9/11 Commission Staff Say They Suspect Deception (2736 hits)
Category: PoliticsLabels: ets_sociopolitical_commentary
Rating: -0.42 on 192 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (View user info) at 2006-08-04 20:39:55 EDT
Up front, I'm sorry for the crappy link post, but in the interest of fulfilling my conscientious objective to spread real information wherever I happen to find it, I offer this for your skeptical viewing.
I'm sure I already know how this will be received, but from my perspective it's pretty bad when you've got two 9/11 Commission chairmen saying their panel was too soft on Rudy Guliani and they suspected government involvement, even considering a full investigation of the Pentagon for possible cover up, it's time for a new investigation, wouldn't you think?
How much more do you need?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14191255/
I'm not gonna debate this issue, but you guys are more than welcome to hammer it out on your own.
User Reviews
Submitted by eppliks (user info) at 2006-08-13 03:08:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Fuck you all. Blind pieces of shit. 2 + 2 = 17 because oil's a'flowin' and ragheads (who have no fuckin' relationship with Bush and his ass-boys) are getting blown up. Plus, your president says so.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-11 16:23:04 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Vibrations would take just under 5 seconds to reach pallisides from the WTC.
Vibrations do not arrive in pallasides until just after the 7 second mark.
Which means the vibrations began two seconds after the start of collapse.
Due to the fact that time move FORWARDS in this universe, this means that the collapse was not caused by explosives.
5 seconds < 7 seconds
QED.
Que?
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-11 16:11:33 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
You aren't making any sense Brad, I don't understnad how you fail to understand me. Try getting someone to sit down and read what I wrote, then explain it to you face to face.
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-08-11 15:35:22 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
HEY!
FUCKSTICK!
THE REPEATING THE SAME LINE OVER AND OVER IN A BLATANT ATTEMPT TO KILL A JOKE THAT'S ALREADY DIED A HORRIBLE DEATH IS MY FUCKING M.O.!
Oh wait...
You weren't trying to be humerous at all....
Oh.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-11 13:51:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-11 05:11:32 (#)
Ranking: 0
A collapse (i.e the govts. theory) would not release any vibrations for at the very least a few seconds, possibly not causing any until the rubble begins to strike the ground.
-------------------
What the FUCK are you talking about!? "A collapsing building would now release any vibrations for at the very least a few seconds..."?!?!?!
You said "RELEASE". It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
Repeat that over and over to yourself so you can begin to understand the absurdity of your statement and the stupidity of your half-assed mind...
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
It wouldn't "release" ANY vibrations until the last few seconds..
You're wrong, dude. Sorry.
You have no understanding what the fuck you're talking about.
Waves travel. Collasping buildings make waves as they shake things and so do explosions. It's that simple.
Both seimographs would look very similar in terms of the timing, except...oh...a building of this type has never fallen on its own before. Well that does pose a problem.
I would say do an experiment since you seem to practice this stuff on an amateur basis... I know you're like the HAM radio guy, just sitting there with your amateur seismograph...but that's impossible, because you'd blow up the first building properly and it would look like the WTC, but you wouldn't know what the hell to do with the other. You'd blow out one floor and try to reproduce the collpse, but the fucking thing would break off and just sit there like a dud, or topple over.
Go find a seismograph of a tall building that was destroyed by demolition then get back to me...or better yet take one since being an expert or an amateur, you undoubtedly have the equipment.
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-08-11 11:44:43 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Wait, ETS is melting down here, too?
ARE YOU SNNNNNNNNERIOUS???
And I'd imagine he's doing the pot/kettle shit here, too.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-11 05:11:32 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
You quoted me vertabim, but you failed to understand simple english.
Let me explain it using as simple language as possible.
I said, an explosion (i.e your theory) would release vibrations instantly.
The word is RELEASE, they would not ARRIVE at the seismometer until later.
30 miles, across NewYork rocks, and notably water, would be less than 5 seconds later.
A collapse (i.e the govts. theory) would not release any vibrations for at the very least a few seconds, possibly not causing any until the rubble begins to strike the ground.
The seismometer clearly shows that the vibrations do not arrive until after the 7 second mark, not absolute proof of the govts. Theory, but certainly absolute disproof of yours.
This is physics undisputed by any scientist anywhere. It is more accpeted than climate change or the theory of evolution.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-11 04:57:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-11 04:45:00 (#)
Ranking: 0
that should be releases vibrations, not explosions.
And I said, I was an expert compared to you, and a the majority of the people on Uber, which I clearly am. No, it may not be clear to you, but it sure as hell is clear to anyone who actually is a professional seismologist.
-----------------
Oh clearly!
Look at your one post where you STOLE a seismograph readout and made a fucking arrow on it.
You're clearly an expert.
Fuck off, you unemployed little pissant.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-11 04:55:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Woody, you are a fucking idiot.
No really...you, sir, are a blathering moron.
I hope you're counting on no one with intelligence reading your stupid-ass replies besides me, because you're fucked otherwise.
Go back and read what I said when I quoted you...I did so VERBATIM.
As for the rest of your questions...FUCK the rest of your questions, Im tired.
I might throw you a fucking bone later if I feel like it.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-11 04:45:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
that should be releases vibrations, not explosions.
And I said, I was an expert compared to you, and a the majority of the people on Uber, which I clearly am. No, it may not be clear to you, but it sure as hell is clear to anyone who actually is a professional seismologist.
I'd also like you to respond to my other points, if you have dificulty, perhaps you could use a dictionary to avoid misunderstandings wuch as this happening again?
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-11 04:41:46 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
No, I said an explosion releases explosions instantly.
RELEASES. Pay attention.
Now that I've pointed out where you apparently failed to understand what the phrase 'releases vibrations instantly' I'd like you to respond to my point.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-11 03:20:49 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-09 14:55:17 (#)
Ranking: 2
""If you accept this premise, then you MUST accept that the seismic waveforms are going to look similar in both instances. They are not going to be the exact same, but they WILL be similar, because, given that just the right amount of exlosives were used to bring down the structure, the energy transferred into the concrete and steel and, thus, the ground, will have been the SAME!""
No they won't. I'm the amateur seismologist here not you, an explosion releases vibrations instantly, and at a mere 30 miles away would have been detected in milliseconds, a building collapsing of its own accord would not begin generating vibrations for a second or two (or 7 in this case). So they would look different. Understand??
Whenever I put a question mark that means I'd like an answer.
----------------------
Why don't you fucking explain it to me instead of just posting a picture, putting a fucking arrow on it, and declaring it conclusively proves something?!
It shoudl be a crime for someone to be as fucking stupid as you and not know it, let alone think you're an expert in anything. Oh wait...now you're an amateur. AMATEUR???
I thought you were an "EXPERT"!
Which is it motherfucker? Amateur is pretty much the exact opposite as expert last time I checked.
Good job obscuring my argument and just not getting it.
You just said, "an explosion releases vibrations instantly." As in at the speed of light? Interesting. So you're saying that the rumble of explosions and the rumble of falling building would travel at different speeds? This is VERY interesting... Now I see why you changed it to 'amateur'.
Don't quit your day job, Chav Boy.
Oh WAIT...I FORGOT! You don't have a day job! Fucking leech. Why don't you do your country a favor and die. At least then you might be some use as fertilizer.
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-08-10 16:57:52 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Get used to it.
I have 3 month old questions about how he'd reshape government still sitting on the table.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-10 15:38:13 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
not answering my questions Brad?
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-08-09 19:22:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
No we won't.
Don't encourage him to come back to this one.
His current meltdown is fun and interesting.
Submitted by matnotharry (user info) at 2006-08-09 19:18:35 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Keep posting along these lines, people will listen eventually
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-09 15:33:03 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-08-08 16:09:41 (#)
Ranking: 2
Woody / Wardy - obviously your egos are too highly invested in this. Take a step back for the moment and look at the actual point rather than concentrating on your bizarre dick-measuring contest with someone you will never meet. Your behaviour says a lot more about you than it says about the validity of the conspiracy theory.
------------------------------
Are you drunk?
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-09 15:32:25 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I'm going to make another post about this...tommorow maybe...erm possibly I'm busy tommorow now that I thkn about it. But anyawy, I'lll put my point again with helpful diagrams in a post soonish.
I could do with some hits/heat.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-09 15:29:44 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
"""FIRST: "The explosions you are refering to..."
I never pointed to ANYTHING specific and said "THERE! There's where the explosions started! Right there!" Never."""
This is very simple, when I say 'the explosions you're refering to' I mean the explosions you were reffering to, remember all that heat arguing with Wardy about those explosions??? yeah, those explosions, the ones you were REFERING TO.
""You have pointed to a spot on the chart and said, "HERE is the start of the collapse," right? Ok, fine, I can accept that, but why that spot? Come on.... It's because..... that's where the waveform begins to increase in intensity, right?""
No, the point I didn't put an arrow to cos I wasn't paying attnetion but have now explained is the point the arrow should be pointing at is where the PROFESIONAL seismologists put the start of the collapse(its actually labeled on the graph even without my editing if you look, if you'd like to go and find a different trace of the event you're welcome, there are lots.
And it WASN'T where the waves began to increase in intensity, it was where the builing started to collapse, as seen by thousands upoin thousands of witnesses and recorded by many many video cameras.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-09 14:55:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 15:22:39 (#)
Ranking: 0
You're expecting ONE BIG BOOM at the start....why???
------i'm not, I'm expecting some sort of explosion. Explosives cause and explosion, hence the name
WRONG. Thanks for playing. Try again.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is great, I can just see you leaning slightlty to the side, big toothy grin, pointing your hand in a fake gun pose while you shout WRONGGGGGGGGGGGGGG.
Well I found it funny anyway.
I've just remebered something, I want to bring up. You said building 7 fell at a speed which could only have occured in a vacuum.
As building 7 was not in space at the time I assume you'd like to retract this statement???
Right, back to the matter at hand.....wrong? I said explosives cause explosions...you say thats wrong...well, thats my whole rebuttal to this point actually, explosives DO cause explosions.
Erm, yeah thats my whole point here. Would you care to elaborate on what you mean by 'WRONG'???
""The energy required to destroy the building, YOU CANNOT DENY, is the same whether done by successive explosions or by the building collapsing of its own gravity.""
This isn't clear, but I think you're saying that the minimum amount of energy released by explosives to destroy the building is the same as the minimum amount of potential energy (excluding the effects of acceleration I guess) which will be released if the building collapses on its own.
There are a lot of ifs and buts I could put in here, but it would all be speculation and I'm going to try and leave that to you.
My point to this point is what is your point?
Even if this were the case (which is pretty unlikely with the ifs and buts, but lets say it is)....... then...what? explosiions release vibrations, something beginning to fall doesn't.
so whats your point?
""If you accept this premise, then you MUST accept that the seismic waveforms are going to look similar in both instances. They are not going to be the exact same, but they WILL be similar, because, given that just the right amount of exlosives were used to bring down the structure, the energy transferred into the concrete and steel and, thus, the ground, will have been the SAME!""
No they won't. I'm the amateur seismologist here not you, an explosion releases vibrations instantly, and at a mere 30 miles away would have been detected in milliseconds, a building collapsing of its own accord would not begin generating vibrations for a second or two (or 7 in this case). So they would look different. Understand??
Whenever I put a question mark that means I'd like an answer.
""Find me another set of seismic data from another building demolition taken from 30 miles away (as that seismic data was), and show me the spike at the start of the collapse of the structure.
Go on...I CHALLENGE you.""
I've tried, but I can't find seismic traces of building collapses (apart from 11/9) at all.
There is no www.seismictracesofbuildingcollapses.com, you try finding a seismic trace of a building collapse(or demolition with explosives) taken from roughly 30 miles away if you like, it would be very helpful.
So I guess I fail your challenge, do you think that proves you right?
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-09 14:31:11 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I am entertained Brad, I am very entertained, I don't care whether you're joking or not, you're definately here for my entertainment.
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-09 13:01:41 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-08-08 16:09:41 (#)
Ranking: 2
Woody / Wardy - obviously your egos are too highly invested in this. Take a step back for the moment and look at the actual point rather than concentrating on your bizarre dick-measuring contest with someone you will never meet. Your behaviour says a lot more about you than it says about the validity of the conspiracy theory.
------------------------------
we have an ego problem? which one of us goes around -2 bombing everyone's posts if they don't agree with us?
ets, get control of your girlfriend. she's starting to sound crazier than you...
Submitted by Jesus_Loves_TwEE (user info) at 2006-08-08 20:12:37 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 20:07:05 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-08-08 19:25:09 (#)
Ranking: -2
Where did they say they suspect foul play? Did yuu even read the fucking article? At worst they implied that the pentagon might have been too soft on their procedures and not accurate enough on their reporting (which people could probably make a cause for if their claims were not hijacked by idiotic conspiracy theorists like ETS).
They make no mention of the US collusion in the attack.
No mention of the Us having a roll in it, just complaints that the reason Al-Queda hates the US weren't investigated enough.
Woody and Wardys egos are too invested in this? ETS makes a goddamn post about it at least every week. He asks for proof of one single picture of debris and promises to leave, what does he do after he gets it, he comes back just as obnoxious and flat out wrong as before. And he makes up lies about wiring explosives (complete fucking BS).
If you think a demolition crew can place explosives unseen behind the walls of some of the busiest office areas in the world without a single one of the thousands of people who work there noticing you are a fucking idiot. Have you seen what a building wired with explosives looks like? There are fucking holes drilled everywhere, with wiring going to every fucking charge, do you think that is easy to hide, much less install so nobody notices?
----------------------------
Whatever. They said they considered a full investigation of the Pentagon. Period.
Shut up and stop trying to confuse people. Let them read it for themselves.
In the days leading up to 9/11,
Bomb sniffing dogs were removed
http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/attack/nynewsday_wtcdogs.html
By guess who...
http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/background/smirkingchimp_securacom.html
And occupancy in WTC towers was low according to workers:
http://culhavoc.blogsome.com/go.php?http://we-dont.gotdns.org/~culhavoc/audio/060227_-_Scott_Forbes_-_Deadline_Live.mp3
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 20:06:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by OneCheapGeek (user info) at 2006-08-08 19:57:20 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by poisonyourkids (user info) at 2006-08-07 18:59:52 (#)
Ranking: 2
some fight...
"THAT is what I rail against. The out and out, firm-as-concrete belief that the government is behind every bad thing that happens to the people."
well i dont know who that was intended for... not me seeing as i havent thrown in my two cents on this, but i dont think the government is behind every bad thing... just this bad thing.
too much shit doesnt add up.
So that means proof of conspiracy? Not possibility, but proof? That's where ETS is as bad as anyone else. He won't accept any explanation tha goes against his that the gov't was 120% behind the attacks.
You're looking at radicals on both sides of the scale.
----------------------------
No, the fact that there was never a proper investigation means there was a fucking conspiracy. Wake the fuck up. They destroyed the evidence.
Have you seen Loose Change? Go to google video and watch the fucking thing. Until you've done so, shut the fuck up.
There is NO DOUBT in my mind my government's fucking responsible for what happened. Who exactly? I can't say for sure, but I know SOME of them.
It's not radical if it's based on evidence, you stupid fuck.
Goddamn I'm tired of you people's shit over this. WATCH THE FUCKING VIDEOS! DO RESEARCH! Stop listening to people who are LYING to you!
Submitted by OneCheapGeek (user info) at 2006-08-08 19:57:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by poisonyourkids (user info) at 2006-08-07 18:59:52 (#)
Ranking: 2
some fight...
"THAT is what I rail against. The out and out, firm-as-concrete belief that the government is behind every bad thing that happens to the people."
well i dont know who that was intended for... not me seeing as i havent thrown in my two cents on this, but i dont think the government is behind every bad thing... just this bad thing.
too much shit doesnt add up.
So that means proof of conspiracy? Not possibility, but proof? That's where ETS is as bad as anyone else. He won't accept any explanation tha goes against his that the gov't was 120% behind the attacks.
You're looking at radicals on both sides of the scale.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-08-08 19:45:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
"Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:47:09 (#)
Ranking: 0
This reminds me of this one time, my crew had wired up a round wrong... This fucked up the timing so much, the blast occured virtually all at once! We were digging a mine shaft. They had to repour some of the concrete WAY UP THE WALL because they had done it improperly, and the work platform that hangs suspended by cables in the middle of the shaft was blown to smithereens even though with was hundreds of feet above the blast point!"
http://www.ubersite.com/m/91424#2092162
"For instance, in 2001 I worked for a construction company that was digging a mining shaft. I worked in the office on site and although I had been with the company for less than a year, I was put in full charge of ALL inventory, INCLUDING the powder and caps in the explosives magazines. I knew exactly where the key was kept, and I knew that the office was almost never locked. At any point there was enough blasting powder in those magazines to level an entire city block and, most importantly, there was absolutely NO security on site. It's not hard to see how someone, even if they didn't have the knowledge to make their own dynamite, could sneak onto mining and construction and demolition sites under the cover of darkness, and take pretty much whatever they wanted."
http://www.ubersite.com/m/90197
Wow I never knew people who work in the office had "crews" who wired up explosives.
Try keeping your own stories straight.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-08-08 19:25:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-08-08 16:09:41 (#)
Ranking: 2
Why is anyone even arguing here?
If two of the guys on the commission sit back say "you know what, we suspect foul play and we did not investigate this properly" (which is the entire post, by the way) then foul play is a possibility and a more thorough investigation is needed.
Everyone is throwing around "facts" like they have first hand knowledge of them - but if the investigation had been adequate in the first place, there would be no room for debate here. All the armchair physicists in the world can expound their theories until the cows come home but the single fact remains that this NEEDS to be reinvestigated and if it is not, or if that investigation is in any way hampered by the government then all bets are off and chances are we're living in a fucking orwellian nightmare.
Woody / Wardy - obviously your egos are too highly invested in this. Take a step back for the moment and look at the actual point rather than concentrating on your bizarre dick-measuring contest with someone you will never meet. Your behaviour says a lot more about you than it says about the validity of the conspiracy theory.
-------------------------------------------------------
Where did they say they suspect foul play? Did yuu even read the fucking article? At worst they implied that the pentagon might have been too soft on their procedures and not accurate enough on their reporting (which people could probably make a cause for if their claims were not hijacked by idiotic conspiracy theorists like ETS).
They make no mention of the US collusion in the attack.
No mention of the Us having a roll in it, just complaints that the reason Al-Queda hates the US weren't investigated enough.
Woody and Wardys egos are too invested in this? ETS makes a goddamn post about it at least every week. He asks for proof of one single picture of debris and promises to leave, what does he do after he gets it, he comes back just as obnoxious and flat out wrong as before. And he makes up lies about wiring explosives (complete fucking BS).
If you think a demolition crew can place explosives unseen behind the walls of some of the busiest office areas in the world without a single one of the thousands of people who work there noticing you are a fucking idiot. Have you seen what a building wired with explosives looks like? There are fucking holes drilled everywhere, with wiring going to every fucking charge, do you think that is easy to hide, much less install so nobody notices?
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-08-08 16:28:46 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
HI, back just for this one, because I have no need to bitch and moan here again for 6 hours...
I sure as hell am the only one who argues and follows ETS, huh?
Man, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO one else does that...
No one at all.
Nope nope.
Yeah, it's childish. So what?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 16:09:54 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
----Never said any of that, like I said the explosion required to demolish one floor would have been the same as that required to demolish another maybe the first few floors were contructed differently, but we're taking about higher up ones
Here is another BLATANT example of your complete and utter lack of common sense. Can you not see that all the debris that's being ejected hundreds of feet from the building in what you're describing as a gravity-fed collapse is striking the ground toward the END of the collapse and not the beginning?
Why would you expect to see more energy being transferred to the ground at the beginning of the collapse than at the end when you can CLEARLY SEE all the goddamn debris hitting at the END of the collapse, not to mention, you can HEAR it on the video, and I'm sure the people standing in the vicinity would have FELT it.
Again, you have no common sense. In my mind, you are a complete moron until you pull your head out of your ass and admit you don't know SHIT.
Goddamn you've fucking pissed me off. I swear to fucking god, I'd love to knock your ass out sometimes. I need to get laid. FUCK.
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2006-08-08 16:09:41 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Why is anyone even arguing here?
If two of the guys on the commission sit back say "you know what, we suspect foul play and we did not investigate this properly" (which is the entire post, by the way) then foul play is a possibility and a more thorough investigation is needed.
Everyone is throwing around "facts" like they have first hand knowledge of them - but if the investigation had been adequate in the first place, there would be no room for debate here. All the armchair physicists in the world can expound their theories until the cows come home but the single fact remains that this NEEDS to be reinvestigated and if it is not, or if that investigation is in any way hampered by the government then all bets are off and chances are we're living in a fucking orwellian nightmare.
Woody / Wardy - obviously your egos are too highly invested in this. Take a step back for the moment and look at the actual point rather than concentrating on your bizarre dick-measuring contest with someone you will never meet. Your behaviour says a lot more about you than it says about the validity of the conspiracy theory.
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2006-08-08 15:55:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
shut the fuck up for once
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 15:48:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Fuck, I wasn't finished...accidentally hit 'enter' in my rabid typing.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 15:32:35 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 15:06:22 (#)
Ranking: 0
I'm off to play D2, but please take note of the fact that the explosions you are reffering to happened AFTER the start of collapse and therefore could not have caused it.
---------------
Again we have fallacy after fallacy...and this is just one single sentence!!!
I'm going to go through them one at a time and sloooowwwly so you'll fucking understand...
FIRST: "The explosions you are refering to..."
I never pointed to ANYTHING specific and said "THERE! There's where the explosions started! Right there!" Never.
SECOND: "...AFTER the start of collapse..."
You have pointed to a spot on the chart and said, "HERE is the start of the collapse," right? Ok, fine, I can accept that, but why that spot? Come on.... It's because..... that's where the waveform begins to increase in intensity, right? And what does that really show, Woody? It shows that energy was being transferred. Nothing more, nothing less. The way I see it, unless you're an expert in explosives as well as 'seismography', which I seriously fucking doubt given your utter ignorance in the subject so far, and have conducted your own real world experiments involving a 110 story building with explosives and a seismograph 30 miles away, or at least have made some actual calculations and/or comparisons to other similar demolition scenarios, you haven't proven a goddamned thing. In fact, what you've done is pointed to an arbitrary point on the graph and said, "EVERYONE STAND BACK...EVEN THOUGH I DON'T EVEN HAVE A FUCKING JOB, I'M A SELF-DECLARED EXPERT IN SEISMOGRAPHY AND I DETERMINE THE BEGINNING OF THE COLLAPSE TO BE HERE!"
Then you turn around and say later..."Oops! I meant it started here instead! But that doesn't matter because I'm an expert!"
I want you to understand something... I sit in a recording studio most weekends and do nothing but stare at waveforms. I manipulate them, I create them, I move and reshape them.
I understand how waveforms work because I've record about 5 albums worth of material with a digital program that displays them. I know what just about every type of sound you can think of looks like. I know what lightning looks like in a wave form, I know what bird chirps look like. An explosion looks like (snare drum hit with reverb), and I know what the same sound wave would look like from far away (recorded with the mic on the other side of the room.
I know all these things, Woody, because I DO them. And what I see you doing is misrepresenting what you're showing, first of all, and making assumptions about the nature of the thing you THINK is supposed to be represented there, (yet another thing I have more experience with than you...actual explosives).
I think by now, anyone can see, if they've read both of our reviews, that your assumptions are too numerous for your assertion of "case closed" to be anything more than wishful thinking from a guy who is NOT a seismologist and doesn't even have a job.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 15:32:35 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 15:06:22 (#)
Ranking: 0
I'm off to play D2, but please take note of the fact that the explosions you are reffering to happened AFTER the start of collapse and therefore could not have caused it.
---------------
Again we have fallacy after fallacy...and this is just one single sentence!!!
I'm going to go through them one at a time and sloooowwwly so you'll fucking understand...
FIRST: "The explosions you are refering to..."
I never pointed to ANYTHING specific and said "THERE! There's where the explosions started! Right there!" Never.
SECOND: "...AFTER the start of collapse..."
You have pointed to a spot on the chart and said, "HERE is the start of the collapse," right? Ok, fine, I can accept that, but why that spot? Come on.... It's because..... that's where the waveform begins to increase in intensity, right? And what does that really show, Woody? It shows that energy was being transferred. Nothing more, nothing less. The way I see it, unless you're an expert in explosives as well as 'seismography', which I seriously fucking doubt given your utter ignorance in the subject so far, and have conducted your own real world experiments involving a 110 story building with explosives and a seismograph 30 miles away, or at least have made some actual calculations and/or comparisons to other similar demolition scenarios, you haven't proven a goddamned thing. In fact, what you've done is pointed to an arbitrary point on the graph and said, "EVERYONE STAND BACK...EVEN THOUGH I DON'T EVEN HAVE A FUCKING JOB, I'M A SELF-DECLARED EXPERT IN SEISMOGRAPHY AND I DETERMINE THE BEGINNING OF THE COLLAPSE TO BE HERE!"
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 15:22:39 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
You're expecting ONE BIG BOOM at the start....why???
------i'm not, I'm expecting some sort of explosion. Explosives cause and explosion, hence the name
WRONG. Thanks for playing. Try again.
Like I said, you've never so much as felt an actual explosion have you? Dude, I have actually RIGGED them. I'm sorry , but you're flat out wrong. And your 'expertise' in seismology still hasn't gotten you a fucking job has it?
Here is what you don't understand. (This would be much easier to explain in fucking person.) The energy required to destroy the building, YOU CANNOT DENY, is the same whether done by successive explosions or by the building collapsing of its own gravity.
If you accept this premise, then you MUST accept that the seismic waveforms are going to look similar in both instances. They are not going to be the exact same, but they WILL be similar, because, given that just the right amount of exlosives were used to bring down the structure, the energy transferred into the concrete and steel and, thus, the ground, will have been the SAME!
This is what you're not considering.
Find me another set of seismic data from another building demolition taken from 30 miles away (as that seismic data was), and show me the spike at the start of the collapse of the structure.
Go on...I CHALLENGE you.
*takes off glove and smacks your chav face with it*
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 15:06:22 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I'm off to play D2, but please take note of the fact that the explosions you are reffering to happened AFTER the start of collapse and therefore could not have caused it.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 15:02:33 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Even if you wouldn't have beleived me telling you how big the waves would be we have an exact measure don't we, the explosions which you claim were the explosves on other floors going off are clearly detected and clearly don't start until several seconds after the start of collapse.
I can't beleive you actually used the phrase 'whos the fucking musician here?' in this context.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:47:09 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:27:36 (#)
Ranking: 0
Actually, I have just noticed a massive error in my post (no it doesn't help your argument one bit)
Where I've labbeled 'start time' the arrow should be pointint to the left hand line, not the right one, the one which is labbeled +0.0s is the start time, not the one labbeled +10s.
See, those rumblings starting around 7 seconds....those are the explosions you're reffering to, the big spikes after 20s are when the bulk of the rubble hits the floor.
-----------------
You really know nothing about acousitcs do you?
You don't understand the first thing about sound waves and how they are created do you?
----sound waves are just vibrations being transfered/created in air.
Who is the fucking musician here?
Have you ever taken a drumstick and done a rimshot with the different parts of the stick? Do you understand how everything has a natural resonance? Do you understand the principle of standing waves and how they apply to a baseball player hitting a homerun?
----I have no fucking idea what you're talking about, but I'm fairly sure that my expertise in the area of Seismology makes me a better seesmologist than your qualification of playing the drums does.
Do you understand the transfer of energy? Do you understand that the towers were designed to sway and that this fact has to be taken into account when you are talking about explosions that are taking place far above ground? Do you understand how moving an object transfers energy into the surrounding air?
Do this right now... Take a pencil, stand it up on its end. Now thump the sides of the pencil all the way from top to bottom while holding onto the bottom with the other hand. FEEL THAT? Do you feel how thumping some areas transfer more energy through the pencil to your other hand than thumping other areas?
What do you think is going to shake the fucking ground more, Woody, dropping a ton of bricks on it, or setting off a bomb on the 75th story of an office building when the whole building is DESIGNED to not only shake with the wind from a 100 year storm and not collapse, but also absorb impacts from jumbo jets?
----Never said any of that, like I said the explosion required to demolish one floor would have been the same as that required to demolish another maybe the first few floors were contructed differently, but we're taking about higher up ones
You're expecting ONE BIG BOOM at the start....why???
------i'm not, I'm expecting some sort of explosion. Explosives cause and explosion, hence the name
Who told you the demolition theory even required this?
-----All those websites you dismiss as straw man even AFTER YOU LINKED TO THEM
Your ASSUMPTIONS are what's fucking you up here.
----I make absolutely no assumptions in that post, it is all absolute fact.
Have you ever worked in a mine? Have you ever FELT a proper demolition blast going off? Well, buddy, I have. And I KNOW what it feels like. It's not one giant blast, it's a series of blasts that are designed to take out a wall of coal in stages, same as a building demolition.
----what the fuck are you talking about....there was a series of blasts but AFTER the building had started to collapse: AFTERWARDS.
This reminds me of this one time, my crew had wired up a round wrong... This fucked up the timing so much, the blast occured virtually all at once! We were digging a mine shaft. They had to repour some of the concrete WAY UP THE WALL because they had done it improperly, and the work platform that hangs suspended by cables in the middle of the shaft was blown to smithereens even though with was hundreds of feet above the blast point!
Listen, I happen to know what the fuck I'm talking about here from a wide variety of experience. You obviously have no idea what you're talking about because you don't even seem to undnerstand how a proper demolition is supposed to take place or how sound waves will travel through a conduit like a building to the ground.
----don't say I don't understand, you're the one comparing New York to a drum.
You have completely forgotten the relationship between intensity of the wave and the distance from the energy source.
----don't be ridiculous, those seismographs were taken right next to the towers (in geological terms) and the explosions you're reffering to are clearly seen
So like I said, shut your fucking mouth and watch the goddamn video. I'm sick of hearing your uninformed bullshit.
-----My 'uninformed bullshit' is pure fact, based on scientific principles undisputed by anyone up to and including people who dispute the theory of evolution.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:53:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
You people have just been owned.
Wardy and Woody...
You both have no idea what the fuck you're talking about, but for some reason you like to think you do. You obviously like to hear yourselves talk and you're trying desperately to have the last word.
The fact is, you'll never stop because you still cling to your assumptions.
For instance...what the FUCK is this supposed to mean: "physics 101: the air would take the path of least resistance. that most certainly would be very random given the nature of the situation and the architecture of the building. furthermore, those aren't the kinds of explosions that occur in a controlled demolition, like i've already shown you."
???
I swear to fucking god, I can't take much more of this stupidity.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:49:06 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
JESUS CHRIST.
thats another one, absolute gold again Brad.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:47:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:27:36 (#)
Ranking: 0
Actually, I have just noticed a massive error in my post (no it doesn't help your argument one bit)
Where I've labbeled 'start time' the arrow should be pointint to the left hand line, not the right one, the one which is labbeled +0.0s is the start time, not the one labbeled +10s.
See, those rumblings starting around 7 seconds....those are the explosions you're reffering to, the big spikes after 20s are when the bulk of the rubble hits the floor.
-----------------
You really know nothing about acousitcs do you?
You don't understand the first thing about sound waves and how they are created do you?
Who is the fucking musician here?
Have you ever taken a drumstick and done a rimshot with the different parts of the stick? Do you understand how everything has a natural resonance? Do you understand the principle of standing waves and how they apply to a baseball player hitting a homerun?
Do you understand the transfer of energy? Do you understand that the towers were designed to sway and that this fact has to be taken into account when you are talking about explosions that are taking place far above ground? Do you understand how moving an object transfers energy into the surrounding air?
Do this right now... Take a pencil, stand it up on its end. Now thump the sides of the pencil all the way from top to bottom while holding onto the bottom with the other hand. FEEL THAT? Do you feel how thumping some areas transfer more energy through the pencil to your other hand than thumping other areas?
What do you think is going to shake the fucking ground more, Woody, dropping a ton of bricks on it, or setting off a bomb on the 75th story of an office building when the whole building is DESIGNED to not only shake with the wind from a 100 year storm and not collapse, but also absorb impacts from jumbo jets?
You're expecting ONE BIG BOOM at the start....why???
Who told you the demolition theory even required this?
Your ASSUMPTIONS are what's fucking you up here.
Have you ever worked in a mine? Have you ever FELT a proper demolition blast going off? Well, buddy, I have. And I KNOW what it feels like. It's not one giant blast, it's a series of blasts that are designed to take out a wall of coal in stages, same as a building demolition.
This reminds me of this one time, my crew had wired up a round wrong... This fucked up the timing so much, the blast occured virtually all at once! We were digging a mine shaft. They had to repour some of the concrete WAY UP THE WALL because they had done it improperly, and the work platform that hangs suspended by cables in the middle of the shaft was blown to smithereens even though with was hundreds of feet above the blast point!
Listen, I happen to know what the fuck I'm talking about here from a wide variety of experience. You obviously have no idea what you're talking about because you don't even seem to undnerstand how a proper demolition is supposed to take place or how sound waves will travel through a conduit like a building to the ground.
You have completely forgotten the relationship between intensity of the wave and the distance from the energy source.
So like I said, shut your fucking mouth and watch the goddamn video. I'm sick of hearing your uninformed bullshit.
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:37:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:30:23 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:18:56 (#)
Ranking: -2
"and this is the important part, if you are saying that those ejections were caused by explosives rather than the air compression"
------------------------------------
air compression being the key word in that statement, ets. think about it. did you do the experiment i told you to do? i'm watching your shitty video right now, how about you do the things i ask? or is this completely one sided?
--------------------
That doesn't hold water in the LEAST. If that were the case, then ALL THE WINDOWS between the collapse point and the rogue explosions doozens of floors below would have been blown out.
We're talking about explosions FAR BELOW the collapse site, in a zone where compression could not possibly have been a factor.
Also, compression requires the inside of the building being air SEALED!, the GAPING holes in the sides of the building and the constant holes being created by the collapsing building would ensure that sealing would not take place.
This is complete and utter bullshit. You people have no idea what the FUCK you're talking about. Honestly...have you not seen the videos?
LOOK AT THEM YOU DUMB MOTHERFUCKERS, AND SHUT. YOUR. FUCKING. MOUTHS.
Seriously, I've fucking had enough.
I have never argued that the airplanes caused great damage. I have never argued the buildings couldn't possibly have fallen as a result of the airplane strikes, BUT, they would not have fallen in the way that I'm seeing when I look at those fucking videos!
-------------------------------------
physics 101: the air would take the path of least resistance. that most certainly would be very random given the nature of the situation and the architecture of the building. furthermore, those aren't the kinds of explosions that occur in a controlled demolition, like i've already shown you.
and finally, woody already tossed the explosion argument to shit in the first place.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:36:20 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
hurry up Brad, I'm off to do something slightly more intellectual (play Diablo 2) and I'd like to see your response first.
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:31:42 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
hahhahahahhaa.... this video is worthless... i'm outta here. woody, give up. if ets can't sift his way through the bullshit presented in this video, he definitely isn't capable of understanding the simple logic you're presenting him with.
good bye,
wardy.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:30:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:18:56 (#)
Ranking: -2
"and this is the important part, if you are saying that those ejections were caused by explosives rather than the air compression"
------------------------------------
air compression being the key word in that statement, ets. think about it. did you do the experiment i told you to do? i'm watching your shitty video right now, how about you do the things i ask? or is this completely one sided?
--------------------
That doesn't hold water in the LEAST. If that were the case, then ALL THE WINDOWS between the collapse point and the rogue explosions doozens of floors below would have been blown out.
We're talking about explosions FAR BELOW the collapse site, in a zone where compression could not possibly have been a factor.
Also, compression requires the inside of the building being air SEALED!, the GAPING holes in the sides of the building and the constant holes being created by the collapsing building would ensure that sealing would not take place.
This is complete and utter bullshit. You people have no idea what the FUCK you're talking about. Honestly...have you not seen the videos?
LOOK AT THEM YOU DUMB MOTHERFUCKERS, AND SHUT. YOUR. FUCKING. MOUTHS.
Seriously, I've fucking had enough.
I have never argued that the airplanes caused great damage. I have never argued the buildings couldn't possibly have fallen as a result of the airplane strikes, BUT, they would not have fallen in the way that I'm seeing when I look at those fucking videos!
I swear to god, if you people haven't ever seen this before, there is one shot in particular where the cameraman was relatively close (not like the CNN camera which was far away across the river, I think) and he focused on the collapse area the whole way down. It is totally and completely undeniable that the building is being exploded BEFORE the weight of the structure above even has time to pancake the floors.
Please, for once, see it for yourself on high quality DVD. IT'S FUCKING OBVIOUS.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:27:36 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Actually, I have just noticed a massive error in my post (no it doesn't help your argument one bit)
Where I've labbeled 'start time' the arrow should be pointint to the left hand line, not the right one, the one which is labbeled +0.0s is the start time, not the one labbeled +10s.
See, those rumblings starting around 7 seconds....those are the explosions you're reffering to, the big spikes after 20s are when the bulk of the rubble hits the floor.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:23:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Which, I'll spell it out especially for you, completely disprooves the theory that the towers were demolished using explosives.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:22:16 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Listen you stupid fucker, as absolutely anyone who goes to that post can see it is absolute proof that there was no explosion initiating the collapse of either of the twin towers.
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:18:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
"and this is the important part, if you are saying that those ejections were caused by explosives rather than the air compression"
------------------------------------
air compression being the key word in that statement, ets. think about it. did you do the experiment i told you to do? i'm watching your shitty video right now, how about you do the things i ask? or is this completely one sided?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:15:40 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:12:23 (#)
Ranking: 0
I take back my previous swollen headed review...very very slightly, it seems you aren't saying exactly what I thought you were....but, and this is the important part, if you are saying that those ejections were caused by explosives rather than the air compression, then
A: Those are some shitily placed explosives to do that much wrong (but maybe they did it on purpose to make it more realistic, thats the argument I'd take if I were you, anyway ignore this one, pay attention to B.)
B: I have already absolutely shredded any possible argument that explosives were used to demolish the towers, http://www.ubersite.com/m/85978 complete total 100% infalliable evidence. Open and closed case, you stand more chance of proving Bush used a superhighpower laser from space, than that he used explosives.
------------------------
You are a fucking moron, dude.
How can you be so fucking stupid, really???
You explain how what you posted refutes ANYTHING. Do it NOW, motherfucker.
How?
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:15:19 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
i love how this guy takes the picture of the fire truck out of the picture when he shows why the 757 couldn't fit in the hole in the pentagon.
what a jack ass. can i stop now?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:14:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:02:37 (#)
Ranking: 0
don't start talking about explosions again Brad, i've never said outright that you're definately wrong,cos i can't prove it outright, i've only ever pointed out my concerns with the more tenous circumstantual evidence you present (most of it) and refuted those parts which are actually physically impossible (most of the rest of it), and explosions is one area I can personally tear you apart on, don't think you stand a chance in hell of convincing anyone anything about explosions while I'm around.
------------------
And just how the fuck is that? I hope you don't think you're refering to your weak-ass seismic data. That shit you posted wasn't even cognizable. You didn't even tell us what the fuck we were looking at!
You have not and will not be tearing anyone 'apart' here, chav boy.
I don't NEED to tear you apart, or anyone else for that matter. Until you explain to me just HOW THE FUCK those windows 30 stories below the blast zone were blown out and why hundreds of people reported explosions AT THE SCENE INCLUDING FIREFIGHTERS INSIDE THE BUILDINGS, I'm not listening to another fucking thing you have to say.
Address the explosions, asshole. Any of you. Explain them.
I gotta hear this.
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:13:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
this video is ridiculous.
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:12:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I take back my previous swollen headed review...very very slightly, it seems you aren't saying exactly what I thought you were....but, and this is the important part, if you are saying that those ejections were caused by explosives rather than the air compression, then
A: Those are some shitily placed explosives to do that much wrong (but maybe they did it on purpose to make it more realistic, thats the argument I'd take if I were you, anyway ignore this one, pay attention to B.)
B: I have already absolutely shredded any possible argument that explosives were used to demolish the towers, http://www.ubersite.com/m/85978 complete total 100% infalliable evidence. Open and closed case, you stand more chance of proving Bush used a superhighpower laser from space, than that he used explosives.
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:10:42 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:07:23 (#)
Ranking: -2
"The book, a behind-the-scenes look at the investigation, recounts obstacles the authors say were thrown up by the Bush administration, internal disputes over President Bush's use of the attacks as a reason for invading Iraq, and the way the final report avoided questioning whether U.S. policy in the Middle East may have contributed to the attacks."
If they were questioning if the US policy in the middle east may have contributed to the attack doesn't that mean they think the attack came from the Middle East, not the US?
Did you read the article you fucking idiot?
They in no way implied that the US was guilty of taking down the WTC, they were just upset about how they tried to play the "cover your ass" game afterwards, refused to question if our support for israel caused it, and implications that Saddam had anything to do with it.
------------------------
haha, that's what i got out of the article... it's funny how when intelligent, educated people read something they understand it on a completely different level. all these two politicians are doing is posturing themselves for an election.
ets, if you were really out for the truth, i expect you to be ordering that book...
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:07:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
"The book, a behind-the-scenes look at the investigation, recounts obstacles the authors say were thrown up by the Bush administration, internal disputes over President Bush's use of the attacks as a reason for invading Iraq, and the way the final report avoided questioning whether U.S. policy in the Middle East may have contributed to the attacks."
If they were questioning if the US policy in the middle east may have contributed to the attack doesn't that mean they think the attack came from the Middle East, not the US?
Did you read the article you fucking idiot?
They in no way implied that the US was guilty of taking down the WTC, they were just upset about how they tried to play the "cover your ass" game afterwards, refused to question if our support for israel caused it, and implications that Saddam had anything to do with it.
Submitted by Adamdidit2u (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:05:14 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-08-08 14:02:37 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
don't start talking about explosions again Brad, i've never said outright that you're definately wrong,cos i can't prove it outright, i've only ever pointed out my concerns with the more tenous circumstantual evidence you present (most of it) and refuted those parts which are actually physically impossible (most of the rest of it), and explosions is one area I can personally tear you apart on, don't think you stand a chance in hell of convincing anyone anything about explosions while I'm around.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-08-08 13:52:45 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-08 13:33:59 (#)
Ranking: -2
i've watched enough conspiracy theory videos, i don't need to see another one that comes up with more of the same shit that doesn't hold water.
and i can't believe you think that those buildings coming down was in any way a controlled demolition. did you watch my videos? guess not, huh?
--------------------
Your videos aren't in hi-def, he doesn't need to watch them.
ETS, if it was brough down with controlled demolition why did not a single one of the thousands of people who work there notice the crew that would have taken days to install the explosives? Not a single one noticed the thousands of wires that would have had to be run to the explosives (or the crews that would have had to hide the wires in the walls)?
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-08 13:49:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHA...... i love this guy.... he's talking about the 'put options' that were placed on the stock and how as 9/11 neared, way higher amounts than normal were placed on the stock..... hahahahhahaha... this guy is fucking retarded. ets, you can't possibly tell me that you listen to this guy.... oh man... hahahhahahahahaha.... i feel bad for you if you do.... hahahhahaha...
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-08 13:33:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
i've watched enough conspiracy theory videos, i don't need to see another one that comes up with more of the same shit that doesn't hold water.
and i can't believe you think that those buildings coming down was in any way a controlled demolition. did you watch my videos? guess not, huh?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 13:27:51 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-08 13:05:06 (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 11:58:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
I've already read that entire website.
It does not erase what I see with my own goddamn eyes.
Watch the video and shut up. Hell, turn the sound off if you want and just watch the towers fall over and over again. I don't give a fuck.
Stop with the cognitive dissonance. Open your fucking eyes and shut your fucking mouth.
--------------------------
you've got to be kidding me.
---------------------------
Again, shut your mouth and watch the fucking film. You obviously have never taken a good look at it if you still believe the bullshit official story. Furthermore, you have obviously IGNORED all the eyewitness accounts of secondary explosions going off in the towers.
This is because you have simply chosen not to look even though I've asked you to 1001 times.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-08-08 13:16:51 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-07 22:21:25 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-07 20:16:06 (#)
Ranking: -2
no response?
------------------
Have you watched the film of the towers exploding in hi-def yet?
-----------------------------
Hahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-08 13:05:06 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 11:58:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
I've already read that entire website.
It does not erase what I see with my own goddamn eyes.
Watch the video and shut up. Hell, turn the sound off if you want and just watch the towers fall over and over again. I don't give a fuck.
Stop with the cognitive dissonance. Open your fucking eyes and shut your fucking mouth.
--------------------------
you've got to be kidding me.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-08 11:58:38 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I've already read that entire website.
It does not erase what I see with my own goddamn eyes.
Watch the video and shut up. Hell, turn the sound off if you want and just watch the towers fall over and over again. I don't give a fuck.
Stop with the cognitive dissonance. Open your fucking eyes and shut your fucking mouth.
Submitted by laika (user info) at 2006-08-08 04:30:29 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
enjoy. i expect a full report after you conscientiously
read through this site for several hours.
http://www.ccdominoes.com/lc/LooseChangeGuide.html
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-07 22:21:25 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-07 20:16:06 (#)
Ranking: -2
no response?
------------------
Have you watched the film of the towers exploding in hi-def yet?
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-07 20:16:06 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
no response?
Submitted by poisonyourkids (user info) at 2006-08-07 18:59:52 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
some fight...
"THAT is what I rail against. The out and out, firm-as-concrete belief that the government is behind every bad thing that happens to the people."
well i dont know who that was intended for... not me seeing as i havent thrown in my two cents on this, but i dont think the government is behind every bad thing... just this bad thing.
too much shit doesnt add up.
but i guess we all have our own takes on the situation. its just that everyone who doesnt agree with me is wrong.
Submitted by icarus1987 (user info) at 2006-08-07 17:56:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-07 12:44:30 (#)
Ranking: 0
Actually, I take that back. If you'd like to ask a specific question nicely I'll consider answering it, otherwise no.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-07 12:38:39 (#)
Ranking: 0
Calling me names is not the way to get me to enter a debate. If you're interested in the truth or really want to know what I think, you will seek out my other posts on this matter and read all my reviews about this matter. I believe I have addressed every question you could possibly pose to me already. Find it or don't find it, I don't fucking care. It's not my problem.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An FAQ does not a solid theory make.
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-07 17:39:13 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-07 16:01:25 (#)
Ranking: 0
That's not how this works Wardy. If you can't explain the obvious and powerful explosions going off dozens of stories below the collapse zone, you've got problems.
------------------------
i did explain it. it's the result of all the air being pushed out as the buildings come down. put it this way: make a jenga tower but leave out half the blocks so that there are gaping holes on every level. now in those gaping holes put tiny pieces of paper. see what happens when the tower falls: where does the paper end up?
------------------------
All classic demolitions have these same hallmarks - there are always anomolies. I remember, for instance watching them blow up the Mariner's stadium, The Kingdome, in Seattle on TLC and even though they prepared for months for the demo, they still had some parts of the structure strike surrounding buildings. Same with the Pirates' old stadium in Pittsburg. Parts of it struck surrounding structures because of ejected material. Even the most precise planning will yield these anomolies.
------------------
really? -- http://www.dhgriffin.com/demolition/explosive.asp
go almost all the way down the page here and download the movies. -- http://www.eurodecommissioning.co.uk/content.php?categoryId=133
how is that the same as this? -- http://www.september-11th.us/Archive.html
please tell me that you can tell the difference...
--------------------------
Also, who knows, they might just be some demo crewmen's way of sabotaging the event. Who knows... But I know this, they weren't done by guys with boxcutters, and they weren't done by the falling building. They were EXPLOSIONS. They are clearly seen.
--------------------------
wait a minute, what do you mean, 'who knows'? i'll read a bit farther, maybe you'll explain yourself.....
--------------------------
That's YOUR job to explain them as an official opponent of my hypothesis, not mine. I've given you MY explanation, now where's yours?
--------------------------
logic 101: you can't disprove another person's statement by giving conjecture. all you did was give this possible conjecture and then say what you knew it wasn't, without anything verifiable. is that really what you call an 'explanation'?
--------------
I'm waiting.
--------------
super!
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-07 16:01:25 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-07 15:22:31 (#)
Ranking: -2
Exactly. Controlled demos implode, they don't shoot shit off everywhere. haven't you ever seen a controlled demo before?
are you seriously trying to tell me that this was a controlled demolition done by the government, but yet it did exactly what it was not supposed to do? let me know.
thanks,
wardy.
-------------------
That's not how this works Wardy. If you can't explain the obvious and powerful explosions going off dozens of stories below the collapse zone, you've got problems.
All classic demolitions have these same hallmarks - there are always anomolies. I remember, for instance watching them blow up the Mariner's stadium, The Kingdome, in Seattle on TLC and even though they prepared for months for the demo, they still had some parts of the structure strike surrounding buildings. Same with the Pirates' old stadium in Pittsburg. Parts of it struck surrounding structures because of ejected material. Even the most precise planning will yield these anomolies.
Also, who knows, they might just be some demo crewmen's way of sabotaging the event. Who knows... But I know this, they weren't done by guys with boxcutters, and they weren't done by the falling building. They were EXPLOSIONS. They are clearly seen.
That's YOUR job to explain them as an official opponent of my hypothesis, not mine. I've given you MY explanation, now where's yours?
I'm waiting.
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-07 15:22:31 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-07 13:57:55 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-07 13:20:59 (#)
Ranking: -2
"For Christ's sake, man, you can see explosions taking place dozens of floors below the collapse point in all the videos, and you cannot explain it. You talk about Occum's Razor...explain those explosions"
--------------------------
probably because the thirty stories above those floors were crashing down with the force of a few thousand tons of steel and concrete, and all the air that was in the elevator shafts and things of that nature had to blow out somewhere, so it took the path of least resistence. it probably also took a lot of debris with it.
i'm pretty sure controlled demos go from the ground up, but i'm not positive...
------------------------------
Have you ever seen a 110 story skyscraper purposefully demolished? Me neither. Not until 9/11 that is.
Listen, do yourselves a favor and get the CNN video "9/11 Remembered" and watch closely while the towers fall.
There is desbris being ejected a good 30-40 stories BELOW the collapse point, and the area around the collapse point is EXPLODING VIOLENTLY OUTWARD INTO THE SKY!
Just look at it. It's obvious, people. Open your goddamned eyes, for the last fucking time.
-------------------------------
Exactly. Controlled demos implode, they don't shoot shit off everywhere. haven't you ever seen a controlled demo before?
are you seriously trying to tell me that this was a controlled demolition done by the government, but yet it did exactly what it was not supposed to do? let me know.
thanks,
wardy.
Submitted by d_prime (user info) at 2006-08-07 15:14:18 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
"I'm not gonna debate this issue, but you guys are more than welcome to hammer it out on your own."
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-07 13:57:55 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-07 13:20:59 (#)
Ranking: -2
"For Christ's sake, man, you can see explosions taking place dozens of floors below the collapse point in all the videos, and you cannot explain it. You talk about Occum's Razor...explain those explosions"
--------------------------
probably because the thirty stories above those floors were crashing down with the force of a few thousand tons of steel and concrete, and all the air that was in the elevator shafts and things of that nature had to blow out somewhere, so it took the path of least resistence. it probably also took a lot of debris with it.
i'm pretty sure controlled demos go from the ground up, but i'm not positive...
------------------------------
Have you ever seen a 110 story skyscraper purposefully demolished? Me neither. Not until 9/11 that is.
Listen, do yourselves a favor and get the CNN video "9/11 Remembered" and watch closely while the towers fall.
There is desbris being ejected a good 30-40 stories BELOW the collapse point, and the area around the collapse point is EXPLODING VIOLENTLY OUTWARD INTO THE SKY!
Just look at it. It's obvious, people. Open your goddamned eyes, for the last fucking time.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-07 13:46:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Stabkill (user info) at 2006-08-07 13:02:54 (#)
Ranking: -2
I was deceived by all the shithead global warming alarmists who claimed hurricanes would be as bad in 2006 as they were in 2005. And where are the fucking hurricanes? WHERE ARE MY FUCKING HURRICANES AND DEAD NIGGERS? Fuck you, ETS.
----------------
Katrina didn't occur till Sept.
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-08-07 13:20:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
"For Christ's sake, man, you can see explosions taking place dozens of floors below the collapse point in all the videos, and you cannot explain it. You talk about Occum's Razor...explain those explosions"
--------------------------
probably because the thirty stories above those floors were crashing down with the force of a few thousand tons of steel and concrete, and all the air that was in the elevator shafts and things of that nature had to blow out somewhere, so it took the path of least resistence. it probably also took a lot of debris with it.
i'm pretty sure controlled demos go from the ground up, but i'm not positive...
Submitted by Stabkill (user info) at 2006-08-07 13:02:54 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
I was deceived by all the shithead global warming alarmists who claimed hurricanes would be as bad in 2006 as they were in 2005. And where are the fucking hurricanes? WHERE ARE MY FUCKING HURRICANES AND DEAD NIGGERS? Fuck you, ETS.
Submitted by choir (user info) at 2006-08-07 12:53:00 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
The flashes that "occur" before the planes hit the towers, what purpose would they serve? If plane of that size were to collide with a building, surely an explosion of that size wouldn't aid in very much destruction.
Submitted by Method (user info) at 2006-08-07 12:52:13 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
you're a poopie head
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-07 12:44:30 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Actually, I take that back. If you'd like to ask a specific question nicely I'll consider answering it, otherwise no.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-07 12:38:39 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Calling me names is not the way to get me to enter a debate. If you're interested in the truth or really want to know what I think, you will seek out my other posts on this matter and read all my reviews about this matter. I believe I have addressed every question you could possibly pose to me already. Find it or don't find it, I don't fucking care. It's not my problem.
Submitted by icarus1987 (user info) at 2006-08-07 12:15:49 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Gotta love ETS. Insinuate he's a nutter and he gets all huffy. PROVE he's a nutter and he goes the "I'm not listening I'm not listening hum hum hum hum HUM HUM HUMMMMM" route.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-07 11:24:44 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-08-07 03:32:41 (#)
Ranking: -2
1) Leave it to a conspiracy nut to link Enron with 9/11.
2) Leave it to a Froggie Canuck to not be able to understand arguments tend to stretch posts.
Here's ANOTHER question for ya, ETS.
If they're so all-pervasive, don't you think they'd be able to find someone gathering strings BEFORE they get them all woven together into a nice little movie?
I mean shit, if you think the government is already tapped into the search engines and the phone companies, you don't think red flags would be going up all across the board if someone were searching for the right information and was contacting the right people?
I don't see how you think the govrnment is omnipotent and impotent at the same time.
And you've still dodged the points of
1) How come no one can find the funding that would have come from out of nowhere?
2) Thousands of people involved, and not one has come forward out of guilt or remorse?
3) How could they get this all done from the middle of December to the beginning of September?
Answe those three questions without the Kool-Aid, Brad.
------------------------
Going down your list of questions...
I never said 9/11 and Enron were directly linked in any way. Go back and read what I said and what I was responding to when it was brought up and you should be able to see that.
As for this:
"I mean shit, if you think the government is already tapped into the search engines and the phone companies, you don't think red flags would be going up all across the board if someone were searching for the right information and was contacting the right people?"
They ARE tapping our phones, Jason...and data mining our search engines. They admit it. This isn't paranoia, it's on fucking CNN and Fox. Haven't you been watching the news? As for the second part of that sentence, I have no fucking clue what you're talking about or how you think that, in any way, presents an obstacle to the military industrial complex who helped carry out and cover up this attack.
I never said the government was either omnipotent or impotent, but you'd be a fool to try and argue that they don't have the means necessary to carry out 9/11, placing explosives in those buildings, particularly when the president's own brother Marvin was head of Securicom, the security company overseeing the security at the World Trade Center. For Christ's sake, man, you can see explosions taking place dozens of floors below the collapse point in all the videos, and you cannot explain it. You talk about Occum's Razor...explain those explosions. Explain the myriad of reports from that day by everyone from civilians on the ground and in the buildings to public officials and firefighters.
If you think 10-12 nobodies from Arabia controlled by a guy with a laptop in a cave in Afghanistan could have pulled this off and you want to follow Occum's Razor, as you say you do, it only follows that the most powerful government on the face of the planet, a government who happens to preside over the target country, would have an easier time of it.
You speak so much of Occum's Razor, but you choose to completely forget this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cui_bono
Now on to your other questions...
1) How come no one can find the funding that would have come from out of nowhere?
How come the entire military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan are off the official books? How come the U.S. government owns 53% of all the stock in the U.S. stock exchange and we never hear anything about it? How come they tell us their is a national debt when there is actually a surplus? The fact that you think the United States government would have trouble finding money to pay for this operation when all the damned thing IS is a money-making scheme is utterly ludicrous.
2) Thousands of people involved, and not one has come forward out of guilt or remorse?
Have you ever heard of blackmail? Death threats? Threats to loved ones? There are ways to get things done, and when a man is faced with a choice of, "Take the massive payday and shut up, or you and your entire family will die mysteriously," I think most men will take the money and run. I know YOU would. Thousands of people would not have had to be invovled. Thousands were manipulated, but not involved. At the very most, a hundred or so would have to be involved intimately to pull it off.
3) How could they get this all done from the middle of December to the beginning of September?
This shit has been planned for years. This probably wasn't the only plan either. It was just the most feasible and had the biggest impact for the least investment of time and money. Don't misunderstand me, Clinton was one of the boys too. Oklahoma was the same fucking thing, only on a much smaller scale. The first WTC attack was carried out under the direction of the fucking FBI. Research it for yourself. Everything I have said here is documented out the ass if you care to follow up on it. I encourage every to follow up on these things.
At this point, Jason, I have an answer for nearly everything you could possibly ask me about 9/11 that will make way more sense than any of the official bullshit you choose to spew out your ass without thinking it through or viewing the fucking video tapes of that day. But you'll never get. You don't WANT to.
Submitted by TheSpook (user info) at 2006-08-07 07:44:41 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I'm not gonna debate this issue, but you guys are more than welcome to hammer it out on your own.
I'll hammer one out whenever I damn well please, mister.
Submitted by OneCheapGeek (user info) at 2006-08-07 06:30:26 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-08-07 01:17:53 (#)
Ranking: 0
Caul: I know. I don't get it either. It would be a bit different if he were attacking me simply because I made a shitty link post, but that's clearly not the case. At this point, man, it's just rabid opposition to anything I say no matter what it is.
You're such a martyr, Bradley.
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-08-07 06:29:43 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by rob_berg (user info) at 2006-08-07 05:59:38 (#)
Ranking: 2
Why? We are all unique. Why shouldn't being or thinking differently be encouraged? Strongly?
That is what defines us as individuals.
Is that really how you think? hmmm?
-----There is a difference between being an individual and being special. Not everyone is special. Doctors, lawyers, astronaughts, teachers. Special. Crybaby fucks who don't get their own way. not special.
Geez, I don't know about you, but I think people >should< embrace the beauty of the fact we are all special in our own little ways. Innovation comes from people who think different. Our differences make us unique.
-----See above, dipshit.
You are absolutely one of kind.
-----That's right, smokey.
And what about your obsessive repulsive crush on ETS?
You don't think that is unique and special in it's own creepy way? It's certainly different. No one else follows him around being so exuberantly painful. Perhaps you should rage against your own machine for the sheer hypocrisy of being so different.
-----Special ed, yes he is. And sorry to burst your bubble, other people DO "follow him around". Just scroll down this page, and you'll see 4-5.
Besides, his obsession is at least trying to provide folks with some pretty important information. I happen to think most people >should< at least read most of what he posts. I would encourage people to not only read them, but form their own opinion of them and then express that opinion in at least a semi-civilzed discourse.
-----I have no problem with him posting it. Seriously, I don't. I have a problem with his Holier Than Thou attitude about this shit. His "I know I'm right, and you all are just sheep of the system for not believing me." His "Listen to me, and you will become enlightened" Jesus-bullshit. When he's willing to present the good AND the bad, then I'll shut up. But he's glass-half-empty. Unless his views are impressed upon the world, the world is in horrible pain and turmoil. He thinks he can solve problems, but all he does is bitch and moan. Anyone can google and post second hand info. it take a stronger person to go out and actually do something about it.
Look, you don't have to agree with him... but you don't have to be so fucking negative either.
-----Again, I'm not going to molly-coddle him and his views. If I disagree strongly, why shouldn't I express my disagreements as strongly as I feel them? I should water down my views because he's taken the time to express his?
Face it you are both obsessed... you are obsesssed with him and he is obsessed with thinking he can save the world. You need to honestly ask yourself which one of those is more pathetic?
-----I don't think either of us are obsessed. When I'm not reading or replying, I don't give him a second thought. When he hasn't posted in 3 days, I don't sit around wondering, "Man, when is ETS gonna post again, I need to flame his ass." I read almost everything posted to Uber. Almost. Everything. If I've missed a day, I go back and find the good shit, but if it's on the main page, I read it. And if I like/dislike, agree/disagree, I say so.
Honestly, how you escape regular beatings in real life is beyond me. Perhaps you do get beat up a lot. That would make me feel a little better. I'm not going to lie.
-----I can give you a few reasons I don't get regular beatings. The first is that what you see of me here on Uber is a fraction of who I am. It's pretty damn hard to sit around Uber and throw stories and jokes around with 10 people just hanging around. It's pretty impossible to go to a park and barbeque over Uber. You can't judge me by what I do here, because I keep most of my life off Uber, unlike Brad, who has openly lived here in the past, and *anyone* who ever paid attention knows enough about him to make an assumption. Are mine harsh, sure? But this is the fuck who said he hates me because I "did not back (him) up after (he) went back and rated a lot of (my) posts" That's a quote.
Either way - you really do need a good solid punch in the brain.
-----Everyone does, every once in a while. That's why I like boxing. That, and it's bad-ass cardio.
I've said it before- I will say it again: Grow up.
-----Nope. I like being who I am. Mild bi-polar disorder can be bad-ass at times.
"So I'm an asshole. I'm rude. I'm inconsiderate.
Who gives a fuck?
I sure as hell don't."
---
Yes you are. Why do you have to be rude? Why do you feel the need to be automatically inconsiderate?
-----Because it's who I am. and I'm not ALWAYS rude and incosiderate. Ask around. Ask people you don't know. Check out other posts. I'm a dick, and I'm a teddy bear. Depends on who I'm dealig with and talking to.
I give a fuck. You are annoying. It's distracting. Why can't you focus on the things you agree with and talk about those things?
-----I do. but no one comments about it and makes a stink then.
Its ok to disagree with someone- STRONGLY disagree with them for all I care. That's healthy.
-----OK.
But what you are doing right now is not healthy. It's obsessive. It's painful. I would like it to stop- and YOU would be a much better human being if you stopped it.
-----I'm fine with the kind of human being I am. And I covered obsessive earlier.
I think it has gone on long enough. You are not a complete idiot - we all know that... but Jesus Christ you sure act like one. Try to salvage what little credibility you have as a human being, grow the fuck up and stop acting like such a retard.
-----No offense, but you say this like I care if I have credibility on a website that 99.9% of the world has never and will never hear of. I don't sit at home at night, hoping that someone on Uber thinks I'm a good person. THAT is unhealthy. The opinions about me that matter, are all from people who matter to me. And I hate to burst bubbles, but with the exception of a select few people like Mon