leftysurprise said:

guruu said:

Just because lots of bullshit surrounds 9/11 doesn't mean the government caused it.

You conspiracy theorists need to break free from the confines of your own minds.

---

not all of us think the government did it.

i for one do not think george bush had anything to do with it. what i do believe that it is a possibility and a probability that some elements within the government had something to do with it, and at the very least helped it happen.

some elements within our government had to have either stood by idly while it happened, or wanted it to happen for whatever reasons, for the historically monumental blunders that happened, to happen.

either it was helped by people within this government and country, or the "greatest nation on earth" is run by a bunch of fucking idiots. i seriously doubt that THAT many people in THAT many branches of the government are THAT retarded.

Quote:

You conspiracy theorists need to break free from the confines of your own minds.

---

why do you find it so hard to step out of the confine of your own mind and accept the possibility that not every american is good, and that many of them work for their own benefit? why is it so hard for you to accept the possibility that people within our own government would have no problem allowing its own people to die for whatever reason? i have stepped out of the box long ago, where are you?

---

guruu said:

Just to clarify: if all you're saying is that the government let 9/11 happen, I have no way of refuting that. It makes sense and is theoretically plausible, but at the same time it seems unlikely that so many people would allow such negligence to occur. The thing about a conspiracy is that you can't have too many people involved in it or else word WILL get out.

If you think the government actively planned and executed 9/11, I'm sorry but that's dumb. I'm not being a sheep. All that shit about building 7, it's been refuted by college physicists and the like. It's easy to fall into the traps of conspiracy theories. Ya gots ta be careful.

---

leftysurprise said:

this is pretty accurate. i think that it was mostly allowed to happen for their benefit, because noone can deny that the current administration has benefitted from 9/11. however i do think that some people HERE did help with the planning, not many, but i definately think a few did.

---

zSDMF said:

the only real way to settle the 9/11 conspiracy is to just not give a fuck.  planes clearly hit the buildings and they fell.  there probably is a lot more important details missing but thank the lord i'm not concerned with them.

---

LOL,

some guy was in the news this week.  He was on a first date with a girl.  The police found the girl dead with 30+ knife wounds.  The guy said she was suicidal and had stabbed herself to death.

I expect you think she did stab herself to death.

Humble lurker said:

zSDMF said:

the only real way to settle the 9/11 conspiracy is to just not give a fuck.  planes clearly hit the buildings and they fell.  there probably is a lot more important details missing but thank the lord i'm not concerned with them.

---

LOL,

some guy was in the news this week.  He was on a first date with a girl.  The police found the girl dead with 30+ knife wounds.  The guy said she was suicidal and had stabbed herself to death.

I expect you think she did stab herself to death.

---

manyc said:

I heard about that, and don't doubt it for a second. The government is a cold, heartless collective organism of selfish individuals only concerned with its own survival. I think its snowballed into something that not even the "leaders" could stop. We are expendable worker ants to them.

---

Viveka said:

Go back and look at my post on page 3 regarding WTC7. Address the points in that post or you are doing nothing more than regurgitating tired bullshit.

---

Quote:

These days this is the most tired misnomer in the true believers' jumblebag. No, it wasn't hit by a plane...but it was hit by huge chunks of concrete and steel falling on it, doesn't that count?

Captain Chris Boyle
Engine 94 - 18 years

Boyle: ...on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.

Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?

Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.

Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?

Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.

www.911myths.com/assets/images/WTC7Corner.jpg

The building was heavily damaged, but you apparently didn't know that otherwise you wouldn't have been so cocksure and loud about it.

Maybe analysis of evidence isn't for you. Perhaps try some critical thinking: If your assertion is that WTC7 was brought down in controlled demolition, would purpose did the controlled demo serve? Was it to destroy evidence? Think that one through for a second and you see how stupid it is. If there was something damning in the building, it could have been burned, or deleted, or moved or removed in advance (like you probably believe the explosive charges in the towers were placed by a black ops team).

What functional purpose could taking down WTC7 with controlled demolition possibly serve for the perpetrators? Oh, lemme guess, it was Larry Silverstein's insurance policy right?

---

Shroomism said:

It doesn't make me feel good at all. The truth that is. In fact, it makes me very, very angry.

---

leftysurprise said:

even that picture does not convince me as to why the building fell in the manner it did. the damage was to one corner, and the hole was roughly 2-3 offices deep, lets just suppose for a minute that the damage shown in the picture WAS enough for the whole building to collapse, it does not explain how the building fell uniformly straight down at the same time, and into itself creating a neat pile of small pieces inside the perimeter of the building. it should have collapsed towards the damaged corner, and the whole building would not have collapsed from the damage shown. there should have been large chunks and huge connecting twisted sections of steel frame.

take a good look at the two videos i posted of the building 7 collapse and tell me you honestly think the damage shown in that picture is responsible for what you see, it is impossible considering the structural strength and design of the frame.

---

You're using a fucking video to determine how a building should have fallen.  Nothing you say is valid.  Then you talk about the structural strength and design of the frame.   I would like to see the structural drawings that you're referencing.