The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
http://www.serendipity.li/wtc.htm
credit for the link to the site has to go to pandaemonium - interesting stuff!
credit for the link to the site has to go to pandaemonium - interesting stuff!
Page:
Well I've never seen the Pentagon footage and I watched the news for a great number of hours that week. Fair enough about it not pointing at the sky but I'd expect at least of the surrounding areas something must have caught footage of it.
Ah well, I very much doubt it was anything but a terrorist attack and lets not forget the loss of life which that site I just read seemed to miss.
Ah well, I very much doubt it was anything but a terrorist attack and lets not forget the loss of life which that site I just read seemed to miss.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> Again, you know exactly what I mean. If you don't, others will. So
> I'll say no more about it.
No I don't. Look at the images, total devestation. I only did Science to GCSE but even I know what happens if you have a massive weight bearing down on a building which it cannot handle - the force collapses it straight down. It's pretty simple.
It's like a water tank leaking in a house. Water comes out, the ceiling can't support it, ceiling breaks taking parts of it down along with the object (the water) which the ceiling cannot take the weight of.
> Again, you know exactly what I mean. If you don't, others will. So
> I'll say no more about it.
No I don't. Look at the images, total devestation. I only did Science to GCSE but even I know what happens if you have a massive weight bearing down on a building which it cannot handle - the force collapses it straight down. It's pretty simple.
It's like a water tank leaking in a house. Water comes out, the ceiling can't support it, ceiling breaks taking parts of it down along with the object (the water) which the ceiling cannot take the weight of.
SHEEPY wrote:
> Oh, they want me to buy a book. How nice.
>
> Anyway, I did find it strange that not one picture or video of the
> attack was seen. Surely they have CCTV all over the Pentagon area?
> And surprising I thought the security alert would go through the roof
> after the first attacks but an hour passes?
CCTV DID capture the impact before it went dead, though only a couple of cameras - the footage was played on 12th September on most networks. The lack of other CCTV is easy. Go out, into town, and look where cameras are pointed. See any looking at the sky? Nope, they look down. Only the ones mounted high up could stand a chance.
The security alert is likewise easily explained. The first impact on the tower was reported as a disaster, Bush's reaction to being informed was recorded as he was at some school elsewhere. It was not until the second tower was hit, and after about ten-fifteen minutes that any network confirmed a terrorist attack. At that point Bush was informed and the procedure for securing him put into play as two airliner were still in the air, and many more were untrackable, no one had any idea how bad this was going to get at this point - and I think any of you who watched this all unfold live would agree with that. I switched on the tv just as the news of the first plane broke, and was one of millions who saw, live, the second plane veer into the other tower. Bush was driven out to Marine 1 (presidential helicopter) and taken direct to Air Force One which took off straight away, at this point all planes in american airspace were told to get down on the ground anywhere they could, all airports were closed, nearly all international flights diverted or recalled. It's not until Bush was on Air Force One, mid air, and the information had been relayed to him and his staff that the alert was officially issued. Unofficially, all American agencies went onto high alert the moment the second tower was hit, and it's known for certain that the moment the airforce was given authority (little matter of the constitution) to get planes in the air that they were taxiing down the runway.
Bascially it's not a case of Bush going, "yeah ramp it up".
There was also a case of how to respond anyway, if you send the airforce up immediately do you have pilots on hold whilst you debate whether to fire? Nope, you have to decide before you take the action because you can bet your ass your every actions will be analysed and critiqued years after the event by people with the benefit of knowing more clearly what happened...
> Oh, they want me to buy a book. How nice.
>
> Anyway, I did find it strange that not one picture or video of the
> attack was seen. Surely they have CCTV all over the Pentagon area?
> And surprising I thought the security alert would go through the roof
> after the first attacks but an hour passes?
CCTV DID capture the impact before it went dead, though only a couple of cameras - the footage was played on 12th September on most networks. The lack of other CCTV is easy. Go out, into town, and look where cameras are pointed. See any looking at the sky? Nope, they look down. Only the ones mounted high up could stand a chance.
The security alert is likewise easily explained. The first impact on the tower was reported as a disaster, Bush's reaction to being informed was recorded as he was at some school elsewhere. It was not until the second tower was hit, and after about ten-fifteen minutes that any network confirmed a terrorist attack. At that point Bush was informed and the procedure for securing him put into play as two airliner were still in the air, and many more were untrackable, no one had any idea how bad this was going to get at this point - and I think any of you who watched this all unfold live would agree with that. I switched on the tv just as the news of the first plane broke, and was one of millions who saw, live, the second plane veer into the other tower. Bush was driven out to Marine 1 (presidential helicopter) and taken direct to Air Force One which took off straight away, at this point all planes in american airspace were told to get down on the ground anywhere they could, all airports were closed, nearly all international flights diverted or recalled. It's not until Bush was on Air Force One, mid air, and the information had been relayed to him and his staff that the alert was officially issued. Unofficially, all American agencies went onto high alert the moment the second tower was hit, and it's known for certain that the moment the airforce was given authority (little matter of the constitution) to get planes in the air that they were taxiing down the runway.
Bascially it's not a case of Bush going, "yeah ramp it up".
There was also a case of how to respond anyway, if you send the airforce up immediately do you have pilots on hold whilst you debate whether to fire? Nope, you have to decide before you take the action because you can bet your ass your every actions will be analysed and critiqued years after the event by people with the benefit of knowing more clearly what happened...
Again, you know exactly what I mean. If you don't, others will. So I'll say no more about it.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> Belldandy wrote:
> That was one "safe" collapse eh?
>
> Don't be pedantic, you know what I mean. It could have been a LOT
> worse for the surrounding area than it actually was.
How do you get any worse than total devestation, environmental damage and a major public health hazard? I think you've watched too many disaster movies...
> Belldandy wrote:
> That was one "safe" collapse eh?
>
> Don't be pedantic, you know what I mean. It could have been a LOT
> worse for the surrounding area than it actually was.
How do you get any worse than total devestation, environmental damage and a major public health hazard? I think you've watched too many disaster movies...
Oh, they want me to buy a book. How nice.
Anyway, I did find it strange that not one picture or video of the attack was seen. Surely they have CCTV all over the Pentagon area? And surprising I thought the security alert would go through the roof after the first attacks but an hour passes?
Anyway, I did find it strange that not one picture or video of the attack was seen. Surely they have CCTV all over the Pentagon area? And surprising I thought the security alert would go through the roof after the first attacks but an hour passes?
Belldandy wrote:
> See below for why that is entirely possible and not rare at all.
Yeah, but... the one thing happens to be a terrorists passport?
Terrorist... front of plane... first into the wall... find passport.
This link, from the original site, covers most of my thoughts...
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/pentagon/introduction.html
...including the wreckage that should have been present.
> See below for why that is entirely possible and not rare at all.
Yeah, but... the one thing happens to be a terrorists passport?
Terrorist... front of plane... first into the wall... find passport.
This link, from the original site, covers most of my thoughts...
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/pentagon/introduction.html
...including the wreckage that should have been present.
Belldandy wrote:
> That was one "safe" collapse eh?
Don't be pedantic, you know what I mean. It could have been a LOT worse for the surrounding area than it actually was.
> That was one "safe" collapse eh?
Don't be pedantic, you know what I mean. It could have been a LOT worse for the surrounding area than it actually was.
WòókieeMøn§†€® wrote:
> Just like at the WTC. But apparently a terrorists passport still
> survived?
See below for why that is entirely possible and not rare at all.
> Now I'm no expert, but I KNOW that to safely demolish a building, you
> have to set charges in exactly the right place.
Wrong. To safely demolish a building you do that.
> Yet two practically identical towers are hit in two different places,
> above their centre, by aircraft. Yet both fall "safely"
> straight downwards, causing relatively little damage to the areas
> around them.
An independent cross party commission of US Senators after 9/11 investigated why this happened and found, surprise surprise, that the building was designed to partially withstand and impact, but critically, not designed to take the weight of upper levels collapsing in on lower levels - which caused the collapse. You are actually wrong about them falling safely - the collapse destroyed the emergency command centre adjacent to the towers, as well as other smaller buildings, most of which were demolished in the aftermath as structurally unsound. Like this one
http://www.911da.org/crr/images (SPACE) /CRRDB/data/documents/3360.htm
That was one "safe" collapse eh?
> Maybe it is just coincidence, but it does seem strange to me. I even
> commented on it at the time, how "lucky" they were that
> they didn't fall over sideways. That was as I was watching it live
> on TV, before the remotest idea of "conspiracy theory" had
> been mentioned by anyone, anywhere.
They collapsed down because of the damage sustained, even in earthquakes most buidlings don't topple over because of their weight. It's physics. The kind of force necessary to knock the towers in half would have destroyed them in an instant - so great would it have to be.
> Just like at the WTC. But apparently a terrorists passport still
> survived?
See below for why that is entirely possible and not rare at all.
> Now I'm no expert, but I KNOW that to safely demolish a building, you
> have to set charges in exactly the right place.
Wrong. To safely demolish a building you do that.
> Yet two practically identical towers are hit in two different places,
> above their centre, by aircraft. Yet both fall "safely"
> straight downwards, causing relatively little damage to the areas
> around them.
An independent cross party commission of US Senators after 9/11 investigated why this happened and found, surprise surprise, that the building was designed to partially withstand and impact, but critically, not designed to take the weight of upper levels collapsing in on lower levels - which caused the collapse. You are actually wrong about them falling safely - the collapse destroyed the emergency command centre adjacent to the towers, as well as other smaller buildings, most of which were demolished in the aftermath as structurally unsound. Like this one
http://www.911da.org/crr/images (SPACE) /CRRDB/data/documents/3360.htm
That was one "safe" collapse eh?
> Maybe it is just coincidence, but it does seem strange to me. I even
> commented on it at the time, how "lucky" they were that
> they didn't fall over sideways. That was as I was watching it live
> on TV, before the remotest idea of "conspiracy theory" had
> been mentioned by anyone, anywhere.
They collapsed down because of the damage sustained, even in earthquakes most buidlings don't topple over because of their weight. It's physics. The kind of force necessary to knock the towers in half would have destroyed them in an instant - so great would it have to be.
And despite the blast destroying everything else, the bodies were identified by DNA evidence?
A large metal plane and everything on it is vapourised, but soft-tissue DNA evidence remains for every passenger to be identified?
Doesn't that just seem... odd?
A large metal plane and everything on it is vapourised, but soft-tissue DNA evidence remains for every passenger to be identified?
Doesn't that just seem... odd?
Page: