|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Apr 10th, 2006 01:23 PM | ||||
| Geggy |
Nothing happened...you know, as usual? It wasn't only Cheney who has accidently flubbed Osama's innocence. W. Bush has flubbed Osama's innocence 13 times since 9/11. Last time was in an interview in Dec. 2005.  Tom Kenney of FEMA’s National Urban Search and Rescue Team, accidently told Dan Rather of CBS News that FEMA had arrived in New York on the night of September 10, 2001, the day before they were schduled to perform terror drills... Rumsfeld who is known to be a loose cannon, has accidently hinted that flight 93 was shot down. Speaking of Rummy, here is another "coincidence", the looting of $2.6 trillion...  SEC. RUMSFELD: (7/16/01) As you know, the Department of Defense really is not in charge of its civilian workforce, in a certain sense. It's the OPM, or Office of Personnel management, I guess. There are all kinds of long- standing rules and regulations about what you can do and what you can't do. I know Dr. Zakheim's been trying to hire CPAs because the financial systems of the department are so snarled up that we can't account for some $2.6 trillion in transactions that exist, if that's believable. And yet we're told that we can't hire CPAs to help untangle it in many respects. Rumsfeld  9/10/01) Well, it takes some time. And, indeed, as you know, sometimes you need to invest some money upfront to make savings. For example, we're going to have to revamp our financial system so that we can actually understand what's taking place. At the present time, the financial systems aren't capable of tracking some 2.6 trillion dollars worth of transactions.Then 9/11 happened and this story dissappeared... |
|||
| Apr 8th, 2006 06:26 PM | ||||
| KevinTheOmnivore |
Quote:
|
|||
| Apr 7th, 2006 01:33 PM | ||||
| Geggy |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
| Apr 7th, 2006 01:26 PM | ||||
| KevinTheOmnivore |
Quote:
|
|||
| Apr 7th, 2006 01:24 PM | ||||
| Geggy |
Quote:
in case you missed this article... The former head of the Star Wars missile defense program under Presidents Ford and Carter has gone public to say that the official version of 9/11 is a conspiracy theory and his main suspect for the architect of the attack is Vice President Dick Cheney. Dont get me wrong, I only take Alex Jones seriously half the time. He's a bit too over the top. But he does provide a lot of balanced news. |
|||
| Apr 7th, 2006 12:18 PM | ||||
| Ant10708 |
They think its because he has to lie about so many things. Geggy I didn't know we were having a mock war. I thought we were actually discussing things you take pretty seriously. I'm trying my best to raise questions for the debate instead of just dismissing it all. I also wouldn't throw a bong out the window. Cops see contrband thrown out the car you still get in trouble for it or atleast a $500 littering fine. In NY anyways. I've been pulled over 3 times by local pigs(who have the least to do yet get paid the most) when I was really blazed and got off with them having no suspicions. Just gotta act calm and pray the car does not smell like skunk. The bud I had that was grown in Maine was boss! I havn't tried Vermont bud to my knowledge yet. |
|||
| Apr 7th, 2006 11:38 AM | ||||
| KevinTheOmnivore |
So Geggy, btw, did we ever get down to the bottom of Cheney contradicting Osama's involvement in 9/11? I'm really curious. |
|||
| Apr 7th, 2006 11:26 AM | ||||
| KevinTheOmnivore | Maybe she had gas. | |||
| Apr 7th, 2006 11:20 AM | ||||
| Geggy |
Quote:
They knew beforehand that it would be hard for anyone to discuss the distortions of 9/11 because if I bring up the topic, it would reopen other people's wounds and makes it more difficult for them to comprehend. They'd rather leave the blinders shut and cling on the 9/11 official conspiracy theory because it's more comforting for them. An interesting picture I've recently found...  This photo was taken at the 9/11 memorial service at the Washington National Cathedral. Printed in the European version of Time magazine on 24 September 2001. Page 56. The sinister facial expression of Barbara's is priceless...[/img] |
|||
| Apr 6th, 2006 04:31 PM | ||||
| Geggy |
The first person to admit they're joking usually loses in a mock war. I was messing with you about being a stoner. I knew you were one when you've claimed to be one several times in the past. I could care less that you smoke pot. I'm a former stoner myself. Currently I smoke only during biking season because it helps take my mind off things to increase focus and stamina while I'm riding. You should try the stuff from Vermont or Maine. They're the fucking boss. I don't know what really happened in the pentagon attack. Anything that I come to a conclusion would be a conspiracy theory because I wouldn't have any proof backed up. I think an American Airline boeing hit it. Because several witnesses have claimed they saw an AA crashing into the building. Firefighters and cops are regular joes like you and I, how'd do you think they'd react if they saw something that wasn't a boeing? But I admit the fact that top officials wouldn't release tapes of the pentagon attack is very suspicious. I think flight 93 was shot down because the plane exploded into confetti and was scattered 8 miles across the field. Or maybe there was a bomb inside the plane. Nobody really knows for sure, which is why I don't spend a lot of time on it. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center]The government agencies housed at 7 World Trade Center were the United States Secret Service, the Department of Defense, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), the Mayor's Office of Emergency Management, the Internal Revenue Service Regional Council ("IRS"), and the Central Intelligence Agency ("CIA").[url] They probably imploded WTC7 to get rid of evidence of documents and control devices, the same way you would throw out a bong of a moving car as soon as a cop switches on the sirens. If they've found a bong in your car, they would suspect you have some pot on you. Because of 9/11 people now realize a terror attack that massive could occur on america soil, which is why homeland security invented the terror alert level to keep the public frightened. People are going to continue to support the war on terror until every one last of them motherfuckers in middle east are killed so we can feel safe again. Why didn't they strike the white house? Good question. If I was an islamic terrorist, white house would be my primrary target, or the capitol. |
|||
| Apr 6th, 2006 01:56 PM | ||||
| Ant10708 |
I accused you of being a part of the CIA? I was obviously joking if I did. I apologize for indirectly accusing you of killing thousands of Americans on 9/11 and for working for a near facist country bent on world domination. I obviously wasn't being serious if I accused you of being in the CIA. I mean come on. I don't know why 5 and 6 didn't fall but why did our government feel the need to destroy building 7 when ti had no people in it and no one even gave two shits about it? I thought 9/11 was to create an atmosphere in order for the neo cons to do whatever they want. Why didn't we set off the demolition explosions when people were still in it? Why didn't they actually attack the White House? Why didn't our govt go all out? Why just the east coast? If you want to rally the entire country for many years to come in order to support some world domination scheme shouldn't you hit targets all over the country? Why havn't the neo cons set off another 'terrorist' attack in the U.S. to bolster support for iraq? its clear the american people and the world no longer have the initial post 9/11 mindset. so why the hell not kill a couple hundred civilians or even blow up a bus of commuters in LA? Just to get the rally going again. I'll believe your story once it has less fucking holes than the official story which most people admit is full of many holes. Also get me some fucking evidence where the person doesn't need to squint their eyes and guess what the fuck they are looking at. I have yet to watch the video because I am at work and unable to but I will once I get home but I'm not expecting to come to the same conclusions you have reached. I smoke nothing but high quality bud and I admit I smoke to much of it. I don't see how I'm being a dumb stoner though. Come to NY and we can get stoned and watch 9/11 footage and laugh our asses off. The best is the free fallers. Who knows maybe all the ganja will open up our minds to the real truth. I don't believe the official story. I think the penn. flight was shot down. I have no idea what hit the pentagon but a story with more holes than the official one doesn't bring anyone closer to the truth. And I'd honestly be more open to your theories if you didn't have a conspiracy theory for just about everything. |
|||
| Apr 6th, 2006 01:42 PM | ||||
| KevinTheOmnivore |
Quote:
|
|||
| Apr 6th, 2006 01:36 PM | ||||
| Geggy |
Can't blame you for thinking the photo was manipulated. I was skeptical at first because the photo looks like it could be easily doctored until I saw a video as proof there was really a woman standing by the edge of the hole...(click on pic) The quality is shitty but you can see it if you squint your eyes. If you pluck a single hair out of your head and place it on the steel girdle of the stove top at high temprature, the hair would quickly vaporize, let alone the steel girdle doesn't melt. This woman waving frantically for help had a head full of hair. Naked steel and when I mean naked, i mean free of fireproof chemical, usually melts at 2500-2750 degrees. Do the math. Chojin...WTC7 was built in 1984. ANT...explain to me why building 5 and 6 didnt collapse? Go back to earlier post I made in this thread about building 5 and 6. You must be smoking some real good shit...you know where i can score some of that you've been smoking? Don't worry, I'm in no way affiliated with CIA like you've wildly accused me of being so. |
|||
| Apr 6th, 2006 12:09 PM | ||||
| ziggytrix |
Quote:
 i think we should be more concerned with what is CLEARLY the face of SATAN over the woman's left shoulder! this was not terrorists! this was demons!!!1! |
|||
| Apr 6th, 2006 11:42 AM | ||||
| Ant10708 |
The body was slumped against something if my memory serves me right. Anyone else remember it? It was no way clear enough for you to see them 'gripping' anything. |
|||
| Apr 6th, 2006 10:54 AM | ||||
| ranxer |
blanco, mit is certainly not beyond reproach, i thought everyone knew that the corporate military industrial complex is deeply embedded in funding and control of research at mit. I'm not dismissing it, the article just doesn't stand on its own, and motives are easily questioned. It's a very well written piece i must admit, i'd say slick even. the article produced by that professor ignores some key points. 1. the fires could not weaken the truss clips in under 2 hours for they were embedded in concrete, he admits that the fires were not very hot noting the black smoke but omits info about the concrete. apparently there is almost no chance of the steel weakening enough in this time (because of the construction redundancy) for the fire to contribute to a total collapse indeed, fires burned on the 11th floor in 1975 for 3 hours with no structural damage to the steel at all http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/S...n8Mar2006.html 2. he addresses the speed of fall but ignores the strength of the core, where did the core go during the collapse? the core beams should resist crumbling but somehow did not. the byu professor Jones does a much better job explaining why the rate of descent should be slower. 3. he ignores the collapse from center of the north tower in under 2 hours, why would the antenna drop into the tower before anything else moved? 4. he says there is no evidence of molten steel or burning steel when that is simply not true. omition is a key tactic of misinformation. ant10708- that was a person standing in the hole.. how would a headless person(as you say) stand there and grip the edge anyway?   regarding keeping 9-11 as an inside job hush hush, its a matter of cognitave dissonance.. there is a built in resistance to questioning our government that results in a faithful blindness keeping the questions down. the idea that if you question the bush admin you are not patriotic keeps many folks away from these issues and is very very strong. As geggy calls it a psy op, it is an attack on an ideology or emotion that is mentally hard to untangle or challenge. checkout: http://prisonplanet.com/articles/mar...dissonance.htm |
|||
| Apr 6th, 2006 10:13 AM | ||||
| Chojin | Eh, it was an old building anyway. Bound to come down sooner or later. | |||
| Apr 6th, 2006 05:05 AM | ||||
| Spectre X |
I did't know that thing collapsed until this thread. I didn't even know it existed. And as such I don't have enough information to speculate on what happened. Sorry.
|
|||
| Apr 6th, 2006 02:54 AM | ||||
| Ant10708 |
Our government couldn't even coverup the fact that we killed that professional football player who joined the military after 9/11. Yet after five years since the attacks they have still kept everything hush hush about how it was really CIA planted bombs that took out the towers demolition style and that bin laden played no role in the attacks or finacing of the attacks(under the assumption he isn't working for the CIA). Even memos between Blair and Bush before Iraq surfaced ruining the coverup that war wasn't planned before un inspections were over; yet Bush and Clinton(because there is no way they aka the JEWS n neocons, pulled 9/11 off in the time Bush jr. was the president) and whatever other jew or skulls and bones member that was a part of this elaborate plan for control of the world and dozens maybe hundreds of people they needed to pull it off and nothing has surfaced? Spectre X explain why the WTC 7 building fell. I know you can do it.  Anyone remember the pictutre that ranxxer posted that proved a guy was standing where the planes hit the building(therefore proving how it wasnt hot but really a nice spring breeze) but apon further inspection it didn't have a head if it was a body at all. Why the fuck would a building collapse with no people (WTC 7) get alot of media attention after 9/11? Do you honestly think thats what people were concerned with. More questions to answer omg~ * While it did not receive any direct impact form the planes, how much debris hit at as the main towers collapsed and what damage did it cause? * To what extent (if any) did the shock or vibrations caused by the collapse of WTC1 & 2 affect the integrity of WTC7? * Did any unseen damage to the WTC7 foundations occur in the collapse of WTC 1 & 2? * Did any of the fire suppression systems in WTC7 function? |
|||
| Apr 6th, 2006 12:16 AM | ||||
| KevinTheOmnivore | uh oh, Ssssssilverstein! Joo Zionist! | |||
| Apr 5th, 2006 11:19 PM | ||||
| Geggy |
I'm curious how much the author is being paid to write that highly unconvincing article. http://www.911research.wtc7.net/disi...agar_0112.html I've read online on how buildings are brought down with explosives and watched a 2 part series of how building implosions are performed on discovery channel (coincidently it was shown after a mythbuster episode.) The pulverization of concrete, explosive charges, and the cloud of dust billowing around the wreckage are all characteristics of a controlled demolition. That's my argument and I'm sticking to it. ANT: I think I already disputed ziggy's claims on the reason for the NORAD standdown. They went ahead with the schedule to practice war games when they had foreknowldge of the attack that was going to take place that morning, ie. the august 6th memo showing bin Laden's plans to attack the US by hijacking planes and use it as missiles, among with other forewarnings the US has received. As for WTC7 ziggy answered my question. Five years since the attack and still no answer as to why it collapsed. That's an obvious sign of a cover-up, just as much as it didn't get a lot of media coverage following 9/11. The building imploding of WTC7 is the only and the most plausible explanation of why it collapsed. If you think otherwise then your brain is probably decaying from smoking too much grade A herbola. Better lay off the pipe, pal. Here is another "coincidence"...Larry Silverstein signed a 99 year, $3.2 billion lease just seven weeks prior to 9/11. Following the attacks, Silverstein was awarded an insurance payment of more than three and a half billion dollars to settle his seven-week-old insurance policy. In addition, the Silverstein group sued the insurers liable for the World Trade Center for another three and a half billion dollars, claiming that by an obscure clause in their contract, the two planes constituted two separate terrorist attacks. In total, Silverstein was awarded nearly $5 billion in insurance money following the destruction of the Twin Towers. |
|||
| Apr 5th, 2006 08:41 PM | ||||
| El Blanco |
Quote:
|
|||
| Apr 5th, 2006 08:26 PM | ||||
| ranxer |
yea spectre, surely it was steel that was molten in the rubble, the scientists i've heard have stated that there should not be molten anything in the building unless there was an explosive like thermite that burns through metal, there are some folks still analyzing the debris that was flying out and saying that the preliminary results are that the metal was burning as it came down.. burning molten steel, a collapse doesnt fit that evidence. anyway your and ziggys questions and points are somewhat plausible but the evidence seems conclusive to me. still, the questions yall have about it are difficult to brush aside especially with the mounds of disinformation out there. for every source i find that states what i have come to believe as facts, there are an almost equal number stating that the hijackers pulled it off by themselves. I'm waiting on pins and needles for some new evidence from scientists and whistleblowers to come out.. I've heard that there is some steel from the structures being analyzed that should make headlines if conclusive. Dr. Steven Jones is a physicist and he says that after his analysis, there's no way that the towers fell from the planes hitting them, i read the paper, I'm convinced, but i fail to explain it to others that convincingly.. we need more physicists, engineers, demolition experts and pilots that are beyond reproach to tip the balance. |
|||
| Apr 5th, 2006 08:17 PM | ||||
| ziggytrix |
Quote:
|
|||
| Apr 5th, 2006 04:57 PM | ||||
| Ant10708 |
Geggy ignored Spectre X's evidence. Ziggy def makes the most sense. Geggy try listening to him. Also wasn't it known that Bin Laden declared war on the U.S. and told reporters like a year or so before that he was planning to attack the U.S. big. But then again according to Geggy he is still working for the CIA maybe! I saw a good hour special on the WTC7 building that explained why it fell. Fucking History Channel is in bed with the Bush administration. |
|||
| This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. | ||||
