Thread: 9/11 Conspiracy

Unfortunately for 911 Truth deniers, there is incontrovertible proof.

Demolition waves are clearly visible, exploding before the top mass can pulverize it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri9Uz1Wa-Xc

WTC7 displays all the characteristics of controlled demolition, not to mention features which can only be explained by it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFFkbo3o0NM

Scientists and Academics have written articles claiming to prove the controlled demolition theory, and have not been refuted.
http://www.journalof911studies.com/v...Demolition.pdf

Its a simple fact that government officials have tried to cover up evidence, like the molten metal.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...03712325092501

And I havnt seen one person in any forum discussing this topic even attempt to refute any of the facts and arguments provided by over a hundred of Architects and Engineers.
http://www.ae911truth.org/

Originally Posted by memeticverb

Unfortunately for 911 Truth deniers, there is incontrovertible proof.

Demolition waves are clearly visible, exploding before the top mass can pulverize it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri9Uz1Wa-Xc

WTC7 displays all the characteristics of controlled demolition, not to mention features which can only be explained by it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFFkbo3o0NM

Scientists and Academics have written articles claiming to prove the controlled demolition theory, and have not been refuted.
http://www.journalof911studies.com/v...Demolition.pdf

Its a simple fact that government officials have tried to cover up evidence, like the molten metal.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...03712325092501

And I havnt seen one person in any forum discussing this topic even attempt to refute any of the facts and arguments provided by over a hundred of Architects and Engineers.
http://www.ae911truth.org/

This proves 100 percent that the United States government is responsible. Because of these wonderful unbias videos you've shown me, I will ignore all the evidence that stupidly points to Al Qaeda. Thank you, sir, for opening my eyes to our government killing people it's people for oil. Our politicians so desperately need money.

I guess the people who were willing to kill themselves so Bush's cronies could get rich knew where the explosives were planted and flew their planes exactly 1 floor over them.

And the people responsible said, hey, why not destroy Tower 7? Its only been a couple of hours after the attacks!! These people also said, hey, there is NO POSSIBLE WAY a single person could photograph our cruise missile going into the Pentagon. Lets go forward with the plan!!

I also guess they knew Saddam Hussein wouldn't let Inspectors into the bunkers. I guess they knew a major terrorist leader would admitt to the attacks. All thanks to the government's Oracle of Truth, who can tell the future.

It all makes sense. Thank you, sir.

By the way, you are a 9/11 Truth denier. And do you not think Democrats would be jumping all over this shit to blame Bush? You think you understand what happened. Democrats know much more than you do, and they are not calling it a conspiracy. They would piss their pants if they found that out, and it would be on the news every day.

ROFL! Yeah keep telling yourself that you actually responded to a single piece of evidence just posted and didnt commit multiple logical fallacies!

Originally Posted by memeticverb

ROFL! Yeah keep telling yourself that you actually responded to a single piece of evidence just posted and didnt commit multiple logical fallacies!

You have no proof for me to counter. I watched your videos. There is no proof, and fankly I didn't see any explosions.

I will ask again. Why aren't Bush's political enemies saying this everyday?

While you're at it, prove to me that fanatical Muslims didn't do this. I swear to God I will come to where you live and kiss your feet if you can do that.

I would also like to point 1 more time that the buildings did not fall from the bottom. Explosives in the basement would not have done a thing.

I did you a courtesy by watching your videos. Now if you would, please read this article.

http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archiv...14-610042.html

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

You have no proof for me to counter. I watched your videos. There is no proof, and fankly I didn't see any explosions.

You mean all I have to do for every fact that I dont like is say, "Thats not a fact," and I can believe anything I want?

Sorry, simply saying that there isnt any proof isnt even an argument. Half Dreaming, youve responded neither directly nor indirectly to any evidence.

There so much proof that hundreds of Architects and Engineers have created an independent organization with the sole purpose of spreading the truth about the 3 WTC buildings that were demolished with explosives.

