9/11 - Not proud, but I'm becoming convinced

whiterebel

oscarBravo wrote:

Trust me, as soon as someone points out a factual inaccuracy in something I've posted - with credible documentary evidence that convincingly demonstrates same - I'll admit that I was wrong.

Same here, problem is there seems to be as much "proof" for one side as the other, and never the twain shall meet.

whiterebel

Rebuild for the NEW WTC building (replace 1&2) estimated at $1B.
Claim paid out for WTC 7 alone $861M (I'll get confirmation on that figure), which according to your figures puts him in profit, especially if he gets away with $3B for the new building (1$B rebuild + fitting out I suppose) or am I missing something here, for NOW points?
He insured against loss of income as well, FYI, unheard of within the industry apparently, so while not profit it covered his losses waiting to rebuild. Problem is, theres so much "information" and counter info out there, anyone can use it to there own ends.

Petrol station footage is disappointing from both points of view, especially as there was such a song and dance over it. I believe one of the hotel ones is to be released next month as well, but the FBI are supposedly disputing there even is one from the Sheraton.

oscarBravo

whiterebel wrote:

Same here, problem is there seems to be as much "proof" for one side as the other, and never the twain shall meet.

That's why I'd distinguish between "proof" and proof.

Ciaran500

whiterebel wrote:

He insured against loss of income as well, FYI, unheard of within the industry apparently, so while not profit it covered his losses waiting to rebuild.

CTs always come up with bits like this, easy to claim and very hard to prove or disprove. Its like the claim that pull it is a common demolition term untill someone actually went and asked some demolition firms.

Jocksereire

Mordeth wrote:

... not a few crazy conspiracy nuts.

.

so you believe the conspiracy of 19 hijackers hijacking 4 airliners with box cutters and evading the US airforce under the guidance of some guy in a cave.....yeeeahh good man.......lol who is the "crazy conspiracy NUT" now i wonder:D

Jocksereire

bonkey wrote:

Its not just the "pull" argument which is tired. All of the arguments here are tired ones.

.

dont we just know it!! know matter how much you tell them what pull means theyll point at something else :rolleyes: here we go again zzzz

Jocksereire

oscarBravo wrote:

Trust me, as soon as someone points out a factual inaccuracy in something I've posted - with credible documentary evidence that convincingly demonstrates same - I'll admit that I was wrong.

lol jaysus ive read it all now.......

Jocksereire

Lads i wouldnt pay too much attention to the people who believe the official conspiracy theory. the funny thing is they call every one else a conspiracy nut without realising that the story that they sadly believe is infact a conspiracy theory itself.....oh the irony

Ciaran500

Jocksereire, the J C of the 911 world?

meglome

Jocksereire wrote:

so you believe the conspiracy of 19 hijackers hijacking 4 airliners with box cutters and evading the US airforce under the guidance of some guy in a cave.....yeeeahh good man.......lol who is the "crazy conspiracy NUT" now i wonder:D

Well yes I do believe it based on a good read of credible evidence.

Jocksereire wrote:

so you believe the conspiracy of 19 hijackers hijacking 4 airliners with box cutters...

Initially no one on the planes knew what was going to happen so they sat back. Funnily enough the last plane to crash ditched into a field once the passengers realised what was going to happen. This is also the reason many Americans and others won’t believe the official line, they just can't accept that a bunch of mere Arabs with box cutters could manage to do all this damage.

Jocksereire wrote:

...evading the US airforce...

I saw a radar plot of the skies over American and Canada on 9/11. There were thousands of planes in the air at the time. So when the hijackers turned off the transponders it was extremely difficult to actually find the planes.

Jocksereire wrote:

...under the guidance of some guy in a cave.....yeeeahh good man.......lol who is the "crazy conspiracy NUT" now i wonder:D

As has been pointed out many times American air defence looked outward. There was no official contact between civilian air traffic control and the air force. As far as I remember someone had to go get out the phone book and start ringing around to get the message through to the air force. The hijackers exploited the obvious inadequacies in American air traffic control and law enforcement agencies. All that time in the cave gave them plenty of time to think this through carefully… but it could have been stopped at several points if the Americans had actually followed up, shared info or were not inept.

davork

i) The towers were not closed in the two weeks leading up to 9/11. We were working quite late (WTC 2, 58th flr) most nights leading up to it - heck Cantor Fitz were a 24 hour operation on the top of WTC 1 as were Eurobrokers a few floors below them

ii) The pure reason so many people survived were various including:
- The attacks came before most people were at work
- Survivors of the early attack in the '80's dragged all their workmates out 'for coffee' - and ignored the security guards who said to go back to their office (incl. my boss. Thank you Tony for that(!))
- The evacuation proceedures in place by some companies (esp. Morgan Stanley) saved their people

iii) My friends who died in the collapse have never come walking out of some cave

iv) There is no way demolition charges would have survived the heat generated by a full tank of lit aviation fuel incinerating them, heck my (mad) sister in law's husband (who does demolition for his job) wouldn't go near a fluster cuck like that to put charges in to demolish the building - I doubt saner people would either

v) as for the USAF getting to NYC - the nearest Air Force base is a good hour and change away *WHEN YOU ARE ON THE AIR* and as has been indicated, the US DOD have had (up til 9/11) a habit of watching for attacks from the outside in rather than something happening from the inside

humanji

whiterebel wrote:

He insured against loss of income as well, FYI, unheard of within the industry apparently, so while not profit it covered his losses waiting to rebuild.

Would it not be common sense for every company in the world to be insured against loss of income? I would of thought it'd standard

Jocksereire

meglome wrote:

Well yes I do believe it based on a good read of credible evidence.


Initially no one on the planes knew what was going to happen so they sat back. Funnily enough the last plane to crash ditched into a field once the passengers realised what was going to happen. This is also the reason many Americans and others won’t believe the official line, they just can't accept that a bunch of mere Arabs with box cutters could manage to do all this damage.


I saw a radar plot of the skies over American and Canada on 9/11. There were thousands of planes in the air at the time. So when the hijackers turned off the transponders it was extremely difficult to actually find the planes.


As has been pointed out many times American air defence looked outward. There was no official contact between civilian air traffic control and the air force. As far as I remember someone had to go get out the phone book and start ringing around to get the message through to the air force. The hijackers exploited the obvious inadequacies in American air traffic control and law enforcement agencies. All that time in the cave gave them plenty of time to think this through carefully… but it could have been stopped at several points if the Americans had actually followed up, shared info or were not inept.

Good lad. tell you what you continue to believe what you believe and ill continue to believe what i believe ok?

meglome

Jocksereire wrote:

Good lad. tell you what you continue to believe what you believe and ill continue to believe what i believe ok?

I love reading fiction... I mean I have a large book collection. In fact I love reading science fiction and again I've got a big sci-fi book/movie collection. I would love to believe that some of these great sci-fi stories in these books could happen or could exist but for the most part there is no credible evidence that they do or could. So while I'd dearly love that some of these things might happen I have to accept they most likely won't, based on the probabilities.

So to 9/11. I'm interested in the conspiracy theories, they make for good reading. But the simple fact is when you look at the evidence, not some of the fiction that is being called evidence, it is not very likely that it was a big conspiracy. Was there some cover-up, most likely there was but it was at worst the Americans covering up their own stupidity and not much more.

I’m always amazed at conspiracy theorists. You don’t get the fact I’ve looked at the credible evidence and come to the conclusion that most likely there is no big conspiracy. The important words here are ‘mostly likely’; I can’t know for a fact but looking at ALL the options it’s just not likely. I’m genuinely open to believe whatever is most probable. But the CT’s want to believe the conspiracy and even when the evidence your using to believe is shown to be flawed you just gloss over it. Believe it or not if someone pointed out with real evidence that I was incorrect in my views on 9/11 I would accept it, I would admit I was incorrect – I don’t have the slightest problem with that. I have no attachment to any one version over another but the CT’s are latched onto the big conspiracy and will not be budged no matter what's most likely.

Jocksereire

i dont read fiction and never have
as i stated already the OCT's (as ill call you since you call us CT's) you believe in the biggest most rediculous conspiracy of all time. im not getting into another boring tedious round and round we go discussion and i only ever really come in here any more to post in the links thread at the top of the board. Plenty there for you too look at and make your own mind up which you have and so have i. and to be honest i dont care at what you have or have not looked at.
it is so obvious the american government has lied about the events of 911 (The NTSB data release for example in the last documentary i posted is in complete conflict with the 911 comission report so who is lying there and why?). Now you believe its to cover up mistakes and stupidity i believe its to cover up a much more sinister elite group who have lied through their teeth since they have come into power and still we have people who will take their word on events.
Ill say it again we will agree to disagree on the events of that day. cheers

meglome

Jocksereire wrote:

i dont read fiction and never have

I think you'll find you've read quite a lot of fiction, it's just you accept it as fact.

Jocksereire wrote:

as i stated already the OCT's (as ill call you since you call us CT's) you believe in the biggest most rediculous conspiracy of all time.

You see this is the whole crux of the matter. I neither believe nor disbelieve any story I hear until I read into it and I am a sceptic just not paranoid. But my own personality will lead me to put a particular slant in any given situation before I hear all the facts, simple human nature. In this case I tried to keep an open mind and read up everything I could about it and when you look at the 'facts' from the CT's they just don't stand up to real scrutiny. It's not about sides for me other than in this case I don't believe the story one side is pushing.

Jocksereire wrote:

im not getting into another boring tedious round and round we go discussion

I agree and yet here I am. I think I go along with Bonkey on this one though, I really don't like disinformation dressed up as fact.

Jocksereire wrote:

it is so obvious the american government has lied about the events of 911 (The NTSB data release for example in the last documentary i posted is in complete conflict with the 911 comission report so who is lying there and why?).

I doubt there is any perfect version of events available to any of us. But I just can't see any possible way any government could get away with a conspiracy of this size. Simple logic nothing more or less. You are giving the governments of the world way more credit than they deserve for their cleverness. I wonder do you normally give governments credit for being so clever?

Now you believe its to cover up mistakes and stupidity i believe its to cover up a much more sinister elite group who have lied through their teeth since they have come into power and still we have people who will take their word on events.

All the so called evidence of this elite group really doesn't stand up. Other threads in here have gone through step by step why. I don't doubt for a second the arms industry in the US was delighted that there was going to be a war. But to organise this conspiracy just isn't possible on the scale it would need to be to make it possible. Bush is a complete asshole as far as I'm concerned but again are you saying his government was clever? I would have said quite the opposite has been proven time and again.

Ashla

oscarBravo wrote:

OK then: can you explain how two buildings that size were rigged for an unconventional demolition job without anyone noticing?

While you're at it, can you explain why planes needed to be involved at all? Why not just rig a conventional demolition job, and claim there was a truck bomb in the basement?

Well if there were no plains involved; who would have thought it was terrorists; No terrorists! well no objective; No new Disney terrorist laws for Bush to enforce;

Ashla

oscarBravo wrote:

How convenient.

WHO FOR YOU?

Ashla

oscarBravo wrote:

Trust me, as soon as someone points out a factual inaccuracy in something I've posted - with credible documentary evidence that convincingly demonstrates same - I'll admit that I was wrong.

Well here is another inaccuracy; as your on the subject; Maybe Those planes were illusion that hit the towers, perhaps a projector in the sky! thought about that one? just like they are going to fake an illusions alien invasion on earth within the next two or three years; called stars wars! With projectors.

I mean, when you watch these you tube movies, it just likes the plains are cutting butter! Imagine a BO7 hitting any where' It would take the ****ing top off anything; and look at the pentagon, no BO7 would fit in that rabbit hole!:D

Ashla

oscarBravo wrote:

That's why I'd distinguish between "proof" and proof.

Well you would;

Ashla

oscarBravo wrote:

Trust me, as soon as someone points out a factual inaccuracy in something I've posted - with credible documentary evidence that convincingly demonstrates same - I'll admit that I was wrong.[/QUOTE

I'D RATHER TRUST A BABOONNNNNN!:D

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

nobody who grins that much can have anything worthwile to say

Ashla

Mordeth wrote:

nobody who grins that much can have anything worthwile to say

Well you certainly don't:D

Nick_oliveri

Ashla wrote:

Well here is another inaccuracy; as your on the subject; Maybe Those planes were illusion that hit the towers, perhaps a projector in the sky! thought about that one? just like they are going to fake an illusions alien invasion on earth within the next two or three years; called stars wars! With projectors.

Please dont start going on about Holograms. I beg you. Its the lowest of the low to say that those planes were projections or holograms. Its sickening, to say the least, and you will get nothing only ridicule for it. And it will be deserved.

Ashla

Nick_oliveri wrote:

Please dont start going on about Holograms. I beg you. Its the lowest of the low to say that those planes were projections or holograms. Its sickening, to say the least, and you will get nothing only ridicule for it. And it will be deserved.

So Telsa! You know it all? Well Excuse me;

Nick_oliveri

Ashla wrote:

So Telsa! You know it all? Well Excuse me;

Oh and i suppose you do. Right so, enlighten us on the evidence you have of teh lolograms on 9/11. Go on, make your own thread about it. We'll all have a great laugh.

Jocksereire

meglome wrote:

I think you'll find you've read quite a lot of fiction, it's just you accept it as fact.

i think youll find i dont need your patronising comments cheers.

You see this is the whole crux of the matter. I neither believe nor disbelieve any story I hear until I read into it and I am a sceptic just not paranoid. But my own personality will lead me to put a particular slant in any given situation before I hear all the facts, simple human nature. In this case I tried to keep an open mind and read up everything I could about it and when you look at the 'facts' from the CT's they just don't stand up to real scrutiny. It's not about sides for me other than in this case I don't believe the story one side is pushing.

Let me translate. I believe the governments conspiracy theory. You either believe them or you dont. They have either lied or they havent.

I agree and yet here I am. I think I go along with Bonkey on this one though, I really don't like disinformation dressed up as fact.



I doubt there is any perfect version of events available to any of us. But I just can't see any possible way any government could get away with a conspiracy of this size. Simple logic nothing more or less. You are giving the governments of the world way more credit than they deserve for their cleverness. I wonder do you normally give governments credit for being so clever?



All the so called evidence of this elite group really doesn't stand up. Other threads in here have gone through step by step why. I don't doubt for a second the arms industry in the US was delighted that there was going to be a war. But to organise this conspiracy just isn't possible on the scale it would need to be to make it possible. Bush is a complete asshole as far as I'm concerned but again are you saying his government was clever? I would have said quite the opposite has been proven time and again.

yak yak yak. enough as i said i dont really care what you have seen or not see as evidence, what you believe to be possible and impossible, who is stupid and who is not, what you class to be "simple logic" or how you have come to your conclusions so give it a rest will ya. you have stated what you believe now 4 times. i get the message mate

Ashla

Nick_oliveri wrote:

Oh and i suppose you do. Right so, enlighten us on the evidence you have of teh lolograms on 9/11. Go on, make your own thread about it. We'll all have a great laugh.

Well you seem to know it all, and have made it blatantly clear that' no one else should have an opinion.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

there is a difference between having an opinion and saying that the planes that hit the twin towers were holograms.

Nick_oliveri

Mordeth wrote:

there is a difference between having an opinion and saying that the planes that hit the twin towers were holograms.

Indeed. It boggles the mind.

Asla wrote:

Well you seem to know it all, and have made it blatantly clear that' no one else should have an opinion.

Yes, no one should have an opinion... Mordeth, Bonkey, Jocks, meglome, humanji and you included. The conspiricy forum might end up as you would expect an American Line Dancing forum to end up, but at least my needs would be met.

Now, i want you to have an opinion on things... and yes i want you to have the right to express these opinions. But as i said earlier, dont expect to be taken seriously or not ridiculed when you bring these hologram "theories" to the table.

meglome

Jocksereire wrote:

i think youll find i dont need your patronising comments cheers.

It was meant more as a joke, wasn't trying to be patronising.

Jocksereire wrote:

yak yak yak. enough as i said i dont really care what you have seen or not see as evidence, what you believe to be possible and impossible, who is stupid and who is not, what you class to be "simple logic" or how you have come to your conclusions so give it a rest will ya. you have stated what you believe now 4 times. i get the message mate

Fair enough... I was under the impression that this was a place for debate and discussion but it turns out that it isn't. It seems to be the one place I've come across on boards.ie that people really don't want to hear other opinions. Which speaks volumes really.

Actually tell me something… why is it that conspiracy theorists want to hang out in a place where everyone agrees with them no matter how patently untrue or ridiculous the discussion is?

meglome

Ashla wrote:

Well here is another inaccuracy; as your on the subject; Maybe Those planes were illusion that hit the towers, perhaps a projector in the sky! thought about that one? just like they are going to fake an illusions alien invasion on earth within the next two or three years; called stars wars! With projectors.

I mean, when you watch these you tube movies, it just likes the plains are cutting butter! Imagine a BO7 hitting any where' It would take the ****ing top off anything; and look at the pentagon, no BO7 would fit in that rabbit hole!:D

I assume you were taking the weewee about the holograms? please tell me you were.

Jocksereire

meglome wrote:

It was meant more as a joke, wasn't trying to be patronising.



Fair enough... I was under the impression that this was a place for debate and discussion but it turns out that it isn't. It seems to be the one place I've come across on boards.ie that people really don't want to hear other opinions. Which speaks volumes really.

Actually tell me something… why is it that conspiracy theorists want to hang out in a place where everyone agrees with them no matter how patently untrue or ridiculous the discussion is?

mate what are you on about? i said about 3 times we agree to disagree. I also stated im not going into why i believe what i believe with you coz it just goes round in circles. This is a place for debate and discussion as you say but im dont want to do it all over again thats all. I have heard your opinion numerous times and made no attempt to change it and i just gave my opinion that i disagree.
Again you continue to call me a "conspiracy theorist". Do you acknowledge that in believing the US governments story you are yourself defending a conspiracy theory?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

no, we're defending a theory about a conspiracy.... there's a difference

Kenners

Fact one: The tell-tale residue of termate is sulpher not copper and iron. Molten pools of metal cannot be explained by fire(even jet fuel fire) because the maximum possible tempeture for burning jet fuel is about 1000 degrees short of melting metal. Collapse by fire is a physical and chemical impossiblity.
Prof. steven jones has conclusively PROVED beyond doubt that termate was used to melt the metal by carrying out intensive non-partizan tests on metal that was taken from the site of the collapse. Needless to even bring up the hundreds of firefighters, law enforcement officers and first responders who reported Seeing explosive devices in the buildings and hearing multiple explosions BEFORE the planes hit!(William Rodriguez a 9-11 survivor tells of explosions before and after planes hit. Read!) you won't find this on fox news because mainstream media is controlled. http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml

Fact 2: Certain floors in the towers were closed off and had unusual construction going on. For two weeks before the attacks most floors were covered in a thick layer of dust and the noise was so bad that a british business man filed several complaints and was promptly told to shut up and mind his business. This is fact and part of the public record.

Fact 3: NORAD for the first time in it's history shut down for 1 hour 20 minutes on the day of 9-11 and funnily enough dick cheney was carrying out drills involving the EXACT senario of what was actually gonna happen(this also happened on 7-7 or the london train bombings) Terrorists in a cave couldn't make this happen...and by the way 7 of the 'terrorists' who were supposed to be on the planes turned up alive and well.

Fact 4: a lot of high profile people recieved anonymous warnings not to fly on the morning of 9-11. including mayor willie brown and salman rushdie

FACT 5:It's called a false flag op. If you don't believe that a government can carry something like this out think again. Hitler burned his own reichstag in order to usher in 'HOMELAND SECURITY' and 'DIRECTIVE 51'. Guess what! Bush has done exactly the same thing! Homeland security and Directive 51 stripping every american of their constitutional rights!
The bay of Tonkin incident which was used by the american government to justify the veitnam war: This has since been proven to have been a false flag op and is part of the public and historical record. A fact! They carried it out themselves and blamed the veitnamese. This is admitted!
Google 'Operation Northwoods'. Kennedy sacked nimitzer for proposing this.The list goes on and on! it's all documented historical fact. Several veteran CIA ops have questioned the 9-11 incident and stated that they believe it to be an inside job. FBI agents were warned not to interfere with
al'qaeda and it has since been proven that the pilots were CIA agents. Not a conspiracy and not hearsay but concrete FACT.
A certain FBI agent filed not one not two but 72 warnings of a major 'terrorist' event about to happen. He was ordered to shut up and stay away from the case. Do not interfere. This was an order signed by bush himself!
Pearl harbour was allowed to happen and indeed provoked to justify america entering world war 2. People this is admitted!!! It's not a conspiracy. It's historical record.

FACT 6: Buildings DO NOT under any circumstances at all collaspe symmetrically into their own footprints at free fall speed without the use of controlled demolitions END OF! Wake up for god's sake. It's not that difficult to understand!

I'm tired. I've waffled enough. There's too much to get in here. Look, watch
'zeitgeist' and check out ALEX JONES(he predicted 9-11 2 months before it happened. Not because he's psychic but because he was warned by highly placed people that something was about to happen and logically deduced it).Start with terrorstorm. then make your own mind up but be sure to check out the facts yourself so some educated idiot or a 'useful idiot' as lennon would say doesn't raise doubt with uniformed statements and pooh-pooh concrete facts and evidence and not a 'conspiracy Theory'.

PNAC is another good thing to google..especially since dick cheney stated in a PNAC document months before 9-11 that they needed a catalysing event such as a new pearl harbour to usher in anti-constitutional laws and controls.

Lastly, The BBC reported the collapse of building 7 25 minutes BEFORE it actually happened. In fact, the reporter is giving the detail of the collapse while building 7 can be seen still standing behind her. You can see this on you-tube.

Guys, hundreds and hundreds of people have been coming forward form high profile postitions to expose the lie with facts and eye-witness reports but they are being completely ignored by the mainstream media. FBI agents, Military, CIA, paramedics, firefighters, police officers and first responders all giving evidence which is being totally ignored.



for now, I'm gone. Peace.

Kenners

Fact one: The tell-tale residue of termate is sulpher not copper and iron. Molten pools of metal cannot be explained by fire(even jet fuel fire) because the maximum possible tempeture for burning jet fuel is about 1000 degrees short of melting metal. Collapse by fire is a physical and chemical impossiblity.
Prof. steven jones has conclusively PROVED beyond doubt that termate was used to melt the metal by carrying out intensive non-partizan tests on metal that was taken from the site of the collapse. Needless to even bring up the hundreds of firefighters, law enforcement officers and first responders who reported Seeing explosive devices in the buildings and hearing multiple explosions BEFORE the planes hit!(William Rodriguez a 9-11 survivor tells of explosions before and after planes hit. Read!) you won't find this on fox news because mainstream media is controlled. http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml

Fact 2: Certain floors in the towers were closed off and had unusual construction going on. For two weeks before the attacks most floors were covered in a thick layer of dust and the noise was so bad that a british business man filed several complaints and was promptly told to shut up and mind his business. This is fact and part of the public record.

Fact 3: NORAD for the first time in it's history shut down for 1 hour 20 minutes on the day of 9-11 and funnily enough dick cheney was carrying out drills involving the EXACT senario of what was actually gonna happen(this also happened on 7-7 or the london train bombings) Terrorists in a cave couldn't make this happen...and by the way 7 of the 'terrorists' who were supposed to be on the planes turned up alive and well.

Fact 4: a lot of high profile people recieved anonymous warnings not to fly on the morning of 9-11. including mayor willie brown and salman rushdie

FACT 5:It's called a false flag op. If you don't believe that a government can carry something like this out think again. Hitler burned his own reichstag in order to usher in 'HOMELAND SECURITY' and 'DIRECTIVE 51'. Guess what! Bush has done exactly the same thing! Homeland security and Directive 51 stripping every american of their constitutional rights!
The bay of Tonkin incident which was used by the american government to justify the veitnam war: This has since been proven to have been a false flag op and is part of the public and historical record. A fact! They carried it out themselves and blamed the veitnamese. This is admitted!
Google 'Operation Northwoods'. Kennedy sacked nimitzer for proposing this.The list goes on and on! it's all documented historical fact. Several veteran CIA ops have questioned the 9-11 incident and stated that they believe it to be an inside job. FBI agents were warned not to interfere with
al'qaeda and it has since been proven that the pilots were CIA agents. Not a conspiracy and not hearsay but concrete FACT.
A certain FBI agent filed not one not two but 72 warnings of a major 'terrorist' event about to happen. He was ordered to shut up and stay away from the case. Do not interfere. This was an order signed by bush himself!
Pearl harbour was allowed to happen and indeed provoked to justify america entering world war 2. People this is admitted!!! It's not a conspiracy. It's historical record.

FACT 6: Buildings DO NOT under any circumstances at all collaspe symmetrically into their own footprints at free fall speed without the use of controlled demolitions END OF! Wake up for god's sake. It's not that difficult to understand!

I'm tired. I've waffled enough. There's too much to get in here. Look, watch
'zeitgeist' and check out ALEX JONES(he predicted 9-11 2 months before it happened. Not because he's psychic but because he was warned by highly placed people that something was about to happen and logically deduced it).Start with terrorstorm. then make your own mind up but be sure to check out the facts yourself so some educated idiot or a 'useful idiot' as lennon would say doesn't raise doubt with uniformed statements and pooh-pooh concrete facts and evidence and not a 'conspiracy Theory'.

PNAC is another good thing to google..especially since dick cheney stated in a PNAC document months before 9-11 that they needed a catalysing event such as a new pearl harbour to usher in anti-constitutional laws and controls.

Lastly, The BBC reported the collapse of building 7 25 minutes BEFORE it actually happened. In fact, the reporter is giving the detail of the collapse while building 7 can be seen still standing behind her. You can see this on you-tube.

Guys, hundreds and hundreds of people have been coming forward form high profile postitions to expose the lie with facts and eye-witness reports but they are being completely ignored by the mainstream media. FBI agents, Military, CIA, paramedics, firefighters, police officers and first responders all giving evidence which is being totally ignored.



for now, I'm gone. Peace.

meglome

Ah bollocks I've managed to delete most of what I was typing I'm way too tired for this right now. Bonkey don't hesitate to help

But I will say, George Bush's government have been repeatedly shown to be pretty incompetent, they **** up at every turn. And yet we're expected to believe that they've also pulled off the greatest conspiracy in history. Seriously people. His government did jump on the bandwagon to bring in a load of new laws that they wouldn't have been able to otherwise but that's opportunism which his government is actually good at.

Why is it that you want to believe a relatively small number of people who see a conspiracy over the large number who don't?

BTW some of your 'facts' have been gone through in here before and have been shown to be either highly dubious or completely incorrect. That Alex Jones guy has been mostly discredited.

Every time I hear the words Black Flag I want to laugh it's just bordering on paranoia. Could they happen, sure. Do they happen as part of the great Zionist/NWO great world conspirancy... I think not.

You know the online videos that say the pentagon wasn't hit by a plane are what stick in my mind the most I think. A handful of people saying they didn't see a plane and there was no plane wreckage etc. But there were hundreds of people who actually saw a plane coming in. I've seen the footage of the wreckage and there were bits of engine and parts of plane with the AA logo on it. So the only conclusion you can come to is the online conspiracies are just not true. But it still persists because people refuse to believe the actual evidence and choose to believe amateur online video presentations. They want to believe the conspiracy over all common sense.

Bed now...

Dirty Dave

Kenners wrote:

Fact one: The tell-tale residue of termate is sulpher not copper and iron. Molten pools of metal cannot be explained by fire(even jet fuel fire) because the maximum possible tempeture for burning jet fuel is about 1000 degrees short of melting metal. Collapse by fire is a physical and chemical impossiblity.
Prof. steven jones has conclusively PROVED beyond doubt that termate was used to melt the metal by carrying out intensive non-partizan tests on metal that was taken from the site of the collapse. Needless to even bring up the hundreds of firefighters, law enforcement officers and first responders who reported Seeing explosive devices in the buildings and hearing multiple explosions BEFORE the planes hit!(William Rodriguez a 9-11 survivor tells of explosions before and after planes hit. Read!) you won't find this on fox news because mainstream media is controlled. http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml

Fact 2: Certain floors in the towers were closed off and had unusual construction going on. For two weeks before the attacks most floors were covered in a thick layer of dust and the noise was so bad that a british business man filed several complaints and was promptly told to shut up and mind his business. This is fact and part of the public record.

Fact 3: NORAD for the first time in it's history shut down for 1 hour 20 minutes on the day of 9-11 and funnily enough dick cheney was carrying out drills involving the EXACT senario of what was actually gonna happen(this also happened on 7-7 or the london train bombings) Terrorists in a cave couldn't make this happen...and by the way 7 of the 'terrorists' who were supposed to be on the planes turned up alive and well.

Fact 4: a lot of high profile people recieved anonymous warnings not to fly on the morning of 9-11. including mayor willie brown and salman rushdie

FACT 5:It's called a false flag op. If you don't believe that a government can carry something like this out think again. Hitler burned his own reichstag in order to usher in 'HOMELAND SECURITY' and 'DIRECTIVE 51'. Guess what! Bush has done exactly the same thing! Homeland security and Directive 51 stripping every american of their constitutional rights!
The bay of Tonkin incident which was used by the american government to justify the veitnam war: This has since been proven to have been a false flag op and is part of the public and historical record. A fact! They carried it out themselves and blamed the veitnamese. This is admitted!
Google 'Operation Northwoods'. Kennedy sacked nimitzer for proposing this.The list goes on and on! it's all documented historical fact. Several veteran CIA ops have questioned the 9-11 incident and stated that they believe it to be an inside job. FBI agents were warned not to interfere with
al'qaeda and it has since been proven that the pilots were CIA agents. Not a conspiracy and not hearsay but concrete FACT.
A certain FBI agent filed not one not two but 72 warnings of a major 'terrorist' event about to happen. He was ordered to shut up and stay away from the case. Do not interfere. This was an order signed by bush himself!
Pearl harbour was allowed to happen and indeed provoked to justify america entering world war 2. People this is admitted!!! It's not a conspiracy. It's historical record.

FACT 6: Buildings DO NOT under any circumstances at all collaspe symmetrically into their own footprints at free fall speed without the use of controlled demolitions END OF! Wake up for god's sake. It's not that difficult to understand!

I'm tired. I've waffled enough. There's too much to get in here. Look, watch
'zeitgeist' and check out ALEX JONES(he predicted 9-11 2 months before it happened. Not because he's psychic but because he was warned by highly placed people that something was about to happen and logically deduced it).Start with terrorstorm. then make your own mind up but be sure to check out the facts yourself so some educated idiot or a 'useful idiot' as lennon would say doesn't raise doubt with uniformed statements and pooh-pooh concrete facts and evidence and not a 'conspiracy Theory'.

PNAC is another good thing to google..especially since dick cheney stated in a PNAC document months before 9-11 that they needed a catalysing event such as a new pearl harbour to usher in anti-constitutional laws and controls.

Lastly, The BBC reported the collapse of building 7 25 minutes BEFORE it actually happened. In fact, the reporter is giving the detail of the collapse while building 7 can be seen still standing behind her. You can see this on you-tube.

Guys, hundreds and hundreds of people have been coming forward form high profile postitions to expose the lie with facts and eye-witness reports but they are being completely ignored by the mainstream media. FBI agents, Military, CIA, paramedics, firefighters, police officers and first responders all giving evidence which is being totally ignored.



for now, I'm gone. Peace.

Writing the word "fact" at the start or end of a statement does not make it one - FACT!

humanji

Well, Kenners, apart from the majority of what your saying already being confirmed as innacurate or false, as Meglome said, this bit stood out for me:

Kenners wrote:

FACT 6: Buildings DO NOT under any circumstances at all collaspe symmetrically into their own footprints at free fall speed without the use of controlled demolitions END OF! Wake up for god's sake. It's not that difficult to understand!

Skyscrapers are designed to collapse in on themselves. The Japanese create that techniques years ago because to have a skyscrapper topple over in a city would do untold damage. But, of course you don't care. You have your theories, and logic and evidence don't come into it. :rolleyes:

humanji

Ashla wrote:

Well if there were no plains involved; who would have thought it was terrorists; No terrorists! well no objective; No new Disney terrorist laws for Bush to enforce;

Considering terrorists bombed the WTF before, it would be the first thought that came to everyones mind.

meglome

Kenners wrote:

FACT 6: Buildings DO NOT under any circumstances at all collaspe symmetrically into their own footprints at free fall speed without the use of controlled demolitions END OF! Wake up for god's sake. It's not that difficult to understand!

Just to add to what humanji said.

I was wondering since seemingly buildings don't collapse like this can you answer me this... How many buildings of the specific design and height of the WTC were hit by planes and mostly left to burn?

I'm not an architect or engineer but I can use common sense. There have been no other truly similar incidents like the WTC and yet people can state as fact they shouldn't fall one way over another. Ignoring of course that the original engineers of the building have little doubt that the way the buildings fell was caused by the planes crashing into them. The one other incident that it could be compared to, the building in Madrid, the steel part of the structure collapsed just as in the WTC. Not the same type of building exactly but strange the only incident we can compare with has a similar outcome. Must have been thermate as well.

Jocksereire

Mordeth wrote:

no, we're defending a theory about a conspiracy.... there's a difference

you back the theory that 19 hijackers conspired to attack the WTC centre and pentagon :rolleyes: You defend to US governments conspiracy theory. no point in playing with words there is no difference

Jocksereire

Kenners mate as i said it already id take it easy and not burst any veins trying to explain to people who believe that a faction of the US government are too dumb to plan this but 19 arabs and a bloke in a cave could.

The links in the sticky thread include all the information already including the presentation of Steven Jones's findings in the WTC dust. Id just let people watch them and make their own mind up and not get too wound up if someone has a different opinion.

bonkey

humanji wrote:

Would it not be common sense for every company in the world to be insured against loss of income? I would of thought it'd standard

No, its by no means standard. For a company to insure themselves against loss of income would be extremely rare.

I amn't 100% certain, but my understanding is that Silverstein was required to take this insurance by some party as a condition of taking the deal regarding the towers. The reason being the '93 bombing.

bonkey

whiterebel wrote:

Claim for the WTC was actually $861M according to some sources,

Just to come back on this...

The $861m is correct as the figure for which WTC7 was insured. The insurance companies agreed to a full payout on this one. However, somwhere in the region of $383 million was owed on WTC7. This money would have been paid directly from the insurance company to the debtors. The balance ($477) would go to Silverstein assuming no other costs. It is reasonable to assume that this is where the originally-quoted figure of around $450m came from.

Also - regarding the building of Freedom Tower, you mentioned that an estimate of $1bn for reconstruction and fitting out would leave Silverstein in profit. I agree. It unquestionably would. However, this is the first time I've seen such a figure. Originally, figures starting at around $4.5bn were being thrown about when the design-competition winner was announced. Since then, the design has apparently been somewhat simplified and the last estimate I've seen referenced was from early this year at around $3bn.

whiterebel

bonkey wrote:

No, its by no means standard. For a company to insure themselves against loss of income would be extremely rare.

I amn't 100% certain, but my understanding is that Silverstein was required to take this insurance by some party as a condition of taking the deal regarding the towers. The reason being the '93 bombing.

He was required to take out the Terrorism clause as you stated, due to the earlier attack. Insuring against Consequential loss is near unheard of though, especially with a policy that size, even though the income lossalone should be reasonable enough to work out. Its the hidden extras like having to house his tenants in other buildings (If he had to) that are harder to define.

whiterebel

meglome wrote:

The one other incident that it could be compared to, the building in Madrid, the steel part of the structure collapsed just as in the WTC. Not the same type of building exactly but strange the only incident we can compare with has a similar outcome. Must have been thermate as well.

What collapse?

Ciaran500

whiterebel wrote:

Insuring against Consequential loss is near unheard of though, especially with a policy that size,

Source?

bonkey

Kenners wrote:

Molten pools of metal cannot be explained by fire(even jet fuel fire) because the maximum possible tempeture for burning jet fuel is about 1000 degrees short of melting metal. Collapse by fire is a physical and chemical impossiblity.

Collapse of steel-supported structures by fire is an accepted reality. Witness the steel-supported section of the Windsor Tower in Madrid, or indeed the recent bridge-collapse in the US. In both cases, normal fire weakened steel enough to cause structural failure.

Needless to even bring up the hundreds of firefighters, law enforcement officers and first responders who reported Seeing explosive devices in the buildings and hearing multiple explosions BEFORE the planes hit!(William Rodriguez a 9-11 survivor tells of explosions before and after planes hit. Read!) you won't find this on fox news because mainstream media is controlled. http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml

Not needless at all. Explosions going off over an hour before the collapse fo the building don't help your case in the slightest. As for the allegations that hundreds of officials reported seeing explosive devices....I say you're mistaken.

Unfortunately, I can't prove that testimony doesn't exist. It is, however, possible for you to prove it does exist. I'm willing to bet you can't provide those hundreds of testimonies saying what you claim they do. They will, rather, say something else which with careful editing and misrepresentation, can be taken to mean something close to what you claim.

Fact 2: Certain floors in the towers were closed off and had unusual construction going on. For two weeks before the attacks most floors were covered in a thick layer of dust and the noise was so bad that a british business man filed several complaints and was promptly told to shut up and mind his business. This is fact and part of the public record.

Please point to the part of the public record that contains this information.

Fact 3: NORAD for the first time in it's history shut down for 1 hour 20 minutes on the day of 9-11

Source?

and funnily enough dick cheney was carrying out drills involving the EXACT senario of what was actually gonna happen

No, he wasn't. There was a drill regarding an aircraft accidentally hitting a smaller federal building nowhere near either the towers or the Pentagon.

...and by the way 7 of the 'terrorists' who were supposed to be on the planes turned up alive and well.

No, they didn't. You are presumably referring to reports in the first 10 days after 9/11 from various news sources, all of which have subsequetly been accepted to be cases of mistaken reports - a bit like that picture of Maddie the other day turned out to not be Maddie after all.

Fact 4: a lot of high profile people recieved anonymous warnings not to fly on the morning of 9-11. including mayor willie brown and salman rushdie

Proof?

FACT 5:It's called a false flag op. If you don't believe that a government can carry something like this out think again.

Whether or not the US government could do this isn't the issue. The question is whether or not the evidence supports the notion that they did. It doesn't.

FACT 6: Buildings DO NOT under any circumstances at all collaspe symmetrically into their own footprints at free fall speed without the use of controlled demolitions END OF! Wake up for god's sake. It's not that difficult to understand!

Its difficult to understand because conspiracy theorists tell us on one hand that never before has a high-rise collapsed from a combination of massive structural damage and uncontrolled fire.....and yet the same consrpiacy theorists can tell us that such an event doesn't look like this!!!

You can't have both. Either you have no idea what it should look like, or you can show us a similar case which we can draw comparisons with. Which one of the two positions are you willing to abandon? Let me know, and then I'll deal with the other one.

watch 'zeitgeist'

There's a great idea. Watch a movie which tells you not to believe what you're told. Then believe it because it tells you to.

and check out ALEX JONES(he predicted 9-11 2 months before it happened. Not because he's psychic but because he was warned by highly placed people that something was about to happen and logically deduced it).

Alex Jones predicted 911 in the same way that cheap fortunetellers tell you your fortune. He predicts disaster regularly and with enough vagueness that when something eventually happens he can claim to have been right.

If you say "the economy is about to crash" long enough, eventually you'll be right. It doesn't mean you predicted it.

Alex Jones makes his living selling conspiracy theories. 'nuff said.

PNAC is another good thing to google..especially since dick cheney stated in a PNAC document months before 9-11 that they needed a catalysing event such as a new pearl harbour to usher in anti-constitutional laws and controls.

Why not read it? Its a public document. I don't think there's a youTube adaptation yet though.

Lastly, The BBC reported the collapse of building 7 25 minutes BEFORE it actually happened. In fact, the reporter is giving the detail of the collapse while building 7 can be seen still standing behind her. You can see this on you-tube.

They did indeed.

And you know what...I'm willing to bet that pretty-much anyone who hadn't been to NYC before September 11th 2001 didn't thave a clue which building was WTC7.

There's a simple explanation. For hours, people were saying "WTC7 is in danger of collapsing" (despite what many would claim about it being sudden and unexpected). Somewhere along the way, "expected to fall any time now" got miscommunicated as "has just collapsed". Misreporting is common.

You'll also find - if you check the records - that explosions on Capitol Hill were reported by all major news channels. Amazingly, this news has no basis in any fact. There were no explosions on Capital Hill.

Guys, hundreds and hundreds of people have been coming forward form high profile postitions to expose the lie with facts and eye-witness reports but they are being completely ignored by the mainstream media.

They're being completely ignored by the conspiracy sites as well, apparently, who prefer to concentrate on a far smaller number of people who don't quite have proof, or who's comments they can misrepresnet.

Dirty Dave

whiterebel wrote:

What collapse?

Landmark 29-floor tower on Madrid skyline remained standing despite a 26-hour, multiple-floor fire.
Despite a complete burn-out, the strength provided by a technical concrete floor, plus the passive fire resistance of the building's concrete core and frame, prevented the building from collapse.
The only part of the building to collapse was the network of steel perimeter columns supporting the slab on the upper floors.
The building was in the process of refurbishment and fireproofing to modern standards when the fire occurred; some fireproofing was being provided on the steel perimeter columns.
NIST's interim report on the World Trade Center disaster recommends the inclusion of 'strong points' within the building frame design - the Madrid Windsor Building's strong points were its two concrete 'technical' floors and the concrete core system enabling the building to survive complete burnout.
This case study is an example of the excellent performance of a concrete frame designed using traditional methods and subjected to an intense fire. It also highlights the risks when active fire protection measures fail or are not included in steel frame construction.

Original article (Including pictures of what the hotel looked like BEFORE the partial collapse can be found below)

http://www.concretecentre.com/main.asp?page=1205

I'll believe anything anyone can give me solid evidence of - but I do like to put it to the test. Hence the above.