TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- 10 Year Anniversary 9/11 Tribute Thread
Pages (8): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 »

fuck

like no one ever was

Yes it's sad 3000 people died, what's more saddening is the +100,000's of people who lost their lives because of the retaliation ie: "war on terror" & "weapons of mass destruction".

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 None of this is funny. Anyone making a joke about any of this is a remarkable imbecile.

Fuck you. I sat trough the whole of that god awful Oliver Stone World Trade Center Movie. After going trough that i have a right to piss all over the actuall ground zero if i want to due to psychological scarring that terrible movie inflicted on me. 5 years later and i still dream about escaping the damn movie theater.

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018

quote:

Originally posted by narcism Yes it's sad 3000 people died, what's more saddening is the +100,000's of people who lost their lives because of the retaliation ie: "war on terror" & "weapons of mass destruction".

Eh, it was eventual.

You'd think a government who could pull off a job like 9-11 would at least be smart enough to put some fake WMDs in Iraq for them to find.

Amateurs!

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby You'd think a government who could pull off a job like 9-11 would at least be smart enough to put some fake WMDs in Iraq for them to find. Amateurs!

Thats the kicker... they did that on purpose so people would think they were to stupid to pull off 9/11 and say things like " You'd think a government who could pull off a job like 9-11 would at least be smart enough to put some fake WMDs in Iraq for them to find " to avoid any and all suspicion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemtr...nspiracy_theory

On a serious note. Some questions have not been answerred yet which as a mechanical engineer I think leave space for some doubts:

http://ae911truth.org/

http://rememberbuilding7.org/10/

quote:

Originally posted by Trance-MB On a serious note. Some questions have not been answerred yet which as a mechanical engineer I think leave space for some doubts: http://ae911truth.org/ http://rememberbuilding7.org/10/

Really?

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 None of this is funny. Anyone making a joke about any of this is a remarkable imbecile.

The funny thing is, I thought of the COR when I heard this a few days ago...

quote:

Also gone, supposedly, was the age of irony. It seemed as though nothing could ever again be mocked or taken lightly.

http://www.npr.org/templates/transc...oryId=140232514

quote:

Originally posted by EddieZilker Really?

Yeah, like this dutch demolition expert (died two months ago driving against a tree) who didn't know that building 7 collapsed the same day.

Congratulations, you're a fucking moron.

quote:

Originally posted by idoru Congratulations, you're a fucking moron.

Why, you act like I'm convinced of something?

quote:

Originally posted by Trance-MB

And videos like this, with clearly propagandandistic elements, confer so much legitimacy to these theories. If memory serves, Building 7 was a controlled demolition made two or three days after September 11. The engineer in your video is only being "told" that it occurred on the same day. He hasn't "discovered" this because of some uncovered, "hidden" evidence.

9/11 was orchestrated by the United States and the supposed moon landing was actually filmed in a studio

I have seen that video many times, but the smoke coming out of those windows doesn't look really strange to me.
Are you saying that did happen few days later?

quote:

Originally posted by dr.america supposed moon landing was actually filmed in a studio

Think that has been proven to be not possible (at that time).

quote:

Originally posted by Trance-MB I have seen that video many times, but the smoke coming out of those windows doesn't look really strange to me. Are you saying that did happen few days later?

The building was damaged beyond repair, in the attack. It was going to fall, eventually, so they made a controlled demolition of it so that it wouldn't damage the surrounding buildings or hurt anyone in case it fell, laterally. But I didn't embed the video so that you could analyze it for clues relevant to the theory that it was deliberately imploded on September 11.

Look at the ridiculously over-the-top graphics and how it was edited. Listen to the music. It's fucking retarded. My point is that you're linking to these paranoid imbeciles as though they were credible. They subvert their own credibility, however, trying to advance their message through very clear propagandistic manipulation.

On the first page you referenced, there's a slide (5) in the splash page slide show which has the phrase, "WTC Twin Towers EXPLOSIVE Evidence" in the upper right hand corner. Look at how the word EXPLOSIVE is positioned and how the font, as though it were stenciled on a crate of dynamite, differs from the rest of the text. If their argument didn't need to be supported with such a base suggestion, why put it up, at all?

Seems for the past few days the news if abuzz with the headline of "government has uncovered terrorist plot for 9/11 anniversary", but, really, it seems there is an uncovered 'new anniversary terrorist plot' every year.

They live on fear, they live on fear, they live on fear!

quote:

Originally posted by EddieZilker The building was damaged beyond repair, in the attack. It was going to fall, eventually, so they made a controlled demolition of it so that it wouldn't damage the surrounding buildings or hurt anyone in case it fell, laterally.

That made sense, but denying it doesn't.

quote:

But I didn't embed the video so that you could analyze it for clues relevant to the theory that it was deliberately imploded on September 11.

I didn't as I told you I have seen it before.

quote:

Look at the ridiculously over-the-top graphics and how it was edited. Listen to the music. It's fucking retarded. My point is that you're linking to these paranoid imbeciles as though they were credible. They subvert their own credibility, however, trying to advance their message through very clear propagandistic manipulation. On the first page you referenced, there's a slide (5) in the splash page slide show which has the phrase, "WTC Twin Towers EXPLOSIVE Evidence" in the upper right hand corner. Look at how the word EXPLOSIVE is positioned and how the font, as though it were stenciled on a crate of dynamite, differs from the rest of the text. If their argument didn't need to be supported with such a base suggestion, why put it up, at all?

Yes, it's retarded, but those are not the things which bring up questions.
To me they way they put it is typical American, so I look through that.

quote:

Originally posted by Trance-MB That made sense, but denying it doesn't.

Who denied what? I'm having trouble understanding what, specifically, you're referring to, throughout your entire post. I can't even be sure if you and I might actually agree about any point you're arguing. You couldn't be less clear when you post things like, "...those are not the things which bring up questions."

What questions are you talking about?

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