The Titanic sinking conspiracy theory
- Thread starter lub0
- Start date
Ok watched it.
In all honesty i thought it an absolute waste of time.
The guy ignored all the data that didn't fit in with his theory and jumped to conclusions of immense proportions.
Do you honestly believe that a team of people got hold of the building plans.
Planned a method of bringing both towers down
Systematically went through all 3 buildings under the eyes of several government organisations and many other extremely security concious companies and planted tons of termite.
Left it in place
Wired it up to remotely execute
Then expected terrorists that were (using conspiracy theorists words) "inexperienced pilots" to hit BOTH towers.
NOT have a pre-organised evacuation system in place.
Then ALL these people who planned and executed this to remain quiet for the rest of their lives?
Personally i don't know why they collapsed, i do know that carrying out tests on a non stressed girder at ground level out of the wind is pretty much a waste of time with regards to proving anything.
Again it is only private companies that have the experience and skills enough to bring a building down the size of the WTC's in their own footprint, this is not something you just throw explosives at and hope for the best.
Bringing buildings down is as much an art form as it is a science.
These conspiracy theories are SO elaborate and involved, this from a government that couldn't keep it's CIA operatives names and pictures out of the papers, a government that couldn't find WMD's in Iraq nor any connection with Al-Qaeda, the 2 reasons it invaded.
Some questions please.
1/ Who planted the thermite/explosives?
2/ How many where they?
3/ Where did they get this VAST amount of explosives/thermite?
4/ How did they purchase ALL these materials and go unnoticed?
5/ How could they plant these explosives/thermite in key structural areas without being noticed?
6/ Who sat with the building plans and planned where and how much explosives/thermite to use?
7/ Where ad when did they pre-weaken the structure?
8/ How where these remotely set off?
9/ Who was involved?
10/ Who pushed the button to bring the towers down?
11/ IF someone put ALL that effort in surely they wouldn't leave it up to inexperienced pilots (using the CT's words) to actually hit the buildings no?
Biker
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Series of good question there cbr6fs (what is you name anyway?) if I had the answers to them I'd be posting vids on youtube instead of linking to them.
The point I was making there in linking that video is that the investigation were carried out by a government appointed commission who were employed to investigate leaving "no stone unturned" to get to the truth. This commission once they'd handed out the red noses balloons and big funny shoes ignored basic procedures that in all honesty are scandalous in nature.
That bloke in the vid referred to NIST choosing words such a pressure puffs instead of the more imflammatory explosions. That bloke showed that such explosions and the eye witness accounts at the scenes corroberated, yet did NIST take their investigation further? Nope. What they did was whitewash the whole thing proving that they were clowns form the start.
Not only that, as the guy said at the begininning of the footage they attempt to debunk the debunkers by having such legendary scientists called Mythbusters come along and prove how thermite won't do diddly, then someone in his back garden with a modicum of techincal skill (and a few screws loose in my opinion) made thermite from over the counter ingredients and put it to destructive use. Then he reduces those explosions to prove just how surgical you can be and still break something like a girder
Those buildings didn't fall down by themselves they followed the path of MOST resistance instead of toppling sideways, once the break occured. But even then they fell in free fall, they didn't slow down as the energy was absorbed by the existing structure closer to the ground.
Believe what you want mate, but take a look around you and find events in history, both old and recent that have replicated some or most of the events on 9/11.
Three Manhatten skyscrapers collapse in their own footprint. One of them from a fire in the basement and NOT from being hit by a plane. That too fell in free fall, there was no partial collapse either but total implosion. From a fire?!!!!!!
Two full-loaded and effing big airliners magically vapourised leaving only the smallest of debris behind, no larger recognisable pieces survived to be once called plane.
A whole series of events occured that left very few loose ends at the time because everyone was reeling in shock from it. But some eople started to question the official word when little tings didn't add up with the offical story. If this doesn't even raise a glimmer of doubt in your mind that something ain't right then nothing I say or present will convince you to question anything ever again.
If however you want to read something interesting check this website out
http://www.american-buddha.com/911.stevenjonescollapseWTC.htm
Like I said better minds than mine have studied this intensively and just like me they have nothing to gain over voicing their opinions except to be called a foilcone hat wearer.
Nuff said. I'm full of cold, coughed a lung up earlier and really can't be ar$ed any longer.
The point I was making there in linking that video is that the investigation were carried out by a government appointed commission who were employed to investigate leaving "no stone unturned" to get to the truth. This commission once they'd handed out the red noses balloons and big funny shoes ignored basic procedures that in all honesty are scandalous in nature.
That bloke in the vid referred to NIST choosing words such a pressure puffs instead of the more imflammatory explosions. That bloke showed that such explosions and the eye witness accounts at the scenes corroberated, yet did NIST take their investigation further? Nope. What they did was whitewash the whole thing proving that they were clowns form the start.
Not only that, as the guy said at the begininning of the footage they attempt to debunk the debunkers by having such legendary scientists called Mythbusters come along and prove how thermite won't do diddly, then someone in his back garden with a modicum of techincal skill (and a few screws loose in my opinion) made thermite from over the counter ingredients and put it to destructive use. Then he reduces those explosions to prove just how surgical you can be and still break something like a girder
Those buildings didn't fall down by themselves they followed the path of MOST resistance instead of toppling sideways, once the break occured. But even then they fell in free fall, they didn't slow down as the energy was absorbed by the existing structure closer to the ground.
Believe what you want mate, but take a look around you and find events in history, both old and recent that have replicated some or most of the events on 9/11.
Three Manhatten skyscrapers collapse in their own footprint. One of them from a fire in the basement and NOT from being hit by a plane. That too fell in free fall, there was no partial collapse either but total implosion. From a fire?!!!!!!
Two full-loaded and effing big airliners magically vapourised leaving only the smallest of debris behind, no larger recognisable pieces survived to be once called plane.
A whole series of events occured that left very few loose ends at the time because everyone was reeling in shock from it. But some eople started to question the official word when little tings didn't add up with the offical story. If this doesn't even raise a glimmer of doubt in your mind that something ain't right then nothing I say or present will convince you to question anything ever again.
If however you want to read something interesting check this website out
http://www.american-buddha.com/911.stevenjonescollapseWTC.htm
Like I said better minds than mine have studied this intensively and just like me they have nothing to gain over voicing their opinions except to be called a foilcone hat wearer.
Nuff said. I'm full of cold, coughed a lung up earlier and really can't be ar$ed any longer.
Last edited:
The same company I believe who were contracted to take away the rubble after the WTC "collapses".
Lot's of interesting info/video/eye witness testimony here:
http://911caper.com/2010/08/17/expl...-world-trade-center-tower-destruction-on-911/
So it's fully plausible for an airliner full of fuel to take out a building that size, but another crashes into the ground leaving not much more than a 'hole'? Come on! And what about the 3rd building which wasn't hit by anything?
Si
Last edited:
Biker
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Just spending some time reading another 9/11 website and found this moving gif of WTC7, it's pretty accurate for the speed it fell down in too.
Hand on heart people, I want an honest opinion here too. Does that look like a building collapsing from a fire in the a corner basement or as a result of a controlled demolition?
If you choose the latter then by that single admission you are in direct conflict with the official reports of that day.
So if that is the case then the knock-on effect of it calls into doubt all the rest of the officially explained events of 9/11.
off for the night now but I leave you with this closing thought
Hand on heart people, I want an honest opinion here too. Does that look like a building collapsing from a fire in the a corner basement or as a result of a controlled demolition?
If you choose the latter then by that single admission you are in direct conflict with the official reports of that day.
So if that is the case then the knock-on effect of it calls into doubt all the rest of the officially explained events of 9/11.
off for the night now but I leave you with this closing thought
Last edited:
If you watch this vid from about 02:36 you can clearly see explosions for lower floors very similar indeed to the ones on the controlled demolition of the department store that was posted a couple pages back, and straight after the cascade starts.
[video=youtube;SXD3bAbZCow]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXD3bAbZCow[/video]
Si
[video=youtube;SXD3bAbZCow]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXD3bAbZCow[/video]
Si
To be 100% honest it does not look like a controlled demolition to me for the simple fact that, if you wanted to bring a building down within it's own footprint you would generally bring the centre section down fractionally before the outer walls.
To bring it down from the bottom up is an extremely risky method.
With regards to the reports on the day, who's reports and what experience and qualifications do they have?
If it was taken down intentionally again though there are all sorts of questions as in my previous post.
The biggest question i have for WTC7 though is.
IF it was an intentional and pre-planed demolition, why didn't they simply topple over the 2 towers onto it?
If your going to the hassle of setting up a terrorist cell, funding and training them, obtaining the detailed and secure building plans, getting an experienced and professional demolitions expert to plan the demolition, buying the explosives, spending hundreds of man hours rigging 3 MASSIVE buildings with explosives under the eyes of everyone from senators to government organisations, not preparing a evacuation drill.
Then you'd think it'd be a LOT easier to simply tipple the WTC's over towards WTC7 wouldn't you?
They already had the answer for WTC7:
Shyam Sunder, NIST’s lead investigator for its World Trade Center projects, said:
“Our take-home message today is that the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery. WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives.”[32]
So that's obviously the reason, cause they said so, simples really.......
Si
Shyam Sunder, NIST’s lead investigator for its World Trade Center projects, said:
“Our take-home message today is that the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery. WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives.”[32]
So that's obviously the reason, cause they said so, simples really.......
Si
Good vid
Really shows very well how the collapse starts at EXACTLY the same floor the terrorists crashed into, dammmm they were talented fliers.
With regards to the dust and debris coming out a couple of things.
1/ IF that was a explosion then it was very badly set as it's forces were exerted OUTSIDE the building, as previously stated if the intention was to bring the building down in it's own footprint then you'd want the centre section to go first.
2/ What we are seeing there is only the outside of the building, the inside must have gone first as that's how the building was structured.
So you have a massive amount of air pressure being created as it went down, certainly more than enough to push debris out like that.
Again though IF there was a controlled demolition:
1/ Who planted the thermite/explosives?
2/ How many where they?
3/ Where did they get this VAST amount of explosives/thermite?
4/ How did they purchase ALL these materials and go unnoticed?
5/ How could they plant these explosives/thermite in key structural areas without being noticed?
6/ Who sat with the building plans and planned where and how much explosives/thermite to use?
7/ Where ad when did they pre-weaken the structure?
8/ How where these remotely set off?
9/ Who was involved?
10/ Who pushed the button to bring the towers down?
11/ IF someone put ALL that effort in surely they wouldn't leave it up to inexperienced pilots (using the CT's words) to actually hit the buildings no?
Last edited:
Hehehe, I reckon the answer to most of those questions is, 'who indeed?' and 'who knew?' I doubt we'll ever find that one out but to me it smacks of the only people who could have pulled it off.
Lots more interesting info here:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19420
And re the badly set explosion, those tell tale signs are also clearly visible in the video of the department store 'planned' demolition if you watch if from all angles, and that one didn't go centre inwards either it went from one end. Meh I just find it odd.
Si
Lots more interesting info here:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19420
And re the badly set explosion, those tell tale signs are also clearly visible in the video of the department store 'planned' demolition if you watch if from all angles, and that one didn't go centre inwards either it went from one end. Meh I just find it odd.
Si
Hehehe, I reckon the answer to most of those questions is, 'who indeed?' and 'who knew?' I doubt we'll ever find that one out but to me it smacks of the only people who could have pulled it off.
Lots more interesting info here:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=19420
And re the badly set explosion, those tell tale signs are also clearly visible in the video of the department store 'planned' demolition if you watch if from all angles, and that one didn't go centre inwards either it went from one end. Meh I just find it odd.
Si
I was unable to find any video a few pages back, but speaking generally if they were squibs from explosives then it is unbelievably lucky that they occurred just as the building was collapsing.
I say that because it's obvious that the initial collapse was due to a structural failure on the floors the plane crashed into.
If you look at demolition videos you'll see the explosions BEFORE the building starts to collapse not as it's collapsing.
The other thing ism in controlled demolitions to date the structures are stripped bare, so we really have no direct evidence on how air pressure reacts as a massive building like the WTC's collapses.
I'm not a structural or a demolition engineer though so any opinion i have is purely anecdotal.
Then of course there is flight 93, if there was a vast conspiracy involving missiles (Pentagon) and explosives were pre-installed in the WTC's and WTC7 then why didn't something happen to what was believed to be flight 93's target, the Whitehouse?
Surely you aren't suggesting the Whitehouse had explosive installed pre 9/11?
What really kicks this conspiracy theory in the bottom for me though, is the fact that you'd realistically need SO many people in on it and for SO many things to go EXACTLY right at EXACTLY the right time in EXACTLY the right location.
I really do not have enough confidence in American politics and human nature that ALL those things could have gone EXACTLY to plan AND everyone stayed quiet about it.
Cheers
Mark
No, that won't work. Watch that link I posted for one thing, its explained there. To bring a building a quarter of that size down takes a lot of work.
The Twin Towers were not designed to withstand an impact of an aircraft as big as the one that bought it down. The Towers were designed with aircraft impact in mind, but much much smaller aircraft.
Last edited:
The question of who physically planted the explosives in the tower is both irrelevent, inconsequential, and no offence but speaks volumes about the kind of fundamentally flawed frame of mind you are looking at this information with.
9/11 was simply a classic false flag operation used as a mind control tool on a mass scale coined "problem-reaction-solution" whereby a problem is created, the reaction is the mass fear and the public outcry "something must be done about this" and the solutution is then offered, which would be something the people that caused the problem in the first place wanted, but could not get it without due justification. Another way they introduce big drastic changes is to do it slowly, over several generations which is how the EU went from a simple trade agreement to a superstate in less than 50 years.
As for answering your question regarding the people behind it, there has always been a section of the population who have always controlled the wealth of the world, today we have several dynastic banking families with a few that can trace their ancestry back to the ancient Egyptian pharaohs and beyond. Since they have always owned the wealth of the world, it dosn't take a genius to work out they control everything in it, too, and therefore have moulded and created the world as we know it today. Some of these control families are called Piso, Aldobrandini, Orsini, the Zionist Rothschilds, the puppet Rockefellers, all are supremely powerful and are proven to be heavily obsessed with dark occultism and Satanism.
These banking families exercise their control through certain groups like the Bilderbergs, CFR, Club of Rome, the Jesuit order, knightly groups such as the Malta's and then down in to the regional groups like Common Purpose and dozens of others using compartmentalized methods so the over all agenda is never fully comprehended by anyone working to forward said agenda. The presidents and prime ministers are merely legislators there to sign in the statutes and announce the decisions of their dark masters in a manner the pathetic general public will accept, in fact many of these "leaders" are not even aware of any agenda and are simply pawns being played.
The public are not aware of the agenda for many reasons, mainly because it is hidden from view and that we are lied to from cradle to grave and secondly people by nature want a frame work to live within and conform to, this is what the system we work and live under as well as conventional wisdom and knowledge is... a pre-packaged model that we all, to our peril commit ourselves to so that we can all live hapilly ever after. When presented with the facts, it's no that they can't see they are indeed facts, it's that sub-consciously they just don't want it to be true, and this is something that has always enraged me ever since I worke up to the global conspiracy.... we are animals, but unlike other animals we have a far greater ability of the mind, and this conformatism and cognitive dissonance is downright pathetic, immature and dangerous.
9/11 was simply a classic false flag operation used as a mind control tool on a mass scale coined "problem-reaction-solution" whereby a problem is created, the reaction is the mass fear and the public outcry "something must be done about this" and the solutution is then offered, which would be something the people that caused the problem in the first place wanted, but could not get it without due justification. Another way they introduce big drastic changes is to do it slowly, over several generations which is how the EU went from a simple trade agreement to a superstate in less than 50 years.
As for answering your question regarding the people behind it, there has always been a section of the population who have always controlled the wealth of the world, today we have several dynastic banking families with a few that can trace their ancestry back to the ancient Egyptian pharaohs and beyond. Since they have always owned the wealth of the world, it dosn't take a genius to work out they control everything in it, too, and therefore have moulded and created the world as we know it today. Some of these control families are called Piso, Aldobrandini, Orsini, the Zionist Rothschilds, the puppet Rockefellers, all are supremely powerful and are proven to be heavily obsessed with dark occultism and Satanism.
These banking families exercise their control through certain groups like the Bilderbergs, CFR, Club of Rome, the Jesuit order, knightly groups such as the Malta's and then down in to the regional groups like Common Purpose and dozens of others using compartmentalized methods so the over all agenda is never fully comprehended by anyone working to forward said agenda. The presidents and prime ministers are merely legislators there to sign in the statutes and announce the decisions of their dark masters in a manner the pathetic general public will accept, in fact many of these "leaders" are not even aware of any agenda and are simply pawns being played.
The public are not aware of the agenda for many reasons, mainly because it is hidden from view and that we are lied to from cradle to grave and secondly people by nature want a frame work to live within and conform to, this is what the system we work and live under as well as conventional wisdom and knowledge is... a pre-packaged model that we all, to our peril commit ourselves to so that we can all live hapilly ever after. When presented with the facts, it's no that they can't see they are indeed facts, it's that sub-consciously they just don't want it to be true, and this is something that has always enraged me ever since I worke up to the global conspiracy.... we are animals, but unlike other animals we have a far greater ability of the mind, and this conformatism and cognitive dissonance is downright pathetic, immature and dangerous.
Last edited:
And here's some food for though.
If you can take the time to look at the information on 9/11, you will, if you are not suffering from a particulary bad case of cognitive dissonance, invariably come to the conclusion that 9/11 was an inside job, you can then quite comfortably use that as a springboard to then come to the conclusion that what I said above is most likely the truth.
If you can take the time to look at the information on 9/11, you will, if you are not suffering from a particulary bad case of cognitive dissonance, invariably come to the conclusion that 9/11 was an inside job, you can then quite comfortably use that as a springboard to then come to the conclusion that what I said above is most likely the truth.
Irrelevant and inconsequential are 2 words that do not come into the context of that day in any way shape or form, it's easy for these conspiracy theorists to dehumanise this event and forget the amount of pain and suffering this day bought.
It is extremely "relevant" to know IF anyone planted explosive who, why and how they did it.
Again IF they did not only should their action have "consequences" but if we know who did plant them, it's a piece in a puzzle to finding out everything else.
The only humour i can find out of all this, is the fact that these conspiracy theorists always dismiss anything that doesn't fit in with their toilet paper thin "theory" to the point where it's pretty much on cue.
What exactly happened that day is a big "fill in the blanks", problem is though the blanks in this "demolition theory" are a LOT bigger than the "a plane crashed into the building, it burnt, it fell down".
I have looked, i've watched and i've read.
Sound bites and dramatic music aside this demolition theory opens up more questions to me than it answers.
All it offers is extremely vague theories with snippets of quotes taken out of context, with solid evidence, facts and testimony ignored whenever it suits.
I'm offering that the initial impact severely weakened the structure (as it would), the resulting fires then took this weakness to failure point.
We witnessed the planes crash into the buildings, we witnessed the MASSIVE shock the buildings took during this impacts, we then witnessed the resulting fires and damage, we then witnessed the building start to collapse from exactly the point of impact.
That is irrefutable.
Now your suggesting that the building was "helped along" with explosives?
If so then i want to know who would have planed the location of these explosives (this is essential as there are only a few individuals on the planet with the experience to setup a demolition on this scale)?
Who would have installed them (again essential info as this is nothing like a military exercise)?
How did they get hold of such a vast amount of explosives (it's possible only 600kg was needed, but lets be straight here 600kg of military grade high explosives is a MASSIVE amount to go missing on anyones books)?
How did they get them through the extremely tight security (i know this as i have had to go through this security)?
How did they install them without anyone of the thousands of workers, maintenance staff, TSA staff, private security or visitors seeing them?
How did they detonate them?
To be honest if no one can offer even a rough theory behind those questions it flushes the entire "demolition theory" down the toilet.
Ohhhh while we are asking i'd like to have an answer for another question please.
If the intention all along was to take down both WTC buildings and WTC7, why on earth didn't they just topple them over on each other?
Seems like the logical and ruthless thing to do no?
