Do you belive 9/11 was a inside job?

[QUOTE="OBLOK"]

YES :)

the fact that Iraq was based on LIES is proof enough to not trust everything the government says.

ThePlothole

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="OBLOK"]

YES :)

the fact that Iraq was based on LIES is proof enough to not trust everything the government says.

OBLOK

Hypocrisy at its finest, the fact that bush and his administration are a bunch of hipocrites is proof enough to no trust everything the government says.

[QUOTE="Vuurk"]No. It saddens me that 23% of the people in this poll answered yes. How can humanity be this unintelligent?MushroomWig

You were wrong about "free-fall speed"

You were wrong about "there's a bomb in the building"

You were wrong about "there's no explanation for building 7"

You were wrong about "there was no wreckage"

You were wrong about the "living hijackers"

Admit it.

Because i don't know what would look more stupid, finding WMD's that have USA written all over or..not finding anything...

OBLOK

[QUOTE="racer8dan"]

When you have some free time to finish all 8.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aECYD1sfAV4

GabuEx

See, no offense, but this is why I find the topic of 9/11 conspiracy theories extremely tiring: you can spend a long time debunking an assertion that a conspiracy theorist makes, but then after all that effort, all you get in response is yet another video. It's like playing Whack-a-Mole, and begins to feel about as futile as well. It would take me 88 minutes to watch that whole thing and who knows how long rebutting everything it says, and then if I did all that, I'd get... another video to watch. No thanks.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

See, no offense, but this is why I find the topic of 9/11 conspiracy theories extremely tiring: you can spend a long time debunking an assertion that a conspiracy theorist makes, but then after all that effort, all you get in response is yet another video. It's like playing Whack-a-Mole, and begins to feel about as futile as well. It would take me 88 minutes to watch that whole thing and who knows how long rebutting everything it says, and then if I did all that, I'd get... another video to watch. No thanks.

racer8dan

Looking at the facts.

Does anyone think that after the planes hit the buildings and the buildings came down into dust that they found a intact ID card from one of the highjackers. who is alive and well in another country on camera with the same face. Somehow got through the airports with boxcutters and hit the most secured building in the world? They could find his ID laying the rubble of New York, but couldn't find the black box for the plane? They could match DNA samples from the chaos but find a ID card and still couldn't find the black box? Thats what they said.That isn't even 98% of it, read the report.

The evidence points to absolute 100% distortion of the truth. I'm not saying the US government was behind it, as I think it is a classic staged false flag operation performed by an expert group.

jamesgj

I don't really believe the Bush Administration was behind it. There are 100's if not 1000's of government agencies and any one of them could have been responsible. It isnt just the Secret Service, the FBI and the CIA or DoD there are tons of other agencies.

I'm not asking you to re-butt the evidence shown in the video, I simply offered it up as a means for whomever is interested in seeing the evidence of both sides. I don't believe it was a plane, you do, neither of us are going to change our opinions arguing in a forum, (it never happens) Step away from the forums and watch it with an open mind, not with a mind set of "he's wrong" before having listened to what he has to say. Then you can reanalyze your opinion based on what you find as plausible and not. These forums tend to bring out the "arguing, even though your not sure of what your arguing is even your belief". People like to argue, not saying that's you.

racer8dan

The problem with "watching it with an open mind" is that an "open mind" in conspiracy theorist terms means ignoring all evidence and basic logic.

[QUOTE="racer8dan"]

I'm not asking you to re-butt the evidence shown in the video, I simply offered it up as a means for whomever is interested in seeing the evidence of both sides. I don't believe it was a plane, you do, neither of us are going to change our opinions arguing in a forum, (it never happens) Step away from the forums and watch it with an open mind, not with a mind set of "he's wrong" before having listened to what he has to say. Then you can reanalyze your opinion based on what you find as plausible and not. These forums tend to bring out the "arguing, even though your not sure of what your arguing is even your belief". People like to argue, not saying that's you.

metroidfood

The problem with "watching it with an open mind" is that an "open mind" in conspiracy theorist terms means ignoring all evidence and basic logic.

[QUOTE="OBLOK"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] To be fair......it's not that Iraq never had WMDs so I wouldn't say it was based on lies. LJS9502_basic

Hypocrisy at its finest, the fact that bush and his administration are a bunch of hipocrites is proof enough to no trust everything the government says.

Actually the Reagan adminstration did arm Iraq during the Iran Iraq War within the Contra Scandal.. Fun fact Israel actually armed Iran.. Hilarious I know.

[QUOTE="racer8dan"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

See, no offense, but this is why I find the topic of 9/11 conspiracy theories extremely tiring: you can spend a long time debunking an assertion that a conspiracy theorist makes, but then after all that effort, all you get in response is yet another video. It's like playing Whack-a-Mole, and begins to feel about as futile as well. It would take me 88 minutes to watch that whole thing and who knows how long rebutting everything it says, and then if I did all that, I'd get... another video to watch. No thanks.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="OBLOK"]You have to be a bit more fair than that, those WMD's were given to Iraq by the USA..

Hypocrisy at its finest, the fact that bush and his administration are a bunch of hipocrites is proof enough to no trust everything the government says.

sSubZerOo

Actually the Reagan adminstration did arm Iraq during the Iran Iraq War within the Contra Scandal.. Fun fact Israel actually armed Iran.. Hilarious I know.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] One...the US doesn't "give". Second...yes some materials were sold but the US was far from the only country doing so. However, this suggests the government definitely CAN'T keep secrets since the sales of materials later used in WMDs is easily known. If the US government could keep such secrets....I don't think we'd know that now would we. So that goes against the US government being able to orchestrate such an operation without the knowledge leaking out. Score one for the US government NOT able to keep secrets.....;)LJS9502_basic

Actually the Reagan adminstration did arm Iraq during the Iran Iraq War within the Contra Scandal.. Fun fact Israel actually armed Iran.. Hilarious I know.

.. I don't see how we could condone either one? They are more or less the same thing.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="racer8dan"]I'm not asking you to re-butt the evidence shown in the video, I simply offered it up as a means for whomever is interested in seeing the evidence of both sides. I don't believe it was a plane, you do, neither of us are going to change our opinions arguing in a forum, (it never happens) Step away from the forums and watch it with an open mind, not with a mind set of "he's wrong" before having listened to what he has to say. Then you can reanalyze your opinion based on what you find as plausible and not. These forums tend to bring out the "arguing, even though your not sure of what your arguing is even your belief". People like to argue, not saying that's you.

racer8dan

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

Actually the Reagan adminstration did arm Iraq during the Iran Iraq War within the Contra Scandal.. Fun fact Israel actually armed Iran.. Hilarious I know.

sSubZerOo

.. I don't see how we could condone either one? They are more or less the same thing.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Fun fact...they didn't "give" anything. They sold. Big difference.;)LJS9502_basic

.. I don't see how we could condone either one? They are more or less the same thing.

.........................Iran was never friendly with Israel, they sold them weapons to kill one another.. The United States specifically did this to have both Iran and Iraq to kill one another, taking out the two greatest threats within the region.. Not to mention the United States also armedthe brutal dictatorship of the Shah which fell into the hands of the forces that took over at the Revolution.. You really can't defend either one of these kinds of behaivors what so ever.. Or even condone them..

.........................Iran was never friendly with Israel, they sold them weapons to kill one another.. The United States specifically did this to have both Iran and Iraq to kill one another, taking out the two greatest threats within the region.. Not to mention the United States also armedthe brutal dictatorship of the Shah which fell into the hands of the forces that took over at the Revolution.. You really can't defend either one of these kinds of behaivors what so ever.. Or even condone them..

sSubZerOo

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

.........................Iran was never friendly with Israel, they sold them weapons to kill one another.. The United States specifically did this to have both Iran and Iraq to kill one another, taking out the two greatest threats within the region.. Not to mention the United States also armedthe brutal dictatorship of the Shah which fell into the hands of the forces that took over at the Revolution.. You really can't defend either one of these kinds of behaivors what so ever.. Or even condone them..

LJS9502_basic

Yeah but how can we condone this when it results in the death of many innocennts for mainly economic and political gain.. The Iraq Iran War around the Contra scandal had nothing to do to upset the security of the US or Israel really.. This would be acceptable in the era of World War 1, but with the creation of the UN with things like the geneva convention and nation rights.. This sort of thing really isn't tolerated any more.

[QUOTE="racer8dan"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]You know if you watch videos you can see planes....right?

LJS9502_basic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAgYVJ1jKZ0&feature=related

racer8dan :) Good going. I agree with everything you have said.JudgementEden

Also. 0:00-1:10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ys9quilme1Q&feature=related

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="racer8dan"]I was obviously speaking of the pentagon. Though I should have been more clear.

racer8dan

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAgYVJ1jKZ0&feature=related

[QUOTE="racer8dan"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Okay. I saw a video of what happened at the Pentagon....and while it was fast...I most certainly DID see a plane crash through the Pentagon that day. So to state otherwise is totally unjustified.

PannicAtack

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAgYVJ1jKZ0&feature=related

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"]

[QUOTE="racer8dan"]I don't see it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAgYVJ1jKZ0&feature=related

racer8dan

[QUOTE="racer8dan"]

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"] However, there were quite a few people there who did see a plane.

PannicAtack

As the video states, one of the most secure facilities in the nation, and that crappy, low frame video is the only camera that caught the impact. Not to mention you can't even see the large plane in it, (how convenient I might add). Doesn't sound very secure to me, if that's the case, I could probably walk out on that field wielding an ak47 and no one would be any the wiser, unless of course they do have the video from those other cameras and there just not going to release them due to the evidence they hold. This alone should be enough, to at the least question the official story, no?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ys9quilme1Q&feature=related

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="racer8dan"]What about my last post?

racer8dan

As the video states, one of the most secure facilities in the nation, and that crappy, low frame video is the only camera that caught the impact. Not to mention you can't even see the large plane in it, (how convenient I might add). Doesn't sound very secure to me, if that's the case, I could probably walk out on that field wielding an ak47 and no one would be any the wiser, unless of course they do have the video from those other cameras and there just not going to release them due to the evidence they hold. This alone should be enough, to at the least question the official story, no?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ys9quilme1Q&feature=related

Also there was that gas station that had a video camera that would have caught the plane but federal agents confiscated the video tape lol *coughs* cover up! And there were the fire fighters who were going to do that radio interview about the pentagon but just before the radio show they canceled and the radio was told they were on a leave of absence... oooooh how convenient!

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="racer8dan"]What about my last post?

racer8dan

As the video states, one of the most secure facilities in the nation, and that crappy, low frame video is the only camera that caught the impact. Not to mention you can't even see the large plane in it, (how convenient I might add). Doesn't sound very secure to me, if that's the case, I could probably walk out on that field wielding an ak47 and no one would be any the wiser, unless of course they do have the video from those other cameras and there just not going to release them due to the evidence they hold. This alone should be enough, to at the least question the official story, no?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ys9quilme1Q&feature=related

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"]Gee, law enforcement people confiscating relevant evidence as per criminal investigation. Must be a cover-up. The DNA of the passengers was recovered from the crash site and positively identified. There was wreckage taken from the site. The black box was recovered. The FDR was recovered. There were countless witnesses who saw a plane hit the Pentagon. What the hell else is there? Be honest, even if I perfectly explained any perceived "anomalies" pertaining to the cameras, that wouldn't change a damn thing. You'd just proceed to the next point.JudgementEden

What evidence do you have that the eyewitnesses were paid shills, or that the wreckage was planted, or that the DNA evidence was forged?

[QUOTE="JudgementEden"][QUOTE="PannicAtack"]Gee, law enforcement people confiscating relevant evidence as per criminal investigation. Must be a cover-up. The DNA of the passengers was recovered from the crash site and positively identified. There was wreckage taken from the site. The black box was recovered. The FDR was recovered. There were countless witnesses who saw a plane hit the Pentagon. What the hell else is there? Be honest, even if I perfectly explained any perceived "anomalies" pertaining to the cameras, that wouldn't change a damn thing. You'd just proceed to the next point.PannicAtack

I love the assumption that if I don't go along with a conspiracy theory, I "believe everything the government says."PannicAtack

Gee, law enforcement people confiscating relevant evidence as per criminal investigation. Must be a cover-up. The DNA of the passengers was recovered from the crash site and positively identified. There was wreckage taken from the site. The black box was recovered. The FDR was recovered. There were countless witnesses who saw a plane hit the Pentagon. What the hell else is there? Be honest, even if I perfectly explained any perceived "anomalies" pertaining to the cameras, that wouldn't change a damn thing. You'd just proceed to the next point.PannicAtack

Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=6

But yeah, believing the many accounts of qualified eyewitnesses is totally ridiculous and makes us government mind slaves.

Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=6

But yeah, believing the many accounts of qualified eyewitnesses is totally ridiculous and makes us government mind slaves.

metroidfood

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"]

[QUOTE="JudgementEden"] Everything you said was hearsay, none of it backed, and you say our beliefs are nuts. In my opinion, those who believe the government should really start thinking for themselves, instead of being told what to believe.JudgementEden

"My friend says that the government cloned people to pretend to be witnesses" is hearsay. "This is an event that is corroborated by the testimony of several eyewitnesses" is not hearsay. By your terrible new definition, everything you say is hearsay, as well.

The black boxes? It's explained in Chapter 41 of this book, which was written by a firefighter and a reporter.

[size=11]79 people? Really?[/size] :|msudude211

Millions of people have seen spirits, millions have seen a demonic possession happen in front of their eyes. Although there have been millions upon millions of sightings by countleess people, how many people here would believe them? Compared to that number, these eyewitnesses are incredibly small. JudgementEden

They usually don't have stuff like this backing them up though.

[QUOTE="metroidfood"]

Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=6

But yeah, believing the many accounts of qualified eyewitnesses is totally ridiculous and makes us government mind slaves.

JudgementEden

[QUOTE="msudude211"][size=11]79 people? Really?[/size] :|JudgementEden

[QUOTE="JudgementEden"][QUOTE="PannicAtack"]Bull. The testimony of countless eyewitnesses is not "hearsay." Wreckage that workers carried away is not "hearsay." Flight data from the black box is not "hearsay."

PannicAtack

"My friend says that the government cloned people to pretend to be witnesses" is hearsay. "This is an event that is corroborated by the testimony of several eyewitnesses" is not hearsay. By your terrible new definition, everything you say is hearsay, as well.

The black boxes? It's explained in Chapter 41 of this book, which was written by a firefighter and a reporter.

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"]

[QUOTE="JudgementEden"] Sure it was, in your perspective, it sure is hearsay. Were you there? Classic question, if that's a no, it's hearsay. Evidence can totally be fabricated (Which there wasn't even much of that) but most people pretend these things aren't possible. Show me these black boxes you keep speaking about.JudgementEden

"My friend says that the government cloned people to pretend to be witnesses" is hearsay. "This is an event that is corroborated by the testimony of several eyewitnesses" is not hearsay. By your terrible new definition, everything you say is hearsay, as well.

The black boxes? It's explained in Chapter 41 of this book, which was written by a firefighter and a reporter.

[QUOTE="JudgementEden"] Millions of people have seen spirits, millions have seen a demonic possession happen in front of their eyes. Although there have been millions upon millions of sightings by countless people, how many people here would believe them? Compared to that number, these eyewitnesses are incredibly small. metroidfood

They usually don't have stuff like this backing them up though.

Really? Do you have ANY idea how easy it would be to just toss it there? Where is the rest of the plane? Did it disintegrate?