cumplidor 0 #26 January 1, 2007 Quote Bin laden suddenly becoming a non-concern of Bush2 after the invasion of Afganistan was complete What are you talking about. We are still looking for him.Quote What are you talking about... 6 months and 2 days after 9-11 Pres is quoted here as to how concerned he is... QuoteWell, as I say, we haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is. I -- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. heres the link http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html Regarding the air defence breakdown, when the heck at any other time have the fighter jets failed to respond in less than 15 minutes to some errant plane over restricted Whitehouse or Pentagon airspace??? Especially since it was known hijacked planes were in the air. If that is not a complete and total breakdown of air defense, then what would you consider it?? Oh that's right... it was a series of unfortunate coincenental events led by some terrorist (ex-CIA op) that coordinated all this from a cave... please You failed to address any of my other items... does that mean you concede them? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cumplidor 0 #27 January 1, 2007 QuoteAnyone who has the least bit of science or physics background gets quite the chuckle out of the tinfoil hatter's theories... It doesn't even require a science or physics background. Laugh But when a physics professor does comes forward and explains how it is not possible for it to happen that way, he doesn't know what he is talking about... For those floors to 'pancake' at FREEFALL speeds without slowing down (that means NO RESISTANCE, like they didn;t even hit each other... one after another after another - huh??) It doesn't make sense. Cutting charges could do this however, and they would leave pockets of molten steel too. And it would cause the buildings to fall into their footprint too! But they want us to beleive a kerosene fire is capable of all of it. and B7 too? come on, please.. Have any of you watched the videos of them building these buildings?? They specifically mentioned how they were designed to withstand this. steel columns MADE IN A BLAST FURNACE, weakened enough from a jet fuel fire to allow this collapse? (all they had to do was weaken, to allow free fall speed during the collapes???) Again I have trouble with that... Have any of you seen the videos of the steel skyscraper in Spain burning for over 20 hours?? Still standing and it looked ALOT hotter to me than the WTC buildings did. Anyone that burns stuff knows that heavy smoke is a sure sign of an oxygen starved fire. Blow on it a bit, the flames will leap up and the smoke almost stops comparitively. Sure there were flames at WTC, but there was ALOT more smoke than flames, and just not that much in there to burn, making sense for an oxygen starved fire... As entertaining as folks may find us tinfoil hatters, believe me, we are equally as stunned and entertained by your ability to continue to deny it all, time and time again, even as the truth wacks you in the face over and over... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SpeedRacer 1 #28 January 1, 2007 QuoteAs entertaining as folks may find us tinfoil hatters, believe me, we are equally as stunned and entertained by your ability to continue to deny it all, time and time again, even as the truth wacks you in the face over and over... and we believe the same thing about you guys. The arguments have been debunked over & over (see the other threads, I'm not going to re-post it all here) but you guys still want to cling to your tin foil hats. It is usually useless to argue with determined conspiracy theorists. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shropshire 0 #29 January 1, 2007 Here's another conspiracy theory for your.... A plethora of conspiracy theories are/could be really useful for hiding real [dark] secrets..... just a though. Real governemnts do it all the time.. "Today would be a good day to release a given piece of onformation, because it will distract other news stories " (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SpeedRacer 1 #30 January 1, 2007 Here's an interesting article about the historical/psychological background behind conspiracy theorists: http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=092006B Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cumplidor 0 #31 January 1, 2007 It is pointless to argue with us, because we used to think like you do. Then the many many obvious examples of a corrupt and out of touch government, all the wierd secrecy, leading us into war after war not seeming to learn from their mistakes. Using weapons banned by international treaties, and having the majority of our elected leaders receiving massive funds and kickbacks from the lobbists, the morally twisted predatory behaviours of senators on our young men, sheesh. How much corruption and sickness does people need to see before they recognize the direction this is going?? If these leaders are capable and willing to lie and cover up such a wide range of issues, then that makes all of their statements questionable doesn't it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shropshire 0 #32 January 1, 2007 Thanks for that ......... I'll need to read it again a few times .... (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SpeedRacer 1 #33 January 1, 2007 QuoteIt is pointless to argue with us, because we used to think like you do. Then the many many obvious examples of a corrupt and out of touch government, all the wierd secrecy, leading us into war after war not seeming to learn from their mistakes. Using weapons banned by international treaties, and having the majority of our elected leaders receiving massive funds and kickbacks from the lobbists, the morally twisted predatory behaviours of senators on our young men, sheesh. How much corruption and sickness does people need to see before they recognize the direction this is going?? If these leaders are capable and willing to lie and cover up such a wide range of issues, then that makes all of their statements questionable doesn't it? This is an example of the kind of thinking that that second article (regarding psychological/historical backgrounds of conspiracy theory) talks about. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freethefly 6 #34 January 1, 2007 QuoteHeck, I'm still trying to figure out what a "thermite explosive" is!! Here you go. http://www.uspto.gov/go/classification/uspc149/defs149.htm"...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nanook 1 #35 January 1, 2007 Quote6 months and 2 days after 9-11 Pres is quoted here as to how concerned he is... I've read the script. It doesn't say anywhere that Bush is not looking for him. He is saying that compared to other things going on, OBL is taking less precedent. We are still looking for him or his body. QuoteRegarding the air defence breakdown, when the heck at any other time have the fighter jets failed to respond in less than 15 minutes to some errant plane over restricted Whitehouse or Pentagon airspace??? Especially since it was known hijacked planes were in the air. Regarding your concept of "air-defence", how many aircraft in past history were shot down over the Eastern Seaboard after the Air Force "scrambled" aircraft? Why do you think they would have shot down the airliners this time? QuoteOh that's right... it was a series of unfortunate coincenental events led by some terrorist (ex-CIA op) that coordinated all this from a cave... please Exactly. Just like NORAD. NORAD is in a cave too. QuoteYou failed to address any of my other items... does that mean you concede them? Nope, here it is again: And the rest is just the utilization of Junk Science. It's a common occurence of people who watch too much TV. It's the Engineering version of the "CSI Effect"_____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nanook 1 #36 January 1, 2007 This is my favorite paragraph: QuoteA clue to the real attraction of conspiracy theories, I would suggest, lies in the rhetoric of theorists themselves, which is filled with self-congratulatory descriptions of those who accept such theories as "willing to think," "educated," "independent-minded," and so forth, and with invective against the "uninformed" and "unthinking" "sheeple" who "blindly follow authority." The world of the conspiracy theorist is Manichean: either you are intelligent, well-informed, and honest, and therefore question all authority and received opinion; or you accept what popular opinion or an authority says and therefore must be stupid, dishonest, and ignorant. There is no third option_____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,114 #37 January 1, 2007 QuoteQuoteHeck, I'm still trying to figure out what a "thermite explosive" is!! Here you go. http://www.uspto.gov/go/classification/uspc149/defs149.htm That describes explosives and thermites, not "thermite explosives". Thermites conflagrate but do not explode.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Michele 1 #38 January 1, 2007 QuoteIt doesn't even require a science or physics background. No kidding. Even I understand it, you know? LOL!! To the OP: Good grief, another "what happened to the WTC" thread. All I can say is there are tons of conspiracy sites out there that will feed your additions if that's what you want. I believe that AQ and UBL did it, and that's why I'm not posting on those sites. But I bet you'd find them interesting... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freethefly 6 #39 January 1, 2007 QuoteAnyone that burns stuff knows that heavy smoke is a sure sign of an oxygen starved fire. Blow on it a bit, the flames will leap up and the smoke almost stops comparitively. Sure there were flames at WTC, but there was ALOT more smoke than flames, and just not that much in there to burn, making sense for an oxygen starved fire... The majority of the smoke was black, indicating that a class B fire was raging. Class B is a fire occurring in the vapor-air mixture over the surface of flammable petroleum products, ie; fuel, plastics, grease, lubricating oils. Extremely hot. Also present was the class D fire that is comprised of combustible metals such as magensium, titanium, and sodium. Class D fires burn at an enormously high tempeture and cannot be extinguished. The combustible metals can and will burn through any structure. If anything can be pointed at for bringing the WTC towers down I would point to the class D and its ability to compromise the integrity of any structure."...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skinnyflyer 0 #40 January 1, 2007 QuoteRegarding your concept of "air-defence", how many aircraft in past history were shot down over the Eastern Seaboard after the Air Force "scrambled" aircraft? why would they shoot down planes that were off course? QuoteWhy do you think they would have shot down the airliners this time? maybe because they were hijacked and headed for new york or other important targets.maybe to stop3000 people from dying. just maybe. QuoteExactly. Just like NORAD. NORAD is in a cave too. so your counter argument is that bin laden's cave is the technological equivalent to norads command center. QuoteAnd the rest is just the utilization of Junk Science it looks like your arguments are just the utilization of junk logic."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freethefly 6 #41 January 1, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteHeck, I'm still trying to figure out what a "thermite explosive" is!! Here you go. http://www.uspto.gov/go/classification/uspc149/defs149.htm That describes explosives and thermites, not "thermite explosives". Thermites conflagrate but do not explode. How right you always are, John. Now, that I think about it. We made thermite welds on the railroad, I actually didn't make them, I was the guy who did the NDT on them. If the thermite was explosive, not many welds would be made"...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skinnyflyer 0 #42 January 2, 2007 QuoteHeck, I'm still trying to figure out what a "thermite explosive" is!! i think that one of the conrolled demolition theories suggest that thermite or thermate was used in combination with other explosives in order to have a top to bottom collapse."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cumplidor 0 #43 January 2, 2007 QuoteIt doesn't say anywhere that Bush is not looking for him. He is saying that compared to other things going on, OBL is taking less precedent. We are still looking for him or his body. Your right, it says he doesn't care where he is, it is not important to the bigger war on terror (translation-who's next) - he can't be important if we are now looking for terrorists and WMD in Iraq, now can we. QuoteRegarding your concept of "air-defence", how many aircraft in past history were shot down over the Eastern Seaboard after the Air Force "scrambled" aircraft? Why do you think they would have shot down the airliners this time? How is whether I think they would have shot them down relevent? They have always been there to escort the planes out. Here is exactly what they were trained to do, respond to this emergency, but they were nowhere to be found until much later. Don't know if they would have shot them down, but at least they would have been able to say they did their job, which thye can't do now... Junk Science? what is junk science? that floors can pancake at unemcumbered speed? That these steel columns were hit with such force they just 'sheer off' with no time necessary to do so? That sounds like junk science to me. QuoteIt's a common occurence of people who watch too much TV. I don't watch TV. To much BS comes out of it. May explain your beliefs though... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cumplidor 0 #44 January 2, 2007 And Michele there are plenty of places to find your opinion as well. Hell just turn on the propaganda box, otherwise called TV, and it spews forward with all the mind numbing BS you could ever want... been there done that, no more thanks... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #45 January 2, 2007 Using weapons banned by international treaties,Quote ?????History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites willard 0 #46 January 2, 2007 It was I. It wasn't that difficult you know. Just had to find a few people willing to fly the planes into the towers under the assumption that the majic gell I gave them would save them from harm. Then, while the pilots were training, me and my guys snuck a few tons of high explosives inside and, working under the cover of cloaking devices, tore out walls, fireproofing, etc. and positioned these explosives to take out the main columns. Everything went ok until the dumbasses flying the planes missed their mark by several floors and knocked most of our pre-positioned charges from their mounts. (Damn it's hard finding good, well trained suicide pilots!) Then, since almost any explosive will burn and not explode when in a fire, most of the remaining charges were incinerated . Not that it mattered, most of our hard wiring was destroyed at the moment of impact. Once it was obvious that our charges had failed I sent my crews back in (had to pay the lazy SOBs overtime) with more explosive to rerig the entire blast sequence, only now at a different level because the stupid pilots couldn't hit a bull in the ass with a scoop shovel and we had to make the collapse look good. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cumplidor 0 #47 January 2, 2007 Nuclear weapons are banned in international treaties are they not? Depleted Uranium is nuclear waste and the government simply states that they are not 'real nukes' or 'not harmful' so it doesn't count in their opinion. A simple 'depends on what the definition of 'is' is' answer to the question. Depends on what you define as a nuke weapon. Reports of phosporus weapons having been used as well in Falluja and Lebanon are out there as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sundevil777 102 #48 January 2, 2007 QuoteFor those floors to 'pancake' at FREEFALL speeds without slowing down (that means NO RESISTANCE, like they didn;t even hit each other... one after another after another - huh??) It doesn't make sense. Another claim that has proven to be utterly false. It didn't fall that fast, the earlier link I provided detailed this. You seem to think that taken together, all the little things that don't add up must mean that there is something to it all. However, each of the little things are lies and half truths. When so many claims are shown to so, I think you gotta come up with some new evidence. Perhaps take a repeated look at some bit of video, and notice something that looks unusual, then think of a way for it to fit the conspiracy and throw it out for general consumption. At least that would be more interesting than re-killing the same assertions.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skinnyflyer 0 #49 January 2, 2007 QuoteIt didn't fall that fast not sure what link you're talking about but the official nist investigation says 9 and 11 seconds which is pretty close to free fall speeds.wtc 7 fell at exactly free fall speed. QuoteYou seem to think that taken together, all the little things that don't add up must mean that there is something to it all the still unexplained mysterious collapse of wtc7, the molten steel, the many observed features characteristic of controlled demolition, and plethora of other unexplained events combined with an obvious coverup and ridiculous or non existant official explanation are more than 'little things'. here is an example of how nist deals with the molten steel; "NIST investigators and experts from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEONY)—who inspected the WTC steel at the WTC site and the salvage yards—found no evidence that would support the melting of steel in a jet-fuel ignited fire in the towers prior to collapse. The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing." they don't deny its existance(surely they would deny it if there was no evidence of it), but they're saying because they don't think it should be there they will just ignore it. these are some of the greatest engineering failures in history yet they can't explain wtc7 and as for the collapse of wtc 1+2 they only pretend to expain up to the point of failure. why can't they reproduce any of these collapses with computer simulations? oh sorry they can but no one is allowed to see it."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skinnyflyer 0 #50 January 2, 2007 QuoteHey, if 9/11 was all a plot by the evil government to justify invading Iraq,,,,,THEN WHY WEREN'T ANY OF THE HIJACKERS IRAQIS???? good question. i don't know the answer. but i don't believe that it was an evil plot designed to justify invading iraq, it was designed to justify the previously mentioned PNAC world domination plans; to drastically increase the military size and budget, and to create support/remove opposition to mobilizing this military(patriot act). iraq is just one aspect of these plans, afghanistan and iran are clearly others and especially having a strong military presence in the entire middle east as this is where almost all of the worlds exportable oil remains. maybe hadn't planned which countries to invade first. maybe they weren't sure which bullshit media story (wmd) they would be able to sell to the public. maybe they couldn't find an iraqi terrorist group to blame it on. the point is there could be many reasonable answers if the us is responsible for 9/11 but we will never know. if you turn your question to the official story; if all the terrorist are saudi arabian they why the hell did the us invade afghanistan and iraq?"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
cumplidor 0 #27 January 1, 2007 QuoteAnyone who has the least bit of science or physics background gets quite the chuckle out of the tinfoil hatter's theories... It doesn't even require a science or physics background. Laugh But when a physics professor does comes forward and explains how it is not possible for it to happen that way, he doesn't know what he is talking about... For those floors to 'pancake' at FREEFALL speeds without slowing down (that means NO RESISTANCE, like they didn;t even hit each other... one after another after another - huh??) It doesn't make sense. Cutting charges could do this however, and they would leave pockets of molten steel too. And it would cause the buildings to fall into their footprint too! But they want us to beleive a kerosene fire is capable of all of it. and B7 too? come on, please.. Have any of you watched the videos of them building these buildings?? They specifically mentioned how they were designed to withstand this. steel columns MADE IN A BLAST FURNACE, weakened enough from a jet fuel fire to allow this collapse? (all they had to do was weaken, to allow free fall speed during the collapes???) Again I have trouble with that... Have any of you seen the videos of the steel skyscraper in Spain burning for over 20 hours?? Still standing and it looked ALOT hotter to me than the WTC buildings did. Anyone that burns stuff knows that heavy smoke is a sure sign of an oxygen starved fire. Blow on it a bit, the flames will leap up and the smoke almost stops comparitively. Sure there were flames at WTC, but there was ALOT more smoke than flames, and just not that much in there to burn, making sense for an oxygen starved fire... As entertaining as folks may find us tinfoil hatters, believe me, we are equally as stunned and entertained by your ability to continue to deny it all, time and time again, even as the truth wacks you in the face over and over... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #28 January 1, 2007 QuoteAs entertaining as folks may find us tinfoil hatters, believe me, we are equally as stunned and entertained by your ability to continue to deny it all, time and time again, even as the truth wacks you in the face over and over... and we believe the same thing about you guys. The arguments have been debunked over & over (see the other threads, I'm not going to re-post it all here) but you guys still want to cling to your tin foil hats. It is usually useless to argue with determined conspiracy theorists. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #29 January 1, 2007 Here's another conspiracy theory for your.... A plethora of conspiracy theories are/could be really useful for hiding real [dark] secrets..... just a though. Real governemnts do it all the time.. "Today would be a good day to release a given piece of onformation, because it will distract other news stories " (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #30 January 1, 2007 Here's an interesting article about the historical/psychological background behind conspiracy theorists: http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=092006B Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cumplidor 0 #31 January 1, 2007 It is pointless to argue with us, because we used to think like you do. Then the many many obvious examples of a corrupt and out of touch government, all the wierd secrecy, leading us into war after war not seeming to learn from their mistakes. Using weapons banned by international treaties, and having the majority of our elected leaders receiving massive funds and kickbacks from the lobbists, the morally twisted predatory behaviours of senators on our young men, sheesh. How much corruption and sickness does people need to see before they recognize the direction this is going?? If these leaders are capable and willing to lie and cover up such a wide range of issues, then that makes all of their statements questionable doesn't it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #32 January 1, 2007 Thanks for that ......... I'll need to read it again a few times .... (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #33 January 1, 2007 QuoteIt is pointless to argue with us, because we used to think like you do. Then the many many obvious examples of a corrupt and out of touch government, all the wierd secrecy, leading us into war after war not seeming to learn from their mistakes. Using weapons banned by international treaties, and having the majority of our elected leaders receiving massive funds and kickbacks from the lobbists, the morally twisted predatory behaviours of senators on our young men, sheesh. How much corruption and sickness does people need to see before they recognize the direction this is going?? If these leaders are capable and willing to lie and cover up such a wide range of issues, then that makes all of their statements questionable doesn't it? This is an example of the kind of thinking that that second article (regarding psychological/historical backgrounds of conspiracy theory) talks about. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #34 January 1, 2007 QuoteHeck, I'm still trying to figure out what a "thermite explosive" is!! Here you go. http://www.uspto.gov/go/classification/uspc149/defs149.htm"...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nanook 1 #35 January 1, 2007 Quote6 months and 2 days after 9-11 Pres is quoted here as to how concerned he is... I've read the script. It doesn't say anywhere that Bush is not looking for him. He is saying that compared to other things going on, OBL is taking less precedent. We are still looking for him or his body. QuoteRegarding the air defence breakdown, when the heck at any other time have the fighter jets failed to respond in less than 15 minutes to some errant plane over restricted Whitehouse or Pentagon airspace??? Especially since it was known hijacked planes were in the air. Regarding your concept of "air-defence", how many aircraft in past history were shot down over the Eastern Seaboard after the Air Force "scrambled" aircraft? Why do you think they would have shot down the airliners this time? QuoteOh that's right... it was a series of unfortunate coincenental events led by some terrorist (ex-CIA op) that coordinated all this from a cave... please Exactly. Just like NORAD. NORAD is in a cave too. QuoteYou failed to address any of my other items... does that mean you concede them? Nope, here it is again: And the rest is just the utilization of Junk Science. It's a common occurence of people who watch too much TV. It's the Engineering version of the "CSI Effect"_____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nanook 1 #36 January 1, 2007 This is my favorite paragraph: QuoteA clue to the real attraction of conspiracy theories, I would suggest, lies in the rhetoric of theorists themselves, which is filled with self-congratulatory descriptions of those who accept such theories as "willing to think," "educated," "independent-minded," and so forth, and with invective against the "uninformed" and "unthinking" "sheeple" who "blindly follow authority." The world of the conspiracy theorist is Manichean: either you are intelligent, well-informed, and honest, and therefore question all authority and received opinion; or you accept what popular opinion or an authority says and therefore must be stupid, dishonest, and ignorant. There is no third option_____________________________ "The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,114 #37 January 1, 2007 QuoteQuoteHeck, I'm still trying to figure out what a "thermite explosive" is!! Here you go. http://www.uspto.gov/go/classification/uspc149/defs149.htm That describes explosives and thermites, not "thermite explosives". Thermites conflagrate but do not explode.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #38 January 1, 2007 QuoteIt doesn't even require a science or physics background. No kidding. Even I understand it, you know? LOL!! To the OP: Good grief, another "what happened to the WTC" thread. All I can say is there are tons of conspiracy sites out there that will feed your additions if that's what you want. I believe that AQ and UBL did it, and that's why I'm not posting on those sites. But I bet you'd find them interesting... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #39 January 1, 2007 QuoteAnyone that burns stuff knows that heavy smoke is a sure sign of an oxygen starved fire. Blow on it a bit, the flames will leap up and the smoke almost stops comparitively. Sure there were flames at WTC, but there was ALOT more smoke than flames, and just not that much in there to burn, making sense for an oxygen starved fire... The majority of the smoke was black, indicating that a class B fire was raging. Class B is a fire occurring in the vapor-air mixture over the surface of flammable petroleum products, ie; fuel, plastics, grease, lubricating oils. Extremely hot. Also present was the class D fire that is comprised of combustible metals such as magensium, titanium, and sodium. Class D fires burn at an enormously high tempeture and cannot be extinguished. The combustible metals can and will burn through any structure. If anything can be pointed at for bringing the WTC towers down I would point to the class D and its ability to compromise the integrity of any structure."...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skinnyflyer 0 #40 January 1, 2007 QuoteRegarding your concept of "air-defence", how many aircraft in past history were shot down over the Eastern Seaboard after the Air Force "scrambled" aircraft? why would they shoot down planes that were off course? QuoteWhy do you think they would have shot down the airliners this time? maybe because they were hijacked and headed for new york or other important targets.maybe to stop3000 people from dying. just maybe. QuoteExactly. Just like NORAD. NORAD is in a cave too. so your counter argument is that bin laden's cave is the technological equivalent to norads command center. QuoteAnd the rest is just the utilization of Junk Science it looks like your arguments are just the utilization of junk logic."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #41 January 1, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteHeck, I'm still trying to figure out what a "thermite explosive" is!! Here you go. http://www.uspto.gov/go/classification/uspc149/defs149.htm That describes explosives and thermites, not "thermite explosives". Thermites conflagrate but do not explode. How right you always are, John. Now, that I think about it. We made thermite welds on the railroad, I actually didn't make them, I was the guy who did the NDT on them. If the thermite was explosive, not many welds would be made"...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skinnyflyer 0 #42 January 2, 2007 QuoteHeck, I'm still trying to figure out what a "thermite explosive" is!! i think that one of the conrolled demolition theories suggest that thermite or thermate was used in combination with other explosives in order to have a top to bottom collapse."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cumplidor 0 #43 January 2, 2007 QuoteIt doesn't say anywhere that Bush is not looking for him. He is saying that compared to other things going on, OBL is taking less precedent. We are still looking for him or his body. Your right, it says he doesn't care where he is, it is not important to the bigger war on terror (translation-who's next) - he can't be important if we are now looking for terrorists and WMD in Iraq, now can we. QuoteRegarding your concept of "air-defence", how many aircraft in past history were shot down over the Eastern Seaboard after the Air Force "scrambled" aircraft? Why do you think they would have shot down the airliners this time? How is whether I think they would have shot them down relevent? They have always been there to escort the planes out. Here is exactly what they were trained to do, respond to this emergency, but they were nowhere to be found until much later. Don't know if they would have shot them down, but at least they would have been able to say they did their job, which thye can't do now... Junk Science? what is junk science? that floors can pancake at unemcumbered speed? That these steel columns were hit with such force they just 'sheer off' with no time necessary to do so? That sounds like junk science to me. QuoteIt's a common occurence of people who watch too much TV. I don't watch TV. To much BS comes out of it. May explain your beliefs though... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cumplidor 0 #44 January 2, 2007 And Michele there are plenty of places to find your opinion as well. Hell just turn on the propaganda box, otherwise called TV, and it spews forward with all the mind numbing BS you could ever want... been there done that, no more thanks... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #45 January 2, 2007 Using weapons banned by international treaties,Quote ?????History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites willard 0 #46 January 2, 2007 It was I. It wasn't that difficult you know. Just had to find a few people willing to fly the planes into the towers under the assumption that the majic gell I gave them would save them from harm. Then, while the pilots were training, me and my guys snuck a few tons of high explosives inside and, working under the cover of cloaking devices, tore out walls, fireproofing, etc. and positioned these explosives to take out the main columns. Everything went ok until the dumbasses flying the planes missed their mark by several floors and knocked most of our pre-positioned charges from their mounts. (Damn it's hard finding good, well trained suicide pilots!) Then, since almost any explosive will burn and not explode when in a fire, most of the remaining charges were incinerated . Not that it mattered, most of our hard wiring was destroyed at the moment of impact. Once it was obvious that our charges had failed I sent my crews back in (had to pay the lazy SOBs overtime) with more explosive to rerig the entire blast sequence, only now at a different level because the stupid pilots couldn't hit a bull in the ass with a scoop shovel and we had to make the collapse look good. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cumplidor 0 #47 January 2, 2007 Nuclear weapons are banned in international treaties are they not? Depleted Uranium is nuclear waste and the government simply states that they are not 'real nukes' or 'not harmful' so it doesn't count in their opinion. A simple 'depends on what the definition of 'is' is' answer to the question. Depends on what you define as a nuke weapon. Reports of phosporus weapons having been used as well in Falluja and Lebanon are out there as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites sundevil777 102 #48 January 2, 2007 QuoteFor those floors to 'pancake' at FREEFALL speeds without slowing down (that means NO RESISTANCE, like they didn;t even hit each other... one after another after another - huh??) It doesn't make sense. Another claim that has proven to be utterly false. It didn't fall that fast, the earlier link I provided detailed this. You seem to think that taken together, all the little things that don't add up must mean that there is something to it all. However, each of the little things are lies and half truths. When so many claims are shown to so, I think you gotta come up with some new evidence. Perhaps take a repeated look at some bit of video, and notice something that looks unusual, then think of a way for it to fit the conspiracy and throw it out for general consumption. At least that would be more interesting than re-killing the same assertions.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skinnyflyer 0 #49 January 2, 2007 QuoteIt didn't fall that fast not sure what link you're talking about but the official nist investigation says 9 and 11 seconds which is pretty close to free fall speeds.wtc 7 fell at exactly free fall speed. QuoteYou seem to think that taken together, all the little things that don't add up must mean that there is something to it all the still unexplained mysterious collapse of wtc7, the molten steel, the many observed features characteristic of controlled demolition, and plethora of other unexplained events combined with an obvious coverup and ridiculous or non existant official explanation are more than 'little things'. here is an example of how nist deals with the molten steel; "NIST investigators and experts from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEONY)—who inspected the WTC steel at the WTC site and the salvage yards—found no evidence that would support the melting of steel in a jet-fuel ignited fire in the towers prior to collapse. The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing." they don't deny its existance(surely they would deny it if there was no evidence of it), but they're saying because they don't think it should be there they will just ignore it. these are some of the greatest engineering failures in history yet they can't explain wtc7 and as for the collapse of wtc 1+2 they only pretend to expain up to the point of failure. why can't they reproduce any of these collapses with computer simulations? oh sorry they can but no one is allowed to see it."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skinnyflyer 0 #50 January 2, 2007 QuoteHey, if 9/11 was all a plot by the evil government to justify invading Iraq,,,,,THEN WHY WEREN'T ANY OF THE HIJACKERS IRAQIS???? good question. i don't know the answer. but i don't believe that it was an evil plot designed to justify invading iraq, it was designed to justify the previously mentioned PNAC world domination plans; to drastically increase the military size and budget, and to create support/remove opposition to mobilizing this military(patriot act). iraq is just one aspect of these plans, afghanistan and iran are clearly others and especially having a strong military presence in the entire middle east as this is where almost all of the worlds exportable oil remains. maybe hadn't planned which countries to invade first. maybe they weren't sure which bullshit media story (wmd) they would be able to sell to the public. maybe they couldn't find an iraqi terrorist group to blame it on. the point is there could be many reasonable answers if the us is responsible for 9/11 but we will never know. if you turn your question to the official story; if all the terrorist are saudi arabian they why the hell did the us invade afghanistan and iraq?"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
willard 0 #46 January 2, 2007 It was I. It wasn't that difficult you know. Just had to find a few people willing to fly the planes into the towers under the assumption that the majic gell I gave them would save them from harm. Then, while the pilots were training, me and my guys snuck a few tons of high explosives inside and, working under the cover of cloaking devices, tore out walls, fireproofing, etc. and positioned these explosives to take out the main columns. Everything went ok until the dumbasses flying the planes missed their mark by several floors and knocked most of our pre-positioned charges from their mounts. (Damn it's hard finding good, well trained suicide pilots!) Then, since almost any explosive will burn and not explode when in a fire, most of the remaining charges were incinerated . Not that it mattered, most of our hard wiring was destroyed at the moment of impact. Once it was obvious that our charges had failed I sent my crews back in (had to pay the lazy SOBs overtime) with more explosive to rerig the entire blast sequence, only now at a different level because the stupid pilots couldn't hit a bull in the ass with a scoop shovel and we had to make the collapse look good. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cumplidor 0 #47 January 2, 2007 Nuclear weapons are banned in international treaties are they not? Depleted Uranium is nuclear waste and the government simply states that they are not 'real nukes' or 'not harmful' so it doesn't count in their opinion. A simple 'depends on what the definition of 'is' is' answer to the question. Depends on what you define as a nuke weapon. Reports of phosporus weapons having been used as well in Falluja and Lebanon are out there as well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 102 #48 January 2, 2007 QuoteFor those floors to 'pancake' at FREEFALL speeds without slowing down (that means NO RESISTANCE, like they didn;t even hit each other... one after another after another - huh??) It doesn't make sense. Another claim that has proven to be utterly false. It didn't fall that fast, the earlier link I provided detailed this. You seem to think that taken together, all the little things that don't add up must mean that there is something to it all. However, each of the little things are lies and half truths. When so many claims are shown to so, I think you gotta come up with some new evidence. Perhaps take a repeated look at some bit of video, and notice something that looks unusual, then think of a way for it to fit the conspiracy and throw it out for general consumption. At least that would be more interesting than re-killing the same assertions.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skinnyflyer 0 #49 January 2, 2007 QuoteIt didn't fall that fast not sure what link you're talking about but the official nist investigation says 9 and 11 seconds which is pretty close to free fall speeds.wtc 7 fell at exactly free fall speed. QuoteYou seem to think that taken together, all the little things that don't add up must mean that there is something to it all the still unexplained mysterious collapse of wtc7, the molten steel, the many observed features characteristic of controlled demolition, and plethora of other unexplained events combined with an obvious coverup and ridiculous or non existant official explanation are more than 'little things'. here is an example of how nist deals with the molten steel; "NIST investigators and experts from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEONY)—who inspected the WTC steel at the WTC site and the salvage yards—found no evidence that would support the melting of steel in a jet-fuel ignited fire in the towers prior to collapse. The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing." they don't deny its existance(surely they would deny it if there was no evidence of it), but they're saying because they don't think it should be there they will just ignore it. these are some of the greatest engineering failures in history yet they can't explain wtc7 and as for the collapse of wtc 1+2 they only pretend to expain up to the point of failure. why can't they reproduce any of these collapses with computer simulations? oh sorry they can but no one is allowed to see it."Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skinnyflyer 0 #50 January 2, 2007 QuoteHey, if 9/11 was all a plot by the evil government to justify invading Iraq,,,,,THEN WHY WEREN'T ANY OF THE HIJACKERS IRAQIS???? good question. i don't know the answer. but i don't believe that it was an evil plot designed to justify invading iraq, it was designed to justify the previously mentioned PNAC world domination plans; to drastically increase the military size and budget, and to create support/remove opposition to mobilizing this military(patriot act). iraq is just one aspect of these plans, afghanistan and iran are clearly others and especially having a strong military presence in the entire middle east as this is where almost all of the worlds exportable oil remains. maybe hadn't planned which countries to invade first. maybe they weren't sure which bullshit media story (wmd) they would be able to sell to the public. maybe they couldn't find an iraqi terrorist group to blame it on. the point is there could be many reasonable answers if the us is responsible for 9/11 but we will never know. if you turn your question to the official story; if all the terrorist are saudi arabian they why the hell did the us invade afghanistan and iraq?"Death is more universal than life; everyone dies but not everyone lives." A. Sachs Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
