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

Malcolm, NE

#259086 Sep 11, 2013
KittyKat wrote:
<quoted text>Link or more of your fantasy cumtwat?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Kean
Charlie Sheen

Malcolm, NE

#259087 Sep 11, 2013
KittyKat wrote:
Oops!
that the official version of the event is nothing but a cover-up, an opinion shared by the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton, who declared the Commission was “set up to fail”.
Hamilton: Well, at the top of my list happens to be a personal one, and that is, I could never figure out why these 19 fellas did what they did. We looked into their backgrounds. In one or two cases, they were apparently happy, well-adjusted, not particularly religious - in one case quite well-to-do, had a girlfriend. We just couldn’t figure out why he did it. I still don’t know. And I think one of the great unanswered questions - a good topic for investigative reporters - would be: why did these 19 do what they did? We speculated in the report about why the enemy hates us, but we simply weren’t able to answer the questions about the 19.

Hamilton: Well, of course, we did deal with it. The charge that dynamite, or whatever, brought down the World Trade Towers, we of course looked at very carefully - we find no evidence of that. We find all kinds of evidence that it was the airplanes that did it.

Don’t take our word on that: the engineers and the architects have studied this thing in extraordinary detail, and they can tell you precisely what caused the collapse of those buildings. What caused the collapse of the buildings, to summarize it, was that the super-heated jet fuel melted the steel super-structure of these buildings and caused their collapse. There’s a powerful lot of evidence to sustain that point of view, including the pictures of the airplanes flying into the building.

Now, with regard to Building 7, we believe that it was the aftershocks of these two huge buildings in the very near vicinity collapsing. And in the Building 7 case, we think that it was a case of flames setting off a fuel container, which started the fire in Building 7, and that was our theory on Building 7.

Now we’re not the experts on this, we talked to the engineers and the architects about this at some length, and that's the conclusion we reached.

Hamilton: Well, we said an airplane went into the Pentagon. And we said that jet fuel there too caused an awful lot of the damage and the injury. We had one member of the staff who had been badly, badly burned by jet fuel, and as you know, jet fuel causes specific kinds of burns, and these burns were from jet fuel. So all of our evidence indicated a plane went in, and that’s what the eyewitnesses said that we saw.

http://web.archive.org/web/20070108233707/htt...
KittyKat

Chico, CA

#259088 Sep 11, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
Wiki!?!? Bwahahahah! Okay cumtwat . At least you admitit, MORON!
KittyKat

Chico, CA

#259089 Sep 11, 2013
Whats up chuck? Why you gotta post three to one? Nervous cumtwat or wat?
Charlie Sheen

Malcolm, NE

#259090 Sep 11, 2013
KittyKat wrote:
Oops!
that the official version of the event is nothing but a cover-up, an opinion shared by the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton, who declared the Commission was “set up to fail”.
Hamilton: Well, at the top of my list happens to be a personal one, and that is, I could never figure out why these 19 fellas did what they did. We looked into their backgrounds. In one or two cases, they were apparently happy, well-adjusted, not particularly religious - in one case quite well-to-do, had a girlfriend. We just couldn’t figure out why he did it. I still don’t know. And I think one of the great unanswered questions - a good topic for investigative reporters - would be: why did these 19 do what they did? We speculated in the report about why the enemy hates us, but we simply weren’t able to answer the questions about the 19.
Charlie Sheen

Malcolm, NE

#259091 Sep 11, 2013
KittyKat wrote:
Oops!
however, that the official version of the event is nothing but a cover-up, an opinion shared by the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton, who declared the Commission was “set up to fail”.
Kean on bin Laden: "We had him"
Main article: 9/11 Commission Report

In December 2003, Kean said that the September 11 attacks could have been prevented, stating: "As you read the report, you're going to have a pretty clear idea what wasn't done and what should have been done. This was not something that had to happen."[18]

On April 4, 2004, Kean again stated that the September 11 attacks could have been prevented, saying that the United States government should have acted sooner to dismantle al-Qaeda and responded more quickly to other terrorist threats. "When we actually saw bin Laden on the ground, using the Predator or other means, did we have...actionable intelligence? Should we have sent a cruise missile into a site where he was at that point? I think those early opportunities are clear. We had him. We saw him. I think maybe we could have done something about it.
KittyKat

Chico, CA

#259092 Sep 11, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
I did, you said that the evidence of the four airliners and the impact sights were not important do determine what happened.
I guess in your feeble mind a murder scene is not evidence and irrelevant in solving the crime.
That is a level of stupidity seldom seen by mankind. Your cookie is in the mail.
I didn't "say" anything cumtwat, I merely posted a quote. So again, cumtwat, I beseech you: LEARN TO READ!
Charlie Sheen

Malcolm, NE

#259093 Sep 11, 2013
KittyKat wrote:
Oops!
that the official version of the event is nothing but a cover-up, an opinion shared by the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton, who declared the Commission was “set up to fail”.
MR. KEAN: Absolutely right. If we had been able to put those people on the watch list for the airlines, the two who were in this country; again, if we'd stopped some of these people at the borders, if we had acted earlier on al-Qaeda when al-Qaeda was smaller and just getting started even before bin Laden went to Afghanistan, there were times we could have gotten him, there's no question. Had we gotten him and his leadership at that point, the whole story might have been different.
Advertise

MR. RUSSERT: Congressman, you think September 11th could have been prevented?

MR. HAMILTON: Well, there's a lot of ifs. You can string together a whole bunch of ifs. And if things had broken right in all kinds of different ways, as the governor has identified, and many more, and, frankly, if you'd had a little luck, it probably could have been prevented. But we'll make a final judgment on that, I believe, when the commission reports.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/4663767/#.UjEdSj9cX...
KittyKat

Chico, CA

#259094 Sep 11, 2013
Here you fckin traitors, fair warning,

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#259095 Sep 11, 2013
KittyKat wrote:
Here you fckin traitors, fair warning,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =gbO2_077ixsXX
At least you have good taste in music. LMAO
onemale

Tower Hill, IL

#259096 Sep 12, 2013
Why the NIST report on WTC7 is unscientific and false

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Vancouver, Canada

#259097 Sep 12, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
The problems with NIST’s explanation continue in step four, where high temperatures were said to have softened the columns and floors.

NIST did tests for this as well, but then abandoned the results. The first test, which examined paint deformation on steel samples chosen specifically from the fire zones, showed that less than 2% of the samples had seen temperatures above 250 °C. And of that in the less than 2% that did, none of the temperatures exceeded 600 °C.

The obvious problem was that steel does not soften or lose significant strength at the low temperatures indicated, yet NIST’s story depends on the softening or weakening of vast quantities of structural steel.

What weakened the structural steel in the lower portion of the towers that suffered no fire or other damage?

Fire resistance tests for the steel components used in the Twin Towers were performed by Underwriters Laboratories (UL), at the time of construction, and the results verified conformance to the New York City code requirements for multiple hours of fire resistance at the temperatures expected in a building fire.5

On 9/11, according to NIST, the fires in the failure zones did not actually last very long. NIST’s estimates indicate that the fires in the failure zones of the towers lasted for only about 45 minutes in each case, much less than the 3 or 4 hours of fire resistance required by the NYC code.6

As for step five, UL performed additional tests as part of the NIST investigation in order to establish the fire resistance of models of the WTC floor assemblies. The results were that the floor assembly models not only didn’t collapse, invalidating the longstanding “Pancake Theory,” but the floors barely sagged&#8213;only about 3 inches&#8213;despite the use of double the known floor load and two hours of fire exposure.7

NIST then added this 3-inch of sag result to its computer model, and by way of an unknown transformation, it suddenly became 42-inches of extreme sagging.8

This appears to have been a direct falsification of test results.

Step six says that sagging floors pulled exterior columns inward. To support this, NIST evaluated nine different scenarios within its computer model, with just one of those producing any inward bowing.

