View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
catfish Validated Poster
Joined: 24 Apr 2006 Posts: 430
|
Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
_________________ Govern : To control
Ment : The mind |
|
Back to top |
|
|
program58 New Poster
Joined: 28 May 2006 Posts: 6 Location: human
|
Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I repeat:
The debate is superfluous. The buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. Building 7 was brought down by controlled demolition. No planes theories are in 'Tony Blair’s words, ' a ludicrous diversion'. Those that peddle the need to debate this misinformation should now consider that their actions are in Tony’s best interest.
It is not about debate any more. It is about action. Action that will get us the result we all crave. An inquiry with teeth and justice meted out to those responsible for 9/11.
The truth will set you free indeed. But those children dying in Afghanistan and Iraq experience an everyday truth while you can afford to slow down the truth movement with theories which can never be proven in a court of law.
The focus is myopic and your vanity is almost New Labour in proportion. If I have offended you I apologise, as my harsh words are meant to be compassionate. Maybe your energies would be best spent to create awareness around the collapse of Building 7; helping to bring about peaceful regime change within our 'democratic' governments, thus saving lives rather than the luxury of vain intellectual posturing on a blog. _________________ master your mind. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 1873 Location: Upstairs
|
Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why is there any debate about the TYPE of aircraft it is?
There are a considerable number of videos clearly showing the second plane. Anybody in the industry would be able to tell at a glance what type it is. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3 9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 1009
|
Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
telecasterisation wrote: | Why is there any debate about the TYPE of aircraft it is?
There are a considerable number of videos clearly showing the second plane. Anybody in the industry would be able to tell at a glance what type it is. |
That's great telecaster - can you please post the link that (clearly) shows the second plane - I have yet to see one |
|
Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 1873 Location: Upstairs
|
Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: | telecasterisation wrote: | Why is there any debate about the TYPE of aircraft it is?
There are a considerable number of videos clearly showing the second plane. Anybody in the industry would be able to tell at a glance what type it is. |
That's great telecaster - can you please post the link that (clearly) shows the second plane - I have yet to see one |
You misunderstand.
During the second war world war, anti-aircraft teams each had spotters who were trained to recognise the outline of aircraft, often many miles away. Are you honestly expecting me to believe that someone who works on the construction on Boeing aircraft couldn't tell a 757 from a 737 from the videos that exist? _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3 9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 1009
|
Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
telecasterisation wrote: | THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: | telecasterisation wrote: | Why is there any debate about the TYPE of aircraft it is?
There are a considerable number of videos clearly showing the second plane. Anybody in the industry would be able to tell at a glance what type it is. |
That's great telecaster - can you please post the link that (clearly) shows the second plane - I have yet to see one |
You misunderstand.
During the second war world war, anti-aircraft teams each had spotters who were trained to recognise the outline of aircraft, often many miles away. Are you honestly expecting me to believe that someone who works on the construction on Boeing aircraft couldn't tell a 757 from a 737 from the videos that exist? |
Slight problem here Telecaster
The second world war anti aircraft team unfortunately were not gathered outside WTC on 9/11 - they are all probably pushing up daisies or pushing their zimmer frames round some gentile rest home
And the people who put together the finished article for boeing - well please tell me who has come forward to identify the plane? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TimmyG Validated Poster
Joined: 04 Apr 2006 Posts: 489 Location: Manchester
|
Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
flight 175 looks like the plane its meant to be to me.
a boeing 767.
i still think its most likely that the planes that hit the towers were the actual ones the OCS says they were. remote controlled to hit the towers successfully. with all the passengers on board.
i can't see any reason to doubt the planes were the official ones other than the unusual phone calls.. which aren't conclusive. just unusual _________________ "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act" |
|
Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 1873 Location: Upstairs
|
Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | Slight problem here Telecaster
The second world war anti aircraft team unfortunately were not gathered outside WTC on 9/11 - they are all probably pushing up daisies or pushing their zimmer frames round some gentile rest home
And the people who put together the finished article for boeing - well please tell me who has come forward to identify the plane? |
So there we have it - to answer your rather lacklustre attempt at rhetoric, if people could do it 60 years ago with just a shakey image through a pair of binoculars, you have today a nice big static version to peruse upon your desktop/laptop.
As for your 'who has come forward to identify the plane?' - you can do that now.
Ain't technology wonderful? _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
Back to top |
|
|
chek Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 11:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
TimmyG wrote: | flight 175 looks like the plane its meant to be to me.
a boeing 767.
i still think its most likely that the planes that hit the towers were the actual ones the OCS says they were. remote controlled to hit the towers successfully. with all the passengers on board.
i can't see any reason to doubt the planes were the official ones other than the unusual phone calls.. which aren't conclusive. just unusual |
Although I really can't be ars*d looking up the link right now,I believe that 767 still may be from the rense.com site, who interestingly also claim to have ID'd the shaft of the engine found 3 streets away as belonging to a B-737.
Although it could be a case of one wrecked engine core looking much like another. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
prole art threat Validated Poster
Joined: 13 Apr 2006 Posts: 804 Location: London Town
|
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Im open minded on the NPT. I prefer to concentrate on the controlled demolitions myself but what I am witnessing here is a 'pack mentality' and it's not good. If TTWSU3 wants to create multiple threads on an issue he is obviously very passionate about then why the hell shouldnt he? Let's stop trying to be protective of potential recruits. If the NPT is going to scare them off, then BOO HOO to them! I say we should applaud TTWSU3's enthusiasm and not demonize his theory. After all we all have the same goal and that's to expose the devils who orchestrated it. We all agree on ONE thing and that is controlled demolitions brought down the twin towers and WTC 7.
So, get over it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
chek Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
prole art threat wrote: | Im open minded on the NPT. I prefer to concentrate on the controlled demolitions myself but what I am witnessing here is a 'pack mentality' and it's not good. If TTWSU3 wants to create multiple threads on an issue he is obviously very passionate about then why the hell shouldnt he? Let's stop trying to be protective of potential recruits. If the NPT is going to scare them off, then BOO HOO to them! I say we should applaud TTWSU3's enthusiasm and not demonize his theory. After all we all have the same goal and that's to expose the devils who orchestrated it. We all agree on ONE thing and that is controlled demolitions brought down the twin towers and WTC 7.
So, get over it. |
Not so fast - what's with this unlikely - and it's not even mentioned by the government - 'explosives' theory?
If you zoom right in I think you'll find that those jetliners delivered thousands of pixie miners each with their little pixie picks and hatchets who chopped down the towers in a single pixie day (that's approx. 11 of our everyday seconds) on th eorders of the wicked queen.
The towers didn't fall down - it was the pixies brought them down. Of course most people think I'm mad when I get to that part, but let them disprove it, I say.
Surely that's obvious to anyone with eyes?
It's what got me into the 911 campaign. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 1873 Location: Upstairs
|
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 8:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | If you zoom right in I think you'll find that those jetliners delivered thousands of pixie miners each with their little pixie picks and hatchets who chopped down the towers in a single pixie day (that's approx. 11 of our everyday seconds) on th eorders of the wicked queen.
The towers didn't fall down - it was the pixies brought them down. Of course most people think I'm mad when I get to that part, but let them disprove it, I say. |
There is always one who has to add a degree of stupidity to a sensible debate.
Pixies have NO special powers, they are simply very small people. The impact and resulting fireball would have killed them all instantly. What you suggest is simply not feasible. Besides this, none were on the passenger manifest and none appeared on the CCTV footage from the airport.
Pixie shmixie. _________________ I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
Back to top |
|
|
chek Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
telecasterisation wrote: | Quote: | If you zoom right in I think you'll find that those jetliners delivered thousands of pixie miners each with their little pixie picks and hatchets who chopped down the towers in a single pixie day (that's approx. 11 of our everyday seconds) on th eorders of the wicked queen.
The towers didn't fall down - it was the pixies brought them down. Of course most people think I'm mad when I get to that part, but let them disprove it, I say. |
There is always one who has to add a degree of stupidity to a sensible debate.
Pixies have NO special powers, they are simply very small people. The impact and resulting fireball would have killed them all instantly. What you suggest is simply not feasible. Besides this, none were on the passenger manifest and none appeared on the CCTV footage from the airport.
Pixie shmixie. |
Well of course there are lots of naysayers - just ask the NPT crowd.
But I'm convinced that the unmistakeable hallmark of pixie involvement
(sub 100 micron particles AND the precise timing - a full pixie day) is damning evidence.
And prole art threat says I'm entitled to any crackers theory I like, so there. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ally Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Aug 2005 Posts: 909 Location: banned
|
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
For the attention of Mick Dear and everyone else who thinks I'm a lunatic for not believing those aluminium planes couldn't penetrate the WTCs steel cage.
•Controversial finding but proven
•Impossible physics for an aluminum airliner to “disappear” into a steel/concrete tower without decelerating and crumpling at the wall, breaking off flaps, panels wings and tail section
•No debris below impact zones
•No debris in gashes
•Run any WTC 2 penetration video frame-by-frame and it shows impossible butter-smooth entry with no deceleration
http://www.total911.info/2006/09/revere-radio-special-reynolds-wood-on .html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
chek Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ally wrote: | For the attention of Mick Dear and everyone else who thinks I'm a lunatic for not believing those aluminium planes couldn't penetrate the WTCs steel cage.
•Controversial finding but proven
•Impossible physics for an aluminum airliner to “disappear” into a steel/concrete tower without decelerating and crumpling at the wall, breaking off flaps, panels wings and tail section
•No debris below impact zones
•No debris in gashes
•Run any WTC 2 penetration video frame-by-frame and it shows impossible butter-smooth entry with no deceleration
http://www.total911.info/2006/09/revere-radio-special-reynolds-wood-on .html |
Hi Ally _ i'm at work now and don't have the time, but being an engineer, does Judy Wood have anything beyond her assertion that you can post a link to?
I'd appreciate it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3 9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 1009
|
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
chek wrote: | TimmyG wrote: | flight 175 looks like the plane its meant to be to me.
a boeing 767.
i still think its most likely that the planes that hit the towers were the actual ones the OCS says they were. remote controlled to hit the towers successfully. with all the passengers on board.
i can't see any reason to doubt the planes were the official ones other than the unusual phone calls.. which aren't conclusive. just unusual |
Although I really can't be ars*d looking up the link right now,I believe that 767 still may be from the rense.com site, who interestingly also claim to have ID'd the shaft of the engine found 3 streets away as belonging to a B-737.
Although it could be a case of one wrecked engine core looking much like another. |
So far this is the best image the plane huggers can come up with - not very good is it?
And yet............................. Minimauve said
"My issue with CGI is the logistics that would be involved in ensuring that hundreds of private video tapes would also have to be faked"
It is news of great joy to me that we now have hundreds of private video tapes - let's se em MM or are you MAKING IT UP? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MiniMauve Moderate Poster
Joined: 24 Aug 2006 Posts: 220
|
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
I guess you didn't understand my point, did you Truth? I'll explain again: CGI as evidence of No Planes (NOT no 7x7s) is a logistical impossibility because EVERY amateur and professional photograph and video would need to be faked. So, EVERY photo or video on the internet that shows a plane hitting the WTCs MUST have been faked, according to you. Do you not understand our skeptism???
Beyond CGI we also MUST assume that ALL eyewitness accounts of planes hitting the WTC are bogus, coerced or mistaken to fit your theory. That's stretches credibility too far. Do you understand? _________________ Stick to what you KNOW. All else is disinformation, intended or not. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ally Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Aug 2005 Posts: 909 Location: banned
|
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
MiniMauve wrote: | I guess you didn't understand my point, did you Truth? I'll explain again: CGI as evidence of No Planes (NOT no 7x7s) is a logistical impossibility because EVERY amateur and professional photograph and video would need to be faked. So, EVERY photo or video on the internet that shows a plane hitting the WTCs MUST have been faked, according to you. Do you not understand our skeptism???
Beyond CGI we also MUST assume that ALL eyewitness accounts of planes hitting the WTC are bogus, coerced or mistaken to fit your theory. That's stretches credibility too far. Do you understand? |
most people on this board believe that to be the case at the Pentagon with f77 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3 9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 23 Jan 2006 Posts: 1009
|
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
MM Said
"My issue with CGI is the logistics that would be involved in ensuring that hundreds of private video tapes would also have to be faked"
I'm still waiting to see these hundreds of private video tapes MM
Ally's point about the Pentagon is very important
Why can you buy into no 7X7 with the eye witnesses lying about what they saw with the Pentagon but not with WTC?
If there was some fuzzy footage of a big plane hitting the Pentagon but no wreckage would you then believe the official story that the plane had vaporised? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John White Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006 Posts: 3187 Location: Here to help!
|
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote: | MM Said
"My issue with CGI is the logistics that would be involved in ensuring that hundreds of private video tapes would also have to be faked"
I'm still waiting to see these hundreds of private video tapes MM
Ally's point about the Pentagon is very important
Why can you buy into no 7X7 with the eye witnesses lying about what they saw with the Pentagon but not with WTC?
If there was some fuzzy footage of a big plane hitting the Pentagon but no wreckage would you then believe the official story that the plane had vaporised? |
I'll pick this one up: its evasive of you to focus on "hundreds of videos": picking holes in poor use on english in fact
There is an essential difference: Video evidance of impact at pentagon available: 4 frames
Video evidance of Plane impacting WTC2: thousands of frames, from multiple angles
I dont know how many seperate videos of the second impact exist TWSU3: Do you?
But its clearly far more than 4 frames from one static camera
With the Pentagon, the problems are focused around the credibility of the evidance supporting the theory that it was hit by a commercial airliner: The undamaged "Pentalawn", the (small) size of the impact hole, the penetration into "C" Wing... and the fact that it is an area under "National Security" control and far far easier to control the scene....so the balance of probability for the official story being correct is very low
However, the questions are different at the WTC: essentially "could the impact of the planes have done sufficient damage to bring the towers down in the way that they fell, in the time that they fell, if at all?"
Its obviously not to difficult to question four frames of footage that dont clearly show anything other than something aproaching the pentagon very fast
No Planes HAS to call into question every single image of a Plane impacting the towers
There are two things "no Planes" theory needs to do before it could start to raise the levels of serious questioing the Pentagon situation has warrented:
1) Admit the need to refute every single image showing a Plane striking the WTC
2) Provide primary sources for the films being used to make the case to prove they are not being "sexed up"
If the intent is genuine, these things should not be too difficult: in fact, they could be done immediately with a clear conscience (assuming you know the primary sources for the "no Planes" videos: if not, you should be demanding them!)
However, if a dis-infomation psy-op, these requirements are impossible to meet
The proof of the pudding is in the eating
I have my spoon ready: whats on the menu? _________________ Free your Self and Free the World |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ally Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Aug 2005 Posts: 909 Location: banned
|
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 10:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
John White wrote: |
The proof of the pudding is in the eating
I have my spoon ready: whats on the menu? |
a steel toe-capped boot |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John White Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006 Posts: 3187 Location: Here to help!
|
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ally wrote: | John White wrote: |
The proof of the pudding is in the eating
I have my spoon ready: whats on the menu? |
a steel toe-capped boot |
Ally, are you totaly oblivious of the damage you are doing to the credibility of "No Planes" with posts like this? _________________ Free your Self and Free the World |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ally Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Aug 2005 Posts: 909 Location: banned
|
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 10:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
John White wrote: |
Ally, are you totaly oblivious of the damage you are doing to the credibility of "No Planes" with posts like this? |
buzz of with your silly little labels john, that's all I have from you since you joined, crappy meme's to demonstrate your inability to percieve such an obvious illusion. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John White Site Admin
Joined: 27 Mar 2006 Posts: 3187 Location: Here to help!
|
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'll take that as a "No John, I really dont get that at all" then
One thing you will learn about me Ally is that I am impossible to intimidate _________________ Free your Self and Free the World |
|
Back to top |
|
|
graphicequaliser Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Sep 2006 Posts: 111 Location: United Kingdom
|
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John White wrote: | No Planes HAS to call into question every single image of a Plane impacting the towers... |
I am surprised at you, John. We have time and time again explained this. If holographic technology was used, then everyone looking at the "plane" will see a plane, whether they are filming it or not. So, that answers that one. Now, answer me this (nobody has yet) :-
After the first tower was hit, why weren't armies of high quality cameras moved into the area to film it and any subsequent actions. Why are all the video clips low quality? _________________ Patriotism, religion, tradition and political/corporate alliance are the vehicles they use to fool us passive, peace-loving, family-orientated apes into fighting each other.
Graphic |
|
Back to top |
|
|
chek Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
graphicequaliser wrote: | John White wrote: | No Planes HAS to call into question every single image of a Plane impacting the towers... |
I am surprised at you, John. We have time and time again explained this. If holographic technology was used, then everyone looking at the "plane" will see a plane, whether they are filming it or not. So, that answers that one. Now, answer me this (nobody has yet) :-
After the first tower was hit, why weren't armies of high quality cameras moved into the area to film it and any subsequent actions. Why are all the video clips low quality? |
Two of the biggest problems I have with have with this issue is the wholesale acceptance of 'holographic' technology as if it's a given.
What examples are there to illlustrate its existence outside the Enterprise's holodeck? Theoretical - certainly. Practical working devices - well maybe if you provide a medium for the laser to reflect off, and squint your eyes, but otherwise it's not anything like as well developed as everyone seems to think at least so far as I'm aware of. I'd be more inclined to believe they'd hired David Copperfield.
Then there's the conventionally produced bin Laden 'confession' video, which is so poor as to be laughable in terms of convincingly achieving its aims, except possibly to the braindead or at a pinch yer average tabloid reader.
I'm not at all convinced with the idea that there are hidden superpowers and supertechnology being used against us. These guys are only men living in houses, and 500 simultaneous arrests would neutralise their whole global network. They aren't superman.
And for the 'n'th time, nobody expected the second plane. It was a surprise. Check how long it takes a cameraman to aim and focus a pro camera during the seconds available during a hi-speed run by an aircraft.
It's not so unexplainable as you seem to imply. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
graphicequaliser Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Sep 2006 Posts: 111 Location: United Kingdom
|
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Chek, you sound like a staunch Bush supporter frantically flailing around trying to defend a ridiculous story. Stealth technology demonstrates holographic advances made so far, but as a matter of "national security", we are not privy to how advanced they are currently.
And if the average Joe still believes the towers came down under only gravitational forces, then what else will they swallow? _________________ Patriotism, religion, tradition and political/corporate alliance are the vehicles they use to fool us passive, peace-loving, family-orientated apes into fighting each other.
Graphic |
|
Back to top |
|
|
chek Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
graphicequaliser wrote: | Chek, you sound like a staunch Bush supporter frantically flailing around trying to defend a ridiculous story. Stealth technology demonstrates holographic advances made so far, but as a matter of "national security", we are not privy to how advanced they are currently.
And if the average Joe still believes the towers came down under only gravitational forces, then what else will they swallow? |
No, not a staunch Bush supporter at all - hopefully you don't lump all thinkers attempting to remain within the rational into that category.
Stealth technology (in the sense that the term is commonly used) is an anti-radar countermeasure achieved by carefully designed refelection angles. What connection has that to holography?
And the world's average Joes saw something that they'd never seen before, and have accepted the official explanation.
There's no mystery for those people at all - awakening them to it is what we're meant to be about. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
graphicequaliser Moderate Poster
Joined: 04 Sep 2006 Posts: 111 Location: United Kingdom
|
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now, you're being obtuse. Stealth technology includes holographic techniques, not just AWACS on its own. And what people saw literally were controlled demolitions, which explains why, when I saw it at first, I thought there's something not quite right about these images I am seeing. While watching these CDs, people were being told by the reporters the official line. Images plus voice of authority yields deluded sheep. I don't believe in authority period. Everyone is equal, the Queen, Tony Blair, the beggar on the way to work this morning, and the newborn mongoloid baby. We are all worth the same in terms of the love we can give and receive. Social hierarchy makes the inequalities we experience daily, and since society is a construct of the human mind, we can reconstruct it just by thinking about it. We are each of us valuable, and each of us worth the same to the planet (our constructor). The competitive upbringing experienced by nearly all humans globally, is what is causing the need to constantly outdo each other, instead of co-operating with each other. Competition in small amounts is healthy, when it is mixed with compassion. However, schools do not teach compassion, but they teach a lot about competitiveness.
First step is to re-educate everyone into knowing that nobody has authority, and that the "natural" identification of an alpha male in any social gathering has got to stop. We do not need someone to tell us what to do next. Free will and concern for repercussions should determine our actions. _________________ Patriotism, religion, tradition and political/corporate alliance are the vehicles they use to fool us passive, peace-loving, family-orientated apes into fighting each other.
Graphic |
|
Back to top |
|
|
chek Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006 Posts: 3889 Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
graphicequaliser wrote: | Now, you're being obtuse. Stealth technology includes holographic techniques, not just AWACS on its own. And what people saw literally were controlled demolitions, which explains why, when I saw it at first, I thought there's something not quite right about these images I am seeing. While watching these CDs, people were being told by the reporters the official line. Images plus voice of authority yields deluded sheep. I don't believe in authority period. Everyone is equal, the Queen, Tony Blair, the beggar on the way to work this morning, and the newborn mongoloid baby. We are all worth the same in terms of the love we can give and receive. Social hierarchy makes the inequalities we experience daily, and since society is a construct of the human mind, we can reconstruct it just by thinking about it. We are each of us valuable, and each of us worth the same to the planet (our constructor). The competitive upbringing experienced by nearly all humans globally, is what is causing the need to constantly outdo each other, instead of co-operating with each other. Competition in small amounts is healthy, when it is mixed with compassion. However, schools do not teach compassion, but they teach a lot about competitiveness.
First step is to re-educate everyone into knowing that nobody has authority, and that the "natural" identification of an alpha male in any social gathering has got to stop. We do not need someone to tell us what to do next. Free will and concern for repercussions should determine our actions. |
Leaving aside the sociological analysis, in modern military terminology 'stealth' relates to two things ONLY:
reducing radar cross section (the ability to be 'seen' by radar),
and:
reducing or otherwise diffusing heat emissions to reduce visibility in the infra-red, commonly also used for weapon guidance.
As far as I'm aware, the current cutting edge of holography is in the data storage field, so again - and not from obtuseness, so much as because of my obviously limited knowledge -I have to ask what other holographic applications do you mean?
You seem to readily accept its existence, so on what evidence, basically? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|