South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
killadoob said:
ignacio said:
You clearly don't know what would be involved. Firstly they would have to manufacture a bomb(s) specifically for this purpose because every bomb can be traced back to its origin. They found a lot of bombs, just not any 'sophisticated' or nuclear ones. And how would they explain the lack of technology needed to manufacture them. It would have looked very suspicious. They look more credible saying they made a mistake than planting a bomb.
It was easy enough for the "torrorists" to do it. Besides most planes fly themselves already. The pilot only does the taking off and landing (which didn't happen anyway) and makes adjustments during flight. The equipment to fly the plane by itself is already in place. All that would be needed is a software update.
Their currency is weakening. They get most of their resources from other countries. In order to 'afford' it they get other countries to owe them. Every dollar was artificially made and is actually WORTHLESS.
Prometheus said:
Recruiting programmers to to make software capable of flying a plane remotely, which has already been in development. Hire others to "only" do testing for a "new flight training program". Losing trillians of dollars? I don't think they have that much and the government only lost a couple million which is a drop in the ocean for the return they thought they would get. And don't forget your reality that oswald shot jfk from the wrong side so that the bullet would have had to have deflected 180 degrees for it to have hit him. How stupid do those theories propagated by governments sound? No one has to be kept quiet if they don't know what they were doing. You don't go around advertising your plans. That would be stupid. Everyones knows only what they need to in order to accomplish their task. Getting Al Qaeda to take the blame? Whenever there's a bombing everyone wants credit so why would someone want to "take credit" for THIS?ignacio said:
Ignacio - you may laugh and jest - but you explain it - what did we see on 9/11? What were the explosions in the basement/heard by everybody including the shock wave. How does concrete manage to get pulverised beyond existence - turned to dust? Where is the 757 at the pentagon (and it wasn't in that last video?) And certainly no evidence of a 757 in any published photos? And Flight 93?
Prometheus said:
I don't have much to say about this in terms of conspiracy... if you are asking if the US wanted to take down Saddam - I would say yes. If you are asking if it was a good idea - I would say possibly - time will tell - but they sure screwed up the post-war. If you are saying that this means that there was a conspiracy involved - I just don't buy it: the simplest theory is that militant Islamists trained in the states to pull off the operation; the WTC was a big target for them (they aleady tried to take them down during Clinton's admin); all evidence points to them - from phone calls about Arabs on board (maybe "programmers" made the civilians sound like loved ones people knew, eh prometheus??), from admission by OBL; from flight training schools; from continued efforts by Islamists to destabilize and attack the west (London, Madrid, African embassy bombings, USS Cole...) ... the list is really endless... and it all points to militant Islamists.... but in your mind it all points to a massive, multi-national conspiracy. Sorry, your ideas don't even begin to make sense.
No - not interested.
Aliens? In this country? Not a chance, surely it was STOLEN.ignacio said:
Corrected your link and it only list the gross domestic products not the economies of any country.
It's called the WORLD trade centre. A lot of those stocks were owned by other countries. You actually think America gives a damn about any other country? Maybe GB where Wush's poodle Tony Blait lives. Also know that a large percentage of that stocks were held by companies which in turn drove their stock prices up. So they were in fact multiplied over and over again how many times? Again artificial money. And how much did the government and not "the people" and companies actually lose?
Sure, I will. Rather that than believe that someone was shot with a bullet that turned around in mid air.
What are you going on about people phoning their families? Do you think it makes any difference to the facts?
We have 4 planes liquefied in one day over how many planes liquefied in history over the amount of plane crashes.kilo39 said:
Prometheus said:Aliens? In this country? Not a chance, surely it was STOLEN.
kilo39 said:Well 4 planes/though it was the buildings that liquified WTC + WTC7 - liquified too(?) Ockham’s Razor proves the point. Must be aliens.
The incredibly obvious point is that we know two of the planes were entirely destroyed or liquified if you want to call it that... since we SAW the two planes go into the WTC (are you arguing optical illusion?!). So - if two planes can be destroyed to the point that only fragments can be found, why is it so unreasonable that it could happen to all four? When a plane blows up in the air (like Lockerbie) parts can go anywhere - when a plane goes directly into an object, all of the fuel + momentum energy is confined to a very localised area. Maybe you are imagining other controlled crashes - in which pilots are trying to save passengers and not trying to go into a building as fast as possible with as much fuel as possible on board - yeah, I agree, in those cases, planes don't "liquify". (btw they did find parts at each site, like a wheel at the pentagon, so I don't know what you are saying by liquified)kilo39 said:The funniest thing of all - is that I am just repeating the official word. Now tell me of Ockham’s Razor.
ignacio said:
