STYLETHREAD -- LET'S TALK SHOP!

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: 9/11 conspiracy


Dooney & Bourke

Status: Offline
Posts: 818
Date:
9/11 conspiracy
Permalink Closed


I was watching a show about this last night on one of those public access channels. This bothers me so much. It angers me because I was near there and saw things that I never want to see again. There are also things I saw that negate what they have said about the building collapse. It disgusts me and I refuse to believe it. But my question to you is this: is there any REAL possibilty that this is even remotely true?





9/11 Conspiracy: Controlled Demolition Dropped WTC by KEVIN BARRETT


(Oct 21, 2005)In two speeches to overflow crowds in New York last weekend, noted theologian David Ray Griffin argued that recently revealed evidence seals the case that the Twin Towers and WTC-7 were destroyed by controlled demolition with explosives.

Despite the many enduring mysteries of the 9/11 attacks, Dr. Griffin concluded, "It is already possible to know, beyond a reasonable doubt, one very important thing: the destruction of the World Trade Center was an inside job, orchestrated by terrorists within our own government."

On Oct. 15th and 16th, New Yorkers filled two venues to hear the prominent theologian and author of two books on 9/11 give a presentation entitled "The Destruction of the Trade Towers: A Christian Theologian Speaks Out."

Dr. Griffin has continued to blaze a trail of courage, leading where most media and elected officials have feared to tread. His presentation went straight to the core of one of the most powerful indictments of the official story -- the collapse of the Twin Towers and WTC-7.


Dr. Griffin included excerpts from the firemen's tapes which were recently released as a result of a prolonged court battle led by victimís families represented by attorney Norman Siegel and reported in the NY Times.

He also included statements by many witnesses. These sources gave ample testimony giving evidence of explosions going off in the buildings. A 12 minute film was shown for the audiences, who saw for themselves the undeniable evidence for controlled demolition.

Dr. Griffin listed ten characteristics of the collapses which all indicate that the buildings did not fall due to being struck by planes or the ensuing fires.

He explained the buildings fell suddenly without any indication of collapse.

They fell straight into their own footprint at free-fall speed, meeting virtually no resistance as they fell -- a physical impossibility unless all vertical support was being progressively removed by explosives severing the core columns.

The towers were built to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707 and 160 mile per hour winds, and nothing about the plane crashes or ensuing fires gave any indication of causing the kind of damage that would be necessary to trigger even a partial or progressive collapse, much less the shredding of the buildings into dust and fragments that could drop at free-fall speed.

The massive core columns -- the most significant structural feature of the buildings, whose very existence is denied in the official 9/11 Commission Report -- were severed into uniform 30 foot sections, just right for the 30-foot trucks used to remove them quickly before a real investigation could transpire.

There was a volcanic-like dust cloud from the concrete being pulverized, and no physical mechanism other than explosives can begin to explain how so much of the buildings' concrete was rendered into extremely fine dust.

The debris was ejected horizontally several hundred feet in huge fan shaped plumes stretching in all directions, with telltale "squibs" following the path of the explosives downward.

These are all facts that have been avoided by mainstream and even most of the alternative media. Again, these are characteristics of the kind of controlled demolitions that news people and firefighters were describing on the morning of 9/11.

Those multiple first-person descriptions of controlled demolition were hidden away for almost four years by the City of New York until a lawsuit finally forced the city to release them.

Dr. Griffin's study of these accounts has led him beyond his earlier questioning of the official story of the collapses, to his above-quoted conclusion.

The destruction of the three WTC buildings with explosives by US government terrorists is no longer a hypothesis, but a fact that has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

Itís important to note that Dr. Griffin is one of many prominent intellectuals--including the likes of Gore Vidal, Howard Zinn, Peter Dale Scott, Richard Falk, Paul Craig Roberts, Morgan Reynolds and Peter Phillips--who have seen through the major discrepancies of the official explanation of 9/11 and have risen to challenge it.

These brave individuals represent the tip of an ever-growing iceberg of discreet 9/11 skeptics. Indeed, 9/11 skepticism appears to be almost universal among intellectuals who have examined the evidence, since there has not yet been a single serious attempt to refute the case developed by Dr. Griffin and such like-minded thinkers as Nafeez Ahmed and Mike Ruppert.

As for the general public, polls have shown that a strong majority of Canadians (63%, Toronto Star, May '04) and half of New Yorkers (Zogby, August 2004) agree that top US leaders conspired to murder nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11/01.

How, then, can the mainstream US media continue to ignore the story of the century? Perhaps the best answer was given by Dr. Griffin himself in the conclusion of his talk, and is worth quoting at length:

"The evidence for this conclusion (that 9/11 was an inside job) has thus far been largely ignored by the mainstream press, perhaps under the guise of obeying President Bushís advice not to tolerate "outrageous conspiracy theories." We have seen, however, that it is the Bush administrationís conspiracy theory that is the outrageous one, because it is violently contradicted by numerous facts, including some basic laws of physics.

"There is, of course, another reason why the mainstream press has not pointed out these contradictions. As a recent letter to the Los Angeles Times said:

"'The number of contradictions in the official version of... 9/11 is so overwhelming that... it simply cannot be believed. Yet... the official version cannot be abandoned because the implication of rejecting it is far too disturbing: that we are subject to a government conspiracy of "X-Files" proportions and insidiousness.'

"The implications are indeed disturbing. Many people who know or at least suspect the truth about 9/11 probably believe that revealing it would be so disturbing to the American psyche, the American form of government, and global stability that it is better to pretend to believe the official version. I would suggest, however, that any merit this argument may have had earlier has been overcome by more recent events and realizations. Far more devastating to the American psyche, the American form of government, and the world as a whole will be the continued rule of those who brought us 9/11, because the values reflected in that horrendous event have been reflected in the Bush administrationís lies to justify the attack on Iraq, its disregard for environmental science and the Bill of Rights, its criminal negligence both before and after Katrina, and now its apparent plan not only to weaponize space but also to authorize the use of nuclear weapons in a preemptive strike.

"In light of this situation and the facts discussed in this lecture---as well as dozens of more problems in the official account of 9/11 discussed elsewhere---I call on the New York Times to take the lead in finally exposing to the American people and the world the truth about 9/11. Taking the lead on such a story will, of course, involve enormous risks. But if there is any news organization with the power, the prestige, and the credibility to break this story, it is the Times. It performed yeoman service in getting the 9/11 oral histories released. But now the welfare of our republic and perhaps even the survival of our civilization depend on getting the truth about 9/11 exposed. I am calling on the Times to rise to the occasion.

Dr. Griffin's speech given at the University of Wisconsin earlier this year, entitled "9/11 and the American Empire," was broadcast twice on C-SPAN.

In late September Dr. Griffin was asked to give expert testimony at hearings sponsored by Cynthia McKinney and the Congressional Black Caucus investigating the 9/11 Commission Report. He is currently Professor Emeritus at Claremont College in California.



-- Edited by Irene at 20:25, 2006-04-05

-- Edited by Irene at 20:26, 2006-04-05

__________________


Marc Jacobs

Status: Offline
Posts: 2159
Date:
Permalink Closed

I honestly think this is a crock of shit. Every conspiracy theory I've ever heard seems to rely on just saying "that doesn't look like what should have happened, it must be fake or rigged!" At least in this article, he offers no explanation for WHY the Bush administration should have wanted to murder thousands of Americans and shatter the the country's most important city. It just doesn't even remotely make sense.



__________________
http://designers-brew.blogspot.com/


Gucci

Status: Offline
Posts: 2744
Date:
Permalink Closed

This article really angered me. I think it is complete bull.

__________________
-jocey-


Hermes

Status: Offline
Posts: 5600
Date:
Permalink Closed

This is the biggest bunch of crap I've ever seen. I don't believe it for an instant.

__________________
Who do you have to probe around here to get a Chardonnay? - Roger the Alien from American Dad


Dooney & Bourke

Status: Offline
Posts: 818
Date:
Permalink Closed

Oh thanks ladies. I am not the only one who thinks its bullshit.

__________________


Chanel

Status: Offline
Posts: 4845
Date:
Permalink Closed

I think it's possible this country and its government (our government) have helped to create and engage terrorists movements across the world. But that's all in theory and in politics. I DO NOT believe we engineered the terrorist attacks on the WTC themselves or, in any way, hoped to cause the death of all those people. It's a horrid thought and I can't imagine anyone thinking that way. Not that it would be wrong (although I think it is) but because it would be absolutely heartbreaking to think such things about one's own government.


I personally am not a conspiracy theorist. I believe in facts and rationality, so, to me, this isn't true.



__________________
http://dailypointers.blogspot.com/


Marc Jacobs

Status: Offline
Posts: 2159
Date:
Permalink Closed

and by the way, notice that this idiot doesn't say, "I've consulted dozens of structural engineers and they all agree that the collapse is not consistent with what would be expected from structural failure of columns due to the fire, they say it is consistent with demolition." He says "looks like a controlled demolition to me." What an asshole.

__________________
http://designers-brew.blogspot.com/


Marc Jacobs

Status: Offline
Posts: 2159
Date:
Permalink Closed

this was pissing me off so I looked it up online and found an article on the popular mechanics web site that includes info from actual engineers and explosives experts that debunks all this crap. Here is an excerpt:


CLAIM: As each tower collapsed, clearly visible puffs of dust and debris were ejected from the sides of the buildings. An advertisement in The New York Times for the book Painful Questions: An Analysis Of The September 11th Attack made this claim: "The concrete clouds shooting out of the buildings are not possible from a mere collapse. They do occur from explosions." Numerous conspiracy theorists cite Van Romero, an explosives expert and vice president of the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, who was quoted on 9/11 by the Albuquerque Journal as saying "there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse." The article continues, "Romero said the collapse of the structures resembled those of controlled implosions used to demolish old structures."


FACT: Once each tower began to collapse, the weight of all the floors above the collapsed zone bore down with pulverizing force on the highest intact floor. Unable to absorb the massive energy, that floor would fail, transmitting the forces to the floor below, allowing the collapse to progress downward through the building in a chain reaction. Engineers call the process "pancaking," and it does not require an explosion to begin, according to David Biggs, a structural engineer at Ryan-Biggs Associates and a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) team that worked on the FEMA report.


Like all office buildings, the WTC towers contained a huge volume of air. As they pancaked, all that air--along with the concrete and other debris pulverized by the force of the collapse--was ejected with enormous energy. "When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it's going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder tells PM. Those clouds of dust may create the impression of a controlled demolition, Sunder adds, "but it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception."


Demolition expert Romero regrets that his comments to the Albuquerque Journal became fodder for conspiracy theorists. "I was misquoted in saying that I thought it was explosives that brought down the building," he tells PM. "I only said that that's what it looked like."


Romero, who agrees with the scientific conclusion that fire triggered the collapses, demanded a retraction from the Journal. It was printed Sept. 22, 2001. "I felt like my scientific reputation was on the line." But emperors-clothes.com saw something else: "The paymaster of Romero's research institute is the Pentagon. Directly or indirectly, pressure was brought to bear, forcing Romero to retract his original statement." Romero responds: "Conspiracy theorists came out saying that the government got to me. That is the farthest thing from the truth. This has been an albatross around my neck for three years."



__________________
http://designers-brew.blogspot.com/
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard