603000000000 Dollars

[TimoTolkki]

In that document they said that those Towers should hold up more than airplane. Those cast pillars should be in their place...!
steel should stand about +1500C and there was only +650c hot flame.
So flame didn't melt that steel?
They said that there was many progmmed explosives.
And they said that in basement was many explosives and there explode many times before airplane crashed to towers!
I have to say now that U.S Coverment is from ass!!!

Yes, the towers should have been able to hold the plane's weight.

What such conspiracy theories fail to take into account, however, is the amount of damage a 140-ton aircraft travelling at over 900km/h can cause, purely by force of impact.

As for the explosives in the basement; total and complete rubbish. If explosions had occurred before the planes hit, the buildings would have been evacuated and it would have been all over the news.

Sorry, StratoTimo, you gotta be a bit more careful with what you believe. I am open to any idea, but I have seen nothing even remotely convincing saying that the planes hitting the towers were not sufficient to bring them down.

As for anyone who believes no plane hit the Pentagon... uh. Try telling that to the families of the passengers and crew of American Airlines flight 77.

I don´t think they were travelling at such a high speed. They would not be able to hit the targets at that speed..that´s cruising altitude speed. I think they were flying around 300 km per hour speed.
Those people who believe in conspiracy regarding the towers say that the explosions were just seconds before the planes hit.
And to add fuel to the fire, the building constructor is in fact saying that the towers were "designed to take the impact from a jet".
The weirdest is the collapsing of the third building, number seven that had only a minimum fire cause it was further away. The building did contain a CIA archive. Lot of smoke, some fire too. But still I don´t believe to the exploding the buildings theory. Slamming the jets to their targets would have been well enough for what whomever was trying to achieve with that.

[black death]

And to add fuel to the fire, the building constructor is in fact saying that the towers were "designed to take the impact from a jet".

I wouldn't make much account of this. Every constructor is proud of his "child", especially when it's somehow exceptional or unique. Titanic constructer thought that his ship is practically unsinkable and we all know how it ended up.

[browneyedgirl]

Well, people are always going to believe what they want to regardless of evidence, pro or con.People who are already suspicious, or already dislike USA are going to believe these theories more readily than those who are open-minded&see both sides.

Here, however, is something scarey, conspiracy theory? Hopefully.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread302187/pg1

Hot topic there!

Some of these conspiracy buffs are obsessed with doomsday scenarios. I mean, events in this 'ol world are unstable, but some of these theories exaggerate occurances&possibilities that stagger the imagination!
Now that news story about a military plane flying 6 nuclear loaded missiles across USA is true---it was a news story for a few days.
Then things got screwy. Steve Fossett, billionaire aviator, went missing. So started the tale about one of the missles going missing, too.
It was reported Fossett was lost&there was a search for him in the Nevada desert. These conspiracy sites started speculating the government was actually looking for the lost missile.

There has not been any word on either Fossett or the missile in about four days. Makes you wonder about the media, and the government!

[htcdude]

I dunno about explosions before the crashes, that would've been dumb cos like NeonVomit said the building would've been evacuated. I've heard a lot about explosions going off after the planes hit, and steelwork being cut at certain angles through a lot of the lower part of the building...i dunno though...it's fun to believe it was a conspiracy

[StratoTimo]

I dunno about explosions before the crashes, that would've been dumb cos like NeonVomit said the building would've been evacuated. I've heard a lot about explosions going off after the planes hit, and steelwork being cut at certain angles through a lot of the lower part of the building...i dunno though...it's fun to believe it was a conspiracy

Yes... Like Tolkki said, I say also! Explosions was about two second before plain crashed to tower...
And Why there isn't been any news about that Tower 7 and that also crashed down? I've never heard that before that document of yesterday

[JensJohansson]

I don´t think they were travelling at such a high speed. They would not be able to hit the targets at that speed..that´s cruising altitude speed. I think they were flying around 300 km per hour speed. Those people who believe in conspiracy regarding the towers say that the explosions were just seconds before the planes hit. And to add fuel to the fire, the building constructor is in fact saying that the towers were "designed to take the impact from a jet". The weirdest is the collapsing of the third building, number seven that had only a minimum fire cause it was further away. The building did contain a CIA archive. Lot of smoke, some fire too. But still I don´t believe to the exploding the buildings theory. Slamming the jets to their targets would have been well enough for what whomever was trying to achieve with that.

