9/11 Conspiracy Video.

Talk to anyone who has ever seen the periodic table. A jet fuel fire, even with unlimited supply of such fuel, would not even begin to weaken the steel in that building (trussed or not).

It's interesting you mention physics in regard to the pentagon hit. Can physics somehow prevent 12 tons of engines from smacking into the pentagon? Not to mention they weren't even found. Don't tell me they were vaporized either, as I will refer you back to the periodic table.

Frankly, your ignorance is an insult to everyone.

General thread subject comment: Too bad they don't teach Occam's Razor in school. It would put so many of these silly conspiracy theories in the trash can, where they belonged in the first place.

Why did building #7 fall?

okay. Let's apply Occam's razor then.

Which is more believable? The towers were brought down with the complicity of the most powerful Government in the world within it's own borders? Or 19 members of a cave dwelling terrorist organization led by a man undergoing dialysis for severe kidney damage managed to pull off the most horrific hijacking and destruction on US soil with BOXCUTTERS.

The silliest conspiracy theory of all is the Government approved version.

The common wisdom of plane hijackings (at least before 11Sep2001) was to cooperate, noting that those aboard the plane are eventually freed (either by being released by the hijackers, or in more extreme cases the hijackers being made to Go Away forcefully by nice young men/women usually wearing black pajamas and carrying around stuff that makes a lot of noise and hurts people). Without that CW, yes a planeful of people, even if they were all fat slobs (statistically unlikely, but theoretically possible), would have been able to overcome a few goombahs armed with boxcutters.

As for the cave, it wasn't just some random hole in the mountain picked as being a temporary shelter, but a developed stronghold equipped for use as a headquarters, with provisions for serving as the base of operations of an international organization.

As for the man undergoing dialysis for severe kidney damage, there are these lovely people available called "subordinates" (though not as many are available to him as before, at this point) that can do the "details" planning and handle the specifics of penetrating a relatively open society where security was (arguably still is, save for blowing the "common wisdom" mentioned above out the door, making hijacking a plane a questionable-at-best proposition) generally minimally effective.

On a tangential note, why aren't these kind of conspiracy theories floating around about the 1993 bombing of the WTC, which the government believes to have been perpetrated by the same group? [impression=wide-eyed innocent]Surely it can't be because of biases regarding the respective presidents at the time, right?[/impression]

you have the whole cognitive disonance thing down dont'cha!



Here ya go.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/wtcbomb.html

No, I'm not. I'm being logical, unlike the video. If someone has the power to implement some sort of brilliant conspiracy, they probably also have the power to keep it secret. It's actually pretty logical.


That's awful funny then, because it did.


You're making an assumption from an incorrect premise. Oh wait, you're making an accusation from no premise.

We all know it was really the illuminati, nothing like this happens without their okay

How do you propose all questions would be unasked? Seriously. Imagine you're the head of a Government conspiracy on the magnitute I suggest happened on 9-11. How would you silence all lines of questioning?

I never wrote the questions would be unasked. I wrote that they would be unpublished - there's a difference.

no there isn't and you haven't answered my question.

Yes, there is. I can ask a question without publishing it - I just did, in my head, right now.

Does your glibness help you sleep at night?

Does your incomprehension of the English language help you?
See, when I use words, I use their actual definitions, not some fantasy one that only I understand.

Can i throw some jello on you both and watch you slug it out please?

hock... pooeee....

"I spit on you" he said with a French accent.

What was the point again? Oh yeah, *smoke screen clears*..... the inconsistencies in the official story.

I haven't seen anyone impeach the evidence provided by the "kid". Maybe I'm just naturally sceptical.

...and you're never ever patronizing. You know damn well what I meant.

If you expect to be taken seriously you'll drop the coy routine. It doesn't become you.

Please show me the evidence that 19 hijackers armed with boxcutters pulled off 9-11, and I'll kiss your feet.

I'm not trying to prove anything, so no. You show me any evidence of any other theory.

You're right, through my magical mind-reading abilities I was able to divine that you were using a word in a way that was entirely different from its accepted definition. Why is it that I necessarily was using a word as you define it, and not as the dictionary defines it?


If you expect to be taken seriouusly you'll use language the same way the rest of reality does.

You're right, through my magical mind-reading abilities I was able to divine that you were using a word in a way that was entirely different from its accepted definition. Why is it that I necessarily was using a word as you define it, and not as the dictionary defines it?


If you expect to be taken seriouusly you'll use language the same way the rest of reality does.

I don't need evidence to ask questions. All I need is lack of evidence.



Really. You don't do glib very well. I'd stop now.




:::yawn:::

No, but you need evidence to back an assertion.


Wow, you just have a complete and total inability to admit being wrong in the slightest. So what, because I don't think exactly like you I'm glib? OK, whatever.
That's a good way to win arguments, I suppose, not respond to what's written and just make personal accusations.

The whole video was full of evidence to support asking questions, did you view the video?

I'm not asserting anything, sweetie.

You're glib because you're patronizing in a particularly annoying way. Plenty of people disagree with me that aren't glib.

/staggers back in amazement.
OMFG I'm finding myself agreeing with Kevn on a point.