• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • 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.

How Bush's incompetence let 9/11 happen

there was cam that caught the whole thing on tape. It showed a plane hitting the pentagon. Therefore, a plane must've hit the pentagon. How is that so difficult to understand?
 
Again did you bother to read my response to you?
 


You've watch Guillagans Island have you not?

They're making radios out of cocunuts, instead of making rafts out of wood.
 
Sir_Alec said:
I'm not completely denying that a plane could have hit the pentagon . I'm just questioning the evidence.
Click to expand...

Then get the fuc*k out of this children's thread and go to "9/11 was an inside job". You know, that place that I drove you out of. And yet you still feel compelled to go shout this bullshit somewhere else. Face the big dog bro. Me. Let's do this. 9/11. I'm not coming back here. You know, Sir Alec, you seem like a smart, funny guy. But I don't tolerate bullshit on this matter. Go read the 9/11 thread and see what becomes of people like you. I've allready answered all your bullshit in that thread. The simple fact of the matter is, I own this topic. I have a place. It's allready been posted. I'm not gonna chase after fools when all your fool bullshit is allready answered there. By now it's pretty much just go see this post number, or that post number. Don't fuc*k with me on this topic. I'll beat you down. Present your so-called evidence there. If you fuc*king dare. You got beat there and you chose to go somewhere else with this bullshit. Tells me you're done.
 
jfuh said:
Again did you bother to read my response to you?
Click to expand...

It's been kind of fun reading your words. Go to the 9/11 thread and figure out for yourself how much you don't know. jfuh. You have no business speaking to this topic.

What I don't get is that this (my posts) have been here for over a year, and still the rookies try to come like they know something. When you jerks see anything that trumps what I say in the 9/11 thread, lemme know.
 
teacher said:
It's been kind of fun reading your words. Go to the 9/11 thread and figure out for yourself how much you don't know. jfuh. You have no business speaking to this topic.
Click to expand...
I have every bit as much right to speak here as anyone else. The thread was started, and I responded. Conspiracy theory was posted, I responded. So why have I no business speaking on this topic.
 

:smash: I'm not convincing you and you ain't convincing me.
 
Sir_Alec,


I'm not convincing you and you ain't convincing me.
Click to expand...

Come on.... If you can't prove your point what's the use of resistance?
 
jfuh said:
I have every bit as much right to speak here as anyone else. The thread was started, and I responded. Conspiracy theory was posted, I responded. So why have I no business speaking on this topic.
Click to expand...
Right. Teacher should know better. You do the flaming around here. How dare teacher show you your own medicine.
 
Sir Alec must think that when planes hit re-enforced concrete buildings, that the plane will leave the outline of its fuselage in the building, like something out of a Tom and Jerry cartoon.

Ha. Ever stop to think that due to the momentum of the plane, that the wings sheared off, and actually pushed through, the hole created by the plane's nose.

Lastly Aluminum burns, if you get it hot enough, it will combust. Anyone remember the shiny Sheffield, during the Falklands war?
 
jfuh, Sir Alec.

It's covered in the 9/11 thread. So some post their weak azz bullshit in one place and then when they get handed their azz choose to go somewhere else with the same weak azz bullshit. I cover the Pentagon, tower #7, just friggin all of it there. Is it predominate on me to follow you around and put fires out, or should you go there and prove me wrong with what I have had posted there for a long time? I'm not gonna spend too much time chasing you people around. I've said it allready.

War on Terror. 9/11 was an inside job.

Really Sir Alec, to get whupped in one spot and change venues is just friggin weak.

Any fuc*king time. Let's talk about the SCIENCE of falling buildings.
 
KCConservative said:
Right. Teacher should know better. You do the flaming around here. How dare teacher show you your own medicine.
Click to expand...
Ahh, so you too feel that 9/11 was an inside job?
 
teacher said:
Any fuc*king time. Let's talk about the SCIENCE of falling buildings.
Click to expand...
I gave both statments, the science and sources to my position. I've read your posts but found a lack of source thereof.
 
Let's take a moment, and assume 9/11 was a government conspiracy. What would the motive be, then? To "justify" the loss of thousands of people, as well as billions of dollars of damage, the government's gains would have to be extraordinary. Can you think of anything that would fit the description? No? Well guess what......niether can I. When you can give me a motive, then we'll discuss conspiracies.

Now, let's suppose it was a plane that hit the Pentagon. Imagine the scene at the Pentagon on the fateful day...on one hand, you've got this wall made of reinforced concrete, and backed by quite a bit of building material. It's stationary. On the other hand, there's this aerodynamic object, by contrast extremely fragile, yet travelling at a high velocity. The nose hits the side of the building, of course crashing right through. The main body of the airplane continued on through the hole, perhaps dislodging additional building material, but for the most part, building on the initial hole. When the wings hit on either side of the hole. One of three things can happen:

a) The wings are vaporized instantly due to the plane's velocity.

Not likely. You'd be hard-pressed to make a commercial plane go fast enough to cause several feet of aluminum to simply disappear, no matter what you hit.

b) The wings hold together, and continue straight through, along with the main fuselage, making a cartoonish-styled sillouette in the side of the building.

Also unlikely. The wings were designed to stand up to the incredible inertia of accelerating hundreds of miles an hour, while taking the brunt of that air resistance. They were not, however made to survive having an equal force shove them in the opposite direction. Air's powerful, but not that powerful, and the additional construction materials needed to make the plane stand up to this kind of force would easily render the plane unable to get airborne.

c) The foremost sections of the wings go through with the fuselage, but the farther-out parts break off, and carry with them the entire wing, and perhaps part of the fuselage. The wings are utterly shredded, and small parts are strewn everywhere, yet they fall inside the building due to their inertia.

The most likely occurrance, in my opinion. And if this is the case, you wouldn't be able to see much debris outside the Pentagon, such as in the picture here. And only their own personnel would be allowed inside, where the debris could be seen. In summary, the pictures posted here could easily be true, without a big conspiracy.

If you insist it was a missile that hit, try comparing the hole to what the missile would have to be. The damage was mostly caused by impact, not an explosion. If a missile had exploded, you'd see debris everywhere, including outside the building. It'd be hard to localize the blast of a warhead large enough to make that whole within such an area as to create that picture.

~Tsereve
 
jfuh said:
Ahh, so you too feel that 9/11 was an inside job?
Click to expand...
Yes, absolutely. I think you and Kidrocks planned the whole thing.
 
KCConservative said:
Yes, absolutely. I think you and Kidrocks planned the whole thing.
Click to expand...
Guilty as charged, cause him and I just had a lot to gain from it. :sarcasticclap
 
jfuh said:
I gave both statments, the science and sources to my position. I've read your posts but found a lack of source thereof.
Click to expand...

Then go to the "9/11 was an inside job" and play with the adults. BTW slick. I don't source. Don't need to.

And...

Sir Alec, I beat your brains in there, no reason to do it here also.

I used the gavel long time ago. Just learn that one did you?

Waste of a thread. I cover all this in great detail in the "War on Terror" forum. Thread, "9/11 was an inside job". Get a life, you lose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…