Israel was behind 9/11

[Deleted User 104]

NIST is a joke. Can't take that source seriously. They claimed that "no one heard explosions" when there's video proof that there were explosions and witnesses.

[pdub]

Is there any credibility to our government being run by lizard people?

[Deleted User 104]

japhy, here's my basic questions for you:

1. Why did the BBC and other news stations report on the collapse of tower 7 before it happened?
2. Why was tower 7 not even mentioned in the 911 commission report?
3. Are you aware that tower 7 was a location for the CIA?
4. How do you explain the explosions that were happening in all three towers before they collapsed?

[Cascadia]

An we update lobster’s screen name to CrazyLobs?

TIA

[PhDhawk]

NIST is a joke. Can't take that source seriously. They claimed that "no one heard explosions" when there's video proof that there were explosions and witnesses.

The explosions to take down that building would be expected to be something like 140 decibels or something, which is 100 times louder than thunder. There's nothing on any of those videos, or any accounts, that would even approach a noise that loud. Which I think is what NIST reported. A building on fire for 8 hours that is about to collapse would surely make loud "explosion" noises...but not nearly as loud as the explosives that you'd use to take down a building.

Also, you have to question all the conspiracy theorists, because they have to keep adjusting their story. First they thought it was thermite, then when that was proven to be highly unlikely, they proposed it was nano-thermite. I mean, if you have to keep changing your story, how believable is it anyway.

[PhDhawk]

japhy, here's my basic questions for you:

1. Why did the BBC and other news stations report on the collapse of tower 7 before it happened?
2. Why was tower 7 not even mentioned in the 911 commission report?
3. Are you aware that tower 7 was a location for the CIA?
4. How do you explain the explosions that were happening in all three towers before they collapsed?

1. They made a mistake, they knew it was in danger of collapsing. What does they're reporting it early mean to you. How does that make it more likely that it was a conspiracy? You think there are multiple international news sources participating quietly in this conspiracy?

2. They focused on towers 1 and 2 and took longer on tower 7. They didn't want to hold up reporting on the more important building while they still needed to figure out what happened to tower 7.

3. So what? There are government intelligence offices all over the place, in pretty much every major city in america. If someone wanted to have files destroyed, there are literally a billion easier ways to do it than this.

4. Entire floors of a building collapsing would likely be very very noisy, probably like an explosion. And it would probably happen just prior to the collapse.

[PhDhawk]

NIST is a joke. Can't take that source seriously. They claimed that "no one heard explosions" when there's video proof that there were explosions and witnesses.

Do you even listen to yourself?

The national institute of standards and technology is a joke, and you're posting youtube videos by lord knows who as being valid.

[Deleted User 104]

PhD, the primary problem is you're submitting to authority over the obvious. NIST is as credible as our government -- you really think our government is honest and scientific? Let's be real here. If you substitute the government's statements for your own critical thinking, there's not much I can do. There have been countless examples of the US government lying, covering up murder, misleading us into wars for profit, etc.

[Deleted User 266]

On one of the vans...



Other videos worth taking a look at...

So was it 3 men or 5 men? Israelis or not Israelis? The same van or a different van?
Who were these guys? What was their involvement? Why were they celebrating? Where were they going in the van? Does anyone really believe that Mossad agents would go outside and celebrate where people could see and identify them? Or were these just 3/5 clowns who had nothing to do with anything?

Thanks for providing the videos.
Did you bother to watch them?
The first one - The Police Commissioner and the Mayor of New York.
The Commissioner said, "HOWEVER THERE WERE NO EXPLOSIVES".
The second one - APB for a white van with 3 men. Ok, and?
The third one - I'm not wasting 8 minutes of my life after I saw who the source of the video is.
The fourth one - "Did Jews know". Right away, I laughed. What "Jews"? All Jews, most Jews, many Jews, some Jews? Or did they mean the alleged Jews that were allegedly seen "celebrating"? Israelis doesn't automatically translate to Jews but we can assume they were/are Jews because we are told hey were Jews by the FBI. THE SAME FBI YOU DON'T TRUST. "The FBI cleared them of any involvement in 9/11". FWIW.
The fifth one - Jeffrey Smith. Who is this guy? Can anyone confirm his identity? Dude was late to work that day. I'm calling for an investigation in to his involvement on 9/11. I find it interesting he's wearing a Growers AG Jacket. Anyone can wear a jacket from a place they don't work but not too sure why they would choose to wear a Growers AG jacket. Anyways, guy had a lot to say. Nothing that convinced me of anything but no doubt an in depth account of what he thought happened and the after affects/effects. I'm just wondering why you felt that video is any different or any more important than the 100s of other witness account videos.

[Deleted User 104]

On one of the vans...



Other videos worth taking a look at...

So was it 3 men or 5 men? Israelis or not Israelis? The same van or a different van?
Who were these guys? What was their involvement? Why were they celebrating? Where were they going in the van? Does anyone really believe that Mossad agents would go outside and celebrate where people could see and identify them? Or were these just 3/5 clowns who had nothing to do with anything?

Thanks for providing the videos.
Did you bother to watch them?
The first one - The Police Commissioner and the Mayor of New York.
The Commissioner said, "HOWEVER THERE WERE NO EXPLOSIVES".
The second one - APB for a white van with 3 men. Ok, and?
The third one - I'm not wasting 8 minutes of my life after I saw who the source of the video is.
The fourth one - "Did Jews know". Right away, I laughed. What "Jews"? All Jews, most Jews, many Jews, some Jews? Or did they mean the alleged Jews that were allegedly seen "celebrating"? Israelis doesn't automatically translate to Jews but we can assume they were/are Jews because we are told hey were Jews by the FBI. THE SAME FBI YOU DON'T TRUST. "The FBI cleared them of any involvement in 9/11". FWIW.
The fifth one - Jeffrey Smith. Who is this guy? Can anyone confirm his identity? Dude was late to work that day. I'm calling for an investigation in to his involvement on 9/11. I find it interesting he's wearing a Growers AG Jacket. Anyone can wear a jacket from a place they don't work but not too sure why they would choose to wear a Growers AG jacket. Anyways, guy had a lot to say. Nothing that convinced me of anything but no doubt an in depth account of what he thought happened and the after affects/effects. I'm just wondering why you felt that video is any different or any more important than the 100s of other witness account videos.

I still owe you a longer reply -- just wanted to clear up that the video I sent with the police claiming there were no explosives was to show how obvious of a lie it was. There's very clear proof that there were explosions, yet they lied. It's obvious in their body language and their language that they lied too. Anyone trained in body language can tell.

[Deleted User 104]

Paul,

In regards to explosions, this video from timestamps 3:30 to 16:00 shows overwhelming proof that there were vans and explosives that day. There was even a report from the FBI about explosives placed at the base of the tower.

[japhy]

One of the things people get confused by is the idea of buildings collapsing due to fire and they think of steel melting or softening etc. Think of it instead in terms of thermal expansion and distortion of a steel frame. For example, use a section that might be typical of a floor plate in a building like WTC 7. A W30x150, it is 30 inches deep and weighs 150 plf and has a cross sectional area of 44 in2. Change the temperature of that beam 200 degrees and it elongates almost one inch. That seems pretty innocuous, except that the force of the thrust at the end of the beam as it expands is equal to the amount of force required to compress the same beam one inch. If everything is full braced so that no stability failure of the beam occurs prior to the full temperature change, the thrust from this beam is about 1700 kips (1 kip = 1000 pounds of force) to any structural elements at the ends (columns, adjacent beams) trying to restrain it from changing shape. Assume that most of the beams across a floor plate are doing something similar in their long axis and you have columns, beams and connections being distorted. It takes a lot more heat to soften steel, but this thermal force can easily create instability in an axial member (column). When columns become unstable they can collapse quickly and depending upon the design they will very rapidly collapse every column around them in what is called a progressive collapse. When a column collapses it takes the beams attached to it down as well. These beams brace the adjacent columns. Once the brace is gone, the column unbraced height is doubled. Column strength is governed by the inverse square of it's unbraced height. So if the column unbraced height is now doubled because it has to span two floors, it has now lost 75% of it's capacity due to change of it's stability (stiffness). Once all of the columns in a floor collapse the weight of the building above falls onto the floor below and that collapses floor below from impact and so on right into the basement. For the short version of why a tall heavy building would fall down rather than tilt over.....gravity always wins.

I am responsible for the design of structures that are exterior to a building and so they see thermal changes that are far less, more in the range of 100-125 degrees. These frames have to be carefully detailed to allow for expansion and contraction without distorting the frame or many of the elements would fail due to instability of the axially loaded elements. Thermal expansion contraction drives the design of many of these structures. The interior frame of a building would be checked for only 70-100 degrees because you assume once the building is enclosed the temperature becomes stable within about 30-40 degree swing. During the bulk of the time the frame is subject to the larger temperature swings it is carrying half or less of it's design load so it is not as much of an issue. This is a developing field of engineering and Code design changes are being made to try and account for the things we saw happen on 9/11 but it is hard to justify the cost of making huge changes to building structures to account for such a catastrophic event. There was not a lot of redundancy in the WTC structures, that's just how buildings were designed back then. Newer tall structures are more robust because of lessons learned the hard way.

[ousdahl]

Japhy’s back!

Though I can’t tell if it’s really him or some imposter, considering these posts are well-punctuated and don’t end with #MAGA

[ChalkRocker]

I'm always late to the f**king party.

Too much gold here. I just shake tryin' to decide where to dig first.

Where the F is DC when we need him?

[Deleted User 104]

It's the same dullness of perception / intellect that allowed most Americans to not recognize the lie in the weapons of mass destruction excuse to go to war. I never once believed that lie, even when it was first said by president Bush. Many of my friends called me a "traitor", "stupid", "our government wouldn't lie to us..." I'm not sure "gold" is what I would call it.

[pdub]

I can believe that the government acted on unverified info to charge into a war they wanted. That would be easy to do and with not much risk if they were wrong.

The risk that “they” would take for murdering their own people with explosives is very high. The difficulty of success without being discovered also very high.

It’s not that I don’t think there are people in power that would say yes to an attack on their people if it meant they could stay in power—it’s just I don’t think they could pull it off.

[Shirley]

NIST is a joke. Can't take that source seriously. They claimed that "no one heard explosions" when there's video proof that there were explosions and witnesses.

Do you even listen to yourself?

The national institute of standards and technology is a joke, and you're posting youtube videos by lord knows who as being valid.

^^^

Good luck trying to educate someone who so casually impugns the integrity of the NIST. One of the earlier tells was when lobster totally disregarded the concept of peer-reviewed evidence that you and Trad tried to school him on.

And thanks to Japhy for the input.

"It’s hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it’s damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person."

[Deleted User 266]

Let's be honest with each other. It's more fun to cast doubt than to believe without questioning.
This thread wouldn't be 5 pages long if it weren't for Lobster expressing his doubts.
It's important for people to question what they don't believe to be true. I wish more people would do it.
I also wish more people wouldn't believe things that aren't true.

On a semi related side note, Yesterday I posted this in response to someone who had posted about immigration and what A.O.C. and Candace Owens both said.

Auschwitz Memorial
@AuschwitzMuseum
When we look at Auschwitz we see the end of the process. It's important to remember that the Holocaust actually did not start from gas chambers. This hatred gradually developed from words, stereotypes & prejudice through legal exclusion, dehumanisation & escalating violence.

This was the response I received from one of his friends - "your a disgrace to your fellow humans all over the world . Get a passport a do some traveling".

Three words/letters - either WTF or JFC. Right?

[PhDhawk]

It's the same dullness of perception / intellect that allowed most Americans to not recognize the lie in the weapons of mass destruction excuse to go to war. I never once believed that lie, even when it was first said by president Bush. Many of my friends called me a "traitor", "stupid", "our government wouldn't lie to us..." I'm not sure "gold" is what I would call it.

You're using the ineptitude of government as proof for a multilayer, multi-department, highly orchestrated, sophisticated secret that involved enormous amounts of people and resources that was largely pulled off successfully (save some youtube heros) with none of the participants speaking out, or any real smoking guns as evidence.

They just aren't capable of pulling something like this off and their history of huge fuck ups (like WMDs is proof of that).

I mean, if you think terrorists were behind the towers falling, that means the government had all the information about the attack, did nothing, set a shit load of explosives up in a neighboring building with no one knowing about it, had the confidence that these foreign terrorists would not only succesfully take over two separate planes, successfully crash them into buildings and that those buildings would collapse how they did. I mean, fuck, that's a shitload of different things that could go wrong, and the people who couldn't provide evidence of WMDs pulled all this off, with the help of an international terrorist organization and didn't get caught?

And for what reason, your argument is that it was all because there were CIA offices in that building containing information someone wanted destroyed. I mean, fuck Lobster, if they were paper files why not shred them, or start a small fire, if they were electronic why not erase them or have some computer failure?

If anyone is putting too much trust or confidence into the federal government it's you.

[PhDhawk]

The Plasco building in Iran and Edifício Wilton Paes de Almeida in Brazil are two examples of tall steel buildings that collapsed as a result of fire. So it is, not only possible, but has happened now at least 3 times.