Who Loves the Conspiraloons?

 Quarsan,

That's absolutely great and as a long term subscriber to your RSS feed I think its wonderful.

It is superb you have solved all the questions and can dismiss those questioning the official version of events as engaging in "lunatic theories [that] are discredited".

Can you please tell me what caused the collapse of WTC7?

Oh and also, how do you crash a large commercial airliner into the Pentagon without leaving any physical damage where the engines or the tail section would have hit the building?

And by the way, I don't have any idea who was responsible. I only know for me the official story does not add up. 

As for branding all those who ask questions haven't you heard the expression about not tarring people all with the same brush?

Anyway, as you have cracked it, I'm really looking forward to your answers.

Many thanks.

Geordie,

You will be pleased to know that our dating site will also include some really valuable sections and advice on 'introducing yourself', 'making a good impression' and crossing cultural boundries such as dating a 'no planer'.

This site will be a tremendous resource for all conspiracy theorists.

Geordie.  I've no interest in intruding on Quarsan's private grief but Larry Silverstein has declared that wTC 7 was intentionally demolished.

Google "larry silverstein wtc7" for endless links and YouTube of him saying same.

Oh Quarsan you old tease! :)

Stick flinging the mud at politicians and holding them to account. It's what you're good at and needs to be done.

Dont get distracted by all this conspiracy stuff.

Interesting idea that, Quarsan  :  people who question the official line are emotional inadequates or not quite right in the mind.

In the old Soviet Union they used to call dissenters mad and lock them up in lunatic asylums.

It's been hinted in the past that this site is a front for the authorities themselves. I'm beginning to believe it.

"WTC 7 was intentionally demolished."

What Silverstein doesn't address is that for such a demolition to occur, a lot a of groundwork has to be done, plans studied, charges calculated and laid, detonators wired, etc. - not something that can be done in half an hour by the Fire Dept (who, as I recall, were pretty busy that day). It was premeditated, and once you accept that, a few other thoughts may spring to mind.

I realise that the idea of 9/11 being an inside job is pretty abhorrent, but the official line simply doesn't stand up, and the excuses made, such as kerosene fires softening structural steel, are just amateurish. One thing the Yanks are very good at is building skyscrapers, and the WTC was a showcase project that was designed to withstand hurricanes and direct hits by airliners.

Also look up the Oklahoma bombing - the damage there was far more than any truck bomb could inflict. If you think big enough, you can get away with almost anything.

If you didn't believe Blair, how much less should you believe Bush and Cheney?

Ah Danny boy Danny boy,,,

www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7d174b42-31fa-11dd-9b87-0000779fd2ac,s01=1.html

Blair is Hungry for Truth yes Blair!!!!!!Blair has not eaten for 14 days as he is hungry for truth.

www.youtube.com/watch

For a group that states on its about page that it is composed of politics junkies/anoraks, and has a want for 'an open accountable government', you are remarkably ignorant.

To dismiss people who question the government account as 'conspiraloons', and to suggest that they are all anti-semites or nazi supporters, apart from being utterly false, just shows your lack of knowledge for the real workings of Western governments.

Have you even looked at the official accounts of 9/11?  Bothered to check up on how they compare with what is known, how much information has been left out, how they were conducted, and by whom?  Are you aware of the known CIA/al Qaeda links?  The ISI links?  Do you have any clue about the silencing tactics used on insiders who may have relevant information?

You don't have to belong to a conspiracy theory to realise that there's something, many things, being covered up, many very important questions not answered, or not even aknowledged.  And you claim that you're after an open and accountable government!?  The US government has been anything BUT open and accountable on this issue.  How about standing up for one of your main aims? 

OK, your primary focus is perhaps on the British government, but considering the close ties between the two, two wars being fought by both nations, is this not relevant information?  One war based on lies, the other based on no hard evidence whatsoever.  A paper was promised by both governments to demonstrate clearly the involvment of bin Laden in the 9/11 attacks, and 7 years on it has never been produced.  The only scraps they have given are testimonies obtained under torture, and several sketchy videos that may have been doctored.  The only bin Laden video actually claiming involvment is widely believed to be faked, its discovery is highly dubious, and in any case, could such a video really provide enough evidence to justify a war that has killed thousands of innocent civilians, and hundreds of our troops.

Even if at a later date it can be proven that bin Laden was involved, firstly, that does not mean it was correct to jump into such a barbaric war when there was no evidence, and secondly, that doesn't leave the CIA off the hook, considering their past relations with al Qaeda.  9/11 MUST be re-investigated, and suggesting that anyone believing an investigation is needed is a Nazi, or resulting to childish name-calling, just shows that you are simply too poorly educated to even comment on this topic.

As I said, investigating the government account and having questions about how they could possibly have come to the conclusions they have given the apparent lack of evidence does not make you a crazed conspiracy theorist.  And it is only natural that alternative theories will emerge when the official one doesn't fit.  So you should either look at these issues seriously, or refrain from commenting on something you're clearly not very well informed on.

For a group that states on its about page that it is composed of politics junkies/anoraks, and has a want for 'an open accountable government', you are remarkably ignorant.

To dismiss people who question the government account as 'conspiraloons', and to suggest that they are all anti-semites or nazi supporters, apart from being utterly false, just shows your lack of knowledge for the real workings of Western governments.

Have you even looked at the official accounts of 9/11?  Bothered to check up on how they compare with what is known, how much information has been left out, how they were conducted, and by whom?  Are you aware of the known CIA/al Qaeda links?  The ISI links?  Do you have any clue about the silencing tactics used on insiders who may have relevant information?

You don't have to belong to a conspiracy theory to realise that there's something, many things, being covered up, many very important questions not answered, or not even aknowledged.  And you claim that you're after an open and accountable government!?  The US government has been anything BUT open and accountable on this issue.  How about standing up for one of your main aims? 

OK, your primary focus is perhaps on the British government, but considering the close ties between the two, two wars being fought by both nations, is this not relevant information?  One war based on lies, the other based on no hard evidence whatsoever.  A paper was promised by both governments to demonstrate clearly the involvment of bin Laden in the 9/11 attacks, and 7 years on it has never been produced.  The only scraps they have given are testimonies obtained under torture, and several sketchy videos that may have been doctored.  The only bin Laden video actually claiming involvment is widely believed to be faked, its discovery is highly dubious, and in any case, could such a video really provide enough evidence to justify a war that has killed thousands of innocent civilians, and hundreds of our troops.

Even if at a later date it can be proven that bin Laden was involved, firstly, that does not mean it was correct to jump into such a barbaric war when there was no evidence, and secondly, that doesn't leave the CIA off the hook, considering their past relations with al Qaeda.  9/11 MUST be re-investigated, and suggesting that anyone believing an investigation is needed is a Nazi, or resulting to childish name-calling, just shows that you are simply too poorly educated to even comment on this topic.

As I said, investigating the government account and having questions about how they could possibly have come to the conclusions they have given the apparent lack of evidence does not make you a crazed conspiracy theorist.  And it is only natural that alternative theories will emerge when the official one doesn't fit.  So you should either look at these issues seriously, or refrain from commenting on something you're clearly not very well informed on.

For a group that states on its about page that it is composed of politics junkies/anoraks, and has a want for 'an open accountable government', you are remarkably ignorant.

To dismiss people who question the government account as 'conspiraloons', and to suggest that they are all anti-semites or nazi supporters, apart from being utterly false, just shows your lack of knowledge for the real workings of Western governments.

Have you even looked at the official accounts of 9/11?  Bothered to check up on how they compare with what is known, how much information has been left out, how they were conducted, and by whom?  Are you aware of the known CIA/al Qaeda links?  The ISI links?  Do you have any clue about the silencing tactics used on insiders who may have relevant information?

You don't have to belong to a conspiracy theory to realise that there's something, many things, being covered up, many very important questions not answered, or not even aknowledged.  And you claim that you're after an open and accountable government!?  The US government has been anything BUT open and accountable on this issue.  How about standing up for one of your main aims? 

OK, your primary focus is perhaps on the British government, but considering the close ties between the two, two wars being fought by both nations, is this not relevant information?  One war based on lies, the other based on no hard evidence whatsoever.  A paper was promised by both governments to demonstrate clearly the involvment of bin Laden in the 9/11 attacks, and 7 years on it has never been produced.  The only scraps they have given are testimonies obtained under torture, and several sketchy videos that may have been doctored.  The only bin Laden video actually claiming involvment is widely believed to be faked, its discovery is highly dubious, and in any case, could such a video really provide enough evidence to justify a war that has killed thousands of innocent civilians, and hundreds of our troops.

Even if at a later date it can be proven that bin Laden was involved, firstly, that does not mean it was correct to jump into such a barbaric war when there was no evidence, and secondly, that doesn't leave the CIA off the hook, considering their past relations with al Qaeda.  9/11 MUST be re-investigated, and suggesting that anyone believing an investigation is needed is a Nazi, or resulting to childish name-calling, just shows that you are simply too poorly educated to even comment on this topic.

As I said, investigating the government account and having questions about how they could possibly have come to the conclusions they have given the apparent lack of evidence does not make you a crazed conspiracy theorist.  And it is only natural that alternative theories will emerge when the official one doesn't fit.  So you should either look at these issues seriously, or refrain from commenting on something you're clearly not very well informed on.

For a group that states on its about page that it is composed of politics junkies/anoraks, and has a want for 'an open accountable government', you are remarkably ignorant.

To dismiss people who question the government account as 'conspiraloons', and to suggest that they are all anti-semites or nazi supporters, apart from being utterly false, just shows your lack of knowledge for the real workings of Western governments.

Have you even looked at the official accounts of 9/11?  Bothered to check up on how they compare with what is known, how much information has been left out, how they were conducted, and by whom?  Are you aware of the known CIA/al Qaeda links?  The ISI links?  Do you have any clue about the silencing tactics used on insiders who may have relevant information?

You don't have to belong to a conspiracy theory to realise that there's something, many things, being covered up, many very important questions not answered, or not even aknowledged.  And you claim that you're after an open and accountable government!?  The US government has been anything BUT open and accountable on this issue.  How about standing up for one of your main aims? 

OK, your primary focus is perhaps on the British government, but considering the close ties between the two, two wars being fought by both nations, is this not relevant information?  One war based on lies, the other based on no hard evidence whatsoever.  A paper was promised by both governments to demonstrate clearly the involvment of bin Laden in the 9/11 attacks, and 7 years on it has never been produced.  The only scraps they have given are testimonies obtained under torture, and several sketchy videos that may have been doctored.  The only bin Laden video actually claiming involvment is widely believed to be faked, its discovery is highly dubious, and in any case, could such a video really provide enough evidence to justify a war that has killed thousands of innocent civilians, and hundreds of our troops.

Even if at a later date it can be proven that bin Laden was involved, firstly, that does not mean it was correct to jump into such a barbaric war when there was no evidence, and secondly, that doesn't leave the CIA off the hook, considering their past relations with al Qaeda.  9/11 MUST be re-investigated, and suggesting that anyone believing an investigation is needed is a Nazi, or resulting to childish name-calling, just shows that you are simply too poorly educated to even comment on this topic.

As I said, investigating the government account and having questions about how they could possibly have come to the conclusions they have given the apparent lack of evidence does not make you a crazed conspiracy theorist.  And it is only natural that alternative theories will emerge when the official one doesn't fit.  So you should either look at these issues seriously, or refrain from commenting on something you're clearly not very well informed on.

Apologies for the multiple posts.  Is it possible for someone to remove the additional ones (just three please)?  If you could correct my spelling mistakes that would be great too.

I also wanted to add that to say that these theories have been discredited is totally untrue.  Some elements of some theories have been shown to be based on insubstantial evidence, or are highly speculative, and so cannot be accepted.  And some theories are just too wild to even be considered, that's certainly true.  However, the ONLY way these theories can possibly be entirely discredited is by a full and open investigation.  And the one single theory that HAS been discredited is the official account.  To claim that it hasn't is either pure denial, or lack of research.

'Debunkers' are to be credited for actually looking at the accusations and offering an alternative view, unlike articles such as this which go no further than unjust ridicule.  Sometimes valid points have been raised which means theories have to be altered, or anyone holding on to them must be dismissed, rightly so.  To discredit one aspect does not render an entire theory false.  There is still a mass of evidence for many of the theories that has never been adequately explained (and cannot possibly be without an investigation), is regularly ignored or is shrugged off as unimportant. 

If you're going to stick with your stance on this issue, then how about producing something to show, fully (and without using the sleazy tactics of Popular Mechanics who made such an arse of trying to debunk these theories), 9/11 skeptics why their theories are so utterly delusional?  A word which I think applies more acurately to the person posting this article.

Perhaps it would also help me with editing

Looks like the BBC have taken a lambasting for paying expenses to  Kollerstrom so he could appear on the channel to air his viewes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PqXw6mS2KA

www.youtube.com/watch

ad deleted