10 Lies About 9/11 - Conspiracy This is the start to my conspiracy suspections

[fermin25 3]

I almost never believe in conspiracy theories, some of them are ridiculous. But in the morning 9/11 I had my doubts when I watched the video of the fall of World Trade Center, over and over again. The first question was, If a plane have the power to collapse a building, Why did the terrorist only use 6 planes when they could hijack a lot of planes? And why the WTC collapse like a demolition? Why this? Why that? I had doubts all the time and I thought and thougth but I was a child and never imagine that the own American Goverment could be behind the attacks until I saw the Zeigest documental.

 

Well I have watched a lot of documentaries and I am going to post topics related to the 9/11 here if you dont mind to expose the truth about 9/11. Please dont be closed mind. If you have prejuices please push "Alt + F4" in your keyboard right now.

 

Well I am going to start with the compilation of "Lies" about the official version:

1) Using a laptop in a cave in Afghanistan and 19 Saudi Arabian hijackers with box-cutters, Osama Bin Laden fooled the most expensive and sophisticated military defense establishment in the history the world. We accept this official explanation that Bin Laden did it even though no evidence has been provided that proves this.

 

 

2) The attacks of 9/11 are the result of "intelligence failures."

 

 

3) 9/11 was a "New Pearl Harbor." We unquestionably accept this paradigm and prepare for a righteous world war.

 

 

4) Bin Laden and Al Qaeda constitute America's #1 enemy. We forget that both Bin Laden and Al Qaeda are fabrications of American intelligence agencies like the CIA.

 

 

5) Three WTC buildings exploded, disintegrated, and collapsed at nearly the speed of gravity due to the impact of hijacked airliners into the buildings and the jet fuel fires. We believe this even though:

 

a. no steel buildings have ever collapsed due to fires and it is physically impossible for them to do so,

 

 

b. Building 7 was never hit by any kind of aircraft, and c) the planes that hit the WTC 1 and 2 most probably were not the hijacked airliners, but rather military drones steered by remote control.

 

 

 

6) The Pentagon was hit by Flight 77. And all the debris and human remains of this approximately 100-ton Boeing 767 disappeared because they were completely incinerated by jet fuel fires. We believe this story, even though:

 

a. the hole in the West Wing of the Pentagon is only 16 feet across and

 

b. no images of a Boeing 767 striking the Pentagon have been shown on any video tape. We are ignorant or unconcerned about the fact that

 

 

c. within 5 minutes of the crash, FBI agents confiscated surveillance camera film from three nearby buildings and have never released these to the public. Expert 9/11 researchers believe that what actually hit the Pentagon was a missile followed by a military aircraft such as a Global Hawk or F-16 fighter.

 

 

8) The U.S. government would never be involved in attacks upon "the Homeland." We believe this despite a long succession of "synthetic terror" events that have been staged in the past by our own government in order to galvanize public opinion to support imperial wars abroad and frighten them into giving up their civil liberties.

 

 

9) The U.S. needs to spend upwards of $450 billion a year to prosecute an endless "war on terrorism" in order to defend itself against state-less Al Qaeda "terrorists." We believe this even though:

 

 

a. the U.N. has estimated there are only about 2000 to 3000 members of Al Qaeda worldwide, and

 

b. Al Qaeda itself was created and funded and is still controlled by the CIA,

 

c) numerous documents prepared by neoconservative think tanks indicate that the goal of the Bush administration is to establish "full spectrum dominance" of the world, i.e., a global Pax Americana.

 

 

 

10) Probably the biggest lie of all is the "war on terrorism;" the notion that the U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan had anything at all to do with 9/11 or Osama bin Laden and the 19 alleged hijackers.

 

 

 

11) Finally, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, we still like to believe that the U.S. government acts in our best interests rather than in the interests of its corporate sponsors.

 

 

Each of these "Big Lies," by itself, is outrageous and preposterous. But you accept them because:

 

1) 9/11 was a fairly successful "psy op" against the American people,

2) we have become conditioned by the incessant barrage of propaganda we get from the mainstream media,

3) these lies are repeated over and over by all forms of media in what is called the "echo effect" (Franken, 2004; Rampton and Stauber, 2004), and

4) we feel we have to believe them in order to maintain our sense of safety and security. To question these lies means we must entertain some very scary realities. We might not want to learn that our government is a serial liar, torturer, thief, and murderer, indeed, a rogue, terrorist state (Chomsky, 1988, 2000; Blum, 2000). It is far easier and more comfortable to remain in the state of denial, perhaps the most over-populated state in the world.

I will post the real facts in another post later. Please be patient.

Notice from truefusion:

Quoted part taken from here.

[Echo_of_thunder 1]

hmmm will I only can tell you this much, why they collapsed was due to the weakened steel in the buildings due to the intense heat from all the jet fuel. got to remember these plane had not been in the air very long and had been heading to LA Cali. Secondly building #7 along with it surrounding buildings had been damaged from the falling pieces of not just the towers but the planes. as for why hitting the WTC? easy. they had been a hub for world trade. not only American but many other countries of the world. That's why they tried to get it the 1st time. not only to screw up the USA but the world in general.

[TheDisturbedOne 1]

I almost never believe in conspiracy theories, some of them are ridiculous. But in the morning 9/11 I had my doubts when I watched the video of the fall of World Trade Center, over and over again. The first question was, If a plane have the power to collapse a building, Why did the terrorist only use 6 planes when they could hijack a lot of planes?

 

And why the WTC collapse like a demolition?

Why this? Why that? I had doubts all the time and I thought and thougth but I was a child and never imagine that the own American Goverment could be behind the attacks until I saw the Zeigest documental.

From right there I see that you don't know all the facts. They hijacked four planes. They chose to use these planes since they weren't fully booked (less people to deal with rebelling) and they were cross country flights. If they were to hijack 10 planes they would need more people, and even less attacks would be successful. Because the middle of the building was weakened and caved in due to the fire. The top floors (above where the plane hit) added to the weight (creating an almost free fall speed) and pulled the building down with it. Ever played Jenga?

Sounds like a load of bologna to me, this documental.

 

Well I have watched a lot of documentaries and I am going to post topics related to the 9/11 here if you dont mind to expose the truth about 9/11. Please dont be closed mind. If you have prejuices please push "Alt + F4" in your keyboard right now.

I have prejudice about liars, but that's about it.

 

1) Using a laptop in a cave in Afghanistan and 19 Saudi Arabian hijackers with box-cutters, Osama Bin Laden fooled the most expensive and sophisticated military defense establishment in the history the world.

 

We accept this official explanation that Bin Laden did it even though no evidence has been provided that proves this.

Indeed he did. Two bored idiots managed to fool the same system, and killed 168 people doing it (Oklahoma City Bombings). 9-11 was just a larger scale.

Other than the numerous videos showing Osama praising the attacks and the numerous training facilities that were found, you are correct about that last part.

2) The attacks of 9/11 are the result of "intelligence failures."

 

3) 9/11 was a "New Pearl Harbor." We unquestionably accept this paradigm and prepare for a righteous world war.

4) Bin Laden and Al Qaeda constitute America's #1 enemy. We forget that both Bin Laden and Al Qaeda are fabrications of American intelligence agencies like the CIA.

What?

 

5) Three WTC buildings exploded, disintegrated, and collapsed at nearly the speed of gravity due to the impact of hijacked airliners into the buildings and the jet fuel fires. We believe this even though:

 

a. no steel buildings have ever collapsed due to fires and it is physically impossible for them to do so,

 

 

b. Building 7 was never hit by any kind of aircraft, and c) the planes that hit the WTC 1 and 2 most probably were not the hijacked airliners, but rather military drones steered by remote control.

a. Three happened on the same day. These aircraft were used as missiles and were driven into the buildings at a high speed. The aircraft were FILLED with jet fuel. Add to that the weight of the many floors above it, the weakening of one main area could cause the whole building to collapse, which is EXACTLY as it happened. See: http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

 

b. You're telling me that you've never seen a fire spread to another building. Add the debris from the other two buildings, a fire can bring it down.

 

c. You're joking right? I assume you have never seen the pictures.

 

 

6) The Pentagon was hit by Flight 77. And all the debris and human remains of this approximately 100-ton Boeing 767 disappeared because they were completely incinerated by jet fuel fires. We believe this story, even though:

 

a. the hole in the West Wing of the Pentagon is only 16 feet across and

 

b. no images of a Boeing 767 striking the Pentagon have been shown on any video tape. We are ignorant or unconcerned about the fact that

 

 

c. within 5 minutes of the crash, FBI agents confiscated surveillance camera film from three nearby buildings and have never released these to the public. Expert 9/11 researchers believe that what actually hit the Pentagon was a missile followed by a military aircraft such as a Global Hawk or F-16 fighter.

See: http://www.oilempire.us/pentagon-photos.html

a. http://www.oilempire.us/oil-jpg/hole11.jpg 16 feet is a load of bolonga.

 

b. The security cameras at the Pentagon didn't capture it because the plane was moving so fast!

 

c. See the website. In re to the tapes, whenever a crime is committed, surveillance tapes are always seized if they may have images of the crime. It happens all the time. A good amount of the time they are never released to the public either.

 

8) The U.S. government would never be involved in attacks upon "the Homeland." We believe this despite a long succession of "synthetic terror" events that have been staged in the past by our own government in order to galvanize public opinion to support imperial wars abroad and frighten them into giving up their civil liberties.

What?

 

9) The U.S. needs to spend upwards of $450 billion a year to prosecute an endless "war on terrorism" in order to defend itself against state-less Al Qaeda "terrorists." We believe this even though:

 

 

a. the U.N. has estimated there are only about 2000 to 3000 members of Al Qaeda worldwide, and

 

b. Al Qaeda itself was created and funded and is still controlled by the CIA,

 

c) numerous documents prepared by neoconservative think tanks indicate that the goal of the Bush administration is to establish "full spectrum dominance" of the world, i.e., a global Pax Americana.

a. Wouldn't you want those 2000 to 3000 jailed and prosecuted? Obama is continuing the war as well.

 

b. Another joke.

 

c. That goes against 99% if not 100% of the conservative mentality.

 

 

10) Probably the biggest lie of all is the "war on terrorism;" the notion that the U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan had anything at all to do with 9/11 or Osama bin Laden and the 19 alleged hijackers.

You're telling me that the Taliban had nothing to do with 9-11? They were in control of Afghanistan before we came in.

As for Iraq, the USA helped to take down one of the largest mass murderers in history, and prosecuted him as well. Sure it had nothing to do with 9-11, but we still made progress there.

 

 

11) Finally, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, we still like to believe that the U.S. government acts in our best interests rather than in the interests of its corporate sponsors.

I never believed that. The less government, the better.

[Watermonkey 0]

Wow. I can see why you're "Disturbed". It must be painful for you when a ray of truth is shown piercing your dark reality.

 

Every time your say "what", you appear to just dismiss what has been quoted instead of actually thinking and analyzing. Right above you say, "another joke." What does that mean? Are you not aware that "Al Quadia" (however you spell it) is a creation of the CIA? I thought that was common knowledge. Building 7 came down after the owner of the Port Authority, can't recall his name (Silverstien), said "Pull it.", common vernacular in the building demolition world. He admitted to this on national television. It came down at free-fall speed after the area was cleared of people in a perfectly executed demolition that must have taken months to plan. Buildings 1 and 2 did the same thing, at the same speed, and only one thing can explain that: Controlled demolition. You're a fool if you believe Kerosene can melt structural steel. (For the uninitiated, Jet fuel= Kerosene= JP-4= Diesel -for all practical purposes. My ATV can take any of those fuels and run just fine, all of them have similar burning characteristics, British Thermal Units, and temps.) Perhaps if it burned for a year or two, and even then the weakened steel wouldn't be so uniform as to bring the building straight down into its own footprint at free-fall speed. It's obvious for anyone with working vision and a TV that the fuel was nearly completely consumed in fire within a few seconds of impact. Common! No one can be that blind! I've had my wood burning appliance so hot the metal on the top glowed orange, and I'm betting that's as hot as Kerosene (diesel) would burn, and it's still structurally sound. Granted, it's garbage steel compared to structural steel, but by your logic and unsound science it'd be a melted pool of metal burning its way through my concrete foundation, much like what was found to be in the sub-floors of the twin towers for weeks after the event. Yes, something melted the steel in those buildings, but it wasn't JP-4. There was a scheduled drill at NORTHCOM that very morning to simulate the exact event that allegedly occurred, hijackers flying planes into the twin towers and pentagon and Richard (can't say "*BLEEP*" here for some reason LOL) Cheney was there to tell them to stand down when requests came in to dispatch fighter jets to intercept the remaining planes.

 

I could go on and on and on and on, but there's just no waking up the people who can't even acknowledge that false flag events have occurred in this country in the past. Two of the most famous are the attack on Pearl Harbor Dec 07, 1941 and the Gulf of Tonkin incident that got us in to S.E. Asia, a winnable war over opium (not unlike Afghanistan today) that was lost intentionally. There was also the scenario brought to the table during the JFK administration that the president rejected involving attacking our own military assents in the Bay of Pigs or somewhere in the Cuban waters then blaming it on Cuba to start a war with them. Operation Northwoods I think it was called. These three events are relatively common knowledge because the U.S. government has declassified them and admitted to the truth behind them. From a link I posted below:

In 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff had envisaged a secret plan entitled "Operation Northwoods, to deliberately trigger civilian casualties to justify the invasion of Cuba:

 

"We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," "We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington" "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation." (See the declassified Top Secret 1962 document titled "Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba", See Operation Northwoods at http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/NOR111A.html ).

You ask about the Taliban? Why in the world would you think they had something to do with 9-1-1? Because of Bin Laden? Believe the propaganda if you want, but they put down the opium crops there, but here come the Americans and now? Three times the opium crops are being grown and they're being protected by American soldiers. Think they signed up for that? And on and on... nothing to see here, move along...

 

If you're ready to see, start with infowars.com, then move on to listen to shows on the Republic Broadcast Network.

Edited November 23, 2009 by Watermonkey (see edit history)

[buxgoddess 1]

There seems to be more of a nuisance going on with the 9/11 incident. With reports coming that Bin Laden is still alive in the Pesawar district of Pakistan and is still making plans, it seems a bit ridiculous to believe that a mastermind like Laden will take a decade to plan another attack. I definitely doubt the intelligence system of any country for that matter to be intelligent enough to figure out what the terrorists are planning behind closed doors. The stories that the intelligence was able to trace the plan and get to action by avoiding the damage or attack is a bull *BLEEP*. I can guarantee that out of 100 plans such made not even two gets to the intelligence branch. If you compare the number of attacks hat have been occurring in countries like Iraq after the Gulf war, Pakistan after the Afgan war and India with the ongoing war with Pakistani ISI military, you will bet and agree that the intelligence system is a farce and is just wasting the national resource and money. Whenever a terror attack fails the credit goes to the intelligence bureau bur 90 percent of attacks go undetected until the damage is done.The 9/11 was an intelligence failure no doubt about that but then there are reports and evidence that the attack was not only by air but also on the ground where adequate measures were taken months before to amplify the attack. The presence of excess people on the twin tower that day also indicates that there were plans made to bring in more people into the towers

[Spudd 0]

The 9/11 conspiracies grow old. The government has nothing to gain from the destruction of a landmark and the loss of 3,000 innocent lives. Some of the "facts" in your post aren't even true, which makes the whole thing look poorly thought through and bogus. Random statistics and details that don't support the main point are also present here. Then there's garbage in there like this:

9) The U.S. needs to spend upwards of $450 billion a year to prosecute an endless "war on terrorism" in order to defend itself against state-less Al Qaeda "terrorists." We believe this even though:

a. the U.N. has estimated there are only about 2000 to 3000 members of Al Qaeda worldwide, and


b. Al Qaeda itself was created and funded and is still controlled by the CIA,

c) numerous documents prepared by neoconservative think tanks indicate that the goal of the Bush administration is to establish "full spectrum dominance" of the world, i.e., a global Pax Americana.

It's nothing but outlandish speculations and wild accusations. Point A has no reason to be there, B is a statement of conjecture presented as fact with no backing whatsoever, C is also an over the top accusation without backing. Where's the proof? Where is the evidence? There is none. You are creating a conspiracy where there is none. While it may be cool to think about some big underlying conspiracy that goes all the way to the top, if you have no proof you shouldn't go around spreading it. Your article is a statement of a theory, and a theory full of holes at that.

[anwiii 17]

well said. thank you for speaking up. i kept looking at this thread and my emotions would immediately turn to anger that people would turn 911 and the destruction caused by it in to a u.s. government conspiracy and cover-up. it's unthinkable. if it was a conspircay and pre planned and the truth came to light, there would be no more government. there would be a revolt. maybe another civil war where the nation is split.

i know our goverment isn't perfect and i can probably safely assume their were conspiracies in the past and some ideas behind theories are correct, but this event sure does not deserve ideas behind a conspiracy.

i am not a perfect person nor a perfect america, but i am an american who loves this country and to believe anyone who can post or believe in any conpiracies behind 911 is UN-AMERICAN.

it made me sick reading what i did in this thread and i knew all i could do is close out or get banned from posting again because of my bluntness and uncaring thoughts towards people who can write such nonsense.

all this thread was about was the intention to plant seeds in american peoples minds to stand against the u.s. government. and in my opinion, anyone who can do that needs to be questioned an interogated to protect the liberties and freedoms people have a right to in the united states and against the seeds that others may want to plant to turn against the country and government that guides us.

The 9/11 conspiracies grow old. The government has nothing to gain from the destruction of a landmark and the loss of 3,000 innocent lives. Some of the "facts" in your post aren't even true, which makes the whole thing look poorly thought through and bogus. Random statistics and details that don't support the main point are also present here. Then there's garbage in there like this:


It's nothing but outlandish speculations and wild accusations. Point A has no reason to be there, B is a statement of conjecture presented as fact with no backing whatsoever, C is also an over the top accusation without backing. Where's the proof? Where is the evidence? There is none. You are creating a conspiracy where there is none. While it may be cool to think about some big underlying conspiracy that goes all the way to the top, if you have no proof you shouldn't go around spreading it. Your article is a statement of a theory, and a theory full of holes at that.

[Watermonkey 0]

I don't know why it's so difficult to do a simple internet search. Type in "cia al-qaeda history" and see what you come up with. I randomly chose this article and will quote the introduction here and add bold to highlight important details to this discussion.

 

Introduction

 

One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to "fabricate an enemy". The "outside enemy" personified by Osama bin Laden is "threatening America".

 

Pre-emptive war directed against "Islamic terrorists" is required to defend the Homeland. Realities are turned upside down. America is under attack.

 

In the wake of 9/11, the creation of this "outside enemy" has served to obfuscate the real economic and strategic objectives behind the war in the Middle East and Central Asia. Waged on the grounds of self-defense, the pre-emptive war is upheld as a "just war" with a humanitarian mandate.

 

As anti-war sentiment grows and the political legitimacy the Bush Administration falters, doubts regarding the existence of this illusive "outside enemy" must be dispelled.

 

Counter-terrorism and war propaganda are intertwined. The propaganda apparatus feeds disinformation into the news chain. The terror warnings must appear to be "genuine". The objective is to present the terror groups as "enemies of America."

 

Ironically, Al Qaeda --the "outside enemy of America" as well as the alleged architect of the 9/11 attacks-- is a creation of the CIA.

 

From the outset of the Soviet-Afghan war in the early 1980s, the US intelligence apparatus has supported the formation of the "Islamic brigades". Propaganda purports to erase the history of Al Qaeda, drown the truth and "kill the evidence" on how this "outside enemy" was fabricated and transformed into "Enemy Number One".

 

The US intelligence apparatus has created it own terrorist organizations. And at the same time, it creates its own terrorist warnings concerning the terrorist organizations which it has itself created. Meanwhile, a cohesive multibillion dollar counterterrorism program "to go after" these terrorist organizations has been put in place.

 

Portrayed in stylized fashion by the Western media, Osama bin Laden, supported by his various henchmen, constitutes Americas post-Cold war bogeyman, who "threatens Western democracy". The alleged threat of "Islamic terrorists", permeates the entire US national security doctrine. Its purpose is to justify wars of aggression in the Middle East, while establishing within America, the contours of the Homeland Security State.

See the rest of the article if you're interested in learning something new. If not, please, put your blinders on tightly and close your eyes. Everything will be all right. http://www.globalresearch.ca/al-qaeda-and-the-war-on-terrorism/7718 (Sorry. It's been too long and I don't recall how to make that a nice clickable link. If a mod wants to modify it, I'd welcome that. Thanks.)
Edited November 22, 2009 by Watermonkey (see edit history)

[anwiii 17]

when your opening line to support conspirosy theories is to pinpoint 1 person and call him disturbed. discredits anything you have to say in the future as you are grabbing on to thin air while falling to your imminent death in your personal beliefs in what you read about theories. for ever circumstance that happened on 9/11. there are multimple theories. not just one. theories that put seeds in to brainless americans that can't think for themselves to understand the realistic possibilities. 9/11 was not about government control but it did give the perfect excuse to prepare ourselves for a safer future. alot of the original theories were started when certain people were misquoting other people. other theories were based on batent lies that could easily be disproved. other theories in what 1 or two people noticed in photographs were disproved. even the theory about the pentagon and the whole smalled than the wingspan of an airplane.

 

as far as the cia and the reation to the taliban, i have no doubts they are related in one way shape or form, but however they are related for intelligence purposes had no relation to 9/11 events.

 

you can quote all you want about theories and speculations. you can even quote from simi respectable sources. that would be no different that quoting from the american media to expose and discredit all the post 9/11 theories.

 

they don't call them conspiracy theories for nothing. all they are are theories. no facts to support them. only lies, misquotes, seeing things in pictures that weren't there, and a wild imagination.

 

you talk about learning something new, and if we don't want to, we should put our blinders on. when you have facts to support your beliefs without using theories as your own imaginary world of facts, then please....teach me something new. otherwise, maybe you should open your own eyes.

 

you seem to think you can talk about the cia like you know more than most in the general population....when in fact, you know didly squat and rely on outside sources of the united states to believe in to to plant little seeds in your own head because you are incapable of coming up with your own beliefs.

 

fact- every theory about 9/11 that happened that day has been discredited....like the fires that took down the buildings. what the original poster did post about because he's anti-american and didn't want to include the realistic possibilities is that the fires didn't have to melt the steal. they only had to weaken the steal.

 

anyway, you discredit your own self by calling someone disturbed within your opening lines...and rather than state facts, only theories and by quoting sources that aren't reliable.

 

you, are the one disturbed. you are weak minded who has no ability to distinguish fact from fiction. and this anti-america talk about how our government killed innocent people to protect a nations future is ridiculous.

 

let me ask you something oh wise one. why didn't these thories start popping up soon after 9/11? why did it take years before theories started to arise? maybe just time enough to make up a story and get recognized if their imagination is ever to become true in their own little world of fairy tales.

 

one of the main theories was 9/11 was pre planned by the united states goverment. there were no theories about this pre 9/11. your talk about the cia and alqaeda history has nothing to do with 9/11 theories. in fact...the theorists were watching t.v. like all the rest of the american public in dismay without a theory.....oh...until a couple years later.....hahaha!

 

you're a joke. now go change your diapers since this has been a messy bed wetting experience for you.

 

I don't know why it's so difficult to do a simple internet search. Type in "cia al-qaeda history" and see what you come up with. I randomly chose this article and will quote the introduction here and add bold to highlight important details to this discussion.

 

 

 

See the rest of the article if you're interested in learning something new. If not, please, put your blinders on tightly and close your eyes. Everything will be all right. http://www.globalresearch.ca/al-qaeda-and-the-war-on-terrorism/7718 (Sorry. It's been too long and I don't recall how to make that a nice clickable link. If a mod wants to modify it, I'd welcome that. Thanks.)

[Watermonkey 0]

Anwiii: I don't know if you noticed, but "Disturbed" is found within a poster's handle: "TheDisturbedOne". I was referring to that in my opening line. If he has something to say about it, let him. I don't think he needs you to come to his defense. If my using his name to cast light upon his conclusions necessarily casts doubt upon my views, then you're only using superficial baseless arguments to discredit what I've written. If you have something to argue, by all means, bring it. If you're only going to bring insults and ignorance to the conversation, you'll be talking to yourself.

The theories regarding what happened on Sept. 11 2001 began that day, some would say they began some time before the events actually took place. It certainly didn't take years or even months for them to form. It's like the Ft. Hood shooting. The following day I was listening to Lame Stream talk radio and someone brought up the fact that only an incredible marksman could have generated that kind of causality rate on a military base no less. It was immediately and falsely dismissed by the host of the program, but it's one of the main details that simply doesn't fit the facts and leads one to believe that there's something missing in the official news reports. Like, for starters, there was more than one shooter. Same thing occurred to me on the morning of Sept. 11. I watched as those buildings fell and immediately began to question the story because I knew buildings don't just fall in like that unless there are high paid experts behind the scenes making them fall neatly. In the history of the world with the exception of the buildings that came down on that day, there has never been a single case of a high-rise steel re-enforced building collapsing from fire. Buildings have burned for days and not collapsed, yet on a single day three buildings are destroyed and you believe they came down because there were fires in them? I call that belief pure naivety, plain and simple.

I won't tolerate any more personal attacks from you Anwiii. You've been warned.

I'll take this discussion one step further than the OP did. Let's list the reasons buildings don't behave as WTC buildings allegedly did on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001. From http://www.ae911truth.org/ :

As seen in this revealing photo, the Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all of the characteristics of destruction by explosives: (and some non-standard characteristics)
1. Destruction proceeds through the path of greatest resistance at nearly free-fall acceleration
2. Improbable symmetry of debris distribution
3. Extremely rapid onset of destruction
4. Over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes
5. Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally 600 ft at 60 mph
6. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking
7. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
8. 1200-foot-dia. debris field: no "pancaked" floors found
9. Isolated explosive ejections 20 40 stories below demolition front
10. Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame
11. Several tons of molten metal found under all 3 high-rises
12. Evidence of thermite incendiaries found by FEMA in steel samples
13. Evidence of explosives found in dust samples
14. No precedent for steel-framed high-rise collapse due to fire

And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.

1. Slow onset with large visible deformations
2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)
3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never collapsed

Edited November 23, 2009 by Watermonkey (see edit history)

[anwiii 17]

hahaha look at this fool making up theries as he goes along. none of them substantiated with any facts or evidence...and would say maybe he is falling prey to rumors, but i don't think so. i think he likes making things up as he goes along. maybe He should change his handle to the disturbed one. hahaha again. what a joke. oh....and a foreigner no doubt. just like the one who started this thread. someone who obviously wants to guide the citizens of another country to disgrace it.haha you're fairy tales would make a great movie. i think you should get started writing your fictional book right away before you come to your senses in the real worldyou are warning me? wow. you ARE disturbed haha is that supposed to scare me in to not posting an opinion? if anyone has an opinion other than your fairy tale rumors, you are going to threaten them? dude, please...please please come back to reality hahaha you discredit yourself better than i could ever doand as far as coming to the defense of the disturbed one, i did no such thing. what i did was point out the fact that you had to start your conversations with insults which totally discredits anything productive you are trying to say. this is true.so i have to know....i find your whole converation humorous.....warn me against what? hahaha please....do tell....

[Watermonkey 0]

From right there I see that you don't know all the facts. They hijacked four planes. They chose to use these planes since they weren't fully booked (less people to deal with rebelling) and they were cross country flights. If they were to hijack 10 planes they would need more people, and even less attacks would be successful. Because the middle of the building was weakened and caved in due to the fire. The top floors (above where the plane hit) added to the weight (creating an almost free fall speed) and pulled the building down with it. Ever played Jenga?Sounds like a load of bologna to me, this documental.


I have prejudice about liars, but that's about it.


Indeed he did. Two bored idiots managed to fool the same system, and killed 168 people doing it (Oklahoma City Bombings). 9-11 was just a larger scale.
Other than the numerous videos showing Osama praising the attacks and the numerous training facilities that were found, you are correct about that last part.

What?


a. Three happened on the same day. These aircraft were used as missiles and were driven into the buildings at a high speed. The aircraft were FILLED with jet fuel. Add to that the weight of the many floors above it, the weakening of one main area could cause the whole building to collapse, which is EXACTLY as it happened. See: http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

b. You're telling me that you've never seen a fire spread to another building. Add the debris from the other two buildings, a fire can bring it down.

c. You're joking right? I assume you have never seen the pictures.



See: http://www.oilempire.us/pentagon-photos.html
a. http://www.oilempire.us/oil-jpg/hole11.jpg 16 feet is a load of bolonga.

b. The security cameras at the Pentagon didn't capture it because the plane was moving so fast!

c. See the website. In re to the tapes, whenever a crime is committed, surveillance tapes are always seized if they may have images of the crime. It happens all the time. A good amount of the time they are never released to the public either.


What?


a. Wouldn't you want those 2000 to 3000 jailed and prosecuted? Obama is continuing the war as well.

b. Another joke.

c. That goes against 99% if not 100% of the conservative mentality.



You're telling me that the Taliban had nothing to do with 9-11? They were in control of Afghanistan before we came in.
As for Iraq, the USA helped to take down one of the largest mass murderers in history, and prosecuted him as well. Sure it had nothing to do with 9-11, but we still made progress there.



I never believed that. The less government, the better.

Thanks for putting up those links to oilempire.us.etc., Disturbedone. I had no idea there is actually a liberal think tank out there coming up with propaganda blaming the "Bush regime" and "peak oil" on the 9-1-1 events. They're actually saying the government let these events transpire because they needed cheap easy oil in the middle east. Amazing anyone would buy that considering there's more easy oil under MT, ND, SD, and AB than in all of the middle east combined. Then, of course, there's AK that has just about as much oil. Then there's pretty much everywhere else in America that's got more oil than you can shake a stick at. Did you know there's countless wells in the region of eastern MT, etc. the oil companies won't tap? The wells are capped. Did you know there are a lot fewer refineries in N. America now than there were in the 70's? It's not the oil prices that are responsible for nearly $3/gallon gasoline. It's the severe lack of refineries. Don't believe me, research it yourself. Try not to research any more from the left, though. I think you've already covered what they're selling. Seek a new angle.

[anwiii 17]

personally, i have no problem believing what you said in this post than believing that the u.s. government was responsible for 9/11. like i said in one of my previous posts. i do believe that the u.s. has covered up many things in the past. but this thread isn't about past u.s. conspiracies. it's about the 9/11 attacks.

oil has always been big business. there have been many business to try and preserve oil rights and will go to great lengths for the all might dollar. but that's business. the bush family has been involved in the oil business before sr. and jr. ever took office which lead to theories. even a movie.

although i believe there is truth in everything, i also believe in exagerated truths that lead to lies in everything. so the real truth is that nobody will ever know the truth when the truth can get lost so easily. especially with the internet age where communication world wide is more easily available and words can spread like wildfire.

this is why words should be chosen carefully. not to talk about theories and fictional events which could slander people and even a nation(which in a lot of countries is against the law and punishable by imprisonment for lible or slander).

the FACT is, all the conspiracy theories behind 9/11 have been disproven and if a person with their eyes closed doesn't see that, then they haven't done their due diligence to research it on their own and in their own time rather than take what someone else has written.

theories are funny to me. they remind me of another thread than baniboy got me involved with which was about the question, "what is the definition of an organism". there are many definitions just like there are many theories. yes, there is truth in those theories and definitions, but what is the REAL truth without the man made definitions and theories? THAT is the question.

people who come up with theories are the ones who have the closed mind. they gain a reputation of seeing one side and one side only when even the other side holds truth to it.

it's like religion and people only believing in only one religion when people can actually learn a lot more when they focus on more than one religion or "theory".

when talking about theories, the possibilities are endless....but the theories don't account for one thing. there is only one truth.

now i have my own beliefs about the u.s. government and it's hidden agendas and it's citizen control despite what is written in the constitution. but that has NOTHING to do with 9/11 and i would stake my life on it knowing what i have come to know about our government. i did see it as an easy solution to the issues we already had in the middle east though.

when talking about these issues, we can easily go in to the issue of why america doesn't disban the nuclear weapons in china...but see, those issues would be off topic in this thread

you talk about the cia which indirectly relates to top secret intellegance the u.s. holds. there is a reason why certain information isn't available to the general public and there is a reason why the american people needs to trust their own government even when a government is able to make mistakes and not knowing the mistakes until the final outcome.

it's so easy for foregners to make judgments in a country they don't even live in. now i can say a lot about canada, but i wont because i don't believe in disgracing a nation. unlike you.

i suggest sticking to hockey conversations rather than conspirosy theories that can ruin a nation if everyone believed in your fairy tales. at least you can have some pride talking about the only thing your country is good in when competing against the united states because you will LOSE in this thread and that is a FACT....not a theory.

Thanks for putting up those links to oilempire.us.etc., Disturbedone. I had no idea there is actually a liberal think tank out there coming up with propaganda blaming the "Bush regime" and "peak oil" on the 9-1-1 events. They're actually saying the government let these events transpire because they needed cheap easy oil in the middle east. Amazing anyone would buy that considering there's more easy oil under MT, ND, SD, and AB than in all of the middle east combined. Then, of course, there's AK that has just about as much oil. Then there's pretty much everywhere else in America that's got more oil than you can shake a stick at. Did you know there's countless wells in the region of eastern MT, etc. the oil companies won't tap? The wells are capped. Did you know there are a lot fewer refineries in N. America now than there were in the 70's? It's not the oil prices that are responsible for nearly $3/gallon gasoline. It's the severe lack of refineries. Don't believe me, research it yourself. Try not to research any more from the left, though. I think you've already covered what they're selling. Seek a new angle.

[Watermonkey 0]

personally, i have no problem believing what you said in this post than believing that the u.s. government was responsible for 9/11. like i said in one of my previous posts. i do believe that the u.s. has covered up many things in the past. but this thread isn't about past u.s. conspiracies. it's about the 9/11 attacks.

Sometimes you have to study history to determine what's happening in the present and attempt to stop bad things from happening in the future.

 

oil has always been big business. there have been many business to try and preserve oil rights and will go to great lengths for the all might dollar. but that's business. the bush family has been involved in the oil business before sr. and jr. ever took office which lead to theories. even a movie.

 

although i believe there is truth in everything, i also believe in exagerated truths that lead to lies in everything. so the real truth is that nobody will ever know the truth when the truth can get lost so easily. especially with the internet age where communication world wide is more easily available and words can spread like wildfire.

 

this is why words should be chosen carefully. not to talk about theories and fictional events which could slander people and even a nation(which in a lot of countries is against the law and punishable by imprisonment for lible or slander).

So, you don't believe in the First Amendment to the Constitution?

 

the FACT is, all the conspiracy theories behind 9/11 have been disproven and if a person with their eyes closed doesn't see that, then they haven't done their due diligence to research it on their own and in their own time rather than take what someone else has written.

If all conspiracy theories behind 9/11 have been disproven, then the government's own theory must be included, or are you calling their theory, "fact"? It's not fact, it's just what they're telling you it is. That doesn't make it fact. And who, pray, has disproven these other theories you've mentioned? A popular science magazine article doesn't qualify as proof. Any time a politician whose last name isn't "Paul" opens his/her mouth, it's almost inevitable lies will spew forth. So, we can conclude that the odds are excellent that any time you hear the main stream media "report" something from the government, it's going to be twisted, skewed, or outright false because the media doesn't actually do any actual investigative research anymore, they just regurgitate what the White House Press Secretary has approved for public consumption.

 

theories are funny to me. they remind me of another thread than baniboy got me involved with which was about the question, "what is the definition of an organism". there are many definitions just like there are many theories. yes, there is truth in those theories and definitions, but what is the REAL truth without the man made definitions and theories? THAT is the question.

There is a group of people who believe as sure they can be the earth is flat. That's their truth and you can't talk them out it. But that just doesn't make it so. I think it just depends upon what you're willing to believe. If you just can't believe your government lies to you, then so be it. Nothing I present to you will change that. But to discount the evidence as rubbish and many thousands of degreed engineers and architects as being full of it without consideration of the extra weight their word carries as a function of their education and experience in their discipline, makes you a fool, in my opinion. That's not just directed at you, Anwiii, but to anyone who would discount the evidence and not believe their own eyes but believe the lies told to them from the media or anyone else for that matter. That's the literal definition of "putting your head in the sand".

 

people who come up with theories are the ones who have the closed mind. they gain a reputation of seeing one side and one side only when even the other side holds truth to it.

So in your world, someone who thinks outside the box or expresses any kind of independent thought is close minded? And you think I've discredited myself? Wow.

 

it's like religion and people only believing in only one religion when people can actually learn a lot more when they focus on more than one religion or "theory".

 

when talking about theories, the possibilities are endless....but the theories don't account for one thing. there is only one truth.

Your truth?

 

now i have my own beliefs about the u.s. government and it's hidden agendas and it's citizen control despite what is written in the constitution. but that has NOTHING to do with 9/11 and i would stake my life on it knowing what i have come to know about our government. i did see it as an easy solution to the issues we already had in the middle east though.

 

when talking about these issues, we can easily go in to the issue of why america doesn't disban the nuclear weapons in china...but see, those issues would be off topic in this thread

So in your world, America has the right to disban[sic] (dis-arm) another country like China? By what right? Does a country not have the right to defend itself or is it just those countries who are allies of America that have that right? Either way, I believe if America were to try and take China's nukes from them, they'd get them the old fashioned way, the way they were intended to be delivered. HOT.

 

you talk about the cia which indirectly relates to top secret intellegance the u.s. holds. there is a reason why certain information isn't available to the general public and there is a reason why the american people needs to trust their own government even when a government is able to make mistakes and not knowing the mistakes until the final outcome.

Give me one reason to trust a group of people or an entity who time after time and time again has proven itself to be untrustworthy.

 

it's so easy for foregners to make judgments in a country they don't even live in. now i can say a lot about canada, but i wont because i don't believe in disgracing a nation. unlike you.

 

i suggest sticking to hockey conversations rather than conspirosy theories that can ruin a nation if everyone believed in your fairy tales. at least you can have some pride talking about the only thing your country is good in when competing against the united states because you will LOSE in this thread and that is a FACT....not a theory.

I thought you weren't going to say anything aboot Canada. Your ignorance speaks volumes. I'm a veteran of the U.S. Navy, honorably discharged under the conditions of Medical Retirement in 1988. I've been around the world and seen things most people I know couldn't even imagine. I've seen the government, first hand, cover up the truth. I trust my eyes, not the CGI manipulated video that is shown on your television during the nightly news hour(s). I'm a home/land owner and citizen with a current, active, valid passport of the United States of America. Care to make any more assumptions about me?

[anwiii 17]

i sure do believe in freedom of speech. what i don't believe in is to allow frodoms to hurt and slander othe4r peoples names with lies and injustice. what about you? do you believe anyone....let's say me...can contionue to slander you with lies?what government theories are you talking about? everyone saw what happened on the television.....EVERYONE. what happened is fact. not made up. what are4 you getting at??? that nothing really happened? that terrorists didn't destroy the world trade centers?anyone who thinks outside the box is a free thinker and limiting ones self. yup. you sure did discredit your self pretty good in your posts. you not only think outside the box(which is good) you believe everything your read and hear outside the box. that is NOT being a free thinkiner. you are taking someone elses idea and supporting it. all you are is a wannabe follower. you're not a free thinnker who thinks outside the box.....unless you can tell the the ridiculous lieas and theories you made up all by your lonesome.depends on the situation in why america would want to go to war. why are you talking about a nuclear war? are you sick or something? what was your point in that???i'm not asking you to trust anyone you don't want to trust. where did that come from?i didn't say anything about canada. but i will say this about you. you're a fool that may have seen a lot before deserting to canada where all you can hope for is to be snowed in right now, but you have never seen any proof to what you are writing about in this thread.oh. now you are saying the graphice to the newscasts were edited. all the home videos too. they havd computer geeks working around the clock to edit anything that came in. haha oh man,,,,,yea,,,,stay in canada! haha the u.s, doesn't want you....maybe they are the ones who told you to leave, huh?as long as we are talking about theries. i shall come up with my own about you. let me give it some thought....they really have to be believable...unlike yours...btw- did i ask for your credentials? you don't impress me. you will never impress me with your talk. seen alot? maybe you havent seen enough....medical released? yea...probably for mental reasons huh? you like to make things up as you go along in your posts.