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

“Turn left at pub Number 42”

Since: Dec 08

Homehill,QLD

#274956 Jul 14, 2014
onemale wrote:
If I had 12 hours a day like Sorry Charlie, I could rip him to shreds.
Really Sorry Charlie you need to find a real job and get a life.
But your NORAD stood down is ripping Dr Zorderz to sheds.
But didnt Dr Zorderz hand your ass to you
And Insults Are Easier handed your ass to you with"if the planes were real" explanation and Rider owning Insults Are Easier with" Bush-Saudi-9/11 Coverup"
Charlie Sheen

Mooresville, NC

#274957 Jul 14, 2014
onemale wrote:
National Security Threat or American Hero? The Governor breaks down the facts on NSA rabble-rouser, Edward Snowden's a Real Life Vigilante:
http://www.ora.tv/offthegrid/real-life-vigila...
The guy that lied about being a Seal and has a show about Chemtrials is your go to for info?
Charlie Sheen

Mooresville, NC

#274958 Jul 14, 2014
who wrote:
<quoted text>
Only in the tiny minds of you brainless fuckwits does accusing someone of raping his children make you the winner of an argument.
Grow up you ridiculous childish retards.
You dipshits are irrelevant anyway.
http://www.ny1.com/content/politics/212077/ma...
It was all consensual, it's just how they roll in onemales shack.
Charlie Sheen

Mooresville, NC

#274959 Jul 14, 2014
who wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.myfoxny.com/story/25984544/coaliti...
It will interesting to see how this all pans out, don't you think Peggy?
You think this actually somehow supports an inside job?
THE REFERENDUM TITLED "THE HIGH RISE SAFETY INITIATIVE" would require the NYC Department of Buildings to investigate the causes of high-rise buildings collapses THAT OCCURRED ON, OR ANY TIME AFTER 9/11.

NYC CAN disputes the reports because the destruction of the steel in the building’s cleanup caused NIST to rely on computer models. Also, NYC CAN claims experts disputed NIST’s findings, saying NIST omitted critical structural features from their models. THE BELIEF IS A NEW INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED BY THE CITY WILL ADDRESS THESE CLAIMS AND HELP BETTER UNDERSTAND HOW 7 WORLD TRADE CENTER COLLAPSED FOR SAFER BUILDING DESIGN IN THE FUTURE.
who

Reading, UK

#274960 Jul 14, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
You think this actually somehow supports an inside job?
THE REFERENDUM TITLED "THE HIGH RISE SAFETY INITIATIVE" would require the NYC Department of Buildings to investigate the causes of high-rise buildings collapses THAT OCCURRED ON, OR ANY TIME AFTER 9/11.
NYC CAN disputes the reports because the destruction of the steel in the building’s cleanup caused NIST to rely on computer models. Also, NYC CAN claims experts disputed NIST’s findings, saying NIST omitted critical structural features from their models. THE BELIEF IS A NEW INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED BY THE CITY WILL ADDRESS THESE CLAIMS AND HELP BETTER UNDERSTAND HOW 7 WORLD TRADE CENTER COLLAPSED FOR SAFER BUILDING DESIGN IN THE FUTURE.
Well in short Charles, it's potentially a new investigation into the collapse of WTC7. I'll keep an eye on it...you should do likewise.
who

Reading, UK

#274961 Jul 14, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
It was all consensual, it's just how they roll in onemales shack.
No, it's just some crap you made up.
BTW....I heard you humped a chicken, and it wasn't the chickens idea of a good time.
Charlie Sheen

Mooresville, NC

#274962 Jul 14, 2014
who wrote:
<quoted text>
Well in short Charles, it's potentially a new investigation into the collapse of WTC7. I'll keep an eye on it...you should do likewise.
well... high-rise buildings collapses THAT OCCURRED ON, OR ANY TIME AFTER 9/11 and other buildings.

If it happens explosive residue won't be found, then starts the baseless claims of coverup.

Twoofer logic, if evidence is found it's a inside job, if no evidence if found it's a inside job via a coverup. Twoofers have reached their conclusion, they just randomly and dishonestly force the evidence to fit.
Charlie Sheen

Mooresville, NC

#274963 Jul 14, 2014
who wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it's just some crap you made up.
BTW....I heard you humped a chicken, and it wasn't the chickens idea of a good time.
You have me confused with the man called "If the Egg can Get out, I can Get In" AKA Onemale. Oddly, the chicken had almost the exact same DNA as the family, Grampa onemale some some 'xplaining to do.
who

Reading, UK

#274964 Jul 14, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text> well... high-rise buildings collapses THAT OCCURRED ON, OR ANY TIME AFTER 9/11 and other buildings.
If it happens explosive residue won't be found, then starts the baseless claims of coverup.
Twoofer logic, if evidence is found it's a inside job, if no evidence if found it's a inside job via a coverup. Twoofers have reached their conclusion, they just randomly and dishonestly force the evidence to fit.
Oh bullcrap Charles....I think WTC7 was a controlled demolition because it looks exactly like a controlled demolition.
That and the fact that there were reports of secondary explosions and molten steel, reports that were ignored by NIST.
Anyway we'll have to wait until the fall to see what happens, in the meantime it's getting some media coverage and that's a good thing.
But thanks for turning up Charles......I appreciate your efforts despite your apparent irrelevance.
Charlie Sheen

Mooresville, NC

#274965 Jul 14, 2014
who wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh bullcrap Charles....I think WTC7 was a controlled demolition because it looks exactly like a controlled demolition.
As any rapid building collapse would to many.

13. Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?

Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.

In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.

For the building to have been prepared for intentional demolition, walls and/or column enclosures and fireproofing would have to be removed and replaced without being detected. Preparing a column includes steps such as cutting sections with torches, which produces noxious and odorous fumes. Intentional demolition usually requires applying explosive charges to most, if not all, interior columns, not just one or a limited set of columns in a building.
Charlie Sheen

Mooresville, NC

#274966 Jul 14, 2014
who wrote:
<quoted text>
That and the fact that there were reports of secondary explosions and molten steel, reports that were ignored by NIST.
1. Any proof it was steel, if so what would that even mean?

2. Yes, Ordinary things blow up in fires. If it was a CD you should have heard this, not a few random explosions.



It was nothing like a CD other than it collapsed.

(PS: The quote above this one about controlled demolitions and db's WAS from the NIST!)
Pegasus

United States

#274967 Jul 14, 2014
who wrote:
<quoted text>
Whatever....I didn't choose anything, I saw a cowardly act of treasonous mass murder and spoke out.
Like I said, you Muppets are irrelevant.
http://www.myfoxny.com/story/25984544/coaliti...
It will interesting to see how this all pans out, don't you think Peggy?
Well that is if it pans out in your favor....but we are talking 12 years and running and honestly WHO has there been any rock solid evidence from your side?

I respect your point of view also ....but then these stateside jokers stymie the action.

Our government has dealt in some very dirty deeds but to kill 3000 plus, attack a highly relative military complex and then not have one person involved spill the beans......come on now.
who

Reading, UK

#274968 Jul 14, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Any proof it was steel, if so what would that even mean?
2. Yes, Ordinary things blow up in fires. If it was a CD you should have heard this, not a few random explosions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =79sJ1bMR6VQXX
It was nothing like a CD other than it collapsed.
(PS: The quote above this one about controlled demolitions and db's WAS from the NIST!)
For Gods sake Charles...how many times do I have to go through this?
It doesn't matter what you or anyone else thinks about what accounted for the secondary explosions. It doesn't matter what you think about molten steel or pulverized concrete.
What matters is the fact that these things were reported in the first place and NIST failed to carry out a simple test for explosives.
Again take it up with Erik......he's quoting NIST's own standards.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Charlie Sheen

Mooresville, NC

#274969 Jul 14, 2014
who wrote:
<quoted text>
What matters is the fact that these things were reported in the first place and NIST failed to carry out a simple test for explosives.
From The NIST!

13. Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?

Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.

In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.

For the building to have been prepared for intentional demolition, walls and/or column enclosures and fireproofing would have to be removed and replaced without being detected. Preparing a column includes steps such as cutting sections with torches, which produces noxious and odorous fumes. Intentional demolition usually requires applying explosive charges to most, if not all, interior columns, not just one or a limited set of columns in a building.
Charlie Sheen

Mooresville, NC

#274970 Jul 14, 2014
who wrote:
<quoted text>
.I think WTC7 was a controlled demolition because it looks exactly like a controlled demolition.
What CD has ever dropped the total inside of the building, then the outer walls about 7 seconds latter?
who

Reading, UK

#274971 Jul 14, 2014
Pegasus wrote:
<quoted text>
Well that is if it pans out in your favor....but we are talking 12 years and running and honestly WHO has there been any rock solid evidence from your side?
I respect your point of view also ....but then these stateside jokers stymie the action.
Our government has dealt in some very dirty deeds but to kill 3000 plus, attack a highly relative military complex and then not have one person involved spill the beans......come on now.
Lots of people have spoken out, the media won't touch it though.
You had the assistant secretary of state under three administration say it was an inside job and the media said nothing, that's a cover up by anyone's standards.
Sorry it's an Infowars link, but no one else in the media would report what he said.
http://www.infowars.com/top-us-government-ins...
All these people have spoken out too, but again the press ignore them.
http://patriotsquestion911.com/
You can't say that people haven't spoken up Peggy, but you can say the media for the most part haven't.
You can't blame me for not believing a lying shit like Rumsfeld.
who

Reading, UK

#274972 Jul 14, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
From The NIST!
13. Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.
For the building to have been prepared for intentional demolition, walls and/or column enclosures and fireproofing would have to be removed and replaced without being detected. Preparing a column includes steps such as cutting sections with torches, which produces noxious and odorous fumes. Intentional demolition usually requires applying explosive charges to most, if not all, interior columns, not just one or a limited set of columns in a building.
They found no evidence of a blast event!!!...LOL!!
They didn't check for it so why would they find evidence?
Erik Lawyer is quoting the manual. NIST should have carried out a simple test for explosives.
who

Reading, UK

#274973 Jul 14, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
What CD has ever dropped the total inside of the building, then the outer walls about 7 seconds latter?
pffft.
who

Reading, UK

#274974 Jul 14, 2014
Anyway I've got things to do that don't involve chickens.......maybe we can have a chat tomorrow.
Laters.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#274975 Jul 14, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
looks like ham
feels like liver
tastes like chicken
smells like fish
there's two things that smell like fish
and one of em's fish
wasted knows what the other one is
if delirious don't beat her to it
Uh Huh Eh !
Would you like to taste something fishy?

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) 35 min guest 653,701
News Who is an atheist? (May '10) 52 min thetruth 9,362
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 1 hr Steve III 45,229
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr Steve III 618,754
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 1 hr Thinking 63,446
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 2 hr DebraE 106,479
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 2 hr karl44 973,685
More from around the web