9/11 conspiracy theories

[StarSparkle]

You'll be waiting a long time brooksy. It was the lizards. Or little green men. Or Elvis.

 

Or something.

 

You seem utterly OBSESSED with lizards, Halibut - you've mentioned them in practically every post you've made on this thread over the last day or two. Why's that then? Do you see a lot of them around? Perhaps you should compare notes with David Icke?

 

StarSparkle

[Halibut]

You seem utterly OBSESSED with lizards, Halibut - you've mentioned them in practically every post you've made on this thread over the last day or two. Why's that then? Do you see a lot of them around? Perhaps you should compare notes with David Icke?

 

StarSparkle

 

I just find it hard to take seriously anyone who cites 'evidence' from people who believe that lizards rule the earth...don't you?

[StarSparkle]

I just find it hard to take seriously anyone who cites 'evidence' from people who believe that lizards rule the earth...don't you?

 

What you're doing though is tarring everyone who has genuine concerns about 9/11 with the same brush as the extreme 'alternative investigators', SOME of whom do hold somewhat outlandish beliefs that suggest their hold on reality isn't too strong.

 

I object to your attempted ridiculing of normal, ordinary people with questioning minds who have some doubts about the line they're being fed by the authorities.

 

Isn't that what people in a democracy are supposed to do - question their leaders and hold them to account? They've proved over and over again they'll happily lie their faces off to us. They can't be trusted to tell the public the truth willingly, so can't be surprised when some members of the public don't automatically take the official line as being the absolute, gospel truth, and carry out some investigations of their own.

 

Do us all a favour on this thread, Halibut, and lay off the insults. If your case is strong enough, you shouldn't need to resort to such low tactics.

 

StarSparkle

[Tony]

lol, now that is funny, your answer for a crime scene not to be investigated. [/url]

No I didn't say that at all. I didn't even imply it. You said that there should be some sort of test to see if the explosion damaged the fire protection, when I stated that it is quite obvious that 80 tons of aircraft smashing through a structure would quite clearly do just that.

 

You're the one saying that it couldn't / wouldn't. What test would you think should be carried out to prove that the fire proofing would stay in place?

 

I do not claim to be an expert of anything on here, my source for this one is Kevin R Ryan from Health Laboratories, linked to Underwriters Laboratories inc who provided the steel.

 

Look for yourself

 

Firstly, they didn't provide the steel or steelwork. They didn't even erect it, and they certainly didn't design it. They are a testing lab, nothing more, nothing less. Facts are important here venger.

 

Next, I'm fully aware of Mr Ryan - the bloke who was sacked for being a bit nutty and making claims that were riddled with holes.

 

Funnily enough the structural engineer who conceptualised, designed and led the design team seems happy that the structure failed. He's alive and well, still practising just around the corner from the WTC site with access to the original plans and people who designed it... despite what some of the more fanciuful 'truth seekers' would insist.

 

 

venger, you really are swimming against the logical and scientific tide.

[KenH]

What you're doing though is tarring everyone who has genuine concerns about 9/11 with the same brush as the extreme 'alternative investigators', SOME of whom do hold somewhat outlandish beliefs that suggest their hold on reality isn't too strong.

 

I have "genuine concerns" about 11/9, I am concerned that thousands of people were murdered by terrorists but all the fruitcakes out there are trying to blame someone else for it. How might the families feel if people hold meetings were they trot out the same old lame, discredited, evidence and then make vague suggestions of cover-ups and conspiracies?

 

It is a fact that every peiece of lame evidence provided by the fruitcakes can be discredited. If you look through these pages you will find that thare are numerous explanations of what happened, and yet the fruitcakes wait a few more pages and then repeat them.

 

Reasonable people have to look at what they saw on that terrible day and come to the conclusion that 4 aircraft were hijacked and crashed. The aircraft were chosen because they would have almost full fuel at the point they were taken over. The targets they choose were high profile and easy to spot. There was no real air defence because there never is (or at least never was), because we have been watching the routes the russians will take not watching civilian airports. The aircraft didn't disapear from RADAR nor was there any reason why an exercise taken place in other parts of ATC would make any difference. Many aircraft quite regularly take part in exercises in canada, in fact last time I was in Goose Bay it was full of Luftwaffe fighters. When the aircraft crashed they caused substantial damage and then started huge fires, tons of fuel dropped to lower floors and caused other fires. The fires, coming after the crashes caused structural failure and the buildings fell down. Lots of people died.

[venger]

 

 

venger, you really are swimming against the logical and scientific tide.

 

We are clearly never going to agree on this, I just find it interesting that you happily ignore most of my questions, yet I have generally answered most of yours even when I said I am trying to work as a vehicle rater than a primary researcher.

 

You still will not admit there there is even a reasonable doubt.

 

You are a man of the law, are you a defense lawyer per chance ?

[Tony]

No venger, I haven't ignored you at all. In fact I've answered you quite fully, often citing scientific analysis, provided technical knowledge, called on real life industry experience, and provided evidence that proves 'truth seekers' utterly wrong.

 

Didn't you notice that or do you just stick your fingers in your ears ago chant lalalalalalalala when you don't like what I write? It certainly feels like it.

[Halibut]

 

Do us all a favour on this thread, Halibut, and lay off the insults. If your case is strong enough, you shouldn't need to resort to such low tactics.

 

StarSparkle

 

Which insults? I think you'll find that what I've been doing is very gentle teasing at best. Besides, I'm sure venger et al can look after themselves without your (doubtless well intentioned) interference.

[venger]

No venger, I haven't ignored you at all. In fact I've answered you quite fully, often citing scientific analysis, provided technical knowledge, called on real life industry experience, and provided evidence that proves 'truth seekers' utterly wrong.

 

Didn't you notice that or do you just stick your fingers in your ears ago chant lalalalalalalala when you don't like what I write? It certainly feels like it.

 

Ithink we have both been looking at different forums then

[ann_a]

Quick reply.

Ken H,I'm sure our experts would be only too happy to answer questions..would love to appear on mainstream tv and radio,but find it rather difficult with the stranglehold there is on the same.

Brooksy,if we knew all the details,we wouldn't be calling for a real investigation.

Lizards?Who mentioned lizards?Cockroaches maybe..in the Whitehouse and the shadows not far behind...

http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/trillions.html

The above,announced just the day before..another coincidence.

Be sure to watch this..

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3438968102444045267

And thanks StarSparkle:)