View Poll Results: do you believe that 9/11 and the attack of the twin towers in new york is a self inflicted wound by

Voters
125. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes

    76 60.80%
  • no

    49 39.20%
Page 18 of 183 FirstFirst ... 81516171819202128 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 1824
  1. #171

    Default Re: 911 - What really happened. (Loose Change 2)

    @ WEED ..... because you provided links that justiies your claims , I salute your consistency of being a " CONSPIRACY THEORIST " mentality and nothing is wrong with that so as being an anti GWB . Though let us not forget also that just because of the provided links , they are the truth .

    Murag maninguha na gyud ko ug kugi ani na mangita ug links na lang akong i atbang pod para ma refute ang mga claims sa links na gi present niom hehhee no matter how cheesy the website is hehehe basta pang atbang .
    " A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. " - 2nd Amendment , Bill of Rights of the United States of America

  2. #172

    Default Re: 911 - What really happened. (Loose Change 2)

    Quote Originally Posted by SPRINGFIELD_XD_40
    @ WEED ..... because you provided links that justiies your claims , I salute your consistency of being a " CONSPIRACY THEORIST " mentality and nothing is wrong with that so as being an anti GWB . Though let us not forget also that just because of the provided links , they are the truth .

    Murag maninguha na gyud ko ug kugi ani na mangita ug links na lang akong i atbang pod para ma refute ang mga claims sa links na gi present niom hehhee no matter how cheesy the website is hehehe basta pang atbang .

    hahahaha, conspiracy theorist forever gyud ko bai... chege, will look forward to your cheesy links... hehehehe[br]Posted on: September 15, 2006, 05:41:45 PM_________________________________________________h ehehe, i will also post CHEESIER links one of these days... links pertaining to UFO participation on 9/11, and HOLOGRAPHIC TECHNOLOGY used on the same day... very cheesy, but there are many PICTURES... :mrgreen:



  3. #173

    Default Re: 911 - What really happened. (Loose Change 2)

    OT : That idea bai makes me think that you are an avid reader of WEEKLY ORALD NEWS pod diay hehehe .. apir !!

    WEED ... I dont know if these site is cheesy to you but it indeed answers a couple of the more FAMOUS QUESTIONS by the CONSPIRACY THEORIST .

    source :

    http://usinfo.state.gov/usinfo/index.html

    The Attack on the Pentagon

    Allegation: 9/11 Revealed suggests that American Airlines flight 77 was not hijacked and flown into the Pentagon but that, instead, “a drone Boeing 757 is used or a smaller, more manageable plane painted in American Airlines colors.”

    Facts: This theory ignores the fact that the passenger and crew remains from American Airlines flight 77 were recovered at the Pentagon crash site. A team of more than 100 forensic specialists and others identified 184 of the 189 people who died in the Pentagon attack (125 from the Pentagon and 64 onboard American Airlines flight 77). All but one of the passengers onboard American Airlines flight 77 was positively identified as a match with DNA samples provided by the families of the crash victims, as reported in the Washington Post on November 21, 2001. This provides irrefutable proof that American Airlines flight 77, not a drone or other aircraft, crashed into the Pentagon on September 11.

    The Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers

    Allegation: 9/11 Revealed suggests that the collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) towers occurred because not the terrorists flew airliners filled with jet fuel into them, but because the towers were “pre-rigged with explosives.”

    Facts: The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) conducted an extremely thorough, three-year investigation into what caused the WTC twin towers to collapse, as explained on NIST’s WTC Web site. Some 200 staff reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than one thousand people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they collapsed. Its conclusion is that the twin towers collapsed because the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns and dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, which meant that the subsequent fire, which reached 1000 degrees Celsius, weakened the floors and columns to the point where they bowed and buckled, causing the towers to collapse.

    NIST’s Draft Summary Report stated (pp. 171-172):

    The two aircraft hit the towers at high speed and did considerable damage to principal structural components: core columns, perimeter columns, and floors. However, the towers withstood the impacts and would have remained standing were it not for the dislodged insulation and the subsequent multifloor fires. …

    In WTC 1, the fires weakened the core columns and caused the floors on the south side of the building to sag. The floors pulled the heated south perimeter columns inward, reducing their capacity to support the building above. Their neighboring columns quickly became overloaded as the south wall buckled. The top section of the building titled to the south and began its descent. …

    In WTC 2, the core was damaged severely at the southeast corner …. The steady burning fires on the east side of the building caused the floors there to sag. The floors pulled the heated east perimeter columns inward, reducing their capacity to support the building above. Their neighboring columns quickly became overloaded as the east wall buckled. The top section of the building tilted to the east and to the south and began its descent. …

    The WTC towers would likely not have collapsed under the combined effects of aircraft impact and the extensive, multifloor fires if the thermal insulation had not been widely dislodged or had been only minimally dislodged by aircraft impact.


    In September 2005, NIST issued a clarification in its WTC Towers Report, stating:

    NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to September 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photos and videos from several angles clearly showed that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward, until the dust clouds obscured the view.


    Allegation: Other conspiracy theorists have claimed that the fact that the towers collapsed at near a "free fall" rate indicates that explosives were needed to cause this rapid a rate of collapse.

    Facts: This allegation ignores the fact that the enormous weight of the top portions of the towers completely overwhelmed the carrying capacity of the floors beneath them, which is what caused the towers to collapse at very close to a "free fall" rate. NIST's Final Report on the Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers states:

    The structure below the level of collapse initiation offered minimal resistance to the falling building mass .... The potential energy released by the downward movement of the large building mass far exceeded the capacity of the intact structure below to absorb that ....

    Since the stories below the level of collapse initiation provided little resistance to the tremendous energy released by the falling building mass, the building section above came down essentially in free fall .... As the stories below sequentially failed, the falling mass increased, further increasing the demand on the floors below, which were unable to arrest the moving mass.

    The falling mass of the building compressed the air ahead of it, much like the action of a piston, forcing material, such as smoke and debris, out the windows ....


    The Collapse of World Trade Center 7

    Allegation: 9/11 Revealed suggests that the 47-story World Trade Center 7 building, which collapsed at 5:20 pm on September 11, was intentionally demolished. The primary piece of evidence for this is a comment that Mr. Larry Silverstein, who owned the World Trade Center complex, made on the September 2002 television documentary American Rebuilds. Mr. Silverstein said:

    I remember getting a call from the Fire Department commander, telling me they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire. I said, you know, “We've had such terrible loss of life that the smartest thing to do is just pull it.” And they made that decision to pull it and we watched the [World Trade Center 7] building collapse.

    9/11 Revealed and other conspiracy theorists put forward the notion that Mr. Silverstein’s suggestion to “pull it” is slang for intentionally demolishing the WTC 7 building.

    Facts: On September 9, 2005, Mr. Dara McQuillan, a spokesman for Silverstein Properties, issued the following statement on this issue:

    Seven World Trade Center collapsed at 5:20 p.m. on September 11, 2001, after burning for seven hours. There were no casualties, thanks to the heroism of the Fire Department and the work of Silverstein Properties employees who evacuated tenants from the building.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) conducted a thorough investigation of the collapse of all the World Trade Center buildings. The FEMA report concluded that the collapse of Seven World Trade Center was a direct result of fires triggered by debris from the collapse of WTC Tower 1.

    In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building.

    Later in the day, the Fire Commander ordered his firefighters out of the building and at 5:20 p.m. the building collapsed. No lives were lost at Seven World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.


    As noted above, when Mr. Silverstein was recounting these events for a television documentary he stated, “I said, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is to pull it.” Mr. McQuillan has stated that by “it,” Mr. Silverstein meant the contingent of firefighters remaining in the building.

    The National Institute of Standards and Technology has stated unequivocally, “NIST has seen so evidence that the collapse of WTC 7 was caused by bombs, missiles, or controlled demolition,” in its Collapse of WTC 7 report (p. 6). NIST’s working hypothesis for the collapse of WTC 7 is that it was caused by the collapse of a critical column due to “fire and/or debris induced structural damage.” There was substantial damage to WTC 7 when the nearby WTC 1 tower collapsed and fires began shortly afterwards. Also, WTC 7 was a very unusual building because it was built over an existing Con-Edison power generation substation, which contained two large 6,000 gallon fuel tanks for the emergency generation of power. The fuel from these tanks could have contributed to the intense heat that apparently weakened the supporting columns in WTC 7.

    Insider Trading

    Allegation: 9/11 Revealed repeats long-standing rumors of “insider trading [based] on advance warnings of the attack.”

    Facts: The 9/11 Commission examined this issue in detail, stating, in The 9/11 Commission Report (p. 499):

    Highly publicized allegations of insider trading in advance of 9/11 generally rest on reports of unusual pre-9/11 trading activity in companies whose stock plummeted after the attacks. Some unusual trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an innocuous explanation. For example, the volume of put options – investments that pay off only when a stock drops in price – surged in the parent companies of United Airlines [UAL] on September 6 and American Airlines on September 10 – highly suspicious trading on its face. Yet, further investigation has revealed that the trading had no connection with 9/11. A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades. These examples typify the evidence examined by the investigation. The SEC [Security and Exchange Commission] and the FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigation], aided by other agencies and the securities industry, devoted enormous resources to investigating this issue, including securing the cooperation of many foreign governments. These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious consistently proved innocuous.

    Absurd, Sinister Interpretations

    9/11 Revealed often places the most absurd, sinister interpretations upon unremarkable occurrences in its effort to construct complex conspiracy theories. For example, it states:

    According to the Kean Commission [9/11 Commission] Report (p. 16, in March 2000, [Mohammed Atta] “emailed 31 different U.S. flight schools on behalf of a small group of men from various Arab countries studying in Germany who, while lacking prior training, were interested in learning to fly in the United States.” Why would a terrorist openly approach flying schools in the USA this way?

    The obvious answer, of course, is that Mohammed Atta was not afraid to openly approach flying schools in the United States because he presumably did not identify himself to them as a terrorist who wished to learn how to fly planes in order that he could crash one into the World Trade Center. This rather simple explanation seemed to have not occurred to the authors of 9/11 Revealed.

    Similarly, 9/11 Revealed gives credence (p. 177) to nonsensical statements such as the one made by “Internet activist” Brian Quig: “[when Flight 77] bypassed a straight-in shot at the offices of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, only to hit an insignificant spot in the back of the Pentagon, I said to myself then, it is not a real terrorist attack.”

    The authors of 9/11 Revealed apparently do not believe that the largest terrorist attack in history was large enough to demonstrate that it was real. Instead, in their minds, the fact that the terrorists did not fly even larger Boeing 747 jumbo jets into the World Trade Center towers, or attack an hour or two later, when more people would have been at work, or hit the offices of the Secretary of Defense or the Joint Chiefs of Staff, means that the events of 9/11 were not real terrorist attacks, but were engineered in order to minimize the number of deaths. 9/11 Revealed states bizarrely, “the attacks … seem almost designed to limit casualties.” One wonders how many more thousands of people would have had to die to convince the authors of 9/11 Revealed that the attacks were real.

    " A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. " - 2nd Amendment , Bill of Rights of the United States of America

  4. #174

    Default Re: 911 - What really happened. (Loose Change 2)


  5. #175

    Default Re: 911 - What really happened. (Loose Change 2)

    @ TOLS ... repost lang nako as to what the US govt says towards your post sa Pentagon attack .

    The Attack on the Pentagon

    Allegation: 9/11 Revealed suggests that American Airlines flight 77 was not hijacked and flown into the Pentagon but that, instead, “a drone Boeing 757 is used or a smaller, more manageable plane painted in American Airlines colors.”

    Facts: This theory ignores the fact that the passenger and crew remains from American Airlines flight 77 were recovered at the Pentagon crash site. A team of more than 100 forensic specialists and others identified 184 of the 189 people who died in the Pentagon attack (125 from the Pentagon and 64 onboard American Airlines flight 77). All but one of the passengers onboard American Airlines flight 77 was positively identified as a match with DNA samples provided by the families of the crash victims, as reported in the Washington Post on November 21, 2001. This provides irrefutable proof that American Airlines flight 77, not a drone or other aircraft, crashed into the Pentagon on September 11.
    " A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. " - 2nd Amendment , Bill of Rights of the United States of America

  6. #176

    Default Re: 911 - What really happened. (Loose Change 2)

    Quote Originally Posted by SPRINGFIELD_XD_40
    @ TOLS ... repost lang nako as to what the US govt says towards your post sa Pentagon attack .

    The Attack on the Pentagon

    Allegation: 9/11 Revealed suggests that American Airlines flight 77 was not hijacked and flown into the Pentagon but that, instead, “a drone Boeing 757 is used or a smaller, more manageable plane painted in American Airlines colors.”

    Facts: This theory ignores the fact that the passenger and crew remains from American Airlines flight 77 were recovered at the Pentagon crash site. A team of more than 100 forensic specialists and others identified 184 of the 189 people who died in the Pentagon attack (125 from the Pentagon and 64 onboard American Airlines flight 77). All but one of the passengers onboard American Airlines flight 77 was positively identified as a match with DNA samples provided by the families of the crash victims, as reported in the Washington Post on November 21, 2001. This provides irrefutable proof that American Airlines flight 77, not a drone or other aircraft, crashed into the Pentagon on September 11.
    heheh..kinsa man nag initiate sa report/findings bai diba c uncle sam lang gihapon?

    here's what the conpiracy theorist can say about that findings:

    If most of Flight 77 disintegrated from hitting the Pentagon's wall and the rest of it burned up after the explosion, how did officials manage to find the remains of all but one of the 64 passengers onboard inside the building all the way up to the Ring C?

    these forensic specialist bai must have a god-like capabilities na maka identify sa DNA sa 63 out of 64 passengers, to think that most of the Boeing 757 parts disintegrated on impact =)

  7. #177

    Default Re: 911 - What really happened. (Loose Change 2)

    The unusual passengers on Flight 77...



    "Flight 77..was unusually light on passengers this day." -Washington Post

  8. #178

    Default Re: 911 - What really happened. (Loose Change 2)

    Quote Originally Posted by tolstoi
    heheh..kinsa man nag initiate sa report/findings bai diba c uncle sam lang gihapon?

    here's what the conpiracy theorist can say about that findings:

    If most of Flight 77 disintegrated from hitting the Pentagon's wall and the rest of it burned up after the explosion, how did officials manage to find the remains of all but one of the 64 passengers onboard inside the building all the way up to the Ring C?

    these forensic specialist bai must have a god-like capabilities na maka identify sa DNA sa 63 out of 64 passengers, to think that most of the Boeing 757 parts disintegrated on impact =)

    Aside from that, they could easily get blood samples from those people who were allegedly in the plane (and are now either dead or in hiding), pour some on a piece of debris, and VIOLA! evidence made easy...

  9. #179

    Default Re: 911 - What really happened. (Loose Change 2)


    The photograph in question 4 shows a truck pouring sand over the lawn of the Pentagon. Behind it a bulldozer is seen spreading gravel over the turf.

    Can you explain why the Defence Secretary deemed it necessary to sand over the lawn, which was otherwise undamaged after the attack?



    what's with covering the lawn with sand? pentagon officials doesn't like greeneries now?


  10. #180

    Default Re: 911 - What really happened. (Loose Change 2)

    ummmm..where are the debris?

    [img width=500 height=266]http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/images/pelouse.jpg[/img]

    DNA's might be scattered around here =)

Page 18 of 183 FirstFirst ... 81516171819202128 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

 
  1. Loose Change 2nd Edition - 9/11 Conspiracy Documentary
    By tolstoi in forum Politics & Current Events
    Replies: 1115
    Last Post: 09-24-2012, 06:07 PM
  2. Digital Photography (2nd Edition)
    By markyap in forum Photography
    Replies: 9386
    Last Post: 01-03-2010, 09:49 PM
  3. Back to 9/11 ---> conspiracy theories.
    By weedmeister in forum Politics & Current Events
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 09-19-2008, 03:26 AM
  4. MOVED: Digital Photography (2nd Edition)
    By BeoR in forum Gizmos & Gadgets (Old)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-23-2005, 01:32 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
about us
We are the first Cebu Online Media.

iSTORYA.NET is Cebu's Biggest, Southern Philippines' Most Active, and the Philippines' Strongest Online Community!
follow us
#top