9-11 was NOT an inside job

[MaineShark]

I see.   


So, according to your logic? everyone who questions the 911 "official" story and/or  discusses other possibilities is a non-credible wacko?

I've already made it clear that this isn't the case.  I think the odds are even for or against government involvement.  Questioning is good.

Deciding that it had to have been some particular way, in the absence of evidence, is not "questioning."  It's no different from blindly accepting the government's story, which is just chock full of holes.

I think your mind is closed to anything other than what you already believe.

You can think what you like, but any rational person knows that ain't the case.  I'll consider any argument, if I have the time and someone wants to present it to me.  But I'm not going to waste my time going to a convention of folks who have decided that they need not pay attention to basic physics.  I have no need to attend conventions of flat-earthers, either.

so if they didn't use charges ... how did the terrorists bring down the buildings?

Crash planes into them.  Planes damage structure and light lots of fires.  Heat from fires weakens structure and causes buckling of steel beams.  Buckled beams are tremendously weaker than straight ones, and were even weaker to due softening (not melting - we all know they didn't melt, but steel gets weaker when it gets hot) as a result of the heat.  Weakened structure begins to fail.  More and more force is transferred to already-weak elements.  More fail.  Process accelerates.  Eventually, the "last straw" breaks and the building collapses.

Very basic physics.

If the government is covering something up about the structural failure, as so many have suggested, might it not be something like having used sub-standard fireproofing in the construction?  Or having fudged the initial design a bit to cut corners?

If the government wanted to bring the buildings down, why not just convince some gullible terrorists to do it for them?  The CIA (etc) has a long history of using dupes of various sorts to accomplish their missions, or otherwise acting through proxy.  If you insist on believing that the government was behind it (something which I do not dispute is entirely possible), it's certainly reasonable to think they would have done it the way they do almost everything else.

Look at how they got us into WWII.  They goaded the Japanese into attacking, then hid the intel that showed an attack was imminent, guaranteeing that it would be successful.  American ends up in WWII.  Why should this be any different?  Goad terrorists into attacking (or even directly convince them, if you prefer that), and then hide the intel that shows an attack was imminent.  At the very least, certain officials knew an attack was coming, and hid it - that much has been shown beyond any reasonable doubt.

There's no logical reason to assume demolitions charges were used.  And plenty of reasons not to.

Joe

[kola]

Sheep Fuzzy Wool nails it.

Reverend Kola 

[Sheep Fuzzy Wool]

Sheep Fuzzy Wool nails it.

Reverend Kola 

Oh shucks.
Thank you, Reverend Kola.
Now, to the next topic!

[JustUs]

This is so sickeningly typical of your average conspiracy theorist.

So, you're a card-carrying member of the collective prejudice club with Joey-boy, eh? Let's all join the paint party and just use a brooooaaad brush - no need to read anything critically or analyze anything in specific when we can just collectivize everyone into the same basket for dismissal. Nice, fun club for fools and tools!

Whad'ya say ConspiracyDebunker, you're a member, too, aren't you?

[coffeeseven]

Whad'ya say ConspiracyDebunker, you're a member, too, aren't you?

ya think?

"9-11 Liars" [X]  conspiracy nuts [X]  people with too much time on their hands [X]  anti-americans [X] ass-hattery [X] tin-foil hat [X] "9-11 Truthers" [X] anti-ass-hattery [X] shills [X] a stoning [X]

[Wretched1]

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/12/probable-collapse.html
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2873871255585611926

[Russell Kanning]

This is so sickeningly typical of your average conspiracy theorist. When are you guys going to just admit it's a religion?

This is your thread to tell us what really happened on 9/11. Enjoy

[ReverendRyan]

Tags: "9-11 Liars" [X]  conspiracy nuts [X]  people with too much time on their hands [X] logical fallacies [X] ass-hattery [X] tin-foil hat [X] religion [X] anti-ass-hattery [X] shills [X] rejection of logic, reason, and rationality [X]

[ReverendRyan]

This is so sickeningly typical of your average conspiracy theorist. When are you guys going to just admit it's a religion?

This is your thread to tell us what really happened on 9/11. Enjoy

19 pissed-off muslims, trained and funded by former US allies, killed thousands of people, injuring thousands more, and leveled 3 buildings, damaging many more, all because the US government was too incompetent to see it coming despite numerous warning signs. End of story. That's not the "official government story," it's the conclusion drawn from all the available facts.

[Russell Kanning]

Could they do it again?

[ReverendRyan]

Absolutely.

[Wretched1]

http://www.jnani.org/mrking/writings/911/king911.htm
http://www.911myths.com/index.html
http://www.debunking911.com/

[Bill St. Clair]

No. If it actually happened as described in the mainstream conspiracy theory, it cannot happen again. Passengers will never again allow an airplane to be hijacked, disarmed or not. Sure would be nice if they were encouraged to travel with their handguns, though. Couldn't have that. People might learn that not only do they not need the government's protection, they can do it better themselves.

[ReverendRyan]

I didn't say it was likely, I only meant it was possible.

[kola]

see "topic title".