Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

54,546 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#247245 Nov 26, 2012
low mass effect wrote:
<quoted text>you mean like the low mass effect of dust acting as a piledriver?
Passports that get ejected from a plane, able to withstand a huge fireball that melts steel...now that's a good'n.
http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlny/files/o...

Sleep it off junkie.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#247246 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...
Not one picture of a volcano...what gives?
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#247247 Nov 26, 2012
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
What about the $300 billion in gold stored down below? Where did it go?
Anyone trying to make off with the gold would not be able to run very fast: each ingot weighs 70 pounds.

Photo: Two Brinks trucks were at ground zero yesterday to start hauling away the $200 million in gold and silver that the Bank of Nova Scotia had stored in a vault under the trade center.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/01/nyregion/a-...
Say the Truth

Eatontown, NJ

#247248 Nov 26, 2012
WasteWater wrote:
Was all this chaos a cover for a big heist? Why did they leave a truck load behind?
yeah, i saw that movie too, the one with Bruce Willis and Sam Jackson, right?

TWOOF = incapable of separating reality from fiction
Say the Truth

Eatontown, NJ

#247249 Nov 26, 2012
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
all your posts are dismissed Jackass.
What kind of moron calls himself "Waste Water"? Maybe the same kind who calls himself "Loser Fool"
hunter

Norwich, UK

#247250 Nov 26, 2012
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
I've done better.
I've spoken with engineers, fire fighters and pilots, they all agree that twoofs a joke, idiots like you are the punch line.
Good luck with that!
Yea of coarse you have spoken to them, NOT!
You may have done,In your imagination!
As I said before,Go see your therapist and get your medication changed.
Personally I don't think there's a lot of hope for you.
hunter

Norwich, UK

#247252 Nov 26, 2012
Say the Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Twoof is DUMB!
It's a pity you can't live by what your name is,Say the truth!
You have been associating with Porkfart and Rapekit to much.
Why can't you just Say the twoof,
You MORONIC IDIOT!

“9/11 Twoof = STUPID ”

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#247253 Nov 26, 2012
Does it matter !?!?!?! You are a CLUELESS MORON who just doesn't get it or doesn't want to get it
low mass effect wrote:
<quoted text>
you mean like the low mass effect of dust acting as a piledriver?
Passports that get ejected from a plane, able to withstand a huge fireball that melts steel...now that's a good'n.
hunter

Norwich, UK

#247254 Nov 26, 2012
RADEKT wrote:
the BBC story is constantly cited as evidence that some of those named as the hijackers are still alive, but the BBC retracted their story and said it was just “confusion over names and identities"
I also wonder if all your paranioa was true why the guys who pulled off 9/11 wouldnt just kll these guys off so they dont spoil the plot ...... they killed 3,000 people whats a few more !?!?!?!?!
<quoted text>
No they did not retract their story!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#247255 Nov 26, 2012
hunter wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a pity you can't live by what your name is,Say the truth!
You have been associating with Porkfart and Rapekit to much.
Why can't you just Say the twoof,
You MORONIC IDIOT!
LOL, It's the loon that wanted to debate and end the insults, till debate started and he ran away for a few days.

Have not met such a UK nutter since "Clara Massa", google her.
Say the Truth

San Rafael, CA

#247256 Nov 26, 2012
RADEKT wrote:
Does it matter !?!?!?! You are a CLUELESS MORON who just doesn't get it or doesn't want to get it
<quoted text>
So am I ! And you for that matter.

“9/11 Twoof = STUPID ”

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#247257 Nov 26, 2012
Steve Herrmann BBC 11:33 UK time, Friday, 27 October 2006

A five-year-old story from our archive has been the subject of some recent editorial discussion here. The story, written in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, was about confusion at the time surrounding the names and identities of some of the hijackers. This confusion was widely reported and was also acknowledged by the FBI.

The story has been cited ever since by some as evidence that the 9/11 attacks were part of a US government conspiracy.

We later reported on the list of hijackers, thereby superseding the earlier report. In the intervening years we have also reported in detail on the investigation into the attacks, the 9/11 commission and its report.

We’ve carried the full report, executive summary and main findings and, as part of the recent fifth anniversary coverage, a detailed guide to what’s known about what happened on the day. But conspiracy theories have persisted. The confusion over names and identities we reported back in 2001 may have arisen because these were common Arabic and Islamic names
hunter wrote:
<quoted text>
No they did not retract their story!

“9/11 Twoof = STUPID ”

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#247258 Nov 26, 2012
..... as are your parents for ever having a worthless piece of shit like you
Say the Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
So am I ! And you for that matter.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#247259 Nov 26, 2012
hunter wrote:
<quoted text>
No they did not retract their story!
That's odd, From the BBC, Link provided.

A five-year-old story from our archive has been the subject of some recent editorial discussion here. The story, written in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, was about confusion at the time surrounding the names and identities of some of the hijackers. This confusion was widely reported and was also acknowledged by the FBI.

The story has been cited ever since by some as evidence that the 9/11 attacks were part of a US government conspiracy.

We later reported on the list of hijackers, thereby superseding the earlier report. In the intervening years we have also reported in detail on the investigation into the attacks, the 9/11 commission and its report.

We’ve carried the full report, executive summary and main findings and, as part of the recent fifth anniversary coverage, a detailed guide to what’s known about what happened on the day. But conspiracy theories have persisted. The confusion over names and identities we reported back in 2001 may have arisen because these were common Arabic and Islamic names.

In an effort to make this clearer, we have made one small change to the original story. Under the FBI picture of Waleed al Shehri we have added the words "A man called Waleed Al Shehri..." to make it as clear as possible that there was confusion over the identity. The rest of the story remains as it was in the archive as a record of the situation at the time.

We recently asked the FBI for a statement, and this is, as things stand, the closest thing we have to a definitive view: The FBI is confident that it has positively identified the nineteen hijackers responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Also, the 9/11 investigation was thoroughly reviewed by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States and the House and Senate Joint Inquiry. Neither of these reviews ever raised the issue of doubt about the identity of the nineteen hijackers.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10...
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#247260 Nov 26, 2012
Sorry, Missed your post.
RADEKT wrote:
Steve Herrmann BBC 11:33 UK time, Friday, 27 October 2006
A five-year-old story from our archive has been the subject of some recent editorial discussion here. The story, written in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, was about confusion at the time surrounding the names and identities of some of the hijackers. This confusion was widely reported and was also acknowledged by the FBI.
The story has been cited ever since by some as evidence that the 9/11 attacks were part of a US government conspiracy.
We later reported on the list of hijackers, thereby superseding the earlier report. In the intervening years we have also reported in detail on the investigation into the attacks, the 9/11 commission and its report.
We’ve carried the full report, executive summary and main findings and, as part of the recent fifth anniversary coverage, a detailed guide to what’s known about what happened on the day. But conspiracy theories have persisted. The confusion over names and identities we reported back in 2001 may have arisen because these were common Arabic and Islamic names
<quoted text>

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#247261 Nov 26, 2012
hunter wrote:
<quoted text>Yea of coarse you have spoken to them, NOT!
You may have done,In your imagination!
As I said before,Go see your therapist and get your medication changed.
Personally I don't think there's a lot of hope for you.
I've spoken to many engineers about twoof, I work with engineers all day, every day.

Not one has ever said, "they're right!". Yet every one I've spoken to has chuckled about the absolute lack of knowledge you losers possess.

I know it hurts little camper, just like finding out reports of molten steel are commonplace in large fires hurts you.

I've had the same experience speaking with fire fighters and pilots, but you read twoofer websites...then think you know more than the lot of them together.

Btw, still waiting for all those papers about nano-thermite...

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#247262 Nov 26, 2012
Say the Truth wrote:
<quoted text>So am I ! And you for that matter.
Why is it twoof relies on intentional deception for everything elevator boy-sheep?

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#247263 Nov 26, 2012
hunter wrote:
<quoted text>No they did not retract their story!
In twooferdumb, here in reality they did.

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#247264 Nov 26, 2012
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.
Porkpie Hat wrote:
Nothing points to the use of explosives and your argument is akin to a coroner examining a body for knife wounds because a bloody knife was found near the body, then turning around and claiming he was wrong because he didn't also examine the body for gun shots or tire tracks.
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.

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...

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.

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.

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

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#247265 Nov 26, 2012
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.
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text> Nothing points to the use of explosives and your argument is akin to a coroner examining a body for knife wounds because a bloody knife was found near the body, then turning around and claiming he was wrong because he didn't also examine the body for gun shots or tire tracks.
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.

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...

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.

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.

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

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
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 3 min Buck Crick 880,341
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 min June VanDerMark 603,477
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 13 min Lyndi 177,899
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 24 min RiccardoFire 8,302
maa ko kaise choda jay (Mar '14) 53 min pradeep patidar 35
News The Latest: Husband: Kentucky clerk is 'standin... 1 hr Gremlin 6
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 1 hr andet1987 6,405
The Christian Atheist debate 1 hr lightbeamrider 3,988
Which is the Oldest Indian Language? Sanskrit V... (Jul '08) 4 hr The swamiji 7,650
More from around the web