Balzac89
Undercover Mod
I hope that is sarcasm.
Do We Dare Discuss 911 With Poll
- Thread starter canuckgrow
- Start date
He misspoke? LOL that is truly the scapegoat Phrase of the Century. Misspeaking is a euphemism for "oh shit I said too much".
Its not sarcasm, he is being facetious.
incognegro999
Well-Known Member
Besides the theoretical arguments supporting the hypothesis that intentional demolition, not fire, brought the Towers down, the huge volume of video evidence shows conclusively an array of specific details of the Towers' collapse that are wholly consistent with the particulars of intentional demolition. The first detail is the speed with which the Towers fell. Despite the huge amount of mass and material sitting underneath them, the tops of both Towers, like with Building 7, collapsed to the ground at close to free-fall speed. To put it more bluntly, if a massive crane hoisted the top 15 floors of the North Tower to the same height at which it sat on the morning of 9/11, and then released the top to fall unimpeded to the ground with nothing but air to block its way, it would have taken approximately 10 seconds to hit down. This is virtually the same speed it took the actual top 15 floors of the North Tower to collapse. With the entire in-tact, undamaged, unaffected 90 floors worth of core building sitting underneath it, somehow providing NO further resistance to the falling building than air itself. (Remember that the impact zone of the aircraft and the subsequent fire was from floor 90 up. No other part of the building could have possibly sustained any serious damage since heat and fire go up. And the government's official theory is that the top 15 floors essentially destabilized and failed, and its then unsupported weight began to pile drive downwardly onto the rest of the 90 as yet undamaged stories.)
stole this
Somehow, in a gross violation of the laws of physics, the remaining 90 floors and core of the North Tower sitting under the damaged section of the building offered little more resistance to impede the speed of the Tower's collapse than air itself.
stole this
Somehow, in a gross violation of the laws of physics, the remaining 90 floors and core of the North Tower sitting under the damaged section of the building offered little more resistance to impede the speed of the Tower's collapse than air itself.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
obama must not want us to know about the other 7 states they don't teach us about.
just kidding, ignore me. on with the debating.
Wait wait, saying 57, instead of 47 is a lot different than coming up with a whole fucking story that takes 10 seconds to tell!!!! You don't misspeak a whole event in your life, especially when that event can be remembered in intimate detail by nearly every single person on earth older than 25. You remember exactly where you were and what you were doing when you heard the news? I sure do, I can tell you times, what I was doing before and after, I can tell you more details about that day than I could hope to remember about Tuesday of last week. Sure, I'm smarter than Bush, who isn't? but to say that he has misspoken is really piling it on.obama must not want us to know about the other 7 states they don't teach us about.
just kidding, ignore me. on with the debating.
Did a plane hit this building?
Then please explain how it burned up and came falling down? Remember these building aren't made of concrete, concrete is just a facade and a flooring, it doesn't provide any of the structural properties that hold the building up.
If temperatures of 800F can weaken steel by 90% then what is happening to our car engines that run internal temperatures of 1600F?
canuckgrow
Well-Known Member
Well it appears as though during the structural design of the buildings,,,,Airplane impact was a consideration,,,,,,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center
Yeah yeah I know its Wilki but funny enough its all I could find on the original design and i think this entry is pretty safe.
Since a B52 had crashed into the Empire State building........Which at least the last time I was in NYC was still standing tall and proud. Interesting: http://history1900s.about.com/od/1940s/a/empirecrash.htm
When you read the report of the B52 crash it sounds eerily like 911 in the way they describe the damage from the crash.....So Empire state building was built and opened in 1931....under the current NYC building code at the time...Here is the interesting part......The World trade Centre was built using NYC revised building codes as of 1968......Which were just coming in to effect and the designers and builders used them instead of the old ones.......So 3 planes of comparable size crash into buildings right........ building A which is older and built with less stringent structural code is still standing while building b and c somehow with their advanced building and structural codes came down.......sorry folks I call bullshit
Oh and i'm no engineer but when you look at the design of the original buildings the steel support got bigger and stronger as you got closer to the ground so you would of thought that more of the buildings would have been left standing.....Which IMO would have been an ever worse disaster due to 30 floors of WTC breaking off and falling over or on top of other buildings......No this was engineered to kill as few people as possible but still get the desired effect of "Shock and Awe" we heard so much about during this period of time......Am I completley right? I doubt it.....but anyway I want to bury a time capsule with an open date of Sept 11 2102 exactly 100 years after the tradgedy with my prediction thoughts on it ....When they open it they will be either like...."This dude wore a tinfoil helmet" or "man this fucker knew what was what..... We should worship him as a god for all eternity" LOL
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
These are questions I came to that always made me re-think my position, and ultimately made me change my opinion from MIHOP (made it happen on purpose) to LIHOP (let it happen on purpose)
How many people do you think would be required to pull of 9/11 as an inside job? - my best guess is it would take a lot, right?
Couldn't the towers have still failed, even though they were fitted with material around the steel? They were designed to take an aircraft impact, but that doesn't ensure that they will, right?
Why wasn't any evidence of controlled demo collected from the scene? I'm taking about wires, chemical traces of TNT or something similar. I've heard people talk about thermite/thermate being used to bring the towers down, and I've seen Jones' evidence to support that, but I just don't think it's conclusive enough to jump to saying it was for sure a controlled demo, we need more evidence.
I'll be back with more later, but see what you guys come up with for those ones.
I'd appreciate it if we kept it civil, no personal attacks. I've been down this road plenty of times before and for some reason it usually gets ugly...
How many people do you think would be required to pull of 9/11 as an inside job? - my best guess is it would take a lot, right?
Couldn't the towers have still failed, even though they were fitted with material around the steel? They were designed to take an aircraft impact, but that doesn't ensure that they will, right?
Why wasn't any evidence of controlled demo collected from the scene? I'm taking about wires, chemical traces of TNT or something similar. I've heard people talk about thermite/thermate being used to bring the towers down, and I've seen Jones' evidence to support that, but I just don't think it's conclusive enough to jump to saying it was for sure a controlled demo, we need more evidence.
I'll be back with more later, but see what you guys come up with for those ones.
I'd appreciate it if we kept it civil, no personal attacks. I've been down this road plenty of times before and for some reason it usually gets ugly...
undertheice
Well-Known Member
it's nice to see that you've come so far, now just take that next leap and realize the most simple truth of the matter. once you've burrowed through all the conspiracy bullshit and come out on the other side, you start to understand that it was SNAFU and i think we all know what that acronym stands for. all the grand cabals that are supposedly guiding this world for their own purposes, all the government conspiracies and secret societies, amount to little more than fantasy. there are certainly conspiracies, most of us engage in thousands of them during our lives, but the only successful ones are kept small by necessity. these complicated schemes, involving far too many participants, are simply unworkable.
on the other hand, we all have a working knowledge of the incompetence of those in command. we see example every day of our government's inability to perform even the most simple tasks without thoroughly screwing things up. things become overly complicated as more and more people must become involved and the comedy of errors becomes self-perpetuating. it's little wonder that one hand would not know what the other was doing and that, even if they had known the exact timing and method of the attack, they would be completely incapable of preventing the unfolding of events. incompetence seems inherent in the workings of government.
of course the conspiracy theories will keep on coming. some folks will keep on insisting a+b=c, even though both a and b contain variables both unknown and willfully ignored. they'll keep on noticing little things that don't make sense and elaborating on them, even though we are surrounded by such meaningless inconsistencies every day and simply consider them a part of our everyday lives. i suppose such idiocy serves some purpose. at least it keeps them out of the bars.
eBaked
Member
I have watched numerous video's, read numerous book's (including the 911 commission report) and all I know is that it definitely did not happen the way they say it did. There are WAAAAAAAY too many questions involved.
The 911 commission report was one of the most ridiculous and almost laughable pieces of literature that I have ever read. There are thousands of engineer's, scientist's and politician's around the world (who are much smarter than me) who do not believe the official story. Alongside with the hundreds of thousands of regular citizens around the world who do not believe the official story, makes me believe that there must be more to the story then we are lead to believe.
I draw no conclusions as to who was involved, why they did it, etc etc... All I know personally is it did not happen the way they said it did.
@undertheice. People will always be drawn to conspiracy's to offer explanations to things they find unfathomable, or just simply fail to understand. But I draw no difference between those people who will draw opinion as gospel pertaining to conspiracy theories, and those who simply chalk specific events up to a governments ignorance or inability to manage a country or govern a people. I have read and watched numerous pieces of literature and video on the both sides of the immediate subject, and I would honestly have to say its currently a draw. The most I could hope for is an independent, open investigation on the subject. But we all know that will never happen. This issue will plague generations to come with the never ending questions. I think all most people want is answers they can trust. When you have equally intelligent people on both sides of the argument suggesting different theories. I think the common sense thing to do would be to begin the independent investigation that I suggest.
My two cents anyways.
The 911 commission report was one of the most ridiculous and almost laughable pieces of literature that I have ever read. There are thousands of engineer's, scientist's and politician's around the world (who are much smarter than me) who do not believe the official story. Alongside with the hundreds of thousands of regular citizens around the world who do not believe the official story, makes me believe that there must be more to the story then we are lead to believe.
I draw no conclusions as to who was involved, why they did it, etc etc... All I know personally is it did not happen the way they said it did.
@undertheice. People will always be drawn to conspiracy's to offer explanations to things they find unfathomable, or just simply fail to understand. But I draw no difference between those people who will draw opinion as gospel pertaining to conspiracy theories, and those who simply chalk specific events up to a governments ignorance or inability to manage a country or govern a people. I have read and watched numerous pieces of literature and video on the both sides of the immediate subject, and I would honestly have to say its currently a draw. The most I could hope for is an independent, open investigation on the subject. But we all know that will never happen. This issue will plague generations to come with the never ending questions. I think all most people want is answers they can trust. When you have equally intelligent people on both sides of the argument suggesting different theories. I think the common sense thing to do would be to begin the independent investigation that I suggest.
My two cents anyways.
canuckgrow
Well-Known Member
I must admit I am a little intrigued by your post and gave it 2 reads.......Here is what you offer as any kind of backup or proof to your claim that there is no conspiracy involved with the attacks on 9/11 ZERO, ZILCH, NADA.....What you do attempt to do is classic deflection...I don't agree with you so your a nutjob not worth of socializing with the rest of us......end of story right?????
If you are too thick to understand the gravity of the events that unfolded as a direct result of 9/11 and the 3 wars being waged based on that event...then I truly feel sorry for you....If you really want to know who did it follow the money it will lead you right up the skirt and into the drawers of this whole thing. Lets look at the defense contractors to start....How much do you think they made for their shareholders due to these wars? Trillions of dollars were and still are being spread around. Give or take a few hundred billion that went missing during Iraq right? Oh well SNAFU right
That is the dumbest acronym on earth....it makes no sense whatsoever....You could say that for everything wrong in the universe LOL....Oh well SNAFU..............you do know that the CIA has already admitted to planning this very kind of scenario way back in 1962....seems they wanted a reason to invade Cuba...... Ever heard of Operation Northwoods? but hey SNAFU right????
You may want to come out from undertheice the lack of Oxygen seems to be getting to you.
Mike Young
Well-Known Member
I gotta go with false flag terrorism. This is not a new concept by any means. Throughout history this type of terrorism has been used by the nazis, the russians, egypt, and yes... The good ol US of A. And I imagine it will be used for many generations to come.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
That's pretty much exactly where I sit.
It seems obvious why the government would allow this to happen, especially when you take a close look at conflicts of interest, like Cheney being CEO of Halliburton then that company receiving unprecedented no-bid contracts from the Bush administration, there's a bunch of little connections just like that all over the place.
I don't know how someone could look at that one fact alone and think anything other than "that's a little suspicious..."...
Antidisestablishmentarian
Well-Known Member
Just because something looks suspicious doesn't mean it is. That tends to lead to a conspiracy state of mind.
canuckgrow
Well-Known Member
Or possibly even the truth
Antidisestablishmentarian
Well-Known Member
You just made my point. Thank you.
canuckgrow
Well-Known Member
Oh your very welcome......If you indeed had a valid point to make.
I could thank you for it and even recognize it.