Axe Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 (edited) Ive just received this link via email, its rather eye opening. In short its the images taken of the 9-11 plain crash on the pentagon or is it? The Cover Up Its rather lengthy so dial up users be warned. Regards, Axe Edited August 12, 2005 by Axe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunkield Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 Axe, I guess this is to replace all the JFK conspiracy theories that were finally put to bed years later! I have seen stuff like this before and the expanation was that the plane more or less vaporised, but that doesn't really explain the eye witness reports :( BTW There are now websites with conspiracy theories about how MI5 planted the 7/7 bombs in London, 'and the beat goes on'..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemini Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 Well I have just spoken to Elvis and he doesn’t believe it. :( G.M. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 Elvis is alive the cia did for JFK they didnt land on the moon it was a missile that hit the pentagon the twin towers were downed by mosad Princess dia was done in by mi5 and of course as reported excluslively in the daily sport a london bus is on the moon! god the list for the gullable is endless Cheers KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the last engineer Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 Hey KW, Is that the buss Stan Butler's driving :( wonder if Blakey knows B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ernyha Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 I saw a TV programme about this some time ago and the "experts" came to the conclusion that it wasn't a civil airliner involved and more likely a missile fired either accidently or deliberately or a military jet crashing into the pentagon, either way the evidence presented certainly ruled out a loaded civil airliner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete k Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 if this is the case what about the people that they say were on the plane and what happened to the plane itself :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zapp Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 I have to say it sounds like a load of rubbish to me. I will watch it again, but one this immediately springs to mind. Its the bit where they ask if a jet punches neat holes in reinforced buildings. I say, yes, they are far more likely to than any conventional weapon in current service. That kindof damage would be caused by something big and heavy moving very fast. That is kinetic damage, not explosive. Even a ground penetrating bomb would have blown the bejesus out of the first few sections and then caused only blast damage to the rest. Also, something like that would not have penetrated horizontally, as the are not designed to do so. Were it some kind of shaped charge like an explosively formed warhead, then the penetration would be uniform and would have caused more internal damage than external. In my opinion, that kindof damage is due to a big, heavy butrelatively soft object hitting the building with massive kinetic energy which dissipated until the object stopped or disintegrated. Hope that hasnt sent you all to sleep! Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 ZZZZzzzzz only kidding :( B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zapp Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 Wake up! :( If noone objects, I'm going to watch ths and debunk it bit by bit. It will be a long post whe it comes, so please tell me if you all think it is a load of **** so I need not bother in the first place! Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemini Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 I think it’s a load of bunkum. What everyone on the video seems to be forgetting about is the plane and all of its passengers that went missing. What happened to them? B) Were they abducted by aliens?? Did they crash into the sea and disappear without anyone noticing??? The plane was tracked by radar for a while and it was only when it went too low to be seen that it was lost. So where did it go?B). Nah, this is just another silly ******* theory to get people thinking “Conspiracy”. Even my own daughter believes that the Americans never landed on the moon because she watched a program about it. But if this was so, then how come the British and Russian governments, who both tracked the rocket all the way to the moon, didn’t blow the gaff if they suspected a hoax. And, I believe that there are now new powerful telescopes on earth that have actually been able to see the remaining parts of the lunar modules that were left behind when they took off from the surface. We have become a nation of people who find it impossible to accept the truth, even if it is shoved up our ar$es, but readily accept any bull$hit we hear as gospel. No wonder the nation is hooked on programs like “Big Brother”……we are all ******* brain dead. :( G.M. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted August 13, 2005 Report Share Posted August 13, 2005 Hey KW, Is that the buss Stan Butler's driving :( wonder if Blakey knows B) last seen parked at the cemetary gates with stan and a duck "at it" cheers KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted August 13, 2005 Report Share Posted August 13, 2005 I saw a TV programme about this some time ago and the "experts" came to the conclusion that it wasn't a civil airliner involved and more likely a missile fired either accidently or deliberately or a military jet crashing into the pentagon, either way the evidence presented certainly ruled out a loaded civil airliner. Yes but it also "ruled out" the people who eyeballed it going in? cheers KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ernyha Posted August 13, 2005 Report Share Posted August 13, 2005 When I posted saying that I saw a programme about this, there is nowhere in that post where I said that I agreed with the theory. In fact I deliberately highlighted the word EXPERTS and was trying to make the point that just presenting one side of an arguement to a large audience can get people believing anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimdfish Posted August 14, 2005 Report Share Posted August 14, 2005 If it were hot enough to vaporize the plane, How come the cable drums survived the conflaguration that must have occured once the aircrafts wings sheard off? JimDfish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted August 15, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2005 I had no idea that this post would spark so much interest. Either way the video seems a little far fetched. The penetrating holes dont figure out. I it were an airliner I doubt it would have continued so far into the building whilst making such pefectly formed holes and where is it! Secondly a missle would have exploded on inpact and infact, the video explains the blast was on the outer ring! Did someone mentione the twilight zone! Regards, Axe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete k Posted August 17, 2005 Report Share Posted August 17, 2005 could have been a bunker buster missile , delayed fuse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted August 17, 2005 Report Share Posted August 17, 2005 so the people who "witnessed" a plane go in are all liars then? cheers KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zapp Posted August 19, 2005 Report Share Posted August 19, 2005 Axe I can only assume that the aircraft would have been slowly shredded as it went through each section and there eventually wasnt enough to keep going. Bear in mind that although airliners are soft when compared to a reinforced building, the impact would have been massive. Ever been hit by a large beetle while riding a motorbike? OWW! The principal is quite similar to how some tank armour works, hard layer (building) soft layer (grassy bit in between) har layer soft layer etc, using each succesive impact to degrade the projectile and diminish its kinetic energy until it disintegrates or stops. This leaves a distinctive pattern of big hole, smaller hole, smaller still until penetration stops. I will try to find an image of this and post it. Pete, If this had been a bunker busting weapon with a delayed fuse, there would have been small holes followed by a great big one, which is the opposite to what the video showed, as bunker busting bombs use kinetic energy to penetrate the target and then chemical (explosive) energy to destroy the target via the kineticly created hole. Damn you lot, you've got me into geek mode again! Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old rooster Posted August 19, 2005 Report Share Posted August 19, 2005 if this is the case what about the people that they say were on the plane and what happened to the plane itself The lengths those yanks will go to just to cover up a simple case of alien abduction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete k Posted August 19, 2005 Report Share Posted August 19, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted August 19, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 19, 2005 Sorry Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.