PDA

View Full Version : It Makes You Think


Jonbo298
08-30-2004, 11:34 PM
I couldn't figure out whether it goes here or in General Talk so I decided here. If Bond or someone else wants to move it to General, go ahead :)

http://trancenews.com/pentagoncrash.swf

I won't say much except watch it. It makes you think.

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

And you can check that out for still images and whatnot on the whole Pentagon crash.

And ahead of time, I hope this thread doesn't get out of hand. We've had one thread closed already and hopefully this one doesn't get too out of hand. But I just want people to think about it. It opened my eyes more.

Acebot44
08-30-2004, 11:48 PM
That was the BOMB!

Seriously though, I never knew anything about this until now. Hmm, like you said, it makes you think.

Neo
08-31-2004, 12:04 AM
So where the hell do they think the plane went?

Typhoid
08-31-2004, 12:11 AM
Yeah.

It showed the plane going in....then it just dissapeared.

What the hell.


I am actually stumped.

Strange....i smell a conspiracy.

Because planes do leave wreckage....and there was none...unless it was photoshopped out, and those spool dealies were edited in.


But then again the explosion does look like a missle.

And some missle can be mistaken for small planes, like a cessna or something.

Jonbo298
08-31-2004, 12:13 AM
It's hard for me to figure it out. They show proof a plane went in but it went through 3 steel reinforced rings of hte pentagon. I'd think a plane would shred apart when it hit the first ring and probably do something to the second ring but doubt it would hit the third. And when they showed the image of the hole that looked like a missile or something went through, it confused me even more.

thatmariolover
08-31-2004, 12:14 AM
I don't know, but it certainly makes you think.

Professor S
08-31-2004, 12:19 AM
Several questions brought up by those "news" pieces...

What happened to the plane?

Did they find the planes at the WTC, or were they obliterated?

What happened to all the people on board the plane that went "missing"?

If the 757 was hijacked, how to you hide a friggin' 757?

This really is a whole lot to do about nothing, IMO.

Jonbo298
08-31-2004, 12:21 AM
My theory about the people missing is that the transponder was turned off, the gov't rerouted the plane to a remote area, took the passengers off and unfortunately got rid of any evidence of it.

manasecret
08-31-2004, 12:30 AM
Yeah, it's interesting in a Michael Moore way. Throw a bunch of interesting facts and quotes at you, make it so that before you react to one another one is flying by, so that it looks very factual without necessarily being so.

****, I know that Moore thing might salt someone the wrong way, but I don't mean anything by it.

I thought the video was interesting, just conspiracy-ish.

Fox 6
08-31-2004, 12:41 AM
ok, but if all those other tapes were taken and not shown then how did they get the film from the closest camera to the explosion?

Professor S
08-31-2004, 12:48 AM
My theory about the people missing is that the transponder was turned off, the gov't rerouted the plane to a remote area, took the passengers off and unfortunately got rid of any evidence of it.

So your theory is that the US government not only blew up the Pentagon (for what reason is still completely unclear since the Twin Towers is what all the stink was about to this day) but then landed the plane and had it dissassembled and then killed everyone on the plane. Thats your theory. Really. You're being serious...

So what about their families? Their co-workers? All their friends? And then all their friends and co-worker's families and so on and so forth? Were they all killed by the US government too so that no questions could be asked? So they did all this, and not one single news organization happened on this story besides radical internet sites? I know what happened... they used on of those mind erasing thingies from Men In Black!

This is retarded... just remember this useful quote: "If its on the Internet, its got to be true.":rolleyes:

Fox 6
08-31-2004, 12:50 AM
I wish I had a neuralizer from men in black

The Germanator
08-31-2004, 02:23 AM
I wish I was Will Smith.

Typhoid
08-31-2004, 02:25 AM
I wish I was little bit taller,
I wish I was a baller
I wish I had a girl who looked good
I would call her
I wish I had a rabbit in a hat with a bat
and a '64 Impala




Oops......sorry....i got caught up in the "i wishes"















:p That crazy Skee-lo.

The Germanator
08-31-2004, 02:31 AM
That crazy Skee-lo.

In conclusion, the Pentagon was definitely blown up by Skee-Lo.

Fox 6
08-31-2004, 02:38 AM
Yes he used the same type of bomb that hit his career.

Jonbo298
08-31-2004, 03:18 AM
So your theory is that the US government not only blew up the Pentagon (for what reason is still completely unclear since the Twin Towers is what all the stink was about to this day) but then landed the plane and had it dissassembled and then killed everyone on the plane. Thats your theory. Really. You're being serious...

So what about their families? Their co-workers? All their friends? And then all their friends and co-worker's families and so on and so forth? Were they all killed by the US government too so that no questions could be asked? So they did all this, and not one single news organization happened on this story besides radical internet sites? I know what happened... they used on of those mind erasing thingies from Men In Black!

This is retarded... just remember this useful quote: "If its on the Internet, its got to be true.":rolleyes:

No. Nowhere did I mention the gov't punched a hole in the pentagon. I was just stating that I doubt a 757 actually hit the Pentagon after watching it because the images shown showed no way a plane that big could've hit the Pentagon. I was just saying it was either a small plane like a cessna (probably hijacked) or a terrorist missile (lesser of the 2 possiblities as the 5 second footage showed a plane coming in).

And about my theory. That's my theory. I wasn't trying to force everyone to believe it. I just felt like giving my opinion like you are Strangler ;)

The reason no one questioned the gov't was because the gov't told everyone the plane hit the Pentagon and everyone was dead so everyone believed it with no questions asked.

and Fox..the reason they had that footage was because the Pentagon released it and told everyone its the only footage of the hit (as far as I can remember back, correct me if I'm wrong).

Typhoid
08-31-2004, 03:53 AM
Jonbo, i dont want to get tangled up in this mess, so i must point out it was Fox who asked about the camera, and not myself.

Jonbo298
08-31-2004, 04:08 AM
oops, my mistake. I'll correct it. Thanks for pointing out my error

Crash
08-31-2004, 04:31 AM
Here's a conspiricy theory:

The govt knew the planes were crashing all over the place, so one of the airliners was taken down by a US fighter to prevent crashing somewhere important, later there was another small cessna loaded with tnt that the US didnt' know about, that crashed into the pentegon. they didnt' want us to know about the one they shot down, so they said it was the plane that hit the Pentagon.

*twighlight music plays*

Professor S
08-31-2004, 10:27 AM
No. Nowhere did I mention the gov't punched a hole in the pentagon. I was just stating that I doubt a 757 actually hit the Pentagon after watching it because the images shown showed no way a plane that big could've hit the Pentagon. I was just saying it was either a small plane like a cessna (probably hijacked) or a terrorist missile (lesser of the 2 possiblities as the 5 second footage showed a plane coming in).

The movie talked about something sounding like a missile, so maybe I applied that to your theory. But yours makes even less sense that than the theory that I applied to you. Now here is the big question question about your theory.

Why would the US government lie about what type of plane it was and then just kill everyone and go through all the effort of erasing all of the evidence of the plane and the people on it for no discernable reason?

Why not just say it was a cessna? Does it make more sense to murder American citizens just to make it look like a bigger plane flew into the Pentagon?

You should have kept with the theory I thought you had, as that one makes much more sense in a crackpot conspiracy theory sense.

Professor S
08-31-2004, 10:29 AM
Here's a conspiricy theory:

The govt knew the planes were crashing all over the place, so one of the airliners was taken down by a US fighter to prevent crashing somewhere important, later there was another small cessna loaded with tnt that the US didnt' know about, that crashed into the pentegon. they didnt' want us to know about the one they shot down, so they said it was the plane that hit the Pentagon.

*twighlight music plays*

That one actually makes the most sense out of all of them.

Jonbo298
08-31-2004, 11:21 AM
Why is a theory called a theory? Because its a THEORY

Oh, and I'll pull this. End of discussion on my theory because like I said, it was just a theory.

Professor S
08-31-2004, 11:38 AM
Jonbo, if you don't want people to discuss the merits of your theory, don't post it on a public forum.

I chimed in because I couldn't believe the amount of people who bought in on that little once sided piece of film which ignored so many obvious questions.

Acebot44
09-01-2004, 02:11 AM
Some more stuff on this ish

One (http://www.911inplanesite.com/)

Trailer (http://www.911inplanesite.com/911trailer.html)

Professor S
09-01-2004, 12:43 PM
You guys really have way too much time on your hands... go do something more constructive like masturbating.

Fox 6
09-01-2004, 12:56 PM
Last time i checked you were a big part of this tread.... so why dont you take your advice.

Professor S
09-01-2004, 01:00 PM
I was referring to researching crackpot conspiracy theories that blame everything that ever went wrong with the world on the United States.

Check out this website, you'd love it.

www.moveonplease.org

Everything Bad Fault Of Rumsfeld
Scientists have found Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, genetically culpable for every contrary event and effect in modern history, including morbid obesity, the Philadelphia Phillies' 23 game losing streak in 1959 and Carrot Top.

Studies revealed even more daunting scenarios as the Rumsfeld-effect not only results from direct contact, but that second-hand liason with the Secretary of Evil can cause severe conservative conjunctivitis. Los Angeles restaurants and bars have recently banned Rumsfeld, and any talk of Rumsfeld, except for restricted outdoor areas.

In case you were wondering, thats satire.

Bube
09-16-2004, 05:32 PM
Quite an old thread, sorry for reviving it.

But I have to ask, Strangler, what those "ignored obvious questions" are? I'm not saying that what I just watched is true, and I'm not saying you don't have any good points, but I had heard other "scenarios" that the US did this, and what I just watched seems interesting enough.

But if you're defending it so strongly, then I have to ask what those questions are. Just so you can prove that what I saw was definitely wrong.

GiMpY-wAnNaBe
09-16-2004, 06:01 PM
i have my own theory about the pentagon:

It was staged. I don't ever recall hearing a death toll at the pentagon, the place was evacuated beforehand. All the footages that should be there are "missing", there is no footage showing a 757 flying through the air, its a pretty pig plane, it shouldn't be that hard to catch on camera.

This one may touch some sensitive nerves, but i've really thought about it for a while. I'm not implying anything but a coincidence, but when the WTC centre fell, it fell awfully uniformly, straight down. None of the surrounding buildings got damaged, perfect demolition. Did anyone find this strange? This isn't a conspiracy theory because I can't honestly say I see the US murdering 4000 or so of its own citizens, as well as destroying one of the most memorable symbols of the united states.

It all makes you think...unfortunately no ones willing to give answers.

Typhoid
09-16-2004, 06:03 PM
when the WTC centre fell, it fell awfully uniformly, straight down. None of the surrounding buildings got damaged, perfect demolition. Did anyone find this strange?


Its supposed to do that, incase it did fall, so as they wouldnt crush any other buildings.

GiMpY-wAnNaBe
09-16-2004, 10:41 PM
Its supposed to do that, incase it did fall, so as they wouldnt crush any other buildings.
But you'd think that a plane hitting a side would cause it to collapse in a certain direction. The designers may have perpared it for almost anything, but I seriously doubt it was constructed with terrorist plane attacks in mind.

Typhoid
09-16-2004, 10:43 PM
But you'd think that a plane hitting a side would cause it to collapse in a certain direction. The designers may have perpared it for almost anything, but I seriously doubt it was constructed with terrorist plane attacks in mind.



No, but if it exploded for some strange reason in one of those areas, the result would be the same. They dont design it for certain attacks, they design it to ensure that if a freak explosion or accident happen, that it will injure as few people and destroy as little propety as possible.

And no, i wouldnt think it would cause it to collapse in a certan direction. I didnt take drafting and how to design buildings for nothing. ;)


*Reads Crono's post*

*Reads Gimpys post*

*Edits his post*


Gimpy, you were partially right, they did build them for plane crashes, i doubt any of the engineers sat around and said 'What if we get attacked by a middle eastern country that plans to crash planes into these buildings." But more along the lines of "What if a plane accidentally crashes into the WTC."

Crono
09-16-2004, 11:27 PM
But you'd think that a plane hitting a side would cause it to collapse in a certain direction. The designers may have perpared it for almost anything, but I seriously doubt it was constructed with terrorist plane attacks in mind.

Maybe a little knowledge in civil engineering would change your view. And yes the WTC was built for plane crashes.

ZebraRampage
09-16-2004, 11:34 PM
The WTC was strong enough to stand up even with those planes crashing into them. There was one problem though. The supports to every floor(I can't remember what they're called) didn't have fire proof on them(I'm not entirely sure about this), and when the planes crashed they were carrying so much fuel that the fire was so hot and intense that it destroyed the supports. Without that support the WTC couldn't hold any part of the building above the damaged area. Once it was too much to hold, the damaged area of the building collapsed and the part on top of it was so heavy that it kept plowing the rest of hte building down with it. This is also why it collapsed straight down.

I saw this on the discovery channel I believe, so I don't have any links to back this up, but I know it's true because I saw the documentary about it.

Crono
09-16-2004, 11:35 PM
ZR is exactly right. I remember watching a very good TV show which said the exact same thing. That is how the buildings were designed.

GiMpY-wAnNaBe
09-17-2004, 01:30 PM
ah well, it was just an observation

Professor S
09-17-2004, 02:06 PM
If I remember correctly, the WTC was built to withstand a 707 crash, which were the biggest commercial planes at the time it was built. Unfortunately the terrorists were fortunate enough to have hijacked 757's.