Dancing Mustard wrote:MarketAnarchist wrote:Trick question: Government is institutionalized terrorism, so it doesn't make a difference.
Parlez vous l'bollox monsieur?
>.>
9/11 Conspiracies(threads merged)
Moderator: Community Team
Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
-
MarketAnarchist
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 10:14 pm
Dancing Mustard wrote:Parlez vous l'bollox monsieur?
Seeing that someone got a warning for speaking ENGLISH in a non-English forum, I think a warning should be given for speaking non-English in an English forum.
THE DEBATE IS OVER...
JESUS SAVES!!!
PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.
JESUS SAVES!!!
-
Dancing Mustard
- Posts: 5442
- Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2007 3:31 pm
- Location: Pushing Buttons
If that's happening, then our friend Mr Market-Anarchist should get a warning for talking bollocks in an English speaking forum.
Trust me, I love sweeping generalisations as much as the next man... but without factual backing they're just annoying pseudo-intellectual spam.
Trust me, I love sweeping generalisations as much as the next man... but without factual backing they're just annoying pseudo-intellectual spam.
Wayne wrote:Wow, with a voice like that Dancing Mustard must get all the babes!
Garth wrote:Yeah, I bet he's totally studly and buff.
-
soundout9
- Posts: 4519
- Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 12:30 pm
- Location: Good ol' MO Clan: Next-Gen Gamers
- Contact:
Experts says 9/11 was caused by the gov
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne ... vel_of.htm
November 3, 2007 at 06:58:31
Former high-level officials challenge the conventional explanation of how and why the Twin Towers came down
by Richard Clark Page 1 of 3 page(s)
http://www.opednews.com
A 2,000 word article, Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report, appeared September 23, 2007 in OpEdNews. (Link provided below.) The article details severe criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report by seven CIA veterans and calls for a new investigation. Here follows a brief quote or two from several of the individuals whose testimony is included in the article:
Ray McGovern, former Chairman of the National Intelligence Council and 27-year CIA veteran: "The 9/11 Report is a joke." “It has long been clear that the Bush-Cheney administration cynically exploited the attacks of 9/11 to promote its imperial designs. . . (And there is) evidence for an even more disturbing conclusion: that the 9/11 attacks were themselves orchestrated by this administration precisely so they could be thus exploited.”
William Christison, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and former Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political, and 29-year CIA veteran: "We very seriously need an entirely new, very high level, and truly independent investigation of the events of 9/11. I think you almost have to look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a joke and not a serious piece of analysis at all." “The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them.”
Robert Baer, 21-year CIA veteran and specialist in the Middle East, was awarded the Career Intelligence Medal upon his retirement in 1997. During an interview by Thom Hartmann, Baer, after commenting on the financial profits being made from 9/11, was asked: “What about political profit? There are those who suggest that someone in (the U.S.) chain of command had pretty good knowledge that 9/11 was going to happen -- and really didn't do much to stop it -- or even obstructed efforts to stop it because they thought it would lend legitimacy to Bush's failing presidency.” Baer replied: “Absolutely.” Hartmann then asked, “So you are personally of the opinion that there was an aspect of 'inside job' to 9/11 within the U.S. government?" To which Baer replied, "There is that possibility, the evidence points at it." When Hartmann continued, "And why is this not being investigated?” Baer replied, "Why isn't the WMD story being investigated? Why hasn't anybody been held accountable for 9/11? We held people accountable after Pearl Harbor. Why has there been no change in command? Why have there been no political repercussions? Why has there not been any sort of exposure on all this? It really makes you wonder."
Robert David Steele has 25 years of combined service in the CIA and the U.S. Marine Corps. Second ranking civilian in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence from 1988 - 1992. Member of the Adjunct Faculty of Marine Corps University. His comment: "I am forced to conclude that 9/11 was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war. "I'm absolutely certain that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition. There's no way that building could have come down without controlled demolition."
http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/print_ ... rans_c.htm
Additional statements questioning the official account of 9/11, and calls for a new investigation, by hundreds of high-level military officers (now retired) and other highly-credible individuals, can be found at http://PatriotsQuestion911.com
Here’s some of the evidence that prompts them to call for a new investigation:
1 20-ton sections of steel beams were propelled, laterally, for a distance of up to 400 feet where they lodged in the sides of nearby buildings. (See video footage of this at http://www.ae911truth.org)
2 Molten metal was seen (and videotaped) gushing out the side of one of the twin towers. (Why is this significant? Jet fuel burns at 1800 degrees Fahrenheit while office furniture, rugs and computers burn at an even lower temperature. Iron and steel don’t vaporize until their temperature gets close to 4000 degrees F. So what does burn at a temperature capable of vaporizing steel? Incendiary compounds known as thermate and thermite, which burn at 4500 degrees F. See more about this later in this article.)
