The Titanic sinking conspiracy theory
- Thread starter lub0
- Start date
Oh brother!
Yeah you're right I did sorta touch the blue paper on my favourite list of conspiracy theories that started this thread trundling on. I can only say decide for yourself about whether you want to dimiss them or ponder them. I can only bring them to your attention. There is a TON of data out there both for and against, but to me the official story just stinks.
The last vid I posted sums it up for me. NIST did a whitewash job on the final report, so professional peers, who have nothing to gain other than trying to bring out the truth, got together and made a point of signing their names to say what an outrage this was. I'm not alone in these thoughts and I'm no one in the grand scheme of things, just someone who questions the official story about this.
Like I said above. Thanks for reading.
I understand how you feel and the last video is emotional stuff but who is Bob McIlvaine that I should trust his opinion so completely? Who are the architects, engineers an such like that he refers to? Do they exist? If they do exist are they saying that it was controlled demolition or are they simply asking that an investigation be opened (not the same thing)?
Personally I'm not saying that conspiracies don't happen. Nor am I an 'innocent' who believes governments without question. I'm simply saying that I don't think the conspiracies being presented here are at all likely. Individually they are unlikely but collectively and linked by some nebulas and nefarious behind-the-scenes super-power they become almost absurd as far as I am concerned.
Last edited:
So... you mean /they/ have some sort of ray or remote control holographic laser doohickey which can literally explode all the water in a water cooler to make, in effect, a massive det charge which is completely invisible to the naked eye? Imagine if you could mount one of those in the eye socket of a genetically modfied shark!
Biker
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Befoe yesterday I hadn't heard of Bob McIlvaine either but saw a comment on a related video at Youtube and followed it. Seems like he says in the intro of that vid he lost his Son on that dreadful day, thereafter he made a big hairy nuisance of himself trying to get a decent investigation started. As with most things people who have common interests group together but these opponents to the official story got themselves organised and in the process some professional recognisable credibilty. It's now his goal to educate people about what really happened.
I'm sure the list or architects exist. Debunkers of this sort can't afford to be as fictional as NIST and such because they have to maintain the moral high ground, they don't have the luxury of conjuring up facts to suit a predetermined outcome, they have to play it straight.
Now just suppose they manage to get NIST to admit that WTC7 came down through controlled demolition. Just that one admission would unravel all the other stuff NIST and the Bush administration has said all along. Because it would mean that it was planned. A premeditated act brought about to coincide with an attack that they apparently had no knowledge about in advance. The ramifications of this are enormous. It could mean that buildings contain demolition charges in them already. Would you feel safe going to work knowing the building was rigged for self destruct and someone else outside had the trigger?
But of course NIST and the rest of those blackhat boys won't come clean and 'fess up, they have everything to lose. So they keep on churning out the smoke and mirrors stuff, distracting the media and the innocent ignorant public hoping eventually things will just fade away.
Bob McIlvaine is one of those many who won't allow it to just fade away.
About the possiblity of all these conspiracy theories being linked together? Hmmm personally I have trouble getting my head around that too. Too much like the 1,000 year Riech for me, but then I haven't studied that side of things that much. On the face of it it does sound absurd, but then someone one proved powered flight was impossible or that man would walk on the moon ... oh, but wait a sec'
.Thanks Huon, been nice chatting with you.
About the possiblity of all these conspiracy theories being linked together? Hmmm personally I have trouble getting my head around that too. Too much like the 1,000 year Riech for me, but then I haven't studied that side of things that much. On the face of it it does sound absurd, but then someone one proved powered flight was impossible or that man would walk on the moon ... oh, but wait a sec'
Thanks Huon, been nice chatting with you.
I do like your style Biker. You've managed to keep your sense of humour throughout and to be honest I don't think many could.
:You_Rock_
Biker
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
So not only do facts and sound logical evidence fail to convince you but doubly bad (and frustrating to those of us that wish to make people like you aware of this sort of information) is that you then say you consider yourself a critic of government and do not readily believe in everything they say.
You are suffering from Orwellian "double-think" whereby you are simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs and you are not even consciously aware you are doing it!
To take an analogy from the classic movie, you are too deeply plugged in to the Matrix to be able to step out and even comprehend the pychological issues you are suffering from, but I will help you out and link you to a webpage that should make you aware of your predicament, oh but then again you don't want to wake up, do you? http://red-pill.org/why-wont-they-listen/
Last edited:
Thanks for that but if you don't mind I'll take some of the pills you are on. They seem much more fun
Do you not think you are the one plugged in? The problem with many conspiracy believers is that they are in fact the ones that ignore the evidence and so often fall back on links and theories from spurious sources which in the cold light of day and after rational analysis are worthless; often the simple truth is just that, yet too simple for them to accept and they grasp at straw looking for truths that are just not there to discover.
I love conspiracy theories but...I look at them in a very cold light detached from my wanting them to be true.
Was Marilyn Monroe poisoned because of her Kennedy connection? Very possible as only a couple of people would have been involved.
Was Kennedy shot by more than one gunman? Very possible, again only a handful of people involved who could easily have been removed by third parties killing them with no idea what they had done.
Is there a UFO cover up? Likely to some extent as far too many credible witnesses have come forward for it all to be explained away as weather balloons or ball lightening.
Were the events of 9/11 some government agency action? Not a chance, too much solid evidence to the contrary and far to many people would have been involved for it to have remained a secret in my opinion.
I respect your views and hope you can respect others without resorting to the type of post you just made; it doesn't make polite reading.
Biker
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Well said Richard. Remarks aimed at individuals is not in the least bit helpful or postitive. Keep it generalised or better yet light-hearted and it will bounce along nicely. I get what you're saying lub0 and the link to that website is VERY interesting and those vids have a LOT of good advice for anyone in general, not just us foilcone hat wearers.
Richard I read what you're saying about the size of this 9/11 consipracy being huge. I get that, believe me I do. But when you add 2 + 2 and get 4 then everything's just dandy. But things fall rapidly apart when you add 2 + 2 and you get 7.87034722. Which is just about how the answers appear to me and a LOT of other people with the official story of events of 9/11. I don't have the answers to give, but I know in my gut that things aren't quite so simple and tied off as the offical word would have us believe.
Maybe these blackhats that do such things as assassinate a President just got cocky and tried something really big. Ask anyone in the US whether Lee Harvey did the dirty deed alone and I bet you get a 40% reply saying he was a patsy. Makes me wonder what a survey will say in 50 years time about 9/11. "Oh yeah we knew it was an inside job." Thing is, nowadays we are better informed about things than back in '63, but on the other hand still just as oblivious of the truth.
Marilyn was poisoned?????
Richard I read what you're saying about the size of this 9/11 consipracy being huge. I get that, believe me I do. But when you add 2 + 2 and get 4 then everything's just dandy. But things fall rapidly apart when you add 2 + 2 and you get 7.87034722. Which is just about how the answers appear to me and a LOT of other people with the official story of events of 9/11. I don't have the answers to give, but I know in my gut that things aren't quite so simple and tied off as the offical word would have us believe.
Maybe these blackhats that do such things as assassinate a President just got cocky and tried something really big. Ask anyone in the US whether Lee Harvey did the dirty deed alone and I bet you get a 40% reply saying he was a patsy. Makes me wonder what a survey will say in 50 years time about 9/11. "Oh yeah we knew it was an inside job." Thing is, nowadays we are better informed about things than back in '63, but on the other hand still just as oblivious of the truth.
Marilyn was poisoned?????
Last edited:
xylaria
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
I did an experiment with 9/11. Showed my son who was about 9 years old at the time three videos of buildings colapsing due to fire, and three of buildings being demolished, i then showed him building 7. He said it looked like it was demolished, he said the twin towers looked half and half, the top half was on fire but it fell over because it was demolished. Using the same logic he could not see a plane hit the pentagon. I cant see a plane either. Applying okham's razor suddenly becomes difficult. I dont say I know the truth, I just know I cant see a plane hit the pentogon, the twin towers and building 7 are falling like they were rigged with explosives. There is a body of architects that agree.
The best place to hide the truth is with a bodyguard of lies :- winston churchill.
My dad on friday 17th may 1974 left work early. He walked down parnell street dublin and walked past a group of men speaking with what he called sandhurst accents [he did national service in the late 1950s] talking jargon. If he left work on time he would of got blown up by the bomb that was planted on the same spot. This certainly wasnt the only suspected fasle flag of this conflict.
This point isnt anything to do with the irish question, it is do with sometimes governments do really appaling things to justify yet more really appaling things. If no-one questions what they do, they get away with it. There is no logical reason why an expert toxicolist would top himself with co-proximols, slit his wrists the wrong way and then throw a knife without finger prints away, i can see no logical reason why a concrete sky scraper would instantly pulverise into dust due a fire let alone three in one day or why an ulster terrorist group would ring the belfast telegraph and have a plumy english accent.
Skyscrapers aren't made of comcrete. They're made of steel. Concrete that tall would collapse under it's own weight without any outside assistance.
Many things strike me as odd, not least of all why a bunch of religiously fanatical madmen would fly planes full of passengers into buildings for some pretend fairy tale book.
Sure there were things in the investigation that could have been done better, there are also some things in the report that still go unanswered.
The facts are though, in each case:
A large plane flew into the building
A intense fire burned
Around 1 hour later the buildings collapsed
It's hardly like i'm being lead to believe GW Bush is a genius or the planet is a triangle here is it.
I mean in any ones mind it's hardly a stretch that a huge plane, loaded with fuel, flying flat out into a building is going to seriously damage it's structural integrity.
How is witnessing on live TV a plane hit the second tower, watching in numerous slow mo's the shock wave physically shake the building, watching a fierce fire burn, then watching the building collapse blindly accepting anything?
I saw the sequence of events with my own eyes.
Yep, a case of the blind following the ones with the blindfolds Aaron, ah well each to their own mate.
Can 1000 architects and engineers be wrong? Hell yeah cause the NIST on behalf of the US government said so, "it was 'primarily' due to fires". Laughable. Honestly cracks me up that most of you believe what they say, I wish we had the lil laugh_side smiley here.
Can't afford anything shiny
Si
But i'm not the person that is completely disregarding a massive plane flying into the buildings.
It's ironic that you call me blind when these massive event has not phased into your theories at all.
What architects?
What EXACTLY are they saying?
If they're asking for another enquiry that's a MASSIVE difference in opinion from them believing the building was demolished using explosives.
That's where the problem lay with all this conspiracy nonsense.
It's all a snippet here, a sound bite there, one interview out of a thousand that's taken as gospel while completely disregarding the other 999 witness reports.
All by people that are trying to sell books on the subject or get some face time on TV.
What facts?
Logic is not accepted as evidence in any court of law i know, so logical evidence is very much a contradiction in terms.
Difficult to understand what point your trying to put forward here.
Should we be accepting the word of a 9 year old as "expert" opinion?
What experience has your lad got in massive scale demolitions?
What other buildings has seen that are similar in scale to WTC's that were demolished?
Should we also accept the word of your son who watched a few vids against the hundreds of eye witnesses that saw a plane fly towards the pentagon then into it?
At the risk of sounding crude, i have never watched 2 men being intimate together, it doesn't mean that homosexuality doesn't exist though does it.
NOT seeing something is not really evidence of anything is it?
Thing is i have offered a scenario, that a big plane crashing into the WTC's weakened the structure.
We all saw and have seen the footage of the planes crashing into the towers, so that's pretty much air tight evidence.
We then witnessed the buildings burn at a fierce rate.
Again we witnessed this ourselves, again not really a stretch is it.
We then witnessed the towers start to collapse at the EXACT floors the planes hit.
Again this is unequivocal.
But rather than believe this scenario you expect me to believe that:
- A private contractor was contacted and consulted to plan the demolition of both towers, who has since stayed quiet.
- Someone managed to find tons of thermite or hundreds of kilos of anally tightly controlled high explosives.
- Then get ALL these explosives into a building with again anally tight security
- Then for a crack team to install ALL these explosives/thermite right under the noses of hundreds of maintenance staff, thousands of workers, and hundreds of private security staff who's sole job was to protect their offices.
- Then for these explosives/thermite to be detonated on EXACTLY the same floor the jets flew into.
- At EXACTLY (to within milliseconds) the right time to assist in the downfall of said buildings.
- These people then rather than take the easiest and most logical route of easily blaming Al-Qaeda and setting up some manufactured evidence showing them installing the explosives/thermite, rather decide to ignore it.
- All the time not taking the logical plan of toppling each building into each other
- THEN this group which MUST be getting up to 100 people, from accountants to sappers, from politicians to security personal in the WTC's, from maintenance staff that MUST of turned a blind eye in the weeks if not months of preparation needed to setup a demolition of this scale ALL have stayed 100% quiet about EVERY single stage
- ALL THIS vast amount of financial, legal and manpower commitment was then left 100% in the hands of a inexperienced pilot.
So tell me who is blind, the person that thinks it's likely that those big planes hitting the buildings and the resulting fire collapsed the towers.
OR the person that has absolutely
NO evidence
NO proof
NO gunman on the grassy knoll
NO idea who did the planning
NO idea who did the hands on graft
NO idea how it was financed
NO idea or motive
No idea how it was carried out
Your thorough knowledge of the methods used by the conspirators and your vehement denial that a conspiracy exists can only lead me to 1 "logical" conclusion. YOU WERE THE CONTRACTOR!!!!!! YOU planted the explosives and now you're covering your tracks!!!
Sounds like a good excuse to secure a book deal to me.
Well a better excuse than most the other 9/11 conspiracy books i've read any ways
Why do threads like this encourage normally sensible posters into bouts of childishness? That baffles me more than anything.
I suppose the adage " folk mock that which they don't understand" is relevant here.
I suppose the adage " folk mock that which they don't understand" is relevant here.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-people-believe-in-conspiracies
And playing Devils advocate...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
And playing Devils advocate...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
Last edited:
