Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Rosie O'Donnell thinks 9/11 was an inside job, which means she thinks the Holocaust didn't happen, which means she weighs as much as a duck, and therefore is made of wood and is a witch. Burn her   ( news.yahoo.com) divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

22272 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Apr 2007 at 1:07 PM (10 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1133 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | » | Newest

 
2007-04-11 03:32:41 PM  
Paedophile_Deluxe: True, but it's not like his family was paraded around on TV with an alternate story that they were actually Andy Griffith's children.

I think in that case, people kept quiet because they liked him. Could be wrong, but Jesus. That was some controversial shiat right there.
 
2007-04-11 03:32:41 PM  
DROxINxTHExWIND

First let me say that I think that 9/11 showed us VERY CLEARLY how farked up our bureaucracy has become. Could we have done better...NO...why...well the proof is in Katrina...

We no longer know our arse from our elbow when it comes to actually handling our business in the US

Now on to your question.....

Because they are the President and Vice-President of the United States of America....and we do not, in the absence of a crime call our Chief Executive, Commander in Chief and his right hand to testify UNDER oath. It is only when congress...AND CONGRESS ALONE decides that a subpoena is necessary that we compel our highest elected official to give his public testimony.

It has happened so few times that you have enough digits on 1 hand to count them.

Is that fair? I don't know, depends on what you're trying to accomplish. This is a power sharing issue and Congress chose not to compel their testimony. Since I do not want to spend all of my days pouring over the documents I have to relinquish that responsibility to someone. I give it over to my Elected representatives. If I dont like the job they do I try for different ones next time.

The system ain't perfect, no system is. But I'll take it over ANY other system past or present.
 
2007-04-11 03:33:25 PM  
2007-04-11 03:18:08 PM albo


The US economy was wrecked by 9/11?

we had to bail out the airlines, the stock market dropped 1400 points, stocks lost $1.4 trillion in value, pension funds lost huge amounts of investments, the tourist industry suffered from lack of travel, insurance companies took a hit, manhattan took a huge hit, etc. it took a couple years to recover.

===============================================

The US economy was in a recession BEFORE 9/11. But, i guess it's all in how you want to remember things.

George W. Bush on Tax ReformBush says the tax cut is necessary to stave off a recession, and many Democrats ... Voice your opinions on Tax Reform or about George W. Bush in The Forum. ...
www.ontheissues.org/2004/George_W__Bush_Tax_Reform.htm - 49k -
 
2007-04-11 03:35:22 PM  
epoc_tnac

How come secret services whipped Cheney away into his undisclosed location immediately, yet Bush was left gawping like a yokel in front of the cameras for what... 10-15 minutes? HELLO, THE COUNTRY IS UNDER ATTACK?


Of the two, Bush is the (cringe) charismatic leader (cringe again, I feel dirty). One of them needed to get Squirreled away, one of them needed to get the country to play it off. One of them dropped the ball.
 
2007-04-11 03:35:29 PM  
I am going to sue ABC for violating my right to free speech because they don't give me my own show.

In fact, I am going to sue every TV station, every TV network, every radio station, every newspaper, every magazine, and every web site while I'm at it.

Oh wait, never mind. Those aren't government entities, and not only do they have the right to hire/fire whomever they want, but they cannot possibly violate my right to freedom of speech. They don't even have prisons that they could put me in.

Forget it, I don't know how I could have possibly been such a FARKING IDIOT to suggest that firing Rosie would violate her right to free speech.

At least I have never been stupid enough to believe all the whackjob tin-foil hat wearers who still think they are going to convince someone that 911 was anything other than a terrorist attack with their retarded little theories and "evidence."

Carry on.
 
2007-04-11 03:36:11 PM  
DROxINxTHExWIND: I see that no matter WHAT the inconsistency you all are more than willing to mount a defense for the administration. So, please answer the question that probably bothers me the most.

1) Inconsistencies?
2) Me. Defend the administration. Ha!

Why did George W. Bush and Dick Cheney refuse to testify, under oath, in the case of the worst terrorist attack ever on American soil?

We all know their supposed account of what happend because you all seem to have a GREAT idea of what they knew and how they responded even though they never publically answered questions about the attack. They're allowing YOU all to tell their story for them. If you pooled the comments of all of the Non-conspiracy folks you'd see how many different justifications, excuses, and just plain bullshiat reasons have been given for these various 'coincidences'. PLease, other than the ridiculous, 'they didn;t want you to know they dropped the ball' argument that you all try to use. You can't use that one because the administration blames it all on intelligence failures and you all use that argument as well. If they were going about their presidential business when this totally unexpected catastrophe occured, why couldn't they tell that to the investigators under oath?


Either they dropped the ball much harder than anyone in the administration has publicly admitted, or they carelessly ignored evidence before the attack, or they intentionally ignored evidence before the attack.
 
2007-04-11 03:36:23 PM  
This thread is living proff of the old saw...
"never argue with an idiot, casual observers won't be able to tell the difference between you"

Facts:
1. Rosie O'Donnell is a flaming moron
2. the Twin Towers were destroyed by aircraft flown by Moslem terrorists
3. conspiracy theorists have WAY TOO MUCH free time and not enough Thorazine
 
2007-04-11 03:36:28 PM  
jst3p

If I recall correctly, burning jet fuel poured down the elevator shafts setting the lobby on fire.


IMPOSSIBLE!

img312.imageshack.us
 
2007-04-11 03:36:51 PM  
I can't believe these idiots.
Have none of you tin-foil hat types ever watched a documentary on building demolition and implosion?
Do you have a farking clue as to how much is taken out of a building, and how much prep work there is before the explosives go off?
Do you think every single person who worked in the towers, including the 2700 or so that "volunteered" to die, kept the secret?
Because there is no way in hell, that that kind of preperation could take place without a couple of thousand people asking what the fark was going on.

Do the species a favor: kill yourselves before you breed.

/*sigh* I feel better now.
 
2007-04-11 03:37:04 PM  
Balrog: "I can't be certain, but the name cryptozoophiliac implies one who enjoys studying mysterious, undiscovered creatures such as the Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot."

Actually, it means one who is sexually attracted to mysterious, undiscovered creatures.

But my personal predilections have little bearing on the discussion at hand, which last I checked had to do with the iron-tight credibility of the Bush Administration and Kean Commission, and the absolute, full-bore gonzo nuttiness of the Alternative Conspiracy set.
 
2007-04-11 03:37:16 PM  
Balrog: I can't be certain, but the name cryptozoophiliac implies one who enjoys studying mysterious, undiscovered creatures such as the Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot.

Actually, it means he enjoys having sex with them.
 
2007-04-11 03:37:43 PM  
albo

The world banks and other global elites hold the puppet strings of the world.

so, who did it? the rothchilds? the bilderberger group? the council on foreign relations? the trilaterals? the bavarian illuminat? the jews? the reverse vampires? major-league baseball?


Well, it's a well known fact, albo, that there's a secret society of the five wealthiest people in the world, known as The Pentavirate, who run everything in the world, including the newspapers, and meet tri-annually at a secret country mansion in Colorado, known as The Meadows.

The Pentavirate is made up of the The Queen, The Vatican, The Gettys, The Rothschilds, and Colonel Sanders before he went tits up. Oh, I hated the Colonel with is wee beady eyes, and that smug look on his face.

/Oh, you're gonna buy my chicken! Ohhhhh!
 
2007-04-11 03:37:48 PM  
As one CTer has stated " 9/11 was done by Disney/PIXAR!"


I hate Mickey Mouse,
he is the true Terraist!
Goofy was in on it to!
Goofy is a jackass!
 
2007-04-11 03:39:43 PM  
I really don't know how much of a dumbass a person would have to be to NOT realize that tons of burning jet-fuel pouring down the inside of a giant metal and glass box is going to result in a Kiln effect.

But you forgot, this is teh internet, where college dropouts everywhere attempt to rewrite the laws of science to match what they put on their last failed science test.
 
2007-04-11 03:39:47 PM  
Paranoia-': and it's simply not plausible to say that a plane achieved the wreckage that occured.

Utter and complete horseshiat.

Look, I say this in every Pentagon thread: my wife's best friend (and a dear friend of mine, this ain't FOAF) was leaving a building across the highway from the Pentagon and the GODDAM FARKING AIRPLANE flew right over her head.

She got a REAL good look at it.

And ince when do missiles need LANDING GEAR?

www.rense.com

www.rense.com
 
2007-04-11 03:40:12 PM  
Headso: so a couple buildings being destroyed results in that much damage to our economy? I didn't know our national economy was fragile.

Things were very, very bad in Orlando for like a year after that. I lost my job, hundreds of thousands of people down here did because tourism flatlined. A lot of people turned up homeless. We all were also convinced that we were next - that someone would bomb the theme parks.I went to Halloween Horror nights that year at Universal. Worst, year, evar. Almost no one was there. It seemed stupid trying to scare yourself for fun, when everyone was terrified over anthrax (at that time). This was a big deal for us down here, because we were pretty sure someone was going to try to poison one of the theme parks, which would effectively, ruin Florida's entire economy, forever. Every year we get a poll going showing what statistics at those parks and in this area was prior to 9/11. Every year the tourism commision down here (which is a huge deal) tries to figure out ways to compensate in order to get up above pre-9/11 figures. I think we are above, now by like 5% or so. The Hurricanes and war didn't help, either.
 
2007-04-11 03:40:20 PM  
pfm-kamikaze: IMPOSSIBLE!

Are you being sarcastic? If not, what's with those mysterious structures on the sides labeled as "express elevators"?
 
2007-04-11 03:40:34 PM  
Nimbokwezer

"Diagonally "cut" beam conspiracy theorists:

45 degrees is the natural angle of failure in metal beams under compression. In other words: that is exactly how you would expect a beam to break if it were under sufficient compression."


Not that I believe the conspiracy wackos but 45 degrees is the natural angle of failure for a ductile beam in tension. For a beam under compression it will buckle.

/mechanical engineer
 
2007-04-11 03:40:59 PM  
elchip Either they dropped the ball much harder than anyone in the administration has publicly admitted, or they carelessly ignored evidence before the attack, or they intentionally ignored evidence before the attack.

TINFOIL TINFOIL! ELCHIP IS A TINFOIL HAT WEARER!!!

Man, that feels good. Now I am starting to agree with you guys.
 
2007-04-11 03:41:41 PM  
"If thermite was used on the base, the bottom of WTC would have given out first,
blowing out the base of the structure frist.
WTC1&2 fell down from the top, it didn't collapse from the base
just as EVERY SINGLE VIDEO CLIP SHOWS that was recorded from the ground level."

Actually, a close up video of the top of the building suggests that the collapse of WTC 1 appears to have originated at the base. You can see the antenna, which was mounted to the core columns, begin to collapse before the outer walls of the building. Most likely the demolition was a double-pronged affair in which the core columns were brought down from bottom to top (as evidenced by the sinking antenna) while the outer skeleton and the attached floors were exploded away from top to bottom a split second later. Note how the outside walls of the tower peeled away like a banana to reveal nothing of the core inside, those 47 massive 1,300 foot-high core columns having apparently telescoped in on themselves and sunk out of sight.
 
2007-04-11 03:41:41 PM  
watch "Catch 22". the scene where they bomb thier own runway in exchange for a warehouse full of cotton...
something akin to that was behind 9/11. always follow the money.......
 
2007-04-11 03:43:13 PM  
Faethe: Things were very, very bad in Orlando for like a year after that. I lost my job, hundreds of thousands of people down here did because tourism flatlined. A lot of people turned up homeless. We all were also convinced that we were next - that someone would bomb the theme parks.

so childish response is the answer to what crapped out the economy and not a couple of buildings being destroyed and it continues every day we waste a few billion in Iraq...
 
2007-04-11 03:43:38 PM  
epoc_tnac: TINFOIL TINFOIL! ELCHIP IS A TINFOIL HAT WEARER!!!

You simply cannot prove that the Bush Administration didn't know about it ahead of time, and did nothing. You can, however, demonstrate with reasonable confidence that the buildings did not collapse because of thermite charges and that the Pentagon was not hit with a cruise missile.
 
2007-04-11 03:44:17 PM  
something akin to that was behind 9/11. always follow the money

now Milo Minderbinder was behind 9/11? when will it stop?
 
2007-04-11 03:46:04 PM  
Just to get back to what is REALLY important here....

Rosie is a greasy haired ho
 
2007-04-11 03:46:11 PM  
dro

Why did George W. Bush and Dick Cheney refuse to testify, under oath, in the case of the worst terrorist attack ever on American soil?

Leaving your delusions of psychic abilities/ adventures inside of my thoughts aside, I'll offer some possible explanations to your question.

A: They werent involved, so there was nothing to testify about

B: They had no desire to be part of a witch hunt when they are the prime targets of the witch hunters combined with the ability to excuse themselves from the party.

C. They were up to their necks in nefarious dealings and adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq which they werent 100% proud of and they were more than a little concerned questioning would turn down that path.
 
2007-04-11 03:46:32 PM  
Headso: so childish response is the answer to what crapped out the economy and not a couple of buildings being destroyed and it continues every day we waste a few billion in Iraq...

Well if you want to go by scale a helluva lot more shiat and people got tore up in bad hurricanes down here between '04 and '06, and no one got invaded over that. So yes,I would have to agree that the scale of the response was over the top.

Plus I am one of the Glass Parking Lot people.I think we should have nuked the fark out of Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, then moved on.
 
2007-04-11 03:47:10 PM  
something akin to that was behind 9/11. always follow the money

Oddly enough, actual investigators, granted without benefit of tinfoil, did follow the money, along with other evidence, and tracked down crypto's pal, KSM.
 
2007-04-11 03:47:32 PM  
I think Occam's Razor can be applied:
What's more likely?

The 2 747 that weigh 140,000 lbs with what, 50,000 gallons of jet fuel slammed into the twin towers causing them to collapse in a fiery inferno.

....or

Bush and his cronies took the 9 months that they were in office to devise, plan, and execute the worst attack on American soil in history complete with international conspiracy ties while also feigning to be one of the most incompetent administrations and acting as some type of Keyser Soze idiot savant super villain. If Bush did this to get into Iraq, why didn't he also peg the terrorists as Iraqi?


... I report, you decide...
 
2007-04-11 03:47:36 PM  
cryptozoophiliac

"the Alternative Conspiracy set."

Oh, My Godness Gov'ner, The "Alternative Conspiracy set," my you have gotten posh! With capitals, no less. La Di Da!

Shall we stand when you say that? Say, when the missile pod kooks come to the "Alternative Conspiracy set" meetings, do you New World Wide order guys talk to them, or what?
 
2007-04-11 03:47:36 PM  
If you look carefully at this picture, there is clearly mechanical damage to the beams, caused by explosives in the basement, right near the grassy knoll:

i12.tinypic.com
 
2007-04-11 03:47:51 PM  
Faethe: I went to Halloween Horror nights that year at Universal. Worst, year, evar. Almost no one was there.

Damn, I wish I visited then instead of last week. I would have had much fewer urges to commit violent acts.
 
2007-04-11 03:48:48 PM  
How could the WTC towers have collapsed without a controlled demolition since no steel-frame, high-rise buildings have ever before or since been brought down due to fires?

Temperatures due to fire don't get hot enough for buildings to collapse.

The collapse of the WTC towers was not caused either by a conventional building fire or even solely by the concurrent multi-floor fires that day. Instead, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large, jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires weakened the now susceptible structural steel. No building in the United States has ever been subjected to the massive structural damage and concurrent multi-floor fires that the towers experienced on Sept. 11, 2001.
 
2007-04-11 03:49:02 PM  
Cryptozoophiliac-

OK, excellent...many CTers can't even go that far..and indeed, the things you listed would indeed have gone along way towards clearing things up.

However, here's the next problem:

IF you believe that the government was able to plan an operation on this scale, involving scores of agencies, businesses and people, and execute it flawlessly enough that they still have not been revealed to be guilty beyond a doubt, then why would that same group of government conspirators have any problem staging this:

"a trial of the living perpetrators, including alleged mastermind KSM ..."

in a way that will make them ( the government) seem completely innocent? Why on earth would you believe a group of people willing to kill thousands of people would have the slightest problem or hesitation about setting up a kangaroo court to convict some hand picked patsies?

I eagerly await your response.
 
2007-04-11 03:50:28 PM  
How could the steel have melted if the fires in the WTC towers weren't hot enough to do so?

In no instance did NIST report that steel in the WTC towers melted due to the fires. The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit). Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36).

However, when bare steel reaches temperatures of 1,000 degrees Celsius, it softens and its strength reduces to roughly 10 percent of its room temperature value. Steel that is unprotected (e.g., if the fireproofing is dislodged) can reach the air temperature within the time period that the fires burned within the towers. Thus, yielding and buckling of the steel members (floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns) with missing fireproofing were expected under the fire intensity and duration determined by NIST for the WTC towers.

UL did not certify any steel as suggested. In fact, in U.S. practice, steel is not certified at all; rather structural assemblies are tested for their fire resistance rating in accordance with a standard procedure such as ASTM E 119 (see NCSTAR 1-6B). That the steel was "certified ... to 2000 degrees Fahrenheit for six hours" is simply not true.
 
2007-04-11 03:50:36 PM  
Utopias Marathon: How could the WTC towers have collapsed without a controlled demolition since no steel-frame, high-rise buildings have ever before or since been brought down due to fires?

Yes, we have the precedent of hundreds of buildings that have been hit by 767s traveling at 500 miles per hour...
 
2007-04-11 03:51:07 PM  
give me doughnuts

I can't believe these idiots.
Have none of you tin-foil hat types ever watched a documentary on building demolition and implosion?
Do you have a farking clue as to how much is taken out of a building, and how much prep work there is before the explosives go off?
Do you think every single person who worked in the towers, including the 2700 or so that "volunteered" to die, kept the secret?
Because there is no way in hell, that that kind of preperation could take place without a couple of thousand people asking what the fark was going on.

Do the species a favor: kill yourselves before you breed.

/*sigh* I feel better now.


Well, things are removed because they're salvageable or you don't want shrapnel. The argument here seems to be that explosives were planted to cause enough damage to destroy the building. Controlled demolition isn't really the point. That also means one guy with a backpack of plastique, or its modern equivalent could have done the job. nobody would notice if you set that shiat above a drop ceiling and shaped a charge to take out a pylon. Not saying I buy it yet, but there are better ways to shoot an argument down. Calm down man. Nobody's talking shiat about your mom. Relax.
 
2007-04-11 03:51:41 PM  
Paedophile_Deluxe: Damn, I wish I visited then instead of last week. I would have had much fewer urges to commit violent acts.

Oh dude this is the worst time of year to be down here! I won't even go out there now! Really - just pretend the whole place has an 'out of order' sign on it until July. Madness! But yeah - one of the benefits of 9/11 was that the theme parks dropped their prices a lot. And there were no lines.

Man, that shiat rattled the hell out of everyone down here.
 
2007-04-11 03:51:53 PM  
Gravitybear: The Pentavirate is made up of the The Queen, The Vatican, The Gettys, The Rothschilds, and Colonel Sanders before he went tits up.

Ooooooh, that's it! No one reveals the existence of the Pentavirate! I am sending the Lizardmen over.
 
2007-04-11 03:52:45 PM  
elchip


I recommend reading my whole post. It is in support that the building fell due to weakened steel from the combination fires
 
2007-04-11 03:53:10 PM  
There were two F15s parked in New York airspace minutes after the first attack. I'm pretty sure the military occasionally oversteps it's bounds in dire circumstances.

Were they parked and cold without pilots on board? Were they there before the first plane hit as well? Or did they land after the first plane hit?
 
2007-04-11 03:53:26 PM  
DROxINxTHExWIND: But, when the building came down those 'uncompromised' steel supports just gave way. What?

Oh, for Fark's sake.

Each floor was designed to bear a certain load.

Not twenty, then twenty-one, then twenty-two, etc, ad nauseum as the collapse occurred.

Look at the construction: the horizontal beams were bolted to the verticals.

Now, look up the notion of "shear".

Of course, the uncompromised floors gave way. They were loaded far beyond their capacity.
 
2007-04-11 03:53:56 PM  
Faethe: Plus I am one of the Glass Parking Lot people.I think we should have nuked the fark out of Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, then moved on.

genocide and causing a global recession doesn't seem like an appropriate response to an attack committed by a bunch of stateless rouges...Not to mention you totally left out the Pakistani ISI in your misguided retaliation...
 
2007-04-11 03:54:12 PM  
DROxINxTHExWIND
 
2007-04-11 03:54:27 PM  
ElBarto79:

"Not that I believe the conspiracy wackos but 45 degrees is the natural angle of failure for a ductile beam in tension."

What about torsion? It wouldn't be that far-fetched to think that the towers had a slight twisting motion (unnoticeable to the eye) during their fall would it? Even under compression, the 45 degree angle failure applies under torsion, right?

/not pickin' a fight, just curious
//Was a mechanical engineering major, switched halfway through because I hated life
 
2007-04-11 03:54:36 PM  
The argument here seems to be that explosives were planted to cause enough damage to destroy the building.

Wrong. The argument is that only controlled demolitions could have brought the towers straight down at near-freefall.

So claiming random placement of explosivies does not help the conspiracy theory in the slightest.

/the towers were brought down by the impact, fires, and Newtons little "discovery"
 
2007-04-11 03:55:57 PM  
mikaloyd


Do you have one of those flexible telescopes they use for endoscopies? If not, how did you read my post with your head so far up your ass?
 
2007-04-11 03:56:19 PM  
cryptozoophiliac
Actually, it means one who is sexually attracted to mysterious, undiscovered creatures.

Mea culpa.

And I just want to remind you, balrogs are technically not crypto-critters.
 
2007-04-11 03:57:27 PM  
2007-04-11 12:04:56 PM elchip


mathmatix: wtc 1&2, should not have collapsed. there are skyscrapers around the world that have burnt from 1-20 hours and the buildings didnt collapse

Were the buildings constructed in the same way, with the same materials? Were they hit by Boeing 767s traveling at 500 miles per hour?

Furthermore, controlled demolitions cause the building to nicely implode, bottom on up, into its own footprint...


Not to continue the flamewar BUT
hhmm elchip assuming it was actually demolition, do you think the perpetrators give a crap if the building fits into its own footprint coming down(done to minimize damage)? They know thousands will die anyway so what if a few hundred more on the ground gets it when it comes down? Your logic in this instance is thus flawed.
 
2007-04-11 03:57:31 PM  
Headso: genocide and causing a global recession doesn't seem like an appropriate response to an attack committed by a bunch of stateless rouges...Not to mention you totally left out the Pakistani ISI in your misguided retaliation...

So? Would have nuked them, too.

I don't care. You let a training camp for armies of idiots who soul purpose is to go into other peoples countries and blow shiat up, you are responsible. You give money to these places knowing full well what they are going to do, you are responsible. Russia would have pulled this shiat we sure as hell would not have invaded Moscow.
 
Displayed 50 of 1133 comments


Oldest | « | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | » | Newest



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report