He did say in the US.
Printable View
He did say in the US.
Obviously, but that's their fault.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oneironaut
My only point is that it's pretty bizarre that the US can hold all these services for these 'innocent people who will always be remembered' when the reaction was to kill even more Americans.
And it's pretty abhorrent that the US can put the hundredfold greater death toll of civilians that it caused to the very back of its mind. Not Americans; not important.
Xei is winning...or losing? :panic:
No, it wasn't an inside job
I gotta tell you something guys, for a site where the majority of its members pride themselves on how bitchin' their intellect is, yall sure have made some retarded threads.
Whiule this is a good point, it's not even the take-away shocker. You think its hypocritical to honor 3000 dead by killing (far more than) hundreds of thousands more? No one disagrees 9/11 was used for far worse atrocities than 9/11 itself. But it's almost a drop in the bucket considering how nefarious and cruel our government has actually been on the issue. Even with the Official Story thrown out, meaning 9/11 has no official report as of now, it's still considered callous and unpatriotic to question the "official story," which is an act of war against accountability in government. Furthermore, people trying to get medical help for breathing in toxins digging through the rubble have had to fight for over 10 years now to get the help they need. Our politicians love using the tragedy to gain support but won't lift a finger to help the actual heroes. Even after they finally managed to get the bill through Congress that would help the 9/11 heroes, the included legislation that still fucked them over in the end. For one, just to rub salt on the wound and prove they'd cause 9/11 all over again if they had the chance, they made the people receiving medical care prove they weren't terrorists. Secondly, the bill doesn't cover cancer because they may have gotten their cancer somewhere else other than breathing in toxins every day for up to a year. In any possible way, our politicians have weaseled out of their responsibility to justice and the american people. In every possible way, they have been the real terrorists. Not only did they create an atmosphere where terrorist attacks are more likely, they shifted this country radically in the direction of a police state. They usurped our democracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
I agree with this 100%, but it says nothing about the point I made. What I'm saying is that these aren't atrocities that are actually perceived as malevolence on the part of the government. They are 'necessary evils,' in the eyes of most of the public. This is not a good thing, I agree. But the point I'm making is that this is not on the level of 'exposed atrocities' such as knowingly engineering the attacks or allowing them to happen as a pretext for war. I understand the point you are trying to make, but it really isn't relevant to what I was saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
Next time you feel compelled to make a comment like that, please keep it to yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenhavoc
And because your intellect is the greatest of all, you sure are about to explain all the details to us, so we don't have to guess and think anymore. Right?Quote:
Originally Posted by greenhavoc
I think God did it... God blowed up the towers.
Sure thing lil buddy: Few mountain boys flew a couple of planes into some buildings.Quote:
Originally Posted by StaySharp
We done here?
What about the smoke that's ejected from the buildings at lower levels when they're falling? There's hundreds of weird little things like this that blow your theory out of the water.
So are Americans complaining that there aren't enough successful terrorist attacks anymore?Quote:
Originally Posted by Omnis Dei
Also reports by first responders of hearing explosions coming from the basement of the towers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
Inner Sanctum is evidence of this :PQuote:
Originally Posted by greenhavoc
http://i.imgur.com/88vHF.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by BLUELINE976
Spoiler for Inner Sanctum:
http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile..._6262656_n.jpg
Did you see the alien thread??Quote:
Originally Posted by Oneironaut
Well nearly. If you know for sure, which you obviously do, I'll just be expecting names, documents and calculations of course. I did see neither so far, where do you start?Quote:
Originally Posted by greenhavoc
If it's so obvious, then why would you still be expecting names, documents and calculations? I am amused, thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by StaySharp
Yes, we are done here.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenhavoc
One word: Irony. Pure, simple Irony.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenhavoc
I'm not going to believe either side without proof. Bring something valid or don't bring anything.
The notion that it was staged is total BS.
Lots of one liner opinions in this thread, but how about something with a little more meat.
This is a great post from abovetopsecret which gives details as to why many believe it was a controlled demolition. 9/11: Blueprint for Truth. The Scientifically Disproven Official Story., page 1
Much to read there, but even without diving deeply into details it should be apparent that the way both towers collapsed is fishy.
An almost perfectly symmetrical collapse at near free fall speeds of three buildings (including wtc7) due to fire. Without knowing anything about physics, you can see why this is very, very odd. Imagine the top portion of the tower collapsing due to structural damage. It is unlikely it would fall straight in on itself instead of collapsing a-symmetrically off to one side , yet it implodes straight down. Even if it did implode in on itself for some reason, why did it do so at near free fall speeds? The lower sections of the tower were still intact and would have greatly slowed its descent. Furthermore, almost no large chunks of concrete are found, or semi intact sections of the building. Just dust. Couple this with multiple explosions heard prior to the collapse. Now this happened to not one, but 3 buildings that day. All reduced to dust in their own footprint.
You could go on and on as to why people think it was an inside job. Many of alleged hijackers are still alive. Flight experts say that maneuvering the jets into the towers at those speeds would be incredibly difficult, yet the hijackers were reportedly near incompetent pilots according to their instructor. The plane's themselves were not intercepted by the airforce. The 9/11 commission was prevented from ever doing a full report.
I know that when one believes something, it is easy to find data that corroborates that belief. However before just dismissing the idea of an inside job as a conspiracy theory, actually take a look at all these "inconsistencies" and judge for yourself.
And if you saw how much work it takes to bring down a building, you'd find the controlled demolition idea equally inconsistent.
For a normal sized building they have hundreds of workers stripping the floors to the bone, weakening the structure in some areas while strengthening it in others, installing and wiring the explosives, etc.
All this under the nose of tens of thousands of workers with not a single person coming forward with an ounce of regret after 10 years? Does that make sense?
So far semantic layman's guesses about complex physical situations with no actual calculations or experiments done. Cool.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tranquil Toad
Yes, getting a plane to hit a target far wider than itself is extremely hard, that's why pilots only manage to land on runways around 50% of the time, and never in a million years could they consistently land in the middle.Quote:
You could go on and on as to why people think it was an inside job. Many of alleged hijackers are still alive. Flight experts say that maneuvering the jets into the towers at those speeds would be incredibly difficult, yet the hijackers were reportedly near incompetent pilots according to their instructor.
Or you could just ask Spartiate. Or... play Microsoft Flight Simulator. Again, whose formed these opinions..? Who relayed the information? Be honest.
Also, how many of the far huger inconsistencies in your account that Spart just pointed out did you come up with when performing critical evaluation? And how many of them do you spend time wondering about?
I honestly do not know what happened that day, however I am trying to bring attention to details which are worthy of consideration. I don't spend all my time investigating 9/11, so I am mainly just viewing info on people who have. So you are right much of what I pointed out wasn't done by personal research. Regardless, when a compelling case is made, it should be brought to other people's attention.Quote:
how many of the far huger inconsistencies in your account that Spart just pointed out did you come up with when performing critical evaluation? And how many of them do you spend time wondering about?
It was mainly suspicious because of the speed at which they were flying at impact, coupled with their poor performance during training. Pilot's opinion here Different than doing a slow, controlled descent onto a runway.Quote:
Yes, getting a plane to hit a target far wider than itself is extremely hard, that's why pilots only manage to land on runways around 50% of the time, and never in a million years could they consistently land in the middle.
Yep, no calculations or experiments. Don't have any desire to get involved in physics or structural engineering. Even though though both towers collapsing into dust seems highly unlikely to me, lets ignore those for now and focus on WTC 7 This was supposedly due to a fire. It looks identical to controlled demolitions.Quote:
So far semantic layman's guesses about complex physical situations with no actual calculations or experiments done
I agree, it would seem likely that more people would have come forward not only in regards to the controlled demolition, but as part of the whole plot as well. The explanation given was repair crews were admitted into the elevator shafts shortly before 9/11, and these elevator shafts have access to the central support structure of the buildings.Quote:
(installing explosives) All this under the nose of tens of thousands of workers with not a single person coming forward with an ounce of regret after 10 years? Does that make sense?
I think the best opinion is no opinion. All of us are sitting at home on a computer right now and are in no way directly involved with the government, or real investigation regarding 9/11. Anything as big as 9/11 being an inside job requires the burden of proof to be on those who support the theory. However there are many questions which were never answered, of course not all addressed in my tiny post. These should not just be ignored.
No opinion here yet, but I have questions..
One of the common claims I see is that both towers collapsed as if in free fall. Can that happen if there are obstructions to the collapsing floors on the way down?
The other thing I noticed are puffs of what looks like dust or smoke coming out of the windows at least 10-20 stories below where the floors are beginning to collapse.
If you go to 2:20 in this video, you'll find a clear shot of what I'm talking about. The "puffs" can be seen on the right side and the forward face of the building on the same floor, at the same time. What might have caused that? It shows up in videos of both buildings.