• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Loose Change

Status
Not open for further replies.
geggy said:
Sighs...

Under normal circumstances of a conteolled demolition, the bottom of the central cores of the building are blasted first (which explains the penthouse fell down before everything else fell), then the cores on both sides of the builidng are blasted. Why? So the two sides of the building can collapse toward and inward of the center of the building. Why? To prevent the risk of both sides of the building from falling outward that could create larger field of debris that would make clean up less convienance and more difficult for machines and trucks.
Click to expand...
Since that's not how WTC7 fell, will you concede that it was not a controlled demo?

The building slumped to one side as it fell, indicative of collapse due to structural damage from fires, rather than straight down, which could be indicative of controlled demo.
 
geggy said:
Read this first...

http://go.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle...oryID=1187499&section=news&src=rss/uk/topNews

Then check out this website...

http://mujca.com/

Oh my god!!!! Conspiracy theorists got to them!!!!! Shame on them!!!!!
Click to expand...

Wow. Could you oversimplify a very complex and emotional series of issues for victims of the attacks? Nowhere did the victims say the man was innocent, or that Bush should be on trial. You are talking about people who have experienced much death and now want to prevent further deaath in the names of their loved ones.

Anyone with a brain knows the Bush administration was complicit in the attacks....have ya ever even try to entertain the thought of it???
Click to expand...

When you consider the complete lack of evidence, the thought doesn't stick around very long. You must have noticed all the posts in this thread that have resulted in you getting your butt kicked every time you tried to bring up a claim?

Its painfully obvious that this conspriacy is an addiction for you. You beleive in it because it makes you feel smart. You can feel superior becuase you are in the 'know' despite the fact that you are consistantly shown to be an idiot.

Conspiracy Theories are the opium of the self-impressed, and you are a junkie.
 
geggy said:
Read this first...

http://go.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle...oryID=1187499&section=news&src=rss/uk/topNews
Click to expand...
What about it? It doesn't mention your conspiracy theory.

Then check out this website...

http://mujca.com/

Oh my god!!!! Conspiracy theorists got to them!!!!! Shame on them!!!!!
Click to expand...
Er, no. They are conspiracy theorists. Shame on them.

Anyone with a brain knows the Bush administration was complicit in the attacks...
Click to expand...
What a strange lie.

I know many intelligent people who do not "know" that.

have ya ever even try to entertain the thought of it???
Click to expand...
Yes, I have "entertained" the thought, and as soon as you guys can show me a scrap of a scintilla of a shred of evidence for it, then I shall take it seriously.
 
geggy said:
. The administration took full advantage to galvinize public support for the hunt of Osama in the middle east, meaning they used sept 11 as a justification to invade the middle east in order to maximize their profit and expand their military power. Also it's a matter of public record that Daddy Bush has financial ties to the bin Ladens that was established in the 70's.
Click to expand...

Gaggy, you are confusing correlation and causation. Sure, it's true that the administration took advantage of the situation, in my opinion. That doesn't mean they caused it. By this same argument, you'd have to say that all the people who took advantage of the chaos in New Orleans to loot stores were responsible for bringing on the hurricane in the first place.

When Avery said 9/11 is the new JFK, he meant that 70 percent of the public were convinced that oswald didn't act alone and the warren commission was a whitewash.
Click to expand...

Actually, what I thought he meant (and if I'm putting words in his mouth, I apologize) was that 9/11 was an eye-opener for our generation. Ask my parents about the day JFK was shot and they'll recall the details like it was yesterday. Same thing for me and 9/11.


Nearly 3 billion dollars have been spent on propaganda and PR campaign since the start of bush's presidency.
Click to expand...

Every administration spends money on propaganda and PR. How does this advance your theory?
 
Geggy, you said:
I thought you'd be interested in knowing that many family members are defending moussaoui from receiving death penalty because they believe he is the wrong guy to be on trial. No BS here.
Click to expand...
I replied:
I am interested. Please tell me who they are. And please be sure that it's for the reason you state, and not because they're opposed to the death penalty as a policy.
Click to expand...
I then decided to do your homework for you. I pointed you to an article that said there was one woman at Moussaoui's trial who, although she believed he was involved, didn't believe he should be on trial. The article made it clear that the rest of the people who testified for the defense did so because they are death panalty opponents.

You took the time to ridicule my response, but you did not respond to my repeated requests to provide that "major media" reference that said there were many family members who believed that Moussaoui was the wrong guy.

After I continued pushing, you finally responded with an article that mentions only the same woman I had told you about as the one who didn't think Moussaoui should be on trial.

So there we have it. You are not trustworthy, and you are full of B.S.

Please go away, troll. This is a forum for people who are serious about these issues.
 
Yeah I'm starting now to see why Bush administration is getting away with it...

thumb_Connect_Dots_small.gif
 
geggy said:
Yeah I'm starting now to see why Bush administration is getting away with it...
Click to expand...

You have a lot of faith in Bush's abilities. You must secretely want to be him for all your fawning admiration of his (alleged) conspiratorial abilities.
 
geggy said:
...Anyone with a brain knows the Bush administration was complicit in the attacks....
Click to expand...

Ahh geggy, you see, now you're simply being insulting. And very, very wrong. Do you know why I know you're wrong? Because, as proved by their contributions to this forum, virtually everyone here has a brain. I'll even go one step further -- comparing the reasoned, researched writings in this forum to yours, your fellow Loose Changers, and the "documentary" itself, the brains in this forum are functioning vastly more efficiently than all the CT'ers combined. But almost everyone in this forum disagrees with your contention regarding Bush's involvement in 9/11. So when you say "Anyone with a brain knows the Bush administration was complicit in the attacks," you are utterly incorrect. This is not a matter of opinion; this is a proven, demonstrable fact.

It appears, geggy my man, that you realize all too well that you've been backed into a corner. You're now ignoring all inconvenient questions, and your postings have recently devolved from doggedly repeating stuff you don't even remotely understand to simply flinging insults at your intellectual superiors. So I think it's time you plot your exit strategy. Here's a popular one: respond to this posting by calling me something really obscene, ignore the warning, and get yourself banned -- you know, 'suicide by mod." Then you can go back to your Loose Change forum or wherever you came from, someplace where they'll welcome every stray piece of idiocy you write without the slightest question, and brag about how you took us on and we had no choice but to ban you for "telling the truth." That way you get to look like a hero to your fellow CT'ers, and we don't have to further endure your offensively stupid drivel.
 
geggy said:
Yeah I'm starting now to see why Bush administration is getting away with it...

[qimg]http://news.globalfreepress.com/images/bush/thumb_Connect_Dots_small.gif[/qimg]
Click to expand...

THAT IS SO CLEVER!!! LOL!!!:blush: ROFL!!! :)!!! PWN!!!11!!!
 
geggy said:
Sighs...

Under normal circumstances of a conteolled demolition, the bottom of the central cores of the building are blasted first (which explains the penthouse fell down before everything else fell), then the cores on both sides of the builidng are blasted. Why? So the two sides of the building can collapse toward and inward of the center of the building. Why? To prevent the risk of both sides of the building from falling outward that could create larger field of debris that would make clean up less convienance and more difficult for machines and trucks.
Click to expand...
So if it wasn't a controlled demolition, what would be different about this building's collapse?
 
geggy said:
Gravy, trust me. It came from the mainstream media source.
Click to expand...
Then by your logic, shouldn't we distrust it? Why is it you conspiracy nuts seem to trust mainstream media sources as a reliable when you think it supports your ideas and dismiss it as propaganda when it does not?
 
Last edited:
geggy said:
Yeah I'm starting now to see why Bush administration is getting away with it...

[qimg]http://news.globalfreepress.com/images/bush/thumb_Connect_Dots_small.gif[/qimg]
Click to expand...
Let's see if I can join the dots.

DOT #1 : Large aircraft laden with fuel were crashed into a building at high speed.

DOT #2 : The building collapsed.

Yeah, I think I can just about manage to join the dots.

How 'bout you, geggy?
 
geggy said:
Sighs...

Under normal circumstances of a conteolled demolition, the bottom of the central cores of the building are blasted first (which explains the penthouse fell down before everything else fell), then the cores on both sides of the builidng are blasted. Why? So the two sides of the building can collapse toward and inward of the center of the building. Why? To prevent the risk of both sides of the building from falling outward that could create larger field of debris that would make clean up less convienance and more difficult for machines and trucks.
Click to expand...

How many times do we need to revist the fact that several buildings in the surrounding area were heavily damaged during the collapse of WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7? Many had to be demolished due to the extensive damage. If any of the three were the result of a controlled demolition, they would be the worst on, or rather off in this case, record.
 
Last edited:
Since we're back on WTC7, geggy, maybe you can answer the question that's been posed several times:

If WTC7 was demolished, why was it done secretly when all the other heavily damaged buildings in the area were demolished out in the open?

If you're going to tell me it's so investigators wouldn't see sooper-secret documents, please be ready to explain why any investigators would be willing to run the blockade of firefighters to enter a burning building with a noticeably slumping roof.

Remember, EVERYTHING has to make sense, not just the part you're ranting about right now, or the whole theory falls apart.
 
delphi_ote said:
Originally Posted by geggy:
Gravy, trust me. It came from the mainstream media source.
Click to expand...
Then by your logic, shouldn't we distrust it? Why is it you conspiracy nuts seem to trust mainstream media sources as a reliable when you think it supports your ideas and dismiss it as propaganda when it does not?
Click to expand...
The astonishing thing is that he posted that when replying to a post that asked whether the Bush administration has a stranglehold on the public media all over the world, as required by Geggy's assertion that "the official theory is accepted by many citizens because the bush administration has a stranglehold of the media."

:hb:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom