So again, my theory explains more of the evidence than yours does.

I dont think we need to beat around the bush. Obviously "they" is Mossad/Jews.

That being said I am curious how does 9/11 trutherism incorporate Bin Laden admitting AQ was behind the attacks? Is he believed to be a Mossad asset in 9/11 truther lore?

Do you guys think its unreasonable to explore the conspiracy side of things?

I feel like it is apart of due diligence, leave no stone unturned etc

I've been trying to explore it, these mother****ers won't give us even a sliver of what it actually is.

something besides the official story happened

the motivation being the trillions of dollars that we spent fighting the war, also larry silversteins double insurance payout

Can you be a tad more specific?

Well, why don't you convene with the rest of the brain trust, and once you guys work out what "something besides" is, you come on back here and let us know.

It was explored in depth beginning around 2004 or 2005, and was fully debunked about 15 seconds later. Think we're good to move on now.

There were 28 classified pages unsealed only in 2016

And it changed nothing on this topic.

I understand that you have a healthy imagination but a bunch of OGs willing to risk possibly commiting mass murder by Macgyvering a demo job in the hopes to receive partial payment despite the building having one side of it completely rip to shreds and on fire leading to insurance payment anyways should at least givw you some pause.

What's the evidence that WTC 7 was in the condition you're describing it? I've never heard anything like that before.

I've gone down that road in this forum already. The arguments have been submitted. You can see David Chandler and Tony Szamboti of A&E for 9/11 truth for technical explanations as to why we know that, if not exactly how, the buildings fell. The planes were theatrical ruses.

Plus you have stated, repeatedly, that you don't enjoy my humor. You think my writing is crap. You have no use for my rhetorical flourishes. But that, and a few more angles to approach the material, is really all I have to add to the credentialed experts views. You want me to spend a half hour putting together some presentation so you can respond with the posting equivalent of a fart noise. Why would I do that?

No your theory hand waves, lies, obfuscates, and ultimately ignores hugely anomalous phenomena such as the enormous heat blooms under all 3 sites or the huge amount of molten metal pouring out of the South tower before it collapses. It ignores the sounds of explosions caught on audio and reported by eye (ear) witnesses. I could go on but you just ignore these things. You are so obedient that you have suppressed all curiosity.

Time for some more psychology. D2 do you believe that if you disobey the state that you will become a penniless crackhead or something? Is that why you hate me so much? I stoke your fear of being voted off the island? People have lost their careers for not aligning with the propaganda line. You should be careful. Not being a sheeple is a risky game, not for everyone.

You shouldn't be surprised someone really good at physics doesn't comment on 9/11. I explained why that is.

It's traditional for the poster making outlandish claims to provide at least a summary of those claims with some supporting evidence rather than directing their audience to view a documentary. Most posters manage to do this without spending half an hour, but given your writing style, I can see why you might find this a challenge. Regardless, we appear to be at an impasse; perhaps PW can watch your documentary and provide a write up, as he seems sufficiently interested in the subject.

I don't hate you, I find you annoying and your writing style grandiloquent. In any case, I don't know how you managed to get "sharks, if Deuces is right, my whole world might get turned upside down!" from "you're a pretentious jackoff who loves the sound of his own voice". Probably through a similar chain of reasoning to the one that led you to conclude that it wasn't airplanes and fires that brought down the buildings.

I imagine there's a good reason for it. I also imagine that reason is not what you think it is.

Uhh no you’re ignoring the trillions of dollars we paid out due to Iraq/ Afghanistan/syria/ Libya


Why was Halliburton making lots of money and the VP was on their board?

There are literal photos of a gash all the way up and down the height of the building and the sw corner is completely gone.

Deuces, your theory waves all that away also. You can't explain enormous heat blooms or even why the towers fell at all. This is why no one with basic critical thinking skills is ever taking your conspiracy nonsense seriously ever.

Composite of two images showing the vertical gash carved out of the side of WTC7 facing the towers' collapse.


The entire SW corner of WTC7 was completely gone after the collapse of the towers.

Here is a photo of the vertical gounge being carved out of WTC7 as one of the towers collapses directly into the side of it.



These "it collapsed into its own footprint people don't even understand how extremely much it DID NOT. It collapsed very sideways, away from the camera point of view and into the buildings across the street. Here are photos of WTC7 debris on the ROOF of buildings across the street.

How come there weren’t any evidence of planes at the pentagon? No photos. My buddy was there trying to rescue his mom. Said he saw zero evidence of planes

They released a video showing four frames.

Of all the conspiracy claims around 9/11 the ones that say planes didn't even hit 1 or more of the 3 buildings (meaning both towers and the Pentagon) are by the far the most ridiculous.