I feel badly for you. I'm a young man and my little brother died last year under terrible circumstances. Nothing has ever been half so painful. I'm glad that his death wasn't one that will be endlessly replayed. You must spend a fair amount of time avoiding places and sites where this footage might be replayed. I know I would.
billbradleyYou want BBQ sauce? Get the fuck out of my house. 2,914 Posts
that's landing gear? and if so... where the fuck did the rest of the plane go?
I was asking the same question then came across this page earlier showing debris from the plane. I would expect the plane to break up into smaller pieces, but in no way would the plane completely disintegrate. Until today I hadn't seen any convincing pictures of the wreckage at the Pentagon. Here are links to where these pictures came from and a little more info about the Pentagon.
It looks like plane parts to me. Decide for yourself...
or what about the claim from the movie that some of the "alleged" hijackers are still living?
the proof? the movie SHOWS ACTUAL HEADSHOTS OF THEM. for real that's like the whole explanation.
then they change the subject.
I'm sorry, as many questions as I have about 9/11, the shoddiness/smarmyness of this documentary leads me to reject it pretty much out of hand.
if only you guys would begin to question the medias sources as much as mine... you'd be a lot more in touch with reality.
yeah but I am referring to a very specific point that was SOOOO PREPOSTEROUS that I couldn't take the rest of it seriously.
for real. admittedly, the subsequent versions of the documentary may omit this scene (it seems the creators have had to delete quite a bit from the original), but I want you to address it.
as I remember, they show a group photo of the hijackers and state earnestly that many of them are still living. no proof. nothing.
and it wasn't just that. they did the same with the lightposts that were destroyed outside the Pentagon. "uh they were facing the wrong way...moving on!" and with the airplane wheel hub found at the Pentagon and pictured above "uh it's the wrong depth...moving on!!"
also crossings STILL hasn't answered my question of whether he read the Popular Mechanics article or not, OR where all the people from those planes went. But he's done with this thread for the 2nd or 3rd time, so I guess they'll never get answered.
in regards (and ONLY in regards) to the missiles with landing gear... Cruise Missiles have been developed in the past with landing gear.
I am not an expert or know if any of these styles are still in use today by the military, however the link below has pictures of one type of cruise missiles with landing gear.
okay i suppose it's possible a 1950s or 1960s era missile was used, although i saw what was pretty clearly a blue American Airlines seat in one of the wreckage pictures and I don't think missiles have seats. OR DO THEY???
And now a friendly question and answer session with our benevolent global overlords.
The Council on Foreign Relations, founded in 1921, grew out of the "round table groups" of Cecil Rhodes and the tireless energy of Colonel Edward House. As seen by themselves and their propagandists or friends, the round table groups in general aimed at securing "a new world order" in which our previous chaos and international anarchy would give way to stability and peace. According to its critics, the purpose of the CFR and other round tables (e.g., England's Royal Institute of International Affairs) is to ensure that a cabal of Insiders (rich Anglo-American families) rule more and more of the world forever and ever. According to the radical, rabit right, the whole thing is a front for the Illuminati. According to Prof. Carroll Quigley, it was through the CFR that many liberal-left activists achieved high political positions in America - but "the power that these energetic Left-wingers exercised was never their own power or Communist power but was ultimately the power of the international financial coterie." All liberal-to-Marxist groups, if they become big enough to make a difference, Quigley says, ultimately derive their money from "Thomas Lamont and the Morgan Bank... (and) a whole network of interlocking tax-exempt foundations." Quigley expresses basic agreement with the goals of this financial elite, and the John Birch Society regards him as "accidentally" spilling the beans on them; but A-Albionic has a more subtle view of Quigley's role. The Washington Post has acknowledged that the CFR is "the nearest thing we have to a ruling establishment in the United States." As of 1996, CFR members in high positions included President Bill Clinton, White House advisors George Stephanopoulos and John Gibbons, Associate Director of National Security Gordon Adams, Secretary of State Warren Christopher, Director of CIA John Deutsch, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili, Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin, Office of National Drug Control Policy Director Barry McCaffrey, Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbot, Arms Control and Disarmament Director John Holum, US Information Agency Director Joseph Duffey, Supreme Court Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, and Stephen Breyer, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Henry Cisneros, Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt, Secretay of Labor Thomas Williamson Jr, 13 Senators, and 13 Representatives. Other CFR members in government include the ambassadors to Australia, Chile, Czech Republic, Ethiopia, France, India, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Korea, Mexico, Nepal, Nigeria, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Syria, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom. The major foundations are also stuffed with CFR people in top offices. The Carnegie Corporation has Newton Minow as Chairman of the Board and 18 other CFR folk in high positions; the Ford Foundation has seven, including their chairman of the board; the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation has nine, including the chairman and president; and the Twentieth Century Fund has 15, including the chairman, the president, and the vice president. CFR members in the media include the president of ABC-TV, a vice president of Associated Press, two editors of Atlantic Monthly, two of Business Week, the president of CNN-TV, the chairman of Forbes, the editor in chief of Entertainment Weekly, two editors of the Nation, six of National Review, six of the New Republic, one at Newsday, one at the New York Review of Books, 16 at the New York Times, 10 at Time, 10 at US News and World Report, etc. (All these lists have been condensed to avoid boredom.) If the CFR had millions of members like, says, the Presbyterian Church, this list might not mean much. But the CFR only has 3200 members.
