The US government is neither intelligent enough, nor is it powerful enough to organize something like 9/11.
I believe in SouthPark!Theory
Conspiracy theorists are actually government agents in disguise trying to play up the power of the government.
[quote]Curodd wrote:
Ps Why did your government make it immpossible to watch loose change?[/quote]
It did not. If it is the movie I am thinking about, my buddy saw it in Cleveland.
[quote]Curodd wrote:
well im not sure many people who believe it was a conspiracy believe thats the way it went down. [/quote]
Well you believe that some of it did from what you posted about bombs going off. I did not say you had to believe it all to be a conspiracy nut, those were many of the theories different people believe. I merely put them together to show how ridiculous they are.
[quote]Curodd wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
I have read a great deal of conspiracy theories.
What do you believe? That the crews and passengers of all the planes were taken to unknown locations and killed.
And they used remote control guidance systems to fly the planes into the towers minus the one which was shot down by jet fighters who were obviously not in on the plan.
Then they fired a missile at the pentagon, use hidden explosives to take down the twin towers.
They just knew a crazy terrorist kinpin like ol’ Bin Laden, a CIA agent, would take the credit for the attack.
Is that easier to believe than 9-11 was the result of a terrorist attack perpetrated by middle eastern muslim terrorists?
Why is it that the government HAS to be involved in this some way? To also justify your belief in a fascist dictatorship in this country?
well im not sure many people who believe it was a conspiracy believe thats the way it went down. For the american governemnt to be behind it deosnt mean that the planes werent real, the people werent on them, and that they didnt fly into the towers. They could have helped with plans, ignored documents saying that this might happen(hmmm i think they might have done this), planted bombs in the building, which coinsidently imploded like a demolition, Theres video footage of fire fighters saying get away theres still bombs at the bottom. Video footage of a man on the bottom floor who was trapped in the elevator when i bomb went off etc. Im not even saying that its what happened, im saying its possible. Very possible.
Ps Why did your government make it immpossible to watch loose change?[/quote]
Could you quote the fire-fighter who said there were bombs? I only know of one. He said this as the chaos was still unfolding and rumors as to what was going down were circulating. Some did say they heard explosions. Which, I’m sure they did hear explosions. From falling debris and people striking the ground, to transformers exploding. And no, the building didn’t come down in the way demolitions would have caused.
Since when has Loose Change been banned? I thought they were up to their 3rd re-edit (they’re video is debunked so often)?
Quick challenge. Name one research article published in an independent, peer-reviewed, engineering/fire science journal supporting the demolition theory. Or, one that just discredits the structural damage/heat conclusion.
[quote]Curodd wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
I have read a great deal of conspiracy theories.
What do you believe? That the crews and passengers of all the planes were taken to unknown locations and killed.
And they used remote control guidance systems to fly the planes into the towers minus the one which was shot down by jet fighters who were obviously not in on the plan.
Then they fired a missile at the pentagon, use hidden explosives to take down the twin towers.
They just knew a crazy terrorist kinpin like ol’ Bin Laden, a CIA agent, would take the credit for the attack.
Is that easier to believe than 9-11 was the result of a terrorist attack perpetrated by middle eastern muslim terrorists?
Why is it that the government HAS to be involved in this some way? To also justify your belief in a fascist dictatorship in this country?
well im not sure many people who believe it was a conspiracy believe thats the way it went down. For the american governemnt to be behind it deosnt mean that the planes werent real, the people werent on them, and that they didnt fly into the towers. They could have helped with plans, ignored documents saying that this might happen(hmmm i think they might have done this), planted bombs in the building, which coinsidently imploded like a demolition, Theres video footage of fire fighters saying get away theres still bombs at the bottom. Video footage of a man on the bottom floor who was trapped in the elevator when i bomb went off etc. Im not even saying that its what happened, im saying its possible. Very possible.
Ps Why did your government make it immpossible to watch loose change?[/quote]
How is being able to buy Loose Change on DVD all over the internet making it “Impossible” to watch?
I honestly think Canada was behind the whole 911 thing. I think they are still mad about that whole war of 1812 thing.
Is it possible you are liking to take the man’s Hrum in the ah-noose?
Possible, Very possible.
Here is one thing I find interesting. We didn’t find Weapons of Mass Destruction over there. Just all the components to make them. This is like walking into Taco Bell, seeing the shells, the lettuce, cheese, and meat, then saying, “Nope, no tacos in there.”
Ok, I’ll be nice, and point out one little piece of fraud in this horribly written article. The complaint that we have a “gulag”, and that takes away our rights. First of all Guantanimo bay is not a gulag, (look up the term,) and second it is not even in America. We are not rounding up Americans and putting them into political prisons. This whole article is about Americans loosing their rights, and how is this happening? Apparently by actions outside of our country to people who are not under the constitution.
Say, anyone listen to the news reports about Bin Laden’s last posted speech where he says specifically he was the one responsible for 911? Nah, let’s ignore that, doesn’t implicate Bush.
By the way, why did a Republican get into trouble for outing Valerie Plame when a Democrat admitted to being the one who outed her? (Potential conspiracy theory talk with actual facts, hmmm.)
Here is the problem with conspiracy theories. No proof. You are allowed to make any accusation you want without any proof. On what basis? On the basis that it could have happened. Ah yes, it could have happened. Maybe Bush jr. actually killed Nicole Brown Simpson, and tried to frame OJ. It could have happened.
See where this “logic” takes you? Want me to listen, then bring proof. We are not going to start lynching people based on it could have happened. (Oh wait, forgot about that Plame thing.)
Maybe they trained monkeys to climb up the world trade center, and plant bombs late at night.
Hey, it could have happened.
[quote]The Mage wrote:
Here is one thing I find interesting. We didn’t find Weapons of Mass Destruction over there. Just all the components to make them. This is like walking into Taco Bell, seeing the shells, the lettuce, cheese, and meat, then saying, “Nope, no tacos in there.” [/quote]
Who are you? The thought police?
Just about every country where there are universities with semi-decent chemistry and biology departments has the means to make Weapons of Mass Destruction.
And to quote the chief US weapons inspector in charge of the issue: The ISG has not found evidence that Saddam possessed WMD stocks in 2003
That said, I understand your position. I’ll be pretty pissed if thousands and thousands of people died and millions became refugees in my name and with my dime.
@sloth: http://www.ae911truth.org/
now you can say every architect and engineer there is crazy. but It is not true that there are no arguments against the official story.
Wanna hear a real conspiracy theory…a guy in a cave orchestrated 9/11 and did an amazing job even getting NORAD to stand down…
[quote]Mishima wrote:
@sloth: http://www.ae911truth.org/
now you can say every architect and engineer there is crazy. but It is not true that there are no arguments against the official story.[/quote]
I asked for papers published in independent, peer-reviewed Journals. Not more conspiracy sites.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Curodd wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
I have read a great deal of conspiracy theories.
What do you believe? That the crews and passengers of all the planes were taken to unknown locations and killed.
And they used remote control guidance systems to fly the planes into the towers minus the one which was shot down by jet fighters who were obviously not in on the plan.
Then they fired a missile at the pentagon, use hidden explosives to take down the twin towers.
They just knew a crazy terrorist kinpin like ol’ Bin Laden, a CIA agent, would take the credit for the attack.
Is that easier to believe than 9-11 was the result of a terrorist attack perpetrated by middle eastern muslim terrorists?
Why is it that the government HAS to be involved in this some way? To also justify your belief in a fascist dictatorship in this country?
well im not sure many people who believe it was a conspiracy believe thats the way it went down. For the american governemnt to be behind it deosnt mean that the planes werent real, the people werent on them, and that they didnt fly into the towers. They could have helped with plans, ignored documents saying that this might happen(hmmm i think they might have done this), planted bombs in the building, which coinsidently imploded like a demolition, Theres video footage of fire fighters saying get away theres still bombs at the bottom. Video footage of a man on the bottom floor who was trapped in the elevator when i bomb went off etc. Im not even saying that its what happened, im saying its possible. Very possible.
Ps Why did your government make it immpossible to watch loose change?
Could you quote the fire-fighter who said there were bombs? I only know of one. He said this as the chaos was still unfolding and rumors as to what was going down were circulating. Some did say they heard explosions. Which, I’m sure they did hear explosions. From falling debris and people striking the ground, to transformers exploding. And no, the building didn’t come down in the way demolitions would have caused.
Since when has Loose Change been banned? I thought they were up to their 3rd re-edit (they’re video is debunked so often)?
Quick challenge. Name one research article published in an independent, peer-reviewed, engineering/fire science journal supporting the demolition theory. Or, one that just discredits the structural damage/heat conclusion. [/quote]
Yes it defintly did implode, you can easily see this. I believe the explanation was that the fuseloge exploded in the building and caused it to implode. Conspiracy thoerists believe it was planted bombs. I can do you one better then quote the firefighter
my bad, i had a friend tell it was band, i guess he wasnt telling the truth.
quick challenge. Name anyone who is going to go for a study that might conclude it didnt happen the way they said it happen. Especially in the middle of it when it would be the best time to do it, when people are dying i dont think anyones going to immediatly come up and say fuck lets get a study going on this. And there currently is a few projects who are trying to get funding to do this. Im sure the american government will make it easy for them
i think this one also has the firefighters, but i know for sure it at least makes light of how random experts showed up on the scene to imprint ideas.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Mishima wrote:
@sloth: http://www.ae911truth.org/
now you can say every architect and engineer there is crazy. but It is not true that there are no arguments against the official story.
I asked for papers published in independent, peer-reviewed Journals. Not more conspiracy sites.[/quote]
I just would think its funny that intelligent people such as architects and engineers would get together and just decide to go crazy with these irrational thoughts after living normal lives.
just a question though, would you think it easy to get a study done on the WTC buildings? do you think the government would make it easy to access this stuff? the funding easy to get?
[quote]Curodd wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Mishima wrote:
@sloth: http://www.ae911truth.org/
now you can say every architect and engineer there is crazy. but It is not true that there are no arguments against the official story.
I asked for papers published in independent, peer-reviewed Journals. Not more conspiracy sites.
I just would think its funny that intelligent people such as architects and engineers would get together and just decide to go crazy with these irrational thoughts after living normal lives.
just a question though, would you think it easy to get a study done on the WTC buildings? do you think the government would make it easy to access this stuff? the funding easy to get? [/quote]
Our government should not spend one red cent paying whackos with preconceived notions to “research” this.
Universities are full of misfits and fools that will say anything.
And by the way the building did not “implode.” It is clear you do not know what an implosion is if you make that statement.
The building collapsed and the debris was expelled by the displaced air as the floors came together.
The 9/11 truther lunacy would be laughable if it wasn’t driven by hateful forces and if it did not distract from the killers of 3000 people.
[quote]Curodd wrote:
Yes it defintly did implode, you can easily see this. I believe the explanation was that the fuseloge exploded in the building and caused it to implode.
[/quote]
No, it didn’t implode as if brought down by demolitions. Which is the claim.
And no, the fuselage exploding is not the explanaition as to why the towers fell. Please get away from the conspiracy sites, and read why the towers did fall.
Quotes please. I’m not trudging through yet another 9-11 conspiracy video. Provide quotes, or “facts” and I’ll look at those, and I’ll share any rebuttals I have. I’m not going to start a running commentary on the whole video.
Huh? Get money from the CT’ers selling books, video, t-shirts, etc. Get money from from foreign universities. But publish it in an idependent peer-reviewed journal.
I started to actually watch this one and had to stop. So, it’s premise is that these people are plants, because they understood consequences of what they’d witnessed?
They see airliners slam through multiple floors of buildings. They believe this must have caused massive structural loss on multiple floors. No, really? An airliner slamming into a building causes massive structural loss? Who needs that kind of information planted? I’d hope it would be common sense. As for the fire. Well, smoke and flames were visible…
[quote]jlesk68 wrote:
Wanna hear a real conspiracy theory…a guy in a cave orchestrated 9/11 and did an amazing job considering he got NORAD to stand down…[/quote]
It is because we were reactive to the threat and not proactive. And now, because we are trying to be proactive, you all are saying we live in a fascist dictatorship.
There was research. By Popular Mechanics.
They decided to take a serious look at the theories, and try to prove them true or false.
And as far as how the buildings fell, that was how they were designed to fall. They were built with the knowledge that one day they would need to come down, and were designed to collapse exactly the way they did. This is not conspiracy, this is the way the construction works.
Now I do expect the conspiracy nuts to “debunk” this article. They work for the government, or don’t really understand physics the way internet bloggers do, or they were bribed, or even ______ (Fill in the blank).
Sorry to break this to you gents, but you only need one thing to get a country to be fascist: Get the people addicted to fiat money. This causes inflation, the populace eventually screams for stringent price controls and there go…authoritarian rule.
Well, then we’re already there.
I’m not getting involved in the arguments here, but I just wanted to say that that lady on the first page of this thread is pretty hot for her age! I’d hit it
Watching that YouTube video - so the firemen definitely said there was a bomb in the building, and there were reports of a secondary device. The question is, who planted that bomb if it was there?
[quote]JohnnyBlaze wrote:
I’m not getting involved in the arguments here, but I just wanted to say that that lady on the first page of this thread is pretty hot for her age! I’d hit it
Watching that YouTube video - so the firemen definitely said there was a bomb in the building, and there were reports of a secondary device. The question is, who planted that bomb if it was there?
[/quote]
I want to know how the firefighter could possibly know there was a bomb? What was he basing his statement on?