9/11 discussion

[Hexen]

I have to say though I've been having mixed thoughts about 9/11 lately, but I've been wondering though, is it really legitimate to think it was a inside job or staged? I know it is commonly dismissed as a conspiracy theory but is it possible that the point has been tainted or hijacked by right wing libertarians to damage it's credibility?

The thing is I don't know what to make out of 9/11 or what to believe.

[Rafiq]

Doesn't matter.

[Hexen]

So what is really the origin of the "9/11 is a inside job" claim?

Well actually, I was asking if how to do respond to people who believes in the 9/11 conspiracy theories?

[Triple A]

I have an opinion, I wont explain here because I am sure that this thread will be used by our enemies to scare people away from leftism.

[Apoi_Viitor]

I know it is commonly dismissed as a conspiracy theory but is it possible that the point has been tainted or hijacked by right wing libertarians to damage it's credibility?

Most people dismiss 9/11 "truth" theories because they are ridiculously implausible and lack any real evidence.

[Magón]

Most conspiracy theories are just ones made-up by people who like to put too much detail and thought into a action that was just plainly done as was shown all over the world. People get a kick out of trying to grab what isn't actually there without some editing, and what could look like something, but is only there for a split second.

[Triple A]

Ahh, the irony.
http://images.starcraftmazter.net/4chan/for_forums/i_like_where_thread_going.jpg

[Blackscare]

http://images.wikia.com/halofanon/images/8/83/How-about-no.jpg

[Os Cangaceiros]

So what is really the origin of the "9/11 is a inside job" claim?

Dude, there have always been people who've viewed major events through the lense of what essentially amounts to the poli-sci version of Star Wars.

Everything would be great in the world if it wasn't for that damn cabal of bankers/Jews/Freemasons! It's very comforting to view the world situation in such a way, as it saves you from carrying out any real thought or analysis. How has 50+ years of US policy in the Middle East contributed to the rise of Salafist activism, and subsequently 9-11? Pfft. What happened on 9-11 was just the result of evil bankers who want to implant all of us with microchips due to their insane love of powwwaaaaahhh. It's a view that's about as complicated as some of the cruder, more unsophisticated branches of the American right-wing, for whom 9-11 was just the result of some evil people living in the desert/caves who suddenly decided one day that they were jealous of all our freeduhm.

[Psy]

Most people dismiss 9/11 "truth" theories because they are ridiculously implausible and lack any real evidence.
Not totally, the military did drop the ball by not even able to defend their central command center (the Pentagon). One must ask with the world's largest military budget why didn't the Pentagon have the means to blow up a slow moving airliner slowly banking to line up with it? Even obsolete Vietnam era anti-air tech can easily take down airliners. Before 9/11 one would have concluded with the vast military budget the Pentagon would have been a impenetrable fortress that would quickly be defended by a butt-load of air defense just encase Russian bombers are able to launch a sneak attack on the capital.

Either way you look at it, there is a conspiracy as even the official explanation means there was a ongoing conspiracy to half-ass US defense prior to 9/11

[Hoplite]

There are differing versions of "inside job."

The popular ones are that the government knew it was happening and actively allowed it to happen by stifling the response, or they set it up by blowing the buildings.

The former, I couldnt speak to.

The latter however, is impossible, and I say that in full confidence. The explosive processes required to bring a building down are extremely complex; it takes MONTHS of prep work before knocking a building down AND it requires access to virtually all of the structural members of the building. That means knocking down walls, jackhammering concrete, and laying charges and lines. This is NOT a quiet or subtle job that you can do in a night or over the weekend without someone wondering what the fuck you're doing with that jackhammer.

You cant just grab a few barrels of TNT, throw them in the basement with a lit cigarette and run. It REALLY doesnt work that way.

On top of that, the explosives used to take buildings down are LOUD. There is not a Bold button Bold enough to highlight that. The explosions can be heard clearly for many miles away from the blast site clear as day. There are some eyewitness statements that claim they heard an explosion, however the problem is they are fairly scarce and NO video or audio recordings of the event picked anything like it up. If it was truly a demo charge explosion, EVERYONE in Lower Manhattan would have heard it and be saying the same thing, not just a few guys near ground zero. It wouldn't be a question.

[Hexen]

So what's the whole story about WTC 7?

[Blackscare]

So what's the whole story about WTC 7?

reptilians

[Iraultzaile Ezkerreko]

So what's the whole story about WTC 7?

The Doctor was forced to detonate it in order to prevent the Dalek conquest of Earth.

[Obs]

How about we respond seriously to people asking questions in the Learning forum

[Iraultzaile Ezkerreko]

How about we respond seriously to people asking questions in the Learning forum

Or, we could spend our time thoughtfully responding to questions about actual Marxist theory instead of engaging in conspiracy-mongering.

[tbasherizer]

All you have to know is that the radical Islamists the news talks about actually exist, that the US aleady is in two wars, and that the event has already been milked of all its political value except for some good old, honest-to-goodness, flag-waving, tear-jearking, hand-over-hearting jingoism. If there was a secret cabal behind the whole thing, (which there probably wasn't, judging from all the real engineers and scientists who attest to it) it doesn't matter, because it can no longer be used to provoke wars again, and going around pasting up infowars posters won't do anything of value for anyone. Except Alex Jones' business.

[Dimmu]

The easiest explanation is always the best..

How hard is it to understand that religious wackos might have done something like this?

[Blackscare]

How about we respond seriously to people asking questions in the Learning forum

illuminati

[Amphictyonis]

Dude, there have always been people who've viewed major events through the lense of what essentially amounts to the poli-sci version of Star Wars.

Everything would be great in the world if it wasn't for that damn cabal of bankers/Jews/Freemasons!

Have you read Bakunin? :)

[Tablo]

This thread is going to need a mod or admin...

Most the 9/11 conspiracies are easily debunked. The only one that really has an ounce of plausibility is that they knew and allowed it to happen, which I am quite skeptical of. WTC 7 fell because of fire or something to that effect. Not really sure.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Have you read Bakunin? :)

Of course I've read Bakunin. Don't you see my tendency?

He is our patron saint. :wub: Wrote something about the jooz, you say? And Proudhon did, too? I'll get back to you on that.

[Sensible Socialist]

Reveft is not a friendly place for anyone who challenges the official narrative of 9/11. After all, if it doesn't have to do with the imminent overthrow of capitalist, which will happen any day now :(, it must not be worth talking about.

At the very least, people should realize that the government obviously did not want the whole truth to be known, ergo some sort of conspiracy is in the works. But people here don't like to acknowledge that, heaven forbid they be compared to the likes of David Icke.

There are serious questions regarding that day. As it stands, I will not believe the official story, because of the governments history of lying and deceit, as well as the various holes in their story and the questions they will not answer.

[Tim Finnegan]

My girlfriend is a trainee civil engineer. The 9/11 collapses are used as in-detail case studies, and so the issue of conspiracy theories inevitably comes up. She says that the official verdict makes perfect sense, that most of the conspiracy theories are entirely infeasible, and that those few which are even remotely feasible explain nothing as well as the official verdict. I tend to trust her on these things.

[NoOneIsIllegal]

The only one that really has an ounce of plausibility is that they knew and allowed it to happen, which I am quite skeptical of.
Some stupid co-worker (same guy if people saw "The Obama Deception" thread) tried convincing me that a girl knew about it, and when she tried to stop it, FBI agents tied her down, gagged her, and killed her.
...wut? Just one girl, eh?
Conspiracy theorists will listen to anyone, even the most unreliable source, just to have "proof". They're so willing to believe anything.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Reveft is not a friendly place for anyone who challenges the official narrative of 9/11. After all, if it doesn't have to do with the imminent overthrow of capitalist, which will happen any day now :(, it must not be worth talking about.Bit of a strawman about us all just being revolution-happy drones don't you think?

