Thanks, Albert. You just proved my point.
Koman...I'd green you but did recently.
Thanks, Albert. You just proved my point.
Koman...I'd green you but did recently.
And you mineOriginally Posted by Latindancer
Thanks Joey
Well, actually I haven't, if you follow the logic of the thread. But then, logic is not your strong point, is it ?
And after THREE YEARS, you have STILL not given any real proof of your viewpoint.
Those grainy, pixelated photos are all you have. Keeeerist ! Perhaps you should avoid the bong for a few months.
Not to mention all those witnesses to the Pentagon crash who were government shills
And the witnesses to the second WTC tower strike. All shills
So let me get this right shaggy.
You constantly repost all these irrelevant and useless pictures and videos, ignoring all of the facts that people keep posting for you, and you wonder why we all think you're a dick?
^you've posted nothing but insults harry, you've made no attempts to discuss anything.
Must be because you're a corporate boy.
And you and LD, koman, Zoohecok, Humbert and Floriduh are all a bunch of irrelevant cocks anyway - like I give a shit what you think.
Now shit or get off the pot you sap.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
None of you useless sheep has said anything other than repeated the bullshit official story which has been proven to be a load of shit 100's of times on this thread.Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
You're a poster boy for sad, scared "think i'm a big man" syndrome. Take away your sad little overpaid halliburton (or the like job) - you wouldn't last 5 minutes on the street.Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
And look at little 'alliburtontuna - he's A SELLOUT.Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
So other than a load of childish insults - any answers arry you 2 bit wrong 'n'?
Take your time fvckface.
Halliburton Tuna.
Bout fvcking right.
On the contrary....and his many posts here prove it. You just babble on with lies and nonsense, trying to keep this thread alive.
You've already admitted (post # 5197, page 208) that many theories put forward here (mostly by ENT) are laughable.
Last edited by Latindancer; 24-09-2014 at 04:41 AM.
Thanks for the link, that's more than I've gotten from Floriduhborn but unfortunately that post and the following posts I read dealt with with whether a plane or a missile hit the Pentagon and I never claimed it was a missile, the evidence indicates it was a 757. My only question about that is why the 3300kg engines didn't leave two marks on the building while a flimsy fuselage, that albeit did of course weigh more, tore through the outer wall and two inner rings of the building? It's an unanswered question, not a conspiracy theory.
I still haven't seen any credible explanation for why all 19 hijackers names were ommitted from the passenger manifests reportered by the media the day of the attack. Or why the FBI/CIA were able to identify them all within 24 hours when there were no survivors,
I guess they could go through the manifests and scan for known or suspected terrorists. But, if they were on that list, why weren't they on a no-fly list especially considering the government were on alert for terrorist attacks?
I also find it highly unlikely that three buildings were preloaded with explosives without anyone noticing it but I find it equally strange that the first three steel frame skyscrapers to ever collapse from a fire, all happened on the same day and one building didn't even have accelerants to feed the fire.
WTC 7 photos showed damage to one corner and had a few fires burning inside yet when it collapsed, it fell straight down, starting in the middle and falling just like all the videos of controlled demolition. Even demolition experts have said it looked like controlled demolition.
If things don't add up, I ask question. If I see or hear more convincing evidence, I change my option based on the new data.
I just haven't seen nor heard any convincing reasons yet.
I don't argue to be right, I discuss things to uncover the truth.
When I see videos of the mayor of Shanksville say "that wasn't a plane that made that hole", watch pentagon employees say they didn't see a plane, watch eye witnesses in Manhattan saying that the second plane was a grey, windowless jet with no markings, It makes me wonder why.
The US has a history of false flag operations. If a government has been deceptive and deceitful in the past I'm not going to rule out that they're not doing it again.
If you know someone who has lied to you in the past, and things don't add up in a story they tell you, I think any reasonable person would question the veracity of their story.
I also found it odd that the US, despite their multi-billion dollar defense budget, couldn't get a single plane in the air to intercept the four airliners. When they did, at least two planes were sent the opposite direction, over the Atlantic. The excuse is they were all busy playing Army and doing a preparedness exercise training what to do if terrorists flew a plane into a building. What are the odds of that?
Where are you getting this from? Of course they were on the passenger lists...and there was CCTV coverage of at least some of them going through the gate to board the plane.Originally Posted by Your name here
None of them were suspected anything. There were all in the US legally...mostly on student visas I believe. They all knew each other and had studied and become radicalized in Hamburg. (lots of landlords, teachers and others knew them in Germany), and their backgrounds were all well researched and established after 9/11Originally Posted by Your name here
The particular design and construction of the towers was the proximate cause of the so called controlled demolition...or the appearance of such. If you fly a big airplane into a structure and destroy 6-8 floors in the right area, (all on the same day) the resulting heat from the burning fuel in a confined area will be very intense and will weaken (but not melt) the steel support beams enough to cause a collapse of that section. Then the weight of the whole undamaged upper section comes down causing a progressive collapse of the lower section....a so called "pancake" effect. No need to wire explosives....but there were lots of "explosions" from expanding gasses, exploding glass sections and a kind of jet engine effect in the elevator shafts.Originally Posted by Your name here
I did not even have to google any of the above. It's been researched and authenticated beyond any reasonable doubt, but you will never hear any of this on the conspiracy sites....its all to rational and inconvenient.
Again the problem is that of misinformation and statements that were made by some sources before the actual cause was established.Originally Posted by Your name here
I've posted this about 100 times.... the fires on the upper floors where NOT the cause of collapse. The mass of debris falling form the towers caused severe structural damage to the lower levels as well as starting secondary fires. It was a combination of fire damage on the upper floors and the structural and fire damage a the bottom that eventually weakened the structure to the point of collapse. The design and the nature of the structure itself cause the appearance of controlled demolition.
All of these things have been examined, recorded, and beaten to death for 13 years. If people simply want to just not believe something, then no amount of reason, evidence or "proof" will ever change things....as can been readily observed in any 9/11 discussion.
That video contained no evidence as to where or when it was taken. When did they start using security cameras that didn't have time and date stamped across the bottom of the image? As for the 2 suspects we have no proof they are who they are without showing some ID. You get shown a video. Your told these are the terrorist. You accept that as being correct? And why no security footage of 'all of them boarding'?Originally Posted by koman
Last edited by Pragmatic; 24-09-2014 at 07:19 AM.
That's another one of the 100's of things that don't add up. 4 planes were alledgedly highjacked yet there is no footage of any of them (terrorists) at any time in any of the airports (with the 1000's of CCTV cameras) - other than you say, that mickey mouse bit of tape.
Well here we go again. Nit pick, hair split and deny. A CCTV video does not "prove" anything. It's just a piece of evidence like a million other pieces of evidence that combine to make a case. Just because all of them (as opposed to some of them) were not captured on CCTV means nothing other than being another suitable item for nutjobs to rave about. Maybe they were all on CCTV, but I've only seen some of them. They did use different airports.
When it suits you, we get a fuzzy picture of a cut beam or some fucking thing offered as "proof" that the CIA or somebody demolished three buildings with thermite bombs or whatever the conspiracy flavour of the day happens to be, but the combined mountain of evidence supporting the so called "official story" is dismissed in the face of something as compelling as a beam cut by some fireman somewhere in the debris field.
It would not matter if there were all on CCTV with time and date on anything else. You just deny deny deny....and then change course when the latest piece of bullshit is show for what it is.
Thats the problem koman people believe what they want no matter evidence one way or the other. You believe you are correct in your reasoning, but the fact remains you are no expert and you werent there. Neither was albert, ent, ld, harry, myself, or any others here.
You believe your answers above are good enough to explain all of the discrepancies away, and they are to you. Others might think otherwise myself included which is why this stupid thread has gone on so long.
As was said before the American govt is a proven liar and I choose to question everything they say or do just as I would for every other bullshit artist that I know.
I'm not saying it was Aliens, but it was Aliens!
How could they possibly combine "million" of pieces of evidence, analyze them and have solid answers 3 days after what the world thought might be the start of WW3?Originally Posted by koman
Yup.Originally Posted by beazalbob69
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)