9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom :: View topic

FAQ

Memberlist

Chat

Usergroups

Calendar

Profile

The Loose Cannon of 9/11
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Critics' Corner

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 12:56 pm Post subject: Re: The Loose Cannon of 9/11

TRUTH wrote:

It took two governors, four congressmen, three former White House officials and two special counsels two years to compile. They reviewed over two and half million pages of classified and declassified documents, consulted 1,200 sources in 10 countries, and spent over $15 million of the taxpayers' money in the process.

$15 million?!? That's almost as much as the Undersecretary of Gypsy Affairs spends on carpeting in his office!

Quote:

Is it possible that two twentysomethings from "a small hippie town that time forgot" could undermine that entire effort with $8,000 and a laptop?

Why not? Look what al Qaeda did with nineteen plane tickets and a few box cutters.

Quote:

Yes, if you ask ex-Army specialist Korey Rowe.

You'll get the same answer if you ask a homeless schizophrenic if the CIA is controlling his mind.

Quote:

The 23-year-old from Oneonta, New York returned home from two tours -- one to Afghanistan, the other to Iraq -- to help his best friends, Dylan Avery (director) and Jason Bermas (researcher), produce the sensational 80-minute, Web-based documentary "Loose Change,"

Take a breath: This is one gawd-awful run-on sentence.

Quote:

which seeks to establish the government's complicity in the terror attacks by addressing some very tough questions: Why wasn't Ground Zero treated like a crime scene?

The day after 9/11, the media was describing Ground Zero as "the largest crime scene in American history". Dylan and his pals were probably watching cartoons at the time.

Quote:

How did both towers "free-fall" to the ground "in 9.2 seconds" in just under two hours?

How do you "include" so many "non-sequiturs" in a single "sentence"?

Quote:

And where are the black boxes from American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175?

Um...maybe you haven't heard...those flights crashed. Sometimes when that happens the black boxes are not recoverable. It's very sad, really, but that's the way it goes sometimes.

Sorry to be so sarcastic, but...damn.

Ally
Moderate Poster

Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned

Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 1:13 pm Post subject:

Bongo Brian wrote:

Why have we not seen footage of a plane hit the Pentagon?
.

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 1:16 pm Post subject:

Alek wrote:

The JREF people aren't coming here to discuss 9/11 earnestly, they're coming here to parrot the government's version of the truth in a lecturing fashion. To add insult, they came here asking innocuous questions for which they were quickly prepared to answer.

Ok, you provide the questions, and we'll answer them. That way we can't be accused of only asking questions we have quickfire replies for. Try to post them one at a time though, because that way we can focus on them a little better, and not got caught up in posting weasels or whatever.
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

Ally
Moderate Poster

Joined: 04 Aug 2005
Posts: 909
Location: banned

Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 1:27 pm Post subject:

nobody wants to discuss anything with you, hasn't that been made plainly clear in the last few weeks? shoo back to jref with the other boot camp rejects

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 1:54 pm Post subject:

Ally wrote:

nobody wants to discuss anything with you, hasn't that been made plainly clear in the last few weeks?

shoo back to jref with the other boot camp rejects

Yes, I've noticed that no-one here actually has any arguments that stand up to any kind of scrutiny, so they've decided not to argue at all.

Unless anyone does have any arguments that they think stand up?

I'll take the silence to mean that you don't actually have any evidence.
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 1:55 pm Post subject:

Ally wrote:

nobody wants to discuss anything with you, hasn't that been made plainly clear in the last few weeks?

It's plainly clear that this subforum has more posts per thread than any other subforum. That suggests a great deal of interest in discussion.

scar
Moderate Poster

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 724
Location: Brighton

Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 2:11 pm Post subject:

chipmunk stew wrote:

Ally wrote:

nobody wants to discuss anything with you, hasn't that been made plainly clear in the last few weeks?

It's plainly clear that this subforum has more posts per thread than any other subforum. That suggests a great deal of interest in discussion.

Look at your postcount, look at Johnnys and JRefs. In a month...
You have more posts than most people on this site. Therein lies your answer. Y'all pat each other on the back and repeat fairytale strawman popular mechanics/911myths. Little more.
A few people here discuss things with you, most see it as a pointless waste of time for many reasons. If i want to hear the bullsh*t government line I'll flick on the tv or go read cia-front yellow journalism hearst shi*te. There is little point debating with trolls who believe every single word of the 911 commission report, even though its admittedly a whitewash.
'its not peer reviewed' they cry then trot off to debunking911 which is done by an anonymous 'person'. You're noob hypocrites one and all.
_________________
Positive...energy...activates...constant...elevation. (Gravediggaz)

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 2:44 pm Post subject:

scar wrote:

chipmunk stew wrote:

Ally wrote:

nobody wants to discuss anything with you, hasn't that been made plainly clear in the last few weeks?

It's plainly clear that this subforum has more posts per thread than any other subforum. That suggests a great deal of interest in discussion.

I think that comes because we're more than a little outnumbered here. so we're replying to a number of posters, so we have to make more posts. I'm still waiting for an actual PM debunk though. The ones I've seen we're, well, wrong.

Quote:

A few people here discuss things with you, most see it as a pointless waste of time for many reasons. If i want to hear the bullsh*t government line I'll flick on the tv or go read cia-front yellow journalism hearst shi*te. There is little point debating with trolls who believe every single word of the 911 commission report, even though its admittedly a whitewash.

Admittedly? The "truth" movement seems to make up its mind without requiring evidence.

Quote:

'its not peer reviewed' they cry then trot off to debunking911 which is done by an anonymous 'person'. You're noob hypocrites one and all.

If you're talking about publishing papers, then peer reviewal is the mechanism which finds and corrects faults. The only reason I can think that 9/11 "scholars" wouldn't want to subject their papers to this, is because they'd be shown to be wrong.

And how does a persons indentity change facts, or law of physics?
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 2:45 pm Post subject:

scar wrote:

chipmunk stew wrote:

Ally wrote:

nobody wants to discuss anything with you, hasn't that been made plainly clear in the last few weeks?

It's plainly clear that this subforum has more posts per thread than any other subforum. That suggests a great deal of interest in discussion.

Quote:

Admittedly? The "truth" movement seems to make up its mind without requiring evidence.

Quote:

'its not peer reviewed' they cry then trot off to debunking911 which is done by an anonymous 'person'. You're noob hypocrites one and all.

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:20 pm Post subject:

scar wrote:

chipmunk stew wrote:

Ally wrote:

nobody wants to discuss anything with you, hasn't that been made plainly clear in the last few weeks?

It's plainly clear that this subforum has more posts per thread than any other subforum. That suggests a great deal of interest in discussion.

Look at your postcount, look at Johnnys and JRefs. In a month...
You have more posts than most people on this site. Therein lies your answer.

I can count on one hand the number of times I've replied directly to a fellow Critic. Face it, people like discussion.

scar wrote:

Y'all pat each other on the back and repeat fairytale strawman popular mechanics/911myths. Little more.

You know a little bit about strawmen, don't you?

scar wrote:

Alek
Minor Poster

Joined: 03 Aug 2006
Posts: 29

Posted: Fri Aug 25, 2006 9:29 pm Post subject: Re: The Loose Cannon of 9/11

Johnny Pixels wrote:

The makers of United 93 have donated more than $1 million to a memorial for the flight.

What should we expect? Universal already endured a lot of criticism for making this movie so soon after 9/11. Their obligatory contribution to 9/11 "charities" still leaves them over $30 million dollars in revenue. With a production budget of $15 million, that leaves them with roughly $15M in profit. Not much by Hollywood standards, but probably approaching the total market value of conspiracy literature. I use the term charity in quotes because I'm skeptical of charities. In fact, there were many reports in the media of how 9/11 families were getting the runaround from these so-called 9/11 charities.

Quote:

10% of the profits of World Trade Centre's opening week are going to charity.

BBC and PBS documentaries raise awarness about the situation, and help people to understand what happened.

Or, from my perspective they just cement the lies.

Quote:

0% of Loose Change and other documentaries go towards the victims families. 0% of Loose Change and other documentaries goes towards helping people understand what happened and why.

By your reasoning I could make a documentary on how you were a child abuser, and make millions from it, and even though it would be 100% lies, that'd be fine by you, that I could make money out of ruining your life.

Don't confuse my reasoning with yours. Your analogy is a poor one, as Loose Change isn't libelous, neither am I encouraging libel. It is so poor that I have to question whether you're not a troll. If Loose Change is libelous then certainly they will be seen in court. Don't hold your breath.

Alek
Minor Poster

Joined: 03 Aug 2006
Posts: 29

Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 12:30 am Post subject:

Johnny Pixels wrote:

With all due respect to your markedly superior intellect, I don't have any questions for you or anyone from JREF. The questions I have are for the government and the media.

If I spot bigfoot, see a ghost, or have the urge to seek consultation from a psychic, I'll let you know.

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 2:35 am Post subject:

Alek wrote:

If I spot bigfoot, see a ghost, or have the urge to seek consultation from a psychic, I'll let you know.

Subjects which interest a very narrow portion of the population there, but I'm sure you'll be able to find substantive answers.

If you have questions about medicine, physics, astronomy, law, mathematics, computer science, history, or any dubious claims made in any of these areas, you'll find an abundance of people with expertise and detailed knowledge that will be able to help you work through your questions.

DeFecToR
Moderate Poster

Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 782

Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 7:45 am Post subject:

Johnny Pixels wrote:

Dont flatter yourself there JP. You did not win one arguement i had with you. I've stopped posting because i got fed up with you and others not swallowing your pride and admitting you were wrong.
You people continue to claim that there is no evidence for what some of us say. This is a complete lie. You have convieniently remembered the areas of the 911 'conspiracy theory' that are false and focus solely on those while dismissing out of hand the vast amount of accurate information. When that information is brought to you you find ANY excuse you can to dismiss it, less you are forced to admit there is evidence for what we say. I mean come on, you've probably only ever watched Loose Change and now think that that piece of rubbish is an accurate representation of all 911 truth ideas and theories. It isnt. You would know that if you had an open mind, but you dont. It has been utterly poisoned by the thinking and attitude over at JREF.
While i have been away, i have slowly been picking out the nonsense that is at 911myths and will at some point bring it all togehter. But dont go thinking that it is so i can score childish points with you. It is so that i may come to a better understanding of the entire truth of 911.
I'm LONG past caring what you apologists think about 911 or me or anything else.
Some very bad things will soon take place in the world and spending my time here argueing over the obvious with you people will solve absolutely nothing.
Enjoy your future. You're helping shape it after all.
_________________
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 7:05 pm Post subject:

DeFecToR wrote:

Johnny Pixels wrote:

Please explain when the explosives were planted in the towers. The whole explosives in the towers theory requires them to have been planted at some point. Please explain when this point was. You claim to have evidence. Show me the evidence for the planting of explosives
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

MiniMauve
Moderate Poster

Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 220

Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 8:48 pm Post subject:

Why is the onus on us to prove an alternative hypothesis from the official hypothesis (apparantly fact according to you and others) of what happened on 911? I don't KNOW what happened on 911! What I do KNOW is that a large part of the official story is impossible. We don't need to come up with an alternative to the official story, we just need to show that there is enough doubt about the official story to warrant a more thorough, transparent and independant investigation. I think, from the evidence, we are way beyond that point already. It's simply dishonest to imply that we must replace the official story with one of our own. We don't what happened but we know what didn't happen. _________________ Stick to what you KNOW. All else is disinformation, intended or not.

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 8:59 pm Post subject:

MiniMauve wrote:

Why is the onus on us to prove an alternative hypothesis from the official hypothesis (apparantly fact according to you and others) of what happened on 911? I don't KNOW what happened on 911! What I do KNOW is that a large part of the official story is impossible. We don't need to come up with an alternative to the official story, we just need to show that there is enough doubt about the official story to warrant a more thorough, transparent and independant investigation. I think, from the evidence, we are way beyond that point already. It's simply dishonest to imply that we must replace the official story with one of our own. We don't what happened but we know what didn't happen.

The onus is on you because you are ones making the claim. However, please provide us with a list of the "impossible" things that you believe didn't happen, and I'll look into them.
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

Mooter
Minor Poster

Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 51
Location: Chester

Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:00 pm Post subject:

MiniMauve wrote:

Couldn't have put it better myself Smile

_________________
"Power tends to corrupt, absolute power corrupts absolutely." Lord Acton 1887
"Head to head,
chest to chest.
Which country is the very best?
and in the land of rape and honey,
you prey" Al Jourgensen

Mooter
Minor Poster

Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 51
Location: Chester

Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:05 pm Post subject:

Johnny Pixels wrote:

MiniMauve wrote:

The onus is on you because you are ones making the claim. However, please provide us with a list of the "impossible" things that you believe didn't happen, and I'll look into them.

You miss the point, it is you that claim that 4 planes were simultaneously hijacked by 19 (some of them known to the CIA/FBI) islamic terrorists and slammed them into 3 major US targets cos they hate our freedoms. It is you that claim that although black boxes were damaged to the point that they were rendered useless yet you manage to identify the "hijackers" from passports that survived the whole ordeal - were these fake passports or their own passports, I cannot tell. People so devoted to the Muslim faith that they spent the night before eating pork, getting drunk and going to strip clubs before pulling off the most spectacular terrorist attack the world has seen. Including slamming a plane into the pentagon - the nerve centre of the worlds most powerful military - that has SAM sites all over to protect from such attacks.

Explain this to me and I shall go away and carry on my already busy life in peace and contentment.
_________________
"Power tends to corrupt, absolute power corrupts absolutely." Lord Acton 1887
"Head to head,
chest to chest.
Which country is the very best?
and in the land of rape and honey,
you prey" Al Jourgensen

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:35 pm Post subject:

Mooter wrote:

Yes. Simultaneouly is not quite accurate though, the hijackings likely took place at 8:14, 8:42, 8:51, and 9:28. The attacks took place because of Islamic fundamentalists hatred of America. They issued a fatwa in 1998 claiming that "America had declared war on god and his messenger, they called for the murder of any American, anywhere on Earth, as the 'individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any coutry in which it is possible to do it.'" They hold America responsible for every conflict involving Muslims. They believe that America should convert to Islam abandon the middle east, and end the immorality and godlessness of its society and culture.

Quote:

It is you that claim that although black boxes were damaged to the point that they were rendered useless yet you manage to identify the "hijackers" from passports that survived the whole ordeal - were these fake passports or their own passports, I cannot tell.

There were several passports and other items that survived the crashes. Because they are light items they were most likely thrown clear when the cabin was crushed. The black boxes are heavier and fixed to the airframe, and so follow the plane.

Quote:

People so devoted to the Muslim faith that they spent the night before eating pork, getting drunk and going to strip clubs before pulling off the most spectacular terrorist attack the world has seen.

People who believe they can break rules to blend in. They were told to specifically not act like devout muslims, and several of them were not particularly devout and did not follow all Islamic guidance. Just because they were fanatics does not make them devout. The fact that they are fanatics shows they have little true understanding of the Islamic faith, but instead followed a gross perversion of it, fuelled by hatred rather than understanding.

Quote:

Including slamming a plane into the pentagon - the nerve centre of the worlds most powerful military - that has SAM sites all over to protect from such attacks.

The Pentagon has no SAM sites to protect it. As you can see: http://www.google.co.uk/maps?ie=UTF8&z=14&ll=38.86083,-77.041626&spn=0 .024929,0.05785&om=1
The Pentagon is a mere 1500 metres or so away from Reagan National Airport. A SAM system would spend all of its time shooting down passenger jets flying overhead. You can also see from the satellite photo on google maps, there are no SAM batteries around the Pentagon site.

Quote:

Explain this to me and I shall go away and carry on my already busy life in peace and contentment.

Have a nice day.
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

jason67
Moderate Poster

Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 129
Location: SE London

Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 10:16 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Please read, then read again that statement. My god. I'm going to call the airlines tomorrow and tell them that the black box made out of this 'heavier' material is a waste of time, paper is the way forward.

Since joining this site I have read most of the discussions/arguments that have gone on between CTS and 'US' and tried to keep out of it for my own sanity.
But I just had to say something about that comment by JP.
I there any wonder why he has become one of the biggest posters with nonsense like that?

Please keep going JP, its great stuff.

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 10:36 pm Post subject:

jason67 wrote:

Quote:

"Currently, EUROCAE specifies that a recorder must be able to withstand an acceleration of 3400 g (33 km/s²) acceleration for 6.5 milliseconds. This is roughly equivalent to an impact velocity of 270 knots and a deceleration or crushing distance of 450 mm"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_data_recorder#Design

The aircraft impacts occured at over 450 knots. That's why the FDR didn't work afterwards. The passport was thrown clear of any significant danger. It was by no means pristine.
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

jason67
Moderate Poster

Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 129
Location: SE London

Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 10:55 pm Post subject:

Quote:

The aircraft impacts occured at over 450 knots. That's why the FDR didn't work afterwards. The passport was thrown clear of any significant danger. It was by no means pristine.

Oh right, I get it now. How stupid of me.
Just a little singed around the edges, maybe some spots of blood? Was it found next to a copy of the koran, or just by the video of how to fly an airplane? I cant remember now.
So who has got the passport now? Can I have a quick look? Can you post a pic?

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:15 pm Post subject:

jason67 wrote:

Quote:

The aircraft impacts occured at over 450 knots. That's why the FDR didn't work afterwards. The passport was thrown clear of any significant danger. It was by no means pristine.

I don't have a picture of the passport, but I do have pictures of some documents recovered from the flight 93 crash:

The passport wasn't found in the tower, it hadn't been subjected to fire. It was found in the street, where it had been thrown clear.
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

jason67
Moderate Poster

Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 129
Location: SE London

Posted: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:58 pm Post subject:

Johnny Pixels wrote:

jason67 wrote:

Quote:

The aircraft impacts occured at over 450 knots. That's why the FDR didn't work afterwards. The passport was thrown clear of any significant danger. It was by no means pristine.

I don't have a picture of the passport, but I do have pictures of some documents recovered from the flight 93 crash:

The passport wasn't found in the tower, it hadn't been subjected to fire. It was found in the street, where it had been thrown clear.

It wasnt subjected to fire? Did you not see the fireball as the plane hit the WTC? You are telling me that a paper passport some how fell out of a pocket or bag of one of the hijackers and 'thrown clear' (as you put it)?
Oh do come on.
If there are any other CTS reading this then please pm him and have a word. He really isnt helping your cause at all.
So lets just imagine that it did get 'thrown clear'.
Dont you think that if they did find a passport belonging to one of the hijackers (how did they know it belonged to one of the hijackers just hours after the first plane hit?) that this would of been shown all around the world to prove who did it?

You cant show a pic because there was NO passport found, it was apparently 'lost' as soon as it was 'found' by an un-named FBI agent.

It was a story put out to get the world to believe who was responsible.

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:24 am Post subject:

jason67 wrote:

Why would they make up the passport story, when they already have the hijackers name on the passenger list? It's not an essential part of the story. As to whether things could survive that fireball:

More photos here:

http://www.pbase.com/peteburke73/september_11
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

Ronin
New Poster

Joined: 26 Aug 2006
Posts: 4

Posted: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:28 am Post subject:

The pentagon does have SAM wtf like they would tell us if they did.Wouldnt it be a part of national security if they did?I mean hey its a part of national security that we cant see a plane fly into a building called the pentagon but theyll tell you ablout every weapon they have at the most highly defended airspace in the world.Cmon now.Your also saying that the guys passport flew out of his pocket through the fireball out of the plane out of the building and onto the city streets.Its paper?!So your saying the plane was strong enough to take out two 110 story building to dust but it didnt destroy a piece of paper.Well now ive heard it all.I must get some of this paper for myself.Lets not forget the hole in the pentagon is tiny and the lawn was untouched even though they said it hit it.theres so much stuff out there against skeptics its pitifull.Wake up and smell the evil dude you live in the real world and in the real world everyone is subject to sin.You know i find it funny how everyone on TV lately has been tryin to say Jesus sinned by having sex or whatnot.But if someone says bush sins its the end o the blasted world!Lets not confuse disloyalty with dissent.This was done by our government and thats it plain and simple theres no way around it period. _________________ http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1 "Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death"Adolf Hitler

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:45 am Post subject:

Ronin wrote:

The pentagon does have SAM wtf like they would tell us if they did.Wouldnt it be a part of national security if they did?

Who told you it did? The Pentagon has no SAM defence.

Quote:

I mean hey its a part of national security that we cant see a plane fly into a building called the pentagon but theyll tell you ablout every weapon they have at the most highly defended airspace in the world.

The Pentagon is approx 1500 metres away from a commercial airport. It is not heavily defended airspace.

Quote:

Cmon now.Your also saying that the guys passport flew out of his pocket through the fireball out of the plane out of the building and onto the city streets.Its paper?!So your saying the plane was strong enough to take out two 110 story building to dust but it didnt destroy a piece of paper.

As I showed above, a lot of debris made it to the streets without burning.

Quote:

Well now ive heard it all.I must get some of this paper for myself.Lets not forget the hole in the pentagon is tiny and the lawn was untouched even though they said it hit it.

The hole in the pentagon was the size of a 757. If that's what you call tiny, then so be it.
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

MiniMauve
Moderate Poster

Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 220

Posted: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:13 am Post subject:

Johnny Pixels wrote:

The onus is on you because you are ones making the claim. However, please provide us with a list of the "impossible" things that you believe didn't happen, and I'll look into them.

ROFL You do have a sense of humour, JP, I'll give you that. You'll "look into them", will you?

I should've known that you would seize on my use of "impossible". My bad. A better characterization would be "vanishingly small probability to the point of practical impossibility plus a few that are in actuality, impossible". Why do all our argument turn into semantics, JP?

As for the list for that, shall we simply assume that we've both read the literature and know what the major issues are? No, I suppose not, you run marathons, not sprints, sigh.

In no particular order...

Impossible:
1) That jet fuel (much of which can be seen burning off in the air on impact) would burn long enough in WTC 1 & 2 to weaken the steel columns enough to cause a complete building collapse.
2) That fires burning floor by floor in WTC 1,2 & 7would burn long enough or hot enough to weaken the steel columns enough to cause a complete building collapse.
3) That some sort of explosive did not create the large quantities of molten iron found under the wreckage of the towers. If not thermite explosives, then what?
4) That the "pancaking" of floors caused the towers to collapse at very near the speed of gravity.
5) That the energy of the collapse pulverized to dust everything except the steel columns inside the towers.
6) That the 'exploding' of floors below the collapse wave (which can be seen in slow motion videos of the collapses of WTC 1 & 2) were not caused by some sort of high explosive.
7) That the collapse of WTC 1 & 2 would start at or near the tops and progess downwards without the use of controlled demolitions.
Cool

That the disintegration of the upper section of WTC1 as it starts it's collapse was not caused by controlled demolitions. You can see this clearly in videos.
9) That Flight 77 disintegrated on impact at the Pentagon, apparantly melting the wings, fusilage and engines yet leaving furniture intact in offices exposed by the blast.

Vanishingly Improbable:
1) That the buildings would collapse so elegantly and uniformly into their own footprints.
2) That the numerous eyewitness testimonies of seeing or hearing explosions (and in some cases even describing the injuries caused by the explosions) are all mistaken or faked.
3) That a fireball from the plane hits rolled down the elevator shafts of the WTCs to cause damage in the basements and lobbies of the WTCs.
4) That fighters were unable to intercept Flight 77 before it hit the pentagon after what happened at WTC.
5) That the recovered Flight Data Recorders would have no usable data on them.
6) That all the Intelligence agencies who claim to have warned the US beforehand are lieing.
7) That all the indications of prior knowledge of the coming attacks are false. These include reports of warnings to people going to NY and/or WTC, cancellations of flight and/or travel plans by officials, short-selling activity in the stock market, etc..

I'm sure I'm forgetting some and many other issues I would rate as only improbable but worrisome enough to warrant a full and transparant investigation - shall I list those, too?
_________________
Stick to what you KNOW. All else is disinformation, intended or not.

Johnny Pixels
Moderate Poster

Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 932
Location: A Sooper Sekrit Bunker

Posted: Sun Aug 27, 2006 11:21 am Post subject:

MiniMauve wrote:

Impossible:
1) That jet fuel (much of which can be seen burning off in the air on impact) would burn long enough in WTC 1 & 2 to weaken the steel columns enough to cause a complete building collapse.

As I've pointed out elsewhere, the fire in the Madrid building burned hot enough to weaken the steel. The plane impact also weakened the structure so that the fire would not need to burn for as long.

Quote:

2) That fires burning floor by floor in WTC 1,2 & 7would burn long enough or hot enough to weaken the steel columns enough to cause a complete building collapse.

Floor by floor? There were entire sections of building on fire. And again, hit by planes, weakened structure.

Quote:

3) That some sort of explosive did not create the large quantities of molten iron found under the wreckage of the towers. If not thermite explosives, then what?

What molten iron? There are unconfirmed stories of molten metal, not even necessarily iron or steel. Usually with the picture of the digger arm and some glowing metal. Except that molten metal is liquid, so how is the digger picking it up? Glowing metal is not unusual in a fire.

Quote:

4) That the "pancaking" of floors caused the towers to collapse at very near the speed of gravity.

I think the freefall rate is given as 9 and a bit seconds. Stopwatch and a video gives at least 15 seconds for the collapse. 15 seconds is half the freefall rate.

[quote]5) That the energy of the collapse pulverized to dust everything except the steel columns inside the towers.[.quote]

Not everything. A lot of items were recovered. That dust you see is mostly plaster board.

Quote:

6) That the 'exploding' of floors below the collapse wave (which can be seen in slow motion videos of the collapses of WTC 1 & 2) were not caused by some sort of high explosive.

The "exploding floors"? Do you mean the ones where clouds of dust shoot out? That's air pressure breaking the window and forcing dust out.

Quote:

7) That the collapse of WTC 1 & 2 would start at or near the tops and progess downwards without the use of controlled demolitions.

WTC 1 & 2 collapses started (surprise surprise) where the planes hit. Controlled demo destroys the internal structure, all at the start, not progressively.

Quote:

That the disintegration of the upper section of WTC1 as it starts it's collapse was not caused by controlled demolitions. You can see this clearly in videos.

Hit by a plane? Weakened structure? Fire? Unsurprisingly, explosives don't withstand fire, so how did they set them off after they had been destroyed?

Quote:

9) That Flight 77 disintegrated on impact at the Pentagon, apparantly melting the wings, fusilage and engines yet leaving furniture intact in offices exposed by the blast.

It didn't. The plane was destroyed mainly by the impact, not vaporised as some claim. Where is this intact furniture?

Quote:

1) That the buildings would collapse so elegantly and uniformly into their own footprints.

They didn't. All the buildings in the WTC complex were hit by debris and destroyed beyond repair. Pretty big footprints.

Quote:

2) That the numerous eyewitness testimonies of seeing or hearing explosions (and in some cases even describing the injuries caused by the explosions) are all mistaken or faked.

No, those people heard explosions. That doesn't mean explosives. A car backfiring sounds like an explosion, it doesn't have TNT in the exhaust. There was electrical equipment in the WTC for the air con and elevators and other services. Electrical equipment makes a loud noise when it explodes, but electrical equipment does not contain C4.

Quote:

3) That a fireball from the plane hits rolled down the elevator shafts of the WTCs to cause damage in the basements and lobbies of the WTCs.

Why should you check a door to see if it is hot before opening it in a fire? Because when you open the door you introduce a fresh supply of oxygen to the fire, causing it to expand. Yes, just like the movie "Backdraft". Where is there a fresh supply of air? Down the elevator shafts. And before you say they were hermtically sealed as some claim, how did anyone ever breathe in the elevator shaft?

Quote:

4) That fighters were unable to intercept Flight 77 before it hit the pentagon after what happened at WTC.

Confusion. No pre-practiced plan of action

Quote:

5) That the recovered Flight Data Recorders would have no usable data on them.

Some of the recorders did, but they're not invincible.

Quote:

6) That all the Intelligence agencies who claim to have warned the US beforehand are lieing.

Not lying, no. They had indications of an attack, but no-one knew where, or when, or what.

Quote:

7) That all the indications of prior knowledge of the coming attacks are false. These include reports of warnings to people going to NY and/or WTC, cancellations of flight and/or travel plans by officials, short-selling activity in the stock market, etc..

Most of them are false or misrepresented.For example John Ashcrofts travel plans were changed due to a personal threat, against him, not the country. He also continued to fly on commercial airliners, but used government planes for work purposes. Short selling activity was traced to a single individual who sold but also bought several thousand shares in one of the airlines, and also a stock tip newsletter.
_________________

I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco

Display posts from previous:

	9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Critics' Corner	All times are GMT Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 2 of 3

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum