AstroProdigy Posted February 28, 2006 Report Posted February 28, 2006 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2023320890224991194 Don't begin to judge it until you watch the whole thing. I didn't say I agree with it, I just think it's interesting.
»Ducky Posted February 28, 2006 Report Posted February 28, 2006 I quit watching it about 30 seconds in when they showed the first quote by a FOX reporter.
AstroProdigy Posted March 3, 2006 Author Report Posted March 3, 2006 Watch the whole thing before making a judgement. You watched 30 seconds so you completely missed the point altogether. You can comment on it too.
MonteZuma Posted March 3, 2006 Report Posted March 3, 2006 Watch the whole thing before making a judgement. You watched 30 seconds so you completely missed the point altogether. You can comment on it too.I got a crappy connection and use browsers with security that makes it hard to view some videos. Anyone wanna give me a Reader's Digest version?
»Ducky Posted March 3, 2006 Report Posted March 3, 2006 9/11 Conspiracy of some sort riddled with twisted facts and what not.
AstroProdigy Posted March 6, 2006 Author Report Posted March 6, 2006 Twisted facts how? You can't just call something twisted facts and not back it up. You can download the whole thing if you wanted, but with a crappy connection i don't know how long it would take.
MonteZuma Posted March 6, 2006 Report Posted March 6, 2006 It goes for one hour. Sheesh. I find it very hard to believe that 9/11 could be a conspiracy cooked up by the US government or a US government agency. What parts did you find interesting Astro?
AstroProdigy Posted March 6, 2006 Author Report Posted March 6, 2006 I found the way the towers fell very interesting.
LearJett+ Posted March 6, 2006 Report Posted March 6, 2006 (without watching the do!@#$%^&*entary) What good could possibly come out of the US blowing up its own towers?
SeVeR Posted March 6, 2006 Report Posted March 6, 2006 Part of a political agenda resulting in the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq to secure America the two things America loves to buy: Drugs and Oil.
MonteZuma Posted March 6, 2006 Report Posted March 6, 2006 The towers fell with each floor concertinaing into the next - like train carriages thumping into each other. Is that beyond belief?
»Ducky Posted March 7, 2006 Report Posted March 7, 2006 This is along the same premise as any other "What if" garbage created for an audience.I had a friend believing in witches and magical en!@#$%^&*ies for months after he watched something lame on the history channel.
LearJett+ Posted March 7, 2006 Report Posted March 7, 2006 Part of a political agenda resulting in the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq to secure America the two things America loves to buy: Drugs and Oil. People put too much emphasis on oil in politics. Canada gives us six times as much oil as Iraq. If we cared that much about oil, why wouldn't we improve relations with Venezuela or try to end their oil strikes? After all, they give us more than four times as much oil as Iraq.
AstroProdigy Posted March 7, 2006 Author Report Posted March 7, 2006 It is believable that the towers fell that way, but not in free fall. If there is an obstacle in the way, such as lower floors, then the tower would not go down in free fall. Also, watch how they fall its like halfway through the video i forget. As for Ducky, saying you're a nut is an easy way to dismiss something without looking into it.
SeVeR Posted March 7, 2006 Report Posted March 7, 2006 People put too much emphasis on oil in politics. Canada gives us six times as much oil as Iraq. If we cared that much about oil, why wouldn't we improve relations with Venezuela or try to end their oil strikes? After all, they give us more than four times as much oil as Iraq. Since the war? As far as i know Iraq has the second largest oil field in the world, America wants to get that oil flowing as soon as possible. As for Venezuela, well we don't have a reason to invade that country since we can't link them to terrorism in America very easily. I hope we all know about the Taliban's efforts to eliminate all drug production in Afghanistan and the subsequent invasion by America for "terrorist reasons" in a back-lash for 9/11 to satisfy the temporarily vengeful hearts of Americans. Convenient indeed; Since the invasion drug production has hit the roof once again. http://opioids.com/afghanistan/ http://opioids.com/afghanistan/opium.html
MonteZuma Posted March 7, 2006 Report Posted March 7, 2006 It is believable that the towers fell that way, but not in free fall. If there is an obstacle in the way, such as lower floors, then the tower would not go down in free fall. Also, watch how they fall its like halfway through the video i forget. As for Ducky, saying you're a nut is an easy way to dismiss something without looking into it.So who do you think is responsible for destroying the towers?
AstroProdigy Posted March 7, 2006 Author Report Posted March 7, 2006 Well if you watched the video, you would see the suggestion. A controlled demolition allows for near free fall. Terrorists could never get bombs in several places in the towers to make it look like it was falling on its own. Only the United States government would have this power. I'm not saying i agree with this, but if you honestly think any politician is looking out for the people, then you are sadly ignorant to politics. To think Bush is special is a ridiculous claim.
MonteZuma Posted March 7, 2006 Report Posted March 7, 2006 Well if you watched the video, you would see the suggestion. A controlled demolition allows for near free fall. Terrorists could never get bombs in several places in the towers to make it look like it was falling on its own. Only the United States government would have this power. I'm not saying i agree with this, but if you honestly think any politician is looking out for the people, then you are sadly ignorant to politics. To think Bush is special is a ridiculous claim.If you don't agree with the conspiracy theory, but you think that it is impossible for the towers to fall like that as a result of the plane crashes, what do you think happened? I don't trust politicians, especially GWB, but I can't believe that the planes, the towers and the people in them were destroyed at the behest of US politicians.
AstroProdigy Posted March 7, 2006 Author Report Posted March 7, 2006 It could happen, actually. There are a lot of powerful interests involved. I don't know if the towers fell in free fall for sure id have to make my own measurements. I did see how the towers fell and evidence of demolition, but I am far from an expert. All I'm saying is, I wouldn't be that surprised if it was true. It was all extremely convenient.
LearJett+ Posted March 7, 2006 Report Posted March 7, 2006 Since the war? As far as i know Iraq has the second largest oil field in the worldAs for Venezuela, well we don't have a reason to invade that country since we can't link them to terrorism in America very easily. I hope we all know about the Taliban's efforts to eliminate all drug production in Afghanistan and the subsequent invasion by America for "terrorist reasons" in a back-lash for 9/11 to satisfy the temporarily vengeful hearts of Americans. Convenient indeed; Since the invasion drug production has hit the roof once again. So you think that getting opium was more important to the government than getting rid of the Taliban? It could happen, actually. There are a lot of powerful interests involved. I don't know if the towers fell in free fall for sure id have to make my own measurements. I did see how the towers fell and evidence of demolition, but I am far from an expert. All I'm saying is, I wouldn't be that surprised if it was true. It was all extremely convenient.Why wouldn't the government attack something else? Something that wouldn't paralyze our economy (we all know that conservatives love the economy). If you actually stood back and looked at the situation common sensically and rationally, you would feel differently. The only reason why you wouldn't be surprised if it was true is that you look for anything that makes Republicans look bad.
AstroProdigy Posted March 8, 2006 Author Report Posted March 8, 2006 George Bush isn't a traditional conservative. If you look at the no bid contracts that are given, they go to the ccompanies that donate to the campaigns. Certain companies gained from 9/11.
LearJett+ Posted March 8, 2006 Report Posted March 8, 2006 One man could not have been responsible for the entirety of 9/11. There was a higher number of companies who donated to the Bush campaign that lost from the terrorist attacks than those that gained.
SeVeR Posted March 8, 2006 Report Posted March 8, 2006 Bush is a business man above all else including national security. The oil and drugs trade are very important to America. Was the Taliban a threat? Were they any more of a threat that Iran, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia were at that time... where do we KNOW most of the actual terrorists came from? But the Taliban were killing the opium trade... so Bush as a business man saw the detrimental effect to the drugs business and the convenient oppurtunity 9/11 offered. 5 years on what do you think has happened to the Middle East? How many terrorists are there now? How has the number of attacks increased? How do you think the flow of money into Al Queda has changed over recent years? Who's side is Bush on and does he know what he's doing?
LearJett+ Posted March 8, 2006 Report Posted March 8, 2006 Osama bin Laden took responsibility for the attacks. He was a member of Al-Quaeda who is !@#$%^&*ociated with the Taliban -- thus, the Taliban was a threat. Your opium source (which was written in 2005) said that the opium production would decrease by 30% compared to the previous year. It says nothing about 2006. It also mentions that Afghan warlords who are US allies make money from the Opium trade, but it never says anywhere that the US profits from it.
Recommended Posts