Author Topic: whats your opinion? the newly released 9/11 vid of the plane vs. the pentagon (Read 15047 times)

noss · « **on:** May 19, 2006, 02:59PM »

i'm interested in seeing what peoples opinions are on this.. its the video just released in an attempt to stifle conspiracy theories on 9/11.. its supposed to be the plane that smashed into the pentagon. if you ask me, it just makes it worse.. i cant see anything large enough to be a plane.. if you look carefully, right on the ground on the right side of the shot, just before the explosion, you see a white object, barely big enough to be a car or small truck in a single frame.. then bang.

http://thatvideosite.com/view/2429.html

if anyone has seen some of the conspiracy theory videos and what not, there is one going around on the net at the moment that shows photos of the damage to the pentagon certainly very interesting.

edit: this is the other vid i was talking about.. it goes for 1hr 20mins but its interesting viewing and well worth it if you want to get opinions outside of what the mainstream media feeds you.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848

imaspy · « **Reply #1 on:** May 19, 2006, 03:46PM »

one small white flash i agree, however you gotta remember that the pentagon is as tall as an aircraft hangar. so that object suddenly doesnt look so small. i still think no commercial airline wouldve hit the pentagon after watching loose change though.

noss · « **Reply #2 on:** May 19, 2006, 04:07PM »

yeh i understand how big the pentagon is.. that little white flash still couldnt be a passenger aircraft.. you have to also remember how big a 757 is, they're not tiny themselves..

imaspy · « **Reply #3 on:** May 19, 2006, 05:03PM »

couldnt be? The Pentagon is actually taller than most airline hangars, and is very broad to boot. Any aircraft would look like a r/c plane from most viewpoints.

http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/Sep2001/010914-F-8006R-002.jpg

That photo should give you some idea of the damage caused.

The Pentagon is 77ft high and each side is 440 ft long. The tail of a Boeing 757 reaches 44 ft from the ground. This is why the aircraft appears to be so small. The demolished segment of the Pentagon is the right size considering the mass that hit it.

Plus, the video camera recording these images was using a fish-eye lens, giving a distorted sense of scale.

-- not my comment, but an interesting opinion nonetheless...

Wolf In Sheep’s Clothing · « **Reply #4 on:** May 19, 2006, 05:47PM »

Iv seen Loose Change is pritty convincing IMO. Its a must see.

vector · « **Reply #5 on:** May 22, 2006, 01:18PM »

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

noss · « **Reply #6 on:** May 22, 2006, 01:31PM »

meh.. i still dont find the official story overly convincing.. and i've already seen everything that snopes shows.

NeVetS · « **Reply #7 on:** May 22, 2006, 01:36PM »

As they said with using mobile phones at 30000ft it can't be done with out the plane being set upto do so. I said from day one that 911 was staged and i remember being grilled about saying that in year 11, most of those people now agree with me. They way those buildings came down to the pentegon never made looked real to me... I hope loose change makes people think for them selves because some people will beleave anything they see on the 6 oclock news.

3391 · « **Reply #8 on:** May 22, 2006, 01:45PM »

wow i didn't realize the 9/11 attacks were such a international news event. living here in NYC and personally affect by this event, it probably would be easy to believe the conspiracy theorists nuts but i have more sense!

1. the camera that filmed that event was designed to document license plates. it is more like a still camera and is too slow to record a plane traveling at an estimated 400-550mph.
2. for those nuts that really believe the government did this........for that to be true it would have to involve A LOT OF PEOPLE.......someone would've talked!

noss · « **Reply #9 on:** May 22, 2006, 01:57PM »

i wouldnt go as far as saying conspiracy theorists are nuts.. i'm also not saying the government did it.. its always good to have a few different opinions and views and what not.. i was never interested in the 9/11 stuff until recently when i stumbled across a few things, and it does make you think. or at least you'd hope it'd make you think.

chr1S · « **Reply #10 on:** May 22, 2006, 01:57PM »

america planned this themselves..

even the planes that hit the twin towers wernt comemrcial jets, they were fighter planes and there was a puff of smoke before they hit.

i havn't seen that link noss put up but ive got one to show you all..

www.antrx.com/temp/pentagon.swf

have a look of that people !

noss · « **Reply #11 on:** May 22, 2006, 02:11PM »

yeh the white thing they point out in the flash movie is what i was trying to point out in the video clip.. yeh i'm aware its a motion delay camera that only takes stills - i have one setup in my house for security - my point was, little white thing, that close to the ground.. 757? i dont think i can believe that. but yeh, as i said, its good to have different opinions and what not.. be rather boring if everyone agreed with each other.

edit: oh, just a note.. i do think the flash is a little overdone and designed in a way to make you go 'ack! the government are out to get us' or something or other.. thats not what i was paying attention to though

Resin · « **Reply #12 on:** May 22, 2006, 03:21PM »

also the thing about the pentagon is that there are no wing marks on the building........where as on the towers there was.

also i love how the american flag has been but up almost immediately after the event in that photo

imaspy · « **Reply #13 on:** May 22, 2006, 03:30PM »

yeah its a good point. i cant exactly say who i think is really responsible for all of that crap.... as a lot of the evidence appears a little ambiguous... but one thing i am convinced of more and more is that there had to be much more to it then just some terrorists crashing some planes.

Chadza · « **Reply #14 on:** May 22, 2006, 10:40PM »

Quote

but one thing i am convinced of more and more is that there had to be much more to it then just some terrorists crashing some planes.

Of course there is: Islamic terrorists who absolutely loathe the west. It was a very smart plan, one that the "fail safes" hadn't been thought of yet. I hate to say it, but a fuel laden airliner is a pretty good weapon to use.

I think anyone who argues that the WTC crashes were a fake or hoaxes must be smoking some pretty strong shit. The fact that there were so many camera angles and the actual impact markings on the buildings themselves cannot be dis-proven. The people who were flying those aircraft into the buildings also MUST have a major screw loose. No pilot in his right mind is going to just fly an aircraft into a building. Let alone two aircraft and two buildings.

Now, the Pentagon one is a bit different, but it all comes down to this- Do you REALLY think the US defense agencies stationed in the Pentagon would DELIBERATELY blow up their own building (in the process making them look pretty silly that they couldn't defend themselves) just to get whatever point across that they theoretically wanted to make??

The one thing that I reckon draws conclusively towards an aircraft crash, is the depth with which the explosion went into the building. A bomb on the outside would not have gone as deep, and a bomb on the inside would have blown the walls OUT a lot more than what occurred.

Also, Resin, the towers were built in big concrete columns that would hold together more easily even when sliced apart by a wing, than only a 5 story building that would "collapse in on itself" once it had exploded.

my thoughts.

chr1S · « **Reply #15 on:** May 22, 2006, 11:11PM »

Chad,

hmm i dont know how to explain it.. you have to see it..

The planes were grey, and there was a bulge under it, not under for luggage but it was on the right side and running along the plan, before the plane hit (you can only see it in slow motion), there was a detonation of somesort and then the plane collided inside.. The WTC fell down in the same scenario as a controlled building demolition, There was reports saying people heard multiple explosions and visually saw the explosions taking place as the building collapsed, level by level...

The plane that crashed into the ground apparently that morning too, the report was made at 10:46am i think, but police investigated the plane at 11am that same day ? - something along those lines.

If that doesn't explain enough what can ? there is alot more but i can't think of it all...

The fireproofing of the metal is bullshit, it's not that that caused the whole structure to collapse, im pretty convinced to what i saw, i've always had a question mark about sep 11, and waking up that morning on sep 12 (my birthday) to see it on tv was shit too

.

but when i do think back on all the accusations made against the us government, it makes me think, if they were military planes, what ever happened to the original planes that took off from the airport ?

nazstang · « **Reply #16 on:** May 22, 2006, 11:26PM »

well being a pissed off, camel jockey hating american that i am

, i've heard a million stories, and a million theories(people have nothing better to do

). Personal, i had a group of friends that where at the WTC and SAW the plane hit(first one) and almost got smashed by the second (luckily were running downstairs). my friend's boyfriend was on his rookie firefighter run that day, and i can assure you, the way he's now messed up, it was very real. no way the US would do ANYTHING to weaken themselve. most of you guy are way over there and may have a small "feeling" for what happened, but this CHANGED life here in the states as we know it. Since pearl harbor, we've never been attacked on our own territory, why would we do it to ourselves?

same goes with the pentagon, that huge building was damn near bombproof, the walls are so thick(i've been there before on a Marine Corp trip), trust me, that damage at 9:41 am was bigger than it may seem.

on that snopes site, that french piece of shit that wrote that book, can suck my left nut. i should write a book myself about him " French have nothing to do, because they are unemployed lazy fucks" , it would sell well, non-fiction is "in". then to follow it would be"french, the best lovers in the world?..... not with that pencil dick

" .

really guys, anyone can make a conspiracy theory about anything, ever heard the million conspiriacy theories about the Jewish holocaust

. The french and germans came up with one really quick, so apparently miliions of jews didn't die because of the nazi... they killed themselves

.

here's a quick joke about the french

Q: Why is good to be French?
A: You can surrender at the beginning of the war, and US will win it for you.

chr1S · « **Reply #17 on:** May 22, 2006, 11:44PM »

i dunno about that one...

it sets america up perfectly to give them right to attack countries that are in conjuction with oil friends.

naz, it may have effected you guys alot because you didnt know it would happen, surely if the harbour bridge was run into by a plane and we accused the lebanese with proof im sure we wouldn't take a second to think back and think only if it was really a lebo or our own government ?

george bush was very calm that day, he was at a school that day, his admiral of defense of whateva told him something and he nodded....

at the funeral service, why did george bush shake hands with the leader guy of the defense across his wife ?

meehh just still ponders to me

it's little planned games like these that america could plan and persue on themselves to put them selves in the position to attack anothe rcountry, nowdays it's about economical domination, it's not like olden days were it was through brute force.. it's too thought-through now..

imaspy · « **Reply #18 on:** May 22, 2006, 11:55PM »

Quote

it was very real. no way the US would do ANYTHING to weaken themselve. most of you guy are way over there and may have a small "feeling" for what happened, but this CHANGED life here in the states as we know it. Since pearl harbor, we've never been attacked on our own territory, why would we do it to ourselves?

dude youve just said it yourself. i am not saying this is the rock solid truth... but it presents itself as a damn distinct possibility... arguably, america has only become stronger after these attacks. to open another can of worms, another 'pearl harbor' is exactly what america would have needed (and WANTED... see george bush quoting it!) to feed their military industrial complex. every cent of money is closely scrutinised and limited when it comes to government spending. but the military budget is virtually unlimited. add to that that america, next year, will spend more on military than the rest of the world combined. wtf?! its insanity. every couple of dxdecades, america (foremostly) needs to flex its' muscle to ensure technology and spending can keep ticking over... more money in the pockets of defense copanies.... it all seems a bit like a private club to me..... hora >>>

Shortly before the current Bush administration took office, a document entitled Rebuilding America’s Defenses was published by an organization called the Project for the New American Century,[44] founding members of which included Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, and Donald Rumsfeld. This document focused primarily on getting more tax money allocated for the technological transformation of the US military, with the centerpiece of this technological transformation being the US Space Command’s project to weaponize and thereby control space. Because this transformation of the US military will be very expensive, the document said, it will probably proceed very slowly--unless America suffers “some catastrophic and catalyzing event--like a new Pearl Harbor."[45] It is interesting that on the night of 9/11, President Bush reportedly wrote in his diary, “The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today.”[46]

In any case, earlier that evening, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld was on message. We might assume that he would have been disoriented by the fact that the Pentagon had just, on his watch, suffered an unprecedented attack. Instead, he was ready to use the attacks to obtain more money for the US Space Command. In front of television cameras, Rumsfeld berated Senator Carl Levin, then chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, saying:

Senator Levin, you and other Democrats in Congress have voiced fear that you simply don’t have enough money for the large increase in defense that the Pentagon is seeking, especially for missile defense. . . . Does this sort of thing convince you that an emergency exists in this country to increase defense spending . . . ?[47]

This strategy worked. Congress immediately appropriated an additional $40 billion for the Pentagon. Since then, furthermore, the president has gotten every additional appropriation he has sought for the so-called war on terror.

quote taken from http://911review.com/articles/griffin/madison.html#nineeleven

yeah ok, maybe this guy is a conspiracy theorist, but how much is he distorting those very simple, very plain facts?

just makes you think.

eurisko · « **Reply #19 on:** May 23, 2006, 12:02AM »

Quote from: ChadzaTRX on May 22, 2006, 10:40PM

Of course there is: Islamic terrorists who absolutely loathe the west.

Now, the Pentagon one is a bit different, but it all comes down to this- Do you REALLY think the US defense agencies stationed in the Pentagon would DELIBERATELY blow up their own building (in the process making them look pretty silly that they couldn't defend themselves) just to get whatever point across that they theoretically wanted to make??

The unfortunate thing is that this is the idea that has being constantly perpetuated by the government to completely disguise what really is going on.

That is all scenery. The who, the where, the when... all scenery. Look deeper. Qui Bono? Who benifits? What is the purpose for it all?

Nonetheless, back to the main point, Yes, i am certain the US is capable of blowing up their own building in an attempt to prove their point. They are capable of sending thousands of soldiers to Iraq in a war that has nothing to do with the war on terror. Why wouldnt they send a drone, or a missle to destroy a section of the pentagon that is still under renovation?

Now check this out, the US was clearly aware, both the cia, and the fbi of all activities of bin laden and his group. The president was handed a document labled "Bin Laden to use Commercial Aircraft as misslies against US targets" 2 years before 9/11. Nothing was done.

Nothing but a series of "internal errors", "red-tape" and "mis-communications" between federal and international agencies, and the president.

This sounds strangely familiar to the re-routing of JFK's route in dallas, and the unheard of decision of making the secret service stand down... leaving the president vunerable.

As for the explosion... no-one is debating wether or not bombs were set off or planes were used in the pentagon. It is obvious something struck the building. A plane? Maybe. A 757? Never. A missle? Perhaps. A Drone? Perhaps... the possibilities are endless.

I know ull question why i say a 757 couldnt have collided.

Simple.

No debris. No fragments of plane. Nothing. It simply dissintergrated.

And that is impossible. And ill tell you why.

Jet turbine engines work by forcing air through the turbines, where they enter a compression chamber (a smaller tube), mixed with fuel, and ignited.

Turbine engines are made with materials like titanium, nickle-superalloys, and carbon-steel alloys. All of these materials are specifically designed to withstand thousands of degrees. Nickel superalloys can withstand more than 1K degrees celcius. This is more than any temperature that can be reached by simply burning fuel. (Jet fuel burns at about 500 degrees... half what the maximum reccomended operating temperature is of nickle superalloys, let alone melting points)

Not just that, parts like landing gears and leading edges experience huge forces and temperatures, and are designed to withstand as much.

These components always survive crashes and explosions.

Yet none were found. Not one trace.

Sound suspicious?

As for nazstang, its may also surprise you to discover that Pearl Harbour attack was decoded by military intelligence days before the attack, and the government allowed it to occur because it gave the US a justification to enter the war.

The attacks didnt weaken the US... thats the cover fed to everyone. What really happened? Its called The Patriot Act. The ability for the government to arrest anyone who mentions the govenrnment and bin laden, and who opposes the newly established facist state. Because thats what it really is.

You may look at me and say "this guy has no idea because he doesnt live here" or "he has nothing better to do than to think about conspiracies"...

Try this out. When ur country, is run by a dictatorship, funded and backed by the US government, which, by the way, has been found guilty of war crimes against it, for 50 years, killing ur family members, destroying ur homes, and everything you hold dear... think about this. Do you think your life has really changed? My family and I had to leave our home, our own country, because of an american backed civil war.

Pick up a history book my friend... and discover what kind of government you really support.

And thats the real point. People dont hate america.... just the sick motherfuckers that run it.

chr1S · « **Reply #20 on:** May 23, 2006, 12:12AM »

haha love the punch line euro

"sick of the motherfuckers that run it"

Jono · « **Reply #21 on:** May 23, 2006, 12:13AM »

I'm finding it very interesting reading these replies, I quite frankly don't care one way or the other if 9/11 was a terrorist attack or something else. But it is a very intriguing subject of discussion.

The Pentagon hit looks very suspicious due to the lack of wreckage, as do the twin towers collapsing in the way they did, that day my dad and I were watching the news coverage saying how it looked like a controlled demolition.

And the whole event was advantageous to the US military and economy in that they were able to liberate the ~~people~~ oil of Iraq, while covering up the whole fiasco by saying that Bin Laden was hiding in the mountains of the middle-east.

I really don't have anything useful to add so carry on with the discussion people.

[JET-20T] · « **Reply #22 on:** May 23, 2006, 12:50AM »

i second eurisko....

the pentagon is defo hit by a missile not a 757..

nazstang · « **Reply #23 on:** May 23, 2006, 01:20AM »

small pic, it's a big building!

Quote

meehh just still ponders to me

i can't blame you for it. when it comes down to the matter of fact of the crashes tho, if someone has any architectural background, the crashes make perfect sense, and the collapse of the WTC is rookie level obvious.

i'm honestly not a "God bless america!" kind of guy. my parents aren't from here, i'm probably not gonna stay here, basically you won't find a US flag tattoo on my ass

. honestly, i don't believe or trust in governments, and i have a very keen sense for when something is off key. I had no such feeling that day, or any after that. politics here is like football , you've got your side(team), and you'll do whatever to win. if the person hates republicans, or bush, they'll say and do whatever to make him(them) the badguy, at all costs. i'm on no side, i am a student of what is going on, and even more important, what HAS gone on.
my major is in history, and that's in portuguese spanish and american study (so i didn't learn what is "US taught"). i'll put this in simple terms, Bin Laden is a terrorist... he came at us, with our gloves down... "we" took the first hit, but came back strong.... he's still loose, but his operations are 90% destroyed.....sadaam had mutual agreement with bin laden.... US knows sadaam is crazy

....US gives him an alternate, he declined, now we're stuck with war. now thanks to my "obsession" with history, the future is easier to read. though iraq almost took over iran a while back, their hate for the US is a clear similar intrest, so iran might have the balls to come get some. the ayatollah (sp) is an evil man at heart, with no other vision than for power. think about it, there has been non-stop fighting in the middle-east for literally thousands of years, it is part of normal life, your born knowing war may come to you at any given time, so for many people, war - conflict is all they know. i hope not, but i think there might be a war with iran involving the US and maybe some other countries. they've got twisted mind.
i think the US is all but innocent, i know they are mischevous and often wrong. but even though the oil theory for all of this may seem apparent, i think it's toward the end of the list of the priorities. cheap oil is worthless if you are dead.

for you guys who are stuck on consiracy's and idea of the US taking hits just to go to war.... wake-up, if i want to fight someone, i'm not gonna wait to get stabbed to hit them $:-\$ . that's just a retarded idea. we are talking about the US, we have enough troops, weapons, intel, and know-how to destroy countries at will. again.... i tell you this from a neutal view, i am the last guy to stick his head out for the US, but facts are facts. some information is valid, other is worthless, you need to filter out the junk and see what's what.

fact is... Many and i mean Many , hate the US, hate it's prosperity, hate the oportunity, and hate it's way of life. i don't understand why, but that's the way it is. Alot of times the US puts out a dumb image of being supreme and life is peaches and cream... but it's not(and it's wrong to put out that image). life here is like anywhere else. we have good things and bad things. customs and traditions, one diffence we may have, is the diversity of those customs n traditions(i absolutly love the cultural meshing). For those who choose to go against the US, they are fighting for no good reason, often times, they are fighting the hand that's fed them $:-\$ not a wise idea.

you can pick up a book and "learn", just remember , one book , one point of view.

Quote

"sick of the motherfuckers that run it"

ha! i love it. cheers for that one

eurisko · « **Reply #24 on:** May 23, 2006, 01:59AM »

And FoxNews rears its ugly head....

Jono · « **Reply #25 on:** May 23, 2006, 02:01AM »

Quote from: nazstang on May 23, 2006, 01:20AM

for you guys who are stuck on consiracy's and idea of the US taking hits just to go to war.... wake-up, if i want to fight someone, i'm not gonna wait to get stabbed to hit them $:-\$ .

Who's to say it wasn't the US Government/etc conspiring to hit itself, then blame it on someone else? a'la a Dirty Harry movie where a guy pays to be beaten up then blames it on Harry, so in turn he is favoured over Harry. (If you've seen the movie you'll know what I mean)

Quote from: nazstang on May 23, 2006, 01:20AM

we are talking about the US, we have enough troops, weapons, intel, and know-how to destroy countries at will.

And what they did in Iraq proves it.

Quote from: nazstang on May 23, 2006, 01:20AM

i tell you this from a neutal view, i am the last guy to stick his head out for the US...

No-one's view is neutral, I'm probably a little anti-US but I can't help it, from the info I've gathered the various US government and its agencies have extremely immoral backgrounds.

Quote from: nazstang on May 23, 2006, 01:20AM

facts are facts. some information is valid, other is worthless, you need to filter out the junk and see what's what.

Agreed.

Nothing personal, this is just what I was thinking as I read that paragraph

imaspy · « **Reply #26 on:** May 23, 2006, 02:04AM »

thanks jono, you saved me some time. i was too lazy to write that lol

nazstang · « **Reply #27 on:** May 23, 2006, 05:02AM »

Quote from: Jono on May 23, 2006, 02:01AM

Who's to say it wasn't the US Government/etc conspiring to hit itself, then blame it on someone else? a'la a Dirty Harry movie where a guy pays to be beaten up then blames it on Harry, so in turn he is favoured over Harry. (If you've seen the movie you'll know what I mean)

let me get this straight, are you saying the US bombed pearl harbor itself?

Quote from: eurisko on May 23, 2006, 01:59AM

And FoxNews rears its ugly head....

i don't get it?

Quote

No-one's view is neutral, I'm probably a little anti-US but I can't help it

you can't help it buddy $:-\$

and yes i am totally neutral, i live in the US, but i'm not a fan of it's current state at all. i always take a look at everything from both sides(my girlfriend hates that

).

for the record, i am against them going to war in iraq (it was premature, maybe they'd eventually have to $:-\$ ). the attack on alkida in afgan was the absolute right decision. no matter what though, DO YOU want Bin Laden free to do his terror acts? Do you want sadaam to be making nuecular weapons(he's crazy enough to use them)?

and now i'm afraid iran might be even worse, the ayatollah keeps growing his army and atomic bomb plants way too fast. the Basiji(sect of soldiers) seem to growing fast as ever, and those soldiers were and are brought up since 6 years old, to learn to kill and die without fear, it is a sick way to live. on top of this all, 2 days before the UN visited iran to talk about the atomic bombs, he threatened the US(and Allies) that if he is put under any version of an attack, quote "The Iranian nation will respond to any blow with double the intensity" .

my veiw is, how about we all squash all the fighting. it will take all sides agreeing for it to be successful, and i just don't see them wanting to.

a quick history lesson : US helped iraq a while ago(with $), iran was being hostile to them(they wanted the persian gulf). iraq was 1 day away from invading big-time, but they put down arms. in return iran attacked(with nominal success) so the iran - iraq war began. US backed iraq previously, so they would have a safe passage for shipping, so iran responded with an attack on a quite a few US owned and bound commercial ships. naturally the US came back... my neighbor was a pilot there, they launched an attack on iran which crippled 70% of all there planes, tanks, missle silo's ... all in 22 hours. then the US backed off.
iraq ended up losing the war(too many volenteered irany soldiers(plus ussr had their back)).

then ofcourse there was the gulf war which iraq lost to iran, so headed south to kuwuit to take over that country(they owed them over 14 billion). the UN was in an outrage, and canada and the US invaded, took them out, and it was over in a short time. the issue was that sadaam was humiliated, and outraged by the US, so right away, intel showed weird military movement, and the construction of plants and a "super canon" . then there was speculation and rumors about their neucular program, and now, somehow war again

. can't we all just get along!

SSS · « **Reply #28 on:** May 23, 2006, 08:45AM »

Just getting back to the whole conspiracy theory thing, didn't the first and failed attempt by terrorists to demolish the world trade centre end up being linked back to the cia?

also chad, the reason why the twin towers came down like they did, was because the central core of the towers weren't concrete. when they were being built, the mafia had dominant control of the concrete industry, so the architects building the twin towers didn't use it and went with a steel frame work instead.
had concrete been used, they probably would have been still standing.

nazstang · « **Reply #29 on:** May 23, 2006, 09:25AM »

Quote from: SSS on May 23, 2006, 08:45AM

didn't the first and failed attempt by terrorists to demolish the world trade centre end up being linked back to the cia?

:Dthat was a theory for a short time, but they actually caught the guys really quick(well caught one who gave info on the others) and 10 in all were charged. they were given 240 years in prison each(why 240 $:-\$ ) .

Quote from: SSS on May 23, 2006, 08:45AM

the reason why the twin towers came down like they did, was because the central core of the towers weren't concrete. ....had concrete been used, they probably would have been still standing.

i see we've got an engineer or architect on our hands

. jackpot, the interior of the building was "non-skeletal" with the central core holding most the weight( in the middle), and the other load bearing walls being on the outside(which didn't hold much) , the stress was too much. it collapsed right there, in the elevator shafts. the concrete to steel ratio was like 4 to 6. another building of it's stature should be atleast 6 to 4. like you said, maybe it would still be standing right now

SSS · « **Reply #30 on:** May 23, 2006, 11:28AM »

Quote from: nazstang on May 23, 2006, 09:25AM

i see we've got an engineer or architect on our hands .

mech engineer.

It bewilders me (apart from cost) why they stray from using concrete for large buildings, afterall it's a static structure (so to speak) so weight shouldn't be a consideration apart from the footings of the building.

nazstang · « **Reply #31 on:** May 23, 2006, 11:59AM »

Quote from: SSS on May 23, 2006, 11:28AM

mech engineer.

i knew it! yeah, i totally agree. i'm not sure what houses in AU are made of(please enlighten me), but the majority are wood here. newer industrial stuff is almost all metal, and the older stuff is a pretty impressive mix. In Portugal the houses are made of concrete, reinforced with re-bar. i totally love those houses, if i ever build myown home from scratch, i'll do it like that. the older stuff is pure rock slabs, mortared, with a Huge pine centerbeam, and huge cornerstones.
here's the last house i rebuilt with my uncle before he died. circa 1876 home.

sorry for the diversion guys

noss · « **Reply #32 on:** May 23, 2006, 12:02PM »

well i must say, i dont take this as seriously as some.. i'm more in the same boat as jono, its an interesting subject to ponder. i have no doubt that it has affected people in america, and in new york, more than anywhere in the world, i never said it was a hoax, i dont think anyone did.. a hoax and a conspiracy are two entirely different things.. regardless of who did it, lives are still going to be shattered, and this discussion means no disprespect to the deceased or people that have been affected by the event.

i'm sure everyone hears the news reports about how terrorists claim responsibility for attacks, bin laden actually put out a video saying he had nothing to do with the sept 11 attacks the day after they happened and expressed his sympathies for america.. it wasnt until america started chasing him that he started being nasty.. he was in america when the attacks happened, in hosipital hooked up to a dialysis (sp?) machine.. why would he want to make an attack while he was in america in hospital being helped by the american people?

anyway, let me give you this analogy..

say if i was to suggest that microsoft along with other companies involved in computer security programmed that bug that kept shutting down everyone's pc's a while back (cant remember its name), and they were to use that in an attempt to sell more firewall and anti virus software.. and use it to ultimately invade the privacy of the end user in an attempt to stop future things such as this.. for the point of the analogy forget they caught they guy that did it.. would you believe that cause you dont like microsoft? not saying you dont like them - but i have no doubts most would find that easier to believe than the 9/11 attacks being something other than what we're told.

basically, in the end, what interests me is, if everything is as simple as what we're being told, then why is a lot of evidence being held back? whats the point of it? there are conspiracy theories around, why not stamp them all out? why would eye witnesses change what they say they saw/heard? how could eye witnesses interviewed at the same time around different parts of the city have very similar stories, yet their recolection of the events be rubbished as 'conspricay theory rubbish'?

its all very strange, and i think having the view of it either was all terrorists or it was all the government is a little naive.. why couldnt it be say, 80% terrorists, and 20% very influential people in different parts of the world? much easier to keep it quiet if it was say, 5 people that know better than to ruin their career/life by opening their mouth, and the other 20 people are now dead/in jail/in hiding terrorists.

noss · « **Reply #33 on:** May 23, 2006, 12:06PM »

um, in reply to the houses thing, older houses are made of hardwood fames, newer houses are made of pine or aluminium framing (i.e. the budget made houses in new estates) with the larger load bearing beams in steel i-beams, oh and obviously there are brick homes and ones of concrete blocks (the cement redered ones).

but there are a wide variety of houses here, but yeh, generally pine and aluminium.. we have a lot of extra stuff to cyclone proof homes, particularly in the northern states, lots of steel reinforcment, deep footings, large beams..

SSS · « **Reply #34 on:** May 23, 2006, 12:10PM »

lol i just pm'd him with a response basically along those lines

noss · « **Reply #35 on:** May 23, 2006, 12:12PM »

haha

pedro666 · « **Reply #36 on:** May 23, 2006, 01:31PM »

this has been a great read for all pov. as mentioned, there are a lot that occurrence/facts that just dont add up. its odd that America has a large military/weapons industry. it also has a need to justify and also 'test' the budget. it also is the worlds largest consumer of oil (coincidently theres a little bit of oil in these regions). whenever America seemingly finds its way into conflict, they are in, or about to enter a recession ("g guys we need to fire up our primary industry"). the other fact that i find odd is the level of propaganda that is used( compared that used in WWII in germany, even exceeding). its an interesting subject that has lots of pov's.

imaspy · « **Reply #37 on:** May 23, 2006, 02:54PM »

Quote

a quick history lesson : US helped iraq a while ago(with $), iran was being hostile to them(they wanted the persian gulf). iraq was 1 day away from invading big-time, but they put down arms. in return iran attacked(with nominal success) so the iran - iraq war began.

another kistory lesson. the us backed afghanistan against the soviets too... whatever the us wants, it will do... oops! couple of decades later and the afghans are apparently attacking the us with the weapons it gave them all those years ago. unfortunately america brings most crap on itself...

Quote

i see we've got an engineer or architect on our hands Wink . jackpot, the interior of the building was "non-skeletal" with the central core holding most the weight( in the middle), and the other load bearing walls being on the outside(which didn't hold much) , the stress was too much. it collapsed right there, in the elevator shafts. the concrete to steel ratio was like 4 to 6. another building of it's stature should be atleast 6 to 4. like you said, maybe it would still be standing right now

thats fine too... but what about WTC 7? it went straight down for no apparent reason.... wtf?!?

Quote

basically, in the end, what interests me is, if everything is as simple as what we're being told, then why is a lot of evidence being held back? whats the point of it? there are conspiracy theories around, why not stamp them all out? why would eye witnesses change what they say they saw/heard? how could eye witnesses interviewed at the same time around different parts of the city have very similar stories, yet their recolection of the events be rubbished as 'conspricay theory rubbish'?

ping pong noss. no matter how many people say "oh it was terrorists and its so bad that it happened, it was this it was that", there are too many shortcomings and holes to accept the goverments 'explanation'.

Chadza · « **Reply #38 on:** May 23, 2006, 05:25PM »

I can't believe that some of you can believe so confidently that it was a hoax. We are in AUSTRALIA people, these events happeneed over 10,000km away. I do think that the people over in the US would be in a better position to comment on what actually happened.

naztang raised an interesting point about the people who ACTUALLY SAW THE AIRCRAFT HIT the WTC. How can how ever many thousands of people who were in downtown manhattan have not come out yet and said that it was a controlled explosion/missile/drone/military plane/pack of carnivorus midgets, that actualy brought down the building.

I think it is quite funny that in this day and age because of so many crap stories and reports in the media that when something massive and worldwide like this happens everyone automatically thinks its a hoax, and conspiracy theorists who have nothing better to do go into overdrive!!

meh

eurisko · « **Reply #39 on:** May 23, 2006, 06:23PM »

Chadza, i dont think anyone said it was a hoax... and i dont think anyone can deny that a plane hit the WTC. People are questioning wether a plane hit the Pentagon... and if there was any assistance to the destruction of the WTC (ie pre-placed exposives)

I dont think explosives destroyed the wtc. It just seems like hard luck that the building was designed the way it was, and someone like bin-laden (who is a civil engineer mind you) exploited that weakness.

What noss says is right, its not one or the other, and ive never said it was just the US government. What I am saying tho, is that its real easy for the government to allow certain events to occur that are favourable to their policy.

Is it really that hard to turn a blind eye to evidence that shows a BinLaden will fly planes into the wtc? Considering the millions to be gained in a war in iraq, and the control by the Patriot act?

Conspiracy theorists go into overdrive when they smell a conspiracy. Plain and simple.

Think about the Report made by Condaleeza Rice and Colin Powel, given to the UN to prove that Saddam had WMD (weapons of mass destruction). Plagerised from a report written 3 years earlier, no evidence from the inspectors on the ground, and in the end proven, not just to be wrong, but a false report used to justify the illegal war.

Just answer this.

Where are the Weapons of mass destruction? Where are the nuclear bombs? The warehouses full of anthrax? Chemical, biologial stockpiles? Where?

No, wait.... the point for going into iraq was to free the poor people from this ruthless dictator. Yeah.... thats it....

Febrile · « **Reply #40 on:** May 23, 2006, 08:01PM »

Quote from: eurisko on May 23, 2006, 06:23PM

Where are the Weapons of mass destruction? Where are the nuclear bombs? The warehouses full of anthrax? Chemical, biologial stockpiles? Where?

No, wait.... the point for going into iraq was to free the poor people from this ruthless dictator. Yeah.... thats it....

IMHO, I think that the administration made the choice to go to Iraq because it would be profitable. I mean, the rational individual does not invest in a project which they predict will cause them a loss, and we can extend this to nations. I don't think anyone is going to deny the fact that the US saw Saddam as a real thorn in the side, and an unpredictable one at that. Nor would I think anyone would deny that the US will now be much more comfortable with it's capacity to acquire oil from Iraq. And, as has been said, the defense industries will certainly have done well from the outing. So overall, in planning to go to war there, the administration saw the outcome as a gain, from a net perspective.

That being the case, I don't really think any justification is/was necessary on the part of the US. Undeniably, the US is the most powerful nation/force of humanity that currently exists. Who is to judge the actions of such an entity? At no time in human history has the most powerful group not done what it liked, simply because it might not be in the best interests of others, and I don't see why we should ever expect that to change, until we change fundamentally as human beings.

Nowadays, we may have pretenses like the United Nations and such, but it does nothing to change where the balance of power really lies, only the opinion of what is done with it.

Jono · « **Reply #41 on:** May 23, 2006, 09:15PM »

Chess is a war game, the world doubly so.

And noss, not many houses are made of aluminium are they? I thought most were galvanised steel as it's cheaper.

chr1S · « **Reply #42 on:** May 23, 2006, 09:36PM »

Bin Laden is a FBI/CIA polished up coverup. I have a feeling america fine tuned his record to the way they want it, when the media hears something, they spread it, when u hear something first then the other, you refer to the first.. which is why people think it was a commercial plane that hit the WTC.

It wasn't.. I MUST find this show that was on, argh.

Adam, then WTF is with the perfectly timed explosions going off level by level as the building collapsed ? People heard it.. people saw it.. you can even see it on TV footage if you watch it in slow motion !

do yourself a favour, watch the plane hitting the building in slow motion too and take not of the pre-explosion...

With this pentagon proof being it NOT a plane.. i think america screwed themselves right up with that one.

eurisko · « **Reply #43 on:** May 23, 2006, 10:47PM »

Quote from: Narxysus on May 23, 2006, 08:01PM

So overall, in planning to go to war there, the administration saw the outcome as a gain, from a net perspective.

That being the case, I don't really think any justification is/was necessary on the part of the US. Undeniably, the US is the most powerful nation/force of humanity that currently exists. Who is to judge the actions of such an entity? At no time in human history has the most powerful group not done what it liked, simply because it might not be in the best interests of others...

Are you actually listening to yourself? This is basically what you are saying.

Lets goto war, to make money.

Fair enough thousands of innocent civilians will die. Who cares tho, their nothing but a bunch of rag head camel f*ckers anyway.

Fair enough, thousands of american soliders will die. Who cares tho, they are mainly african americans, or inbred f*ckers from hicktown anway.

Fair enough, the very few people that will stand to gain are huge mulitnational corporations with no links to any soverign nation. Companies like shell, Dupont, General Motors.

Human lives vs Cash Money.

Innocent human lives vs Money for Businesses.

Yeah, i can see that America has the right to decide who lives and who dies. Because they can.

Its quite clear you have no real grasp of what happens in the real world. People use the word war so loosely its disgusting.

Wait untill you carry a child in your arms with its head blown open by a 5.56mm Nato round, or completely burned by the aftermath of a 500pound bomb and tell me that america has the right to do what it likes..... for private companies.

Jono · « **Reply #44 on:** May 23, 2006, 10:50PM »

They do not have the right to wage unneeded war on other countries, but does that stop them?

eurisko · « **Reply #45 on:** May 23, 2006, 11:02PM »

No. But neither does complacency.

pedro666 · « **Reply #46 on:** May 24, 2006, 12:17AM »

hot topic , great to see opions and not just excepting the shit."dont believe the hype"p.e.

imaspy · « **Reply #47 on:** May 24, 2006, 12:53AM »

Quote

That being the case, I don't really think any justification is/was necessary on the part of the US. Undeniably, the US is the most powerful nation/force of humanity that currently exists. Who is to judge the actions of such an entity? At no time in human history has the most powerful group not done what it liked, simply because it might not be in the best interests of others, and I don't see why we should ever expect that to change, until we change fundamentally as human beings.

who is to judge?! TO JUDGE?! regular people who dont have some fucked up agenda are to judge. regular american people. anybody. just because america is 'all mighty all poewrful all influential', does not give them any right to just do as it pleases. like you siad, the same thing has always happened thru out history... it wasnt right then and it sure as hell doesnt make it right now. fundamentally, human beings will never change. thats why its the responsibility of people from all walks of life to do something against tyranny like this. and tryranny is the perfect word because you defined it with your comment. people need to question things, and say, "no....... get FUCKED." question these suspicious things... dont just let it go because you want to put all your faith in a government that has its' own obscene vested interests..... it makes me sick..........

deep breath! aaaand drink

[JET-20T] · « **Reply #48 on:** May 24, 2006, 12:59AM »

maybe george dubya is the....... something is holding me back from typing it... i get goosebumps at the thought...

nostrildamus predicted it in 1999.. theres a movie coming out about it soon... hmmmm...

maybe theres a twist in the story

nazstang · « **Reply #49 on:** May 24, 2006, 01:05AM »

Quote from: imaspy on May 23, 2006, 02:54PM

another kistory lesson. the us backed afghanistan against the soviets too... whatever the us wants, it will do... oops! couple of decades later and the afghans are apparently attacking the us with the weapons it gave them all those years ago. unfortunately america brings most crap on itself...

you've hit that on the button.

the US keeps helping other countries out there, and it seems like it blows up in their face every time. but with the afgan situation, they were being overtaken by communists, and at the end of the war, Afghanistan was a totally new country. the taliban grew quick after the war tho(1996 took power), and all they were, were a group of warlords with alot of $$$ to back them. too bad the warlords had hate for western civilization. fighting is still going on there, and by what i've heard, they are cleaning up pretty good, and are beginning to rebuild. my cousin just came back from there, and he compared it with iraq. he said the people are soooo happy to be free from the threat they had, they're excited to start over fresh.. in iraq, the people told my cousin that honestly, they don't trust anyone, not the US, not the UN, anyone. who knows, maybe 10 years from now, Boznia or Croatia can be overtaken by terrorists and attack the US, you never know.

Quote

thats fine too... but what about WTC 7? it went straight down for no apparent reason.... wtf?!?

same agenda there, but they had a failure in the lower end of the building(7th floor i think), and that was just asking for it with the fires, they had thousands of gallons of fuel in there $:-\$

i understand those who say "you must ask questions, you need to second guess", and i do, but there is a difference for looking at a situation and seeing if there is a problem, and trying
to find a problem. consp. theorists are like anyother cult, they are just obsessed with finding alternate reasoning for everything. if you've ever taked with one, you hear it in there voice, the obsessive and compulsive thoughts boncing in their head..... it's like talking with a child with A.D.H.D.

pedro666 · « **Reply #50 on:** May 24, 2006, 01:08AM »

MMMM? NOT

Jono · « **Reply #51 on:** May 24, 2006, 01:11AM »

I missed that the first time round imaspy, "Who is to judge the most powerful entity in the world?"... Why shouldn't we judge said entity? IMO it's more reason to judge them. With great power comes great responsibility. It's a pity common sense isn't so common these days.

aargh I'm tired and probably talking utter crap so I'm off to bed

And jet, I have no idea what you're on about.

imaspy · « **Reply #52 on:** May 24, 2006, 01:37AM »

Quote

you've hit that on the button. Smiley the US keeps helping other countries out there, and it seems like it blows up in their face every time. but with the afgan situation, they were being overtaken by communists,

sorry i didnt think i would need to point out that it was the reds that hit afghanistan... are you selectively forgetting about the cold war? if the soviets were involved, america was always going to be there to go against it. its hard to find any conflict america hasnt been involved in where it doesnt have its own vested interest in the aftermath or some other trait or asset of the supposed victim. i dont buy into the whole world police theory for america because they arent police. theyre simply trying to further their own nation - which is not essentially bad - but america sees no limits to what they should or could do to advance the country. america only gets involved in conflict where they stand to gain - therefor arent really polizia.
i dont think any of us can deny the presence of the ground troops; good on 'em for what they do. theyre just following orders. and yes, there have been plenty of past occasions where they have done good for a country or a people. however, its the high level management that should be tried. america (or the governments of past years at least) have created their own monster, the military industrial complex... even Eisenhower warned against it in his parting national address. MIC must always be fed because the entire economy depends on it. simple as that. no choice. therefore, any excuse will do to let the beast out, allow it to stretch its legs and feed it some more.

imaspy · « **Reply #53 on:** May 24, 2006, 01:37AM »

and we're officially off topic now

lol

Febrile · « **Reply #54 on:** May 24, 2006, 04:51AM »

Quote from: imaspy on May 24, 2006, 01:37AM

words words words

Wow, I think you may have overreacted a bit to my post. You should note that at no point did I assert that the US has the 'right' to wage war, nor that the war is 'right' in a moral sense. What I was trying to drive at with my statements:

Quote from: Narxysus

I think that the administration made the choice to go to Iraq because it would be profitable

I'm not cheering on business and profits here, I'm stating the reason why I think the US administration would enter any war, regardless of international opinion: because the outcome would be beneficial for the US, and because they have the capacity, and power, to do so.

Quote from: Narxysus

Who is to judge the actions of such an entity?

And here I mean that it is an action in futility to judge the US. They are the supreme power in the world; until that changes, it will, as a nation, always have a perogative to use that power to benefit itself, first and foremost.

I think these outcomes are the case regardless of who in particular is in charge. As long as they represent America, and as long as America is the greatest power in the world, those in charge will do anything that promises to be a net gain for the country. Along these lines, it does not matter how many soldiers or innocent people die, so long as, on net, the denizens of the US stand to be better off. This is simply how humans operate, and it would apply to whichever country was most powerful.

It may seem apathetic, but the average person does not and will never care about happenings which never affect them; so much the better if those things make that person better off. If a person in Queensland loses $100 and it blows all the way to me in Perth, I am $100 better off. I do not care that someone is worse off far away, and given the choice, I will not post it back. A quote I recall from somewhere on this topic goes something like "tell a man thousands die in an earthquake on the other side of the world and he thinks it unfortunate; cut off that man's little finger and it is a tragedy". I suppose that what I am getting at is that in the face of large, aggregate goals (such as national welfare), I think people are overvaluing the worth of a human life, as considered by that aggregate.

nazstang · « **Reply #55 on:** May 24, 2006, 04:56AM »

Quote from: imaspy on May 24, 2006, 01:37AM

and we're officially off topic now

lol

yeah, your definitely right, we've always got self intrests at mind, but we're no different than any other country. lets say AU had issues with Pakistan, and Pakistan was invading India. I'm pretty sure AU would be backing India. you wouldn't want Pakistan to grow.

my overall view is, US is a very young nation(230 years old) with it's central source being business. they've alway been the best at it(morals aside). US is the first to get to many "milestones" and is always on the forefront and cutting edge. Other countries(both gov. and people) often envy or hate it. more often than not, those countries are the ones who hold themselves down, and just toss the blame. you don't see england or japan going against America, and they have both been in very serious wars with the US.

having both a European view and American view, i can see why the us is often loathed. to me, the view on the us is: they are cocky, arrogant, loud, selfish country, that's always in a rush(i hate the busy lifestyle, love the 2 hour Spanish Lunch break

). but living here, life is just life. it's a great mesh of people from around the world who have a great sense of pride in all that they do. i believe the govt. gives us a more "hardass" bad image, but all they are is a group of business men who unfortunately run this country(but the same goes for 9\10 countries now). that being said, though they may be business men, only one thing comes before $$$ in this land, and that is pride for your family and your nation. both contradict any ridiculous ideas of self inflicted wounds on our country. economically, we've been in a whole for the past 4 years, we are finally emerging this year. 9\11 in simple terms FUCKED this country, but we were strong to get thru it.

it's very tough to see the world in it's current state, i am honestly worried about raising kids in this world. even though i'm young, morals, responsabilities, and just the way of life has changed alot since i was younger. i'm afraid if the world doesn't reach a general agreement, we are ALL fucked, and without a paddle, up shit's creek.

imaspy · « **Reply #56 on:** May 24, 2006, 03:03PM »

Quote

Wow, I think you may have overreacted a bit to my post.

yeah, but as you explained stuff i think you can see how it was a little bit ambiguous

no drama pig farmer

eurisko · « **Reply #57 on:** May 24, 2006, 04:37PM »

Quote from: Narxysus on May 24, 2006, 04:51AM

It may seem apathetic, but the average person does not and will never care about happenings which never affect them; so much the better if those things make that person better off.

And thats the exact reasoning, selfishness, and arrogance that can lead to people strapping bombs to their chest, or flying planes into buildings.

You all know WHY people do such things, but you dont care.

Every single-minded american joe watching fox news seems quite content in saying these people just hate america for being free and prosperous (as mentioned a few posts before), as a way of relieveing oneself of responsability.

Blame the ignorant, radical thinking america hating terrorist. Its quite simple, isnt it?

Febrile · « **Reply #58 on:** May 24, 2006, 05:20PM »

Quote from: eurisko on May 24, 2006, 04:37PM

And thats the exact reasoning, selfishness, and arrogance that can lead to people strapping bombs to their chest, or flying planes into buildings.

You all know WHY people do such things, but you dont care.

Every single-minded american joe watching fox news seems quite content in saying these people just hate america for being free and prosperous (as mentioned a few posts before), as a way of relieveing oneself of responsability.

Blame the ignorant, radical thinking america hating terrorist. Its quite simple, isnt it?

What are you trying to say here? I wrote two replies, but then realised I didn't understand enough your point to post either.

noss · « **Reply #59 on:** May 24, 2006, 05:51PM »

i'm pretty sure that what he is trying to say is that there are terrorists in the world because they feel like the world in general is turning a blind eye towards them and their concerns.. if you read through his previous posts, you could probably piece together an example like so..

america comes into a country to 'liberate it of its opressors'

america actually makes things worse, said 'opressed citizens' have to flee to another country and seek asylum

they decide they're going to australia, they end up in a detention centre, they are now much worse off than before america (and others) stuck their noses in

they get angry, and decide (rationally or irrationally) that they're gonna fly a plane into a building

the act of terror occurs.. america (and other western countries) say that the reason the terrorists did what they did because 'they hate america - they hate the west - but we dont know why'

terrorists get shittier, keep blowing things up, and the cycle repeats.

so, in essence, even though you might think your (and others) apathetic attitude to the situation is not a big deal, it is the root of all the problems.

at least thats how i see this all coming together.

eurisko · « **Reply #60 on:** May 24, 2006, 11:44PM »

Well said noss. Exactly what I have tried to say, perhaps in a way that was longwinded, confusing or maybe a little abstract...

Febrile · « **Reply #61 on:** May 25, 2006, 01:25AM »

Well, moving on then, what are we proposing is the alternative?

imaspy · « **Reply #62 on:** May 25, 2006, 01:53AM »

hehe.... alternative to what exactly? this thread is all over the place now

eurisko · « **Reply #63 on:** May 25, 2006, 02:17AM »

I think he means the alternative to being apathetic.

Simple. Dont be. And dont believe that America is the heart of the world, the Judge, Jury and executioner for the world either.

To me it will never end. People will always have resentments, and always have revenge to dish out. (Lord knows i would if they wiped out my entire family)

But, it can be quenched to the point its no longer so widely supported in their communities.

Listen to the peoples fights, their aims. Their problems. Care for what happens and things will change.

For example, a current situation involving australia directly. North Korean refugees in china. China sends them back to NK, where they are sent to political prisoner camps and killed.

Yet australia and the world turns a blind eye to this blatant inhuman (and illegal activity against all UNHRC treaties) treatment of its citizens and refugees, to give them trade and the olympic games.

People just want a fair go. Give them that, and they'll have no reason to commit terrorist acts.

Now. Back to topic. Lol... maybe i should just shut up, i seem to divert the topic everytime i speak!

I seriously would like to see the other footage (the petrol station, and freeway cameras) of this plane.
Its trajectory is obscenely low, even for missles and the like. Its crazy to try and hit the pentagon like that.

Can you imagine trying to hit a target that low and small, at 500mph???

See what happened with the WTC, the second plane almost missed!! It was struggling to realign to the center.

Same people, same training, yet military precision with the hardest target. Please.

nazstang · « **Reply #64 on:** May 25, 2006, 05:36AM »

Quote from: imaspy on May 25, 2006, 01:53AM

this thread is all over the place now

tell me about it ! so far we've talked about jews, nazi, communists, china, america, the UN, bin laden, bush, and even what houses are made of

. you could study for a History test with this thread!

noss · « **Reply #65 on:** May 25, 2006, 11:39AM »

dont forget the midgets

i was having a chat to some friends in melbourne around christmas time and we were discussing the terrorist situation.. one of my mates came up with a simple solution.

beer and bitches

my mate's take on why there is terrorist activity is because people (muslims in particular i suppose

) dont get the chance to sit down and have a beer and talk things out.. instead, all their problems build up and in turn is expelled in agression..

instead of america (and other countires) going in to liberate a country from their heads of state, blair, bush & howard (and whoever else) should just rock on over with a carton of boags and a bottle of canadian club or smirnoff, sit down, have a barbeque, and talk about things.

i gaurantee it would have better results than going in with thousands of troops and farkloads of guns.

imaspy · « **Reply #66 on:** May 25, 2006, 02:43PM »

dont forget the bitches... dressed like a beekeeper... COS THATS FAIR!!!... whoops. im putting the lid back on that now. this thread is exhausted.

pedro666 · « **Reply #67 on:** May 26, 2006, 12:16AM »

http://prisonplanet.tv/
just in case anyone is still interested in this topic .
i agree with noss on the beer and bitches bit, it would calm the whole nation down(in theory).

Jtas · « **Reply #68 on:** May 27, 2006, 04:14PM »

Delete religion.

/end

DeathPlaza · « **Reply #69 on:** May 31, 2006, 01:35PM »

this thread isn't too old is it?

why - because they can, because they dont like iraq, because they want troops in that part of the world, because they want to pass the "patriot act", because they want more money for the military, because the people in power in america have ONE concern... that is money.

the video - the video they released doesn't show anything. why wouldn't they release it originally? why was the building still standing after the "plane hit it", how can shitty iraqi terrorists who just learned how to fly perform a manuever that the blue angels would think twice about.

the questions - if the U.S. had nothing to hide, why wouldn't it release all of its hidden data about 911 and disprove all the conspiracy theorists at once.

the WTC was hit by two planes, and they were hijacked, who is to say that the CIA/FBI and anyone else didn't know it was going to happen at that time.

to stay on topic, all i know, and i know for SURE, is that there was no way a plane hit the god damn pentagon and if the government wants to prove me wrong they would have done it already by showing us the wreckage of that plane!

noss · « **Reply #70 on:** May 31, 2006, 02:23PM »

but but but... the little tiny piece of aluminum can painted like a plane everyone keeps showing us!

that means it must have been a plane! lol

hehe.. hey watch the vid again.. here is a animated gif of it zoomed up 400%..

notice anything? an airplane tail! go back and watch the video from the first page.. i thought it was doctored at first you see it there too.. you just have to look for it!

after a bit more research, i found this..

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/01/307126.shtml

not saying this article is correct, but its another good read and give you something to think about

Jono · « **Reply #71 on:** Jun 1, 2006, 12:16AM »

Just looking at that gif there noss, wouldn't the plane have hit the building and then blown up? The fuel tanks of the plane are in the wings, so what's causing the large fireball already visible in the second frame?

Oh and I think your link's broken, I get a blank page when I click on it. Not even a 404 error

chr1S · « **Reply #72 on:** Jun 1, 2006, 08:42AM »

i say a missile in the plane

noss · « **Reply #73 on:** Jun 1, 2006, 10:30AM »

yeh there is a white bunch of smoke as you see the plane from beside behind the plane.

Resin · « **Reply #74 on:** Jun 1, 2006, 03:07PM »

it may have clipped somehting on the way down ....its looks pretty dam low at that point and so it may have clipped a light pole or something ....

Jono · « **Reply #75 on:** Jun 1, 2006, 10:44PM »

Well the 'plane' apparently did bring down a line of light poles, but none of them seemed damaged. i.e. they looked like they'd just fallen over, not been hit by a plane.

noss · « **Reply #76 on:** Jun 2, 2006, 10:59PM »

i dont think it was a lightpole, thats the lawn out the front of the pentagon
Posted on: Jun 2, 2006, 09:56PM

anyway, my new theory is that some military guy flipped out because of the terrorists or maybe his family was killed in the wtc, and commited suicide by flying his plane into the pentagon, the government hid it because they didnt want to look like they could control their own guys.. i dunno.. i'm over it

imaspy · « **Reply #77 on:** Jun 2, 2006, 11:50PM »

same.

chr1S · « **Reply #78 on:** Jun 3, 2006, 12:05AM »

same.

nazstang · « **Reply #79 on:** Jun 3, 2006, 01:09AM »

Quote from: noss on Jun 2, 2006, 10:59PM

i dunno.. i'm over it

haha! me too $:-\$

i've even heard that a US military chopper flew down and did a kamakazee routine on it.

imaspy · « **Reply #80 on:** Jun 3, 2006, 01:26AM »

...i've heard that budgie was so gay that his steering wheel fell off and he couldnt stop himself from careering into the pentagon!

pedro666 · « **Reply #81 on:** Jun 18, 2006, 05:09PM »

heres a great site of intrest, if there is anyone who still cares

http://www.universalseed.org/main.asp