9/11 Coincidences

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZ9BofDUXv0

this is very weired, anyone else question 9/11? was it really terrorist or us.

Lol.... here we go...

:munchout:

I'm not gonig to blast you for this thread but be prepared for the storm you are about to witness from others.

Good luck man.

Wow, after watching a few parts of that...it has got me thinking.

Even Kerry in part twelve says "they destroyed building 7 in a controlled fashion".

It would take months to prepare something like that.

This is an update for part 8 - it's a powerful video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JithuVAIb7Y&feature=related

It was us.... Look at the history of our country... THEY (our powers at be.... aka the government) Did this to us. To scare us, so we ask for what they want to give us instead of them pushing them on us... Chips, so they see our every move and can turn them off whenever they want... Absolute power.

Go and watch.

http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

well here's a new topic for the tailgate.

:munchout:

Even Kerry in part twelve says "they destroyed building 7 in a controlled fashion".

The English language is great huh? you see, Kerry describes it in the way that humans try to describe chaotic scenes - by equating it with something else, trying to make sense of it all. Hence the word 'fashion' i.e it looked like something else. Doesnt mean thats what happened. You have to think about this from the comfort zone of post-event and remember people are reporting live from a desperate situation and trying to pull together huge events in seconds and minutes for a news broadcast.

Years ago people thought there were canals on Mars. Why? because when they looked through telescopes they saw these smudged 'lines' on the surface. Automatically, they tried to make sense of those images and started putting nice straight lines where actually none existed. Of course when we sent craft up there to take a look, hey! no 'man made' canals. Just big rolling deserts and canyons.

:munchout: This should be interesting

The English language is great huh? you see, Kerry describes it in the way that humans try to describe chaotic scenes - by equating it with something else, trying to make sense of it all. Hence the word 'fashion' i.e it looked like something else. Doesnt mean thats what happened. You have to think about this from the comfort zone of post-event and remember people are reporting live from a desperate situation and trying to pull together huge events in seconds and minutes for a news broadcast.

Years ago people thought there were canals on Mars. Why? because when they looked through telescopes they saw these smudged 'lines' on the surface. Automatically, they tried to make sense of those images and started putting nice straight lines where actually none existed. Of course when we sent craft up there to take a look, hey! no 'man made' canals. Just big rolling deserts and canyons.

You're comparing an unexplored planet millions of miles away with a collapsing building filmed 200 yards away. Quite the exaggeration, if I may.

All I know is that demolition experts are all in agreement that building 7 collapsed in a manner that they describe as "induced by man". Several buildings suffered damage 50x more fearsome, but building 7, which housed the mayor's safehouse, collapsed like my great grandfather's outhouse in a hurricane.

Or should I say, collapsed like an outhouse demolished by an expert.

This **** never stops coming.

You're comparing an unexplored planet millions of miles away with a collapsing building filmed 200 yards away. Quite the exaggeration, if I may.

Nope, I am not exaggerating anything. Mars has no context at all with 9/11 (amazing eh?!). The point you missed is that people attempt to make sense of things by comparing confusing situations with experience they know of. That does not mean its the same. Even your experts say it fell in a 'manner'. Ok, the next step is to show the evidence that proves that not only did it fall in a 'manner' but was actually due to a controlled explosion. I am still waiting on that evidence from anyone, anywhere.

The search function is your friend.

this has all been gone over 50 times.

You lose, please try again.

Nope, I am not exaggerating anything. Mars has no context at all with 9/11 (amazing eh?!). The point you missed is that people attempt to make sense of things by comparing confusing situations with experience they know of. That does not mean its the same. Even your experts say it fell in a 'manner'. Ok, the next step is to show the evidence that proves that not only did it fall in a 'manner' but was actually due to a controlled explosion. I am still waiting on that evidence from anyone, anywhere.

Dude, watch the videos; they are interesting, if nothing else. Do they need to pull out an undetonated stick of TNT out for you?

I've always been one to blow off 9/11 conspiracy theories, but I think in reality I'd take these engineers' observations over Bush & Co. These are brainiacs sitting here telling us that the way the buildings came down just isn't right.

Dude, watch the videos; they are interesting, if nothing else. Do they need to pull out an undetonated stick of TNT out for you?

Maybe not an undetonated stick but evidence of controlled explosions would do nicely - got any (looking at film doesnt count, I mean forensic evidence of explosives......)

I've always been one to blow off 9/11 conspiracy theories, but I think in reality I'd take these engineers' observations over Bush & Co.

Exactly 'Observations' - 'observation' says that if you look closely you can see the face of a man on the Moon. WTF!? those **** CIA at it again! :doh:

The new series MonsterQuest is out right now also: I've wasted 5 hours of my life watching that crap too.. you'd think it would have something new.. as its new.. You'd be wrong.

^ ^ ^

It' states in one of the videos that it took Bush 400+ days to initiate an investigation team for 9/11. Previous disasters took less than 10. Pearl Harbor, Titanic, ect ect ect. Why?

Again, you are comparing things that are very far away, virtually unexplored first hand by man, with things that engineers have learned how to set up first hand. NASA has very little grasp on space compared to head demolition experts' grasp on bringing down a building. It really isn't rocket, or space science. It's a controlled blast that weakens columns in the middle of a building in order for it to collapse on itself. Did you even see the part about Thermite and Thermate?

It takes more than 2400 degrees to melt steel. The jet fuel maxed out at 1200 degrees. How could it melt the steel? Thermate reactions were seen going off around the towers minutes before their collapse, bringing temperatures to the point that they'd slice through steel like butter.

Sorry if you guys really like blowing this sort of stuff off, I find it pretty fishy, and never have until now.

you see comments like "...Thermate reactions were seen going off around the towers minutes before their collapse..." are pointless unless you can show evidence of the Thermate explosions. People are looking at a peice of film and second-guessing what happened then proposing it as 'fact'. Yet, when other engineers say that its not controlled explosions they are treated as liars, Government stooges etc. Based on what? the 'evidence' and 'facts' gleaned from a movie? I cant accept that. Sorry.

As for 9/11 reports, its no-win..the Government takes x hundred days and people claim they are buying time to cover tracks; do it in a couple of weeks and people are outraged that a 'full' investigation hasnt been carried out, what are they trying to hide blah blah. Come on.

you see comments like "...Thermate reactions were seen going off around the towers minutes before their collapse..." are pointless unless you can show evidence of the Thermate explosions. People are looking at a peice of film and second-guessing what happened then proposing it as 'fact'. Yet, when other engineers say that its not controlled explosions they are treated as liars, Government stooges etc. Based on what? the 'evidence' and 'facts' gleaned from a movie? I cant accept that. Sorry.

As for 9/11 reports, its no-win..the Government takes x hundred days and people claim they are buying time to cover tracks; do it in a couple of weeks and people are outraged that a 'full' investigation hasnt been carried out, what are they trying to hide blah blah. Come on.

You have a tendency for blowing things off, don't you?

Tons of hard-to-judge cases would be EASILY solved with a little film evidence.

I'd like to see other engineers opinions on this. Please, point me in that direction. I'm open to anything as far as this goes, didn't really give these theories any thought until now.

You say "movie" like it's a fictional piece of film, which it most certainly not. Again, the temperature properties speak for themselves. The jet fuel temps were half of which could have melted steel. The slices of steel beams were dug up looking like they were professionally demolished. I dunno, I'd have to watch more of this, but I feel like the building 7 incident is very fishy. The owner of the building made $7 billion by suing his insurance agency, if any of this evidence of controlled demolition is true - which it really actually makes it look like - I'm wondering why nobody has sued him for fraud yet. A lot of unanswered questions.

I have a good source that tells me the Bush administration was behind 9/11. My source is my ex-wife's cousin's son who worked for a guy that worked for his sister's fiancee's brother who used to work for Cheney's lesbian daughter. Well, anyway, my source says that Cheney was actually the mastermind behind it all. Bush was too busy doing coke in the oval office. So, my source tells me that the trigger man, the guy that brought down both buildings was ....

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Yep, there he is, moments before detonating the World Trade Center. ****.

Ok, go through these and we'll leave it at that:

The two engineers responding arent exactly built for TV and come over stilted but listen to what they say. Listen too to how their opponents continually mouth off 'liar' all the time no matter what they say. It also covers Building 7. One of the conspiracy guys talks of someone coming from floor 23 and at floor 8 hearing a 'bomb' going off. A huge leap is then made from this comment to explosives being taken in to the building, how could this happen, must be a cover up etc. Remember too that the person was at floor 8 not 23 when he heard the explosion - he/she did not actually see any 'bomb' detonate. All they heard was a loud explosion and not surprisingly in a moment of what must have been total fear and confusion uses the word 'bomb' to describe an incident. Brilliant, an entire consipracy gift-wrapped so long as you ignore some salient facts that the person didnt see the 'bomb' go off, there is no forensics for a bomb, that the enginereing structure explained by the two engineers may have some facts in it etc etc etc non, no all lies, lies, lies (shout it in the other guys ear, even) unlike our two heroic conspiracy guys. I'm glad I wasnt being interviewed with the two ****s spinning their conspiracy. Had they spoken to me like that they wouldn't need a conspiracy for what would happen to them live on TV.

"It's the Gub'ment. WoooHoooo!"