well, i have had fun reading this thread, nice to see all the usual suspects weighing in with the usual mix of facts, opinion, bullshit and propaganda.
i remember seeing the buildings fall and it just didnt look right, how can something so damn big fall in such a 'controlled way' after being hit by something so damn small 9comparitavly).
i have watched as many documentaries as the next man explining the scientific reasons why this occurred, (that the fireproofing that was sprayed on the iron beams was blasted off by all the high temperature jet fuel and then it was just a case of waiting for the temperatures to hit the right level). and i understand now how this happenned, this dosnt mean that every single time i see those shocking images, my brain still has a hard time accepting the facts, but then again i am not a structural engineer...
as for the loose change documentary... shoddy images, shoddier reasoning and the beats were a nice touch.
unfortunatly the pentagons images are just as shoddy, the question of the Sheratons tapes remains and the Bush administrations culture of fear does nothing to encourage trust nor rational thought.
hell yes there are still questions to be answered, but films like loose change and attitudes like that shown by the Bush government will ensure that these questions will remain unanswered.
(but lizard people jokes are still funny).
seeing as this thread looks like it has started slowing down allow me to post an article from the BBC news website from yesterday:
The release of new video pictures of the Pentagon being attacked on 9/11 will not quell the endless claims in the world of conspiracy theorists that a missile or military aircraft hit the building instead.
The theorists do not believe eyewitnesses, physical evidence, engineering studies or even the claims of Osama Bin Laden, so it is unlikely that they will be convinced by grainy video frames.
The latest pictures are the missing frames from a series taken from two cameras at a filling station.
If you look closely, you do see what could be a plane, flying very low and then hitting the building, causing a huge fireball. It is consistent with the official account.
However, the new frames do not absolutely without doubt show that this was American Airlines 77 in its final moments, so hope will spring eternal for the conspiracists that they have not been knocked out.
And even if the pictures did clearly show the doomed airliner, the theorists would probably just change their charge.
After all, in the case of the Twin Towers, they argued that the attacks were carried out by, or tolerated by, the US government. The Pentagon could easily be fitted into that category as well.
Claims
To understand the conspiracy theory, it is worth considering a film called Loose Change: 2nd edition. Available on the internet, it reveals the full alternative version of what happened to the Pentagon in all its glory. It states:
AA77 did not crash into the building. And if there was no AA77, it must have been a missile, a military aircraft or a drone that did it
The alleged pilot Hani Hanjour was not skilled enough to execute the manoeuvre and the plane would have stalled in the tight turn alleged
Street lights were knocked down but did not bring down the plane; therefore there was no plane. They could have been deliberately lifted from the ground
The damage was not consistent with the size of the airliner and therefore there was no airliner
There were no remains of either the 757 or passengers and therefore neither existed
Pieces of fuselage found nearby were planted
Eyewitnesses who said they saw the plane were confused. Others said they saw a commuter jet or a helicopter
Answers
There are, of course, answers to all of the above, to be found in the report of the 9/11 Commission, in other technical assessments and in common sense.
For example, the limited damage on each side of the impact zone was due to recent strengthening work on the building. Windows that survived were made of shatterproof glass.
Another obvious weakness in the film is that the eyewitnesses chosen are all treated as if they have equal value. And did nobody see the lampposts being lifted out of the ground?
And the passengers...?
The most glaring gap in the theory is surely this. If AA77 did not end its flight hitting the Pentagon, what happened to it and its passengers?
This appears to be of little relevance to 9/11 theorists. In the course of an e-mail exchange with one of them I asked this question and was told that for all she knew, the plane could have been diverted somewhere and the passengers gassed.
One of the passengers was well-known. She was Barbara Olson, wife of Ted Olson, the US Solicitor general. However, I was told by the theorist that two calls she made to her husband from the plane probably never existed. Exactly where she might be now remains a mystery, it seems.
The film "Loose Change" also claims incidentally that United 93 which came down in a field in Pennsylvania, never crashed (the "crash site" was dug out by bulldozers) but landed at Cleveland and the passengers taken off. What happened to them, one wonders.
It also says that the Twin Towers were brought down by "controlled demolition". Again, great emphasis is placed on immediate eyewitness accounts of "explosions" within the towers, and almost none on later engineering examinations of the sequence of the collapse.
Plane comes into view at far right
The film is the work of three young American videomakers, who started off making a fictional film about how they revealed that 9/11 was a US government conspiracy.
One of them, Dylan Avery, has described what happened next: "It was that month that I began writing Loose Change, a fictional story about my friends and I discovering that 11 September was not a terrorist attack, but rather, an attack by their own government.
"Upon researching for the movie, it became apparent that the subject matter might not have been entirely fiction. Over two years time, adding more and more information, the fictional movie evolved into what it is today: a documentary."
The film is quite professionally done on a technical level, with sinister music and fast cutting. Avery said it cost only $2,000 to make and was done on a laptop.
Internet influence
It is proving popular on the internet in reinforcing beliefs that 9/11 might not have been all it seems.
The theorists are very small in number but are working in fertile soil. The events are endlessly fascinating.
And the fact remains that some people around the world believe that somehow the US government might have been involved.
Part, most probably, of that suspicion has to do with anger against the United States. There are always conspiracy theories involving the US right across the Middle East and beyond. Many people want to believe the worst.
The new pictures will not have much effect on that kind of thinking.
It might well be that, as in the case of the Kennedy assassination, it will take many years for a settled view on the events of 11 September 2001 to take hold.
[email]Paul.Reynolds-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk[/email]
EDIT: Sween, i somehow missed your post when i woke this morning and re-read the thread. After re-reading what i wrote here, i guess i could come across as flippant and disrespectful to you and the memory of your brother, This was never my intention.
ok, although I am totally not for this type of conspiracy theory and I really feel it cheapens the memory of those that died, especially those that did so trying to save lives I want to add one big thing about the footage that has people flipped out.
The airplane that crashed into the pentagon was beleived to be going somewhere between 400 & 500 mph.
At that speed a standard 24 frame camera or even a 30 frame camera could not pick up an accurate shot.
in other words all you are seeing is a abstract picture.
Please try to keep in mind that many Americans died that day, and to say something like the message in Loose Change is completely disrespectful to those like Sweens brother who sacrificed their lives for the belief of love and care in their fellow man.
Rest in peace to all who passed away that sad day
and shame to those who try to take this loss and transform it into something else based on unfounded "evidence"
my younger brother way back in middle school found out about conspiracy stuff and together we blew our minds daily with revelations (not even a little ayo). at the same time, we were deep into civilization ii, and somehow he got his head into the space where he started thinking the aztecs were behind it all. innocent-seeming road construction? 'damn aztecs!' jfk? 'aztecs!' the illuminati? 'it's those goddamn aztecs, again!' => ? the truth is out there :sayin:
ok, although I am totally not for this type of conspiracy theory and I really feel it cheapens the memory of those that died, especially those that did so trying to save lives I want to add one big thing about the footage that has people flipped out.
The airplane that crashed into the pentagon was beleived to be going somewhere between 400 & 500 mph.
At that speed a standard 24 frame camera or even a 30 frame camera could not pick up an accurate shot.
in other words all you are seeing is a abstract picture.
Please try to keep in mind that many Americans died that day, and to say something like the message in Loose Change is completely disrespectful to those like Sweens brother who sacrificed their lives for the belief of love and care in their fellow man.
Rest in peace to all who passed away that sad day
and shame to those who try to take this loss and transform it into something else based on unfounded "evidence"
there it is.
and to add a little, it wasnt just Americans who died on that day (or in the war/s following).
A little bit of perspective and respect goes a long way.
oh and crossings, regarding them "leaning to the side", here is a picture of the south tower as it began to collapse. looks like it "leans to the side" to me.
That's the tower in which my brother was in when it collapsed. So basically, you're pretty much looking at the moment my brother was killed, give or take a few seconds.
I wonder how some of you would feel if I posted up the photo of the moment when someone in your family was killed, and did some scientific debate about my opinion of it? Like if your father was hit by a truck crossing the street, and I somehow had a traffic camera video of it and posted it so you could keep looking at it and reliving it, then I went on to say "Now see here, it looks as if he is crossing against the light but the police report clearly says...."
Debate away though, it's a national topic of course and the theories and questions will be around long after all of us are dead. I'm just trying to show that other perspective that some of you forget about. Carry on, I'm back to lurking...
I started reading this thread late, but by the time I got to Johnny Paycheck's first post (on the first or early second page) I was already thinking along the same lines. Some of the posts in this thread are making a mockery of human suffering. I was going to post that regardless of anyone's opinions or speculations on this issue, it makes me very uncomfortable to know that Sweendog and others directly affected by 9/11 could be reading this thread. Apparently he is (and others probably are). I don't think discussion on this issue is bad. On the contrary, I think it's somewhat necessary. But some of the talk, speculation, bickering, insulting, etc. going on here is so disrespectful to those who are still thinking of lost friends and loved ones.
When Sween first posted about his brother on soulstrut I cried. When he went overboard on heatrock bidding I was in awe. Now I'm impressed with his ablitity to keep his composure while telling some of you to show some fucking tact.
When Sween first posted about his brother on soulstrut I cried. When he went overboard on heatrock bidding I was in awe. Now I'm impressed with his ablitity to keep his composure while telling some of you to show some fucking tact.
Look dudes. If you want to call people out, call them out. There are specific people involved in this thread. Stop bringing up abstract ideas and claims not made here. If you have a problem with my treatment of Sween's brother CALL ME OUT. I did not post in the last 3 threads about 9-11 because of him and I almost didn't post in this one. If I made a mistake let me know (spelling aside).
The way I understand it Loose Change was only posted so some of you could get another look at the tower falling, and hopefully come to the conclusion as nzshadow did that something looks wrong. That's it. No one is here to critic a film.
This is where I act like a baby who doesn't get his way and cry about my questions not being answered way back at the beginning of this thread.
Respect to everyone who's lives were touched by 9-11.
ok, although I am totally not for this type of conspiracy theory and I really feel it cheapens the memory of those that died, especially those that did so trying to save lives I want to add one big thing about the footage that has people flipped out.
The airplane that crashed into the pentagon was beleived to be going somewhere between 400 & 500 mph.
At that speed a standard 24 frame camera or even a 30 frame camera could not pick up an accurate shot.
in other words all you are seeing is a abstract picture.
Please try to keep in mind that many Americans died that day, and to say something like the message in Loose Change is completely disrespectful to those like Sweens brother who sacrificed their lives for the belief of love and care in their fellow man.
Rest in peace to all who passed away that sad day
and shame to those who try to take this loss and transform it into something else based on unfounded "evidence"
For once you and I are in total agreement. I kinda think that alot of this conspiracy theorizing has to do with the fact that it's more comforting at some level to tell yourself that this was a vast government conspiracy, rather than the work of a few dedicated psychos who exploited America's "it can't happen here" attitude to deadly effect. I watched the second tower come down, and though I'm no scientific expert of any kind, I know what I saw and that plane brought down the building. y'all, for serious.
I am not going to let you get away with that crap.
I kinda think that alot of this conspiracy theorizing has to do with the fact that it's more comforting at some level to tell yourself that this was a vast government conspiracy,
how do you figure? honestly?
rather than the work of a few dedicated psychos who exploited America's "it can't happen here" attitude to deadly effect.
I personally have never claimed that no planes hit the trade centers, or that Osama wasn't behind the attacts, all of that is beside my point. The buildings collapsed due to a controlled demolition.
I watched the second tower come down, and though I'm no scientific expert of any kind, I know what I saw and that plane brought down the building.
From what I've seen, read and discussed I disagree. In this case that disagreement is disrespectful to a murder victim's family?
I am not going to let you get away with that crap.
I kinda think that alot of this conspiracy theorizing has to do with the fact that it's more comforting at some level to tell yourself that this was a vast government conspiracy,
how do you figure? honestly?
rather than the work of a few dedicated psychos who exploited America's "it can't happen here" attitude to deadly effect.
I personally have never claimed that no planes hit the trade centers, or that Osama wasn't behind the attacts, all of that is beside my point. The buildings collapsed due to a controlled demolition.
I watched the second tower come down, and though I'm no scientific expert of any kind, I know what I saw and that plane brought down the building.
From what I've seen, read and discussed I disagree. In this case that disagreement is disrespectful to a murder victim's family?
I wasn't just addressing you, I was addressing a bunch of folks in this thread..time to get that ass-protector out of storage hommie. Your theory is however stupid, insupportable, and offensive, and I have no desire to grant it legitimacy by engaging in an extended discussion about it.
Your theory is however stupid, insupportable, and offensive, and I have no desire to grant it legitimacy by engaging in an extended discussion about it.
then by all means, may the last words on this topic be yours.
this is a massive loss of freedom. Its easy to stand up and call your government fascist when you're sure they wont come saw your head off.
Right. Of course, if you make comparisons between our country and somewhere like a Saddam controlled Iraq or Iran, things are a million times better here. But we're not Iraq or Iran. We are in America (home of the free and all that, remember?). We live under the pretense that we are in a free society. It's one of the staples of this country and a big part of why we are here, and why many will do anything to live here.
So for you to be so nonchalant about the Patriot Act, Domestic Surviellance, etc. is disconcerting. It's that same apathetic "well, what do I care? I'm not doing anything wrong." train of thought that enables more and more freedoms to erode with no public outcry.
Laws are being put into place that will affect us for years to come under the guise of "The War on Terror". And while I'm definitley for some of those laws and for the nation to stay protected, I also realise that we're fighting a perpetual war with no ending. Obviously, some of these laws that are being put into place to defend us from terrorists can easily be used against the very citizens they were put in place to protect.
What has gone on since September 11th in regards to civil rights is unprecedented.
"Some of the fundamental changes to Americans' legal rights by the Bush administration and the USA Patriot Act following the terror attacks are:[/b]
Freedom of Association:[/b] Government may monitor religious and political institutions without suspecting criminal activity to assist terror investigation
Freedom of Information:[/b] Government has closed once-public immigration hearings, has secretly detained hundreds of people without charges, and has encouraged bureaucrats to resist public-records requests.
Freedom of Speech:[/b] Government may prosecute librarians or keepers of any other records if they tell anyone that the government subpoenaed information related to a terror investigation. The FBI won't say how many public libraries it has checked in order to determine who is getting particular books or looking up certain information on computers. A University of Illinois survey of nearly 2,000 libraries in December and January determined that the agency searched one of every nine of the nations largest libraries.
Right to Legal Representation:[/b] Government may monitor federal prison jailhouse conversations between attorneys and clients and deny lawyers to Americans accused of crimes.
Freedom from Unreasonable Searches:[/b] Government may search and seize Americans' papers and effects without probable cause to assist terror investigation.
Trial:[/b] Government may jail Americans without a trial.
Right to Liberty:[/b] Americans may be jailed without being charged or being able to confront witnesses against them.
Other Changes:[/b] Government may listen to suspects on any telephones they might use, not just on a specific phone. The FBI and intelligence agents may share information, an unprecedented shift away from a 24-year-old policy that placed a high wall between domestic law enforcement officials and the CIA. The Treasury Department may target banks and foreign countries deemed havens for money-laundering. The Immigration and Naturalization Service may hold noncitizens up to seven days without charges and detain them indefinitely if they are considered a threat to national security.
If you have a problem with my treatment of Sween's brother CALL ME OUT. I did not post in the last 3 threads about 9-11 because of him and I almost didn't post in this one. If I made a mistake let me know (spelling aside).
Don't worry about me, I'm not taking any offense from anything you type.
All I was trying to do was explain how the image of the South Tower collapsing hurts me due to how I was involved. I tried to make the point that you guys can debate all you want, it's certainly your right to do so. Whoever posted the photo certainly didn't know it was going to affect me, how could they know that right?
I really should just stay out of the 9/11-related threads from now on, I tend to cast a pall over them.
Really though, post away. It doesn't bother me. You dudes can debate this stuff until you're all blue in the face but no one here will ever get the answers they're looking for.
And don't forget that if they wanted to, our Government could also use weapons of mass destruction and wipe out millions of people and entire countries off the face of the earth.
And don't forget that if they wanted to, our Government lizards could also use weapons of mass destruction and wipe out millions of people and entire countries off the face of the earth.
Comments
I was asking the same question then came across this page earlier showing debris from the plane. I would expect the plane to break up into smaller pieces, but in no way would the plane completely disintegrate. Until today I hadn't seen any convincing pictures of the wreckage at the Pentagon. Here are links to where these pictures came from and a little more info about the Pentagon.
It looks like plane parts to me. Decide for yourself...
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html
http://www.911review.com/errors/pentagon/nodebris.html
yeah but I am referring to a very specific point that was SOOOO PREPOSTEROUS that I couldn't take the rest of it seriously.
for real. admittedly, the subsequent versions of the documentary may omit this scene (it seems the creators have had to delete quite a bit from the original), but I want you to address it.
as I remember, they show a group photo of the hijackers and state earnestly that many of them are still living. no proof. nothing.
then they move on to the next "topic."
also crossings STILL hasn't answered my question of whether he read the Popular Mechanics article or not, OR where all the people from those planes went. But he's done with this thread for the 2nd or 3rd time, so I guess they'll never get answered.
I am not an expert or know if any of these styles are still in use today by the military, however the link below has pictures of one type of cruise missiles with landing gear.
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-15.html
I am not taking sides either, just pointing out that missiles do have landing gear...
The Council on Foreign Relations, founded in 1921, grew out of the "round table groups" of Cecil Rhodes and the tireless energy of Colonel Edward House. As seen by themselves and their propagandists or friends, the round table groups in general aimed at securing "a new world order" in which our previous chaos and international anarchy would give way to stability and peace.
According to its critics, the purpose of the CFR and other round tables (e.g., England's Royal Institute of International Affairs) is to ensure that a cabal of Insiders (rich Anglo-American families) rule more and more of the world forever and ever. According to the radical, rabit right, the whole thing is a front for the Illuminati.
According to Prof. Carroll Quigley, it was through the CFR that many liberal-left activists achieved high political positions in America - but "the power that these energetic Left-wingers exercised was never their own power or Communist power but was ultimately the power of the international financial coterie." All liberal-to-Marxist groups, if they become big enough to make a difference, Quigley says, ultimately derive their money from "Thomas Lamont and the Morgan Bank... (and) a whole network of interlocking tax-exempt foundations." Quigley expresses basic agreement with the goals of this financial elite, and the John Birch Society regards him as "accidentally" spilling the beans on them; but A-Albionic has a more subtle view of Quigley's role.
The Washington Post has acknowledged that the CFR is "the nearest thing we have to a ruling establishment in the United States." As of 1996, CFR members in high positions included President Bill Clinton, White House advisors George Stephanopoulos and John Gibbons, Associate Director of National Security Gordon Adams, Secretary of State Warren Christopher, Director of CIA John Deutsch, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili, Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin, Office of National Drug Control Policy Director Barry McCaffrey, Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbot, Arms Control and Disarmament Director John Holum, US Information Agency Director Joseph Duffey, Supreme Court Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, and Stephen Breyer, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Henry Cisneros, Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt, Secretay of Labor Thomas Williamson Jr, 13 Senators, and 13 Representatives. Other CFR members in government include the ambassadors to Australia, Chile, Czech Republic, Ethiopia, France, India, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Korea, Mexico, Nepal, Nigeria, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Syria, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom.
The major foundations are also stuffed with CFR people in top offices. The Carnegie Corporation has Newton Minow as Chairman of the Board and 18 other CFR folk in high positions; the Ford Foundation has seven, including their chairman of the board; the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation has nine, including the chairman and president; and the Twentieth Century Fund has 15, including the chairman, the president, and the vice president.
CFR members in the media include the president of ABC-TV, a vice president of Associated Press, two editors of Atlantic Monthly, two of Business Week, the president of CNN-TV, the chairman of Forbes, the editor in chief of Entertainment Weekly, two editors of the Nation, six of National Review, six of the New Republic, one at Newsday, one at the New York Review of Books, 16 at the New York Times, 10 at Time, 10 at US News and World Report, etc. (All these lists have been condensed to avoid boredom.)
If the CFR had millions of members like, says, the Presbyterian Church, this list might not mean much. But the CFR only has 3200 members.
i remember seeing the buildings fall and it just didnt look right, how can something so damn big fall in such a 'controlled way' after being hit by something so damn small 9comparitavly).
i have watched as many documentaries as the next man explining the scientific reasons why this occurred, (that the fireproofing that was sprayed on the iron beams was blasted off by all the high temperature jet fuel and then it was just a case of waiting for the temperatures to hit the right level).
and i understand now how this happenned, this dosnt mean that every single time i see those shocking images, my brain still has a hard time accepting the facts, but then again i am not a structural engineer...
as for the loose change documentary... shoddy images, shoddier reasoning and the beats were a nice touch.
unfortunatly the pentagons images are just as shoddy, the question of the Sheratons tapes remains and the Bush administrations culture of fear does nothing to encourage trust nor rational thought.
hell yes there are still questions to be answered, but films like loose change and attitudes like that shown by the Bush government will ensure that these questions will remain unanswered.
(but lizard people jokes are still funny).
seeing as this thread looks like it has started slowing down allow me to post an article from the BBC news website from yesterday:
The release of new video pictures of the Pentagon being attacked on 9/11 will not quell the endless claims in the world of conspiracy theorists that a missile or military aircraft hit the building instead.
The theorists do not believe eyewitnesses, physical evidence, engineering studies or even the claims of Osama Bin Laden, so it is unlikely that they will be convinced by grainy video frames.
The latest pictures are the missing frames from a series taken from two cameras at a filling station.
If you look closely, you do see what could be a plane, flying very low and then hitting the building, causing a huge fireball. It is consistent with the official account.
However, the new frames do not absolutely without doubt show that this was American Airlines 77 in its final moments, so hope will spring eternal for the conspiracists that they have not been knocked out.
And even if the pictures did clearly show the doomed airliner, the theorists would probably just change their charge.
After all, in the case of the Twin Towers, they argued that the attacks were carried out by, or tolerated by, the US government. The Pentagon could easily be fitted into that category as well.
Claims
To understand the conspiracy theory, it is worth considering a film called Loose Change: 2nd edition. Available on the internet, it reveals the full alternative version of what happened to the Pentagon in all its glory. It states:
AA77 did not crash into the building. And if there was no AA77, it must have been a missile, a military aircraft or a drone that did it
The alleged pilot Hani Hanjour was not skilled enough to execute the manoeuvre and the plane would have stalled in the tight turn alleged
Street lights were knocked down but did not bring down the plane; therefore there was no plane. They could have been deliberately lifted from the ground
The damage was not consistent with the size of the airliner and therefore there was no airliner
There were no remains of either the 757 or passengers and therefore neither existed
Pieces of fuselage found nearby were planted
Eyewitnesses who said they saw the plane were confused. Others said they saw a commuter jet or a helicopter
Answers
There are, of course, answers to all of the above, to be found in the report of the 9/11 Commission, in other technical assessments and in common sense.
For example, the limited damage on each side of the impact zone was due to recent strengthening work on the building. Windows that survived were made of shatterproof glass.
Another obvious weakness in the film is that the eyewitnesses chosen are all treated as if they have equal value. And did nobody see the lampposts being lifted out of the ground?
And the passengers...?
The most glaring gap in the theory is surely this. If AA77 did not end its flight hitting the Pentagon, what happened to it and its passengers?
This appears to be of little relevance to 9/11 theorists. In the course of an e-mail exchange with one of them I asked this question and was told that for all she knew, the plane could have been diverted somewhere and the passengers gassed.
One of the passengers was well-known. She was Barbara Olson, wife of Ted Olson, the US Solicitor general. However, I was told by the theorist that two calls she made to her husband from the plane probably never existed. Exactly where she might be now remains a mystery, it seems.
The film "Loose Change" also claims incidentally that United 93 which came down in a field in Pennsylvania, never crashed (the "crash site" was dug out by bulldozers) but landed at Cleveland and the passengers taken off. What happened to them, one wonders.
It also says that the Twin Towers were brought down by "controlled demolition". Again, great emphasis is placed on immediate eyewitness accounts of "explosions" within the towers, and almost none on later engineering examinations of the sequence of the collapse.
Plane comes into view at far right
The film is the work of three young American videomakers, who started off making a fictional film about how they revealed that 9/11 was a US government conspiracy.
One of them, Dylan Avery, has described what happened next: "It was that month that I began writing Loose Change, a fictional story about my friends and I discovering that 11 September was not a terrorist attack, but rather, an attack by their own government.
"Upon researching for the movie, it became apparent that the subject matter might not have been entirely fiction. Over two years time, adding more and more information, the fictional movie evolved into what it is today: a documentary."
The film is quite professionally done on a technical level, with sinister music and fast cutting. Avery said it cost only $2,000 to make and was done on a laptop.
Internet influence
It is proving popular on the internet in reinforcing beliefs that 9/11 might not have been all it seems.
The theorists are very small in number but are working in fertile soil. The events are endlessly fascinating.
And the fact remains that some people around the world believe that somehow the US government might have been involved.
Part, most probably, of that suspicion has to do with anger against the United States. There are always conspiracy theories involving the US right across the Middle East and beyond. Many people want to believe the worst.
The new pictures will not have much effect on that kind of thinking.
It might well be that, as in the case of the Kennedy assassination, it will take many years for a settled view on the events of 11 September 2001 to take hold.
[email]Paul.Reynolds-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk[/email]
EDIT: Sween, i somehow missed your post when i woke this morning and re-read the thread. After re-reading what i wrote here, i guess i could come across as flippant and disrespectful to you and the memory of your brother, This was never my intention.
I admire your restraint and composure.
ill shut up now.
aLAN
The airplane that crashed into the pentagon was beleived to be going somewhere between 400 & 500 mph.
At that speed a standard 24 frame camera or even a 30 frame camera could not pick up an accurate shot.
in other words all you are seeing is a abstract picture.
Please try to keep in mind that many Americans died that day, and to say something like the message in Loose Change is completely disrespectful to those like Sweens brother who sacrificed their lives for the belief of love and care in their fellow man.
Rest in peace to all who passed away that sad day
and shame to those who try to take this loss and transform it into something else based on unfounded "evidence"
the truth is out there :sayin:
there it is.
and to add a little, it wasnt just Americans who died on that day (or in the war/s following).
A little bit of perspective and respect goes a long way.
I started reading this thread late, but by the time I got to Johnny Paycheck's first post (on the first or early second page) I was already thinking along the same lines. Some of the posts in this thread are making a mockery of human suffering. I was going to post that regardless of anyone's opinions or speculations on this issue, it makes me very uncomfortable to know that Sweendog and others directly affected by 9/11 could be reading this thread. Apparently he is (and others probably are). I don't think discussion on this issue is bad. On the contrary, I think it's somewhat necessary. But some of the talk, speculation, bickering, insulting, etc. going on here is so disrespectful to those who are still thinking of lost friends and loved ones.
When Sween first posted about his brother on soulstrut I cried. When he went overboard on heatrock bidding I was in awe. Now I'm impressed with his ablitity to keep his composure while telling some of you to show some fucking tact.
The way I understand it Loose Change was only posted so some of you could get another look at the tower falling, and hopefully come to the conclusion as nzshadow did that something looks wrong. That's it. No one is here to critic a film.
This is where I act like a baby who doesn't get his way and cry about my questions not being answered way back at the beginning of this thread.
Respect to everyone who's lives were touched by 9-11.
Rob
Here:
http://save.nazanin.googlepages.com/home
this is a massive loss of freedom. Its easy to stand up and call your government fascist when you're sure they wont come saw your head off.
For once you and I are in total agreement. I kinda think that alot of this conspiracy theorizing has to do with the fact that it's more comforting at some level to tell yourself that this was a vast government conspiracy, rather than the work of a few dedicated psychos who exploited America's "it can't happen here" attitude to deadly effect. I watched the second tower come down, and though I'm no scientific expert of any kind, I know what I saw and that plane brought down the building.
I am not going to let you get away with that crap.
how do you figure? honestly?
I personally have never claimed that no planes hit the trade centers, or that Osama wasn't behind the attacts, all of that is beside my point. The buildings collapsed due to a controlled demolition.
From what I've seen, read and discussed I disagree. In this case that disagreement is disrespectful to a murder victim's family?
I wasn't just addressing you, I was addressing a bunch of folks in this thread..time to get that ass-protector out of storage hommie. Your theory is however stupid, insupportable, and offensive, and I have no desire to grant it legitimacy by engaging in an extended discussion about it.
then by all means, may the last words on this topic be yours.
Right.
Of course, if you make comparisons between our country and somewhere like a Saddam controlled Iraq or Iran, things are a million times better here. But we're not Iraq or Iran.
We are in America (home of the free and all that, remember?).
We live under the pretense that we are in a free society. It's one of the staples of this country and a big part of why we are here, and why many will do anything to live here.
So for you to be so nonchalant about the Patriot Act, Domestic Surviellance, etc. is disconcerting. It's that same apathetic "well, what do I care? I'm not doing anything wrong." train of thought that enables more and more freedoms to erode with no public outcry.
Laws are being put into place that will affect us for years to come under the guise of "The War on Terror". And while I'm definitley for some of those laws and for the nation to stay protected, I also realise that we're fighting a perpetual war with no ending. Obviously, some of these laws that are being put into place to defend us from terrorists can easily be used against the very citizens they were put in place to protect.
What has gone on since September 11th in regards to civil rights is unprecedented.
You can also read this report: Center for Constitutional Rights - "Civil Liberties after 9/11"
If you really cared about this country and it's future, you would give a shit about all of this.
Don't worry about me, I'm not taking any offense from anything you type.
All I was trying to do was explain how the image of the South Tower collapsing hurts me due to how I was involved. I tried to make the point that you guys can debate all you want, it's certainly your right to do so. Whoever posted the photo certainly didn't know it was going to affect me, how could they know that right?
I really should just stay out of the 9/11-related threads from now on, I tend to cast a pall over them.
Really though, post away. It doesn't bother me. You dudes can debate this stuff until you're all blue in the face but no one here will ever get the answers they're looking for.