Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Amadinejad says he is "su**CENSORED**ious" of 9/11 events « previous next »
Page: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 ... 19

Runole

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 8934
Online
#165 : April 18, 2008, 03:49:15 PM

When you put the RAMONES as one the 10 greatest rock-n- roll bands of all time you aren't so credible!! LOL



Dude, the Ramones kick butt and helped (with the Sex Pistols) to revolutionize the sound of rock


Are you sure that wouldn't be de-evolutionize the sound of rock?.. I hardly consider "God save the queen" much of a toe tapper or much in the way of a recognizable melody one could hum along with.;D
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh and olaf?


The fantasy is only yours!! ;D :D

Groupie- 1. an enthusiastic supporter or follower.

               2 an ardent fan of a celebrity or of a particular activity

olafberserker

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 21323
Offline
#166 : April 18, 2008, 03:57:07 PM

Fantasizer - : to indulge in reverie : create or develop imaginative and often fantastic views or ideas.   ;)

Runole

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 8934
Online
#167 : April 18, 2008, 04:07:57 PM

Runole- I suggest you stop trying to associate Jenga with steel skyscrappers, it really isn't relevant.

I challenge all the people who refuse to believe anything but "terrorists did it" to present a plausible motive for all the architects and engineers who have questioned the official story, why would they do that if they did not truly believe it? It obviously isn't a very popular move.

As Joe has already touched upon, there are many plausible reasons to account for the support of the official story.


Whatever?   I admit I haven't paid anymore attention to those that can't believe a jet airliner could bring down a skyscraper anymore than I pay attention to those that claim the Holocaust didn't happen or  Man did not land on the moon.

That there are engineers and architects that find such things of critical importance is their choice. I have a structural engineer that works with me that I have discussed this with and he tends to side with Olaf's links.

I certainly have as much mistrust of Govt policy as almost anyone, but denying that a jet airliner couldn't bring down a huge skyscraper just isn't high on my list.  I have read some of each of the links posted.  JMO, but the ones Olaf posted seemed more credible.

The internet has lots of kooky things and opinions.

As to your challenge..  The counterpoint theories just don't seem that credible IMO.  As to why?  Perhaps to get noticed?

Runole

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 8934
Online
#168 : April 18, 2008, 04:10:01 PM

Fantasizer - : to indulge in reverie : create or develop imaginative and often fantastic views or ideas.   ;)


What you do with your fantasies is your business just don't include me in them.  I always keep my "groupies" at a respectful distance.

Balls Out

*
Starter
****
Posts : 894
Offline
#169 : April 18, 2008, 05:29:37 PM

Runole- I suggest you stop trying to associate Jenga with steel skyscrappers, it really isn't relevant.

I challenge all the people who refuse to believe anything but "terrorists did it" to present a plausible motive for all the architects and engineers who have questioned the official story, why would they do that if they did not truly believe it? It obviously isn't a very popular move.

As Joe has already touched upon, there are many plausible reasons to account for the support of the official story.


Whatever? I admit I haven't paid anymore attention to those that can't believe a jet airliner could bring down a skyscraper anymore than I pay attention to those that claim the Holocaust didn't happen or Man did not land on the moon.

That there are engineers and architects that find such things of critical importance is their choice. I have a structural engineer that works with me that I have discussed this with and he tends to side with Olaf's links.

I certainly have as much mistrust of Govt policy as almost anyone, but denying that a jet airliner couldn't bring down a huge skyscraper just isn't high on my list. I have read some of each of the links posted. JMO, but the ones Olaf posted seemed more credible.

The internet has lots of kooky things and opinions.

As to your challenge.. The counterpoint theories just don't seem that credible IMO. As to why? Perhaps to get noticed?

To get noticed? That's weak at best, I wouldn't think that's the type of publicity professionals would go out of their way to get with the majority of Americans thinking the way you do. Sorry but I do not find that explanation plausible, we're not just talking about 1 or 2 guys here.

Maybe your not the most asstute when it comes to the laws of nature, but maybe you're better with human nature....when you have 100's of proffessional engineers/architects out there putting their reputations/careers on the line for this, don't you think it's for more than to just get noticed, in a very negative way no less? How could it benefit them to lie about this intentionally?

They deserve a little more respect then just grouping them with Holocaust deniers.




"Some birds can only have a back archer if you flick the starter button - spocking the G spot doesn't work on all of them"

ufojoe

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28869
Online
#170 : April 18, 2008, 06:51:08 PM


Hey honey, we need an architect to design our building. How about the guy who thinks the WTC
was brought down by explosions and thermate? Yes, let's get him! I noticed that guy on the
off ramp the other day waiving a sign saying, "911 Doubting Architect. Will Design for Food"
If it wasn't for that, I wouldn't have noticed him!

Get noticed? Isn't it amazing to see the psychology of those like Runole on this subject? He's not
alone in the least. And he's somebody that is open to government agencies being nefarious.
Imagine how people who aren't open to that stuff think? Well, we don't have to imagine
because some of them are here.

The Holocaust denying analogy was inserted to get an reaction out of us. I've yet to see anybody
make that kind of an analogy.

Runole

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 8934
Online
#171 : April 19, 2008, 12:43:55 PM

I don't believe any architect or engineer is putting their reputation on the line.  They are entitled to their opinion as are those that have a different equally valid opinions.

That you believe it is weak from my "getting attention suggestion" don't understand how advertising works in this country.  Happens all the time as people get celebrity status by the media just by making a public declaration, and it ends up increasing the business greatly.

Think about the girl artist and the abortion art scam?    Certainly put HER out there and she definitely was noticed. I would imagine she will indeed profit from the whole thing.

There are 1000's of people that deny the Holocaust ever happened just like apparently there are thousands? that believe the WTC was cooperative effort by the Government , the airlines?? , and terrorists.. 

I admit I haven't been paying that much attention to all the theories of the US Govt being responsible for the Trade center coming down.

And perhaps you and Joe are correct and it was totally impossible for the WTC to be brought down like it was despite those architects and engineers that believe it indeed was possible.

You are correct I am totally aware of the nefarious nature of how our government operates.  I just think in this case it happened the way it appeared.


I  don't know anything about "the psychology" of my disagreement.  I just thought the buildings coming down like they did appeared very normal.  Watched the whole event on TV.  Though you both disagree I would tend to think that the vast majority of the world agrees with my opinion.  Does that make it the correct opinion?  Nope but I tend to think it certainly seems plausible despite those intent on creating a vast conspiracy out of the whole thing by the US Govt.


You both disagree.
 

Just for clarification   You are proposing that the Government sent people into the WTC's after the airlines hit to make sure the buildings came down quickly? or that the bombs were already in the building set to go off whenever any airliner crashed into them?   just a bit of clarification on what you are in disagreement .

ufojoe

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28869
Online
#172 : April 19, 2008, 02:50:32 PM

Runole,

At times, you are one of the more reasonable people on this board. But other times. you come across
"differently." I haven't done any reading on the Holocaust denial stuff. Maybe one or two short articles.
But from what I understand, most of them feel the numbers are A LOT lower than 6 million. They
don't deny that it happened. Just in lower numbers. In many countries, just questioning the
6 million number can put you in jail. Let's get away from that because it really has nothing to
do with 911. And, by the way, it's tens of millions (at least) who have serious doubts about
911. And that's just in the US. Doesn't mean squat when it comes to the evidence. Just
stating it for the record.

You really should check out that video I linked to from the AE911 site. It's a very good
presentation about the problems with the official story on the WTC1 2 and 7.

Just for clarification   You are proposing that the Government sent people into the WTC's
after the airlines hit to make sure the buildings came down quickly? or that the bombs
were already in the building set to go off whenever any airliner crashed into them?   
just a bit of clarification on what you are in disagreement .

If bombs and thermite were involved, they would have had to have been placed beforehand
by SOMEBODY. You don't need to invoke the word "government." Somebody with access
to the proper areas of the WTC would have had to had access weeks before the event.
If you want to see how that was possible, check out the story of bomb sniffing dogs
being removed from the WTC right before 911 after they had heightened security
in the weeks leading up to the event. Also, there were other events like power
brownouts where people didn't have access to certain areas of at least one tower
for 36 hours at a time. Maybe just a coincidence.

Check out this very short video. It's only 3 minutes. The relevant part is right off the
bat.



Shows you that the FBI suspected bombs right off the bat. But if there were bombs,
they had to be placed in more areas than just the basement because the collapse
started towards the top of WTC 1 and 2.

Just some interesting comments that aren't presented as evidence...

http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_lavello_050503_bombs.html

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."

Just after the disaster, Firefighter Louie Cacchioli said, "We think there were bombs set in the building."

* * * * *

http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/retractions/romero.html

Notable Retractions

New Mexico demolitions expert Van Romero said on the day of the attack that he believed the building collapses were "too methodical" to have been a result of the collisions, and that he thought "there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse." His remarks were published in the Albuquerque Journal and are reprinted below. Ten days later the same newspaper printed a retraction, in which Romero is quoted as saying "Certainly the fire is what caused the building to fail." His assertion of the official line in the second article is not backed up by any explanation or analysis.

Here is the text of the 9/11/01 article.
Explosives Planted In Towers, N.M. Tech Expert Says
By Olivier Uyttebrouck
Journal Staff Writer

Televised images of the attacks on the World Trade Center suggest that explosives devices caused the collapse of both towers, a New Mexico Tech explosion expert said Tuesday. The collapse of the buildings appears "too methodical" to be a chance result of airplanes colliding with the structures, said Van Romero, vice president for research at New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology. "My opinion is, based on the videotapes, that after the airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse," Romero said.

doobiedoright

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3223
Offline
#173 : April 20, 2008, 09:08:31 PM

Gee could it be from the debri from the towers that created a 10 story whole in the building?
Things are not so hard if you find and use common sence!

That's what the Popular Mechanics folks said and most of the mainstream experts. One of the
Pop. Mechanics guys was involved in a debate a while ago. He said that WTC7 had 25% of
the material scooped out by the debris when the towers fell. The host of the show said
something like, "How do you know that? Because the photos that have been released
don't show that." The Pop. Mechanics guy said "We were given photos of WTC7 that
were not released to the public."

So, a magazine is given supposed "classified" photos of WTC7 but the public can't see
those photos because of why? The ongoing investigation? This host harped on this and
the PM guy had no answer. Doesn't prove anything but I thought it was an interesting
point.

The architects and engineers on AE911 say that WTC7 should have collapsed towards
the side where all of the damage was. But it fell straight down and it fell just like a
standard demolition would look.

I love being able to refer to the structural engineers who disagree with the official
story. I couldn't do that in the earlier years.

BTW, I didn't buy any of this stuff for a long time. I didn't even want to look at
any alternative explanation. But I changed my mind.



Actualy it did fall sodeways see.......http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/didwtc7fallintoa%E2%80%9Ctidypile%E2%80%9Dinitsownfootpr

Anyone who puts them selves on the side of this nut deserve all the ridcual they get...

This throng of wrong was led by Alex Jones (not to be confused with journalist Alex S. Jones), a conspiracy salesman whose radio show, website, and videos make him the Prince of Paranoia to those who fear they’re being followed by silent black helicopters. Jones claims, apparently in all seriousness, that members of the U.S. political and economic elite practice satanic occult rituals. He also claimed that:
"They're preparing for new terrorist attacks that are much larger. & they're planning to bring in foreign armies....The U.S. government is going to engage in large terrorist attacks domestically & probably internationally...They may kill millions of Americans." (Alex Jones Radio Show, 7/11/02)


The most common conspiracist misuse of eyewitness accounts involves descriptions of loud noises in and around the Twin Towers. "Controlled demolition" theorists claim that such descriptions indicate that explosive devices were at work in the towers, even, for some unfathomable reason, long before the collapses. To them, all descriptions are literal and figures of speech don't exist. When Hursley Lever, who was in the north tower basement when flight 11 hit, said "I heard a bomb," but then explained that he thought the noise was a transformer explosion and went back to work, conspiracists will focus on "bomb" and omit the rest.

In 2005, north tower janitor William Rodriguez changed his story and began publicly claiming that he believes explosives were used in that tower, somewhere from one to seven seconds before flight 11 struck. His new story is not supported by any evidence and is contradicted by eyewitnesses and by physical evidence. Read about Rodriguez's many false statements and his refusal to adjust his beliefs to the facts here.

In 2006, "Scholars for Truth and Justice" members Gordon Ross (a mechanical engineer) and Craig Furlong wrote a paper in which they claim to have found seismographic proof that a large explosion occurred at the WTC, 14 seconds before flight 11's impact. While ignoring the obvious fact that this supposed massive explosion was undetected by every person and alarm there, and ignoring the fact that the seismographers who recorded and analyzed the data say it does not show explosions, Ross and Furlong based their entire paper on a laughably bad error: they misread the seismograph's timeline. This typical truther ineptitude passed "peer review" at Steven Jones' Journal of 9/11 Studies, and the paper remains online and uncorrected, although its authors were advised of their error. Such is the willful ignorance of these people who claim to stand for the truth.

What about explosions or sounds like explosions before the towers collapsed, as the fires progressed? Such would not be surprising, and perhaps would be expected. During the huge fire in Madrid's Windsor building (during which the structural steel that was on the fire floors failed, leaving the building's concrete core exposed), "Explosions could be heard within the building and authorities cordoned off a zone some 500 metres in diameter in case it should collapse." Source

Needless to say, that building was not hit by an airliner, nor were explosive devices suspected to be at work. In the towers there were partial floor collapses, falling elevators, likely debris falling down elevator shafts, fuel vapors igniting, bursting pipes, and perhaps steel failing, electrical systems shorting, and pressurized containers from the buildings and aircraft exploding. None of these things would be surprising during such events. As veteran firefighters said,


doobiedoright

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3223
Offline
#174 : April 20, 2008, 07:39:38 PM

After all, if in fact these buildings were professionally demolished with explosives, and since it takes months of planning and engineering to place the explosives, and since these buildings were highly secure from foreign terrorists, then we are presented with a horrible conclusion that we cannot deny: that this entire event must have been planned and orchestrated by a group other than those who are blamed by our Government.

Or, you could come to the much simpler and more logical conclusion that common sense keeps pointing to - the buildings were demolished by jets, not explosives.


what he said...

It certainly is simpler to think that planes hijacked by crazy arabs took down the 2 towers, now lets see how the simple minds explain how a 47 story buiding collapses without being struck by a plane (WTC 7)??? A building which happened to house the financial records of 100's of corporations which the gov't was investigating (remember this was when corporations were being busted left, right and center for all their illegal "accounting" and insider tradings.

I've done a lot of my own research into this and there's a lot of evidence to support demolition and therefore gov't involvement....but the one piece of evidence that nobody who sells "hijackers did it" want to touch is WTC 7....because you literally can't explain it given the laws of physics which scientists have accepted for hundreds of years.


Gee could it be from the debri from the towers that created a 10 story whole in the building?
Things are not so hard if you find and use common sence!


doobiedoright

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3223
Offline
#175 : April 20, 2008, 07:51:15 PM

McCaddy, you don't even need to link to those sites. I would stick with the engineers and architects site.
Although, sites like the one you linked to a great for collecting mainstream articles on the subject.

Here you go joe every question about 9 11 anwsered for you...............http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=64


olafberserker

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 21323
Offline
#176 : April 20, 2008, 07:55:24 PM

McCaddy, you don't even need to link to those sites. I would stick with the engineers and architects site.
Although, sites like the one you linked to a great for collecting mainstream articles on the subject.

Here you go joe every question about 9 11 anwsered for you...............http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=64

We've tried that.  Those sites are part of the conspiracy to manipulate the naive American public.   ;)

doobiedoright

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3223
Offline
#177 : April 20, 2008, 08:20:15 PM

Runole, you are right on with all that you posted.. Another point, we have never ever taken over a country and made it our own. We have always liberated and then set the country free..
We even rebuild our enemies after they attack us.
You guy's that do not love our country remind me of the Gruden haters. He can do nothing right and the USA can do nothing right in your eyes....

The U.S. gov't is no different than any other historical empire...it's too greedy...and it will fall just like every other empire because of it.

Do you ever wonder why the nations with the most oil have some of the poorest populations? It's because the rich/powerful take far more than they give back and at some point the exploited people have enough and fight back. If they would just give back a little and quit being so greedy, the population would never even think of fighting.

We give more and feed more than any other country on the planet.
It is the job of the people who rule that country to give it to the people not ours.
Thats why they use the  theyer in the middle esast or they love the jews.So thier own people dont see whats happening!


ufojoe

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28869
Online
#178 : April 20, 2008, 08:28:59 PM

Gee could it be from the debri from the towers that created a 10 story whole in the building?
Things are not so hard if you find and use common sence!

That's what the Popular Mechanics folks said and most of the mainstream experts. One of the
Pop. Mechanics guys was involved in a debate a while ago. He said that WTC7 had 25% of
the material scooped out by the debris when the towers fell. The host of the show said
something like, "How do you know that? Because the photos that have been released
don't show that." The Pop. Mechanics guy said "We were given photos of WTC7 that
were not released to the public."

So, a magazine is given supposed "classified" photos of WTC7 but the public can't see
those photos because of why? The ongoing investigation? This host harped on this and
the PM guy had no answer. Doesn't prove anything but I thought it was an interesting
point.

The architects and engineers on AE911 say that WTC7 should have collapsed towards
the side where all of the damage was. But it fell straight down and it fell just like a
standard demolition would look.

I love being able to refer to the structural engineers who disagree with the official
story. I couldn't do that in the earlier years.

BTW, I didn't buy any of this stuff for a long time. I didn't even want to look at
any alternative explanation. But I changed my mind.


Runole

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 8934
Online
#179 : April 20, 2008, 08:44:52 PM

OK I guess I am getting where Joe and McCaddy are coming from...  In anticipation of the WTC being hit by airlines some "group" was able to plant bombs in both buildings so they would come down decisively.  Correct?


If that was what this discussion is about does it really make difference?    I certainly could understand the US govt not wanting to face further embarrassment for allowing such a thing to happen. 

The US is no where near as "Sharp" as they are often portrayed.   Bin Laden is still prospering.  That is enough for me to realize the US isn't as infallible as they pretend and with someone as Dumb as Bush as president pretty much seals the deal.


I have always maintained that the whole anti- terrorism policy is pretty much a waste of time as far the draconian way the govt has taken  against American citizens.
If you can't keep drugs out of prisons and illegal immigrants from getting in the country there is no terrorist protection.


If some terrorist in the US wants to take down any building of airplane there really is little that can be done to prevent it.  People that are willing to commit suicide to blow something up can't  be deterred .  That to me is the sad truth.   

Page: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 ... 19
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Amadinejad says he is "su**CENSORED**ious" of 9/11 events « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools