Jedi Council Forums - Conspiracy Theories

Jedi Council Forums » JC Community » The Senate Floor »

Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

« 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 - Previous | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: Conspiracy Theories
darthOB1 Registered: Mar '00	Date Posted: 8/10/07 6:30am Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories
	perhaps a summary bluie....... Who's got 45 minutes to listen to that guy? -----signature----- “This most beautiful system [The Universe] could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.” Isaac Newton "The fact that a theory is able to describe an observation does not mean the observation proves the theory" unknown
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Blue_Jedi33 Registered: Aug '03	Date Posted: 9/2/07 2:59pm Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories
	That fireman was one of the last fireman out of the building. He went up to the 24th floor of the WTC and then got out after the second plane hit. When they got to the lobby which had been abuzz with activity when he was going up, now on the way out, everybody was now gone. Too many explosions were happening, he believes the plane strike itself did not bring down the building down. He testified at the 9/11 commission, and said it was a joke, that they were not interested in the truth. So if a fireman that was actually there questions the official story, isn't it worth a second look?
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Lowbacca_1977 Title: Senate Moderator Registered: Jun '06	Date Posted: 9/2/07 4:06pm Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories
	However, you can always find some people that will disagree. Its GOTTEN a second look, and then some.
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
LemmingLord Registered: Apr '05	Date Posted: 9/3/07 5:41am Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories
	While government-wide conspiracies do seem unrealistic - I have no trouble believing that their are power elite who can make people disappear without answering to anyone. -----signature----- LemmingLord Criticise Me
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Blue_Jedi33 Registered: Aug '03	Date Posted: 9/3/07 12:21pm Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories - Date Edited: 9/3/07 12:34pm (2 edits total) Edited By: Blue_Jedi33
	The following is an interesting read for those with an open mind to what happened to WTC building #7, very few people seem to know about WTC7 40+ floor building that also fell on 9/11 despite no plane ever hitting it, and it fell like it was demolished on purpose. BUILDING SEVEN IS THE SMOKING GUN OF 9/11 © 2006 – 2007 by G. Edward Griffin. Many people have asked my opinion of the possibility that, on 9/11, the Twin Towers and Building 7 were brought down by controlled demolition. My view is that there is a great deal of evidence pointing in that direction, but I have been reluctant to dwell on it, because it can get us sidetracked from other issues about which there can be no question – such as the fact that CFR controllers within the Bush Administration had ample foreknowledge of the attacks but chose to allow them. It's not that they bungled the defense of America, but that they chose to do so – just as the Roosevelt Administration chose to allow the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor to justify American involvement in World War II. The facts in support of this scenario are so clear and numerous, it is virtually a closed case to anyone who will take the time to examine them. One doesn't need to go any further to understand that the so-called War on Terrorism is a ploy to justify American military intervention in the Middle East and expansion of political power at home, so why must we dwell on secondary issues where there can be plausible denial and reasonable dissagreement? That is still my attitude, but with the passage of time and the accumulation of additional evidence, the case for controlled demolition on 9/11 has become so powerful as to justify a very serious second look. Even though there is still some wiggle room for plausible denial, the accumulating evidence is like slowly advancing jaws in a clamp, gradually squeezing that space out of exisence. There is no such thing as absolute proof. There is only evidence. Proof may be defined as sufficient evidence to convince the observer that a particular hypothesis is true. The same evidence that is sufficient to convince one person may be insufficient for another. The case may be proved to the first but not to the second who still needs more evidence. It is in the spirit of this reality that I offer the following evidence. A video documentary released in 2006 sharply tipped the scales toward what most people would consider to be proof of an inside job. It is called 911 Revisited, and it can be viewed in its entirety at: www.911revisited.com I find it difficult to believe that anyone can consider all the facts presented in this program and still cling to the view that these buildings were destroyed as a result of fire. SILVERSTEIN SAYS THE BUILDING WAS PULLED Larry Silverstein, the owner of The Twin Towers and Building 7, said on a PBS TV documentary entitled America Rebuilds, broadcast in September 2002, that he and others made a decision to "pull" Building 7 because of fires on two of its floors. He didn't say who the others were, but it was assumed to be the New York Fire Department. His exact words were: I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me that they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire, and I said, We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it; and they made that decision to pull, and we watched the building collapse. This was the genesis of a thousand articles and blogs suggesting that Silverstein had deliberately destroyed his own buildings for the purpose of collecting insurance on them which, reportedly, was about two times their actual value. It was claimed that, in the demolition industry, the term "pull" was commonly understood to mean "pull down" or demolish, although an Internet/Google search could not verify that. I personally sent inquiries to thirteen people whose names and e-mnail addresses appeared on demolition web sites asking them if this was true. Curiously, only one person replied, and it was with a single word: "no." That seemed very strange. I didn't know what the response would be but I expected at least there would be one. It was as though everyone in the industry was intimidated by the topic and didn't want to have their name associated with the debate. 2 YEARS LATER, HE CHANGED HIS STORY Two years later, after his statement had come under scrutiny and the full implications began to emerge, Silverstein claimed that, when he said “pull” he was only talking about pulling the firefighters out of the building! It is tempting to just laugh at that statement thinking that no one could take it seriously. However, a review of the Internet shows that there are, indeed, many commentators who are content to accept his revised explanation. So, let us analyze. 1. Never before in history have steel buildings collapsed from fire, even though many of them had sustained massive confligrations that raged for days and consumed everything combustible within them. Their steel structures always remained standing. 2. No airplanes struck Building 7. 3. There were two relatively small fires in Building 7 but, in view of the history of steel structures withstanding blazing infernos, there was no reason to think that these modest blazes were a threat to the structural integrity of the building. 4. All occupants of the building had been evacuated and, at no time was there any reason to think that the fires would cause additional loss of life. 5. The two fires in Building 7 were not far from each other at one end of the structure. If, somehow, they were responsible for the building's collapse, it would be logical to see the burning end collapse while the other remained standing or, at the very least, to see the burning end collapse first. However, contrary to all logic, the entire building came down simultaneously, including the end with no fire whatsoever. It fell at free-fall speed (as can be seen on the video capture of the event), which means there was no resistance to upper floors crashing onto lower floors. Furthermore, it collapsed neatly into its own footprint, exactly as done with a controlled demolition. 6. At the time Silverstein says the decision was made to "pull" the firefighters from the building, there were none in there to be "pulled". In the March, 2005, issue of Popular Mechanics, Dr. Shyam Sunder of the National Institutes of Standards and Technology, which investigated the collapse of Building 7, is quoted as saying: "There was no firefighting in WTC7." The FEMA report on the building's collapse, dated May 2002, says: "No manual firefighting operations were taken by FDNY." And, on November 29, 2001, the New York Times reported: "By 11:30 a.m., [six hours before Silverstein said he decided to "pull" firefighters from Building 7] the fire commander in charge of that area, Assistant Chef Frank Fellini, ordered firefighters away from it for safety reasons." In February of 2007, a New Jersey Emergency Team worker went public with the story of his personal experience at Ground Zero on 9/11. He contacted Dylan Avery, the producer of the documentary, Loose Change, which challenges the official version of 9/11 and claims that it was a false-flag operation directed by covert agencies of the government. The video has been broadcast in numerous countries and viewed by millions. The team worker said: "There were bright flashes up and down the sides of Building 7. You could see them through the windows ... and it collapsed. We all knew it was intentionally pulled." He said that the workers were warned over bullhorns that Building 7 was about to be pulled. This was followed by a twenty-second countdown over their radio units preceding the collapse. In the same testimony, the Ground Zero worker went on to explain his experiences at the Twin Towers, adjacent to Building 7. He had been called to the site after the first impact but before the collapse of the towers, so he was there when it happened. At one point, he had to take shelter under a bus as the debris rained down around him. In graphic detail, he described how he and many others heard multiple explosions within the buildings prior to their collapse. He said: "There were explosions. There were flashes. There was molten metal running down the I-beams of the basement levels like lava flows. I've never seen anything like it. Yes, planes hit the building. Anybody who says otherwise is a moron. But the explosions – the rapid, symmetrical, sequential explosions – they happened." He went on to explain how he and his co-workers were in the basement of one of the towers helping injured victims when he saw "One of the huge steel and concrete support pillars with an eight-foot section blown out of the center of it" and there were other support columns in the same condition. (Reference: "Ground Zero EMT: We were told Bldg 7 was to be "pulled". When you watch the video of Silverstein's statement about Building 7, listen carefully to the inflection of his voice as he ties together the phrase: “They made that decision to pull, and we watched the building collapse.” There can be no doubt that the two events are tied together just as the words are: the decision to pull and the collapse of the building. Notice, also, that there is no indication of surprise when he mentions the collapse. If he had not anticipated the collapse, one would expect him to say something like: "It's a good thing we made the decision to get those firefighters out of there because, to our surprise, the building collapsed just a short time afterward." But he did not say anything like that. He simply said, as in one continuous thought: "They made the decision to pull, and we watched the building collapse." In view of all these facts, to believe that Silverstein was talking about pulling firefighters from Building 7 is not the sign of a logical mind. Here is the video: Silverstein on PBS THE FASTEST BUILDING DEMOLITION IN HISTORY If you still think that Silverstein was referring to firefighters, there is no point in reading any further. You will not consider what follows to be of significance. However, if your judgment plus the manner in which Building 7 collapsed lead you to believe that it was brought down by controlled demolition, then what follows should be of great interest. It takes many weeks of planning and preparation by a team of highly trained experts to bring down a structure the size of Building 7. The first step is to locate a qualified organization. Other than military demolition units, their number is small, and it is not likely that the New York Fire Department is one of them. After negotiating a contract, the engineers have to obtain master blueprints and identify the main structural components. They must analyze the building materials, the thickness of load-bearing beams, the weight that rests upon them, the space between them, where the access points are to place charges, how intense the charges must be, in what timing sequence they must be ignited. A computerized firing system must be programmed to deliver the precisely timed firing impulses. Then the charges must be obtained from a storage depot in a remote location away from urban areas. Technicians must gain access to the beams and, in many cases, hack their way through walls to get to them. Safety procedures are followed to insure that all technicians are clear of the area before implosion is triggered. This is just a sampling of what must be done before a building like Number 7 can be pulled, and it normally takes many weeks or even months to do it. Yet, the elapsed time between Mr. Silverstein's alleged decision to “pull” the building and the final collapse was 45 minutes! What more do we need to know? For many of us, the evidence is so overwhelming that we consider it to be nothing less than proof. The claim that the destruction of the World Trade Center was an inside job is absurd. But the story advanced by the government and Larry Silverstein is even more so. That the building was brought down by controlled demolition now is obvious to almost everyone, but what generally has been overlooked is the rapid execution of the demolition. That reality leads to the inescapable conclusion that explosives had to have been placed inside Building 7 long before 9/11. And, if they were planted in Building 7, we must take very seriously the possibility – no, the probability – that they also were placed in the Twin Towers. That means 9/11 was an inside job. I can't say it any clearer or more logically than how Mr. Griffin explains it.
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Darth Geist Registered: Oct '99	Date Posted: 9/3/07 1:13pm Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories - Date Edited: 9/3/07 1:17pm (2 edits total) Edited By: Darth Geist
	So Griffin's argument is that Silverstein committed grand scale insurance fraud (oh, and mass murder), then announced it on national television, using a term that Griffin admits he doesn't understand. The idea that "pulling" a building means demolishing it with explosives is one of the truthers' oldest crocks, yet new truthers keep regurgitating it as soon as the old ones put it down. "Pulling" a building refers to stabilizing its vertical axis with cables. Griffin admits that he couldn't find out what it means, so he then assumes that it means "execute a controlled demolition." Not only does Griffin not understand basic demolition terminology, he has no concept at all of basic demolition principles. A controlled demolition requires knocking out walls, knocking out pillars, planting explosives in plain sight, and laying down hundreds (or in a building that size, thousands) of yards' worth of wires, all of which would go back to a central detonator. It takes days. Anyone who worked in the building for the past week would have seen all of this — and yet no witnesses ever came forward to any bombs or wires being planted anywhere. WTC 1 and 2 alone housed 60,000 workers. Thousands would have seen it all — or were they all in on the magically vast conspiracy too? Anyone want to talk about the tons of debris that fell from the Towers onto WTC 7, tearing out an entire corner of the structure and igniting the fuel reserves kept inside? Griffin doesn't even mention that. Given his shoddy research skills, he probably doesn't even know about it. If Griffin, or any truther, bothered to do their homework, they'd know all of this. But they don't want real facts. They don't want real truth. They want to cling to their neat little fantasies, and whenever one fantasy shatters, they run like hell for another one. Enough is enough. P.S. Anyone still trotting out the "fire can't melt steel" nonsense, as Griffin does, fails automatically. -----signature----- When George Lucas was in his early twenties, he was wrecking his health in the burning Tunisian desert, risking a new and fragile career on a movie no one believed in. When I was in my early twenties, I was complaining on the Internet about George Lucas.
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Espaldapalabras Registered: Aug '05	Date Posted: 9/3/07 1:20pm Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories
	I can't say it any clearer or more logically than how Mr. Griffin explains it. I hope for your sake you are kidding. How these people survive in the real world defies all explanation. -----signature----- A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user. Theodore Roosevelt We should be eternally vigilant against attempts to check the expression of opinions that we loathe. Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
darthdrago Registered: Dec '03	Date Posted: 9/3/07 1:29pm Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories - Date Edited: 9/3/07 1:34pm (2 edits total) Edited By: darthdrago
	[Apologies in advance to Mr44 & ES if this is too long. I wanted to highlight certain bits of the text] http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18380884/ Fire from crash melts Calif. freeway (AP) Updated: 2007-04-30 06:19 OAKLAND, Calif. - A stretch of highway near the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge collapsed Sunday after a gasoline tanker crashed and burst into flames, leaving one of the nation's busiest spans in a state of near paralysis. Officials said traffic could be disrupted for months. Flames shot 200 feet in the air and the heat was intense enough to melt part of the freeway and cause the collapse, but the truck's driver walked away from the scene with second-degree burns. No other injuries were reported. "I've never seen anything like it," Officer Trent Cross of the California Highway Patrol said of the crumpled interchange. "I'm looking at this thinking, 'Wow, no one died - that's amazing. It's just very fortunate." Authorities said the damage could take months to repair, and that it would cause the worst disruption for Bay Area commuters since the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake damaged a section of the Bay Bridge itself. Nearly 75,000 vehicles use the portion of the road every day. But because the accident occured where three highways converge, authorities said it could cause commuting problems for hundreds of thousands of people. Transportation officials said they already had added trains to the Bay Area Rapid Transit light rail system that takes commuters across San Francisco Bay, and were urging people to telecommute if possible. State officials said motorists who try to take alternate routes Monday instead of relying on public transportation would face nightmarish commutes. The tanker carrying 8,600 gallons of gasoline ignited around 3:45 a.m. after crashing into a pylon on the interchange, which connects westbound lanes of Interstate 80 to southbound I-880, on the edge of downtown Oakland about half a mile from the Bay Bridge's toll plaza. A preliminary investigation indicated he may have been speeding on the curving road, Cross said. The fire melted a second interchange from eastbound I-80 to eastbound I-580 located above the first interchange, causing a 250-yard section of the roadway to collapse onto the roadway below, according to the highway patrol. Witnesses reported flames from the blaze reached up to 200 feet high. Late Sunday morning, the charred section of collapsed freeway was draped at a sharp angle onto the highway beneath, exposing a web of twisted metal beneath the concrete. The Bay Bridge consists of two heavily traveled, double-decked bridges about two miles long straddling San Francisco Bay. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom said the accident showed how fragile the Bay area's transportation network is, whether to an earthquake or terrorist attack, and has the potential to have a major economic effect on the city. "It's another giant wakeup call," Newsom told reporters at the California Democratic Party convention in San Diego. You know what they say, a picture is worth a thousand words... ETA: just so folks know how this story ended, California's DOT (CalTrans) quickly got on the ball with Arnold (along with support from SF mayor Newsom & Oakland mayor Ron Dellums) for emergency repair funding on a no-bid contract. The restored overpass was reopened by Memorial Day [end of May], several days ahead of schedule. Now if we could just fix ALL of Cali's roads like that...
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Fire_Ice_Death Registered: Feb '01	Date Posted: 9/3/07 3:03pm Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories
	Now, Blue Jedi, do you believe Nostradamus predicted 9/11 as well? There's about as much evidence supporting both theories. Which is to say that...no...there is no evidence supporting your argument. And that article just leaves me speechless that someone can be that oxygen deprived that they believe such nonsense. -----signature----- Humor is my shield. Sarcasm my sword. The Changing Face of America: What can brown do for you? Gamertag: FIDo Almighty Remember: Frank Miller hates you.
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Tatooine_native Registered: Sep '03	Date Posted: 9/4/07 12:21am Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories
	I'd always heard that WTC 7 had quite a bit of damage to it, a portion had been scooped out. Here's a link that describes some of that damage. Blue_Jedi33 posted: Furthermore, it collapsed neatly into its own footprint, exactly as done with a controlled demolition. I hear this a lot in reference to the building's collapse. But if you look at it this way - buildings are going to fall down when their support is weakened, whether by explosive demolition or fire. They're not going to fall upward, or fall over sideways, or spiral down. Controlled demolition is more common to our experience and readily comes to mind when trying for a comparison. But just because it looked like a demolition doesn't mean it was one. -----signature----- A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away ... The End. A lot happens in between, eh?
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Master_SweetPea Registered: Nov '02	Date Posted: 9/4/07 7:35pm Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories
	Every big event has someone saying that there is an alternative "true" story. so what. It makes no difference to me who planned 9/11 my beliefs in government are still the same -----signature----- I don't like the donkeys and I don't like the Elephants http://www.lp.org "Some people never have anything except ideas Go Do it! Lucky Numbers 3, 11, 21, 31, 41, 43"
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
SWBob Registered: Jun '03	Date Posted: 9/6/07 10:05am Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories
	JFK, RFK, MLK.... Good God. Their killing all the K's. I see it! Its so clear. Once all the people with the last name staring with K are gone their going to move on to.....Quick hide George Lucas! But seriously, I've never placed much stock in consperacy theories. This is just an oppinion, I'm not proveing aything just stating how I feel. And by the way...... NAZIS ARE EVERYWHERE!!!!1!!1!!!!one!! -----signature----- "There will be pages. Lots and lots of pages. Most of them will have letters on them, and a vast majority of those letters will be in the Roman alphabet" -Aaron Allston Minister of Internal Affairs and CoW Senator Sith Governer of the NJO Fan Club
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Lowbacca_1977 Title: Senate Moderator Registered: Jun '06	Date Posted: 9/6/07 10:29am Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories
	JFK RFK MLK Or is it that they're working on eliminating the KKK?
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Kimball_Kinnison Registered: Oct '01	Date Posted: 9/6/07 11:11am Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories
	SWBob posted: JFK, RFK, MLK.... Good God. Their killing all the K's. I see it! Its so clear. Do I need to duck? Kimball Kinnison -----signature----- You deserve the wrath of Kimball...- OWM Why, Kimball... I didn't know you had it in you.- KW I think that Kimball just made a joke, and a funny joke at that.- Raven Stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Fire_Ice_Death Registered: Feb '01	Date Posted: 9/6/07 12:29pm Subject: RE: Conspiracy Theories - Date Edited: 9/6/07 12:32pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Fire_Ice_Death
	Duck and cover, man, duck and cover. -----signature----- Humor is my shield. Sarcasm my sword. The Changing Face of America: What can brown do for you? Gamertag: FIDo Almighty Remember: Frank Miller hates you.
	~~Locked Topic~~ \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

« 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 - Previous | Next | Reload

Jedi Council Forums » JC Community » The Senate Floor »