9/11 CONSPIRICY THEORY

Got to laugh programme on just now Head ABC reporter said she was shocked that someone would interupt the president during a press campaign. ie listening to kids telling a story...

But not a mention of shock that he chose to carry on listening to kids after being told that 2 planes had hit the nations biggest iconic symbols. And the nation was obviously under attack.


Leaving florida on air force 1

Head of security just said they had to assume president was a target.

Yet he walks out of car by himself nearest security ten feet away walks up stairs by himself (not surrounded by people paid to take the bullet) stops at top of stairs by himself turns and waves to press photographers.

Get real he would have been surrounded by secret service and thrown into the plane.
 
Sponsored Links
namsag, anyone who thinks the 9/11 thing was the result of a government conspiracy can only be described as deluded. That's all I'm going to say, because the arguments for one are too ridiculous for words.
 
namsag, anyone who thinks the 9/11 thing was the result of a government conspiracy can only be described as deluded. That's all I'm going to say, because the arguments for one are too ridiculous for words.

agreed !!!
 
Declassified documents from the 1960's about Operation Northwoods show that the idea of a false flag operation of this nature had been thought of years back to attack Castro in Cuba.

Oh,and yet just another coincidence Marvin Bush(the youngest brother) was a director of the security company responsible for the towers up until the day they were blown up.
http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0204-06.htm
There are many testaments to the buildings being half empty, yet a lot of construction noise going on and what firms were there being decanted to different floors without good explanation, so it would be remarkably easy to rig the place over a few years.
And reading this about the new leaseholder of these buildings makes you realise just what a coincidence it all isn't-
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/silverstein.html
War on Terror is like a War on Drugs- utterly futile and designed never to be won because you can't....
So, why did WTC 7 collapse? Still waiting for one of the official story(and it is PURE fiction) believers to explain this one. :LOL:
 
Sponsored Links
Any open minded intelligent person would accept the sequence of events if they were proven, but when experts can stand up and challenge the official version, that cannot be defended, then those same people are right to accept different versions of the events that are put forward, particularly when the authorities cannot dispute them.

Besides, only a fool would accept what the US and British governments told them.
 
Anyway- why did WTC 7 collapse then? Not hit by planes, only 16 yrs old, full of incriminating documentation on fraud and missing public money(and ENRON docs)....Why did the BBC report it 20 mins before it happened with it in the background of the reporter!
BBC made a mistake. Its called breaking news, and the BBC are notorious as getting such things wrong.
WTC7 collapsed due to fire. There was a lack of water to attack the fire with, and structural deformation was noticed well before collapse giving firemen enough time to get out (or "pull" their men out). There is a YouTube of a fireman explaining this on the day. The fustration in his voice is there to witness (I can't access YouTube here).

I mean, why would they demolish WTC7? To hide incriminating evidence? Try this thought experiment:
You are an evil conspirator, and want to hide evidence that is in WTC7. Do you a. put files through a shredder, and destroy any harddrives you find, b. take all evidence to a remote location and burn them, c. demolish the building that they are housed in.

C. is funny and yet many take it seriously. No one has ever demolished a building that tall, and it just isn't practical. And even if they did, it would take months of prep and be very audible. And no, someone hearing bangs about an hour before does not count.

There is enough actual fact out there to stop calling this a conspiracy. Just read it, and stop f***ing with the laws of physics those buildings didn't collapse and they were in virtual freefall.
Er no. It took a bit longer than free fall. If you include all of the structure:
site1074.jpg

It took considerably longer.
In fact debris falling faster than the collapse area points to it falling slower than free fall:
wtc_collapse1.jpg

This does not look anything like a controlled demolition. One just does not start a controlled demolition so high up, and near an area were you've just had a major incident.

In the BBC2 propaganda the other night they still didn't explain where the huge central columns went if their baloney pancake theory could ever have happened- the pancaked floors would have been hundreds of feet high and nicely holding up the columns.
See above for the central columns.
The buildings collapsed in an uncontrolled way. They caused severe damage to surrounding buildings (not just WTC7), some were either destroyed at the time, while one or two others were demolished later.

Pancaking evidence is even in the remains.

But....nothing. Just dust.....
....And 1000s of tonnes of steel piled up.
The concrete floor, and plasterboard and office equipment was broken down into pieces ranging from large chunks, to dust. But when you have a 1000(ish)ft building collapse, I would expect nothing else.

See also, here:
http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/911NutPhysics1.HTM

I understand for a lot of people it's just too scary to think these sociopathic cretins we elect to "lead" us would do this to their own people for other gains. But look at the aims and authors of PNAC, and then who were all front line US government. The same people....
Oh but that's just silly coincidence.....I'm off to take my daily blue pill I don't want to look further down the rabbit hole, it's just too scary!
Leave your ego at the door please.
 
And for a bit of fun:
Uncomfortable Questions: Was the Death Star Attack an Inside Job?

We've all heard the "official conspiracy theory" of the Death Star attack. We all know about Luke Skywalker and his ragtag bunch of rebels, how they mounted a foolhardy attack on the most powerful, well-defended battle station ever built. And we've all seen the video over, and over, and over, of the one-in-a-million shot that resulted in a massive chain reaction that not just damaged, but completely obliterated that massive technological wonder.

Like many Americans, I was fed this story when I was growing up. But as I watched the video, I began to realize that all was not as it seemed. And the more I questioned the official story, the deeper into the rabbit hole I went.

Presented here are some of the results of my soul-searching regarding this painful event. Like many citizens, I have many questions that I would like answered: was the mighty Imperial government really too incompetent to prevent a handful of untrained nerf-herders from destroying one of their most prized assets? Or are they hiding something from us? Who was really behind the attack? Why did they want the Death Star destroyed? No matter what the answers, we have a problem.

Below is a summary of my book, Uncomfortable Questions: An Analysis of the Death Star Attack, which presents compelling evidence that we all may be the victims of a fraud of immense proportions.


Uncomfortable Questions about the Death Star Attack

1) Why were a handful of rebel fighters able to penetrate the defenses of a battle station that had the capability of destroying an entire planet and the defenses to ward off several fleets of battle ships?

2) Why did Grand Moff Tarkin refuse to deploy the station's large fleet of TIE Fighters until it was too late? Was he acting on orders from somebody to not shoot down the rebel attack force? If so, who, and why?

3) Why was the rebel pilot who supposedly destroyed the Death Star reported to be on the Death Star days, maybe hours, prior to its destruction? Why was he allowed to escape, and why were several individuals dressed in Stormtrooper uniforms seen helping him?

4) Why has there not been an investigation into allegations that Darth Vader, the second-ranking member of the Imperial Government, is in fact the father of the pilot who allegedly destroyed the Death Star?

5) Why did Lord Vader decide to break all protocols and personally pilot a lightly armored TIE Fighter? Conveniently, this placed Lord Vader outside of the Death Star when it was destroyed, where he was also conveniently able to escape from a large-sized rebel fleet that had just routed the Imperial forces. Why would Lord Vader, one of the highest ranking members of the Imperial Government, suddenly decide to fly away from the Death Star in the middle of a battle? Did he know something that the rest of the Imperial Navy didn't?

6) How could any pilot shoot a missile into a 2 meter-wide exhaust port, let alone a pilot with no formal training, whose only claim to fame was his ability to "bullseye womprats" on Tatooine? This shot, according to one pilot, would be "impossible, even for a computer." Yet, according to additional evidence, the pilot who allegedly fired the missile turned off his targeting computer when he was supposedly firing the shot that destroyed the Death Star. Why have these discrepancies never been investigated, let alone explained?

7) Why has their been no investigation into evidence that the droids who provided the rebels with the Death Star plans were once owned by none other than Lord Vader himself, and were found, conveniently, by the pilot who destroyed the Death Star, and who is also believed to be Lord Vader's son? Evidence also shows that the droids were brought to one Ben Kenobi, who, records indicate, was Darth Vader's teacher many years earlier! Are all these personal connections between the conspirators and a key figure in the Imperial government supposed to be coincidences?

8) How could a single missile destroy a battle station the size of a moon? No records, anywhere, show that any battle station or capital ship has ever been destroyed by a single missile. Furthermore, analysis of the tape of the last moments of the Death Star show numerous small explosions along its surface, prior to it exploding completely! Why does all evidence indicate that strategically placed explosives, not a single missile, is what destroyed the Death Star?
 
I recently watched a repeat series of Fred Dibnah demolishing buildings and chimneys.

What is interesting is that to make a building implode on its self Fred had to ensure that his explosives / fires were positioned equally around the perimeter of the building. If he wanted it to collapse in a certain direction (ie to one particular side to avoid other buildings etc, then he concentrated his efforts to that one side to weaken the structure and eventually for it to collapse outwards from that point.

All the 9/11 buildings basically imploded ............... very interesting.
 
Its easy to setup a demolition when the building spent most of its time vavcant

No. It was well occupied:
But as a result of the last year's work, Ms. Nanninga, said the complex is over 90 percent occupied and expects to it reach the 95 percent mark by the end of the year. That, she said, would be about as full as the center is likely to get, since there is almost always someone moving in or out. ''Ninety-seven percent occupancy would be full,'' said Ms. Nanninga, whose name is pronounced NAN-in-gay.
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/31/r...world-trade-center-things-are-looking-up.html
 
wobs, you're wasting your time mate. Anyone who gives credence to those wild 9/11 conspiracy theories is obviously beyond reasoning with.,
 
I heard that they had to destroy the WTC since the basement has the fake lunar landscape used in the false Apollo missions :rolleyes: Use one conspiracy to bury another :confused:
 
Dont mention scousers cause sooey will suddenly start believing in conspiracy theories and say the police where 100% responsible for hillsborough and made up all those stories about the fans and are hiding all the real evidence.
But authorities and powers at be cant and dont do that .
 
Nah, don't think anything like that about hillsborough nam. It was caused by a horrible set of circumstances, the police were just incompetent. Mckenzie was the pr1ck printing all the made up stories (not many people round here buy the sun to this day), There was some kind of cover up after the event to hide certain stuff I suppose. But that's hardly in the same bracket as a government planning and carrying out something like 9/11 against their own people.
 
Nah, don't think anything like that about hillsborough nam. It was caused by a horrible set of circumstances, the police were just incompetent. Mckenzie was the pr1ck printing all the made up stories (not many people round here buy the sun to this day), There was some kind of cover up after the event to hide certain stuff I suppose. But that's hardly in the same bracket as a government planning and carrying out something like 9/11 against their own people.

Whether stories were fabricated by the press or not, you still can't get away from the fact that there were fans there that day who didn't have match tickets and yet were in the ground. These fans have to share responsibility for what happened. (but they don't do they? They'd rather blame someone else.)
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top