9/11 Paranoia,and Conspiracy Nut Jobs

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Oct 28, 2005
2,980
25
0
42
www.myspace.com
#21
I feel about it the same way I feel about a High School teacher that also coaches a sports team. That teacher might be easier on his players (or on all athletes in general), because he/she wants to help them out.....that teacher might be tougher on athletes to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. Either way, it's up to that teacher. And the fact that that teacher also teaches sports, IS IN NO WAY PROOF IN ITSELF that that teacher is doing special favors.

The fact that our leaders are not afforded the same DECENCY and RESPECT, to me, is indicative of the poor state of affairs we are in right now. People in their 20's, in general, have no confidence in anything but themselves, give no considerations to anyone but themselves, entertain no extenuating circumstances or logical explanations other than ones that benefit themselves.....and it is saddening.
 

TROLL

Sicc OG
Aug 8, 2003
5,360
22
0
43
#22
Dirty Shoez said:
I feel about it the same way I feel about a High School teacher that also coaches a sports team. That teacher might be easier on his players (or on all athletes in general), because he/she wants to help them out.....that teacher might be tougher on athletes to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. Either way, it's up to that teacher. And the fact that that teacher also teaches sports, IS IN NO WAY PROOF IN ITSELF that that teacher is doing special favors.
but apply that example to a consumer and buisnessman and the ability to use one(politics) to help regenerate the other(buisness) and your example falls to pieces because theres no monetary gain in teaching a subject you actively particpate in and your downright not answering the question if one corporate politician would manipulate one to help sustain the other...
Dirty Shoez said:
The fact that our leaders are not afforded the same DECENCY and RESPECT, to me, is indicative of the poor state of affairs we are in right now. People in their 20's, in general, have no confidence in anything but themselves, give no considerations to anyone but themselves, entertain no extenuating circumstances or logical explanations other than ones that benefit themselves.....and it is saddening.
Is it any wonder why they have no faith in and express hatred towards those who are destroying our country? we are facing facism in the face and people dont have the strive to activly change the world around them because they ARE too into themselves.. but that doesnt negate their dislike for the people who are taking advantage of the current political structure...
 
May 9, 2002
37,066
16,283
113
#23
Dirty Shoez said:
I dare you to get rid of every single piece of clothing, furniture, electronics or anything else made by a so-called "big corporation" that you own or use. Once (that is to say, if) you claim to have done so, I'm going to call you a fucking liar. And you know what? You surely will be one.

Pick and choose; this and that; one of these, one of those. You do it and everyone does it. You rail on the government, then hop off-line and go buy a Subway sandwich and a new pair of Jordans. Do not sit here and act like you are above other people, and have a so-called "open mind", because you are full of shit just like the rest of us, and you know it. On 9/11, on Life...on ANY topic. I see right through you, and so should everyone else.

And before you start crying about me not speaking on the topic.....i think it's evident what your agenda is. Instead of even discussing the Popular Mechanics claims, you simply went out and Googled a page and said "there, that is the refutation! It is disproven!". No attempt to even discuss the topic. Talk about being brainwashed by propaganda.
What does government controlled propaganda have to do with Jordans???
 

BAMMER

Siccness Gray Hair
Apr 25, 2002
5,828
479
83
48
Auburn Wa
www.dawgman.com
#24
"Instead of even discussing the Popular Mechanics claims, you simply went out and Googled a page and said "there, that is the refutation! It is disproven!". No attempt to even discuss the topic."

BTW Jessy,I'm not gonna sit through a 1 hr + movie that edits in music into real footage.Your film try's to brainwash,by playing that slow melodic God Bless America jingle.They tipped their caps to early.Please discuss the Pop Mech. article you obviously never read,because it contradicts your scientific theories.
 

TROLL

Sicc OG
Aug 8, 2003
5,360
22
0
43
#25
BAMMER said:
"Instead of even discussing the Popular Mechanics claims, you simply went out and Googled a page and said "there, that is the refutation! It is disproven!". No attempt to even discuss the topic."
translation: "IM NOT ACKNOWLEDGEING YOUR PROOF BECAUSE I HAVE TO CLICK A LINK AND READ FOR MYSELF!!"
BAMMER said:
BTW Jessy,I'm not gonna sit through a 1 hr + movie that edits in music into real footage.Your film try's to brainwash,by playing that slow melodic God Bless America jingle.They tipped their caps to early.Please discuss the Pop Mech. article you obviously never read,because it contradicts your scientific theories.
translation:"THAT MOVIE HAD MUSIC SO IM NOT GOING TO WATCH IT!!!"

u can quote me on this...
"the last step before outright denial is circumventing the acknowledgment of a fact through justification by means of a mundane exscuse"


witness your popular mechanics claim crumble...

-Popular mechanics biased???-
"It comes as no surprise that Popular Mechanics is owned by Hearst Corporation. As fictionalized in Orson Welles' acclaimed film Citizen Kane, William Randolph Hearst wrote the book on cronyism and yellow journalism and Popular Mechanics hasn't bucked that tradition."
"A hefty chunk of its advertising revenue relies on the military and defense contractors. Since the invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq and in the future Iran all cite 9/11 as a pretext, what motivation does the magazine have to conduct a balanced investigation and risk upsetting its most coveted clientele?"
where is popular mechanics biased in its claims to 9/11??-

1st.. they threw insults..
We as a society accept the basic premise that a group of Islamist terrorists hijacked four airplanes and turned them into weapons against us. Sadly, the noble search for truth is now being hijacked by a growing army of conspiracy theorists.
Those who peddle fantasies that this country encouraged, permitted or actually carried out the attacks are libeling the truth -- and disgracing the memories of the thousands who died that day.
2nd..they used strawman tactics (focus on minute details of a theory to take away focus from other facts)...

Popular Mechanics said:

On 9/11 there were only 14 fighter jets on alert in the contiguous 48 states. No computer network or alarm automatically alerted the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) of missing planes. "They [civilian Air Traffic Control, or ATC] had to pick up the phone and literally dial us," says Maj. Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD. Boston Center, one of 22 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regional ATC facilities, called NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) three times: at 8:37 am EST to inform NEADS that Flight 11 was hijacked; at 9:21 am to inform the agency, mistakenly, that Flight 11 was headed for Washington (the plane had hit the North Tower 35 minutes earlier); and at 9:41 am to (erroneously) identify Delta Air Lines Flight 1989 from Boston as a possible hijacking. The New York ATC called NEADS at 9:03 am to report that United Flight 175 had been hijacked--the same time the plane slammed into the South Tower. Within minutes of that first call from Boston Center, NEADS scrambled two F-15s from Otis Air Force Base in Falmouth, Mass., and three F-16s from Langley Air National Guard Base in Hampton, Va. None of the fighters got anywhere near the pirated planes.

"The idea that Air Traffic Control had to "pick up the phone and literally dial" NORAD -- a routine procedure in handling unresponsive aircraft -- does not begin to explain the long gaps between ATC being aware of off-course and non-responsive jetliners and NORAD acting. Standard procedure was for ATC to notify NORAD if they were unable to contact such an aircraft within three minutes.


Popular Mechanics said:

Why couldn't ATC find the hijacked flights? When the hijackers turned off the planes' transponders, which broadcast identifying signals, ATC had to search 4500 identical radar blips crisscrossing some of the country's busiest air corridors. And NORAD's sophisticated radar? It ringed the continent, looking outward for threats, not inward. "It was like a doughnut," Martin says. "There was no coverage in the middle." Pre-9/11, flights originating in the States were not seen as threats and NORAD wasn't prepared to track them.

When the jetliners' transponders were switched off, their blips on the ATC screens lost their identifying data, and would stand out against the remaining blips, which were labeled. The idea that NORAD had no radar coverage of much of North America comes from that best-selling work of fiction, The 9/11 Commission Report.

Popular Mechanics said:

In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999. With passengers and crew unconscious from cabin decompression, the plane lost radio contact but remained in transponder contact until it crashed. Even so, it took an F-16 1 hour and 22 minutes to reach the stricken jet. Rules in effect back then, and on 9/11, prohibited supersonic flight on intercepts. Prior to 9/11, all other NORAD interceptions were limited to offshore Air Defense Identification Zones (ADIZ). "Until 9/11 there was no domestic ADIZ," FAA spokesman Bill Schumann tells PM. After 9/11, NORAD and the FAA increased cooperation, setting up hotlines between ATCs and NORAD command centers, according to officials from both agencies. NORAD has also increased its fighter coverage and has installed radar to monitor airspace over the continent.


PM's claim that only one civilian plane was intercepted over North America in decade before 9/11 is preposterous and illustrates how sloppy the article is with facts. While the military doesn't report intercepts, the AP reported the following statement from one of PM's own experts, Maj. Douglas Martin: "From Sept. 11 to June, NORAD scrambled jets or diverted combat air patrols 462 times, almost seven times as often as the 67 scrambles from September 2000 to June 2001, Martin said."

http://www.wanttoknow.info/020812ap
Popular Mechanics said:

Jet fuel burns at 800º to 1500ºF, not hot enough to melt steel (2750ºF). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength--and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100ºF," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800º it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.


However, the idea that fire temperatures -- much less steel temperatures -- were anywhere close to 1800º F runs contrary to experience with building fires. Fire tests by Corus Construction recorded maximum steel temperatures of about 680ºF in UNINSULATED parking garages. The claim that insulation was knocked off the WTC steel is routinely invoked in defenses of the official story to make the weakening of the steel seem more plausible.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/fires/steel.html
Popular Mechanics said:

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832ºF.

"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."

But no amount of office contents burning has ever brought down a steel-frame high-rise before, even in fires more serious than in the Twin Towers and Building 7.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/fires/severity.html
Popular Mechanics said:

Once each tower began to collapse, the weight of all the floors above the collapsed zone bore down with pulverizing force on the highest intact floor. Unable to absorb the massive energy, that floor would fail, transmitting the forces to the floor below, allowing the collapse to progress downward through the building in a chain reaction. Engineers call the process "pancaking," and it does not require an explosion to begin, according to David Biggs, a structural engineer at Ryan-Biggs Associates and a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) team that worked on the FEMA report.


If the floors "pancaked", sections of floor platters would have been found at Ground Zero. But photographs of Ground Zero show no evidence of pieces of concrete from the floor slabs or large sections of the underlying corrugated steel floor pans. Instead the floor pans were shredded and the concrete was pulverized and spread over Lower Manhattan.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/groundzero.html
Popular Mechanics said:

Like all office buildings, the WTC towers contained a huge volume of air. As they pancaked, all that air--along with the concrete and other debris pulverized by the force of the collapse--was ejected with enormous energy. "When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it's going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder tells PM. Those clouds of dust may create the impression of a controlled demolition, Sunder adds, "but it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception."

This use of handwaving with vague, grandious quantifiers -- massive energy ... huge volume of air ... enormous energy -- is typical of the writing of apologists for the official explanation.

Sunder's explanation that pressure from falling floors was responsible for "shoot[ing] air and concrete dust out the window" begs the question of where the pulverized concrete came from, since the only concrete part of the towers was the floor slabs.


Popular Mechanics said:

Demolition expert Romero regrets that his comments to the Albuquerque Journal became fodder for conspiracy theorists. "I was misquoted in saying that I thought it was explosives that brought down the building," he tells PM. "I only said that that's what it looked like."

Here is how the Albuquerque Journal quoted Romero. " My opinion is, based on the videotapes, that after the airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse. "

Popular Mechanics said:

Romero, who agrees with the scientific conclusion that fire triggered the collapses, demanded a retraction from the Journal. It was printed Sept. 22, 2001. "I felt like my scientific reputation was on the line." But emperors-clothes.com saw something else: "The paymaster of Romero's research institute is the Pentagon. Directly or indirectly, pressure was brought to bear, forcing Romero to retract his original statement." Romero responds: "Conspiracy theorists came out saying that the government got to me. That is the farthest thing from the truth. This has been an albatross around my neck for three years."

PM implies that "conspiracy theorists" rely entirely on experts such as Van Romero for the conclusion that the buildings were demolished by controlled demolition, and ignores the many common-sense arguments made in the talk The World Trade Center Demolition and elsewhere.

The handsome rewards Romero has enjoyed since his retraction may make many envious of his albatross.

vvvv
http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/retractions/romero.html

i could keep going.. and will if this isnt enough to prove a biased and sloppy reporting on PM's work.
 

TROLL

Sicc OG
Aug 8, 2003
5,360
22
0
43
#26
before you can lean on popular mechanics to keep u safe in that delusional reality you reside in please.. ante up some explanations to these facts..


1)Thermate was found at the craters of each building

2)Nearly half of the alleged hijackers are still alive today

3)the manuvers made by the plane moments before it hit the pentagon had air traffic controllers thinking it was a military plane, however, the alleged hijacker failed his courses at an arizona flight school, flying a single engine cesna due to problems controlling and landing the plane..

4)The FBI first tried to claim that the hijacker was a man who flew commercial planes in saudi arabia but then soon retracted their statement after finding out that man was still alive in saudi arabia

5)The 5 frames that were released to the public from the pentagon were altered instead of shown in their entirety.. also, the time stamp on them is false and when asked why it was the military stated they didnt know why.

6)Flight 77 disapeared from air traffic controllers near ohio and was unable to be detected until it showed up as a blip near the pentagon nearly an hour later..

7)The flight school in florida where the alleged terrorists earned their pilot licenses' had ties to the CIA and was operated by a fugitive in holland.

8)The pentagon holds more people in it then do most cities. However, the plane supposedly hit the only area of the building which was near empty and was renovated to with stand a plane running into it.

9)No pieces of the supposed plane that hit the pentagon were big enough that a person could not pick up and walk away with..

10)some witness claimed to have seen an airliner... some witnesses reported to have seen a private jet with no markings and some witness claimed to have seen a military helicopter circle the pentagon..

11)The north tower collapsed in 8.4 seconds... the time it takes a rock thrown from the 94th floor.. 8.4 seconds.. the towers fell at freefall speed. to put in perspective.. the towers fell at avg 10 floors per second's breaking the laws of physics because the floors would have slowed the collapse down. science has proven, pieces of a building cannot crash through steel and concreate as fast as they fall through the air

12)If the small explosions seen on the towers before the falling debris was really pancaked pressure being released from falling floors, then why are the centered releases only in a few areas and not widespread throught the floor?

13)Mayor Rudy Giuliani authorized the steel and pieces of debris to be destroyed. They victims families protested and asked FEMA to stop Giuliani, however it was too late and the mayors response was "I was unaware that people wanted me to keep the debris"

14)After a Zogby poll showed that 50% of new yorkers beleived that the government was behind 9/11, CNN aired a special demonizing the theories and at the end of the hour long show conducted their own poll and out of 7000 people surveyed 90% still believed the government was behind the attacks

15)Video was taken from nearby areas that would have gotten the whole incident on film, however, ALL were confiscated and a warning was given by the agents to the employees to not discuss what they had seen.

16)9/11 is the first time in history three buildings collapsed due to fire, the towers and building 7.

15)Never before in history has a black box been unsalvageable.. on 9/11 it was the first time in history that it supposedly happend 4 times!!

16)MSNBC ran a headline saying "Trade center warnings baffle police:the urban myth's turn out to be true" About hundreds of workers being warned by an isreali instant messaging service Odigo who recieved a warning and the company admitted to telling there workers about the threat.

17)Larry silverstein the landlord had only bought the entire building complex months before the attack and had taken out a record insurance policy on the building giving specific refrences to "acts of terror"

18)Larry Silverstein also said on camera that he gave the order to "pull it" the demolition term for detonating....however, non-believers say he meant "pull it" as in evacuate, however, they were unable to explain his following sentence of "and we watched the building collapse"

19)WTC 7 had the cities command control bunker, also inside the bulding were offices for Department of Defense, US secret service, FEMA, Central intelligence Agency, secruitys and exchange commision,

20)Rudy Giuliani was reported to have been told to leave WTC 7 to a bunker, which had been set up the previous day, before anyfires were reported in it.

21)George bushes youngest brother ran security for WTC7 and his contract expired, on 9/11

22)Steel melts at 2000 degrees jet fuel burns at a maximum 1200 degrees

23)The arcitect for the WTC towers went on record saying "we designed the towers to withstand multiple jumbo jet hits"

24)Senior fire fighter Lou Catchioli who survived the collapse told people magazine that bombs were placed and detonated inside the towers.

vvvv
http://www.siccness.net/vb/showthread.php?t=203982&highlight=9/11
 
Apr 26, 2002
3,896
638
113
#27
wut i noticed is troll "debunked" statements made by popular mechanics one by one, but when it comes to dirty shoez or bammer, all they can say is:

Dirty Shoez said:
Pick and choose; this and that; one of these, one of those. You do it and everyone does it. You rail on the government, then hop off-line and go buy a Subway sandwich and a new pair of Jordans. Do not sit here and act like you are above other people, and have a so-called "open mind", because you are full of shit just like the rest of us, and you know it. On 9/11, on Life...on ANY topic. I see right through you, and so should everyone else.

And before you start crying about me not speaking on the topic.....i think it's evident what your agenda is. Instead of even discussing the Popular Mechanics claims, you simply went out and Googled a page and said "there, that is the refutation! It is disproven!". No attempt to even discuss the topic. Talk about being brainwashed by propaganda.
now please yall, debunk trolls statements, ONE BY ONE. also how NO TRACES of the planes were found from flight 93 OR the one that hit the pentagon. and the NUMEROUS OFFICIAL news footages witnessing EXPLOSIONS in the towers. and the disappearing camera footages from the gas station, the hotel, and the highway that were confiscated that coulda showed "proof" of the "airplane" that hit the pentagon. please, one by one. if u can't, then............. fold.
 
Apr 26, 2002
3,896
638
113
#28
its also funny how it took popular mechanics, so far the ONLY one i've seen to attempt to "debunk" conspiracies theories, this many years to TRY to debunk conspiracy theories. y them? and y not george bush or somebody from his administration? if i were being accused of wrongdoing, and i have NOTHING to hide, i would sit one on one with ANYBODY (conspiracy theorists), on live tv, and debate with them. y cant they? fold.
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,001
86
48
#29
Bammer, get your ass the HISTORY channel, and watch some of the shit they haev on there...Then come back on here and talk that weak ass pro-government, I'll lay on my stomach and get fucked in the ass type shit.
 
May 9, 2002
37,066
16,283
113
#30
BAMMER said:
"Instead of even discussing the Popular Mechanics claims, you simply went out and Googled a page and said "there, that is the refutation! It is disproven!". No attempt to even discuss the topic."

BTW Jessy,I'm not gonna sit through a 1 hr + movie that edits in music into real footage.Your film try's to brainwash,by playing that slow melodic God Bless America jingle.They tipped their caps to early.Please discuss the Pop Mech. article you obviously never read,because it contradicts your scientific theories.
Why should i read it?If youre nto gonna watch the whoel thing...then im not gonna read your article...

You think the way you think...and i think the way i think...i could care less if you think im a "nut" or "paranoid"...

And since when did a "y" grown on the end of my name?
 
Nov 22, 2005
840
0
0
41
#33
Dirty Shoez said:
I feel about it the same way I feel about a High School teacher that also coaches a sports team. That teacher might be easier on his players (or on all athletes in general), because he/she wants to help them out.....that teacher might be tougher on athletes to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. Either way, it's up to that teacher. And the fact that that teacher also teaches sports, IS IN NO WAY PROOF IN ITSELF that that teacher is doing special favors.

The fact that our leaders are not afforded the same DECENCY and RESPECT, to me, is indicative of the poor state of affairs we are in right now. People in their 20's, in general, have no confidence in anything but themselves, give no considerations to anyone but themselves, entertain no extenuating circumstances or logical explanations other than ones that benefit themselves.....and it is saddening.

Dirtz shoez, I bet your some how affiliated to the goverment, what do u do for a living, are you one of those people that donates money to the police? u join the military at some time?? u work for the post office?? are u an undercover agent trying to persuade people to keep their eyes closed. to just accept everything thats going on, to just belive bush, did you like richard nixon? u probly support the war in vietnam too??? do you pray to god for him to strike down and kill someone too??? I know u aint just some normal person, unless u live in texas or arkanssa or some shit
 

Cmoke

Sicc OG
May 10, 2002
3,391
4
38
41
#36
Since you were bold enough to back these claims and support them by calling anyone who does not a "nut job" I will quote YOU and except a detailed response for each quote i have selected as a return for reading and taking a look and the at the information which you and PM claim are facts, and that "debunk" 911 "mthys"



BAMMER said:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html

FROM THE MOMENT the first airplane crashed into the World Trade Center on the morning of September 11, 2001, the world has asked one simple and compelling question: How could it happen?
How? or why? Which is more important?

BAMMER said:
Three and a half years later, not everyone is convinced we know the truth. Go to Google.com, type in the search phrase "World Trade Center conspiracy" and you'll get links to an estimated 628,000 Web sites. More than 3000 books on 9/11 have been published; many of them reject the official consensus that hijackers associated with Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda flew passenger planes into U.S. landmarks.
So why would all these people not believe the "official" story? Possibly because people contain the ability to understand common sense and scientific fact?

BAMMER said:
[Healthy skepticism, it seems, has curdled into paranoia.
Says the BIASED magazine company.

BAMMER said:
Wild conspiracy tales are peddled daily
THE SAME COULD BE SAID ABOUT THE "OFFICIAL STORY"


BAMMER said:
Blurry photos, quotes taken out of context and sketchy eyewitness accounts have inspired a slew of elaborate theories:
EVIDENCE OF BIASED SLANDERING OF THOSE WHO WITNESSED 911 IN ATTEMPTS TO DISCREDIT SOURCES. ELABORATE ON WHOS ACCOUNT?

BAMMER said:
[the World Trade Center was razed by demolition-style bombs; Flight 93 was shot down by a mysterious white jet. As outlandish as these claims may sound,
ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE OF BIASED COMMENTS BY A BIASED MAGAZINE. AND THEY CLAIM TO DEBUNK THE CONCEPTION AND CONSIDERATION OF EXPLOSIVES BEING PLACED IN THE BUILDINGS? BIASED.

BAMMER said:
they are increasingly accepted abroad and among extremists here in the United States.
BASICALLY STATING THAT ANYONE WHO BELIEVES THESE THINGS IS AN EXTREMIST ANTI AMERICAN TERRORIST. BIASED.

BAMMER said:
To investigate 16 of the most prevalent claims made by conspiracy theorists, POPULAR MECHANICS assembled a team of nine researchers and reporters who, together with PM editors, consulted more than 70 professionals in fields that form the core content of this magazine, including aviation, engineering and the military.
A BIASED MAGAZINE SELECTED 9 PEOPLE TO DEBUNK 911 "MYTHS"

BAMMER said:
In the end, we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense.
POPULAR MECHANICS WAS "ABLE TO DEBUNK" THINGS THE US GOVERNMENT COULD NOT? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA MAYBE POPULAR MECHANICS SHOULD BE RUNNING THE COUNTRY.....


BAMMER said:
We learned that a few theories are based on something as innocent as a reporting error on that chaotic day.
YES THERE WAS ONLY 1 REPORTER CLAIMING EXPLOSIONS WERE GOING OFF INSIDE BOTH BUILDINGS.......YEAH FUCKING RIGHT....PATHETIC ATTEMPT AT AN EXCUSE TO TOSS OUT FIRST HAND ACCOUNTS.

BAMMER said:
Others are the byproducts of cynical imaginations that aim to inject suspicion and animosity into public debate.
PRIME EXAMPLE OF BIASED CONTRASTING.

BAMMER said:
Only by confronting such poisonous claims
POISONOUS CLAIMS? HAHAHA BIASED.

BAMMER said:
[with irrefutable facts can we understand what really happened on a day that is forever seared into world history

IRREFUTABLE FACTS ACCORDING TO A BIASED MAGAZINE THAT WORKS FOR THE MILITARY. THE END. STILL WAITING ON THOSE FACTS

If dont wish yo reply to this then stop making post about a topic you are obviously uneducated about. If you expect people to read your sourced information (which i did) Then you must reply and debate back. If you dont then why the fuck would anyone even waste the time of day reading what you have to offer? I would also like to see YOU detest all the scientific FACTS that troll posted ONE.........BY...........ONE. If you cant then you have no business making a thread like this and labeling people "nut jobs" that dont accept the "official story".
 

Cmoke

Sicc OG
May 10, 2002
3,391
4
38
41
#38
Yes it is, uneducated people think they can speak up without getting slapped in the face with real facts.
 

BAMMER

Siccness Gray Hair
Apr 25, 2002
5,828
479
83
48
Auburn Wa
www.dawgman.com
#39
Sixxness said:
Bammer, get your ass the HISTORY channel, and watch some of the shit they haev on there...Then come back on here and talk that weak ass pro-government, I'll lay on my stomach and get fucked in the ass type shit.
Watch your scrawny ass mouth,and quit talkin tough you faggot.We already know I'll make you go to sleep you bitch.Keep it clean,this is a discussion,not some "fuck in the ass" bullshit Sherm head.Is the history channel the one station that is'nt government opperated?

Jessy,I apologize...but I am not going to watch a 1hr 15 minute video that starts with biased music playing 1 second into it.If the proof is in the pudding,leave it be.When did I start spelling my name Camron?

Troll,you my friend are the lone person to impress me,I will do some looking into your claims
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,001
86
48
#40
BAMMER said:
Watch your scrawny ass mouth,and quit talkin tough you faggot.We already know I'll make you go to sleep you bitch.Keep it clean,this is a discussion,not some "fuck in the ass" bullshit Sherm head.Is the history channel the one station that is'nt government opperated?
Since when did I do anything to you? Jesus fucking Christ. And get your facts straight before you say shit cause anybody that knew would laugh in your face. You seem to have a one sided opinion about me, but it's whatever, cause I've never said shit that was disrespectful to you as another human being. :ermm:

I don't know who operates the History Channel, do you want me to look on their website for you?

I'm also not trying to "talk tough." If you have a problem with profanity then I suggest you leave the message board or just put me on ignore.