[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632170]Sorta like saying that. But also a hundred other things that don't add up. It isnt one thing that makes me go "Hmm maybe there is more to this" but the combination of a hundred different ideas.
Like a passport surviving an inferno.
Men who were supposed to be hijackers reported alive.
etc.[/QUOTE]
Fires don't always destroy everything.
If they were supposed to be hijackers but were found alive then obviously they either were just on stand-by, missed the flight, or it was a mistake on intelligence.
Tiny inconsistencies and an eerie coincidences here and there does not a cover-up make. I could present plenty of little bits of trivia and coincidences to point out that the Lincoln assassination was similar in many ways to the Kennedy assassination, but that doesn't mean they're related.
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632170]
Why did Bush stay reading to the children if the nation was under attack, his life could have been in danger.[/QUOTE]
To show some composure, think about it, the reaction was bad enough already, imagine how it would've been if the leader of the nation panicked.
[QUOTE=asteroidrules;37632212]Stranger things have happened, and the "alive hijackers" thing is completely fake.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1559151.stm[/url]
[quote]FBI Director Robert Mueller acknowledged on Thursday that the identity of several of the suicide hijackers is in doubt. [/quote]
[editline]11th September 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=asteroidrules;37632306]To show some composure, think about it, the reaction was bad enough already, imagine how it would've been if the leader of the nation panicked.[/QUOTE]
Its not panicking, its being safe. They were unaware of how many planes were highjacked, another could have been headed straight for that school.
[editline]11th September 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;37632261]Fires don't always destroy everything.
If they were supposed to be hijackers but were found alive then obviously they either were just on stand-by, missed the flight, or it was a mistake on intelligence.
Tiny inconsistencies and an eerie coincidences here and there does not a cover-up make. I could present plenty of little bits of trivia and coincidences to point out that the Lincoln assassination was similar in many ways to the Kennedy assassination, but that doesn't mean they're related.[/QUOTE]
No, please don't bring up the Lincoln Kennedy shit. Its stuff about their birthdays and letters in peoples names. That stuff is plain stupid.
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632022]This is fine, but some people support a reinvestigation because NIST never did tests themselves for explosives at the time.[/QUOTE]
They didn't because there was no signs or proof of explosives.
[url]http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm[/url]
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;37632211]First off, I fail to see why you had to quote all of those names as though it'll get your point across. Secondly they may have degrees in Architecture, but realize architecture is a [I]very[/I] big field of study. Landscape architecture is a major, and that's essentially gardening.
[/QUOTE]
That is 1,500 engineers and architects. You can click there names on the website and see what field they are in. Why just blow them off?
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632044]Please Take Notice That:[/QUOTE]
would you believe in creationism if I posted a big list of names of creationists and nothing else to support creationism?
[QUOTE=AaronM202;37632045]What POSSIBLE reason would there be for the government to destroy three buildings, attack the pentagon, and attempt to crash another plane somewhere in pennsylvania?[/QUOTE]
Larry Silverstein bought the complex only a few months before hand, he made billions from the insurance policy which was also taken out at the time.
Maybe this (which aired in March 01 btw ) will help explain why too:
Maybe it's a coincidence, but it sure is a weird one.
[video=youtube;rIZ205ccX8M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIZ205ccX8M[/video]
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632400]That is 1,500 engineers and architects. You can click there names on the website and see what field they are in. Why just blow them off?[/QUOTE]
I read a study that most of them are either lying, don't have a real degree or are generally considered insane by their respective communities.
Even then, there are ten times more agreeing with the official story.
[QUOTE=cccritical;37632405]would you believe in creationism if I posted a big list of names of creationists and nothing else to support creationism?[/QUOTE]
Not at all. Why don't you look into what those engineers actually did instead. Watch the video compiled by them on their beliefs and make your own judgements.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg[/url]
[QUOTE=Techno-Man;37632449]Larry Silverstein bought the complex only a few months before hand, he made billions from the insurance policy which was also taken out at the time.
Maybe this (which aired in March 01 btw )will help explain why too:
[video=youtube;rIZ205ccX8M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIZ205ccX8M[/video][/QUOTE]
A coincidence that in no ways links anything to the government.
[editline]11th September 2012[/editline]
Not to mention he has been paying families affected for years.
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632329][url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1559151.stm[/url]
[/QUOTE]
FBI reports these men were hijackers. Hijackers turn up alive and well. FBI responds by saying they were indeed not some of the hijackers on the plane.
Where's the problem?
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632329]
Its not panicking, its being safe. They were unaware of how many planes were highjacked, another could have been headed straight for that school.
[/QUOTE]
What's the president supposed to do, jump into Air Force One and start up Missile Command: NORAD edition to shoot down any more incoming planes? The damage was already done and was being handled by systems in place designed for just such an occasion. The President did the prudent thing; finish up his time in the school without freaking anyone out, then get the hell out of there to hear what happened.
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632329]
No, please don't bring up the Lincoln Kennedy shit. Its stuff about their birthdays and letters in peoples names. That stuff is plain stupid.[/QUOTE]
I was trying to point out that the fact there are minor coincidences and interesting oddities in a nation-wide tragedy doesn't automatically mean something's up. I'm making a point that it's easy to make a connection between things and try to sell it as "the smoking gun."
And last I checked a show about aliens is not a source.
[QUOTE=ThePinkPanzer;37632450]I read a study that most of them are either lying, don't have a real degree or are generally considered insane by their respective communities.
Even then, there are ten times more agreeing with the official story.[/QUOTE]
Please cite. Should we move to the 9/11 debate thread?
[editline]11th September 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;37632478]FBI reports these men were hijackers. Hijackers turn up alive and well. FBI responds by saying they were indeed not some of the hijackers on the plane.
Where's the problem?
[/QUOTE]
The 9/11 Commission Report states it was 19 hijackers. They were never removed.
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632488]Please cite. Should we move to the 9/11 debate thread?[/QUOTE]
I read some of these engineers profiles and constantly see them making well debunked claims. Nothing they say is a problem in the event is actually true. Most of them have no photo's and almost no proof that they are real.
[QUOTE]There is no doubt in my mind that the collapses of all three buildings were caused by professionals using explosives.
I remember my surprise at the time that the buildings collapsed after the plane impacts. I could not understand why they would do so
Your demonstration of the creation of the myth was clear. The choice of words "structural collapse" by the man in the black t-shirt and baseball cap was clearly scripted.[/QUOTE]
I mean seriously, what type of argument is that.
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632488]
The 9/11 Commission Report states it was 19 hijackers. They were never removed.[/QUOTE]
And that reveals... What?
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;37632478]
I was trying to point out that the fact there are minor coincidences and interesting oddities in a nation-wide tragedy doesn't automatically mean something's up. I'm making a point that it's easy to make a connection between things and try to sell it as "the smoking gun."[/QUOTE]
I still don't think a comparison between the 9/11 and the Lincoln Kennedy thing should be made.
[editline]11th September 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;37632574]And that reveals... What?[/QUOTE]
Nothing really but why would the report state them as hijackers if they were still alive?
lol didnt they find terrorist passports near the WTC ruins
[QUOTE=HTMLfreak;37632118]I do think that 9/11 conspiracy theories were always a bit far fetched and still believe what i hear in the media, but we still shouldn't excuse the massive insurance policy on the building taken out soon before, and the witnesses who claim to have seen a military plane, not a commercial plane.[/QUOTE]
Anybody that thinks they would have use a military plane is probably not thinking at all.
If the government was trying to cover this up, why would they use actual military planes? That would be EXTREMELY obvious.
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632597]I still don't think a comparison between the 9/11 and the Lincoln Kennedy thing should be made.
[/QUOTE]
They were compared because the Lincoln-Kennedy links is a perfect example of how two disparate events can still have similarities that imply a correlation. Bits of interesting evidence and odd coincidences in an event as massive as 9/11 [I]does not equal[/I] a correlation to some massive conspiracy theory. As Freud once said, sometimes a cigar is really just a cigar.
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632597]
Nothing really but why would the report state them as hijackers if they were still alive?[/QUOTE]
Because they were originally labeled as hijackers and as such that bit of evidence should still be shown in the Commission. Not to mention a hijacker didn't have to be on the plane to have a hand in the plot, for all we know they could've been the guy procuring IDs and money.
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632329][Its not panicking, its being safe. They were unaware of how many planes were highjacked, another could have been headed straight for that school.
[/QUOTE]
Would still be perceived as panicking.
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632400]That is 1,500 engineers and architects. You can click there names on the website and see what field they are in. Why just blow them off?[/QUOTE]
Because, 1500 sounds like a big number on its own, but if you look at it as a percentage it comes out to approximately 0.01% of architects and engineers, meaning for every one in support of that petition, there are 99,999 who don't.
I've taken physics, I understand how things work, and this video makes perfect sense to me.
[video=youtube;oXxynEDpwrA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXxynEDpwrA[/video]
I'm sorry. It's not a controlled demolition. It just isn't.
[QUOTE=entertainer89;37631771]This is why I gave up trying to convince people. You say I don't know what I'm talking about[/quote]
Because you don't know what you're talking about.
[quote]What do you know? Are you an architect? A pilot? I highly doubt it. You know as much as I yet seem to think your more clued up.[/quote]
Because I have the miraculous ability to google things and realise most of your weird shit is so obviously wrong it may as well be satire.
[quote]A little paranoia never hurt anyone.[/quote]
Yes, yes it does. It hurts people all the time.
[quote]People say that ignorance is bliss to which I disagree heartily.[/quote]
You're in a state of ignorance, but not bliss. You are a very tragic person.
[quote]When I look at the world trade center attacks I simply can't believe the official story and you telling me I'm a fan of Alex Jones or some other wacko won't change my opinion.[/quote]
You can't believe it because you're ignorant as shit and walk with blinders on to any and all evidence that proves you wrong.
[quote]Finally, your arguments are as flimsy as the wtc steel beams. Logical fallacies and straw man arguments everywhere hurr durr.[/QUOTE]
Did you happen to ignore that essay I posted on the last page?
[QUOTE=HTMLfreak;37632118]I do think that 9/11 conspiracy theories were always a bit far fetched and still believe what i hear in the media, but we still shouldn't excuse the massive insurance policy on the building taken out soon before, and the witnesses who claim to have seen a military plane, not a commercial plane.[/QUOTE]
How do you make out a military plane and a commercial plane within milliseconds? So I'll excuse that.
As for the insurance policy. So what? This doesn't prove anything.
[editline]11th September 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632400]That is 1,500 engineers and architects. You can click there names on the website and see what field they are in. Why just blow them off?[/QUOTE]
Because they just signed a petition that that's LITERALLY their only credibility.
[editline]11th September 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632467]Not at all. Why don't you look into what those engineers actually did instead. Watch the video compiled by them on their beliefs and make your own judgements.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg[/url][/QUOTE]
Except this video has been disproved time and time again.
[editline]11th September 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Techno-Man;37632449]Larry Silverstein bought the complex only a few months before hand, he made billions from the insurance policy which was also taken out at the time.
Maybe this (which aired in March 01 btw ) will help explain why too:
Maybe it's a coincidence, but it sure is a weird one.
[video=youtube;rIZ205ccX8M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIZ205ccX8M[/video][/QUOTE]
Are you really citing a fucking Xfiles episode?
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632044]Please Take Notice That:
On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the undersigned Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and affiliates hereby petition for, and demand, a truly independent investigation with subpoena power in order to uncover the full truth surrounding the events of 9/11/01 – specifically the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7. We believe there is sufficient doubt about the official story to justify re-opening the 9/11 investigation. The new investigation must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that might have been the actual cause of the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7.
Sincerely,
- dumbasses -
And many many many more
[url]http://www2.ae911truth.org/signpetition.php[/url][/QUOTE]
meanwhile millions of other architects and engineers, who DONT believe in insane theories such as "ufos did it" and "death ray from low orbit" attest to the fact that the official story is true and complies with all known structural data about the building. oh but a couple thousand hack engineers who have been discredited and proven wrong by their colleagues and universities clearly outweigh the millions of "sheeple". just buy their book for $49.99 and find out!
[QUOTE=HTMLfreak;37632118]I do think that 9/11 conspiracy theories were always a bit far fetched and still believe what i hear in the media, but we still shouldn't excuse the massive insurance policy on the building taken out soon before, and the witnesses who claim to have seen a military plane, not a commercial plane.[/QUOTE]
yeah those witnesses who saw a military jet are a pretty big smoking gun. if only we all had video to prove that it was passenger planes, or even wreckage that was painted just like an American Airlines fli--
[t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5a/Flight_77_wreckage_at_Pentagon.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632597]
Nothing really but why would the report state them as hijackers if they were still alive?[/QUOTE]
Because the media sucks at wording things?
It SAYS in the fucking report that the FBI doubts it. Are pretending to be this dense or are you literally just so fucking out of your mind that reality and logic fall around you.
READ the god damn source YOU posted.
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632400]That is 1,500 engineers and architects. You can click there names on the website and see what field they are in. Why just blow them off?[/QUOTE]
because they're like 0.01% of architects and have been disproven a million times and half of them are trying to sell you a shitty book about how aliens are responsible for 9/11??
[editline]11th September 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632597]Nothing really but why would the report state them as hijackers if they were still alive?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;37632478]FBI reports these men were hijackers. Hijackers turn up alive and well. FBI responds by saying they were indeed not some of the hijackers on the plane.
[/QUOTE]
they corrected their mistake which was made in a frenzied investigation into one of the most memorable attacks on american soil in history. sorry they didn't build a time machine to go back and change the 9/11 commission report just because they guessed wrong on 4 guys
I wonder what kind of response someone would get if they posted a thousand threads about how the moon landing was faked by the reptilian illuminati on every anniversary of neil armstrong's death
Governor Goblin I would like to say your posts have been meticulous and persuading. I see that 9/11 was very likely not more than it actually is, however I still enjoyed thinking and reading about how it could have been.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-- Aristotle
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37634029]
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-- Aristotle[/QUOTE]
educated minds don't 'entertain' that 2+2 could be anything other than 4
[QUOTE=cccritical;37634162]educated minds don't 'entertain' that 2+2 could be anything other than 4[/QUOTE]
Well 2+2 could equal 5 if we're dealing with extremely large values of 2.
[QUOTE=MadPro119;37632044]Please Take Notice That:
On Behalf of the People of the United States of America, the undersigned Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and affiliates hereby petition for, and demand, a truly independent investigation with subpoena power in order to uncover the full truth surrounding the events of 9/11/01 – specifically the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers and Building 7. We believe there is sufficient doubt about the official story to justify re-opening the 9/11 investigation. The new investigation must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that might have been the actual cause of the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7.
Sincerely,
The Undersigned
Architects
(Degreed & Licensed – Active & Retired)
Richard Gage, AIA, Architect
Lic: C19220
B. Arch.
Berkeley, CA Daniel B. Barnum, FAIA
Lic: TX3741
BArch, Rice University
Houston, TX
David Paul Helpern, FAIA
Lic: NY 03 010070
Ny, NY Kevin A. Kelly, FAIA
Lic: TX7724
Austin, TX
Paul Stevenson Oles, FAIA
Lic: MASSACHUSETTS 2754
MArch, Architecture, Yale
Santa Fe, NM Eason Cross, FAIA
Lic: Virginia and Maryland
BA Harvard, MArch. HGSD
Alexandria, VA
Harry G. Robinson III, FAIA
Lic: Architect 2667, Washington, DC
B Arch and MCP Harvard U. / MCPUD Harvar
Washington, DC Abby Goodman, VP
Lic: ARC4744
BS Psychology
Washington, DC
Alan Anderson Jr, Architect
Lic: C10835 CA
BS Architecture, Cal Poly SLO
Fair Oaks, CA Alan Haymond, Architect
Lic: 025143
B Arch., Rensselaer Polytechnic
Greenwich, NY
Alan D. Kato, Architect
Lic: 001-010128
Bachelor of Science
Morton Grove, IL Alan Shulman, Architect
Lic: 1165 NH
B. of Architecture
New London, NH
Alan Tyson Zorthian, Architect
Lic: C22838
B.A.
Altadena, CA Alexander Davidson Dority, Architect
Lic: Arizona license No. 8380
B.A. Architecture, Stanford 1962
Santa Fe, NM
Alice F. Dodson, AIA
Lic: NC 6304
Asheville, NC Allen Kitselman, Architect
Lic: 6642
BA Arch
Berryville, VA
Andrew Wolff, Architect, AIA,LEED
Lic: 30395 CA
M Arch, Yale University
Los Angeles, CA Andus H. Brandt, Architect
Lic: Cal. Architect's license C27998
B.A. Architecture
Berkeley, CA
Anne Lee, AIA
Lic: AR-10177 MA
M.Arch
Boston, MA April Wethe Palencia, Aia, Architect
Lic: C31675
Bach of Architecture, Univ. of Miami
Santa Barbara, CA
Arlene Hopkins, Architect & Educator
Lic: California (28239) & Nevada (2267)
M.Arch & M.A. Education
Santa Monica, CA Arpad A. Chabafy, Architect
Lic: California Licensed Architect C-9141
Architecture, Masters / Post Earthquake
Newport Beach, CA
Barry Koren, Architect
Lic: 3281-005 WI
B.Arch, City College of NY.
Oak Park, IL Barry NewDelman, Architect, ALA, NCARB
Lic: 01-006448 Ill, 3113-5 WI
B. Arch., University of Illinois
Portland, OR
Bassam Altwal, V.P. Architecture
Lic: 1576A2 (overseas)
Masters in Architecture
Concord, CA Bertie McKinney Bonner, AIA
Lic: RA009013X
M. Arch
Media, PA
Brad Will, AIA, LEED AP
Lic: 028572-1 NY
B. Arch.
Woodstock, NY Bradley J. Marczuk, Architect
Lic: AR-1814
B.Arch - UofO, M.Arch- UofW
Boise, ID
Brandon M. Chouinard, Architect
Lic: A5550 OK
B. Arch, U. of Oklahoma
Oklahoma City, OK Brian Van Hromadka, AIA
Lic: 50076 MA
M. Architecture, Boston Architectural Co
Newburyport, MA
Bruce B. Maxwell, Architect
Lic: C27715
M.Arch.
Oakland, CA Bryan Evan Westgate, Architect
Lic: arc.0914988
Master Of Architecture
Cleveland, OH
C Matthew Taylor, Architect
Lic: South Carolina Architect's License #AR .4827 I, ex
B.A. Architecture, U. of Cincinnati
Hilton Head Island, SC C. Michael Henry, Sr., President
B. Arch.
Newport News, VA
C.J. Richards, R.A., B. Arch
Lic: 7505-5 WI
B.A., Architecture, U-Minnesota
Milwaukee, WI Cary J. Spiegel, AIA
Lic: NY 03022495, NJ 21AI01239900
B. Arch, City College, NY
Plainfield, NJ
Charles W. Ekstedt Sr., B. Arch.
Lic: MN #: 19398
B. Arch., U of Minnesota
Saint Paul, MN Charles Ralph Traylor, Architect
Lic: Texas 4179 also NCARB certificate 21435
B Arch Texas Tech
Dallas, TX
Christian Mungenast, AIA, Architect
Lic: Massachusetts Architect's License #8856, exp. 8/08
Arlington, MA Christine R. Balint, Architect
Lic: Architect in NY, NJ, PA & MI
B. Arch.
Aberdeen, NJ
Christopher C. Allen, AIA
Lic: 1301037464
Ann Arbor, MI Christopher Free, Architect
Lic: 56914 MI
M. Arch., Architecture, U.of Illinois
Brighton, MI
Crystal Danielle Nanney, AIA
Lic: FL AR93662
B. Arch, University of Detroit Mercy
Savannah, GA Cynthia Howard, AIA
Lic: MArch MIT, 1243 ME, 4486 MA
Biddeford Pool, ME
Dale R. Port, Architect
Lic: Lic. # 1760 State of Iowa
Waterloo, IA Dale Williams, Landscape Architect
Lic: 2384 CA
MS in Land Arch, Univ of Arizona
Cameron Park, CA
Damon C. Smith, AIA
Lic: AR94915
B.A, Carnegie Mellon University
Orlando, FL Dan Bartlett, AIA
Lic: New Hampshire Architect's license 2919
B. Arch
Keene, NH
Daniel R. Hirtler, architect
Lic: 023012-NY
B.Arch.
Ithaca, NY Daniel La Pan, Executive Director, Facility Services
Lic: Michigan License #1301034243
BS, M Arch
Saginaw, MI
Daniel Roach, B.Arch, AIA
Lic: OR 3978
B.Arch Drury University
Salem, OR Dante Amato, AIA+NCARB+LEED AP - Architect
Lic: CA: C28394; NV: 6224; CO: ARC 203438; NM: 00479
BA Environmental Des./Arch. UC Berkeley
Las Vegas, NV
Dartmond Cherk, Architect
Lic: C3743
B.A., Architecture, UC Berkeley
Mill Valley, CA Dave E. Arnoth, NCARB
Lic: 201812 CO (Colorado)
M. Arch, University of New Mexico
Los Angeles, CA
David Joiner, AIA
Lic: KS 3700
Bachelor of architecture
Shawnee Mission, KS David Ray Solomon, Architect
Lic: State of Colo. 202351
BA Architecture
Denver, CO
David A. Techau, AIA
Lic: 12496
BArch-Az. State, MSc, Cornell
Kula, HI Deane Rykerson, AIA NCARB LEED AP
Lic: MA 8400
BArch Boston AC MDes Harvard
Cambridge, MA
Dennis R. Holloway, Architect
Lic: New Mexico Architect License #002569
B.Arch., Univ. of Mich., MAUD, Harvard G
Rio Rancho, NM Dennis L. Lippert, Architect
Lic: Montana #1829 & Colorado #400695
Montana State University
Missoula, MT
Dennis E. Teske, Architect
Lic: C-7351 CA
Foster City, CA Dohn C. Swedberg, Architect
Lic: 2272
B.A. Architecture
Tacoma, WA
And many many many more
[url]http://www2.ae911truth.org/signpetition.php[/url][/QUOTE]
soo what? what's that? like 0.1% of their respective fields? there's morons in every profession.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