To do this, NIST had to take a computer mock-up of a 9-story high by 9-column wide section of steel wall and perform manipulations that had no relevance to the events at the World Trade Center. NIST removed the virtual steel from its web of support by “disconnection”of most of the floor trusses, stripped off all the fireproofing, exposed it to twice the known fire time (i.e. 90 minutes), and then applied an artificial 5,000 to 6,000 lb. lateral load to the columns to get any inward pull.9

It is difficult to understand how an inward pull force could be applied to columns that have been disconnected from the floors, as it is the floors that are supposed to have applied the inward force on the columns.

Go figure.

Huh Eh !

http://rethink911.org/evidence/twin-towers/im...

http://rethink911.org/evidence/twin-towers/im...

http://rethink911.org/evidence/twin-towers/im...
The very first sentence is a lie.

NIST didn't claim it was high temperatures that caused softening which initiated collapse. They said, and many reputable sources confer, that temperatures which reduced the tensile strength of steel plus deformation caused by creep caused the initiation of collapse.

But hey, what are lies where twoof is concerned right oh elevator boy-sheep 20 pilots STREET CORNER JEEBUS!

It's not like you verify anything before mindlessly schlepping it here!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#259098 Sep 12, 2013
KittyKat wrote:
Here you fckin traitors, fair warning,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =gbO2_077ixsXX
Sorry you were wrong, would you like a tissue?
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#259099 Sep 12, 2013
onemale wrote:
Why the NIST report on WTC7 is unscientific and false
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =2V0WQFztLygXX
Got a link on those suicides yet?

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#259100 Sep 12, 2013
pig ...

Do you have to heat steel to soften it?

What a revelation!

Is that the extent of your analysis?

Weak, very weak
KittyKat

Chico, CA

#259101 Sep 12, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry you were wrong, would you like a tissue?
Far from it cumtwat
Update, 12 September 2013
http://www.consensus911.org

Five New Consensus Points Released September 11, 2013
on SEPTEMBER 12, 2013
The 22-member 9/11 Consensus Panel has conducted three rounds of review, during which the Panelists were blind to one another, to produce five new Consensus Points refuting the official evidence of 9/11:

Seismic evidence of large underground explosions beneath the Twin Towers
Physical and testimonial evidence of explosions beneath the Twin Towers
Molten metal running below the Twin Towers’ debris for weeks after 9/11
The failure — after 7 years of effort — of the National Institute of Standards and Technology to produce a computer simulation of the collapse of World Trade Center 7 that matched the visual collapse
A serious problem in the timeline of the famous “Let’s Roll” call from Flight 93, which was used as a call to war
This brings the total number of Consensus Points to 37.

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#259102 Sep 12, 2013
All false just like your last misinfo! LOL, Are you crying!
KittyKat wrote:
<quoted text>Far from it cumtwat
Update, 12 September 2013
http://www.consensus911.org
Five New Consensus Points Released September 11, 2013
on SEPTEMBER 12, 2013
The 22-member 9/11 Consensus Panel has conducted three rounds of review, during which the Panelists were blind to one another, to produce five new Consensus Points refuting the official evidence of 9/11:
Seismic evidence of large underground explosions beneath the Twin Towers
Physical and testimonial evidence of explosions beneath the Twin Towers
Molten metal running below the Twin Towers’ debris for weeks after 9/11
The failure — after 7 years of effort — of the National Institute of Standards and Technology to produce a computer simulation of the collapse of World Trade Center 7 that matched the visual collapse
A serious problem in the timeline of the famous “Let’s Roll” call from Flight 93, which was used as a call to war
This brings the total number of Consensus Points to 37.
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/
KittyKat

Chico, CA

#259103 Sep 12, 2013
9/11: Twelve Years of War, Lies and Deception

in Breaking News 18 hours ago
Twelve years after the 9/11 attacks, no credible independent investigation has been done to find out what really happened on that day and who was responsible. Independent journalists and researchers have demonstrated, however, that the official version of the event is nothing but a cover-up, an opinion shared by the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton, who declared the Commission was “set up to fail”.

In fact, 9/11 was a starting point for even more atrocities and was used as a pretext for numerous wars in which too many people have lost their lives or their loved ones. A horrendous theater of the absurd has ensued over the years; as strange as it may seem, today the U.S. is openly supporting Al Qaeda offshoots in the Middle East to further its imperial design, as we have seen in Libya and Syria.

SELECTED ARTICLES

THE 9/11 READER – The September 11, 2001 Terror Attacks

The tragic events of September 11, 2001 constitute a fundamental landmark in American history, a decisive watershed. 9/11 opens up an era of crisis, upheaval and militarization of American society.

Commemorating September 11, 2001: Too Many Years Of Lies. From Mossadeq to 9/11, Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, September 11, 2013
http://rinf.com/alt-news/breaking-news/911-tw...
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#259104 Sep 12, 2013
KittyKat wrote:
<quoted text>
Seismic evidence of large underground explosions beneath the Twin Towers
LMFAO! Not a seismologist in sight!

Craig T. Furlong (AM)
Quantitative Methods, Business Administration

Gordon Ross (AM)
Mechanical engineering, Production engineering

----------

Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Version II)
Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross (Member, Scholars for 9/11 Truth)© 2006

BUT HEY, If you want to expand your small business, Craig may be able to help!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#259105 Sep 12, 2013
KittyKat wrote:
however, that the official version of the event is nothing but a cover-up, an opinion shared by the co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton, who declared the Commission was “set up to fail”.
That's odd, I don' see them saying there was a cover up here, could you link me to that quote Dumplin?

Hamilton: Well, at the top of my list happens to be a personal one, and that is, I could never figure out why these 19 fellas did what they did. We looked into their backgrounds. In one or two cases, they were apparently happy, well-adjusted, not particularly religious - in one case quite well-to-do, had a girlfriend. We just couldn’t figure out why he did it. I still don’t know. And I think one of the great unanswered questions - a good topic for investigative reporters - would be: why did these 19 do what they did? We speculated in the report about why the enemy hates us, but we simply weren’t able to answer the questions about the 19.

Kean on bin Laden: "We had him"
Main article: 9/11 Commission Report

In December 2003, Kean said that the September 11 attacks could have been prevented, stating: "As you read the report, you're going to have a pretty clear idea what wasn't done and what should have been done. This was not something that had to happen."[18]

On April 4, 2004, Kean again stated that the September 11 attacks could have been prevented, saying that the United States government should have acted sooner to dismantle al-Qaeda and responded more quickly to other terrorist threats. "When we actually saw bin Laden on the ground, using the Predator or other means, did we have...actionable intelligence? Should we have sent a cruise missile into a site where he was at that point? I think those early opportunities are clear. We had him. We saw him. I think maybe we could have done something about it.

MR. KEAN: Absolutely right. If we had been able to put those people on the watch list for the airlines, the two who were in this country; again, if we'd stopped some of these people at the borders, if we had acted earlier on al-Qaeda when al-Qaeda was smaller and just getting started even before bin Laden went to Afghanistan, there were times we could have gotten him, there's no question. Had we gotten him and his leadership at that point, the whole story might have been different.

MR. RUSSERT: Congressman, you think September 11th could have been prevented?

MR. HAMILTON: Well, there's a lot of ifs. You can string together a whole bunch of ifs. And if things had broken right in all kinds of different ways, as the governor has identified, and many more, and, frankly, if you'd had a little luck, it probably could have been prevented. But we'll make a final judgment on that, I believe, when the commission reports.

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
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 9 min Michael 650,699
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 16 min Dr Banonator 56,304
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 43 min Aura Mytha 971,888
Queen Cleopatra was clearly Black. White people... (Aug '10) 1 hr AfricaQueen 764
UK Phone Numbers for Fun 1 hr Rachel19F 4
what color panties are you guys wearing????????... 1 hr uncute 2
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 1 hr NACKED TRUTH 45,001
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 3 hr bad bob 182,976
More from around the web