| HOME - LOST ENDING -> 9/11 | Start A New Topic | Reply |
| Post Info | TOPIC: 9/11 |
| Posted By: Truth Posted On: Apr 29, 2006 Views: 168 | 9/11 Even if you don't agree with the words, the pictures speak for themselves. http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/ View the flash |
| Posted By: Not even close to the truth Posted On: Apr 29, 2006 Views: 167 | RE: 9/11 Another stupid conspiracy theory. A jet hit the building no matter how much you want to pretend otherwise. Get over it already. |
| Posted By: ..... Posted On: Apr 29, 2006 Views: 165 | RE: 9/11 Look at the pictures and explain. |
| Posted By: James Posted On: Apr 29, 2006 Views: 158 | RE: RE: 9/11 Look, I agree with you, something isn't right there. At least the grass should be burnt, or a hole bigger than 20 feet before it colapsed. Some wings or a tail would be an indicator to. Hitting the building at over 500mph and right at the base, yet nobody on the highway was blown off or even saw it. One thing though. Nobody here gives a ****. 90% of these people are kids still in school, or are very happy the government ****s them in the ass. Try somewhere else. |
| Posted By: Posted On: Apr 29, 2006 Views: 127 | RE: 9/11 Oh for god’s sake, here we go again. You idiots need a six week training course just to work your fry machine, yet you think you are an expert at high impact analysis. Some lunatic comes up with a theory and you people, the ones that like to call everyone else sheep, go running to it without a shred of evidence. What you have there are select photos, quotes taken out of context, a convenient disregard for facts and physics, combined with loud music. James, you have yet again showed your ignorance with your false claims of knowledge. You continue to show that you are willing to use any lie to support your fantasy life as an intellectual. Why didn’t anyone see it – Well, over one hundred eye witnesses reported seeing it. They saw it clear enough to easily read the name on the plane and in some cases see people through the windows. Here are a couple of the smaller quotes: "Traffic was at a standstill, so I parked on the shoulder, not far from the scene and ran to the site. Next to me was a cab from D.C., its windshield smashed out by pieces of lampposts. There were pieces of the plane all over the highway, pieces of wing, I think. (...) "There were a lot of people with severe burns, severe contusions, severe lacerations, in shock and emotional distress" – Don Fortunato "I thought something was coming down on me. I know this plane is going to crash. I've never seen a plane like this so low." He said he looked at it and saw American Airline insignia and when it made impact with the Pentagon initially he saw smoke, then flames.” - Asework Hagos - You can go to http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/bart.html#witnes ses and read through the one hundred or so accounts and tell yourself they are all lying. Witnesses saw a missile – False. No witnesses reported seeing a missile, jet fighter, or smaller plane. Some did say they saw a C130 fly over the crash and head away from the Pentagon. The crash site was too small for a 757 – False. The impact hole was over 100 feet long making it very consistent with the 124 foot wingspan hitting it at a 50 degree angle. The jet penetrated the 24” thick (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/dayart/20010913/PentagonDamage.pdf) outside wall and continued into the third ring doing extensive damage. Have you forgotten the first jet crash at the WTC was being reported as a small plane crash before it was known to be a terrorist attack because of the small hole. Also, the Pentagon is not the local WalMart. This wing of the Pentagon just went through renovations with major reinforcements throughout. “In addition to major overhauls of the mechanical and electrical systems, the Wedge One renovation included the fire sprinklers, automatic fire doors, and the steel which saved many lives on the day of the attack. The blast-resistant windows were nearly two inches (5 centimeters) thick. Some of them remain remarkably intact and in place adjacent the point of impact. Some were popped out of their frames by the force of the exploding jet fuel, but they fell without breaking or splintering. Also on the exterior walls, between the steel columns, the renovation crew had placed Kevlar cloth, similar to the material used for bullet-proof vests. This had the effect of holding together building materials so they wouldn't become deadly projectiles in an explosion. “ – ArchitectureWeek.com Here is some good research on the physics of the crash: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html Here are some photos that have not been doctored: http://www.oilempire.us/pentagon-photos.html http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/jpg/P200027-1.jpg http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/jpg/P200028-1.jpg http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/jpg/P200039-1.jpg http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/jpg/P200040-1.jpg Why were no bodies or plane debris recovered - Utter bull****. The first piece of plane wreckage was photographed 10 minutes after the plane hit. Here are several photos of debris: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html The 757 would have had a good 8,000 gallons of Jet A fuel which is pure kerosene. With a flash point of around 120 degrees it would have gone off with a huge bang and created a fire well over the 1220 degree melting point of aluminum. There are accounts of the fire being so hot that the glass was melting and running down the walls. That would mean temps of 2500-3000 degrees, which is hot enough to melt steel. Here are some images of the Flight 93 crash. Where is the wreckage there? Another conspiracy? http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/jpg/P200057-1.jpg http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/jpg/P200058-1.jpg Over 60 bodies were recovered and identified as passengers and crew. A total of 64 onboard and another 125 on the ground were killed. This is what happened to them: http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/jpg/P200045-1.jpg (WARNING: Very graphic. Not for the weak or the people in denial). And here are the people you disrespect every single time you spread these false rumors: http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/jpg/P200336.jpg There are literally hundreds if not thousands of reasons to mistrust the government but this is not one of them. They are far too incompetent to pull off a conspiracy of this magnitude. You all give them far too much credit. A lie can travel halfway round the world while the truth is putting on its shoes. - Charles Haddon Spurgeon Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. - Thomas Jefferson |
| Posted By: kris Posted On: Apr 29, 2006 Views: 125 | RE: 9/11 well there are good arguments to both points, we will never know for sure. I guess it will be debated for a long time but I'm more likely to believe it wasn't a jet impact. good research though |
| Posted By: adam Posted On: Apr 30, 2006 Views: 123 | RE: 9/11 i think it was a plane...but if a plane hits and explodes, shouldnt peices of the siding fly off in crazy directions....you're saying they all stayed there and melted which sounds just as crazy as a missile |
| Posted By: Posted On: Apr 30, 2006 Views: 115 | RE: RE: 9/11 "we will never know for sure" Actually we do know for sure. It is just that some people such as yourself are just too stupid to get it. There are no good arguments against it being a jet unless you call ignoring the mountains of evidence and using doctored photos a good argument. "shouldnt peices of the siding fly off in crazy directions....you're saying they all stayed there and melted which sounds just as crazy as a missile" Simple physics will keep the plane parts from exploding in all different crazy directions. A mass traveling at a high rate of speed will maintain that speed and direction until an opposing force acts on it enough to stop it. The jet would have started breaking up on impact but the pieces would still be moving at hundreds of miles and hour into the building. Crash sites go from the impact forward, not the other way around. Take a water balloon and throw it fast at an angle to the sidewalk and you will see the splash patterns more in the direction the balloon was traveling. This is not to say there was no debris behind the crash site. There was reports of 2" sized pieces of aircraft skin spread out all over the lawn and road. There were also a few 3’ or so pieces of aircraft in front of the building. Most likely they sheared off when the jet clipped a power generator in front of the building. Smaller pieces have less mass and with less mass have less energy. Go grab a clump of dirt and rocks and throw it into a fan. All the big chunks are unaffected but the small bits will blow back. So you have the jet breaking up on entry and continuing forward until it hits enough stuff to stop its forward progress. This pulverized the plane to smaller bits. The fire would have melted a great deal of the wreckage given the high temps but it was not that hot everywhere and there was plenty of plane debris photographed and recovered from inside the building. Parts of the engines, wheels, landing gear, and fuselage have been clearly identified. The building was not in motion so it behaved differently. The plane hit would have sent a shockwave through the impact zone and propelled debris in an outward pattern. The fuel explosion would have created a pressure wave that would blast more debris outward. This is clearly what happened and obvious from this photo - http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/jpg/P200027-1.jpg There is no mystery at the pentagon. Everything that is claimed to have happened is in keeping with the physics and evidence of the crash site and the eye witness accounts at the scene. If you are looking at the real evidence and not seeing this it does not mean there is a cover-up. It just means you don't have the capacity to understand it. “Don’t cloud my argument with facts” will continue to be your motto. |
| Posted By: James Posted On: Apr 30, 2006 Views: 111 | RE: 9/11 God damn, my rants arent that bad... are they? |
| Posted By: Posted On: Apr 30, 2006 Views: 108 | RE: 9/11 Your rants have very little factual content and have at least one misspelled word per sentence. Your rants are usually spreading stupidity instead of correcting it. So, yea your rants are very much worse. Interseting how you avoided the fact that you were shown to be an outright liar. |
| Posted By: Posted On: Apr 30, 2006 Views: 106 | RE: 9/11 ^Interesting |
| Posted By: James Posted On: Apr 30, 2006 Views: 105 | RE: 9/11 I didn't bother to read it. I'll read it latter. It's my birthday tomorrow, see you on the T. |
| Posted By: kris Posted On: Apr 30, 2006 Views: 94 | RE: 9/11 I read it. Reports can be made up, photos and videos doctored. So, that's why I said we will never know for sure. you weren't there... you just googled a bunch of info and gullibly assumed it was true... then told us we're stupid because we don't believe it |
| Posted By: adam Posted On: Apr 30, 2006 Views: 92 | RE: 9/11 i have sand in my eye, but thanks, that really put things into perspective |
| Posted By: Posted On: Apr 30, 2006 Views: 89 | RE: 9/11 "you just googled a bunch of info and gullibly assumed it was true" Wrong again moron. |
| Pages [ 1 2 ] Next Page -> |