Conspiracy Theory 9/11 - Part 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rioliusta, it's said the Jews were heavily involved, like up to their eyeballs, they control American money and use their military for their purposes, they wanted to clean house in the Middle East so some say.
I suppose that's what happened as history now shows, I mean if we open our eyes that's what happened.
 
meto said:
Rioliusta, it's said the Jews were heavily involved, like up to their eyeballs, they control American money and use their military for their purposes, they wanted to clean house in the Middle East so some say.
I suppose that's what happened as history now shows, I mean if we open our eyes that's what happened.
Click to expand...
Just ... um ... ok ...

hang on ...

...

WHAT?!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Log in to remove this ad.

nut said:
Having flown multiple full motion flight simulators..... Which the instructor in the clip was referring to, not some Microsoft keyboard computer game ...I can tell you it's the same as flying the real thing, and is regarded as the real thing by CASA and every other aviation governing body.
Click to expand...

yep, and it still says nothing about what happened in 2001.
 
meto said:
It was done as justification for war against any remaining sovereign states in the middle east, and any other that might try to direct themselves rather than obey UN mandates.
History now tells us this is exactly what happened, puppet government exists but everything comes under UN authority. The war on terror was launched, a means of threatening individual or state who refuse to tow that line.
That's why they pulled the towers, to be seen in the right when they went to war, it was part of a global takeover plan.
Click to expand...
Yes, but there were many layers to this event - bulk gold bullion was heisted for one thing. The towers were old and Larry had taken out an insurance policy protecting for terrorist events (and made a healthy profit from the TWO cases he claimed - one for each tower).

The wars, various oustings and assassinations were also predicated on the threat to the petrodollar - Hussein was going to accept euros for Iraqi oil and the gold-backed dinar was proposed by Gaddafi to become a united African currency, likewise not selling oil in US dollars. The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline threatens to undermine the Israeli and Qatari oil interests, and we all know about the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline, not to mention the bulk heroin and lithium the US-friendly corporations now have access to.

Corruption motivated by intense greed. What a sad world. So many people are talking about this as they witness Obama's numerous failures as President (http://danfromsquirrelhill.wordpress.com/2013/08/15/obama-252/). I do not specifically endorse this blogger's political views, though at least he considered Ron Paul, who wouldn't come clean about everything like 9/11 of course, but he was never going to really win given the contrived nature of the funding of US presidential candidates. (https://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_we_the_people_and_the_republic_we_must_reclaim#)

Yet so many still buy the official narrative of 9/11.
 
luapjb said:
Yes, but there were many layers to this event - bulk gold bullion was heisted for one thing. The towers were old and Larry had taken out an insurance policy protecting for terrorist events (and made a healthy profit from the TWO cases he claimed - one for each tower).

The wars, various oustings and assassinations were also predicated on the threat to the petrodollar - Hussein was going to accept euros for Iraqi oil and the gold-backed dinar was proposed by Gaddafi to become a united African currency, likewise not selling oil in US dollars. The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline threatens to undermine the Israeli and Qatari oil interests, and we all know about the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline, not to mention the bulk heroin and lithium the US-friendly corporations now have access to.

Corruption motivated by intense greed. What a sad world. So many people are talking about this as they witness Obama's numerous failures as President (http://danfromsquirrelhill.wordpress.com/2013/08/15/obama-252/). I do not specifically endorse this blogger's political views, though at least he considered Ron Paul, who wouldn't come clean about everything like 9/11 of course, but he was never going to really win given the contrived nature of the funding of US presidential candidates. (https://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_we_the_people_and_the_republic_we_must_reclaim#)

Yet so many still buy the official narrative of 9/11.
Click to expand...

Well, your first two assertions (Gold Bulion/Silverstein) are demonstrably false.

Your comments about the wars has no bearing on who committed 911 and commits the is/ought fallacy. Even if what you say happened did happen, which I'm just taking your word for btw, doesn't mean 911 was an inside job. It's like saying "if it rains the footpath will be wet. Therefore, if the footpath is wet it must have rained".

Your political opinions and satisfaction with this candidate or that one, likewise carry no bearing on who masterminded 911.

So yes, I still "buy" the official story because none of its findings have yet been refuted, despite almost 10 years of heavy review from CTs.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
luapjb said:
The towers were old and Larry had taken out an insurance policy protecting for terrorist events
Click to expand...

because they were uninsured before right?

luapjb said:
(and made a healthy profit from the TWO cases he claimed - one for each tower).
Click to expand...

uh huh.

Judge Hellerstein said Thursday that giving Mr. Silverstein's group money in addition to what he received from insurers would effectively compensate Mr. Silverstein twice for the same losses, something barred by New York state law. Therefore, Mr. Silverstein "would not be able to recover anything" if the case against the airlines and their insurers were able to go forward, the judge said.

...

Should Judge Hellerstein's decision withstand the appeals process, it would bring an end to Mr. Silverstein's quest to receive additional money for the attacks. That litigious pursuit has been motivated in part by the fact that rebuilding the 10 million square feet lost in the attacks is proving to cost billions more than the $4.1 billion Mr. Silverstein received from his insurers.
Click to expand...

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323993804578614292502152144
 
Kellythatsit said:
Well, your first two assertions (Gold Bulion/Silverstein) are demonstrably false.

Your comments about the wars has no bearing on who committed 911 and commits the is/ought fallacy. Even if what you say happened did happen, which I'm just taking your word for btw, doesn't mean 911 was an inside job. It's like saying "if it rains the footpath will be wet. Therefore, if the footpath is wet so it must have rained".

Your political opinions and satisfaction with this candidate or that one, likewise carry no bearing on who masterminded 911.

So yes, I still "buy" the official story because none of its findings have yet been refuted, despite almost 10 years of heavy review from CTs.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Well, that's fine to disagree. In my opinion there is more than enough information to cast strong doubts about the official version. I mean, just the way they went about putting the 9/11 Commission together...ah whatever. Ain't gonna change your mind, nor do I care about trying to do so any more.
 
meto said:
Rioliusta, it's said the Jews were heavily involved, like up to their eyeballs, they control American money and use their military for their purposes, they wanted to clean house in the Middle East so some say.
I suppose that's what happened as history now shows, I mean if we open our eyes that's what happened.
Click to expand...
solid post friend :drunk:
 
new to thread
i have followed and researched 911 for years, investigating all theories and really not being convinced by any, because for every theory there is a theory against just as newtons law, but going away from the twin towers and what happened to them because its just speculation and thats all it is which could literally keep conversation endless for a lifetime, what are peoples personal opinions on what happened to the pentagon?
 
The Presh King said:
new to thread
i have followed and researched 911 for years, investigating all theories and really not being convinced by any, because for every theory there is a theory against just as newtons law, but going away from the twin towers and what happened to them because its just speculation and thats all it is which could literally keep conversation endless for a lifetime, what are peoples personal opinions on what happened to the pentagon?
Click to expand...
A hijacked plane crashed into it
 
The Presh King said:
new to thread
i have followed and researched 911 for years, investigating all theories and really not being convinced by any, because for every theory there is a theory against just as newtons law, but going away from the twin towers and what happened to them because its just speculation and thats all it is which could literally keep conversation endless for a lifetime, what are peoples personal opinions on what happened to the pentagon?
Click to expand...
I think they fired a missile from the conspirators evil lair on doomsday island. The missile struck flight 77 which was timed precisely to ensure the wreckage fell into a large net placed on the ground. The smouldering remains were then flown poste haste to the pentagon where another missile was targeted. In the confusion the wreckage was placed in key areas around the site to make it look like flight 77 had in fact struck the pentagon.

Voila, Iraq was as good as gone.

You know it makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kellythatsit said:
I think they fired a missile from the conspirators evil lair on doomsday island. The missile struck flight 77 which was timed precisely to ensure the wreckage fell into a large net placed on the ground. The smouldering remains were then flown poste haste to the pentagon where another missile was targeted. In the confusion the wreckage was placed in key areas around the site to make it look like flight 77 had in fact struck the pentagon.

Voila, Iraq was as good as gone.

You know it makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
imagesCABHHNZ5.jpg
 
there was no plane wreckage to be seen after the pentagon was hit, plus no footage of the plane hitting, despite various cameras around the area.
 
Does anyone ever wonder how we come to form the opinions that we have?
That alone may be more interesting and somewhat more revealing than the standard "I believe", "I don't believe" lines.
Unfortunately though ego may get in the way of open and honest discussion and again, unfortunately isn't that always the way?

We seem hell bent on proving others wrong rather than picking up all the information and signals coming our way.
Again, if greater minds than ours knew how the populace work, they'd recognize us to be a pretty pliable bunch, you'd think.
 
HARKER said:
Does anyone ever wonder how we come to form the opinions that we have?
That alone may be more interesting and somewhat more revealing than the standard "I believe", "I don't believe" lines.
Unfortunately though ego may get in the way of open and honest discussion and again, unfortunately isn't that always the way?

We seem hell bent on proving others wrong rather than picking up all the information and signals coming our way.
Again, if greater minds than ours knew how the populace work, they'd recognize us to be a pretty pliable bunch, you'd think.
Click to expand...

Plenty of good books around on the topic. "The Believing Brain" covers a lot of this - basically the belief comes first, then the rationalisation comes afterwards. It's why weird beliefs are far more normal than abnormal, and the more intelligent you are, the better you are as justifying your beliefs.
 
Atch said:
there was no plane wreckage to be seen after the pentagon was hit, plus no footage of the plane hitting, despite various cameras around the area.
Click to expand...

Apparently the part of the Pentagon that was damaged was empty due to so call renovations happening,
good excuse for that area to be empty!
The only plane wreckage found was part of an engine which was reported not be part go an engine the suggested plane would contain.
No skid marks leading to the damaged wall?
Almost as dodgy as World Trade Centre 7 falling to the ground yet it wasn't struck by a plane, many experts have provided image of its fell to be identical to buildings professional demolished by implosions.

Just like Aliens will be my neighbours one day, the truth about 9/11 will also prevail.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top