If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Absolutely. That's why I think regime change is morally justified, but the people doing the regime change weren't in any political position to do it (plus various other things that I predicted would lead to the cock up).
The pentagon ...The soft nose of a jet traveling at a couple of hundred miles an hour drills a hole straight through reinforced concrete that is designed to withstand bomb blasts but ...the two engines on either side made of steel and titanium ...one of the hardest substances man can make ...weighing nine tons each ...don't touch the building.
The government declare they have recovered the DNA of all the passengers on board but ...the heat was enough to vapourise a whole plane ...no black box recovered ...that too was vapourised ...do you know how delicate DNA is?
Rolls Royce state that the small engine found at the scene is not one of theirs ...not from that kind of plane.
Building number seven. A small fire burns cos the central heating tank has caught fire ...this is deisel not petrol ...does not reach high temperatures.
The building has not been hit. The building is forty seven stories tall and a city block wide ...if the girders were made of polystyrene it may have melted but ...yo cannot melt a building of steel cos some diesel at one end is burning along with some paper and furniture. It is impossible.
The guy who owned number seven was interviewed and stated that there was no one in the chaos who could tackle the fire so they gave the order to demolish the building ...it would have been a miracle to be able to get the right explosives in the middle of all that chaos and wire the building in less than a week ...the guy has never been seen in public since.
The twin towers ...Most of the fuel explodes in a huge fireball outside the building. The fuel is parrafin and burns with black smoke. Black smoke means low temperature fire. The temperature was so low that firemen reach the floors where the planes hit and radio back that they can control the SMALL fires. There are then a series of explosions on different floors ...described clearly by the firemen who got out. The building then goes into free fall ...meaning as the first building fell ...you could have stood on the other one and dropped an apple ...the apple in free fall would have reached the ground the same time as the collapsing building ...impossible.
A month after the collapse of the towers the fire crews could not get near the foundations of the buildings cos of molten steel ...
No one is suggesting that GWB came into office and ordered this in a matter of days or even that it was him. Do yoiu know how powerful and unacountable the security services are
The elite knew whilst Clinton was still in power that the country could only go into financial meltdown anytime soon so economic considerations were not the ones your thinking of.
No black boxes were ever found ...but a flimsy paper passport somehow did and in all that chaos and dust and rubble and fear ...it just fluttered down to the ground and into the hands of an FBI agent giving them a name...yeah right.
Worth quoting the rest don't you think?
So they weren't planning to actually shoot down an aircraft with civilians, but fake it...
I guess my main gripe with the reasoning that Saddam was a despot who committed genocide, and hence should have been removed, is that it leaves a whole host of other countries and despots more in need of regime change than Iraq. We cherry-picked this war as it had the potential for large recompense. Uncle Sam's hand up Tony's arse was almost palpable, as well.
My bad, not my intention to deceive, I'm just trying to emphasise in my arguments that similair ideas/false flagging have been considered by governments in the past and highlighting examples. I have no idea what the truth is but the suggestion that governments would not consider doing this sort of thing a false one based on cases like Northwood, the Reichstag fire etc
North Korea? Sudan? Burma?
Jim Hoffman, a LEADING conspiracy theorist, has himself disputed the no-crash theory concerning The Pentagon and in an interview with Salon, alleged ad hominen attacks on conspiracy theorists, stating, "This is just the sort of wackiness defenders of the Official Story harp on to show how gullible and incompetent "we conspiracy theorists" are supposed to be."
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=44890 ??????? There is lots of information on the net about this.
As Jim Meigs, Editor-in-Chief of Popular Mechanics, publishers of the book "9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up To The Facts", he explains "when planes hit at high speed, there's not much left. That's not to say the plane vaporizes, but it collapses in on itself quite dramatically. Most plane crashes we see happen at very low speeds around airports during take-off and landing. This was a high-speed impact, a totally different scenario, and yet without getting too gruesome, human remains often survive that kind of impact in some state or other. Sadly, you don't need the complete person in order to do DNA testing."
From the aerospace website ... :-
"Since this article was first published, we have received several comments from readers citing a quote from Rolls-Royce spokesman John W. Brown who said, "It is not a part from any Rolls-Royce engine that I'm familiar with..." The critics go on to suggest that this statement disproves all of our analysis indicating the disk is a compressor stage from the Rolls-Royce RB211-535. However, a simple review of the source of this quote shows just the opposite. The material is from an article titled "Controversy Swirling Over September 11 Pentagon Mystery: Industry Experts Can't Explain Photo Evidence" written by Christopher Bollyn that appeared on the pro-conspiracy website American Free Press.
The article describes John Brown as a spokesman for Rolls-Royce in Indianapolis, Indiana. This location is home to the Allison Engine factory that builds the AE3007H turbofan used aboard the Global Hawk. Brown's quote regarding the mystery wreckage states that, "It is not a part from any Rolls Royce engine that I'm familiar with, and certainly not the AE 3007H made here in Indy." Furthermore, the article correctly notes that the RB211 is not built in Indianapolis but at the Rolls-Royce plant in Derby, England. Since Brown is a spokesman for Allison Engines, which was an independent company that only became a subsidary of Rolls-Royce in 1995, it stands to reason that an engine built in the United Kingdom would be one he's not "familiar with." The article even goes on to point out that Brown could not identify specific parts from one engine or another since he is not an engineer or assembly line technician who would be familiar with the internal components of turbine engines."
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml
Yada yada yada ... etc ... etc ... I'm not going to go about the buildings themselves because there is SO MUCH evidence out there to disprove the conspiracy theorists.
Honestly, Rolly, you gotta just let this go ... just because things can't always be readily explained or proved, doesn't mean that it's a conspiracy.
Your listening to strawmen tactics.
How come the engines weighing nine tons each ...didn't impact the pentagon.
http://tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_facts.html
I refer you back to my earlier post : Jim Hoffman, a LEADING conspiracy theorist, has himself disputed the no-crash theory concerning The Pentagon and in an interview with Salon, alleged ad hominen attacks on conspiracy theorists, stating, "This is just the sort of wackiness defenders of the Official Story harp on to show how gullible and incompetent "we conspiracy theorists" are supposed to be."
Jim Hoffman is the FOUNDER of 911research !!!
From the website itself : "Because of the absence of public evidence proving that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon and assertions that damage to the building and crash debris were inconsistent with the crash of such a large aircraft, speculation has flourished about what really hit the pentagon on September 11th. Most such speculation ignores, discounts, or misrepresents the abundant eyewitness evidence that a jetliner flew into the building and exploded."
Well, why don't you ask Mr Hoffman? I am not a scientist but who knows? Maybe the force of the impact buckled the wings back paralell to the plane, thus giving the impact greater impetus of having the interia of the heavy engines behind it. *shrugs*
Mr Hoffman obviously thinks that it was plausible - and the plane impact did, indeed, happen.
Anyway, we could go back and forth with this and change neither of our minds.
There was no heat in building number seven ...no i think it was the beast of bolsover who killed diana.
Building number seven ...do you see a fire raging here?http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/b7/videos.html
Apologies .. I thought you were referring to the Twin Towers.
Anyway, see : http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
Ah, but you posted :
"I'm amazed that anyone can still believe a guy on a dyalisis machine in a cave attacked New York!
I'm amazed anyone still believes a plane hit the pentagon.
I'm amazed anyone can believe building seven fell demolition style just like the towers cos the central heating tank caught fire.
I'm amazed so few people are not more up to date with the ever unfolding evidence."
This 'generalisation' by you implies that there must be something wrong with me (and anyone else) who don't think that this was anything more than a murderous terrorism attack.
I'm nice!
Well it didn't melt 100,000 tons of steel. It heated them to a degree they lost some of their strength so they collapsed under their weight, then the momentum carried on crushing them all the way down the building.
3000 dead is nothing to these people ...4000 dead marines ... QUARTER MILLION INNOCENT iRAQUIS ...ALL JUST COLLATERAL DAMAGE TO THES PEOPLE.OOOPPS
I know ... but that's what makes me adorable.
I do .. but then I look out for alternative views. Under the circumstances, I personally feel that the non-conspiracy explanations are equally (if not more) credible.
Ha! I bet you just can't stay away ... I expect another post from you shortly!
Ignore that and instead look at the WTC attacks - there is so much to suggest this had fuck all to do with Islamic militants I don't believe any rational-minded person who does the research can come to the conclusion it was bin Laden. Plenty of people who don't exactly fit the paranoid conspiracy theorist mould have said the same - Paul Craig Roberts, who served under Reagan in the Treasury and edited the Wall Street Journal, Micheal Meacher who served in the Cabinet, Andreas von Bulow who served as German Defence & IT minister to name but a few. And not to mention David Schippers, who impeached Clinton and successfully prosecuted the largest criminal organisation in US history.
Hardly bedsit fantasists.
I always opposed the war, for a few good reasons. A) 9/11 was a load of Lies. One of my first thoughts was "Why did they collapse so perefectly for a building damaged on ONE side?
When it came to Iraq... the reason were great. First, it was because of WMD's. Then, when that was a Lie, it was because Saddam was helping Al-Q, a group he dispised. Then it was for Liberation.
I was actually