9/11 Truth for Dummies: Wrap Your Head Around One Thing

Trogdor the Burninator · Aug 26, 2013

If we’re going to run another 9/11 conspiracy thread, can we get these questions answered this time?

If the WTC was a controlled demolition, how did the conspirators get all the explosives, wiring and control gear into a building used 24x7, sight unseen?
Why use a controlled demolition at all when a large explosion would have a similar effect propaganda-wise?
If the WTC was a controlled demolition, why the need for hijackers to fly the planes into the building at all?
If there were no hijackers (a common assertion), who flew the planes? (This goes for the Pentagon as well)
How did the airliner debris get onto the Pentagon lawn if there was no plane? And where did the passengers, plane and crew from the “real” flight go?
If the hijacker from the Pentagon flight "couldn't fly a large jet", then who flew it, and why were they happy to die?
If the passengers from flight 93 did not make any phone calls and instead they were faked, where did the "real" plane, crew and passengers go?

EnemyOfReason · Aug 26, 2013

keith99 said:
Where did vacuum come into this? Is it from the idiotic presentation in the OP?

Or is it some other idiot trying to explain why the building as a whole fell as fast as some smaller pieces with nothing under them?

I really wish this was the cycling site I frequent, there a sizable percentage of people know that here on Earth larger objects do descend significantly faster. AS in 240 lb me vrs 160 lb riders. Enough that they are working for speed when I'm chickening out and squeezing the brakes.

I am indeed referencing the OP. To be honest I am trying to build a hypothetical situation for the occurrence of the OP's "observations" . But the minute rationality kicks in it makes my head hurt.

The fact still stand that there is no way to conclude that a vacuum was created during the occurrence to make the structure collapse as even if this was the case, nothing could burn and only gravity would take effect (which it always does).

It is a serious irrelevancy to be honest. Just like over or under hand toilet paper the key factor is that regardless you can still use it!

sword_of_truth · Aug 26, 2013

I'm really looking forward to a good debate. However, sadly I find that more people just want to naysay everything without any effort on their own to disprove statements, provide their own sources to confirm their point, or defend their own stance.[/quote]

Unfortunately, you are casting your pearls to swine.

Btodd · Aug 26, 2013

Trogdor the Burninator said:
If were going to run another 9/11 conspiracy thread, can we get these questions answered this time?

If the WTC was a controlled demolition, how did the conspirators get all the explosives, wiring and control gear into a building used 24x7, sight unseen?

Why use a controlled demolition at all when a large explosion would have a similar effect propaganda-wise?

If the WTC was a controlled demolition, why the need for hijackers to fly the planes into the building at all?

If there were no hijackers (a common assertion), who flew the planes? (This goes for the Pentagon as well)

How did the airliner debris get onto the Pentagon lawn if there was no plane? And where did the passengers, plane and crew from the real flight go?

If the hijacker from the Pentagon flight "couldn't fly a large jet", then who flew it, and why were they happy to die?

If the passengers from flight 93 did not make any phone calls and instead they were faked, where did the "real" plane, crew and passengers go?

Haven't you learned the rules yet? Only Truthers get to ask the questions!

Btodd

Oafman · Aug 27, 2013

The beauty of the plan was its simplicity. All they needed to do was:

1) Find some pilots prepared to commit suicide and mass murder; this would have been easy, pilots are known to often be suicidally unhinged

2) Find some demolition teams prepared to commit mass murder; easy, skilled demolition teams are reknowned to be heartless mercenaries for hire

3) Get everyone to swear to a lifetime of secrecy. Couldn't be simpler. We're only talking about pilots/copilots, actors to 'pretend' to be terrorists, Air Force commanders who arranged an exercise to ensure a slow response, the demolition teams who set the explosives, the security people who gave them access to well-secured buildings to set the explosives, the city officials in on the plan, various top brass military and intelligence personnel. That's what, only a few hundred people? With that kind of number, there is certainly no way that any of them would succumb to their guilty consciences and go public, even on their death beds. No chance whatsoever of that happening. The plan was totally foolproof.

bhsmte · Aug 27, 2013

Oafman said:
The beauty of the plan was its simplicity. All they needed to do was:

1) Find some pilots prepared to commit suicide and mass murder; this would have been easy, pilots are known to often be suicidally unhinged

2) Find some demolition teams prepared to commit mass murder; easy, skilled demolition teams are reknowned to be heartless mercenaries for hire

3) Get everyone to swear to a lifetime of secrecy. Couldn't be simpler. We're only talking about pilots/copilots, actors to 'pretend' to be terrorists, Air Force commanders who arranged an exercise to ensure a slow response, the demolition teams who set the explosives, the security people who gave them access to well-secured buildings to set the explosives, the city officials in on the plan, various top brass military and intelligence personnel. That's what, only a few hundred people? With that kind of number, there is certainly no way that any of them would succumb to their guilty consciences and go public, even on their death beds. No chance whatsoever of that happening. The plan was totally foolproof.

As the old saying goes:

Three people can keep a secret, as long as two of them are dead!

cow451 · Aug 27, 2013

Oafman said:
The beauty of the plan was its simplicity. All they needed to do was:

1) Find some pilots prepared to commit suicide and mass murder; this would have been easy, pilots are known to often be suicidally unhinged

That's just paranoid nuts. They used Cruise Missiles disguised as airliners. Otherwise they'd have to get rid of a bunch of passengers and deal with their disgruntled survivors.

2) Find some demolition teams prepared to commit mass murder; easy, skilled demolition teams are reknowned to be heartless mercenaries for hire

That is so preposterous. I cannot believe you still buy that worn-out fiction. They used trained rats and loaded them with backpacks with nanothermite and timers. Sheesh.

3) Get everyone to swear to a lifetime of secrecy. Couldn't be simpler. We're only talking about pilots/copilots, actors to 'pretend' to be terrorists, Air Force commanders who arranged an exercise to ensure a slow response, the demolition teams who set the explosives, the security people who gave them access to well-secured buildings to set the explosives, the city officials in on the plan, various top brass military and intelligence personnel. That's what, only a few hundred people? With that kind of number, there is certainly no way that any of them would succumb to their guilty consciences and go public, even on their death beds. No chance whatsoever of that happening. The plan was totally foolproof.

Another simple-minded Truther.

Psalm 91 · Aug 27, 2013

Btodd said:
First of all, I agree that 9/11 Truth is for dummies.

Aside from that, this is the same attempt at a false argument that you've copied-and-pasted before. The 'official story' does not state that the rate of collapse accelerated, so that is a strawman argument.

Another strawman: The towers fell at the same speed that they would have in thin air. FALSE. But keep repeating it, maybe repetition will make it true.

This is sheer idiocy, and you clearly don't understand even the most basic ideas about physics. Granted, you didn't write the article, but you were once again sucked into the rabbit-hole.

Btodd

Do you have a more logical theory or do you just believe everything you hear on the evening news?

Psalm 91 · Aug 27, 2013

LostMarbels said:
To be completely honest, for me, I do not ask wither or not my government was behind the events of 911. I just ask myself if I would put it beyond their capabilities.

Would my government kill American citizen's in order to justify it's own means?

Would Bush lie?

Could there be some agenda?

I will never be able to say definitely: yes the government did it. However I can not say they are incapable of such an act either. Can you?

My favorite 'conspiracy' clips.

*** WARNING RAW FOOTAGE AND LAUNGAGE***

(NEW 2012 WTC DEMOLITION PROOF) DEBUNK THIS (REMAKE) RARE FOOTAGE AND INTERVIEWS SHOWING NEW PROOF - YouTube

(2013) The Demolition of the WTC Towers - what was used? - YouTube

Just wondering. I don't know what happened on 9/11 and I'm not sure I want to know since 3000 people died that day. But I've always wondered: Would buildings that high fall in their own footprints? I mean, I don't know science. I know water will take the path of least resistance, as will most people, lol. Would a falling building do the same thing? I mean, why fight all those floors of steel and concrete when it could just fall sideways? Like I said, I know nothing scientifically. Please don't laugh. Maybe you've already discussed this but I have to log out and will read more later.

Lethe · Aug 27, 2013

The "logical" theory is that the planes, which were seen by both eyewitnesses and captured on numerous videos, crashed into the towers and burned.

A handful of members collapsed in the heat leading to catastrophic failure.

Simple. Short. Logical.

So yeah, it makes sense that the official story is the real one.

Lethe · Aug 27, 2013

Psalm 91 said:
Just wondering. I don't know what happened on 9/11 and I'm not sure I want to know since 3000 people died that day.

How are you convinced of the legitimacy of the spiritual world based on personal thoughts and feelings, but not convinced that the 9/11 attacks were a terrorist attack despite video footage of planes striking the buildings and despite video footage of the group claiming responsibility?

Btodd · Aug 27, 2013

Psalm 91 said:
Do you have a more logical theory or do you just believe everything you hear on the evening news?

A more logical theory than the controlled demolition hypothesis? Yes. The Twin Towers were hit by Boeing 767s, taking out support columns. The jet fuel they were running on exploded and fueled the fires that ensued, which caused the steel to lose significant strength. Since the structural damage caused by the impact of the planes already caused the floors directly below the impact points to be way more stressed than they were designed for, and since the steel was significantly weakened...structural failure occurred at the impact points. Once the upper floors initially fell, total collapse was inevitable.

This is also why the 2nd tower to be hit actually collapsed FIRST...because the plane hit that building at a significantly lower point, which meant there was more mass (more floors) pushing down on the damaged area.

Btodd

trunks2k · Aug 27, 2013

Psalm 91 said:
Would buildings that high fall in their own footprints?

More or less, yes.

I know water will take the path of least resistance

Not really, water will try to flow straight unless something immovable blocks its path. Shoot a stream of water at some sand, the water will push the sand out of the way. That's kinda what happened as the WTC towers collapsed.

I mean, why fight all those floors of steel and concrete when it could just fall sideways?

Because a building like that is not like a tree. Unless there is a lateral force applied, a collapsing building will fall more or less straight down.

As the upper floors fell onto the floors below, the floors below also collapsed. With no force pushing from the side, they force is going to continue straight down. Granted, there is a little bit of lateral movement due to things like deflection and large unbalanced chunks that managed to hold together fall away some (kinda like a tree), but we would expect it to collapse "straight" down. In the videos you can see one of the tops of one of the towers tip a good degree. That's because the top stayed together as one side started to collapse. It tipped some, then the other side started to collapse as well, and the whole thing goes straight down.

Take a house of cards and pull a card out about 3/4ths of the way up. It's gonna collapse straight down (more or less).

Now, there have been fairly large buildings that have fallen over like trees, but they were constructed differently and the buildings fell over because the earth the foundation was in gave way. It wasn't collapsing in a way the WTC towers did.

Paul01 · Aug 27, 2013

Psalm 91 said:
Just wondering. I don't know what happened on 9/11 and I'm not sure I want to know since 3000 people died that day. But I've always wondered: Would buildings that high fall in their own footprints? I mean, I don't know science. I know water will take the path of least resistance, as will most people, lol. Would a falling building do the same thing? I mean, why fight all those floors of steel and concrete when it could just fall sideways? Like I said, I know nothing scientifically. Please don't laugh. Maybe you've already discussed this but I have to log out and will read more later.

From an engineering standpoint, they could absolutely have fallen vertically.

ManFromUncle · Aug 27, 2013

trunks2k said:
More or less, yes.

Not really, water will try to flow straight unless something immovable blocks its path. Shoot a stream of water at some sand, the water will push the sand out of the way. That's kinda what happened as the WTC towers collapsed.

Because a building like that is not like a tree. Unless there is a lateral force applied, a collapsing building will fall more or less straight down.

As the upper floors fell onto the floors below, the floors below also collapsed. With no force pushing from the side, they force is going to continue straight down. Granted, there is a little bit of lateral movement due to things like deflection and large unbalanced chunks that managed to hold together fall away some (kinda like a tree), but we would expect it to collapse "straight" down. In the videos you can see one of the tops of one of the towers tip a good degree. That's because the top stayed together as one side started to collapse. It tipped some, then the other side started to collapse as well, and the whole thing goes straight down.

Take a house of cards and pull a card out about 3/4ths of the way up. It's gonna collapse straight down (more or less).

Now, there have been fairly large buildings that have fallen over like trees, but they were constructed differently and the buildings fell over because the earth the foundation was in gave way. It wasn't collapsing in a way the WTC towers did.

LOL towers with 95,000 tons of structural steel in the frams are just like a house of cards. That is for the stupiidest people imaginable. These were not houses of cards, these were three of the strongest buildings in the world:

Twin Tower core backbone under construction

Illustration of main support columns

Stop the silliness and let's move on to how it was done, shall we? Basic demolitions.

Thermite charges melt through the substructure like butter, giving that nice touch "bowing" effect on the top floors before the destruction, weaken the mechanical floors and strong points. Then crack the foundation which is what Willie Rodriguez heard, then standard cutter and kicker charges. First cuts the beam the next kicks it out. Exactly what we found. Not rocket science.

linear shaped charges

cutter charge

9/11 - Computer Animation of the WTC Towers - YouTube

how thermite works
[youtube]rdCsbZf1_Ng[/youtube]

similar WTC1 & 2 banana peel demolition
[youtube]jO15CXhsTM4[/youtube]

Explosive Evidence at WTC Cited by Former CDI Employee
Explosive Evidence at WTC Cited by Former CDI Employee | COTO Report

October 1996: Security Firm with Connections to Bush Family Acquires Security Contract for World Trade Center

Marvin Bush. [Source: Eric Draper / White House]A security company called Stratesec acquires an $8.3 million contract to help provide security at the World Trade Center. It is one of numerous contractors hired in the upgrade of security at the WTC following the 1993 bombing. Stratesec, which was formerly called Securacom, is responsible for installing the security-description planthe layout of the electronic security systemat the World Trade Center. It has a completion contract to provide some of the centers security up to the day the buildings fell down, according to Barry McDaniel, its CEO.
Involved with Airport Security...

Directors Include Bush Family Member - Marvin P. Bush, the youngest brother of future President George W. Bush, is a director at Stratesec from 1993 to June 2000, when most of its work on these big projects is done. Wirt D. Walker III, a distant relative of George W. Bush, is chairman of the board at Stratesec from 1992, and its CEO from 1999 until January 2002.

Close up of steel debris

Sept. 23, 2001 Aeriel Photo of World Trade Center, 911 Truth

bhsmte · Aug 27, 2013

ManFromUncle said:
LOL towers with 95,000 tons of structural steel in the frams are just like a house of cards. That is for the stupiidest people imaginable. These were not houses of cards, these were three of the strongest buildings in the world:

Twin Tower core backbone under construction

Illustration of main support columns

Stop the silliness and let's move on to how it was done, shall we? Basic demolitions.

Thermite charges melt through the substructure like butter, giving that nice touch "bowing" effect on the top floors before the destruction, weaken the mechanical floors and strong points. Then crack the foundation which is what Willie Rodriguez heard, then standard cutter and kicker charges. First cuts the beam the next kicks it out. Exactly what we found. Not rocket science.

linear shaped charges

cutter charge

9/11 - Computer Animation of the WTC Towers - YouTube

how thermite works
[youtube]rdCsbZf1_Ng[/youtube]

similar WTC1 & 2 banana peel demolition
[youtube]jO15CXhsTM4[/youtube]

Explosive Evidence at WTC Cited by Former CDI Employee
Explosive Evidence at WTC Cited by Former CDI Employee | COTO Report

Close up of steel debris

Sept. 23, 2001 Aeriel Photo of World Trade Center, 911 Truth

I take it, you don't think Oswald acted alone either, do you?

Lethe · Aug 27, 2013

Gish gallop

cow451 · Aug 27, 2013

There is not a shadow of a doubt that the 9/11 “Truth” was planned simultaneously with 9/11 itself. That is why you have so many conflicting stories, points of view, arguments and discussions, etc. The Trolls were pre-ordained and planned. So were the major websites (e.g., 911Truth.org, Infowars). “It is a known fact that any grouping of five or more will be infiltrated.” - Veronica Chapman, Truther

It's worse than I thought.

Trogdor the Burninator · Aug 27, 2013

ManFromUncle said:
LOL towers with 95,000 tons of structural steel in the frams are just like a house of cards. That is for the stupiidest people imaginable. These were not houses of cards, these were three of the strongest buildings in the world:

<<...stuff about thermite...>>

So....

If the WTC was a controlled demolition, how did the conspirators get all the explosives, wiring and control gear into a building used 24x7, sight unseen?
Why use a controlled demolition at all when a large explosion would have a similar effect propaganda-wise?
If the WTC was a controlled demolition, why the need for hijackers to fly the planes into the building at all?

Paulos23 · Aug 27, 2013

I never understood why the need for a more complicated story when a simple one can explain it. Why over complicate things?

9/11 Truth for Dummies: Wrap Your Head Around One Thing

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Try telling that to these bog brained murphys

Newbie

Standing with Ukraine.

Newbie

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Contributor

Sinner

ManFromUncle

Guest

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Standing with Ukraine.

Senior Veteran

Never tell me the odds!

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency