9/11 - Experts Speak Out

Rasta · Sep 14, 2012

Zeno said:
The CIA was involved in traficking cocaine from Columbia to the US. They did this to have money for which they don't have to account, a "black pot", as we say over here.

Today they're big in the land of heroin.

I'm not too well versed in all the conspiracy theories, but i'll tell you this: i'll take the word of a Taliban representative over that of a US official anytime.

I doubt that somehow.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWVC4JBjtEE]Osama Bin Laden Talks About the 9/11 Attacks - YouTube[/ame]

Zeno · Sep 14, 2012

Rasta said:
I doubt that somehow.

Osama Bin Laden Talks About the 9/11 Attacks - YouTube

OBL wasn't a Taliban. For all i know his last official job was CIA agent.

Rasta · Sep 14, 2012

Sargon said:
Okay. When an object collapses, it follows the path of least resistance.

The twin towers had a core of steel girders and an outer 'mesh' that gave them strength and flexibility. The mesh acted like a fly net, so that even if a few parts of it were broken (if, for example, a plane collided with the building) then the rest would remain strong and stable. The architects designed it so that the buildings would be able to take a few planes hitting before any major structural damage occurs.

Now, we know how the planes hit the towers, on one side or the other, but not all four at once. This means that any damage is localised at these locations, and even if the 'jet fuel weakened the steel beams' supporting the towers, which it's thoroughly unlikely to have done, the beams closest to the impact zone would be weaker than the ones on the other side of the tower.

The centre of the tower was the path of greatest resistance, so the beams - if they were weakened - would have bent/snapped and the top of the tower would have fallen sideways.

The lower floors - unaffected by the impacts and supported by the unweakened sections of steel and mesh - should have been just fine. There is literally no way physically that the entire thing could have just collapsed on itself because of the way it was designed. For it to happen once is an incredible anomaly, for it to happen twice in a few seconds is statistically and physically impossible.

I don't know about calling it physically impossible. According to computer simulations I have seen, the jet fuel would have covered the entire span of the floor(s) almost immediately. Both towers did survive the initial impacts as they were designed. The supports were weakened for nearly an hour before they collapsed, and since they were hit in similar ways, it makes sense that they would fall in similar ways. There was quite a bit of force coming down on those internal supports when the collapse started, and the towers were definitely not designed to survive catastrophic structural failure.

Yes, it was built with redundancies, but that can only go so far.

On your point with the CIA, yes I think they have performed black op assassinations, and overthrown governments, but they make mistakes, they are fallible, and not all powerful, IMO.

Bluehawk · Sep 14, 2012

Zeno said:
They have reason to hate us. We have only bussiness interest in their lands.

"They" also have many reasons to respect and support us, and that second part is not only false, but THEY have business interests in our country and everywhere else as well.

Zeno · Sep 14, 2012

Bluehawk said:
"They" also have many reasons to respect and support us, and that second part is not only false, but THEY have business interests in our country and everywhere else as well.

You're probably right. It's simply better not to trust anyone.

Bluehawk · Sep 14, 2012

Sargon of Akkad said:
They were known, but not world famous. And the US knew exactly who the culprit was before the ruins were cold, and made sure the world knew it. Despite the fact they never actually charged OBL with the crime.

I don't know what world anyone was living in on 9/11 in which OBL or Taliban were not known and infamous... unless they were too busy texting and chasing skirts.

As for the US knowing the culprit, the culprit was quick to declare total victory and celebrate our suffering in a widely distributed taped and written message and, as a matter of fact, while the ruins were still smoldering our officials did NOT know, and said they did not yet know, who was responsible.

Rasta · Sep 14, 2012

Zeno said:
OBL wasn't a Taliban. For all i know his last official job was CIA agent.

The taliban were trained by CIA too. I'm guessing what you mean is that so long as someone disagrees with anything a US official says, you will agree with that?

Bluehawk · Sep 14, 2012

Rasta said:
The taliban were trained by CIA too. I'm guessing what you mean is that so long as someone disagrees with anything a US official says, you will agree with that?

Taliban were NOT "trained by CIA"!

The Mujahideen were.

Zeno · Sep 14, 2012

Rasta said:
The taliban were trained by CIA too. I'm guessing what you mean is that so long as someone disagrees with anything a US official says, you will agree with that?

You can't deny something smells rotten. I can't tell you wether the rot is in the reason why OBL hated the US, in who did the attacks and why, in taking opportunities arising from the attacks, in what the secret services and military's role and knowledge was. Something else, a combination... ? So many lies have been exposed and still we're being lied to. Trust is something you can lose and earn. Not a special privilege once gained held forever.

Rasta · Sep 14, 2012

Emilio Primo said:
I take it you still never watched the video. Examining the physical evidence would be conclusive. Or in other words "without doubt". Do you mean to tell me you can't view something with your own eyes where it can give you pause that something is not right?

I did, like 10 years ago. But then I saw the responses to criticisms, I saw how the CT revised their theories as individual bits were debunked, how they were emotionally devoted to their thesis no matter what the evidence was, and how their minds twisted the evidence to suit their agenda.

Rasta · Sep 14, 2012

Bluehawk said:
Taliban were NOT "trained by CIA"!

The Mujahideen were.

The Taliban was a construct of the CIA and was armed by the CIA…. | Rupee News

Rasta · Sep 14, 2012

Sargon of Akkad said:
You've already made the assumption terrorists were capable of defying the defences of the US.

I'll not get into listing your assumptions, but people who accuse others of assumptions or bias usually have some of their own.

Rasta · Sep 14, 2012

Zeno said:
You can't deny something smells rotten. I can't tell you wether the rot is in the reason why OBL hated the US, in who did the attacks and why, in taking opportunities arising from the attacks, in what the secret services and military's role and knowledge was. Something else, a combination... ? So many lies have been exposed and still we're being lied to. Trust is something you can lose and earn. Not a special privilege once gained held forever.

Can you tell me that if you had the knowledge the government had, that you had the pressure of making decisions that effect the entire world, you would have made different decisions?

If it was all up to you, would you share a full disclosure of intelligence information on CNN? Do you think if governments stopped keeping secrets that our problems would go away?

That they only reason reality sucks is due to some selfish fat cat elites?

Bluehawk · Sep 14, 2012

Rasta said:
The Taliban was a construct of the CIA and was armed by the CIA…. | Rupee News

Rupee News is not authority on CIA, nor (obviously) is it capable of distinguishing between Mujahideen fighters and a sadistic murderous minority sect of Islam hated by everyone but themselves.

May there have been CIA operatives infiltrated into Taliban?

You betcha! Still are to this day.

However, our CIA had no reason to "arm Taliban" - they have more arms than anyone could ever possibly use coming from their precious allies and left over from everything else that has been happening there.

We did, absolutely, arm the Mujahideen for the sole purpose of kicking Ivan out of Afghanistan, successfully. He even departed, he says, eastern Europe.

Zeno · Sep 14, 2012

Rasta said:
Can you tell me that if you had the knowledge the government had, that you had the pressure of making decisions that effect the entire world, you would have made different decisions?

If it was all up to you, would you share a full disclosure of intelligence information on CNN? Do you think if governments stopped keeping secrets that our problems would go away?

That they only reason reality sucks is due to some selfish fat cat elites?

That's frankly ridiculous Rasta.

Something that made me think is how for instance the suspension of civil rights through the patriot act is a re-establishing of cold-war practices which have proven to can go terribly wrong.
I think there's also a distinction between no full disclosure and outright lying. And then still between "little lies" for the better and undermining the already brittle international framework through a great, cynical hoax (Iraq).

Rasta · Sep 14, 2012

Bluehawk said:
Rupee News is not authority on CIA, nor (obviously) is it capable of distinguishing between Mujahideen fighters and a sadistic murderous minority sect of Islam hated by everyone but themselves.

May there have been CIA operatives infiltrated into Taliban?

You betcha! Still are to this day.

However, our CIA had no reason to "arm Taliban" - they have more arms than anyone could ever possibly use coming from their precious allies and left over from everything else that has been happening there.

We did, absolutely, arm the Mujahideen for the sole purpose of kicking Ivan out of Afghanistan, successfully. He even departed, he says, eastern Europe.

This is fairly irrelevant to the thread, so I am willing to concede the point.

Emilio Primo · Sep 14, 2012

Bluehawk said:
I don't know what world anyone was living in on 9/11 in which OBL or Taliban were not known and infamous... unless they were too busy texting and chasing skirts.

BEFORE 9/11 is the point we are talking about not on or after 9/11.

Rasta · Sep 14, 2012

Zeno said:
That's frankly ridiculous Rasta.

Something that made me think is how for instance the suspension of civil rights through the patriot act is a re-establishing of cold-war practices which have proven to can go terribly wrong.
I think there's also a distinction between no full disclosure and outright lying. And then still between "little lies" for the better and undermining the already brittle international framework through a great, cynical hoax (Iraq).

It's not ridiculous. We used to broadcast our tactics on CNN, during Viet Nam. The effect was that the VC knew our tactics before our troops on the ground.

There is a reason why governments, not just the US mind you, behave the way they do.

Yes it sucks that it is impossible to determine between a civilian and a terrorist. Do I like the patriot act? No. Do I have a better idea? No.

If the US stopped worrying about international affairs, would things get better? I don't believe so. Do I think Iraq was a personal vendetta? Yes. Do I cry because Saddam is dead? No.

It seems that many people in liberal societies take the fabric of society for granted. They do not realize that all of our feel good fuzzy ideals mean nothing without the force of arms to ensure that it is so.

Emilio Primo · Sep 14, 2012

Rasta said:
I did, like 10 years ago. But then I saw the responses to criticisms, I saw how the CT revised their theories as individual bits were debunked, how they were emotionally devoted to their thesis no matter what the evidence was, and how their minds twisted the evidence to suit their agenda.

So because some had it wrong they all must be wrong? Is this why you keep referring to the over 10,00 experts in their respective fields who support the claim that something does not sit right, in the video, as "experts".

Maybe you are right maybe there is no big conspiracy, but the point remains what occurred does not account for, cannot account for what transpired.

Zeno · Sep 14, 2012

Rasta said:
It's not ridiculous. We used to broadcast our tactics on CNN, during Viet Nam. The effect was that the VC knew our tactics before our troops on the ground.

That IS ridiculous.

There is a reason why governments, not just the US mind you, behave the way they do.

Yes it sucks that it is impossible to determine between a civilian and a terrorist. Do I like the patriot act? No. Do I have a better idea? No.

If the US stopped worrying about international affairs, would things get better? I don't believe so. Do I think Iraq was a personal vendetta? Yes. Do I cry because Saddam is dead? No.

It seems that many people in liberal societies take the fabric of society for granted. They do not realize that all of our feel good fuzzy ideals mean nothing without the force of arms to ensure that it is so.

The force of arms is simply not there to protect our feel good fuzzy ideals, but to preserve "our" possessions. This isn't 1776, you know. Neither is the fabric of society constructed around ideals (ideals? really?) but around property.
People who are into that are allowed feel good fuzzy ideals because masses recquire opium.

About Iraq, my point is that it was one of those times my faith at least in US officials (or official versions) was severely battered.

And ultimately all these troubles remind me of the Ourobouros, the snake that bites its own tail. When you go full circle on the history of OBL or Saddam Hussain you end up in Washington.

Search

Search

9/11 - Experts Speak Out

Rasta

Zeno

Rasta

Bluehawk

Zeno

Bluehawk

Rasta

Bluehawk

Zeno

Rasta

Rasta

Rasta

Rasta

Bluehawk

Zeno

Rasta

Emilio Primo

Rasta

Emilio Primo

Zeno

More History Discussions

Recent History Discussions

Trending History Discussions