9/11 again

[Furr]

ohhh a conspiracy theorist, i suppose you believe the moon landing was fake too.

Especially when the overwhelming evidence is there, there are some ,usually paranoid, who will look at the smaller less clear details that can be easily corrupted to what "they" want to believe it to show.

Reminds of a girl in my year at school when one of the lunar astronauts came to give us a presentation (the one who dropped the feather and the hammer) her question was how the moon was faked, thankfully all the students in the lecture hall told her to sit down, shut up and keep her stupid mouth shut.

Some people are just OMFGWTF stupid its just silly....

 

[yaruar]

The closest comparison I can think of is Pearl Harbour, where recent research has suggested that the Yanks had foreknowledge of the attack beforehand (they'd successfuly cracked the Japanese Naval codes), but let it go ahead regardless for political reasons. Back than is gave them a cassus belli for declaring war on Japan (Note than they didn't join in the struggle against Germany until after Hitler declared war on them), and in 2001 it suited the nutters in America (who'd already discussed NEEDING a new Pearl Harbour) a reason to lie to their public (and the rest of the world) and basically declare war on Islam.

Maybe after the 7/7 bombing we should have declared war on Leeds?

Actually the Us hadn't cracked the Japanese codes, us plucky brits did, and it was Churchill who decided not to tell the americans and he summised that Pearl Harbour would galvanise the US into action in the war, whereas they had been sitting back before twiddling their thumbs watching europe being devestated and not caring.

 

[Mofo8]

Prove that anybody 'knew it'.

Many different individuals and companies bought put options in the 2 airlines involved in 911 (and Boeing who made all the aircraft involved), in the days running up to attacks. These people made a lot of money. Buying put options is basically betting that a certain stock will fall in value. Do you expect us to believe that the people who profited all made the same gamble? The put options on these carriers were up by 40% on normally activity. That's statisically suspicious. I don't need to prove anything. It's up to the financial authorities in the USA and the FBI to investigate.

Controlled demolition my arse. Have you ever seen a building prepared for demolition with explosives? You can't hide that. The building fell because of damage from falling debris and fire. Fact.

Most of the jet fuel exploded in a huge fireball on impact. The aircraft themselves were made of the notoriously light and flimsy aluminium you mention below. There are recordings of FDNY teams who actually managed to reach the burning and damaged sections of one of the towers (must have been a knackering climb), who's assessment of the situation was that the fires weren't as bad as they expected and they thought they'd need two lines to put them out and bring the situation under control. There are numerous eyewitness reports (including some from NYPD and FDNY) who report secondary explosions, crackling noises similar to the sound of demolitions charges, etc. Their was the eyewitness janitor who reported hearing a loud explosion in the basement before he heard the much more distant aircraft impact.

Thats your problem then. Aircraft aren't made from aluminium and made to be as lightweight as possible for no reason. They could always make them from wrought Iron if it would make you feel better. They wouldn't fly very far though.

What are the huge fuckoff engines made out off though? Titanium? I'll bet they just melted or something or turned into fine powder... bollocks.

You don't need to rebuild the aircraft. You've got clear video evidence of exactly what happened to them. They flew into buildings at very high speed and disintegrated amongst huge fireballs of burning fuel. Also, not all of the debris was removed and destroyed. Debris was recovered from the areas around each impact, analysed, and it was demonstrated that the steel had lost most of its strength through excess heat, and that the structure had failed. Coupled with multiple camera angles showing a structural collapse of both towers, it doesn't take a genius to work out what happened.

So if I rig a building for demolition, then while being filmed strike the building rather forcefully with a hammer, and then the building collapses straight into it's own foorprint in 10 seconds, you'd say it was my hammer blow that forced it to collapse. The whole jet fuel thing is bollocks too... it relies in there being a constant source of fresh fuel. After the fuel burned itself of there would just be less volatile, cooler burning stuff heating the steel.

Prove it.

It was reported in the San Francisco Chronicle and Pacifia Radio. Your turn.... prove he wasn't.

You can't. You can wave accusations around all you like, but until you can prove any of them, they're irrelevant. You appear to have joined the ranks of 'OMG CONSPIRACY', well done mate you're now officially an idiot. Especially if you believe in the old 'controlled demolition' story heh.

I certainly don't believe all the conspiracy stuff surrounding 9/11. You on the otherhand seem to be the kind of subservient right-wing frother that believes that governments and powerful organisations are incapable of lying to their citizens for their own ends.

I'm not necessarily saying that 'Bush did it. or the 'US government did it' or 'Mossad did it', but I have many doubts about the official story and think there's enought that smells rotten to warrant investigation. Get a hold of some of the share dealers who profited and subject them to a wee bit of 'water-boarding' or whatever they call it these days at GITMO.

 

[Aada]

Fuck off.

No you fuck off you silly scrote.

 

[Aada]

Tom watch this video its only around 7mins but it opened my eyes and before this video and the other videos this guy has done i was a believer in the fact that Bush had nothing to do with it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDY6LIKZmIA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McRRD_XbHUQ

Also Tom you seem like a person with a high IQ can you explain why the 3rd building in 9/11 fell down? it wasn't hit by a plane.. the falling buildings couldn't have taken it out and it fell from the bottom down.

Also heres a video from a professional about the buildings falling down and why he thinks it was not the planes that caused the explosion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcUQg3DadaA

 

[old.user4556]

Oh lord, please make it stop

 

[leggy]

Prove that anybody 'knew it'.

<some stuff here>

Controlled demolition my arse. Have you ever seen a building prepared for demolition with explosives? You can't hide that. The building fell because of damage from falling debris and fire. Fact.


<some random stuff>

Prove it.

<some more stuff>
You can't.

Now I don't believe the conspiracy theory as I'm a fairly rational person. What I will say is this though:

It's easy for you to demand proof that it was a conspiracy but I don't see you providing them any proof that it wasn't. You claim that your comments are fact without actually 'knowing' this for sure.

Proof works both ways.

In order to state anything as 'fact' you need to provide a certain amount of evidence to make us believe that it couldn't be anything else.

I suspect that you don't have this evidence or have ever seen it. Websites and the news don't count. For obvious reasons.

/edit

I'm not having a go at you, I just don't like debates where one side uses the "proof" card at every move. What you should do is provide some rational argument to counter it. IMO ONLY OF COURSE.

 

[Aada]

Another video from a professional who has investigated the collapse of the buildings.

Probably the best video around on the collapse of the towers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FujppU50Ep

 

[Aada]

Oh lord, please make it stop

The questions will stop when the US goverment launches a honest investigation.. the questions that are brought up in almost every conspiracy video are questions that need to be answers yet the US goverment refuses to answer.

 

[Furr]

The only type of people i ever seems to hear this conspiracy from is either moslems or anti bush/americans people.

But hey, ok aada and mofo you believe what you want. I won't judge I won't call you morons, or idiots or prats, or nuts (+jobs) or say you probably believe that we are all part of the matrix and that the illuminati control the planet using mind control or whatever, because im nice like that

 

[Aada]

Also the Thermite theory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wVLeKwSkXA

Look at that molten spewing from the south tower before its collapse.

 

[Aada]

The only type of people i ever seems to hear this conspiracy from is either moslems or anti bush/americans people.

But hey, ok aada and mofo you believe what you want. I won't judge I won't call you morons, or idiots or prats, or nuts (+jobs) or say you probably believe that we are all part of the matrix and that the illuminati control the planet using mind control or whatever, because im nice like that

I'm not anti american i'm more anti mass murder and pass the book onto whoever you feel like person.

And now you're being stupid so go away.

I'm posting videos for you to watch and a look at why more and more people are thinking it was an inside job.

Now you go away look around and give me some proof that there isn't anything to question.

Fact is you can't because the US goverment won't talk about it.

Within 1-2 weeks the FBI solved one of the biggest mass murder cases of all time and named Bin Laden as the culprit.

Fucking mugging cases are investigated for longer then that.

 

[Furr]

Wow youtube videos!!!!!!!!!!! mate you've got me convinced. Hold on a second while i get some tinfoil and make a hat.

And your right the the bush administration never ever brings up 9/11,

And on the other side could it possibly that they think the conspiracy people are complete crack heads like many other resonable person?!?!?

And don't deserve spending more time and more effort proving what has already been studied by MIT, FEMA SEIA, ASCE. Im sure alot others.

While your doing "this" have a read of these

http://architecture.about.com/library/weekly/aawtc-collapse.htm

http://www.icivilengineer.com/News/wtc.php

http://www.icivilengineer.com/News/WTC/structure.php

http://enr.construction.com/news/buildings/archives/021104.asp

http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/

http://www.icivilengineer.com/News/WTC/Fire.html

http://www.asce.org/pdf/3-6-02wtc_testimony.pdf

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/latest/wtc.php#why

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/resources.html

http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/

Since im sure your basis for your opinion is tainted by predudice so you ignore the above information or marginise it in comparisson with proof from grainy pics and internet fabrications.

Addionally having had this conversation with a whole bunch of graduted uni mates the normal structural engineers, chemists, materials engineers etc and having one of "you conspiracy nutters" among us several months ago my mind was put completly and firmly at rest after a long (heated) debate, in which the conspiracies in regards to the "demolition", steel strength etc were completely and utterly debunked.

But hey, Im sure i won't sway you from your "belief" so go suck balls, big ones preferably, that iranian president probably has big ones, he believes the holocaust was conpiracy too!! Im sure you'd get right on.

 

[Mofo8]

Wow youtube videos!!!!!!!!!!! mate you've got me convinced. Hold on a second while i get some tinfoil and make a hat.

And your right the the bush administration never ever brings up 9/11,

And on the other side could it possibly that they think the conspiracy people are complete crack heads like many other resonable person?!?!?

And don't deserve spending more time and more effort proving what has already been studied by MIT, FEMA SEIA, ASCE. Im sure alot others.

While your doing "this" have a read of these

http://architecture.about.com/library/weekly/aawtc-collapse.htm

http://www.icivilengineer.com/News/wtc.php

http://www.icivilengineer.com/News/WTC/structure.php

http://enr.construction.com/news/buildings/archives/021104.asp

http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/

http://www.icivilengineer.com/News/WTC/Fire.html

http://www.asce.org/pdf/3-6-02wtc_testimony.pdf

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/latest/wtc.php#why

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/resources.html

http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/

Mmmhhh.... With open mind I clicked on the first of your well-researched (what was it? a google search?) links..... only to be presented with some kind of primary school friendly version of events. Oh well, the next link looks more promising... click... I was present with a whole host of other links. I chose one and clicked again.... 404 page not found. Mmmhh.... let's try another.... Page no longer exists. Back to your list... where I realised that clicking on the 3rd thing on your list is the same as clicking on the 2nd. I tried another link.... 404 Page no longer exists.... bollocks.

 

[Tom]

Many different individuals and companies bought put options in the 2 airlines involved in 911 (and Boeing who made all the aircraft involved), in the days running up to attacks. These people made a lot of money. Buying put options is basically betting that a certain stock will fall in value. Do you expect us to believe that the people who profited all made the same gamble? The put options on these carriers were up by 40% on normally activity. That's statisically suspicious. I don't need to prove anything. It's up to the financial authorities in the USA and the FBI to investigate.

Perhaps they have. Perhaps they haven't. Perhaps perhaps.........perhaps before making unsubstantiated claims you should actually demonstrate that you've looked either way? Until then, your claims are meaningless.

Most of the jet fuel exploded in a huge fireball on impact. The aircraft themselves were made of the notoriously light and flimsy aluminium you mention below. There are recordings of FDNY teams who actually managed to reach the burning and damaged sections of one of the towers (must have been a knackering climb), who's assessment of the situation was that the fires weren't as bad as they expected and they thought they'd need two lines to put them out and bring the situation under control. There are numerous eyewitness reports (including some from NYPD and FDNY) who report secondary explosions, crackling noises similar to the sound of demolitions charges, etc. Their was the eyewitness janitor who reported hearing a loud explosion in the basement before he heard the much more distant aircraft impact.

A jet hit WTC7? Wow, thats news to me.

What are the huge fuckoff engines made out off though? Titanium? I'll bet they just melted or something or turned into fine powder... bollocks.

Yeah, this engine certainly looks a bit melted:

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidence/photos/wtcengines.html

So if I rig a building for demolition, then while being filmed strike the building rather forcefully with a hammer, and then the building collapses straight into it's own foorprint in 10 seconds, you'd say it was my hammer blow that forced it to collapse. The whole jet fuel thing is bollocks too... it relies in there being a constant source of fresh fuel. After the fuel burned itself of there would just be less volatile, cooler burning stuff heating the steel.

You're not an engineer (I think) and neither am I, but you really need to have a bit of a think about how a controlled demolition works. You don't just strap explosives to various load bearing elements of a building. Theres a great deal more work than that, and its simply impossible to hide that.

It was reported in the San Francisco Chronicle and Pacifia Radio. Your turn.... prove he wasn't.

I don't have to prove anything. You see, its not the job of people who understand and believe the official story. We don't have to debunk anything. Claims, stories, whatever - they have to be proven by the people making them. Its not the job of me to disprove random claims and quotes from various sources. If you believe theres something in it, do some research, find evidence/proof, and tell us about it. If you can't, then you're pissing in the wind. Thats what conspiracy theorists don't get.

I certainly don't believe all the conspiracy stuff surrounding 9/11. You on the otherhand seem to be the kind of subservient right-wing frother that believes that governments and powerful organisations are incapable of lying to their citizens for their own ends.

Er no. I don't swallow everything I'm told. But I'll tell you this - I've read in detail both sides of this argument, and theres one side thats full of truth and fact, and the other side is full of rumour and fiction. Guess which is which?

I'm not necessarily saying that 'Bush did it. or the 'US government did it' or 'Mossad did it', but I have many doubts about the official story and think there's enought that smells rotten to warrant investigation. Get a hold of some of the share dealers who profited and subject them to a wee bit of 'water-boarding' or whatever they call it these days at GITMO.

There has already been an investigation. It has concluded that the intelligence services failed in their duty, that there was a lack of proper leadership to deal with such threats, that such examples of terrorism were completely unexpected, that both towers fell because big planes full of fuel hit them at high speed combining loss of structural integrity from damaged steel walls and loss of fireproofing together with structurally weak steel from the intense heat, that WTC 7 fell because of damage from falling debris and fire leading to a structural collapse, that the pentagon was hit by a plane travelling at high speed, and that United 93 fell into a field because the passengers decided "hey fuck that, we're not going to sit here and die".

The people whinging about 9/11 conspiracies are the same mindset as the Moon hoaxers and JFK assassination plots. Mindless morons who aren't prepared to believe that amazing shit happens.

 

[Tom]

Also Tom you seem like a person with a high IQ can you explain why the 3rd building in 9/11 fell down? it wasn't hit by a plane.. the falling buildings couldn't have taken it out and it fell from the bottom down.

Its been discussed on here before. Do a search, but in short there was massive damage to the structure of the building from falling debris. Then there was a rather large fire. The load bearing elements of the building failed, and down she went. It fell from the bottom because thats where the majority of the damage to the load bearing elements was.

Please understand that such a building would not necessarily fall sideways. Theres simply too much mass involved, the only way it can go is down. Its not a chimney being burned down by F.Dibnah.

 

[Tom]

Also the Thermite theory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wVLeKwSkXA

Look at that molten spewing from the south tower before its collapse.

Molten aluminium from the airframe of the aircraft.

Thermite is slow burning, and the quantities required to cause any damage to the steel supports would be massive. Not to mention that both towers collapsed at exactly the points the aircraft hit.

 

[Mofo8]

Blah, blah, blah, blah.....

Sorry, I got caught up in this page from the website you so kindly linked to:

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/audiotape.html

 

[Furr]

Mmmhhh.... With open mind I clicked on the first of your well-researched (what was it? a google search?) links..... only to be presented with some kind of primary school friendly version of events. Oh well, the next link looks more promising... click... I was present with a whole host of other links. I chose one and clicked again.... 404 page not found. Mmmhh.... let's try another.... Page no longer exists. Back to your list... where I realised that clicking on the 3rd thing on your list is the same as clicking on the 2nd. I tried another link.... 404 Page no longer exists.... bollocks.

Acutally I think you'll find your internet is borked. most of them work, admitidly the list of links coalated some are out of date, but hey! as we all know the internet changes. Or don't you know that? if not your a bit dim aren't you. Oh wait!! i've just remembered what your trying to say.

PS your effort at sarcasm is oh so good. Have an apple! but wait the apple might try to take over your body using CIA secret warfare!

 

[Tom]

I'm not anti american i'm more anti mass murder and pass the book onto whoever you feel like person.

And now you're being stupid so go away.

I'm posting videos for you to watch and a look at why more and more people are thinking it was an inside job.

Now you go away look around and give me some proof that there isn't anything to question.

Fact is you can't because the US goverment won't talk about it.

Within 1-2 weeks the FBI solved one of the biggest mass murder cases of all time and named Bin Laden as the culprit.

Fucking mugging cases are investigated for longer then that.

No mate. You've missed the point completely.

It is not the job of the government or the civil services to defend their account of what happened. They do not have to investigate their own results. As for Bin Laden, the man was responsible for the attack on the USS Cole, and several US embassies. It was fairly obvious who had the means and the will to 'do it'.

 

[Tom]

Sorry, I got caught up in this page from the website you so kindly linked to:

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/audiotape.html

So what? The anecdotal evidence from two firefighters means that everybody else was wrong? Wow, amazing. Next you'll be telling us that the planes fired missles before they hit the towers, something that the original edit of 'Loose Change' implied. Quality.

 

[Tom]

It's easy for you to demand proof that it was a conspiracy but I don't see you providing them any proof that it wasn't. You claim that your comments are fact without actually 'knowing' this for sure.

The proof is in the testimonial evidence from the many experts who have demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt what happened on the day. Its accepted fact.

It doesn't require defending against unsubstantiated claims. When the conspiracy theorists present unequivacle proof of their version of events, then perhaps they'll have some teeth. Until then, they're a bunch of mindless morons IMO.

 

[Furr]

Sorry, I got caught up in this page from the website you so kindly linked to:

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/audiotape.html

Errrrrrr riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. From that one, just one page its obvious thats sites crap. Could it be that the fire which was over quite a few floors had begun to spread? and that maybe they had reached just the start? maybe? really!!! wow

hahahahahah if you two were'nt so serious i'd seriously think that you were acting like complete morons for a joke. But its obvious you aren't but then i remember that there have been and always will be people like you, from the moon lands, to UFO's, to crop cicles etc.

Tom im guessing your riled aswell because this amount of completly stupid "OMFGWTF its obvious its a huge coverup" as its remarkably painfull to have to read, although there is the option not to read it. But hey, insulting morons give's me pleasure. Like fat people who brought it on themselves.

 

[Mofo8]

Last comment for tonight. I sure wouldn't like to work in a tall building (skyscraper). According to Tom, all you need is a fire to break out and the whole fucking thing will collapse. I wonder why every documented case of this happening comes from one day 5 years ago? Other multi-storey buildings have burned for fucking DAYS and been structurally sound.

To try and move the arguement on a wee bit. Tom.... who gained most from the events of just over 5 years ago? Osama? (probably still hooked up to his dialysis machine in Pakistan), the 19 hijackers? (at least 7 of whom are remarkably alive), Al-Queda? (Shadowy SPECTRE-like movement), the Taliban? (holding their own against out troops 5 years later), Saddam? (deposed and on trial), Islam?

Bush? (Good for elections, and got his War on Terror rolling), Blair? (Scratch that and add him to the list above.... poor old Tony), Israel? (Carte Blanche to do what the fucking please in the Middle East), Big Oil? American-Isreali Zionists? Weirdo Wacko End-of-the-fucking-world right wing Christianisty?

Yup.... the World is a much safer place than it was 5 years ago. We in the UK should have learned our lesson that last time we had adventures in Afghanistan. An army went in.... fought for a bit... and retreated from Kabul. One fucking man survived.

Goodnight and God Bless

 

[Furr]

quick before he goes to bed

bwahahahahahah

what did you study at uni a BA in lameness...... im sorry i just had to try it, not funny... ok ok....

You lame, you tame, you are the undisputible kings in lameness and tameness.

OMFGLATFLTN = oh my f*cking god look at the lame tame numpties

Sorry i have no time to debate with people like you two, like people who deny the hollocaust, claim the moon landing were faked I can't be arsed to try to hard to make you see the "light" so i waste no time in just cussing you as it makes me feel good and you shit.

Goodbye and good night, watch out for the men in black under your bed.

 

[Mofo8]

Acutally I think you'll find your internet is borked. most of them work, admitidly the list of links coalated some are out of date, but hey! as we all know the internet changes. Or don't you know that? if not your a bit dim aren't you. Oh wait!! i've just remembered what your trying to say.

PS your effort at sarcasm is oh so good. Have an apple! but wait the apple might try to take over your body using CIA secret warfare!

I'm so, so fucking sorry. I had initially thought that YOU had actually found and read some counterbalancing evidence and were presenting it for the forum. Little had I realised that you had simply grabbed the list of links from somewhere else and not actually bothered reading through the stuff yourself.

Again, my most humble apologies.

 

[Furr]

Again, my most humble apologies.

Yes because i am king and you aren't, the self righteous pompous twat i am. If i had to think about everyones bloody feelings and give time to people with views that are just plain stupid im sure i would be one of those weak subservient males, doesn't suit me im afraid.

 

[Tom]

Last comment for tonight. I sure wouldn't like to work in a tall building (skyscraper). According to Tom, all you need is a fire to break out and the whole fucking thing will collapse. I wonder why every documented case of this happening comes from one day 5 years ago? Other multi-storey buildings have burned for fucking DAYS and been structurally sound.

First, look at the design of the WTC towers. Compare them to your average skyscraper - they're totally different. Read about how they're different before you embarrass yourself any more.

Second, show me an example of another skyscraper of similar design being hit by a jet going seriously fast, laden with aviation fuel. Go on, do it.

To try and move the arguement on a wee bit. Tom.... who gained most from the events of just over 5 years ago? Osama? (probably still hooked up to his dialysis machine in Pakistan), the 19 hijackers? (at least 7 of whom are remarkably alive), Al-Queda? (Shadowy SPECTRE-like movement), the Taliban? (holding their own against out troops 5 years later), Saddam? (deposed and on trial), Islam?

Bush? (Good for elections, and got his War on Terror rolling), Blair? (Scratch that and add him to the list above.... poor old Tony), Israel? (Carte Blanche to do what the fucking please in the Middle East), Big Oil? American-Isreali Zionists? Weirdo Wacko End-of-the-fucking-world right wing Christianisty?

Yup.... the World is a much safer place than it was 5 years ago. We in the UK should have learned our lesson that last time we had adventures in Afghanistan. An army went in.... fought for a bit... and retreated from Kabul. One fucking man survived.

Goodnight and God Bless

LMFAO. History according to TEH INTERNETS LOL

 

[Aada]

First, look at the design of the WTC towers. Compare them to your average skyscraper - they're totally different. Read about how they're different before you embarrass yourself any more.

Second, show me an example of another skyscraper of similar design being hit by a jet going seriously fast, laden with aviation fuel. Go on, do it.



LMFAO. History according to TEH INTERNETS LOL

But Tom most of the fuel burnt up on that HUGE explosion you saw when the jets first crashed into the tower there would have hardly been ANY fuel left for it to cause that much damage.

Yes we could go on all night and i know everyone has a different opinion on this but the fact remains there is still a huge list of questions the goverment hasn't answered.

 

[Tom]

Most of the fuel in the second collision burned outside the building upon impact. However the impact was much lower down the building, and the impact also damaged a great many more of the structural supports lining the outside of the building. For those reasons, it collapsed before the North tower which was hit first.

In the first explosion, a great deal of the fuel from the aircraft burned inside the building.

And I won't say this again - the government doesn't need to 'disprove' any crackpot theories. Its the job of the crackpots to prove their theories.