Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

53,851 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#261853 Nov 4, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>Hello Magnesium, Titanium and aluminum all burn, very hot too.
In fact metal fires are the worst, because water excites it and makes it worse.
Now don't go confusing him with facts!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#261854 Nov 4, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
ou can't find any link debunking him so you make something up.
Really, DID YOU EVER FIND A LINK TO THIS?

onemale wrote:
<quoted text> 6 weeks later Mohamed Atta stood up and was alive in front of cameras at a Saudi Arabia television station!!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#261855 Nov 4, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
Moreover the link debunks your ass.
SO TRUE BUT You are so shallow in intellect you did not even notice.
onemale wrote:
The jet engine found at the Pentagon does not match that of 757.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspira...
DUMBMALE SELFDEBUNKS WITH A LINK!

LMFO! PANTYSNIFFER, DO YOU EVEN READ!

FROM YOUR LINK!

In summary, we have studied two key pieces of wreckage photographed at the Pentagon shortly after September 11 and found them to be entirely consistent with the Rolls-Royce RB211-535 turbofan engine found on a Boeing 757 operated by American Airlines.

The circular engine disk debris is just the right size and shape to match the compressor stages of the RB211, and it also shows evidence of being attached to a triple-shaft turbofan like the RB211.

There is simply no evidence to suggest these items came from any other engine model than the RB211-535, and the vast majority of these engines are only used on one type of plane--the Boeing 757.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#261856 Nov 4, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
Moreover the link debunks your ass.
YEA, If one actually read them first this would not happen.
onemale wrote:
The landing gear found at the Pentagon does not match that of a 575
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspira...
AND DUMBMALE SELF DEBUNKS AGAIN, FROM YOUR LINK!

DO YOU EVEN READ WHAT YOU USE AS A LINK?

This investigation indicates that the only wheel matching that found at the Pentagon is the main gear wheel of a Boeing 757-200, the same model as American Airlines Flight 77.

The key features of the wreckage--including the number, size, and shape of the cutouts and bolt attachments--perfectly match those found in a main landing gear wheel of a Boeing 757-200, as illustrated in the above comparison. None of the wheels of the Global Hawk, A-3, or 737 match the debris, which is not surprising since all of these aircraft weigh considerably less than the 757 and use correspondingly smaller wheels of differing design.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#261857 Nov 4, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
So what are your credentials?
I'll trust a true patriotic with 3 degrees in engineering.
With over a thousand of experts like this, why in the blue hell do you think I would listen to you???
EVEN When they have mutually exclusive theories, you are not looking for the truth, you are just looking for anything that fits your pre determined conclusion which is limited to THE GOVERNMENT AND THE JEWS DID IT, no real reason to weigh any evidence.
onemale wrote:
Dr. Judy Wood is an engineer who is ending all speculation of 9/11
Her credentals:
* Batchlor's degree in Science & Civil Engineering (Structural Engineering)
* Master's degree in Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics)
* PHD in Materials Engineering Science
With expertise in image analyses, optical methods, applied mechanics and over 35 years experience in this area.
This is a very long clip but well worth the view.
If your willing to listen to the same 911 story for over a decade, you should be willing to hear all new evidence backed up by a 500 page book that has never been challenged or redacted . That alone should tell you SHE IS THE REAL DEAL and is a true patriot who is demonized but never discussed by 9/11 community, but i can assure you those days are limited.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =sRlYwyqDA3YXX
----------

WELL THEN ALL THOSE EXPERTS YOU LIKE TO QUOTE ARE WRONG PANTYSNIFFER!

ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS FOR 9/11 TRUTH DEBUNK JUDY WOOD

Fortunately, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have recently made their position very clear on this matter regarding Directed Energy Weapon theories. A new article written by Jonathan Cole, Richard Gage and Gregg Roberts shows many of the absurdities of Judy Wood's claims. The article is reproduced here, with some extra links I have added:

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2011/05/arch...
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#261858 Nov 4, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
And the government controls the news
Yea, That is what Nixon said during Watergate and Obama did about the Health Care Website, that the press was printing what they wanted!

