Dunc Posted 2 November 2005 Posted 2 November 2005 Now you're labelling me twice, Ken. I am neither a conspiracy theory wacko (there is enough proof that the White House lied to the World public) nor a Hollywood director (I doubt that I'll ever become one, that's not the way I see my future). Incidentally, on the Hollywood Director/Conspiracy theory angle - if you are into this kind of grassy knoll, smoking man, CIA, Bush admin, it was really Marilyn Munroe conspiracy you should read "American Hero" by Larry Beinhart. Conspiracy theorists say its been discontinued as its the true story behind the original Gulf War. I just say its a good satire.
Hullfox Posted 2 November 2005 Posted 2 November 2005 well well well, ive just watched the docu, and its very very interesting. the twin towers: one eye witness explained the 2nd plane as "a cargo plane, it definately had a blue logo on the front". another woman cliamed, "that was not an american airline". a fox news employee said "there was definately a circlier blue logo on the front of the plane". was it a commercial flight? in slow motion, the docu shows/explains an explosion INSIDE each building just before the planes hit the towers. when you look closely, you can see something rather big attached to the bottom of the plane. certainly nothing a commercial plane would carry. have a look? when you watch the plane arriving at the building in ultra slow motion, you can see something being launched at the building, then creating the explosion. a rocket? after the buildings collapsed, firefighters were asked about it, and they described it as "explosions one after the other, as each flooor came down, as if they had planned to take down the building". building 7: BEFORE either of the 2 towers had colapsed, "building 7" fell to the ground, why? no plane had hit it. CNN are the ONLY media outlet to ever have shown it live, and only once. why not again? this could explain the $7B insurance policy, that it was blown up deliberately. the pentagon: the dimension of the crash where the pentagon was supposedly hit, is 73ft high, 65ft in width. the supposed plane, a boeing 757 is 124ft and 10inc wide. from nose to tail it is 155ft 3inc, and in height, its 44ft 6inc. how did a plane that big, only create a hole 65ft wide? the roof and upper floors were still visibly intact. how can this be with a 44ft in height plane hitting the building from a height angle? on the left hand side of the inner part building, there is no serious damage, nothing burnt. a computer monitor 2 feet away completely untouched, a book, inc`s away from the edge, but no burnt marks whatso ever. yet were led to believe that a commercial plane melts through steel. an expert claims that the 800 gallons of fuel wouldve burnt everything. pictures of an explosion occuring there, were released some days ago, but with the date 12 september 2001, time 1737pm. how is this possible? there is not one single picture showing any aspect of a plane. surely the wings would be about? if this is was made up by the US government (and i believe it is), why? now we have the prospect of i.d. cards etc, is it to keep control of us, by saying, them the terrorists are coming to get us. view it, its facinating! To save me having to trawl back through the thread, how do you get to see it?
Dunc Posted 2 November 2005 Posted 2 November 2005 To be fair without having seen the DVD it does look an interesting piece of film making, but some of the arguments look tenuous to say the least.
Gamesmaster Posted 2 November 2005 Posted 2 November 2005 To save me having to trawl back through the thread, how do you get to see it? you can buy it as swiss says on page 1, or like me, you can download it on kazza, limewire etc its approximately 500mb`s.
Blue Arrow Posted 2 November 2005 Posted 2 November 2005 And asked by a kid what he did when he heard about the first plane hitting the tower: (no quotation, but in essence) "I was shocked seeing the explosion on television..." But the thing is, there is NO TV footage of the first plane hitting the tower... So what did President Bush see? I've seen footage
MADLEVEIN Posted 2 November 2005 Posted 2 November 2005 this link is to a website...sorry the language is foreign but if you have time to go through the clips and photos of all the index there is some very intresting stuff. http://www.terrorize.dk/911/#toc
MC Prussian Posted 2 November 2005 Author Posted 2 November 2005 this link is to a website...sorry the language is foreign but if you have time to go through the clips and photos of all the index there is some very intresting stuff. http://www.terrorize.dk/911/#toc It's Danish. "Foreign"... Shen would be able to translate it properly, but judging from the design, it looks pretty much like the official "In Plane Site" webpage. 911 In Plane Site
shen Posted 3 November 2005 Posted 3 November 2005 It's Danish. "Foreign"... Shen would be able to translate it properly, but judging from the design, it looks pretty much like the official "In Plane Site" webpage. 911 In Plane Site I would yes, but I can't be bothered .. the titles and videos probably explain themselves..
Fox 4 Life Posted 4 November 2005 Posted 4 November 2005 Its all well saying this, but the one key thing that makes this all a load of rubbish is the fact that the people who "went down" on the flights and called parents etc MUST still be alive now, if there was in fact nobody onboard and it landed safely in Cleveland, Therefore you are trying to say that 200 people have been given new idnetities that is absolutley pathetic! They named people for instance the guy who said "lets roll" and attacked the terrorists, there was interviews with his family and he was called a hero - so youre saying this is all made up? And he is alive under a diff identity - no chance! Thats is complete bollocks! The only way that bush could get away with it would be to kill the people who landed in Cleveland to stop them speaking, 200+ people could not keep this secret and more to the point the govt could not trust them to keep it! The footage on that DVD could have easily been edited it is not hard to edit a plane, sorry but its to far fetched. Now i could belive that Bush had something to do with it i.e. was in cahoots with the terrorists, but doing it all with military planes is far far to dodgy and not even dumbass Bush would go along with that!
Gamesmaster Posted 4 November 2005 Posted 4 November 2005 ive been doing some homework 9/11 victims list in which only 148 people were on board both wtc planes. how many people would you expect would be on one, 200? anyway, The 9/11 Commission Report: "More significantly, what this carefully drafted script fails to mention is that, given the prevailing technology in September 2001, it was extremely difficult, if not impossible, to place a wireless cell call from an aircraft traveling at high speed above 8000 feet: " "Wireless communications networks weren't designed for ground-to-air communication. Cellular experts privately admit that they're surprised the calls were able to be placed from the hijacked planes, and that they lasted as long as they did. They speculate that the only reason that the calls went through in the first place is that the aircraft were flying so close to the ground ( http://www.elliott.org/technology/2001/cellpermit.htm Expert opinion within the wireless telecom industry casts serious doubt on "the findings" of the 9/11 Commission. According to Alexa Graf, a spokesman of AT&T, commenting in the immediate wake of the 9/11 attacks: "it was almost a fluke that the [9/11] calls reached their destinations... From high altitudes, the call quality is not very good, and most callers will experience drops. Although calls are not reliable, callers can pick up and hold calls for a little while below a certain altitude" lets say the 4 planes are genuine highjacked commercial aircraft. how do you explain a 124 foot wide boeing 757 only damaging a building to the degree of 65 feet? Fox 4 Life, the american government is capable of producing 9/11. there the most powerful nation on earth. did you know britain cant use nuclear weapons without the pentagon giving the all clear? im not saying you should believe the US produced 9/11, but keep an open mind about it. if you want to control society, how do you do it? make people believe theres an "enemy" out there wanting to kill em perhaps? i.d cards, iris scanning, finger printing, cameras on just about every street corner in town etc etc they have enough control over us. you cant even protest within a square mile of the commons now. how do you explain the destruction of building 7?
MC Prussian Posted 4 November 2005 Author Posted 4 November 2005 Now there were two... One less to doubt the evidence without having seen it! Keep it up!
Fox 4 Life Posted 4 November 2005 Posted 4 November 2005 I am definetly open minded, as fear is the best way to unite a country and get support for Bush. I just think it is far to far fetched for this to actually be true. You mention the victims, but they are real people. so where did they go then if they were not aboard the planes? Who identified the bodies?
davieG Posted 4 November 2005 Posted 4 November 2005 Now there were two...One less to doubt the evidence without having seen it! Keep it up! As I said before it's not a case of believing or disbelieving, even if what you say about the explosions are true, there could still be over explanations other than the Yanks did it to themselves, they could for instance be trying to cover up a more serious scenario such as they were military traqnsport planes stolen from the US Air force, I'm pretty sure they would not want to admit to that or that the Pentagon was hit by a missile again there may be 'legitimate' reasons to cover that up. All far-fetched I'm sure but so is any explanation. I just prefer to keep an open mind, I have no reason to commit myself to any particular explanation, rather I take a jaundiced view of politics at all times and treat all political statements, no matter where they come from with a degree of 'pull the other one mate'. Perhaps it's an age thing but it seems to get me by.
Fox 4 Life Posted 4 November 2005 Posted 4 November 2005 Thats why conspiracy theories are so good. If you want a good read have a look at the death of Tupac and the number 7 theory, he is 100% dead but after reading it you start to think, conspiracies theories are called that beacuse they are theories and they are very good ones and well researched!
Fox 4 Life Posted 4 November 2005 Posted 4 November 2005 As I said before it's not a case of believing or disbelieving, even if what you say about the explosions are true, there could still be over explanations other than the Yanks did it to themselves, they could for instance be trying to cover up a more serious scenario such as they were military traqnsport planes stolen from the US Air force, I'm pretty sure they would not want to admit to that or that the Pentagon was hit by a missile again there may be 'legitimate' reasons to cover that up. All far-fetched I'm sure but so is any explanation. I just prefer to keep an open mind, I have no reason to commit myself to any particular explanation, rather I take a jaundiced view of politics at all times and treat all political statements, no matter where they come from with a degree of 'pull the other one mate'. Perhaps it's an age thing but it seems to get me by. I 110% agree with Davie, I think something is definetly fishy but to go as far as to say they made up all the victims etc and it was an empty plane, that is just ludicrous!
davieG Posted 4 November 2005 Posted 4 November 2005 I 110% agree with Davie, I think something is definetly fishy but to go as far as to say they made up all the victims etc and it was an empty plane, that is just ludicrous! Whoa, I didn't say they didn't make it all up and I didn't say they did, anything is possible that's why I can't commit to a particular explanation.
Fox 4 Life Posted 4 November 2005 Posted 4 November 2005 Fair enough but surely anyone who is sane minded cannot really think they could fake all this http://www.september11victims.com/ All the victimes from the planes who were formally identified, the families who have spoken on independent documentarys etc. Something that big could never be kept a secret.
shen Posted 4 November 2005 Posted 4 November 2005 Its all well saying this, but the one key thing that makes this all a load of rubbish is the fact that the people who "went down" on the flights and called parents etc MUST still be alive now, if there was in fact nobody onboard and it landed safely in Cleveland, Therefore you are trying to say that 200 people have been given new idnetities that is absolutley pathetic! They named people for instance the guy who said "lets roll" and attacked the terrorists, there was interviews with his family and he was called a hero - so youre saying this is all made up? And he is alive under a diff identity - no chance! Thats is complete bollocks! The only way that bush could get away with it would be to kill the people who landed in Cleveland to stop them speaking, 200+ people could not keep this secret and more to the point the govt could not trust them to keep it! The footage on that DVD could have easily been edited it is not hard to edit a plane, sorry but its to far fetched. Now i could belive that Bush had something to do with it i.e. was in cahoots with the terrorists, but doing it all with military planes is far far to dodgy and not even dumbass Bush would go along with that! Well I know this is a very sinister thought, but what you said there actually made me think about the possiblity that this scenario could've been faked i.e. that no people were actually on the planes. People couldve called their loved ones and been told to say they're on a plane etc. with a gun to their heads. With the sinister part being that a secret governmental organisation or the like were behind it. Certainly the CIA have done far worse things abroad than kill a few (relatively speaking) people.... I admit it's a sinister thought, and it's not what I necessarily believe. But I don't have the answers, so like davieG, I like to keep an open mind about it... As I said before it's not a case of believing or disbelieving, even if what you say about the explosions are true, there could still be over explanations other than the Yanks did it to themselves, they could for instance be trying to cover up a more serious scenario such as they were military traqnsport planes stolen from the US Air force, I'm pretty sure they would not want to admit to that or that the Pentagon was hit by a missile again there may be 'legitimate' reasons to cover that up. All far-fetched I'm sure but so is any explanation. I just prefer to keep an open mind, I have no reason to commit myself to any particular explanation, rather I take a jaundiced view of politics at all times and treat all political statements, no matter where they come from with a degree of 'pull the other one mate'. Perhaps it's an age thing but it seems to get me by. It's just as credible a theory in my opinion. But that would still not explain the people on the planes...
Gamesmaster Posted 13 November 2005 Posted 13 November 2005 Well I know this is a very sinister thought, but what you said there actually made me think about the possiblity that this scenario could've been faked i.e. that no people were actually on the planes. People couldve called their loved ones and been told to say they're on a plane etc. with a gun to their heads. With the sinister part being that a secret governmental organisation or the like were behind it. Certainly the CIA have done far worse things abroad than kill a few (relatively speaking) people.... I admit it's a sinister thought, and it's not what I necessarily believe. But I don't have the answers, so like davieG, I like to keep an open mind about it... thats a very interesting theory, because we all think what the media told us that they were on the planes, when infact they could`ve been anywhere with a US CI5 gun pointing at their head? some interesting footage here, watch extremely closely about 3 mins in, the big explosion on the pentagon and what looks like a plane hitting it, certainly not a boeing 757 though.
Thracian Posted 13 November 2005 Posted 13 November 2005 Stranger things have happened. I am thinking of a big scandal that surfaced in the hmm 80s or 90s in Italy. A very well-known political figure was kidnapped and eventually assassinated in the 1970s. There was a huge uproar and it is felt that the following couple of elections were decided by this one single but major public event, as an extreme faction of the opposing party was long blamed for this (they seemingly had admitted to it). But now all the evidence points to his own party having "sacrificed" him? It is not that far-fetched really... Not sure if it was the same incident but I seem to recall a cracking book linked to that called "In God's Name". Wasn't there also a guy found hung on Blackfriars Bridge in London?. Terrific and supposedly true story. I have no firm opinion on the Bush issue. Nothing would surprise me about the man although it really is difficult to comprehend how he, or others connected with him, could have pulled it off. Trouble is politicians either lie or are economical with the truth on a daily basis. Take Blair over the 90-day detention issue. Turns out his calim that 90 days was needed to translate encrypted files was rubbish. I am not naturally anti-Labour. I try to keep an open mind. But Blair is a bullshitter of the first order as has been proved time and again. Furthermore he is a hypocrite. Manufacturing has all but disappeared, good companies have gone bust and been scandalously donated to the Chinese, lots of people have nothing spare to spend, we now have to work for more weeks of a year than ever before before WE keep any money and, even at the polls, the population of England didn't want him. Yet still he has the arrogance to keep going. Still he presides over the disappearance of so many of our traditions. Now, they say, he even intends to do away with our counties. Why and how does he get away with it. Because he's been cuning enough to win over the media and they have been stupid enough to be conned (which doesn't surprise me). When will the nation cry enough? When will America do the same. The two of em should be exiled onto the same South Pacific Island where they can kiss each other's arses without being seen and where they can muse over a plan to convince the world that Leicester City will be next season's Premiership Champions.. Well after what they've managed so far they need a real challenge.
Gamesmaster Posted 16 November 2005 Posted 16 November 2005 fascinating stuff this 9/11 conspiracy. watch clips of the documentary check this out the first clip just shows building 7 being demolished, blown up. the 2nd clip does the same, but you can hear dan rather (a cbs news presenter) clearly say “Amazing, incredible, pick your word. For the third time today, it’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen too much on television before, where a building was deliberately destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down.†whats this underneath plane 2?
MC Prussian Posted 31 March 2006 Author Posted 31 March 2006 A new movie has shown up: 9/11 Loose Change on Google Video
Jordan Posted 31 March 2006 Posted 31 March 2006 "In Plane Site" has been soundly criticized by even many people involved with efforts to uncover 9/11 conspiracies. Everything I've read about that DVD says that it's got quite its share of misinformation and plagiarism... and I think the notion of missiles being attached to the planes is ridiculous (I think that theory has been largely discounted as footage showing the "missiles" are either doctored or misleading--I've certainly not noticed them). So why should I watch this DVD?
MC Prussian Posted 31 March 2006 Author Posted 31 March 2006 Well, as long as those two movies can't be proved wrong, there still is a very fishy smell surrounding the 9/11 events. Have you watched them, Jordan? What's your say on it?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.