9/11 - proof, America attacking itself.
- Thread starter ENOZEGAR
- Start date
Dataforce said:Turin, I am ware of that, i was just pointing out an easier way for the government to raise a measly 7million if they wanted to
----
I would also like to add "Jamis learning how to spell" to my list of more likely probabilities
lmao >_<
---
:| Wow, that'd be the most pursuasive argument on this thread. It'd be more justified if you replace 'prideful' with arrogant.
Turin
Last edited:
ENOZEGAR said:
No, humans do. Without humans money is nothing, without money humans are unorganised, but not useless.
ENOZEGAR said:Page 313 of the report has a picture of the collapsed pentagon which is just one singular block.
Page 314 then states "at 9:37, the west wall of the pentagon was hit by a highjacked American airlines Flight 77."
Problem is..
outline of a small plane.
real size of what should have hit
aftermath
Oh and..
Wheres the burn marks from the impact and such?
Link: http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flight77.htm
Link: http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77/debris.html
You phisicly make me sick, even bringing the subject back up is an insult in my eyes. I have never disliked you more
Truth hurts, but you cannot really dislike me for bringing in a debate unless it effected you and im sorry, but thats not my intension.
ENOZEGAR said:
You really are incredibly stupid.
you cant tell how big it is from that, there is nothing there to compare it to. and thats on top of the fact its a 2D image.
outline of a small plane.
Yes, because the plane would have come in perfectly straight and at a flat angle, and no way could it have exploded before the wings had a chance to make contact. Idiot.
Oh and..
Wheres the burn marks from the impact and such?
What makes you think everything would be charred? Are you saying that after the explosion, some government official came along with a huge piece of mangled feselage and placed it there without anyone seeing? Infact according to you it was a smaller plane, in which case even with your dumbass theories, there would have been plane shrapnel.
Last edited:
Van m8, can you suggest any other position that the plan (which is correctly proportional in the image) could have flown into the building...?
You have to respect the fact that this information is not being spewed out randomly. A detailed analysis has been conducted and the results are presented. This is another reason why the const. should have released the tapes in question... after all according to your argument, it couldn't have "put at risk, homeland security".
That's all I ask, to keep an open mind.
Turin.
You have to respect the fact that this information is not being spewed out randomly. A detailed analysis has been conducted and the results are presented. This is another reason why the const. should have released the tapes in question... after all according to your argument, it couldn't have "put at risk, homeland security".
That's all I ask, to keep an open mind.
Turin.
Last edited:
I've now watched the videos, and visited various sites to research this information further, and honestly, I feel sick... really sick, seeing this on the news was enough.
Imagine, if you will... sitting on the 93rd floor of a tower, feeling a gut-crunching shake and realising the building has just been hit, running to the window to see massive explosions, a plane, everyone around you screaming, crying, trying frantically to get out of the building. So after running around a while you then come to terms with the fact that unless you can grow wings, you’re screwed. You then feel the building move a substantial amount, the floor coming from underneath you. You know you're about to die, you know there's nothing you can do, so you just stand there, falling, like the worst rollercoaster you’ve ever ridden, to then get crushed by several hundred tonnes of upper building, your family, your friends, never to be seen again. Just because you went to work, to feed your family, to live. Yeah, that, 1,344 estimated times (and that's just above the 91st floor). Nice.
Anyway, that's besides the topic of this thread. I still stand by my opinion; a minimum of 12 people could have carried this out if this was an inside job, according to reliable sources. 12 is a high amount of people, and 12 of the most powerful minds in the world, I don't think every one of them is corrupt enough to wish that much death for money. Sorry, but I just won't subject myself to that belief, I have far too much willpower and respect for my species to believe that kind of theory, no matter how much evidence you shove my way. There's also a lot of evidence to support the original theory.
In response to MentaL's theories, they're straw-clutching compared to some of the strength in some of the other arguments, but not even those I believe. I think you'll find, with a bit of further research... that most of the debris was left inside the building, and that it's a common error to believe that the plane would leave a lot of large remains, especially at those speeds into a solid object. We're not talking about a car here, and we're not talking about lost.
In conclusion, I've got a great strength of mind, and I refuse to be brainwashed. I believe it's very easy to come up with conspiracy theories for this type of event, but the fact of the matter is... that without replicating an exact copy of this attack, there's no way to prove either way. Everything that's worked out is scientific, and not everything can be worked out via logic and science, you have to accept that things don't always go exactly how science predicts, especially when there are so many other elements involved.
Imagine, if you will... sitting on the 93rd floor of a tower, feeling a gut-crunching shake and realising the building has just been hit, running to the window to see massive explosions, a plane, everyone around you screaming, crying, trying frantically to get out of the building. So after running around a while you then come to terms with the fact that unless you can grow wings, you’re screwed. You then feel the building move a substantial amount, the floor coming from underneath you. You know you're about to die, you know there's nothing you can do, so you just stand there, falling, like the worst rollercoaster you’ve ever ridden, to then get crushed by several hundred tonnes of upper building, your family, your friends, never to be seen again. Just because you went to work, to feed your family, to live. Yeah, that, 1,344 estimated times (and that's just above the 91st floor). Nice.
Anyway, that's besides the topic of this thread. I still stand by my opinion; a minimum of 12 people could have carried this out if this was an inside job, according to reliable sources. 12 is a high amount of people, and 12 of the most powerful minds in the world, I don't think every one of them is corrupt enough to wish that much death for money. Sorry, but I just won't subject myself to that belief, I have far too much willpower and respect for my species to believe that kind of theory, no matter how much evidence you shove my way. There's also a lot of evidence to support the original theory.
In response to MentaL's theories, they're straw-clutching compared to some of the strength in some of the other arguments, but not even those I believe. I think you'll find, with a bit of further research... that most of the debris was left inside the building, and that it's a common error to believe that the plane would leave a lot of large remains, especially at those speeds into a solid object. We're not talking about a car here, and we're not talking about lost.
In conclusion, I've got a great strength of mind, and I refuse to be brainwashed. I believe it's very easy to come up with conspiracy theories for this type of event, but the fact of the matter is... that without replicating an exact copy of this attack, there's no way to prove either way. Everything that's worked out is scientific, and not everything can be worked out via logic and science, you have to accept that things don't always go exactly how science predicts, especially when there are so many other elements involved.
Turin said:
yes, like i said, when the wings arent parallel with the wall
here let me draw up a diagram
where the grey thing is the plane (from the rear)
But whatever angle it came from doesnt matter, it would have exploded before the wings even had a chance to make cnotact with the structure
Last edited:
Vannaroth said:yes, like i said, when the wings arent parallel with the wall
here let me draw up a diagram
where the grey thing is the plane (from the rear)
But whatever angle it came from doesnt matter, it would have exploded before the wings even had a chance to make cnotact with the structure
Oh good god, is that plane in your drawing flying in from the top!?
The security tape clearly showed a horizontal (that is skid to hit, in whatever position the plane came it) strike.
If not then I appologise, because I can't see what your picture is saying. :s
Turin
--------------------------
In response to your post before the last.
Once again, an argument based on the pathos of the terrorists in question is baseless, because:
Turin said:
I go on to say:
Turin said:
Because too many people are trying to make this look like an over- elaborate Bank Robery!
It is NOT.
The attack in effect provided the stimulation required for the consequent legislations ("anti-terror or security legislations") and the wars that have taken place, which could not have been produced or hell would have payed for it. This fact is true regardless of whether or not the American Government orchestrated the attacks on the World Trade Centre and Pentagon.
Yet it seems to me quite amazing that with that ruling factor present as well as other beneficial motivations possible from the attack and the consequent wars were just a coincidence.
It is about money, it is about oil, and most importantly it is about Security. But what is it for? It is for the interest of America and expansion of their foreign policy.
It is a sick suggestion, suicide bombings are sick suggestions, terror attacks are very sick suggestions, genocides, martydom, rape, murder... the list goes on. Whether the suggestions are evil or benign does not effect their existance. I've extrapolated the argument abit here, but it is required to get my point across.
Turin
I am going to request anyone replying to my posts from now on, to not disect any part without putting it in context please, thanks!
Last edited:
I was showing you another possibility, the tape doesnt clearly show anything, and all possibilities must be considered right?
But again, the plane would have exploded anyway, you can see from the tape that the plane didnt just plough through the wall, it exploded pretty much on contact, thats right, the whole ''the gap in the wall is too small'' argument is flawed by its own evidence.
But again, the plane would have exploded anyway, you can see from the tape that the plane didnt just plough through the wall, it exploded pretty much on contact, thats right, the whole ''the gap in the wall is too small'' argument is flawed by its own evidence.
Vannaroth said:
Thats the whole point m8, if it exploded, then it should have left scorch marks in the perimetre around the blast.
Your pic cannot be a possibility because of the fact that the hole was horizontal (i.e. through the walls, across the building and not in the roof). Yes the roof collapsed, but that was after the object tore through the infrastructre as is stated in the Report posted kindly by Bio.
Conspiraces are set by one event in one time, however they were 4 events in this case. Both World Trade Centers were hit, along with the pentagon and American Airlines Flight 93 crashed in near Shanksville, PA after a brave attempt by Todd Beamer to stop the terrorists aboard the air plane. If the President Wanted to start a war he would't hit 4 targets and kill thousands of innocent lives. The fact is, stop reading conspircy theories written by people who hate the United States. Start looking facts and stop looking at pictures that are taken out of context. Use common sense.
Last edited:
Turin said:
Not scorched?!? so i guess those huge black burn marks were already there??
And i thought the whole point was that the hole was too small for the plane to have made it?
We can even see from the video there that it exploded!
And since when do we trust american reports? They planned the whole thing.
Last edited:
Biohazard said:
Yes, you would ask me to start reading specifically anything rightist wouldn't you. After all anything written by those smelly leftys isn't fact or is taken out of context. I've given my reason for why huge scale attacks are usually required to start such huge wars, but I am staying neutral about whether or not America actually attacked itself. It is just as bad if the US didn't stop potential attacks. My earlier post explained:
i.e. an example would be you Biohazard.
Turin
I'm not talking about the building, sorry I should draw an example for you in paint to make it clearer... grass apparently doesn't burn very easily!
EDIT: I was only joking about the 'paint job' but since Van thought otherwise -_-
The red part is the projectile through reinforced solid concrete. Now (although it isn't true, as we already know), according to Van, if the plane exploded outside, before it hit, the projectile of the damage through solid concrete would have been half that in an open space. This is defined by classical physics for us. [/edit]
Van, unlike some people, I consider both sides of the argument and hold a reasonable stance and debate the points at hand. I think you might want to take a leaf out of my book eh?
Last edited: