Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: 2Hawks on October 08, 2005, 11:46:50 PM
-
911 and the Pentagon. (http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/flash.htm)
Think Exocet...
Dan.
-
:noid
-
500mph aluminum tube vs. concrete. Hmm, I wonder why there wasn't much left.
-
I think the person who made it wouldnt know his/ her own underwear in a pile of dirty clothes.
They just kinda pointed out all the normal stuff minus the airplane parts strewn about.
Besides that I think somebody posted some pics awhile back showing all the parts of the plane that the ones who think a missle hit dont want you to see. Wait I bet the FBI confiscated those pics to.
(Twilight Zone Theme song)
-
Originally posted by 2Hawks
Morgan Hill, California
Oh, ok. Makes sense.
-
Originally posted by VOR
Oh, ok. Makes sense.
Alrighty Then.
Content of the post aside, it seems Vor is the one that doesn't know how to find his underwear in a laundry pile. :)
-
Lol rocket toy...
Btw, The film suggests to me that it was military hardware of some form that was used. Not that the us government fired a missile at the pentagon.
I feel it would be far more disturbing to think that anyone of these aircraft flying above my head could carry a missile, rather than thinking of an airliner being made into an improvised bomb.
It does have compelling questions I think though. Like the total lack of Aircraft parts.
Prove me wrong, post the photos please. I would appreciate it.
Dan.
-
Originally posted by 2Hawks
It does have compelling questions I think though. Like the total lack of Aircraft parts.
You've let others do your homework for you, or so it seems. ;) Dig around a little..the truth is out there.
(http://files.politicalbrief.com/i_want_to_believe-web.jpg)
-
Ok, Here's one piece of evidence that totally debunks this entire idea.
Planes burn. Missiles explode.
But, if that wasn't convincing enough, do some research on to what the construction of that piece of the pentagon actually consisted of. There is a great poster in my ARCHITECTURAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT IN PENN STATE that tells you exactly how, and why the building did what it did. That also includes the windows.
But what would they know? They only design, build, and fix the friggin things. Quite literally. One of my professors helped design the windows to withstand impacts quite like the one that happened on 9/11.
-
Hes convinced me.
2Hawks you have to go spread the word everywhere!! the CIA are on their way to this very board now,
run for it 2hawks!!!
:noid :noid
but with your help 2Hawks I solved teh mystery
its was
Elvis
in the
Flying Saucer
with the
Exocet
-
What am I supposed to be convinced of? 3 of the 4 airliners were accounted for but the 4th one is missing and "they" shot an Exorcet in to the Pentagon? Where the hell is flight 77 then? Oh, let me guess. I have to buy thier ****ing book to get the " truth".
-
Originally posted by 2Hawks
911 and the Pentagon. (http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/flash.htm)
Think Exocet...
Dan.
Dan, you're a nut if yiou belive the crap in this flash movie.
-
did i s tumble into the oclub???:confused: i am a little tipsey@
-
Originally posted by SuperDud
did i s tumble into the oclub???:confused: i am a little tipsey@
Indeed.... wrong forum kidies.
Dave
-
Originally posted by 2Hawks
Alrighty Then.
Content of the post aside, it seems Vor is the one that doesn't know how to find his underwear in a laundry pile. :)
No he just understands the mentality of the Left coast.
Dave
-
Originally posted by 2Hawks
911 and the Pentagon. (http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/flash.htm)
Think Exocet...
Dan.
Think black helicopters, conspiracy theories, paranoia, and just plain stupidity.
-
There is not much things to whitch you could compare...
http://www.aeronautics.ru/nws002/reuters044.htm
Anyway lets do it again on the same place with same airplane and we will see :D
-
"Where the hell is flight 77 then?"
And the conspiracy then involves somebody making the a/c, the crew, and the passengers dissappear...for good.
As well as FAA and NORAD radar operators have to be in on it otherwise they would spill the beans about the flights "real flightpath"...and of course, why didnt the crew land safe somehwere else?, or radio a transmission as to their "real" plight?, and nobody on the ground or in the air ever sees flight 77 again, it just goes *poof*?
And so on and so forth...
The thing is, conspiracy theories are like having children, unfortunately, anybody can do it. :(
-
boring. seen this one.
lets change the channel.
-
I love it. There's a more than a few frames in the film were they are basically saying WTF???? and there's Air Craft parts in the back round.
FWIW I've been on crash investigation teams before. A/C don't allways leave a wreckage on impact.
-
(http://www.rense.com/general32/aedrive6.jpg)
In the heap of debris next to the hole lies an airliner wheel hub from one of the landing gears (as shown on TLC's "Pentagon Under Fire," aired 9/11/02):
More photos of airliner debris inside the Pentagon along with eyewitness accounts of lying government stooges that were working in that part of the building at the time of the impact who saw aircraft pieces IN the building immediately after the impact. Click the link at the bottom of the page.
.Photos Of Flt 77 Wreckage Inside The Pentagon (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/photowreck.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/F77penta13.html&h=182&w=338&sz=40&tbnid=g3ZNZ5fUyfMJ:&tbnh=61&tbnw=115&hl=en&start=17&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dflight%2B77%2Bpentagon%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rls%3DGGLG,GGLG:2005-22,GGLG:en%26sa%3DN)
They are all lying to cover for Elvis who was commanding the Flying Saucer with Excocets. Both Elvis and the Saucer are safely back at Bush's ranch in Crawford, staying in the underground hangar until they are needed again
-
Clearly they must have firebombed the pentagon afterwords. Look at all this fire. This couldnt be from Burning Jet fuel....clearly :noid
(http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/F77Pl.jpg)
-
That movie, like the websites I have seen about this "theory" is pure nonsense.
There were lots of airplane parts, and as anyone would half a brain would realize, when an aircraft hits a buildling like the Pentagon at over 250 mph, most of the parts continued on into the building, not bounced off onto the lawn.
Since the majority of aircraft structure is aluminum, those parts would be smashed into pieces and then melt into little puddles in a fire as hot as an aircraft crash.
I have seen photos of the engines laying at the scene, with one websight trying to say they are too small around to have been from a 757. Too funny, as anyone who actually knows anything about jet engines is aware, only the front, first stage fan is large in diameter. One set of blades. The rest of the engine, the "core" as it is called, is much smaller in diameter than you might think, and the cores they showed laying at the scene were exactly the correct size for a 757 engine.
I wonder what this freaking idiots are trying to prove? Were do they think that missing 757 is, and all the people in it? Why are they trying to pretend it would boune off the Pentagon, and not bore straight into it, where, loaded with jet fuel, it would burn intensely and consume the majority of the materials it was manufactured with?
Anyone who believes those conspiracy lunatics is missing many marbles.
dago
-
Originally posted by Dago
That movie, like the websites I have seen about this "theory" is pure nonsense.
There were lots of airplane parts, and as anyone would half a brain would realize, when an aircraft hits a buildling like the Pentagon at over 250 mph, most of the parts continued on into the building, not bounced off onto the lawn.
Since the majority of aircraft structure is aluminum, those parts would be smashed into pieces and then melt into little puddles in a fire as hot as an aircraft crash.
I have seen photos of the engines laying at the scene, with one websight trying to say they are too small around to have been from a 757. Too funny, as anyone who actually knows anything about jet engines is aware, only the front, first stage fan is large in diameter. One set of blades. The rest of the engine, the "core" as it is called, is much smaller in diameter than you might think, and the cores they showed laying at the scene were exactly the correct size for a 757 engine.
I wonder what this freaking idiots are trying to prove? Were do they think that missing 757 is, and all the people in it? Why are they trying to pretend it would boune off the Pentagon, and not bore straight into it, where, loaded with jet fuel, it would burn intensely and consume the majority of the materials it was manufactured with?
Anyone who believes those conspiracy lunatics is missing many marbles.
dago
You're part of the cover up aren't you!!!
:noid :eek: :noid
-
i think 2hawks is Whitehawk in disguise to hide himself from the CIA.
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=161305
-
(http://forumspile.com/Post-Crap-Family_cry.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Furball
i think 2hawks is Whitehawk in disguise to hide himself from the CIA.
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=161305
Lol,
No sorry to dissapoint you there. but I have to say there is no better sounding board than these forums here. Much more active critical thinking than what you would find on msn boards. keep it coming.
Even unlikly scenarios must be investigated to be assertivly disproven, no matter how unpopular. Lest the doubt of the kind displayed by the film have a place to take root. So if everyone here says it's completely impossible then it must be true. So this begs the question;
Did America really land astronauts on the moon?
*Evil Grin*
Dan.
-
Originally posted by SuperDud
You're part of the cover up aren't you!!!
:noid :eek: :noid
shhhhhhhhhh, "they" might be listening.
where oh where is my tinfoil radar and nuetron scanning rays reflective hat?
-
Originally posted by 2Hawks
Did America really land astronauts on the moon?
not that I want to feed this troll but this has been argued and there have been several documentaries that proved the nutjobs wrong on this. Kinda like your post here.
-
Deleted.
7- Members should remember this board is aimed at a general audience. Posting pornographic or generally offensive text, images, links, etc. will not be tolerated. This includes attempts to bypass the profanity filter.
-
Originally posted by tikky
Deleted.
7- Members should remember this board is aimed at a general audience. Posting pornographic or generally offensive text, images, links, etc. will not be tolerated. This includes attempts to bypass the profanity filter.
I concur...WTG!
-
Clarksville, TN USA (http://www.mytrailerpark.com/)
Originally posted by VOR
Oh, ok. Makes sense.
-
Originally posted by tikky
Deleted.
7- Members should remember this board is aimed at a general audience. Posting pornographic or generally offensive text, images, links, etc. will not be tolerated. This includes attempts to bypass the profanity filter.
yet highly amusing
-
Originally posted by 2Hawks
911 and the Pentagon. (http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/flash.htm)
Think Exocet...
Dan.
Well I'm convinced.
Our administration made this all up.
We planned to murder our own people, destroy our own property.
I mean just look at the extraordinary timing and coordination as we just know how well the federal govt works and is just sooo efficient.
We also had to kill all the extra participants to hide any future info leaks.
We have a big hangar at Area 51 where some airliners now hide.
The passengers have been killed or are being used for evil experiments.
Yup, I'm convinced.
:noid
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
not that I want to feed this troll but this has been argued and there have been several documentaries that proved the nutjobs wrong on this. Kinda like your post here.
Lol. dammit come on!
I am 1500 miles from home stuck on an Army base in the middle of nowhere, can't a guy have a little fun?! :)
*Sigh*
Dan.
-
this is the internet, no fun allowed, sorry.
-
Where is darwin when you really need him *sigh*
-
Originally posted by FUNKED1
Clarksville, TN USA (http://www.mytrailerpark.com/)
In my defense, I'm a transplat. :D
Aren't you a Kalifornian too, Funked?
-
im sure its been said up ^ but at least dont post stuff thats like 9 months old and claim it as new ground breaking news...........
it is and was good. but go read:
RENSE.COM get more info (be it real or fanatical atleast its a good read!)
-
Originally posted by 2Hawks
Lol,
No sorry to dissapoint you there. but I have to say there is no better sounding board than these forums here. Much more active critical thinking than what you would find on msn boards. keep it coming.
Even unlikly scenarios must be investigated to be assertivly disproven, no matter how unpopular. Lest the doubt of the kind displayed by the film have a place to take root. So if everyone here says it's completely impossible then it must be true. So this begs the question;
Did America really land astronauts on the moon?
*Evil Grin*
Dan.
It's not critical thinking. It's nonsense.
No one ever landed on the moon. A laser ranging retroflector (http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEhelp/ApolloLaser.html) erupted out of the ground.
-
Could it be that a member of the USAF, a pilot, crashed his fighter into the pentagon? Like everyone said...what happened to the airline plane then? Why do people waste their time with crap like this?
Next thing they will say is the whole 9-11 event, was a smoke screen, so they could fire a missile at a certain office in the pentagon, to destroy a file cabinet that provided the military service record of Bush.
-
2Hawks,
What you're espousing is not critical thinking so much as it is uncritical acceptance of crap. When presented with this type of stuff, it's perfectly acceptable to not dismiss it out of hand, but don't confuse that with an endorsement to propagate nonsense.
You look at the presentation/assertion, then examine the bona fides of the presenter. Is the person a peer-reviewed/accepted expert in his/her field? The evidence itself, how solid is it? How does it survive Occams Razor? Even if this crackpot theory survived #1 and #2, it fails miserably on the razor. For it to be true, you would need (as stated earlier) for thousands of people (from eye witnesses to radar controllers to investigators to firemen) to cooperate, not to mention the people that would presumably have been needed to destroy the actual airplane and kill all the passengers that died in the disaster.
Be open minded, but not so much so that your brains fall out. And if you come back and claim that you don't actually believe it and never did, then I'll take that as a tacit admission of purposeful trolling.
Your call.
-
Originally posted by FiLtH
Could it be that a member of the USAF, a pilot, crashed his fighter into the pentagon? Like everyone said...what happened to the airline plane then? Why do people waste their time with crap like this?
Next thing they will say is the whole 9-11 event, was a smoke screen, so they could fire a missile at a certain office in the pentagon, to destroy a file cabinet that provided the military service record of Bush.
Ha Ha Ha Ha HA now THAT is funny :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
2Hawks,
Be open minded, but not so much so that your brains fall out. And if you come back and claim that you don't actually believe it and never did, then I'll take that as a tacit admission of purposeful trolling.
Your call.
Trolling or not, the whole purpose of this post was to make a point with a friend I have been in conversation with.
Nowhere did I or the video suggest that it was ever the government that perpetrated the bombings, everyone else here suggested that on their own in their haste to dispute a point that was never made.
The point I was making by posting this video, was the assumptions everyone immediatly jumps to regarding the topic of 911 and controversy regarding the accuracy of the data therein.
Of special note, and you can create your own conclusions and flame me for them at your liesure, has to do with Katrina and Rita respones. - After 911 we have systematically lost due process and civil liberties in order to create a more efficient disaster response and better fight the war on terror.
If we cannot do better in regards to disaster response then we need our due process and civil liberties back. If the war on terror is truly benefiting from the loss of some freedoms then we need to see something we can reconcile to those gains / losses.
There is more that goes into the conversation we have been having, but would more than likely be way above the level of the kind and cooperative laboratory rats you have been.
I will be home soon, and back to cllubbing seals in no time at all. Until then:
Dan.
-
Originally posted by 2Hawks
The point I was making by posting this video, was the assumptions everyone immediatly jumps to regarding the topic of 911 and controversy regarding the accuracy of the data therein.
There is no ****ing controversy. We know exactly what happened to the Pentagon.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
There is no ****ing controversy. We know exactly what happened to the Pentagon.
Yeah... aliens...
-
There is more that goes into the conversation we have been having, but would more than likely be way above the level of the kind and cooperative laboratory rats you have been.
If I may observe, women and liberal twits exibit circular logic that refuses to accept responsibility for the failure of their cornball ideas. Lab rats just don't give a damn about anything but the cheeze. Logic is useless unless there's CHEEZE.
..the whole purpose of this post was to make a point with a friend I have been in conversation with.
And my dog never ate your homework.
In fact, I don't even have a dog.
..everyone else here suggested that on their own in their haste to dispute a point that was never made.
Mayhaps you'll get to the point?
The point I was making by posting this video, was the assumptions everyone immediatly jumps to regarding the topic of 911 and controversy regarding the accuracy of the data therein.
Enh? How's that again.. yer making to a non-respondent imaginary friend a point on assumptions using a farsical consipiracy theory video clip.. ??
BRILLIANT! I stand, sir, in awe of your illuminating powers of discovery.
Tell yah what. You bring yer friend on by and well make some assumptions about him (her, it, whatever) too. All free of charge. After all, we have our reputations as your cooperative pet labratory rats to maintain. We'll try to keep up. Do remember to bring some quality cheeze next time.
Have a nice day. ;)
-
Originally posted by Hangtime
If I may observe, women and liberal twits exibit circular logic that refuses to accept responsibility for the failure of their cornball ideas. Lab rats just don't give a damn about anything but the cheeze. Logic is useless unless there's CHEEZE.
And my dog never ate your homework.
In fact, I don't even have a dog.
Mayhaps you'll get to the point?
Enh? How's that again.. yer making to a non-respondent imaginary friend a point on assumptions using a farsical consipiracy theory video clip.. ??
BRILLIANT! I stand, sir, in awe of your illuminating powers of discovery.
Tell yah what. You bring yer friend on by and well make some assumptions about him (her, it, whatever) too. All free of charge. After all, we have our reputations as your cooperative pet labratory rats to maintain. We'll try to keep up. Do remember to bring some quality cheeze next time.
Have a nice day. ;)
I wasn't going to justify this with a response, however... I wanted to remark on some points you made, and more interestingly, some you didn't comment on.
The quality of your post is just mind blowing, and would suggest to me was strongly influenced by chemical dependencies...
Cheeze??
Your Dog didn't eat my homework.... What?!?
the sarcasm regarding my powers of discovery might be interpreted as trying to take attention away from the very real and valid arguments against the loss of our civil liberties in regards to 'enhancing disaster response and common defense against terrorists'. My conclusions aside on this topic, the point was made perfectly when you made your last post.
Perhaps labrats were a tad too harsh, I should have said; "Independant control group oblivious to their participation in a social experiment".
*Grin*
Dan.
-
Nothing personal, but your current "lecture" for us all regarding our "loss of civil liberties" comes off as nothing more than Bravo Sierra spin used as damage control/cover for a post that was poor quality Bravo Sierra to begin with, and likely a really piss poor troll.
-
Originally posted by 2Hawks
I wasn't going to justify this with a response, however... I wanted to remark on some points you made, and more interestingly, some you didn't comment on.
The quality of your post is just mind blowing, and would suggest to me was strongly influenced by chemical dependencies...
Cheeze??
Your Dog didn't eat my homework.... What?!?
the sarcasm regarding my powers of discovery might be interpreted as trying to take attention away from the very real and valid arguments against the loss of our civil liberties in regards to 'enhancing disaster response and common defense against terrorists'. My conclusions aside on this topic, the point was made perfectly when you made your last post.
Perhaps labrats were a tad too harsh, I should have said; "Independant control group oblivious to their participation in a social experiment".
*Grin*
Dan.
We'll just skip on past the bombshell civil liberties disclosure 21 posts into a thread you started by postulating that a hole in the pentagon was made by a missile instead of a jetliner. We'll also gloss over the request for proof of the jetliner doing the damage instead of a missile or 'military hardware'.
Instead, I'll just cut to the chase with an electrifying observation that carries more factual content and logic than anything you've managed to get up here so far..
The only connection between civil liberties and their erosion and a jetliner you alledge launched a missile into the Pentagon (and then disappeared itself) is your imagination. To take US to task because we ain't buying into your pet delusion is piteous at best, and mildly humorous only because it's distracting me from a painful papercut.
Now, remember, take your meds and ask mommy before you get on the computer next time.
-
4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.
5- Flamebaiting, trolling, or posting to incite or annoy is not allowed.