General discussions : Non mobile discussion : Truth about 9/11 and how everyone was one fooled
>
New Topic
>
Topic Locked
Esato Forum Index
>
General discussions >
Non mobile discussion
> Truth about 9/11 and how everyone was one fooled
Bookmark topic
@ADT0079
...and that is the point.
Why is it that the "conspiracy theorists" are not happy keeping their opinions to themselves (or to share with each other in their private little world, where Bush actually flew the plane into the WTC himself and parachuted to safety!). In one breath, you are telling us how stupid Bush is, and in the next you would have us believe that he orchestrated 9/11 (never mind the moral implications) and so far, NOBODY has been able to prove it. Sounds like a clever guy to me - I just can't reconcile that with a man who gets caught on news clips reading childrens' books upside-down!
And finally, the agenda is revealed - da da DAH!
Quote:
On 2005-01-22 00:01:17, MominIslam wrote:
...the media tells false aquisations about the muslims as a whole, those who blow them selves up and so, they r not even human, dont even go consider them muslims just cuz they say so...
...that is what the media, does manipulates media to grab peoples attention and also give out false but interesting information
And, also, for your viewing pleasure, I highlight an example of the quality research and fact upon which this "conspiracy theory" is based.
Quote:
On 2005-01-22 01:32:46, MominIslam wrote:
...the bbc is american funded and controlled by americans, i know about the design flaw,
the reason they told the world about this extensivley was to shut people up, (as soon as its broadcasted, they think because the tv is true that they beleive them completely) thats not the point,
Really?! The BBC is funded and controlled by Americans? Do you know what BBC stands for? BRITISH BROADCASTING CORPORATION!! Here is some fact for you: The BBC virtually went to war with OUR government, who actually DO control it (well, in theory anyway!) and accused our Prime Minister of exaggerating his claims that Saddam had WMDs that could be deployed in 45 minutes - which translates as a pretty serious offence. Your reasoning, therefore, that their motivation was to protect the US government, has about as much grounding in truth as anything else you have posted here. At least we now have confirmed what you are trying to prove by attempting to slander and discredit the US government. The only irony, really, is that supporting this concoction as vociferously as you do, only serves to show you to be as ethically bereft as you are accusing Bush of being!
_________________
This message was posted in an envelope
[ This Message was edited by: dave_uk on 2005-01-22 02:40 ]
--
Posted: 2005-01-22 03:40:00
Edit :
Quote
To be honest i couldnt give a fiddlers fart about the whole thing! Ive heard so much about it over the last couple of years, it just gets me down. I only watch the end bits of news programmes now, where the dog accidentaly gets left behind but makes the 300 mile journey home to be reunited with his family. Great, that is.
--
Posted: 2005-01-22 04:06:00
Edit :
Quote
Number one, @ slattery69....do u know the diff between a bomb and a boeing ? A bomb is designed to EXPLODE into small pieces to inflict damage. Hence no wreckage of a bomb is expected to be found. A boeing is however expected to leave a HUGE wreckage behind. Get that first.
Quote:
On 2005-01-22 03:40:00, dave_uk wrote:
Why is it that the "conspiracy theorists" are not happy keeping their opinions to themselves
So what you want is for the "conspiracy theorists" to be muzzled. So much for free expression of speech eh ?
The basis of a civilised society is healthy debate. There cannot be healthy debate when one group like yours rubbishes the other and wants them to keep to themselves just because you dont like what their ideas are.
The crux of the matter is that there is no footage of any wreckage of the boeing that hit the Pentagon. And neither can the anti-conspiracy faction provide any proof of wreckage. All other arguments are futile until this is resolved. The onus of proof is with the anti-conspiracists. it is for them to come out with proof of existance of wreckage. The conspiracists have provided proof of absence of wreckage, it is now for you to provide proof of wreckage. SIMPLE AS THAT.
As for the argument for Bushs actiuons being supported by Americans , first of all, (1) It wasnt even close to a landslide. And number (2), the eye-opener......
There was a guy elected to his countrys top post based on an open agenda he publicly declared. This country was neither a banana republic nor a dictatorship. He recieved overwhelming support for his agenda, and was voted in by a landslide in free and fair elections.
Care to know who ?
The country was Germany. The man, Adolf Hitler.
Really teaches you something about how free democracies can fukc up, doesnt it ?
--
Posted: 2005-01-22 06:52:55
Edit :
Quote
@neonw perhaps you should get something first
bombs do leave piece when they explode as these are often found and used to catch people and see what the bomb was made out of. missles also leave evidence of there presence.also the plane was used as a missle note the twin towers
since you such an expert why dont you explain to me what the plane fully ladden with fuel travelling at 400miles an hour into a bomb proof building will look like.
also why dont you see what stuff is left from the plane that flew into the tower (the one that got most of the way in) and see how much of that plane they found.
the bit that always gets me on this consirpsey thoery is the jump from the us did it so they could go to war for oil. i agree with people that the usa war on terror is a war to gather oil. however they did nt need 9/11 to kill 6000 people to do this. a few arrests of arab looking people in key areas of the country saying they were carrying bombs, perhaps even shooting down an empty plane that had been stolen and was on a course to fly into the whitehouse etc would have been more than enough to get the majority of amercians feeling threatened and allow the us to go bombing around the world.the old smoke and mirrors, like they did with communism made it look like a threat to the world when in reality it was nothing. its not like 9/11 gave them hundreds of allies to fight the terror threat in reality only britian and spain sent troops with some australians.sure lots of sympathy but when push came to shove very nations really offered any support for afganistan or iraq
this for me is the real problem with going from 9/11 to the war on terror its a huge leap that never needed to be taken
[ This Message was edited by: slattery69 on 2005-01-22 09:44 ]
[ This Message was edited by: slattery69 on 2005-01-22 10:38 ]
--
Posted: 2005-01-22 10:39:30
Edit :
Quote
I would gladly see how much is left of the planes that hit the towers if you provide the photographs slattery.
And as for the plane that hit the Pentagon, I assure you the remnants would be very much visible. Its not rocket science, just plain common sense. Boeings do not dissolve into thin air on impact.
--
Posted: 2005-01-22 11:35:33
Edit :
Quote
As for the bombs, it was you who claimed that there were no traces of their remains in the bombing of houses in Iraq.
And now you claim there are remains when missiles explode.
Pls clarify the contradiction.Do you have images that show no remnants of bombs in the bombed houses in Iraq?
--
Posted: 2005-01-22 11:39:27
Edit :
Quote
like i said if you can explain the effect of what would happen to the plane i would gladly look at my view point but the true is unless your a scientist you cant explain it
i did say it disappeared into thin air but you assume that there should be huge pieces with the word boeing written all over it yet you still havent expalined what would happen to a fully ladden plane hitting a bomb proof wall at 400miles an hour.
at the end of the day this arguement is going to go round in circle s as you have your view and i have mine and you want there to be a consipresy so you will find one
--
Posted: 2005-01-22 11:42:48
Edit :
Quote
youve completely misunderstood me, my comments on the bombs in iraqi houses was merely showing how you can make up a conspiresy thoery and it worked as you accpeted it.
i know that the us bombs were responsible my point been was that you can twist things into conspiresy theories and not present any real facts and people will take them on board.
--
Posted: 2005-01-22 11:45:53
Edit :
Quote
So, in essence, wht you are saying is that it is possible for a boeing 757 to hit a building and leave no traces of itself other than the actual crater ?
If that is what you mean, I respect that. It is fine as long as no one claims that there DOES exist proof of the wreckage, because that would be a lie.
So all that it boils down to is whether a boeing 757 can crash into a sturdy building as the Pentagon and leave no traces of its body.
--
Posted: 2005-01-22 11:53:53
Edit :
Quote
Quote:
On 2005-01-22 11:53:53, neonw wrote:
So, in essence, wht you are saying is that it is possible for a boeing 757 to hit a building and leave no traces of itself other than the actual crater ?
If that is what you mean, I respect that. It is fine as long as no one claims that there DOES exist proof of the wreckage, because that would be a lie.
So all that it boils down to is whether a boeing 757 can crash into a sturdy building as the Pentagon and leave no traces of its body.
thats correct i aint a scientist so the affects of that palne hitting that building i have no idea what it should look like bits of metal were found. now we have 2 chooses to make 1. they were all that was left of the plane or 2. they were planted
i side on the part that they were part of the plane and you side that they were planted. at the end of the day i bet neither of us will ever be proved right or wrong in our life time.
the crux to me comes down to if you can believe the any goverment could kill thousands of its people just to go and kill more people for oil. i dont think they could or would need to
--
Posted: 2005-01-22 12:00:29
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Topic Locked
