Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

Arguments for the 9/11 Conspiracy

Maryland_Kid
Posts: 32
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2014 2:21:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'd like to know more about the 9/11 Conspiracy to get into a debate with someone.

-Why was it done?
-How was it performed (I think that there is two schools of thought; the government let it happen or the government did it by itself?)
-What are the objective facts?
The defender of Christianity, Calvinism, Creationism, and Conservative politics.
ararmer1919
Posts: 362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2014 4:11:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/9/2014 2:21:59 PM, Maryland_Kid wrote:
I'd like to know more about the 9/11 Conspiracy to get into a debate with someone.

-Why was it done?
-How was it performed (I think that there is two schools of thought; the government let it happen or the government did it by itself?)
-What are the objective facts?

The best thing to take away from 9/11 "truthers" is that there are no facts to support any of their wild claims and that anyone who believes that 9/11 was an inside job is most likely incredibly stupid.
NJF
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 8:37:46 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/9/2014 4:11:05 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 6/9/2014 2:21:59 PM, Maryland_Kid wrote:
I'd like to know more about the 9/11 Conspiracy to get into a debate with someone.

-Why was it done?
-How was it performed (I think that there is two schools of thought; the government let it happen or the government did it by itself?)
-What are the objective facts?

The best thing to take away from 9/11 "truthers" is that there are no facts to support any of their wild claims and that anyone who believes that 9/11 was an inside job is most likely incredibly stupid.

If you watch Youtube videos like 'Loose Change' then they really do a good job of convincing people that things don't add up. I do have a few questions about 9/11 that I personnally would like answered.

1. Why are they only showing us the 1 camera that caught the jet crashing into the Pentagon? 1 frame per second showed us nothing. Im not saying it wasnt a jet, but why hide the footage? There had to be more cameras that would have caught it.

2. Why did building 7 collapse? I dont get this. I get the world trade centers, hot burning jet fuel and weight, but building 7 didn't have any structual damage, if just burned a tiny bit and then collapsed.

3. This one is my oppinion. The jet that crashed in Pennsylvania was most likely shot down by an F-16 from Langley. But it makes a much better story that the passengers are heroes. Also, no pilot wants that under their name. Killed all those civilians and all.
ararmer1919
Posts: 362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 10:31:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 8:37:46 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/9/2014 4:11:05 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 6/9/2014 2:21:59 PM, Maryland_Kid wrote:
I'd like to know more about the 9/11 Conspiracy to get into a debate with someone.

-Why was it done?
-How was it performed (I think that there is two schools of thought; the government let it happen or the government did it by itself?)
-What are the objective facts?

The best thing to take away from 9/11 "truthers" is that there are no facts to support any of their wild claims and that anyone who believes that 9/11 was an inside job is most likely incredibly stupid.

If you watch Youtube videos like 'Loose Change' then they really do a good job of convincing people that things don't add up. I do have a few questions about 9/11 that I personnally would like answered.

Loose change was one of the stupidest things Iv ever had the misfortune of wasting time out of my life watching. It was created by a couple of collage kids who had absolutely no real world or professional experience in any subject that would have given them any form of credibility. Their entire premises was based off of (the usual truther method) asking random questions while providing 0 facts or supporting evidence and yet claiming that their questions some how merit proof of whatever. The entire video can and has been debunked. I've seen plenty of other videos and visited many truther sites. I've yet to be impressed.

1. Why are they only showing us the 1 camera that caught the jet crashing into the Pentagon? 1 frame per second showed us nothing. Im not saying it wasnt a jet, but why hide the footage? There had to be more cameras that would have caught it.

I'm no expert on why there was only 1 video, though I'm sure there are reasons. However, lack of multiple videos proves nothing. And we have plenty of other evidence to support the official story. Parts of the plane, bodies of those onboard confirmed by DNA testing. The damage from the flight path of 77, (damaged light polls, fence). And most important the 6 different radar stations that positively tracked flight 77 from take off to pentagon impact and confirmed by the recovered flight data recorder.

2. Why did building 7 collapse? I dont get this. I get the world trade centers, hot burning jet fuel and weight, but building 7 didn't have any structual damage, if just burned a tiny bit and then collapsed. I have no idea where you got the idea that building 7 only had a tiny fire and no structural damage. The fire was enormous and there was massive damage caused by the collapse of towers 1 and 2. I'm guessing you've seen the truther picture which shows the north side of tower 7 which is relatively un scratched. However if you look up the south side you will find out that almost the entire side of that building was demolished. There was a 35 by 30 story gash.

3. This one is my oppinion. The jet that crashed in Pennsylvania was most likely shot down by an F-16 from Langley. But it makes a much better story that the passengers are heroes. Also, no pilot wants that under their name. Killed all those civilians and all.

Aside from there being absolutely no evidence to support that claim,we know for a fact that it is not possible because there were no military planes anywhere near the area at the time that 93 went down. The FFA did not contact the air force until 10:07. Flight 93 crashed at 10:03. The failure to notify the Air Force and the slow response from both groups was the result of mostly human error (failure to report missing air planes the moment they went missing, not calling the Air Force at the appropriate time, an Air Force service men not answering the phone when the call did come in). These errors occurred primarily do the fact that nothing of this sort had ever happened before and many were unsure of how to act. Remember that prior to 9/11 our procedures for incidents within US airspace were very very different. People always ask "well how come NORAD and the military didn't shoot down the planes?" Well prior to 9/11 the US Air Force didn't even have jurisdiction of operating capability within IS airspace.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org...
ararmer1919
Posts: 362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 10:32:59 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Sorry didn't separate this part from yours.

2. Why did building 7 collapse? I dont get this. I get the world trade centers, hot burning jet fuel and weight, but building 7 didn't have any structual damage, if just burned a tiny bit and then collapsed.

I have no idea where you got the idea that building 7 only had a tiny fire and no structural damage. The fire was enormous and there was massive damage caused by the collapse of towers 1 and 2. I'm guessing you've seen the truther picture which shows the north side of tower 7 which is relatively un scratched. However if you look up the south side you will find out that almost the entire side of that building was demolished. There was a 35 by 30 story gash.
NJF
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 10:55:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 10:32:59 AM, ararmer1919 wrote:
Sorry didn't separate this part from yours.

2. Why did building 7 collapse? I dont get this. I get the world trade centers, hot burning jet fuel and weight, but building 7 didn't have any structual damage, if just burned a tiny bit and then collapsed.

I have no idea where you got the idea that building 7 only had a tiny fire and no structural damage. The fire was enormous and there was massive damage caused by the collapse of towers 1 and 2. I'm guessing you've seen the truther picture which shows the north side of tower 7 which is relatively un scratched. However if you look up the south side you will find out that almost the entire side of that building was demolished. There was a 35 by 30 story gash.

By the way I am in no means a truther, and I dont buy into any of the numerous videos out there. As far as the Single Video, I dont debate that a plane didnt hit the pentagon just why we dont see any video of it. Wouldn't this shut some people up?

As far as building 7, I was not aware of extensive damage on the one side. The video's of the collapse are all from the other side so that makes some sense.

F-16 theory. There is no doubt that F-16s were in the air prior to that jet crashing. The question is did they intercept in time. Just remember, dont believe too much media when it comes to these things, specially military. A lot of classified things go on here that we do not get the luxory of knowing.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 10:59:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 8:37:46 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/9/2014 4:11:05 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 6/9/2014 2:21:59 PM, Maryland_Kid wrote:
I'd like to know more about the 9/11 Conspiracy to get into a debate with someone.

-Why was it done?
-How was it performed (I think that there is two schools of thought; the government let it happen or the government did it by itself?)
-What are the objective facts?

The best thing to take away from 9/11 "truthers" is that there are no facts to support any of their wild claims and that anyone who believes that 9/11 was an inside job is most likely incredibly stupid.

If you watch Youtube videos like 'Loose Change' then they really do a good job of convincing people that things don't add up. I do have a few questions about 9/11 that I personnally would like answered.

1. Why are they only showing us the 1 camera that caught the jet crashing into the Pentagon? 1 frame per second showed us nothing. Im not saying it wasnt a jet, but why hide the footage? There had to be more cameras that would have caught it.

2. Why did building 7 collapse? I dont get this. I get the world trade centers, hot burning jet fuel and weight, but building 7 didn't have any structual damage, if just burned a tiny bit and then collapsed.

This is false. Most images of the scene don't show the other side of the building, which suffered massive damage. Why on earth would the government blow up building 7 even IF it orchestrated the attacks?


3. This one is my oppinion. The jet that crashed in Pennsylvania was most likely shot down by an F-16 from Langley. But it makes a much better story that the passengers are heroes. Also, no pilot wants that under their name. Killed all those civilians and all.

Your opinion is ridiculous.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 11:01:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 10:55:26 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 10:32:59 AM, ararmer1919 wrote:

By the way I am in no means a truther, and I dont buy into any of the numerous videos out there.

You believe that an f-16 shot down flight 93. Yes you are lol
NJF
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 11:04:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 10:59:32 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 8:37:46 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/9/2014 4:11:05 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 6/9/2014 2:21:59 PM, Maryland_Kid wrote:
I'd like to know more about the 9/11 Conspiracy to get into a debate with someone.

-Why was it done?
-How was it performed (I think that there is two schools of thought; the government let it happen or the government did it by itself?)
-What are the objective facts?

The best thing to take away from 9/11 "truthers" is that there are no facts to support any of their wild claims and that anyone who believes that 9/11 was an inside job is most likely incredibly stupid.

If you watch Youtube videos like 'Loose Change' then they really do a good job of convincing people that things don't add up. I do have a few questions about 9/11 that I personnally would like answered.

1. Why are they only showing us the 1 camera that caught the jet crashing into the Pentagon? 1 frame per second showed us nothing. Im not saying it wasnt a jet, but why hide the footage? There had to be more cameras that would have caught it.

2. Why did building 7 collapse? I dont get this. I get the world trade centers, hot burning jet fuel and weight, but building 7 didn't have any structual damage, if just burned a tiny bit and then collapsed.

This is false. Most images of the scene don't show the other side of the building, which suffered massive damage. Why on earth would the government blow up building 7 even IF it orchestrated the attacks?


3. This one is my oppinion. The jet that crashed in Pennsylvania was most likely shot down by an F-16 from Langley. But it makes a much better story that the passengers are heroes. Also, no pilot wants that under their name. Killed all those civilians and all.

Your opinion is ridiculous.

You must have first hand knowledge of Flightline Ops at Langley Airforce Base in September of 2001. You must have inventoried the Aim-9 missiles and been in charge of the Basic Postflight Inspections the 2W1's did not accomplish on the Lau-129 launchers. Because you seem to be certain.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 11:07:52 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 11:04:38 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 10:59:32 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 8:37:46 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/9/2014 4:11:05 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 6/9/2014 2:21:59 PM, Maryland_Kid wrote:
I'd like to know more about the 9/11 Conspiracy to get into a debate with someone.

-Why was it done?
-How was it performed (I think that there is two schools of thought; the government let it happen or the government did it by itself?)
-What are the objective facts?

The best thing to take away from 9/11 "truthers" is that there are no facts to support any of their wild claims and that anyone who believes that 9/11 was an inside job is most likely incredibly stupid.

If you watch Youtube videos like 'Loose Change' then they really do a good job of convincing people that things don't add up. I do have a few questions about 9/11 that I personnally would like answered.

1. Why are they only showing us the 1 camera that caught the jet crashing into the Pentagon? 1 frame per second showed us nothing. Im not saying it wasnt a jet, but why hide the footage? There had to be more cameras that would have caught it.

2. Why did building 7 collapse? I dont get this. I get the world trade centers, hot burning jet fuel and weight, but building 7 didn't have any structual damage, if just burned a tiny bit and then collapsed.

This is false. Most images of the scene don't show the other side of the building, which suffered massive damage. Why on earth would the government blow up building 7 even IF it orchestrated the attacks?


3. This one is my oppinion. The jet that crashed in Pennsylvania was most likely shot down by an F-16 from Langley. But it makes a much better story that the passengers are heroes. Also, no pilot wants that under their name. Killed all those civilians and all.

Your opinion is ridiculous.

You must have first hand knowledge of Flightline Ops at Langley Airforce Base in September of 2001. You must have inventoried the Aim-9 missiles and been in charge of the Basic Postflight Inspections the 2W1's did not accomplish on the Lau-129 launchers. Because you seem to be certain.

What is so implausible about the report? We know the course the plane took (and why it lead to the crash).... We have cockpit recordings to back it up... We have the phone calls from inside the plane which indicated an ambush.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 11:08:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
The only remotely plausible conspiracy theory concerning 9-11 is that the government knew of the attack, but did nothing to stop it, or somehow helped the terrorists. Anything else is just ridiculous.
NJF
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 11:09:05 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 11:01:03 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 10:55:26 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 10:32:59 AM, ararmer1919 wrote:

By the way I am in no means a truther, and I dont buy into any of the numerous videos out there.

You believe that an f-16 shot down flight 93. Yes you are lol

I lean towards shot down. So I guess the only truth I'd like to know is did it? Maybe I misinterpreted being a truther as someone that thinks the government was in anyway behind 9/11.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 11:09:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 11:09:05 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:01:03 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 10:55:26 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 10:32:59 AM, ararmer1919 wrote:

By the way I am in no means a truther, and I dont buy into any of the numerous videos out there.

You believe that an f-16 shot down flight 93. Yes you are lol

I lean towards shot down. So I guess the only truth I'd like to know is did it? Maybe I misinterpreted being a truther as someone that thinks the government was in anyway behind 9/11.

A truther is someone who believes the official report is false in some crucial way, hence "truther".
NJF
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 11:14:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 11:07:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:04:38 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 10:59:32 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 8:37:46 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/9/2014 4:11:05 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 6/9/2014 2:21:59 PM, Maryland_Kid wrote:
I'd like to know more about the 9/11 Conspiracy to get into a debate with someone.

-Why was it done?
-How was it performed (I think that there is two schools of thought; the government let it happen or the government did it by itself?)
-What are the objective facts?

The best thing to take away from 9/11 "truthers" is that there are no facts to support any of their wild claims and that anyone who believes that 9/11 was an inside job is most likely incredibly stupid.

If you watch Youtube videos like 'Loose Change' then they really do a good job of convincing people that things don't add up. I do have a few questions about 9/11 that I personnally would like answered.

1. Why are they only showing us the 1 camera that caught the jet crashing into the Pentagon? 1 frame per second showed us nothing. Im not saying it wasnt a jet, but why hide the footage? There had to be more cameras that would have caught it.

2. Why did building 7 collapse? I dont get this. I get the world trade centers, hot burning jet fuel and weight, but building 7 didn't have any structual damage, if just burned a tiny bit and then collapsed.

This is false. Most images of the scene don't show the other side of the building, which suffered massive damage. Why on earth would the government blow up building 7 even IF it orchestrated the attacks?


3. This one is my oppinion. The jet that crashed in Pennsylvania was most likely shot down by an F-16 from Langley. But it makes a much better story that the passengers are heroes. Also, no pilot wants that under their name. Killed all those civilians and all.

Your opinion is ridiculous.

You must have first hand knowledge of Flightline Ops at Langley Airforce Base in September of 2001. You must have inventoried the Aim-9 missiles and been in charge of the Basic Postflight Inspections the 2W1's did not accomplish on the Lau-129 launchers. Because you seem to be certain.

What is so implausible about the report? We know the course the plane took (and why it lead to the crash).... We have cockpit recordings to back it up... We have the phone calls from inside the plane which indicated an ambush.

Nothing is implausible. Its a good report, one I agree that america should hear. They were heroes.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 11:15:18 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 11:14:08 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:07:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:04:38 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 10:59:32 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 8:37:46 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/9/2014 4:11:05 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 6/9/2014 2:21:59 PM, Maryland_Kid wrote:
I'd like to know more about the 9/11 Conspiracy to get into a debate with someone.

-Why was it done?
-How was it performed (I think that there is two schools of thought; the government let it happen or the government did it by itself?)
-What are the objective facts?

The best thing to take away from 9/11 "truthers" is that there are no facts to support any of their wild claims and that anyone who believes that 9/11 was an inside job is most likely incredibly stupid.

If you watch Youtube videos like 'Loose Change' then they really do a good job of convincing people that things don't add up. I do have a few questions about 9/11 that I personnally would like answered.

1. Why are they only showing us the 1 camera that caught the jet crashing into the Pentagon? 1 frame per second showed us nothing. Im not saying it wasnt a jet, but why hide the footage? There had to be more cameras that would have caught it.

2. Why did building 7 collapse? I dont get this. I get the world trade centers, hot burning jet fuel and weight, but building 7 didn't have any structual damage, if just burned a tiny bit and then collapsed.

This is false. Most images of the scene don't show the other side of the building, which suffered massive damage. Why on earth would the government blow up building 7 even IF it orchestrated the attacks?


3. This one is my oppinion. The jet that crashed in Pennsylvania was most likely shot down by an F-16 from Langley. But it makes a much better story that the passengers are heroes. Also, no pilot wants that under their name. Killed all those civilians and all.

Your opinion is ridiculous.

You must have first hand knowledge of Flightline Ops at Langley Airforce Base in September of 2001. You must have inventoried the Aim-9 missiles and been in charge of the Basic Postflight Inspections the 2W1's did not accomplish on the Lau-129 launchers. Because you seem to be certain.

What is so implausible about the report? We know the course the plane took (and why it lead to the crash).... We have cockpit recordings to back it up... We have the phone calls from inside the plane which indicated an ambush.

Nothing is implausible. Its a good report, one I agree that america should hear. They were heroes.

Bye moron.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 11:33:45 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
In case any of you actually believe that Loose Change is any way credible, please keep in mind that they claim the towers were destroyed with the use of explosives or incendiary devises DESPITE the fact that the towers started to collapse at the section the planes hit...and no explosives could survive such an impact. They claim that the towers collapsed within 10 seconds DESPITE the fact that they DIDN'T. Only debris that came off the towers fell at that speed (since they were FALLING) which made it look like the towers fell faster than would be expected.
NJF
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 11:40:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 11:15:18 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:14:08 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:07:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:04:38 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 10:59:32 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 8:37:46 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/9/2014 4:11:05 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 6/9/2014 2:21:59 PM, Maryland_Kid wrote:
I'd like to know more about the 9/11 Conspiracy to get into a debate with someone.

-Why was it done?
-How was it performed (I think that there is two schools of thought; the government let it happen or the government did it by itself?)
-What are the objective facts?

The best thing to take away from 9/11 "truthers" is that there are no facts to support any of their wild claims and that anyone who believes that 9/11 was an inside job is most likely incredibly stupid.

If you watch Youtube videos like 'Loose Change' then they really do a good job of convincing people that things don't add up. I do have a few questions about 9/11 that I personnally would like answered.

1. Why are they only showing us the 1 camera that caught the jet crashing into the Pentagon? 1 frame per second showed us nothing. Im not saying it wasnt a jet, but why hide the footage? There had to be more cameras that would have caught it.

2. Why did building 7 collapse? I dont get this. I get the world trade centers, hot burning jet fuel and weight, but building 7 didn't have any structual damage, if just burned a tiny bit and then collapsed.

This is false. Most images of the scene don't show the other side of the building, which suffered massive damage. Why on earth would the government blow up building 7 even IF it orchestrated the attacks?


3. This one is my oppinion. The jet that crashed in Pennsylvania was most likely shot down by an F-16 from Langley. But it makes a much better story that the passengers are heroes. Also, no pilot wants that under their name. Killed all those civilians and all.

Your opinion is ridiculous.

You must have first hand knowledge of Flightline Ops at Langley Airforce Base in September of 2001. You must have inventoried the Aim-9 missiles and been in charge of the Basic Postflight Inspections the 2W1's did not accomplish on the Lau-129 launchers. Because you seem to be certain.

What is so implausible about the report? We know the course the plane took (and why it lead to the crash).... We have cockpit recordings to back it up... We have the phone calls from inside the plane which indicated an ambush.

Nothing is implausible. Its a good report, one I agree that america should hear. They were heroes.

Bye moron.

Lets just say im right, why is this so horrible? You seem very turned off by the idea. I dont really care one way or the other, I have my reasons for believing what I believe. But why retort to 'Moron' over an opinion that really doesnt change your life in any way. This opinion is based on testimony of personnal friends of mine who were there. Now can I believe them 100%? of course not, they are human after all and human are susceptible to lies. But, I lean in favor that they probably were not lying.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 11:48:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 11:40:28 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:15:18 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:14:08 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:07:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:04:38 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 10:59:32 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 8:37:46 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/9/2014 4:11:05 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 6/9/2014 2:21:59 PM, Maryland_Kid wrote:
I'd like to know more about the 9/11 Conspiracy to get into a debate with someone.

-Why was it done?
-How was it performed (I think that there is two schools of thought; the government let it happen or the government did it by itself?)
-What are the objective facts?

The best thing to take away from 9/11 "truthers" is that there are no facts to support any of their wild claims and that anyone who believes that 9/11 was an inside job is most likely incredibly stupid.

If you watch Youtube videos like 'Loose Change' then they really do a good job of convincing people that things don't add up. I do have a few questions about 9/11 that I personnally would like answered.

1. Why are they only showing us the 1 camera that caught the jet crashing into the Pentagon? 1 frame per second showed us nothing. Im not saying it wasnt a jet, but why hide the footage? There had to be more cameras that would have caught it.

2. Why did building 7 collapse? I dont get this. I get the world trade centers, hot burning jet fuel and weight, but building 7 didn't have any structual damage, if just burned a tiny bit and then collapsed.

This is false. Most images of the scene don't show the other side of the building, which suffered massive damage. Why on earth would the government blow up building 7 even IF it orchestrated the attacks?


3. This one is my oppinion. The jet that crashed in Pennsylvania was most likely shot down by an F-16 from Langley. But it makes a much better story that the passengers are heroes. Also, no pilot wants that under their name. Killed all those civilians and all.

Your opinion is ridiculous.

You must have first hand knowledge of Flightline Ops at Langley Airforce Base in September of 2001. You must have inventoried the Aim-9 missiles and been in charge of the Basic Postflight Inspections the 2W1's did not accomplish on the Lau-129 launchers. Because you seem to be certain.

What is so implausible about the report? We know the course the plane took (and why it lead to the crash).... We have cockpit recordings to back it up... We have the phone calls from inside the plane which indicated an ambush.

Nothing is implausible. Its a good report, one I agree that america should hear. They were heroes.

Bye moron.

Lets just say im right, why is this so horrible? You seem very turned off by the idea.

Yes, I am turned off by the idea. You claim that the U.S. government attacked its citizens despite the fact that there is no evidence in support of that belief.

I dont really care one way or the other, I have my reasons for believing what I believe. But why retort to 'Moron' over an opinion that really doesnt change your life in any way.

Because you are cognitively deficient, and I dislike stupid people. You say you don't really care one way or the other?...and why is that?

This opinion is based on testimony of personnal friends of mine who were there. Now can I believe them 100%? of course not, they are human after all and human are susceptible to lies. But, I lean in favor that they probably were not lying.

And what did they say that was so convincing? And why do you assume that false reports = lying? It is a well known fact that eye witness accounts are unreliable, especially for events as traumatic and chaotic as 9-11.
NJF
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 11:49:49 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/9/2014 2:21:59 PM, Maryland_Kid wrote:
I'd like to know more about the 9/11 Conspiracy to get into a debate with someone.

-Why was it done?
-How was it performed (I think that there is two schools of thought; the government let it happen or the government did it by itself?)
-What are the objective facts?

I would say if you really want to have fun with it, read the official report, and then watch the conspiracy theory videos. I would suggest watching the videos that debunk all the conspiracies as well, something I have not done. I am a skeptic so I dont buy into much conspiracies but try to keep an open mind and think for myself.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 11:51:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 11:49:49 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/9/2014 2:21:59 PM, Maryland_Kid wrote:
I'd like to know more about the 9/11 Conspiracy to get into a debate with someone.

-Why was it done?
-How was it performed (I think that there is two schools of thought; the government let it happen or the government did it by itself?)
-What are the objective facts?

I am a skeptic so I dont buy into much conspiracies but try to keep an open mind and think for myself.

Clearly that is not working.
NJF
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 12:12:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 11:48:58 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:40:28 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:15:18 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:14:08 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:07:52 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 11:04:38 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 10:59:32 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 6/11/2014 8:37:46 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/9/2014 4:11:05 PM, ararmer1919 wrote:
At 6/9/2014 2:21:59 PM, Maryland_Kid wrote:
I'd like to know more about the 9/11 Conspiracy to get into a debate with someone.

-Why was it done?
-How was it performed (I think that there is two schools of thought; the government let it happen or the government did it by itself?)
-What are the objective facts?

The best thing to take away from 9/11 "truthers" is that there are no facts to support any of their wild claims and that anyone who believes that 9/11 was an inside job is most likely incredibly stupid.

If you watch Youtube videos like 'Loose Change' then they really do a good job of convincing people that things don't add up. I do have a few questions about 9/11 that I personnally would like answered.

1. Why are they only showing us the 1 camera that caught the jet crashing into the Pentagon? 1 frame per second showed us nothing. Im not saying it wasnt a jet, but why hide the footage? There had to be more cameras that would have caught it.

2. Why did building 7 collapse? I dont get this. I get the world trade centers, hot burning jet fuel and weight, but building 7 didn't have any structual damage, if just burned a tiny bit and then collapsed.

This is false. Most images of the scene don't show the other side of the building, which suffered massive damage. Why on earth would the government blow up building 7 even IF it orchestrated the attacks?


3. This one is my oppinion. The jet that crashed in Pennsylvania was most likely shot down by an F-16 from Langley. But it makes a much better story that the passengers are heroes. Also, no pilot wants that under their name. Killed all those civilians and all.

Your opinion is ridiculous.

You must have first hand knowledge of Flightline Ops at Langley Airforce Base in September of 2001. You must have inventoried the Aim-9 missiles and been in charge of the Basic Postflight Inspections the 2W1's did not accomplish on the Lau-129 launchers. Because you seem to be certain.

What is so implausible about the report? We know the course the plane took (and why it lead to the crash).... We have cockpit recordings to back it up... We have the phone calls from inside the plane which indicated an ambush.

Nothing is implausible. Its a good report, one I agree that america should hear. They were heroes.

Bye moron.

Lets just say im right, why is this so horrible? You seem very turned off by the idea.

Yes, I am turned off by the idea. You claim that the U.S. government attacked its citizens despite the fact that there is no evidence in support of that belief.

I dont really care one way or the other, I have my reasons for believing what I believe. But why retort to 'Moron' over an opinion that really doesnt change your life in any way.

Because you are cognitively deficient, and I dislike stupid people. You say you don't really care one way or the other?...and why is that?

This opinion is based on testimony of personal friends of mine who were there. Now can I believe them 100%? of course not, they are human after all and human are susceptible to lies. But, I lean in favor that they probably were not lying.

And what did they say that was so convincing? And why do you assume that false reports = lying? It is a well known fact that eye witness accounts are unreliable, especially for events as traumatic and chaotic as 9-11.

I have known multiple people who loaded weapons on F-16s at Langley at that time. I also was a weapons loader for 20 years. But if you had to do an After Fire inspection on a Missile launcher that day, then there would be no "False Report" about it. You would know that a weapon was fired on that day. At what? Well you can do that logic.

I would rather the fact be the people took over the aircraft, and even if they didnt, there is enough evidence that supports that they planned to. So they are heroes no matter what. But I also believe if that didnt happen, the Military did do what was necessary in shooting down the jet before it crashed into say, the White House.

The attacks on my personal intelligence level is not necessary. Not all humans are gifted with outstanding cognitiveness (is that a word?).
ararmer1919
Posts: 362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/11/2014 12:37:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/11/2014 10:55:26 AM, NJF wrote:
At 6/11/2014 10:32:59 AM, ararmer1919 wrote:
Sorry didn't separate this part from yours.

2. Why did building 7 collapse? I dont get this. I get the world trade centers, hot burning jet fuel and weight, but building 7 didn't have any structual damage, if just burned a tiny bit and then collapsed.

I have no idea where you got the idea that building 7 only had a tiny fire and no structural damage. The fire was enormous and there was massive damage caused by the collapse of towers 1 and 2. I'm guessing you've seen the truther picture which shows the north side of tower 7 which is relatively un scratched. However if you look up the south side you will find out that almost the entire side of that building was demolished. There was a 35 by 30 story gash.

By the way I am in no means a truther, and I dont buy into any of the numerous videos out there. As far as the Single Video, I dont debate that a plane didnt hit the pentagon just why we dont see any video of it. Wouldn't this shut some people up?

It is a possibility that there really is only just the one video. I couldn't really tell you. Nor could I tell you why, if there is other videos, the government chooses not to show them to anyone. There could be any number of reasons why. But for the record I think that the most likely reason is that they really don't give a crap about the idiotic ravings of that tiny group of Americans that are still to dumb to acknowledge the truth and so they have chosen to just not waste their precious time on them.

As far as building 7, I was not aware of extensive damage on the one side. The video's of the collapse are all from the other side so that makes some sense.

Truthers don't like to acknowledge that little tidbit.

F-16 theory. There is no doubt that F-16s were in the air prior to that jet crashing. The question is did they intercept in time. Just remember, dont believe too much media when it comes to these things, specially military. A lot of classified things go on here that we do not get the luxory of knowing.

I am in the military and I have a Secret security clearance so telling me not to believe military media is like telling me not to believe in my self. I already provided a link which proved no planes were in the air in that area until AFTER flight 93 went down. This isn't assumption, speculation or theory. It's fact.