Is it really necessary to spam with 1 more word each post?
Oh no, neither governments are dumb.
Which is why the US is training and sending "terrorists" of China into China from Afganistan, in the hope of cause internal problems and divide China from within as more options. Of course in a small conventional war the US will have the advantage. But if it is a full all out war, or even a nuclear war, then... Which is why China used the name of "assisting" the US on "War on Terror", and sent 100k troops along with 1 military satellite to reinforce the border with Afganistan right after the US invaded it.
Alot of stuff that i could have mentioned has already been stated here, but i think the most pertinent question , wether or not you think the video is true, would be =
"Does the US government have the tools at it's disposal to do such a thing?"
Since it's perfectly alright to imprison people without trial for reasons of national security, i think i've made my opinion.
Originally posted by r0guy Nice video, i'll be sure to pass it along. Alot of stuff that i could have mentioned has already been stated here, but i think the most pertinent question , wether or not you think the video is true, would be = "Does the US government have the tools at it's disposal to do such a thing?" Since it's perfectly alright to imprison people without trial for reasons of national security, i think i've made my opinion.
I'm glad it's not my country...
Could you pass this along? It's a link that turns around and picks the video apart. Please read it carefully and take a look at the flat out lies, ommissions, use of unqualified experts, picking and choosing of photorgraphs (only showing you the side of wtc 7 where the flames couldn't be seen, for example) misquotes, etc. You'll see how the authors of the video deliberately misrepresented the siesmographs. In fact, you'll see that from the guys who actually made the siesmographs the conspiracy nuts like to use! Loose Screw...err, I mean Change...Relies on an audience who is devoid of critical thinking, initiative to research the claims made, and any logical faculties. Read what I linked point by point, then go back to all the other links I've posted. Read all the analysis by Universities, engineers, scientific and engineering journals. Then do this as a challenge to yourself, find one structural engineer that refutes that stuctural loss and heat caused a loss of integrity and collapse. One that claims it's consistent with bombs. Then find me one qualified aviation crash researcher that backs up Loose Change's claims. Just one, that's all Im asking. Then do me a favor and pass those along too. Unless, of course, you have an agenda.
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
In fact, have you read any hard scientific analysis at all on this? Can you link me a structural engineer that refutes the "goverment version" of why the towers collapsed? Just one? Can you also link me one aviation crash expert that does? Just one of each. Out of the population of them, surely you can find one that isn't part of the 'gub'ment' conspiracy.
I don't like that last link at all lardmouth. That's a blind patriot if I've ever seen one. Some of your previous links were useful, but that last one is clearly made by a guy who will not admit anything, or even admit there was ever any sort of possibility for any governmental involvement at all...
It's too one-sided in my opinion.
By the last link, I mean thge media2.uploadjar one.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
Originally posted by Cymdai I don't like that last link at all lardmouth. That's a blind patriot if I've ever seen one. Some of your previous links were useful, but that last one is clearly made by a guy who will not admit anything, or even admit there was ever any sort of possibility for any governmental involvement at all...
It's too one-sided in my opinion.
By the last link, I mean thge media2.uploadjar one.
Care to argue what points were wrong?
Of course it's one-sided. Why wouldn't it be? Which point did he raise that you see a contradiction on? Another side?
Originally posted by lardmouth Originally posted by r0guy Nice video, i'll be sure to pass it along. Alot of stuff that i could have mentioned has already been stated here, but i think the most pertinent question , wether or not you think the video is true, would be = "Does the US government have the tools at it's disposal to do such a thing?" Since it's perfectly alright to imprison people without trial for reasons of national security, i think i've made my opinion.
I'm glad it's not my country...
Could you pass this along? It's a link that turns around and picks the video apart. Please read it carefully and take a look at the flat out lies, ommissions, use of unqualified experts, picking and choosing of photorgraphs (only showing you the side of wtc 7 where the flames couldn't be seen, for example) misquotes, etc. You'll see how the authors of the video deliberately misrepresented the siesmographs. In fact, you'll see that from the guys who actually made the siesmographs the conspiracy nuts like to use! Loose Screw...err, I mean Change...Relies on an audience who is devoid of critical thinking, initiative to research the claims made, and any logical faculties. Read what I linked point by point, then go back to all the other links I've posted. Read all the analysis by Universities, engineers, scientific and engineering journals. Then do this as a challenge to yourself, find one structural engineer that refutes that stuctural loss and heat caused a loss of integrity and collapse. One that claims it's consistent with bombs. Then find me one qualified aviation crash researcher that backs up Loose Change's claims. Just one, that's all Im asking. Then do me a favor and pass those along too. Unless, of course, you have an agenda.
I read some of the stuff within that link and TBH it didn't really work on me. I just don't know wether it was the overuse of sarcasm and insults ( You take people who disagree with for you idiots... OK, i take it you're pissed atm, but why do you have such a condescending view on people who share your own point of view or the ones you're "supposedly" trying to "educate"?!), the attempt to pressure me for being a traitor (I'm not American!), or the "Improven" facts of the video that you try to destroy without any proof of your own and/or false statements and/or without answering the questions that your own comments raise...
Ok just for one example = "Le Figaro" (a newspaper of the "Free World", wich is regarded with just about as much repect in French speaking countries as the NY Times in the Anglo saxon nations...) being an unreliable source of information (about bin laden being in an American Hospital rior to 9/11)... A bunch of french propaganda apparently... Putting that aside i come to wonder if it's true NOT BECAUSE THE GUY JUST "TOLD" ME THIS, mostly because there has been pretty CONCRETE evidence of the BUSH families ties to bin laden's, and by concrete EVIDENCE i mean LIVE FOOTAGE VIDEOS of BUSHes shaking hands with it's members before AND after 9/11. I'll check out the lefigaro.com later to see if i can find the article in question. I'll still go look up the rest of the stuff to see there's some truth into it, some remotely interesting counter-points nonetheless.
I'm afraid i don't know any structural engineers, i'll see if i can find one, shouldn't be too hard.But to be honest i think your gonna regret ever daring me to find an Aviation expert, since=
A)It just so happens i post from time to time on PROFFESSIONAL AVIATION forums such as PPRUNE.NET or AIRLINERS.NET. Wich yes, does include qualified aviation crash researchers.
And My DAD sits on the AIR FRANCE-KLM (You know, the biggest airline in the world.) Security Council as Director of A320 Fleet personnel, so i guess he should know huh?
It's 3:26am in central Europe atm, i'll give a more in depth post tommorow.
Originally posted by r0guy A)It just so happens i post from time to time on PROFFESSIONAL AVIATION forums such as PPRUNE.NET or AIRLINERS.NET. Wich yes, does include qualified aviation crash researchers. And My DAD sits on the AIR FRANCE-KLM (You know, the biggest airline in the world.) Security Council as Director of A320 Fleet personnel, so i guess he should know huh?
So, you and your dad are aviation experts. Which of you were invited to investigate the crashes immediately following 9/11? Or will you both have to rely on the reams of untampered evidence presented by both sides of the story?
Seriously, I am not trying to be condescending so don't get all defensive. I am just making a point for the following paragraph.
In the end, the biggest error we all make in the evaluation of all these "theories" and "official stories," is that none of us are actually experts on what happened on 9/11. That is both good news and bad news. The good news is that the reason none of us are experts is because nothing similar has happened before or since. The bad news is that none of us know enough to actually state which side is truly correct without relying on other "experts."
So the question becomes not which story is true, since even today there really isn't enough concrete evidence to decide the whole truth, the question becomes which experts do you believe?
I will submit this to anyone reading here:
Do not make your judgement based on the commentators, the out of context quotes, the incomplete film footage, or the condescending arguments. Do not make your judgement based on what someone says the melting point and structural strength of steel is, the type of engine used, or any other technical detail.
Do make your judgement after investigating beyond hearsay. Research the physics, the engineering, the thermodynamics, aircraft design, etc yourself. If you are given a source, don't just click the given link, investigate beyond the link. Both sides of this argument give you only what they want you to see. Search beyond their spoon-fed propaganda and beyond your pre-conceived lazyness. Research both sides thoroughly and do not discount one side just because you are prejudiced.
9/11 and the resultant invasion into Afghanistan, and if you include Iraq, have resulted in 10's of thousands of deaths. Do not disgrace them with half-assed theory, speculation, and condescension.
ok im not gonna say im pro video here or pro anything, but you definatly MUST QUESTION YOUR AUTHORITY. That is a freedom we have and enables threads like this it is freedom of press, freedom of speech, it is we the people, i feel priveledged to read this thread, other countries this type of thread alone would get us years of prison and torture for being outspoken against the government...while were at it lets recount the florida votes, hehe
a few quick examples of myths busted in there and some evidence provided.
1. The whole general idea that the planes strikes didn't collapse the buildings, but bombs.
I provided multiple academic/scientific/engineering studies showing just how those planes did lead to the collapse. Examples of the authors of looks change stating similies as fact. "It sounded like a bomb" does not equal "it was a bomb."
2. The claim that a whole plane couldn't have just vaporized having struck the Pentagon.
Noone has ever claimed this. And, my links provided photos of the of the supposedly nonexistant debris at the pentagon.
3. The fallacy that the plane couldn't have left the 12ft. hole in the pentagon.
Yup, it can't. The landing gear created that hole on the inner ring. Where the plane initially struck...a 75 foot hole. Yep, you guessed it. My links provided pictures.
4. But, why are there no wing holes! where are they?!
This is real life. Plane struck, wings were sheared to the sides and dragged in by momentum and the rest of the plane. There wasn't going to be a cartoon like outline of the plane in the building. Sorry, folks.
5. Blatant misrepresentation of the siemographs concerning WTC. My links have direct statements from the folks who put out the siesmographs. And, they share all of the data, not only part of the data that Loose change put out.
6. again with how the building came down at the WTC.
You basically brushed off the links. Links containing hard science. Yet again, Loose Change has not one structural engineer's analysis that agree with it. None. I can't repeat this enough. None.
ETC., ETC.
Why is he angry? Wasn't me who wrote the one pdf by the way. He's angry soudning because the authors deliberately lied about many of their facts. Deliberately left out photos that completely contradicted their assertions. Multiple times used people who had no qualification whatsoever to give an educated statement on the events. Deliberately misquoted and misrepresented similies (like a..). This video and others tend to tick off people who have looked beyond what these nutcases claim happened. People that actually are capable of researching and finding the falsity of these claims. I remember seeing people jumping out of those windows as the buildings burned. And it pisses me off that freaks like this would incorporate that event into their agendas, delusions, video/book/paid lecturing/schemes.
Now, you say your dad is an Aviation Expert is he trained and qualified for forensics with airline crash sites?
If so, what does your dad say? That is, if he's seen all the photos and read all the reports. Does he find it so hard to believe a plane struck the pentagon?
I have always found it odd , how flight 93 has been made out to the public . Like giving the names of specific heros on the plane . As far as I know there were no survivors .
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Originally posted by Malickiebloo I have always found it odd , how flight 93 has been made out to the public . Like giving the names of specific heros on the plane . As far as I know there were no survivors .
They took accounts from people that various passengers had called. Well, the kooks will tell you that the people called (like wives, etc.) were either part of the conspiracy or had been tricked my some kind of voice simulation program, or held hostage by the gub'ment and forced to make the call...Also there are recordings of some of the conversations. Especially, as as the passengers began to fight. I don't remember if it came over the flight communications or if the planes are set up so authorities can listen in to the plane in the event of a hijacking. But yes, ultimately to make the movie they had to make their best guesses to who participated in the struggle against the terrorist, etc.
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
Oh BTW, to the creators of that video. Doesn't your fucking paranoid hallucinations even have a good enough imagination to even consider that if you were a terrorist group to not only have planes crash into such a large skyscraper to even possibiliy have more suicidal freaks to be human bombs in those elevators and etc as well?
There are your secondary and thirdary and even fourth explosions.
It really funny how this video creator cant get information about what the total makeup of what a Boeing aircraft is made of, however has more information about things that would be considered even more top secret as so to speak.
Oh yeah, as for the cell calls. Why does the creator of that video try to claim they were at 35,000 feet? AS I seen all the videos, most planes were coming in at a horizontal path. I don't see any coming down to the targets from a high altitude. I am sure with they staying under the radar as they approached their targets everyone that had cell phones were smart enough to notice their cell phones coming back in service range. Wouldn't you call home as well if you had the opportunity?
I could go on and on, but to quote a sick fuck that puts together over a hour and a half of bullshit to only slap americans in the face with their own paranoia is just assinine.
Um, you give me as proof, information from wikipedia? Come on AlexAmore, by now you should know that I am not so gullible. Dr. Griffin gives nothing more than his opinion on the 9/11 Commission Report. His sole "proof", as you seem to claim, is that Zelikow was placed in a position of too much power over the investigation for it to remain objective. However, in reality, the main reason he rejects the 9/11 commission report is not because of Zelikow but rather that it chose to ignore the Loose Change Theory. Do you not see through the duplicity of his argument?
On yeah, forgot. let me help you get over your delusions!
As for the rest of that video. Just right off the top of my head I can think of more logical explainations that still points to what we already know. Crap like this shit makes me only wonder how many people like the creators of that video are contributors to terrorism as well. That's what happens when you live in a free society, even the fucking terrorist can have free speak to create even more fucking confusion.
Your post has shown how brain dead a person can be.
You believe in nothing but what you were told by the government and their media. And can't stand any other explainations or even just to think about it for 1 sec.
Many of us believe in such theory about 9/11 isn't based our opinion of the government on this single event. They have done such things ALL THIS TIME. And the less intellgent people like you have being hardcore followers of the government ALL THIS TIME. They NEED YOU btw.
No one is going to be heard here. If you agree with the video, you're an anti-American paranoid conspirator reject, and if you don't agree with the video, you're a blindly loyal over-zealous patriotic imbecile.
See, that's the problem with the damned forums nowadays, there's too many asshats using them. People can't take what's given, use bits and pieces from both sides, and form their own logical conclusions. There's just a "wrong" or a "right" "side". Am I the only one in this topic thus far to look at both sides of the argument, and come to the conclusion that there is truth in both of what the conspirators and the patriots are saying in this topic?
For God's sake, all of you need to learn that everything isn't always black and white. There are grey areas in life too. Since neither an expert, an investigative journalist, or a single person who's posted here knows for a FACT that they are all right, all of you need to stop preaching in such matter-of-fact tones. There's probably 100 people in the world who really know all the details surrounding 9/11, and none of them are on MMORPG.com.
So, instead of condemning each other, and pointing fingers calling each other patriots, communists, or whatever the hell else we've decided to throw into the mix, why not analyze evidence presented by both sides with an open-mind? It's so much more rewarding to actually learn something, instead of just bashing other posters constantly.
I will say one thing though. United 93, the movie, should not have been made. It's disgusting that any movie agency would presume to know what went down, and have the audacity to put "Based on a true story", when they haven't got an ounce of proof who was involved. Throwing out random guesses on what went down, and labeling them as facts, well, let's just say that if that was a general practice in life, we'd have one hell of a fruitful history textbook. That's despicable, unethical, and I'm appalled that the relatives of those involved with 9/11 would allow anyone to bastardize the event so harshly.
What I am trying to say is that, both the conspirators and the patriots' statements need to be taken with a grain of salt, because both parties have an agenda. I'd like to consider myself without an agenda, because I don't hate the government, nor do I hate America, but I look for the facts in the pursuit of the truth.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
Which is why the topic was a question with "?". Which is why there is a "Not really sure" option in the poll.
Everything was fine until some hardcore mindless followers of the government started to point fingers and yell at the people who did not believe the government like they do.
I started to yell back in the last a few posts because I am getting pretty mad about how blind they can be and use nothing as facts but point their useless fingers.
Comments
ppssst, if you want to know who really killed JFK, wire me $20k and I'll tell you
Is it really necessary to spam with 1 more word each post?
Oh no, neither governments are dumb.
Which is why the US is training and sending "terrorists" of China into China from Afganistan, in the hope of cause internal problems and divide China from within as more options. Of course in a small conventional war the US will have the advantage. But if it is a full all out war, or even a nuclear war, then...
Which is why China used the name of "assisting" the US on "War on Terror", and sent 100k troops along with 1 military satellite to reinforce the border with Afganistan right after the US invaded it.
Nice video, i'll be sure to pass it along.
Alot of stuff that i could have mentioned has already been stated here, but i think the most pertinent question , wether or not you think the video is true, would be =
"Does the US government have the tools at it's disposal to do such a thing?"
Since it's perfectly alright to imprison people without trial for reasons of national security, i think i've made my opinion.
I'm glad it's not my country...
Could you pass this along? It's a link that turns around and picks the video apart. Please read it carefully and take a look at the flat out lies, ommissions, use of unqualified experts, picking and choosing of photorgraphs (only showing you the side of wtc 7 where the flames couldn't be seen, for example) misquotes, etc. You'll see how the authors of the video deliberately misrepresented the siesmographs. In fact, you'll see that from the guys who actually made the siesmographs the conspiracy nuts like to use! Loose Screw...err, I mean Change...Relies on an audience who is devoid of critical thinking, initiative to research the claims made, and any logical faculties. Read what I linked point by point, then go back to all the other links I've posted. Read all the analysis by Universities, engineers, scientific and engineering journals. Then do this as a challenge to yourself, find one structural engineer that refutes that stuctural loss and heat caused a loss of integrity and collapse. One that claims it's consistent with bombs. Then find me one qualified aviation crash researcher that backs up Loose Change's claims. Just one, that's all Im asking. Then do me a favor and pass those along too. Unless, of course, you have an agenda.
http://media2.uploadjar.com/uploads/911_loose_change_vie15a3eb.pdf
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
Have you read this?
http://media2.uploadjar.com/uploads/911_loose_change_vie15a3eb.pdf
In fact, have you read any hard scientific analysis at all on this? Can you link me a structural engineer that refutes the "goverment version" of why the towers collapsed? Just one? Can you also link me one aviation crash expert that does? Just one of each. Out of the population of them, surely you can find one that isn't part of the 'gub'ment' conspiracy.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Biederman/Biederman-0112.html Why the WTC 7 actually fell....
http://www.caddigest.com/subjects/wtc/index.htm#Engineering%20and%20Construction
http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/
Here's another one that addresses various tin foil hat claims.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=1&c=y
I don't like that last link at all lardmouth. That's a blind patriot if I've ever seen one. Some of your previous links were useful, but that last one is clearly made by a guy who will not admit anything, or even admit there was ever any sort of possibility for any governmental involvement at all...
It's too one-sided in my opinion.
By the last link, I mean thge media2.uploadjar one.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
Care to argue what points were wrong?
Of course it's one-sided. Why wouldn't it be? Which point did he raise that you see a contradiction on? Another side?
Could you pass this along? It's a link that turns around and picks the video apart. Please read it carefully and take a look at the flat out lies, ommissions, use of unqualified experts, picking and choosing of photorgraphs (only showing you the side of wtc 7 where the flames couldn't be seen, for example) misquotes, etc. You'll see how the authors of the video deliberately misrepresented the siesmographs. In fact, you'll see that from the guys who actually made the siesmographs the conspiracy nuts like to use! Loose Screw...err, I mean Change...Relies on an audience who is devoid of critical thinking, initiative to research the claims made, and any logical faculties. Read what I linked point by point, then go back to all the other links I've posted. Read all the analysis by Universities, engineers, scientific and engineering journals. Then do this as a challenge to yourself, find one structural engineer that refutes that stuctural loss and heat caused a loss of integrity and collapse. One that claims it's consistent with bombs. Then find me one qualified aviation crash researcher that backs up Loose Change's claims. Just one, that's all Im asking. Then do me a favor and pass those along too. Unless, of course, you have an agenda.
http://media2.uploadjar.com/uploads/911_loose_change_vie15a3eb.pdf
I read some of the stuff within that link and TBH it didn't really work on me. I just don't know wether it was the overuse of sarcasm and insults ( You take people who disagree with for you idiots... OK, i take it you're pissed atm, but why do you have such a condescending view on people who share your own point of view or the ones you're "supposedly" trying to "educate"?!), the attempt to pressure me for being a traitor (I'm not American!), or the "Improven" facts of the video that you try to destroy without any proof of your own and/or false statements and/or without answering the questions that your own comments raise...
Ok just for one example = "Le Figaro" (a newspaper of the "Free World", wich is regarded with just about as much repect in French speaking countries as the NY Times in the Anglo saxon nations...) being an unreliable source of information (about bin laden being in an American Hospital rior to 9/11)... A bunch of french propaganda apparently... Putting that aside i come to wonder if it's true NOT BECAUSE THE GUY JUST "TOLD" ME THIS, mostly because there has been pretty CONCRETE evidence of the BUSH families ties to bin laden's, and by concrete EVIDENCE i mean LIVE FOOTAGE VIDEOS of BUSHes shaking hands with it's members before AND after 9/11. I'll check out the lefigaro.com later to see if i can find the article in question. I'll still go look up the rest of the stuff to see there's some truth into it, some remotely interesting counter-points nonetheless.
I'm afraid i don't know any structural engineers, i'll see if i can find one, shouldn't be too hard.But to be honest i think your gonna regret ever daring me to find an Aviation expert, since=
A) It just so happens i post from time to time on PROFFESSIONAL AVIATION forums such as PPRUNE.NET or AIRLINERS.NET. Wich yes, does include qualified aviation crash researchers.
And
My DAD sits on the AIR FRANCE-KLM (You know, the biggest airline in the world.) Security Council as Director of A320 Fleet personnel, so i guess he should know huh?
It's 3:26am in central Europe atm, i'll give a more in depth post tommorow.
So, you and your dad are aviation experts. Which of you were invited to investigate the crashes immediately following 9/11? Or will you both have to rely on the reams of untampered evidence presented by both sides of the story?
Seriously, I am not trying to be condescending so don't get all defensive. I am just making a point for the following paragraph.
In the end, the biggest error we all make in the evaluation of all these "theories" and "official stories," is that none of us are actually experts on what happened on 9/11. That is both good news and bad news. The good news is that the reason none of us are experts is because nothing similar has happened before or since. The bad news is that none of us know enough to actually state which side is truly correct without relying on other "experts."
So the question becomes not which story is true, since even today there really isn't enough concrete evidence to decide the whole truth, the question becomes which experts do you believe?
I will submit this to anyone reading here:
9/11 and the resultant invasion into Afghanistan, and if you include Iraq, have resulted in 10's of thousands of deaths. Do not disgrace them with half-assed theory, speculation, and condescension.
playing eq2 and two worlds
r0ry, are you kidding? no proof in my links?
a few quick examples of myths busted in there and some evidence provided.
1. The whole general idea that the planes strikes didn't collapse the buildings, but bombs.
I provided multiple academic/scientific/engineering studies showing just how those planes did lead to the collapse. Examples of the authors of looks change stating similies as fact. "It sounded like a bomb" does not equal "it was a bomb."
2. The claim that a whole plane couldn't have just vaporized having struck the Pentagon.
Noone has ever claimed this. And, my links provided photos of the of the supposedly nonexistant debris at the pentagon.
3. The fallacy that the plane couldn't have left the 12ft. hole in the pentagon.
Yup, it can't. The landing gear created that hole on the inner ring. Where the plane initially struck...a 75 foot hole. Yep, you guessed it. My links provided pictures.
4. But, why are there no wing holes! where are they?!
This is real life. Plane struck, wings were sheared to the sides and dragged in by momentum and the rest of the plane. There wasn't going to be a cartoon like outline of the plane in the building. Sorry, folks.
5. Blatant misrepresentation of the siemographs concerning WTC. My links have direct statements from the folks who put out the siesmographs. And, they share all of the data, not only part of the data that Loose change put out.
6. again with how the building came down at the WTC.
You basically brushed off the links. Links containing hard science. Yet again, Loose Change has not one structural engineer's analysis that agree with it. None. I can't repeat this enough. None.
ETC., ETC.
Why is he angry? Wasn't me who wrote the one pdf by the way. He's angry soudning because the authors deliberately lied about many of their facts. Deliberately left out photos that completely contradicted their assertions. Multiple times used people who had no qualification whatsoever to give an educated statement on the events. Deliberately misquoted and misrepresented similies (like a..). This video and others tend to tick off people who have looked beyond what these nutcases claim happened. People that actually are capable of researching and finding the falsity of these claims. I remember seeing people jumping out of those windows as the buildings burned. And it pisses me off that freaks like this would incorporate that event into their agendas, delusions, video/book/paid lecturing/schemes.
Now, you say your dad is an Aviation Expert is he trained and qualified for forensics with airline crash sites?
If so, what does your dad say? That is, if he's seen all the photos and read all the reports. Does he find it so hard to believe a plane struck the pentagon?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
What accusations did you find inadequate?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_D._Zelikow
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
I have one word to this...PARANOID!!!
On yeah, forgot. let me help you get over your delusions!
http://www.break.com/index/911pentagon.html
As for the rest of that video. Just right off the top of my head I can think of more logical explainations that still points to what we already know.
Crap like this shit makes me only wonder how many people like the creators of that video are contributors to terrorism as well.
That's what happens when you live in a free society, even the fucking terrorist can have free speak to create even more fucking confusion.
------------------------------
What doesn't kill you makes you stronger.
Game On!
Oh BTW, to the creators of that video. Doesn't your fucking paranoid hallucinations even have a good enough imagination to even consider that if you were a terrorist group to not only have planes crash into such a large skyscraper to even possibiliy have more suicidal freaks to be human bombs in those elevators and etc as well?
There are your secondary and thirdary and even fourth explosions.
It really funny how this video creator cant get information about what the total makeup of what a Boeing aircraft is made of, however has more information about things that would be considered even more top secret as so to speak.
Oh yeah, as for the cell calls. Why does the creator of that video try to claim they were at 35,000 feet? AS I seen all the videos, most planes were coming in at a horizontal path. I don't see any coming down to the targets from a high altitude. I am sure with they staying under the radar as they approached their targets everyone that had cell phones were smart enough to notice their cell phones coming back in service range. Wouldn't you call home as well if you had the opportunity?
I could go on and on, but to quote a sick fuck that puts together over a hour and a half of bullshit to only slap americans in the face with their own paranoia is just assinine.
What accusations did you find inadequate?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_D._Zelikow
Um, you give me as proof, information from wikipedia? Come on AlexAmore, by now you should know that I am not so gullible. Dr. Griffin gives nothing more than his opinion on the 9/11 Commission Report. His sole "proof", as you seem to claim, is that Zelikow was placed in a position of too much power over the investigation for it to remain objective. However, in reality, the main reason he rejects the 9/11 commission report is not because of Zelikow but rather that it chose to ignore the Loose Change Theory. Do you not see through the duplicity of his argument?
Your post has shown how brain dead a person can be.
You believe in nothing but what you were told by the government and their media. And can't stand any other explainations or even just to think about it for 1 sec.
Many of us believe in such theory about 9/11 isn't based our opinion of the government on this single event. They have done such things ALL THIS TIME. And the less intellgent people like you have being hardcore followers of the government ALL THIS TIME. They NEED YOU btw.
This topic is officially retarded.
No one is going to be heard here. If you agree with the video, you're an anti-American paranoid conspirator reject, and if you don't agree with the video, you're a blindly loyal over-zealous patriotic imbecile.
See, that's the problem with the damned forums nowadays, there's too many asshats using them. People can't take what's given, use bits and pieces from both sides, and form their own logical conclusions. There's just a "wrong" or a "right" "side". Am I the only one in this topic thus far to look at both sides of the argument, and come to the conclusion that there is truth in both of what the conspirators and the patriots are saying in this topic?
For God's sake, all of you need to learn that everything isn't always black and white. There are grey areas in life too. Since neither an expert, an investigative journalist, or a single person who's posted here knows for a FACT that they are all right, all of you need to stop preaching in such matter-of-fact tones. There's probably 100 people in the world who really know all the details surrounding 9/11, and none of them are on MMORPG.com.
So, instead of condemning each other, and pointing fingers calling each other patriots, communists, or whatever the hell else we've decided to throw into the mix, why not analyze evidence presented by both sides with an open-mind? It's so much more rewarding to actually learn something, instead of just bashing other posters constantly.
I will say one thing though. United 93, the movie, should not have been made. It's disgusting that any movie agency would presume to know what went down, and have the audacity to put "Based on a true story", when they haven't got an ounce of proof who was involved. Throwing out random guesses on what went down, and labeling them as facts, well, let's just say that if that was a general practice in life, we'd have one hell of a fruitful history textbook. That's despicable, unethical, and I'm appalled that the relatives of those involved with 9/11 would allow anyone to bastardize the event so harshly.
What I am trying to say is that, both the conspirators and the patriots' statements need to be taken with a grain of salt, because both parties have an agenda. I'd like to consider myself without an agenda, because I don't hate the government, nor do I hate America, but I look for the facts in the pursuit of the truth.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
Not really.
Which is why the topic was a question with "?". Which is why there is a "Not really sure" option in the poll.
Everything was fine until some hardcore mindless followers of the government started to point fingers and yell at the people who did not believe the government like they do.
I started to yell back in the last a few posts because I am getting pretty mad about how blind they can be and use nothing as facts but point their useless fingers.