Study of the NIST Collapse of World Trade Center 7 Theory

Discussion in '9/11' started by Bob0627, Sep 13, 2017.

  1. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,571
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is no and never has been an offical conspiracy theory and the facts of what happened in the so called official story are in fact supported by math and physics.

    On the contrary math and physics consistently debunk and shred the twoofer conspiracy theories
    Sorry false none of them are still alive that myth was long since crushed and proven to be myth manufactured by conspiracy fools just like the myth of cell phones not working on aircraft in 2001

    There was no coverup and the conspiracy was nothing more than a criminal terrorist conspiracy of muslims
     
  2. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    16,858
    Likes Received:
    5,812
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thanks, I just checked it out, and you seem to be right about the hijackers still alive. I had read the BBC report back in 01, I think, and that is where my out of date info originated. With that said, I recall Mueller saying when questioned on the ID of these men, that identification documents used were stolen or something like. I have that memory, but have not researched this lately. With all of this said, it would seem that a real journalist, like Greenwald, would go to the middle east and see if our media and gov't are being honest about none being alive. Have you ever seen any hard evidence, like airport videos of these men boarding those planes? I am not aware of any.

    There was some cover up, for as I said, far too many incoherences and coincidences involved. You can ignore them of course, and yet many of them cannot be logically accounted for, which would take you years to even attempt to do this.

    I went to Nam based upon a false flag in the Gulf of Tonkin. And don't try to tell us that is a lie too, tin foil hat stuff. What about the planned false flag to use against castro? A drone aircraft blown up, blamed on cuba. Which JFK apparently axed. All documents but one were destroyed but found years later by accident. Conspiracies do happen, and only a fool would believe differently.
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2017
  3. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,571
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    Trophy Points:
    113

    No one said conspiracies do not happen. They do happen everyday. Most are harmless and mundane, such as parents conspiring to let their kids believe that a fat guy slips into the house every dec 24 to leave gifts under a tree. Others are criminal such as a common drug deal. But conspiracy THEORY is a different thing altogether and no they are never true.

    BTW the gulf of tonkin attack, or more precisely one of the attacks, was not a false flag. It did happen but it was exaggerated and used as a pretext for escalating a war which did not need to be escalated but yes it did happen.

    A planned false flag which did not happen is not a false flag attack it is just a weird idea someone had which was never tried.

    There are always coincidences and anomalies all you have to do is dig deep enough to find them but they prove..............nothing. Conspiracy theorists thrive on claiming that such inconsistencies are evidence of something. They are not. They are in fact normal.
     
  4. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    16,858
    Likes Received:
    5,812
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The term conpiracy theory was invented by the CIA. Post JFK conspiracy. And of course some of them are true. If not, the CIA would have no interest in inventing the term. LOL

    Gulf of Tonkin, the incident which never happened, escalated the war in a huge way. Of course it never happened, but was used still to escalate the war, which sent me over there to risk my life. Since it was not planned, it was not a false flag, and yet it served as well as if it was one. And finding out the truth later on, did not stop the escalation, so it effectively worked just as well as a genuine false flag.

    It is the number of coincidences and incoherence that points to a conspiracy. And 911 has more than enough to question it.
     
    Bob0627 likes this.
  5. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,571
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wrong the term conspiracy theory was not invented by the CIA it was around long before the CIA was even founded. And NO none of them are true.

    There was for example no conspiracy to kill JFK, Oswald acted alone.

    There was in fact a real attack in the gulf of tonkin it was not completely invented.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident

    You are quite wrong. There is no number of coincidences and inconsistencies which point to a conspiracy or you could name the magic number.

    Nor is there an excessive number of such coincidences and inconsistencies inn the 911 attacks.
     
  6. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    16,858
    Likes Received:
    5,812
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I do not believe what you believe on JFK. So, we can go no farther here on that. Believe as you will.

    The torpedo attack never happened. According to McNamara who was Sec. of Defense. Here, in his own words, which you will perhaps reject?



    If you think there isn't an excessive amount of incoherence and coincidences in 911, it only means you mind will not allow your eyes to look. So you are wrong, and no one will convince you to the contrary. You have the mentality of a real deal tin foil hatter, IMO. Yes, they exist on both sides. And I mean no intentional offense to you. My money says, you have never listened to the horde of witnesses at the 911 event, fireman, police, nor IMO, would you ever not trust your own gov't. If so, that is really a terrible mistake to trust known liars, especially our CIA. Who lie to the people via MSM, intentionally, so that some of us, perhaps people like yourself, will eat it up like a hop in a slop bucket.

    In regards to the term conspircy theory...

    So, when did you first hear that term? I first heard it when the JFK conspiracy was being questioned. As a reaction against those who questioned the official story. I will of course defer to Prof. Smith, who perhaps researched it a little bit more than you?
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2017
    Bob0627 likes this.
  7. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,252
    Likes Received:
    1,140
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is way off topic but it is important nonetheless.

    Point Video-1: The Alleged Security Videos of Mohamed Atta during a
    Point Video-1: Mysterious Trip to Portland, Maine, September 10-11, 2001


    http://www.consensus911.org/point-video-1/

    Point Video-2: Was the Airport Video of the Alleged AA 77 Hijackers Authentic?
    Point Video-2: Official 9/11 Videotaped Evidence


    http://www.consensus911.org/point-video-2/
     
  8. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,252
    Likes Received:
    1,140
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is good reason he (she?) has the distinct honor of being the only poster in any forum I've ever put on ignore.
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2017
  9. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    16,858
    Likes Received:
    5,812
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yeah, you know, with all of the disinfo, misinfo, mixed in with real info, it is so hard to tell what is fact and what isn't. I generally do not dive into such things, due to this. All that I note are the huge number of coincidences and incoherence, which I have listened to, from people who were there that day, firemen, policemen, and then looking at what happened with our defense system on that day of the event.

    Bld 7, is one of the incoherences. No way in hell did that bld fall at basically free fall speed, from a fire, and the minimum damage it took And as far as I can tell, it is the only building in history that came down, from a limited office fire. LOL We have seen a couple fires, since then, consuming the whole tall buildings, with the structure still intact. No one has ever seen a building come down like number 7, nor the twin towers, without assist from humans.

    IMO, the people that call others tin foil hatters, are perhaps rubes for what Goebbels said about the state repeating a lie, over and over. I would add to that, you then call anyone who will not believe the lie, a tin foil hatter, a conspiracy theorist.
     
  10. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    16,858
    Likes Received:
    5,812
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, and yet I never use ignore but of course understand why some do. The person seems rational, up to a point. But not acknowledging the vast number of incoherence and coincidence is beyond rationality, IMO. But I got degrees in anthropology, physical, where incoherence were red flags, and vast incoherence would make one change a hypothesis. Sure, one can set aside one or two, if insignificant, to be looked at later on, (which seldom comes) but not the number we see with the official story and NIST report of 911.
     
  11. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,252
    Likes Received:
    1,140
    Trophy Points:
    113
    These people are a panel of experts in various disciplines who have reviewed the details of the official narrative and offer their assessment in the form of Consensus Points. So their purpose is to determine what is fact from the official narrative and what contradicts or questions each significant piece of the official narrative. They are a "Hulsey study" in another form.

    I completely agree that there were a vast number of convenient coincidences before, especially during and following 9/11. Many of these coincidences can only be categorized as absolute miracles if one were to believe the official narrative. That alone makes the official narrative sheer nonsense made for children. No one really needs specific details to know the official narrative is not true. In my case though, I like to expose everything I can that I believe is significant.

    Correct and no one needs Dr. Hulsey to know these buildings were not destroyed by planes/damage/fire or just fire. But no one can dispute science. So it's critically important to show in a detailed peer reviewed analysis (hopefully along with a few supporting articles from these peers) how NIST's analysis is fatally faulty and the procedural reasons why.

    And that's exactly why I said this earlier.

     
  12. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,252
    Likes Received:
    1,140
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A troll pathologically denies EVERYTHING that questions or contradicts the official narrative, does it nearly 24/7 and rarely if ever offers any supporting argument. That kind of mentality is illegitimate (i.e. fake). There is no discussion to be had with such a person, period.

    IMO there's no point to parroting the official narrative, just post the links to the 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST reports, it's all there. I've done that myself a few times.
     
  13. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    16,858
    Likes Received:
    5,812
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well perhaps the good man will defend himself, and I am a bit uncomfortable with him not chiming in to set us straight.
    But here is the deal. Any critical thinker would exhibit skepticism, given the coincidences and incoherence involved here. I wonder if the gentlemen in question ever exhibited any skepticism, but only he can answer that. For if he just accepted the official story, and NIST, given the coincidences, and incoherence, in great number, this could be a psychological issue, instead of a cognitive issue.
     
  14. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,571
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As the wiki article I linked to pointed out there was more than one incident and yes at least one attack did happen.

    What I state about JFK is about evidence and fact not belief but you are correct there are other threads for that.

    No I am correct there is simply is no excessive number of coincidences or inconsistencies in 911. You backhandedly admit that there are always such coincidences and inconsistencies but claim there are too many in this case. That requires a magic number how many are too many? Since you cannot answer it is simple factual conclusion that there are not too many,

    Witness statements are irrelevant. But yes I have listened to them and they do not support any conspiracy theory or amount to evidence of anything. When you have multiple witnesses there will ALWAYS be inconsistencies because no two or more people ever tell the same tales the same way. 911 was a huge event witnessed by millions which by definition means the inconsistencies between witness accounts will be enormous in number.

    I have seen the term conspiracy theory thrown around in books and articles from the 19th century which referenced the Lincoln assassination and other obscure subjects. They even applied the term to the death of president Zachary Taylor almost 200 years ago. The claim that the CIA invented it is simply false and a claim to authority from a professor is meaningless.
     
  15. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    16,858
    Likes Received:
    5,812
    Trophy Points:
    113
    First you understand how wilkipedia works, right? It can be extremely political. Which means in some cases, one group will be like the monkeys in a kipling novel, and say, "we all say so, so it must be true". Rupert Sheldrake run into this, and it was impossible to resolve, so the facts were represented, in his case. And thus, I prefer not to use that site, given it is not always objective. But then again, who would need more than what was said by the S of D, under Johnson, who was directly involved. If his word is not acceptable, then it is a problem with your mind, and not McNamara.

    I can give no accurate number of coincidences and the number of incoherence because they are just too many to ascertain, without serious search online, and neither of us have the time to expend on such a long and serious search. I know of the ones I have read over the years, and I have read so many. Perhaps someone here who has been involved in past research can supply you a substantial list?

    Witness statements are irrelevant? People are in prison over such statements, so your dismissal is not only invalid, but very telling that your bar is so high to disprove your beliefs that you will forever remain impervious to all, except what you believe. So I think you and I are done here. You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink. So giddy up!
     
  16. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,571
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wiki is no more political than your sources and yours are exclusively addressing ONE of the attacks not the others.

    Witness statements are irrelevant and you are quite wrong. It takes PHYSICAL evidence to put someone in prison for a serious crime.

    Witnesses are always the weakest form of evidence
     
  17. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    16,858
    Likes Received:
    5,812
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wikipedia is controlled by crowds. I never use it because of that. I preferred to go to the man involved. So, what about what he said that pissed in your cereal? You didn't want to accept the man's words apparently about something.
     
  18. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,571
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    Trophy Points:
    113
    One more time I was very clear he only addressed ONE of multiple incidents which he says did not happen it has been proven that at least one other attack DID happen.
     
  19. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,252
    Likes Received:
    1,140
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I asked him if he ever questioned the US government in any forum on anything and he claims he did but when I asked him to provide links to any post anywhere that would substantiate his claim he refused. Certainly I've never seen any post of that nature from him in at least 2 forums that I'm aware of. I don't know if he has a psychological issue or not but his posts are pathological denials of anything that contradicts or questions the official narrative on both JFK and 9/11 and he does that nearly 24/7. So it's either a psychological issue or he has some kind of weird agenda that has absolutely no value.
     
  20. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    16,858
    Likes Received:
    5,812
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Or he could just be convinced all stories other than the official story necessarily must be tin foil hat thinking. And he thinks the hard evidence supports his belief on the subject. I also think he has a decent trust in his gov't and the people who run it.
     
  21. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    7,009
    Likes Received:
    2,484
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You are correct in your analysis.

    That so many people still today believe the official story simply demonstrates how true it is that "you can fool some of the people ALL THE TIME"
     
  22. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    16,858
    Likes Received:
    5,812
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As I said before, the genuine tin foil hatters are the people who accept the official story. They are a percentage of the population who are easy victims for clever propaganda. They also believe and trust their gov't when by now, no one with a critical mind could ever trust them again. How many lies until these trusting people, stop trusting? I doubt a million lies would stop them. It is a mental thing, IMO.

    Yet I have no theory as to what really happened, the true story. And I think some of these theories people have are also tin foil hat territory.

    Of course our intel could have been this inept, but if so, we need to destroy them, and start over. We are not getting our money's worth.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.
  23. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,252
    Likes Received:
    1,140
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't really know if he's actually convinced or pretending to be convinced. He certainly posts as if he's convinced. The problem with those who defend the official narrative 24/7 is that they're constantly being exposed to many contradictory arguments supported by evidence, some of these are incontrovertible. One who rejects every single one of these arguments is either incurably cognitive dissonant or has an agenda and is just pretending.

    It's difficult to figure out what these people are really thinking.

    A person like that would necessarily have to have cult like faith in the US government or is a fake with an agenda.
     
  24. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,252
    Likes Received:
    1,140
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't believe for one minute it was. The evidence shows the Bush administration was warned multiple times. The evidence also strongly implies many were aware 9/11 (or some sort of major event) was going to take place.
     
  25. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    16,858
    Likes Received:
    5,812
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, as I said, I don't have a theory to replace the official lie, and just know the official story is filled with too many coincidences and incoherence for me to just accept. If my gov't had not lied to us so habitually over the years, there would be no reason for me to distrust it. But I am like an elephant, I tend not to forget the lies.

    I find it also very suspicious that the New American Century papers, which laid out what the neocons were promoting for american hegemony in the 21st century, also noted they need a major event in order to implement it. But after 911, this little statement was removed from the version one can see today online. Then, the nations listed, to be dealt with in those papers, were dealt with, Iraq, Libya, and we are still trying in Syria. Iran was on that list as well as russia. 911 was the needed event by the neocons, and cheney is a neocon.

    This stuff proves nothing, but it should make a critical thinker suspicious. So, with the events of 911, the coincidences, the incoherence, the neocon agenda needed 911 and by god they got it. As cheney was handling Bush Jr, IMO.
     
    Eleuthera likes this.

Share This Page