expandspanos wrote:I'm kind of surprised this thread hasn't been moved to politics yet, or merged with the other one.. what's up?
Blue Hen Fanatic wrote:
The Authorities stated they have pictures, video, and DNA, but an actual body for all to see live on TV would have been the best prescription against the wingnut conspiracy theorists. Conspiracy theories often arise when an 'official' explanation of an event seems incongruous to people who have a worldview that doesn't connect with the prevailing view. Conspiracy theorists tend to be people who feel like they don't have power in the world, and when believing they've been victimized come up with wild theories of how something, or somebody, must be behind it all
Well.. as long as the authorities say it's so it must be..
Just like the Gulf of Tonkin Incident that got us into Vietnam, which was turned out to be staged.
How many Americans did that kill? any demotions?
How many demotions after 9/11- the largest blunder in defending American soil to date? zero.
Why can't we see what hit the Pentagon? 9/11 Commissioner slips up and says a missile hit it: " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Why don't you go back to one of your other threads where you asked these questions and they were answered for you. Are you gonna bring up the phone calls not working from 30,000 feet again too or any of the other shit and the actual posters on this board who saw the fucking plane fly into the Pentagon?
Your performance is once again unsatisfactory. Please go back to jesse V & Alex Jones and let them have another crack at ya and when you are prepared try again in 3 months or so.
BUT CLENZ!!! THE PHYSICS DOESN'T MAKE SENSE!!! I'M NOT A PHYSICIST NOR ARE THE PEOPLE I CITE, BUT THE PHYSICS JUST DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!!! IT DOESN'T!!! THE PHYSICS!!!
It's amazing the difference in demenor between the two sides. The Popular Mechnanics side is very calm and using facts that are cited. The Loose Change side is yelling, calling people liars, and not really citing anything.
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
Last edited by clenz on Wed May 04, 2011 10:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
clenz wrote:It's amazing the difference in demenor between the two sides. The Popular Mechnanics side is very calm and using facts that are cited. The Loose Change side is yelling, calling people liars, and not really citing anything.
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
Sounds exactly like the global warming psychos who rant and rave at anyone who doesn't agree with their "science".
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
AZGrizFan wrote:
Sounds exactly like the global warming psychos who rant and rave at anyone who doesn't agree with their "science".
Seems to be the opposite to me. The global warming "psychos" publish their findings in scientific journals. The others yell on Fox News while being interviewed by Hannity and Beck.
"The unmasking thing was all created by Devin Nunes"
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)
AZGrizFan wrote:
Sounds exactly like the global warming psychos who rant and rave at anyone who doesn't agree with their "science".
Seems to be the opposite to me. The global warming "psychos" publish their findings in scientific journals. The others yell on Fox News while being interviewed by Hannity and Beck.
edit: btw, it's really climate change, not global warming.
clenz wrote:It's amazing the difference in demenor between the two sides. The Popular Mechnanics side is very calm and using facts that are cited. The Loose Change side is yelling, calling people liars, and not really citing anything.
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
Sounds exactly like the global warming psychos who rant and rave at anyone who doesn't agree with their "science".
Or the evolutionist wackos who think they are right and everyone else is wrong.
clenz wrote:It's amazing the difference in demenor between the two sides. The Popular Mechnanics side is very calm and using facts that are cited. The Loose Change side is yelling, calling people liars, and not really citing anything.
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
The Loose Change (yea, good name. Something's loose) must be Democrats. All emotion, no facts.
AZGrizFan wrote:
Sounds exactly like the global warming psychos who rant and rave at anyone who doesn't agree with their "science".
Seems to be the opposite to me. The global warming "psychos" publish their findings in scientific journals. The others yell on Fox News while being interviewed by Hannity and Beck.
How IS it that you libtards know SO much about what goes on at Fox News yet claim to not be able to watch it?
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Skjellyfetti wrote:
Seems to be the opposite to me. The global warming "psychos" publish their findings in scientific journals. The others yell on Fox News while being interviewed by Hannity and Beck.
How IS it that you libtards know SO much about what goes on at Fox News yet claim to not be able to watch it?
Because, unfortunately at holidays... I spend time at my grandmother's... and her tv is on Fox News 24/7. And she generally spends the entire weekend rambling about the Mexicans and Obama. And I have to sit there politely nodding my head.. "Yes ma'am. That's a good point." etc. etc.
"The unmasking thing was all created by Devin Nunes"
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)
clenz wrote:It's amazing the difference in demenor between the two sides. The Popular Mechnanics side is very calm and using facts that are cited. The Loose Change side is yelling, calling people liars, and not really citing anything.
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
What a couple of complete clowns these two are (loose change). They struggled to even put together articulate sentences.
If you put everything else aside, I think the two most compelling questions relating to the 9-11 conspiracies are:
1.) Why is it unreasonable to believe that radical Islamists could have carried out a terrorist attack in the US? There are countless examples of terrorist actions against the US by the same group of people (1993 WTC bombing, USS Cole bombing, Embassy Bombings in Kenya, Khobar Towers, etc) along with numerous plots that were foiled - but no one claims those were conspiracies. Why, then, is it not plausible to believe that terrorists could have staged the attacks on 9-11? AQ has also claimed responsibility numerous times for the attacks.
2.) Is it really reasonable to believe that the US government killed roughly 3,000 of it's own citizens? Really? "Truthers" like to cite Gulf of Tonkin and Northwood as examples of previous false flag operations, but there's one major fallacy with these comparisons: Neither one involved killed thousands of Americans.
Why has there never been *ONE* person to step forward and talk about their involvement in this "conspiracy"?
EWURanger wrote:
Why has there never been *ONE* person to step forward and talk about their involvement in this "conspiracy"?
Would you turn yourself in if you were behind a mass murder? Amazingly, one guy involved did slip up. Loyd England admits that the whole thing was done by the people with power and money who were bigger than him (to paraphrase): Here he is admitting it:
[youtube][/youtube]
He was a taxi driver on 9/11- who claimed his car had been hit.
There's been a ton of people in our government who have spoken out, and there's been nothing but silence in the media.
Patriotsquestion911.com - 1,400+ Engineers and Architects
220+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials
250+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals 400+ Professors Question 9/11
300+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members
200+ Artists, Entertainers, and Media Professionals
400+ Medical Professionals
General Wesley Clark, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Commanding General of U.S. European Command, which included all American military activities in the 89 countries and territories of Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. Additionally, Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), which granted him overall command of NATO military forces in Europe 1997 - 2001. Awarded Bronze Star, Silver Star, and Purple Heart for his service in Viet Nam and numerous subsequent medals and citations. Graduated valedictorian of his class at West Point.
* Video interview ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos 3/5/06: "I think when you look at this country, right now, we need a 2-party system that works. We need Congress to do its job. We need real investigation of some of the abuses of authority that are apparently going on at the Executive branch. ... We've never finished the investigation of 9/11 and whether the administration actually misused the intelligence information it had. The evidence seems pretty clear to me. I've seen that for a long time."
Major General Albert Stubblebine, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Commanding General of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, 1981 - 1984, commanding 15,000 intelligence and security personnel. Also commanded the U.S. Army’s Electronic Research and Development Command and the U.S. Army’s Intelligence School and Center. Former head of Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence. 32-year Army career. Member, Military Intelligence Hall of Fame.
* Video interview 6/28/09:
General Stubblebine: I am Major General Albert Stubblebine. I am retired Army Major-General. In my last assignment -- my last command -- I was responsible for all of the Army's strategic intelligence forces around the world. I had responsibility for the Signals Intelligence, Photo Intelligence, Counter Intelligence, Human Intelligence. They all belonged to me, in my last assignment. …
I was supposed to find out what the enemy was doing, before the enemy did it so that we could take action against the enemy. That's Intelligence, OK, before the fact. So, we always -- always -- rely not on a single piece of data, before we make a statement, but on multiple and the more pieces of data that you have that correlate, the better you know exactly what is going on. …
So I have had a lot of experience looking at photographs. I have looked at many, many different kinds of photographs, from many, many different platforms on many, many different countries, around the world.
Interviewer: OK. So on September the 11th, in 2001, what hit the Pentagon?
General Stubblebine: I don't know exactly what hit it, but I do know, from the photographs that I have analyzed and looked at very, very carefully, it was not an airplane.
Interviewer: What made you believe that?
General Stubblebine: Well, for one thing, if you look at the hole that was made in the Pentagon, the nose penetrated far enough so that there should have been wing marks on the walls of the Pentagon. I have been unable to find those wing marks. So where were they? Did this vessel -- vehicle, or whatever it was -- have wings? Apparently not, because if it had had wings, they would have made marks on the side of the Pentagon.
One person counteracted my theory, and said, "Oh, you've got it all wrong. And the reason that it's wrong is that as the airplane came across, one wing tipped down and hit the ground and broke off." I said, "Fine, that's possible, one wing could have broken off." But if I understand airplanes correctly, most airplanes have two wings. I haven't met an airplane with only one wing. So where was the mark for the second wing? OK, one broke off -- there should have been a mark for the second wing. I could not find that in any of the photographs that I've analyzed. Now I've been very careful to not say what went in there. Why? Because you don't have that evidence. …
I did -- I've never believed that it was an airplane since I've looked at the photographs. Up until the time I looked at the photographs, I accepted what was being said. After I looked at it -- NO WAY! …
We pride ourselves with the "free press." I do not believe the "free press" is free any more. It's very expensive. It's very expensive. And the press is saying what they have been told to say about this.
Now, do I have proof of that? No. But I believe that what is being -- what certainly the -- the stories that were told -- all about 9/11 were false. I mean, you take a look at the buildings falling down. They didn't fall down because airplanes hit them. They fell down because of explosives went off inside. Demolition. Look at Building 7, for God's sake. It didn't fall down to its side. It didn't fall to this direction or that direction; just like the two Towers. …
When you look at the temperatures that you can create with fuel in a gas tank or a fuel tank of an airplane, and then you investigate the amount of heat that would be required to melt -- to melt -- the superstructure of the buildings that came tumbling down, when you put all of that together, the one thing that shows; It does not match the facts. What is it they do not want the public to know? " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
* Video documentary One Nation Under Siege 7/11/06: "One of my experiences in the Army was being in charge of the Army’s Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence during the Cold War. I measured pieces of Soviet equipment from photographs. It was my job. I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon. And I said, ‘The plane does not fit in that hole’. So what did hit the Pentagon? What hit it? Where is it? What's going on?" http://www.undersiegemovie.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter. U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. (PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Cal Tech). Former Head of the Department of Aeronautical Engineering and Assistant Dean at the U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology. 22-year Air Force career. Also taught Mathematics and English at the University of Southern California, the University of Maryland, and Phillips University.
* Member: Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth Association Statement:
"Scholars and professionals with various kinds of expertise---including architects, engineers, firefighters, intelligence officers, lawyers, medical professionals, military officers, philosophers, religious leaders, physical scientists, and pilots---have spoken out about radical discrepancies between the official account of the 9/11 attacks and what they, as independent researchers, have learned.
They have established beyond any reasonable doubt that the official account of 9/11 is false and that, therefore, the official “investigations” have really been cover-up operations.
Thus far, however, there has been no response from political leaders in Washington or, for that matter, in other capitals around the world. Our organization, Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth, has been formed to help bring about such a response.
We believe that the truth about 9/11 needs to be exposed now---not in 50 years as a footnote in the history books---so the policies that have been based on the Bush-Cheney administration’s interpretation of the 9/11 attacks can be changed.
We are, therefore, calling for a new, independent investigation of 9/11 that takes account of evidence that has been documented by independent researchers but thus far ignored by governments and the mainstream media."
* Video 9/11/04: "A lot of these pieces of information, taken together, prove that the official story, the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 is a bunch of hogwash. It’s impossible. … There’s a second group of facts having to do with the cover up. … Taken together these things prove that high levels of our government don’t want us to know what happened and who’s responsible.…
Who gained from 9/11? Who covered up crucial information about 9/11? And who put out the patently false stories about 9/11 in the first place? When you take those three things together, I think the case is pretty clear that it’s highly placed individuals in the administration with all roads passing through Dick Cheney.
I think the very kindest thing that we can say about George W. Bush and all the people in the U.S. Government that have been involved in this massive cover-up, the very kindest thing we can say is that they were aware of impending attacks and let them happen. Now some people will say that’s much too kind, however even that is high treason and conspiracy to commit murder."
PATRIOTSQUESTION911.COM
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
AZGrizFan wrote:
How IS it that you libtards know SO much about what goes on at Fox News yet claim to not be able to watch it?
Because, unfortunately at holidays... I spend time at my grandmother's... and her tv is on Fox News 24/7. And she generally spends the entire weekend rambling about the Mexicans and Obama. And I have to sit there politely nodding my head.. "Yes ma'am. That's a good point." etc. etc.
So, anecdotal evidence.
Got it.
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
EWURanger wrote:
Why has there never been *ONE* person to step forward and talk about their involvement in this "conspiracy"?
Would you turn yourself in if you were behind a mass murder? Amazingly, one guy involved did slip up. Loyd England admits that the whole thing was done by the people with power and money who were bigger than him (to paraphrase): Here he is admitting it:
[youtube][/youtube]
He was a taxi driver on 9/11- who claimed his car had been hit.
There's been a ton of people in our government who have spoken out, and there's been nothing but silence in the media.
Patriotsquestion911.com - 1,400+ Engineers and Architects
220+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials
250+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals 400+ Professors Question 9/11
300+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members
200+ Artists, Entertainers, and Media Professionals
400+ Medical Professionals
General Wesley Clark, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Commanding General of U.S. European Command, which included all American military activities in the 89 countries and territories of Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. Additionally, Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), which granted him overall command of NATO military forces in Europe 1997 - 2001. Awarded Bronze Star, Silver Star, and Purple Heart for his service in Viet Nam and numerous subsequent medals and citations. Graduated valedictorian of his class at West Point.
* Video interview ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos 3/5/06: "I think when you look at this country, right now, we need a 2-party system that works. We need Congress to do its job. We need real investigation of some of the abuses of authority that are apparently going on at the Executive branch. ... We've never finished the investigation of 9/11 and whether the administration actually misused the intelligence information it had. The evidence seems pretty clear to me. I've seen that for a long time."
Major General Albert Stubblebine, U.S. Army (ret) – Former Commanding General of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command, 1981 - 1984, commanding 15,000 intelligence and security personnel. Also commanded the U.S. Army’s Electronic Research and Development Command and the U.S. Army’s Intelligence School and Center. Former head of Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence. 32-year Army career. Member, Military Intelligence Hall of Fame.
* Video interview 6/28/09:
General Stubblebine: I am Major General Albert Stubblebine. I am retired Army Major-General. In my last assignment -- my last command -- I was responsible for all of the Army's strategic intelligence forces around the world. I had responsibility for the Signals Intelligence, Photo Intelligence, Counter Intelligence, Human Intelligence. They all belonged to me, in my last assignment. …
I was supposed to find out what the enemy was doing, before the enemy did it so that we could take action against the enemy. That's Intelligence, OK, before the fact. So, we always -- always -- rely not on a single piece of data, before we make a statement, but on multiple and the more pieces of data that you have that correlate, the better you know exactly what is going on. …
So I have had a lot of experience looking at photographs. I have looked at many, many different kinds of photographs, from many, many different platforms on many, many different countries, around the world.
Interviewer: OK. So on September the 11th, in 2001, what hit the Pentagon?
General Stubblebine: I don't know exactly what hit it, but I do know, from the photographs that I have analyzed and looked at very, very carefully, it was not an airplane.
Interviewer: What made you believe that?
General Stubblebine: Well, for one thing, if you look at the hole that was made in the Pentagon, the nose penetrated far enough so that there should have been wing marks on the walls of the Pentagon. I have been unable to find those wing marks. So where were they? Did this vessel -- vehicle, or whatever it was -- have wings? Apparently not, because if it had had wings, they would have made marks on the side of the Pentagon.
One person counteracted my theory, and said, "Oh, you've got it all wrong. And the reason that it's wrong is that as the airplane came across, one wing tipped down and hit the ground and broke off." I said, "Fine, that's possible, one wing could have broken off." But if I understand airplanes correctly, most airplanes have two wings. I haven't met an airplane with only one wing. So where was the mark for the second wing? OK, one broke off -- there should have been a mark for the second wing. I could not find that in any of the photographs that I've analyzed. Now I've been very careful to not say what went in there. Why? Because you don't have that evidence. …
I did -- I've never believed that it was an airplane since I've looked at the photographs. Up until the time I looked at the photographs, I accepted what was being said. After I looked at it -- NO WAY! …
We pride ourselves with the "free press." I do not believe the "free press" is free any more. It's very expensive. It's very expensive. And the press is saying what they have been told to say about this.
Now, do I have proof of that? No. But I believe that what is being -- what certainly the -- the stories that were told -- all about 9/11 were false. I mean, you take a look at the buildings falling down. They didn't fall down because airplanes hit them. They fell down because of explosives went off inside. Demolition. Look at Building 7, for God's sake. It didn't fall down to its side. It didn't fall to this direction or that direction; just like the two Towers. …
When you look at the temperatures that you can create with fuel in a gas tank or a fuel tank of an airplane, and then you investigate the amount of heat that would be required to melt -- to melt -- the superstructure of the buildings that came tumbling down, when you put all of that together, the one thing that shows; It does not match the facts. What is it they do not want the public to know? " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
* Video documentary One Nation Under Siege 7/11/06: "One of my experiences in the Army was being in charge of the Army’s Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence during the Cold War. I measured pieces of Soviet equipment from photographs. It was my job. I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon. And I said, ‘The plane does not fit in that hole’. So what did hit the Pentagon? What hit it? Where is it? What's going on?" http://www.undersiegemovie.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter. U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. (PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Cal Tech). Former Head of the Department of Aeronautical Engineering and Assistant Dean at the U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology. 22-year Air Force career. Also taught Mathematics and English at the University of Southern California, the University of Maryland, and Phillips University.
* Member: Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth Association Statement:
"Scholars and professionals with various kinds of expertise---including architects, engineers, firefighters, intelligence officers, lawyers, medical professionals, military officers, philosophers, religious leaders, physical scientists, and pilots---have spoken out about radical discrepancies between the official account of the 9/11 attacks and what they, as independent researchers, have learned.
They have established beyond any reasonable doubt that the official account of 9/11 is false and that, therefore, the official “investigations” have really been cover-up operations.
Thus far, however, there has been no response from political leaders in Washington or, for that matter, in other capitals around the world. Our organization, Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth, has been formed to help bring about such a response.
We believe that the truth about 9/11 needs to be exposed now---not in 50 years as a footnote in the history books---so the policies that have been based on the Bush-Cheney administration’s interpretation of the 9/11 attacks can be changed.
We are, therefore, calling for a new, independent investigation of 9/11 that takes account of evidence that has been documented by independent researchers but thus far ignored by governments and the mainstream media."
* Video 9/11/04: "A lot of these pieces of information, taken together, prove that the official story, the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 is a bunch of hogwash. It’s impossible. … There’s a second group of facts having to do with the cover up. … Taken together these things prove that high levels of our government don’t want us to know what happened and who’s responsible.…
Who gained from 9/11? Who covered up crucial information about 9/11? And who put out the patently false stories about 9/11 in the first place? When you take those three things together, I think the case is pretty clear that it’s highly placed individuals in the administration with all roads passing through Dick Cheney.
I think the very kindest thing that we can say about George W. Bush and all the people in the U.S. Government that have been involved in this massive cover-up, the very kindest thing we can say is that they were aware of impending attacks and let them happen. Now some people will say that’s much too kind, however even that is high treason and conspiracy to commit murder."
PATRIOTSQUESTION911.COM
In other words, you still have nothing from any reputable, peer-reviewed, scientific journal?
I thought I told you to come back when you had some facts?
You matter. Unless you multiply yourself by c squared. Then you energy.
"I really love America. I just don't know how to get there anymore."John Prine
In other words, you still have nothing from any reputable, peer-reviewed, scientific journal?