9/11 - proof, America attacking itself.

[Turin]

Why the hell would you smile at that fact?

I couldn't find a sardonic or cynical smilee.

Perhaps the worst part of your posting within this thread is the fact that you've actually made up your own theory for this whole attack, at least the opposition in this thread is justified, due to a very powerful conspiracy argument. False though it is.

Strange that I have not said anything else, but repeated what everyone else has said in different context or just added my opinion. - STRIKE THAT

[edit] Tell me please what part I made up! I think I know what you're talking about but go on... [/edit]

What the hell is all this arguing about what sized plane crashed into the pentagon though? Does anyone here actually know what happens to a 747 when it crashes into a wall similar to the one constructed at the pentagon? Or is this again, just another theory about what else could happen?

No, but we know the makeup of the building and the make up of a boeing 757. We can therefrom conclude that the result was physically impossible.

The shortages of materials required for war production raised many design and construction problems. The use of reinforced concrete in lieu of formed steel for the building made possible a saving of 43,000 tons of steel, more than enough to build a battleship. The use of concrete ramps rather than elevators further reduced steel requirements. Drainage pipes were concrete; ducts were fiber, interior doors were wood. An unusual wall design - concrete spandrells carried to window sill level - eliminated many miles of through-wall copper flashing. When Somervell was asked to make still more drastic reductions, he agreed to “striptease” the entire structure. Bronze doors, copper ornamentation, and metal partitions in rest rooms were among the first to go. The stripping process continued throughout construction.

Quote

 

[HunterR]

You people are all tossers for even bringing this topic up.

1. First off, the video was made to change people's believes about USA going against itself and i think that the gullable people bought it, most of you are saying that the top american's created a conspiracy to destroy the twin towers, american's pride and joy, also their two biggest sky scrapers?.
2. The thing happend 5 years ago, and i really dont know why you are bring it up its old news.

If anything, this is like saying "God really exists" and someone creates a movie to prove God exists, by simply putting some video's of virgin marry crying or other stuff heck even bring movies out such as stigmata ... (awsome film btw)

 

[ENOZEGAR]

JFk happened many years ago and 75% of americans believe there was a government conspiracy to cover the truth up.

 

[Turin]

You people are all tossers for even bringing this topic up.

1. First off, the video was made to change people's believes about USA going against itself and i think that the gullable people bought it, most of you are saying that the top american's created a conspiracy to destroy the twin towers, american's pride and joy, also their two biggest sky scrapers?

Either the guillable bought it, or the ignorant rejected it. That accusation can go both ways.

2. The thing happend 5 years ago, and i really dont know why you are bring it up its old news.

Well considering so many people have viewed/responded to this thread, I'd say it is still a pretty hot topic to discuss.

If anything, this is like saying "God really exists" and someone creates a movie to prove God exists, by simply putting some video's of virgin marry crying or other stuff heck even bring movies out such as stigmata ... (awsome film btw)

It is very peculiar how people can dismiss or just gloss over an entire topic, without reading important facts contained in the posts, yet still they manage to generate an opinion on the subject - I mean anyone can have an opinion, it just matters on how educated that opinion is, which gives it its credibility.

---

 

[Vannaroth]

JFk happened many years ago and 75% of americans believe there was a government conspiracy to cover the truth up.

Thats because its far more plausable.

Not that I even believe that statistic in the first place.

 

[Turin]

*yawn* this is getting boring.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1

That above link is a MUCH better forum to debate these things. You'll know who I am once you join. Have fun kids.

Turin

 

[ENOZEGAR]

Thats because its far more plausable.

Not that I even believe that statistic in the first place.

Well, dont you find it strange that there is more evidence released every day about 9/11 than JFK.. its still funny how people can dismiss evidence, dispite the constant blunders by the American government.

 

[Wond]

Well, dont you find it strange that there is more evidence released every day about 9/11 than JFK.. its still funny how people can dismiss evidence, dispite the constant blunders by the American government.

They dismiss evidence because they don't want to believe that there is the slighest chance of it being true. Your wasting your time arguing this subject on this forum. Someone says somthing, you reply with evidence on why that may not be true and basically they are just sticking to their word. I'm almost sure alot of the people here arguing against you have considered the evidence to be true but dont want to admit it.

 

[HunterR]

What i dont understand is how can you people believe this shet, media bends the truth all the time so they can sell their story ... like

A guy in nigeria dies after eating a chicken, then its all over the news that ITS BIRDFLUE AND IT HAS CAME TO AFRICA but you will NOT see a report from the media saying "oh sorry 2 weeks ago we said it was bird flue in africa really we were bs sorry". ...

 

[ENOZEGAR]

HunteR,

What you do not understand is that the powers that be control the media, you dont follow suit you loose your job or end up dead its simple as.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8439228734279462200&q=JFK+alex+jones

This video i watched which was basically putting together the bits and bobs from JFK, it has allot of hard evidence but thats another topic, but the main point im getting is that, the guy here is showing how the NBC news or something runs a documentary on how BS conspiracy is.. so he follows the words the guys says stuff like..

No evidence ...

Then the guy simply shows evidence and basically pointing out that the media are withdrawing evidence trying to change history and such.. but still, good video.

 

[Robert]

Hunter ill reply before you are made to look like the exact imbecile that your doing a blooming good job of being.

Let me explore your sentence 'the media bends everything anyway' you are suggesting that the documentary has been mediated to look like the usa attacked itself. Now, where you there on 9/11 hunter thats a question that can draw your parcipitation in this thread to a close?

If you were then im very sorry and your eyewitness accounts i cannot begin to unpick.

However if you got all of your information from the news and or papers, or even dare i say the internet, then you will have experienced mediation my dear misguided friend.

If you broaden your mind and allow yourself to be open to anything then you must realise that what you saw on tele that day was the point of view of the people reporting in and event through the investigation that followed you would only have got a one track answer to whom was indeed behind the atrosity.

I keep saying this is my last post on this subject but then some imbecile frustrates me into posting, good day for now.

 

[Valerii]

No, but we know the makeup of the building and the make up of a boeing 757. We can therefrom conclude that the result was physically impossible.

No, no you can't. Why don't you "conclude" our existence while you're at it.

Until I see another 757 crash into the pentagon with different results, all the mathematics and science in the world isn't going to sway me otherwise, unless I don't believe it with my own eyes. I've seen a crash test of a plane into a concrete wall, and I've seen what the wall makes of it, I also know that the 757 supposedly span a full 270 degrees whilst falling at a very fast rate, around 400mph, that’s going to make a mess, you know what? I think it did.

Trust me, if it was "physically impossible", 98% of the world would agree with your theory. Fact is, people with common sense sat down, watched the TV, saw what happened and were devastated. It's just people like you who stray from the obvious because it gives you a "rebellious streak", even if it is disrespecting the lives of thousands. Well guess what, when I was in the pub at lunch today, I didn't put my glass on a beer mate. ****ing 'aye.

Why don’t you go and loiter outside Tesco express, use your freedom of expression there, instead of backing slanderous statements about one of the most successful governments in existence. Pfft, murdering their own people, please, if America wanted to frame another country for a terrorist attack, they would use a much more effective and easily covered up method than the crap Osama pulled.

I think people just prefer killing their enemies to their own family, funny that.

 

[Turin]

No, no you can't. Why don't you "conclude" our existence while you're at it.

Until I see another 757 crash into the pentagon with different results, all the mathematics and science in the world isn't going to sway me otherwise, unless I don't believe it with my own eyes. I've seen a crash test of a plane into a concrete wall, and I've seen what the wall makes of it, I also know that the 757 supposedly span a full 270 degrees whilst falling at a very fast rate, around 400mph, that’s going to make a mess, you know what? I think it did.

Trust me, if it was "physically impossible", 98% of the world would agree with your theory. Fact is, people with common sense sat down, watched the TV, saw what happened and were devastated. It's just people like you who stray from the obvious because it gives you a "rebellious streak", even if it is disrespecting the lives of thousands. Well guess what, when I was in the pub at lunch today, I didn't put my glass on a beer mate. ****ing 'aye.

Why don’t you go and loiter outside Tesco express, use your freedom of expression there, instead of backing slanderous statements about one of the most successful governments in existence. Pfft, murdering their own people, please, if America wanted to frame another country for a terrorist attack, they would use a much more effective and easily covered up method than the crap Osama pulled.

