Hi, Guest
Holy crap...
First of all, I didn't post this link hoping to force ideas down people's throats. People must take everything with a grain of salt. This movie poses some serious and REAL questions that need to be answered. Do you seriously deny that this movie poses some real questions?
You speak with such an air of over compensated intelligence and yet you refuse to have an intelligent conversation. In two posts now you've basically called me stupid.
The amazing thing is that people believed that a fire could actually destroy a building whose steel is certified to more than 3000F and was designed to withstand way more than an airplane hitting it. My engineering degree forbids me to believe that a building will FREE FALL after burning for 45 minutes. Those buildings could not have collapsed the way they did without other detonations. Please do not lecture me on engineering.
I just would like to know how you negate the following:
- Audio tapes of firemen inside the buildings reporting numerous explosions.
- The whole bottom floor of the building exploded, and the base structure of the buildings completely melted.
- Billions of dollars of gold missing from the safes below the towers.
- The thousands of put options (bets that a stock will fall) days before the attacks.
- The Billion dollar insurance policy taken out on the towers 6 weeks before the attacks.
That's just a small percentage of the real questions that need to be answered. Besides the fact that for both of the other two crashes (pentagon and flight 93) there was absolutely no wreckage found.
Flight 93: Next time you are in a plane at 30,000 ft, try using your cell phone like they do in that "movie".
Obviously, not everything in this movie is true, everything has to be taken with a grain of salt. But to say outright that it's all bull, now THAT is ignorant. And please, keep this civil, no need to insult people's intelligence, that's not the way to start an intelligent conversation.
Plus, we can argue ad nauseum, I just wanted for people to see this so that they can ask some questions themselves. If it only reinforces your beliefs that's fine too, but at least they were open minded enough to see it.
First of all, I didn't post this link hoping to force ideas down people's throats. People must take everything with a grain of salt. This movie poses some serious and REAL questions that need to be answered. Do you seriously deny that this movie poses some real questions?
You speak with such an air of over compensated intelligence and yet you refuse to have an intelligent conversation. In two posts now you've basically called me stupid.
The amazing thing is that people believed that a fire could actually destroy a building whose steel is certified to more than 3000F and was designed to withstand way more than an airplane hitting it. My engineering degree forbids me to believe that a building will FREE FALL after burning for 45 minutes. Those buildings could not have collapsed the way they did without other detonations. Please do not lecture me on engineering.
I just would like to know how you negate the following:
- Audio tapes of firemen inside the buildings reporting numerous explosions.
- The whole bottom floor of the building exploded, and the base structure of the buildings completely melted.
- Billions of dollars of gold missing from the safes below the towers.
- The thousands of put options (bets that a stock will fall) days before the attacks.
- The Billion dollar insurance policy taken out on the towers 6 weeks before the attacks.
That's just a small percentage of the real questions that need to be answered. Besides the fact that for both of the other two crashes (pentagon and flight 93) there was absolutely no wreckage found.
Flight 93: Next time you are in a plane at 30,000 ft, try using your cell phone like they do in that "movie".
Obviously, not everything in this movie is true, everything has to be taken with a grain of salt. But to say outright that it's all bull, now THAT is ignorant. And please, keep this civil, no need to insult people's intelligence, that's not the way to start an intelligent conversation.
Plus, we can argue ad nauseum, I just wanted for people to see this so that they can ask some questions themselves. If it only reinforces your beliefs that's fine too, but at least they were open minded enough to see it.