PerryLogan
Member
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2005
- Messages
- 194
- Reaction score
- 23
- Location
- Austin, Texas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Liberal
http://consortiumnews.com/2006/032306.htmlIn the U.S. government’s pursuit of the death penalty for Zacarias Moussaoui, FBI officials have inadvertently revealed how an even mildly competent George W. Bush could have prevented the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people – and set the country on a dangerous course for revenge.
PerryLogan said:Incompetence? GWB? Naaa...
9/11 & Bush's 'Negligence'
By Robert Parry
http://consortiumnews.com/2006/032306.html
PerryLogan said:Incompetence? GWB? Naaa...
9/11 & Bush's 'Negligence'
By Robert Parry
http://consortiumnews.com/2006/032306.html
Sir_Alec said:Nobody could have stopped 9/11 because the terrorists were being helped by a powerful military group that is imbedded into the US.
Sir_Alec said:If you watch all of the videos saying George Bush was connected to 9/11 you'll notice that the most likely case is that the terrorists were helped by a rogue US military faction that had access to a missle and explosives.
The Real McCoy said:Evidence?
No, the terriorists had their own missles and explosives: near fully fueled Boeing 757s and 767s.
Sir_Alec said:A plane did not crash into the pentagon so what did? A missile is the only thing that could fit into the blast hole in the side of the pentagon.
Wishful thinking. The pentagon was built in the 1940's during WWII largely out of reinforced concrete (very new concept at the time). The Pentagon weighs in a several million metric tons while an B-757 weighs in at most a few hundred tons. That's a factor difference of 10^6. Thus incontrast the mass of a 757 is nearly negligible to that of the pentagon.Sir_Alec said:A plane did not crash into the pentagon so what did? A missile is the only thing that could fit into the blast hole in the side of the pentagon.
ProudAmerican said:it was definately incompetence that allowed 9-11 to happen. from jimmy carter all the way to w. bush.
no doubt about it.
and im a die hard republican and Bush supporter.
however, to fully place the blame on Bush, and only Bush, is partisan nonsense.
jfuh said:Wishful thinking. The pentagon was built in the 1940's during WWII largely out of reinforced concrete (very new concept at the time). The Pentagon weighs in a several million metric tons while an B-757 weighs in at most a few hundred tons. That's a factor difference of 10^6. Thus incontrast the mass of a 757 is nearly negligible to that of the pentagon.
Add in to that the inertia of the moving plane as 1/2mv^2, by which now the factor difference will decrease by 10^3. Still fairly insignificant (1000:1). The aircrafts frame nearly disintegrates upon impact. Ever seen a bullet that strikes a hard surface? It nearly disintegrates on impact.
Same thing here, so what happens is you've formed a highly compacted heated metal slug that would travel right through the small opening. Or it would be a turbine, which is much denser then an aircraft fusealage.
My eyes are wide shut.Sir_Alec said:Are you blind?
I'm quite aware of that, exactly what you would expect from a high speed object to make.Sir_Alec said:That circle is the impact hole.
Not all of it.Sir_Alec said:The "plane" struck head on at that hole and went clear on through to the center ring of the pentagon.
No, that is simply not true.Sir_Alec said:The only object that could go through a hole that big and still have the force to push onto the other side is a missle.
Let me ask you this, do you deny that the WTC was struck by aircraft? Look at the footage, the holes are not large. Explosion by jet fuel as well as the shear force of impact would cause disintigration of the fuselage and wing. The WTC may show a large hole then the pentagon though for the simple reason of different construction material. One was steel beams, the other reinforced concrete. Aircraft, aluminum magnesium alloy. Soft material against hard material. You needn't be a rocket scientist to figure that one out.Sir_Alec said:And if a plane really did strike the pentagon where is the wing damage and where are the engines?
No that is not true at all, the aircraft trubines were recovered just outside the E-ring as the aircraft first skidded on the ground before it hit the building.Sir_Alec said:No large 757 engine/wing wreckage was ever recovered and cannot be veiwed by the public.
You can not be serious, planted? Come on.Sir_Alec said:What the hell is their secret. The only wreckage at the scene was small and easily planted.
jfuh said:Wishful thinking. The pentagon was built in the 1940's during WWII largely out of reinforced concrete (very new concept at the time). The Pentagon weighs in a several million metric tons while an B-757 weighs in at most a few hundred tons. That's a factor difference of 10^6. Thus incontrast the mass of a 757 is nearly negligible to that of the pentagon.
Add in to that the inertia of the moving plane as 1/2mv^2, by which now the factor difference will decrease by 10^3. Still fairly insignificant (1000:1). The aircrafts frame nearly disintegrates upon impact. Ever seen a bullet that strikes a hard surface? It nearly disintegrates on impact.
Same thing here, so what happens is you've formed a highly compacted heated metal slug that would travel right through the small opening. Or it would be a turbine, which is much denser then an aircraft fusealage.
Arch Enemy said:Of course it wasn't a plane.
It was the White Rabbit from Monty Python and the Holy Grail. That's the only reasonable arguement. Let us regard Alec's picture of this whole, and the only known picture of this famous White Rabbit in action
Clearily that's the answer. This whole "wings disinegration" theory is nothing but science mumble jumble. The same people that used to think we evolved from Apes and that Jesus (Yeshua) actually existed.
Now come on...
Down the rabbit whole we go.
Did you even bother to read my response? I specifically noted the variance in structural material between the WTC and the pentagon as well as listing of several sources countering your claim of conspiracy.Sir_Alec said:The wings would atleast do damage before disintigrating. Either the plane was very small and packed with explosives or a missile was used. The impact hole of tower 1 was very wide and the planes wings did not disintagrate before it smashed into the building.
cnredd said:I have a question which should be incredibly obvious to anyone with an IQ above single digits...
If the plane didn't hit the Pentagon...
Then where's the plane?...
Hundreds of people haven't seen hide nor hair of their family and friends since that day...
Are they off on some island sipping iced tea?...:roll:
If the plane and the people weren't anywhere near the Pentagon that day, then they sure as hell gotta be someplace else...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?