Experts Claim Official 9/11 Story is a Hoax

It's gets more fruity here each day?

yes and Bush also never won the election

And I suppose KBizzle doesn't really have $12 million secured to pay for Paris Hilton's storage contents right ? You people and your tinfoil hats. Hmmph.

While I'm sure shit was covered up this isn't the way to support the cause. Press releases are hardly headlines.

bush and his cabinet will go down as the most corrupt group of politicians in history

Peoples eyes will one day open..

One of the worst events in US history, yet it had one of the fastest cleanups and the shortest investigations in US history, odd for such a major event.

Why is it so difficult to accept that the Islamofacists hate us and every non-Muslim country. The evidence is overwhelming that al-Qaida was responsible for 9-11 and many OTHER terrorists attacks throughout the world. Just look around as to what is happening in Europe?

Apparently the conspiracy theorists, and the "blame America/Bush" crowd are permanently "stuck on stupid"...

Racism blinds many (especially Texans) to the truth.

toinfoil hats people, get them out

I'm a racist?
Typical response of a leftist appeaser lacking a logical argument....
and an example of my "stuck on stupid" comment

'PRWEB' - That pretty much says it all right there

Regards,

Lee

I guess is doesn't matter who prints the story you're gonna say that.

tell the lie , enforce the lie , the lie soon becomes the truth

as far as i know the evidence that al-Qaida is behind the attacks worldwide isn't there , i have seen no evidence , all i see is government press releases and media services claiming it is al-Qaida because some website said so

Don't question, just follow. Politicians are all honest, good citizens working for everyone's best interests.

As soon as anyone asks why something happened they way it happened, dumbass tinfoil hat comments start popping up.

We will never know the truth, but it is a sad state of affairs when you think that your government COULD do something like that. The fact that we even question if they were in on it speaks volumes about our country and how much we distrust our leaders.

Experts Claim This Thread Is Idiotic

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/arti...demolition.htm

did you take a break from watching the cartoon channel to make this reply?

God Dammit!!!! Now I completely forgot which pill I chose. I need to find a spoon.

It's worth taking a second look, it was a major event in history and it seems that no two people can agree on what exactly transpired.

Democracy is a terrible type of government - it's just that everything before it was even worse.

Blue. And there is no spoon.

Here here.... now about that birthday party you got coming up... is it invite only?

I'm sure it was looked at a second time and a third. In fact I'm sure it was looked at over and over again.

just when you thought there were too many morons in the public eye, six more pop up

And Bin Laden doesn't exist.

Isn't there a tape with Bin Laden saying that he did it.

Why can't that be evidence?

Bin Laden is just as much an actual leader as Bush is.

Truths have a tendancy to eventually wiggle free though they often take great amounts of time to do so.

I however do not think it is a sad state of affairs when people think that a government could do something like this. Questioning if they were in on it and distrusting our leaders really says nothing let alone volumes.

History has already taught us that governments can do things like this, have done things like this, and will generally continue to do things like this. I am not sure if we are ever supposed to trust our governments no matter whom they are or at any point in history.

On a side note, I do not buy into this or many conspiracy theories.

When I read an article from a PRWEB PRESS RELEASE I know its true!

When you look at time lines and the speed fighters can go but then when you look how long it took them to get where they had to go.It makes you think, when you read plan for a new amercian century. Written by the a right wing think tank signed by rumsfield and cheney in the late 90's. It talks about wanting to go back in Iraq and the only way to get the american people to go along would be a event like pearl harbor.

tin foil hat time

god i hate stupid people
`

The president can't even get a blowjob with it being kept secret.

What makes you think they can pull off this grand mass conspiracy?

What about the people on the plane that called people and said

"The plane is hijacked by some Arab motherfuckers"

Don't they count for something? Is that part of this huge hoax or what?

Unfortunately the most any of us seem capable of doing is ignoring it, accepting the simplest explanation, and trying to get on with our lives as best we can.

For a lot of people - if they didn't have to vote, they would hardly even be aware of the world of politics - and this may not be a bad thing. I'm just thankful i'm not a soldier, as I would have to know and keep in touch with every truth about what I'm fighting for, and that itself may be scarier than facing the enemy.

Am I rambling?

Wrong President, and when is the last time you got a blowjob and tried to keep it a secret?

Not aware of anyone in the US that has to vote.
Also not sure if being a soldier has anything to do with the truth, you are to follow orders and your orders are the truth.

So - I'm rambling.

i just have a real sense of dread for the way world affairs are going right now. I think a lot of people are experiencing the same.

If that is the case, stay away from history books.

Experts? Bullshit. A self-published pseudo news article writen by JFK conspiracy nut James Fetzer and his buddies does not mean Jack Shit.

This same group of wackos spends most of their time trading tinfoil hats and whacking off to the Zapruder film while trading stories of shadowy figures divulging information that if only the masses would take heed to, their world would be proven to be the correct reality, when in fact they're one step from the back yard of the county puzzle factory.

Now I know that FOX news is made up of tin foil hats people.....

but.... they (FOX) do have it on video....

... when the second jet approached the WTC, their (FOX's) reporter observed (and the video shows) that there were no passenger windows on the jet.

He stated emphatically that this plane was not from "here" or any commercial airport.

He and the cameraman must have been very hung over... or something.

Slowly but surely, the truth is coming out.

if any of the stories about the US gov't having sumthin to do with it happened to be true that would crush the USA!

by the way,how many days do we have left with our backwoods genious anyway?

I can't even read this board anymore..... [shakes head ruefully]

I'm really bored tonight so I'll answer the questions addressed in this article. Don't blast me too much for this; I'm just being very general. Most of the questions about the WWC involve things that had never happened in real life before, so pretty much anything is possible so much as I'm concerned.

Q: In the history of structural engineering, steel-frame high-rise buildings have never been brought down due to fires either before or since 9/11, so how can fires have brought down three in one day? How is this possible?
A: This is the first time a fucking airliner crashed into the top of a building spreading out tens of thousands of gallons of aviation fuel.

Q: The BBC has reported that at least five of the nineteen alleged "hijackers" have turned up alive and well living in Saudi Arabia, yet according to the FBI, they were among those killed in the attacks. How is this possible?
A: My last name isn't all too common, yet I'm surprised at how many people share my full name. I'm pretty sure if this was true it would have been exposed in the first forty-eight hours. In fact, if this was true, why don't they just take some video footage of them or something to expose this "lie'.

Q: Frank DeMartini, a project manager for the WTC, said the buildings were designed with load redistribution capabilities to withstand the impact of airliners, whose effects would be like "puncturing mosquito netting with a pencil." Yet they completely collapsed. How is this possible?
A: I'm sure it was designed to withstand the impact of jetliners. However, designing something and in this case testing it is too different things. I'm pretty confident that no one has smashed jet planes into a one hundred story bulkding before. At the same time, in fact, the buildings did continue to stand. It wasn't the planes hitting the towers that brought them down, but the fire.

Q: Since the melting point of steel is about 2,700*F, the temperature of jet fuel fires does not exceed 1,800*F under optimal conditions, and UL certified the steel used to 2,000*F for six hours, the buildings cannot have collapsed due to heat from the fires. How is this possible?
A: Well, I'll just have to assume that this is true because I don't give a fuck about how hot steel needs to be before melting. First, how do we know the fire wasn't above 2,700*F? Think about all the other things that caught fire in there afterwards. Then factor in that the towers don't have any center supports; The weaight was carried by the steel on the outer edges of the bulilding. When you think that four or five floors worth of steel was destroyed when the plane hit the building PLUS the resulting fire, well, pretty much anything is possible, isn't it?

Q: Flight 77, which allegedly hit the building, left the radar screen in the vicinity of the Ohio/Kentucky border, only to "reappear" in very close proximity to the Pentagon shortly before impact. How is this possible?
A: I'm not a radar expert, but I'm pretty sure that the US doesn't have wall to wall radar coverage. Large cities like NYC might, but not every place between Ohio/Kentucky and Washington DC does. I'd imagine that these radar tracking stations aren't hooked together; They don't take a plane on radar and pass them off to another tracking station; They can't because there would be too many gaps. Also, you need to define "close proximity". Does the Pentagon have it's own radar? I doubt this. Thus, they must have been using the radar of one of the local airports which was how far away?

Q: Foreign "terrorists" who were clever enough to coordinate hijacking four commercial airliners seemingly did not know that the least damage to the Pentagon would be done by hitting its west wing. How is this possible?
A: Because terrorists are stupid and were unable to fly an airplane.

Q: A former Inspector General for the Air Force has observed that Flight 93, which allegedly crashed in Pennsylvania, should have left debris scattered over an area less than the size of a city block; but it is scattered over an area of about eight square miles. How is this possible?
A: I would imagine that anything is possible when an airplane of this size crashes. Maybe parts of the damn plane fell off as it was crashing down and the wings and the tail ended up coming down miles from where the body landed.

Q: A tape recording of interviews with air traffic controllers on duty on 9/11 was deliberately crushed, cut into very small pieces, and distributed in assorted places to insure its total destruction. How is this possible?
A: Pretty fucking simple really. They crushed the tape, cut it into little bits, and then threw the pieces up into the air or something. Not exactly fucking rocket science, is it?

Q: The Pentagon conducted a training exercise called "MASCAL" simulating the crash of a Boeing 757 into the building on 24 October 2000, and yet Condoleezza Rice, among others, has repeatedly asserted that "no one ever imagined" a domestic airplane could be used as a weapon. How is this possible?
A: How many fucking employees does the US Goverment have, how many different agencies, and is Condoleezza Rice aware of every exercise each of different agencies does four years prior. This is a simple statement that's being twisted around. Perhaps she meant to say the her fucking knitting club never imagined this could happen.

Ya THAT! Free submission news source... Breaking story.

I agree with many of your points, but not all of them.

: In the history of structural engineering, steel-frame high-rise buildings have never been brought down due to fires either before or since 9/11, so how can fires have brought down three in one day? How is this possible?
A: This is the first time a fucking airliner crashed into the top of a building spreading out tens of thousands of gallons of aviation fuel.

I am sure that with computer modeling, adding in the exact specs on the construction, this can very easily be answered. And some of the oldschool engineers just know what they hell they are doing.



Q: The BBC has reported that at least five of the nineteen alleged "hijackers" have turned up alive and well living in Saudi Arabia, yet according to the FBI, they were among those killed in the attacks. How is this possible?
A: My last name isn't all too common, yet I'm surprised at how many people share my full name. I'm pretty sure if this was true it would have been exposed in the first forty-eight hours. In fact, if this was true, why don't they just take some video footage of them or something to expose this "lie'.

I believe that they actually have shown some of these guys alive, but never on US television. We watched a program here in mexico, that was filmed in europe somewhere showing the sustects photos from the US, and the actual guys still alive. I think that there were three of them.


Q: Flight 77, which allegedly hit the building, left the radar screen in the vicinity of the Ohio/Kentucky border, only to "reappear" in very close proximity to the Pentagon shortly before impact. How is this possible?
A: I'm not a radar expert, but I'm pretty sure that the US doesn't have wall to wall radar coverage. Large cities like NYC might, but not every place between Ohio/Kentucky and Washington DC does. I'd imagine that these radar tracking stations aren't hooked together; They don't take a plane on radar and pass them off to another tracking station; They can't because there would be too many gaps. Also, you need to define "close proximity". Does the Pentagon have it's own radar? I doubt this. Thus, they must have been using the radar of one of the local airports which was how far away?


I have more than 800 hours of flight time in small aircraft, and I would have to say that 90% of the major metro areas are covered. And if the Public airports could not track them, the military sure could have.

Q: A former Inspector General for the Air Force has observed that Flight 93, which allegedly crashed in Pennsylvania, should have left debris scattered over an area less than the size of a city block; but it is scattered over an area of about eight square miles. How is this possible?
A: I would imagine that anything is possible when an airplane of this size crashes. Maybe parts of the damn plane fell off as it was crashing down and the wings and the tail ended up coming down miles from where the body landed.


This airplane did NOT explode in mid air. Like the lockerbee jet crash. This was said to have been forced down by either the struggle with the " hijackers " or because no one was flying it any longer. There for it would have crashed more like an egg being dropped, rather than being skipped across a floor.

But hey. Thats just my