Tags for this video have been changed from 'wtc, 911, smoke, iss, new york, 2001, september' to 'wtc, 911, smoke, iss, new york, 2001, september, frank culbertson' - edited by brycewi19

>> ^quantumushroom:

Occam asks: Why would the demolitioninjas collapse the building in an orderly manner that would arouse the suspicions of conspiracy theorists (and 1500 construction experts)? Why didn't they wire the building so it would fall over?

>> ^marinara:
Let's say WT7 had 20 columns holding up 47 floors (that's big). So these big ass columns get pushed around by by the "flooring under heat expansion" and then the other 20 ginormous columns fail instantly, and the whole thing goes down.
If one column can bring down WT7, it wasn't a skyscraper, it was a deathtrap.



You're mis-wielding the Razor. 1) The construction of T1/T2, and I assume 7-- steel-structured buildings in the old WTC site were such that they *would* impolode in the face of structural failure, not fall over. this limits casualties from outside the buildings. 2) The assumption that there are demoninjas necessitates the sub-assumption of the fact that demonninjas do not care what conspirators think, because conspirators will not be able to prove anything, because the ninjas are ninjas. 3) Because, in theory, the demoninjas are making so much money off of this that risking the ire of 1500+ construction experts, demo experts, engineers, and internet users isn't nearly reason enough to stop them taking the risk.

Can I just say... (I lived a few short blocks away in NYC at the time of the collapse. And I am a truther of sorts.) ...I'd like to stop the idea that conspiracy "nuts" are akin to religious zealots, suffer from some kind of mania, think that Illuminati lizards control the world, etc. The government's official story is BOTH a conspiracy (religious nuts in a cave in Afghanistan conspired to crash two planes into two of the largest structures in the financial capital of the west) and a theory (there has been no trial, there is very little hard evidence, there was no comprehensive official investigation, and both the Commission and NIST reports were produced by government institutions or congressionally appointed committee, and neither were conclusive- both were, in the end, speculative.

"One Meridian Plaza is a 38-floor skyscraper in Philadelphia that suffered a severe fire on February 23, 1991. The fire started on the 22nd floor and raged for 18 hours, gutting eight floors and causing an estimated $100 million in direct property loss. 1 2 3 It was later described by Philadelphia officials as "the most significant fire in this century". "
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/fires.html


This clip is a pathetic little band-aid against the piles of "weird shit" about 9/11 that still to this day should make any intelligent person think twice.

Such as:

- The alleged masterminds of 9/11 have never been produced and never put to trial, despite having supposedly been captured in 2001/02

- Total failure of the air defense system. The Pentagon was struck One hour and Twenty minutes after the attacks began, yet there was no response from Andrews Air Force base, which is just 10 MILES away and supposed to be in charge of defending the capitol.

- The Bush / Bin Ladin / Saudi families connection was never fully explored or explained.

- According to two first responders, black boxes were found, but later "disappeared" and their existence denied by the 9/11 Commision Report.

- The multiple military wargames planned long in advance and held on the morning of September 11th included scenarios of a domestic air crisis, a plane crashing into a government building, and a large-scale emergency in New York. Some fucking co-incidence huh.

- Of all the cameras around the pentagon, including the security tapes taken from local gas stations, only one blurry clip was released.

- The remains of the twin towers were quickly carried off and buried before any forensic investigations could be done.

the list goes on....


9/11 Never Forget??

You're damn right I'll never forget. You can count on it.

Actually I have no problem with motive. I heard Ron Paul say at the debates that we are spending 20bil to air-condition tents for soldiers in Afghanistan... that 20bil is making SOMEONE really rich, so there is definitely a LOT of profit to be made in war.

That said, there is absolutely no way in hell that our government (present, past or future) is clever enough to pull off some of the absolutely ludicrous shit that these conspiracy nuts are peddling. What pissed me off the most is how many internet "experts" we have on demolitions, engineering, plane debris, etc.

It is the same logic that idiots who think that aliens built the pyramids use: I can't conceive of how to build a pyramid without the use of modern heavy-lifting machinery, therefore ancient societies couldn't have possibly done so and therefore... fucking aliens.

Basically, just because they don't understand something, they go to ANY explanation that is controversial and feeds conspiracy. NWO Ninja Demolitionists, lizard politicians, aliens, impossible conspiracies where hundreds if not thousands of participants have to not only keep quiet, but also cover an inevitable trail of planning, communication and on-the-ground efforts that simply cannot go unnoticed.

Seriously, there is just no way that our government, stupid fucks that they ALL are (dems, reps, libertarians, etc), just no way.


>> ^NetRunner:

@marinara maybe I've just forgotten my 9/11 conspiracy storyline, but to me the problem with the whole "WTC was taken down by demolition" theory is motive.
Why would someone want to do that? It's a lot easier to destroy documents with shredders, and there are much easier ways to commit insurance fraud.
I can see someone making the case that some people in the US wanted 9/11 itself to happen, but I don't really see why those someones would do something as weird as packing the building with explosives, and then hitting it with airplanes.
I mean, there was an Al Qaeda bombing of the WTC some eight years earlier, why mess with the planes if you could've just blown the building up with secret bombs?

@marinara maybe I've just forgotten my 9/11 conspiracy storyline, but to me the problem with the whole "WTC was taken down by demolition" theory is motive.

Why would someone want to do that? It's a lot easier to destroy documents with shredders, and there are much easier ways to commit insurance fraud.

I can see someone making the case that some people in the US wanted 9/11 itself to happen, but I don't really see why those someones would do something as weird as packing the building with explosives, and then hitting it with airplanes.

I mean, there was an Al Qaeda bombing of the WTC some eight years earlier, why mess with the planes if you could've just blown the building up with secret bombs?

You know that building that rolled over wasn't WTC 7, right? It was a different building. Built differently and destroyed in a different way, under different circumstances.

Building number 7 descended in free-fall...


Why repeat this kind of easily and thoroughly debunked crap? And if you can debunk the debunking, do that. Focus on one thing, and actually make a case for it. Don't just throw out crap like this and pretend there isn't plenty of well researched answers that are a Google search away for anyone.

But, then again, don't bother. Aside from any particular physical evidence, even more clear is the fact that the "alternate" story doesn't make any sense. You want to start a war with Iraq or Afghanistan? How about you find some terrorists from one of those places instead of the random Saudis? Or do a reasonable job planting some WMDs (not memos or hearsay but real bloody stuff that you can bring back hard evidence of) in Iraq (which would have been a hell of a lot easier and better, surer motivation for war). Another idea: find a terrorist plot that would work on its own, instead of a weird compound plot where you fly in some planes, but then also have explosives. It makes no sense.

And why the hell would you bother with tower 7? It just increases your risk of detection without anyone giving a single crap. How many people were going to say, "well, the terrorists got the big towers... but they didn't hurt tower 7, so we don't need to go to war". It's just so very dumb, and it's the kind of mistake not compatible with an otherwise apparently magical, omniscient, undetectable operation.

I can scarcely imagine a bizarre universe where any of this makes sense. If I'm some Illuminati type who can pull of 9/11 the way these guys describe, I could have come up with a million cheaper, easier, surer plans - or even just simple variations that would have decreased risk of detection, funneled American reaction better, and generally been not batshit insane.

Sure people have profited from 9/11 - a lot of varied, disconnected people have probably got moderately rich. But if they needed money and had this kind of skill and willingness to kill thousands, they could have got it a lot of easier ways. Again, if you want to go to war with Iraq, launch a few missiles out of Baghdad into Israel. Boom. Easy (comparatively at least). Or just find a few Iraqis and blow them up somewhere sensitive (and maybe, again, plant some good evidence). Again, just put enough explosive (or, hell, a nuke) in their semi truck to blow up the building - no synchronized controlled demolition required. Or millions other easier, more foolproof plans.

It's like the fantastic idiots who believe Russians surgically modified children and crashed them in experimental aircraft by Roswell (or whatever). Yeah, sure, whatever... I guess it's possible (as in doesn't contravene laws of physics) and I suppose it is an explanation for certain people's claims of experiences. But it's also complete nonsense. It's not a plan that makes sense to work towards any possible goal. And, like these WTC conspiracies, it's trivial to come up with much better plans that don't require nearly the work or risk and accomplish goals easier and better.

In before the "WTC 7 was blowed up by splosives hurr" people.

Oh yeah, the Arab Spring revolts were such a NATO conspiracy. They really had to spread it, topple a couple of other dictators peacefully, all that to be able to... whatever it is they're scheming to do.


Yes, and remember that the Afghan war was all about a pipeline. Then for a little while it was about minerals. I don't remember what it's all about now. Oh, and the Iraq war was all about oil too. Obviously. Also, the Cold War was all fake.

The general WTC conspiracy (ie. it was all done by the US government) is complete nutbars. It imagines a kind of omniscient foresight and complete control that it is quite clear the US government (and all of its fantastic, bumbling agencies) lacks.

It can be an oddly pleasing little fiction to imagine hyper-intelligent, all-powerful string pullers manipulating world events. The reality is that the guys at the top are, well, guys like George Bush - aggressive, not to smart, motivated by emotion and family grudges, and born in the right place to the right people to one day end up in power.

And this video is clearly made by disingenuous douchebags. They don't acknowledge and counter the "official explanation" (and there is official explanations for this stuff, it's not new material) - they just kind of hand-wave it away. If they said "well, this is the official explanation but here's why we still think there's issues" then I'd have a bit of respect for them. Instead, they pretend this is stuff that hasn't been responded to; the same approach you see in, say, anti-evolution videos. Douchebags.

Humorously, the "1500 engineers agree" crap is also common in anti-evolution videos; similarly, I'm sure it would be easy to respond with 1500 engineers named Steve who accept the general "official" version. If they had good arguments, they should have led with them, instead of trotting out the same tired crap and hiding behind the "big numbers" of engineers they found.

@marbles

Oh yeah, the Arab Spring revolts were such a NATO conspiracy. They really had to spread it, topple a couple of other dictators peacefully, all that to be able to... whatever it is they're scheming to do.


Also: "It's already been admitted that NATO had special forces on the ground from the beginning of the "humanitarian mission"." --> [citation needed]

As for the WTC, people far more informed than I have debunked the numerous conspiracy theories surrounding it (first site Google offers, for some among many examples). But hey, those are all just guv'mint paid shills perpetuating the lies, and the evidence they present is really just very, very elaborate smoke screens, right?

>> ^hpqp:

@marbles
Yes, the Sift is not ready for the TRUTH, what with reason and evidence getting in the way and all that.
But keep preachin' brother!

@marinara
It's one thing to know that stepping in in Libya to aid a grassroots revolt (while not doing the same elsewhere, e.g. Syria) is about oil, it's another entirely to suggest that the big evil guv'mint would take the risk murdering 3000 of its citizens for a 700bio$ in contracts. The terrorist attack on 9/11 was definitely opportunistically manipulated, but that doesn't make it a big conspiracy.


I'm still waiting... please share.

And for someone calling out lies to believe Libya was a "grassroots revolt" is hilarious. It's already been admitted that NATO had special forces on the ground from the beginning of the "humanitarian mission". The so called rebels were a bunch of incapable dumbfuks that were more interested in killing each other than taking on Gaddafi. Those damn conspiracy nuts were right AGAIN.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

Anyone care to enlighten me as to why these supposed conspirators blew up the towers? I mean, it must have been a pretty extensive operation to plan, so I'm guessing they didn't just murder a few thousand of their own citizens for shits and giggles.
Hell, even maddox isn't retarded enough to actually believe this shit.


In his book, The Grand Chessboard, Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski (former national security advisor for President Carter, former director of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a member of the Trilateral Commission along with Bush Sr. and Dick Cheney) writes of an imperialistic endeavor of controlling the world's vast natural resources (oil, natural gas, minerals, gold, etc.) and also human labor in Eurasia (specifically central Asia/Uzbekistan) that the U.S. must undertake to maintain global domination despite the American public's indecisiveness towards the external projection of American power (in which he reminds the reader that the American public supported U.S.'s engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor) and cautions that it will become more difficult to establish consensus on foreign policy issues with an ever increasingly multi-cultural society in America unless the public widely perceives a massive direct external threat. (killtown.911review.org)

>> ^mxxcon:

>> ^marbles:
>> ^mxxcon:
These firefighters might not be lying or actors
The might not be lying or actors? Yeah, maybe this is the real conspiracy. The 9.11 truthers have staged a fake video of firefighters claiming huge explosions blew out the lobby of WTC1.
why don't you stop shitpicking on words and read the whole thing to understand what I said.


Oh, so it's my failure to understand the context of your statement? LOL

It's ok. Join your friend. The blue pill is great!

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

>> ^marbles:
>> ^EvilDeathBee:
rolleyes You don't believe there are levels of severity to conspiracies? Basically you're saying that your paranoid, delusional nonsense idea that the US government planned 9/11 causing one of the worst disasters in American history, if that were an actual conspiracy you would equate it's severity to some police officer falsely arresting someone and planting evidence up them, and having the station cover it up? Are you retarded? Oh right, you believe in all this 9/11 cover up horse shit. I suppose the US faked the moon landing too. Don't forget your tin foil hat.Brilliant reply. So what are the levels of severity to conspiracies? I need to know this because I'm retarded/believe in 9/11 cover up horse shit. Or better yet, just define conspiracy for me.

aaaand, ignore
i'm this close || to doing the same w/ him

>> ^marbles:

>> ^mxxcon:
These firefighters might not be lying or actors
The might not be lying or actors? Yeah, maybe this is the real conspiracy. The 9.11 truthers have staged a fake video of firefighters claiming huge explosions blew out the lobby of WTC1.
why don't you stop shitpicking on words and read the whole thing to understand what I said.