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

MrTaints

Charleston, WV

#255624 May 13, 2013
TristanM wrote:
<quoted text>
We haven't abandoned anything, just the quality of SO CALLED truther is falling! 10 years still posting the same crap, with nothing new or original. Every time you claim the smoking gun proof, it turns out false, misleading, or damn right bogus!
So how much is Alex Jones and crew paying you to keep this up!
You do realize Alex Jones made millions off you SO CALLED truthers and your lack of independent thought!
You do realize the laughing trio of Loose Change made millions off you SO CALLED truthers with your 'I believe anything I'm told' mentality!
You do realize every major so called leader of the 9/11 Truth movement made millions off you people who have no ability to reason and research anything on your own!
12 years of unquestioningly slurping the official govie fairytale in its entirety, you shills remain unwavering in your devotion to your masters. Every shred of evidence disproving the official story completely ignored with a wave of the hand. Do you realize the trillions the government has made in the illegal wars of occupation and conquest which you shills have supported because you have no ability to reason and research anything on your own!

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#255625 May 13, 2013
TristanM wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually those videos didn't show shit of anything but what they were suppose to be covering!
You should research security camera systems of the day, understand the frames per sec ratio to number of cameras on those systems.
But doing that takes research, something you are not capable of doing!
The type of cameras used in 2001 at the pentagon would not matter .
Since these 12 cameras only showed "after" the impact of flight 77 ,the frames per second ratio would have nothing to do with showing the plane hit the pentagon.
You are correct on one ASSumption though , they won't show shit unless they are supposed to be covering (sh)it up.
Please learn to debunk with a little more effort you have only posted the same non - researched bullshit you seem to think the I post. How about you tell me the formula used by nist to get their "baseline performance" of the world trade center towers.Simulated computer programs developed for the very purpose of supporting the "probable collapse sequence" do not count as they can be fixed or manipulated . Or maybe provide a link to the nist experts that performed the wind resistance test on these towers.A peer reviewed study on these subjects will be sufficient.
Hint . nist didn't perform the wind tunnel tests, insurance company results were used.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#255626 May 14, 2013
ex military wrote:
<quoted text>UDT are what Navy SEALS are now. They were the begining of specops Navy u facking idiot
So you admit he lied and was never a SEAL.

Good start in your recovery from massive, morbid stupidity lil twoofer!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#255627 May 14, 2013
blur wrote:
<quoted text>people lie, cameras don't...and there are endless amount of liars in this world, you and your crew especially
but at least we agree that the blur does not count as evidence of a plane
you can't show me evidence of a plane that doesn't exist, but I can show you evidence of a missile hitting the Pentagon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =RaK_-4j7CpsXX
Oh junkie!

That's truly hilarious and if your goal is to mock and discredit twoof, good job!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#255628 May 14, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>Imagine that, eh? The unanswered questions remain unanswered and these people still ask the same questions a decade later... It's crazy to not accept cover-ups. Patriots don't question.

How many people saw the plane fly into the Pentagon? Hundreds, reduced to dozens, then we find one witness who admitted to being coerced by powerful people to lie.

The cab driver admits the Pentagon was staged.

http://youtu.be/kvyQ0vVwjqc

Im sure he was the only one who experienced coercion.

Yes, people should go look up 2000 to 2001 off the shelf camera technology and assume our high priority defense installations were protected with gear purchased at Radio Shack. The military didn't have the funding to use high tech gear, and high capacity hard drives to store the data was too expensive for them.

You know the US military has a history of being frugal.

And thermate wasn't checked for because it couldn't cut sideways and would take thousands of pounds to weaken all the floors. Never mind the fact that none of this is true, and the fact the official story claims a couple of floors were heated by fire and that localized collapse led to a global, symmetrical collapse.

And who needs evidence anyway? All we need is computers that can simulate fires set with zero thermal conductivity and other highly unlikely parameters to reach NISTs probable collapse scenario.

So be good slaves and stop asking questions, and remember the government is too incompetent to do things to hurt it's own people so it can gain more control.

And remember

Insults Are Easier
Wow!

In Twooferdumb all CCTV are high res, high frame rate with endless amounts of storage I guess.

