|
Post by PeterB on Mar 29, 2006 21:19:47 GMT -4
G'day 911:InsideJob
How many commercial airline pilots dispute the ability of the hijackers to fly the planes the way they did?
How many structural engineers dispute the official explanations for the collapse of the WTC towers?
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Mar 29, 2006 22:23:45 GMT -4
(Why did Bush fly the Bin Ladens out the same day of the attacks?)
|
|
|
Post by 911: Inside Job on Mar 29, 2006 22:25:09 GMT -4
Perhaps you could take your own advice and think for yourself instead of being force fed from biased conspiracy sites what you will believe.
People like me do think for themselves, rather than being spoon-fed "reality" on the evening "snooze". The majority of Americans in the latest mainstream poll believe the government is covering up the truth about 9/11. People like you are in the minority now.
You are fooling no one on this board. Perhaps conspiracy site forums are a better choice?
Last time I checked this is a conspiracy board.
The sites are rubbish
If you bothered to check them out, you'd find that all their news is taken from mainstream sources. I guess ignorance can be bliss, until reality finally catches up to you.
How many commercial airline pilots dispute the ability of the hijackers to fly the planes the way they did?
How many structural engineers dispute the official explanations for the collapse of the WTC towers?
The information is out there. Do your own research. Then use your own mind to come to the logical conclusion: The official story is just one long series of increasingly improbable events strung together into an absurd cover story for what really happened and why.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Mar 29, 2006 22:46:32 GMT -4
Last time I checked this is a conspiracy board. Actually, as the person who created the forum, I can safely say that it is not a conspiracy board... not one that is friendly towards conspiracy theories anyway. I like how in a single post you jump from using mainstream news to support your beliefs to claiming the mainstream media brainwashes the public and can't be trusted. Which is it? Are they on your side or not?
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Mar 29, 2006 22:50:34 GMT -4
Last time I checked this is a conspiracy board. From the "home" page here:
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Mar 29, 2006 22:59:20 GMT -4
Ya beat me to it, Lunar! Yeah, that's good 9/11, use a MEDIA driven poll as evidence, while saying the media lies...yep, InsideJob, we're two peas in a pod after all!!! I don't listen to the media and I certainly ignore their polls...they create their own reality. Meanwhile, tell me, from your sources, approximately how many armed fighters did NORAD (or anyone else) have ready to fly (or flying) the morning of 9/11 in the northeastern US...( lets make the area between Chicago, Boston and Norfolk, VA.) Any guesses?
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Mar 29, 2006 23:33:08 GMT -4
I asked:
911:InsideJob replied:
Well, I took up your challenge, and visited the site you provided the link to. There’s information out there, and I did my own research.
I note that although the authors of the site expressed doubts over the skills of the pilots, no pilots were so quoted. I also note that although the authors of the site expressed doubts over the official explanations for the collapse, no structural engineers were so quoted.
So I’ll ask again:
How many commercial airline pilots dispute the ability of the hijackers to fly the planes the way they did?
How many structural engineers dispute the official explanations for the collapse of the WTC towers?
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Mar 30, 2006 0:17:56 GMT -4
How many structural engineers dispute the official explanations for the collapse of the WTC towers? That is the best way to be on list for lucrative reconstruction contratsThe wise thing these US structural engineers firms have to do is stay in line with the official story. Do you know structural engineeers -inside and outside- the USA which have put time and money for and independant analysis?
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Mar 30, 2006 0:27:37 GMT -4
I asked: feelfree222 replied:
Will they all get a contract? What about those who don't?
|
|
|
Post by jaydeehess on Mar 30, 2006 0:29:20 GMT -4
How many structural engineers dispute the official explanations for the collapse of the WTC towers? That is the best way to be on list for lucrative reconstruction contratsThe wise thing these US structural engineers firms have to do is stay in line with the official story. Do you know structural engineeers -inside and outside- the USA which have put time and money for and independant analysis? So all structural engineers in the USA are willing to cover for the murder of 3000 people?
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Mar 30, 2006 0:30:22 GMT -4
I asked: feelfree222 replied: Will they all get a contract? What about those who don't? They all hope to have the reconstruction contrats. Right? Imagine you were owner of a structural engineers firm what you will hope for?
|
|
|
Post by feelfree222 on Mar 30, 2006 0:41:15 GMT -4
So all structural engineers in the USA are willing to cover for the murder of 3000 people? Why talking about covering? As far as I know they were not mandated for an independant analysis right? Only few selected firms who were part of NIST.
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Mar 30, 2006 0:41:30 GMT -4
You're trying to say that the possibility of reconstruction contracts (where, in Iraq?) is sufficient to buy the silence of every structural contractor in the USA? Are you trying to say there are so many reconstruction contracts available that every one of them can expect to be satisfied?
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Mar 30, 2006 0:42:15 GMT -4
Oh come on. Not all engineers work for companies bidding on the new buildings... surely you can find an engineer out there who doesn't have to worry about losing that particular contract.
|
|
|
Post by jaydeehess on Mar 30, 2006 0:43:05 GMT -4
|
|