We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 2876 comments are related to the topic:
9/11 was it a conspiracy?
9/11 was it a conspiracy?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 2,876
|
By:
I imagine the Pentagon is very secretive about it`s security akabula but isn't it reasonable to assume that there were dozens, if not hundreds, of security cameras ringing the huge building that is the heart of the United States military establishment?
|
|
By:
I agree with you but I'm sure they are deployed as most are and that is to give a complete view of the building.
Again I say that none will have been used to detect an aerial attack. I know lots of stuff looks iffy but if it was an inside job how many people would need to be involved? Dozens? Hundreds? Thousands? Surely someone would have spoiled the beans by now. |
|
By:
spoiled lol spilled. One other thing at what level was this instigated and why?
|
|
By:
There are obviously different levels of theory akabula but from a personal stand point i think that intellegence was aware of the attacks prior to 9/11 and orders from above confused the air defence deliberately and with this in place events unfolded.
Not many would need to know and documentation was destroyed when WTC7 went down. How many warmongerors are high up in the American administration? i am sure they can keep a secret or threaten a few others that they are in danger. |
|
By:
Maybe I'm blinded because I look at all the conspiracy theories put forward instead of separating the wheat from the chaff and if everything on here was true the collaborators would need to number many thousands.
I could see what you are saying as a possibility but the theory that the buildings were riddled with explosives to ensure they would be destroyed is a step too far for me as is most of everything else. In your scenario not too many would need to be in on it and that is feasible. I still don't think it's what happened though. |
|
By:
Operation Able Danger was the key for me akabula, the cia Operation tracking the terror cell into the country and then all documentation went down with WTC7.
Explosives in WTC7?military technology? who knows. |
|
By:
To demolish a building,the explosives have to be calculated as to strength and distances,depending on size and shape I would have thought.
|
|
By:
I've not read that but will. The problem for me though is that I'm not sure what to believe on the net.
Too much rubbish posted as fact on here especially wiki. |
|
By:
instead of saying " the conspiracy theories are rubbish" just explain why tower 7 went down like a sack of spuds when nothing touched it, and it only had a few sporadic fires, which for some unbeknown reason had a sprinkler system that failed ? why a highjackers passport was found but indestructible black boxes that are designed to withstand such an instance could not be, why there is such limited cctv at one of the most important buildings in america
its all been said before but to just pass it all off as conspiracy nonsense means you are either very gullible or plain naive.. |
|
By:
At the enquiry did someone ask for a explanation as to the perfect hole in the pentagon wall after the missile sorry plane hit.
|
|
By:
Falling debris from the twin towers hit the building.
You say I'm gullible or naïve then what about the nonsense about the 'they didn't want to learn about take-off or landing, just flying' comments.  I said MOST theories are rubbish and perpetuated by mythical postings on the net. I could buy into the theory that Angel Gabrial suggests but very little else. |
|
By:
those comments came from the people who took the apparent hijackers for flying lessons, thats exactly what im saying, its bollox
a buiding surely should not collapse after being hit by falling debris - not unless the building was made from straw, damaged yes, also the others didnt collapse |
|
By:
There is plenty of cross pollination of information on the net and it is hard to know what to believe,
This maybe deliberate by the powers that be to move people away from the real cover up. The real cover up could be massive incompetance by government agencies but i think it`s more and that there was prior knowledge. The NASA images of molten metal hot spots at the ground zero site also points to more than just what has been told in the official version. |
|
By:
The initial amount allotted to investigate 911 (and nearly 3000 lives) from the government was a paltry $4M (raised to about £15M over the years) yet the enquiry to 'clear' Lewinsky's throat of Clinton's jízz cost $100M
 Any possible reason for this? PS - I think The Pentagon had at least 85 cameras on its grounds (covering all angles) and I'm not sure how many other films (CCTV from local businesses they sequestered) were available, so every cubic yard of air is covered extensively - there must be a lot of people that know EXACTLY what occurred that day. |
|
By:
@AyersRock
I don't know how a building of that size would be affected by falling debris. If it was a controlled explosion I wonder how they managed to rig the building without anyone knowing and how many people it took. (adds more to the list) What is the old saying 'The only way three people can keep a secret is if two of them are dead - Benjamin Franklyn. |
|
By:
akabula
The official NIST report suggested any structural damage to WTC7 did not effect it`s collapse. They blame thermal expansion due to office fires and the design of the building. For it to collapse downwards at near free fall speed were it should have be met by ressistence suggests this type of collapse is a one off. Uniquely, oh and it housed the CIA and other top secret dogs. |
|
By:
@NG
That figure you quote excludes the technical side of the investigation ie sifting the remains of the buildings for clues, this added approx. $40m to the costs. Every cubic yard of air covered. Could you give me a link to your source. And do you know of any footage that is available other than from the news companies of the planes hitting the towers. Our skies aren't under cctv scrutiny. |
|
By:
NG was talking about the cameras at the Pentagon akabula
He was not suggesting that New York Cenral had cameras pointing to the skies. |
|
By:
Akabula - I've heard sums close to the amounts I mentioned several times in documentaries so I can't point you to a precise link.
And I'm not familiar with the 'technical side' of the investigation (and its costs) so I can't really comment on that. The disparity with the amounts given to the Clinton/Lewinski business (even with the extra $40M you state) is still bewildering. PS - you can bet your arse that the skies around The Pentagon ARE covered by cameras! |
|
By:
its the first building to collapse due to fire
|
|
By:
@AyersRock
@Naval-Gazer @Angel Gabrial I think you three are conspiring against me  |
|
By:
What irritates me is the reluctance of people to confront the evidence.
I put up a link yesterday that nobody's commented on and it was only a clip for TWO minutes or so...this is what I'm always presented with  One more time then for anyone who can't be arsed rewinding the thread several pages...and I'll pack it in; At 17:50m in - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afUS_58XC5I And this is the fascinating 'Death Ray' episode; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Tey6xg8uqQ Have any of you guys that DON'T think I'm talking through my arse watched those links? |
|
By:
I've watched these links. Where's the credibility in them. A series of comments presented as fact and everyone of them discredited elsewhere as has every other theory. Who's telling the truth?
|
|
By:
Ffs tober- I looked in on the 10th of September and was amazed to see this wasn't floating round the top again. I thought that I was witnessing evolution occur at an incredible speed and the fruitloops were either extinct or had developed higher level thinking.
No. Same old ridiculous ****. Like...picking one at random...: "Pennsylvania- No plane wreckage, just a whole in the ground." First of all it would be a fcking hole but secondly, how about a read of this? A Call comes in to the San Luis Obispo County, California Sherrif's Office citing a small plane crash in the mountains of southern California. Detective Bill Wammock is the first to arrive on the scene. He recalls “nothing that resembled an airliner... we went on for hours, before we heard the news reports of a missing airliner, believing that we were dealing with a small airplane full of newspapers that had crashed. We saw no pieces of the aircraft that were larger than, maybe, a human hand. It did not look like a passenger aircraft.” The biggest thing found onsite - part of a window frame. A sure sign of CIA involvement there. Except there wasn't. It was the crash of Pacific Southwest Airlines Flight 1771 in which a murderous loony got on board, killed the crew and threw the aeroplane into a suicidal dive, leaving, on impact, not much more than a 'whole (sic) in the ground'. Does that scenario sound vaguely familiar to the scene onboard 93? |
|
By:
To expand on that
That first link tells you experts say the central steel structure should remain after the collapse whilst elsewhere an expert gives an explanation for it. I'm no expert so who should I believe? |
|
By:
Pandy
Interesting crash that Pacific Southwest 1771, get this After two days of digging through what was left of the plane, [b]they found the parts of a handgun containing six spent cartridge cases and the note on the airsickness bag written by Burke, indicating he may have been responsible for the crash. FBI investigators were able to lift a print from a fragment of finger stuck in the pistol's trigger guard, which positively identified Burke as holding the weapon when the aircraft crashed.[/b] So dispite your not much more than a 'whole (sic) in the ground' gesture, they still managed to find enough evidence including a paper bag with a suicide note on it to frame Burke for the crash.Did you know the crash killed three managers and the president of Chevron USA, James R. Sylla, along with three officials of Pacific Bell. |
|
By:
Yes AG. Paper often survives impacts that destroy metal. You can easily Google why.
Allegorically 9-11 conspiracy theories can be represented with a simple made-up story. Every time a man, Derek, visits the canteen on a particular industrial site he makes himself a coffee in the only red cup in the cupboard and puts it on the corner of the coffee table. Every single time. Without fail. One day a plane crashes into the canteen killing everyone in there and rendering all methods of victim identification useless. Miraculously the coffee table remains untouched and there on the corner is that red cup, containing coffee. To a fruitloop that's evidence that the man is dead, killed by the aeroplane. To more rational thinkers, it's evidence of no such thing. |
|
By:
Perhaps I should have added...
Derek never left the canteen once he'd made his coffee: not until he'd drunk it all. |
|
By:
I've got a few minutes. I think I'll turn that into an abysmally edited video, with heavily slanted commentary, and upload it to YouTube.
|
|
By:
and after all that, the iraqi's have democracy at last. Go go usa!most evil empire the world has ever known, and thayyyats a fact
|
|
By:
..tho theyre only puppets being worked by the illuminati of course.
|
|
By:
Yes AG. Paper often survives impacts that destroy metal. You can easily Google why.
googled it, no explanations given, explain why now? Satam Al Suqami was supposedly on Flight 11, the plane that hit the North Tower. In that collision, the building's core absorbed almost the entire airplane, which hit the northeast wall nearly dead center. his passport survived after a plane travelling at 500+ mph crashed dead centre absolutely impossible, Hhave a look at the passport and concentrate on the face pic - note the interruption to the security lines, looks like a inserted face pic i.e fake passport |
|
By:
http://www.lostrepublic.us/Graphics/9-11-passport.jpg
|
|
By:
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/WT00001A.jpg zoom in to the face pic |
|
By:
There is always this demand from conspiracy theorists for doubters to explain various supposed unlikely events. I cant say why WT7 fell down. I'm not a structural engineer, an explosives expert or even Fireman Sam. Black boxes destroyed and paper surviving? Not being a forensic scientist or an air crash investigator I cant explain it.What I do know is that those towers were brought down by terrorist attack. Does inconsistency in the official line change my view? Of course not.There is not a government in the world that speaks the whole truth and nothing but the truth but that is a long,long way from concluding that this was a US plot against its own people ,which is frankly, utter ****.
|
|
By:
WHERE ARE THE MASSES OF AMATEUR FILM RECORDINGS
OF THE 'PLANE' CRASHING INTO THE SECOND TOWER? (Because, obviously, every man and his dog would be filming by then) SEARCH HIGH AND LOW, YOU YOU WILL FIND THE SAME CLIPS AGAIN AND AGAIN. |
|
By:
WHERE ARE THE MASSES OF AMATEUR FILM RECORDINGS
OF THE 'PLANE' CRASHING INTO THE SECOND TOWER? (Because, obviously, every man and his dog would be filming by then) SEARCH HIGH AND LOW, YOU YOU WILL FIND THE SAME CLIPS AGAIN AND AGAIN. |
|
By:
See above.
And again. |
|
By:
In fact there was a docu on BBC4 the other night which consisted only of amateur footage.
|
|
By:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SMITpoKSXM
worth watching also http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFiEgwLQVJk a mix of both amateur and news network footage of the second tower being hit from different angles so i dont know waht ur on about mcginty fr |