Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

53,590 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#257883 Jul 26, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
You really can't believe that.
WTC 7 had minimal damage.
WTC 3, 4 and 5 had severe heavy damage because the debris from the towers rained down upon them, and none of them collapsed. They were smaller buildings therefore they would be much lighter weight and not as strong as WTC 7
FALSE WTC7 had major damage.

FALSE WTC7 had a unique construction and heavy loading on the seventh floor.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#257884 Jul 26, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Oh is that why Mohammed Atta and 18 dumb and dumber Arab college students, some of whom flunked out of flying school and could not solo a Cessna, allegedly was able to FOOL:
The largest, most modern, technologically superior defensive and offensive military force in the world, namely NORAD, FAA, Washington DC Air National Guard, New York Air National Guard, Northeast Air Defense Sector and the US Air Force long enough to hijack 4 commercial airliners, fly them hundreds of miles around the US country side and then fly them into buildings in New York City and Washington DC without one of them being intercepted? Flying time for the four hijacked airliners indicates a total of one hour and twenty-five minutes elapsed between the time that Boston Air Traffic Control lost contact with the first allegedly hijacked Flight 11 and the Pentagon was allegedly attacked by flight 77.
They didn't have the right equipment! Oh now its so clear.
So the next time many wargames are scheduled on one day we can expect another false flag black op attack by our own govie that can't be foiled by our elite defensive forces.
I got it now. Huh Eh !
What part of "welding rod" don't you understand?
Both!
The welding rod and the false flag again. ROTFLMAO

Very funny.

GREAT

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#257885 Jul 26, 2013
A welding rod and a false flag walked into a bar. The bartender said "Oh no not you too again?"

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#257886 Jul 26, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
A welding rod and a false flag walked into a bar. The bartender said "Oh no not you too again?"
That's right. The bartender had a little common sense.

Good one.

Gotta love you for it bro.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#257887 Jul 26, 2013
Slurpee sales must be slow today.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#257888 Jul 26, 2013
Headline:

SHTTY PILOT CRASHES PLANE

News at 11.
HEADLINE

Mill Valley, CA

#257889 Jul 26, 2013
SHITTY PILOT CRASHES PLANE

BUILDING BLOWS UP AND FALLS DOWN

The "Rest Of The Story" next post.

HEADLINE

Mill Valley, CA

#257890 Jul 26, 2013
Govie creates phony hi-jack scenario, blows up buildings and blames "terrorists" as a reason to push the Patriot Act through Congress and use as an excuse to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, conveniently encircling Iran with US troops.

Read all about it. Despite the pig's shortcomings.
onemale

Pana, IL

#257891 Jul 26, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
FALSE WTC7 had major damage.
FALSE WTC7 had a unique construction and heavy loading on the seventh floor.
WTC 7 had very minor damage compared to WTC 3, 4 and 5 none of which collapsed. Multi-ton beams were stuck in other building and none of them collapsed. According to you the high rise buildings are built like a house of cards.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#257893 Jul 26, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
WTC 7 had very minor damage compared to WTC 3, 4 and 5 none of which collapsed. Multi-ton beams were stuck in other building and none of them collapsed. According to you the high rise buildings are built like a house of cards.
They are indeed built like a house of cards. Think about it. The vertical members are stress loaded. These outside members would bow out due to the forces if not held together by horizontal floor trusses. When these trusses fail, the vertical members deflect outward at the weakest point. The downward thrust takes over and everything comes down like a house of cards due to structural failure. As a machinist you should appreciate these kind of things. Have you ever used a 20ton bearing press and had things come apart with explosive force? When the parts give up, watch out.
onemale

Pana, IL

#257894 Jul 26, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
FALSE WTC7 had major damage.
FALSE WTC7 had a unique construction and heavy loading on the seventh floor.
NIST didn't bother to explian WTC 7 in their report.
But you know all about it??? HOw???
When they were pressed, they said it fell due to normal office fires.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#257896 Jul 27, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
NIST didn't bother to explian WTC 7 in their report.
But you know all about it??? HOw???
When they were pressed, they said it fell due to normal office fires.
Why would they? It's quite obvious that it came down due to damage. It is quite clear that a huge chunk of WTC 1. So much for controlled demolition huh? WTC 1 tilted into the hole cut by the airliner and then broke apart on the way down. Obvious stuff huh?

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#257898 Jul 28, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove it then.
So lets play the game you like others to play, but lets do it different than you normally do, lets make it fair...

Lets play Prove It!

1. Prove firefighters did not have temperature measuring equipment on 9/11.

2. Prove Kevin Barrett is a racist.

3. Prove the Iranian government produced the Barrett conspiracy study video hosted by Press TV.

Remember, if you don't play then you're just repeating.

Insults Are Easier

“the summer home in Cape Cod”

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#257899 Jul 28, 2013
You're really starting to bore the hell out of everybody
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
So lets play the game you like others to play, but lets do it different than you normally do, lets make it fair...
Lets play Prove It!
1. Prove firefighters did not have temperature measuring equipment on 9/11.
2. Prove Kevin Barrett is a racist.
3. Prove the Iranian government produced the Barrett conspiracy study video hosted by Press TV.
Remember, if you don't play then you're just repeating.
Insults Are Easier

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#257900 Jul 28, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>Barrett accomplished nothing and the only thing he was effective at was once again showing how mindless the average twoofer is in that none bothered to verify what Barrett claimed the paper said.
That's you, the mindless useful idiot.
Barrett was not discussing the data from the paper, he intentionally lied about its conclusions knowing full well his target audience of malcontents have always been as intellectually lazy as you've shown yourself to be.
<quoted text>Why would I need to take either side?
I never used the paper or anyone's opinion of what it said to support anything.
You really don't get it do you zealot guy?
<quoted text>Studying abnormal behaviour is a perfectly valid reason.
I've pointed out many times the crippled epistemology you all share as a crutch. In your case, your posting Barrett's article without ever reading the source and "uncritically" accepting Barrett's word of what the article concluded is a perfect example.
Other great examples would be the one I pointed out yesterday where a twoofer who very obviously doesn't understand materials or emissivity is making a definitively incorrect claim that he'll never accept as incorrect regardless of fact.
Just like you when you claimed the majority don't believe in "the official 911 fairy tale" and posted a poll that didn't support your claim as proof.
In both cases you display irrationality and lack of understanding of the disciplines required to understand the material.
That's the definition of a crippled epistemology and more than adequate reason for psychologists to want to understand what makes you twoofers tick.
<quoted text>The point is that you all display the same irrational behaviour.
<quoted text>Sorry, not interested.
But hey, we have the CAP here in Canada and its run by a loon who thinks 911 was an inside job...you should join!
Mr Hat, you think it's normal to study 'conspiracy theorists' because they exhibit 'abnormal behaviour'? Seriously?

How about defining 'abnormal behaviour' first?

As we've just seen, your pitiful definition can be applied to all manner of people... and your OCD contribution to this website can hardly be described as 'normal'. Perhaps you would consider it 'normal' for someone to decide to carry out an academic study of your behaviour?

I guess you'd probably be quite pleased.

The very fact your willing to openly generalise in this way shows just how blinkered your world view is.

...but, most of your posts show that.

The fact your virtually creaming your pants over all this supposed 'intellectual laziness' is nothing short of hilarious.

Barrett asserts that you and your ilk are unhinged, you're not doing a very good job of proving him wrong.

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#257901 Jul 28, 2013
“The best predictor of belief in a conspiracy theory is belief in other conspiracy theories,” says Viren Swami, a psychology professor who studies conspiracy belief at the University of Westminster in England. Psychologists say that’s because a conspiracy theory isn’t so much a response to a single event as it is an expression of an overarching worldview.

So what do these studies actually tell us? They tell us nothing, because the opposite is also true, even though they wont mention it, because a person who doesn't believe in conspiracy theories tends not to believe any of them.

Psychologists and researchers are affected by normalcy bias as much as anyone else.

A more accurate study would be do people that believe in conspiracy theories do so with no regard to evidence. A psychologist would need to be well versed in all the available evidence regarding each theory to be able to judge if that belief is based on delusion or not.

Not all conspiracies are equal, which is why

Insults Are Easier
onemale

Pana, IL

#257902 Jul 28, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would they? It's quite obvious that it came down due to damage. It is quite clear that a huge chunk of WTC 1. So much for controlled demolition huh? WTC 1 tilted into the hole cut by the airliner and then broke apart on the way down. Obvious stuff huh?
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
But NIST said WTC 7 was destroyed by normal office fires???
onemale

Pana, IL

#257903 Jul 28, 2013
Zealous_Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
Mr Hat, you think it's normal to study 'conspiracy theorists' because they exhibit 'abnormal behaviour'? Seriously?
How about defining 'abnormal behaviour' first?
As we've just seen, your pitiful definition can be applied to all manner of people... and your OCD contribution to this website can hardly be described as 'normal'. Perhaps you would consider it 'normal' for someone to decide to carry out an academic study of your behaviour?
I guess you'd probably be quite pleased.
The very fact your willing to openly generalise in this way shows just how blinkered your world view is.
...but, most of your posts show that.
The fact your virtually creaming your pants over all this supposed 'intellectual laziness' is nothing short of hilarious.
Barrett asserts that you and your ilk are unhinged, you're not doing a very good job of proving him wrong.
Well said Zealous Guy, well said indeed.
He probably still thinks Saddam has weapons of mass destruction.

onemale

Pana, IL

#257904 Jul 28, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would they? It's quite obvious that it came down due to damage. It is quite clear that a huge chunk of WTC 1. So much for controlled demolition huh? WTC 1 tilted into the hole cut by the airliner and then broke apart on the way down. Obvious stuff huh?
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
You're talking from both sides of your mouth.
First you said a huge chunk of WTC 1, damaged it...
Then you said the huge chunk broke apart on the way down...
which one is it?
Why didn't WTC 3, 4 and 5 collapse?
They had severe damage, one was almost cut in half.

“Turn left at pub Number 42”

Since: Dec 08

Homehill,QLD

#257905 Jul 29, 2013
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
So lets play the game you like others to play, but lets do it different than you normally do, lets make it fair...
Lets play Prove It!
AussieBobby wrote:
Its time for you to put up or shut up
Melt 50 liters of steel for 24 hours and keep it MOLTEN STEEL using thermite and keep a note of how much thermite was used as we will need this data for the 6 month experiment.
Predicts excuses
waiting

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
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 4 min atemcowboy 542,918
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 7 min It aint necessari... 739,875
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 19 min Eagle 12 227,708
Submissives 23 min Ellejonson 1
Wake up, Black America!! (Sep '13) 38 min Edthirty 3,142
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 40 min Chris Clearwater 173,768
Rachael Davis Kornacki 42 min Bev Jamison 2
Sims 4 Key Generator (Oct '13) 3 hr Azphene 154

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••