So, uhh.. was 9/11 an inside job or nah?

  • Thread starter Thread starter New Editor
  • Start date Start date
blackamerica;8356123 said:
VIBE;8356080 said:
blackamerica;8356059 said:
And Vibe said ain't no witnesses tho smh

No, never said that, I said their words are TWISTED, as I just proved.

I'll do another quote.

You basically said there is NOTHING that insist there could've been a controlled demolition. You requested quotes w/ names of witnesses (as if they didn't exist) and calmly got sonned. Nothing else to prove on my part. Be ez out there son

And nothing does insist it was a controlled demo. They are describing a situation, personifying the collapse to an implosion.

which btw, the towers collapsing wasn't an implosion, an implosion is when the building falls inward on itself, creating a pile of debris. The collapse was an "explosion" of debris that covered 16 acres. Demolition jobs do not create that big of a mess. Even experts say it's not a controlled demo.

Controlled.

It wasn't.

16 acres of debris.
 
You didn't son me, Broski. Now you're waving the white flag. You realize the quotes ARE OUT OF CONTEXT. I'll do more.
 
Ed Cachia -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 53]

we originally had thought there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.

2sa056u.jpg


^ explains what he thought it was because of how it collapsed, "didn't collapse at point of impact" from his vantage point, every camera angle shows both collapses start at the point of impact
 
The rest of those quotes stand as is, but again, obviously, what they were hearing were not actual explosions. They were hearing the building fall. They were seeing everything from 110-stories down from the impact zone.

Not one helicopter footage, witness footage or documentary footage (Naudet brothers) ever recorded flashes or explosions.

I've sat here and shown you why truthers are liars. I have fought my case. You've done nothing.
 
VIBE;8356139 said:
You didn't son me, Broski. Now you're waving the white flag. You realize the quotes ARE OUT OF CONTEXT. I'll do more.

You've been in denial throughout this ENTIRE thread, yes you absolutely have been getting schooled, you and s2j also have been schooling yourselves by way of his own ignorance

You've continued to ignore facts that I have presented, but I'll throw some more ether in your face just for good measure

Explain this please

http://www.projectcensored.org/16-no-hard-evidence-connecting-bin-laden-to-9-11/

Osama bin Laden’s role in the events of September 11, 2001 is not mentioned on the FBI’s “Ten Most Wanted” poster.

On June 5, 2006, author Ed Haas contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters to ask why, while claiming that bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 1998 bombings of US Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, the poster does not indicate that he is wanted in connection with the events of 9/11.

Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI responded, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.” Tomb continued, “Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11.” Asked to explain the process, Tomb responded, “The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice then decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”

Haas pauses to ask the question, “If the US government does not have enough hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11, how is it possible that it had enough evidence to invade Afghanistan to ‘smoke him out of his cave?’” Through corporate media, the Bush administration told the American people that bin Laden was “Public Enemy Number One,” responsible for the deaths of nearly 3,000 people on September 11, 2001. The federal government claims to have invaded Afghanistan to “root out” bin Laden and the Taliban, yet nearly six years later, the FBI said that it had no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5

President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden if the United States ended the bombing in Afghanistan.

Returning to the White House after a weekend at Camp David, the president said the bombing would not stop, unless the ruling Taliban "turn [bin Laden] over, turn his cohorts over, turn any hostages they hold over." He added, "There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's guilty". In Jalalabad, deputy prime minister Haji Abdul Kabir - the third most powerful figure in the ruling Taliban regime - told reporters that the Taliban would require evidence that Bin Laden was behind the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US, but added: "we would be ready to hand him over to a third country".

Interesting.

I ask again, why are you making me walking you through this like you're a child??

@vibe

@s2j
 
xxCivicxx;8356233 said:
@Jabu_Rule

What were you saying before about the UN?

You talking about that time before 9\11? When Clinton chose to work with them instead of going in unilaterally? Oh, you don't wanna hear about that. I don't wanna ramble.
 
Jabu_Rule;8356252 said:
xxCivicxx;8356233 said:
@Jabu_Rule

What were you saying before about the UN?

You talking about that time before 9\11? When Clinton chose to work with them instead of going in unilaterally? Oh, you don't wanna hear about that. I don't wanna ramble.

Lol and still you won't give up on your ignorance

Not only could we have taken bin laden at any point, we were OFFERED the man if we could PROVE the allegations against him. But we couldn't

So instead we chose to go bully the middle east
 
But he chose not to do to wanting to work with the UN. But his history of working with the UN on foreign engagements instead of acting unilaterally holds no merit i suppose.

Secretary-General, Calling Osama bin Laden’s Death ‘Watershed Moment’, Pledges Continuing United Nations Leadership in Global Anti-Terrorism Campaign
http://www.un.org/press/en/2011/sgsm13535.doc.htm

Say bruh, @xxCivicxx i thought you wanted me to end the convo with you? You can't seem to make up your mind.

I'm gonna end it for you though. You will not be getting any more ignorant responses from me.
 
Last edited:
If the thing about all the drills is true, that's all the evidence needed for an inside job.

Unless ol' binny had spies.
 
I just don't see how someone could not see the conspiracy side of this. We saw what the Government did with Iran

Contra,even some people speculate that what the Cartels are doing is government endorsed. You mean to tell me

that they caught Osama and just threw him in the water ? LMAOOOOOOO,That doesn't seem suspicious to you ?

Since when do they give war criminals "proper burial",wouldn't he be brought back to America to either A:serve time

for his crimes,or B:be put to death ? My theory is the whole thing was done for money(Oil overseas),and power(

constantly monitoring society/Patriot Act),I think I stated earlier in this thread that Bush and Cheney own Halliburton

oil company,guess what oil company got the contracts overseas.
 
brown321;8356394 said:
If the thing about all the drills is true, that's all the evidence needed for an inside job.

Unless ol' binny had spies.

Pretty much. You'll also find "military drills" right before alot of these so called mass shootings
 
blackamerica;8357147 said:
brown321;8356394 said:
If the thing about all the drills is true, that's all the evidence needed for an inside job.

Unless ol' binny had spies.

Pretty much. You'll also find "military drills" right before alot of these so called mass shootings

Yeah, let's do a military drill to draw attention by the crazies, pull off these "tragedies" within a few weeks then disappear.

Yeah. Logic.
 
VIBE;8356137 said:
blackamerica;8356123 said:
VIBE;8356080 said:
blackamerica;8356059 said:
And Vibe said ain't no witnesses tho smh

No, never said that, I said their words are TWISTED, as I just proved.

I'll do another quote.

You basically said there is NOTHING that insist there could've been a controlled demolition. You requested quotes w/ names of witnesses (as if they didn't exist) and calmly got sonned. Nothing else to prove on my part. Be ez out there son

And nothing does insist it was a controlled demo. They are describing a situation, personifying the collapse to an implosion.

which btw, the towers collapsing wasn't an implosion, an implosion is when the building falls inward on itself, creating a pile of debris. The collapse was an "explosion" of debris that covered 16 acres. Demolition jobs do not create that big of a mess. Even experts say it's not a controlled demo.

Controlled.

It wasn't.

16 acres of debris.

Hahahahhaa

Aye. Be a man and give the guy his credit.

BE CONSISTENT!

I was ready to concede some doubt on the firefighter quotes, but he ethered the fuk outta yall by expanding the FULL quotes, just ugly exposure and typical half truths from biased conspiracy theorists . And it makes sense. A fuking building is falling on you of course it will sound like Fire and Brimstone

And now you have this. 16 acres of debris? !?!

BE CONSISTENT. Be a fuking man and acknowledge this.

If these little ass inconsistencies (Bin Laden wasnt on the Most Wanted list for 9/11...really?) are enough to make you believe in an entire conspiracy, address this inconsistency that completely shatters your entire premise.

Fuking pathetic
 
Last edited:
@VIBE @S2J

2300(!) engineers and architects came together and released a booklet of 50 pages called beyond misinformation, no opinions,no bullshit, just science regarding the collapse of the 3 wtc towers. Using material and concrete evidence. No speculation, just scientific facts.
http://www.beyondmisinformation.org/

now I know the .org and name etc makes it seem like some nutjobs, but just check it out bros.
 
I'll PDF it and add it to my iBooks.

I see Richard Gage's name there. I highly dislike him. He has fixed shit to fit his agenda. The others I don't know by name.

I'll check it out. Thanks.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Trending content

Thread statistics

Created
-,
Last reply from
-,
Replies
840
Views
237
Back
Top
Menu
Your profile
Post thread…