|
Oiled and Ready posted:The planes were real, duh. Easiest way to get those passengers to disappear? Fly them into the buildings. The buildings, though, were wired with explosives. Jet fuel does not melt steel beams, but burning office furniture can melt them. That burning furniture, however, would not cause 3 buildings, only two of which were even hit, to fall at near-freefall only a couple of hours after impact. That is absurd. No, this is too far gone and way too unbelievable. Why bother with explosives when you're doing the planes anyway? How did no one notice these major buildings being wired with explosives? It doesn't pass the smell test and it assumes a level of competence that large organizations are literally incapable of having. As for "jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams" loving lmao https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzF1KySHmUA
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 16:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 09:38 |
|
|
WampaLord posted:No, this is too far gone and way too unbelievable. Why bother with explosives when you're doing the planes anyway? How did no one notice these major buildings being wired with explosives? first off, i said that because the official report cites burning office furniture, not jet fuel, as the reason for reaching the melting point. I don't dispute office furniture can reach such a temperature. Large organizations are perfectly capable of such a thing. These organizations need only intersect with the national security apparatus to be perfectly capable of hiding large secrets. Did anyone know, prior to the leaks, that we had and were using for several years the tools listed in the "Vault 7" leaks in Germany, the US, and elsewhere? Did anyone leak a single one of the cables present in the Wikileaks cable controversy before 100k+ cables were leaked at once? Did any news organization run any articles about the hundreds of companies with offshore accounts present in the Panama Papers before all of those papers were made public? The idea that these things cannot be kept secret is not credible. Such big leaks would have been preceded by smaller leaks if this were true. Why bother with explosives if you're doing the planes? Probably because the planes burned up within a few minutes, and no steel building has ever collapsed prior or since as a result of fire. If I were doing that, I would be sure to wire the buildings, and when one plane went down as a result of "terrorist error", I would pull that building down with explosives anyway (building 7). That building was the target of the 3rd plane. That building fell, at near free-fall, from a fire caused by debris from the first two towers. Those two towers fell straight into their footprint. Another plane hit the loving pentagon. You really think 17 morons from Saudi Arabia pulled that off without at least tacit approval? If they had tacit approval, why not employ explosives as well? Why leave it to chance?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 16:23
|
|
|
Oiled and Ready posted:You really think 17 morons from Saudi Arabia pulled that off without at least tacit approval? If they had tacit approval, why not employ explosives as well? Why leave it to chance? Yes. Because people would notice explosives being planted. Leaving it to chance was fine because even if the attack happened not perfectly, it's still an attack, which is all the excuse they needed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 16:26
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Yes. Because people would notice explosives being planted. Leaving it to chance was fine because even if the attack happened not perfectly, it's still an attack, which is all the excuse they needed. No, the first attack in 1993 was the excuse to wire the explosives. They were bombed in a way that required a security revamp, which was then used as a pretext to wire the buildings to explode. I'm not an expert, and this may have merely been revamping the building to fall without employing actual explosives, but for what other reason would they target the same buildings? Pride? The 1993 attack had nothing to do with OBL. He did not "strike twice", this was an entirely different group of terrorists. If you're actually interested, here is an indepth look by the Washington Spectator from 2005. It is literally the only real journalism on this left on a google search, period. It's very indepth, and yet it stands alone. Is this because it is all 100% bullshit? Or is it because the rest has been scrubbed? https://washingtonspectator.org/family-business-at-the-watergate/ It linked KuwAm to Stratasec, which did the security for the WTC and Dulles airport. quote:KuwAm was by far the biggest long-term backer for both Stratesec and Aviation General, acting much like a swinging door for Kuwaiti money to pass through. In 1996, KuwAm owned 90 percent of Securacom, directly or through partnerships with names like “Special Situations Investment Holdings” and “Fifth Floor Company for General Trading and Contracting.” KuwAm owned 31 percent of Securacom in 1998 and 47 percent of Stratesec in 1999. Embry-riddle was one of the flight schools in Florida at which the hijackers trained. Notice I can corroborate some of the facts from the Washington Spectator article on CNN*, yet none of the actual reporting. Why is that? Is this not worth reporting on? Is it unfactual? Did the Washington Spectator make this article up? *http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/13/flight.schools/ Or was it gag ordered, asked to be taken down, "requested to be removed in the name of national security", elsewhere? Please feel free to discredit the article.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 16:41
|
|
|
Oiled and Ready posted:You really think 17 morons from Saudi Arabia pulled that off without at least tacit approval? Yes. 17 morons with box cutters killed nearly 3000 people. Multiple presidents have been taken down by lone dipshit losers with guns. Our "perfectly controlled" nuclear arsenal is an endless carnival of incompetence and explosions. The top echelons of every great institution are more like the people on Veep than House of Cards, and the greatest con they've ever pulled is tricking people into believing anyone is in control of this chaotic swirl of a world when the evidence right in front of your eyes every day is screaming at you that it's not true.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 16:45
|
|
|
And this is why I don't bother bringing this up in real life, I don't want to encourage insane truther poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 16:51
|
|
|
Goon Danton posted:Yes. 17 morons with box cutters killed nearly 3000 people. Multiple presidents have been taken down by lone dipshit losers with guns. Our "perfectly controlled" nuclear arsenal is an endless carnival of incompetence and explosions. The top echelons of every great institution are more like the people on Veep than House of Cards, and the greatest con they've ever pulled is tricking people into believing anyone is in control of this chaotic swirl of a world when the evidence right in front of your eyes every day is screaming at you that it's not true. it isn't about how many people they killed 17 morons could probably kill 3000 people even now, with all the advanced tech the FBI and government in general employs to stop such attacks It's about the idea that after the first plane, the rest stayed airborne. That the plane hit the Pentagon 45 minutes after the first plane hit a tower. The PENTAGON. Square in the side of it. It's about the fact that those towers, including a third, unimpacted tower, fell straight down in mere seconds, as if in a taunt. Why didn't any of them fall sideways into other buildings? Why did they not meet more resistance from the unmelted steel on the floors below? Also, It doesn't take timeless perfect control to pull off a single morning of perfect control. Afterward, the impetus to control the "chaotic swirl" is on the US government, not the conspirators, as they have no choice but to pretend to us regular Americans that this was but a fluke, something that wasn't perfectly planned, rather something we let slip through the cracks on a bad day. Also, JFK was not taken down by a "lone dipshit loser". No one knows exactly what happened but the idea that that is what happened defies the odds.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 16:52
|
|
|
Oiled and Ready posted:The PENTAGON. Square in the side of it *Pentagonally* in the side of it
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 18:27
|
|
|
I too was suspicious when the Pentagon's laser turrets and Mecha let the plane sail past them. and who did that plane land on? Col Ronald Real, who sources say was just about to finish his blockbuster report on how actually Gore won the election.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 18:55
|
|
|
 E: VVV I mean, I'm not going to argue that there's proof that I'm correct, but the question was "what's the conspiracy theory you think is true?" and that's my answer. WampaLord has issued a correction as of 19:12 on Mar 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 19:01
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:The US allowed 9/11 to happen as excuse to get into wars they already wanted to get into. oh bullshit
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 19:10
|
|
|
lmao if you think we’ve never attacked a sovereign nation before Iraq
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 19:52
|
|
|
Uranium posted:lmao if you think we’ve never attacked a sovereign nation before Iraq That's not what I'm saying, I'm saying it was just a way of ensuring popular support for it, clearly we have attacked many nations without being attacked first
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 19:55
|
|
|
still waiting for the false flag to get us into a war with Iran lmao
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:00
|
|
|
Oiled and Ready posted:Why did they not meet more resistance from the unmelted steel on the floors below? I'm not going to argue with the rest of your post because good god do I have better things to do with my life, but are you seriously asking why the lower levels of the WTC couldn't hold up thousands of tons of dead weight?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:02
|
|
|
One of my favorite memories of truther nonsense was some dude building a small model of the towers out of wood and lighting it on fire. This "proved" that a fire wouldn't compromise the structural integrity or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:07
|
|
|
I know this is a thread dedicated to a batshit conspiracy theory but y'all are really off the shits today
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:07
|
|
|
What if I made the same claim about Pearl Harbor and WW2? More or less believable? Not "false flag planned attack" but "they knew there was a danger and they did nothing about it"
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:10
|
|
|
love too be plagued by fantasies *sniff* in the strictly lacanian sense
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:11
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:What if I made the same claim about Pearl Harbor and WW2? More or less believable? Check the manifests, there were explosives all over those ships! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:12
|
|
|
Goon Danton posted:Check the manifests, there were explosives all over those ships! god damnit now i'm getting lumped in with the guy who thinks jet fuel can't melt steel beams can I change my answer to "FBI assassinated MLK?"
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:13
|
|
|
It was just a joke about being paranoid re: explosives on battleships 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:18
|
|
|
big dyke energy posted:I'm not going to argue with the rest of your post because good god do I have better things to do with my life, but are you seriously asking why the lower levels of the WTC couldn't hold up thousands of tons of dead weight? Sort of. When a steel building collapses, pieces of steel should splinter off in various directions, the steel should stack up at the bottom instead of collapsing flat, and it should take longer than the few seconds it took to collapse. Obviously at some point the steel will collapse, and the steel will then bear down on the steel below it. That doesn't mean it will fall like nothing at all was below it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:28
|
|
|
I am literally terrified of scary bats.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:31
|
|
|
9/11 did Bush.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:35
|
|
|
It would be cool if the hijackers doused the towers in liquid nitrogen beforehand to make them really brittle and then when the planes hit them they just shattered into a million pieces
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:35
|
|
|
It'd be cooler if they rigged the tower with fireworks like they do in Abu Dhabi on New Years. Heck, they could even play some live music and sell some food, booze and merch. If you're going to get their attention, not putting the effort into additional revenue streams is myopic. Basically, those terrorists were not good business people or promoters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:can I change my answer to "FBI assassinated MLK?" this one is true though
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 20:51
|
|
|
I like maritime conspiracy myself. The British put a whole lot of munitions on the RMS Lusitania but didn't report them on the manifest because obviously the best way to ensure that your munitions transport doesn't get blown up is making it a civilian ocean liner with innocent people on it. The Germans sunk the RMS Lusitania. It sank so quickly because the torpedo did indeed hit some of the munitions. The British covered this up and went so far as to bomb the wreck of the ship to destroy evidence. My other favourite is that the roll-on roll-off ferry MV Estonia was intentionally sunk in 1994 by the Russians because it was carrying/smuggling nuclear weapons or the material to make nuclear weapons. This would explain why the wreck of the ship has been entombed in a "sarcophagus" of concrete and gravel, similar to the reactor at Chernobyl.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 21:14
|
|
|
lol at truthers in the make-fun-of-conspiracy-theories thread guess this flat-earth poo poo will always be with us
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 21:23
|
|
|
Google "KuwAm corporation" Click on as many links as you need to click to convince yourself this isn't a real corporation, it didn't exist, or it wasn't important, or it wasn't called that, or whatever Then go to google books and google "KuwAm Corporation" for official documents between 1990 and 2005 or so, stuff like SEC records, lawsuits, etc There are plenty, right? Why is there nothing but wacky tinfoil when you google that? Was it not a major corporation? Could you not search GHWB's other oil company, "Zapata Oil", and find thousands of entries about it? It's scrubbed 100% clean. No news articles referencing it, no other websites, nothing but a single lawsuit regarding the name of Securacom that they couldn't scrub because it entered the public record. "KuwAm" was a major corporation, worthy of articles from major news sites. It had subsidiaries, 100s of thousands of shares were issued, but where is all the archived news? Examples: https://books.google.com/books?id=AGUpAQAAIAAJ&q=Kuwam+oil&dq=Kuwam+oil&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi2oJTe8fXgAhUHP60KHTpQBbY4ChDoAQhIMAc https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/1998/january/pilot/pilot-briefing quote:Commander Aircraft Company located in Bethany, Oklahoma, has received a $3.6 million cash infusion from parent company KuwAm Corporation, located in Washington, D.C. Commander Aircraft, which manufactures the IFR-equipped $322,500 Commander 114B and the IFR $376,500 Commander 114TC, will use the money to pay off debts and expand into aircraft refurbishment and used aircraft sales. This year Commander expects to sell nearly a dozen new aircraft.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 21:26
|
|
|
Oiled and Ready posted:Sort of. When a steel building collapses, pieces of steel should splinter off in various directions, the steel should stack up at the bottom instead of collapsing flat, and it should take longer than the few seconds it took to collapse. Obviously at some point the steel will collapse, and the steel will then bear down on the steel below it. That doesn't mean it will fall like nothing at all was below it. Ooh, ooh, do the fake moon landings next. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 21:27
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
Stoatbringer posted:Ooh, ooh, do the fake moon landings next. oh wow yeah and do i also believe sandy hook was a conspiracy?!?! that broad brush is why if iran-contra never became public knowledge you'd be laughing at me because "Reagan was way too incompetent to pull that off!" gently caress you
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
I don't believe any 9/11 theories but if I did, I'd blame Mossad. Remember that time they planned to bomb a bunch of British and American citizens and blame it on Egypt? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 21:47
|
|
|
The virgin Qanon and the chad QAnon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 21:54
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:I don't believe any 9/11 theories but if I did, I'd blame Mossad. Remember that time they planned to bomb a bunch of British and American citizens and blame it on Egypt? [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident]lol not the only controversy[/url] but no they didn't do 9/11. If they did it, they wouldn't have had Mossad agents sitting on a rooftop filming the event and laughing their asses off about it
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 21:57
|
|
|
Oiled and Ready posted:No, the first attack in 1993 was the excuse to wire the explosives. They were bombed in a way that required a security revamp, which was then used as a pretext to wire the buildings to explode. I'm not an expert, and this may have merely been revamping the building to fall without employing actual explosives, but for what other reason would they target the same buildings? Pride? The 1993 attack had nothing to do with OBL. He did not "strike twice", this was an entirely different group of terrorists. holy gently caress true vintage grade Broken Brain
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 22:02
|
|
|
i can tell you right now all your stupid conspiracy poo poo is stupid because I did 9/11 do not try and take away my credit you hack
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 22:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 09:38 |
|
|
ok now do one on the vast conspiracy of why scalise's dick and balls needed to be shot off
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 22:08
|
|