I reject the official narrative of 9/11 that "they hate us for our freedoms" that "Islam did this" that the wars by the US after 9/11 have anything to do with the incident.

But I also reject all these conspiracy theories and the waste of time that people put into "prooving" these conspiracies.

Was their a conspiracy, hell yeah, it was to use a freak accident in order to justify the US unleashing it's military in an unrestrained way after the end of the cold war. In the years before they had to play nice and act like they were "negotiating" with the UN, part of a legal, civilized world etc. After 9/11 they had a fucking laundry list of shit they wanted to do.


At the very least, people should realize that the government obviously did not want the whole truth to be known, ergo some sort of conspiracy is in the works. But people here don't like to acknowledge that, heaven forbid they be compared to the likes of David Icke. If 9/11 happened as they said, would you support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the PATRIOT ACT, profiling of Arabs, setting up by the FBI of Muslims? I think - or at least hope - the answer is no. So what the fuck does it matter what they could have possibly maybe done, but of course then fabricated the evidence anyway and control everything so we will never find proof, just a deeper conspiracy yadda yadda yadda.

I don't have to "dig up" secrets to condemn the US's wars, and their wars against us at home - it's mostly out in the fucking open. What keeps people complacent about the obvious "conspiracies" of the rich smashing us down is that people don't think they have the power to change things... something that many of these deep-dark conspiracy theories re-enforce.

Sure the US ruling class has a lot of secrets, but they are not good at keeping even small ones hidden, so something this massive would just be impossible to cover-up. If people want to know the dark secrets of the US ruling class, the best bet is some more wiki-leaks type things and ultimately overthrowing them and opening up the files.

Personally I don't think we need to speculate about the nature of the US ruling class, capitalism, or imperialism - the worst aspects of the system are out in the open: the conspiracy to keep food prices profitable at the expense of starving people, the conspiracy to let banks let go of their debts by squeezing us and on top of that make out taxes pay for private corporate debt, the conspiracy to solve the inherent problems of capitalism through pushing down working class wages and living standards.

[Tablo]

Some stupid co-worker (same guy if people saw "The Obama Deception" thread) tried convincing me that a girl knew about it, and when she tried to stop it, FBI agents tied her down, gagged her, and killed her.
...wut? Just one girl, eh?
Conspiracy theorists will listen to anyone, even the most unreliable source, just to have "proof". They're so willing to believe anything.
Sounds like such bs. I really do not understand the people that come up with all these crazy conspiracy theories.

[Scarlet Fever]

I'm sceptical--of both the conspiracy theories and the government's "official" narrative.

[Tim Finnegan]

I'm sceptical--of both the conspiracy theories and the government's "official" narrative.
Why on earth are you scare-quoting the word "official"? :confused:

[Jimmie Higgins]

Sounds like such bs. I really do not understand the people that come up with all these crazy conspiracy theories.You know it's the government that makes all conspiracy theories right? They do it so that we will spent too much time worrying about the secret shit they could possibly be pulling to do anything about the obvious shit they ARE doing out in the open. It's true, I've read documents and saw a youtube video exposing how elites at the bohemian grove orchestrate all the conspiracy theories!

[Psy]

My girlfriend is a trainee civil engineer. The 9/11 collapses are used as in-detail case studies, and so the issue of conspiracy theories inevitably comes up. She says that the official verdict makes perfect sense, that most of the conspiracy theories are entirely infeasible, and that those few which are even remotely feasible explain nothing as well as the official verdict. I tend to trust her on these things.
Yet that doesn't explain why the Pentagon the HQ of the world's largest imperialist armed forces couldn't shoot down a large defenseless slow moving target with more then a half-hour advanced warning. If instead it was a KGB sneak attack in advance of a main Russian invasion force, the US forces would have been decapitated and thrown into complete disarray as we seen the US military wait for the chain of command instead of simply reacting like the Russian military did with mobilizing forces for a counter-attack of Georgia before Moscow even knew what was going on. What good is a imperialist armed body to the ruling class if it can't even defend itself?

Not to say the US military stood down it could very well be the US military was just bloated and incompetent thus was totally unprepared for any serious threat against it.

[cb9's_unity]

Here's my equally plausible conspiracy theory. There was actually a conspiracy to create the 9/11 conspiracy theory's. Some group of right-wingers knew that there would be nothing more offensive to most Americans than the idea that their own government was responsible for 9/11. So they called up their friend Alex Jones and told him to start spouting his truther bullshit (they knew the mainstream media couldn't even comprehend something so anti-Bush coming out of the right, so nobody would notice that Jones was a right-wing "libertarian").

The logical result is that every time 9/11 "truth" got brought up, there would be some pundit conflating that sort of logic with the whole American left. Thus every time a centrist heard the words "911 truth," the democrats lost a vote.

[Tim Finnegan]

Yet that doesn't explain why the Pentagon the HQ of the world's largest imperialist armed forces couldn't shoot down a large defenseless slow moving target with more then a half-hour advanced warning. If instead it was a KGB sneak attack in advance of a main Russian invasion force, the US forces would have been decapitated and thrown into complete disarray as we seen the US military wait for the chain of command instead of simply reacting like the Russian military did with mobilizing forces for a counter-attack of Georgia before Moscow even knew what was going on. What good is a imperialist armed body to the ruling class if it can't even defend itself?

Not to say the US military stood down it could very well be the US military was just bloated and incompetent thus was totally unprepared for any serious threat against it.
Perhaps because nobody realise that the damn thing was actually aimed at the Pentagon, but instead believed that it was some sort of kidnapping gone awry because of the incompetence of the pilots? This was the first attack of its kind, after all, most previous hijackings conducted by individuals of identifiably Middle Eastern heritage have involved turning around and stopped off in some rogue state or other, which, given that Flight 77 turned and headed in the general direction of the Middle East, seemed the most likely outcome. As such, it's no surprise that they were slow to act- it is generally held to be unbecoming of the military to blow up an aircraft full of civilians on the off-chance that it may hit a strategically important building.

[The Red Next Door]

I said it, before and i say it, again. I personally, do not give a flying fuck about 9/11 and i did said, it karma and it what the US deserve and the real victims are the working class workers, because America have to 1. did the same act in Chile, 2. fuck with the workers of the middle east. We blow up billions, but people have to cry over rich white yankees.


Also, the WTC collapse due to the heat melting the beams and steal in the building.
The heat from the jet fuel raise the fire to a temperature to allow that to happen.

[Tim Finnegan]

it karma
How the hell was it karma? Did the actual victims commit any of the sins which you (quite rightly, I will admit) place at the feet of the US government? Because it was a big goddam present in the lap of the bourgeoisie*, and I'm not sure what good deeds they did to receive that particular karmic bonus.

(*In the short term, at any rate. I'm inclined to agree that it represents the beginning of the collapse of liberalism a hegemonic political ideology, which could certainly cause problems for the bourgeoisie further along the line.)


Also, the WTC collapse due to the heat melting the beams and steal in the building.
The heat from the jet fuel raise the fire to a temperature to allow that to happenWell, just for the record, most of the the steel didn't actually melt (only some small segments), but was weakened to a point at which the building lost structural integrity. Steel has a very high melting point, but weakens very swiftly at high temperatures (i.e. on a graph of strength/temperature, it takes the form of a steeply plummeting curve, rather than a steadily falling line).

[Psy]

Perhaps because nobody realise that the damn thing was actually aimed at the Pentagon, but instead believed that it was some sort of kidnapping gone awry because of the incompetence of the pilots? This was the first attack of its kind, after all, most previous hijackings conducted by individuals of identifiably Middle Eastern heritage have involved turning around and stopped off in some rogue state or other, which, given that Flight 77 turned and headed in the general direction of the Middle East, seemed the most likely outcome. As such, it's no surprise that they were slow to act- it is generally held to be unbecoming of the military to blow up an aircraft full of civilians on the off-chance that it may hit a strategically important building.
We are talking about a half hour after the second plane hit the towers. In that time the US Army should have had more then enough time to deploy self-propelled anti-air gun/missile systems that should be stored near the capital in the event of a bombing raid on the capital.

[Tim Finnegan]

We are talking about a half hour after the second plane hit the towers. In that time the US Army should have had more then enough time to deploy self-propelled anti-air gun/missile systems that should be stored near the capital in the event of a bombing raid on the capital.
That doesn't meant that they felt confident enough to fun down a plane full of civilians; there was still a chance, albeit slim, that Flight 77 may not have been intended as a missile. Even the military high-ups are only human, and were no doubt in some degree of shock and confusion. Remember Hanlon's razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence."

[The Grey Blur]

people have to cry over rich white yankees.
as you'd imagine in as multi-cultural a city as new york there were plenty of latinos, blacks and even muslims within the towers when they fell.

[The Vegan Marxist]

So what's the whole story about WTC 7?

Since everyone else is (rightfully) being a troll about this, because really, everything of the 9/11 truth movement is nothing but pseudoscience, I'll answer your question, in the hopes of never asking it ever again! In fact, I'll go into the WTC's as a whole, just to make sure.

This is the major theory that has fueled the entire movement from the start & it deserves to be addressed. In order to support the controlled demolition theory, conspiracy theorists tend to attack the official NIST report by insisting that fire does not melt steel.

Though, what always bothered me about this was that it was a straw-man argument. Never did the NIST report claim that steel had melted. What did the NIST report say? It claimed that the fires were sufficient enough to weaken the steel to the point of structural failure - NOT melt the steel.

To better understand this, one must first understand the structure of the WTC.

Most high-rises have a concrete inner core or concrete-encased outer columns, or both. Guess what, the WTC had neither of these. Instead, the WTC's steel columns & trusses were protected by layer of foam fireproofing, which was blown off during the plane impacts.

For the north tower, 15% of the perimeter columns & 13% of the core columns were severed, with many more damaged. When it came to the south tower, 14% of the perimeter columns & 21% of the core columns were severed, with many more damaged. The difference between the crash & normal office fires is that the crashes ended up piling debris against the furthest walls & corners, providing fuel for persistent fires right at the most vulnerable points in the building.

Although it is true that steel doesn't melt until it reaches 2750 degrees F, it loses 50% of its strength at 1100 degrees F. The worst of the fires were burning at 1800 degrees F (sadly, a lot of conspiracy theorists will claim that fire couldn't weaken steel, yet they still claim that it can melt it, go figure).

As the weakened floor trusses sagged, they pulled on both the core columns & perimeter columns. Because the perimeter columns provided only 40% of the building's support & were weakened the most by fire, the sagging caused the perimeter columns to bow inward. The photo below shows bowing of 20 inches along the east face of the south tower at 9:53.

http://911motive.tripod.com/WTCTWO953.jpg

And further bowing 1 minute before the collapse:

http://toolateforregrets.tripod.com/WTCTWO958.jpg

The bowing continued until the perimeter columns finally reached their breaking point & snapped. To get a close up on this happening, then look no further:

nLHGLI1Ihv0

The fact that the worst fires took place where the debris was concentrated is why the south tower collapsed to the east & the north tower towards the south. The north tower had half as many floors of weight on its weakened columns, which is one reason it stood twice as long as the south tower, but its own collapse was inevitable.

At 10:21, an NYPD aviation unit officer reported that the north tower was buckling in the southwest corner & leaning to the south. An NYPD officer took the photo below at 10:23, which shows bowing of as much as 55 inches:

http://toolateforregrets.tripod.com/WTCONE1023.jpg

Seeing as to where the bowing taking major length at 10:23, here a live video shows where the collapse initiates at 10:28, 5 seconds after the bowing takes damage:

ezxwA0Fmrak

There are a lot of conspiracy theorists who seem highly unable to discredit the bowing theory due to the photo/video evidence which confirms it as a fact, so they instead try & fabricate straw-man claims such as "fire doesn't melt steel", & then follow next by attacking the facts. Like the fact that the steel did not melt! It was ultimately the fire & the sagging floor trusses that bowed the columns, in which led to the collapse of both towers.

Not a controlled demolition!

One of the best claims out right now put out by the "9/11 Truth" movement is that the buildings had fallen in free-fall speed. This is only for buildings 1, 2, & 7. For buildings 1 & 2, according to Loose Change, had fallen in under 10 seconds, which would be estimated as free-fall speed. Then, again according to Loose Change, building 7 was recorded to have fallen in under 7 seconds, which is another estimate for free-fall speed. Now, given that these are repeated claims by the movement to verify their theory of 9/11 being an inside job, I thought it might be necessary to clear that theory out of the debate on whether 9/11 was an inside job or not.

The truth is that the buildings didn't fall in under 10 seconds, which is recorded free-fall speed. That was clear bogus information that was given by Loose Change. Here's a video showing the true timing of the building's collapse:

qLShZOvxVe4

Then there is building 7. Yes, if you look when the building falls completely, you'll find a free-fall speed time, but the problem is that those videos that time free-fall in their calculations lack to include the early collapse of one of building 7's sections, which would be included with the time of collapse & would knock the "free-fall" speed claim out of the door:

G86yuunRBIw

I would also like to talk about the argument that "there's no way such a high-rise body of steel building could collapse due to fire." This is the same argument that many theorists make, in which they claim by making up the story that it's the first time in history this has happened. Yet they completely forget the fact that this was also the first time in history where a high-rise steel structure was hit by a 200-ton bullet, going at 490 mph & 590 mph, being rocked by explosions (inner & outer), had 15% of their support columns severed with others severely damaged, & their fire insulation completely blown away. All of this before the fires began to increase & take their toll.

For building 7, no other building has ever had 47 stories of weight on its supports after having the lower 10 floors scooped out 25% into the depth of the building by falling debris & its fires left to burn for 7 hours! Remember, most high-rises have a concrete inner core or concrete-encased outer columns, or both. In which none of the buildings on 9/11 had either of such.

And the idea that this is the first steel-framed structure to collapse due to fire is very misleading! Especially ones that were never struck by aircrafts.

How about in April of 2007 where sections of Interstate 580 collapsed from fire alone?

hXb5M8qKrjw

Or how about in 1997 where three 4-story buildings at the Kader Toy Factory in Singapore caught fire, in which all three collapsed from fire alone in under 2 hours?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kader_Toy_Factory_Fire

The Dogwood Elementary School in VA caught fire in 2000, which resulted to the collapse of the fire-affected sections in 21 minutes!

http://books.google.com/books?id=Lspr7M38Mw0C&pg=PA2&lpg=PA2&dq=dogwood+elementary+school+fire&source=bl&ots=XbZ6L9sp5s&sig=38KkU1Erd4AdGMoFwKbAUebKSCY&hl=en&ei=UwlBTKbMOoK78gaM3qkF&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CDQQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q&f=false

In 2005, fires broke out on the steel-framed Mumbai High North Platform, causing it to completely collapse in just 2 hours.

http://home.versatel.nl/the_sims/rig/bhn.htm

One can't deny all these incidents as well, which were similar to the WTC's collapse. The only difference between all those incidents & the WTC's is that the WTC was also hit by huge planes, bringing more damage to the structure.

[maskerade]

By focusing on the "9-11 as an inside job" conspiracy theory, which is what it is, real scrutiny is taken away from the greater evil - namely the destructive US foreign policy which caused the attack.

It is easier for someone to dismiss claims of 9-11 being an inside job than to actually analyse the causes behind it, and so the debate becomes slanted: either you accept the government's line that terrorists hate American freedom or you claim it was an inside job. Regardless, US imperialism is maintained because any critical inquiry is taken away from it.

[Psy]

That doesn't meant that they felt confident enough to fun down a plane full of civilians; there was still a chance, albeit slim, that Flight 77 may not have been intended as a missile.


Deployed forces wouldn't have to shoot down the airliners it would have been there to give the military that option. Also the military didn't deploy smoke screens to hamper visual based navigation, fog oil is hard to breath in and breathing it dramatically increases the risk of cancer but troops have respirators and they had a 1/2 hour to evacuate the capital so they could cover it in smoke encase it was a target.



Even the military high-ups are only human, and were no doubt in some degree of shock and confusion. Remember Hanlon's razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence."
I said that is a possibility that would be a conspiracy too, one where the military had embezzled its budget so it lacked the means to do the job it was tasked with, thus it covered up its lack of abilities in the follow up to 9/11.

[The Vegan Marxist]

By focusing on the "9-11 as an inside job" conspiracy theory, which is what it is, real scrutiny is taken away from the greater evil - namely the destructive US foreign policy which caused the attack.

It is easier for someone to dismiss claims of 9-11 being an inside job than to actually analyse the causes behind it, and so the debate becomes slanted: either you accept the government's line that terrorists hate American freedom or you claim it was an inside job. Regardless, US imperialism is maintained because any critical inquiry is taken away from it.

:laugh: You make it seem like those are the only options. You completely disregard science, and make it out as if we can only determine the truth of 9/11 through ideology. That's complete bullshit! Science can easily tell us that 9/11 wasn't an inside job, by any means. Fuck both sides of the story - govt. and Alex Jones cult. I'll stick with the scientific side.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Scientific explanations can tell you how* something like 9-11 happened, but they can't tell you why it happened. Pretty sure that's what the poster you quoted was referring to.

*in terms of the actual structural collapse, etc.

[I.Drink.Your.Milkshake]

I can say for certain, categorically that 9/11 was definitely a conspiracy. I'll go that far, and leave it.

[Nolan]

Yes it was a conspiracy - by Islamic jihadists.

[Jimmie Higgins]

:laugh: You make it seem like those are the only options. You completely disregard science, and make it out as if we can only determine the truth of 9/11 through ideology. That's complete bullshit! Science can easily tell us that 9/11 wasn't an inside job, by any means. Fuck both sides of the story - govt. and Alex Jones cult. I'll stick with the scientific side.
Maybe I misread it, but I thought maskerade was arguing that the debate over conspiracy or non-conspiracy is a distraction and basically polarizes the discussion over 9/11 rather than allowing for a meaningful debate about imperialism etc.

I was working customer service in a yuppie the Bay Area when the sort of liberal conspiracies began to emerge and it was pretty amazing because it was taken up by a lot of professionals - engineers and doctors and lawyers and so on. When I felt safe (I was at work) enough to kind of push the issue and ask what would proof of this conspiracy do or matter, they'd invariably say that it would cause people to rise up or lead to the imprisonment of Bush.

So the sense I got was that this conspiracy was really the result of the rampant idealism (common in US politics and even commoner among people who do mental labor) and the desire to find a short-cut to change. Professionals who don't understand why the US government would bomb and don't have much experience with collective organizing, instead tend to want to influence the material world through ideas alone.

[Hexen]

What about the scientists/professors who claim of finding "nanothermite" from the remains is this true? Also what about the "slicing metal as butter" claim?

[Die Rote Fahne]

It's irrelevant. Anything is possible, but the most likely situation is what is widely accepted. That 19 terrorists hijacked planes and crashed them into buildings.

There is no doubt that the situation was USED after the fact. However, to speculate, and waste time on the issue, is completely absurd.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwZ-vIaW6Bc

Noam Chomsky explains it well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMwAifRQOU4

Norman Finkelstein also explains it.

[The Vegan Marxist]

What about the scientists/professors who claim of finding "nanothermite" from the remains is this true? Also what about the "slicing metal as butter" claim?

Steven Jones has done plenty of speeches about this in which he points out the chemical elements found within the debris. These elements pointed out are as such: iron, sulfur, aluminum, potassium, manganese, fluorine, & titanium.

Yes, most of these elements can be found in thermate. Jones had this one right. So what's the problem here? Well, like any proper scientist who would conduct studies on these elements, they'd first try & find any natural sources in which these elements could come from. And guess what? They all check out for other natural sources:

Sulfur: The third most common ingredient in the WTC construction was gypsum-based drywall, which is 18.62% sulfur.
Iron: Used in paint & electronic devices.
Potassium: Used in concrete.
Manganese: Used in the structural steel, paint, batteries, & ceramics.
Fluorine: Used in Freon. 200,000 pounds of Freon cooled the WTC complex. This was the largest air-conditioning system in the country.
Titanium: Used in paper & paint & made up 2% of each of the 767's. WTC7 was also clad in polished steel & titanium.

I find the idea of Jones claiming these elements were uncommon & only found within thermate quite disturbing, & at the least illogical.

So what would any professional scientist do next? Well, they would check if these elements were presently in their correct, signature quantities.

According to Steven Jones' own estimates, "about 1,000 pounds of explosives would be sufficient [per tower]". For both towers & WTC7, this would equal about 3,000 pounds of thermate. Thermate is 2% sulfur, in which calculates to about 60 pounds of sulfur. Approximately 1 million tons (2 billion pounds) of dust blanketed lower Manhattan.

So, based on Professor Jones' estimates, a thermate reaction would cause the WTC dust to be approximately 0.000003% sulfur. Correct? (don't worry, it's text. You can get a calculator if needed)

Yet, this would then be highly unlikely for such a low percentage to be detectable, especially when compared to USGS dust samples in which showed as much as 5.4% sulfur!

And finally, what is the last important thing a scientist would need to do in order to confirm the presence of a chemical device? Well, they would need to ensure that all of the elements of thermate are present. So, are all elements present?

I would say no! For the two main byproducts of thermate are aluminum oxide (41%) & barium nitrate (29%). Both are especially unique to thermate & would have no reason whatsoever to be found within the WTC - unless, that is, thermate was in the twin towers.

However, neither the USGS nor Steven Jones himself report finding any traces of either of these elements - the two main ingredients of thermate! Yes, Jones does point out the presence of aluminum, but there's a huge difference between aluminum & aluminum oxide (which has 3 oxygen atoms). Not to mention aluminum was common through its use in the WTC's facade, the 767's, & vehicles.

The presence of all elements pointed out through natural sources within the WTC complexes, & the very lack of aluminum oxide & barium nitrate just completely destroys the theory that thermate was in the WTC!

[StalinFanboy]

as you'd imagine in as multi-cultural a city as new york there were plenty of latinos, blacks and even muslims within the towers when they fell.

shhh don't say that.

[Amphictyonis]

Of course I've read Bakunin. Don't you see my tendency?

He is our patron saint. :wub: Wrote something about the jooz, you say? And Proudhon did, too? I'll get back to you on that.

I think his view of the American revolution was centered around the Masons and conspiracy theories. Antisemitism was almost the norm in his time...I don't think the word antisemitism existed then though. As far as 9/11 I'm totally open to the idea the American government did it or let it happen I just don't see any hard tangible proof. I mean, our military has killed millions of human beings, I don't think our 'leaders' really care if 2000 Americans die in order to achieve certian geopolitical objectives. I think it would actually be good for our cause if it were proven to be an "inside job" but it's not good for our cause to focus on it without any proof.

[Os Cangaceiros]

I'm unfamiliar with his views on the American Revolution.

[Jimmie Higgins]

This thread is a plotA Kafkaesque plot of alienation and powerlessness and absurdity!

[MarxSchmarx]

I just received word from my shape-shifting overlords in Buckingham Palace that this thread is starting to complicate their long term goals. Accordingly, I am going to have to close it before we cause any more raucous and endanger us all.

That, and it's an utter waste of time.