That is so true, I like it...
That is so true, I like it...
Do I have to get the point of this video? 
I wont comment on the Rick Astley stuff. Too many horrid memories.
Conspiracy theories of 9/11 do make me laugh though. Some people are absolutely determined that there was hidden explosives to cause the towers to collapse, and that it was all a government plan.
I dont know about you guys, but I watched 9/11 happening and i'm pretty sure I saw these two bloody big airoplanes hit the towers, I suspect that might be the real reason they collapsed...
No amount of planning a demolition could account for the random element of a plane hitting a building, how could you plan how the buildings would collapse and then go plant explosives inside afterwards without worrying about it taking out half a city? Before it happened nobody had any idea how a building would even react to that, oh dont tell me, that's what they do at Area 51 right?
Conspiracy theories of 9/11 do make me laugh though. Some people are absolutely determined that there was hidden explosives to cause the towers to collapse, and that it was all a government plan.
I dont know about you guys, but I watched 9/11 happening and i'm pretty sure I saw these two bloody big airoplanes hit the towers, I suspect that might be the real reason they collapsed...
No amount of planning a demolition could account for the random element of a plane hitting a building, how could you plan how the buildings would collapse and then go plant explosives inside afterwards without worrying about it taking out half a city? Before it happened nobody had any idea how a building would even react to that, oh dont tell me, that's what they do at Area 51 right?
I DO find the whole Pentagon attacks suspicious (ie Pentalawn, where are the wings/fuel etc), however it is pretty blatent that the Twin Towers were destroyed by planes, irrespective of who by.
@Maelstrom: Precisely. That's exactly what they are doing - if there's even one person in the whole mess that is speaking with verifiable facts, it all gets messed up by the lot of screaming nonsense.
@U4IK ST8:
Sort-of-related sidenote: I just noticed you got a link to Zeitgeist in your signature. I tried watching that movie and compiled a list of over 10 false/not-based-on-any-facts statements in the first 15 minutes (the first 6 minutes were a horrible music video introduction). Needless to say I didn't keep at it. Props to them for mixing in the audio of this George Carlin stand-up act though, I really like his material.
I am not seriously saying anything - I am taking the piss at all the so-called "let's find the truth" movements because quite honestly I believe they're a joke.
After 9/11 I, like many people, went through ALL the material that showed up from time to time. Including the whole round-about through all the theorists (like Mr Jones) and all the sides presented being in either the "patriots" or the "antigovernmentals". Seriously, I dedicated too much time to this (I'll also add up the time this series of posts has taken too). What I find is that both the "NEVA FORGET!!!" and the "WTC7 was a demolition - the truth is out there" crowds are a bunch of tossers who rehash the same old stuff over and over.
@U4IK ST8:
Sort-of-related sidenote: I just noticed you got a link to Zeitgeist in your signature. I tried watching that movie and compiled a list of over 10 false/not-based-on-any-facts statements in the first 15 minutes (the first 6 minutes were a horrible music video introduction). Needless to say I didn't keep at it. Props to them for mixing in the audio of this George Carlin stand-up act though, I really like his material.
I am not seriously saying anything - I am taking the piss at all the so-called "let's find the truth" movements because quite honestly I believe they're a joke.
After 9/11 I, like many people, went through ALL the material that showed up from time to time. Including the whole round-about through all the theorists (like Mr Jones) and all the sides presented being in either the "patriots" or the "antigovernmentals". Seriously, I dedicated too much time to this (I'll also add up the time this series of posts has taken too). What I find is that both the "NEVA FORGET!!!" and the "WTC7 was a demolition - the truth is out there" crowds are a bunch of tossers who rehash the same old stuff over and over.
On the pentagon one, i've not seen videos but I did read a lot of witness testimony that they saw a rocket or missile like object heading for the pentagon.
This, I believe, isn't because it wasnt a plane to hit the pentagon. It was the AA missile trying to stop the plan hitting the pentagon.
Their government cant admit they shot at civilians, but in the same breath it was clearly the only sensible thing to do short of any better ideas + resources being available at the time.
This, I believe, isn't because it wasnt a plane to hit the pentagon. It was the AA missile trying to stop the plan hitting the pentagon.
Their government cant admit they shot at civilians, but in the same breath it was clearly the only sensible thing to do short of any better ideas + resources being available at the time.
Not funny at all!
In short the problem is that we've eyewitness accounts of people seeing something much smaller than the plane they should have seen, and footage that was taken from a roof cam of a TV station, that was taken by the CIA and has never been released since. Of course, if that doesn't sway you (like it wouldn't me - imo they fired something at it, it missed and obviously they tried to cover up the fact they couldn't stop it, or that it was some experimental thing) then think about it this way - where did the wings enter the Pentagon?
Theres a (small) fuselage whole, but no wing holes. No wings were discovered...
There was also no jet fuel, and no rediculous explosion to show where it went
The wierdest thing is that the lawn is completely unscathed - the pilots that trained the guy to fly said there was no way he could of held the plane about 10 ft off the ground without touching it, yet the lawn is completely untouched - usually planes make a ruddy mess.
The frame from the security camera at the gate (that caught the whole thing) is missing the crucial frame where it impacts, and instead we see it flying at it (blurred) for twice as long and then a small explosion.
It's fishy. Perhaps there was some laser defence system thats top secret that vapourized most of the plane (would make sense in most contexts actually), but either way it IS dodgy.
Of course, whether it was some sick plan by a Politician to make it an attack not only on financial institutions (ie an attack on capitalism - they could have known the attacks were going to happen, but instead decided to use it as a PR stunt :shrug
, but also directly on the US via the pentagon.We'll never know, but tbh even if we did there's little we could do...
EDIT - To repeat, i do NOT think it didn't happen - lots of people lost their lives, innocent people, i just find that one part of it doesn't add up - it seems to remind me of the IRS office bombing (was that in Lousianna? Or was it Atlanta? not sure - either way an office was bombed, however the Government office was "suspiciously empty for that time of day" while the Nursery on the floor below was full as usual...)
There lots of possibilities and too little information and i'm too untrained to figure out the truth, for instance: Did the pilot dive at the pentagon? If so the wings may have sheered off before impact, possibly even landing on the same or a nearby spot, possibly landing miles away or even in water somewhere. That would also explain the lack of an explosion as the fuel is ... in the wings.
There's probably other possibilities but instead of suggesting them i'm going to accept i'm not an expert and say there's other people who know more than me.
I dont believe it wasnt a cover up, and I dont believe it was a cover up. I just think it happened and the blank cheque it has allowed the current American administration to write is a far bigger issue. Not that i'm blaming the American government for all the worlds ills, i'm well aware my own PM went against my own personal wishes and supported them (damn my lack of influence!).
There's probably other possibilities but instead of suggesting them i'm going to accept i'm not an expert and say there's other people who know more than me.
I dont believe it wasnt a cover up, and I dont believe it was a cover up. I just think it happened and the blank cheque it has allowed the current American administration to write is a far bigger issue. Not that i'm blaming the American government for all the worlds ills, i'm well aware my own PM went against my own personal wishes and supported them (damn my lack of influence!).
It was a bad day, and as usual some ''slightly narrow minded'' people made some documentaries in their favour claiming all sorts of outrageous things. The real problem is that people listen to that crap..
There are probably a few valid questions to raise after the MS Flightsim Trained guys flew into the towers and there are always things the govt. should/could have done.. It was a sucky day for sure..
But the uber activists (in general not the 'lets hear both sides and use brain to verdict' type crowd) simply went conspiracy theory about 0.1 seconds after the first plane hit the building. Even if all the "terrorists" in the world would say "We did it!" complete with proof, these activist fools would still say its an inside job..
Scary people .. On average much more scary than some dude in a cave Afghanistan.
But more on topic.. Rick Ashtley (sp) rulez!! :P
There are probably a few valid questions to raise after the MS Flightsim Trained guys flew into the towers and there are always things the govt. should/could have done.. It was a sucky day for sure..
But the uber activists (in general not the 'lets hear both sides and use brain to verdict' type crowd) simply went conspiracy theory about 0.1 seconds after the first plane hit the building. Even if all the "terrorists" in the world would say "We did it!" complete with proof, these activist fools would still say its an inside job..
Scary people .. On average much more scary than some dude in a cave Afghanistan.
But more on topic.. Rick Ashtley (sp) rulez!! :P
About the "I did it!" thing: As far as I know has Osama NEVER sayed that he did it. He only sayed that he welcomes the people who did that.
In that FBi-Video that is around shows Osama wearing a gold ring. Strange for a muslim... specially for a fundamentalist.
In that FBi-Video that is around shows Osama wearing a gold ring. Strange for a muslim... specially for a fundamentalist.
I don't have any theories as to who did or didn't carry out 9/11, but I do notice holes in the story. One of the biggest is the fact that the debris from the WTC was carted away and recycled or destroyed, instead of having the FBI crawl all over it with microscopes looking for anything that could point to the culprits. WTC was a crime scene the likes of which the US has never seen but the evidence - all million tons or so of it - was taken away and not examined. Noone has been explain that to my satisfaction.
That those airliners could have caused the towers to collapse is a big sticking point. The official explanation points to the steel core of the towers being melted by burning jet fuel. The vast difference between the burning temperature of jet fuel (methanol iirc) and the melting point of reinforced steel leaves a big hole in the story. As does the fact that the WTC towers were designed precisely to withstand impacts from Boeing 707 jetliners (which were the largest in operation at the time of the towers' construction). But even if the initial impact or subsequent fires managed to weaken the steel cores of the towers, why didn't their structures fail just at the impact/fire points and collapse from there, instead of collapsing as neatly into their own footprints as any controlled demolition that any of us have seen on TV (think back to the last Vegas casino demolition video you've seen). Again, I have no alternate theory for who made this happen, but the official explanation leaves too many holes to ignore.
WTC 7, which briefly contained a 9/11 command centre, also collapsed neatly into its own footprint, despite having only suffered minor superficial damage. No satisfactory official explanation has been put forward to explain this.
A thorough investigation of the evidence from all of those sites would have revealed the exact cause of the collapses, leaving no room for speculations or assumptions from either side of the debate. Any couch potato who watches CSI or any cop show knows that you keep everything from a crime scene and you look at it as many times as you need to, no matter how insignificant it may appear. But the WTC evidence is gone. If I came home to find my house trashed and my wife dead and then proceeded to clean up the house and get rid of the body before calling the police, I would expect to receive some very tough questioning ...
Leaving aside a few other things (such as the precision flying of large airliners by some guys who apparently had only ever flown light aircraft, the failure to respond by NORAD as soon as the airliners veered dramatically off course, early media reports and eyewitness testimonies which were "buried" and not heard again after the 11th, apparent discrepancies in the Pennsylvannia account and the completely inexplicable 2-year stonewalling of the 9/11 commission by the Bush team - why act like you have something to hide if you don't?), I think the families of those killed are owed a lot more than their government has given them. To leave 9/11 half-investigated in this manner disrespects them a lot more than someone demanding a bit more vigilance and an honest investigation. You can throw around terms like "conspiracy theory" and blast guys who ask hard questions and may even have imaginative theories, but it doesn't remove the fact that the official 9/11 story does not make sense when you approach it logically.
Bush has used 9/11 to launch a war in Afghanistan (dubious in legality in a best-case scenario) and one in Iraq (unconnected to 9/11 in any way, shape, or form, utterly reprehensible and a war crime under the terms of Nuremberg and every international treaty & law as well as the revered US Consitution itself). He and his party members continue to use 9/11 to instill fear in the hearts of Americans in order to justify to the continuance and escalation of the war in Iraq and will now do the same to commence war with Iran.
Almost 3000 people were killed on 9/11. Bush has sacrificed almost 4000 more Americans in Iraq, fighting an enemy which did not attack America. Around a million Iraqis have been killed, with millions more displaced and seeking refuge in neighbouring countries. Bush lied to 300 million Americans - and six billion of the rest of us - to start his war and he continues to repeat the same lies to keep it going and constantly invents new lies to expand his war to other countries.
Regardless of who actually carried out the 2001 attacks or why they did it, Bush has cynically used it to further his agenda or, at least, the agendas of the people who control him. To me, that's a lot more disrespectful to the memory of the victims than someone demanding a real investigation.
That those airliners could have caused the towers to collapse is a big sticking point. The official explanation points to the steel core of the towers being melted by burning jet fuel. The vast difference between the burning temperature of jet fuel (methanol iirc) and the melting point of reinforced steel leaves a big hole in the story. As does the fact that the WTC towers were designed precisely to withstand impacts from Boeing 707 jetliners (which were the largest in operation at the time of the towers' construction). But even if the initial impact or subsequent fires managed to weaken the steel cores of the towers, why didn't their structures fail just at the impact/fire points and collapse from there, instead of collapsing as neatly into their own footprints as any controlled demolition that any of us have seen on TV (think back to the last Vegas casino demolition video you've seen). Again, I have no alternate theory for who made this happen, but the official explanation leaves too many holes to ignore.
WTC 7, which briefly contained a 9/11 command centre, also collapsed neatly into its own footprint, despite having only suffered minor superficial damage. No satisfactory official explanation has been put forward to explain this.
A thorough investigation of the evidence from all of those sites would have revealed the exact cause of the collapses, leaving no room for speculations or assumptions from either side of the debate. Any couch potato who watches CSI or any cop show knows that you keep everything from a crime scene and you look at it as many times as you need to, no matter how insignificant it may appear. But the WTC evidence is gone. If I came home to find my house trashed and my wife dead and then proceeded to clean up the house and get rid of the body before calling the police, I would expect to receive some very tough questioning ...
Leaving aside a few other things (such as the precision flying of large airliners by some guys who apparently had only ever flown light aircraft, the failure to respond by NORAD as soon as the airliners veered dramatically off course, early media reports and eyewitness testimonies which were "buried" and not heard again after the 11th, apparent discrepancies in the Pennsylvannia account and the completely inexplicable 2-year stonewalling of the 9/11 commission by the Bush team - why act like you have something to hide if you don't?), I think the families of those killed are owed a lot more than their government has given them. To leave 9/11 half-investigated in this manner disrespects them a lot more than someone demanding a bit more vigilance and an honest investigation. You can throw around terms like "conspiracy theory" and blast guys who ask hard questions and may even have imaginative theories, but it doesn't remove the fact that the official 9/11 story does not make sense when you approach it logically.
Bush has used 9/11 to launch a war in Afghanistan (dubious in legality in a best-case scenario) and one in Iraq (unconnected to 9/11 in any way, shape, or form, utterly reprehensible and a war crime under the terms of Nuremberg and every international treaty & law as well as the revered US Consitution itself). He and his party members continue to use 9/11 to instill fear in the hearts of Americans in order to justify to the continuance and escalation of the war in Iraq and will now do the same to commence war with Iran.
Almost 3000 people were killed on 9/11. Bush has sacrificed almost 4000 more Americans in Iraq, fighting an enemy which did not attack America. Around a million Iraqis have been killed, with millions more displaced and seeking refuge in neighbouring countries. Bush lied to 300 million Americans - and six billion of the rest of us - to start his war and he continues to repeat the same lies to keep it going and constantly invents new lies to expand his war to other countries.
Regardless of who actually carried out the 2001 attacks or why they did it, Bush has cynically used it to further his agenda or, at least, the agendas of the people who control him. To me, that's a lot more disrespectful to the memory of the victims than someone demanding a real investigation.
For people with enough knowledge and power, its easy to manipulate "the hole picture", turning facts around and making innocent people guilty and the opposite of it. And one thing is for sure, they give a damn about anything as long as they can pull the trigger. Now im not sure what to believe and im not about to bring any kind of information into this conversation since im not sure who and for what purpose they has been made, where the sources are from and most importantly, which side they support. I would support the theorie that we already passed the point where the ordinary people had enough influence on this complected issue since too many important informations and evidences has been destroyed, people has been payed or forced to shut up. But then again, this is just a theorie and i'd love to be proven wrong on that.
Im curious about what's comming next and how it's gonna end and i know exactly who's going to take over when this "democratic system" fails but thats another story.
illepall
Hope for the best and be prepared for the rest...
cheers
Im curious about what's comming next and how it's gonna end and i know exactly who's going to take over when this "democratic system" fails but thats another story.
illepallHope for the best and be prepared for the rest...
cheers
Go over millions of tonnes of debris hoping to find what? A hand still grasping a 747 yoke with a characteristic tattoo on it? The debris was there until November IIRC.
If the controlled demolition theory stood - what was to gain from it? If they wanted to demolish the towers they didn't have to do a "neat" demolition of them. Neat demolitions take a lot of pre-planning and there is a synchronized detonation involved. If they wanted to just blow shit up they didn't have to synchronize it. Just blow the side of the building off or just parts of it. If they're so smart to do such a covered up job, why not go all the way and do it properly? If I can think of it, surely they can too.
It wasn't just superficial damage, there are photos that show it to be much more than that. Also, it burned for hours. There were diesel fuel tanks inside the building apparently (and no, they weren't installed the night before the attack), I recall reading the FDNY reports about having warned them it was a bad idea.
"Conspiracy theory" is just that - an unproven assumption to a claim of an underlying machination. It's just shorter to say "conspiracy theory" - it's not a bad term, it just describes what it is.
Based on the train of logic that most such theorists follow I could say that they are trying, just as well as any shadow govt, to terrorize the world for their own personal gain.
Oh, and here's a nice article from Popular Mechanics.
And a video from inside tower 1 as it came down. Also has external footage that shows the debris falling on buildings around.
Can we get this thread back on topic?
Aha! Yet another cover-up!
lol, alright then, lets go off topic again cuz thats what i would call it but thats a matter of how your interpret it right?
whatever..
There were two skyscrapers' worth of debris, of course it was there for two months! It wasn't like they loaded it up on some guy's pickup and carted it straight off. As for what they were looking for, I'm sure noone wanted a hand on a 767 yoke. I was thinking more along the lines of evidence of how the buildings came down so fast. Either they were the worst-designed, most flimsy goddamned buildings ever built or something else happened. You investigate evidence to find the "something else".
To repeat, I don't have a theory, I just want to know why such lengths were taken, at an official level, to hinder a decent investigation into such a horrendous crime. The official explanation said the steel core was melted which caused a chain reaction of collapsing floors which ended in the collapse of both towers. One would be plausible, maybe, but both towers collapsing in the same way within minutes of each other seems a tad outlandish. Or a bit convenient, if you're into conspiracies. Either way, a thorough, scientific investigation of the debris would have told investigators the cause of the collapse and ended all speculation. Why this wasn't done still hasn't been explained to me.
If, and let me stress the "if" here, there was a controlled demolition as many people think, it would make perfect sense to do it that way as perfectly collapsed building debris would pulverise much of the evidence from the aircraft (the black boxes were never recovered from the WTC debris). IF it was an inside job (if!) then it was done very neatly indeed.
As an aside, I wonder why these psycho pilots didn't make a beeline for the Whitehouse if they were wanting to injure America so badly...they seem to have found the Pentagon ok - it's about the same height as the WH and it's not that far away.
Burning buildings seldom, if ever, simply collapse into themselves in that manner. Exploding tanks may have accounted for some more damage, but exploding diesel tanks wouldn't have brought down an entire building. Again, it was either a badly-designed building or something else happened. And, yet again, an investigation of the debris would have confirmed that something else.
That's quite true, but in today's charged environment it's a hastily-used term trotted out to instantly discredit anything that runs contrary to mainstream opinion. The way you would say "conspiracy theory" may be very different to the way a White House shill would use it. The White House has had plenty of its own conspiracy theories anyway: the Afghans did it; the Iraqis did it; some new evil called "Islamofascism" is threatening to take over the word; Saddam was going to use nukes/chemicals/bioweapons on the US; we have to get "them" over "there" before "they" come and get us; Iran now wants to nuke the US so we have to get them next ... and I could go on. The chief conspiracy theorists in the last 6 years have been White House employees and their on-leash TV commentators/parrots.
I think the only people who are currently terrorising the world with the aid of conspiracy theories live in Washington DC - but that's another discussion entirely.
That nice Popular Mechanics article has been debunked by competent engineers and scientists around the world ever since its release. It seems the only place it's still used as "evidence" is in the US.
While that video does show debris falling all over the place (not unlike the news footage that dominated TV in the months after), it's still not an adequate explanation of how the towers collapsed so neatly.
Anyway, like I said, I don't have alternate theories. I look at stuff logically and if there are things that don't quite fit they stick out at me like a sore thumb. Also, given the Bush team's reluctance to even begin the 9/11 commission, and given how they've used those catastrophic events to further their plans (and lied about the real reasons for them from day one), I really don't blame people for thinking 9/11 was very conveniently timed. Before, Bush was tanking in the polls and couldn't get anything done (like he tried anyway). After, his ratings were in the 90s and he could do no wrong. He kicked off two wars (without which there's no way he would've been re-elected in '04 - Americans always seem to re-elect their goons-in-chief when there's a war on), stripped Americans of their rights and freedoms in the name of security, did whatever he wanted and continues to do so. I'm not a nutjob theorist but I can understand why some people are
And Rick Astley can burn. Bloody Islamofascist.
Naturally, but still none of the sides that DO provide theories gives a clean or any actual facts for anything that happened that day. The only thing I can say is that whatever few scientific reports I've read, from verifiable sources, don't seem to favor the non-governmental conspiracy theorists' ideas (see below).
And it's logic that dictates to me that if they wanted to demolish the buildings to look like a result of the attack they wouldn't just bring them down all neat and controlled. What for? Not to cause more damage?
As for the part of the article in Popular Mechanics that mentions the above subject, the articles that took to rebuting that section all seemed to use selective quoting of a certain Scientific American article from October 2001. (saying that one was debunked as well won't stand as quite simply, that was the major source for supposedly debunking the PM article :P)
In the latter link there's a list of all the commitees and teams and probes that went into analyzing the causes of the collapse:
the National Science Foundation has funded eight research projects to probe the WTC catastrophe. The American Society of Civil Engineers is sponsoring several studies of the site. Meanwhile the Structural Engineering Institute of the American Society of Structural Engineers has established an investigative team to analyze the disaster and learn from the failure. W. Gene Corley, senior vice president of the Construction Technology Laboratory in Skokie, Ill., is said to be heading the ASSE study team through its initial phase of data gathering, and then William Baker, a structural engineer at the Chicago-based firm of Skidmore Owings & Merrill in Chicago, will lead the following analysis phase.
Ofcourse -all of that could just be bullshit too and the whole damn thing is controlled by the feds and none of the above ever DID any forensics or analysis of the site. I'm sure there's more than one article saying it (possibly by the very same authors who used this article as a source).
Yes, things don't add up and certainly don't make sense. But blindly following one conclusion (not you specifically Hank) gets you in just the same situation as you were before, only slightly more paranoid.
OK GUYS STOP HERE!!! i see all these b*****t. SO if you ALL want too se th e TRUTH,go and watch this video: http://video.google.de/videopl ... type=search&plindex=0
everything explained there.
everything explained there.
The way the current government has the media and several dozen institutes in its pocket, it wouldn't surprise me if it was all bullshit. All science and technicalities aside, there are still a number of things that don't add up. A big bunch of holes and no spackle 
x, thanks for not throwing me in the hole with the nutjobs It's always refreshing when people can disagree without going postal.
edit: no need to shout at people, mustang. It was actually quite civil until your post.
x, thanks for not throwing me in the hole with the nutjobs
It's always refreshing when people can disagree without going postal.edit: no need to shout at people, mustang. It was actually quite civil until your post.
That'd be absolutely senseless, especially for a subject like this that we both agree we essentially know dick all about.
As for the thing that REALLY ires me and got me caught up in this discussion is the mentality behind posts like mustang's above; all too eager to consume the most "esoteric" version of the truth without pausing to actually look up the stuff mentioned in this truth or find out who exactly is publishing it.
This may be sounds a bit odd or maybe not but im just curious if the kkk has ever been considered? Im mean this pile of shite is still trying to catch more flies aren't they? I remember that a well known member from this community once joined our ventrilo server and put a link to a forbidden forum behind his name and you wouldn't guess how much bullshit these people are creating, and this also includes every other fascism/ racism "organisation" or "society" world wide. In this respect i hate democracy for its tolerance towards those sort of individuals. But on the other hand, i cant blame it since this is what it all about and differs it from them. (Well ok, that clown has been banned for life from all FM servers (at least as long as i do have the admin pass
)) But this is another topic and im not going any further here since name and shame is forbidden and this forum isn't the place to do so anyway. So please just focus on the question if you intent to answer.
Interesting new 9/11 conspiracy video released re: Tower 7
(60 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG