Actually no, frame rate was too slow and the plane moving too fast to capture that kind of image.
Well whos fault is that, the pentagon or mine?
Or noone's? Maybe the terrorists that piloted an airliner at 300+mph hour in front of the security camera's range of sight? You asked a question, I answered. Your plane looks like it's at runway speed or something. That's all. Don't get offended, you did ask.
Ummmm, actually is that landing gear I see??? Is the image taken from a plane just taking off/landing/taxing?
Actually no, frame rate was too slow and the plane moving too fast to capture that kind of image.
Well whos fault is that, the pentagon or mine?
Or noone's? Maybe the terrorists that piloted an airliner at 300+mph hour in front of the security camera's range of sight? You asked a question, I answered. Your plane looks like it's at runway speed or something. That's all. Don't get offended, you did ask.
Ummmm, actually is that landing gear I see??? Is the image taken from a plane just taking off/landing/taxing?
Well some guy just got a picture of the airplane and put it into the frames. He's not trying to fool anyone, he's just saying maybe this is what it might look like if the Pentagon had the balls to release the tapes.
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
And this guy, did he mention the status of the plane that he lifted his image from? Because I'm pretty darn sure I'm seeing landing gear. Would you happen to know? Because it says a whole hell of alot about the guys perspective.
Originally posted by lardmouth And this guy, did he mention the status of the plane that he lifted his image from? Because I'm pretty darn sure I'm seeing landing gear. Would you happen to know? Because it says a whole hell of alot about the guys perspective.
I'm not sure what his perspective would be if the landing gear was down (yes I think I see landing gear too). I think he only got the first matching aircraft that was pictured from a side view, and if you get pictures of a plane's side view then odds are it's a landed plane because if He got a plane without landing gear then it would be flying and he would have the wrong view (we would probably see too much of the bottom of the plane).
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
" He's not trying to fool anyone, he's just saying maybe this is what it might look like if the Pentagon had the balls to release the tapes."
I don't buy that as his original intent. How could he possibly say "this is what it might look like?" "Might?" The simulated speed in that image doesn't even come close to the 300+mph. He can't think this could even remotely resembles how the real image would look. It's a cheap, tasteless...no, scratch that...ghoulish gimmick. I bet he thought he was real clever. If he really wanted to see what it "might look like" maybe he should have sped it up 5, 6, whatever, times till is actually was at the proper flight speed. Then, I'd buy his explanation. But this, it's just disgusting. Real people died at the site, and it does neither side of this debate any good to introduce sick gimmicks like that.
Originally posted by lardmouth " He's not trying to fool anyone, he's just saying maybe this is what it might look like if the Pentagon had the balls to release the tapes." But this, it's just disgusting. Real people died at the site, and it does neither side of this debate any good to introduce sick gimmicks like that.
Lard I really appreciate from your posts how strongly you feel about this topic. But your sounding like some front man for the Whitehouse, not in what your saying but the way you say it.
"Real people died at the site, and it does neither side of this debate any good to introduce sick gimmicks like that."
I mean cmon man. No one is trying to say this is anything other than what people would "like to see" in order to add some more clarity thats all.
It doesnt denegrate the lives of the people on the plane, its not a "sick gimmick" in any way more than the artists impressions from the Zacharius Musawhei trial are a "sick gimmick". Its one persons interpretation of what we might have seen if the situation had been different. Its the kind of thing that if the real video looked like this then it would basically shut everyone up. Hell I would have thought from your perspective this is exactly what you would like the real video to look like coz then you wouldnt have to spend so much time here telling us how the Government is 100% trustworthy.
Its a really old chesnut to staunch a debate when you start pulling out lines like "the lives of the people involved". Well unless your related to one of them pretty closely Id say the integrity of the "lives of the people involved" is a matter for their families.
I for one think their families deserve the right to know what actually happened and staunching debate is not the way to achieve that. Their families deserve to have every avenue of enquiry exhausted. Every so called fact scrutinised and every possible explanation investigated. Not to have people from any branch of the Government or anyone who claims to support the Government saying "we have decided that the lives of your dead loved ones are best served by all of you shutting the hell up"
Sounds a lot like totalitarianism to me man.
+-+-+-+-+-+ "MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol" http://purepwnage.com -+-+-+-+-+-+ "Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
Originally posted by Razorback Originally posted by lardmouth " He's not trying to fool anyone, he's just saying maybe this is what it might look like if the Pentagon had the balls to release the tapes." But this, it's just disgusting. Real people died at the site, and it does neither side of this debate any good to introduce sick gimmicks like that.
Lard I really appreciate from your posts how strongly you feel about this topic. But your sounding like some front man for the Whitehouse, not in what your saying but the way you say it.
"Real people died at the site, and it does neither side of this debate any good to introduce sick gimmicks like that."
I mean cmon man. No one is trying to say this is anything other than what people would "like to see" in order to add some more clarity thats all.
It doesnt denegrate the lives of the people on the plane, its not a "sick gimmick" in any way more than the artists impressions from the Zacharius Musawhei trial are a "sick gimmick". Its one persons interpretation of what we might have seen if the situation had been different. Its the kind of thing that if the real video looked like this then it would basically shut everyone up. Hell I would have thought from your perspective this is exactly what you would like the real video to look like coz then you wouldnt have to spend so much time here telling us how the Government is 100% trustworthy.
Its a really old chesnut to staunch a debate when you start pulling out lines like "the lives of the people involved". Well unless your related to one of them pretty closely Id say the integrity of the "lives of the people involved" is a matter for their families.
I for one think their families deserve the right to know what actually happened and staunching debate is not the way to achieve that. Their families deserve to have every avenue of enquiry exhausted. Every so called fact scrutinised and every possible explanation investigated. Not to have people from any branch of the Government or anyone who claims to support the Government saying "we have decided that the lives of your dead loved ones are best served by all of you shutting the hell up"
Sounds a lot like totalitarianism to me man.
Bravo Razorback. I was lost for words so I just gave up lol.
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
Lard I really appreciate from your posts how strongly you feel about this topic. But your sounding like some front man for the Whitehouse, not in what your saying but the way you say it.
The frontman comment is way too predictable.
"Real people died at the site, and it does neither side of this debate any good to introduce sick gimmicks like that."
I mean cmon man. No one is trying to say this is anything other than what people would "like to see" in order to add some more clarity thats all.
I'm sorry, I don't buy that Alex or others are seeking more clarity. I am absolutely confident that, if by some miracle the image could be that clear, it'd be written off as some video tampering stunt. After all, we've seen video of the planes striking towers and Bin laden laughing it up about the plan and his 9/11 recruits. Yet, here we are, debating if bombs were planted and/or if Islamic terrorist actually hijacked that plane. Hell, there are people that claim it wasn't a pair of 757's, but a military plane with a bomb on it's underbelly. And that's with the videos we've all seen countless times.
It doesnt denegrate the lives of the people on the plane, its not a "sick gimmick" in any way more than the artists impressions from the Zacharius Musawhei trial are a "sick gimmick". Its one persons interpretation of what we might have seen if the situation had been different. Its the kind of thing that if the real video looked like this then it would basically shut everyone up. Hell I would have thought from your perspective this is exactly what you would like the real video to look like coz then you wouldnt have to spend so much time here telling us how the Government is 100% trustworthy.
See, Zacharius is a real person, sitting in a real court room. He can be observed and sketched. This image was meant to "see what it might look like." Not "what we'd like" to see. The image is not only not in the same ballpark in representing what it might look like, it's on the other side of town from the game. You can eyeball this image and see the velocity isn't even close.
Its a really old chesnut to staunch a debate when you start pulling out lines like "the lives of the people involved". Well unless your related to one of them pretty closely Id say the integrity of the "lives of the people involved" is a matter for their families.
And, it's and old chestnut to throw that out to shut someone down. I won't lose any sleep if people don't believe my sentiment. Nor, do I feel like because I'm their family that I'm devoid of the right to feel a strong sense of empathy, therefore, a strong sense of disgust at this image.
I for one think their families deserve the right to know what actually happened and staunching debate is not the way to achieve that. Their families deserve to have every avenue of enquiry exhausted. Every so called fact scrutinised and every possible explanation investigated. Not to have people from any branch of the Government or anyone who claims to support the Government saying "we have decided that the lives of your dead loved ones are best served by all of you shutting the hell up"
And we'd investigate this matter till the end of mankind. Everyone and their pet theory would want their turn. There is no such thing as an independat inquiry. All it takes is one person to believe there's a conspiracy. Now we got to start all over again. That is until someone else objects because the facts aren't supporting their theory. There would be conspiracy theories about ties the panel members have to jews, big business, governmet. Then we'd want investigate the panel members before we could proceed. Investigate them against every hair brain theory out there. And then, just when the investigation of the panel members was done, "that investigation was a conspiracy, I demand my time, unless you're a toletarian regime!" No, we shouldn't investigate every possible avenue. It's possible that aliens did it. After all, it's possible there are intelligent alien life forms in a universe so big, I suppose. Its possible they're malicious and enjoy tinkering with Earthly events. Stupid sounding, but I suppose if you stretched the word "possible," yeah. Hell, I bet if I googled, I'd find a theory a similar to that.
No, we should investigate the evidence. In this case, it a mountain of evidence. I've challenged, I don't know how many times, to post one Structural engineer and/or Airline crash forensics expert who supports the conspiracy theories. Whom says the official report isn't plausabile. If you can't even name one, why would we waste years and millions on a theory with no hard base of facts. We don't run investigation based of what some guy researched on the internet are through ungualified 'experts.' And, who the heck knows just how many theories are out there.
Sounds a lot like totalitarianism to me man.
To me, it sounds like qualified evidence, engineers, witnesses, etc etc. And, like a common sense and structured approach to the act of investigation.
Lard I really appreciate from your posts how strongly you feel about this topic. But your sounding like some front man for the Whitehouse, not in what your saying but the way you say it.
The frontman comment is way too predictable.
"Real people died at the site, and it does neither side of this debate any good to introduce sick gimmicks like that."
I mean cmon man. No one is trying to say this is anything other than what people would "like to see" in order to add some more clarity thats all.
I'm sorry, I don't buy that Alex or others are seeking more clarity. I am absolutely confident that, if by some miracle the image could be that clear, it'd be written off as some video tampering stunt. After all, we've seen video of the planes striking towers and Bin laden laughing it up about the plan and his 9/11 recruits. Yet, here we are, debating if bombs were planted and/or if Islamic terrorist actually hijacked those planes. Hell, there are people that claim it wasn't a pair of 757's, but a military plane with a bomb on it's underbelly. And that's with the videos we've all seen countless times.
It doesnt denegrate the lives of the people on the plane, its not a "sick gimmick" in any way more than the artists impressions from the Zacharius Musawhei trial are a "sick gimmick". Its one persons interpretation of what we might have seen if the situation had been different. Its the kind of thing that if the real video looked like this then it would basically shut everyone up. Hell I would have thought from your perspective this is exactly what you would like the real video to look like coz then you wouldnt have to spend so much time here telling us how the Government is 100% trustworthy.
See, Zacharius is a real person, sitting in a real court room. He can be observed and sketched. This image was meant to "see what it might look like." Not "what we'd like" to see. The image is not only not in the same ballpark in representing what it might look like, it's on the other side of town from the game. You can eyeball this image and see the velocity isn't even close.
Its a really old chesnut to staunch a debate when you start pulling out lines like "the lives of the people involved". Well unless your related to one of them pretty closely Id say the integrity of the "lives of the people involved" is a matter for their families.
And, it's an old chestnut to throw that out to shut someone down. I won't lose any sleep if people don't believe my sentiment. Nor, do I feel like because I'm not their family that I'm devoid of the right to feel a strong sense of empathy, therefore, a strong sense of disgust at this image.
I for one think their families deserve the right to know what actually happened and staunching debate is not the way to achieve that. Their families deserve to have every avenue of enquiry exhausted. Every so called fact scrutinised and every possible explanation investigated. Not to have people from any branch of the Government or anyone who claims to support the Government saying "we have decided that the lives of your dead loved ones are best served by all of you shutting the hell up"
And we'd investigate this matter till the end of mankind. Everyone and their pet theory would want their turn. There is no such thing as an independat inquiry. All it takes is one person to believe there's a conspiracy. Now we got to start all over again. That is until someone else objects because the facts aren't supporting their theory. There would be conspiracy theories about ties the panel members have to jews, big business, governmet. Then we'd want investigate the panel members before we could proceed. Investigate them against every hair brain theory out there. And then, just when the investigation of the panel members was done, "that investigation was a conspiracy, I demand my time, unless you're a totaltarian regime!" No, we shouldn't investigate every possible avenue. It's possible that aliens did it. After all, it's possible there are intelligent alien life forms in a universe so big, I suppose. Its possible they're malicious and enjoy tinkering with Earthly events. Stupid sounding, but I suppose if you stretched the word "possible," yeah. Hell, I bet if I googled, I'd find a theory a similar to that.
No, we should investigate the evidence. In this case, it a mountain of evidence. I've challenged, I don't know how many times, to post one Structural engineer and/or Airline crash forensics expert who supports the conspiracy theories. Whom says the official report isn't plausabile. If you can't even name one, why would we waste years and millions on a theory with no hard base of facts. We don't run investigations based of what some guy researched on the internet or through ungualified 'experts.' And, who the heck knows just how many theories are out there.
Sounds a lot like totalitarianism to me man.
To me, it sounds like qualified evidence, engineers, witnesses, etc etc. And, like a common sense and structured approach to the act of investigation.
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
Originally posted by anarchyart This thread sucks great big hairless goat nads.
And exactly what experience do you have to qualify that statement ?
+-+-+-+-+-+ "MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol" http://purepwnage.com -+-+-+-+-+-+ "Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
Lardmouth, you're dancing along the borderline of hypocrisy. I can deal with that. But it's the way you've damned every other post, called anyone who's not on your boat an idiot (snidely, not directly), constantly challenged every single anti-government statement ever made, and then fallen back on "what's good for the people".
That's a crock. You've clearly got an agenda in this topic, why not just admit it? It amazes me, you've posted probably 50 links, 50 links involving quotes, professional's opinions, theories and explanations of what happened. You get frustrated when no one reads all of those links. Yet here you are, consistenly condemning the people in the video. The people who sat there, who got the best look at what happened, the ones who were at ground zero, the ones who were around the pentagon. But because these direct witnesses aren't scholastically qualified professionals, you're completely willing to disregard their testimony regarding what they saw and heard.
How ridiculous is that? We're supposed to read through your hundreds of pages of links, many of which merely directly attack this theory, witness statements, and other professionals who gave contradicting opinions about what happened, and take all of it wholeheartedly? No, no, that's unacceptable. I will ALWAYS trust the people before the government. The fact you're so willing to write off your own brethren's remarks for what a man in a suit said, 2000 miles away, well, that just goes to show a difference in us write there.
Also, lardmouth, it disgusts me that you would get worked up over that doctored video, and yet you would not condemn the people who made the movie "United 93". Oh, I think I see the difference here. The doctored video showed what the crash to the Pentagon "might" have looked like, and that's unacceptable. Yet United 93 shows what "might" have happened which is.......oh wait, there's a difference somewhere in there. I just can't seem to find it.
I've entered this topic without an agenda, and I believe I'm slowly starting to gain one. The sad thing is, it's not because I have a side I agree with more, but the pro-government side is so full of hypocrites and presumptious asshats, that I'd rather not believe what they say as much. In my eyes, the conspirators are also seeking "the truth", while the patriots just want security, and would rather just believe what is presented to them without questioning it in the least.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
After first 15 pages I gave up, too much flame and stupidity flying around. Anway after reading everything add watching everything, I dont believe that our government MADE 9/11 happen. However I would not be surprised if our government knew about it and didnt stop it from happening.
Same way some still argue that Roosevelt knew about Pearl Harbor and chose to do nothing for the sake of what he though was right.
Was designs of our administration right? I don't know, I think we will have to ask that our grandchildren, because only history can make that judgement.
Originally posted by Cymdai I have to agree with what Razor said as well...
Lardmouth, you're dancing along the borderline of hypocrisy. I can deal with that. But it's the way you've damned every other post, called anyone who's not on your boat an idiot (snidely, not directly), constantly challenged every single anti-government statement ever made, and then fallen back on "what's good for the people".
That's a crock. You've clearly got an agenda in this topic, why not just admit it? It amazes me, you've posted probably 50 links, 50 links involving quotes, professional's opinions, theories and explanations of what happened. You get frustrated when no one reads all of those links. Yet here you are, consistenly condemning the people in the video. The people who sat there, who got the best look at what happened, the ones who were at ground zero, the ones who were around the pentagon. But because these direct witnesses aren't scholastically qualified professionals, you're completely willing to disregard their testimony regarding what they saw and heard.
How ridiculous is that? We're supposed to read through your hundreds of pages of links, many of which merely directly attack this theory, witness statements, and other professionals who gave contradicting opinions about what happened, and take all of it wholeheartedly? No, no, that's unacceptable. I will ALWAYS trust the people before the government. The fact you're so willing to write off your own brethren's remarks for what a man in a suit said, 2000 miles away, well, that just goes to show a difference in us write there.
Also, lardmouth, it disgusts me that you would get worked up over that doctored video, and yet you would not condemn the people who made the movie "United 93". Oh, I think I see the difference here. The doctored video showed what the crash to the Pentagon "might" have looked like, and that's unacceptable. Yet United 93 shows what "might" have happened which is.......oh wait, there's a difference somewhere in there. I just can't seem to find it.
I've entered this topic without an agenda, and I believe I'm slowly starting to gain one. The sad thing is, it's not because I have a side I agree with more, but the pro-government side is so full of hypocrites and presumptious asshats, that I'd rather not believe what they say as much. In my eyes, the conspirators are also seeking "the truth", while the patriots just want security, and would rather just believe what is presented to them without questioning it in the least.
You clearly had an agenda. To single me out for all my links? Hello, the conspiracy theorists have been posting links for how long? How long have they been writing off others as 'brainwashed,' 'frontmen', 'sheep?' Yet again, you chose to single me out. You choose to believe people that were there? Good, because the authors of Loose Change, Alex Jones, and posters on this forum weren't there. So, I guess you discount their information as much as the government man in the suit, right? Wait, you're not lecturing them about who they choose to use to back up their arguements, though. No, you singled me out. Um, I haven't seen flight 93, I can't comment on that. Don't know what that keeps coming up, as If I saw it and gave it a positive review or something.
I don't have to single out those people; it's clear they have an agenda.
As for your links, I singled you out because you posted one link which was a DIRECT response to Loose Change. Hell, it was so biased, the guy even attacks Hunter Thompson in the first few paragraphs. Also, you discredit the testimony of those who were involved in the video presented by loose change, and those people WERE directly at the scene.
It may seem arrogant, but I'll listen to the janitor, the fireman, the guy in the apartment complex a block away from the Twin Towers long before I'll listen to a suit who was hudnreds of miles away, theorizing as to what happened.
Again, I don't have an agenda, I'm only interested in the entirety of the truth. I simply chose to single you out because most of your links are the written/spoken testimony of experts who were nowhere near the crashes, and you take their word for gold, but the people who experienced everything at ground zero don't seem qualified to even express an opinion. At least that's what I gather from your posts.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
What testimonies? Where are all the eyewitness accounts that doesn't support the theory? Pentagon, for instance. Why didn't he qoute a single eyewitness that reported seeing the airliner flying so low, as to knock down light poles. What happened to all those eywitness testimonies. Ok, you believe the testimonies of eyewitness over the 'man in a suit.' Do you believe the testimonies of eyewitness that discredit loose change's theory? Why does loose change also quote people using similies?
And yes, you do have an agenda. It's glaringly obvious with they way you single-mindedly jumped on my case. And in the way you phrase certain things. "The man in a suit. 2000 miles away." Give me a break, the investigations on these sites weren't done by some politician who never showed up. They were done and compiled together, by engineers, aviation proffesionals, etc. Eyewitness testimony. Etc. Etc. Yes, you gave away your bias.
Why has it gotten to the point that American's distrust their government so much? Does anyone in America actually feel like they are overseeing the federal government anymore? Or do you feel the government is in control of you?
Do you feel like you have the power to change anything that goes on in government, or it's just a hopeless cause?
The fact is that the government has been allowed to grow out of control. People in government now make a career out of governing. There are no term limits. No chance for getting people into positions that actually care about doing the business of the people.
We don't have a monetary system that is ours anymore. It's run by the federal reserve. Which isn't federal. It's a commercial bank. With it's own best interests in mind.
Whether 9-11 was a conspiracy or not, it should show everyone what kind of government we have now. One that keeps secrets, lies, and has been involved in enough proven cover ups to cause people to be skeptical of them to the point of paranoia. Just go look at history. Look at he apologies the federal government has made for things it once denied it was doing. Look at the times it's controlled information to manipulate people into allowing it to commit crimes.
The people are just responding to history.
============================= It all seems so stupid It makes me want to give up But why should I give up When it all seems so stupid
It's interesting that the debunking 911 article in Popular Mechanics was written by Ben Chertoff and released into PM in the March 2005 issue. Around the sametime (Feb 15 2005) Ben Chertoffs cousin (Michael Chertoff) gets sworn into the Department of Homeland Security and before that worked in the Bush Administration and helping them with the 9/11 issue. Michael Chertoff
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
lol nice one. The government didn't make a video like that is because, it is impossible to make it flawless. Plane fly that low would have made huge marks on the ground in front of the Pentagon. In fact there was no mark at all on the grass in front of the building.
Then again, they can't raise the plane either, because it would hit higher than the hole on the building. They just can't fit a plane into the video without lots of flaws.
On the other hand, this funny made up video got one thing right, the ratio of the size of the plane and Pentagon.
It was pathetic to see the "REAL Pentagon video" show something 1/5 the size of a 757 with 2 frame per second video, and expect us to believe it was not a missle.
but then again, there are about 30% hardcore followers of the government will buy anything they were told by the government. It doesn't matter what they see in the video, as long as you give a text form or voice form "explaination" in the background, they'll believe everything.
It was pathetic to see the "REAL Pentagon video" show something 1/5 the size of a 757 with 2 frame per second video, and expect us to believe it was not a missle.
You problem with that statement is that you don't seem to take the distance into account.
I'm totally fine with someone not believing in the goverment. I don't do it either. But please be abit more critical with the evidence the conspiracy folks present you with. Threat that "evidence" like you would threat the "evidence" from the goverment.
download or look up a seminar by DR. Griffin Madison. If your not absolutly positive the american governemnt had a big hand in 9/11 after that, id check between your ears
Originally posted by your_nemesis download or look up a seminar by DR. Griffin Madison. If your not absolutly positive the american governemnt had a big hand in 9/11 after that, id check between your ears
I checked between my ears and I didnt find anything.
+-+-+-+-+-+ "MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol" http://purepwnage.com -+-+-+-+-+-+ "Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
Comments
Well whos fault is that, the pentagon or mine?
Or noone's? Maybe the terrorists that piloted an airliner at 300+mph hour in front of the security camera's range of sight? You asked a question, I answered. Your plane looks like it's at runway speed or something. That's all. Don't get offended, you did ask.
Ummmm, actually is that landing gear I see??? Is the image taken from a plane just taking off/landing/taxing?
Well whos fault is that, the pentagon or mine?
Or noone's? Maybe the terrorists that piloted an airliner at 300+mph hour in front of the security camera's range of sight? You asked a question, I answered. Your plane looks like it's at runway speed or something. That's all. Don't get offended, you did ask.
Ummmm, actually is that landing gear I see??? Is the image taken from a plane just taking off/landing/taxing?
Well some guy just got a picture of the airplane and put it into the frames. He's not trying to fool anyone, he's just saying maybe this is what it might look like if the Pentagon had the balls to release the tapes.
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
" He's not trying to fool anyone, he's just saying maybe this is what it might look like if the Pentagon had the balls to release the tapes."
I don't buy that as his original intent. How could he possibly say "this is what it might look like?" "Might?" The simulated speed in that image doesn't even come close to the 300+mph. He can't think this could even remotely resembles how the real image would look. It's a cheap, tasteless...no, scratch that...ghoulish gimmick. I bet he thought he was real clever. If he really wanted to see what it "might look like" maybe he should have sped it up 5, 6, whatever, times till is actually was at the proper flight speed. Then, I'd buy his explanation. But this, it's just disgusting. Real people died at the site, and it does neither side of this debate any good to introduce sick gimmicks like that.
Lard I really appreciate from your posts how strongly you feel about this topic. But your sounding like some front man for the Whitehouse, not in what your saying but the way you say it.
"Real people died at the site, and it does neither side of this debate any good to introduce sick gimmicks like that."
I mean cmon man. No one is trying to say this is anything other than what people would "like to see" in order to add some more clarity thats all.
It doesnt denegrate the lives of the people on the plane, its not a "sick gimmick" in any way more than the artists impressions from the Zacharius Musawhei trial are a "sick gimmick". Its one persons interpretation of what we might have seen if the situation had been different. Its the kind of thing that if the real video looked like this then it would basically shut everyone up. Hell I would have thought from your perspective this is exactly what you would like the real video to look like coz then you wouldnt have to spend so much time here telling us how the Government is 100% trustworthy.
Its a really old chesnut to staunch a debate when you start pulling out lines like "the lives of the people involved". Well unless your related to one of them pretty closely Id say the integrity of the "lives of the people involved" is a matter for their families.
I for one think their families deserve the right to know what actually happened and staunching debate is not the way to achieve that. Their families deserve to have every avenue of enquiry exhausted. Every so called fact scrutinised and every possible explanation investigated. Not to have people from any branch of the Government or anyone who claims to support the Government saying "we have decided that the lives of your dead loved ones are best served by all of you shutting the hell up"
Sounds a lot like totalitarianism to me man.
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
Lard I really appreciate from your posts how strongly you feel about this topic. But your sounding like some front man for the Whitehouse, not in what your saying but the way you say it.
"Real people died at the site, and it does neither side of this debate any good to introduce sick gimmicks like that."
I mean cmon man. No one is trying to say this is anything other than what people would "like to see" in order to add some more clarity thats all.
It doesnt denegrate the lives of the people on the plane, its not a "sick gimmick" in any way more than the artists impressions from the Zacharius Musawhei trial are a "sick gimmick". Its one persons interpretation of what we might have seen if the situation had been different. Its the kind of thing that if the real video looked like this then it would basically shut everyone up. Hell I would have thought from your perspective this is exactly what you would like the real video to look like coz then you wouldnt have to spend so much time here telling us how the Government is 100% trustworthy.
Its a really old chesnut to staunch a debate when you start pulling out lines like "the lives of the people involved". Well unless your related to one of them pretty closely Id say the integrity of the "lives of the people involved" is a matter for their families.
I for one think their families deserve the right to know what actually happened and staunching debate is not the way to achieve that. Their families deserve to have every avenue of enquiry exhausted. Every so called fact scrutinised and every possible explanation investigated. Not to have people from any branch of the Government or anyone who claims to support the Government saying "we have decided that the lives of your dead loved ones are best served by all of you shutting the hell up"
Sounds a lot like totalitarianism to me man.
Bravo Razorback. I was lost for words so I just gave up lol.
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
I specially liked their parts on the white smoke and the squibs.
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
And exactly what experience do you have to qualify that statement ?
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon
Lardmouth, you're dancing along the borderline of hypocrisy. I can deal with that. But it's the way you've damned every other post, called anyone who's not on your boat an idiot (snidely, not directly), constantly challenged every single anti-government statement ever made, and then fallen back on "what's good for the people".
That's a crock. You've clearly got an agenda in this topic, why not just admit it? It amazes me, you've posted probably 50 links, 50 links involving quotes, professional's opinions, theories and explanations of what happened. You get frustrated when no one reads all of those links. Yet here you are, consistenly condemning the people in the video. The people who sat there, who got the best look at what happened, the ones who were at ground zero, the ones who were around the pentagon. But because these direct witnesses aren't scholastically qualified professionals, you're completely willing to disregard their testimony regarding what they saw and heard.
How ridiculous is that? We're supposed to read through your hundreds of pages of links, many of which merely directly attack this theory, witness statements, and other professionals who gave contradicting opinions about what happened, and take all of it wholeheartedly? No, no, that's unacceptable. I will ALWAYS trust the people before the government. The fact you're so willing to write off your own brethren's remarks for what a man in a suit said, 2000 miles away, well, that just goes to show a difference in us write there.
Also, lardmouth, it disgusts me that you would get worked up over that doctored video, and yet you would not condemn the people who made the movie "United 93". Oh, I think I see the difference here. The doctored video showed what the crash to the Pentagon "might" have looked like, and that's unacceptable. Yet United 93 shows what "might" have happened which is.......oh wait, there's a difference somewhere in there. I just can't seem to find it.
I've entered this topic without an agenda, and I believe I'm slowly starting to gain one. The sad thing is, it's not because I have a side I agree with more, but the pro-government side is so full of hypocrites and presumptious asshats, that I'd rather not believe what they say as much. In my eyes, the conspirators are also seeking "the truth", while the patriots just want security, and would rather just believe what is presented to them without questioning it in the least.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
Same way some still argue that Roosevelt knew about Pearl Harbor and chose to do nothing for the sake of what he though was right.
Was designs of our administration right? I don't know, I think we will have to ask that our grandchildren, because only history can make that judgement.
As for your links, I singled you out because you posted one link which was a DIRECT response to Loose Change. Hell, it was so biased, the guy even attacks Hunter Thompson in the first few paragraphs. Also, you discredit the testimony of those who were involved in the video presented by loose change, and those people WERE directly at the scene.
It may seem arrogant, but I'll listen to the janitor, the fireman, the guy in the apartment complex a block away from the Twin Towers long before I'll listen to a suit who was hudnreds of miles away, theorizing as to what happened.
Again, I don't have an agenda, I'm only interested in the entirety of the truth. I simply chose to single you out because most of your links are the written/spoken testimony of experts who were nowhere near the crashes, and you take their word for gold, but the people who experienced everything at ground zero don't seem qualified to even express an opinion. At least that's what I gather from your posts.
Waiting for something fresh to arrive on the MMO scene...
What testimonies? Where are all the eyewitness accounts that doesn't support the theory? Pentagon, for instance. Why didn't he qoute a single eyewitness that reported seeing the airliner flying so low, as to knock down light poles. What happened to all those eywitness testimonies. Ok, you believe the testimonies of eyewitness over the 'man in a suit.' Do you believe the testimonies of eyewitness that discredit loose change's theory? Why does loose change also quote people using similies?
And yes, you do have an agenda. It's glaringly obvious with they way you single-mindedly jumped on my case. And in the way you phrase certain things. "The man in a suit. 2000 miles away." Give me a break, the investigations on these sites weren't done by some politician who never showed up. They were done and compiled together, by engineers, aviation proffesionals, etc. Eyewitness testimony. Etc. Etc. Yes, you gave away your bias.
=============================
It all seems so stupid
It makes me want to give up
But why should I give up
When it all seems so stupid
=============================
It all seems so stupid
It makes me want to give up
But why should I give up
When it all seems so stupid
Michael Chertoff
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
lol nice one. The government didn't make a video like that is because, it is impossible to make it flawless.
Plane fly that low would have made huge marks on the ground in front of the Pentagon. In fact there was no mark at all on the grass in front of the building.
Then again, they can't raise the plane either, because it would hit higher than the hole on the building.
They just can't fit a plane into the video without lots of flaws.
On the other hand, this funny made up video got one thing right, the ratio of the size of the plane and Pentagon.
It was pathetic to see the "REAL Pentagon video" show something 1/5 the size of a 757 with 2 frame per second video, and expect us to believe it was not a missle.
but then again, there are about 30% hardcore followers of the government will buy anything they were told by the government. It doesn't matter what they see in the video, as long as you give a text form or voice form "explaination" in the background, they'll believe everything.
It was pathetic to see the "REAL Pentagon video" show something 1/5 the size of a 757 with 2 frame per second video, and expect us to believe it was not a missle.
You problem with that statement is that you don't seem to take the distance into account.
I'm totally fine with someone not believing in the goverment. I don't do it either. But please be abit more critical with the evidence the conspiracy folks present you with. Threat that "evidence" like you would threat the "evidence" from the goverment.
+-+-+-+-+-+
"MMOs, for people that like think chatting is like a skill or something, rotflol"
http://purepwnage.com
-+-+-+-+-+-+
"Far away across the field, the tolling of the iron bell, calls the faithful to their knees. To hear the softly spoken magic spell" Pink Floyd-Dark Side of the Moon