ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 94 of 372
« First < 44849091929394 95969798104144194 > Last »
Patteeu Memorial Political Forum>911 was an inside job.
Taco John 12:06 AM 02-09-2006
After watching this, I am once and for all convinced that it was an inside job...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...81991288263801


The evidence is way too strong.
[Reply]
Taco John 03:46 PM 07-20-2007
I would just like some sort of explination for the devices that exploded in the building prior to the collapse... I don't think it's irrational to ask the question, considering the number of credible witnesses who heard it, and the video footage which confirm it.


[Reply]
Dallas Chief 03:51 PM 07-20-2007
Originally Posted by Cochise:
You are not understanding what people like Dense and BEP mean when they say neocon. They use the word as a slur, it has no real meaning. Whether it's Dense calling you that, basically hurling a generic insult, or BEP, who dropped some bad neocon acid and sees neocons crawling up the neocon walls and the neocon ceiling and everyneoconwhere else... It's just a way to name-call.

You neoconic neocon.
:-) :-)

You made me laugh out loud at work!!!! :-)
[Reply]
Fishpicker 03:52 PM 07-20-2007
My main doubt is whether or not the bottom 1/2 of the towers had reached the temps that would cause collapse. wouldn't the entire building be unbearably hot in that case?

the collapse is more than feasible in the areas around the impact and above. the portions of the building that were falling never encountered any resistance. the collapse never slowed.
[Reply]
CHIEF4EVER 03:53 PM 07-20-2007
Originally Posted by Taco John:
I would just like some sort of explination for the devices that exploded in the building prior to the collapse... I don't think it's irrational to ask the question, considering the number of credible witnesses who heard it, and the video footage which confirm it.
Uh, oh. I can hear TJ backpedaling from here. Slow down TJ, don't hurt yourself.
[Reply]
Taco John 03:55 PM 07-20-2007
Originally Posted by CHIEF4EVER:
Uh, oh. I can hear TJ backpedaling from here. Slow down TJ, don't hurt yourself.


Backpedaling? How so?

There were detonations that went off in those buildings that the government report doesn't account for. I want to know why.

How is that backpedaling?
[Reply]
BucEyedPea 03:57 PM 07-20-2007
Cochise,
No I do not mean "neo-con" it as a slur. How is that different than a right-winger calling out someone as a liberal. Projection.

It's true I don't like their ideology, but I call it as I see a particular point of view either as a single issue or that someone holds many issues in common with them, in which case they are in that camp.

It's not that they're everywhere. It's that they're the dominant wing of the GOP right now and work through the AEI. If a candidate or politician is connected with them, since I believe in the power of ideas, then most likely that politician is influenced by that think-tank. There's a lot of think tanks in DC that try to peddle influence but AEI/NCs are dominant right now.

So I say that because I happen to believe it's the truth. Other than that I've used to term sarcastically at times or to joke. But mostly, I believe they are the driving force in DC right now on the right.

On the other hand, the pro-war righties see Islamofascists everywhere.
[Reply]
stevieray 03:59 PM 07-20-2007
Originally Posted by Adept Havelock:
Exactly. Didn't the impact knock off most of the fire retardant put on the beams? That would be a factor as well, I'd think.
c'mon now...after an impact @ 600 miles an hour, it was bound to hold.
[Reply]
CHIEF4EVER 04:03 PM 07-20-2007
Originally Posted by Fishpicker:
My main doubt is whether or not the bottom 1/2 of the towers had reached the temps that would cause collapse. wouldn't the entire building be unbearably hot in that case?

the collapse is more than feasible in the areas around the impact and above. the portions of the building that were falling never encountered any resistance. the collapse never slowed.
Have you ever heard of the "avalanche effect"? Once a large amount of weight starts to move downward, it only GAINS in energy. That gain can only be slowed by obstacles but in this case the obstacle in question was not enough to slow the energy of the mass impacting it.
[Reply]
CHIEF4EVER 04:08 PM 07-20-2007
Originally Posted by Taco John:
Backpedaling? How so?

There were detonations that went off in those buildings that the government report doesn't account for. I want to know why.

How is that backpedaling?
Give it up TJ. Admit you were wrong and move on. Neither logic nor fact is on your side. There were NO explosions. Can you provide ABSOLUTE PROOF of your allegation? If not, it's a rumor. Matter of fact, do you have any experience with explosions or photos of them? I have seen them first hand. Hundreds of times. I was an infantryman for 11 years, came with the job. I contend that what you saw was dust plumes from collapsing floors.
[Reply]
Fishpicker 04:16 PM 07-20-2007
this vid shows footage of firefighters that hear an explosion. its so loud it startles them. to see the footage of the explosive going off, skip to 4:50


[Reply]
Eleazar 04:19 PM 07-20-2007
To summarize the article:

Claim: photo of plane as it crashes into WTC shows some kind of "military pod" or external fuel tank, proving that it was a military jet.
Article: photography expert says it's the bulge that contains the landing gear. There's also the matter of all the people and crew on the airliners who never returned home.

Claim: Air Force was ordered not to intervene
Article: Only 14 jets were on alert in the entire 48 contig states... NORAD was only notified at the same time as the first plane hit... terrorists turned off plane transponders making radar identification impossible to do quickly. 5 planes were scrambled but did not reach the areas in time.

Claim: Fox News employee says the plane he saw had no windows
Article: Person was in Brooklyn, more than 2 miles away, and that he didn't see it strike but that it flew over him and he heard the explosion. Photos of debris at the site show fuselage fragments with windows. Fragments linked to hijacked passenger jetliners.

Claim: Planes that are off course and not responding are routinely intercepted within minutes.
Article: NORAD conducted only 1 interception in the previous decade. It took 1 hour and 22 minutes to intercept.

Claim: Damaged elevators and damage to building lobbies proves buildings were wired with explosives.
Article: Burning fuel from crash damaged elevators. Eyewitnesses said flames came out through elevator doors on the ground floor.

Claim: Fuel can't burn hot enough to melt steel
Article: Jet fuel burns at a temp hot enough to take 50% of steel's strength. Some parts of the fire may have been hot enough to reduce it to 10%.

Claim: Puffs of dust as the towers collapsed were caused by demolitions explosives going off as the buildings were intentionally imploded.
Article: When the collapse began, the weight of all the floors above the collapsed zone fell "with pulverizing force on the highest intact floor." It does not require an explosion to begin. The newspaper quote sparking this theory was out of context and later retracted.

Claim: Seismographs 21 miles away prove explosives brought the buildings down
Article: Graphs usually show 30 minute time span that includes 8 and 10 second collapses, making them look like huge spikes. A 40 second plot shows a crescendo of rumbling inconsistent with an explosion.

Claim: WTC 7 was demolished with explosives 7 hours later.
Article: Claim rests on initial FEMA report before the collpase, but researchers later determine building to be more damaged than was thought in the first hours after the attack. Building was also on fire and there was no firefighting that entire day at WTC 7. Design flaws could result in a collapse from the loss of just one of the support columns.

Claim: A 125ft. wide plane would not have made only 75 and 16 feet wide holes in the Pentagon
Article: "A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself in a hardened concrete building". Inner hole was made by landing gear and not fuselage.

Claim: Intact windows above the hole at the Pentagon prove it was a missle attack.
Article: The windows in the Pentagon are blast-resistant.

Claim: No plane wreckage found at the Pentagon
Article: Quotes from first person on the scene, photos, eyewitness accounts, etc.

Claim: A white jet shot down flight 93 in Penn., or performed some kind of computer attack to crash it.
Article: Such a jet in the area was a corporate jet, Asked by the FAA to descend and attempt to locate the crash site, which they did.

Claim: One of the engines from flight 93 was found a long distance from the crash site, "with damage consistent with a heat-seeking missile". ( :-) )
Article: Portion of the engine was found 300 yards from crash site, in the direction the plane was travelling. Not unusual given the airspeed involved.

Claim: Human remains and debris found in a lake a long distance from the scene.
Article: Falsely reported by Pittsburgh newspaper that human remains were at the site. Small debris was, but not particularly unusual for debris to land such a distance away.

Claim: Retired army Col. says flight 93 was shot down, names the pilot who allegedly shot them down.
Article: Named pilot denies the story; was flying from ND to Montana that morning and had someone else with him at the time of the crash who also denies the story.
[Reply]
Eleazar 04:21 PM 07-20-2007
Originally Posted by CHIEF4EVER:
Give it up TJ. Admit you were wrong and move on. Neither logic nor fact is on your side. There were NO explosions. Can you provide ABSOLUTE PROOF of your allegation? If not, it's a rumor. Matter of fact, do you have any experience with explosions or photos of them? I have seen them first hand. Hundreds of times. I was an infantryman for 11 years, came with the job. I contend that what you saw was dust plumes from collapsing floors.
There's also a high volume of air between those floors that had to go somewhere when the floor above came down on top of it.
[Reply]
CHIEF4EVER 04:22 PM 07-20-2007
Originally Posted by Fishpicker:
this vid shows footage of firefighters that hear an explosion. its so loud it startles them. to see the footage of the explosive going off, skip to 4:50
THAT wasn't an explosion. It was the sound of a building collapsing. :-)
[Reply]
Fishpicker 04:24 PM 07-20-2007
it wasnt a sustained rumble. it sounded like a cannon shot off. that is not the sound of 7 collapsing.
[Reply]
Taco John 04:26 PM 07-20-2007
Originally Posted by CHIEF4EVER:
There were NO explosions.
Yes, actually there were. You have to ignore evidence to come to your conclusion. I'm not willing to just ignore evidence to the greatest mass murder committed on American soil.

One man's moonbat is another man's patriot.
[Reply]
Page 94 of 372
« First < 44849091929394 95969798104144194 > Last »
Up