StarGateWars Forums

i wanted to post a 9/11 revisited topic on the 8th anniversary, but thought better of it and decided to wait till after, anyways...



i don't know how many of you know, but Charlie Sheen has written a letter to Obama, entitled "Twenty Minutes With The President" in which Sheen has outlined a fictional account of the 2 meeting and discussing 20 key points with relation to the events of 9/11-put forward by Charlie Sheen to the president.
Sheen has also requested a meeting with Obama and Obamas staff have sent Sheen a reply in which they have denied Sheen a meeting with the president because he is "to busy", and yet, Obama has found the time to make some comments regarding some rap star, but doesnt have time to address the concerns of a US citizen with regards to a VERY important event in US and world history...

regardless, here's the letter: http://www.prisonplanet.com/twenty-minu ... ident.html

there's allot of pressure coming from the truth movement, pilots and architects and engineers demanding a new investigation into the events of 9/11. so, should the wars be stopped and charges be brought on certain people if it comes out that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are based on lies, deceit and false intell, should not the troops be brought home immediately and laws that were passed because of "terrorists" be quashed???

http://www.ae911truth.org/


[spoiler]everyone here knows where i stand on this subject, but just in case you don't...9/11 was an inside job and the wars ARE based on lies and charges of treason, murder and genocide should be brought on more than a few former and current politicians from quite a few country's. that's the only time in this thread that i will voice my opinions with regards to "9/11 being an inside job".[/spoiler]

Your thread title is blatantly misleading, you are once again talking conspiracy theories.. I just knew it was too good to be true.

Charlie Sheen is nothing more as a passé actor seeking attention he cannot get from regular television appearances anymore. 20 minutes with the President? Hell, if all Americans would ask for that.. imagine the insanity. No preferential treatment for Sheen, so NO meeting.
Stop seeing things that are not there. You sound like your 'truth'-movement. I know magical monkeys with more sense of realism. There IS no truth, and you could never find it if it did.



Anyway.. I've fixed your title, because you can't go saying "this is not about this" while in fact it is about "this".

Sure that running away from Afghanistan will solve anything...
No matter who/what did the 9/11, there's a war going there, and running away would mean defeat and talibans would be asap back in office!

Hmm.. I can do what 'Sheen' (or rather, his ghostwriter) did.. write a story in which I have a talk with Julius Caesar, answers and jokes included, and then claim that Caesar should entertain me as a guest. Funky!

that's not even on the same level as sheens now is it?!

Sheen is a huge celeb, recognized the world over, his letter is about a major world event which has had far reaching consequences, it has 20 bullet points all of which are backed up by a bibliography...does that not warrant a meeting with the president?

[KMA]Avenger wrote:that's not even on the same level as sheens now is it?!

I could make it better.
Besides, I would be appalled at the person who would have such a lack of historical insight as to deem the Crossing of the Rubicon less globally reaching as the 9/11-thing. How incredibly arrogant.

[KMA]Avenger wrote:Sheen is a huge celeb, recognized the world over, his letter is about a major world event which has had far reaching consequences, it has 20 bullet points all of which are backed up by a bibliography...does that not warrant a meeting with the president?

So just because mr. Sheen, huge celeb, decides something is worth talking about with the president, he should take the time to talk to someone who is going to 'present the facts'? That very same kind of insane rhetoric is what you use here. Frankly, I would love to talk to you about normal things, have a beer or whatever you drink, and laugh about last night's game.. but to enter into a debate with one so predetermined? No way.
To do so as president would be ridiculous and unnecessary. Mr. Sheen has the truth? Laughable. Like his shows, quite entertaining, but entirely shallow. Nothing further, I will not be tempted to continue a talk as ridiculous as mr. Sheen's bull.

as i said in the PM i sent you, you've missed the point its not about him being a super-dooper star and MUST be listened to, its about us as opposed to him, he has effectively killed his career, where as we can (within reason) discuss any subject matter we want without fear of retribution, reprisal or comebacks of any kind from the establishment.

this ISN'T a discussion about how the towers fell or whether there were bombs in the buildings, it is a discussion about Sheens letter to the prez, why 6 of the 10-9/11 commission members said a new investigation was needed and if it is proven that the wars are based on lies, what needs to be done to rectify those "mistakes".

Apophis The Great wrote:Sure that running away from Afghanistan will solve anything...
No matter who/what did the 9/11, there's a war going there, and running away would mean defeat and talibans would be asap back in office!

of course the Taliban would be back in office if the US keeps helping them!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3340165

So I read the first link and in the link it said that interveiw happened. But at the bottom of the link it said that the interveiw did not happen.

Can you please explain why? Because it is contradict this thing that you posted about the first link.

as i said in my original post, its a fictional account of a meeting between Charlie Sheen and president Obama.

sheen wrote the letter because he hopes to meet with Obama (in real life) on behalf of the victims family's of those that died on the day (who have given Sheen their full support) in hopes that president Obama will give Sheen 20 mins of his time, and after that Sheen hopes Obama will see sense and reopen the investigation into the events and after-events of 9/11...

hope that makes it clear for you Rudy?

[KMA]Avenger wrote:as i said in my original post, its a fictional account of a meeting between Charlie Sheen and president Obama.

sheen wrote the letter because he hopes to meet with Obama (in real life) on behalf of the victims family's of those that died on the day (who have given Sheen their full support) in hopes that president Obama will give Sheen 20 mins of his time, and after that Sheen hopes Obama will see sense and reopen the investigation into the events and after-events of 9/11...

hope that makes it clear for you Rudy?

Oh must have not read that part(its kinda hard(at least for me) to read things from the internet on my PS3).

Yes it does make it clear, thanks for making more clear now. I will read the other link later and comment on that link.


So those 20 things he was talking about in that fictional interview is really true?

Kanye is a jackass and it needed to be said; end of discussion.

look i know steel melts a very high temperatures but it's structural integrity goes at much lower ones. If it was controlled demolition their would have been flashes from demo charges (alot of them).

the braces used to connect the inner and outer walls of the structure were designed to stop sheering effects. Not support the weight of sagging metal cross beams. Once those snapped the weight of building took over and pancaked. It wasn't a cross section structure like the empire state. It's a 2 in 1 design. When your getting that high up the design of the wtc is better and more cost effective. A cross section design would not have withstood the sheering effects unless you gave the building twice the area at the base that they had to work with..

So it did what it was designed to do in the event of catastrophic material failure. New York is lucky the building was designed so well or lot more people would have been hurt.

I mean they were hit by goddamn planes!!! you know how many newtons of energy were transfered when they collided. A **Filtered** load!!!

If their was no fire or stronger braces they would have help up too.

Well the WTC towers might have been made as well as they could with the materials and techniques of the time but to todays building codes they would have been considered decidely unsafe

Kit-Fox wrote:Well the WTC towers might have been made as well as they could with the materials and techniques of the time but to todays building codes they would have been considered decidely unsafe

your going to have to give a source on that one.

Gah I'll be damned if I can recall it. This was from a '01 discussion (actually I think the duscussion might have been in '02, but when the thread happened doesnt really matter) on another forum, Futuremark. One of the members posted links to architecture / engineering experts who were to say the least critical of the buildings structure.

All I can really remember is the overall point, and that was if the building plans were submitted today (at the time of the attacks, '01) they would have been rejected as unsafe, although it was said that when the towers were built they were considered a exemplary design but like everything else ideas/knowledge and experience change such perceptions.

Rudy Pena wrote:So those 20 things he was talking about in that fictional interview is really true?

yes they are. the good thing with what Sheen has done is that he wrote the letter in such a way, and provided 20 key points that would be bullet proof, because lets face it, it would be EXTREMELY disrespectful to all the victims, their family's and the first responders to write something like that without getting facts straight.

Thriller wrote:Kanye is a jackass and it needed to be said; end of discussion.

look i know steel melts a very high temperatures but it's structural integrity goes at much lower ones. If it was controlled demolition their would have been flashes from demo charges (alot of them).

the braces used to connect the inner and outer walls of the structure were designed to stop sheering effects. Not support the weight of sagging metal cross beams. Once those snapped the weight of building took over and pancaked. It wasn't a cross section structure like the empire state. It's a 2 in 1 design. When your getting that high up the design of the wtc is better and more cost effective. A cross section design would not have withstood the sheering effects unless you gave the building twice the area at the base that they had to work with..

So it did what it was designed to do in the event of catastrophic material failure. New York is lucky the building was designed so well or lot more people would have been hurt.

I mean they were hit by goddamn planes!!! you know how many newtons of energy were transferred when they collided. A **Filtered** load!!!

If their was no fire or stronger braces they would have help up too.

though i appreciate you replying to points i originally made, any chance we can stay on the subject of Sheen, his letter and what it would mean if a new investigation was found to be in order?

thanks

[spoiler]if you want to test how accurate those beliefs are, then i suggest you watch 9/11 Ripple Effect and the film that architects and engineers made, if those 2 films fail to convince you that you need to re-examine your beliefs, then nothing will [/spoiler]

Thriller wrote:

Kit-Fox wrote:Well the WTC towers might have been made as well as they could with the materials and techniques of the time but to todays building codes they would have been considered decidedly unsafe

your going to have to give a source on that one.

KF is correct, not so much with regards to the construction and materials used in the structural steel but in the interior of the building and the fire proofing.

the original owners of the WTC complex (The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey) repeatedly requested permission for the twin towers to be demolished, and were denied each time due the amount asbestos and other hazardous materials used in the out fitting of the towers...the cost of refurbishment of the towers was $1 billion. this was deemed as infeasible since they were having major difficulties in renting enough space to make it a viable option....

but those are all side issues.