Conspiracy theorists - Page 6 - Mitsubishi Lancer Register Forum
 
 

Go Back   Mitsubishi Lancer Register Forum > General Stuff > Non-Lancer Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 8 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
Old 14-07-2013, 13:36   #76
henke
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,906
Initial damage:



There's no damage to anything other than a very small part of the builings facade. All the lamposts are standing, the lawn is pristine.

So what we're saying is that a plane came in avoiding everything in it's path until it hit the building. It punched a hole 15 feet wide in the building, the fuselage went through the whole then the wings and the tail section neatly tucked themselves in behind the fuselage. There was then a big explosion and some plane parts blew out of the hole and landed on the lawn? They must have because they aren't there to begin with.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"Well, of course we're going to throw poo at them!"
henke is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 14-07-2013, 14:45   #77
paul.
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In the garage
Car: 480hp E8, Audi A3 2.0tdi DSG daily
My Car
Posts: 2,540
You can make your mind believe anything if your that set on something.

You have to ask yourself this, if (if being the operative word ) there was a strong possibility that there is some sort of conspiracy theory into this whole saga, then somebody somewhere, somehow would have had this proven.

The fact that it hasn't been, and lets be honest, 9/11 is quite a page in the history books, has got to tell you something.

No matter what the occurrence, you could pick holes in anything and everything and make believe that it's a conspiracy theory.

Like I said, once your set on something, you make your mind believe anything.
paul. is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to paul. For This Useful Post:
geefin (15-07-2013), MarkM (14-07-2013), vampy (14-07-2013)
Old 14-07-2013, 15:20   #78
henke
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,906
Absolutely, Paul.

I am far from a conspiracy theorist, and in the past i've laughed them down as weirdo heretics. I purposely steer clear of any debate regarding the WTC because there's so much crap surrounding it i'm fairly sure you could find "proof" online that Lord Lucan rode Shergar up the stairs to plant the bombs, if you so wished.

But... the pentagon is different. One of the securest buildings anywhere and the only footage anyone can get shows what appears to be a missile. All the early pictures suggest it was hit by a missile. Because it was hit by a missile.

So as i've said from my very first post, once you accept that we're being lied to about the pentagon it then throws everything else that happened that day into doubt. But we'll leave that up to the Lucan / Shergar brigade.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"Well, of course we're going to throw poo at them!"

Last edited by henke; 14-07-2013 at 15:21..
henke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 15:23   #79
spilioholio
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 687
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul. View Post
Terrorists hijacked three planes, two crashed into the towers, the other crashed into the pentagon.

The twin towers collapsed due to the planes hitting them.

A lot of innocent people died due to stupid religion again.

That's what ACTUALLY happened.

If anyone wants to see real conspiracy theories and the like, watch that Jeremy Kyle program on weekdays.
What about the fourth plane that vaporised into the ground?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyB View Post
This is the official story but as has already been mentioned on this thread there is no evidence of a plane crashing at the pentagon, with a building covered in cctv cameras surely there must be some footage.
The other big one for me, that's also been mentioned is that tower 7 fell down at free fall speed.
No sky scraper has ever fallen down due to fire at free fall speed within its own footprint before or after 9/11, yet 3 towers all fall like this on the same day?
Now I know that no sky scrapers have had large passenger jets fly into them before like the twin towers but the official story is that building 7 was destroyed due to falling debris from the other towers.
This does not add up and when linked to the evidence of thermite in the dust from the collapsed buildings must at least make any rational thinking person question the official story.
Just pointing out that the official explanation for the collapse of 47 storey building 7 was fire alone.

I think they saw the problem in saying that the building collapsed symmetrically due to asymmetrical damage.

They modeled the collapse using computer software to show what happened, but their model looks nothing like what we acually see in the video footage of the collapse.
They will not release the data used in their simulation due to security reasons

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul. View Post
Well I must be seeing things. I remember seeing the plane fly into the pentagon.

Also, just how many sky scrapers at nearly 1,400ft tall have been purposely built for a plane full of people and fuel to fly into it just to see what happens.

Stop talking out of your backside mate.

It is what it is, plane hits the towers, sets on fire, innocent people burn to death, towers collapse, simple.
You saw the plane crash into the pentagon

The towers were designed to take multiple aircraft impacts.

Do you not think that a real invesigation should be carried out in the name of these poor souls that perished, so that the real perpetrators can be brought to justice?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve220 View Post
Hundreds of eye witnesses from the pentagon crash stated aircraft. People on the freeway running by all stated aircraft. All interviewed by? Media.
We have official eyewitnesses that saw the plane on the official path approaching from the south side, then we have other eyewitnesses (including pentagon police officers) that saw a plane approach from the north side which completely contradicts the official eyewitnesses statements.
We have a civilian pilot claiming he saw a large drone at low level heading towards the pentagon.
We have other eyewitnesses that claim they saw a small plane.
and many many more inconsistencies of witness reports.


Quote:
Originally Posted by paul. View Post
So, what were saying is the most powerful country in the world cooked up a story and plan to fly two planes into the twin towers and the other into the pentagon. Knowing full well thousands of people would die and would cause a world wide retribution.

And, they would get away with ?

If there was a *genuine* case of conspiracy, then it would have been proven years ago.

For gods sake, PEOPLE GET REAL IT WAS A TERROIST ACT.
They have cooked up similar scenarios in the past that they have acknowledged, just look up 'operation northwoods'.

It has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that it was a conspiracy, it is just that you won't see any of it on the tv or in the news papers.
.....just think, IF such a conspiracy did happen then don't you think that the corruption and infiltration will run very deep?

Quote:
Originally Posted by vampy View Post
The planes that were around and taken into consideration at the time, were very much lighter and carried much less fuel. Plenty written on the engineering of the towers and why they failed.

Cheers
Incorrect, the towers were designed to take the impact of a boeing 707 fully loaded at 600mph.
Whilst a 707 is slightly smaller and slightly lighter than the modern 767, the kinetic energy released by a 707 is greater than that of a 767 (flight 11) at the speeds recorded before impact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by heaveho View Post
Has anyone considered just trying to live in the world as it is, and not how they'd like it to be?

If you think you can really change something for the better, go for it, otherwise it's just a waste of angst.
A waste of angst in wanting to rid the evil and corruption for a better future for our children, grandchildren etc?

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul. View Post
Kid?

Shut up you idiot.
Not liking what he speaks?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ptwenty View Post
Building 7 - the litmus test for crazy Govt fanboys who suspend the laws of physics

Anybody who has been presented with the information, but still refuses to accept what it is, should be very worried about their own state of mind, and accept they are no free-thinker.


Has anybody NOT heard of Building 7 yet?
Crazy isn't it.

A steel frame building that is 330ft long and 140ft wide can experience free fall acceleration (ZERO resistance) due to fire alone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul. View Post
Yes it's MY opinion, which I'm perfectly entitled to, as is you and everyone else.

To be honest with you, nobody probably cares what either of us think, and I don't *really* care either way on that to tell you the truth.I'm not going to spend all Sunday looking on the Internet to *try* and find stuff out about 9/11. If it wasn't a plane that hit the pentagon, then whatever else it might have been means nothing to me, I couldn't care less.
But, thousands of innocent people died because of religion, thousands of innocent people died because of people like Osama Bin Laden who ordered definitely TWO planes that hit the towers.

The whole modern world should concentrate there efforts in trying to banish ALL religion from mankind, as that's the route of all evil, always has been, always will be.
What I have bolded is a big part of the problem, many many people think that way.....can you not see why that is a massive problem?


Blind belief that the government is their to protect and help you and would never murder and deceive their own (although history proves otherwise) is very similar to someones blind belief in god.

Tell someone that 9/11was a inside job and they just shut down and get angry - cognitive dissonance.

Tell a religious person that there is no evidence to support their god and they just shut down and get angry - cognitive dissonance.

.....both believe the big guy is there to protect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by New Reg View Post
Gee golly gosh! Its ptwenty, a man whose views on 9/11 and all other matters are shaped by religious dogma, caliing other people small minded and brainwashed! Call those opinions into question and you will be met with snide comments and insults. Who whouldda thought?

Talk about pots and kettles....
When facts and common sense totally contradict the official version what else are you meant to believe?

Quote:
Originally Posted by vampy View Post
The net is full of the pictures of the bits of the plane at the site - not a lot of bits left though. The security camera shots.......


Cheers
A few pretty props laid on the lawn for some official photos.

How can wings vapourise and not leave any marks on the building (pre collapse)

More importantly how can the engines vapourise?


Quote:
Originally Posted by paul
You can make your mind believe anything if your that set on something.

You have to ask yourself this, if (if being the operative word ) there was a strong possibility that there is some sort of conspiracy theory into this whole saga, then somebody somewhere, somehow would have had this proven.

The fact that it hasn't been, and lets be honest, 9/11 is quite a page in the history books, has got to tell you something.

No matter what the occurrence, you could pick holes in anything and everything and make believe that it's a conspiracy theory.

Like I said, once your set on something, you make your mind believe anything.
Like I mentioned earlier, IF this was a conspiracy then obviously the implications of that are huge. People get silenced, people get murdered, people get bought off in order to keep the majority of the population believing the story.



We are all entitled to our own opinion, but please try to base these opinions on facts and common sense and not just repeating the opinion of the people that perpetrated these crimes.

The more you look into the subject, the more all the pieces of the puzzle line up to show you the greater picture.
Try to steer clear of the many theories of what might have happened and concentrate on all the gaping holes that proves the official story incorrect.

spilioholio is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to spilioholio For This Useful Post:
henke (14-07-2013), JD51GNS (14-08-2013), ptwenty (14-07-2013)
Old 14-07-2013, 15:49   #80
vampy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ayrshire
Car: Dark Grey
Posts: 3,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by spilioholio View Post

A few pretty props laid on the lawn for some official photos.
There is a lot more evidence than that. Including the witnesses, the camera, and the dead. Up to you to dismiss it all as it is for me to be believe.

Cheers
__________________
I have no responsibility here whatsoever!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
vampy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 15:50   #81
vampy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ayrshire
Car: Dark Grey
Posts: 3,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul. View Post
You can make your mind believe anything if your that set on something.

You have to ask yourself this, if (if being the operative word ) there was a strong possibility that there is some sort of conspiracy theory into this whole saga, then somebody somewhere, somehow would have had this proven.

The fact that it hasn't been, and lets be honest, 9/11 is quite a page in the history books, has got to tell you something.

No matter what the occurrence, you could pick holes in anything and everything and make believe that it's a conspiracy theory.

Like I said, once your set on something, you make your mind believe anything.


Well said.
__________________
I have no responsibility here whatsoever!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
vampy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 16:07   #82
ptwenty
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,427
Hasn't occurred to you that people who conspire to commit a crime, would destroy evidence and try to conceal their activities?

Lots of evidence pointing to a conspiracy however.

Somebody, somewhere?
How about scholars and engineers, worldwide in peer reviewed papers.

Building 7 needs explaining if you want to say there is nothing proving the official story is bunkum.

So if you think anybody has a closed mind, explain WTC B7.

Without rewriting the laws of physics, if you don't mind Sir.
ptwenty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 16:13   #83
ptwenty
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by vampy View Post
There is a lot more evidence than that. Including the witnesses, the camera, and the dead. Up to you to dismiss it all as it is for me to be believe.

Cheers
Yeah, cheers. Cheeeeers.

None of it adds up to a plane though muttonhead.

They can find John the Baptist in there for all I care, still means they LIED about the PLANE.

Cheers again for taking part.
ptwenty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 17:27   #84
paul.
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In the garage
Car: 480hp E8, Audi A3 2.0tdi DSG daily
My Car
Posts: 2,540
Ptwenty, I think your that kind of bloke that would argue and fall out with yourself.
paul. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 23:03   #85
will2
Regional Organiser
 
will2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Ask google maps ffs !!
Car: jdm evo 7gsr , forged +full buddyclub exhaust,cams+ ix turbo,silver fastest with carbon ! ......
Posts: 20,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul. View Post
Ptwenty, I think your that kind of bloke that would argue and fall out with yourself.
...Fair comment ..but I go back and sit on the fence
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
will2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-07-2013, 23:53   #86
Beemer_Deano
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Yorkshire man, born 'n bred, strong in't arm un thick in't 'ead.
Car: Standardish Evo IV. I'd say it's blue, but according to our lass it's Barney Purple?
Posts: 247
There's a very good analysis of the Pentagon crash here, including the shots of downed lamp-posts, the +100 foot impact hole, evidence that the descent was within the capabilities of a 757, comparable wreckage sites etc.

Evidence aside, this piece shows the biggest difference between informed analysis and the sort of stuff that's typical of "conspiracy theorists". The author puts forward the evidence but concludes while it points to the likely impact of a 757, and likely flight 77, say's it's not conclusive evidence. You'll rarely see that from a "CT", their opinions are pretty much set in stone, until disproved then they're ignored or modified to fit the new evidence.

The available evidence points to an airliner crashing, we know an airliner disappeared that day, Occam's razor tells us the two events are the same. "CT"'s rarely get Occam's razor though.

Personally, the reasons why it was unlikely to be anything else hinge on the questions that "CT"'s never seem to want to answer. Questions like:-

If the whole thing was set up then why would they fire a missile into the Pentagon if they were capable of engineering two planes to crash into the WTC? Why not fly the plane into it anyway, since they would have had to get rid of it and its occupants?

If it was set up, why so little CCTV evidence? Surely a regime that can crash two planes into the WTC can surely fake convincing CCTV? Why attack a target in daylight at a location where they'd have to fake the hundreds eyewitnesses, each one capable of blowing the whole thing at any time?

Deano
Beemer_Deano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-07-2013, 00:04   #87
K
Registered User
 
K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: a man of kent
Car: EVO 7 RS S-P-R-I-N-T->
My Car
Posts: 26,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemer_Deano View Post
There's a very good analysis of the Pentagon crash here, including the shots of downed lamp-posts, the +100 foot impact hole, evidence that the descent was within the capabilities of a 757, comparable wreckage sites etc.

Evidence aside, this piece shows the biggest difference between informed analysis and the sort of stuff that's typical of "conspiracy theorists". The author puts forward the evidence but concludes while it points to the likely impact of a 757, and likely flight 77, say's it's not conclusive evidence. You'll rarely see that from a "CT", their opinions are pretty much set in stone, until disproved then they're ignored or modified to fit the new evidence.

The available evidence points to an airliner crashing, we know an airliner disappeared that day, Occam's razor tells us the two events are the same. "CT"'s rarely get Occam's razor though.

Personally, the reasons why it was unlikely to be anything else hinge on the questions that "CT"'s never seem to want to answer. Questions like:-

If the whole thing was set up then why would they fire a missile into the Pentagon if they were capable of engineering two planes to crash into the WTC? Why not fly the plane into it anyway, since they would have had to get rid of it and its occupants?

If it was set up, why so little CCTV evidence? Surely a regime that can crash two planes into the WTC can surely fake convincing CCTV? Why attack a target in daylight at a location where they'd have to fake the hundreds eyewitnesses, each one capable of blowing the whole thing at any time?

Deano

facts facts ****ing facts you can't be posting them on here I have you know

post reported.......
__________________
The north and the south of England hate each other, the Scottish hate the English, the Welsh hate the English, the English hate everyone, and everyone hates the Welsh.
K is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to K For This Useful Post:
geefin (15-07-2013)
Old 15-07-2013, 08:38   #88
Beemer_Deano
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Yorkshire man, born 'n bred, strong in't arm un thick in't 'ead.
Car: Standardish Evo IV. I'd say it's blue, but according to our lass it's Barney Purple?
Posts: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by K View Post
facts facts ****ing facts you can't be posting them on here I have you know

post reported.......
The thing is, the guy who wrote that would actually be classed as a conspiracy theorist, he was one of the original proponents of it not being an airliner that hit the Pentagon and still believes that Sept 911 wasn't just the act of a few terrorists. I wouldn't call him a "CT" in the derogatory sense though, clearly he's able to reason and to admit he's wrong when presented with evidence that shows his opinions to be incorrect, I don't have a problem with that and I don't equate him with your run of the mill "CT", the type who continues to argue a point no matter how hopeless it is. Amusingly it's usually the ones who talk abou how enlightened they are, and how everyone else are sheep that are the most gullible, due to their inability to accept information that doesn't meet their confirmation bias.

Deano
Beemer_Deano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-07-2013, 08:52   #89
henke
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,906
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemer_Deano View Post
There's a very good analysis of the Pentagon crash here, including the shots of downed lamp-posts, the +100 foot impact hole, evidence that the descent was within the capabilities of a 757, comparable wreckage sites etc.
It's only a very good analysis if you're in that camp. It shows pictures that contradict all the early pictures of the attack on the pentagon. You know the ones that show the 15 to 16 foot wide hole a plane apparently went through.

If you look on youtube the first tv reports from the pentagon claim it was hit by a missile, before the reporters were told otherwise. Donald Rumsfeld, the secretary of defense actually said "missile" by accident in a interview.

Take a butchers:



Little wonder the initial reports claimed it was hit by a missile. Nobody would believe it was a commercial airliner.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"Well, of course we're going to throw poo at them!"
henke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-07-2013, 11:27   #90
105170
Registered User
 
105170's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: You call it Earth
Car: Yogic Flying
My Car
Posts: 8,872
Some people are saying that the United States would never conspire to commit an atrocity and blame it on some other nation, well, thay drew up plans to commit such a crime in the 60's which went by the name of Operation Northwoods by hijacking plans and flying them into buildings....

Quote:
Operation Northwoods was a series of false flag proposals that originated within the United States government in 1962, but were rejected by the Kennedy administration.[2] The proposals called for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or other operatives, to commit perceived acts of terrorism in U.S. cities and elsewhere. These acts of terrorism were to be blamed on Cuba in order to create public support for a war against that nation, which had recently become communist under Fidel Castro.[3] One part of Operation Northwoods was to "develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington".

Operation Northwoods proposals included hijackings and bombings followed by the introduction of phony evidence that would implicate the Cuban government. It stated:

The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

.
105170 is offline   Reply With Quote
Mitsubishi Lancer Register
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT. The time now is 03:16.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2021 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.