Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

53,601 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254552 Apr 2, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Explain how these pre-planted charges survived the intense fires in the impact areas of tower 1 and 2 since that is the collapses origin.
I wonder how they concealed tons of steel plating necessary to direct the charges into the girders.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254553 Apr 2, 2013
Rachel wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny, when I read the bit about the South Tower damage, I had the same reaction. "Waste Water" doesn't know the material and is just making things up!
I followed the link to the "Structure Magazine" article and found the graphic on the top of page 44 showing "possible damage" from the North Tower, but no mention of South Tower damage. The key word, of course, is "possible," indicating speculation. It is also interesting to see the relative position of the famous column 79 to these areas of damage. The one area of damage that is confirmed is the Southwest corner, about as far from column 79 as you can get! Even the theorized areas of damage do not directly affect column 79.
The story in "Structure Magazine" is very revealing to the careful reader. Again, a look at the top graphic on page 44 shows that column 79 is at the northeast corner of the core columns (in other words, far off-center), and yet the authors (and NIST) speculate that the failure of this single column brought the entire WTC-7 down. I use the word "speculate" because the authors have titled the article "Single Point of Failure: How the loss of one column MAY have led to the collapse of WTC-7"
I emphasize again: "MAY HAVE LED" = speculation
The hypothesized failure of a column far off center, column 79, being responsible for the demise of the entire WTC-7, is a bit of a stretch... and completely without precedent. However, when the symmetric and free-fall drop of the roof are included as conditions that must be met by any theoretical failure sequence, the far-off center single-point failure hypothesis is impossible. But the article mentions neither the period of free fall nor the symmetry of collapse, and this is also telling. These characteristics are readily apparent in any video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =LD06SAf0p9AXX
You believe in speculative nonsense.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254554 Apr 2, 2013
Rachel wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny, when I read the bit about the South Tower damage, I had the same reaction. "Waste Water" doesn't know the material and is just making things up!
I followed the link to the "Structure Magazine" article and found the graphic on the top of page 44 showing "possible damage" from the North Tower, but no mention of South Tower damage. The key word, of course, is "possible," indicating speculation. It is also interesting to see the relative position of the famous column 79 to these areas of damage. The one area of damage that is confirmed is the Southwest corner, about as far from column 79 as you can get! Even the theorized areas of damage do not directly affect column 79.
The story in "Structure Magazine" is very revealing to the careful reader. Again, a look at the top graphic on page 44 shows that column 79 is at the northeast corner of the core columns (in other words, far off-center), and yet the authors (and NIST) speculate that the failure of this single column brought the entire WTC-7 down. I use the word "speculate" because the authors have titled the article "Single Point of Failure: How the loss of one column MAY have led to the collapse of WTC-7"
I emphasize again: "MAY HAVE LED" = speculation
The hypothesized failure of a column far off center, column 79, being responsible for the demise of the entire WTC-7, is a bit of a stretch... and completely without precedent. However, when the symmetric and free-fall drop of the roof are included as conditions that must be met by any theoretical failure sequence, the far-off center single-point failure hypothesis is impossible. But the article mentions neither the period of free fall nor the symmetry of collapse, and this is also telling. These characteristics are readily apparent in any video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =LD06SAf0p9AXX
There was no free fall. WTC7 took around 18 seconds to come down start to finish.

GIANT FAIL

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254555 Apr 2, 2013
How were tons of steel plating necessary required to direct explosive charges concealed in WTC7?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254556 Apr 2, 2013
RADEKT wrote:
speculation!?!?!?!?! I think NOT Proxy Sox Puppet
The major concern at that time was number Seven, building number Seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing.–FDNY Chief Frank Fellini
So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good - FDNY Capt. Chris Boyle
Chief Coloe from the 1st Division, told Chief Coloe and myself that 7 World Trade Center was badly damaged on the south side and definitely in danger of collapse. Chief Coloe said we were going to evacuate the collapse zone around 7 World Trade Center, which we did.– FDNY Lieutenant Rudolph Weindler
At this point, 7, which is right there on Vesey, the whole corner of the building was missing. I was thinking to myself we are in a bad place, because it was the corner facing us.–Fred Marsilla, FDNY Fire Fighter
BUT HEY LET'S IGNORE THE GUYS WHO WERE ON THE SCENE
<quoted text>
Exactly. Twoofs say, "Let's take the word of armchair quarter backs looking for attention."

Clueless paranoid conspiracy shills.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#254558 Apr 2, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>Thank you. Structure fires often have extreme heat due to up drafts. It is a proven fact that drafted fire a capable of melting steel.
It's funny how twoofers accept silly little memes that are so easily debunked.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#254559 Apr 2, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>Bejing is irrelevant. It is a different structure and different circumstances.
Ironically that building was designed with the lessons learned from the WTC collapses.

Twoofers, getting everything wrong since 2001!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254561 Apr 2, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
It's funny how twoofers accept silly little memes that are so easily debunked.
Also silly little memes which have been debunked a long time ago.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254562 Apr 2, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
Ironically that building was designed with the lessons learned from the WTC collapses.
Twoofers, getting everything wrong since 2001!
I suppose. That's interesting. I find the most overlooked point is how steel is destroyed in a controlled demolition. It requires heavy steel plating on each side of the charge. Thermite works like a cutting torch which would be unsuitable for controlled demolition due to the time it takes to cut through the steel. The arm chair twoofer experts have no experience in the field. They know mathematical formulas but nothing of the real world.
behold the lonely shills

Logan, WV

#254563 Apr 2, 2013
in the past 10 hours 13 out of 14 posts from the govie shills...you guys seem awfully lonely now that most of the truthers are gone and don't even want to bother arguing with you anymore. I guess in your puny delusional minds that means you have won this debate, eh shills?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254564 Apr 2, 2013
behold the lonely shills wrote:
in the past 10 hours 13 out of 14 posts from the govie shills...you guys seem awfully lonely now that most of the truthers are gone and don't even want to bother arguing with you anymore. I guess in your puny delusional minds that means you have won this debate, eh shills?
Go play in your sandbox with the other Twoofer shills child.
Don

Anonymous Proxy

#254565 Apr 2, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no free fall. WTC7 took around 18 seconds to come down start to finish.
GIANT FAIL
There was a period of free-fall for the entire visible perimeter of WTC-7. This can be easily verified by anyone who understands how to determine free-fall acceleration in a video (and physics teacher David Chandler provides lessons to anyone who needs schooling -- including the NIST "investigators"!) Yes, even NIST has conceded a period of free fall for WTC-7.

You are an unrepentant and shameless liar. You accuse others of speculating, and yet your links are at best speculative (as is evident from the prominent role of words like "may have" and "probable" and "hypothesized." On the other hand, you deny FACTS (like the period of symmetric free-fall of the WTC-7 roof line) that undermine these speculations.

Here are actual experiments done with conventional thermite as a way of cutting through steel beams. You will see first hand that it is possible.

The fact that sophisticated thermitic pyrotechnic material has been found in the World Trade Center dust confirms demolition beyond all doubt.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/e...

Demolition means that 9/11 was an inside job.

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#254566 Apr 2, 2013
Remember back in November 2012, when WasteOfWater graced us with her presence.

Ladies and gentleman, I present to you the actions of a disinfo agent, or a crazy person. Credibility has no importance to these people and their supporters of the official story.
WasteWater wrote:
FEMA lied about WTC7. The owner himself said it was "pulled" meaning demoed. What's more, just prior to the demolition, an official on the street told others to clear the area because the building was full of explosives. Cars in the same area were incinerated by a pyroclastic flow. The official FEMA report said the 46 story building collapsed due to fire. Pure BS.
What a Jackass.
WasteWater wrote:
I have no idea who's job it was. What I do know is that there are many lies and inconsistencies in the official reports and media coverage. There are too many unanswered questions.
My conclusion is that it was staged as part of a huge power play to side-step the United Nations and establish control of the Middle East along with the oil resources. It failed and backfired. We are now in the middle of WWIII which is being fought with drones, espionage, and counter espionage. We have suspended human rights and our Constitutional rights. People have become insane and paranoid. Most of our leaders are powerless to control what has been unleashed.
WasteWater wrote:
BS. Refute the evidence troll. Your reply is nothing but a pointless ad hominem statement.
What's the matter? Can't face the possibly that the government isn't protecting you and providing for national security?
Can't face the fact that people are telling lies, especially those entrusted to tell the truth?
I provided factual evidence with links. You have failed to refute one of them.
WasteWater wrote:
Larry Silverstein stated very clearly that they decided to "pull" the building. Then they watched it fall down. The Fire Chief on the ground told everyone to clear out just before they detonated the building. It takes at least three weeks to prepare a 67 story building for demolition.
Why did FEMA lie about it saying it fell down due to fire?
What a bunch of morons. Come on trolls. Refute the facts. I double dog dare you.
WasteWater wrote:
The firemen were pissed as hell. They knew blasts had been set off inside the building.
Interesting to note is the fact that controlled demolition requires cutting both the elevator shafts and stairwells along with weakening all structural members where the initial failure is planned. Afterward, precise sequential failures must be carried out in order to implode a structure.(This is what I understand from the experts and why they dismiss the notion that these buildings were brought down by aircraft.)
WasteWater wrote:
Carefully placed non-thermite charges with programmed RC activated timers. Do your research, don't ask stupid questions.
WasteWater wrote:
Brain-washing was easy to accomplish due to the fact that the media kept running the limited footage over and over. All that was required was to inject a false story into and superimposed upon that footage.
For example, the so called FEMA expert arrived and imposed the offical explanation upon the collapse of the towers. How would he have any amount of educated knowledge of such a complicated matter? The fact is he had part of the equation and lies to cover the other part. Yes, the building did collapse downward in a kind of pancake pile driver scenario. This was part of the demolition plan. What he left out were the parts where the stairways and elevator shafts were severed along with the weakening of other major supports prior to the demolition. He also left out the sequential charges. The planes alone could not take down any of the buildings.

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#254567 Apr 2, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
Do you have one about the jet engine found on site which did not fit any Boeing 767?
I love the story about a terrorist passport found on the street. How convenient? No so called black boxes. Imagine that? Those would be at the very top of the pile if they existed in the first place.
Too much monkey business if you ask me.
WasteWater wrote:
WTC7 was demolished. The Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile. Why not help the other buildings to collapse? Clean-up or repairs would have been far more expensive. All it really took was weakening the structures below the point of impact along with severing the stairwells and elevator shafts. It was determined by experts that the building would pancake downward.
WasteWater wrote:
There are several ways to melt iron.
1. Oxy/Acetylene torch.
2. Iron foundry with lots of coal and blowers.
3. Concentrated charges using high tech materials such as nano-thermite.
Sorry, jet fuel is not hot enough to cut through key members in strategic places.
Then on a dime, she reversed her position and is now the jackass you see trolling today.
WasteWater wrote:
Hey look at that. The conspiracy people are angry because I have taken the other side. Hey the other side is easy. Give me a scenario for the missing aircraft and passengers that doesn't involve more than three people and I will concede.
WasteWater wrote:
I like to mess with people. Sometimes I'll take an unpopular position.
It is fun when you meet someone who is actually rational like you. People take me way to seriously. I am always fair and balanced like that post Foxy always says. lol
Credibility means nothing to these lowlifes.

Tell me again, why are you here every day?

Oh yea,

Insults Are Easier

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254568 Apr 2, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
Remember back in November 2012, when WasteOfWater graced us with her presence.
Ladies and gentleman, I present to you the actions of a disinfo agent, or a crazy person. Credibility has no importance to these people and their supporters of the official story.
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
At least I looked at facts and evidence which proved my previous position wrong. You are plainly stuck on stupid. Why post this crap? It only makes you look all the more ignorant and misguided. Oh that's right.

You don't have a life.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254569 Apr 2, 2013
Don wrote:
<quoted text>
There was a period of free-fall for the entire visible perimeter of WTC-7. This can be easily verified by anyone who understands how to determine free-fall acceleration in a video (and physics teacher David Chandler provides lessons to anyone who needs schooling -- including the NIST "investigators"!) Yes, even NIST has conceded a period of free fall for WTC-7.
You are an unrepentant and shameless liar. You accuse others of speculating, and yet your links are at best speculative (as is evident from the prominent role of words like "may have" and "probable" and "hypothesized." On the other hand, you deny FACTS (like the period of symmetric free-fall of the WTC-7 roof line) that undermine these speculations.
Here are actual experiments done with conventional thermite as a way of cutting through steel beams. You will see first hand that it is possible.
The fact that sophisticated thermitic pyrotechnic material has been found in the World Trade Center dust confirms demolition beyond all doubt.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/e...
Demolition means that 9/11 was an inside job.
So what? That proves the bottom part of the building gave up and the rest came tumbling down. There is no evidence of any explosives being used anywhere. Are you still talking about Twoofer dust?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254570 Apr 2, 2013
Don wrote:
<quoted text>
There was a period of free-fall for the entire visible perimeter of WTC-7. This can be easily verified by anyone who understands how to determine free-fall acceleration in a video (and physics teacher David Chandler provides lessons to anyone who needs schooling -- including the NIST "investigators"!) Yes, even NIST has conceded a period of free fall for WTC-7.
You are an unrepentant and shameless liar. You accuse others of speculating, and yet your links are at best speculative (as is evident from the prominent role of words like "may have" and "probable" and "hypothesized." On the other hand, you deny FACTS (like the period of symmetric free-fall of the WTC-7 roof line) that undermine these speculations.
Here are actual experiments done with conventional thermite as a way of cutting through steel beams. You will see first hand that it is possible.
The fact that sophisticated thermitic pyrotechnic material has been found in the World Trade Center dust confirms demolition beyond all doubt.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/e...
Demolition means that 9/11 was an inside job.
Free fall speculation proves nothing.

You haven't proven me to be a liar. This is simply an ad hominem statement and a dodge.

You have no facts.

If thermite is used, it acts like a cutting torch. It is way too slow to be used in a controlled successive demolition of a steel framed building. In fact, I defy you to come up with a single structure of twenty-six stories or more where such a technique has been used successfully. It is obvious you have no idea what you are talking about.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254571 Apr 2, 2013
behold the lonely shills wrote:
in the past 10 hours 13 out of 14 posts from the govie shills...you guys seem awfully lonely now that most of the truthers are gone and don't even want to bother arguing with you anymore. I guess in your puny delusional minds that means you have won this debate, eh shills?
You calling me a govie shill?

That makes you a liar and a fool. The government case has been closed for over ten years Twoofer shill. OTOH I can call you a Twoofer shill because you are still trying to pedal your conspiracy snake oil.

ROTFLMAO

TWOOFER SHILL

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#254572 Apr 2, 2013
Vehicles, aircraft parts, remains etc. from WTC.

http://www.youtube.com/watch ...

Relics From the Rubble documentary.(Full Length)

http://www.youtube.com/watch ...

Fresh Kills landfill. Evidence collection area.

http://www.youtube.com/watch ...

Slow Motion WTC collapse proving that free fall is a lie.(Watch the big chuncks descend at a much faster rate of speed than the building.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch ...

WTC plaza just after attack showing airplane debris and paper.

http://www.youtube.com/watch ...

People jumping from WTC Tower.

http://www.youtube.com/watch ...

Second hit from street level

http://www.youtube.com/watch ...

Why watch Twoofer edited propaganda?

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#254573 Apr 2, 2013
Really, you have a life?

No, enjoyment of deception or "messing with people" isn't a life, it's a travesty.

Your only goal is to see the destruction of your own people through ignorance and deception.

You are absolutely pathetic.

Ok, I'll let you get back to your life on Topix.

*laughter*

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) 1 min New Age Spiritual... 740,598
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 4 min Gordon 227,950
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 min USA Born 543,219
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 10 min bad bob 173,886
Wake up, Black America!! (Sep '13) 47 min RFD 3,167
Word association game (Aug '08) 47 min Kid_Tomorrow 53,353
Aiding the hearing impaired 1 hr Kip 21
Sims 4 Key Generator (Oct '13) 2 hr Joana 158

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••