ANZACs and war and stuff

[Katman]

I give up on you. :no:

"...I cannot find any actual reference to that in the actual documents beyond outling the possible risk in engaging such tactics on the streets."

6. Use of MIG type aircraft by U.S. pilots could provide additional provocation. Harassment of civil air, attacks on surface shipping and destruction of U.S. military drone aircraft by MIG type planes would be useful as complementary actions. An F-86 properly painted would convince air passengers that they saw a Cuban MIG, especially if the pilot of the transport were to announce such fact. The primary drawback to this suggestion appears to be the security risk inherent in obtaining or modifying an aircraft. However, reasonable copies of the MIG could be produced from U.S. resources in about three months.

7. Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft should appear to continue as harassing measures condoned by the government of Cuba. Concurrently, genuine defections of Cuban civil and military air and surface craft should be encouraged.



Sure sounds like risky business Ed.

[jonbuoy]

We don't, according to many, know that planes hit the buildings.
One has to suspend belief in all we have learnt to imagine that an Aluminium plane could penetrate the outer web of steel, go through the building taking out 20% of the internal supporting structure and come out the through the other web of steel largely intact!

You do have to ask why the secrecy?- why the cover up?

Certainly the missile theories concerning the destruction at the Pentagon could be silenced by simply showing all of the video of an aeroplane hitting the building not just 5 or 6 frames which explain nothing. Isn't that reasonable, sensible, logical?

There have been plenty of theories proposed.
There are plenty theories attempting to debunk the former.
All of the debunking theories have in turn been debunked as far as I am aware. - Most it seems needed one to suspend belief in the laws of physics.

Here is a question for the 'Believers': how did thousands of tons of steel turn into dust?
Remember these were mostly steel buildings; not just steel reinforced concrete.
Pancake theory (the official line) certainly doesn't explain that situation.

Erm you do know that's a heavily populated area and hundreds if not thousands were watching outside when some of the planes hit? Either al queda or the government brought down those towers. Doing it with explosives or planes either way the towers were destroyed - are we all agreed on that?

[Katman]

James Bamford claimed it did, but I cannot find any actual reference to that in the actual documents beyond outling the possible risk in engaging such tactics on the streets.

James Bamford also said this....

"Operation Northwoods, which had the written approval of the Chairman and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Castro, thus giving Lemnitzer and his cabal the excuse, as well as the public and international backing, they needed to launch their war".

[Hinny]

What is worrying is that our Govt has now let our equivalent loose amongst its own citizens. The CIA not being normally "allowed" to operate within the USA ...

According to Jessie Ventura that has changed in the US now with the CIA embedded in all State govts.

[Hinny]

the towers were destroyed - are we all agreed on that?

That raises a big question.
How could they be so comprehensively destroyed?
200,000 tons of super strength steel turned to dust.
All the office furniture etc. Refrigerators, filing cabinets, steel chairs, and all the people - 'vapourised' (911 Commission report) - turned to dust.
Save for part of the lower corners of each building.

This question hasn't been answered.

Why will the Govt. not answer any questions about the destruction of the towers? 12 years down the track - still no answers.

[scumdog]

That raises a big question.
How could they be so comprehensively destroyed?
200,000 tons of super strength steel turned to dust.
All the office furniture etc. Refrigerators, filing cabinets, steel chairs, and all the people - 'vapourised' (911 Commission report) - turned to dust.
Save for part of the lower corners of each building.

This question hasn't been answered.

Why will the Govt. not answer any questions about the destruction of the towers? 12 years down the track - still no answers.

So...how did 'they' do it?

Empty the buildings pre-destruction?

[Katman]

So...how did 'they' do it?

Empty the buildings pre-destruction?

I'm quite prepared to accept that planes flew into the twin towers - my eyes told me so.

But do you still contend that there is no possibility of anyone in the American government having an idea that it was going to happen?

And do you still believe that there is nothing unusual regarding the official story?

[Edbear]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks_advance-knowledge_conspiracy_theories

"Despite these reports, the Intelligence Community did not produce any assessments of the likelihood that terrorists would use planes as weapons, and U.S. policymakers apparently remained unaware of this kind of potential threat."[10] Former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger testified to the Joint Inquiry:

"We heard of the idea of planes as weapons, but I don't recall being presented with any specific threat information about an attack of this nature, or highlighting this threat, or indicating it was more likely than any other"[11]

[Katman]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks_advance-knowledge_conspiracy_theories


Did you read the whole paragraph Ed?


The Joint Inquiry of 2002 confirmed that the Intelligence Community had received at least twelve reports over a seven-year period suggesting that terrorists might use planes as weapons. After briefly discussing each of them, it says that "The CIA disseminated several of these reports to the FBI and to agencies responsible for preventive actions. They included the FAA... Despite these reports, the Intelligence Community did not produce any assessments of the likelihood that terrorists would use planes as weapons, and U.S. policymakers apparently remained unaware of this kind of potential threat."[10] Former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger testified to the Joint Inquiry:
"We heard of the idea of planes as weapons, but I don't recall being presented with any specific threat information about an attack of this nature, or highlighting this threat, or indicating it was more likely than any other"

[Edbear]

Did you read the whole paragraph Ed?


The Joint Inquiry of 2002 confirmed that the Intelligence Community had received at least twelve reports over a seven-year period suggesting that terrorists might use planes as weapons. After briefly discussing each of them, it says that "The CIA disseminated several of these reports to the FBI and to agencies responsible for preventive actions. They included the FAA... Despite these reports, the Intelligence Community did not produce any assessments of the likelihood that terrorists would use planes as weapons, and U.S. policymakers apparently remained unaware of this kind of potential threat."[10] Former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger testified to the Joint Inquiry:
"We heard of the idea of planes as weapons, but I don't recall being presented with any specific threat information about an attack of this nature, or highlighting this threat, or indicating it was more likely than any other"

For the mentally challenged among us here, of course I did. :weird:

I quoted to sum up the fact that while the idea of using aircraft had been well publicised for a long time, they did not receive any specific information that would suggest such an attack on these targets was probable at the time, and they were not expecting it. The information was of a nature as to warn of the possiblity that at some point, such tactics may be used.

Had they received credible and specific warning I have no doubt they would have reacted.

I've also said in the past, there was no reason to destroy the two main symbols of US power and prestige along with killing thousands of their own people to give credence to take any actions against any country. The US has never in the past attacked and killed its own in order to give reason to go to war and there was no need to do so on 9/11 either. As it turned out the 9/11 incident was not used as an excuse for any actions against any country.

[Katman]

Have you seen this one Ed?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFPOstgw3rk

[Edbear]

Have you seen this one Ed?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFPOstgw3rk

Two points, that was not the only footage of the first plane hitting the tower. A typical conspiracy lie.

The fact that George W was an idiot and possibly lied is irrelevant. Few people took him seriously.

He would not have had the influence to organise anything even if it would have occured to him to do so. Does nothing to support the conspiracy theories, which have so resoundedly been debunked!

[Katman]

Two points, that was not the only footage of the first plane hitting the tower. A typical conspiracy lie.

The fact that George W was an idiot and possibly lied is irrelevant. Few people took him seriously.

He would not have had the influence to organise anything even if it would have occured to him to do so. Does nothing to support the conspiracy theories, which have so resoundedly been debunked!

I'm not saying that he did have the influence to organise anything. In fact, I agree with you that GWB is an idiot.

Those pulling his strings may well have had that influence though.

[Katman]

Two points, that was not the only footage of the first plane hitting the tower. A typical conspiracy lie.


So when was the very first time that the footage of the first plane hitting the tower was broadcast on television Ed?

[Edbear]

I'm not saying that he did have the influence to organise anything. In fact, I agree with you that GWB is an idiot.

Those pulling his strings may well have had that influence though.

Not for something that horrendous...

[Edbear]

So when was the very first time that the footage of the first plane hitting the tower was broadcast on television Ed?

I don't know, I do remember getting up that morning, switching on the TV and standing there gobsmacked in disbelief at the footage.

My point, as usual, was not anything to do with the time but the claim that it was the only footage.

[Katman]

Not for something that horrendous...

Really? Yet the Joint Chiefs of Staff can put forward proposals for acts of terrorism to be carried out on American soil?

[Banditbandit]

State-sanctioned Acts of terror occur every day on the streets in 'merika .. the armed services patrol the streets every day enforcing the wishes of the ruling elite ... they terroize the civilian population into aquiessence ...

[Edbear]

Really? Yet the Joint Chiefs of Staff can put forward proposals for acts of terrorism to be carried out on American soil?

Feigned acts of terorrism to be more specific which as has been verified, was sqaushed by the Govt.

[Edbear]

State-sanctioned Acts of terror occur every day om the stereets in 'merika .. the armed services patrol the streets every day enforcing the wishes of the ruling elite ... they terroize the civilian population into aquiessence ...

You have evidence of course... :cool:

[Katman]

Feigned acts of terorrism to be more specific which as has been verified, was sqaushed by the Govt.

No, they were proposed acts of terrorism that most likely would have eventuated had the idea not been quashed.

Surely you're not putting GWB's level of integrity and leadership in the same category as JFK's.

[SPman]

Feigned acts of terorrism to be more specific which as has been verified, was sqaushed by the Govt.
Squashed by the Government?

Would you believe anything that came out of Govt sources?

Of course the planes hit the buildings - they were designed to be able to be hit by a fully laden 707 and still remain intact - a similar weight aircraft to the 767s or whatever that hit them. Why is this in dispute?

Firefighters who actually got to the scene of the first impact zone reported that the fires were relatively minor and could be easily handled - shortly before the building "imploded" - much to the puzzlement of the Architect and engineers who designed and built it. And reams of top engineers since. Hasty disposal (after the gold in the building was removed), shoddy official investigation and all the hallmarks of coverups at high places will always leave large room for severe doubt about official events - particularly to those who study the whole debacle....

Unless "smoking gun" papers are found, no one is going to know exactly, what went on - just that it was soooo convenient for Dubya and his backers........and a total disaster to the American population as a whole, since - whether they know it or not! Make that the world population, as the USA ramped up it's military bullying around the (brown people) world.....

[jonbuoy]

Squashed by the Government?

Would you believe anything that came out of Govt sources?

Of course the planes hit the buildings - they were designed to be able to be hit by a fully laden 707 and still remain intact - a similar weight aircraft to the 767s or whatever that hit them. Why is this in dispute?

Firefighters who actually got to the scene of the first impact zone reported that the fires were relatively minor and could be easily handled - shortly before the building "imploded" - much to the puzzlement of the Architect and engineers who designed and built it. And reams of top engineers since. Hasty disposal (after the gold in the building was removed), shoddy official investigation and all the hallmarks of coverups at high places will always leave large room for severe doubt about official events - particularly to those who study the whole debacle....

Unless "smoking gun" papers are found, no one is going to know exactly, what went on - just that it was soooo convenient for Dubya and his backers........and a total disaster to the American population as a whole, since - whether they know it or not! Make that the world population, as the USA ramped up it's military bullying around the (brown people) world.....

It wouldn't be the first time Architects and Engineers have made mistakes. Fact still remains the towers did collapse, they weren't emptied out before hand. People were inside going about their daily duties. Maybe explosives were used as well - if so why not blame the terrorists for those as well?

[Banditbandit]

You have evidence of course... :cool:

Jeez .. it's not that hard to find .. they even make TV shows about it ... the interdweb's playing up right now so I can't give you any pictures

[Katman]

Maybe explosives were used as well - if so why not blame the terrorists for those as well?

Are you serious?

Are you suggesting that the terrorists had the time and the access to rig all three buildings for demolition?

[jonbuoy]

Do you think it's possible for a special forces team to do it without anyone noticing?

[Kickaha]

i started. i tried, but i just couldn't stomach the BS
What you mean it because it didn't agree with what you've already decied it must be BS, that was only the first site I looked at there's plenty of others that debunk all the conspiracy and supposed demolition as well

Why did the engines burn up in the resulting fire? -
They didn't engines/parts were found at the scene

It wouldn't be the first time Architects and Engineers have made mistakes.
I've seen a few sites where engineers and architects saw nothing much unusual in what happened

[Katman]

Do you think it's possible for a special forces team to do it without anyone noticing?

Dude, the elevators had just undergone a massive 'upgrade'.

There was plenty of opportunity over the preceding months.

[Hinny]

I'm quite prepared to accept that planes flew into the twin towers - my eyes told me so.

Well as we have recently seen on another thread your eyes can deceive you.

Look at the footage of the planes going into the towers. Without resistance.... Like flying through a glass facade.
The construction of the WTC twin towers was that of a box within a box, The exterior box was made up of 14" box beams on 36" centres with 22" wide windows.
These steel web was made of super strength steel.
How can an Aluminium plane fly through that?
Even one that is travelling at a higher velocity than they were capable of, as one of the jets in the video appeared to do.
Also as the WTC towers were 208 feet wide the plane could not have been exiting one side of the building whilst still entering the other side as seen in the video footage shown to the world.

[Hinny]

Dude, the elevators had just undergone a massive 'upgrade'.

There was plenty of opportunity over the preceding months.

Remember the explanation for the windows being blown out on the ground floor was that Jet fuel had leaked down the elevator shafts and then exploded.
The massive upgrade to the elevators must have completely altered their original design as no elevator shafts went from the floors that were hit to the ground. They were all staggered to prevent a chimney effect in the case of a fire. In other words this explanation was complete bunkum as well.

[Hinny]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks_advance-knowledge_conspiracy_theories

"Despite these reports, the Intelligence Community did not produce any assessments of the likelihood that terrorists would use planes as weapons, and U.S. policymakers apparently remained unaware of this kind of potential threat."[10] Former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger testified to the Joint Inquiry:

"We heard of the idea of planes as weapons, but I don't recall being presented with any specific threat information about an attack of this nature, or highlighting this threat, or indicating it was more likely than any other"[11]

Why would you trot out dross like this as credible evidence.

The evidence uncovered since reveals that this was not the case.
Sandy Berger may have stated this to the commission but that is irrelevant.
Not everybody has total recall.

The reason there were no aircraft to intercept the planes was that Norad was running an exercise where a highjacked plane flew into a skyscraper.
That's why so many questions have been asked .
Same scenario on several other terrorist attacks. Coincide with official exercises of the same type. London bombings for instance.
Get up with the play man.

[Laava]

no elevator shafts went from the floors that were hit to the ground. They were all staggered to prevent a chimney effect in the case of a fire. In other words this explanation was complete bunkum as well.
Would you like some facts with that?
I have been up the towers so knew that they were very impressive in their speed and will take you from level 2 to 107


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOgqSkiEWdU&sns=em

[Kickaha]

Would you like some facts with that?
facts? dont be stupid we dont want no facts

[Laava]

facts? dont be stupid we dont want no facts

Yeah, sorry! What was I thinking?
It's ok tho, no-one will believe them.

[scumdog]

Once again another KB thread overloaded by too many windmill-jousters...<_<:rolleyes:

[Madness]

Would you like some facts with that?
I have been up the towers so knew that they were very impressive in their speed and will take you from level 2 to 107

Was level 2 at ground-level prior to all levels being at ground-level or was it 2 levels above ground?

[Katman]

Would you like some facts with that?
I have been up the towers so knew that they were very impressive in their speed and will take you from level 2 to 107


According to this....

There were 99 passenger elevators in each tower, arranged in three vertical zones to move occupants in stages to skylobbies on the 44th and 78th floors. These were arranged as express (generally larger cars that moved at higher speeds) and local elevators in an innovative system first introduced in WTC 1 and WTC 2. There were 8 express elevators from the concourse to the 44th floor and 10 express elevators from the concourse to the 78th floor as well as 24 local elevators per zone, which served groups of floors in those zones. There were seven freight elevators, only one of which served all floors. All elevators had been upgraded to incorporate firefighter emergency operation per American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) A17.1 and Local Law 5 (1973).http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-1.pdf (PDF pg. 50)

....it would appear that there was only one shaft in each tower that went from the concourse all the way to the top.

[jonbuoy]

Dude, the elevators had just undergone a massive 'upgrade'.

There was plenty of opportunity over the preceding months.

And plenty for a terrorist organisation too- I´m not sure that elevator shafts are supporting the building or the best place to plant explosives - if anything its a huge area to dissipate the explosion in. They are however a good way for fire to spread. I´m not in any doubt that planes hit the building and the building fell down. If you think it was Spielberg/Hollywood special effects your smoking some strong stuff. I don´t think they make movie projector screens big enough to fool the hundreds of live witnesses.

Who was really behind orchestrating the plane attacks can easily be questioned and debated and never really 100% proved.

[Edbear]

facts? dont be stupid we dont want no facts


Yeah, sorry! What was I thinking?
It's ok tho, no-one will believe them.


Once again another KB thread overloaded by too many windmill-jousters...<_<:rolleyes:

I'm over this thread. The few moronic conspiracy theorists who continue to spout absolute crap on here are beyond reason and no facts that contradict their pet theories will ever be considered. :weird:

[Katman]

I'm over this thread.

We'll take that as an admission of defeat.

[Edbear]

We'll take that as an admission of defeat.

Yup! You idiots are beyond help... :doh:

[Katman]

I´m not in any doubt that planes hit the building and the building fell down. If you think it was Spielberg/Hollywood special effects your smoking some strong stuff. I don´t think they make movie projector screens big enough to fool the hundreds of live witnesses.



If you're going to quote me at least make an effort to read what I've previously written.

I've already stated that I'm prepared to accept that planes hit the building.

However, I don't believe that it was the impact of the planes that caused the building to collapse in the manner that they did.

[Katman]

Once again another KB thread overloaded by too many windmill-jousters...<_<:rolleyes:

Don't ever think of moving into detective work.

You'd suck at it.

[Virago]

We don't, according to many, know that planes hit the buildings.
One has to suspend belief in all we have learnt to imagine that an Aluminium plane could penetrate the outer web of steel, go through the building taking out 20% of the internal supporting structure and come out the through the other web of steel largely intact!...

Basic physics.

In much the same way that a tiny soft lead pellet which weighs around 1/30,000th the weight of a man, can punch a sizeable hole through said man, killing him quite effectively - and itself surviving largely intact.

Always assuming of course, that the millions of people supposedly shot to death over the years, aren't actually part of a huge conspiracy.

I mean, one has to suspend all belief that such a thing isn't physically possible.

But the "sheeple" still think that people are actually shot to death. Idiots...

[Hinny]

Basic physics.

In much the same way that a tiny soft lead pellet which weighs around 1/30,000th the weight of a man, can punch a sizeable hole through said man, killing him quite effectively - and itself surviving largely intact.

Always assuming of course, that the millions of people supposedly shot to death over the years, aren't actually part of a huge conspiracy.

I mean, one has to suspend all belief that such a thing isn't physically possible.

But the "sheeple" still think that people are actually shot to death. Idiots...

Are you saying that you believe the video footage showing the nose of the aircraft coming out the other side of the building largely intact?

[Hinny]

I'm over this thread. The few moronic conspiracy theorists who continue to spout absolute crap on here are beyond reason and no facts that contradict their pet theories will ever be considered. :weird:

Is that why you haven't bothered to quote any facts Ed?

The 911 debate continues and at least two parts of it I can think of could be put to rest quite simply.
1. Show the video footage seized from the garage near the Pentagon which showed whatever hit the Pentagon. Not 6 frames which explain nothing.
2. Show the video footage from the airport of the alleged Hijackers getting on the planes.

Why do you suppose they won't do that?

Interesting that they found a part of one of the planes that allegedly hit the Twin towers. The first bit of either aircraft they have recovered unless I am mistaken.

Interesting that a new film of the plane crashing at Shankesville has just surfaced.

[Hinny]

No suggestions from any believers on how much of the 200,000 tons of Super Strength Steel turned to dust nor why there would be a pool of molten steel underground three months after the collapse.

These questions interest me.
I can find no explanation for it apart from that Russian dude who reckons they put nuclear devices under them.

There are so many unanswered questions it sounds more than just fishy.

The way I see it,
If it looks like dog shit,
it smells like dog shit
and it tasted like dog shit ...
you'd better not step in it.

[Kickaha]

1. Show the video footage seized from the garage near the Pentagon which showed whatever hit the Pentagon. Not 6 frames which explain nothing.

Which one of these was it?
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/FBI_hides_84_Pentagon_videos

[Ocean1]

No suggestions from any believers on how much of the 200,000 tons of Super Strength Steel turned to dust nor why there would be a pool of molten steel underground three months after the collapse.

It did?

There was?

Show me.


There are so many unanswered questions it sounds more than just fishy.

You can't prove anything to someone that's got a preconcieved notion of "the facts", not even those who had nothing to do with the events in question and who have no expertise in any of the disciplines required to believably comment. And there's no end to the questions from that quarter, whereas there's definitely a limit to the sane and responsible resources available to answer them, so I'm not amazed that some tiny percentage of them go unanswered.

[Hinny]

Which one of these was it?
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/FBI_hides_84_Pentagon_videos
The 84/ 85 figure for videos came about as the result of a FOIA request for videos showing the Pentagon impact. FBI Special Agent Jacqueline Maguire responded with the following point:
<center></center>...I subsequently searched a series of FBI evidence databases, including the FBI's Electronic Case File system and the FBI's Investigative Case Management System, and determined that the FBI possessed eighty-five (85) videotapes that might be potentially responsive to plaintiff's FOIA request.

many of these videotapes do not have footage of the Pentagon at all.

many have footage of the WTC

some are security video tapes taken from a Kinko's in Florida
No wonder they have a hard time solving anything.
It was indeed very fortunate then that the passport of one of the hijackers conveniently fell to earth intact and was picked up which led the FBI to his address in upstate New York where they discovered all the details of the plot including a list of all 19 hijackers.
This apparently was how they were able to reveal their identities so quickly.

[Hinny]

Which one of these was it?
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/FBI_hides_84_Pentagon_videos

The one they released the 6 frames from may be the one. The authorities seemed to think so.
It beggars explanation why they would only release 6 frames which don't help at all.
Any one got a theory on that?

[oneofsix]

The one they released the 6 frames from may be the one. The authorities seemed to think so.
It beggars explanation why they would only release 6 frames which don't help at all.
Any one got a theory on that?

Control. Those people are control freaks and believe information is power therefore you control the information. Sure there is a conspiracy but its not the bombing, it is rather the agencies arse covering and the stupidity of the President. :bleh:

[oneofsix]

You can't prove anything to someone that's got a preconcieved notion of "the facts", not even those who had nothing to do with the events in question and who have no expertise in any of the disciplines required to believably comment. And there's no end to the questions from that quarter, whereas there's definitely a limit to the sane and responsible resources available to answer them, so I'm not amazed that some tiny percentage of them go unanswered.

+1 but this is like trolling with a butterfly net in a bucket full of whitebait, you don't even have to try, just dip the net in and in they go. Of course the same can be said both ways. :laugh:

[Kickaha]

1. Show the video footage seized from the garage near the Pentagon which showed whatever hit the Pentagon. Not 6 frames which explain nothing.


Why would they need to show video when they have heaps of eyewitness accounts? or are they all plants and in on the coverup?

[Hinny]

Would you like some facts with that?
I have been up the towers so knew that they were very impressive in their speed and will take you from level 2 to 107


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOgqSkiEWdU&sns=em

from level 2 ....

With your intimate knowledge of the WTC do you think that Kerosene could pour down the express elevator shaft and blow out the seven inch thick Ground Floor Lobby windows and do considerable damage in the basement areas?
Is Kerosene explosive?

The eye-witnesses for these events have apparently all become deceased since 2001. - Terrible car accidents and the like.

[Virago]

I'm over this thread. The few moronic conspiracy theorists who continue to spout absolute crap on here are beyond reason and no facts that contradict their pet theories will ever be considered. :weird:

Ed Zachary. This thread was solely about conscientous objectors. Back on topic please, people...:cool:

[Kickaha]

The eye-witnesses for these events have apparently all become deceased since 2001. - Terrible car accidents and the like.
Yeah sure they have :rolleyes:

How many, what are their names and put up a link with some credible proof

[Hinny]

Why would they need to show video when they have heaps of eyewitness accounts? or are they all plants and in on the coverup?


Heaps of eyewitness accounts?
As you state you are a newbie to the investigation and you already can find heaps of eyewitness accounts.
I feel so inadequate.
One story from near the start was that the staff at the Gas station were watching the footage when the FBI showed up and seized the tape and told them they were not to discuss anything they had seen ... as a matter of National Security.
I understand this is the tape the Truthers want revealed.

[jonbuoy]

If you're going to quote me at least make an effort to read what I've previously written.

I've already stated that I'm prepared to accept that planes hit the building.

However, I don't believe that it was the impact of the planes that caused the building to collapse in the manner that they did.

But you do believe that someone calculated that the planes weren't enough to bring the building down by itself and so planted explosives to finish it off?

[Laava]

from level 2 ....

With your intimate knowledge of the WTC do you think that Kerosene could pour down the express elevator shaft and blow out the seven inch thick Ground Floor Lobby windows and do considerable damage in the basement areas?
Is Kerosene explosive?

The eye-witnesses for these events have apparently all become deceased since 2001. - Terrible car accidents and the like.
Fucked if I know dude, I was just pointing out the fact that there are about 4 elevator shafts that go to or beyond the 77th (i think) floor and most of the other 90 or so share a common shaft system stacked one above the other. But you already knew that.

[Madness]

What does all of this have to do with the ANZACs anyway?

[Kickaha]

One story from near the start was that the staff at the Gas station were watching the footage when the FBI showed up and seized the tape and told them they were not to discuss anything they had seen ... as a matter of National Security.
I understand this is the tape the Truthers want revealed.

From the Citgo gas station? or a different one?

Video from security camera at Citgo Gas Station, 801 S. Joyce Street, Arlington, Virginia. Submitted to FAVIAU to determine if video showed impact of plane into Pentagon. Determined not to show impact. Obtained by FBI on 9/11/2001.

[Laava]

What does all of this have to do with the ANZACs anyway?

Get thee to PD!

[Katman]

But you do believe that someone calculated that the planes weren't enough to bring the building down by itself and so planted explosives to finish it off?

That's what I believe the evidence appears to point to.

[scumdog]

One story from .....

Too many claimed 'facts' seem to start like that - sounds like Womans Weekly or similar...

[Virago]

...The eye-witnesses for these events have apparently all become deceased since 2001. - Terrible car accidents and the like.

We have entered the Twilight Zone.

Without a vampire in sight.

[Kickaha]

Heaps of eyewitness accounts?
As you state you are a newbie to the investigation and you already can find heaps of eyewitness accounts.
I feel so inadequate.
So you should, you might try a thing called google, took me about 5 seconds to find these, but hey without that video from the garage we'll never really know what happned
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77w.htm
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/bart.html
http://911review.com/attack/pentagon/witnesses.html
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html
They're probably all dead by now in car crashes and shit

[Hinny]

Here's a new story.
Nuclear destruction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lec9giab90I

[Laava]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFNO2sSW-mU&sns=em

[Katman]

I'm over this thread. The few moronic conspiracy theorists who continue to spout absolute crap on here are beyond reason and no facts that contradict their pet theories will ever be considered. :weird:

Even Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the 911 Commission, are on record as saying they believe the 911 Commission was "set up to fail".

It appears even they struggle to have much faith in the integrity of the report.

[mashman]

"You know what I've noticed? Nobody panics when things go "according to plan." Even if the plan is horrifying! If, tomorrow, I tell the press that, like, a gang banger will get shot, or a truckload of soldiers will be blown up, nobody panics, because it's all "part of the plan." But when I say that one little old mayor will die, well then everyone loses their minds!"

[Paul in NZ]

I'm not sure how this ended up being about 911 loonie fringe theories but i think Mark Twain summed it up best....

"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't."

[Hinny]

So you should, you might try a thing called google, took me about 5 seconds to find these, but hey without that video from the garage we'll never really know what happned
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77w.htm
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/bart.html
http://911review.com/attack/pentagon/witnesses.html
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html
They're probably all dead by now in car crashes and shit


Haha That first one is funny. :niceone:

[Akzle]

Proof one. You disappoint me Akzle. I would have expected you at least to have looked at all the evidence for and against. I guess it's just easier to sit back and criticise without investigation. Govt. is too easy a target and you go along with the conspiracy theorists on that basis alone.
sorry to disapoint you, grand zionist cyclops Ed.
i have read a fair bit, for and against, unforunately the "there's no conspiracy" camp are sadly lacking in anything that i can believe...

The only things we can 100% know is that planes did crash into the twin towers, the twin towers did collapse.

If it was government planned did they calculate that those planes weren't enough to bring down the building and extra explosives were needed? Why not blame the terrorists for the bombs as well?
i'm not sure about the planes thing. the videos have been "debunked" - maybe they were missiles? why did the wings of the plane disappear from the frames immediately preceding impact?
i don't know the answers to that. i'm not putting it beyond the realms of possibility.
i still question how two airliners went drastically off course without being picked, painted and potentially shot down.
i question also how "terrorists" without CPL and who admittedly struggled to land a light aircraft, could pilot them so effectively to hit centremass of a fucking building many thousand feet below he flight path.

but yes, i agree, the towers came down.

And the vidoes of the planes hitting the towers..? The fact that recently they found another part of a plane jammed between two buildings? The fact that enough of the plane that hit the Pentagomn survived to identify it and the reports from paramedics and others actually there and involved, (with pictures), of the body parts, pieces of uniforms and other clothing, that prove it was a 757?

Oh, that's right, only the conspiracy theorists are telling the truth, eh?
yes. in an "explosion" that melts steel girders and levels a hundred story building, uniforms and passports survive to tell us the whole story.

Erm you do know that's a heavily populated area and hundreds if not thousands were watching outside when some of the planes hit? Either al queda or the government brought down those towers. Doing it with explosives or planes either way the towers were destroyed - are we all agreed on that?
yuh.

So when was the very first time that the footage of the first plane hitting the tower was broadcast on television Ed?
wasn't the second tower reported as down about five minutes before the "plane hit"?


Unless "smoking gun" papers are found, no one is going to know exactly, what went on - just that it was soooo convenient for Dubya and his backers........and a total disaster to the American population as a whole, since - whether they know it or not! Make that the world population, as the USA ramped up it's military bullying around the (brown people) world.....
they've been put on the hundred year "super secret" list. in a hundred years the americans wont care or will be so fucking stupid that they'll say (assuming the government did it) "well it was for the good of the world - we sure got those WMDs and are so much safer since we've quashed domestic terrorism"

Are you serious?

Are you suggesting that the terrorists had the time and the access to rig all three buildings for demolition?
jews dude. jews.
hilariously and ironically, the airport security from both planes, and the tower security, were he same jew-company.
jews don't like muslims, so if you can make people hate muslims more than jews, you get to keep selling them shit. and that's profitable, which, at the end of the day, if what it's about. money.

it's pretty un-PC to hate jews in the west, while muslim hate is encouraged by propoganda and ignorance (anyone tell me what "jihad" means?)

What you mean it because it didn't agree with what you've already decied it must be BS, that was only the first site I looked at there's plenty of others that debunk all the conspiracy and supposed demolition as well
yes, and the debunking has been debunked. as at the beginning of my post, IMO, the evidence for the "conspiracy theories" outweighs the "proof" against.

Once again another KB thread overloaded by too many windmill-jousters...<_<:rolleyes:
aha! scummy was in on it!
a jew and a pig... all hail a society that gives people like him guns...


In much the same way that a tiny soft lead pellet which weighs around 1/30,000th the weight of a man, can punch a sizeable hole through said man, killing him quite effectively - and itself surviving largely intact.
do the maths dude. bullets flying at <3000FPS have impact energy in excess of plane at low altitude cruising speed. human flesh is squishy, construction steel is not.
they're also (the ones that "go straight through") made of solid metal and designed to penetrate, whereas an airframe, is not.

and still no takers to answer the 5 billion dollar terrorist insurance a month prior eh...
or why the jews didn't turn up for work that day.

[Hinny]

I'm not sure how this ended up being about 911 loonie fringe theories but i think Mark Twain summed it up best....

"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't."

Are the 911 loonie fringe theories as you call them are the stories that we are sold to go to war as allies (very good friends) of George Bush Snr's " New World Order" ?

People on here seem to blithely believe things that are outside the possibilities of existing knowledge.
Is this the stranger than fiction Truth that you allude to?

[Hinny]

and still no takers to answer the 5 billion dollar terrorist insurance a month prior eh...
or why the jews didn't turn up for work that day.

Still no takers for Michael Moore's One Million dollar reward challenge to show that anything in his movie Fahrenheit 911 was not true.

[Katman]

Still no takers for Michael Moore's One Million dollar reward challenge to show that anything in his movie Fahrenheit 911 was not true.

Well Ed's clearly got nothing.

[Banditbandit]

I've already stated that I'm prepared to accept that planes hit the building.

However, I don't believe that it was the impact of the planes that caused the building to collapse in the manner that they did.

Why not? As I understand it, the building's construction was not that great ... also affected by lack of maintenance ... so if the planes had hit a well constrcuted and well maintained building it would not have crashed and burnt like it did ... the building was poor and the impact of the planes directed caused the collapse .. once one floor collapsed the weight could not be supported by the floor below ... and so on, al the way to the ground ..

The bashing and rubbing and tumbling effect of al that concrete (remember it is a lot of concrete) with some steel and other stuff ..) inside the steel skeleton smashed up everything pretty well ..


Are you saying that you believe the video footage showing the nose of the aircraft coming out the other side of the building largely intact?

Yeah .. why not .. there are explanations that say it is possible .. it may well be unlikely .. but that does not mean it would not happen ... models of events are just that .. what actualy happens can be pretty wild ... the nose of the plane going through the building and out the other side appratrently largely intact is possible ... that's not hard to accept ..


Control. Those people are control freaks and believe information is power therefore you control the information. Sure there is a conspiracy but its not the bombing, it is rather the agencies arse covering and the stupidity of the President. :bleh:

Yeah .. that's about right ... a cover-up conspiracy for arse-covering purposes .. not a conspiracy to destroy the buildings ... Al Qaeda still flew those planes into the buildings, killing people and causing gthem to fal down ..

[Banditbandit]

sorry to disapoint you, grand zionist cyclops Ed.
i have read a fair bit, for and against, unforunately the "there's no conspiracy" camp are sadly lacking in anything that i can believe...

i'm not sure about the planes thing. the videos have been "debunked" - maybe they were missiles? why did the wings of the plane disappear from the frames immediately preceding impact?
i don't know the answers to that. i'm not putting it beyond the realms of possibility.
i still question how two airliners went drastically off course without being picked, painted and potentially shot down.
i question also how "terrorists" without CPL and who admittedly struggled to land a light aircraft, could pilot them so effectively to hit centremass of a fucking building many thousand feet below he flight path.

but yes, i agree, the towers came down.

yes. in an "explosion" that melts steel girders and levels a hundred story building, uniforms and passports survive to tell us the whole story.

yuh.

wasn't the second tower reported as down about five minutes before the "plane hit"?

they've been put on the hundred year "super secret" list. in a hundred years the americans wont care or will be so fucking stupid that they'll say (assuming the government did it) "well it was for the good of the world - we sure got those WMDs and are so much safer since we've quashed domestic terrorism"

jews dude. jews.
hilariously and ironically, the airport security from both planes, and the tower security, were he same jew-company.
jews don't like muslims, so if you can make people hate muslims more than jews, you get to keep selling them shit. and that's profitable, which, at the end of the day, if what it's about. money.

it's pretty un-PC to hate jews in the west, while muslim hate is encouraged by propoganda and ignorance (anyone tell me what "jihad" means?)

yes, and the debunking has been debunked. as at the beginning of my post, IMO, the evidence for the "conspiracy theories" outweighs the "proof" against.

aha! scummy was in on it!
a jew and a pig... all hail a society that gives people like him guns...

do the maths dude. bullets flying at <3000FPS have impact energy in excess of plane at low altitude cruising speed. human flesh is squishy, construction steel is not.
they're also (the ones that "go straight through") made of solid metal and designed to penetrate, whereas an airframe, is not.

and still no takers to answer the 5 billion dollar terrorist insurance a month prior eh...
or why the jews didn't turn up for work that day.



Fuck ... on top of it all you're such a racist arsehole !!!

[Katman]

Why not? As I understand it, the building's construction was not that great ... also affected by lack of maintenance ... so if the planes had hit a well constrcuted and well maintained building it would not have crashed and burnt like it did ... the building was poor and the impact of the planes directed caused the collapse .. once one floor collapsed the weight could not be supported by the floor below ... and so on, al the way to the ground ..


But that's certainly not the case with Building 7.

If one suspects that Building 7 was rigged for demolition then one has to suspect that Buildings 1 & 2 were also similarly rigged.

[mashman]

wasn't the second tower reported as down about five minutes before the "plane hit"?

WTC building 7 was reported by the BBC to have collapsed 20 minutes before it did. I'm sure there's a vid of a US newsreader saying the same thing, and you could see WTC building 7 still standing in the distant background.

[Katman]

WTC building 7 was reported by the BBC to have collapsed 20 minutes before it did. I'm sure there's a vid of a US newsreader saying the same thing, and you could see WTC building 7 still standing in the distant background.

Yeah, and when they realised their mistake they suddenly 'lost transmission'.

[Hinny]

Yeah .. why not .. there are explanations that say it is possible .. it may well be unlikely .. but that does not mean it would not happen ... models of events are just that .. what actualy happens can be pretty wild ... the nose of the plane going through the building and out the other side appratrently largely intact is possible ... that's not hard to accept ..

Mate you are dreaming.
Ever seen photos of a bird strike on the nose of an aircraft? Little bird smashing the nose in.

This plane, was exiting the building before it had totally entered the other side. It grew rather than was crushed smashing into a steel web stronger than a tank.
Instead of being crushed by smashing through two webs of Super Strength steel with 22" gaps between the columns and a bunch of Inner steel support columns, it comes out the other side seemingly intact. Like the scene from 'Flying High' when the aeroplane goes through the curtain wall of glass in the terminal building. .
These walls were not curtain walls of glass.

[Banditbandit]

But that's certainly not the case with Building 7.

If one suspects that Building 7 was rigged for demolition then one has to suspect that Buildings 1 & 2 were also similarly rigged.

No .. I don't get that .. why do you have to suspect that?

[Banditbandit]

Mate you are dreaming.
Ever seen photos of a bird strike on the nose of an aircraft? Little bird smashing the nose in.

But not always ...


This plane, was exiting the building before it had totally entered the other side. It grew rather than was crushed smashing into a steel web stronger than a tank.

Where ??? Show me the video .. I have never seen that ..


Instead of being crushed by smashing through two webs of Super Strength steel with 22" gaps between the columns and a bunch of Inner steel support columns, it comes out the other side seemingly intact. Like the scene from 'Flying High' when the aeroplane goes through the curtain wall of glass in the terminal building. .
These walls were not curtain walls of glass.

I'm not a structural engineer - or any kind of engineer ... but it not only needs an engineerign explanation - it needs some understanding of the laws of probability ... and I think it is possible .. just unlikely .. but unlikely things happen every day ..

I seriously doubt there are 22 inch gaps betwen the columns .. how would people walk between them ...

If the aircraft nose has a "point" then surely it goes through small gaps .. just how much of the "nose" makes it through the bulding intact? I doubnt that all of it back to the pilot's windows does (if it does at all) .. and at some pont the nose is quite small ..

[Katman]

No .. I don't get that .. why do you have to suspect that?

Three buildings fell in a perfect implosion into their own footprint - in a manner that demolition experts would dream to be able to replicate.

If one building had been rigged for demolition then it would not be surprising to discover that all three had been done likewise.

Anything else would be like saying "building 7 fell like that due to an expert demolition job but those other two buildings that are over twice the height fell like they did purely by luck".

[Virago]

...do the maths dude. bullets flying at <3000FPS have impact energy in excess of plane at low altitude cruising speed...

Bwahahahahahaha...!

No, you do the maths. Your results will be... ...interesting... :lol:

If you're right, I should be able to shoot down massive buildings with one shot from my rifle. I await your confirmation.

:weird:

[Virago]

Still no takers for Michael Moore's One Million dollar reward challenge to show that anything in his movie Fahrenheit 911 was not true.


Well Ed's clearly got nothing.

Ironically, you're playing Ed at his own game.

"We are right until you can prove we're wrong, and you are wrong until you can prove you're right." As always, the onus of proof is always on the other party - the key fall-back position of both conspiracy theorists and the religious bigots.

[Oscar]

Bwahahahahahaha...!

No, you do the maths. Your results will be... ...interesting... :lol:

If you're right, I should be able to shoot down massive buildings with one shot from my rifle. I await your confirmation.

:weird:

Nice point, but I suspect logic is wasted here.

The WTC towers were designed to withstand an impact from a errant aircraft (it was modeled on an impact from a 707).
What was not factored in was the intense heat caused by burning fuel, which caused the floor supports to fail (as these were only supported at the edges).
The floors pancaked, slowly at first, which gave a collapse similar to that experienced with controlled demolition.
Video clearly shows the pancake effect starting on the floors immediately under the impact point. If, as some say, there was a conspiracy which somehow blew the building up, why would they go dozens of floors up, and hope that the explosion caused complete destruction?

[Oscar]

Three buildings fell in a perfect implosion into their own footprint - in a manner that demolition experts would dream to be able to replicate.

If one building had been rigged for demolition then it would not be surprising to discover that all three had been done likewise.

Anything else would be like saying "building 7 fell like that due to an expert demolition job but those other two buildings that are over twice the height fell like they did purely by luck".

The "WTC7 was blown up" theory only works from one point of view, where the building appears to collapse as if subject to a controlled explosion.
Any cusary search will turn up articles like this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2056088/Footage-kills-conspiracy-theories-Rare-footage-shows-WTC-7-consumed-fire.html

...that show a several damaged and burning building.

[Katman]

The "WTC7 was blown up" theory only works from one point of view, where the building appears to collapse as if subject to a controlled explosion.
Any cusary search will turn up articles like this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2056088/Footage-kills-conspiracy-theories-Rare-footage-shows-WTC-7-consumed-fire.html

...that show a several damaged and burning building.

Sorry man but that's not 'consumed' by fire.

There are many examples of high rise buildings actually being 'consumed' by fire that don't fall down.

The photo's on this page are what I'd consider to be showing a building being 'consumed' by fire.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/fires.html

[scumdog]

Sorry man but that's not 'consumed' by fire.

There are many examples of high rise buildings actually being 'consumed' by fire that don't fall down.

After a large laden plane had been flown into them???

[oneofsix]

Nice point, but I suspect logic is wasted here.

The WTC towers were designed to withstand an impact from a errant aircraft (it was modeled on an impact from a 707).
What was not factored in was the intense heat caused by burning fuel, which caused the floor supports to fail (as these were only supported at the edges).
The floors pancaked, slowly at first, which gave a collapse similar to that experienced with controlled demolition.
Video clearly shows the pancake effect starting on the floors immediately under the impact point. If, as some say, there was a conspiracy which somehow blew the building up, why would they go dozens of floors up, and hope that the explosion caused complete destruction?

But your third paragraph suggests Hinny's "web of steel" didn't exist. You wouldn't be saying the buildings were built as per design, with a central dense support column and looser more space external support, and that it is quite see-able from the video and analyses that the plane's nose didn't hit the central support column? To suggest the the extra fuel load of a fully fuelled 747 could weaken steel designed to with stand a much smaller 707 - really? :corn:

Sorry but the pancake must have been set off by explosives in the basement because that is what some conspiracies say happened. And it can't have been fuel leaking down the elevator shaft because the viability of that senario has already been called in to question. :no:

[Katman]

After a large laden plane had been flown into them???

Remember building 7?

[Oscar]

Sorry man but that's not 'consumed' by fire.

There are many examples of high rise buildings actually being 'consumed' by fire that don't fall down.

The photo's on this page are what I'd consider to be showing a building being 'consumed' by fire.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/fires.html

So you know of another 81 story building that didn't collapse after being damaged by adjacent collapse’s of two other buildings and subsequent fire?


Notwithstanding that, let's apply Occam's Razor.
How would anyone benefit from the controlled demolition of an empty (it had been succesfully evacuted with no casualties) and burning building (there are dozens of pics of it burning prior to it's collapse)? Why would you somehow construct a plan to fly planes (missiles) into WTC 1&2 or blow them up, only to wait until WTC7 was damaged and on fire, and then blow it up?

[Oscar]

But your third paragraph suggests Hinny's "web of steel" didn't exist. You wouldn't be saying the buildings were built as per design, with a central dense support column and looser more space external support, and that it is quite see-able from the video and analyses that the plane's nose didn't hit the central support column? To suggest the the extra fuel load of a fully fuelled 747 could weaken steel designed to with stand a much smaller 707 - really? :corn:

Sorry but the pancake must have been set off by explosives in the basement because that is what some conspiracies say happened. And it can't have been fuel leaking down the elevator shaft because the viability of that senario has already been called in to question. :no:

I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

The video clearly shows the buildings starting to pancake at the point of impact, whereas a controlled demolition from the basement would show an obvious pancaking effect from the ground floor.

The point about the design specs is that the building was built to withstand the impact of a 707, but that the steel supporting the floors was not designed to withstand the heat of burning jet fuel. The building was designed around a central column, and the floors were basically set on bearers attached to the column and the outside grid, but not joined.

BTW - The planes involved were not 747's, but the smaller 767's IIRC.

[mashman]

After a large laden plane had been flown into them???

Is that an African one or a European one?

[Katman]

How would anyone benefit from the controlled demolition of an empty (it had been succesfully evacuted with no casualties) and burning building (there are dozens of pics of it burning prior to it's collapse)? Why would you somehow construct a plan to fly planes (missiles) into WTC 1&2 or blow them up, only to wait until WTC7 was damaged and on fire, and then blow it up?

Possibly Larry Silverstein stood to gain more by the buildings being demolished than by them being left standing.

[Edbear]

So you know of another 81 story building that didn't collapse after being damaged by adjacent collapse’s of two other buildings and subsequent fire?


Notwithstanding that, let's apply Occam's Razor.
How would anyone benefit from the controlled demolition of an empty (it had been succesfully evacuted with no casualties) and burning building (there are dozens of pics of it burning prior to it's collapse)? Why would you somehow construct a plan to fly planes (missiles) into WTC 1&2 or blow them up, only to wait until WTC7 was damaged and on fire, and then blow it up?

Logic and facts are wasted on these idiots, but you can try if you like. :no:

[Katman]

Logic and facts are wasted on these idiots, but you can try if you like. :no:

Ed, there's a lot of highly qualified people around the world that don't think things stack up here.

I'm sure they would be amused that someone with your beliefs would describe them as idiots.

[Edbear]

I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

The video clearly shows the buildings starting to pancake at the point of impact, whereas a controlled demolition from the basement would show an obvious pancaking effect from the ground floor.

The point about the design specs is that the building was built to withstand the impact of a 707, but that the steel supporting the floors was not designed to withstand the heat of burning jet fuel. The building was designed around a central column, and the floors were basically set on bearers attached to the column and the outside grid, but not joined.

BTW - The planes involved were not 747's, but the smaller 767's IIRC.

They were 767's.

[Katman]

I think they were 757s

Your research is letting you down again Ed.

[oneofsix]

I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

The video clearly shows the buildings starting to pancake at the point of impact, whereas a controlled demolition from the basement would show an obvious pancaking effect from the ground floor.

The point about the design specs is that the building was built to withstand the impact of a 707, but that the steel supporting the floors was not designed to withstand the heat of burning jet fuel. The building was designed around a central column, and the floors were basically set on bearers attached to the column and the outside grid, but not joined.

BTW - The planes involved were not 747's, but the smaller 767's IIRC.

True, they were not 747s but they were bigger than what the building was designed to handle. As to your question I was being ironic, thought it would have been obvious, perhaps my mistake on aircraft type threw you.

[Banditbandit]

Three buildings fell in a perfect implosion into their own footprint - in a manner that demolition experts would dream to be able to replicate.

Yeah .. and ? That does not imply aytrhing other than the three buildings imploded in a maner that made demolition experts envious .. and nothing else ..


If one building had been rigged for demolition then it would not be surprising to discover that all three had been done likewise.

No, that would not be surprising at all .. but gives you no grounds to suspect gthe otrher buoldings had been wired fror demolition .. the reason they fell down was pretty obvious .. a bloody big plane flew into each ione of them

The reasons for the way the collapsed was to do with the way they were built ... not how force was applied to them.


Anything else would be like saying "building 7 fell like that due to an expert demolition job but those other two buildings that are over twice the height fell like they did purely by luck".

Not at all ... pure luck had nothing to do with it ... the two towers fell because bloody great big aircraft flew into them and damaged them so badly they fell down ... I have no idea why Building 7 fell down ... but then I'm not looking to put the responsibility for the attack on anyone but Al Qaeda and the freedom fighters in the planes ...

But then, I have no issues in saying that the reasons why the two towers fell down in the way they did was a combination of chances ... a deep gravitation well with random motions is a chancey environment .. or what you would call pure luck ...

Just as I would have no issue with saying that if a car came around a corner on the wrong side of the road and took you out ... that it was just pure luck (or bad luck) .. and would not need to look for a reason why you might have fucked up .. ...

[Edbear]

Ed, there's a lot of highly qualified people around the world that don't think things stack up here.

I'm sure they would be amused that someone with your beliefs would describe them as idiots.

Why don't you simply stick to the known facts?

The planes were 767's that hit the towers, and a 757 that hit the Pentagon. Proven by eye-witnesses actually there, like Police, Paramedics and so on! Enough of all the planes survived to prove what they were.

Building 7 was extensively damaged by impact from the falling debris and severe internal fires, FACT, borne out by photo and video and eye-witness accounts.

The experts I prefer to believe are those who are qualified to give testimony, like the architects and designers, the Firefighters who were actually there on the job, and the construction engineers who examined the buildings.

You dumbo's will not even read and critique the links as they are in contrast to your precious theories. The only links you will accept are the conspiracy links and we all know that conspiracy theorists never lie or mis-represent anything, eh? Even when it is proven beyond question they have...

[Katman]

The experts I prefer to believe are those who are qualified to give testimony, like the architects and designers, the Firefighters who were actually there on the job, and the construction engineers who examined the buildings.


For every expert you choose to believe Ed I could probably give you six others that choose to believe differently.

[Edbear]

For every expert you choose to believe Ed I could probably give you six others that choose to believe differently.

As I said, start with the proven facts and go from there, but you won't even acknowledge them let alone comment on them. I gave you proven facts that anyone who cares, can verify, but as you always do, you simply pass over them and ignore them and continue in your dogged prejudice and keep asking the same dumb questions.

[Katman]

The planes were 767's that hit the towers, and a 757 that hit the Pentagon. Proven by eye-witnesses actually there, like Police, Paramedics and so on! Enough of all the planes survived to prove what they were.

I'm not the one questioning that.


Building 7 was extensively damaged by impact from the falling debris and severe internal fires, FACT, borne out by photo and video and eye-witness accounts.


I don't believe Building 7 was sufficiently damaged by falling debris and localised office fires to cause it to collapse.

[Edbear]

I don't believe Building 7 was sufficiently damaged by falling debris and localised office fires to cause it to collapse.

Well of course you are far more highly qualified to judge, aren't you... :rolleyes:

I prefer to believe those who were actually qualified to judge and who clearly and in detail explained why and how.

[Drew]

I can't pick a side to argue for. It's too fuckin funny either way!

[bogan]

I can't pick a side to argue for. It's too fuckin funny either way!

Yeh I'm with Drew on this one. Half of the arguments would be considered immature on a primary school playground.

Also, wasn't this exact same topic being discussed in another thread not long ago? Doom is approaching if they figure out how to jump it into the more 'normal' kb thread as well.

[oneofsix]

I can't pick a side to argue for. It's too fuckin funny either way!

Go on pick a side and jump in, you can always switch sides just to confuse them. You know there will be a Govt cover up somewhere in there because someone fucked up somewhere, also with GW involved there are plenty of bad statements to pick on. As to the large conspiracy, there is just too much fodder.

[oneofsix]

I don't believe Building 7 was sufficiently damaged by falling debris and localised office fires to cause it to collapse.

A twenty story hole not enough damage? Localises fires that were big enough to obscure the back of the building?

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Afb7eUHr64U?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Drew]

Go on pick a side and jump in, you can always switch sides just to confuse them. You know there will be a Govt cover up somewhere in there because someone fucked up somewhere, also with GW involved there are plenty of bad statements to pick on. As to the large conspiracy, there is just too much fodder.

Just for another chance to argue with Katman, I'm going to side against the conspiracy.

I have extensive knowledge and experience with the 'State insurance' building here in Wellington. This is relevant to the argument, because it s modeled on the 'World trade center' towers.

The middle of it is a cunt to work on, the sheer size of the columns, beams, and bracing leave no room to do anything. The ceilings are hard up against air conditioning ducting, the walls are not strapped with timber or anything else, because the toilets and stair cases are too fuckin small as it is.

The outer walls and structure are no bigger or closer together than most buildings. On account probably, of office workers wanting to be able to actually see the outside world. They prolly also don't wanna feel claustrophobic. It's quite conceivable that part of the plane would make it through the whole building.

The only lift that goes from top to bottom of the building, is in the core. However, all seven lift shafts go all the way from the basement to the roof.

I think that we could all find something on the internet to back up any argument we want. So I'll abstain from that avenue, and stick with what I know from personal experience.

[Katman]

Well of course you are far more highly qualified to judge, aren't you... :rolleyes:

I prefer to believe those who were actually qualified to judge and who clearly and in detail explained why and how.

Refer post #356.

[Drew]

Refer post #356."Experts" is a very fuckin reletive term. I reckon the same amount of energy researching these so called experts, instead of looking for doctored video footage, the number of "experts" would drop to near zero.

[Katman]

A twenty story hole not enough damage? Localises fires that were big enough to obscure the back of the building?



All I saw was a whole lot of smoke - not a lot of fire.

[Drew]

All I saw was a whole lot of smoke - not a lot of fire.Fires fueled by stuff less flamible than wood are good like that.

[Banditbandit]

I can't pick a side to argue for. It's too fuckin funny either way!

Yeah .. I don't know why people cann't seem to accept that planes flew into the buildings ... and caused a big fucken mess that killed people ... not too hard really

I try not to get sucked into this sort of argument .. but then occasxsionally it just gets me ...

[oneofsix]

Fires fueled by stuff less flamible than wood are good like that.

Especially when viewed from another side because no one could actually get around that north side due to the rubble from the towers. But hey that's the basis of a good conspiracy, make people think of a good bonfire then comment on the lack of flames, ignore that soft furnishing fires produce more smoke than flame and that the viewing angle is wrong to be able to see what flame there is.

[Edbear]

Refer post #356.

Refer the above posts and http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2056088/Footage-kills-conspiracy-theories-Rare-footage-shows-WTC-7-consumed-fire.html

[Katman]

Fires fueled by stuff less flamible than wood are good like that.

Yeah, I'm sure burning plastic produces a lot of smoke but does it produce a lot of heat?

[Edbear]

Yeah, I'm sure burning plastic produces a lot of smoke but does it produce a lot of heat?

Read the link yet?

[Banditbandit]

I don't believe Building 7 was sufficiently damaged by falling debris and localised office fires to cause it to collapse.

Which bit of that stement don't you believe ? THe bulding certainly collapsed .. it is not there any more and there is footage of it happening ...

You don't believe it was damaged enough to collapse ?? Well, are you suggesting that a perfectly good building simply self-destructs??

You don't believe it was suffiecnetly damaged by falling debris? No .. neither do I ..

Localised fires ??? Hell yes .. olny take one or two fires to heat and destory the steel around the single bolts that held the floor trusses in place to cause one or two to collapse ... then your whole building comes down exactly like it did ... The WTC Powers that be had already identified an issue with fire restance, and were workign to impriove that when Al Qaeda struck ... (The had only got a few floors doen in one building) .. adn they were also installing sprinklers .. not required in those skyscrapers ...

[Banditbandit]

Yeah, I'm sure burning plastic produces a lot of smoke but does it produce a lot of heat?

Hahaha .. light a ballpoint pen and let the plastic drip onto your hand .. that should tell you how hot it burns ...

[Katman]

Read the link yet?

Read post #341 yet?

[Katman]

Hahaha .. light a ballpoint pen and let the plastic drip onto your hand .. that should tell you how hot it burns ...

Hot enough to melt steel?

[Edbear]

Read post #341 yet?

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

And this one.

[Banditbandit]

Doesn't have to melt steel ... only has to weaken the bolts that hold the floor so they no longer support one or two floor
.. then the extra weight dropping oto the lower floor caused that to break . adn so on down the building .. getting heavier and heavier as it gets down ..

Firefighters warned about the dangers of the construction used int he towers BEFORE the towerrs collappsed .. I'll go looking for you ..

[Edbear]

http://www.structuremag.org/Archives/2007-11/SF-WTC7-Gilsanz-Nov07.pdf

And this one...

[Bald Eagle]

Hot enough to melt steel?


If my memory from Fire Service days is correct - plastic teaspoon ala maccas and the like burns at 600degrees plus or thereabouts.
(After all plastics are a petro-chemical by product )

[Katman]

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

And this one.

Read post #224 yet?

[Katman]

If my memory from Fire Service days is correct - plastic teaspoon ala maccas and the like burns at 600degrees plus or thereabouts.
(After all plastics are a petro-chemical by product )

Do you know what the melting point of steel is?

http://911review.com/coverup/fantasy/melting.html

[Banditbandit]

OK .. here you go .. The WTC was built using these contrustion methods ...

THis one is brief and succinct - it's post-9/11 but relevent ..

http://www.trussid.org/

Note it says ..


However, when exposed to fire presents a great danger to firefighting personnel when those structures are involved in fire conditions. Under these fire and heat conditions the truss systems can weaken and fail, leading to roof or floor collapse. Truss systems in a building are covered by roof and floor decking and in many cases not in view. Fires can go undiscovered long enough to weaken the diagonal member connections in as little as 10 minutes. Failure of one truss jeopardizes the entire floor and/or roof system.

By design, the truss members in floor and roof assemblies will collapse, without warning, after being exposed to heat or flame contact for a very short period of time.

From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_the_World_Trade_Center .. I've done a bit of a cut and paste


Fireproofing was incorporated in the original construction and more was added after a fire in 1975 that spread to six floors before being extinguished. After the 1993 bombing, inspections found fireproofing to be deficient. The Port Authority was in the process of replacing it, but replacement had been completed on only 18 floors in 1 WTC, including all the floors affected by the aircraft impact and fires, and on 13 floors in 2 WTC, although only three of these floors (77, 78, and 85) were directly affected by the aircraft impact.

The light construction and hollow nature of the structures allowed the jet fuel to penetrate far inside the towers, igniting many large fires simultaneously over a wide area of the impacted floors. The fuel from the planes burned at most for a few minutes, but the contents of the buildings burned over the next hour or hour and a half. It has been suggested that the fires might not have been as centrally positioned, nor as intense, had traditionally heavy high-rise construction been standing in the way of the aircraft. Debris and fuel would likely have remained mostly outside the buildings or concentrated in more peripheral areas away from the building cores, which would then not have become unique failure points. In this scenario, the towers might have stood far longer, perhaps indefinitely. The fires were hot enough to weaken the columns and cause floors to sag, pulling perimeter columns inward and reducing their ability to support the mass of the building above.

As the fires continued to burn, occupants trapped in the upper floors of the South Tower provided information about conditions to 9-1-1 dispatchers. At 9:37 am, an occupant on the 105th floor of the South Tower reported that floors beneath him "in the 90-something floor" had collapsed

As the North Tower collapsed, heavy debris hit 7 World Trade Center, causing damage to the south face of the building and starting fires that continued to burn throughout the afternoon. Structural damage occurred to the southwest corner between Floors 7 and 17 and on the south face between Floor 44 and the roof; other possible structural damage includes a large vertical gash near the center of the south face between Floors 24 and 41. The building was equipped with a sprinkler system, but had many single-point vulnerabilities for failure: the sprinkler system required manual initiation of the electrical fire pumps, rather than being a fully automatic system; the floor-level controls had a single connection to the sprinkler water riser; and the sprinkler system required some power for the fire pump to deliver water. Also, water pressure was low, with little or no water to feed sprinklers.

Some firefighters entered 7 World Trade Center to search the building. They attempted to extinguish small pockets of fire, but low water pressure hindered their efforts. Fires burned into the afternoon on the 11th and 12th floors of 7 World Trade Center, the flames visible on the east side of the building. During the afternoon, fire was also seen on floors 6–10, 13–14, 19–22, and 29–30. In particular, the fires on floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 continued to burn out of control during the afternoon.[35] At approximately 2:00 pm, firefighters noticed a bulge in the southwest corner of 7 World Trade Center between the 10th and 13th floors, a sign that the building was unstable and might collapse. During the afternoon, firefighters also heard creaking sounds coming from the building.[37] Around 3:30 pm FDNY Chief Daniel Nigro decided to halt rescue operations, surface removal, and searches along the surface of the debris near 7 World Trade Center and evacuate the area due to concerns for the safety of personnel. At 5:20:33 pm EDT on September 11, 2001, 7 World Trade Center started to collapse, with the crumble of the east mechanical penthouse, while at 5:21:10 pm EDT the entire building collapsed completely.



Now .. there is nothing too hard or too fantastic about any of that is there ?

[Edbear]

Read post #224 yet?


http://www.structuremag.org/Archives/2007-11/SF-WTC7-Gilsanz-Nov07.pdf

And this one...

And Bandits post above...

So no chance of you accepting any proof to the contrary then. :no: The other conspirators have gone very quiet... :rolleyes:

[Katman]

"Experts" is a very fuckin reletive term. I reckon the same amount of energy researching these so called experts, instead of looking for doctored video footage, the number of "experts" would drop to near zero.

Here you go Drew.

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

I'd hazard a guess that every 'expert' on that video is far more qualified to give an opinion than our Ed is.

[Edbear]

Here you go Drew.

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

I'd hazard a guess that every 'expert' on that video is far more qualified to give an opinion than our Ed is.

You are so thick you even think the links I post are mine! They...are...not...my...opinions...they...are...fr om...qualified...people... :weird:

Your bugbear is that I agree with them, not your silly conspirators!

How dumb does one have to be to attack the messenger..? :doh:

[The Reibz]

How the fuck does a thread about Anzac Day end up about 9/11? To much disrespect to our fallen soldiers in this thread too.
Admin please lock

[Katman]

You are so thick you even think the links I post are mine! They...are...not...my...opinions...they...are...fr om...qualified...people... :weird:

Your bugbear is that I agree with them, not your silly conspirators!

How dumb does one have to be to attack the messenger..? :doh:

Right back at ya Ed.

[mashman]

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/000898103/lesbians_xlarge.jpeg

[Drew]

Yeah, I'm sure burning plastic produces a lot of smoke but does it produce a lot of heat?Loads and loads.


Here you go Drew.

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

I'd hazard a guess that every 'expert' on that video is far more qualified to give an opinion than our Ed is.OK, it takes a month to prepare a demolition like that. According to one of your "experts". Ya don't think that maybe someone working in that building leading up to the day would notice the people placing explosives? Ya know, the hundreds of bombs that it takes to do it.

I could almost believe it, if the building was completely empty for a refurbishment. But it wasn't was it?

[Edbear]

How the fuck does a thread about Anzac Day end up about 9/11? To much disrespect to our fallen soldiers in this thread too.
Admin please lock

You are right. :yes:

[Drew]

How the fuck does a thread about Anzac Day end up about 9/11? To much disrespect to our fallen soldiers in this thread too.
Admin please lock


You are right. :yes:

Fuckin bulshit.

This is no more disrespectful, than letting the thread go quietly into oblivion as it would have.

[Kickaha]

i question also how "terrorists" without CPL and who admittedly struggled to land a light aircraft, could pilot them so effectively to hit centremass of a fucking building many thousand feet below he flight path.
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Flight_School_Dropouts

and the debunking has been debunked.
Probably been debunked again by now, there seems to be a lot of debunking going on

or why the jews didn't turn up for work that day.
Really? how did the 400 odd die then?
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/israel.asp
http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/pages/israel/were-4000-jews-told-to-stay-home-on-911.htm

[Katman]

OK, it takes a month to prepare a demolition like that. According to one of your "experts". Ya don't think that maybe someone working in that building leading up to the day would notice the people placing explosives? Ya know, the hundreds of bombs that it takes to do it.

I could almost believe it, if the building was completely empty for a refurbishment. But it wasn't was it?

There were certainly large areas in the twin towers that were untenanted.

The towers also underwent an elevator upgrade in the months before 911. There are reports of security guards cordoning off areas during this upgrade.

I doubt very many of the office workers at all would have known what was going up and down in the service elevators of those buildings.

[jonbuoy]

I´m sure they did cordon off areas- health and safety etc.... It seems a very elaborate way to destroy a building - explosives AND aircraft. The planners of the attack my never have thought the building would collapse. Hijacking US airliners and using them as Kamikaze bombers would be enough to make a point and enough reason for the US to go to war. Its an interesting point the damage the Kamikaze bombers managed to do to US Aircraft carriers in WW2 - albiet carrying a lot less fuel/momentum and a relatively small payload high explosives

[Drew]

There were certainly large areas in the twin towers that were untenanted.

The towers also underwent an elevator upgrade in the months before 911. There are reports of security guards cordoning off areas during this upgrade.

I doubt very many of the office workers at all would have known what was going up and down in the service elevators of those buildings.I've worked in our reserve bank here in Wellington, also the trading floor in what was the BNZ building which is now the state insurance tower. All contractors are kept to their areas of work, by security posted on any pathway to the people who normally work there.

It's not to keep the nosy office staff out.

I tire of this already.

[Katman]

It's not to keep the nosy office staff out.


But it would certainly work that way if that's what was required.

[Katman]

It seems a very elaborate way to destroy a building - explosives AND aircraft. The planners of the attack my never have thought the building would collapse. Hijacking US airliners and using them as Kamikaze bombers would be enough to make a point and enough reason for the US to go to war.

See post #348.

[Drew]

But it would certainly work that way if that's what was required.So, (even though I was addressing your concerns regarding building 7 originally), it's your belief that workers were rigging the lift shafts with explosives months before the big day. And to set them off, they felt a plane would make a good detonator?

That was sarcastic of me. Not going to change it, just wanted you to know that I knew.

It's hard to swallow that three buildings collapsed in a manner consistent with demolition methods, but the fact is. The twin towers started to collapse from the exact floor above where the plane hit. We are pretty positive planes did hit them. Ya know, a million eye witnesses to the second crash and all. And there's no way that many explosives could have been put in building seven, without someone noticing. Lots of people would have noticed.

[Laava]

So, (even though I was addressing your concerns regarding building 7 originally), it's your belief that workers were rigging the lift shafts with explosives months before the big day. And to set them off, they felt a plane would make a good detonator?

That was sarcastic of me. Not going to change it, just wanted you to know that I knew.

It's hard to swallow that three buildings collapsed in a manner consistent with demolition methods, but the fact is. The twin towers started to collapse from the exact floor above where the plane hit. We are pretty positive planes did hit them. Ya know, a million eye witnesses to the second crash and all. And there's no way that many explosives could have been put in building seven, without someone noticing. Lots of people would have noticed.

Pfft! That's just conjecture!

[Katman]

So, (even though I was addressing your concerns regarding building 7 originally), it's your belief that workers were rigging the lift shafts with explosives months before the big day. And to set them off, they felt a plane would make a good detonator?


Here's an idea......

Larry Silverstein had a problem and said to someone in the US government "hey, I'll do you a deal".

That person in the US government then found some Muslims and asked "who wants an opportunity for Martyrdom?"

[Katman]

It's hard to swallow that three buildings collapsed in a manner consistent with demolition methods, but the fact is.

Lots and lots of people find it hard to swallow Drew.

[Drew]

Here's an idea......

Larry Silverstein had a problem and said to someone in the US government "hey, I'll do you a deal".

That person in the US government then found some Muslims and asked "how about an opportunity for Martyrdom".

Did you mention a Jewish chap for Akzel's sake?

That is an idea. If you can give me some indication that you have personal knowledge of those events, I will take your word for it.

[Katman]

That is an idea. If you can give me some indication that you have personal knowledge of those events, I will take your word for it.

It's all about keeping an open mind Drew.

[Drew]

Lots and lots of people find it hard to swallow Drew.I would much rather live in a world, where the general populace will believe a series of very fuckin freaky but possible events, over a government killing thousands of it's own citizens on it's own soil. In order to start a war, where thousands more citizens get killed!


Lots of people find it hard to swallow, no doubt. More people don't. You can cry apathy from the masses if you like, but I bet as many or more of those not supporting the conspiracy theory, have given it thought and come to the same conclusion I have.

[Katman]

I would much rather live in a world, where the general populace will believe a series of very fuckin freaky but possible events, over a government killing thousands of it's own citizens on it's own soil. In order to start a war, where thousands more citizens get killed!


That's the attitude that many governments rely on.

[Drew]

It's all about keeping an open mind Drew.I have. I read a lot about this a while ago. When someone posted up a video of what they said was a rocket being fired from the passenger aircraft, moments before impact on the tower.

Realistically, it's easier to argue as you choose. There is more material supporting what you say. The rest of us simply ignore it all these days, and write the people bringing all this 'evidence' to light, as nut jobs.

[Katman]

Lots of people find it hard to swallow, no doubt. More people don't. You can cry apathy from the masses if you like, but I bet as many or more of those not supporting the conspiracy theory, have given it thought and come to the same conclusion I have.

Actually Drew, I don't call it apathy. My theory is that, deep down, it's fear.

The idea that any government could commit something of this enormity upon their own people is a scary thought.

The full ramifications of that idea/thought are actually terrifying.

[Drew]

That's the attitude that many governments rely on.

I am happy to take your word as I have said, if you say you have personal knowledge or experience, with an murderous American government.

Otherwise, my way of thinking is the only option. In the pursuit of keeping whatever sanity I might still have like.

[Drew]

Actually Drew, I don't call it apathy. My theory is that, deep down, it's fear.

The idea that any government could commit something of this enormity upon their own people is a scary thought.

The full ramifications of that idea/thought are actually terrifying.

Totally. Take that to it's logical conclusion.

How many people in the whitehouse would have to be in on it? Heaps! That administration is no more, of all those people who were in on it, some would have by now broken down at the thought of what they had done. Nothing has gone public though.

There are hundreds of thousands of wanna be journalists running around trying to break a big story. Most with the best intentions and motives. It's too big to stay under wraps.

[Katman]

It's too big to stay under wraps.

Like I said Drew, I'm keeping an open mind.

[jonbuoy]

Nope - not enough in that post to explain why the buildings needed to actually fall down. The conspiracy theorists always seem to surmise that 911 was engineered to enable the US to invade Iraq for oil or to boost the profits of the defence industry. The building didn´t need to fall down for that. If there were explosives in the building would they not have been better put to use in co-ordinating bomb attacks on other heavily populated targets?

I don´t argue that 911 could have been planned by someone other than Osama - or that someone was pulling Osamas strings and we don´t know who that was - but I don´t buy the whole "planes were faked" "explosives in the buildings" theory.

Too many people needed to be involved for it all to be faked. Victims, eye witnesses can´t be faked - not in those quantities.

[Drew]

Like I said Drew, I'm keeping an open mind.

Not sure if you are implying that I am not.

I have questioned several things about this, but can't find anything solid enough, to start pointing fingers or suggest it was not as reported.

[Katman]

Nope - not enough in that post to explain why the buildings needed to actually fall down. The conspiracy theorists always seem to surmise that 911 was engineered to enable the US to invade Iraq for oil or to boost the profits of the defence industry. The building didn´t need to fall down for that. If there were explosives in the building would they not have been better put to use in co-ordinating bomb attacks on other heavily populated targets?

I don´t argue that 911 could have been planned by someone other than Osama - or that someone was pulling Osamas strings and we don´t know who that was - but I don´t buy the whole "planes were faked" "explosives in the buildings" theory.

Too many people needed to be involved for it all to be faked. Victims, eye witnesses can´t be faked - not in those quantities.

I certainly haven't put forward any 'faked' argument.

Think about it though, if Larry Silverstein offered up his white elephants as sacrificial lambs, I bet he'd be pissed if they stayed standing and ended up having to be repaired.

[Drew]

I certainly haven't put forward any 'faked' argument.

Think about it though, if Larry Silverstein offered up his white elephants as sacrificial lambs, I bet he'd be pissed if they stayed standing and ended up having to be repaired.

The damage of those impacts, two thirds of the way up the tower, would have all but wrecked the structure.

I would have been more cost effective to demolish them and rebuild.

[Katman]

The damage of those impacts, two thirds of the way up the tower, would have all but wrecked the structure.

I would have been more cost effective to demolish them and rebuild.

Maybe he didn't know how 'successful' the operation might be.

[Drew]

Maybe he didn't know how 'successful' the operation might be.Lotsa 'maybes' bro.

[Katman]

Lotsa 'maybes' bro.

<img src="http://img.sparknotes.com/content/sparklife/sparktalk/scrabble_Large.jpg"/>

[jonbuoy]

I certainly haven't put forward any 'faked' argument.

Think about it though, if Larry Silverstein offered up his white elephants as sacrificial lambs, I bet he'd be pissed if they stayed standing and ended up having to be repaired.

Do you think the US government would ask for his OK before using the buildings in the attack or you think he came to them with that idea? How would you start that conversation to your CIA/Government buddy - can you imagine the repercussions of planning an attack on your own country? You better make sure the other guy shares your extremist views.

[Katman]

Do you think the US government would ask for his OK before using the buildings in the attack or you think he came to them with that idea? How would you start that conversation to your CIA/Government buddy - can you imagine the repercussions of planning an attack on your own country? You better make sure the other guy shares your extremist views.

Heard of Operation Northwoods?

[oldrider]

Do you think the US government would ask for his OK before using the buildings in the attack or you think he came to them with that idea? How would you start that conversation to your CIA/Government buddy - can you imagine the repercussions of planning an attack on your own country? You better make sure the other guy shares your extremist views.

I find this (and others like it) and history kind of lining up in rather more than a frightening way but as usual one must judge for ones self! :confused:

http://michaeljournal.org/pearl.htm Who benefits I always ask myself, sometimes I don't like the seemingly obvious answers! :no:

[Virago]

I was looking at the Oklahoma tornado footage earlier. There's something really dodgy about the way some of those buildings have been demolished.

[mashman]

I was looking at the Oklahoma tornado footage earlier. There's something really dodgy about the way some of those buildings have been demolished.

I bet you can't tell fake tits from real ones.

[Katman]

I was looking at the Oklahoma tornado footage earlier. There's something really dodgy about the way some of those buildings have been demolished.

The reported deaths of at least 100 people, which has been scaled back to about 25, might give an indication of the value of mainstream journalism though.

[Virago]

I bet you can't tell fake tits from real ones.

Fuck off. I'm an expert.

In fact I've been growing my own for many years.

[mashman]

Fuck off. I'm an expert.

In fact I've been growing my own for many years.

:killingme... do you shave or pluck?

[jonbuoy]

Heard of Operation Northwoods?

So you think it was a government plan- would the government involve a civilian or ask permission to use his building? Adding another possible weak link in the chain of people.

[puddytat]

Some ones been fiddlimg on the H.A.A.R.P in Oklahoma maybe? http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/pandora/haarp.html

[Akzle]

Some ones been fiddlimg on the H.A.A.R.P in Oklahoma maybe? http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/pandora/haarp.html

you beat me to it!

[Banditbandit]

Actually Drew, I don't call it apathy. My theory is that, deep down, it's fear.

The idea that any government could commit something of this enormity upon their own people is a scary thought.

The full ramifications of that idea/thought are actually terrifying.

That's crap ... Governmments have made decisions to kill millions of people ... and they still make those decisions ... and people are well aware of it ... or maybe they just don't join the dots.

I do worry about our Government and it's actions ... but I'm with Drew ...


I would much rather live in a world, where the general populace will believe a series of very fuckin freaky but possible events, over a government killing thousands of it's own citizens on it's own soil. In order to start a war, where thousands more citizens get killed!

and I refuse to live in a state of paranoia ... it's not necessary ... and it wears on the nerves ..

[Katman]

and I refuse to live in a state of paranoia ... it's not necessary ... and it wears on the nerves ..

However much you might not like the idea it's a fact that many governments find fear to be a useful tool in controlling the masses.

[scumdog]

However much you might not like the idea it's a fact that many governments find fear to be a useful tool in controlling the masses.

Hmmm..well they failed here.

[SPman]

Hmmm..well they failed here.

Yep - they prefer relying on the total ignorance of most of the population, backed up by a msm the now delivers total misinformation, when it bothers to report on anything important at all.......

[Edbear]

Yep - they prefer relying on the total ignorance of most of the population, backed up by a msm the now delivers total misinformation, when it bothers to report on anything important at all.......

Funny how nobody on KB belongs to these cowed, fearful, ignorant masses that are mind controlled by this shadowy group manipulating the politicians... It's only the conspiracy theorists who are wide awake taking note and endeavouring to keep us safe from these powerful behind the scenes manipulators. Everyone else is a blind, malleable and easily lead supporter of their respective governments.

:shifty:

[Katman]

It's only the conspiracy theorists who are wide awake taking note and endeavouring to keep us safe from these powerful behind the scenes manipulators. Everyone else is a blind, malleable and easily lead supporter of their respective governments.


If you say so Ed.

[Paul in NZ]

What blows me into the weeds is the suspicion of all elected governments everywhere despite evidence and most silly ideas eventually get exposed no matter what YET the conspiracy theorists ignore the corporations that literally kill millions pushing their shit down peoples thoats.

Tobacco, big oil, food companies, alcohol - you name it these guys have hoodwinked billions with their claims over the decades. Deaths at 911 was a drop in the bucket compared to any one of those examples and it was mostly done in full view and for money alone....

Government? Nah - those guys are safe as houses compared to the big corporations

[Edbear]

What blows me into the weeds is the suspicion of all elected governments everywhere despite evidence and most silly ideas eventually get exposed no matter what YET the conspiracy theorists ignore the corporations that literally kill millions pushing their shit down peoples thoats.

Tobacco, big oil, food companies, alcohol - you name it these guys have hoodwinked billions with their claims over the decades. Deaths at 911 was a drop in the bucket compared to any one of those examples and it was mostly done in full view and for money alone....

Government? Nah - those guys are safe as houses compared to the big corporations

Yeah, funny that... They keep bleating on about the manipulators behind the scenes and that the majority of the populace is brainwashed or duped, or ignorant. Can't point to any credible evidence let alone any particular person(s) though, never have and never will. They never accept any proof contrary either, no matter how well established it is.

Witness them in this thread completely and consistently overlooking, dismissing and ignoring any such evidence.

That's why I have given up, those with a brain cell or two understand clearly and have shown so, the idiots never will.

[Katman]

.....the suspicion of all elected governments everywhere.....

Come on Paul, I thought your reading skills would be better than that.

Where has anyone said that "all elected governments everywhere" are shady?

I'm sure there's a great number of honest politicians around the world who would take great offense to that suggestion.

Perhaps you just used those words for some cheap sensationalism.

[Paul in NZ]

Perhaps you just used those words for some cheap sensationalism.

Cheap sensationalisim in THIS thread??? Well I never..... :laugh:

Actually I think 99% of politicians are honest when they start out! My points still valid - governments are usually reasonably straight up - even when they aren't. Corporations on the other hand owe no loyalty to any country.

[Banditbandit]

However much you might not like the idea it's a fact that many governments find fear to be a useful tool in controlling the masses.

Yes - totally agree


Hmmm..well they failed here.

Yes. That's because as a police officer you are one of the tools that the state uses to scare its citizens ...

[Edbear]

While it is no doubt true that some people in authority may be keen to absolve themselves of any failure on their part, the actual, verifiable facts about 9/11 are crystal clear and irrefutable.

9/11

http://www.structuremag.org/Archives/2007-11/SF-WTC7-Gilsanz-Nov07.pdf
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/05/9-11-conspiracy-theories-debunked
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/4220721
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tacYjsS-g6k
http://rense.com/general32/phot.htm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-136382/9-11--Survivors-Twin-Towers.html

Now wait for the idiots to ignore or blithly dismiss the links. We seem to be down to only one pro-conspiracy idiot now anyway.

[Banditbandit]

Funny how nobody on KB belongs to these cowed, fearful, ignorant masses that are mind controlled by this shadowy group manipulating the politicians...

Yeah ??? Just watch the cowed and scared masses' brake lights come on when a white car with blue and yellow stripes comes along ...

[scumdog]

Yes - totally agree



Yes. That's because as a police officer you are one of the tools that the state uses to scare its citizens ...

Well they failed here - the whole of my life.

And I wasn't 'a tool of the state' for my whole life...unless a baby/schoolboy/freezing worker also constitute one<_<

[mashman]

Government? Nah - those guys are safe as houses compared to the big corporations

Despite the fact that they're supposed to be the first line of defense against the corporations, it makes them as safe as a non mortared brick house sitting in a subduction zone.

[Edbear]

Yes - totally agree



Yes. That's because as a police officer you are one of the tools that the state uses to scare its citizens ...

I have met Scummy, the citizens should be scared... :shifty:

[Oscar]

While it is no doubt true that some people in authority may be keen to absolve themselves of any failure on their part, the actual, verifiable facts about 9/11 are crystal clear and irrefutable.

9/11

http://www.structuremag.org/Archives/2007-11/SF-WTC7-Gilsanz-Nov07.pdf
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/05/9-11-conspiracy-theories-debunked
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/4220721
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tacYjsS-g6k
http://rense.com/general32/phot.htm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-136382/9-11--Survivors-Twin-Towers.html

Now wait for the idiots to ignore or blithly dismiss the links. We seem to be down to only one pro-conspiracy idiot now anyway.

You're almost certainly wasting your time.
These people are trying to say that a Government that couldn't keep a secret about their Prez getting a blow job in the Oval Office are somehow capable of a multi level conspiracy involving multiple branches of Govt and thousands of people...

[Katman]

Now wait for the idiots to ignore or blithly dismiss the links.

Here you go Ed. Plenty more articles for you to read.

http://www.911truth.org/?page=1

(Note at the top that there are 179 pages with 2678 articles. Should keep you going for a while).

[Edbear]

Here you go Ed. Plenty more articles for you to read.

http://www.911truth.org/?page=1

(Note at the top that there are 179 pages with 2678 articles. Should keep you going for a while).

As I was saying... :doh:

[Katman]

As I was saying... :doh:

Are you ignoring or blithly dismissing the link?

[SPman]

Funny how nobody on KB belongs to these cowed, fearful, ignorant masses that are mind controlled by this shadowy group manipulating the politicians... It's only the conspiracy theorists who are wide awake taking note and endeavouring to keep us safe from these powerful behind the scenes manipulators. Everyone else is a blind, malleable and easily lead supporter of their respective governments.

:shifty:I was more referring to the local msm and events in NZ - like the latest GCSB report by Neazor "the law's so opaque it's open to interpretation" - dutifully reported as such by TV etc! The law surrounding the GCSB is most certainly not “opaque”. It's fairly straight forward to anyone with a primary school grasp of the Queen’s English.
The only people who’ve been seriously promoting the meme that the Act is somehow “vague” or “unclear” are the Prime Minister – not exactly noted for being 100% honest with the public – and his appointed minion, GCSB Director, Ian Fletcher.

But - because it's presented as such on TV, radio and the papers, there are large numbers of people who will believe this as gospel truth - "because the TV said so"!

The fact that people are on forums talking about stuff, and that includes KB, is an indication that they at least may be open to alternative views and perspectives - even the died in the wool trolls and those who are of a particular mind set. But such people are a distinct minority.
The majority who have only the msm as their news source and are content with that are more easily manipulated - and cowed and fearful! Diets of terror attacks/crime/home invasion headlines actually do have that effect on a lot of people - particularly useful if you consider the fact that 2/3rd's of people will believe, or at least obey, a person or organisation they consider to be in authority over them. The Milgram experiments, (http://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html), and many since have shown that most people are programmed to obey authority, even against their own consciences. Very simple - dehumanise, minimise, denigrate the opposition - convince the majority that what they are saying/believe/are doing, is somehow contrary to their own interests (even if they aren't), convince the population that they are others, not really part of "their" society - reduce them to non beings. That makes it far easier to then turn "others" into criminals, deluded crackpots, conspiracy theorists, ...enemies! Then, if "authority" gives the order, the bulk of main society will quite happily turn against them to the point of extermination, if required, despite what their conscience is telling them!

[Laava]

This thread is like the old"Did we land on the moon" thread. There is no way that anyone can prove anything. The US govt doesn't have to and the conspiracy theorists can't. Exactly the same as NASA can't prove, and don't attempt to, that they walked on the moon.
overdue for PD I reckon.

[Katman]

overdue for PD I reckon.

What a typical response from those who can't handle open discussion.

Are you sure you and Ed aren't related?

[scumdog]

What a typical response from those who can't handle open discussion.



Of course 'open discussion' interpretation is open to discussion...eh...:shifty:

[Edbear]

Are you ignoring or blithly dismissing the link?

As I said several times, I have seen virtually every video and interview including that one and it is crap. But as I also said, you keep on proving me right about you every day...

The links I posted are verifiable and irrefutable, but of course you have to have at least one brain cell to see that.

[Edbear]

This thread is like the old"Did we land on the moon" thread. There is no way that anyone can prove anything. The US govt doesn't have to and the conspiracy theorists can't. Exactly the same as NASA can't prove, and don't attempt to, that they walked on the moon.
overdue for PD I reckon.

The links I posted above are proof.

The conspiracy theorists are full of crap and are very obviously wrong. Maybe the thread does now belong in PD, but that is up to KB management to decide if it has become pointless or not.

[Katman]

The links I posted are verifiable and irrefutable, but of course you have to have at least one brain cell to see that.

Really Ed?

The only link you posted that made any effort to verify the validity of it was the first one written by Ramon Gilsanz.

Did you notice that Ramon Gilsanz worked closely with FEMA and NIST (two government agencies) following 9/11?

Not exactly what I'd call an impartial opinion.

[Drew]

I'm sure there's a great number of honest politicians around the world who would take great offense to that suggestion.






Actually I think 99% of politicians are honest when they start out! My points still valid - governments are usually reasonably straight up - even when they aren't. Corporations on the other hand owe no loyalty to any country.


I'd say more than 99% start out with nothing but the purest of motives. It isn't an environment that allows those people to get to the top without giving in to other things though, in my opinion. So when they get to the top, they literally don't remember the principles they stood for to get started. But they still believe in what they're doing.

Corporate world? People go down that road in the pursuit of serving themselves. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, until they start misleading people to that end.


Anything he's said in this thread

You are letting whatever problems you have with Katman, cloud everything you say. Trying to debate emotionally is like masturbating with a cheese greater man, slightly amusing, but mostly painful!

[Oscar]

This thread is like the old"Did we land on the moon" thread. There is no way that anyone can prove anything. The US govt doesn't have to and the conspiracy theorists can't. Exactly the same as NASA can't prove, and don't attempt to, that they walked on the moon.
overdue for PD I reckon.

You can prove that they went to the moon.
The last mission left a lazer reflector behind.
If you know where it is, you can bounce a lazer off it.

[Edbear]

I was more referring to the local msm and events in NZ - like the latest GCSB report by Neazor "[I]the law's so opaque it's open to ...big snip... Then, if "authority" gives the order, the bulk of main society will quite happily turn against them to the point of extermination, if required, despite what their conscience is telling them!

Unfortunately you are right about the media and its influence. Too many are willing to believe that if it's on TV it must be true. Even many KB'rs fall into this trap with knee-jerk reactions that fall over once the full story comes out.


I'd say more than 99% start out with nothing but the purest of motives. It isn't an environment that allows those people to get to the top without giving in to other things though, in my opinion. So when they get to the top, they literally don't remember the principles they stood for to get started. But they still believe in what they're doing.

Corporate world? People go down that road in the pursuit of serving themselves. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, until they start misleading people to that end.

You are letting whatever problems you have with Katman, cloud everything you say. Trying to debate emotionally is like masturbating with a cheese greater man, slightly amusing, but mostly painful!

Yeah, pretty much right too, IMHO.

Re: Katman, I guess I should go back to ingoring him, he's proved me right so many times it can now be a given.

[Edbear]

You can prove that they went to the moon.
The last mission left a lazer reflector behind.
If you know where it is, you can bounce a lazer off it.

The conspiracy theorists would just say it's a natural rock formation or something. :rolleyes:

There is enough evidence by now that as with 9/11 it can't be argued with except by the totally moronic.

[Katman]

Unfortunately you are right about the media and its influence. Too many are willing to believe that if it's on TV it must be true. Even many KB'rs fall into this trap with knee-jerk reactions that fall over once the full story comes out.


Those words might just come back to haunt you one day Ed.

[Akzle]

Really? how did the 400 odd die then?
400... out of 4000? those are fucking betting odds my man, whereas 3999 out of 4000 non-jews died, innit?

Hmmm..well they failed here.
yes, because NZ society is apathetic and sometimes, frankly stupid. *tsunami warning*...: "lets go down to the beach to watch" :facepalm:

Funny how nobody on KB belongs to these cowed, fearful, ignorant masses that are mind controlled by this shadowy group manipulating the politicians... It's only the conspiracy theorists who are wide awake taking note and endeavouring to keep us safe from these powerful behind the scenes manipulators. Everyone else is a blind, malleable and easily lead supporter of their respective governments.

:shifty:
you cerainly know yourself, ed. that's a lot of adjectives.

l - you name it these guys have hoodwinked billions with their claims over the decades. Deaths at 911 was a drop in the bucket compared to any one of those examples and it was mostly done in full view and for money alone....

Government? Nah - those guys are safe as houses compared to the big corporations
i'm not trying to save any nigger from anything. afaiac you probably deserve what you get.


You can prove that they went to the moon.
The last mission left a lazer reflector behind.
If you know where it is, you can bounce a lazer off it.
nononno.. new legislation - you're not allowed a laser without lawful and sufficient reason. or scum puppy will come and fuck your ass.

do what you're told, plebian.

[Katman]

Re: Katman, I guess I should go back to ingoring him,

Fuck Ed, I don't know what ingoring is but it sounds scary.

[Drew]

nononno.. new legislation - you're not allowed a laser without lawful and sufficient reason. or scum puppy will come and fuck your ass.

Wait, that's all it takes to get a date with Scummy?

Cheeper than dinner and a movie, I'll bare it mind.

[Edbear]

[you cerainly know yourself, ed. that's a lot of adjectives.
.[/COLOR]

Why use one word when several will do the same job..? :rolleyes:


Fuck Ed, I don't know what ingoring is but it sounds scary.

As tempting as it is, I think I'll just put it down to a typo.

[bogan]

You can prove that they went to the moon.
The last mission left a lazer reflector behind.
If you know where it is, you can bounce a lazer off it.

Wasn't that the Decepticons though?


This thread is like the old"Did we land on the moon" thread. There is no way that anyone can prove anything. The US govt doesn't have to and the conspiracy theorists can't. Exactly the same as NASA can't prove, and don't attempt to, that they walked on the moon.
overdue for PD I reckon.

Overdue for PD for the simple reason the 'debate' posts are outweighed by the mindless trading of insults.

[Drew]

Overdue for PD for the simple reason the 'debate' posts are outweighed by the mindless trading of insults.
Aye? I've been good in this thread ya cunt!

Goddamnit, now look what ya made me do!

[Laava]

What a typical response from those who can't handle open discussion.

Are you sure you and Ed aren't related?

Are you sure you and Ed aren't related?

[bogan]

Aye? I've been good in this thread ya cunt!

Goddamnit, now look what ya made me do!

Indeed, and probably to the surprise of everybody too! (cos you're going soft ya cunt) but look at the rest of those neener neener I know you are but what am I bitches...

[Drew]

Indeed, and probably to the surprise of everybody too! (cos you're going soft ya cunt) but look at the rest of those neener neener I know you are but what am I bitches...

I can only hope that when I'm doing my scone, it is as entertaining.

[mashman]

The conspiracy theorists would just say it's a natural rock formation or something. :rolleyes:

Something. They sent it there... however they should have used a rover coz a moving target would be more of a challenge. My laser was using too much juice and it got boring pretty quickly.

[Katman]

http://michaeljournal.org/pearl.htm Who benefits I always ask myself, sometimes I don't like the seemingly obvious answers!

Interesting link.

In September 2000 a report was released by the Bush administration called 'Rebuilding America's Defenses' in which they used the words "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor".

How convenient that they got exactly that a year later.

[Katman]

This is interesting reading.

http://911truthnews.com/the-facts-speak-for-themselves/

[Banditbandit]

This is interesting reading.

http://911truthnews.com/the-facts-speak-for-themselves/

Yeah and ??? .. nothign new in there .. nothing sinister .. nothign to fret about 'cept Geo W was too dumb and freaked out to know hos to rect whe he first heard a plane had hit the WTC .. I'd be worried if another person that dumb got their finger on the nuclear trigger ...

And also that he wanted to out do his father and kill Saddam Hussein .. he needed to prove that he had bigger balls than Daddy .. the attack gave him an excuse - a crappy excuse but still an excuse ..

[Edbear]

Yeah and ??? .. nothign new in there .. nothing sinister .. nothign to fret about 'cept Geo W was too dumb and freaked out to know hos to rect whe he first heard a plane had hit the WTC .. I'd be worried if another person that dumb got their finger on the nuclear trigger ...

And also that he wanted to out do his father and kill Saddam Hussein .. he needed to prove that he had bigger balls than Daddy .. the attack gave him an excuse - a crappy excuse but still an excuse ..

That link is to a typical conspiracy site, you only have to browse around it to see it is full of absolute crap.

George W. made himself a laughing stock so many times in his career, you can envisage Daddy cringing at his son's faux pas'!

[Katman]

That link is to a typical conspiracy site, you only have to browse around it to see it is full of absolute crap.

George W. made himself a laughing stock so many times in his career, you can envisage Daddy cringing at his son's faux pas'!

Ed, the whole conspiracy idea wouldn't still be going strong (and getting stronger) 12 years after the event if it was all crap.

The reality is that you have chosen to believe the official story and have closed your mind off to any other possibilities - while I prefer to keep a totally open mind.

[Edbear]

Ed, the whole conspiracy idea wouldn't still be going strong (and getting stronger) 12 years after the event if it was all crap.

The reality is that you have chosen to believe the official story and have closed your mind off to any other possibilities - while I prefer to keep a totally open mind.

There are enough gullible idiots like you around that it will never die, and as for getting stronger, you do have eveidence for that?

Of course you have read all the links, watched all the videos I posted above and recognise that they prove beyond any question the theories are crap?

Just three examples... That a missile hit the Pentagon, not a plane? That explosives could not have been used in any of the buildings? That it was military jets that hit the towers?

Of course you have, you just can't bring yourself to admit it. Your co-conspirators have all left the thread and gone very quiet, I wonder why?

[Madness]

I wonder why?

They have better things to do, like filing tax returns or counting jellybeans? Anyhoo, I thought you were going to resume ignoring Katman? Just can't help yourself, eh Ed?

[bogan]

There are enough gullible idiots like you around that it will never die

Are we talking about religion or consiracy theorys now?

I find it so hard to sift through the insults and keep up, maybe that is why everyone else has gone quiet...

[Katman]

Overdue for PD for the simple reason the 'debate' posts are outweighed by the mindless trading of insults.

I wouldn't quite call it trading insults.


'Sokay, you've already provided ample evidence of your lack of intellect and comprehension.


You are rather slow aren't you? Don't you read much?


But of course if you are serious, you will be far too stupid to read or comprehend anything.


For the mentally challenged among us here, of course I did.


The few moronic conspiracy theorists who continue to spout absolute crap on here are beyond reason and no facts that contradict their pet theories will ever be considered.


You idiots are beyond help.


Logic and facts are wasted on these idiots, but you can try if you like.


You dumbo's will not even read and critique the links as they are in contrast to your precious theories.


I gave you proven facts that anyone who cares, can verify, but as you always do, you simply pass over them and ignore them and continue in your dogged prejudice and keep asking the same dumb questions.


How dumb does one have to be to attack the messenger..?


That's why I have given up, those with a brain cell or two understand clearly and have shown so, the idiots never will.


Now wait for the idiots to ignore or blithly dismiss the links. We seem to be down to only one pro-conspiracy idiot now anyway.


The links I posted are verifiable and irrefutable, but of course you have to have at least one brain cell to see that.


The conspiracy theorists are full of crap and are very obviously wrong.


There is enough evidence by now that as with 9/11 it can't be argued with except by the totally moronic.


There are enough gullible idiots like you around that it will never die, and as for getting stronger, you do have eveidence for that?

[bogan]

I wouldn't quite call it trading insults.

Hey I just said trading, I didn't say anything about an equal exchange rate :bleh:

[scumdog]

I wouldn't quite call it trading insults.

You waste your time worse than I do!

[Katman]

You waste your time worse than I do!

I'm allowed to though - I work for myself.

[Edbear]

They have better things to do, like filing tax returns or counting jellybeans? Anyhoo, I thought you were going to resume ignoring Katman? Just can't help yourself, eh Ed?

Sigh... I am the eternal optimist and he does post so that others may benefit from a response...


I wouldn't quite call it trading insults.

So stop proving to be such. Man up, address the links, acknowledge the facts and stop lamely trying to slight me personally as though that somehow strokes your ego or makes the facts a fallacy.

Not really rocket science is it..? :yes:

[Katman]

Man up, address the links....


I've addressed the links Ed and provided a few of my own.

[bogan]

You waste your time worse than I do!

:shit: And this coming from a government employee too :crazy:

[scumdog]

:shit: And this coming from a government employee too :crazy:

Worse - he's not even at work...:shutup:

[Katman]

....and stop lamely trying to slight me personally.....

Oh, how I lolled.

[Drew]

Are we talking about religion or consiracy theorys now?

I find it so hard to sift through the insults and keep up, maybe that is why everyone else has gone quiet...No no, I'm gonna start making a case for the conspiracy soon. I just wanted a couple pages buffer between my conflicting opinions.


I wouldn't quite call it trading insults.Don't you have customers bikes to test ride? There's a track not far from you ya know?


You waste your time worse than I do!Woah woah woah. Let's not say anything we can't take back now!

[Katman]

....acknowledge the facts......

How much do you understand about freefall Ed?

Watch these videos and when you've done so I've got some questions for you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDvNS9iMjzA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXTlaqXsm4k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3mudruFzNw

[mashman]

They fought so that Lockwood Smith could live in a $7,500 (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/newshome/17308484/goff-questions-sky-high-rent/) pad in the service of his country. Is he paying for it himself? fucker should be sent to live in Brixton.

[scumdog]

They fought so that Lockwood Smith could live in a $7,500 (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/newshome/17308484/goff-questions-sky-high-rent/) pad in the service of his country. Is he paying for it himself? fucker should be sent to live in Brixton.

A tad light skinned for there ain't he???

[Oscar]

They fought so that Lockwood Smith could live in a $7,500 (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/newshome/17308484/goff-questions-sky-high-rent/) pad in the service of his country. Is he paying for it himself? fucker should be sent to live in Brixton.

I tell you what I am sure about.
I'm sure they didn't give up their youth and/or their lives so that wankers like you could use that sacrifice to make cheap political points.
Have some respect.

[mashman]

I tell you what I am sure about.
I'm sure they didn't give up their youth and/or their lives so that wankers like you could use that sacrifice to make cheap political points.
Have some respect.

I've got a nice bucket of sand with your name on it.

[mashman]

A tad light skinned for there ain't he???

I know right. No white people live in Brixton.

[Oscar]

I've got a nice bucket of sand with your name on it.

If you pour the sand out and look into the bucket, you will see there your contribution to mankind.

[mashman]

If you pour the sand out and look into the bucket, you will see there your contribution to mankind.

You're right, I've done nothing for anyone. But I did hear a baaaaa, baaaaaa, coming from the bottom of the bucket and it sure as hell wasn't me. Anyway, haven't you got a past to live in.

[bogan]

You're right, I've done nothing for anyone.

And here I thought he meant you were in the business of bucket manufacturing or sand relocation, which in all honesty are related industries anyway.

[Katman]

I just wanted a couple pages buffer between my conflicting opinions.


Hey, if it's good enough for Ed.....


Very close and it is what the world powers are working towards right now. They want a One World Government under the auspices of the UN. They recognise the fact that religion is the most divisive force on Earth and will eliminate organised religion, replacing it with adherence to the UN. They will no doubt plunder the resources of the major churches, too.


Funny how nobody on KB belongs to these cowed, fearful, ignorant masses that are mind controlled by this shadowy group manipulating the politicians... It's only the conspiracy theorists who are wide awake taking note and endeavouring to keep us safe from these powerful behind the scenes manipulators. Everyone else is a blind, malleable and easily lead supporter of their respective governments.

:shifty: