The Big DebateIf you feel the need to get your teeth stuck right into a heavy debate on a subject you feel really passionate about, then this is the place to do so. Post about religion, politics, laws and all things juicy like that here.
its interesting the amount of debate on the BBC website on the 9/11 conspiracy,, theres over 500 comments, I read about 50 before I got bored, but I had no idea there were so many more.
on the one hand there are people stating that it cant of been a controlled demolition because it takes too much effort to do without anyone noticing.
however claiming that 3 buildings all collapsed so perfectly by ordinary fires contradicts the amount of effort required.
again another contradiction is claiming that it needs 1000 Americans to do all this - which would be impossible to keep quiet, yet it only took 19 non Americans to achieve the same thing.
most amusing is that the missing tapes got put by accident on the 2002 shelf, when , according to one comment by a viewer, at the time there wouldn't of even been a 2002 shelf !!!!
also amusing is the claim that as its such a big atrocity that proves it cant be their own government, wow how naive,,, so if a government wants to make a story impossible to disbelieve they just have to do it big.
on the other hand claiming that there wasn't even an air plane that hit the pentagon building is so absurd makes me wonder if its trying to create a false smoke screen.
with the the epic failures of things like the helicopter hostage rescue team does make you think they wouldn't of been capable of doing it.
it would be interesting to be around in 50 years time if revealing documents became un classified, oh i forgot, those all went up with WTC7,,,
this is all so much like the X files,,, I bet they wish they'd thought up as good a script.
I've read so much about 9/11 and seen so many photo's, video clips, documentary shows, joined in debates, conspiracy theory debates on the subject and pretty much done everything I can in covering it, yet I still don't have any conclusive opinion as to whether there is actually a major conspiracy theory behind it or not...
The most bizarre part of it all, is definately how all the buildings fell so perfectly, but there is no conclusive evidence proving theory or disproving assumed fact. But anyone having seen any of these demolition shows on discovery knows, it takes huge amounts of planning and a damn sight more prep work, cables, explosives, etc, etc and seriously accurate and specific placement, certainly more than was earthly possible without being spotted by the vast amount of security employed by both towers for starters...
The bit about 9/11 that most people forget, which is far more relevent in my opinion, is how they always sweep the pentagon part of the so called attack right under the carpet and there is very little ever said about that by the government, except their rigid pre-scripted explaination of what went down... The explosions, building collapse, plane collision and pretty much every other aspect of the situation seriously doesn't add up, a lot of theorists even say there was no plane and that it was actually a rocket attack, as within the first few minutes, there was no sign of bits of plane anywhere to be seen. I think it will be under scrutiny for a fair time to come anyway....
At the same time, the plane that was supposedly brought down out of heroism by the passangers before it could get to it's target... Well, you just have to read up a few of the actual factual articles on that, together with actually listening to some of the actual phone footage to know that, that entire situation was something slightly different to what official reports tried convincing everyone of...
At the end of the day, the government made an absolute fortune out of the insurance for what happened that day, money talks.....
Hell, it's a fairly widely known fact that they knew weeks/months in advance what the exact plan was, when it was roughly planned to happen, how it was to be executed and who was going to be responsible for it happening... Now this is the bit that ties in with the pre planted explosives... If they knew that far in advance, that would have easily given them the time to plan controlled explosions... It was also the perfect excuse to go war against "terror" and as we all know, war is profitable....
It's all good clean fun for those of us who are interested in the conspiracy side of life... Just don't go taking it too seriously, or you'll end up wearing a tinfoil lined hat...
I agree with Det about both the buildings falling too perfectly and how the Pentagon incident is just swept under the carpet.
There's two points I'ld like to make out though. I remember reading that security dogs at the WTC were removed one week before the events that happened. These dogs were trainned in searching for bombs.
Also, the planning that would have taken place to carry out search an attack, the Bush administration where not in power that long, not long enough for them to plan such an attack and how to hide the lot i.e. get Bin Ladin involved to crash the planes. If it was planned it's been planned for years imo.
The most bizarre part of it all, is definately how all the buildings fell so perfectly, but there is no conclusive evidence proving theory or disproving assumed fact. But anyone having seen any of these demolition shows on discovery knows, it takes huge amounts of planning and a damn sight more prep work, cables, explosives, etc, etc and seriously accurate and specific placement, certainly more than was earthly possible without being spotted by the vast amount of security employed by both towers for starters...
It's all good clean fun for those of us who are interested in the conspiracy side of life... Just don't go taking it too seriously, or you'll end up wearing a tinfoil lined hat...
yeah, they fell so perfectly, thats what gives it away. but your using the same point that I made fun of initialy :- by saying it takes so much prep work to get them to fall like that, that kind of saying just ordinary fires would not of cuased the same effect.
there is a mathmatical study of the rate of fall of the buildings, and this is the only facts that realy are reliable, as its easy to tell the velocity by the individual frames of the news coverage.
by the difference of acceleration with that of something in freefall they can determine the amount of resistance and hence the strength of the colapsing structures.
this shows that the rate of fall increased such that any resistance was minimal.
even if the structure was significantly weakened by fire it would stil put up a significant resistance while each part crumpled under the weight of that above it. there was no floor by floor dips in acceleration which are characteristic of other such natural building collapses.
The missing tapes ,,,
Linear Mode
