.

[Delusional Liberal]

You're irrational.  Incredible that you'd shit on my 911 beliefs blindly, then trumpet your belief that we should illegally steal resources from other nations.  I'm guessing you're ill in your soul.

i didn't say anything about stealing, we can buy their oil, till it's gone.  but i'm not against stealing from muslims.  hope this helps.

[Delusional Liberal]

Incredible that you'd shit on my 911 beliefs blindly

you must have me confused with someone else, i base my judgements on facts, credible sources and common sense, unlike yourself.

[240 is Back]

you must have me confused with someone else, i base my judgements on facts, credible sources and common sense, unlike yourself.

please see the 911 thread. I would like your facts on WTC7.

[kh300]

besides the fact that you would be able to see and hear the explosions which no one did.  it was burning for hours, nobody was in there. so what use would it have been to bring it down?

[240 is Back]

besides the fact that you would be able to see and hear the explosions which no one did.  it was burning for hours, nobody was in there. so what use would it have been to bring it down?

If you look at the back half of the building, you see that only one of the windows has blown out.  So if the fires weren't hot enough to blow out those windows, how were they hot enough to melt every floor support in all 47 floors - AND both huge central support columns.

[kh300]

no the building was pretty fuked up. anyways asnwer this Why did the "conspirators" wait until the end of the day to do it? What possible reason would they have to keep WTC 7 up all day long?

[240 is Back]

no the building was pretty fuked up. anyways asnwer this Why did the "conspirators" wait until the end of the day to do it? What possible reason would they have to keep WTC 7 up all day long?

No, I beg of you - look at the photographs and videotapes.  Even if the front bottom half of the building was torn to shit, the BACK half wouldn't collapse just as uniformly as the front.

And even if it did, there's no way the concrete would be pulverizes in such a manner. I mean, thousands of tons of concrete converting to powder - this is completely inconsistent with any building collapse in history. I beg you, I implore you, to find a building which has been on fire that collapses in a manner like WTC7 - even MUCH worse fires.  Concrete has never pulverized in a building without explosives. And it pulverizes in WTC7.

kh300, I don't want it to be an inside job.  Man, it fucks with my head to think about that scenario.  but the evidence of building collapses throughout history from small fires - or ANY fires - say that it was a controlled demolition.

Also - it's very possible that the 4th plane which crashed in Penn was designed to crash into WTC7.  The timeline is perfect (evacuated completely right after 10, and the plane would have arrived right before 11.) 

[kh300]

still avoiding the question.
looks pretty damaged to me

[240 is Back]

no the building was pretty fuked up.

here is the damage the building sustained.  Verify on your own.  Bottom right corner had some shit damage.  Worst case, part of the building could have tipped forward or collapsed into that area.  The way we see the back of it collapse cleanly at the speed of freefall or faster - completely inconsistent with damage.

kh, there's a reason the 911 commission won't touch it.  it's completely unexplainable.

but look at the pic, man.  

[kh300]

wtf i post a real pic of wtc7 up in flames and u give me some diagram someone drew up?
and for the 4th time you havnt answerd my question

[kh300]

No, I beg of you - look at the photographs and videotapes.  Even if the front bottom half of the building was torn to shit, the BACK half wouldn't collapse just as uniformly as the front.

And even if it did, there's no way the concrete would be pulverizes in such a manner. I mean, thousands of tons of concrete converting to powder - this is completely inconsistent with any building collapse in history. I beg you, I implore you, to find a building which has been on fire that collapses in a manner like WTC7 - even MUCH worse fires.  Concrete has never pulverized in a building without explosives. And it pulverizes in WTC7.

kh300, I don't want it to be an inside job.  Man, it fucks with my head to think about that scenario.  but the evidence of building collapses throughout history from small fires - or ANY fires - say that it was a controlled demolition.

Also - it's very possible that the 4th plane which crashed in Penn was designed to crash into WTC7.  The timeline is perfect (evacuated completely right after 10, and the plane would have arrived right before 11.) 

what a buch of bull. "i dont want 911 to be an inside job". give me a fukin break. you love this shit. you think everything is a conspericy. like 911 is the first time you thought of this shit. you claim that you would have never thought of this stuff until you saw the "facts". total lie. that might work on one of these crackheads, but your not getting that shit past me bro.

[240 is Back]

and for the 4th time you havnt answerd my question

I did - it's very possible that the 4th plane which crashed in Penn was designed to crash into WTC7.  The timeline is perfect (evacuated completely right after 10, and the plane would have arrived right before 11.)  

The reason they chose 5:20 PM and not 10:45 Am or so, as would have originally been planned?  Number of people around and cameras on the collapse.  

At 5:20 pm - most in America were driving home, not glued to screens. Most don't know there was a WTC7 collapse.

At 5:20 pm - most news people were in the studio prepping for the most watched 6 pm newscasts in history.  We see that only 4 to 6 cameras even caught the collapse.

At 5:20 pm - the streets were way emptier.  Less people, less witnesses, less collateral damage, etc.

kh300, i was reading tonight about over a dozen 'false-flag' operations that govts have used, killing its own people, to get their nations to support war.  Do you accept such an instance has occurred in the past?

[240 is Back]

what a buch of bull. "i dont want 911 to be an inside job". give me a fukin break. you love this shit. you think everything is a conspericy. like 911 is the first time you thought of this shit. you claim that you would have never thought of this stuff until you saw the "facts". total lie. that might work on one of these crackheads, but your not getting that shit past me bro.

No.  I'm a conservative patriot and it saddens me.  it took a lot of studying the evidence to believe it, but I now do.  And I do not think everything is a conspiracy.  But I do recognize some false-flag attacks which have occurred in our lifetimes.  It is what it is - and anyone who has spend 2 hours studying the evidence will at the very least spot you the chance something is amiss.  It seems to me you're arguing against evidence you haven't studied.

[kh300]

typical liberal motto, "i used to be a conservative".
your nothing but a very paranoid schizophrenic. its one theory after another. no facts, just theory. you can just go on and on and on, but nobody with half a brain is listening to your shit. after your last bit with the plane hitting the wtc7, now i know your nothing but a nutjob. thats why nobody takes you serious

[240 is Back]

typical liberal motto, "i used to be a conservative".
your nothing but a very paranoid schizophrenic. its one theory after another. no facts, just theory. you can just go on and on and on, but nobody with half a brain is listening to your shit. after your last bit with the plane hitting the wtc7, now i know your nothing but a nutjob. thats why nobody takes you serious

I think even those who disagree with me here will agree if anything, i am a wealth of information, evidence, and details on the 9/11 events.

You can call me a nutjob.  I consider myself enlightened enough to see the events of 9/11 about 5 years before you do, thanks to my ability to remove fear, anger, and party loyalty from the equation and look at the facts - before, on, and after - 9/11.

kh, someday you will learn it, as all americans will.  I'm sure people were once mocked for saying JFK was killed by someone other than Oswald.  Now that Congress itself has admitted it was a group effort, the only people who believe the official story are just uneducated.

[240 is Back]

BTW, kh...

you called me a liberal.  That is the furthest thing from the truth.  I'm a fucking patriot.  You're a blind neocon lemming.  You believe whatever Bush says.  you feel safe that way.  And it's good that you've found your security blanket, Linus.  Just don't let Mom wash it, or it might fall apart on ya!

[Camel Jockey]

I hate how people feel bad for exploitation of illegals when these people purposely work for less than minimum wage.  Gain citizenship, get better wages.  I think it could be good for the economy.  If they got higher wages as citizens, they would get taxed and more money would go into the economy.  Even if companies had to charge more for products, they would still make the same profit.  Illegals should get no government funding whatsoever.  That would be billions better spent on education and other important things.

Illegals also send a big portion of their wages back to their respective homes(Mexico and Latin American countries) instead of putting that money into the American economy.

there's no way to deport 12 million people, so the only solution here is to secure the borders which isn't happening.    You gotta put machine gun batteries and land mines on the border, that'd stop those dudes cold!

[Hugo Chavez]

BTW, kh...

you called me a liberal.  That is the furthest thing from the truth.  I'm a fucking patriot.  You're a blind neocon lemming.  You believe whatever Bush says.  you feel safe that way.  And it's good that you've found your security blanket, Linus.  Just don't let Mom wash it, or it might fall apart on ya!

Yea, KH.... Liberal leaning individuals can't be patriots

[kh300]

jfk is a completely differant story. from the way the bullets entered and exited there had to be more than one shooter. thats a fact. now to just blindly go out and say" um ya the government did it" with no proof then your a moron. just like 911.

your not enlightened by shit. you think The government is evil, and it is out to do something sinister. Needless to say, it is basically impossible to argue with you, because each and every fact that discredits yours, or any conspiracy theorist's argument in itself is automatically taken as proof that something else must be hidden.

dont let my mom wash my security blanket? how gay are you

[240 is Back]

jfk is a completely differant story. from the way the bullets entered and exited there had to be more than one shooter. thats a fact. now to just blindly go out and say" um ya the government did it" with no proof then your a moron. just like 911.

Who do you think the group of people who killed JFK were?

And since some of the evidence was glaring (more than 3 bullets, etc), wouldn't any govt which didn't notice that be COMPLETELY incompetent to the point of retardation, or more likely, guilty of a cover up?

And since there was the appearance of collusion (drive of car didn't speed off at sound of first shot.  Turned around and watched until JFK was hit then drove off).  Wouldn't they ask the drive about that?

And why did they all say JFK's head flew fwd on the Zapruder film (remember the tape was kept secret for many years) then when it was finally relseased, we all saw it fly backward).

In other words, who do you think killed him?  And if kids like us can see such glaring problems, why didn't the Warren Commission, a collection of govt people who investigated, see these same things?

[Hugo Chavez]

jfk is a completely differant story. from the way the bullets entered and exited there had to be more than one shooter. thats a fact. now to just blindly go out and say" um ya the government did it" with no proof then your a moron. just like 911.

your not enlightened by shit. you think The government is evil, and it is out to do something sinister. Needless to say, it is basically impossible to argue with you, because each and every fact that discredits yours, or any conspiracy theorist's argument in itself is automatically taken as proof that something else must be hidden.

dont let my mom wash my security blanket? how gay are you

When one secret service guy orders another away from JFK's car to clear a shot, the government is in at some level.  240, post that documentary, good shit...  And it's also not the government, that's a terrible way to look at it, it's bad guys committing crimes...


BILL:
"Now you guys, come on. You're talking
about the United States Government
here!"
JIM:
"We're talking about a crime, Bill.
No one is above the law. Reduce it.
A crime was committed. Let's get to
work."

[Hugo Chavez]

JFK II

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2928756561478705121&q=jfk+II&hl=en

[240 is Back]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4315024059102108031&q=jfk+assassination&hl=en

NO ONE who watches the first 30 minutes of this will still believe the 'lone gunman' story.

Take the JFK Challenge!

[kh300]

i learned in the 5th grade it was a coverup. there had to be more than one gunmen. thats a fact. but of course you lunatics have to take it further and further. going past the facts and into speculation

[Hugo Chavez]

i learned in the 5th grade it was a coverup. there had to be more than one gunmen. thats a fact. but of course you lunatics have to take it further and further. going past the facts and into speculation

KH, you didn't learn the things in this documentary in the 5th grade... Just fucking watch it, it's not going to kill you   Just clear you mind of any bias watching it, we're not going to gang up and laugh "I told you so"