Give me your 9/11 conspiracy theories! And/or their debunking

[GIGObuster]

@ivan_astikov

Does anyone really find it surprising that firemen “predicted” Tower 7 was going to collapse, after what they had already witnessed that day?

No.

debunking911.com - contact with domain owner | Epik.com

"They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it.

You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone.

We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about.

They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there - this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn’t really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down." - Richard Banaciski

If you had bothered to read the 9/11 debunking cite already mentioned and available for anyone to read and with cites, we could save a lot of time.

[XT]

@Try2B Comprehensive

But I need the details: Al Quaeda-> Afghanistan. There are ‘training camps’? What are the facts-of-the-matter of the relationship?

I’m sorry, but this is getting ridiculous at this point. You don’t know that AQ had training bases in Afghanistan prior to 9/11? You never heard about the US bombing said camps and killing or capturing AQ para-military types after 9/11? This is incredibly basic stuff that you SHOULD know by now. Really, it’s stuff you should know before joining in such a discussion.

Just for drill, start here…it’s a Wiki article on AQ that talks about their history, their relationship with Afghanistan and why they were there and why the Taliban allowed them to set up training camps and bases of operation within their borders. After that I would suggest trying this new site called ‘Google’ (www.google.com) and doing some basic research.

Refuge in Afghanistan
Main article: Taliban

After the Soviet withdrawal, Afghanistan was effectively ungoverned for seven years and plagued by constant infighting between former allies and various mujahedeen groups.

Throughout the 1990s, a new force began to emerge. The origins of the Taliban (literally “students”) lay in the children of Afghanistan, many of them orphaned by the war, and many of whom had been educated in the rapidly expanding network of Islamic schools (madrassas) either in Kandahar or in the refugee camps on the Afghan-Pakistani border.

According to Ahmed Rashid, five leaders of the Taliban were graduates of a single madrassa, Darul Uloom Haqqania (also known as “the University of Jihad",)[60] in the small town of Akora Khattak near Peshawar, situated in Pakistan but largely attended by Afghan refugees.[61][unreliable source?][page needed] This institution reflected Salafi beliefs in its teachings, and much of its funding came from private donations from wealthy Arabs, for whom bin Laden provided conduit. A further four leading figures (including the perceived Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar Mujahed) attended a similarly funded and influenced madrassa in Kandahar, Afghanistan.

Many of the mujahedeen who later joined the Taliban fought alongside Afghan warlord Mohammad Nabi Mohammadi’s Harkat i Inqilabi group at the time of the Russian invasion. This group also enjoyed the loyalty of most Afghan Arab fighters.

The continuing internecine strife between various factions, and accompanying lawlessness following the Soviet withdrawal, enabled the growing and well-disciplined Taliban to expand their control over territory in Afghanistan, and they came to establish an enclave which it called the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. In 1994, they captured the regional center of Kandahar, and after making rapid territorial gains thereafter, conquered the capital city Kabul in September 1996.

After Sudan made it clear that bin Laden and his group were no longer welcome that year, Taliban-controlled Afghanistan — with previously established connections between the groups, a similar outlook on world affairs and largely isolated from American political influence and military power — provided a perfect location for al-Qaeda to establish its headquarters. Al-Qaeda enjoyed the Taliban’s protection and a measure of legitimacy as part of their Ministry of Defense, although only Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates recognized the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan.

Al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan and the Pakistani border regions are alleged to have trained militant Muslims from around the world.[62][63] Despite the perception of some people, al-Qaeda members are ethnically diverse and connected by their radical version of Islam.

An ever-expanding network of supporters thus enjoyed a safe haven in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan until the Taliban were defeated by a combination of local forces and CIA Special Activities Division Paramilitary Officers, US Army Special Forces and air power in 2001 (see section September 11, attacks and the United States response). Osama bin Laden and other al-Qaeda leaders are still believed to be located in areas where the population is sympathetic to the Taliban in Afghanistan or the border Tribal Areas of Pakistan.

-XT

[Cisco]

@GIGObuster

If you had bothered to read the 9/11 debunking cite already mentioned and available for anyone to read and with cites, we could save a lot of time.

If truthers wanted anything to do with the truth, their “movement” (heh) would’ve grown to a couple dozen people max and then died shortly after it began.

[XT]

@Sarahfeena

Am I crazy, or when you watch the twin towers collapse, don’t they each fail at the exact spot where the planes hit them and the fires are raging? Then, as the part above the impact zones crash down, they go past that point and just keeps going straight down? I mean, we’ve all seen it with our own eyes, multiple times. How in any way is does this look the same as controlled demos, where the whole building just gives way all at once? And what would ever make them suddenly topple one way or the other? Doesn’t everything that falls basically go straight down unless there’s some other force in play besides gravity? And wouldn’t that have to be an awfully strong force? I mean, the pleasant summer breeze that day wouldn’t have done it.

No…you aren’t crazy. It’s pretty well documented that the collapse started at the impact sites. Theories that it started in the basement are fantasy and aren’t backed up by either the physics OR the video evidence. Not even most of the Truther types attempt to make this idiotic assertion…most of them point at ‘squibs’ firing (from top to bottom) and taking out the floors in succession.

Of course, this effect comes from the simple fact that when the floors pancake together debris is shot out. Anyone who has ever slapped their hands together rapidly with talcum powder on them can at least grasp the concept. It is unfortunate that most of the Truther types seem incapable of this rather basic understanding.

@RogueAOV

Terrorists seized control of 4 planes.
Three did what they were suppose to do.
One was shot down due to the fighter pilot not knowing they were retaking the plane.
I do think they was bombs in the twin towers, in the basements on the main structural supports which would cause the tower to fall.

Now logically, assuming the powers that be had a rough idea of what was going to happen, And i do not think there is any real argument that there were no warnings previously, it would make sense to ensure the towers fell. Firstly the shock value and the dramatic images help sell the story and distort evidence. Secondly the damage to the buildings would have made them almost impossible to bring down later by a controlled demolition without the possiblity of damaging near by buildings… so you might as well get the advantage of doing it at the same time. Thirdly it would have looked bad if America had to bring down the towers itself after the fact,it would have affected the American mentality of rebuilding, if it took months to ready the building to come down etc.

It’s like playing Whack-A-Mole. I’d ask ‘where is the evidence’, but what would be the point? You haven’t got any, after all.

Just for drill (because I know that Truthers are not going to read any cites I give), here is a pretty good and detailed description of flight 93 and what happened.

As for the assertion about the bombs in the basement…well, the less said about that the better.

-XT

[ivan_astikov]

@Mr.Miskatonic

He produces a few papers countering the lies and somehow he’s obsessed? There’s a logic disconnect in your reasoning somewhere. This is a big fat tu quoque argument by someone desperate to cling to his delusion. Spare us.

Not really. He’s made an average 5 posts a day on the JREF forum for the last 3 years. And he doesn’t do one-line drive-bys. He may have got into the game much later, but he’s just as obsessed as that other self-professed 9/11 expert, Mark “Gravy-train” Roberts.

@Mr.Miskatonic

Do you know he’s producing a book? Please support this claim.

No, I don’t, but I bet he’d like to.

[Bryan_Ekers]

@ivan_astikov

Not really. He’s made an average 5 posts a day on the JREF forum for the last 3 years.

All of them on this specific topic?

[Cisco]

@ivan_astikov

Not really. He’s made an average 5 posts a day on the JREF forum for the last 3 years. And he doesn’t do one-line drive-bys. He may have got into the game much later, but he’s just as obsessed as that other self-professed 9/11 expert, Mark “Gravy-train” Roberts.

:rolleyes: Dude, you’re averaging almost 11 posts per day here. Are you twice as obsessed with the SDMB as Mackey is with refuting junk science and specious claims?

[ivan_astikov]

@Bryan_Ekers

All of them on this specific topic?

15 of the 28 threads he has started are on this subject, so you could guess that at least half were.

@Cisco

:rolleyes: Dude, you’re averaging almost 11 posts per day here. Are you twice as obsessed with the SDMB as Mackey is with refuting junk science and specious claims?

Not even close. I just have a lot of time on my hands(and spent on my ass), and varied interests. Which is more than seemingly can be said about R.Mackey.

[Cisco]

@ivan_astikov

15 of the 28 threads he has started are on this subject, so you could guess that at least half were.

Not even close. I just have a lot of time on my hands(and spent on my ass), and varied interests. Which is more than seemingly can be said about R.Mackey.

So, basically, you’re saying he posts about 1/4th as much on 9/11 as you post here, but he’s definitely obsessed and you just have a lot of time on your hands and varied interests. :rolleyes:. Your “ability” to spin things the way you want them never ceases to amaze me.

[Bryan_Ekers]

Ivan, is this your refuation of R. Mackey? Seriously? I don’t even know who R. Mackey is, but at least the sum total of his writings I’ve seen (that is, zero) contain fewer absurdities than I’ve seen in yours just today, so at the moment, my sympathies are with him.

Or her. Whatever.

[ivan_astikov]

Missed the edit window:

After a quick check I found there was 480 posts in his 15 conspiracy threads and 24 in the 13 non-conspiracy ones…make your own mind up.

[ivan_astikov]

@Cisco

So, basically, you’re saying he posts about 1/4th as much on 9/11 as you post here, but he’s definitely obsessed and you just have a lot of time on your hands and varied interests. :rolleyes:. Your “ability” to spin things the way you want them never ceases to amaze me.

No more so than your ability to misinterpretate my posts ceases to amaze me. At least DRG has got the excuse that he’s making money pursuing his interests…Mackey is doing this for a fucking hobby!

[Cisco]

DRG is profitting off of idiots who are willing to pay to be lied to.

[ivan_astikov]

A read through this thread does seem to suggest that anyone could have worn an FDNY jacket and been allowed onto Ground Zero, and what’s that business about the firefighters refusing to let the FEMA workers on site? How long were the firefighters insisting on being the only ones at the rescue scene? I’d be really surprised to find out they’d be allowed to get away with this, despite their obvious grief, so can someone confirm or deny this allegation?

[ivan_astikov]

@Cisco

DRG is profitting off of idiots who are willing to pay to be lied to.

Have you read all the responses from those who have reviewed the book? It’s interesting that the short dismissals come from those who have briefly skimmed or not even read the book, because of the obvious bollocks in his other books they hadn’t read. Are you willing to declare that everyone who has praised that book and the author, are merely idiots?

[GIGObuster]

@ivan_astikov

A read through this thread does seem to suggest that anyone could have worn an FDNY jacket and been allowed onto Ground Zero, and what’s that business about the firefighters refusing to let the FEMA workers on site? How long were the firefighters insisting on being the only ones at the rescue scene? I’d be really surprised to find out they’d be allowed to get away with this, despite their obvious grief, so can someone confirm or deny this allegation?

The thread only deals for a few posts on a **second hand accusation **regarding the Firefighters not letting others in, mostly the thread was hijacked.

A useless cite.

[GIGObuster]

@ivan_astikov

Have you read all the responses from those who have reviewed the book? It’s interesting that the short dismissals come from those who have briefly skimmed or not even read the book, because of the obvious bollocks in his other books they hadn’t read. Are you willing to declare that everyone who has praised that book and the author, are merely idiots?

Last time I requested that you post just one of the items the writer claimed were important. By checking a few of his points one can indeed make an educated judgment of the worthiness of the book.

As you refused to mention any specifics on a previous occasion I have to conclude that you either do not have the book or you have an interest on leading others into purchasing it

[ivan_astikov]

Hold on a second! DRG was a theologian, involved with writing 30 books?

I take back everything I’ve said - he must be full of shit.

[ivan_astikov]

@GIGObuster

The thread only deals for a few posts on a **second hand accusation **regarding the Firefighters not letting others in, mostly the thread was hijacked.

A useless cite.

So you don’t think there were any interesting questions raised about who might have had access onto the site? And how expert are firefighters on what the remnants of an explosive device might look like amongst tons of rubble?

Who were the ‘explosives experts’ on site sifting through the rubble for signs of sabotage? If firefighters were doing all the heavy shifting and sifting with no expert oversight, is it entirely impossible that some of those ‘firemen’ on site were not who they seemed?

[tomndebb]

@Sarahfeena

Am I crazy, or when you watch the twin towers collapse, don’t they each fail at the exact spot where the planes hit them and the fires are raging? Then, as the part above the impact zones crash down, they go past that point and just keeps going straight down? I mean, we’ve all seen it with our own eyes, multiple times. How in any way is does this look the same as controlled demos, where the whole building just gives way all at once? And what would ever make them suddenly topple one way or the other? Doesn’t everything that falls basically go straight down unless there’s some other force in play besides gravity? And wouldn’t that have to be an awfully strong force? I mean, the pleasant summer breeze that day wouldn’t have done it.

Also, how much can we figure those top 20-30 floors weigh, and what would happen if we removed 10 floors from the buildings and then dropped that much weight on it, even without the fires? From what I understand about the way they were designed, they lost most of their upright integrity when they lost those floors, because the floors kept the corner supports square to each other. When the weight came down, the building twisted slightly and that was that.

This is ridiculous!
Here we have a perfectly nice CT thread going and you want to calmly post facts and draw logical conclusions with no histrionics or wild accusations. You’re going to ruin the thread!
Yeeesh!