« previous   misc   next »

Who dunnit? Who benefits? How did those towers come down?


By coriacci1   Follow   Mon, 3 Sep 2012, 1:23am PDT   77,064 views   1351 comments   Watch (3)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (6)   Dislike (3)  

Congress rolled over for the White House(again), and did not preform it's Constitutional Duty. 11 years ago we were hoodwinked by the NeoCons and the Controlled Media. You can't cover up the fact that Explosives were used on all 3 buildings that collapsed on September 11. Many people still do not Realize Building 7 dropped in a free fall demolition at 5 thirty in the Afternoon in a classic Controlled Fashion. It is way past time to reconcile the Lies. The Tide will turn our way now as the Financial and Political Systems implode like building 7. This is what

« First     « Previous     Comments 1312-1351 of 1351     Last »

Bigsby   befriend   ignore   Sun, 14 Oct 2012, 11:31am PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1312

The Professor says

I think another wrong has happened in this world and I want to know the truth. I am convinced that there is a cover up of what really happened on 9/11/2001.

I am not sure we can convince each other of what the "truth" of 9/11 is but I appreciate a civil debate on such an important topic.

If you want to know the truth, then you should stop claiming a conspiracy at every turn and realize that the truthers are clearly manipulating and distorting the facts so as to mislead the uninformed.

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Sun, 14 Oct 2012, 1:30pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1313

"Consensus 9/11 seeks "best evidence" proof to dispel official story falsehoods. It's founded on:

(1) The opinions of respected authorities, based on professional experience, descriptive studies, and reports of expert committees.

(2) Physical data in the form of photographs, videotapes, court testimony, witness reports, and FOIA releases.

(3) Direct rather than circumstantial evidence.

Determining "best evidence" depends on "integrating individual professional expertise with the best available documentary and scientific evidence.""

http://www.activistpost.com/2012/01/consensus-911-panel-seeking-truth.html

Homeboy   befriend   ignore   Sun, 14 Oct 2012, 1:34pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 1314

The Professor says

Now imagine taking a blowtorch and destroying all of the connections that might have been damaged by debris from the twin towers. Now take the blowtorch to column 79 until all of its connections were melted and destroyed.

Would this cause the rest of the building to be dragged down?

And how again are you qualified to make this engineering determination and to second-guess NIST's determination?

Bigsby   befriend   ignore   Sun, 14 Oct 2012, 1:54pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1315

The Professor says

That is exactly what they did!

They predetermined that fires weakened the structure of WTC 7, causing it to implode.

They never even checked for explosives!!!

Don't be stupid. They took the available data and created the simulation using that data. That simulation shows the building falling down in a very similar manner to that witnessed (and surprise, surprise without the aid of explosives). And what the hell your lego post has to do with anything is anyone's guess. You use no data, post up entirely inaccurate and misleading videos, and then shout conspiracy every time proper research shows you to be wrong. You are simply questioning the wrong things. You are utterly dismissive of all mainstream research and entirely accepting of all the truther videos - intellectual dishonesty at its most obvious.

Bigsby   befriend   ignore   Sun, 14 Oct 2012, 1:59pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1316

The Professor says

If you want to know the truth, then you should stop claiming a conspiracy at every turn and realize that the official story is clearly manipulating and distorting the facts so as to mislead the uninformed.

A lazy and childish response, one regularly used by Darrell in Phoenix/War/Realtors are Liars. The official report was a painstaking analysis carried out independently. You rely on videos posted by kids and conspiracy nuts that deliberately set out to mislead the gullible by being utterly selective and deceptive in what they portray. And as a purported academic you choose to go with the latter rather than the former. Very strange. Very strange indeed.

Bigsby   befriend   ignore   Sun, 14 Oct 2012, 2:04pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1317

The Professor says

"Consensus 9/11 seeks "best evidence" proof to dispel official story falsehoods. It's founded on:

(1) The opinions of respected authorities, based on professional experience, descriptive studies, and reports of expert committees.

(2) Physical data in the form of photographs, videotapes, court testimony, witness reports, and FOIA releases.

(3) Direct rather than circumstantial evidence.

Determining "best evidence" depends on "integrating individual professional expertise with the best available documentary and scientific evidence.""

http://www.activistpost.com/2012/01/consensus-911-panel-seeking-truth.html

They have already decided what is right and wrong before even doing the research. They create their 'theory' and fit the 'evidence' to that. It's utterly arse backwards and you would be aware of that if you actually were a scientist.

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Sun, 14 Oct 2012, 2:24pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1318

"The data provide strong evidence that chemical reactions which were both violent and highly-exothermic
contributed to the destruction of the WTC buildings. NIST neglected the high-temperature and fragmentation
evidence presented here: it appears nowhere in their final report".

http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

Bigsby   befriend   ignore   Sun, 14 Oct 2012, 2:53pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1319

The Professor says

@bigsby
I just cut, pasted, and modified your post and reposted it. You then call it a lazy and childish response. I agree, your responses are lazy and childish.

Mirroring back somebody else's post is a childish and lazy method of response. Get it now?
And you claim to be a professor and yet here you are saying you are an evangelist for a 9/11 conspiracy theory. Very academic. More befitting of someone in their teens I'd say.

The Professor says

"The data provide strong evidence that chemical reactions which were both violent and highly-exothermic
contributed to the destruction of the WTC buildings. NIST neglected the high-temperature and fragmentation
evidence presented here: it appears nowhere in their final report".

http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

Ah, surprise, surprise. Another copy and paste effort. Why is all this sort of stuff the 'truth' to you and yet the far, far, far more detailed work done by NIST is merely taken by you to be some sort of elaborate disinformation effort and dismissed out of hand?

Homeboy   befriend   ignore   Sun, 14 Oct 2012, 3:17pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 1320

The Professor says

We don't live on the earth

Speak for yourself.

Bigsby   befriend   ignore   Mon, 15 Oct 2012, 5:21am PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1321

The thread for non-censored discussion of truther conspiracy theories.

bob2356   befriend   ignore   Mon, 15 Oct 2012, 12:23pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1322

Homeboy says

bob2356 says

Homeboy says

There's an incredible amount of crap out there about aliens. Doesn't mean it's true.

It's not true?

Of course it's true. You can't find an official group of scientists who say that alien abductions aren't happening, so therefore it's true.

There's not an official group of scientists who say that the WTC wasn't brought down by mutant steel eating earthworms either, so it must have been mutant steel eating earthworms that destroyed the WTC. The truth is finally out at last.

bob2356   befriend   ignore   Mon, 15 Oct 2012, 12:27pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 1323

The Professor says

I expect Bob to pop in with alien talk anytime now.

No I am forming 911mutantsteeleatingearthwormstruth.org. Aliens clearly didn't do it, mutant steel eating earthworms are the true culprits..

How are the contributions going to ae911truth.org by the way? Any extra money coming in from all your shilling on this post?

Homeboy   befriend   ignore   Mon, 15 Oct 2012, 5:08pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 1324

bob2356 says

There's not an official group of scientists who say that the WTC wasn't brought down by mutant steel eating earthworms either, so it must have been mutant steel eating earthworms that destroyed the WTC. The truth is finally out at last.

Those puffs of smoke you see coming out of the windows are actually earthworm farts. It makes so much more sense than the "official" story.

Homeboy   befriend   ignore   Fri, 19 Oct 2012, 2:24pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 1325

Hey Professor, why did you start another thread, and why do you delete anyone's post who proves you wrong? We all know you contradicted yourself. First, you argued that a steel skyscraper has never before in history collapsed due to fire. Then you argued that just because something never happened before doesn't mean it can't happen. You are contradicting your own arguments, and you started a new thread because you don't want to own up to your mistakes.

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Fri, 19 Oct 2012, 5:22pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 1326

@homeboy
All your "arguments" are here for all to see.

Thanks for your contribution and have a good night.

Homeboy   befriend   ignore   Fri, 19 Oct 2012, 6:12pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 1327

The Professor says

All your "arguments" are here for all to see.

Thanks for your contribution and have a good night.

You deleted my arguments in your other thread. Why do you refuse to comment on your contradiction where you refuted your own point? Is it because you are embarrassed? Too bad for you that you can't delete posts in this thread.

Bigsby   befriend   ignore   Fri, 19 Oct 2012, 7:34pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1328

The Professor says

@homeboy

All your "arguments" are here for all to see.

Thanks for your contribution and have a good night.

And so are all yours, so why do you feel the need to post them all again in another thread? Oh, I forgot it's because you can censor posts that disprove your points in that thread.

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Sat, 20 Oct 2012, 12:23am PDT   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 1329

Bigsby says

And I see you've even started deleting some of your more embarrassing posts. Censoring yourself now?

Just keeping it clean. You can write whatever you want on this thread. My new thread is for sincere argument and actual evidence. I did not delete the half of your post that was not personal.

There is a lot of real arguments and evidence for the official story out there. Convince me that they are correct!

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Sat, 20 Oct 2012, 12:27am PDT   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 1330

Homeboy says

The Professor says

I don't expect to convince the deniers. The truthers are so far up in conspiracy that they believe things like "mutant steel eating earthworms".

Do you really not understand sarcasm or the concept of "reductio ad absurdum" or are you being deliberately obtuse?

Do you understand the concept of "feed the trolls"?

If you ever come up with some sincere and valid arguments I will entertain them. I already have.

Thank you for your continuing contributions.

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Sat, 20 Oct 2012, 12:32am PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1331

Bigsby says

Come on now 'Professor.' Would you care to explain why my last 2 posts were deleted? Do you not want anything pointed out to you?
And I see you've even started deleting some of your more embarrassing posts. Censoring yourself now?

Yes I have deleted some of my own comments. I am trying to keep my thread clean.

Bigsby   befriend   ignore   Sat, 20 Oct 2012, 12:37am PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1332

The Professor says

Just keeping it clean. You can write whatever you want on this thread. My new thread is for sincere argument and actual evidence. I did not delete the half of your post that was not personal.

There is a lot of real arguments and evidence for the official story out there. Convince me that they are correct!

You deleted multiple posts from a number of people, including at least one of your own. Perhaps you'd like to explain why you deleted your sophistry post and my response.

Your new thread is about nothing more than censoring responses to the lies you are peddling.

And give the 'convince me' line a rest. You've already made up your mind. All the points have been covered in this thread. There is absolutely no need to repeat your exact same claims in a different thread. It is just utterly ridiculous and intellectually bankrupt.

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Sat, 20 Oct 2012, 12:37am PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1333

Bigsby says

The Professor says

Is there any other reason you don't want an investigation?

Because one was already done? You just don't like it as it doesn't mesh well with your conspiracy theory. Look, it's very simple, investigations aren't redone because a bunch of conspiracists post up Youtube videos with arrows pointing at puffs of forced air being expelled after the building starts to collapse, or because people post up videos 'showing' controlled demolitions that strangely enough only fellow conspiracists can actually see (but obviously not hear), or because...

... there is evidence of thermite at the crime scene.

Bigsby   befriend   ignore   Sat, 20 Oct 2012, 12:40am PDT   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (1)     Comment 1334

The Professor says

... there is evidence of thermite at the crime scene.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Sat, 20 Oct 2012, 1:16am PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1335

Bigsby says

The Professor says

Bigsby says

You have already posted that. You are a troll and a liar, 'professor.'

I have not posted it here. Do you have an argument on why this is not a valid illustration of the official story of the building collapse?

Don't be such a child. It's a ridiculous little drawing. You know damn well that it bears absolutely no resemblance to what actually happened. And if you don't, then you have no business posting on the topic. It's an insult to people's intellect. And far more importantly, it is an insult to the near 3000 people who died.

Personal attack, belittle the evidence, and then appeal to the memory of the victims. A trollish trifecta!

Brilliant bigsby!

Bigsby   befriend   ignore   Sat, 20 Oct 2012, 1:19am PDT   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike (2)     Comment 1336

The Professor says

Personal attack, belittle the evidence, and then appeal to the memory of the victims. A trollish trifecta!

Brilliant bigsby!

It's not trolling, it's a fact. You keep posting that bloody image. It's childish and insulting. You claim you want to discuss the evidence, yet you post up that image multiple times and claim it to be evidence. Says all that needs to be said about what you are up to. Pathetic.

Homeboy   befriend   ignore   Sat, 20 Oct 2012, 5:08pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1337

The Professor says

Homeboy says

The Professor says

I don't expect to convince the deniers. The truthers are so far up in conspiracy that they believe things like "mutant steel eating earthworms".

Do you really not understand sarcasm or the concept of "reductio ad absurdum" or are you being deliberately obtuse?

Do you understand the concept of "feed the trolls"?

Yes.

Do you really not understand sarcasm or the concept of "reductio ad absurdum" or are you being deliberately obtuse?

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Sat, 20 Oct 2012, 6:09pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1338

The Professor says

Bigsby says

The Professor says

An illustration of the official story of how the Tower collapsed.

And how, pray tell, does that represent the official version of what happened? Come on, explain it.

It's the logical conclusion of this image from Bazant:

http://web.archive.org/web/20011031095744/http://www.tam.uiuc.edu/news/200109wtc/

Bigsby   befriend   ignore   Sat, 20 Oct 2012, 6:44pm PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (2)     Comment 1339

And as I said in the other thread, no, it isn't.

coriacci1   befriend   ignore   Sat, 10 Nov 2012, 12:51am PST   Share   Quote   Like (2)   Dislike     Comment 1340

new contribution to the debate.

http://grtv.ca/2012/11/air-defense-911-anomalies-and-questions

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Sun, 11 Nov 2012, 1:09am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1341

Long video compiling different documentaries

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Sun, 11 Nov 2012, 7:46am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (2)     Comment 1342

It is so obvious that this is not a controlled demolition.

A controlled demolition would not have killed so many people.

Let us not forget on Veterans Day that this was the reason for the last decade of war.

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Tue, 13 Nov 2012, 5:38am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1343

Homeboy says

Do you really not understand sarcasm or the concept of "reductio ad absurdum"

Not as well as you.

The whole situation is absurd.

The whole episode from not stopping the hijacking to a decade of war on "terror" is absurd.

I was only made aware of the controversy over the official conspiracy story of how a handful of jihadists flew hijacked planes into the WTC 2 months ago today.

My research has brought up more questions than it has answered. I have found that there is definitely incompetence and probably criminal behavior among some factions of our government regarding 9/11 and its aftermath.

Whether the buildings were intentionally demolished is not near as important as the fact that the whole thing was an excuse to pay off contractors, distract the public, spend trillions of dollars, murder many thousands of innocent civilians, kill thousands of our soldiers, and further limit our civil rights.

The Internet is a new paradigm of information transfer and learning. Hopefully we can use this medium to stop the perpetuation of the warmongering, slaveholding, overclass that controls this world.

Bigsby   befriend   ignore   Tue, 13 Nov 2012, 10:54am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (2)     Comment 1344

The Professor says

Whether the buildings were intentionally demolished is not near as important as the fact that the whole thing was an excuse to pay off contractors, distract the public, spend trillions of dollars, murder many thousands of innocent civilians, kill thousands of our soldiers, and further limit our civil rights.

Ah, so you are finally back-peddling from all your ridiculous copy and pasted CD arguments.

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Tue, 13 Nov 2012, 1:00pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1345

robertoaribas says

December 2012 apocalypse....

I forgot all about that.

Better stock up.

Thanks for reminding me.

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Tue, 13 Nov 2012, 1:02pm PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (2)     Comment 1346

Bigsby says

Ah, so you are finally back-peddling from all your ridiculous copy and pasted CD arguments.

Just for you Bigs

coriacci1   befriend   ignore   Wed, 14 Nov 2012, 11:40pm PST   Share   Quote   Like (1)   Dislike     Comment 1347

what’s goin on in kuala lumpur?

September 11, 2001: The Crimes of War

Committed “in the Name of 9/11″

Initiating a Legal Procedure

against the Perpetrators of 9/11

Michel Chossudovsky

* * *

International Conference on “9/11 Revisited – Seeking the Truth”

Perdana Global Peace Foundation (PGPF)

Kuala Lumpur, November 2012

Introduction

http://www.globalresearch.ca/september-11-2001-the-crimes-of-war-committed-in-the-name-of-9

The Professor   befriend   ignore   Fri, 16 Nov 2012, 1:19am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike (1)     Comment 1348

"In assessing the crimes associated with 9/11 in the context of a legal procedure, we must distinguish between those associated with the actual event, namely the loss of life and the destruction of property on 9/11, from the crimes committed in the aftermath of September 11, 2001 “in the name of 9/11″.

The latter build upon the former. We are dealing with two related dimensions of criminality. The crimes committed “in the name of 9/11″ involving acts of war are far-reaching, resulting in the deaths of millions of people as well as the destruction of entire countries.

The 9/11 event in itself– which becomes symbolic– is used to justify the onslaught of the post 9/11 US-NATO military agenda, under the banner of the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT), not to mention the ushering in of the Homeland police state and the repeal of civil liberties."

coriacci1   befriend   ignore   Thu, 29 Nov 2012, 1:13am PST   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 1349

bring the prosecutions on!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=UUPLAYER_globalresearchtv&feature=player_embedded&v=8Z0Lsyox2zg

coriacci1   befriend   ignore   Thu, 24 Oct 2013, 3:01am PDT   Share   Quote   Like   Dislike     Comment 1350

The Professor says

Do you understand the concept of "feed the trolls"?

If you ever come up with some sincere and valid arguments I will entertain them. I already have.

Thank you for your continuing contributions.

you go professor! you are a gentleman and a scholar!

« First     « Previous comments    

Email (Required, will not be visible)

Username (Just pick a name if you're new)

Watch comments by email

home   top   share   link sharer   users   register   best comments   about