<!--QuoteBegin--Eviscerator+Oct 31 2003, 09:10 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Eviscerator @ Oct 31 2003, 09:10 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Well so far a lot of knee-jerk reactions have been rebutted without a single shred of actual discussion. "Oh I saw one thing I didn't like and so the whole thing is garbage." And the rest are just thinly-veiled attempts at dismissing it with humor... humor is a natural nervous reaction to something discomforting. That does not make for a very good argument, however. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Well , if you hoped to have positive replies , that's a failure. Try to post better links next time , things like :
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><a href='http://www.rense.com/general31/lifeof.htm' target='_blank'>The Life Of An American Jew In Racist-Marxist Israel</a>
<u>And the best site of them all</u>, one that you should read thoroughly, is that of a Henry Makow, now considered by Zionists as a self-hating Jew: <a href='http://www.savethemales.ca' target='_blank'>save the males.ca</a><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
are indeed utter garbage. If you think that save the males.ca is a pearl of wisdom , then there's no need to read through the rest of your rants.
Don't misunderstand me , I do hate zionists , and know how violent they can be. But I'm tired of conspiracy theories , and yours isn't particulary believable. Especially when it's backed up by articles claiming that the USSR has spread feminist propaganda in order to weaken the western world , or that jewish communists who helped the gestapo arrest their friends are now controlling any Israeli government and building a totalitarian "racist-marxist" state...
<!--QuoteBegin--greyfox555+Oct 31 2003, 12:56 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (greyfox555 @ Oct 31 2003, 12:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ok...think of this.
Fully loaded and fully fuel'd 747. A thick massive steel support girder. Plane hits girder. Byby girder, byby support. In no way possible were the WTC's up to being hit with such a force, and then, hmm....explosion? The fuel. Fuel fires are almost a thousand times more deadly and hot than your regular campfire, plus, thousands of gallons of fuel were in that plane. Many people dont realize, that with such and explosion, there is an violent inward rush of air afterwards. Air blasted out is then sucked in very quickly, shifting debres, and could have ripped more supports off the towers. The explosion and air sucking action could have been the reason the artifacts were thrown clear.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
All of that fuel very quickly burned up. In the case of the South Tower, most of the fuel was thrown outside of the building, which resulted in a tremendous fireball. This was due to the plane's approach path. Yet the South Tower was the first to fall. Err, I mean... be demolished. By the time the buildings were about to be destroyed, the fires were merely smoldering, having run out of fuel and consumable material.
Here's a link to the firefighters audio tape from 9/11. A lot of the recording was "classified" for some strange reason, probably because those sections revealed the series of explosions that occurred as the building was taken down. The rest shows how the firefighters were in control of the situation and the fire was not a raging inferno capable of melting steel:
<!--QuoteBegin--Stakhanov+Oct 31 2003, 01:12 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Stakhanov @ Oct 31 2003, 01:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Don't misunderstand me , I do hate zionists , and know how violent they can be. But I'm tired of conspiracy theories , and yours isn't particulary believable. Especially when it's backed up by articles claiming that the USSR has spread feminist propaganda in order to weaken the western world , or that jewish communists who helped the gestapo arrest their friends are now controlling any Israeli government and building a totalitarian "racist-marxist" state... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Those links were merely to demonstrate that there are Jews practicing Judaism that dislike Zionism. My goal is to separate the two, so as to avoid the dreaded "anti-semitic" label, which brings people to immediately negate everything else. It is quite clear that Zionism and Judaism are two separate things. Taking those links as nothing more than an effort to separate the two, please discuss the rest.
No one can dispute that Zionists control mass media here in the U.S. It is undeniable.
- Universal Studios - Walt Disney - Viacom - MTV - ABC - CBS - NBC - UPN - BET - CNN - Time Warner - Random House - New Yorker magazine - Vogue - Madamoiselle - Glamour - Vanity Fair - GQ - New York Times - Wall St Journal - Washington Post - New York Post - NY Daily News - Village Voice - McCall's - Time - Newsweek - U.S. News and World Report - Simon and Schuster - Time Inc Book Co - Western Publishing
Control the media and you control public opinion here in the U.S. I have another topic here discussing this at length, and no one seems to deny it. Now understand how much influence and control Zionists have over our media, and you can easily see how they are able to dominate American opinions. You can't deny this, because it is fact. Look up any of these media outlets and you'll find they are Zionist owned or Zionist controlled. It has led to this:
SpoogeThunderbolt missile in your cheeriosJoin Date: 2002-01-25Member: 67Members
<!--QuoteBegin--Eviscerator+Oct 31 2003, 02:47 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Eviscerator @ Oct 31 2003, 02:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I have another topic here discussing this at length, and no one seems to deny it. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> The fact that nobody is responding doesn't mean they agree. It just means they don't want to waste their time in fantasy land. But feel free to keep adding replies if if makes you feel important.
Quit double posting with stupid pictures, if you can't get your points across by explaining them, don't post pictures to make up for it.
To explain the reason the hole in the Pentagon was so small is easy, The Pentagon is a modern day fortress. The side that the jet hit had recently been reinforced and coated with some kind of kevlar like solution, it could of withstood the impact, knowing what kevlar is and what it does. Second, as for the "exit hole" when the two jets hit the WTC plane debree was shot miles away, the "exit hole" could very easily be an engine piece. Your theroy is easy to cut apart, and you sites are more then a little basied in their ideas. <a href='http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings/The_Pentagon.html' target='_blank'>http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings/Th...e_Pentagon.html</a>
Hey did anyone see that banned episode of The Family Guy, where Peter decides covert his son into Judaism so he'll be a successful person? That was hilarious!
Another thing just occured to me, The mossad is credited with being the best intelligence agency in the world. Now do you honestly think that they would allow you to have enough access to any information that would allow to prove this theroy, do you think you would have those pictures of the Pentagon if that really were a missel, in the sence of a long tube like bomb propelled over long distances. I don't think they would. Also you don't seem to be to quick in saying where that missel came from? Do the zionists controll the military as well? Do you really think they launched a missel from Israel to the Pentagon, because this would require our Atlantic missel defence system, which I belive Bush supported, would have to be down. Now considering we gave Israel its military hardware, I doubt they have anything that can get past us. I also don't think they have men on the inside, to do something like that would take a large group of people in high positions. Your only way of logically saying a missel hit the Pentagon is by saying they had help from our goverment, which would make no sence, because why would the DOD attack itself?
Well I have yet to see you take a stance in this thread or post anything construcitve for ether side. So why don't you at least tell me whats so funny (as long as it's Eviscerator's theroy) <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Lmao, I know this is going to get locked now, but that was funny <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--Spyder Monkey+Oct 31 2003, 07:21 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Spyder Monkey @ Oct 31 2003, 07:21 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> There's a distinct difference between engaging in intellectual debate, and posting hateful, as well as poorly-drawn, images. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Then why did you edit the rest of my brilliant brilliant comedy?
I'd better get WELL-drawn hateful images next time, with NO SARCASTIC INTENT BEHIND THEM WHATSOEVER!
<!--QuoteBegin--Dread+Oct 31 2003, 02:17 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Dread @ Oct 31 2003, 02:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Why all the hate towards Eviscerator?
Evisc: can you prove that all those medias are controlled by Zionists? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> People don't like competing theories to 9/11. It makes them uncomfortable, because the mere notion that someone would lie to them (and that they believed it) is too much to bear.
Do a Google search on "Zionist controlled media" and you'll find more sites than you can possibly read. Now, if you take that entire list of media corporations, and you had "Palestinian owned and controlled" in place of Zionist, what do you think they would be putting in front of Americans on a daily basis?
<!--QuoteBegin--reasa+Oct 31 2003, 02:27 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (reasa @ Oct 31 2003, 02:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> To explain the reason the hole in the Pentagon was so small is easy, The Pentagon is a modern day fortress. The side that the jet hit had recently been reinforced and coated with some kind of kevlar like solution, it could of withstood the impact, knowing what kevlar is and what it does. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Well that makes sense. Unfortunately, that doesn't stand up. How, if the Pentagon is a modern day fortress, did the nose of the plane pierce through three rings of the Pentagon, yet the rest of the plane was "pulverized on impact?" Are you saying that only the nose cone was made of some kind of fortress-penetrating material? I do know of some missiles that the nose cone is indeed made of fortress-penetrating material. Commercial airplanes, however, <b>are not missiles</b>.
Look at the images again. The missile goes through <b>three</b> rings. If this is supposed to be caused by an airplane nose, where is it? It obviously broke through the third ring before coming to a stop, therefore it must be in between the third and fourth rings, right? Or was it one of those special airplane nose cones designed to "burn up" immediately after penetration?
Three rings of kevlar-coated Pentagon fortress. Rumsfeld himself said "the missile that struck this building." I don't understand the confusion here.
<!--QuoteBegin--Lord Fanny-[MacH]+Oct 31 2003, 06:14 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Lord Fanny-[MacH] @ Oct 31 2003, 06:14 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Google is an excellent source for the REAL news! Because the internet never lies. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Thank you for the meaningful discussion. The Google search is to merely to allow people to find for themselves who owns and controls the media companies here in America (and Britain, and Canada, and many other countries.) That way they don't have to just take my word for it. Now, are you wanting to debate the fact that the media here is owned and controlled by Zionists? Otherwise I fail to see any useful meaning to your posts here.
Very true, Many of the media outlits listed as controlled by "zionists" are very critical of the war on terror, the conflict in Iraq, and president Bush. I could of sworn I read an artical in TIME that criticized Israel pretty harshly. I think our media is pretty fair and balanced and I don't mean that in the FOX way <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
The passengers.Im not sure what happened to the bodies.Did they,like the alleged airplane,disintegrated?Im assuming they did,and that no remains were left,or only a few bits were left.
In that case,simple.A government,killed them.Shot them and buried them somewhere.
But what about the plane?Make it dissapear.How?Its not conceivably impossible ot manipulate radar records,so that the one showing the plane going somewhere,landing somewhere isnt there anymore.
But heres something interesting.What about the alleged phone calls in from poeple on the plane?Think about it.A government's agents hijack the plane,posing as terrorirsts from the middle east.They land it somewhere and radar records are manipulated.The passengers are conveniently given time to call and report the hijacking.Conveniently.
Why would the DOD attack itself?To get an excuse to do anything ranging from testing its newest weapons in actualy combat,to imposing new security measures aimed at curbing freedom,to increase support for Bush when hes seen going after the perperators of this "terrible crime" aka 9/11.
Also i remember seeing some other stuff.Such as how the WTC top brass were somehow not in the WTC that day,because they were called away or some-such.Convenient.Then we have the one where WTC contained lots of incriminating evidence of the government,and was destroyed partly because of this.A lot of other stuff.Some of those pages dont exist anymore.Gee,wonder why.
P.S.Mods kiss me.Now.*
*<span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'>Girls only please</span>
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->In that case,simple.A government,killed them.Shot them and buried them somewhere.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->But heres something interesting.What about the alleged phone calls in from poeple on the plane?Think about it.A government's agents hijack the plane,posing as terrorirsts from the middle east.They land it somewhere and radar records are manipulated.The passengers are conveniently given time to call and report the hijacking.Conveniently.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm going to need alot of proof before I even come close to beliveing that. Death records, and a missing plane are proof, all you just did was make up a story. I can speculate that Mongolia had a hand in 9/11 by sending over agents to distract and hold up Air Marshels and allow the terrorists to bored the jets. I can speculate alot of things, show me some proof?
When the towers were designed, the designers DID take into consideration a plane crashing into them. But that was how long ago? The plane was how big compared to the planes that did crash into the towers? How much fuel did those considerations take into account?
As for the buildings collapsing... Lets think about this logically... You have a big plane crash into multiple floors... Of course parts of the building would immediately be broken, yet some ( especially the central supports ) would survive... For a while... The airplanes were practically FULLY LOADED with fuel... The fuel would not all burn up in the explosion at once ( don't even kid yourself into assuming that it would... That's just foolish and blind hate ).... The fuel would burn extremely hot ( jet fuel has a tendency to do that )... It did this for quite some time, thus weaking the remaining supports even more...
Why did the second tower fall first? Look at where the planes hit. Was the second tower hit lower than the first? How would severely damaged supports handle more wait? More wait = more stress. It would actually be an exponential increase ( over time )... Not linear.
Why did they collapse so nicely? Good question. I'm not a structural engineer, but I did watch them fall... As has everyone ( over and over and over again ). There were no explosions from any outside force other than the planes. From what I do understand... It's not very surprising that the buildings fell the way they did.
Now to the phone calls from the planes... The calls did not come from any of the planes that crashed into either the towers or the pentagon... But from the plane that crashed out in the middle of no where.
Ok... Now to the Pentagon. You keep bringing up the lack of debrie... The size of the whole... The way the building was damaged. Your lack of understanding about the Pentagon ( or just your unwillingness to actually believe the truth ) is almost humorous were it not so insiduous.
The Pentagon is the premier military building in the US. How well do you think it will be built? How tough do you think it would be? Do you think it would ( by chance ) be designed to withstand "strikes"?
Read the VERY FIRST response... You'll perhaps ( if you'll actually cease your Zionist brainwashing conspiracy theory thinking for a moment ) understand how the Pentagon is actually constructed ( well... With what we actually know of it ).
Actually... Read the entire page. It's far more plausible than your first post. They actually back their stuff up and are far more qualified than you to even say what would happen to a plane when it crashed.
---------------------------------------
This actually brings up a really good point. Your post is hilarious. You mention this, you mention that. As if they are facts. You back up nothing of your post with anything other than more unproven "facts". Your entire post is nothing more than one big conspiracy theory ( and yes, you do implicate US involvement even though you claim not to ) that sounds just as wacko as the ones about the US not really landing on the moon.
If you're going to try to argue a point, it is usually good practice ( this is why you see this in academic circles all the time ) to backup anything you want to portray as "fact". Only time you have succeeded in doing this thus far is telling that there is a Balfour Declaration... Not a good track record.
Alright, I've read the whole thing, and once again I stand in awe at people who always feel the need to ridicule/insult the original poster simply because they disagree. I too think eviscarator's claims are ludicrous, but I'm not stupid enough to just insult and dismiss him.
Fist - the claim of missele. I have a sister who works in para legal. She spends larger portions of her day in court. And she regularily hears the word missile used. How many military missiles do you think gets talked about in an Australian Court of Law? Not many. Missile refers to an object propelled through the air - nothing more. There is a law stating that any object ejected from a car moving at speed is deemed a "Missile" and as such dangerous and the person responisble for the launching of said missile can be prosecuted.
So let the missile idea rest in its grave. There was no way in hell Rumsfeld was talking about a real missile. Missile can be and is often used to refer to things other than military propelled explosives.
Apart from that - I agree thoroughly with Jammer. I dont know if we have Zionist controlled media in Australia, but Jammer's link to the Anti-idolatrian Rottweiler summed up my thoughts perfectly. If you would be so kind as to answer those on a point by point basis, I'd really appreciate it. If not - I can understand that also - that would be a hell of a lot of work.
Comments
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well , if you hoped to have positive replies , that's a failure. Try to post better links next time , things like :
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><a href='http://www.rense.com/general31/lifeof.htm' target='_blank'>The Life Of An American Jew In Racist-Marxist Israel</a>
<u>And the best site of them all</u>, one that you should read thoroughly, is that of a Henry Makow, now considered by Zionists as a self-hating Jew: <a href='http://www.savethemales.ca' target='_blank'>save the males.ca</a><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
are indeed utter garbage. If you think that save the males.ca is a pearl of wisdom , then there's no need to read through the rest of your rants.
Don't misunderstand me , I do hate zionists , and know how violent they can be. But I'm tired of conspiracy theories , and yours isn't particulary believable.
Especially when it's backed up by articles claiming that the USSR has spread feminist propaganda in order to weaken the western world , or that jewish communists who helped the gestapo arrest their friends are now controlling any Israeli government and building a totalitarian "racist-marxist" state...
Fully loaded and fully fuel'd 747.
A thick massive steel support girder.
Plane hits girder.
Byby girder, byby support. In no way possible were the WTC's up to being hit with such a force, and then, hmm....explosion? The fuel. Fuel fires are almost a thousand times more deadly and hot than your regular campfire, plus, thousands of gallons of fuel were in that plane. Many people dont realize, that with such and explosion, there is an violent inward rush of air afterwards. Air blasted out is then sucked in very quickly, shifting debres, and could have ripped more supports off the towers. The explosion and air sucking action could have been the reason the artifacts were thrown clear.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
All of that fuel very quickly burned up. In the case of the South Tower, most of the fuel was thrown outside of the building, which resulted in a tremendous fireball. This was due to the plane's approach path. Yet the South Tower was the first to fall. Err, I mean... be demolished. By the time the buildings were about to be destroyed, the fires were merely smoldering, having run out of fuel and consumable material.
<img src='http://www.serendipity.li/wot/crash.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image'>
Here's a link to the firefighters audio tape from 9/11. A lot of the recording was "classified" for some strange reason, probably because those sections revealed the series of explosions that occurred as the building was taken down. The rest shows how the firefighters were in control of the situation and the fire was not a raging inferno capable of melting steel:
<a href='http://propagandamatrix.com/multimedia_priorknowledge_firefighterstape.html' target='_blank'>The Firefighters' Tapes</a>
Especially when it's backed up by articles claiming that the USSR has spread feminist propaganda in order to weaken the western world , or that jewish communists who helped the gestapo arrest their friends are now controlling any Israeli government and building a totalitarian "racist-marxist" state... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Those links were merely to demonstrate that there are Jews practicing Judaism that dislike Zionism. My goal is to separate the two, so as to avoid the dreaded "anti-semitic" label, which brings people to immediately negate everything else. It is quite clear that Zionism and Judaism are two separate things. Taking those links as nothing more than an effort to separate the two, please discuss the rest.
- Universal Studios
- Walt Disney
- Viacom
- MTV
- ABC
- CBS
- NBC
- UPN
- BET
- CNN
- Time Warner
- Random House
- New Yorker magazine
- Vogue
- Madamoiselle
- Glamour
- Vanity Fair
- GQ
- New York Times
- Wall St Journal
- Washington Post
- New York Post
- NY Daily News
- Village Voice
- McCall's
- Time
- Newsweek
- U.S. News and World Report
- Simon and Schuster
- Time Inc Book Co
- Western Publishing
Control the media and you control public opinion here in the U.S. I have another topic here discussing this at length, and no one seems to deny it. Now understand how much influence and control Zionists have over our media, and you can easily see how they are able to dominate American opinions. You can't deny this, because it is fact. Look up any of these media outlets and you'll find they are Zionist owned or Zionist controlled. It has led to this:
<img src='http://www.shwa.org/pix/otrapix/911/lieberman_sharon.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image'>
<img src='http://www.shwa.org/pix/otrapix/911/bushisrael.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image'>
<img src='http://www.shwa.org/pix/otrapix/911/bushisrael2.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image'>
<img src='http://www.shwa.org/pix/otrapix/911/cheneyisrael.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image'>
The fact that nobody is responding doesn't mean they agree. It just means they don't want to waste their time in fantasy land. But feel free to keep adding replies if if makes you feel important.
Evisc: can you prove that all those medias are controlled by Zionists?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->You can't deny this, because it is fact.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
To explain the reason the hole in the Pentagon was so small is easy, The Pentagon is a modern day fortress. The side that the jet hit had recently been reinforced and coated with some kind of kevlar like solution, it could of withstood the impact, knowing what kevlar is and what it does. Second, as for the "exit hole" when the two jets hit the WTC plane debree was shot miles away, the "exit hole" could very easily be an engine piece. Your theroy is easy to cut apart, and you sites are more then a little basied in their ideas.
<a href='http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings/The_Pentagon.html' target='_blank'>http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings/Th...e_Pentagon.html</a>
You are warned not to attempt that again.
LOLZ, I hate Zionists! Down with Neo!
</span>
Then why did you edit the rest of my brilliant brilliant comedy?
I'd better get WELL-drawn hateful images next time, with NO SARCASTIC INTENT BEHIND THEM WHATSOEVER!
Evisc: can you prove that all those medias are controlled by Zionists? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
People don't like competing theories to 9/11. It makes them uncomfortable, because the mere notion that someone would lie to them (and that they believed it) is too much to bear.
Do a Google search on "Zionist controlled media" and you'll find more sites than you can possibly read. Now, if you take that entire list of media corporations, and you had "Palestinian owned and controlled" in place of Zionist, what do you think they would be putting in front of Americans on a daily basis?
Well that makes sense. Unfortunately, that doesn't stand up. How, if the Pentagon is a modern day fortress, did the nose of the plane pierce through three rings of the Pentagon, yet the rest of the plane was "pulverized on impact?" Are you saying that only the nose cone was made of some kind of fortress-penetrating material? I do know of some missiles that the nose cone is indeed made of fortress-penetrating material. Commercial airplanes, however, <b>are not missiles</b>.
Look at the images again. The missile goes through <b>three</b> rings. If this is supposed to be caused by an airplane nose, where is it? It obviously broke through the third ring before coming to a stop, therefore it must be in between the third and fourth rings, right? Or was it one of those special airplane nose cones designed to "burn up" immediately after penetration?
Three rings of kevlar-coated Pentagon fortress. Rumsfeld himself said "the missile that struck this building." I don't understand the confusion here.
Thank you for the meaningful discussion. The Google search is to merely to allow people to find for themselves who owns and controls the media companies here in America (and Britain, and Canada, and many other countries.) That way they don't have to just take my word for it. Now, are you wanting to debate the fact that the media here is owned and controlled by Zionists? Otherwise I fail to see any useful meaning to your posts here.
In that case,simple.A government,killed them.Shot them and buried them somewhere.
But what about the plane?Make it dissapear.How?Its not conceivably impossible ot manipulate radar records,so that the one showing the plane going somewhere,landing somewhere isnt there anymore.
But heres something interesting.What about the alleged phone calls in from poeple on the plane?Think about it.A government's agents hijack the plane,posing as terrorirsts from the middle east.They land it somewhere and radar records are manipulated.The passengers are conveniently given time to call and report the hijacking.Conveniently.
Why would the DOD attack itself?To get an excuse to do anything ranging from testing its newest weapons in actualy combat,to imposing new security measures aimed at curbing freedom,to increase support for Bush when hes seen going after the perperators of this "terrible crime" aka 9/11.
Also i remember seeing some other stuff.Such as how the WTC top brass were somehow not in the WTC that day,because they were called away or some-such.Convenient.Then we have the one where WTC contained lots of incriminating evidence of the government,and was destroyed partly because of this.A lot of other stuff.Some of those pages dont exist anymore.Gee,wonder why.
P.S.Mods kiss me.Now.*
*<span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'>Girls only please</span>
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->But heres something interesting.What about the alleged phone calls in from poeple on the plane?Think about it.A government's agents hijack the plane,posing as terrorirsts from the middle east.They land it somewhere and radar records are manipulated.The passengers are conveniently given time to call and report the hijacking.Conveniently.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm going to need alot of proof before I even come close to beliveing that. Death records, and a missing plane are proof, all you just did was make up a story. I can speculate that Mongolia had a hand in 9/11 by sending over agents to distract and hold up Air Marshels and allow the terrorists to bored the jets. I can speculate alot of things, show me some proof?
I suggest you pay closer attention to this site that was linked earlier. It is FAR more convincing than any of these conspiracy theories:
<a href='http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77/debunking/urbanlegends.html' target='_blank'>http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/flight77/d...banlegends.html</a>
Ok... The towers...
When the towers were designed, the designers DID take into consideration a plane crashing into them. But that was how long ago? The plane was how big compared to the planes that did crash into the towers? How much fuel did those considerations take into account?
As for the buildings collapsing... Lets think about this logically... You have a big plane crash into multiple floors... Of course parts of the building would immediately be broken, yet some ( especially the central supports ) would survive... For a while... The airplanes were practically FULLY LOADED with fuel... The fuel would not all burn up in the explosion at once ( don't even kid yourself into assuming that it would... That's just foolish and blind hate ).... The fuel would burn extremely hot ( jet fuel has a tendency to do that )... It did this for quite some time, thus weaking the remaining supports even more...
Why did the second tower fall first? Look at where the planes hit. Was the second tower hit lower than the first? How would severely damaged supports handle more wait? More wait = more stress. It would actually be an exponential increase ( over time )... Not linear.
Why did they collapse so nicely? Good question. I'm not a structural engineer, but I did watch them fall... As has everyone ( over and over and over again ). There were no explosions from any outside force other than the planes. From what I do understand... It's not very surprising that the buildings fell the way they did.
Now to the phone calls from the planes... The calls did not come from any of the planes that crashed into either the towers or the pentagon... But from the plane that crashed out in the middle of no where.
Ok... Now to the Pentagon. You keep bringing up the lack of debrie... The size of the whole... The way the building was damaged. Your lack of understanding about the Pentagon ( or just your unwillingness to actually believe the truth ) is almost humorous were it not so insiduous.
The Pentagon is the premier military building in the US. How well do you think it will be built? How tough do you think it would be? Do you think it would ( by chance ) be designed to withstand "strikes"?
Ok... Here:
<a href='http://paulboutin.weblogger.com/2002/03/14' target='_blank'>http://paulboutin.weblogger.com/2002/03/14</a>
Read the VERY FIRST response... You'll perhaps ( if you'll actually cease your Zionist brainwashing conspiracy theory thinking for a moment ) understand how the Pentagon is actually constructed ( well... With what we actually know of it ).
Actually... Read the entire page. It's far more plausible than your first post. They actually back their stuff up and are far more qualified than you to even say what would happen to a plane when it crashed.
---------------------------------------
This actually brings up a really good point. Your post is hilarious. You mention this, you mention that. As if they are facts. You back up nothing of your post with anything other than more unproven "facts". Your entire post is nothing more than one big conspiracy theory ( and yes, you do implicate US involvement even though you claim not to ) that sounds just as wacko as the ones about the US not really landing on the moon.
If you're going to try to argue a point, it is usually good practice ( this is why you see this in academic circles all the time ) to backup anything you want to portray as "fact". Only time you have succeeded in doing this thus far is telling that there is a Balfour Declaration... Not a good track record.
Fist - the claim of missele. I have a sister who works in para legal. She spends larger portions of her day in court. And she regularily hears the word missile used. How many military missiles do you think gets talked about in an Australian Court of Law? Not many. Missile refers to an object propelled through the air - nothing more. There is a law stating that any object ejected from a car moving at speed is deemed a "Missile" and as such dangerous and the person responisble for the launching of said missile can be prosecuted.
So let the missile idea rest in its grave. There was no way in hell Rumsfeld was talking about a real missile. Missile can be and is often used to refer to things other than military propelled explosives.
Apart from that - I agree thoroughly with Jammer. I dont know if we have Zionist controlled media in Australia, but Jammer's link to the Anti-idolatrian Rottweiler summed up my thoughts perfectly. If you would be so kind as to answer those on a point by point basis, I'd really appreciate it. If not - I can understand that also - that would be a hell of a lot of work.