Conquer Club

jay_a2j wrote:SolidLuigi you have put the evidence before them as best I've seen. Still, they don't want to believe, still they grasp at straws. Looking at the evidence now, makes me ashamed I ever doubted it. I just didn't want to believe my own government would do such a thing.

Maybe next time, they will have an open mind.

Once again Mr. Open mind I ask...


WHO planted the charges.

WHY were they not seen?

WHO detonated the charges?

WHY were they not seen?

WHERE were the thousands of wires needed?

WHY did no one in either tower notice the miles & miles of detonation wiring?

WHY were there no reports of roaming crews cutting beams on every floor, as would be necessary for a controlled demo?

WHY has no one come forward after more than five years...ANYONE...to say "I was there"..."I was involved"..."These are the players"..."This is how it happened". Not even an anonymous book. Not even an anonymous POST on the internet! Not one camera phone picture of the massive prep work.

Nothing.

Crickets.

Grasping at straws indeed.

You are a lemming and a fool. Both with your conspiracy theories and your belief in magical creatures.

SolidLuigi wrote:-the maximum resistance issue(has 1 sec frame intervals and a graph which clearly show the building is accelerating as it falls which means it is meeting no resistance, in order for there to be no resistance the steel columns must be cut)

Actually, that is just not true. The resistance just has to be less than the force that is pulling the building down. There can still be resistance. The building didn't fall at free-fall speed, so there had to be some resistance.

-the TRUTH that no steel skyscraper has ever fallen due to fire(he names a bunch of skyscrapers that had more floors on fire and a lot longer burning time and no collapse, all are back in use now with only minor renovation, no structural renovation)

Yeah but it's not only the fire that caused the buildings to fall, it probably had something to do with the fucking planes that flew inside too. The fire wasn't the only factor.

To argue that because it has never happened it isn't possible is silly.

this is just after 30 mins. I will watch the rest. I hope you will too. I'm not asking you to believe everything, but I'm trying to show you another side than your own.

Problem is that we've already seen way to many posts by crazies about the other side. There is just as much credibility to 9/11 conspiracy as to the moonlanding-conspiracy, actually even less.

and since Mr. Gage is saying all the same things I did in earlier posts, and most importantly he did all the work of getting sources and evidence haha, I'll just refer you to his presentation.

You have to post it here though. We're not going to look for the evidence and refute it, as that would be an impossible task and I have better things to do.

Now the ball is in your court, here is a logical argument, you can choose to just blow it off and not even watch it and not give a fair chance

The ball is in your court. I have no desire to watch a long video again to just refute all the evidence again. You can post the evidence and explain it, but I'm not going to waste all my time by listening to some twat on a video.

We are not doing your research for you, dude.

Backglass wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:SolidLuigi you have put the evidence before them as best I've seen. Still, they don't want to believe, still they grasp at straws. Looking at the evidence now, makes me ashamed I ever doubted it. I just didn't want to believe my own government would do such a thing.

Maybe next time, they will have an open mind.

Once again Mr. Open mind I ask...


WHO planted the charges.

WHY were they not seen?

WHO detonated the charges?

WHY were they not seen?

WHERE were the thousands of wires needed?

WHY did no one in either tower notice the miles & miles of detonation wiring?

WHY were there no reports of roaming crews cutting beams on every floor, as would be necessary for a controlled demo?

WHY has no one come forward after more than five years...ANYONE...to say "I was there"..."I was involved"..."These are the players"..."This is how it happened". Not even an anonymous book. Not even an anonymous POST on the internet! Not one camera phone picture of the massive prep work.

Nothing.

Crickets.

Grasping at straws indeed.

You are a lemming and a fool. Both with your conspiracy theories and your belief in magical creatures.

Exactly. I openly admit that I'm not an engineer or a physics major, and I frankly don't think so highly of myself that I believe I could do enough research using only wikipedia articles and the occasional (dubious) expert testimony on youtube to discover the supposed "truth" behind one of the most elaborate terrorist attacks ever.

I do, however believe I have at least a basic understanding of human nature. The idea that something this big, this gigantic, could be covered up to everyone except for the errant forum dweller is pretty tough to swallow. Also, how is it that the government was able to do this without a single leak yet a few years later they weren't able to come up with any WMDs in Iraq? Heck, how hard could that be? There's no huge cover-up or massive civilian casualty count to worry about there, and it sure as hell would have helped bring up their credibility a bit.

I realize that this doesn't actually touch on the attack itself, but before you can begin looking at specific details you have to be able to look at the big picture, and the big picture is frankly unrealistic.

Backglass wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:SolidLuigi you have put the evidence before them as best I've seen. Still, they don't want to believe, still they grasp at straws. Looking at the evidence now, makes me ashamed I ever doubted it. I just didn't want to believe my own government would do such a thing.

Maybe next time, they will have an open mind.

Once again Mr. Open mind I ask...


WHO planted the charges.

WHY were they not seen?

WHO detonated the charges?

WHY were they not seen?

WHERE were the thousands of wires needed?

WHY did no one in either tower notice the miles & miles of detonation wiring?

WHY were there no reports of roaming crews cutting beams on every floor, as would be necessary for a controlled demo?

WHY has no one come forward after more than five years...ANYONE...to say "I was there"..."I was involved"..."These are the players"..."This is how it happened". Not even an anonymous book. Not even an anonymous POST on the internet! Not one camera phone picture of the massive prep work.

Nothing.

Crickets.

Grasping at straws indeed.


You are a lemming and a fool. Both with your conspiracy theories and your belief in magical creatures.

I don't have all the answers, but I know what makes sense and what doesn't.



The WTC was closed down due to a "power failure" the week before 911. (Nice opportunity to rig the building with no one around)


The detonations could have been ignited by remote control....no wires needed.


possible explanations, but stay asleep if you prefer.

Neutrino wrote:Even if the initial fall was uneven (which, admittedly, seems pretty likely) I find it hard to believe that subsequent floors would have exacerbated the effect, since each floor would have existed for such a short time after contact with the falling section.

The best explanation about this arguement is:

Do sagging floors weigh more than non-sagging floors?--Kevin Ryan, former UL manager and chemist

The WTC was designed to withstand load. Extreme amounts of load. Each floor is designed to withstand the load (plus some) of the floors above it. Even if the columns failed above a particular floor, that floor would have sustained the load of the sagging trusses above it.

How do randomn fires melt core columns uniformly?
And if the WTC towers collapsed do to airplane crashes and jetfuel fires, how did WTC7 collapse, of which it didn't possess any of those traits?

So, we're all agreed, bar Jay who is clearly one ball short of a full set, that THIS THREAD IS A COMPLETE PILE OF SMELLY ARSE?
WHY would Bush want to kill loads of his own people you idiots?
You dont think he could have found another reason for war that would have been slightly less embarrassing to him? 9/11 happened on his watch, so ultimately (a bit harsh, I know) it was his responsibility.
Pull your thick paranoid heads out of your conspiracy crap filled arses, and go back to the Nursery where you belong.
All the Best!
Suggs.

jay_a2j wrote:
I don't have all the answers, but I know what makes sense and what doesn't.

The WTC was closed down due to a "power failure" the week before 911. (Nice opportunity to rig the building with no one around)

OK:
1) This testimony came from one man, Scott Forbes, who claimed there was a power outage on his floor in tower 2 (the 50th floor, i believe) from midday on september 8, 2001. He was an IT geek.
- this means there were witnesses in the buildings
- this does not mean the power outage affected every circuit in the building. in fact, here is a link to a picture of a ticket stub for the viewing platform dated the time and day this power outage was supposed to have happened: here

So we know at least the lifts were working, the ticket machines were working, and tourists were inside the building at the time this team of shadowy demolition experts were wiring over 100 floors of skyscraper. No, mr Forbes didn't see them either.

2) I googled some controlled demolition examples. Here is a press release from 2005: link - detailing the demolition of a 9-story hospital in the US. It took the professional demolition squad ONE WEEK (6th para in press release) to wire the building. Not to prepare the logisitics - to set the explosives. How long would it take a demo team to wire two buildings, each ten times the size?


The 'closing of the WTC' I have shown to be a myth.
Controlled demolition is also just a myth - it would have been a MASSIVE job, weeks long, and yet nobody saw a demolition man, strange wiring, ANYTHING to corroborate this.

If you guys can show me otherwise in either case - perhaps with evidence, as I have done - i'd be happy to discuss it.




PS if you mention Marvin Bush i will make you blush with my pwnage

DaGip wrote:how did WTC7 collapse, of which it didn't possess any of those traits?

It didn't collapse actually. It might have done due to being heavily damaged from debris from other buildings, so they decided it would be better to pull it down.

Backglass wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:SolidLuigi you have put the evidence before them as best I've seen. Still, they don't want to believe, still they grasp at straws. Looking at the evidence now, makes me ashamed I ever doubted it. I just didn't want to believe my own government would do such a thing.

Maybe next time, they will have an open mind.

Once again Mr. Open mind I ask...


WHO planted the charges.

WHY were they not seen?

WHO detonated the charges?

WHY were they not seen?

WHERE were the thousands of wires needed?

WHY did no one in either tower notice the miles & miles of detonation wiring?

WHY were there no reports of roaming crews cutting beams on every floor, as would be necessary for a controlled demo?

WHY has no one come forward after more than five years...ANYONE...to say "I was there"..."I was involved"..."These are the players"..."This is how it happened". Not even an anonymous book. Not even an anonymous POST on the internet! Not one camera phone picture of the massive prep work.

Nothing.

Crickets.

Grasping at straws indeed.

You are a lemming and a fool. Both with your conspiracy theories and your belief in magical creatures.

Once again, name calling and a sense of self-righteousness, signs that the peer pressure effect is in place. Just because someone has a different belief than you means they are an idiot? Magical creatures? another baseless attack on my character to make me look less credible to others, when I have never mentioned any magical creatures in my posts. Totally irresponsible as someone supposedly trying to point out the truth.

I exhibit the use of an open mind, I admitted to Neutrino earlier I don't have all the answers to who and why, my argument isn't 100% perfect, no ones is.

If you look at the video, and my earlier posts, we don't claim to know everything about why and who did it, that matter comes afterwards. So using those questions isn't a counter to the evidence Mr. Gage is putting forth. We are just trying to show that something totally different happened than the 9/11 commission and the NIST investigation states. Look at a murder investigation, the police don't go for who did it right away, they investigate and meticulously rebuild the crime scene and take in all the evidence and information they can, then suspects are made and eliminated by evidence.

Mr. Gage explains in the presentation that there are many wireless detonation systems in use now.

The crews don't cut the beams, the thermite explosions, that there is clear evidence of, cut the beams in a split second upon detonation. Mr. Gage made a good statement in the presentation, he said people always say there are no signs of all the work that has to be done in a controlled demolition. Well this isn't a typical controlled demolition, it's made to look like a collapse so reason states that the requirements of a typical controlled demo wouldn't be present.

People have come forward over the years. Hundreds of eyewitnesses that were in the basement levels or outside when they saw and heard explosions just before the towers fell, the 9/11 commission ignored and didn't even take a statement from them. As for insiders, in the presentation Mr. Gage has video of a NY firefighter who states he and other firemen had previous knowledge, but many wont come out for fear of losing their jobs. He also has a NIST whistle blower who said NIST was obviously covering up or outright ignoring evidence that pointed away from fire as a cause and towards explosions. He was fired shortly later.

You never answered my question in an earlier post. Of the 100's of firefighters police officers and workers that were all there that claim explosions happened, are you willing to call them lemmings or fools. Also do you know what a lemming is? A lemming follows a leader blindly, whether you agree with any of my argument or not, since I am questioning the status quo, you have to admit that removes the possibility of me being a lemming. You have more of a chance of being a lemming than I. Grasping at straws???? This 2 hour presentation which everyone on here wants to ignore because "we've already seen crazies," or "I don't wanna sit through a long vid" has so much evidence in it, it has more explanations in it than the NIST report had for their fire theory, which is still only of theory, was never proven definitive. To say we are grasping at straws is a total uneducated statement and misleading lie in the face of everything presented.

Once again, the founding fathers intended for us to question govts, and purposely put checks and balances in place to stop govts from getting bigger and more powerful, yet that is happening. Why do you think the 9/11 truth movement is getting STRONGER as time goes on? In theory conspiracy theories that are just crackpot ideas die out over time, they don't get stronger unless there is hard evidence. The longer it has been since 9/11, the more of the emotion and horror and fear that was caused by the attack goes away, people start thinking with their heads and science and not their hearts and faith in their govt. Polls show more and more Americans doubt what actually occurred on 9/11 is what we are told by the commission. Mr. Gage has a poll that shows 49%, thats not a typo, 49% HALF of New Yorkers believe explosions were present before the towers fell and the 9/11 commission is covering up or ignoring. Are you ready to dismiss this growing movement and half of NYC as idiots?

Lastly, if you notice in my posts, I'm not attacking you personally. I am bringing up points in order to get people to think. The attack caused so much fear and horror, then the ultra-patriotism following that it was easy to be overwhelmed by it all. I was, everyone was. What I'm saying is, you owe it to yourself and your country as a citizen to equally way both sides of this story. This is the biggest thing to happen in our lives so far, you are willing to just ignore a whole trove of evidence?! We owe it to the victims to study every aspect. Imagine your friend is killed and the police come up with a story and you accept it. Then you find out about this info and evidence that shows something else, are you gonna just push it out of your head and not even deal with it? The victims deserve a top quality investigation and the truth. the Architects and Engineers for 911 truth which Mr. Gage represents are calling for a new investigation, they aren't accusing anyone specifically. So you have to realize they aren't trying to get you to believe the govt is evil, they are just trying to get you to admit the investigations and the 9/11 commission were totally unacceptable and we need a new investigation by independent companies chosen by the people.

here it is again: http://911blogger.com/node/10025

Snorri1234 wrote:

DaGip wrote:how did WTC7 collapse, of which it didn't possess any of those traits?

It didn't collapse actually. It might have done due to being heavily damaged from debris from other buildings, so they decided it would be better to pull it down.

How could they "pull it down" on 911? It would take days/weeks to rig it to pull it down!

jay_a2j wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

DaGip wrote:how did WTC7 collapse, of which it didn't possess any of those traits?

It didn't collapse actually. It might have done due to being heavily damaged from debris from other buildings, so they decided it would be better to pull it down.

How could they "pull it down" on 911? It would take days/weeks to rig it to pull it down!

THEY USED CABLES YOU STUPID PRICK! THIS HAS BEEN EXPLAINED ALREADY!

Snorri1234 wrote:

DaGip wrote:how did WTC7 collapse, of which it didn't possess any of those traits?

It didn't collapse actually. It might have done due to being heavily damaged from debris from other buildings, so they decided it would be better to pull it down.

Like pickup trucks with ropes?

DaGip wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

DaGip wrote:how did WTC7 collapse, of which it didn't possess any of those traits?

It didn't collapse actually. It might have done due to being heavily damaged from debris from other buildings, so they decided it would be better to pull it down.

Like pickup trucks with ropes?

Yeah they used cables. I think heavycola posted a link somewhere to the video of them doing it, but I can't find the thread.

I am reposting this because it got lost, and i want some asnwers dammit

jay_a2j wrote:
I don't have all the answers, but I know what makes sense and what doesn't.

The WTC was closed down due to a "power failure" the week before 911. (Nice opportunity to rig the building with no one around)

OK:
1) This testimony came from one man, Scott Forbes, who claimed there was a power outage on his floor in tower 2 (the 50th floor, i believe) from midday on september 8, 2001. He was an IT geek.
- this means there were witnesses in the buildings
- this does not mean the power outage affected every circuit in the building. in fact, here is a link to a picture of a ticket stub for the viewing platform dated the time and day this power outage was supposed to have happened: here

So we know at least the lifts were working, the ticket machines were working, and tourists were inside the building at the time this team of shadowy demolition experts were wiring over 100 floors of skyscraper. No, mr Forbes didn't see them either.

2) I googled some controlled demolition examples. Here is a press release from 2005: link - detailing the demolition of a 9-story hospital in the US. It took the professional demolition squad ONE WEEK (6th para in press release) to wire the building. Not to prepare the logisitics - to set the explosives. How long would it take a demo team to wire two buildings, each ten times the size?


The 'closing of the WTC' I have shown to be a myth.
Controlled demolition is also just a myth - it would have been a MASSIVE job, weeks long, and yet nobody saw a demolition man, strange wiring, ANYTHING to corroborate this.

If you guys can show me otherwise in either case - perhaps with evidence, as I have done - i'd be happy to discuss it.




PS if you mention Marvin Bush i will make you blush with my pwnage

DaGip wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

DaGip wrote:how did WTC7 collapse, of which it didn't possess any of those traits?

It didn't collapse actually. It might have done due to being heavily damaged from debris from other buildings, so they decided it would be better to pull it down.

Like pickup trucks with ropes?

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf

Sorry, I couldn't find the pickup truck with ropes theory in the FEMA report anywhere? Can you help me find that section?

I can, however, find the pancake-style collapse theory that FEMA likes, but the NIST hates...so many contradictions. Why, God? Why?

Christ on a bike, AM I THE ONLY PERSON POSTING ACTUAL FUCKING EVIDENCE AS OPPOSED TO HEARSAY AND 'NOT QUITE RIGHT' FEELINGS HERE? I'm certainly the only person being igonred. I SMELL A CONSPIRACY.

DaGip wrote:

DaGip wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

DaGip wrote:how did WTC7 collapse, of which it didn't possess any of those traits?

It didn't collapse actually. It might have done due to being heavily damaged from debris from other buildings, so they decided it would be better to pull it down.

Like pickup trucks with ropes?

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf

Sorry, I couldn't find the pickup truck with ropes theory in the FEMA report anywhere? Can you help me find that section?

I don't know about WTC7, but they had pulled down other buildings in that manner.

heavycola wrote:Christ on a bike, AM I THE ONLY PERSON POSTING ACTUAL FUCKING EVIDENCE AS OPPOSED TO HEARSAY AND 'NOT QUITE RIGHT' FEELINGS HERE? I'm certainly the only person being igonred. I SMELL A CONSPIRACY.

YOU ARE NOT ALONE, MY FREIND! I TOO AM POSTING IN FLAGRANT ALL-CAP MODE! PERHAPS THE MASSES WILL NOW TAKE HEED TO OUR WORDS OF WISDOM!

Go on the, take heed of my words of wisdom. Tell me why I am wrong. Someone. Please, tell me where I am wrong in my earlier post. Please.

Heavycola, tell me why Bush/the "authorities" would have wanted to destroy the WTCentre?
Answers that include "Afghanistan, Iraq, To Create A Climate of Fear"
wont wash, so i hope you got something decent.

suggs wrote:Heavycola, tell me why Bush/the "authorities" would have wanted to destroy the WTCentre?
Answers that include "Afghanistan, Iraq, To Create A Climate of Fear"
wont wash, so i hope you got something decent.

They feel that they somehow made money off of it. So basically they're arguing that rather than illegally getting money the usual way (handing out favors to rich friends for "donations", skimming a bit off of taxes), they killed several thousand Americans on 9/11 and the ensuing wars. Seems dubious to me.

As if politicians give a shit about money-thats one of the biggest misconceptions around (in relatively civilized democracies anyway).
Read up on G>W> BUsh-he clearly doent need the money, but whatever else you think about the guy, he's obviously a massive patriot-there is NO WAY he want to do anything to hurt america. (deliberately, i mean).
Sadly, cynicism and conpiracy theories are often used by intellectual mediocrities to make them look a bit more intersting and sharp than they really are.
"Oh, Bush is just in for the money" is, in fact, a tremendously ignorant and dumb ass thing to say.
9/11 was the worst thing that happened to BUsh, as it destroyed his Republican tax cutting agenda.

Evidence:
Reptilian Overlords

DaGip wrote:Evidence:
Reptilian Overlords

Also the Catholic church.

DaGip wrote:Evidence:
Reptilian Overlords

I hope you're joking
You might as well treat the Da Vinci Code as History