Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
9/11 was an inside job. Change my mind.
9/11 was an inside job. Change my mind.
By Vegas
22 Jul 2023 12:05 pm in No Holds Barred Political Forum
12 Aug 2023 9:29 pm
There is this great divide, in America today.Kobia2 » 12 Aug 2023, 7:54 pm » wrote: ↑ Bin Laden's body should have been handled & disposed of with all the respect & dignity he deserved... It should have been wrapped in Bacon -- cremated -- then had his ashes blown into an open sewer ditch by a farting Camel.
Are you of the tribe of the Lord, or of the heathen?
Here’s to you, my dear angel mother, who made me memorize this poem, one of the greatest poems of the English language. She had this quilted pink robe, and not one trace of age on her face, when I learned this sixty years ago:
Abou Ben Adhem (may his tribe increase!)
Awoke one night from a deep dream of peace
,And saw, within the moonlight in his room,
Making it rich, and like a lily in bloom,
An angel writing in a book of gold:
Exceeding peace had made Ben Adhem bold,
And to the presence in the room he said,
,"What writest thou?"
The vision raised its head,
And with a look made of all sweet accord,Answered,
"The names of those who love the Lord."
"And is mine one?" said Abou.
"Nay, not so,"Replied the angel.
Abou spoke more low,But cheerly still; and said,
I pray thee, then,Write me as one that loves his fellow men."
The angel wrote, and vanished.
The next night came again with a great wakening light,
And showed the names whom love of God had blest,
And lo! Ben Adhem's name led all the rest.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abou_Ben_Adhem_(poem)
—-
Every word, of every line, she made me memorize when I was five years old, and could not read any of the words.
My father said essentially the same thing when he’d often say, the best Christians he’d ever known, had never darkened a church house door.
Christ loves those, who love his sheep.
12 Aug 2023 9:36 pm
80 cameras and not one of them showed anything? Come on. Then what would be the point of confiscating them if their content was of no value?Kobia2 » 12 Aug 2023, 1:50 pm » wrote: ↑
What were the security cameras mounted on buildings directed at?....... You are assuming there were high speed cameras pointed at the sky to capture an incoming attack.... They were most likely pointed at parking lots, pathways, roads, building entrances / exits, and other areas closer to ground level...
I dismiss it because it is 'claimed' to be the case. Proving me wrong should be easy. All you have to do is show me the plane wreck at the pentagon. You showed me pics of a wreckage. There is no evidence that was from the pentagon. It could be from anywhere. There was only one pic you showed me that had a piece in the lawn. Two problems: 1. If you look at the background, the crews already put out most of the fire, it was just smoke. That means That pic could have been taken up to a couple hours after the crash. 2. Look at that piece. It looks like it was washed and even waxed. Hell, my car doesn't look that clean after I wash and wax it.You were shown plenty of physical evidence, which of course you insist was planted or fabricated... PLane debris from a Boeing 757, human remains from Flight 77 identified through DNA, the Flight Records of Flight 77, personal effects belonging to passengers & crew of Flight 77 identified by loved ones and returned to the victim's families At one point you conceded you were unaware and had not seen the 5 downed Street Light poles... You were shown photographs of the downed poles, along with a schematic of their positioning in relation to the Plane's path along with the distance between them which proved only an Aircraft with a wide enough wingspan like a 757 could have ,,, There isn't a Missile in existence today let alone in 2001 that had such a wingspan.. All of this is physical evidence which you deny or dismiss, but you accept & embrace alternative possibilities without any physical evidence at all...
This is what would convince me:
1. Pics of wreckage outside the pentagon such as pieces of the tail or wings.
2. Burn marks on the ground where the official 9/11 report claimed the plane hit before it hit the wall.
3. A credible reason as to why all 80 cameras were confiscated.
The claim is that a plane hit the pentagon. Billions of people are claiming that. What I claim could have happened is irrelevant. The burden of proof is on the original claim. Not me.Your confused.... You have made one claim after another which you could not prove which I clearly pointed out to you... Again, the Insider-Jobbers think they are the safe position where they can sling **** at the walls hoping something sticks, and when it doesn't (which it never does) they simply throw more.... That's how you think it ought to work.
Blackvegatble's hypcorisy summed up in one post:
[/size]
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...
From which you are running...
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...
From which you are running...
12 Aug 2023 9:38 pm
Bruce » 12 Aug 2023, 1:33 pm » wrote: ↑ MGM Grand Fire
—
The fire was limited to the first floor,[15] but the burning material created toxic fumes and smoke, which ascended throughout the hotel tower via vertical shafts (elevators and stairwells) and seismic joints, causing the majority of the deaths.[16] More than 200 firefighters responded to the fire,[17] and some reported having to crawl through the dark and over "mounds of stuff" trying to extinguish the fire. It was later determined that the "mounds" were deceased guests and staff near an elevator bank.[6] The Las Vegas fire department operated separately from the county fire department; the latter served the Las Vegas Strip, so city firefighters were unfamiliar with the MGM's layout, including fire escape routes. This hindered the rescue effort.[18]
——
Those steel and glass towers are over engineered.
The walls are glass, and the steel skeletons sway in the wind or else they’d come down. They all have automatic sprinkler systems, and emergency stair exits, all over the world, they share that.
What’s only happened one time in the history of steel and glass towers happened on 9/11.
Two planes, converted into the largest cruise missiles in world history, full of aviation fuel, over 200,000 pounds each, hit the two tallest towers on earth at 530 miles an hour, so high no ladder trucks can rescue anyone above the target point.
By the way, Deep State or Camel Jockeys, it was a perfect hit on both towers.
The sprinklers can’t put out a plane load of jet fuel. Not even close to put it out.
So Johnny here comes the cavalry, the best fire department on earth.
—-
343 FDNY firefighters died responding to the attacks on September 11, 2001. All of the 100,000 first responders and 400,000 other people who were working, living, and studying in Lower Manhattan on and after 9/11 have a higher incidence of 68 different types of cancer and many respiratory illnesses
——
So now two towers have came down and killed 343 firemen and converted every one of the others left alive to stay the **** out of burning steel and glass towers.
And when they came down that busted all the water mains and the sprinklers in WTC7 started drizzling.
They pumped a lot from pumper trucks, but the fires were just too hot to extinguish.
So they evacuated America’s Mayor Rudy and let it come down
The sprinklers at the MGM were outdated and they didn't work. The point I am making is that you can't find one building fire that caused a building to just fall down. They burn down.
Blackvegatble's hypcorisy summed up in one post:
[/size]
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...
From which you are running...
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...
From which you are running...
12 Aug 2023 10:09 pm
Vegas » 12 Aug 2023, 9:36 pm » wrote: ↑ 80 cameras and not one of them showed anything? Come on. Then what would be the point of confiscating them if their content was of no value?
I dismiss it because it is 'claimed' to be the case. Proving me wrong should be easy. All you have to do is show me the plane wreck at the pentagon. You showed me pics of a wreckage. There is no evidence that was from the pentagon. It could be from anywhere. There was only one pic you showed me that had a piece in the lawn. Two problems: 1. If you look at the background, the crews already put out most of the fire, it was just smoke. That means That pic could have been taken up to a couple hours after the crash. 2. Look at that piece. It looks like it was washed and even waxed. Hell, my car doesn't look that clean after I wash and wax it.
This is what would convince me:
1. Pics of wreckage outside the pentagon such as pieces of the tail or wings.
2. Burn marks on the ground where the official 9/11 report claimed the plane hit before it hit the wall.
3. A credible reason as to why all 80 cameras were confiscated.
The claim is that a plane hit the pentagon. Billions of people are claiming that. What I claim could have happened is irrelevant. The burden of proof is on the original claim. Not me.
Are you really this **** stupid or are you just trolling Kobia and Z09? I'm guessing the latter.
12 Aug 2023 10:11 pm
Rock » 12 Aug 2023, 10:09 pm » wrote: ↑ Are you really this **** stupid or are you just trolling Kobia and Z09? I'm guessing the latter.
Translation: You got nothing, so you decided to project your ignorance onto me.
Okay got it.
Blackvegatble's hypcorisy summed up in one post:
[/size]
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...
From which you are running...
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...
From which you are running...
12 Aug 2023 10:29 pm
Vegas » 12 Aug 2023, 10:11 pm » wrote: ↑ Translation: You got nothing, so you decided to project your ignorance onto me.
Okay got it.
I guess that answers my question. You're not trolling the other members of the forum.
12 Aug 2023 10:50 pm
Rock » 12 Aug 2023, 10:29 pm » wrote: ↑ I guess that answers my question. You're not trolling the other members of the forum.
Well, you could try answering my questions. Z09 keeps running from them. My questions are fair, they aren't obscure or ridiculous.
1. Out of 80 cameras, how come there is no footage of the plane hitting the pentagon? That one video of a white blurry thing is ridiculous.
2. The official 9/11 report stated that the plane hit the ground right before it hit the wall. Where are the marks on the grass? There aren't even any burn marks.
3. And finally, wait for it....wait for it...drum roll...where is the plane?
Blackvegatble's hypcorisy summed up in one post:
[/size]
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...
From which you are running...
Blackvegetable » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑7 minutes ago
Very simple questions...
From which you are running...
12 Aug 2023 11:02 pm
They did work. The fire was put out on on the first floor. The MGM fire was out a long time before the heat compromised the steel support beams.Vegas » 12 Aug 2023, 9:38 pm » wrote: ↑ The sprinklers at the MGM were outdated and they didn't work. The point I am making is that you can't find one building fire that caused a building to just fall down. They burn down.
And every other fire in a modern steel and glass tower all over the world has always turned out the same, the sprinklers and the fire trucks win and extinguish the fire quickly.
But even if the Deep State took down WTC7 they waited eight hours. During that eight hours the NYFD fought a losing battle with pumper trucks to fight a fire where the remains of WTC 1 and 2 made it so hot they couldn’t fight the fire from that side.
12 Aug 2023 11:03 pm
All of these questions were addressed by Kobia. You just chose to ignore them.Vegas » 12 Aug 2023, 10:50 pm » wrote: ↑ Well, you could try answering my questions. Z09 keeps running from them. My questions are fair, they aren't obscure or ridiculous.
1. Out of 80 cameras, how come there is no footage of the plane hitting the pentagon? That one video of a white blurry thing is ridiculous.
2. The official 9/11 report stated that the plane hit the ground right before it hit the wall. Where are the marks on the grass? There aren't even any burn marks.
3. And finally, wait for it....wait for it...drum roll...where is the plane?
12 Aug 2023 11:08 pm
12 Aug 2023 11:33 pm
Vegas
80 cameras and not one of them showed anything? Come on. Then what would be the point of confiscating them if their content was of no value?
Why would you not expect any camera or video footage of the attack on the Pentagon to be confiscated for investigation into what happened, and use as evidence in the 9/11 trials?.... As of 2022, there are still 5 detainees at Gitmo charged with plotting & orchestrating the 9/11 attacks... You insist that because you haven't been shown all the photos or anything else being held as evidence in this case, that it simply does not exist... At present after all these years, it looks as though plea agreements may be reached for some of them to avoid death penalty sentences.. Once the cases are all settled I agree all evidence should be made public..
I dismiss it because it is 'claimed' to be the case. Proving me wrong should be easy. All you have to do is show me the plane wreck at the pentagon. You showed me pics of a wreckage. There is no evidence that was from the pentagon. It could be from anywhere. There was only one pic you showed me that had a piece in the lawn. Two problems: 1. If you look at the background, the crews already put out most of the fire, it was just smoke. That means That pic could have been taken up to a couple hours after the crash. 2. Look at that piece. It looks like it was washed and even waxed. Hell, my car doesn't look that clean after I wash and wax it.
You were very easily & repeatedly proven wrong and will continue to be so...... You were shown numerous pieces of Aircraft debris from both inside and outside the Pentagon... You were shown photos of the Heliport Tarmac which was covered with small pieces of building and Aircraft debris.... The mostly hollow wings which were much lighter than the Planes fuselage shattered into small pieces when striking the building, and the tail remained attached and also entered through the Pentagon wall... This was immediately followed by a huge explosion -- witnesses saw this.. You were shown a photo of a Compressor Disk Hub from a Rolls Royce RB211-535E4B engine, recovered at the scene.. You were provided a photo of a Combustion casing for the engine's fuel injectors --- again from a Rolls Royce RB211-535E4B... You were shown a photo of the engine's Turbine compressor shaft... You were shown photos of the Plane's damaged Flight Recorders -- You have been shown photos of pieces of shredded aluminum with yellow Primer on them which is used on Aircrafts... You were shown a photo of one of the PLane's Wheel Hubs from a Boeing 757's landing gear....
On the heliport thousands of tiny shards of airplane wreckage cover the ground, 9/11/01 — Photo by jamie McIntyre ©2001
https://aerospaceweb.org/question/consp ... 0265.shtml
https://aerospaceweb.org/question/consp ... 0290.shtml
757 Wheel Hub in Pentagon debris.
This is what would convince me:
2. Burn marks on the ground where the official 9/11 report claimed the plane hit before it hit the wall.
This is the 9/11 Report in its entirety.... Show me where it says such in the Report... https://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
3. A credible reason as to why all 80 cameras were confiscated.
Read above... This was explained.
The claim is that a plane hit the pentagon. Billions of people are claiming that. What I claim could have happened is irrelevant. The burden of proof is on the original claim. Not me.
12 Aug 2023 11:47 pm
This is what would convince me:
2. Burn marks on the ground where the official 9/11 report claimed the plane hit before it hit the wall.
This is the 9/11 Report in its entirety.... Show me where it says such in the Report... https://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
3. A credible reason as to why all 80 cameras were confiscated.
Read above... This was explained.
The claim is that a plane hit the pentagon. Billions of people are claiming that. What I claim could have happened is irrelevant. The burden of proof is on the original claim. Not me.
——-
All 80 cameras were confiscated and only a blur shows on the one aimed at the impact point.
That could have been a 530 mph 250,000 pound cruise missile piloted by remote control, or a 757.
Darn good shooting, wasn’t it?
2. Burn marks on the ground where the official 9/11 report claimed the plane hit before it hit the wall.
This is the 9/11 Report in its entirety.... Show me where it says such in the Report... https://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
3. A credible reason as to why all 80 cameras were confiscated.
Read above... This was explained.
The claim is that a plane hit the pentagon. Billions of people are claiming that. What I claim could have happened is irrelevant. The burden of proof is on the original claim. Not me.
——-
All 80 cameras were confiscated and only a blur shows on the one aimed at the impact point.
That could have been a 530 mph 250,000 pound cruise missile piloted by remote control, or a 757.
Darn good shooting, wasn’t it?
13 Aug 2023 12:00 am
1. At the time of the 9/11 Attacks in 2001, the US Air Force had only 1 such bomb carrying Drone.... This was the early MQ-1 Predator, which could fire a Hellfire Missile.... The Drone was 26.8 ft long, with a 41.8 wingspan ----was powered by a Rotax Propeller Engine... It had a top speed of approximately 135 MPH.... Do you honestly believe people (including Pilots and Air Traffic Controllers) mistook this for a large commercial Airlines?Vegas » 12 Aug 2023, 9:19 pm » wrote: ↑ One of two reasons:
1. I still maintain that perhaps it could have been a drone carrying explosives. They are white with wings, and could easily be mistaken as a plane. Especially to anyone who is trying to drive and can't look for longer than a second. Also, drones are not as sturdy as a Boeing 757. They could easily crumple and dintegrate upon impact into nothing. A plane? Not a chance. There would be some debris around the lawn, easily.
2. Crisis actors.
2. Crisis Actors?..... Please tell me you're joking... LOL
13 Aug 2023 12:44 am
Anyone wanns buy a watch real cheap...right here on the street ?
ultraliberals are not happy unless they are obsessing about something.
.
.
.
.
.
.
13 Aug 2023 4:00 am
Not by burning jet fuel, those engines are designed for that...
In memory of Pumpkins
13 Aug 2023 4:30 am
Steel begins to fail at 1300 degrees and at 1500 degrees will fail.Jantje_Smit » 13 Aug 2023, 4:00 am » wrote: ↑ Not by burning jet fuel, those engines are designed for that...
https://www.edtengineers.com/blog-post/ ... ects-steelReduction of StrengthAs the temperature of the steel increases above room temperature, the strength of the steel decreases:
- At 204°C (400°F), carbon steel retains approximately 90 percent of its yield strength.
- At 427°C (800°F), it retains approximately 60 percent of its yield strength.
- At 566°C (1050°F), carbon steel only retains approximately 50 percent of its yield strength. The loss of strength due to elevated temperatures is often temporary. Permanent Changes in the Steel MicrostructureIf heated to sufficiently elevated temperatures, between 704°C (1300°F) and 843°C (1550°F) for most structural steel, and rapidly cooled by suppression water during firefighting operations, some of the steel's microstructure will be transformed into martensite. Martensite is a hard, but brittle phase of steel. If the exposure temperature of the steel is less than the temperature at which this transformation takes place, then the mechanical properties of the steel essentially return to their pre‐fire values after cooling, depending on the time of exposure and cool down rate.
13 Aug 2023 4:31 am
They spelled it out perfectly... they needed a new Pearl Harbor to make their neocon dreams come true..Sumela » 12 Aug 2023, 11:01 am » wrote: ↑ So why did they do this??
That seems much more important....THE GOAL, not the act.
The cold war was over, no more USSR and evil commies to justify unlimited budgets, spying powers, new and better military toys etc.. a new enemy was needed so they created one.. a nice war on terrorism, the patriot act, a hysterical and compliant media to keep the people afraid, propaganda Goebbels could only dream of.. the Manhattan Reichstag fire is a perfect description...
In memory of Pumpkins
13 Aug 2023 4:50 am
The truth —-Marinus van der Lubbe was arrested in the Reichstag building. He was a 24 year-old vagrant and had just arrived in Berlin from Leiden. Van der Lubbe was interviewed by the Gestapo and he admitted setting fire to the Reichstag but claimed that he had no connections with the KPD or the SDP. However, back home in the Netherlands, he had supported a tiny Dutch political group called the "Rade or International Communists". On his arrival in Germany he talked to many people and was shocked to discover that the "workers will do nothing against a system which grants freedom to one side and metes out oppression to the other". He decided that since "the workers would do nothing, I had to do something by myself".Jantje_Smit » 13 Aug 2023, 4:31 am » wrote: ↑ They spelled it out perfectly... they needed a new Pearl Harbor to make their neocon dreams come true..
The cold war was over, no more USSR and evil commies to justify unlimited budgets, spying powers, new and better military toys etc.. a new enemy was needed so they created one.. a nice war on terrorism, the patriot act, a hysterical and compliant media to keep the people afraid, propaganda Goebbels could only dream of.. the Manhattan Reichstag fire is a perfect description...
On 23rd March, 1933, the German Reichstag passed the Enabling Bill. This banned the German Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party from taking part in future election campaigns. This was followed by Nazi officials being put in charge of all local government in the provinces (7th April), trades unions being abolished, their funds taken and their leaders put in prison (2nd May), and a law passed making the Nazi Party the only legal political party in Germany (14th July).—-
Everybody you ever heard use the “Reichstag Fire” in your life as a synonym for a false flag ignores the fact a communist confessed to setting the fire, along with overwhelming corroborating evidence he in fact set the fire.
For 80 years sensationalist conspiracy theorists have made a living arguing the Nazis burned their holy of holies themselves.
13 Aug 2023 4:53 am
I already told you that 1 frame a second is ****, it's the Pentagon ffs, even the local McDonalds can afford something better than that.. and I posted pictures of the other cameras, you can see where they are located and what they should have captured.. what brand are they.. lol.. please.. oh, and why did the (fake) FBI confiscate the security tapes of the buildings overlooking the Pentagon...Kobia2 » 12 Aug 2023, 11:23 am » wrote: ↑ Everything that doesn't support your belief that a hijacked Boeing 757 Flight 77 was shot down or forced landed enroute to attacking the Pentagon --- only to seamlessly be replaced by a US MIssile that attacked the same target is fake...
I already told you the Cameras at that time which would have captured the Plane only operated at 1 frame per second... This is what was shown in the released Vid of 77 impacting the Pentagon. At one point you posted a picture of cameras that were on the building that day.... Explain / prove which of these should have captured a clear photo of Flight 77.... What type of cameras were they?... What was their precise positioning, and what were they directed at?... You are assuming those cameras should have captured the precise photographic or video footage & evidence you are demanding ...Prove it.. Be fair, even if the Feds (or anyone else) had & released such photos or footage, it would simply be another piece of evidence that the inside-jobbers would insist was planted, manipulated, faked etc...
Be fair, something seriously smells about that, time for you to admit it...
In memory of Pumpkins
13 Aug 2023 5:42 am
Building 7 went down because Larry Silverstein (the guy who leased the TWC towers and had just updated his insurance policy to include terrorism, I'm not kidding you) told them to pull it...sootedupCyndi » 12 Aug 2023, 12:20 pm » wrote: ↑ I've been a bit more interested in why building 7 went down. To date i see no info on that? Is there any?
I lost all the good conspiracy links I had on 9/11 but I found this..
'Pull the Building!' Proof That 9/11 Was a Conspiracy
On PBS's aired report "Rebuilding America's Defenses," developer and leaseholder of the World Trade Center towers Larry Silverstein admitted "I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire … and I said, 'Well, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life … maybe the smartest thing to do is, is 'pull' it … and they made that decision to 'pull' … uh, and we watched the building collapse."
In memory of Pumpkins
Who is online
In total there are 4304 users online :: 8 registered, 15 bots, and 4281 guests
Registered users: Blackvegetable, RebelGator, Beekeeper, PhiloBeddo, SouthernFried, Deezer Shoove, sole, Huey
Bots: Baiduspider, TTD-Content, NING, CriteoBot, Bolt, ADmantX, proximic, DuckDuckBot, YandexBot, Mediapartners-Google, curl/7, Googlebot, facebookexternalhit, Applebot, bingbot