Enough with the dishonest behaviour Truthers - I'm calling you out.

page: 5
60
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZiggyMojo
The film 9/11: Blueprint for Truth and THIS thread, completely destroy all claims made by the OP as fact. I would have done it myself but someone already did the hard work. I'd also like to ask to those people who believe the Official Story.. Were you there?


No, I was watching TV.

However the death of my Grandma, Aunt, two cousins, and the many other deaths of friends' family members are enough to make me believe. Also, my Grandpa who is a 93 year old master electrican, tells me every year about how "He didn't hear no goddamn explosions" And than rants about the collapse theories for hours. He also wont eat lentils now but thats offtopic.


To say that the government made this is... so disrespectful to those who died.




posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by spw184
What FACTS. There are no FACTS, only theories and inferences and assumptions.


I'm boiling when I read your posts. Here are FACTS simpled down for you.
1. 3 buildings designed to withstand an airliner jet, completely collapse in their footprints 56 mins and 102 mins, from the moment of being striked by one each, respectively. 3rd collapses after another 7 hours.
2. Aerial object (a plane most likely) hits Pentagon, causing serious damage to this immense steel-concrete structure. We got some witnesses indeed seeing a plane, but we never see it ourselves, for NO REASON being ever given. Media shove images of falling towers 24/7 but none ever made a slightest notion to demand this footage from military.


Originally posted by CitizenNum287119327
Trolls thread.

Agree, those two are hopeless. One bringing half-truths without any evidence, doesn't confront answers and if he does thats rather laughable, like his exploding thermite youtube proof. Other one is just hooting and cheering for him, while mocking others for spelling or no reason at all.

Think we can close this one admins, no conspiracy will be discussed here, kicking OS'r on the ground im afraid.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:21 AM
link   
reply to post by stainlesssteelrat
 


Your right, Im just hooting and cheering because I don't feel like saying that some engineering flaw or
impossibility means this this and this...

Sorry, I dont feel like being a illumisheep like so many truthers are.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Whoa whoa whoa.. I never said that the government did this.. But the government's story stinks like hell. There has been some critical facts omitted by the government and I don't know why. I do know that the official story doesn't add up. I'm not placing the blame on anyone, I'm simply stating my opinion towards the official story. I'm not even beginning to try and understand WHY the media and government haven't been more forthcoming with truths about the story.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 09:05 AM
link   
O K.

I think most of us who "question" the OS will be willing to strike a deal with you.

Just after you demonstrate how to suspend the laws of physics, we will tell you the truth about why we do not believe the OS

Oh yes !! I just now remember a video I saw that you might be interested in seeing. Don't know if or when it was last viewed here but somethings deserve to be repeated.

www.youtube.com...


edit on 12-9-2011 by hdutton because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-9-2011 by hdutton because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 09:11 AM
link   
reply to post by BigBruddah
 


FAIL

WTC 7 had its own report done by a government agency. What you are thinking of is that WTC 7 wasnt mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report. It wasn't supposed to be, the Commission Report was to cover the history leading to that day, the failures in our military/intell agencies and the events of that day. It was never supposed to be an engineering report.
edit on 12-9-2011 by vipertech0596 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 



dont really know if this has been said yet but i dont wanna read the whole thread,

yes there are tons of videos of police officers/firefighters/civliians saying "WE HEARD EXPLOSIONS BEFORE THE BUILDING CAME DOWN"



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Nucleardoom
 


People that think the Pentagon has a missile system are among the most clueless people around. The building lies in the approach/departure area of Reagan National Airport. Too great a chance of accidentally shooting down an airliner for shooting a missed approach.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


Just wanted to be sure you had the soonest opportunity to see the edit I made to my other reply.


Watch this little, minorly informative, video and then reply about the deal I have offered in my first reply !!

www.youtube.com...



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by hdutton
 


If that video is meant to be hugely damning of the NIST report it doesn't really succeed.

This guy makes allllll sorts of speculative leaps, like what was stored in meeting rooms. I've worked in offices which frequently had large amount of paper on the tables and boxes of documents are often stored in unused meeting rooms. Now this guy doesn't know, he's just looking at pictures in the documents and assuming people are lying and there's a big conspiracy. He then drolly says things like, "hardly scientific" when his own guess work is not exactly scientific in the least.

On top of that, he assumes that changes made in documents don't reflect honest edits based on mistakes or new information, but, instead, "we'll have to assume NIST is lying"

Why?

In typical Truther fashion, without evidence, he jumps to the most sinister conclusion.

Maybe in your head this is damning. In my estimation this video is childish and silly.

Unless you have EVIDENCE, don't jump to conclusions.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by MastaShake
 


Again, this is such a weak argument.

What people heard were things that "sounded like" explosions... and not a lot of them, but a few of them, not timed, not hundreds of them, but a few. No one saw these either.

So no, those statements in NO WAY describe what people would see or hear in a demo.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by hdutton
 


the laws of physics weren't suspended, you just don't understand them very well... like 1/10th of 1% of Engineers.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 10:07 AM
link   
Here's some Truth.

Saudi Arabia was saying they were going to cease accepting US Dollars for oil in 2007.

And they were going to start the Gulf Monetary Union.

Well once Hussein Obama was elected Saudi Arabia ceased all that talk.

How come nobody ever discusses this?



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
 


Dude, or whatever you are, you already pointed out the the towers were not designed with aircraft impacts in mind, when any person with a bit of research, on both sides of the fence knows that they were in fact designed to whistand one or more 707 jet liners, comparable in size and weight to the planes that hit the towers. Your rant has been called out, and yet here you are typing ignorance in big bold capitals, and habe the balls to call ANY architect ignorant.

What bothers me the most is that those kind of rant driven threads are let to roam free, cluttering important or otherwise relevant info shown on the boards, but I guess as it parrots OS and the site owner has already shown us their true colors, we can expect this to continue.
Expecting this thread to be labele offtopic in 3...2...1...



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by stainlesssteelrat
 


they didn't fall down completely in their own footprints. That's been repeatedly debunked.

On top of that something failing to do what it was engineered to do isn't evidence of anything other that something failing to do what it was engineered to do.

You still can't explain how this magic (and unheard of) top down demo was done in such a way as gradually speed up... and on top of that, you'll need to go explain to all the other truthers, the ones that believe there were explosive charges, that they're wrong... you two groups can argue it out... and then you'll realise that neither of you has ANY evince, either for explosions of thermite somehow magically melting through steel at a lighting pace... thermite doesn't immediately disintegrate steel, it cuts through it (in your theory at least)... that takes a few seconds... this cutting nature makes the accelerated top down nature of the building next to impossible to create... on TOP of that... a huge percentage of the buildings mass was suspended by the outter walls... in order for the demo theory to work though walls would need to be cut... thermite burns VERY VERY BRIGHTLY. NO witnesses report seeing a preceding burn on any of the load bearing walls, no video shows it, etc.

So even in your magic thermite theory the burn, and there's have been a few dozen on EACH FLOOR, was completely invisible. So that's HUNDREDS of BRIGHT burning steel beams, in three buildings, which NO ONE SAW. AND which is in NO video.

Give me a break. There's NO evidence that happened.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Saltarello
 


What you Truther folks always seem to not understand is that simply because something was designed to do something doesn't mean it will actually DO that thing.

That's not actually proof of anything other than the fact that the initial design was flawed in relation to it being able to withstand being hit by a plane.

here look:

en.wikipedia.org...:Bridge_disasters_caused_by_engineering_error

See how many bridges, all designed by Engineers, has failed due to engineering failures? Were those all inside jobs? I mean, c'mon. Engineers # up all the time. That's NOT evidence of anything.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   
Some useful information here:
www.mace.manche ster.ac.uk...

Also note that much of the fire protection insulation was ripped away on impact in the area of the collision. This would have exposed the core columns and supports to a lot of heat and 'buckling'.

The section that's most interesting is the part where it mentions that there was buckling on the perimeter columns around the impact zone on both towers just before they collapsed.

I'm still confused how the collapse at the top was able to crush through the lower floors - aka the pancake collapse - but I suspect it's related to the design of these buildings. The fact that both towers collapsed indicates a common culprit and implicates the design. This would have to be looked at again if any future buildings are made similarly. It's an interesting topic.
edit on 12-9-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Pervius
 


Because it's not true?



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 10:26 AM
link   
Actually people did hear timed explosives

www.youtube.com...

23 million people have viewed this video, so you can add 23 million to that list as well.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by jonnywhite
 


Exactly. The design was flawed and very unique. The whole insulation thing is something serious folks discuss, but something that Truthers never seem to mention.
edit on 12-9-2011 by captainnotsoobvious because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
60
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join