|
9/11 RIP to the Fallen & F*CK the US GOV (pg. 12)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by geroin
.
agree with you my man
and this is how they debunk 9/11 by posting the exact factual quotes....oh wait never mind they are trying to be humorous so we can all sit and laugh of how it took place ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaa
http://www.debunking911.com/meeting.htm
this site is worse than the actual conspiracy theory sites, jesus christ.. |
Do you know anything about cruise missiles? No, I doubt you do. To think its anything other than an airplane demonstrates a fundamental lack of knowledge on cruise missiles. The amount of penetration in that building was amazing. There is not a cruise missile deployed anywhere in the world large enough to cause penetration damage like that.
A cruise missile warhead, especially one designed to hit a target in the broad side like that would point to its development being for anti-shipping and would not be of the penetrator type. Modern fighting ships have very little armor, since armor became fairly useless with the advent of good armor piercing shells and then shaped charge warheads (as well as the move away from guns, to over the horizon cruise missiles). It was easier and cheaper to build the ships with light armor and more improved point defense systems like Phalanx, Sea Sparrow, and the Standard Missile System (which is all tied into Aegis in a lot of western fleets). The point being, cruise missiles now are mainly piercing in kinetic effect only, with a delayed main charge so that it explodes inside the ship after the warhead has pierced the fairly thin steel of the hull. This causes maximum damage to the internal parts of the ship, blowing out bulkheads, rupturing lines and wires, and making a GIANT ING HOLE in the side of the ship. It is not designed to penetrate.
What we saw on 9/11 is damage through multiple steel reinforced concrete and cinder block walls, including damage that extended across free space gaps (in a normal explosion free space gaps are good at preventing damage, explosions travel in the path of least resistance, if they meet free space then the explosive force will happily expand out). Free space crossing in an explosion demands that there is a physical solid object traveling on a ballistic path. In most cases this is a penetrator warheads copper or other metallic shaped charge projectile. There is no way that a cruise missile of any common size could impact and continue across that many barriers, crossing free space and into another set of concrete walls.
What does make sense is a very very large mass of material traveling at 500MPH being able to do that. The body of the plane acted like a knife, cutting through each layer till its kinetic energy ran out, progressively making smaller and smaller holes as it met more and more resistance.
This is simple warhead design theory, cruise missile history/design, and physics. Something I doubt you know very little about.
I've studied military technology my whole life, since I was a little boy. I am very knowledgeable on cruise missile systems, both Western and Eastern, and I also work in the defense industry making simulation software. So kindly off. |
|
|
| Comrade Stalin |
| quote: | Originally posted by geroin
|
I'm sure that'll fly in a court of law...:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by geroin
Government: We want to cause a tragedy so great the American people will blindly follow us into war... What do you think gentlemen...
Accomplice #1: Well, the Towers are a perfect choice.. It's been bombed before. We can just blame Osama again. We've been priming the American people by having him blow up our warships and our buildings in other countries.
Government: Yeah, good idea! How will we do that?
Accomplice #1: We can hire Osama to get some of his friends to fly planes into it!
Accomplice #2: Wait... I have a better idea, We can BOMB the buildings!
Accomplice #1: Well, that means placing enough bombs into two 110 story buildings. That's going to take a lot of man power and risk us being uncovered...
Accomplice #2: Yeah, but that way, you’re sure to knock them down. Besides, maybe the hijackers won’t make it to the target. Maybe they'll be uncovered!
Accomplice #1: But you don't need to knock them down, all you need is the horrific sight of the planes hitting the buildings. People will get the message. It's an attack on American soil. We'll also have people like the blind sheik to cover for us. We'll even put a guy on a train with evidence.
Your plan isn't perfect either, you know. Do I have to remind you of Operation Towel Pop? We already tried to embarrass Clinton by knocking it down and failed.
Accomplice #2: Yeah, our Bay of Pigs, but I say the only way they can get the message is if we knock them down.
Accomplice #1: Do not
Accomplice #2: Do too
Accomplice #1: Do not
Accomplice #2: Do too
Accomplice #1: Do not
Accomplice #2: Do too
Government: Gentlemen, gentlemen... Please... What the hell, we'll just do both! :blink: How do we do that? I mean, how do you keep explosions from showing up on TV? We're going to have to investigate this at some point. How do we cover up the scene?
Accomplice #2: But why not just knock it dow...
Government: I've made my decision. Continue...
Accomplice #2: OK.. We install charges on every floor so that after the planes hit, we blow each floor under the crash floor one by one, very fast to simulate pancaking. We'll let the building burn a while just for effect. This will also give time for the trusses to sag making it LOOK like a fire caused the building to fall.
Accomplice #1: Nice touch...
Accomplice #2: Why, thank you. :) ...We'll set a charge off in the middle of the building AFTER the top is on its way down so everyone thinks the puffs of debris coming from the windows are from the tremendous hypodermic needle like pressure blowing debris from the weakest point in the building.
Government: What about the sound of explosions? Isn't that a dead giveaway?
Accomplice #2: No problem, We'll just let them think it's normal electrical explosions like transformers blowing up or the initial concrete and steel and floors hitting the floors below.
Accomplice #1: Yeah, it could also be the steel columns snapping like twigs from the tremendous weight of the floors above... Don't worry, we have disinformation specialists in key internet forums.
Government: WOW, You guys think of everything.. What about Building 7? Can we take that out at the same time?
Accomplice #1: We won’t be able to fly planes into it, that's for sure...
Accomplice #2: Leave it to me. If we set off the explosions just right, we can have one of the towers hit Building 7, missing the two next to it. After that, we can set fires on the bottom floors and let it burn for a while, you know, to make it look possible for a normal collapse. I'll call my agent in the fire department to get everyone out before we blow it. I'll figure a way to make the floors look buckled for effect as well.
Government: Amazing ... I also want to take out the Pentagon. Any suggestions?
Accomplice #1: What we'll do is hijack a plane just for effect, then fire a missile at the Pentagon. A bunker buster.
Government: But what about the people on the plane?
Accomplice #1: We'll land the plane in area 51, then shoot them all.
Government: Why not use the plane instead of the missile? That way, you take care of all the evidence at the same time... People on the highway can also see the planes hit. If you use a missile, there's going to be a lot of witnesses who saw a missile and not a plane.
Accomplice #1: Err... ah, don't worry about these small details. I have an undercover op in the DC police department who will take the names down and shot them all.
Government: How are you going to get all the people involved in this? Bush isn't exactly loved you know..
Accomplice #1: Don't worry, psych-ops will take care of the brainwashing of the American people. As for the media, we control the left and the right!
Government: GREAT! Nice work all! Let’s make the target date Sept 11, 2001. |
I can't tell what you are arguing... You are either a moron... or ... no, you are probably just a moron. |
|
|
| Brennen |
http://www.militaryofficersfor911truth.org/
I guess these military officers are all morons. What do they know about flying, weapons, and explosives?
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/
Same goes with these pilots. They never flew a plain in their lives?
http://physics911.net/
How about these scientists? Morons too right? |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Brennen
The government said it was a plane. End of discussion. |
lol so true.:stongue: I would love to see the footage of the actual plane crashing into the pentagon. Too bad we'll never see that in our life time. |
|
|
| shagnew13 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
And you believe whatever the government says is the exact opposite 100% of the time. You have no opinions of your own either.
You fail to use any logical thinking process and instead go with a reactionary answer that is "that CANT be the truth because they never tell the truth!" Its self fulfilling logic.
You honestly think that something like 9/11 could be an inside job? You have far more faith in government being competent than any of us do if that is the case. |
You really think that if the Gov't was at all involved, that they would actually come out and explain it to the people in words they would understand???
Mr. President did the Gov't have any hand in what happened that fateful day on Sept. 11th, 2001?
President: Yup, we did it, we were involved.
I don't think so.
Just one simple question how come there are reports that none of the blackboxes were recovered? That they were all destroyed in the crahes. Yet there are reports that like 90% of blackboxes are always recovered. Then a report that 1 was recovered but no one can hear whats on it, or take notes. Then a report that a total of 3 had been recovered, but that they were too badly damaged to garner any useful information?
Really, how come they were never released? |
|
|
| Brennen |
| quote: | Originally posted by hardcore trancer
lol so true.:stongue: I would love to see the footage of the actual plane crashing into the pentagon. Too bad we'll never see that in our life time. |
There ya go:
http://physics911.ca/pentcrashvideo |
|
|
| shagnew13 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Brennen
The government said it was a plane. End of discussion. |
A Boeing 757 I believe to be exact!!!!
Where is the footage on that actually hitting the Pentagon? Like we seen all the footage of the Twin Towers?
Oh right the Gov't seized those videos!!!! |
|
|
| geroin |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Do you know anything about cruise missiles? No, I doubt you do. To think its anything other than an airplane demonstrates a fundamental lack of knowledge on cruise missiles. The amount of penetration in that building was amazing. There is not a cruise missile deployed anywhere in the world large enough to cause penetration damage like that.
A cruise missile warhead, especially one designed to hit a target in the broad side like that would point to its development being for anti-shipping and would not be of the penetrator type. Modern fighting ships have very little armor, since armor became fairly useless with the advent of good armor piercing shells and then shaped charge warheads (as well as the move away from guns, to over the horizon cruise missiles). It was easier and cheaper to build the ships with light armor and more improved point defense systems like Phalanx, Sea Sparrow, and the Standard Missile System (which is all tied into Aegis in a lot of western fleets). The point being, cruise missiles now are mainly piercing in kinetic effect only, with a delayed main charge so that it explodes inside the ship after the warhead has pierced the fairly thin steel of the hull. This causes maximum damage to the internal parts of the ship, blowing out bulkheads, rupturing lines and wires, and making a GIANT ING HOLE in the side of the ship. It is not designed to penetrate.
What we saw on 9/11 is damage through multiple steel reinforced concrete and cinder block walls, including damage that extended across free space gaps (in a normal explosion free space gaps are good at preventing damage, explosions travel in the path of least resistance, if they meet free space then the explosive force will happily expand out). Free space crossing in an explosion demands that there is a physical solid object traveling on a ballistic path. In most cases this is a penetrator warheads copper or other metallic shaped charge projectile. There is no way that a cruise missile of any common size could impact and continue across that many barriers, crossing free space and into another set of concrete walls.
What does make sense is a very very large mass of material traveling at 500MPH being able to do that. The body of the plane acted like a knife, cutting through each layer till its kinetic energy ran out, progressively making smaller and smaller holes as it met more and more resistance.
This is simple warhead design theory, cruise missile history/design, and physics. Something I doubt you know very little about.
I've studied military technology my whole life, since I was a little boy. I am very knowledgeable on cruise missile systems, both Western and Eastern, and I also work in the defense industry making simulation software. So kindly off. |
while it's very nice of you to explain why it's not a missile i'd like you to explain to me how a plane could have traveled in that particular path/direction, how there were no plane parts left on site and how is that there is absolutely no evidence from any camera anywhere indicating that it was a plane that hit the building?
thank you in advance |
|
|
| Comrade Stalin |
| quote: | Originally posted by Brennen
I'm not going to get into it with you. |
You're more than welcome to explain to me how the US government is able to keep such a huge secret, well...secret, given the fact they can't even prevent Wikileaks from publishing tens of thousands of top secret documents, not even mentioning the myriad of other "secret stuff" that's leaked to the press all the time. This should be interesting.
| quote: | | Clearly you are a scientist and an expert in weapons, explosives, demolition, architecture, fire, and physics. |
No, I'm just an expert at calling out bull when I see it. Little tiny puffs of smoke coming out of a building, in a Youtube video, is hardly evidence for anything. It would be so much more helpful if you, more importantly, the entire conspiracy theory movement, would oblige to a legal standard of truth and evidence. 100% of everything put forward by Loose Change and others prove absolutely nothing in a court of law. There are no defendants, no stated motive, no details of "how" the plot was planned and carried. No names. No hard evidence of anything, i.e. blast caps. No insiders coming forward with details on the plot. Who set the explosives? How did they set the thousands of tonnes needed to blow up the WTC and do it without being seen? The entire 9/11 truth movement is a farce, lacking any real evidence of anything, with gaping gaps of logic comparable to young-earth creationist "science" and based solely on the paranoid delusion that we are on the verge of a world-wide fascist dictatorship. Laughable... |
|
|
| Comrade Stalin |
| quote: | Originally posted by geroin
how there were no plane parts left on site
thank you in advance |
No parts left? :rolleyes:
FACT: Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"
| quote: | | while it's very nice of you to explain why it's not a missile i'd like you to explain to me how a plane could have traveled in that particular path/direction, and how is that there is absolutely no evidence from any camera anywhere indicating that it was a plane that hit the building? |
Why does a perfect camera shot have to exist for you to believe a plane hit the Pentagon? Has it occurred to you that the standard of truth isn't tied to whether a camera recorded it? I also don't know why you think it's so hard to fly a plane into the Pentagon...and since they found the black box, we know exactly how the plane was flown into the Pentagon. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by geroin
while it's very nice of you to explain why it's not a missile i'd like you to explain to me how a plane could have traveled in that particular path/direction, how there were no plane parts left on site and how is that there is absolutely no evidence from any camera anywhere indicating that it was a plane that hit the building?
thank you in advance |
How many plane crashes are recorded on video? And there were airplane parts, there are parts from the APU all over, most of which you idiots instantly thought "OMG THATS A CRUISE MISSILE ENGINE!"
Again, not a cruise missile. The security footage from the gate shows a fire ball that is evident of a mainly fuel explosion. The flames move up rather slowly. Do not be fooled by Hollywood explosions from missiles and bombs. There is a whole lot less fireball than you think. Fireballs do not do damage, shockwaves and shrapnel do damage. What you see is the fuel from the jetliners wings exploding on contact with the building, the rest of the liner is slicing through the pentagon walls like I explained above. |
|
|
|
|
