Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

55,132 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#247284 Nov 26, 2012
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Thought you wanted debate, not insults?
SECOND TIME!
A: Show us any test that proves it was steel
B: How would molten steel weeks latter prove explosives?
I can't debate NFL on who his father is, because I, like him, have no idea.

Insults Are Easier
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#247285 Nov 26, 2012
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
Show the tests where it proves molten metal was aluminum sitting in pools and running down the channel rails.
Molten steel is not suggested to be caused by explosives, it's a result of incendiaries like thermate, that was never tested officially,
So try to keep up.
Insults Are Easier
A: You claimed it was steel, not me, I make not claims, BACK IT UP, show us a test that it was steel.

B: How did a thermate reaction, which lasts a minute or two tops until all the heat energy is expended account for molten steel weeks and months latter?

An NFL Fan

“Brevity is the soule of wit”

Since: May 09

USA

#247286 Nov 26, 2012
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny you should mention "pulling out" when the subject of your mom comes up.
Insults Are Easier
Does that sort of gag elicit a hearty guffaw from your 'friends', Bozo?

An NFL Fan

“Brevity is the soule of wit”

Since: May 09

USA

#247287 Nov 26, 2012
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't debate NFL on who his father is, because I, like him, have no idea.
Insults Are Easier
You're on a roll! Did you pick that material up from an old Bob Hope comedy pamphlet?

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#247288 Nov 26, 2012
Insults Are Easier wrote:
The lost quote... Third times a charm.

First off, Canadians should celebrate Thanksgiving, because without the Pilgrims breaking bread with the Native Americans, then subsequently committing genocide upon them, none of what our two nations enjoy today would be possible.
Canadians do celebrate Thanksgiving although on a different date.

The difference is that we signed treaties rather than go to war with Native Canadians...regardless, a meaningless comment with no value.
Insults Are Easier wrote:
In this investigative scenario, the coroner should check for all causes of injury, especially if witnesses claimed to hear gunshots and the sound of an engine. I have a problem with any investigation not being thorough and scientific, and so should everyone.
Again, the evidence was visually examined and expecting anyone to go back a re-examine it because they didn't explicitly look for signs of explosives is asinine.

Here's a corollary in a court of law;

"Defense call coroner John Doe."

"Dr. Doe, can you please describe the wounds found on Dead Guy's body?"

"Of course...(coroner lists the various wounds and their specifics)."

Defense: "Dr. Doe, did you specifically examine the body for gun shot wounds?"

Coroner: "Not specifically, no. I examined the body in full for what may have caused death."

Defense: "Perhaps Mr. Guy succumbed to a gun shot wound?"

Coroner: "I examined the body and found no gun shot wounds."

Defense: "But you've just admitted you never examined the body specifically for gun shot wounds."

Judge: "Defense, are you drunk?"

That's your argument.

On top of that, there's an entire section of the NIST report dealing with materials and the fact that dozens of positive material identification tests, which would also show the presence of residues, done on the steel to confirm material grades and compliance to ASME Sec II.

Only in your world did NIST not practice due diligence.

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#247289 Nov 26, 2012
An NFL Fan wrote:
<quoted text>
Does that sort of gag elicit a hearty guffaw from your 'friends', Bozo?
It's also funny you should mention "gag" when your mom is mentioned.

Subconscious is a b*tch, eh?

I do agree with you on one thing,

Insults Are Easier
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#247290 Nov 26, 2012
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
It's also funny you should mention "gag" when your mom is mentioned.
Subconscious is a b*tch, eh?
I do agree with you on one thing,
Insults Are Easier
A: You claimed it was steel, not me, I make no specific claims about the substance, BACK IT UP, show us a test that it was steel.

B: How did a thermate reaction, which lasts a minute or two tops until all the heat energy is expended account for molten steel weeks and months latter?

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#247291 Nov 26, 2012
Insults Are Easier wrote:
All scientific investigations should follow the scientific method (which is taught in 5th grade), where all observations are tested. At WTC the investigators were not there to observe first hand, so witness testimony and video should have been the observation that they prove or disprove.

The NIST ignoring molten steel at WTC video shows steel in yellow hot status days and weeks after the collapse. This suggests temperatures much higher during collapse, and why explosives should have been tested, not ignored.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_r9lhQTeVJv4/S7zWJeG...
Molten steel weeks after does not suggest anything about the collapse. That's a fallacy you desperately wish was true, but you have nothing to qualify it.

Reports of molten steel in fires is common. That's an established fact.

Again, there were tests done which would have exposed any residues showing that explosives were used.

Those tests confirmed nothing aside from the material grades and their conformance to ASME Sec II.

We won't even mention dual trained search and rescue dogs all over ground zero.
Insults Are Easier wrote:
The "meteorite" itself shows concrete wrapped around steel. Indicative of high heat and/or pressure. Assuming NIST didn't consider these types of recovered pieces relevant, because they assumed them to be created long after the collapse, is unscientific in itself, because science shouldn't assume, it should test and prove.
A pressure artifact from the collapse of a 110 story building is somewhat more interesting than commonplace reports of molten metal.

I highly doubt NIST concluded they were formed AFTER collapse, but you must have a citation right?
Insults Are Easier wrote:
Most of the links you provide start off with the premise that "conspiracists" are crazy and can't be convinced of anything scientific, then labels them "troothers". I tend to disregard these types of biased attack pieces intended to mislead readers into false belief systems.
The links I provided were from the ASCE and the company hired to manage the land fill sites, they don't mention twoofers at all.

But I can see why you'd want to hand wave them away, they prove you're wrong on multiple accounts.
Insults Are Easier wrote:
One article actually compares questioning government accounts to questioning the sun rise, even though government has been shown to mislead on countless occasions, while the sun rising has always been truthful.

Facts do not require character attacks, but

Insults Are Easier
Right, find a mirror.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#247293 Nov 26, 2012
RADEKT wrote:
<quoted text>"I have a problem with any investigation not being thorough and scientific"

CAN ANYBODY SAY .... IRONIC !!!!!!!!!!
Ya, especially given that the molten material is conclusively called steel by the same poster when no evidence for that conclusion exists.

Pure irony.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#247294 Nov 26, 2012
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>How many engineers are truly willing to put their careers on the line to speak out against the official story? And as you walk up and say with a grin "Do you believe in the inside jobity job these twoofers are suggesting?", how many of them will be truly forth coming? Also, how many of them have actually studied all the reported evidence, political and scientific combined?

Insults Are Easier
The engineers I've discussed thus with were shown what you and other twoofers base your conclusions on, not one has bought it.

And seriously, the fallacious argument that all the engineers all over the world are somehow scared for their jobs and beholden to the US government?

I know at least a couple who hated Bush to a degree that they would've sacrificed their first born to see him exposed for something like 911.

That's not an argument, it's obfuscation.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#247295 Nov 26, 2012
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>Thought you wanted debate, not insults?

SECOND TIME!

A: Show us any test that proves it was steel

B: How would molten steel weeks latter prove explosives?
I'd also like to see reports of molten aluminum.

Since it has a lower melting point and was in abundance AND can be identified by sight alone, there must be tons of those reports!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#247296 Nov 26, 2012
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>Show the tests where it proves molten metal was aluminum sitting in pools and running down the channel rails.

Molten steel is not suggested to be caused by explosives, it's a result of incendiaries like thermate, that was never tested officially,

So try to keep up.

Insults Are Easier
But it was officially tested during PMI testing for material chemistry.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#247297 Nov 26, 2012
_Abraxas_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Mostly the tires, some got broken windows from falling debris and the interiors caught fire.
This slide show shows the vehicle fires started after the first collapse.
http://smg.beta.photobucket.com/user/DoYouEve...
Yea I saw that one. Must have caught from a direct hit of really hot debris. The others could have caught from hot debris blowing out of the collapsing buildings. See, we can agree on many things if we look at the existing footage.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#247298 Nov 26, 2012
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
First you'd have to show the damage was anomalous.
You know, the phase of actually proving your idiotic claim had merit.
Funny how twoof always avoids that part...oh and the damage is consistant with all car fires and if you can't figure out what caused the fires, you're a bigger fool than the idiot who originally claimed it was pyroclastic flows.
I see you are not a CSI fan.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#247299 Nov 26, 2012
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>Yea I saw that one. Must have caught from a direct hit of really hot debris. The others could have caught from hot debris blowing out of the collapsing buildings. See, we can agree on many things if we look at the existing footage.
*face palm*

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#247300 Nov 26, 2012
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>I see you are not a CSI fan.
Not a fan of tv in any way, shape or form.

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#247301 Nov 26, 2012
Porkpie Hat wrote:
Canadians do celebrate Thanksgiving although on a different date.
The difference is that we signed treaties rather than go to war with Native Canadians...regardless, a meaningless comment with no value.
Well thats good to know, and since Canada was greatly influenced by the traitors who were loyal to the British and who went there as refugees, it makes sense they brought their customs with them. It also explains your pro-government position on everything, it's in your Canadian blood after all.

But happy pre-emptive Thanksgiving anyways.
Porkpie Hat wrote:
Here's a corollary in a court of law;
"Defense call coroner John Doe."
"Dr. Doe, can you please describe the wounds found on Dead Guy's body?"
"Of course...(coroner lists the various wounds and their specifics)."
Defense: "Dr. Doe, did you specifically examine the body for gun shot wounds?"
Except in 9/11, the coroner ignored various wounds... In court, as in life, experts can be found to disagree on virtually anything.

If 9/11 was a an individual murder, then the coroner only tested a few pieces of the body, after it was dismembered and shipped off to China, and didn't bother checking for other possible causes of death, because he saw a bloody knife in a crime scene photo.

Defense: Did you check for explosives or incendiaries?

NIST: No, I saw a video of a plane hitting and assumed that to be the only cause. And all the wreckage I was allowed to see showed no indication of explosives.

Defense: Objection, unscientific, and contrary to the scientific method.
Porkpie Hat wrote:
Right, find a mirror.
You first.

Insults Are Easier
Say the Truth

Ann Arbor, MI

#247302 Nov 26, 2012
WasteOfSpace wrote:
<quoted text>
I see you are not a CSI fan.
Hint: CSI is "entertainment", not reality.

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#247303 Nov 26, 2012
The Osama bin Laden Myth
Monday, November 26, 2012 – by Paul Craig Roberts
.
Paul Craig Roberts
.
The interview below with Osama bin Laden was conducted by the Karachi, Pakistan, daily newspaper, Ummat, and published on September 28, 2001, 17 days after the alleged, but unsubstantiated, al Qaeda attack of September 11, 2001, on the World Trade Center twin towers and Pentagon. The interview was sensational.
.
The alleged "mastermind" of 9/11 said that he and al Qaeda had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack.
.
The British Broadcasting Corporation's World Monitoring Service had the interview translated into English and made public on September 29, 2001.
.
Osama bin Laden's sensational denial was not reported by the US print and TV media. It was not investigated by the executive branch.
.
No one in the US Congress called attention to bin Laden's refusal of responsibility for the greatest humiliation ever inflicted on a superpower.
.
To check my memory of the lack of coverage, I googled "Osama bin Laden's interview denying responsibility for 9/11." Some Internet sites reproduced the interview, but the only mainstream news source that I found was a 1 minute YouTube video from CNN in which the anchor, after quoting an al Jazeera report of bin Laden's denial, concludes that "we can all weigh that in the scale of credibility and come to our own conclusions." .
.
In other words, bin Laden had already been demonized, and his denial was not credible.
.
The sensational news was unfit for US citizens and was withheld from them by the american "free press," a press free to lie for the government but not to tell the truth.
.
Obviously, if bin Laden had outwitted not only the National Security Agency, the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the FBI but also all 16 US intelligence agencies, all intelligence agencies of Washington's NATO puppet states, Israel's Mossad and in addition the National Security Council, NORAD, US air traffic control and airport security four times on the same morning, it would be the greatest feat in world history, a movement-building feat that would have made al Qaeda the most successful anti-imperialist organization in human history, an extraordinary victory over "the great satan" that would have brought millions of new recruits into al Qaeda's ranks.
.
Yet the alleged "mastermind" denied all responsibility.

I remember decades ago when a terrorist attack occurred in Europe, whether real or an Operation Gladio false-flag attack, innumerable organizations would claim credit.
.
Perhaps this was the CIA's way of diverting attention from itself but it illustrates that every intelligence service understands the value to an organization of claiming credit for a successful attack.
.
Although bin Laden denied responsibility, in 2011 some al Qaeda leaders, realizing the prestige value of the 9/11 attack, claimed credit for the attack and criticized Iranian President Ahmadinejad for questioning the official US story.
.
Although only a few Americans are aware of the September 28, 2001 interview in which bin Laden states his non-involvement with the 9/11 attacks, many Americans have seen post-2001 videos in which a person alleged to be bin Laden takes credit for the attacks. There are two problems with these videos. Experts have examined them and found them to be fakes, and all of the videos appeared after bin Laden was reported by the Pakistan Observer, the Egyptian press and Fox News to have died in mid-December, 2001, from lung disease.
.
Bin Laden also suffered from kidney disease. According to a CBS news report on January 28, 2002, Osama bin Laden was hospitalized for dialysis treatment in the Pakistani military hospital in Rawalpindi on September 10, 2001, the day before 9/11.
.
http://www.thedailybell.com/28364/Paul-Craig-...
.
Jet Fuel ha ha ha ha agggh
.
That's A Funny One huh eh !

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#247304 Nov 26, 2012
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
Not a fan of tv in any way, shape or form.
Me neither. I rent the series on DVDs. I don't think cable has much worth paying for.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 1 min MayDay 6,625
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 5 min kent 681,597
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 8 min Aerobatty 122,764
topix drops human sexuality forum.......this be... (Jun '16) 1 hr Christ sans politics 101
Guilty of a DUI or DWI? Important IDRC Info (Jan '12) 1 hr Durka 7
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr lil whispers 619,440
Why many ugly MEN R gettin' the cutie pies 2 hr Doctor REALITY 1
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 hr New Age Spiritual... 982,158
More from around the web