You know what debate me 9/11 was not an inside job.

reply to post by ShiftTrio


Anyone in the planes that crashed into the WTC died...they didn't have to be in on it. All the supposed disproving has been done so with poor wording and sad excuses.

"You're crazy. Hitler would never do that to the jews. It doesn't make any sense. Why does everything have to be a conspiracy?"

I'm sure ya'll get what i'm saying here. The simple fact that American's got fooled into the Iraq war is ample proof that you can be manipulated by government (and their goons-media, etc.) relatively easily.

Personally, I believe the evil occultists would do such a thing.

And if the Decider did see the first plane hit the building live on TV like he said he did, it must have been on a private channel...

And one thing I clearly remember was that CNN had it scroll across the bottom of the screen that there may have been up to 8 planes hijacked because they were tracking 4 that were leaving US airspace.

Don't know if it's true or not, but that's what it said.

[edit on 15/1/09 by NuclearPaul]

Originally posted by Make Speed Limit 45

Originally posted by ShiftTrio

With your way , 1000's of Americans are involved in killing other Americans for no gain of there own? For Haliburton? For what?

No gain??? They were paid of course. Just like our soldiers are paid to kill innocent people in iraq.

Yes your right here, additionally how and why did ppl put HUGE put
options on the airlines that were to be used and those ppl were NOT
middle eastern in origin.

Look at this:

Israeli's dancing and high fiving as towers fell, filming the event

Now if that doesn't make you say WTF ? Nothing will.

You think that 9/11 wasnt an inside job?

Thats because your either scared crapless of the truth, or your head is buried in the sand, go watch some more Fox news for yourself..

The truth is there you just have to look, If you have an ounce of common sense in your brain you'll see it....

Originally posted by ShiftTrio
These so called facts have been proven to be wrong over and over again, If the government is guilty of anything, its doing nothing to prevent it, its being taken off guard when they were warned. It was mishandling the "Now what do we do" part of this tragedy.

I call bull... sry but I have not seen anything about these so called facts proven wrong... 19 highjackers 6 are still alive (FACT) Never before in history has a steel high rise building collapsed simply because of fire. (FACT) ect..


and if you think this you haven't seen this
Zero: An Investigation Into 9-11
www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by thetruth777
Yes, I know 9/11 was an inside job, but a large number of people don't.


"You really think OUR GOVERNMENT would do that???"

"WHY would our government do something like this???"

"You're crazy if you believe a 9/11 conspiracy theorist"

"It is unpatriotic and anti-American to believe this garbage"


Answer there 3 arguments.

Unfortunately, you're presenting a backward argument and it's not possible to have a logical discussion based on that alone.

If you were to rephrase and provide us with evidence as to why it was an inside job, we could debate that.

To recap, you're making an accusation that 9/11 was an inside job which is away from or outside the normal accepted account of history. Based on that alone, you would be the one that would be required to present facts showing why history is wrong.

Innocent until proven guilty.

I guess another way to look at it is you're asking skeptics to prove your case for you instead of you doing the work yourself.

reply to post by jfj123


I don't agree. I think the OP is challenging the skeptics to prove their point. We don't know what truly is historically accurate because there is no "official" story about what happened on 9/11, that is if you believe that there is no "official" story. There was a thread somewhere about that recently.

Originally posted by FightLies
I call bull... sry but I have not seen anything about these so called facts proven wrong... 19 highjackers 6 are still alive (FACT)

Whoa...that's BS. There was a BBC story that reported it around 2001 but it turns out they'd just found some guys with similar names. If the hijackers were alive they'd be instant celebrities!

Haven't you ever heard of the "banality of evil"?

Whenever police investigate a crime they look at means, motive and opportunity.

Who had superior means with which to pull this off? BL & Co have a few billions to work with, a network of relatively lowtech agents, and a willingness to sacrifice vs B & Co with complete access and control of the military, a high tech intelligence service that could track BL & Co's finances and communications, a friendly unquestioning media, and access to the buildings in question. Close, but the nod goes to Bush & Co.

When we compare the positions of each of the suspects (Bin Laden & Co vs. Bush & Co) we find that both have strong motives: embarassing the US on the one hand (I don't see any other attainable motive here...anybody else?) vs passing the Patriot Act, implementing the dreams of "The New American Century", consolidating power in the Executive, creating an environment disallowing dissent, and making tons and tons of money. Hmmmm....tough one there, but I'm afraid Bush & Co have to get the nod for most powerful motives.

Opportunity: Bin Laden & Co have to work against incomplete intel and pray to Allah for help. Bush & Co get to schedule exercises, spoof the radars, and hold back the Air Force.

Who actually benefited the most?

Sorry, but everything points to Bush & Co.

9/11 was an inside job.

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
reply to post by jfj123

 

I don't agree. I think the OP is challenging the skeptics to prove their point.

I understand what the OP's point is, it's just that the way the OP is going about it is like saying,
"Prove god DOESN'T exist".

We don't know what truly is historically accurate because there is no "official" story about what happened on 9/11,

Actually there is. It's the NIST final report. As far as I know, that's the only sanctioned explanation of the events of 9/11.

On the skeptics end, really all we need to do is say, go look at the NIST reports. Those are the "official reports".

Now if someone doesn't believe them, it's up to them to present evidence against them.

this is proof of demolition!

or can you explain?

reply to post by Zerbst


What does the circled fire fighter have to do with proof of anything?

Explain why the circles prove demolition.

Originally posted by adam_zapple

Originally posted by FightLies
I call bull... sry but I have not seen anything about these so called facts proven wrong... 19 highjackers 6 are still alive (FACT)

Whoa...that's BS. There was a BBC story that reported it around 2001 but it turns out they'd just found some guys with similar names. If the hijackers were alive they'd be instant celebrities!

link please....... if Iam wrong I am wrong but I dont see anything that tells me Iam wrong....

here is my link
9/11 Hijackers ALIVE!
www.youtube.com...

and he did stand up and say that he was alive and well and if i remember right he also said he didnt know how to fly a plane

Originally posted by jfj123
reply to post by Zerbst

 

What does the circled fire fighter have to do with proof of anything?

Explain why the circles prove demolition.

what is circled are support columns cut on 45 degree angles leaving slag dripping below cut line which are evidence of some form of controlled demolition. at very least a fact deserving explanation. the fact that you see firefighters within the circles are evidence that you see only what you choose to see. the idea that nothing about these images deserves suspicion to you is strange? also assures me that discussing this with you, though i am curious to your twisted logic, is a complete waste of time.

to summarize :

actual photo = controlled demolition

what you choose to see = firefighters ass

Originally posted by jfj123
reply to post by Zerbst

 

What does the circled fire fighter have to do with proof of anything?

Explain why the circles prove demolition.

The firefighter isn't circled, the steel beams are.

What they show is that they were cut explosively: examine it for yourself and compare the edges of the beams with edges of beams seperated by known forces: melting, structural failure, and cutting explosives, then tell me what you think.

[edit on 16-1-2009 by apacheman]

Originally posted by Zerbst

Originally posted by jfj123
reply to post by Zerbst

 

What does the circled fire fighter have to do with proof of anything?

Explain why the circles prove demolition.

what is circled are support columns cut on 45 degree angles leaving slag dripping below cut line which are evidence of some form of controlled demolition. at very least a fact deserving explanation. the fact that you see firefighters within the circles are evidence that you see only what you choose to see. the idea that nothing about these images deserves suspicion to you is strange? also assures me that discussing this with you, though i am curious to your twisted logic, is a complete waste of time.

to summarize :

actual photo = controlled demolition

what you choose to see = firefighters ass

translation for slow people= THEY CUT THE BEAMS SO THE BUILDING WOULD FALL A CERTAIN WAY!!

Originally posted by Zerbst

this is proof of demolition!

or can you explain?

This photo also shows what I call candle drippings inside and outside of the steel beam with the oval shape around it. This explains why the building fell like a peeled banana.

Originally posted by Zerbst

Originally posted by jfj123
reply to post by Zerbst

 

What does the circled fire fighter have to do with proof of anything?

Explain why the circles prove demolition.

what is circled are support columns cut on 45 degree angles leaving slag dripping below cut line which are evidence of some form of controlled demolition. at very least a fact deserving explanation.

OK so you do agree it doesn't prove controlled demo, just that something looks odd and you'd like an explanation as to how it happened.
Just curious but could these have been cut as part of post collapse demo? Do you have a time frame for this photo and when post collapse demo started?

the fact that you see firefighters within the circles are evidence that you see only what you choose to see.

The reason I didn't originally see what I think I was supposed to see is that the particular circle with the firefighter in it that also had an I beam support with a straight edge, doesn't look unusual to me.

the idea that nothing about these images deserves suspicion to you is strange?

Well the idea that something strange happened just because you posted a photo and implied something strange may have happened, is in and of itself strange. Again, I don't know when this photo was taken. I don't know what part of the building that was and how it was originally designed or if it had even been cut, moved and repaired. The angled "cut" photo looks interesting but before I'd hang someone, I'd need a lot more info about the photo, the building and it's history. I wouldn't want to jump to conclusions, would I ?

also assures me that discussing this with you, though i am curious to your twisted logic, is a complete waste of time.

Well excuse me for not jumping to conclusions. Simply posting a photo with circles at points of interest is almost entirely useless without finding out a lot more information. Do you have all the background to the photo and the building itself so you can make an educated decision that yes indeed this had something to do with the collapse in that this was deliberate and premeditated sabotage?

Everything isn't as black and white as it may seem initially. I'm interesting in the truth and not jumping on a bandwagon because someone found a weird looking picture.

to summarize :

actual photo = controlled demolition

Actually all you can say is that according to you, it looks like controlled demolition but you have not shown it actually was controlled demolition based on the photo alone.

what you choose to see = firefighters ass

Useless comment

Originally posted by apacheman

Originally posted by jfj123
reply to post by Zerbst

 

What does the circled fire fighter have to do with proof of anything?

Explain why the circles prove demolition.

The firefighter isn't circled, the steel beams are.

What they show is that they were cut explosively: examine it for yourself and compre the edges of the beams with edges of beams spereated by known forces: melting, structural failure, and cutting explosives, then tell me what you think.

This is your opinion. What I'm looking for are actual facts. Sounds like you're parroting what you've read on a conspiracy site.