Justice Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 (edited) Watch at the 3:25 mark. If you dare. Then explain that. Edited March 7, 2016 by Justice
Chef Jim Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 (edited) Watch at the 3:25 mark. If you dare. Then explain that. Are you !@#$ing kidding me? Dude you are MUCH smarter that that. BTW you linked two different videos. Edited March 7, 2016 by Chef Jim
Justice Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Are you !@#$ing kidding me? Dude you are MUCH smarter that that. BTW you linked two different videos. I know. The second one I should just delete. The audio doesn't match the video. The first one does though.
GG Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 I know. The second one I should just delete. The audio doesn't match the video. The first one does though. So, you're asking us to believe that not a lot of people were involved in the plot, but the supporting video has a NYPD commander clearing traffic before the controlled explosion? NYPD involved in a controlled explosion plot that took the lives of hundreds of NYPD and NYFD? And not a single person has come out with the truth?
Chef Jim Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 I know. The second one I should just delete. The audio doesn't match the video. The first one does though. And it's only :57 long I think. I thought you were using Silverstein's "Pull it" remark as evidence.
Justice Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 So, you're asking us to believe that not a lot of people were involved in the plot, but the supporting video has a NYPD commander clearing traffic before the controlled explosion? NYPD involved in a controlled explosion plot that took the lives of hundreds of NYPD and NYFD? And not a single person has come out with the truth? Both stories seem far fetched. Don't act as if the story you believe is actually believable too. And it's only :57 long I think. I thought you were using Silverstein's "Pull it" remark as evidence. Look again. It's 11 minutes long. Watch it for a minute or so. On the meantime Kiko is a Dolphin. Dang it.
Chef Jim Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Look again. It's 11 minutes long. Watch it for a minute or so. On the meantime Kiko is a Dolphin. Dang it. No time right now. I'll give it a look later. Oh and keep that football bull **** where it belongs.
GG Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Both stories seem far fetched. Don't act as if the story you believe is actually believable too. Two 767s loaded with fuel slam into two 110 story buildings, causing them to sway, burn & collapse. The resulting fire & debris take down a poorly designed skyscraper on the site. Other buildings around the site suffer extreme damage, but do not collapse because they had better structural integrity. Deutsche Bank building damaged by falling debris but stayed up because it's base wasn't compromised. WTC7 was compromised. Sounds a hell of a lot more plausible than any conspiracy theory you can toss out there.
IDBillzFan Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 I think you're overly exaggerating how many people it takes to execute such a plan. So let me get this straight: you agree that terrorists flew planes into the Twin Towers, but also believe that...totally separately and unrelated... somneone rigged WT7 with bombs to go off...just in case?
DC Tom Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Both stories seem far fetched. Don't act as if the story you believe is actually believable too. Having studied more than a few bombing raids from World War 2, including reports from both sides...WTC7 falling late in the day is not all that unusual. Damage tends to add up and compound, even days after the bombings stop. The only reason to look for an alternative explanation is immaturity. So let me get this straight: you agree that terrorists flew planes into the Twin Towers, but also believe that...totally separately and unrelated... somneone rigged WT7 with bombs to go off...just in case? The classic mark of a bad theory: it gets progressively more complex, the more you question it. If you have to keep postulating endless new adjustments to your theory, your theory sucks.
Justice Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 (edited) So let me get this straight: you agree that terrorists flew planes into the Twin Towers, but also believe that...totally separately and unrelated... somneone rigged WT7 with bombs to go off...just in case? Not totally separate. In concert. Having studied more than a few bombing raids from World War 2, including reports from both sides...WTC7 falling late in the day is not all that unusual. Damage tends to add up and compound, even days after the bombings stop. The only reason to look for an alternative explanation is immaturity. The classic mark of a bad theory: it gets progressively more complex, the more you question it. If you have to keep postulating endless new adjustments to your theory, your theory sucks. Dude gave orders to pull it. And did they collapse at free fall speed? Edited March 7, 2016 by Justice
Deranged Rhino Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 I can't but it's easier to assume that a when two huge jetliners filled with several thousand gallons of jet fuel crash into two buildings that the ensuing fire will spread. Easier to believe that somehow some group of people entered WTC7 and rigged up explosive and no one...not a single goddamn person saw or reported seeing something fishy. That's just !@#$ing whacked. Again, no dog in this fight but: The bolded isn't true. There are plenty of eye witnesses on the ground that day who claim to have seen or heard explosions from WTC7. Not saying those people aren't suffering from the fog of war and/or making stuff up after the fact -- but there are plenty of people who reported seeing/hearing something "fishy" from the ground. So let me get this straight: you agree that terrorists flew planes into the Twin Towers, but also believe that...totally separately and unrelated... somneone rigged WT7 with bombs to go off...just in case? The major theory out there (which I'm not a believer in but I have looked into it for my own work) is that it was a coordinated attack. It wasn't rigged "just in case", it was rigged before, as were the towers themselves, to go off in a controlled demolition.
Chef Jim Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 (edited) Again, no dog in this fight but: The bolded isn't true. There are plenty of eye witnesses on the ground that day who claim to have seen or heard explosions from WTC7. Not saying those people aren't suffering from the fog of war and/or making stuff up after the fact -- but there are plenty of people who reported seeing/hearing something "fishy" from the ground. The major theory out there (which I'm not a believer in but I have looked into it for my own work) is that it was a coordinated attack. It wasn't rigged "just in case", it was rigged before, as were the towers themselves, to go off in a controlled demolition. Explosions?!?! Say it ain't so!!!! Two !@#$ing jumbo jets crashed into two of the world's largest buildings and people said they heard explosions afterwards. What a revelation!! Oh and I mean no one saw or heard anything fishy prior to the crash. You know ninjas climbing the exterior of the buildings with dynamite in backpacks. Edited March 7, 2016 by Chef Jim
IDBillzFan Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Not totally separate. In concert. So the terrorists bombed the building? What is the reason for not telling anyone?
Deranged Rhino Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Explosions?!?! Say it ain't so!!!! Two !@#$ing jumbo jets crashed into two of the world's largest buildings and people said they heard explosions afterwards. What a revelation!! Oh and I mean no one saw or heard anything fishy prior to the crash. You know ninjas climbing the exterior of the buildings with dynamite in backpacks. Oh, my bad.
meazza Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Explosions?!?! Say it ain't so!!!! Two !@#$ing jumbo jets crashed into two of the world's largest buildings and people said they heard explosions afterwards. What a revelation!! Oh and I mean no one saw or heard anything fishy prior to the crash. You know ninjas climbing the exterior of the buildings with dynamite in backpacks. That's because they're ninjas. You're not supposed to see them
Chef Jim Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 That's because they're ninjas. You're not supposed to see them What a !@#$ing dumbass I am.
Justice Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Let's just agree to disagree. You guys can't explain how a 50 story building collapses at free fall speed and I can't explain my side either. Your only explanation is to tell me fire caused it. Or debris. Both are physically impossible. OKC took a truck bomb and still stood. Debris takes down WTC 7??? But but but how did they get away with it?? Nobody saw them??? How am I supposed to know. All I know is a building collapsed that wasn't hit by a plane and it only took 9 hours to do it. Many other buildings burned much longer than that and stood.
DC Tom Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Not totally separate. In concert. Dude gave orders to pull it. And did they collapse at free fall speed? What speed are buildings supposed to collapse at?
GG Posted March 7, 2016 Posted March 7, 2016 Let's just agree to disagree. You guys can't explain how a 50 story building collapses at free fall speed and I can't explain my side either. Your only explanation is to tell me fire caused it. Or debris. Both are physically impossible. OKC took a truck bomb and still stood. Debris takes down WTC 7??? But but but how did they get away with it?? Nobody saw them??? How am I supposed to know. All I know is a building collapsed that wasn't hit by a plane and it only took 9 hours to do it. Many other buildings burned much longer than that and stood. Did those buildings have a design flaw as they burned for hours.? If this was a controlled demolition of WTC, why the need for the other two planes to target DC?
Recommended Posts