# WTC Collapse: Need airtight answer please! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 31, 2014, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226 "2014-01-31T19:14:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/221 "2014-02-14T15:43:08Z")
> [@nevadaexile](#): > > I’m aware of how intelligence “works.” Most of it is “magic rock scenarios” where people take credit for things not occurring as proof that they are doing their job. _Please_ tell us where your awareness of how intelligence works comes from. Television? Movies? Lurid paperbacks? CT websites with lots of red type, flashing lights and exclamation points? ---
**Author:** ![nevadaexile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/eb8c5e/32.png) [@nevadaexile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nevadaexile)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/222 "2014-02-14T15:45:47Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > _Please_ tell us where your awareness of how intelligence works comes from. Television? Movies? Lurid paperbacks? CT websites with lots of red type, flashing lights and exclamation points? Ahhh…extensive reading and personal experience. And yours comes from…James Bond and Matt Helm? Or Jason Bourne? ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/223 "2014-02-14T15:48:53Z")
> [@nevadaexile](#): > > “Just as loony?” > Really? > > Sooo…if someone was given hard data about the attack and threw it into the “I’m just going to ignore this file” you believe that they wouldn’t try to CYA when what they blew off actually did occur? > > Seriously, what planet do you live on and is there routine service to get there? People aren’t going to serve themselves up to Congress and the media when it would simply be easier and safer career-wise to throw away a file, have a quiet talk with a few assets and pretend that you aren’t part of the biggest intelligence f\*ckup in American history. > > I’m aware of how intelligence “works.” Most of it is “magic rock scenarios” where people take credit for things not occurring as proof that they are doing their job. If someone was given actionable intelligence and simply discarded it as being highly improbable, that would be a relatively easy thing to coverup as most f\*ckups usually are. > > Loony? > Yeah right… Available evidence indicates that the US Intelligence community knew something was up but not exactly when, where, nor how. Among these reports were mentions of AQ-associated training camps which specialized in how to use boxcutters to facilitate the hijacking of planes. Intelligence which did not get shared with the rest of the community until after the fact. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/224 "2014-02-14T15:52:12Z")
> [@nevadaexile](#): > > Why can’t their be a conspiracy of one? Because, by definition, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/225 "2014-02-14T15:52:26Z")
> [@nevadaexile](#): > > Why can’t their be a conspiracy of one? > Sooo…when individuals do something wrong and then cover it up, that’s not a conspiracy? The definition of conspiracy requires multiple people be involved: [Conspiracy](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conspiracy?s=t) > [@](#): > > 1. the act of conspiring. > > 2. an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot. > > 3. a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government. > > 4. Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act. > > 5. any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result. [Kentucky Revised Statutes: Criminal conspiracy](http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=19704) > [@](#): > > (1) A person having the intention of promoting or facilitating the commission of a crime is guilty of criminal conspiracy when he: > (a) Agrees with one (1) or more persons that at least one (1) of them will engage in conduct constituting that crime or an attempt or solicitation to commit such a crime; or > (b) Agrees to aid one or more persons in the planning or commission of that crime or an attempt or solicitation to commit such a crime. ---
**Author:** ![nevadaexile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/eb8c5e/32.png) [@nevadaexile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nevadaexile)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/226 "2014-02-14T16:04:52Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > The definition of conspiracy requires multiple people be involved: > > [Conspiracy](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conspiracy?s=t) > > [Kentucky Revised Statutes: Criminal conspiracy](http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=19704) Soooo…it’s just a “coverup” when a single person is involved? Anyway…my point was this: Again, I have no doubts that the events of 9/11 occurred as they are claimed to have occurred. The preponderance of evidence indicates that and the most parsimonious explanation is that airplanes were hijacked by a small group of men with the intent to fly into buildings and cause mass death and destruction. And this occurred without the CTers beloved “pre-planted” explosives in the World Trade Center, with a plane actually striking the Pentagon or having the plane in Pennsylvania being shot down by the US military. That was not my original point. What I stated (again) was that if conspiracy theorist were looking to latch onto a “believable” conspiracy, then US intelligence being informed of the events in advance and dismissing them as being disinformation, unlikely or completely improbable seems to be a somewhat more logical conspiracy theory than: 1. The event requiring pre-planted explosives 2. The plane not actually impacting the Pentagon 3. The plane being shot down near Shanksville,PA and the government covering up that event. And that’s what I said earlier before things went off on a tangent. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/227 "2014-02-14T17:22:44Z")
> [@nevadaexile](#): > > Soooo…it’s just a “coverup” when a single person is involved? Right. [QUOTE=nevadaexile] Anyway…my point was this: Again, I have no doubts that the events of 9/11 occurred as they are claimed to have occurred. The preponderance of evidence indicates that and the most parsimonious explanation is that airplanes were hijacked by a small group of men with the intent to fly into buildings and cause mass death and destruction. And this occurred without the CTers beloved “pre-planted” explosives in the World Trade Center, with a plane actually striking the Pentagon or having the plane in Pennsylvania being shot down by the US military. That was not my original point. What I stated (again) was that if conspiracy theorist were looking to latch onto a “believable” conspiracy, then US intelligence being informed of the events in advance and dismissing them as being disinformation, unlikely or completely improbable seems to be a somewhat more logical conspiracy theory than: 1. The event requiring pre-planted explosives 2. The plane not actually impacting the Pentagon 3. The plane being shot down near Shanksville,PA and the government covering up that event. And that’s what I said earlier before things went off on a tangent. [/QUOTE] I agree that the above is more plausible on its face than the typical CTer nonsense, but they aren’t selecting their theories on the basis of believability. Quite the opposite, in fact, at least in some cases: the more outlandish the theory, the fewer people will give it any creedence, and the more smugly superior the CTer gets to feel for being one of a handful that knows the truth, asks the tough questions, and all that. That’s how you get to the point of theories involving the planes actually being sophisticated holograms. ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/228 "2014-02-14T17:30:25Z")
> [@nevadaexile](#): > > What I stated (again) was that if conspiracy theorist were looking to latch onto a “believable” conspiracy, then US intelligence being informed of the events in advance and dismissing them as being disinformation, unlikely or completely improbable seems to be a somewhat more logical conspiracy theory… More believable and logical, but it’s not a conspiracy. A conspiracy is when two or more people plan to commit a crime. A failure to adequately judge the seriousness of a threat isn’t a conspiracy. It’s a fuck-up, but no crime is being committed. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/229 "2014-02-14T17:37:21Z")
He explained in a previous post: > [@nevadaexile](#): > > The “conspiracy” would then be covering people’s collectives asses by pretending that they didn’t have any foreknowledge of the event and making reports detailing anything about that fact “disappear.” That would be more probable than pre-planted demolition explosives and planes being shot down with no evidence of either having occurred. ---
**Author:** ![superImposed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f04885/32.png) [@superImposed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/superImposed)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/230 "2014-02-14T19:38:38Z")
> [@CurtC](#): > > A conspiracy is when two or more people plan to commit a crime. A failure to adequately judge the seriousness of a threat isn’t a conspiracy. It’s a fuck-up, but no crime is being committed. Ah, yes, the old “incompetence” argument. Doesn’t it strike you as odd the enormous gap between (a) infinite incompetence at every turn of those in charge and, (b) brilliant competence at some of the most complex tasks of those who did it? Whatever helps you sleep at night is good enough, I guess. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/231 "2014-02-14T19:40:07Z")
> [@superImposed](#): > > Ah, yes, the old “incompetence” argument. Ah, yes, the old “dictionary” definition. ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/232 "2014-02-14T19:51:11Z")
> [@superImposed](#): > > infinite incompetence … > brilliant competence “infinite incompetence” and “brilliant competence”? Give one example of where either was suggested by any poster in this thread. Overlooking an outlandish threat is not an example of “infinite incompetence”. Nor is leaving a swath of clues and failing to hit one of your targets and further failing to critically damage a 2nd target “brilliant competence”. Add “excluded middle” to the things you should look up. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/233 "2014-02-14T19:53:22Z")
See, it’s all about being smugly superior: > [@superImposed](#): > > Whatever helps you sleep at night is good enough, I guess. Believability isn’t part of the equation. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/234 "2014-02-14T20:31:03Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > More probable? Nope. Just as loony as the rest. The number of people involved in intelligence collecting and processing is not negligible and thus the same objections apply. actually the plot to drive airplanes into buildings WAS known. They got that information from [Ramzi Yousef](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramzi_Yousef) who bombed the WTC with a truck 10 years prior. I’d always thought that information was withheld from airliners but it was passed on to the FAA who released it to individual airliners. I don’t think the pilots of the doomed flights were aware of it or they would have alerted passengers to prevent access to the cockpit. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2014, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/235 "2014-02-14T20:37:03Z")
> [@superImposed](#): > > Ah, yes, the old “incompetence” argument. Why does this strike me the same as if you had said “Ah, yes, the old “2+2=4” argument”? > [@](#): > > Doesn’t it strike you as odd the enormous gap between (a) infinite incompetence at every turn of those in charge When it comes to stopping and preventing acts of terror, the phrase “we have to get lucky all the time, they only need to get lucky once” is quite apt. > [@](#): > > and, (b) brilliant competence at some of the most complex tasks of those who did it? brilliant competence? They learned to fly, hijacked planes, and crashed them. > [@](#): > > Whatever helps you sleep at night is good enough, I guess. Just say what you want to say and express a real opinion about what happened that day instead of game-playing. We got tired of that years ago. ---
**Author:** ![split\_p\_j](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e19b73/32.png) [@split\_p\_j](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/split_p_j)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/236 "2014-02-19T19:58:11Z")
> [@nevadaexile](#): > > Soooo…it’s just a “coverup” when a single person is involved? > > Anyway…my point was this: Again, I have no doubts that the events of 9/11 occurred as they are claimed to have occurred. The preponderance of evidence indicates that and the most parsimonious explanation is that airplanes were hijacked by a small group of men with the intent to fly into buildings and cause mass death and destruction. > > And this occurred without the CTers beloved “pre-planted” explosives in the World Trade Center, with a plane actually striking the Pentagon or having the plane in Pennsylvania being shot down by the US military. That was not my original point. > > What I stated (again) was that if conspiracy theorist were looking to latch onto a “believable” conspiracy, then US intelligence being informed of the events in advance and dismissing them as being disinformation, unlikely or completely improbable seems to be a somewhat more logical conspiracy theory than: > > 1. The event requiring pre-planted explosives > 2. The plane not actually impacting the Pentagon > 3. The plane being shot down near Shanksville,PA and the government covering up that event. > > And that’s what I said earlier before things went off on a tangent. There is plenty of evidence that some type of thermite was used. Here is a guy doing experiments in his [backyard](http://youtu.be/5d5iIoCiI8g?t=12m22s) that perfectly match eye witness accounts and video. I already brought up the evidence of thermite found at the WTC and even [the NIST report](http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=861610) can’t explain the squibs, or pressure pulses as they call them. The no planes thing that Loose Change went nuts with is misdirection, used to discredit 911 truth, but that is meaningless. It is not necessary to explain every detail of 911 if you don’t believe the official story. The evidence of the collapse of buildings 1,2 and 7 show that the official story can’t be true, and that in itself warrants a real investigation. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/237 "2014-02-19T20:10:08Z")
> [@split\_p\_j](#): > > There is plenty of evidence that some type of thermite was used. Here is a guy doing experiments in his [backyard](http://youtu.be/5d5iIoCiI8g?t=12m22s) that perfectly match eye witness accounts and video. You know what else perfectly matches eyewitness accounts and videos? Two planes crashing into the buildings and burning controlled for about an hour. Also, there’s no evidence whatsoever for thermite being used at the WTC. None. > [@](#): > > I already brought up the evidence of thermite found at the WTC and even [the NIST report](http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=861610) can’t explain the squibs, or pressure pulses as they call them. We have five pages of people explaining the “squibs” in this very thread, both explaining what they actually were, and pointing out why they couldn’t have been explosives. > [@](#): > > The no planes thing that Loose Change went nuts with is misdirection, used to discredit 911 truth, but that is meaningless. It is not necessary to explain every detail of 911 if you don’t believe the official story. 9/11 Truth discredits itself. It doesn’t need outside assistance. > [@](#): > > The evidence of the collapse of buildings 1,2 and 7 show that the official story can’t be true, and that in itself warrants a real investigation. This is simply false. There is no evidence inconsistent with the official report. Not a scrap of it. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/238 "2014-02-19T20:54:38Z")
[The Onion nails it once again.](http://www.theonion.com/articles/911-truther-vows-not-to-rest-until-everyone-knows,35319/)😃 ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/239 "2014-02-19T23:25:26Z")
> [@split\_p\_j](#): > > There is plenty of evidence that some type of thermite was used. For very lesser definitions of ‘plenty’. > [@](#): > > Here is a guy doing experiments in his [backyard](http://youtu.be/5d5iIoCiI8g?t=12m22s) that perfectly match eye witness accounts and video. Which means jack squat and is still completely impractical. > [@](#): > > I already brought up the evidence of thermite found at the WTC and even [the NIST report](http://www.nist.gov/manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=861610) can’t explain the squibs, or pressure pulses as they call them. Seems like they have been explained plenty well. You just do not like the explanation. > [@](#): > > The no planes thing that Loose Change went nuts with is misdirection, used to discredit 911 truth, but that is meaningless. Loose Change didn’t really go with the no planes at WTC. > [@](#): > > It is not necessary to explain every detail of 911 if you don’t believe the official story. Maybe, but you sure need to explain a whole lot more than what you have given us. > [@](#): > > The evidence of the collapse of buildings 1,2 and 7 show that the official story can’t be true, and that in itself warrants a real investigation. Simply, utterly wrong. We had investigations. Truthers have yet to prove any need for their silly demands for another investigation. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2014, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226/240 "2014-02-19T23:50:35Z")
> [@Mr.Miskatonic](#): > > Simply, utterly wrong. We had investigations. Truthers have yet to prove any need for their silly demands for another investigation. They need their demands as a way to continue spouting nonsense. I suspect that, on the off-chance that some investigation finally proves them _right_, it’ll get dismissed as a cheesy attempt to buy their silence so they can continue spouting nonsense. Now, proof of a need for yet another investigation is an entirely separate matter. 😉 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-collapse-need-airtight-answer-please/680226.md?page=13)