Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » 9/11
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401043 is a reply to message #400984] |
Mon, 31 August 2009 18:38   |
 |
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| DarkKnight wrote on Mon, 31 August 2009 18:34 |
news flash Einstein, Bush wasn't involved either
|
It was on his watch. He was the Commander-In-Chief at the time. It was his responsibility (Or at least, the responsibility of the people he hired) to prevent that sort of thing from happening. While he probably didn't cause 9/11 directly, he's certainly guilty through inaction.
| DarkKnight wrote on Mon, 31 August 2009 18:36 |
ok well I just got home and I dont care to spend my whole night arguing with conspiracy nut jobs. have a nice night.
|
Conspiracy nut job? Lol.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
[Updated on: Mon, 31 August 2009 18:38] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401049 is a reply to message #400984] |
Mon, 31 August 2009 18:49 |
dr3w2
Messages: 485
Registered: September 2006
Location: Ottawa,Canada
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
Tupac planned 9/11, him and Osama are home boys now living it up with MJ down in Latin America... Elvis wasn't invited.
n00bstories Server Administrator
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401056 is a reply to message #401040] |
Mon, 31 August 2009 19:10 |
 |
GEORGE ZIMMER
Messages: 2605
Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Mon, 31 August 2009 20:33 |
Clinton gets a "pass" because he had nothing to do with anything. He isn't involved at all and the only reason his name is being brought up is because conservatives like yourself, Mr. ZIMMER, and Rush Limbawwww have a pathological need to paint the Clinton family as the root of all evil. It's fucking pathetic.
|
I... wait, what? I was, again, making a hypothetical argument, assuming that conspiracy theories were true.
Hence my earlier comment, that every President would HAVE to have been involved. Yes, I know their goals and such are vastly different- hence WHY they would have to all be in on it, and all their goals/ideals/etc would have had to have been fake.
Which, of course, is even more bullshit, proving that 9/11 conspiracy theorists are ridiculous.
Toggle Spoiler| Scrin wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 13:22 |
| cAmpa wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 12:45 |
Scrin, stop pming people to get the building bars.
|
FUCK YOU AND THIS SHIT GAME WITH YOUR SCRIPTS!!! I HAVE ASKING YOU AND ANOTHER NOOBS HERE ABOUT HELP WITH THAT BUILDING ICONS FEATURES FOR YEARS, BUT YOU KEEP IGNORING ME AND KEEP WRITE SHIT, SO BURN YOU AND YOUR ASSLICKERS FRIENDS, THIS TIME I'M NOT COME BACK!!!!!!!!!   
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401058 is a reply to message #401056] |
Mon, 31 August 2009 19:26 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Mon, 31 August 2009 19:10 |
Hence my earlier comment, that every President would HAVE to have been involved. Yes, I know their goals and such are vastly different- hence WHY they would have to all be in on it, and all their goals/ideals/etc would have had to have been fake.
|
...What?
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401062 is a reply to message #400984] |
Mon, 31 August 2009 19:41 |
appshot
Messages: 83
Registered: August 2006
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
|
Nice Fallacy usage Mr. DarkKnight. Also, you think that conspirators are idiots. Way to be ignorant, there.
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401080 is a reply to message #401027] |
Mon, 31 August 2009 22:16 |
 |
nikki6ixx
Messages: 2545
Registered: August 2007
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Mon, 31 August 2009 19:56 |
While I get what you're trying to do, I don't get why you're dragging Clinton into this. Why not blame it on Carter while you're at it?
|
Actually, the threat was festering for quite some time before George Bush's presidency. If you read 'Against all Enemies' by Richard Clarke, you'll see that both the Clinton and Bush administrations had failed in a number of ways in curbing the attack.
However, the blame lies less with the indicisiveness of either president, and more with the various agencies like the military and CIA being incredibly incompetent. It's shameful to see that the government had been tracking Osama bin Laden and were on the verge of using an unmanned drone to drop a small payload onto him between his daily rounds, only to have the idea aborted because those agencies are idiots and won't let the other do shit-all without bitchin'.
Renegade:
| Aircraftkiller wrote on Fri, 10 January 2014 16:56 |
The only game where everyone competes to be an e-janitor.
|
[Updated on: Mon, 31 August 2009 22:26] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401092 is a reply to message #401043] |
Tue, 01 September 2009 02:33 |
 |
DarkKnight
Messages: 754
Registered: May 2006
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Mon, 31 August 2009 20:38 |
| DarkKnight wrote on Mon, 31 August 2009 18:34 |
news flash Einstein, Bush wasn't involved either
|
It was on his watch. He was the Commander-In-Chief at the time. It was his responsibility (Or at least, the responsibility of the people he hired) to prevent that sort of thing from happening. While he probably didn't cause 9/11 directly, he's certainly guilty through inaction.
|
How would you suggest a president might have prevented 9-11 or even prevent something similar from happening today? Just curious since you seem to know all the answers.
| appshot wrote on Mon, 31 August 2009 21:41 |
Nice Fallacy usage Mr. DarkKnight. Also, you think that conspirators are idiots. Way to be ignorant, there.
|
no i think that the conspiracy theory of 9/11 is stupid.
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401135 is a reply to message #400984] |
Tue, 01 September 2009 07:38 |
hazmat68
Messages: 2
Registered: August 2009
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
To pin the blame on any one president is short sighted in my opinion.
Bill Clinton was elected to reduce the deficit and cut the size of government. Intelligence was not a priority at the time and was cut.
George Bush was just coming off the American spy plane landing in China mess when the attacks occured.
It was never concieved that someone or an organization would go to such extremes to attack the USA.
We got caught with our pants down and it hurt.
The signs were there but missed, as for the theories, well, I personally sont believe them, but someone will always try to sell a bill of goods if it meets their agenda.
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401144 is a reply to message #401058] |
Tue, 01 September 2009 08:51 |
|
GEORGE ZIMMER
Messages: 2605
Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Dover wrote on Mon, 31 August 2009 21:26 |
| GEORGE ZIMMER wrote on Mon, 31 August 2009 19:10 |
Hence my earlier comment, that every President would HAVE to have been involved. Yes, I know their goals and such are vastly different- hence WHY they would have to all be in on it, and all their goals/ideals/etc would have had to have been fake.
|
...What?
|
To put it in another way, 9/11 Conspiracy theories are bullshit because of the fact that in order for it to have worked the way people claimed, almost every single President would have had to be super evil and devious and whatnot.
Toggle Spoiler| Scrin wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 13:22 |
| cAmpa wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 12:45 |
Scrin, stop pming people to get the building bars.
|
FUCK YOU AND THIS SHIT GAME WITH YOUR SCRIPTS!!! I HAVE ASKING YOU AND ANOTHER NOOBS HERE ABOUT HELP WITH THAT BUILDING ICONS FEATURES FOR YEARS, BUT YOU KEEP IGNORING ME AND KEEP WRITE SHIT, SO BURN YOU AND YOUR ASSLICKERS FRIENDS, THIS TIME I'M NOT COME BACK!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401190 is a reply to message #401166] |
Tue, 01 September 2009 12:53 |
 |
Prulez
Messages: 439
Registered: August 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
| infusi0n wrote on Tue, 01 September 2009 20:28 |
| andr3w282 wrote on Mon, 31 August 2009 18:12 |
or.. JUST MAYBE there were some extreme islamic people sourced from afganistan and saudi arabia that disagreed with western culture. I know it's a long shot but it is possible! 
|
I hope you aren't serious in believing that?
|
Why wouldn't he be? For all I know, for all I care, andr3w is right.
| nikki6ixx wrote on Fri, 08 May 2009 19:47 |
Every so often, I get this positive feeling that humanity can somehow, possibly attain pure awesomeness, and enlightenment, and that there is light at the end of the road for us all. However, I only need to go to the latest HUD thread at RenForums to remind me of how dumb I was for thinking such stupid things.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401211 is a reply to message #400984] |
Tue, 01 September 2009 15:44 |
appshot
Messages: 83
Registered: August 2006
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
|
i am not sure if i am correct or not... but the world trade center shouldn't have fallen straight down. The laws of physics don't permit it to fall down straight... unless there was a systematical dynamite. And also.. how was it that the building right next to it fell down, way after the original building collapse, and it also fell down straight...WITH NO FIRE OR ANYTHING.
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401214 is a reply to message #401211] |
Tue, 01 September 2009 15:57 |
 |
BlueThen
Messages: 2402
Registered: February 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| appshot wrote on Tue, 01 September 2009 17:44 |
i am not sure if i am correct or not... but the world trade center shouldn't have fallen straight down. The laws of physics don't permit it to fall down straight... unless there was a systematical dynamite. And also.. how was it that the building right next to it fell down, way after the original building collapse, and it also fell down straight...WITH NO FIRE OR ANYTHING.
|
What the FUCK.
Ok, imagine you have a house of cards. You pull one card out, what happens? The entire thing collapses. It doesn't fall sideways.
The point is, the towers weren't completely rigid. If you've ever been in a skyscraper before, you'll find that it twists and swings about slightly in the wind. If it were completely rigid, then it would fall sideways, but this isn't the case.
The surrounding buildings being damaged was pretty obvious and self-explanatory as well. For god's sakes, a SKYSCRAPER collapsed RIGHT next to it! You expected them to stay standing after that?!
Your logic makes me cringe.
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401229 is a reply to message #400984] |
Tue, 01 September 2009 18:42 |
 |
NukeIt15
Messages: 987
Registered: February 2003
Location: Out to lunch
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
I love that argument. It's funny to look at, because it means the person writing it hasn't got a clue how buildings are constructed. Specifically, it means that they haven't got a clue how skyscrapers are constructed. The possibility of a catastrophic failure is part of any architect's design if they're worth two shits; those towers fell more or less straight down because they were designed to do exactly that in the event that they were so compromised.
Actually, they were quite an inspired design for the time they were built; the outer structure (the steel beams running down the sides of the buildings that gave them their iconic look) actually supported a fairly large percentage of the total weight of the building while remaining flexible enough to deal with high winds. Had the planes been low on fuel, the towers would likely still stand today; collisions were a consideration in the design... it's just that nobody in the 1960s thought anyone would plow a fully-fueled airliner into a building deliberately.
Also, do you have any notion of just how much something that big weighs? Once the structural members were weakened by heat, the kinetic energy of the falling upper levels even across an extremely short distance (say a single story) would have been (and was) sufficient to cause cascading failures all the way down. It wouldn't have toppled in any case; toppling requires that the building retain structural integrity in at least one place- but the fire from the jet fuel weakened the steel all the way around the buildings (and in case you were wondering, steel loses much of its strength well below its melting point). Buildings don't just arbitrarily fall over; more often than not they have to be made to fall over by the conditions of the collapse (as when the foundation is knocked out on one side but not on the other).
Anybody who's had basic high school physics should be able to work that much out; look up the overall mass of each tower (which is likely public record on a trivia page somewhere) and work out a rough estimate on how heavy the portions above the impact sites were (1/3? 1/4?). With that, you can work out more or less how much force was exerted on the lower floors when the impact sites gave way. Momentum = Mass * Velocity. Here's a hint: it's gonna be a really, really big number. Then think about whether or not you can really imagine those buildings falling in any other direction than straight down.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine
Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401237 is a reply to message #400984] |
Tue, 01 September 2009 19:31 |
 |
slosha
Messages: 1540
Registered: September 2008
Location: North Dakota FTW
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
All I have to say is, we need to find that mother fucker and the rest of those fucks and put them out of their fucking misery. Nice and slow, so they feel every single man, woman and child they fucking helped kill.
The road I cruise is a bitch now, baby.
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401241 is a reply to message #400984] |
Tue, 01 September 2009 20:51 |
 |
Ryan3k
Messages: 363
Registered: September 2004
Location: USA
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
to me, the only weird thing about 9/11 was that the wtc7 building collapsed. i never really understood how or why that happened, but then again, i haven't looked into it very much.
A Path Beyond
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401250 is a reply to message #401241] |
Tue, 01 September 2009 22:28 |
|
GEORGE ZIMMER
Messages: 2605
Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Ryan3k wrote on Tue, 01 September 2009 22:51 |
to me, the only weird thing about 9/11 was that the wtc7 building collapsed. i never really understood how or why that happened, but then again, i haven't looked into it very much.
|
Same here. Other than that, the rest of the shit's pretty self explanatory.
Then again, for the most part, New York itself isn't exactly a stable city to begin with. It's practically built right on the water- the fact that the whole city didn't go under kinda surprised me.
Toggle Spoiler| Scrin wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 13:22 |
| cAmpa wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 12:45 |
Scrin, stop pming people to get the building bars.
|
FUCK YOU AND THIS SHIT GAME WITH YOUR SCRIPTS!!! I HAVE ASKING YOU AND ANOTHER NOOBS HERE ABOUT HELP WITH THAT BUILDING ICONS FEATURES FOR YEARS, BUT YOU KEEP IGNORING ME AND KEEP WRITE SHIT, SO BURN YOU AND YOUR ASSLICKERS FRIENDS, THIS TIME I'M NOT COME BACK!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401255 is a reply to message #401237] |
Tue, 01 September 2009 22:48 |
|
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Glock~ wrote on Tue, 01 September 2009 19:31 |
All I have to say is, we need to find that mother fucker and the rest of those fucks and put them out of their fucking misery. Nice and slow, so they feel every single man, woman and child they fucking helped kill.
|
Revenga!
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401314 is a reply to message #400984] |
Wed, 02 September 2009 13:21 |
|
slosha
Messages: 1540
Registered: September 2008
Location: North Dakota FTW
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
I bet if we put as much effort into finding Osama as we are into Iraq, I bet we would have found him years ago.
The road I cruise is a bitch now, baby.
|
|
|
|
| Re: 9/11 [message #401347 is a reply to message #400984] |
Wed, 02 September 2009 21:14 |
 |
infusi0n
Messages: 53
Registered: October 2008
Location: New York
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
Ok, would the uneducated people please stop posting in this thread. Read up on the concept of gravity and paths of least resistance and maybe come back to it?
The US spent MILLIONS on the 9/11 commission and I can say 2 words that proves 500+ pages completely wrong. What are they? Building 7.
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Nov 14 17:55:49 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01369 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
