response to emerging independent science on the 9/11 attacks

[Pappa]

Well, Randy you did NOT watch it unfold before your eyes. You just saw what you wanted to see; not the reality, but a delusional interpretation of the reality, like someone at a magic show who thinks the lady really was cut in half & put together again.
The evidence that you keep asking for, pretentiously, has been around you since the first videos of the tower collapses.

Are you still hanging on to this "free fall speed" nonsense? They didn't fall at free fall speed.

But, as I said, you are not interested in the evidence, you just want affirmation of your bias,

You must be referring to yourself now.

otherwise you wouldn't write the crap that you do about every single contention having been put to rest years ago.
It is wishful thinking that the new generation will tend towards accepting that 9/11 was the conspiracy that it was. The new generation are like the old generation; like you. They couldn't give a rat's arse who did 9/11 or how, or why...they want to party. They want excitement. They want to shoot some 'a-rabs'...any excuse will do.

Well, my brother in law saw the second plane hit, live, from his office window. A friend of mine since college (a Muslim) was in building 7 that morning. An ex-girlfriend of mine was in NJ with a perfect view of the towers and also saw the second plane hit the towers. We have video tapes from dozens of independent sources, including people on the street who had handheld cameras. We have dozens of news outfits that all reported on the attacks, and all have footage of airplanes hitting the towers. We have cell phone logs. We have phone conversations between family members and people on the planes. We have air traffic controller records and other flight records, including radar. We have the admissions of Al Qaeta members, including bin Laden and others.

On your side, we have assertions that there were controlled demolitions of three buildings, the smallest of which would have been the largest controlled demolition of a building in American history, using "thermite" (a compound that has never once been used in controlled demolitions). There is no evidence that anyone ever rigged the buildings with explosives, despite thousands of potential witnesses every day. Normally buildings are completely gutted to allow proper wiring of the building for demolition, but none of that was done. So, two of the largest buildings in the nation and the world - many times taller than the current record-holder for the largest controlled demolition ever, plus another building (no. 7) which was about 3 times the size of the current record-holder for largest demolition (Hudson's Building, Detroit), were all taken down on the same day as part of some complex plan, and timed so that it would look like airplanes had hit the buildings and taken them down, and we have no evidence of any of it happening.

And, then you add to that another complex conspiracy about a plane being spirited away and a fake impact into the Pentagon being made, by using a cruse missile that nobody has seen, and for which there is no evidence.

And, there was, for good measure, another plane which was shot down in Pennsylvania, which the conspirators want us to think was headed for another building, but for some reason didn't want it to hit that other building, but rather wanted it to look like it went down in Pennsylvania.

And, you have the nerve - the temerity - the unmitigated gall - to suggest that we are the deluded ones? Dude, face it, you believe in this conspiracy nonsense because you wish it to be true, and for no other reason.

[Cunt]

Well, Randy you did NOT watch it unfold before your eyes. You just saw what you wanted to see; not the reality, but a delusional interpretation of the reality, like someone at a magic show who thinks the lady really was cut in half & put together again.
The evidence that you keep asking for, pretentiously, has been around you since the first videos of the tower collapses.

Are you still hanging on to this "free fall speed" nonsense? They didn't fall at free fall speed.

But, as I said, you are not interested in the evidence, you just want affirmation of your bias,

You must be referring to yourself now.

otherwise you wouldn't write the crap that you do about every single contention having been put to rest years ago.
It is wishful thinking that the new generation will tend towards accepting that 9/11 was the conspiracy that it was. The new generation are like the old generation; like you. They couldn't give a rat's arse who did 9/11 or how, or why...they want to party. They want excitement. They want to shoot some 'a-rabs'...any excuse will do.

Well, my brother in law saw the second plane hit, live, from his office window. A friend of mine since college (a Muslim) was in building 7 that morning. An ex-girlfriend of mine was in NJ with a perfect view of the towers and also saw the second plane hit the towers. We have video tapes from dozens of independent sources, including people on the street who had handheld cameras. We have dozens of news outfits that all reported on the attacks, and all have footage of airplanes hitting the towers. We have cell phone logs. We have phone conversations between family members and people on the planes. We have air traffic controller records and other flight records, including radar. We have the admissions of Al Qaeta members, including bin Laden and others.

On your side, we have assertions that there were controlled demolitions of three buildings, the smallest of which would have been the largest controlled demolition of a building in American history, using "thermite" (a compound that has never once been used in controlled demolitions). There is no evidence that anyone ever rigged the buildings with explosives, despite thousands of potential witnesses every day. Normally buildings are completely gutted to allow proper wiring of the building for demolition, but none of that was done. So, two of the largest buildings in the nation and the world - many times taller than the current record-holder for the largest controlled demolition ever, plus another building (no. 7) which was about 3 times the size of the current record-holder for largest demolition (Hudson's Building, Detroit), were all taken down on the same day as part of some complex plan, and timed so that it would look like airplanes had hit the buildings and taken them down, and we have no evidence of any of it happening.

And, then you add to that another complex conspiracy about a plane being spirited away and a fake impact into the Pentagon being made, by using a cruse missile that nobody has seen, and for which there is no evidence.

And, there was, for good measure, another plane which was shot down in Pennsylvania, which the conspirators want us to think was headed for another building, but for some reason didn't want it to hit that other building, but rather wanted it to look like it went down in Pennsylvania.

And, you have the nerve - the temerity - the unmitigated gall - to suggest that we are the deluded ones? Dude, face it, you believe in this conspiracy nonsense because you wish it to be true, and for no other reason.

Well said.

[Galaxian]

Well, Randy you did NOT watch it unfold before your eyes. You just saw what you wanted to see; not the reality, but a delusional interpretation of the reality, like someone at a magic show who thinks the lady really was cut in half & put together again.
The evidence that you keep asking for, pretentiously, has been around you since the first videos of the tower collapses.

Are you still hanging on to this "free fall speed" nonsense? They didn't fall at free fall speed.

But, as I said, you are not interested in the evidence, you just want affirmation of your bias,

You must be referring to yourself now.

otherwise you wouldn't write the crap that you do about every single contention having been put to rest years ago.
It is wishful thinking that the new generation will tend towards accepting that 9/11 was the conspiracy that it was. The new generation are like the old generation; like you. They couldn't give a rat's arse who did 9/11 or how, or why...they want to party. They want excitement. They want to shoot some 'a-rabs'...any excuse will do.

Well, my brother in law saw the second plane hit, live, from his office window. A friend of mine since college (a Muslim) was in building 7 that morning. An ex-girlfriend of mine was in NJ with a perfect view of the towers and also saw the second plane hit the towers. We have video tapes from dozens of independent sources, including people on the street who had handheld cameras. We have dozens of news outfits that all reported on the attacks, and all have footage of airplanes hitting the towers. We have cell phone logs. We have phone conversations between family members and people on the planes. We have air traffic controller records and other flight records, including radar. We have the admissions of Al Qaeta members, including bin Laden and others.
On your side, we have assertions that there were controlled demolitions of three buildings, the smallest of which would have been the largest controlled demolition of a building in American history, using "thermite" (a compound that has never once been used in controlled demolitions). There is no evidence that anyone ever rigged the buildings with explosives, despite thousands of potential witnesses every day. Normally buildings are completely gutted to allow proper wiring of the building for demolition, but none of that was done. So, two of the largest buildings in the nation and the world - many times taller than the current record-holder for the largest controlled demolition ever, plus another building (no. 7) which was about 3 times the size of the current record-holder for largest demolition (Hudson's Building, Detroit), were all taken down on the same day as part of some complex plan, and timed so that it would look like airplanes had hit the buildings and taken them down, and we have no evidence of any of it happening.
And, then you add to that another complex conspiracy about a plane being spirited away and a fake impact into the Pentagon being made, by using a cruse missile that nobody has seen, and for which there is no evidence.
And, there was, for good measure, another plane which was shot down in Pennsylvania, which the conspirators want us to think was headed for another building, but for some reason didn't want it to hit that other building, but rather wanted it to look like it went down in Pennsylvania.
And, you have the nerve - the temerity - the unmitigated gall - to suggest that we are the deluded ones? Dude, face it, you believe in this conspiracy nonsense because you wish it to be true, and for no other reason.

More bullshit ^^^ from a master of bullshittery?
You don't follow any evidence that's contrary to your support of officialdom? Let's start at the top vomit & go down:
All 3 steel towers fell at close to freefall on to their own footprint. Hasn't happened before or since; unless demolished.
You are not interested in the evidence as proved by your twisting of the facts & denial mode.
Your brother in law saw the planes hit...Good for him. I saw them WTC 1 & 2 as well. But not WTC 7 & Pentagon.
That's your style ^^^ make a straw man, then pretend you're really clever in demolishing your distraction.
To be strictly factual, all non-visible evidence should be ignored. So, for example, air traffic, discovered body parts, etc can be planted or lied about by vested interests. That's why I've based most of my arguments on the laws of physics, eg; the impossibility of 3 steel towers falling straight down at close to freefall, unless helped by controlled demolition. No conspiracy can overcome the laws of physics, so I don't have to worry about who lied or who told the truth.
I don't care if the smallest demolition was the largest ever conducted in the US. I don't care if it was shaped charges, thermate, cat's pee, or a fat man leaning on a column. They were brought down by more than a mere plane crash. I don't need to prove how they came down, or by whom, or for what reason. I've already shown on RDF, here & Rational Skepticism, that they could NOT come vertically down, in the manner that they did, due to a plane crash near the top. Due some following up of links...I mean sincere follow ups, not bored ones where you yawn & look for your own prejudices.
What plane was spirited away? I never said that. I said the Pentagon was likely hit by a bunker busting cruise missile.
The Shanksville crater could have been due to a plane or other method. The crater was small, & may have been done at an earlier time, with a suitable staged explosion at the time to attract attention. But that's just a guess. The shooting down of that plane is due to debris from several miles back; such as an engine a half mile back.
You have no insight into the mind of the conspirators, as I don't & have never claimed to, other than a vague probability that it has to do with expanding power or wealth or directing world events.
What I have is the courage and sincerity to see a con for what it is. It is YOU who have the timidity, lack of curiosity, & blase, flippant attitude indicated by your signature, which presumably is Latin for "I fuck therefore I am". If you were really interested & courageous you'd follow up the inconsistencies of the official stories.

[Ian]

Galaxian, you've painted yourself into an impossible corner. Why do you even bother? I think we'd have more respect for you if you were ranting about how all those moon landings were faked.

Wait, don't tell me you buy that theory too...

[owtth]

all non-visible evidence should be ignored.

Good call

I don't care if the smallest demolition was the largest ever conducted in the US. I don't care if it was shaped charges, thermate, cat's pee, or a fat man leaning on a column. They were brought down by more than a mere plane crash. I don't need to prove how they came down, or by whom, or for what reason.

Would you care to offer a suggestion as to how it was done? Perhaps including some "visible evidence" or do you suggest we just ignore you?

[Coito ergo sum]

More bullshit ^^^ from a master of bullshittery?

No, just the facts. When you produce some evidence for any of your claims....still waiting....

You don't follow any evidence that's contrary to your support of officialdom?

I will if you present some.

Let's start at the top vomit & go down:
All 3 steel towers fell at close to freefall on to their own footprint.

No, they fucking damn well did not fall at freefall speed or "close to freefall speed." Freefall would have been about 9 seconds and it took about 12 seconds or so for them to fall, not 9 or 10 seconds. And, the observed time of collapse is consistent with what would be expected if the buildings collapsed.

Hasn't happened before or since; unless demolished.

What hasn't happened since? That buildings collapsed at other than free fall speed? The buildings did NOT collapse at or near free fall speed. You are quite simply, wrong.

You are not interested in the evidence as proved by your twisting of the facts & denial mode.

You haven't presented any evidence. You have alleged the towers fell at free fall speed, or near it, and they didn't. 12 seconds is 25% longer than 9 seconds. That's a huge difference.

Where's your evidence that the towers were rigged for controlled demolition? Anywhere?

Speaking of "never happened before or since" -- no building the size of building 7 has ever, before or since, been demolished in a controlled demolition, and it's at least 3 times as big as the biggest one EVER - the Hudson's Building in Detroit. No building anywhere close to the size of theWTC 1 and 2 have ever been dreamed of being controlled demolished.

Your brother in law saw the planes hit...Good for him. I saw them WTC 1 & 2 as well.

So, we are in agreement that the towers 1 and 2 were hit by jetliners full of people and fuel at high speed.

But not WTC 7 & Pentagon.

So what - dozens of independent witnesses witnessed the pentagon impact, and nobody ever claimed a plane hit WTC7. That building was damaged by the fall of one of the other towers.

That's your style ^^^ make a straw man, then pretend you're really clever in demolishing your distraction.

Straw man? Ridiculous. Just present your argument. What do you claim, and what is the evidence for it?

You've claimed free fall speed. Nope. Didn't happen.

To be strictly factual, all non-visible evidence should be ignored.

Not in the real world. Audible evidence is evidence and forensic evidence is evidence.

So, for example, air traffic, discovered body parts, etc can be planted or lied about by vested interests.

Yes, but you have no evidence that the air traffic controllers lied, that body parts were planted, etc. Let me know when you have evidence to produce.

That's why I've based most of my arguments on the laws of physics, eg; the impossibility of 3 steel towers falling straight down at close to freefall,

The buildings fell just like you'd expect them to fall - they don't "tip over" when they collapse. And, they did not fall straight down at or close to free fall.

unless helped by controlled demolition. No conspiracy can overcome the laws of physics, so I don't have to worry about who lied or who told the truth.

You have your physics wrong.

I don't care if the smallest demolition was the largest ever conducted in the US. I don't care if it was shaped charges, thermate, cat's pee, or a fat man leaning on a column. They were brought down by more than a mere plane crash.

Proof? The free fall allegation is wrong. So what's your proof that something other than the plan crashes brought them down?

I don't need to prove how they came down, or by whom, or for what reason.

You don't need to do anything. But, if you make an assertion, nobody in their right mind should believe you unless you have evidence. You don't. Well, you said "free fall collapse" is your evidence, but they didn't collapse at or near freefall speed, so - unless you have something else, we have nothing to support your claim.

I've already shown on RDF, here & Rational Skepticism, that they could NOT come vertically down, in the manner that they did, due to a plane crash near the top.

Of course they could. You haven't shown it here anyway, not that I've seen. But, if you have, please link to it. I'd love to see it.

Due some following up of links...I mean sincere follow ups,

Stop condescending. I've sincerely looked at this issue. You're just wrong.

not bored ones where you yawn & look for your own prejudices.

You need to present something coherent. False allegations that the buildings collapsed at freefall speed don't cut it.

What plane was spirited away? I never said that.

What happened to flight 77?

I said the Pentagon was likely hit by a bunker busting cruise missile.

There's no proof of that. But, if it wasn't hit by Flight 77, what happened to flight 77?

The Shanksville crater could have been due to a plane or other method. The crater was small, & may have been done at an earlier time, with a suitable staged explosion at the time to attract attention. But that's just a guess.

Guesses are worthless.

The shooting down of that plane is due to debris from several miles back; such as an engine a half mile back.
You have no insight into the mind of the conspirators, as I don't & have never claimed to, other than a vague probability that it has to do with expanding power or wealth or directing world events.

Guesses are worthless.

What I have is the courage and sincerity to see a con for what it is.

Without evidence.

It is YOU who have the timidity, lack of curiosity, & blase, flippant attitude indicated by your signature, which presumably is Latin for "I fuck therefore I am". If you were really interested & courageous you'd follow up the inconsistencies of the official stories.

I have. There are no inconsistencies that point to an "inside job." Quite the opposite.

Frankly, if it was an inside job, one might wonder why we never found WMD in Iraq. Planting WMD in Iraq during a war would have been a walk in the park compared to the convoluted and complex Rube Goldberg machine you propose.

[Coito ergo sum]

Collapse rates support the official version, and not controlled demolition:

[Ian]

I'd still like an explanation for why the Pentagon strike must've been a cruise missile, other than "I didn't see enough evidence of an airplane." I suppose I could talk about my former boss who was away from his office in the Pentagon when the plane hit; he literally saw chunks of burning airplane in his former office area. But why would Galaxian believe an eyewitness?

Galaxian, you're the one thinking like a sheep here, not us. I say that because you're approaching your analysis with the mind-set of a victim, reaching for explanations to show how the world could've been conned so well. (I could also go into your rabidly anti-American mind-set, but I'll just ignore that for now. Still, you might want to consider if your analysis could possibly have been tainted in any way by preconceived biases.)

Instead, try thinking like a leader - seeing the attack before it happened. You'll have to be a US leader for this, since your theories about cruise missiles and shoot-downs over Pennsylvania imply nothing else. Let's say you're involved in the 9/11 conspiracy, and you're about ready to initiate the attack. You've got a few suicide crews ready to hijack planes. As a bonus, you've even made sure that the damage in New York will be really bad because your men have been discreetly installing controlled demolition in the towers, since you figure horribly damaged towers alone won't cause enough public outrage; the buildings will have to come down. You've got phony information about Al Qaeda operatives living in the US for months, taking flying lessons and so on. You're 100% positive that there will be no leaks, no whistleblowers anywhere. Your deniability is set. The whole world will see these muslim lunatics fly those planes into these targets, and they'll never suspect you were behind it.

Now... at what point do you decide that you also need to launch a cruise missile into the Pentagon??

Please, also answer the following:
- If the whole world is going to see and know about hijacked aircraft flying into the towers, why would you risk exposure of a conspiracy by also adding a cruise missile?
- Would you really able to control every bit of information that comes out? If someone with a camera uploaded a photo of a cruise missile flying in the Washington area, could you really stop the image before it spread all over the net?
- What assurances do you have of full deniability?

[Cunt]

Now... at what point do you decide that you also need to launch a cruise missile into the Pentagon??

Please, also answer the following:
- If the whole world is going to see and know about hijacked aircraft flying into the towers, why would you risk exposure of a conspiracy by also adding a cruise missile?
- Would you really able to control every bit of information that comes out? If someone with a camera uploaded a photo of a cruise missile flying in the Washington area, could you really stop the image before it spread all over the net?
- What assurances do you have of full deniability?

Ian, I really think that if Galaxian took the time to fairly examine the questions you raise here they would lead him out of his 'rabbit hole'. Trouble is, he will simply ignore any difficult questions and harp on about how we are all 'sheep' (why on earth would he want to keep associating with us if we are sheep...?)

Because he likely won't say it I will - I appreciate the thought you put into this (mostly ridiculous) subject and the effort you have put into getting some valid questions ready which can expose more of the truth of the matter.

Nice work (nice avatar, too).

[Thinking Aloud]

Ian, the only logical explanation is that your former boss is on the inside, and part of the conspiracy. Why else would he be away from his office at the critical moment? He probably brought the bits of burning, "American"-branded wreckage with him that morning, and popped out to get them at the right time.

Oh - and if anyone ever wants proof that hundreds of people can be kept hushed about secret projects, just look at Groom Lake. No-one ever talks about what goes on there. And if they do, the black helicopters get 'em.

[Rum]

I was suspiciously absent too. In fact I had the perfect alibi - I was in the UK!

Clear evidence that I was involved - got me bang to rights.

[Ian]

Ian, the only logical explanation is that your former boss is on the inside, and part of the conspiracy. Why else would he be away from his office at the critical moment? He probably brought the bits of burning, "American"-branded wreckage with him that morning, and popped out to get them at the right time.

Quite possible. Like myself, he was an American military officer. You can't trust a word we say.

I was suspiciously absent too. In fact I had the perfect alibi - I was in the UK!

So was I! I was safely ensconced onboard my warship, docked in Plymouth... away from all suspicion...
:twisted:

[BlackBart]

Trouble is, he will simply ignore any difficult questions and harp on about how we are all 'sheep' (why on earth would he want to keep associating with us if we are sheep...?)

Funny how we're all sheep, but an incredibly complex and heinous con trick was needed to convince us to go to war.

[Clinton Huxley]

This thread has never been hit by any evidence for the conspiracy, eye-witnesses report the opposite of evidence, etc etc

[BlackBart]

This thread has never been hit by any evidence for the conspiracy, eye-witnesses report the opposite of evidence, etc etc

The CIA removes it before you ever get to see it.