but how could they have planted the explosives??

farfromglorified · August 2006

El_Kabong wrote:

if someone a serial killer says something like i may have a chance w/ john's wife if only he was dead, then he ends up dead...some ppl would see that as motive

difference being 9/11 has been exploited to further an agenda. certain ppl stated they needed 'a catalyzing event like a new pearl harbor' to happen in order for them to fulfill htese agendas...then they take steps that help the event take place.

so, you have a group saying they want a, b and c to happen but only if d happens first can they do it. then yuo have these same ppl doing things that help d happen...then they exploit d so they can carry out a, b and c.

Ok. Can you show me where Dick Cheney says "if only the world trade center were attacked by 'islamic facists' I'd be able to invade Iraq"? Can you show me a direct statement by any member of the administration that matches your analogy?

again, both are theories, yours just has a governmental stamp on it. you are so tied up in being right you can not concede this.

I've "conceded" that a dozen times. I've never said that these things aren't theories. Of course they are theories. Again, in case you missed it:

The validity of a theory or hypothesis is the measure of supporting causal evidence relative to the conclusion. Just because the NIST/FEMA/911commission documents propose theories does not put them on equal ground as someone who proposes a theory that 9/11 was an "inside job" or someone else who proposes a theory that 9/11 was done by space beings from Mars.

El_Kabong · August 2006

farfromglorified wrote:

Don't spare yourself the research of these names. Here's just one:

Judy Wood (FM)
Civil and Structural Engineering, Engineering Mechanics, Materials Engineering Science, Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University

Judy Wood's "relevant" studies center around the stresses of dentistry.

according ot her college's website she is still in the Department of Mechanical Engineering

she still studied mechanical engineering she has a PhD in Engineering Mechanics, not dentistry...she teaches in the mechanical engineering department of clemson, not dental...any other names you'd like to pick?

also found this:
Judy D. Wood is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Clemson University with degrees in Civil Engineering, Engineering Mechanics, and Materials Engineering Science. Professor Wood teaches courses in the areas of engineering mechanics and experimental stress analysis.

where's the 'dental' courses in those?

El_Kabong · August 2006

onelongsong wrote:

you hit the nail on the head and i bet no one catches it.
we have a group of people here who couldn't build a dog house; arguing material science; metalurgy; building stress; sulfur content of jet fuel; flow rates of liquid; etc; and trying to legitimize their conclusions.

and i bet there were places outside of china, hell even in the US, that could've melted the steel from the wtc's down...so why send it to china? i know you can't possibly point to cost b/c it must've cost far more to ship all that to china than perform the work here

El_Kabong · August 2006

onelongsong wrote:

i can and did but you won't accept it.

we'll never know if ya don't try, will we?

onelongsong · August 2006

El_Kabong wrote:

perhaps you can cite some other steel framed buildings that collapsed from fire?

wouldn't the owner of the buildings (a single person who went to court to get the insurance payment instead of rebuilding) have those blueprints??

if only explsoives were used it would open far too many questions as to how they got them in. hijacked planes crashing into them doesn't require this.

you can SAY the white house was targeted, but how do you come to this conclusion? b/c youwere told it?

the pentagon was hit in the area that was being renovated, very few ppl died and the overwhelming majority manual workers

i don't keep track of every burned building i hear about on the news. i can ask that if it can't happen; then why is temperature a big factor in calculating ubc's and structeral integrity? how can extreeme cold make a metal brittle and require different bracing and engineering? how can one temperature bend and forge a horseshoe and a hotter fire just melt the metal?

too many questions? i'd be proud that i got into a building to plant explosives which seemed impossible to penetrate. any coward can use an airplane. having someone get explosives into that building would have had a greater effect then driving a plane into the building.

i believe i said possibly the whitehouse. i'm sure the gov planted the guys who stopped that flight.

an amature cannot hit a target with much accuracy. if the pentagon attack was a bit higher; the building could have been destroyed much more. just like a bullet to the lung is survivable yet a bullet to the heart is not.

from what i remember; the building could not be rebuilt because of public outcry that a monument should be built; and; that bodies not recovered deserved a burial place. the vacant land is worth a fortune and i'd fight for that too. i also wouldn't torch a building that provided an income large enough to retire myself and my entire family.

onelongsong · August 2006

PS: the fear effect that someone can get into such a public building would be much more intense and support the war effort even more.

Skitch Patterson · August 2006

El_Kabong wrote:

we'll never know if ya don't try, will we?

You're always looking for people to address you to the point, and be open minded...

we'll please show me an instance where you have admitted to being wrong, biased, short sighted, or respectful of those with differing opinions beyond 1 to 2 posts in a thread?

El_Kabong · August 2006

farfromglorified wrote:

Hold on a minute....are you telling me that a conservative neo-con group actually wants to spend more on the military, militarize space, and control regions????? I'm shocked.

you do realize this same line of thinking could be used to say

are you telling me that a group of ppl in the government that created, funded, trained and armed death squads didn't care if innocents died to further their agenda???? I'm shocked.

?

The Illinoisemakers · August 2006

If the WTC was taken down by a controlled demolition, which in my opinion wasn't the case. Who placed the explosives? How did they do it so quickly? The blackout was like 30 hours and it covered the top 50 floors. Wouldn't people who went to work that day have noticed holes drilled all over the place and blasting cords running through out the building? If you really want to say that the building was brought down by explosives then tell me how that much explosive material was placed without anyone noticing, in one of the largest buildings in the world, in one of the busiest cities in the world. I'm not interested in Sulfur found in the metal, or Dick Cheney and the PNAC. I just want to focus on the days leading up to 9/11. Those are the questions you should be investigating.

El_Kabong · August 2006

Skitch Patterson wrote:

You're always looking for people to address you to the point, and be open minded...

we'll please show me an instance where you have admitted to being wrong, biased, short sighted, or respectful of those with differing opinions beyond 1 to 2 posts in a thread?

i've been wrong before and admitted it, i'm not doing a search to find all the specifics you ask...can you show me any for you for any of your names? remember when you called me a nazi? was that respectful of those with differing opinions? hmm? but off the top of my head i accused know1 of saying something he didn't say, when he said as much i looked it up and admitted both in the thread and in pm that i mixed him up w/ someone else and apologized. i have said in some thread w/ angelica i am biased in some respects (as everyone here is). as for being respectful several ppl who disagree w/ me have said as much. you can ask any of those ppl if you wish, i'm not gonna spend my last 30 min searching for them for you

smobeepj · August 2006

This information has to get out to the people. I just hope people who refuse to believe just the possibility that what happened on 911 was not executed solely by 19 box cutter men. So many people don't want to believe that our goverenment may have been involved. I don't want to believe it. Unfortunately I do believe it. I've believed for almost a year now. I think there is more than enough red flags with the Official story that everyone should be demanding a REAL investigation. But who is there to investigate the most powerful people in the world?

As far as being called a conspiracy theorist for what I believe, I guess I understand where people are coming from. I am just a regular person. I am married and I go to work everyday. I have seen the greatest band in the world (pearl jam) 15 times, my first being at Soldier Field in 1995. Up until about a year ago, I was all about catching Bin Laden and was clueless as to what was actually happening in this world. The world we live in is FUCKED up. Thank God we have Pearl Jam's music to escape into.

farfromglorified · August 2006

El_Kabong wrote:

according ot her college's website she is still in the Department of Mechanical Engineering. she still studied mechanical engineering she has a PhD in Engineering Mechanics, not dentistry...

Ok. According to her research she has no expertise in structure physics. She studies biomaterials. The next time I need an overbite analyzed, I'll give her a call.

any other names you'd like to pick?

80% of your list doesn't even have a relevant educational background. Sure, your cut-and-paste list wins points for length, but did you even read it? You have economists, particle physicists, government bureaucrats, radio engineers, health scientists and electrical engineers on there. Furthermore, simple research shows that your "architects" build rest areas, homes, and garages.

Furthermore, many members on your list have been largely disowned by the group for suggesting that the planes were holographic or that the government deliberately doctored the media images of 9/11 (along with somehow doctoring the personal images captured).

The co-founder of this group believes that the hijackers are still alive and in secret prisons. His evidence? None. Plausibility is all that matters. And since he's a "Professor Emeritus", he must be right. Even though that "Professor Emeritus" is in philosophy.

farfromglorified · August 2006

El_Kabong wrote:

you do realize this same line of thinking could be used to say

are you telling me that a group of ppl in the government that created, funded, trained and armed death squads didn't care if innocents died to further their agenda???? I'm shocked.

?

No. That's not the "same line of thinking" because the evidence of Al Qaeda being involved isn't just their platform. There's a reason I don't think Hezbollah or the IRA is behind 9/11. Do you understand that?

El_Kabong · August 2006

farfromglorified wrote:

80% of your list doesn't even have a relevant educational background. Sure, your cut-and-paste list wins points for length, but did you even read it? You have economists, particle physicists, government bureaucrats, radio engineers, health scientists and electrical engineers on there. Furthermore, simple research shows that your "architects" build rest areas, homes, and garages.

Furthermore, many members on your list have been largely disowned by the group for suggesting that the planes were holographic or that the government deliberately doctored the media images of 9/11 (along with somehow doctoring the personal images captured).

The co-founder of this group believes that the hijackers are still alive and in secret prisons. His evidence? None. Plausibility is all that matters. And since he's a "Professor Emeritus", he must be right. Even though that "Professor Emeritus" is in philosophy.

do i have to believe everything every single one of them says? i was simply contradicting your 'list' youa cted as if the only ppl supporting these theories were theologians and journalists, i only pointed out plenty of other educated ppl think differently. that does not translate to "all these ppl on this list speak for me!"

onelongsong · August 2006

The Illinoisemakers wrote:

If the WTC was taken down by a controlled demolition, which in my opinion wasn't the case. Who placed the explosives? How did they do it so quickly? The blackout was like 30 hours and it covered the top 50 floors. Wouldn't people who went to work that day have noticed holes drilled all over the place and blasting cords running through out the building? If you really want to say that the building was brought down by explosives then tell me how that much explosive material was placed without anyone noticing, in one of the largest buildings in the world, in one of the busiest cities in the world. I'm not interested in Sulfur found in the metal, or Dick Cheney and the PNAC. I just want to focus on the days leading up to 9/11. Those are the questions you should be investigating.

the smell of that much explosives would have been noticed. whether you know the smell or not. since no residue was found and jet fuel is high in sulfur; there is no evidence of explosives except in peoples imaginations. the design of the building made it a blast furnace capable of melting steel.

farfromglorified · August 2006

El_Kabong wrote:

and i bet there were places outside of china, hell even in the US, that could've melted the steel from the wtc's down...so why send it to china? i know you can't possibly point to cost b/c it must've cost far more to ship all that to china than perform the work here

Good god...

It was sent to China because the Chinese bought it.

http://www.china.org.cn/english/2002/Jan/25776.htm

farfromglorified · August 2006

El_Kabong wrote:

do i have to believe everything every single one of them says?

Yes. You posted that list as a list of people that you can "point to". That implies that you would point to them as providing proof for your theories. Or were you posting some that you agree with and others you don't just so the list looked nice and long?

onelongsong · August 2006

El_Kabong wrote:

do i have to believe everything every single one of them says? i was simply contradicting your 'list' youa cted as if the only ppl supporting these theories were theologians and journalists, i only pointed out plenty of other educated ppl think differently. that does not translate to "all these ppl on this list speak for me!"

this isn't directed at you el.
why do people believe those not involved with the investigation and evidence yet will consider the opinions of people not involved?
people would rather believe that flight 800 was brought down by a missle when similar problems were found in other planes after the discovery of the defect found during the investigation.

El_Kabong · August 2006

farfromglorified wrote:

No. That's not the "same line of thinking" because the evidence of Al Qaeda being involved isn't just their platform. There's a reason I don't think Hezbollah or the IRA is behind 9/11. Do you understand that?

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/gen.america.under.attack/

Bin Laden denies role in New York, Washington slaughter

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.binladen.denial/index.html

Bin Laden says he wasn't behind attacks
DOHA, Qatar (CNN) -- Islamic militant leader Osama bin Laden, the man the United States considers the prime suspect in last week's terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, denied any role Sunday in the actions believed to have killed thousands.

In a statement issued to the Arabic satellite channel Al Jazeera, based in Qatar, bin Laden said, "The U.S. government has consistently blamed me for being behind every occasion its enemies attack it.

"I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons," bin Laden's statement said.

http://www.robert-fisk.com/usama_interview_ummat.htm

USAMA BIN LADEN: In the name of Allah (God), the most beneficent, the most merciful. Praise be to Allah, Who is the creator of the whole universe and Who made the Earth as an abode for peace, for the whole humankind. Allah is the Sustainer, who sent Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) for our guidance. I am thankful to the Ummat Group of Publications, which gave me the opportunity to convey my viewpoint to the people, particularly the valiant and momin (true Muslim) people of Pakistan who refused to believe the lies of the demon (Pakistani military dictator General Pervez Musharraf).

I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam....

now perhaps that is a lie, i have no clue, just pointing out he has denied being a part of it

BUT, what is interesting is he called Musharraf a 'lying demon'...i'llhave to look later but i remember reading something about a pakistani (tho i thought it was the head of their intel apparatus) was found to have wired the main hijacker $ a few days before 9/11...i did, however, post thsi before
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=170642

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/who/miller.html

But bin Laden denied to me that he was behind the bombing and claimed he didn't know Ramzi Yousef.

boxwine_in_hell · August 2006

El_Kabong wrote:

perhaps you can cite some other steel framed buildings that collapsed from fire?

wouldn't the owner of the buildings (a single person who went to court to get the insurance payment instead of rebuilding) have those blueprints??

if only explsoives were used it would open far too many questions as to how they got them in. hijacked planes crashing into them doesn't require this.

you can SAY the white house was targeted, but how do you come to this conclusion? b/c youwere told it?

the pentagon was hit in the area that was being renovated, very few ppl died and the overwhelming majority manual workers

Perhaps if other steel structure buildings had been hit by a 400 mph missile filled with thousands of gallons of jet fuel then they might have collapsed as well.

but how could they have planted the explosives??

Comments

Categories