Tranqvillia - Remembering the past

Zebonka12 wrote: "The whole fuel thing spreading everywhere and material such as curtains and office stuff was the cause of an giant super building to fall down like butter"

Office materials are quite combustible.  If you'd kept reading, you would've gotten to know that some of them would've gotten the fire considerably hotter than just the jet fuel alone - up to 1800F.  Now, steel does not "melt" at this temperature, but it doesn't have to.  At 1800F, it has something like 10 percent of its usual strength.  Are you at all aware of what is going to happen when 20 storeys of a skyscraper is being supported by steel that is (in parts) at only 10 percent of its usual load carrying ability?  You stopped reading 'just because it kept saying Fact'?  Could you be a bigger imbecile if you tried?  

" This is the sole reason why i stopped reading : Building 7 now all of a sudden had some damage to its bottom part from nowhere , now how did that happen?"

No.  It didn't 'suddenly' get damage 'from nowhere'.  It is well documented that a large part of the face on one side was knocked out and that a strong fire was burning in the building (which itself was accelerated by DIESEL which was stored inside the building for reasons that would be obvious if you knew how to read).  WTC 7 also wasn't your typical building design - again, you could read this for yourself but you stopped because you didn't like being told that you were wrong and that these were facts.  This is purely a matter of architecture - you should acquaint yourself with terms like 'stress', 'load', things like that.

"This right here below is revealing that they took it down by controlled demolition THEREFORE COMPLETLY debunking that whole website of yours"

Hmmm.  I watched carefully and at no point did he say "we made the decision to destroy the building".  He is referring to pulling away from the building, knowing that it was beyond help.  "We made the decision to pull it" =/= someone saying "we made the decision to blow it up".  You wouldn't understand this because English is not your first language and you're not acquainted with the bizarre phrases we use sometimes (especially in the land of America - a people so inept, that they ACTUALLY say 'could care less' instead of 'couldn't care less', which is the correct expression).

The BBC reporter doing an early report on WTC7 is also quite explainable.  There are rational reasons for the reporters to have thought that WTC7 had already come down.  The other World Trade Center buildings were not nearly as famous as the Twin Towers.  It's likely that the news teams weren't even sure what building they were talking about, and they had been told all afternoon that the building was also going to come down (because of the damage and fire that you just ignored in an article with 300 professional sources - primary sources, physical evidence, video footage, photography, testimony from experts who know a shitload more about architecture than you do).  They jumped the gun - news teams have a long, long precedent for doing this.  Many inaccurate reports were made that day.  This happens on busy days when news services get information from a lot of places without verification.

As important as a witness statement can be, you can't always take them literally.  When people watched the Titanic sink, they reckoned it sounded like 'thunder' or 'a gun going off'.  I suppose to Max and Amir, this means that there was a nearby thunderstorm, or gunplay was taking place on the deck of the sinking ship.  Actually, the ship didn't sound like thunder or a gun going off - it sounded like a ship breaking up, but the people listening didn't have a proper frame of reference because they'd never heard a 45000 ton ship break in half.  It is no different on 9/11.  People said a lot of things that day that, in hindsight, could've been worded better.  Because (funny enough) people aren't used to things like this happening.  I think it's almost tragic that people like you seize upon this poorly chosen words and try to build a story out of it.

This is not a reliable way to get to the truth of things.  Each of the theories you've mentioned has been approached logically and debunked.  I am not a person who ever thinks that one should close the book on a debate.  If you have NEW information, new theories that haven't had holes poked in them, then please bring them up.  I urge you to read that site again.  Yes, seeing the words FACT in capitals can be a bit annoying - this is something you could possibly bring up with your brother.  All the same, you shouldn't just stop reading things because they make you feel uncomfortable.  In reading about 9/11, I've seen theories that the jumpers (the people falling out of the building) were actors, or vagrants, ABDUCTED to make the scene of carnage look more legitimate.  Have you any remote understanding of how absolutely insane and hurtful a claim like that is?  Does that bit even bother you; that it is not only complete fiction, but that it might offend people? It didnt make me feel uncomfortable at all , it just makes no sense so just stopped reading it cause its ridiculous in my oppinion...  If it made sense then i would have read it all... but it doesnt so why waste time on it.

With people like you , how could they fail? You protect them better than they do themselves, props to you!
No it has nothing to do with english not being my first language , PULL IT is the term they you use when they bring down buildings , there is videos out there from control demolition people even saying that so dont try that stuff with me...

There is no meaning in discussing this with you cause you are so blinded by their fairytales its almost impossible to change your naive mind.

I think it all has more to do with you not wanting to face the truth that there maybe some evil scumbags controlling you and everybody else so you do whatever you can to deny it.

"I think it all has more to do with you not wanting to face the truth that there maybe some evil scumbags controlling you and everybody else so you do whatever you can to deny it. "

I'm not even talking about that, though!  I just agreed with your brother on that very point!  

Besides which, there's a good bit of to-ing and fro-ing about WTC 7 and the "pull it" thing over here.  http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_pulled.html

It's not ubiquitous industry jargon as you would like to believe.  If he thought they were going to bring the building down, he obviously forgot to tell someone to do it because that's not what happened.  Again, if you would have read the original article I posted, you would've learned something about the construction about WTC7, which conveniently you haven't mentioned at all.  

Realistically, it doesn't harm anyone that you have these delusions about 9/11, but I personally don't like to see someone make such a conscious decision to remain ignorant about a topic like this.

Some simple facts to help you:  the Titanic was not swapped with the Olympic, men did land on the Moon, Oswald shot JFK (although why he shot him is up for debate), Jose Perdomo did not shoot John Lennon. and planes knocked the Twin Towers over.  There is really interesting history and backstory for all of these events, and plenty of good discussion to be had, but you cannot argue against things which have been reasoned out and scientifically proven until you actually have a basis for making such claims.  

Let's take the temperature of the fires in the Twin Towers for example.  It has been established that, in places, the fire reached 1832F.  That's an actual, irrefutable fact.  Some guy in Sweden saying "I don't think that's possible" is utterly meaningless, because it can happen, and it did happen.  Steel loses most of its strength at these temperatures.  Again, another fact.  

I love a good debate but for God's sake, bring something new along.  Everything you've posited in this thread has been proven to be wrong (or, at the very best, unreliable, debatable, or subjective in nature - which means it's not a fact).  Have you got anything else??

IF you dont see that WTC 7 is brought down with explosives then you are one ignorant man. It falls down exactly like controlled demolition no matter what you say !

"We made the decision to pull it" means they brought it down with explosives man, stop being naive! And that means they rigged it weeks before and that reveals everything.

I still dont buy that fuel and other material brought the building down like that , sorry. Doesnt matter what or who says it , i still dont think its possible for it to fall like that.I dont need people telling me that its possible , i can think for myself and know that its not possible. 

 AND both of them also? Haha come on man , three buildings that falls like control demolition........ one of which had nothing happen to it and the owner even says PULL IT. ITS NOT POSSIBLE FOR IT TO FALL IN FREE FALL SPEED got it? Bring every scientist guy in the world and i still wont believe this UNLESS offcourse its a controlled demolition , then its possible for it to fall like that cause then every part of the building collapses with precision.

"I still dont buy that fuel and other material brought the building down like that". 

"It falls down exactly like controlled demolition no matter what you say !"

" i can think for myself and know that its not possible. "

"TS NOT POSSIBLE FOR IT TO FALL IN FREE FALL SPEED"

Sorry, were you talking to me about ignorance?  Cold hard facts vs. you 'not buying that it's possible'.  Where is your data?

Healthy skepticism is good for the individual and good for society, so though it was contrary to my instincts about which side the facts fell on  I did give the ideas of the 9/11 truth movement a fair and extensive hearing.   All I have seen to date is classic conspiracy theory thinking full of fallacious reasoning, half truths and bad assumptions.  There are plenty of perfectly intelligent and competent people who think the government pulled off 9/11.  This seems kind of amazing until you consider that the ability to perceive whether or not an argument is full and complete and properly supports a conclusion is a very specific skill.  Some people just don't have it, and are unlikely to ever be able to recognize that.

I took a class once where the prof posited that research indicated that conspiracy theorists, the deeply religious and those with exotic beliefs, for example, share a general credulity and susceptibility that is rooted in temporal lobe sensitivity within the brain.   Other features of this group included being deeply creative and exquisitely attuned to small shifts or changes in the culture. So while a person might be really bad at accurately perceiving a situation like 9/11, that same person could also excel in areas and in ways that are beyond the reach of those of us rolling their eyes at them for general crackpottery

In that class there was an unusual new-agey kind of hippe gal probably in her forties, about 10 years older than me at the time.   She lived near my mom and I'd see her when I was in the neighbourhood and we were always pleasant to each other, but I kind of always kept her at arm's length because she was just not my cup of tea. It was a psychology class, and we did a whole bunch of tests and inventories in class and I remember her really bombing on out on the logic and reason tests on which I excelled to the point of being 2.8 standard deviations above the norm, and I remember her scoring high on the gullibility inventories. I wasn't surprised.  Subsequently we did another test where we read 10 statements from 5 women and 5 men who were couples.  The assignment was to match the couples based on their statements by looking for shared emotional themes, colours, mood and other similar elements I don't recall.  Colours?  There weren't any colours in the text, so in that sense I didn't even understand the question!  Nonetheless I buckled down and reasoned it out and was supremely confident in my conclusions.  I got zero right.  Zero. Worse than chance.  She got all five, and was the only one in the class to do so. I had a lot more respect for her after that and it was just such a great lesson in recognizing that there are limitations in ourselves and abilities in others that the normal course of life is unlikely to reveal. I still feel lucky to have experienced it.

Greatefulfan

its simple logic, the government did it for 2 reasons:

1. to have a lame excuse to invade new countries
2. to install new laws that limit the privacy and freedom of their own people so they can control them more

its like 1+1=2, how anyone can be naive enough to believe the bullshit official story is beyond me when we all know what kinda corrupt evil people OWN the media, the government and us.

Some simple points I'd like to put out there for you, TM:

1).  Never in history has any government had to go to such lengths to start a war or change their laws.  Frequently, these things will have a pretext, but nothing on the order of what you're suggesting.  

2).  I'm not debating who made it all happen and for what reason.  I'm talking about the scientific fact of what crashing airliners were responsible for on 9/11.  'Inside job'?  Sure - go ahead, argue about that one until the cows come home!  But scientifically, they did not need 'controlled demolition', 'hidden missiles', or any of the other crap that you guys suggest.  It would've looked rather different to what actually took place.  Besides which, even if the airplanes hadn't brought the buildings down, it still was such a massive act of terrorism that a war could've been started over it anyway.

My feeling is that they knew something was coming, and they totally dropped the ball on that one.  For that, I honestly feel someone should be accountable; but of course, that'll never happen.  Something Amir should understand is that everything he's pointed out in this thread is ridiculous and bunkum.  If he has any trump cards he hasn't mentioned yet, then I'd like to hear them, because I am a skeptic and I think every theory deserves testing, in the appropriate manner.  This is how people find the truth, the right way.  You take a theory, and then you try to disprove it logically.  You don't start with the conclusion, and then try to make shit up to fit that conclusion.  

That's what Amir keeps doing.  He keeps annoying hard, physical evidence, just because it upsets him.  In one of his posts he said there was no damage to WTC7.  We know that's not true.  Why on earth would he ignore something like that?  That's like architectural leprosy.

are you naive or something? they have started wars A LOT  of times for the purpose of their agenda. simply the elite dont give a fuck about regular people and do whatever they want.

What really happend by Zebonka:  

A group of crazy angry YET incredibly smart arabs decided one day in a cave that they should make a trip to the US and hijack 4 jumbojets. They packed their bags and flew to the states. There they chose which arab to hijack which plane and off they went into each plane. With no problem whatsoever ,they  all successfully hijacked the aircrafts (in a country where security is top notch) , managed to have the people on the plane under control while taking over the controls of the plane.

While all this was going on , they also had the luck of that  the whole nations air space security was rehearsing some drills faar faar away so NONE of them was there to defend the country.. Now it was just to accurately hit the towers which is a piece of cake for an cave arab to do , they've done it thousands of times already by playing videogames in their cave, soo its a piece of cake. Both of them hit the towers.

While this is going on , the third arab is doing a nearly impossible task , he actually has to spin the airplane around in circles in order to get the big jumojet in at the right height to hit the pentagon , which at this moment also had NO security whatsoever to do anything to stop this airplane that is SPINNING AROUND IN CIRCLES to get down to the right height of the pentagon to hit it.

So after like 10mins that the airplane is spinning around in circles , it FINALLY gets to that precise height it needs to hit pentagon and BOOM it hits perfectly. Oddly enough. there was no parts of the actual air plane though...... hmm must have been an very unusual crash where the jumbojet got destroyed into particles... Meanwhile all of the 500+ security cameras installed at the area ONLY 4 snapshots with very low quality make it out and still you cant see an airplane.

Nevertheless

As this was going on jet fuel was spreading down like a virus down the twin towers making the whole buildings steel structure to bend , now with chairs and curtains also on fire , there is no way this building was going to stand anymore , and sure enough it falls like melted butter right down , not to the sides or anything ,just right down , perfectly so that it does not do any harm  or damage to neighbouring buildings. Next tower does exactly the same as its brother.

Also when this happend , some fire balls accidently came into the windows of Building 7 and started a fire in some of the rooms there. They call upon the owner Larry silverstein and he said to them that they should pull it (not to maybe put out the fire?). Now pull it means that , the building itself decides that it wants to come down by itself , not that they put explosives in weeks advance into the building and then pull it down. So again this building without any arabs crashing into it with an jumbojet, it too falls like butter and again not falling to the left or right causing potential damage to neighbouring buildings. So now three buildings fell down perfectly.

And the fourth plane must have been the drunken arab, the arab that isnt a real muslim cause of the alcohol he drinks , he just crashed into the woods mysteriously with no airplane parts visable yet again... Hmmm arabs must be magicians , getting airplanes to dissappear like molecules.

This was what actually happend believe it or not, this is what happend and you are a retard to not believe in this non fairytale story...

Now off we go into Afghanistan and Iraq and lets start killing innocent people in civilians and our stupid soldiers...and lets start making laws that take the freedom of people away for the cause of Security .. Perfect how it all panned out for us......

The lesson learned here is that , even if you are an cave arab you still can trick the most powerful country/people in the world. Never underestimate an cave arab OK?!!

THE END , now stop with all these conspiracy theories!!!
just stay asleep , asleep.......  they will take care of everything , just stay asleep.

"are you naive or something? they have started wars A LOT  of times for the purpose of their agenda."

Either you can't read, or you misread me.  I said that they never had to go to *such lengths* to start a war or find a pretext for some other action.  There's a long history of 'civilised' nations interfering in the affairs of others.  Look at how us whities behaved in Africa and the Middle East; arbitrarily redrawing borders without paying much attention to the consequences it would have on the natives.  

The US (and England, and others if you care to mention them) have never been remotely ashamed of doing the wrong thing when it suits them.  What I'm getting at is that they don't need to stage a terrorist strike to do it.  They MIGHT (and this is a bit of speculation that I'm not entirely comfortable with) 'let' one happen, but they don't need to stage one of their own.  And even if they did, they wouldn't need to go to such lengths to do so.  A simple bombing like the 1993 one would've sufficed.

who gives a fuck anyways? just live your lives, people discuss these things out of boredom

It was worth it just to see Amir's barely legible, unintentionally hilarious brainfart.

Mercury SingerOfLife, the 9/11 hijackers weren't 'cave Arabs.' They were educated, middle/upper class and probably never stepped foot in a cave in their entire lives. Bin Laden, himself, is a product of one of the wealthiest and most respected families in Saudi Arabia, while Ayman al-Zawahiri (Bin Ladan's second in command) is a former doctor and speaks three languages. It is not entirely hard to believe that they would be capable of carrying out the 9/11 attacks.

Come on to fuck guys, this is getting really difficult to read.....NOT because I am retarded and don't understand the conversation, but for THIS - when you're quoting someone, please pick out the relevant bits instead of copying/pasting the entire post, because the next person does the same and we are ending up with pages and pages of repeated blurb.  Or at least add ========== under what you're quoting so we know what the reply is.  I've read the same paragraphs at least 6 times in this thread already.

Amazon wrote: Mercury SingerOfLife, the 9/11 hijackers weren't 'cave Arabs.' They were educated, middle/upper class and probably never stepped foot in a cave in their entire lives. Bin Laden, himself, is a product of one of the wealthiest and most respected families in Saudi Arabia, while Ayman al-Zawahiri (Bin Ladan's second in command) is a former doctor and speaks three languages. It is not entirely hard to believe that they would be capable of carrying out the 9/11 attacks.

Ya but still there is no real proof that it was bin laden that did this attack , we only have what they say about it.

Its all a scam made by the US gov. and whoever that cant see that even after everything has been brought up about it,  is not very bright in my oppinion.