Quote from: ring_theory on July 29, 2007, 10:32:46 PM

Quote from: d3adp00l on July 29, 2007, 08:19:08 PM
yes well I am done with ring theory invading a topic that he obiviously doesn't have any reason to post on except to be an antagonist. Again ring you should just leave the topic alone, you have a very closed mind, flat world opinion on the subject in the topic, and your only goal seems to be to get rid of it. If you want to diminish the experience of some users on the forum by being disruptive, then I find that I don't particularly like your contributions at all. And no longer value your opinion. Had you posted your thought discussed them and agreed to have your opinion and we have ours then I would still value what you had to say. But you have gone beyond that to nearly violent protest of the subject at all, it seems to me that YOU have a problem with it not the rest of us. Its your show Stephen but I feel, as too many times I do, that a mainstream concept is simply trying to quiet a contradictory opinion. And as far as off topic? To me the same reasons those building were attacked (doesn't matter who did it), that war is being fought, that people are oppressed, etc, are the reasons I even bother looking into O/U and spend time researching looking for an answer. I can tell you right now that it is not for personal gain of any kind, because when it really comes down to it, if I ever figured anything out, I most certainly wouldn't put my name to it, I would not try to profit from it. Those are the actions that get you killed.

And on top of that I could find a dozen topics that are not really o/u but are still on the forum, why does this one dig at ring theory so much, what is your problem with free speech ring?

"nearly violent protest"?   I object!  "mainstream concept is simply trying to quiet a contradictory opinion" Now isn't that what your trying to do to me on this subject and my contradictory opinion??? What was the reason those buildings was attacked?? I was thinking it was an attempt to destabilize our economy? My goals are not meant to be disruptive. I'm not seeking for anyone to like my contributions either on this thread or this forum. If you think it's going to hurt my feelings that you don't your sadly mistaken. This thread is disruptive if anything. it would be in comparison to posting OU or free energy things on a 9/11 forum, Off topic. I have nothing against free speech in fact if you havn't noticed i'm exercizing it in this thread. Seemingly to your and others dislike. Isn't it great the power of the first ammendment?

Why cannot I discuss the so called "9/11 truth movement"? I mean really I only see one side to this discussion (those that support it). Where is the objective point of view? Can I not pose it? Can I not answer some of the questions posed? Why because they contridict the general opinion? I have to jump on the band wagon no questions asked? I find the resulting answers within the 9/11 truth movement highly questionable and more like fabrication based on a wanting desire for the administration to have orchistrated it. There is two things i dislike about this thread and information contained within. #1 It is off topic and #2 it is filled with speculative reasoning based on lies, misrepresented observations, denial of facts/contributing factors, and unrealistic comparisons represented as observations. 

Ring I would like to remind you to please stay on topic here, the voting clearly shows what people want. So I would either post some evidence of an opinion, that is not opinion in itself. Or a verifiable quote or some other news release. The point of the topic is clear.

Quote from: hartiberlin on July 30, 2007, 01:58:02 AM

Quote from: ring_theory on July 30, 2007, 01:35:47 AM


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5474006551011489413&q
I watched this video a few times since I started posting to this thread.

At 12:22 the girl says:
It was a millitary plane !

So as she was the eye witness, but they unfortunately cut the scene out,
where the millitary plane crashed into the second WTC, at least
they said a few seconds later , that it was not a normal plane but a millitary plane !

So the question remains,
what happened to the original planes and the people in there ?

Was one plane really , as in the movie Loose Change told, was flown
to Ohio airport and brought to a hangar there ?
What happened to the passengers then ?

What happened to the plane, that "officially" went into the
Pentagon ( which was indeed a missile) and the people in there ?

Is there somehow a current video of the allieged terrorists which
are said still to be still alive, so we can verify this ?
Then the theory of terrorists would not make any sense at all...

Not much evidence in the plane area unfortunatly. For an accounting, we can only confirm (by video) that two planes were really even destroyed, and what or where those planes where is something up for debate. There is no hard evidence that they were or were not airliners. 4 planes of course are supposed to be missing, however 93 and 77 as has been shown on many videos to be still listed as viable aircraft. That being the case rule 2 of the 4 out as being missing, one thing I know about big business is that they don't make mistakes when it comes to insurance claims, we would be lucky if they didn't try to say that 4 other planes were damaged from fear. So 2 planes left missing, but we also have two planes that landed in Chicago. Ever seen the game with three cups and a ball under one of them? There is a number of newer small airlines in operation nowadays, who sometimes buy used planes from the larger fleets. Theres also a number of businesses that have ties as possible fronts for other agencies.

As far as the people who were supposedly on the planes, good question, WHERE ARE THEY, they weren't in the field of penns., or embedded into the pentagon, and judging from the impacts at the towers, they proly weren't there either. I say the last for these reasons, given the amount of flame that exited the towers after impact, it would be clear that glass and obstruction was cleaned out of the way as the flame front propagated out of the building. Knowing something of inertia (as disturbing as it sounds no pleasure is taken in mentioning it) why didn't some of the passengers get thrown out of the building? how about chairs, or luggage, we didn't hear of any of those parts being found at the site. In addition many of us have seen the pictures of people standing in the holes made by the planes, if the bodies didn't leave the building then they where still in there, and these people didn't come from the impact site, so they must have made their way through the flame and debris, and through dead charred people. I don't think that most people, especially office women have the stomach to go through that and stand at the hole for some air.

So I would say this, I have not seen any credible evidence, that would hold up in a court room, that those people were on the two planes, and even less evidence that the other two incidences were even planes. I would find it very interesting to look at the air traffic at the time of the two planes supposed takeoff, and I would like to track planes before after and during the events, a transponder isn't that hard to change plane id. Where did all of the planes that took off from Dulles land, and who got off them.

Quote from: d3adp00l on July 30, 2007, 02:11:27 PM

Quote from: ring_theory on July 29, 2007, 10:32:46 PM

Quote from: d3adp00l on July 29, 2007, 08:19:08 PM
yes well I am done with ring theory invading a topic that he obiviously doesn't have any reason to post on except to be an antagonist. Again ring you should just leave the topic alone, you have a very closed mind, flat world opinion on the subject in the topic, and your only goal seems to be to get rid of it. If you want to diminish the experience of some users on the forum by being disruptive, then I find that I don't particularly like your contributions at all. And no longer value your opinion. Had you posted your thought discussed them and agreed to have your opinion and we have ours then I would still value what you had to say. But you have gone beyond that to nearly violent protest of the subject at all, it seems to me that YOU have a problem with it not the rest of us. Its your show Stephen but I feel, as too many times I do, that a mainstream concept is simply trying to quiet a contradictory opinion. And as far as off topic? To me the same reasons those building were attacked (doesn't matter who did it), that war is being fought, that people are oppressed, etc, are the reasons I even bother looking into O/U and spend time researching looking for an answer. I can tell you right now that it is not for personal gain of any kind, because when it really comes down to it, if I ever figured anything out, I most certainly wouldn't put my name to it, I would not try to profit from it. Those are the actions that get you killed.

And on top of that I could find a dozen topics that are not really o/u but are still on the forum, why does this one dig at ring theory so much, what is your problem with free speech ring?

"nearly violent protest"?   I object!  "mainstream concept is simply trying to quiet a contradictory opinion" Now isn't that what your trying to do to me on this subject and my contradictory opinion??? What was the reason those buildings was attacked?? I was thinking it was an attempt to destabilize our economy? My goals are not meant to be disruptive. I'm not seeking for anyone to like my contributions either on this thread or this forum. If you think it's going to hurt my feelings that you don't your sadly mistaken. This thread is disruptive if anything. it would be in comparison to posting OU or free energy things on a 9/11 forum, Off topic. I have nothing against free speech in fact if you havn't noticed i'm exercizing it in this thread. Seemingly to your and others dislike. Isn't it great the power of the first ammendment?

Why cannot I discuss the so called "9/11 truth movement"? I mean really I only see one side to this discussion (those that support it). Where is the objective point of view? Can I not pose it? Can I not answer some of the questions posed? Why because they contridict the general opinion? I have to jump on the band wagon no questions asked? I find the resulting answers within the 9/11 truth movement highly questionable and more like fabrication based on a wanting desire for the administration to have orchistrated it. There is two things i dislike about this thread and information contained within. #1 It is off topic and #2 it is filled with speculative reasoning based on lies, misrepresented observations, denial of facts/contributing factors, and unrealistic comparisons represented as observations. 

Ring I would like to remind you to please stay on topic here, the voting clearly shows what people want. So I would either post some evidence of an opinion, that is not opinion in itself. Or a verifiable quote or some other news release. The point of the topic is clear.

OK MOM! 

Quote from: hartiberlin on July 30, 2007, 01:58:02 AM

Quote from: ring_theory on July 30, 2007, 01:35:47 AM


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5474006551011489413&q
I watched this video a few times since I started posting to this thread.

At 12:22 the girl says:
It was a millitary plane !

So as she was the eye witness, but they unfortunately cut the scene out,
where the millitary plane crashed into the second WTC, at least
they said a few seconds later , that it was not a normal plane but a millitary plane !

So the question remains,
what happened to the original planes and the people in there ?

Was one plane really , as in the movie Loose Change told, was flown
to Ohio airport and brought to a hangar there ?
What happened to the passengers then ?

What happened to the plane, that "officially" went into the
Pentagon ( which was indeed a missile) and the people in there ?

Is there somehow a current video of the allieged terrorists which
are said still to be still alive, so we can verify this ?
Then the theory of terrorists would not make any sense at all...

Ok Stefan i better understand now why this thread has been allowed to fester on this forum and why the poll is biased at best. You have questions and doubts. First if you want me to leave the forum all you have to do is ask me, I'll go quietly.

I was more wanting to present audio of tower 1 as it collapsed and to present audio that may clear up the explosives theory. However as usual everyone concintrated on what was said, instead of what sounds came from the street. Just because the wittness said it was a military plane does not make it such. wittness reliability is at best unreliable. What plane was she talking about? the one that hit tower one or tower two? Was she talking about the planes that hit the towers while seeing a military plane or helicopter in the distance and confusing her words? there are many questions that can be posed based on an emotional responce. to address them without research would be what is fueling the whole truth movement. You hear her say a military plane, you then deduct thet that fits with the general theme of the truth movement. So you conclude that they are the wittnesses and it must be fact. Again, wittness reliability is at best unreliable. 

There is plenty of imagery out there on 9/11 all of which pose a plithora of questions as well as answers if your really looking. they couldn't have seen the plane that well. given the speed of the plane on impact it would have went from a dot in the sky to imact in a matter of seconds. in that time it would be nearly impossible to define what color it was let alone type of plane. We have to rely on other footage to confirm that it was not a military plane. I doubt that they seen the plane that impacted tower one either. If they did, it would have been nothing more than a fleeting glimpse.

"what happened to the original planes and the people in there ?"

Stefan as tragic as it is They are no more. destroyed on impact lifes and equipment alike. Untill evidence is provided that they are still alive. we must assume they are dead.

There was alot of planes bieng landed and shuffeled out of the way. Flight traffic was suspended. all aeroplanes were to immediatly land at the nearest air field.

"What happened to the plane, that "officially" went into the
Pentagon ( which was indeed a missile) and the people in there ?"

Destroyed on impact. the whole face of the pentagon is bomb resistant and the structures pentigon shape is among the "golden section" in mathematics. It is in all intentional means designed as a fortress would be. there are many support columns that effectively dispursed the impacts energy shredding the plane. any remaining bits would have been reduced to molten form in the resulting fire. A missle of modern warfare would have did more damage it is designed as a delivery vessel for explosives as explosives are more volitile than fuels alone. There would have been a crater where the pentagon section was.

There was no survivors and untill confirmation that there is we can only assume there was none. 

"Is there somehow a current video of the allieged terrorists which
are said still to be still alive, so we can verify this ?
Then the theory of terrorists would not make any sense at all..."   

That's an interesting question. However there was not enough of the real terrorists left to make a positive identification. how does Knowing who isn't the piloting terrorist help us to determine who was the piloting terrorist? Knowing my governments efficiency the list was hap hazardly thrown together from a list of suspects that fit certain criteria. I believe that even then if say half or even 1/3 of the list is correct it would suprise me. But still i cannot see enough evidence pointing in the direction of condemning the government as of yet.

@ Ringtheory -

Some questions you perhaps could answer.

Edit 1. What is your opinion on the war games perfomed by the military on 9/11?

2. What is your opinion on the ash samples taken from the wtc site which contained traces of thermate?

3. Why did they only release 5 frames from the pentagon video?  Why has the Sheraton Hotel video never been released?

4. Whats your take on the FBI find no solid evidence that Bin Laden had anything to do with 9/11?

http://www.keenefreepress.com/mambo/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=210&

5.  What is your opinion about the pentacon video?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5296595694237574426

Doubts?  Oh ya...