Conspiracy Theories

[SEC=UGA]

(CBS News) Each of us remembers where we were on September 11, 2001, but we never knew what the masterminds of al Qaeda's terrorist plot were doing that terrible day.

 

 

Now, we have an answer, as found in more than 700 documents from the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, and just published by WikiLeaks.

 

 

As it turns out, while Americans watched in horror as the twin towers burned, al Qaeda's top leaders were watching, too. CBS News correspondent David Martin reports that Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the plot mastermind, was in Karachi, Pakistan, watching on television with Ramsi bin al Shib, the day-to-day coordinator of the operation.

 

 

"After the success of the attacks, the operatives prostrated themselves and gave thanks to Allah," one document says.

 

 

Abd al Rahim al Nashiri, who engineered the bombing of the USS Cole, couldn't be there. He was in a Karachi hospital after having had his tonsils out. Nashiri may have been the most dedicated terrorist of all. "He reportedly received injections to promote impotence (rather than be distracted by women)," a document says.

 

 

The documents, based on the interrogation of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, say after 9/11, all senior operatives left Pakistan for Afghanistan to meet with Osama bin Laden, who had watched the attacks from Kandahar.

 

 

Bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al Zawahiri, spent the next couple of months moving about Afghanistan by car, finally taking refuge in the Tora Bora mountains. In mid-December 2001, the two disappeared across the border into Pakistan. The others were eventually captured, but not before Bin al Shib threatened to slit his own throat rather than be taken alive.

 

 

Of course, one should not believe everything a captured terrorist says. One sensational but unconfirmed claim found in the documents says al Qaeda had a nuclear bomb it would set off if Bin Laden were ever captured.

 

Wiki-Leaks is being fed mis-information to perptuate the lies...

[Ursa Majoris]

And the distrust that sprang from the assasination/Warren report certainly is a factor in why people might be inclined to believe that all is not as it seems with 911.

I'd say a bigger factor would be stuff like the X Files, Ludlum books and all the rest of the popular entertainment. If you think people automatically can separate that from reality, I invite you to check out how many juries think CSI Vegas / NY / Miami is reality.

 

Another factor is the Internet itself - now everyone has a megaphone platform for whatever craziness they want to expound. See how long Internet chain emails survive despite them being demonstrably untrue in the great majority of cases.

[Azazello1313]

The John F Kennedy conspiracy theories vs 9-11 was an inside job is apples to oranges, IMO.

 

yeah, JFK, if there were a conspiracy at all, was likely a conspiracy of a handful of people and probably people who were either career criminals or people with a clear axe to grind against kennedy. a 9-11 conspiracy requires a hugh orchestration at the highest levels of government with hundreds if not thousands of foot soldiers just to carry everything out, not to mention all the cover up, all the scientists lying about what happened, etc.

[peepinmofo]

Watched Loose Change last night. If what they are saying is true, then it seems clear that the official explanations at all 3 scenes don't add up. Pretty disturbing.

Now watch Zero: An investigation in to 9/11 (something like that) next.

 

At the very least, you begin to question what really happened. Im glad you are, at the very least, open minded to it (as opposed to the people here that know all, and know exactly what happened since thats what the govt told us).

[peepinmofo]

bold-faced liiiiieeeeee. same amount? come on, man. a handful of crackpot "architects and engineers for truth" is all you've got. well, that and a bunch of clueless dolts who probably never took a college science class babbling about "micro thermate" and such.

Can you tell me exactly the number of "professionals" that saw the evidence? No. So dont sit there and act like anything is a "bold faced liiiiieeeeee" if you cant back it up with anything other than an opinion.

 

Dude, unless you watch the videos, you have NOTHING more to add to this. You have already proven yourself to be close minded. So do us all a favor and move along. Thanks!

[Azazello1313]

Watched Loose Change last night. If what they are saying is true, then it seems clear that the official explanations at all 3 scenes don't add up. Pretty disturbing.

 

tell you what. make a list of each particular fact that you think doesn't add up, and research them one by one considering the principle of occam's razor. if you come to the same conclusion as the tinhat brigade of brave truthseekers...

[Ursa Majoris]

Perhaps we could take the issues one at a time, using the preferred language of those who believe 9/11 was an inside job?

 

Question 1: How did parts of aircraft get scattered around the Pentagon so quickly after the Cruise missile hit it?

[Azazello1313]

Dude, unless you watch the videos, you have NOTHING more to add to this. You have already proven yourself to be close minded. So do us all a favor and move along. Thanks!

 

umm, I posted links to the videos. what the videos show:

 

news footage shows cracking and bowing of the building's east wall immediately before the collapse, which began at the penthouse floors.In video of the collapse, taken from the north by CBS News and other news media, the first visible sign of collapse is movement in the east penthouse 8.2 seconds before the north wall began to collapse, which took at least another 7 seconds

[peepinmofo]

umm, I posted links to the videos. what the videos show:

What building are you talking about? If building 7, I dont know how you or anyone else could ever think the building fell from anything OTHER THAN demolition. It is impossible for ANY building to fall in that manner by anything other than demo. Also, again, what about buildings that have burned hotter, longer? Windsor building is one. There was another in Spain I believe. Answer - It isnt possible. The buildings were designed to withstand plane impacts, and no fire is going to melt the support columns.

[SEC=UGA]

With regard to Architects and engineers...

 

I have built a bunch of buildings in my life. I have seen plans from a bunch of architects in my life. I have had my drawings sealed by a bunch of structural engineers in my life... None of them agree totally at the end of the day.

 

For instance, on a project we are currently doing there is a detail for a header across the hallways. Our structural engineer speced a screw pattern with three # 12 screws with a shear strength of 1,916 lbs each. The engineer for the GC/Owner cam through for third party inspections, looked at the detail and determined that the connection needed four screws, not a big deal, but when the request was made we asked why and stated we would have our structural engineer send over his calcs, which we did. The other structural engineer in turn agreeds that our calcs were correct and it was in fact a good connection, but he felt that the margin of error in the calc was insufficient and that he wanted another screw in these headers for precautionary measures because under certain "extraordinary circumstances" a failure could occur.

 

In another instance our structural and another structural got into an argument with regard to steel sizing for a first floor (also partition gauge to add adequate diapragm to the building.) The initial structural engineer had speced out 4x21/2x16 gauge cees for the application and on the third and fourth floors a 29 gauge partition. Our engineer's calcs told him that this would not work, due to potential tectonic activity and loading requirements that we would have to use 6X2X16 gauge cees and 26 gauge partitioning for this building, the went back and forth for about a week ultimately settling on the 6x2x 16 gauge and the 29 gauge partitioning.

 

You give me 100 structural engineers and I can guarantee you at least 50 different opinions.

 

As for architects... they can draw a pretty building. They are also quite a bit of fun to go out drinking with, unlike structural engineers.

[Azazello1313]

What building are you talking about? If building 7, I dont know how you or anyone else could ever think the building fell from anything OTHER THAN demolition. It is impossible for ANY building to fall in that manner by anything other than demo. Also, again, what about buildings that have burned hotter, longer? Windsor building is one. There was another in Spain I believe. Answer - It isnt possible. The buildings were designed to withstand plane impacts, and no fire is going to melt the support columns.

 

have you read the NIST report? people who are experts in the field find the explanations contained within to be convincing beyond any doubt. are they all liars who are "in on it"? or simply unable to see what is so patently obvious to your expert eyes?

[SEC=UGA]

What building are you talking about? If building 7, I dont know how you or anyone else could ever think the building fell from anything OTHER THAN demolition. It is impossible for ANY building to fall in that manner by anything other than demo. Also, again, what about buildings that have burned hotter, longer? Windsor building is one. There was another in Spain I believe. Answer - It isnt possible. The buildings were designed to withstand plane impacts, and no fire is going to melt the support columns.

 

Tell me how you know other buildings have burned hotter and longer.

 

Were any of said buildings of the same design and of the same size?

 

Can you guarantee that the steel used in these other buildings was of the same tensile strength, gauge, origin as the steel in the WTC buildings?

 

Did these buildings experinece the impact of a 100+ ton projectile moving at a couple/few hundred miles per hour hit it. The disruption, shaking, swaying from this alone could have caused massive shock to the steel frame, not just on the floort where it hit but for many floors due to the resonance of the impact.

 

My main question is how the charges would have been set to perform a controlled demolition of these buildings. One would have to place the shape charges against the structural members. In order to do this one would have to remove sheet rock, masonry, piping, etc... Why did no one notice that the wall of their office was missing and report such an event?

 

You also argue that the fire would have been starved of oxygen, please explain this to me... The building is only a few hundred feet above sea level with winds at elevation of 20 to 50 mph, it would be like a blast furnace up there.

Edited April 26, 2011 by SEC=UGA

[Brentastic]

Wiki-Leaks is being fed mis-information to perptuate the lies...

When I first heard of wikileaks a few months back, my initial hunch is that it's a staged affair. I totally thought and still do think that wikileaks is a red herring.

[SEC=UGA]

When I first heard of wikileaks a few months back, my initial hunch is that it's a staged affair. I totally thought and still do think that wikileaks is a red herring.

 

I will say that I have some info that they are being fed so much info from certain organizations that they don't know what is true, what is not true, where exactly it came from, etc...

[Ursa Majoris]

I will say that I have some info that they are being fed so much info from certain organizations that they don't know what is true, what is not true, where exactly it came from, etc...

Our intelligence people would have to be idiots not to use Wikileaks for disinformation. Wikileaks is just a site that puts stuff up for public viewing, it has no idea as to the genuineness or otherwise of the stuff it displays.

[Brentastic]

tell you what. make a list of each particular fact that you think doesn't add up, and research them one by one considering the principle of occam's razor. if you come to the same conclusion as the tinhat brigade of brave truthseekers...

I'm so sick of hearing about Occam's Razor. It's the in term to use when you have cannot adequately win an argument.

[bushwacked]

I'm so sick of hearing about Occam's Razor. It's the in term to use when you have cannot adequately win an argument.

 

The cool conspiracy kids use "group think" and "sheep."

[matt770]

tell you what. make a list of each particular fact that you think doesn't add up, and research them one by one considering the principle of occam's razor. if you come to the same conclusion as the tinhat brigade of brave truthseekers...

Well, remember I said if what they are saying is true. The problem with these things is you are only viewing the evidence presented by the documentary, not anything that would refute it. Maybe some things have come to light that debunk it all, I honestly don't know. But the major pieces I would like to see explained further:

 

1. The thermite residue found in the dust cloud that blew into the neighboring building.

2. The fact that all the building wreckage was removed and either destroyed or sold to other countries before it could be independently examined for things like explosive residue.

3. The way the towers collapsed after burning for such a short time and the fact that other buildings have burned for much longer and never collapsed. Also the mini-explosions captured on video as the buildings collapsed need to be explained. I can buy the idea that the fire melted the steel at the upper floors where the planes hit, but I find it hard to fathom why all the fully intact steel beams 80+ floors below that point would just give way like they did. If you watch the video, the collapses of both towers were extremely quick, as if nothing was holding it back except gravity. There was a lot of concrete and steel structure that was fully intact and should have offered at least a slight bit of resistance as the upper floors started to fall.

4. The witness who says there were multiple explosions in WTC 7 before it collapsed. And I don't think there can be any debate that the way that bullding collapsed is more in line with a professional demolition than a fire.

5. Flight 93 was blown to tiny smithereens and some parts were found miles away. Seems more like an explosion in midair than an intact plane colliding with the earth. In similar crashes, intact bodies were found still strapped into their seats. Here, very few pieces that large were found.

6. The lack of any video at the Pentagon showing the actual plane approaching or colliding with the building, the hole being smaller than a plane of that size, and the lack of any identifiable plane wreckage in the footage that was shown.

 

[bushwacked]

I guess it depends on how narrow a view one takes.

 

Ummm..

yeah, JFK, if there were a conspiracy at all, was likely a conspiracy of a handful of people and probably people who were either career criminals or people with a clear axe to grind against kennedy. a 9-11 conspiracy requires a hugh orchestration at the highest levels of government with hundreds if not thousands of foot soldiers just to carry everything out, not to mention all the cover up, all the scientists lying about what happened, etc.

 

Or what Az posted, the patently obvious recognition of different degrees of plausibility in 9-11 vs. Kennedy.

Edited April 26, 2011 by bushwacked

[Azazello1313]

I'm so sick of hearing about Occam's Razor.

 

I'll bet you are!

[SEC=UGA]

I think thermite dust can be realitively easily explained... Isn't it a mixture of Iron Oxide (rust), aluminum (what an airplane is made from) and magnesium?

 

Also, thermite is used in welding steel, you think any of the connections during construction of these steel buildings were welded and that residue from this activity remained?

Edited April 26, 2011 by SEC=UGA

[peepinmofo]

have you read the NIST report? people who are experts in the field find the explanations contained within to be convincing beyond any doubt. are they all liars who are "in on it"? or simply unable to see what is so patently obvious to your expert eyes?

Watch. The. Videos.

[Azazello1313]

But the major pieces I would like to see explained further:

[*]The thermite residue found in the dust cloud that blew into the neighboring building.

 

 

.

 

the important part starts at about 2:50

Edited April 26, 2011 by Azazello1313

[westhemess2]

ive watched all the videos and i still have one question. Tons of people would have to know about the cover up and not one person feels guilty or wants to make a few dollars and share the story? please.

[bushwacked]