I'm glad you know more about their family situation than video clips do.

1/5/2004 3:21:27 PM

It bears mentioning that I'm sure a great many many people would just as soon bomb the shit out of Saudi Arabia and the bin Ladens, too.

The bin Laden family isn't big into oil, from my understanding, so I'm not sure what DirtyGreek and that fat bastard Michael Moore are implying. Seems to me we let them leave the country to keep the Saudis happy, knowing we'd need their support and their oil to launch a retaliation.

And don't act like you wouldn't be bitching up a storm if we had detained OBL's family, either. It's like I've always said, Bush is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't in the book of Moore and his leftist comrades, because they've shifted away from issues to a bitter hatred of the President.

1/5/2004 3:35:54 PM

THEY have shifted away from issues?

The bush administration barely even HAS anything resembling a policy-structure! It's entirely political!

And you're saying "the left" has shifted away from issues?

pshaw

1/5/2004 3:40:45 PM

trying to have a battle of wits and quoting member's pages on mass webhosting sites gets you nothing...you would fail any class is you tried to use any of these sources to present a counter-theory...crudely photoshopped pictures, distorting evidence (such as showing a portion of the wall that isn't the central impact area), and wild rants about unfounded beliefs are worthless

just because you find it on the web doesn't mean that it counts as a source or as evidence

oh...and from the military side of the house...andy flying object used as a weapon is referred to as a missile...a rock from a slingshot can be a missile...it is also not uncommon for tracks to be switched when passing closely together (even on the most advanced AEGIS radar systems)...the only way to deconflict would be through transponder info (which was turned off, right?)...just one simple quick response to that bullshit about it not being flight 77

[Edited on January 5, 2004 at 5:14 PM. Reason : .]

1/5/2004 5:08:23 PM

Quote :

"I'm glad you know more about their family situation than video clips do."

what video clips?

and his progeny and wives don't fucking count.

I'm tlaking about parents, and brothers and sisters.

1/5/2004 5:11:58 PM

I think salisburyboy blew up the pentagon cause he heard the pope controls the US military and is in league with skeletor to take over the world. Really. He has a website to back it up too:

http://www.thisreallyisalegitsource.org/propaganda/dumbass.html

[Edited on January 5, 2004 at 7:45 PM. Reason : hehe]

1/5/2004 7:44:42 PM

Quote :

"^^forget the hole for a second, where is/was any of the wreckage?"

They found some wreckage, even salisburyboy's conspiracy site admits that. It's just not enough wreckage to satisfy the theorists.

1/5/2004 9:47:23 PM

The only purported "wreckage" I have seen was a silver-colored small section of the skin of a plane that had part of the letter "n" on it. That was it. At least one of the sites I referenced claimed that this "wreckage" could not have been from a 757 because the letter on the "wreckage" was not the same size as the lettering on a 757. If this "wreckage" was not from a 757, it was most likely planted evidence.

1/5/2004 11:34:13 PM

One of the sites you referenced listed some lighting, the black box and I believe a landing strut.

And out of curiosity, what authority does the author of you site have to decide what is proper sizing for 757 lettering?

1/5/2004 11:40:27 PM

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hunthoax.html

1/6/2004 6:33:23 PM

^Wait...that may be the best thing I've read yet.

Hillarious.

Apparently, the government creates conspiracy theories to discredit conspiracy theorists. Which are, uh, the government.

1/6/2004 11:13:57 PM

The firefighters who were at the WTC the day of the disaster believe there were bombs in the WTC towers and that bombs were what brought the buildings down (including WTC 6)

Quote :

"Before beginning this article, I met Auxiliary Lieutenant Fireman and former Auxiliary Police Officer, Paul Isaac Jr. at the World Trade Center Memorial. Paul, along with many other firemen, is very upset about the obvious cover-up and he is on a crusade for answers and justice. He was stationed at Engine 10, across the street from the World Trade Center in 1998 and 99; Engine 10 was entirely wiped out in the destruction of the towers. He explained to me that, “many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings, but they’re afraid for their jobs to admit it because the ‘higher-ups’ forbid discussion of this fact.” Paul further elaborated that former CIA director Robert Woolsey, as the Fire Department’s Anti-terrorism Consultant, is sending a gag order down the ranks. “There were definitely bombs in those buildings,” he told me. He explained to me that, if the building had ‘pancaked’ as it’s been called, the falling floors would have met great resistance from the steel support columns, which would have sent debris flying outward into the surrounding blocks. I asked him about the trusses, and quoted the history channel’s ‘don’t trust a truss’ explanation for the collapses. He responded in disbelief, and told me, “You could never build a truss building that high. A slight wind would knock it over! Those buildings were supported by reinforced steel. Building don’t just implode like that; this was a demolition.” http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_lavello_050503_bombs.html"

1/6/2004 11:49:43 PM

For someone on a "crusade" for answer and justice, this is the first I've heard of Mr. Paul Isaac Jr., and I tend to follow 9/11 stuff with interest.

1/6/2004 11:52:34 PM

See, I read that and see the opinion of an auxillary fireman -- a noble profession, to be sure, but it doesn't exactly require an engineering degree, or extensive knowledge of physics, construction, or demolition.

So what I see is the delusion of a traumatized man. Sad, but not convincing.

1/6/2004 11:55:13 PM

An explosion took place at WTC 6 and brought down that building:

Quote :

"Just after the disaster, Firefighter Louie Cacchioli said, “We think there were bombs set in the building.” Notice he said ‘we’. At 9:04, just after flight 175 collided with the South Tower, a huge explosion shot 550 feet into the air from the U.S. Customs House known as WTC 6. A huge crater scars the ground where this building once stood. Something blew up WTC 6 - it wasn’t a plane; it must have been a bomb of some sort. http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_lavello_050503_bombs.html"

1/6/2004 11:55:46 PM

Notice once again how, rather than respond, he cuts and pastes.

1/7/2004 12:00:00 AM

Seismic evidence strongly suggests bombs brought the WTC towers down:

Quote :

"The seismic record from Columbia University’s observatory in Palisades, NY (21 miles away) provides indisputable proof that massive explosions brought down those towers. At the precise moment the South Tower began collapsing, a 2.1 earthquake registered on the seismograph. At the precise moment the North Tower began collapsing, a 2.3 earthquake registered; however, as the buildings started to crumble these waves disappeared. The two ‘spikes’ on the seismograph, which both occurred at the exact instants the collapses began, are twenty times the amplitude, or more than 100 times the force of the other waves. If the buildings had simply collapsed, the largest jolts would have occurred when the massive debris struck the earth, not at the beginnings of the collapses. Seismologist Arthur Lerner-Lam of Columbia University stated, “Only a small fraction of the energy from the collapsing towers was converted into ground motion. The ground shaking that resulted from the collapse of the towers was extremely small.” In other words, the collapsing did not cause 2.1 and 2.3 magnitude earthquakes. http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_lavello_050503_bombs.html "

[Edited on January 7, 2004 at 12:03 AM. Reason : .]

1/7/2004 12:02:21 AM

In fact, for someone on a Cursade, he doesn't even have any web space, just two mentions on conspiracy sites, and copies of those articles on blogs.

As for the second person, he said it once, he said it Sept 12 or maybe the 11th, and hasn't said anything since. Odd that he woul dnot be joining Mr. Isaac's crusade.

1/7/2004 12:03:02 AM

I don't think he even bothers to read what we post at all.

1/7/2004 12:03:47 AM

'Molten steel' is found in the basement of the WTC towers...perhaps underground nuclear explosions brought the towers down.

Quote :

"Furthermore, a ‘sharp spike of short duration’ is how underground nuclear explosions register on seismographs. Underground explosions, where the steel columns meet Manhattans granite would account for both the demolition-style implosions and these ‘spikes’ on the seismograph. ...The American Free Press reported that in the basements of the collapsed towers, where 47 central support columns (per building) connected with the bedrock, hot spots of ‘literally molten steel’ were discovered more than a month after the attack. There is only one explanation for this: An explosion of unprecedented magnitude destroyed the bases of the columns, then the massive structures buried the impact points, trapping the intense heat below for all that time. http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_lavello_050503_bombs.html"

1/7/2004 12:06:59 AM

Oh, I'm reading what you post...most of it is not worth responding to.

1/7/2004 12:07:43 AM

Quote :

"most of it is not worth responding to."

Well, obviously, but we do anyway, because we don't want you to feel unnoticed.

1/7/2004 12:09:14 AM

^^^ive read the thing about the nuke blast also, the seismic research center is in palisades NY or something like that, when i was in school up there, we had ppl talking about it, about there being a big deal at the place, as if there was some uncertainty about the spikes on the graphs, etc

1/7/2004 12:15:39 AM

The steel debris at the WTC were not tested or investigated...the steel was quickly loaded on ships and transported to China to be recycled.

Quote :

"Why was no investigation permitted of the debris? Dr W. Gene Corley headed the FEMA sponsored engineering assessment of the World Trade Center collapse, which performed no tests on the steel for traces of explosives. When asked about this process known as ‘twinning,’ he responded, “I am not a metallurgist.” Dr. Corley also ‘investigated’ the debris at Waco and Oklahoma City… and we all know how thoroughly those ‘investigations’ were performed. No government agency performed forensic examinations of the rubble; no effort was made to validate their official story. The rubble was quickly loaded onto ships and delivered to China for smelting. These are the actions of criminals disposing of evidence! By these actions, FEMA proves itself to be a subversive element in our government! http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_lavello_050503_bombs.html"

[Edited on January 7, 2004 at 12:18 AM. Reason : .]

1/7/2004 12:16:43 AM

Quote :

"ive read the thing about the nuke blast also, the seismic research center is in palisades NY or something like that, when i was in school up there, we had ppl talking about it, about there being a big deal at the place, as if there was some uncertainty about the spikes on the graphs, etc tkeaton"

Very interesting.

[Edited on January 7, 2004 at 12:17 AM. Reason : .]

1/7/2004 12:17:22 AM

I heard Jesus Did it


http://www.jesuskills.org/realwebsite/article/roberston.html

1/7/2004 12:20:42 AM

Hmm, the plane impacts registered a .7 and a .9, but the 1993 bombing didn't show up at all? Why am I doubtful? Infact, I see nothing in the release by CU to indicate that they felt there was anthing suspicious about the collapse at all:

http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/prrl/prrl0128.html

1/7/2004 12:22:16 AM

Quote :

"he American Free Press reported that in the basements of the collapsed towers, where 47 central support columns (per building) connected with the bedrock, hot spots of ‘literally molten steel’ were discovered more than a month after the attack. There is only one explanation for this: An explosion of unprecedented magnitude destroyed the bases of the columns, then the massive structures buried the impact points, trapping the intense heat below for all that time. "

Ah yes, the underground nuclear explosion, odly enough, no radiation to be found. And of course an explosion is the only explination, never mind that the ammound of pressure and the force of the colapse of the building in teh short abmmount of time that it collapsed generates large amounst of energy that turns into heat.

1/7/2004 12:25:08 AM

The collapse of 'WTC 7' is very mysterious.

Quote :

"At 5:20 PM, September 11th, 2001, a 47 story steel frame skyscraper in Manhattan underwent a swift, systematic, straight-down collapse. In a matter of seconds, the immense 600-foot tall structure was transformed into a small pile of rubble lying almost entirely within the building's original footprint. http://www.wtc7.net/"

Quote :

"People who have heard of Building 7 tend to assume that 'ancillary damage' from the collapses of the Twin Towers had something to do with Building 7's collapse. It is important to note that Building 7 was no closer to the towers than any of several other large buildings outside of the WTC complex. http://www.wtc7.net/location.html"

This building collapsed as a building does in a controlled demolition. Videos showing the collapse of WTC 7 are located here:http://www.wtc7.net/videos.html

[Edited on January 7, 2004 at 12:40 AM. Reason : .]

1/7/2004 12:38:54 AM

Here is an EXCELLENT website with many videos, pictures, and links...and a lot of analysis on what really happened at the WTC on 9-11-01:

http://www.freedomfiles.org/war/awtc.htm



[Edited on January 7, 2004 at 1:09 AM. Reason : .]

1/7/2004 12:58:31 AM

Eyewitnesses report hearing (and seeing) explosions/bombs go off in the WTC towers...television video shows a blast near WTC 7 prior to the collapse of the first tower...

Quote :

"Televised images show what appears to be a huge explosion occurring near ground level, in the vicinity of the 47-story Salomon Brothers Building, known as WTC 7, prior to the collapse of the first tower. ...One eyewitness whose office is near the World Trade Center told AFP that he was standing among a crowd of people on Church Street, about two-and-a-half blocks from the South tower, when he saw "a number of brief light sources being emitted from inside the building between floors 10 and 15." He saw about six of these brief flashes, accompanied by "a crackling sound"before the tower collapsed. Each tower had six central support columns. One of the first firefighters in the stricken second tower, Louie Cacchioli, 51, told People Weekly on Sept. 24: "I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there were bombs set in the building." Kim White, 32, an employee on the 80th floor, also reported hearing an explosion. "All of a sudden the building shook, then it started to sway. We didn't know what was going on," she told People. "We got all our people on the floor into the stairwell . . . at that time we all thought it was a fire . . .We got down as far as the 74th floor . . . then there was another explosion." http://www.rense.com/general17/eyewitnessreportspersist.htm"

[Edited on January 7, 2004 at 12:33 PM. Reason : .]

1/7/2004 12:31:55 PM

you're a fucking idiot.

1/7/2004 12:38:56 PM

Because of course explosions can only be caused by bombs, never mind that there were fires in those buildings, and very likely explosive materials.

1/7/2004 3:07:07 PM

Quote :

"you're a fucking idiot --BobbyDigital"

Ad hominem attacks and name-calling are no substitute for sound reasoning and evidence.

1/7/2004 3:12:46 PM

^ And videos with crackpot analysis from anonymous web users are no substitute for them either.

Look, if these people were so sure about themselves, they would be banding together and going public. It's not that hard. But they don't.

Oh, and I went to your "excellent" site, and saw nothing new or compelling. And the UFO? give me a break.

1/7/2004 3:28:55 PM

Quote :

"And the UFO? give me a break."

All "U.F.O." means is "unidentified flying object." The connotation (due to television and the media) is to think of "little green aliens" from "outer space"....but I don't think the website you refer to was making that link at all.

It merely showed (using video evidence) that there was a plane or something that flew by the towers after the second plane hit the WTC. Do you dispute the validity of the video shown? Do you dispute that the objects on the video really flew past the WTC shortly after the second plane hit the WTC?

[Edited on January 7, 2004 at 3:44 PM. Reason : .]

1/7/2004 3:42:45 PM

the only thing sadder than your ridiculous conspiracy theories is that people here actually take you seroiusly.

1/7/2004 3:44:06 PM

Quote :

"the only thing sadder than your ridiculous conspiracy theories is that people here actually take you seroiusly. ---BobbyDigital"

Maybe that's because I am being serious.

....AND because the questions I am raising are valid questions....the evidence I am presenting raises serious questions....and the "theories" I am presenting are not ridiculous


[Edited on January 7, 2004 at 3:51 PM. Reason : .]

1/7/2004 3:46:52 PM

Who taught Salisbury the term "ad hominem?" Now he's getting a big head over the whole thing.

And notice how he says that he doesn't respond to us when we make arguments against him because "they are not worth responding to," then invariably replies when the person involved is just insulting him, etc. -- not actually making a point. Yay hypocrisy!

1/7/2004 3:51:53 PM

Quote :

"ll "U.F.O." means is "unidentified flying object." The connotation (due to television and the media) is to think of "little green aliens" from "outer space"....but I don't think the website you refer to was making that link at all. It merely showed (using video evidence) that there was a plane or something that flew by the towers after the second plane hit the WTC. Do you dispute the validity of the video shown? Do you dispute that the objects on the video really flew past the WTC shortly after the second plane hit the WTC? "

I am very much aware of that, and I reviewed the video. The clearest one (the one apparently taken from a boat) shows birds. The pictures of the trail leaving the one tower could be any number of things, fuel, some other liquid in storage in the buildings etc. So yes, the UFO theories are BS too

1/7/2004 4:46:11 PM

Quote :

"Ah yes, the underground nuclear explosion, odly enough, no radiation to be found --1337 b4k4"

IT said explosion. There are alot of explosions other than nuclear explosions. Structural analysis of the buildings said that the buildings were designed to take an impact much greater than that which an airplane could cause. The impact to be great enough that it would cause a building specifically designed for extra strength would not cause the entire building to fall to rubble.

If the building was strong enough to hold the plane inside after a very high speed collision, it would certainly be strong enough not to collapse the entire building from such an impact, much less several buildings. There would have to be something near the floor level that would cause the entire building to shift, which would cause it to fall. An explosion at ground level, or a couple levels up, would be necessary for the ENTIRE building to fall. Tell me I'm wrong.

1/7/2004 6:44:00 PM

1) The buildings were designed to withstand smaller planes than the ones that hit. And they did withstand the impact, it was the subsequent events that caused a collapse.

2) An explosion of such magnitude on or under the ground would have been felt or noticed by something other than seismographs.

3) An explosion at the BOTTOM of a building would not have cause the top down collapse of the towers.

4) To take a building down in a controlled manner, you need explosions going all the way up the building.

1/7/2004 6:48:41 PM

Quote :

"they did withstand the impact, it was the subsequent events that caused a collapse"

What subsequent events? If the impact didn't cause the buildings to fall, then you agree with me.

Quote :

"An explosion at the BOTTOM of a building would not have cause the top down collapse of the towers."

If the bottom supports were blown out, then the whole building would fall straight down just like it did. The building started to fall in sequence, not just a little bit at a time. Sequences indicating an organized set of explosions. Noone was close enough to the buildings when they fell to know if there was an explosion, all they knew was stuff fell. There are "silent" explosions, such as heat explosives that could possibly weaken the steal enough to cause a collapse. Though unlikely, its very possible something of this nature happened.

1/7/2004 7:02:29 PM

Quote :

"The buildings were designed to withstand smaller planes than the ones that hit. And they did withstand the impact, it was the subsequent events that caused a collapse. ---1337 b4k4"

Not only were the buildings designed to withstand a jet airliner impact, they were designed to SURVIVE an attack from a plane very similar to a 767 (ie, similar fuel capacity).

Quote :

"A lead engineer who designed the World Trade Center Towers expressed shock that the towers collapsed after being hit by passenger jets. "I designed it for a 707 to hit it," Lee Robertson, the project's structural engineer said. The Boeing 707 has a fuel capacity of more than 23,000 gallons, comparable to the 767's 23,980-gallon fuel capacity. Another architect of the WTC, Aaron Swirski, lives in Israel and spoke to Jerusalem Post Radio after the attack: "It was designed around that eventuality to survive this kind of attack," he said. Hyman Brown, a University of Colorado civil engineering professor and the World Trade Center's construction manager, watched in confusion as the towers came down. "It was over-designed to withstand almost anything including hurricanes, high winds, bombings and an airplane hitting it," he said. http://www.rense.com/general17/eyewitnessreportspersist.htm "

[Edited on January 7, 2004 at 9:58 PM. Reason : .]

1/7/2004 9:47:55 PM

Quote :

""I designed it for a 707 to hit it," "

Well, you know, to err is human. Men have designed a lot of things to be able to stand up, only to have them promptly fall over. Engineers in China have planned one of the world's largest projects, the Three Gorges Dam, with the intent of having its construction not washed away regularly, but that still seems to happen.

And exactly what kind of test do you do to simulate a giant airline crashing into a skyscraper? My guess: not a very accurate or encompassing recreation.

1/7/2004 10:23:42 PM

a 757 is fucking bigger than a 727 (which they were designed to withstand)

1/7/2004 10:34:40 PM

it's not the size of the plane, it's the amount of fuel it holds that we're talking about. You guys are saying yourself that it wasn't the impact, it was the subsequent events that lead to the buildings fall. So don't talk about how big the plane was.

1/7/2004 11:29:28 PM

Of fucking course it was designed to be durable. And like the actual architect of the building said, there was NO way to know what would happen with fires burning at high temps. They were correct, they withstood the collisions. They said nothing about fires burning at high temps. We all know that the fire proofing foam would only buy time when flames are being fueled by tons of jet fuel.


Also, if a fucking underground nuclear explosion, and I cannot believe I am even gonna reply to this becuase all you did was pull some hack paraniod shit from some no name web site, please explain to me why you can see the top part of the WTC building (above impact) clearly fall first. You can see the antenna fall, then the subsequent implosion begin to take down the part of the building below the impact area. stop posting shit that is utter bull.

[Edited on January 7, 2004 at 11:44 PM. Reason : fds]

[Edited on January 7, 2004 at 11:48 PM. Reason : fd]

1/7/2004 11:39:53 PM

no

1/8/2004 12:03:01 AM

Quote :

" If the bottom supports were blown out, then the whole building would fall straight down just like it did. "

^Your a blind moron, the top part collapsed first, anyone who is not a fucking idiot remembers that.

1/8/2004 12:14:35 AM