Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Building What? (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: Building What?
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Kicking off September 1st; the poop-storm ought to be interesting.
http://buildingwhat.org/

The group’s main webpage: http://nyccan.org/

Of course, building 7 is the lynchpin to proving some sort of greater conspiracy. If it was rigged to be imploded, that opens Pandora's box.

I would say the can of worms, but the implication is quite a bit more like Pandora's box than a little can of worms.

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
*rolls eyes* Nutjobs.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So goes your opinion...
[Roll Eyes]

Time will tell if it goes anywhere.

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 2763

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Time will tell" is the default state of all nutty conspiracies. Not that a nutty conspiracy never pans out, just that it's infrequent enough that rolly-eyes is the appropriate default response.
Posts: 3481 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So says the peanut gallery... Time will tell = we'll see in about a week if the ads get traction or fizzle.
Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
*rolls eyes* Nutjobs.

Why yes. Because if you don't believe the official government narrative after the dog-and-pony show congressional "investigation", which also happens to be the same narrative reported by the corporate owned - lobbyist influenced, "investigative" mainstream media about 9-11...clearly, you must be a nutjob.

Useful idiot. [Roll Eyes]

[ August 27, 2010, 07:03 PM: Message edited by: Daruma28 ]

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 2763

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Colin JM0397:
So says the peanut gallery... Time will tell = we'll see in about a week if the ads get traction or fizzle.

Oh, you're just asking if the ads will generate interest? I suspect not much. People that are inclined toward conspiracy theories who aren't yet aware of this one may, but I don't know how large of a population that is. Whatever ramping up happens will likely be sharp and plateau quickly. This isn't the sort of thing to change minds over continual exposure.
Posts: 3481 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
A pretty small population I'd imagine, since the 9/11 Hoax is the most popular conspiracy theory since the Moon Landing Hoax.

Meanwhile I get the feeling Colin's expecting this ad campaign or whatever to blow the lid off the whole dastardly plot and expose the truth or something. So I'm going to go on the record as saying time will tell that 9/11 conspiracy theorists are idiots and this ad campaign will have even less of an impact than the tour de force of truthiness that was Loose Change (which accomplished nothing except keeping Snopes.com occupied for a couple of days).

Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm more into the idea that certain people suppressed evidence of 9/11 and allowed it to happen.

In other news, there will be an anarchist bookfair in Minneapolis on 9/11/10.

Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TommySama:
I'm more into the idea that certain people suppressed evidence of 9/11 and allowed it to happen.

I can buy the idea that certain people knew in advance that something was in the works and the system failed to get its act together properly, but not that the people who were in the know sat back and let it happen so they could use it to their advantage. Who allowed it? What did they gain? Was the gain worth the consequences they'd have faced if the truth came out? And given America's long and proud tradition of starting wars over far smaller provocations, was it even necessary to allow something so big to happen?
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Rallan:
quote:
Originally posted by TommySama:
I'm more into the idea that certain people suppressed evidence of 9/11 and allowed it to happen.

I can buy the idea that certain people knew in advance that something was in the works and the system failed to get its act together properly, but not that the people who were in the know sat back and let it happen so they could use it to their advantage. Who allowed it? What did they gain? Was the gain worth the consequences they'd have faced if the truth came out? And given America's long and proud tradition of starting wars over far smaller provocations, was it even necessary to allow something so big to happen?
I'm not convinced. But if I woke up tomorrow and the headlines said "Top US officials allowed 9/11" I wouldn't miss a beat. Its happened before, it will happen again. Neocons? Ideological warfare. Money. A new great enemy.
Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cherrypoptart
Member
Member # 3942

 - posted      Profile for cherrypoptart     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If 9-11 had been prevented, most people still wouldn't even imagine it could ever happen.

This is probably one of the few conspiracy theories I don't much buy into it, but I learn a lot reading about them anyway and wouldn't dismiss it out of hand.

Reading up on wikipedia it seems like the fire fighting efforts were halted because of safety concerns and everyone was successfully evacuated before it collapsed. The power of fire should never underestimated.

Concerns for civil rights are as much responsible for 9-11 as anything else we can blame on our government. Able-Danger is another "conspiracy theory" but one that I can believe. If people want to look at what our government knew but didn't act on, that's one place to start.

Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LetterRip
Member
Member # 310

 - posted      Profile for LetterRip   Email LetterRip   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
cherry,

interesting reading about able danger,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger

I wouldn't have thought that the pentagon could prevent people from testifying? That is a bit messed up.

Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"the fire fighting efforts were halted because of safety concerns "

Yet no modern building has ever come down from fire. Not a single one, ever.
Of course, some point to the damage on one corner of the building being the tipping point...
However, speaking of tipping point, what happens when you kick one leg out from under a table?

What happens when one side of a building structurally fails?
Now watch the video and you’ll see a building drop into its own footprint at freefall speed.

I don't claim to know a damn thing about all this, but I know what common sense and my eyes tell me. And I see something that doesn't fit with the official story, and I see/hear 100’s or eyewitness testimonies that report explosions and all sorts of strangeness going on that day – all of which are in direct contradiction to the official story. I hear some of the 9/11 commissioners declare certain bits of information were whitewashed, and I can’t help but suspect the full story has yet to be told.

Speaking of the official story, if you bobbleheads out there would bother to listen to what these folks are saying and filter out the chaff, you'd hear they want a proper investigation and explanation into WTC 7. The 9/11 report didn't even mention WTC 7 and the NTSB's info is sorely lacking.

That said, I have no idea what happened. But at least I'm not so arrogant to sit in my ivory tower of absolute opinions and hurl insults at a group of people who just what an honest answer as to why their loved ones were killed that day.

Maybe this push will do something, maybe it’ll fizzle out. It’ll be interesting to see what, if anything, comes out of it. I, for one, would like a proper investigation fielded by a wide range of experts with access to everything.

[ August 28, 2010, 02:20 PM: Message edited by: Colin JM0397 ]

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And let us not forget Operation Northwoods - they'd never do that today, of course. Our government grew a conscience and stopped lying to us, apparently, at some point in the 70's, right?
[Roll Eyes]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So who was in on 9/11 Colin? If there were enough loose threads for people on the internet to pick it up, how come no mainstream news source and no government on Earth has picked up on it? What spooky powers did the conspirators use to make sure that, say, the Chinese media, or the Russian foreign ministry, didn't reveal the awful truth?

Because before we even get into the shopping list of extremely spurious technical details, the sheer size and scope of the alleged coverup is probably the single biggest problem with this whole ridiculous conspiracy. Why is it that kooky libertarian bloggers seem to have better powers of deduction than every intelligence agency on Earth?

Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That's a big strawman and misdirection. I have no answers and I won't field your questions because you already know what you think, and those questions are only designed to reinforce your already rock solid opinion.

I don't know. I only have questions myself, but feel there is more here than we've been told/allowed to know.

If you think there's no media or foreign governments saying there are problems with the official story, you are not paying attention.

"too big to hide" and therein is how it could be hidden. Because you've just shut down any logical thoughts you might actually have. You have a theory, and everything you see supports that theory. Anything that doesn't support your theory you label rubbish, or flat out ignore.

You shut down any possible opening for information into that thick noggin of yours when you take on such beliefs.

I have no answers, only questions... If you are completely comfortable with the official story, that's fine.

But don't insult my intelligence with such broad-sweeping garbage as "too big to be possible".

Anything is possible.
Probable is another argument, for sure, but it is definitely possible.

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm not saying it's too big to be possible, I'm saying that if it's as big as you say, then the lack of exposure from sources who don't have a vested interest in keeping it hushed up is extremely suspicious. Everyone except the kookiest of governments and the trashiest of tabloid gutter rags ran with the "9/11 was a terrorist attack" angle. And almost a decade later, when there's no real pressing interest even among neutral and friendly countries to maintain America's official position because the wheels have long since fallen off the War on Terror, nobody in a position of authority is buying it.

Meanwhile you're quite happy to tell us that the entire US government and US media were subverted by the conspiracy, but the moment I ask questions about why other governments and the foreign press also went along with it, I'm told that I'm making up strawmen. That's not an intellectually honest answer Colin, that's an attempt to shut down debate because this is a topic which gravely undermines the credibility of your conspiracy theory.

What's in it for China to maintain the lie? What's in it for Russia to maintain the lie? What's in it for all the western nations who were never part of the "coalition of the willing" to maintain the lie?
What's in it for the free press around the world to keep ignoring the biggest story of the last few decades, especially when it's apparently so poorly hidden that any paranoid blogger with time on his hands can uncover the truth?

If the conspiracy is real, then the governments and press of the world are acting extremely suspiciously, and the cause of this suspicious behavior should be of interest to you because it could imply that the conspiracy is even vaster than it first appeared to be. So why do you refuse to discuss the topic?

Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It is a straw man because the information is out there. You claim it's not there without, I'll wager, ever searching for it. However, if you want to find it, you go find it. I'm not going to bother because what I present is pointless. Either you want to go on the hunt for discovery, or you don't. Anything I say or do has nothing to do with your attitude or fixed opinions.

If you want to poke holes without investigating, that's your prerogative. If you have questions, then go out and answer them. To sit back and claim things are such-and-such way simply because you feel that way yourself is, IMO, proof of nothing other than your opinion on the matter.

Also, you are ascribing ideas and things you seem to think I claimed, yet I’ve claimed very little. Go back in read if you must. The ONLY claim I've made is I don't know much, I am suspicions of the official story, and that I find the dismissiveness of some to be a problem of closed minds (which does get on my nerves). Anything else is you arguing with those straw men in your head.

That's not me.

I did not say definitively one way or the other. However, IF the official story on WTC 7 is false, and it can be proved, then it will open a Pandora’s box. That seems to be the idea behind this whole BuildingWhat? campaign.

[ August 30, 2010, 11:05 AM: Message edited by: Colin JM0397 ]

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ahh, what the hell - I was already reading it, anyway, so no problem for me to at least cough up one example with several ideas/points that can be followed if one has the inclination:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19420
quote:
...Moreover, whereas Jones and Rather, being laymen in these matters, merely said that the collapse of Building 7 looked like a controlled demolition, experts, upon seeing the video, could tell immediately that it actually was a controlled demolition. In 2006, for example, a Dutch filmmaker asked Danny Jowenko, the owner of a controlled demolition company in the Netherlands, to comment on a video of the collapse of WTC 7, without telling him what it was. (Jowenko had been unaware that a third building had collapsed on 9/11.) After viewing the video, Jowenko said: “They simply blew up columns, and the rest caved in afterwards. . . . This is controlled demolition.” When asked if he was certain, he replied: “Absolutely, it’s been imploded. This was a hired job. A team of experts did this.”

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What's the sound of one hand clapping?

Just curious, Rallan and the other naysayers, did anyone read that entire article? It answers the questions Rallan asked and several others not asked. You can follow any of the 90-some footnotes for even more info...

I doubt it… But does anyone else think a new investigation is in order? Or do you still think this is all just a bunch of wackos and ignorant knaves?

Why and based on what?

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G2
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Colin JM0397:
What's the sound of one hand clapping?

Just curious, Rallan and the other naysayers, did anyone read that entire article? It answers the questions Rallan asked and several others not asked. You can follow any of the 90-some footnotes for even more info...

I wanted to but the link gives me nothing bu the line "concurrent hits exceeded". Must have gotten real popular all of a sudden ... Maybe it'll be up again soon.

Well, as soon as I submitted this post the link worked. [Cool] So to the 1 or 2 other members of this forum that will follow links (being very optimistic here), you might just be patient.

[ September 01, 2010, 09:54 AM: Message edited by: G2 ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I cannot come up with a single good thing that an investigation might accomplish.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G2
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
For context, here's video on controlled demolitions and WTC 7: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3898962504721899003#

And of course, wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G2
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
I cannot come up with a single good thing that an investigation might accomplish.

That's an odd position for a guy that thinks the height of patriotism is to reveal classified information ...
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It's not that I don't think it wouldn't be useful to know the truth. Rather, I don't think any investigation could possibly reveal truths that would satisfy the people calling for investigations.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The BuildingWhat? campaign is kicking off today, and that seems to be the article that started the idea, so it's interesting that its, apparently, getting so many hits.

Now, these are big if's...
But
If the official story is a lie, and if they can get enough traction to show that, then satisfying those people will be the least of our worries.

Now, if there is such a conspiracy, and if there is a group so all-encompassing, so powerful to pull it off, then the fight against "the truth" "they" can field will be enormous...

I figure even many who suspect we're being lied to would rather the matter just go quietly away, because - again if - if these things can be proven, then it's not hyperbole to assume we could have a collapse of our government and all the messes that go with that.

That could be a hell of a mess.

[ September 01, 2010, 10:37 AM: Message edited by: Colin JM0397 ]

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vegimo
Member
Member # 6023

 - posted      Profile for vegimo   Email vegimo       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
IF WTC 7 was a controlled demolition, there would have to have been some extraordinary fortune for the planners to have been able to pull it off. The extensive damage to the front of the building and the multiple fires would've had to occur in just the right way to mask the explosions. The organizers would have been required to control the demolition of the twin towers in a manner which would have produced the right amount of damage to this building so they could bring it down when the time was right.

From here,

quote:
While the Titanic was sinking, passengers heard explosions in the ship. In this case, the "Official Story" would be wrong, using the same conspiracy theory logic. To this day, no one really knows what exactly caused the sound, only that it sounded like an explosion. Some say it was the steel snapping as the ship broke in two. Others say it was the hot steam engines hitting the cold water which exploded. Using Conspiracy Theory logic, it was blown up because witnesses characterized the sound as an "Explosion".

and

quote:
Do the conspiracy theorist leaders have one shred of REAL evidence of explosives or anything else which could take down the buildings? Air samples with trace explosive chemicals in it? A memo like the Downing Street memo? A whistleblower who was in on the planning maybe? None of that involves the so called "whisked away steel". They have nothing. They're left to scour the internet for the slightest mistake made by anyone on that horrific, chaotic day. They're left destroying peoples' lives by suggesting innocent people are involved in mass murders.


Posts: 255 | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
For my part, I'm curious why the controlled demolition of a single building would matter. How would 9/11 have played out differently, from a This Was All A Massive Conspiracy perspective, had that building not fallen but everything else had happened as witnessed?
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G2
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by vegimo:
IF WTC 7 was a controlled demolition, there would have to have been some extraordinary fortune for the planners to have been able to pull it off. The extensive damage to the front of the building and the multiple fires would've had to occur in just the right way to mask the explosions. The organizers would have been required to control the demolition of the twin towers in a manner which would have produced the right amount of damage to this building so they could bring it down when the time was right. The organizers would have been required to control the demolition of the twin towers in a manner which would have produced the right amount of damage to this building so they could bring it down when the time was right.


That's really the problem isn't it? A controlled demolition is not a simple operation. These things general require weeks of planning and preparation and a lot of onsite pre-work to set the charges and wire them so they blow in the proper sequence. Even the best at this kind of thing are not a lock to do it right under the best of circumstances and we're far from the best of circumstances in this case.

To borrow some logic from upthread, sure, it's possible but the probability is so slim it's virtually non-existent. That being said, damn, I love good conspiracy theories. They're fun.

[ September 01, 2010, 01:22 PM: Message edited by: G2 ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I would love them, but for the fact that people believe them and allow those beliefs to affect their policy positions.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Veg, it's obvious you haven't read the Global Research article. Yes, there is "REAL evidence" and it's been presented as peer-reviewed scientific papers in some cases, most of which have received no publicity/coverage in the US.

Tom, that is misdirection and it's irrelevant how things might have played out differently. WTC 7 did fall, so we're left to question if the official story is accurate or not. You can't "what if" that fact away. It matters quite a bit IF WTC 7 was prewired for implosion and then manually imploded.

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vegimo
Member
Member # 6023

 - posted      Profile for vegimo   Email vegimo       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It is not obvious that I haven't read the article you linked...I gave you a link in return.

An Unprecedented Occurrence:
The fact that it never happened before does not mean that it could not happen.

Collapsed straight down:
It actually left quite a footprint. One building had to be destroyed because of the damage from WTC 7's collapse, and several others had damage as well.

Virtual free-fall:
The fall of WTC 7 actually took quite a bit longer than free-fall time. The chain of failure events started a minute before it hit the ground, and when it started to fall it was significantly slower than free-fall.

Dutch demolition expert:
How many views was he shown? How much other evidence was he shown? I agree that from specific viewpoints, this looks like a controlled demolition, but it was not.

Testimonies about explosions:
Did they try to start the demolition in mid-morning, give up, then re-start it in the late afternoon? That is what the site claims. If they tried to blow it once, with some of the charges going off, then had to re-wire the rest, how did they get this to work? I prefer the explanations I linked. I would submit that windows popping could be the result of air compression from the collapsing structure. Sounds like explosions do not explosions make. This was why I put the Titanic quote in my original response.

Physical Evidence:
I am not a Mechanical or Chemical Engineer, but I would direct you to follow the evidence on the site I linked. I did go through this exercise a few years ago when I was discussing this issue with another person, and there are discrepancies galore. There are people supporting theories, and acceptance of the set of evidence you have linked requires avoiding many more holes than exist in other sets.

Failure to Become Well-Known:
The collapse of the Twin Towers became the symbol of the day. People died. I don’t know why so many people don’t remember WTC 7 coming down. I do. People wanted answers for the tragedy, not for 7. It became low-priority, but this does not mean that it was being ignored.


I agree with Tom – what purpose did the demolition of this building serve? I would go one step further (as I tried to do in my previous post). How could they know that this would be the building that would give them the opportunity? Or were all the buildings in the area wired?

Posts: 255 | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yup, there's all sorts of conflicting info.
Make up your own minds...

Counter evidence doesn't make either side of the argument any more or less relevant. If the families who lost loved ones and 1000’s of engineers and architects think a new investigation is in order, why not?

Fear that some people won’t accept any answer other than Bush himself “pulled” all three buildings is no reason to shut down informed discussion and open investigations.

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
by all means, have the discussion. You can have a discussion about Apollo dragging the Sun through the sky on purpose, but it doesn't make it very likely and it doesn't mean there's any evidence to support it.

If the government were to have staged 9/11, why would there be a need to collapse building 7 in the first place? Any of the geopolitical motives are not bolstered. So its just that they feel they have a better case to make in B7 (because less is known about it) than the controlled demo of the twin towers.

For the record, it is 1271 architects and engineers who are deluded or angry enough to petition the government, which just goes to show you that one's profession does not trump human nature - which is believe what you want to believe, all data to the contrary notwithstanding.

I accept the description put most concisely in Structure

Read this and decide for yourself if that report seems more credible, or aetruth911 does.

[ September 01, 2010, 06:09 PM: Message edited by: The Drake ]

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
If the families who lost loved ones and 1000’s of engineers and architects think a new investigation is in order, why not?
Because it will cost money, take time, and keep the ridiculous conspiracy theories alive. And when it concludes that the building was not demolished, it will not satisfy the people who, for whatever reason, still refuse to abide by that conclusion.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Any if's or why's someone or some group might have done such a thing are completely irrelevant to proving/disproving how the building came down. To start down that road before answering the question at hand is to cloud your judgment.
To make any such statement as Drake made is to invoke cognitive dissonance as an answer without any further thought or investigation. This says nothing about the validity or “proof” from either side, just that invoking the “they’d never do that” defense has no bearing on evidence/proof.

One person's ridiculous theory is another's plain truth.
quote:
For the record, it is 1271 architects and engineers who are deluded or angry enough to petition the government, which just goes to show you that one's profession does not trump human nature - which is believe what you want to believe, all data to the contrary notwithstanding.
That comment works both ways, of course. Folks not wanting to see a conspiracy will never see one, folks looking for one will always find one...

Yet conspiracies do exist. The Gulf of Tonkin non-incident, Iran-Contra, BCCI collapse, the Tuskegee syphilis experiments, MK-Ultra experiments with LSD, Operation Paperclip, Operation Gladio, Operation Ajax, etc.

Still doesn't change the facts, and that there is a huge disagreement from some very learned people as to how WTC 7 came down. I find the armchair quarterbacking pooh-poohing their questions quite interesting.

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Any if's or why's someone or some group might have done such a thing are completely irrelevant to proving/disproving how the building came down.
That we need to prove how the building came down is the question at hand.

We already have a perfectly good theory for why the building came down: it got hit by another building, and its substructure was destroyed. Some people don't find that theory sufficient. And that's fine. They don't have to.

But they are saying that we need to spend money and time coming up with a theory that satisfies them, and their justification for this is that something suspicious must have happened. To which I say: why? Who had motives to do this suspicious thing? Before we spend resources trying to make these conspiracy theorists happy, shouldn't we at least have some reason to investigate beyond "the building could have come down some other way?"

Bear in mind, there are lots of people who still don't think planes brought down the Twin Towers, or that a plane struck the Pentagon; these aren't people who are likely to be convinced by, y'know, facts.

[ September 02, 2010, 09:34 AM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]

Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Structure piece is a summation of NIST's report, not anything new or different. Notice they are not sure, it is a theory as to what, exactly, failed.

Looking at pg. 3, column 79 is the most likely culprit, and it is on the other side of the building from the damaged caused by WTC 1 debris.

That means the "weakened by debris and then failed by fire" explanation is not accurate; it then becomes "failed by fire". Which, as many have pointed out, has NEVER happened before in any modern high-rise fire.

So what it comes down to is a never before seen collapse from fire vs. something else.

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1