Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.

[eots]

I did not cut and paste the rules so it is not required

 

[eots]

again moron cant post a link and your videos are total unimpressive all but for the shot of the huge squid in the first one and there hardly answer the the ridiculousness of finding a passport ,,bandana and body of john O'Neill..but no black boxes

there's no squid in the first one
do you even know what a squid IS?
you have told me you did commercial diving, if you dont know what a squid is then that puts THAT claim into question

and the bandana was found in PA from flight 93
and it was a freak occurrence as you have been told

oh so the odds go up its three freak finds in plane crashes on 9/11 at different locations and different flights..and your squid line is as lame as scooby doo divers like yourself

 

[Fizz]

oh so the odds go up its three freak finds in plane crashes on 9/11 at different locations and different flights..and your squid line is as lame as scooby doo divers like yourself

you want to talk about odds? ok. lets talk about odds.

what are the odds of wiring an entire building for explosives without anyone noticing?

what are the odds of doing it again for a second building?

what are the odds of being able to do it again for a third building?

what are the odds of a plane crashing into a building in the exact spot that building is wired to explode first?

what are the odds of doing the same exact thing again for the second building?

what are the odds of being able to get the top of a building to noticeably tilt before total collapse?

what are the odds that the same guy that was framed as causing all this would take credit for it anyway?

what are the odds of blowing up a building in front of literally hundreds, if not thousands of cameras and not a single camera catches one single explosion?

what are the odds of being able to do it a second time?

what are the odds of doing it again a third time?

what are the odds that the government was able to pull off the greatest scam ever in front of millions of people live on TV and in person and yet was too stupid to even know where to bring the presidents plane and get air support for it for 40 minutes after it was airborne.

what are the odds that....... oh nevermind..... i am wasting time.... you dont really care about odds..... all you care about is proving the official version wrong and dont really give a shit about the truth. the truth is that all evidence points to the official story being true.

 

[eots]

the odds are far better with planning and expertise than a huge series of unprecedented or phenomenally rare events a occurring one day around one single monumental event by sheer chance as is the supposed case with 9/11

 

[eots]

and many of your what are the odds questions are not even valid or true

 

[Fizz]

the odds are far better with planning and expertise than a huge series of unprecedented or phenomenally rare events a occurring one day around one single monumental event by sheer chance as is the supposed case with 9/11

i can prove the events of 9/11 were planned. can you prove explosives were?

 

[eots]

you cant prove anything what the hell are you talking about ,,you cant even make a compelling argument for the official story being plausible or support your building fires did it theory with any conclusive evidence.. never mind prove it

 

[Fizz]

you cant prove anything what the hell are you talking about ,,you cant even make a compelling argument for the official story being plausible or support your building fires did it theory with any conclusive evidence.. never mind prove it

actually, my theory is the "TWO BIG FUCKING PLANES CRASHED INTO THE BUILDINGS" theory that you twoofers seem to forget so easy.

 

[eots]

wow you are not even certain of that ?

 

[Fizz]

wow you are not even certain of that ?

its a bit like trying to be certain of the cause of death of a suicide bomber. i dont care if the bomb caused cardiac damage or brain damage. i am certain the root of the problem is the fucking bomb strapped to his chest.

 

[eots]

Fizz
its a bit like trying to be certain of the cause of death of a suicide bomber. i dont care if the bomb caused cardiac damage or brain damage. i am certain the root of the problem is the fucking bomb strapped to his chest.

really ..how intresting

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u3JSEqNtlg[/ame]

 

[Fizz]

funny that you should mention the george washington bridge. i do believe there was something extremely strange going on there as i had a firend there that day. i'll keep the details to myself for now since you probably wouldnt believe me anyway (especially in light of the coincidence of meeting Atta in 2000 in the philippines) but if there is anything i do find strange about 9/11 this is at the top of the list.

 

[eots]

funny that you should mention the george washington bridge. i do believe there was something extremely strange going on there as i had a firend there that day. i'll keep the details to myself for now since you probably wouldnt believe me anyway (especially in light of the coincidence of meeting Atta in 2000 in the philippines) but if there is anything i do find strange about 9/11 this is at the top of the list.

ok max..

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Akwki7Ozbm0[/ame]

 

[Toro]

the odds are far better with planning and expertise than a huge series of unprecedented or phenomenally rare events a occurring one day around one single monumental event by sheer chance as is the supposed case with 9/11

Right, the odds of planning and expertise of 19 guys hijacking four jets in a co-ordinated attack on the same day is far greater than a rare series of events that would have to occur if the conspiracy theorists' were correct.

That's the point!

 

[eots]

but an incorrect one...19 guys didn't plant passports ..19 guys didn't plan a NORAD stand down 19 guys didn't plan all the intelligence failures and non response to warning from intelligence and even the public required for even limited success.. for black boxes to vanish..for three buildings to fall..the spoliation of the crime scene ..the withholding of evidence the blocking of investigations..for the death of john O'Neil

 

[Toro]

but an incorrect one...19 guys didn't plant passports ..19 guys didn't plan a NORAD stand down 19 guys didn't plan all the intelligence failures and non response to warning from intelligence and even the public required for even limited success.. for black boxes to vanish..for three buildings to fall..the spoliation of the crime scene ..the withholding of evidence the blocking of investigations..for the death of john O'Neil

The odds of failure in a complex system are far greater than the odds of success in a complex system. The more complex the system, the odds of failure rises and the odds of success falls in a non-linear fashion. Conspiracy theories - all conspiracy theories - assume a level of control and influence over random events and underestimates the nature of randomness. That is why it is far more plausible that 19 guys with box cutters slammed planes into buildings than an elaborate and complex scheme by the government that would require thousands of people to pull off. The terrorists' plot was simple and exploited the random failures in a complex system. A government conspiracy would have to have been enormously complex, and would have to have been executed in a near-perfect manner.

 

[eots]

except it would not succeed based on the plan they were capable of ..a plan can be so simplistic that it is all but sure to fail..they would of been stopped several times over and even if all that failed they would never of got past NORAD

 

[Toro]

except it would not succeed based on the plan they were capable of ..a plan can be so simplistic that it is all but sure to fail..they would of been stopped several times over and even if all that failed they would never of got past NORAD

Of course it could succeed. It did. Its easy to see how.

Security at airports used to be lax. After the hijackings in the 70s, everyone learned not to resist. Nobody would expect hijackers to use box-cutters. Everyone expects hijackers to use guns so that's what they look for. Passengers who were hijacked would expect to have been taken to Cuba, not to be slammed into buildings. Therefore, nobody resists. And it is difficult to believe so people aren't as vigilant as they would be if they were expecting it.

And how do you now that everything got passed NORAD? Isn't one of the conspiracy theories that a plane was shot out of the sky over PA? How do you know that it wasn't blown apart by a fighter? I don't think it was, but it is the only plausible conspiracy theory. And if it was, why would a fighter blow it out of the sky and let the other three planes hit buildings? Why would it not be allowed to hit its next target, whatever it may be?

 

[eots]

Of course it could succeed. It did. Its easy to see how.

Security at airports used to be lax. After the hijackings in the 70s, everyone learned not to resist. Nobody would expect hijackers to use box-cutters. Everyone expects hijackers to use guns so that's what they look for. Passengers who were hijacked would expect to have been taken to Cuba, not to be slammed into buildings. Therefore, nobody resists. And it is difficult to believe so people aren't as vigilant as they would be if they were expecting it

.


getting a sharp object on a plane is still no big task and you ignore the ample prior warnings and offer no examination of the timeline and the ability to intercept or the many conflicts of critical testimony of key people involved at NORAD and the FAA

And how do you now that everything got passed NORAD? Isn't one of the conspiracy theories that a plane was shot out of the sky over PA? How do you know that it wasn't blown apart by a fighter

the stalling of air defense could no longer be contained

I don't think it was, but it is the only plausible conspiracy theory. And if it was, why would a fighter blow it out of the sky and let the other three planes hit buildings? Why would it not be allowed to hit its next target, whatever it may be

same answer...these are theories..only a honest independent investigation with full subpoena power, testimony under oath and subject to cross examination will give definitive answers...the absolute certainty is the official reports are cover-ups,,and almost completely false

 

[Liability]

Of course it could succeed. It did. Its easy to see how.

Security at airports used to be lax. After the hijackings in the 70s, everyone learned not to resist. Nobody would expect hijackers to use box-cutters. Everyone expects hijackers to use guns so that's what they look for. Passengers who were hijacked would expect to have been taken to Cuba, not to be slammed into buildings. Therefore, nobody resists. And it is difficult to believe so people aren't as vigilant as they would be if they were expecting it

.


getting a sharp object on a plane is still no big task and you ignore the ample prior warnings and offer no examination of the timeline and the ability to intercept or the many conflicts of critical testimony of key people involved at NORAD and the FAA

And how do you now that everything got passed NORAD? Isn't one of the conspiracy theories that a plane was shot out of the sky over PA? How do you know that it wasn't blown apart by a fighter

the stalling of air defense could no longer be contained

I don't think it was, but it is the only plausible conspiracy theory. And if it was, why would a fighter blow it out of the sky and let the other three planes hit buildings? Why would it not be allowed to hit its next target, whatever it may be

same answer...these are theories..only a honest independent investigation with full subpoena power, testimony under oath and subject to cross examination will give definitive answers...the absolute certainty is the official reports are cover-ups,,and almost completely false

There was a full, complete investigation. In fact, its findings and supporting documentation are fairly described as voluminous. There is nothing of any REAL concern left unaddressed. There are always, in such investigations, some opportunities for idiots -- such as you -- to cobble some dark sinister mystery out of. But nothing of any validity.

We know who did it. Despite your pathetic mewings, we also know who didn't do it.

So, fuck off.