And the do this only because,

[Their] Ignorance is [Their] Bliss

Steel plating.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#255629 May 14, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
And who needs evidence anyway? All we need is computers that can simulate fires set with zero thermal conductivity and other highly unlikely parameters to reach NISTs probable collapse scenario.
Oh Ignorance!

That's yet another extremely dumb claim to add to your ever expanding repertoire of stupid!

First you claim there's some mythical velocity to support twoofers using the term " free fall speed" (but alas, you could never solve for "x").

Then you claimed steel plating lowers the melting steel and that references to steel melting in many other fires was because of plated steel (although you failed miserably to support either contention).

Then you went full chromosome damaged mutant and claimed free fall/symmetry=cd (but again couldn't support either claim with science).

And now your circle of stupid is complete by making yet another preposterous claim that has zero merit.

Ever notice how a blacksmith can hold onto a piece of steel that's glowing red on the other end?

Thermal conductivity, how the heck does it work eh twoofer!

Wow!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#255630 May 14, 2013
UidiotRaceMAKEWORLDPEACE wrote:
<quoted text>Twoof woof on the little Shrill Shill shrew that gone on a screaming help that Truth movement will win over injustice... Woof from a Twoof you Shill screwed good... BWHAHAHHAAA
Twoofer shill nonsense dismissed.

NEXT
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255631 May 14, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
Amazingly any footage before the impact of flight 77 has not been found. I bet they use motion cameras with a time delay start in these videos . How else would these cameras switch on "after" the impact?
Actually, I doubt they looked for footage before the impact, during and after yes, but what would the purpose of before serve?

The lamest attempt at evidunce ever.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255632 May 14, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
And thermate wasn't checked for because it couldn't cut sideways and would take thousands of pounds to weaken all the floors.
YAWN!

WHAT ABOUT ALL THOSE UNIGNITED NANOTHERMITES THEY FOUND IN THE DUST SAMPLES IN THAT EXPERIMENT? Niels Harritt, Steven Jones and other 9/11 controlled demolition theorists claim to have found nanothermite particles in dust samples from the World Trade Center. They made sure the dust samples were untainted, and used advanced instruments to measure what happened when these tiny red-grey chips were heated up.

Thermites reach temperatures of around 4500° and have their own oxygen supply when they burn, so they can burn underwater. Harritt, Jones, et. al. therefore should have heated up the chips in a nitrogen or argon atmosphere to eliminate the possibility that regular hydrocarbons were burning. They also failed to take the carbon-based products out of the mix, so what we may well be seeing is some kind of carbon-based product burning in oxygen. They compared the sudden energy spike of their burning chips with the spikes of known nanothermites, and found that their chips ignited at around 150° C. lower than the known nanothermites, and the energy release was off between their chips and the nanothermites by a factor of at least two. Yet they called this a match for nanothermite!

Attempts to independently replicate this experiment have been dismal. Mark Basile, who appeared in the acknowledgments of the original study, burned the chips in air, replicating the error of the original experiment and not even measuring the energy released. A chemist named Frédéric Henry-Couannier got another dust sample from the original experimenters and wrote,“Eventually the presence of nanothermite could not be confirmed.” The R.J. Lee Company did a 2003 study on the dust and didn’t find thermitic material.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255633 May 14, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
How many people saw the plane fly into the Pentagon? Hundreds, reduced to dozens,
Could you list the dozens out of hundreds and explain what methodology you used to eliminate the majority of the witnesses?
Equality---

Ascot, UK

#255634 May 14, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
YAWN!
WHAT ABOUT ALL THOSE UNIGNITED NANOTHERMITES THEY FOUND IN THE DUST SAMPLES IN THAT EXPERIMENT? Niels Harritt, Steven Jones and other 9/11 controlled demolition theorists claim to have found nanothermite particles in dust samples from the World Trade Center. They made sure the dust samples were untainted, and used advanced instruments to measure what happened when these tiny red-grey chips were heated up.
Thermites reach temperatures of around 4500° and have their own oxygen supply when they burn, so they can burn underwater. Harritt, Jones, et. al. therefore should have heated up the chips in a nitrogen or argon atmosphere to eliminate the possibility that regular hydrocarbons were burning. They also failed to take the carbon-based products out of the mix, so what we may well be seeing is some kind of carbon-based product burning in oxygen. They compared the sudden energy spike of their burning chips with the spikes of known nanothermites, and found that their chips ignited at around 150° C. lower than the known nanothermites, and the energy release was off between their chips and the nanothermites by a factor of at least two. Yet they called this a match for nanothermite!
Attempts to independently replicate this experiment have been dismal. Mark Basile, who appeared in the acknowledgments of the original study, burned the chips in air, replicating the error of the original experiment and not even measuring the energy released. A chemist named Frédéric Henry-Couannier got another dust sample from the original experimenters and wrote,“Eventually the presence of nanothermite could not be confirmed.” The R.J. Lee Company did a 2003 study on the dust and didn’t find thermitic material.
Conspiracies?
I Prefer fact!
Wasn't the Iraqi war based on a huge unforgivable lie, were thousands of working class fodder American soldiers were sent to there untimely deaths and thousands of innocent Iraqis also killed, while the fat cat military arms makers and dealers built there new holiday homes on the huge profits made, on the back of this unnecessary war?

Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255635 May 14, 2013
Equality--- wrote:
<quoted text>Conspiracies?
I Prefer fact!
Wasn't the Iraqi war based on a huge unforgivable lie, were thousands of working class fodder American soldiers were sent to there untimely deaths and thousands of innocent Iraqis also killed, while the fat cat military arms makers and dealers built there new holiday homes on the huge profits made, on the back of this unnecessary war?
Can't say I disagree on the core of the post.
Kcalberaswejlaer eht

Monroe, LA

#255637 May 14, 2013
TristanM wrote:
<quoted text>
We haven't abandoned anything, just the quality of SO CALLED truther is falling! 10 years still posting the same crap, with nothing new or original. Every time you claim the smoking gun proof, it turns out false, misleading, or damn right bogus!
So how much is Alex Jones and crew paying you to keep this up!
You do realize Alex Jones made millions off you SO CALLED truthers and your lack of independent thought!
You do realize the laughing trio of Loose Change made millions off you SO CALLED truthers with your 'I believe anything I'm told' mentality!
You do realize every major so called leader of the 9/11 Truth movement made millions off you people who have no ability to reason and research anything on your own!
How the hell do you know what the hell Alex Jones or anyone else makes? You people kill me with that bullsh!t.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255638 May 14, 2013
Kcalberaswejlaereht wrote:
<quoted text>
How the hell do you know what the hell Alex Jones or anyone else makes? You people kill me with that bullsh!t.
You missed the point of the statement,(all debunkers are on the CIA payroll so ........)

But to answer your question.

http://www.therichest.org/tag/alex-jones-sala...

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#255640 May 14, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>You missed the point of the statement,(all debunkers are on the CIA payroll so ........)

But to answer your question.

http://www.therichest.org/tag/alex-jones-sala...
I don't think all debunkers are being paid, but the daily lunatic ones such as yourself are highly suspect.. But more likely most are just influenced to repeat disinfo by the few that our. 95% of all people are followers, after all.

Alex Jones is grossly underpaid for the amount of good that he does in making people think critically about the world around them.

Jim Rome, sports radio host on CBS makes 30 million a year talking about things that mean nothing.

Rush Limbaugh brings in more than that keeping people distracted in the left/right false paradigm.

Yet Alex Jones is demonized for being worth 5 million after creating a web network that allows people and concepts to be discussed openly without censorship.

The hypocrites complain that earning a living and providing for his family equals deception, but with bias keep silent about every one else in the media who simply repeat government propaganda. How do we know this? One of many examples was WMD in Iraq, which was never questioned by all the media outlets who are rewarded with seats at the White House.

But sure, lets demonize Alex Jones for operating a business and not starving to death because

Insults Are Easier
lmao

Padre Island Ntl Seashor, TX

#255641 May 14, 2013
Porkpie Hatull shit wrote:
<quoted text>
So you admit he lied and was never a SEAL.
Good start in your recovery from massive, morbid stupidity lil twoofer!
Oh man u r facking stupid whoooooooo I am done reading this bullshat

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#255643 May 15, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, I doubt they looked for footage before the impact, during and after yes, but what would the purpose of before serve?
The lamest attempt at evidunce ever.
This is a typical answer from someone wanting to project intellect but lacks the knowledge to provide it. How can you film the impact
without filming the seconds before it ? Once again 12 cameras captured "after" the impact yet none caught the planes initial contact with the pentagon (this would be the "during" you mentioned but they curiously failed to find).
Please elaborate on your statement of evidunce being lame or feel free to provide the "During" frames you seem to think they searched for. I'll be satisfied with the "during impact" frames so don't worry about the "before" frames I believe you said would be useless.
From merriam webster online dictionary
evidence noun (Concise Encyclopedia)
In law, something (e.g., testimony, documents, or physical objects) presented at a judicial or administrative proceeding for the purpose of establishing the truth or falsity of an allegation of fact. To preserve legal due process and to prevent the jury from being misled, an extensive body of rules has sprung up regarding the handling of evidence. In the U.S., all federal and many state courts adhere to the Federal Rules of Evidence, which covers such elements as types of evidence, admissibility, relevance, competency of witnesses, confessions and admissions, expert testimony, and authentication. Most evidence received at trial is in the form of verbal statements of witnesses, who are subject to questioning by attorneys from both sides. Two important categories of evidence are direct evidence, which is offered by a witness whose knowledge of a factual matter is firsthand (as through sight or hearing), and circumstantial evidence. See also exclusionary rule.

Please show me the direct evidence against obl or any of the alleged 19 terrorists supposedly responsible for the 911 atrocities. Be careful how you present this evidence because I would hate for someone involved in the "judicial process " to blatantly manufacture direct evidence from circumstantial evidence.Although this is a common tactic used by most prosecutors and crooked cops it is unconstitutional and should be forbidden.

A link to the direct evidence provided by the government during the trials against all defendants actually brought to trial will suffice , I'll be happy to do the reading since comprehension would be difficult for a paid government employee. Interpretation of any statement provided by first hand witnesses that saw or participated in the events will be discussed if needed for the gramatically challenged .

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#255644 May 15, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Could you list the dozens out of hundreds and explain what methodology you used to eliminate the majority of the witnesses?
Can you provide the methodology used to determine which "witnesses " statements were admissible and how they developed such methodology?
Certainly there is a rule of the courts specifying the requirements of credibility. Should be easy for you since you work for the prosecution side of our judicial system.

crucifiedguy

“atheism is knowing the bible ”

Since: Jan 09

fictional hell

#255645 May 15, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow!
In Twooferdumb all CCTV are high res, high frame rate with endless amounts of storage I guess.
And the do this only because,
[Their] Ignorance is [Their] Bliss
Steel plating.
It doesn't take a high resolution ,high frame rate camera with endless amounts of storage to film a jet aircraft crashing into a building. Any type of video camera will capture the bulk of the footage , it just has to be turned on with film in it. Which I believe all 12 cameras would positively been in this very operational state since they caught the "after" impact footage.
How many of the other 63 cameras do you think started filming "after" the impact? Position of these are not the question , timing is all I would need for conformation.

Hows the weather up there? Been fu*kin beautiful down here ,but in a couple of weeks It'll be hot as hell . I won't mind though cause next week I leave for corpus christi and I'll be sitting by the pool or on Padre Island sipping a cool beverage,smoking my herb and enjoying the scantly clad women .Only draw back is I have to work at least 2 or 3 hours a day to warrant a paycheck. lol!!
Jaques

Paris, France

#255647 May 15, 2013
Are you equating "conspiracies" with fiction? You are misunderstanding the word.

The Iraq war was indeed a huge unforgivable lie and responsible for a much larger body count than the 9/11 false flag operation in isolation, but 9/11 lie set the stage for the Iraq lie and other big lies. Still, Iraq should by itself be enough for war crimes prosecutions of American and British officials. The fact that this hasn't happened is a good indication of how badly broken the Anglo-American "legal" systems are.

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) 5 min oneear69 988,375
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 21 min old_moose 36,128
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 50 min Chuck 688,461
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 hr scienceanswersall 619,813
How did black people get here ( economically) 5 hr Johnny 53
We do NOT need any walls! 12 hr Johnny 31
What was the Vegas mass murderer's REAL problem? 17 hr RFD 12
More from around the web