Conspiracy of the day
Conspiracy of the day
Out of context: Reply #422
- Started
- Last post
- 1,307 Responses
- moldero-1
- son of a b####!
hadn't seen this one!!!maquito - I know dozens of people who watched it happen with their own eyes.monospaced
- I don't even know why we're discussing this nonsense of no planes, just tell me how these planes brought down two towers symmetrically and we're goodGeorgesIV
- I agree, Georges. This never really set well with me either.monospaced
- there aren't many case studies to go on. Unless you recreate 9/11 a few dozen times, we're all pissing in the wind.Fax_Benson
- ^ lots of examples of burning skyscrapers that didn't collapse.fadein11
- science, logic and common sense brought them down. why not just bomb the buildings in the first place and claim that it was the terrorists like in 93?_niko
- why go through all the trouble of flying planes into them and then bringing them down via explosives? tell me that and we're good_niko
- wasn't really symmetrical, landed on bldg 7 which was a good distance away._niko
- how many burning skyscrapers the size of the WTT's that were also hit by planes that weakened the structure? 0._niko
- and what was the point of triggered explosives anyway? everyone above the strike zone was fucked, everyone below pretty much got out, so they wouldn't_niko
- ...necessarily be able to kill more people by blowing it up, and if their plan was maximum casualties why wait so long after impact to do it? why give people a_niko
- ...chance to escape?_niko
- it wasn't about lives, it was about destroying information, records and covering up traces. That is if it was an inside job.BabySnakes
- son of a b####!