Think our Govt.didn't lie about 9/11 WTC buildings? Check this out:

[jimnyc]

Popular mechanics? Really?

A Boeing 767 cannot break the sound barrier, dude.

The only one mentioning Popular Mechanics at this time is a quote from the OP from years back. He's the one who thinks it's married cousins backing up the wacko theories.

But, since you mentioned it, just how much of their investigations and "facts" can you dispute with direct evidence, and not theories? Give us a link to what was stated in PM and then another link to factual evidence to dispute it...

[Noir]

I don;t have the time to watch the video, but on the whole am not convinced the US Admin had anything to do with 9/11. Except for WTC 7.

I don't think anyone could look at WTC 7 objectively and conclude it was anything other than demolition.

[Little-Acorn]

I wonder sometimes about the mental processes of people who think the government put demolition charges against all major structural supports of a building some (long?) time before Sept. 11, 2001 and then just bided their time until someone happened to fly airliners into the two tallest WTC towers; and then took that opportunity to set off the charges. And somehow kept it so completely secret, possibly for years until the planes hit, that no one had any idea what was going on until long afterward when they saw the films of the multiple collapses.

Just how stupid and gullible would you have to be to believe that? It boggles the mind.

Yet people who actually expect us to believe those claims, post on boards like this one every day.

[revelarts]

I'm sorry... is this thread about me?
I'm flattered.
But I'm afraid it's a pretty boring and unimportant subject.

Thread about you?
you said it's kooky.... without watching it.

Another truffer documentary. It's over two hours long. No I'm not going to watch the same crap they put out every six months for the past 10 years all because they hate Bush. Nut cases with degrees are still nut cases.

How do you know if it the same "crap" if you haven't watched it? And you claim to know they all hate Bush.
Not very honest Gaff.
It's fine to reject it out of hand without watching, (not very scientific but it's OK) but your commentary on it is pretty lame and based on ignorance not facts.
It's lazy like the alot of MSM commentary on the tea party.
"OH they are racist , OH the Only Hate Obama cuase he's Black"
"Oh really, Ever Go to a tea party meeting?"
"NO, I wouldn't waste my time.".

What would you tell that person?

[Little-Acorn]

Thread about you?
you said it's kooky.... without watching it.

Still waiting for an answer to my question.

[Noir]

I wonder sometimes about the mental processes of people who think the government put demolition charges against all major structural supports of a building some (long?) time before Sept. 11, 2001 and then just bided their time until someone happened to fly airliners into the two tallest WTC towers; and then took that opportunity to set off the charges. And somehow kept it so completely secret, possibly for years until the planes hit, that no one had any idea what was going on until long afterward when they saw the films of the multiple collapses.

Just how stupid and gullible would you have to be to believe that? It boggles the mind.

Yet people who actually expect us to believe those claims, post on boards like this one every day.

I know what you mean, and in what i can only describe as a bizarre process of thought i somewhat agree with you, however, that building did not fall naturally. Totally even and at free fall speed. Something is wrong with that.

[Little-Acorn]

Yet people who actually expect us to believe those claims, post on boards like this one every day.

I know what you mean, and in what i can only describe as a bizarre process of thought i somewhat agree with you, however, that building did not fall naturally. Totally even and at free fall speed. Something is wrong with that.

Can I call 'em, or what?

[Noir]

Can I call 'em, or what?

Its not really 'calling 'em" given i said the same in the post before your post =/

But do you believe that a building 40 odd stories high with a steel structure can collapse uniformly at free fall speed due to fire damage?

[revelarts]

Is the thread About lil Acorn?
Uh No. Not sure what that has to do with it. You made an ignorant comment about a film you never watched we responded

I wonder sometimes about the mental processes of people who think the government put demolition charges against all major structural supports of a building some (long?) time before Sept. 11, 2001 and then just bided their time until someone happened to fly airliners into the two tallest WTC towers; and then took that opportunity to set off the charges. And somehow kept it so completely secret, possibly for years until the planes hit, that no one had any idea what was going on until long afterward when they saw the films of the multiple collapses.

Just how stupid and gullible would you have to be to believe that? It boggles the mind.

Yet people who actually expect us to believe those claims, post on boards like this one every day.

Who said people think that?
But lets play truther advocate here....



the government put demolition charges against all major structural supports of a building...
well meh OK were good so far except for "ALL" and "the Government". But base on the evidence explosives where in the building. Someone put them there maybe Bin Laden, maybe the SOME people in the Gov't, Maybe ___ ?
Who had greater motive and opportunity? if we're just looking at the facts. And not making assumptions of innocents or guilt based on reputation.

some (long?) time before Sept. 11, 2001...
Some time before... OK


and then just bided their time until... someone happened to fly airliners into the two tallest WTC towers
Where does this come from? who said this?

the Attack seemed coordinated. many in the military and intell agencies say that the attack was not unknown. Alqeda and Bin laden worked with the intel folks against the USSR and in Bosinia, freedom fighters back in the day. And according to 1 FBI source Bin Laden was in contact with US on SEPT 10.

and then took that opportunity to set off the charges
coordinated, but not well enough to include building 7 i guess.

And somehow kept it so completely secret possibly for years until the planes hit,
Not hard to keep a secret that, even if you expose it some folks will refuse to believe it.

[Gaffer]

Give me a logical reason why. Why would explosives be planted. Why weren't all the surrounding building taken down as well with explosives. Why wait for planes to be flown into the buildings. For every speculation and every theory you present I have to ask WHY?

[revelarts]

In a murder trial motive is great to have but if you've got the prime suspects prints on the gun and video of the murder. Unless it's self defense or insanity, the reason why is not necessary to get a conviction. Even if we catch the all the perps we may never know the real reason(s) WHY.
We can speculate generally and in some specific areas all day long but only the people involved can really answer that question.

[-Cp]

Ironic how the mods moved this to the "conspiracy theory" section when in fact, the video posted is not at all "Conspiracy" - it's 100% based on raw data. But then again, most of the folks believe everything the Govt. tells them and there for anyone who dares question the govt. must be a "conspiracy weirdo"...

[-Cp]

Another truffer documentary. It's over two hours long. No I'm not going to watch the same crap they put out every six months for the past 10 years all because they hate Bush. Nut cases with degrees are still nut cases.

Typical, brain-washed "sheeple" who refuses to look at opposing views..

And this video was not made by "truffers"....

When you post stuff like this, Gaffer - it shows that you're an arrogant, self-important, kool-aid drinker who, despite MOUNTAINS of contrary evidence, keep your head buried in the sand.

[-Cp]

The only one mentioning Popular Mechanics at this time is a quote from the OP from years back. He's the one who thinks it's married cousins backing up the wacko theories.

But, since you mentioned it, just how much of their investigations and "facts" can you dispute with direct evidence, and not theories? Give us a link to what was stated in PM and then another link to factual evidence to dispute it...

Unlike you, Jim, I can retract statements in light of new data- I'm not so brainwashed to "toe-the-party-line" as to not examine all the data, not just the stuff supporting my view at the time.

[-Cp]

Give me a logical reason why. Why would explosives be planted. Why weren't all the surrounding building taken down as well with explosives. Why wait for planes to be flown into the buildings. For every speculation and every theory you present I have to ask WHY?

Asking "why" won't make the evidence presented in this video go away...