911 Conspiracy

The events that unfolded on 911 were

  • Terrorist attack! No Coverup!

    Votes: 35 30.2%

  • Terrorist Attack! Government Coverup!

    Votes: 30 25.9%

  • Government False Flag Attack!

    Votes: 48 41.4%

  • Other! with good evidence

    Votes: 3 2.6%

  • Other! without evidence !

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    116
  • Poll closed .
tip top toker

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
How can anyone with any brains whatsoever believe the government on this when the governemnt cannot even offer a single credible answer to 3 seperate inciden ts, being two missing aircraft and a controlled demolition. It's absolutely laughable listening to people defending it, when they don't have a single valid explanation over WTC7 :lol: oh right, fire, of course LOL be proud! be american! goto war! YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEHAAAAAA
 
tip top toker

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
Mcgician said:
Prove it. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Um. Plenty of proof around of the collapse of trade centre 7. plenty of proof abot burning points of materials the aircraft was compromised of, and well, the other plane, i think they claimed it sunk into the ground or something :D

The joy of it is i have to prove nothing. A huge fucking building falls down in a perfectly controlled demollition, the government has no plausible explanation, yet we are supposed to believe them anyways. loooool. your government will happily lock people away in jail without charge for a decade, you honestly think they give two shits about your life and that you're somehow different to these folk in Guantanamo in their eyes? :D

This is great, it's like religeous crazies getting livid and demanding you prove that god doesn't exist etc, um, they made the bullshit statements so it's their job to prove their statements are correct, not ours to disprove. There is no requirement to disprove as they are baseless from the start.
 
Mcgician

Mcgician

Well-Known Member
tip top toker said:
Um. Plenty of proof around of the collapse of trade centre 7. plenty of proof abot burning points of materials the aircraft was compromised of, and well, the other plane, i think they claimed it sunk into the ground or something :D

The joy of it is i have to prove nothing. A huge fucking building falls down in a perfectly controlled demollition, the government has no plausible explanation, yet we are supposed to believe them anyways. loooool. your government will happily lock people away in jail without charge for a decade, you honestly think they give two shits about your life and that you're somehow different to these folk in Guantanamo in their eyes? :D

This is great, it's like religeous crazies getting livid and demanding you prove that god doesn't exist etc, um, they made the bullshit statements so it's their job to prove their statements are correct, not ours to disprove. There is no requirement to disprove as they are baseless from the start.
Click to expand...
No offense, but you prove my earlier point. Saying there's "plenty of proof" is hardly empirical evidence. Saying you don't have to prove anything goes against everything the scientific method stands for. Try again,........please. Thanks.
 
tip top toker

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
There is proof out there if you want it, but i can't be arsed to go drag it up :)

Let's look at it like this. Provide me proof as to how WTC7 WAS terrorism, and i will then counter with proof it was not, but unless you can offer any proof to suggest that it was indeed a terrorist act, then it's all just a load of hot air and bollocks.

Try it like this. WTC7 collapsed because some funky Egyptian space Sphinx blew it up with his eyes. That is the governemnt statement. Are you seriously suggesting that the statement must remain true unless someone can disprove it :lol:
 
Mcgician

Mcgician

Well-Known Member
tip top toker said:
Are you seriously suggesting that the statement must remain true unless someone can disprove it :lol:
Click to expand...
No, what I'm saying is that most claims are bullshit unless they can be proven, or disproven. That's why it's called proof!!! Any jackass can come up with any theory they want. Are you suggesting science needs to disprove all such ridiculous theories in order to validate itself? If the proof is so overwhelming it should be not only easy, but even easier for you to prove since you're such a vehement believer. As of yet, I've seen nothing of the sort to persuade me in the least.......and I've seen a lot of the "truther" videos i.e Loose Change and what not. Continue on, please.
 
tip top toker

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
So where is the evidence that has persuaded you that world trade center 7 collapsed from fire. Might be good to go and read about all the rescue workers testimonies, maybe the comments about 2pulling" the building, or the reported countdown over the radio.

Imagine i know nothing, so please offer me your first compelling piece of evidence that it was terrorists, and not just because there is a government statement, evidence that would dictate it was a terrorist attack. Because if i knew nothing and saw the video of it collapsing, well it is a perfect example of controlled demolition.

You don't seem to be able to offer a single piece of evidence indicating it was not a controlled demolition. It's a scary time when someone will believe something because they've simply been told that is what they must believe and can't evens top to think wait, where is the evidence.
 
Mcgician

Mcgician

Well-Known Member
tip top toker said:
You don't seem to be able to offer a single piece of evidence indicating it was not a controlled demolition.
Click to expand...
I'm really trying to be as respectful as I can here, but if this same statement were asked of me on the street I'd say the person asking it was completely retarded at this point. The reason I say it wasn't a "controlled demolition" was because we all saw a couple huge aircraft fly into them! Lofl!! Burden of proof? Are you serious??? The burden of proof is not on me but you and your swiss cheese of a theory.
 
tip top toker

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
Um, no aircraft flew into world trade centre 7. The government claims it was fire. Near all eye witness testimony claims otherwise. Please explain how world trade centre 7 collapsed in a controlled demolition sequence, a steel building i should add, from a simple fire. As i say, you have not been able to offer any proof so far other than to avoid the issue. We are talking about trade centre 7. Please explain to me the reasons behind trade centre 7 collapsing as it did, and hell, just collapsing at all.
 
Mcgician

Mcgician

Well-Known Member
tip top toker said:
We are talking about trade centre 7.
Click to expand...
We are? Says who? Why not include the two obvious buildings hit by jetliners? You're the one stuck on TC7, not me. I need not prove it was fire, as there is no definitive proof of "controlled demolition". Nor do I need to prove there "WAS" a conspiracy as I don't believe there was one. The burden of proof is solely upon those who claim such things. As you are one of those, the evidence should be easy to come up with and overwhelming in PROVEABLE facts. Like most Americans, I belive the Bush administration, while well intentioned, is, was, and at particularly that point in time INCAPABLE of pulling off a conspiracy a large as you belive. Not to mention, even if it was beyond the administration's capacity, stemming the tide of truth and the ensuing covering up of such a large conspiracy every bit as statistically improbale as well as impossible in covering up.
 
tip top toker

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
Well yeah, they obvioulsy were incapable, hence all the information available proving the contrary to what they need us to believe. If they'd pulled it off successfully we wouldn't have a thread like this :lol:

You seem to now better than the rescuers on the ground who witnessed the underground explosiions, but hey, you must be right :D i'm outta here, waste of time talking to somneone who'll do anything to avoid the point.
 
Mcgician

Mcgician

Well-Known Member
tip top toker said:
You seem to now better than the rescuers on the ground who witnessed the underground explosiions, but hey, you must be right :D
Click to expand...
Did you just claim that rescuers witnessed "underground explosiions"? lol. At what point are you going to give me some actual, PROVEABLE, factual evidence? Btw, how does ANYONE prove a "witnessed explosiion"? Care to explain? lol. The only shred of "evidence" you claim to be able to come up with are either anecdotal or extremely weak.


tip top toker said:
i'm outta here, waste of time talking to somneone who'll do anything to avoid the point.
Click to expand...
Look in the mirror buddy.
 
six8

six8

Well-Known Member
have you ever been to the World Trade Center before and after the were destroyed? I have and it wasn't until i witnessed how big the demolition site was that the full scale and magnitude of the buildingds hit me. so taking this into account, #7 being the smaller of the buildings couldn't withstand the destructive force caused by the two other buildings along with the underground explosions. what do you think would happen if your foundation got rocked. not to mention WTC buildings swayed within specs with the wind, had many a gas lines going through them, along with a maze of an underground of trains, shops and so forth. i think some of you guys are just playing monay quaterback. regardless of who or why, terrorists did this.
tip top toker said:
Um, no aircraft flew into world trade centre 7. The government claims it was fire. Near all eye witness testimony claims otherwise. Please explain how world trade centre 7 collapsed in a controlled demolition sequence, a steel building i should add, from a simple fire. As i say, you have not been able to offer any proof so far other than to avoid the issue. We are talking about trade centre 7. Please explain to me the reasons behind trade centre 7 collapsing as it did, and hell, just collapsing at all.
Click to expand...
 
six8

six8

Well-Known Member
if the government responded to every threat, all of society would come to a halt. if they did give anyone a heads up it was because of protocol when danger is eminent, but the tactics are unknown. i guess you could compare it to schools receiving bomb threats, i'm sure they happen more frequently than the schools let us know and only until they disprovedd the threat or were really unsure did they take action.
missnu said:
Hell! Our government knew it was going to happen! They moved all their important documents and gave all the "important people" the day off....Why else were only low level people and such not killed? We even knew and instead of just closing it down to keep people alive we chose to act like we had no idea...even though like I said they had jsut moved all the important documents and people....See!? That is what I mean they think we are all so stupid we won't notice these things and put 2 and 2 together...and with a few more years every child will be left behind and the powers that be will finally have their complete plan...huge movements of zombies as work labor for the 1%
Click to expand...
 
six8

six8

Well-Known Member
i'm searching...how bout lending a hand in my search and save your condescending mannerisms. i fully believe this was an act of terrorism and not some government conspiracy. i believe the newspaper article was purely trying to put in perspective the extreme force and improbable nature to cause the destruction of the World Trade Center....for reals!!! I remember the day the towers were attacked; both times. I'm a New Yorker. Didn't witness the destruction first-hand, but I saw the smoke from the aftermath. I'm from Inwood, NY (rep your city!!!), look it up. there wasn't a day that went by that i didn't have a clear view of Manhattan. does that do it for you?
NoDrama said:
Thats funny, especially considering no other commercial aircraft had ever destroyed a skyscraper before. So how do you suppose they concocted this idea? I'm not saying you are trying to deceive us, but if you could link that info it would lend some credibility to your statement. "For reals" just doesn't do it for me.
Click to expand...
 
six8

six8

Well-Known Member
some of you don't know what it means to fail and try again. some of us have been dumbed down through our educational system. you've been taught competition is bad and everyone should get a trophy just for participating. people don't like America and want to see it's destruction. even more disturbing is the fact that there are politicians who don't like America. many of us may be to young to know the communist party tried infiltrating our government or socialist, or many other groups. what better way to destroy something than from the inside out. it may not happen overnight, but constant persistence is what enemies do. wars never stop, revenge never sleeps, knocking off #1 is always on #2's mind, #3's mind and so on and so on.....read up suckers and stop placing your energy toward government conspiracies.
http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=world_trade_center
six8 said:
i'm searching...how bout lending a hand in my search and save your condescending mannerisms. i fully believe this was an act of terrorism and not some government conspiracy. i believe the newspaper article was purely trying to put in perspective the extreme force and improbable nature to cause the destruction of the World Trade Center....for reals!!! I remember the day the towers were attacked; both times. I'm a New Yorker. Didn't witness the destruction first-hand, but I saw the smoke from the aftermath. I'm from Inwood, NY (rep your city!!!), look it up. there wasn't a day that went by that i didn't have a clear view of Manhattan. does that do it for you?
Click to expand...
 
six8

six8

Well-Known Member
stopping terrorists attempts is like stopping the drug trade...you can't. criminals get phones in prison...your dealer sells to you everday....people are growing illegally everyday....people are sneaking in this country everyday...i drive using 2 log books...what do you do that's against the law everyday. you may think it's petty crime, but it's still a crime. conspiracy theories are for those who seek to or are afraid to accept reality. you don't think it could be that easy, but reality proves otherwise. it's not who has the most guns, money, drugs, who's the biggest, who's the baddest (Sho'nuff!!!), who has the most power etc....it's who willing to do whatever, whenever, however. what kind of conspiracy theory will you write about when n.korea comes knocking next....o yea, they've all ready knocked....three times
 
N

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
six8 said:
i'm searching...how bout lending a hand in my search and save your condescending mannerisms. i fully believe this was an act of terrorism and not some government conspiracy. i believe the newspaper article was purely trying to put in perspective the extreme force and improbable nature to cause the destruction of the World Trade Center....for reals!!! I remember the day the towers were attacked; both times. I'm a New Yorker. Didn't witness the destruction first-hand, but I saw the smoke from the aftermath. I'm from Inwood, NY (rep your city!!!), look it up. there wasn't a day that went by that i didn't have a clear view of Manhattan. does that do it for you?
Click to expand...
So you were watching the twin towers from your front porch instead of on the TV? Oh wait you just said you didn't watch anything first hand, so what does the proximity of your town to NYC and the Manhattan skyline have to do with anything? Does being close to the action give you more credibility than say someone from Hoboken, NJ? If I live in Brooklyn does that mean I am automatically more correct than you because I was closer?

In effect it doesn't do it for me, you have provided proof of nothing and evidence of nothing. Your account of the situation is uninformed since you personally witnessed nothing. You weren't thinking very deeply to come up with this drivel, try again, and this time try to have at least a modicum of evidence to back your unsubstantiated claims of phantasmagorical proximity.
 
missnu

missnu

Well-Known Member
Noone will ever know, but I don't think the US government handled it quite right...just like everything else. I would just be hapopier with my government if they even tried to act like they cared about the people. Politics is politics...but Hey! what can ya do? I mean really?
 
six8

six8

Well-Known Member
never said where i watched the aftermath from, so get that straight. i provided a link that clearly backed my claims of having read of a commercial airliner being listed as a possible terrorist plot, before 9/11 along with other tactis and vulnreabilities proven to exist. But I will agree with you that my proximity does'nt play any role, because there are many within the state that i am sure also believe it was a government conspiracy. I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS TO BE TRUE. you conspiracy theorists have no conclusive evidence, just theories. where are your facts. until proven otherwise i will just have take my government's word on this one.
NoDrama said:
So you were watching the twin towers from your front porch instead of on the TV? Oh wait you just said you didn't watch anything first hand, so what does the proximity of your town to NYC and the Manhattan skyline have to do with anything? Does being close to the action give you more credibility than say someone from Hoboken, NJ? If I live in Brooklyn does that mean I am automatically more correct than you because I was closer?

In effect it doesn't do it for me, you have provided proof of nothing and evidence of nothing. Your account of the situation is uninformed since you personally witnessed nothing. You weren't thinking very deeply to come up with this drivel, try again, and this time try to have at least a modicum of evidence to back your unsubstantiated claims of phantasmagorical proximity.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top