Thread: When You Heard George W. Say...

Originally Posted by 3FLryan

I just thought one who's mind is so obviously rooted in logic would ask for actual proof of a story so important.
[/b]

I am skeptical enough to question why there aren't things like a "Million Engineer March" every Saturday. Can you tell me why there aren't? I live very close to New Orleans, and I have not even seen ONE nut case on a street corner in the French Quarter saying he is an engineering expert and knows that the 9/11 story is a myth. My ex was an architect, and she hated Bush and our wars in the Middle East, and she never made a single comment about how the 9/11 story does not add up. But I have seen proof of the story I think is most likely. I have seen videos of the airplanes hitting the World Trade Center, and I have seen pictures of the Pentagon. I also know that a very large number of people are employed at the Pentagon, and far more were employed at the World Trade Center. Are all of the survivors keeping the secret that their buildings were not hit by airplanes and that Bush and his demolition sidekick showed up with David Copperfield at those places and did some tricks? Am I supposed to believe that the people who were on board those airplanes were prank calling their family members in large numbers while Bush's robots were flying the planes? If not robots, then who? Did Bush make a purchase at Rent A Suicidal Murderer? The story I described makes the most sense of every theory/hypothesis I have come across.

truth is stranger than fiction

Just stop posting on this forum. It's done. We're done. I'm sorry for you.

Originally Posted by Universal

Am I supposed to believe that the people who were on board those airplanes were prank calling their family members in large numbers while Bush's robots were flying the planes? [/b]

In case you can't read (I'm not sure), I didn't ask you to believe anything. I merely asked you if the official story was logically believable. And, in case you didn't notice, the official story has holes in it you might be able to fly a 747 through. The fact that there has never been a "million engineer march" comes nowhere near being relevenant in this conversation, as it clearly does not prove one point either way.

You are just being ridiculous in order to draw attention away from the fact that there is absolutely no proof to support the conculsion you are backing.

Originally Posted by 3FLryan

In case you can't read (I'm not sure), I didn't ask you to believe anything. I merely asked you if the official story was logically believable. And, in case you didn't notice, the official story has holes in it you might be able to fly a 747 through. The fact that there has never been a "million engineer march" comes nowhere near being relevenant in this conversation, as it clearly does not prove one point either way.

You are just being ridiculous in order to draw attention away from the fact that there is absolutely no proof to support the conculsion you are backing.
[/b]

I didn't say you asked me to believe anything. I simply asked you what would be logical for me to do. Learn to read. I backed up my belief, debunked yours, and have yet to see your counterargument. Since you don't already know, merely saying things to the extent of, "That's not true. You're being ridiculous," does not qualify as giving a counterargument. Go to dictionary.com and look up the term "counterargument". Then you should Google some information about how to give them. If you have anything to counter my points with after that, let me know. I won't hold my breath.

Originally Posted by Universal

I am skeptical enough to question why there aren't things like a "Million Engineer March" every Saturday. Can you tell me why there aren't? I live very close to New Orleans, and I have not even seen ONE nut case on a street corner in the French Quarter saying he is an engineering expert and knows that the 9/11 story is a myth. My ex was an architect, and she hated Bush and our wars in the Middle East, and she never made a single comment about how the 9/11 story does not add up. But I have seen proof of the story I think is most likely. I have seen videos of the airplanes hitting the World Trade Center, and I have seen pictures of the Pentagon. I also know that a very large number of people are employed at the Pentagon, and far more were employed at the World Trade Center. Are all of the survivors keeping the secret that their buildings were not hit by airplanes and that Bush and his demolition sidekick showed up with David Copperfield at those places and did some tricks? Am I supposed to believe that the people who were on board those airplanes were prank calling their family members in large numbers while Bush's robots were flying the planes? If not robots, then who? Did Bush make a purchase at Rent A Suicidal Murderer? The story I described makes the most sense of every theory/hypothesis I have come across.
[/b]

This is just one version of the theory though. Heck, there are probably hundreds of possible ways they could have even pulled off the somewhat apparently unrealistic version. If you're gonna fake something like this, the cleverest thing to do is make all other possibilities seem stupid and unpatriotic. They coulda flown the passengers to area 51 and told them that the rest of the world was at nuclear war, and they had to live there forever more, and no-one would be any wiser. (I don't actually think they did this, for the record&#33

Originally Posted by Universal

I simply asked you what would be logical for me to do.[/b]

EDIT: Okay, I'm going to change everything I wrote and make this simple:

Do you think that the official story is logically coherent?

EDIT #2: Sorry, couldn't help myself:

Originally Posted by Universal

Since you don't already know, merely saying things to the extent of, "That's not true. You're being ridiculous," does not qualify as giving a counterargument.[/b]

If you read my post again, I wasn't saying, "You're being ridiculous, therefore your argument is false," because, as you have so deftly pointed out, that would not be a valid counterargument. However, I said that you were being ridiculous in order to draw attention away from the fact that there is absolutely no proof to support the official story. This, of course, is a much more damning assertion.

Originally Posted by 3FLryan

EDIT #2: Sorry, couldn't help myself:
If you read my post again, I wasn't saying, "You're being ridiculous, therefore your argument is false," because, as you have so deftly pointed out, that would not be a valid counterargument. However, I said that you were being ridiculous in order to draw attention away from the fact that there is absolutely no proof to support the official story. This, of course, is a much more damning assertion.
[/b]

You assume that I believe there is "absolutely no proof" even after I told you about a bunch of proof, and you assume that I am deliberately trying to distract you from noticing? Why do you leap to conclusions like that? I'm the one who would know what I think and what my intentions are. I wish you could know how you sound to me, the one who would know what I think and intend.

I told you the proof. Here it is again, plus some more:

- many, many phone calls from passengers to relatives-- witnesses to what was said on the phones
- videos of airplanes hitting the towers
- photographs of the Pentagon
- large numbers of workers and other witnesses, in the thousands
- air traffic radio witnesses to what was going on with the airplanes
- the logic that Muslim suicide murderers, who have a long history of existing on this planet and hating Israel and Israel's allies and dying in suicide attacks against them, died to hurt Americans, when they have done it in the past and hated us for a very long time, is far more probable than any alternative theory, such as one that robots or aliens took over the airplanes or that Bush was able to find people willing to die for some selfish Bush conspiracy even though they would not live to get a cut of the profits
- Al Qaeda's history of such things and their admissions of their role, as evidenced in videos
- later attacks in other places by Al Qaeda and the many witnesses to them and the admissions by Al Qaeda, shown in videos
- Al Qaeda attacks that have been prevented, as witnessed by federal security officials as well as many local law enforcement Bubbas who aren't buddies with Bush

Are you sure you want to call that "absolutely no proof"? Does the above really completely not exist? What exactly are you saying?

Tell me all about your "logically coherent" theory.

I believe that most likely is fake, made up by anti-Bushists.

To answer the question, I would not mind much - not even if I was an U.S. citizen.

Originally Posted by Universal

You assume that I believe there is "absolutely no proof" even after I told you about a bunch of proof, and you assume that I am deliberately trying to distract you from noticing? Why do you leap to conclusions like that? I'm the one who would know what I think and what my intentions are. I wish you could know how you sound to me, the one who would know what I think and intend.

I told you the proof. Here it is again, plus some more:

- many, many phone calls from passengers to relatives-- witnesses to what was said on the phones
- videos of airplanes hitting the towers
- photographs of the Pentagon
- large numbers of workers and other witnesses, in the thousands
- air traffic radio witnesses to what was going on with the airplanes
- the logic that Muslim suicide murderers, who have a long history of existing on this planet and hating Israel and Israel's allies and dying in suicide attacks against them, died to hurt Americans, when they have done it in the past and hated us for a very long time, is far more probable than any alternative theory, such as one that robots or aliens took over the airplanes or that Bush was able to find people willing to die for some selfish Bush conspiracy even though they would not live to get a cut of the profits
- Al Qaeda's history of such things and their admissions of their role, as evidenced in videos
- later attacks in other places by Al Qaeda and the many witnesses to them and the admissions by Al Qaeda, shown in videos
- Al Qaeda attacks that have been prevented, as witnessed by federal security officials as well as many local law enforcement Bubbas who aren't buddies with Bush

Are you sure you want to call that "absolutely no proof"? Does the above really completely not exist? What exactly are you saying?

Tell me all about your "logically coherent" theory.
[/b]

I'm not sure there is a logically coherent theory, but it seems to me we should question and question until we get one...right?

I didn't really intend for this to be an in-depth discussion of 9/11. I just wanted to point out that there are very big holes in any "official" account, and since you attacked my assertion that Bush uttered the statement this thread is about, I thought you would jump on those holes in the story as well and demand a better explanation. I'm not saying anything positive about what happened, I just want to know why you don't question these issues until you get a coherent picture of what actually happened that day.

For instance, the owner of WTC towers 1, 2, and 7 is on video record saying they decided to "pull" WTC seven, even though it was not very badly damaged compared to other buildings around it, (which, incidentally, he did not own or have a large insurance premium on), and the fires in it were pretty much out. The building then proceeded to collapse in a classic demolition fashion, barely disturbing the ground very close to its base. How long does it take to set up such a perfectly controlled demolition? Well...the answer is a long time (more than even a day or two). Therefore, there must have been explosives in place long before 9/11.

This is an example of a piece of information that just doesn't make sense with the story. When I encounter a piece of information that would make a story inconsistent, I do research and ask questions in order to make the story coherent again. There are many people like me who are also demanding a coherent story of what happened on 9/11, it's just that their voice is drowned out by the media. I once watched as some mainstream show (on NBC or whatever) invited someone on that was questioning 9/11. It was pathetic to watch - they didn't even let this guy talk, or respond to his points. Usually, in a conversation, you listen to someone's points, consider them, and respond to them in an intelligent manner (like we are doing now). But, of course, when the agenda is set, things change. He would try to say something like, "But this part of the story just is inconsistent." A very calm, unassuming statement, right? Well, the guy interviewing him would ignore him completely and interrupt him. He would just keep saying things like, "So you really believe that? WOW ZOMFG YOU ARE SO STUPID AND UNAMERICAN" and then the firefighter they had as a guest at the same time would literally say "I am so offended. You are unamerican. It was so hot. The flames we hot. I was scared for my life. And here you are questioning it." Don't you think they would at least CONSIDER what this guy was saying? "Hey, the story is inconsistent for reason X." "Interesting. But what about Y?" and so on. Instead, there was no substance. They brought him on for the sole purpose of yelling at him. Instead, it was "Hey, the story is inconsistent for reason X." "You're not an american, are you?"

Apparently, it is unamerican to ask questions and want a story that makes sense. That is all I am doing here. All the reasons you stated are nice, but it still doesn't make the story add up. The official story cannot be true; it doesn't add up. I just want it to add up. Don't you, as well?

As I said, I am not an engineering/demolition expert. I know very, very little about that stuff. That is why I cannot argue construction or demolition specifics. What I can do is talk about how I think it would be the by far the best conspiracy in history to make all of the stuff I listed above happen when 9/11 didn't happen the way it supposedly did. It seems incredibly far fetched that it is all a big put on. It would be thousands of times greater than any other put on the government has pulled off. There are some smart people in the government, but I don't think they are THAT smart. You couldn't get a million David Copperfield's to come together and pull off an illusion so impressive. I also still don't understand why people who do understand engineering/construction/demolition, who are all over the place, aren't going off to the top of their lungs all day every day in gigantic numbers about it. Even basic construction workers would understand such holes in the story. I wouldn't, but they would. I know some engineers and a lot of construction workers, and I have yet to hear a word from any of them about holes in the engineering/demolition story. That is the most I can say about it. I would have to take a course on building construction and demolition to get into those specifics. I am retarded when it comes to anything mechanical. It's not my area. My lego formations were pathetic when I was a kid. It takes me two hours just to figure out how to use a new remote control. I can't tell you the first thing about that stuff. But do I still question whether there are holes int the story? Yes. I just see crater size holes in the idea that what I listed is a big put on.

You don't have to be a demolition expert, and I certainly don't want you to believe in wild conspiracy theories.


It takes a long time to set up a controlled demolition.
WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition.

Conclusion: There were explosives in place well before 9/11.



Here's a link investigating WTC 7.

Please read it, but again, take it with a grain of salt if you wish. Especially interesting is this page, which details a few things that were in WTC 7. Here are some videos of the collapse. Try not approach it with a guilty-until-proven-innocent attitude, which it seems like you are doing (I might be wrong, I can't tell for sure). Take a step back from whatever you believe and just read it, it is very interesting stuff.

There are a great many people working to get the word out on this kind of thing, but the problem is the mainstream media ignores it, most people don't take the time to actually consider problems like these, and 90% of the people just don't want to believe that the official story might not be right. But it just isn't right, it doesn't matter how many sheeple don't know it yet. I mean, for God's sake, consider how many stupid and apathetic people there are out there that couldn't even follow our conversation or even name a single senator or governor! EDIT: These people can certainly react with emotion, but not with logic. :END EDIT When people are confronted with a confusing situation or problem, they are extremely likely to believe any explanation or follow any order as long as it takes the confusion away; this is a psychological fact. To me, it seems more likely that people would believe a false story that makes them feel safe than ask hard questions that might make them feel uncomfortable.

I guess we just fundamentally differ on what is far fetched. You say it is far fetched that it happened any other way, while I say it is far fetched that it happened the way they say. I tend to think that whether it is the best conspiracy ever, or whether people are marching all over protesting the story is irrelevent, you should just look at the facts. And I don't see how the facts point to the validity of the official story.

It doesn't matter whether you think it is far fetched that it is a big put on. That's fine. What I'm saying is, there are questions to be answered, whether you think it is a put on or not, that are nowhere near being answered, and I don't understand why you wouldn't be seeking to answer them.

Originally Posted by 3FLryan

You don't have to be a demolition expert, and I certainly don't want you to believe in wild conspiracy theories.
It takes a long time to set up a controlled demolition.
WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition.

Conclusion: There were explosives in place well before 9/11.
[/b]

You did see the planes fly into it, right?

Originally Posted by Mark75

You did see the planes fly into it, right?
[/b]

Into WTC 7?

Hahaha, no. I saw them fly into WTC 1 and 2.

Originally Posted by 3FLryan

I mean, for God's sake, consider how many stupid and apathetic people there are out there that couldn't even follow our conversation or even name a single senator or governor! EDIT: These people can certainly react with emotion, but not with logic. :END EDIT When people are confronted with a confusing situation or problem, they are extremely likely to believe any explanation or follow any order as long as it takes the confusion away; this is a psychological fact. To me, it seems more likely that people would believe a false story that makes them feel safe than ask hard questions that might make them feel uncomfortable.
[/b]

What percentage of engineers are like that?

You say you saw the planes flying into the two tallest towers, right? Give your best possible theory as to why that happened. PLEASE!

I'll read the link. I have read them before, and I have no idea what they are talking about. It reminds me of when my ex used to talk for an hour straight about how this piece goes with that piece and all kinds of stuff like that when she got home from work at her architecture firm. I have no idea what any of it is about. I told you I am retarded when it comes to that stuff. Any time I have to put together something or figure out a device, my brother gets his kicks by refusing to help me with it and saying he just wants to watch me try to figure it out. I am not an idiot in general, but I am severely ADD, and my ADD turns mechanical explanations into brick walls for me. No amount of ultrameth would ever allow me to pay attention to it for more than one minute. I would love to understand the conspiracy charges better, but I am not ready to hire ten tutors to help me with a crash course in construction, I don't automatically trust the obscure sources of the construction/demolition aspects of the accusations, and I have yet to see somebody give me a straight answer to my questions about how this supermajician stunt could be so successful. I am not talking about the demolition. I am talking about the stuff I listed. Not one person has told me how it could have all been pulled off. It is about like a claim that England never existed. And when I ask people how an illusion of England's existence could have possibly been pulled off, all they tell me is stuff like, "There are holes in the theory that England has ever existed. I can't believe you won't question England's existence. Read this obscure left wing site that has nothing to lose by lying. They go into construction principle detail about how Big Ben could not have been built."

By the way, conspiracy theories entertain the Hell out of me. I just don't have a mind for construction. I love Art Bell's radio show, even when they talk about 9/11 conspiracy theories. My favorite book of all time is Robert Anton Wilson's book Cosmic Trigger Vol. 1: Final Secret of the Illuminati. I'm totally serious. I love stuff like that, and I do a lot of thinking about it because it is so entertaining. I just don't think it adds up.

But the official story doesnt add up. Why don't you question it? That is the ONLY thing I am asking.

I'll read the link. I have read them before, and I have no idea what they are talking about. It reminds me of when my ex used to talk for an hour straight about how this piece goes with that piece and all kinds of stuff like that when she got home from work at her architecture firm. I have no idea what any of it is about. I told you I am retarded when it comes to that stuff.[/quote]

Well maybe you should try to understand it!

Originally Posted by 3FLryan

But the official story doesnt add up. Why don't you question it? That is the ONLY thing I am asking.
[/b]

I question it and keep questioning it. That is why I have repeatedly asked you how everything I listed could possibly be a put on. I want to know. I very much want to know. I am extremely curious. This is not just some stump game I am playing with you. My mind is open, and I am asking you the best questions I know to ask about what might have actually happened. How do you not see that I am questioning it? I keep questioning and keep questioning you about it, and you won't answer me. Do you remember where I used all caps and said "PLEASE!"? Please tell me how the stuff I listed was put on for the public. You said you saw the videos of the airplanes hitting the two tallest towers, right? How do you explain that, for starters? The next big question would be about how thousands of witnesses are lying and not spilling the beans about the cover up. I listed several other issues too. I want to understand.

As I said, the theory that the official story does not add up... does not add up. But my eyes are fully open for the best possible hypothetical explanation you can give me.

Give me a couple of days, will you? I'm kinda depressed and worn out with this kind of talk and I don't know if my brain can handle any intense thinking. It's just such a downer. I just spent all last night talking with a friend about this kind of thing and it's just really getting to me, so I don't think I'm in the best state to give an adequate response to your questions. I don't know if I'm getting my point across, but I'm not being sarcastic at all, this stuff really takes it out of me. But thanks for making me work hard to justify my views, its excellent exercise, I'm just worn out right now.