WHO am I kidding, that was never said and you remain blinding stupid.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#261859 Nov 4, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course it would seem so, but under Ford and Carter it was Top Secret, so obviously we never heard of it until Reagan.
If the Star Wars program was Secret under Ford and Carter how do you know about it, LINK! OR LIE!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#261860 Nov 4, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
One 5/8 bolt doesn't hold up each floor.
According to a drawing at least 200 bolts were used on each floor.
DID I SAY one, Or are you just retarded?

"Yes, They were 5/8 inch bolts much of a tilt would snap them, it's not going to fall over like a tree."
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#261861 Nov 4, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
You are notorious for putting down people who severed in the armed forces... shame on you f___ ing bastard! I don't appreciate it one damn bit and I'm sure many others doesn't either.
Show me one example where I did, now if you served I would be glad to point out you were too mentally unstable to serve.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#261862 Nov 4, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
Dr. Robert Bowman PhD. flew 101 combat missions over Vietnam.
You are notorious for putting down people who severed in the armed forces... shame on you f___ ing bastard! I don't appreciate it one damn bit and I'm sure many others doesn't either.
LINK OR LIE, Show me one case where I have done so!
Pegasus

United States

#261863 Nov 4, 2013
onemale wrote:
<quoted text>
Jet fuel won't burn Titanium.
Many, many years ago when aluminum was cheap, I threw a piece of sheet aluminum into a brush fire and it didn't cause a raging inferno, it just slowly melted.
Next time blast some free-air at your little brush fire with a leaf blower and squirt a couple good jiggers of Kingsford charcoal lighting fluid on that brush fire.....keep that air flowing just above the embers..........on second tbought scratch all that......seeing bow moronic you are you will have the neighborhood ablaze if not yourself or both.

Since: Aug 11

Scotts Valley, CA

#261864 Nov 4, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
LINK OR LIE, Show me one case where I have done so!
Did you go to the link? Dr. Bowman is the same as those phony "experts" who always appear in court proceedings. They try to get you to believe them by touting a big list of irrelevant credentials. It always gets down to the old line, "Trust me, I'm a doctor," routine. I always take them with a grain of salt. When I get on a jury, during deliberations, I always become a leader because others want to get done with the case and get on with their lives after listening to so much boring shit. I help them to organize everything they heard and rate it accordingly. Is it factual, tangible, etc. The experts are always at the bottom of the list. Fore example, suppose you have the word of an "expert" against the word of a coroner. The coroner actually examined a piece of tangible evidence; the "expert" only made an opinion. Which is more relevant? Yep. Bottom of the list. I would put Bowman at the bottom of the list wearing a tin foil hat. He jumped to several conclusions without examining the evidence.

Since: Aug 11

Scotts Valley, CA

#261865 Nov 4, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
LINK OR LIE, Show me one case where I have done so!
Of course. Not only that, the reply is a specious ad hominem straw man argument of the weakest kind. It is laughable.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#261866 Nov 4, 2013
No but I have been there many times. Sounds like your experience in Court is all about justice and organization. Since I have more than one job I pick the ones that move me but for the full timers with iffy cases you are their worst nightmare, they want a jury that runs on emotion and takes two experts and does not weigh them but lets them cancel each other out so it's not evidence of anything.

Typical Tactic. If you think you got it in the bag ask for a bench trial so the judge decides as he or she uses your method.

If the case is iffy get a jury and appeal to emotion and not the facts.
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you go to the link? Dr. Bowman is the same as those phony "experts" who always appear in court proceedings. They try to get you to believe them by touting a big list of irrelevant credentials. It always gets down to the old line, "Trust me, I'm a doctor," routine. I always take them with a grain of salt. When I get on a jury, during deliberations, I always become a leader because others want to get done with the case and get on with their lives after listening to so much boring shit. I help them to organize everything they heard and rate it accordingly. Is it factual, tangible, etc. The experts are always at the bottom of the list. Fore example, suppose you have the word of an "expert" against the word of a coroner. The coroner actually examined a piece of tangible evidence; the "expert" only made an opinion. Which is more relevant? Yep. Bottom of the list. I would put Bowman at the bottom of the list wearing a tin foil hat. He jumped to several conclusions without examining the evidence.

Since: Aug 11

Scotts Valley, CA

#261867 Nov 4, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
No but I have been there many times. Sounds like your experience in Court is all about justice and organization. Since I have more than one job I pick the ones that move me but for the full timers with iffy cases you are their worst nightmare, they want a jury that runs on emotion and takes two experts and does not weigh them but lets them cancel each other out so it's not evidence of anything.
Typical Tactic. If you think you got it in the bag ask for a bench trial so the judge decides as he or she uses your method.
If the case is iffy get a jury and appeal to emotion and not the facts.
<quoted text>
Exactly. I use it both ways. If I want to get on a case I usually can. Otherwise, I just play it and get kicked out. I was on one case where the pictures gave the whole story right from the start. All I needed to do was explain the physics of how it happened. The two experts did a good job of confusing the issues involved. If I have been the prosecution expert, it would have been a slam-dunk case. OTOH, if I hadn't been on the jury or been an alternate, it would have ended in a hung jury for sure. To think they almost kicked me out. Too bad for them.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#261868 Nov 4, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly. I use it both ways. If I want to get on a case I usually can. Otherwise, I just play it and get kicked out. I was on one case where the pictures gave the whole story right from the start. All I needed to do was explain the physics of how it happened. The two experts did a good job of confusing the issues involved. If I have been the prosecution expert, it would have been a slam-dunk case. OTOH, if I hadn't been on the jury or been an alternate, it would have ended in a hung jury for sure. To think they almost kicked me out. Too bad for them.
It's easy to get kicked off if you want to be, I always say tell them during voir dire (Jury selection) that the defendant has beady eyes and those folks are not very honest.

I get kicked off almost automatically, basically because any attorney worth their salt would play it like you did in the first post, and I know of none that would cave into pressure instead of causing a deadlock and a mistrial.

Since: Aug 11

Scotts Valley, CA

#261869 Nov 4, 2013
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
It's easy to get kicked off if you want to be, I always say tell them during voir dire (Jury selection) that the defendant has beady eyes and those folks are not very honest.
I get kicked off almost automatically, basically because any attorney worth their salt would play it like you did in the first post, and I know of none that would cave into pressure instead of causing a deadlock and a mistrial.
Nobody wants lawyers on the jury. They want people like Twoofers, the kind of people who are susceptible to manipulation.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#261871 Nov 4, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody wants lawyers on the jury. They want people like Twoofers, the kind of people who are susceptible to manipulation.
LOL, I can see it now,

Defense: "The plaintiff was giving a speech to 1,000 members of the PTA at the time he was accused of robbing the bank."

Prosecution: "The PTA is a known Illuminati front and that's exactly what they want you to believe!"
hunter

Norwich, UK

#261872 Nov 4, 2013
Has anyone seen that program on the Quest channel
the DETONATORS,about teams of demolition crews,
Demolishing from bridges to high rise buildings.
The buildings,the high rise structures i'm talking about. Watch stooges and LEARN!
Pegasus

Chicago, IL

#261873 Nov 4, 2013
hunter wrote:
Has anyone seen that program on the Quest channel
the DETONATORS,about teams of demolition crews,
Demolishing from bridges to high rise buildings.
The buildings,the high rise structures i'm talking about. Watch stooges and LEARN!
Watch the one where two jet airliners plow into the upper floors of two twin skyscrapers.....without explosives.

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) 8 min Kaitlin the Wolf ... 765,085
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 8 min USA Born 555,041
sexy Lisa 12 min samnort 3
Stung By Scandals, GOP Proposes New Ethics Rules (Mar '06) 19 min Swedenforever 9
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 40 min Innocent Holy dr ... 603,691
What Your Church Won't Tell You by Dave and Gar... (Apr '10) 42 min Protester 33,136
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 47 min Trunketeer 4,966
Hot gays in Abu Dhabi (Nov '13) 3 hr Ayyan 1,187
Why do BLACK People hate Mexicans so much? (Dec '13) 8 hr truth 932

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE