TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- September 11th Attacks - Do You Think It Was a Conspiracy?
Pages (19): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 »

ask Bill Maher.


Bill Maher. This popular figure for the liberal wing confirms this particular forum has some _____________ people.

quote:

Originally posted by LittleGoku ask Bill Maher. Bill Maher. This popular figure for the liberal wing confirms this particular forum has some _____________ people.

It's really easy to back the government's official story - just as long as you don't investigate all of the whitewash, inconsistencies, ommissions and distortions that have congruously become a part of it.

Although I do agree with him sometimes, I think that Bill Maher is for the most part just another left-leaning gatekeeper.

The towers were brought down by secondary explosions. I have no sources, but I do recall the twin towers being specifically designed to withstand commercial jet liner accidents.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton The towers were brought down by secondary explosions. I have no sources, but I do recall the twin towers being specifically designed to withstand commercial jet liner accidents.

i didnt realise you threw your towel in with the morons? this is another half-truth propogated by the tinfoil brigade.

here's just the tiniest hint: the titanic was BUILT to be unsinkable. honestly, im surprised at your foolishness.

gee, imagine a massive building that was hit by a massive plane having "secondary explosions". i wouldve thought nothing at all would have happened afterwards- no explosions, no fire, nothing falling at all!

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton The towers were brought down by secondary explosions. I have no sources, but I do recall the twin towers being specifically designed to withstand commercial jet liner accidents.

Thats is alot of people talking about the same thing,and I highly doubt that are a bunch of conspiracy Theorists just making shit up.

Looks like we are getting close to the bottom of all this.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN i didnt realise you threw your towel in with the morons? this is another half-truth propogated by the tinfoil brigade. here's just the tiniest hint: the titanic was BUILT to be unsinkable. honestly, im surprised at your foolishness. gee, imagine a massive building that was hit by a massive plane having "secondary explosions". i wouldve thought nothing at all would have happened afterwards- no explosions, no fire, nothing falling at all!

Care to actually address the content of the video? I don't want to hear your speculation..

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Care to actually address the content of the video? I don't want to hear your speculation..

does it have anything other than various news reports from that chaotic day? does it have anything other than panicked people repeating hearsay and third-hand information? does it provide any evidence at all that the various "explosions" heard that day were generated by explosives rather than any of the million things that could explode in a skyscraper hit by a big plane?

honestly, i read your posts with interest and i am extremely surprised you could be duped by some half-arsed youtube video which doesn't actually present a shred of evidence. i am surprised you can't see the relationship between terror, panic, news reporters, rescuers etc and unsubstantiated theories that are born in such an environment.

i am also keen to hear your explanation of how the government overcame the logistical nightmare that was

-secretly planting explosives in a huge building x3
-hiding the demolition cord (hundreds of kilometers)
-knowing exactly where to plant them coz they knew exactly where the planes were going to hit

etc etc etc.

the controlled demolition hypothesis creates far more questions that it supposedly answers, and shame on you krypton for becoming an internet detective with second-rate movies

The US government isn't capable of keeping a secret. Especially one this large that would involve so many people. It's simply not feasible. Anyone who has seen the massive bureaucracy in action knows what I'm talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov The US government isn't capable of keeping a secret. Especially one this large that would involve so many people. It's simply not feasible. Anyone who has seen the massive bureaucracy in action knows what I'm talking about.

precisely, bush couldn't even keep his illegal wire-tapping secret ffs.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN precisely, bush couldn't even keep his illegal wire-tapping secret ffs.

Or Clinton's sex life, or Libby's phone records, or Gonzales' memos... etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Or Clinton's sex life, or Libby's phone records, or Gonzales' memos... etc.

Or Washington's homosexual and/or child prostitution rings, or what goes on at Area 51 (with thousands of people being flown in and out on a DAILY basis), etc.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer Looks like we are getting close to the bottom of all this.

there's more info coming to light every day

WTC 7: The Smoking Gun of 9/11



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwSc7NPn8Ok

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN does it have anything other than various news reports from that chaotic day? does it have anything other than panicked people repeating hearsay and third-hand information? does it provide any evidence at all that the various "explosions" heard that day were generated by explosives rather than any of the million things that could explode in a skyscraper hit by a big plane? honestly, i read your posts with interest and i am extremely surprised you could be duped by some half-arsed youtube video which doesn't actually present a shred of evidence. i am surprised you can't see the relationship between terror, panic, news reporters, rescuers etc and unsubstantiated theories that are born in such an environment. i am also keen to hear your explanation of how the government overcame the logistical nightmare that was -secretly planting explosives in a huge building x3 -hiding the demolition cord (hundreds of kilometers) -knowing exactly where to plant them coz they knew exactly where the planes were going to hit etc etc etc. the controlled demolition hypothesis creates far more questions that it supposedly answers, and shame on you krypton for becoming an internet detective with second-rate movies

Well, I want to know what these people heard.. You got any explanations for that? A video perhaps?

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Well, I want to know what these people heard.. You got any explanations for that? A video perhaps?

Nothing to see here. It was just swamp gas.

Now go back to sleep, they have everything under control.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X Nothing to see here. It was just swamp gas. Now go back to sleep, they have everything under control.

Patriotism compels me to obey, thank you sir for explaining everything..

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Patriotism compels me to obey, thank you sir for explaining everything..

What most people need to understand is that there is a huge difference between patriotism and blind nationalism.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X What most people need to understand is that there is a huge difference between patriotism and blind nationalism.

yep

So if 911 is an inside job, why don't we hunt down and execute these traitors? Revolution if you will? This is certainly a revolution catalyst...

The Zeitgeist documentary provides by far the best analysis of an inside job.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN does it have anything other than various news reports from that chaotic day? does it have anything other than panicked people repeating hearsay and third-hand information? does it provide any evidence at all that the various "explosions" heard that day were generated by explosives rather than any of the million things that could explode in a skyscraper hit by a big plane? honestly, i read your posts with interest and i am extremely surprised you could be duped by some half-arsed youtube video which doesn't actually present a shred of evidence. i am surprised you can't see the relationship between terror, panic, news reporters, rescuers etc and unsubstantiated theories that are born in such an environment. i am also keen to hear your explanation of how the government overcame the logistical nightmare that was -secretly planting explosives in a huge building x3 -hiding the demolition cord (hundreds of kilometers) -knowing exactly where to plant them coz they knew exactly where the planes were going to hit etc etc etc. the controlled demolition hypothesis creates far more questions that it supposedly answers, and shame on you krypton for becoming an internet detective with second-rate movies

maybe you'd care to explain to me why my best friends father who lives in manhattan while in a cab ride(he's no ct either) was told a day before september 11th not to go down in that area the next day, i find that rather strange don't you?!

quote:

Originally posted by SiLveR_NrGy_985 maybe you'd care to explain to me why my best friends father who lives in manhattan while in a cab ride(he's no ct either) was told a day before september 11th not to go down in that area the next day, i find that rather strange don't you?!

perhaps you'd like to explain to me why the government was haemorrhaging information so badly that even new york's cabbies knew something about the super secret conspiracy?

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN perhaps you'd like to explain to me why the government was haemorrhaging information so badly that even new york's cabbies knew something about the super secret conspiracy?

+1.

This whole thread seems like an exercise in wasted time, so I'll merely ask two questions.

1.) How many people would have to be included in the planning, preparation, and execution in order to pull off an intricate inside-job as described by your beloved Youtube videos?

2.) How did not a single one of these people say to themselves "Damn, the government just killed 2000 of their own people... maybe I should speak out?" There is a whistleblower in Washington every day who jeopardizes career and reputation in order to point out something illicit or improper happening in Washington. Every scandal inevitably has one. And yet there is no dissent on 9/11. Not a single government official, at any level, has stepped forward and revealed complicity in 9/11, and that to me says so much more than any video of loose connections and insinuated allegations ever could.

They might be threatened with death..

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton So if 911 is an inside job, why don't we hunt down and execute these traitors? Revolution if you will? This is certainly a revolution catalyst... The Zeitgeist documentary provides by far the best analysis of an inside job.

I think these people are just abolishing their own responsability, people couldn't do anything to stop 9/11 but they could do something about subsequent deception that resulted in invasion of iraq among others. So they would rather put attention to where they couldn't do anything that is 9/11 the day instead of everything that happened afterwards

Why did NORAD stand down? Why did Cheney or Bush have to give authorization for interception? Why did NORAD seemingly fail to do its duty, but every other time they are called to intercept by Air Traffic Control (not the WHite House), they did their job within minutes...

First of all, authorization of interception is not needed from the White House, otherwise, they would be busy all year long looking at radars and calling NORAD over 100 times a year.. NORAD was not incompetent, they were just following orders..

We have the most advanced radar defense system in the world, and our skies were left undefended for 2 hours. If this doesn't stink of corruption, I don't know what does..

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Why did NORAD stand down? Why did Cheney or Bush have to give authorization for interception? Why did NORAD seemingly fail to do its duty, but every other time they are called to intercept by Air Traffic Control (not the WHite House), they did their job within minutes... First of all, authorization of interception is not needed from the White House, otherwise, they would be busy all year long looking at radars and calling NORAD over 100 times a year.. NORAD was not incompetent, they were just following orders..

You need approval from the President to shoot down an airliner filled with American citizens. Especially when the threat is unknown - it was difficult pinpointing what planes were hijacked, etc. In fact, air traffic controllers were calling in hijacked planes whenever a pilot didn't respond to hailing - which occured fairly often unfortunately. Had NORAD acted impulsively without presidential approval, we probably would have had 10 airliners shot down and there would be a thread about over-reaction instead of under-reaction.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.