Originally posted by Dis_Ordur To Alex and all the rest of you nutjobs:
PWNED
Wow took them so many YEARs to finally completed the computer generated video. And still, the frame per second sux.
Even if it is real. How can you prove it was not a guided missle? Don't you know that the guided missles have wings etc. with a shape of just like a TINY plane?? The hole on the building definately was smaller than the size of the plane's wings. Why the building did not have the damage from the plane's wings? Where were the plane parts?
Can someone please step in and help me combat the ignorance here? It is quite a chore doing it by myself....
Did you watch the fox news one? its on their website. They said this is the "closest they can get to visual evidence". Now while they are saying that they are showing a still clip of a giant flash. Thats it a flash. Maybe you can hook me up to another source that shows it better and explains it better.
EDIT: Oh wait I see what you guys are talking about.
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
Can someone explain to me why the video timestamp is incorrect on the pentagon video? Here's the vid link. You might want to view it quickly, because they're going to change it once they realise the, um well can you say, error?
The timestamp says: September 12 2001 17:37:22 #3 IMPACT
Originally posted by Deva-state Originally posted by xPaladin Ok, well, seeing dogpile topics like this thread gets me pissed off. I'm a native new yorker who lived through 9/11 and support the actions of this country. Most of this paranoid crap is spewed by people who weren't even on site that day and just want to take a piss on the government. And because it's "cool" to be anti-whatever, people jump on crap like this.
Let's get one thing straight: when you support sh*t like this, you are effectively spitting on the corpses of everyone that died that day. You should be damn right ashamed of yourselves.
That said, let's talk counterargument:
That's Just Stupid - This video is a pragmatic approach to 9/11. Kinda biased, but very pragmatic. I like it because they make an excellent point in discussing how conspiracy theories are formulated. This is an effective set up for the next argument:
Remember kiddies, conspiracy whackos prey on the gullible and uninformed. The kind of "uninformed" that you believe everyone else to be.
Hopefully there's enough common sense in the PM article to shut some of you the hell up.
Not saying I agree or disagree with what I just saw. But one thing I do know sir is you are an idiot.
Did you even click the link with the Popular Mechanics article that totally disproves any of these conspiracy nutjobs lies? The saddes thing in all of this is that people like you have access to a computer where your moronic thoughts actually might get read by someone who is new to the internet and actually believes the crap people like you say.
Like I said, it's hard to swallow that I have to entrust people like you to assemble my fast food meals.
A few things I'd like to state about the new release of the Pentagon "video".
1. Have you seen a video camera with 2 frame per second? I said 5, and I was wrong. It is really 2. If you download it, and play it with fraps turn on. It seems the frame dropped just as the video started.
2. a 757 would be a lot larger than appeared in this Pentagon "video". If it was really a 757, why the hole on the building was perfectly round with no sign of the damage from its HUGE wings? If you mean the wings were no match for the building, then shouldn't the wings be found outside the building on the ground? Where were they? If they actually got into the building, then where was the damage on the wall from the wings?
3. A fact, a guilded missle has small wings and shape of a tiny plane, and it strikes with about 30 meters parallel to the ground. It is extremely hard to tell the difference between a guided missle and a tiny plane when it is at high speed and, with 2 frame per second "video".
4. Even if the video was real, why didn't they release it the day it happened? Why did they release it 5 years after that day? Oh wait, they were still working on it to make it more "believable".
Originally posted by Jazia A few things I'd like to state about the new release of the Pentagon "video".
1. Have you seen a video camera with 2 frame per second? I said 5, and I was wrong. It is really 2. If you download it, and play it with fraps turn on. It seems the frame dropped just as the video started. 2. a 757 would be a lot larger than appeared on this Pentagon "video". If it was really a 757, why the hole on the building was perfectly round with no sign of the damage from its HUGE wings? If you mean the wings were no match for the building, then shouldn't be the wings be found outside the building on the ground? Where were they? If they actually got into the building, then where was the damage on the wall from the wings?
3. A fact, a guilded missle has small wings and shape of a tiny plane, and it strikes with about 30 meters parallel to the ground. It is extremely hard to tell the difference between a guided missle and a tiny plane when it is at high speed and, with 2 frame per second "video".
4. Even if the video was real, why didn't they release it the day it happened? Oh wait, "we" were still working on it.
Holy crap, you're serious aren't you? People were there, man. They saw the debris of the airplane IN PERSON! They took pictures of the debris of the aircraft IN PERSON! That Airplane that took off that day DIDN'T LAND! Those people who were on that plane DIDN'T GO HOME. THEY DIED IN IT AND YOU ARE SPITTING ON THEIR GRAVES.
Holy crap, you're serious aren't you? People were there, man. They saw the debris of the airplane IN PERSON! They took pictures of the debris of the aircraft IN PERSON! That Airplane that took off that day DIDN'T LAND! Those people who were on that plane DIDN'T GO HOME. THEY DIED IN IT AND YOU ARE SPITTING ON THEIR GRAVES.
People were there? Who? You?
Did they say they see a large 757 OR something looked like a tiny plane without windows?
People from that claimed 757 were missing? Who? Your buddies? And you sure it is "not possible" for the government to make up a list of people that never existed? or make a bunch of real people disappear without a trace?
Holy crap, you're serious aren't you? People were there, man. They saw the debris of the airplane IN PERSON! They took pictures of the debris of the aircraft IN PERSON! That Airplane that took off that day DIDN'T LAND! Those people who were on that plane DIDN'T GO HOME. THEY DIED IN IT AND YOU ARE SPITTING ON THEIR GRAVES.
People were there? Who? You?
Did they say they see a large 757 OR something looked like a tiny plane without windows?
People from that claimed 757 were missing? Who? Your buddies? And you sure it is "not possible" for the government to make up a list of people that never existed? or make a bunch of real people disappear without a trace?
Let me tell yall this for the nutjobs who want to believe it was a missile. My father works in Newark (which is right accross the river for those who don't know). My fathers office window you could have seen the WTC and he saw the planes with his own two eyes and his camera lense. He has photos of the second plane crashing into the second tower. So don't give me the BS of a missle or some other crap. Keep in mind around 3000 people died (inocent civilans and NYs finest) because we are Americans and don't you forget that fact. This childish notion of blaming the govn't because you don't like GW Bush is insane, grow up.
Originally posted by Solution9 Let me tell yall this for the nutjobs who want to believe it was a missile. My father works in Newark (which is right accross the river for those who don't know). My fathers office window you could have seen the WTC and he saw the planes with his own two eyes and his camera lense. He has photos of the second plane crashing into the second tower. So don't give me the BS of a missle or some other crap. Keep in mind around 3000 people died (inocent civilans and NYs finest) because we are Americans and don't you forget that fact. This childish notion of blaming the govn't because you don't like GW Bush is insane, grow up.
Before you post, learn how to read first.
WTC were hit by planes. But not collapsed because of the planes.
Pentagon was hit by a missle.
Both planes and the missle were remotely controlled by the government.
Originally posted by Solution9 Let me tell yall this for the nutjobs who want to believe it was a missile. My father works in Newark (which is right accross the river for those who don't know). My fathers office window you could have seen the WTC and he saw the planes with his own two eyes and his camera lense. He has photos of the second plane crashing into the second tower. So don't give me the BS of a missle or some other crap. Keep in mind around 3000 people died (inocent civilans and NYs finest) because we are Americans and don't you forget that fact. This childish notion of blaming the govn't because you don't like GW Bush is insane, grow up.
We're talking about the pentagon and whether it was a missle or plane. Not talking about the twin towers.
______________________________ "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 dolphin666 Can someone explain to me why the video timestamp is incorrect on the pentagon video? Here's the vid link. You might want to view it quickly, because they're going to change it once they realise the, um well can you say, error?
The timestamp says: September 12 2001 17:37:22 #3 IMPACT
Originally posted by anarchyart Originally posted by Jazia A few things I'd like to state about the new release of the Pentagon "video".
1. Have you seen a video camera with 2 frame per second? I said 5, and I was wrong. It is really 2. If you download it, and play it with fraps turn on. It seems the frame dropped just as the video started. 2. a 757 would be a lot larger than appeared on this Pentagon "video". If it was really a 757, why the hole on the building was perfectly round with no sign of the damage from its HUGE wings? If you mean the wings were no match for the building, then shouldn't be the wings be found outside the building on the ground? Where were they? If they actually got into the building, then where was the damage on the wall from the wings?
3. A fact, a guilded missle has small wings and shape of a tiny plane, and it strikes with about 30 meters parallel to the ground. It is extremely hard to tell the difference between a guided missle and a tiny plane when it is at high speed and, with 2 frame per second "video".
4. Even if the video was real, why didn't they release it the day it happened? Oh wait, "we" were still working on it.
Holy crap, you're serious aren't you? People were there, man. They saw the debris of the airplane IN PERSON! They took pictures of the debris of the aircraft IN PERSON! That Airplane that took off that day DIDN'T LAND! Those people who were on that plane DIDN'T GO HOME. THEY DIED IN IT AND YOU ARE SPITTING ON THEIR GRAVES.
Haha, and to add to this statement: Why would the military attack their own headquarters? You have to be pretty stupid to believe that the Pentagon was attacked by a missile.
Even if the military decided to attack itself, what purpose would it be for? What would anyone gain from shooting a missile on top of what already happened?
Originally posted by dolphin666 Can someone explain to me why the video timestamp is incorrect on the pentagon video? Here's the vid link. You might want to view it quickly, because they're going to change it once they realise the, um well can you say, error?
The timestamp says: September 12 2001 17:37:22 #3 IMPACT
That is the timestamp from the edit and production by BBC news and not the original. You can tell because it doesn't follow NTSC formating, both rather PALv2.
Originally posted by Gane1 Haha, and to add to this statement: Why would the military attack their own headquarters? You have to be pretty stupid to believe that the Pentagon was attacked by a missile. Even if the military decided to attack itself, what purpose would it be for? What would anyone gain from shooting a missile on top of what already happened?
You must be kidding me How blind can you be???
Can't you see? SO the US military can "legally" invade and occupy many other countries in the name of "War on Terror". While their goals are really something else.
Originally posted by IIRLFirst of all, I don't care if terrorists or the other terrorists executed 9/11, US government isnt afraid of targeting civilians being their own or others and alike to pursue their goals (Hiroshima, Nagasaki and so on) so it would not suprise me.
So, you obviously havent seen the video or how the buildings collapsed have you now?
It's not trying to say that a missile brought down the buildings, explosives inside the building did, like how they bring down buildings usually.
And George Bush is a mere puppet, he runs nothing, he can barely speak - he fumbles with speeches written by his staff and turns them into madlibs.
Judging by your multiple choice answers you fall into the same category for intelligence as the president of the US, Enjoy.
FOR MOTHER RUSSIA!
By nuking those cities in Japan we cut off 5-10 years of fighting a conventional war. I think they estimated that by continuing the conventional war against Japan that over a million more people would have died. (I don't agree with nuking people, but your example is flawed because lives were actually saved.)
And while you seem to support freedom for people and the saving of lives you then say "For Mother Russia". I assume you are talking about communist Russia which, if I remember correctly murdered over 20 million people in less than 10 years.
Originally posted by Gane1 "For Mother Russia". I assume you are talking about communist Russia which, if I remember correctly murdered over 20 million people in less than 10 years. Way to go.
Originally posted by Gane1 Haha, and to add to this statement: Why would the military attack their own headquarters? You have to be pretty stupid to believe that the Pentagon was attacked by a missile. Even if the military decided to attack itself, what purpose would it be for? What would anyone gain from shooting a missile on top of what already happened?
You must be kidding me How blind can you be???
Can't you see? SO the US military can "legally" invade and occupy many other countries in the name of "War on Terror". While their goals are really something else.
They needed to shoot a missile at the Pentagon after the towers were already attacked? I think the attack on the towers would be reason enough.
No military in the world would agree to attacking it's own headquarters, which is what you are suggesting. There was more than enough reason to attack terrorist groups before 9/11 happened. The government did not need to attack itself for a reason to attack terrorists.
I assume you are refering to Iraq as an occupied country. Which is a completely seperate issue. We didn't even base the invasion on terrorism. It was based on the idea that Iraq had WMDs. If you look at the UN resolution it clearly says that an attack could be used against Iraq if they did not cooperate with inspecters. So 9/11 did not need to happen for that war.
Afganistan serves no real strategic purpose to us. So why would we want to invade them? Those are the only two country that we are involved with right now. Of course I'm sure you have proof that we are planning attacks against the entire world by the end of the year.
Originally posted by Gane1 "For Mother Russia". I assume you are talking about communist Russia which, if I remember correctly murdered over 20 million people in less than 10 years. Way to go.
Says the US and its western allies media.
You're joking right? There are many books and sources, many written by people in the gulag that would disagree with your ignorance.
I'm sure sure the government bought them all off though to say what they want.
Comments
Wow took them so many YEARs to finally completed the computer generated video. And still, the frame per second sux.
Even if it is real. How can you prove it was not a guided missle? Don't you know that the guided missles have wings etc. with a shape of just like a TINY plane?? The hole on the building definately was smaller than the size of the plane's wings. Why the building did not have the damage from the plane's wings? Where were the plane parts?
Can someone please step in and help me combat the ignorance here? It is quite a chore doing it by myself....
Did you watch the fox news one? its on their website. They said this is the "closest they can get to visual evidence". Now while they are saying that they are showing a still clip of a giant flash. Thats it a flash. Maybe you can hook me up to another source that shows it better and explains it better.
EDIT: Oh wait I see what you guys are talking about.
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
Can someone explain to me why the video timestamp is incorrect on the pentagon video?
Here's the vid link. You might want to view it quickly, because they're going to change it once
they realise the, um well can you say, error?
The timestamp says: September 12 2001 17:37:22 #3 IMPACT
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolavconsole/ukfs_news/hi/newsid_4980000/newsid_4988000/nb_wm_4988038.stm
There is nothing to worry about. You have the majority of the population
Did you even click the link with the Popular Mechanics article that totally disproves any of these conspiracy nutjobs lies? The saddes thing in all of this is that people like you have access to a computer where your moronic thoughts actually might get read by someone who is new to the internet and actually believes the crap people like you say.
Like I said, it's hard to swallow that I have to entrust people like you to assemble my fast food meals.
A few things I'd like to state about the new release of the Pentagon "video".
1. Have you seen a video camera with 2 frame per second? I said 5, and I was wrong. It is really 2. If you download it, and play it with fraps turn on. It seems the frame dropped just as the video started.
2. a 757 would be a lot larger than appeared in this Pentagon "video". If it was really a 757, why the hole on the building was perfectly round with no sign of the damage from its HUGE wings? If you mean the wings were no match for the building, then shouldn't the wings be found outside the building on the ground? Where were they? If they actually got into the building, then where was the damage on the wall from the wings?
3. A fact, a guilded missle has small wings and shape of a tiny plane, and it strikes with about 30 meters parallel to the ground. It is extremely hard to tell the difference between a guided missle and a tiny plane when it is at high speed and, with 2 frame per second "video".
4. Even if the video was real, why didn't they release it the day it happened? Why did they release it 5 years after that day? Oh wait, they were still working on it to make it more "believable".
People were there? Who? You?
Did they say they see a large 757 OR something looked like a tiny plane without windows?
People from that claimed 757 were missing? Who? Your buddies? And you sure it is "not possible" for the government to make up a list of people that never existed? or make a bunch of real people disappear without a trace?
People were there? Who? You?
Did they say they see a large 757 OR something looked like a tiny plane without windows?
People from that claimed 757 were missing? Who? Your buddies? And you sure it is "not possible" for the government to make up a list of people that never existed? or make a bunch of real people disappear without a trace?
Wow
Before you post, learn how to read first.
WTC were hit by planes. But not collapsed because of the planes.
Pentagon was hit by a missle.
Both planes and the missle were remotely controlled by the government.
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
Haha, and to add to this statement: Why would the military attack their own headquarters? You have to be pretty stupid to believe that the Pentagon was attacked by a missile.
Even if the military decided to attack itself, what purpose would it be for? What would anyone gain from shooting a missile on top of what already happened?
You must be kidding me
Can't you see? SO the US military can "legally" invade and occupy many other countries in the name of "War on Terror". While their goals are really something else.
By nuking those cities in Japan we cut off 5-10 years of fighting a conventional war. I think they estimated that by continuing the conventional war against Japan that over a million more people would have died. (I don't agree with nuking people, but your example is flawed because lives were actually saved.)
And while you seem to support freedom for people and the saving of lives you then say "For Mother Russia". I assume you are talking about communist Russia which, if I remember correctly murdered over 20 million people in less than 10 years.
Way to go.
Says the US and its western allies media.
You must be kidding me
Can't you see? SO the US military can "legally" invade and occupy many other countries in the name of "War on Terror". While their goals are really something else.
They needed to shoot a missile at the Pentagon after the towers were already attacked? I think the attack on the towers would be reason enough.
No military in the world would agree to attacking it's own headquarters, which is what you are suggesting. There was more than enough reason to attack terrorist groups before 9/11 happened. The government did not need to attack itself for a reason to attack terrorists.
I assume you are refering to Iraq as an occupied country. Which is a completely seperate issue. We didn't even base the invasion on terrorism. It was based on the idea that Iraq had WMDs. If you look at the UN resolution it clearly says that an attack could be used against Iraq if they did not cooperate with inspecters. So 9/11 did not need to happen for that war.
Afganistan serves no real strategic purpose to us. So why would we want to invade them? Those are the only two country that we are involved with right now. Of course I'm sure you have proof that we are planning attacks against the entire world by the end of the year.
Says the US and its western allies media.
You're joking right? There are many books and sources, many written by people in the gulag that would disagree with your ignorance.
I'm sure sure the government bought them all off though to say what they want.