Conspiracy Theory - Jesse Ventura

[ocsdor]

Yes you can. Plane hits 70th floor, explosives on 50th and below......just an example of your faulty logic....

I concur (agree).

 

[ocsdor]

To be able to ask for a "viable counter argument"
you must FIRST have a "viable argument" to "counter".

I have yet to see any seriously "viable" argument as to what caused the World Trade Towers and the other buildings to burn, and then collapse, other than the purposeful attack, with 2 fuel laden aircraft, that were hijacked, crashed into the towers, and then the ensuing 1000+ degree fires, that caused the entire tragic events to unfold as they did.

If you've watched the videos posted in this thread, then you HAVE seen viable arguments. Whether or not you are willing to accept them is your issue.

Also, how is it two fuel laden aircraft struck two towers, and yet Three towers fell down (1, 2, & 7) all exactly the same?

YouTube - HOW DID WORLD TRADE CENTER 7 FALL?

 

[cce1302]

I concur (agree).

Have you ever used explosives? I mean real ones, not firecrackers and junk they sell on the corner for independence day.

 

[Roadie]

Ah, MN must be so proud

 

[ocsdor]

Have you ever used explosives? I mean real ones, not firecrackers and junk they sell on the corner for independence day.

So, now your going to attack me, huh? Perhaps you'd like to share your experience/knowledge with us in regards to explosives, controlled demolition, physics, metallurgy, fire sciences, aircraft, aircraft jet fuels, and history.

Take a guess which five I do have knowledge/experience in.

 

[cce1302]

So, now your going to attack me, huh? Perhaps you'd like to share your experience/knowledge with us in regards to explosives, controlled demolition, physics, metallurgy, fire sciences, aircraft, aircraft jet fuels, and history.

Take a guess which five I do have knowledge/experience in.

No, I'm attacking your ignorance of explosives. You claim that a building full of explosives is going to reliably detonate after having an airplane driven into it. Not to mention all the demo guys that it would take to set the charges, all the explosives that would need to be carried into the building, and all the people that wouldn't notice it happening under their noses.

 

[ocsdor]

No, I'm attacking your ignorance of explosives. You claim that a building full of explosives is going to reliably detonate after having an airplane driven into it. Not to mention all the demo guys that it would take to set the charges, all the explosives that would need to be carried into the building, and all the people that wouldn't notice it happening under their noses.

Exactly. I agree with everything you just said, except an airplane didn't hit WTC 7.

By the way, I'm sure you know this being an explosives expert, but for those that aren't, Thermite can be "painted" safely on to steel supports (under everyone's noses, and by a painting crew). Once activated, the Thermite burns so hot that is cuts right through steel.

p.s. Learning to set off claymores in the Marines doesn't make someone a "demolitions expert".

 

[jeremy]

So, now your going to attack me, huh? Perhaps you'd like to share your experience/knowledge with us in regards to explosives, controlled demolition, physics, metallurgy, fire sciences, aircraft, aircraft jet fuels, and history.

Take a guess which five I do have knowledge/experience in.

Ocs, I doubt if Cce is attacking you personally, not his style.

Let me interupt you to for a second. I am someone who has blown up a lot of stuff, there is only two weak points for me on that list of yours. care to take a guess...

Now that I have your attention...

Let us think about the number of charges that would need to be placed to make this happen. Let's think of the weeks of prep work that would have been done installing charges. Let's talk about the realiability of explosives and the devices that fire them.

From someone who has worked explosives my entire adult life. The chance of using explosive devices like this are almost null.

 

[ocsdor]

Ocs, I doubt if Cce is attacking you personally, not his style.

Let me interupt you to for a second. I am someone who has blown up a lot of stuff, there is only two weak points for me on that list of yours. care to take a guess...

Now that I have your attention...

Let us think about the number of charges that would need to be placed to make this happen. Let's think of the weeks of prep work that would have been done installing charges. Let's talk about the realiability of explosives and the devices that fire them.

From someone who has worked explosives my entire adult life. The chance of using explosive devices like this are almost null.

I tell you what. I'll give you everything else IF you can tell me how WTC 7 fell exactly (straight down, symmetrically, at freefall speeds) like WTC 1 and WTC 2 without having had an airplane crashed into it.

 

[cce1302]

Exactly. I agree with everything you just said, except an airplane didn't hit WTC 7.

By the way, I'm sure you know this being an explosives expert, but for those that aren't, Thermite can be "painted" safely on to steel supports (under everyone's noses, and by a painting crew). Once activated, the Thermite burns so hot that is cuts right through steel.

p.s. Learning to set off claymores in the Marines doesn't make someone a "demolitions expert".

So you wiki'd 1302, congratulations. and somehow you know enough about it to summarize my last 7 years as "learning to set off claymores." wow, so you really do know a lot how demolitions works. [/sarcasm]

With all that knowledge, I'm not surprised you believe this "9/11 inside job" garbage.

 

[jeremy]

Now Ocs that is the $5 question isn't it.

 

[ThrottleJockey]

all the explosives that would need to be carried into the building

Do you know anything about buildings? Nothing is carried in, you drive it in with a truck. There need not be any noses involved either as there tend to be access passages used for various mechanical systems and inspections. Additionally, there were work crews there for several weeks that no one seems to be able to explain since no work was scheduled.

Oh, I also know a tad bit about explosives. I'm sure not as much as a marine, but my EOD training in the USNavy was enough for me.

 

[cce1302]

It's funny nobody on these rumored "work crews" has come out and told us what happened. Oh, that's right, there were never any leaks during the Bush administration.

 

[ocsdor]

Now Ocs that is the $5 question isn't it.

It sure is.

 

[turnandshoot4]

I tell you what. I'll give you everything else IF you can tell me how WTC 7 fell exactly (straight down, symmetrically, at freefall speeds) like WTC 1 and WTC 2 without having had an airplane crashed into it.

Got glossed over again.

 

[ThrottleJockey]

Got glossed over again.

Lol, funny isn't it?

 

[cce1302]

1. Why knock down WTC7? I've never heard a good reason to even knock it down.
-to hide the "fact" that it was set up to blow? that makes no sense at all
-to get rid of classified material? Yeah, because all their shredders and burn barrels were broken.
-to get us to go to war? sure, WTC 1 & 2, plus the pentagon and the 4th target weren't enough to do it, but WTC 7 pushed America over the edge. Right.


2. The whole idea that this was cooked up by the Bush administration to stage a war in Iraq. Don't you think that if it was staged, they would have had a patsy in Iraq to take the blame, say AMZ for instance, instead of going through Afghanistan to get to Iraq?

There is no credible motive to take down 1 & 2 in the first place, let alone #7.

 

[jblomenberg16]

Still hard for me to take Mr. Ventura seriously. Afterall, he did have this memorable quote in Predator:

Blain: Bunch of slack-jawed [homosexuals] around here. This stuff will make you a god damned sexual Tyrannosaurus, just like me.
Poncho: [holds up his grenade launcher] Yeah, strap this on your "sore ***", Blain.

 

[ThrottleJockey]

1. Why knock down WTC7? I've never heard a good reason to even knock it down.

Just my opinion, but I believe we instantly approved $160,000,000,000 in defense spending with no restrictions as a result. If that in itself isn't reason enough, the people of the USA willingly and happily forfeited a great deal of our freedoms and constitutional rights in the name of our "safety". I don't believe it was the Bush administration that cooked it up at all, that is a common misconception cast about by nay sayers. It was the group that the administration worked for, the same bosses the great "O" answers too. The bilderbergers. There is a big picture to see and it hinges upon a goal of world domination. Those with narrow vision only see a small piece of the puzzle at any given time, those with great minds can see the whole picture.

 

[cce1302]

Just my opinion, but I believe we instantly approved $160,000,000,000 in defense spending with no restrictions as a result.

because of WTC 7 alone?

If that in itself isn't reason enough, the people of the USA willingly and happily forfeited a great deal of our freedoms and constitutional rights in the name of our "safety". I don't believe it was the Bush administration that cooked it up at all, that is a common misconception cast about by nay sayers.

No, that's a common explanation by the conspiracy theorists.

It was the group that the administration worked for, the same bosses the great "O" answers too. The bilderbergers.

Yeah, Bush and Obama working for the same people. It's all clear to me now. [/sarcasm]

There is a big picture to see and it hinges upon a goal of world domination. Those with narrow vision only see a small piece of the puzzle at any given time, those with great minds can see the whole picture.

Great minds, huh? Like you've demonstrated so far?