the said part is moron's like you are actually allowed to VOTE in real life and not just Polls like these
the said part is moron's like you are actually allowed to VOTE in real life and not just Polls like these
Based on the evidence, no it is not possible.
Radar data showed no "evidence" of a second plane. Several dozen witnesses watched Flight 77 bear down on Washington and tracked it visually all the way into the Pentagon. Pieces of the wreckage are clearly visible on numerous photographs taken minutes after impact. None of the air-to-air missiles used by the US military could have caused that much damage to a heavily reinforced structure like the Pentagon.
Our AIM and Sidewinders carry blast-fragmentation warheads that are designed to do only enough damage to knock a plane from the sky, not disintegrate it in mid-air. It is not even certain that either missile is capable of reliably 'killing' aircraft the size of a commercial passenger liner. Nothing short of a 2,000lb bomb could have caused the damage at the Pentagon and the blast pattern would have been vastly different. A typical air-to-air missile carries a 25lb~80lb warhead.
There was an inferno at the Pentagon immediately on impact. Real life high explosives (e.g. RDX, HMX, PBX, PETN, TNT, etc.) don't explode like the movies. Movie and television sets use large amounts of gasoline and other incendiary compounds to create huge fireballs that are ignited with plain old black powder pyrotechnics. In the real world, high explosives (HE) are typically invisible upon detonation, emitting little more than an instantaneous flash with little heat or flame.
The fireball and resulting inferno at the Pentagon could only be the result of a large amount of fuel. The pattern of scorch in photos of the Pentagon is consistent with an aircraft crash. I could fill a couple pages, and I'm not even an expert, but in short, everything about the Pentagon crime scene points towards an aircraft crash and nothing points to another explanation, except in the empty minds of those who don't know better.
ok in this poll there are about 12% who voted yes or probable, I don't think it's possible the number of completely delusional people is really that high, so I would guess that is more representative of people who
1.blame Bush in some indirect way
2.blame Bush for everything
3.like to be contrary in polls
4.are skeptical to the point of mental illness.
1.blame Bush in some indirect way
2.blame Bush for everything
3.like to be contrary in polls
4.are skeptical to the point of mental illness.
Turkish
Lifer
- May 26, 2003
- 15,547
- 1
- 81
///
High Possibility.
I believe that the Bush Administration would do anything for the Corporate America.
Read these books:
1. "Against Empire" by Michael Parenti
2. "Rule By Secrecy" by Jim Marrs.
3. "Unseen Hand" by Ralph Epperson.
After reading those, research about assasination attempts on these people. Research a bit more.
It's a horrible thing, but Bush will do anything to kiss ass.
Xiety
///
High Possibility.
I believe that the Bush Administration would do anything for the Corporate America.
Read these books:
1. "Against Empire" by Michael Parenti
2. "Rule By Secrecy" by Jim Marrs.
3. "Unseen Hand" by Ralph Epperson.
After reading those, research about assasination attempts on these people. Research a bit more.
It's a horrible thing, but Bush will do anything to kiss ass.
Xiety
///
lol! Yes, please do read "Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History That Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, and the Great Pyramids", in which Marrs proposes...well...it embarrasses me to say and its not even my book.
And when you're finished reading "Rule by Secrecy", please take a look at Jim Marrs' other 'insightful' books, such as "Alien Agenda: The Untold Story of the Extraterrestrials Among Us", in which Marrs proposes UFOs from outer-space are real, alien beings live among us, and the government has been covering it all up for decades.
Oh, and don't forget to don your Aluminum Foil Deflector Beanie.
I've heard Jim Marrs on the radio a few times. The man's not just a few sandwiches shy of a picnic, he forgot the damn basket at home.
Are you saying you believe his other books?
If so, you've got problems only heavy medication can solve. If not, why would you believe something by someone that is so completely full of BS?
No doubt his claims are as true as Ross Perot's when he said Bush Sr. was going to use the CIA (or was it the FBI?) to crash his daughter's wedding.
If the government wanted him dead, he would be dead already. A government that could stage 9/11 would have no problem eliminating a crackpot author.
Turkish
Lifer
- May 26, 2003
- 15,547
- 1
- 81
Originally posted by: ShotgunSteve
No doubt his claims are as true as Ross Perot's when he said Bush Sr. was going to use the CIA (or was it the FBI?) to crash his daughter's wedding.If they were truly going to assassinate him, it would be so that the rest of society didn't have to put up with morons believing the drivel he writes.
If the government wanted him dead, he would be dead already. A government that could stage 9/11 would have no problem eliminating a crackpot author.
Must have been another Noam Chomsky case.
Nap time. Naf Naf.
OMG, people are using the words and opinions of Jim Marrs to help prove their "govt was behind 9/11" theory?
- the "home run" technology link is a bunch of crap - No US Airline has this technology installed in any of their commercial planes
- if you've already 'allowed' the twin towers to be hit, why on earth would you need to 'fake' another impact at the pentagon? The only reason the pentagon crash is even a remote target for this type of idiotic theory is that the whole thing wasn't on live TV like the second plane hitting the WTC.
-someone please list one valid question about this whole thing that hasn't already been disproven
I'm changing my sig to "We did land on the moon", JFK was shot by L.H.Oswald, Alien Autopsy was fake, and 9/11 really did involve 4 planes that were hijacked by foreign (mostly Saudi) terrorists and crashed into the WTC (2), the Pentagon, and a field in PA.....
If you want to say that people in our Govt, perhaps even Bush himself, had some warning of impending attacks, fine, speculate all you want, there is at least some normal and credible discussion to that point....but if your point of view is that GW is the anti-christ, then chances are anything you say isn't going to be objective, accurate, or worth anyone's time.
- the "home run" technology link is a bunch of crap - No US Airline has this technology installed in any of their commercial planes
- if you've already 'allowed' the twin towers to be hit, why on earth would you need to 'fake' another impact at the pentagon? The only reason the pentagon crash is even a remote target for this type of idiotic theory is that the whole thing wasn't on live TV like the second plane hitting the WTC.
-someone please list one valid question about this whole thing that hasn't already been disproven
I'm changing my sig to "We did land on the moon", JFK was shot by L.H.Oswald, Alien Autopsy was fake, and 9/11 really did involve 4 planes that were hijacked by foreign (mostly Saudi) terrorists and crashed into the WTC (2), the Pentagon, and a field in PA.....
If you want to say that people in our Govt, perhaps even Bush himself, had some warning of impending attacks, fine, speculate all you want, there is at least some normal and credible discussion to that point....but if your point of view is that GW is the anti-christ, then chances are anything you say isn't going to be objective, accurate, or worth anyone's time.
Let me clarify something for you, since you've got your "facts" all wrong. First of all, homerun technology *is* installed on all U.S.-built commercial airliners, BY THE MANUFACTURER. This is a fact. Debate it all you like, you're wrong and it's not even worth the time to argue with your ignorant ass.
LOL, you just love the fact that it's my belief your precious George W Bush is the Antichrist, don't you? You mention it every chance you get. I'm sorry that your savior is, in fact, the devil, but no one forces you to worship at the altar of Bush.
Concerning your "objective" comment. Newsflash: NO ONE IS OBJECTIVE!!!!!! If you're a person, you're not objective. If you claim to be, you're full of it. 99% of the stuff you read on these forums is someone's opinion. Get that through your thick skull.
How would I be familiar with "Rule of Secrecy" or "Alien Agenda" if I hadn't already 'gleaned' through Marrs' fiction-fantasy?
I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Marrs believes the government tried to have him assassinated. Its rather characteristic among delusional paranoid-schizophrenics.
I encourage everyone to pick up a copy of anything Marrs has written and read for themselves how much of nutcase he truly is. Me saying he is a nutcase would never quite do his paranoid-delusional fantasies justice.
Say the goverment wanted to fake a terrorist attack what would they use car bomb or air planes? A sufficient bomb in a large truck would have been sufficient to bring down a large office building. Why then would the government use air planes which could have backfired in about 1000 different ways? Over an extremely easy to pull-off car bomb with equal destruction capability. Maybe it wouldn't have had the same impact on America. It would have been enough though. The Penn. crash would have been sufficent to go into Afganistan. Why would a president risk such a conspiracy when it is only going to maybe gain him a couple percentage points in his approval ratings? Do you guys think this was a scheme to increase his chances of winning the next election? Don't you wonder why most conspiracies are extremely far-fetched? It's not a coincidence.
Hmmm..... I am not certain were to go from here.
Before anyone else jumps to any conclusions, I am not saying that what we were told is false. I am only trying to point out that it is possible that what we were told is false.
Let us start with...
While I freely admit that I do not have any idea what so ever of what actually happended at the Pentagon, I would have to ask if you actually trust the evidence, as presented, to be the whole truth? Not to mention that it was not doctored at all?
I went back through this thread, and the P & N poll to find that web link posted earlier, but I can not find it now... Perhaps I am better off for it.
But it is the one with pictures of the Pentagon, and the site just after the incident.Now, if those pictures are true (as well as not doctored themselves), then I do question what we were told about what happend. Not to mention, that all of the information I have been spoonfed as accurate came from the media. (For the record, I do not know what I trust less. The Government, or the Media...)
And as far as eyewitness acounts... I do not trust those terribly far either. There is a demonstration, usually used in criminal law classes - but occasionally elsewhere, where the teacher is "attacked" by an assistant during a lecture. Shortly afterwards, the professor asks the class what they saw. Invariably, they all see the attacker poke (I hate the forbidden word....) the professor with a knife. It turns out what the assistant had was a banana. Combine that with the movie Phonebooth (for those who have seen it, what the prostitutes tell the police they saw) and you get a good idea of what usually happens when a witness sees something. The twist it into what they think they should have seen.
Now that my scepticism is clearly mapped out, I have to reiterate my question.
Do you trust wholeheartedly, and without a doubt what we have been told about the incident?
I do not. I do not know what happened, but personally I would not put it past our current administation to allow it to happen to further their own agendas.
QueBert
Lifer
- Jan 6, 2002
- 23,009
- 1,198
- 126
yes, no I think ANYONE saying ANYONE elses opinion as to what exactly happened is FOOLISH.
I'm not sure what I believe, but I do know I'll never see anything come out regarding even the possiblity that the US was involved. No TV station or newspaper would dare walk that thin line.
Is it possible, of course.
Is it likely, of course not.
I am not beyond at least listening to any story behind this.
The biggest tragedy of the time of my mothers childhood was Pearl Harbor. Did anyone speak out against the goverment, especially the President being behind that? I'm sure they did, and I'm sure they were called nutcases.
A lot of Americans are blind to the possibilities that our goverment could EVER betray us. And on the other end you have the left wing nuts who try to place the blame for everything bad on them.
I am somewhere in the middle.
I don't have children, but when I do and they're my age who knows what information about 9/11 will have surfaced.
only time will tell...
I'm not sure what I believe, but I do know I'll never see anything come out regarding even the possiblity that the US was involved. No TV station or newspaper would dare walk that thin line.
Is it possible, of course.
Is it likely, of course not.
I am not beyond at least listening to any story behind this.
The biggest tragedy of the time of my mothers childhood was Pearl Harbor. Did anyone speak out against the goverment, especially the President being behind that? I'm sure they did, and I'm sure they were called nutcases.
A lot of Americans are blind to the possibilities that our goverment could EVER betray us. And on the other end you have the left wing nuts who try to place the blame for everything bad on them.
I am somewhere in the middle.
I don't have children, but when I do and they're my age who knows what information about 9/11 will have surfaced.
only time will tell...
What you're talking about are minute details and yes most witnesses are not reliable concerning details that might be considered important. Details such as, if a man sets himself on fire, what the gasoline container looked like. But they don't imagine central things that don't happen, such as a man setting himself on fire when actually no one set themselves on fire.
Witnesses can squabble over the aviation numbers on the side of the aircraft, or the commercial carrier's name, the type of aircraft, or if the aircraft's landing gear were deployed, but hundreds of witnesses don't imagine commercial airliners crashing where none did.
Witnesses may even disagree over the angle of the aircraft's descent and its relative position as it flew into the ground, because the angle, heading, and position of an aircraft can be deceptive depending on one's visual perspective. There have been many times I couldn't tell for several seconds what direction an aircraft was traveling relative to me; toward or away. But that is a far cry from suggesting I saw aircraft where none existed.
There is a big difference between flawed recall and a hallucination.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter