i am new to the 911 conspiracies, where would I start reading, what thread , I wanna know everything

Ya right the Military never trained for smoke and fire hazards.

I believe htis cause I am Sheeple!!!

Originally posted by infamouskiller
Military never trained for smoke and fire hazards.

Sarcasm aside, not all military MOS's have. But on the bright side, there are literally manuals for every conceavable procedure that can be drilled.
What to do in a fire while in a building, a humvee and a rolled over humvee. Some where there is a manual with instructions, and it exists in the Army. Most branches have these manuals, and often more so than not, they are over expanded series of common sence that is not so common.

This is less directed at you, than it is more so directed at the urge I had to clarify. For what ever reason that urge was summoned.

I am a newer member and have see some serious arguements on here some that really show the users IQ. Insults should never be part of any debate. But I can not for the life of me figure out what trolling is.........

a little stupid feeling but sould somebody elaborate please????

Originally posted by Timmyboi23
I am a newer member and have see some serious arguements on here some that really show the users IQ. Insults should never be part of any debate. But I can not for the life of me figure out what trolling is.........

a little stupid feeling but sould somebody elaborate please????

Trolling is posting comments and/or threads with the express purpose of of angering people and starting trouble. Essentially.

I am no expert, but that just goes to show you that even a novice like me can figure out that buildings don't just "up and fall down". At 5:30pm 9/11/01, building 7 just fell right down in a perfect asymetrical freefall foramtion with the middle top clearly being blown out first and then falling into its own footprint. Then you have Larry Silverstein, the leaseholder, admitting on video to demolishing the building on purpose saying, "..there was such tremendous loss of life, we decided to "pull it", and then we sat back and watched the building come down". That is admission of guilt by even by the most lehman standards.
I watch the television show called "The First 48" all the time and and watch suspects give "admission of guilt" statements, and this one is about as blatant as you can get. I'm sure the prosecution would have no trouble finding expert engineer witnesses to testify to the fact that the term "pulling it, or pull it or to pull" is commonly referred to in the demolition industry as "bringing down a building" Now, as i said before...i'm no expert, but if i were on the jury, i would convict of willful knowledge and conspiracy in about 2 sec's, based on the video and admission staements.

Now let's talk about the twin towers. Those towers were built to withstand multiple impacts from the biggest airliner at the time the towers were built, the Boeing 707, a 4 engine jet airplane. The builder is on video stating that the twoers were built like a screen door with 47 steel columns meshed and summed it up by saying that a plane hitting the towers is equivalent to sticking a pencil through a screen door. The screen door doesn't collapse, it just has a hole in it. Now some say, the jet fuel caused the steel girters to give way thus causing a pancake effect...if that was the case then you would have the floors collapse but the 47 steel middle columns standing, so essentially, the outside of the floors would have collapsed leaving the middle steel columns still standing high. Not-to-mention that experts are on record staing that most of the jet fuel burned up in the impacts explosion, leaving little fires with oxygen deprived smoke billowing outside the buildings, indicating small fires.
The towers fell in just over 6 sec's in freefall speed, turning to dust on the way down and video's show squibs going off several floors below the collapse reached those floors in perfect little circles. Now if the force of the building caused the floors to blow out as asked earlier, then we should see massive floor blowouts, instead we see neat little circular explosions from floors below as the building comes down.
Then we have the thermate. How can you exlain the thermate being there dripping down the side of tower 1 as seen in videos?
Total inside Job.

Now let's talk about the Pentagon. Jamie McIntyre, a CNN white house correspondent, shows up to the Pentagon minutes after the explosion and reports no airplane wreckage. You can google or "youtube" that video btw. Secondly, i work for an airline and work around airplanes all day and know that the enginges on a 757 are made of titanium alloy. Titanium alloy does not eviscerate on impact, so we should have easily seen the engines in the rubble. Secondly, where are the wing indentations on the building where this supposed airplane hit? We saw perfect airplane wing indentations in the twin towers where the planes struck, so where are the wing indentations? Thirdly, there are several hundreds of cameras all over the Pentagon, but none of them captured a gigantic airplane cruising across the lawn slamming into the building? Why not just show us the airplane striking the building and end the whole conspiracy theory? Because they can't.
Go to www.pilotsfor911truth.org and watch the video, "Pandora's Box" and it will explain from pilots how it was impossible for that plane to strike the Pentagon based on the FAA;s own black box recording of that crash. The pilots assert that one word can debunk the wole airplane myth...that word is called, "altimeter". The altimeter was set wrong at the time of the crash, indicating that either novice pilots were flying that commercial airliner and didn't follow checklist procedures, or that airplanes alitemetry systems were dysfuntional meaning that 4 systems would have had to fail at once to make that happen. If commercial pilots coming out of 18,000 ft do not set the landing airports alitmeter correctly, it could throw them vertically off by as much as 500 ft altitude wise meaning that the plane would have either flown over the pentagon, or struck the ground well before the building strike. Watch it for yourself and see the truth.

I apologize. I had a bad night and Im catharsting. Didint mean to vent moronically on the boards. I will calm down

if you guys were to actually close the forum down because of trolls, I would lose all faith in this site, and just strike it from memory.

Troll Reversal

Originally posted by scientist
if you guys were to actually close the forum down because of trolls, I would lose all faith in this site, and just strike it from memory.

The trolls are the ones trying to shut down the forum by disrupting civil discussion.

We're the ones fighting to keep it open.

The good news: trolls don't have a ban button.

Thank you for this. I rarely even look into that Forum due to the ridiculous nature of the arguments. Occasionally I would have liked to post but saw no point considering the tone of the Threads. Once again: Thank You

Maybe you could do something like the chat requirements to enter , ie have a number of posts already submitted elsewhere ( maybe 20- 30 ish) before you could make a post in that section of the forum ?

Bleh.
Poor poor off the wall theorists cry foul when they are called to task for their tactics and demeanor.
Poor poor people so discriminated against for defending off the wall theories, by attacking others when they disagree or ask for TANGABLE PROOF, and by general name calling of the afformentioned individuals by the poor poor poor discriminated group.

I shall now cry a river for you.

Here's a thought though, just because the alot of people don't agree with you don't make them sheep and you right (even a fool can speak wise words at times). Especially when you go as far as some of you have.



[edit on 16-12-2007 by WraothAscendant]

Glad to see the new banner for the 9/11 forum; with certain exceptions/spasms the tougher rules have been very effective in calming the mudslinging, and hopefully from here on in we won't need a pulsating yellow banner to remind everyone of that.

The new banner makes clear reference to the POV of ATS as a conspiracy site, and that debunkers should be mindful of this. Good.

Recently I've noticed a compensating rise in supremely-confident (i.e., obnoxious) and out-of-left-field (OP is discussing whatever, and debunker hustles in to plop down an early post on the level of "OBL did it, for chrissakes! There were no nukes/DEW/holograms/UFOs/Luciferians...!!!") baiting and topic derailment now that good ol' character assassination is off the table. Less obvious, but still very effective. Hope this will be watched accordingly.