Bill Maher kicks out 9/11 conspiracy nut!

[BITEYOASS]

I would have done the same thing Bill did:

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CzrUD-5hf1A"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CzrUD-5hf1A" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

[DrMaddVibe]

Kooks will be kooks!

At least Bill isn't having any of it.

[Hummarstra]

I was two blocks from WTC when it all went down. I'll never forget the sound of the buildings collasping. For years I have described as the sound of a handful of match sticks as you slowly bend and break them. A slow cascading sound that started very small and gradually got louder and louder. There was no "boom" or bomb sound. And the windows blowing out as the towers came down were'nt from detonations but from the air on the floors having no place to go (as the building pancaked) but the path of least resistance - out the glass windows. That's why you see the windows blowing out as the building fell.

[Nickdfresh]

You know, nothing says credibility and articulation like being a fucking crazy bitch screaming in the audience during a show taping. Thank God for people like him for showing me the light...

[jhale667]

...As if being disruptive during a show taping is going to advance their cause.

I mean, I've seen pics of the Tower 7 collapse, and while it DOES look fishy (no impact, fires, nothing, just a building collapsing in much the same manner as a controlled demolition, but there's no explosions!),
I'd like to hear a scientific reason for it...but I'm not running down to CBS to yell at a talk-show host...:p



That's the only gif file I could find quickly, but whether you believe the conspiracy theories or not -
does that not look a bit odd?

[jhale667]

Here's a larger version...



Anyone else think that looks weird? :confused:

[Nickdfresh]

Well, being an animated GIF, yeah, it looks weird...

[jhale667]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Well, being an animated GIF, yeah, it looks weird...

:p You know what I mean...
If the building was supposedly fatally damaged by debris from the falling towers on the NORTH side or whatever,
wouldn't it have collapsed SIDEWAYS, instead of straight down ala an implosion? :confused:
I'm just saying I can see where people could draw that conclusion...not that they should go start yelling during tapings of "Real Time"...

[FORD]

Yes it was a controlled demolition, No, yelling at Bill Maher isn't going to change anything.

[Warham]

I don't believe it was any kind of controlled demolition.

How many people would have been involved in such an operation? 500? 1000? How do they keep all these people quiet?

Conspiracy theorists squeeze the evidence to fit into their theory, and if any evidence contradicts their theory, they disregard it.

[Warham]

The US government can't keep the NSA spying and other top secret programs under wrap, because of leaks, but for some reason a huge plot to take out the WTC and the Pentagon on 9/11 could survive undetected for years. Heck, more information has gotten out from Area 51, and that doesn't even exist, according to the government.

It's ridiculous.

[jhale667]

Originally posted by WAR
I don't believe it was any kind of controlled demolition.

While I agree it would be near impossible to keep something like that quiet,
NO ONE has been able to explain why it "imploded" when according to the official info, it was damage to ONE side that took it down.
I'm no engineer, but doesn't it stand to reason the damaged side would have fallen FIRST, thus causing the building to list to one side as it fell, rather than seemingly collapsing into its own footprint?
Please explain...

[Nickdfresh]

I think I've read enough about it to think it did implode because of fire and after being peppered by debris and weakened by the collapse of the Twin Towers, which was a seismic event...

I don't know what about that is so hard to believe. But what makes me sick of this crap is that the WTC7 has become the last stand of the "Truth Movement" as most of the conspiracy 'evidence' they've thrown out there has been continually refuted and discredited...

I'm still waiting for the alternate "Truth Movement" MIHOP theory on how the gov't made four airliners and it's passengers disappear, plant explosives, prepared USAF drone aircraft, and how it was kept quiet with thousands involved by the sheer necessity of it. Nor have I seen any chart or time line on how the MIHOP forces were able to plan and organize this operation, or what assets such an operation would have required...

But all I've ever seen is "but it couldn't happen like that..." and "but that doesn't look right..." blah blah blah blah...


Of course, if this were done, then it would they would be forced to place their own theories under the same hyper-analysis that they do the official story...

[jhale667]

I've never heard of an implosion caused by fire...explosive detonations at the foundation, sure, but...

I agree, it would take hundreds, if not thousands of people to pull it off, and it wouldn't easliy be kept secret forever, but....

If I remember correctly, 9/11 was the first time ANY skyscraper/high-rise building in history has been brought down by fire, much less three....
I'm just sayin'...

[Warham]

Yeah, but it's also the first skyscraper to be brought down by two airliners both carrying 1,000s of gallons of fuel.