Okay, so I found myself in a 9/11 thread (it was on the greatest page),

and I'll admit right now that I'm skeptical--clearly the official narrative is rife with bullshit (WTC 7 collapsing spontaneously, Flight 93's heroic passengers, etc.), but so is a lot of what I read here in the 9/11 forum (Pentagon/WTC hit by missile(s), Flight 77 passengers in hiding or killed by US troops, al Qaeda doesn't exist, etc., etc., etc.). The thing I kept asking for in that thread is a single, unified, comprehensive, fact-based theory that explains what happened, who did it, and how they did it--a theory that doesn't depend on speculation or supposition, and whose factual material is clearly sourced and reviewable. So far, no takers. Maybe I was talking to the wrong people, but it's my impression that no such theory exists. Am I wrong? Help me out here, you tinfoil-hatters! What the fuck really happened on 9/11? Did airliners really hit the WTC and the Pentagon? If it wasn't al Qaeda, who was it? Was Flight 93 shot down--or did it ever really crash in the first place? What happened, who did it, how did they do it, facts and nothing but the facts. Anybody game?

This is a chance for all you 9/11 experts to strut your stuff! Surely in the 4-1/2 years since 9/11, somebody that frequents this forum has developed a theory that takes everything we know into account and makes sense of the big picture--no?

I could have sworn we did.

I think you knew that.

C'mon, give it a shot. All I got from you today was speculation.

Quite a few Americans will never believe that "theory," either, and for pretty much the same reasons.

One crashed into the Pentagon, One crashed into a former strip mine in Pennsylvania and one each crashed into the two WTC towers, which subsequently collapsed because of structural damage from the crash and the effects of intense fires.

A third tower, WTC 7 collapsed due to damage from collapse of the nearby towers and an intense fire that burned for several hours.

The basic facts are entirely clear and not controversial.

The 9/11 Commission report no doubt white-washes much of the Administration's incompetence and inattention. Nonetheless, that is a good place to find a basic summary.

strippers, and couldn't qualify to rent a Cessna.

Please provide pictures of these intense fires that brought down the towers.
I've never seen them.

Please provide pictures of the airplane that crashed in PA.

Please explain how asymmetrical structural damage and asymmetrical fires
could cause a symmetrical straight-down collapse at near-freefall speeds
of WTC7. If this is so the whole Controlled Demolition industry is
busted.

That they are less hypocritical?
If so, you shouldn't.

is very revealing, especially to those DUers who aren't familiar with OCT'er tactics.

Against the massive and multifaceted information supporting the actual events and the near impossibility of the alternatives, these arguments mean nothing.

And, they HAVE been refuted. Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.
Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.
Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.
Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.Repeatedly.

they mean nothing to you..

72 virgins after their martyrdom. That does not square with consorting with
hookers on earth. Certainly some Christians and some Muslims are hypocrites.
Are fanatical suicide terrorists hypocrites?

fanatical fundamentalist who is willing to give his life for his religion
and the simple hypocrite who professes a simple and rigid faith and fails
to live up to it.

There are few examples of the former to study and I have no experience with
them. As to the latter, I'll suppose the Muslims and the Christians are
pretty similar in their hyposcrisy.

The psychology is all screwed up.

But, moving on...

Barring Holographic airliners or Secret Remote Controls,

SOMEBODY

got on those planes knowing that they were going to die that day. If not Islamic fundies, then WHO?

Elite CIA Suicide Squads?

How can you prove it?

Even if you assume the pilots knew they were on a suicide mission, there's
no reason to think the "muscle" (they were shorter than 5'7") knew.

In August of 2001 Raytheon landed a pilotless 727 six times. Not "flew it into
a radio beacon." Landed it.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/searchResults.jsp?searchtext=raytheon&events=on&entities=on&articles=on&topics=on&timelines=on&projects=on&titles=on&descriptions=on&dosearch=on&search=Go

I'm not actually sure how "official" that story is. Or, how authentic an interpreation of Islamic doctrine.

Its probably an Urban Myth that's floating around.

NO ONE understands the psychology of the hijackers. They are dead.

Even so, it was the prevailing belief in Middle America, and probably still is.
Myths like that die hard in a part of the country that badly needs heroic myths.

Trying to annoy the Grownups?

Well, you are succeeding.

1. You haven't been around many fundie Christians, have you?

2. There WERE fires. Get real.

3. Why would I have a picture of a crashed airplane? What would that prove?

4. Gravity causes buildings to fall straight down. That's how it works. Unless there is some force from the SIDE, that's the only thing that can happen. The world's best engineers have studied this, and have no problem with it.

Now, go away.

You haven't been around many fundie Christians, have you?

Yes I have. In my experience fundies who indulge in earthly transgressions
rarely entertain the notion that they can murder their way to heaven.

We're talking about suicidal fanatics, not your run-of-the-mill hyposcrites.

There WERE fires. Get real.

No one denies there were fires. The claim was intense fires that weakened the
structure to the point of failure. Please provide pictures of the intense fires.
My barbeque does not suffer total progressive collapse every time I grill some
chicken. Does yours?

Why would I have a picture of a crashed airplane?

The point is, there are no pictures of a crashed airplane. Have you ever seen
any pictures of engines from flight 93, or any landing gear? Why not?

Gravity causes buildings to fall straight down.

I suppose then I needn't bother to have a friend hold the ladder, because it can only
collapse into its own footprint.

Unless there is some force from the SIDE

Asymmetrical damage and asymmetrical weakening result in forces from the side, as
for instance the enormous torque on WTC2 as the top twisted off.

The world's best engineers have studied this

Baloney. Name some.

We're all aware of the irrational hypocritical behavior that fundamentalist extremists engage in, all the while believing that their God approves or at least giving the impression that they are doing God's work in order to retain power. Crusades? Abortion clinics? Murdering gays?

mentally ill. Though capable of pulling off a simple action on their own, it would
be lunacy to recruit people like that for an operation requiring skill, coordination,
keeping secrets, keeping schedules, and incredible luck in outwitting the greatest
military defence the world has ever seen, a defence that had ample warning of the
attack.

yes, "unreliable".

While a mentally ill person can bring great powers of concentration to a project
of his or her own devising, especially one that can be implemented on a date
chosen by the ill one, in my opinion expecting a mentally ill person to adhere to
and perform on an imposed schedule in someone else's project is not very realistic.

That's assuming they're not medicated, of course.

Point is, your argument in support of the premise that Muslim fundamentalists are incapable of hijacking planes and crashing them into buildings is feeble.

Red herring! I'm not depending on a strawman argument.

well before 9-11. It's hard to imagine they managed to pull off the hijackings in spite of that.
Then there are the called off investigations into US-Saudi-terrorist money trails, and the fact that the admin claimed the hijackings were a complete surprise. These are just a few facts that make the OCT implausible.

"Mentally ill" isn't really a technical term.

But, the various personality disorders are quite orderly and effective within their disordered universe--"sociopath, psychopath, narcissistic personality disorder, etc."

FWIW, these guys may not have been any of these things. There's a book recently out of the diaries of WWII Japanese Kamikaze pilots. According to reviews and excerpts (I haven't read) the remarkable thing about these men is that they were NOT religious zealots or superpatriots. Committing suicide was just part of their world.

in the defense of their homeland is a different proposition than volunteers
for aggressive and pointless suicide attacks.

Indications are that these guys were not religious fanatics but drug smugglers.

If they see "Islam" as their Country and are loyal to that, its the same thing. THEY don't see the attacks as pointless.

I'm not saying I understand this. It's just clear that there ARE plenty of young men willing to kill themselves for this cause.

WHAT indications are there that the hijackers were drug smugglers? And, how does this matter? If the CIA can finance operations with drug dealing, why not Al Qaeda?

You've hit the nail on the head, there. Go to the head of the class.

<<Please provide pictures of the intense fires.
My barbeque does not suffer total progressive collapse every time I grill some
chicken. Does yours?>>

My barbeque grill isn't a 100 story building. And the legs don't get hot. And it hasn't been hit by an airliner. I did have one collapse once. The steel legs rotted after 30 years. Webber.

The buildings were on fire and they collapsed. That's pretty good evidence. The extent of the fires simply can't be determined from pictures posted on the Internet.

<<there are no pictures of a crashed airplane. Have you ever seen
any pictures of engines from flight 93, or any landing gear? Why not?>>

I get confused. 93 was Pennsylvania, right? What's the point? The plane is missing, as are the passengers. There was an investigation by independent agencies. What are we supposed to conclude?

I haven't seen pictures of a lot of things. So?

<<I suppose then I needn't bother to have a friend hold the ladder, because it can only
collapse into its own footprint.>>

You are talking about a force from the SIDE. Or a tilt from the BOTTOM. A stepladder really can't fail the same way a skyscraper would.

A skyscraper isn't a ladder or an Oak tree. They aren't strong enough to fall over that way. Cut out one side near the bottom, maybe. With damage at the top, they have to fall straight down. Think House of Cards.

<<enormous torque on WTC2 as the top twisted off.>>

That's the TOP. How does th
t Controlled Demolition?

<<Baloney. Name some.>>

Check the NIST report. Check various engineering pubs. Check 911Myths for refs. Check the famous Pop Sci site. There are video stories from Discovery Channel and National Geographic.
I don't have time to look this up for you.

You have one Utah Cold Fusion physics prof making a lot of noise. The people who actually know what's going on think he's a nut. The whole world's community of engineers is intensely interested in the collapse of those buildings. If there were an obvious problem with the official explanation, there would be an outcry.

Only in the OCT fairy tale do steel buildings "fall straight down" due to gravity. In the real world, it takes more than that.

Only in the OCT fairy tale do 19 muslim fanatics/suicidal terrorists use cocaine, frequent topless bars, have live-in girlfriends, fly large commercial airliners with pinpoint accuracy despite having never flown more than a paper airplane and a small Cessna, spend time in Las Vegas, and then give it all up in hopes that after turning their earthly bodies into MUSH they'll be able to meet and have their way with 72 virgins. What kind of sense does that make? I'll take you. It makes NONsense, and that is what your posts consist of. The only polite excuse I can think of for that is maybe that it's an exercise all OCT Spin Doctors go through during their internship.

Do you expect it to topple over like a tree?

Sid

It's how the WTC buildings were brought down. You and a few others must be the only people on this forum that insist on the preposterous fairy tale taught at 9/11 OCT school.

Ever heard of that?

Whatever caused the buildings to collapse happened at the point of impact. Everything below was JUST THE SAME.

I, and the entirety of the sane world, understand that those buildings collapsed because of impact damage and fire.

Now run along and think up some more entertaining crap.

Professor Jones has credibility. An anonymous OCT'er that spends hours trying to disrupt and distract people that s/he disagrees with has motivations that may well be suspected of being less than objective , forthright, and free of paid bias.

really, Americus, you gotta get some new material. That stuff is getting stale.

Sid

Your post is worded in a very intentionally misleading manner or else it's an intentional lie.

Regarding your insult: with all of the efforts of you and your fellow OCT Brigade members, why do you feel you have failed completely to convince anyone here that the Official 9/11 Conspiracy Theory is anything more than a fairy tale?

If you were a practicing Catholic, would you go to a forum about Southern Baptist beliefs and spend hours every day insulting them, disrupting their discussions, and generally making a fool of your anonymous self? (assuming that particular forum welcomed disruptors - would you still do it?)

1. In which direction do you expect a building to fall? The buildings were damaged NEAR THE TOP. Whether they fell from explosives or fire and structural damage, everything below the point of impact would be THE SAME.

Even Mr. Goat has acknowledged that explosives could as well have been set by terrorists as by the United Nations Secret Government.

2. For what reason would the writers of "the OCT fairy tale" have their fictional characters behave as libertines? Just to raise suspicions?

Actally, I've never known a Middle Eastern Muslim Suicide Terrorist. Maybe they all behave this way all the time.

It's an extraordinary weak argument, any way you look at it.

The only guy with anything to offer is pushing the OCT? That's it?

evidence was destroyed and is currently withheld so speculation is all that's available concerning all the unanswered questions about 911. Therefore how do you expect someone to explain it without speculation?
It would be so easy to clear everything up by just releasing all related video and other evidence and eagerly investigating any unanswered questions! Including bldng. #7, photos, questioning witnesses under oath, etc.

at the moment to formulate a comprehensive theory--is that right? It's impossible to do so without resorting to speculation--that's your argument?

speculation.

Most of us in the DU 9/11 forum are more interested in critical examination of
facts. There is plenty of speculation on the internet if that's what you want.

I'm sorry we can't hand you the Capital T Truth all wrapped up in a doggie bag,
but given the secrecy of government these days and the destruction of evidence,
a rigorous examination of the issues really can't conclude much more than
that the official explanations don't make sense and we need a new investigation.

to a curious outsider. It looks like you've started with a conclusion (parts of the official story don't make sense, therefore the whole thing is false), and are suffering under the misapprehension that if you can poke enough holes in the official story, it will somehow be conclusively disproved and you'll be vindicated here on DU, and in the larger world. My sense is that that won't happen until you can formulate a plausible, compelling and fact-driven competing theory. It's not enough to just trash Genesis; in order to have any credibility at all, you have to have a competing narrative of your own. It's about intellectual rigor--and having the courage to open yourselves up to the same fierce critiques to which you subject proponents of the OCT.

$15 million to do our own 9/11 Commission (and wouldn't have access to the secret
records even if we did) and don't have $20 million for an engineering report
(and wouldn't have access to the videos, the photos, and the blueprints even if
we did.)

An examination of the facts soon leads to the conclusion that the official story
is impossible.

We don't have the resources or the access to the evidence to formulate a proper theory,
but we can say the official investigation was shoddy and political and a coverup and
that a new investigation conducted by principled people with subpoena power is needed.

We know Miss Scarlet was nowhere near the murder victim, and the weapon was not the
rope. To proclaim it was Professor Plum or Colonel Mustard and we know the weapon was
the candlestick would be premature and proving it is impossible.

Okay, I'll take a stab at a plausible theory, which is not to say I believe it above
other plausible theories:

Osama bin Laden, a known CIA asset, recruited 19 Muslims into a hijacking scheme. Whether
they joined for mercenary reasons and had no idea it was a suicide mission or they joined
for fanatical religious ones is not known. Somebody in the US Gov't told the hijackers
that on September 11 six simultaneous war games would disrupt the US air defence. Whether
piloted by the hijackers or flown by remote control, three of the planes were flown into
their targets. Very likely SAM missiles were defending the Pentagon and were deactivated
9/11 because of the war games. The WTC towers were blown up. Flight 93 was shot down
because the passengers had taken over the plane and turned it back toward Pittsburgh.

satisfied in the least as to the story the government professed to the citizens of this country to be true, is enough for me, and I believe, enough for anyone, to keep the inquiry into the the events of 9/11 alive, and to continue to demand an open, independent investigation.
If the events occurred as the government related to us, and given the massive security breaches, such as numerous passes over restricted air space, to massive deriliction, or stand-down orders, to the very inaction of the president and staff, I find it hard to believe we have not heard a single call by the OCT people for investigation into the security failures, and what should be done to correct it. Of course, bringing the people up the line responsible for this failure to bear responsibility would help. The only thing I remember are medals, promotions, a lotta "attaboys", and oh yeah, something about "hitting the trifecta".:headbang: Thanks.
quickesst

The official story is demonstrably false in many of its major factual assertions.

That really is the starting point, isn't it? If the administration appointed this commission and devoted time and resources to come up with a story, and the story falls apart, then we have evidence of a cover up, and that means that there is something malignant to cover up.

Other than that, we mostly have questions, not answers. We are doing research, not pontificating on a single truth.

If you want to browse the source of factual assertions that I suspect the majority of 9/11 researchers agree on, go the cooperativeresearch, the site run by Paul Thompson. Read through all the entries, based on mainstream media and governmental sources.

After you have done that, please stop by again and tell us whether you think the official story has any credibility.

1. The list of questions submitted by the 9/11 families to the 9/11 Commission,
which questions they were promised would serve as the Commission's "roadmap".
The Commission's (non)-responses are rated by two 9/11 widows here:

http://www.justicefor911.org/Appendix4_FSCQuestionRatings_111904.php

2. Dr. Griffin's list of 115 criticial omissions and distortions of the 9/11
Commission.

http://www.septembereleventh.org/newsarchive/2005-05-22-571pglie.php

3. The petition of the Scholars for 9/11 Truth asking for the release of
suppressed evidence including plane parts, steel samples, securicam videos,
and more.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/929981172?ltl=1141667399#body

with one of your assumptions: you say "If the administration appointed this commission and devoted time and resources to come up with a story, and the story falls apart, then we have evidence of a cover up, and that means that there is something malignant to cover up." I think that's making quite a leap, frankly. Of course there's a cover-up--government always covers up when it screw the pooch; the bigger the pooch, the more elaborate the coverup. It does not necessarily follow that what's being concealed is active intent on the part of the government to destroy the WTC and kill 3,000 people. And don't tell me about operation Northwoods--I already know.

Assuming you want the evidence included with the theory/scenario, it would be nothing short of writing a book. That's not something that anyone can do in a timespan that would not leave you impatient. Anything that would fit in a reasonable time frame would be unsatisfactory wrt content.

If you want to know more you'll have to read what's already out there, ie "Crossing the Rubicon" and the 9/11 timeline on www.cooperativeresearch.org. Also i'd recommend looking into some background wrt the history of CIA covert operations and US foreign policy in general.

The link in my sig "subversive documentaries" points to a number of interesting sources on those topics.

Four planes were hijacked, three were flown into buildings, and one crashed in Pennsylvania - shot down or not is really immaterial. If you start with the understanding that al Qaeda began as the mujahedeen, financed and trained by the CIA to give Russia their own Vietnam the reality of the OCT begins to stand on its head. The facts make it look like a false flag operation on ourselves from ourselves.

Summary of the following: They knew it was coming, ignored it, and actually stopped the investigations of it. People who ignored it and "let it happen" were promoted. Their friends financed it. They got in the way of any real investigation into it, i.e., there has been no criminal investigation of the crime. Hence, there are many more questions than answers.

Nearly every FBI investigation into said terrorists was thwarted, stopped by the * cabal. The investigators were told to STFU, they had more important things to deal with. Repeated warnings fell on deaf ears, and eventually the people screaming were punished, fired, will never work again in this business, etc... (I will get a full rundown on this when I have time.) Conversely, the chiefs who stopped the investigations were promoted. I cannot stress enough that the rank and file FBI tried really hard to stop this and you have to give them credit.

Military intelligence was also thwarted in their attempts to uncover what was happening. In the case of Able Danger, they put a yellow sticky note over Atta's face which is enough to say "he's one of ours leave him alone". The military and CIA just happened to be having several war games/drills that day, which kind of left them asleep at the wheel. That summer the language in the rules regarding NORAD and scrambling jets to intercept planes was changed. The on the ground commanders could do nothing until the Sec. Def. gave the go ahead.

Coincidentally, Rummy and Wolfie were having a meeting that morning, and when they heard about the planes hitting WTC, though they knew they were under attack, they didn't think there was anything they could do, so they continued their meeting until the plane hit the Pentagon, then went into rescue mode I guess.

The hijackers, and other terrorists, were financed by good friends of the * Cabal, that would be Bandar Bush (supposedly his wife did the questionable deeds, but we know how independent Saudi women are), the bin Ladens (several family members - not Usama), bin Mahfouz (from BCCI), and the head of Paki intelligence.
Run down on the money angle at this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=91841&mesg_id=91841

Coincidentally, the FBI now says they can't tie Usama to it.
See the following thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=94736&mesg_id=94736

After the fact, they magically knew who did it in no time. They gave the folks at NIST very limited access to the physical evidence from WTC, amid loud complaints from the good investigators there. They had to dig through a landfill to get some of the pieces of steel they used in their analysis. They can't reproduce the phenomenon in a lab so far... they continue to try.

William Rodriguez (Rodriguez v. Bush et. al.) experienced an explosion which he believes was a bomb going off in the basement of the towers very early in the event, i.e., shortly after the plane struck. A lot of other folks experienced explosions or "bombs", both people who worked in the building and firemen (I think the firemen would know the dif between a bomb and something exploding due to fire... but that's just me, maybe I give too much credit). Workers trying to get out were blown back by explosions, knocked off their feet and thrown down hallways.

The buildings fell way too fast for some of us to be comfortable saying it was just the fire and planes. I would have expected some resistance. Given this fact, the quick disposal of evidence, and the "bomb" statements the questions regarding the use of explosives in the destruction of the buildings, or "controlled demolition" can't help but surface, IMO.

Link to Rodriguez v. Bush PDF
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.911forthetruth.com%2Fpdfs%2FRodriguezvs.Bush%2520.pdf&ei=o36ZRLGiJaK8YM_eqesC&sig2=LPfNmO6BgM-cDEvcc8hSrg


* proclaimed that he would tolerate no "outrageous conspiracy theories" about 9/11. Simply stating this fact is more than enough to keep people who want to keep their jobs from doing any real digging. They're better off not knowing. Personally, the fact that he said that leads me to want to create multiple outrageous conspiracy theories about the day... I feel it's my patriotic duty (and duty as a human being in general) to defy him.

These are all the "facts" I can think of at this time. It's more than enough, I think, to warrant a full-on criminal investigation into our own governments behavior as per 9/11.

lied repeatedly about Atta's meetings in Prague in an attempt to conflate Al Queda with Saddam, when he knew damn well the FBI had a bead on him in Florida.

Really quite well done.

Theres's simply too much, information, misinformation and disinformation to make such a determination.

All we really know is that we've been lied to a lot.