Login  | |
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/3/2009 5:10:12 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 726
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cow451
...many observers think that the impact should have left a clear imprint of a 757's profile on the facade, much as the impacts of 767s left their profiles in the Twin Towers. This is not a persuasive argument against the crash of a 757: The physical integrity of the Pentagon attack plane on impact is unknown. It is possible that either or both of the wings was severely damaged by the impacts with the lamp poles, generator, and retaining walls on its final approach. Portions of the wings may have separated prior to impact, changing their impact profiles. [/link]
So your links have basically addressed nothing beyond saying, "we don't know why the evidence doesn't make sense, there could be some unknown reason. But trust us, it happened like we said."
You are the one making extraordinary claims here, I want extraordinary proof. These extraordinary claims of, "Portions of the wings may have separated prior to impact" with the proof being, "It is possible" and "The physical integrity of the Pentagon attack plane on impact is unknown" isn't good enough. "We don't know" isn't proof enough to substantiate your extraordinary claims.
"Portions of the wings may have separated prior to impact"
This is not an extraordinary claim, it's typical for wings to spontaneously fall off of airplanes with no apparent cause. There is no reason to suggest that this should affect the terrorists ability to maneuver the plane in the right direction and into the building afterwords.
quote:
There never was a stand down order issued. That would have been way too incriminating and risky a piece of evidence.
I never said that there was a stand down order, once again, your links have failed to actually address the issues and instead have side stepped them.
Your argument basically amounts to, "well, at least it could have been more obvious. The perpetrators could have admit to their wrongdoings."
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 8/3/2009 5:27:59 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/3/2009 6:13:49 PM
|
|
|
cow451
Posts: 3573
Joined: 5/6/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: cow451
...many observers think that the impact should have left a clear imprint of a 757's profile on the facade, much as the impacts of 767s left their profiles in the Twin Towers. This is not a persuasive argument against the crash of a 757: The physical integrity of the Pentagon attack plane on impact is unknown. It is possible that either or both of the wings was severely damaged by the impacts with the lamp poles, generator, and retaining walls on its final approach. Portions of the wings may have separated prior to impact, changing their impact profiles. [/link]
So your links have basically addressed nothing beyond saying, "we don't know why the evidence doesn't make sense, there could be some unknown reason. But trust us, it happened like we said."
This sight is about the only site that is skeptical of all claims. I trust that approach over blanket acceptance or denial. They don't say "trust us". They just lay out evidence for the scenarios. They do say which scenarios have the greatest evidential support, but clearly don't accept the company line. You might want to look more at the site before you issue your knee-jerk rejection.
_____________________________
I know when there is a trouble, and when there is not a trouble, and you may rest assured that there is a trouble.---- Inspector Jacques Clouseau
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/3/2009 6:54:28 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 726
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cow451
You might want to look more at the site before you issue your knee-jerk rejection.
I think the knee-jerk reaction consists of dismissing those that ask questions as being crazy conspiracy theorists. Kinda like you did when you said
quote:
ORIGINAL: cow451
tacitus, you have to bear in mind how efficient these conspirators are. Just because they can't run the government doesn't mean they can't pull off the most elaborate terrorist conspiracy in history.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/3/2009 8:47:22 PM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 3119
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: tacitus
So how many hundreds, thousands of people are in on this conspiracy? Yet not one of them has leaked a single piece of information to anyone. It should be plainly obvious that Washington can't keep a secret to save its life, let alone keep secret a vast conspiracy that would be the greatest criminal enterprise in American history.
Perhaps people have been trying to leak out information but it never makes it on mainstream media. For example, see
General of all American Intelligence: 911 was a fraud!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daNr_TrBw6E
You do realize that the general is also an advocate of remote viewing as a research tool, right?
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/3/2009 10:38:18 PM
|
|
|
justpassinby
Posts: 785
Joined: 3/16/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
Why did building #7 collapse, at free fall speed with no damage from airplane impact?
