Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

War on terrorism , 9-11, Iluminati etc

Options
12357…12

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    Wurzelbert
    Registered Users Posts: 1,804 ✭✭✭Wurzelbert


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mxFRigYD3s

    building 7 is visible in the background.

    it is entirely conceivable word in nyc might have been "could collapse" or "is about to collapse" and they just got it mixed up in all the confusion...and i would not have known wtc7 by name or looks back then either...the whole conspiracy thing is just preposterous...though not really beyond us government...pearl harbor comes to mind...


  • Options
    #123
    RecordStraight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭RecordStraight


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    because there was nobody in the building other than firefighters.

    unless he was really really paranoid and thought someone had snuck into possibly the most guarded area in the world on that day?
    So they might have thought there were firefighters dying in there?


  • Options
    #124
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    RecordStraight wrote: »
    So they might have thought there were firefighters dying in there?

    no, because it was reported by the same station that all firefighters had left the building before the building owner gave the word to 'pull it'.

    bbc world news were very much on top of the situation as it happened.

    google 'larry silverstein pull it' for the evidence of this. this statement is a huge part of the wtc7 conspiracy.


  • Options
    #125
    RecordStraight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭RecordStraight


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    no, because it was reported by the same station that all firefighters had left the building before the building owner gave the word to 'pull it'.

    bbc world news were very much on top of the situation as it happened.

    google 'larry silverstein pull it' for the evidence of this. this statement is a huge part of the wtc7 conspiracy.
    Are you CERTAIN about the order of events here? The BBC reported that the building was empty, and THEN cut away from the collapse?


  • Options
    #126
    Maximus Alexander
    Registered Users Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    stevowhelo1 wrote: »
    1. Do you believe 9-11, Boston Bombing and various other events were planned for the benefit of corrupt people or heads of state?

    2. Is there such thing as a new world order or illumiti that controls the minds of people through subliminal messaging and were various celebrities killed for speaking out ?

    3. Do you believe that ISIS or ISIL actually exists?

    Even if the answers were yes, yes, no - what difference would it make? You'd still spend the rest of your days in drudgery, working day after day to pay bills to keep yourself alive and well enough so that you can get up the next day to do it all over again.

    Basically, if all conspiracy theories are correct, but so well hidden as to be undetectable, they're irrelevant to you. Like God.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    RecordStraight wrote: »
    Are you CERTAIN about the order of events here? The BBC reported that the building was empty, and THEN cut away from the collapse?

    no they didnt but their own explanation confirms me.
    On September 11, 2001, Reuters incorrectly reported that one of the buildings at the New York World Trade Centre, 7WTC, had collapsed before it actually did. The report was picked up from a local news story and was withdrawn as soon as it emerged that the building had not fallen

    which brings us back to where the story originated as being the most important thing.


  • Options
    #128
    ScumLord
    Registered Users Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    google 'larry silverstein pull it' for the evidence of this. this statement is a huge part of the wtc7 conspiracy.
    Don't really see anything there either. They clearly knew the building was at risk due to damage and with everyone out what's the point of risking firefighters? "pull it" is a phrase used to end efforts. As in "pull the plug", end the activity.


  • Options
    #129
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    Wurzelbert wrote: »
    it is entirely conceivable word in nyc might have been "could collapse" or "is about to collapse" and they just got it mixed up in all the confusion

    i agree 100%

    but its still another unanswered question in a right mess. who made the initial report of the collapse before it happened?


  • Options
    #130
    RecordStraight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭RecordStraight


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    which brings us back to where the story originated as being the most important thing.
    What is your explanation of how the misreporting occurred, then?


  • Options
    #131
    RecordStraight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭RecordStraight


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    i agree 100%

    but its still another unanswered question in a right mess. who made the initial report of the collapse before it happened?
    I'm going to say...THE JOOOS


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    ScumLord
    Registered Users Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    i agree 100%

    but its still another unanswered question in a right mess. who made the initial report of the collapse before it happened?
    Why does it matter? It could have been misheard from firefighters, people on the street, other news agencies, a guy in the office that didn't know which building was which. It could have come from anywhere and given the chaos of the day it may be next to impossible to find out.


  • Options
    #133
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    ScumLord wrote: »
    Don't really see anything there either. They clearly knew the building was at risk due to damage and with everyone out what's the point of risking firefighters? "pull it" is a phrase used to end efforts. As in "pull the plug", end the activity.

    id agree if he'd said 'pull them out'

    but even linguistic experts have claimed that the use of the word 'it' would be completely innapropriate if talking about people in the situation.

    also the guy collected 4.3 billion from the 3 buildings collapsing. follow the money.

    again, all things that mean nothing on their own.


  • Options
    #134
    Wurzelbert
    Registered Users Posts: 1,804 ✭✭✭Wurzelbert


    ScumLord wrote: »
    Don't really see anything there either. They clearly knew the building was at risk due to damage and with everyone out what's the point of risking firefighters? "pull it" is a phrase used to end efforts. As in "pull the plug", end the activity.

    was just about to post that too...


  • Options
    #135
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    ScumLord wrote: »
    Why does it matter? It could have been misheard from firefighters, people on the street, other news agencies, a guy in the office that didn't know which building was which. It could have come from anywhere and given the chaos of the day it may be next to impossible to find out.

    it wouldnt have mattered had the official investigation been independent and not hand picked by the US government.


  • Options
    #136
    ScumLord
    Registered Users Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    but even linguistic experts have claimed that the use of the word 'it' would be completely innapropriate if talking about people in the situation.
    Which linguistic experts? I don't see how it would be inappropriate or unusual, I've heard people say "pull it" in relation to ending something.
    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    it wouldnt have mattered had the official investigation been independent and not hand picked by the US government.
    If they weren't hand picked by the US government then who were they going to be hand picked by? It was the American government's duty to hand pick the investigation team, there's no other body that could have sanctioned people to go in and investigate.


  • Options
    #137
    RecordStraight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭RecordStraight


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    id agree if he'd said 'pull them out'

    but even linguistic experts have claimed that the use of the word 'it' would be completely innapropriate if talking about people in the situation.
    These would be conspiracy theorist linguists, right?

    Would it be the appropriate word to use if you were referring about giving up on the operation to save the building?
    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    also the guy collected 4.3 billion from the 3 buildings collapsing. follow the money.

    again, all things that mean nothing on their own.
    I think he was also a JOOO


  • Options
    #138
    Wurzelbert
    Registered Users Posts: 1,804 ✭✭✭Wurzelbert


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    id agree if he'd said 'pull them out'

    but even linguistic experts have claimed that the use of the word 'it' would be completely innapropriate if talking about people in the situation.

    also the guy collected 4.3 billion from the 3 buildings collapsing. follow the money.

    again, all things that mean nothing on their own.

    sure, cui bono and all...so with that it seems we have arrived at the international jewish conspiracy....


  • Options
    #139
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    ScumLord wrote: »

    If they weren't hand picked by the US government then who were they going to be hand picked by? It was the American government's duty to hand pick the investigation team, there's no other body that could have sanctioned people to go in and investigate.

    they could have sanctioned an independent body of experts and allowed them full access to the site and any evidence.

    they didnt, they shipped the evidence off to china for recycling & got their cronies to run the investigation, who ran with the government explanation and redacted 28 pages on saudi arabia's involvement.

    how can anyone not question that?


  • Options
    #140
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    Wurzelbert wrote: »
    sure, cui bono and all...so with that it seems we have arrived at the international jewish conspiracy....

    why are you assuming its a jewish conspiracy?


  • Options
    #141
    Wurzelbert
    Registered Users Posts: 1,804 ✭✭✭Wurzelbert


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    why are you assuming its a jewish conspiracy?

    well with larry involved and all...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    Wurzelbert wrote: »
    well with larry involved and all...

    nope. im aware there are jewish conspiracies about the event but as far as im concerned religion doesnt even come in to it.

    maybe there were jews involved, its highly likely given the amount of them in america but ive no claims on a jewish conspiracy.


  • Options
    #143
    ScumLord
    Registered Users Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    they could have sanctioned an independent body of experts and allowed them full access to the site and any evidence.
    What's an independant body of experts though? Experts don't just sit around waiting for the American government to call. They tend to work for companies and there could have been many national security issues that take a lot of companies out of the running. The American government have some of the worlds best experts on the subject in their employ already through their military.
    they didnt, they shipped the evidence off & got their cronies to run the investigation, ran with the government explanation and redacted 28 pages on saudi arabia's involvement.
    Shipping the evidence off to a secure location and investigating it is what happens in most cases and the evidence would have been so important that they would want to keep it very secure. I still don't really see a conspiracy here, it's what you would expect to happen. Redacting 28 pages about saudi Arabia doesn't seem out of the ordinary either especially if it starts off accusing them and ends up finding out maybe other things that they want to be able to act on, things that they don't want hand over to the international media.


  • Options
    #144
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    ScumLord wrote: »

    Shipping the evidence off to a secure location and investigating it is what happens in most cases and the evidence would have been so important that they would want to keep it very secure.

    most of the evidence was melted and recycled without any investigation.
    Some 185,101 tons of structural steel have been hauled away from Ground Zero. Most of the steel has been recycled as per the city's decision to swiftly send the wreckage to salvage yards in New Jersey. The city's hasty move has outraged many victims' families who believe the steel should have been examined more thoroughly. Last month, fire experts told Congress that about 80% of the steel was scrapped without being examined because investigators did not have the authority to preserve the wreckage.
    (ny daily news)

    Redacting 28 pages about saudi Arabia doesn't seem out of the ordinary either especially if it starts off accusing them and ends up finding out maybe other things that they want to be able to act on, things that they don't want hand over to the international media.

    it doesnt seem out of the ordinary at all. zero transparency is how the bush administration treated the entire event. thats incredibly worng and just asking for conspiracies to evolve.


  • Options
    #145
    RecordStraight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭RecordStraight


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    they could have sanctioned an independent body of experts and allowed them full access to the site and any evidence.
    Sure same as they do for every other investigation. Oh, no, wait, the usual state authorities do them all.


  • Options
    #146
    RecordStraight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭RecordStraight


    DT, can you please explain why your giant, earth-shattering conspiracy involving thousands of people who HAVE NEVER SAID A WORD is more likely than the BBC making a mistake in a live broadcast?


  • Options
    #147
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    RecordStraight wrote: »
    Sure same as they do for every other investigation. Oh, no, wait, the usual state authorities do them all.

    exactly.

    how can a body that is implicated by the destruction of evidence in a criminal investigation, investigate & exhonerate themselves.

    why do you think this country is screaming for independent bodies to investigate and even manage the guards? its a joke to allow someone to investigate themselves.


  • Options
    #148
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    RecordStraight wrote: »
    DT, can you please explain why your giant, earth-shattering conspiracy involving thousands of people who HAVE NEVER SAID A WORD is more likely than the BBC making a mistake in a live broadcast?

    where have i laid out what i think the conspiracy is?

    if you want to talk reasonably then go ahead, if you want to dramatise the conversation by lying about what ive said and using BIG LETTERS then take it elsewhere. ive no interest in discussing this with a child.


  • Options
    #149
    RecordStraight
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,292 ✭✭✭RecordStraight


    DamagedTrax wrote: »
    where have i laid out what i think the conspiracy is?
    You haven't. You just keep hinting at it. That's the problem.

    Lay it out there and let's see which one seems more likely, shall we? Or are you just going to play a silly game where we are supposed to guess what explanation you are hinting at?

    Please put your cards on the table like a man.


  • Options
    #150
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    conspiracy-theories26.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    DamagedTrax
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭DamagedTrax


    RecordStraight wrote: »
    You haven't. You just keep hinting at it. That's the problem.

    Lay it out there and let's see which one seems more likely, shall we?

    you seem to think i have some great big theory that you're about to shoot down like a hero! i dont, sorry.

    i know as much about what really happened as you do. ie, nothing.

    i can see plenty of areas that need questions answered and i will lay these out for you. please try and keep in mind that these are QUESTIONS AND NOT THEORY... (caps for your benefit). please answer them in an easy to follow manner if possible, keep things straight and all that.


    why was 80% of the evidence not examined?

    why was operation able danger left out of the final report?

    why was bulding 7 left out of the final report?

    why was Pakistani General Mahmoud Ahmad on capital hill as a guest of the US government ON the morning of sept 11th, after wiring $100,000 to lead hijacker, Mohammad Atta?

    why were the pages on Saudi Arabia redacted when most of the hijackers were Saudi?

    why did Dick Cheney refuse to give an intercept order when the 'plane' was about to hit the pentagon? and why was that left out of the official report?

    why, even though airspace was closed, were the bin laden family flown out by the US government?



    anyway i have tons more questions that need to be answered. when/if they do ever get answered i'll form my opinion on what happened. until then i can only ponder.


    OHH! i forgot about this one.. more of a general question. not just 9/11

    why is it, when some high body count events happen, the authorities happen to be running a similiar training scenario that just happens to excuse the lack of response? 911. london bombings, boston marathon..


    these are all questions we should be asking as a human race. i find it utterly bizarre that people refuse to question and just swallow some BS that the ruling party lays out.. just look at our own great leader, a proven liar.


Advertisement