9/11 Conspiracy Thread (There can be only one!)
- Thread starter Stryder
- Start date
- Status
Then stop posting your shit here and go back to the CIT forum. If you can't back up your shit...then don't post it.
MacGyver, what happened to keeping things above the belt? You ask Headspin to lay the smoking gun in front of you but you seem to require no such proof when it comes to the official story. Why would that be?
I would argue that the official story has very little corroborating evidence; just an elaborate array of falsehoods that may lull you into believing its falsehoods. The truth simply isn't pretty sometimes and some would rather believe then lie then face up to the truth. Jack Nicholson, as a corrupt general, said to Tom Cruise (the heroic lawyer) in the film "A Few Good Men":
"You can't handle the truth!"
Tom Cruise did ultimately handle the truth, but seriously, sometimes it's easier to believe the lies. I'd certainly say this was the case in terms of 9/11. I think I'm beginning to see why. Those who know the truth just get -tired- of trying to persuade the people who refuse to consider anything but the official story, who, far from wanting to learn the truth, seem to be trying to find every single possible way for the truth to be false so they don't have to deal with it. So we go play World of Warcraft or watch a movie, or whatever. And official story believers can leave the forum with their beliefs relatively untouched of the unpallatable truth.
You are absolutely right. I apologize HS, for getting too emotional.
i dont think you can tell the truth.:shrug:
. Something to think about MacGyver; many people aren't sure that the official story is wrong in many things, but you must remember that even the official story has changed over time in some details. In essence, at the very least, what is needed is more investigation. People like me and Headspin aren't getting paid to investigate whether patents can do what they say they can do. This is something that the bodies investigating 9/11 should have done ages ago.This said, do you atleast agree that another investigation is required to address the many questions that have been brought up here?
Ok
. But do you atleast agree that there should be another investigation regarding 9/11?I'm afraid sir, you are the delusional one. At least Scott makes sense....sometimes
Pff. Sometimes. Logic is my middle name ;-).
This said, do you atleast agree that another investigation is required to address the many questions that have been brought up here?
I have come to my own conclusions about the events of 9/11. No one told me what to believe. It's just what I have deduced to be the actual events of that day.
People don't make things harder than they have to be...so many things about the TS argument are so much more complex than they have to be. For me it just doesn't add up.
You raise a lot of points I don't yet know how to address (I took the liberty of quoting your post extensively into a truther forum to address the issues). In regards to your last one, that thermite can't cut a thick steel beam; I know that Steven Jones has said otherwise and I now see that Headspin described quite an interesting patent as well in the following post:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2077527&postcount=2066
Last edited:
You know, one thing that is certainly interesting is, why do we see things differently? I have a strong feeling that it has to do with the way we are brought up; a person who has a skeptic for a father is likely to be skeptical of institutions in general, be they religious or governmental (I raise my hand here).
So at the risk of getting fatally off topic, do you think that your upbringing may be affecting what you believe concerning 9/11? If not, what explanation do you give to us holding such different views regarding what happened that day?
I'll bite, why do you believe they used a flower pot? Also, the argument is that the WTC buildings used thermate, not thermite.
Hint doesn't do anything for me
.Let me know what you think the role of the flower pot was. (Hey...who said we couldn't learn about science and debate conspiracies!
Laugh
. I've learned a fair about demolitions and thermate at any rate .If you search for "thermite reactions" on you tube, you can see the whole video, including another experiment on the Fiat they did by placing a flower pot of thermite on the top of the car in the rear, over the gas tank. They put like 5 gallons of gas in the tank, and when the thermite hits it...Kablooey! Cool explosion...has nothing to do with the debate...just neat to watch.
Lol
. I'm not sure we should get -that- distracted .I think I'll stop troubling them for a second, since we're not actually disagreeing on anything right now
.
My father was a stress engineer for Boeing, McDonald Douglas, Lockhead, LTV, and several other major aircraft manufacturers. He help design, the 727, 737, 747, 757,767, and 777. (when he retired) he also worked on the f-4, f-15, f-18.
He flew b-24's over Italy in WWII..I come from a aircraft family. He is a devote Baptist and one of the moral men you will ever meet.
He flew b-24's over Italy in WWII..I come from a aircraft family. He is a devote Baptist and one of the moral men you will ever meet.
As I said, you readily accept gypsum wallboard used for fireproofing capable of melting steel on the word of someone who agrees with your position (no evidence), and yet deny the existence of a thermite charge when presented with a thermite charge patent (evidence). What you are doing is just choosing what evidence to believe.
I have a feeling that in MacGyver's case, the government's story is innocent unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Personally, I think he has it backwards; the government's story isn't a person; it won't 'go to jail' if wrongly convicted. But 3000 people died that day and for this reason, I believe the case -against- the alternate theories should be proven wrong beyond a reasonable doubt before dismissing them.
At present, what most people want is further investigation, regardless of their beliefs. Why? Because the more is investigated, the more we find out concerning the truth. The government reports, for all their flaws, -did- discover some interesting things. It stands to reason that another government report could go discover more things and perhaps answer more questions as well.
Did he believe that his government knew about Pearl Harbor and yet did nothing to prevent what happened there, in order to get involved in World War II? Does he believe that it was impossible for Lee Harvey Oswald to have killed JFK alone, at the very least? Does he believe that the second 'gulf of tonkin incident' actually occured?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_Incident
I'll even ask a (potentially) risky question: did he view his government's stance on gays in the military and gay marriage rights as bad?
If he would have answered yes to any of those questions, then I can think of him as someone who has the ability to question his own government on some very shady things. If he would say no to all of them, well... it's simply hard for some people to question certain authorities.
There's an old saying:
"They must find it hard,
those who take authority for truth
rather than truth as the authority"
Tell me you're joking? From what I've heard, Obama is one of the men keenest in pursuing Osama Bin Laden. I believe that it's because of him that there's been a noticeable shift of attention from Iraq and towards Afghanistan. And while Osama Bin laden may have done some terroristic actions against the U.S., there is little if any evidence that he had anything to do with 9/11 (The FBI never charged him for it and he's not even accussed of masterminding it now). The U.S. government, on the other hand...
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Pearl Harbor? Dragging that old chestnut out of the cob webs. That does not help advance your fantasy though because there was no way that the U.S was going to sit by and watch the Nazi's kill millions of people in Europe. Especially since probably the majority of Americans were from Europe themselves. IOW's the did not need to be a Pearl Harbor and as soon as the U.S were to become part of the Allied forces they would have been an enemy of Germany and Japan so of course Pearl Harbor would have been a target.
Lee Harvey Oswald did kill JFK and he did it alone. I know, someone like yourself would want to think that the government itself was involved but if that were true then no one would have gotten caught and there would be no evidence left behind. All the evidence points to LHO, a poor choice for a hitman, doing it all by himself. So now you will have some people coming in who watched the movie saying he did not act alone but who cares?
There is the slight chance he had some invoolvement with organized crime but even that is far fetched because there is no way they would have hired a drifter like him to do a crime like that. Communists? maybe but either way you can be damn sure that right after he got caught he would have been naming names, why wouldnt he? The reason - He had none to name but himself.
Are you serious?
And who cares? The government is made up of people and the people at the times of those incidents would have been bad\dishonest people to carry out those criminal acts. And what do you think that he would cry if it were true? Big deal.
Being a rebel is one thing and being an idiot is another.
- Status