9/11

http//video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2023320890224991194&q=%22loose+change%22+9%2F11


I could have thrown this into the "video discussion" topic already going on, but I thought this deserved it's own space. It's old, I know, but still, the points he raises are valid in some respects. I don't agree with the boms being planted in the towers pre-9/11, but I'm convinced whatever hit the pentagon was NOT a plane.


Edit Also, post where you were when it happened, just curious if anyone was in new york or had anyone die in the attacks, my condolences go out to you.

PPS I was at school in the middle of phys ed, my dad was set to go on that plane that departed from Boston, but he called in sick to work. Pretty amazing.

I was at school when it happened, yea you know from my school you can see the whole skyline of manhattan, nobody knew about anything at our school till you just say black clouds of smoke all over the sky.....


And about the whole discussion things...yes its a consipiracy....no way in hell can a single plane take down a whole 100+ story...

I was catching up on some much needed sleep in spanish class... then the principal mentioned that the "twin towers" were hit and everyone is to go home. I had no clue what the twin towers were but i was happy to get the fuck out of that useless class.... Funny thing is on the way home I saw a guy explaining to a girl that "Everyone thinks its a terrorist attact but its not..." roll

Scurry.

it was right before i went to prealgebra in the 8th grade. didnt even know what the towers were or what they looked like. i just remember my teacher's husband calling twice and each time saying one tower fell. but what i remember most was listening to the radio in art class later that day. good times, good times.

Yeah I was in 8th grade too, and we didn't get to leave early, but how could you not know what the twin towers were??

I was in a class when someone entered the room saying there has been an attack. Our class went down to the library and watched footage from CNN for a few minutes (it was a multicultural class) and then we had to leave for the next class, but I was sure as hell shocked, glued to that TV every second of that time.

I haven't seen this video, but I have seen a shit load and researched it quite a lot and I believe there is/was a cover-up about 9/11. From Firefighters saying they say multiple explosions like a timed demolition, to the fact that they pulled down building 7 when nothing had happened to it, how all the debris, rubble and steel were all removed and the steel was all very quickly recycled.

Not to mention the fact that in over 100 years there has never been a steel frame building collapse due to fire, no matter how bad the fire was and also the fact that even though there were/are video tapes from various different locations in DC of the "plane hitting the Pentagon", within hours, the FBI had confiscated every single one of them and none have been made public.

I've brought these points up before, started threads about them, but I'm always shot down as some kind of left-wing lunatic. These threads never really do well which is a shame, because I think it's a good conversational peice.

As for where I was on 9/11, it was 2pm in Scotland and I was listening to the radio and thought I'd take a nap. Just as I laid down, the 2 guys I was listening to who were usually not serious at all, said that a plane had hit one of the WTC's but I thought they were joking. I put the BBC on and there it was. Speaking of which, the 1st report that the BBC had about the Pentagon incident, was that it was a truck bomb. shrug

Just finished the video. Mind bending stuff. One of those things that make you completely overhaul all of your past thoughts. I don't know what to think now.

[quoteeb8be47a0e="johnjimjones"]Just finished the video. Mind bending stuff. One of those things that make you completely overhaul all of your past thoughts. I don't know what to think now.[/quoteeb8be47a0e]

Whether someone believes there is a conspiracy or not, it's good to see that not everyone is blinded and led by what they are told and/or see or read. It shows that you are open-minded if you can change your outlook or view on certain things, especially about something like this.

I'm pretty liberal so I dunno if that makes me more "prone" to believe it. I mean, c'mon the evidence is overhelming on many on the points.

Some people just can't possibly comprehend that the people in charge would either cover something up about this, or even do anything in the 1st place that would need to be covered up.

It happens all over the world in different governments, so why not this one?

I was in 5th grade when it happened. I had an idea of where the twin towers were, but it didn't really affect me.

As for the consiparcy theory, there is a conspiracy for every single action that has been taken. Some people say that Pearl Harbor was pre-planned to make America involved in WW2. Some say that JFK was assissinated by the CIA because he wasn't a good leader. Some people say that we never landed on the moon. Consipracy for everything these days.

JFK was actually assissnated by the CIA because he wanted to disband the CIA and get rid of it. wink

Just finished the video as well. Strange that the feeling I was filled with was pride for these guys to take the time and determination to figure out what really happened.

Was in first period Chemistry, sophmore year of High School. My teacher left the room to speak with some of his co-workers. He told us what happened.. I remember looking out the window and being absolutely shocked. Later that day, went with my dad to get close and take pictures.. a very eerie feeling was in the air that day.. I sure wont ever forget it.

nice movie they made.. just makes you sit there and go "wow." it sure as hell makes you wonder. some other things that werent mentioned is why there were no more attacks on america since then.. you kept hearing from cnn and fox debating people that another attack could come at all these different times over the years, yet not one other thing has happened. it could be the beefed up security or it could be there was never a threat to begin with. there were two weird things since that though.. the anthrax scare and the shoe bomber.

another thing is how bin laden hasnt been captured. i still find it hard to believe that a guy in his condition right now could not be found. hes supposedly hiding in caves and shit.. nobody ratted him out for millions.. no military personnel could find him.. basically no trace of the guy.. he could be dead right now for all we know.

could you imagine what the fallout of this would be if it were somehow proven true one day? its hard enough to imagine it could have been set up by the us government.. but its just as hard to believe what the public outcry would be against america, bush and the government. can you honestly picture what people would do if they found out their own government is willing to kill anyone at anytime and frame it all? people would be moving out of america left and right.. in all people would be scared shitless and go nuts. that would open the door to every other damn controversy out there.. aliens, landing on the moon, etc.

i hope to hell this is all untrue.. if it is proved in the future im moving to canada. )

They won't make any money from illegal wars, corruption or blind nationalism if they caught Osama Bin Laden. As long as he stays uncaught, then they can use it to fund wars, get people re-elected, make already rich people even richer.

[quoteaa84ecdff9="theysayjump"]They won't make any money from illegal wars, corruption or blind nationalism if they caught Osama Bin Laden. As long as he stays uncaught, then they can use it to fund wars, get people re-elected, make already rich people even richer.[/quoteaa84ecdff9]

they should have mentioned this kinda thing in their video when they were talking about him. i guess they didnt because they simply dont have as solid facts as the other stuff they mentioned, to say why he is still free. or they just plain forgot about this little tidbit. we caught saddam rather quickly and as far as im concerned, he hasnt attacked america like bin laden supossedly did... but after years of searching for what is now a caveman, we still cant find him? this is where the conspiracy theorists come in.. he could be getting tipped off by the government of military searching or he is simply the all-time king at hide and seek. thats how these conspiracy things get started and why it gets so confusing because there are so many questionable events all the time.

it would be nice if a big network company like abc or fox gave a special show on all this. i know they produced one for the moon landing a couple years ago, im sure this one would get some big ratings. its been mentioned a few times in the media, but your average american is completely clueless to all this.. a big advertised show would open eyes.

My brother in Scotland said there was an hour or two documentary that was shown over there about The Truth Behind 9/11 and he said it was really good. Opens your eyes, makes you think etc, just like this video.

If an airplane didn't hit the pentagon, where did the plane full of people go? Doesn't that just disprove that theory?

The plane could be anywhere. It didn't even have to have hijackers on it. It could have been flown somewhere and the people are all still alive. It could have been shot down somewhere remote or over Area51, or Aliens could have stoeled it.

Just because we are told there was a plane full of people which was flown into the Penatgon, doesn't necessarily make it so.

I'm sure that the people who lost loved ones on that flight would beg to differ.

So the loved ones of the people who were supposedly on that flight know that the plane they were on was flown into the Pentagon by terrorists?

How do they know this?

Because they were told so by the government.

I've believed that it's been a conspiracy ever since I saw the video that talked about the pentagon and showed the 5 frames. It really is incredible to think that enough people would be willing organize this, but how can argue against most of this evidence?

[quote3002df8168="theysayjump"]The plane could be anywhere. It didn't even have to have hijackers on it. It could have been flown somewhere and the people are all still alive. It could have been shot down somewhere remote or over Area51, or Aliens could have stoeled it.

Just because we are told there was a plane full of people which was flown into the Penatgon, doesn't necessarily make it so.[/quote3002df8168]

I doubt they would've flown it all the way to area 51, wink I can think of a close by place that they could easily hide the plane. How about the Pacific?

Man, I have so many DVD's on this. One recalls the plane in PA, how it seemed to be shot down as there was wreckage for miles

[quote3388cb9ee9="drummer_kew_03"]I've believed that it's been a conspiracy ever since I saw the video that talked about the pentagon and showed the 5 frames. It really is incredible to think that enough people would be willing organize this, but how can argue against most of this evidence?

[quote3388cb9ee9="theysayjump"]The plane could be anywhere. It didn't even have to have hijackers on it. It could have been flown somewhere and the people are all still alive. It could have been shot down somewhere remote or over Area51, or Aliens could have stoeled it.

Just because we are told there was a plane full of people which was flown into the Penatgon, doesn't necessarily make it so.[/quote3388cb9ee9]

I doubt they would've flown it all the way to area 51, wink I can think of a close by place that they could easily hide the plane. How about the Pacific?[/quote3388cb9ee9]

Yeah that Area51 part was a joke. wink

[quote3388cb9ee9="Airkat"]Man, I have so many DVD's on this. One recalls the plane in PA, how it seemed to be shot down as there was wreckage for miles[/quote3388cb9ee9]

Also there were people reporting low flying, non-passenger planes, as well as the total lack of "plane-age" at the crash site.

wow... I figured that that this movie would be a interesting way to spend a moring )

It is almost laughable, these arguments....

OF COURSE jet fuel brought down the WTC.... There was a great documentay on Discovery channel outlining how jet fuel made the WTC collapse....

Every one of these arguments simply expresses opinions, without using any readily available scientific facts...

I stopped watching half way through. THere are more solid facts in the episode of "Joey" im going to go watch )

Mike

[quote7b1b9739e7="mikedb"]wow... I figured that that this movie would be a interesting way to spend a moring )

It is almost laughable, these arguments....

OF COURSE jet fuel brought down the WTC.... [b7b1b9739e7]There was a great documentay on Discovery channel[/b7b1b9739e7] outlining how jet fuel made the WTC collapse....

Every one of these arguments simply expresses opinions, without using any readily available scientific facts...

I stopped watching half way through. THere are more solid facts in the episode of "Joey" im going to go watch )

Mike[/quote7b1b9739e7]

Sheep. The discovery channel told me so! Did the discovery channel show you how jet fuel could cause there ot be no plane wreckage on the pentagon lawn? How a huge plane could skim so close to the ground? How it's wings would make no impact marks?

Lol, I know. Seriously, I'm skeptical about some of these things too mikedb, but there's no denying things like how the pentagon does not have tell tale marks of a plain hitting it. The author does raise some valid points.

[quote26afbac7e1="Batman"]If an airplane didn't hit the pentagon, where did the plane full of people go? Doesn't that just disprove that theory?[/quote26afbac7e1]

Throughout the whole movie I kept asking myself that question. Just about anything could have happened.

[quotebc26b60451="theysayjump"]They won't make any money from illegal wars, corruption or blind nationalism if they caught Osama Bin Laden. As long as he stays uncaught, then they can use it to fund wars, get people re-elected, make already rich people even richer.[/quotebc26b60451]

Just in case anyone forgot, they [ibc26b60451]did[/ibc26b60451] catch Laden. About four months before the 2004 elections. ?

Hmmm rrrrrright jet fuel can collapse a 100+ story building but but when a building burns for 17 hours it doesnt collapse ( http//www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/18/world/main649824.shtml )

Is jet fuel really that powerful?

[quotee2036f5ee8="ilanbg"][quotee2036f5ee8="theysayjump"]They won't make any money from illegal wars, corruption or blind nationalism if they caught Osama Bin Laden. As long as he stays uncaught, then they can use it to fund wars, get people re-elected, make already rich people even richer.[/quotee2036f5ee8]

Just in case anyone forgot, they [ie2036f5ee8]did[/ie2036f5ee8] catch Laden. About four months before the 2004 elections. ?[/quotee2036f5ee8]

?? Did they? I don't remember that? I know they caught Saddam...

"Bin Laden Captured — Investigators Cite Terror Mastermind’s Addiction to Friendster “It’s not easy living in a cave,” Osama bin Laden explains to U.S. interrogators moments after he’s captured early in 2004. “You might learn to put up with the cold, the bugs, the lumpy bed, but it’s the social life that hurts the most. So you go online for a few hours to keep up with your friends. Where’s the harm in that?” But Friendster, the popular online social networking tool, proves to be OBL’s undoing. Through a series of unlikely relationships — which folks like Michael Moore have long been whining about but which were not quite clear until Friendster graphically demonstrated them — George W. Bush turns out to be connected to bin Laden."

Duhhhh

[quote0f2447e2f8="Th3Great1"]Hmmm rrrrrright jet fuel can collapse a 100+ story building but but when a building burns for 17 hours it doesnt collapse ( http//www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/18/world/main649824.shtml )

Is jet fuel really that powerful?[/quote0f2447e2f8]

[quote0f2447e2f8]
Sheep. The discovery channel told me so! Did the discovery channel show you how jet fuel could cause there ot be no plane wreckage on the pentagon lawn? How a huge plane could skim so close to the ground? How it's wings would make no impact marks?[/quote0f2447e2f8]

Well, it may come down to who you want to believe more... I choose several skilled engineers' expert analysis of hard data, some choose a filmmaker and select individuals making wild guesses and assumptions. I believe what the discovery channel says becasue it makes sense.

In a nutshell, it wasnt so much the fire that weakened the sturcture, but the inpact, whick knocked much of the fire-resistant caoting off of the structure. Whhn that happened, the floors themselves started falling, and without the horizontal stabilization, the building went caput.

The pentagon one seems to hold a wee bit more water, as opposed to the crazy WTC thoery. No matter what anyone sas, though, you cant simply make a full passenger plane disappear. I dont proport to know much about airspace, etc, but I am sure that there are far too many radars watching for it to jsut disappear.

I honestly dont have a problem with people believing this, what is scary is the fact that people bleive this without questioning it. Same case with Michael Moore.

[quote405193ee37="Th3Great1"]"Bin Laden Captured — Investigators Cite Terror Mastermind’s Addiction to Friendster “It’s not easy living in a cave,” Osama bin Laden explains to U.S. interrogators moments after he’s captured early in 2004. “You might learn to put up with the cold, the bugs, the lumpy bed, but it’s the social life that hurts the most. So you go online for a few hours to keep up with your friends. Where’s the harm in that?” But Friendster, the popular online social networking tool, proves to be OBL’s undoing. Through a series of unlikely relationships — which folks like Michael Moore have long been whining about but which were not quite clear until Friendster graphically demonstrated them — George W. Bush turns out to be connected to bin Laden."

Duhhhh[/quote405193ee37]


P

http//www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

Consider it closed ) lol

doubtful.

I think this is all bull there if there was a consiparcy it wasnt as big as they say in the video. This were atc conversations between the hijacked flights, they pressed the wrong button instead of broadcating to passengers the terrorists broadcasted to atc. They had arabic accents. The videos show aircraft hitting the towers which you can see as normal a/c. The second one you can see United logos. The 5 second frame at the pentagon beats me but thats it. People saw the plane coming down. The last plane that crashed in Pennsylvania, there were people that called home and said everything that happened. The plane was put down by the terriorists because the passengers were about to take control. All of the evidence point to a terrorist attack. Our government would never do anything like that.

http/" alt=""/img448.imageshack.us/img="448/3239/nexicashsig17vv.jpg[" alt=""/img41f5675874][=http//imageshack.us][img="41f5675874]http/" alt=""/img448.imageshack.us/img="448/3239/nexicashsig17vv.jpg[" alt=""/img41f5675874][/url]

Just as it is foolish to believe everything the authorities say (sheep), it is also foolish to believe everything that these Alex Jones types say, especially when they mostly state opinions, not hard facts. I know governments do a lot of fucked up stuff and I'm open to conspiracy theories (I like reading them), but I don't buy most of what's in the video.

The first scenes where they say there was a flash and missiles was ridiculous. You can't really tell from that resolution. And I think there's more to it than comparing how long some buildings were on fire, when you consider that the WTC got slammed by a large passenger plane. Did he even mention that? And only a few guys said the second plane didn't look like a passenger plane... I can understand how some people could say that given the stress/panic of the situation, but can't be taken too seriously. More people would've brought it up if it had been true, and it's hard to see anyway given the height/distance.

As for the Pentagon part, he brought up some interesting points that I'd check up on. However, since he BSed so much on the WTC part, I don't know how credible he can be.

I saw the second tower fall from about 1.5 miles north of the WTC site. It was surreal...

[quoted0697b41ba="Th3Great1"]Hmmm rrrrrright jet fuel can collapse a 100+ story building but but when a building burns for 17 hours it doesnt collapse ( http//www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/18/world/main649824.shtml )

Is jet fuel really that powerful?[/quoted0697b41ba]

The heat from burning jet fuel would easily be hot enough to soften steel, probably MUCH hotter than a regular structure fire. A 767 can carry around 24,000 gallons of jet fuel. Let's not mention the initial structural damage that was done upon plane impact, and explosion.

[quote003e10be8a="hehehhehe"]

As for the Pentagon part, he brought up some interesting points that I'd check up on. However, since he BSed so much on the WTC part, I don't know how credible he can be.
[/quote003e10be8a]

The 5 frame clip is real so he was telling the truth about that part and mostly everything else was bull. The stupidest thing if this was a conspiracy would the government let those 9 terrorists live, they would capture them right away not to let it spill. I live in NYC and all that talk of a conspiracy I think is complete nonsence the gov't wouldnt go that far. On the video when he shows that the wtc exploded before the plane was hit that looks photoshoped in. Another thing when he says some guy took a cessena up to test cell phone connection, he says he took the cessna up to 32,000ft im an airplane enthusiast and cessnas cant fly that high unless it was theyre citation jet but I believe he said it was a prop. If you dont believe your government you definitely shouldnt believe this guy.

[quoteac65cabff8="NexiCash"][quoteac65cabff8="hehehhehe"]

As for the Pentagon part, he brought up some interesting points that I'd check up on. However, since he BSed so much on the WTC part, I don't know how credible he can be.
[/quoteac65cabff8]

The 5 frame clip is real so he was telling the truth about that part and mostly everything else was bull. The stupidest thing if this was a conspiracy would the government let those 9 terrorists live, they would capture them right away not to let it spill. I live in NYC and all that talk of a conspiracy I think is complete nonsence the gov't wouldnt go that far. On the video when he shows that the wtc exploded before the plane was hit that looks photoshoped in. Another thing when he says some guy took a cessena up to test cell phone connection, he says he took the cessna up to 32,000ft im an airplane enthusiast and cessnas cant fly that high unless it was theyre citation jet but I believe he said it was a prop. If you dont believe your government you definitely shouldnt believe this guy.[/quoteac65cabff8]

I live in nyc too, whats your point?

Well that was a good laugh for an hour.

[quotecf9fbbbba3="Th3Great1"]

I live in nyc too, whats your point?[/quotecf9fbbbba3]

My point is that Skunk asked where everyone was on 9/11. One more thing I want to bring up. In the video they said that Bin Laden gave a report to some magazine and said they wouldnt not harm inocent women and children, he gave another televised interview before 9/11 where he said "we do not deferentiate between innocent people and those dressed in military uniform everyone is a target in this jihad".

did you ever notice in the video he talks about the "jihad" it has the shittiest quality compared to his other videos....

[quote692163eb8c="Th3Great1"]did you ever notice in the video he talks about the "jihad" it has the shittiest quality compared to his other videos....[/quote692163eb8c]

Which video are you talking about?

For all that don't know jet A fuel is basically diesel fuel just cleaner. At the airport I worked at we could use it in all of our diesel equipment. Second of all this is complete bullshit. Anyone who believes this should wear a tin foil helmet because the government is trying to read your mind. Also, don't go near area 51 there are aliens there. All stupid conspiracies people blindly believe. BTW area 51 was determained to be an aircarft test site. So you can kill that alien theory too.

YEAHHHH!!! was banned for being SkeetBoopTurd btw who was a past scammer.

For a start, you can't judge or comment on something if you don't listen, view, watch or read the entire thing. Just like The White House saying that Fahrenheit 9/11 was all lies and bullshit, even though they hadn't seen it. You can't comment or disrespect something just because you think you know what it's about.

When you look at the planes hitting the WTC's, what happens to the fuel? It burns on the outside of the building, or most of it anyway. So the Jetfuel being the cause of bringing down the buildings doesn't stand true. If you then say that it was down to the fires that it caused inside, then the fact that not one single steel framed building in over 100 years has ever collapsed due to fire. To loosely paraphrase the video "Some buildings have had fires in them for 19 hours at a time, that were made before the WTC's and spread through more floors than the WTC fires did, but yet the WTC collapses after less than an hour, becoming the 1st steel framed buildings in over 100 years to collapse due to fire".

Also the Snopes.com article is laughable in terms of it being a legitimate, trustworthy news source. You can't consider what they say as being the proof that there is/was no conspiracy because all they do is either prove or refute urban legends. I'm sure everyone knows about the JFK conspiracy, so if snopes said that it was Lee Harvey Oswald and not a cover-up would you believe them? Are you going to go snopes.com for all your news stories and to find out if the naughty president was telling the truth?

[quote58ab7683be="mikedb"]OF COURSE jet fuel brought down the WTC....There was a great documentay on Discovery channel outlining how jet fuel made the WTC collapse....[/quote58ab7683be]

[quote58ab7683be="mikedb"][b58ab7683be]In a nutshell, it wasnt so much the fire that weakened the sturcture, but the inpact,[/b58ab7683be] whick knocked much of the fire-resistant caoting off of the structure. Whhn that happened, the floors themselves started falling, and without the horizontal stabilization, the building went caput.[/quote58ab7683be]

You changed your story pretty quickly. Why would the impact knocked much of the fire resistant material off the entire building, up and down from where it hit? And what's this horizontal stabalisation you talk about?

[quote58ab7683be="mikedb"]The pentagon one seems to hold a wee bit more water, as opposed to the crazy WTC thoery. No matter what anyone sas, though, you cant simply make a full passenger plane disappear. I dont proport to know much about airspace, etc, but I am sure that there are far too many radars watching for it to jsut disappear.[/quote58ab7683be]

I wasn't claiming that the plane just disappeared into thin air, but that doesn't mean that the plane couldn't have been diverted or flown somewhere else. How many people would notice a passenger plane being escorted by 2 military planes at 35,000ft in the air? I don't think it would be that difficult to hide.

[quote58ab7683be="hehehhehe"]The first scenes where they say there was a flash and missiles was ridiculous. You can't really tell from that resolution.[/quote58ab7683be]

The missile part I agree. I didn't see shit about any missiles, although I did see a flash in each of the 4 angles that they showed, just before the plane(s) hit.

[quote58ab7683be="hehehhehe"]And I think there's more to it than comparing how long some buildings were on fire, when you consider that the WTC got slammed by a large passenger plane. Did he even mention that?[/quote58ab7683be]

No I don't believe he did. I still fail to see why this should even be an issue, when the governments version or reasons for the WTC collapse was due to the fire. It collapsed because the heat from the fire was so intense that it melted the steel frames. But yet I say again, no steel framed building in over 100 years has ever collapsed due to fire, no matter how bad the fire was or how long it raged for.

lileaves thread shaking headli

I love this thread!

Sorry didn't read a lot of the long drawn out previous posts but since I'm 2 time zones behind NY I was actually getting ready for school so I saw it happen before I even got to school. That day we didn't really have classes but watched TV all day.

I'll break this up into a few sections...

1.) I fail to see what the U.S. government would gain from killing thousands of innocent people and destroying the WTC, a very important building in terms of business. Can anyone enlighten me on this?

2.) In the video he explains how jet fuel alone burning at a maximum temperature of 1,000 degrees Celsius couldn't melt the supporting beams of the WTC, which were made with Titanium (melting point of 1668 degrees Celsius). Thus, jet fuel alone most likely wouldn't be able to cause the collapse of the WTC. For those who say that the impact also contributed, consider that the WTC buildings were constructed to be able to "sway" with the wind because they were such tall buildings that high winds could possibly cause them to collapse (think the Tacoma Narrows disaster). The buildings were able to perform their duty and sway from 1-4 feet in any horizontal direction, depending on the wind speed. When the planes hit it was estimated that the buildings absorbed the impacts swayed about 9 feet, but as you know, they didn't collapse.

3.) How do you explain the small puffs of smoke that echoed down the buildings during the collapse of each, the firefighters' accounts of secondary explosions, the voice recordings of those secondary explosions, and others' accounts of them?

4.) Look closely at the article describing the test with the cell phone-usage in the Cessna. It's clearly written, "Using this formula, we can get a [b77219daec0]best-case estimate for the probability[/b77219daec0] of [getting successful cell phone calls] as summarized in the following table." They didn't take the Cessna up to 32,000 feet, they probably took it up as high as they could before calculating the [b77219daec0]probability[/b77219daec0] of getting cell phone calls through at hbigher altitudes.

[quotec5fae1c5d6="theysayjump"]
[quotec5fae1c5d6="hehehhehe"]The first scenes where they say there was a flash and missiles was ridiculous. You can't really tell from that resolution.[/quotec5fae1c5d6]
The missile part I agree. I didn't see shit about any missiles, although I did see a flash in each of the 4 angles that they showed, just before the plane(s) hit.[/quotec5fae1c5d6]
I wouldn't say I can see the impact point given the resolution. How can he? Can you absolutely say that you see the impact point and be sure that the flash comes before it?

[quotec5fae1c5d6="theysayjump"]
[quotec5fae1c5d6="hehehhehe"]And I think there's more to it than comparing how long some buildings were on fire, when you consider that the WTC got slammed by a large passenger plane. Did he even mention that?[/quotec5fae1c5d6]

No I don't believe he did. I still fail to see why this should even be an issue, when the governments version or reasons for the WTC collapse was due to the fire. It collapsed because the heat from the fire was so intense that it melted the steel frames. But yet I say again, no steel framed building in over 100 years has ever collapsed due to fire, no matter how bad the fire was or how long it raged for.[/quotec5fae1c5d6]
Well, I think it's a huge issue because we're trying to figure out the reason for the fall. The gov't says the towers withstood the initial impact but succombed to the fire. For me the reasons for the collapse would be the combination of heat and the plane impact but wtf do I know about architecture? Nothing. I bet the filmmaker doesn't know much about it either. Read these
http//www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html[]http//www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html and
http//www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html[]http//www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
and let me know what you think. I trust these profs (MIT and BYU) more than this filmmaker, that's for sure, especially since they have expertise and/or cite their sources. They also go into much more detail.

I can't say what definitely happened, I really don't know. However, I wonder who is more gullible. Those that believe the government, or those who believe movies like this (not all films on the matter, but films of this quality and level of credibility)... I mean come on, missiles mounted on that plane? Do you know how many people would have to be involved just to do that and be secretive?

[quote79eb8eb837="Automag389"]1.) I fail to see what the U.S. government would gain from killing thousands of innocent people and destroying the WTC, a very important building in terms of business. Can anyone enlighten me on this?[/quote79eb8eb837]

Think about what happened due to 9/11. The war in Afghanistan to find Bin Laden. All that money that was needed to bomb the shit out of mountains and to remove the Taliban. Sounds like a waste of money to me. Yeah the Taliban was bad, but if they really gave a shit about the Taliban, they would have done something about it long before they had beef with them.

They then spun it around and tried to make everyone think that there was a connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussain, therefore "proving" that there was a need to invade Iraq. How much money has been spent on this war, just to remove a man who hasn't touched a single hair on any Americans head, threatened America or attempted to attack America?

http//nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

And that's just the monetary cost. Is it a coincidence that Halliburton have received nearly $4.5bn worth of DoD contracts in 2003 alone, and the ex-CEO just happens to be the Vice President of the country? Is it fair that only US companies have received contracts for the rebuilding of Iraq? Then there is the oil supply in Iraq. That one speaks for itself.

If the US government (or US governmental factions) were behind 9/11, then they have used it to get their hands on the oil in Iraq, wage an illegal war in Iraq that has so far cost around $227bn and generated fear into it's people. The patroit act is a great example. Make the people scared that terrorists are after them, tell them we have to spy on them so that they can be safe, they can then be more closely monitored and controlled and as long as there isn't another terrorist attack in this country, the people are more than happy to do it. Well at least some of them anyway.

Authorites should always be questioned.

[quote79eb8eb837="hehehhehe"][quote79eb8eb837="theysayjump"]
[quote79eb8eb837="hehehhehe"]The first scenes where they say there was a flash and missiles was ridiculous. You can't really tell from that resolution.[/quote79eb8eb837]
The missile part I agree. I didn't see shit about any missiles, although I did see a flash in each of the 4 angles that they showed, just before the plane(s) hit.[/quote79eb8eb837]
I wouldn't say I can see the impact point given the resolution. How can he? Can you absolutely say that you see the impact point and be sure that the flash comes before it?[/quote79eb8eb837]

No. I'm no aviation expert either, but I would think that if that if there was an explosion from the fuselage that it would be bigger than the explosion shown in the video. I don't see any missiles and I really don't believe that there were missiles. I mean wouldn't it make more sense to fire the missiles sooner than when they supposedly were fired? In this video, there is only a tiny explosion when the fuselage hits the wall. Different plane, but still

http//www.alexisparkinn.com/photogallery/Videos/2005_jet-vs-concrete-wall.wmv

[quote79eb8eb837="hehehhehe"]Read these
http//www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html[]http//www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html and
http//www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html[]http//www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
and let me know what you think. I trust these profs (MIT and BYU) more than this filmmaker, that's for sure, especially since they have expertise and/or cite their sources. They also go into much more detail.

I can't say what definitely happened, I really don't know. However, I wonder who is more gullible. Those that believe the government, or those who believe movies like this (not all films on the matter, but films of this quality and level of credibility)... I mean come on, missiles mounted on that plane? Do you know how many people would have to be involved just to do that and be secretive?[/quote79eb8eb837]

I'll take a look at those links. I can't say what really happened either and like I said, I think the missiles on the WTC plane thing are bullshit. I can say what I believe happened, but I think the only people who know or knew what happened, are the people who flew the planes, and the people who organised it. Whomever they may be. I'm pretty sure that the public will be allowed to hear the truth or see the classified files on JFK's assissination 75 years after it happened which would make it 2038 that we could see them or they be made public. I hope the same thing happens with this.

its all the government....and oil ;)

authorities are like mods.........think about it wink

[quotec36dfe6673="theysayjump"]Also the Snopes.com article is laughable in terms of it being a legitimate, trustworthy news source. You can't consider what they say as being the proof that there is/was no conspiracy because all they do is either prove or refute urban legends. I'm sure everyone knows about the JFK conspiracy, so if snopes said that it was Lee Harvey Oswald and not a cover-up would you believe them? Are you going to go snopes.com for all your news stories and to find out if the naughty president was telling the truth? [/quotec36dfe6673]

The snopes article i simply the only one that put all of the arguments in a nicely formatted matter.... heres another, and you cant doubt the legitimacy of this...

http//paulboutin.weblogger.com/2002/03/14

[quotec36dfe6673][quotec36dfe6673="mikedb"]OF COURSE jet fuel brought down the WTC....There was a great documentay on Discovery channel outlining how jet fuel made the WTC collapse....[/quotec36dfe6673]

[quotec36dfe6673="mikedb"][bc36dfe6673]In a nutshell, it wasnt so much the fire that weakened the sturcture, but the inpact,[/bc36dfe6673] whick knocked much of the fire-resistant caoting off of the structure. Whhn that happened, the floors themselves started falling, and without the horizontal stabilization, the building went caput.[/quotec36dfe6673]

You changed your story pretty quickly. Why would the impact knocked much of the fire resistant material off the entire building, up and down from where it hit? And what's this horizontal stabalisation you talk about?
[/quotec36dfe6673]

This is a very dificult thing to explain, becasue it very visual.. ill give it a try anyways ).

When the plane hit, the impact and subsequent firebomb blew away much of the fire resistant insulaton, epsecially on the floor trusses. Without thermal protection, they slowly bent, and the brackets holding hem to support colombs failed. Once on floor fell, the its kinetic energy started a domino effect, and subsequently, most of the flooring fell down through the tower.

Now heres the hard part to explain. With all of the floors gone, all that was holding up the structure was the vertical support beams. It is understood that a structure with horizontal support can hold MUCH more than one without. So, weakened, the structure collapsed over these ffected floors, and the kinetic energy was enough to keep the collapse going.

[quote906c193a4a="theysayjump"]
I'll take a look at those links. I can't say what really happened either and like I said, I think the missiles on the WTC plane thing are bullshit. I can say what I believe happened, but I think the only people who know or knew what happened, are the people who flew the planes, and the people who organised it. Whomever they may be. I'm pretty sure that the public will be allowed to hear the truth or see the classified files on JFK's assissination 75 years after it happened which would make it 2038 that we could see them or they be made public. I hope the same thing happens with this.[/quote906c193a4a]

I can see that point that the missile on the plane being false, I personally look at the movement of the plane before it hit. A missile couldn't have turned at a 45 degree angle before impact.

However, how about the Pentagon? A plane hitting there is just impossible.

A point just came into my head. Could it be possible that the government made up a extra plane (thus excluding all of these people gone missing) so that they could send a plane/missile look-a-like into a building? There's something to think about. Could there have been no actual Flight 77? There are probably records of people that knew people on that flight, but if not.....well that's my theory.

1. I love you all

2. How big is the video

3. I still love you all

Not sure on the size of the video, but it's an hour long.

[quote8f07ff3738="theysayjump"][quote8f07ff3738="Automag389"]1.) I fail to see what the U.S. government would gain from killing thousands of innocent people and destroying the WTC, a very important building in terms of business. Can anyone enlighten me on this?[/quote8f07ff3738]

Think about what happened due to 9/11. The war in Afghanistan to find Bin Laden. All that money that was needed to bomb the shit out of mountains and to remove the Taliban. Sounds like a waste of money to me. Yeah the Taliban was bad, but if they really gave a shit about the Taliban, they would have done something about it long before they had beef with them.

They then spun it around and tried to make everyone think that there was a connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussain, therefore "proving" that there was a need to invade Iraq. How much money has been spent on this war, just to remove a man who hasn't touched a single hair on any Americans head, threatened America or attempted to attack America?

http//nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

And that's just the monetary cost. Is it a coincidence that Halliburton have received nearly $4.5bn worth of DoD contracts in 2003 alone, and the ex-CEO just happens to be the Vice President of the country? Is it fair that only US companies have received contracts for the rebuilding of Iraq? Then there is the oil supply in Iraq. That one speaks for itself.

If the US government (or US governmental factions) were behind 9/11, then they have used it to get their hands on the oil in Iraq, wage an illegal war in Iraq that has so far cost around $227bn and generated fear into it's people. The patroit act is a great example. Make the people scared that terrorists are after them, tell them we have to spy on them so that they can be safe, they can then be more closely monitored and controlled and as long as there isn't another terrorist attack in this country, the people are more than happy to do it. Well at least some of them anyway.

Authorites should always be questioned.[/quote8f07ff3738]

I thought that Bush used the WMDs theory as an excuse to invade Iraq, not the WTC. He claimed that Hussein had WMD's and would probably use them on the U.S., yet when the U.N. searched they found none.

[quotebdefcd59e1="Automag389"]I thought that Bush used the WMDs theory as an excuse to invade Iraq, not the WTC. He claimed that Hussein had WMD's and would probably use them on the U.S., yet when the U.N. searched they found none.[/quotebdefcd59e1]
He used the WTC as well. There are quotes that prove this, although some neo-cons will deny this.

Free stuff is a conspiracy too. They're rounding up everyone insane enough to actually participate in all these free sites and, when the time is right, they'll STRIKE.

No one is safe...