Log in with a social network:
Log in with your username or email:
If you judge peoples credibility by the tone in which they deliver their argument I assume you probably miss out on a lot.
It seems to me that you refuse jump off the fence as far as this particular discussion goes and instead choose to waste my time commentating on the way I write. I find this unfortunate as you`re obviously intelligent and could probably add a lot to the discussion.
And thank you. Truthfulness is very important to me. But, so is accepting the fact that not everyone thinks the same way that I do, and respecting the fact that they have different view of the world.
You should probably put more effort into deciding what`s factual and what`s not factual instead of treating discussions like popularity competitions.
Perhaps the "sneering attitude" in the articles you mention comes from the fact that people are DISGUSTED at the way the American people are treated by their government. Do you think they should be overwhelmed with joy and write with the tone of someone who just discovered true love?
As far as Im concerned, ignorance just irritates the hell out of me, and the last few people who have confronted my opinions (without actually attempting to counter them) have exhibited ignorance in spades.
I was impressed yesterday by your profile - you say you`re only interested in the truth, and you never lie. I share that exact same ideal.
Do you seriously, genuinely, honestly believe he was saying "We`ve had such a terrible loss of life. I think the smartest thing to do is evacuate the building"?
Like the Fire Chief was gonna go "OMG! You`re so right! Why didn`t I think of that! All my years of training have failed me! Guys! We need to EVACUATE THE BUILDING!!"
Of course not.
Larry Silverstein (owner of the WTC complex) has publically stated that WTC7 was pulled (a widely used professional term for demolishing a building).
Apart from that, you failed to provide any kind of argument to explain why the building fell perfectly symmetrically. Do you really believe that something as chaotic and unpredictable as a fire would conveniently distribute the exact same amount of heat over the exact same time across four specific areas of the building (ie - the load bearing supports). Do you genuinely believe that`s how it happened?
Also I should point out AGAIN that no steel-based high-rise structure has ever collapsed due to fire in the history of the planet.
For the building to collapse as it did (perfectly symmetrically) all four load bearing supports would have to fail at the EXACT same moment. So you`re telling me that exactly the same amount of heat was coincidentally applied over the base four corners of the building for the exact same period of time necessary to cause them to fail at the exact same moment, together? No, I credit you with more intelligence than that.
"I`m just saying that I don`t buy any of this conspiracy crap."
So anything that goes against the official story is "crap"? Shouldn`t you be running around in a woolly coat bleating in a field somewhere? Baaaaa!
You can believe anything you want. You can believe that they Royal Family are lizard-people from Mars, for all I care.I`m just saying that I don`t buy any of this conspiracy crap.
If you genuinely believe that the Secret Service would umm and aah over whether to remove the President from the building to safety IMMEDIATELY under such circumstances, then I respectfully congratulate you on being a special kind of ignorant.
As for why Bush would do it, see above. And as for why so many people would play along? Who knows? Greed? Fear? When it comes down it, whether I can answer your question or not does not eliminate the huge holes in the official story of what happened on 9/11.
Give me a break.
How can you claim that the Secret Service "would have definitely percieved" a plane flying into a building in New York as a threat to the President`s life? You can make that connection now, four years later, but at the time...?He was miles and miles away. They didn`t know what was going on. And I think it`s a pretty fair assumption that they were tracking air traffic once they found out that planes were being hijacked, and were watching for any direct threat.
Now, please answer my question about how nobody has stepped forward about this being a big conspiracy. Out of the thousands of people that it would take to orchestrate this, not one has said anything.Also, please tell me: why would Bush plan to do this, and how could he get so many people to play along?
1. Do you believe that planes flew into the towers?2. What would be the benefit of demolishing them?3. Do you believe that a plane flew into the Pentagon? -If not, what happened to the people on that flight, as they are all not here anymore?4. What would the government serve to gain by pulling this off?5. How can something so large scale happen without any leaks?
Oh, and since you`ve kindly given me the burden of proof, I would say that the fact that the Secret Service blatantly ignored what would have immediately been perceived as an imminent threat to the President`s life serves as proof that they were in on the whole thing.
When you have a better explanation for why the Secret Service ignored what they would have definitely perceived as an immediate threat to the President`s life, get back to me.
So how do you explain the fact that the Secret Service did zero to protect the President when they "learned" that "hijacked" planes were flying into buildings? Since it`s their JOB to protect the President, don`t you even find it slightly suspicious that they did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to protect him, allowing him to sit for 20 minutes reading to schoolchildren, especially given the fact that the Presidents visit to the school was advertised in the media three days beforehand giving the "terrorists" his exact location to fly their planes into?
If you can offer a better explanation than the obvious one - that they already knew he was not in danger because it was an inside job; or the official one (which can only possibly be meant as a bad joke) - that they didn`t want to scare the kids - I`d like to hear it.
Be careful not to begin with the conclusion you want and then work backward. ;)
As for your assertion that "it will change nothing", you`re right - my posts on a random internet forum are highly unlikely to bring about justice in the Western world, but again, I disagree that being ignorant is the way to approach any issue.
I also find it very interesting that although you don`t appear to disagree with the points I`ve made, you seem determined for me to stop posting. If all you can bring to the discussion is to tell me I`m wasting my time (ummm... isn`t that what this site is for?) I could just as easily ask what you`re hoping to gain.
Be sure to check the bottom of this page to see how buildings fall when not the subject of a controlled demolition: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc7.h...
The main error these conspiracy theorists make is comparing the WTC to conventional structures. lmfao makes the point that no skyscaper has ever collapsed due to fire, but the WTC was not a conventional skyscraper. It was built to maximize internal space, with little or no internal supporting steel.
LOL. Great attitude.
I agree to a certain extent though. The national shame and embarrassment that would be caused if an independent investigation revealed the truth about the demolition of the towers would damage America`s global reputation irreparably (not that it can get much worse than it already is), so it`s in the American people`s best interests to just keep quiet and be good sheeplike citizens.
I guess "by the people and for the people" looked good on paper, but the people obviously just don`t care enough to make it a reality.
And don`t get me wrong. Americans are among the biggest-hearted and friendliest people in the world, but the populace on the whole seems to have been very easily led as far as The War On Terror is concerned (although this does seem to be changing, with Bush`s approval rating now at an all time low and Americans opposing the war in Iraq now being the majority)
And of course you want the issue to be dropped as it`s blatantly obvious that the buildings were demolished, and as an American you are extremely embarrassed and would rather the issue would just go away.
Did you know that the twin towers were the first skyscrapers to "collapse due to fire" EVER? And there have been far, far worse fires in skyscrapers than the ones that supposedly caused the WTC towers to fall perfectly symmetrically into their own footprints in the exact manner that a controlled demolition falls.
Do you consider it likely that after no skyscraper ever collapsed due to fire that two could collapse on the same day, and WTC7 nearby could collapse HOURS LATER even though it hadn`t been hit by a plane?
The question America needs to be asking their government is "Why was the World Trade Center demolished?", but the fact is the idiots can`t accept it, the smart people are embarrassed and the really intelligent people get shouted down
Being critical minded is healthy.Being paranoid and buying every conspiracy theory that plops its smelly way onto the `net is not healthy.
The media and government sucks. They should all go to hell. Tell us the damn truth.
When you gleefully point out how "ignorant" Americans are, you`re really only exposing your own bigotry and (ironically) ignorance. This is in light of the fact that the article that supports your "point" is written by Americans.
There is ignorance and bigotry all over the world I guess. Enlightened Europe is no exception
Oh, poor you. Yeah, the terrorists decided that they wanted to do it on your birthday just to spite you. It was my birthday too and I don`t go around acting like a victim. Nearly 3,000 people DIED. Nobody gives a crap that it was your birthday.
Not like those "enlightened" Europeans, eh lmfao (Bush did it. No, wait. The Jews did it).
-------------------------------------------------Time is like a knife..... slowly and relentlesly.... cuts the cored of life.You! Off My Planet!! (My Homepage)
Whether the article is well written or not (and an article like this simply won`t be funny because the subject matter is not easy to swallow), it raises a good point on how ignorant Americans are determined to be in light of the glaring inconsistencies they`re faced with.
The problem is that the author is trying to be ironic while pointing out the massive holes in the official story. As he`s not good at irony at all he produces just a rather poor article.
The guy isn`t making light of the people who died. He`s making light of people`s determined ignorance of the massive holes in the official story of what happened on 9/11. You people are such mindless sheep it`s hilarious.
Inconsistencies in Official 9-11 Story Resolved.