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

Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255940 May 29, 2013
Yellow Star Seed is Back wrote:
<quoted text>
If you are knowledgeable about the fed then how come you parroted BINYAMIN APPELBAUM?!?!?
BWHAHAHAAAAAAA!!!!!
Yawn!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#255941 May 29, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you ever see one photograph of the buckled steel, or any physical proof that it buckled from the heat of an office fire?
Of course not Opie, because
Insults Are Easier
Why yes, many times, here is your brothers web site almost exactly half way down, Tommy makes the point that fire can not cause a steel framed building to collapse with these pictures.

http://www.foxnews.com/images/154020/2_21_021...

http://www.septembercoup.com/images/madrid02....

PS: THE BEST PART IS HE WRITES THIS RIGHT BELOW THE TWO PICTURES!

The Madrid fire was clearly hot enough to warp steel beams.

https://sites.google.com/site/911whatyoumight...

PS: Ever find those 20 pilots?

“"Tanners Flat" U dummy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#255942 May 29, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Yawn!
Get some sleep kid, you might even make some sense afterward. Stranger things have happened.

“"Tanners Flat" U dummy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#255943 May 29, 2013
HAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!

Charlie went from Mr. Knowledgeable to Mr. Yawn in one post, and now he is Mr. Spam.

What a pathetic tool he is, he is here to occupy you and frustrate you as you beat him like a dead horse. His cohorts will then shine the spotlight on you and try to make you look unhinged.

I already know your playbook.

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#255944 May 29, 2013
Yellow Star Seed is Back wrote:
<quoted text>Get some sleep kid, you might even make some sense afterward. Stranger things have happened.
I know, huh? He copy/pasted that response so fast he forgot what my original question was about.

And where's Catfish at? Look at this scene and tell me which "Wall Street broker" he is? I call it RADEKT's first and last day on the job.

http://youtu.be/S63kIH96Bi0

Insults Are Easier

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#255945 May 29, 2013
C'mon Opie, answer the question...

How did the "witness" see the faces in the windows of the commercial aircraft seconds before it crashed into the Pentagon?

And while you're searching for a response to copy/paste, then copy/paste the proof were I ever said 20 pilots did anything.

And while your at it, time to ween yourself off of the prescriptions.

Insults Are Easier

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#255946 May 29, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>Well to be fair, he's so delusional that he's willing to believe the Boston Marathon terrorist attack was a "false flag" because the guy who had both legs blown off was showing tenacity and character a few weeks later by being upbeat and positive.

He also waved a US flag and in twooferdumb, that's a no-no.

We must believe the US is inherently evil and any outward showing of patriotism is a sign of the devil himself!

Of course,

[His] Ignorance is [His] Bliss
None of this is true, and my opinions are clearly stated on the Boston thread.

Its was a Boston Strong flag and the guy was celebrating 20 days after such a traumatic event. I just found the behavior odd and nowhere did I say it was conclusive of anything.

But all you can do is "twoofer" people, because you find the mere questioning of authority offensive, as true subjects of the crown generally do.

Your ignorance is my bliss, and for you without truth

Insults Are Easier

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#255947 May 29, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok ,you want to talk facts .
Fact , nist factually states their ncstar 1 report is fabricated from evidence not directly related to the structures being investigated .
Fact ,Simulations from a computer do not qualify as real world investigation.
Fact , "Probable collapse sequence " in no way means "real world collapse" nor does it mean "only collapse sequence" . It means "possible collapse sequence "
Fact , nist states because congressional funding took to long, most of the evidence was destroyed or removed and discarded.
Fact , the ncstar 1 report specifically says all damage to the core columns and any interior damage such as fire proof insulation being knock the trusses ,were determined by computer driven "simulations" of which they used the ones that support their theory.
Fact, the ncstar 1 report is incomplete. At best it's an educated Guess.
Fact ,The ncstar 1 reports purpose was to determine the order of events from "impact" to "collapse initiation ", then provide recommendations for safer more structurally sound high rise buildings.
Fact once the planes "impacted the towers " nist had their "impact to initiation " requirements fulfilled . Everything they wrote after the impact of the planes would be an eminence front for the sake of the controlled , entertained masses foolish enough to believe this fictional literature. 1200 pages of bullshit may look impressive but when it comes to the nut cutting it fails miserably as the official story.
Fact , You cannot prove flight 77 hit the pentagon.If you have verifiable proof I'll be glad to look into it but as of yet every fu*kin one of ya'll saying this alleged aircraft impacted the pentagon have not provided any thing but circumstantial evidence. Not one picture of said plane has been produced , no one has provided an "official " link to these "witnesses" interviews .
Fact , any one supporting the official story do not live in a real world society and should stay home in their computerized virtual world where two planes can cause the "global collapse " of two 110 story high rises and a forty seven story structurally reinforced building.And ya'll say twoofers are stupid?
Feel free to debunk anything I stated here . Please refer to the ncstar1 report for references ,Aside from the pentagon statements ,as this is where I got most of my information .
It is a well known fact that flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

NEXT

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#255948 May 29, 2013
Where did flight 77 if not into the Pentagon?

That's where all the wreckage of Flight 77 was found. Did flight 77 become Twoofer Dust?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#255949 May 29, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you ever see one photograph of the buckled steel, or any physical proof that it buckled from the heat of an office fire?
Of course not Opie, because
Insults Are Easier
Yes I have seen steel buildings buckled by ordinary fires. Hell, the pellet stove reaches 1,000 degrees in a few minutes. Parts inside warp. Hi-rise buildings get up to 3,000 degrees due to updrafts.

“Dying 4 ur sins-so tell me”

Since: Jan 09

Fort Worth

#255950 May 29, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Not that I am calling you stupid, but I am.
28. Why didn’t NIST conduct large-scale/small-scale tests to evaluate the response of the WTC towers structures to the aircraft impact and the fires in the buildings?
For studying the impact on a 110-story building by an actual Boeing 767 aircraft, a full-scale test was not feasible. For a test to capture the response of the towers as a system, it would have been necessary to construct a test assembly that included the core columns, exterior columns, floors and hat truss. Even to replicate experimentally the response of the floors near and above the impact zones would have required test assemblies of about 20 stories for WTC 1 and 30 stories for WTC 2. No facility exists to conduct such a test, either with fire or in the absence of fire; and, indeed, such tests are not conducted in current engineering practice.
Therefore, NIST relied on high-fidelity finite element modeling of the aircraft impact event and subsequent fires. The analyses were calibrated against the observed structural response of the towers upon impact (videos, photographs, and physical evidence) and the evolution of the ensuing fires.
NIST did not conduct reduced-scale system-level tests because there are no generally accepted scaling laws that apply to fire propagation, temperature evolution, and structural response.
Furthermore, fire test facilities with the capability to apply arbitrary fire exposures (in contrast to the standard time-temperature exposure) and arbitrary loads to structural components did not exist in the United States at the time of the investigation. Even had such a facility been existent, each large-scale structural fire test would have evaluated only a single set of conditions, e.g., structural system, fire exposure, amount of fireproofing, etc. Even a modest parametric series of such tests would have been prohibitively expensive.
NIST did conduct full-scale fire tests of single and multiple workstations. These tests were of sufficient size to properly capture the combustion physics. These tests established burning histories, mass burning rates, and heat release rates. The results were used to validate the fire dynamics calculations for fire growth and spread (see NIST NCSTAR 1-5E). NIST also conducted full-scale fire tests exposing insulated and bare structural elements to real fires to validate the fire and thermal modeling approaches (see NIST NCSTAR 1-5B).
Thank you for clarifying the ncstar 1 report was an educated guess. Using simulation software to produce an answer is not absolute . It can be manipulated easier than any size scale model.
They only assume insulation was "knocked off" , assume the heat caused the failure , and assume these core columns were severed.

An educated guess. Call me whatever makes you feel superior .I don't care . I read the report , I got my facts straight out of the report, and any thing you try to debunk it with only shows the report to be contradictive or fabricated. Why would nist claim plausible deniability from the start. Read the description of the first tower being hit . The first paragraph will suffice.

“Dying 4 ur sins-so tell me”

Since: Jan 09

Fort Worth

#255951 May 29, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
It is a well known fact that flight 77 hit the Pentagon.
NEXT
Show me the fuselage , a tail section with numbers on it , or maybe remains of passengers. Or did they burn up do to the fires caused by the jet fuel and office furniture fires?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#255952 May 29, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text> Show me the fuselage , a tail section with numbers on it , or maybe remains of passengers. Or did they burn up do to the fires caused by the jet fuel and office furniture fires?
Don't need too. The flight boxes were recovered. Besides, where could flight 77 have gone if not into the Pentagon? The C-130 pilot saw it happen. So did a whole bunch of other people.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#255953 May 29, 2013
crucifiedguy wrote:
<quoted text> Show me the fuselage , a tail section with numbers on it , or maybe remains of passengers. Or did they burn up do to the fires caused by the jet fuel and office furniture fires?
BTW, charred passengers were still strapped into their seats. Other witnesses verified this information.
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#255954 May 29, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes I have seen steel buildings buckled by ordinary fires. Hell, the pellet stove reaches 1,000 degrees in a few minutes. Parts inside warp. Hi-rise buildings get up to 3,000 degrees due to updrafts.
According to architects there were no updrafts the towers were designed to prevent that.
Commonsense tells us that sheet metal may buckle with a 1000 degree fire but not massive steel beams.
The exhaust valve in your auto engine normally run around 1500 degrees, it doesn't warp or melt.
Furthermore, there were nothing that was flammable in the core columns.
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#255955 May 29, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't need too. The flight boxes were recovered. Besides, where could flight 77 have gone if not into the Pentagon? The C-130 pilot saw it happen. So did a whole bunch of other people.
We were told they identified the passengers by fingerprints and DNA... What kind of fire vaporizes aluminum and tempered steel but leaves bodies in tack???
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#255956 May 29, 2013
Yellow Star Seed is Back wrote:
HAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!
Charlie went from Mr. Knowledgeable to Mr. Yawn in one post, and now he is Mr. Spam.
What a pathetic tool he is, he is here to occupy you and frustrate you as you beat him like a dead horse. His cohorts will then shine the spotlight on you and try to make you look unhinged.
I already know your playbook.
AMEN to that... so true
The Spelling Otter

Groveland, CA

#255957 May 30, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
We were told they identified the passengers by fingerprints and DNA... What kind of fire vaporizes aluminum and tempered steel but leaves bodies in tack???
That's "intact".

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#255958 May 30, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>Thats some good copy/paste Opie, but when it comes to organizing and analyzing the facts before reaching a conclusion, not your strength.

James R. Cissell claimed to see the commercial plane fly into and strike the Pentagon in a "perfectly straight line" while sitting in traffic.

Perfectly straight lines indicate an aircraft without wing wobble, course correcting, almost GPS like - all by an amateur pilot. But never mind, because this witness is lying.

He states he saw a blur, and an aircraft traveling 500 mph and low its what you expect him to see, but he goes on to say this.

"That is a big plane.'Then I saw the faces of some of the passengers on board,"

From seeing a blur, to seeing faces, is a clear sign this witness is embellishing, either because he just wants attention, or was coerced like the cab driver who admitted coercion. Had this testimony been given under oath, would have been ripped apart by even the most novice of attorney's on cross.

How many other of your frantic copy/pastes contain equally as flawed information?

But I'm sure for you

Insults Are Easier
There's just so much irony in a poster who uses multiple yourubes as his basis for evidunce criticizing another poster posting a first hand witness account of an event.

The fact is he saw a plane dippy.

Embellishment to include faces is irrelevant and the sighting of the plane is in accordance with other accounts and the evidence.

No planers are the most idiotic of all twoofers.

All you've accomplished is proving once again that,

[Your] Ignorance is [Your] Bliss

Steel plating.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#255959 May 30, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>Did you ever see one photograph of the buckled steel, or any physical proof that it buckled from the heat of an office fire?

Of course not Opie, because

Insults Are Easier
Have you seen one piece of steel which was blown apart by explosives?

Awww.... Your failed logic suits you.

Because,

[Your] Ignorance is [Your] Bliss

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
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 1 min YOURMOTHERISINMYC... 56,164
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 min Vikinglovespenis 972,394
American Soldiers - Duty, Honor, Country (Jun '11) 48 min DENG 39,054
What's UP?!! Wasn't ya'll @ the club last night??! 1 hr Doctor REALITY 1
Play "end of the word" part 2 (Dec '15) 1 hr andet1987 2,296
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 hr RoSesz 649,837
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 2 hr Peace_Warrior 618,574
Moms having sex with their sons (Aug '12) Fri Noname 69
More from around the web