• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Stop posting this 9/11 conspiracy bull$*@%

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

SirStev0

Lifer
Nov 13, 2003
10,451
4
81
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
This thread is pure entertainment.
I'm tempted to put links to 9/11 conspiracies in my sig just to see if it pushes him over the edge.
I believe his head will pop...
 

WildHorse

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2003
5,023
0
0
David Ray Griffin >>>> the archie bunker opinion expressed in the OP.

Everybody understands the 9/11 Commision Report as a standard political non-credible whitewash. The official 911 story is a fary tale.

It's plainly obvious that a large jetliner did not hit the Pentagon.

The WTC towers were collapsed by preplanted and remotely controlled explosives, not by the planes that hit.

Cheney & cohorts openly wanted such an event to rally public support for adventuring into Iraq & Afghanistan. This fact can't be denied because the literature published before the event by their Project for the New American Century explicitly states this.

The fact is that quite a few really credible people raise valid questions with supporting justification strong enough to warrant considering what they say, instead of just tossing it out like the OP wants to co-opt people into doing.

I've become convinced we should take the questions seriously. It's foolish to just dismiss it all with jeers & catcalls.

So it's off to P&N with the lot of you (that's sort of like banishment to hell).


edited to fix typos
 

WildHorse

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2003
5,023
0
0
Originally posted by: clamum
Originally posted by: scott
It's plainly obvious that a large jetliner did not it the Pentagon.
O rly?

What the hell is this then? Well... MAYBE SOMEONE PLANTED IT!!!
Maybe the executives of both Rolls Royce and Pratt & Whitney who stated the little engine bit recovered was not from a jetliner engine nor jetliner APU don't know their business.

Off to P&N with you.
 

clamum

Lifer
Feb 13, 2003
26,193
377
126
Originally posted by: scott
Originally posted by: clamum
Originally posted by: scott
It's plainly obvious that a large jetliner did not it the Pentagon.
O rly?

What the hell is this then? Well... MAYBE SOMEONE PLANTED IT!!!
Maybe the executives of both Rolls Royce and Pratt & Whitney who stated the little engine bit recovered was not from a jetliner engine nor jetliner APU don't know their business.

Off to P&N with you.
LOL

Maybe they don't. Regardless, what's that in the pic I posted?
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
100,204
3,353
126
Originally posted by: scott
Originally posted by: clamum
Originally posted by: scott
It's plainly obvious that a large jetliner did not it the Pentagon.
O rly?

What the hell is this then? Well... MAYBE SOMEONE PLANTED IT!!!
Maybe the executives of both Rolls Royce and Pratt & Whitney who stated the little engine bit recovered was not from a jetliner engine nor jetliner APU don't know their business.

Off to P&N with you.
read
 

Jinru

Senior member
Feb 6, 2006
680
0
71
I know this has been beaten to death already, but has anyone seen this video yet? I just watched it a few days ago and thought it was very well done compared to Loose Change. The video only concentrates on the WTC buildings and the connections between people in power.
 

QueBert

Lifer
Jan 6, 2002
21,585
112
106
I don't believe for half a second a full sized commercial jet was what crashed into the Pentagon, too bad an image of what it was didn't pop up on Google Maps. I know they have something like a 2 year delay on the images they relay. I would have loved to have seen those.
 

QueBert

Lifer
Jan 6, 2002
21,585
112
106
Originally posted by: Jinru
I know this has been beaten to death already, but has anyone seen this video yet? I just watched it a few days ago and thought it was very well done compared to Loose Change. The video only concentrates on the WTC buildings and the connections between people in power.
interesting video, some of the points they bring up, even if I've basically heard them before elsewhere make a lot of sense to me. Just because I don't believe the buildings were brought down ONLY by the 2 jets doesn't mean I think Bush was behind it. I think the 9/11 Commission did a piss poor job. I don't see how anyone can go "yeah a plane hit it and 110 floors were reduced to rubble in less then 9 seconds" Those people are about as smart as the Tin Foil people who claim it was an inside job.

I pay Taxes and I'd love some of my tax dollars to go into funding a new 9/11 report with a group of people who have a f*cking clue what they're doing. This is assuming of course, the Government isn't somehow behind 9/11 and in that case it would be a waste of money.



 

grohl

Platinum Member
Jun 27, 2004
2,849
0
76
Originally posted by: QueBert
I don't believe for half a second a full sized commercial jet was what crashed into the Pentagon, too bad an image of what it was didn't pop up on Google Maps. I know they have something like a 2 year delay on the images they relay. I would have loved to have seen those.

:confused:
 

dug777

Lifer
Oct 13, 2004
24,778
1
0
Everyone knows it was a conspiracy.

It makes so much more sense than some terrorists hijacking planes and flying them into buildings.

A bit like the JFK assassination. There's no way he could have been killed by a single, possibly mentally unstable, man. It must have been a vast and involved conspiracy.

There's just no other answer you can validly come to, i'm afraid.
 

Jeff7

Lifer
Jan 4, 2001
41,602
11
81
Originally posted by: MasonLuke
Originally posted by: montypythizzle
So did the planes take off from a conveyor belt or what?

NO
Oh god no, he's awakened from his slumber!

It's like saying Beetlejuice three times. Make a post with "airplane" and "conveyor belt," and MasonLuke instantly apears.

Just like saying the words "yellowcake enriched uranium terrorist bomb" in one post makes Echelon twitch. Everyone wave to Homeland Security! *waves*

:laugh:



One other thing.
YES
 

QueBert

Lifer
Jan 6, 2002
21,585
112
106
Originally posted by: dug777
Everyone knows it was a conspiracy.

It makes so much more sense than some terrorists hijacking planes and flying them into buildings.

A bit like the JFK assassination. There's no way he could have been killed by a single, possibly mentally unstable, man. It must have been a vast and involved conspiracy.

There's just no other answer you can validly come to, i'm afraid.
110 stories fell in 8.4 seconds, planes alone didn't do that, if stating the obvious means I should be wearing a Tin Foil hat. Then fine I'll go make one and put it on :)

 

dug777

Lifer
Oct 13, 2004
24,778
1
0
Originally posted by: QueBert
Originally posted by: dug777
Everyone knows it was a conspiracy.

It makes so much more sense than some terrorists hijacking planes and flying them into buildings.

A bit like the JFK assassination. There's no way he could have been killed by a single, possibly mentally unstable, man. It must have been a vast and involved conspiracy.

There's just no other answer you can validly come to, i'm afraid.
110 stories fell in 8.4 seconds, planes alone didn't do that, if stating the obvious means I should be wearing a Tin Foil hat. Then fine I'll go make one and put it on :)
I'm not sure how explosives would have caused the building to fall any faster than in the non-tin hatted version of the story, i'm afraid...:eek:

EDIT:

http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg3.html

About a third of the way down this issue is considered, for what that is worth.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Administrator
Mar 5, 2001
49,619
160
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
In response to the arguments that it fell as fast as free-fall - you're right! It *IS* a government conspiracy. They have a super-gravity machine that was used to accelerate debris that broke off the building at a greater rate so that it would fall faster than the building. /sarcasm

Watch a video of the collapse again. Note the debris raining down - it falls faster than the building. Now... tell me again, your calculations show that the building accelerated as fast as free-fall? Either your calculations are wrong, you timed it wrong, or the government really does have a super-gravity machine. Probably the middle problem.
 

Pliablemoose

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
25,197
0
56
Originally posted by: DrPizza
In response to the arguments that it fell as fast as free-fall - you're right! It *IS* a government conspiracy. They have a super-gravity machine that was used to accelerate debris that broke off the building at a greater rate so that it would fall faster than the building. /sarcasm

Watch a video of the collapse again. Note the debris raining down - it falls faster than the building. Now... tell me again, your calculations show that the building accelerated as fast as free-fall? Either your calculations are wrong, you timed it wrong, or the government really does have a super-gravity machine. Probably the middle problem.
Marked as the answer
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY