|
Hunter S. Thompson Commits Suicide (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by CyberneticAngel
I only have one question, why? Whats the motive?
(and no, don't link me, I am not going to look. I want you to try and put it in your own words instead of just repeating some crap you read on some nuts website) |
Ultimately? World government under a totalitarian, fascist state. |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nou
You need to shut the up and start thinking logically you ing gimp.
Yea, I am sure that there was a controlled explosion setup during the time that those planes had hit the building and the people in the buildings were evacuated, as well as firefighters and police and other personal, INCLUDING a video crew that has footage from inside the lobby of the first building to fall while it was being evacuated and fire crews were heading up. I seriously doubt that something like that would go un-noticed.
Yea, the planes were designed to take 757, a smaller aircraft than the 767 that did hit, and also was ment for it to hit at slow speeds (becuase it might be lost in fog, etc) not a fully loaded 767 travelling at 550 mph.
You're a ing fool if you think anything other than those planes took down the buildings. |
Typical, try and attack someone's character when you have little idea as to what you are talking about and cannot logically defend your argument.
Keep repeating the lies you've so ignorantly accepted and maybe your denial will save you. Or not. :rolleyes:
When could they have planted the bombs, you ask?
http://la.indymedia.org/news/2004/04/108539.php
http://www.sourcewatch.org/wiki.pht...h&printable=yes
Among the many other anomalies that can be used to refute the official story, I'd like to know how you attribute the molten steel in the basement to the planes crashing 80+ stories up. (Structural Steel melts at around 2800 degrees Fahrenheit) It doesn't sound like the planes really did as much structural damage as the public is being led to believe. At around 1100 degrees, the fires from the jet fuel couldn't even come close to being hot enough to melt structural steel, and even if they did manage to get that hot, the fuel would have burned off within 10-15 minutes. Of course, there is always the chance that they used Thermite.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0411/S00177.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation...-wtc-tape_x.htm
Also regarding the jet-fueled fire theory of bringing the tower down keep in mind that when Flight 175 hit the (corner of the) South Tower, the majority of it's fuel was ejected out of the side in a large fireball - greatly lessening it's chances of causing damage as severe as that of in the.
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JO...Eagar-0112.html
And yes, the towers were designed to absorb the impact from a 707 (the largest plane at the time) and not a 767. While it's 60,000 lbs lighter, the 707 actually travels at a higher velocity, so what's your point?
The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 707-320B is 336,000 pounds.
The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 767-200ER is 395,000 pounds.
The wingspan of a Boeing 707 is 146 feet
The wingspan of a Boeing 767 is 156 feet
The length of a Boeing 707 is 153 feet
The length of a Boeing 767 is 159 feet
The Boeing 707 could carry 23,000 gallons of fuel
The Boeing 767 could carry 23,980 gallons of fuel
The cruise speed of a Boeing 707 is 607 mph = 890 ft/s
The cruise speed of a Boeing 767 is 530 mph = 777 ft/s
| quote: | We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.
- David Rockefeller
|
|
|
|
| nchs09 |
| i just laughed a little. thx |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-brea...02755-6408r.htm
http://www.booktv.org/General/index...677&schedID=362
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-brea...02755-6408r.htm
Senator Accuses Bush of Cover-Up
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: September 8, 2004
WASHINGTON, Sept. 7 (AP) - Senator Bob Graham, the Florida Democrat who is a former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused the White House on Tuesday of covering up evidence that might have linked Saudi Arabia to the Sept. 11 hijackers.
Mr. Graham made the accusation in a new book and repeated it at a news conference Tuesday arranged by Senator John Kerry's presidential campaign. Republicans called the accusations "bizarre conspiracy theories," and the Saudis said they were unsubstantiated and reckless.
The accusation stems from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's refusal to allow investigators for a Congressional inquiry and the independent Sept. 11 commission to interview an informant, Abdussattar Shaikh, who had been the landlord in San Diego of two Sept. 11 hijackers.
In his book "Intelligence Matters," Mr. Graham, the co-chairman of the Congressional inquiry with Representative Porter J. Goss, Republican of Florida, said an F.B.I. official wrote them in November 2002 and said "the administration would not sanction a staff interview with the source.'' On Tuesday, Mr. Graham called the letter "a smoking gun" and said, "The reason for this cover-up goes right to the White House."
The report added to suspicions about a Saudi role in the hijacking plot.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/08/p...5070&oref=login
No there's no cover up :rolleyes:
Senator Dayton: NORAD Lied About 9/11
http://www.911truth.org/article.php...040731213239607 |
|
|
| nchs09 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trancer-X
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-brea...02755-6408r.htm
http://www.booktv.org/General/index...677&schedID=362
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-brea...02755-6408r.htm
Senator Accuses Bush of Cover-Up
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: September 8, 2004
WASHINGTON, Sept. 7 (AP) - Senator Bob Graham, the Florida Democrat who is a former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused the White House on Tuesday of covering up evidence that might have linked Saudi Arabia to the Sept. 11 hijackers.
Mr. Graham made the accusation in a new book and repeated it at a news conference Tuesday arranged by Senator John Kerry's presidential campaign. Republicans called the accusations "bizarre conspiracy theories," and the Saudis said they were unsubstantiated and reckless.
The accusation stems from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's refusal to allow investigators for a Congressional inquiry and the independent Sept. 11 commission to interview an informant, Abdussattar Shaikh, who had been the landlord in San Diego of two Sept. 11 hijackers.
In his book "Intelligence Matters," Mr. Graham, the co-chairman of the Congressional inquiry with Representative Porter J. Goss, Republican of Florida, said an F.B.I. official wrote them in November 2002 and said "the administration would not sanction a staff interview with the source.'' On Tuesday, Mr. Graham called the letter "a smoking gun" and said, "The reason for this cover-up goes right to the White House."
The report added to suspicions about a Saudi role in the hijacking plot.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/08/p...5070&oref=login
No there's no cover up :rolleyes:
Senator Dayton: NORAD Lied About 9/11
http://www.911truth.org/article.php...040731213239607 |
so wait a senator says something and we all MUST bel...
ok nevermind. lol i dont really care that much to argue this. lol |
|
|
| jrbuddha |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trancer-X
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-brea...02755-6408r.htm
http://www.booktv.org/General/index...677&schedID=362
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-brea...02755-6408r.htm
Senator Accuses Bush of Cover-Up
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: September 8, 2004
WASHINGTON, Sept. 7 (AP) - Senator Bob Graham, the Florida Democrat who is a former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused the White House on Tuesday of covering up evidence that might have linked Saudi Arabia to the Sept. 11 hijackers.
Mr. Graham made the accusation in a new book and repeated it at a news conference Tuesday arranged by Senator John Kerry's presidential campaign. Republicans called the accusations "bizarre conspiracy theories," and the Saudis said they were unsubstantiated and reckless.
The accusation stems from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's refusal to allow investigators for a Congressional inquiry and the independent Sept. 11 commission to interview an informant, Abdussattar Shaikh, who had been the landlord in San Diego of two Sept. 11 hijackers.
In his book "Intelligence Matters," Mr. Graham, the co-chairman of the Congressional inquiry with Representative Porter J. Goss, Republican of Florida, said an F.B.I. official wrote them in November 2002 and said "the administration would not sanction a staff interview with the source.'' On Tuesday, Mr. Graham called the letter "a smoking gun" and said, "The reason for this cover-up goes right to the White House."
The report added to suspicions about a Saudi role in the hijacking plot.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/08/p...5070&oref=login
No there's no cover up :rolleyes:
Senator Dayton: NORAD Lied About 9/11
http://www.911truth.org/article.php...040731213239607 |
wow...all it looks like to me, was that Graham was trying to get some free publicity for his book...and dips like you take it as fact. |
|
|
| DJFreaq |
 that is all |
|
|
| nchs09 |
| wtf nou u belive in this so strongly? for one wack job out there u dont ahve to go all crazy.. count to 10. |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nou
I am attacking your character because its a fundamental part of your argument.
You are an idiot.
Most likely this was the huge support beams that ran from the exoskeleton of the building to the internal support structure breaking.
That second link had nothing to do with anything... :conf:
First off, the steal didn't melt, its integrity was compromised by the heat and the weight of the building caused it to fail.
Thermite would be an unlikely method as its hard to deploy, and if it were used it would have been thrown all over the place during the collapse. Thermite burns hot and quickly.
You have to remember that the building collapsed onto a subway tunnel, and a lot of the fires centered around the areas close the line, which basically let huge amounts of oxygen in to fuel fires of debris that were in the wreckage.
The fact that it hit the side was even more damaging as one of the points that failed worse than the actual beams were the parts that attached it to the super structure. When those parts failed the floors started falling apart and falling on top of each other. Eventually the weight was too much and it just all went down.
Yes, true that it has a faster cruising speed but the design of the buildings was meant to take a 707 at 250-300 miles an hour and the situation was based around a plane that had been lost in the fog, and most likely was at the end of its journey (it would be more likely that a plane coming in would get lost and hit then a plane leaving and following direct routes away from the city).
The planes that hit the towers were traveling at nearly twice the speed and had an almost full fuel load.
OK now to totally prove your wrong.
Do you even know the basics of a controlled demolition? You have to practically strip a building bare and place explosives on exposed parts of the structure. I doubt this would go unnoticed at the world trade center site. It also takes along time to do this and lots and lots of people involved. Its really hard to keep secrets that big.
Now just to prove Mr. Thompson wrong, watch ANY video of the buildings collapsing and you will see that the building collapses from the top. THE PARTS UNDER THE COLLAPSING TOP SECTIONS DO NOT MOVE! IF IT WERE BLOWN UP FROM THE BASE THAT MEANS THE WHOLE BUILDING WOULD BE MOVING AT ONCE!!!
Unless every video taken, personal and network, was somehow faked, along with live video that I watched on TV when it happened then he is totally baseless and wrong.
THIS IS CALLED BASIC LOGIC, AND THATS WHY I CAN CALL YOU AND IDIOT AND ITS NOT AN ATTACK OF CHARACTER, ITS POINTING OUT A FACT.
idiot. |
It's funny, because I can almost picture you trying to make sense out of all of this, but coming up short you are forced to resort to personal attacks. That's what people of lower intelligence do out of desperation - they resort to using ad-hominem attacks.
Anyway, back to the topic. The second link has much to do with it.
George W. Bush's brother was on the board of directors of a company providing electronic security for the World Trade Center, Dulles International Airport and United Airlines, according to public records. The company was backed by an investment firm, the Kuwait-American Corp., also linked for years to the Bush family.
It's cool how you're calling me an idiot when you're the one that is arguing against a society of engineers and physicists who have put their careers on the line by claiming that it would be virtually impossible (aside from implementing controlled demolition) for the Towers to have fallen like that.
BTW - the seismic data as well as the video footage from the ground points to a large quake 9 seconds before the North Tower collapsed into it's own footprint. It's against all odds that it could have happened so neatly WITHOUT using controlled demolition.
You still haven't answered me about the molten steel in the basement, btw.
And since you seem to know everthing about these events, can you explain to me why they changed the story on Tower 7? Larry Silverstein himself said that they pulled it, so why does the official story say otherwise? Hmmmmmmm?
Now please try to convince me that you're not the 14 year old adolescent you seem to be, and dispense with the personal insults which add absolutely nothing to the argument. I'm sure you know how to have an honest discussion without getting your panties in a bunch. It's called emotional maturity, so try to display some for a change.
;) |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nou
Trancer-X, I will agree with you and suggest that there might have been a cover up over 9-11.
But the cover up was not of the US planning and committing these acts.
Arab extremist Muslims carried out these attacks. The US probably knew of these attacks.
Either through blunder (which I wouldn't put past our agencies, they are pretty retarded) or turning a blind eye the US let 9-11 happen.
But one thing I know for sure is that those planes are the soul reason for those two buildings to collapse, along with WTC Tower 7 which collapsed due to debris from one of the main towers (see it wasn't a totally controlled collapse, the buildings fell to their sides and smashed another building to a point of collapse). |
So I guess that's why so many CIA agents and FBI agents were up in arms when they were blocked from further investigating the terrorists.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/knew/
I just think it's funny how few people seem to talk about this, but as soon as someone starts posting all of the relevant information they are attacked and called "whacko's!"
Perhaps you spineless souls are the whacko's for being such sheeple, taking every lie at face value and then attacking anyone who says otherwise.
The facts don't lie, and I'm sure that they will ALL be revealed some day, just as Germany's Reichstag fire was. |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nou
I HATE IDIOTS AND IGNORANCE!
But yea, I am done. If he is stupid enough to keep believing that hopefully he walks in front of a bus. |
Worse than that, though, is hubris. Exaggerated self-confidence in THINKING that you know.
Your comments reflect greatly on your character, or lack therof.
And don't hate yourself so much, there will be a day when you finally grow up and understand that not everything is as it appears, that the government has, and will continue to lie to you - especially if you continue to be so arrogantly naive in your propagandized assertions. |
|
|
|
|
