|
So what reappl happened with 9/11?
Ok, my favorite thing to do these days when I have some extra time is to check out some random google video, and this is what I found today.
Maybe this is an old story, but I never knew this perspective before. I just wanted to see what you guys think of this. ps ...the film is sort of long, but it's worth it, IMO. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
Your link doesn't work, but I'm assuming you're talking about the Loose Change video. We have seen it. It beings up some good points, and it also has some flaws. Look in the politics forum.
|
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
|
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
I love the fancy Google Earch special effects.
|
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
lol WTF every post in this thread has a spelling mistake.
|
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
I had to reread my post 3 times before I saw the mistake. I guess I never figured I would spell Earth wrong. Earch? WTF. Funny, C isn't really close to T on the keybaord either.
|
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
[ QUOTE ]
I had to reread my post 3 times before I saw the mistake. I guess I never figured I would spell Earth wrong. Earch? WTF. Funny, C isn't really close to T on the keybaord either. [/ QUOTE ] KEYBAORD! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HE WAS RIGHT YOU DONKS CAN'T SPELL |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
fwiw, you need 1hr 20min to watch this. but yea, it's been posted before a few times. good stuff even though some of it was overexaggerated.
|
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
I understand that everything in the film "could" be right, but one thing I don't get it is this.
For those of you who don't have more than an hour to watch the film, basically it says that the cell phone calls from the plane were made up. It also sort of say that a plane didn't crash into Pentagon or in Pennsylvania. If that's the case, where did all the people who're in the planes go? That's what I don't get it. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
It's amazing people buy into this [censored].
|
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
[ QUOTE ]
I understand that everything in the film "could" be right, but one thing I don't get it is this. For those of you who don't have more than an hour to watch the film, basically it says that the cell phone calls from the plane were made up. It also sort of say that a plane didn't crash into Pentagon or in Pennsylvania. If that's the case, where did all the people who're in the planes go? That's what I don't get it. [/ QUOTE ] I had never heard the one about the plane not crashing in Pennsylvania. Supposedly the plan that didn't crash into the Pentagon crashed into the ocean, from the theories I've read. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I understand that everything in the film "could" be right, but one thing I don't get it is this. For those of you who don't have more than an hour to watch the film, basically it says that the cell phone calls from the plane were made up. It also sort of say that a plane didn't crash into Pentagon or in Pennsylvania. If that's the case, where did all the people who're in the planes go? That's what I don't get it. [/ QUOTE ] I had never heard the one about the plane not crashing in Pennsylvania. Supposedly the plan that didn't crash into the Pentagon crashed into the ocean, from the theories I've read. [/ QUOTE ] I heard that it was system failure on a strange deserted island that caused a giant geo-electric magnet to overload and bring the plane down. |
Re: So what really happened with 9/11?
Not that I'm spending a lot of time on this matter, but I found a web page titled "Evidence That A Boeing 757 Really Did Impact the Pentagon on 9/11."
I don't know which one to believe. All I'm saying is "if" the plane didn't crash Pentagon, where did the plane go? |
Re: So what really happened with 9/11?
|
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
[ QUOTE ]
If that's the case, where did all the people who're in the planes go? [/ QUOTE ] The Feds put them in a deal kinda like the Federal witness protection program and gave them like $4 million dollars each. They have bought homes is small midwestern towns and are trying to blend in with the locals. They all have cable connections and have opened accounts at PartyPoker. They all play Omaha 0/8 for small stakes and see 85% of the flops. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
|
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
I'll tell you the most unbelievable thing posted in this thread, something you really need to be gullible to believe:
The OP ran across this video randomly, out of the milllions of videos on Google. (Yes, I misspelled "milllions" deliberately, keeping with the theem.) |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] If that's the case, where did all the people who're in the planes go? [/ QUOTE ] The Feds put them in a deal kinda like the Federal witness protection program and gave them like $4 million dollars each. They have bought homes is small midwestern towns and are trying to blend in with the locals. They all have cable connections and have opened accounts at PartyPoker. They all play Omaha 0/8 for small stakes and see 85% of the flops. [/ QUOTE ] lolololol [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] post more. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
[ QUOTE ]
lol WTF every post in this thread has a spelling mistake. [/ QUOTE ] Wood half bean funner iv ewe maid won two. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
[ QUOTE ]
I'll tell you the most unbelievable thing posted in this thread, something you really need to be gullible to believe: The OP ran across this video randomly, out of the milllions of videos on Google. (Yes, I misspelled "milllions" deliberately, keeping with the theem.) [/ QUOTE ] Amen. Email from Nigerians is easier to believe. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
[ QUOTE ]
Amen. Email from Nigerians is easier to believe. [/ QUOTE ] Whatever happened to Idi? That guy was a solid poster. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
The proper response to the loose change video.
|
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
I'm not going to try to defend the conspiracy theories to the majority here who don't think it was an inside job. That's impossible, especially since I don't even have any qualifications in physics, architecture, or any of the other fields that could be useful in analyzing the physical nature of the collapse of the buildings.
However, one must admit that the following, which are logically derived from the official explanation, are very peculiar circumstances: 1) That both buildings were constucted in a way such that if a large fireball were to travel through the elevator shaft, it could detonate existing fuel supplies within the buildings, causing the building to accidentally collapse in a well-contained free-fall that appears identical to a well-planned, expert demolition. I am not an expert on demolitions, but it would seem to me that getting buildings of that size to collapse so perfectly would be a remarkably challenging task, and would require the best experts the field had to offer. Buildings that collapse in the absence of planned demolition teams tend to look more like this: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/buildfall2.jpg http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/buildfall5.jpg http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/buildfall6.jpg (these are photos of Earthquake disasters) 2) It is also strange that building seven collapsed in a very similar fashion, despite having an entirely different cause of its destruction (no fireball could have accidentally taken out all the load bearing members simultaneously, as was the case with the twin towers). 3) If indeed the terrorists' intent was not only to crash into the buildings and kill the civilians who were incinerated in the explosion, but to in fact destroy these extremely sturdy structures in a manner beyond repair, then we must admit that they must have undertook a PHENOMENAL level of research in the architecture of the building to know that, why and how an explosion from an airplane could in fact bring about a full demolition of two 110-story steel buildings. (If you had asked anyone before Sept. 11, 2001 what would happen if you crashed a plane into the middle of one of the buildings, I don't think anyone would suggest that it would bring about the destruction of the entire building in such a manner that would accidentally resemble a very difficult expert demolition.) I recognize the holes in the conspiracy theories, I know that, if it was an inside job, the chances of keeping everyone quiet would probably be as unlikely as the above-mentioned situations, but anyone who believes the official report of how the buildings collapsed must acknowledge that the way it unfolded was either remarkably unlikely, or required a phenomenal mistake in the construction of the building, accompanied with an equally remarkable level of planning, research and coordination. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
"So what reappl happened with 9/11?"
An event occurred that gave ample opportunity to retarded conspiracy theorist idiots to make fools of themselves. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
I know exactly what really happened, but, whoops, there goes my last sentence.
|
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
[ QUOTE ]
2) It is also strange that building seven collapsed in a very similar fashion, despite having an entirely different cause of its destruction (no fireball could have accidentally taken out all the load bearing members simultaneously, as was the case with the twin towers). [/ QUOTE ] The towers did not collapse because all load bearing beams were taken out simultaneously. The plane crashes started huge fires as the jet fuel ignited, and the fires grew as furniture, office paper, etc. burned. Steel looses strength as it is heated. Estimates I have read are that the structural steel beams in the towers lost well over 50% of their strength at the tempertures involved, causing them to collapse under the weight they were supporting. Building 7 was also the site of a major fire. The fire department abandoned it as a lost cause, and it collapsed after burning for several hours. [ QUOTE ] 3) If indeed the terrorists' intent was not only to crash into the buildings and kill the civilians who were incinerated in the explosion, but to in fact destroy these extremely sturdy structures in a manner beyond repair, then we must admit that they must have undertook a PHENOMENAL level of research in the architecture of the building to know that, why and how an explosion from an airplane could in fact bring about a full demolition of two 110-story steel buildings. (If you had asked anyone before Sept. 11, 2001 what would happen if you crashed a plane into the middle of one of the buildings, I don't think anyone would suggest that it would bring about the destruction of the entire building in such a manner that would accidentally resemble a very difficult expert demolition.) [/ QUOTE ] Investigations after the fact, reported in the media, indicated that the attack was planned in detail, and included members who had engineering degrees. The results were expected. The planes chosen were long range non-stop flights which would be carrying full fuel loads, and the impact points were chosen because of the effects of fire there, and because fires that high up would be impossible to fight. Again, the destruction was not caused by the impact or initial explosion, but by the subsequent fire. This was anticipated by the planners. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
1. If the government was willing to kill all the people in the planes and two trade centers, would it really have made much difference if they had risked a few more lives and property damage and let the towers collapse in a more disorganized, unsuspicious fashion?
2. There's no comparison to how a building falls over in an earthquake, to how it would behave under the circumstances of 9/11. No comparison at all. Those photos are useless. 3. Osama himself has said that the building collapses were beyond his wildest dreams. Of course, he liked it, but had no idea the destruction would be so complete. 4. I'm not an engineer either, but it makes sense to me. The planes crashed through the upper floors. The fire was unimaginably intense. All you needed was a couple of floors to have their integrity compromised and collapse. So now the weight of all the floors above collapse and created a pancake effect, adding sudden and tremendous weight to the floor beneath it and eventually caving in the whole building in a somewhat neat and orderly fashion. 5. The number of people who would need to be in on such a conspiracy would be quite a lot. It would be an overwhelming task to insure so many people kept it a secret forever. There's just too great a risk it would be leaked and come out eventually. It wouldn't even be worth attempting. 6. If it WERE a conspiracy, and Bush had planned this out with Bin Laden so that he would have reason to invade Iraq, don't you think people like Osama and his brethren would eventually jump at the chance to tell-all, and destroy not only the Bush administration, but the whole integrity of the United States of America and it's reputation throughout the world? Don't get me wrong. I think President Bush is probably one of the dumbest men ever elected to the this country's presidency, but I still don't think even he is dumb enough to have created such a conspiracy. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
[ QUOTE ]
Don't get me wrong. I think President Bush is probably one of the dumbest men ever elected to the this country's presidency, but I still don't think even he is dumb enough to have created such a conspiracy. [/ QUOTE ] This leads me to a question I still don't have an answer to: How do the people who think Bush is too stupid to tie his own shoes in the morning but simultaneously claim that he's intelligent enough to orchestrate and cover up the largest terrorist attack in history reconcile the contradiction? |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
Well, I don't think presidents have all that much to do with the actual implementation of things. They decide what to do, and have people who figure out how to do it. I'm not even sure how much say they have in the "what to do" part.
Of course, this is if a president is smart. Smart leaders guide and realize certain things are better left in the hands of people specifically trained in certain areas (I've always thought good CEO's operate in this fashion). Say what you want about Bush, but he does seem to be a very "hands on" president. That IMO, is the problem. He's not smart enough to know what needs to be done and can't manage the messes he gets us into. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
Lestat-
Half of your arguments involve citing the absurdity of the conspiracy theory. I am not arguing for that (as there is no point; I have neither the evidence nor qualifications to make a convincing argument of any kind). All I am saying is that it seems extremely unlikely that buildings 1, 2, and 7 would have been brought down in a manner that so greatly resembles a planned demolition as a result of a massive fire. I think it is very strange that no other buildings in history, when hit by a plane or an unquenchable inferno, have ever displayed this behavior. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
BenFranklin:
[ QUOTE ] Investigations after the fact, reported in the media, indicated that the attack was planned in detail, and included members who had engineering degrees. The results were expected. [/ QUOTE ] Lestat: [ QUOTE ] 3. Osama himself has said that the building collapses were beyond his wildest dreams. Of course, he liked it, but had no idea the destruction would be so complete. [/ QUOTE ] Sources? |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
I'm sure there have been other incidents of smaller planes crashing into buildings... But to my knowledge, this is the first time a fully fueled jumbo jet willfully crashed nose first at full speed into a skyscraper.
I'm just saying that in order for something to be "extremely unlikely" as you state, there should be something to base that opinion on. Since, it's never happened before, there is no sample size from which a claim like this can be (or should be), made. Especially, not by lay-people like us. So I'm perfectly fine with accepting it as being completely reasonable until shown otherwise. I do see your point however. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
<font color="blue">Lestat:
Quote: 3. Osama himself has said that the building collapses were beyond his wildest dreams. Of course, he liked it, but had no idea the destruction would be so complete. Sources? </font> At the time Bin Laden admitted responsibility for the attacks, he also gave a brief discription on how it was plotted out and what the expectations were. I either saw, heard, or read this from a reputable news source, like CNNC. Newseek, etc. I'll try to cite a specific source, although I'm terrible at researching things on the internet. My point is, I didn't make it up and should be pretty well established he said this in case anyone else is inclined to find a source. |
That was kinda easy
Maybe I'm getting better at research?
First, I never said this attack was not planned in painstaking detail. Surely it was. My only point was that the damage exceeded expectations. Here is one link from CNN, which indicates that while Bin Laden was experienced in building design and DID expect a partial collapse, it was only the floors above where the planes struck. He did not anticipate the entire building coming down. This is not a full transcript of Bin Laden's comments. A fuller review states that he did claim that a total structural collapse was beyond his expectations. But this is what I found for now after a quick search (from CNN)... "Due to my experience in this field, I was thinking that the fire from the gas in the plane would melt the iron structure of the building and collapse the area where the plane hit and all the floors above it only. This is all we had hoped for," . bin Laden said on the tape Link |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure there have been other incidents of smaller planes crashing into buildings... But to my knowledge, this is the first time a fully fueled jumbo jet willfully crashed nose first at full speed into a skyscraper. I'm just saying that in order for something to be "extremely unlikely" as you state, there should be something to base that opinion on. Since, it's never happened before, there is no sample size from which a claim like this can be (or should be), made. Especially, not by lay-people like us. So I'm perfectly fine with accepting it as being completely reasonable until shown otherwise. I do see your point however. [/ QUOTE ] My reasoning for considering it as "very unlikely" has more to do with considering the difficulty involved in a planned demolition. If one were to plan the demolition of one of the towers, a great deal of planning, rigging and research would be necessary to ensure that the building collapsed into a neat little pile, and didn't collapse unevenly, resulting in the tower tipping over to one side and not demolishing completely. Yes, I know that we don't have other examples to compare it too, it just seems astounding to me that a laborious planned demolition could be counterfeit by a simple, brutish explosion at the high end of the tower. (Does this mean that we are overpaying our demolition experts for unnecessary calculations and time when all you need to do to bring down a skyscraper completely is to just create a massive explosion somewhere in the building?) What I can more accurately call extremely unlikely, however, is the collapse of building seven. The twin towers were the first time that a jumbo jet filled with that much explosive power crashed into a tall building, but building seven was not caused by that. It simply caught on fire as a peripheral effect of the explosions. This is not the first time that a large building was consumed by flame, but it is the first time that a building was properly demolished as a result of it. Whether the building was brought down as a result of the fire, or whether it was brought down by a planned demolition, it is undeniable that the effect of the incident was functionally identical to that of a planned demolition; the collapse of building seven undeniably resembles that of a demolition. Unless I am mistaken, I believe this is the first case in which a fire-ravaged building ended in a complete, symmetrical collapse. Again, I know that there are just as many, if not far more problems with the conspiracy theories surrounding the event, but it seems to me that the disaster should be at least considered something of an architectural anomaly. |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
[ QUOTE ]
An event occurred that gave ample opportunity to retarded conspiracy theorist idiots to make fools of themselves. [/ QUOTE ] Comments like this make it painfully obvious that you didn't even bother to watch the video. I agree that generally conspiracy theories like this don't have much merit (like the moon landing ones.) However, I at least gave the movie a chance, and it seems to have some merit. Their sources are valid and arguments seem solid, and I'm interested in learning more about it. You're reaction was essentially the same as mine when I opened the thread. -Craig |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
Actually, to anyone who has spent time actually doing the research themselves, its painfully obvious that the government was behind 911.
There are over 300+ University professors who started a group to study the evidence regarding 911 and they all now believe the government was involved. And not just involved, but carried it out. Here's Fox News interviews with a few of the professors: http://youtube.com/watch?v=LfqYBQYYD1g http://youtube.com/watch?v=J0XhEW39fgY http://youtube.com/watch?v=wyq0EiAvQ8Q I personally think its naive to think that super rich and powerful people WOULDN'T use this power to achieve their goals. You think because they're our leaders that they actually care about us? Think again and think serious about this. All throughout history, leaders have proven time and again to have their own agendas and have done whatever it takes to achieve this. Including killing their own citizens. It happened in Rome, it happened in Germany, and it has now happened in America. You don't think the American Government has ever thought to kill US citizens to get backing for a war? Operation Northwoods: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1 The only people that still think Osama was behind 911 are all people who haven't spent the time to research it themselves. It's too easy to believe the mainstream story. You're actually an outcast if you think for yourself. But what's more important? Getting people to like you, or knowing the truth so you can protect your family and your fellow countrymen? There are so many flaws to the official story its sickening that people actually believe it. But then again, when that's the only story you hear, its easier to just believe it. They say the jet fuel was hot enough to melt or weaken the steel beams? Except that in the video right before the towers went down, you could see people in the windows waving for help and jumping out (remember?). If it was so hot as to melt the steel, wouldn't those people have melted instantly? What about the fact that jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel? What about the fact that architects that built the WTC, actually built it to withstand a plane crashing into it?? What about the fact that firefighters THERE THE MORNING OF 911 TESTIFIED THAT THEY HEARD EXPLOSIONS IN THE BUILDINGS? They testified to the 911 commission and now there are gag orders placed on all the firefighters that testified this. Why? What about the seismic readings proving there were explosions other than the plane crash on that day? What about the proof that there were explosive residue on the rubble, that has been verified by several scientific labs? Did you know that the WTC was public property its entire existance, until just 6 weeks before 911? A jewish man by the name of Larry Silverstein leased the WTC just 6 weeks before 911 happened. Not only that, he took out a special terrorist attack clause in the insurance policy, netting him 7 billion dollars when 911 happened. Did you know that building 7 was "pulled" by Larry Silverstein in a controlled demolition that same day? Why were there bombs already in the building? Check out Larry Silverstein admitting in a PBS special that they ordered the building pulled: http://youtube.com/watch?v=C3E-26oVIIs Start piecing these things together people. I didn't believe it at first either. It sounds too incredible. But the more you research into the truth, the more you realize how possible it really was, and how sloppily it was done. You think there are millions that believe the government did it for no reason? There are are just millions of loons out there? Well, look at the evidence yourself, and you'll see that the government's version of events is the biggest conspiracy theory of all. Or just believe what you're told, be obedient, the government will protect you... |
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
I pity you and your need to believe such things to feel intelligent and special.
|
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
|
Re: So what reappl happened with 9/11?
[ QUOTE ]
I pity you and your need to believe such things to feel intelligent and special. [/ QUOTE ] And I pity you as well for believing blindly and walking with the masses. It has nothing to do with feeling intelligent. It has everything to do with not believing what you're told, and doing research yourself before you believe something. If you call it a "need to be intelligent" then so be it. ALL governments, not just ours lie to the people. It is only "common sense" to assume they are lying, and research yourself the truth. Go ahead and pity me. You're not going to be losing any sleep until its you or your kid dying in a war over there. You might not even lose sleep then...I personally worry about the world my daughters are coming into. Listen to the professors explain themselves, even though they're being attacked and bombarded. They don't sound like "nutbag conspiracy theorists" to me. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:27 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.