Explosives in the WTC?

[gh0st]

Yes no one made any link to that and a terrorist event, we were just saying how that burnt for ages, and didnt collapse while the WTC did.

Uh. One building lit on fire.

The WTC WAS CRASHED INTO BY AN 767. THE MADRID ONE WAS NOT. DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW.

 

[ray_MAN]

Maybe NORAD was ordered to stand down by the administration, so it could be used as a pretext for war.

Think about it. NORAD, nor the FAA, had any idea of what the terrorists were going to do. No one thought they would fly the plane right into the WTC. Usually hijackings end with the plane on the run-way of some airport. The terrorists say they have a bomb, the government negotiates, Delta Force goes in, the passengers come out, and so do the "smart" terrorists. (The stupid ones are dead.) NORAD did not want it to end with innocent passengers getting killed if there was an alternative. Actually F-16s were launched, but they did not reach the planes in time. This was after the first plane hit the towers.

As wodsoa says, its the reichstag again. There trying to use fear to pass there laws and start there wars. Like they have with the patrioct act, removing your rights does not make you safer your real enemy is your government.

How can you compare this at all to the Reichstag? Are you insane? America is not even close to Nazi Germany in 1930-1945. Yes, Bush is not the best president. Yes, I do not agree with him very well. But, I believe he handled 9/11 better than most presidents would. Oh, I am American too. I live in New York City. I do not, in any way, shape, or form, feel that my government is the enemy. Terrorists are the enemy. They hate freedom. They hate America. They will do anything to kill us.

Their is no terrorst threat, I was reading Micheal Moores book and it raises some good points, in 200 the chance of an american in amercia dying from a terrorist attack was 0 in 2002 it was 0 in 2003 it was 0 in 2004 it was 0, in 2001 it was 1 in 100 000. That means you are more liekley to commit suicide than die in a terrorist attack, but no laws are passed to protect you rom yourslef, oh no these make belive terrorists have been an excellant pretext to remove your rights and wage war, for the Bush administration 911 was excellant.

Michael Moore is such a pompous jackass, it's not even funny. Why was it that the chances of a terrorist attack magically jumped in 2001? Because Michael Moore makes things up. He pulled those numbers out of his fat-ass. The topic of me commiting suicide has nothing to do with it. Me dying in a terrorist attack is slim. A terrorist attack happening is very, very high. At this day, at any given time, we can be attacked again. I think we will be attacked again. I think it will happen soon. I think it will be devastating, a scale higher than anything on 9/11. Look at the Madrid bombing. If that happened in the subways of New York City, Boston, Washington D.C., and Los Angeles simultaneously, thousands would die.
I have a question for you, and think before you answer. This has nothing to do with the Iraq war, either.
Would you rather us chasing Osama Bin Laden, the mastermind and leader of Al Quaeda and 9/11, or would you like us to remain idle and let him kill more civilians?

Wow, I just spent 20 minutes arguing. I like it.

 

[DEATH eVADER]

"You mean as if the supports melted away from the extreme heat of the burning jet fuel? The buildings could survive the impact of the jets but the support beams couldn't survive the extreme heat that resulted from the burning jet fuel. Thats what brought them down."

Then why were people in the 'crater' standing waiting to be rescued, surley they could survive thoose temperatures, look at the video. The people are there! And the firefighters reported that the fires were almost out, and then you can cleary see aload of explosions just before it collapses.

Also OMFG NUB ROXORS TEH BOXORS

If your not going to contribute and flame, do so in a PM so not everyone has to see your whining.

Depends how far away they are from the fuel. plus the fire caused by the jet fuel only had to weaken the structure, but the weight and the wind would of did the rest, the structure was protected by fire resistant foam and boards, with two flaws. Inspection on the building noted that the the structure wasn't properly covered in foam, and the fire resistant boards pretecting the inner stairwell can be destroyed by a hammer blow, nevermind a aircraft. I'm a student engineer, so I come across these things

 

[Solaris]

Sorry but i am going to ahve to rip apart your argument like, a ripped cloth.

You said NORAD "did not want it to end with innocent passengers getting killed if there was an alternative."
You think that, I believ they were ordered to stand down, using the training mission as a reason.

America is fast becoming like nazi germany, the telvison you watch is controlled the information yuo get is controlled.
"They hate freedom. They hate America. They will do anything to kill us."

Yes that is what they want you think, that is the exact meassage they are trying to get out, think for yourself, say: "Hay, if fox news is owned by george bushs cousin, then maybe the information hes giving you might be a little bias.

You have to learn from history, I can compare it to the reichstag like this.

Nazis Burn Down reichstag-Say Communists did it-Communists arrested-Civil rights restricted in order to keep the little nazis safe from thoose evil communists - war to get all thoose evil jews and others

CIA Burn down WTC-Say terrorits did it-Civil rihgts restricted in order to protetc you from terrorists-War to get the terrorists some more

We obviously dont agree, on the CIA burning down the WTC, but we agree that it is claimed the terrorists did it, and that civil rights have been restricted ( if you want to dispute this say so) And we agree that we have gone to war to get those terrorists. So thats quite a few similatrites.


And then you have said somethign unbelievably stupid:
"Why was it that the chances of a terrorist attack magically jumped in 2001? Because Michael Moore makes things up. He pulled those numbers out of his fat-ass."

Erm Not becuase the WTC collapsed and thousands died, the only terrorist attack in a few years, thats why the chance of you dying jumped, jeez.


You then say
"Look at the Madrid bombing. If that happened in the subways of New York City, Boston, Washington D.C., and Los Angeles simultaneously, thousands would die."

So it wont, look at the sky if one of thoose comets hit earth we would all die, neither is likely to happen.

"I have a question for you, and think before you answer. This has nothing to do with the Iraq war, either.
Would you rather us chasing Osama Bin Laden, the mastermind and leader of Al Quaeda and 9/11, or would you like us to remain idle and let him kill more civilians?"

Yes but he isnt, in your war against terror you have killed more civillians than he has on his "War against america and freedom". I would prefer for you to remain idle then less civillians would die. Just becuase tehere not American doenst mena there lives have no value god dammit.


Solaris

 

[seinfeldrules]

Yes, America clearly is turning into a Nazi- like empire. Hey, maybe I should just repeat that enough times until somebody gets so scared that will believe anything I say. It seems people are far too willing to throw around the 'Nazi' scenario. I mean I just saw the CIA(Ghestapo (sp)) throw a Jew out of a house down the street! VIVA LA REVOLUTION!!!

 

[Solaris]

Dunno if thats supposed to be an anti-semitic flame or just spam. Cant make much sense of it, sry.

 

[DEATH eVADER]

"I have a question for you, and think before you answer. This has nothing to do with the Iraq war, either.
Would you rather us chasing Osama Bin Laden, the mastermind and leader of Al Quaeda and 9/11, or would you like us to remain idle and let him kill more civilians?"

Yes but he isnt, in your war against terror you have killed more civillians than he has on his "War against america and freedom". I would prefer for you to remain idle then less civillians would die. Just becuase tehere not American doenst mena there lives have no value god dammit.
Solaris

Paranoia, George Bush is ripe with it. In reality, Osama Bin Laden suceeded in the Shock and Awe tactic, but we have all seen bombs and bullets, but not two aircraft going into very tall buildings.

 

[Solaris]

Paranoia, not from that quote, just facts.

 

[seinfeldrules]

Dunno if thats supposed to be an anti-semitic flame or just spam. Cant make much sense of it, sry.

In that way it resembles your entire argument. Just cant make much sense out of it. You come in and claim 9/11 was a hoax, then avoid a document proving otherwise entirely.

 

[ray_MAN]

Then he says that America under Bush is the Fourth Reich.

 

[seinfeldrules]

Then he says that America under Bush is the Fourth Reich.

Meanwhile the CIA is blowing up the WTC. I hear they also caused the Tsunami using similar explosive devices...

 

[DEATH eVADER]

Then he says that America under Bush is the Fourth Reich.

What was the First and Second Reich

 

[seinfeldrules]

What was the First and Second Reich

Well I think it may have something to do with years. Since 0-1000 and 1000-2000 were pretty much done then the Third Reich would make sense. Bush is obviously planning ahead to US domination from years 3000-4000 so we should definitely watch out. Anyways, I am pretty sure it was based on years....

 

[ray_MAN]

What was the First and Second Reich

I think it's Greece and Rome.

 

[seinfeldrules]

I think it's Greece and Rome.

So Egypt gets left out? Thats lame.

 

[Foxtrot]

So Egypt gets left out? Thats lame.

Egypt didn't have mass orgies.

 

[ray_MAN]

So Egypt gets left out? Thats lame.

I wasn't sure. I know one is Rome.

 

[Solaris]

Back on topic, Ray man I spent about 20minuites ripping apart your argument, only for you to go way off topic.

"You come in and claim 9/11 was a hoax, then avoid a document proving otherwise entirely."
I ahvent seen this documnent, and 'Oh no! theres a document that proves me wrong, its gotta be true, its a document!'

 

[KoreBolteR]

wp solaris, you are declared the winner!

(unless Ray man comes back with a fantastic comeback).

 

[Nofuture]

Oh, I am American too. I live in New York City. I do not, in any way, shape, or form, feel that my government is the enemy. Terrorists are the enemy. They hate freedom. They hate America. They will do anything to kill us.

Some kind brainwashed? Being American, you can´t see the reality?

Yes, your government (the former and the present) is the enemy. Saying it in generally, the enemy of peace.

 

[KoreBolteR]

Some kind brainwashed? Being American, you can´t see the reality?

Yes, your government (the former and the present) is the enemy. Saying it in generally, the enemy of peace.

i could say the terrorists are, because the kill innocent civilians every week. cause fear in the hearts of iraqis and others.

i dont see bush running round with an ak shooting little children on purpose? or ordering a US marine to blow himself up in a crowd of children and women?

 

[el Chi]

"9/11 was all just one big conspiracy!"

"To what end?"

<Silence and confused looks>

 

[Nofuture]

i could say the terrorists are, because the kill innocent civilians every week. cause fear in the hearts of iraqis and others.

i dont see bush running round with an ak shooting little children on purpose? or ordering a US marine to blow himself up in a crowd of children and women?

Just tell me, in this particular case (Iraq), who started the war, the illegal one?

 

[seinfeldrules]

I ahvent seen this documnent, and 'Oh no! theres a document that proves me wrong, its gotta be true, its a document!'

Yeah, it actually is probably true. I would definitely believe an MIT Professor over some wack producer interviewing random people in NY trying to become Michael Moore II. Oh and this document has been posted twice so far, do you need it for the third time?

 

[ray_MAN]

wp solaris, you are declared the winner!

(unless Ray man comes back with a fantastic comeback).

Working on it.

 

[Sprafa]

So much bullshit glued together hurts my brain.

 

[KoreBolteR]

Just tell me, in this particular case (Iraq), who started the war, the illegal one?

saddam and his dodgy terrorist deals.

 

[Sprafa]

saddam and his dodgy terrorist deals.

what dodgy terrorist deals ?

I'd say other than giving some cash to families of suicide bombers in Palestine, he never openly did anything to fund world terrorism...

other than a few other certain individuals.

 

[ray_MAN]

Sorry but i am going to ahve to rip apart your argument like, a ripped cloth.

Try me.

You said NORAD "did not want it to end with innocent passengers getting killed if there was an alternative."
You think that, I believ they were ordered to stand down, using the training mission as a reason.

Think about it. Most air plane hijackings end with the plane on some runway,the terrorists saying a bomb is on the plane, the government negotiating with them, the women and children are released, and Delta Force goes in and does their job. It usually ends happily, with minimal deaths, and most terrorists alive. Now, NORAD only knew that a hijacked plane was flying towards New York City. There are three airports in that vicinity that it could have landed in: Newark, JFK, and La Guardia. If it landed in those airports, everyone would have been saved. But, we didn't know that. We had no idea that a plane was going to fly into a building in the city and kill 3000 people. If we did, we would have launched our fighters to intercept the plane. But, you have to relalize that there were alternate things that could have happened. Once the first plane hit, fighters were launched. They were eight minutes behind the second plane. You also have to realize, there was a lack of information as to where the planes were. Radar showed the last known location was towards NYC. It could have gone anywhere. I was a craps shoot. Aimlessly launching planes is not a good idea, because there are other planes in the sky, flying towards NYC, and any one of them could be hijacked. Basically, what I am trying to say was that there was a lack of information and there was not enough information to launch fighters to destroy a plane carrying 200+ innocent civilians.

America is fast becoming like nazi germany, the telvison you watch is controlled the information yuo get is controlled.

The television I watch is controlled in the terms of content. We rate our TV programs based on the content. We lock out porn to younger kids. We lock out violence to younger kids. It's what is right. If you want your kid to watch porn and some guy getting blown up, by all means, go ahead. But, it is a decent thing to do. Also, the information we get is controlled for a reason. Too much information would cause anarchy. We do get a lot of information, however. Today, for example, the Pentagon said that Osama Bin Laden did escape from the US and indegenous forces at Tora Bora in 2001.

"They hate freedom. They hate America. They will do anything to kill us."

Yes that is what they want you think, that is the exact meassage they are trying to get out, think for yourself, say: "Hay, if fox news is owned by george bushs cousin, then maybe the information hes giving you might be a little bias.

Who is "they"? The government? I also want proof that Fox News is owned by Bush's cousin. Also, I don't just watch Fox News. I also watch CNN, and I absorb some information from my daily life. All news is biased, so that argument there is bad. Also, terrorists, at least Al Quaeda, say publically that they hate America and Americans.

You have to learn from history, I can compare it to the reichstag like this.

Nazis Burn Down reichstag-Say Communists did it-Communists arrested-Civil rights restricted in order to keep the little nazis safe from thoose evil communists - war to get all thoose evil jews and others

CIA Burn down WTC-Say terrorits did it-Civil rihgts restricted in order to protetc you from terrorists-War to get the terrorists some more

You even think the victory of the European Theater of WWII is a conspiracy? The Reichstag was demolished and captured by the Russians. I didn't understand the last half of the Nazi argument, rephrase it in clear English please. As for the CIA burning down the WTC: Horseshit. It doesn't even sound right. Why would they even want to destroy the WTC and the Pentagon? It makes no sense. Once again, I lost you on the last half of that argument.

We obviously dont agree, on the CIA burning down the WTC, but we agree that it is claimed the terrorists did it, and that civil rights have been restricted ( if you want to dispute this say so) And we agree that we have gone to war to get those terrorists. So thats quite a few similatrites.

I don't think my civil rights are restricted. I think we are just being protected. Yes, the phones are tapped, but it's for our own good. Why would the government want to know who I am having sex with tonight? They listen for key words such as "Pipebomb" or "TNT" or "Hijack", and then they record. If it sounds fine, they stop. Until I get an FBI van parked outside of my house, I feel not restricted.
Nevertheless, as recently as February 2004:

* 43% of Americans thought that the PATRIOT Act is "about right"
* 25% say it goes "too far"
* 21% say "not far enough"

And then you have said somethign unbelievably stupid:
"Why was it that the chances of a terrorist attack magically jumped in 2001? Because Michael Moore makes things up. He pulled those numbers out of his fat-ass."

Erm Not becuase the WTC collapsed and thousands died, the only terrorist attack in a few years, thats why the chance of you dying jumped, jeez.

A chance is the probablilty of soemthing happening. I just wanted to clear that up. Now, the chance of a terrorist attack is high, very high. It has always been. What I was saying was that you said that it was "0 in 2000 and 1 in 100000 in 2001 and 0 in 2002 and 0 in 2003" ad infinitum. It makes no sense! Chances don't magically jump! And then go back to what they were. If anything, the chances increased after 9/11. Chances are predicted before something happens. It could have easily been in 2000 when the terrorists struck. So the chances must remain constant.

You then say
"Look at the Madrid bombing. If that happened in the subways of New York City, Boston, Washington D.C., and Los Angeles simultaneously, thousands would die."

So it wont, look at the sky if one of thoose comets hit earth we would all die, neither is likely to happen.

Actually, it is likely to happen. A meteor can, and will strike the Earth again. It's happened before. Go look around. And the bombing of the subways is more likely to happen, yes. But, that doesn't mean it won't happen.

"I have a question for you, and think before you answer. This has nothing to do with the Iraq war, either.
Would you rather us chasing Osama Bin Laden, the mastermind and leader of Al Quaeda and 9/11, or would you like us to remain idle and let him kill more civilians?"

Yes but he isnt, in your war against terror you have killed more civillians than he has on his "War against america and freedom". I would prefer for you to remain idle then less civillians would die. Just becuase tehere not American doenst mena there lives have no value god dammit.

We just don't go and massacre civilians because we feel like it. We gave the citizens of Afghanistan a fair warning that we were coming to bomb. We let out pamphlets and the sort saying, "GET OFF THE STREETS!" But, do they listen? Not always. We try to save as many civilians lives as we can, but sometimes we can't. Sometimes civilians do die by our gun, and by our fault, but it is a mistake. Some terrorists try to hide behind civilians, like in Somalia. In order to carry out the mission, sometimes there must be sacrifice. Do civilians count as the followers of Osama Bin Laden? Or are you referring to the citizens of Afghanistan?I think the war in Afghanistan is worth it. If we left Osama alone, a terrorist attack would have come soon after 9/11.

Wow, that was a doozy. :rolling:

EDIT: Sorry about going off-topic before.

 

[Nofuture]

saddam and his dodgy terrorist deals.

You can´t rewrite history.

I still remember, watching the start of US invasion in Iraq on TV, I coudn´t believe it, how such ad absurdum is happening in XXI century, a civilized century as I thought before. It seems that some countries such as US still remain on the lowest development level, when the only possible solution was using force, e.g. Neanderthals etc.

 

[The Mullinator]

You can´t rewrite history.

I still remember, watching the start of US invasion in Iraq on TV, I coudn´t believe it, how such ad absurdum is happening in XXI century, a civilized century as I thought before. It seems that some countries such as US still remain on the lowest development level, when the only possible solution was using force, e.g. Neanderthals etc.

You seem willing to believe conspiracy theories. If thats they case then you should also consider that the U.S. purposely went in to Iraq with the purpose of creating a foothold in the middle east with which to begin implementing a new American doctrine for the rest of the world. In which case I have to say using force really would be the only way of getting such a thing accomplished.

 

[Nofuture]

Once the first plane hit, fighters were launched. They were eight minutes behind the second plane. You also have to realize, there was a lack of information as to where the planes were. Radar showed the last known location was towards NYC. It could have gone anywhere. I was a craps shoot. Aimlessly launching planes is not a good idea, because there are other planes in the sky, flying towards NYC, and any one of them could be hijacked. Basically, what I am trying to say was that there was a lack of information and there was not enough information to launch fighters to destroy a plane carrying 200+ innocent civilians.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/essayaninterestingday.html

Military pilots must have "permission from the White House because only the president has the authority to order a civilian aircraft shot down." [CNN, 10/26/99] But if retaliatory strikes needed to the authorized, Bush was not available. If one of the planes had to be shot down to save more lives on the ground, Bush was not available. Although several fighters had been dispatched to defend New York City, the pilot of one of the planes flying to catch Flight 175 later noted that it wouldn't have mattered if he caught up with it, because only Bush could order a shootdown, and Bush could not be reached in the classroom. [Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02]

The television I watch is controlled in the terms of content. We rate our TV programs based on the content. We lock out porn to younger kids. We lock out violence to younger kids. It's what is right. If you want your kid to watch porn and some guy getting blown up, by all means, go ahead. But, it is a decent thing to do. Also, the information we get is controlled for a reason. Too much information would cause anarchy. We do get a lot of information, however. Today, for example, the Pentagon said that Osama Bin Laden did escape from the US and indegenous forces at Tora Bora in 2001.

Do you know that the media in US is in a big part owned or performed by Jews?

Is this the reason, why the most Americans don´t know they are paying the hudge amount of tax dollars to support Israels racist policy?

Do you think if Americans knew more about Israel apartheid policy, that would cause anarchy in US?


OK, there is quite the same in Germany, there is almost no critical information on the news about Israel. I assume, it is so because of Nazi crimes against the Jews in the past. But it still not right, as the anti-semitism and the criticism on the Israel are two different things.

Also, terrorists, at least Al Quaeda, say publically that they hate America and Americans.

I want a proof of that. I have heard and read others stating this, but not Al Quaeda themselves.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3966817.stm

"I will speak to you about the reasons behind these incidents. I will honestly tell you about the minutes in which the decision was made so that you will consider. I say to you that God knows that the idea of striking the towers never occurred to us.

But, after things had gone too far and we saw the injustice of the US-Israeli alliance against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, I started thinking of that.

The events that influenced me directly trace back to 1982 and subsequent events when the United States gave permission to the Israelis to invade Lebanon, with the aid of the sixth US fleet.

At those difficult moments, many meanings that are hard to describe went on in my mind. However, these meanings produced an overwhelming feeling to reject injustice and generated a strong determination to punish the unjust ones.

While I was looking at those destroyed towers in Lebanon, it occurred to me to punish the unjust one in a similar manner by destroying towers in the United States so that it would feel some of what we felt and to be deterred from killing our children and women..."


I don´t see here a hate on American people. What I see is the use of the (uncivilised) method "Eye for eye, tooth for tooth". With the purpose of the involvement and change, I assume.

Btw, do you know, what happened then in Lebanon?

I didn't understand the last half of the Nazi argument, rephrase it in clear English please..

Hmm, how does it come that I did? It´s about a pretext.

We just don't go and massacre civilians because we feel like it. We gave the citizens of Afghanistan a fair warning that we were coming to bomb. We let out pamphlets and the sort saying, "GET OFF THE STREETS!" But, do they listen? Not always. We try to save as many civilians lives as we can, but sometimes we can't. Sometimes civilians do die by our gun, and by our fault, but it is a mistake. Some terrorists try to hide behind civilians, like in Somalia. In order to carry out the mission, sometimes there must be sacrifice. Do civilians count as the followers of Osama Bin Laden? Or are you referring to the citizens of Afghanistan?I think the war in Afghanistan is worth it. If we left Osama alone, a terrorist attack would have come soon after 9/11. ..

I don´t know what do you value. But I know what you chiefs don´t value. That is a life of non-Americans:

Madelaine Albright (you know it already, I assume, because it was repeated here many times)

When asked about the number of Iraqis who died in "Desert Storm," General Colin Powell replied: "It's really not a number I'm terribly interested in."

“I will never apologize for the United States of America — I don’t care what the facts are.”
President George Bush, Sr. referring to the mass-murder of Iranian civilian people by the U.S.S. Vincennes.

 

[jondy]

Sorry to tell you guys, but the WTC was not built to withstand 3000+ degrees Fahrenheit. In fact, there was no fire testing in the WTC since it was built in the 1970's. The restaurant on the top floor, "Windows on the World", was forced to use electric stoves rather than typical gas stoves because they didn't want fire problems. The WTC was very, very weak. A Cessna with a full amount of fuel could have taken it down if it hit it in the right spot. Now shut up.

The WTC only hit about 1200-1400F.

Not that I advocate this guys theory, but it wasn't temperature alone that brought the buildings down

 

[The Mullinator]

The WTC only hit about 1200-1400F.

Not that I advocate this guys theory, but it wasn't temperature alone that brought the buildings down

NOVA: You've pointed out that structural steel loses about half its strength at 1,200°F, yet even a 50 percent loss of strength is insufficient, by itself, to explain the collapse.

Eagar: Well, normally the biggest load on this building was the wind load, trying to push it sideways and make it vibrate like a flag in the breeze. The World Trade Center building was designed to withstand a hurricane of about 140 miles an hour, but September 11th wasn't a windy day, so the major loads it was designed for were not on it at the time.

As a result, the World Trade Center, at the time each airplane hit it, was only loaded to about 20 percent of its capacity. That means it had to lose five times its capacity either due to temperature or buckling -- the temperature weakening the steel, the buckling changing the strength of a member because it's bent rather than straight. You can't explain the collapse just in terms of temperature, and you can't explain it just in terms of buckling. It was a combination.

From here:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse2.html

 

[CptStern]

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/essayaninterestingday.html

Military pilots must have "permission from the White House because only the president has the authority to order a civilian aircraft shot down." [CNN, 10/26/99] But if retaliatory strikes needed to the authorized, Bush was not available. If one of the planes had to be shot down to save more lives on the ground, Bush was not available. Although several fighters had been dispatched to defend New York City, the pilot of one of the planes flying to catch Flight 175 later noted that it wouldn't have mattered if he caught up with it, because only Bush could order a shootdown, and Bush could not be reached in the classroom. [Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02]




Do you know that the media in US is in a big part owned or performed by Jews?

Is this the reason, why the most Americans don´t know they are paying the hudge amount of tax dollars to support Israels racist policy?

Do you think if Americans knew more about Israel apartheid policy, that would cause anarchy in US?


OK, there is quite the same in Germany, there is almost no critical information on the news about Israel. I assume, it is so because of Nazi crimes against the Jews in the past. But it still not right, as the anti-semitism and the criticism on the Israel are two different things.




I want a proof of that. I have heard and read others stating this, but not Al Quaeda themselves.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3966817.stm

"I will speak to you about the reasons behind these incidents. I will honestly tell you about the minutes in which the decision was made so that you will consider. I say to you that God knows that the idea of striking the towers never occurred to us.

But, after things had gone too far and we saw the injustice of the US-Israeli alliance against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, I started thinking of that.

The events that influenced me directly trace back to 1982 and subsequent events when the United States gave permission to the Israelis to invade Lebanon, with the aid of the sixth US fleet.

At those difficult moments, many meanings that are hard to describe went on in my mind. However, these meanings produced an overwhelming feeling to reject injustice and generated a strong determination to punish the unjust ones.

While I was looking at those destroyed towers in Lebanon, it occurred to me to punish the unjust one in a similar manner by destroying towers in the United States so that it would feel some of what we felt and to be deterred from killing our children and women..."


I don´t see here a hate on American people. What I see is the use of the (uncivilised) method "Eye for eye, tooth for tooth". With the purpose of the involvement and change, I assume.

Btw, do you know, what happened then in Lebanon?





Hmm, how does it come that I did? It´s about a pretext.





I don´t know what do you value. But I know what you chiefs don´t value. That is a life of non-Americans:

Madelaine Albright (you know it already, I assume, because it was repeated here many times)

When asked about the number of Iraqis who died in "Desert Storm," General Colin Powell replied: "It's really not a number I'm terribly interested in."

“I will never apologize for the United States of America — I don’t care what the facts are.”
President George Bush, Sr. referring to the mass-murder of Iranian civilian people by the U.S.S. Vincennes.

dont forget this famous quote:

"We don’t do body counts” - General Tommy Franks, US Central Command

 

[ray_MAN]

The WTC only hit about 1200-1400F.

Not that I advocate this guys theory, but it wasn't temperature alone that brought the buildings down

I didn't pinpoint what the temperature was. I just said that it wasn't built to withstand a fire of that size.

 

[Solaris]

America gave warning to the people thye bombed, oh thats fair them. Were were they supposed to go?
You try and save as many civillians as you can, bull!
Randomly dropping bombs on a city is not preventing deaths, you killed more civilians than the terrorists did.



"chance is the probablilty of soemthing happening. I just wanted to clear that up. Now, the chance of a terrorist attack is high, very high. It has always been. What I was saying was that you said that it was "0 in 2000 and 1 in 100000 in 2001 and 0 in 2002 and 0 in 2003" ad infinitum. It makes no sense! Chances don't magically jump! And then go back to what they were. If anything, the chances increased after 9/11. Chances are predicted before something happens. It could have easily been in 2000 when the terrorists struck. So the chances must remain constant."

Okay the chance of a terrorist attact is not very high. Why do you think it is and always has been? Now you obviously dont understand probablitly, go back to school. I said the chance of you dying in the USA in an act of terrrism in 2002 was 0. This is correct becuase no-one died due to that. So the chane of you dying of that was 0. Then thats the same for 2003 and 2004. The reason it jumped in 2001. Is not becuase Michea moore pulled it out of its ass. Its because for once in a long time people died in a terrorist attack. So the chance of you dying was 1 in 100,000. That is becuase approximatley 1, in 100,000 people died in the USA due to the september 11 attacks.

The reason NORAD did not react was becuase wargames were taking place on september 11. The NORAD people were told not to launch planes, becuase it was only a drill. These wargames were the perfect cover.

If you want to see a list of these then visit:http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2004/080904wargamescover.htm

"Also, the information we get is controlled for a reason. Too much information would cause anarchy."
Why would informed voters create anarchy, your saying that the amount of information you recieve , should be restricted? Whats wrong with having different media, owned by different people. It allows different facts to be put forward. And for you to make an informed choice.

And yes your civil rights have been restricted, you can now be imprisoned without trial. Your libary records can be obtained, your house can be searched without your knowledge. Theese are all restrictions. I think the main point I am trying to forward is "RIGHTS PREVENT TYRANNY". Giving away your rights does not make you safer.Terror is the pretext for removing your rigts to make way for martcial law. You can see in america how the military is wrking closer with the police force than ever before. And all this is being allowed to happen becuase you think you need this to protect you from terrorists! Hell if you really wanted to stop them, then you should stop creating terrorists.

Stop bombing people homes becuase a sad man can become an angry man, some times angry enough to kill himself and others. Stop giving money to Isreal so they can abuse the palestinians to create more terrorist's.

Now back to the reichstag, I don't think you know your history very well. What happened was is that the Nazis needed more public support in order to put forward knew laws, such as stopping protesters(Like what the USA did in the WTC riots of Seatlle, this directley infringed your consitutional right of free speech.) But anyway the nazis burnt down the reichstag and blamed on thoose damn communists. So in order to protect the people they passed these laws and people allowed them because they thought these non exisnant communists who would burn down germany were dangerous, and they needed to be protected from them.

This is exactly what is happening in America, you belive so badly that terrorists will kill you, that you are allowing your government to reduce your rights, EVEN YOUR CONSTITUTION! to protect you from terrorists.

Why would the CIA want to burn down the pentagon, for the exact same reason that the NAZIS burnt down the reichstag, as a pretext for passing there laws, and creating wars.

"Go look around. And the bombing of the subways is more likely to happen, yes. "

Yes that is realistic, but the chance of four subways being bombed at once, is a far exagerated fact. You have been conditioned to think that these terrorists are the threat when actually youre own government are.


Solaris

 

[ray_MAN]

Why would the CIA want to burn down the pentagon, for the exact same reason that the NAZIS burnt down the reichstag, as a pretext for passing there laws, and creating wars.

FOR THE LAST ****ING TIME! THE NAZIS DID NOT BURN DOWN THE REICHSTAG!
(I will argue later. I hate to write a report for school.)
(Also, please use the quote system. It makes it so much easier to read.)

 

[The Mullinator]

What I find funny and sad about all this is that no matter what disaster could occur in the U.S. today, no matter how real it may have been will always have a sizeable number of people saying it was all a conspiracy and that the government did it.

The U.S. isn't invincible. Disasters and attacks CAN happen, they don't need the government to allow them to happen. Everything points to the attacks having been done by Islamic extremists. Anyone who believes other wise is in my opinion either completely mislead and misinformed or they have a weird fantasy of the government having secret supreme controll over everything.

Think about it. If the U.S. did cause those terrorist attacks then why didn't they cause others to happen on U.S. soil during the initial war in Iraq and blame it on Iraqi trained terrorists? You people seem to believe they are capable of pulling something of that size off so tell me why they didn't? Support for the Iraq war would have gone through the roof.

 

[Solaris]

"FOR THE LAST ****ING TIME! THE NAZIS DID NOT BURN DOWN THE REICHSTAG!"

All the historians think they did, but wait, you did a school report, Jesus christ a school report dis agrees with me. Well historians who specilise in nazi history would beg to differ, but you did a school report on it, you obviously have more experience in it than I do.

Think about it. If the U.S. did cause those terrorist attacks then why didn't they cause others to happen on U.S. soil during the initial war in Iraq and blame it on Iraqi trained terrorists? You people seem to believe they are capable of pulling something of that size off so tell me why they didn't? Support for the Iraq war would have gone through the roof.

Seens as though many Americans now belive the administration had some involvement in 911, they didnt want to push there luck.