One Conspiracy Theory to Bind Them All...........

I have an engineering background and know what causes materials to fail under stress. It was planes that set the fires that brought down the WTC towers and an checked fire that caused the collapse of WTC7. There is one and only one aspect of 9/11 that MIGHT be considered a "conspiracy" and that is the flight that returned the Saudi families afterwards. However it was more likely to be a matter of diplomacy and greased palms given how the fossil fuel oligopy owns the US government.

But let's take TWO steps back and deal with REALITY!

Who knows more about you than anyone else? The government only knows a very small fraction of your personal information and doesn't care about the rest unless you violate the law.

But every time you open your browser ads pop up that are selling similar products to things that you looked at yesterday!

Corporations KNOW EVERYTHING about you, your finances, your spending habits, where you live, where you shop, what size clothes you wear, what kind of vehicle you drive, what sports you like, etc, etc, etc!

Corporations are watching every keystroke you make on your computer and they are doing so because they can and because they OWN the government. You have no privacy from corporations, only the government.

So when it comes to those who are always getting all round eyed and psyched up about the "deep state government" I have to laugh because the government DOES NOT HAVE the resources to do as conspiracy theorists suggest.

If someone came up with a conspiracy that 9/11 was funded by the fossil fuel oligopy in order to start a war to secure their resources that would be worth investigating IMO because they DO have both the means and the nefarious intentions to do something of that nature.

 

Hold on. Not so fast. I am not pretending to be an engineer so I am no expert and keep in mind I am somewhat agnostic on the 9/11 story but there is more to it than that. According to the buildings designers, they were built to withstand multiple strikes from a full loaded 707 which is approximately comparable to a half full 767 or 757. The laticework steel structure should have been able to take a single plane. According to the NIST report then it was fire that caused the already weakened trusses to fail. Fair enough but buildings in Caracas, Dubai and even Philadelphia have burned for many more hours, up to 22 without collapsing.

And the NIST report said the failure of the trusses at or about the point of impact was what caused a subsequent pancaking of the building such as would happen in an Earthquake. Yet that is not what we saw happen. The buildings literally disintegrated into flying steel and dust before our very eyes. There was almost no evidence of the pancaking that NIST describes. I could see this happening once as a one off but to have it happen in exactly the same way three times on the same day? And keep in mind that not of the buildings keeled over or feel anything but straight down symmetrically - three times on the same day exactly the same way......doesn't that seem strange to you?

So as I said, I am not an engineer but I know a little about physics. Tower 7 came down in a very strange way that I have never heard anyone explain convincingly. How do fires on one side a building that supposedly take out a single support bring down a building absolutely symmetrically and at what appears to be freefall speed. And I timed it myself and I know the equation where objects fall due to gravity with no resistance.

As an engineer, if you can explain any of this it would be helpful to put some of these controversies in better light.

I disagree. I think government is the only player that has the kind of resources to pull something like this off. Don't forget that a lot of the knowledge corporations have of us are because of the internet which has become much less private since 2001. But you don't think government has the ability to know everything about you or to track your finances and political views or affiliations?

Government intelligence has way more ability to eavesdrop and spy on you than any single corporation or conglomerate.

Don't discount the level of cooperation between government intelligence and corporate "oligopy" especially in areas like fossil fuels, the weapons manufacture industry and private war contractors such as Halliburton or the Carlyle Group.

Now you are bringing up motivation for something like 9/11. I have heard many debunkers say it is unthinkable that the government would do something like that to it's own citizens. But is it? There is a long history of false flag operations since even the post war era. Think about how many innocent civilians and US service personnel have died as a direct result of the Iraq war which was a direct result of the 9/11 attacks.

Here is an interesting aside just for fun. When I was reading the popMech debunking of the Pentagon attack, the dismissed the crazy, deluded, truthers with only one argument about the size of the hole in the pentagon. I'm paraphrasing but it was along the lines of what do those stupid, idiots thing that a plane going through a building is going to leave a perfect cookie cutter shape like in a roadrunner cartoon......

 

There are lots of suspects.

My personal one is the Mafia.

 

You are both right, partially, I think.

 

Despite your claim to have an "engineering background" none of that has ever been proven by any official government investigation (see especially #4 - NIST WTC Tower report). The following is a summary of findings from expert analyses of NIST's theories from which your personal beliefs are derived and contradicted:

Summary of problems with the NIST WTC Tower Report

1. The claim that the upper part of the towers crushed the lower part of the towers violates the laws of conservation of momentum and the law that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. As shown by the measured smooth uninterrupted descent of the upper portion of the North Tower.

2. NIST claims that the floor trusses in the aircraft impact zone push outward on the perimeter columns with a force of about 80 KIPS before starting to sag and pull the columns inward to cause the building to collapse. Yet there is no evidence to support this claim. Extensive photos and videos of the towers show no outward bowing of the perimeter columns at any time during the fires before the collapse.

3. NIST imposed unrealistic artificial 5 KIP forces on each floor truss to column connection over the 5 stories of the damage zone on the south face of the North Tower in order to make their collapse initiation model work. This amounts to a lateral force of about 750 KIPS applied artificially to that face of the building which cannot be justified by any rationale.

4. NIST does not investigate or explain the global collapse which occurred after the collapse initiation was supposedly initiated by the column failures in the impact zone. NIST simply states, “global collapse ensued”.

5. The NIST collapse sequence is initiated by the failure of the floor trusses in the impact zone and subsequent pulling in of the perimeter column. But the sequence ignores the fact that the core columns failed first, as evidenced by the video of the North Tower collapse showing that the antenna and hat truss resting on the core column began their descent well before the outer perimeter of the building began to fall. This fact invalidates the NIST collapse initiation theory.

6. The NIST report fails to provide any information suggesting that the load capacity of the core and perimeter columns was exceeded at any time during the collapse sequence. NIST ignored the fact that the factor of safety of 3 in the core columns and 5 in the perimeter columns would have prevented the failure mechanism that is theorized in their collapse initiation model.

7. The NIST global collapse theory depends upon the ASCE-published progressive collapse theory by Zdenek Bazant. His theory has been shown to have erroneous input data rendering it non-viable as an explanation for the observed behavior of the vertical propagation. ASCE refuses to acknowledge the errors in the input data of Bazant’s theory.

All assumptions below, which were used in the NIST WTC7 report, have been shown to be erroneous, and correction of these assumptions invalidate the report's conclusions.

1. A girder bearing seat width of 12 inches not 11 inches at column 79 would prevent girder walk off.

2. The omitted stiffeners on girder A2001 at column 79 would have prevented the flange from folding and eliminated any chance of walk off.

3. The thermally expanded girder A2001 could not move past the column 79 side plate.

4. There were shear studs on girder A2001 and this would cause the beams to buckle before pushing the girder off its seat.

5. All west and south girder connections to column 79 were not broken down to the 6th floor.

6. A northeast corner floor failure could not cascade down eight floors so there is not enough energy to break through the girder connection on the next floor down.

7. There were lateral support beams framing G3005 and they would have prevented it from buckling.

8. Beam and girder notching to simulate their buckling due to the fire in the model is not consistent with the time phased weakening fire would produce.

9. Evidence of temperatures high enough to melt steel as documented by FEMA was ignored.

10. The NIST model shows radical deformation of the upper exterior as the east side interior collapses but this is not observed in actual footage of the video collapse.

11. A simultaneous free fall of all four corners of the roofline does have implications.

And a preliminary analysis by Dr. Leroy Hulsey - Chair, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Alaska Fairbanks:

http://ine.uaf.edu/media/92216/wtc7-structural-reevaluation_progress-report_2017-9-7.pdf

According to Dr. Hulsey's research and forensic analysis NIST's theory is based on concocted data and shown to be impossible even when using NIST's concocted data. A final report is allegedly forthcoming by the end the year which will be available for peer review.

 

Two good books on the One Giant Conspiracy paradigm

Foucault's Pendulum by Umberto Eco

VALIS by Philip K. Dick

Both very entertaining

 

The Brittish had been flying US flags on their transports to try and sneak by German torpedo boats. The Germans responded by informing us that they would be targetting ships with US flags. We promptly sent the Lusitania over.

We never should've entered WW1. It was based on a setup. The germans had nearly completed a new fleet of submarines that would've cut England off from Europe, winning Germany the war.

Theres no telling how drastically different history would be had we simply stayed out of it, but its certain that the Nazi's never would've gained power had Germany not been decimated by the reparations of the Treaty of Versailes.

 

Allow me to suggest a scenario to help you to grasp the concept of strength of materials and the impact of heat upon them.

Build a bonfire in a safe place in the middle of an open field with 9 of your strongest buddies. Once the fire is alight have 5 of you on each side lift a small vehicle, like an ATV up and carry it over the fire. Now just stand there holding up the vehicle without moving. Those closest to the fire will feel the heat the most and need to let go and move away. This transfers the weight onto the others. As more and more let go eventually there is only 4 of you each holding a corner furthest from the fire, but you are each now carrying a quarter of the weight instead of just the original 10% that you originally lifted. The fire is causing you to sweat and your ability to hold up your 25% gets less and less the longer you stand there. Eventually you let go and the weight your remaining 3 buddies are holding increases to 33% and they let go too. The ATV pancakes down on top of the bonfire essentially flattening it.

No, I don't expect you to try this in real life but you probably get the concept now. The floors ABOVE the fire are the ATV and they were originally supported by ALL of the columns so each only carried a small percentage of the weight. The impact of the planes either destroyed or compromised the north and south columns. That left just the east and west columns to carry the weight of all of the floors above them. The fires then started to gradually weaken the remaining columns. They did not need to actually melt them, just make them soft enough to bend slightly which they would have done under that weight. As soon as enough of the columns were compromised the top floors collapsed onto the floors below causing a pancake collapse.

WTC7 is the same in principle but you need to know what you could not see from the outside of the building. WTC7 was a BRIDGE structure built over a substation. The substation contained a lot of oil that fueled the fire. The point about a bridge is that it has much greater loads placed onto smaller load bearing surfaces as opposed to the same weight being carried by multiple supports. Imagine of all of you are holding the ATV over the fire but you are all only on one side of the vehicle and there is no one on the other side. It is much more difficult to hold it up and you are all under more strain than you were in the first example. The uneven weight distribution means that when even just one of you let's go the sudden additional weight is enough to cause the rest of you to drop the ATV.

Yes, these are simplistic examples but the math is straightforward. Each of you can bear 10% of the weight of the ATV with a Factor of Safety around 2.5. That means that when there is only 4 of you left you can still hold up the ATV at the limit of your capacity. But when the load increases to 33% it is more than your ability to carry so you let go.

The WTC building trusses all work on that same principle as does every other structure in the world.

 

All the above is a whole cloth invention of yours. For example, even NIST originally claimed the alleged diesel fuel in WTC7 contributed to the fire then later backed off on that hypothesis. This article quotes NIST on that issue:

Non-Existent Diesel Fuel Fire

http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/803-fraud-exposed-in-nist-wtc-7-reports-part-5-of-5.html

Furthermore, none of the 3 towers exhibited anything that resembles a "pancake collapse", even NIST walked away from that silliness as there was no such thing.

Quit making stuff up you know nothing about.

 

Yeah, and the "Camp fire" in California really didn't happen, \
it is a fraud, staged by the insurance companies, to get people to buy insurance.

 

When President Kennedy's body arrived in Maryland from Dallas, it was taken to Bethesda Naval Hospital were the official autopsy was performed. Unprofessionalism and inconsistencies from the autopsy would yet another major factor in many people questioning the official account of the assassination.

First of all, the team of pathologists performing the procedure seemed wholly unqualified for the task. Two of the doctors had never performed a autopsy by unnatural causes and the third was a supervisor who had not performed an actual procedure for over two years. They managed to miss entirely the throat wound under the traechonectomy(sp) the doctors in Dallas had performed until the procedure was finished and then made "educated" guesses as to the trajectory and direction.. None of the actual wounds were dissected properly and organs and relevant tissues were not weighed and properly inspected.

The procedure room itself was a chaotic mess of secret service personnel who often interrupted the procedure giving the doctors specific directions on how to carry out their job. In fact, the secret service seemed to have been extraordinarily involved in all aspects of how the body was handled right from the time they wrested it from the Dallas hospital where, by law, the autopsy should have been performed.

The original autopsy report was covered in blood so the doctor who had charge of it decided to burn it destroying the crucial evidence and then made a copy which was then used to make determinations by the Warren commission. Asked if you thought he had missed any important details, the doctor replied reassuringly, "I don't think so."

There are inconsistencies in the photographic and x-ray evidence from the autopsy. On thing that is clear is that Kennedy's head wounds in Bethesda were very different than the ones described by the first responders in Dallas. For one thing their appeared to be a new v-shaped incision on the right temple and the back of the head wound was greatly enlarged. The brain examination of which may have cleared up many of the misconceptions about direction and impact of bullets was missing and has never been recovered.

Then a series of drawings and photographs were made which also show very different conclusions that those from Dallas observations. Many of the subsequent debunkings are based on these autopsy drawings and photos including that of the fatal head wound which appears to have a entrance wound high up on the right side of the skull and a large exit splatter in the upper temporal region rather than the back of the skull as noticed in Texas.





Notice the entrance wound from the photo showing the back area. The actual wound seems far lower than those represented in the drawings. And the drawing of the fatal head wound is not anything like those described in Dallas.

Later, the photo technician who processed the photos in the Naval photographic lab, Saundra Spencer would testify before and examination committee that the photos from the autopsy were not the ones that she had processed. A staff photo consultant from the House Committee on Assassinations would later testify that some of the numbered photos were missing and that others appeared to have been added when he examined the photos in the National Archives.

How accurate can the debunkings be that are based on autopsy drawings that seem as suspect and unprofessional as these?

 

Remember J Edgar Hoover, is still very much alive when all this happened.

 

EarthSky

An excellent thread you have here, good points all the way around, but as another poster noted, I'm not sure that there is any unifying theory regarding tying these events together. I would love to hear more about such a grand theory.

On 911, the official theory is pure bunkum, an impossible theory. From impossible cell phone calls to obviously false passenger manifests to impossible aviation events to the government commission being set up to fail, the story is absurd. I'm no engineer either, but I know the ability of steel to conduct heat is poor indeed. Fires on the 80th floor could not possibly have had temps transmitted throughout the building for such a collapse. Not to mention the lateral displacement of large pieces.

As the recent court filing shows, explosives were very much involved.

Also, people can keep secrets way better than some people think....

 

LOLOL

3 people can't keep a secret for 20 years, not to consider 20 or 30 thousand.

and how about all the people they had to kill, because they wouldn't go along with it.
Probably another 20.000.

 

Hi Eleuthera,

Thanks for commenting on the thread. I am trying to be as factual in presenting a case as I can. Unfortunately the fact-checking and cross referencing is taking longer than I thought it would. I had intended to start with the assassination of Kennedy and then work through to interesting facts about Watergate, then scandals of the seventies and eighties such as Savings and Loan, BCCI and Iran/Contra before moving into the modern era with some of the strangeness surrounding the 9/11 attacks. Way more time consuming than I thought it was going to be but as long as people are commenting and liking the thread I'll keep at it.

And what is the common link in all this you ask? Well it has actually been very much in the news recently.

For instance, George H W Bush is apparently one of the few people who has publicly stated in interviews that he cannot remember exactly where he was on the day Kennedy was shot. It turns out however that he was right there in a Dallas suburb and according to FBI records he actually called the agency just over an hour after the assassination to give information about someone named James Parrot who had allegedly made threats against the President. The information Bush supplied was a bogus dead end but seemed to have been forwarded as a way to place his whereabouts outside of Dallas proper.

Strange, huh? What does this have to do with anything else? I'm going to try to build up to that. Don't forget that on of Poppy's sons was deeply involved in the Savings and Loan fiasco, that BCCI was basically a CIA and international money laundering front, that Bush himself was VP and former CIA director during Iran/Contra and that another of his sons was President and many of his former Reagan/Bush colleagues were in positions of high authority in the administration in power during the 9/11 attacks and their aftermath.

I've probably said too much without offering corroborating evidence of any sort but I am working on it.......slowly....

Anyway, I appreciate the comment and any more ideas you may have on the subject.

 

Who was Lee Harvey Oswald?

In his short, mysterious life, Oswald was seemed to constantly be surrounded by murky, sinister figures and lived in a constant shadow of contradictions. Oswald first appears on the scene in his teens as a member of the Louisiana Civil Air Patrol (CAP) which was founded as a training platform for young pilots. Interestingly, the organization was founded and supported by David Harold Byrd a Texas oilman who also owned the Texas School-book Depository building from where Kennedy was supposedly shot - another of the strange coincidences and bizarre twists that are so ever present in the assassination.

In the CAP Oswald came into contact with David Ferrie a sinister figure connected with the Marcello New Orleans crime family and one of the key, murky figures who would arise out of Jim Garrison's later investigation of the New Orleans angle in Kennedy's death. Allegations were that Ferrie was a getaway pilot but these were never substantiated or confirmed. Ferrie was found dead of a declared aneurysm before he could testify in Garrison's investigation despite leaving suicide notes and telling associates that he "was a dead man."

Later, Oswald joined the marines just after his 17th birthday and served until released with an honorable discharge, despite being court-marshaled at one point, though this would be changed to dishonorable at a later occasion. While in the marines he professed support for communism and began to learn Russian which according to George De Mohrenschiltd, another strange and sinister character in Oswald's story, he spoke so well after returning from Russia that he could have passed for a local.

Upon leaving the marines, Oswald defected to Russia before his 20th birthday intimating to Russian authorities that he had information to give them about special training he received in the armed services. Oswald spent close to three years in Russia eventually marrying a Russian native before expressing a dissatisfaction with life in the Soviet Union and a desire to return to the US and bring his young wife with him.

Despite having renounced US citizenship, he was processed and allowed to return with his wife to Texas where he he settled in the Dallas/Fort Worth area and worked at odd jobs to support his family. He was eventually befriended by De Mohrenschilt a well-connected Russian emigre and oilman who had many connections that proved valuable to Oswald. Interestingly, De Mohrenschilt knew George H.W. Bush and would later ask for Bush's help as CIA director before his appearance at the House Committee on Assassinations. De Mohrenschilt would die of his own hand before testifying before the committee.

Why De Mohrenschilt would meet and befriend someone as inconsequential as Lee Harvey Oswald is a mystery but there is evidence that there was a connection to US intelligence there. He was a known associate of Dallas CIA official J. Walter Moore and acted on the CIA's behalf on propriety organizations such as the Dallas Council on World Affairs. In fact, it appeared that for all intents and purposes, George De Mohrenschilt was involved in intelligence and was working at recruiting Oswald or even acting as his handler. De mohrenschilt took Oswald to anti-Castro meetings and introduced him to the person who would eventually get him a job at the Texas Schoolbook Depository in 1963.

This is just a little background of Oswald's early life in Russia and Dallas. Many more questions remain and I will try to explore some of these next post.

Among these questions is why Lee Oswald appeared to be working both sides of the Cuba issue in New Orleans attending both anti-Castro and Fare P:lay for Cuba meetings and rallies in the summer of '62 and why he was so closely associated with ex-rouge FBI official Guy Banister?

And what happened on the mysterious trip Oswald took to Mexico City where he appeared to seek asylum at both the Cuban and Russian embassies.

Why was Oswald able to defect to and from Russia with so little trouble when he was a professed communist? Travelling both ways he would have been deeply questioned by both Russian and American intelligence officials. He was even able to get a repatriation loan from the American government to resettle in America with his Russian wife.

 

Yes, Bush is one of the most successful crime families in the world. All that you mention, and the Carlyle Group. All that you mention and Project Hammer and Leo Wanta and so much more. The work done by Dick Eastman, Tom Flocco, V.K. Durham and Karl Schwarz, put together in an article by E.P. Heidner in June 2008 is most educational.

Keep up the good work.