Buckrogers

Watched it a few nights ago, very interesting. Also watched the beebs documentry on the collaspe of the WT towers some time ago, again very interesting.

Buzzer

What did you think of the film clip which freezed and was digitally enhanced, was it a large plane or not?

Cheers

Buckrogers

You mean that small blip, the 757 size blip?

mmmm, looks like a 757, to my untrained, never seen a plane before, eye...

Brit_in_Japan

...and to me.

What I can never understand is what do the conspiracy theorists propose happened to the missing aircraft and everyone on board? However cynical the pentagon and US security services maybe about loss of life of non-US citizens in other countries, there is no way they will sacrifice a plane load of their own citizens, absolutely no way.

FrenchBoy

Unlike you i dont like to waste my time repeating not only myself but the countless other logical, informed and factual rebuttals to your frankly pathetic attempt to cling to these poorly supported conspiracy theories.

I'm all for keeping an open mind, I must admit at first glance these theories are quite interesting and seductively plausible. However, they dont really seem to stand up to close scrutiny and there is not one point that I haven't seen adequately countered.

So *Sonic* I will take your advice and am now going to "Shut the f*ck up" as this is getting boring and I have things to be getting on with in the real world.

turbotroll

Same here ;-)

Geezer

Well, there is alot of eyewitnesses to the fact that a 757 flew over the highway and into the Pentagon.

There is alot of debris from an airplane of some sort within the wrecked building.

There is not a single witness that says they saw a missile hit the Pentagon.

There is nothing left of the missile that hit it.

Missiles do leave debris as well, the scuds that hit Israel in the first Gulf war left very visible debris, and they hit the ground (at least has hard as the Pentagon) at a far higher speed.

So, there is evidence that a plane hit the Pentagon, and pretty much none that it was a missile, os your argument really does not stand up.

There are inconsistencies of course, but as has already been pointed out, no one has run a comprehensive program of slamming commercial airliners into large buildings for a complete set of control results to satisfy conpiracy nutters in future events.

Geezer

Nimbus

There's a flaw to your logic as well. Leaving aside the post on here pointing to that evidence, just because you believe there is no evidece of a plane does not mean that the there was NOT one, just that you can see no proof. It does not mean it MUST have been something else. You still have to include a plane as a possibility until you find something that eliminates it. I've seen nothing yet that means it COULD NOT have been a plane...

bren@apex

iTrader: (20)

Very interesting read :nod:

Its wasted my entire morning and Ive got absolutely sweet fa work done so far but a very interesting read nontheless

Tiggs

"there are absolutly NO FACTS AT ALL, NO evidence, NO Proof, and NO footage that a Plane hit, show me those "

lol...are these ppl for real? wheres the footage of your postman this morning? MY GOD you must have had letters via laser guide bomb! FACT

EVOVI

After seeing all the websites with the pentagon photos and watching the program I doubt that a 757 hit the pentagon....
It is pretty hard to fly a commercial plane 1 ft off the ground,the ground effect would make it very difficult and the so called hijacker of this plane was the worse pilot on his pilots course and failed...
There were a few witnesses that say they saw the plane go over the freeway but at 9:30 in the morning in the city there would have been thousands of people who would have seen a 757 a few feet off the ground but do you hear from them??
I also saw another programme a few weeks ago that was about the pentagon and how they were bringing it upto date as it would not pass any building codes in the USA as it was.The rebuilding would take years and it included making the building stronger.It just so happens the plane hit a section that was being worked on...But where were the workmen when the plane hit??
You can see alot of building supplies in some of the photos so there should have been workmen there....

Sprint Chief

Just a few additional comments

- wing mounts are very strong, but trust me, they are *not* strong enough to cope with a 400mph impact with concrete, they *will* break

- Nobody flew a plane 1 ft off the ground for any length of time, the plane would have come in at a dive angle of some description. Then it really isn't very difficult.

OllyK

Errr that's your interpretation. If he meant it had been blown up, why didn't he say "it was blown up"? It could mean "there was no chance of saving it so we pulled out"

You have taken 1 word out of context and jumped to a whole load of conclusions.

OllyK

No - there was no footage of the plabe crashing. The only video was from a secuity camera which took a picture a 1 second intervals (something conveniently omitted on most of the consipracy sites) plenty of time for something travelling a 400+ kmh to not actually be captured between the edge of the frame and dissapearing through the wall.

OllyK

Cobblers. At best you can say there is insufficient evidence to proove that a plane hit, now way can you conclude that something else did instead without having any proof for that either.

There is plenty of proof for a plane hitting:
1) Witness statements
2) Wreckage on the lawn
3) Wreckage in the Pentagon
4) Forensic evidence
5) Computer models carried out to work out how it happened

Proof for soemthing else hitting the Pentagon????

OllyK

Woah there!! Even the conspiracy sites admit there is wreckage, they even suggest it was planted over night and that the CIA messed up as they put the wrong type of engine inside the Pentagon. So there is plane wreckage, the question is more how it got there:
1) Plane crash
2) Hurridly brought in at night and scattered about

IIRC The repair work was almost finished, they had installed bomb proof windows and considerable strengthening.


The eveidence is there - your just choosing to ignore it.

OllyK

I saw the above program and no it does not show the plane, see my earlier post, they explain that the vidoe shoots at 1 frame per second and in that 1 second the plane had entered the frame and crashed.

OllyK

...but mainly in the vertical plane rather than the horizontal

OllyK

Never mind the loss of life of those in the Pentagon (and there were some)

Buzzer

OllyK

You're just post whoring now

OllyK

Lol - that's me.

Geezer

They are storing it in the same studio they used to fake the Moon landings

Joking apart, I'm surprised some ******* hasn't actually proposed that !

Geezer

OllyK

They have - one of the sites suggests that it is in a large hanger - probably the one containing the alien ship from Roswell and the passengers are being kept drugged, that's where I kinda gave up on that site.

Geezer

LOL! What's the website? I gotta see that!!!!!

Geezer

OllyK

Can't remember - but I went to the links posted early on in this thread and then wandered on to a few of the suggested sites from those and that's where I came across it - sorry I can't be more helpful.

As i say by that point the credibility was wearing thin and I resisted the temptation to bookmark it!!

Aztec Performance Ltd

iTrader: (234)

3000+ US civilian lives
1000+ US army lives
tens of thousands of Iraqi civilian lives

= one of the worlds most desirable oil reserves

Worth it? Without a shadow of doubt I believe that Bush thinks so.

Bob

Sprint Chief

Why on earth would Bush need to instigate fake terrorist attacks to invade Iraq? What an absurd suggestion! He would have gone into Iraq if 9/11 happened or not. If anything, without 9/11 it would have happened sooner because he would not have been distracted by Afghanistan!

Aztec Performance Ltd

iTrader: (234)

Why? Its far easier now to invade whatever middle eastern country he pleases with this "war on terror" bull$hit.

Now he has shown his ability to invade (and destroy), other countries are more wary. Also has shot down the credibility of UN which suits him no end.

A law unto themselves now (the US that is).

Bob

Sprint Chief

I believe Bush had sufficient support to wage the wars he wanted to in the US anyway. He didn't care about the UN or outside support so that is a red herring.

To fake a terrorist incident like this would be massively risky. The first rule in keeping secrets is to ensure as few people know as possible. The more people that know, the more likely there will be a leak. Most "massive conspiracy" theories are almost certainly wrong because it is simply impossible to keep a secret across the number of people involved.

The risk of being found out outweighs the benefits by about a billion to one, IMHO. Nobody would do something like that, not even someone as mad as Saddam Hussein.

A law unto themselves? They have been for a while, nothing to do with terrorist attacks, just because they are the only remaining superpower. All these things you describe would be true whether 9/11 happened or not.

Aztec Performance Ltd

iTrader: (234)

Put it this way....he now has far more support now with his "war on terror" than he did pre 9/11. It has put fear into US civillians and as a result has less resistance to Iraqi occupation.

9/11 benefited Bush no end.