old ground i suppose

katcha · **Posted:** Sun Jul 06, 2008 5:39 pm

but i never knew of no third building

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/

verbalkint · **Joined:** Thu Dec 20, 2007 9:08 pm **Posts:** 3135

very interesting that, but i blame the black fella sat on the stairs

parmopooly · **Posted:** Sun Jul 06, 2008 6:47 pm

I like the title of one of the lnks there: Plots,paranoia and blame.....................sums up the USA perfectly!!!

katcha · **Posted:** Sun Jul 06, 2008 10:00 pm

watched the end of it after the tennis and all i can say i dont trust america

Jonny · **Posted:** Sun Jul 06, 2008 10:36 pm

No one seems to be able to explain why building 7 fell so quickly and consistantly (with little or no resistance). But I don't think anyone really cares whether there was foul play or not anyway........

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 37284

Maybe it fell because the other two buidings falling affected its stability......... the talk of controlled explosions is pure bollox, does any one know the time and effort involved in destroying a structire by explosives? I'll swear too many people have watched 'Where Eagles Dare' too many times where Clint East wood wanders around with a haversack full of dynamite on timers sticking them up here, there and everywhere. :laugh:

p.s Danny Boy to Broadsword.

Jonny · **Posted:** Sun Jul 06, 2008 11:20 pm

MadJohn wrote:

Snowy wrote:

Maybe it fell because the other two buidings falling affected its stability......... the talk of controlled explosions is pure bollox, does any one know the time and effort involved in destroying a structire by explosives? I'll swear too many people have watched 'Where Eagles Dare' too many times where Clint East wood wanders around with a haversack full of dynamite on timers sticking them up here, there and everywhere. :laugh:

p.s Danny Boy to Broadsword.

I've heard otherwise sensible people rave about the immense cowpat that was "Loose Change". People just love a conspiracy theory don't they.

It was all one big con so that the US would have an excuse to invade the Middle East again stpid

Like they need a fooking excuse :laugh:

I don't think anyone will ever have the answers but certain events will always promote discussion. And rightly so.

PJ_Poolie · **Posted:** Sun Jul 06, 2008 11:25 pm

Snowy wrote:

Maybe it fell because the other two buidings falling affected its stability......... the talk of controlled explosions is pure bollox, does any one know the time and effort involved in destroying a structire by explosives?

I'm privy to some quite sensitive information. In the month before 9/11 this man was hired by the US government;

You do the 'math' A traction enigne was seen leaving Manhattan in the hours, days, weeks, months, and years after the attacks.

Snowy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:18 pm **Posts:** 37284

87% of al UFO's are reported in the USA.....either it says we are very important to aliens or we have some very stupid people living in the country...I go for the latter.

Jonny · **Posted:** Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:01 am

I have seen Loose Change - I thought it was a bit crap, but if you sift through the 95% of crap bits there are some good points in it like -

Why did the buildings collapse so quickly?
Why have about half of the supposed hijakkers been found alive?
Why was one of the hijakkers passport found in the rubble just a couple of hours after the collapse?

I think that you have to be a bit naive to believe that some bloke in a cave masterminded the whole thing from another part of the world but there will never be proper answers, and some of the arguments put forward by the supposed 911 truth seekers probably hinder answers more than helping get them. It will just be another JFK - there will be no answers and in all probability no one really gives a shit......

Montpoolier · **Posted:** Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:48 am

Everyone knows the attack on the twin towers was just a smokescreen for building 7. :roll:

I have another theory why building 7 collapsed so easily.

Because it was jerry-built. Let's face it the Yanks aren't renowned as the world's best civil engineers. Go and check how many "collapsing object" disasters they've had, starting with this: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/08/01/bridge ... index.html

parmopooly · **Posted:** Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:02 pm

PJ_Poolie wrote:

Snowy wrote:

Maybe it fell because the other two buidings falling affected its stability......... the talk of controlled explosions is pure bollox, does any one know the time and effort involved in destroying a structire by explosives?

I'm privy to some quite sensitive information. In the month before 9/11 this man was hired by the US government;

You do the 'math' A traction enigne was seen leaving Manhattan in the hours, days, weeks, months, and years after the attacks.

He was later overheard saying, "Aah, i't wor rart escapade an 'all" !!!!

old ground i suppose

Gadgies online