Which Arguments Should Be Used When Talking About 9/11?

[Gold9472]

I grabbed the topics from the 911Truth.org poll.

[PhilosophyGenius]

I picked Pentagon hole. But building 7 & the WTC are up there as well but the Pentagon hole is the easiest to prove.

Holla at yo boy!

[jetsetlemming]

Pentagon hole?

[somebigguy]

WTC7!!!! Without question. Steel framed skyscrapers do not drop like that for any reason other than explosives. Lack of Air Response is a good one too, as being an impossible situation.

[Gold9472]

I 9/11 Truth prefer 9/11 Truth subliminal 9/11 Truth suggestions.

[PhilosophyGenius]

Pentagon hole?

The whole is waaayyyyy too small for it to have been hit by an airliner. Also, there was no visible plane wreckage.

[PhilosophyGenius]

WTC7!!!! Without question. Steel framed skyscrapers do not drop like that for any reason other than explosives. Lack of Air Response is a good one too, as being an impossible situation.

Yeah WTC7 also. But the rebuttal to that is that a gas tank exploded in the lower level causing it to collapse. And the rebuttal to the lack of air respone
is that it was too hard to coordinate multiple hijackings and that the war games confused everyone.

There is no rebuttal to the Pentagon hole.

[somebigguy]

Yeah WTC7 also. But the rebuttal to that is that a gas tank exploded in the lower level causing it to collapse. And the rebuttal to the lack of air respone
is that it was too hard to coordinate multiple hijackings and that the war games confused everyone.

There is no rebuttal to the Pentagon hole.

The existence of Diesel fuel is irrelevant. No building has ever fallen in that fashion for any reason other than controlled demo. Explosions do not cause buildings to disintegrate.

Furthermore, WTC7 was built above a power substation (or something like that) meaning it was built even stronger than a normal building. Plus Guliani had a bunker in that building somewhere with its own air and water supply. Are they gonna build a bunker in a building that can disintegrate after a little fire?

[PhilosophyGenius]

The existence of Diesel fuel is irrelevant. No building has ever fallen in that fashion for any reason other than controlled demo. Explosions do not cause buildings to disintegrate.

Furthermore, WTC7 was built above a power substation (or something like that) meaning it was built even stronger than a normal building. Plus Guliani had a bunker in that building somewhere with its own air and water supply. Are they gonna build a bunker in a building that can disintegrate after a little fire?

Yeah, also WTC7 is a brand new steel building. And I think I read somewhere that they had incriminating evidence linking Bush to Enron (or something like that).

[somebigguy]

Yeah, also WTC7 is a brand new steel building. And I think I read somewhere that they had incriminating evidence linking Bush to Enron (or something like that).

Yeah, seems to me there were all kinds of things in WTC7, not just Enron.