9/11 - A Planned Demolition ???

[OAC 10]

We traders pride ourselves on our ability to think independently.

As we are approaching the eve of the 6th anniversary of 9/11.

What do you think of the following film clip ?

 

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/video_improbable_collapse.htm

[Soultrader 12]

Have you seen Loose Change? [GVIDEO]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5651675924179685534&q=loose+change&total=3004&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=5[/GVIDEO]

[Reaver 10]

I lost a good friend in the Pentagon that day. He had just transferred over. We always joked about how lucky he was to have a cushy job like the Pentagon.

 

He got there in April, died in September.

 

I would really hope that all this wasn't just some planned demo.

[jbtrades 10]

I thought this was a trading site, not a conspiracy nut site.

[Reaver 10]

Please note topic of forum you are in.

[jbtrades 10]

I stand corrected. I did not know that "General Discussion" was code for "Conspiracy Nut Discussion".

[OAC 10]

Please Note:

 

General Discussion

 

 

Need to take a break? Talk politics, business, entertainment, etc... Anything goes!

[OAC 10]

Also, EXCUSE ME.

May be I should have it put under the Trading Psychology section.

Even if all facts can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, I would

have a very tought time accepting it emotionally. the natural reaction is

to laugh it off as totally ridiculous. because I don't care what culture you came from, we were conditioned at a very young age to trust our leaders.

If some other deeply imbedded belief that is holding you back from being a successful trader, you will know that you have a lot of work ahead of you.

[Reaver 10]

I stand corrected. I did not know that "General Discussion" was code for "Conspiracy Nut Discussion".

 

It's okay. We are here to help.

[waveslider 10]

JBtrades- if you study history (as traders we must), you will find numerous examples where leaders (political, religious, etc.) use deception to place the "average joe" into a more agreeable state to accept the leadership's agenda.

 

In this case a part of the agenda is apparently control of the middle east and its oil reserves.

 

If you can't see the strategic importance of this area to the US government, your head is in the sand.

 

As OAC mentioned, as traders we have to think independently. This means thinking objectively and seeing every angle of a situation.

 

911 created a perfect excuse to launch a thousand ships and attempt dominance of an area and culture which has always alluded US control.

 

Days before 911 occurred, massive put options on airline companies and stock indices were executed. The US government knows who profited from 911.

 

It's like the Dude paraphrased (Lebowski) : "It's like what Lenin said... you look for the person who will benefit, and, uh, uh... " (Donny: I am the walrus.)

 

Bush was elected by oil money, the defense industry, etc. His vice president is on the board of Halliburton - who got the contract to rebuild Iraq. HELLO? His job is to pay back the price of his soul to these people.

 

By the way, if you are really skeptical against conspiracies, check out Robert Anton Wilson's "The Illuminatus", if you dare!

[waveslider 10]

PS you must be a breakout trader

[james_gsx 16]

This whole thing was debunked far too many times.

 

Can't we just agree that something of that magnitude is far too large for the government to plan and never have any sort of leak 6 years later?

 

I've heard all the arguments for and against a conspiracy, and I chose not to believe one happened. I've seen more independent evidence against the theory for it, so for those of you who will think I am brainwashed by the government please don't bother.

 

Of all the research I've done on this topic (because I've argued it too many times) I find Steve Maddox to have the best review, enjoy

 

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons

[Reaver 10]

While on paper it seems like the conspiracy would be possible....human nature pretty much precludes it from actually being feasible.

 

Same reason communism doesn't work.....too many loose ends to count on....

[michaltrade 10]

In politic, argument without end.

In war, the winner is always right, the "good guy".

In trading, both winners and losers are smart!!! (well, a fool will not trade).

Richer does not mean smarter. Who is smarter than who?

:haha:

[OAC 10]

I agree. People obsessed with conspiracy theory probably has mental problems like someone is always out to get them. I was kind of curious

how it looks from the law of physics point of view. I live 30 minutes outside of NYC and I can tell you there was just a absolutely huge dusk cloud generated from the collapse. As the engineering professor pointed out in the film clip. When the concrete converts to dusk cloud, tremendous kinetic energy is released. As we know Einstein's equation E=MC2, when all the energy is released, where did the mass go. Without mass , there would'nt be the Pankcake effect claimed by FEMA which one floor cave into the next floor below and so on. Also when one floor cave into another floor, the flloor below create temporay support( Like our pivots ?). They estimate for 100

floors or so to fall like a domino, it will take minimum of 45 seconds. But if you view the footage , it only took 15 seconds. To make the long story short, the only plausible explanation is the TWC was brought down by explosives

placed at various strategic locations. As who has planted there explosives ? I will let you guys figure it out. Do I believe there are evil people who are in very powerful positions in our society, well I would'nt rule that one out either.

[james_gsx 16]

The pancake theory was never supported.

 

2. Why did NIST not consider a “controlled demolition†hypothesis with matching computer modeling and explanation as it did for the “pancake theory†hypothesis? A key critique of NIST’s work lies in the complete lack of analysis supporting a “progressive collapse†after the point of collapse initiation and the lack of consideration given to a controlled demolition hypothesis.

 

NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory†of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers (the composite floor systemâ€â€that connected the core columns and the perimeter columnsâ€â€consisted of a grid of steel “trusses†integrated with a concrete slab; see diagram below). Instead, the NIST investigation showed conclusively that the failure of the inwardly bowed perimeter columns initiated collapse and that the occurrence of this inward bowing required the sagging floors to remain connected to the columns and pull the columns inwards. Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon.

 

 

NIST’s findings also do not support the “controlled demolition†theory since there is conclusive evidence that:

 

*

 

the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers and nowhere else, and;

 

*

 

the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102 minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact floors.

 

Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their downward movement upon collapse initiation.

 

In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the view.

 

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

 

 

A lot of that stuff is on the Maddox site I posted for those interested.

[OAC 10]

There is a thing in trading , I think in the army too, called KISS principle.

Kiss It Simple and Stupid. Lawyers use fancy words and many people would'nt trust them. I believe if I drop a rock from the top of a 100 story bldg, when it hit the pavement, it may break into smaller pieces, but it won't be in powder form. When all the jet fuel get ignited, most is waisted in a large ball of fire in the air. What ever is left is no way enough to convert most of that concrete that we see into powder form. Energy are not created but only from one form to another, if I remember correctly from high school.

[james_gsx 16]

Well thats a lot of dust that was created, the towers didn't just fall and turn to dust if thats what you mean? They fell and there was a ton of debris everywhere.

[brownsfan019 17]

I stand corrected. I did not know that "General Discussion" was code for "Conspiracy Nut Discussion".

 

You can't be serious.

 

Have you bothered to read any of the other threads in General Discussion?

 

Any of them? :doh:

 

This is the first thread in recent memory to fall under the 'conspiracy nut' discussion. This is the first thread that could actually stir some debate on this forum.

 

Next time take a look around before posting your remarks.

[brownsfan019 17]

While on paper it seems like the conspiracy would be possible....human nature pretty much precludes it from actually being feasible.

 

I have to agree with Reaver on this one. When I first watched Loose Change, it definitely stirred up some emotion. And like Reaver said, it does seem possible on paper. But pulling this off in real life would be difficult with so many people needing to be involved AND then not one soul saying a word since. It's just hard to believe that it could have been planned out so perfectly and that there would not be at least one whistle blower.

[OAC 10]

Another thing is if I take a paper clip and try to burn it with the flame on

my gas stove, it would turn red and I don't think it is hot enough to ever melt.

If you are telling me that jet fuel fire is ten times hot. I am a layman, I don't know. It just appear to me ,that if will take huge amount of energy to make this huge verticle steel beam that run straight through the center WTC tower to just magically melt down, not to mention that it is covered by thick layers of fire proofing material. These findings and calculations by the independent

engineering professional just confirm my gut instinct and common sense, That's all.

[james_gsx 16]

Another thing is if I take a paper clip and try to burn it with the flame on

my gas stove, it would turn red and I don't think it is hot enough to ever melt.

If you are telling me that jet fuel fire is ten times hot. I am a layman, I don't know. It just appear to me ,that if will take huge amount of energy to make this huge verticle steel beam that run straight through the center WTC tower to just magically melt down, not to mention that it is covered by thick layers of fire proofing material. These findings and calculations by the independent

engineering professional just confirm my gut instinct and common sense, That's all.

 

The steal beams didn't melt, they don't need too.

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=4

[darthtrader 10]

personally i think both the official story and the conspiracy theory are bogus.

 

on that very day we just happen to know its this phantom boogey man behind it that runs around caves for 6 years and is totally impossible to catch. Imagine how insane it would have been on sept 20th 2001 if someone told you 6 years later that not only would we have not caught bin laden but no one even really cares. Its not even an issue for the 08 election.

A month after 9/11 we get anthrax being tossed around the mail and at congress, can't find who did that either. no one cares that we can't either.

Bin Laden can pull off this huge military style attack but had no power after to send one suicide bomber into a mall which would have had just as much pyschological impact terror wise.

 

I don't see the point in getting into all the specifics with what happend that day though, you will never know and can't know.

[waveslider 10]

This might be a different discussion altogether, but it seems to come to the root of this discussion also..

 

Do you trust the US govt to make the best decisions for the US citizens(and the world, since it is the most powerful and influential country). Are the motivations of the US govt in line with the people?

 

The first time that the US govt had a real challenge to it in recent years was the rejection of the Vietnam war by the majority of the people. While the US didn't want to admit that that was a real factor in pulling out (the official reason was "negotiations"), it realized that a mis-alignment of policy with popular opinion can actually lead to revolution (Nixon admitted this later in his memoirs).

 

Wasn't it Lincoln who said that the only way the US could actually be brought down would be from within? That would be by straying from a govt "for the people, of the people, by the people".

 

Personally, this government is far from aligning with my opinion. It would be nice to put the fear into the government and give it some accountability for some of the legislation (ie. patriot act) it is attempting in the name of fear.

[james_gsx 16]

Bin Laden can pull off this huge military style attack but had no power after to send one suicide bomber into a mall which would have had just as much pyschological impact terror wise.

 

He doesn't want to do something like that, it would represent desperation on his half. He wants his group to come across as organized and have the ability to lay out well planned attacks that would lay more fear than a simple bombing in a mall. Anyone can bomb a mall, and he's smart enough to figure that out. But not everyone can plan an attack of the same caliber as 9/11.

 

That would be something in Iraq because most of that is Sunni vs Shiite no Al Qaeda vs USA. Again, three bombs going off at the same time in Baghdad still isn't as complex as 9/11. Osama is a smart man, look at his family. I don't think he'd want to carry out small attacks when he could just deliver one massive blow.

 

Thats my take on it at least.