Page 1 of 7

Freakaloin

Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:51 pm
by Guest
Is it safe to consider that the US was behind the 9/11 attacks and that a missile hit the pentagon and the world trade center was destroyed by contolled demolition?

By the way, if anyone hasn't seen Loose Change 2nd edition before, watch it (its free, so the torrent is legal): http://www.mininova.org/get/184395

Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:53 pm
by Denz
Don't encourge him!!! Geezz, now we will never hear the end of it.

Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:13 pm
by Jackal
Leave it to Toxic to ask for advice from Goof.

Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:54 pm
by seremtan
ok, i'll bite

Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 2:07 am
by Dark Metal
He's just trying to post a thread that someone won't move/delete.

Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 2:17 am
by Guest
Wtf why was the photography submissions thread deleted?

Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 2:17 am
by ek
bcz

Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 3:24 pm
by Freakaloin
heres the deal...the military turned the internet over to civilian use for the purpose of tracking ppl...

Re: Freakaloin

Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 6:43 pm
by seremtan
ToxicBug wrote:Is it safe to consider that the US was behind the 9/11 attacks and that a missile hit the pentagon and the world trade center was destroyed by contolled demolition?

By the way, if anyone hasn't seen Loose Change 2nd edition before, watch it (its free, so the torrent is legal): http://www.mininova.org/get/184395
ok, i've watched the doc and it's pretty good. what it DOES demonstrate without a doubt is that the official explanation is bullshit. what it DOESN'T do is provide a fully worked out alternative theory (though the obvious 'reichstag fire' theory is lurking in the wings)

well worth the download

Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 6:46 pm
by Guest
Well who else but the government would be behind the controlled demolition?

Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 8:04 pm
by seremtan
i wasn't rejecting the alternative theory (which is well supported by the evidence), just pointing out that the film-makers didn't dwell on that for too long, which makes sense if you're simply trying to cast doubt on the official explanation

Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 9:05 pm
by Duhard
I AM A WATERMELON

Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 10:02 pm
by Captain
Image

Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 10:26 pm
by seremtan
Image

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 1:36 am
by Dark Metal
ToxicBug wrote:Wtf why was the photography submissions thread deleted?
Someone wanted it done.

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 1:44 am
by Captain
seremtan wrote:Image
Nice lipstick Toohard. And blush. Boy am I jellus.

:olo:

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 4:08 pm
by Duhard
wow..another thread owned by the total package..good times

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 5:54 pm
by dmmh
great img rofl

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:07 pm
by Nightshade
ToxicBug wrote:Well who else but the government would be behind the controlled demolition?
The fact that you think it was a controlled demolition further cements your position in the Fucking Idiot Hall Of Fame.

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:08 pm
by +JuggerNaut+
Duhard wrote:wow..another thread owned by the total package..
Image

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:21 pm
by Captain
+JuggerNaut+ wrote:
Duhard wrote:wow..another thread owned by the total package..
Image
:olo: :icon14:

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 7:58 pm
by R00k
Nightshade wrote:
ToxicBug wrote:Well who else but the government would be behind the controlled demolition?
The fact that you think it was a controlled demolition further cements your position in the Fucking Idiot Hall Of Fame.
TBH, after all the reading I've done, I would have to say that anyone who dismisses the possibility outright is either uninformed of the facts, trying to convince themselves, or just in open denial.

Any reasoning person who has really looked at everything involved with an objective eye would see that what we have been told happened that day was intentionally inaccurate.

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 8:12 pm
by seremtan
Nightshade wrote:
ToxicBug wrote:Well who else but the government would be behind the controlled demolition?
The fact that you think it was a controlled demolition further cements your position in the Fucking Idiot Hall Of Fame.
the evidence says different

(about the controlled demo that is, not about toxicbug. i think that issue is beyond question)

edit: let me put it this way: there are two competing explanations for what happened to the WTC:

* (the official explanation) that the 6 steel columns supporting the building were all softened/melted at identical rates by the burning jet fuel so as to cause a perfectly symmetrical collapse of two buildings within less that 90 minutes (an event unheard of in the history of modern construction, and in fact physically impossible); or

* (the conspiracy) that the buildings were 'pulled' by controlled demolition

the actual evidence doesn't support the official explanation in any way. take a look at the movie for the details. also have a look here:

http://www.911proof.com/

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 8:24 pm
by Captain
Stole the words out of my mouth Rook and Seremtan :icon14:

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 10:56 pm
by Doombrain
Best part of the video has to be the part describing the underside of one of the plains hitting the TWC. The part where it slows the video frames down to provide indisputable evidence about some attachment, which must have been attached by aliens in area 51 or that mountain they keep the stargate in.