Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

53,825 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

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.

Since: May 10

YOUR MOM'S HOUSE

#254138 Mar 16, 2013
You must be exhausted you were on here all day yesterday with your other account now your back all day today using your sock puppets ... why don't you go to bed and get some rest ?
Navigator wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe in your world...
<quoted text>
Only in your world...
<quoted text>
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.
<quoted text>
You stated that the planes were fully fueled. This is a false statement.
<quoted text>
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.
<quoted text>
Repeating a falsehood does not make it true.
<quoted text>
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.
<quoted text>
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 -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =IO1ps1mzU8oXX
guest

Anonymous Proxy

#254139 Mar 16, 2013
YellowPissreality wrote:
You must be exhausted you were on here all day yesterday with your other account now your back all day today using your sock puppets ... why don't you go to bed and get some rest ?
<quoted text>
What, don't you like having your a22 kicked by Navigator? It's the only reasonable explanation for why you return to these forums over and over, every day, weeks, months...

“SHEEN IS A LIAR”

Since: Dec 10

Lincoln, NE

#254140 Mar 16, 2013
It was a mini nuke planted on the 92nd floor of the North Tower and the 86th floor of the South Tower that brought down the buildings. They were planted by govie agents possing as workers during the power down the weekend before 9/11
Hercule Poirot

Tonawanda, NY

#254141 Mar 16, 2013
Interesting thread.

Though this may have already been mentioned:

Steel is melting, concrete collapsing and yet paper is flying in pristine condition.

I never did understand that.

Replies Welcome. Thanks.
onemale

Pana, IL

#254143 Mar 16, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
The law of physics works fine. If you watch some of the footage of the towers collapsing, you will see big chunks flying out as the structure fails. Those chunks descend at a much faster rate than the building. What this means is the chunks are free falling; the building is descending at a slower rate of speed proving successive structural failure rather than the Twoofer free fall claim. The NIST report is correct.
In other words you know more about physics that physicists.
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#254144 Mar 16, 2013
Navigator wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe in your world...
<quoted text>
Only in your world...
<quoted text>
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.
<quoted text>
You stated that the planes were fully fueled. This is a false statement.
<quoted text>
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.
<quoted text>
Repeating a falsehood does not make it true.
<quoted text>
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.
<quoted text>
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 -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =IO1ps1mzU8oXX
"Repeating a falsehood does not make it true. "

But Smith, that doesn't stop you from trying anyway...
Say the Truth

Lansdale, PA

#254145 Mar 16, 2013
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
What, don't you like having your a22 kicked by Navigator? It's the only reasonable explanation for why you return to these forums over and over, every day, weeks, months...
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/stilwell-ok/T...

BWAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAa .... you STUPID sock!!!

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
4 word game (use same Letter) (Mar '13) 1 min andet1987 1,250
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 2 min WildWeirdWillie 175,004
Why do BLACK People hate Mexicans so much? (Dec '13) 5 min Johnny 888
Last Word + 2 8 min andet1987 942
Last post wins (May '13) 11 min andet1987 522
Bull and Boar - an 18th century Welsh tavern. 15 min Ed Teach 63
3 Word Game (Feb '12) 18 min andet1987 4,404
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 20 min Dave Nelson 763,392
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 35 min truth 554,571
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr Innocent Holy dr ... 603,507
Dubai massage Body To Body full service 0559... (Feb '14) 11 hr prakash singh 134

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE