Conspiracy theorists

by JimmyPage 182 Replies latest jw friends

  • Judge Dread
  • Judge Dread
  • ProdigalSon

    Someone please explain this angle-cut melted beam right behind the fireman in the center....

    posted by mrpotatohead

    The picture of the cut beams with the melted metal on the lower side, is exactly how it would look if cut with an oxy-acetalene cutting torch.No big mystery there. Any iron worker will tell you that. The angled cut is used for the same reason a tree is cut with an angled cut to start with, to make the large steel beam fall in the desired direction.

    No structural steel worker would touch that beam without a crane attached to the upper section. And with a crane attached, there would be no need to cut the wasteful angle.

    Take a closer look. There is no sign a heavy piece fell over in the right foreground. Do you see how dangerous it would be with those other heavy steel stubs sticking up for the felled piece to bounce off?

    There is every reason to believe that piece was cut at an angle before the tower fell. Also taking another look at the
    photo, no construction worker would be allowed near that diagonal cut piece with all that dangerous debris around the base.

    No person has been near that beam since before the tower fell. GUARANTEED.

  • diamondiiz

    Personally I don't believe in Illuminati as there is no proof of them. I do think that people at the top, central bankers, heads of spy agencies and such know more than they led on about the near future for the economies and strategic plans for national security and most likely they have plans that the rest of us aren't privy to. They may have so called "evil" plans for humanity but than again this has been going on ever since mankind began where each tribe tried to reign supreme and eliminate the weaker tribe. Today, it's more sophisticated and on grander scale than it happened 2000 years ago.

    As for theories on things like 9/11, JFK and so forth - well not everything the government says adds up and some things don't make sense but it all falls under the individual's belief system for or against. I can't belief that US with NORAD would somehow be unable to locate few hijacked planes that were in air for almost an hour, and not send fighter jets to escort them while this has been routinely done before and especially over sensitive areas like Washington. Personally, I can't say that CIA planned it but I belief they knew about it and allowed it to happen so they could not only invade resource rich areas in middle east and take control of strategic region but also use that as an excuse for tightening the security within it's borders while also the Fed was able to lower interest rates to 1% creating the housing bubble which burst in 2007. In 2001 the markets were having hard time and the ultra low rate allowed to inflate a new bubble just as is happening today in different sectors.

    Would a government be as evil as to kill it's own people? Why not? 2000 people that died 9/11 is really a small number when one looks at how many US soldiers died in Afghanistan and Iraq since then, or how many innocent people died in those countries. Ask yourself, who killed more people, Hussein during his 20 years in power or were there more deaths under the US occupation? I can't prove what CIA knows and neither does a general public so while some belief in so called conspiracy theories they do so in a similar manner as the other side who belief their government is telling them the whole truth. The actual truth may lay somewhere in the middle.

  • 1975

    Good comments and observation ProdigalSon and diamondiiz. We're not pushy our views on anyone just telling it as it is. Again for me, the firefighters of 911 say it was controlled demolition. Explosions can be seen coming from lower floors. In short, Mrfreeze says the firefighters are liars, they don't know what their talking about.


  • ProdigalSon

    I personally believe that the government's official explanation of the events of 911 are the real conspiracy theory. According to them, building 7 had perfectly placed diesel tanks that caused the building's collapse into its own footprint at free fall speed. Shit, I should go into the controlled demolition business, all I need is some well-placed diesel tanks.

    I have eyes to see and I know the basic laws of physics. This was either a fantastic snow job or the physical laws of the universe ceased to exist that day. Here is the bottom line: Steel buildings cannot fall at free fall speed straight down into their own footprint and offer absolutely no resistance to the upper floors coming down on top of it. Hell, not even a house of cards can fall at free fall speed. It is clear on the video that building seven had a sequence of charges running up the right side and then it cracked in the middle and came straight down. SO we have visual evidence and the owner admitting to it. I find it interesting that MrFreeze chooses to isolate my one sentence saying "I know it was controlled demolition" while refusing to address the fact that the building's OWNER admitted to giving the order to pull it. Very telling indeed. Not to mention the fact that the scumbag profited THREE BILLION DOLLARS that day after purchasing the Trade Center 3 months before and immediately doubling the insurance against terrorist attacks! Geez, how dense does one have to be to stick up for these assholes?

  • ProdigalSon

    Oh, and I almost forgot... who built the World Trade Center? The Rockefellers! And guess what problem the buildings had? A really big asbestos issue with a billion-dollar price tag to clean it up. Now we're all breathing it. These are buildings that were less than half-occupied and hemorrhaging money.

  • 1975

    PSon, I wonder if MRfreeze is aware of that. "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when we pratice to decieve."


  • Mary
    Unshackled said: Mary...don't forget he also has sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads.

    Indeed they do.......I was able to capture a picture of one of them in action just the other day!

  • sizemik
    MrFreeze, type in "Firefighters comments on 911 Tower Destruction" on your computer.Where did these extra explosions come from especially on the lower floors?

    Yep . . . did that . . . and I don't see the slightest evidence of man made or "extra" explosions. Firstly, the corner of the tower has quite plainly suffered significant structual damage and likely on the point of collapse as a result. The emission of some small amount of flame along with the larger bursts of dust are obviously (to me anyway), the result of the air escaping as the floors above pancaked . . . squeezing out dust and the remnant of burning aircraft fuel and other combustibles. The fire fighters description was of a scale of collapse they had probably never witnessed before and they simply likened it to a series of explosions as the pancake effect compounded, This phenomenon would continue all the way down throughout the collapse. Great food for the conspiracy theorists though LOL

    As for the "angled cut" . . . it's only the result you can see. That the molten material covering the beam is "molten metal" is not certain for a start. There seems way too much excess for the result of a gas cutting exercise. And to have the excess on the outside would mean it was cut from the inside outwards . . . huh? I would expect structural beams to fracture in a variety of ways depending on the forces they are exposed to. It would be more unusual to my mind if every severed beam were dead straight . . . that would be strange. It's making the facts fit the theory . . . wrong way round I believe. For example . . . the beam in question may have descended among the debris and spiked into the ground. The angle cut (now upright) could simply be the 45 degree join that severed when it let go. It's not certain that it stands upright in it's original position. A picture like this can tell a very misleading story if taken at face value. Gas torching a beam in advance? . . . not very likely.

    The collapse of tower No7 began in the lower floors as a result of damage there from the enormous energy and debris released from the previous collapse. The small emissions from widows along one side were once again air being compressed from lower floor pancaking and being emitted from the stair well. Such collapses will be accompamied by "explosive" noises as multiple structual elements give way. There were no explosions . . . the buildings all fell as a result of the initial aircraft impacts.

Share this