Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? you guys are slow. Bush set up 9/11. One week before 9/11 bush evacuted the towers due to a security thing. While that took place bush or his brother (govenor of florida) placed bombs in the towers. If you take a pic of the towers, you will see that the towers blew up before the planes hit. fishy ain't it? Plus if you look it up, the towers were built to widstand plane crashes. There is no way the towers could just blow up and fall after a crash. Also the first floor blew up too. How did that happen? I have pics of 9/11, I'll find them and show them. Once you see them you'll know it was bush.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? yes show me the pictures, because there is no way Bush was behind it.the towers were designed to withstand an airplane impact from a plane going at a slow rate of speed and low on feul. the planes that hit were going at a high rate of speed(500mph I believe), and were nearly full of fuel. when they hit they caused fires, and the building actually worked as an insulator, making it hotter inside. Steel also loses half of its structual integrity at a certain tempature, which the build surely hit. the weakend steel combined with the gravitational force, and weight of the building is the reason why it collapsed. if you watch the video footage of them falling, you see that its the top levels which fell first, than their inertia caused a chain reaction which caused the rest of the building to fall down. a lot of the lower few levels were somewhat intact, their damage was caused by the weight of the rest of the building pancaking them.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (desi tmac91 @ Sep 13 2006, 04:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you guys are slow. Bush set up 9/11. One week before 9/11 bush evacuted the towers due to a security thing. While that took place bush or his brother (govenor of florida) placed bombs in the towers. If you take a pic of the towers, you will see that the towers blew up before the planes hit. fishy ain't it? Plus if you look it up, the towers were built to widstand plane crashes. There is no way the towers could just blow up and fall after a crash. Also the first floor blew up too. How did that happen? I have pics of 9/11, I'll find them and show them. Once you see them you'll know it was bush.</div>I never insult members, I have to set an example. But you are an idiot.http://youtube.com/watch?v=J0Qu6eyyr4c It obviously blew up after the plane hit.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? Glad to see Tony isn't an idiot that believes in these conspiracies...if anyone on here believes in them, let me hear it.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BCB @ Sep 13 2006, 07:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Glad to see Tony isn't an idiot that believes in these conspiracies...if anyone on here believes in them, let me hear it.</div>I don't trust them 100% but I believe some of it - it can't all be BS...a person who spends money, and time to produce these documentaries isn't going to just put bullsh** to make the government look bad - again, I don't believe a lot of the things said, but you have to believe it to an extent...and I am not an idiot for believing some of these theories.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ReppinTheD @ Sep 13 2006, 06:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't trust them 100% but I believe some of it - it can't all be BS...a person who spends money, and time to produce these documentaries isn't going to just put bullsh** to make the government look bad - again, I don't believe a lot of the things said, but you have to believe it to an extent...and I am not an idiot for believing some of these theories.</div> I'm sure most of these people making these little films are not living on the street, they either have the money or get donations..etc..These little films they make are usually video from the internet and bullsh** evidence and quotes taken out of context....The most expensive video they have made cost $6,000 and that guy was loaded. What do you belive from watching these conspiracy people?
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BCB @ Sep 13 2006, 07:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm sure most of these people making these little films are not living on the street, they either have the money or get donations..etc..These little films they make are usually video from the internet and bullsh** evidence and quotes taken out of context....The most expensive video they have made cost $6,000 and that guy was loaded. What do you belive from watching these conspiracy people?</div>It doesn't matter where they got the money from, it's a lot of money to produce these kinds of things, it takes a lot of time, which is needed for research, interviews, editing, etc. - also, the clips included in the documentary "Loose Change" were not from the internet - they were from things like other 9/11 memoirs like CNN specials or FOX specials - all very conservative networks. The makers of "Loose Change" took those clips and analyzed them frame by frame which proved some things that I won't mention now - (just watch it). Also - while I believe you may be right about some quotes being taken out of context - things like the interviews for example with one of the suspected terrorists flight instructors was an exclusive interview done by the makers of "Loose Change" - that is authentic, and it gives evidence against what 'they' told us about 9/11. The thing I don't believe about 9/11 that this documentary produced as evidence is that George Bush or Cheney or any current Executive people didn't really have anything to do with 9/11...I DO think that politicians behind the scenes such as Wolfowitz did have something to do with this. Also - just as a point of reference - I do believe a lot of the Pearl Harbor conspiracies.As you know - The Depression was the worst time economically for the United States, when Pearl Harbor came along it seemed like it came at the perfect time because it spawned WWII - and something well known about war is that war gets countries out of depressions - it makes money - a lot of money. It puts companies to work, it puts people to work, overall it gives a huge boost to the economy - even big enough to get the you.S. out of the depression - a very tough thing to do. Currently - the United States is in a recession - we would've have been in worse condition, but thanks to Federal Organizations like the FDIC, we aren't as bad as we should be. (A recession is like a mini-depression) Now, using deductive reasoning - I want to think that 9/11 was done to trigger a war in order to get us out of our recession...yes it sounds farfetched now, but thats what they said about Pearl Harbor too back then...anyways...this war IS working to get the you.S. out of it's recession - the stock market is getting slowly, but surely better, and in about 5 years the United States will truely reap the benefits of this war. We have new connections to oil, we put our people to work, we put our soldiers to work, we put big companies to work that produce tanks, armored vehicles, artillary, missiles, helicopters, and all of those things that go into war...to work. When things like this happen, the economy is surged with money that without war wouldn't have been there. 5 years from now, we will be in a economic boom - garunteed. (and you can quote me if this board is still around..lol) Although a very minor sign of economic boost - workers are getting paid more and more by the year...for example in my state (Michigan) - minimum wage is increasing from $5.25 to $7.25 in November, and finally in January it'll increase another 50cents to $7.75 - that is a huge jump. Another state is California - California's new minimum wage is $8.00 p/h - a huge jump from it's old minimum wage. All these things are signs of economic boost - that means that this war is helping.So...basically, I think this war was 'engineered' to help the you.S. get out of our economic recession...sorry about the long post.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? Bush is responsible but it wasn't his faultin general I blame the american government between 96-01 which included Bush's administrationbut I also blame the Clinton administrationeven though both of them are just puppets to the real criminals
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? Nobody is predicting an economic boom...their was no boom after the gulf war.Loose Change- rebuttalhttp://youtube.com/watch?v=4SgjWGVHxW8 :rock:
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (desi tmac91 @ Sep 13 2006, 02:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you guys are slow. Bush set up 9/11. One week before 9/11 bush evacuted the towers due to a security thing. While that took place bush or his brother (govenor of florida) placed bombs in the towers. If you take a pic of the towers, you will see that the towers blew up before the planes hit. fishy ain't it? Plus if you look it up, the towers were built to widstand plane crashes. There is no way the towers could just blow up and fall after a crash. Also the first floor blew up too. How did that happen? I have pics of 9/11, I'll find them and show them. Once you see them you'll know it was bush.</div>I don't want to make this into a Christian vs. Muslim thing, but do you notice that a lot of Muslims believe in this conspiracy? Stupidest conspiracy out there right now is it is very disgraceful in my opinion towards those who died during the attacks.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pjcolpitts @ Sep 13 2006, 08:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't want to make this into a Christian vs. Muslim thing, but do you notice that a lot of Muslims believe in this conspiracy? Stupidest conspiracy out there right now is it is very disgraceful in my opinion towards those who died during the attacks.</div> Go to the middleeast, it's even worse. Most muslims think the Jews were behind it...ignorance.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (desi tmac91 @ Sep 13 2006, 03:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>you guys are slow. Bush set up 9/11. One week before 9/11 bush evacuted the towers due to a security thing. While that took place bush or his brother (govenor of florida) placed bombs in the towers. If you take a pic of the towers, you will see that the towers blew up before the planes hit. fishy ain't it? Plus if you look it up, the towers were built to widstand plane crashes. There is no way the towers could just blow up and fall after a crash. Also the first floor blew up too. How did that happen? I have pics of 9/11, I'll find them and show them. Once you see them you'll know it was bush.</div>I know I'm late to this, but just a bit of technical info. During constuction of the WTC around 1969 the largest commercial airliner currently in service was a 707 (one year before the 747 entered service). Seeing as how Lower Manhattan is in between 3 major airports, the possibility of a landing plane getting lost in the fog and hitting the towers was thought of. The buildings were built to take the impact of a 707 traveling under 300mph. Of course a 767 is much larger than a 707 and each plane hit the towers at about 490mph and 501mph respectively. Obviously not what they planned for.And the buildings were built using a new building technique called "tubing". That means that instead of building the towers with a traditional ridged skeleton wrapped with a steel and glass skin, they were built using the outer skin as the support, and a center "tube" made up of elevator shafts and staircases, hence all the vertical beams on the facade. They actually held most of the load. Because of that design, the buildings collapsed on top of themselves rather than just toppling over. That's why it looked like an implosion, and not an accident.