9/11; Never forget.

RDM · 14 Sep 2011 at 18:22

You are a high ranking CIA agent that has a building full of files you need to get rid of. Do you:

1. Conduct an elaborate yet hidden controlled demolition of the building the files are in using a pre-planned false flag "terrorist" attack as cover. Destroying the building and hoping that all the files are either destroyed in the fire, demolition or resulting building collapse. Then paying off the contractor brought in to clear the site to make sure they do not discover anything.

or:

2. Shred all the documents and then incinerate them.

Glaucus · 14 Sep 2011 at 18:26

^^^
but another twist is, he doesn't think the WTC 1&2 was a false flag. So it was pre planned but with no forward knowledge.

SexyGreyFox · 14 Sep 2011 at 18:49

RDM said:
You are a high ranking CIA agent that has a building full of files you need to get rid of. Do you:

1. Conduct an elaborate yet hidden controlled demolition of the building the files are in using a pre-planned false flag "terrorist" attack as cover. Destroying the building and hoping that all the files are either destroyed in the fire, demolition or resulting building collapse. Then paying off the contractor brought in to clear the site to make sure they do not discover anything.

or:

2. Shred all the documents and then incinerate them.

Definitely number 1

msmalls74 · 14 Sep 2011 at 19:15

RDM said:
You are a high ranking CIA agent that has a building full of files you need to get rid of. Do you:

1. Conduct an elaborate yet hidden controlled demolition of the building the files are in using a pre-planned false flag "terrorist" attack as cover. Destroying the building and hoping that all the files are either destroyed in the fire, demolition or resulting building collapse. Then paying off the contractor brought in to clear the site to make sure they do not discover anything.

or:

2. Shred all the documents and then incinerate them.

How about
3)You evacuate the building as instructed noticing it damaged by fire and parts of the external walls damaged by the falling WTC, the fires left alone and it collapses as been proven by any numerous independent organisations.
or maybe
4) Said files would never be left in a building that wasnt that secure, as it must have been for demo teams to walk about and plant charges.

Fr0dders · 14 Sep 2011 at 19:35

you are all mistakingly assuming that the only thing they had to hide was the contents of computer hard drives and files.

who knows what **** the US government had in there they might want to hide.

cm1179 · 14 Sep 2011 at 19:50

MrLOL said:
you are all mistakingly assuming that the only thing they had to hide was the contents of computer hard drives and files.

who knows what **** the US government had in there they might want to hide.

hey yeah, that could explain why they hit the pentagon too! maybe there was stuff to hide in there aswell? and maybe, just maybe, there was something buried in the field in PA too?!

Fr0dders · 14 Sep 2011 at 20:02

i'm not a complete nutter.

Just saying its not inconceivable they had something to hide in there. The stuff that has come out now about what the US were doing abroad decades ago, sponsoring terrorism abroad to overthrow unfriendly governments is shocking.

Who knows what will come out in 50 years time ?

cm1179 · 14 Sep 2011 at 20:12

i know a british MP got into trouble for making a comment along the lines of 'maybe now is a good time to bury bad news' on 9/11 so i'm thinking this sparked off this particular conspiracy

deuse · 14 Sep 2011 at 20:20

cm1179 said:
hey yeah, that could explain why they hit the pentagon too! maybe there was stuff to hide in there aswell? and maybe, just maybe, there was something buried in the field in PA too?!

The servers that got destroyed at the pentagon had the infomation about the missing 2.3 Trillion Dollars the DOD misplaced.
Oh and that got reported ONE day before 911 by Rumsfeld on TV .hmmmm

Now this is a fact so don't have a go at me i'm just saying

ecksmen · 14 Sep 2011 at 20:24

Would a government allow the death of so many people? Yes, people aren't as important individually as they would like to think "greater good and all that".

Do I think it was a planned explosion / CIA master plot to hide "something"? No, but the towers did fall in a rather too controlled fashion to me.

Regardless off the CT, the US and various other governments have used this for war that really didn't need to happen.

War on terrorism, or a search for oil.

Hatter The Mad · 14 Sep 2011 at 20:27

ecksmen said:
Do I think it was a planned explosion / CIA master plot to hide "something"? No, but the towers did fall in a rather too controlled fashion to me.

I don't mean to be rude, but who are you, how many controlled demolitions have you performed, and what qualifies you to determine if a demolition is 'rather too controlled', or not?

The buildings started collapsing from the top - it wasn't controlled whatsoever

cm1179 · 14 Sep 2011 at 20:29

Hatter The Mad said:
I don't mean to be rude, but who are you, how many controlled demolitions have you performed, and what qualifies you to determine if a demolition is 'rather too controlled', or not?

The buildings started collapsing from the top - it wasn't controlled whatsoever

ditto

ecksmen · 14 Sep 2011 at 20:35

Hatter The Mad said:
I don't mean to be rude, but who are you, how many controlled demolitions have you performed, and what qualifies you to determine if a demolition is 'rather too controlled', or not?

The buildings started collapsing from the top - it wasn't controlled whatsoever

"To me". Did I say I was an expert? Nope, but it just doesn't look right to me. Read into that what you want.

Ditto all you like

Fr0dders · 14 Sep 2011 at 20:45

ecksmen said:
Would a government allow the death of so many people? Yes, people aren't as important individually as they would like to think "greater good and all that".

Do I think it was a planned explosion / CIA master plot to hide "something"? No, but the towers did fall in a rather too controlled fashion to me.

Regardless off the CT, the US and various other governments have used this for war that really didn't need to happen.

War on terrorism, or a search for oil.

Its very, very easy to prove that the twin towers fell of their own accord.

Controlled demolitions work from the bottom up. The twin towers fell from the top down. Completely wrong.

To argue that the government would perform a controlled demolition and kill 3000 people in full view of the entire world's media gazing on is laughable.

StriderX · 14 Sep 2011 at 20:47

Can this thread just be closed, its woefully annoying, especially since the day is past (I realise yes, but this is how the Americans do things, so ill just agree with it for now).

ecksmen · 14 Sep 2011 at 20:53

MrLOL said:
Its very, very easy to prove that the twin towers fell of their own accord.

Controlled demolitions work from the bottom up. The twin towers fell from the top down. Completely wrong.

To argue that the government would perform a controlled demolition and kill 3000 people in full view of the entire world's media gazing on is laughable.

I'm not saying they did, please re-read. Just how many people died in day one of the battle of the somme? 50,000+ IIRC.

Vonhelmet · 14 Sep 2011 at 20:54

ecksmen said:
"To me". Did I say I was an expert? Nope, but it just doesn't look right to me. Read into that what you want.

I think we'll read into it that you don't know a thing about how buildings collapse. For the record, I don't particularly either, but nothing about the 9/11 collapses "just doesn't look right".

I could show you any number of things that "just don't look right" but which can be perfectly well explained once you know the first thing about the relevant subject.

Vonhelmet · 14 Sep 2011 at 20:54

ecksmen said:
I'm not saying they did, please re-read. Just how many people died in day one of the battle of the somme? 50,000+ IIRC.

What's that got to do with the price of fish?

ecksmen · 14 Sep 2011 at 20:57

Vonhelmet said:
I think we'll read into it that you don't know a thing about how buildings collapse. For the record, I don't particularly either, but nothing about the 9/11 collapses "just doesn't look right".

I could show you any number of things that "just don't look right" but which can be perfectly well explained once you know the first thing about the relevant subject.

I'm not saying otherwise.

People think individual human life is so important, its not in the greater scheme. I'm merely throwing in things for some sort of discussion.

For all I know there could have been explosives planted by Bob Geldoff...

Vonhelmet · 14 Sep 2011 at 21:00

ecksmen said:
People think individual human life is so important, its not in the greater scheme.

Human life is actually pretty important to the family and friends of those who have lost it, and when that human life is taken in such dramatic fashion. It's a bit bizarre to suggest otherwise.

ecksmen said:
I'm merely throwing in things for some sort of discussion.

Yes, things which have been widely debated and are roundly agreed to be utter balls.

ecksmen said:
For all I know there could have been explosives planted by Bob Geldoff...

For all you know? I fear you're right on that one.