An inside job?

Yes

I don't think so.

Bin Ont Turf wrote:Yes

You are joking obviously?

Oh just feck off Saltyman

chekhov wrote:You are joking obviously?

No.

Have a look above your username at the question.

I'm planning on going to the memorial and museum when we go to New York in July. Something I've wanted to do for a long time.

Bin Ont Turf wrote:No.

Have a look above your username at the question.

I missed that as well. It's late here to be fair.

A bit of both I think. I think it was an attack but I also think certain people either knew of the actual attack or knew that one was imminent (and let certain things happen to suit their own agendas) but underestimated the scale of the event. I don't however believe that they blatantly murdered 3000 of their own innocent people.

The internet is a dangerous thing if you have a very small mind.

I'm waiting..

Third building anyone?

OK, its not worked.. I was 'blue labrador' fishing!

Why did number 10 die?

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

..

...

...

...

...

...

...


Because it was stuck in the middle of 9/11.

IndigoLake wrote:I'm planning on going to the memorial and museum when we go to New York in July. Something I've wanted to do for a long time.

I went last month and would highly recommend it. Powerful stuff.

As for the third building, I really don't understand the conspiracy theory around this. If it really was an inside job, why would they bother to - apparently randomly - demolish the third building later on?

If you consider the sheer force of the two towers collapsing and the trauma that would cause to nearby structures, it's no surprise that at least one more collapsed.

It.was.a.joke..

It was (((Obama's))) fault.

https://youtu.be/eFQhw3VVToQ?t=208" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Saxoman wrote:It.was.a.joke..

You've unintentionally started a discussion of value. Congratulations.

3 steel towers collapsed in one day, first time that's happened, yet they found a few of the terrorists passports, which survived despite being made out of paper.

They needed another event on a Pearl Harbour scale and got it.

I don't believe for one second that the powers that be care about peoples life's or welfares, if some get in the way then tough break, wrong place wrong time.

The entire Bush family should be in jail as far as I'm concerned.

Fretters wrote:I went last month and would highly recommend it. Powerful stuff.

Yes, I imagine it is! It's certainly an event that shaped how I saw the world as a kid. One of those times that everybody can remember where they were and what they were doing.

IndigoLake wrote:You've unintentionally started a discussion of value. Congratulations.

Ffs..

boiledclaret wrote:
about peoples life's or welfares,

Well, at least we've got to the bottom of why your posts are usually almost entirely made out of links to other people's videos and writings.

And those buildings didn't collapse due to fires alone. Two of them had planes flown into them which, i'm told, can be detrimental to the structural integrity of buildings. But i'm no expert.

Imploding, What do you mean by other peoples writings?

If I agree with others then I tend to look into it, how is that different from anyone else.

Have also been to the memorial and would highly recommend it. It was fascinating and incredibly moving.

boiledclaret wrote:Imploding, What do you mean by other peoples writings?

If I agree with others then I tend to look into it, how is that different from anyone else.

Well, this is embarrassing. For some reason I thought i was replying to a BlueLabrador post. Sorry, man! I'm not even drunk.

We were told the 3nd tower collapsed due to the heat, it later transpired that it had been detonated. How did they wire it up with explosives so quickly with two other buildings collapsing around them?

Was it pre-wired with explosives? and if so, why?

boiledclaret wrote:3 steel towers collapsed in one day, first time that's happened, yet they found a few of the terrorists passports, which survived despite being made out of paper.

And it was also the first time two jets full of fuel were flown directly into two of them.

As for the passports, do you really think the organisers of the biggest conspiracy the world has ever seen would have made such a mistake? I can just imagine the planning:

"Now, I know it's us really blowing up these buildings but we need to make people think these plane hijacking terrorists are at fault. What can we do?"

"Won't thousands of people witnessing the planes flying into the buildings be enough?"

"No, no. We need to really hammer it home. I know, let's leave their passports lying around near the buildings"

"But won't people question how the passports didn't burn up in the crash?

"No, no. People will be too distracted to bother with questions like that. This is fool proof"

"Oh, okay. What about the terrorists who are actually on these passports. Where will they really be?"

"Oh, they'll be on the planes. We can't have them showing up later!"

"Right..."



It's the equivalent of the moon landing conspiracy theorists believing the government had forgotten to consider shadows and wind. It's laughable.

Airplanes have struck buildings before and none have completely collapsed. A plane hit a skyscraper in Sao Paulo and destroyed the area it hit but the rest remained, it was repaired and is still in working order today.

boiledclaret wrote:3 steel towers collapsed in one day, first time that's happened, yet they found a few of the terrorists passports, which survived despite being made out of paper.

They needed another event on a Pearl Harbour scale and got it.

I don't believe for one second that the powers that be care about peoples life's or welfares, if some get in the way then tough break, wrong place wrong time.

The entire Bush family should be in jail as far as I'm concerned.

Hooray!

We have a winner!

Fretters wrote:And it was also the first time two jets full of fuel were flown directly into two of them.

As for the passports, do you really think the organisers of the biggest conspiracy the world has ever seen would have made such a mistake? I can just imagine the planning:

"Now, I know it's us really blowing up these buildings but we need to make people think these plane hijacking terrorists are at fault. What can we do?"

"Won't thousands of people witnessing the planes flying into the buildings be enough?"

"No, no. We need to really hammer it home. I know, let's leave their passports lying around near the buildings"

"But won't people question how the passports didn't burn up in the crash?

"No, no. People will be too distracted to bother with questions like that. This is fool proof"

"Oh, okay. What about the terrorists who are actually on these passports. Where will they really be?"

"Oh, they'll be on the planes. We can't have them showing up later!"

"Right..."



It's the equivalent of the moon landing conspiracy theorists believing the government had forgotten to consider shadows and wind. It's laughable.

What about the third building?No plane flew into it but was detonated,how can this happen in a matter of hours?

As for the passports,what did that have to do with Iraq?

Your post sums up how gullible people are.

boiledclaret wrote:Airplanes have struck buildings before and none have completely collapsed. A plane hit a skyscraper in Sao Paulo and destroyed the area it hit but the rest remained, it was repaired and is still in working order today.

Interesting, could you share a link for that São Paulo story? When did it happen?

So we're of the opinion that the terrorists did all of it independently?

What exactly did they stand to gain by bombing the towers?

It resulted in over a million dead in Iraq and the country being colonised.

boiledclaret wrote:Airplanes have struck buildings before and none have completely collapsed. A plane hit a skyscraper in Sao Paulo and destroyed the area it hit but the rest remained, it was repaired and is still in working order today.

How many of those buildings had exterior load-bearing steel walls, coupled with large passenger jets hitting them directly and in a controlled fashion at over 500mph?

boiledclaret wrote:So we're of the opinion that the terrorists did all of it independently?

What exactly did they stand to gain by bombing the towers?

It resulted in over a million dead in Iraq and the country being colonised.

Really? You're using terrorists' sense of rationality to support your argument?

PWBFC wrote:Interesting, could you share a link for that São Paulo story? When did it happen?

I couldn't find it either.

Imploding Turtle wrote:I couldn't find it either.

I can find something about a 'small private plane' which I'm sure the poster would agree is a little different from a 767.

How did they fly at 500 mph at sea level, according to pilots its impossible.

Why did many witnesses report that the planes flew in silen?

Wouldn'they make a defeaning racket?

Have you seen the Youtube video of the first plane?

That is not coming in at sea level, or silently!

FFS, you are making bluelab sound sane

boiledclaret wrote:How did they fly at 500 mph at sea level, according to pilots its impossible.

Why did many witnesses report that the planes flew in silen?

Wouldn'they make a defeaning racket?

What do you suppose it is that makes these guys look up if it's not a great big plane making a racket?

https://youtu.be/h3shmfKOZ9g?t=58" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

They look up when it hits which I'm sure we can all agree would make a racket.

Indonesia not Sao Paulo, sorry. I'm on my phone so I can't do links.

It's too late for this nonsense. There are many books and thousands of hours of videos. Why so hard to accept it was just a bunch of religious lunatics?

LoveCurryPies wrote:It's too late for this nonsense. There are many books and thousands of hours of videos. Why so hard to accept it was just a bunch of religious lunatics?

Which religion though?

boiledclaret wrote:They look up when it hits which I'm sure we can all agree would make a racket.

Indonesia not Sao Paulo, sorry. I'm on my phone so I can't do links.

You didn't watch it, did you? They looked up when the plane flew overhead. This can be heard from the video audio. Seconds later it hits the building.

And just because you're on your phone doesn't mean you can't give details of the crash, like the date, the flight number, etc, because i still can't find the crash you're talking about.

It'll have its own wikipedia page so how about you give us the title of its page.

*shakes head*

pretty conclusive to me

Just quickly googled to see if I could find any info on the Sau Paulo / Indonesia Tower strike. Came up blank, but, I did find this beauty.

BREAKING NEWS. THE PLACES THAT HIT THE TOWERS WEREN'T REAL!

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/yournewswi ... id-samsung" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ah a good old conspiracy theory, to rank alongside the moon landings and who shot Kennedy.

Did the yanks do it themselves?
Indirectly yes, by continuously sticking their noses into everybody else's business over a long period of time.
They're continuously looking for the next fight to get involved with, but its usually the wrong fight too, so to speak.

boiledclaret wrote:How did they fly at 500 mph at sea level, according to pilots its impossible.

Why did many witnesses report that the planes flew in silen?

Wouldn'they make a defeaning racket?

The 90th floor of the Twin Towers wasn't at sea level. It was at least 90 floors above sea level. Try it sometime - go to the top floor of your house, and have someone stand on the street, and see who's higher - if you have to look down at the street, to see them, it will be you. It's the same principle in a skyscraper - the higher floors are always above the lower floors.

"Open minded people embrace being wrong, are free from illusions, don't mind what people think of them, and question everything even themselves."

Within reason, geopancake. When you start questioning whether you saw a plane flying into the Twin Towers, then it's not so much open-mindedness as severe memory loss. Would I be considered open-minded if I posted about why we failed to beat Sunderland last week and who was responsible?