once upon a time in shaolin - buy the book now!
Page 2 of 16 FirstFirst 1234512 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 228

Thread: If you know your 9/11 Conspiracy shit

  1. #16
    Wu Vatican Sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    London
    Age
    26
    Posts
    3,894
    Rep Power
    26

    Default

    I find it funny how everybody becomes a fuckin architecture and engineering expert after what happened lol - talking about how they are 100% certain there must have been explosions cause they (the youtube nerds) KNOW that the building would not collapse from fire, etc etc.

    People claiming that the buildings wouldn't collapse from fire forget to mention the fact that they were hit by a fuckin plane lol. I don't know shit about architecture but I assume that would make some kind of difference. They say that no steel buildings have collapsed from fire, but that's maybe cause they weren't hit by a fuckin plane.

    Real experts aren't on Youtube making 100 videos a day about conspiracies - they're out in the world, you know, being experts

    I'm not denying that there is some shady and questionable shit surrounding 9/11 and the government in general. However I think it's ridiculous to look at these few abnormalities and suspicious occurances and just decide that the whole thing was definately a great big conspiracy by the evil government who are out to kill us all


  2. #17
    The People's Champ Visionz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Age
    38
    Posts
    13,653
    Rep Power
    54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean View Post
    I find it funny how everybody becomes a fuckin architecture and engineering expert after what happened lol - talking about how they are 100% certain there must have been explosions cause they (the youtube nerds) KNOW that the building would not collapse from fire, etc etc.

    People claiming that the buildings wouldn't collapse from fire forget to mention the fact that they were hit by a fuckin plane lol. I don't know shit about architecture but I assume that would make some kind of difference. They say that no steel buildings have collapsed from fire, but that's maybe cause they weren't hit by a fuckin plane.

    Real experts aren't on Youtube making 100 videos a day about conspiracies - they're out in the world, you know, being experts

    I'm not denying that there is some shady and questionable shit surrounding 9/11 and the government in general. However I think it's ridiculous to look at these few abnormalities and suspicious occurances and just decide that the whole thing was definately a great big conspiracy by the evil government who are out to kill us all
    that's the thing though, the internet does allow for research in a way that would've been a lot harder to do a decade ago.

    The official theory states that the impact of the plane combined with the burning of the jet fuel weakened the steel significantly enough for the building to collapse. They don't say that the steel melted and truthfully jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel. (I'm no expert but that's what my research into the matter has told me) So the tops weakend enough structurally to fall into themselves and the rest of the building collapsed due to the weight of those tops collapsing, of which they did so at almost free-fall speeds. (again I'm not an expert on phsyics but it can be research as to just what free-fall speeds are) The pancake theory and free-fall speeds don't really seem to go hand-in-hand (stated as much by a MIT professor in physics) so it just seems fishy.

    All the weakened steel deal doesn't really explain why you have molten steel in the rubble. I don't doubt that a collapsing building of that magnitude creates alot of force and engery but does it make it hotter than ignited jet fuel?

    again I don't have answers or accusations, only skepticism on the official story and awareness that what happened that day was never properly investigated. After all they took the evidence and shipped it off to recycling centers far,far away.

    Support the Real. Click HERE

  3. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean View Post
    I find it funny how everybody becomes a fuckin architecture and engineering expert after what happened lol - talking about how they are 100% certain there must have been explosions cause they (the youtube nerds) KNOW that the building would not collapse from fire, etc etc.

    People claiming that the buildings wouldn't collapse from fire forget to mention the fact that they were hit by a fuckin plane lol. I don't know shit about architecture but I assume that would make some kind of difference. They say that no steel buildings have collapsed from fire, but that's maybe cause they weren't hit by a fuckin plane.

    Real experts aren't on Youtube making 100 videos a day about conspiracies - they're out in the world, you know, being experts

    I'm not denying that there is some shady and questionable shit surrounding 9/11 and the government in general. However I think it's ridiculous to look at these few abnormalities and suspicious occurances and just decide that the whole thing was definately a great big conspiracy by the evil government who are out to kill us all

    massive co-sign.

  4. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beautifulrock View Post
    Jesus none of you have any facts straight

    Here are some key points to help you

    So, 19 guys, 12 who were on a terrorist watchlist just strolled through security and managed to take over 4 planes with boxcutters. Ok, I guess that could happen. I guess it could also be possible for Norad to hold large scale military exercises on the West coast at the same time. I suppose it could take 2 hours to get shoot down orders from a president slowly reading a story of a goat to school children because clearly we know which was more pressing. I suppose that the jets scrambled to take out the planes could have been mistakenly sent 1100 miles south of their target. I suppose all that COULD have happened. If it did though, what the 9/11 debunkers are suggesting is that the US Government is the most inept agency in the history of the world, perhaps, after all the had a cocktail party when they were warned of the attack on Pearl Harbor. Here's where things get a bit fuzzy for me. Hey that plane coming to hit tower 2, how come it has no windows? How come the nose flew right through the building in tact? Aren't those noses made of NOTHING on commercial jets? What are those sparks coming out of South tower just before it fell? What could cause that? Thermate perhaps? Why was building 7 allowed to burn for 9 hours unchecked? Do you think it had something to do with all that evidence against Wall Street corruption that went up in flames? And speaking of Wall Street, why were put options being placed on American Airlines and United stock just days before the 11th? Why was security changed and all bomb sniffing dogs removed from the building just weeks before the 11th? Why did the owner sign a 99 year insurance policy on the World Trade Center a week before it collapsed?

    and finally

    A steel building has never collapsed because of fire in history. How did it happen 3 times in one day?

    Even if you believe the government didn't deliberately bring down the buildings themselves, it's clear from all evidence that they knew it would happen and did nothing. This is your government.


    The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was an American think tank based in Washington, D.C. that lasted from early 1997 to 2006. It was co-founded as a non-profit educational organization by neoconservatives William Kristol and Robert Kagan. The PNAC's stated goal was "to promote American global leadership."[1] Fundamental to the PNAC were the view that "American leadership is both good for America and good for the world" and support for "a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity."[2] The PNAC exerted influence on high-level U.S. government officials in the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush and affected the Bush Administration's development of military and foreign policies, especially involving national security and the Iraq War.[3][4]




    "New Pearl Harbor"

    Section V of Rebuilding America's Defenses, entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force", includes the sentence: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor" (51).[13]
    In his appearance on Democracy Now!, theologian David Ray Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11, explains the allusion to "the New Pearl Harbor" from the PNAC report in the title of his book, which argues that PNAC members within the Bush Administration were complicit in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.[37]
    Further information: 9/11 truth movement and Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center
    Though not arguing that Bush administration PNAC members were complicit in those attacks, other social critics such as commentator Manuel Valenzuela and journalist Mark Danner,[38][39][40] investigative journalist John Pilger, in The New Statesman,[41] and former editor of The San Francisco Chronicle Bernard Weiner, in CounterPunch,[42] all argue that PNAC members used the events as the "Pearl Harbor" that they needed––that is, as an "opportunity" to "capitalize on" (in Pilger's words), in order to enact long-desired plans.[43]
    "When the Towers came down," William Rivers Pitt writes in his editorial in Truthout.org, "these men saw, at long last, their chance to turn their White Papers into substantive policy."[32]
    Gracias amigo. I just used all that!

    You NEED to invite yourself into that thread!

    They wouldn't be able to throw sand at you, bro.

  5. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FMJ View Post
    The truth speaks for itself. If they cannot see the truth, it is too bad for them. No amount of arguing imo is gonna change their opinion.
    Unfortunately, that's not accurate. I was a skeptic originally, but after hearing enough persuasive arguments, I was won over to the conspiratorial side.

    So, that's how the truth spreads, by persuading others. Most people don't "just know."

  6. #21

    Default

    Jesus titty fuckin christ.

  7. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by beautifulrock View Post
    here are three possibilities


    "It's exactly what they wanted, they made it happen."
    "It's exactly what they wanted, they allowed it to happen."
    "It's exactly what they wanted, how lucky for them!"

    I'm guessing most of you are rooting for answer 3.
    LOL, I used this too. Keep em coming... :^)

    Or just go slay them yourself.

  8. #23

    Default

    I've already made my opinion on such conspiracies clear in the past, so i won't repeat myself.

    This thread is funny though, some guy coming here to recruit fellow believers to help him battle it out on another site.


    Quote Originally Posted by TSA View Post
    post nudes of your chin


  9. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Visionz View Post

    Testimony from firefighters there that day have been silenced etc ... things like silencing the firefighters, why do that if it happened just the way they say it did?
    This is a great argument I'd love to use in that debate! Can you be more specific? I'm debating with people who slap down general statements like that and demand exact proof.

  10. #25

    Default

    Visionz, i just used your inquiry about not releasing the pentagon tapes

  11. #26

    Default

    Maybe you should get a life there FlamingAssport.

  12. #27

    Default

    LOL, they've discovered I used my one phone call to call the Wu. So now, by denouncing me personally for "plagiarism", they think they they've debunked your brilliant arguments.

  13. #28

  14. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FlamingPassport View Post
    They came at me kinda hard with this link: http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/kade...uralsteelquick

    Any explanations?
    Sure I have an explanation, structural steel in Bangkok = plastic.
    Quote Originally Posted by IrOnMaN View Post
    If your posts are not relevant to the thread or if there's a strong indication of trolling/rudeness/slander, the post will be deleted. As a moderator, it's my job to moderate to the best of my ability.

  15. #30

    Default

    "fires burned until they weakened the steel until it could no longer support the weight of the building above, and then the building collapsed."

    ^^

    Can anyone help me refute this?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •