizarre scenarios out there with all sorts of heretofore unrevealed weaponry ). Need to show proof of their existence AND employment.

[bee]

4 minutes ago, mrbusdriver said:

falling back on to imaginary/speculative weaponry (there are some real bizarre scenarios out there with all sorts of heretofore unrevealed weaponry ). Need to show proof of their existence AND employment.

 

who do you think I am...?... Wonder Woman...

I can only work with what I've got and that isn't PROOF of classified advanced weaponry -

I'm just a regular forum member not a spy....

 

 

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

1 hour ago, RoofGardener said:

Thank you for being patronising  And here's a thing:  I read it as well Noteverytingshouldbetakenatfacevalue. 

And here's the thing....it is unattributed, unverified, and I find it suspicious !

Of course... not EVERYTHING is a conspiracy.

Some things are just lies  

I just find it a little funny that your comment on colour of the map, eventhough it said clearly in the text that it was the colour of the circle that is important. Having countries represented by different colour is a very common way to differentiate them from each other. In fact if you have just five colours you can make a world map where no two bordering countries have the same colour. It was just very strange to me that you apparently felt the need to discredit a map based on something that had nothing to do with what the map was actually about. Reading something before commenting on it is never a bad idea.

1 hour ago, RoofGardener said:

As per my late add to the post... why are the Falklands listed as "Malvinos" 

Here is a better version of the map. While it is still difficult to see precisely, I am pretty sure it says the Falkland Islands and that they belong to the UK. They even have the same colour as the UK and not Argentina. So where did you get the Malvinos reference ? 

 

 

[Space Commander Travis]

23 minutes ago, bee said:

 

who do you think I am...?... Wonder Woman...

I can only work with what I've got and that isn't PROOF of classified advanced weaponry -

I'm just a regular forum member not a spy....

 

 

You don't think it might be to do with dimensions?

[Likely Guy]

4 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Oh REALLY ? 

And who produced the map, and why does it show the Falklands as "The Malvinas" ? 

How do you know that this map is TRUE ? 

And why the colour scheme that implies a communality between Canada, Peru, and India ? 

 

It's just the "five colour rule" when you're colouring in a map. With only using five colours no adjacent country will be same colour. It's random.

Edited October 29, 2017 by Likely Guy

[RoofGardener]

9 hours ago, Likely Guy said:

It's just the "five colour rule" when you're colouring in a map. With only using five colours no adjacent country will be same colour. It's random.

Truly ? Oh.... right.... I didn't know that... thanks

It makes sense now you say it. 

HOWEVER..... just because its sensible and random, STILL doesn't mean that it is NOT a conspiracy

[bee]

16 hours ago, South Alabam said:

There are many contradictions in the official report of the 9/11 commission. To believe conspiracy theorist are just a bunch of tin foil hat wearers is incorrect.

I agree  --- well I would do wouldn't I --- 

In fact part of my ideas about the whole 9/11 business is that much of the Inside Job Theory is driven by Intelligence Agencies
to polarize discussion --- make anyone questioning events to look like crazy, paranoid Tin Foil Hatters - and steer away from
what really happened that day - 

 

[bee]

16 hours ago, South Alabam said:

And here is the Official 9/11 report: https://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
If you believe the Official report, why disbelieve the 9/11 Commissioners statements below:

Max Cleland – 9/11 Commissioner who resigned because “It’s a Scam!”
Lee Hamilton – 9/11 Commissioner – “We were set up to fail”
Thomas Kean – 9/11 Commisioner – “We were set up to fail..”
Glenn Corbett, Professor of Fire Sciences, “Evidence was being destroyed…”

Quotes about the Investigation
9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says “I don’t believe for a minute we got everything right”, that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, and that the 9/11 debate should continue

The 9/11 Commission chair said the Commission was “set up to fail”
The Commission’s co-chairs said that the CIA (and likely the White House) “obstructed our investigation”
9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said “We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting”
9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”; “This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”.  When asked in 2009 if he thought there should be another 9/11 commission, Cleland responded: “There should be about fifteen 9/11 commissions”

 The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) – who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry – said “At some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened“. He also said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.”

 

Above is another extract --- cheers for the whole post --  

In reality the Official Account is in as much trouble as the Inside Job Theory - both extremes cannot satisfy when trying
to understand what went on that day - (IMO)

It could all be so sensitive that it could take a hundred years - if ever - for the full facts to be made public -

 

Edited October 30, 2017 by bee

[RoofGardener]

Hmm.... one curious thing. The commission was set up by George W Bush, and he appointed all of the members. Five Republicans, and five Democrats.

Soooo.... why didn't the Democrat members (including the vice chair) take this up with Ombama when he came into power ?

[Space Commander Travis]

As I'm sure everyone knows, I don't hold any water with conspiracy theories , but I'm sure the very last thing anyone would have wanted would have been for the Democrats to cause any trouble for the Republicans. If there was a real Opposition, it might have done so, but how many people still believe that that is the case? Mr. Obama was never particularly loud in his attacks on what Mr. Bush did, was he. 

[pallidin]

Trump took down the 9/11 towers because they were in the way of his further real estate developments.

I can PROVE it. You know how?

Just because I said so. My word is BEYOND any need for actual evidence.

[mrbusdriver]

No doubt that many layers of 'CYA' still exist, and will exist for a long time. Facts will come out, but sorting and separating the crap from the real facts will no doubt be a huge undertaking...

[pallidin]

Thus, we must define what is "crap"

Is "crap" substantiated, or, is it just a general anti-Gov position?

What gets me about CT's is their incessant "hearsay" from fringe websites, offering no actual proof, rather, just a point of argument for arguments sake.

CT's do NOT seek truth... they seek pseudo-validation of (and comfort in) paranoia and delusion, usually that which involves the Gov or "authority" in general.

 

Edited October 30, 2017 by pallidin

[pallidin]

To think that CT's "misinterpret" facts is not entirely correct.

Many CT's are highly intelligent. They don't "misinterpret" facts, rather, they dismiss them as being non-factual.

This fuels the psychosis, making it nearly impossible to "correct" a CT, as they view your correction as being non-factual and an "attack"

[pallidin]

And to think of CT's as wholly non-contributive would also be in error.

By benefit of their "angle", sometimes truth itself can be clarified.

[mrbusdriver]

Even some of the more "serious" CT sites get things wrong. They gripe about airspeeds (did you know the first supersonic airliner was the DC-8??...during a test flight in the early 60s, testing a new wing design). They want the interceptors racing at full afterburner after the hijacked jets (meaning maybe 10 minutes of fuel).

There are valid questions out there, and a lot of the players are getting old. We'll see...

 

 

[pallidin]

A rational person agrees that 1+1=2

A CT modifies the very basics of that equation and say's:

1 + 1 + corrupt Gov = 2.5, or, - 3

Their basic perspective is dominated (thus in a simple equation) that the government is corrupt and must be included in all perspectives of Reality.