Conspiracy Talk Archive October 06 2013


Use our posting form to send us conpiracy talk.

06 Oct 2013 20:22:34
Was having a browse on youtube last night and came across this, Devil Pentagram in Kazakhstan on Google Maps, you can check it out for yourself, and here's a video showing it aswell. It's quite scary.

Believable0 Unbelievable0

06 Oct 2013 19:57:26
Exposing the fraud of 9/11 in 22 minutes


Believable5 Unbelievable1

Brilliant vid Ryan, cheers

Agree0 Disagree0

Wow total total eye opener

Agree0 Disagree0

06 Oct 2013 14:20:28
We're told that Satam al Suqami's passport was picked up by a passer-by and given to a detective shortly before the WTC towers collapsed. So no trace of the aircraft but a piece of paper flew out of the aircraft/building and landed in the rubble, almost intact.

11 years later someone miraculously finds part of an aircraft engine 3 blocks away from the south tower. Trouble is it's a CFM56, is from a 737 not the 767 alleged to have struck the South Tower.

It's the same story with the Pentagon JT8D engine that was identified that was not from Flight 77.

Alleged hijacker Ziad Jarrah's visa was supposedly found in the remains of Flight 93 at Shanksville.


Believable3 Unbelievable1

06 Oct 2013 10:41:09
And ed, don't forget that te whole top floors that weighed so much had to come down on the below building, too much weight for the girders, because when one girder goes, everything goes.


Believable0 Unbelievable3

{Ed001's Note - utter lies. Your knowledge of basic physics is non-existent if you think that. There would be twisting, moving, sliding forces impacting on the building. None of that was in evidence. They simply collapsed in a cloud of dust, there was no lateral movement whatsoever. If one girder went up near the top, why did that floor not collapse over towards and bend? Why did it simply drop down? Even Hollywood film effects wouldn't make such a ludicrous attempt at a building collapse on film, because it simply doesn't happen. That is why recent films, such as the Transformers: Dark of the Moon and Avengers Assemble don't have tower blocks collapsing when hit by the aliens. They base their effects on what it is believed would really happen, they spend a lot of money on the special effects computers, which use physics modeling to decide how to make the effects. Why did they not show their tower blocks all collapsing after a hit? Surely, if your ludicrous nonsensical assertions were correct, they would want to do that, as it would make for exciting scenes as they crumbled away on screen.}

Why would a building be heavier at the top than the rest of it gobblemaster? Dear me.


Agree2 Disagree0

Gobblemaster I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with anything on this site but mate you come across as a troll and your looking for a wind up.

Agree3 Disagree1

06 Oct 2013 12:38:03
But ed, the paper and wood inside the building is flammable and made the fuel temperature even hotter which melted the steel girders, and I saw a documentary which labeled that the girders that melted were in the middle which made te building fall straight down, not slide.


Agree1 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - that is simply not true, paper and wood burn hotter than fuel oil now do they? The documentary you saw was simply a lie, the girders that would have been hit on the plane's entry would have been the first to go. Their structure would have been weakened and twisted, they would have been first to go, if any. What you saw was a lie, not a documentary. Like I have said many times before, the building, including all girders in the structure, were designed to cope with this impact and fuel oil burning without collapsing. It would not be safe to have a tower that tall, in such a built up district, without numerous safety measures, such as being able to stand up to impact. That is why they require controlled demolition to bring them down.}

I'm sorry guys, I'm not trying to troll or anything, I just don't believe and do not see why the government would do this to there own people, really shocking what happened, I apologise if I come across as a troll


Agree1 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - there are many conspiracy theories about, most I don't believe in either, but this one definitely has something to it. The facts just don't add up to the story given out in the main stream media. I have no idea about 'black technology' or holograms etc, but I do know that the official story is utter nonsense. It doesn't even come close to reality, which is why I assumed you were trolling. I can understand people disputing, for instance, the shooting of JFK, or the events surrounding Diana's death in Paris. But this one is so well documented, that it is easy to check up things like how hot steel needs to get to melt and compare that to the heat that fuel oil burns at. It is also easy to check up building regulations in the city to see how all towers have to be designed to withstand the impact of a plane. It then becomes difficult to believe what we are told happened is really what did happen. Then you add that to information like the 1950s plan to fly a plane into a high building and blame it on the Communists in order to bring in greater powers for the US Govt to crack down on them. That plan is freely available to read, as it was released under their 'Freedom of Information' legislation. Then you factor in that the govt and its employees denied any such plan ever existed or that there had ever been any plans made should a plane be crashed into the towers. All of those things add up to one big lie, somewhere, someone, or some group, are lying about what happened that day. The only real questions are who, why and what really did happen? Oh and I apologise, I did think you were a troll, so my mistake, sorry.}

06 Oct 2013 15:27:17
Na mate, my mistake, I guess I was just being stupid, all your points make sense, but it's just so hard to believe, I'm 50/50 on this and will look up 9/11 in the search function, watch some videos if there are any, sorry about my. attitude lol and I will look out for some things



Agree1 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - naivety is not the same as stupidity mate. It is difficult to believe that a government would do such a thing to its own people, unless you are a keen student of history. When you are, you see repeated instances of it happening over and over again. You also see how propaganda is used to present the view the victor wishes to present. For instance, Alexander is known as 'The Great' in the West, but in the East he is remembered for having villages put to the sword. In the West we are taught Genghis Khan was a mass murderer and inhuman killer, yet he was actually far easier on the area he conquered than his contemporaries in Western Europe. Even as recently as World War 2, we are told that Pearl Harbour was an unprovoked attack by the Japanese against the innocent USA. In fact, the USA had been deliberately picking at Japan for years, including the invasion and assimilation of Hawaii, just prior to their referendum, which was almost certain to vote for Hawaii to become a province of Japan. That is not to say Japan was innocent either, they were an aggressive empire, looking to conquer new lands, but America did everything they could to antagonise them into a direct conflict. Also, despite the story told, they knew the attack was coming, but never did anything to protect the base so that the resultant outrage would put the US public firmly behind a war (sound familiar?). Politicians lie to the public constantly, putting their own interests ahead of the people they are meant to represent, so it is not really a surprise that a government made up of politicians can not be trusted!}

Wow I didn't know that about Pearl Harbour ed, every day is a school day

Agree2 Disagree1

{Ed001's Note - which bit mate? That the British Govt had forewarned the US? Or that they had previously invaded Hawaii purely to keep the base out of Japanese hands?}

That the British Govt had forewarned the US, very interesting

Agree2 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - ah right, yes, they had cracked the Japanese naval codes at that time, so they knew exactly what was going on.}

The buildings are designed to ward of earth quakes. a plane slamming into it won't knock it down.

Agree1 Disagree2

Ed I though that Hawaii was more likely to vote to become British? They still have the Union flag on the Hawaiian state flag. Although I guess the Yanks would have still invaded either way.

There was plenty of evidence what was going to happen provided both by us and also by their own intelligence service.

And the Yanks had been pushing Japan for most of the previous decade with trade embargo's. Japan got pushed into war by a desperate need for resources before the economy collapsed. Not to condone what they got up to in the war but the Yanks pushed them into a corner.

Which was something we could have done without as at the time we were just hanging on and couldn't really commit resources to defend the Asian colonies.

Some have suggested FDR allowed it to happen to bring the Yanks into the war. Poppycock. The Yanks were edging in anyway, all it did was kick things off with Japan which didn't help us at all. If the Germans hadn't have declared war would the Yanks have gone to war with Germany?

And look who benefitted out of it? It picked up the Yank economy. Ford and GM and the rest were on shaky ground after the crash but building Jeeps and Tanks and the rest soon perked them up. Look up Bretton Woods. There was only 1 winner of WW" and it wasn't us.

Then look at what they got upto in the 50's, Iran, Guatemala, Cuba, Vietnam. They bumped JFK off when he was an inconvenience. Gulf of Tonkin led to how many deaths? And how many billions in the companies coffers?

Some group has long been directing US foreign policy for the benefit of big business.

9/11 was the tip of a shady iceberg. They thought they could get away with stuff in their arrogance.


Agree2 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - Hawaii's vote was for Japan mate, most of the population was Japanese in origin.}

07 Oct 2013 18:01:53
Fair enough ed, still find the state flag odd though. I know they rounded a lot up in the islands after. Mort

Agree1 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - a lot of countries have the Union Flag as part of their design, purely as it is part of their history. Very few would want to be part of the UK though.}

07 Oct 2013 22:05:21
Yes ed but they were all colonies, Hawaii never was. Sorry bit off topic but its always puzzled me. Mort

Agree0 Disagree0

{Ed001's Note - it was a protectorate of Great Britain, the stripes represent the 8 islands and the Union Flag to show its historical relationship with Great Britain. After Kamehameha created the independent Kingdom of Hawaii, Britain helped it stay independent.}

Mort they unfortunately kinda have gotten away with it, they'll never be brought to justice.

Agree1 Disagree0

06 Oct 2013 10:36:49
Ed, I'm not up for a fight mate, but can you please show me the evidence that the fuels heat would melt the steel girders? It can, and it did, an can you tell me why a Boeing 767 jet couldn't bring that building down? When te plane first crashed into the building, there was a massive destruction caused, and that feel on the support and the rest of the building, the plane weighs so much, the plane caused 9/11, not explosions


Believable0 Unbelievable2

{Ed001's Note - sorry but you are just wasting my time, try looking into the heat that fuel burns at, then check the temperature it takes for the steel to warp. You will find the steel needs to be heated to a higher temperature than fuel oil burns at. As for the plane can and did do that, you are talking out of your backside, it did no such thing and there is absolutely no evidence to say it did do, other than clearly false TV footage at the time. The destruction of a plane hitting a building near the top might cause it to topple over, if the hit was with sufficient force, which was not the case. Even saying it was, there is absolutely no way that it would crumble to the ground and vanish in a cloud of dust. So try explaining how that happened from a plane hit, a smaller plane than the towers were designed to cope with hitting them, and which hit at a lower speed than their designed to withstand.}

How did building 7 collapse like a controlled explosion? I bet my life that the towers did not fall because of planes.

Geordie Al

Agree1 Disagree0