My theory on the world trade centre

  • Thread starter Dudebusta
  • 168 comments
  • 4,342 views
Originally posted by Dudebusta
one thing, why have you linked osama with the planes?

wheres any evidence he had something to do with it?
:eek: Dude I sit here shaking my head. Yes you're entitled to your opinion, and yes you are correct when you say American Foriegn Policy is sometimes wrong. Are you now trying to say Bush controls the media? Within days after the 9/11 attacks the highjackers were linked to Al Queda cells operating in N.America and the CIA and FBI knew of them and their members. Osama has been linked by the media and many countries security services as a major contributor to terrorist training camps and organizer. Remember Osama comes from a very wealthy Arab royal family, and he has the money. He is a Muslim who uses his religion as a weapon, rather than a comfort. He has made no bones about the fact that he HATES America because of their Middle East involvement(Isreal) and the exploitation of Arab oil, and the foulling of pure Arab people by their presence in Arab countries. I suppose your next theory will be that either nearly 5000 deaths were faked, or the U.S. did it themselves. As a Canadian and neighbour to this country I watched and read with sadness as several people that I knew were pulled from this carnage. I played hockey against some of those Paramedics and Firefighters you choose to dishonour with your theory. I slept in their homes and ate meals with their families. Yes you are entitled to your opinion, but if I called you an ASS*OLE out of the blue does that make it true?
 
ok you say days after the attacks the hijackers were linked to al queda...how? did they check the flight manifest and say 'well that looks like an arabic name, this was our man'. and if they knew about al queda in north america why did the CIA and FBI not act? thats pretty ****ing stupid if you ask me.

how am i dishonering the fireman and paramedics that busted their ass for months? they did a bang up job. i never said a bad word about them.
 
Don't misunderstand my position. By no means am I defending the FBI nor the CIA. They have data bases filled with photos and bios of known terrorists in and outside of N.America. I don't know if you have many public security cameras but having been through American airports several times they are in plain view. Imagine the ones you can't see. The problem lies with these 2 security services communicating with each other. Both are very territorial the FBI is responsible for U.S. security and criminal investigation within the borders of the U.S., and the CIA watches foriegn nationals and spies on and in other countries, including Austrailia and Canada. They won't share info with each other, and this is the result. So to answer your question, yes and no. The would have checked the manifests and looked at known terrorists, and then cross-refrenced it with the data base of known operators inside U.S. borders. Unfortuneatly too little, too late. Many things occurred that day that probably won't ever happen again(I hope), mainly due to the knee jerk reaction. Regardless of what you hear in the news, I have flown into Boston and Washington for seminars in the last 6 months and the security now is extremely hard. Just a point of interest, I don't know how old you are or if you are a student of history, but this situation has occurred in the U.S.'s past. Pearl Harbour. Several people had advanced knowledge of both situations but the ability to step away from the situation and take a look at the overall picture(the big picture) and take all the info and try to formulate scenarios that may occur is easier said than done. If a complete stranger walks toward you on crowded street, quickly pulls a gun and shoots you, is it your fault for not being aware of strangers. We all were taught to be cautious of them, but can we really call it living if we walk around in utter terror all the time. This is how the U.S. used to approach threats. Now they follow the latter.
 
the provking continues, and dudebusta your little conspiracy theory is just about as good as the conspiracy theory of the filming of the first moon mission in a film studio.
 
Originally posted by TALONclaw
the provking continues, and dudebusta your little conspiracy theory is just about as good as the conspiracy theory of the filming of the first moon mission in a film studio.


er actually i think the moon landings were probably filmed in area 51.....

And, um, when you see the shot of the lunar lander taking off (with presumably all the astronauts inside?) who panned the camera up as it took off?



But yeah this is a daft idea, and one i think we should all just walk away from.
 
29th july? typo, slip?

well, the panning camera may have been remotely controlled or set up with a special mechanism to pivot it.
 
Hello everyone! Long time no arguing! Everyone hear of this French loser's book saying that 9-11 was a gov't hoax and that the thing that hit the Pentagon was a missle?

Well then what the hell happened to the people on that plane!?! :lol: What a French dope!
 
Originally posted by Talentless
29th july? typo, slip?

well, the panning camera may have been remotely controlled or set up with a special mechanism to pivot it.

Exactly my point, all i was trying to do was show that you can ask questions about almost anything with an element of doubt in it and if you try a bit you can put up a counter argument to it. Mix in a bit of national pride and whahey big row.

Err, did i make sense? :confused:

These days absolute proof of anything is almost impossibe to obtain. Example below....

So how did they get the film out of the camera?

Before answering remember that there were two types of moving image that came back, 1st the really grainy "live" transmissions and 2nd the better quality "filmed" images that came back with the astonauts.

Oh and please, i'm not botherd one way or the other if the astronauts got to the moon or not, I'm just intrested in the conspiracy theory surrounding it and certain other events in history. You don't have to convince me one way or the other, i'm prepared to accept either possibility.
 
Originally posted by M5Power
THE U.S.A. HAS NEVER BEEN IN A WAR. REMEMBER, IN WORLD WAR one AND two we saved England, China's and Australia's NECKS. WE never had to get into that war. NEVER. THE UNITED STATES DROPPED THE NUCLEAR BOMB, NOT ENGLAND OR AUSTRALIA!

If I remember correctly, wern't the USA fighting the Japanese in the pacific?
 
Originally posted by M5Power
Hello everyone! Long time no arguing! Everyone hear of this French loser's book saying that 9-11 was a gov't hoax and that the thing that hit the Pentagon was a missle?

Well then what the hell happened to the people on that plane!?! :lol: What a French dope!


If it was a missile, why did they find a planes undercarrige and aviation fuel in the wreckage?
 
Originally posted by M5Power
Remember, since 9-11, we've issued a warning each time we've gotten a threat -- six in all -- and there hasn't been an attack. You can't take everything seriously (Abe Lincoln got two death threats a week, sometimes daily. And he was only shot by one man :lol: )

I can't believe you just said that. MAYBE IT MEANS THEY PREVENTED THE ATTACK!

You are trying to pin the government for everything! Think about it! When there isn't an attack, it was a SILLY false alarm. When there is an attack, the government should have prevented it and might have been involved in it! So where does the govt do anything right for you!? :mad: :rolleyes:
 
Back