I have a son who is a mechanical engineering student. They tell them that there are definitely reasons why the buildings fell with merely the plane impact and that conspiracy theorists are wacko.
However, that being said, I, too, am really bothered by the quote I have above. In addition, the BBC reported the building as fallen when it was in plain view of the background. How did they know? Where they psychic? However, anti-conspirators claim that the background picture were OLD ones that were not in real time. "They" always seem to have an answer and a brush-off as surely as the US government knows that all UFO's are weather balloons or whatever.
Something just does not add up, but I don't say too much otherwise I am considered anti-American or worse. I can still believe what I want in my heart and choose not to be a sheep.
I can understand why people embrace the Illuminati theories. Actually, they are not far-fetched. IMO, the Illuminati is just the world's way of saying the same thing the Bible teaches: Antichrist. I think all true Christians that embrace a futurist view of Revelation are in effect promoting an Illuminati-type theory but just call it the beast's system. Same thing, just different terminology. But I'll just shut up now before the white-coated men drag me away. Instead, let's stand up with Kenny Rodgers and sing (unquestionably) "Proud to be an American". I wonder if our founding father's would even recognize us today? Probably not--- I think most people here now, including those in government are not their offspring, but something from Canaan or whatever.
_____________________________
Link to Genealogy of Christ
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/3/2009 10:51:33 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 726
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: iluvatar
You do realize that the general is also an advocate of remote viewing as a research tool, right?
What does that have to do with this discussion?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/4/2009 6:40:30 AM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 3119
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: iluvatar
You do realize that the general is also an advocate of remote viewing as a research tool, right?
What does that have to do with this discussion?
It's evidence that his may not be the best opinion to rely upon.
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/4/2009 11:18:57 AM
|
|
|
cow451
Posts: 3573
Joined: 5/6/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: cow451
You might want to look more at the site before you issue your knee-jerk rejection.
I think the knee-jerk reaction consists of dismissing those that ask questions as being crazy conspiracy theorists. Kinda like you did when you said
quote:
ORIGINAL: cow451
tacitus, you have to bear in mind how efficient these conspirators are. Just because they can't run the government doesn't mean they can't pull off the most elaborate terrorist conspiracy in history.
I am only dismissing those that come up with ridiculous theories that have no evidence. The 9/11 hijackers and their material supporters were small in number. To pull off the "inside job" would require thousands of people working in secrecy both before and after. Some theories require an explanation as to how the passengers were secretly murdered (since an airliner didn't hit the Pentagon, for example, the plane and passengers would have had to been made to disappear).
_____________________________
I know when there is a trouble, and when there is not a trouble, and you may rest assured that there is a trouble.---- Inspector Jacques Clouseau
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/4/2009 12:55:43 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 726
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: iluvatar
It's evidence that his may not be the best opinion to rely upon.
Sounds Ad - Hom to me.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/4/2009 12:58:10 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 726
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cow451
To pull off the "inside job" would require thousands of people working in secrecy both before and after.
I don't necessarily buy this. It could just require someone at the top making seemingly innocent day to day decisions that were in actually designed to make it easier for the hijackers to get away with it. For instance, it's easy for someone in a high position at the police station to assign cops to one area to help make it easier for a crime to occur somewhere else and to come up with some pretext as to why the cops should be assigned to that specific area. An inside leak on the day that NORAD took place to help the hijackers pick the perfect time, for instance, would not necessarily (and probably would not) require the coordination of thousands of people. All it would take is one person to tell the hijackers on what day the tests were being conducted.
People who claim that conspiracies never happen (despite the fact that they have happened all throughout history and continue to) often use this (false) argument but it's never stopped conspiracies from happening.
quote:
I am only dismissing those that come up with ridiculous theories that have no evidence.
As if what the mainstream media presents is any less ridiculous.
quote:
Some theories require an explanation as to how the passengers were secretly murdered (since an airliner didn't hit the Pentagon, for example, the plane and passengers would have had to been made to disappear).
I am not claiming an airline did or did not hit the pentagon, I don't know, just that there are serious questions that the media overlooks and to me that's upsetting.
quote:
This sight is about the only site that is skeptical of all claims. I trust that approach over blanket acceptance or denial.
Good, then my problem is not with that site, it's with the mainstream media which only presents one side as being definitively true and completely neglecting opposing sides. To me that's the strongest evidence of a coverup. Sure, you may argue that insiders have not come forward but when the mainstream media completely neglects counter arguments and then you ignore anything from youtube and other sources that disagree with the mainstream media then it might very well be that people did come forward but the media ignored it like they ignored all the other difficult to answer questions.
To say that people didn't come forward assumes that people have the means to come forward and if the mainstream media doesn't give them those means and you neglect other sources then, by your very own definition, people didn't come forward regardless of how many people tried to come forward.
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 8/4/2009 1:09:21 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/4/2009 1:21:59 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 726
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
Anywho, this site presents good evidence that an airplane, 757, did hit the pentagon.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1
Again, I'm not saying it did or didn't, not making claims, the main thing I'm upset at is the mainstream media not fully covering various sides of the issue.
Anywho, after reading through the posts it looks like there was wing damage after all. Seems the general was wrong.
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 8/4/2009 1:38:43 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/4/2009 3:39:38 PM
|
|
|
tscoffey
Posts: 46
Joined: 2/7/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
-As jet fuel only burns at around 1200 degrees or less, why was this used as an excuse for the collapse of the buildings, when it takes 3000 degrees to melt steel?
You incorrectly assume that the steel had to melt before the buildings could collapse.
Research this: How much structural integrity does steel lose at 1200 degrees? Was there enough structural integrity left at 1200 degrees to continue holding up the thousands of tons of building above it? If not, what do you suppose is going to happen long before the steel can possibly melt?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/4/2009 5:18:41 PM
|
|
|
SuspenseWriter
Posts: 451
Joined: 2/22/2008
Status: offline
|
My dad is a retired Army bird colonel. A friend of his was working in the Pentagon that morning, and was in the ring that was hit. I've met the man; he was horribly burned, but survived. He told me whenever he hears some "it's all just a cover-up story" from some nutcase, he just rolls his eyes. "Do I look like I'm covering something up?" he asks them. That's usually enough to get the person to shut their trap.
_____________________________
John Robinson
writer of suspense
Coming soon: Heading Home (Sheaf House Publishing, August 2010), and Relentless--A Mac Ryan Novel (Narrow Road Publishing, Spring 2011)
http://www.johnrobinsonbooks.com
http://www.johnrobinsonbooks.com/blog.htm
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/4/2009 5:55:25 PM
|
|
|
lhtytlp
Posts: 418
Joined: 6/6/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
Anywho, this site presents good evidence that an airplane, 757, did hit the pentagon.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1
This is a wonderful website, I feel like I just went through a lecture, learning the structure of Boeing 757. 
I believe the power of Propaganda, it happended during WWII from both German and the Allies. Personally, this whole 911 is one of the biggest conspiracies in the world history!
_____________________________
The Lord is my strength and song ....... I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the LORD.
Talk no more so exceeding proudly; let not arrogancy come out of your mouth: for the LORD is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/4/2009 6:17:55 PM
|
|
|
lhtytlp
Posts: 418
Joined: 6/6/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cow451
quote:
ORIGINAL: lhtytlp
I believe the power of Propaganda, it happended during WWII from both German and the Allies. Personally, this whole 911 is one of the biggest conspiracies in the world history!
Please tell us which conspiracy theory you support.
I don't want to be off the thread, however, the power of propaganda, being through writings or photographs could re-write the history!
I once read some articles about the Holocaust during the WWII, just to response to your question, you're free to log on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMGbZswSz_w
Again, I don't want to get into another topic. God bless you!
_____________________________
The Lord is my strength and song ....... I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the LORD.
Talk no more so exceeding proudly; let not arrogancy come out of your mouth: for the LORD is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/4/2009 6:21:43 PM
|
|
|
cornergas
Posts: 369
Joined: 7/28/2009
Status: offline
|
Found a very informative website which has an abundance of professional testimony and evaluation, as well as people that were there. It is zero.investigation.into.911.AVI ..Sure answers a lot of questions especially when commercian pilots are interviewed etc..Give it a peek!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/4/2009 6:59:52 PM
|
|
|
cow451
Posts: 3573
Joined: 5/6/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lhtytlp
quote:
ORIGINAL: cow451
quote:
ORIGINAL: lhtytlp
I believe the power of Propaganda, it happended during WWII from both German and the Allies. Personally, this whole 911 is one of the biggest conspiracies in the world history!
Please tell us which conspiracy theory you support.
I don't want to be off the thread, however, the power of propaganda, being through writings or photographs could re-write the history!
I once read some articles about the Holocaust during the WWII, just to response to your question, you're free to log on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMGbZswSz_w
Again, I don't want to get into another topic. God bless you!
I was really interested in which 9/11 conspiracy theory you support.
_____________________________
I know when there is a trouble, and when there is not a trouble, and you may rest assured that there is a trouble.---- Inspector Jacques Clouseau
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/4/2009 8:49:47 PM
|
|
|
lhtytlp
Posts: 418
Joined: 6/6/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
Aluminum/magnesium Alloys
Bettawrekonize, thanks the site you referred. I though this is quite interesting to see the following comments made on the site that may relate to the conspiracy of 9/11:
MINIMUM IGNITION TEMPERATURE: 650 deg C (1202 deg F) (cloud); 760 deg C (1400 deg F) (layer) (aluminum, atomized); 610 deg C (1130 deg F) (cloud); 320-326 deg C (608-619 deg F) (layer) (aluminum, flake); 420 deg C (788 deg F) (aluminum, 6 µm)
MINIMUM CLOUD IGNITION ENERGY: 50 millijoules (mJ) (aluminum, atomized); 10 mJ (aluminum, flake); 13 mJ (aluminum, 6 µm); 28 mJ (aluminum, 17 µm)
MAXIMUM EXPLOSION PRESSURE: 579.2 kPa (84 psi) (aluminum, atomized); 875.7 kPa (127 psi or 8.8 bar) (aluminum, flake); 640 kPa (6.4 bar) (aluminum, 6 µm); 700 kPa (7.0 bar) (aluminum, 17 µm); 540 kPa (5.4 bar) (aluminum, 100 µm)
MAXIMUM RATE OF PRESSURE RISE: Greater than 138000 kPa/sec (greater than 20000 psi/sec or 1380 bar/sec) (aluminum, atomized and flake); 133100 kPa/sec (1331 bar/sec) (aluminum, 6 µm); 62100 kPa/sec (621 bar/sec) (aluminum, 17 µm); 13500 kPa/sec (135 bar/sec) (aluminum, 100 µm) "-------
Unless this was a "finely powdered" or "atomized" Boeing 767-200, I don't afford much credibility to the "burning Al/Mg" theory. Also, I think aircraft are entirely irrelevant in discussions about WTC7, since it was never struck by aircraft.
Again, thanks for the website of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daNr_TrBw6E
The general said in the clip, "The free press is not free press anymore, it's very expensive. The press has been told to say, they have been paid to say...."
Well, the purpose of this thread is not to convince one another about certain topic, however, only to express our view based on our human intelligence and researches!
_____________________________
The Lord is my strength and song ....... I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the LORD.
Talk no more so exceeding proudly; let not arrogancy come out of your mouth: for the LORD is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/4/2009 10:24:30 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 726
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lhtytlp
Again, thanks for the website of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daNr_TrBw6E
The general said in the clip, "The free press is not free press anymore, it's very expensive. The press has been told to say, they have been paid to say...."
While I do believe our mainstream media is generally corrupt I think iluvatar killed the general's credibility in post 29. While I am generally against Ad Homs I read iluvatar's link and did some research on this whole remote viewing thing and came to the conclusion that it looks like a scam to get gullible people to waste their money on junk. No, I didn't know the general is an advocate of remote viewing, didn't even know what that is, but if I ever use him as a reference again I will have to note his association with remote viewing to readers so they can be aware of this. Again, while I am against Ad - Homs I still think something like this is worth noting in this situation.
I even found this wikipedia article on remote viewing.
quote:
Remote viewing was popularized in the 1990s, following the declassification of documents related to the Stargate Project, a 20 million dollar research program sponsored by the U.S. Federal Government to determine any potential military application of psychic phenomena.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_viewing
No wonder the government is in the mess that it's in, it wastes a bunch of money on things like this.
Thanks iluvatar for directing me towards that link.
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 8/4/2009 10:57:47 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/4/2009 11:20:02 PM
|
|
|
cornergas
Posts: 369
Joined: 7/28/2009
Status: offline
|
The official story is 19 arabs, (who could not even get private licenses to fly small cessnas because of their incompetence) directed from a guy in a cave in Afghanistan, were able to enter the country, go to flight school, board jumbo jet planes carrying box cutters, over power the flight crew, then change course and fly these huge aircraft into bldgs. Now that is a conspiracy THEORY! They would not have been able to find New York let alone the twin towers and hit them. The flight crew would not surrender their aircraft to three or four small motley arabs without a big struggle for sure, and yet through all this not one fighter plane came up to take a look? Strange..they have 63 intercepts that year up to Sept 11 where aircraft went off course, but yet on 9/11 you got four jumbo jetliners with transponders turned off and flying all over the sky off course, and not one intercept...hmmmm makes one think..google 9/11 Silverstein insurance claims, for lots of very good information Oh and also PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH.
Know the truth and the truth will set you free
God bless us all
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/5/2009 2:23:15 AM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 3119
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tscoffey
quote:
-As jet fuel only burns at around 1200 degrees or less, why was this used as an excuse for the collapse of the buildings, when it takes 3000 degrees to melt steel?
You incorrectly assume that the steel had to melt before the buildings could collapse.
Research this: How much structural integrity does steel lose at 1200 degrees? Was there enough structural integrity left at 1200 degrees to continue holding up the thousands of tons of building above it? If not, what do you suppose is going to happen long before the steel can possibly melt?
Additionally, at what temperature do all of the contents of the office burn? Remember, there's lots of plastic in there.
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/5/2009 9:52:33 AM
|
|
|
cow451
Posts: 3573
Joined: 5/6/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cornergas
The official story is 19 arabs, (who could not even get private licenses to fly small cessnas because of their incompetence) directed from a guy in a cave in Afghanistan, were able to enter the country, go to flight school, board jumbo jet planes carrying box cutters, over power the flight crew, then change course and fly these huge aircraft into bldgs. Now that is a conspiracy THEORY! They would not have been able to find New York let alone the twin towers and hit them. The flight crew would not surrender their aircraft to three or four small motley arabs without a big struggle for sure, and yet through all this not one fighter plane came up to take a look? Strange..they have 63 intercepts that year up to Sept 11 where aircraft went off course, but yet on 9/11 you got four jumbo jetliners with transponders turned off and flying all over the sky off course, and not one intercept...hmmmm makes one think..google 9/11 Silverstein insurance claims, for lots of very good information Oh and also PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH.
Know the truth and the truth will set you free
God bless us all
Why not look at all the evidence and come up with a believable theory of your own. And share that with us.
_____________________________
I know when there is a trouble, and when there is not a trouble, and you may rest assured that there is a trouble.---- Inspector Jacques Clouseau
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Questions about 9/11 - 8/5/2009 1:54:40 PM
|
|
|
cornergas
Posts: 369
Joined: 7/28/2009
Status: offline
|
Hey cowboy why do u bother posting anything if that is the best you can come up with?
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
