|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 1 month, 9 days
|
Re: 9/11 Questions [Re: Turn]
#5322933 - 02/21/06 04:07 AM (18 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
All old news that has been debated into oblivion... There are basically two schools of thought:
1) Terrorists attacked the US 2) The US government attacked the US
I am firmly in group 1, but then I am a scientist and a critical thinker that requires proof, or at least realistic evidence, before I will accept something.
There are a lot of people in group 2. There is a lot of conflicting information, therefore a conspiracy must exist.
The main thing that I notice about group 2 is the absolute inability to accept any evidence that goes against the conspiracy theory. They will claim there was no plane. You show them pictures of the plane parts spread all over the area. They will continue to claim there is no plane. You will show them more pictures of plane parts from the site. They will then claim that the plane parts were added later, or some other boneheaded excuse.
Decide for yourself which group you are in, but keep an open mind and think through what is being presented. You will see stuff like, "The pentagon lawn was covered in sand and gravel immediately after the attack to hide something." Of course, if you talk to the people that were there, you will find out that the sand and gravel came later, when the heavy construction equipment was brought in, to provide a solid foundation for the machines to work upon (rather than a soggy, muddy field). For almost every insane conspiracy "inconsistency", there is an honest and simple answer.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
Silversoul
Rhizome
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: 9/11 Questions [Re: Seuss]
#5323793 - 02/21/06 11:59 AM (18 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said: All old news that has been debated into oblivion... There are basically two schools of thought:
1) Terrorists attacked the US 2) The US government attacked the US
3) The US government knowingly allowed the terrorists to attack the US
While I suppose it could just be explained by stupidity, I do believe that #3 is a reasonable school of thought, given the evidence.
--------------------
|
MisterMyco
Myco-fanatic
Registered: 12/08/05
Posts: 636
Last seen: 18 years, 24 days
|
|
Quote:
Paradigm said:
Quote:
Seuss said: All old news that has been debated into oblivion... There are basically two schools of thought:
1) Terrorists attacked the US 2) The US government attacked the US
3) The US government knowingly allowed the terrorists to attack the US
While I suppose it could just be explained by stupidity, I do believe that #3 is a reasonable school of thought, given the evidence.
That really wouldn't be a THIRD explanation, it would just be a further clarification of point number one.
-------------------- "I have never, in all my life, not for one moment, been tempted toward religion of any kind. The fact is that I feel no spiritual void. I have my philosophy of life, which does not include any aspect of the supernatural." Isaac Asimov
|
downforpot
Stranger
Registered: 06/25/01
Posts: 5,715
|
Re: 9/11 Questions [Re: Turn]
#5326501 - 02/21/06 11:25 PM (18 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
This is for all the people that said the Pentagon was hit by a missle.
Here's a website http://911review.com/pm/markup/
-------------------- http://www.myspace.com/4th25 "And I don't care if he was handcuffed Then shot in his head All I know is dead bodies Can't fuck with me again"
|
Annapurna1
liberal pussy
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
|
Re: 9/11 Questions [Re: Turn]
#5326835 - 02/22/06 01:17 AM (18 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
same shit...different asshole...
-------------------- "anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...
|
downforpot
Stranger
Registered: 06/25/01
Posts: 5,715
|
|
You are comparing a systematic extermination of people with a person who's main purpose is to establish security for America with minimal casualties? Yes, same shit, I agree.
-------------------- http://www.myspace.com/4th25 "And I don't care if he was handcuffed Then shot in his head All I know is dead bodies Can't fuck with me again"
|
gluke bastid
Stinky Bum
Registered: 12/20/00
Posts: 3,322
Loc: Charm City
Last seen: 5 years, 5 months
|
|
Quote:
downforpot said: You are comparing a systematic extermination of people with a person who's main purpose is to establish security for America with minimal casualties? Yes, same shit, I agree.
How can you prove that Bush's main purpose is to establish security for America? Because he said so? I mean Hitler said the same thing. He didn't acheive popularity on a platform of "let's gas the jews," but "I'm going to make Germany safe and wealthy again." He appealed to the citizens need for stability and security.
Don't get pissed, I agree that when the left compares Bush to Hitler they are being stupid. Hitler came to your house and killed your family based on ethnicity. That is blatantly evil.
But do you really believe Bush, or any politician, is about to tell Joe Public what their real primary concerns are? What does he have to gain from telling the truth vs. what does he have to gain from lying?
-------------------- Society in every form is a blessing, but government at its best is but a necessary evil - Thomas Paine
|
gluke bastid
Stinky Bum
Registered: 12/20/00
Posts: 3,322
Loc: Charm City
Last seen: 5 years, 5 months
|
|
Quote:
MisterMyco said:
Quote:
Paradigm said:
Quote:
Seuss said: All old news that has been debated into oblivion... There are basically two schools of thought:
1) Terrorists attacked the US 2) The US government attacked the US
3) The US government knowingly allowed the terrorists to attack the US
While I suppose it could just be explained by stupidity, I do believe that #3 is a reasonable school of thought, given the evidence.
That really wouldn't be a THIRD explanation, it would just be a further clarification of point number one.
You don't see a difference between the government not knowing that there was about to be an attack vs. allowing an attack to happen?!?!? What if it had been a nuclear bomb instead of an airplane? Same thing, right?
FDR pulled the same move in WWII, and is the one thing I can't forgive him for. He knew that Japanese were planning an attack, and used Pearl Harbor to whip up a frenzied support of US military involvement in the war. Before Pearl Harbor, Americans were mostly contented to let the war stay in Europe and Asia. Ultimately I'm glad we fought in WWII, but I have to admit it was a dirty trick letting the enemy bomb us first.
I think they pulled it in Vietnam too, isn't there speculation that the attack on the ships off the coast of N. Vietnam was staged?
Anyway, the government will do it everytime. They don't care how many Americans die, just as long as they can get their war underway. The only question is whether or not the war is worth getting underway. Only WWII was in my opinion. But even I won't pretend like it was about defense, it was about domination. It takes a dull mind to actually believe that the current war is about defense.
-------------------- Society in every form is a blessing, but government at its best is but a necessary evil - Thomas Paine
|
Penguarky Tunguin
f n o r d
Registered: 08/08/04
Posts: 17,192
|
|
Quote:
downforpot said: This is for all the people that said the Pentagon was hit by a missle.
Here's a website http://911review.com/pm/markup/
That's one of my favorite pics. "Hey guys, here's a picture of the plane reckage at the pentagon, see see, there it is." And it's a 4 foot section off of any plane in existance.
-------------------- Every mistake, intentional or otherwise, in the above post, is the fault of the reader.
|
Skeptikos
GeneticallyEngineeredBonobo
Registered: 01/15/06
Posts: 145
Loc: Rome, west side
Last seen: 15 years, 4 months
|
|
The U.S. was already involved in WWII against the Japanese before Pearl Harbor. Three items come to mind which I'm sure helped to instill in the Japanese mind that the U.S. was already the enemy: The Flying Tigers, The Lend Lease Act, Embargoes. WWII was BIG business for U.S. Industrialists and the Banking Cartel, it also served to divert the common man's attention away from Roosevelt's failed policies to pull the U.S. out of the Great Depression.
-------------------- Sincerely, Skeptikos
|
downforpot
Stranger
Registered: 06/25/01
Posts: 5,715
|
|
DMT, what the fuck are you talking about.
-------------------- http://www.myspace.com/4th25 "And I don't care if he was handcuffed Then shot in his head All I know is dead bodies Can't fuck with me again"
|
Penguarky Tunguin
f n o r d
Registered: 08/08/04
Posts: 17,192
|
|
What I meant was: You're telling me I'm supposed to believe that an airliner struck the pentagon and all the debris that is left is a tiny bite size piece like that shown in the photo?? Please....I've taken dumps bigger than that.
-------------------- Every mistake, intentional or otherwise, in the above post, is the fault of the reader.
|
exclusive58
illegal alien
Registered: 04/16/04
Posts: 2,146
Last seen: 6 years, 12 days
|
|
Quote:
downforpot said: This is for all the people that said the Pentagon was hit by a missle.
Here's a website http://911review.com/pm/markup/
Hey, that was a very useful read. you probably didn't read it before posting the link (there is still no hard evidence that prove it really was a 757 that crashed in the pentagon), but thanx anyways.
I had already read Popular Mechanic's attempt to debunk the skeptic's claim that 9/11 was an inside job, but I wasn't convinced by it, and that link shows how sloppy and how poorly argumented their article really is. The lack of logical reasoning in there is almost embarassing, how could an engineering magazine not realize that the official explanation is full of contradictions, falacies and misleads? Maybe the reason for that is that there have been connections between the owners of Popular Mechanics and the intelligence agencies and industries that have most benefited from the 9/11/01 attack. http://911review.com/disinfo/press/index.html
This is also a very interesting read, concerning the sudden stupefying fall of the twin towers: Muslims Suspend Laws of Physics
--------------------
|
exclusive58
illegal alien
Registered: 04/16/04
Posts: 2,146
Last seen: 6 years, 12 days
|
Re: 9/11 Questions [Re: Seuss]
#5330530 - 02/23/06 03:03 AM (18 years, 29 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said: All old news that has been debated into oblivion.
That's kind of farfetched, there are so many issues with the official story that it is practically impossible to bring all of them up in this forum. And how can you debate something like the fall of WTC7, the phone calls made at high altitudes, the investigators' lack of access to ground zero, the immediate recycling of the rubbles, etc etc. Its ridiculous.
Quote:
There are basically two schools of thought:
1) Terrorists attacked the US 2) The US government attacked the US
I am firmly in group 1, but then I am a scientist and a critical thinker that requires proof, or at least realistic evidence, before I will accept something.
If you were really scientific about it, keeping an open mind and all, then you would have taken an objective look at both sides, just like I did. And I'm sorry to say, but there is far more and far stronger arguments in favor of the cover-up version than the government's version of the story.
I think in the end, since most people are unable to examine the entirety of the facts for themselves, its a matter of faith.. the most important factor for deciding which side one takes is the question "Do I believe the government could do something against its people for its own interests or not?"
The people who take side number 1 usually have this type of strain of thought:
"I believe in the President, the Flag, and the Statue of Liberty. I believe in the honesty of the FBI and the humility of military men. I believe in the network news anchor-persons, who strive to learn the truth, to know the truth, and to tell the truth to America.
And I believe all Americans are so well educated in the basic physics, they would rise up in fury if someone tried to pull a cheap Hollywood trick on them. "
And then, there's the people who tend to "question authority", who analyze what they're being fed before accepting it as truth, who don't put all their trust in their government. These folks tend to fall under the second category (or the third mentioned by Paradigm).
Quote:
Decide for yourself which group you are in, but keep an open mind and think through what is being presented.
--------------------
Edited by exclusive58 (02/24/06 04:40 AM)
|
downforpot
Stranger
Registered: 06/25/01
Posts: 5,715
|
|
You people will turn anything into a conspiracy if it doesn't suit you. We never landed on the moon, it's the truth.
-------------------- http://www.myspace.com/4th25 "And I don't care if he was handcuffed Then shot in his head All I know is dead bodies Can't fuck with me again"
|
The_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth
Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
|
Re: 9/11 Questions [Re: Turn]
#5332877 - 02/23/06 08:04 PM (18 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
A serious question i have in 9/11 Was how the fuck they found one of the terrorists passports laying conveniently in the rubble if liquid fuel burned carbon steel girders enough to collapse?
|
Turn
Hey Its Free!
Registered: 12/14/04
Posts: 367
Loc: The fabled catbird seat
Last seen: 13 years, 10 months
|
|
And once again what happend to Flight 93, the one that crashed in Philidelphia, in the picture, only one I could find, there is no plane wreckage. Just a hole in the ground with scraps all around it but no engine, cabin, or wings. Does anyone have an explanation of this? If not it shows there is something wrong with the official story.
|
downforpot
Stranger
Registered: 06/25/01
Posts: 5,715
|
Re: 9/11 Questions [Re: Turn]
#5333628 - 02/23/06 11:06 PM (18 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Unless you people design airplanes for a living, blow up buildings, or are actually trained experts in the areas that you are discussing, you are just making uneducated guesses.
-------------------- http://www.myspace.com/4th25 "And I don't care if he was handcuffed Then shot in his head All I know is dead bodies Can't fuck with me again"
|
exclusive58
illegal alien
Registered: 04/16/04
Posts: 2,146
Last seen: 6 years, 12 days
|
|
Another interesting question: How the fuck is it possible that they only found one of the eight black boxes that the planes should have left behind??
--------------------
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 1 month, 9 days
|
|
> And once again what happend to Flight 93, the one that crashed in Philidelphia, in the picture, only one I could find, there is no plane wreckage.
There was, it was just too small to see in pictures... part of a finger here, a bit of a tooth there, part of a screw over here, a bit of rubber from a tire, there, etc.
Remember, a plane is not built like a car... if it were, it would be too heavy o get off the ground. A plane is built to be light, not strong. A plane is constructed from aluminum, magnesium, and plastic for the most part, with very little steel. Solid aluminum will oxidize with heat into a gas, as will magnesium. Toss an empty aluminum soda can into a hot fire and try to find the can later when the fire goes out... you won't be able to locate it any more than you can find the plane in the picture. Trust me, it wasn't terrorists that snuck to your camp fire and snagged the soda can out of the fire.
The velocity at which the plane struck also had a large impact in the debris. When a crash happens at extreme velocity, rather than a few big parts spread out over a little area, you get lots of little parts spread out over a huge area. Think of a bowling ball striking a concrete floor. If the ball is going slow, it will split into a few fragments that are all close together. If the ball is going extremely fast, it will turn into powder with a few small fragments that will spray out over a large area.
Again, there was a lot of wreckage from the crash, but it was small and spread over a large area. The photos you see were taken from a distance and lack the resolution needed to identify the small parts. The bulk of the plane vaporized, literally, when it struck the ground, both from the kinetic energy of the crash and from the burning jet fuel.
> How the fuck is it possible that they only found one of the eight black boxes that the planes should have left behind??
Again, you have to appreciate the energy released from these 'accidents'. The towers going down released the as much energy as a small nuclear bomb detonating. There is a lot of potential energy in a skyscraper. The black boxes are good, but they aren't that good. I don't know which box they found, but I would expect it to be one from the Pentagon crash site first, followed by flight 93 second, and the towers the least likely of all.
When thinking about the black boxes, ask yourself why have two boxes on each plane if the boxes are so great that they always survive a crash and are easy to locate. Do a search and look at how many other crashes there have been that the boxes were not found. It isn't that uncommon for the black boxes to be lost, or damaged beyond use in a crash.
The only two conspiracies from 9/11 that I can believe might be true are:
1) Flight 93 was shot down 2) Tower 7 was pulled down
If Tower 7 was indeed pulled down, I suspect it was pulled down for safety and is being kept quite for insurance reasons, not because of some US/terrorists/Bush/neocon plot to take over the world.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
|