ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 53 of 417
« First < 3434950515253 5455565763103153 > Last »
Patteeu Memorial Political Forum>911 was an inside job.
Taco John 12:06 AM 02-09-2006
After watching this, I am once and for all convinced that it was an inside job...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...81991288263801


The evidence is way too strong.
[Reply]
banyon 02:15 PM 02-14-2006
I notice you gave up on your earlier, incoherent argument. good decision.
[Reply]
Chiefs Express 02-14-2006, 02:18 PM
This message has been deleted by Chiefs Express.
B_Ambuehl 02:27 PM 02-14-2006
Originally Posted by :
Secrets concerning national defense is one thing, but to infer that the U.S. destroyed the WTC and attacked the Pentagon goes beyond anything, other than what a total raving lunatic would come up with, remotely related to common sense.
I've asked this question at least once on this thread and nobody has answered. If that's the case how do you explain the declassified northwoods document?

The only thing that isn't speculation about your story is 2 planes crashing into buildings. That's the only 100% verifiable and provable occurance in that entire story. Everything else involved in the entire "911 saga" appears to be supported by more things demonstrating your story is bullshit then proving it to be real. This goes all the way to the very beginning when you try to identify the "terrorists" that are on the planes. Additionally, the events that have happened since then do a much better job supporting the explanations by the tin foil wearing asshats instead of supporting the official story.

It's kind've like someone steals your car and you narrow your list down to 2 suspects. One of the suspects lives in Mexico and one lives in Canada. Three months later someone finds your car in Mexico. Hmmm..wonder who stole it?
[Reply]
banyon 02:30 PM 02-14-2006
Originally Posted by ChiefsExpress:
I didn't give up on the argument, I have all of the links that I need to prove that the videos were faked as well as engineering data that explains why WTC 7 fell.

It is a waste of my time and efforts to convince anyone here that already has their mind set that a conspiracy has taken place. None of the links reside inside classified areas, I'm surprised that not one of the people here have found them and posted them. If they have found them they have intentionally left them out to keep the argument and rage going.

Too bad.....
I would refer you back to post 775. That link was bogus.
[Reply]
Chiefs Express 02-14-2006, 02:33 PM
This message has been deleted by Chiefs Express.
Chiefs Express 02-14-2006, 02:35 PM
This message has been deleted by Chiefs Express.
patteeu 02:43 PM 02-14-2006
Originally Posted by B_Ambuehl:
I've asked this question at least once on this thread and nobody has answered. If that's the case how do you explain the declassified northwoods document?

The only thing that isn't speculation about your story is 2 planes crashing into buildings. That's the only 100% verifiable and provable occurance in that entire story. Everything else involved in the entire "911 saga" appears to be supported by more things demonstrating your story is bullshit then proving it to be real. This goes all the way to the very beginning when you try to identify the "terrorists" that are on the planes. Additionally, the events that have happened since then do a much better job supporting the explanations by the tin foil wearing asshats instead of supporting the official story.

It's kind've like someone steals your car and you narrow your list down to 2 suspects. One of the suspects lives in Mexico and one lives in Canada. Three months later someone finds your car in Mexico. Hmmm..wonder who stole it?
The Northwoods document doesn't contemplate the murder of thousands of US citizens. Does the fact that we were willing to risk collateral damage in the recent predator attack against al Qaeda #2 imply that we are willing to commit genocide on the Pakistani people?
[Reply]
patteeu 02:44 PM 02-14-2006
"Building 7 was a 47 story building with a steel frame. No airplane crashed into it, nor did the towers fall onto it. However..."


Taco, would you please strip that embedded audio and replace it with a link?
[Reply]
banyon 03:04 PM 02-14-2006
Originally Posted by Chiefs Express:
But only bogus if you didn't follow it out, but..who am I to try to convince you of anything. I have no credibilty and no contacts to prove you other wise. Refer to whichever post you would like to see your opinion on the matter.

I further refer you to the following:

Fu*k off, I don't care to try to prove anything to someone that is just a raving lunitic. If you really want to solve the case, do some searching on your own, but when you find the "right stuff" be sure to admit that your opinion of the conspiracy was wrong.
I copied and pasted what was from that linked page and it obviously wasn't what you wanted it to be. Don't Bitch at me because you don't know WTF you are talking about.
[Reply]
patteeu 03:06 PM 02-14-2006
"Building 7 was a 47 story building with a steel frame. No airplane crashed into it, nor did the towers fall onto it. However..."
[Reply]
Chiefs Express 02-14-2006, 03:13 PM
This message has been deleted by Chiefs Express.
patteeu 03:16 PM 02-14-2006
"Building 7 was a 47 story building with a steel frame. No airplane crashed into it, nor did the towers fall onto it. However..."
[Reply]
banyon 03:29 PM 02-14-2006
Originally Posted by patteeu:
"Building 7 was a 47 story building with a steel frame. No airplane crashed into it, nor did the towers fall onto it. However..."
Are you:

making fun of that effeminate sounding guy's voice...

contemplating your own eventual descent into insanity after this thread is over...

making a Dada-esque point about the direction of this thread...

Or a little of all three? :-)
[Reply]
banyon 03:43 PM 02-14-2006
Aww, man. Chiefs Express deleted all of his insights again.

:-)

Originally Posted by ChiefsExpress:
My information seems to have been incorrect.

Continue with your discussions.

[Reply]
Taco John 03:54 PM 02-14-2006
Originally Posted by patteeu:
There was an investigation. As long as there are clever conspiracy theorists out there who can produce internet videos, I'm not sure you'll be satisfied with any investigation.

And I'm not trying to trap you into anything, I was just asking you what I think is a reasonable question. I can't diagnose over the internet, but I do see symptoms of paranoia.


One man's paranoia is another man's patriotism.
[Reply]
Taco John 03:57 PM 02-14-2006
Originally Posted by go bo:
wtc 7 didn't have an airplane crash into it, but it was severely damaged by debris falling from the wtc tower collapses...

and it did have a raging fire fueled by kerosene tanks...

and it did have an unusual structure so that damage to one column could easily bring down the surrounding area, which then put unbearable stresses on the remaining structure, leading to it's collapse...

there is no mystery here...


Prove it. This is the first steel framed building in the hisory of the world to collapse via fire... You're telling me that damage to one column could easily bring down the surrounding are? I'm telling you prove it. Show me how this could be. How could this building be the first building in the history of steel structured buildings to go down due to fire.


There is most certainly mystery here.
[Reply]
mlyonsd 04:00 PM 02-14-2006
Originally Posted by Taco John:
Prove it. This is the first steel framed building in the hisory of the world to collapse via fire... You're telling me that damage to one column could easily bring down the surrounding are? I'm telling you prove it. Show me how this could be. How could this building be the first building in the history of steel structured buildings to go down due to fire.


There is most certainly mystery here.
Technically towers 1 and 2 were destroyed by fire. They withstood initial impact but the resulting fire weakened the structure till it collapsed under its own weight.

But you knew that.
[Reply]
Taco John 04:03 PM 02-14-2006
Originally Posted by mlyonsd:
Technically towers 1 and 2 were destroyed by fire. They withstood initial impact but the resulting fire weakened the structure till it collapsed under its own weight.

But you knew that.


Yes, of course... But given they had planes flown into them, I'll forget the evidence that exists that they were brought down demolition style and focus on the smoking gun: WTC 7
[Reply]
Logical 04:08 PM 02-14-2006
Originally Posted by Stinger:
OK let me see if I get this straight. I am coming in late in this discussion.

This video is saying that this is a cover-up by this administration that would take hundreds of people including local, state officals, and civilians to cover up and no one has come forward yet.

Yet someone in this administration shoots someone in the woods with no press around and what maybe 5 people yet they choose to disclose it?

Ohh ... Ohh ... Ohh ... I know this was all done by Karl Rove to bury the Abramoff situation.
I have watched the video twice, I heard no accusation of a cover-up, can you quote it specifically? There are many items disclosed as reasons that are not without major flaws that are not adequately explained. Just like the governments flawed report on WTC there are suggestions of what could have happened, suggestions (implosion being the main one) that make much more sense than the governments explanation for WTC 7. Also when it comes to the Pentagon something is being hidden that cannot be denied, otherwised they would have released the full tapes that they confiscated. Now what is being hidden is definitely in question, it could be a classified operation that coincidently would be revealed by those tapes, but there is an agenda for not releasing those complete videos.
[Reply]
Page 53 of 417
« First < 3434950515253 5455565763103153 > Last »
Up