comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 34 seconds ago
So you're off the belief that all these huge stories are as they are presented

..........

No, not in the slightest.

I just happen to be rational and do not see little green men round every corner.

Have I made myself clear on that with you now Metro?

I told you exactly the same thing on the 9/11 thread.

Just as your 'controlled explosion theory' was debunked, yet you still come out with the same bollox.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Take it easy

You're the one that started saying people believe in conspiracies around every corner.

Alls people like myself have done is question one, possibly two huge events with anomalies that are questioned by people in their millions.

So don't try and tar people with comments like 'little green men' - nobody is that naive.

The problem with posters like you is that you want an alternative suggestion. But posters like me aren't here to do that. That doesn't mean we can't question the official story.

The other interesting thing is when he was in my house I asked hime the coffee or tea back or white. He refused to give any preference. Was strange.

Melton

I saw some idiot earlier on saying Neil Armstrong refused to talk about it.

WTF? I have seen him in countless documentaries about the race to the moon.
-------------------------
I am that idiot. He was notoriously unwilling to talk about being on the moon. He very rarely gave interviews and would not talk about being on the moon. He would reluctantly talk about the space race in general but not about the specifics of walking on the moon.

Lots of people remember the suggestive names in Captain Pugwash despite the fact that there weren't any.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Take it easy

You're the one that started saying people believe in conspiracies around every corner.

..........

You are living proof.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by joely_the_goaly. (U15498)
posted 5 minutes ago
What people forget about WTC 7 is that it had been hit with debris from the twin tower when collapsing. nearly 25 % of the building was reported to have been "scooped out" which caused a massive re-distribution of weight to the trusses. the fire crew and media anticipated the collapse of the building. when the east penthouse collapsed there was more redistribution of weight. not to mention the fact the building had fires.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2056088/Footage-kills-conspiracy-theories-Rare-footage-shows-WTC-7-consumed-fire.html

interesting read
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Might be interesting but the Commission report state that 'fire' and not damage from debris was the cause of the collapse.

Also, the damage to one side of the building puts more doubt on your stance as the building collapsed straight down into its own footprint. This is called a symmetrical collapse.

I studied the collapse of WTC, TTs at Uni. There's nothing fishy about the collapse and the conspiracy theories are rubbish. The structure and material used for construction played a big part. Had it been a concrete frame building the building wouldn't have at 700c heat.

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 25 seconds ago
Take it easy

You're the one that started saying people believe in conspiracies around every corner.

..........

You are living proof.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Ignore comment and cherrypick

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 24 seconds ago

Earl

That explanation just doesn't sit right with me.

No, instead there were tons of esxposives set throughout all the buildings and some government official pressed a row of red buttons
-----------------------------------------------------
Quality

When do I start?
===============================================
I think you've misunderstood it.
If you reverse all of your answers, THEN you'll get the job.

There's nothing fishy about the collapse
------

Actually it's the first steel framed building in history to have collapsed due to fire

To not have questioned it would have been fishy

"They did it once to show that it can be done more than anything else, they don't need to do it again."

They actually did it more than once.

Kennedy is still alive

that was barely a graze / flesh wound

he dived

If the collapse was triggered by an explosion, it wouldn't have started from the top. Would've collapsed evenly.

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 1 minute ago
Take it easy

You're the one that started saying people believe in conspiracies around every corner.

..........

You are living proof.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Vid, you have to accept there is a degree of spin and subterfuge regarding actual events and reported events for some fairly major incidents as well as the quite evident mass surveillance at the very heart of governments. Surely you accept there will be a degree of questionable activities?

That being said, the Twin towers and moon landing conspiracies are all a load of baloney.

Wasn't that to do with the design of the structures though?, they were built on a pretty tight budget and one of the consequences was the "floating floor" design where each floor was fixed to the inside of the steel structure, so when one slab/floor went, it dropped directly on to the one below and so on, gaining speed and momentum resuting on a complete collapse on the inside, I watched the documentary on the construction and all the experts involved agreed this is what happened
--------------

i dodnt know that mate.

having said that, what feckin idiot gave the go ahead to have two of the tallest buildings in the world to be built like that!!

comment by Admin1 (U1) posted 7 minutes ago
The other interesting thing is when he was in my house I asked hime the coffee or tea back or white. He refused to give any preference. Was strange.

------------------------
Admin

In relation to all those questions you had to answer, do you think they were asked simply to decipher whether he was susceptable to blackmail?

comment by Metro_1 (U6770)
posted 3 minutes ago
There's nothing fishy about the collapse
------

Actually it's the first steel framed building in history to have collapsed due to fire

To not have questioned it would have been fishy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
People are entitled to question. But it isn't like the prior sampling size of such events is very great. As there were only two twin towers built the height of the towers and to the same design as the towers.

comment by UnitedRedMacca-The Original Rooney Fanboy (U2024)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by Admin1 (U1) posted 7 minutes ago
The other interesting thing is when he was in my house I asked hime the coffee or tea back or white. He refused to give any preference. Was strange.

------------------------
Admin

In relation to all those questions you had to answer, do you think they were asked simply to decipher whether he was susceptable to blackmail?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, that was the main jist of that questioning. He had continently been learning Chinese for a few year prior too.

"People are entitled to question. But it isn't like the prior sampling size of such events is very great. As there were only two twin towers built the height of the towers and to the same design as the towers."

I can't remember many having a plane flown into them either...

Actually it's the first steel framed building in history to have collapsed due to fire
=============================
Not true.
Also no other steel framed high rise has 700c fire at the structural frames..

I think they should have rebuilt them

they were cooler than the new one

I cant remember the techical term used for it. But it is like having driven 1000 safe journeys in you car, then after getting hammered for the first time assume that given you have had 1000 safe car journeys the chances of you crashing is low and you drive home only to crash.

Admin

Do I believe every thing we have been told about 9/11?

Probably not.

But I don't believe any theory that is irrational.

The controlled exposion theory is irrational for the reasons I have said.

For the amount of explosives to be used to bring down buildings of that magnitude, someone would have noticed them.

You can't hide that kind of thing.