Comments | alephomega: Want the proof that 9/11 was an inside job?

alephomega

Want the proof that 9/11 was an inside job?

Jun 08, 2006 02:50

Do you think it's possible our government could have aided, or even carried out the attacks of September 11th? Do you think that any suggestion of such a thing is ridiculous "conspiracy theory?" If so, I welcome you to read on, and even more, feel free to question me or raise any doubts you might have, or evidence you've found which contradicts ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Back to all threads

inimicalfool June 8 2006, 18:59:02 UTC

I guess I'm still undecided, but certainly a bit suspicious, which itself is a pretty sad thing as I'd like to live somewhere where I don't believe that my government might kill me just to further their own ends... ah, to dream.

Eddie makes a good point though, it's not "impossible" that the attacks could have been carried out on another day. You have to at least acknowledge the possibility that it is just a coincidence, though I'm not saying that's very realistic. Like Eddie said a lot of it depends on how routine such a maneuver is. But, like everything else involving the military we probably won't be allowed to find that out ( ... )

alephomega June 8 2006, 20:10:10 UTC

"but unless you are a structural engineer ( ... )

inimicalfool June 9 2006, 08:25:52 UTC

Well, if you follow the 9/11 movement, you would know that several structural engineers (not to mention top officials in Reagan, Bush sr. and even G.W. administrations) HAVE come forward and called the official story ludicrous.

Uhm, yeah, I'm well aware of that and it was pretty much my point. I was saying that there are structural engineers supporting both sides of the argument. To me at least, there does not seem to be an expert consensus on this issue, and so to you and me (people who are not structural engineers) it is difficult to judge the superiority of either side.

"Actually find me a reference where someone with good credentials backs the official story (besides articles in Popular Mechanics who's editor Benjamin Chertoff, by the way, is the cousin of the Secretary of Homeland Security..."I'll ignore that ad hominem argument, of which I was already aware, for the moment (attacking the man instead of finding logical problems with his argument) and will attempt to give you at least a couple of other expert opinions ( ... )

inimicalfool June 10 2006, 00:15:12 UTC

prolonged heating

30 minutes? That's "prolonged heating" ?

I would also add here that none of these other pancake theorists seem to have an explanation for the sulfide residue that was found on the wreckage. Stephen Jones, Professor of Physics at Brigham Young University suggests that sulfide residue is a byproduct of a thermite detonation.

continued... inimicalfool June 9 2006, 08:42:13 UTC

Or we have A. S. Usmani, Y. C. Chung and J. L. Torero from the "School of Engineering and Electronics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh" who say:

"The results are illuminating and show that the structural system adopted for the Twin-Towers may have been unusually vulnerable to a major fire. The analysis results show a simple but unmistakable collapse mechanism that owes as much (or more) to the geometric thermal expansion effects as it does to the material effects of loss of strength and stiffness. The collapse mechanism discovered is a simple stability failure directly related to the effect of heating (fire). Additionally, the mechanism is not dependent upon failure of structural connections." (from ... )

Re: continued... alephomega June 10 2006, 07:35:01 UTC

In the article I linked to, the professor counters some of the above claims, or at least points out flaws in them. I read most of all the articles you posted, and really the only thing they say to me is that there is absolutely no concensus among the experts as to how the buildings fell, just a lot of theories (funny, there's that word again). We may never really know why exactly they fell, and the reason why is because the evidence was destroyed, literally. Giuliani very promptly sent the wreckage off to China before it could scrutinized, or examined. Controlled demolition is really only one aspect of 9/11 anyway, and if the buildings were actually brought down by the planes, it wouldn't make any difference at all, or change the fact that there are many other red flags which point towards the attack being an inside job. You have to view everything in context, and that's the problem with every critic I've come across so far... they want to compartmentalize every detail, break it down into a digestible chunk so they can argue very ( ... )

Back to all threads