Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

9/11 questions unaswered? What do you think?

Comments

49 comments

  • Marc1301
    quote:Originally posted by zipperzap
    quote:Oswald did it. OJ did it. A few crazy POS Muslims did it. Get over it.

    Of the three, I choose what's behind Door Number One - but with another 50 year extension added on to the locked JFK documents, few - if any - of us will see that information. That's my only concern about the JFK fiasco. I seriously doubt Oswald was alone ... and if you do a little research into Jack Ruby ... I wonder if Oswald wasn't a fall guy.

    Again, my guess is that we will never know and that (at least behind locked / sealed / barred / bound and restricted Door Number One) ... jpwolf might not be as nuts as many here seem to think he is.

    ... of course, that's from a guy who claims he saw a 100" 'flying cigar' once ... so there goes my credibility, too!
    [:D]





    Zip,......you saw an 8'3" flying saucer?
    0
  • Civil Rights
    I find it ironic that the Bush Administration has been the victim of more leaks from the CIA, NSA, Pentagon, and State Dept than any other administration EVER, yet somehow Bush has been able to prevent any leaks from whomever was responsible for orchestrating the goverment aspect of 9-11 involvement.
    0
  • zipperzap
    quote:Marc1301:

    Zip,......you saw an 8'3" flying saucer?

    I absolutely HATE IT when THAT happens!

    No excuse ... but it WAS 35 years before I got Lasik!

    ... like I said ... there goes my credibility (again)!
    [:D]
    0
  • GuvamintCheese
    quote:Originally posted by Civil Rights

    okay. i am done here.
    Then be done.
    0
  • CA sucks
    quote:Originally posted by meunke
    quote:Originally posted by CA sucks

    I just know the official story is not what actually went down.


    And that is why you will never be satisfied with anything. Every structrual engineer on the face of the planet could explain everything to you in detail, and you wouldn't believe it, BECAUSE YOU KNOW OTHERWISE.

    Every question you have HAS BEEN ANSWERED BY EXPERTS ALREADY. Try reading (with an open mind, if possible) the report from Popular Mechanics. Or, if you believe them to be slaves of Bush or something, read the explanation from any number of sources that debunks EVERY... SINGLE... 911 conspiracy issues that has been raised in aching detail.

    But then, it won't work, will it? Because, you KNOW it's all a lie!

    Why do you believe in the moon landing? There is more evidence that the government's story is true for 911 than the moon landing. Why no believe the government killed Kennedy? After all, if the government killed/let die over three thousand, what is one president?

    Sorry, I just have no toleration for this stuff.


    So a structural engineer can explain in great detail why they reported in Britain a building had collapsed while it was still standing?
    This is my main point, the collapse looks staged, but I won't pretend to be an expert there. (although I should note my brother is a structural engineer, and he in fact does reside on the face of this planet, I could see what he has to say about the collapse- in a blind experiment showing videos of other demolitions, and asking to spot the one that collapsed by other causes)

    Reason for the collapse aside, how do they report the event before the event occurs?

    And please send me links to an explanation of the collapse of the third building that wasn't struck.
    0
  • Colt Super
    JFK - after hundreds of hours of research and study, I have concluded that more than one shooter was involved - although it may not have been a conspiracy.

    Flying saucers/UFOs - No doubt at all that they exist.

    Flight 800 - I am still unsure about this event.

    9/11 - I watched it. It happened. To believe that it was a government conspiracy indicates that the believer is, at least, uninformed.

    Doug
    0
  • guntech59
    quote:Originally posted by zipperzap
    quote:Marc1301:

    Zip,......you saw an 8'3" flying saucer?

    I absolutely HATE IT when THAT happens!

    No excuse ... but it WAS 35 years before I got Lasik!

    ... like I said ... there goes my credibility (again)!
    [:D]



    If that's the worst thing you've done all day, you're way ahead of alot of people. At least you can laugh at yourself.[:D]
    0
  • Tartersauce
    Marc1301,

    Just a few weeks prior to 9-11 the Saudi military took the US military hostage for 48hours at Prince Sultan Air Base.

    You won't find anything on CNN about it, find someone that was there and ask them. After 9-11 US mil folks had to get Saudi military ID's. No chet.



    .....As for the story of AF fighters ready to intercept aircraft in the US at a moments notice.....not anymore. Those days are long gone.
    0
  • Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by jpwolf
    "Finally, going over the hill and highway and crashing into the Pentagon right at the wall/ground interface is difficult for even a small slow single engine airplane and no way for a 757. Maybe the best pilot in the world could accomplish that but not these unskilled `terrorists'.

    This one cracked me up. Does this brainiac actually think they were aiming at the wall/ground interface? Would not the ground portion of this plan reduce the amount of damage to the wall?[:)]

    Most of the myths are addressed in the following Popular Mechanics link, and have been thoroughly and convincingly debunked. Yes the same answers have been offered for 6+ years. These old answers are still fact and remain true.

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html
    0
  • pickenup
    jpwolf,
    What kind of responses did you expect?

    High ranking military officers DARE to question THE OFFICIAL STORY?
    HOW DARE THEY........
    THEY ARE ALL LIARS.. [:(!][:(!]
    Darn military anyway.
    0
  • PanzerSlayer2
    I don't think there are any questions. A bunch of planes crashed into the WTC and Pentagon. End of story. There are no unanswered questions. There is only people unsatisfied with the answer. BTW I lost one buddy on a plane and another in the WTC.
    0
  • JamesRK
    quote:Originally posted by zipperzap
    Of the three, I choose what's behind Door Number One - but with another 50 year extension added on to the locked JFK documents, few - if any - of us will see that information. That's my only concern about the JFK fiasco. I seriously doubt Oswald was alone ... and if you do a little research into Jack Ruby ... I wonder if Oswald wasn't a fall guy.
    Zip, as you mention, neither of us will be around to find out, but I'll do a little speculating anyway.

    It doesn't take much research to find out Jack Ruby was a mobster wanabe. That doesn't make him a mobster or mean he had connections. Oswald might have had backing, but I doubt that too. I think for the actual murder he acted alone.

    My theory is in investigations of this type a lot of information comes out which would be evidence of other criminal activity or embarrassing to some high level politicians. I think that's why we'll never see it.
    0
  • dongizmo
    Yet everyone believes 2 disgruntled bums blew up the Murrah building........
    0
  • Don McManus
    quote:Originally posted by pickenup
    jpwolf,
    What kind of responses did you expect?

    High ranking military officers DARE to question THE OFFICIAL STORY?
    HOW DARE THEY........
    THEY ARE ALL LIARS.. [:(!][:(!]
    Darn military anyway.
    pickenup:

    I don't see where anyone has called ex-military officers liars. These guys are not experts in building structures, they are not experts in controlled demolition, hell most are not even experts in metals and materials, yet they are being asked to respond to these questions. To comment on things about which they obviously know little makes them look stupid, but does not make them look like liars. How exactly does 300 combat missions makes someone an expert regarding the collapse of WTC 7?
    0
  • JackBwr
    Hey JP. I'm not here to attack you or support the idea. The only thing that really does remain fishy to me is that building # 7. Some of you guys need to go back to the article, click on that video and watch it go. I mean, what's up with that? No damage and it just collapses? Something's wrong with that picture. I've heard of this one before and have not heard it debunked.

    On the other hand, I did make it out to PA on vacation this year and I visited the Flight 93 crash sight. Some locals there, including a sister of one of the women that were on that plane, were at the site that day. Some locals give presentations there daily now. I stayed for it.
    The guy said people saw the plane flying eratically over Pittsburgh, which they guess is when the take over started and the terrorists were trying to start losing altitude.

    There's a scrap yard over the hill next to the site. The guy that gave the presentation said that the workers working there that day, watched the plane fly over the scrap yard at approximately 100 ft, upside down. It was estimated that it was going over 500 mph. Well over what it was designed for.

    The explanation that they gave to him is that the plane buried itself about 30' deep and mostly disinigrated while the dirt that was removed by the impact and blast fell back on top of it. He debunked the idea of papers found west of the crash site and said they were only in the direction the wind was blowing that day over the crash. How did the steel desinigrate and the papers survive?? I don't know. Maybe some of it is still in the ground.

    All I know is that I have seen a military test with an F-4 phantom slamming into a concrete wall at high speed in slow motion and it does desinigrate into fine particles. It was amazing. Yes, much smaller but you would think something would be left. Most plane crashes don't happen at the speeds these planes hit.

    I've been back and forth on what I believe happened. This day and age, I think it's good to never assume what they tell you. Just that there were so many eye witness accounts from random people and video... it's hard to say they made it up or were payed off. Now, could they have done more in hindsight? That's hindsight. I will admit there were screw ups that might have helped prevent this if people weren't asleep on the job and would work together.

    I have no explanation for building # 7 though. I wish somebody here would watch and explain that one to me. There's clearly no damage or smoke rising from it. If building are that unstable in NYC, I won't be visiting there anytime soon.
    0
  • JackBwr
    Ok, bad angle. There is smoke behind it. It's still amazing that a building that wide would have all the same structural damage to the point where it would fall that evenly.
    0
  • dcinffxva
    quote:Originally posted by jpwolf
    Hmmmm, I wouldn't thoerize about such things.

    You still didn't answer my question about your "proof" however, only proving my point.



    Can you really ignore the gaping holes in the explanation?

    It hasn't a thing to do with hating Bush. He is merely a puppet.


    Not that you will believe it, but I was at the Pentagon on September 11. There was debris from the airdraft on the ground. One of my friends watched it fly into the building. I'm sure you will claim these were staged as well, but here are some photos showing the pieces of the aircraft.


    pent4.jpg

    pent17.jpg

    pent20.jpg
    0
  • meunke
    quote:Originally posted by CA sucks
    And please send me links to an explanation of the collapse of the third building that wasn't struck.


    TRANSLATION: You're too lazy to do the work myself. You're the one that 'has questions', why don't you look for answers? That's kinda how the whole process should work, ya know. You could start with the links in this article (but of course they are plants by Bush and Halliburton, right?) Or reading the accounts of thousands of witnesses (which were probably all paid off by Dick Cheney). Or try typing just a single search into Google.
    0
  • COLT
    ...Unanswered questions, maybe. ..but the IMPORTANT questions about JFK, 9/11 have been answered.

    ...The premise of the bullet stopping and turning in mid air is bogus, that crap has been debunked thru extensive trajectory tests in the last several years...as IF it needed to be, geez. Bullets follow predictable, mathematical trajectories, period. Oswald killed JFK, not hard to figure that out...and did it w/o a magical bullet. BTW, the back of his skull was not blown out, it was his right side skull that was.

    ...Amazing all the theories that abound, and people who believe them, instead of believing facts.

    ...How hard is it for most people to keep a simple, innocuous "secret", pretty damn hard. Considering the magnitude of the JFK assination, 9/11, AND the sheer number of people that would have had to have been involved in a conspiracy in either incident; BS to a "conspiracy" in either case and the idea "they" did it.

    ...POS musloons pulled off 9/11, the black choppers had nothing to do with it...[;)]

    ani-texas-flag-2.gif

    Bhogie.gif
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity