Is there any doubt why JFK was killed?
Are there really
in here that think 9/11 was a conspiracy? If so please make you way off the 30 ft cliff . . .Thanks
Are there really
in here that think 9/11 was a conspiracy? If so please make you way off the 30 ft cliff . . .Thanks
There is one specific part that interests me.....there were 3 shots.....all accounted for. And 3 shell casings from the rifle in the depository. Yet many conspiracy folks say he was shot from the front (grassy knoll). Please post the evidence as to why this is true. If you can, I'lll show you what a fool you are. If you can't, I'll assume you chose to believe fairy tails and aren't interested in the facts.
There is one specific part that interests me.....there were 3 shots.....all accounted for. And 3 shell casings from the rifle in the depository. Yet many conspiracy folks say he was shot from the front (grassy knoll). Please post the evidence as to why this is true. If you can, I'lll show you what a fool you are. If you can't, I'll assume you chose to believe fairy tails and aren't interested in the facts.
What questions? I would love to see this check list of nonsense you came up with.
Feel free to jump in any time.....or did you realize how stupid you made yourself look?
What questions? I would love to see this check list of nonsense you came up with.
Feel free to jump in any time.....or did you realize how stupid you made yourself look?
What questions? Two (2) planes crashed into the towers! Why would anyone sacrifice that many American lives, cripple the U. S Economy and put fear in the
Come on!
I love when these Liberals come out and try to undermine this great country!
Let me guess, your voting for your savior? Obama?
it wasnt just done for oil. It was done for alot of reasons, mostly to get total control over people by taking away lot of freedoms, like with the patriot act. No better way to control people then by making them afraid. If you think the people behind the scenes running the world wouldnt sacrfice a few thousand people to get what they want, you dont much about power obsessesd people. Read your history book about power obsessed people and what crimes they have done, in order to keep their power and control over people. Everybody thinks because we live in America, something like this could never take place. Like i said, when the govt releases a clear video of a plane hitting the pentagon, then i will say i was wrong.
What questions? Two (2) planes crashed into the towers! Why would anyone sacrifice that many American lives, cripple the U. S Economy and put fear in the
Come on!
I love when these Liberals come out and try to undermine this great country!
Let me guess, your voting for your savior? Obama?
it wasnt just done for oil. It was done for alot of reasons, mostly to get total control over people by taking away lot of freedoms, like with the patriot act. No better way to control people then by making them afraid. If you think the people behind the scenes running the world wouldnt sacrfice a few thousand people to get what they want, you dont much about power obsessesd people. Read your history book about power obsessed people and what crimes they have done, in order to keep their power and control over people. Everybody thinks because we live in America, something like this could never take place. Like i said, when the govt releases a clear video of a plane hitting the pentagon, then i will say i was wrong.
I agree....However...If NO plane hit the pentagon and no real signs of a plane crashed in PA....What do you think happened to those planes,crew and passangers ?
I agree....However...If NO plane hit the pentagon and no real signs of a plane crashed in PA....What do you think happened to those planes,crew and passangers ?
Feel free to jump in any time.....or did you realize how stupid you made yourself look?
Wow, how long were you waiting for me to respond? Sitting by your comp all weekend?
Unlike you some people have lives.
Your questions are foolish! How could the pieces of shit fly a plane into the building? You guys make me sick. LoL.
Please post more about your theories of 9/11 . . . We need some laughs LoL . . .
FYI . .
There is no Tooth Fairy . . . sorry to break the bad news.
Also, I am not trying to change your opinions. You can believe what you want. There is always some morons out there in the world, I am not going to try to change your view points.
Feel free to jump in any time.....or did you realize how stupid you made yourself look?
Wow, how long were you waiting for me to respond? Sitting by your comp all weekend?
Unlike you some people have lives.
Your questions are foolish! How could the pieces of shit fly a plane into the building? You guys make me sick. LoL.
Please post more about your theories of 9/11 . . . We need some laughs LoL . . .
FYI . .
There is no Tooth Fairy . . . sorry to break the bad news.
Also, I am not trying to change your opinions. You can believe what you want. There is always some morons out there in the world, I am not going to try to change your view points.
https://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3214024953129565561&q=Loose+Change+not+again&ei=cJ9fSK_1DYjGqALOqOC-Cw
Watch that. A true American who debunks just about everything these nitwits say.
https://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3214024953129565561&q=Loose+Change+not+again&ei=cJ9fSK_1DYjGqALOqOC-Cw
Watch that. A true American who debunks just about everything these nitwits say.
Stop bringing up facts from Loose Change...that was the biggest piece of garbage ever. They presented SOME of the facts, simply leaving out others that did not support their views. The makers of the film have even admitted to making mistakes.
https://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3214024953129565561&q=Loose+Change+not+again&ei=cJ9fSK_1DYjGqALOqOC-Cw
Watch that. A true American who debunks just about everything these nitwits say.
"in plan sight" is a hell of alot more credible as well as the 2nd part of the the zeitgeist, the part of loose change were they slow it down and say that bombs ignight when the plans hit, idk, seems kinda shady to me, but theres so much other stuff i try to pick and choose, when bringing up topics, i try to bring up the most undisputedable facts and evidance. i dont want to convence others that 9/11 was a governemt opp, but i want to hear others views, opinions, but first they need to atleast try to open there mind, i want to find someone that can throw conspiracy therorys out the window that have seen"in plan sight" and others. i want to find someone that tells me why the laws of gravity changed for one day in one city. the people that say the gov. had nothing to do with it havent looked into it. tower7 fell at free fall speeds, wasnt hit with a plan, thats all i need to know theres something we dont know, i have no proff that the US goverment did it, i do have proff that what the US government told us about 9/11 was in fact bull shit, i love this country, i risk my life when i go to work, i have friends over seas and i had one of my best friends die in this war, it's my love for this country, that makes me seek the answers to the biggest attck on american soil.
Stop bringing up facts from Loose Change...that was the biggest piece of garbage ever. They presented SOME of the facts, simply leaving out others that did not support their views. The makers of the film have even admitted to making mistakes.
https://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3214024953129565561&q=Loose+Change+not+again&ei=cJ9fSK_1DYjGqALOqOC-Cw
Watch that. A true American who debunks just about everything these nitwits say.
"in plan sight" is a hell of alot more credible as well as the 2nd part of the the zeitgeist, the part of loose change were they slow it down and say that bombs ignight when the plans hit, idk, seems kinda shady to me, but theres so much other stuff i try to pick and choose, when bringing up topics, i try to bring up the most undisputedable facts and evidance. i dont want to convence others that 9/11 was a governemt opp, but i want to hear others views, opinions, but first they need to atleast try to open there mind, i want to find someone that can throw conspiracy therorys out the window that have seen"in plan sight" and others. i want to find someone that tells me why the laws of gravity changed for one day in one city. the people that say the gov. had nothing to do with it havent looked into it. tower7 fell at free fall speeds, wasnt hit with a plan, thats all i need to know theres something we dont know, i have no proff that the US goverment did it, i do have proff that what the US government told us about 9/11 was in fact bull shit, i love this country, i risk my life when i go to work, i have friends over seas and i had one of my best friends die in this war, it's my love for this country, that makes me seek the answers to the biggest attck on american soil.
FACT: One of the clearest, most widely seen pictures of the doomed jet's undercarriage was taken by photographer Rob Howard and published in New York magazine and elsewhere (opening page). PM sent a digital scan of the original photo to Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University. Greeley is an expert at analyzing images to determine the shape and features of geological formations based on shadow and light effects. After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER's undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a "pod." In fact, the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear. He concludes that sunlight glinting off the fairing gave it an exaggerated look. "Such a glint causes a blossoming (enlargement) on film," he writes in an e-mail to PM, "which tends to be amplified in digital versions of images — the pixels are saturated and tend to 'spill over' to adjacent pixels." When asked about pods attached to civilian aircraft, Fred E. Culick, professor of aeronautics at the California Institute of Technology, gave a blunter response: "That's bull. They're really stretching."
FACT: One of the clearest, most widely seen pictures of the doomed jet's undercarriage was taken by photographer Rob Howard and published in New York magazine and elsewhere (opening page). PM sent a digital scan of the original photo to Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University. Greeley is an expert at analyzing images to determine the shape and features of geological formations based on shadow and light effects. After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER's undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a "pod." In fact, the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear. He concludes that sunlight glinting off the fairing gave it an exaggerated look. "Such a glint causes a blossoming (enlargement) on film," he writes in an e-mail to PM, "which tends to be amplified in digital versions of images — the pixels are saturated and tend to 'spill over' to adjacent pixels." When asked about pods attached to civilian aircraft, Fred E. Culick, professor of aeronautics at the California Institute of Technology, gave a blunter response: "That's bull. They're really stretching."
FACT: One of the clearest, most widely seen pictures of the doomed jet's undercarriage was taken by photographer Rob Howard and published in New York magazine and elsewhere (opening page). PM sent a digital scan of the original photo to Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University. Greeley is an expert at analyzing images to determine the shape and features of geological formations based on shadow and light effects. After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER's undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a "pod." In fact, the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear. He concludes that sunlight glinting off the fairing gave it an exaggerated look. "Such a glint causes a blossoming (enlargement) on film," he writes in an e-mail to PM, "which tends to be amplified in digital versions of images — the pixels are saturated and tend to 'spill over' to adjacent pixels." When asked about pods attached to civilian aircraft, Fred E. Culick, professor of aeronautics at the California Institute of Technology, gave a blunter response: "That's bull. They're really stretching."
i brought that up as well that there were crap like that in vidoes that i called "shady" as in made up shit to prove a point. i belive in the 9/11 conspiracys, thats not a secret but i think that in videos such as loose change some, of the stuff isnt all facts because the film makers have ther own agenda, its sad but true. "in plan site" slows everything down, with the pentagon attack. i was previously bringing up the video loose change and i never should have, because theres more credible videos hell theres even award winning documentrys out there. there's about 70 reasons why what you think happend on 9/11 was bull shit, some off them might have been made up or stretched, this is one reason that people see this shit as wacky, i guess but. the pentagon stuff, disprove it, try it, a plane would have blown the cars off the road and had to skeed into it pluss there was a 12 foot hole before the hole thing collapesed. cnn said it didnt look like a plan hit it, so did the fire fighters, how the hell did a 737 fit into a 12ft hole, that and the fact that bulidings dont fall at free fall speeds due to fires, thats ALL I NEED, disprove all the other bs, and i wouldnt care tell me how a 737 fit into a 12ft hole as well, keep in mind that tower7 fell at free fall speeds and it wasnt hit by a plane, some of the ideas out there are bs but as long as some of them are true, then the governemt is hidding something
FACT: One of the clearest, most widely seen pictures of the doomed jet's undercarriage was taken by photographer Rob Howard and published in New York magazine and elsewhere (opening page). PM sent a digital scan of the original photo to Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University. Greeley is an expert at analyzing images to determine the shape and features of geological formations based on shadow and light effects. After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER's undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a "pod." In fact, the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear. He concludes that sunlight glinting off the fairing gave it an exaggerated look. "Such a glint causes a blossoming (enlargement) on film," he writes in an e-mail to PM, "which tends to be amplified in digital versions of images — the pixels are saturated and tend to 'spill over' to adjacent pixels." When asked about pods attached to civilian aircraft, Fred E. Culick, professor of aeronautics at the California Institute of Technology, gave a blunter response: "That's bull. They're really stretching."
i brought that up as well that there were crap like that in vidoes that i called "shady" as in made up shit to prove a point. i belive in the 9/11 conspiracys, thats not a secret but i think that in videos such as loose change some, of the stuff isnt all facts because the film makers have ther own agenda, its sad but true. "in plan site" slows everything down, with the pentagon attack. i was previously bringing up the video loose change and i never should have, because theres more credible videos hell theres even award winning documentrys out there. there's about 70 reasons why what you think happend on 9/11 was bull shit, some off them might have been made up or stretched, this is one reason that people see this shit as wacky, i guess but. the pentagon stuff, disprove it, try it, a plane would have blown the cars off the road and had to skeed into it pluss there was a 12 foot hole before the hole thing collapesed. cnn said it didnt look like a plan hit it, so did the fire fighters, how the hell did a 737 fit into a 12ft hole, that and the fact that bulidings dont fall at free fall speeds due to fires, thats ALL I NEED, disprove all the other bs, and i wouldnt care tell me how a 737 fit into a 12ft hole as well, keep in mind that tower7 fell at free fall speeds and it wasnt hit by a plane, some of the ideas out there are bs but as long as some of them are true, then the governemt is hidding something
Big Plane, Small Holes
Claim: Two holes were visible in the Pentagon immediately after the attack: a 75-ft.-wide entry hole in the building's exterior wall, and a 16-ft.-wide hole in Ring C, the Pentagon's middle ring. Conspiracy theorists claim both holes are far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757. "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. across?" asks reopen911.org, a Web site "dedicated to discovering the bottom line truth to what really occurred on September 11, 2001."
The truth is of even less importance to French author Thierry Meyssan, whose baseless assertions are fodder for even mainstream European and Middle Eastern media. In his book The Big Lie, Meyssan concludes that the Pentagon was struck by a satellite-guided missile part of an elaborate
FACT: When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.
Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at
The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage.
Big Plane, Small Holes
Claim: Two holes were visible in the Pentagon immediately after the attack: a 75-ft.-wide entry hole in the building's exterior wall, and a 16-ft.-wide hole in Ring C, the Pentagon's middle ring. Conspiracy theorists claim both holes are far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757. "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. across?" asks reopen911.org, a Web site "dedicated to discovering the bottom line truth to what really occurred on September 11, 2001."
The truth is of even less importance to French author Thierry Meyssan, whose baseless assertions are fodder for even mainstream European and Middle Eastern media. In his book The Big Lie, Meyssan concludes that the Pentagon was struck by a satellite-guided missile part of an elaborate
FACT: When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.
Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at
The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage.
WTC 7 Collapse
NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.
According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."
There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation: First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.
Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time."
WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors — along with the building's unusual construction — were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse.
WTC 7 Collapse
NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.
According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."
There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation: First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.
Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time."
WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors — along with the building's unusual construction — were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse.
It's really easy to get on the internet and cut and paste shit.
I am still waiting for someone to explain to me how several buildings have a "chain reaction collapse" and fall at free fall speed. How can that happen?
Let me save you the trouble of looking it up....it can't.
Do you not find it odd that the President and Vice President would be allowed to tesitfy to the 9/11 Commission under the following guide lines.... 1) Not under oath 2) No media or family present 3) They would tesity at the same time 4) No recording devices of any kind and the list goes on....
So I ask you another question...who in the world would REFUSE to testify under oath....
Simple answer....that would be a liar. I have a problem with the President and Vice President being able to "testify" without having to tell the truth. You should too. Stop being a sheep, turn off your tv, and pull your head out of your ass.
Government only goes to war when it wants to.
It's really easy to get on the internet and cut and paste shit.
I am still waiting for someone to explain to me how several buildings have a "chain reaction collapse" and fall at free fall speed. How can that happen?
Let me save you the trouble of looking it up....it can't.
Do you not find it odd that the President and Vice President would be allowed to tesitfy to the 9/11 Commission under the following guide lines.... 1) Not under oath 2) No media or family present 3) They would tesity at the same time 4) No recording devices of any kind and the list goes on....
So I ask you another question...who in the world would REFUSE to testify under oath....
Simple answer....that would be a liar. I have a problem with the President and Vice President being able to "testify" without having to tell the truth. You should too. Stop being a sheep, turn off your tv, and pull your head out of your ass.
Government only goes to war when it wants to.
Let me know what else you need. . . . ![]()
that didnt answer anything "a chain collapse? wtf, im a fire fire fighter, theres others on here what the hell is that, anyone
" buldings dont fall at free fall speeds, look into it, i cant belive thats the best our government came come up with, "a chain collapse" why didnt the whole city fall then from your magic then omg read before you post
Let me know what else you need. . . . ![]()
that didnt answer anything "a chain collapse? wtf, im a fire fire fighter, theres others on here what the hell is that, anyone
" buldings dont fall at free fall speeds, look into it, i cant belive thats the best our government came come up with, "a chain collapse" why didnt the whole city fall then from your magic then omg read before you post
No matter what explanation I came back with, you would have considered it wrong. Facts are facts. Every single building in downtown
No matter what explanation I came back with, you would have considered it wrong. Facts are facts. Every single building in downtown
Hot Forum Topics
-
🤢🥴💩_ Fubah's risky baseball bets _🥶😲🥵
445,961
-
🏈🏈🏈 “To BEt, or not to BEt, that is the question” ...Fubah2's risky bets
301,656
-
PART DEUX
345
-
Wednesday 09/09/2026
824
-
🏈🏈🏈 Fubah2's risky CFB bets
253,382
-
Patriots vs Seahawks in-game live season kickoff
1,404
-
9/9 🫣🫣🔥🔥🔥
4,517
-
Couple thoughts
4,012
-
PART TROIS
251
-
NFL LOCKED IN!
95,209
Warning - External Link
Report User
This post is spam
Delete Post
Remove Thread
Scan Results
Login/Register
Accounts are free and easy to create.
Search
