Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

9/11--Who was behind it?

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-15 0:31

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-15 0:35

umm, im not sure where you've been living all these years but ill let you in on a secret......THE MUSLIMS

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-15 0:55

so this documentary is trying to say that the U.S. government collaborated with terrorists to carry out 9/11.............yah that guy is a dumbass

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-15 0:56

So two people replied, one within four seconds of the post, and one within 24 seconds of the post. 

Glad to see you actually took the time to watch it before you made your stupid comments.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-15 4:37 (sage)

I'll tell you who was behind it.

God. HAHAHAHAHA!

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-15 13:05

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-15 13:07

>>4
its minutes not seconds you dumbass

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-15 13:07

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-15 13:47

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-15 15:30

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-15 16:38

It's all so long ago, I really don't give a fuck

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-15 16:57

you guys really think the bush administration is intelligent enough to pull this off?  I hate the fucker, but even if he would do this(which i have my doubts) does he have the intelligence and organizational ability to pull it off.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-15 18:47

It's not him personally.  It's whoever benefits the most.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-15 18:48

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-16 1:07

>>13
       So the world is a network or conspiracies orchastrated individually by the people that benifit the most from any particular one.  You live in a small and paranoid world my friend.  Where nobody in control makes a mistake and they are all miraculously well organized and nobody ever tells a secret.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-16 12:43

>>12
Maybe he doesn't, but I wouldn't doubt other people he knows do.  I'm sure Bush is just a posterboy.  The real brain is hidden behind the curtain somewhere.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-16 12:52

Your mom

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-16 13:21

WTC Building 7 just happens to get "destroyed by falling debris" when it exhibits a typical pancake demolition collapse.  The towers themselves collapse in a very short time, when the fires were already dying down, and then show molten steel, smoke plumes ejected from windows ten stories below, and a rapid descent in ten seconds at near free fall speed, like the floors belows weren't even there.  The rubble had twisted, melted steel that smoked for days.  The remains of the tower were quickly shipped off before analysis could be done, and flight recorders were confiscated.

Dick Cheney and co just happen to be making money off of Halliburton contracts in Iraq, Afghanistan and New Orleans.  The food for oil program just happened to make a lot of individuals rich.  Condaleeze Rice has an oil tanker named after her for no particular reason.  Larry Silverstein just happened to get a great insurance policy on the towers in case they were destroyed before they were attacked.     

It goes on and on, and it has nothing to do with being evil.  It's about greed and corruption.  It's about the importance of making money for individuals over the importance of making money for nations.  To the friends of Bush, it's all about "how much can I make during this term,"  with the next president being left to pay off debts and try to fix any problems.           

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-16 14:13

>>18
      Stop pretending to be a engineering and architechture genius.  Ok, the truth is that nothing on that scale has ever happened before.  WTC is the first building ever to collapse in that fashion, and threw rubble into many of the outlaying buildings, 1 of them happened to collapse.
       Nobody has ever poored thousands of gallons of jet fuel into a sky scraper and set it ablaze before.  We have no way to know the exact heat it reached, but it is safe to say a shit load.  Collapse is completely possible.
      Halliburton makes money from all manner of construction and building contracts.  If my appartment burned down tomorow they or one of their subsidiaries might be involved in the rebuilding and make money.  that is their job.  It doesn't mean they caused the fire.  They made lots of money from clintons actions over the years as well in hurricanes and disasters, nobody blames clinton.  Cheyney did not decide to attack Iraq to make money.  And the New Orleans thing is stupid, nobody just decided to throw a hurricane there, experts have been saying for years one day a hurricane is going to put New Orleans under watter.  I mean it is built surronded by the sea, below sea level for God's sake. 
       "It goes on and on, and it has nothing to do with being evil.  It's about greed and corruption."  Anyone as greedy and corrupt as you are accusing them is evil.  They deserve to be tried and executed if they really did all that shit.  But there is nothing beyond circomstantial evidence that they happened to make a profit on several of the things.  Now he is a politican, and a "good 'ol boy" which leads to a certain ammount of corruption and dishonesty in itself.  however, this does not start wars and commit terrorist acts and cause hurricanes. 

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-16 14:21

>>19
don't bother. he's just a deluded marxist crackpot.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-16 16:41

>>19

Clinton was a shithead... but the reason nobody blames him for corruption (in this instance, and with Halliburton) was because Cheney's company was given no-bid contracts... and was the vice president at the same time.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-16 19:39

There are many no bid contracts done by the government all the time.  Sometimes it is because of only one company having the infastructure to take care of a massive job, but more often it is more simply because the companies plan it that way.
   Example:
       Lets say you and I each own the two largest construction companies in a city.  The city is building a stadium, and breaking it into individual contracts of construction such as electrical work and plumbing.  Now we could each try to cut the price of the other company and make a little money in the job, but what if we got together and agreed that your company would do the electrical job and mine the plumbing?  This would mean being the only two companies capeable of doing the massive job,  You could bid whatever you wanted to get on the electrical job, and I could charge whatever I wanted on the Plumbing job, and we could both make massive profit and not get in one anothers way.  So I make $10,000 per toliet seat, and you make $10,000 per light switch, we both get rich.  Simular situations happen with every job the government gives out, other companies becides Haliburton got no bid jobs if you look it up.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-16 20:32

>>22

That is stupid.  The government indiscriminately go for whoever provides the best deal...period.  No-bid contracts are a symbol of corruption, imo.

Regardless of whether this is often the case or not, doesn't excuse it. 

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-16 21:37

Jews

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-17 2:45

>>23
       I am not denying that no-bid contracts sometimes come from corruption.  However this requries further evidence.  For instance why does no other company bid, the govenment almost always makes the job open for bids, so why is it that so often only one company makes a bid.  My example tends to fit into the relm of possibility much more often than your vast corporate-political conspiracy.  I don't excuse It I simply demand non-circomstantial evidence of wrong-doing.(innocence until guilt is proven and all that stuff you guys preach)  And there is no solid evidence that the no-bid contracts of haliburton where any more done by cheyney than any of the hundreds of other no-bids across the nation.  The government does go for whoever provides the best price, but often times only one company offers a bid on a particular project, as my example can explain the reason for.There are massive projects where they end up hireing every company in an area(pentagon reconstruction contracted with almost every construction firm in the D.C. area due to size and rush of the job).   Most projects are put up for public bid, with 10%(I believe but it may be more) tagged for small businesses.  However companies know that they can make much more profit by letting everyone have their piece, and so they often do. 

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-17 2:48

>>23
       And we are still away from the point, even if the constrution jobs were corrupt, that doesn't mean the terrorist attacks were done by Bush.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-17 13:12

>>26
Sure.  But many would say if he's lieing about one thing, he's likely generally not an overall trustworthy person, and thus shouldn't be in office. 

Sure, you can assume most politicians, and likely his successor will/would be corrupt as well, but it's not an excuse to NOT punish outright and blatant corruption when it is right before your eyes. 

Not to mention all the Iraq bullshit.  Bush shifted his story so much, and, while I don't think he outright LIED to the public, I would say I think he intentionally mislead them--with regard to 9/11, WMDs, etc, taking advantage of their emotions resulting from 9/11 and using them as an excuse for his war. 

This alone is plenty of reason not to vote for him, imo.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-18 2:36

If President Bush was, as you imply, the only person in the United States who knew there were no WMD and managed by shear force of personality to entice both houses of Congress to vote in favor of armed intervention then I'd say he must be an extraordinarily gifted politician.

  By the way, President Bush isn't running for office. You missed your chance to not vote for him.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-19 0:19

>>28
I was not trying to imply that.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-19 11:50

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-19 13:21

Bush flew those planes into the wtc, he parachuted out and in 5 minutes was in another plane. He then trebuche'd 4 or 5 coke machines laiden with explosives to collapse the towers. He also snuck into the  the architect for the wtc's office and replaced the gravitational constant for a slightly different gravitational constant so he would think that the weak building was safe.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-19 13:49

Bush is a Ninja, he's Konoha White Fag

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-19 15:34

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-19 15:43

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-19 15:53

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-19 16:03

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-19 16:05

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-20 0:02

>>19 You don't need to be an engineer or architect to know that Tower 7 shouldn't have just free fallen to bits in a manner very similar to controlled demolition while not a single plane had flown into it.  What the fuck seriously... the whole building just went down because some debris and shit fell on it from the other towers?  THE WHOLE BUILDING JUST COLLAPSED?

Bullshit.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-20 22:58

>>28
President Bush isn't the only problem.  There are PLENTY of pro-war dems.  We should vote them all out.

Name: Anonymous 2006-06-21 4:51

>>condoleeza rice has an oil tanker named after her cuz she fucking worked for chevron ahnd obviously did a damn good job. So before she left they named a tanker after her, Goddamn you are dumb

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List