Chinahand Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Stevie, what do you think happened? Just give us a rough summary - don't link to thousands of out of date and exagerated news stories - just explain what you think happened. My scale is a rough attempt to get people like you to actually explain roughly where they stand, if you agree with parts of it say where, if you disagree do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 And Slim would be very correct in saying that, were my conclusions based on a single lie or an apparent coincidence.... but they are certainly not based on any single act. I think people who don't see what went on are very naive and dim See what, specifically, that showed government involvement? Single discrepancy or multiple, it doesn't matter. You've got questions, not answers, and nothing that actually shows the government was actively involved in the incident. Your example, the bbc report, could be explained by a number of things, miscommunication in the chaos being the most likely, but we don't know for sure. That doesn't mean it's a conspiracy, it means we don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 maybe look at events the day BEFORE 9/11??????? Which were? Do you honestly believe that this was the greatest conspiracy of all time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Stevie, what do you think happened? Just give us a rough summary - don't link to thousands of out of date and exagerated news stories - just explain what you think happened. My scale is a rough attempt to get people like you to actually explain roughly where they stand, if you agree with parts of it say where, if you disagree do the same. out of date news stories? hmmm.... what do you want me to say? no i don't believe every sinlge person across every government department knew about it. but yes, some did. do i believe the us govt carried out the attacks themselves? no. did some people in the us govt allow the attacks to take place. yes. China, i have actually answered all these questions at different times during this thread. i think you know where i stand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 maybe look at events the day BEFORE 9/11??????? Which were? Do you honestly believe that this was the greatest conspiracy of all time? no. the greatest conspiracy of all time is that there are no conspiracys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 out of date news stories? hmmm.... what do you want me to say? no i don't believe every sinlge person across every government department knew about it. but yes, some did. do i believe the us govt carried out the attacks themselves? no. did some people in the us govt allow the attacks to take place. yes. Well if you think that some members of the US government allowed the attacks to happen then that is far, far more plausible than a grand plan to make orchestrate those attacks in the way that many do. It is the more outlandish claim of planning that seems to be fuelling this interest in 9/11 to such an extent, it is getting annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 out of date news stories? hmmm.... what do you want me to say? no i don't believe every sinlge person across every government department knew about it. but yes, some did. do i believe the us govt carried out the attacks themselves? no. did some people in the us govt allow the attacks to take place. yes. Well if you think that some members of the US government allowed the attacks to happen then that is far, far more plausible than a grand plan to make orchestrate those attacks in the way that many do. It is the more outlandish claim of planning that seems to be fuelling this interest in 9/11 to such an extent, it is getting annoying. Yes there is a lot of disinformation regarding 9/11 on both sides of the fence. yeah it is annoying, a lot of people don't know what they're going on about.... "no plane at the pentagon" and all that absolute bollox... it's just disinformation, to make niave people spread the "conspiracy theory", thus basing their theory on dissinformation, which is then easily disproved by the believers that 9/11 was all it seemed..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman2 Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 The fuel is the most explosive thing on a plane, as i said before this must have been some fire to weaken 110 storeys od steel and concrete. Link now this link will show you what happens when a steel and concrete building goes on fire. I do love the silly season. The Madrid fire was an extensive fire, in a 32 story building. It started in the top and worked its way down, creating a towering inferno. The reports say the fire reached 800 degrees C. The only combustable items were the building structure and furniture. The WTC fires were intensive fires concentrated within a few floors of 110 storey buildings. Engineering analysis of failed structural steelwork shows the temperatures were in the order of 1000 degrees C. The WTC fires had 90,000 gallons of Jet fuel explode into a fire ball that was hot enough to ignite alluminium, as well as the building structure and furniture. There is a big difference between heat and temperature: a spark has a huge temperature, but almost no heat; a 1000 degree sparkler won't burn through my trousers! In the WTO fires there was huge amounts of temperature and heat concentrated into just a few floors. In the Madrid fire the extensive nature of the fire meant there was much less heat concentrated in to the structure. In the WTO fires once the floors where the fires were burning, collapsed there was no way to stop a runaway process; the weight above them was so great, plus accelerated by gravity to create a huge impulse to punch through the lower floors; a classic house of cards collapse. The Madrid fire was a huge fire that structurally damaged a minor skyscraper; there is every indication that it could have collapsed and was so structurally weakened by the fire it had to be demolished afterwards. I in no way see this as showing anything unusual about the WTC collapses; quite the opposite it confirms that fires, even extensive, non-fuelled fires, pose a great risk. Just some questions for the conspiracy nutters: why was it necessary to blow up WTC 7? Why was it necessary to set fire to it and let it burn for 7 hours before blowing it up? How were the explosives and fuses kept from detonating during these 7 hours? How was it possible to get the pilots to fly their planes into the correct floors where the explosives had been rigged in the two different buildings? Many huge american coporations lost billions of dollars in the WTC collapses; Warren Buffets Berkshire Hathaway being the most famous example. These companies aren't involved in Iraq or the military or oil, but have trully huge resources to be directed to preserve their interests. They had a huge vested interest in ensuring the insurance claims the attacks caused were not paid out. For example there were major legal battles fought over whether the WTO attacks were one or two incidents; ie whether the companies involved could claim once or twice. These companies employed structural engineers, lawyers, and investigators by the thousand to attempt to prove the buildings were badly designed, or badly built, or whatever reason they could think of to stop having to pay out the insurance claim, but they could not find any thing other than a perfectly rational explanation of the events. Meanwhile Conspiracy Tim the computer geek with 20 dollars and his evenings free has found conclusive proof the whole thing was a deliberate fraud designed to make a killing on the stock exchange when the markets crashed and to allow another set of huge corporations to make money hand over fist as they lead America into its biggest foreign policy disaster since Vietnam. Your just silly for believing this sort of thing. Silly silly silly. Happy New Year! thats a great post that china .. attack the claims with logic and not the person making them with vitriol.. only on page5 and its taken 3 hours to get this far with all the links good thread tho. i personally thougt the whole thing started to stink when they went one step too far to my mind in keeping the whole thing in peoples minds as they pushed thru all the new laws .. the ricin letters .. that was blatant. .. as for the towers we all seen the jets fly into the towers and the world stood still we all everyone of us felt americas and the worlds loss .. no=one will ever forget the pictures of people jumping from windows a hundred floors up .. so we all deserve an emphatic answers like in a format such as chinas reply above and not the sneering shit of the likes of slim. .. i saw no fires in wtc7 altho it is burning abit like a candle as the fire rained down on it....nor did i see jets hit it and it dropped in 4.15 seconds thats quicker than a steel girder the same lengh and width as those used in the construstion in a vaccum would fall the same distance.. and that is just one of many reasons why i question the official version.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tameelf Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 It wasn't Muslims who trained their cameras on the World Trade Center Towers prior to the first aircraft impact, who danced and celebrated with high fives prior to the second impact as most onlookers still believed it had been a terrible accident rather than terrorism, and who were caught with foreign passports, $4,700 in cash hidden in a sock, maps highlighting certain places in the city, and a van that tested positive for traces of explosives; it was ...................... http://www.takeourworldback.com/itwasntmuslims.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 IMO the biggest cause of conspiracy theories are the "conspirators" who conspire with each other to keep them going. I have not read one hard FACT in this thread that demonstrates US Government involvement in the planning or execution of 9/11. What I have observed outside of this thread is that the US Government agencies were incompetent in identifying and stopping the preparation and execution of the attacks that day. But incompetence doth not a conspiracy make... Of course this will rumble on ad nauseam along with, "who was on the Grassy Knoll?' and "the Americans never got to the Moon" because all the conspiracy theorist have to do is to make some outlandish statement, unblemished by facts, so noone can prove or disprove it. Round and round we go until everyone, but the obsessed, gets bored of the nonsense and move on to something more important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 Of course this will rumble on ad nauseam along with, "who was on the Grassy Knoll?' and "the Americans never got to the Moon" because all the conspiracy theorist have to do is to make some outlandish statement, unblemished by facts, so noone can prove or disprove it. Round and round we go until everyone, but the obsessed, gets bored of the nonsense and move on to something more important. Exactly, though it is unfortunate that people are going to harp on about 9/11 for a very long time. People still think the Kennedy assassination is something worthy of further investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 IMO the biggest cause of conspiracy theories are the "conspirators" who conspire with each other to keep them going. I have not read one hard FACT in this thread that demonstrates US Government involvement in the planning or execution of 9/11. What I have observed outside of this thread is that the US Government agencies were incompetent in identifying and stopping the preparation and execution of the attacks that day. But incompetence doth not a conspiracy make... Of course this will rumble on ad nauseam along with, "who was on the Grassy Knoll?' and "the Americans never got to the Moon" because all the conspiracy theorist have to do is to make some outlandish statement, unblemished by facts, so noone can prove or disprove it. Round and round we go until everyone, but the obsessed, gets bored of the nonsense and move on to something more important. Conspiracy theories appeal to those whose characteristics include credulity, paranoia, and low intelligence. Their paranoia inclines them to seek a more complex and worrying explanation for events, in order to bolster their theory that "they" are out to get us. "They" being a vast number of people generally working within or for the government. Their credulity leads them to believe anything that tends to support their theory, no matter how outlandish or far-fetched, and however slender the evidence. In fact, no evidence at all is best, because how can anybody disprove evidence that didn't exist in the first place. Their low intelligence is evidenced by the fact that all the popular conspiracy theories require there to have been a huge number of people "in the know". The moon landings, for instance, would, if faked, have required the complicity of large numbers of eminent scientists, as well as huge numbers of engineers, administrators, etc., etc.. How such vast numbers of people could be persuaded to take such a momentous secret to the grave with them is never explained. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 How such vast numbers of people could be persuaded to take such a momentous secret to the grave with them is never explained. S S. didn't you know? They all had implants that made them obey commands from the US military-industrial complex...that were transmitted from a top-secret base in the deserts of New Mexico (the one where they keep the bits and pieces of that alien they found). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 Conspiracy theories appeal to those whose characteristics include credulity, paranoia, and low intelligence... You simply cannot generalise like that...ask Woodward and Bernstein, who uncovered Watergate which led to the downfall of a president and the jailing of many. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringwraith Posted May 12, 2009 Share Posted May 12, 2009 Conspiracy theories appeal to those whose characteristics include credulity, paranoia, and low intelligence. That can't be right, otherwise we'd have witnessed you stomping around yelling '911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB' through a megaphone in Strand Street by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.