9/11 Conspiracy

[n0spam4me]

all of it...

Standard device to avoid having to define exactly what you object to.
The official explanation of 9/11 is an insult to human intelligence!

 

[SAYIT]

all of it...

Standard device to avoid having to define exactly what you object to.
The official explanation of 9/11 is an insult to human intelligence!

The alternate universe promoted by your "Truther" Movement proves you have none to be insulted.

 

[n0spam4me]

all of it...

Standard device to avoid having to define exactly what you object to.
The official explanation of 9/11 is an insult to human intelligence!

The alternate universe promoted by your "Truther" Movement proves you have none to be insulted.

So rather than supply some bit of supporting evidence for your case, that is the 19 suicidal hijackers argument, you choose to post insult.

Thank U very much.

 

[SAYIT]

So rather than supply some bit of supporting evidence for your case, that is the 19 suicidal hijackers argument, you choose to post insult.

Thank U very much.

I, like so many here, have had YEARS of trying to reason with loony 9/11 "Truthers." You demand all manner of proof (which you then ignore) while providing none for your silly CTs. If you were a child I might have more patience (although YEARS seems like enough). Now you get only the ridicule a pig-headed adult deserves. You're welcome.

 

[n0spam4me]

So rather than supply some bit of supporting evidence for your case, that is the 19 suicidal hijackers argument, you choose to post insult.

Thank U very much.

I, like so many here, have had YEARS of trying to reason with loony 9/11 "Truthers." You demand all manner of proof (which you then ignore) while providing none for your silly CTs. If you were a child I might have more patience (although YEARS seems like enough). Now you get only the ridicule a pig-headed adult deserves. You're welcome.

What we have here is a horrendous disaster, be it truly a terrorist attack carried out by radical Arabs, or whatever really happened. Bottom line, are people paying attention to what is happening here, if I where to go out with clip-board in hand and ask people on the street if they supported the 19 radical Arabs explanation, or? and most people would say they support the official story, and some would choose to call me rude names for even bringing up the subject and some would walk away pretending to have not heard me at all.

9/11 is a HUGE issue and it is seriously under documented.
Do people actually believe that the quantity of alleged aircraft wreckage extracted from each of the 4 crash sites, constitutes sufficient evidence to prove that an airliner did indeed crash at that location and indeed the aircraft was one of "FLT11", "FLT175", "FLT77" or "FLT93"?

Do people actually BELIEVE that "FLT11" & "FLT175" could have not only penetrated completely into the skyscraper, but that a jet engine from "FLT175" could have had sufficient inertia to fly for blocks and land on Murray St? and the ONLY thing offered up so far - OH but the airliner was going SOOOO fast ......

The mainstream media was first to assert that 19 radicals hijacked airliners and used said airliners as weapons, did they properly support this assertion? I for one, am VERY skeptical.

 

[daws101]

all of it...

Standard device to avoid having to define exactly what you object to.
The official explanation of 9/11 is an insult to human intelligence!

false! since all of it is based on a false assumption then saying all of it, is precise and exact ..

 

[daws101]

So rather than supply some bit of supporting evidence for your case, that is the 19 suicidal hijackers argument, you choose to post insult.

Thank U very much.

I, like so many here, have had YEARS of trying to reason with loony 9/11 "Truthers." You demand all manner of proof (which you then ignore) while providing none for your silly CTs. If you were a child I might have more patience (although YEARS seems like enough). Now you get only the ridicule a pig-headed adult deserves. You're welcome.

What we have here is a horrendous disaster, be it truly a terrorist attack carried out by radical Arabs, or whatever really happened. Bottom line, are people paying attention to what is happening here, if I where to go out with clip-board in hand and ask people on the street if they supported the 19 radical Arabs explanation, or? and most people would say they support the official story, and some would choose to call me rude names for even bringing up the subject and some would walk away pretending to have not heard me at all.

9/11 is a HUGE issue and it is seriously under documented.
Do people actually believe that the quantity of alleged aircraft wreckage extracted from each of the 4 crash sites, constitutes sufficient evidence to prove that an airliner did indeed crash at that location and indeed the aircraft was one of "FLT11", "FLT175", "FLT77" or "FLT93"?

Do people actually BELIEVE that "FLT11" & "FLT175" could have not only penetrated completely into the skyscraper, but that a jet engine from "FLT175" could have had sufficient inertia to fly for blocks and land on Murray St? and the ONLY thing offered up so far - OH but the airliner was going SOOOO fast ......

The mainstream media was first to assert that 19 radicals hijacked airliners and used said airliners as weapons, did they properly support this assertion? I for one, am VERY skeptical.

Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results.”
― Narcotics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous

 

[n0spam4me]

The facts are clear here,
the complete destruction of WTC1,2 & 7
including the 2.25 sec of free-fall acceleration by WTC7,
the also completely illogical insistence on "FLT175" being flown at outrageous speed & penetrating completely into the WTC tower.
In addition to the same behavior by "FLT11".....

The fact that some people will call it wrong from the start and not even entertain discussion of the issue, speaks volumes.

 

[daws101]

The facts are clear here,
the complete destruction of WTC1,2 & 7
including the 2.25 sec of free-fall acceleration by WTC7,
the also completely illogical insistence on "FLT175" being flown at outrageous speed & penetrating completely into the WTC tower.
In addition to the same behavior by "FLT11".....

The fact that some people will call it wrong from the start and not even entertain discussion of the issue, speaks volumes.

another false conclusion based on a deeply biased and flawed POV..AND NOTHING ELSE.
THE ISSUE AS BE DISCUSSED AD NAUSEAM ...
Ad nauseam
Ad nauseam is a Latin term for a discussion that has continued so long that it has continued "to nausea". For example, the sentence "This topic has been discussed ad nauseam" signifies that the topic in question has been discussed extensively, and that those involved in the discussion have grown tired of it.

 

[n0spam4me]

so if you are truly tired of it, don't post, allow somebody else to get into the discussion. The problem here is that some people seek to negate evidence of anything that challenges the 19 radical hijackers story.

Please can we have some real discussion of the evidence, or will this thread degenerate into insults & B.S.?

 

[SAYIT]

So rather than supply some bit of supporting evidence for your case, that is the 19 suicidal hijackers argument, you choose to post insult.

Thank U very much.

I, like so many here, have had YEARS of trying to reason with loony 9/11 "Truthers." You demand all manner of proof (which you then ignore) while providing none for your silly CTs. If you were a child I might have more patience (although YEARS seems like enough). Now you get only the ridicule a pig-headed adult deserves. You're welcome.

What we have here is a horrendous disaster, be it truly a terrorist attack carried out by radical Arabs, or whatever really happened. Bottom line, are people paying attention to what is happening here, if I where to go out with clip-board in hand and ask people on the street if they supported the 19 radical Arabs explanation, or? and most people would say they support the official story, and some would choose to call me rude names for even bringing up the subject and some would walk away pretending to have not heard me at all.

9/11 is a HUGE issue and it is seriously under documented.
Do people actually believe that the quantity of alleged aircraft wreckage extracted from each of the 4 crash sites, constitutes sufficient evidence to prove that an airliner did indeed crash at that location and indeed the aircraft was one of "FLT11", "FLT175", "FLT77" or "FLT93"?

Do people actually BELIEVE that "FLT11" & "FLT175" could have not only penetrated completely into the skyscraper, but that a jet engine from "FLT175" could have had sufficient inertia to fly for blocks and land on Murray St? and the ONLY thing offered up so far - OH but the airliner was going SOOOO fast ......

The mainstream media was first to assert that 19 radicals hijacked airliners and used said airliners as weapons, did they properly support this assertion? I for one, am VERY skeptical.

SPAMMY! STOP! Your obsession with 9/11 now borders on insanity. It is over 13 years since we were attacked and we know what we know. Yes, it's incomplete and yes, not all your questions will ever be answered but unless someone comes up with some startling new info - and in 13+ years that just hasn't happened - there is no reason for rational people to reopen that wound. Do like so many "Truthers" have already done ... GIVE IT UP.
"I thought the term ‘Truth Movement’ meant that there’d be some search for truth. I was wrong." - Charlie Veitch

 

[SAYIT]

so if you are truly tired of it, don't post, allow somebody else to get into the discussion. The problem here is that some people seek to negate evidence of anything that challenges the 19 radical hijackers story.

Please can we have some real discussion of the evidence, or will this thread degenerate into insults & B.S.?

Ridiculous. When your pseudoscience was challenged by Gamelon you vanished like a fart in the wind ... TWICE ... and remained gone for weeks at a time. It is clear you are not here to argue real facts but rather to spew your silly CT du jour, ad nauseam. As such you are worthy only of the disdain, disrespect and ridicule you receive here.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

There. I said it. "9/11 Conspiracy."

In writing those words I have unavoidably linked myself and this posting to people who fret about "Area 51," who wear aluminum foil hats to prevent the CIA from stealing their thoughts, and those who think Castro (or the CIA) killed JFK.

But the events of 9/11 were obviously brought about by a criminal conspiracy (many people coordinating their actions to bring about a particular result), and the only remaining questions are (1) who conspired, (2) what was the objective, and (3) what conclusions are to be drawn.

We, the American public, are led to believe that basically all of the conspirators either died in the plane crashes or have been convicted in American courts, or were killed at a residential compound in Pakistan.

The Bogey Man (men) is (are) dead.

But I call your attention to the collapse of WTC7, a 48 story skyscraper that collapsed in a very controlled manner a couple hours after towers 1 and 2 collapsed. Looking at the video (sorry, I'm too technically stupid to link it), the collapse looks remarkably like the planned implosions of large buildings that we see on the news when one or another demolition company is brought in to destroy a large building for future development of the real estate. "We" are expected to believe that the plane crashes and the seismological movement from the previous events of that day so weakened the superstructure of WTC7 that it simply collapsed on its own.

But that is simply not believable, looking at the video. This was a planned implosion.

There is a former Marine (etc, etc, etc) called, "Alan Sabrosky" who makes a fairly convincing case that the events of 9/11 were the product of two parallel conspiracies, one by Arab-Muslim extremists and one by radical Zionists, the two of which being surreptitiously coordinated to impel the U.S. into a global war against Islam, for the benefit of the Zionist State.

Sabrosky cites other factual information from the days following 9/11 - men in white vans seen filming the events and "high-fiving" one another, and so forth.

Not surprisingly, there is a cottage industry of debunking Sabrosky, but viewed carefully, none of it refutes his facts; it's all about attacking his bona fides as a military consultant, lecturer, professor, and so on (his C.V. is quite impressive).

But the biggest factor supporting Sabrosky's theory is that IT WORKED! The attacks were the catalyst for a war against - basically - radical Islam, which worked to the benefit of the Zionists, beyond their wildest dreams, one might imagine.

I haven't done justice to Sabrosky's theory or summary in this short posting. If you have any interest in the question it is easy enough to look up and review. I personally have, until very recently, accepted the generally-held view that this was the work of a couple dozen Arab crazies who took a pretty good plan and turned into - posthumously - a fabulously successful terrorist attack, costing America thousands of lives and many billions of dollars. An attack that to this day makes air travel a royal pain in the ass for those of us who have to endure it.

Look it up. Whaddya think?

speaking of JFK,amazingly you got people at this site and other places as well who STILL think oswald did it amazingly.

whats really funny though is that even the government concluded in the 70's in the HSCA investigation that there was a second shooter involved,yet despite that,the government and the media to this day,STILL say oswald was the lone assassin.

despite the fact that 80% of americans no longer believe the warren commission report.

sheesh,no wonder people don't trust our government to tell the truth.

the bush dupes here and around the country obviously dont remember what they were taught in junior high school science classes cause if they did,they would know the laws of physics were violated with the collapse of the towers.

that one of many similarities between 9/11 and the jfk assassination is in both instances,the laws of physics were violated.

those people who accept the 9/11 commission report and the warren report,they need to look in the mirror when calling people who say the CIA was behind it,tin foli hatters.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

to no surprise at all,the CIA has one of their agents,agent sayit/aka sock dawgshit here to fart immediately after my post sending him here to troll the thread.

 

[n0spam4me]

I see a VERY strange phenomenon here, people who would ordinarily be very logical, hang on to the story about hijacked airliners being used as weapons, when in fact the evidence for said assumption is so VERY thin.

and its like, TABOO to question the official story? what?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

so if you are truly tired of it, don't post, allow somebody else to get into the discussion. The problem here is that some people seek to negate evidence of anything that challenges the 19 radical hijackers story.

Please can we have some real discussion of the evidence, or will this thread degenerate into insults & B.S.?

I see a VERY strange phenomenon here, people who would ordinarily be very logical, hang on to the story about hijacked airliners being used as weapons, when in fact the evidence for said assumption is so VERY thin.

and its like, TABOO to question the official story? what?

yep.

 

[daws101]

so if you are truly tired of it, don't post, allow somebody else to get into the discussion. The problem here is that some people seek to negate evidence of anything that challenges the 19 radical hijackers story.

Please can we have some real discussion of the evidence, or will this thread degenerate into insults & B.S.?

anybody who wishes to join in is welcome ...however that does not mean that that their truther bullshit will be treated with the same distain for specious reasoning, false assumptions and non credible "evidence" is .
just as yours is ....
what you want is some poor ignorant soul to agree with you..

 

[daws101]

There. I said it. "9/11 Conspiracy."

In writing those words I have unavoidably linked myself and this posting to people who fret about "Area 51," who wear aluminum foil hats to prevent the CIA from stealing their thoughts, and those who think Castro (or the CIA) killed JFK.

But the events of 9/11 were obviously brought about by a criminal conspiracy (many people coordinating their actions to bring about a particular result), and the only remaining questions are (1) who conspired, (2) what was the objective, and (3) what conclusions are to be drawn.

We, the American public, are led to believe that basically all of the conspirators either died in the plane crashes or have been convicted in American courts, or were killed at a residential compound in Pakistan.

The Bogey Man (men) is (are) dead.

But I call your attention to the collapse of WTC7, a 48 story skyscraper that collapsed in a very controlled manner a couple hours after towers 1 and 2 collapsed. Looking at the video (sorry, I'm too technically stupid to link it), the collapse looks remarkably like the planned implosions of large buildings that we see on the news when one or another demolition company is brought in to destroy a large building for future development of the real estate. "We" are expected to believe that the plane crashes and the seismological movement from the previous events of that day so weakened the superstructure of WTC7 that it simply collapsed on its own.

But that is simply not believable, looking at the video. This was a planned implosion.

There is a former Marine (etc, etc, etc) called, "Alan Sabrosky" who makes a fairly convincing case that the events of 9/11 were the product of two parallel conspiracies, one by Arab-Muslim extremists and one by radical Zionists, the two of which being surreptitiously coordinated to impel the U.S. into a global war against Islam, for the benefit of the Zionist State.

Sabrosky cites other factual information from the days following 9/11 - men in white vans seen filming the events and "high-fiving" one another, and so forth.

Not surprisingly, there is a cottage industry of debunking Sabrosky, but viewed carefully, none of it refutes his facts; it's all about attacking his bona fides as a military consultant, lecturer, professor, and so on (his C.V. is quite impressive).

But the biggest factor supporting Sabrosky's theory is that IT WORKED! The attacks were the catalyst for a war against - basically - radical Islam, which worked to the benefit of the Zionists, beyond their wildest dreams, one might imagine.

I haven't done justice to Sabrosky's theory or summary in this short posting. If you have any interest in the question it is easy enough to look up and review. I personally have, until very recently, accepted the generally-held view that this was the work of a couple dozen Arab crazies who took a pretty good plan and turned into - posthumously - a fabulously successful terrorist attack, costing America thousands of lives and many billions of dollars. An attack that to this day makes air travel a royal pain in the ass for those of us who have to endure it.

Look it up. Whaddya think?

speaking of JFK,amazingly you got people at this site and other places as well who STILL think oswald did it amazingly.

whats really funny though is that even the government concluded in the 70's in the HSCA investigation that there was a second shooter involved,yet despite that,the government and the media to this day,STILL say oswald was the lone assassin.

despite the fact that 80% of americans no longer believe the warren commission report.

sheesh,no wonder people don't trust our government to tell the truth.

the bush dupes here and around the country obviously dont remember what they were taught in junior high school science classes cause if they did,they would know the laws of physics were violated with the collapse of the towers.

that one of many similarities between 9/11 and the jfk assassination is in both instances,the laws of physics were violated.

those people who accept the 9/11 commission report and the warren report,they need to look in the mirror when calling people who say the CIA was behind it,tin foli hatters.

way to dodge the subject!
so tell us, why have you disappeared so often..?

 

[n0spam4me]

I notice that the title of this thread is "9/11 conspiracy"
OK, was it really suicidal radical Arabs conspiring together....
or was it some other entity(s) conspiring to commit fraud on a huge scale?

 

[Capstone]

way to dodge the subject!
so tell us, why have you disappeared so often..?

Yeah, because obviously, at least where stalker-types like you are concerned, "the subject(s)" of any and all threads are the posting activities of your chosen prey.