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Michael Bryant @ Sep 13 2006, 09:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I know I'm late to this, but just a bit of technical info. During constuction of the WTC around 1969 the largest commercial airliner currently in service was a 707 (one year before the 747 entered service). Seeing as how Lower Manhattan is in between 3 major airports, the possibility of a landing plane getting lost in the fog and hitting the towers was thought of. The buildings were built to take the impact of a 707 traveling under 300mph. Of course a 767 is much larger than a 707 and each plane hit the towers at about 490mph and 501mph respectively. Obviously not what they planned for.And the buildings were built using a new building technique called "tubing". That means that instead of building the towers with a traditional ridged skeleton wrapped with a steel and glass skin, they were built using the outer skin as the support, and a center "tube" made up of elevator shafts and staircases, hence all the vertical beams on the facade. They actually held most of the load. Because of that design, the buildings collapsed on top of themselves rather than just toppling over. That's why it looked like an implosion, and not an accident.</div> I love smart members like you. :winkglasses:
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Michael Bryant @ Sep 12 2006, 09:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You can't blame Clinton. Nobody really took Bin Ladin seriously, I mean they knew who he was but all of his attacks were in other countries, the USA seemed too safe for that to happen. Preventing a freak occurence like 9/11 wasn't high on the to-do list. The worst attack on US soil before 9/11 was the oklahoma city bombing. That was done with a truck filled with explosives. The WTC was very prepared for that possibility. In fact, the WTC was ready for all possible attacks that have been thought of. Of course nobody thought of flying an airplane into them.</div>Also remember George Bush Sr. and the previous attacks toward the end of his presidency, and the start of Clinton's. The terrorists seem to know when to time: Right after a new president has been elected.The other question is that why was george bush "taking a vacation" and golfing, etc. for the first part of his office. Until 9/11 he didn't really do much. And people have already confirmed, (I think Rice did) that he was given a packet or something about details of "bin laden to attack inside US".I'll watch that Loose Change thing now and tell ya what I think
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Something-To-Say @ Sep 14 2006, 12:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Also remember George Bush Sr. and the previous attacks toward the end of his presidency, and the start of Clinton's. The terrorists seem to know when to time: Right after a new president has been elected.The other question is that why was george bush "taking a vacation" and golfing, etc. for the first part of his office. Until 9/11 he didn't really do much. And people have already confirmed, (I think Rice did) that he was given a packet or something about details of "bin laden to attack inside US".I'll watch that Loose Change thing now and tell ya what I think</div> What did you want Bush to do when he heard that report? They get threats all the time, the report was very vague and no immediate action could have been taken. Everyone knows George Bush takes a 'vacation' during much of the summer but it's not like he isn't doing anything. He just goes from Washington and moves everything to the ranch in Texas.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pjcolpitts @ Sep 13 2006, 08:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't want to make this into a Christian vs. Muslim thing, but do you notice that a lot of Muslims believe in this conspiracy? Stupidest conspiracy out there right now is it is very disgraceful in my opinion towards those who died during the attacks.</div>That's because Islam couldn't have done it! It's a peaceful religion!
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Justice @ Sep 14 2006, 02:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>That's because Islam couldn't have done it! It's a peaceful religion!</div>Islam is about as peaceful as a Tiger is vegiterian. Islam, and Christianity both claim to be religions of peace yet those two are the most violent religions in the world. most people are aware of what the Christians have done, but yet seem to forget it was the Muslims who intiated this entire conflicted in the 8th century when they began attacking and converting Christian lands such as Syria, Egypt and Cyranicia. also people forget that the Muslim juggernaught extended into Europe, going as far as Toulouse, in the west after conquering Hispania, and as far as Tregovista in the East.Look at how the Muslims and Hindus are constantly fighting, so its not just Islam and Christianity.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? Islam is a peacefull religion, to the individual. It's when it's in the hands of radical fundementalists that it is evil. Like all religion, it does not belong in the hands of the masses.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>That's because Islam couldn't have done it! It's a peaceful religion!</div>Your funniest award is well deserved.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Islam is a peacefull religion, to the individual. It's when it's in the hands of radical fundementalists that it is evil. Like all religion, it does not belong in the hands of the masses.</div>So what, you're saying religion is something all of us do by ourselves. Each of us will have our littl philosophy and that's religion for you?
