Ocean11 0 Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 Sure we can. I don't believe everything I read on the internet either - there's a lot of rubbish to sift through. I used to believe the official conspiracy theory behind 9/11. Then when I read more about it, I concluded that I should look for the truth elsewhere. I think it will be very interesting when it's all pieced together. Link to post Share on other sites
JPchucky 0 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Do you have what it takes to down the Kingdome. Check your skill here. http://www.martinidesign.com/kingdome/implode.htm Link to post Share on other sites
7-11 2 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Like with all the news, people believe it when only hearing it from one source. Problem is there is so much more crap on the internet. "I read it on the internet" - well, yeah, great! "Where?" "Oh, I don't know, Rupert Jones blog". Ah, must be true! How do you know what to believe and what not to believe? I bet harldy anyone goes round looking for different sources and looks into news stories. That clip, movie?!, sure was interesting though. I enjoyed watching that and hearing all these things. I want to know more. Link to post Share on other sites
bobby12 0 Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Regarding the Pentagon crash, people are saying a 757 couldnt have crashed into it, and that it was actually a small fighter plane that also fired a missile before impact. While looking into this, I came across the following: Evidence That A Boeing 757 Really Did Impact the Pentagon on 9/11 It seems to have been written by someone pro-Bush, possibly even some pentagon staff member, although some of the arguments here are truly laughable. There is one image where they have drawn the outline of the 757 hitting the pentagon, but clearly there is no plane there at all, its really crazy. Also at the end of the article, about 5mins after its published, theres about 10 replies saying 'wow great arguments, good job' etc. comical. Link to post Share on other sites
egglesby 1 Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Nice find bobby12. Link to post Share on other sites
ncorrenti 0 Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 Steel frame constructions tend to melt pretty quickly when you add almost 100,000 litres of burning aviation fuel. My father owns a construction company that specialises in building the post-tensioned steel frames in high-rise towers. Steel frames are very strong and can bear a heap of weight, however, when other building materials are damaged, say by a fire, this increases the amount of pressure exerted on the frame. This becomes problematic in extremely high buildings where the frame is already supporting a huge amount of weight. Link to post Share on other sites
sava 0 Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 And John Titor is really from the future! I'm serious! Link to post Share on other sites
bobby12 0 Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 Those buildings are supposed to be designed to withstand airplane attacks though. And the steel frames are 'heavily redudant'. Also, why did it fall straight down and not to one side? Or why didnt just the top tipple over and the bottom be still left standing? Anyway I know nothing about construction and even if they didnt demolish the WTC, I still believe the US government were, at the very least, aware that this attack was going to happen and let it happen in order to allo wthem to go into the middle east. However I suspect they directly organised it, and if so why not go the whole hog and demolish the buildings etc? Link to post Share on other sites
ncorrenti 0 Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 I dunno. Would they really take out two buildings that were vital to their country's economy? Why not hit just one building? It doesn't really make sense. Link to post Share on other sites
rigor mortis 0 Posted March 12, 2006 Author Share Posted March 12, 2006 i think the fact that the towers were so vital to the economy is why they were taken out. and the third building too that wasnt even hit by a plane!? maybe there was a lot of information and records that was quite convenient if it was destroyed. did some deals with the Bin Ladens?? also, in that video they said something about gold stored under the buildings. Some people made a lot of money from 911. Link to post Share on other sites
Ocean11 0 Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 nicole, the way the world economy is structured, destroying buildings contributes more to GDP and the wealth of the individuals that own them than leaving them standing. You can find out the details of who stood to benefit by reading "The New Pearl Harbor". As for the jet fuel and melting thing, structural engineers do not agree with you, and the ways in which the 'official' conspiracy theory explain the collapse are not consistent with the phenomena observable in the photos and films (phenomena which are all consistent with demolition). This is the sort of case where having an opinion without being aware of the facts is not generally in your best interests. Link to post Share on other sites
ncorrenti 0 Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 011, are you a structural engineer? I'd imagine you must be, because you're quite clearly an expert on this topic. When did conspiracy theories of any kind become 'official' anyway? What a ridiculous concept. As for not having facts, well I don't see you citing sources for every single one of your opinions. Link to post Share on other sites
Ocean11 0 Posted March 12, 2006 Share Posted March 12, 2006 > 011, are you a structural engineer? I'd imagine you must be, because you're quite clearly an expert on this topic. No, but I've read the opinions of structural engineers and physicists, and I've linked to their work in my previous posts. I've also suggested a book where you can read the analysis of structural engineers. > When did conspiracy theories of any kind become 'official' anyway? What a ridiculous concept. Well, about a few hours after the attacks happened, it was declared to have been the work of OBL and some mostly Saudi hijackers, and the story hasn't officially changed in spite of the fact that at least some of the hijackers are still alive, and a video purporting to be of OBL confessing is clearly a fake. Ridiculous indeed. But defended by many people nevertheless. > As for not having facts, well I don't see you citing sources for every single one of your opinions. No, I'm not into that academic habit, and I don't have the time. But again, I direct you to the websites linked in my earlier posts. Link to post Share on other sites
Karnidge 2 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 I clicked on that link and started watching that vid and couldn't stop! Conspiracy theories and the like are always addictive and very interesting, this one no exception. It has spurred me on to find out more from different sources. Link to post Share on other sites
damian 0 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 Quote: Originally posted by nicole: When did conspiracy theories of any kind become 'official' anyway? What a ridiculous concept. Hang on and think about it. It isn't ridiculous, it just requires an understanding of the C word. Governments are nothing short of being perfect conspiracy participants: they conspire to benefit their own end, in perpetuity. This is a natural by product of government ambition in dual party democratic capitalist societies. Whenever something big hits the news, the story line that the government delivers will likely be, in the very first instance, the verbiage of conspiracy. But, Government spin is by default labelled 'official'. Therefore, what the Government says is naturally the "official conspiracy theory". One thing it is not is the truth. Link to post Share on other sites
MeronKinenbi 0 Posted March 14, 2006 Share Posted March 14, 2006 I have sent on that link to 20 friends. It was an education. Link to post Share on other sites
rigor mortis 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Author Share Posted March 15, 2006 the more people who read it the better a! evil bunch of *#">%&7(*.... Link to post Share on other sites
ncorrenti 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 Just to stir things up some more... Even the conspiracy theorists are debunking the video. http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/green/loose_change.html I'm amazed how many of you unquestioningly believe the claims made in the video. Do some research on these guys - they've got no credentials and no experience in this sort of thing. Their movie is based on a bunch of claims from blogs, some unproven media reports and footage from another 9/11 conspiracy theory DVD. I'm certainly not a supporter of the Bush administration or the US Government in general, but I also don't believe what I see in that clip. Link to post Share on other sites
Ocean11 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 nicole, just to set you straight; Nobody actually knows what happened, but they do know some of things that didn't happen. Not everybody who publishes videos, books or websites is blessed with clear thinking. In fact they often contradict themselves quite obviously. Concluding from Loose Change that the official conspiracy theory is implausible is not to unquestioningly believe the claims made in the video. (Did you notice how the guy in your link quoted the Northwoods conspiracy documents to 'prove' how 9/11 must have been done? Does that really constitute evidence...?) And do stop talking about 'the conspiracy theorists'. It's as crass as Bush talking about 'the terrorists'. Anybody who tries to understand the news is a conspiracy theorist. Link to post Share on other sites
kintaro 0 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Excellent thread. I hear it was actually Ghandi that shot Kennedy and that the Dali Lama had an affair with Marylin Monroe. Link to post Share on other sites
Ocean11 0 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Ha ha Kintaro you're right! Your shrewd and yet lighhearted realism has driven the dark clouds away. I'm going to forget all this nonsense about drones and stolen identity and not think any more about it! Link to post Share on other sites
ncorrenti 0 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 011, thanks ever so much for setting me straight. I almost forgot for a second that you're the absolute authority on everything in the world. My bad! Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts