if the muslim threat of terrorism is so real then why..

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Logarock

Yep. Because as we all know those Muslim nice guys burned that teacher and then killed all those kids in response to a drone strike.

Yea I am aware of this counterpoint but have little sympathy for it especially when it comes to whats been going on around Pakistan. Its not like the Taliban and its associates need a reason or anything.

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: muckleduck

Be patient?

The "war on terror" is a fabrication. But wait, it isn't. Somewhere out there a drone just blew up a house of people. Any survivors are now terrorists. The more strikes the more terrorists.

Endless wars can't remain one sided for ever.

Hopfully it blew up some of the azz holes that slaughtered all those kids.

'Blowing up some azzholes' … only makes more of them. So who's the azzhole again?

Yea I am sorry. These guys that attacked a school were probably a bunch of misguided boyscouts out for merit badges.

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: muckleduck

Be patient?

The "war on terror" is a fabrication. But wait, it isn't. Somewhere out there a drone just blew up a house of people. Any survivors are now terrorists. The more strikes the more terrorists.

Endless wars can't remain one sided for ever.

Hopfully it blew up some of the azz holes that slaughtered all those kids.

'Blowing up some azzholes' … only makes more of them. So who's the azzhole again?

Yea I am sorry. These guys that attacked a school were probably a bunch of misguided boyscouts out for merit badges.

You missed the point the poster was making. What caused these people to become assholes? Is it previous terrorism? Maybe their parents were blown up in a drone strike or they were mistreated racially by some military. It is a HUGE circle of violence. Even the most hardened terrorists have loving family and by writing them off with killing the terrorist, you are saying they are guilty by association.

Anyone who tells you that a country needs to attack preemptively to prevent the other country from attacking is lying through their teeth.

Many of the Muslims living in the west like the freedoms but don't want to talk about it. They like alcohol and strip clubs fast cars and food that's banned in their home country's. Mc Donalds and Subway are all loved .

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: muckleduck

Be patient?

The "war on terror" is a fabrication. But wait, it isn't. Somewhere out there a drone just blew up a house of people. Any survivors are now terrorists. The more strikes the more terrorists.

Endless wars can't remain one sided for ever.

Hopfully it blew up some of the azz holes that slaughtered all those kids.

'Blowing up some azzholes' … only makes more of them. So who's the azzhole again?

Yea I am sorry. These guys that attacked a school were probably a bunch of misguided boy scouts out for merit badges.

Sure you're sorry those kids died. If you are how come you don't complain about the thousands killed in Pakistan (including kids) from drone strikes?

link

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: muckleduck

No. Not a single, solitary one of them, from the list released at the end of September 2001 has been seen since. Whether or not individuals with similar names have remained on the terrorism watchlist for other reasons may be true, but not for 9/11.

it was a saudi pilot , ill try bring up the details been replying to other threads, just woke up not long go.

my point is when we were at war with real terrorists, the ira, they made sure we knew who they were, on our own shores. thats how terrorism works, a guy getting his head cut off in afghanistan doesnt strike fear into me one little bit.

perhaps if america didnt fund al qaeda they would not have so much problems, has your safety improved with these new terror laws? nope ur more likely to be shot on sight by police now for voicing an opinionin tht goes against the grain.

the only people i see terrorising on a daily basis in america is your own police force.

and the ttwin towers did fall from below otherwise they couldnt have possibly fell in that order, if it fell from the floors above where the plane hit only the top would fall sideways onto the street, not hammer its way thru invisible floors at freefall speeds, no matter what america thinks they cant negate the laws of gravity lol.

there are thousands of discrepancies with the official story that have been debated over and over, most evidence points towards an inside job via u.s gov/mossad/mi5/6/saudi, these countries are the only ones who have gained anything out of these conflicts.

if we want to fight the war on terror, maybe the bombs should drop on israel,suadi ,us and british soil. only way terrorists learn eh.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

The attack on the school was payback for Paki ops against the Taliban in the nrth and for general support of the Americans occupation in Afghanistan.

Kind of selective aren't we? How many kids has the US killed in both countries?

Or is it more-- as long as its bombs falling from ten thousand feet its okay?

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: muckleduck

Um, the FBI did detain and interview his family. Did the conspiracy pages you read skip that fact?

then flew them straight out to saudi arabia, they should of been detained indefinitely till the capture of osama, but obviously this wasnt going to happen.

america is messing with a culture they know nothing about, do u even know the history of the regions that u are invading? most americans think iran is 3rd world, its more of a free country than america is , break the law u will face the punishment of their courts, america can hardly complain, u still keep people on deathrow, at least in iran if theyre gonna kill u they dont keep u waiting for 20 years.


iran is painted as some crazy 3rd world dictatorship in the media , when infact its quite a good place to live, even many jews live there and prefer it to israel.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: cardinalfan0596

The attack on the school was payback for Paki ops against the Taliban in the nrth and for general support of the Americans occupation in Afghanistan.

Kind of selective aren't we? How many kids has the US killed in both countries?

Or is it more-- as long as its bombs falling from ten thousand feet its okay?

we started the war and now were crying when they retaliate on us, pot kettle black all the time..

when we bombed german civies in ww2, hitler responded in exactly the same way, if ur gonna go round killing peoples wives and children, expect anything to happen to u.

america only seem to like war when it isnt near their land, wonder what america would think if red dawn become reality.

all in due time.

we go to war now and the public think our troops should not die in any circumstances, because were the best right?

only the muslims are allowed to die in these wars, curse them if they try to defend themselves such travesty.

if your home had just been bombed losing your whole family what would you do? pretend it didnt happen?

u killed saddam illegaly, watch his last day in court, he tells the truth about prison conditions after america showed up to "liberate", the prisons are alot worse, more torture than ever.

saddam wasnt speaking for himself though, he was speakin only for those around him, he knew what awaited him and showed no fear.

no wmds were found so why is bush not facing war crimes? oh he is thats why he cant visit a selection of countries outside of the u.s , same with tony blair.

a reply to: muckleduck
Thats the problem with the war game, people think they can play it… just a little bit.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: muckleduck
lets be real though, if u hit a building with a plane, its not going to crumble from the lower floors straight down, at best it would toppple the floors above the crash site, leaving the lower floors intact

Let's be real, you are making up physics here.

the only way it could fall like it did is if they blew out the floors and supports below.

u cqant reach free fall speed if ur bashing through floors = friction slowing it down

Good thing the towers didn't reach free fall speed then

free fall = no friction, implying that there was NO floors or anything t all beloew where the planes hit.

its funny how simple physics ruins the whole official story from the get go.

It's funny how truthers make up physics to suit their narrative.

yea im definitely making up the laws of physics, they teach university students with videos of 9/11 to show what friction is and what it isnt, u cant have freefall unless theres only air friction, which in turn implies that there was NOTHING AT ALL below the floors of where the plane impacted, whats so hard to grasp about this?


its funny how u probably have no qualifications in physics and think u can debate it.

maybe argue with these guys on this topic?

Simple.
its the government hype that Makes the terrorists.
like the FBI get some one to BE a terrorist.
Then say LOOK we have got one.
we are doing a great job!

heres another video, maybe u would care to elaborate which parts of the laws of physics that ive made up to suit my cause? more like too many americans dont have a clue about physics and think they can still chime in, ur only going to be embarassed further now.

heres a video to explain it in childrens terms, because well uve proved u have no understanding.




so please do tell which parts i make up to suit my agenda? i bet u wont even admit u were wrong about it and will still believe the official story. lol

originally posted by: buddha
Simple.
its the government hype that Makes the terrorists.
like the FBI get some one to BE a terrorist.
Then say LOOK we have got one.
we are doing a great job!

this ^

make people belive in something long enough and it will eventually become reality, the younger muslims growing up think that this is what is expected of them now, so some will pick up arms since they will probably be bombed at some point might aswell go out fighting.

u cannot simply invade a country and expect no deaths on your own side.

a reply to: muckleduck

Did you even read the link I posted? It skipped video sensationalism and literally posted the math saying you are wrong. I'm sorry, but math trumps a youtube video ANY day.

Here is all the math and physics that you like to ignore for you conspiracy narrative:

Below are calculations from a physics blogger...

When I did the calculations, what I got for a thousand feet was about nine seconds- let's see,
d = 1/2at^2
so
t = (2d/a)^1/2
a is 9.8m/s^2 (acceleration of gravity at Earth's surface, according to Wikipedia), [He gives this reference so you can double check him.]
d is 417m (height of the World Trade Center towers, same source)
so
t = (834m/9.8m/s^2)^1/2 = 9.23s
OK, so how fast was it going? Easy enough,
v = at
v = (9.8m/s^2 x 9.23s) = 90.4m/s
So in the following second, it would have fallen about another hundred meters. That's almost a quarter of the height it already fell. And we haven't even made it to eleven seconds yet; it could have fallen more than twice its height in that additional four seconds. If the top fell freely, in 13.23 seconds it would have fallen about two and one-half times as far as it actually did fall in that time. So the collapse was at much less than free-fall rates.


Let's see:
KE = 1/2mv^2
The mass of the towers was about 450 million kg, according to this. Four sources, he has. I think that's pretty definitive. So now we can take the KE of the top floor, and divide by two- that will be the average of the top and bottom floors. Then we'll compare that to the KE of a floor in the middle, and if they're comparable, then we're good to go- take the KE of the top floor and divide by two and multiply by 110 stories. We'll also assume that the mass is evenly divided among the floors, and that they were loaded to perhaps half of their load rating of 100lbs/sqft. That would be
208ft x 208ft = 43,264sqft
50lbs/sqft * 43264sqft = 2,163,200lbs = 981,211kg
additional weight per floor. So the top floor would be
450,000,000 kg / 110 floors = 4,090,909 kg/floor
so the total mass would be
4,090,909 kg + 981,211 kg = 5,072,120 kg/floor
Now, the velocity at impact we figured above was
90.4m/s
so our
KE = (5,072,120kg x (90.4m/s)^2)/2 = 20,725,088,521J
So, divide by 2 and we get
10,362,544,260J
OK, now let's try a floor halfway up:
t = (2d/a)^1/2 = (417/9.8)^1/2 = 6.52s
v = at = 9.8*6.52 = 63.93m/s
KE = (mv^2)/2 = (5,072,120kg x (63.93m/s)^2)/2 = 10,363,863,011J
Hey, look at that! They're almost equal! That means we can just multiply that 10 billion Joules of energy by 110 floors and get the total, to a very good approximation. Let's see now, that's
110 floors * 10,362,544,260J (see, I'm being conservative, took the lower value)
= 1,139,879,868,600J
OK, now how much is 1.1 trillion joules in tons of TNT-equivalent? Let's see, now, a ton of TNT is 4,184,000,000J. So how many tons of TNT is 1,139,879,868,600J?
1,139,879,868,600J / 4,184,000,000J/t = 272t

Now, that's 272 tons of TNT, more or less; five hundred forty one-thousand-pound blockbuster bombs, more or less. That's over a quarter kiloton. We're talking about as much energy as a small nuclear weapon- and we've only calculated the kinetic energy of the falling building. We haven't added in the burning fuel, or the burning paper and cloth and wood and plastic, or the kinetic energy of impact of the plane (which, by the way, would have substantially turned to heat, and been put into the tower by the plane debris, that's another small nuclear weapon-equivalent) and we've got enough heat to melt the entire whole thing.

Remember, we haven't added the energy of four floors of burning wood, plastic, cloth and paper, at- let's be conservative, say half the weight is stuff like that and half is metal, so 25lbs/sqft? And then how about as much energy as the total collapse again, from the plane impact? And what about the energy from the burning fuel? You know, I'm betting we have a kiloton to play with here. I bet we have a twentieth of the energy that turned the entire city of Nagasaki into a flat burning plain with a hundred-foot hole surrounded by a mile of firestorm to work with. - Schneibster edited by Debunking 911

Let me make this clear, I don't assume to know what the ACTUAL fall time was. Anyone telling you they know is lying. The above calculation doesn't say that's the fall time. That was not its purpose. It's only a quick calculation which serves its purpose. To show that the buildings could have fallen within the time it did. It's absurd to suggest one can make simple calculations and know the exact fall time. You need a super computer with weeks of calculation to take into account the office debris, plumbing, ceiling tile etc.. etc... Was it 14 or was it 16? It doesn't matter to the point I'm making, which is the fall times are well within the possibility for normal collapse. Also, the collapse wasn't at free fall as conspiracy theorists suggest.

For more analysis of the buildin

Same link, but I'm reposting it anyways.

the american military are pretty inferior, they have allthe toys with no idea how to use them.

british support for allying with america is falling rapidly, were tired of the friendly fire.

so is the rest of the co-allition that went to afghan/iraq, we want nothing more to do with american wars to prop up ur fiat currency for a few more years at the expense of brown peoples lives.

america has no right on this planet to be going round telling people what do to, in 300 years america has had 277 years war., compare that to any other nation and the picture becomes very clear who the real threat to world peace is.

bit off more than they can chew in ukraine though a good hiding coming their way soon i forsee.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: muckleduck

Did you even read the link I posted? It skipped video sensationalism and literally posted the math saying you are wrong. I'm sorry, but math trumps a youtube video ANY day.

lolol seriously..u wont watch it because u know ur wrong, just get out of this thread dude , im not going to lower my standards to a debate at childs level.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: muckleduck

Did you even read the link I posted? It skipped video sensationalism and literally posted the math saying you are wrong. I'm sorry, but math trumps a youtube video ANY day.

the video is 1 minute long and proves u wrong without doubt, u cant change the laws of physics to suit americas official story, no self resprecting physicist would ever accept what is in the official story.

must be hard bieng so arrogant that u cant admit ur wrong , when its blatant.

a reply to: muckleduck

Except I just posted math that doesn't rely on a video to paint a narrative. I don't care how long the video is, it is wrong. Disprove the math I posted then we'll talk. Stop letting youtube posters speak for you and actually do some REAL research. Then maybe you'll learn some real truth.

a reply to: muckleduck

So now we start with the ad hominem attacks. You are par for the course with the truther movement. All your "evidence" is from youtube videos and when someone calls you on it, you resort to insults and derisive behavior. How about disproving the MATH that I posted?

The day I believe a youtube video over math is the day I've given up on critical thinking altogether. That's like posting Facebook as a valid source. Lol. Actually, it may be worse.