• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

911 Mysteries

Can someone just give me a brief synopsis of this movie and let me know if it's just another tin foil hat conspiracy?
 
This movie doesn't really go into Dem or Dep side of things, but dives right into the physics. It attempts to explain that the official statements from the government were physically impossible.

The steal contractors that made the buildings claimed that they could withstand a b52 bomber hitting them in the original contracts.

Very interesting stuff. According to them, tower 2 fell faster than gravity. They also show footage of tower 7 which appears to have been demolished.

Then it goes into details of the new owner (within 3 months of 9/11) of the World Trade centers and states what he has gained from the disaster.

Worth looking at if you have the time.
 
vauge said:
The steal contractors that made the buildings claimed that they could withstand a b52 bomber hitting them in the original contracts.
Click to expand...

Old argument. Been done, and I don't really have toime to look into it again, but, vauge, if you believe it to be true then can you supply the following:

1) Find out the mass and velocity of a B52, then the mass and velocity of the plane that hit the towers. And was the b52 supposed to have been flying at full speed and with a near full load.
2) Evidence that the constructors said it
3) Did the constructors have any evidence to back it up? After all, you know what builders are like, they'll tell you that anything when they know it won't happen!

vauge said:
According to them, tower 2 fell faster than gravity. They also show footage of tower 7 which appears to have been demolished.
Click to expand...

No it didn't. Just out of interest: how do you make a tall tower fall faster than gravity? and why would you?

vauge said:
Then it goes into details of the new owner (within 3 months of 9/11) of the World Trade centers and states what he has gained from the disaster.
Click to expand...

OK, so they had insurace, s have I, and I tell you what: if my house burnt down, I'd be well p***ed off if the insurers told me they were suspicious just on the basis that I had extra insurance! I also know people who mnade their 'gain' form house fires and of course they made their 'gain' in three months, why shouldn't they?

I was recommended this site, which answer a lot of questions:

[URL="http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm"[/URL]
 
I've looked at the site that was refered to in the first post. Obvious promotion for the guy who has shot this film, imho.

There are dozens of sites with 9-11 revelations, hundreds (I guess) forum threads, thousands and thousands of the pics, a couple of movies. What is that special about his one?
Has he mentioned something that was not said in the great thread "9-11 was inside job" of this forum?

I doubt that he has found something new. Everything that was possible to figure out before loyal investigation was already said.

Controlled demolitions don't occur from office fires (especially if there are no signs of any fire at all as in the case of WTC7).
 
arussian said:
What is that special about his one?
Has he mentioned something that was not said in the great thread "9-11 was inside job" of this forum?
Click to expand...

None of the info was new to me, I just feel that the method of presentation is more appropriate for the general public; not as in your face as say Alex Jones.
 
In the number 2 movie they use explosions as evidence for their conspiracy theory. But isn't it possible that the same terrorist group who flew the planes into the towers knew that the buildings wouldn't collapse just from the impact of a plane crash so they planted explosives on strategic places inside and outside the building. That would explain much of the so called "evidence" for conspiracy theories.
 
9/11 wasn't a terrorist attack. It was a military operation.

...the "war on terrorism" is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The "war on terrorism" is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the "New World Order", dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex.

September 11, 2001 provides a justification for waging a war without borders. Washington's agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American Empire to facilitate complete U.S. corporate control, while installing within America the institutions of the Homeland Security State.

CRG Books and Videos
Click to expand...
If it was terrorism, they would have targeted Disneyland instead of the Pentagon and WTO. Although, I'm still not convinced that our government was complicit in it's planning. I do believe they used 9/11 more as an opportunity, than a tragedy.
 
Why is it so far-fetched that Al-Qaeda would target the WTC and the Pentagon. They were targetting our way of life and form of government, both of which are exemplified in democratic and representative government and capitalistic economic policies. Disneyland would have served in no way to further their message: that our country is a corrupt monopolistic world power. Disneyland would have just made Americans HATE almost every Middle-Eastern person in existence.
 
9/11 wasn't part of a conspiracy. if there were explosions planted in the towers, how are thousands of people working in the buildings not going to see huge explosions being transported throughout the city. and the smoke that is shot horizontally from the tower when it collapses is not from an explosion. it was caused by the weight of the plane on top of the building. also, when people say that the tower could not have collapsed from just the plane and fires, do they realize that the plane broke some of the metal structure inside of the building, that the fires would weaken the metal, and that there was a huge plane filled with people near the top of the building. i'm not an expert at building collapses, but i think that might be just enough to cause the tower to collapse.
 
vauge said:
The steal contractors that made the buildings claimed that they could withstand a b52 bomber hitting them in the original contracts.
Click to expand...

And they did withstand the planes hitting them.

It was the fire weakening the structure causing the upper floors to colapse that brought the building down.

vauge said:
Very interesting stuff. According to them, tower 2 fell faster than gravity. They also show footage of tower 7 which appears to have been demolished.
Click to expand...

How? did they turn up the gravity under them or something?

I couldn't get the vireo to load, I'll try to watch it later.
 
okay honestly, i'm not a big fan of the us government. but i don't believe that it was staged.

ive seen the loose change movie (2nd edition) and after seeing it i felt at first "f*** me, jihad on bush!" but after further investigation i realized that the movie contained so much bull (i.e. the pentagon being hit by a missile) that i have trouble believing any of the 9/11 conspiracies.

however one can easily say that the white house benefited from 9/11 it helped them get into iraq, which is something they planned long before 9/11.
 
Doremus Jessup said:
Best video that I have seen by far.
http://www.911weknow.com/911-mysteries-movie.html
Click to expand...

On a related note, i would like to know if any of you know of anymore information on the theory of the "plane" striking the 5gon was an actual plane or a missle. i have seen things such as Gas station security camera's tapes being stolen, never being released, the shrapnel of the "plane" being left on the ground not matching up to the supposed plane that struck the tower. however i dont know much else.
 
There was one of the surviellance tapes released the other day, but nobody heard about, it didn't show anything except a fireball, but it was a weird angle. I think it was from the Marriott. Try youtube.
 
Doremus Jessup said:
There was one of the surviellance tapes released the other day, but nobody heard about, it didn't show anything except a fireball, but it was a weird angle. I think it was from the Marriott. Try youtube.
Click to expand...

yeah that just came out a day or two ago. there was also this video that i saw on the internet that barely anyone (i think) knows about. it was from a helicopter above and shows a large plane-like figure crashing into the pentagon. i saw it a while ago but forgot the link. if i find it i will post it.
 
yeah and people in the pentagon saw a plane hit the building... so regardless if you believe that it was staged you shouldnt buy all crap you see on the internet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom