Lets apply some logic to the Charlie Sheen 9/11 theory - Page 4 - GoFuckYourself.com

Manga1 · 03-26-2006, 03:42 PM

Watch this video first and then ask questions. But watch the whole thing before coming to any conclusions http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...se+change+9-11

BV · 03-26-2006, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quagmire

Don't be stupid, everything flows south to the bottom of the planet. Everyone knows that. DUH

wrong

In the US alone there are 3 rivers that flow North, the ST Johns River in Florida being one of them. I've fished it many many times.

BV · 03-26-2006, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quagmire

Them wingz be chopped and the rimz be spinnin' yo.

No honky pentagram buildin' gonna shut this muthafucka down.

I laughed my ass off during that movie!

Quagmire · 03-26-2006, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BV

wrong

In the US alone there are 3 rivers that flow North, the ST Johns River in Florida being one of them. I've fished it many many times.

That was the whole purpose of

<-- mr winky

The Niagara river flows north from Lake Erie to Lake Ontario... Just seemed like a nice retarded comment to make at the time...

Scootermuze · 03-26-2006, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronbotx

Sticky.....look at aerial photo.... without analysis it looks like pretty massive damage to a highly reinforced structure and a big chunk of outer ring destroyed

HQ ATTACK: Taken three days after 9/11, this photo shows the extent of the damage to the Pentagon, consistent with a fiery plane crash.

Thanks for showing that...
Of course it shows the bldg. after the collapse.. which didn't do so for awhile after the impact..

Makes be wonder how a 757 flying at 500 mph was able to pass over the interstate and drop fast enough to enter the first floor and not leave any crater where it went it..
That means it had to fly straight in .. oh.. and the wings and vertical stabilizer folded back too where the hole plane just vanished..

And all of this was done by a pilot that didn't know how to fly..

BV · 03-26-2006, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quagmire

That was the whole purpose of

<-- mr winky

The Niagara river flows north from Lake Erie to Lake Ontario... Just seemed like a nice retarded comment to make at the time...

Scootermuze · 03-26-2006, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quagmire

Them wingz be chopped and the rimz be spinnin' yo.

No honky pentagram buildin' gonna shut this muthafucka down.

Wo! Wouldn't that be kewl?!?!

FetishTom · 03-26-2006, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KRL

I've had my doubts from time to time about certain things also. But after seeing how the government responded when Katrina hit the gulf states, my conspiracy thoughts pretty much evaporated.

It was all about incompetence and blunders.

Excellent post(s) and also highlights why conspiracy theories are eagerly believed - its at the core of who we are in that we prefer to believe that all disasters are the work of a higher power or part of a hidden agenda rather then think we are governed by flawed and often incompetent people who are powerless to protect us when it goes wrong.

In the past Floods, droughts were never natural disasters but 'we had angered the gods and they must be appeased' etc. Now its 'Kennedy can never have been killed by one lone weirdo' The fact that the leader of the worlds biggest democracy can be felled by a lone nut job is truly unsettling for people so we need to invent eleborate and complex theories as to 'what really happened'. It comforts people as they can rationalise better and see 'a pattern' - we need patterns - chaos and random chance are very frightening.

9/11 is no different and its no use telling people that the WTC was constructed to collapse that way, planes can find two fuck off big buildings,and that explosions are never neat and tidy - I knew of two army guys in Northern Ireland i the 80's, bomb explodes, one is killed the other has his upper clothes blown off and hardly a scratch and they were standing next to each other. Bizarre but true - or was it? Perhaps there was no bomb. Perhaps one was murdered as he had learned that the American President was part of the New World Order and his companion did the deed and tried to cover it up. Oh and the strange part was the surviving soldier's last name was Regan! Ah it's all becoming clear now etc etc.....you can fill the rest in yourselves!

Its a strange world and frightened people need to find comfort. Sad but true.

SmokeyTheBear · 03-26-2006, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronbotx

Sticky.....look at aerial photo.... without analysis it looks like pretty massive damage to a highly reinforced structure and a big chunk of outer ring destroyed

HQ ATTACK: Taken three days after 9/11, this photo shows the extent of the damage to the Pentagon, consistent with a fiery plane crash.

hmm does that look anything close to this

SmokeyTheBear · 03-26-2006, 04:02 PM

heres another gif of the first wtc coming down.. its big let it load.. notice where i have marked in red expplosion at least 10 floors below

KRL · 03-26-2006, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BV

Discovery Channel had a whole documentary explaining this, made sense to me.

What doesn't make sense to me is WTC 7 coming down in the same manner and that video of Silverstein saying to go ahead and "pull" it. I'm a bit confused on that part.

If I'm remembering correctly, he did authorize bringing that one down once they determined it would be unsavable, unstable and dangerous.

stickyfingerz · 03-26-2006, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg B

You've just single handedly killed off any credibility you could have possibly mustered for your arguments. How the fuck does a card carrying Republican engage in the porn industry?

There's no fucking excuse! Porn is in direct irrefutable conflict with the mores and direction of the Republican Party, the Republican ethic.

Unless you're some super secret shill just posting to offset any counter viewpoints, you're a hippocrite.

It's like here in Hollywood we have gay talk show hosts who are right wing. WTF? That's like some 'Fannie Dooley' shit. ( only old asses here will recall Fannie Dooley ).

We're all around you bubba. Just most aren't outspoken, but they speak at the ballot box dont they.

Any businessman that supports the democratic party should have his head examined. And everyone loves porn no matter what is said.

FetishTom · 03-26-2006, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

hmm does that look anything close to this

See here we have the knowing 'hmm" translated as 'I know something you don't' with two pictures proving what exactly - well nothing obviously since the poster wants to put doubt in your minds with the 'Hmmm' bit and for you then to fill in your own conspiracy angle

because you also want to see a 'pattern' - its inbred in us

Classic

Titan · 03-26-2006, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

Planes don't turn into jello.. and nobody had a chance to study the inside of the wtc where the planes entered...
Not the case with the Pentagon.. A plane the size of a 767 could not have maneuvered and entered the first floor first of all.. and if it did, why no damage to the 10' high cable spools in the path? why no damage to the fence or construction trailer in the path? Why is fire damage shown only on the fist floor office walls?
A 767 is full of steel framing and the fuel is in the fuselage and root of the wings and could not have just 'turned to jello' and folded in to get through a small hole...

As far as computer animations.. check out this page A number of scientists, engineers, and architects studied the damage and conducted tests which show that no 767 could have hit the Pentagon.. If you don't want to read it, just look at the photos.. They tell a different story..

Look at this video. Looks like soup to me:

http://www.compfused.com/directlink/458

Titan · 03-26-2006, 04:08 PM

Jenga pieces are solid. A building is mostly empty space. They are completely dissimilar.

[QUOTE=StuartD]1. Ever played Janga? When something falls, it has a very slight chance of falling pancake style... much less 3 times in one day. And no, not many people have watched a 100 story building fall... but many engineers have tested what would happen via simulation, and they have watched small buildings fall. Adding a few floors doesn't suddenly change the laws of physics.

stickyfingerz · 03-26-2006, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

Gee! that'll show me..

You really need to brush up on your physics if you think otherwise..

In that you like experiments.. try running through a brick framed door at 500 mph with your arms stretched out.. I'm sure they'll just fold back and pass right on through the door...
Now imagine 2 55' wings just folding back and doing the same thing...

oh.. and let's not forget the vertical stabilizer must have folded back too..
What an amazing aircraft that must be..

Let me ask you do the wings on a 757 point staight out, or do the angle back?

SmokeyTheBear · 03-26-2006, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titan

Look at this video. Looks like soup to me:

http://www.compfused.com/directlink/458

no offense but thats a tiny jet on a super thick wall. the pentagon had nothing like that. they had foot thick reinforced concrete not 10 ft thick concrete with a tiny ass jet..

FetishTom · 03-26-2006, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

heres another gif of the first wtc coming down.. its big let it load.. notice where i have marked in red expplosion at least 10 floors below

Again this gif explains - absolutely nothing. There was an 'explosion' there so what? Was it that the window in that area was weaker then the surrounding windows, that the explosion as it travelled down the building partially vented at this point? Was it a bomb? Was it the coffee machine going blueey? All varying degrees of probability but proves nothing

Titan · 03-26-2006, 04:11 PM

They would have to close down EVERY section of the WTC to plant the explosives and then they would have to hide thousands of pounds of explosives and hundreds of miles of cable. Seems like this would be hard to me. The WTC was hit by a plane filled with fuel at 300mph. This is significantly more damage than just fire.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix

regarding point #1 you drew out of thin air or pulled out of your ass;)
MArvin Bush took over security of the towers a few monts before 9/11 and he closed down huge sections and massive work was being done all secretly as the sections worked on were always cleared of people. Dont know who Marvin bush is? too bad maybe you should do more research.

Secondly the explanation was that fire is what brought down all 3 buildings, even though many skyscrapers have beeb on fire for much longer times before and been perfectly fine. Lets not even bother mentioning that kerosene doesnt even reach a temaperature hot enough to melt steel.
physics911.net

regarding point #2
im not sure what happend to those people...i suspect all the people killed aboard planes that day died in the two crashes into the towers. I believe it was actually airliners retro fitted to carry small rockets which were used to make sure the plane made it inside the building and not just smashed into the outside and maybe half of it would have fell out onto the ground below.
this is all conjecture...

regarding point #3
have a look at the size of the wholes made by the planes into a solid steel building..then look at the tiny precision hole the so called plane made that hit the pentagon. look very closely....in fact where the wings should have ripped big wholes in the ground and caused massive damage...there was none...windows didnt even get broken.

regarding point #4
this is the most absurd part...trained pilots dont open the door to a plane because some raghead has an exacto knife..lol They would have just landed the plane. i mean if we are talking about highly trained people doing their role..the pilots stand out as most professional. Now lets not forget that 10/19 hijackers that were blamed are alive and well.

thats right..they are alive and living in various countries around the world....explain that. ask bush who must be your buddy im guessing to come up with a better cover story then that ok.

point #5 isnt worth talkig about..Bush and his entire family are scum and have sold the people out to profits and power

regarding point #6 i agree the poll is skewed same as the cnn polls they gathered also are most likely skewed...however when multiple surverys appear done by diferent groupls all with the same info...you have to say hmmm

Bush = the real mob

Titan · 03-26-2006, 04:11 PM

They would have to close down EVERY section of the WTC to plant the explosives and then they would have to hide thousands of pounds of explosives and hundreds of miles of cable. Seems like this would be hard to me. The WTC was hit by a plane filled with fuel at 300mph. This is significantly more damage than just fire.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix

regarding point #1 you drew out of thin air or pulled out of your ass;)
MArvin Bush took over security of the towers a few monts before 9/11 and he closed down huge sections and massive work was being done all secretly as the sections worked on were always cleared of people. Dont know who Marvin bush is? too bad maybe you should do more research.

Secondly the explanation was that fire is what brought down all 3 buildings, even though many skyscrapers have beeb on fire for much longer times before and been perfectly fine. Lets not even bother mentioning that kerosene doesnt even reach a temaperature hot enough to melt steel.
physics911.net

regarding point #2
im not sure what happend to those people...i suspect all the people killed aboard planes that day died in the two crashes into the towers. I believe it was actually airliners retro fitted to carry small rockets which were used to make sure the plane made it inside the building and not just smashed into the outside and maybe half of it would have fell out onto the ground below.
this is all conjecture...

regarding point #3
have a look at the size of the wholes made by the planes into a solid steel building..then look at the tiny precision hole the so called plane made that hit the pentagon. look very closely....in fact where the wings should have ripped big wholes in the ground and caused massive damage...there was none...windows didnt even get broken.

regarding point #4
this is the most absurd part...trained pilots dont open the door to a plane because some raghead has an exacto knife..lol They would have just landed the plane. i mean if we are talking about highly trained people doing their role..the pilots stand out as most professional. Now lets not forget that 10/19 hijackers that were blamed are alive and well.

thats right..they are alive and living in various countries around the world....explain that. ask bush who must be your buddy im guessing to come up with a better cover story then that ok.

point #5 isnt worth talkig about..Bush and his entire family are scum and have sold the people out to profits and power

regarding point #6 i agree the poll is skewed same as the cnn polls they gathered also are most likely skewed...however when multiple surverys appear done by diferent groupls all with the same info...you have to say hmmm

Bush = the real mob

Scootermuze · 03-26-2006, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titan

Look at this video. Looks like soup to me:

http://www.compfused.com/directlink/458

Again.. that's a small craft hitting a solid concrete barrier.. not a 60 ton, 125' wingspan 757 hitting a building filled with windows..

SmokeyTheBear · 03-26-2006, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerzdotnet

Let me ask you do the wings on a 757 point staight out, or do the angle back?

why bother wondering about endless questions , we have several videos of it , why not release it.. ? you always seem to skip that question ?

on one hand a plane can hardly make a mark on a small building yet completely demolish 3 huge buildings designed for the specific purpose of withstanding TWO planes hitting EACH tower ? ..

And none of that matters either , all that matters is theres enough questions to warrant a real investigation , and that the majority of americans support that..

stickyfingerz · 03-26-2006, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

hmm does that look anything close to this

Come on now seriously......

SmokeyTheBear · 03-26-2006, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FetishTom

Again this gif explains - absolutely nothing. There was an 'explosion' there so what? Was it that the window in that area was weaker then the surrounding windows, that the explosion as it travelled down the building partially vented at this point? Was it a bomb? Was it the coffee machine going blueey? All varying degrees of probability but proves nothing

did anyone say it proved anything ? are you hallucinating voices ? stop the idiocy.. it is exactly what it is .. anyone with eyes can see what it is.. i want an explanation to what it is , by someone QUALIFIED to give that explanation.. thats what i want.. and the majority of americans agree.

stickyfingerz · 03-26-2006, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

why bother wondering about endless questions , we have several videos of it , why not release it.. ? you always seem to skip that question ?

on one hand a plane can hardly make a mark on a small building yet completely demolish 3 huge buildings designed for the specific purpose of withstanding TWO planes hitting EACH tower ? ..

And none of that matters either , all that matters is theres enough questions to warrant a real investigation , and that the majority of americans support that..

Who says we have videos?

SmokeyTheBear · 03-26-2006, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerzdotnet

Dumbest post ever Come on now seriously......

if you think they even closely resemble each other you need your glasses checked..

stickyfingerz · 03-26-2006, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

heres another gif of the first wtc coming down.. its big let it load.. notice where i have marked in red expplosion at least 10 floors below

DO YOU understand that torsion and pressure will blow windows out???

stickyfingerz · 03-26-2006, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

if you think they even closely resemble each other you need your glasses checked..

Dude one was what 6 floors and one was how high, and fell all the way down.

SmokeyTheBear · 03-26-2006, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerzdotnet

Who says we have videos?

lol now the videos dont exist ? haha

We know that citgo gas had a camera pointed directly at impact it was confiscated and widely reported in the news. we also know sheraton had a video and employees verify the video cameras were recording and pointing at the impact , we also know the dept of highways had a camera pointed at the impact as it was ont he internet for a short time ( the angle not the video itself ) and anyone naive enough to think the pentagon has nothing better than a grainy skippy little clip of the plane hitting , needs to lower their medication

SmokeyTheBear · 03-26-2006, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerzdotnet

Dude one was what 6 floors and one was how high, and fell all the way down.

exactly...

SmokeyTheBear · 03-26-2006, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerzdotnet

DO YOU understand that torsion and pressure will blow windows out???

a little , but not enough to know thats what that was , an independant review with people experienced to answer that question would be a great start considering it was one of the worst attacks on american soil since pearl harbour.. and the majority of americans want it that way..

Titan · 03-26-2006, 04:24 PM

I think you are referring to video showing his head jerking backwards after geting shot. A head does jerk towards the point of impact because the brains spraying out the front act as a propellant forcing the head the opposite direction. Shoot a water melon with a rifle. The watermelon will fly towards you. There was an episode on Myth busters about this.

[QUOTE=wonton]Everyone here is unfortunately missing the point. Arguing about scientific questions (planes, missles, controlled demolitions) is exactly the kind of technical confusion that the powers-that-be want.

Think of it this way - for over 40 years we have had a piece of film (Zapruder) that offers SCREAMING PROOF that President Kennedy was shot in the front, and not in the back of the head by some lone gunman. And what good has that concrete piece of evidence done? The Warren Commission simply rolled out paid scientific shill after scientific shill, even going so far as to present a cockamamie MAGIC BULLET THEORY, a totally outlandish explanation to counteract the obvious. And in the past 40 years, an ENTIRE INDUSTRY in the media has been formed all to convince you of one thing:
[QUOTE]

BV · 03-26-2006, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KRL

If I'm remembering correctly, he did authorize bringing that one down once they determined it would be unsavable, unstable and dangerous.

Yes, so it has been said, but I find it to be a very illogical plan since there was so much important information, equipment, computers, etc etc in that building. If it was so unstable and dangerous why did they send in pyrotecs to install explosives? That is something that takes more than a few hours to pull off anyways. All this going on while you have the trade towers collapsing around the corner and the Pentagon under attack?

To me the logical thing to do would be put out the fire in WTC 7 and salvage what you can out of it afterwards. Not implode it on purpose with everything in it while you have a major catastrophe going on with the towers. Makes no sense to me.

Does it to you?

RF_Erick · 03-26-2006, 04:30 PM

Actually setting explosives for controlled demolition takes days not hours.
But on 9/11 the laws of physics do not apply.

SuckOnThis · 03-26-2006, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerzdotnet

DO YOU understand that torsion and pressure will blow windows out???

Are windows black?

Go back to trying to burn metal with a lighter

Scootermuze · 03-26-2006, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerzdotnet

Let me ask you do the wings on a 757 point staight out, or do the angle back?

They are angled back about 29 degress.. and are set back almost half of the way back on the fuselage.. The object that struck the bldg. hit at about a 45 degree angle to the bldg.

Now if you're about to suggest that the sweep of the wings permitted them to fold back into the fuselage, don't forget the speed at impact...

Wings break when they hit buildings..

Scootermuze · 03-26-2006, 05:01 PM

If ya'll get tired of discussing the wtc/pentagon stuff, maybe we can discuss the 13 cell phone calls that were made from Flight 93 which was flying at 40,000 feet when the calls started coming in..

"The idea of being able to use a cellphone while flying is completely impractical. Once through about 10,000 feet, the thing is useless, since you are too high and moving too fast (and thus changing cells too rapidly) for the phone to provide a signal." (AVWeb, 1999)

Cellphone calls from commercial aircraft much over 8000 feet are essentially impossible, while those below 8000 feet are highly unlikely down to about 2000, where they become merely unlikely.

One can make a cellphone call from inside an aircraft while on the ground because the weakened signal is still close enough to the nearest cellsite (relay tower) to get picked up. Once above 10,000 feet, however, calls rarely get through, if ever.

But 13 calls made it through at 40,000 ft... kewl eh?

Phoenix · 03-26-2006, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Titan

They would have to close down EVERY section of the WTC to plant the explosives and then they would have to hide thousands of pounds of explosives and hundreds of miles of cable. Seems like this would be hard to me. The WTC was hit by a plane filled with fuel at 300mph. This is significantly more damage than just fire.

they just prepared for months...they laid all the explosives in just one week...the week before 911 they took out all the bomb sniffing dogs

FetishTom · 03-26-2006, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

did anyone say it proved anything ? are you hallucinating voices ? stop the idiocy.. it is exactly what it is .. anyone with eyes can see what it is.. i want an explanation to what it is , by someone QUALIFIED to give that explanation.. thats what i want.. and the majority of americans agree.

You inferred it 'proved' something otherwise why post? And you want an explanation? From whom exactly? Any 'explanation' will be pure 'speculation' as to what exactly caused the brief puff of smoke given the only people who know the source were the people on the floor at the time and are now dead.

It could be the explosion from the plane impact venting at that point. It could be the coffee machine but there is no 'explanation'. You want an explanation because you are convinced that it was bomb and you want someone to confirm it. Any other possibility is met with bluster. You want this so bad it warps your thinking. I know why. Its comforting for you. Not everything is black and white. There is no grand plan. Just lots of little plans executed with varying degress of competence. And in the world shit just occaisionally happens and sometimes there is no reason or explanation. And remember the simplest and mst obvious explanation is usually the one to go with. As a species we tend to ignore this hence why we invented religion 'to explain everything'. Now we invent conspiracy theories.

Oh and the majority of Americans may want an 'explanation' but only because they need comforting. Besides a majority of Americans voted for Bush so its hardly helping your case.

Morgan · 03-26-2006, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chadglni

No dumbass, that is the jello!

ronbotx · 03-26-2006, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

hmm does that look anything close to this

I am not a civil engineer, or self proclaimed worlds foremost authority on everything (like directfiesta

), but I do believe you are comparing apples to oranges in terms of the type of construction between a skyscaper like the Twin Towers, and the Pentagon and the type of damage you could expect.

I neither recommend or endorse the following site, but it does have some good info on how the Pentagon was constructed, as well as photos of the plane debris, damage, etc.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/..._evidence.html
There is another link to "Architecture Week" which talks about some building upgrades done at the Pentagon, that you all may find interesting.
http://www.architectureweek.com/2001/1003/news_1-1.html

Greg B · 03-26-2006, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

Thanks for showing that...
Of course it shows the bldg. after the collapse.. which didn't do so for awhile after the impact..

Makes be wonder how a 757 flying at 500 mph was able to pass over the interstate and drop fast enough to enter the first floor and not leave any crater where it went it..
That means it had to fly straight in .. oh.. and the wings and vertical stabilizer folded back too where the hole plane just vanished..

And all of this was done by a pilot that didn't know how to fly..

Bingo. You heard it here first:

It was a cruise missle.

The elevation needed for a 757 or any large jet would have been needed to be damn near flat for at least a mile for it to level off and hit the lower floors like that piss poor vid clip shows.

A cruise missle on the other hand can do that easy.

directfiesta · 03-26-2006, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronbotx

I am not a civil engineer, or self proclaimed worlds foremost authority on everything (like directfiesta

),

Please quote where I give even opinions ( forget authority ...) on :

- fire burning features
- plane folding wings
- missiles
- 500 mph
- burning spoons (

)

You probably were referring to " Shittyfingerzdotnet " ...

I only sometimes give info ( with backup info ) on certain activities of your beloved administration...

So please, quote me.

If you were just able to read, I even posted above that I do not " buy " the actual conspiracy theory that ' Bush did it ' .. just a little above.

But naturally, you wont , you will just jibble stupid comments like most of you do here ...

SmokeyTheBear · 03-26-2006, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FetishTom

You inferred it 'proved' something otherwise why post? And you want an explanation? From whom exactly? Any 'explanation' will be pure 'speculation' as to what exactly caused the brief puff of smoke given the only people who know the source were the people on the floor at the time and are now dead.

The only thing i "inferred" was exactly what we both can see , nothing more nothing less , you chose to put words into my mouth because your so wrapped up in your theory that everything is exactly as it should be you cant see the obvious right in front of your face , instead you think it was a xoffee machine

.. and yes i want an explanation . who you ask ? well an independant investigation of 9/11 as the MAJORITY of americans agree, the MINORITY of americans think everything is a-ok. someone qualified in both structural engineering and physics. not some ass kisser who cant keep his facts straight.

SmokeyTheBear · 03-26-2006, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronbotx

I am not a civil engineer, or self proclaimed worlds foremost authority on everything (like directfiesta

), but I do believe you are comparing apples to oranges in terms of the type of construction between a skyscaper like the Twin Towers, and the Pentagon and the type of damage you could expect.

actually its not apples and oranges , its more like watermelons and cherries

Nice to see the pentagon had some upgrades, the wtc towers were contructed to withstand MULTIPLE COMMERCIAL AIRLINERS into EACH of them. The pentagon appears to have had some upgrades , none that include defense against multiple commercial airliners crashing into them..

So to sum up , buildings that are constructed to withstand MULTIPLE commercial airline strikes , disintegrate from half the damage estimated , and buildings NOT designed to withstand ANY commercial airliners end up basically unscathed.. gee that makes sense..

im sure the pentagon was built especially well , but dont try to say it isnt a good comparison, it is THE comparison of all comparisons..

SmokeyTheBear · 03-26-2006, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FetishTom

Oh and the majority of Americans may want an 'explanation' but only because they need comforting.

I wouldnt make assumptions about the majority of americans , but sure , whatever reason you want to use doesnt really matter unless we are not a democracy anymore. i could care less what the reason is, all i know is they are spending my money on this shit , spend some to answer americans questions..

Sexxxy Sites · 03-26-2006, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

The only thing i "inferred" was exactly what we both can see , nothing more nothing less , you chose to put words into my mouth because your so wrapped up in your theory that everything is exactly as it should be you cant see the obvious right in front of your face , instead you think it was a xoffee machine

.. and yes i want an explanation . who you ask ? well an independant investigation of 9/11 as the MAJORITY of americans agree, the MINORITY of americans think everything is a-ok. someone qualified in both structural engineering and physics. not some ass kisser who cant keep his facts straight.

Are you not aware that there has been multiple investigations by different entities? Are you not aware that everything that is factually explainable has been explained by multiple experts in many different fields of expertise? Are you not aware that educated guesses have been presented by multiple experts in many different fields of expertise to help explain that that cannot be factually proven? KRL and some others are aware of this but you seem to have missed out, or is it that the minds of conspiratists, such as yourself, just cannot accept any explanation unless it is a sinister explanation?

Scootermuze · 03-26-2006, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sexxxy Sites

Are you not aware that there has been multiple investigations by different entities? Are you not aware that everything that is factually explainable has been explained by multiple experts in many different fields of expertise? Are you not aware that educated guesses have been presented by multiple experts in many different fields of expertise to help explain that that cannot be factually proven? KRL and some others are aware of this but you seem to have missed out, or is it that the minds of conspiratists, such as yourself, just cannot accept any explanation unless it is a sinister explanation?

I've yet to see any gov't funded explanations that make sense..

and as I've stated before.. I'm not saying that I think Bush did it, or had anything to do with it.. I just see and read too many things from experts that contradict the gov't findings..
and.. I've just been spending my lazy day on here to carry on the type of discussion that usually leads to nowhere... But it's been entertaining..

FetishTom · 03-26-2006, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

The only thing i "inferred" was exactly what we both can see , nothing more nothing less , you chose to put words into my mouth because your so wrapped up in your theory that everything is exactly as it should be you cant see the obvious right in front of your face , instead you think it was a xoffee machine

.. and yes i want an explanation . who you ask ? well an independant investigation of 9/11 as the MAJORITY of americans agree, the MINORITY of americans think everything is a-ok. someone qualified in both structural engineering and physics. not some ass kisser who cant keep his facts straight.

Ah I can't see the obvious - so what is the obvious? And if it is 'obvious' why do you need an investigation and an explanation? I take it the jets crashing into the WTC was not 'obvious'.

The coffee machine is actually humour on my part. A novel concept I know. Next time I will make it the water cooler planted by Bush timed to explode at the moment of impact and drown anyone in a 5 yard radius.

And experts are like lawyers they will give you their informed opinion based on who is signing their checks. Besides who are you kidding. Unless the 'experts' come up with something you agree with you will dismiss them as 'stooges of Bush and his lackeys'

You are not after the truth - just someone to validate your theories.

Your need for this 'comfort blanket' borders on the psychotic

Seek help

Buy more tinfoil

directfiesta · 03-26-2006, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by directfiesta

Please quote where I give even opinions ( forget authority ...) on :

- fire burning features
- plane folding wings
- missiles
- 500 mph
- burning spoons (

)

You probably were referring to " Shittyfingerzdotnet " ...

I only sometimes give info ( with backup info ) on certain activities of your beloved administration...

So please, quote me.

If you were just able to read, I even posted above that I do not " buy " the actual conspiracy theory that ' Bush did it ' .. just a little above.

But naturally, you wont , you will just jibble stupid comments like most of you do here ...

As usual, .... ronbotx dissapears when asked to ' put up ...'

03-26-2006, 04:02 PM	#160
SmokeyTheBear ►SouthOfHeaven Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: PlanetEarth MyBoardRank: GerbilMaster My-Penis-Size: extralarge MyWeapon: Computer Posts: 28,609	heres another gif of the first wtc coming down.. its big let it load.. notice where i have marked in red expplosion at least 10 floors below __________________ hatisblack at yahoo.com

03-26-2006, 04:08 PM	#165
Titan Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: teencash.com Posts: 994	Jenga pieces are solid. A building is mostly empty space. They are completely dissimilar. [QUOTE=StuartD]1. Ever played Janga? When something falls, it has a very slight chance of falling pancake style... much less 3 times in one day. And no, not many people have watched a 100 story building fall... but many engineers have tested what would happen via simulation, and they have watched small buildings fall. Adding a few floors doesn't suddenly change the laws of physics. __________________ TEEN CASH - EXCLUSIVE TEEN NICHE REALITY SITES Check out our Newest Site: Teen Porno Pass - Free Hosted Galleries, Flash Galleries, Tube Content, & Great Support Sample Galleries: Movie Gallery 1 Flash Gallery 1 Pic Gallery 1

03-26-2006, 04:24 PM	#182
Titan Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: teencash.com Posts: 994	I think you are referring to video showing his head jerking backwards after geting shot. A head does jerk towards the point of impact because the brains spraying out the front act as a propellant forcing the head the opposite direction. Shoot a water melon with a rifle. The watermelon will fly towards you. There was an episode on Myth busters about this. [QUOTE=wonton]Everyone here is unfortunately missing the point. Arguing about scientific questions (planes, missles, controlled demolitions) is exactly the kind of technical confusion that the powers-that-be want. Think of it this way - for over 40 years we have had a piece of film (Zapruder) that offers SCREAMING PROOF that President Kennedy was shot in the front, and not in the back of the head by some lone gunman. And what good has that concrete piece of evidence done? The Warren Commission simply rolled out paid scientific shill after scientific shill, even going so far as to present a cockamamie MAGIC BULLET THEORY, a totally outlandish explanation to counteract the obvious. And in the past 40 years, an ENTIRE INDUSTRY in the media has been formed all to convince you of one thing: [QUOTE] __________________ TEEN CASH - EXCLUSIVE TEEN NICHE REALITY SITES Check out our Newest Site: Teen Porno Pass - Free Hosted Galleries, Flash Galleries, Tube Content, & Great Support Sample Galleries: Movie Gallery 1 Flash Gallery 1 Pic Gallery 1

03-26-2006, 04:30 PM	#184
RF_Erick Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Baltimore,Md Posts: 946	Actually setting explosives for controlled demolition takes days not hours. But on 9/11 the laws of physics do not apply. __________________ Exclusive Reality Feeds - [email protected] - ICQ: 4144516

03-26-2006, 03:42 PM	#151
Manga1 Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Malakiaville Posts: 952	Watch this video first and then ask questions. But watch the whole thing before coming to any conclusions http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...se+change+9-11

03-26-2006, 05:01 PM	#187
Scootermuze Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 4,513	If ya'll get tired of discussing the wtc/pentagon stuff, maybe we can discuss the 13 cell phone calls that were made from Flight 93 which was flying at 40,000 feet when the calls started coming in.. "The idea of being able to use a cellphone while flying is completely impractical. Once through about 10,000 feet, the thing is useless, since you are too high and moving too fast (and thus changing cells too rapidly) for the phone to provide a signal." (AVWeb, 1999) Cellphone calls from commercial aircraft much over 8000 feet are essentially impossible, while those below 8000 feet are highly unlikely down to about 2000, where they become merely unlikely. One can make a cellphone call from inside an aircraft while on the ground because the weakened signal is still close enough to the nearest cellsite (relay tower) to get picked up. Once above 10,000 feet, however, calls rarely get through, if ever. But 13 calls made it through at 40,000 ft... kewl eh?