Theres so much proof that thousands of academics, and millions of intelligent Americans have accepted the CD theory as undoubtedly true.

Even more proof than all the links I just posted (some showing molten iron flowing out of one of the twin towers, other showing demolition waves exploding before the tower can collapse, others showing the perfectly symmetrical collapse of WTC7 impossible without cutter charges removing the resistance, etc) can be found here:

http://journalof911studies.com/volum...emistryWTC.pdf

Originally Posted by memeticverb

Sorry, simply saying that there isnt any proof isnt even an argument.

Oh, it's not? Well then... The invisible aliens working for the CIA have sex with vegetable robots from Atlantis, which was shipped to Neptune in 2538, in order to create a voodoo spell which projects holographic images of soldiers to create the illusion that the U.S. military exists. Kennedy is still the president of the supposed United States, and he is also the Great Pumpkin. I guess the sky is the limit on the legitimate acceptance of claims if the point that there is no proof doesn't qualify as an argument.

I certainly would not nearly go as far as to say that our own GOVERNMENT is responsible for these attacks. I loath and despise most or our current government, but to say that they would kill thousands of their own citizens to me seems completely unrealistic. As far as these videos, I will not deny that they do have SOME rather convincing bits of evidence, such as the demolition thing, and the fact that it is scientifically impossible for a boeing 700 series jet to be vaporized entirely by jet fuel as the government claims.

I think the government knows a lot that we do not, but I still have concluded at least for myself that this was terrorists. Logically, it makes sense. Around the world we are gaining more enemies constantly. Just a thought.

Originally Posted by memeticverb
Sorry, simply saying that there isnt any proof isnt even an argument.

That..doesn't quite make sense. Of course that's an argument. The lack of proof or a logical explanation of things is grounds for a lost argument.

On a side note...

Many psychologists say that aggression is most commonly linked to fear. Do many of you act so immature and childlike because you might be....afraid of being wrong? I guess all of the unnecessary childish sarcastic remarks are a result of letting kids partake in what once were "intelligent" discussions. So sad that so few have the maturity to have a friendly debate. it is not impossible to make your point without insulting other people.

Originally Posted by memeticverb

Unfortunately for 911 Truth deniers, there is incontrovertible proof.

Demolition waves are clearly visible, exploding before the top mass can pulverize it.

Scientists and Academics have written articles claiming to prove the controlled demolition theory, and have not been refuted.

Its a simple fact that government officials have tried to cover up evidence, like the molten metal.

And I havnt seen one person in any forum discussing this topic even attempt to refute any of the facts and arguments provided by over a hundred Architects and Engineers.

Again, since none of the 911 Truth deniers has responded to any of these arguments or facts, they bear repeating. As well as this video comparison of WTC7 to a controlled demolition.

Oh and UM, why didn't you respond to the short video link I provided showing how Popular Mechanics "chief researcher" for the 911 article was caught in multiple lies? Or the fact that the article was not written by a real scientist, contained multiple fallacies, and was backed by no credible research? Popular Mechanics has lied so many times that it would take an hour to post all of them.

What about Flight 93?

Originally Posted by memeticverb

Again, since none of the 911 Truth deniers has responded to any of these arguments or facts, they bear repeating. As well as this video comparison of WTC7 to a controlled demolition.

Oh and UM, why didn't you respond to the short video link I provided showing how Popular Mechanics "chief researcher" for the 911 article was caught in multiple lies? Or the fact that the article was not written by a real scientist, contained multiple fallacies, and was backed by no credible research? Popular Mechanics has lied so many times that it would take an hour to post all of them.

What major source is that? Some Youtube video that claims to be something credible? Okay, let's pretend we should blindly trust that nobody source. They split hairs over the use of the term "pull it" and hound a mechanics expert on where a DNA sample came from and he didn't know. Yippie whooptie wooo!!! I am not basing my argument on Popular Mechanics any way. I told Alric that none of us are demolition experts and flat out said I was speculating on what might have happened to building 7 and said on a side note that a Popular Mechanics article argued what I speculated. I have said many times in this thread that I don't know enough about the mechanics of demolition to argue about how boards and beams should have fallen and melted. So let's get to the arguments I have been making and you have been ignoring.

Respond to the points you have ignored after two rounds of my posting, particularly the ones concerning the social phenomena I described and didn't happen and the points about the airplanes. Your bizarre story is not adding up.

UM, Since you must resort to direct insults without correlation or connection to the debate, you have in essence conceded defeat. That'd be the exact same thing as, after having ran out of steam to continue on, you have no choice but to stoop as low as throwing around, YO MOMMA, jokes in desperation. How old are you again, 35? going on 12? How pathetic.

Hating on my music has nothing to do with al Qaeda, 9-11, or anything about anything, and all it proves to me is you are some jealous unproductive loser ex-social worker who stays up until ungodly hours of the morning, arguing things without backing them up, while listening to Led Zepplin, and knows next to nothing about music or music production. If you knew anything about music or the elements and instruments involved you would know you are full of it, it's pathetic really. No one in real life has ever said any of the things you said, because quite simply there is no one that feels the way you do.

So, tell me again where does my music, or my views on manipulation which you even later agreed with me on, have anything to do with this? You unproductive jealous tool, you.

I'll bet there's a lot of people on Earth that don't like you. Go ahead, make another post about how my insults are an act of desperation . Honestly, how are you any different?

What about Flight 93?

Also, can I get a link to this music? I want to hear the next Elvis before he gets famous.

Originally Posted by SolSkye

UM, Since you must resort to direct insults without correlation or connection to the debate, you have in essence conceded defeat. That'd be the exact same thing as, after having ran out of steam to continue on, you have no choice but to stoop as low as throwing around, YO MOMMA, jokes in desperation. How old are you again, 35? going on 12? How pathetic.

Hating on my music has nothing to do with al Qaeda, 9-11, or anything about anything, and all it proves to me is you are some jealous unproductive loser ex-social worker who stays up until ungodly hours of the morning, arguing things without backing them up, while listening to Led Zepplin, and knows next to nothing about music or music production. If you knew anything about music or the elements and instruments involved you would know you are full of it, it's pathetic really. No one in real life has ever said any of the things you said, because quite simply there is no one that feels the way you do.

So, tell me again where does my music, or my views on manipulation which you even later agreed with me on, have anything to do with this? You unproductive jealous tool, you.

Oh, I was thinking you used personal insults in your previous posts, as well as the above one. Maybe not. Your entire argument is always, "You're a robot. You're a sheep. You suck. I'm better than you." So I thought I would play your game a little bit, but only after making points that you obviously can't counter. You know very little about my job history or the business I do now. I got a law degree after I stopped being a social worker, and now I work for myself. I do know about music, and I am not the only person on Earth who would gag after hearing your music. Make it where five people on Earth have heard it, and you will get the same reaction. Now if you would like to get insults out of our conversations, let's see it.

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

Also, can I get a link to this music? I want to hear the next Elvis before he gets famous.

There's a Myspace link in his sig line. Prepare yourself.

All of my insults have been in the vein of the topic at hand and should've been taken with a grain of salt. You didn't actually let one hit home, did you? Only after you bothered to stoop as low as to throw around Yo momma jokes, did I bother doing the same about talking about your ex-social worker too much free time loser status. Only to show how pointless and stupid a method it is.

An eye for an eye leaving the world blind, and all that jazz. Fun stuff.

I know what our music is and what it isn't. You try talking like you know what you like and what not, but we have plenty of people that dig our music and have listened to it so it really means nothing that you hate it. I wouldn't want someone with your 'refined' tastes listening to our music anyway. Try looking into the 'shakuhachi' which we incorporate into the music. It's only one of the world's most difficult instruments to play, and all. Y'know, nothing special. Be my guest though. Lace into our music all you want. You must know absolutely nothing about our music or our influences, or you wouldn't be able to say the things you are saying. It's funny how you're desperately trying to find something that'll strike a nerve with me, and as always, you are sadly mistaken. Poor baby

Originally Posted by SolSkye

All of my insults have been in the vein of the topic at hand and should've been taken with a grain of salt. You didn't actually let one hit home, did you? Only after you bothered to stoop as low as to throw around Yo momma jokes, did I bother doing the same about talking about your ex-social worker too much free time loser status. Only to show how pointless and stupid a method it is.

An eye for an eye leaving the world blind, and all that jazz. Fun stuff.

I know what our music is and what it isn't. You try talking like you know what you like and what not, but we have plenty of people that dig our music and have listened to it so it really means nothing that you hate it. I wouldn't want someone with your 'refined' tastes listening to our music anyway. Try looking into the 'shakuhachi' which we incorporate into the music. It's only one of the world's most difficult instruments to play, and all. Y'know, nothing special. Be my guest though. Lace into our music all you want. You must know absolutely nothing about our music or our influences, or you wouldn't be able to say the things you are saying. It's funny how you're desperately trying to find something that'll strike a nerve with me, and as always, you are sadly mistaken. Poor baby

Calling me lame, half witted, full of hot air, and closed minded was on topic? This thread is supposed to be about me, not 9/11? I'm honored. A grain of salt? Oh, how convenient. Uh, yeah, me too. While I'm at it, I agree that your music is very special and that nobody with taste could ever possibly not like it. At least I didn't strike a nerve with you. If you have anything to say to disprove the statements I made about the actual subject of this thread, I'm ready to get back to it whenever you are. Try to stay on topic from now on.

Just to summarize, here are a couple points UM and Half Dreaming have not even engaged, let alone given arguments against.

1) FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, has along with many other FBI agents, blown the whistle on top officials within the FBI, saying they have supported terrorists and protected them.

Her claims were reviewed and confirmed by the Justice Department, but all efforts since this have been blocked by Attorney General without cause.

"On January 14, 2004 , the Justice Department's Office unclassified summary of the Justice Department's Inspector General's report on Edmonds found that many of her claims "were supported, that the FBI did not take them seriously enough, and that her allegations were, in fact, the most significant factor in the FBI's decision to terminate her services."


2) FBI AGENT ROBERT WRIGHT SAYS FBI AGENTS ASSIGNED TO INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS CONTINUE TO PROTECT TERRORISTS FROM CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS AND PROSECUTIONS

"Wright is the only FBI agent to seize terrorist funds (over $1.4 million) from U.S.-based Middle Eastern terrorists using federal civil forfeiture statutes, prior to the September 11th attacks. The original source of the funds was Yassin Kadi, a Saudi businessman, who is reportedly a financier of Osama bin Laden.

SA Wright points to recent misconduct and falsifications of wiretap warrant applications by FBI agents (signed-off by the former FBI Director, Louis Freeh) to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court. Prior to September 11th, SA Wright alleged FBI intelligence agents lied and hid vital records from" criminal agents for the purpose of obstructing his criminal investigation of the terrorists in order to protect their “subjects,” and prolong their intelligence operations."

__________________________________________________ __________

Ok so we can leave the physical hard evidence alone for a brief moment, because as has already been pointed out, such evidence is irrefutable, and the best rebuttal from has been a logical fallacy, not to mention completely unsupported by any kind of evidence. According to UM - "There should be more engineers risking their lives and careers besides the thousands who are already doing so because..."

Lets talk about the whistle-blowers, whose claims have been verified by the justice department, and the official investigations of which have only been blocked by executive order.

I'm not going to pretend to know anything about the FBI, or these people's ranks and access to classified materials. Yet in the end, all you have is the assumptions of a few FBI. I also know that if this were tied to 9/11, no peons like the ones you've mentioned would be allowed to know.

As to "controlled demolitions". That amount of explosives would have made and undeniable noise, predicted by professionals to be as loud or louder than the actual buildings falling. This noise would have also been in one, short BOOM. You claim this happened in 3 buildings. Nobody heard these noises. Due to the lack of people claiming to hear these noises, it is illogical that they ever happened. I feel obligated to mention that explosives in the basement would have dropped the entire building, then fell. Instead, the basement was the very last to be affected.

I have responded to your "evidence". Now please, by the grace of GOD can you counter our arguments? What about Flight 93 and the proven hostile takeover? What about Osama bin Laden, the educated architect, and his confession?

For the sake of the argument don't respond to my counterarguments until you have answered my questions. Do it in the same post if you want. But, I have gone a very long time without getting these answers.

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

I'm not going to pretend to know anything about the FBI, or these people's ranks and access to classified materials. Yet in the end, all you have is the assumptions of a few FBI. I also know that if this were tied to 9/11, no peons like the ones you've mentioned would be allowed to know.

As to "controlled demolitions". That amount of explosives would have made and undeniable noise, predicted by professionals to be as loud or louder than the actual buildings falling. This noise would have also been in one, short BOOM. You claim this happened in 3 buildings. Nobody heard these noises. Due to the lack of people claiming to hear these noises, it is illogical that they ever happened. I feel obligated to mention that explosives in the basement would have dropped the entire building, then fell. Instead, the basement was the very last to be affected.

I have responded to your "evidence". Now please, by the grace of GOD can you counter our arguments? What about Flight 93 and the proven hostile takeover? What about Osama bin Laden, the educated architect, and his confession?

For the sake of the argument don't respond to my counterarguments until you have answered my questions. Do it in the same post if you want. But, I have gone a very long time without getting these answers.

Anyone can counter your arguments, quite easily in fact. As for a few FBI, no its quite a few, and they have evidence that they discovered, and has been verified by the Justice Department.

You say no one heard explosions in the tower. Wrong. 118 Firefighters and paramedics reported hearing very loud explosions. Dozens of them distinctly referencing controlled demolition and bombs.

The govt did everything in its power to stop these testimonies from being released to the public. Just read what some of the judges ended up saying about that. Why would t 911 Families have to wage multiple court battles to release something that was public property? Why was the govt trying to hide them, and what were they trying to hide?

As for your questions they are irrelevant and in no way, even if proven correct, (that osama had a hand in the attacks, or that 93 happened the way the govt says) would discount all the evidence for controlled demolition, and the evidence verified by the Justice Department of numerous FBI whistle-blowers that top officials in the FBI are funding and protecting terrorists.

Where were these explosives planted?

Originally Posted by memeticverb

Just to summarize, here are a couple points UM and Half Dreaming have not even engaged, let alone given arguments against.

1) FBI translator Sibel Edmonds, has along with many other FBI agents, blown the whistle on top officials within the FBI, saying they have supported terrorists and protected them.

Her claims were reviewed and confirmed by the Justice Department, but all efforts since this have been blocked by Attorney General without cause.

I did talk about that in the the thread about Al Qaeda's supposed nonexistence. You should start reading the responses you request. Supposedly some disgruntled FBI agents who probably need jobs and probably want book money said some crazy things about classified subject matter. Wow, that proves once and for all that Bush put bombs in the World Trade Center that he could blow up as soon as remote control airpanes hit the towers after robots posed as pilots and talked to the other workers on the airplanes and communicated with the workers on the runways and caused the buildings to collapse in such a way that you know a bomb had to have done it but the engineers, constructions supervisors, and demolition experts of the world are not engaged in any major chatter because the government was willing to take that kind of risk with what would be the biggest news story of all time. No, I don't agree with you. But you are welcome to finally answer my questions and counter my points, if you think you can. I don't.

Originally Posted by memeticverb

2) FBI AGENT ROBERT WRIGHT SAYS FBI AGENTS ASSIGNED TO INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS CONTINUE TO PROTECT TERRORISTS FROM CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS AND PROSECUTIONS

Oh, a guy said that. I can't believe so much is known by an agent who is too low on the totem pole to know about certain classified information. Well then screw the thousands of other agents and CIA workers and everybody else who says otherwise. Terrorists are treated as prisoners of war in most cases, and a great deal of the information concerning them is classified. We are at war. How would that prove that 9/11 was an inside job? And what would terrorists have to do with this if terrorists were not responsible for 9/11?

And where is the big chatter among construction/demolition professionals? And where is the major chatter from government workers (about a 9/11 coverup, not just any supposed corruption you think you have found)? And who faked the hostile takeover on flight 93? And who showed up for work posing as pilots? And who flew those airplanes? And why was the government willing to roll such risky dice? And why do you keep dodging these questions?

Talk about not reading the posts your trying to respond to!! LOL

Sibel Edmonds' evidence, as already pointed, out was CONFIRMED by the JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. They verified her information, and her case was going to court proceeding. THEN, Ashcroft placed gag orders on her. THEN he even gagged the congress from further hearing any of her evidence, or even mentioning anything about her case like the languages she spoke!

UM, you are hopelessly in denial. So whats YOUR crackpot reason for why Sibel Edmonds is the most gagged person in history? Oh yeah, she is supposedly just a disgruntled ex-FBI who is absolutely no threat to those in power right??

Her case will almost certainly go to the Supreme Court. Her allegations are so damning, and since already verified by evidence as first presented to congress and the Justice Department (then retroactively classified), they will lead, according to Daniel Ellsberg (you know who that is right UM? lol) criminal indictment of Ashcroft himself for failing to meet the criteria for having sufficient reason o place the gag orders.

And it gets WORSE.

The Judge "randomly assigned" to both of Sibel Edmonds federal cases was a long-time Bush insider. (and also the Judge in the "Scooter" Libby case). This person, Judge Walton, has had his entire financial statement redacted.

Less than 1% of Judges have their financial disclosure statements hidden...

"In July 2004, Judge Reggie Walton disposed of Edmonds’ First Amendment case on the basis of the government’s assertion of State Secrets Privilege. On the same day as the decision, Judge Walton quashed a subpoena for Edmonds’ deposition by attorneys representing over 1,000 family members who lost love ones during the terrorist attacks on 9/11. In limiting the deposition in the case, Burnett et al. v. Al Baraka Investment & Development Corp., Judge Walton prevented the 9/11 attorneys from asking a majority of the proposed questions related to the attacks."

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

And where is the big chatter among construction/demolition professionals? And where is the major chatter from government workers (about a 9/11 coverup, not just any supposed corruption you think you have found)? And who faked the hostile takeover on flight 93? And who showed up for work posing as pilots? And who flew those airplanes? And why was the government willing to roll such risky dice? And why do you keep dodging these questions?

Hello?

I would like to ask, where were the explosives in the twin towers placed?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Hello?

The answer to those is. I don't know. The risky dice thing makes sense. They made sure that people would think it was a jihad invasion. They got what they wanted, the war of terror thing.

I have a question for you. Don't you want to know the truth? Do you even look at the facts, evidence the "conspiracy theorists" present. Don't tell me that when you see all the info you still don't see a reason to even doubt, just a little bit. Are you going to believe them, just because you're waiting for someone who took part in the inside job to stand up and speak. I know you're smart, but why blind yourself. It's true that I should be open minded, but with all I've seen I just can't believe the usual Osama did it because he's evil truth.

Half/Dreaming, for what it's worth:
Core column pic
There are also videos of people talking about explosions and some videos showing the probable explosions themselves (the one on the base or the other ones, I'm no professional).