Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 13896508)

"We decided to pull-it"

Originally Posted by Headless (Post 13896359)

You have knowledge of how to demo a building such as the wtc?

Cause if you did, you wouldnt of said that...

Originally Posted by GrouchyAdmin (Post 13896363)

Send the pedophiles to god, and let him sort them out.

Other than that, you're kinda dumb, but I don't dislike you. Just your sig.

Originally Posted by theking (Post 13896519)

The "pull it" was used intending to mean pull the men out.

Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 13896541)

Sure, it then fell straight down from what? The jet fuel two blocks away?

Originally Posted by theking (Post 13896591)

but you will of course believe whatever you choose to believe.

Originally Posted by Scootermuze (Post 13896221)

"Project Shipboard Hazard and Defense" (SHAD), was a program started in the early 1960's, to learn the vulnerabilities of US warships, during chemical or biological warfare attacks. Under "Project SHAD" were 113 different "Operations" or tests.

US Naval crews and Marine personnel were sprayed with various biological and chemical germ warfare agents, and simulants. Some ships, and Marine personnel were sprayed from overflying aircraft, while other tests on ships were being sprayed by aircraft carriers, which were upwind. While some high ranking personnel may have had knowledge of what was happening, most of the ships crews did not.

Project SHAD was controlled by The US Army Deseret Test Center, later to be known as Dugway Proving Grounds, Utah. For over 35 years, The Department of Defense said, "there was NO Project SHAD".

Today the DoD admits that it tested the deadly nerve agent Sarin, known as VX, or biological toxins on American Servicemen, but said the information was "classified".

Lately the DoD agreed to declassify all of the 113 "Operations" and inform the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) of the findings. Presently 12 of the 113 have been declassified, although the information being released is very limited.

The Department of Defense is not releasing ALL the information needed by the Veteran, which would allow him to apply for treatment in a VA facility and to file a claim for service connected disability compensation.

Only about 600 veterans of the estimated tens of thousands of those exposed to warfare agents have been notified they could be suffering from related dangerous health effects, according to VA and Pentagon officials....

Just to name one instance...

Originally Posted by MOCKBA (Post 13896632)

I think FAT people did it!

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear (Post 13896643)

forget every "theory" you have heard about 9/11 , lets just assume for the time being the government story for 9/11 is pretty much fact

Now lets just assume for a second that george bush paid osama bin laden 500 million in cash to pull the whole thing off.

No bombs, no wild plots, no help , nothing but a one-time payment and a handshake.

Explain to me why this didn't/couldn't happen ?

i'm certainly not saying it did , but if it did , how would anyone here know about it, and how can it be disproven.

Originally Posted by theking (Post 13896746)

Pigshit. Where would President Bush get 500 million and what would be his motive?

Originally Posted by theking (Post 13896746)

But it is a very silly speculation and really does not deserve a response.

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear (Post 13896788)

money = daddy

motive = money


How much do you think his family has made from the war so far ?



he borrowed alot of money from the bin laden family this isn't a theory this is fact




i think what you meant to say was you have no valid response nor can you disprove it thus saying its silly voids you from having to think :winkwink:

Any open minded person would consider all options before discounting them.

A smart person would say "all known evidence suggests 9/11 was not an inside job" a foolish person says "thinking is wrong, dont think things unless everything can be proven without a shred of doubt" how utterly ridiculous

Originally Posted by Matt 26z (Post 13896523)

What is your opinion of witness accounts stating that there were explosions in the basement of the WTC that caused considerable damage?

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear (Post 13896643)

forget every "theory" you have heard about 9/11 , lets just assume for the time being the government story for 9/11 is pretty much fact

Now lets just assume for a second that george bush paid osama bin laden 500 million in cash to pull the whole thing off.

No bombs, no wild plots, no help , nothing but a one-time payment and a handshake.

Explain to me why this didn't/couldn't happen ?

i'm certainly not saying it did , but if it did , how would anyone here know about it, and how can it be disproven.

Originally Posted by Headless (Post 13896814)

How did hundreds of crew men get into the world trade center and rig it with explosives to create a contriolled demolition without any of the THOUSANDS of visitors to the wtc ever knowing?

Explain that one buddy.

Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 13896855)

No, there weren't hundreds of guys in coveralls walking into the lobby along with office workers.

First, it wouldn't take hundreds. Second, there were six underground levels with separate entrances for vehicles. Third, who knows how security was handled for the underground floors containing the utilities.

Personally I wouldn't even consider a 911 conspiracy ...... except building #7 makes me question everything.

Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 13896855)

except building #7 makes me question everything.

Originally Posted by Headless (Post 13896866)

You see they tried what youre insinuating back in 1993 and the building didnt fall.

To take the building down the way it came down with explosives they would of had to rig the entire building or at least the top floors with explosives.

To do that they would of needed jack hammers. Where did all the dust go? How come nobody heard the jack hammers?

Do a little research, learn how a building gets taken down, and then comment.

Originally Posted by Headless (Post 13896872)

That is ridiculous. My father in law who is a fire chief was there when 7 came down. Nothing suspicious happened.

God you people are so gullable.

Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 13896881)

So #7 came down from a minor fire? What do I research?

Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 13896890)

So a Fire Chief thinks it's normal for a building to impolde after a minor fire? OK, I believe him.

Originally Posted by Headless (Post 13896891)

Minor fire? That building basically got hit with one of the towers and was burning from the early morning til that evening.

Did you not see this?

I dont even need to ask my father in law about it to know this...

Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 13896903)

Headless, #7 was NOT hit by a tower.

Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 13896223)

No one has come close to explaining building #7 ... or the comments from it's owner.

Originally Posted by Headless (Post 13896905)

Where you on scene?

Originally Posted by Headless (Post 13896814)

How did hundreds of crew men get into the world trade center and rig it with explosives to create a contriolled demolition without any of the THOUSANDS of visitors to the wtc ever knowing?

Explain that one buddy.

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear (Post 13896918)

but its easier to disprove a demolition purely on common sense. Why would you fly 2 planes into 2 buildings then demolish them at the same time and why would you hide it, i see no rational explanation for that .. flying 2 planes into the building would be enough i think , there would be no reason to demolish the building completely, or to try and do it covertly.

Originally Posted by MOCKBA (Post 13896917)

you were? How did you pull your fat ass out of there?

Originally Posted by Headless (Post 13896899)

How do you know it was a minor fire?

HAHAHA Where you on scene?

Originally Posted by Headless (Post 13896905)

Where you on scene?

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear (Post 13896950)

because it was on film, showed very little smoke or fire. I have seen plenty of buildings on fire way more severe and they didnt fall down.

my gut feeling was they let #7 burn because they had plenty of other things to do, and there wasnt any people in it. or someone took advantage of a shitty situation.
remember #7 was the command hub for a disaster so it should have been alot harder to bring down.

i think alot of the demolition talk is kinda silly, whats more likely is shoddy mob controlled contractors built shitty buildings that shouldnt have come down , and to admit that just makes america look bad so its kinda been swept under the rug :2 cents:

Originally Posted by Malicious Biz (Post 13896912)

actually there is mountains of evidence that debunks the 9-11 conspiracy theories but conspiratards choose to ignore it because it doesn't play into their super awesome evil murderous government fantasies that some how only they are smart enough to see. They are also some how immune to the brain washing the other 95% of America are under the influence of.

gee who should I believe? Popular mechanics magazine

http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...w/1227842.html

Or dipshit some kids with a mac book, video editing program, and absolutely no particular expertise to even comment on such matters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loose_Change_(video))

Tough choice.

Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 13896963)

No, of course not. If I was I couldn't have seen anything anyway. Look at the way this building fell from being on fire, it just doesn't happen. Then there are the remarks of the owner.

Because this was never explained satisfactorily ... I have doubts about other aspects I probably shouldn't have.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IM...ocked.down.wmv

http://infowars.com/Video/911/wtc7_pbs.WMV

Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 13896968)

I'm not talking about a grand 911 theory, believe me. But #7 causes doubt on my part.

Originally Posted by Malicious Biz (Post 13896988)

Ahh ok. So they figured "Terrorists destroyed these.. Might as well sneak in a mini-conspiracy and blow up the last one for some reason".