Are conspiracy theories destroying democracy?

[Goldstone76]

Yep using cardboard boxes doesn't come close to replicating the science and scale of what happened. A dumb example by your leader.

The towers didn't freefall anyway as explained in the video I uploaded earlier.

You haven't recruited any converts on here so your mission has been a complete failure.

That's all I have to say on the matter, but good luck on your quest and don't forget to set up a direct debit to Richard Gage to help him on his truth mission.

Theres a lot of blah blah blah but zero substance.. Nite nite..

 

[Seagull on the wing]

I really cannot believe some CT posters are saying there were no planes,internal charges were used...OK we know one plane crashed into a field,so that's accounted for. But what about the other 3 planes...if they did not crash into the towers and the pentagon...what happened to them...they must have gone somewhere...but no other crash sites have been reported.
I watched the Documentry on rebuilding the NY subway and an engineer explained how much the TT collapse damaged the subway and the reason being that the heat of the fires buckled the cross braces in the floor,which attached to the outer girders pulled inwards causing the towers collapse.
Parts of the planes,landing wheel,part of a wing were scattered around the area.

9,717 of burning aviation fuel will bring down any building that is of height....(North)
9,118 in the South tower.
The reason the pentagon came off with less damage was A. It was not a tall building so less weight on top.
B. The walls were over 20ft of reinforced concrete.
So CTs....What happened to the planes that were Kaput,no more,gone.....answers on a £10 note please...

 

[hybrid_x]

......OK we know one plane crashed into a field,.......

pfffff......lol.

I love this site, it must be a troll invasion of the century, or some people do not know criticial thinking, stockholm syndrome, or cognitive dissonance.


let me help you.....no bodies, no plane (well a few placed pieces of scrap metal) were found, just this was found......

 

[pipkin112]

pfffff......lol.

I love this site, it must be a troll invasion of the century, or some people do not know criticial thinking, stockholm syndrome, or cognitive dissonance.


let me help you.....no bodies, no plane (well a few placed pieces of scrap metal) were found, just this was found......


View attachment 48512

Must. Stop. Reading. This. Crap.

 

[One Love]

This was posted on another site.

WHY would the government do it? I don’t mean Iraq , oil etc I mean why would they do it in this way ? just to help a pal with his insurance?

Why use a plane at all . Why crash your own airline industry and every other countries { Swissair etc}, damage your financial markets { just when you are going to need some war funds} destroy very very
valuable property, panic the WORLD, kill your own citizens etc. Could all this not be achieved by a ‘foiled’ plot. Terrorists were 15 minutes from the murder of thousands… a president would certainly come out better
having stopped an attack than permitted one. Or if you needed a big attack why not just the anthrax that came after. Everyone panicking over any white powder. Far far easier to plant Anthrax or similar in the towers or Disneyland, have a panic, then capture your suspects who blow themselves up or whatever you want.

If you were going to do this, would you do it this way?’ There are cheaper, better, easier and safer ways to get into a war.. Also why pick Osama as the fall guy if the target is Hussein. Why not just pick Saddam and ‘plant’ evidence to show it was him all along, thereby never needing to go to Afghanistan at all .After all if you can plan the attack why not the culprit.. no need to go scratching for evidence of a link to Iraq AFTER the attack , set it up before.

Funny how the authorities are both all powerful, all seeing, all knowing, and completely incompetent at the same time...

The good old Pearl Harbor theory always struck me the same way . Why destroy your fleet just as you are planning war. Discover the jap carriers 500 miles out while on manouevers’ and the impact on public opinion would be similar to a attack.

Why sink your whole fleet ? Especially if you could sink theirs .. take a few years off the war if they lost 6 carriers day 1 !!

 

[Goldstone76]

Must. Stop. Reading. This. Crap.

Ahh yes.. the mystery of the Shanksville field.. The plane that was shot down??

"This crash was different. There was no wreckage, no bodies, and no noise."
- Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller [1]

"I was looking for anything that said tail, wing, plane, metal. There was nothing."
- Photographer Scott Spangler

"I was amazed because it did not, in any way, shape, or form, look like a plane crash."
- Patrick Madigan, commander of the Somerset barracks of the Pennsylvania State Police

"It was strange. The black boxes are right next to each other on the aircraft, but one was found 13 feet deeper into the crater than the other." In other words, had Flight 93 really crashed at this location, the black boxes should have been found in the same place. The fact that they weren't suggests they were planted at the site, but had carelessly been placed at different depths in the soil. Morrison also commented that FBI agents had been "surprised, quite honestly, that we didn't find [the black boxes] sooner."
-FBI agent Wells Morrison


"I know of two people - I will not mention names - that heard a missile. "They both live very close, within a couple of hundred yards. . .This one fellow's served in Vietnam and he says he's heard them, and he heard one that day." The mayor adds that based on what he knows about that morning, military F-16 fighter jets were "very, very close."
- Mayor Ernie Stuhl

Federal investigators said on Thursday they could not rule out the possibility that the United jet was shot down. "We have not ruled out that," FBI agent Bill Crowley told a news conference when asked about reports that a U.S. fighter jet may have fired on the hijacked Boeing 757. "We haven't ruled out anything yet." - CBS 58 News

“I (Dick Cheney) gave the instructions that we’d authorize our pilots to take it out,” he says, referring to the jet headed to Washington that crashed in a Pennsylvania field. He adds: “After I’d given the order, it was pretty quiet. Everybody had heard it, and it was obviously a significant moment.” - The New York Times’ Maureen Dowd

"If they hadn't shot down the fourth plane [Flight 93] it would've hit the dome," Stone, a Navy officer, said in his opening remarks (Guantanamo trial). [Reuters]

Make of these witness statements as you will..

 

[One Love]

let me help you.....no bodies, no plane (well a few placed pieces of scrap metal) were found, just this was found......ATTACH=CONFIG]48512[/ATTACH]

Ernie Stull (the Mayor of Shanksville) has been reported as visiting the site and saying there was no plane.

He is asked about this

The man is speechless: "My statements were taken completely out of context. Of course there was an airplane. It's just that there wasn't much left of it after the explosion. That's what I meant when I said 'no airplane'. I saw parts of the wreckage with my own eyes, even one of the engines. It was lying in the bushes."

"They just found the two turbines because, of course, they're heavier and more massive than everything else. But there was almost nothing left of the actual airplane. You can still find plate-sized parts out there. And Neville from the farm over there found an aluminum part from the airplane's outside shell behind his barn that must've been about 8 by 10 or even 8 by 12 feet."

 

[One Love]

Make of these witness statements as you will..

As you can see there are statements for and against all over the internet.

You believe what you want to believe and so will I.

 

[beorhthelm]

... 9/11 was essential and is to date one of the most defining moments in history. Anything less than what happened on 9/11 would not have given the needed leverage the Bush regime needed.

you keep saying this, but it did not give them the leverage they needed to invade Iraq. 9/11 leads to a military engagement that has little strategic purpose and is a distraction of the main trust of all that neocon objectives you draw upon. remember, China, India and Europe have walk away with most the mineral and resource rights in Afghanistan, how exactly does this square with the plot? they have to have a whole other concoction to go into Iraq. this does not make sence. the evidence of controled demolition doesnt stand up and the motive doesnt stand up.

 

[Goldstone76]

This was posted on another site.

WHY would the government do it? I don’t mean Iraq , oil etc I mean why would they do it in this way ? just to help a pal with his insurance? Not only was there a high insurance payout but there was also suspected insider dealing on the airlines involved.. something in the order of $5m plus was made but these two issues were not the point. The Bush administration needed something huge to get the world reaction they needed in order to allow them to invade Iraq and of course eventually Afghanistan. There is also evidence to suggest that plans were already being made for regime change in other Middle East countries.

Why use a plane at all . Why crash your own airline industry and every other countries { Swissair etc}, damage your financial markets { just when you are going to need some war funds} destroy very very
valuable property, The Twin Towers were bought cheap.. they were full of Asbestos.

panic the WORLD, YES!! kill your own citizens etc. Yes.. 4,487 US servicemen died in Iraq alone with around 100,000 Iraqis dead. The irony is that foreign policy by the USA has created the war on terror and will be going on long after we have all passed,

Could all this not be achieved by a ‘foiled’ plot. Terrorists were 15 minutes from the murder of thousands… a president would certainly come out better
having stopped an attack than permitted one. Or if you needed a big attack why not just the anthrax that came after. Everyone panicking over any white powder. Far far easier to plant Anthrax or similar in the towers or Disneyland, have a panic, then capture your suspects who blow themselves up or whatever you want. Again the drama isnt big enough IMHO. Bush sold himself post 9/11 as the saviour of the USA and also earned a 2nd term on the back of the invasion of Iraq.

If you were going to do this, would you do it this way?’ There are cheaper, better, easier and safer ways to get into a war.. How? Bush never would have got the UN mandate to invade Iraq without a very good reason. Watch Hubris.. which goes into very fine detail with those who were actually in government etc about how he forced the war with Iraq through the system. Had there been no 9/11 I dont think he would have got into Iraq ... or even Afghanistan.

Also why pick Osama as the fall guy if the target is Hussein. Why not just pick Saddam and ‘plant’ evidence to show it was him all along, thereby never needing to go to Afghanistan at all .After all if you can plan the attack why not the culprit.. no need to go scratching for evidence of a link to Iraq AFTER the attack , set it up before. Its all about the control or regions, natural resources and regime change. The arms industry has profited enormously with annual defense industry profits have nearly quadrupled, approaching $25 billion last year. As much as Bush tried to force a relationship between Hussein and Bin Laden none has ever been proved. They were both ideologically opposed. Bin Laden's enemy was the Saudi Royal famile etc. and then the USA.. even though Bin Laden was once in the pay of the CIA. The reason why no WMD was found in Iraq was that it was finally proved to have all been removed years earlier.. its in the Hubris doc..

Funny how the authorities are both all powerful, all seeing, all knowing, and completely incompetent at the same time... Yes your right.. They got through this by the skin of their teeth.. so far

The good old Pearl Harbor theory always struck me the same way . Why destroy your fleet just as you are planning war. Discover the jap carriers 500 miles out while on manouevers’ and the impact on public opinion would be similar to a attack. Again the reason is profit.. wars are good for profit and the 2nd ww was profitable for the USA.. Conflict is started to gain resources and regions or to implement regime change.. which in the longer term becomes profit. The loss of machinery and people is not necessarily a concern of those who run countries.

Why sink your whole fleet ? Especially if you could sink theirs .. take a few years off the war if they lost 6 carriers day 1 !!

Yes I agree.. but the conspiracy theory goes something like.. President Roosevelt provoked the attack, knew about it in advance and covered up his failure to warn the Hawaiian commanders. Congress were overwhelmingly against entering the war in Europe. It was his backdoor to war. The other irony was that up until this point US companies were supplying both the UK and Germany with parts etc. Germany was sold oil by the USA.. Like 9/11 when you start digging there are inconsistancys with official history accounts. Ford for example were very entrenched in Nazi Germany.

 

[One Love]

Yes I agree.. but the conspiracy theory goes something like.. President Roosevelt provoked the attack, knew about it in advance and covered up his failure to warn the Hawaiian commanders. Congress were overwhelmingly against entering the war in Europe. It was his backdoor to war. The other irony was that up until this point US companies were supplying both the UK and Germany with parts etc. Germany was sold oil by the USA.. Like 9/11 when you start digging there are inconsistancys with official history accounts. Ford for example were very entrenched in Nazi Germany.

All this shows you are very firmly entrenched in your view of the world.

I don't think any amount of persuasive argument or logic is going to shift you.

 

[Goldstone76]

you keep saying this, but it did not give them the leverage they needed to invade Iraq. 9/11 leads to a military engagement that has little strategic purpose and is a distraction of the main trust of all that neocon objectives you draw upon. remember, China, India and Europe have walk away with most the mineral and resource rights in Afghanistan, how exactly does this square with the plot? they have to have a whole other concoction to go into Iraq. this does not make sence. the evidence of controled demolition doesnt stand up and the motive doesnt stand up.

It gave the USA the leverage to get into Afghanistan immediately and added weight to Iraq. The strategy is getting feet on the ground in the region. I think Bush was arrogant enough to think that Iraq would be a walk in the park hence the non existent plan for a post Hussein Iraq. Afghanistan has huge mineral reserves plus a project proposed by several oil companies to transport oil from Azerbaijan and Central Asia through Afghanistan to Pakistan.

The way I see it there was a controlled demolition of the WTC... most certainly Building 7 at the very least.

 

[Goldstone76]

Ernie Stull (the Mayor of Shanksville) has been reported as visiting the site and saying there was no plane.

He is asked about this

The man is speechless: "My statements were taken completely out of context. Of course there was an airplane. It's just that there wasn't much left of it after the explosion. That's what I meant when I said 'no airplane'. I saw parts of the wreckage with my own eyes, even one of the engines. It was lying in the bushes."

"They just found the two turbines because, of course, they're heavier and more massive than everything else. But there was almost nothing left of the actual airplane. You can still find plate-sized parts out there. And Neville from the farm over there found an aluminum part from the airplane's outside shell behind his barn that must've been about 8 by 10 or even 8 by 12 feet."

"And Neville from the farm over there found an aluminum part from the airplane's outside shell behind his barn that must've been about 8 by 10 or even 8 by 12 feet"

... if Flight 93 crashed into a hole as described by the official version how did a part of the plane end up away from the hole? If you consider the Lockerbie event, which happened at 31,000 feet, then the wreckage distributes itself over a large area of countryside BUT it was grouped together. The angle and speed of impact obviously comes into play and the Lockerbie plane was larger.. The Pennsylvania state police said debris from the crash has shown up about 8 miles away in a residential area where local media quoted some residents as seeing flaming debris from the sky.

 

[Hillian1]

Any chance you could post another animated gif with a real airliner hitting a real skyscraper so I can judge how the building should have reacted?

Still waiting.

 

[Goldstone76]

All this shows you are very firmly entrenched in your view of the world.

I don't think any amount of persuasive argument or logic is going to shift you.

Ditto.. its all a question of what reality you/I/we have.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

Ahh yes.. the mystery of the Shanksville field.. The plane that was shot down??

"This crash was different. There was no wreckage, no bodies, and no noise."
- Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller [1]

"I was looking for anything that said tail, wing, plane, metal. There was nothing."
- Photographer Scott Spangler

"I was amazed because it did not, in any way, shape, or form, look like a plane crash."
- Patrick Madigan, commander of the Somerset barracks of the Pennsylvania State Police

"It was strange. The black boxes are right next to each other on the aircraft, but one was found 13 feet deeper into the crater than the other." In other words, had Flight 93 really crashed at this location, the black boxes should have been found in the same place. The fact that they weren't suggests they were planted at the site, but had carelessly been placed at different depths in the soil. Morrison also commented that FBI agents had been "surprised, quite honestly, that we didn't find [the black boxes] sooner."
-FBI agent Wells Morrison


"I know of two people - I will not mention names - that heard a missile. "They both live very close, within a couple of hundred yards. . .This one fellow's served in Vietnam and he says he's heard them, and he heard one that day." The mayor adds that based on what he knows about that morning, military F-16 fighter jets were "very, very close."
- Mayor Ernie Stuhl

Federal investigators said on Thursday they could not rule out the possibility that the United jet was shot down. "We have not ruled out that," FBI agent Bill Crowley told a news conference when asked about reports that a U.S. fighter jet may have fired on the hijacked Boeing 757. "We haven't ruled out anything yet." - CBS 58 News

“I (Dick Cheney) gave the instructions that we’d authorize our pilots to take it out,” he says, referring to the jet headed to Washington that crashed in a Pennsylvania field. He adds: “After I’d given the order, it was pretty quiet. Everybody had heard it, and it was obviously a significant moment.” - The New York Times’ Maureen Dowd

"If they hadn't shot down the fourth plane [Flight 93] it would've hit the dome," Stone, a Navy officer, said in his opening remarks (Guantanamo trial). [Reuters]

Make of these witness statements as you will..

I will...but query the picture of the crater,the crater will depend at what angle the plane hit the ground,if it went nose first straight down then the crater will be smaller, but from the black box it had just over 7,000 gallons of avation fuel on board and hit the ground at 560 mph,so there would not be much wreakage left,most of the bodies and the light bodywork would have been burnt up.
You seem to know a lot of people...you've spoken to people who were witnesses of the Two Towers,spoken to people in Afghanistan...and you know two people,'they heard a missile, both live very close,within a couple of hundred yards...what near each other, or near the crash site....There must be a song for you...Ah!YES, 'I've been everywhere man,I've been everywhere....
Your saying the the USAF shot the plane down,maybe that was the missile they heard and if the plane flying at 560mph was hit by a missile it would've disintigrated.
You also quote that the black boxes were planted...OK So this plane slams into the ground,they then come and plant the black boxes...with all the information of the flight on them at different levels...really.
You do stretch incredibility to the highest levels,but as I say,it is your choice but you do not have much support on here for your theories.
But good luck in your research...hope you come across the truth.....good night.

 

[Goldstone76]

I will...but query the picture of the crater,the crater will depend at what angle the plane hit the ground,if it went nose first straight down then the crater will be smaller, but from the black box it had just over 7,000 gallons of avation fuel on board and hit the ground at 560 mph,so there would not be much wreakage left,most of the bodies and the light bodywork would have been burnt up.
You seem to know a lot of people...you've spoken to people who were witnesses of the Two Towers,spoken to people in Afghanistan...and you know two people,'they heard a missile, both live very close,within a couple of hundred yards...what near each other, or near the crash site....There must be a song for you...Ah!YES, 'I've been everywhere man,I've been everywhere....
Your saying the the USAF shot the plane down,maybe that was the missile they heard and if the plane flying at 560mph was hit by a missile it would've disintigrated.
You also quote that the black boxes were planted...OK So this plane slams into the ground,they then come and plant the black boxes...with all the information of the flight on them at different levels...really.
You do stretch incredibility to the highest levels,but as I say,it is your choice but you do not have much support on here for your theories.
But good luck in your research...hope you come across the truth.....good night.

Dick Cheney gave a shoot down order (which later was said to have been ignored by the military). This is a fact so the question is did the military shoot 93' down and then the government later decided to say that the passengers overcame the terrorists (official line) or did an F16 shoot down hence the evidence both physical and verbal? I have been to New York and to Afghanistan yes.. I never said I spoke to the Shanksville witnesses. Have a read here.. you may become curious! (or not)..

 

[symyjym]

Your saying the the USAF shot the plane down, maybe that was the missile they heard and if the plane flying at 560mph was hit by a missile it would've disintigrated.

I wasn't going to post anymore but you make such a good point.

If the USAF shot down the plane with a missile, the wreckage would have been that of Lockerbie and would have been was strewn for miles. Whereas a plane nose diving into the ground would have left a crater. and at the speed it hit, with humans being 60% water it would have turned people into soup.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

Agree with you on time of impact 10.03. Just read your link,interesting but it is a CT site.
It is possible that when flight 93 hit the deck it exploded sending debris that was not burnt everywhere,if the plane hit the ground at a slight angle it would have put one black box at a different level.
The thing for these links and youtube videos...you put up one video,somebody could find a video that was completely different view on the same subject.
Vodka time so goodnight...watch out for the vampires....

 

[Seagull on the wing]

I wasn't going to post anymore but you make such a good point.

If the USAF shot down the plane with a missile, the wreckage would have been that of Lockerbie and would have been was strewn for miles. Whereas a plane nose diving into the ground would have left a crater. and at the speed it hit, with humans being 60% water it would have turned people into soup.

Tomato or Ministrone....is there a theory about it ?