• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

We are ALL experts on this bus.....

Menard_K

Banned
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
2,476
Reaction score
233
Location
L5
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Please people, there are lots of requests for documentation that supports
one argument or another. That is either the Controlled Demolition of WTC 1, 2, & 7
or the "no-planes" bit or whatever it is, and people seem to want some sort of pontification
by a PHD type to somehow bless their position on this subject. HOWEVER
PLEASE GET THIS, there are PHD types who will support the "no-planes" explanation
and Controlled Demolition & whatever you want really after all Dr. Wood has a PHD.
so what it really boils down to, is what do YOU think? and really ( maybe just IMHO )
but it seems to me that no more than high school level science is needed to get this.
9/11/2001 was either a false flag, or not, and even if "experts" put out all sorts of
possible explanations for what happened, the bottom line here is WHAT DO YOU THINK?

I personally do not believe for a second the "19 suicidal fanatics" explanation .....

However, experts aside, WHY do you think as you do?
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,933
Reaction score
9,896
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Please people, there are lots of requests for documentation that supports
one argument or another. That is either the Controlled Demolition of WTC 1, 2, & 7
or the "no-planes" bit or whatever it is, and people seem to want some sort of pontification
by a PHD type to somehow bless their position on this subject. HOWEVER
PLEASE GET THIS, there are PHD types who will support the "no-planes" explanation
and Controlled Demolition & whatever you want really after all Dr. Wood has a PHD.
so what it really boils down to, is what do YOU think? and really ( maybe just IMHO )
but it seems to me that no more than high school level science is needed to get this.
9/11/2001 was either a false flag, or not, and even if "experts" put out all sorts of
possible explanations for what happened, the bottom line here is WHAT DO YOU THINK?

I personally do not believe for a second the "19 suicidal fanatics" explanation .....

However, experts aside, WHY do you think as you do?

Why does a person think as they do? Pretty wide open question. I bet you started this thread because of the negative feedback you got on CGI in the other threads.

Here is a clue. In a debate (forum), asking for supporting documention to statements is not unusual.

I tend to look at a wide range of materials. This can come from books, publications, reference books, text books, news, forums, web sites, personal experiences, etc. I also evaluate the the credentials and creditibilty of the authors of the material I am reviewing, work experience, education, etc. From that I make a decision on if I agree or not on someones statements.

I thinks as I do because of many factors. Upbringing, education, work, live experiences, etc.

So why do you think the way you do? Interesting you asked in your OP of others, yet you do not provide an answer to your own question.
 

psikeyhackr

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
1,579
Reaction score
270
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
WHY do you think as you do?

Skyscrapers must hold themselves up. The levels near the bottom must support much more weight than those at the top. This is not news and the Empire State Building is 80 years old.

So how do scientists not talk about the distributions of steel and concrete down the towers for 12 years?

I don't care who did it or why. The Laws of Physics do not give a damn about terrorism or patriotism. But a problem this simple should have been clearly resolved within a year. So this is an educational issue that involves all of our engineering schools and even high school physics teachers like David Chandler.

But how can physicists disagree about something this simple? So there are people trying to convince us this problem is not simple. But I find it so curious that I can't find the distribution of steel and concrete data on any skyscraper. Creating a program that computes collapse time based only on the conservation of momentum isn't that difficult.

The Next Level :: View topic - Basic Skyscraper Physics

So the problem is that experts say nothing about so much. Is the center of mass of the tilted top portion of the south tower difficult to comprehend?

I attended one of Richard Gage's dog and pony shows in 2008. I got in line afterwards to ask him about the steel and concrete on every level. He looked at me like I had grown a second head. Then he said that the NIST was not releasing accurate blue prints. But most of the people who came just talked about conspiracy crap. Conspiracies cannot change physics.

psik
 

radioman

feckless bon vivant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
4,958
Reaction score
3,656
Location
lotusland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
[QUOTE.

I personally do not believe for a second the "19 suicidal fanatics" explanation .....

However, experts aside, WHY do you think as you do?[/QUOTE]
----------

Well, it seems as if there is an endless supply of suicide bombing fanatics.
Probably wasn't too difficult to recruit them.
It's also possible some of the hijackers were unaware they were on a suicide mission.
The Popular Mechanics articles/documentary seemed logical and believable.
I have yet to see/hear a conspiracy advocate as convincing as PM.
 
Last edited:

HonestJoe

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
5,544
Reaction score
2,821
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
However, experts aside, WHY do you think as you do?
I've not prodded this for ages (it gets too silly too quickly) but I've yet to hear of any alternative hypothesis to the general official story that is complete and coherent, with believable motive, method and opportunity. There are plenty of questions about some of the evidence, the competence of the various government institutions prior to the attack and on the day and the political manovering afterwards but I don't think that counters any of the basic facts of the attack.

Lots of the "conspiracy" aspects seem to focus of very specific questions and issues then build up extravagant ideas from them, yet never seem to manage a coherent end-to-end theory, tending to require some over-complex or unbelievable steps (such as the classic planting explosives in exactly the right places or the idea anyone would plan something so deadly and destructive as a "false flag" when a much smaller incident could have been used to the same ends) or simply dismissing such wider questions in favour of their specific hook.
 

Menard_K

Banned
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
2,476
Reaction score
233
Location
L5
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
I've not prodded this for ages (it gets too silly too quickly) but I've yet to hear of any alternative hypothesis to the general official story that is complete and coherent, with believable motive, method and opportunity. There are plenty of questions about some of the evidence, the competence of the various government institutions prior to the attack and on the day and the political manovering afterwards but I don't think that counters any of the basic facts of the attack.

Lots of the "conspiracy" aspects seem to focus of very specific questions and issues then build up extravagant ideas from them, yet never seem to manage a coherent end-to-end theory, tending to require some over-complex or unbelievable steps (such as the classic planting explosives in exactly the right places or the idea anyone would plan something so deadly and destructive as a "false flag" when a much smaller incident could have been used to the same ends) or simply dismissing such wider questions in favour of their specific hook.

Here is my take on the subject .. I do not have to explain in great detail HOW or even WHY it was done,
when you can clearly see what was done.

Please think about this, all of the EDUCATED people here have had to take Physical Science 101
complete with the Newtons Laws bit .... OK .. so far so good, NOW what do you do, when the
TV "news" shows you pictures & gives an explanation, such that if you accept what they have said,
the LAWS OF PHYSICS have been violated in order to produce the event as shown on TV.

What?
 

Surtr

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 30, 2011
Messages
7,017
Reaction score
2,980
Location
The greatest planet in the world.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Good god, you people are still ranting about the 9/11 "conspiracy"? Seriously, there are too many damned 9/11 threads floating around. Come up with a new conspiracy, like that one about the shape shifting lizard secret security guy, or go back to the Illuminati. The Illuminati and the new world order are actually fun to debate. They're like CPT Willard's COL Kurtz, or Harker's Dracula. The arch nemesis slant gives it pull, and intrigue that people want. Not this same rehashed garbage.
 

Menard_K

Banned
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
2,476
Reaction score
233
Location
L5
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Good god, you people are still ranting about the 9/11 "conspiracy"? Seriously, there are too many damned 9/11 threads floating around. Come up with a new conspiracy, like that one about the shape shifting lizard secret security guy, or go back to the Illuminati. The Illuminati and the new world order are actually fun to debate. They're like CPT Willard's COL Kurtz, or Harker's Dracula. The arch nemesis slant gives it pull, and intrigue that people want. Not this same rehashed garbage.

OH MY Chutzpah ... or something! Please note that there isn't any statute of limitations on
TREASON, therefore the Criminals still at large who are the REAL perpetrators of all the
death & damage on 9/11/2001 should be apprehended, prosecuted & incarcerated for
the remainder of their natural lives.

WE THE PEOPLE have been SCREWED .... big time
& I don't know about everybody else here, but I want JUSTICE !
 

radioman

feckless bon vivant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
4,958
Reaction score
3,656
Location
lotusland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
. Come up with a new conspiracy, like that one about the shape shifting lizard secret security guy ..
-----------------------

Holy crap!!!
I hadn't heard of the lizard guy.
Why has the media been silent on this one?
Disturbing information, my friend.
 

Menard_K

Banned
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
2,476
Reaction score
233
Location
L5
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Here you go:


is lulz

PLEASE, this is off-topic, if you want to debate the various bits about
9/11/2001 ... lets have at it, but don't try to pollute the discussion
with "shape shifter" crap!
 

HonestJoe

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
5,544
Reaction score
2,821
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Here is my take on the subject .. I do not have to explain in great detail HOW or even WHY it was done,
when you can clearly see what was done.
Well, you certainly need to state what you think the "it" you actually claim was done is. All you've referred to here is an apparent inconsistency in how some of the buildings collapsed (and even that is a matter of disagreement). Without anything else, there are countless plausible (and less so) explanations for that, which could favour all sorts of different conclusions.

Assuming it leads you to a conclusion that there were controlled demolitions (do correct me if I read that wrong), if you're really going to stop there, what's the point? To have any kind of respect, you have to at least address the question of how controlled demolitions could have been achieved and you must be at least curious as to why it would have been done (which has always been the big sticking point for me on this kind of theory).

Since such theories will tend to lead to accusations of criminal activity by a number of people, including named individuals, I also think you'd have a moral responsibility back up you claims and address any reasonable counter-arguments.
 

Menard_K

Banned
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
2,476
Reaction score
233
Location
L5
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Well, you certainly need to state what you think the "it" you actually claim was done is. All you've referred to here is an apparent inconsistency in how some of the buildings collapsed (and even that is a matter of disagreement). Without anything else, there are countless plausible (and less so) explanations for that, which could favour all sorts of different conclusions.

Assuming it leads you to a conclusion that there were controlled demolitions (do correct me if I read that wrong), if you're really going to stop there, what's the point? To have any kind of respect, you have to at least address the question of how controlled demolitions could have been achieved and you must be at least curious as to why it would have been done (which has always been the big sticking point for me on this kind of theory).

Since such theories will tend to lead to accusations of criminal activity by a number of people, including named individuals, I also think you'd have a moral responsibility back up you claims and address any reasonable counter-arguments.

The thing that the vast majority of the "truth movement" can agree upon is the fact that
the attack was a FALSE FLAG OPERATION.

What we have is a total of three skyscrapers demolished by something other than a
gravity induced "collapse".

We need to work with what we have, & not speculate about stuff like
atom bombs use to destroy the towers ( etc.... )

We already have plenty of evidence to prove that the MSM
is at the very least an accomplice in this crime.

The documentary evidence in the form of the video from the MSM
is very clear on the subject, the destruction of WTC 1, 2 & 7 could NOT
have been a gravity induced "collapse".

The MSM has shown us "B movie" special effects & told us a fairy tale
about Suicidal Arab Fanatics .... oh my!
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,933
Reaction score
9,896
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The thing that the vast majority of the "truth movement" can agree upon is the fact that
the attack was a FALSE FLAG OPERATION.

What we have is a total of three skyscrapers demolished by something other than a
gravity induced "collapse".

We need to work with what we have, & not speculate about stuff like
atom bombs use to destroy the towers ( etc.... )

We already have plenty of evidence to prove that the MSM
is at the very least an accomplice in this crime.

The documentary evidence in the form of the video from the MSM
is very clear on the subject, the destruction of WTC 1, 2 & 7 could NOT
have been a gravity induced "collapse".

The MSM has shown us "B movie" special effects & told us a fairy tale
about Suicidal Arab Fanatics .... oh my!

so when are you asking charges to be filed against the msm?

sticking to the CGI, yet I would bet most of your CT partners do not buy the CGI stance.
 

HonestJoe

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
5,544
Reaction score
2,821
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The thing that the vast majority of the "truth movement" can agree upon is the fact that
the attack was a FALSE FLAG OPERATION.
Yes, because it's their pre-determined conclusion prior to there being any actual evidence. They then all went of a search for evidence to fit their preconceptions which is why they came back with some many different, often wild and contradictory, theories.

What we have is a total of three skyscrapers demolished by something other than a
gravity induced "collapse".
That is obviously disputed.

We already have plenty of evidence to prove that the MSM is at the very least an accomplice in this crime.
Slow down there. You don't even have evidence of a crime yet (the manner in which the buildings fell isn't alone proof of a specific crime). The term "Mainstream Media" is also unspecific and amorphous - you can't accuse it in general of any crime. Anyway, if you want something kept secret, the last people you tell is a load of journalists. Even assuming the many steps you've skipped so far, I don't see how you can state with such certainty that anyone in the media was an actual knowing accomplice rather than duped victim. Again strong on the speculation, weak on the details.

The theory you're throwing random pieces of about hits the issue I've already mentioned. Why commit this act in such a convoluted manner with so many risks and holes when the alleged motive could have been achieved much more easily.
 

Menard_K

Banned
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
2,476
Reaction score
233
Location
L5
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Yes, because it's their pre-determined conclusion prior to there being any actual evidence. They then all went of a search for evidence to fit their preconceptions which is why they came back with some many different, often wild and contradictory, theories.

That is obviously disputed.

Slow down there. You don't even have evidence of a crime yet (the manner in which the buildings fell isn't alone proof of a specific crime). The term "Mainstream Media" is also unspecific and amorphous - you can't accuse it in general of any crime. Anyway, if you want something kept secret, the last people you tell is a load of journalists. Even assuming the many steps you've skipped so far, I don't see how you can state with such certainty that anyone in the media was an actual knowing accomplice rather than duped victim. Again strong on the speculation, weak on the details.

The theory you're throwing random pieces of about hits the issue I've already mentioned. Why commit this act in such a convoluted manner with so many risks and holes when the alleged motive could have been achieved much more easily.

There isn't any alleged motive, I'm not going there. & as for most of the rest of the "movement"
not buying into the no-planes bit, so be it, I do not go for the "consensus" I go with what is supported by evidence. The very fact that people say they do not see the violations of the laws of physics, is prof of the POWER of TV, people are as much as standing around praising a non-existent tailor rather than bust the emperor for indecent exposure. The "collapse" of WTC 1, 2, & 7 is prof that 9/11/2001 was a FALSE FLAG & the fact that our own "leaders" would endorse the waste of taxpayer $ on the "reports" that have been sold to the AMERICAN public as an explanation of what happened, proves beyond any doubt that the President & Congress are also in on the cover-up. "total collapse was inevitable after collapse initiation" Do YOU buy this crap? Your tax $ paid for it.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,933
Reaction score
9,896
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
There isn't any alleged motive, I'm not going there. & as for most of the rest of the "movement"
not buying into the no-planes bit, so be it, I do not go for the "consensus" I go with what is supported by evidence. The very fact that people say they do not see the violations of the laws of physics, is prof of the POWER of TV, people are as much as standing around praising a non-existent tailor rather than bust the emperor for indecent exposure. The "collapse" of WTC 1, 2, & 7 is prof that 9/11/2001 was a FALSE FLAG & the fact that our own "leaders" would endorse the waste of taxpayer $ on the "reports" that have been sold to the AMERICAN public as an explanation of what happened, proves beyond any doubt that the President & Congress are also in on the cover-up. "total collapse was inevitable after collapse initiation" Do YOU buy this crap? Your tax $ paid for it.

If someone looks at the same msm data as you and comes up with a different conclusion, who is correct?
 

Menard_K

Banned
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
2,476
Reaction score
233
Location
L5
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
If someone looks at the same msm data as you and comes up with a different conclusion, who is

correct?


The Immutable laws of nature, Please remember your PHYSICAL SCIENCE 101 class, and
examine the events as recorded ... that is the "collapse" of WTC 1, 2, & 7
The ONLY reason why anyone would say that they do not clearly see violations of
the laws of physics, is that they have accepted the idea that if they can not see
the work of Arab Fanatics in these events, they are unworthy of the station that they hold.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,933
Reaction score
9,896
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The Immutable laws of nature, Please remember your PHYSICAL SCIENCE 101 class, and
examine the events as recorded ... that is the "collapse" of WTC 1, 2, & 7
The ONLY reason why anyone would say that they do not clearly see violations of
the laws of physics, is that they have accepted the idea that if they can not see
the work of Arab Fanatics in these events, they are unworthy of the station that they hold.

The ONLY reason? pretty closed view of things MK.
Nice way to say you are correct and others who disagree are wrong. No need for further discussion, you have all the answers:mrgreen:
 

Menard_K

Banned
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
2,476
Reaction score
233
Location
L5
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
The ONLY reason? pretty closed view of things MK.
Nice way to say you are correct and others who disagree are wrong. No need for further discussion, you have all the answers:mrgreen:

Very funny, not ALL of the answers,

However .... Bust the emperor for indecent exposure is a pretty good start on the matter.

Big Brother sez 2 + 2 = 5
All Hail BIG BROTHER ...... or oppose him because he is WRONG .... what do YOU think?
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,933
Reaction score
9,896
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Very funny, not ALL of the answers,

However .... Bust the emperor for indecent exposure is a pretty good start on the matter.

Big Brother sez 2 + 2 = 5
All Hail BIG BROTHER ...... or oppose him because he is WRONG .... what do YOU think?

You know this just demonstrates you can not conduct a civil discussion.
Put on your tin hat.
 

Menard_K

Banned
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
2,476
Reaction score
233
Location
L5
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
You know this just demonstrates you can not conduct a civil discussion.
Put on your tin hat.

Do tell, Please enlighten me as to what proves ( at least to you ... ) the idea that Fanatics hijacked airliners & crashed them into buildings? What does it for YOU?
 

HonestJoe

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
5,544
Reaction score
2,821
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
There isn't any alleged motive, I'm not going there.
False flag is a motive. Just by using that phrase, you're not just saying that the physical sequence of events couldn't have occurred as officially described, you're saying someone intentionally caused them to make people think there had been a terrorist attack. That is the motive you're avoiding discussing.

The very fact that people say they do not see the violations of the laws of physics, is prof of the POWER of TV, people are as much as standing around praising a non-existent tailor rather than bust the emperor for indecent exposure.
Did you witness the event first hand or are you also relying on TV? Isn't it equally possible that you're being misled rather than the people who disagree with you?

The "collapse" of WTC 1, 2, & 7 is prof that 9/11/2001 was a FALSE FLAG & the fact that our own "leaders" would endorse the waste of taxpayer $ on the "reports" that have been sold to the AMERICAN public as an explanation of what happened, proves beyond any doubt that the President & Congress are also in on the cover-up. "total collapse was inevitable after collapse initiation" Do YOU buy this crap?
No, I really don't. I don't buy that apparent inconsistencies in the collapse of the towers prove a false flag operation and I don't buy that, even if it were the case, the official report saying otherwise proves the President (then or now) and everyone in Congress must have been in on a cover-up.

At the moment, I'm not really buying anything but this kind of leaping from conclusion to conclusion is exactly what has always put me off even considering the kind of stuff you're throwing out. And you've still not even tried to explain why they would do it.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,933
Reaction score
9,896
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Do tell, Please enlighten me as to what proves ( at least to you ... ) the idea that Fanatics hijacked airliners & crashed them into buildings? What does it for YOU?

MK, I have in other threads provided information on why the crash/damage/fires is a reasonalble answer.
I have also stated each explanation should stand on its own.
So why do you keep bring up the "fairy tale", when I know you don't believe it?
Explain why your explanation of what happended is correct.

I know this did not answer your question with details.
 

Menard_K

Banned
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
2,476
Reaction score
233
Location
L5
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
MK, I have in other threads provided information on why the crash/damage/fires is a reasonalble answer.
I have also stated each explanation should stand on its own.
So why do you keep bring up the "fairy tale", when I know you don't believe it?
Explain why your explanation of what happended is correct.

I know this did not answer your question with details.

The reason that I bring up the "official" reports on the subject
is that I hope people can get it, that is the point I'm trying to make
YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK, publishing total LIES & FRAUD
as an alleged explanation of what happened on 9/11/2001.

WHY did the worlds greatest military power FAIL to defend even its own HQ
& on 9/12 Donald Rumsfeld still had a JOB?
whats up with that?

A! where are we going
& WHY are we in this handbasket?
 
Top Bottom