3 Various explosions (some quite powerful) were seen, heard and felt by hundreds of people, including many firemen and policemen, prior to the collapse of the twin towers, but occurred well after the airliners collided with the buildings.
4 Huge numbers of extremely tiny iron spherules (formed when steel or iron vaporizes at extremely high temperatures) can be found in most of the 9/11 dust samples. (more evidence for thermite)
5 Many column sections seen in the wreckage of the twin towers were cut at 45-degree angles, and have, close to the cut lines, previously-melted 'drippings' produced when the steel was melted at a temperature much higher than can be produced by an acetylene torch. This kind of angle cut can be used to direct the falling beam inward.
Source for the above information is http://www.ae911truth.org, which is the web site of an investigative organization whose 200+ members are all either professional architects or professional engineers.
If there were no high-powered explosives detonated inside the twin towers, as the official explanation contends, then defenders of that official explanation must provide us with an alternate theory as to how those column and/or beam sections got embedded in the sides of buildings that were 400 feet away. (The compressed air created by floors collapsing one upon the other could provide nowhere near the energy required to propel a 20-ton beam or column section that far.) In addition, defenders of the official explanation must provide us with a plausible fuel source for the temperatures approaching 4000 degrees F. which would have been necessary to vaporize parts of many of the steel beam remnants found in the wreckage.
The evidence for incendiary cutting of steel consists of the video evidence, the forensic evidence in the dust and rubble, and the testimony of eyewitness early responders and survivors who saw glowing molten metal flowing out of window openings. These incendiary events and the forensic evidence strongly suggest that the official story is wrong. The chemistry of the iron-aluminum-rich microspheres that are found in the dust from the rubble, the chemical content of these microspheres suggest that the official story is wrong. http://www.journalof911studies.com/volu ... emistryWTC
So when could the explosives and incendiary materials have been planted?
The official record shows that various floors of each of the twin towers were completely closed off 'for repairs,' for days at a time. Monitoring TV cameras on these floors were disconnected.
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/20 ... world.html. Owner Larry Silverstein was perhaps in on the deal. Why suspect this? Well, for one thing he received a fabulous insurance settlement, after purchasing the WTC complex just weeks earlier under unusual circumstances. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein.html. The terrorist attack on the twin towers saved him the immense expense of having the towers demolished in the conventional way. (The towers had many structural problems. Two applications to have the buildings demolished were submitted by the previous owners because of the advanced galvanic corrosion that was taking place at each of the thousands of joints where aluminum parts were mistakenly put in tight contact with steel structural members.) http://redlineav.com/tsg.deposition.contd.2.html
There is plenty of evidence to suggest that explosives and incendiary compounds might have been planted at strategic locations within the Twin Towers. For example:
Bomb-sniffing dogs were inexplicably prevented from doing their job in the Twin Towers five days before 9-11
Various floors in the Twin Towers had been evacuated a number of times in the weeks preceding 9/11
There was a ‘power-down’ in parts of the Twin Towers on the weekend before 9/11, security cameras were shut down, and many workers ran around busily doing things unobserved.
And, as an interesting coincidence, a Bush-linked company ran security at the trade center, thus giving it free reign within the buildings.
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/20 ... world.html
In addition to these facts, demolition-and-building-collapse experts have raised the possibility of "explosive tenants" -- i.e. tenants in the Twin Towers who might have planted explosives in their own rented office spaces. http://911blogger.com/node/2487
1 | 2 | 3
November 3, 2007 at 06:58:31
Former high-level officials challenge the conventional explanation of how and why the Twin Towers came down
by Richard Clark Page 1 of 3 page(s)
http://www.opednews.com
A 2,000 word article, Seven CIA Veterans Challenge 9/11 Commission Report, appeared September 23, 2007 in OpEdNews. (Link provided below.) The article details severe criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report by seven CIA veterans and calls for a new investigation. Here follows a brief quote or two from several of the individuals whose testimony is included in the article:
Ray McGovern, former Chairman of the National Intelligence Council and 27-year CIA veteran: "The 9/11 Report is a joke." “It has long been clear that the Bush-Cheney administration cynically exploited the attacks of 9/11 to promote its imperial designs. . . (And there is) evidence for an even more disturbing conclusion: that the 9/11 attacks were themselves orchestrated by this administration precisely so they could be thus exploited.”
William Christison, former National Intelligence Officer (NIO) and former Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political, and 29-year CIA veteran: "We very seriously need an entirely new, very high level, and truly independent investigation of the events of 9/11. I think you almost have to look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a joke and not a serious piece of analysis at all." “The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them.”
Robert Baer, 21-year CIA veteran and specialist in the Middle East, was awarded the Career Intelligence Medal upon his retirement in 1997. During an interview by Thom Hartmann, Baer, after commenting on the financial profits being made from 9/11, was asked: “What about political profit? There are those who suggest that someone in (the U.S.) chain of command had pretty good knowledge that 9/11 was going to happen -- and really didn't do much to stop it -- or even obstructed efforts to stop it because they thought it would lend legitimacy to Bush's failing presidency.” Baer replied: “Absolutely.” Hartmann then asked, “So you are personally of the opinion that there was an aspect of 'inside job' to 9/11 within the U.S. government?" To which Baer replied, "There is that possibility, the evidence points at it." When Hartmann continued, "And why is this not being investigated?” Baer replied, "Why isn't the WMD story being investigated? Why hasn't anybody been held accountable for 9/11? We held people accountable after Pearl Harbor. Why has there been no change in command? Why have there been no political repercussions? Why has there not been any sort of exposure on all this? It really makes you wonder."
Robert David Steele has 25 years of combined service in the CIA and the U.S. Marine Corps. Second ranking civilian in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence from 1988 - 1992. Member of the Adjunct Faculty of Marine Corps University. His comment: "I am forced to conclude that 9/11 was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war. "I'm absolutely certain that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition. There's no way that building could have come down without controlled demolition."
http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/print_ ... rans_c.htm
Additional statements questioning the official account of 9/11, and calls for a new investigation, by hundreds of high-level military officers (now retired) and other highly-credible individuals, can be found at http://PatriotsQuestion911.com
Here’s some of the evidence that prompts them to call for a new investigation:
1 20-ton sections of steel beams were propelled, laterally, for a distance of up to 400 feet where they lodged in the sides of nearby buildings. (See video footage of this at http://www.ae911truth.org)
2 Molten metal was seen (and videotaped) gushing out the side of one of the twin towers. (Why is this significant? Jet fuel burns at 1800 degrees Fahrenheit while office furniture, rugs and computers burn at an even lower temperature. Iron and steel don’t vaporize until their temperature gets close to 4000 degrees F. So what does burn at a temperature capable of vaporizing steel? Incendiary compounds known as thermate and thermite, which burn at 4500 degrees F. See more about this later in this article.)
3 Various explosions (some quite powerful) were seen, heard and felt by hundreds of people, including many firemen and policemen, prior to the collapse of the twin towers, but occurred well after the airliners collided with the buildings.
4 Huge numbers of extremely tiny iron spherules (formed when steel or iron vaporizes at extremely high temperatures) can be found in most of the 9/11 dust samples. (more evidence for thermite)
5 Many column sections seen in the wreckage of the twin towers were cut at 45-degree angles, and have, close to the cut lines, previously-melted 'drippings' produced when the steel was melted at a temperature much higher than can be produced by an acetylene torch. This kind of angle cut can be used to direct the falling beam inward.
Source for the above information is http://www.ae911truth.org, which is the web site of an investigative organization whose 200+ members are all either professional architects or professional engineers.
If there were no high-powered explosives detonated inside the twin towers, as the official explanation contends, then defenders of that official explanation must provide us with an alternate theory as to how those column and/or beam sections got embedded in the sides of buildings that were 400 feet away. (The compressed air created by floors collapsing one upon the other could provide nowhere near the energy required to propel a 20-ton beam or column section that far.) In addition, defenders of the official explanation must provide us with a plausible fuel source for the temperatures approaching 4000 degrees F. which would have been necessary to vaporize parts of many of the steel beam remnants found in the wreckage.
The evidence for incendiary cutting of steel consists of the video evidence, the forensic evidence in the dust and rubble, and the testimony of eyewitness early responders and survivors who saw glowing molten metal flowing out of window openings. These incendiary events and the forensic evidence strongly suggest that the official story is wrong. The chemistry of the iron-aluminum-rich microspheres that are found in the dust from the rubble, the chemical content of these microspheres suggest that the official story is wrong. http://www.journalof911studies.com/volu ... emistryWTC
So when could the explosives and incendiary materials have been planted?
The official record shows that various floors of each of the twin towers were completely closed off 'for repairs,' for days at a time. Monitoring TV cameras on these floors were disconnected.
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/20 ... world.html. Owner Larry Silverstein was perhaps in on the deal. Why suspect this? Well, for one thing he received a fabulous insurance settlement, after purchasing the WTC complex just weeks earlier under unusual circumstances. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein.html. The terrorist attack on the twin towers saved him the immense expense of having the towers demolished in the conventional way. (The towers had many structural problems. Two applications to have the buildings demolished were submitted by the previous owners because of the advanced galvanic corrosion that was taking place at each of the thousands of joints where aluminum parts were mistakenly put in tight contact with steel structural members.) http://redlineav.com/tsg.deposition.contd.2.html
There is plenty of evidence to suggest that explosives and incendiary compounds might have been planted at strategic locations within the Twin Towers. For example:
Bomb-sniffing dogs were inexplicably prevented from doing their job in the Twin Towers five days before 9-11
Various floors in the Twin Towers had been evacuated a number of times in the weeks preceding 9/11
There was a ‘power-down’ in parts of the Twin Towers on the weekend before 9/11, security cameras were shut down, and many workers ran around busily doing things unobserved.
And, as an interesting coincidence, a Bush-linked company ran security at the trade center, thus giving it free reign within the buildings.
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/20 ... world.html
In addition to these facts, demolition-and-building-collapse experts have raised the possibility of "explosive tenants" -- i.e. tenants in the Twin Towers who might have planted explosives in their own rented office spaces. http://911blogger.com/node/2487
1 | 2 | 3
-
wcaclimbing
- Posts: 5598
- Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 10:09 pm
- Location: In your quantum box....Maybe.
- Contact:
soundout9 wrote:wcaclimbing wrote:TL/DR
summary for the lazy people, please?
The gov set-up 9/11
Americans, just get over it already! Does it really matter if the government set up 9/11? NO, because it is the past. Just STFU about it already, NO ONE CARES WHAT YOU CONSPIRACY IDIOTS HAVE TO FUCKING SAY.
KraphtOne wrote:when you sign up a new account one of the check boxes should be "do you want to foe colton24 (it is highly recommended) "
soundout9 wrote:wcaclimbing wrote:TL/DR
summary for the lazy people, please?
The gov set-up 9/11
Here’s some of the evidence that prompts them to call for a new investigation:
* 20-ton sections of steel beams were propelled, laterally, for a distance of up to 400 feet where they lodged in the sides of nearby buildings. (See video footage of this at http://www.ae911truth.org.
* Molten metal was seen (and videotaped) gushing out the side of one of the twin towers. (Why is this significant? Jet fuel burns at 1800 degrees Fahrenheit while office furniture, rugs and computers burn at an even lower temperature. Iron and steel don’t vaporize until their temperature gets close to 4000 degrees F. So what does burn at a temperature capable of vaporizing steel? Incendiary compounds known as thermate and thermite, which burn at 4500 degrees F. See more about this later in this article.)
* Various explosions (some quite powerful) were seen, heard and felt by hundreds of people, including many firemen and policemen, prior to the collapse of the twin towers, but occurred well after the airliners collided with the buildings.
* Huge numbers of extremely tiny iron spherules (formed when steel or iron vaporizes at extremely high temperatures) can be found in most of the 9/11 dust samples. (more evidence for thermite)
* Many column sections seen in the wreckage of the twin towers were cut at 45-degree angles, and have, close to the cut lines, previously-melted 'drippings' produced when the steel was melted at a temperature much higher than can be produced by an acetylene torch. This kind of angle cut can be used to direct the falling beam inward.
THE DEBATE IS OVER...
JESUS SAVES!!!
PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.
JESUS SAVES!!!
Alright, enough, we get it already. Blah, blah, blah ... controlled demolition ... temperature of burning jet fuel ... explosions ... free-fall faster than terminal velocity. Let me know if I missed anything.
You know what, just for fun, lets say you're right. Lets assume that the buildings did undergo a controlled demolition, the sounds in fact were bombs, ect. Even if this was the case, why does the government have to be responsible for it? Perhaps terrorists planted bombs to do the actual damage, but used the planes to cause doubt and suspicion to spread through people such as yourself and cause the people to doubt the government. This would then lead them to speak out against the government and cause unrest, ultimately leading to a weaker government that takes less action in foreign policy and regulation of the nation.
Isn't the crazed international conspiracy just as likely to come from the opposite side of the argument?
You know what, just for fun, lets say you're right. Lets assume that the buildings did undergo a controlled demolition, the sounds in fact were bombs, ect. Even if this was the case, why does the government have to be responsible for it? Perhaps terrorists planted bombs to do the actual damage, but used the planes to cause doubt and suspicion to spread through people such as yourself and cause the people to doubt the government. This would then lead them to speak out against the government and cause unrest, ultimately leading to a weaker government that takes less action in foreign policy and regulation of the nation.
Isn't the crazed international conspiracy just as likely to come from the opposite side of the argument?
J-Duds wrote:Alright, enough, we get it already. Blah, blah, blah ... controlled demolition ... temperature of burning jet fuel ... explosions ... free-fall faster than terminal velocity. Let me know if I missed anything.
You know what, just for fun, lets say you're right. Lets assume that the buildings did undergo a controlled demolition, the sounds in fact were bombs, ect. Even if this was the case, why does the government have to be responsible for it? Perhaps terrorists planted bombs to do the actual damage, but used the planes to cause doubt and suspicion to spread through people such as yourself and cause the people to doubt the government. This would then lead them to speak out against the government and cause unrest, ultimately leading to a weaker government that takes less action in foreign policy and regulation of the nation.
Isn't the crazed international conspiracy just as likely to come from the opposite side of the argument?
lol...yeah imagine hundreds of arabs going inside the towers to set it up.....unnoticed! Now THAT is nutty!
And it still wouldn't explain why our air force stood down!
Last edited by jay_a2j on Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
THE DEBATE IS OVER...
JESUS SAVES!!!
PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.
JESUS SAVES!!!
-
static_ice
- Posts: 9174
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:51 am
-
edwinissweet
- Posts: 1342
- Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 7:59 pm
- Location: cozumel
-
vtmarik
- Posts: 3863
- Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 9:51 am
- Location: Riding on the waves of fear and loathing.
- Contact:
jay_a2j wrote:lol...yeah imagine hundreds of arabs going inside the towers to set it up.....unnoticed! Now THAT is nutty!
As opposed to workers and demolitions teams wrapping hammersacks around the actual beams and support structures. That wouldn't of raised any eyebrows at all!
And it still wouldn't explain why our air force stood down!
What are you blabbing about now?
Initiate discovery! Fire the Machines! Throw the switch Igor! THROW THE F***ING SWITCH!
Frigidus wrote:jay_a2j wrote:And it still wouldn't explain why our air force stood down!
Most hijackers before 9/11 would hold the plane hostage and make demands, not run themselves into buildings.
How many minutes elapsed between the first tower being hit and the second? The FAA knew 4 planes had been hi-jacked. Our fighter planes remained on the ground.... they could have been in the air in minutes following the first tower collision. Yet.....they stood down.....
THE DEBATE IS OVER...
JESUS SAVES!!!
PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.
JESUS SAVES!!!
vtmarik wrote:jay_a2j wrote:lol...yeah imagine hundreds of arabs going inside the towers to set it up.....unnoticed! Now THAT is nutty!
As opposed to workers and demolitions teams wrapping hammersacks around the actual beams and support structures. That wouldn't of raised any eyebrows at all!
Security Guard: Hey, what are you guys doing over there?
"Maintenance Worker": Uh...reinforcing the beams.
SG: There sure are a lot of wires and explosives on those reinforcements.
"MW": Yah, those are er...very useful for reinforcement purposes. Here's a quarter.
SG: Oooooooooo, shiny. I'll forget this ever happened and never bring it up if something catastrophic were to occur.
-
peanutsdad
- Posts: 718
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 9:16 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: behind you
Ahhhh, the second best load of crap i've heard all year!!!!! Come on you conspiracy freaks, the gov. did not set up 9/11. For all the fools that think this is true, here let me help you out. 9/11 was caused by terrorists, plain and simple, that and the lack of security that we should have already had in place in our airports and to this day don't........so there, now your all set, go back to your rooms now and start looking for the real killer JFK....
-
soundout9
- Posts: 4519
- Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 12:30 pm
- Location: Good ol' MO Clan: Next-Gen Gamers
- Contact:
static_ice wrote:Welcome back soundout, and while this is a nice attempt at "an intelligent thread", I honestly prefer your spamming over this thread.
well remember this post?Political Soundout9
Smart Soundout9 Mad
xtra-like Soundout9
Mod? Soundout9
Flamer Soundout9
Retard Soundout9
Spam-hater Soundout9
Flirting Soundout9
Cheating Soundout9
Well guess which one i choose
edwinissweet wrote:wtf... soundout last guy that talked about conspiracies got banned from the forums
Ahhh but I am much wisser than him...and don't put people on my ignore list cause they don't play by made up rules
