9/11 documentary now

  • Thread starter Thread starter worsleyweb
  • Start date Start date
You've missed the point.

I agreed it was designed for a lower speed collision and that ljworld link backs it up. It doesn't mention a 600mph collision.

Not according to NIST:

825275612.jpg
 
Ok, I get it, you're not a fan of the USA. What's the relevance to 9/11 though? They didn't have to destroy a section of their largest city and kill thousands of their own population to justify a war.

I like US, i have worked with US nationals for good part of my 10 year professional life and found them to be great people to work with, there is difference between being opposed to a government policies of a specific country and in being opposed to the whole country
 
Whoosh....

You claimed the 1964 Port Authority white paper "doesn't mention a 600mph collision." Nist say it did.
No I said John Skilling didn't mention a 600mph collision. It was in the Port Authority white paper. Go back one page and read it. Your comprehension skills appear to be sadly lacking.
 
How do you know some charges weren't set off by the crashes but masked by the huge fireballs created by the combustion of aerosolized jet fuel? Secondly, explosives can be engineered so that heat alone will not detonate them. For example, high explosive RDX requires the simultaneous delivery of high heat and pressure to induce detonation. Thirdly, it is relatively easy to design casings for explosives that would allow them to survive even the most violent assaults. The casings of jetliners' black boxes protect their contents from impact accelerations of 3,400 Gs and from temperatures of 2,000ºF for up to 30 minutes.

You're not even thinking about this rationally are you?
I've already said I'm out. There's literally no point arguing with fanatics. Enjoy.
 
Who do you think happened to the towers then, did they collapse due to planes hitting them or did they collapse because of explosives?
Personally, I believe that all the relevant people in the USA either knew of the timings of the attacks or had more involvement.
This isn't the same as someone claiming they've seen lord lucan /loch Ness monster /elvis, it's a whole catalogue of scientific and logical unlikelyhoods that when put together, don't ring true.
In answer to your question, explosives.
 
Personally, I believe that all the relevant people in the USA either knew of the timings of the attacks or had more involvement.
This isn't the same as someone claiming they've seen lord lucan /loch Ness monster /elvis, it's a whole catalogue of scientific and logical unlikelyhoods that when put together, don't ring true.
In answer to your question, explosives.
If the motivation was to have an excuse to go to war, then two passenger jets slamming into the towers would have been more than enough. They didn't need to then rig them with explosives for that extra Hollywood effect. So if "they" knew about the planes, why go to all the trouble and risk of planting the explosives as well? If your answer is something about "insurance" then you're already widening the conspiracy to include yet more groups of people, all of which have different vested interests and motivations.

I'm not saying the official story doesn't have holes in it, but the conspiracy theories don't make a whole lot of sense either.
 
If the motivation was to have an excuse to go to war, then two passenger jets slamming into the towers would have been more than enough. They didn't need to then rig them with explosives for that extra Hollywood effect. So if "they" knew about the planes, why go to all the trouble and risk of planting the explosives as well? If your answer is something about "insurance" then you're already widening the conspiracy to include yet more groups of people, all of which have different vested interests and motivations.

I'm not saying the official story doesn't have holes in it, but the conspiracy theories don't make a whole lot of sense either.

How many people would it take to plan all the events on 9/11? Not one has came out and said they was a part of it. You'd think they would of by now.
 
I'm not sure it would have been enough Dubai Blue. The American public are reluctant to commit to boots on the ground. A huge attack striking the heart of the country left them with a feeling that they could be got at whereas before, they felt reasonably sheltered.
 
I'm not sure it would have been enough Dubai Blue. The American public are reluctant to commit to boots on the ground. A huge attack striking the heart of the country left them with a feeling that they could be got at whereas before, they felt reasonably sheltered.
We'll have to agree to disagree then, because had the buildings not collapsed, I believe we'd still be looking back on a seismic event that changed the world forever. If going to war was the motivation, hundreds of people dying as a result of two planes hitting the twin towers would have been more than enough (in my opinion, of course).
 
Until that day comes, the conspiracy theories are worthless.

Yes for those who only believe the truth as word from offcials involved. It took almost 40 years for truth to come out about Vietnaam war which started because of a false flag. So at this rate me bay we need another 24 years and when it will, it will be irrevalant except for a minority
 
Personally, I believe that all the relevant people in the USA either knew of the timings of the attacks or had more involvement.
This isn't the same as someone claiming they've seen lord lucan /loch Ness monster /elvis, it's a whole catalogue of scientific and logical unlikelyhoods that when put together, don't ring true.
In answer to your question, explosives.
How were the explosives put in place?
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top