Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 58

Thread: Has anyone seen the movie "Loose Change 2nd Edition" ?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    931
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMax13 View Post
    However those puffs of smoke contained and explosion, now im guessing theres some explanation to that as well???. Yeah, there we ALWAYS be skeptics, however scinece, god knows how many laws, refute this one in a LIFETIME occurance. Like JFK right, he was shot from high right, yet there were bullet holes in not only the windshield but the firewall as well, supporting the fact that there WAS at least a second shooter...
    Err "those puffs of smoke contained and explosion" what are you trying to say. How about 1000s of kgs of jet fuel burning for over an hour and sheer force of impact? Can we stop looking for a scapegoat in the government and just accept the reality that 20 hijackers killed thousands of Americans on their own accord?

    If the US government orchestrated 9/11 than they probably would have killed every last person who even suggested a conspiracy theory (I mean hell you killed 3000 of your own countrymen why not a few more to complete the conspiracy and assure secrecy).

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Aurora, Co
    Posts
    775
    Quote Originally Posted by MRR View Post
    Err "those puffs of smoke contained and explosion" what are you trying to say. How about 1000s of kgs of jet fuel burning for over an hour and sheer force of impact? Can we stop looking for a scapegoat in the government and just accept the reality that 20 hijackers killed thousands of Americans on their own accord?

    If the US government orchestrated 9/11 than they probably would have killed every last person who even suggested a conspiracy theory (I mean hell you killed 3000 of your own countrymen why not a few more to complete the conspiracy and assure secrecy).

    Right, the jet fuel and force of impact caused the main beams to explode in a cloud of smoke and fire, in sequance, from a few floors below the burn area allt he way to the bottom, at all four corners. C'mon, this is a government thats lied BEFORE, DURING, and CONTINUES to lie, i wouldnt trust these ****ers with my shopping list, i wouldnt leave my ****ing plant unattended with them, they could kill a ****ing Cactus. I mean, the first flag was the "responsibility video", theres the old homie OBL claiming it was him, here i am, "TURN UP THE ****ING VOLUME!!!", my mum, "IT IS UP!!!", nothing, the video had no sound, but everyone believed it was that crazy, "anti-American", Muslim raghead the "patriots" have been warning us about admitting he did it...

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    931
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMax13 View Post
    Right, the jet fuel and force of impact caused the main beams to explode in a cloud of smoke and fire, in sequance, from a few floors below the burn area allt he way to the bottom, at all four corners. C'mon, this is a government thats lied BEFORE, DURING, and CONTINUES to lie, i wouldnt trust these ****ers with my shopping list, i wouldnt leave my ****ing plant unattended with them, they could kill a ****ing Cactus. I mean, the first flag was the "responsibility video", theres the old homie OBL claiming it was him, here i am, "TURN UP THE ****ING VOLUME!!!", my mum, "IT IS UP!!!", nothing, the video had no sound, but everyone believed it was that crazy, "anti-American", Muslim raghead the "patriots" have been warning us about admitting he did it...
    Jet fuel is a liquid am I not correct? When the aircraft impacted off course the explosion covered several floors and the beams themselves did not explode just the fuel itself as it spread when the plane was obliterated. In fact much of the structure was intact but the intense heat created by the fire caused the steel to weaken, bow, and eventually fail to support to the remaining floors and pancake the buildings down.

    As for the rest of what you said it seems to be irrational paranoia. I think you critiqued my ability to connect the dots in another thread but the fact that the government may have lied about other past situations does not logically imply that they A) lied about 9/11 or B)brought the towers down themselves.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    95616
    Posts
    5,357
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Canuck View Post
    Oh and aliens built the pyramids.
    No, it was the Canadians who built them. The aliens were the overseers. Duh.
    I'm dropping out to create a company that starts with motorcycles, then cars, and forty years later signs a legendary Brazilian driver who has a public and expensive feud with his French teammate.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    True North
    Posts
    7,682
    Who told you?

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    95616
    Posts
    5,357
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMax13 View Post
    Did you even watch the vid, have you even heard the experts talk about it?!?!?!. The fact is when a building falls it falls down and out, NOT on top of itself, unless of course the lower half has been weakened. And the Pentagon, give me a ****ing break, i saw the footage on the tele, no plane hit that, and if it did then you would be saying that an entire passenger line disappeared into that hole without leaving ANYTHING outside, not to mention no damage to anywhere surrounding the hole...
    Yes, a plane hit the building and there were debris. They found airplane parts with... get this THE LOGO of the company on them and body parts of the victims.

    But I guess the huge hole and blackened area don't count as damage. After all, the building was built to withstand attacks (thus the bomb resistant windows), which is why the damage wasn't that bad.

    Go read this
    I'm dropping out to create a company that starts with motorcycles, then cars, and forty years later signs a legendary Brazilian driver who has a public and expensive feud with his French teammate.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Aurora, Co
    Posts
    775
    Quote Originally Posted by MRR View Post
    Jet fuel is a liquid am I not correct? When the aircraft impacted off course the explosion covered several floors and the beams themselves did not explode just the fuel itself as it spread when the plane was obliterated. In fact much of the structure was intact but the intense heat created by the fire caused the steel to weaken, bow, and eventually fail to support to the remaining floors and pancake the buildings down.

    As for the rest of what you said it seems to be irrational paranoia. I think you critiqued my ability to connect the dots in another thread but the fact that the government may have lied about other past situations does not logically imply that they A) lied about 9/11 or B)brought the towers down themselves.
    A building built to the specs that one was would not, under ANY circumstances, pancake STRAIGHT down unless the integrity of the lower floors was compromised, which they werent. And as far as the Pentagon goes, SOME of that plane would have been left OUTSIDE of the hole, however there was NONE, not ONE PIECE of the plane...

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    True North
    Posts
    7,682
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMax13 View Post
    A building built to the specs that one was would not, under ANY circumstances, pancake STRAIGHT down unless the integrity of the lower floors was compromised, which they werent. And as far as the Pentagon goes, SOME of that plane would have been left OUTSIDE of the hole, however there was NONE, not ONE PIECE of the plane...
    The Towers were NOT built to withstand planes being flown into them.

    and I don't know where people get this shit from but there were pieces of the plane on the outside of the pentagon. However since it's the friggin pentagon it was cleaned up pretty damn fast.

    Looks like you've benn gathering all your information from one shaky conspiracy video.
    Last edited by The_Canuck; 09-22-2007 at 03:33 PM.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    95616
    Posts
    5,357
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Canuck View Post
    The Towers were NOT built to withstand planes being flown into them.
    Well... I hate to play devil's advocate but it was built to withstand a plane. However, this was in the 60's so the plane it could handle was a Boeing 707, which is rather small compared to the 757s used.
    I'm dropping out to create a company that starts with motorcycles, then cars, and forty years later signs a legendary Brazilian driver who has a public and expensive feud with his French teammate.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    931
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMax13 View Post
    A building built to the specs that one was would not, under ANY circumstances, pancake STRAIGHT down unless the integrity of the lower floors was compromised, which they werent. And as far as the Pentagon goes, SOME of that plane would have been left OUTSIDE of the hole, however there was NONE, not ONE PIECE of the plane...
    There are plenty of pictures of plane parts outside the Pentagon from landing gear to scraps of the body with the airline name visible. As was mentioned above they were cleaned up quickly and construction of the Pentagon commenced almost immediately.

    The integrity of the floors were compromised, they were hit by a friggin 757 and it doesn't take but an even a rudimentary knowledge of physics to understand this.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    931
    Quote Originally Posted by kingofthering View Post
    Well... I hate to play devil's advocate but it was built to withstand a plane. However, this was in the 60's so the plane it could handle was a Boeing 707, which is rather small compared to the 757s used.
    He's absolutely correct the towers were built to withstand some aircraft impact and even the steel was covered with fire resistant insulation to protect the building from fire. If I am not mistaken the Empire State Building had been hit by an aircraft by accident at some point and the architects of the Twin Towers took this into consideration. However the 757 is a much larger aircraft and the impact simply obliterated the fire retardant insulation.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sydney, Down Under
    Posts
    8,833
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMax13 View Post
    A building built to the specs that one was would not, under ANY circumstances, pancake STRAIGHT down unless the integrity of the lower floors was compromised, which they werent. And as far as the Pentagon goes, SOME of that plane would have been left OUTSIDE of the hole, however there was NONE, not ONE PIECE of the plane...
    What do you mean "unless the integrity of the lower floors was compromised"? The floors below the ones that pancaked down had a bloody passenger jet full of fuel crash in to them! And as for wreckage, the freaking thing blew up! What were you expecting, an intact but burnt out 757?

    Quote Originally Posted by MRR View Post
    He's absolutely correct the towers were built to withstand some aircraft impact and even the steel was covered with fire resistant insulation to protect the building from fire. If I am not mistaken the Empire State Building had been hit by an aircraft by accident at some point and the architects of the Twin Towers took this into consideration. However the 757 is a much larger aircraft and the impact simply obliterated the fire retardant insulation.
    They were designed to withstand a plane coming in to New York and therefore low on fuel, not outbound and full of JP.
    Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death...
    – Hunter Thompson

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    brisbane - sub-tropical land of mangoes
    Posts
    16,251
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMax13 View Post
    Like JFK right, he was shot from high right, yet there were bullet holes in not only the windshield but the firewall as well, supporting the fact that there WAS at least a second shooter...
    for JFK read the first autopsy, it's pure hilarity - the coroner hadn't had experience with any form of gunshot wound before - he said the first 6.5mm bullet (capable of penetrating 7 inches of concrete or 13 inches of wood) actually fell back out the entry wound...
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMax13 View Post
    A building built to the specs that one was would not, under ANY circumstances, pancake STRAIGHT down unless the integrity of the lower floors was compromised, which they werent.
    but how to set up a building for demolition without getting noticed? you'd have to do it after hours, ripping out bits of wall to strap ~ 10,000 separate charges in each tower using a team of demolition workers that will stay silent after the attack? not to mention the bomb sniffer dogs had to miss thousands of explosive charges, and it would have taken months to set up?
    why not just plant terrorists on the planes, because if flying two planes into the towers isn't shocking enough to get the public behind your agenda, then i don't know what is.

    oh my god! planes flew into the twin towers! thousands were killed!
    american public: eh.
    holy shit! the towers collapsed!
    american public: my god, we're outraged! we'll back whatever agenda you have, mr bush.

    see what i mean? i don't know if there was any reason to demolish them in the first place, it's kind of a 'bonus'?
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMax13 View Post
    no plane hit that, and if it did then you would be saying that an entire passenger line disappeared into that hole without leaving ANYTHING outside, not to mention no damage to anywhere surrounding the hole...
    there was, the thing is you have to remember this vid was originally a work of fiction until he got approached by conspiracy nuts to tout it as truth. There was wreckage at the pentagon, just not in the bits of footage.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Andreas Preuninger, Manager of Porsche High Performance Cars: "Grandmas can use paddles. They aren't challenging."

  14. #44
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA, Colorado, Vallecito Lake
    Posts
    3,831
    This thread reminds me of zeitgiest. How do the two compare concerning 9/11?
    "Horsepower sells motor cars, but torque wins motor races."
    -Carrol Shelby

  15. #45
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA, Colorado, Vallecito Lake
    Posts
    3,831
    Tased student. Lesson in point. Dont be and idiot.

    YouTube - University of Florida student Tasered at Kerry forum
    "Horsepower sells motor cars, but torque wins motor races."
    -Carrol Shelby

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. my mk3 golf gti 16v
    By ripper46 in forum User's rides
    Replies: 282
    Last Post: 04-16-2011, 12:37 PM
  2. General Photography Competition #105 [Voting]
    By netburner in forum Photography
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-13-2007, 08:24 PM
  3. a nice sportscar w/out the high price.
    By rgibbs205 in forum Car comparison
    Replies: 130
    Last Post: 08-20-2007, 12:28 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
  •