The Instigator
JustCallMeTarzan
Con (against)
Winning
33 Points
The Contender
thisoneguy
Pro (for)
Losing
22 Points

Conspiracy II: September 11, 2001

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 9 votes the winner is...
JustCallMeTarzan
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/15/2009 Category: Technology
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 8,587 times Debate No: 8639
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (27)
Votes (9)

 

JustCallMeTarzan

Con

The proposition on offer is that the events of September 11, 2001 were orchestrated actions perpetrated by the United States Government.

Caveats:

* Ignorance and stupid decisions are not evidence of conspiracy.
* "Willful Ignorance" must be demonstrated to be part of a conspiracy (i.e. Rice's non-meeting a week before).
* Facts about collapse rates, debris clouds, etc... must be backed up by both sides with math, not conjecture.
* This debate is limited to WTC 1 & 2.

*******************************************

As an opening volley - popular pieces and rebuttals of this theory:

1) The "Pancake Theory" does not support the actual fall speed or style of the building.

The pancake theory clearly does not fully describe the collapse, as you can see the top of the towers begin to tilt off. However, the case is NOT that one floor just impacted into the next floor - the collapse started mid-building. So you have 30 floors falling on the next floor to start the collapse.

2) Demartini is reputed to have "designed" the towers to withstand a crash by a plane.

Demartini is a construction manager, NOT an engineer. His quote actually reads: "The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building..." A fully loaded 707 is almost 67,000 pounds lighter than a 767 (the plane that actually HIT the towers) and carries almost 1000 gallons less fuel.

3) Core Columns show explosive separations.

The core columns show shear, not explosive separation. If you look here (http://algoxy.com...) you can see the difference between explosive shear (left) and cuts. If you look at pictures of the wreckage of the towers, you will plainly see that what he calls explosive shear is post-collapse cleanup cuts with an oxyacetylene torch.

4) There were basement explosions.

There are numerous videos and pictures of the lobby. Any explosion powerful enough to push people upwards would have damaged the floor of the lobby. None of this damage is visible in any photos. The powerful explosions in the basement are probably the result of electric feedback into the machinery that controls much of the tower's internal functionality. These explosions would have been instantaneous with the crash of the jet into the upper floors.

5) The Unscathed Passport is planted evidence.

Look at it (http://www.historycommons.org...) - it's hardly "unscathed." Almost looks like it was in a really hot cockpit module and got ejected from a burning building 100 stories up...

6) There was Thermite/Thermate at ground zero.

Thermite (which they found) is a product of Aluminum and an Oxide (like rust). The most common oxide is Iron Oxide, but any oxide will do. Other common sources available in the WTC would have included Copper. So Aluminum airplane + Oxide (rust, melted copper pipes, etc...) = Thermite. I'm no chemist, but I'm willing to bet that what can be interpreted as thermite on a scan can come from stuff that's present in a huge building and a plane. And Dr. Jones (who purported this theory)... never visited ground zero.

7) Bin Laden wasn't involved in 9/11.

Aside from the fact that Bin Laden has publicly stated on numerous accounts that he was involved, had specific foreknowledge, and personally communicated with the hijackers... There is also the testimony of Khalid Sheik Mohammed that he (Mohammed) not only planned the attacks, but presented them to Bin Laden and Mohammed Atef. Bin Laden then both approved the plan, and supplied the financial means for it to take place.

*************************************************

Just an opening volley... I await a rebuttal.

NEGATED.
thisoneguy

Pro

A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves.- Bertrand de Juvenal

Three elements of a criminal investigation are motivation, means, and opportunity. Evidence is gathered to fill in the details in each of these categories. Anomalies, contradictions, and gaps in that evidence suggest that a probable scenario for 9-11 is a false flag operation in which the perpetrator tries to place blame for a criminal act on an innocent individual or group.

A False Flag Operation? The discovery of a connection between Mohammed Atta and Abu Nidal in Iraq is interesting more for who it implicates as perpetrator of a false flag operation. Since Abu Nidal has been implicated as an asset of the Israeli Mossad, this becomes part of the evidence pointing the finger of guilt at Israel as the perpetrator of 9-11 because of the attempt to mask their involvement with false information that points toward their Arab enemies, especially Saddam Hussein.

"Al-Qaeda "
is a name coined by Richard Clarke in 1998 and his revelations about the Bush Administration's dismissal of al-Qaeda prior to 9-11 are part of a carefully choreographed disinformation campaign to grind the al-Qaeda legend deeper into the mind of the American sheeple. Add a little "opposition" from the right and the left thinks they have a whistle blower. Soon "progressives" are buying Clarke's book and lavishing praise for his "courageous plea for forgiveness" for failing the American people. It makes great theater and the unaware and hapless buy the con, hook, line and sinker. The false flag operation gains more credibility as the Official Conspiracy Theory.

Motivation:
There are many possible ways that implementing 9-11 would motivate Israel to shift attention from Zionist atrocities in Palestine and to further exacerbate peace and tranquility in the region. With a track record of "Mission Impossible" successes such as inducing the US to bomb Libya, their attack on the USS Liberty to attempt to blame Egypt, and installing one of their own as President of the United States and helping him goad Japan into attacking Pearl Harbor, and their willingness to even sacrifice their own people for the cause of furthering the State as they did in World War II, Zionists have succeeded over the centuries in demonstrating their cold cruelty and efficiency at murder, massacre and manipulation.

Means:
With the backing of the US Treasury, funding from Zionist International Financiers, and Zionist collusion in drug running, arms sales, child prostitution, pornography, and money laundering world wide, Zionist Israel has acquired the means to carry out any covert or overt operation anywhere in the world.

Opportunity:They have access to US communications, consumer data, and business transactions, control of most of the US media, banks, courts, politicians, military, industry, commerce, shipping, and education. Many who pledge their allegiance first to Zion and secondly to the USA are embedded in government at all levels and all departments as well as in corporations, the military, communications, universities and foundations. This is how they brought down the Russian democracy in 1917 and the German Kaiser in 1918.

Someone who had infiltrated into government agencies knew that NORAD would be simulating a foreign hijacked airliner crash into a building in the northeastern USA on 11 September 2001 and likely passed it on to the real terrorists. As a result, they could take advantage of a scheduled exercise as cover for the real thing. Who could do that and organize a sophisticated, precision false flag operation? Perhaps the most efficient covert operations group in the world, the Mossad.

A central actor in this massive morality play is a dual citizenship rabbi, Dov Zakheiim who has penetrated the top echelons of the American bureaucracy. Beginning with the Reagan Administration, Dr. Zakheim has worked in the Pentagon as its comptroller, in charge of the military budget, a budget that has been found to be missing over one trillion dollars for which no one can account

In a document called "Rebuilding America's Defenses" published by The American Enterprise's "Project for a New American Century"(1), SPC International executive, Dov Zakheim, called for a 'Pearl Harbor' type of incident being necessary to foster the frame of mind needed for the American public to support a war in the Middle East that would politically and culturally reshape the region. A respected and established voice in the intelligence community, his views were eagerly accepted, and Dov went from his position at Systems Planning Corporation to become the Comptroller of the Pentagon in May 2001. (2) Tridata, a subsidiary of Systems Planning Corporation, was in charge of the investigation after the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in 1993

-no human could have piloted Flights 175 and 77 in accordance with the Official Conspiracy Theory, (In that bank into the South Tower at 575 mph, the controls of a Boeing 767 would become almost impossible for a human pilot to handle because of built in Flight Control Computer program.)
-no way for Mohammed Atta or any Arab to trick the USAF to stand down for an hour while they flew around the Northeast, directly over USAF bases without a notice or interception
-no way for jet fuel to burn any hotter than 1110� F.-1740� F. and only when steel is at a temperature of 2000� F-2550� F can it be deformed by heavy force.
steel angle connectors at the perimeter would not be heated any more than 1000� F. because the heat would be conducted away by the steel fa�ade. This is the temperature of a cook stove on medium.
-no way for a carbon nose cone of a Boeing 757 to slam through a foot thick reinforced wall and not leave debris outside the exit point at the Pentagon,
-no way for cellphones to function at that altitude and speed, (So who made those calls?)
-no way for a building to fall at the rate of free fall and still encounter masses on the way down.
-a Zionist had won a $3.2 billion lease for WTC 1 and 2 in July and had insured it for $3.55 billion should it be attacked by terrorists. He claimed two terrorist attacks for $7.1 billion.
-Vice President Cheney was in charge of at least 6 training exercises on 9-11, three of which involved real planes simulating hijackings
and so on.

The following video will kill this debate, a knockout in the first round.
I invite all to study it, it's by far the best 9/11 evidence research video on the net,
Please do not forget to use the pause and back slide functions that will freeze any frame you desire. (92 Min's)
http://video.google.com...

Here is the agreement to lie about 9'11.
http://www.prisonplanet.com...
Sept 11 in History:
The troubled Munich Olympic Games end on September
11, 1972 and the world witnesses the beginnings of
terrorism. Eleven Israelis are killed by terrorists

Henry Hudson sails into New York harbor and
discovers Manhattan Island and the mouth of the
river later named in his honor - the Hudson River.

Construction of the Pentagon began on this day in 1941.
The purpose was to provide a temporary solution to the
War Department's critical shortage of space. The ground
breaking ceremony also took place on September 11, 1941.
That's only 3 of many, New york, Pentagon, and terrorism, So here's another 3,,, New york, Pentagon, and terrorism,
On this day in 2001 the US government staged a false flag operation, killed thousands of US citizens, then soon deployed troops over seas in desperate search for "the toilet". ("Al-Qaeda " translated to English)

Those in possession of absolute power can not only prophesy and make their prophecies come true, but they can also lie and make their lies come true.

If 'pro' is the opposite of 'con' what is the opposite of 'progress'
Debate Round No. 1
JustCallMeTarzan

Con

Unfortunately, much of my opponent's rebuttal is meaningless. However, he does deliver several positions near the end that are somewhat salient. I must also remind him of the caveat from the first round limiting debate on this subject to the twin towers, and not the Pentagon.

Also, I'm out of town at the moment and will be unable to respond to my opponent's first "argument" until tomorrow. However, posting a 90-minute movie is not an argument.

In rebuttal, I suggest my opponent read the entirety of the 911 Commission Report.

Post individual points, not movies.
thisoneguy

Pro

I waited only two days and twenty three hours for my opponents 2ND round contribution, therefor I thank my opponent for posting prior to the 3 day deadline, and remaining hour at his disposal.

As to his suggestion to read the entirety of the 911 Commission Report. the answer to that is quite simple,,
Why would someone spend time reading a report that was given an unacceptable tight time schedule, an unworkable budget of 3 Million Dollars,which I may add is, $62 Million less than what they spent on investigating Bill Clinton's blow job. (if you pardon the expression) Is also incomplete resulting in many unanswered questions, and was edited by the US government,? more info available here. http://www.wanttoknow.info...

Raymond L. McGovern " Former Chairman, Nation Intelligences Estimates, CIA. Responsible for President's Daily Brief (PDB) for Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. 27-year CIA veteran. Former U.S. Army Intelligences Officer.
Stated: "I think at simplest terms, there's a cover-up. The 9/11 report is a joke. The question is: What's being covered up".? and I can name others of the same opinion.!

This debate in centered on "Were the 9/11 events orchestrated actions perpetrated by the United States Government".
Opponent's (Opening volley,#2) mentions the word "plane", Which prompted a decision to post the 9/11 (worldwide) cartoon (Another short example > http://www.livevideo.com... )TV coverage, which shows no planes!, the video was also posted for other reasons.

( NB: video described as "just a video".by opponent )

#1) establish what Plane is my opponent was referring to.
#2) Add weight to my claim that the US media among others are controlled by an out side source, namely the US Government.
#3) Highlight the Guv's necessity to demolish both asbestos ridden towers as a means to conceal the false flag operation
#4) Expose the fraudulent (Terrorist attack) claim and collection of $7 billion on the newly insured asbestos ridden nightmare structures.
#5) Bring home one example of the US Government's chequered history: consisting of:- A) 9/11 1782 when The Fort Henry siege began,, and became the last battle of the American Revolution. B):- 9/11 1814,The American navy defeated the British in the Battle of Lake Champlain.( the War of 1812) C):-9/11 1944, President Roosevelt, British PM Winston Churchill, and Canadian PM Mackenzie King (All Freemasons) met in Canada, at the Quebec Conference. Also, the US 1st Army crossed the border for the first time into German (Freemason Hitler) territory. (And people wonder why he was never found.) D):- 9/11 1907, The building of the Titanic was announced by the UK to the US media, and later sank on it's maiden voyage under suspicious circumstances killing over 1.500 people, including the main opposition opposing the Federal reserve act, which just happened to be passed to the delight of the Zionists, the following year with few objections. E):-(last for now.) 9/11 1857, The brain washed Mormons led by (Freemason) Prophet, seer, and revelator B Young in Utah, slaughtered an innocent Fancher party, consisting of men woman and children (Known as the Mountain Meadow Massacre)
"Blood bath" would describe all these examples.!

The date 9/11 can be traced back to Satanic blood sacrifices of the Egyptians, after all it is their new years day,
So what have the Egyptians got to do with the US ?, Well apart from the aforementioned, is a pyramid not displayed on the dollar bill ?, Is Horus, "Satan" the all seeing eye not displayed on the dollar bill also ?, "Horus" is where we get the word "hours" from, and the word Horizon means "Horus is rising", Why does the White house have an Egyptian obelisk standing outside, (Used for sun, "Satan"worship)
Perhaps the fact that it stands 555 foot tall with a further 20% going down into the foundations (111 foot + 555 foot = 666 foot) would answer the question. The US has no relationship with Egypt, unless you are a high ranking Freemason Government official, or maneuvered into a position of power by a corrupt Government, Freemason, (Illuminati) or Zionist.

Is it any wonder why the fake 9/11 TV coverage is being talked about by Governments around the world,
The US has practically been at war every year since Korea, 1952 !. "land of the free" ? "land of Satanic and corrupt Governments", would describe it better.
A US Government who has had more blood relations and Freemasons in the history of democracy going back to and including G Washington,(http://media.photobucket.com...) party due to the controversial Diebold voting Machine, a machine that provides less piece of mind than that afforded to a person who gives their dirty linen to a rag and bone man to take to the laundrette.
-Links provided will highlight who's taking who to the cleaners.
http://www.scoop.co.nz......
http://citp.princeton.edu...
http://www.daily.pk...
http://www.opednews.com...

So at this point I'm looking for:- Proof that planes hit the WTC. ( NO poor digital composites please)
Then we may proceed further by debating why 2 tower blocks consisting of 17' thick cast concrete cores can fall at near free fall speed without being pre- rigged with explosives.

My last statement in round one: - "Those in possession of absolute power can not only prophesy and make their prophecies come true, but they can also lie and make their lies come true."
Please observe it is broken into two distinct parts, ( prophecy, and lies) the second part I can now claim as proven given my opponent's expressed opinions, intention to continue with this debate, and the very fact he instigated this debate, (As Eric Hoffer said, "We lie loudest when we lie to ourselves". See "True Believer".)
Referring to the first part of the statement, ,,,," prophecies",,, I can also claim as proven as shown in the following short video. http://video.google.co.uk......

I now await proof of this plane my opponent referred to, as I have not seen any relating to 9/11. !
Debate Round No. 2
JustCallMeTarzan

Con

Responses:

>> "Proof that planes hit the WTC. "

There are literally thousands of eyewitnesses that describe the towers being hit by planes.
There are hundreds of video images that show these planes from dozens of different angles.

(0:27)

(CNN filming unrelated event catches sound of 1st plane)

http://img508.imageshack.us...
http://911research.wtc7.net...
http://patriotic.jimrlong.com...

Just a couple problems with the video my opponent posted that "proves" edited video:

1) The camera angle purports to show a gap between the towers, but the space identified as the gap is the sunlight's reflection off the North tower. Considering this egregious errors, all other speculation from this camera angle is useless.

2) The video does not take into account the other tall buildings in Manhattan that could cast shadows on the second plane, especially considering how low it was.

3) The movie obscures many difficulties by jumping to conclusions far before all the possibilities have been exhausted. For example, when considering the zoom in on the South tower, the narrator does not take into consideration that before the zoom, the resolution of the camera was too poor to pick out the plane's approach. During the zoom, similar problems would have prevented one from seeing the plane. And in the last section, the plane enters the frame because the camera "zoomed over" it.

<>

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

<>
thisoneguy

Pro

I don't think my prophesy video link worked in the last round so here it is again, sorry for that.
http://www.flixya.com...

It's obvious we are not going to agree on what are real images and what are not, I'll post some videos to counter my opponents idea of reality.
http://www.livevideo.com...
http://www.livevideo.com...
http://www.livevideo.com...

My opponent brought a very good point, "There are literally thousands of eyewitnesses that describe the towers being hit by planes",, but unfortunately as we seen in the first video (posted in first round) these consisted of employees of the TV broadcasting companies, Allow me now to expose what else they have been up to, would you believe that they employed low grade professional actors to sell their lies around the world ?
http://www.livevideo.com...
http://www.davidicke.com...
http://www.livevideo.com...

I do have more videos of fake witnesses but I think the point is made

Next subject:- How could a structure with a cast concrete core fall at near free fall speed.? impossible !

I can place a member of the Bush family who had overall control over electrical security, Which provided a source of access to wire the WTC for demolition. you'll find it around the half hour mark.
http://video.google.co.uk...#

The evidence is overwhelming.!
Debate Round No. 3
JustCallMeTarzan

Con

Responses:

Here's an image that took me about three seconds to work with in MSPaint that immediately casts serious doubt on the "nose-out" theory.

Original: http://bonez.us...
Edited: http://students.millikin.edu...

Obviously, the shapes of the "noses" are not even remotely the same. If the image was a fabrication where the same model of the plane was accidentally shifted to the left, the shapes of the noses would be... exactly the same, which they are not.

>> "I do have more videos of fake witnesses but I think the point is made"

Of course the ones that are obviously fake are posted on the internet in big bold letters. For every video of people saying there were no planes, there are videos of people saying there are planes...

1)
2)

>> "How could a structure with a cast concrete core fall at near free fall speed.? impossible !"

This one is very easy to refute. If you actually watch videos of the collapse, you'll see large pieces of debris that are not attached to the building falling MUCH faster than the collapse:

3)
4)

This clip, which is 18 seconds long, doesn't even show the entire collapse. The tower starts to fall at 0:02, and still isn't done 16 seconds later. Absolute free fall for the 417 meter tall tower is 417 = 0.5 gt^2 (g = gravity; t = time)... do the math and you find that free fall is about 9.2 seconds.

5)

>> "I can place a member of the Bush family who had overall control over electrical security"

Someone in control of electrical security would hardly be in a position to mask a demolition crew. Consider that teams would need to enter the building with hundreds of pounds of high-power explosives, sneaking past the 50,000 daily workers and 200,000 daily tourists (http://en.wikipedia.org...). Can you imaging trying to hide the arrival and setup (including drilling into walls beams, etc...) of a building that size?

Let's do a little thought experiment. Let's say I'm in charge of all things electric in a building. I can turn on/off lights, cameras, elevators, etc... but I'm still of course limited to the physical electrical layout of the building - meaning I can't shut down the lights or cameras in 1 area without killing power to other things there as well. How do I, master of electricity, hide a team of demolition experts and their hundreds of pounds of explosives, wires, transmitters, drilling gear, etc... from 250,000 people??

>> "The evidence is overwhelming."

On the contrary - when examined 911 conspiracy "evidence" points towards one of three things. First, making mountains out of molehills as in the case of the few people that say they saw no planes. Second, simple mathematical inaccuracy as in the proponents of free-fall for the towers. And third, inaccuracy, or worse, lies, as in the case of the "nose-out" theorists, or the video from the first round that purported to show a gap between the towers that was actually the reflection of the morning sun on the East faces...

NEGATED.
thisoneguy

Pro

Sorry, but again I can't accept my opponents drawing, the best "nose out" examination on the web is this video.
http://www.livevideo.com...
anyone can clearly see this plane is a fake, and outwith "the nose out" theory the plane and the blast smoke both overlap the structure facing, not to mention the wing fades to nothing on approach.
The image posted by my opponent (MS Paint) shows the plane with a square/flat nose, ? The planes nose can be seen changing shape before impact, here's a picture of a planes nose after being hit by one seagull.
http://images.google.co.uk...
And we're to believe that two planes just melted into buildings ?
Videos of witnesses posted by my opponent do not prove anything, do these people know the difference between a jet and a winged cruise missile flying at speed ?

How do I, master of electricity, hide a team of demolition experts and their hundreds of pounds of explosives, wires, transmitters, drilling gear, etc... from 250,000 people?? Answer below, and youtube video. posted as Proof !
http://www.livevideo.com...

As stated in the first round that Zionists (Jews) were responsible for using the US Guv as puppets, so the question, "How many Jews died in the 9/11 WTC",? would you believe they (4,000) moved out just before 9/11 ?

ZIM, an Israeli company, vacated its office (10,000 square feet) in the North WTC tower a few days before 9/11, breaking its lease. The lease ran till the end of 2001, and the company lost $50,000 by breaking the lease. Later, FBI agent Michael Dick, who was investigating Israeli spying before and after 9/11 and looking into the suspicious move, was removed from his duties by the head of the Justice Department's criminal division, Jew Michael Chertoff.
Following link proves my account of the 9/11 attacks. (video included lasts 2 hours, but the first 15 Min's opens your eyes to Zionist's false flag operations in history) http://www.judenfrei.org...

The website also shows how the Jews (Zionist's) had control over WTC, post 9/11 investigation, and more Jewish companies who vacated the WTC just prior to the missile attacks, thus breaking their lease agreement in the process.

My opponent makes the comment, " making mountains out of molehills ",,,, I found this very interesting, never before has a steel structure fell due to fire, then all of a sudden we get 3 in a single day, we see planes melt into buildings, hear countless eyewitnesses testify about missiles, listen to firefighters and first responders talk about explosions on various floor levels, suddenly TV networks form an alliance and share live news reports, professional B grade actors posing as eye witnesses to sell the false story to the world, and on and on,,,,,,.

Next round I intend to show how millions of dollars were made through insider trading due to the events of 9/11.

I would say that my opponent is trying to make a molehill out of a mountain ! (A mountain of evidence)
http://911-harley-shirt-guy.blogspot.com...
Debate Round No. 4
JustCallMeTarzan

Con

Responses:

>> "The image posted by my opponent (MS Paint) shows the plane with a square/flat nose, ?"

The image is a composite of the frames from your video. If the plane was actually inserted in the manner described by the video, the images would be identical, which they clearly are not. The comparison done in Paint proves that the nose-in-nose-out theory is simply wrong.

>> "And we're to believe that two planes just melted into buildings ?"

This computer-generated simulation with data regarding the actual structural strengths of materials shows exactly how the plane "melted" into the building (1 - ). The plane turned to debris as it went in... This link (http://www.purdue.edu...) describes in detail the creation of the simulation, and how the weight from the fuel in the plane was what actually caused a lot of the structural damage as the plane entered the building.

>> "do these people know the difference between a jet and a winged cruise missile flying at speed ?"

Let's ask the readers...

Boeing 747: http://www.air-and-space.com...
Tomahawk Cruise Missile: http://www.aerospaceweb.org...

Can you tell the difference? I mean... they look SOOOOOO similar .

>> "How do I, master of electricity, hide a team of demolition experts and their hundreds of pounds of explosives, wires, transmitters, drilling gear, etc... from 250,000 people?? Answer below, and youtube video. posted as Proof ! http://www.livevideo.com...;

This video has nothing to do with electricity or explosives...

>> "I found this very interesting, never before has a steel structure fell due to fire, then all of a sudden we get 3 in a single day"

False - WTC 1, 2, and 7 all fell due to structural damage. In the case of the WTC1 and 2, the severing of some of the core columns by debris weakened the floor where the plane impacted enough that the weight of the floors ABOVE that area caused that specific floor to collapse. And of course, the kinetic energy from the collapsing floors added significantly to the impact weight as it hit the next floor down, causing a runaway collapse.

>> "http://911-harley-shirt-guy.blogspot.com......
thisoneguy

Pro

Why did it take me five rounds of reading my opponents post before it hit home that he wasn't even paying attention ?.

No electrical shutdown ?,, obviously he didn't watch the video,, Also I received no reply to the video showing Dollar bills with the twin towers under attack and collapsing.

I can debate all day with someone who pays attention, but when it resembles talking to a lamp post with no lights on, it's time to call it a day.

I recommend infowars.com for anyone who wants to hear real news, instead of the rubbish that's being broadcasted.

Planetprison.com for information relating to 9/11,, 7/7, and much more, including what to expect in the future, from our nice squeaky clean US Government.
Debate Round No. 5
27 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by warlord2080 7 years ago
warlord2080
I feel as though pro was going out of the subject. Even being limited pro goes out of the way by saying things that has no purpose for 9/11 tragity. I love how Con's rebuttal kept up with the pro's arguement. Although it consisted of 5 rounds it was a pretty good debate.
Posted by Volkov 7 years ago
Volkov
RFD

B & A: CON
Conduct: CON; PRO failed to stay on topic.
S & G: Tied
Argument: CON
Sources: CON; despite what Geo says, Prison Planet is *not* enough to prove PRO's burden.
Posted by JustCallMeTarzan 7 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
The link about the 9/11 commission doesn't have anything to do with the EVENTS on 9/11. Covering up the failures of the government to respond to a crisis does not indicate that the government had any hand in the crisis itself.
Posted by GeoLaureate8 7 years ago
GeoLaureate8
Isn't the link thisoneguy posted enough to fulfill his burden?

http://www.prisonplanet.com...

It's proof that the government intentionally agreed to lie about 911. This is direct proof from the 911 Commission that there was a cover up.

.
Posted by thisoneguy 7 years ago
thisoneguy
"One of their own" - Puppet, Freemasons, brother of destruction,Satan lover, Bohemian club member,Illuminati-st. Blood line ?. Thanks for your interest Mark.
Posted by MrMarkP37 7 years ago
MrMarkP37
One of Pro's claims that stood out to me was that the "zionists" installed "one of their own" as President and he goaded Japan to attack starting our involvement in WWII. I assume he is talking about Franklin Roosevelt, who was not Jewish. Here is the confusion Rosevelt is a Jewish name but Roosevelt is a dutch name. We have never had a Jewish president in the history of the U.S. My Grandmother's last name was Roosen, which is dutch, people often made the same mistake with her because Rosen is a Jewish name.
Posted by JustCallMeTarzan 7 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
Obviously the videos are not taken at a high enough resolution to display the logos. Also, the logos are all on the top halves of the planes. So even with extra-high resolutions, we couldn't see the logos.

At 1:52 - there's a comparison of the underbellies of one of the WTC planes and an AA plane of matching type.
Posted by thisoneguy 7 years ago
thisoneguy
Sounds interesting ! can you please show me a plane with a AA logo crashing into one of the towers please, I mean if there's hundereds of them as you claim this shouldn't be a problem.
Posted by JustCallMeTarzan 7 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
>> "Prove ?,, I can prove no planes hit the WTC, Pentagon, Shanksville, none!"

Remember that this is limited to just WTC 1 & 2. I'll make a debate about Shanksville if you want it...

But you do realize that there are literally dozens of videos of the 1st plane and hundreds more of the second plane hitting the towers... you have no sort of proof that can deny that kind of visual evidence.
Posted by thisoneguy 7 years ago
thisoneguy
Prove ?,, I can prove no planes hit the WTC, Pentagon, Shanksville, none ! it's just a case of which round do I choose to produce the evidence.

Do I go for a quick bush style kill, or take it underground like Tony Blair on 7/7, maybe I could just ignore it like Roosevelt at Pearl Harbour, or devise a scheme like Roosevelt, Churchill, and Mckenzie King did on 9/11 1944, then there's the slow death Clinton Gulf War Syndrome approach, and there's the all American rig the voting plot, or do a Maggie Thatcher and sell my assets. Hmmmmmm,, where does it end,? another option would be to go all satanic, press the Hiroshima destruct button in an attempt to kill the believers, (only deemed Christian City in Japan)

If only I was a member of the Bohemian Club, they would tell me how to draw blood !
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by cbass28 7 years ago
cbass28
JustCallMeTarzanthisoneguyTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
JustCallMeTarzanthisoneguyTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by devildog3024 7 years ago
devildog3024
JustCallMeTarzanthisoneguyTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by GeoLaureate8 7 years ago
GeoLaureate8
JustCallMeTarzanthisoneguyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Volkov 7 years ago
Volkov
JustCallMeTarzanthisoneguyTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by Refer_Madness 7 years ago
Refer_Madness
JustCallMeTarzanthisoneguyTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by thisoneguy 7 years ago
thisoneguy
JustCallMeTarzanthisoneguyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by tribefan011 7 years ago
tribefan011
JustCallMeTarzanthisoneguyTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by JustCallMeTarzan 7 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
JustCallMeTarzanthisoneguyTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60