Learn the truth about 9/11!

[socal swimmer]

it seems to me like both sides are saying that have credible, rock-solid, unassailable proof that the other is wrong.

 

My friend once told me a story about a guy that devoted 20 years of his life to proving conspiracy theorists wrong. After trying for 20 years, he realized it was impossible, and that he had just wasted his entire life.

 

Also, anyone can start up a website that i have never heard of, call it credible, and show me "expert" testimonies from people that I, again, have never heard of. bottom line? there is no proof whatsoever (from my, and many other people's, point of view) that anything loose change says is true. sure, it sounds good, but that means nothing. I could make up a line of reasoning about how it is possible to triple your CPU's speed and triple your RAM at the same time, but I would be completely wrong. But would someone who didn't know computers know that? of course not. because it sounded good. So, just because it sounds good doesn't make it true. I'm sure loose change sounds good (I have better things to do with 90 minutes, like sleep, than watch it) but that doesn't make it any more true, or any more reliable.

 

I am going to side with the brainwashed masses on this one, and say that the official story is the correct one (aside from trivial inconsistencies).

 

If they could get expert testimonies from accredited university professors to support the claims of loose change, then I would listen. Not to loose change, but to the professors. but will that ever happen? i highly doubt it.

[Cdnalsi]

That's just awful

 

Yes I've watched Loose Change, and yes I know the official story. And no, I'm not american, so my head is unbiased.

It's common sense. There's too many things being covered.

[Alessandro17]

If they could get expert testimonies from accredited university professors to support the claims of loose change, then I would listen. Not to loose change, but to the professors. but will that ever happen? i highly doubt it.

 

Did you care to read post #198 at all?

[Paranoid Marvin]

Umm... back to 9/11.

 

I am sorry that this topic goes beyond the intellectual capacity of some people here, but for the rest of us this a very serious problem that everyone needs to be informed of. Apparently, you need to have a degree in engineering to understand the truth of 9/11. For those who do (or who have a clue about physics), Richard Gage's talk "How the Towers Fell" proves beyond any doubt that controlled demolitions were used to bring down all three World Trade Center buildings: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3118021782753292874

 

Richard Gage is an expert architect and there are now 196 architects and engineers which have signed there names to his petition for 9/11 truth here: http://www.ae911truth.org/

 

Now at least 7 CIA veterans are publicly calling the offical account of 9/11 into serious question: http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_al..._veterans_c.htm

 

Over 110 Senior Military and Government Officials question 9/11 here: http://patriotsquestion911.com/

 

Well done Bofors, you have succeeded in calling everyone that disagrees with you stupid.

 

I'm not saying that I have degrees in Physics and Engineering, but I don't need them. Merely an unbiased look and plain old common sense, which you have shown a lack of...

 

 

196 Architects and Engineers isn't a lot, by the way - it's more like a tiny minority (most of them probably just crazy conspiracy theorists), same with the 110 "Senior Military and Government Officials"

 

Oh, and a note for the future, Bofors, perhaps you should use a few unbiased, real sources for once

[apowerr]

Hmm, perhaps I'm starting to see the light (i.e. non conspiracy). It does make sense that the aircraft would cut straight through the core pylons and weaken the building, as demonstrated here:

[Alessandro17]

Hmm, perhaps I'm starting to see the light (i.e. non conspiracy). It does make sense that the aircraft would cut straight through the core pylons and weaken the building, as demonstrated here:

 

I don't believe that that single factor could solve all the issues which have been discussed here.

[bxsci(macuser)]

well anyone that doesnt agree with bofors is obviously stupid - because bofors is god and therefor everything he says is right and anyone who disagrees with him is part of the brainwashed mass

 

 

DUH

[Alessandro17]

well anyone that doesnt agree with bofors is obviously stupid - because bofors is god and therefor everything he says is right and anyone who disagrees with him is part of the brainwashed mass

DUH

 

Nobody says he is a god. But he is extremely intelligent, well educated and informed, and he is not a teen (teens tend to conform to the Establishment).

Besides his arguments are always very well laid out, as he proved countless times when he was mainly interested in hardware.

[ahduke99]

hehe. this is very amusing. we have an anarchist telling us we are brainwashed when we believe that 9/11 was actually done by the guys that claimed responsibility for it. shocking! the funny thing about this whole debate is that the conspiracy theorists show all these half assed sources (loose change is NOT a legitimate source), while the non-conspiracy theorists present calm arguments backed up with reputable sources. if you look at the loose change editors debate with popular science scientists, where they make a mockery of the loose change boys, they basically act the same way: immature, whiny, and defiant, despite facts that disprove their arguments. they just jump to the "brainwashed" argument or "the scientists are tools of the Bush administration."

 

the funniest part of this is that the same people that say that the bush administration is the most incompitent group of people ever to hold office also believe that they could pull off something like this and fool the entire world.

 

i love liberals. when you sit back and read what they say, it's a wonder they are still a force to be reckoned with.

[Alessandro17]

the funniest part of this is that the same people that say that the bush administration is the most incompitent group of people ever to hold office also believe that they could pull off something like this and fool the entire world.

 

Did they? I am not American and, since I began to take a serious look into the matter, I didn't believe the official version.

If we could have a reliable poll of how many non Americans believe the official version, I believe it would be a minority.

Ask educated French or Germans, for instance.

[socal swimmer]

Umm... back to 9/11.

 

I am sorry that this topic goes beyond the intellectual capacity of some people here, but for the rest of us this a very serious problem that everyone needs to be informed of. Apparently, you need to have a degree in engineering to understand the truth of 9/11. For those who do (or who have a clue about physics), Richard Gage's talk "How the Towers Fell" proves beyond any doubt that controlled demolitions were used to bring down all three World Trade Center buildings: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3118021782753292874

 

Richard Gage is an expert architect and there are now 196 architects and engineers which have signed there names to his petition for 9/11 truth here: http://www.ae911truth.org/

 

Now at least 7 CIA veterans are publicly calling the offical account of 9/11 into serious question: http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_al..._veterans_c.htm

 

Over 110 Senior Military and Government Officials question 9/11 here: http://patriotsquestion911.com/

 

 

 

like Marvin said, these 196 people are a small minority. also, we have no proof that any of these people are reasonable (or sane for that matter, though insanity is unlikely). With such a huge population of architects and engineers, it is a given that a small percentage will have a differing opinion. moreover, most of the people listed had bachelor's degrees. a small handful had master's. How hard do you think it is to go out and find 196 college graduates in the United States that have weird, unreasonable ideas? I'm betting its pretty easy. now im not saying that this conspiracy is weird or unreasonable (I think it is, but that is for the experts to decide).

 

I was watching law&order, and i heard a good quote on there: "it is better to have one great witness than 20 mediocre ones". It would be a much stronger argument if there were impeachable people, meaning professors from renowned schools, on that list, but from my quick glance, there were none. if i am wrong, please correct me.

 

Also, that site is no where near unbiased. In fact, the url itself shows that it is out to prove a point. One of the first things to do when searching for information on a topic is make sure your sources are impartial 3rd party sources. This is not. This bias makes the information on there uncredible.

 

Finally, i wonder why there is no alternate list. Why is there no list for professionals to publicly state their agreement with the official version? Is it because such a list would be many times bigger, and the size of such a list would disprove their point? we wouldn't want any alternative viewpoints now would we....

 

the same ideas hold true for the other sources. How many CIA veterans would go on record to agree with the official version? How many senior military and governmental officials? How many already have?

 

I will stop short of calling everyone on those lists crazy conspiracy theorists, but only because I have no evidence to back that up....

 

On the other hand, I can provide two very good sources, from a 3rd party source:

"Thomas Eager, a professor of materials science at MIT, has studied the collapse of the twin towers. "At first, I thought it was amazing that the buildings would come down in their own footprints," Eager says. "Then I realized that it wasn't that amazing — it's the only way a building that weighs a million tons and is 95 percent air can come down." But the chatter out there is loud enough for the National Institute of Standards and Technology to post a Web "fact sheet" poking holes in the conspiracy theories and defending its report on the towers."

 

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nati...conspire09.html

 

I would say an MIT professor of materials science and the National Institute of Standard and Technology are pretty good sources.

but wait, I'm a teen so that is the only reason I am agreeing with the establishment.

[gwprod12]

Obviously someone in the Government Got To Him.

 

I can see the conversation now. "Hey... I understand you're disputing the official story... talk like that could make it a lot harder to receive grants in the future. You wouldn't want people to think you're a krank, now would you? Just a friendly piece of advice."

 

 

But seriously. It's good to be skeptical of everything. Maybe it is a massive conspiracy. Maybe it happened the way most experts claim it did. Who knows? What difference does it make? None.

 

Maybe also there really is a nigerian prince with vast and enormous quantities of money that really wants to give it to you, and there is a vast government conspiracy to prevent this from happening.

 

Exercise ur noodle.

 

As an aside. To all the folks who say it must have been in accordance with the official version because someone in authority says it is so... show me one piece of unequivocal evidence that proves it is so. I've never seen one.

[Superhai]

Another view of the coin from britain:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7057601.stm

[Alessandro17]

Another view of the coin from britain:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7057601.stm

 

"They're a very naive people, or they pretend to be," she added of Americans.

 

Lessing, whose novels include The Golden Notebook and Memoirs of a Survivor, also branded President George W Bush "a world calamity".

 

"Everyone is tired of this man. Either he is stupid or he is very clever, although you have to remember he is a member of a social class which has profited from wars."

 

This made my day. I am very glad that an English Nobel Prize winner has ideas similar to mine.

[Cdnalsi]

That pretty much sums it all up!

[PSPHax0r9]

and he is not a teen (teens tend to conform to the Establishment).

Wait...what?! Are you seriously, like, in touch with reality? Teens are the single most rebellious age group. I mean JESUS CHRIST do you just spew {censored} all over the place all the time? I'm sorry but how in the world did you ever come to the conclusion that the most rebellious age group conforms to "the Establishment?" It's those facts again. You guys and your great facts from credible sources.

[socal swimmer]

Wait...what?! Are you seriously, like, in touch with reality? Teens are the single most rebellious age group. I mean JESUS CHRIST do you just spew {censored} all over the place all the time? I'm sorry but how in the world did you ever come to the conclusion that the most rebellious age group conforms to "the Establishment?" It's those facts again. You guys and your great facts from credible sources.

dude what are you talking about? we all know the grandmas are the crazy anti-establishment anarchists.

 

It is good to question everything (and fun too i might add). But it is going to far to say that everyone who agrees with the official story is either stupid and naive, or someone got to them. It seemed to me like a few posts were saying that.

 

and just because it is good to question everything doesn't mean that it is good to believe the minority no matter what.

 

*The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking.

-A. A. Milne

 

I am sure that there are many out there who are in the third-rate category. and I am also sure that many who agree with loose change are in the second-rate category. I strive to be in the first-rate category, and in this case, I think the evidence is stronger for the official version, hence my views.

 

My english teacher once told me "Its ok to have your own opinion, as long as you can prove it." I think its safe to say that everyone here has proven (or at least substantiated) their opinion, so its all good.

[gwprod12]

I absolutely agree with most of what you've said.

 

It's not right because the majority says it is.

 

And it's not right simply because the majority (sheep) disagrees.

 

Although. It always rankles me when people automatically dismiss something because it doesn't jive with their sensibilities.

[Alessandro17]

Wait...what?! Are you seriously, like, in touch with reality? Teens are the single most rebellious age group. I mean JESUS CHRIST do you just spew {censored} all over the place all the time? I'm sorry but how in the world did you ever come to the conclusion that the most rebellious age group conforms to "the Establishment?" It's those facts again. You guys and your great facts from credible sources.

I expected this one. Ask any psychologist who is worth an ounce of his/her degree.Teenagers are rebellious in ways which aren't really important: they might dress different, they might like unconventional music, they might even use drugs, but when it comes to the fundamental values of Society they hardly ever challenge them. They'll start doing that in their twenties.

As to my "credible sources", as a counsellor with decades of experience I should be better qualified than you about this subject, regardless of who you are (unless your name is Carl Rogers or Roberto Assagioli-both dead, BTW)

dude what are you talking about? we all know the grandmas are the crazy anti-establishment anarchists.

See above. I'll tell you more. Sometimes well educated grandmas can be quite unconventional. See Nobel Prize-winning author Doris Lessing:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7057601.stm

 

 

Lessing says 9/11 'not that bad'

 

Doris Lessing has been nominated for the Booker Prize three times

Nobel Prize-winning author Doris Lessing has said that the 11 September attacks were "not that terrible" compared to the IRA's terror campaign.

 

"Some Americans will think I'm crazy... but it was neither as terrible or as extraordinary as they think," the writer told Spanish newspaper El Pais.

 

The 88-year-old added that "people forget" the IRA bomb attack on Margaret Thatcher's government in 1984.

 

Lessing won the Nobel prize, worth £763,000, honouring her 57-year career.

 

Five people died and 34 were injured when an IRA bomb exploded in a Brighton hotel where leading members of the Conservative party - including Mrs Thatcher - were staying for its annual conference.

 

'World calamity'

 

The author conceded that "many people died and two prominent buildings fell" in the attacks on New York's World Trade Center in 2001.

 

"They're a very naive people, or they pretend to be," she added of Americans.

 

Lessing, whose novels include The Golden Notebook and Memoirs of a Survivor, also branded President George W Bush "a world calamity".

 

"Everyone is tired of this man. Either he is stupid or he is very clever, although you have to remember he is a member of a social class which has profited from wars."

 

The writer also said that she "always hated Tony Blair from the beginning".

 

Lessing was awarded the Nobel Prize for her "fire and visionary power", and is due to collect her award at a ceremony in Stockholm on 10 December.

 

More about Doris Lessing:

 

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

[Paranoid Marvin]

<3 Doris Lessing

[Alessandro17]

 

Sorry, I don't get that one.

[socal swimmer]

...

As to my "credible sources", as a counsellor with decades of experience I should be better qualified than you about this subject, regardless of who you are (unless your name is Carl Rogers or Roberto Assagioli-both dead, BTW)...

 

lol ok I'll back down on that one. I never really thought about it that way, but you are right. It does seem to me like most teens are just regurgitating their parents views (with maybe some of their own twists) on stuff.

 

I would like to think that I don't do this. Still, it would be nice if you didn't dismiss everything said by teens outright, especially if what they (we) say is supported by strong evidence. If I said "loose change is a bunch of bs because the government would never in a million years do something like that", then you could say "well you are just a naive teen". But if I bring up evidence and good arguments, i don't think its right to do that.

[Alessandro17]

Still, it would be nice if you didn't dismiss everything said by teens outright, especially if what they (we) say is supported by strong evidence. If I said "loose change is a bunch of bs because the government would never in a million years do something like that", then you could say "well you are just a naive teen". But if I bring up evidence and good arguments, i don't think its right to do that.

 

I don't mean it like that at all, I respect teenagers, I have worked with many. But it is simply the way they are, they are too busy asserting their own identity. Challenging the Establishment is something which (normally) comes (a bit) later in life, starting from about 20. Of course there could be the odd one out who starts at 18 or 19. Also, if you belong to an oppressed minority, it is possible that you become aware a bit earlier.

[bofors]

NIST admitts that it is "unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse" of the WTC Twin Towers after a 20 million dollar, three year study of the case (because it refuses to consider controlled demolition):

 

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/octob...nist_admits.htm

http://www.nationalexpositor.com/News/508.html

http://www.911proof.com/NIST.pdf

 

James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the NIST Fire Science Division calls for an independent review of the NIST World Trade Center study: http://www.ae911truth.org/info/12

[socal swimmer]

NIST admits that it is "unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse" of the WTC Twin Towers after a 20 million dollar, three year study of the case (because it refuses to consider controlled demolition):

 

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/octob...nist_admits.htm

http://www.nationalexpositor.com/News/508.html

http://www.911proof.com/NIST.pdf

 

James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the NIST Fire Science Division calls for an independent review of the NIST World Trade Center study: http://www.ae911truth.org/info/12

regarding prisonplanet:

 

somehow, the sentence "We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse" (from NIST) "Implicitly acknowledges [that] controlled demolition [is] only means by which towers could have fallen at free fall speed ".

 

Now maybe I am slow, but it doesn't seem to me that it is acknowledging anything of that sort. It is saying that there were other, unknown factors involved, not that controlled demolition is the ONLY MEANS that it could have happened.

 

A 10,000 page scientific study only offers theories as to how the "collapse initiation" proceeded and fails to address how it was possible for part of a WTC structure to fall through the path of most resistance at free fall speed

actually, the towers did not fall at free fall (this is physically impossible in the atmosphere). free fall = 8 seconds, it took 10. The towers were also 95% air.

 

My point is not to start an argument over the scientific merits of each side, only to show that prison planet exagerates and draws flawed conclusions from insufficient data.

 

You have shown that the official (NIST) story is not completely satisfactory. Does this mean that the only other possibility is a controlled demolition orchestrated by key members of the United States government? doesn't seem that way to me.

 

 

 

btw,

This site does a good job of answering a lot of the questions brought up. Also, it was published in a scholary journal.