Discussion in 'Members' Lounge' started by pissedoffsol, Mar 2, 2007.
RatTube.com Â» THE SMOKING GUN WTC7, BBC JUMPS THE GUN !!!
BBC NEWS | The Editors
there's a video of them saying they had to "pull" wtc7
i wish it would go someplace but this will just fade away
that's cause there'snothing too it.
I was doing some further thinking on the whole "it had to be explosives because the windows blew out" theory. wouldn't the pressure of the air compressing in a collapsing building do the same thing?
this is a good illistration on why this country is failing
Top Things that hold America's interest in the news:
Paris Hiltons new rack
Anna Nichole Smith trial
trying to make our President look like Hitler
no wonder we're a failing country
wide open throttle is never a goverment issue
I am not sure that this is a smoking gun. I could see how someone could give out just plain wrong information. Remember when it happened it was complete chaos. Reporters were blocks away and info was scattered. I am just placing this into the catagory file with the faces of the devil in the smoke pictures and every other conspiricy theory out there. It is interesting but not the nail in the coffin so to speak
I have no doubt that the owner of the WTC is an evil guy, who could have conspired to cause the whole incident. The Tower 7 evidence, what I actually saw 9/11/01, and the insurance data for the entire plaza is the ONLY conspiracy there. I think that he asked for his towers to be flown into. The Pentagon damage is also extreme, but I'm not ready to pass judgement on it. (The pentagon is the country's only above-ground fortress, and a 747 at triple speed should not have gone through all those layers of the pentagon)
or left a punch hole. The cover up is the pentagon was attacked by a MiG flown by Al Qaeda. Why cover it up? Do you know how vulnerable that would make us look. What it would do to our economy?
What is the answer to 99 out of 100 questions: Money
There is no way a MiG got into US airspace.
I would believe a shoulder launched rocket over that. Which it does seem an awful lot like.
a turbine and a wheel from a MiG was found in the crash site. several reports say it was a "small jet", and the punch hole it unmistakable, it was an air to ground missle followed by the impact of a small jet fighter.
When I was in the military I was at plenty of costal militay bases. You wanna know how many had SAM sites? none
EDIT: Photos of the above items and a breif discription is in loose change.
What ? Never heard of this. Where did you hear of it ?
Say Rense and I'll make you choke on my boot
you tube loose change
How can you think that a 747 is incapable of punching through several layers of the pentagon? those things weigh roughly 850,000 pounds! I dont care if you have 10 feet of concrete, its going to come down.
And the fact that they found a mig wheel and turbine in the wreckage is total bullshit. Where the hell is the rest of the plane? I dont care if it burned in jet fuel for 3 days, there would still be a mountain of identifiable parts.
where are the wings of the 747?
I don't want to tell you your wrong but aircraft crash investigation is something most prior Air Force people have a fair ammount of knowlege on. And the "Punch Hole" I'm refurring to was several layers of wall in and smaller then the smallest production aircraft.
EDIT: As a basic explination a plane of that size can hit the Pentagon one of two ways.
1. It hits the ground and slides in: This would leave an odvious drag mark as it slid across the ground, on impact the wings would have sheered off causing damage to the left and right of the hole the impact made and leaving the wings on the ground
2. It hits the Pentagon in a nose dive (which goes agianst everything the government said): Damage from the wings would then occur to the top of the building to the left and right of the impact site. Wings may sheer off and go a number of directions to include the impact site, but would most proably fly in the direction opposite the impact which would put them on the ground in front of the Pentagon.
look at a photograph from the crash site. the picture supports neighor possiblility
I did a little reading. one of the engines weigh 6 tons.. could have easily been an engine. And also, the pentagon is FAR from being a fortress. its a very large building, but it most certainly is not worthing of being called a "fortress". Those walls arent much thicker than any other wall of a large building.
that section of the pentagon was just fortified, check into it
Also several key officials were reportedly moved to the other side of the building for no apparent reason. Well, I guess it's apparent now.
Loose change is not a factual resource.
Nothing is a factual resource. Everything is hearsay, someone's opinion, or someone's opinion about hearsay. You can't know ANYTHING for sure.
The more you know, the more you realize how little you know.
Separate names with a comma.