Originally Posted by mr dave

first off, you realize the bulk of Jesse Ventura's career revolves around getting people to watch right? it's a whole hell of a lot easier to get people to just watch when you convince them they're being let in on a secret.

you also do remember the earlier WTC bombings that damaged the internal structure from the early 90s also right? truck bomb in 1993.

as for it being an inside job, i'll play devil's advocate for Tore since i did take that stance in the days following (but wised up shortly after). the short term benefit was an obliteration of the piss poor image Bush had in the public eye, his approval rating skyrocketed, all of a sudden he was a doe eyed good ol' boy who just watched his horse get shot, had his administration not had the equivalent ability of a recently shot horse he could have probably milked this image for the remainder of his first term and into a clear victory leading into his second. instead we got cowboy dubbya playing dress up at every opportunity.

long term benefit is that a victorious war is beneficial for the economy and that an attack on american soil would definitely guarantee popular support. only with the wisdom of his administration they declared a war on an idea instead of a clear bad guy, then advanced on two fronts, forgot it's not the 50s anymore, and just dogf*cked the bejesus out of that eagle with a tear in its eye.

Originally Posted by Sljslj

Some may consider this old news, but I think not, not until all the government officials that may have been involved, including the former pres., are put on trial will it be "old news". It's quite obvious to me that it wasn't only the plane that caused the buildings to fall, but alot of people deny it. Sorry if I've offended anyone, that is not my intention

Originally Posted by Janszoon

What? No. No. No. No no no.

Originally Posted by Sljslj

My biggest problem (even before watching Ventura's program) is that the towers would not have fallen like that from the plane hitting it. There would've had to have explosives planted inside the building.

Originally Posted by TheCunningStunt

I don't understand why people say this. How do we know how a building would fall from planes hitting it? Have people seen other cases of planes flying into buildings? If yes, and the building didn't fall to the ground then then fair point. If they haven't seen it, then how the fuck would people know what the result of planes flying into buildings be?

Even if people say well it's just common sense, it's unfathomable that 2 planes could do that damage. That's just an opinion, a theory. Nothing more.

Originally Posted by Sljslj

That's all a good point, but I can't bring myself to agree with you. How about the people that said that heard explosions before the plane hit? And others that say there were explosions under the building as well. There was a large amount of thermite (a material known to be explosive) in the ash. Any contractor or skyscraper designer will tell you that a building with a steel frame will only fall straight down at the speed of gravity unless the explosion was on the inside. Once again, I'm really sorry if anyone's offended by my arguement. I really hope the American government didn't cause it, but I can't help thinking they did it.

Originally Posted by TheCunningStunt

I don't know enough about it to have an opinion. I don't know about the people that said they heard explosions before the planes hit, and if there was actually a large amount of thermite in the ash. Wouldn't that constitute as evidence? Surely if the government were trying to do some kind of inside job, they wouldn't use explosives that leaves traces of evidence in the ash. It's like pissing on someone's back and then telling them it's raining.

I don't think anyone would be offended. It's an interesting enough conspiracy. But that's all it is. I almost believe in the Bemuda triangle.. just 'cause I want to. The mythology around it makes me want to believe. But I actually think a government inside job is TOO far fetched, even more so than the triangle.. which is saying something.

Originally Posted by TheCunningStunt

I don't understand why people say this. How do we know how a building would fall from planes hitting it? Have people seen other cases of planes flying into buildings? If yes, and the building didn't fall to the ground then then fair point. If they haven't seen it, then how the fuck would people know what the result of planes flying into buildings be?

Even if people say well it's just common sense, it's unfathomable that 2 planes could do that damage. That's just an opinion, a theory. Nothing more.

Originally Posted by Sljslj

That's all a good point, but I can't bring myself to agree with you. How about the people that said that heard explosions before the plane hit? And others that say there were explosions under the building as well. There was a large amount of thermite (a material known to be explosive) in the ash. Any contractor or skyscraper designer will tell you that a building with a steel frame will only fall straight down at the speed of gravity unless the explosion was on the inside. Once again, I'm really sorry if anyone's offended by my arguement. I really hope the American government didn't cause it, but I can't help thinking they did it.

Originally Posted by Sljslj

Of course they can leave evidence because the general public (aka blind patriots) will always believe the government, especially since the idea of their involvement in 9-11 is so absurd. The government can easily say "nope, not us", and most people will just accept it.
And there was thermite in the ash, I believe that 100%.

Originally Posted by Tuna

Did you know that every year thousands of people claim they've "seen Elvis!" before too?

Someone's word doesn't constitute much.


How is that different from a conspiracy theory sheep who is too caught up the "you can't miss this" aspect of it to look objectively