Saw that a few months ago. With every major event there seems to be a conspiracy. The thing is, the truth always lies somewhere in between. It will be many years before all documention is released to the public. Look how long it took to de-classify all of the Kennedy documentation.
Definately some compelling info there. I really liked the movie type format, I was glued to the screen watching it!
there was a a sight called 911 in plane sight uzzled: basicly it said the George Bush admin. took out the twin towers and pentagon to start the war in Iraq :eek2: :shock: here it is uzzled: let the fur fly http://www.911inplanesite.com/ Guy's ......it's pretty scarry if it's true :shock:
Sooo... So.... in a country where the President of the United States can't fool around with an intern without someone blowing the whistle someone or small group managed to blow the hell out of the PENTAGON and nothing ever made it to the surface of the national media???? Come on...... :TU:
Would there be a fire? How do you know there would be a fire? Common sense tells me that fuel burns, but common sense also tells me to investigate every thing I suspect with the same scrutiny I used to come up with my suspicion These things get all sorts of attention, and it's an interesting mental exercise. then you can see one little bit of info, and it kinda fits with another...and then you're convinced there's something to it. The problem is, you're overlooking other little things like "would there be a fire? How much? Would we see a fire through the dust cloud? How long would a fire last if the sprinlker system worked? Could the sprinkler system extinguish this type of fire? Does the building, being made to a certain code, resist the fire long enough for that fuel to fall through other floors without flame gouting out the windows? How much volume could the twin towers hold of a liquid? How much per floor? How much weight does it take for that liquid and any aircraft wreckage to break through to the floor underneath? Could the bodies be incinerated in this building if the fire didn't do what we like to think a burning building does, and go up like a roman candle? What was the temperature inside the building? Was it hot enough to incinerate human bodies? Was it hot enough to make a senseless mess of the plane wreckage? What does the NTSB say about all this?" Until you ask those hard to answer questions, and you still can't shake your conspiracy theory, it's just an interesting mental exercise coupled with your imagination exploring possibilities you really can only make assumptions about. Question the "proof" of a conspiracy as much as you allow the theory to question the event
As far as the Pentagon goes, do you think that the Pentagon is built the same way a regular old office building is built? During the Cold War, the Pentagon was considered a very high risk target for a nuclear strike. Do you suppose that the US Government might have made the building able to withstand some punishment? Or is it built the same way my parent's house is? Seriously, based on that photograph and nothing else, you can present evidence that an airliner is not in there? What's stronger: the building that houses the military brain trust of the USA, or an airliner? I don't mean to be argumentative, but questioning everything really means questioning *everything*. One photo of something that illustrates what a person assumes isn't proof of anything. Especially on the internet. It's way to easy to photoshop a pic to add, remove, or exaggerate something. I'm not saying that pic is faked, I'm saying it proves zilch
My brother who is a Chicago Fire Fighter, has attended many Homeland Security seminars, including Bio Weapon, bomb, and such. He sent us this reply after we forwarded the link to him..... "All fakes. I was at a seminar with the DC Chief who was in command there and he has pictures of a crane taking tail pieces out of one of the inner courtyards. Just another paranoid jackass who happens to be good with Photoshop." I don't know what to believe, Dana does not buy my brothers explaination uzzled: Beth o No:
I just thought I would share. Sure is a mental excersise. Jet fuel burns, just look at flight 400. I mean a little fuel pump spark blew the whole plane to bits. If you believe that one?? John
"Never attribute to conspiracy what can be explained by sheer stupidity" ...I'll go with poor photography and shoddy science here.
His vocab teacher signs his paychecks? To take this line of reasoning to the extreme, George Bush could easily be making up websites that post fake pics of "proof" that he in fact did orchestrate the 9/11 attacks, thereby allowing people to mistakenly think they have come up with the conclusion he didn't really do it, because the evidence he did do it is so obviously fictitious. The bottom line is: never take conspiracy theory 'proof' as Gospel on the internet. Who makes these websites up? Do they have their own agenda? Or are they just interested in truth?
The government did experiments in the late 60s early 70s where they wanted to test the reinforced concrete used in nuclear power plants against an aircraft strike. They took an old F4 Phanton fighter and put it on a set of dolly wheels so it could follow a track. They ran it into a reinforced concrete wall at 500 mph. They filmed the whole thing on a high speed camera. Here is the link: http://www.big-boys.com/articles/concreteplane.html Anyhow,as you can see in the video the plane traveling at 500 mph basically vaperized when it hit the wall. There was no large pieces at all. The wall was damaged, but not as bad as one would think considering what just hit it. Now, I would be willing to bet that the Pentagon also used some pretty healthy reinforced concrete considering who is housed there. Here is also a scientific study performed by engineers and computer scientists. http://news.uns.purdue.edu/UNS/html4ever/020910.Sozen.Pentagon.html As a matter of fact, here is a page with a whole slew of reports discrediting the conspiracy theorists. http://ourworld-top.cs.com/mikegriffith1/refute.htm I tend to beleive scientists and engineers over crack pot conspiracy theorists who have little knowledge of this kind of stuff and their only motive is their distrust and hatred towards the government.
In an even greater security breach..... Yardley was able to park on the Pentagon lawn & climb to the roof because he says " I've always wanted to be on TV & Alan would never give me a shot" :laugh: :laugh: Beth uzzled: P.S. Is this good enough Alan??? p
So when shown an actual video of what an aircraft does when it hits a wall, basically proving that it vaporises while doing little damage, your response is to ignore it and then make a comment on how well I sleep at night? I sleep fine, since I'm not hopelessly worrying about how our government is doing ridiculously far fetched cover ups for no reason. But thanks for asking. I am pretty willing to bet that the scientists made an attempt to replicate reality as much as possible in the simulated aircraft impact. It would kind of be in their best interest considering it was simulating an aircraft strike into a nuclear power plant. BTW, what was propelling the aircraft down the track, secret government magic?? Just curious, how do you know what an aircraft hitting the Pentagon is supposed to look like? What we perceive in our minds and what happens in reality is often two completely different things. Just because it didn't create a 1000 foot crater like it would have in a Hollywood movie, doesn't mean that it didn't actually happen like it did. The Pentagon was designed to withstand attacks. The World Trade Center was not.
I'm with you Mike! Besides, there were plenty of eye witnesses who saw the plane coming in fast & low, taking out light poles on it's way! All these witnesses, they were all part of the conspiracy too right? Lyndon Johnson had Kennedy assasinated. Man landing on the moon was faked in a film studio. Etc, Etc. Or, Make your own conspiracy theory here. :grin: It's all GW's fault They will be just as credible.
I think that they are backed by the same people who attacked us. Web sites like these are set-up tto make us question our goverment and it doesn't matter who is in office. Two thumbs up to this :TU: :TU: :tend to beleive scientists and engineers over crack pot conspiracy theorists who have little knowledge of this kind of stuff and their only motive is their distrust and hatred towards the government. __________________
I think its OK to question our government, after all...............power currupts Absolute power currupts absolutly Its all about checks and balances, right? & whats the problem with my brother in laws vocabulary? uzzled: D.
Well, like I've been saying, question everything, even the conspiracy itself. Quastion whether or not it was a conspiracy, but use the same line of questioning for any 'proof' the conspiracy theorists might provide. This is why I studiously avoid the JFK thing. I got into it once, and man, do I wish i knew who the guy on the railroad tracks in a police uniform was. But it drove me nuts, so I stopped. I mean, just because something or someone was odd during a notable event, that doesn't eliminate random chance. the guy could have been planning on looting a color TV from a local store or something while the President was in town, and was skedaddling before somebody found out he wasn't a real cop! You never know, it could be unrelated. As far as jet fuel goes, it is supposed to burn...in a jet engine. Sometimes volatility and flashpoint make a strange combination. Science is weird. Things don't always work the way we think they should. How come every tractor/trailer combo that is hauling gasoline that flips over doesn't burn? Even though it spills X number of gallons along the road? Why doesn't THAT turn into a huge fireball in a spectacular explosion? One does that every six months or so in my State (OK, Commonwealth ). Why don't they burn? It's perfectly fine to investigate this Pentagon attack for yourself, but keep an open mind, and by that I do not mean build on your mistrust of an agency or government, if you mistrust one party involved in the theory, mistrust ALL parties- especially whoever came up with it. Everyone has a motive for everything they do, even if it's just idle curiousity
