Topic: 9/11 derail: rpietila Wall Observer - the Quality TA Thread ;) - page 4. (Read 6216 times)

if it's such drivel, explain how the buildings came down in free fall? The termite residue? The multon iron pools. The multiple multiple records of explosive blast in the basement before the first plane hit? The third tower that came down in the same fashion with out being hit by any plane? How the central pillar fell to dust when if it did collapse due to fire damage that central pillar should have stayed up as that's what it's built for. What about the 3rd plane that "evaporated" on impact with the Pentagon which is scientifically impossible no matter how you slice it.

If your disillusioned enough to think that the US government wouldn't do something like that TO START A WAR, you really need to do more research into the first second, Vietnam and most other wars.

In Ukraine over ten thousand people have been killed. Mostly on the rebel side, and what do the Americans(American controlled NATO to be more precise) do? Send the Kiev army 4.5m dollars in aid.

Weapons of mass destruction? PAAAHA

Asama bin Laden = terrorist? Former close friend of Bush admin on via payroll more like

Isreal.. Thousands dead, over 300 children, America treble the military funding for poor old Israel.

Oh no Isis are getting close to an oil refinery... We better bomb them while congress are conveniently on holiday!!

http://instagram.com/mallaretreat

Blind + sheep + sad

well this is a straw man I'd say. You have cherry-picked the most difficult to believe parts of 9/11 conspiracy theories, yet those are not the only ones in existence. For instance it is possible that the towers indeed collapsed just due to the impacts of the airplanes, yet US gov was aware of the attack.

Anyways I don't see a reason to debate this with you. You seem to have made up your mind already and you have categorized people with a different opinion with certain derogatory labels. In other words, your mind has stopped receiving new signals concerning the subject matter and thus killed any potential for a beneficial discussion.

My point here has always been that absolute belief is dangerous. And it doesn't matter if it is absolute belief in your favorite conspiracy theory, in your government, in your religion or in your conviction that there are no conspiracies. The refusal to consider an idea and the insulting of its proponents reeks of dogma to me and I'm allergic to that shit 

Oh and let me take this chance to state my own personal bias: while I don't support ANY dogma, I am much more sympathetic towards people believing their own conspiracy theories than towards people who stand firmly behind the official cultural narrative. It's just a personal aesthetic preference, so take it as such.

fucking red pill. Can be hard to digest at times...

No of course they did not. Many have spoken out, some lost their lives for it. Respect the martyrs and shut up, please.

The truth is about to hit you hard. With one minute google search you will find enough to read to permanently change your thinking about this subject. The condition is, of course, that you have the cognitive ability to understand what you read, and some background in science to verify the hard evidence. But most of people have those. The problem is their brainwash. (Somebody better versed in this area can explain, I lack the correct words.)

I've begun to think that the reason why more and more unbelievable things are propagated as truth in mass media, is to gauge the individual people's reactions via social media. You are graded in a scale of most gullible to least gullible. This list is kept for future purposes. Then there is a breaking point when you decide to actively disbelieve everything, the attitude that if it's on the mass media, it is more likely false than true, and anyway not good for me. That is a point of no return, your life has just started.  

That's why I said it's not about intellect. I respect risto's intellect and believe it's stronger than mine, but it doesn't mean that it always produces better results than mine does. Humans are not computers, and no human conclusion is made using intellect only. Smart people sometimes can believe in stupid things, just because they want to believe in them.

It's called human nature....

Anyone who is delusional enough to buy into a massive conspiracy that would necessarily involve tens of thousands of individuals in not only the government, but also aviation, engineering, explosives, and building security... all of whom have kept their mouths shut all this time about the empty airplanes (or the rockets on airplanes... or just rockets or whatever the hell the nuts want to believe now), all the explosives rigged up in the buildings weeks in advance, and the crews who went around the building discreetly planting the explosives in what would be the largest planned demolition of a building ever... all in the goal to kill their fellow countrymen in cold blood...

(this would be the same government, by the way, that couldn't even keep a presidential blow job secret for long) .... yes, I do begin to doubt the intellectual capacities of anyone who could believe in such drivel.

Heh. When you respect someones intellect but suddenly lose that respect because you disagree with some conclusions (which were arrived at by a respectable intellect!) you lose that respect? Seems to me this says more about your intellect than his

It's not about intellect. It's other cognitive feature, I'm not sure what to call it. Skepticism? Gullibility? Self-deception? It's compatible with any level of intellect, from very high to very low.

Professor Buttcorn and co would probably say the same about you and your support of Bitcoin. Ironic, eh?

People! Go vote about 9/11! https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/whats-your-opinion-about-ta-and-911-730862  Every vote matters! 

Your resorting to ad hominems speaks volumes.

to quote ErisDiscordia from just a few posts back:

to explain building 7 collapse from fire, you're using the only other example of a skyscraper collapsing (apparently) from fire: the twin towers. lol. of course those were also demolished on purpose, maybe using some sort of nanothermite.

I don't know of any case (other than 9/11) where a steel-framed building collapsed from fire. You?


Indeed. Man-made ones specifically prepared to bring them down.

WTC steel was tested for 2000 degrees C and the kerosene's open air burning temperature is around 350 degrees C. You can't have a fire that burns at 350 degrees burn something that melts at 2000 degrees.

Crazy + grammar + ignorance.

You should study a bit before you watch too many propaganda videos...

That and the structural beams that hold the towers up were all cut to a Tee of 45 degrees that people can all see pics of. The only way this happens is if it was pre cut and fabricated and makes sense that a single fire can knock such a big building down in one swoop without affecting the others.

How about the insurance stocks that secretly shot up with big orders the days leading up to it? Whats this I hear that Bush's relatives or he was the head of the security servailance team or something leading up to the attack... too many things to obvious that it was coordinated to invade another country for its resources.

To believe that conspiracies don't happen is to fall prey to what I call the Great Conspiracy.

"Conspiracy theorist" has become the universal derogatory term with which to label anyone unwilling to line up behind the official cultural narrative without the need to actually engage him/her in meaningful discussion or to present facts which contradict his/her theory. Exactly like the term "communist" some decades ago.

To believe any one conspiracy theory to be 100% false, especially without consulting the evidence, is as insane as believing any one of them to be 100% true. This is outdated artistotelian either/or thinking which just doesn't cut it when thinking about complex phenomena.

The fact that people are routinely dismissing conspiracy theories from a position of arrogant superiority without feeling the need to engage the evidence (because they KNOW what is true and what is not...) seems extremely worrying to me as it indicates a captured population which has been trained to unquestioningly trust authority and even attack anyone who dares suggest that the authorities are not benevolent and wise.

Shame on you, people! Go read Robert Anton Wilsons work on conspiracy theories and learn how think about them in a sane manner - namely by assigning probabilities to various parts of presented theories according to your best effort at interpretin g the currently available facts. HURR DURR you are stupid because conspiracies makes you just look like a pathetic lemming.

EDIT: just to give you guys an example of what I'm talking about, let's consider the 9/11 case.

The theory here is that the US government (or parts of it) knew about the attacks before they happened or maybe even partly or completely organized them. If true, this would not present anything unprecedented as far as actions of governments go. Oppressive regimes routinely stage false flag operations in order to consolidate public opinion against a presented enemy, or pass legislation deemed unacceptable under regular conditions. So the most important part of the theory - the motive of the actor, can be deemed plausible for it has precedents. This is further supported by the speed with which the US gov responded with the PATRIOT act - it looks like they were prepared.

As for the actual logistics of the attack, whether steel beams can collapse from the heat generated by burning fuel, whether towers will collapse with such speed as they have when not destroyed by controlled demolition, where the plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon went, what about building 7...I am not sure about these things for I don't consider myself an expert in any areas of knowledge needed to form an expert opinion here. I do consider the circumstances highly suspicious though and the official story seems to have holes in it. Overall, considering the possible motives of the US gov, I am assigning a probability of 50 - 70% that the US gov was at least partly aware and participating in the attacks. In other words I consider it more likely than not, that they had something to do with it. After all, when I consider incidents which prompted the US to go to war in the past (sinking of Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin) it would be the exception, not the rule if this was not a false flag operation.

This is incorrect and what they want you to believe. Yes heat does weaken steal but it doesn't weaken it to the extent that a steal frame would collapse. Especially not in a controlled manner.