My understanding is that it was mainly the fire proofing around the steel being blown away, and then the steel buckling as a result of the heat.

WTC7 was struck by a lot of debris from WTC1.

http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1CollapseofTowers.pdf

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/WTC%20Part%20I ... 0Final.pdf

The speed estimates from NIST are 700 ± 48 km/h for the first plane (WTC 1), and 870 ± 39 km/h for the second plane (WTC 2). I assume they worked their way back from the video tapes to get those figures. Yes, completely outside the design envelope for those planes at that altitude.. but hey.. virgins are waiting, better hurry up!

I do know they managed to do it, but I dont know how difficult it would be to hit the target at those speeds.. perhaps someone with mircosoft flight simulator can try it and see what happens

I think the aircraft impact they talked about in the 60s when the WTC was designed was a Boeing 707. But anyway, an architect proudly saying his building can withstand this or withstand that ... does not make it so. The only real way to find out for sure would be to actually fly a plane into the thing and see what happens... or better, build fifty empty buildings and fly fifty remote controlled planes into them and count how many buildings are standing afterwards. (Sounds expensive but sort of fun .. )

Anything else is just speculation until it actually happens.. architects don't normally specify office buildings to withstand dynamic forces from being struck by aircraft or military weapons. They talk about stuff like wind and maybe earthquakes for dynamic forces and wave their hands around a little, hoping that there is never going to be a really big earthquake or a huge fucking storm. I guess the WTC was not a "normal" building so they did think even a little about aircraft. But reality is much more unpredictable than anything you can prepare for ..

[Rebel]

Yes. That is pretty much. BTW, did you saw the document on Finnish TV at spring which was made by vice President of U.S.A?
I didn't saw it but I heard that on that document they said that that attack to 9/11 was made by U.S, not Al Qaeda.
But if that's true... U.S Coverment really sucks because they lie to everybody.
PS: I need to know name of that document because I want to see that

Dick Cheney shot a friend in the face. And considering some of the other things he's done. I would be appaled to hear he planned 9/11 is some way or another, but I would most likely believe it if the evidence was strong enough.

[htcdude]

Pah...whatever people say, i'm going to watch Equilibrium now! I've not seen it before

[stratoplayer]

Pah...whatever people say, i'm going to watch Equilibrium now! I've not seen it before

It's awesome, one of the best gun fights ever!

[stratohawk]

The whole fucking Afghanistan project was/is ridiculous. Same goes with Iraq war.

No, absolutely not. Do not make the mistake to equate those two campaigns. Those are two completely different situations.

[I'm too tired so I refer to my post on the previous page ]

[IceBreaker]

Back to the subject showed by StratoTimo on the 1st page ´bout US Goverment being behind the attacks.

Except those few TV documents you have watched or heard, have you read/noticed more evidences for that theory. You could tell or even link a few. Instead of just having heard it from a friend who seems to have more knowledge about the attacks.

Also, how do you explain the young arabs attending flight schools before and gathering them all to those four hijacked jets. US Goverment supporting those anti-USA thinking islam fundamentalists or even the whole al-Qaeda?? Sounds way too remote. (Excluding the supporting arabs in the Afghan war in the 80´s against the Soviets case). Having the placed bombs (assuming those being put by the people related the goverment) under the towers and the Arab hijacked jets in the air going towards the same target > just a big coincidence?

To my ears the conspiracy theory you´re showing is just a normal well selling "hit" tale.

[browneyedgirl]

Think jihadists are not serious?

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=57596

Maybe they are just jealous.

@Jens, great post&credible explanation, but you are wasting your time. Like I said, people are going to believe what they want to, and if people stubbornly get it in their head USA was responsible for 9/11, no amount of proof or explanation is going to change their mind!

[miditek]

To "free the Iraqi people from the tyrant"? Was Saddam a real threat to the area at that time? No he wasn´t.

Saddam should never have been left in power following Gulf War I. As I'm sure that most will recall, he went positively apeshit and launched attacks against the Kurds in the north, and then there were also some violent reprisals against Shi'ites in the south. Don't you remember the American and British warplanes having to patrol the "no-fly" zones that were implemented after the war? Saddam's intransigence was certainly a thorn in the side of the Clinton administration.

And you can ask Hans Blix, the UN weapons inspector, who protested violently when they were informed the plan of USA attack. He said that there is "nothing there" and even the majority of the army never recovered from papa Bush´s operation.

What I'd like to ask Hans Blix is approximately how much he made off of Saddam. I'd also like to see a search warrant for a complete audit of Blix's finances, in addition to seeing if a trail can be found leading from his house to the bank in Geneva. Ted Turner was bribing Saddam (and looking the other way on reports of atrocities) in order to keep his Baghdad CNN bureau open, so the possibility of Blix being on the take would be difficult to ignore. Saddam has been "open for business" for a long time- and I am certain that he had some interesting relationships with the French, Germans, and Russians during the UN "Oil for Food" scandals.

Why ask Blix? Why not ask former Iraqi Air Marshal Georges H. Sada about WMD? In his new book "Saddam's Secrets", he claims that Saddam actually did bribe and/or otherwise impede UN weapons inspectors while WMD's were being smuggled out of Iraq, on the very days and weeks leading up to the invasion.

Moreover, General Sada also claimed that Saddam had asked him to draw up battle plans for a massive air raid on Israel, and that Saddam intended to burn half of Israel off of the map. The general claims that he convinced Saddam (during a highly technical 90 minute presentation) of the futility of such a venture. He claimed that the IDF would never allow the Iraqi airforce to penetrate its airspace, that the falling WMD's would kill scores of innocent civilians in Jordan and Syria, and that it was all but certain that Jerusalem would in turn retaliate with nuclear weapons.

I would like to personally add that such a scenario could very well have convinced Israel to invoke it's own doomsday scenario known as the "Samson Option", where all of Israel's enemies get hit with nuclear weapons.

I would probably take Sada at his word much more so, given his status as an Iraqi national, war hero, etc., but it is interesting to note that he was no Ba'ath party bully-boy, but an Assyrian Christian, which is most definitely a minority in Iraq today. Moreover, General Sada attends a church that is now located in the former military HQ where he convinced Saddam not to launch the suicidal strikes against Israel. That is certainly food for thought.

[NeonVomit]

Fact: The entire UN inspection team failed to find any WMDs.

Fact: The invading forces found no WMDs, and none were used against them.

All else is speculation and until hard evidence comes to light, there is nothing to convince me otherwise. It was a pretext for invading, and a poor one at that. Okay, you'll say he hid them in Syria... why exactly? What possible motive would he have for that? Wouldn't he use them against the approaching forces? Or was he suddenly worried about his own population? He was going down and he knew it, so why not cause horrendous casualties to his sworn enemy, the USA?

Saddam was not the type to shy away from using WMDs on his own soil while being invaded. I believe if he had them, he would have used them.

[Carcass]

Fact: The entire UN inspection team failed to find any WMDs.

Fact: The invading forces found no WMDs, and none were used against them.

All else is speculation and until hard evidence comes to light, there is nothing to convince me otherwise. It was a pretext for invading, and a poor one at that. Okay, you'll say he hid them in Syria... why exactly? What possible motive would he have for that? Wouldn't he use them against the approaching forces? Or was he suddenly worried about his own population? He was going down and he knew it, so why not cause horrendous casualties to his sworn enemy, the USA?

Saddam was not the type to shy away from using WMDs on his own soil while being invaded. I believe if he had them, he would have used them.

...and the US knew that, otherwise they would have never in a thousand years invaded Iraq and risked a nuclear war. Or who am I to know, maybe they would've.

But would Syria have been stupid enough to take Saddam's WMDs and make themselves the next cherry on the cake?

[stratohawk]

To "free the Iraqi people from the tyrant"? Was Saddam a real threat to the area at that time? No he wasn´t.

Saddam should never have been left in power following Gulf War I. As I'm sure that most will recall, he went positively apeshit and launched attacks against the Kurds in the north, and then there were also some violent reprisals against Shi'ites in the south. Don't you remember the American and British warplanes having to patrol the "no-fly" zones that were implemented after the war? Saddam's intransigence was certainly a thorn in the side of the Clinton administration.

And you really believe they cared so much about the Kurds that they later on had to remove Saddam because he was such a cruel dictator that tortured and killed his own people? C'mon... If Saddam was useful due to political reasons for the US administration, he'd still be in power, as the US supported many other barbarous dictators in other countries when they had benefit from it.

And never forget this - it's the best example for US opportunism:




As I often pronounced, I don't say other countries/administrations are not opportunistic or unscrupulous. But what you wrote there - and what I hear/read so many times is simply hypocritical.

[JensJohansson]

@Jens, great post&credible explanation, but you are wasting your time. Like I said, people are going to believe what they want to, and if people stubbornly get it in their head USA was responsible for 9/11, no amount of proof or explanation is going to change their mind!

Hey, I was just quoting the NIST report.. but yeah, I know what you mean.

Obviously those 2-300 engineers that made that report are part of the conspiracy as well. And none of them had any reason (moral or financial, or just to get publicity or attention) to break ranks or talk about this huge conspiracy... but anyway even if they were not in on it, what do all those Ph.D.'s know about engineering or physics in the first place .. fuck those fancy-schmancy FEM simulations using 800000 elements for the aircraft alone.. look at this grainy video I found on youtube, you can see explosive charges and Satan's face is in the smoke!!

Think jihadists are not serious?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=57596
Maybe they are just jealous.

Go Britney!!

I tell you, people like her may be the best weapon the West has against jihadists of all colors and shapes. Because when you have a man's balls, his heart will follow. Obviously this dude realizes this:

If I meet these whores I will have the honor – I repeat, I will have the honor – to be the first one to cut the heads off Madonna and Britney Spears if they will keep spreading their satanic culture against Islam.

... I definitely consider anybody that makes someone called "Muhammad Abdel-Al" this pissed off an ally in the jihad against jihad. Welcome to the secular west, Muhammad.... women are not required to wear burqas here.... and these "whores" are conquering your potential martyr brethren's balls

[JensJohansson]

What I'd like to ask Hans Blix is approximately how much he made off of Saddam. I'd also like to see a search warrant for a complete audit of Blix's finances, in addition to seeing if a trail can be found leading from his house to the bank in Geneva.

I think Blix may still be a Swedish resident, and presumably you could then just request the first page of his tax return if you wanted (since it would be a public document).

Blix strikes me as pretty trustworthy anyway.. but I don't know if I would buy a used car from Ted Turner.

[browneyedgirl]

Fact: The entire UN inspection team failed to find any WMDs.

Fact: The invading forces found no WMDs, and none were used against them.

Yeah, because Saddam cleaned house&used his WMD(gas&chemical agents)on his own people! I do not think anyone will argue that except these conspiracy theorists, some of which beleve the USA did the atrocities pictured in the photos of the Kurds which were killed by Saddams WMD.
Why any sane person would defend Saddam in any way, shape or form is beyond me!

@Jens, Britney&Madonna turn those guys on but they won't admit it.

[NeonVomit]

Fact: The entire UN inspection team failed to find any WMDs.

Fact: The invading forces found no WMDs, and none were used against them.

Yeah, because Saddam cleaned house&used his WMD(gas&chemical agents)on his own people! I do not think anyone will argue that except these conspiracy theorists, some of which beleve the USA did the atrocities pictured in the photos of the Kurds which were killed by Saddams WMD.
Why any sane person would defend Saddam in any way, shape or form is beyond me!

Saddam was supposedly possessed of enough chemical and biological weapons to pose a serious threat to American national security, not just take out a proportion of the Iraqi Kurdish population. That was meant to be one of the reasons that the war took place at all.

Again, if he did indeed have WMDs, why did he not use them when he needed them most? He obviously didn't care about innocent civilians dying or international opinion.

I am not defending Saddam. I am saying that the pretext given for the war was false. Saddam got what he deserved, but the ends did not justify the means.

Those two statements are widely accepted as the truth and I have seen no evidence to convince me otherwise.

[stratoplayer]

Fact: The entire UN inspection team failed to find any WMDs.

Fact: The invading forces found no WMDs, and none were used against them.

Yeah, because Saddam cleaned house&used his WMD(gas&chemical agents)on his own people! I do not think anyone will argue that except these conspiracy theorists, some of which beleve the USA did the atrocities pictured in the photos of the Kurds which were killed by Saddams WMD.
Why any sane person would defend Saddam in any way, shape or form is beyond me!

Saddam was supposedly possessed of enough chemical and biological weapons to pose a serious threat to American national security, not just take out a proportion of the Iraqi Kurdish population. That was meant to be one of the reasons that the war took place at all.

Again, if he did indeed have WMDs, why did he not use them when he needed them most? He obviously didn't care about innocent civilians dying or international opinion.

I am not defending Saddam. I am saying that the pretext given for the war was false. Saddam got what he deserved, but the ends did not justify the means.

Those two statements are widely accepted as the truth and I have seen no evidence to convince me otherwise.

Any way you look at it, Saddam was bluffing, he bluffed since the 70's when he was put in power (three guesses to who bankrolled and supported him) and in the beginning of the Gulf War he chanted that it would be the "Mother of all conflicts"... His old russian weapons worked craptastically against the Allies (read US).

BUT I don\t recall him ever threatening to use WMD or Biological weapons... He would have used them back in 1991 or in 2003. Hell, his "dirty" move was lighting the oil fields.

[miditek]

I wouldn't compare 9/11 with Chechnya. This is an absolutely different issue...

Definitely not comparing the two, just ridiculing the rumors and fantasies behind both.

I wonder why Osama bin Laden shows up at this time after 3 years of absence? Where has he been hiding?

In a cave in Pakistan, most likely. He's a fucking coward, and knows better than to raise his head up - since it's likely to get blown off by a .50 cal Barrett sniper rifle. I do like the shoe polish that he's been using on his beard though. Makes him look much younger!

Al Qaeda, trying to show their figurehead is alive? I thought he was on kidney dialysis.

Yep, and I'll bet it takes a lot of gas in the generator (or a lot of tribesmen pedaling on a bicycle) to keep the machine running in his Hobbitt hole. He's better hope that he has a bio-med tech nearby, in case the machine breaks down.

So.. missing 'W' keys were dwarfed by the 9/11 attacks.

9/11 is dwarfed by the destruction of all the conflicts of Europe.

And those in their turn are dwarfed by the issue of global warming.

And if someone releases a bad enough bioweapon, we can just forget about global warming.... it will be a trivial non-issue.

Bioweapons would be very bad indeed, and some time ago we did discuss whether or not global warming would be negated by nuclear winter.

So..... wonderful times to be alive... all hail the idiotic knee-jerk media and arrogant and stupid politicians while the ship sinks. Barkeep! We need another round to try to forget this crap!

Since everyone's going to die anyway,

You pour...

while I twist up a nice big fatty for everyone!

I think that I still have the garguantuan size rolling papers that originally came with one of my ancient Cheech and Chong vinyl LP's up in the attic somewhere.

Nevertheless, nowadays, the whole international community should think about how to solve the situation there. It's absolutely coward and absurd to lean back and point at the Americans saying now they should get out of that mess on their own. The situation nowadays (NOT the state that was existing with Saddam Hussein) is a real menace to world peace.

Well said, @stratohawk. Although we may have to agree to disagree that Saddam's regime was not a threat to world peace.

[Lightyear]

Well said, @stratohawk. Although we may have to agree to disagree that Saddam's regime was not a threat to world peace.

It certainly wasn't a threat to the U.S because they didn't have any WMD. Hell, they even took over the whole country with very little or no military resistance, how can that country be a threat to world peace when they don't even have a proper military force ??

Secondly, the U.S govt. doesn't give a f### about world peace. There are so many dictators around the world that are far worse than or equally bad as Saddam, so If the U.S was such a Mother Teresa, they would have gone to those countries as well.. but NO.. those countries have no oil, so it's not worth it.

Edit: Why do I have to wait before I can make an edit ??

[black death]

I wouldn't compare 9/11 with Chechnya. This is an absolutely different issue...

Definitely not comparing the two, just ridiculing the rumors and fantasies behind both.

Sure, but I wouldn't even compare the rumours

It certainly wasn't a threat to the U.S because they didn't have any WMD. Hell, they even took over the whole country with very little or no military resistance, how can that country be a threat to world peace when they don't even have a proper military force ??

When somebody doesn't have any WMD, it doesn't mean that he's not a threat. Countries with regime like Saddam's are always a threat. The threat doesn't necessarily has to be in military...

Secondly, the U.S govt. doesn't give a f### about world peace. There are so many dictators around the world that are far worse than or equally bad as Saddam, so If the U.S was such a Mother Teresa, they would have gone to those countries as well.. but NO.. those countries have no oil, so it's not worth it.

Iraq is not the only "oil country" that has (had, respectively) at least questionable government. But nor USA have such facilities to be everywhere even if they wanted.
Besides that, there are e.g. UNO forces in some of those countries trying to stabilize them peacefully.

[exe knight]

This is what the "operations" in Afghanistan and Iraq have cost 2001-2007.
603 Billion US Dollars. That´s pretty much says it all...

Did you count it your self?

[TimoTolkki]

This is what the "operations" in Afghanistan and Iraq have cost 2001-2007.
603 Billion US Dollars. That´s pretty much says it all...

Did you count it your self?

That was from the Petraeus report, but there are different figures.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington ... -war_x.htm

http://www.nationalpriorities.org/Cost- ... War-3.html

Half the world's people live on less than $2 a day. World Bank, "Global Poverty Measures 1987-1998 and Projections for the Future," 1999.

1.2 billion people live on less than $1 per day. World Bank, "Global Poverty Measures 1987-1998 and Projections for the Future," 1999.

Each day in the developing world, 30,500 children die from preventable diseases such as diarrhea, acute respiratory infections or malaria. Malnutrition is associated with over half of those deaths.

Bread for the World (UNICEF, World Health Organization)


Do you people understand what these insane figures mean?

[exe knight]

Do you people understand what these insane figures mean?

I quess I do, there's not really anythgin really strange there.

[TimoTolkki]

Do you people understand what these insane figures mean?

I quess I do, there's not really anythgin really strange there.

I think there is something really strange there. I don´t understand these figures at all. I don´t understand how this is possible and that nobody is doing anything.

[black death]

I think there is something really strange there. I don´t understand these figures at all. I don´t understand how this is possible and that nobody is doing anything.

I know what you mean. But I wouldn't say that nobody is doing anything. The crucial problem is that those who have the power (particularly governments) to do something with this totally insane situation are doing nothing . There are many non-governmental organizations who are trying to do something or to put pressure on governments and other subjects to do something. But unfortunately their possibilities are just limited.

[RazielSR]

There are many non-governmental organizations who are trying to do something or to put pressure on governments and other subjects to do something. But unfortunately their possibilities are just limited.

Yes, that's true, but I don't trust this organizations either. It's always the same.

If these little organizations becomes bigger, you can be sure they will act the same way as a big goverment.