[extracted] New(?) 9-11 stuff
KSM got a plea deal. The guy who supposedly masterminded the 9/11 attacks is not getting the death penalty.
If you still
Still being a dishonest little POS and ignoring anything you can't answer, I see. When are you going to tell us how you tell molten aluminium apart from molten steel, clown?
Still being a dishonest little POS and ignoring anything you can't answer, I see. When are you going to tell us how you tell molten aluminium apart from molten steel, clown?
It certainly SEEMED important to him that we all agree there was molten steel at the sites. I wonder why he won't just show it to us.
STRANGE
the terrorists, who were no Ramzi Yousefs (the 1994 or 93? WTC bomber) who had an EE degree and still failed, somehow managed to completely destroy 3 skyscrapers with 2 planes when they would have no reason to think they could do anything like that.
Yeah, I mean how they have possibly known they could kill a bunch of people by flying planes into a building, you need advanced degrees to figure out a diabolical plan like that.
Yeah, I mean how they have possibly known they could kill a bunch of people by flying planes into a building, you need advanced degrees to figure out a diabolical plan like that.
I really can't figure out whether this guy is legitimately insane or just very, very stupid. And I don't see a third option.
So are you saying these guys weren’t smart enough to fly commercial planes into the two tallest buildings in NYC but at the same time were smart enough to calculate the destructive force of these impacts to understand the resulting damage to WTC 7, which they had also rigged for a controlled demolition, just in case?
So are you saying these guys weren’t smart enough to fly commercial planes into the two tallest buildings in NYC but at the same time were smart enough to calculate the destructive force of these impacts to understand the resulting damage to WTC 7, which they had also rigged for a controlled demolition, just in case?
No, no, gubmint and joos done the demolitions and remote controlled the planes, remember?
I really can't figure out whether this guy is legitimately insane or just very, very stupid. And I don't see a third option.
The possible third option is a fictive belief system, which is what sustains religions, conspiracy theories and a lot of modern politics. It's like when the audience 'believe' that the actor playing Hamlet really is the Prince of Denmark. They know he isn't, but they react as if he is. Same as people reading novels or watching films or TV dramas. They suspend disbelief -- for a time. Unfortunately, some people apply that willed suspension of disbelief to fabricated and fantastical explanations of real events.
The possible third option is a fictive belief system, which is what sustains religions, conspiracy theories and a lot of modern politics. It's like when the audience 'believe' that the actor playing Hamlet really is the Prince of Denmark. They know he isn't, but they react as if he is. Same as people reading novels or watching films or TV dramas. They suspend disbelief -- for a
Yeah, that's a good explanation, but I kinda used "insane" as shorthand for that, so it's not really a third option.
I think trying to hit the two buildings that were significantly higher than the rest of the NYC skyline would have been pretty easy and were the buildings intended to be struck with the planes.
Well there are a bunch of airline pilots and aviation experts who disagree with that notion. They have their own website full of explanations as to why the official story doesn't make sense from an aviation perspective. There was also analysis, published in the NYT, explaining that at a certain position as one of the planes which hit the towers was banking, the course correction to hit the towers required extreme precision. So you can think what you want if it soothes your mind, but that has little to do with the facts or the truth.
But assuming they missed those targets, the hijackers could have crashed into 800 other skyscrapers with the same domestic terror impact (except, of course, those buildings werent alll rigged for a control demolition, were they?) .
I don't agree. How to estimate the domestic impact is clearly more of an art than a science, so there are no right or wrong answers, but what you are saying doesn't sound serious. The twin towers were iconic symbols of American financial and global power. They were clearly visible and within the view of anyone with a camcorder so the footage was going to be plentiful and that's what you really want with terrorism, a spectacle everyone sees, for the horror to register far and wide. If elites did this they were clearly going for maximum impact. This paved the way not just for money, but for mass surveillance and, now, ICE - full spectrum dominance over the American people in total violation of civil rights. They are executing people in the street now and no one is being prosecuted. How is that not registering and how do you not see the through line from 9/11? No one knows what it would take before they do it, so obviously they were aiming for maximum impact.
Similarly, hitting a building of national importance in DC is not exactly difficult once you have the plane and are willing to die crashing it. Your so called lottery calculation scenario is real quite a worthless analogy and really just another thing you have made up to lie about.
Again, like all you guys, speaking from your feelings which are apparently totally disconnected from the real world. In the real world, the air space around DC is the most protected air space in the world. Do you think they never thought of people doing stuff like what happened? It is known that they absolutely did.
And that brings up another bit of spectacular luck which I have barely touched upon. The day of the attacks the military was conducting a drill depicting the exact terrorist scenario which was actually happening. Mass confusion was created as people couldn't tell whether information was regarding the training exercise or something actually happening. There were other miraculously fortuitous events as well regarding NORAD. If you actually research the defense response to the attacks that day you either coming away knowing these attacks were assisted by some well placed military personnel or you are a complete idiot. I don't think all of you are complete idiots. I think you simply refuse to actually look into what happened.
You could post these things here for people to read them. Not only links to articles but the actual text too.
When you say "unexplained", you mean "explained a million times that I choose to ignore", right, brokebrain?
NIST does acknowledge that molten steel was pouring out of the south tower and they have no explanation for it. They don't, as far as I know, acknowledge the molten steel at ground zero. But there is video of it and a ton of eye witnesses and we know the temps were available. You wouldn't know this because you only know who you believe, not what you believe.
To make it plain, the molten steel pouring out of the tower, in the official narrative, is molten steel and it's presence is officially unexplained.
NIST does acknowledge that molten steel was pouring out of the south tower and they have no explanation for it.
Citation please.
They don't, as far as I know, acknowledge the molten steel at ground zero. But there is video of it and a ton of eye witnesses and we know the temps were available.
You still haven't explained how you identified this molten metal as steel, dipshit. These eye witnesses, are they ****ing metallurgists or something?
Well there are a bunch of airline pilots and aviation experts who disagree with that notion. They have their own website full of explanations as to why the official story doesn't make sense from an aviation perspective. There was also analysis, published in the NYT, explaining that at a certain position as one of the planes which hit the towers was banking, the course correctio
Unfortunately, you do fall into the complete idiot category. If the norad information was true, that seems to be leaked information, not a one in a billion coincidence.
Well there are a bunch of airline pilots and aviation experts who disagree with that notion. They have their own website full of explanations as to why the official story doesn't make sense from an aviation perspective. There was also analysis, published in the NYT, explaining that at a certain position as one of the planes which hit the towers was banking, the course correctio
The notion that flying a plane into a building wider than a runway is somehow impossible is absurd on its face and there are numerous experts who have said precisely the opposite, but the real question is: why would the Lizard People make the plane do extreme course corrections in the first place? Surely the people who organized the biggest conspiracy in human history would just have the plane fly in normally? Because the whole point is tricking us into thinking it's a human pilot?
It's weird how this conspiracy uses crazy advanced tech and collaborators who can rig a building full of explosives with no one noticing, but then completely blows their cover by making the plane do stunts for some reason.
There was also analysis, published in the NYT, explaining that at a certain position as one of the planes which hit the towers was banking, the course correction to hit the towers required extreme precision. So you can think what you want if it soothes your mind, but that has little to do with the facts or the truth.
I think this post is a good illustrator at showing that you don't believe that any of this happened in the way you said. You're just tossing out everything you can find for whom you can convert.
But it goes back the posts you ignored from me when I mentioned that you should lead it bit more into the things you do care about. Because you do have a fan base here in that regard. But I'm pretty sure they're also wondering wtf you're doing with segues like this. But I'm sure they appreciate the effort.
I suspect he's talking about this, which doesn't even look like liquid to me, it just looks like electrical (sparks?).
I'm only guessing though, since he won't show us anything. (Most of the time, I know their arguments better than they do, so I wouldn't be surprised if this is what he means)
Compare to this for instance:
So not only is there nothing indicating it's steel and not any number of other really hot materials, it's probably not even "molten," but electrical.
And that's without him even showing the video.
This whole thing is just sad.
Don't worry, I am sure Deuces will be here soon to show us and "kick our asses", linking the relevant section of the NIST report. I mean, he's a very honest guy, I doubt he'd make up something like that.
I suspect he's talking about this, which doesn't even look like liquid to me, it just looks like electrical (sparks?).I'm only guessing though, since he won't show us anything. (Most of the time, I know their arguments better than they do, so I wouldn't be surprised if this is what he means)Compare to this for instance:So not only is there nothing indicating it's steel and not
You probably were unaware that the WTC was built without generators or any type of electrical components.
Unfortunately, you do fall into the complete idiot category. If the norad information was true, that seems to be leaked information, not a one in a billion coincidence.
It's common knowledge that a drill simulating the exact scenario actually taking place was ran concurrent with the actual attacks and that is cause massive confusion. The fact is used by both sides.
The official narrative gives this as an excuse why there was no defense of the skies that morning (not that any of you would even ask that question).
Those skeptical of the official narrative say it indicates direct involvement in the attacks by whoever planned the exercise because WITFF?
This is also gives you 2 different categories of sources to confirm what I'm saying. Google is your friend. I'm not taking you through the ABCs of 9/11. Actually I will, but it will have to be where you let me know if you can't find a citation. Anything I say should be pretty easy to Google, although there is clearly an attempt to suppress information contradicting the corporate state's narrative.
YouTube took down the best video I'd ever seen criticizing the NIST report with absolutely no justification whatsoever. It was a mock episode of Mythbusters where the hosts at first assume everyone who questions 9/11 is a conspiratard, but then as they actually read the reports they gradually figured out what it was, just a weird potemkin village of an investigation. The actual show Mythbusters made it clear they would never tackle any 9/11 related questions. I always thought they was an odd choice for such a show which claims to debunk misinformation. You'd think they could do a lot of good (under the assumption that the official narrative was true).
Cool, so about all those questions you haven't answered?
Yeah, I mean how they have possibly known they could kill a bunch of people by flying planes into a building, you need advanced degrees to figure out a diabolical plan like that.
You're so into your schtick you are inventing new types of strawmanning. Congrats I guess?
I'm sure terrorists would think they could kill a lot of people by flying planes into buildings. But they had no reason to think they could bring the buildings down, especially if they had anyone who knew anything consulting with them, which they would have. So in your scenario, they intended to fly into the buildings and kill people and then, woops, look how lucky we got, we brought down 3 skyscrapers as if they were demolished as a bonus.
What they didn't intend to do, bring down 3 massive skyscrapers completely, would be way, way harder to do than just ram planes into the buildings, not that that was easy peasy. You don't just luck your way into that kind of achievement and I can hardly believe anyone would think it would be possible.
The crew and the plan you insist did it, Trolly, how many times out of 100 do they totally and utterly destroy the 3 three largest buildings in the complex? Not to mention, there were 7 buildings in the complex, so of course the 3rd one they brought down without hitting it was the next largest and best terror target because why not?
