Whats your thoughts on 911 as a conspiracy theory

[anonymousyamParticipant 4605]

I do not think it is a outright conspiracy but at the bare minimum Mossad had some knowledge of the attack.

Just an east coast asshole who likes to curse, If you get offended by words like fuck, cunt, shit, piss, bitch or any racial slurs then you just scroll down.

[John Woods 13Participant 2855]

Well, like I said, Meister et.al. together with most of the people OUTSIDE the US, believe it was an inside job.
Myself, Beer and Narwhal, based on our comments, do NOT believe that. I am however skeptical of both the conspiracy theory AND the msm story.
Does that clear things up?

The answer is NO. “I could but I won’t”. Memini murum!

[MeisterParticipant 2093]

PuniShredder wrote:

Dude why the f~~~ are you trying to convince each other of anything? You know what you know or you don’t know what you don’t know. However no one else knows. I studied the subject so extensively for so many thousands of hours over so many f~~~ing years that there’s holes the size of Jupiter and every single purported “fact” that the mainstream has put out. A child could come to the conclusion that this entire f~~~ing story is bulls~~~ if they looked into it for a week. Anyone who’s taking physics in college will come to the conclusion that it’s bulls~~~ because it’s not possible. Every single aspect of this bulls~~~ story is implausible at best. This is obvious to anyone has looked into it. It was obvious to me watching the buildings fall at almost freefall speed and also having worked with plastic explosives in the military.

Go to architects and engineers for 911 truth and start reading if you are a denier. If you don’t want to fine it’s your life MGTOWS!!! Enjoy

The fact that the official story is bulls~~~ has massive, massive implications.

People need to be educated about this.

Monk

[MeisterParticipant 2093]

John Woods 13 wrote:

Well, like I said, Meister et.al. together with most of the people OUTSIDE the US, believe it was an inside job.
Myself, Beer and Narwhal, based on our comments, do NOT believe that. I am however skeptical of both the conspiracy theory AND the msm story.
Does that clear things up?

What is “the conspiracy theory”?

Monk

[John Woods 13Participant 2855]

Even if the msm told the wrong story, does that prove anything? No. They get stories wrong all the time fallas. What it does is it raises suspicions. And when we suspect something we try to find proof, because without proof all we have are theories, and theories are not facts.
That’s all I’m saying. No need to get all emotional and throw insults left and right like offended little princesses because others dare to disagree with us.

The answer is NO. “I could but I won’t”. Memini murum!

[MeisterParticipant 2093]

John Woods 13 wrote:

Even if the msm told the wrong story, does that prove anything? No. They get stories wrong all the time fallas. What it does is it raises suspicions. And when we suspect something we try to find proof, because without proof all we have are theories, and theories are not facts.

It’s not just the msm.

The explanation the government has given is obvious bulls~~~.
I have no “theory” about this.

All I know is that the government and the msm is lying.
And they have passed laws and started wars based on that lie.
That’s quite a big deal.

John Woods 13 wrote:

No need to get all emotional and throw insults left and right like offended little princesses because others dare to disagree with us.

Monk

[John Woods 13Participant 2855]

The theory is that someone on the inside conspired to bring down the buildings.
When you can show proof that that happend(names, emails, dates, etc) you prove the theory and it becomes fact. Until you can produce such proof it remains a theory. A theory that someone conspired, aka, a Conspiracy Theory.

The answer is NO. “I could but I won’t”. Memini murum!

[Freeman_KParticipant 3524]

I don’t want to speculate on whole 9/11 but i know that it is pretty strange that there isn’t 1 frame of plane that hit Pentagon available after 15 years, you would assume that this is one of the most guarded and videomonitored buildings in the world and this was 2001, not stone age.

The choices we make, not the chances we take, determine our destiny

[Anonymous 5]

The globalists planned that s~~~, for their own selfish agenda. Funny s~~~ though, I heard before 911, you didn’t need an ID to go anywhere, but now, you need it for everything. Now, they have control over the populace. They also wanted to invade the middle east, and created a fake war, that profited both sides. Look at ISIS, the daughter of the CIA. Obama created the illusion, that he was battling ISIS, but instead, he funded them. This world is f~~~ed up! That’s the main reason, I’m not having kids.

[LookAfter#1Participant 352]

Just watching Loose Change 2nd Edition
(Is that the same as part 2?)

Its an interesting documentary, but people are taking it for granted its 100% accurate. Whos to say it’s correct ? For example how do the film makers know what the airspeed and and attitude of the aircraft was? Or who said what when? Or even if their conversations actually happened? What qualifies the narrator to be a subject matter expert on Civil and Building Engineering?

Maybe the authors changed the facts to fit their conspiracy? Handy if you’ve a video to sell.

My first thoughts on 911… If anyones been in the military you’ll know
– They couldn’t organise a p~~~ up in a brewery with a fist full of fivers. We worked off improvisation and a make do attitude.
– The shear number of people involved to get things to happen. Including the ‘backroom’ ops staff, logistics, technicians, armourers and adminers. UAV’s and missiles dont plan, build, store, transport, prepare, refuel, fuze and launch themselves.
– People gossip. You couldn’t keep a conspiracy quiet. There was a joke where I worked that the best person with all the intel was the barber! He cut everyones hair from all departments and would start a conversation with them all, each person would casually slip what was happening while sat in the barbers chair. Nowadays it social media where sensitive material is leaked, even accidentally (status notifications, photos, tags, etc).
– Some eyewitnesses dont know what they saw, or get confused, mistaken, seeking attention, or have a book to sell or simply liars. There is some people out there who are such bulls~~~ting mentally ill fruitcakes you cant take what they say seriously.

To conclude.. Just because someone says something on YouTube, doesn’t mean it’s true.

[SunStormParticipant 1277]

John Woods 13 wrote:

he buildings.
When you can show proof that that happend(names, emails, dates, etc) you prove the theory and it becomes fact. Until you can produce such proof it rem

I’m afraid it’s the contrary.

The burden of proof lies on those that believe a fire pulverised two concrete and steel towers.

Not only that but there is no explanation as to why building 7 came down, except that Larry Silverstein said they decided to ‘pull it’?

Errrrr, you what Larry? You just decided to blow up the building like that? Do all the buildings in your portfolio come ready rigged with explosives then?

There is no evidence for the official story except it is what the media tell you to believe.

So are you a thinker or are you a follower who defers to authority and the voice of your masters?

A man going his own way doesn’t need to be told what to think.

[LookAfter#1Participant 352]

Do all the buildings in your portfolio come ready rigged with explosives then?

Do the conspiracy theorists not think those involved with rigging the buildings with explosives would see that they’ve caused 2996 deaths, have guilt, realise something is not right and say something?
Do you not think the teams involved would be thinking “So why are we doing this again?”

[MeisterParticipant 2093]

LookAfter#1 wrote:

Do all the buildings in your portfolio come ready rigged with explosives then?

Do the conspiracy theorists not think those involved with rigging the buildings with explosives would see that they’ve caused 2996 deaths, have guilt, realise something is not right and say something?
Do you not think the teams involved would be thinking “So why are we doing this again?”

Good question.

You’d have to ask the people who wired up the buildings.

Monk

[LookAfter#1Participant 352]

Good question.

You’d have to ask the people who wired up the buildings.

My point is, if it was a conspiracy to wire up the buildings it would have involved many many people and no American would deliberately do something like this against their own. They would have questioned it at the time or said something after 2996 were killed
… OR ….
Simply, there was no conspiracy.

[BeerParticipant 11832]

SunStorm wrote:

The burden of proof lies on those that believe a fire pulverised two concrete and steel towers.

Because here in America, we are guilty until proven innocent, right?

Besides, it wasn’t just the fire…it was also that hundreds of thousands of pounds of jet flying hundreds of miles an hour that caused structural damage, and the weight of the higher floors pressing down on the damaged area that was also weakened by the following fire…I’m sorry if that is too complex for you to comprehend. If the plane hit the top floor of the building and the building collapsed, I’d be a bit more of a skeptic, but that wasn’t what happened.

There is plenty of scientific fact that proves the planes could have dropped the buildings, and absolutely zero to back up anything you say other than he said she said and shoddy theories that defy physics and material science.

SunStorm wrote:

There is no evidence for the official story except it is what the media tell you to believe.

And what evidence do you have? Some guy on a youtube clip said something so its gospel? Lol.

I mean seriously man…are you denying that the jet hitting the side of the building would have knocked support beams out of place, or that a fire much cooler than the actual melting point of steel significantly weakens it?

LookAfter#1 wrote:

Its an interesting documentary, but people are taking it for granted its 100% accurate. Whos to say it’s correct ?

Nailed it. Its like I mentioned earlier about the early conspiracies claiming the government staged it because there was cell phone recordings from people on the PA flight before it went down and cell phones don’t work at planes. I remember hearing this for months on my college campus…only…cell phones work fine on planes. Michael Moore put it in his documentary though so all the idiot liberals took it as gospel.

LookAfter#1 wrote:

… OR ….
Simply, there was no conspiracy.

Exactly. We have never needed such a grand excuse to go to war in the past. A smaller attack on a military base dragged us into WWII…did we really need something even bigger to drag us into…Afghanistan? We seemed to get involved just fine in Libya and Syria, and pretty much every other country in the region on a more covert basis, without them attacking American soil and killing thousands.

[narwhalParticipant]

SunStorm wrote:

The burden of proof lies on those that believe a fire pulverised two concrete and steel towers.

Bulls~~~. People are always throwing out ‘burden of proof’ to say they have the high ground somehow, when they don’t. The burden of proof isn’t on the positive side, negative side, the side most people believe, or whatever side you’re on. It isn’t on whatever academic logicians say it is. The burden of proof always lies on the person who is trying to change the opinion or understand of a different person. If you don’t give a s~~~ what the other person thinks, then you have no burden to prove a damn thing.

A Christian has no burden to proof God exists if he doesn’t care what the atheist thinks. The atheist doesn’t need to prove God doesn’t exist if he doesn’t care what the Christian thinks. If your buddy says he wants to get married, you DO have a burden to prove marriage is a s~~~ty deal if you care.

No one can define someone else’s burden (of proof or otherwise). You decide what you give a s~~~ about. Do not fall for manipulation like this.

Ok. Then do it.

[MeisterParticipant 2093]

LookAfter#1 wrote:

Good question.

You’d have to ask the people who wired up the buildings.

My point is, if it was a conspiracy to wire up the buildings it would have involved many many people and no American would deliberately do something like this against their own. They would have questioned it at the time or said something after 2996 were killed
… OR ….
Simply, there was no conspiracy.

None of this makes the regime narrative more believable.

Monk

[SunStormParticipant 1277]

Beer wrote:

SunStorm wrote:

There is no evidence for the official story except it is what the media tell you to believe.

And what evidence do you have? Some guy on a youtube clip said something so its gospel? Lol.

I have empirical scientific reality on my side.

It is you who has a case to answer and why you have chosen to follow lies and unreason over reality.

That’s my next question to you.

Why do you believe the ‘official story?’

No more bulls~~~, no need for saracism and invective. Simply tell me why you believe the official story, against all the evidence.

Why do you choose not to think?

[BeerParticipant 11832]

SunStorm wrote:

I have empirical scientific reality on my side.

So are you saying several hundred thousand pounds of jet flying hundreds of miles an hour wouldn’t be enough to knock some steel supports out of position?

Or are you saying that steel support beams in a structure wouldn’t fail under high heat loads unless they completely melted?

SunStorm wrote:

Why do you believe the ‘official story?’

Jeeze I don’t know…why would anyone believe jumbo jets crashing into the side of a sky scraper followed by massive fires could bring it down.

SunStorm wrote:

No more bulls~~~, no need for saracism and invective. Simply tell me why you believe the official story, against all the evidence.

What evidence? I mean seriously…show me some evidence? I’ve seen some pretty complex calculations proving that the steel wouldn’t have melted that completely overlook it didn’t have to melt to fail. I’ve heard a lot of theories based on potential motives for the government to do it…but everything the government does is a conspiracy or has an ulterior motive to someone.

You can’t watch a documentary created by a conspiracy theorist with no actual proof other than interviewing other conspiracy theorists and claim it as proof of something and expect people with a brain to believe you. I can find similar documentaries on Bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster…but guess what, it doesn’t make them real, does it?

SunStorm wrote:

Why do you choose not to think?

Its quite the opposite. I have a background with engineering and material sciences lol. Look at this video…the guy is showing some steel beams from a warehouse fire that bent and failed.

Do you think the steel beams in the WTC that were under a tremendous amount more stress than this much smaller warehouse wouldn’t have done the same thing?

[Anonymous 22]

LookAfter#1 wrote:

My point is, if it was a conspiracy to wire up the buildings it would have involved many many people and no American would deliberately do something like this against their own. They would have questioned it at the time or said something after 2996 were killed
… OR ….
Simply, there was no conspiracy.

You can’t be serious. Every day, many Americans are killed by other Americans.

[Author]

Posts