Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Enthusiast

(50,983 posts)
70. The official enforced narrative is that planned explosives are anti-science.
Wed May 25, 2016, 01:54 PM
May 2016

The establishment will trot out expert after expert. But curiously enough these experts never quite have the right credible answers. No one has explained Building Seven to my satisfaction.

They went to great lengths to explain how intense heat weakened structural steel elements in the other buildings but there were no such intense fires in Building Seven.

9/11 probably looked like a false flag operation because it was one.

Partners in crime having a falling out - are they? jwirr May 2016 #1
Looks that way. forest444 May 2016 #2
Ugh. AtheistCrusader May 2016 #23
Please explain your disgust greiner3 May 2016 #76
ANOTHER LINK Lodestar May 2016 #83
I wonder what's going on behind the scenes that prompted this... yurbud May 2016 #101
Hillary's emails? Fawke Em May 2016 #104
The Saudi's, just making shit up to cover what will appear on those redacted pages. Agnosticsherbet May 2016 #3
It's possible. forest444 May 2016 #8
It is a sad day when conspiracy theories and tin foil hat declarations ends up in LBN Agnosticsherbet May 2016 #13
People conspire. forest444 May 2016 #16
People invent conspiracy theories out of moonbeams, dust bunnies, rumor, and fear. Agnosticsherbet May 2016 #22
people invent conspiracy theories. People like the Bush Crime Family. olddad56 May 2016 #32
That the buildings were taken down by planned explosions is anti-science Agnosticsherbet May 2016 #40
How about the 28 redacted pages - is that "anti science" ? pauldp May 2016 #50
The redacted will cover Saudi's who were involved. Agnosticsherbet May 2016 #82
The official enforced narrative is that planned explosives are anti-science. Enthusiast May 2016 #70
The issue I have with the false flag narrative... metalbot May 2016 #147
yeah, because building always collapse from the baement first when they are hit at near the top.. olddad56 May 2016 #81
Both towers collapsed from the point of impact not the basement. hack89 May 2016 #85
Yea yea, go sell your baloney somewhere else. ChisolmTrailDem May 2016 #108
Simple challenge. Show me a video with the towers collapsing from the bottom. hack89 May 2016 #110
Blah, blah, blah-de-blah-blah-blaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh! ChisolmTrailDem May 2016 #111
So all the video on the internet is faked? Holograms perhaps? nt hack89 May 2016 #112
shrubcheneypnac & Co. are innocent! A-hurr-huuuurrrrrrrrr! ChisolmTrailDem May 2016 #113
You are the one that says there is no video of the WTC collapse that is accurate. hack89 May 2016 #115
Stop sayin' I say-id sheeeit thet din't happen...guh... ChisolmTrailDem May 2016 #117
My bad. Should have picked up on that sooner. Sorry. nt hack89 May 2016 #120
Nine elervern hollergram splosives blew dishere nanner all over my head! Derp! ChisolmTrailDem May 2016 #122
You forgot mini-nukes and space weapons hack89 May 2016 #124
Haha, this guy thinks there was nukes and space weapons involved in 9/11. Damn dude... ChisolmTrailDem May 2016 #125
Well - it gets complicated trying to make all the evidence fit. nt hack89 May 2016 #128
I'm sure it does, honey. But you'll figure it all out in time. Maybe. A-hurrr-hurrrrrr! ChisolmTrailDem May 2016 #129
I know exactly what happened hack89 May 2016 #131
Derp! ChisolmTrailDem May 2016 #134
I bought a DVD back then Marthe48 May 2016 #114
We are talking about a single, easy to verify fact. hack89 May 2016 #116
Duh-huh-huuhhhhhh... ChisolmTrailDem May 2016 #121
Why not go to the experts? merrifield May 2016 #138
I understand how the towers fell hack89 May 2016 #139
Living in Denial 13Dogs May 2016 #123
" yeah, because building always collapse from the basement first when they are hit at near the top." hack89 May 2016 #126
Hey dude, the buildings didn't collapse from the basement. You're confused. nt ChisolmTrailDem May 2016 #130
I know they collapsed from the top. nt hack89 May 2016 #132
I like how he tries the old hollergrams, nucular weapuns, and teeny-tiney nukes bullshit. nt ChisolmTrailDem May 2016 #127
Anti-science, that's a good one. zeemike May 2016 #91
Your comment makes no sense at all 13Dogs May 2016 #118
Was the Iraq war a conspiracy? OnyxCollie May 2016 #38
The Iraq war was foreign policy, 9/11 perpetrated by the US government, fantasy conspiracy theory. Agnosticsherbet May 2016 #39
The Bush crime family are banking on everyone believing they did it is fantasy. olddad56 May 2016 #41
LOL! "Foreign policy?" LOL! OnyxCollie May 2016 #46
Huge +1! Enthusiast May 2016 #73
The selling of the Iraq war was a conspiracy resulting in mass murder. pauldp May 2016 #55
False Narrative 13Dogs May 2016 #136
Wow Accusations means you have nothing factual and are pushing a false narrative. Agnosticsherbet May 2016 #141
If you believe that, you need to read this: merrifield May 2016 #54
People don't "invent" conspiracy theories. LiberalLovinLug May 2016 #56
Well greiner3 May 2016 #80
Which is a perfect place to hide felix_numinous May 2016 #93
Doesn't have to be a conspiracy to have participation by the Akamai May 2016 #59
But I Thought It Was Just A Few Guys With Box Cutters? billhicks76 May 2016 #72
People also make things up and pretend it's real. LanternWaste May 2016 #86
Conspiracy Theories are all the rage here at DU these days. dbackjon May 2016 #96
So WHY Did Schemer Do THIS??? ChiciB1 May 2016 #75
this post of yours druidity33 May 2016 #148
Exactly. passiveporcupine May 2016 #103
seriously - the "Inquisitr" as the source???? NoMoreRepugs May 2016 #4
Do you think they made his speech up? jalan48 May 2016 #7
Secondary source. forest444 May 2016 #9
As far as I can tell EdwardBernays May 2016 #15
What is interesting is a rightwing rag, the 2nd one is saying that the Bush administration LiberalArkie May 2016 #10
Inquisitr.com Douseeme May 2016 #5
I ask myself this question jamzrockz May 2016 #6
Israel benefitted the most. They wanted Iraq destroyed, but so did Saudi Arabia. LiberalArkie May 2016 #11
As well, definitely. forest444 May 2016 #14
So the US blames the Saudi's leftynyc May 2016 #18
As long as poor Halliburton and others do not get critiqued. LiberalArkie May 2016 #20
You think Halliburton leftynyc May 2016 #25
Very warm. forest444 May 2016 #29
There's enough to criticize Israel over. cpwm17 May 2016 #52
Both, really. forest444 May 2016 #12
re: "how could they have predicted that the US would try to make war with Iraq" thesquanderer May 2016 #17
Well said. They're the very people who waged one (possibly two) huge wars on false pretenses. forest444 May 2016 #24
Gonna call BS EdwardBernays May 2016 #19
Good work. n/t emulatorloo May 2016 #28
Perhaps this is not the most appropriate thread for my comment asiliveandbreathe May 2016 #21
I told my Republican best friend at the time the very same thing: Bush means war and recession. forest444 May 2016 #27
Keep in mind that Bush's honeymoon period was almost non-existent RufusTFirefly May 2016 #35
And would have continued to sink... forest444 May 2016 #37
When 9/11 happened, I cried RufusTFirefly May 2016 #42
well... you weren't wrong MidwestTech May 2016 #88
When that second plane hit the towers, I said to my coworkers, "What is Bush doing to us?" valerief May 2016 #47
my first thought shanti May 2016 #79
And our MSM helped the Administration. Duval May 2016 #106
This is a mainstream view outside of the United States oberliner May 2016 #26
20% is not a majority, thus not a mainstream view. LanternWaste May 2016 #90
Good point oberliner May 2016 #107
Well duh. PeteSelman May 2016 #30
Alas, the power of denial. forest444 May 2016 #36
Yep, the bigger the lie the more people will believe it. nt valerief May 2016 #48
Republican treason - most foul Scientific May 2016 #31
Probably because they've turned it into a business. forest444 May 2016 #34
Sadly, I must agree with your observation Scientific May 2016 #58
Well, the U.S. didn't conduct the 9-11 attacks SpankMe May 2016 #33
Too much of a coincidence. We know who the Neo-Cons were. We witnessed their influence Enthusiast May 2016 #97
^^ This ^^ Scuba May 2016 #109
I've always been LIHOP but will look at all MIHOP evidence w an open mind nt riderinthestorm May 2016 #43
You have the right approach RufusTFirefly May 2016 #49
Right before the collapse you can see the massive fires in the windows.......... Enthusiast May 2016 #98
With just a few moments on the Google cpwm17 May 2016 #144
Dick Cheney and his oil buddies were divvying up Iraq oil fields before 9/11. He was in a position GoneFishin May 2016 #44
A new Pearl Harbor. Yeah, we knew this from the PNAC papers. It would't be the first time valerief May 2016 #45
Would Dick Cheney have thought up 9/11? left-of-center2012 May 2016 #51
Hard to argue that the US government has NOT used terrorism as a reason to expand its presence and GreatGazoo May 2016 #53
Kick 99th_Monkey May 2016 #57
This message was self-deleted by its author silvershadow May 2016 #60
It's nice to know Saudi has truthers too, lol nt Gore1FL May 2016 #61
Please read this: merrifield May 2016 #64
That doesn't prove anything. It merely infers things. Gore1FL May 2016 #67
This message was self-deleted by its author silvershadow May 2016 #69
In any event. Until I see evidence I don't tend to believe conspiracy theories. nt Gore1FL May 2016 #87
This message was self-deleted by its author silvershadow May 2016 #89
But we CAN'T SUE BushCo for the all of the loss of life and treasury BushCo caused.... NT vkkv May 2016 #62
It was both people inside the US Govt. and Saudis w/help from the Saudi Royals and Govt. Botany May 2016 #63
I see the Saudis as accomplices only. Enthusiast May 2016 #65
Bush and Saudi's covering for each other - Nah, no way - show me some proof packman May 2016 #66
This is latest breaking news? marble falls May 2016 #68
But didn't Obama say that we shouldn't be looking back d_legendary1 May 2016 #71
that comment really pissed me off RussBLib May 2016 #94
You're not the only one d_legendary1 May 2016 #102
Who should we invade next? Is Saudi Arabia on the list? JDPriestly May 2016 #74
No, you don't have a crystal ball merrifield May 2016 #84
I was being a bit sarcastic! I don't know who was behind 9/11 for sure, but there JDPriestly May 2016 #100
Well the Saudi's would be wrong. But it is U.S. related. LiberalFighter May 2016 #77
well,well, well shanti May 2016 #78
fuel for the conspiracy theorists RussBLib May 2016 #92
All I see is smoke. (Smoke clears) And a red herring! eom Festivito May 2016 #95
Despite my cynicism over Bush and Cheney's every action and my hatred for polly7 May 2016 #99
It is past time for the truth to come out. Duval May 2016 #105
Yes! Past time! Enthusiast May 2016 #119
Bwaaahaaalhaha libodem May 2016 #133
This message was self-deleted by its author silvershadow May 2016 #135
But at least 2 Senators are traitors to the 9/11 survivors who want to sue. They put a clause in rladdi May 2016 #137
Free Fall Velocity Proves Buildings were Demolished with Explosives 13Dogs May 2016 #140
How could the towers be falling at free fall velocities hack89 May 2016 #142
Honestly, I wouldn't put ANYTHING past Cheney. OregonBlue May 2016 #143
Nor I - least of all the very thing that gave them EVERYTHING they wanted. forest444 May 2016 #145
Hey Saudi Arabia, I have an idea---------------------lets go into the Hague turbinetree May 2016 #146
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Saudi Arabia: Legal exper...»Reply #70