Wow. You are so smart. We are all impressed. Really.

 

Actually, I put to rest many of the theories that are hurting the 9/11 Truth Movement...such as flying saucers, missiles, pods under aircraft and the like.

It comes down to one thing (once again), WTC 7.

Nope, I did my own research. Have you done yours? I would love to here you back up the goverments claims on the 9/11.

Yeah, companies like BBC, CNN and CSPAN are pretty much in moms basement...

Im sure you, like a lot of "Americans" have watched the evening news and thought, "that sounds right to me". But have you researched? Until you have, I must say that you are ignorant of all the facts regarding, specifically, WTC 7.

 

Too bad they may never get it. If there is a vast conspiracy here a bunch of internet nerds with no credibility aren't going to blow the lid off it. If anyone does it will be the mainstream media you are so fond of knocking. Nobody beleives people like you except sheep who choose to follow an "alternative" shepard because it's cool to do so.

Most Americans voted for Bush too. That should tell you that "most Americans" have no idea what the f*ck is going on.

So why don't you sum up your theory about what happened on 9/11 in 300 words or less for those of us who don't care to read all the crap on the 47 URL's you posted. I'd be interested to hear who you think was flying those planes and why explosive charges were loaded in all these buildings and planes and whatever the hell else you are talking about. It should be entertaining, if not enlightening.

 

Impressed or not, at least I can approach things without a closed mind. Can you?

The moment we begin to fear the opinions of others and hesitate to tell the truth that is in us, and from motives of policy are silent when we should speak, the divine floods of light and life no longer flow into our souls.

-Elizabeth Cady Stanton


All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

-Arthur Schopenhauer

 

WTC 7 was brought down with explosives. Now compare the collapse of 7 to 1 and 2. WTC 1 and 2 were also brought down with explosives.

I never claimed to have all the answers (yet) but I do know that the theory offered up by our goverment is much more the conspiracy theory than the theory I put out there.

 

I don't necessarily buy the governments version of events outright, but until I hear some practical evidence to suspect otherwise I am assuming the truth is something close to what we are being told, yes. The problem with the conspiracy theories is you need to back them up with a motive in order for them to have any relevance at all.

If you want people to really think about your theories on this, why not summarize them here breifly, since no one is going to read all those links. I'd especially like to hear what you think the governments motivation might be for this big cover-up and what precisely they would gain from doing what you accuse them of.

 

WHY and HOW would explosives be either in the WTC or on the planes?

WHY would they blow up WTC 7?

What is the motivation there? It makes no sense at all. What leads you to conclude that 1 and 2 were destroyed by explosives in the first place? Did you see the Nova special or any of the many other programs explaining exactly how the towers collapsed? Or do you think they are all part of the vast conspiracy?

 

All of what I have said has been backed up. You said it yourself, you have no interest in clicking links, so there is not a lot I can do for you if you dont want to research. I have gone as far as to provide the links, eliminating possible hours of research trying to find them yourself. Now you want a 300 word summary of the events so you can attack that. Anything to get out of doing the work yourself, huh?

 

theres no way its a consipracy... but, as far as their motivation IF they blew it up, maybe it was a way to get the public to not mind going to war

 

I never said there were explosives on the planes.

As previously explained, the person to ask is Larry Silverstein. He told the fire dept. to "pull" the buildings.

The towers required some $200 million in renovations and improvements, most of which related to removal and replacement of building materials declared to be health hazards in the years since the towers were built. Other New York developers had been driven into bankruptcy by the costly mandated renovations, and $200 million represented an entire year's worth of revenues from the World Trade Towers.

Instead of renovation, Silverstein is rebuilding, funded by the insurance coverage on the property which 'fortuitously' covered acts of terrorism. Even better, Silverstein filed TWO insurance claims for the maximum amount of the policy, based on the two, in Silverstein's view, separate attacks. The total potential payout is $7.1 billion, more than enough to build a fabulous new complex and leave a hefty profit for the Silverstein Group, including Larry Silverstein himself.


Have you even watched them collapse? Watch them again.

Regarding NOVA, why do you put so much faith into a "documentary" that does not name names, refuses to show the vertical core columns instead showing them as flat floors, Eagars comments saying that the building were "mostly air", the animation showing only the cross trusses and not the perpendicular trusses.....

NOVAs special is as relevant as the 9/11 commission report.

Dont take that video at face value...research what they are saying. Find out if it is true. I have, and I can assure you it is not.

 

Grand events like assasinations, coups, etc. that are political or socioeconomic in scale and scope can have a host of planned effects globally that may not be apparent or even seen to completion for years.

An immediate reaction to a planned event (like war was to 9/11) may not be the ultimate result that was intended, however the event itself may be a large piece of a much bigger puzzle.

To not have all the answers about why someone may have had a hand in 9/11 means that we cannot form a working theory as to it's alleged purposes or how it would play in the larger picture. Our govt. (CIA) has bankrolled both sides of many conflicts for years, that lends some credence to the thought that it is plausible someone in our govt may have had a hand in 9/11- even if it was inadvertent.

Things like this tend to fall into a category of "games governments play" and a true aftermath or implication probably won't be played out with imbedded reporters on CNN. Sometimes we wag the dog, and war is a distraction. A problem we have is not looking at the big picture and our historical place in it.

 

I love how people say this crazy sheite as if it's fact...

How about if I just speak your language...I'll post a website & expect you to believe everything on it:

http://ourworld-top.cs.com/mikegriffith1/refute.htm

Now go put your tinfoil hat back on before big brother steals your thoughts.

 

Actually, that's EXACTLY what all this is about...if you think otherwise, YOU are the ignorant one.

Polls also showed Kerry winning by a large margin...and look what happened. You know why? Because the VAST majority of left wingers LOVE to scream & protest & spend all their time taking these polls, while those of us occupying the right don't bother with any of it until it's time to do something REAL...like VOTE. How, then, can you possibly think any of those polls are even CLOSE to accurate?

 

Nice try but where on that site is there an explaination on how WTC 7 collapsed?

 

Back to the name calling...so typical.
HOW DID WTC 7 COLLAPSE? I would love to hear your thoughts on that.


Then explain to me HOW WTC 7 collapsed then. FEMA couldn’t do it. The 9/11 (c)ommision report couldn’t.
How do YOU think it fell?

 

Exactly!
To me it is not as important to find out who did it and why, but the impact said events will have on the world as a whole. Most of the times things are not black or white, but multiple shades of grey

 

Sticking to one thing, thinking it impossible to refute, without researching it for yourself...so typical.

ok, here you go...next time, try google...it's all out there, all you have to do is REALLY want to look for it instead of stopping when you hear what you WANT to hear.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...e/1227842.html

 

Haha!
You should really follow your own advice! That carries about as much weight as the 9/11 commision report and NOVA's documentary long ago debunked.

PM's article debunked: http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pm/index.html#planes

The article you link to makes no mention to the following:

The towers fell straight down through themselves maintaining radial symmetry,
The towers' tops mushroomed into vast clouds of pulverized concrete and shattered steel.
The collapses exhibited demolition squibs shooting out of the towers well below the zones of total destruction.
The collapses generated vast dust clouds that expanded to many times the towers' volumes -- more than occurs in typical controlled demolitions.
The towers came down suddenly and completely, at a rate only slightly slower than free fall in a vacuum. The flat top of the North Tower's rubble cloud revealed in these photos show the rubble falling at the same speed inside and outside the former building's profile, an impossibility unless demolition were removing the building's structure ahead of the falling rubble.
The explosions of the towers were characterized by intense blast waves that shattered windows in buildings 400 feet away.
The steel skeletons were consistently shredded into short pieces which could be carried easily by the equipment used to dispose of the evidence.
Eyewitnesses reported explosions before and at the outset of the collapses.

 

And once again, you have not mentioned how YOU think 7 fell. We can post linkls all day long but, again, I ask you, HAVE YOU RECENTLY WATCHED THE COLLAPSE OF THOSE TOWERS?

We can quote others all we want, but a picture is worth a thousand words. Watch the videos and THEN get back to me.

 

RANDOM THOUGHT:

There is an interesting part at the beginning of the movie Braveheart - "I shall tell you of William Wallace. Historians from England will say I am a liar, but history is written by those who have hanged heroes."

That statement is very true.