Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

54,279 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

Since: May 10

YOUR MOM'S HOUSE

#254114 Mar 16, 2013
Hey Sock Puppet, how much energy was released by each tower during the collpases ?
Werner wrote:
<quoted text>
Some chunks of the towers were moving faster because they were being propelled by late-firing explosives!
Multi-toin chunks of a building don't "fly out" in all directions hundreds of feet in a gravity driven collapse.
Truth Teller

Centerville, UT

#254117 Mar 16, 2013
RADECKTs SOCK wrote:
how much energy was released by each tower during the collpases ?
<quoted text>
The presence of so many tons of nanothermitic pyrotechnic material in the buildings, discovered by researchers later in the dust, guarantees that the energy released was sufficient to destroy the tough steel core columns and dense perimeter structure. Gravity alone could not have brought the entire building down, and gravity certainly wasn't responsible for the horizontal forces that blew the towers apart in every direction.

Since: May 10

YOUR MOM'S HOUSE

#254118 Mar 16, 2013
WRONG Sock Puppet, an independent lab tested dust samples in Feb 2012 and found no thermite ... try keeping up Dim Wit
Truth Teller wrote:
<quoted text>
The presence of so many tons of nanothermitic pyrotechnic material in the buildings, discovered by researchers later in the dust, guarantees that the energy released was sufficient to destroy the tough steel core columns and dense perimeter structure. Gravity alone could not have brought the entire building down, and gravity certainly wasn't responsible for the horizontal forces that blew the towers apart in every direction.
Van der Holleen

Amsterdam, Netherlands

#254119 Mar 16, 2013
mini radish wrote:
WRONG Sock Puppet, an independent lab tested dust samples in Feb 2012 and found no thermite ... try keeping up Dim Wit
<quoted text>
Well, next time you perform the test, try igniting the pyrotechnic material in the dust with sufficiently high energy source (torch) and watch them flash and produce molten iron droplets, a product of thermite reaction.

But your mother may not appreciate you using your basement room for pyrotechnic experiments.
Mark

Crofton, MD

#254120 Mar 16, 2013
i own 9-11, myself,Tom,rade etc...have already proved everything there is abouyt this, clearly a Terrorist operation..No Government Involvment what so ever..so move along

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254121 Mar 16, 2013
ClearWater wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =pre2lIlbyQoXX
Anyone can see with their own eyes!
Chandler has been debunked. What an idiot.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254122 Mar 16, 2013
Truth Teller wrote:
<quoted text>
The presence of so many tons of nanothermitic pyrotechnic material in the buildings, discovered by researchers later in the dust, guarantees that the energy released was sufficient to destroy the tough steel core columns and dense perimeter structure. Gravity alone could not have brought the entire building down, and gravity certainly wasn't responsible for the horizontal forces that blew the towers apart in every direction.
Nonsense. More false claims.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254123 Mar 16, 2013
Mark wrote:
i own 9-11, myself,Tom,rade etc...have already proved everything there is abouyt this, clearly a Terrorist operation..No Government Involvment what so ever..so move along
Exactly.
Your Teacher

Nürnberg, Germany

#254125 Mar 16, 2013
Researcher Jonathan Cole, summarizes the physical evidence and other forms of solid evidence, which indicates sophisticated demolition at the World Trade Center, and then he demonstrates how even the conventional variants of thermite can cut through the steel structure. The advanced nanothermitic materials that have been found by multiple researchers are much more efficient than the conventional incendiaries that Jonathan Cole uses to successfully cut steel beams. Watch

Judged:

11

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254126 Mar 16, 2013
Your Teacher wrote:
Researcher Jonathan Cole, summarizes the physical evidence and other forms of solid evidence, which indicates sophisticated demolition at the World Trade Center, and then he demonstrates how even the conventional variants of thermite can cut through the steel structure. The advanced nanothermitic materials that have been found by multiple researchers are much more efficient than the conventional incendiaries that Jonathan Cole uses to successfully cut steel beams. Watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =JLrPxFCLNkAXX
More nonsense devoid of any tangible evidence or common sense. What's wrong with the fact the buildings fell because of catastrophic damage caused by fully fueled airplanes crashed into them at full speed? Kind of obvious isn't it?
Erik

Anonymous Proxy

#254127 Mar 16, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
More nonsense devoid of any tangible evidence or common sense. What's wrong with the fact the buildings fell because of catastrophic damage caused by fully fueled airplanes crashed into them at full speed? Kind of obvious isn't it?
What is wrong is, number one, it is not a "fact",
and number 2, the Towers did not "fall" - they were blown apart violently, as is obvious in the news footage
and number 3, the airplanes were not "fully fueled"
and number 4, the Towers were designed to sustain airplane impacts, as they obviously did

The fires in the impact zones were burning out. However, there were explosives detonating on other floors of the Towers, as we could hear on the fireman radios and as we learned from testimony of firefighters who survived blasts that had nothing to do with the plane impacts. It is quite obvious from the way the Towers were being blown very quickly apart that these were not structural failures from fire and impact!


https://www.youtube.com/watch...
Convar

Germany

#254128 Mar 16, 2013
Hard disks that were recovered from the ground Zero and cleaned in a sophisticated procedure revealed evidence of financial crimes

Since: May 10

YOUR MOM'S HOUSE

#254129 Mar 16, 2013
because we all know that the ONLY thing that explodes in a fire is ..... Explosives

House Fire Triggers Massive Explosion - Firefighter Injured
FireFightingNews.com

(Oregon)- At 12:26 am on November 29th Canby Firefighters responded to a house fire located at 12777 S. Union Hall Rd. Upon arrival, firefighters found a home fully involved in fire. The home was located on an 18-acre rural home-site, which had a very long, very narrow, and very dark driveway that looked much like others driveways. Firefighters had to literally guess as to which driveway might lead them to the burning home, and fortunately, they chose the correct driveway the first time. Firefighters were forced to park their fire engine about 200 feet from the home and deployed an exterior defensive attack.

At 1:09 AM, 23 minutes after firefighters initially started fire-ground operations, a massive explosion rocked the fire scene. Within seconds, firefighters heard the ominous words over their radios, "Firefighter Down." Firefighter Raina Eshleman had suffered and injury, and her fellow firefighters, John Footman and Andrew Gordian rushed to her aid, and quickly removed her from the hazard area.
Erik wrote:
<quoted text>
What is wrong is, number one, it is not a "fact",
and number 2, the Towers did not "fall" - they were blown apart violently, as is obvious in the news footage
and number 3, the airplanes were not "fully fueled"
and number 4, the Towers were designed to sustain airplane impacts, as they obviously did
The fires in the impact zones were burning out. However, there were explosives detonating on other floors of the Towers, as we could hear on the fireman radios and as we learned from testimony of firefighters who survived blasts that had nothing to do with the plane impacts. It is quite obvious from the way the Towers were being blown very quickly apart that these were not structural failures from fire and impact!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =IO1ps1mzU8oXX
https://www.youtube.com/watch...
van Eyke

Amsterdam, Netherlands

#254130 Mar 16, 2013
YellowPissreality wrote:
because we all know that the ONLY thing that explodes in a fire is ..... Explosives
House Fire Triggers Massive Explosion - Firefighter Injured
FireFightingNews.com
(Oregon)- At 12:26 am on November 29th Canby Firefighters responded to a house fire located at 12777 S. Union Hall Rd. Upon arrival, firefighters found a home fully involved in fire. The home was located on an 18-acre rural home-site, which had a very long, very narrow, and very dark driveway that looked much like others driveways. Firefighters had to literally guess as to which driveway might lead them to the burning home, and fortunately, they chose the correct driveway the first time. Firefighters were forced to park their fire engine about 200 feet from the home and deployed an exterior defensive attack.
At 1:09 AM, 23 minutes after firefighters initially started fire-ground operations, a massive explosion rocked the fire scene. Within seconds, firefighters heard the ominous words over their radios, "Firefighter Down." Firefighter Raina Eshleman had suffered and injury, and her fellow firefighters, John Footman and Andrew Gordian rushed to her aid, and quickly removed her from the hazard area.
<quoted text>
This is a red herring, yes? What does this have to do with explosions that are many many meters from the fire, and in some cases <<BEFORE>> the airplains hit the building?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254131 Mar 16, 2013
Erik wrote:
<quoted text>
What is wrong is, number one, it is not a "fact",
and number 2, the Towers did not "fall" - they were blown apart violently, as is obvious in the news footage
and number 3, the airplanes were not "fully fueled"
and number 4, the Towers were designed to sustain airplane impacts, as they obviously did
The fires in the impact zones were burning out. However, there were explosives detonating on other floors of the Towers, as we could hear on the fireman radios and as we learned from testimony of firefighters who survived blasts that had nothing to do with the plane impacts. It is quite obvious from the way the Towers were being blown very quickly apart that these were not structural failures from fire and impact!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =IO1ps1mzU8oXX
https://www.youtube.com/watch...
It is a fact unless you can prove otherwise. So far there are many far fetched opinions but no evidence to back any of those claims.

The towers stood for a little over two hours before metal fatigue and truss bolts sheared causing them to collapse.

The two airplanes had just taken off from nearby airports. They had plenty of fuel on board to reach their destinations.

The towers did sustain the immediate impact but were not designed to be flown into at full speed with fully fueled planes of that size. Besides, this is the test of the engineering. They actually held up pretty well.

There were no explosives. What was heard was structural failure. I see you have no experience with things letting go under pressure, I have.

The firefighters spoke of undetermined secondary explosions common in fires of that size.

It is obvious the towers failed. It is equally obvious there was no evidence of explosive devices.

Since: May 10

YOUR MOM'S HOUSE

#254132 Mar 16, 2013
ZERO explosions before plane impacts
van Eyke wrote:
<quoted text>
This is a red herring, yes? What does this have to do with explosions that are many many meters from the fire, and in some cases <<BEFORE>> the airplains hit the building?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254133 Mar 16, 2013
Convar wrote:
Hard disks that were recovered from the ground Zero and cleaned in a sophisticated procedure revealed evidence of financial crimes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =4-OClX54EFQXX
Could be. Opportunists often take advantage of chaotic situations. Does this prove anything?
Navigator

Amsterdam, Netherlands

#254134 Mar 16, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a fact unless you can prove otherwise.
Maybe in your world...
WasteWater wrote:
So far there are many far fetched opinions but no evidence to back any of those claims.
Only in your world...
WasteWater wrote:
The towers stood for a little over two hours before metal fatigue and truss bolts sheared causing them to collapse.
The Towers did not "collapse." It is quite apparent from video that masses are being ejected horizontally (perpendicular to gravitational force) with tremendous force. Everything is being pulverized before it even can impact the ground or anything else! Hundreds of tiny human bone fragments are ejected hundreds of feet onto neighboring building roofs instead of being trapped between "collapsing" floors. You are blind.
WasteWater wrote:
The two airplanes had just taken off from nearby airports. They had plenty of fuel on board to reach their destinations.
You stated that the planes were fully fueled. This is a false statement.
WasteWater wrote:
The towers did sustain the immediate impact but were not designed to be flown into at full speed with fully fueled planes of that size. Besides, this is the test of the engineering. They actually held up pretty well.
Again, you say "fully fueled." Repeating a falsehood does not make it true.

The Towers survived the plane impacts and fires, just as they have survived a serious fire before, and a bombing in the basement, and huricane winds. They did not survive explosive demolition.
WasteWater wrote:
There were no explosives. What was heard was structural failure.
Repeating a falsehood does not make it true.
WasteWater wrote:
I see you have no experience with things letting go under pressure, I have.
I imagine that the force of your cranium imploding with every serious instance of cognitive dissonance can be very painful. I do not envy you.
WasteWater wrote:
The firefighters spoke of undetermined secondary explosions common in fires of that size.
The firefighter in the video said: "People don't understand. There may be more! Any one of these [effing] buildings can blow up! This aint done yet!" Listen carefully --
Navigator

Amsterdam, Netherlands

#254136 Mar 16, 2013
YellowPissreality wrote:
ZERO explosions before plane impacts
<quoted text>
Lady: "The bomb hit the lobby first. Then a couple of seconds later the first plane hit" --


Also reported by William Rodriguez
Navigator

Amsterdam, Netherlands

#254137 Mar 16, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Could be. Opportunists often take advantage of chaotic situations. Does this prove anything?
Evidence of FOREKNOWLEDGE of the attacks... dismissed by the government September 11 Commission.

Ignoring evidence is fraud.

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
i m in hot sex 9 min stemaxgizmo 2
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 21 min Hidingfromyou 818,435
sex (May '13) 23 min stemaxgizmo 117
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 37 min karl44 579,442
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr True Truth 609,990
Can anyone recommend me the best and affordable... 1 hr zeeanderson 1
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 1 hr Classic 2,203
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 2 hr Rosa_Winkel 2,053
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 3 hr RiccardoFire 39,987
More from around the web