9/11 Conspiracies

[Fa-Q]

And it didn't take 7 seconds, that's what loose change wants you to think. But there are cameras from the ground that show it takes over 23 seconds to bring it all the way down...watch the debunkers videos too, not just the loose change assholes

[77o77]

Our government wouldnt lie to us.

[EminemBase]

^ yes because the Taliban and the people who ran the country before the invasion were justified when they did things like this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24LNQfIx ... re=related

public exicutions?

nice call, bro

Proof that Taliban were behind 9/11 please. Any, one piece.

You won't be able to provide me with one answer. And the official account defies science. Where as to contrary there's evidence galore that proves all three buildings came down via controlled demolition and plenty to implement elements of the US Government.

Trying to wash over the matter at hand by showing me brutality done by them does nothing. Nothing excuses the people who had hand in killing 3,000 of their own citizens for an illegal invasion, oil seizure and assassination attempt.

[EminemBase]

And it didn't take 7 seconds, that's what loose change wants you to think. But there are cameras from the ground that show it takes over 23 seconds to bring it all the way down...watch the debunkers videos too, not just the loose change assholes

No I don't get my information from conspiracy movies buddy.

I go right to the source. NIST were forced to admit that all three buildings came down at free-fall acceleartion for a good period of time. After they were backed into a corner and forced to confront facts they tried to brush under the carpet with nonsense lies and distortion. With many top officials of the investigation stepping down at the time, declaring it a national scandal and saying they were purposely withholding and distorting facts.

Loose Change didn't invent the fact WTC 7 came down in seven seconds, it DID come down in seven seconds. Fact. And it's free-fall speed, impossible to happen in a normal collapse. You're also ignoring the fact all buildings fell in the exact same fashion - Straight down, symmetrical and into their own footprint. Buildings do not naturally fall like that, fire collapses = Buildings topple.

IN normal collapses influenced by fire you see slow defamation of steel from the head and then maybe tiny bits will break off OR the building will topple. Although no high rise steel building in history had ever collapsed from fire - Many which wihstood days of complete engulfment of flames and stood solid. Fire cannot bring thousands of tons of steel and concrete to dust finer than a human hair in seconds. Anybody who thinks that's possible is a total moron / delusional.

You're also ignoring the fact WTC 7 wasn't even hit by a plane yet fell FASTER than the towers, again, in the exact same fashion. It takes a team of professionals to bring buildings down in this manner, this is why demolition teams are assigned as otherwise buildings topple all over the place. It's way too sporadic. Buildings don't fall perfectly by themselves, especially after in-different damager. It's like chopping one leg out then falling straight down.

You can ignore facts and talk yourself into corners all you like but at the end of the day, you're the one in denial here. I have solid proof to back up my claims, proof which is objective, observable and real. You have none to back up your delusion of fire bringing those buildings down. It's impossible but you just cannot admit the implication of the alternative. Probably also in part due to your stigma with 'conspiracy' thoeries failing to realize any theory in which people conspire to do something is a conspiracy theory. The OFFICIAL story is a conspiracy too. The only difference is, the one I believe has a shitload of logic and tangible information behind it. Your version is a fairytale.

[Emadyville]

Again, I have to agree completely. Especially with the fact that there is often more/only evidence to prove contrary to the actual "events" of which we have been told.

And yes, I'd like someone who is continuously agreeing with the "official" story to show us evidence that proves us wrong, because I have shown evidence, embase has shown evidence, yet no one else who is agreeing has

[Fa-Q]

Who told you about the conspiracy

[EminemBase]

^ More relevant question is who told you.

Al-Queda being the masterminds of 9/11 and nothing but relatively small amounts of fire damage bringing down three buildings in perfect symmetary is the conspiracy.

It's a wild theory with no evidence to back it up requiring leaps of faith to make connections.

Where as the 'theory' of the buildings coming down by controlled demolition is much more simply a matter of fact. It's based on a collection of objective facts, forensic evidence, real science. It doesn't require guesswork or leaps of faith to work. Every piece of the puzzle fits.

The only truly relevant question now is WHO. And once again, in terms of likelyhood, it's much much more likely that elements of the US government who have constant access to these buildings and the explosives used did it as apposed to terrorists plotting from the caves of Afghanistan.

[Fa-Q]

In an argument, although you bring up valid points, answering questions with questions is a way to "beat around the bush." Now, a big problem with your argument is Bush had no reason to blow up the towers, the Afghans did and they took responsibility

[EminemBase]

^ No, you've just in fact exposed the problem in your argument.

Despite about me emphasizing what you continue to do with about 2,000 words already. You still do it. Still unable to question or address the FACTS of the collapses. Which are completely impossible unless the buildings were intentionally demolished in a controlled fashion.

You can't just ignore the facts. Forget subjection, forget whether you think the government would do it, why they would do it, all of that is irrespective to first and foremost - the nature of the collapses. Now, once anybody who seriously takes the time to look and understand the science of it all realizes the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition, there is no other explanation.

So you either believe a totally delusional account in that all buildings came down identical to controlled demolition fashion by 'chance' and three buildings defied the laws of logic on the same day, in a row. OR you beiieve the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition but that it was still Al-Queda behind that. So you're then implying Al-Queda managed to sneak and rig in tons of nano-thermite (let alone have access to it) into three of the most secure buildings in New York City.

Either way, either one is insane and ludicrous. You're also making a false connection between... Your current lack of understanding and the ultimate reasoning that started out. For one, there are many reasosns (which I've already stated) why elements of the US Government would want to take down the towers. I mean lets just rattle off two...

- The only people who profited from 9/11 were the ones involved in the scandal. Former leaser of WTC 7 became (literally) the RICHEST MAN IN THE WORLD when that building fell. Because of the new insurance against terrorist attack(s) he signed weeks before 9/11 happened. I can't remember his name but if you search within what I said you'll find him. And he's just one of many 'fat cats', top officials and Bush cronies that made out like bandits from the disaster.

- Justification for illegal invasion of Afghanistan. America were already in Iraq from 91' but in order to put more force on them and to justify a completely unrelated, political and economical / criminal invasion of Afghanistan they needed a huge huge anti-American disaster. To make it a 'no brainer' to the UN that invasion was the only solution. Exploiting the scale / horror of the disaster to evade ever proving the links between Al-Queda / 9/11 / Saddam. People are so predisposed to blindly trust their Government's intent (despite thinking they aren't) that all it took was for CNN to flash up a few images of Osama and that was it. Image was sold. Buildings came down, men in turbans... Case-closed.

There are dozens upon dozens of very obvious reasons why they would of done it. If you'd bother to actually look yourself. Instead of arrogantly stating 'there's no reason' to have done it yet not actually exploring the many many possible / self-evident reasons it was done. Not that it's needed to make the case anyway. You're really clutching at straws now, doing what a typical conspiracy theorist does. Avoiding fact and going for emotional debate. Which is what the mainstream media do. They won't even question, won't even consider the alternative. It's just always "No they wouldn't" - "Why would they" etc. etc. - That is BLIND irrational faith in the establishment.

Yes they would, yes they've done similar things throughout history and yes they will continue unless 9/11 is taken to task. Seriously, people have such fickle memories of fucking history. How do you think America have become the richest most powerful country on Earth? They did it the same way Britain at one point did it. They've built an empire. Only difference is they've done it behind closed doors.

Using the monetary system as their slave wagon. Invading poorer countries, wrecking socities - Rebuilding them and owning all of the constructional workforce that do so, re-financing / putting countries into immeasurable debt. Basically what the banks to do humans to keep the wealth divide, even if indirectly, it's self-perpetuating. And they'll be ruthless in their actions to keep the divide. As nice as America / American politics pretends to be, it's one big Truman Show.

Anybody who takes it at face value and doesn't seriously look into each and every element themselves doesn't have a valid opinion on it. Getting your opinions from papers and trash news channels doesn't give you the right to debate on this level. You're just aimlessly defending things you feel you instinctively should despite the fact logically, you have all the odds stacked against your argument. You still feel compelled to hang onto ANYTHING to defend it lmao.

Whatever man. You're clearly... In my opinion, too 'stuck' in it. Like other people who I've met you can't objectively look at it, the actual idea of them doing it is so extreme and horrid to you that you just blank out all the evidence. Even when it's in front of your face. And you come at it from an emotional standpoint not an objective one. Saying 'you don't think they would''' or 'bush wouldn't etc. Believe what you want, I really don't care. Anybody with common sense knows what's going on.

I am out of this shit. Said all I want / need to say.

[shanefrommaine]

Our government wouldnt lie to us.

Haha I very much beg to differ...

[Emadyville]

Our government wouldnt lie to us.

Haha I very much beg to differ...

You've added such valuable input

[Fa-Q]

Look, Embase I've seen loose change...if you go on Youtube videos concerning this and other theories. If you watched videos on Michael Jackson faking his death then I guarantee you would be convinced that he indeed faked his death because its all one sided

[EminemBase]

LOOSE CHANGE? WHERE THE FUCK AM I QUOTING THIS FILM BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU KEEP MENTIONING.

LIKE I SAID, I DON'T GET MY INFORMATION FROM CONSPIRACY FILMS. I LOOK AT EVERY ANGLE AND FIND THE MOST VALID SOURCE OF EVERYTHING POSSIBLE. AND THEN BE AS CRITICAL AND OBJECTIVE AS POSSIBLE, I LOOK OVER EVERY VIEW.

NO I WOULDN'T BE CONVINCED OF THAT. STOP TRYING TO LUMP IN 9/11 WITH GENUINE NONSENSE. AL-QEUDA = THE CONSPIRACY THEORY. BUILDINGS BEING DESTROYED BY DEMOLITION = FACT.

HENCE THE FACT YOU'VE BEEN UNABLE TO DENY ANY SINGLE ONE OF MY POINTS, THE ACTUAL FACTS WHICH I KEEP MENTIONING EVERY SINGLE POST AND YOU KEEP IGNORING. YOU CAN'T ADDRES THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE 100% CORRECT, THEY'RE PURE REALITY. AND YOU CANNOT FACE IT. HENCE WHY YOU'RE NOW USING LAME TACTICS, GOING BACK TO EMOTIONAL COMPARISON.

I REALLY AM OUT THIS TIME, I JUST HAD TO RESPOND TO YOUR NONSENSE. FUCKING LOOSE CHANGE.

FA-Q - MY BELIEFS WITH 9/11 ARE TOTALLY BACKED UP WITH VALID SCIENCE AS I'LL SAY OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND IF NEEDS BE PROVE OVER AND OVER AGAIN. YOUR BELIEFS ARE BASED ON ZERO EVIDENCE AND A BLIND EMOTIONAL TRUST IN YOUR GOVERNMENT TO THE EFFECT OF 'BUSH WOULDN'T DO THAT' OR 'WHY WOULD HE'. YOU'RE NOT OBJECTIVE.

YOU ARE DELUSIONAL.

[Fa-Q]

Haha calm down Eminembase, I'm enjoying our conversation. Now, facts can only be considered facts if they can be proven. Now nowhere inhistory has a plane crashed into the side of a building filled with Jet fuel on route to a trans-continental trip. We can't know, you can say its scientifically impossible, but that doesn't make it so. We can prove the universe was evolution or Creation because it can't be repeated. In this place we COULD repeat it but we won't.

Now you can say its impossible but that doesn't make it so. Have you ever considered once that it could have been just the plane to bring it down, or have you always thought it was a conspiracy?

And I have a question, whoever you think is responsible whether it be Bush or the owner of the WTC, don't you think the government could think of a better way to go to war. Maybe they capture some fake spies or something. But really, is their last resort to kill 3,000 people. On the other hand our enemy had reason to kill 3,000 people.

[97Civic]

^ yes because the Taliban and the people who ran the country before the invasion were justified when they did things like this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24LNQfIx ... re=related

public exicutions?

nice call, bro

Proof that Taliban were behind 9/11 please. Any, one piece.

You won't be able to provide me with one answer. And the official account defies science. Where as to contrary there's evidence galore that proves all three buildings came down via controlled demolition and plenty to implement elements of the US Government.

Trying to wash over the matter at hand by showing me brutality done by them does nothing. Nothing excuses the people who had hand in killing 3,000 of their own citizens for an illegal invasion, oil seizure and assassination attempt.

I wasn't implying that the Taliban were the masterminds...

All I said was how can you not say that it's not justified helping people that have to go through things like that?

And I'm AGAINST the war. I really could give a fuck less about those people. Mainly because they don't give a fuck about me nor do they like me or my country at all.

BUT thats like saying someone is wrong for pulling off a big kid that is beating up a little kid, is that wrong?

It's justified for the purpose of freeing the people of Afganistan, but we have our own problems. I would rather spend the trillions of dollars of defence funds on things like helping the needy in AMERICA. Helping students get scholarships to college IN AMERICA. Help find a cure for all kinds of deseases IN AMERICA AND THE WORLD.

I am not disagreeing with anyone in this topic for I for one know I will never find out who caused the shit. So I concentrate on how we can prevent it from happening again.