Conspiracy Theories...do you believe?

[UncleMo]

what about the fact 15 years ago some cars could get 50 mpg, and today the new Civic Hybrid only gets 47.36 mpg

"The Fit Is Go"

I'm looking at getting the Yaris and "pimping it out".

[UncleMo]

Thanks I was still wondering this, even today when I saw a newer commercial for it. I want to see it but heard the first half of the movie was all about everyone boarding the plane and was boring.

[Sean O]

Did my boy Kanye tell you that one?

I won't say how I know, but one of the levees were intentionally destroyed to alleviate some of the pressure and to control the inevitable flooding.

If you think it was to flood the black areas instead of the white ones, you're probably too dumb to keep yourself alive.

Sean O seems to enjoy backing up his claims with false information. All that have conceded to his logic should be ashamed.

As opposed to you, Tom101, who uses pathetic, nonsensical claims. I suppose it's hard for you, Tom 101, to come up with anything logical through the tinfoil hat you, Tom101, wear to keep the government out.

You mentioned the PM article Sean O. I have an article that counters PM's article and proves in the process why the WTC should not have fallen.

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/rep...r_mechanics.htm

Well, Tom101, I'll be happy to rip apart that pathetic response. Honestly, anyone who would believe what they're saying seriously needs help. It's written in a "drink the flavor-aid" style designed to make the delusional feel vindicated in their insanity, and to keep the logical from even attempting to listen to their responses. Just like all conspiracy theories. Tom101.

#1). You've gotta be kidding with that image.

1). There's no reason why we should think this wasn't photoshopped.

2). Isn't it interesting how these pods don't show up on any other photo?

3). Why shouldn't we believe those are the wheel wells?

#2). Their claim that PM's argument doesn't make sense because they use experts? Oh god, not experts. Be serious.

How about this, Tom101, post evidence where a fighter was scrambled to a transponder being turned off before 9/11. You can cite all the policy you want, but if you confuse policy for what actually happens, well, you've been spending too much time inside.

#3). they don't even attempt to mount a response, which is surprisingly logical of them.

#4). Same as #2.

#5). The PM article, if the people who wrote this actually had read it, also said that it caught everything in the shafts on fire, which caused the elevator cars to plummet down to the lobbies.

But the more logical question is, why would the lobbies have already been damaged otherwise? Why would, if there is a controlled demolition, the lobby damaged immediately after the plane hit? It doesn't make any sense.

#6). Oh my god, are you kidding me? This response says that several people disagree about the believe the fire explanation is sufficient, and PM ignored their statements. You know what, several people think we don't breathe air, but I don't care what they think, because their insane. Saying that something is wrong because several people disagree is DSM-IVably crazy.

Also, one of their experts says that the jet fuel may not burn more than 10 minutes. Now, why should we think something burning at 800-1400 F wouldn't do any damage? Insane.

And, finally, they're saying it's a conspiracy that something that happened only on 9/11 was the only time buildings had collapsed on the same day. Well, show me a similar attack, and we'll start talking. That's like me saying more people were injured due to dust inhalation in the days after 9/11 than any other time in NY history. It's a conspiracy!

Tell you what, Tom101, why don't you try to make your own arguments for once instead of just posting the URL to a horribly poorly written response to logical responses.

As for your photos, if you'd read the PM article, you'd see that was due to the air being crushed as the floors pancaked on each other. Make sense?

Seriously, lose the tinfoil hat, it's not attractive. I know it must be appealing to think there's something more interesting than meets the eye, but it just isn't happening.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

[tom-nyy-26]

"If you think it was to flood the black areas instead of the white ones, you're probably too dumb to keep yourself alive."

- Did i say i believed it ? NO, i said it could be believeable, i never said i believed it was true. As i said the word "apparantly" suggests i didnt believe it, its just a rumour that is out there, and hey, since this is a conspiracy theories forum, why not post it ?

[RAM]

out of hand...again. try to keep it civil guys or i'll close the topic.

it's fine to disagree but, if i see anymore attacks on members' intelligence or lack of i will lock it. everyone is entitled to an opinion. accept it or diagree with it- that's fine- even at times encouraged (at least IMO). but, to disparage and insult others here because they don't necessarily agree with you is low and won't be tolerated.

i'm not singling anybody out here just keep it above the belt.

[tigersfan05]

Those pictures are accurate, Sean O, but what it is, is NOT a bomb going off.

It's the building crumbling beneath itself. The building was designed to collapse inwards in that situation to prevent it from falling over and causing more damage to other buildings as it falls. There is much more going on inside than what you can see. The building collapses from the center, thus thrusting things out the window. That is no explosion.

People claim to have heard "bombs" going off. Again, this has been disproven time and time again. It's actually the sound of bodies hitting the concrete. Just ask the hundreds of witnesses and loads of firefighters who saw it themselves.

I came to my conclusion that we were not behind it when I actually tryed to PROVE we were behind it, just to find out we were not.

Also, you need to realise that the metal does not need to melt to collapse. It doesn't need to turn into a goo like form to collapse. Plus, they try and compare this to previous fires. THIS WAS NO FIRE. A friggin plane blasting into a building is much different than some fire.

I think you theorists give our government way to much credit. An impossible amount of things would have to have gone right for this to work. Even the US government isn't that powerful.

I doubt if they can't keep oral sex with President Clinton out of the media, they could keep this out.

With conspiracy theorists, no answer will EVER do, but for those who know what truly happened, no answer is ever needed.

---

And if President Bush is as dumb as some people love to claim, I doubt he could mastermind 9/11 and blowup New Orleans without people knowing about it :wink: . Anybody who thinks we blew up levees need to relook at this situation without aimlessly firing accusations. Many sources knew our levees were bad in New Orleans prior to the Hurricane. They didn't suddenly blow up, trust me. I don't at all think Bush did a great job during the Hurricanes, but I would only rank him 3rd on the "who's to blame list" behind Nagan (who just hid in a hotel for a few days) and the governer (who just went crazy asking for unrealistic amounts of help).

[bluenotebacker]

Chiming in pretty late here, but yes, I believe in many Conspiracy Theories :D

[tigersfan05]

I would hate to raise the dead, but for those who truly believe in "Loose Change", here you go:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1506026976066602012

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1704985757029288892

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8331615143873106815

Knock yourselves out at how much Loose Change lies.

[RainesItPours]

Everything in Loose Change seems to be true and everything makes sense. One thing though that is a fact is the gold underneath the building, because in '91 when it happened the terrorists try to blow it up at the bottom, which failed horribly.

[The_Jerk]

Both sides of the argument use non-credible sources to form their points, so I don't know what to believe, and I almost don't care to look for answers anymore.

[rickel2]

the conspiracy is that the wealthy continue to oppress the poor, and use them for profit while making them think they have power. war=profit. that's the conspiracy folks. profit through deception of the masses.

[Dazedcat]

Ok great. People who just don't quite believe the official government story are labeled "conspiracy theorists". Fair enough.

Apparently if it's not on Fox, CNN or other major news outlets it just cannot be true. We all know how hard corporate media works to dig for the truth, just look at the bangup job they've done covering Iraq.

Nothing to see here then, move along.

[tigersfan05]

Ok great. People who just don't quite believe the official government story are labeled "conspiracy theorists". Fair enough.

Apparently if it's not on Fox, CNN or other major news outlets it just cannot be true. We all know how hard corporate media works to dig for the truth, just look at the bangup job they've done covering Iraq.

Nothing to see here then, move along.

News reporters don't report it because it's logicless and offensive.

Lemme tell you what would have to go right just so people don't find out, my friends:

The US would have to intercept the planes on the runway, burn them, and replace them with "fake" planes without anybody on radar at the Air Control noticing, they'd have to change frequencies, again without anybody knowing, hope to God that several known terrorists affiliates walk on board, use voice changers that sound remarkably like the people on board, even have the voices of the people who bought tickets at the last second, kill them and deposit of their bodies without anybody knowing, fly the plane and mimmick the voices of the airplane pilots (and we do this 3 times much less) and know all of the plane lingo between the pilots and air control, fly the plane to a proffesional degree using a remote control, then launch a missle and fire it to the Pentagon (at hit the Military area much less which we need to go to war), then while in the air we have a fake scuffle going on with voice changers and have several people using voice changers call their families, then we crash one of them into a field for no reason, and perfectly crash 2 planes into the exact spots they should so the "detonation" doesn't blow from above the explosion, but directly under it, then risk igniting the detonators during the crashs, then hit the Pentagon and hope to God that nobody sees the missle, then have a crew rush out onto the ground and lay a bunch of body parts and plane parts everywhere without anybody seeing them, then detonate the buildings and hope none of the firefighters snitch on them even though their brothers died because of it, then the firefighters will blow up WTC 7 :roll: and deny doing it, then we'll use this as an excuse to go to a war that nobody supports, then change our story and fight Iraq just to get some oil that we could have bought from Saddam in the first place and pay Usama Bin Laden to take credit for it, then run him into a cave for the rest of his life (1.) Osama doesn't need the money so wouldn't get paid off to help the country he hates. 2.) By the time everybody is out to kill him he'd realise he got the raw end of the deal). We'd do all of this without anybody finding out.

Okay first of all, we can barely keep a Clinton incedent out of the oval office, how can we keep this secret?

Bottom line, we didn't attack ourselves for the sake of getting something we could have got in a more effeciant and cheaper way. To say so is downright offensive to the families who lost their Brothers/Sisters/Fathers/Mothers.

[Dazedcat]

Where did you come up with your reply to me based on anything I've posted so far in this thread? Your post sounds like an overview of every conspiracy theory ever talked or written about. Good grief.

I was merely trying to point out that two massive structures like the WTC towers pancaked and fell upon themselves in less than 10 seconds. This is the first time that's ever happened. These buildings were so cheap and flimsy that collapsing floors took the entire structures down? I posted the dimensions of the core that the building was built around.....yet you're telling me you believe that steel trusses holding up various floors bent with the intense heat (firefighters reached the blaze by the way and were in the process of putting it out...so much for massive 2,000 degree jet fuel fires huh?) were what was holding the building up in the first place and they lost their integrity and that caused everything to crumble to ash?

That's what's offensive to me. Throw in the fact that the ruins that were shipped over to NJ were then sold off for scrap asap..........no there's nothing wrong with that at all. The biggest crime scene in the history of the United States and nobody did anything regarding forensic study of the ruined steel other than a passing overview? Ok fine then.

I said nothing about fake jets, faked crashes, faked body parts, hell I barely even mentioned the Pentagon attack...although I would like to know why, out of all the buildings in the United States, the Pentagon is the ONE building with the most surviellence camera coverage.......why there's just that ridiculous parking lot "video" release to show the attack? Nothing else huh? Ok.

I personally save the lunatic fringe theories to those who believe such nonsense. I just ask some basic questions......why those buildings fell like they did, why WTC7 fell hours afterwards looking more like a controlled demolition than a damaged building (by the way, I was down there within days of these attacks, several buildings including a hotel right next to the original towers were all heavily damaged, yet they didn't just....FALL). There are many many things I question. By your definition if this makes me a nut case, then so be it. I'm not though; I'd just like to know what happened and why.

We now return you to our regular scheduled programming.

[arossi12]

Let me pose this question - If the rest of the world has disapproved of Israel's attacks on Hezbollah, but Bush has supported the decision, do you believe or trust anything that this government churns out? Until Bush leaves the oval office, other countries will continue to laugh and look on with amazement at our "world leader" Mr. Bush. It's sad to see people rag on Clinton, who actually did his job (keep it clean!) the right way and didn't stir up any trouble or create a multi-trillion dollar debt. I know it sounds biased, but that's what happens when your parents vote for Kerry and he loses.

[jogar84]

Let me pose this question - If the rest of the world has disapproved of Israel's attacks on Hezbollah, but Bush has supported the decision, do you believe or trust anything that this government churns out? Until Bush leaves the oval office, other countries will continue to laugh and look on with amazement at our "world leader" Mr. Bush. It's sad to see people rag on Clinton, who actually did his job (keep it clean!) the right way and didn't stir up any trouble or create a multi-trillion dollar debt. I know it sounds biased, but that's what happens when your parents vote for Kerry and he loses.

So if Bush were the president during WWII and decided to ally with Churchill against the Nazi regime, you would be against him because you dont trust Bush?

The problem here is that too much emphasis is being put on "what other countries" feel instead of doing the right thing- which is to dismantle a terrorist organization that has served as the right hand of Syria and Iran.

Of course the usual suspects are against Irael- France, Russia, China, every Arab country. WOW, WHAT A SURPRISE.

Protecting Israel is the single most important objective the U.S. has because it is the only democracy, the only beacon for any sort of human decency in the Middle East. If Israel is destroyed by these Arab countries, we might as well forget about Iraq and Afghanistan and admit that Muslims arent compatible with democracy.

I suggest people put their hatred for Bush aside and seperate "DOMESTIC BUSH" -who is INCOMPETENT in issues like national disasters and stem cell research, from "FOREIGN POLICY BUSH" who is actually doing the right thing by standing up for Israel.

[tigersfan05]

Where did you come up with your reply to me based on anything I've posted so far in this thread? Your post sounds like an overview of every conspiracy theory ever talked or written about. Good grief.

I was actually refering to the biggest of conspiracy theories which is "Loose Change's" 4th grade Michael Moore logic.

I

was merely trying to point out that two massive structures like the WTC towers pancaked and fell upon themselves in less than 10 seconds. This is the first time that's ever happened.

Watch the videos I posted. They point out that it was longer than 10 seconds and that Loose Change started the clock to late and also made the clip a bit faster.

These buildings were so cheap and flimsy that collapsing floors took the entire structures down?

WTC is one of the world's biggest buildings. It'd be impossible for a few floors to collapse and others to hold it up. If the building was strong enough to hold the floors up, the plane would have bounced off the building in the first place.

-

Let me also point out that demolishin is not a reckless buisness. To rig the WTC buildings with explosives it'd take years not hours. Plus they'd have to sneak in thousands of pounds of explosives into every floor without people knowing. Plus, they'd also be risking the planes going into the buildings detonating the explosives. The building collapsed from where the plane hit down. Now, if the plane hit within feet of the detonators, it'd collapse immediately after it hit the building.

I posted the dimensions of the core that the building was built around.....yet you're telling me you believe that steel trusses holding up various floors bent with the intense heat (firefighters reached the blaze by the way and were in the process of putting it out...so much for massive 2,000 degree jet fuel fires huh?)

The building didn't need to be melting temperatures. Under that logic the steel beems need to turn to goo to melt. They just need to bend slightly. The weight would do the rest. And the firefighters never made it to the floor. They made it to last floor below the fire. A few minutes later it collapsed.

were what was holding the building up in the first place and they lost their integrity and that caused everything to crumble to ash?

Collapse to ash? There was a lot of dusty debree but unlike what Loose Change wants you to believe, the building didn't turn into dust. Just look at the aftermath videos. There's many parts of the building sticking out.

That's what's offensive to me. Throw in the fact that the ruins that were shipped over to NJ were then sold off for scrap asap..........no there's nothing wrong with that at all. The biggest crime scene in the history of the United States and nobody did anything regarding forensic study of the ruined steel other than a passing overview? Ok fine then.

Watch the video I posted that points out the flaws in Loose Change.

I said nothing about fake jets, faked crashes, faked body parts, hell I barely even mentioned the Pentagon attack...

Again, I was adressing Loose Change who likes to preach that the planes were all drones and a missle was fired at the pentagon.

although I would like to know why, out of all the buildings in the United States, the Pentagon is the ONE building with the most surviellence camera coverage.......

There's already 2 videos out about the attacks. Neither shows a clear image. And if we were behind it, we wouldn't pointed the cameras away from the attacks not directly at them.

why there's just that ridiculous parking lot "video" release to show the attack? Nothing else huh? Ok.

Actually there ARE other videos that the government now owns. I'm sure they'd taken the WTC videos too if they had a chance but those were broadcasted live and the footage is owned by media.

I just ask some basic questions......why those buildings fell like they did, why WTC7 fell hours afterwards looking more like a controlled demolition than a damaged building (by the way, I was down there within days of these attacks, several buildings including a hotel right next to the original towers were all heavily damaged, yet they didn't just....FALL).

No, but they were heavily damaged. Something Loose Change refuses to acknoledge. They fell because WTC 7 took the biggest brunt of the falling debree. Then Loose Change tries to make the owner look like he publically admitted to taking it down. Again, watch the videos I posted a few posts back which will also shoot that theory down.

There are many many things I question. By your definition if this makes me a nut case, then so be it. I'm not though; I'd just like to know what happened and why.

I never said you were a nutcase. The nutcases are people who, even when are given overwhelming evidence to the contrary of their beliefs, continue to deny 9/11 was the real deal.

We now return you to our regular scheduled programming.

Tigers vs. Athletics

--

The thing that bugs me about Loose Change is that they dedicate this to 9/11 families, yet KNOWINGLY LIE about many things in their documentary. Not twist things, not make accidental remarks, they flat out lie.

[pdub]

I like Loose Change second edition, its a good conspiracy theory video. I also like the "Screw Loose Change" video because it had very good research on the facts along with the sources to back them up. I don't like how he rags on the music though, its unnecessary.

There is a video on google somewhere but I forgot the name of it. It is about 1 hour and 40 minutes long and shows a completely different view of the towers of a photographers perspective from across the water. The weirdest thing in this video is that a helicopter appears to fly right into the smoke above the roof of the first tower that collapses. There is a flash of light in the smoke when it appears to enter the cloud of smoke. Moments later the helicopter clears through the smoke and the building starts its collapse. Its interesting and I believe it provides no bias of information, its basically a long interview with footage of the towers and some interesting findings. Kind of slow, but worth it to me. I haven't seen it in a while, if I can find it, I'll post a link.

Edit - sorry its been a while since I saw it, it is biased. It attempts to show evidence that proves explosives were used to bring down the building. It also had alot of radio broadcasts accompanied by "live" footage. Here's the link, its called 911 Eyewitness http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3...80438587461603&

As far as 9/11, questions and answers, I just want to see the other confiscated video footage of the pentagon. Thats the hotel, the highway traffic camera, the gas station, and anymore if there are.

[aaronuconn]

Ya screw loose change was a good one. Not to get to far off topic but did any one see the one, where we DIDNT land on the moon. Pretty good facts here. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2...&q=land+on+moon

[arossi12]

So if Bush were the president during WWII and decided to ally with Churchill against the Nazi regime, you would be against him because you dont trust Bush?

The problem here is that too much emphasis is being put on "what other countries" feel instead of doing the right thing- which is to dismantle a terrorist organization that has served as the right hand of Syria and Iran.

Of course the usual suspects are against Irael- France, Russia, China, every Arab country. WOW, WHAT A SURPRISE.

Protecting Israel is the single most important objective the U.S. has because it is the only democracy, the only beacon for any sort of human decency in the Middle East. If Israel is destroyed by these Arab countries, we might as well forget about Iraq and Afghanistan and admit that Muslims arent compatible with democracy.

I suggest people put their hatred for Bush aside and seperate "DOMESTIC BUSH" -who is INCOMPETENT in issues like national disasters and stem cell research, from "FOREIGN POLICY BUSH" who is actually doing the right thing by standing up for Israel.

First off, I really respect you for you work Jogar, so I'm not trying to argue here, just trying to shed a new viewpoint on the public.

I spent a whole week listening to my social studies teacher babble on about how Bush is the worst prez ever, which I don't agree with, but he did throw out a lot of things that raised some red flags. MY social studies teacher is also my religion teacher, so he put it us to this way:

The fact that the US given Israel the military power to attack and take the countries around them, what is stopping them from taking Jerusalem? And, if they do, is it our fault?

That right there made me think twice about whether or not Bush's foreign policy was a good one or not. From that standpoint, if Israel marches into Jerusalem and takes over, Iran and the rest of the Islamic nations start a bloody war that could escalate into a violent one if Israel uses all fo the weapons they have at their disposal.

What I'm saying is, I don't really think that we should let Israel run wild over there and attack everything in sight. While it is our only democracy, we also have to set a standard, which we are not doing as of right now.

[tigersfan05]

le somewhere but I forgot the name of it. It is about 1 hour and 40 minutes long and shows a completely different view of the towers of a photographers perspective from across the water.

The thing about this is just that. It's far too far away as oppose to the cameras that were close to it.

The weirdest thing in this video is that a helicopter appears to fly right into the smoke above the roof of the first tower that collapses.

Those would be news choppers and I believe there was a rescue chopper. How do you think they got the arial view of the towers? This is the part I was talking about above. The camera angle is decieving. The choppers aren't going directly into the smoke. They are either in front of it or behind it.

There is a flash of light in the smoke when it appears to enter the cloud of smoke.

Again, it's camera angles. It could be anything from spotlights, to reflections. I don't think helecopters are going to fire missles into a building without people noticing.

Moments later the helicopter clears through the smoke and the building starts its collapse.

See, I doubt Channel 7 action news is responsable for taking down the towers :wink:

It attempts to show evidence that proves explosives were used to bring down the building. It also had alot of radio broadcasts accompanied by "live" footage. Here's the link, its called 911 Eyewitness http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3...80438587461603&

The problem with their video is that it lies (not sure if they are knowingly doing it though). The sound isn't explosives it is debree and people falling from the buildings. As is the smoke. I doubt some guy would catch a building being destroyed be a chopper from a mile away as appose to the thousands who were standing right next to it.

As far as 9/11, questions and answers, I just want to see the other confiscated video footage of the pentagon. Thats the hotel, the highway traffic camera, the gas station, and anymore if there are.

I think a lot of people want to see those. I myself want to see them just to shut people up, but they are being kept. As I said before, they would have taken the other 9/11 footage of the WTC attacks if they could have, but that was broadcast live.

[UncleMo]

The fact that the US given Israel the military power to attack and take the countries around them, what is stopping them from taking Jerusalem? And, if they do, is it our fault?

That right there made me think twice about whether or not Bush's foreign policy was a good one or not. From that standpoint, if Israel marches into Jerusalem and takes over, Iran and the rest of the Islamic nations start a bloody war that could escalate into a violent one if Israel uses all fo the weapons they have at their disposal.

What I'm saying is, I don't really think that we should let Israel run wild over there and attack everything in sight. While it is our only democracy, we also have to set a standard, which we are not doing as of right now.

Think for yourself. Are we letting them run around taking over neighboring countries? No. Isreal is targeting a terror group that is hiding inside of Lebanon. That is why the US did nothing to stop Israel from attacking recently. Think, man, think. Watch what kind of garbage gets put into your mind, but keep an open mind.

[jhath]

yea we are sorta in a lose lose situation with israel, if we intervene, all these wacked liberals get upset cause we are world policing again... if we dont intervene.... all the wacked liberals get upset because we dont intervene... its quite funny how they use the "killing innocent people" on whatever side is convenient for them when in all actuality, innocent people are getting killed and are going to continute being killed whether we do or dont do something about it... so you might as well do the morally right thing

[tigersfan05]

yea we are sorta in a lose lose situation with israel, if we intervene, all these wacked liberals get upset cause we are world policing again... if we dont intervene.... all the wacked liberals get upset because we dont intervene... its quite funny how they use the "killing innocent people" on whatever side is convenient for them when in all actuality, innocent people are getting killed and are going to continute being killed whether we do or dont do something about it... so you might as well do the morally right thing

If there would ever be a time to turn a cheeck to what another country does it'd be Israel fighting back.

If we convince Hezbollah to stop fightings, the war would stop. If we convince Israel to stop fighting there'd be another Holocaust.

[jp_hidalgo]

I think the gov lies. I think that older govs made that USA had based your economy in wars, so the gov needs wars to keep the "war jobs". I am from Argentina. And I know how it feels having a corrupt man as president.

Don't worry, you are a country with smart people, the inhabitants can think, even if goverment doesn't want to.