911 was indeed a inside job

[JOHN MATRIX]

Controlled clean collapse compared to what?
every other modern skyscraper that has collapsed

Do only controlled demolitions produce controlled like collapses?
yeah pretty much


Do we know the extent of the damage in building from the debris?
many other building in the vicinity were severely damaged including some reduced to a burned out(but sill standing) shell, WTC 7 appeared relatively undamaged then all of a sudden collapsed in a perfect textbook collapse, the only skyscraper in history to collapse from fire alone.

 

[JOHN MATRIX]

[OzmO]

every other modern skyscraper that has collapsed

Such as?

many other building in the vicinity were severely damaged including some reduced to a burned out(but sill standing) shell, WTC 7 appeared relatively undamaged then all of a sudden collapsed in a perfect textbook collapse, the only skyscraper in history to collapse from fire alone.

So becuase other buildings were damaged and they didn't fall down, then WC7 was certainly demolished?

You have pictures or saw for your self every side of WTC7?

Do you know for a fact it collapsed from fire alone?   Was there other factors?  Do you have undeniable proof based on structural engineering?  do you have the blue prints?  Do you know all the other things that were involved?  Do you know how to read the blue prints to rule out any possibility of it doing what it did?

Or are you basing this on faulty logic full of holes and lack of expertise and incomplete facts?

[JOHN MATRIX]

Such as?
no other skyscrapers have collapsed besides those on 9/11, thats the point. for example the 2nd tallest building in LA had a severe fire burn some 13 floors for almost a day and there was never a threat of collapse.

So becuase other buildings were damaged and they didn't fall down, then WC7 was certainly demolished?
the fact that it had far less visible damage than other nearby buildings, and especially the way it fell, makes it incredibly suspicious.

You have pictures or saw for your self every side of WTC7?

Do you know for a fact it collapsed from fire alone?   Was there other factors?  Do you have undeniable proof based on structural engineering?  do you have the blue prints?  Do you know all the other things that were involved?  Do you know how to read the blue prints to rule out any possibility of it doing what it did?
the official story is that it fell from fire, and structural damage from falling debris. the only skyscraper ever to do so
Or are you basing this on faulty logic full of holes and lack of expertise and incomplete facts?
are you more of an expert than me? watch that clip and tell me thats not a controlled demo. dont be afraid to let the possibility slip into your mind

[OzmO]

dude would you stop the red highlights in while responding in my quote box?    

no other skyscrapers have collapsed besides those on 9/11, thats the point. for example the 2nd tallest building in LA had a severe fire burn some 13 floors for almost a day and there was never a threat of collapse.

Were the conditions and buildings exactly the same?

the fact that it had far less visible damage than other nearby buildings, and especially the way it fell, makes it incredibly suspicious.

Is suspicion as good as fact?

how to read the blue prints to rule out any possibility of it doing what it did?
the official story is that it fell from fire, and structural damage from falling debris. the only skyscraper ever to do so

Do you have the official story?  does the writers of the official story have allt he variables, conditions, and information at the time of the collapse.  where they in the building?

 

are you more of an expert than me? watch that clip and tell me thats not a controlled demo. dont be afraid to let the possibility slip into your mind Grin

I have no problem agreeing to the possibility that it could have been a controlled demo, but i do have a problem, based on common sense, to conclude it is a controlled demo with my limited knowledge of the above mention fields of expertise and lack of all the info, and i am certainly not gullible enough to be swayed by a video that shows less than 1% of all the factors involved in the collapse.

However, there is a reason why commercial advertising works well......."seeing is believing"  Just ask Bush and his propaganda war machine called the American Media.

[JOHN MATRIX]

dude would you stop the red highlights in while responding in my quote box?    

Were the conditions and buildings exactly the same?

Is suspicion as good as fact?

Do you have the official story?  does the writers of the official story have allt he variables, conditions, and information at the time of the collapse.  where they in the building?

 
I have no problem agreeing to the possibility that it could have been a controlled demo, but i do have a problem, based on common sense, to conclude it is a controlled demo with my limited knowledge of the above mention fields of expertise and lack of all the info, and i am certainly not gullible enough to be swayed by a video that shows less than 1% of all the factors involved in the collapse.

However, there is a reason why commercial advertising works well......."seeing is believing"  Just ask Bush and his propaganda war machine called the American Media.

1. i guess but its less clear this way
2. are they ever?
3. you cant always judge a book by its cover. but usually you can
4. do you have the official story? what reasons do you have for concluding that that is any less unreasonable than the alternatives?

[240 is Back]

NIST said the fuel tank was a non-factor.  Near empty and never detonated.

THey also said they'l have a full explanation for why WTC7 fell.  It's 3 years late.

It'll never come.  THey got away with it.  Our descendents will look at it like we look at pearl harbor - some BS that some people here let happen to justify greater actions (us beating down hitler before he vanquished europe and took on the USA HERE) for our longterm good.

[Deicide]

NIST said the fuel tank was a non-factor.  Near empty and never detonated.

THey also said they'l have a full explanation for why WTC7 fell.  It's 3 years late.

It'll never come.  THey got away with it.  Our descendents will look at it like we look at pearl harbor - some BS that some people here let happen to justify greater actions (us beating down hitler before he vanquished europe and took on the USA HERE) for our longterm good.

You're white trash neo-con material 240...you actually like what's going on....pathetic.

[240 is Back]

Fucking Neo-Con Prick!

Just for that I hope your white trash ass falls hard in the coming recession!

neocons are deceptive.  I am not.  I'm a realist.  I know that th US dollar would have been in serious shit if Iraq stopped selling oil in dollars.  Taking over stopped that.

It's fucked up, i agree.  which is why i admit i'm a POS hypocrite for supporting it.  The neocons are the ones calling 911 CT nonsense, and talking about how we're not there for oil, but democracy.  


It's like this... you want the most shrewd businessmen running your retirement package, right?  You want the most cunning, manipulative SOBs trading your $ because you know they know how to twist arms and make the most of your $.  And you begrudgingly accept their higher rates cause you believe it's worth it.  The neocons in power now are ilke that.  You know they're stealing, you know they're out doing bad shit... but...

how many here would choose to live in poverty and have us do the right thing in the world?  how many would give up living beyond our nat'l means despite minimal SCAs in the global market/  How many want to be 37th in the world?  I sure don't.  

nations have done this since the beginning - manipulate other nations so their people can live better.  China and Rus and every other nation would be exploiting our alaskan oil right now if they could get away with it.

we elect people with dirt on their hands because that's what the job requires.  A nice guy who does the right thing will quickly let us be manipulated by our neighbors.  I'm a POS for my position, but i'm honest about it.  

[240 is Back]

You're white trash neo-con material 240...you actually like what's going on....pathetic.

I feel guilt for supporting us expansion.  but i do believe we're lacking any real sustainable competitive advantages


i was crying anti war, 911 CT stuff for a year here.  I'm by no means a lifetime neocon.  I was a repub til 2005, then confused, now I don't know.  I could vote for obama just as easily as huck.  I just dont know...

no need to call names - i'm being honest and i do feel bad for it.  I think it's inevitable, and none of us can really change anything.

[Deicide]

I feel guilt for supporting us expansion.  but i do believe we're lacking any real sustainable competitive advantages


i was crying anti war, 911 CT stuff for a year here.  I'm by no means a lifetime neocon.  I was a repub til 2005, then confused, now I don't know.  I could vote for obama just as easily as huck.  I just dont know...

no need to call names - i'm being honest and i do feel bad for it.  I think it's inevitable, and none of us can really change anything.

All you have done is given up. Nothing honest about that, or noble for that matter.

[Hugo Chavez]

How could you know it was what you say it was?   

Will it be conclusive and practically airtight?

Will it be something that could hold up in a court of law?

Or will it be some over dramatized, graphic heavy, grainy assumptive vague glimpse of something and obviously spun to make the average Joe who gets most of his exercise by jumping to conclusion go "wow, oh my god i never thought of that!" and conveniently ignores real facts that someone put together with Final Cut and uploaded to youtube?

If so, then it won't do it for me.   

exactly... you made my point more perfect than I had imagined   Just so people know exactly what the impossible is that you want when you say, show me the proof...  You probabaly shouldn't mention court of law though, we both know that men are found guilty all the time on less than sturdy material.

[EL Mariachi]

Hey cut the crap, there is plenty of evidence.

- just look how many people reported explosions that were there
- how about the owner of the world trade building making a insurance policy for terrorism attack
- how about the building structure, that was designed not to crush when hit by something
- how about the government report tyhat 6 hijackers survived
- how about reported bin laden visiting a american hospital
- what about the NORAD not doing their job that day at all
- how about the official warnings from a lot of nation's prior to the attack that it will happen, us doing nothing about it

I know you will come with some bullshit claims to justify all this. Either you re plain dumb or you re part of the propaganda, which is it?

[Slapper]

I will say this in regards to the subject: I was about 200 yards from the WTC when the planes hit the towers. When the first plane hit I went downstairs to get a coffee at a nearby Starbucks, and although AT THE TIME no one knew what had happened (right after the first plane hit everyone kept taking about a bomb going off in the observation deck) all nearby streets were being cordoned off and there were black SUVs all over the friggin streets. I'm taking about 5 minutes after the first plane hit the tower here, not 2 hours. And yes, let it be known, the people driving those cars were wearing suits.

That's one of the things that struck me as odd on that day... well, that and the huge airplane engine "parked" right in front of out building.

[OzmO]

1. i guess but its less clear this way

thanks

2. are they ever?

Well I'd think they'd need to be very close for your conclusion to be true.  At lease scientifically when they conduct experiments they can't come to legitimate conclusions if the conditions are not similar.   But WE laymen, do all the time and that's why that logic about other buildings is false.

3. you cant always judge a book by its cover. but usually you can

In very simple things you can, but this case with the complexity of it, it is pure speculation based on incomplete facts with out expertise.

4. do you have the official story? what reasons do you have for concluding that that is any less unreasonable than the alternatives?

The official story is vague also.  Which can mean they don't have many of the facts either, but does not prove conspiracy or a demolition. 

[OzmO]

exactly... you made my point more perfect than I had imagined   Just so people know exactly what the impossible is that you want when you say, show me the proof...  You probabaly shouldn't mention court of law though, we both know that men are found guilty all the time on less than sturdy material.

Look, there are many videos running around in cyberspace, most of them are over dramatized rookie crap.

If there was a video, and it was conclusive, then we'd have been seeing soo much more of it. 

So my point is, if you had one that wasn't of the garbage you see on youtube, then by all means show it, but you don't, because otherwise we'd have seen it before. 

And yes, men have been found guilty on less sturdy material, but this isn't about finding a man or a small group guilty, this is about the fantastical notion that hundreds or thousands of people were in involved scamming in the worst attack in US soil in History.  A REAL video, would go along way.  Not one where someone thinks the reflections on the news helicopters were holographic devices emitting an image of a plane.

[240 is Back]

It's asinine to believe the official story - there have been hundreds of holes punched in it by contradictory govt reports, NYPD/FDNY, and videotaped evidence.

It's asinine to want anyone sent to jail for it - there has not been enough proof at all.

It's reasonable to want a second investigation to look into the myriad of new evidence and witnesses who have come fwd since the report was issued 3 years ago. It's reasonable to want a crime thoroughly investigated, isn't it?  Nothing unpatriotic at all about that. 

Heck, it might be considered unpatriotic - even anti-American - to prefer that a crime against americans NOT be fully investigated.  I mean, if there was a countdown to demolition (as video and witnesses show), then at the very least Silverstein committed insurance fraud for $450 mil and one man died in that tower unnecessarily, right?

[OzmO]

Hey cut the crap, there is plenty of evidence.

- just look how many people reported explosions that were there
- how about the owner of the world trade building making a insurance policy for terrorism attack
- how about the building structure, that was designed not to crush when hit by something
- how about the government report tyhat 6 hijackers survived
- how about reported bin laden visiting a american hospital
- what about the NORAD not doing their job that day at all
- how about the official warnings from a lot of nation's prior to the attack that it will happen, us doing nothing about it

I know you will come with some bullshit claims to justify all this. Either you re plain dumb or you re part of the propaganda, which is it?

Still haven't shown anything concrete there.  I have high hopes for you.  Please elaborate on every point there, provide proof, links, etc.., all you have there is speculation.  How long have you been reading those web sites?

Is making and insurance policy out of the ordinary considering the WTC was attacked before?  Have you ever heard of any coincidence of a person getting something like insurance before it happened?  right.

When a building is on fire, are there never explosions?  Especially a building this big?  right.

Building designed not to crush wne hit by something?   You mean they design buildings to with stand Airliners full of fuel crashing into them?  They design building thnking that someday, maybe pieces of other building might crash into them?  right.

Well how about that report that 6 survived?  Where is it?  And does the government or news agencies EVER report news that isn't accurate?  So everything they report is always accurate?  right. 

Yeah bin laden in a hospital in the USA?  Nice rumor.  Any links?  Name of hospital?  Is this 2nd, 3rd, 4th hand info?  Because it's "reported" it must be true.  right.

Do you know what NORAD's job is?  Do you know the protocol for something like this?  Do you know if they even had a plans for an attack like this?  Do you know what the defense poster was at the time of the attack?  But now you know you all of this and know they purposely didn't do their job.  right.

do you know how many thousands of pieces of information we get on a daily basis?  Do you how many warnings we get?  Do you have the power to know which are relevant and which aren't?   right.



 

[OzmO]

It's asinine to believe the official story - there have been hundreds of holes punched in it by contradictory govt reports,

It's asinine to want anyone sent to jail for it - there has not been enough proof at all.

It's reasonable to want a second investigation to look into the myriad of new evidence and witnesses who have come fwd since the report was issued 3 years ago. It's reasonable to want a crime thoroughly investigated, isn't it?  Nothing unpatriotic at all about that. 

Heck, it might be considered unpatriotic - even anti-American - to prefer that a crime against americans NOT be fully investigated.  I mean, if there was a countdown to demolition (as video and witnesses show), then at the very least Silverstein committed insurance fraud for $450 mil and one man died in that tower unnecessarily, right?

I 100% agree there needs to be a second investigation. But i am not foolish enough to buy into all the fantastical speculation  based on garbage that so many conspiracy hungry people love to do.

[Bobby]

I will say this in regards to the subject: I was about 200 yards from the WTC when the planes hit the towers. When the first plane hit I went downstairs to get a coffee at a nearby Starbucks, and although AT THE TIME no one knew what had happened (right after the first plane hit everyone kept taking about a bomb going off in the observation deck) all nearby streets were being cordoned off and there were black SUVs all over the friggin streets. I'm taking about 5 minutes after the first plane hit the tower here, not 2 hours. And yes, let it be known, the people driving those cars were wearing suits.

That's one of the things that struck me as odd on that day... well, that and the huge airplane engine "parked" right in front of out building.

Interesting story, I guess they had to remote detonate the bombs from somewhere...

[240 is Back]

I 100% agree there needs to be a second investigation. But i am not foolish enough to buy into all the fantastical speculation  based on garbage that so many conspiracy hungry people love to do.

There will be a second investigation.  It's been drawn up by many - problem is, lawsuits keep getting crushed in court under label of nat'l security, and for a congressoinal investigation we all know Bush will veto it - despite that fact that some from his own CABINET have called it in inside job now.

It'll just take time.  Bush will retire to S. America, Cheney will follow Haliburton to Dubai in 2008, they'll both get their $ and leave.  America will heal its wounds from this sad time in history.  The next President will focus on domestic healing, scaling back Iraq to S. Korea-like levels, and improving our social standing in the world now that Buch and CO. improved our military and strategic resource standing.

It's cyclical.  I keep saying that.  We have a war presidency to gain resources, bases, position, and favorable relationships, under the heading of an "ism" - fascism, nazism, communism, terrorism (vague and never defeatable).  Then, we have a healing presidency that heals the economy.  Reagan - domestic.  Bush 1- Gulf War 1.  Clinton- domestic and economy.  Bush2- Gulf War 2, afghanistan.  Next prez. will heal things here.

[OzmO]

I will say this in regards to the subject: I was about 200 yards from the WTC when the planes hit the towers. When the first plane hit I went downstairs to get a coffee at a nearby Starbucks, and although AT THE TIME no one knew what had happened (right after the first plane hit everyone kept taking about a bomb going off in the observation deck) all nearby streets were being cordoned off and there were black SUVs all over the friggin streets. I'm taking about 5 minutes after the first plane hit the tower here, not 2 hours. And yes, let it be known, the people driving those cars were wearing suits.

That's one of the things that struck me as odd on that day... well, that and the huge airplane engine "parked" right in front of out building.

Considering they knew where the plane was heading a few minutes before it hit, and there was government offices in the area, it's not surprising.   Plus "they" knew a plane had hit the tower, while others didn't.

[OzmO]

- despite that fact that some from his own CABINET have called it in inside job now.

Really?  And who they be?  And what did they say?

[240 is Back]

Still haven't shown anything concrete there.  I have high hopes for you.  Please elaborate on every point there, provide proof, links, etc.., all you have there is speculation.  How long have you been reading those web sites?

Is making and insurance policy out of the ordinary considering the WTC was attacked before?  Have you ever heard of any coincidence of a person getting something like insurance before it happened?  right.

When a building is on fire, are there never explosions?  Especially a building this big?  right.

Building designed not to crush wne hit by something?   You mean they design buildings to with stand Airliners full of fuel crashing into them?  They design building thnking that someday, maybe pieces of other building might crash into them?  right.

Well how about that report that 6 survived?  Where is it?  And does the government or news agencies EVER report news that isn't accurate?  So everything they report is always accurate?  right. 

Yeah bin laden in a hospital in the USA?  Nice rumor.  Any links?  Name of hospital?  Is this 2nd, 3rd, 4th hand info?  Because it's "reported" it must be true.  right.

Do you know what NORAD's job is?  Do you know the protocol for something like this?  Do you know if they even had a plans for an attack like this?  Do you know what the defense poster was at the time of the attack?  But now you know you all of this and know they purposely didn't do their job.  right.

do you know how many thousands of pieces of information we get on a daily basis?  Do you how many warnings we get?  Do you have the power to know which are relevant and which aren't?   right.  

Oz, you owe it to yourself to watch Loose Change 3.  They answer many of these questions with actual media reports and govt documents.  They prepared repeatedly for these kinds of attacks.  Hell, the Boeing pilot who piloted the plane that hit the pentagon actually used to work at the pentagon - in the room that was hit - and they ran drills on exactly that - a plane hitting it.  You see 1993 photos of the man posing with a model of the building and a plane hitting it.   LC3 also lists many other exact preparations/drills which contradict "we never imagined such attacks".

I don't have the energy to argue what you wrote point by point...  but know that the warnings delivered to GWB were very specific, from other heads of state, and from his top men at our intel agencies.  They were the biggest, clearest, most detailed reports that any prez has probably ever received of such an attack - and they came from all our allies.  29 total warnings.  YOU are an intelligent poster, Oz.  I don't think you can believe that Bush would receive identical warnings from so many grousp in a 2-day span in August, and "overlook" it.  I mean, the head of the FBI takes a red-eye to TX in the middle of night to hand-deliver the intel - and it's "overlooked".  Do you believe that?

[EL Mariachi]

Still haven't shown anything concrete there.  I have high hopes for you.  Please elaborate on every point there, provide proof, links, etc.., all you have there is speculation.  How long have you been reading those web sites?

Is making and insurance policy out of the ordinary considering the WTC was attacked before?  Have you ever heard of any coincidence of a person getting something like insurance before it happened?  right.

When a building is on fire, are there never explosions?  Especially a building this big?  right.

Building designed not to crush wne hit by something?   You mean they design buildings to with stand Airliners full of fuel crashing into them?  They design building thnking that someday, maybe pieces of other building might crash into them?  right.

Well how about that report that 6 survived?  Where is it?  And does the government or news agencies EVER report news that isn't accurate?  So everything they report is always accurate?  right. 

Yeah bin laden in a hospital in the USA?  Nice rumor.  Any links?  Name of hospital?  Is this 2nd, 3rd, 4th hand info?  Because it's "reported" it must be true.  right.

Do you know what NORAD's job is?  Do you know the protocol for something like this?  Do you know if they even had a plans for an attack like this?  Do you know what the defense poster was at the time of the attack?  But now you know you all of this and know they purposely didn't do their job.  right.

do you know how many thousands of pieces of information we get on a daily basis?  Do you how many warnings we get?  Do you have the power to know which are relevant and which aren't?   right.



 

You re a good lawyer, just too bad you re defending the wrong sides. How is it so that everything the government says you assume its true? You know how corrupt the government is, dont you? When the government comes with phony bin laden footage, you assume its real and not played? What is the formula of deciding what information is correct?

Are you honestly that naive to think that the ''wealthy bankars'' dont rule the us government? That wars are been started trough them so they can make interest money off the war. I quess you ll scream to give you proof of that
Can you proof to me that it was not an inside job? There is always an excuse to be found to defend your opinion.
Do you gather information at television, and then draw your own conclusions?

And about the witnesses that reported the explosion sounds, they heard explosions, try to get that trough your head, real demolition explosions, please tel me you have something better to offer then claiming that that type of explosians can happen during a collapse, can yu proff that its possible to have massive explosions during a collapse, then prove it.
www.zeitgeistmovie.com have you seen this film? Why would you believe the presidents story, and not the actual workers and witnesses that had something to do with the whole 911? Could it not be that Bush is making a conspiracy ''terror'' theory for his own reasons?