WTF is going on here?

[adrenaline]

911 is a huge conspiracy...??:eek: :eek:

Just watched a video proving that 911 is a big cover up...some might have seen it already.

It fully proves that the planes that hit the world trade centres were NOT passenger jets...They had no windows, and had petrusions from the bottom, identical to US airforce refueling jets....

http://www.911inplanesite.com/new_york_magazine.htm

It also prooves that there is no possible way that a boeing jet hit the pentagon...the engines that were found are way way too small... and the damage that was left by the plane is scientifically impossible..!!

Even former members of Bush's administration are saying it is bogus...


"A former Bush team member during his first administration is now voicing serious doubts about the collapse of the World Trade Center on 9-11. Former chief economist for the Department of Labor during President George W. Bush's first term Morgan Reynolds comments that the official story about the collapse of the WTC is "bogus" and that it is more likely that a controlled demolition destroyed the Twin Towers and adjacent Building No. 7"

The following are clips...

http://www.911inplanesite.com/fox_hatchetjob.html

http://www.911inplanesite.com/911trailer.html

So what do people think about this?

Bogus or not?

:D :D :D

[Biggie]

dude every1... no wait... most people now that 911 was a cover up and it was so that bush could get all the oil from the middle east. remmber this it was bush's father that put Saddam in power in the first place. and it was the CIA that Trained Osama-Bin-Ladan

[lightweight]

I smell a big conflict here.

The facts are the following:

1. Bush said he started the war because Saddam had WOMD.
2. He never found WOMD.

This simple analysis shows that it is a cover up.

BUT: I believe that any leader would do the same thing in his place. A country wants to maximise its advantage compared to other countries. Sometimes this is done with "unethical" ways.

[adrenaline]

dude every1... no wait... most people now that 911 was a cover up and it was so that bush could get all the oil from the middle east. remmber this it was bush's father that put Saddam in power in the first place. and it was the CIA that Trained Osama-Bin-Ladan

Lol maybe americans but i dont know anyone in australia that has ever heard of this...

[Sweeney921]

dude every1... no wait... most people now that 911 was a cover up and it was so that bush could get all the oil from the middle east. remmber this it was bush's father that put Saddam in power in the first place. and it was the CIA that Trained Osama-Bin-Ladan
you live in Canada, how would you know

[Blitz_]

just watched it too, should shut all the pro-bush people up. All the evidence is there, it was all a big, and disgusting effort to go to war and make money, just sick and pathetic...

[Matra et Alpine]

I believe it, I'll pay them for the video, yeah sure, just like the "alien autopsy" ones too :D

[car_fiend]

there's another website, i found, where they send a free dvd out, its www.reoppen911.org . i watched it, although i never believed that it was highjackers who did this, and the video proved it. now, though, i wouldn't recommend going to the site , for i heard that 'they' are tracking those who visit that site, and putting fines and junk on them. if u want the dvd, just email, or pm me with the indication, and i'll give u info on what i'll need to get it out to you. (:o hope this doesn't sound like or is spam. that;s not my agenda, just gettin out my $.02)

[:Exige:]

The Pentagon crash theory has already been proven complete bull**it. This is just what happens when people get over-imaginative. If anything is a conspiracy, this video is.

[man 430gt]

I smell a big conflict here.

So do i, and i've always believed theres something else big going on under the table that we could never imagin...

[werty]

We also never landed on the moon;)

EDIT: I wonder how much money this guy has suckered out of people for this dvd of his

[man 430gt]

The Pentagon crash theory has already been proven complete bull**it. This is just what happens when people get over-imaginative. If anything is a conspiracy, this video is.
BUt what about the evidence in "plane" site?

[Wolf03]

This 1-hour long video will change the way you think about the 9/11 events.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2023320890224991194&q=9%2F11

Most of the evidence has been shown before but they have been put together in a very professional-like video.

I'm not even going to bother giving my point of view on this one because last time I gave my opinion about something and it was against Bush, all those pro-Bush Americans just started flaming me like idiots.

[Esperante]

It fully proves that the planes that hit the world trade centres were NOT passenger jets...They had no windows, and had petrusions from the bottom, identical to US airforce refueling jets....
You've got to be kidding me.

[Viper007]

Yea lets have a conspiracy that works in a way that it kills thousands of people and accomplishes very little. Highly unlikely that Bush would kill all these people for oil. What kind of sicko would do that.

[man 430gt]

Yea lets have a conspiracy that works in a way that it kills thousands of people and accomplishes very little. Highly unlikely that Bush would kill all these people for oil. What kind of sicko would do that.
Have a guess..

Bush
And don't forgot what bushes former job was connected to, bingo! Oil..

[Esperante]

The conspiracies about 'oh, why did the towers fall down when planes hit them on the sides! OMG!' is just bullshit. The planes exploded and weakened the towers, whose load bearing walls later failed;thus the building will fall down. The idea that bombs were placed in the buildings to make them fall down is just bullshit.
I don't think you've seen any of the several thousand videos availible across the boards that display the impact and destruction of the World Trade Centres. If you think those were cargo planes without windows, you're either blind, or a moron who believes anything fed to him. The two proturusions on the bottom are the housings of the wheels once they retract, and are on virtually every plane that flies.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a4/Britair.b737-400.g-docp.arp.jpg/250px-Britair.b737-400.g-docp.arp.jpg
You can see in the above picture that the bottom of the fueselage flattens out and subtly develops into two bumps. In the better lighting on 9/11, this was more apparent.
By the way, this is what the standard 723 US refuling jet looks like. If you think that with some repainting those could appear just like Boeing 737s and increase size as well, then, well, you have issues and I recommend you see your doctor/psychiatrist immeaditely.
http://www.a3skywarrior.com/pg01photos/slide16.jpg
There are some larger refuelers, but those refuelers are considerably larger than a 737.
http://media.nasaexplores.com/lessons/03-047/images/refuel.jpg
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1640000/images/_1640092_refuel300afp.jpg
See that mate? 4 engines! Would you like to count to me how many a 737 has?
To answer some other theories about bomb placement in the WTC:
Some believe that since explosions were seen on the other side of the building than the impact, there were bombs.
Well, typically, large jet planes moving at 400 mph filled with highly flammable jet fuel and impacting a comparitively weak building will go partly through the building before incinerating.
http://www.jerseycityonline.com/wtc/wtc_photos/plane1.JPG
http://www.solcomhouse.com/wtc2series.jpg
http://www.utsa.edu/today/images/graphics/wtc.jpg
See that? That's a 737.

These theories have been disproved by so many engineers and analysts that it's not even remotely funny. Yet people like to ignore them just for another instance to blame Bush for something.
Please, give me any conspiracy theory dealing with 9/11 and I'd be glad to debunk it.

[man 430gt]

The fireman saying they heard expolisions in the 10-15 floors..

[Matt]

The conspiracies about 'oh, why did the towers fall down when planes hit them on the sides! OMG!' is just bullshit. The planes exploded and weakened the towers, whose load bearing walls later failed;thus the building will fall down. The idea that bombs were placed in the buildings to make them fall down is just bullshit.
I don't think you've seen any of the several thousand videos availible across the boards that display the impact and destruction of the World Trade Centres. If you think those were cargo planes without windows, you're either blind, or a moron who believes anything fed to him. The two proturusions on the bottom are the housings of the wheels once they retract, and are on virtually every plane that flies.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a4/Britair.b737-400.g-docp.arp.jpg/250px-Britair.b737-400.g-docp.arp.jpg
You can see in the above picture that the bottom of the fueselage flattens out and subtly develops into two bumps. In the better lighting on 9/11, this was more apparent.
By the way, this is what the standard 723 US refuling jet looks like. If you think that with some repainting those could appear just like Boeing 737s and increase size as well, then, well, you have issues and I recommend you see your doctor/psychiatrist immeaditely.
http://www.a3skywarrior.com/pg01photos/slide16.jpg
There are some larger refuelers, but those refuelers are considerably larger than a 737.
http://media.nasaexplores.com/lessons/03-047/images/refuel.jpg
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1640000/images/_1640092_refuel300afp.jpg
See that mate? 4 engines! Would you like to count to me how many a 737 has?
To answer some other theories about bomb placement in the WTC:
Some believe that since explosions were seen on the other side of the building than the impact, there were bombs.
Well, typically, large jet planes moving at 400 mph filled with highly flammable jet fuel and impacting a comparitively weak building will go partly through the building before incinerating.
http://www.jerseycityonline.com/wtc/wtc_photos/plane1.JPG
http://www.terrorism-victims.org/terrorists/wtc-pentagon/1wtc-plane.jpg

See that? That's a 737.

Please, give me any conspiracy theory dealing with 9/11 and I'd be glad to debunk it.

I'm not going to say I agree with the original content of this thread, but if you had bothered to read what was posted, your argument would be a lot more credible. They weren't 737s that hit the Trade Center. They were 767s. And the military has 767s without windows, with mid-air refueling capabilities.

[man 430gt]

I'm not going to say I agree with the original content of this thread, but if you had bothered to read what was posted, your argument would be a lot more credible. They weren't 737s that hit the Trade Center. They were 767s. And the military has 767s without windows, with mid-air refueling capabilities.
Go matt, it's your birthday:D:D

[Esperante]

I'm not going to say I agree with the original content of this thread, but if you had bothered to read what was posted, your argument would be a lot more credible. They weren't 737s that hit the Trade Center. They were 767s. And the military has 767s without windows, with mid-air refueling capabilities.
You're right. they weren't 737's, they were 757s. Miscommunication on my part.
The 767 is a plane that resembles closely the 757, so anyone could simply say the planes were gov't run 767s...Even with my miscommunication the argument holds little water.



It also prooves that there is no possible way that a boeing jet hit the pentagon...the engines that were found are way way too small... and the damage that was left by the plane is scientifically impossible..!!
I continue my campaign to call you a ****ing moron.
Would you like to tell me HOW a 757 moving at 400 mph with tonnes of jet fuel would NOT destroy the wing of a large building?
http://www.spanishladyranch.com/images/pentagon_after_after_11_20_01s.jpg
It only penetrated the first three rings, about the same distance as one of the World Trade Centre towers. Seems perfectly physically right to me.
http://www.tfeagle.army.mil/tfetalon/PhotoGallery/15TalonPhotos/Nov12/Images/Pic18-Pentagon-9-11.gif
Here you'll see that the only building it completely destroyed was one of the outer ring. However, it penetrated the next two, and set fire to the remainder.
When a plane hits a low rise building, it does not simply create a hole. The pentagon is not just one building, nor is it just 5. The pentagon is several different buildings connected and parceled together. Hence, if a jet plane with tonnes of fuel moving 400 mph hits on building, that building will likely collapse.

This picture always comes into the debate.
http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images2/pentagon_hole2.jpg
Dear God, there's so much that people instantly assume that it makes me want to slam my head into a brick wall.
Number 1-The parking space issue:The pentagon is the largest edifice on the face of the planet, and, in my explanation about the buildings, you'll notice there is space between them. it would not surprise me if high up officials brought there cars within the outer walls and parked on the interior of the campus. They may use golf carts to get around.
Number 2-The wingspan issue:Yes, the wingspan of a 757 is quite large, but the wings are frail in comparison to the remainder of the plane, and likely broke off.
Number 3-The location issue:This is probably a photo from one of the various interior alleys between buildings, which means this is likely were the nose peaked through the rest of the buildings and finally blew this hole and stopped. Watch the WTC videos again and you'll notice that noses came through to the other side.
Number 4-Another debunking:The pentagon has it's own backup power generators, and this might be the result of one exploding from the fires that raged through the building.
Number 5-Another debunking:This may be a vent hole that firefighters knocked open to relieve the interior of smoke.


Even former members of Bush's administration are saying it is bogus...

I'd like to see your source, and the print that tells they said such.

[Esperante]

The fireman saying they heard expolisions in the 10-15 floors..
1:This sound may have been caused by the buckling of lower pylons in the buildings when the planes hit.
2:They may be BSing us
3:The sound of the explosions may have carried through the stairwells
4:the firefighters were in the building, they heard the explosions in their floors, yet managed to get out and tell about it. Tell me what's fishy?
5:paranoia. Extreme trauma may lead someone to exagerate in real time what happens in their surroundings.

[Vindesh17]

Im probably one of the biggest anti-bush people here but I won't take this theory too seriously if I were you guys.

[man 430gt]

1:This sound may have been caused by the buckling of lower pylons in the buildings when the planes hit.
Most likely, if there are no bombs..


2:They may be BSing us
60+ policeman, firefighters and civilians..

3:The sound of the explosions may have carried through the stairwells
And rip off marbles off the war, and blow open elevator doors and smash windows "outwards". Very very unlikely.



4:the firefighters were in the building, they heard the explosions in their floors, yet managed to get out and tell about it. Tell me what's fishy?

Incorrect, the many of the interviewed "firefighters" on the matter were in the lobby, which would give them enough time to escape..

[Godlaus]

And here I was looking for a video to debunk all of these theories, but esperante's doing it for me :).

Except, one more thing; there were 5 video cameras (security, personal, etc.) that were collected by the FBI that all covered the plane that hit the pentagon. the tapes were never released, can I ask why?

And also; this entire conspiracy is absurd. If the bsuh administration wanted to invade afghanistan, they'd patch up some photo-shopped photos of Osama being in Afghanistan, and they'd head after him, and then tell the public that the situation is escalating, and that they need more troops.

(run-on sentence, anyone?)

[RazaBlade]

Im not too concerned, even if they collected all this evidence, what can they really do?

One thing though....


Number 2-The wingspan issue:Yes, the wingspan of a 757 is quite large, but the wings are frail in comparison to the remainder of the plane, and likely broke off.


Where are the wings in the photos? There was barely any sign there that a plane had caused that damage... Sure, you say that small hole was created by the fuselage/nose of the plane, but where are the bits of plane?? Theres just a hole, that should be filled with plane debris!! And if you happen to say "it disintegrated" Im obliged to point out the near perfect concrete and brick barely a foot away from the hole edge... why did that not get affected.

[Godlaus]

Incorrect, the many of the interviewed "firefighters" on the matter were in the lobby, which would give them enough time to escape..


Wouldn't a plane hitting the tower sound like a bomb exploding? And people have heard bombs exploding on TV and places, but haven't ehard planes crashing into towers, hence, when they hear a plane hitting the tower, they'd identify it as the closest thing that they'd have heard, which is a bomb exploding on TV.

(Another run-on sentence)

[Godlaus]

Where are the wings in the photos? There was barely any sign there that a plane had caused that damage... Sure, you say that small hole was created by the fuselage/nose of the plane, but where are the bits of plane?? Theres just a hole, that should be filled with plane debris!! And if you happen to say "it disintegrated" Im obliged to point out the near perfect concrete and brick barely a foot away from the hole edge... why did that not get affected.

Read his post again, chief. That's not the outer-ring, probably the third or fourth. And you don't know when that photo was taken either, the plane parts could already be taken away.

[RazaBlade]

Would you like to tell me HOW a 757 moving at 400 mph with tonnes of jet fuel would NOT destroy the wing of a large building?
http://www.spanishladyranch.com/images/pentagon_after_after_11_20_01s.jpg
It only penetrated the first three rings, about the same distance as one of the World Trade Centre towers. Seems perfectly physically right to me.
http://www.tfeagle.army.mil/tfetalon/PhotoGallery/15TalonPhotos/Nov12/Images/Pic18-Pentagon-9-11.gif
Here you'll see that the only building it completely destroyed was one of the outer ring. However, it penetrated the next two, and set fire to the remainder.

Discrepancy in your argument, at first you say its a big mess (3 rings) and then just the outer ring.

Sure, Im picking on tiny errors, but the only reason is that your being so irritatingly cocky about it, and being personal for no reason. No one knows for sure what happened, have some open talk instead of being narrow-minded, whichever way that happens to be.

[The_Canuck]

On the pentagon, i was watching a show (probably on discovery cant remember) and they were talking about how the pentagon is one of the most structuraly stable buildings around (you'd assume so anyway considering its pretty important to the U.S) and therefore there wasn't as much damage as some people think there should have been.

[kingofthering]

Obviously bogus. the parts recovered from the wreckage shows that there were windows on the planes and body parts were found.

[R34GTR]

This video is just a scam to make some money of naive people it's just pure BS, Btw not the first time a thing like this has been posted so it's getting anoying now

Kind of disrespectful to the victims to make up something like this

[Viper007]

Have a guess..

And don't forgot what bushes former job was connected to, bingo! Oil..

Regardless the guy isnt so heartless that he would kill thousands just to get oil thats ridiculous. If 911 was a conspiracy, we can all just go kill ourselves cuz if we dont, our country will.

[Zondaboy1]

i dont know about you guys but i did a school newspaper report on conspiracy theory and i watched this one video. those slow motion frames of the security camera was 'chopped' and not fully released. there were at least 6 more frames. and it showed a 'missile' like thing hitting the building
i'm not saying it was, i'm saying that it was a smaller jet with explosives.... or an inside job involving a small plane

also i cant belive they didnt mention the 'no groundmarks on the pentagon lawn when the plane hit it' if you look closely at the photographs... there are no groundmarks on the ground. this also rules out the big jet theory. but so what, it wasnt a big jet, it could have been a small jet flying 12 feet above the ground. the other movie also commented on the jet stream

you know how there's a highway (the beltway i think) where the pentagon got hit,,, well if the jet were flying like 12 feet off the ground, it would have knocked over some serious s@#$. the jet stream would flip cars in both directions, it would also takedown lamp posts and highway signs that the plane and wings missed. this also rules out the big jet idea... after all WHO said it was a 'big jet' it could have been a smaller jet.

if you ask me thats completely BS

and if you go to www.sfogs.com <<or www.sfogs.com.sg or some rendition of that and find your way to pictures, they have a picture of the jet crashing in..... and someone chopped it to make it look like satan's face was in it


its just completely bull s@#%

[my porsche]

Im probably one of the biggest anti-bush people here but I won't take this theory too seriously if I were you guys.
case closed

as if this wasnt bullshit enough, one of the most-anti bush people ive herad of who blames everything on Bush wont succumb to this theory

thank you vindesh :D

[Zondaboy1]

yes, thank you, and thank you MP for pointing that out

if Vindesh doesnt belive it, it is NOT true

[aNOBLEman]

The conspiracies about 'oh, why did the towers fall down when planes hit them on the sides! OMG!' is just bullshit. The planes exploded and weakened the towers, whose load bearing walls later failed;thus the building will fall down. The idea that bombs were placed in the buildings to make them fall down is just bullshit.
I don't think you've seen any of the several thousand videos availible across the boards that display the impact and destruction of the World Trade Centres. If you think those were cargo planes without windows, you're either blind, or a moron who believes anything fed to him. The two proturusions on the bottom are the housings of the wheels once they retract, and are on virtually every plane that flies.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a4/Britair.b737-400.g-docp.arp.jpg/250px-Britair.b737-400.g-docp.arp.jpg
You can see in the above picture that the bottom of the fueselage flattens out and subtly develops into two bumps. In the better lighting on 9/11, this was more apparent.
By the way, this is what the standard 723 US refuling jet looks like. If you think that with some repainting those could appear just like Boeing 737s and increase size as well, then, well, you have issues and I recommend you see your doctor/psychiatrist immeaditely.
http://www.a3skywarrior.com/pg01photos/slide16.jpg
There are some larger refuelers, but those refuelers are considerably larger than a 737.
http://media.nasaexplores.com/lessons/03-047/images/refuel.jpg
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1640000/images/_1640092_refuel300afp.jpg
See that mate? 4 engines! Would you like to count to me how many a 737 has?
To answer some other theories about bomb placement in the WTC:
Some believe that since explosions were seen on the other side of the building than the impact, there were bombs.
Well, typically, large jet planes moving at 400 mph filled with highly flammable jet fuel and impacting a comparitively weak building will go partly through the building before incinerating.
http://www.jerseycityonline.com/wtc/wtc_photos/plane1.JPG
http://www.solcomhouse.com/wtc2series.jpg
http://www.utsa.edu/today/images/graphics/wtc.jpg
See that? That's a 737.

These theories have been disproved by so many engineers and analysts that it's not even remotely funny. Yet people like to ignore them just for another instance to blame Bush for something.
Please, give me any conspiracy theory dealing with 9/11 and I'd be glad to debunk it.

I know a lot about planes and we have an airforce base that has many many refueling planes and they don't even look close to a 737. I'm glad to see that at least you can see that. :)

[my porsche]

yes, thank you, and thank you MP for pointing that out

if Vindesh doesnt belive it, it is NOT true
um, if you're serious, yes...but i can't tell :p

[Matra et Alpine]

I know a lot about planes and we have an airforce base that has many many refueling planes and they don't even look close to a 737. I'm glad to see that at least you can see that. :)
Your local FORD dealer has plenty of cars in it too.
I'm betting not one of them looks close to a Ferrari.
Silly argument :D

[man 430gt]

How comes my post was deleted?

[Pando]

Did you press the edit button and then delete?

I'm just trying to help.

[Esperante]

Most likely, if there are no bombs..
Which there weren't. Read on:


60+ policeman, firefighters and civilians..
Listen, bub, in order for your conspiracie to work, all of the families of those who were killed on the planes were paid off or created by the gov't. If several hundred families can BS us, your '60+' fireman, policeman and civilians can. I have seen almost all of the video taken documenting the towers from impact to collapse, and I don't recall any explosions near the base. In fact, there weren't explsosions from the base, as proven on video, unless all of the video was doctored by the govt'. In fact, even if it wasn't videoed, there's even more civilians who took flight from the buildings. Remember, 50,000 people worked in the WTC daily. If explosion that engulfed 5 floors near the base of the building occured, more than 60 people would see it.


And rip off marbles off the war, and blow open elevator doors and smash windows "outwards". Very very unlikely.
How can you not trust the thousands of people who make up the US Gov't but place wholeheartedly your faith in internet bloggers who claim that firefighters or workers inside those 5 floors of the WTC experienced an explosion? If an explosion that engulfed 5 floors occured, it would breach the outer walls and burn everyone inside alive.



Incorrect, the many of the interviewed "firefighters" on the matter were in the lobby, which would give them enough time to escape..
12 floors is pretty damn high up. Maybe not so apparent in New York City, but 10 floors is more than a hundred feet up. You said this explosion occured from floors 10-15. The explosion would not have carried down to the lobby, which is floors 1-3. As a matter of fact, your factual output has just disproved that part of the theory.
You say they were in the lobby, and since firefighters were present we must assume that, since a small explosion from floors 10-15 could not carry, this is tower 1/the South Tower;as Tower 2 would not have been occupied as nobody expected a first hit. Thus:
They cannot see up from the lobby. So, once the plane hits the buliding they reside in, it could easily be mistaken for a blast occuring only a few floors up. I should add that the blast from the planes ws much greater than the one you claim occur. So, since they did not actually witness an explosion, how can they know where it came from?



Where are the wings in the photos? There was barely any sign there that a plane had caused that damage... Sure, you say that small hole was created by the fuselage/nose of the plane, but where are the bits of plane?? Theres just a hole, that should be filled with plane debris!! And if you happen to say "it disintegrated" Im obliged to point out the near perfect concrete and brick barely a foot away from the hole edge... why did that not get affected.

You moron, the wings are where the fuel was. When fuel ignites, it combusts. When large amounts of fuel combust, it explodes. That's why the wing debris is not present.


Discrepancy in your argument, at first you say its a big mess (3 rings) and then just the outer ring.
Maybe I should tell you what I said just because you're maybe not intelligent enough to interpret it.
The plane of the pentagon destroyed 3 of the rings. Not obliterated, like the WTC, but destroyed. In speaking terms of engineering, such structures as the coliseum in Rome are destroyed. Look at the second photo I posted and notice how the plane carried on after obliterating the first building. The first buliding was the only building that structurally collapsed following the attack.
If the interior of your house burns out but the facade is still standing, your house is destroyed. If that facade falls and leaves nothing, your house is obliterated.

And yes, Canuck, the Pentagon is built like a rock. I'm actually rather surprised that even one building collapsed.



also i cant belive they didnt mention the 'no groundmarks on the pentagon lawn when the plane hit it' if you look closely at the photographs... there are no groundmarks on the ground. this also rules out the big jet theory. but so what, it wasnt a big jet, it could have been a small jet flying 12 feet above the ground. the other movie also commented on the jet stream
The reason there are none is becuse airplanes fly, and thus can fly into things without hitting the ground, if the pilot is skilled enough.


you know how there's a highway (the beltway i think) where the pentagon got hit,,, well if the jet were flying like 12 feet off the ground, it would have knocked over some serious s@#$. the jet stream would flip cars in both directions, it would also takedown lamp posts and highway signs that the plane and wings missed. this also rules out the big jet idea... after all WHO said it was a 'big jet' it could have been a smaller jet.
Ah, yes, I forgot. It's impossible to have a plane do a nosedive or fly at an angle greater than that necessary to scrape the ground. Pshaw! How naive of me.

Conspiracy theories are 99.9999999% of the time complete bullshit. In fact, this 9/11 conspiracy theory about the identifiction of the 757 that hit the buildings is akin to this:
Several thousand spectators line the straightaway at a race track, and a Vauxhall VX220 zooms by. Everyone concurs that a Vauxhall just went by. A few months later, someone at home watching a grainy video of the event concludes it was rather an Opel Speedster, and starts a movement that believes the race coordinators who fund the event rigged the competition.

I should start a conspiracy theory that the state of Idaho doesn't actally exist, because none of you have been there and none of you know anyone claiming to be from Idaho.

[werty]

In case you're wondering what just happened...

You all just got OWNED by Esperante

[johnnynumfiv]

I don't think you guys would be saying any of this conspiracy crap if you knew people that died on 9/11 or are in the area of nyc.

[Rockefella]

I don't think you guys would be saying any of this conspiracy crap if you knew people that died on 9/11 or are in the area of nyc.
Agreed, although I have no direct relative/acquaintance that suffered through 9/11; however, my dad worked 36 hrs straight setting up an emergency shelter wired w/ emerg. phone-lines/internet services/food/cots/etc.

[Pando]

...on the subject on conspiracies one great documentary/drama/comedy is the Swedish film Konspiration 58, if someone can get it from somewhere it's definately worth watching(probably avaliable with english subtitles).

Anyway, the video "proves" quite convincingly that the football world cup in Sweden 1958 never happened. It truly shows that the creators has put alot of effort to make it, and you sit trough the movie wondering if they're serious or not and even begin to question the whole thing yourself. Nevertheless you have to admire the uniqueness of the thing, you don't see ideas like this emerge from hollywood ;)

The konpiration58 (http://www.konspiration58.com/) website seems to be down (OMG!! GOVERNMENT CENSORING :eek: ;) )
but here's a review, too bad it's not in english http://www.filmtidning.se/recensioner/3744/

[Rockefella]

...on the subject on conspiracies one great documentary/drama/comedy is the Swedish film Konspiration 58, if someone can get it from somewhere it's definately worth watching(probably avaliable with english subtitles).

Anyway, the video "proves" quite convincingly that the football world cup in Sweden 1958 never happened. It truly shows that the creators has put alot of effort to make it, and you sit trough the movie wondering if they're serious or not and even begin to question the whole thing yourself. Nevertheless you have to admire the uniqueness of the thing, you don't see ideas like this emerge from hollywood ;)

The konpiration58 (http://www.konspiration58.com/) website seems to be down (OMG!! GOVERNMENT CENSORING :eek: ;) )
but here's a review, too bad it's not in english http://www.filmtidning.se/recensioner/3744/
That's pretty cool, maybe I'll pick it up World Cup time w/ some English subtitles. Regarding conspiracies, we could prob. make BS stories about everything. Hell, I could probably pull off a story stating that Wouter Melissen is a robot programmed by the Danish government and built to post on forums and make updates, if I had enough time and BS evidence.

EDIT: The Pentagon story I find 50% true, seeing as I believe in it being a plane that hit, but see the plane as being more of a leer jet/private plane rather than a 757.

[Wolf03]

What about the fourth plane that crashed into a rural field in Somerset County, Pennsylvania? All the videos and pictures show just a small crater...and no large aircraft parts have been found.

I have serious doubts about the plane crashing into the Pentagon too. I mean it looks like the plane (or whatever hit) was lined up with the Pentagon so the plane couldn't have came in a steep dive. So how could something so big crash into the Pentagon while the grass in front is completely "clean" and green and no cars on the highway were flipped?

[Esperante]

What about the fourth plane that crashed into a rural field in Somerset County, Pennsylvania? All the videos and pictures show just a small crater...and no large aircraft parts have been found.
When planes hit the ground from very high up at a high rate of speed I wouldn't expect much save the black box to remain intact. Have you seen the test footage of bombs being blown through vacant 747s? Large commuter jets are very weak when it comes to anything the plane wouldn't see on a regular basis.


I have serious doubts about the plane crashing into the Pentagon too. I mean it looks like the plane (or whatever hit) was lined up with the Pentagon so the plane couldn't have came in a steep dive. So how could something so big crash into the Pentagon while the grass in front is completely "clean" and green and no cars on the highway were flipped?
Read my above post. The plane wouldn't have to touch ground to hit and collapse a portion of the Pentagon. Planes do fly indeed.


And Rock-You'll have to take my word for it that the Pentagon is built like a rock.
Next time you go into the city, take note of the AT&T Long Lines Building, about a block from City Hall. That sucker was built to withstand impact from fair sized jets and nuclear blasts.
http://www.benstrawbridge.com/photo/buildings/img_0935_std.jpg
There's another one just off the Brooklyn Bridge, but has false windows to be easier on the eyes for most New Yorkers. There's also one in MIdtown somewhere....
But I digress. If a plane hit the AT&T conspiracies would arise that a helicopter hit it, and that's why it barely penetrated the walls.

[werty]

What about the fourth plane that crashed into a rural field in Somerset County, Pennsylvania? All the videos and pictures show just a small crater...and no large aircraft parts have been found.

I have serious doubts about the plane crashing into the Pentagon too. I mean it looks like the plane (or whatever hit) was lined up with the Pentagon so the plane couldn't have came in a steep dive. So how could something so big crash into the Pentagon while the grass in front is completely "clean" and green and no cars on the highway were flipped?
can somebody please explain to this guy that planes are not designed to crash into buildings

[woodstock827]

cool... i wouldn't say if it's a conspiracy or not, but i wouldn't be surprised if the USA govn't actually did it...

[Matt]

If the plane that hit the Pentagon was structurally sound enough to punch through three rings of this supposedly incredibly strong building, why are there none of these parts in the wreckage? Again, I don't buy all of this conspiracy, but it's a good question. You can't say in one sentence that the plane was strong enough to punch through three layers of the Pentagon and then in the next sentence say it was so weak that it just disintegrated. Apparently it didn't just disintegrate or there wouldn't be nearly as much damage to the building.

[SupraMan22]

Exactly matt. All these pics created a question in my head. If a jet liner is traveling at 400mph, slams into the pentagon, only damages 3 of the 5 rings. Only fully destroying 1 of them. How is that possible? A liner traveling at 400mph would have traveled further than 3 rings. And sure the hell would have fully destroyed more than 1 ring. And the left side is a smooth cut. Damn smooth from a plane smashing into it. Its way too perfect to be busted into by a 400 mph machine. And if you look where the plane supposivley entered, on the top floors of the front ring, there is concrete clearly showing through. Not burnt at all. Looks in perfect condition, but there is burning all around. Looks a bit odd to me.
I dont believe all of this, but it really opened my eyes. This is a very excellent arguement, wonder what bush has to say about this. :rolleyes:

[Spastik_Roach]

Are you sure it was going 400mph though?

[spi-ti-tout]

I can't say how true it is, but it does have some good points in it. Click here (http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php#Main)to look at the video.

[R34GTR]

If I recall correctly the pentagon was designed to with stand any bomb attacks because of it's unique shape , it's nearly indestructable

But let's stop this arguing I mean Esperante alone here has disproved all the conspiracy's and as I've said before this really isn't respectful the family of the victims

[Matt]

If I recall correctly the pentagon was designed to with stand any bomb attacks because of it's unique shape , it's nearly indestructable

But let's stop this arguing I mean Esperante alone here has disproved all the conspiracy's and as I've said before this really isn't respectful the family of the victims

He didn't disprove anything. And many of the family members themselves have asked similar questions in the media and before Congress.

[adrenaline]

I continue my campaign to call you a ****ing moron.
Would you like to tell me HOW a 757 moving at 400 mph with tonnes of jet fuel would NOT destroy the wing of a large building?


Dude your the one being a moron, no offense...

I said that because I saw it on a video, why are you going personal???

Whats up with u and this whole issue...people have their opinions...lol why are u so intent to prove them wrong??

You know nothing more than anyone else. Yes, there are people who say that it is a conspiracy. I personally believe that the whole truth is not being told to the world.

Have u seen the evidence that ties Osama with 911?? I dont think anyone has.

How about the black box flight recorders that were CONVENIENTLY confiscated by the FBI.

If u have seen the video, it show in slow motion that there was a flash of light coming FROM the building BEFORE the plane hit it. The flash was on 4 different tapes of the plane hitting. It wasnt inserted. The reflection of this flash could be seen on the plane. Can you explain this? I cant.

And about the Bulge under the airplane, you said it was landing gear. Give me a break. Thats just crazy.


"The detected cylindrical objects cannot be due to shadows caused by the angle of incidence of the sun on the plane, because they always appear to be the same shape and size, though with varying luminosity.

"The detected objects have varying luminosity around them because they are in relief (this is the only possible explanation).

"The detected objects are clearly distinct from the landing gear."

http://www.911inplanesite.com/images2004/1-767anomaly5.jpg

Do u seriously think that that bulge is landing gear?? Its not. Then what is it?? No other 757 has it, so why would this one have it for?? Surely the airport would have noticed such a huge abnormalty before takeoff:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

You also didnt entertain the possibility that a former bush member said that 911 was bogus. Well, heres the story from the Washington Times. Is that enough?


http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050613-102755-6408r.htm


Also, what about the plane that plunged into the ground brfore making its target, flight 93. AFTER it was meant to have crashed, it was reported 'grounded' with the threat of a bomb on board. This makes it impossible that it was flight 93. There was a news article done on it.
Funny thing is though, once it was announced on national radio that the articleexisted, it was removed. Quite convenient isnt it.


Plane Lands In Cleveland; Bomb Feared Aboard


Reported by: 9News Staff
Web produced by: Liz Foreman
9/11/01 11:43:57 AM

This story has been removed from WCPO.com.

It was a preliminary AP story, and was factually incorrect.

They waited 3 years to remove it.



Ah, yes, I forgot. It's impossible to have a plane do a nosedive or fly at an angle greater than that necessary to scrape the ground. Pshaw! How naive of me.

There were extreemely high poles in the area and technically, the plane SHOULD have hit them, going by the angle of entry (found by looking at the hole in the building. If what you are saying is true, the plane nosedived or flew at a strange angle on its decent, then it would not have left the damage it did. It would have gone straight throught the roof. Funny thing is, the roof wasnt touched. Ive attached a picture that might help u visualise it all...



And now, because you know everything, answer these:


(a.) Why were there so many reports of bombs or explosions going off in and around the World Trade Center before any buildings collapsed?


(b.) Why did firefighters, reporters and other eyewitnesses report hearing explosions being detonated and why did they describe a demolition-like, pancake collapse of the WTC?


(c.) Why did a FOX News employee report seeing no windows on “Flight 175” a commercial United Airlines jetliner and why did an eyewitness in the streets of New York say that the plane hitting the second tower was not an American Airlines jet?


(d.) What is the bright flash seen right before impact on both the North Tower and the South Tower, as captured in at least five known pieces of video footage?


(e.) Was there a “pod” of some sort attached to the bottom of “Flight 175” and, if so, why was it there?


(f.) How does a plane 125 feet wide & 155 feet long fit into a hole at the Pentagon which was only 16 feet across and leave no signs of wreckage (wings, tail section, fuselage, seats, luggage, passengers, engines, et cetera) on the lawn as seen in photographs taken moments after the impact and before the outer wall had collapsed?



Have a nice day:D :D :D

[R34GTR]

Have u seen the evidence that ties Osama with 911?? I dont think anyone has.



Yes I have , He's in this cave with all his G-unit soldiers , ok I'm serious now He and the Al-Queda movement have admitted to being repsonsible for the attacks on one of those Al-Jazeera tapes

that makes him guilty to me

[adrenaline]

Well if George Bush 'created' him like many say, then ofcourse he would admit to it.

[R34GTR]

umm yeah....... ^^

[The_Canuck]

good site that disproves conspiraces http://www.oilempire.us/bogus.html

[man 430gt]

Regardless the guy isnt so heartless that he would kill thousands just to get oil thats ridiculous. If 911 was a conspiracy, we can all just go kill ourselves cuz if we dont, our country will.
Depends how much oil iraq has to satisfy bush, hopefully enough..
And R34GTR this is an open discussion for anyone to give there free opionion, and i'll respect yours so please do the same for me and the rest, and this is quite a sensitive topic so we have to becareful how some of us step(;)) and this topic hasn't really been discussed that much really..

[SupraMan22]

The pentagon was hit supposivley from the front, the damage was created from the "front" of the building. It would have scattered the wreckage all over the lawn. Like was pointed out there was nothing on the lawn, no damage, wreckage, etc. And if it was hit from the top, then there wouldnt be a large hole going through 2 of the other rings. Plus damage on the roof would be more significant, and the plane would be sticking out the top. So there goes that idea. I do indeed, now after watching and looking at things believe that a plane couldnt have hit the pentagon. A missle could create that damage, so could a plane also, but there would be a shit load more damage and debris. And also the tubrulance would have screw everything around it up, flipping cars, twisting light posts, turning over and throwing the large spools, etc. With the WTC, i have no clue. It is very possible that there were only cargo planes that hit it. Something that very well supports this i believe is why were the black boxes never recovered. They cleared that site and picked through it looking for bodies to identify. Why not a black box? They possible link the the whole thing and its sifted through? WTF. Sounds fishy to me, i dont believe it all the way. But it is very possible.

[The_Canuck]

http://www.oilempire.us/graphics/debris1_wheel.jpg

[The_Canuck]

http://www.oilempire.us/graphics/debris2_engine.jpg

[The_Canuck]

is it still soundin fishy????

[The_Canuck]

any one who doubts pentagon was hit by plane READ THIShttp://www.oilempire.us/pentagon.html
this is good::: "there is zero evidence for any of the "no plane" claims - hundreds of people saw the plane, none saw a cruise missile, Global Hawk robot plane, smaller plane or flying saucer piloted by giant lizards"

[dydzi]

yea copperfield came and make WTC disappear

c'mon, those are terrorists who attacted it, all of that is just overinterpretation of some facts and normal manipulation

[Rockefella]

At this point, the US government should just come out and provide some kind of credible evidence disapproving this conspiracy, seeing as too many people, including myself, question it's validity in parts.

[SupraMan22]

^^Exactly^^

[The_Canuck]

there is already credible evidence people just ignore it, people make up conspiraces all the time, ie: moon landing

[Rockefella]

there is already credible evidence people just ignore it, people make up conspiraces all the time, ie: moon landing
Ok, I know. But the government HAS to know about all of this conspiracy stuff, so wouldn't a simple press conference fix all of this crap. The government's never lied before. Wait, nevermind.

[The_Canuck]

they have had numerous press conferences in the years following the attacks about the conspiracys

[PerfAdv]

I could say that too much brushing will wear away tooth enamel and therefore brushing your teeth is unhealthy. Everything in moderation, even skepticism.

I didn't read through this site completely but I know the premise of this conspiracy theory is that FDR let the Pearl Harbor attack happen so the American populace would back US involvement in the war.

http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/pearl.html

[The_Canuck]

now that pearl harbour stuff is hard to disprove cause it all happened 60+ years ago

[PerfAdv]

That's the key word: prove. This is all speculation. A little speculation is healthy, too much and it starts to be paranoia. The truth I'm sure lies somewhere in the middle of what the two parties claim.

[my porsche]

Well if George Bush 'created' him like many say, then ofcourse he would admit to it.
are you ****ing insane?

yeah he created some fake terrorist, bombed the WTC in 1993 blamed ot on said created terrorist, got bored, bombed the WTC DOWN this time, with air force refueling planes, and then blamed it yet again on this created terrorist, that sounds totally believable to me

[Esperante]

Dude your the one being a moron, no offense...

I said that because I saw it on a video, why are you going personal???

Whats up with u and this whole issue...people have their opinions...lol why are u so intent to prove them wrong??
I'm not stating opinion, I'm stating fact.


You know nothing more than anyone else. Yes, there are people who say that it is a conspiracy. I personally believe that the whole truth is not being told to the world.
I gave you concrete details and explanations of why the conspiracy doesn't work. In the world of structural engineering, I actually do know considerably more than a random person on the street.


