473,842 Members | 1,622 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
+ Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

OT: 9/11 Anniversary: Watch 9/11 Mysteries - How the World TradeCentre was demolished by the Neocons for an excuse to go back into Iraq

.
9/11 Mysteries
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...71955308136871

http://www.911weknow.com

Ignore those who would go to great effort and expend much of heir time
in poo-pooing this post. See for yourself what really happened in the
3 demolished buildings in the weeks before 9/11. Since 9-11 the
American public has shown a "remarkable indifference to being
deceived" (George Soros). But this is changing. As Hugo Chavez put it:
"The world is waking up. It's waking up all over. And people are
standing up." Millions around the world are realizing that they are
being lied to - not in a small, lazy way, but in a big way. It's time
to ask hard questions, many of which 911 Mysteries helps to answer. 90
minutes of evidence and analysis, filled with eyewitness testimonials.
Point-by-point review of the official story set alongside clear
science. The question is not one of politics or nationalism or
loyalty, but one of strict and simple physics. Does steel melt in open
air fires? What caused the core to vanish in seconds? No agenda. No
finger-pointing. Just the facts and the questions.

A story of people: Willie Rodriguez's strange recollection of noises
on the 34th floor. Who was up there, bumping around? Scott Forbes'
similar story, weeks before the towers fell. Here's how shaped charges
slice through steel beams to control the way they fall.

For greater clarity, download the movie over bittorrent - or buy a DVD
online at www.911weknow.com.

Sep 11 '08
176 5043
Danny T wrote:
On Sep 16, 4:13 pm, "Mike Schilling" <mscottschill.. .@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>Danny T wrote:
>>I broke my own rule. I conversed with the idiots that start these
things. I'm going back to rule 1
All of those jerks on rec.arts.sf.wri tten are exactly those kinds of idiots.
It would serve them right if you never talked to them again.

I've never been to rec.arts.sf.wri tten
Oh really? Look at the newsgroups you've posted this drivel to.

Followups set to alt.flame.
Sep 16 '08 #41
Danny T wrote:
You're a pretty major fool of you can look at photos on the moon with
the flag blowing in the wind and think something isn't funny.
Oh my god. One of the Real Conspiracy believers. And I thought the
species was almost extinct!

You do know that the flag isn't blowing in the wind, but a rigidly
suspended flag? Because NASA knew perfectly well that there was no wind
on the Moon, and thus selected a flag design which would stay up as
though blown in the wind even in vacuum, so that it wouldn't just sag
limp and lifeless on the pole, which would look stupid?
Take a
look at the something like 6000 photos that are proven to be touched
up or fake.
If you can point to one of these -- not 6,000, just ONE -- you'd have a
point.

Of course, you can't. You can point to some photos that some nutbars
have CLAIMED is fake, but as it turns out, they're not fake.

I don't think we didn't go, I think the photos are fake.
Take a look at the photos and if you don't know much about
photography, I'm sure you will still be able to see they are fake if
you spend a few seconds looking at the lighting and such.

I never said we didn't go to the moon and if you think I did, go back
and read it again. I clearly stated I think we did but I said we were
for some reason faking the photos.
And what reason would that be, which wouldn't be so ludicrous as to
surpass any sane person's belief?

(Hint: if you don't know, and can't think of a decent reason, and no
one's come forward with the evidence, YOU'RE WRONG.)

The Manhattan Project was, by comparison, a very short-lived, small,
easily controlled group of people, and there were STILL leaks. Shortly
after WWII, major facts that they'd tried to hide about the Project were
revealed or stolen.

You want us to believe that thousands of photographs of the moon
landings -- possibly the single most studied scientific achievement in
the history of the world -- were faked. At a time when faking so many
photos in a manner that would pass any reasonable examination would have
been an undertaking involving hundreds of people and with literally
THOUSANDS of people who knew about it, and that not ONE credible member
of this Secret Group has come forward to spill the beans?

As Ben Franklin once put it, "Three can keep a secret... if two of them
are dead." This is a secret that would have to have been kept DEAD quiet
for 40 years, aside from nutbars who will claim anything is faked.

IT CANNOT BE DONE. Thousands of people CAN'T keep secrets that well.
Someone talks. Someone decides that the secret isn't worth keeping, or
worse, that keeping it is the wrong idea. Someone makes a mistake and
releases the wrong info.

Try it. Really, do. Get yourself a thousand people and tell them a
secret, one important enough that it matters that it's kept. Do you
seriously think you could expect that secret to remain secret? Without
the Mighty Power of the Government behind you, I wouldn't give you three
months before the secret was out. Even WITH the armed fist of the US
Government and secret agents, I wouldn't give you more than a few years.
40? Not a chance.

The same thing is true of the World Trade Center business. Only FAR
worse, because one COULD speculate that whatever the supposed fakery
involved in the moon landings, it has some terribly important purpose
that no one would question.

Killing thousands of people in the WTC under the circumstances we
know... no. If I assume you find the largest collection of amoral
bastards on the planet, you'll STILL end up with someone who decides
what you're doing is wrong, and blows the whistle. Loudly. With
convincing and incontrovertibl e evidence, not with handwavy "someone
heard explosions" and badly-reasoned arguments about steel components
that they clearly don't understand.

The world isn't full of diabolical and shadowy conspiracies. Idiots and
incompetence, yes, but the conspiracies that exist are small, pathetic,
and usually found out within months, not decades.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://seawasp.livejournal.com
Sep 17 '08 #42
And don't forget my favorite:

Mike Walter rebuts "cruise missile" claims (video):
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1dd_1177892305

Remember the famous "it was like a cruise missile with wings" quote that the
truthers like to pull out? Well Mike Walter is the guy you're quoting. He
was an eye witness and in this video, he calls out the truthers for the liars
they are.

--
-Ed Falk, fa**@despams.r. us.com
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
Sep 17 '08 #43
Danny T wrote:
On Sep 16, 3:22 pm, theget <the...@bigmail box.netwrote:
>On Sep 16, 2:40 pm, Danny T <dannytad...@gm ail.comwrote:
>>On Sep 16, 1:24 pm, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood. ed.ac.ukwrote:
In rec.photo.digit al Danny T <dannytad...@gm ail.comwrote:
If you remember all of the moon photo controversies, there are two
camps. There is the "we did go to the moon you moron" group and the
"look at the 1000's of fake photos you moron" groups. There is no "I
bet they faked the photos to lead you off the track of what they were
really doing up there" group. That is the group I am with that and
that is similar to where I stand on beliefs here. I think there is a
lot of coverups going on so you don't know who knew what was going to
happen but I don't think it was a government plan to do it.
I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.
You mean like they really did go to the moon, but forgot to put film
in their cameras?
--
Chris Malcolm, IPAB, School of Informatics,
Informatic s Forum, 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB
Have you seen the photos? There is no way they were not fake photos so
people say we never went. Personally, I watched to apollo flights take
off but I do see how the photos were faked. I'd bet that we were 1)
making sure there were great photos for cold war propaganda garbage or
2) doing something spy related that the general public wasn't suppose
to know about.
Yeah man. I know what you mean. Like that whole World War II
controversy thing. Some people say it happened, some people say all
the photos of it were faked because Hirohito had a huge crush on
Neville's wife Anne and the whole thing was set up to make Neville
look bad. He was a cool dude, really.
>>Either way, I think we went but I think we don't really know what they
were doing up there.
Yeah that's like why Uncle Joe never really wanted to fight in the far
east. He knew the whole thing was a fake and he liked Neville. So
like he didn't want to go along with the fake. But like he wanted
Neville to get a treaty that would make him look bad. But by that
time there were too many fake entries being airbrushed. Like this onehttp://en.wikipedia.or g/wiki/Image:Stalin_je schow_molotow.j pghttp://en.wikipedia.or g/wiki/Image:The_Commi ssar_Vanishes_2 .jpg
And like the airbrushers hated Neville too and they had like all the
power cause they could make anyone at all vanish so they like secretly
took over and airbrushed all of that war and then they wanted to fake
the moon landing too, because they thought Jackie was so cool so they
airbrushed that too. But you never see any pictures of the airbrushers
themselves. Ever notice that? They're too clever to get caught.

Theget

If you have no idea what I'm talking about you should remain silent
instead of making a total fool of yourself
Why?

You don't know what you're talking about and you don't remain silent.

>
I broke my own rule. I conversed with the idiots that start these
things. I'm going back to rule 1
Bye...

Auntie
Sep 17 '08 #44
On Sep 16, 6:59 pm, Danny T <dannytad...@gm ail.comwrote:
On Sep 16, 3:34 pm, pv+use...@pobox .com (PV) wrote:
Danny T <dannytad...@gm ail.comwrites:
>Have you seen the photos? There is no way they were not fake photos so
>people say we never went. Personally, I watched to apollo flights take
And on this wonderfully comprehensive argument, a/k/a proof by assertion,
it is time to drop your loony self into the bottom of my killfile. Please
remove yourself from the gene pool as soon as you find convenient. Cuticle
shears and tweezers will be provided if necessary. *
--
* PV something like badgers--something like lizards--and something
like corkscrews.

You're a pretty major fool of you can look at photos on the moon with
the flag blowing in the wind and think something isn't funny.
You are so right. I am very glad to see you agreeing with me. I
thought you might be an airbrusher because of what you posted before.
I'm glad to see that you know the truth. The airbrushers don't stop at
still pictures they are very good with motion pictures too. They are
making the breeze obvious. It's a signal that only people like you and
me can understand. Don't expect many other people to understand or to
be able to see the message that the airbrushers put in the photos. You
have to look very carefully to see it.
Take a
look at the something like 6000 photos that are proven to be touched
up or fake. I don't think we didn't go, I think the photos are fake.
No, they're not fake. The airbrushers start with real photos and then
change them but they obviously weren't taken on the moon you can tell
because of the breeze.

Take a look at the photos and if you don't know much about
photography, I'm sure you will still be able to see they are fake if
you spend a few seconds looking at the lighting and such.
Yes, yes, yes. I think you are seeing the message.
I never said we didn't go to the moon and if you think I did, go back
and read it again. I clearly stated I think we did but I said we were
for some reason faking the photos.
Doh! Well, that's obvious. The airbrushers are at work again.

The whole thing is really an outgrowth of the airbrushers world war
fakery. They had to make up lies about so called rocket scientists
and the fake moon landings were the result. Plus they liked Jackie and
didn't want her to see the "promise" of going to the moon not kept.
Theget
Sep 17 '08 #45
Danny T <da*********@gm ail.comwrote:
>theget <the...@bigmail box.netwrote:
>And like the airbrushers hated Neville too and they had like all the
power cause they could make anyone at all vanish so they like secretly
took over and airbrushed all of that war and then they wanted to fake
the moon landing too, because they thought Jackie was so cool so they
airbrushed that too. But you never see any pictures of the airbrushers
themselves. *Ever notice that? They're too clever to get caught.

If you have no idea what I'm talking about you should remain silent
instead of making a total fool of yourself
Oh, we know _exactly_ what you're talking about. And there's only one total
fool involved in this conversation, who has no idea of the realities involved.
And who's crossposting to hell and back (apologies to the other groups here)
over groups that have nothing to do even slightly with what he THINKS he's
talking about.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from db*@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Sep 17 '08 #46
Danny T <da*********@gm ail.comwrote:
>Laurence Payne <l...@laurencep ayne.co.ukwrote :
><dannytad...@g mail.comwrote:
>I do believe that truth usually stands somewhere in the middle of what
the two sides always argue, no matter what the argument is.

Do you really? *Want to think that one through?

Thought it through..... Yep, pretty much think most arguments have
some valor on both sides.
By which you show that you aren't capable of actually thinking it through,
and don't know much about history, don't know much psy-cholo-gy, don't know
much about a science book... or about logic.

If you're talking about a comparison of opinions, then sometimes both sides
have something to stand on. But even there, a lot of times one of the sides
is UNINFORMED opinion and falls flat on its face when confronted with actual
data.

So no, most arguments DON'T have some "valor" on both sides. Sorry. You may
want to try next door, it's Abuse, instead?

Dave "setting followups out of here AGAIN" DeLaney
--
\/David DeLaney posting from db*@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Sep 17 '08 #47
Danny T <da*********@gm ail.comwrote:
>f...@green.rah ul.net (Edward A. Falk) wrote:
>And don't forget my favorite:

Mike Walter rebuts "cruise missile" claims (video):
*http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1dd_1177892305

Remember the famous "it was like a cruise missile with wings" quote that the
truthers like to pull out? *Well Mike Walter is the guy you're quoting. *He
was an eye witness and in this video, he calls out the truthers for the liars
they are.

So I ask, what if and why not explore it?
Because once you grow up, you learn to discriminate "things that are worth
checking into" from "things that the children are making up and saying 'Well,
it COULD have happened! Why are you punishing ME for this, when the space
aliens CLEARLY broke that window?". And to discriminate between people who
can check their imaginings against reality, and ones who try to keep reality
as far away from what they're talking about as they can.

Several other people have told you why the TRVTH you think you've found is
flat-out lies, and why the people you've picked it up from are pushing it
anyway. What if, and why not explore THAT? Cuz you aren't exploring that,
you know.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from db*@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Sep 17 '08 #48
In article <ga**********@b lue.rahul.net>,
Edward A. Falk <fa**@green.rah ul.netwrote:
>And don't forget my favorite:

Mike Walter rebuts "cruise missile" claims (video):
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1dd_1177892305

Remember the famous "it was like a cruise missile with wings" quote that the
truthers like to pull out? Well Mike Walter is the guy you're quoting. He
was an eye witness and in this video, he calls out the truthers for the liars
they are.
Yup.

Washington Newsman Mike Walters shows how Truthys have twisted his
9/11 reporting;
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1dd_1177892305

--
Al Dykes
News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
- Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail

Sep 17 '08 #49
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 15:59:09 -0700 (PDT), Danny T <da*********@gm ail.comwrote:
>You're a pretty major fool of you can look at photos on the moon with
the flag blowing in the wind and think something isn't funny. Take a
look at the something like 6000 photos that are proven to be touched
up or fake.
You're pretty much a major fool to believe the conspiracists that make a buck
off of your paranoia and delusions by selling you their books or feeding you
their spam-ridden web-sites.

Unlike you, I followed the moon-landing extensively while it was happening,
YEARS before it ever happened. I collected all news articles and reports
possible on what was going to occur, even built a 1:32 scale model of the LEM to
go along with my fascination of the upcoming event. I still have my three 4"
thick tomes of scrap-books that I saved as well as a commemorative Apollo 11
coin made of brass, given to me by someone that was involved in the project.
Discussions of how the flags would be reinforced with a support to make them
look like they were suspended in moving air was nicely explained months before
they ever lifted-off on the TV shows and in newspaper and magazine articles. Why
would they do that? Intentionally plan to suspend the flags with a horizontal
support? Simple, you fool. Because there is no air on the moon and a flag
wouldn't remain open for the live-TV transmitted back to earth, for the
higher-res photos, and to make a greater visual political-landmark for
generations in the future that might happen to visit the place. They planned
ahead for that dilemma, they weren't as stupid as you are. We even watched them
on TV as they unfurled the flag, upright support, and click the horizontal
supports into place. The flag, in a vacuum, now happily bouncing around (waving)
for a long time because there was no air-resistance to stop its motion.

Over the years I've occasionally stumbled on the "fake lunar landing" web-sites
and browsed them for the laughs they provide. Each and every photo can be very
easily explained by the science background of a 3rd-grader, common sense, and
some basic knowledge of light and photography, not to mention the way things act
in lower gravity and a vacuum. Only people with a kindergartner mentality would
believe the outlandish conspiracy-explanations invented by the "Fake Lunar
Landing" conspiracists. That be people like you. The only thing that you prove
is that P.T. Barnum was right, "A fool is born every minute." He too made his
fortune off of people like you, even after telling them to their face that they
were fools. They would rather buy the outlandish hoax than the truth, so he sold
hoax to them and made a fortune.

Sep 17 '08 #50

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.