The Ultimate Con

Status
Not open for further replies.
1) public do not understand explodes and how to recognise them. They where hearing debris. This is backed up by video, seismic and the fact no explosives or the 10's of miles of cable where found.

2) same as 1

3) there are loads of training. The biggest problem was not the training but lack of protocols. FAA had no direct line to military and no effective chain of command. Milliatry was set up to look for incoming threats not internal. There was a basically amassing breakdown in communication duevto lack of protocols and training


4) why would hd be risked to safety there Is no need. It is not all out war, it is a plane hitting a tower. Initially an accident then a localised terrorist attack. What you want him to do start shouting in front of the kid.

5)
 
5) warning of a terrorist attck not specifics:

6) which restrictions I'm particuler.
National security, or the fact you can not reassemble three buildings like you can with a plane.
 
The Mad Rapper said:
1. The eye witness accounts that there were multiple controlled demolitions in both of the towers
Click to expand...
No, you mean accounts of a tiny handful of people who have been convinced that there was a controlled demolition.

2. Tower 7 being demolished with explosives (one eye witness, a fireman, stating that he could see the explosions initiating on each floor).
Click to expand...
You say this is fact, but it isn't.

3. The convenient military air defence exercise scheduled at the exact same time simulating the exact same attack, which meant reports weren't taken seriously or acted upon quickly enough.
Click to expand...
Coincidence.

4. The footage from the school where George Bush was, in which he looked completely unsurprised when told of the news, and further, the absolute inaction of the Secret Service in removing him immediately to a safe location.
Click to expand...
What did you expect him to do? Jump up and scream "**** WE'RE UNDER ATTACK".

It's worthy of further consideration IMHO.
Click to expand...
lol
 
I watched a bit of it. Will ask one question before I hit the sack. I'm curious on the BBC report that Tower 7 came down ... well .... a whole 13 minutes before it came down. One would think a worldwide outfit like BBC would check their sources before reporting such shocking news. The documentary asked if someone press the 'Release' button too early? :D

I'll have more questions tomorrow.

Night!
 
The Mad Rapper said:
Perhaps for the best - we're clearly not going to have the considered debate I hoped for.
Click to expand...

You put it in the wrong forum if you seriously expected to have a serious debate on this subject.

Problem with the theory that video and yourself present is theres sod all evidence to back up the claims and turn the theory into even partial fact.

To compare facts so far:

"How many people died in the September 11 attacks?

2,995.

A total of 2,995 deaths were tallied from the deadly terrorist attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001. This is according to the online encyclopedia Wikipedia. Of these deaths, 2,976 were civilian casualties while 19 are hijacker deaths. The greatest civilian casualty count occurred in the World Trade Center with 2,605, followed by 125 in the Pentagon. The rest were casualties from the hijacked commercial airliners American 11 and 77 and United 93 and 175."

http://www.numberof.net/number-of-deaths-on-911-2/

then

"Total Fatalities
Operation Iraqi Freedom: 4,402
Operation Enduring Freedom: 1,215
(Updated August 15, 2010)"

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/fallen/

Why would a government condemn just short of 3000 people, over 95% civilian to then lose a further 5617 military personnel in the war it sparked?

Doesn't make sense to me at all I'm afraid.
 
A mistake. People didn't know what building was wich and the presenter doesn't have much idea of what is on the green screen behind them.

So they managed to make special effects matching the scene, fire, smoke ahead of time and then messed up.

Or you are saying they had a script. Why would they inform an outside agency. Media can quite easily report a collapsing building with out being pre-warned.
 
Last edited:
James J said:
Problem with the theory that video and yourself present is theres sod all evidence to back up the claims and turn the theory into even partial fact.
Click to expand...

I've presented nothing. I have highlighted a few aspects of the video I found interesting, but further investigation is required before I'd draw any conclusions.

Why would a government condemn just short of 3000 people, over 95% civilian to then lose a further 5617 military personnel in the war it sparked?

Doesn't make sense to me at all I'm afraid.
Click to expand...

Why would they care? It's not their lives is it? Or their families for that matter. Don't overlook the huge amount of money the industrial military complex make in all of this.

Ultimately, what's 6000 lives in the context of securing a source for the fossil fuel demands of the country for the next 50 years?

The how is less important than the why. Who had vested interests? Who had the most to gain?
 
So your telling me that the government knew that not one single family member of the people that died in the aircraft, both towers and the pentagon worked in government?

Not only is that amazingly unprovable, theres more chance of you proving theres life on mars then getting any serious evidence to back that up.

It's pretty much just conspiracy theory waffle I'm afraid.
 
I think people are so against the idea of a government treating their people in such a way that they'll never consider anything but the official story. I think the fact that such things as false flag operations and "Operation Northwoods" were drafted up shows that there is a chance that such things as massive inside jobs aren't that far out of the realm of "normality".

Especially things like "operation northwoods" where in simple terms, it was a plan to carry out inside jobs, making them look like terrorist acts from other nations to give an excuse to go to war with a nation.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf
 
Still love how no one sort of emphasises that WTC7 just apparently 'collapsed' like **** all those cool towers are collapsing, I better be like them!
 
mikeyp123 said:
Still love how no one sort of emphasises that WTC7 just apparently 'collapsed' like **** all those cool towers are collapsing, I better be like them!
Click to expand...

When ever this comes up, you'll always get some one who claims that debris from one of the towers hit WTC7 which caused it to collapse.
 
ayb-xfiles.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom