Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 235

Thread: WTF is going on here?

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Gran Canaria, Spain
    Posts
    3,525
    ...on the subject on conspiracies one great documentary/drama/comedy is the Swedish film Konspiration 58, if someone can get it from somewhere it's definately worth watching(probably avaliable with english subtitles).

    Anyway, the video "proves" quite convincingly that the football world cup in Sweden 1958 never happened. It truly shows that the creators has put alot of effort to make it, and you sit trough the movie wondering if they're serious or not and even begin to question the whole thing yourself. Nevertheless you have to admire the uniqueness of the thing, you don't see ideas like this emerge from hollywood

    The konpiration58 website seems to be down (OMG!! GOVERNMENT CENSORING )
    but here's a review, too bad it's not in english http://www.filmtidning.se/recensioner/3744/
    http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31695
    - Are YOU listed? -

  2. #47
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Northern New Jersey
    Posts
    16,602
    Quote Originally Posted by Pando
    ...on the subject on conspiracies one great documentary/drama/comedy is the Swedish film Konspiration 58, if someone can get it from somewhere it's definately worth watching(probably avaliable with english subtitles).

    Anyway, the video "proves" quite convincingly that the football world cup in Sweden 1958 never happened. It truly shows that the creators has put alot of effort to make it, and you sit trough the movie wondering if they're serious or not and even begin to question the whole thing yourself. Nevertheless you have to admire the uniqueness of the thing, you don't see ideas like this emerge from hollywood

    The konpiration58 website seems to be down (OMG!! GOVERNMENT CENSORING )
    but here's a review, too bad it's not in english http://www.filmtidning.se/recensioner/3744/
    That's pretty cool, maybe I'll pick it up World Cup time w/ some English subtitles. Regarding conspiracies, we could prob. make BS stories about everything. Hell, I could probably pull off a story stating that Wouter Melissen is a robot programmed by the Danish government and built to post on forums and make updates, if I had enough time and BS evidence.

    EDIT: The Pentagon story I find 50% true, seeing as I believe in it being a plane that hit, but see the plane as being more of a leer jet/private plane rather than a 757.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Originally in Romania, now in Canada
    Posts
    988
    What about the fourth plane that crashed into a rural field in Somerset County, Pennsylvania? All the videos and pictures show just a small crater...and no large aircraft parts have been found.

    I have serious doubts about the plane crashing into the Pentagon too. I mean it looks like the plane (or whatever hit) was lined up with the Pentagon so the plane couldn't have came in a steep dive. So how could something so big crash into the Pentagon while the grass in front is completely "clean" and green and no cars on the highway were flipped?
    Last edited by Wolf03; 01-04-2006 at 06:25 PM.
    "To control 800 horsepower relying just on arm muscles and foot sensitivity can turn out to be a dangerous exercise."
    Michael Schumacher

  4. #49
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Milwaukee
    Posts
    6,542
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf03
    What about the fourth plane that crashed into a rural field in Somerset County, Pennsylvania? All the videos and pictures show just a small crater...and no large aircraft parts have been found.
    When planes hit the ground from very high up at a high rate of speed I wouldn't expect much save the black box to remain intact. Have you seen the test footage of bombs being blown through vacant 747s? Large commuter jets are very weak when it comes to anything the plane wouldn't see on a regular basis.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf03
    I have serious doubts about the plane crashing into the Pentagon too. I mean it looks like the plane (or whatever hit) was lined up with the Pentagon so the plane couldn't have came in a steep dive. So how could something so big crash into the Pentagon while the grass in front is completely "clean" and green and no cars on the highway were flipped?
    Read my above post. The plane wouldn't have to touch ground to hit and collapse a portion of the Pentagon. Planes do fly indeed.


    And Rock-You'll have to take my word for it that the Pentagon is built like a rock.
    Next time you go into the city, take note of the AT&T Long Lines Building, about a block from City Hall. That sucker was built to withstand impact from fair sized jets and nuclear blasts.

    There's another one just off the Brooklyn Bridge, but has false windows to be easier on the eyes for most New Yorkers. There's also one in MIdtown somewhere....
    But I digress. If a plane hit the AT&T conspiracies would arise that a helicopter hit it, and that's why it barely penetrated the walls.
    Last edited by Esperante; 01-04-2006 at 07:24 PM.
    TOYNBEE IDEA IN KUBRICK 2001 RESURRECT DEAD ON PLANET JUPITER

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    4,939
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf03
    What about the fourth plane that crashed into a rural field in Somerset County, Pennsylvania? All the videos and pictures show just a small crater...and no large aircraft parts have been found.

    I have serious doubts about the plane crashing into the Pentagon too. I mean it looks like the plane (or whatever hit) was lined up with the Pentagon so the plane couldn't have came in a steep dive. So how could something so big crash into the Pentagon while the grass in front is completely "clean" and green and no cars on the highway were flipped?
    can somebody please explain to this guy that planes are not designed to crash into buildings
    UCP's NO. 1 Source for Enzo & 69 Camaro pic's

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Markham, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    263
    cool... i wouldn't say if it's a conspiracy or not, but i wouldn't be surprised if the USA govn't actually did it...

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Wichita, Kansas USA
    Posts
    11,217
    If the plane that hit the Pentagon was structurally sound enough to punch through three rings of this supposedly incredibly strong building, why are there none of these parts in the wreckage? Again, I don't buy all of this conspiracy, but it's a good question. You can't say in one sentence that the plane was strong enough to punch through three layers of the Pentagon and then in the next sentence say it was so weak that it just disintegrated. Apparently it didn't just disintegrate or there wouldn't be nearly as much damage to the building.
    I'm going to eat breakfast. And then I'm going to change the world.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Kokomo, IN
    Posts
    1,253
    Exactly matt. All these pics created a question in my head. If a jet liner is traveling at 400mph, slams into the pentagon, only damages 3 of the 5 rings. Only fully destroying 1 of them. How is that possible? A liner traveling at 400mph would have traveled further than 3 rings. And sure the hell would have fully destroyed more than 1 ring. And the left side is a smooth cut. Damn smooth from a plane smashing into it. Its way too perfect to be busted into by a 400 mph machine. And if you look where the plane supposivley entered, on the top floors of the front ring, there is concrete clearly showing through. Not burnt at all. Looks in perfect condition, but there is burning all around. Looks a bit odd to me.
    I dont believe all of this, but it really opened my eyes. This is a very excellent arguement, wonder what bush has to say about this.
    Ucp's #1 Toyota Supra fanatic......still.

    2006 Scion tC..
    Forced Induction - Props to Dezod Motorsports & PTuning

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,465
    Are you sure it was going 400mph though?

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    land of the Desert Extreme Challenge Rally
    Posts
    5,499
    I can't say how true it is, but it does have some good points in it. Click here to look at the video.

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Zandvoort, Holland
    Posts
    356
    If I recall correctly the pentagon was designed to with stand any bomb attacks because of it's unique shape , it's nearly indestructable

    But let's stop this arguing I mean Esperante alone here has disproved all the conspiracy's and as I've said before this really isn't respectful the family of the victims

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Wichita, Kansas USA
    Posts
    11,217
    Quote Originally Posted by R34GTR
    If I recall correctly the pentagon was designed to with stand any bomb attacks because of it's unique shape , it's nearly indestructable

    But let's stop this arguing I mean Esperante alone here has disproved all the conspiracy's and as I've said before this really isn't respectful the family of the victims
    He didn't disprove anything. And many of the family members themselves have asked similar questions in the media and before Congress.
    I'm going to eat breakfast. And then I'm going to change the world.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Living the good life in Antarctica.
    Posts
    2,827
    Quote Originally Posted by Esperante
    I continue my campaign to call you a ****ing moron.
    Would you like to tell me HOW a 757 moving at 400 mph with tonnes of jet fuel would NOT destroy the wing of a large building?
    Dude your the one being a moron, no offense...

    I said that because I saw it on a video, why are you going personal???

    Whats up with u and this whole issue...people have their opinions...lol why are u so intent to prove them wrong??

    You know nothing more than anyone else. Yes, there are people who say that it is a conspiracy. I personally believe that the whole truth is not being told to the world.

    Have u seen the evidence that ties Osama with 911?? I dont think anyone has.

    How about the black box flight recorders that were CONVENIENTLY confiscated by the FBI.

    If u have seen the video, it show in slow motion that there was a flash of light coming FROM the building BEFORE the plane hit it. The flash was on 4 different tapes of the plane hitting. It wasnt inserted. The reflection of this flash could be seen on the plane. Can you explain this? I cant.

    And about the Bulge under the airplane, you said it was landing gear. Give me a break. Thats just crazy.

    "The detected cylindrical objects cannot be due to shadows caused by the angle of incidence of the sun on the plane, because they always appear to be the same shape and size, though with varying luminosity.

    "The detected objects have varying luminosity around them because they are in relief (this is the only possible explanation).

    "The detected objects are clearly distinct from the landing gear."


    Do u seriously think that that bulge is landing gear?? Its not. Then what is it?? No other 757 has it, so why would this one have it for?? Surely the airport would have noticed such a huge abnormalty before takeoff

    You also didnt entertain the possibility that a former bush member said that 911 was bogus. Well, heres the story from the Washington Times. Is that enough?


    http://washingtontimes.com/upi-break...2755-6408r.htm


    Also, what about the plane that plunged into the ground brfore making its target, flight 93. AFTER it was meant to have crashed, it was reported 'grounded' with the threat of a bomb on board. This makes it impossible that it was flight 93. There was a news article done on it.
    Funny thing is though, once it was announced on national radio that the articleexisted, it was removed. Quite convenient isnt it.

    Plane Lands In Cleveland; Bomb Feared Aboard


    Reported by: 9News Staff
    Web produced by: Liz Foreman
    9/11/01 11:43:57 AM

    This story has been removed from WCPO.com.

    It was a preliminary AP story, and was factually incorrect.
    They waited 3 years to remove it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Esperante
    Ah, yes, I forgot. It's impossible to have a plane do a nosedive or fly at an angle greater than that necessary to scrape the ground. Pshaw! How naive of me.
    There were extreemely high poles in the area and technically, the plane SHOULD have hit them, going by the angle of entry (found by looking at the hole in the building. If what you are saying is true, the plane nosedived or flew at a strange angle on its decent, then it would not have left the damage it did. It would have gone straight throught the roof. Funny thing is, the roof wasnt touched. Ive attached a picture that might help u visualise it all...



    And now, because you know everything, answer these:

    (a.) Why were there so many reports of bombs or explosions going off in and around the World Trade Center before any buildings collapsed?
    (b.) Why did firefighters, reporters and other eyewitnesses report hearing explosions being detonated and why did they describe a demolition-like, pancake collapse of the WTC?
    (c.) Why did a FOX News employee report seeing no windows on “Flight 175” a commercial United Airlines jetliner and why did an eyewitness in the streets of New York say that the plane hitting the second tower was not an American Airlines jet?
    (d.) What is the bright flash seen right before impact on both the North Tower and the South Tower, as captured in at least five known pieces of video footage?
    (e.) Was there a “pod” of some sort attached to the bottom of “Flight 175” and, if so, why was it there?
    (f.) How does a plane 125 feet wide & 155 feet long fit into a hole at the Pentagon which was only 16 feet across and leave no signs of wreckage (wings, tail section, fuselage, seats, luggage, passengers, engines, et cetera) on the lawn as seen in photographs taken moments after the impact and before the outer wall had collapsed?


    Have a nice day
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by adrenaline; 01-05-2006 at 09:09 AM.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Zandvoort, Holland
    Posts
    356
    Quote Originally Posted by ADRENALINE
    Have u seen the evidence that ties Osama with 911?? I dont think anyone has.
    Yes I have , He's in this cave with all his G-unit soldiers , ok I'm serious now He and the Al-Queda movement have admitted to being repsonsible for the attacks on one of those Al-Jazeera tapes

    that makes him guilty to me

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Living the good life in Antarctica.
    Posts
    2,827
    Well if George Bush 'created' him like many say, then ofcourse he would admit to it.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. WTF iz this car???
    By bos3eed in forum General Automotive
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-09-2005, 06:55 AM
  2. WTF?! is this for real?
    By r1ckst4 in forum Miscellaneous
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 04-04-2005, 12:51 AM
  3. Australia is like WTF mate?
    By Pando in forum Miscellaneous
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 03-03-2005, 07:40 AM
  4. Wtf! ?
    By Mustang in forum Miscellaneous
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-14-2005, 05:00 PM
  5. X3... wtf mate?
    By Othix in forum General Automotive
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-26-2003, 04:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •