An Urban Legend Posted October 23, 2006 #51 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Wow!!!! I knew you couldn't answer my questions. IMO, your debunked. Have fun in your little conspiracy world. I will continue to live in the real world where I actually worry about real problems. God Bless America! UncleSam what the hell are you talking about? I just answered you question beyond belief, why dont you start disproving the information in the article. This is all you have to offer Sam, nothing intellectual, just cheerleading! You want to disprove something? You want to know where the people are who came out and said there is a conspiracy??? Go read Sunofones Wistleblower thread, he done a great job at posting TONES of wistleblowers. Read Bish...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fate Posted October 23, 2006 #52 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Don't forget Morgan Reynolds, who served in the Bush cabinet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_Reynolds And check this out. Behind the fireman in the picture is a steel beam cut at a perfect 45 degree angle. When beams are taken out, they are not simply exploded, they are "cut" by shape charges. If this makes you think we should study the steel for more evidence, then you are right, we probably should, but it has all been recycled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
An Urban Legend Posted October 23, 2006 #53 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Don't forget Morgan Reynolds, who served in the Bush cabinet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_Reynolds And check this out. Behind the fireman in the picture is a steel beam cut at a perfect 45 degree angle. When beams are taken out, they are not simply exploded, they are "cut" by shape charges. If this makes you think we should study the steel for more evidence, then you are right, we probably should, but it has all been recycled. Nah, nah nah Fate, theyre just gonna say " Oh firemen cut that to make the steel easier to move"....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
landscapecontractor Posted October 23, 2006 #54 Share Posted October 23, 2006 LOL, I've seen this BS in bits and pieces over the last several of years but all seperate, and now... the work is complete, and the "BUSH CONSPIRACY" to kill his own countrymen so he can go to war against iraq is exposed. There certainly is a "sucker born every minute", unfortunately their dangerous now days as they can pass their dillusions on easily on the internet to other suckers who help to perpetuate this nonsense. And, no more attempts to describe how steel beams should look after a building collapse ok, that was reduiculous. Are we to suppose you are an metaluragical expert? YOU SUPPORT THE TERRORIST DONT YOU? Are you american or english? Hmmmmm? POST THE PROOF OF EVERY WORD HERE? Internet rags from the UK and elsewhere dont count. nice try though, looked like a lot of typing. Bush/cheney are not my favorites by a long shot, but they arent even close to this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeyBombs Posted October 23, 2006 #55 Share Posted October 23, 2006 (edited) It's like Urban Legend and BZRK have said over and over and over to the point where you suspect they're being ignored for a reason. Prove the points wrong or cast a futher shadow of doubt on their sources credabilty or don't post at all! There's no point in all these smart remarks about how stupid conspiracy theorists are or how ridiculous the allegations are. The article is the subject at hand, it's contents are the focus of this discussion therefore could preople try dealing with the information at hand rather than going off at tangents and insulting it's provider. I am a neutral. Open minded enough to hear both sides of the debate but willing to believe on this planet that we know so little about, anything is possible. If Hitler can brain-wash a nation and murder millions, why can't Bush orchestrate the crashing of a couple of planes to line his pockets. His IQ is probably half Adolfs. Be open minded! Prove the points wrong! Deabte the topic! Sincerely, Joey Edited October 23, 2006 by JoeyBombs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleSam1776 Posted October 23, 2006 #56 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Like I have said before the article is one-sided. The information in the article is not what I am debating, it is too one-sided. I have just asked question which are being thoroughly ignored. I should have asked to have one person who is credible to come forward. I don't believe in alien spacecraft and that is because of all the "proof" that is offered by people like Stan Friedman. If a source is not credible it hurts the hunt for the truth. It is the same with the names you have given me, either they are unreliable or what they have said has been taken out of context and made into what the 9/11 conspiracies want to hear. I started this by stating that it is ridiculous to believe that the government killed its own people for the reasons stated in the article. I also went on to say that the article was too one-sided to make a good argument. I finished by stating that if you want people to make a rational decision then all the information needs to be there. Make your own choices but only when you have access to all the information. It has been BZRK and Urban Legend who has ignored points and been the most rude in responses. "Prove the article wrong", they say. I have long since said that the article is too one-sided to be proven wrong. I ,and others, have asked them to answer some simple questions, off-topic they may be, but still related to this 9/11 conspiracy. We have been bashed and ignored by these two. There will be no resolution to this problem. They have done a horrible job of convincing me, and I am incapable of changing their minds. We both lose at this race; the only winner is Unexplained Mysteries with a high number of posts for such a topic. God Bless America! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bella-Angelique Posted October 23, 2006 #57 Share Posted October 23, 2006 It's like Urban Legend and BZRK have said over and over and over to the point where you suspect they're being ignored for a reason. Prove the points wrong or cast a futher shadow of doubt on their sources credabilty or \don't post at all! There are no points to prove wrong. They are facts with a story of nonsense woven around them inspired soley by hate, like a group of viscious gossips who chose to use lies rather than truth to attack. The big "ace in the hole" that a Pakistani intelligence official was in DC discussing his nation's need for weapons technology is no different from any intelligence official of any nation visiting a foreign capitol of any nation to discuss purchasing classified tech. It is a common event that occurs around the planet. Weapon sales are big business. It is also common that many officials in Pakistan were and are still tied to the Tailiban and Al Qaeda. The highest estimate that I ever heard was that fifty percent of Pakistani intelligence have some sort of ties with them. What people secretly did in Pakistan did has nothing to do with Bush, any more than it has to do with Clinton. I feel reasonably sure that both presidents fear nuclear Pakistan falling into the hands of radical fundementalist rule, and that it affected the behavior of both. Behind complaints radical elements of both US political parties have lodged against both these presidents they seem to have allowed their personal hate of these men to blind them to the incredibly difficult tight rope walk both have had to perform in connect with Pakistan. The information they received about suspected secret dealings in Pakistan came from the nation that has nukes trained on Pakistan and is their greatest enemy, India. India cannot be seen as a totally onjective observer, although all intelligence offered is considered and appreciated. However, even if all of the information from India is correct, it still has nothing to do with any plottings of either President. Bush did not need 9/11 to attack Iraq any more than Clinton needed a 9/11 to bomb Iraq or any of the other six nations Clinton attacked during his presidency (google nations bombed by Clinton). The chaos was already in play and going on. I myself never voted for Bush because I thought the last people you want in power during a Mideast conflict are oil people. Oil people are naturally going to see the world through the eyes of oil company executives and time has proven this out, not just in their choice of actions in the Middle East, but also in Africa. If you buy a cow do not become enraged because it does not act like a horse. If your laws allow cows to be sold as horses then change your laws to prevent it from happening again, with some other powerful corporate group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zukie&jim Posted October 23, 2006 #58 Share Posted October 23, 2006 there are so many holes in the so called "theory" that where do you start ? the whole problem is that scientific method is thrown out the window . the backers of this "theory" which it is really less than a hypothetical--more like a suspicion-- anyway they must prove that there is something behind their claims -- this so called theory don't have to be de-bunked to prove thats it's crap . it has to be proved to be factual --and it don't have a leg to stand on. these types of threads are more fantasy than reality and i think are put out just to draw the lunatic fringe as some sort of "flame-bait." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saru Posted October 23, 2006 #59 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Can I remind participants of this discussion to attack the opinions expressed in the article or the counter-points provided in the follow up comments, not the people who are offering those opinions or views. Personal insults will be removed, please be civil towards other members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SasquatchKing Posted October 24, 2006 #60 Share Posted October 24, 2006 (edited) Same old information, same old conclusion. The thought that the government killed its own people to gain some fantastic goal, is preposterous. It is good to see that not many people are buying this fantasy. Every conspiracy is the same, facts taken, other facts ignored, just so that the theory fits. This conspiracy goes further than most though. The amount of people who would need to be involved in a cover-up is hundreds if not thousands. Believe whatever you would like to believe, I can’t change your mind. Next time though you may want to rethink your approach, and the presentation of your information. Lots of good points, neatly fitting into your theory. Try presenting the facts, all of them not a selected few, and let the reader make up their own mind. Don’t force your views down my throat and I won’t force my boot down yours. God Bless America! Lets see the facts then. show us the 'REAL' facts. Edited October 24, 2006 by SasquatchKing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SasquatchKing Posted October 24, 2006 #61 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Oh and by the way, for all you moronic people out there, anyone who comes to conclusions regarding huge catastrophes such as the 9/11, from hand me down or 2nd hand knowledge are the real idiots.. its the people with the open minds that will eventually get somewhere..there are so many unanswered questions about the so called 9/11 attack...so why bash people who are searching for the answers? searching is what got humanity this far... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlimited Posted October 24, 2006 #62 Share Posted October 24, 2006 the true story behind 9/11...you wont believe me but..the hamburg alqueda network was brought to the US to do a hit job on someone..ie..Christ...the hamburg cell tricked the CIA and bill clinton and didnt finish the hit but blew up the buildings instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleSam1776 Posted October 24, 2006 #63 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Oh and by the way, for all you moronic people out there, anyone who comes to conclusions regarding huge catastrophes such as the 9/11, from hand me down or 2nd hand knowledge are the real idiots.. its the people with the open minds that will eventually get somewhere..there are so many unanswered questions about the so called 9/11 attack...so why bash people who are searching for the answers? searching is what got humanity this far... That is good advice. I have never said where I got my information because I can't. I have signed a confidentiality agreement with the US government, while working for the Department of Homeland Security. The DHS has information which does not make it out onto the internet. Part of my job included access to the DHS database, where there is information which, for good reason, does not make it into the public’s hands. Say whatever you would like, but I know that 9/11 was not some sort of inside job. The only conspiracy was Al-Qaeda’s plots to blow-up a lot more than the World Trade Centers. There has been no more large scale attacks because of the DHS, the preventative measures go so much deeper than the public realizes. God Bless America! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlimited Posted October 24, 2006 #64 Share Posted October 24, 2006 That is good advice. I have never said where I got my information because I can't. I have signed a confidentiality agreement with the US government, while working for the Department of Homeland Security. The DHS has information which does not make it out onto the internet. Part of my job included access to the DHS database, where there is information which, for good reason, does not make it into the public’s hands. Say whatever you would like, but I know that 9/11 was not some sort of inside job. The only conspiracy was Al-Qaeda’s plots to blow-up a lot more than the World Trade Centers. There has been no more large scale attacks because of the DHS, the preventative measures go so much deeper than the public realizes. God Bless America! the DHS is mostly a cover-up agency for the neo-nazi facist agenda isnt it?..what do they do ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sept Posted October 24, 2006 #65 Share Posted October 24, 2006 (edited) Hi Saruman, BZRK, Urban, Fate... I stumbled upon that thread, saw you guys struggling with the (playing?) dumb notsees, so I thought I could give a hand The demolition of WTC building 7 is the best key to 9/11. It's one of the best elements as it doesn't require faith in anything else than the Laws of Physics. No need for sources, or beliefs of any nature : just science. To debunk that part you'd need to debunk physics. Good luck with that, notsees. WTC 7 was a massive 47 floors, 174 meters (570 feet) building, that wasn't hit by any aircraft on 9/11. Some debris from the towers hit it, though, and a few limited fires were observable. It collapsed on 9/11 at 5:20pm, in about 6.5 secs, on its own footprint. Physically,The only way for this to happen, is for all supporting columns to give way simultaneously. Uncontrolled fires, and/or asymmetrical damage, can't induce symmetrical collapse. Only way to achieve that, is the use of some kind of explosives/incendiary device (i.e. thermite). To this date, there is no official explanation for the collapse of WTC7. It's only mentioned as a footprint in the 9/11 'commission' report. Interestingly, that collapse is almost never mentioned in the media. Very few people out of those who did some honest research into 9/11, have heard of it. Higher definition gif of the collapse, slow motion : http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc-7_1_.gif An interesting thing to watch, is Mr Jowenko's (top demolition expert in the Netherlands) take on that collapse when exposed to it (as many, he didn't know of that collapse until now...): Youtube video of Mr Jowenko's reaction - "Are you sure ?" - "Absolutely, it's been imploded". It takes weeks to wire a building for demolition. It couldn't have been done on 9/11. Alleged al qaeda terrorists didn't have the possibility to wire that building (which hosted the CIA, the SEC, and various govt agencies) by themselves. By itself, the silence from the US govt, the 9/11 'commission' and the media on WTC7, is evidence of a cover up, which demolishes the official 9/11 fairy tale we've been fed with. P.S. BZRK : Thanks for your wits, they're refreshing Edited October 25, 2006 by Sept Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fate Posted October 24, 2006 #66 Share Posted October 24, 2006 (edited) An excellent first post Sept. Just one thing to add. Larry Silverstien, the owner of the WTC on video talking about the descision to "pull it." http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7...9&q=pull+it He later explained this remark, that he meant pull the firemen out of the building. To those who believe this I ask how does a civilian have to power to make a descision to pull firemen out of a burning building? Edited October 24, 2006 by Fate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sept Posted October 24, 2006 #67 Share Posted October 24, 2006 Thanks Fate I purposedly leave silverstein's comment out, because as clear as it is, it still leaves room for interpretation. The DoS issued a statement to cover for silverstein, and the coincidence theorists just love it, they jump on it like it was a popular mechanics 'article'. It then gets into endless, pointless arguments, "he was talking about the firemen" (even though the official fairy tale states there was no firefighting operations in WTC7, so no firemen to "pull"), etc. The notsees tactics are all about instilling reasonable doubt, so I'd rather not give them that chance. Physics leave no room for interpretation : symmetrical collapse means simultaneous destruction of all load bearing columns. There's no other way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlimited Posted October 24, 2006 #68 Share Posted October 24, 2006 I've always said that..buildings were falling that didnt get hit; and people just look at me funny.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BZRK Posted October 24, 2006 #69 Share Posted October 24, 2006 (edited) Hi Saruman, BZRK, Urban, Fate... I stumbled upon that thread, saw you guys struggling with the (playing?) dumb notsees, so I thought I could give a hand The demolition of WTC building is the best key to 9/11. It's one of the best elements as it doesn't require faith in anything else than the Laws of Physics. No need for sources, or beliefs of any nature : just science. To debunk that part you'd need to debunk physics. Good luck with that, notsees. WTC 7 was a massive 47 floors, 174 meters (570 feet) building, that wasn't hit by any aircraft on 9/11. Some debris from the towers hit it, though, and a few limited fires were observable. It collapsed on 9/11 at 5:20pm, in about 6.5 secs, on its own footprint. Physically,The only way for this to happen, is for all supporting columns to give way simultaneously. Uncontrolled fires, and/or asymmetrical damage, can't induce symmetrical collapse. Only way to achieve that, is the use of some kind of explosives/incendiary device (i.e. thermite). To this date, there is no official explanation for the collapse of WTC7. It's only mentioned as a footprint in the 9/11 'commission' report. Interestingly, that collapse is almost never mentioned in the media. Very few people out of those who did some honest research into 9/11, have heard of it. Higher definition gif of the collapse, slow motion : http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc-7_1_.gif An interesting thing to watch, is Mr Jowenko's (top demolition expert in the Netherlands) take on that collapse when exposed to it (as many, he didn't know of that collapse until now...): Youtube video of Mr Jowenko's reaction - "Are you sure ?" - "Absolutely, it's been imploded". It takes weeks to wire a building for demolition. It couldn't have been done on 9/11. Alleged al qaeda terrorists didn't have the possibility to wire that building (which hosted the CIA, the SEC, and various govt agencies) by themselves. By itself, the silence from the US govt, the 9/11 'commission' and the media on WTC7, is evidence of a cover up, which demolishes the official 9/11 fairy tale we've been fed with. P.S. BZRK : Thanks for your wits, they're refreshing Thank you SEPT, for this post. Although the debunkers will most certainly come back and counter argue those points by saying the fires in WTC7 were intense therefore it collapsed due to fires and structural damage which is absolutely absurd, when Larry Silverstein actually mentioned that "we decided to PULL IT" which in demolition terms means a controlled demolition, but once again the debunkers will counter argue the term "PULL IT" by saying Silverstein means to pull the firefighters out of the buildings which again is just absurd. So "IT" is now refered to as "firefighters". Any logical and sane person can see WTC7 fell neatly in its own footprint by means of controlled demolition. Also the government agencies housed at WTC 7 were: United States Secret Service Department of Defense Immigration and Naturalization Service U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Mayor's Office of Emergency Management Internal Revenue Service Regional Council (IRS) Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) FATE indeed your right about Silverstein. The only reasonable conclusion is that Larry Silverstein's statement is an admission that WTC 7 was brought down by a controlled demolition, meaning that the official version of what happened to WTC 7 is false, and casting serious doubt on the official story that terrorists of a foreign origin destroyed the twin towers, as well as on the rest of the official account of 9/11. Note that this admission is a statement against Silverstein's own interests (putting him at odds with the official version of events and potentially jeopardizing his insurance claims). Such statements are given great weight as a matter of law. In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7. Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. This building's collapse alone resulted in a profit of about $500 million. NOTE: Any building that was not owned by Silverstein Properties strangely remained upright. How concerned should we be therefore that Silverstein Properties bought the lease from MetLife for Chicago's Sears Tower in March 2004? The length of time that it took Silverstein to respond to these charges and the fact that his eventual rebuttal does not correspond with the facts only gives us more grounds for skepticism. A real, thorough, impartial, independent investigation of the collapse of Building 7 needs to take place and if the conclusions of that investigation are that Building 7 was professionally demolished, criminal charges need to be brought against those suspected of involvement. NOTE: Not one person has counter argued or debunked the facts in this article. Cheers BZRK Edited October 24, 2006 by BZRK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sept Posted October 25, 2006 #70 Share Posted October 25, 2006 (edited) You should write 'debunkers', as they don't debunk anything actually. Wild assumptions, obfuscations and smearings is all there is to be seen from them. Demand facts and logic, and only crickets can be heard. Edited October 25, 2006 by Sept Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sept Posted October 25, 2006 #71 Share Posted October 25, 2006 ...Crickets... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
__Kratos__ Posted October 25, 2006 #72 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Facts are hard to come by when you're making up silly conspiracies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fate Posted October 25, 2006 #73 Share Posted October 25, 2006 I think it is more desacrating and dishonorable to not look at the facts and try to find the truth about what really happened. 600 years ago, most people believed demons caused sickness and the Earth was flat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlimited Posted October 25, 2006 #74 Share Posted October 25, 2006 Why is it so unbelievable; Bush and the neo-cons staged 9/11 to start a war?...you think they aren't capable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BZRK Posted October 25, 2006 #75 Share Posted October 25, 2006 (edited) ...Crickets... SEPT your right all im hearing is crickets. Once again no response in debunking the facts in the article. Although Lizardian_guy did mention he would debunk the article a few posts back but i am now waiting over a week. Cheers BZRK Edited October 25, 2006 by BZRK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now