Community > Politics, Current News & Events

Topic: I don't believe the official story of 9/11
Jeanniebean Joined Wed 01/30/08 Posts: 40028	Mon 08/20/12 05:06 PM
There is no evidence that can support the official government's conspiracy theory of the events of 9-11. It holds no more weight or credibility than any of the wildest conspiracy theories you can dig up. lol CT's that someone else digs up? there is that evidence thing again... there none so blind as those who won't see... You better watch out, the "cliche'" police are watching...

Jeanniebean Joined Wed 01/30/08 Posts: 40028	Mon 08/20/12 05:06 PM
You can't explain it either. I can, but that would be considered against the rules. No, you can't

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Mon 08/20/12 05:06 PM
Dust from explosions. i guess 100's of tons of crushed concrete cannot create dust...

HotRodDeluxe Joined Sun 05/06/12 Posts: 2743	Mon 08/20/12 05:07 PM Edited by HotRodDeluxe on Mon 08/20/12 05:07 PM
You can't explain it either. I can, but that would be considered against the rules. No, you can't I don't think you got my joke, but that's even better. I'm lovin' this thread.

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Mon 08/20/12 05:08 PM
There is no evidence that can support the official government's conspiracy theory of the events of 9-11. It holds no more weight or credibility than any of the wildest conspiracy theories you can dig up. I've read some ridiculous sci-fi crap about 9/11. That nutter, Judy Woods springs to mind. Judy Wood is right about a lot of things, and she has a lot of questions that no one can answer. DUST DUST DUST DUST... MELTED ENGINE BLOCKS in cars that were a long distance from the towers and where there were no fires. .... just fantasy, there was no "melted" engine blocks...

HotRodDeluxe Joined Sun 05/06/12 Posts: 2743	Mon 08/20/12 05:10 PM
Dust from explosions. i guess 100's of tons of crushed concrete cannot create dust... You're applying logic-you should know that is not allowed!

Jeanniebean Joined Wed 01/30/08 Posts: 40028	Mon 08/20/12 05:10 PM
There is no evidence that can support the official government's conspiracy theory of the events of 9-11. It holds no more weight or credibility than any of the wildest conspiracy theories you can dig up. I've read some ridiculous sci-fi crap about 9/11. That nutter, Judy Woods springs to mind. Judy Wood is right about a lot of things, and she has a lot of questions that no one can answer. DUST DUST DUST DUST... MELTED ENGINE BLOCKS in cars that were a long distance from the towers and where there were no fires. .... just fantasy, there was no "melted" engine blocks... wrong... I have a lot of pictures of the front parts of cars with melted engine blocks and missing door handles... missing glass... all kinds of strange stuff. And that stuff was blocks away from the towers.

HotRodDeluxe Joined Sun 05/06/12 Posts: 2743	Mon 08/20/12 05:12 PM
So, what about the missile that was covered with a hologram of a plane?

Jeanniebean Joined Wed 01/30/08 Posts: 40028	Mon 08/20/12 05:12 PM
Dust from explosions. i guess 100's of tons of crushed concrete cannot create dust... There has NEVER been any building demolished or destroyed by any other means where fine dust particles rose up into the upper atmosphere and steel beams turned into dust right before your eyes. Steel beams, turned to dust.

HotRodDeluxe Joined Sun 05/06/12 Posts: 2743	Mon 08/20/12 05:15 PM Edited by HotRodDeluxe on Mon 08/20/12 05:16 PM
...turned into dust right before your eyes. Steel beams, turned to dust. This has been disproved ad infinitum. And around in circles we go!!!! The same old cliched string of photos should come out soon.

HotRodDeluxe Joined Sun 05/06/12 Posts: 2743	Mon 08/20/12 05:23 PM
This is one of the dumbest theories out there. Pure SF! Please watch it, as it is hilarious in its stupidity. http://youtu.be/tSnkRol5ghQ

Bestinshow Joined Mon 06/01/09 Posts: 5540	Mon 08/20/12 05:31 PM
Lets try them one at a time boys and try to stay on topic. Number one. Why did the news agencies report that WTC 7 collapsed almost 1/2 hour before it did, even though it was not hit by a plane, only had a few floors on fire, and gave no indication that it was in any serious danger? Anyone willing to take this on?

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Mon 08/20/12 06:16 PM
Dust from explosions. i guess 100's of tons of crushed concrete cannot create dust... There has NEVER been any building demolished or destroyed by any other means where fine dust particles rose up into the upper atmosphere and steel beams turned into dust right before your eyes. Steel beams, turned to dust. not before my eyes, i see reality...

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Mon 08/20/12 06:16 PM Edited by mightymoe on Mon 08/20/12 06:17 PM
There is no evidence that can support the official government's conspiracy theory of the events of 9-11. It holds no more weight or credibility than any of the wildest conspiracy theories you can dig up. I've read some ridiculous sci-fi crap about 9/11. That nutter, Judy Woods springs to mind. Judy Wood is right about a lot of things, and she has a lot of questions that no one can answer. DUST DUST DUST DUST... MELTED ENGINE BLOCKS in cars that were a long distance from the towers and where there were no fires. .... just fantasy, there was no "melted" engine blocks... wrong... I have a lot of pictures of the front parts of cars with melted engine blocks and missing door handles... missing glass... all kinds of strange stuff. And that stuff was blocks away from the towers. no you don't...

metalwing Joined Fri 11/14/08 Posts: 26218	Mon 08/20/12 06:18 PM
This is one of the dumbest theories out there. Pure SF! Please watch it, as it is hilarious in its stupidity. http://youtu.be/tSnkRol5ghQ Classic CT!

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Mon 08/20/12 06:19 PM
This is one of the dumbest theories out there. Pure SF! Please watch it, as it is hilarious in its stupidity. http://youtu.be/tSnkRol5ghQ i hate those flying ball things...they should be banned

mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Mon 08/20/12 06:25 PM
Lets try them one at a time boys and try to stay on topic. Number one. Why did the news agencies report that WTC 7 collapsed almost 1/2 hour before it did, even though it was not hit by a plane, only had a few floors on fire, and gave no indication that it was in any serious danger? Anyone willing to take this on? we already did... you need to catch up... we are past it and listening to wild yappings about metal turning to dust now...

Bestinshow Joined Mon 06/01/09 Posts: 5540	Mon 08/20/12 06:46 PM
Why did the news agencies report that WTC 7 collapsed almost 1/2 hour before it did... They didn't. ....even though it was not hit by a plane... It was severely damged by debris... ... only had a few floors on fire... Again, not accurate. ...and gave no indication that it was in any serious danger? What? You mean WTC7 didn't call 911? It must be a conspiracy!!!! they also cleared out the building about 6 hours before it fell, and the fire chief pulled out all the firepeople about 2 hours before.... but they had no clue? The BBC reported the building fell a half hour before it fell that is a fact. You should probably start over and stop being misleading. I am not surprised you haven't heard about it but you can view it here. "An astounding video uncovered from the archives today shows the BBC reporting on the collapse of WTC Building 7 over twenty minutes before it fell at 5:20pm on the afternoon of 9/11. The incredible footage shows BBC reporter Jane Standley talking about the collapse of the Salomon Brothers Building while it remains standing in the live shot behind her head. How did the BBC know that it was going to collapse? And why did they report the collapse when it is clearly standing in the background?" watch it. http://www.metacafe.com/watch/450679/bbc_reported_building_7_had_collapsed_20_minutes_before_it_fell/

Bestinshow Joined Mon 06/01/09 Posts: 5540	Mon 08/20/12 06:48 PM Edited by Bestinshow on Mon 08/20/12 06:50 PM
Or if you do not like the BBC maybe CNN? Another Smoking Gun? Now CNN Jumps the Gun: On 911 CNN Announced WTC 7 "Has Either Collapsed or is Collapsing" Over an Hour Before it Fell Chris \| Information Liberation In an amazing redux, new video has been unearthed of a CNN report on the day of 911 in which a CNN anchor announces they have received word that WTC 7 is on fire and "has either collapsed or is collapsing." The problem with this is that WTC 7 is clearly visible behind the anchor. watch it. http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=20521 Surely, some will say they knew the building was going to collapse because it was on fire. This claim holds no water due to the fact no steel building has ever collapsed due to fire. For example in 2005 the Madrid Sky Scraper was a towering inferno for hours on end and it did not come close to collapsing. http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=20521

metalwing Joined Fri 11/14/08 Posts: 26218	Mon 08/20/12 06:54 PM
Sometimes New York is called Gotham City and Batman was trained as a ninja ... thus allowing him to be invisible as he swung around the Twin Towers. His huge personal fortune and vast technical assets could have allowed him to develop wires that could cut through steel beams and columns. Has anyone disproved any of this???