Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ReppinTheD @ Sep 27 2006, 10:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This is def a good topic tho...its just way too vast.</div>Thanks. Aside from All sport name game, I think it's the most posted in thread of mine. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ReppinTheD @ Sep 27 2006, 08:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'></div>WOW. LOOK AT THE FIRST PIC.Compare what I circled to the original. Tell me you don't see that ghost on the right side. It's a shape of a person, I swear. And that cloud kinda forms an angry cloud face thing... Angry spirits... something happened... O.O
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? I don't know about what you circled, but if you look to the upper corner of that, it looks like there is an angel there.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (redneck @ Sep 27 2006, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't know about what you circled, but if you look to the upper corner of that, it looks like there is an angel there.</div>wtf? outline it like I did with the angry ghost face.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? ooh how about this:I know who did 9/11....not osama, not the government...but the devil himself...I knew it.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? That looks crazy. Is that actually a coincidence or is it photoshopped?
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Michael Bryant @ Sep 28 2006, 02:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>That looks crazy. Is that actually a coincidence or is it photoshopped?</div>nah thats def photoshopped
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ReppinTheD @ Sep 28 2006, 01:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>nah thats def photoshopped</div>The one you posted actually isn't photoshopped.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? Yeah it's not, Check this out.http://youtube.com/watch?v=SkYMc1-frWECreepy.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? Come on, you can't look for meaning in everything. If you do you'll end up finding crazy coincidences and eating cheetos.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? To everyone that refuses to look at the evidence--check out some links. Do some research. There is no way that what the 9-11 commision report said happened. Check Operation Northwoods, and the name Tim Osman.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? I've looked into hundreds of these so called conspiracies and they are frivolous. All the evidence they claim supports their theory is either undocumented, or hear say. while if you use logic, its easy to come to the conclusion that the government had nothing to do with 9/11. they may have been able to prevent it, but legally they had very little abilities to do so.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? Like I've said, post the 9/11 conspiracies and I will debunk them right here. Bring it.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheHoo @ Oct 1 2006, 12:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>To everyone that refuses to look at the evidence--check out some links. Do some research. There is no way that what the 9-11 commision report said happened. Check Operation Northwoods, and the name Tim Osman.</div>Dude, look it up! It didn't happen, I swear!
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BCB @ Oct 1 2006, 07:35 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Like I've said, post the 9/11 conspiracies and I will debunk them right here. Bring it.</div>Ok......will do.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? For one, there is the fact that many of the hijackers are alive.http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stmThen there is the surveillance camera the FBI took, the only video documentation of the pentagon attack. They have yet to release it...http://fluxview.com/v/911/StartHere/911_Bomb_Montage.WMVConcerning WTC 7:his was WTC 7 and its fires.Read this carefully and know this ... not once, ever has a steel structured building been brought down by fire. Never, Zero. Nada. Hasn't ever happened ... yet we have WTC 7 which had small fires "collapse" as FEMA would like to put it, but we have another building with larger fires not collapsing like WTC 7 did. Something is fishy ... big time! Something doesn't make sense.So why is it WTC 7 defied architectual history? And ironically enough resembles a controlled demolition?That's just a very small sample. The real stuff I have to search for, and I have other things to do right now. But definitely check out anything at:http://www.letsroll911.org/phpwebsite/and a lot of the information at www.whatreallyhappened.comEver heard of Operation Northwoods? This isn't some whole new idea, either.Anyways, I'll get the specifics later, as I'm sure you've already checked these out, considering you've researched this and all....http://www.letsroll911.org/phpwebsite/
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? I've heard of the stories involving some hijackers showing up in the middleeast etc...Considering they were 'involved' in the most deadly terrorist attack you would think they would make it on the news or other media outlets..etc..Sounds pretty fishy to me. These could be people claiming to be the hijackers as well..etc... The Pentagon video from the gas station was taken as part of the investigation, the FBI took it because it was vital video it needed right away...it's not like they would let the gas station keep it. And I believe the video of the plane hitting the Pentagon was released 2 months ago. I remember watching it, it shows the flash of a white plane and then the fireball...The FBI de-classified it... Here I found itPentagon Releases Video of 9/11 Attackhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6051601034.html Dozens of USA Today employee's who work in a building right by the Pentagon confirmed it was a commercial airliner that hit the Pentagon...Why would planes be used in the other 3 attacks and not in the Pentagon attack?<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>At 17:20 EDT on 11 September 2001, 7 World Trade Center collapsed. Since it had been evacuated, there were no casualties.In May 2002, the Federal Emergency Management Agency of the United States (FEMA) released a report on the collapse. [3] FEMA made preliminary findings that the collapse was due primarily to fires on multiple stories caused by debris from the other two towers, and not to the actual impact damage of 1 WTC and 2 WTC as they collapsed. The report noted that, prior to this collapse, there was no record of the fire-induced collapse of a large fire-protected steel building such as 7 WTC.The report did not reach final conclusions, outlining a number of issues needing to be explored with respect to the cause of the collapse. Specifically, FEMA made these findings:?Loss of structural integrity was likely a result of weakening caused by fires on the 5th to 7th floors. The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue.? (Chapter 5, pg 31.)In response to FEMA's concerns, the Commerce Department?s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) conducted a three-year, US$24 million investigation into the structural failure and progressive collapse of several WTC complex structures, including 7 World Trade Center. The study included not only in-house technical expertise, but also drew upon the knowledge of several outside private institutions, including the Structural Engineering Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers (SEI/ASCE), the Society of Fire Protection Engineers (SFPE), the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH), and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEAoNY).[4]NIST has released video and still photo analysis of Building 7 prior to its collapse that appears to indicate a greater degree of structural damage from falling debris than originally assumed by FEMA. Specifically, a large 10-story gash existed on the south facade, extending a third across the face of the building and approximately a quarter of the way into the interior.[5] A unique aspect of the design of 7 WTC was that each outer structural column was responsible for supporting 2,000 square feet (186 square meters) of floor space, suggesting that the simultaneous removal of a number of columns would lead to a severely compromised structure. Consistent with this theory, news footage shows visible cracking and bowing of the building's east wall immediately prior to the collapse, which started from the penthouse floors. [5]The final report from NIST regarding the collapse of 7 WTC was due in July 2005, but is still ongoing.[6] NIST released a progress report in June of 2004 outlining its working hypothesis. On this hypothesis a local failure in a critical column, caused by damage from either fire or falling debris from the collapses of the two towers, progressed first vertically and then horizontally to result in "a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure".[7][8] In answer to the question of whether "a controlled demolition hypothesis is being considered to explain the collapse", NIST says that it "While NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event, it would like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements."[6]Despite FEMA's preliminary finding that fire caused the collapse, some have presented alternate theories, usually as part of a larger belief in 9/11 conspiracy theories. In support of this belief, they have pointed to the presence of an undercover CIA office in the building[9], and FEMA's finding that the average debris field radius was approximately 70 feet.[10]</div> - Wikipedia (WTC 7)
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? Sorry if this has already been said, but its more of Clintons fault than Bushs, it took years to plan this attack, way longer than Bush was in office. Clinton didnt do sh*t to the 93 attackers than 9/11 happened, im not saying to was Clintons fault, but hes more to blame than Bush.
Re: Was 9/11 George Bush's fault? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (austingriz76 @ Oct 4 2006, 06:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Sorry if this has already been said, but its more of Clintons fault than Bushs, it took years to plan this attack, way longer than Bush was in office. Clinton didnt do sh*t to the 93 attackers than 9/11 happened, im not saying to was Clintons fault, but hes more to blame than Bush.</div> Bill Clinton and George Bush have nothing to do with the CIA and FBI's intelligence gathering etc...It's completely illogical to blame either considering it was not their job.
