The end of "911 Conpiracy", and the beginning of "911 Common Knowledge"

reply to post by Skelkie3


Terrorism happened before 911.

The WTC affair is iconic and I have found it interesting that there are such a range of theories over and above the mainstream which range from the ludicrous and on-another-planet to those which give pause for thought.

That said, I do think that the studies on the WTC which I have seen are rationale and provide a reasonably clear and compelling story as what happened to the towers and why. I believe that the assumptions made by the builders that the towers could survive a plane strike were wrong because they obviously did not. Essentially, it is that simple and no amount of selective quotes, amateur YouTube comparisons and conspiracy junkies which suggest a different fate have carried much weight with me so far.

For tasters, see this Edinburgh research paper

The same has happened in a smaller way following the atrocities in London on 7 July where the mainstream explanation (including forensics, CCTV and eye witness) have not stopped some people blaming everyone else apart from a bunch of sick fanatics.

It does not matter to me that there are different theories.

Regards


[edit on 19/7/2009 by paraphi]

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

A white paper released on February 3, 1964 by the firm of Worthington, Skilling, Helle & Jackson contained over 1200 pages of ...

...Analysis indicates that such a collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.

John Skilling, the head structural engineer had this to say:

"[...] A lot of people would be killed, ... The building structure would still be there."

Same source from above.

That 'evidence' pretty thin. So these guys' math didn't work out right. These were projections and models... and they're being used as evidence of a controlled demolition now??

I think one of the biggest dividers in this subject is whether or not the government was involved. I do believe more happened than what the official story says, but whether or not the government was involved is a whole other issue. People, I believe, would be more willing to push for the truth if they didn't feel like they had to be up in their governments face (out of fear). For example, being outraged at an incompetant, insufficient study of the events is plausable, where as getting the country to find out why "they" are trying to control us by bombing our own buildings and killing our own citizens just isn't going to happen. People are always going to be resistant to that. Also, if the people could be mobilized to push for a better investigation to fill in the holes, any involvement of the government COULD be exposed (if it was indeed involved). The fact that people make extreme claims first and ask questions later is just asking for people to call you crazy and write you off, imo.
Great post, op.

Your reasoning is flawed. You have created what is known as a false dichotomy, wherein you limit the possible responses to to an issue to an either/or answer, denying any other possibilities.

You claim that a person either believes the official story, or disbelieves it. Not so. I do neither. I don't have enough credible information to make a rational decision on this issue. That puts me in a third group, those who admit that they don't know. "I don't know" is a perfectly valid response.

Your short anecdote about the boy accused of stealing is flawed. An innocent boy might very well refuse to empty his pockets, on the grounds that since he has done nothing wrong, he should not be subjected to unreasonable search and seizure. We have a Constitutional guarantee against such searches. Asserting this right is not evidence of guilt, but a refusal to participate in what could be a "fishing expedition" or someone trying to deny you the rights you are guaranteed.

The burden of proof is always on the claimant. After 9/11, an investigation was conducted to try to determine who was responsible and how they did it. Answers were provided. To some, these answers were unsatisfactory. Now it is up to those dissatisfied people to show why the answers weren't sufficient, to show that there was some problem with them. Just as the non-believers are unable to provide full answers, neither are the investigators. Even if there is some grand conspiracy, the investigators were almost certainly not a part of it. If there were a conspiracy, these investigators were no doubt fed carefully selected facts that would lead to the desired - mistaken - conclusion.

If the government (or some faction of the government) is completely innocent, it has no way to prove this, any more than you could prove that you had nothing to do with it. Any more than I could prove I was uninvolved. Obviously I wasn't on the planes, but... how could I ever prove that I didn't have a hand in the planning I can't. So the mere fact that the government couldn't prove its innocence, is not evidence of its guilt.

Your comments about the flu are not well-reasoned, either. First of all, the immunity to prosecution applies to the vaccine manufacturers. Without it, they would rightly refuse to make vaccine in the time given to them, because that time doesn't allow for proper testing. The immunity absolves *them* of liability; it does not mean that people who are injured by the vaccine have no recourse. The Federal Government is still liable.

The "public hysteria" of which you speak applies to the hysteria over the vaccination. All medical treatment carries risk. What you need to do is to balance the risk of vaccination against the risk of the disease itself. Vaccination has shown to be far less risky than flu, even during the normal flu season. Around 36,000 people die of flu in the US each year. Some hundreds die as a result of the vaccine.

During the "Swine flu" scare of 1976, some 46 million people took the vaccine. Of that number, some few thousands had adverse reactions, most notably Guillaine-Barre syndrome. This is a serious neurological disease that killed about 300 people. Survivors had serious problems, weakness and paralysis that in some cases did not resolve over time. The vast majority of people *did* recover, however. So even with the unusually high percentage of adverse reactions to the vaccine, the incidence of injury was about 1 in 15,000; the incidence of fatalities was less than 1 in 150,000.

There won't be enough vaccine to go around, according to the manufacturers. Probably health care workers and first responders will receive the vaccine first; possibly other public workers such as teachers and public transportation workers, municipal workers, etc. There will probably not be any sort of mandatory vaccination for the general public.

Your comment about the "astronomical odds" of the attack are unfounded. The targets that were hit are obviously attractive ones. There aren't that many juicy targets where you could kill a whole lot of people and strike a serious blow against the US. The WTC would be high on any list; so would the Pentagon, White House, Golden Gate Bridge, Statue of Liberty, etc. But the WTC would be the #1 juiciest target, since you'd not only kill thousands of people, you'd destroy an icon of America, and severely impact its financial heart.

The odds of hitting the correct wing of the Pentagon were not excessive. They were 1 in 5.

As for the buildings that fell down onto themselves, in their own footprint - it may be true that this has not happened before or since. However, I ask you - how many buildings have been struck by jets fully loaded with fuel? That hasn't happened before or since, either. We really don't know what would happen to such a building. One can guess that it wouldn't collapse in just that way, but we're guessing. We have insufficient data to say how - or even whether - the buildings would collapse.

You claim that it's "obvious" that fire couldn't account for molten metal under WTC, weeks after the attack. It's not at all obvious. For one thing, aluminum melts quite easily, and could easily account for the molten metal. I am told that jet fuel wouldn't be enough to melt steel, but... we are dealing with a situation we've never encountered before. It is not impossible that the fire created its own updraft, allowing enough oxygen to reach the fuel to give it unusual heat.

Conclusion? We don't know enough to form a solid conclusion. Most of the "suspicious" facts are based on assumptions and guesses. Scientists have no data about this type of building hit by a jet. We, the general public, have far less information, and fewer tools with which to analyze the data. In particular, things that look suspicious to us often are simply the way things are done, or how materials react.

This is why I am firmly convinced that some entities within the US power circles planned and executed 9/11 :

Interpretation of Seismic 9/11 charts from LDEO, compared to NIST photo time stamp - Studyof911 Board
www.studyof911.com...

The NIST photo I talk about (Cianca's WTC 7 collapse begin) is surprisingly not altered in the FINAL NIST report on WTC 7.
It's time stamp has not been altered and thus my already proved thesis has been fortified.

Shortly said:
The time stamp of that photo has been used by me to correlate to the seismic evidence posted by an official government paid source, LDEO.
They publicized the 5 detailed seismic graphs of the two plane impacts, the two WTC 1 and 2 collapses and finally the collapse of WTC 7 in the late afternoon.

It is crystal clear from my posted drawings, that there were initiating, huge energy events before any physical evidence was obvious just before all three collapses. Especially in the case of the WTC 7 collapse it indicates an initiating energy burst event, much bigger in total seismic energy exposed on the underlaying bedrock than the following global building collapse did.

This WTC 7 pre-collapse huge energy burst happened about 3 to 6 seconds before we can see ANY building movement at all in ANY video or photo footage of the WTC 7 collapse sequence.

It gives strong corroborating evidence to the circa 4 seconds of free fall now admitted by NIST, that occurred in the beginning of the global WTC 7 building collapse.

This is the main drawing depicting my reasons to mistrust any data from official sources alone:

www.studyof911.com...

You must always combine several of these sources to be able to find the flaws inside them.
NIST gave us the time stamped Cianca photo, LDEO gave us those 5 seismic charts. They are both official US sources.

This is a link to the same drawing in one of my seismic threads:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

and this is a simplified drawing to get the reader's attention :



This is my Seismic 9/11 Evidence folder in My Pictures :
media.abovetopsecret.com...&action=list_photos&album_id=5899

where you can find the same extensive drawing about the WTC 7 seismic evidence here:
files.abovetopsecret.com...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9de0eb1e6e68.jpg[/atsimg]

Do have also a look at the two expanded WTC 1 and 2 collapse seismic diagrams in my picture gallery to visually get used to see the initiating events in both graphs before the onset of the actual global building collapses of WTC 1 and 2, these graphs have been changed back to the original 10 nanometer per second sensitivity, so you can spot those energy bursts before the buildings moved:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2521f6ffe77d.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fcefe2057a1f.jpg[/atsimg]

and this is that now famous Cianca photo of the first visual movement of the WTC 7 building, the start of the dent in the penthouse roof.
Note that embedded time stamp of 5:20:46 p.m. by NIST themselves, 5:21:03 was the time that this Cianca event arrived at the seismic chart needle at the LDEO seismic station, 4 to 6 seconds later than when that same needle recorded those huge energy bursts first :

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/fbbe69122acc.gif[/atsimg]

That huge energy burst in WTC 7 occurred 4 to 6 seconds before any first visible sign of collapse.
Then a period of several seconds of true free fall started in the WTC 7 global collapse sequence.
Which two combined events are clearly indicative of a planned demolition sequence.

Originally posted by dodadoom
reply to post by jfj123

 

Really? Hey, thanks for the reply!
Ya maybe so, its what I gathered. My bad.
Just wondering why its so scary for some to even question authority!

Frankly I think it's our duty to question our authority. As citizens it's our responsibility to make sure our government is doing what we want. In short, we are the watchers who watch the watchers (enemy of the state).

I am glad you feel that way JFJ.

Thanks.

From some of your posts it sounds like you support it.
But your signature tells me otherwise.

I know this might sound a bit confusing but I feel that the government hasn't been completely forthcoming regarding 9/11, but I don't think their involvement was as far reaching as others do.

I realize it is embarassing to admit you/we voted for them.
For that means you/we are responsible also.

Well, I can honestly say I personally didn't vote for the criminals but I do understand why many did.

I am not saying you neccesarily JFJ, I'm saying whomever it applies too.
We all have been taken to the cleaners!

Very true.
Even if we take 9/11 out of the equation entirely, there is a very long list of crimes that people need to be charged for.

I am embarrassed to admit I once had 'some'(carefully crafted)hope for this country.
Wrong again...


[edit on 19-7-2009 by dodadoom]

Don't give up hope. We can make massive changes easily by simply voting for the right person. Ron Paul or Kucinich could have been elected if we all learned more about what they stand for and simply not listen and trust random, soulless news anchors opinions as to who we should vote for.

Of course this is all just my opinion for what it's worth.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by jfj123
SUPPOSEDLY overbuilt. SUPPOSEDLY.

A white paper released on February 3, 1964 by the firm of Worthington, Skilling, Helle & Jackson contained over 1200 pages of preliminary calculations and over 100 detailed drawings. The white paper states:

The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707—DC 8) traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such a collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.

Source

Doesn't matter at all. Notice how you wrote PRELIMINARY calculations? Not even FINAL calculations.
Also just because the paper says this is how a building should react, doesn't mean that is actually how it will react. Ask any builder if the building they built matched the preliminary or even final blue prints and they'll tell you NO.
Now ask a good contractor if he/she has ever seen a building that should have failed inspections and they'll all tell you yes.
Then ask them if those buildings were passed anyway and they will also tell you yes.

This is what I believe the government MAY actually be covering up. The fact that these buildings and many more, were not actually built to design specs.

That's what you believe "may" have been covered up, but you didn't address the other points in my post of a much more massive conspiracy. Care to address those points?

Please refresh my memory and I'll be glad to address your points. Sorry I missed them.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THE OFFICIAL STORY

The gold, the thermite, the media saying, "It was Bin Laden" from the getgo (not, "It is reported that Bin Laden was behind this, but further investigation will determine whether he was or not...").

The fact (covered up, as the structural reports showing the corrosion from aluminum/steel contact was an issue have gone missing according to one I spoke to who tried to find these reports) that the Towers were to be decommissioned by 2007, and cont. demo was out of the question as too dangerous, requiring a very expensive scaffolding be erected to deconstruct them...

Why would anyone sign a 99 year lease on Towers that were to be deconstructed in less than 10...?

Cheney snapping at a guy who asked him if "orders still stood" (to do nothing) after a plane had been tracked coming in for many miles...

The resistance to an initial investigation - why resist if the public wants it, unless there is something to hide?

And the fact that the Pentagon has more cameras set up than any other building in the world. Many would have the event there recorded, and yet we get six frames that show nothing, in essence.

The fact that a 900+ page act - something that would take two years at least to write, debate, rewrite, debate some more, and so on... Was plopped onto Congress's desks in less than 2 months (having been written in secret) with admonishments not to read it but just sign it... The "Patriot" Act was written BEFORE 9/11.

The many cases that just vanished - like Enron - with the collapse of #7 which contained evidence...

And the Problem-Reaction-Solution as the OP points out.

Plus many other things.

[edit on 7/19/2009 by Amaterasu]

I dont believe the official story, but I also dont believe the whole conspiracy theory. Its stupid to blindly follow anything.

Also this is unrelated but I get the impression some of you think there are not terrorists or muslim extremeists, well believe me I'm a marine and been over there and there ARE TERRORISTS and extremists and they HATE US. And the only reason they hate us isnt just because we are in their countries, like some people suggest. Everything westerners do go against all of their tradition and principles, thats why they hate us. Believe me no one I shot was innocent what so ever. These people also killed my sister. So I have NO sympathy for middle eastern people. And dont ask me why I joined the marines if I'm against the war, I joined before 9/11, my sister joined afterwards but she only joined because she thought she was doing right at the time. The whole iraqi civilian casualties thing is propaganda and you guys buy right into it. Fact is these extremists shouldnt hide in civilian areas, no civilian casualties would happen if they didnt. These people are cowards. If you have not been in the middle east YOU HAVE NO IDEA how much these people hate us.

You people sit in your confortable homes and complain all day while soldiers are dieing and none of you seem to care about us. Sickening. Maybe you should be working to bring us home instead of worrying about 911. PLEASE bring us home! A lot of us soldiers dont believe in this war but as marines we have no choice but to fight in it. If we refuse we will be jailed.

BTW I'm totally against this corruptass war nowadays. I am out of Iraq and I will not go back there to fight for these filthy politicians (I was honorably discharged after being shot in the face).

And to you people who think no planes hit the buildings, I have friends in NYC who SAW the planes. My family even knows a women who had a relative ON ONE OF THE PLANES!!!

But yes, I dont really believe the official story. I do think planes did hit though (I know for a fact they did), but I also believe there was some kind of controlled explosion.

Peace and love.



[edit on 19-7-2009 by jeasahtheseer]

Originally posted by paraphi
Dear me. I bet you are a laugh to live with - seeing conspiracies around every corner... The postman's late, which must mean "xyz".

It seems to me that all sorts of "evidence", omission or discounted theory gets blown out of all proportion and escalates into so-called fact in the eyes of people who don’t want to believe the evidence before their eyes – or ANY official story.

Every missing comma in a report is "proof". All actions beforehand are reinterpreted to fit the new story hypothesis. Everyone has been fooled, even though they had eyes in their head. Broadcasters got it all wrong. It was all a plot. There were no terrorists. All those who actually take the mainstream view are gullible or brainwashed. All those who take the "quack" view are correct - they know the truth for they are the self professed “truth movement”. Fantasy movement more like.

The Partnair Flight 394 tragedy back in 1989 was first thought to have been a bomb and this was "confirmed" when traces of military grade explosives were found. A bit of digging found that the seas around Denmark are awash with munitions from two world wars and the actual cause was eventually identified as being something else. No doubt, there are still those who believe that it was a bomb and the official explanation was a cover-up.

Regards

You skeptics can stop already. No one is listening to you while you just turn your head and "see" nothing. Time itself is innundated with conspiracies, Jesus even spoke of them in the Bible. Every conspiracy is nothing more thatn they government or some organization doing things that are not in YOUr best interest and making sure that it IS in THEIR self-service. A conspiracy doesn't always have aliens and ufo's....this is nothing more than a debunking tactic. But read all through history and you will know that there ARE conspiracies around every corner. If you challege me, I can easily conjure up a history list for you. From Pontias Pilate to King Herod to Nero to many great leaders killed by being poisoned by women who were payed to seduce them, to Nixon and "Deepthroat", to the International bankers that started the whole banking phase of conspiracy in 1913. To minimize conspiracy is to minimize life.......because there is not much more left to life than conspiracy these days. The governments are professionals at getting you to GIVE them your cash, stealing the rest and making YOU believe that you asked them to do it. The way I see it. The skeptic doesn't have much of a place left in the face of government audacity latley.

Just WAAAAY too many coincidences on that morning.

It's simply rediculous ,imo, to believe the official "story".

Mountains of circumstantial evidence. I mean really people have been tried in the American judicial system and found guilty, with 90% less evidence than we have against certain high level (well the highest levels) of the U.S. government.

If this case were ever brought to trial, well it's not cause the people that did 9/11 run this country, but IF it ever was, I'm fairly sure the jury wouldn't take but 6 hours to come back with a guilty verdict on all these mass murderers.

I do agree, the people who believe the official "story" are in denial, and ignorance is bliss as they say. They just don't wanna admit to themselves that they live in a country where thier government could do such a hideous thing.

Well wake up sheeple, you do live in a country, where your government will do things like this to further thier goals.For 9/11 The main one being they wanted to get public suppourt for a war. And yea it worked, it worked on me. Hell I wanted to see Iran/Iraq/Afganistan all nuked back to the stone age for months after 9/11.

But after certain facts started comeing out, and more importantly, certain thing NOT comeing out and being keep hidden from the public. I mean it's just too obvious to me at the very least the US gov. Let this happen. That is bad enough, and makes them murderers right there. Whether you wanna take it a step further, which I believe they Made it happen doesn't really matter in a court of law, either way, 9/11 was an inside job, and the US government was at the helm of this false-flag attack, which benefited them in multiple ways.

New laws passed, Patriot Act, public support for the war,profits galore made by many people who would have lost money repairing those buildings, massive amounts of information that neededto be destroyed in WTC7. The list goes on and on.

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999

Umm..yeah.....

I don't get angry or frustrated with "truthers". Its more a feeling of sadness that they truly believe what they post. You might want to do some research on some of the items that King posted. They are not the evidence of a conspiracy. Over active imagination maybe....

You might want to do some research yourself. The only active imaginations I have seen are those who refuse to look at the facts. It takes an active imagination to really believe in the OS that real sciences has already proved impossible.

I do not believe in the OS and I do agree with King’s OP. However, if you feel King is wrong then why don’t you elaborate where he is wrong? If you think that people who don’t believe in the OS have an “Over active imagination” why don’t you demonstrate why it is only the truth movement?


[edit on 19-7-2009 by impressme]

I love it, I love how I can include a short anecdote that highlights human nature and people respond with "AND YOU GOT A LAWSUIT!"

Don't get me wrong, I am not a theif, so if a shop owner were to question me and say 'hey, sorry but I think you may have swiped something' I would be fairly upset. But, after showing my empty pockets I would kindly tell the owner I will never return to his shop and he will never get another dollar of my money.

Some of you would rather quickly jump off topic with lawsuits... give me a break ... please? It never fails to amaze me how people can focus on one fraction of my post, and write multiple responses about that part. Come on people, it was just to show human nature, not a law case.

MORAL OF THE ANECDOTE = THOSE WITH NOTHING TO HIDE ARE EAGER TO PROVE THEIR INNOCENCE, WHILE THOSE WITH SOMETHING TO HIDE DO EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO HIDE THEIR GUILT.

Look at the case of when guys wives go missing or are murdered, the guilty husband acts like a weasel, where as the innocent husband does everything in his power to clear his name asap so the cops can quit wasting their time checking into him.

It's all human nature. And human nature was plain to see on 911. And after pulling off the most horrific attack on American Soil, the perps weaseled for days,months and years after that continuing THEIR reign of terror. That is the only thing I was trying to illustrate. So get off it.

More people that haven't got a clue
Those who want to quickly bring up one inane point and harp on it, while blissfully ignoring every other single point that is made that proves guilt. You shouldn't even bother post in this thread.

Here I am once again REITERATING MY OP, when I say the VARIABLES don't matter! Argue about them somewhere else, cause the results of the solution, the spoon fed "reaction" SHOWS us the problem. Or was it all just a coincidence?

We have people arguing over kerosene melting metal, hey I got an idea... Who the hell cares? WTC 7 Was never HIT WITH A PLANE, sustained only superficial damage, and like the other buildings - experienced uniform structural failure. That does not happen in REALITY. I don't care what your arguement is for 1 and 2, cause theyre totally irrelevant. WTC7 cannot be proven to have happened the way they said, thus, they are lying, why would they lie? Oh perhaps they may be covering for themselves.

Or perhaps, they just want to cover for the evil terrorists who some how planted tons of thermite in those 3 buildings.. Of course, protecting the terrorists makes much more sense.


I was once told, "to find the truth, one must run from the money"..

So when I hear about an absolute world changing event, I don't wanna hear a half baked story that was formulated by a pack of lying criminals who benefited to the tune of billions +, to tell me "the truth".


It truly is time for many people on this forum who are suffering from denial disorder to

GET A GRIP

Originally posted by paraphi

Originally posted by Parallex
Off you toddle back to the NSA.

I am not from the US so “NSA” means National Sleep Association to me.

The problem I have is that when people run out of rational justification for their views they fall back on insult, rudeness and brashness often implying the person who has a contrary view is a lackey to some sinister secret service, has been brainwashed or is somehow intellectually inferior because the whole conspiracy is just sooooo complex. Well, at least I can spell.

There have been many reports on the WTC including several on the actual mechanics of the collapse. I tend to believe these over and above amateurs who see conspiracy around every corner, or people who (rightly) have such a distrust of their government they just don't believe anything they say.

I am persuaded by reading the reports etc., that there has NOT been some conspiracy - variously enacted by aliens, Bush, the NWO, the CIA, the Mafia, MI5/MI6, Iran, Israel, Illuminati-reptiles, Wales, the Chinese, Uncle Tom Cobley and all - take your pick!

The facts are a bunch of psycho terrorists decided to kill as many people as they could and they did it quite dramatically. Terrorists have been doing this kind of thing for years and will doubtless continue.

I am happy to debate the rights and wrongs of your theories including the accepted mainstream, but ask that you keep it civil.

Regards

I don't know what you read and really it is immaterial. There was a lot of un-substantiated publicity put out by Popular Mechanics magazine and NIST. Popular Mechanics never once supported any claim they made. NIST is an embarrassment.
You have not cited the sources you 'claim' explain away the collapse. I can provide you information from one of the designers...

911research.wtc7.net...

READ IT. Don't waste our time because you don't want to spend yours to inform yourself. I can provide you information on any aspect of the bldgs you want if you just ask. I've read and watched a lot on this . I'm not going to insult you by calling you names but I will say you are ill-informed or you have other reasons for being here. If you have legitimate questions then pose them and I and others, I'm sure, will attempt to provide you answers.

[edit on 19-7-2009 by baboo]

It was stated that the buildings needed serious refurbishment, why would someone wish to take them over etc.

To what extent where they in disrepair.? was the outside of the building also requiring work.? had materials dried and cracked with age/weather,would this be a factor in the collapse.?

Originally posted by ironbutterflyrusted
It was stated that the buildings needed serious refurbishment, why would someone wish to take them over etc.

To what extent where they in disrepair.? was the outside of the building also requiring work.? had materials dried and cracked with age/weather,would this be a factor in the collapse.?

The Towers were losing money hand over fist, they were running in the red. They couldn't fill the towers with enough occupants. They had asbestos in them that needed to be removed.

Any single person who knew a thing about the WTC's would have never purchased them. It was likely one of the worst business moves in history, but magically, with only $14 million out of pocket, Silverstein was able to make good on a double indemnity clause citing each plane as a separate attack. He was awarded $4.5 billion.

From the absolute WORST business move in history, to the absolute best in 6 weeks. What an AMAZING coincidence?

Then, as thousands of first responders spent months on a poisonous pile of rubble, clearing debris and rescuing survivors, Silverstein didn't spend a single dollar helping those people who would later have severe respiratory illness. And many would die over the next several years, and many are still dying.

Why does anyone want to defend the actions of such a sick man?

It's all well and good talking about, but it doesn't change a thing and it's likely you're never going to find out what the real story is.

So the official story isn't true, what are YOU going to do about it ? The reality is you're still going to live your life under the kosh of the government because there's nothing you can do.

There was once a time when people didn't stand for bullcrap and actually acted on things instead of talking about it for eons and never plucking up the balls to do anything about it to stand up against this so called opression. You're all happy to debate 9/11 and how the government concocted this conspiracy and did it themselves till your blue in the face but heaven forbid you actually take any action against this travesty.

Originally posted by baboo
READ IT. Don't waste our time because you don't want to spend yours to inform yourself. I can provide you information on any aspect of the bldgs you want if you just ask. I've read and watched a lot on this . I'm not going to insult you by calling you names but I will say you are ill-informed or you have other reasons for being here. If you have legitimate questions then pose them and I and others, I'm sure, will attempt to provide you answers.

Just because I hold a contrary view to your does not mean I am misinformed, mate. I consider myself to be quite well informed, I just don't think that there is the evidence to suggest the WTC was felled by any other means other than aircraft, the resultant fire and building design. What's wrong with that, apart from not fitting in with your belief?

If you cannot articulate - or point me to compelling evidence to the contrary then you just have to live with it. I am open minded to compelling evidence.

You are right not to call me names because when you do, we all know you've lost the arguement. Try to be civil as that helps with debate.

Regards


[edit on 19/7/2009 by paraphi]

reply to post by jeasahtheseer


You're terribly mistaken.

We do care that our soilders are dying. That's why we think it is repulsive that they were sent to invade two sovereign countries that ADMITTEDLY HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 911!

If you honestly believe that they actually had the means to attack American Soil, from caves in afghanistan, you need a coloring book and some crayons.

If you honestly believe that if North America was invaded, that we would stand around and do nothing, your out of your mind. We would all take up arms and resist the invaders, we would be terrorists 100%.

So don't quickly dismiss us as lunatics that don't care. Cause we do. But don't let the military propaganda that has indoctrinated you convince you that civilians had anything to do with this war. The people who are attacking our army are resisting our invasion. I cannot blame them for that.

Those same people would NEVER have had a chance to kill Americans if we simply never invaded them.

We need justice for the thousands that died 911, and we need justice for the thousands that had died since. And it all comes back to the fraud of 911.

Originally posted by paraphi

Originally posted by baboo
READ IT. Don't waste our time because you don't want to spend yours to inform yourself. I can provide you information on any aspect of the bldgs you want if you just ask. I've read and watched a lot on this . I'm not going to insult you by calling you names but I will say you are ill-informed or you have other reasons for being here. If you have legitimate questions then pose them and I and others, I'm sure, will attempt to provide you answers.

Just because I hold a contrary view to your does not mean I am misinformed, mate. I consider myself to be quite well informed, I just don't think that there is the evidence to suggest the WTC was felled by any other means other than aircraft, the resultant fire and building design. What's wrong with that, apart from not fitting in with your belief?

If you cannot articulate - or point me to compelling evidence to the contrary then you just have to live with it. I am open minded to compelling evidence.

You are right not to call me names because when you do, we all know you've lost the arguement. Try to be civil as that helps with debate.

Regards


[edit on 19/7/2009 by paraphi]

God you love bouncing around in ignorance don't you.

FORGET ABOUT WORLD TRADE CENTER 1 AND 2.

Now, focus on WORLD TRADE CENTER 7.

Tell me how a plane brought that building down.