Ferretness, why do you always have to quote yourself? It's not going to make your words any more valuable. Anyway, there's so much evidence showing that 911 was a staged event just to let Bush invade the Middle-East. Now it's only a matter of time before people actually catch on to the bigger picutre painted for the future.
LOL Did you watch all five of videos of Loose change vs. Popular mechanics? Anytime the conspiracy theorist retards got proven wrong they just said, "No, those are lies". They got taken to school hardcore, plus they sound completely un-professional and completely insane. The problem is people out there like you want to believe the lunatic theories for only god knows whatever reasons. If 9/11 were a conspiracy it would have honestly been the most poorly executed plan of all time, just look at it. Watch starting at three minutes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MELaLQLLMYg
QFT -Tex -_- But to say something a little more meaningful, instead of just spamming the debate forums, 9/11 was staged, this video doesn't give too much evidence proving that, but just watch the first 2 minutes at least... http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=jwsHrst8Grw
1. Attack the problem - not the person. 6. Forum wide rules apply here as well. No spam. I've warned several people here, next step is infractions.
Ferret quoted himself because when someone doesn't respond to something you've posted but continues to argue its necessary to re-state something again because it warrants a response. I did this in the gay marriage thread by re-stating a point and you whined about it. And that makes it any less spam? If people ignored it then they didn't care about it. Take this up in a PM next time instead of whining at me for doing my job in a thread.
It was definitely terrorists. Did we ignore the warning signals and provoke the attack? Yes. Very much so. However, WTC 7 is a puzzler. Fires on two floors and some minor damage from falling debris. No skyscraper in the world since 9/11 or before has collapsed from fires 9/11 was our fault, even though we didn't carry it out.
Yeah, I could definitely see it as something ignored by the US government. I'm not saying it is because I really don't know, but planes hi-jacked my terrorists definitely hit buildings. There were no missiles of any sort and it was not a setup. And that makes it any less spam? If people ignored it then they didn't care about it. Take this up in a PM next time instead of whining at me for doing my job in a thread. Doing this is a part of debating, all I have to say.
There's evidence supporting either side. I'm now what to believe now. If it is true that the US government set it up and that becomes public, Bush and his administration will go down as the biggest war criminals in history. What confuses a lot of people and me is the Pentagon, where'd the plane go?
Total setup. Theres waaaay more facts supporting all these incidents were planned out. The Zeitgeist movie explains it all too well. So, im vote for burn those war criminals to smithereens.
how about being able to put a strangle hold on the oil fields as they dry up? ensuring that the american blood (oil ) does not stop being sent to us? If they were to cut the oil from us, can you imagine the panic at a global scale that would cause? and if you refuse to watch the video and be ignorant to information, than your voice is a mute sound in the background noise of reality. why would muslum terrorist strike a economic center in ther words of terror, because they hate the american symbol of freedom, when clearly the statue of liberty or the washington monument holds more american images than anything? why did building number 7, several city blocks down the road, collaspe? it wasn't even hit. why when i mention that a third building fell in NY that day, almost every single person looks at me like im crazy. why did no reporter notice that 30 floor building crumble.? what has inside that building that needed to be destroyed? what confuses me is that SEVERAL video capturing devices and security cameras from a gas station, a local building, and a business suite captured every second of that wall being hit. it woudl show exactly what happened, frame by frame. Why are these videos being held in washington, confiscated and not allowed to be viewed bythe public? it would answer every question for THAT situation immediatly. and Reyn, Very friggin well said +1 Airplanes can be remote controlled, and the plane made a stop along teh way and transfered every single passenger to another plane. and in a holding section.. most of which had been letter realsed were lowere members of cia. and phone calls on planes is impossible at the time. my sister worked for CAN jet and before they implemented new technologies, as soon as they hit 3000 ft, her cell was useless. no action at all. so how did those phone calls get made BACK then when up to this year it was almost completly impossible?
There is little need in trying to sum up a discussion when it hasn't even started. Seriously. I personally think that there is some sort of conspiracy behind it. - The three towers in New York that fell down on the day of 9/11, Tower 1, Tower 2 and World Trade Center, were the only 3 Skyscrapers in the world to ever completely fall down in a fire. - There are skyscrapers that were built over 100 years before these 3 towers, that have been on fire for more than 24 hours, and still stood, yet the Towers fell in around 50 minutes on the day of 9/11 - In WW2 a B52 Plane flew into the Empire State Building. The building still stands, yet a plane Roughly 2/3 of the size of the B52 manages to demolish a building that was built some 50 years later, that was designed to be able to sustain the impact of a plane. - The whole created in the side of the Pentagon was smaller than the size of the Plane that apparently hit it. The largest piece of debris found was small enough to pick up.
Nicely stated. All these things have not been proved wrong, at least just yet. What I'm trying to figure out is how those videos that are against the theories, prove anything right? It's really... profound.
I agree that there are some small discrepancies in the official story. However, I don't believe that it was entirely set up by the government. There is no logical reason for the government - our own government - to kill hundreds of its own people. Some say so we could invade Iraq. Evidence against this? In the first Gulf War, we left Saddam Hussein in power. Source. It was hoped that an internal coup would drive him out of power, and the CIA even used some agents to help organize a coup. It was subsequently defeated by the Iraq government. If we had wanted to, we could have easily sent in more military troops then to counteract this response. We didn't need an excuse like a terrorist attack to go into Iraq. Bush (no. 2) is not, by any means, a crazed anti-Muslim bigot bent on destroying their race. We went into Iraq because 9/11 was the final straw, because they killed many of our people. In other words, the idea that we used 9/11 as an excuse is more or less a logical fallacy. It is, of course, questionable as to why the only three towers to be destroyed by fires would be the WTC 1, 2 and 7. The first tower to be struck burnt for almost an hour before collapsing. The second burnt for 102 minutes until collapsing. The thing is, the hypothesis of a 'controlled demolition' is strictly that: a hypothesis. It is an educated guess, but there is definitely more evidence leaning towards the combination of impact+fire damage+debris, compared to 'controlled demolition'. Source. Additionally, the FEMA teams noted to find traces of sulphur that could not be explained. Then, CTs used this as a way to say, 'the government planted bombs'. How is that correlated? FEMA is a government organization. If the government really did plant bombs, they obviously wouldn't allow the release of this information to incriminate them. You will see, more often than not, that many legitimate, smart, and responsible people who established these reports are often barraged with criticism from Conspiracy Theorists, who argue that they made up facts, manipulated computer simulations, and etc. Whereas they have little basis to prove this, and are basically trying to throw mud at people.
I have to back up a page now and address this video. .............. Did you just try to use a South Park video as a source? It's entertainment, not a source for a debate... unless it's about how stupid or not stupid South Park is. I just have a problem with someone using a cartoon as a source. Also, I apologize if you didn't mean to use this video as a source, but still, South Park has no point to it.
^^^^ I did not use it as an informational source, but it brings up a perfectly valid point about the logic behind a 9/11 conspiracy. Sure its meant to be funny but the show always makes a point, and here it is incredibly obvious. 9/11 if it was a conspiracy, would have been terribly executed if it were in fact pulled off the way conspiracists say it was. If you say south park never has a point you've clearly never watched it much before.
Id have to say it's a conspricacy because the facts piled up against what they have told us is amazing. When Bush found out that the Towers had been hit, he showed no real emotion and it has been said that he was at a school that day to look innocent. Also the towers fell in such a way that only explosives with a controlled detonation could have caused it. The plane certainly did hit that but it could have been a cover up or an excuse for going to wat with Iraq. America were slowly running out of oil and Iraq was the solution. An errie fact about the plane is that if you add up the numbers on the side of it, they add to 911 or sumin like that. Also in Windings 2 (the font), it also comes up with a camera and 2 tower looking things. I'm not saying that this has got anything to do with it as i did not discover it but it is kinda creepy.