try to convince me it was anything other than the official story.

[Fizz]

there are some problems with the conspiracy theories. so let me take a step by step approach to this.

1. as far as the 9/11 attacks are concerned i think most people agree the twin towers were hit by airplanes. is there anybody that wishes to argue this point?

2. assuming we got past step one i think we can all agree the towers collapsed. now here is where the conspiracy people lose me. there already were planes flown into the buildings. there were fires burning. people were dying. lots of people. there were around 3000 people dead by the end of the day. a few hundred were police and firemen (i think its a little over 400 but exact numbers arent important for this discussion right now). so we have about 2500 civilians getting killed because they are trapped by fires in a burning skyscraper. everybody with me so far? ok, maybe even a few hundred people were still making their way down the steps. still we are talking a very large amount of casualties, right?

3. so we already have severe damage to a building, people dying by the thousands, etc.
so why blow up the buildings with explosives? where is the logic in that? its already a horrific tragedy. what logical purpose could sending people with explosives into a burning building serve? at this point the building probably needs to come down anyway and thousands are going to die anyway. where is the logic to risk getting caught sending in explosives? why not just wait and take down the building later?

4. now you already have people outraged over an incident in new york with people dying. why would you go and do something stupid like firing a missile at the pentagon or some other "it wasnt a 757" conspiracy?

5. ok, so i kinda get that flight 93 passengers may have been made into heroes. its nice to have some heroes out of the horrible day. i've seen claims of it being taken down by a missile and all that stuff. i'm not convinced and i dont think it happened but i am open minded about it. so what about these claims that it didnt crash in pennsylvania? what purpose does faking a crash serve? if a plane didnt crash in pennsylvania then where is it? what about the DNA of the victims and the hijackers found there?

 

[Terral]

Hi Mr. Fizz:

Mr. Fizz is here to push the Official Cover Story LIES in any way possible. Period.

there are some problems with the conspiracy theories. so let me take a step by step approach to this.

1. as far as the 9/11 attacks are concerned i think most people agree the twin towers were hit by airplanes. is there anybody that wishes to argue this point?

Try making the same case for WTC-7 (my WTC-7 CD Topic) that was struck my no Jetliner, but suffered the identical CD Implosion Fate!!!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A&feature=player_embedded]Mr. Fizz Says 'This' Is WTC-7 Collapsing From Building Fires[/ame]

3. so we already have severe damage to a building, people dying by the thousands, etc.
so why blow up the buildings with explosives?

That is how Controlled Demolition (AE911Truth.org) works. Mr. Fizz is asking questions, when he should be providing Official Cover Story evidence . . .

GL,

Terral

 

[Terral]

Hi Mr. Fizz:

4. now you already have people outraged over an incident in new york with people dying. why would you go and do something stupid like firing a missile at the pentagon or some other "it wasnt a 757" conspiracy?

I explain the need for a 9:31:39 AM Missile Strike at the Pentagon in a recent post here. The three bomblets were required to murder bookeepers and accountants (#1), Navy Commanders about to launch Navy Jets into the NYC Theater (#2) and Defense Intelligence Personnel (#3) about to blow the cover on the 9/11 Inside-Job Attack.

5. ok, so i kinda get that flight 93 passengers may have been made into heroes. its nice to have some heroes out of the horrible day.

Flight 93 never crashed into that empty Shanksville field (my Topic).

Just how many pictures of the same EMPTY HOLE would Mr. Fizz like to see??

The U.S. Geological Survey Photograph is here, but Mr. Fizz cannot see the 911Truth for all the 911LIES . . .

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-59kouBgO_s"]Mr. Fizz Is Pushing Official Cover Story LIES[/ame]

i've seen claims of it being taken down by a missile and all that stuff. i'm not convinced and i dont think it happened but i am open minded about it.

Bullony! This idiot is here to push Official Cover Story LIES no matter what!!! Watch and see . . .

GL,

Terral

 

[CurveLight]

Well if you want to entertain the logic behind aspects of a false flag op that may or may not have happened during the commission of a real attack you have to first ask what the traitors would ask: How much damage is necessary to scare the public into supporting the agenda of The War on Terror? As for the Towers, we know from the '93 bombing that unless the Towers were brought down the effects would be minimized. Meaning, if the skyscrapers were still standing they probably could have been rebuilt by now. In the currency of propaganda, that is worthless. How much is the currency worth by having parades of architecture companies competing for Memorial designs? What is that Memorial worth today? The Towers were a symbol of our imperial strength as seen in countless movies and tv shows.

Take that same model of symbolic meaning and apply it to the Pentagon. Is there any other American symbol more prevalent regarding our military? The entire Pentagon attack was one of remorse. It was attacked where it would cause the least amount of damage to both lives and property. Does it make any sense for terrorists to plan an attack for at least a couple of years only to hit where the impact would be the least harmful? Construction of that wing was public knowledge.....it wasn't like the terrorists only had a 20% chance of hitting the strongest section out of pure accident. Also, it would have caused a lot more damage to hit the Pentagon from the top down and not risk complete failure by skimming the lawn. Remember Hanjour was a very very very poor pilot even on Cessnas. He couldn't even rent a single engine cessna 3 weeks before 9E due to his poor skills. He made 3 attempts and all three times his skills were so bad they rejected and questioned how he even had a license. Less than 6 hours after the attack Rumsfeld had a meeting in his office requesting plans to invade afghanistan and iraq. How did he know who was responsible? (it's not like the US has a short list of enemies in the world). More importantly, if the attacks were a surprise how did he know they were over?

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. That is a complete waste of time. I don't know much about the towers and don't know if explosives were used or not. I do know that for years the State of New York withheld eyewitness testimony from responding officials because what they had to say sure gave credence to the claim of explosives. How ironic. We were told we were attacked for our "Freedom" while the government strong arms silence.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Hi Mr. Fizz:

Mr. Fizz is here to push the Official Cover Story LIES in any way possible. Period.

there are some problems with the conspiracy theories. so let me take a step by step approach to this.

1. as far as the 9/11 attacks are concerned i think most people agree the twin towers were hit by airplanes. is there anybody that wishes to argue this point?

Try making the same case for WTC-7 (my WTC-7 CD Topic) that was struck my no Jetliner, but suffered the identical CD Implosion Fate!!!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A&feature=player_embedded]Mr. Fizz Says 'This' Is WTC-7 Collapsing From Building Fires[/ame]

3. so we already have severe damage to a building, people dying by the thousands, etc.
so why blow up the buildings with explosives?

That is how Controlled Demolition (AE911Truth.org) works. Mr. Fizz is asking questions, when he should be providing Official Cover Story evidence . . .

GL,

Terral

Terral is right.agent Fizz is here to push the propaganda piece that muslins and Bin Laden were behind the attacks and he ignores irrefutable evidence that explosives brought the towers down.someone new to this site like the last poster that just posted,should read the posts of myself,Eots and Terral over here on terrals thread at this link below.unlike the Bush dupes here,we have evidence and facts to back up our claims.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...7-was-a-controlled-demolition-inside-job.html


also this post of mine is a post that Fizz or nobody else here has EVER been able to refute that explosives brought the towers down despite their pathetic efforts.

think you MEANT to say his job is to prove that it didnt collapse CD style in its own footprint Terral? which of of course the Bush dupe cant do that.He has made pathetic attempts to convince us that it didnt fall at 6.5 seconds freefall speed to no avail and also satalite photos taken a week after the towers collapsed showed fires still going with temps that were far too hot and intense to be office fires.

the fires had been hosed down everyday for that whole week.so much so one firefighter said it was like a lake because there was so much water sprayed down on the fires.impossible for office fires to STILL be burning at that point.

However molten metal which many rescue workers spotted underneath all three towers at the bottom of the towers which was still burning despite all the fires put on it,IS a consistant sign of thermite.Not to mention that 7 of the most renowed scientists discovered through samples taken that nano thermite was found. office fires would have been put out several days ago being thermite though and molten metal still burning at high intense temps after that period of time days later is consistant with explosives being used.which pretty much ends this debate and why this whole discussion is mute at this point.The agent as usual of course,will make some more pitiful attempts to try debunk it to no avail as we know.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Amanda]

Aw Fizz... why'd ya go an' do it? Why???

 

[Fizz]

Well if you want to entertain the logic behind aspects of a false flag op that may or may not have happened during the commission of a real attack you have to first ask what the traitors would ask: How much damage is necessary to scare the public into supporting the agenda of The War on Terror? As for the Towers, we know from the '93 bombing that unless the Towers were brought down the effects would be minimized.

i dont need to quote your entire post but it was all good. this part was particularly thought provoking. i agree that the 93 bombing was completely botched by both the government and the media. i think they both minimized the event and in hindsight we should have persued the groups behind it more aggressively.

im still not convinced that explosives were necessary but at least you gave me at least some explanation. the one thing missing from the 93 attack were mass casualties. whether the buildings come down or not there already were mass casualties before the collapse. i havent checked on whether the buildings would have needed to be torn down had they withstood the initial fires. of course my thoughts now are that they were weakened enough to collapse so of course they would have needed to be torn down, at least partially, if they continued to stand.

at least you answered like an adult and didnt try to convince me that i work for the government when i am already certain that i dont. i think their chances of convincing me i do are rather small.

 

[Fizz]

Terral is right.agent Fizz is here to push the propaganda piece that muslins and Bin Laden were behind the attacks and he ignores irrefutable evidence that explosives brought the towers down.

there is more evidence that muslims and bin laden were behind the attacks than there is evidence of explosives.

how many people do you have admitting they planted explosives? because al qeda has admitted they were behind the attacks.

 

[SFC Ollie]

And as normal none of the conspiracy people can tell us how many people were involved. They cannot provide any real proof of explosives. And all they really have is:

"Well it sure looked like a controlled demolition to me, duh"

You see we do not have to prove that there were no explosives, you make the claim, you prove that there were. And that means acceptable proof that could be introduced in court. The proof of the hijackings and the fates of the passengers and crew have already been proven in court. Your turn.

 

[Fizz]

Just how many pictures of the same EMPTY HOLE would Mr. Fizz like to see??

l

you keep showing a hole with all kinds of stuff in it and claiming its empty. do you need glasses or what?

now i did find your claim that the hole existed in 94 interesting and i did check on it. here are two pictures to compare:

this picture is from 1994

sorry, but apparently you need to click on them for the larger version. i dont know how to fix that.

as you may or may not know the field where Flight 93 crashed is an old strip mine. it has been filled back in with dirt. i would imagine that this area is probably slightly softer than an area that has never been dig up and filled in but thats just logical thinking. i wouldnt want to assume anything but its probably a safe guess. its not terribly important. i'm just pointing it out.

anyway, as you can see in the 94 picture there is a long ditch running from top to bottom roughly in the middle of the picture. there also seems to be a patch of grass that is either cut short or dead that starts at about the middle of the long ditch and goes to the left towards the road. pay particular attention to how the ditch lines up with where the road goes through the trees at the bottom of the picture.



this picture is from 2001

this picture is from a different angle of the same area. the road that was at the bottom of the 94 picture going through the trees is now at the top of the picture leading to the lake. you can clearly see the impact crater from flight 93. you can also see the scar from where there was a ditch in 1994. the scar still points to the road through the trees near the top and runs down to the bottom of the picture just to the right of center. the patch of grass talked about earlier is visible as the dark spot about one car length to the lower right from the impact crater.

as you can see the claims that the ditch that existed in 1994 is a fake impact crater are completely absurd.

 

[CurveLight]

Well if you want to entertain the logic behind aspects of a false flag op that may or may not have happened during the commission of a real attack you have to first ask what the traitors would ask: How much damage is necessary to scare the public into supporting the agenda of The War on Terror? As for the Towers, we know from the '93 bombing that unless the Towers were brought down the effects would be minimized.

i dont need to quote your entire post but it was all good. this part was particularly thought provoking. i agree that the 93 bombing was completely botched by both the government and the media. i think they both minimized the event and in hindsight we should have persued the groups behind it more aggressively.

im still not convinced that explosives were necessary but at least you gave me at least some explanation. the one thing missing from the 93 attack were mass casualties. whether the buildings come down or not there already were mass casualties before the collapse. i havent checked on whether the buildings would have needed to be torn down had they withstood the initial fires. of course my thoughts now are that they were weakened enough to collapse so of course they would have needed to be torn down, at least partially, if they continued to stand.

at least you answered like an adult and didnt try to convince me that i work for the government when i am already certain that i dont. i think their chances of convincing me i do are rather small.

It seems one of the biggest obstacles in examination is the belief nobody in our government nor other americans would permit or play an active role for such atrocities. Not saying this applies to you, it's just a general observation. Those who do openly question are ridiculed in the hopes of silencing them. I see that as the phenomenon of Nationalism. It's very bizarre people find it motivating to attack others as being whack jobs for wanting the truth. Many people have lost their jobs for openly questioning the official version and these are not whacko french fry makers at BK. Apparently many do not know it was surviving families who created the truth movement and the commission.

There are several anomalies that point in the general direction of complacency or an active role. Two weeks after the attacks the bush admin passed legislation to offer the families money but only on the condition they did not sue the airlines. When has that ever happened? Especially so soon. Normally it would take years of court battles to squeeze one rusty Lincoln out of the government but in this case the government tosses out millions and millions in exchange for silence? There are quite a few of these Virgin examples and I have not studied the towers demolition theory very much because from my pov the strongest case for challenging the official version is the Pentagon. As for the three buildings that collapsed, all three were Virgins and it took (I believe) over 6 years for NIST to explain why wtc 7 came down. That's pretty bizarre considering there were no physical mysteries.

I see that day as one of Murder. As in any murder trial there are two crucial components: motive and opportunity. Thanks for not offering me a free tin hat. Lol. I don't know what happened that day but the official version is so spaced with gaps it's nearly impossible to accept it without closer scrutiny.

 

[Fizz]

It seems one of the biggest obstacles in examination is the belief nobody in our government nor other americans would permit or play an active role for such atrocities. Not saying this applies to you, it's just a general observation. Those who do openly question are ridiculed in the hopes of silencing them. I see that as the phenomenon of Nationalism. It's very bizarre people find it motivating to attack others as being whack jobs for wanting the truth. Many people have lost their jobs for openly questioning the official version and these are not whacko french fry makers at BK. Apparently many do not know it was surviving families who created the truth movement and the commission.

There are several anomalies that point in the general direction of complacency or an active role. Two weeks after the attacks the bush admin passed legislation to offer the families money but only on the condition they did not sue the airlines. When has that ever happened? Especially so soon. Normally it would take years of court battles to squeeze one rusty Lincoln out of the government but in this case the government tosses out millions and millions in exchange for silence? There are quite a few of these Virgin examples and I have not studied the towers demolition theory very much because from my pov the strongest case for challenging the official version is the Pentagon. As for the three buildings that collapsed, all three were Virgins and it took (I believe) over 6 years for NIST to explain why wtc 7 came down. That's pretty bizarre considering there were no physical mysteries.

I see that day as one of Murder. As in any murder trial there are two crucial components: motive and opportunity. Thanks for not offering me a free tin hat. Lol. I don't know what happened that day but the official version is so spaced with gaps it's nearly impossible to accept it without closer scrutiny.

i dont see anything wrong with the government offering the money to the victims in return for them not suing the airlines. the airlines took a big hit from this and if you remember they got bailed out later. also the families didnt have to wait years. i think it was a win-win situation for everyone except the common taxpayer. the families could choose not to take the money and proceed with filing lawsuits (in fact i think some did).

personally, i dont find it difficult that someone in the government would do something this horrible. what i have a problem with is the thousands and thousands of people needed to pull off most of the comspiracy scenarios. i really think its quite impossible to silence thousands of people involved in killing thousands of americans and have nobody come forward.

like i said before, this is the same government that couldnt keep the president getting a blowjob a secret.

 

[rightwinger]

there are some problems with the conspiracy theories. so let me take a step by step approach to this.

1. as far as the 9/11 attacks are concerned i think most people agree the twin towers were hit by airplanes. is there anybody that wishes to argue this point?

2. assuming we got past step one i think we can all agree the towers collapsed. now here is where the conspiracy people lose me. there already were planes flown into the buildings. there were fires burning. people were dying. lots of people. there were around 3000 people dead by the end of the day. a few hundred were police and firemen (i think its a little over 400 but exact numbers arent important for this discussion right now). so we have about 2500 civilians getting killed because they are trapped by fires in a burning skyscraper. everybody with me so far? ok, maybe even a few hundred people were still making their way down the steps. still we are talking a very large amount of casualties, right?

3. so we already have severe damage to a building, people dying by the thousands, etc.
so why blow up the buildings with explosives? where is the logic in that? its already a horrific tragedy. what logical purpose could sending people with explosives into a burning building serve? at this point the building probably needs to come down anyway and thousands are going to die anyway. where is the logic to risk getting caught sending in explosives? why not just wait and take down the building later?

4. now you already have people outraged over an incident in new york with people dying. why would you go and do something stupid like firing a missile at the pentagon or some other "it wasnt a 757" conspiracy?

5. ok, so i kinda get that flight 93 passengers may have been made into heroes. its nice to have some heroes out of the horrible day. i've seen claims of it being taken down by a missile and all that stuff. i'm not convinced and i dont think it happened but i am open minded about it. so what about these claims that it didnt crash in pennsylvania? what purpose does faking a crash serve? if a plane didnt crash in pennsylvania then where is it? what about the DNA of the victims and the hijackers found there?

The fallacy of your questions id that you try to use truthers and logic in the same sentence.

Why argue logic with the illogical? You can't win

 

[mudwhistle]

Fuck.......

 

[CurveLight]

It seems one of the biggest obstacles in examination is the belief nobody in our government nor other americans would permit or play an active role for such atrocities. Not saying this applies to you, it's just a general observation. Those who do openly question are ridiculed in the hopes of silencing them. I see that as the phenomenon of Nationalism. It's very bizarre people find it motivating to attack others as being whack jobs for wanting the truth. Many people have lost their jobs for openly questioning the official version and these are not whacko french fry makers at BK. Apparently many do not know it was surviving families who created the truth movement and the commission.

There are several anomalies that point in the general direction of complacency or an active role. Two weeks after the attacks the bush admin passed legislation to offer the families money but only on the condition they did not sue the airlines. When has that ever happened? Especially so soon. Normally it would take years of court battles to squeeze one rusty Lincoln out of the government but in this case the government tosses out millions and millions in exchange for silence? There are quite a few of these Virgin examples and I have not studied the towers demolition theory very much because from my pov the strongest case for challenging the official version is the Pentagon. As for the three buildings that collapsed, all three were Virgins and it took (I believe) over 6 years for NIST to explain why wtc 7 came down. That's pretty bizarre considering there were no physical mysteries.

I see that day as one of Murder. As in any murder trial there are two crucial components: motive and opportunity. Thanks for not offering me a free tin hat. Lol. I don't know what happened that day but the official version is so spaced with gaps it's nearly impossible to accept it without closer scrutiny.

i dont see anything wrong with the government offering the money to the victims in return for them not suing the airlines. the airlines took a big hit from this and if you remember they got bailed out later. also the families didnt have to wait years. i think it was a win-win situation for everyone except the common taxpayer. the families could choose not to take the money and proceed with filing lawsuits (in fact i think some did).

personally, i dont find it difficult that someone in the government would do something this horrible. what i have a problem with is the thousands and thousands of people needed to pull off most of the comspiracy scenarios. i really think its quite impossible to silence thousands of people involved in killing thousands of americans and have nobody come forward.

like i said before, this is the same government that couldnt keep the president getting a blowjob a secret.

The BJ comparison fails on several levels....namely.....their were people involved who wanted the public to know....very badly.


As for the assumption it would take "thousands" of people......could it be explained why that many would be needed?

 

[CurveLight]

there are some problems with the conspiracy theories. so let me take a step by step approach to this.

1. as far as the 9/11 attacks are concerned i think most people agree the twin towers were hit by airplanes. is there anybody that wishes to argue this point?

2. assuming we got past step one i think we can all agree the towers collapsed. now here is where the conspiracy people lose me. there already were planes flown into the buildings. there were fires burning. people were dying. lots of people. there were around 3000 people dead by the end of the day. a few hundred were police and firemen (i think its a little over 400 but exact numbers arent important for this discussion right now). so we have about 2500 civilians getting killed because they are trapped by fires in a burning skyscraper. everybody with me so far? ok, maybe even a few hundred people were still making their way down the steps. still we are talking a very large amount of casualties, right?

3. so we already have severe damage to a building, people dying by the thousands, etc.
so why blow up the buildings with explosives? where is the logic in that? its already a horrific tragedy. what logical purpose could sending people with explosives into a burning building serve? at this point the building probably needs to come down anyway and thousands are going to die anyway. where is the logic to risk getting caught sending in explosives? why not just wait and take down the building later?

4. now you already have people outraged over an incident in new york with people dying. why would you go and do something stupid like firing a missile at the pentagon or some other "it wasnt a 757" conspiracy?

5. ok, so i kinda get that flight 93 passengers may have been made into heroes. its nice to have some heroes out of the horrible day. i've seen claims of it being taken down by a missile and all that stuff. i'm not convinced and i dont think it happened but i am open minded about it. so what about these claims that it didnt crash in pennsylvania? what purpose does faking a crash serve? if a plane didnt crash in pennsylvania then where is it? what about the DNA of the victims and the hijackers found there?

The fallacy of your questions id that you try to use truthers and logic in the same sentence.

Why argue logic with the illogical? You can't win

That broadbrushing makes very little sense. There are several highly intelligent and very successful people who doubt bush's version. To dismiss everyone with a simple couture wave is disingenuous.

 

[Terral]

Hi Curve:

That broadbrushing makes very little sense. There are several highly intelligent and very successful people who doubt bush's version. To dismiss everyone with a simple couture wave is disingenuous.

Mr. Fizz cool is here to push the Official Cover Story LIES (#7-10) . . . no matter how ridiculous ... and 'all liars' end up here.

GL,

Terral

 

[CurveLight]

Hi Curve:

That broadbrushing makes very little sense. There are several highly intelligent and very successful people who doubt bush's version. To dismiss everyone with a simple couture wave is disingenuous.

Mr. Fizz cool is here to push the Official Cover Story LIES (#7-10) . . . no matter how ridiculous ... and 'all liars' end up here.

GL,

Terral

Are you aware the post I quoted about broadbrushing was not made by Mr. Fizz? I gave a response to the op and was given an honest reply. Whatever personal issues you may have would best be discussed somewhere else.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Hi Curve:

That broadbrushing makes very little sense. There are several highly intelligent and very successful people who doubt bush's version. To dismiss everyone with a simple couture wave is disingenuous.

Mr. Fizz cool is here to push the Official Cover Story LIES (#7-10) . . . no matter how ridiculous ... and 'all liars' end up here.

GL,

Terral

Any time you have any real proof that the official story is a Lie we will be glad to listen to it. However the Moussaoui trial kind of reinforced the official story and the new trials coming up will be more of the same. Looks like you need some real proof to get into that courtroom with. Proof that you just don't have.

 

[eots]

yes because only proof that seems to support the offical decision will ever be brought before the court

how can you respect a court that allows tortured confessions..LOL