WTC incident 'fake'?

[tris-]

Originally posted by Deadmanwalking
Instead of eating up everything some Yank hater on the internet says maybe you should be taking it and trying to make it vaguely credable.

The towers and the pentagon were hit by planes, right real damage real deaths. No hollograms or "fixed" images.

But who was in control on the planes when they hit the targets?
Now that is a question that will be very hard to answear with 100% confidence.

so explain why the grass stays perfect when the pentagon is 'hit', why there is no plane at the point of explosion from the CCTV footage, why the front of the pentagon stays in tact but inside its on fire, why there is only a hole in the wall instead of the wings slicing through it like on the WTC?

why is there an explosion BEFORE the plane hits the building? in the 1fps videos, how come there is no damage untill the plane is completley inside the building? if i drive my car 100mph into a wall, it will explode when i hit the wall and the wall will be damaged when i hit it, not after ive hit it...

so how can you be 100% sure its all as it seems, when there is no real answers to the questions?

 

[Damini]

Unless you actually witness an event, all incidents in history are questionable, and even if you do there's always space for self doubt over what you witnessed. You can't "prove" anything ever happened really. Therefore, people will always argue we didn't land on the moon, that Hitler never killed jews and that the WTC was a hologram.

"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it - but nerds and schitzophrenic people will write websites saying thats its all lies and aliens did it regardless."

Winston Churchill.

Anyway, Xane will turn up soon and answer all your questions because he's clever (and infinately patient) like that.

 

[Ash!]

I dont think it was faked but I truly believe there is something more sinister at work. It is widely reported by members of the Intelligence community that America knew a large scale terrorist attack was imminent.

They knew the month, the city and the type of building Al Quieda(sp?) were going to go after. Could the 3000 innocent people who died be described as Collateral Damage in the grander scheme of things. Was this not the perfect excuse the American administration needed to justify a war in the middle east.

People laugh and mock people like David Icke when he went on about the New World Order. However it was George double ya who said Either you are with us or against us.

Out of interest I am neither Pro Yank or Anti Yank just for the record

 

[old.ignus]

Originally posted by Damini

"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it - but nerds and schitzophrenic people will write websites saying thats its all lies and aliens did it regardless."

Winston Churchill.

Didn't Churchill die in the 60's? When websites and nerds didn't exist.

 

[Jonaldo]

It is impossible to either prove, or disprove that what happened actually happened until someone invents a time machine, and even then people will doubt. Should we prove it was staged, what then? fact of the matter is that no matter what you beleive it will make no difference to what has happened now so really it's best to just get on with things instead of worrying about what has or hasn't happened.

If the American government did indeed stage it then it kind of backfired after they were unable to catch the man they claimed was responsible and also the man who they wanted to kill for no apparent genuine reason other than they don't like him very much.

 

[Jonaldo]

Originally posted by old.ignus
Didn't Churchill die in the 60's? When websites and nerds didn't exist.

That's the other Winston Churchill, dummy!

 

[old.ignus]

Originally posted by Jonaldo
That's the other Winston Churchill, dummy!

Oh yeah the guy who was famous for having a famous name.

 

[tris-]

Originally posted by Jonaldo
It is impossible to either prove, or disprove that what happened

i know in the end its upto you to think what the hell you want about what happend.
but sometimes it seems people think something happend just because the news said so and there is nothing else to it, end of disscussion and if you happen to question it, all kinds of things are said and people try to force it on your that THIS happend and nothing else.

 

[Tom]

There is a lot of controversy and confusion over the ability of the passengers of the plane that crashed before it could hit anything, to make phone calls on their cellular phones.

At that height, and the speed of the aircraft, it is accepted by most people 'in the know' that mobile phones just do not work. Try it the next time you take off, you'll find after a couple of minutes, that the signal drops off to zero.

 

[old.ignus]

or the plane craches because your signal is interferring with the instruments.

 

[FatBusinessman]

Aha, maybe that's what caused it!

 

[Damini]

http://www.wisdomquotes.com/002493.html

 

[Dr_Weasel]

A reasonable article from Wired News about phones on planes.... Includes a few conspiracy theorys too.

 

[Tenko]

Load of bollocks

The easiest way to "fake" the whole thing would be to plant the idea of the attack in a known terrorist cell and aide and abet them to actually commit said act of terrorism, thus really flying the planes into the WTC for you.

Why do conspiracy theorists go to such lengths when they can sound right and belieavable at the same time with just a little work?

 

[tris-]

Originally posted by Tenko
Load of bollocks

Why do conspiracy theorists go to such lengths when they can sound right and belieavable at the same time with just a little work?

suppose you never watched the videos eh? if holograms were never mentioned would you still say they are talking bollocks? when the videos are there for you to watch (actual footage that is, not the slowed down versions to help you see it better)? if you watch the videos they show explosions before point of impact and the plane dissapears first then the damage is caused etc, but i suppose if the news says it happend in a certain way, it did right?

 

[Any]

Originally posted by tris-
why the front of the pentagon stays in tact but inside its on fire, why there is only a hole in the wall instead of the wings slicing through it like on the WTC?

Because the Pentagon was built to withstand an attack like this, the WTC wasnt. The body of the plane went into the building but the wings would have snapped off instead of slicing into the building.

if i drive my car 100mph into a wall, it will explode when i hit the wall and the wall will be damaged when i hit it, not after ive hit it...

Your car doesnt weigh 100tons nor does it travel at 300mph.

 

[Cdr]

Originally posted by tris-
snip

Hey! I know. Why not go across to New York and ask them if it really happened? Then as you're beaten out of the city, please, come back and inform us of what they said.

Ta.

 

[old.ignus]

Originally posted by Damini
http://www.wisdomquotes.com/002493.html

So you added the last bit, sorry went right over my head.

And Damini go check the books forum.

 

[tris-]

Originally posted by Any
Your car doesnt weigh 100tons nor does it travel at 300mph.

which sound explain why something traveling at that speed and weight, would produce more destruction at point of impact. are you saying because it weighed more and it traveld faster that it should be less initial damage?

and the wings just snapped off? and vanished into thin air too i bet? how do you also explain a steel structure just turning into dust for no reason and then floating back to the ground? it just happend for no reason?

and i never said it didnt happen, i already said that im not saying it didnt happen, quote where i said it didnt happen Cdr, or perhaps you only read one post and thought i must of said something else in another one...

 

[Cdr]

Ummm did I say that you said it didnt happen? I merely suggested that if you didnt think it happened, why not go ask the people who are likely to know? Instead of finding odd-ball sites on the internet to back up a claim that I consider insane.

 

[old.ignus]

TBH anyone who believes it didn't happen really needs help.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by old.ignus
or the plane craches because your signal is interferring with the instruments.

That doesn't happen tbh, and neither do mobile phones cause problems in anywhere but intensive care areas in hospitals.

 

[tris-]

Originally posted by Cdr
Ummm did I say that you said it didnt happen? I merely suggested that if you didnt think it happened, why not go ask the people who are likely to know?

well why quote me in the first place?
and for the last time, im not saying IT DIDNT HAPPEN, like people say the holocaust never happend and all those jews were never killed, im not saying it like that, im just saying there is a possibility it was staged, not that it didnt happen at all.

 

[Any]

Originally posted by tris-
which sound explain why something traveling at that speed and weight, would produce destruction at point of impact, like a 1ton car traveling at 100mph would. are you saying because it weighed more and it traveld faster that it should be less initial damage? and the wings just snapped off? and vanished into thin air too i bet? how do you also explain a steel structure just turning into dust for no reason and then floating back to the ground? it just happend for no reason?

No. Lets say the explosion happens 5 seconds after you hit the building, something traveling at 300mph will get further into the building before it explodes than something doing 3mph.

The wings probably snapped back into the body of the plane and carried on going forward with it.

 

[Cdr]

Originally posted by tris-
well why quote me in the first place?
and for the last time, im not saying IT DIDNT HAPPEN, like people say the holocaust never happend and all those jews were never killed, im not saying it like that, im just saying there is a possibility it was staged, not that it didnt happen at all.

I quoted you so you knew my comment was directed at you. And I'm saying if you WANT TO KNOW, go ask the people that are likely to know - the people of New York.

 

[Tenko]

Originally posted by tris-
suppose you never watched the videos eh? if holograms were never mentioned would you still say they are talking bollocks? when the videos are there for you to watch (actual footage that is, not the slowed down versions to help you see it better)? if you watch the videos they show explosions before point of impact and the plane dissapears first then the damage is caused etc, but i suppose if the news says it happend in a certain way, it did right?

And MY point was fucking holograms is a stupid and currently impossible way to fucking fake something when its easier to actually do it and just let someone else take the blame.

Next they'll be saying the moonlandings were fake, don't laugh. They really will.

 

[Any]

Originally posted by Cdr
I quoted you so you knew my comment was directed at you. And I'm saying if you WANT TO KNOW, go ask the people that are likely to know - the people of New York.

How would the people of New York know? If you were going to go as far as making a holographic plane then you are going to make sure it is perfect.

 

[tris-]

Originally posted by Tenko
And MY point was fucking holograms is a stupid and currently impossible way to fucking fake something when its easier to actually do it and just let someone else take the blame.

Next they'll be saying the moonlandings were fake, don't laugh. They really will.

holograms was only mentioned once, yet that is all you can pick up, not the fact that there was small explosion on the plane before it hit the building or anything, just the only one thing that you can safely say and know people will agree with you about it being a load of shit. and we dont know if holograms are impossible, do you just think they are because the news hasnt reported it yet? and i didnt say faked, i said STAGED!

Originally posted by Cdr
I quoted you so you knew my comment was directed at you. And I'm saying if you WANT TO KNOW, go ask the people that are likely to know - the people of New York.

i know it happend, im not saying it didnt.....:help:

 

[Xtro 2.0]

KEKE WHILST YOU LOT WERE TYPING THIS I PUT WHITE WEE WEE INTO MY GIRLFRIEND'S MOUTH KEKE LOLZOR

 

[Tom]

The problem with the footage from that site is that it cannot be authenticated, therefore it cannot be used as reliable evidence.

And Xtro, wtf u on?