| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
faceless
admin
Joined: 25 Apr 2006
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 12:32 am Post subject: |
 |
|
|
|
Did you not read that post earlier? Or have you spent the evening wondering about the simple logic of it and then fought against it to get to this point?
You say you work on facts, so you must saying that my theory has no basis in logic. If you could explain how it is illogical I'd appreciate your input. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
seshme
Joined: 02 May 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Brown Sauce wrote: | Why has there never been a video or photo of an airplane hitting the pentagon?
a) How can you fly a jet airliner into a tower at high speed, and with pin point accuracy, when you have only had a small handful of hours learning to fly small propeller planes? (a bit like asking a learner driver to drive an articulated truck around a car park at speed without hitting anything, not once but three times).
b) The guy who is supposed to have flown into the pentagon did a maneuver that would have taken a pilot with 35 years experience a few tries at least to pull off. This guy - Hani Hanjour- wasn't good enough to fly a Cessna 150 alone according to the folk who trained him.
c) How come members of the Bin Laden family were whisked out of the country by air within hours, without being questioned by the authorities, and during the time when all civilian and private air traffic were grounded due to 'security reasons'.
there are loads of these bits, easily answered questions that remain unanswered. Now I have two choices, I go along with the official story, one really full of holes, but go blindly along.
Or I say what's up here? I don't have to be a ranting conspiracy nut, just someone who can find some easily answerable unanswered questions.
the folk who go along with the neocunts normally say that they don't have to answer anything. I say they do. |
a) I don't understand the question. Are you saying no planes hit the towers? They did. Have you ever played with a flight simulator, the difficult bit is landing. If you want to know whether its easy or impossible we now have the evidence. Yes it patently can be done. You say pinpoint accuracy it's not like they hit some obscure address in downtown Jersey they aimed for and hit the biggest fucking target going. In any case what is your alternative?
b) See my earlier post about puddles. The plane hit what is the largest office in the whole fucking world. The biggest target going. There are dozens of independent witnesses saw the plane fly over the interstate before it hit. Lots of witnesses saw bits of aircraft in the pentagon. If it wasn't a hijack where are the passengers -Celebrity fucking love island?
It's offensive. Go spend some time looking for these people on the internet and their lives and all the people that miss them now.
c) Because they are rich and owned the Bush government. It's an entirely different point from the conspiracy fantasy. This is what annoys me most. Because people come up with the bullshit crap about fake planes and planned explosions then it makes it really easy for the Bush empire to skip past all the real shit because they can lump it all together.
Stupid fuck talk of missiles hitting the Pentagon or people blowing up the towers after planes hitting them has completely let them off the hook on the real stuff like Bin Ladens getting out or all the other mistakes on the day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
faceless
admin
Joined: 25 Apr 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 12:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Nobody's denied Bin Laden's involvement, or that planes hit 2 out of 4 of those buildings (well apart from building 7 and the pentagon, obviously). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seshme
Joined: 02 May 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| taiwan4lee wrote: | what a coincidence the same bloke that argues castro/cuba is an oppressed example of how a nation ought not to be, and then naively believes that a structure that has damage 2/3's of the way up can crush the remaining undamaged part of the structure into dust. "seshme" please take the time to school me on asymmetrical damage to the symmetrical collapses of buildings, not once but thrice in one day, go on then get your calculator out.
"Anyone who doesn't take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either."
Albert Einstein |
I posted a link to all you need to know.
I'm guessing you are like me and don't have a flying fuck of an idea how to build a 110 story building. I actually went to the top of the World Trade Centre once and felt it sway in the wind. It would move 20 feet in the wind an odd feeling at first.
The thing that amazes me is that when there is a plane crash in any Western country they bring in air crash experts. These guys have dozens of years of training, background and study of aircraft, structural engineering, metallurgy, physics and ballistics and they come back with reason for the crash.
Fucking amazing because according to you guys that's a big fucking fat waste of time and money and effort. All you really need is a couple of teenagers with access to Google and they'll tell you what happened every time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seshme
Joined: 02 May 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 12:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| faceless wrote: | Did you not read that post earlier? Or have you spent the evening wondering about the simple logic of it and then fought against it to get to this point?
You say you work on facts, so you must saying that my theory has no basis in logic. If you could explain how it is illogical I'd appreciate your input. |
Dude this isn't personal, one of my best pals is an American conspiracy theorist but its just plain wrong.
If you want to talk about logic tell me what the alternative scenario is.
Even in all the 'authoritative female voice' shows I've never heard it and I think that's because it would be some funny shit...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seshme
Joined: 02 May 2008
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taiwan4lee
Joined: 07 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 1:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
"It would move 20 feet in the wind an odd feeling at first." yet 3 buildings telescoped down in one day.
"The thing that amazes me is that when there is a plane crash in any Western country they bring in air crash experts. These guys have dozens of years of training, background and study of aircraft, structural engineering, metallurgy, physics and ballistics and they come back with reason for the crash."
who or what are you speaking about, are you referring to the expedition of all the steel of the towers sent to asia weeks after the in depth investigation of these experts?
faceless, bin laden is not wanted for 911 for a simple reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seshme
Joined: 02 May 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 1:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| faceless wrote: | | Nobody's denied Bin Laden's involvement, or that planes hit 2 out of 4 of those buildings (well apart from building 7 and the pentagon, obviously). |
I'm not even going that far. I don't know about Bin Laden's involvement. I'm just saying there was no controlled demolition or rocket at the Pentagon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seshme
Joined: 02 May 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 1:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| taiwan4lee wrote: | "It would move 20 feet in the wind an odd feeling at first." yet 3 buildings telescoped down in one day.
"The thing that amazes me is that when there is a plane crash in any Western country they bring in air crash experts. These guys have dozens of years of training, background and study of aircraft, structural engineering, metallurgy, physics and ballistics and they come back with reason for the crash."
who or what are you speaking about, are you referring to the expedition of all the steel of the towers sent to asia weeks after the in depth investigation of these experts?
faceless, bin laden is not wanted for 911 for a simple reason. |
Most of these buildings were air.
The steel structure was weakened by fire and collapsed. Personally I and everyone else who knew nothing about structural engineering up until 2001 were amazed we could even build stuff that high. I just don't understand the big fucking problem with it falling down.
Personally I think the terrorists would have been surprised but delighted that they fell down but why was that the significant aspect? Why does that make it a success? Say neither had fallen down (BTW they acted together so when one went the other was bound to). Would it have been insignificant? What difference does it make? They would have had to have been demolished in any case.
All 9-11 conspiracy theories are completely senseless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
faceless
admin
Joined: 25 Apr 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 1:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| seshme wrote: | | All 9-11 conspiracy theories are completely senseless. |
And you're a cunt who is scared to think anything other. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taiwan4lee
Joined: 07 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 1:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
"I just don't understand the big fucking problem with it falling down."
there in lies your problem, it's not that they fell, it's how they fell. and dismissing people that have questions about an extremely dodgy event as "senseless conspiracy" nuts is a failure of your ability to think laterally.
when you want to venture into specifics i'll gladly have a go. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taiwan4lee
Joined: 07 Mar 2008
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taiwan4lee
Joined: 07 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 3:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
sorry seshme, i sent the wrong link, here ya are
http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=YJnwfkrMpdc&feature=related
"Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism - how passionately I hate them!"
Albert Einstein |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brown Sauce
Joined: 07 Jan 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
how is it that every exponent of the official story, when faced with any sort of question or alternative thought always will resort to insult?
edit :-
Cessna 172 cockpit
and
Boeing 757 cockpit
so someone who couldn't be trusted to fly the top, after a couple of hours on his pc could bring off a stunt that pilots with decades of experience with the second, in the second, would have to have had several tries at.
It don't add up.
nice fur on the seats.
The Project for the New American Century, or PNAC, was founded in 1997. The group's Statement of Principles [PDF]* published September 2000 stated that "some catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor" would advance their policies.
Dov Zakheim is a co-author of the Statement of Principles and an ex-CEO of System Planning Corporation which manufactures equipment to remotely pilot aircraft. Zakheim was appointed as Undersecretary of Defense and Comptroller of the Pentagon by President Bush on May 4, 2001.
| Code: | | http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf |
is it too much a jump for someone who believes that a "pilot" who failed in a cessna, yet could fly a 757 in the expert manner described, to give some thought to the above PNAC stuff. Probably. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taiwan4lee
Joined: 07 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
mr brown, i fear we're pissing in the wind. hardened MSM prats gleefully mimic what they watch on tv. all you put forth as an intelligent argument/evidence will be met with
snotty diatribe put forth by an ignorant s choice of network.
"People often say that humans have always eaten animals, as if this is a justification for continuing the practice. According to this logic, we should not try to prevent people from murdering other people, since this has also been done since the earliest of times."
Isaac Bashevis Singer |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
