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

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#254365 Mar 25, 2013
Not to worry.

When the denying sorts get tired of going around in circles? They will emerge, even somewhat shaken they will.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254366 Mar 25, 2013
I agree, Bush Jr. was a crappy president and did many utterly stupid things. It doesn't mean he was part of a conspiracy to do what happened on 9/11. You have failed to make any plausible connection.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254367 Mar 25, 2013
StellarKnight wrote:
I have broken the effin code..........
ya'll scramble about for evidence. I know 911 was 'orchestrated.'
Knowing cetainly isn't controling. Nay, I can no more control posters mad hatter distribes about a War on Terror and CHARGE........let's go killem, anymore than a parent can control a childs bed wetting when dreaming the unfathomable. That perhaps the reality with which they were tucked to sleep to bed one night, was not the one in the reality of their unconscious reflections bodly imposing itself upon them as a dream.
Nice rant. No evidence of anything or plausible explanation of a conspiracy.
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#254368 Mar 25, 2013
9/11 goes much deeper than we even know...
The collapse of building #7 is the proof of 9/11...
Building #7 contained the records of all the scandals such as Enron etc. and they all disappeared.
A lot of high ranking shysters were going meet Buba in Cell Block C.
But when you have money you can do anything.
And these were Bush's buddies he couldn't let that happen.
This is a small tip of the iceberg.

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#254369 Mar 25, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice rant. No evidence of anything or plausible explanation of a conspiracy.
and who the flip are you? The editorial board? Or a self serving importance judicial reader legendary only in your own presumptuous \platitudes?

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#254370 Mar 25, 2013
911 is the date in 1941 when ground breaking for the Pentagon got under way. DONTCHA KNOW?

NO you did not unless you have read my previous posts.
Which makes me smarter than you. huh. For I research.
911 becomes and emergency phone number.

OH REALLY?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254371 Mar 25, 2013
onemale wrote:
9/11 goes much deeper than we even know...
The collapse of building #7 is the proof of 9/11...
Building #7 contained the records of all the scandals such as Enron etc. and they all disappeared.
A lot of high ranking shysters were going meet Buba in Cell Block C.
But when you have money you can do anything.
And these were Bush's buddies he couldn't let that happen.
This is a small tip of the iceberg.
Building 7 collapsed due to damage. Proves nothing. You can go read what the firemen who were there had to say about rather than Twoofer shills selling a load of crap.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254372 Mar 25, 2013
StellarKnight wrote:
<quoted text>
and who the flip are you? The editorial board? Or a self serving importance judicial reader legendary only in your own presumptuous \platitudes?
Give me evidence rather than worthless opinions and we can talk. Your ad hominem reply is noted.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254373 Mar 25, 2013
StellarKnight wrote:
911 is the date in 1941 when ground breaking for the Pentagon got under way. DONTCHA KNOW?
NO you did not unless you have read my previous posts.
Which makes me smarter than you. huh. For I research.
911 becomes and emergency phone number.
OH REALLY?
This proves what exactly? The the hijackers were numerologists? Maybe they thought choosing that date would make it more memorable. Do we know their motives?

Interesting coincidence though.

Nice post.
ToiletWater

Charleston, WV

#254374 Mar 25, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Give me evidence rather than worthless opinions and we can talk. Your ad hominem reply is noted.
Hey ToiletWater, is there anything in the official story that you doubt? Anything at all?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254375 Mar 25, 2013
ToiletWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey ToiletWater, is there anything in the official story that you doubt? Anything at all?
Not really. It is very well done with lots of documentation, reliable evidence and credible witnesses. Twoof OTOH has nothing but speculative opinions and total lack of viable evidence.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254376 Mar 25, 2013
socci wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the one looking for preppers. The one with no facts is the
"paranoid" - You!
McVeigh was just a fed in on the planned event. There was no Ryder truck. If there were the investigators would have found the truck at the scene of the blast and put it on the news. The evidence would be there for all to see with no debate about the facts.
I don't care. That case is closed. I am perfectly satisfied with the outcome and the investigation.

NEXT
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#254377 Mar 25, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Building 7 collapsed due to damage. Proves nothing. You can go read what the firemen who were there had to say about rather than Twoofer shills selling a load of crap.
What damage? Minimal damage at best.
Three other WTC buildings surrounding the towers were severely damaged and set on fire by the falling debris, but NONE of them collapsed. Building #7 was 300 feet from the nearest tower. According to the NIST report, building #7 collapsed due to normal office fires (period). Throughout history NO steel frame highrise building has ever collapsed due to fire (period). The real load of crap is the NIST report. Also the NIST report denies molten steel in the basemant, while firefighters says there were tons of it.

Since: May 10

YOUR MOM'S HOUSE

#254378 Mar 26, 2013
9/11 was also the day of the CIA led coupe in Chile.DONTCHA KNOW?

NO you did not unless you have read my previous posts.
Which makes me smarter than you.
StellarKnight wrote:
911 is the date in 1941 when ground breaking for the Pentagon got under way. DONTCHA KNOW?
NO you did not unless you have read my previous posts.
Which makes me smarter than you. huh. For I research.
911 becomes and emergency phone number.
OH REALLY?

Since: May 10

YOUR MOM'S HOUSE

#254379 Mar 26, 2013
Minimal damage ??? almost the entire interior support stucture collpased .. how is tha minimal ??
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
What damage? Minimal damage at best.
Three other WTC buildings surrounding the towers were severely damaged and set on fire by the falling debris, but NONE of them collapsed. Building #7 was 300 feet from the nearest tower. According to the NIST report, building #7 collapsed due to normal office fires (period). Throughout history NO steel frame highrise building has ever collapsed due to fire (period). The real load of crap is the NIST report. Also the NIST report denies molten steel in the basemant, while firefighters says there were tons of it.

Since: May 10

YOUR MOM'S HOUSE

#254380 Mar 26, 2013
Everybody in the Enron case went to jail Stupid ..... and of course we all know sensitive documents are never backed up in multiple locations ..... and of course when I want to get rid of documents I blow up the building instead of wiping out a hard drive or shredding papers ....... DUHHHHHHHHHHHH
onemale wrote:
9/11 goes much deeper than we even know...
The collapse of building #7 is the proof of 9/11...
Building #7 contained the records of all the scandals such as Enron etc. and they all disappeared.
A lot of high ranking shysters were going meet Buba in Cell Block C.
But when you have money you can do anything.
And these were Bush's buddies he couldn't let that happen.
This is a small tip of the iceberg.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#254382 Mar 26, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>What damage? Minimal damage at best.
Three other WTC buildings surrounding the towers were severely damaged and set on fire by the falling debris, but NONE of them collapsed. Building #7 was 300 feet from the nearest tower. According to the NIST report, building #7 collapsed due to normal office fires (period). Throughout history NO steel frame highrise building has ever collapsed due to fire (period). The real load of crap is the NIST report. Also the NIST report denies molten steel in the basemant, while firefighters says there were tons of it.
1) The mandate of the NIST report was to find the most plausible theory for collapse initiation. Reports of molten material weeks later has no relevance to the initiation phase.

2) I've repeatedly proven that reports of molten steel in fires in very common and as such, scientifically uninteresting.

The NFPA has noted that such reports are often erroneous since one simply can tell the composition of a molten material by sight alone.

3) In 11+ years of spewing the exact same twoofer sanctioned meme, not one twoofer has ever proposed a credible mechanism which could cause collapse then be the explanation for reports of molten steel weeks later.

4) Using your own "never before" argument we can say never before has molten steel been reported in a controlled demolition.

Your own fallacious logic defeats your argument.

5) Fire has caused the collapse of steel structures and the height of a building doesn't somehow make the steel impervious to the well understood effects of heat on steel.

6) Every argument you've attempted can be summarized as an argument from authority, incredulity and/or ignorance.

Jeez, I wonder why twoofers get laughed at eh?
Amadeus

Netherlands

#254383 Mar 26, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
1) The mandate of the NIST report was to find the most plausible theory for collapse initiation. Reports of molten material weeks later has no relevance to the initiation phase.
2) I've repeatedly proven that reports of molten steel in fires in very common and as such, scientifically uninteresting.
The NFPA has noted that such reports are often erroneous since one simply can tell the composition of a molten material by sight alone.
3) In 11+ years of spewing the exact same twoofer sanctioned meme, not one twoofer has ever proposed a credible mechanism which could cause collapse then be the explanation for reports of molten steel weeks later.
4) Using your own "never before" argument we can say never before has molten steel been reported in a controlled demolition.
Your own fallacious logic defeats your argument.
5) Fire has caused the collapse of steel structures and the height of a building doesn't somehow make the steel impervious to the well understood effects of heat on steel.
6) Every argument you've attempted can be summarized as an argument from authority, incredulity and/or ignorance.
Jeez, I wonder why twoofers get laughed at eh?
The mandate of any investigation is to determine what happened. In the case of an unprecedented failure, this includes determining the failure sequence from start to finish. NIST made no attempt to chart the failure sequence in the Towers from start to finish.

Your "scientifically uninteresting" claim is an obvious lie. Determining the make up of the "molten metal" would be an indicator of temperatures achieved in the fires. For some reason, however, NIST limited itself to physical evidence that was subjected to temperatures under 250 C, with very few exceptions. Since such cool temperatures cannot result in failure, one must ask why NIST chose to preserve these "scientifically uninteresting" samples of steel from the Towers and discard the rest, more than 99.5% of the steel evidence.
Bobby Mac

Netherlands

#254385 Mar 26, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
It was destroyed by a Ryder Truck rigged with explosives. You have no evidence to the contrary.
Around and around you go.
Your previous comment was "aimed" at evidence to the contrary, but you didnt understand the significance of the words or the building that those words referred to.

Maybe you should try again:

http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TSBMT04...
Charlie Sheen

Mooresville, NC

#254386 Mar 26, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
What damage? Minimal damage at best.
Three other WTC buildings surrounding the towers were severely damaged and set on fire by the falling debris, but NONE of them collapsed. Building #7 was 300 feet from the nearest tower. According to the NIST report, building #7 collapsed due to normal office fires (period). Throughout history NO steel frame highrise building has ever collapsed due to fire (period). The real load of crap is the NIST report. Also the NIST report denies molten steel in the basemant, while firefighters says there were tons of it.
It was hit by a huge chunk of the North Tower, there is not proof that it was molten steel and the entire metal framed part of the Windor Tower collapsed due to fire ALONE, no plane impact strutral damage needed.

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 (Mar '17) 5 min Riverside Rednek 59,316
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 20 min kent 695,378
"You Might Be A Liberal If..." 29 min Libs R Dumbacrats 3
CNN: Bill Cosby past away today after long batt... (Dec '08) 1 hr How does it feel 93
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 3 hr Robert F 994,029
topix is a joke and unfair to the people who s... (Jan '09) 7 hr Ricky F 27
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 8 hr verykinky 446,246
More from around the web