Reply With Quote
Right, I'm waiting for McDermott to come out with Perfect Soldiers: The Second and Perhaps Penultimate Edition Unless I'm Mercilessly Owned Again When Caught Saying Things Like a B-52 Hit the Empire State Building.
Funny how these "Loose Change" college kids (the ones who started this whole 9-11 conspiracy fad) have had to "revise" their do entary several times due to "inaccuracies." Yet somehow the nutjobs continue to gobble up everything they say.
Right, I'm waiting for McDermott to come out with Perfect Soldiers: The Second and Perhaps Penultimate Edition Unless I'm Mercilessly Owned Again When Caught Saying Things Like a B-52 Hit the Empire State Building.
McDermott is part of the conspiracy. I bet he's part JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
I think it's odd that some people don't realize that some "conspiracy theorists" on this forum have been given the answers to seemingly simple questions.
While the Repug defenders are making lists, let's see the list of anti-terror actions, the WH reactions to the summer chatter and blinking red lights, even just bull blah-blah NatSec meetings, between Jan and Sep 2001.
Kinda hard for him to give answers considering that you haven't asked any questions.
and I guess we made Hitler when we disarmed Germany after the Treaty of Versailles. People today have the historical knowledge of a Chimpanzee.
don't hate on skepticism.
skepticism is okay.
unless you have the answers stop in giving your hateful opinions of supposed "nuts"
and just because the other side gives rebuttals doesn't make those rebuttals concrete in stone. there is two sides to everything.
Being skeptical is one thing. But believing that the WTC was brought down by demolition absolutely qualifies you as a conspiracy nutjob. Period.
that is a nice red herring right there.
This thread should have been dead after the 3rd post.
Why is everyone still arguing?
Conspiracy theorist: Look! I have evidence 9/11 was an inside job!nbadan has questions. mookie has questions. mouse has questions. i am not as skeptical as these three, but when they ask their questions i'd like for you geniuses to answer them rather than calling them idiots. or else admit that you don't know the answers. .
Normal people: Your evidence is wrong because of incontrovertible facts A, B, and C.
Conspiracy theorist: But what about this?
Normal people: Fact D disproves it.
Conspiracy theorist: HA! Bet you can't debunk THIS!
Normal people: Facts E and F debunk it.
Conspiracy theorist: HA! You still haven't disproved anything! You don't have any facts!
Normal people: We just presented you with a series of facts.
Conspiracy theorist: No you didn't! You won't answer any of my questions! You keep stalling! SHEEPLE! SHEEPLE!
Normal people: Stop wearing your ass as a hat.
There are literaly dozens of websites with pictures, eyewitness testimony, video, etc that totally debunk this 9-11 conspiracy nonsense. All you have to do is try a little research. But your minds are already made up. Common sense be damned.
Screw it. You're right. The most incompetent administration of our generation was smart enough to pull off the great 9-11 conspiracy, yet couldn't even manage to plant some WMD's to justify the Iraq invasion.
You win.
Sorry. But for every nutjob conspiracy webpage on 9-11, there's 5 more that debunk it all. Try again.
debunk?
oh yea, i hear about debunks of debunks.
give me a break...
more like opinion and preaching to the choir cookie cutter jibberish.
Is there a "Structural Engineers for 9/11 Truth" organization out there you can point me to.
repost:
"While the Repug defenders are making lists, let's see the list of anti-terror actions, the WH reactions to the summer chatter and blinking red lights, even just bull blah-blah NatSec meetings, between Jan and Sep 2001."
Anybody? Anybody? Bueller? Bueller?
"countless debunkings of your theories"
The only "theory" I have is that the WH did NOTHING in reaction to chatter and blinking red lights.
And since nobody, including the 9/11 Commission, has found ANYTHING that the dubya Exec did prior to 9/11, my theory goes unchallenged.
DEBBUNK DEBUNK DEBUNK DEBUNK...
god stfu already.
"stfu already."
PH threatening AHF's heretofore contested lead in content-free posts.
You are absolutely right that the Bush Administration from January to September 2001 de-emphasized whatever focus Clinton had in dealing with Al-Qaeda. At first, they were looking to constrain China as their top objective.
"WTC 7 wasn't heavily damaged!"
Photo and video evidence shows a 24-story gash taken out of the south face, a huge hole where the fifth story was supposed to be, the lower southwest corner of the building missing. Eyewitnesses say a third of the building was scooped out.
WTC 7 was an unusual design in order to accomodate the electrical substation equipment and the trading floors. When only a few key columns were destroyed, enormous loads were placed on the remaining few. This was not a proven design. But, nobody designs skyscrapers to withstand having adjacent skyscrapers fall on them.
Firefighters at the scene realized early on that WTC 7 was unstable and pulled everybody out. They did not fight the fires raging inside.
"But the fire never made it to the north side of the building!" Photos and videos show that indeed it did.
"But it fell straight down!" When the main truss failed, the rest of the trusses on the level of failure, which were not designed to handle the extreme loads, failed diagonally within a few seconds, causing the floor above to collapse. Once this began, the momentum of the building rapidly led to global failure.
"But it fell straight down!" Well, almost straight down. But when the collpase began, the moment is going to cause the outside walls to start failing inward, causing the building to start bowing in the middle and collapsing on itself.
"But the buildings fell at (close to) free fall speed!" Once the building started moving downward, whatever small resistance could be offered by the failed structure would have been no match for the enormous momentum of such a large mass, and as it accelerated, it would have gotten closer to theoretical free fall.
"But on WTC 1 and 2, some physicist said that the reinforced core should have offered at least a little resistance!" But the core did not collapse at the same time as the rest of the building, and video evidence shows that the core stayed standing for several seconds after the floors collapsed around it.
"But there has never been any evidence verifying who the hijackers were!" Except that a respected journalist did an in-depth study on each of them.
"But you haven't answered a single one of my questions! You're stalling! SHEEPLE! SHEEPLE!" Pull your head out of your ass.
And of course, elpimpo, I'm sure that you, just like all your buddies, will ignore that post, and go on believing whatever you want to believe, or at the very least pull out the boilerplate "Well, I still don't believe the entire official report."
Debunking 9/11 conspiracy theories is like debunking creation science. The adherents believe for reasons that have nothing to do with objective evidence, and aren't really interested in having their minds changed.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