I think people just prefer killing their enemies to their own family, funny that.

I am not going to bother replying word-to-word to any of this, purely because I'd just end up repeating what I said earlier.

 

[ENOZEGAR]

Hes a lost caught Turin, maybe on the pay roll! who knows.

 

[Valerii]

I am not going to bother replying word-to-word to any of this, purely because I'd just end up repeating what I said earlier.

That's cool, if you've run out of "facts" to copy and say in this thread, and can't justify new arguments as opposed to saying the same thing when one of your arguments is challenged, we'll just have to move on and wait for someone who can really fight this debate.

 

[Atomicide]

This peice of crap STILL going?

1. For everyone pointing out the fact the planr doesnt appear to leave the size of hole they expected.... what exactly are you comparing it to? I mean, does a plane hit the pentagon every fortnight, and if it does, does this hole not match the regular size?

2. The video clearly shows a plane flying into the side of the twin towers.... and the big question is "did it actually hit!?!?!?! LOL INTERNET" lets examine the evidence, a plane flies towards a building and possibly into it.... yet as obvious scenes of explosions inside take place, the plane doesnt come out the other side. From this 2 conclusions can be drawn.

a. The plane hit the building.
b. The Government hired David Blane to make the aeroplane "dissapear" on the other side.

**** off please.

 

[Biohazard]

problem is urban, that video you posted does show puffs of explosions in steel frames to which are used to weaken for the demolition... its really not possible for them to randomly 'pop' that far distance for nothing especially as un uneffected area of the impact.

The puffs you see in the definition were actually the concrete collums curshing under the emense wieght of the 870,000 pound plane.

 

[Turin]

That's cool, if you've run out of "facts" to copy and say in this thread, and can't justify new arguments as opposed to saying the same thing when one of your arguments is challenged, we'll just have to move on and wait for someone who can really fight this debate.

Considering that's the first time I refused to continue debating, I'd say I'm not: "saying the same thing when one of [my] arguments is challenged". I'm offended, because I've actually taken the time to write back detailed replies with supporting evidence, opinions and so forth.

In fact you're being oxymoronous, considering your previous post & this one has nothing to do with the debate at hand. It's an attempt to degrade my position in this thread and in doing so attempt to make my presentation of the facts appear uncredible.

And so I'm not hypocritical I will reply to Atom's Post instead

---------------

This peice of crap STILL going?

1. For everyone pointing out the fact the planr doesnt appear to leave the size of hole they expected.... what exactly are you comparing it to? I mean, does a plane hit the pentagon every fortnight, and if it does, does this hole not match the regular size?

2. The video clearly shows a plane flying into the side of the twin towers.... and the big question is "did it actually hit!?!?!?! LOL INTERNET" lets examine the evidence, a plane flies towards a building and possibly into it.... yet as obvious scenes of explosions inside take place, the plane doesnt come out the other side. From this 2 conclusions can be drawn.

a. The plane hit the building.
b. The Government hired David Blane to make the aeroplane "dissapear" on the other side.

**** off please.

Yes.

Don't pick and descriminate agains the points m8, there's more than one argument for why the plane couldn't have been a 757. I provided a link:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1

Which is the sort of argument people can't produce on this forum. Compare that to the post you just made, and tell me who's going to look more credible in a debate?



I think you lost the plot here, it isn't a question of whether a plane hit or not, its a matter of did America administer the attacks. That is the question, and I will admit, as I have previously, I don't see how a video that finds inconsistancies in an attack prove that the Govt. of America attacked itself, rather than the innitial report of the attacks was tainited or at the very extreme not completely truthful.

Now I know you were being sarcastic m8, but its that kind of sarcasm that actually loses you the argument.


This thread is killing my brain cells fast,
Turin

 

[Vannaroth]

If america wanted to destroy its buildings using planes and say that it was a 757, they would have used a 757. Why woudlnt they? Why would they use small cargo planes and then say it was a 757? They might aswell just use the real thing.

 

[Biohazard]

http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.shtml

Oh noes, peope who know what they're talking about.