9/11 was a conspiracy not a conspiracy theory

[trestres]

NightDragon83 said:

trestres said:

NightDragon83 said:

trestres said:

NightDragon83 said:
For all the idiots out there who STILL cling to all these "9/11 was an inside job and here's why" memes even after they've all been thoroughly debunked... I point you to the ultimate evidence that 9/11 was NOT an inside job or a conspiracy of any kind with just one word...

Wikileaks.

Look at all the classified info that has been (illegally) leaked to the public over the past few years regarding everything from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to the financial crisis of 2008 through this website. It was revealed that essentially the war in Iraq was launched on a "hunch" by an informant who turned out to be nothing but a bad lead regarding Saddam's push to develop WMDs. Pretty big piece of information to know, right?

Now... don't you think that if there was even a single shred of hard evidence that the government had a hand in either deliberately planning or carrying out the attacks themselves, or otherwise aiding or allowing the attacks to happen in any way, shape or form... then wouldn't that sort of info be the "Holy Grail" of stuff to get leaked onto Wikileaks? These guys would be hailed as heroes if they could come up with any hard evidence regarding 9/11, so why haven't they? Are the sex lives of the Italian PM and the accounts of major banks that much more important than a terror attack that literally changed the world?

Or are Wikileaks also part of the conspiracy in refusing to release any 9/11 info???

Oh I see. Then Wikileaks has all the answers. That's how we found out why Kennedy was shot. Oh wait we didn't and there's still no way to find out how a single person was able to do so by himself. You don't believe in conspiracies because it's easier for you to avoid doing research and thinking for yourself. Besides insulting people who think differently will just get you banned.

Call these experts "idiots" all you want. I would listen to a national science award winner all day, rather than a no one who thinks that's someone over the internet.

Ummm... Kennedy got shot decades before the advent of the modern internet, and we found out about it loooong before the days of AOL and Bill Gates' Windows and all that good stuff.  Unless of course you believe in all the conspiracy theories further perpetrated in Oliver Stone's "JFK" and elsewhere.

And you guys can talk about building 7 all you want... fact is it was not demo'd by order of Larry Silverstien after he said "pull it", no matter how much you try to repeat it.  It collapsed because a 110 story building was destroyed right next door and left a 20-story tall gaping hole in it that caused the rest of the building to fail.  Or do you not understand physics and the way buildings are designed?

Stop making up crap. Did you even read the FEMA or NIST reports? Not even the official story says that. You just lost all the little credibility you had.

Ahem.... according to the "official story" on the collapse of WTC 7(which is apparently completely made up along with all the other events
that occured on 9/11 according to conspiracy theorists)...

"On September 11, 2001, 7 WTC was damaged by debris when the nearby North Tower of the WTC collapsed. The debris also ignited fires, which continued to burn throughout the afternoon on lower floors of the building. The building's internal fire suppression system lacked water pressure to fight the fires, and the building collapsed completely at 5:21:10 pm The collapse began when a critical column on the 13th floor buckled and triggered structural failure throughout, which was first visible from the exterior with the crumbling of the east mechanical penthouse at 5:20:33 pm."

Again... THIS is why the building collapsed...

But yours and ever other conspiracy theorists' explanation for that is "duhhhh, well a plane never hit the building, so it must have been a controlled demolition AH-DUUUUUHHHHHH!"

If it was a controlled demolition... then why didn't any of the debris or fires set off ANY of the explosives in the building prematurely (ditto for buildings 1 and 2 when the planes hit and exploded... why didn't they set off the charges if they were demo jobs too?)  And why, if it was a controlled demo, did that evil Jew Larry Silverstein and his cronies Bush and Cheney wait an entire 7 hours AFTER the twin towers had already been destroyed to demo that building too?

Oh, by the way... I found Obama's original Kenyan Birth Certificate.  I'll give it to you if you give me your SS number and the PIN to your debit card since you won't be needing either one of those after you become filthy rich by being able to prove to the world that the president is not a legal US citizen.

The final conclusion of the NIST report (the official story) claims that the tower 7 didn't come down because of fuel oil burning, neither because of debris hitting the tower and neither because of weakened steel structure (Because fires were not hot enough to even weaken steel).
It claims that it was due to steel expansion which damaged the concrete floors and then a single column failing (which they even specify despite never seeing a single piece of steel from the wreckage because it was all quickly removed) caused a structural massive failure which led into a chain reaction and brought down the building. They claim all the columns failed at the same time, thus the falling building followed a path of NO RESISTANCE. Do you understand how stupid and unrealistic this sounds. Do you even understand basic physics?

Stop being a sheep, open your eyes and listen to what independent sources have to say before you single out everyone who is searching for the truth and is backing up those claims with cold hard facts. Your government lied to you, and so do most of the world governments.
I'm sure you aren't even an adult, so I won't deal with you much longer, since all I get are immature and stupid answers.