Have u seen the evidence that ties Osama with 911?? I dont think anyone has.
Funny you should mention it, because he implicated responsibility in a video found a few months following the attacks. He said something along the lines of 'We were surprised to see the jet fuel burn the steel as well as they did in the World Trade Centre.' So yes, I have seen evidence supporting Osama's involvment with 9/11, though you'll simply contradict me and tell me it was a fabrication of the government.


How about the black box flight recorders that were CONVENIENTLY confiscated by the FBI.
Black boxes contain some pretty emotional information, and if you're family was on one of the planes I don't think you'd want those recordings declassified.


If u have seen the video, it show in slow motion that there was a flash of light coming FROM the building BEFORE the plane hit it. The flash was on 4 different tapes of the plane hitting. It wasnt inserted. The reflection of this flash could be seen on the plane. Can you explain this? I cant.
This statement is pointless without multiple links to videos of the event from reliable sources. NOT a documentary on the subject, I'm talking FOX, ABC, CNN, MSNBC... Of the hundreds of cameras concentrated on the WTC, the fact that only four cameras picked up this flash of light leads me to believe it was lens flare.
Another question arises. Why would the gov't plant bombs in the buildings when planes they jacked were already heading towards them? Why would they detonate these bombs before the planes hit?


And about the Bulge under the airplane, you said it was landing gear. Give me a break. Thats just crazy.



http://www.911inplanesite.com/images2004/1-767anomaly5.jpg

Do u seriously think that that bulge is landing gear?? Its not. Then what is it?? No other 757 has it, so why would this one have it for?? Surely the airport would have noticed such a huge abnormalty before takeoff:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
You've got to be ****ing kidding me. EVERY Boeing 757 has landing gear housing bulges. Take a look, dumbass....
http://levinbrass.orcon.net.nz/graphics/Boeing%20757.jpg
Yes, that is a standard 757 passenger plane. THIS is why I call you a moron, a dumbass. You fail to look at any evidence suggesting anything other than your conspiracy.


You also didnt entertain the possibility that a former bush member said that 911 was bogus. Well, heres the story from the Washington Times. Is that enough?


http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050613-102755-6408r.htm


That explains little. It doesn't say he knew 9-11 was bogus, it just says he 'has his doubts.' He only tells us his opinion in that artical.


Also, what about the plane that plunged into the ground brfore making its target, flight 93. AFTER it was meant to have crashed, it was reported 'grounded' with the threat of a bomb on board. This makes it impossible that it was flight 93. There was a news article done on it.
Funny thing is though, once it was announced on national radio that the articleexisted, it was removed. Quite convenient isnt it.



They waited 3 years to remove it.

If it was removed, how do you know it ever existed? Is this another thing that documentary told you? I can tell you right now that there was a documentary that proved Idaho did not exist, but, oops! The gov't took it down. I guess I can't show it to you...
Guess what else:ever heard of phony information? If one place reports a grounded plane, someone else could report a crashed one. We learned this just this past week, were families learned that all but one miner was alive. Oops, wrong information. Incorrect information is very common immeaditely following an event.
http://img328.imageshack.us/img328/7337/deweydefeatstruman8ds.jpg
Oh my, looks like the Chicago Tribune wrote the truth. Dewey did defeat Truman...the gov't rigged the election to put Truman in.
If you ask me, the information regarding Flight 93 was an honest mistake, and when the articdle raised speculation it was promptly deleted for its misinformation.




There were extreemely high poles in the area and technically, the plane SHOULD have hit them, going by the angle of entry (found by looking at the hole in the building. If what you are saying is true, the plane nosedived or flew at a strange angle on its decent, then it would not have left the damage it did. It would have gone straight throught the roof. Funny thing is, the roof wasnt touched. Ive attached a picture that might help u visualise it all...
Really? Where?
http://www.disordered.org/desktop/Pentagon.jpg
Where the construction cranes are is where the plane hit. That's plenty of room to level a plane to take out a building.
Oh, silly me, I found a pole. There must have been plenty of poles similar to it around the area, too.
http://www.wildlandfire.com/pics/nywtc_pentagon/pentagon.jpg
But..would you look at that? It's a temporary lamp post put up by the clean up crew. Which means that:
A:)The plane knocked over the poles
or
B:)There were no poles
Here's another pic showing the temporary poles, and lack of permanent ones:
http://www.wildlandfire.com/pics/nywtc_pentagon/pentagon6.jpgh

And now, because you know everything, answer these:















Have a nice day:D :D :D
That's a homemade diagram done with probably 30 seconds of research. I think the photograph above is a LOT more accurate.

[Matra et Alpine]

yeah he created some fake terrorist
m-p, American policy CREATED Osama Bin Laden and his power base.
It was trained and funded by America to have them fight the Russians in Afghanistan.
Without that intervention who knows if ANY of it might have happened.
WHat-ifs are fine mental exerciese but in this case are too late.

[johnnynumfiv]

the fact that only four cameras picked up this flash of light leads me to believe it was lens flare

It probably was, there wasn't a cloud in the sky that day. Sad to see something so tragic happen on a beautiful day like that. :( :(

[my porsche]

m-p, American policy CREATED Osama Bin Laden and his power base.
It was trained and funded by America to have them fight the Russians in Afghanistan.
Without that intervention who knows if ANY of it might have happened.
WHat-ifs are fine mental exerciese but in this case are too late.
ohhh sorry i took it in a literal sense :p like Osama is a figment of Bush's imagination type of thing

[Esperante]

ADRENALINE, to answer the points you brought up:
(a.) Why were there so many reports of bombs or explosions going off in and around the World Trade Center before any buildings collapsed?
Fire burns things. When fire comes in contact with something flammable, it explodes. However, I don't recall seeing numerous explsions besides the ones the airplanes caused.


(b.) Why did firefighters, reporters and other eyewitnesses report hearing explosions being detonated and why did they describe a demolition-like, pancake collapse of the WTC?

I answered this in my first post. Buildings don't get hit by planes, vurn for 2 hours, then fall over. The planes hit the buildings, and burned. You'll notice that the area above the impact zone on the North Tower actually leaned from the force exerted on it immeaditely following the impact. From the impact on, the planes and the lateral forces they exerted don't mean anything. The fires are what do. The fires eventually melted the steel exoskeleton of the WTC at about floors 70-80, which, I believer, are where the planes about hit. Once those pylons are destroyed, the floors above will fall. This is due to a phenomenon called gravity. The lower floors could not support this and thus also collapsed. You'll notice that with each floor that falls, the net weight of the collapsing region increases.

Debunking the myth that bombs went off was also explained in my earlier post.
A:>The canyons of large cities rebound noise, thus an explosion from 1,000 feet up can be amplified to sound like it is from 100 ft. up.
B:>The firefighters who reported these bombs were in the lobby when they supposedly went off. Answer this for me:How do you know how high up an explosion is if you can't seen anything except the lobby ceiling above you?


(c.) Why did a FOX News employee report seeing no windows on “Flight 175” a commercial United Airlines jetliner and why did an eyewitness in the streets of New York say that the plane hitting the second tower was not an American Airlines jet?
Numerous explanations for the FOX News employee scenario:
A:>It's FOX News. This is the same network who has a major figure recommending terrorist attacks on San Francisco.
B:>This is one person. Literally hundreds of thousands of people saw the plane before impact. He might be telling us what he thought he saw, completely honestly, but what he thought he saw was wrong.
C:>He's BSing us
D:>He didn't actually get a good look at the plane, which was moving at about 400 mph, and just told us what he saw in the heat of the moment.

Explaining the eyewitness scenario:
A:>We know it was an American Airlines jet because there's countless photographs and videos that prove so
B:>He's BSing us
C:>How would a regular joe on the street be able to look into the sky and recognize that the paintwork on the plane was NOT of a specific airline?
D:>Airlines have several different variations of paintwork on planes in service. This man may have seen one he was not familiar with
E:>Once again, this is one guy of thousands.


(d.) What is the bright flash seen right before impact on both the North Tower and the South Tower, as captured in at least five known pieces of video footage?
You said four before, and I already answered this. You can't even keep the facts within your conspiracy straight.




(e.) Was there a “pod” of some sort attached to the bottom of “Flight 175” and, if so, why was it there?
Why was it there? It was standard bodywork on all Boeing 757s.




(f.) How does a plane 125 feet wide & 155 feet long fit into a hole at the Pentagon which was only 16 feet across and leave no signs of wreckage (wings, tail section, fuselage, seats, luggage, passengers, engines, et cetera) on the lawn as seen in photographs taken moments after the impact and before the outer wall had collapsed?
Once again, I already answered this. Consider yourself lucky that i'm not tired enough to have you actually go back and read my post.

On the mtter of why it didn't leave wreckage, which it did:
A:>It DID leave debris on the lawn, but since it was moving so fast, most of the debris pressed up against the building, and inside the hole it created. This is a property of what we call inertia.
B:>Expanding on A, the fireman did a good job at responding quickly and cleaning up.
C:>The Canuck just posted about five images that proves the existence of 757 parts found in the Pentagon wreckage

On the matter of how it left a 16 foot hole:
A;>I already anwesered this
B:>It could be a hold punched by firefighters to vent smoke from the building
C:>It could be the result of a power generator exploding. The Pentagon has backup power generators, and, generally, when such things set fire, they explode.
D:>The wall with this hole is probably an interior hole where only the nose section of the plane peeked through.

'Have a nice day.'

[woodstock827]

the point about Bin Laden admitting to organizing 9/11, i don't believe his word/video one bit...
i personally find that terrorists like to take credit for whatever attacks there are out there... therefore, even if someone says they did it, i wouldn't believe it..

again.. i'm not saying who's responsible... i'm just saying i dun believe anything osama says...

it's a miracle that both towers collapsed straight down the way they did (assuming no "planned" demolition).. i would think that any small disturbence (e.g. wind, shockwave from the first tower, etc) would send one of the tower side way...

[Esperante]

the point about Bin Laden admitting to organizing 9/11, i don't believe his word/video one bit...
i personally find that terrorists like to take credit for whatever attacks there are out there... therefore, even if someone says they did it, i wouldn't believe it..
He asked for evidence of an Osama Bin Laden-9/11 link. The video were he 'admitted' it stands out.



it's a miracle that both towers collapsed straight down the way they did (assuming no "planned" demolition).. i would think that any small disturbence (e.g. wind, shockwave from the first tower, etc) would send one of the tower side way...
This is what irks me about most average people who don't take interest in buildings. People like such are usually the ones that conceptualize such conspiracies. The worst steryotype about skyscrapers is that they are weak, which is about as far from the truth as one can get. Please read what I had to say regarding the collapse on the towers. They collapsed exactly as they should have; physically there was no other way they could have possibly fallen. It makes me even more angry when people argue it was conspiracy because the buildings should have fallen over rather than fallen downwards. People who don't think this is possible need to go retake their high school physics. So no, it is not a miracle they fell straight down, it's science.
Here, I'll explain it in lamens terms.

1:Plane impacts building.

Note this much:The World Trade Centre is unique in that it has a stell exoskeleton rather than the tradition steel frame. The only other notable exoskeleton framed building in the US is the John Hancock Building in Chicago.
This is a traditional steel cage skyscraper.
http://www.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/AboutSydney/images/history/historyofcouncil/hs_chos_history_of_council_pa_p79a.jpg
A web of I-beams hold up the building. Thus, one segment of the building could collapse but leave the rest standing, as each floor relies on a number of pillar complexes.
This is an exoskeleton building.
http://www.aawe.org/aawe-grap/newsletters/septnews01/septnews01_files/image001.gif
Exoskeleton framed buildings have all the supports pushed to the outside, thus freeing up interior space of pylons. The WTC pylons were about 12 inches wide and about 19 inches deep on all sides, with probably 40-50 pylons on each side. The windows were 14 inches wide (some attribute the narrow windows to architect Minoru Yamasaki's fear of heights). The WTC pylons were exceptionally strong.
This picture illustrates the exterial framing and core of elevator shafts.
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/fig3.gif
http://kspope.com/assets/groundzero/b6bl.jpg
In the picture immeaditely above, you can see that the interior floors broke their mooring with the exoskeleton frame, leaving a part of the frame to stand. If one were to strip the building of its exoskeleton frame, the floors would all fall on each other, rather than if one were to remove the exterior frames of a steel cage the building would remain standing because there are still plenty of pylons.
Because of the removal of the interior pylons, the exterior pylons have to be able to bear more weight.
Anyway, the plane impacts the building. As soon as the plane is stops/explodes, the building has absorbed all lateral forces the plane exerted on it. THERE IS NOTHING PUSHING ON THE BUILDINGS BESIDES GRAVITY AND WIND FROM THIS POINT ON.
2:The fires burn. The World Trade Centre did their job exceptionally well in absorbing the force of the planes, but the buildings were designed in case of accidental impacts, in which case the planes would be nearly out of feul and travelling considerably slower. The fires are what did the building in. The fires eventually weakened enough by melting the exoskeleton of at least one entire side of a floor, which then allowed the floors once supported by those buildings to collapse.
3:http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/0305911-collapse-lg.jpg
Notice in the above how one side of the skeleton gives, but the other holds on, until the collapsing section bends far enough and falls with great engouh velocity to destroy the columns on the opposite side.
The structure fails. THIS IS HOW THE BUILDINGS 'PANCAKED.' Lets say, hypothectically, each floor weighed 1 pound. So, initially, 20 pounds (20 floors) fell, but the next floor down could not support the force of the 20 pounds bearing down. Thus, floor 90 collapses, which makes 21 pounds for floor 89 to hold. 89 cannot hold it, so the weight becomes 22 pounds, and so on and so forth.

http://www.demel.net/wtc/wtc-24.jpg
The demise of the World Trade Center was a textbook collapse of a large building.

[adrenaline]

OK, Im not looking for a fight, but what the **** is wrong with u people??

I copied and pasted all of my information from www.911inplanesite.com Take a look. Im not taking 4 hours to write a post like u all are. Whatching esperante is just pathetic. I post something, with nothing but information from the above site, and I get 'myporch'e calling me a dipshit and esperante trying to prove everything i said wrong. I could pick through and answer to all the crap that was written, like the camera flares (The explosion was seen reflecting off the plane and it appeared on the CNN documentary)

Someone should seriously lock this thread, esperante is taking it too seriously, getting personal with people because of what they think. I havent gotten personal with anyone, so why am i copping bullshit.

Esperante u dont know if it was a conspiracy or not. Ur not a damn scientist ur 15 for christs sake!! Some of your responses just DONT work. The wings would have hit the side of the pentagon, but there was no damage to it and they were not seen. There was no fire or smoke damage to the inside of the pentagon, where the explosion happened. Its inconsistent with the Twin Towers. U gonna call me a dipshit for saying that??

And the 'generators at the pentagon exploded blah blah blah' Yeah they had generators inside the building that sounds real:confused:

Seems u have to answer to everything. Why cant someone have an opinion?

I will stress that u have no more idea than anyone else does.

Its just interesting that, FOX's position suddenly changed on the matter, at the scene the reporter said that the plane had no windows. Its on video. Also on video is a woman that said that the plane was 'definately not american airlines'. That kind of stuff makes me wonder, because after the incident FOX suddenly retracted its information about the plane having no windows. WHY would they do that? Because FOX is owned by General Electric. GE is one of the biggest suppliers to Americas military. But why would a fox reporter and another woman captured on video say that it had no windows, and wasnt an airliner jet?? It must have been a mistake esperante, they must have been just dreaming about it. Right?

Seriously, what has america actually acheieved in afghanistan and iraq? Not what they set out to. They wanted to find weapons of mass destruction. They wanted to find Osama. They found neither. Strange, isnt it.

Im pretty sure they found oil though :D :D :D

Some parts of 911 make sense, and others dont. The pod under the plane is not landing gear, just admit it. Its a cylindrical object, nothing like the landing gear housing. Thats an issue that should be open for discussion. U cant dismiss it saying that it is landing gear. Although some people sleep better at night thinking theres an explanation for all of it. Fine. Do i call them dipshits? No. U call me one...

Theres just heaps of unanswered questions. Thats what makes me think that the whole truth is not being said. Heres something simple for someone to explain to me...

How come all of the witnesses that were near flight 93 (the one that ploughed into the ground) say that there was an unmarked jet tailing it. Once 93 crashed, it circled, and went off. The FBI said that it never existed, and that there were no planes in the area. They stuck with that. Then when people started to go public they said that it was a plane sent to get the co-ordinates of the crash, so emergency teams could get there. They say it was at 3000 feet, although witnesses have said from the biginning that it was very very low. How come the FBI's story changes, and the witnesses dont? The earthquake station nearby picked up a sonic boom at around the same time of a crash. So it proves that a supersonic aircaft was in a 60Km radius. the FBI denied that any aircraft was anywhere near the site, besides flight 93.

That one of the unanswered things that makes me wonder about the whole lot. Why shouldnt i have doubts. Am i a dipshit for having them??

I respect ur opinion esperante, but dont force it. Dont incriminate me for having my own opinion that differs to yours. Its just babyish. U are taking it all too seriously and i find myself wasting my time writing out this post to try and explain my opinion. I shouldnt have to. I shouldnt be called a dipshit or a f***ing idiot. U seem to want to fight about this. I dont. Have some maturity and act like a man. Respect what others say, and if u think its wrong, say it in a nice way. :D :D :D

[Rockefella]

Ugh, don't make me use the timeout stick on your posts. (It's getting fiesty in here)

[adrenaline]

Im making an attempt to make it civilised, but it will probably just create more arguement....im hoping it wont though:D

[Vindesh17]

Adrenaline, Im on your side so dont bitch at me. :) Do you personally believe all the things you are posting? I do but to a certain degree, some of the things they suggest are really extreme.

[adrenaline]

I believe that they are possible, but i dont take them as gospel, because nobody knows what happened, all people can do is speculate. It just seems interesting, given the background of the US, remember they bombed their own ships for an entry into the cold war...but yea im just saying its possible and that people shouldnt count out the possibility...BTW i dont mean to bitch at anyone..sorry if im coming accorss that way...im trying to be calm whilst some people are calling me a dipshit and F***ing idiot etc...

[Vindesh17]

I see I see, and the part about you bitching, I was making a joke. I wouldnt be too happy either if someone was calling me a "dipshit" or a "f***ing idiot, infact if that person was infront of me I would handle it right there because I have anger problems plus muscles that dont help me to stay calm, but thats just me and here we are supposed to be mature and civilized, which more than I can say for some other people, not you.

[Rockefella]

I see I see, and the part about you bitching, I was making a joke. I wouldnt be too happy either if someone was calling me a "dipshit" or a "f***ing idiot, infact if that person was infront of me I would handle it right there because I have anger problems plus muscles that dont help me to stay calm, but thats just me and here we are supposed to be mature and civilized, which more than I can say for some other people, not you.
Me and my dad can beat up you and your dad.

[Vindesh17]

I don't know what your dad's occupation is but if you wanted to take us on, my dad's a 55 year old doctor. :D

[Spastik_Roach]

Me and my dad can beat up you and your dad.

Roflmao, pwn3d.

[Rockefella]

I don't know what your dad's occupation is but if you wanted to take us on, my dad's a 55 year old doctor. :D
It's just a 'phrase', a mere joke. Nothing serious involved there. ;)

[Vindesh17]

Dont see how thats owned but yea whatever. :)

[Rockefella]

Dont see how thats owned but yea whatever.
It's a joke that most people wouldn't get. :D

[Vindesh17]

^^^true, for example me^^^

[Matt]

it's a miracle that both towers collapsed straight down the way they did (assuming no "planned" demolition).. i would think that any small disturbence (e.g. wind, shockwave from the first tower, etc) would send one of the tower side way...

Actually, one of the towers didn't fall straight down. If you watch the footage (I honestly don't remember which tower it was), like the top 5th of the building falls to the side. One of the buildings that was next to the trade center was severely damaged by that large piece of debris and just reopened in the past few months.

[Fleet 500]

The pentagon was hit supposivley from the front, the damage was created from the "front" of the building. It would have scattered the wreckage all over the lawn. Like was pointed out there was nothing on the lawn, no damage, wreckage, etc.
There was wreckage:

[adrenaline]

Where are the wings, because if they are inside the building like people are saying, then how come the hole in the building was only 16 feet wide?? Its impossible. A university came to the conclusion that the damage was more likely caused by a missile, and definately not a 757.

Another thing:
The pentagon is one of the most secure locations in the states. Its the nerve centre of the military. Every inch is under survailence. So why then, do the FBI tell everyone that the only captured footage was from a single security camera. They showed the footage. The date was wrong, and it DID NOT show the 757. Something else, a gas station nearby had a security camera pointing at the pentagon. It would have been the only private camera that would have recorded the hit. What happened? The FBI confiscated the tape.

Thats the kind of evidence that really makes me wonder.

Tell me someone, WHERE THE HELL DID THE WINGS GO??????


Oh yea and something else i found out...
In the LIVE report by FOX news on the twin towers attack, the reporter said that he saw the plane VERY clearly and that it WAS NOT a commercial plane. He said it had blue markings on te front, and that it had no windows. This is coming from a live report on FOX. A reporter wouldnt just make that up. Infront of thousands of people he just couldnt have made it up.

How can this be explained, seriously how can it??

And the fact that the lease owner of no. 7 said on live TV that they decided to 'pull it'. Pull it is a term that is used when doing a controlled explosion in a building. It takes months to prepare for those, working our which beams need to be rigged and all the rest. How could they rig the building, which is on fire by the way, in a few hours?? I think he screwed up when he said 'pull it'.

I dont take all of this as gospel but its very interesting to look at. It seems to all come together.

I just cant explain all of that....

[The_Canuck]

on the pentagon, Again read posts 65-68 and use the link in post 68. it has evidence that disproves most if not all pentagon conspiracy theories.

[kingofthering]

Bush is too stupid to plan 9/11. He probably took advantge of 9/11 and bad information to invade Iraq

[kingofthering]

Where are the wings, because if they are inside the building like people are saying, then how come the hole in the building was only 16 feet wide?? Its impossible. A university came to the conclusion that the damage was more likely caused by a missile, and definately not a 757.

Another thing:
The pentagon is one of the most secure locations in the states. Its the nerve centre of the military. Every inch is under survailence. So why then, do the FBI tell everyone that the only captured footage was from a single security camera. They showed the footage. The date was wrong, and it DID NOT show the 757. Something else, a gas station nearby had a security camera pointing at the pentagon. It would have been the only private camera that would have recorded the hit. What happened? The FBI confiscated the tape.

Thats the kind of evidence that really makes me wonder.

Tell me someone, WHERE THE HELL DID THE WINGS GO??????


Oh yea and something else i found out...
In the LIVE report by FOX news on the twin towers attack, the reporter said that he saw the plane VERY clearly and that it WAS NOT a commercial plane. He said it had blue markings on te front, and that it had no windows. This is coming from a live report on FOX. A reporter wouldnt just make that up. Infront of thousands of people he just couldnt have made it up.

How can this be explained, seriously how can it??

And the fact that the lease owner of no. 7 said on live TV that they decided to 'pull it'. Pull it is a term that is used when doing a controlled explosion in a building. It takes months to prepare for those, working our which beams need to be rigged and all the rest. How could they rig the building, which is on fire by the way, in a few hours?? I think he screwed up when he said 'pull it'.

I dont take all of this as gospel but its very interesting to look at. It seems to all come together.

I just cant explain all of that....
Airplanes tend to disintergrate as they crash through a building at a high speed. Saying that it will punch a exact hole everytime as it crashes is like saying that a car smashing into a wall will remain in one piece. If you need proof, Popular Mechanics wrote about all the 9/11 conspiraces.

[man 430gt]

Airplanes tend to disintergrate as they crash through a building at a high speed. Saying that it will punch a exact hole everytime as it crashes is like saying that a car smashing into a wall will remain in one piece. If you need proof, Popular Mechanics wrote about all the 9/11 conspiraces.
disintergrate into such little peices that can never be found again?

[johnnynumfiv]

Tell me someone, WHERE THE HELL DID THE WINGS GO??????


Did you expect the wings to stay on the plane and go through the building?
A plane made out aluminum, designed for light weight, isn't built to stay together when hitting a solid object at however fast the plane was going. The wings most likely hit the side of the building and blew a apart, ripped off, or disenegrated. Where as the cabin section kept travelling. It's like you with your arms out like -|- through a door, your arms bend back, most likely similar what happened with the plane.

[man 430gt]

Did you expect the wings to stay on the plane and go through the building?
A plane made out aluminum, designed for light weight, isn't built to stay together when hitting a solid object at however fast the plane was going. The wings most likely hit the side of the building and blew a apart, ripped off, or disenegrated. Where as the cabin section kept travelling. It's like you with your arms out like -|- through a door, your arms bend back, most likely similar what happened with the plane.
No we expect to see at least some sort of evedence that a plane acually hit the building..

[Fleet 500]

Airplanes tend to disintergrate as they crash through a building at a high speed. Saying that it will punch a exact hole everytime as it crashes is like saying that a car smashing into a wall will remain in one piece. If you need proof, Popular Mechanics wrote about all the 9/11 conspiraces.
That's right, and ADRENALINE really should by a copy (back issues or by any way possible).
It is explained that a plane crashing into a building does not leave a cartoon-like hole...

I will recan these in a little while and make them bigger.

[johnnynumfiv]

Look in Fleet's post, there is a picture with debris.

CONSPIRACY FU(KTARDS, WHAT THE FU(K HAPPENED TO THE PEOPLE ON THE PLANE IF THERE WASNT REALLY A PLANE? WERE THEY FAKE? WERE THEY KILLED OFF BEFORE THE FLIGHT? WHERE IS THE PLANE THAT TOOK OFF THAT MORNING IF IT DIDN'T CRASH? FU(KIN' IDIOTS.

[man 430gt]

I can't find his post?
FOund it

[Fleet 500]

No we expect to see at least some sort of evedence that a plane acually hit the building..
The author Barbara Olsen was on that plane. And as her husband sadly knows, she is dead.

[Matra et Alpine]

The author Barbara Olsen was on that plane. And as her husband sadly knows, she is dead.
But remember in the minds of the TRUE consipracy nut then the government has either imprisoned them in AbuGhirab or has "terminated" them !!!!!

[Fleet 500]

But remember in the minds of the TRUE consipracy nut then the government has either imprisoned them in AbuGhirab or has "terminated" them !!!!!
Yeah, maybe she's in some prison living on vanilla wafers and reading Good Housekeeping.

[my porsche]

Me and my dad can beat up you and your dad.
**** that, i could beat him and his dad up, as UCP's reigning beast


adrenalinealinealinealine, the reason people are getting so angry is because youa re stating that a huge tragedy that killed almost 3000 people just plain didnt happen, say someone bombed the harbour bridge in sydney, the opra, and also a skyscarper, then an american came and said that never happened and your president did it and that it was all an excuse to go to war, how would you feel about that?

[Fleet 500]

Here are two pages of the article with a bigger scan:

[Esperante]

OK, Im not looking for a fight, but what the **** is wrong with u people??

I copied and pasted all of my information from www.911inplanesite.com Take a look. Im not taking 4 hours to write a post like u all are. Whatching esperante is just pathetic.
So then you are, essentially, admitting that you don't read my posts, and that you don't actually make an argument. You just put up a bunch of info and leave it, expect to win. I responded to just about every bit of 'info' you posted, but you didn't bother respond to that, and then complained that I'm calling you names. I attempted to debunk your argument but you call me pathetic for doing so. Nice work.

I post something, with nothing but information from the above site, and I get 'myporch'e calling me a dipshit and esperante trying to prove everything i said wrong. I could pick through and answer to all the crap that was written, like the camera flares (The explosion was seen reflecting off the plane and it appeared on the CNN documentary)
Jesus Christ, you posted a vast and unproved conspiracy theory and you don't expect anyone to even try to debunk it? You've got to be kidding me. You even replied to my first attempt at debunking by giving me more things to disprove. In fct, you even told me to answer the questions for you. I did. Don't argue, then get cold feet and blame me for over dramatizing the issue.


Someone should seriously lock this thread, esperante is taking it too seriously, getting personal with people because of what they think. I havent gotten personal with anyone, so why am i copping bullshit.
Taking this too seriously? You brought up the idea that the most president of the most powerful country on the face of the planet ruthlessly killed thousands of people and you think I'm taking this too seriously?

Esperante u dont know if it was a conspiracy or not. Ur not a damn scientist ur 15 for christs sake!!
Fine. I don't know it's a conspiracy. But you don't know that Idaho exists, because you've never been there.
The reason I know this conspiracy didn't happen is because it's been disproved so many times it's not funny.
By your grammar on this website you don't sound much older than me, if not younger. I know about structural engineering, so I post what I know here. This is no different than you copying and pasting articles from websites.

Some of your responses just DONT work. The wings would have hit the side of the pentagon, but there was no damage to it and they were not seen.
The wings are the weakest parts of the plane. The Pentagon is a fortress. The wings essentially hit the building and exploded. There's plenty of debris proving it. The fact that there were no battle scar from the wings left on the Pentagon is not a valid point, as well as saying there was a lack of debris. Cleanup started immeaditely.
This is essentially like throwing an egg at a Hummer, cleaning it up and saying it never happened because it would have left a dent.


There was no fire or smoke damage to the inside of the pentagon, where the explosion happened.
What the **** are you smoking?
http://post-journal.com/News/images-all/Pentagon.jpg
Okay, so maybe there isn't dramatic fire damage in the upper floors, but the significant charring of the lower floors is enough to collapse the portion of the building that did.

Its inconsistent with the Twin Towers. U gonna call me a dipshit for saying that??
Yes, because there's no information telling me that it was inconsistant with the twin towers. And, as you request, I shall call you 'dipshit,' dipshit.


And the 'generators at the pentagon exploded blah blah blah' Yeah they had generators inside the building that sounds real:confused:
You have no idea what you're talking about, do you?
I have a backup power generator in my basement, you want to tell me the Pentagon doesn't?


Seems u have to answer to everything. Why cant someone have an opinion?
It's my opinion to disprove yours.


I will stress that u have no more idea than anyone else does.
I do, as I know why the buildings collapsed like they did, which you or someone else did not, I know that 757s have bulges on the bottom of the fuelselage, which you did not, and I know that buildings can have power generators, something you clearly don't.


Its just interesting that, FOX's position suddenly changed on the matter, at the scene the reporter said that the plane had no windows. Its on video.
I don't care if it's on tape. This guy is one of several thosand who saw that plane, and I already discussed with you my beef with FOX News and reporters.

Also on video is a woman that said that the plane was 'definately not american airlines'.
If you were to talk with Renee Descartes he would say you do not exist. because it cannot be proved that you are not a figment of imagination or REM. But I'm rather sure you know you do indeed exist.


That kind of stuff makes me wonder, because after the incident FOX suddenly retracted its information about the plane having no windows. WHY would they do that?
Because FOX is made up of a comittee of complete morons. And where did they retract this information from? A show that aired 3 years in the past? Evidence, please...

Because FOX is owned by General Electric. GE is one of the biggest suppliers to Americas military. But why would a fox reporter and another woman captured on video say that it had no windows, and wasnt an airliner jet?? It must have been a mistake esperante, they must have been just dreaming about it. Right?
It must have been a mistake, because several thousand people would be willing to tell you about the windows those planes had.


Seriously, what has america actually acheieved in afghanistan and iraq? Not what they set out to. They wanted to find weapons of mass destruction. They wanted to find Osama. They found neither. Strange, isnt it.
Bush proved to us that he doesn't need to kill of his populants by telling us to invade Iraq for WMDs. According to you Bush would kill thousands of people, blame it on Saddam, and then invade Iraq.


Im pretty sure they found oil though :D :D :D
Damn right they did, I'm not arguing why we went into Iraq, we're arguing why they went into Afghanistan. Iraq, which has more oil, would have been invaded right off the bat if 9/11 was a conspiracy.


Some parts of 911 make sense, and others dont. The pod under the plane is not landing gear, just admit it. Its a cylindrical object, nothing like the landing gear housing. Thats an issue that should be open for discussion. U cant dismiss it saying that it is landing gear. Although some people sleep better at night thinking theres an explanation for all of it. Fine. Do i call them dipshits? No. U call me one...
Fine, I'll tell you now that it's not landing gear. The landing gear, as I just discoverd, folds out from under the wings. But that bulge exists on EVERY 757, and the fact that you don't recognize that is just plain idiotic. It's not open for discussion, it exists on every 757 and thats that. It's not opinion, it's fact.
http://www.tamu.edu/easterwoodairport/images/gaimages/757.jpg
http://www.globalaircraft.org/photos/planephotos/b757_3.jpg
http://ax2.old-cans.com/WTC/Boeing%20757%202.jpg
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/d/d8/250px-Ba.b757-200.g-cpen.750pix.jpg
Go ahead. Tell me that the Boeing 757 doesn't have a bulge.


Theres just heaps of unanswered questions. Thats what makes me think that the whole truth is not being said. Heres something simple for someone to explain to me...

How come all of the witnesses that were near flight 93 (the one that ploughed into the ground) say that there was an unmarked jet tailing it. Once 93 crashed, it circled, and went off. The FBI said that it never existed, and that there were no planes in the area. They stuck with that. Then when people started to go public they said that it was a plane sent to get the co-ordinates of the crash, so emergency teams could get there. They say it was at 3000 feet, although witnesses have said from the biginning that it was very very low. How come the FBI's story changes, and the witnesses dont? The earthquake station nearby picked up a sonic boom at around the same time of a crash. So it proves that a supersonic aircaft was in a 60Km radius. the FBI denied that any aircraft was anywhere near the site, besides flight 93.

How would a witness know about a runaway jet? That's like me looking up into the sky and, upon seeing a plane, yelling, 'That's a runaway!' These are common Pennsylvania folk, not FAA operators.

That one of the unanswered things that makes me wonder about the whole lot. Why shouldnt i have doubts. Am i a dipshit for having them??
Of course there will be unanswered questions, but the simple idea that you bring up incorrect information and parade it around as gospel truth irks me.

[Esperante]

I respect ur opinion esperante, but dont force it. Dont incriminate me for having my own opinion that differs to yours. Its just babyish. U are taking it all too seriously and i find myself wasting my time writing out this post to try and explain my opinion. I shouldnt have to. I shouldnt be called a dipshit or a f***ing idiot. U seem to want to fight about this. I dont. Have some maturity and act like a man. Respect what others say, and if u think its wrong, say it in a nice way. :D :D :D
I'm not calling you a ****ing idiot for purely believing a conspiracy theory, I'm calling you a ****ing idiot because you didn't actually take a look at a 757 before jumping to conclusions about it.
Overall, your argument holds little water. You blame me for blwoing the lot out of proportion and for agrguing, but you just go on and argue the points I brought up. You tell me that I don't respect your opinion because I tried to disprove it, but then go on and tell me that you respect mine but at the same time argue everything I brought up.





Where are the wings, because if they are inside the building like people are saying, then how come the hole in the building was only 16 feet wide?? Its impossible. A university came to the conclusion that the damage was more likely caused by a missile, and definately not a 757.
The hole was not 16 ft. wide. The 16 ft. wide hole was near the interior of the building, in the photo I showed you before.


Another thing:
The pentagon is one of the most secure locations in the states. Its the nerve centre of the military. Every inch is under survailence. So why then, do the FBI tell everyone that the only captured footage was from a single security camera. They showed the footage. The date was wrong, and it DID NOT show the 757. Something else, a gas station nearby had a security camera pointing at the pentagon. It would have been the only private camera that would have recorded the hit. What happened? The FBI confiscated the tape.

Thats the kind of evidence that really makes me wonder.
Oh really? A gov't that was able to pull off such a brilliantly concocted conspiracy plot released a tape with the incorrect date and subject? Good riddance they didn't release all the tapes. After a month or so, people were getting post-traumatic stress disorder after simply seeing videos of the WTC snafu. On top of that, the Pentagon didn't need to release the tapes. Releasing them would yield no benefit to the gov't and rather create another nasty snag.


Tell me someone, WHERE THE HELL DID THE WINGS GO??????
The most widely accepted theory now is that the plane hit the first floor, which would explain everything, like why there wasn't fire damage above. You'll see in this pic that the area where the wings would've hit are charred and the interiors are burned out. The wings exploded once they hit the building.
http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/Sep2001/010914-F-8006R-002.jpg
I'm sure you'll tell me that was impossible because there's no debris around it, but I might as well tackle that now by telling you this is after some cleanup.


Oh yea and something else i found out...
In the LIVE report by FOX news on the twin towers attack, the reporter said that he saw the plane VERY clearly and that it WAS NOT a commercial plane. He said it had blue markings on te front, and that it had no windows. This is coming from a live report on FOX. A reporter wouldnt just make that up. Infront of thousands of people he just couldnt have made it up.
I think a reporter could very well just make something up. Reporters like to sound like they know something other news affiliates don't, which acquires greter ratings. FOX News isn't a utensil for getting information to the people, it's a business.


How can this be explained, seriously how can it??
How can someone explain how someone got the information that 12 miners were alive? How can that happen?



And the fact that the lease owner of no. 7 said on live TV that they decided to 'pull it'. Pull it is a term that is used when doing a controlled explosion in a building. It takes months to prepare for those, working our which beams need to be rigged and all the rest. How could they rig the building, which is on fire by the way, in a few hours?? I think he screwed up when he said 'pull it'.
Firefighters decided to abandon attempts to put out the fire in WTC 7 in the late afternoon, anticipating its collapse. Yes, 'pull it' is also used to say you are giving up.
'Pull it' is also a command of the game 'Bop it.' And, since 'pull it' is also used as such, he MUST have been playing 'Bop it' while the building was on fire.



I dont take all of this as gospel but its very interesting to look at. It seems to all come together.
You must take some of it as gospel if you go to on to say 'Just how can you possibly explain someone doing this?


I just cant explain all of that....
Everything can be explained by logical analyzation, but it's more about if humankind comes to that conclusion.







So ha.

[SlickHolden]

Conspiracy come from the lack of effort, Before bad things happen such as this.
When you have the one of the master minds behind bars you have his lap-top and it has all the info on there plans and that info gets nowhere to stop what has happen on 11sep, People then will start to look in further and deeper for more answers till someone pays for it.
Bush's government ignored most the Warning's as unlikely to happen.

But on the tip rats flying the planes. Does anyone really think these guys could just step into a large plane with only having experience in small planes and pull it off perfect?.
Hey it's like I'm learning to drive a 700HP road car then I'm stepping into a Top Fuel car with 7000HP and first time down the straight I'm going to do 4 sec pass perfect.
Still doesn't mean it is all crap but there are wholes in some of it maybe because so many are still so pissed off. After death you become a very angry person and look for blame it's natural, you can't help but feel angry that a loved one's life was taken like that.

But on trusting a Government wholeheartedly? You can't trust a politicians words, they lie cheat deceive all the time, They really don't have much emotions or feelings, they block most of the bad stuff out of there minds and move on.
When electing you elect on the one who you think might give you the best and not cheat or hurt you personally the most as they are all born liars.


And on another thing, I don't think calling people names will get anyone anywhere as it will just incite more trouble and conflict, Sometimes it's just better to agree to disagree.

[johnnynumfiv]

I'm just curious, did you watch this when it was happening?

[adrenaline]

Esperante, i could pick through and answer each of ur posts, but that would take ages and i dont live in my study:D

basically, you are saying that its all good, im all wrong, blah blah blah. It only takes one peice of evidence to prove that something is going on. I commend you for looking up the bulges on the planes, but the documentary showed much bigger pods underneath, well they looked alot bigger. Anyway, the twin towers incident can be debated upon forever. Some of your debate doesnt really use logic though, like the pathetic exuse for the FOX reporter saying that there were no windows. He said that there was DEFINATELY a blue symbol on the front. He couldnt have mistaked a blue symbol on the front. And he said that live, so its not like he knew what was going on, he just said what he saw. That cant be explained. You cant dismiss him for being 'dumb' or 'stupid'. It makes your arguement look weak.

Another thing. A few people are saying, if they werent the real flights, then where are the passengers? Dont ask me, how the hell would I know?? They could be sitting at the bottom of the atlantic ocean for all i know. I wouldnt expect the richest government in the world to screw up. Then again it could have been the real plane that hit the building, but it draws back to the fact that a fox news reporter said that it wasnt a passenger jet. Do u see the dilemma here? I choose to entertain the possibility that not all is easily explained, and as slick said, do u completely trust your government?? The same government that bombed its OWN ships for an entry into the cold war, and the same government that covered up aspects of the Oklahoma bombing. Do you trust EVERYTHING they say??

What we should be focussing on is the Pentagon. That is the biggest area with things that cant be explained. There is still the question, 'Where did the wings go?' You cannot try to tell me that they dissintegrated, thats just complete Bullsh**!! You would have seen peices on the front lawn atleast! They did not enter the building, how could they have, the hole was too small and there was no damage to the front. So i dont think that we can explain that, right? If u think you can, tell us all but really it seems unlikely that they simply disappeared. You would think that the government would release video of the plane to disporove this WILD theory, but they wont. All they will do is show a few frames of an explosion. There was no plane in it, and there was no wreckage seen. Just a fireball, that all they showed. I havent seen one reasonable explanation on that. Even the date of the video was wrong.

Now for what you said about me.


I tried to disprove it, but then go on and tell me that you respect mine but at the same time argue everything I brought up.

I did say that i respect your opinion, but i did not argue every point that you raised, only the ones that didnt convince me. Thats what your trying to do isnt it, convince me. Im not trying to convince YOU of anything i am simply telling you what i think doesnt make sense. I dont have to look up and research before I post. You can if you want to but i dont have to.

And you say that i am taking it as gospel. You contradicted what i said in a previous post, I SAID I DIDNT TAKE IT AS GOSPEL. Is that hard to understand?? What is wrong with me saying that it doesnt make sense, bacause it doesnt. Face it. The Twin towers issue is very unclear, but the pentagon speaks for itself. You are the one calling this conspiracy wild, when half of your counter evidence is just wild. Like the plane wings decintegrating. Gimme a break. Yea like im going to believe that huge wings just disappear into a building never to be seen again. How about 'I think a reporter could very well just make something up'...What the hell is that. Yea so your telling me that on live TV, there were all these people just making up what they saw?? You say that there are so many people who will say that they saw windows and such, I havent heard any of their stories and I certainly didnt see them on LIVE TV.



Jesus Christ, you posted a vast and unproved conspiracy theory and you don't expect anyone to even try to debunk it? You've got to be kidding me. You even replied to my first attempt at debunking by giving me more things to disprove. In fct, you even told me to answer the questions for you. I did. Don't argue, then get cold feet and blame me for over dramatizing the issue.

What the hell are you on about? Are you dumb??? You are the one that called me a f***ing idiot because of what I posted. Have I called ANYONE that?? NO I havent. Yes, I posted this theory. No, I didnt expect to be called a fu**ing idiot by someone that thinks they know everything. So dont give me that crap of 'you started it'.



but it's more about if humankind comes to that conclusion.

61% of New Yorkers want this matter further investigated.



So then you are, essentially, admitting that you don't read my posts, and that you don't actually make an argument. You just put up a bunch of info and leave it, expect to win.

Who said anything about winning?? This is NO COMPETITION. I will stress that. That post of yours proves that you are taking this like its a competition of who wins. There is NO gold medal for whoever 'wins'. Because I tell you right now, there will be no winner. You are never going to convince everyone on earth that the planes wings disappeared out of thin air, and that the reporter and people around him were 'making it up' and that the flashes that occured before each plane hit the towers were just camera angle or reflection. Because the flash happened in all 5 peices of footage, including a peice of footage that was features IN CNN's documentary. You cant prove to people that the fire fighters were making it up. Seems that your every answer to PEOPLE who saw what happened is that they were MAKING IT UP. I didnt know that so many people just made things up about disasters, on live TV. Are you going to prove all of that by "logical analyzation" as you previously stated? What the hell is logical about those wild exuses?

[johnnynumfiv]

How did your post just get below mine when I posted after you?

[adrenaline]

Magic:D:D

Actually i edited it...


I'm just curious, did you watch this when it was happening?

Huh...watch the towers when it happened?

[my porsche]

61% of New Yorkers want this matter further investigated.

and 67.34543464808% of percentages are made up on the spot

[Sauc3]

Hopefully this might help with some points, it certainly explains where the wings went.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

[SlickHolden]

I'm just curious, did you watch this when it was happening?
Are you talking to me mate?

[Esperante]

Esperante, i could pick through and answer each of ur posts, but that would take ages and i dont live in my study:D

basically, you are saying that its all good, im all wrong, blah blah blah. It only takes one peice of evidence to prove that something is going on. I commend you for looking up the bulges on the planes, but the documentary showed much bigger pods underneath, well they looked alot bigger. Anyway, the twin towers incident can be debated upon forever. Some of your debate doesnt really use logic though, like the pathetic exuse for the FOX reporter saying that there were no windows. He said that there was DEFINATELY a blue symbol on the front. He couldnt have mistaked a blue symbol on the front. And he said that live, so its not like he knew what was going on, he just said what he saw. That cant be explained. You cant dismiss him for being 'dumb' or 'stupid'. It makes your arguement look weak.
I can't?
A few years ago the Bank One Building's, a fair sized high rise in Milwaukee, top floor had started fire. Local affiliates were reporting that there were no casualties, and the building was safely evacuated. Some firefighters were seen on the roof by news helicopters managing the situation, and the most dramatic moment arrived when someone broke a window to get some fresh air. Firefighters quickly got tothe scene, everyone was saved, hurrah. The affiliates were done with their reporting and they went on with their stories.
Interested in more, I switched around CNN, MSNBC and FOX for more info.
The Bank One Building, at the time (now Chase) is the blue glass box to the right. Not apparent at this angle, there are large signs on the East and West sides of the roof that said BANK ONE. The neigbouring building, Faison is nearly twice the height.
http://img356.imageshack.us/img356/2953/img84440xn.jpg
FOX was running a segment on the fire that ran something like this:
A shot from one of the affiliate's helicopters was shown, which featured Faison in the pan. The BANK ONE sign was clearly centered, and the Faison dwarfed it. Three firefighters were on the roof.
Anchor:'In Milwaukee the US Bank Building, tallest in the city, caught fire and sent thousands of people in the downtown area scrambling for safety. Reports came in earlier of firefighters on the roof, but we have yet to confirm this. We'll keep you updated.'
Keep in mind this is being said while a video clip of the building and surrounding area is being aired.
In reality, only the river frontage and streets surrounding the building were shut down, no one was hurt, and no one outside the Bank One building evacuated. FOX News has some of the biggest morons working for them that I could bash my head in. And if you want to credit a journalist who just happens to have a complete knowledge of aircraft suddenly, who just coincidentally works for the same news corporation that brings us faulty information and Bill O'Reilly, fine.

Another thing. A few people are saying, if they werent the real flights, then where are the passengers? Dont ask me, how the hell would I know?? They could be sitting at the bottom of the atlantic ocean for all i know.
Well, that's a rather large hole in your argument, isn't it?

I wouldnt expect the richest government in the world to screw up.
Yes you would, otherwise you wouldn't be aware of such a conspiracy.

Then again it could have been the real plane that hit the building, but it draws back to the fact that a fox news reporter said that it wasnt a passenger jet. Do u see the dilemma here? I choose to entertain the possibility that not all is easily explained, and as slick said, do u completely trust your government?? The same government that bombed its OWN ships for an entry into the cold war, and the same government that covered up aspects of the Oklahoma bombing. Do you trust EVERYTHING they say??
Hell no, I told you that earlier. But this argument doesn't have its roots in trust.


What we should be focussing on is the Pentagon. That is the biggest area with things that cant be explained. There is still the question, 'Where did the wings go?' You cannot try to tell me that they dissintegrated, thats just complete Bullsh**!! You would have seen peices on the front lawn atleast! They did not enter the building, how could they have, the hole was too small and there was no damage to the front. So i dont think that we can explain that, right? If u think you can, tell us all but really it seems unlikely that they simply disappeared. You would think that the government would release video of the plane to disporove this WILD theory, but they wont. All they will do is show a few frames of an explosion. There was no plane in it, and there was no wreckage seen. Just a fireball, that all they showed. I havent seen one reasonable explanation on that. Even the date of the video was wrong.
I gave you my personal explanation of this about three or four times. You'll notice I never said they simply disintigrated.


And you say that i am taking it as gospel. You contradicted what i said in a previous post, I SAID I DIDNT TAKE IT AS GOSPEL. Is that hard to understand?? What is wrong with me saying that it doesnt make sense, bacause it doesnt.
Some parts of the argument you just couldn't let go of. I first gave you evidence of the bulge in 757s, and you still didn't believe me, to the point where you were yelling along the likes of 'THEY'RE NOT ON 757S, OK?" I'm not saying you take the entire theory to heart, but there are definitely bits and pieces you do or did take as gospel truth.


Face it. The Twin towers issue is very unclear, but the pentagon speaks for itself.
What? I think that was just a mis-type, as the WTC collapse was very straightforward. The only things that complicate the Pentagon is its irregular, fortress like construction.

You are the one calling this conspiracy wild, when half of your counter evidence is just wild. Like the plane wings decintegrating. Gimme a break. Yea like im going to believe that huge wings just disappear into a building never to be seen again.
I never said they disintigrated. I said they exploded, and were cleaned up. I don't think you're aware of where exactly the plane hit. The plane hit on the lower floors, that's why there is minimal damage to the upper ones.

How about 'I think a reporter could very well just make something up'...What the hell is that. Yea so your telling me that on live TV, there were all these people just making up what they saw?? You say that there are so many people who will say that they saw windows and such, I havent heard any of their stories and I certainly didnt see them on LIVE TV.
I suggested people making up things as an option. I gave you several to choose from, but you choose to point out one. People BSing us isn't uncommon, just as you told me to not trust the gov't.


What the hell are you on about? Are you dumb??? You are the one that called me a f***ing idiot because of what I posted. Have I called ANYONE that?? NO I havent. Yes, I posted this theory. No, I didnt expect to be called a fu**ing idiot by someone that thinks they know everything. So dont give me that crap of 'you started it'.
I called you a ****ing idiot for details concerning the 757, which you clearly knew nothing about. You may be confusing me with someone else, also, as you've been seeming to reference me as to calling you dipshit or something of the like, which I'm sure I have not. Anyway, I called you a ****ing idiot because you did no research whatsoever on the structure of 757s and then told us that you were positive no bodywork like a bulge ever existed on any 757 ever. That's why I called you a ****ing idiot. If I said your usename was not ADRENALINE, and I saw a documentary that proved it, you'd think the same.


61% of New Yorkers want this matter further investigated.
Of course they want it investigated, but just because they want it investigated doesn't mean their looking for a gov't conspiracy. The vast majourity of that 61% are looking for things that they hope will be found in the Middle East, with Al Qaeda and Bin Laden.


Who said anything about winning?? This is NO COMPETITION. I will stress that. That post of yours proves that you are taking this like its a competition of who wins. There is NO gold medal for whoever 'wins'. Because I tell you right now, there will be no winner.
It was a stupid use of vocabulary on behalf, and I apologize for that. 'Winning' is certainly not the matter, but you parading over to these boards expecting nobody challenging the matters you raise is naive.

You are never going to convince everyone on earth that the planes wings disappeared out of thin air,
I never said they did.

and that the reporter and people around him were 'making it up'
Because human error is unprovable, I suppose.

and that the flashes that occured before each plane hit the towers were just camera angle or reflection. Because the flash happened in all 5 peices of footage, including a peice of footage that was features IN CNN's documentary.
Just as CNN can't prove that they were explosives. You made clear in the beginning of this thread that everything this documentary pointed out was airtight.

[Esperante]

You cant prove to people that the fire fighters were making it up. Seems that your every answer to PEOPLE who saw what happened is that they were MAKING IT UP.
I can in the firefighters case. The story of the firefighters came up when the firefighters were in the lobbies. They heard the explosions while in the lobbies. There is a ceiling above them. They cannot see how far up the explosion is, as there is a ceiling in the way.

I didnt know that so many people just made things up about disasters, on live TV. Are you going to prove all of that by "logical analyzation" as you previously stated? What the hell is logical about those wild exuses?
'Wild excuses?' Every single possibility I have given you has happened numerous times throughout history and not a single one is remotely ridiculous. You want a ridiculous excuse? YOU hired the terrorists to destroy the WTC and hit the Pentagon. There was a ton of documents suggesting this, but the government deleted them all. Sorry, I can't show them to you.

[SlickHolden]

Dam no one can say you just post spam:D When you post it's one big mother fu^&#r of a post, It takes 2:D

[Esperante]

Dam no one can say you just post spam:D When you post it's one big mother fu^&#r of a post, It takes 2:D
I've already twice filled up the 1000 charachter maximum. :D

[F1_Master]

"Where did the wings go?"

Are you THAT dense!?
Read the articles Fleet posted. They explain it all!


Or better yet, here!
http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/Sep2001/010914-F-8006R-002.jpg
See, the black marks on the sides of the hole (Next to the flag and the larger one on the left)? That's were the wings and engines hit. When the engines hit, they exploded and blew the wings into extremely little parts.


If you still don't understand, go back to school and learn about some d*mn chemistry.

[SlickHolden]

"Where did the wings go?"
.
Ok i got hungy and eat them:D

[F1_Master]

Ok i got hungy and eat them:D
You must have had a big appatite....:eek:

[my porsche]

eh only half mine, i had six 3" diameter chocolate cookies with milk for snack then two big seafood enchiladas and another cookie, still not overly full

[ZeTurbo]

you live in Canada, how would you know
Your american, go have big mac continue ignoring that there is a civilised world outside the american borders...you do know what the world is right?

[my porsche]

Your american, go have big mac continue ignoring that there is a civilised world outside the american borders...you do know what the world is right?
eh? whats that? i cant hear you over your bong water and the mountie's horse's galloping, eh. go get some free health care.


only kidding mate, see what stereotypes do?

[Rockefella]

The lock is close to entering, but hasn't taken off it's shoes yet. Either get back to civilized debate, or this thread is done.

[my porsche]

read what i wrote in white :p im only having a bit of fun

[ZeTurbo]

"Where did the wings go?"

Are you THAT dense!?
Read the articles Fleet posted. They explain it all!


Or better yet, here!
http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/Sep2001/010914-F-8006R-002.jpg
See, the black marks on the sides of the hole (Next to the flag and the larger one on the left)? That's were the wings and engines hit. When the engines hit, they exploded and blew the wings into extremely little parts.


If you still don't understand, go back to school and learn about some d*mn chemistry.


DUDE! you are the one that needs some chemisrty lessons!!!
If you were not aware of this, wings and engines anre made of metal.No matter how violent the explosion was, the wings would not be desintegrated to infenitely many pieces like you say. EVEN if it was That violent the metal would melt, not desintegrate, its not paper, its not wood, its METAL!!!!!
further more, Explosion occurs due to collision, that means that the wings and engines must HIT THE GODDAMN BUILDING IN ORDER TO EXPLODE!!

And An explosion Big enough to completely melt the wings wuld blow the pentagon of the chart.

WEAK!!

[Rockefella]

read what i wrote in white :p im only having a bit of fun
I know you are, but this thread is going down the drain slowly. :o

[ZeTurbo]

eh? whats that? i cant hear you over your bong water and the mountie's horse's galloping, eh. go get some free health care.


only kidding mate, see what stereotypes do?
I was only giving this guy a taste of his own medicine.

I know not all americans are like that, MOST of them are actually intelligent and interesting people.

just trying to get apoint across, I apologise if i offended any of you guys, but stuff like that really ticks me off. Not the making fun of canadiens ( im not even one) but steretyping really really tiks me off.

[Rockefella]

I was only giving this guy a taste of his own medicine.

I know not all americans are like that, MOST of them are actually intelligent and interesting people.

just trying to get apoint across, I apologise if i offended any of you guys, but stuff like that really ticks me off. Not the making fun of canadiens ( im not even one) but steretyping really really tiks me off.
Sadly I don't fall into either part of that category. :(

[SlickHolden]

You must have had a big appatite....:eek:
I'm a big fella:D

[my porsche]

I was only giving this guy a taste of his own medicine.

I know not all americans are like that, MOST of them are actually intelligent and interesting people.

just trying to get apoint across, I apologise if i offended any of you guys, but stuff like that really ticks me off. Not the making fun of canadiens ( im not even one) but steretyping really really tiks me off.
yeah hehe most of us (even those of us from Texas! surprise surprise!) are intelligent, its just the ones that somehow make the news that are the jackasses

[Rockefella]

yeah hehe most of us (even those of us from Texas! surprise surprise!) are intelligent, its just the ones that somehow make the news that are the jackasses
How bout 'dem Longhorns.

[ZeTurbo]

Sadly I don't fall into either part of that category. :(
I dont know you very well, I only read your posts after all, but seem like an interesting fella.
You do like cars, that makes you interesting to talk to.

sorry for the inteligencce part. Its like sports, some have it...some dont...

[Rockefella]

I dont know you very well, I only read your posts after all, but seem like an interesting fella.
You do like cars, that makes you interesting to talk to.

sorry for the inteligencce part. Its like sports, some have it...some dont...
I was being sarcastic, I'm the most intelligent and interesting person in the world, or close to it.

[my porsche]

How bout 'dem Longhorns.
im more of an Aggie myself, but I'll ALWAYS take a Texas team over the University of Spoiled Children :D

[ZeTurbo]

yeah hehe most of us (even those of us from Texas! surprise surprise!) are intelligent, its just the ones that somehow make the news that are the jackasses
Mass media shows what the people want to see.

They dont want to hear a smart guy comenting on how the war has its pros and cons. Tey want some dumb ass that will say " LETS KICK TOSE SOBs ASSES LIKE WE DID ID THE GULF WAR, **** SADAM, WE WILL **** HIM UP"

[ZeTurbo]

I was being sarcastic, I'm the most intelligent and interesting person in the world, or close to it.
not quite at my level yet heh?

[adrenaline]

Yes you would, otherwise you wouldn't be aware of such a conspiracy.

I wouldn’t “EXPECT”


Well, that's a rather large hole in your argument, isn't it?

Well if I did know where they were then this wouldn’t be a conspiracy THEORY, it would be a FACTUAL CONSPIRACY


I gave you my personal explanation of this about three or four times. You'll notice I never said they simply disintigrated.

Well that’s the general vibe that I’m getting, and I don’t usually read all of ur posts…theyre pretty huge…ill have to have a look at ur explanation….

[/quote] Some parts of the argument you just couldn't let go of. I first gave you evidence of the bulge in 757s, and you still didn't believe me, to the point where you were yelling along the likes of 'THEY'RE NOT ON 757S, OK?" I'm not saying you take the entire theory to heart, but there are definitely bits and pieces you do or did take as gospel truth.[/quote]

There is though, a considerable size bulge in the photographs, bigger than that. I don’t take any of this entire thread as gospel because there are 2 opposing arguments…its difficult to draw a straight conclusion…


What? I think that was just a mis-type, as the WTC collapse was very straightforward. The only things that complicate the Pentagon is its irregular, fortress like construction.

What I mean is the fact that there is no footage of the plane hitting, the wings haven’t turned up, and I know that there have been reports filed, but I don’t believe some of them…the official building performance report was clearly a sham. It had in it that there was a hole in the building that was nearly the width of the plane!!!


I never said they disintigrated. I said they exploded, and were cleaned up. I don't think you're aware of where exactly the plane hit. The plane hit on the lower floors, that's why there is minimal damage to the upper ones.

The tail of the aircraft, however, would have reached the top floors assuming that the plane hit the bottom floors. And this comes back to the fact that there were not any knocked over poles. And the whole clean up thing is BS. They were recording TV live there and there were no wings on the lawn.


I suggested people making up things as an option. I gave you several to choose from, but you choose to point out one. People BSing us isn't uncommon, just as you told me to not trust the gov't.

The government has an agenda though, New Yorkers don’t. What were the other options?


I called you a ****ing idiot for details concerning the 757, which you clearly knew nothing about. You may be confusing me with someone else, also, as you've been seeming to reference me as to calling you dipshit or something of the like, which I'm sure I have not. Anyway, I called you a ****ing idiot because you did no research whatsoever on the structure of 757s and then told us that you were positive no bodywork like a bulge ever existed on any 757 ever. That's why I called you a ****ing idiot. If I said your usename was not ADRENALINE, and I saw a documentary that proved it, you'd think the same.

That’s just stupid. You called me a f***ing idiot nevertheless. (My porche called me a dipshitL..I think he was following suit) I don’t think I have to do research to post something. And I thought that this forum was quite civilisedL And with the bulge I am definitely, definitely not saying that you are right. The bulge in the footage is A LOT bigger than that tiny mosquito bite sized one ur talking about. U seem to be saying that I said nothing ever existed ever blah blah blah can u quote me cos I don’t wanna go back and re-read what I wrote. And it also goes back to my source, 911 in plane site. So technically I did research. The fact that it contradicted what you thought annoyed you, but no reason to go personal. U should never go personal on someone like that….


Of course they want it investigated, but just because they want it investigated doesn't mean their looking for a gov't conspiracy. The vast majourity of that 61% are looking for things that they hope will be found in the Middle East, with Al Qaeda and Bin Laden.

If they want it investigated then it means that they are not happy with the story that the Govt gave to them. Ofcourse it means that some think it may be a conspiracy. Some might not, but they are the facts and you cant refute them without running ur own survey :D


It was a stupid use of vocabulary on behalf, and I apologize for that. 'Winning' is certainly not the matter, but you parading over to these boards expecting nobody challenging the matters you raise is naive.

Can you quote me in all my pride and glory??


I never said they did.

Well I haven’t seen any great explanations on where they have gone. Even the website that someone linked to is bogus. It said that the folded into the interior of the plane. But if they did it would be a result of direct contact with the front of the building and there is no sign of that. Well I haven’t seen any but Im open to evidence…


Because human error is unprovable, I suppose.

So whats the difference between both of our explanations here? U say that some said they saw windows. I said the opposite and Im backed up by live TV. I don’t think that its possible that all of those people were so wrong, even a reporter lol and u cant say the reporter was wrong, because think about it, He didn’t know what was going on. All he could do is say what he saw. It was only a few minutes after the attack. He wouldn’t make something up, or mistake a blue symbol on the front of the plane. Neither would the other hundreds of people caught on tv.


Just as CNN can't prove that they were explosives. You made clear in the beginning of this thread that everything this documentary pointed out was airtight.[quote]

Huh? Im saying it was in a CNN documentary so u cant say that it was digitally inserted or just a bad angle, because it happened at every available angle.

[quote] I can in the firefighters case. The story of the firefighters came up when the firefighters were in the lobbies. They heard the explosions while in the lobbies. There is a ceiling above them. They cannot see how far up the explosion is, as there is a ceiling in the way.[quote]

They said that they saw it, they were outside the building, and a lot more than one bacth of firefighters said that it, it was people, and then there was the fact that the lease holder screwed up and said ‘PULL IT’ That term is only used during a controlled demolition.

[quote] 'Wild excuses?' Every single possibility I have given you has happened numerous times throughout history and not a single one is remotely ridiculous. You want a ridiculous excuse? YOU hired the terrorists to destroy the WTC and hit the Pentagon. There was a ton of documents suggesting this, but the government deleted them all. Sorry, I can't show them to you.

So u saying that just about everyone that appeared on TV live lied, The ‘PULL IT’ comment. I mean it doesn’t seem possible that SO MANY people would lie, and this happened across a number of TV stations.

Something else ive found out is very interesting. Another guy…forgot his name…was releasing a documentary that supposedly proved it to be a conspiracy. Guess what!! He committed SUICIDE. Only weeks before publishing!!!... How convenient!!!

Also, when MSNBC requested that they interview the firefighters that heard the explosions that sounded very much controlled, a week before the schedules interview every one of the firefighters went into EARLY RETIREMENT and were indefinitely unavailable for interview. Oh how convenient!!!

This argument is really getting annoying…lol its turning into a war in itself. We aren’t going to end up perfectly agreeing what happed, so why argue about it? You can keep going if u want to, but im sick of replying. There is evidence that the government can prove wrong. It goes both ways. If a plane acyually hit the pentagon, then WHY haven’t they showed us footage. They seem to have a nice little shot of the explosion, but the plane was missing. And the bulge. Yes, the bulge. Would a huge campaign use the bulge as evidence if it was so clear that it’s a normal part of the plane. Ill attatch a picture to give u an idea of the kind of bulge that ive been talking about….anyhow its that kinda stuff that really makes me wonder and I think u have to admit that the argument is not completely clear cut. There are 2 sides and both have their evidence. If the whole thing just happened the way the Govt said it did then why is there all of this controversy? Why did the FBI change their story about the unmarked plane that was tailing flight 93 numerous times? Really, some makes sense, but the scary part is that there is a lot that just doesn’t at this point. Maybe it will be straightened out in the future, but for now, u cant call too much fact. :confused: :confused: :confused:

[my porsche]

Mass media shows what the people want to see.

They dont want to hear a smart guy comenting on how the war has its pros and cons. Tey want some dumb ass that will say " LETS KICK TOSE SOBs ASSES LIKE WE DID ID THE GULF WAR, **** SADAM, WE WILL **** HIM UP"
controversy sells :rolleyes:

[my porsche]

I don’t usually read all of ur posts…theyre pretty huge…
therein lies the problem i would assume

[adrenaline]

It supports what i said...i dont argue with every one of his points...just the bits that im not convinced about...and not much right now will convince me about the wings..as if the folded and went inside.:D:D:D if u look at the cross section, nothing, like computer monitors and office equipment, is damaged...none lol... If wings went throught there i would expect some damage!!!

[PerfAdv]

Maybe completely unrelated but hoping someone could shed some light on a bumper sticker I saw recently. It read, "on Earth as it is in Texas". It's a play off of "on Earth as it is in Heaven." What's so special about Texas that it replaced heaven in the minds of Texans?

[my porsche]

Maybe completely unrelated but hoping someone could shed some light on a bumper sticker I saw recently. It read, "on Earth as it is in Texas". It's a play off of "on Earth as it is in Heaven." What's so special about Texas that it replaced heaven in the minds of Texans?
for one it hasnt, i think that was a satirical sticker poking fun at Bush's state and his religious connections

Texas is quite a lovely state, we have several climates, almost every common freshwater and saltwater fish, game animals, luch forrests, lakes, rivers, everything, huge cities, small towns, country, anything you could find in the US basically, exclusding a few thigns

[F1_Master]

further more, Explosion occurs due to collision, that means that the wings and engines must HIT THE GODDAMN BUILDING IN ORDER TO EXPLODE!!

And An explosion Big enough to completely melt the wings wuld blow the pentagon of the chart.

WEAK!!
And what was it the wings and engine hit again?

The wings and engines did not stay intact. When those wings hit the Pentagon, they tore apart. They may have not completely blew up, but they did not stay together. Those wings blew apart from the engines' explosions.
When the pics were taken, it's most likely the wings were taken away.

[F1_Master]

It supports what i said...i dont argue with every one of his points...just the bits that im not convinced about...and not much right now will convince me about the wings..as if the folded and went inside.:D:D:D if u look at the cross section, nothing, like computer monitors and office equipment, is damaged...none lol... If wings went throught there i would expect some damage!!!
Do you know how strong the Pentagon's "rings" are compared to airline wings?

Like said before, the wings weren't made to go head to head against the material the Pentagon has.

[adrenaline]

Yea they werent made to disappear either. the only theory on where they went is: "They folded into the interior..."...OK enough said. They are gone. Ive seen shots that were taken live..there were no wings there!!!!:D:D

Oh yea and for all those with broadband or equivalent, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6194109588627538638&q=911+conspiracy

Thats from the documentary i saw...as u will see u cant really find holes in their arguement...

[Pando]

Bush is too stupid to plan 9/11. He probably took advantge of 9/11 and bad information to invade Iraq
I think this post could actually end the debate. I assume no one really thinks Bush is smart enough to plan something like this? Agreed?

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Bush? Absolutely not.

His war-mongering, hidden-linked Vice President? Most Definately.

[Pando]

I know, presidents are usually just puppets anyway... I just thought we could find something everyone would agree on, maybe even Fleet.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

No, Fleet wouldn't agree.....It points out the inheirant lack of intelligence in Curious George, which is not allowed :p

But an accord has been reached; Bush is not intelligent enough to plan in what order to tie his shoes, let alone such an elaborate deception.

[my porsche]

Yea they werent made to disappear either. the only theory on where they went is: "They folded into the interior..."...OK enough said. They are gone. Ive seen shots that were taken live..there were no wings there!!!!:D:D

Oh yea and for all those with broadband or equivalent, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6194109588627538638&q=911+conspiracy

Thats from the documentary i saw...as u will see u cant really find holes in their arguement...
what you just posted seems to be on Esperabntes side....?

it says "i think it is safe to assume until that the rising plume is a result of WTC tower 2"

and also, could the supposed explosive NOT be one planted by the same terrorists to ensure that the building went down? sounds alot more logical to me than GW planting a bomb...

[my porsche]

But an accord has been reached; Bush is not intelligent enough to plan in what order to tie his shoes, let alone such an elaborate deception.
i dont know why people think this? i think alot of it has to do with his accent, people automatically want to deduct 100 iq points when they here a southern accent, when thats not the case, right after elections last year there was something i saw on the news showing GW had better grades and test scores in college than John Kerry did, and i think they both went to the saem college

[johnnynumfiv]

Huh...watch the towers when it happened?
Yea and the pentagon converage on 9/11.
If you did, you would know that the reporters said that the first plane that went into the towers was a cessna type aircraft, so we should believe that because it was on live tv?

[my porsche]

Yea and the pentagon converage on 9/11.
If you did, you would know that the reporters said that the first plane that went into the towers was a cessna type aircraft, so we should believe that because it was on live tv?
no of course not, it was doctored footage run simultaneously on all networks, bush made the footage in his secret evil lair

[Matra et Alpine]

i dont know why people think this? i think alot of it has to do with his accent, people automatically want to deduct 100 iq points when they here a southern accent
Not all - and I dont' know of anyone who does !!!!

GW had better grades and test scores in college than John Kerry did, and i think they both went to the saem college
IIRC it was actually that they were very close in grades :D But I'm sure FOX will ahve made a fractional point difference a whole huge thing when in reality a few points mean NOTHING.
So all it really said was Kerry and Bush were on a par ( IIRC it was 77 versus 76 college )

BUT, GWB's problem is away from something he can prep for and possibly "bone up" on then he comes over easily confused, struggling to use English language and uncertain/clumsy in what to do.

There is a BIG difference between exam results and smarts :D

Which makes the better statesman ? Someone who can work all teh numbers behind the scenes or one who can think on their feet ? Preferably someone capable of both !!!

[Esperante]

I wouldn’t “EXPECT”
Well, in the passage you said you wouldn't expect the gov't to fail, but if the gov't hadn't failed you wouldn't be aware there was a conspiracy.

Well that’s the general vibe that I’m getting, and I don’t usually read all of ur posts…theyre pretty huge…ill have to have a look at ur explanation….
Please do. It's rather irritating when you bring up something I covered multiple times or answered before.



Some parts of the argument you just couldn't let go of. I first gave you evidence of the bulge in 757s, and you still didn't believe me, to the point where you were yelling along the likes of 'THEY'RE NOT ON 757S, OK?" I'm not saying you take the entire theory to heart, but there are definitely bits and pieces you do or did take as gospel truth.

There is though, a considerable size bulge in the photographs, bigger than that. I don’t take any of this entire thread as gospel because there are 2 opposing arguments…its difficult to draw a straight conclusion…
http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/3461/767tanker19vq.jpg
This is a photograph of a Boeing 767 refueling plane, exctly the one you believe slammed into the WTC, and doesn't have much of a bulge. Now please take into account that in this photo, the bulge isn't apparent, yet as you are rather sure it exists and is larger than those found on 757s. According to this photo, however, I would confidently say that the bulge on a 767 is significantly smaller than that of 757 or even non-existant.

What I mean is the fact that there is no footage of the plane hitting, the wings haven’t turned up, and I know that there have been reports filed, but I don’t believe some of them…the official building performance report was clearly a sham. It had in it that there was a hole in the building that was nearly the width of the plane!!!
Width of the fuelselage or width of the wingspan?



The tail of the aircraft, however, would have reached the top floors assuming that the plane hit the bottom floors. And this comes back to the fact that there were not any knocked over poles. And the whole clean up thing is BS. They were recording TV live there and there were no wings on the lawn.
There really weren't any poles in the immeadite lawn in front of this section of the building, though. It was a LAWN.



The government has an agenda though, New Yorkers don’t. What were the other options?
The other majour option was that the people telling us what they thought they saw, but didn't see very well. It might be difficult looking up Beaver St, with 600 ft skyscrapers to either side of you, seeing a plane moving at 400 mph cross the limited line of sight in less than a half of a second, and then determining that it didn't have windows, was not a passenger plane, and thus wasn't an American Airlines jet. The only place where civilians could get a clear view of the plane would be from:
A:)Battery Park, but you wouldn't see the sides. One of the videos of the impacting plane was shot from Battery Park, and the belly of the plane is what faces the viewer.
B:)The Hudson River. But tourist boats wouldn't be many at 8:00 in the morning on a business day, and tugs and barge operators don't look out at that kind of thing. The more valid one would be pedestrians on the Staten Island Ferry.
C:)New Jersey. But you'd be too far away to destermine the colouring and windows on the plane.
D:)Brooklyn. Same as New Jersey.
E:)Greewich Village, SoHo, or Chelsea, but you wouldn't get a good view because the World Trade Centre would've blocked it. The planes did not approach from the North.
or
F:)A highrise in the financial district. This is the only place one could have gotten a clear view of the planes, but it's not that people would be watching for them to hit, and they probably wouldn't make their way to the street to see it and be interviewed by reporters, seeing as they have such a great view from their office, along with, likely, cable news coverage.



That’s just stupid. You called me a f***ing idiot nevertheless. (My porche called me a dipshitL..I think he was following suit) I don’t think I have to do research to post something. And I thought that this forum was quite civilisedL And with the bulge I am definitely, definitely not saying that you are right. The bulge in the footage is A LOT bigger than that tiny mosquito bite sized one ur talking about. U seem to be saying that I said nothing ever existed ever blah blah blah can u quote me cos I don’t wanna go back and re-read what I wrote. And it also goes back to my source, 911 in plane site. So technically I did research. The fact that it contradicted what you thought annoyed you, but no reason to go personal. U should never go personal on someone like that….
It's really hard for me to call you a****ing idiot again. Of course you have to have done some research, be it years ago or seconds ago, to say that you KNOW 757s have no bulge and you KNOW two 767 tankers hit the WTC. Otherwise you're just BSing us, and you said that average people don't just BS.

If they want it investigated then it means that they are not happy with the story that the Govt gave to them. Ofcourse it means that some think it may be a conspiracy. Some might not, but they are the facts and you cant refute them without running ur own survey :D
I think you need to delve into how many people voted on this.
I'm not even sure if 61% of New Yorkers voted for the presidential race, so for 61% of New Yorkers to vote for investigation means that there was a 100% turnout. The 61% statistic is 61% of the people that voted, which could be 100 people or could be 10000 people. Seeing as New York is a city of 15 million, I would expect probably a quarter of that to vote on this issue. I could be drastically wrong, but that is my estimate. That means that 61% of 5 million people just want answers to 9/11, not necessarily meaning 3 million people want the gov't to come out and declare the whole thing as a conspiracy.


Can you quote me in all my pride and glory??
You said earlier that you were simply presenting the facts and not looking for a debate, but for you to present such facts and not expect a debate is ridiculously naive.



Well I haven’t seen any great explanations on where they have gone. Even the website that someone linked to is bogus. It said that the folded into the interior of the plane. But if they did it would be a result of direct contact with the front of the building and there is no sign of that. Well I haven’t seen any but Im open to evidence…
I haven't thought of that one, but it makes complete sense. With weak aluminum wings filled with gasoline moving at 400 mph and hitting a building that sports 36 inch thick steel reinforced stone walls at the base I don't see where else the wings could go. Actually, that makes complete sense to me. It wouldn't if the plane were moving at 100 mph, as then the wings would just explode and leave debris everywhere, but at 400 mph the wings inertia keeps the debris going forward and has no place else to go expect the interior of the building via the hole the fuelselage just made.

So whats the difference between both of our explanations here? U say that some said they saw windows. I said the opposite and Im backed up by live TV. I don’t think that its possible that all of those people were so wrong, even a reporter lol and u cant say the reporter was wrong, because think about it, He didn’t know what was going on. All he could do is say what he saw. It was only a few minutes after the attack. He wouldn’t make something up, or mistake a blue symbol on the front of the plane. Neither would the other hundreds of people caught on tv.
So, a reporter doesn't know that two planes just slammed into the two tallest buildings world (besides the Sears Tower, and, as some believe, the Petronas), but he is able to say confidantly that it wasn't an American Airlines jet and it didn't have windows? ANd hundreds of other people were saying the same? So tell me, these people were looking straight up and not running for cover and not hesitating at the moment they exploded and killed thousands of people in a split second? I don't know about you, but if I just saw two of the largest buildings in the world go up in flames via two jets I wouldn't be paying much attention to if the planes had windows. In fact, there would be so much emotion coming from me that I wouldn't be able to notice if the planes had windows if I wanted to.


Just as CNN can't prove that they were explosives. You made clear in the beginning of this thread that everything this documentary pointed out was airtight.

Huh? Im saying it was in a CNN documentary so u cant say that it was digitally inserted or just a bad angle, because it happened at every available angle.
Show me all five.

[Esperante]

I can in the firefighters case. The story of the firefighters came up when the firefighters were in the lobbies. They heard the explosions while in the lobbies. There is a ceiling above them. They cannot see how far up the explosion is, as there is a ceiling in the way.

They said that they saw it, they were outside the building, and a lot more than one bacth of firefighters said that it, it was people, and then there was the fact that the lease holder screwed up and said ‘PULL IT’ That term is only used during a controlled demolition.
In the case of the firefighters, I think this is simply a myth. Many things lead me to believe this. For one, there is conflicting information. I have now heard that the firefighters were inside the lobby when bomb went off, inside floors 10-15 when a bomb went off, and in the plaza when the bomb went off. For another, several other myths arose surrounding firefighters after 9/11, like a firefighter riding the roof down as the building collapsed. This might even be propoganda set by the conspiracy believers to hook more people. There's too many variables in this story that I can't be led to believe any account ever happened.
And 'pull it,' or even a mispronounced 'pull out' can't mean to abandon efforst of stopping the fire because of the hazard that a 50 storey building could collapse? That means that all people who want to pull out of Iraq want to demolish the entire state, because the term isn't used anywhere else.

So u saying that just about everyone that appeared on TV live lied, The ‘PULL IT’ comment. I mean it doesn’t seem possible that SO MANY people would lie, and this happened across a number of TV stations.
15 million people live in New York City, and only 1/15 of that population is still 1 million people, which is double the population of Boston. So a lot can simultaneously be a little, and I still don't think that as many people as you say did ran out to reporters and declared 'I'M 100% SURE THAT A NON AMERICAN AIRLINES PASSENGER JET WITHOUT WINDOWS SLAMMED INTO THE WORLD TRADE CENTER IN THE SPLIT SECOND I SAW IT.'

Something else ive found out is very interesting. Another guy…forgot his name…was releasing a documentary that supposedly proved it to be a conspiracy. Guess what!! He committed SUICIDE. Only weeks before publishing!!!... How convenient!!!
I also saw a documentary that proves we are all dead, but it's not on TV or DVD anymore, and the creator died. Therfore, it's the gov't's fault!


Also, when MSNBC requested that they interview the firefighters that heard the explosions that sounded very much controlled, a week before the schedules interview every one of the firefighters went into EARLY RETIREMENT and were indefinitely unavailable for interview. Oh how convenient!!!
Hell, if I was a firefighter who saw people die daily and then see 5,000 people die in 2 hours, the shit would be scared out of me, and I don't think I'd hesitate to retire early and settle down.


This argument is really getting annoying…lol its turning into a war in itself. We aren’t going to end up perfectly agreeing what happed, so why argue about it? You can keep going if u want to, but im sick of replying. There is evidence that the government can prove wrong. It goes both ways. If a plane acyually hit the pentagon, then WHY haven’t they showed us footage. They seem to have a nice little shot of the explosion, but the plane was missing. And the bulge. Yes, the bulge. Would a huge campaign use the bulge as evidence if it was so clear that it’s a normal part of the plane. Ill attatch a picture to give u an idea of the kind of bulge that ive been talking about….anyhow its that kinda stuff that really makes me wonder and I think u have to admit that the argument is not completely clear cut. There are 2 sides and both have their evidence. If the whole thing just happened the way the Govt said it did then why is there all of this controversy? Why did the FBI change their story about the unmarked plane that was tailing flight 93 numerous times? Really, some makes sense, but the scary part is that there is a lot that just doesn’t at this point. Maybe it will be straightened out in the future, but for now, u cant call too much fact. :confused: :confused: :confused:
'Blah blah blah.'




The gov't could've carried out a conspiracy, yes, absolutely, but this is how they would've done it.

They would NOT have fired a cruise missile at their own base. They would hit it with something that doesn't cause a ton of damage but creates a dramatic scene. A small plane, like you argued earlier, would not be used because it would, essentially, boune off the Pentagon. Bingo! They would've decided to use an airliner.
They would NOT have placed explosives in the World Trade Centers if they had two jet filled airliners crashing into them anyway. They know that the explosives used ten years before failed to bring them down.
They would've had every camera availible trained at the Pentagon's hit spot, in order to release tons of footage that tore at the heart of each American.
They would NOT have used a tanker, as that would be overkill with an explosives ridden building, as you speculated. If they used that or a cargo plane they would have to make an excuse as to how Al Qaeda got such planes and how they got them to the United States loaded with fuel. If they decided to pass them as real airline flights, the real counterparts and occupants would have to be disposed of, which would be unecessary if you simply hijack it.
The ONLY way such a conspiracy could've happened is if gov't agents hijacked the planes and did nothing different the supposed Al Qaeda freedom fighters did. That is all.

[RazaBlade]

Which makes the better statesman ? Someone who can work all teh numbers behind the scenes or one who can think on their feet ? Preferably someone capable of both !!!

Completely agree, but the lack of thinking on your feet is more worrying, as its what loses the confidence in the people!! You can get a team to do the behind the scenes number crunching if youre bad at that, the public wont see you not having a clue, whereas if you slip up on camera, the whole world sees, and GWB has prob learned the hard way!!!

[Esperante]

It supports what i said...i dont argue with every one of his points...just the bits that im not convinced about...and not much right now will convince me about the wings..as if the folded and went inside.:D:D:D if u look at the cross section, nothing, like computer monitors and office equipment, is damaged...none lol... If wings went throught there i would expect some damage!!!
Actually, the interior space that wasn't damaged by fire was still ripped apart. Take a look at the photos I posted.

[The_Canuck]

look about the wings the fuel on the plane that hit was stored in the wings also there the most flimsy part of the plane so what do you think happened Boom exploding wings.

[adrenaline]

OK esperante. Look at the picture of the plane that is circled. How is that not a bulge???? That does not appear on 757s. None that I have ever seen. If u can get a picture to prove me wrong, get it.

http://www.911inplanesite.com/images2004/1-767anomaly5.jpg

Now look at this picture:

http://ax2.old-cans.com/WTC/Boeing%20757%203.jpg

Argument OVER. :D :D


Back to all of ur points up there...cant be bothered to answer them aslong as i have this evidence...:D:D:D But yea if u find a picture that proves it wrong then by all means show me cos i havent seen any ;)



BTW the official pentagon building performance report said that the hole was nearly the length of the entire WINGSPAN!!! Sounds like a coverup to me...:confused: :confused:

[Esperante]

OK esperante. Look at the picture of the plane that is circled. How is that not a bulge???? That does not appear on 757s. None that I have ever seen. If u can get a picture to prove me wrong, get it.


Argument OVER. :D :D

That picture actually proves itself wrong. You probably don't know the first thing about lighting, and the more dramatic lighting there is, the more noticable a feature is. In the circled photo, also, the engines are way too small to be those of a 767 tanker. I have shown you probably 7 photos of 757s that clearly display a bulge, and it is absolutely moronic of you to throw out all of the pictures I have shown you and say that 757s have no bulge. You are completely right, The arguement ends here. I have shown you evidence so many times I feel like a broken record. I have PROVEN to you that 757s have bulges, yet you continue to ignore the facts and continue believe your crackpot theory. Forget it.

Here is evidence that should prove to you that the type of bulges existant on your photo earlier do not exist. The only bulges featured on 767 tankers, and 767s in general, are bulges that come off the sides, and not down.
http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/photorelease/q2/05-1338-377.jpg
http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/photorelease/q2/05-1338-372.jpg
http://www.silicon.fr/images/uploads/200573-Boeing767Tanker.gif
Now here is a large sucession of photographs of Boeing 757s, which have large bulges that protrude downward, as in your circled photograph.
http://www.aeronautics.ru/img/img006/boeing757-200_dhl_001.jpg
http://fotodj.com/images/airliners/Boeing%20757-251%20AL002D.jpg
^See that? That's a ****ing bulge, exactly like depicted in your picture.
http://www.bredow-web.de/Berlin_Tegel/Boeing_757/Boeing_757-200.JPG
^'Tis another bulge.
http://www.free-picture-graphic.org.uk/images/boeing-757-single-aisle-sreighter.jpg

****ing idiot.

[F1_Master]

ADRENALINE, you numbnut.

That's where the wings are attached. The buldge helps air flow, and it's on all 757s. Even on the pic you posted!

[The_Canuck]

Adrenaline please read :
The third "no plane" claim stated that the plane that hit the South Tower was swapped in mid-flight with military plane that crashed into the tower, carrying a "pod" under the plane that fired a missile at the building just before crashing into it.

The "pod" hoax seemed to have been test-marketed in 2003 on obscure websites in England and Spain. But the hoax got a much bigger promotional effort in mid-2004, shortly after the International Inquiry into 9/11 in San Francisco and as the "election" campaign entered full steam. A website called "letsroll911" started up with "new video footage" claiming to show a missile fired from the plane into the South Tower, but without presenting any documentation to prove that this footage was not merely manipulated with digital photographic software such as "Photoshop." Without any "chain of custody" this "evidence" is useless and irrelevant -- and any "new footage" magically appearing years after the event must be considered bogus until proven authentic.

One consequence of the staged timing of the tower attacks is that the second crash was seen and photographed by countless people from every possible perspective. If there had been a missile fired at the WTC, or an anomaly on the plane that suggested plane swapping, it would have been revealed shortly afterwards. (This is a reason why the "no plane hit the Pentagon" claims are not true -- too many people saw it happen to believe that it did not happene.)

While the footage of the "missile" looked fake, the "pod" claim was much more subtle. It was not added to the photos of Flight 175 -- it was merely a carefully chosen image of the normal "fairing" connecting the wing to the fuselage.

A film focused on the "pod" claim released in the summer of 2004 called "911: In Plane Site" tacitly admitted that the "pod" was really just a picture of the fairing. Shortly before its release, a participant in the "911 Truth Alliance" email list posted a photo of a 757 showing the bulge between the wing and fuselage, noting that the "pod" claim was not true. The producers of this movie chose the exact same photo (of all of the photos ever taken of Boeings) to use as part of a montage on the cover of their DVD. A bad joke "hidden in plain sight."

Some 9/11 truth activists started calling this campaign an effort of "pod people," an analogy to the movie "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," a science fiction story about alien invasion of the United States (thought by some to be a parable for anti-communist fears of subversives overtaking the country, or perhaps a parable about anti-communist paranoia). In that film, the aliens emerged from "pods" and then took over normal humans, who were then converted into aliens yet looked normal on the outside.

The "parallel 9/11 movement" that emerged to challenge the "mainstream" 9/11 truth movement for control of the terms of debate parallels the "pod people" from the "Body Snatchers" film. This parallel effort appears to most people to be part of the same movement as the 9/11 truth movement. However, this parallel effort avoids the primary issues raised by 9/11 truth activists and writers in favor of speculations and photographic misinterpretations such as the "pod").

The pod campaign got some traction -- more than the "webfairy" theory, but much less than the "Pentagate" claims. In Plane Site was moderately effective at disrupting unity among the 9/11 truth activists, with some thinking it to be a sincere effort (even if some of the claims were incorrect), and others pointing out that it was mostly disinformation.

In March, 2005, Popular Mechanics published a front-page story about debunking 9/11 conspiracy theories that began with the pod hoax. That article mixed exposure of fake claims with a couple of real pieces of evidence while ignoring most of the best evidence for complicity.

A couple minor variations on the pod hoax are that it was not firing missiles, but was really a bomb or perhaps a remote controlled flight system (if the planes were remote controlled, the altered navigational systems would have been made in or near the cockpit - this claim is a means to discredit the probable reality of remote control on 9/11). None of the pod people suggested why the military conspirators wouldn't have merely placed these devices in the plane itself, why no one noticed the pod and/or missile until they pointed it out, or why the plane would have been unable to penetrate the towers without first firing a missile.

It is amazing how much time can be spent refuting this endless flood of nonsense, which is probably the purpose for this propaganda.

Perhaps one day there will be "no building" theories offered as part of this information warfare attack.

[adrenaline]

http://www.911inplanesite.com/images2004/1-767anomaly5.jpg

Im talking about the little white thing, not the whole underbelly bulge, just the thing attatched to it... Maybe ur seeing something im not:D:D

All those photos dont shot that little thing, or maybe they do but im not seeing it.

Learn to be calm...theres no need for rudeness

[Cyco]

The white thing is a reflection off the egde of the bulge.

[adrenaline]

Meh it doesnt look that way to me. I guess im a fu(ken idiot arent i esperante...

[my porsche]

i guess you are ;)

btw esperante, i suggest you read a book called DO as I Say (Not as I Do) forgot who its by

[The_Canuck]

http://www.911inplanesite.com/images2004/1-767anomaly5.jpg

Im talking about the little white thing, not the whole underbelly bulge, just the thing attatched to it... Maybe ur seeing something im not:D:D

All those photos dont shot that little thing, or maybe they do but im not seeing it.

Learn to be calm...theres no need for rudeness
dude! read my posts! the guys who started that hoaxe made a movie about it and you know what they admitted it was FAKE! IT"S A HOAX! do you want me to prove it again!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Esperante]

Meh it doesnt look that way to me. I guess im a fu(ken idiot arent i esperante...
Yes you are. You are one of the most moronic people I have ever 'met.' For you to not understand that things reflect light is utterly idiotic.

Im talking about the little white thing, not the whole underbelly bulge, just the thing attatched to it... Maybe ur seeing something im not

All those photos dont shot that little thing, or maybe they do but im not seeing it.

Learn to be calm...theres no need for rudeness
You were talking about the underbelly bulge before....

Here, mate, I'll spell if out for you, as you may be too ignorant to figure it out yourself.
http://www.bredow-web.de/Berlin_Tegel/Boeing_757/Boeing_757-200.JPG
Above is the original image.
Here is the image reformated by the miracles of Photoshop to resemble the same quality of your above photographs.
http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/2163/stupidmoron4fe.jpg
Oh no! A black and white, low resolution version of the same photograph reveals a missile! OMGWTF!!@1?!!11!

[adrenaline]

I said i didnt take it as gospel. You dickhead. Read my last post. I said that i didnt see what u saw. You angry little adolescent. Whist I could be nice about things, you had to be an arsehole about it. WTF is wrong with you?? I came to this forum and thought that it was a civilised, friendly place. How wrong I was. I could have been nice again in this post, but whats the point? I try to be nice to u about it and u are just a plain asshole back to me. Get fu(ked you rude little shit.

[werty]

I said i didnt take it as gospel. You dickhead. Read my last post. I said that i didnt see what u saw. You angry little adolescent. Whist I could be nice about things, you had to be an arsehole about it. WTF is wrong with you?? I came to this forum and thought that it was a civilised, friendly place. How wrong I was. I could have been nice again in this post, but whats the point? I try to be nice to u about it and u are just a plain asshole back to me. Get fu(ked you rude little shit.
you're just bitter because he exposed your stupidity

here is a special version of what i just said for you;)

you mad, he make you look dumb

[Esperante]

I said i didnt take it as gospel. You dickhead. Read my last post. I said that i didnt see what u saw. You angry little adolescent. Whist I could be nice about things, you had to be an arsehole about it. WTF is wrong with you?? I came to this forum and thought that it was a civilised, friendly place. How wrong I was. I could have been nice again in this post, but whats the point? I try to be nice to u about it and u are just a plain asshole back to me. I notice you're not especially polite yourself.

Meh it doesnt look that way to me. I guess im a fu(ken idiot arent i esperante...

Get fu(ked you rude little shit.
Way to go, hypocrit.
I call you a ****ing idiot because you ignore all facts and all reasoning. You didn't realize that hoax theories can be hoaxs, buildings can have power generators, planes can have bulges, buildings can fall straight down, and that light can be reflected.
And when I finally prove your points, or suggest overly compelling evidence, you snap back at me and somehow manage to contradict yourself every time. Such things as: 'I can't imagine why you would argue my points, I don't have time to, but here I go anyway.' Or, 'Why are you so rude, you ****ing idiot?' I provide more than ample evidence debunking many of your theories, yet you return to them later and ask me the same questions. When I get fed up and call you a ****ing idiot for debating without reading my evidence, you turn around and call me a rude adolescent. My personal breakdown to the point where I call you a ****ing idiot is exactly the same as yours. I can't possibly bear the ignorance you bring to this thread much longer.
Oh, and for the record's sake, I used just as much satire in my last post as you did in this one:

Meh it doesnt look that way to me. I guess im a fu(ken idiot arent i esperante...










Have a nice day!!!!!:D:D:D:D:D

[Fleet 500]

A:>It's FOX News. This is the same network who has a major figure recommending terrorist attacks on San Francisco.

I just want to clear this up. I'm assuming the major figure here is Bill O'Reilly. I watch and listen to him every day and anyone else who does knows that he was being sarcastic. He is obviously is someone who cares very much about his country which is why he is on TV and radio 5 days/week- he investigates and lets the public know when something wrong is going on (like when money to the 9/11 victims collected by the Red Cross wasn't going where it was supposed to). Bill doesn't really have to deal with people who criticize him- he's now worth millions due to his book sales and TV and radio shows.
He said that since the city of San Francisco voted not to allow military recruiting in schools, that maybe the terrorists should bomb that city. Again, anyone who listened to him (and any commentator) knows when they are not being serious.

[werty]

I just want to clear this up. I'm assuming the major figure here is Bill O'Reilly. I watch and listen to him every day and anyone else who does knows that he was being sarcastic. He is obviously is someone who cares very much about his country which is why he is on TV and radio 5 days/week- he investigates and lets the public know when something wrong is going on (like when money to the 9/11 victims collected by the Red Cross wasn't going where it was supposed to). Bill doesn't really have to deal with people who criticize him- he's now worth millions due to his book sales and TV and radio shows.
He said that since the city of San Francisco voted not to allow military recruiting in schools, that maybe the terrorists should bomb that city. Again, anyone who listened to him (and any commentator) knows when they are not being serious.
They dont allow recruiting in schools there? That is so odd to me.

[Fleet 500]

They dont allow recruiting in schools there? That is so odd to me.
It was last November's election. A ballot measure passed by 60% of San Francisco voters which prohibits on-campus military recruiting at high schools and colleges.

[nota]

I continue my campaign to call you a ****ing moron.

Seems to me there is only one person who initiated the cheap personal denigration within this thread, and it was you. Evidently this rude lack of style was already an established tactic by only your 3rd post, above :rolleyes:

[adrenaline]

Esperante, WTF is wrong with you???:confused: :confused:


My personal breakdown to the point where I call you a ****ing idiot is exactly the same as yours.

So you are saying that you broke down on your 3rd post in this thread??

And you say that Im not polite? You have got serious problems. It took me 13 pages to get to the point where i was ready to snap at you personally. It took you 3 posts.

I posted to try and stop you from being a rude little prick as you have been, and you reply with the exact same crap. Cant you just admit that you are being an asshole??

From the start you have been obsessed with this. I merely posted something that got my attention. I believed it was true, and it still doesnt add up. All i wanted was to hear what people thought. I said in the very first post, "Bogus or Not??" All i wanted to hear was what people thought. I didnt want to be dragged into a fight with "esperante".

You started the whole lot, calling me a ****ing idiot from the very start. It took me 13 pages, OMG. Even when i posted to try and stop your rudeness, i got even more. You act like you are a 30 something year old. Your 15. Yes, 15. Treat people with respect. Nobody likes a 15 year old asshole that shows no respect to others and thinks he knows everything.



'I can't imagine why you would argue my points, I don't have time to, but here I go anyway.' Or, 'Why are you so rude, you ****ing idiot?'

When did i say that??


Way to go, hypocrit.

OMG i cannot live with your stupidity. That was a really stupid thing to say.



I can't possibly bear the ignorance you bring to this thread much longer.

OK, so basically, i should believe that everyone that was on TV live happened to lie. And that the flashes, the object or bulge on the plane were all reflections of light. How come they were all seen from DIFFERENT ANGLES. Why shouldnt i argue that. You are calling me ignorant because i dont agree with you. Im allowed to post an issue i have with something. Why cant I? I dont have to agree with you. And if i dont, im suddenly a ****ing idiot, a moron, ignorent, stupid...the list goes on. You havent been nice once, all you do is attack people who dont share your opinion. Yes, i say opinion, because you cant PROVE most of the things you have said. I would love to see you prove that the people from FOX lied, the firefighters LIED, the random Newyorkers caught on tv LIED....and that when the lease holder of building 7 said "PULL IT", it was an invoulantary SPASM.

Who's the one thats ignorent??? Look at the history of your government you fool, they bombed their own ships to get into the cold war, they knew that the pearl harbour attack was coming, but left it....to GET INTO THE WAR...there is so much more, the list goes on and on.

So really, who is the ignorent one??

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

[The_Canuck]

i should believe that everyone that was on TV live happened to lie. And that the flashes, the object or bulge on the plane were all reflections of light. How come they were all seen from DIFFERENT ANGLES.

plz just plz read my posts. the guys who origonally put those photos on the internet addmitted that they were a hoax, you have No arguement at all . as for the fire fighters hey i dunno but its sounds hoaxish too .

[Esperante]

I just want to clear this up. I'm assuming the major figure here is Bill O'Reilly. I watch and listen to him every day and anyone else who does knows that he was being sarcastic. He is obviously is someone who cares very much about his country which is why he is on TV and radio 5 days/week- he investigates and lets the public know when something wrong is going on (like when money to the 9/11 victims collected by the Red Cross wasn't going where it was supposed to). Bill doesn't really have to deal with people who criticize him- he's now worth millions due to his book sales and TV and radio shows.
He said that since the city of San Francisco voted not to allow military recruiting in schools, that maybe the terrorists should bomb that city. Again, anyone who listened to him (and any commentator) knows when they are not being serious.
Bill O'Reilly is a nutcase, and, for the record, that is my opinion.
So, if everything Bill O'Reilly says and does is lighthearted, his on-air spat with David Letterman was just plain fun?

Esperante, WTF is wrong with you???



So you are saying that you broke down on your 3rd post in this thread??
I apologized for that bit earlier. Please take time to read what I have to say. It's not all pointless name calling, you know.


And you say that Im not polite? You have got serious problems. It took me 13 pages to get to the point where i was ready to snap at you personally. It took you 3 posts.
So, you make sarcasm or the implication of sarcasm, and then are surprised that someone got pissed off? Maybe you meant smilies as a pure of heart way to lighten things up, but don't you think to give evidence and then say 'Have a nice day:D:D:D:D' comes off as just a tad arrogant? It's not the first time you posted arrogantly as well. One doesn't have to curse to come off as snobbish or asshole-like.

I posted to try and stop you from being a rude little prick as you have been, and you reply with the exact same crap.
Sounds a lot like someone else...I posted evidence for you repeatedly, my brother, and you chose to ignore it and bring it up repeatedly, in a similarily arrogant fashion. You also failed to admit that I was actually RIGHT on some things by demoting me as an immature 15 year old who doesn't know anything.

Cant you just admit that you are being an asshole??
Erm, I already did. PLEASE read.


From the start you have been obsessed with this. I merely posted something that got my attention. I believed it was true, and it still doesnt add up. All i wanted was to hear what people thought. I said in the very first post, "Bogus or Not??" All i wanted to hear was what people thought. I didnt want to be dragged into a fight with "esperante".
Once again, you seriously expected that posting about a touchy and debated subject would not ensue in a double digit paged debate?


You started the whole lot, calling me a ****ing idiot from the very start. It took me 13 pages, OMG. Even when i posted to try and stop your rudeness, i got even more. You act like you are a 30 something year old. Your 15. Yes, 15. Treat people with respect. Nobody likes a 15 year old asshole that shows no respect to others and thinks he knows everything.
And no 15 year old respects a 30 year old who tells him he knows nothing.




When did i say that??

You'll notice they aren't direct quotes, as much as they are summaries. In one of your posts you mentioned how you did not want to debate me as you did not have the time or passion to get into a debate with me, yet you carried on in the same post to argue the points I had brought up.



OMG i cannot live with your stupidity. That was a really stupid thing to say.
Is it?

OK, so basically, i should believe that everyone that was on TV live happened to lie. And that the flashes, the object or bulge on the plane were all reflections of light. How come they were all seen from DIFFERENT ANGLES.
Yes, light can be reflected from different angles, and yes, fakes can be made.

Why shouldnt i argue that. You are calling me ignorant because i dont agree with you. Im allowed to post an issue i have with something. Why cant I? I dont have to agree with you. And if i dont, im suddenly a ****ing idiot, a moron, ignorent, stupid...the list goes on. You havent been nice once, all you do is attack people who dont share your opinion. Yes, i say opinion, because you cant PROVE most of the things you have said.
I am not debating the theory of a conspiracy, I am debating the multiple facts you brought up. Bulges existing on planes a is not an opinion. That's a fact. I debated that bulges existed on planes. I debated that a power generator could've exploded, and that power generators actually can exist in office blocks. Just because you have an opinion that power generators can't eexist in buildingsand bulges don't exist on 757s doesn't make it fact. I only once debated your opnion, in which I did not go so far as to prove it. I said once that G Bush would need an excuse that required the death of 5,000 people to go into Afghanistan, as he went into Iraq just the same with a verbal excuse. I'll repeat. I only presented evidence that attempted to debunk your details. I did not, ever, throughout the course of this thread, say that a conspiracy could not have happened. In fact, I said it could've happened. Go read my posts before making assumption.

I would love to see you prove that the people from FOX lied,
Things like this cannot be proven, no matter how much evidence is brought in. However, there is so much evidence surrounding you that it is impossible to make the conclusion that ALL news anchors are right ALL THE TIME.Read my posts.

the firefighters LIED,
No, they simply did not exist. There's too many conflicting reports of their story I can't believe it ever happened. You give me a video of all 60 some firefighters you claim saw and heard this explosion at floors 10-15 telling us, on 9/11, that it actually happened, and I'll shut up.Read my posts.

the random Newyorkers caught on tv LIED....
I presented lying as a possibilty. People reporting simply what they saw without getting a clear look is completely different than someone getting a clear look and reporting their findings. I already presented you TONS of evidence that this is what happened. Read my posts,

and that when the lease holder of building 7 said "PULL IT", it was an invoulantary SPASM.
Read my posts.


Who's the one thats ignorent??? Look at the history of your government you fool, they bombed their own ships to get into the cold war, they knew that the pearl harbour attack was coming, but left it....to GET INTO THE WAR...there is so much more, the list goes on and on.
READ MY GODDAMN POSTS. I never said the conspiracy was impossible, I said the conspiracy that happened exactly as you described, with physically impossible details, could not have.


So really, who is the ignorent one??

:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:
Well, I am, thus far, the only one to have read every word of ever page on this thread. You have not, and continue to throw things at me which I have already provided evidence for. You also misinterpret what I say. Read my posts.

[spi-ti-tout]

Matra already got the award for longest post.

[adrenaline]

You cant let it go. You really cant let it go.

Answer to this then. You say that you called me a ****ing idiot because i was so ignorent, right? I remember that u first called me a ****ing idiot because I BELIEVED THAT THE CONSPIRACY WAS POSSIBLE.


I never said the conspiracy was impossible

Then why do u put someone down for believing that there was more to 911???

And yea, i read your posts. PATHETIC EXUSES. You have nothing that is fact, u only say what u THINK, like the "Pull it" and the lying new yorkers. I didnt call u a ****ing idiot for believing that, yet u call me a ****ing idiot for posting it, when you clearly dont have any facts at all.

GO on, start to pick through this post and say "READ MY POSTS". Its really repetitive, and when u actrually do read your posts, they're full of shit.

[QBridge]

Not related much but everyone here needs to watch Enron.The.Smartest.Guys.In.The.Room.2005.LiMiTED.D VDSCR.XviD-HLS

[Schmallz]

It sounded like a missile, it did not sound like a plane, how many of you have been within 500 feet of a jet goingfull speed, thats right, its like if a tree falls in the woods and no one is around, does it make a noise? Your guess for the sound is as good as mine. The reason the towers fell is because they got hit by a plane going extremely fast and consisting of alot of mas, but less than 1% of the weight of the tower. Even wind moves a building, especialy one as tall as the Twin Towers. That would tweak the towers in uninmaginable ways.Plus when the jet fuel eploded on impact, the tower received more damage. Plus one must consider how the towers are built, with out interior columns.

l____________l
l l
l l
l____________l
l l

So when the fires were burning, the steal began to expand, like all metals when exposed to heat. So the only reason that the floors do not fall down, is because they are conected to the sides, the reason the sides do not fall away because the floors hold them together, kind of like a house of cards, very delicate. No when these conections were broken, the structure lost its support. Keep in mind that the explosion from impact destroyed much of frame, almost half. Now the floors fell in the impact zones fell and pancaked on the lower floors, now the extra weight above the impact zones begins to come down. The frame buckels on near the impact zone and the whole tower falls. Now the "Explosions" or demolition charges that apear below the falling frame, that is because the floors were pancaking about 10 or 15 levels below the fallinf top section. Of coarase it looked like it was a building brought down by demolition, have you ever seen a building collapse normally maybe but my point is that human beings like to compare, of coarse the only building we have seen that falls, is well a controled demolition.
"It sounded like a atomic bomb, not an airplane explosion."
Wow she heard a atomic bomb, wow, if it sounded like an a-bomb, wouldn't it create a simular explosion you know, the mushroom cloud. Lastly, Americans aren't the smartest people, if you think they are smart then a i know a Nigerian banker who wants your credit card number. These foolish Americans are the ones that by into this.
Now this is just my opionion, i see it half full, you see it half empty.

[adrenaline]

OK so all americans are dumb and foolish...???? Thats just stupid. You describe yourself as an optimist with the glass half full bla bla bla...does an optimist really see a whole nation as dumb and foolish???:D:D


(BTW im not from america...crazy country)

[McReis]

Lastly, Americans aren't the smartest people, if you think they are smart then a i know a Nigerian banker who wants your credit card number. These foolish Americans are the ones that by into this.

Aren't you proud of carrying more intelligence inside your head, than a population of millions of persons from a powerful nation? You should. Or is your modesty buch better than anyone's too?

[Revo]

The reason the towers fell is because they got hit by a plane going extremely fast and consisting of alot of mas, but less than 1% of the weight of the tower. Even wind moves a building, especialy one as tall as the Twin Towers. That would tweak the towers in uninmaginable ways.Plus when the jet fuel eploded on impact, the tower received more damage....So when the fires were burning, the steal began to expand, like all metals when exposed to heat.So the only reason that the floors do not fall down, is because they are conected to the sides.....
Being an engineer myself, I'd like to clarify few things :)

The towers did not fall because they got hit by plane. The towers did not fall because of exploding jet fuel. The impact did wipe out about one third of supporting columns, but remaining ones were capable of carring the extra load. Although severly damaged, the towers stayed in one piece.

The last nail in the coffin was the fire. Fire is no.1 enemy of steel structures. As the temperature of steel increases, its strenght dramatically decreases. The result for steel columns is that they will simply buckle out under pressure. When columns in the damaged floor (where the fire was fiercest) collapsed, columns one floor below had to carry a huge dynamic impact. Of course they couldn't handle it and a domino effect followed.

[Fleet 500]

Bill O'Reilly is a nutcase, and, for the record, that is my opinion.
So, if everything Bill O'Reilly says and does is lighthearted, his on-air spat with David Letterman was just plain fun?
[/b]
Yes, it's your opinion but you didn't post any examples of why he is a "nutcase." See below for O'Reilly's views on different subjects... they are pretty much the same as hundreds of thousands of other people's. And not really radical (or "nutcase") at all.

I didn't say that everything O'Reilly says is lighthearted- I was pointing out that about the San Francisco comment, it was.
But I really don't want to get into yet another 10-page debate about O'Reilly. Anyone who is familiar with him knows that he makes sense much of the time and the reason he is so popular is because his way of thinking is similar to many Americans.

But I do agree with everything you have been saying about the phony "no planes crashed into the Pentagon/World Trade Center" claim.

[spi-ti-tout]

Anyone who is familiar with him knows that he makes sense much of the time and the reason he is so popular is because his way of thinking is similar to many Americans.
A badger will never understand a cat's meow or a lion's roar.

[F1_Master]

Take his advice and read his posts. His posts contain a LOT of facts such as the plane types and evidence.

Your posts are the ones full of sh*t, and as you put it



You have nothing that is fact.

Your posts have hardly any facts because your posts are either of questions or part of the NON-PROVEN "Conspiracy" thus making them opinions and not facts.

[adrenaline]

Yeh i got all my info from that conspiracy site....lol go there and u will see...copy paste copy paste....

[F1_Master]

And a Conspiracy is most likely, if not always, OPINION.

This conspiracy is opinion, therefore, my previous post is still correct.

[my porsche]

adrenalie when will you ever give up?

[The_Canuck]

^really eh? i already proved the pod theories wrong (as well as esperante) and they still think its true this is just annoying.

[Esperante]

You cant let it go. You really cant let it go.

Answer to this then. You say that you called me a ****ing idiot because i was so ignorent, right? I remember that u first called me a ****ing idiot because I BELIEVED THAT THE CONSPIRACY WAS POSSIBLE.
I called you a ****ing idiot purely for the reasoning that a conspiracy that happened exactly as y ou described, the most often run theory, is physically impossible.

Then why do u put someone down for believing that there was more to 911???
I didn't. Look, will you please go read my goddamn posts from earlier? Try to make some sense of what I'm saying-Implications are everything.


And yea, i read your posts. PATHETIC EXUSES. You have nothing that is fact, u only say what u THINK, like the "Pull it" and the lying new yorkers. I didnt call u a ****ing idiot for believing that, yet u call me a ****ing idiot for posting it, when you clearly dont have any facts at all.
What facts do you have? Speculative evidence from shady, biased conspiracy theorist sites?


GO on, start to pick through this post and say "READ MY POSTS". Its really repetitive,
Wanna know why they're repetitive? I would answer one thing and then have several other people not read them and ask the questions again, including you.

and when u actrually do read your posts, they're full of shit.
How so are my posts full of shit? I've just had two more people back up my explanation of the WTC collapse-Including a structural engineer. That's clearly not shit. I've shown you photographs of bulges on 757s. Thats not shit. I actually knew that generators exist in buildings! That is absolutely not shit!

Now then , if you want to pull the whole 'OMG how can network news lie! It's impossible OMG!' shit, then please answer this for me: How did ALL the majour new corporations, CNN, MSNBS and FOX, along with newspapers across the coutnry including the NY Times, Post, Chicago Tribune, Sun Times, San Francisco Chronicle and Milwaukee Journal Sentinal ALL report 12 miners to be found alive, when, in reality, 12 were dead? Someone MUST have lied or made a mistake.

Revo and Schmallz, I really appreciate your posts. It reminds me that some people have can grasp basic physics.

[johnnynumfiv]

adrenalie when will you ever give up?
This dipshit is like the freakin energizer bunny....

[Esperante]

I should at least, ADRENALINE, offer you a more sincere apology. Mw jumping on you at the beginning of the thread was rather a reflex, as most conspiracy theory believers are those that say 'I just saw a documentary/read a website/had a conversation/[insert other unreliable source here] that proves 9/11 was all Bush's fault cuz he wanted oil.' I see now that it was wrong to do this with you;you can at least open up and discern the difference between fact and fabrication, albeit slightly selectively, something a fanatic who usually beings topics of the like cannot. For my credibility's sake, and so we can at least debate on the same level, I offer you my humblest apogologies for my abrupt behaviour/ :)

[adrenaline]

This dipshit is like the freakin energizer bunny....

Never say Die!!

Actually when i started the thread i didnt actually intend to get into a fight...the only reason its got all drawn out is because i was flamed for believing something on TV...I wasnt gonna get yelled at and be wrong at the same time...:D...So i actually went to the site that they quoted...911 inplane site i think it is...and pasted stuff from there...then that caused an even bigger issue...Basically the majority of my posts in this thread have just been at esperante...i understand he went in and researched it, and i didnt...technically i did by going to that site but apparently its bias or something.

You will notice though that i havent really being fighting for the theory for the last few pages ive been trying to teach esperante manners...but that led to all the evidence and such being brought back up so i answered it....

And, johnnynumfiv, i would have thought by now that the message would have got through...dont go personal on people...13 pages into it and u are doing what started the major part of the arguement in the first place...:eek: :eek: BTW esperante must be running on those lithium energisers....look at the size of my posts and compare with his....

[challenger]

i think 911 was a conspiracy..........



































!!!!!!!!!!!!!GO ADRENALINE!!!!!!!!!!

[man 430gt]

i think 911 was a conspiracy..........

!!!!!!!!!!!!!GO ADRENALINE!!!!!!!!!!
(after some time or pressing backup on your quote to get it down to size:D) ditto that, i just really can't be bothered to get involed in these debates as it really is a waste of time. i ain't gonna spend days or even weeks to convince somebody to believe something else, if i can do that then i will..

[Pando]

i think 911 was a conspiracy..........
I've seen plenty of 911's so I'm pretty sure they're not.

[Revo]

i think 911 was a conspiracy..........

I've seen plenty of 911's so I'm pretty sure they're not.
:D :D
Good one, Pando!

[kingofthering]

read the march 2005 issue of popular mechanics. this should end all the controversy and rip this thread a new one.

[Schmallz]

Every once in a while man stumbles upon truth, but most of the time, he quickly picks himself up and brushes off his shirt as i nothing happened.

I know i'll get alot of shyte for this, but Adrenaline, Esperante probaly doubles your I.Q. and SAT score, and he's not even asian.

[SlickHolden]

I think there is some type of cover up, There is facts and things that are hidden some for peoples own good, And then there will be some that might point the finger of blame and they can't have that.
Conspiracy come because the whole world knows governments politicians lie as easy as breathing air. To be honest they don't lie straight in bed at night.
Truth hardly ever surfaces, None comes forward to Deni or admit to anything.
It's just like TUCKER and his cars, Was he or wasn't he drove out of business by the big boys, Or did he just fall over on his own face? Will we ever know 100% for sure?? NO.

[adrenaline]

Well in 50 years or so the real truth might come out if there really was a conspiracy...but slick is right when he says that certain facts might be covered up for peoples..or the nations own good...but yeah we'll restart this thread in about 50 years from now assuming the govt say something...:D:D:D

[my porsche]

I know i'll get alot of shyte for this, but Adrenaline, Esperante probaly doubles your I.Q. and SAT score, and he's not even asian.
hahaha that is so true

[Esperante]

Every once in a while man stumbles upon truth, but most of the time, he quickly picks himself up and brushes off his shirt as i nothing happened.

I know i'll get alot of shyte for this, but Adrenaline, Esperante probaly doubles your I.Q. and SAT score, and he's not even asian.
Erm, I appreciate the flattery but not particularily the insult of light racial remark. ;)

I agree, once again, with Slick. The facts are withheld from the public for whatever reason, and yes, politicians are vile, cunning bastards. But I can't be led to believe that Bush would go to the trouble with killing thousands of people to invade a country when he invades a country a few months later purely on whimsical accusations.
On top of that, the 'discoverers' of this conspiracy don't know what's going on. Either they make their own facts about it, or use points that people know little about (such as why the towers fell straight down) or just use some fact and cover it up in their opinion or just use fact and then ignore the possible solutions.
But yes, the gov't could've physically carried out such a conspiracy, however this was only possible by having gov't agents simply hijack planes, not fire missiles or plant bombs or anything.

[adrenaline]

I know i'll get alot of shyte for this, but Adrenaline, Esperante probaly doubles your I.Q. and SAT score, and he's not even asian.

Esperante is committed to this. From the start go he researched and re-researched it...he searched images, went through a tonnne of sites to try and prove me wrong. I didnt bother doing that...i pasted info from one site that was quoted from that documentary. So ofcourse his posts appear more thougt out, but thats because...they are!! He put in a big effort...I think he is the only one here that has read every post in this thread, and the only one to take out the time to research it all. I commend him for that but I wouldnt waste my time doing that, no offence to esperante, but i have a life...I dont live on my computer and i definately dont spend my spare time researching 911 in order to prove someone on the other side of the world that i dont even know wrong. Just look at the length of his posts, he went over the 1000limit on various occasions!! He wrote it all himself and was intent on getting his facts accross. I couldnt be bothered to do that. Carelessness may be a cousin of laziness, but it is definately no related to stupidity. The reason that I even answered to him is because I was abused for believing that not all truth was told.

I dont know if esperante had planned to elicit my response by using personal discrimination...possibly because he has an interest in this issue and wanted a debate?? I dont know. He will have to answer that imself. But I don't think that someone with no interest in the issue would go to the lengths that he went to in order to prove me wrong. As I have already stressed, this issue is not even on my to-do list.

Happy now??

And BTW I've said it already, I'm not an 'American Idiot' (yes i quoted greenday)...so I dont know what the hell SAT scores are...!!

Adrenaline OUT. :D

[my porsche]

Esperante is committed to this. From the start go he researched and re-researched it...he searched images, went through a tonnne of sites to try and prove me wrong. I didnt bother doing that...
so quoting from one source and claiming it as the truth, and arguing against any who dare disagree is right...how?

way to be lazy

[my porsche]

And BTW I've said it already, I'm not an 'American Idiot' (yes i quoted greenday)...so I dont know what the hell SAT scores are...!!

Adrenaline OUT. :D
scholastic apptitude test, used to measure what you've learned in school, required for almost all colleges, the higher the better, i got a 1050 in 7th grade :D slightly above the 11th grade average scores :D

[h00t_h00t]

I've seen plenty of 911's so I'm pretty sure they're not.

But most 911s are not infact 911s!

*wins some QI points*

[adrenaline]

so quoting from one source and claiming it as the truth, and arguing against any who dare disagree is right...how?

way to be lazy

Your right when I claimed it as truth, but i didnt intend to argue about the facts in the first place...i just didnt like the fact that i got abused for giving my opinion...so i stood by it...

[IBrake4Rainbows]

I think 9/11 was merely great timing.

-Allowed a swift and devastating blow to be unleashed upon America by it's enemies.
-Allowed a Newly elected president who hadn't really done anything after fighting so hard to earn his new post to become a strong and engaged leader.
-And allowed a heck of a lot of controversy and brought to a head the issue of western/islamic relations.

seriously, I think 9/11 actually happened, but i do think the US had SOME prior knowledge of "an Attack", nothing specific, just info.

[Fleet 500]

seriously, I think 9/11 actually happened, but i do think the US had SOME prior knowledge of "an Attack", nothing specific, just info.
Wow... I actually agree with you.
There were vague warnings of an attack, but no one in the U.S. government could have known that airplanes would be used as cruise missiles, after the terrorists took control of the plane using box cutters as weapons.
And certainly NO U.S. President would have let any kind of terrorist attack happen without trying to prevent it.

[SlickHolden]

Wow... I actually agree with you.
There were vague warnings of an attack, but no one in the U.S. government could have known that airplanes would be used as cruise missiles, after the terrorists took control of the plane using box cutters as weapons.
And certainly NO U.S. President would have let any kind of terrorist attack happen without trying to prevent it.
Yeah shame the laptop with all of 9-11's details got lost or didn't turn up at FBI HQ till after the attack.
It was there but on a scale of importance it was low as they truly didn't think it could happen... Now hang on I'll rephrase that, they didn't thing anyone had the balls to get in the ring with them and dance, I think we can say that nothing will be over looked again.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Wow... I actually agree with you.
There were vague warnings of an attack, but no one in the U.S. government could have known that airplanes would be used as cruise missiles, after the terrorists took control of the plane using box cutters as weapons.
And certainly NO U.S. President would have let any kind of terrorist attack happen without trying to prevent it.

Wow, I Mostly agree with this as well....... Coincidence?:p

what surprises me is the simplicity, extreme ease and veracity of these attacks. Literally someone could have just bought a plane ticket and a box cutter and run a plane into the ground.

I also agree that No US president would have sat Idle with such knowledge.

Had an attack such as this (Air Plane = Cruise Missile) occured before?
Were the Warnings Plane/Air Travel Specific?

[QBridge]

Did anybody see the news lately.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm
Another of the men named by the FBI as a hijacker in the suicide attacks on Washington and New York has turned up alive and well.

The identities of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.

[Esperante]

^That means nothing except that the gov't screwed up in guessing who hijacked the planes, not that the gov't used his name as a cover up. If the gov't carried out the attacks, the profiles of supposed hijackers would be people who never existed, simply fabrications of the gov't/

[snowskateRX8]

Plus another point is that, just like saddam, They could have plastic surgary to have look alikes to just cause more comotion! It's a crazy world we live in. Good thing for the Gospel of Jesus Christ!

[SlickHolden]

I must have missed him when i was watching the TV and all those lives were taken.

[ANDREW G]

NO NO It was Santa and the Easter bunny that did it?Get a life lay off the drugs!!Where do you people come up with this stuff 3000+ people died

[MRR]

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

Funny but true page (make sure to check out the links at the bottom too since the popular mechanics and loose change guide answer much of the questions regarding the factual accuracy of 9/11 conspiracies).