Conspiracy theories

[trueblue84]

An opinion is an opinion, nothing more. It is a belief held by an individual.

Let's turn the questioning around, eh? Do you believe it was an inside job? Do you believe all four events were terrorist-led 100%. Can you explain away all four events with indisputable facts? Can you explain Towrs 1 and 2 imploding within their 'footprint'? Ditto for Tower 7, which wasn't even hit? How on earth did that go down?

Set to it, tb84, and YOU come up with the answers.

I believe 100% that it was a terrorist attack. The evidence overwhelmingly points to this. 2 aircraft flew into the world trade centres. There are eye witnesses, recordings/photos that support this. There is nothing I have seen presented to support that it was anything other than as presented. Those theories which do, require the suspension of logic in all or some areas (as is the case with all conspiracy theories). The collapse of the buildings within their footprint is a perfect example. Any form of controlled explosion requires masses of planning and execution, with strategic placement of explosives, by trained teams. For this to be done with nobody noticing is simply impossible. Theories that it was all done underground to avoid detection would not result In a controlled collapse.

 

[JimmyJeffers]

Thread of the day! Well done to everyone involved. You know who you are!

 

[Old Blue 2]

I believe 100% that it was a terrorist attack. The evidence overwhelmingly points to this. 2 aircraft flew into the world trade centres. There are eye witnesses, recordings/photos that support this. There is nothing I have seen presented to support that it was anything other than as presented. Those theories which do, require the suspension of logic in all or some areas (as is the case with all conspiracy theories). The collapse of the buildings within their footprint is a perfect example. Any form of controlled explosion requires masses of planning and execution, with strategic placement of explosives, by trained teams. For this to be done with nobody noticing is simply impossible. Theories that it was all done underground to avoid detection would not result In a controlled collapse.

Fair enough tb84. But... what about Tower 7, which was not hit by an aircraft? That went down the same way as Towers 1 & 2...

 

[Old Blue 2]

Thread of the day! Well done to everyone involved. You know who you are!

Thank you Jiimmy. I take your accolade most seriously.
























Believe that, you believe anything!

 

[Lob]

Nobody really knows what happened on 9/11 and we probably never will. One thing that i know beyond a shadow of a doubt though after over 30 years in the construction industry myself is that wtc 7 (below) is a controlled demolition and could never be anything else and given the fact that the official narrative is that it occurred because of fires and a single structural column failure which is absolutely preposterous and impossible, people should honestly question everything that comes from official sources as dishonesty is an integral component of their occupation.

Side by side with a known controlled demolition

 

[trueblue84]

Nobody really knows what happened on 9/11 and we probably never will. One thing that i know beyond a shadow of a doubt though after over 30 years in the construction industry myself is that wtc 7 (below) is a controlled demolition and could never be anything else and given the fact that the official narrative is that it occurred because of fires and a single structural column failure which is absolutely preposterous and impossible, people should honestly question everything that comes from official sources as dishonesty is an integral component of their occupation.

Side by side with a known controlled demolition

But why would they demolish it and why would they do it when they did?

EDIT: And have you ever know a controlled explosion be carried out with no sign of planning and placement of explosives?

 

[Lob]

But why would they demolish it and why would they do it when they did?

No idea mate and it would be pointless to try and theorize or guess.

Only thing i know is what i can see with my own eyes and that is a very obvious controlled demolition of a building. The official narrative for wtc 7 is impossible.

 

[JimmyJeffers]

Thank you Jiimmy. I take your accolade most seriously.
























Believe that, you believe anything!

You’ve been a big player

 

[Old Blue 2]

You’ve been a big player

Just one thing for people to think about. And I say that quite seriously, Jimmy. Thousands were killed - an utter tragedy!

 

[Old Blue 2]

EDIT: And have you ever know a controlled explosion be carried out with no sign of planning and placement of explosives?

ANd that is a VERY moot point, tb84.

 

[magicjuan]

No idea mate and it would be pointless to try and theorize or guess.

Only thing i know is what i can see with my own eyes and that is a very obvious controlled demolition of a building. The official narrative for wtc 7 is impossible.

Bearing in mind the bbc reported it down 45 minutes before it did, with it still stood behind the reporters shoulder.
There were reports of engineers 'working' around the structures in the days leading up.

 

[Tramps_mate]

For me, it's the collapse of WT7 that is the biggest indicator of the attack being something other than the 'official narrative'. You have to jump through several hoops to explain the manner in which that building collapsed, and many people continue to put forward such 'legitimate' explanations, but I'm not buying it. That's a controlled demolition if ever there was one.

Absolutely. As well as the film footage of a fire chief clearing the area saying 'they're bringing it down..'.

 

[SteveSC]

Neither do I.

Like reports (whether true or not I don't know) of the registration codes of two of the airliners still being used years later.

There's a whole lot of unanswered things, and all I (we) can do is sit on the fence and try to make sense of it all.

All I do is simply put things out for consideration, but still the clowns come after me (as if I'm bothered).

Once a plane is retired it's registration code can be recycled and used by the owner for a different aircraft. If that wasn't the case.they would run into problems with the codes and would have to increase the size of them thus making some software requiring massive updates.

 

[SteveSC]

But why would they demolish it and why would they do it when they did?

EDIT: And have you ever know a controlled explosion be carried out with no sign of planning and placement of explosives?

Indeed.

Killing people in the process

Any fire chief in on a controlled explosion would be lynched.

The FDNY are super close like a family. It would be tough to convince them and then have them keep secrets. Also killing their own no chance.

 

[Lob]

For me, it's the collapse of WT7 that is the biggest indicator of the attack being something other than the 'official narrative'. You have to jump through several hoops to explain the manner in which that building collapsed, and many people continue to put forward such 'legitimate' explanations, but I'm not buying it. That's a controlled demolition if ever there was one.

Yup it couldn't be anything else but a controlled demolition. The official narrative itself acknowledges that the building fell at free-fall acceleration which can clearly be seen in all the various footage of the collapse. There is only one possible way that can happen and that is if all 24 interior structural columns and all 58 exterior structural columns are removed/fail across a lower 8 floor in height span within a fraction of a second. Nothing theoretical with that, it simply has to happen for the building to fall the way it did and yet the official narrative says that just 1 column failed hence the official narrative for wtc 7 collapse is completely impossible and should only be used for comedy hour or toilet paper.

Bearing in mind the bbc reported it down 45 minutes before it did, with it still stood behind the reporters shoulder.
There were reports of engineers 'working' around the structures in the days leading up.

Yes remember watching that at the time. Shameful from the BBC. Not an investigative journalist among them, just repeaters and jumped the gun with their repeating that day.