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

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#279991 Sep 3, 2014
You wouldn't know a fact if it kicked you in the vagina you dumb bastard
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
Au Contraire sewerwater
.
What both buildings DID HAVE IN COMMON is they both fell down in 7 SECONDS .
.
This is a fact that is applicable, relevant and pertinent .
.
You can squeal all you want but you can't change these basic facts .
.
Uh Huh Eh !

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#279992 Sep 3, 2014
RADEKT wrote:
Just watched a great documentary called 9/11 Firehouse about the 10th FDNY group based on Liberty Street almost next to the WTC that lost 6 members that day. When you watch stuff like that, and hear about people's experiences on that day, it makes you realize what a bunch of clueless fkwits twoofers are
They would rather believe nitwits looking for attention than the word of those brave people who were there.

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#279993 Sep 3, 2014
You know, somewhere along the way, debunking just turned into denying by appealing to authority and bare assertions.

Sad really.

Insults Are Easier

“Turn left at pub Number 42”

Since: Dec 08

Homehill,QLD

#279994 Sep 3, 2014
Insults Are Easier wrote:
You know, somewhere along the way, debunking just turned into denying by appealing to authority and bare assertions.
Sad really.
Insults Are Easier
eg:?
Steven E Jones Ph.D
Thermite

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#279995 Sep 3, 2014
Insults Are Easier wrote:
You know, somewhere along the way, debunking just turned into denying by appealing to authority and bare assertions.
Sad really.
Insults Are Easier
False. You are the one who has appealed to authority in the past.

You are the one in denial of the facts and evidence which proves your assertions to be 100% false.

Sad? No, it makes little difference. Normal people don't care at all about your delusion.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#279996 Sep 3, 2014
AussieBobby wrote:
<quoted text>
eg:?
Steven E Jones Ph.D
Thermite
No. It must have been termites.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#279997 Sep 3, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
No. It must have been termites.
nanomites

“Turn left at pub Number 42”

Since: Dec 08

Homehill,QLD

#279998 Sep 3, 2014
Steel eating nano-bot termites/nanomites.
I think there as market for this in the exotic weaponry 911 twoofers

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#279999 Sep 4, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> nanomites
the nanomind of aura mythos
oink oink

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#280000 Sep 4, 2014
How about you debwunkers getting your stories straight respective to these collapse times.
.
I especially like the obviously phony story of how the interior of WTC7 fell down only you can't see it behind the facade, and the final ending of the collapse is obscured by dust, so therefore it took more than twice as long as the real time visual data .
.
The one about 9/11 Commission Report stating that the South tower fell down in 10 seconds is an estimate only, not to be taken literally and the real time is again actually more than twice as long is a hoot.
.
Seismic records of the Twin Tower collapses show a large signal for each collapse lasting just under 10 seconds. The durations of the large signals are widely equated with the durations of the collapses themselves. However, the signals may correspond to only parts of the collapse events, such as the rubble reaching the ground.
.
Consider the seismic records of the closest seismic recording station, at Palisades, NY (PAL). They show a very similar pattern for the leveling of WTC 1 and 2. In both cases there is about five seconds of high-amplitude movement, followed by about three seconds of movement at less than half that amplitude, and then by about 15 seconds of much weaker movement. In addition there is some still weaker movement starting about 12 seconds before the onsets of the high-amplitude movement. The main difference is that for WTC 1 the initial high-amplitude phase builds in intensity to a much higher spike than any seen for WTC 2.
.
The fact that the largest movement is followed by smaller movement has been cited as evidence that bombs, detonated at the starts of the collapses, generated the large movement, and that the debris impacting the ground contributed to the smaller subsequent movement.
.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/coll...
.
Oh and lets not forget that even though no one can see the Boeing or any parts of it in or around the hole in the facade of the Pentagon that is too small for it to fit into, the debwunkers insist that "it's in there" 124' wings, engines, 47' tall tail section, in fact every scrap of the 220,000 ton aluminum airplane,(luggage/cargo bins, over 200 seats, and long structural members) is claimed to have entered the building through the "C" ring and disintegrated into bits too small for identification, so proper identification of any wreckage was never an issue, for the so called "investigators". How convenient is that ?
.
Uh Huh Eh !

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#280001 Sep 4, 2014
Insults Are Easier wrote:
You know, somewhere along the way, debunking just turned into denying by appealing to authority and bare assertions.

Sad really.

Insults Are Easier
The funny thing is, your post is a bare assertion and you're too bloody dumb to understand that!

Thanks for playing moron!

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#280002 Sep 4, 2014
AussieBobby wrote:
<quoted text>
Why dont we get in on this scam?
Make some videos with outrageous claims that will never be proven and get twoofers to post links all over the net.All those clicks will keep me in Beer and fishing trip money..you,is there a Guitar you always wanted?
Gage is a genesis,getting noobs to work for nothing
Actually Gage is a genius not a genesis !
.
You won't get in on any scam cause Aussie noobs are too drunk and stupid to accomplish something that takes a genius to figure out. That SHOULD be obvious ! LOL
.
Uh Huh Eh !

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#280003 Sep 4, 2014
CLASSIC TWOOF WITLESSNESS -

"We screwed up. We had never seen the CBS video when we claimed that it took WTC 7 6.5 seconds to collapse. We only relied on the street video that does not show the Penthouses. By the time we saw the CBS video, we had so much invested in the 6.5-second collapse time, we could not disappoint our supporters who were successfully using the 6.5 free fall time to push 9/11 Truth. We just ignored the evidence.- Dr Steven Jones, 5/19/07 (BNN - May 19, 2007 - New York, NY)

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#280004 Sep 4, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
How about you debwunkers getting your stories straight respective to these collapse times.
.
I especially like the obviously phony story of how the interior of WTC7 fell down only you can't see it behind the facade, and the final ending of the collapse is obscured by dust, so therefore it took more than twice as long as the real time visual data .
.
The one about 9/11 Commission Report stating that the South tower fell down in 10 seconds is an estimate only, not to be taken literally and the real time is again actually more than twice as long is a hoot.
.
Seismic records of the Twin Tower collapses show a large signal for each collapse lasting just under 10 seconds. The durations of the large signals are widely equated with the durations of the collapses themselves. However, the signals may correspond to only parts of the collapse events, such as the rubble reaching the ground.
.
Consider the seismic records of the closest seismic recording station, at Palisades, NY (PAL). They show a very similar pattern for the leveling of WTC 1 and 2. In both cases there is about five seconds of high-amplitude movement, followed by about three seconds of movement at less than half that amplitude, and then by about 15 seconds of much weaker movement. In addition there is some still weaker movement starting about 12 seconds before the onsets of the high-amplitude movement. The main difference is that for WTC 1 the initial high-amplitude phase builds in intensity to a much higher spike than any seen for WTC 2.
.
The fact that the largest movement is followed by smaller movement has been cited as evidence that bombs, detonated at the starts of the collapses, generated the large movement, and that the debris impacting the ground contributed to the smaller subsequent movement.
.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/coll...
.
Oh and lets not forget that even though no one can see the Boeing or any parts of it in or around the hole in the facade of the Pentagon that is too small for it to fit into, the debwunkers insist that "it's in there" 124' wings, engines, 47' tall tail section, in fact every scrap of the 220,000 ton aluminum airplane,(luggage/cargo bins, over 200 seats, and long structural members) is claimed to have entered the building through the "C" ring and disintegrated into bits too small for identification, so proper identification of any wreckage was never an issue, for the so called "investigators". How convenient is that ?
.
Uh Huh Eh !
Collapse time is irrelevant. The preponderance of evidence shows structural failure as the cause.

The preponderance of evidence proves that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

Do you anything which hasn't already been completely debunked?

YAWN

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#280005 Sep 4, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>False. You are the one who has appealed to authority in the past.
Bare assertion.
WasteWater wrote:
You are the one in denial of the facts and evidence which proves your assertions to be 100% false.
Bare assertion
WasteWater wrote:
Sad? No, it makes little difference. Normal people don't care at all about your delusion.
Appeal to popularity, bare assertion, while appealing to the bandwagon effect of cognitive bias.

So all you really have done in attempting to refute my previous post was to confirm it.

Damn your dumb.

Insults Are Easier

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#280006 Sep 4, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
How about you debwunkers getting your stories straight respective to these collapse times.
.
I especially like the obviously phony story of how the interior of WTC7 fell down only you can't see it behind the facade, and the final ending of the collapse is obscured by dust, so therefore it took more than twice as long as the real time visual data .
.
The one about 9/11 Commission Report stating that the South tower fell down in 10 seconds is an estimate only, not to be taken literally and the real time is again actually more than twice as long is
.
The fact that the largest movement is followed by smaller movement has been cited as evidence that bombs, detonated at the starts of the collapses, generated the large movement, and that the debris impacting the ground contributed to the smaller subsequent movement.
.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/coll...

.
Uh Huh Eh !
Long or short fall , with a hush boom start huh?
The problem is the towers have been falling for 12-13 years now without a real bomb going off,
or at least any bomb that sounds like a bomb. You know ...one that goes BOOM!
We should write you a theme song for you to sing.

What kinda bomb don't go boom?
Hushboom hush boom!
Twoofer say NIST got it wrong
Hush boom Hushbooms!
Gage and his buddys got it going on.
Hush booms Hushboom!
Twoofer going to investigate, all day long..
Hushboom Hush Booms!
Old Bin Laden done nothing wrong
Hushbooms hushbooms!

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#280007 Sep 4, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Collapse time is irrelevant. The preponderance of evidence shows structural failure as the cause.
The preponderance of evidence proves that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.
Do you anything which hasn't already been completely debunked?
YAWN
"Collapse time is irrelevant."
.
Irrelevant to you maybe but to someone who is interested in the truth, collapse time means a lot.
.
The preponderance of evidence shows structural failure as the cause."
.
Exactly what evidence is there to show how and why the bottom third of the towers failed to structurally resist the top third as they easily did for over thirty years?
.
"The preponderance of evidence proves that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon."
.
Wrong, there is no evidence. Where is it ? See previous "Where's the Boeing" posts .
.
"Do you anything which hasn't already been completely debunked?"
.
Huh. This is gibberish gobblydegook.
.
"YAWN"
.
Go back to bed sewerwater .
.
Uh Huh Eh !

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#280008 Sep 4, 2014
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
Bare assertion.
<quoted text>
Bare assertion
<quoted text>
Appeal to popularity, bare assertion, while appealing to the bandwagon effect of cognitive bias.
So all you really have done in attempting to refute my previous post was to confirm it.
Damn your dumb.
Insults Are Easier
FLUSHED

NEXT

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#280009 Sep 4, 2014
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/demolit...
.
Are WTC 1 & 2 falling down from gravity or are they exploding ?
.
Did WTC 7 fall down from gravity or was it imploded by controlled demolition ?
.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#280010 Sep 4, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
"Collapse time is irrelevant."
.
Irrelevant to you maybe but to someone who is interested in the truth, collapse time means a lot.
.
The preponderance of evidence shows structural failure as the cause."
.
Exactly what evidence is there to show how and why the bottom third of the towers failed to structurally resist the top third as they easily did for over thirty years?
.
"The preponderance of evidence proves that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon."
.
Wrong, there is no evidence. Where is it ? See previous "Where's the Boeing" posts .
.
"Do you anything which hasn't already been completely debunked?"
.
Huh. This is gibberish gobblydegook.
.
"YAWN"
.
Go back to bed sewerwater .
.
Uh Huh Eh !
The exterior columns descended at a faster rate than the rest of the building proving your assertion of controlled demolition false and your bogus collapse time to be irrelevant.

The preponderance of evidence proves flight 77 hit the pentagon. Over one-hundred witnesses saw the event. Plane parts were documented and recovered. DNA was recovered. A C-130 pilot watched the plane hit and explode into fire. There was jet fuel smell and the jet fuel fire. Olsen made a phone call from the plane.

All of this has been presented over and over. Your claim otherwise is pure drivel.

GOT ANY REAL EVIDENCE BABBLING FOOL?

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) 6 min dotard tracker 987,404
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 7 min waaasssuuup 31,513
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 13 min kent 687,401
God is REAL - Miracles Happen! (Jun '11) 1 hr Wisdom of Ages 6,493
Trump: "Get that Son of a B- - - - off the fiel... 2 hr HFCS - What It Is 2
the REAL reasons O.J. Simpson beat murder charges 7 hr Doctor REALITY 31
News Abortion issue looms over Supreme Court choice (May '09) 8 hr Ricky F 2,335
More from around the web