9/11 conspiracies

mep:

everyone saw the twin towers fall.
did everyone notice how PERFECTLY it fell? what the hell was with those explosions? Kinda like the way you would demolish of building -!! it was one level after the next - in sequence! what kind of a plane does that by crashing into a tower?

mep:

paradoxical:

The laws of physics work for truth, not some far fetched idea the President Bush was in on this. Let's face it-- there is NO WAY he's either that evil and intelligent or THAT stupid. Everyone wants to blame him for everything, but the truth of the matter is, he's harmless and foolish. But he's got to be doing something right, we reelected him.
And it WAS a conspiracy. Just not what you're trying to say it is. Let's go over what we know. On 9/11/01 several airplanes were hijacked. They were flown into the WTC, Pentagon, and one was crashed in a field in PA. The hijackers were killed in the crashes. They were nearly all citizens of Saudi Arabia. The US government had information about the atacks for a long time before they ocurred. For some reason it was ignored, but perhaps that was because it seems so far fetched. It was premeditated.
I'm not happy about the government right now, but no one is that stupid.

WHAT THE...???? DID YOU EVEN READ THE LINK?? YOU JUST SAID IT YOURSELF!!! The laws of physics work for the TRUTH!!!
The way the towers fell tell us that the planes that crashed into the towers were NOT responsible for the towers collasing in THAT WAY!!!! The FEMA report stated that "fires plus impact damage alone caused complete collapses of all three buildings" - IT'S NOT POSSIBLE!!

"No steel structure has ever been collapsed by fire, before or since"
"In the "official" account, the floor-plate attachments are supposed to have let go, (on cue - given the images) causing the accelerating cement "pancake" mass. According to that theory, only the first floor above the fire initially collapsed, causing the floors below to progressively collapse; one-floor-at-a-time. That requires a sequence of delays - however brief."
"The reason that the firefighters bolted up the stairwell was that they were totally certain that there was no danger of collapse. They had no fear; one may go to the transcripts of the radio traffic for evidence of their associated faith and courage. Steel buildings just don't collapse from fire damage. Now, the world is expected to believe that there were three such collapses on 9-11; one building receiving no impact or affected by jet fuel."
"One must remember that each building had 47 steel columns at its center. It's possible to imagine the cement floors dislodging themselves; but there is no rational accounting for the ABRUPT collapse of the core columns!"
"The center-section supporting structure of the WTC tower buildings broke apart as it collapsed. Therefore, an argument for ‘mechanical energy transmission’ doesn’t hold up. It’s not the same as hitting a nail with a sledge-hammer - producing/transmitting tremendous heat from the impact. Comparing the mechanics of the collapsing buildings, a ‘shattering’ nail would not transmit the impact force to necessary to ‘heat’ the opposite end of a nail. In other words, the force of the collapse couldn't/didn't melt the bases of the core columns. "

JUST READ THE FREAKEN SITE!!!

FOR SOME REASON IT WAS IGNORED? NOT THAT INTELLIGENT OR STUPID? HARMLESS??

Why on earth then DO YOU THINK that there are SO MANY holes in the 'official' story????

Here's more:

"Bush’s later claims as to having witnessed the aircraft strike on TV don’t hold up under elementary scrutiny. His statements (presumed reasoning) support other evidence of a serious a mental problem.

Specifically, at a public appearance, Bush gave the following response to a 7th grader –

“Thank you, Jordan. Well, Jordan, you're not going to believe what state I was in when I heard about the terrorist attack. I was in Florida. And my Chief of Staff, Andy Card -- actually, I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly, myself, and I said, well, there's one terrible pilot. I said, it must have been a horrible accident.

But I was whisked off there, I didn't have much time to think about it. And I was sitting in the classroom, and Andy Card, my Chief of Staff, who is sitting over here, walked in and said, "A second plane has hit the tower, America is under attack."




THE SECOND STATEMENT:


“Anyway, I was sitting there, and my Chief of Staff -- well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on. And you know, I thought it was pilot error and I was amazed that anybody could make such a terrible mistake. And something was wrong with the plane, or -- anyway, I'm sitting there, listening to the briefing, and Andy Card came and said, "America is under attack."


( http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020105-3.html )

For starters, just note the verbal chaos in Bush's descriptions (plural) of events - clearly poorly constructed lies.

1. The Booker Elementary teacher said there was no TV present.

2. The first attack was known, before Bush entered the school, itself.

3. Remembering that the second strike was described to Bush in the classroom, he is implying he saw the first aircraft hit the WTC - impossible, of course.

4. The video coverage showed clear weather. No pilot is going to have such an ‘accident’ in clear weather. As a pilot himself, Bush should have recognized that as elementary logic.

5. Given the 1993 bombing of the WTC, it would be natural to assume more terrorism – not an ‘accident.’

6. He wasn't "whisked" anywhere."

auh-buh-cuh-s:

why the fuck would they kill that many of their own people?

unless this theory states that they did it to allow them to commence war in afghanistan and the neighbouring countries for their resources

but that is still rediculously far fetched.

paradoxical:

I DID READ THE LINK.
I didn't place much faith in its conpiracy theory. No author was posted. There is no real record of reliable source, just a series of interpretations of what happened. If you want to convince me that science works in favor of US government conspiracy, show me legitimate scientific documentation, not some moronic journal thing that some idiot posted who also probably claims they were abducted by aliens.

Bloodraine:

...I'm sorry, but you people can harp on all you want and point the finger (I can understand if you lost relatives in the WTC attacks or something, you need to blame somebody for your loss...). But these conspiracy theories you cling onto have little truth in them. Accept that.

mep:

Bloodraine:

...I'm sorry, but you people can harp on all you want and point the finger (I can understand if you lost relatives in the WTC attacks or something, you need to blame somebody for your loss...). But these conspiracy theories you cling onto have little truth in them. Accept that.

Could you tell me why?

mep:

Waddabout here?
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc1_fire.html

I'm not sure about 'legitimate scientific documentation' in this one... but if you could -would you visually compare: what should have happened and what didn't happen?

And, only if you're willing to -would you take into consideration the testimonies of those who survived..?

Bloodraine:

mep:

Bloodraine:

...I'm sorry, but you people can harp on all you want and point the finger (I can understand if you lost relatives in the WTC attacks or something, you need to blame somebody for your loss...). But these conspiracy theories you cling onto have little truth in them. Accept that.

Could you tell me why?

Tell you why?

Tell you why?

My dear, are you actually reading them?. Or are you reading what you want to hear...

I'm no top drawer Physician like paradoxical and the rest but it doesn't take a genius to look at the facts you put before me and see that there is very little hard evidence. Now you're asking me a very badly worded question, but I have endeavoured to answer it as best I can.

paradoxical:

mep:

everyone saw the twin towers fall.
did everyone notice how PERFECTLY it fell? what the hell was with those explosions? Kinda like the way you would demolish of building -!! it was one level after the next - in sequence! what kind of a plane does that by crashing into a tower?

The structure of the buildings and the laws of physics would actually mean the towers falling like that. Really. When the upper levels of a building are blown to pieces, the weight of the rubble is concentrated on the floor below it, which will cave under the weight. The focus of the weight of the upper stories of the buildings being shifted from a balance across weight bearing walls to a ceiling causes a chain reaction much like the way Uranium is used for nuclear bombs.

mep:

paradoxical:

The laws of physics work for truth, not some far fetched idea the President Bush was in on this. Let's face it-- there is NO WAY he's either that evil and intelligent or THAT stupid. Everyone wants to blame him for everything, but the truth of the matter is, he's harmless and foolish. But he's got to be doing something right, we reelected him.
And it WAS a conspiracy. Just not what you're trying to say it is. Let's go over what we know. On 9/11/01 several airplanes were hijacked. They were flown into the WTC, Pentagon, and one was crashed in a field in PA. The hijackers were killed in the crashes. They were nearly all citizens of Saudi Arabia. The US government had information about the atacks for a long time before they ocurred. For some reason it was ignored, but perhaps that was because it seems so far fetched. It was premeditated.
I'm not happy about the government right now, but no one is that stupid.

WHAT THE...???? DID YOU EVEN READ THE LINK?? YOU JUST SAID IT YOURSELF!!! The laws of physics work for the TRUTH!!!
The way the towers fell tell us that the planes that crashed into the towers were NOT responsible for the towers collasing in THAT WAY!!!! The FEMA report stated that "fires plus impact damage alone caused complete collapses of all three buildings" - IT'S NOT POSSIBLE!!

"No steel structure has ever been collapsed by fire, before or since"
"In the "official" account, the floor-plate attachments are supposed to have let go, (on cue - given the images) causing the accelerating cement "pancake" mass. According to that theory, only the first floor above the fire initially collapsed, causing the floors below to progressively collapse; one-floor-at-a-time. That requires a sequence of delays - however brief."
"The reason that the firefighters bolted up the stairwell was that they were totally certain that there was no danger of collapse. They had no fear; one may go to the transcripts of the radio traffic for evidence of their associated faith and courage. Steel buildings just don't collapse from fire damage. Now, the world is expected to believe that there were three such collapses on 9-11; one building receiving no impact or affected by jet fuel."
"One must remember that each building had 47 steel columns at its center. It's possible to imagine the cement floors dislodging themselves; but there is no rational accounting for the ABRUPT collapse of the core columns!"
"The center-section supporting structure of the WTC tower buildings broke apart as it collapsed. Therefore, an argument for ‘mechanical energy transmission’ doesn’t hold up. It’s not the same as hitting a nail with a sledge-hammer - producing/transmitting tremendous heat from the impact. Comparing the mechanics of the collapsing buildings, a ‘shattering’ nail would not transmit the impact force to necessary to ‘heat’ the opposite end of a nail. In other words, the force of the collapse couldn't/didn't melt the bases of the core columns. "

JUST READ THE FREAKEN SITE!!!

FOR SOME REASON IT WAS IGNORED? NOT THAT INTELLIGENT OR STUPID? HARMLESS??

Why on earth then DO YOU THINK that there are SO MANY holes in the 'official' story????

Here's more:

"Bush’s later claims as to having witnessed the aircraft strike on TV don’t hold up under elementary scrutiny. His statements (presumed reasoning) support other evidence of a serious a mental problem.

Specifically, at a public appearance, Bush gave the following response to a 7th grader –

“Thank you, Jordan. Well, Jordan, you're not going to believe what state I was in when I heard about the terrorist attack. I was in Florida. And my Chief of Staff, Andy Card -- actually, I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly, myself, and I said, well, there's one terrible pilot. I said, it must have been a horrible accident.

But I was whisked off there, I didn't have much time to think about it. And I was sitting in the classroom, and Andy Card, my Chief of Staff, who is sitting over here, walked in and said, "A second plane has hit the tower, America is under attack."




THE SECOND STATEMENT:


“Anyway, I was sitting there, and my Chief of Staff -- well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on. And you know, I thought it was pilot error and I was amazed that anybody could make such a terrible mistake. And something was wrong with the plane, or -- anyway, I'm sitting there, listening to the briefing, and Andy Card came and said, "America is under attack."


( http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020105-3.html )

For starters, just note the verbal chaos in Bush's descriptions (plural) of events - clearly poorly constructed lies.

1. The Booker Elementary teacher said there was no TV present.

2. The first attack was known, before Bush entered the school, itself.

3. Remembering that the second strike was described to Bush in the classroom, he is implying he saw the first aircraft hit the WTC - impossible, of course.

4. The video coverage showed clear weather. No pilot is going to have such an ‘accident’ in clear weather. As a pilot himself, Bush should have recognized that as elementary logic.

5. Given the 1993 bombing of the WTC, it would be natural to assume more terrorism – not an ‘accident.’

6. He wasn't "whisked" anywhere."

paradoxical:

mep:

Waddabout here?
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc1_fire.html

I'm not sure about 'legitimate scientific documentation' in this one... but if you could -would you visually compare: what should have happened and what didn't happen?

And, only if you're willing to -would you take into consideration the testimonies of those who survived..?

Look. Just because our government is notoriously stupid doesn't mean that the WTC was blown up by the old men on Capitol Hill.
For one, what's done is done. We can't exactly change it now, and regardless of the party responsible, there is NO WAY of making it right.
We've had a couple wars, one of them continuing.
We can't take things back. There is no sense in trying to pin a conspiracy on an event that took place so long ago when we have a war on our hands right NOW.
Isn't the important thing to get our heroes back home and stop the damn killing?
Isn't it about time that we as teenagers stop rebelling against our government and start trying to work with it to accomplish something bigger than both?
Could our government function correctly if every citizen with voting rights actually went out and voted, if we actually played a part in government, participated instead of just complaining?
Do you agree that if instead of dwelling on the past we looked to the future, maybe all the wrongs committted by the US government and every other could be made up for at least a little by not letting it happen again, by protecting every citizen equally, by taking threats seriously, and by choosing fights because they will help people who really need it RATHER than having it look like we just want oil?
In the grand sceme of things, what does the "how" matter at all? Do we really care "who"?
I don't think so. I think the more important question is "what next?" or "how can we learn from this?" or even "what have we gained?"

NeoSteph:

paradoxical:

mep:

everyone saw the twin towers fall.
did everyone notice how PERFECTLY it fell? what the hell was with those explosions? Kinda like the way you would demolish of building -!! it was one level after the next - in sequence! what kind of a plane does that by crashing into a tower?

The structure of the buildings and the laws of physics would actually mean the towers falling like that. Really. When the upper levels of a building are blown to pieces, the weight of the rubble is concentrated on the floor below it, which will cave under the weight. The focus of the weight of the upper stories of the buildings being shifted from a balance across weight bearing walls to a ceiling causes a chain reaction much like the way Uranium is used for nuclear bombs.

you also have to take into account that the heat of the flames set off by the fuel of the plane would be enough to burn metal, so the actual structure would of been melting allowing it to easily crumble.

NeoSteph:

we're not talking about a ordinary fire here, we're talking about a fuel fire, have you ever seen an oil tanker burn, oiler tankers are made from steel and they will start to melt in a matter of minutes.

secondly this is aviation full, used to pilot jet engines, it's a heck of lot stronger than what your mum puts in your car.

FEMA IS A FUCKING LOAD OF APPOINTED DISC JOCKEYS WHO WOULDN'T KNOW AN APPLE FROM AN ORANGE.

they have been discredited time and time again, they are responcible for the time delays in hurrican katrina along with ignoring information that leaked through about the twin towers.

secodnly it is possible for Bush to have thought the first plane was an accident, for god sakes the rest of the world thought so to, and if you think that bad weather can be the only reason whya plane can crash then you are very simple minded. Bush said he saw the plane crash on the tv before he entered the classroom, he could of been in his car, or a monitor could of been on near by. The one teacher witness might not of been there.

Unfortunately the rest of the world didn't live in fear and believed everything to be a terrorist attack like you seem to believed, planes have crashed by accident into building before and will again, but thanks to small minded conspiricies they are all going to be labelled terrorist.

after he finished the reading he straight flew back to washington to deal with the matter, everyone sayd he shoudl of gone straight away but what did that 20 minutes actually matter.

mep:

NeoSteph:

paradoxical:

mep:

everyone saw the twin towers fall.
did everyone notice how PERFECTLY it fell? what the hell was with those explosions? Kinda like the way you would demolish of building -!! it was one level after the next - in sequence! what kind of a plane does that by crashing into a tower?

The structure of the buildings and the laws of physics would actually mean the towers falling like that. Really. When the upper levels of a building are blown to pieces, the weight of the rubble is concentrated on the floor below it, which will cave under the weight. The focus of the weight of the upper stories of the buildings being shifted from a balance across weight bearing walls to a ceiling causes a chain reaction much like the way Uranium is used for nuclear bombs.

you also have to take into account that the heat of the flames set off by the fuel of the plane would be enough to burn metal, so the actual structure would of been melting allowing it to easily crumble.

The heat of the flames were not hot enough to melt steel.

mep:

NeoSteph:

we're not talking about a ordinary fire here, we're talking about a fuel fire, have you ever seen an oil tanker burn, oiler tankers are made from steel and they will start to melt in a matter of minutes.

secondly this is aviation full, used to pilot jet engines, it's a heck of lot stronger than what your mum puts in your car.

FEMA IS A FUCKING LOAD OF APPOINTED DISC JOCKEYS WHO WOULDN'T KNOW AN APPLE FROM AN ORANGE.

they have been discredited time and time again, they are responcible for the time delays in hurrican katrina along with ignoring information that leaked through about the twin towers.

secodnly it is possible for Bush to have thought the first plane was an accident, for god sakes the rest of the world thought so to, and if you think that bad weather can be the only reason whya plane can crash then you are very simple minded. Bush said he saw the plane crash on the tv before he entered the classroom, he could of been in his car, or a monitor could of been on near by. The one teacher witness might not of been there.

Unfortunately the rest of the world didn't live in fear and believed everything to be a terrorist attack like you seem to believed, planes have crashed by accident into building before and will again, but thanks to small minded conspiricies they are all going to be labelled terrorist.

after he finished the reading he straight flew back to washington to deal with the matter, everyone sayd he shoudl of gone straight away but what did that 20 minutes actually matter.

FEMA SUPPORTED THE ARGUMENT THAT THE TOWERS COLLAPSED FROM FIRE AND STRUCTURAL DAMAGE.

I agree with your opinion of FEMA!

We're not talking about an ordinary oil tank burner here either -even if what you are saying is reliable... that is, about the oil tank.

It was Bush's calm reaction to what he was told that was mostly disturbing -the 20 minutes he spent doing what he thought was the best thing to do at the time is... for the public to debate.


AND ANOTHER THING! HOW DO YOU KNOW MY MUM EVEN HAS A CAR? NEVER MIND WHAT SHE PUTS IN IT? HUH? ANSWER THAT!!!

Kidding. I'm aware.

mep:

paradoxical:

Look. Just because our government is notoriously stupid doesn't mean that the WTC was blown up by the old men on Capitol Hill.
For one, what's done is done. We can't exactly change it now, and regardless of the party responsible, there is NO WAY of making it right.
We've had a couple wars, one of them continuing.
We can't take things back. There is no sense in trying to pin a conspiracy on an event that took place so long ago when we have a war on our hands right NOW.
Isn't the important thing to get our heroes back home and stop the damn killing?
Isn't it about time that we as teenagers stop rebelling against our government and start trying to work with it to accomplish something bigger than both?
Could our government function correctly if every citizen with voting rights actually went out and voted, if we actually played a part in government, participated instead of just complaining?
Do you agree that if instead of dwelling on the past we looked to the future, maybe all the wrongs committted by the US government and every other could be made up for at least a little by not letting it happen again, by protecting every citizen equally, by taking threats seriously, and by choosing fights because they will help people who really need it RATHER than having it look like we just want oil?
In the grand sceme of things, what does the "how" matter at all? Do we really care "who"?
I don't think so. I think the more important question is "what next?" or "how can we learn from this?" or even "what have we gained?"

How can we learn from something when what we thought happened was a lie..? How can we stop the war if what's fuelling it is the thought that we are trying to end, and win -the war on terror? The same terror the American government conspired on America to incite war?

It does matter ‘who’. Without 'who', we are on the wrong side. WE become the terrorists.

Isn't rebellion needed NOW? Should we really be fighting a war WE aren't really fighting? Should we just trust them..?

YES -we need to stop the fighting.
YES -we need to stop the killing. For God's sake, we NEED to stop the killing.

"Let us not tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories" says President Bush.
"You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror."

It's actually compulsorily to vote in Australia.

NeoSteph:

mep:

NeoSteph:

we're not talking about a ordinary fire here, we're talking about a fuel fire, have you ever seen an oil tanker burn, oiler tankers are made from steel and they will start to melt in a matter of minutes.

secondly this is aviation full, used to pilot jet engines, it's a heck of lot stronger than what your mum puts in your car.

FEMA IS A FUCKING LOAD OF APPOINTED DISC JOCKEYS WHO WOULDN'T KNOW AN APPLE FROM AN ORANGE.

they have been discredited time and time again, they are responcible for the time delays in hurrican katrina along with ignoring information that leaked through about the twin towers.

secodnly it is possible for Bush to have thought the first plane was an accident, for god sakes the rest of the world thought so to, and if you think that bad weather can be the only reason whya plane can crash then you are very simple minded. Bush said he saw the plane crash on the tv before he entered the classroom, he could of been in his car, or a monitor could of been on near by. The one teacher witness might not of been there.

Unfortunately the rest of the world didn't live in fear and believed everything to be a terrorist attack like you seem to believed, planes have crashed by accident into building before and will again, but thanks to small minded conspiricies they are all going to be labelled terrorist.

after he finished the reading he straight flew back to washington to deal with the matter, everyone sayd he shoudl of gone straight away but what did that 20 minutes actually matter.

FEMA SUPPORTED THE ARGUMENT THAT THE TOWERS COLLAPSED FROM FIRE AND STRUCTURAL DAMAGE.

I agree with your opinion of FEMA!

We're not talking about an ordinary oil tank burner here either -even if what you are saying is reliable... that is, about the oil tank.

It was Bush's calm reaction to what he was told that was mostly disturbing -the 20 minutes he spent doing what he thought was the best thing to do at the time is... for the public to debate.


AND ANOTHER THING! HOW DO YOU KNOW MY MUM EVEN HAS A CAR? NEVER MIND WHAT SHE PUTS IN IT? HUH? ANSWER THAT!!!

Kidding. I'm aware.

I doubt your mum puts jet fuel in her car unless it's chitty chitty bang bang

Bush is a public speaker and front man, he is not in charge of communications, it's his job to listen to every argument and then make a decision, there was alot of media present at that stage meeting, if he had run from the room it would of stirred a media panic, he needed to look like he was in control. Secondly how do you explain to room full of kids that the president needs to leave because America is under attack.

paradoxical:

mep:

paradoxical:

Look. Just because our government is notoriously stupid doesn't mean that the WTC was blown up by the old men on Capitol Hill.
For one, what's done is done. We can't exactly change it now, and regardless of the party responsible, there is NO WAY of making it right.
We've had a couple wars, one of them continuing.
We can't take things back. There is no sense in trying to pin a conspiracy on an event that took place so long ago when we have a war on our hands right NOW.
Isn't the important thing to get our heroes back home and stop the damn killing?
Isn't it about time that we as teenagers stop rebelling against our government and start trying to work with it to accomplish something bigger than both?
Could our government function correctly if every citizen with voting rights actually went out and voted, if we actually played a part in government, participated instead of just complaining?
Do you agree that if instead of dwelling on the past we looked to the future, maybe all the wrongs committted by the US government and every other could be made up for at least a little by not letting it happen again, by protecting every citizen equally, by taking threats seriously, and by choosing fights because they will help people who really need it RATHER than having it look like we just want oil?
In the grand sceme of things, what does the "how" matter at all? Do we really care "who"?
I don't think so. I think the more important question is "what next?" or "how can we learn from this?" or even "what have we gained?"

How can we learn from something when what we thought happened was a lie..? How can we stop the war if what's fuelling it is the thought that we are trying to end, and win -the war on terror? The same terror the American government conspired on America to incite war?

It does matter ‘who’. Without 'who', we are on the wrong side. WE become the terrorists.

Isn't rebellion needed NOW? Should we really be fighting a war WE aren't really fighting? Should we just trust them..?

YES -we need to stop the fighting.
YES -we need to stop the killing. For God's sake, we NEED to stop the killing.

"Let us not tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories" says President Bush.
"You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror."

It's actually compulsorily to vote in Australia.

Human rights violations have been running rampant all over the middle east for decades now. Maybe the original goal isn't the important thing. Maybe it's really the end we should be looking at here.
Under no circumstances do I condone the killing of humans. Guilty or innocent, we have no right as humans to judge other humans and decide whether they deserve to live or die. But maybe, just maybe, something good can come out of this since we can't exactly give back all the lives lost and we can't take back this war.
And we knew what was going on over there just like we knew what Hitler was doing in the 40's. We didn't step in then because there was no gain for us until Pearl Harbor. We didn't step in in the middle east until we were attacked and because...what...there was a major gain there.
So YES, question the motives. I agree with that. As humans we have that responsibility.
But the US government did NOT conspire against its own people when those towers fell.