Of course, if you live in an Islamic country and the government does not allow for a free media or you're just biased, then it's the Israelis or the US government (though, this is a popular theory amongst US democrats too).
However, I can easily show those who claim it was the Israelis or the US government are lying through their teeth and are just saying so as mere propaganda and are using something called "Island Hopping Logic."
If you ask them who brought down the Twin Towers, it was Bush or the Jews.
Ask them what they think of Osama Bin Laden and "Oh, he's our hero! Did you see what he did to the Twin Towers!"
You'd be amazed how common this is...or perhaps not.
Another thing that stuck out about this chart is our good Mexican friends to the south. Only 25% of them believe it was Islamic terrorists. Of course, that's why they were all cheering for Osama Bin Laden during a soccer match against the US.
So I don't want the world telling us who they (wink wink) "think" pulled off 9-11. You all know who did.
11 comments:
George Orwell perfectly described this phenomenon in the book 1984 as "Doublethink."
Doublethink is holding two contradictory beliefs simultaneously.
Believing or saying anything other than what you're supposed to believe or say is called "Thoughtcrime."
The process of suppressing the conflicting emotional response of Doublethink is called "Crimestop."
It's amazing to actually see these concepts in action so many years after he wrote that book.
I'm not surprised at anything some people say these days. When Daily Kos puts up a cartoon saying "Happy Twin Towers Day", making fun of the attacks of September 11, nothing surprises me.
Debbie Hamilton
Right Truth
What also stood out to me, was that, at least according to this chart, MORE Kenyans and Nigerians believe the attacks were carried out by Islamic terrorists than Germans, French and even British people do!
I suppose that shows the crisis level the "Islamification of Europe" has taken.
Also, ONLY about 30% of Mexicans claim to believe it was Islamic extremists?!
That last one is perhaps even MORE astounding, given that Mexico doesn't have a significant Muslim population.....apparently, it DOES HAVE a fairly significant anti-American one.
It's not just Democrats, Captain.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1531304,00.html
According to a different poll, 36% of Americans though it was "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that the US government either knew about it or did it.
I'm in that camp. Buildings don't just collapse straight down on themselves by accident and jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to produce molten metal weeks later, although thermite does. Jet engines don't just bounce off of the side of the Pentagon and disintegrate leaving a perfect circle smaller in diameter than the distance between the engines either. No high rise building has ever collapsed due to fire, and they've been hit before. Hell, the Empire State building got nailed by a B-25, and the WTC was designed to withstand the impact of a passenger airliner as a result.
So who really did it? Hell if I know. I think the US government probably helped, maybe making the most of a situation that they might have known about in advance but believed they were unable to stop.
The Kenyans and Nigerians are under actual assault by Muslims, though I should point out that in Nigeria the offending Muslims are themselves Nigerian. Don't forget their relative proximity to Sudan, where Muslims are busy killing thousands of Christians and animists.
An the media keeps telling us that the world wants Obama as our next president. let's listen to them.....
"Buildings don't just collapse straight down on themselves by accident and jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to produce molten metal weeks later..." (Ryan Fuller)
<
<
Actually, Ryan, pancake collapses are very common in burning buildings...I KNOW that because I was caught in one (on Walton Avenue and East Clarke Place) in the South Bronx back in 1990 and I’ve been present at more than a dozen others.
While it is true that building fires rarely get above 1200 degrees Fahrenheit, not close enough to “melt steel,” prolonged exposure to fires of that magnitude have proven to weaken steel to such an extent that they loose as much as 65% of their tinsel strength.
With prolonged exposure to such “free burns” steel warps, twists, bends and fails to hold loads it was initially designed to hold.
Moreover, “pancake” (floor upon floor) collapses are NOT “indicative of controlled demolitions” as some misinformed people claim.
When free burning fires get into a building’s cockloft (the space between the ceiling and the roof) the roof’s steel supports lose their strength, and portions of, or in some cases the entire roof, fall onto the top floor below...that floor, while it might have been designed to hold that much of a static load, it CANNOT deal with that IMPACT LOAD and so the top floor (that would usually be the 6th or 7th in many Bronx Apartment Houses or “H-Types”) falls onto the floor below that, which gives way under that IMPACT LOAD and that chain continues downward until the roof and top floor ultimately sit atop the first.
You might want to see; http://vincentdunn.com/wtc.html
And;
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html
@ Ryan Fuller - It was built to withstand being hit by only a small passanger plane, I can't recall the exact size off the top of my head. But it was definitely not built to withstand being hit by a 747.
It was a 707, actually. Not exactly a Cessna.
And what's up with WTC 7? It didn't get hit by anything, and came crashing down anyway. No steel reinforced high rise building has ever collapsed due to fire. The CIA, Secret Service, and IRS were all tenants.
Apparently it was just "buildings fall down" day and we're supposed to just take it all in stride. Sure.
"And what's up with WTC 7? It didn't get hit by anything, and came crashing down anyway. No steel reinforced high rise building has ever collapsed due to fire." (Ryan Fuller)
<
<
First, the second part of that statement ("No steel reinforced high rise building has ever collapsed due to fire,") is erroneous.
The H-type apartment buildings in the Bronx, many of which went vacant in the 1980s are ALL steel reinforced buildings and many have collapsed "due to fire" and they generally coallapse in a floor-upon-floor or "pancake collapse."
So there's that.
In the case of Building 7, WTC 7 had burned out-of-control for over 7 hours. The FDNY had lost over 400 men to injuries and death (343) that day and the water systems around that area were badly damaged after the towers fell. Car fires were burning out-of-control in the area as well because the FDNY neither had the manpower or resources available for those efforts at that time.
The statement often made by 9-11 Truthers, that “The claim that the collapse was the result of a fire requires the fire be equally distributed throughout the entire floor of the building, providing equal heat for an equal amount of time, so that all the load bearings members would fail at the exact same moment,” is as false as is the one that claims “Jet fuel burns at too low a temperature (around 2000 degrees F max) to melt steel (which melts at 2700 degrees F.” The fact is that the fires didn’t HAVE to MELT the steel, as steel loses 90% of its strength at around 1800 degrees F.
The supports DID NOT have to all “fail at the same time,” for the floors below the collapsing upper floors couldn’t stand the IMPACT LOAD of the floors coming down on them. Once one floor, or a large portion of one floor collapses onto another, that floor cannot withstand that IMPACT LOAD and it too collapses and the weight of those floors now collapses onto the floors below that, all the way down to the ground.
That’s why pancake (floor-on-floor) collapses are NOT all that uncommon in fire situations – there have been a lot of pancake collapses in vacant structures where fires burn out-of-control before extinguishing measures can be put in place.
Well at least the "means" are clearer now.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13049
Post a Comment