Conspiracy Theory Proof 9/11 was an Inside Job?

Status
Not open for further replies.

CLUBMEDhurst

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Posts
7,262
Likes
4,892
Location
Under the moonlight, the serious moonlight
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Man City
Ah, the ad hominem approach to completely avoid his perfectly valid comments.
Absolutely not. As you've posted his perfectly valid comments on more than one occasion, I've left it to someone who's more informed than myself on the matter to debunk Taibbi's comments.

If you believe that Taibbi had the better of the exchange, could you point out how you reached this conclusion?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

TheBloods

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 14, 2003
Posts
17,894
Likes
94
AFL Club
Sydney
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

Absolutely not. As you've posted his perfectly valid comments on more than one occasion, I've left it to someone who's more informed than myself on the matter to debunk Taibbi's comments.

If you believe that Taibbi had the better of the exchange, could you point out how you reached this conclusion?
His response is
In addition to this one-sidedness, there is a second problem with your claim that anyone challenging a theory must have a complete alternative theory: It is false. There are several ways to challenge a theory. You can cast doubt on it by showing that its alleged evidence does not stand up to scrutiny. You can show that a theory is probably false by pointing to evidence that apparently contradicts it. You can positively disprove a theory by providing evidence showing that it cannot possibly be true. The 9/11 truth movement has done all three with regard to the official account.
This is a false and weak argument. He does not address the critical aspects that undermine the concept of an inside job - he focusses on the mind-numbing detail of technical analysis, that he doesn't really understand. Given...
My work from the beginning has been devoted to summarizing and synthesizing the findings of those members of the 9/11 truth movement who have done original research of various types.
...that's not surprising (and as former Professor of Philosophy of Religion and Theology, he's hardly qualified to rely on the arguments he presents).
 

crowmyzone

Baghdad Kayoosh
Joined
May 20, 2001
Posts
28,853
Likes
23,143
Location
Beetaloo
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Baghdad Bombers
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

If it was a Senate appointment you would have complained that it was de facto Bush given that it would have been a Republican appointment, ditto House of Reps, ditto the Executive Branch, ditto the Supreme Court.

As it stood he appointed 6 Democrats and 6 Republicans. How can it not get any fairer than that ?

So who should have done the appointing ?

How is that relevant at all ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Commission_Report
"The Commission interviewed over 1,200 people in 10 countries and reviewed over two and a half million pages of documents, including some closely guarded classified national security documents. "


Again, I'm not quite sure what you're getting at - should Kissinger have remained as Chairman ?
Its Zelikows appointment that bothers me....that makes 7 / 6 in favour of Bushs Republican Party.
But its his control that aces the rest of the pack.
I dont trust him.

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=abefore012703zelikowhired#abefore012703zelikowhired
The 9/11 Commission hires Philip Zelikow for the key position of executive director, the person actually in charge of the commission’s day-to-day affairs. Zelikow was recommended by Commissioner Slade Gorton, who had worked with Zelikow on an electoral reform commission after the disputed presidential election in 2000.

We all know how voters were disinfranchised so that Bush would get elected there dont we.;)


http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a012703clarkezelikow#a012703clarkezelikow
Counterterrorism “tsar” Richard Clarke had previously thought that the 9/11 Commission might get to the truth of how President George Bush and Rice had ignored the intelligence in the run-up to 9/11, but Zelikow’s appointment dashes these hopes.


http://www.infowars.com/philip-zelikow-had-911-report-rewritten-to-be-more-favorable-of-condi/
9/11 Commission Executive Director Philip Zelikow tells the staff team working on the Bush administration’s response to terrorist threats in the summer of 2001 that their drafts must be rewritten to cast National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice in a better light. WTF?

http://www.infowars.com/lt-col-anthony-shaffer-interviewed-on-the-alex-jones-show/

Shaffer made a protected disclosure to the 9/11 Commission staff director, Philip D. Zelikow, while undercover in Afghanistan in October 2003 regarding the existence of the ABLE DANGER program that had identified alleged 9/11 lead hijacker Mohammed Atta and three other al-Qaeda operatives operating in the United States prior to 9/11.

What did Zelikow do about it? Nothing.
 
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Posts
1,032
Likes
1,233
Location
Rainy Park City
AFL Club
West Coast
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

The only HARD evidence maybe. But I would have thought that was the whole point of a cover-up. Wouldn't be much of a cover-up if hard evidence was left lying around for folks to seize upon.

Indirect evidence however:
. . .

Collapse at freefall speed


WTC 1 Collapse time = 15.28 seconds
WTC 2 Collapse time = 22.02 seconds
Freefall time from same height = 9.22 seconds

In every video and photo you can see the perimeter columns far outpacing the collapse. Were these strapped to rockets to bring them down faster?
Truthers cut their videos out when the perimeter columns hit the ground and not the building.

No toppling of the structures above the impact sites


This is actually part of what initiated the collapse. As the top of the buildings tilted it pushed down on the supporting floor, which created further tension in the weakend trusses which eventually gave way. This Along with the bowing of the trusses, pulling in the perimeter columns was the mechanism that began the pancake collapse of the underlying floors. The top sections then disintegrated when they struck the ground.

Enormous buildings that collapsed into their own footprint

Were they wearing snowshoes? The actual footprint for each of the towers was 1 acre (total of 2 acres). The debris after the collapse, was scattered over a 16 acre site. That’s some big feet!

Debris whisked away and shipped overseas without proper examination

Not true. The removal wasn’t concluded until May of the following year. Dr W. Gene Corley, head of the Building Performance Assessment Team, saw no problem with the removal. In his testimony to the House of Representatives he said that “The team has had full access to the scrap yards and to the site and has been able to obtain numerous samples”.

Reports of explosions heard at the scene prior to the collapse

Each floor had about an acre of 3” - 4 “ concrete flooring. The sound of that plus office furniture and equipment collapsing on an office below would make a very loud boom. Steel snapping under tension would make a very loud boom. Large transformers exploding in the building would make a very loud boom. Large oil filled transformers exploding from the fire in WTC 7 could account for explosions heard in the building before collapsing. Many of the people who said they heard explosions also said they realized it was the building collapsing causing the sound. Even bodies hitting the ground sounded like explosions to some people.
Some say “It was like” before saying what they heard. People generally try to describe something hard to describe by saying it’s like something most people know. Like the sound of a hurricane is often described as a freight train by survivors.
You would expect a few people who are under attack by terrorists to think a loud boom is an explosive going off.

Reports of pools of molten metal at the scene following the collapse

No one has scientifically proven the molten substance was steel. Can even be molten glass coating steel or an aluminum mixed with something else. Steel can burn/oxidize and would explain red hot steel
The photo of firemen over a glowing hole (often used as evidence to support this flimsy claim) cannot be molten steel. The heat would have been too great for the firemen. No demolition in history ever had steel glow for weeks.
The amount of thermite (the supposed source of the alleged molten steel) needed to collapse the tower would have been massive. (Tons) Impossible to hide. Thermite cannot cut columns without large canisters all around the column. Thermite needs another primary charge to set it off. It would have exploded during impact explosion.

Not to mention an entire building collapsing as a result of fire. A phenomenon completely unheard of before.

It is not a phenomenon completely unheard of. There are many examples of steel structures collapsing from fire including:

Interstate 580 Bridge

Kadar Toy Factory
Mumbai High North Platform

However, it is the first time in history an airliner rammed into a steel hi-rise building built like the towers (Tube in a Tube design). It’s the first time in history a steel framed building built like Building 7 (Con Ed substation in the lower floors and a cantilever column core) was hit by another steel framed building.
Unprotected steel collapsed within 2 1/2 hours in Madrid fire without being hit by anything.

AArgh!!! Please, please, please you guys! This has all been covered ad nauseum already in this very thread! Everything above has already been mentioned by ODN, The Bloods and others pages and pages ago. Do some research into both sides of the story, not just the Truther sites or Loose Change. Here are some links to some of the best:

911 Myths
Debunking 911
Screw Loose Change
Mark Roberts rebuttal of Loose Change
Mark Roberts rebuttal of the WTC 7 “evidence” for controlled demolition

How many of you have actually read the 911 Commission report? The NIST report? Don’t just rely on the opinions of the “scholars” who’ve read it for you, research it for yourself, look at the facts! Read the documents, search the investigative records - it is all available in the public domain.

I get where you are coming from. Really, I do. I used to think like you guys. The moon landings, JFK, Jack the Ripper, Diana, Dead Sea Scrolls, Billy the Kid - if there was a conspiracy theory I believed it. I would read up on all the sites that confirmed my beliefs, I’d debate the “sheeple” in the forums, I’d dismiss their “evidence” as irrelevent because it was supplied by those that might have an interest in a cover up. Deep down I loved the idea of being in the know, that I could see through the lies. The theories also made the world a little more interesting. I had no interest in the real politics or events. It was the cover-up, the unseen, faceless men who were manipulating the whole thing that peaked my imagination. What was their agenda? How did they do it?

When I finally read some of the differing points of view and saw the mountains of evidence piled up against my beliefs it shattered me. And in the end, that’s what they were - beliefs. I had no proof, all the evidence pointed against it but I just believed. Like the god of the gaps, I filled in the anomolies, the spaces that the official theories couldn’t explain were evidence that the conspiracy existed - until the gap was filled - then I’d search for or create new gaps.

This wasn’t research, this wasn’t truth, this wasn’t critical thinking! It was nothing more than unsupported theory, speculation and belief.

It is so important to think critically, to do this you must examine both sides of the story! Please check out some of the links I have supplied above. At the very least you will have tested your beliefs. If you can dismiss what you read as ridiculous and can back this up with what you’ve already learned then you really will know the truth!
 

EasternTiger

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Posts
4,717
Likes
4,283
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

His response is This is a false and weak argument. He does not address the critical aspects that undermine the concept of an inside job - he focusses on the mind-numbing detail of technical analysis, that he doesn't really understand. Given...
...that's not surprising (and as former Professor of Philosophy of Religion and Theology, he's hardly qualified to rely on the arguments he presents).
As opposed to Taibibi, whose claim to fame is writing political columns for Playboy and Rolling Stone magazine.

I know which one I'd be listening to when it comes to mind-numbing detail.

In a 2010 Vanity Fair article chronicling the demise of the eXile, journalist James Verini alleges that Taibbi cursed at him and threw a coffee in his face after being told The Exile: Sex, Drugs, and Libel in the New Russia was "redundant and discursive."
In March 2005, the New York Press published Taibbi's satirical essay "The 52 Funniest Things About the Upcoming Death of the Pope"
I'll give you a hint. Not this bloke ^^^^
 

TheBloods

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 14, 2003
Posts
17,894
Likes
94
AFL Club
Sydney
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

As opposed to Taibibi, whose claim to fame is writing political columns for Playboy and Rolling Stone magazine.

I know which one I'd be listening to when it comes to mind-numbing detail.

I'll give you a hint. Not this bloke ^^^^
Irrelevant ad hominem again. Whether Taibbi understands the technical detail or not is irrelevant - Taibbi is not putting forward an argument. He is asking legitimate questions that go directly to the conspiracy theory. Who is asking the questions is irrelevant. Similar questions have been asked by numerous people. Truthers are unable to present a coherent, big-picture argument and prefer to dodge it, as Griffin did.
 

EasternTiger

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Posts
4,717
Likes
4,283
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

Irrelevant ad hominem again. Whether Taibbi understands the technical detail or not is irrelevant - Taibbi is not putting forward an argument. He is asking legitimate questions that go directly to the conspiracy theory. Who is asking the questions is irrelevant. Similar questions have been asked by numerous people. Truthers are unable to present a coherent, big-picture argument and prefer to dodge it, as Griffin did.
No he probably doesn't understand the technical detail and is precisely why he shouldn't have been asking the questions. It's no 'coincidence' Griffin smacked him out of the park.
 

TheBloods

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 14, 2003
Posts
17,894
Likes
94
AFL Club
Sydney
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

No he probably doesn't understand the technical detail and is precisely why he shouldn't have been asking the questions. It's no 'coincidence' Griffin smacked him out of the park.
Still irrelevant. Griffin - like all Truthers - still avoided the critical questions.

As for "smacked him out of the park", you're basing that on him regurgitating in enormous volume the information that he finds - but doesn't understand - on the internet, which suits your particular viewpoint. As has been shown - see Kellythatsit's post above as an example - various presumed 'facts' of the Truthers are erroneous, despite how often they are repeated.

You continue to show your inability to think broadly, analytically or logically with your puerile little references to 'coincidence'.
 

EasternTiger

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Posts
4,717
Likes
4,283
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond

EasternTiger

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Posts
4,717
Likes
4,283
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

Debris whisked away and shipped overseas without proper examination

Not true. The removal wasn’t concluded until May of the following year. Dr W. Gene Corley, head of the Building Performance Assessment Team, saw no problem with the removal. In his testimony to the House of Representatives he said that “The team has had full access to the scrap yards and to the site and has been able to obtain numerous samples”.
Clicked the link, had a bit of a read.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE J. RANDY FORBES

I am concerned that no clear protocol was in place for building investigators who were attempting to understand how the two buildings collapsed.

I was disappointed to learn that investigators were unable to examine recovered pieces of steel from the Twin Towers before they were recycled. I am also troubled that investigators had difficulty in obtaining blueprints, design drawings, and maintenance records because of liability concerns from the buildings' owners. These records are invaluable in fully understanding how the buildings collapsed.
In the month that lapsed between the terrorist attacks and the deployment of the BPAT team, a significant amount of steel debris—including most of the steel from the upper floors—was removed from the rubble pile, cut into smaller sections, and either melted at the recycling plant or shipped out of the U.S. Some of the critical pieces of steel—including the suspension trusses from the top of the towers and the internal support columns—were gone before the first BPAT team member ever reached the site. Fortunately, an NSF-funded independent researcher, recognizing that valuable evidence was being destroyed, attempted to intervene with the City of New York to save the valuable artifacts, but the city was unwilling to suspend the recycling contract. Ultimately, the researcher appealed directly to the recycling plant, which agreed to provide the researcher, and ultimately the ASCE team and the SEAoNY volunteers, access to the remaining steel and a storage area where they could temporarily store important artifacts for additional analysis. Despite this agreement, however, many pieces of steel still managed to escape inspection.
Difficulty obtaining documents essential to the investigation, including blueprints, design drawings, and maintenance records: The building owners, designers and insurers, prevented independent researchers from gaining access—and delayed the BPAT team in gaining access—to pertinent building documents largely because of liability concerns. The documents are necessary to validate physical and photographic evidence and to develop computer models that can explain why the buildings failed and how similar failures might be avoided in the future.
Interesting isn't it.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

TheBloods

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 14, 2003
Posts
17,894
Likes
94
AFL Club
Sydney
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

Ok, I'll leave you to continue with the personal insults.

I encourage everyone to read this. Thanks to CLUBMEDhurst for posting the link:thumbsu:
Moral high ground doesn't sit well with you. Hypocrisy does though.

The link is only of interest if you already believe everything Griffin says as he regurgitates the same things you will read on dozens of Truther sites.
 

EasternTiger

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Posts
4,717
Likes
4,283
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

Moral high ground doesn't sit well with you. Hypocrisy does though.

The link is only of interest if you already believe everything Griffin says as he regurgitates the same things you will read on dozens of Truther sites.
You mean he regurgitates the facts!

How ghastly.

Important to note none of the 'coincidence' jockeys have commented on my last post.

P.S You still supporting Taibbi, the PlayBoy journalist?? Didn't think you read PlayBoy considering you're um..well..just for the articles?
 

TheBloods

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 14, 2003
Posts
17,894
Likes
94
AFL Club
Sydney
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

You mean he regurgitates the facts!

How ghastly.
So anything on a Truther internet site is now a 'fact'. Despite your constant denials it's pretty obvious where your allegiance lies.
Important to note none of the 'coincidence' jockeys have commented on my last post.
You continue to make a fool of yourself on this point.
P.S You still supporting Taibbi, the PlayBoy journalist?? Didn't think you read PlayBoy considering you're um..well..just for the articles?
And this one.
 

EasternTiger

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Posts
4,717
Likes
4,283
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

Ladies first.

I'd hate for everyone to think you're running away from a fight.

That wouldn't be your style would it Bloods, running away like a girl.

Hmm??
 

TheBloods

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 14, 2003
Posts
17,894
Likes
94
AFL Club
Sydney
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

Ladies first.

I'd hate for everyone to think you're running away from a fight.

That wouldn't be your style would it Bloods, running away like a girl.

Hmm??
That would be the only possible explanation for anyone taking TheBloods posts seriously.

Never mind.
LOL. Here we see the mind of a debunker at work. ...
Apart from the fact Bloods will have to now buy his romance novels from another book chain, or heaven forbid on the evil interweb...
No offence, but you're making about as much sense as Daytripper.
Ok, I'll leave you to continue with the personal insults.
Nice work at avoiding questions (now which comes first, 2011 or 1870...?).
Now what was that about hypocrisy and bounds...?
Ah, yes...
:rolleyes: Does your hypocrisy know no bounds.

Any realistic chance of a show of intelligence from you, or should we let the local mods know you are just derailing the thread consistently at this point?

There's a few posters here engaging in debate. You are merely derailing the thread without adding anything of substance. I would appreciate it if you let them continue
rather than pouting and throwing your toys out of the cot. Show some maturity or else leave the thread.
Interesting...
 

TheBloods

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 14, 2003
Posts
17,894
Likes
94
AFL Club
Sydney
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

I ask for comment on an official report.

The Bloods asks for comment on a piece of satire.

Bloods continues to deflect.

Interesting isn't it;)
The deflection would be to avoid the questions underpinning the assumptions of the conspiracy theorists asked hundreds of posts ago as the most recent example and plenty of times before that, pretending the questions aren't relevant because the article is satire and you don't like the author.

Par for the course though.
 

EasternTiger

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Posts
4,717
Likes
4,283
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

The deflection would be to avoid the questions underpinning the assumptions of the conspiracy theorists asked hundreds of posts ago as the most recent example and plenty of times before that, pretending the questions aren't relevant because the article is satire and you don't like the author.

Par for the course though.
And what is your reason for avoiding the questions asked of the very same report you defend to the death?

Bloods!

Are you there?

Bloods?

Post 2011 if you don't mind.

ODN would be disgusted with you. An intelligent and lucid response please, if that isn't too much to ask
 

TheBloods

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 14, 2003
Posts
17,894
Likes
94
AFL Club
Sydney
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

And what is your reason for avoiding the questions asked of the very same report you defend to the death?

Bloods!

Are you there?

Bloods?

Post 2011 if you don't mind.

ODN would be disgusted with you. An intelligent and lucid response please, if that isn't too much to ask
You've not asked for a comment on an official report.

You've asked for comments on what selected pieces you've chosen to cut and past from an official report.

You've provided no comment on those pieces yourself.
There are no questions to answer.

As for "very same report you defend to the death" - this is just more of your delusion and lies because I have done nothing of the sort, not even close.

And you continue to avoid the pertinent questions already asked of you.

You continue to be tedious and puerile.
 

EasternTiger

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Posts
4,717
Likes
4,283
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Re: Proof 911 was an Inside Job?

You've not asked for a comment on an official report.

You've asked for comments on what selected pieces you've chosen to cut and past from an official report.

You've provided no comment on those pieces yourself.
There are no questions to answer.

As for "very same report you defend to the death" - this is just more of your delusion and lies because I have done nothing of the sort, not even close.

And you continue to avoid the pertinent questions already asked of you.

You continue to be tedious and puerile.
You no longer have a crime scene do you. Poof!! Gone! Recycled before anyone could even get to it!

Your 9/11 Commission report not only swept away the evidence, but failed to even investigate WTC7.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom