08-02-2006, 01:42 AM
Good god Mozzy, coming after me with a passion.
I've been over this in different threads, and it feels much akin to kicking a dead horse, given how most sensible people realize that the truth provides answers. You can pick through the article that provided and keep saying why why why but you don't have any answers of your own. Oh I'm sure you can drum up some insurance-war-oil-antibush jargon as to why.
But I'll humor you seeing as how you've waved aside all these rational arguements with vauge open questions..
1. The pods. I hadn't heard anything about these either, but if you check the date on the articles you'll see it was fairly early, which leads me to believe it was some wild theory that was shot down by plainly obvious logic long ago.
2. Only 14 jets. Most people think we have fighter jets flying 24/7 by the dozen but there are really only 14 jets designated to take off and defend ourselves from outside threats. The time scale between when we knew the jets were hijacked to when they hit is rather small, inside half an hour. Not enough time. As for not be able to find the flights, well, you sort of answered your own question. Radar picks up nonspecific blips, so any aircraft anywhere will come up on radar. Not to mention the planes were flying low around the city and most radar has to clear ground obsticles. Even if NORAD had radar it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference, the transponders were shut off, so even if they picked it up on radar without a real visiual it could have been anything.
2b. If you read the article thoroughly, Pane Steward's plane was intercepted becuase it was incorrectly identified as a hijacked flight.
3. What are you talking about, in a timely way? And anyone knows that WIND actually makes fires HOTTER becuase it introduces more oxygen.
3b.. Again, I'm not sure what you are rambling about. People say there were charges placed that went off while the building was falling, and these charges blew crap out into the air. I'm not sure if you are argueing for the case of the conspiracists, or against....
4. Again you didn't read WTC7's collapse in full. It fell becuase of internal fires, and very much for the same reason the twin towers did... The heated steel weakened enough to where it wouldn't support the load, paired with the unusual structural design of WT7.. And it did take time for WT7 to collapse, WTC7 took seven hours to fall after the twin towers did JESUS man
And then you didn't even bother after that. I think I see where all these wild theories come from. People not understanding or misinterpeting what really happened. You rise arguements against what's said with no factual basis. Anytime something comes along that threatens to debunk your silly little beliefs you get frusterated and swear it off as close-minded jargon. You're closed minded. You see this crap crop up on the news from time to time, but fortunately most news orgnizations have sense enough not to pay these theories too much attention and not give them much air-time.
So C-Span has a blurb about it and you wet yourself in glee. And you hoped this forum would be filled a bunch of like-minded dolts that can stomach this 'fight big brother' dirreah. Well it's not, and most our more reputable memebers knew to stay away from this old, tired topic (admittedly, I probably should have paid no attention to it either). Anyways, I've said what I had to say, I'm not going to waste anymore time on these OMG WAROIL9/11CONSPIRACY GG threads...
I've been over this in different threads, and it feels much akin to kicking a dead horse, given how most sensible people realize that the truth provides answers. You can pick through the article that provided and keep saying why why why but you don't have any answers of your own. Oh I'm sure you can drum up some insurance-war-oil-antibush jargon as to why.
But I'll humor you seeing as how you've waved aside all these rational arguements with vauge open questions..
1. The pods. I hadn't heard anything about these either, but if you check the date on the articles you'll see it was fairly early, which leads me to believe it was some wild theory that was shot down by plainly obvious logic long ago.
2. Only 14 jets. Most people think we have fighter jets flying 24/7 by the dozen but there are really only 14 jets designated to take off and defend ourselves from outside threats. The time scale between when we knew the jets were hijacked to when they hit is rather small, inside half an hour. Not enough time. As for not be able to find the flights, well, you sort of answered your own question. Radar picks up nonspecific blips, so any aircraft anywhere will come up on radar. Not to mention the planes were flying low around the city and most radar has to clear ground obsticles. Even if NORAD had radar it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference, the transponders were shut off, so even if they picked it up on radar without a real visiual it could have been anything.
2b. If you read the article thoroughly, Pane Steward's plane was intercepted becuase it was incorrectly identified as a hijacked flight.
3. What are you talking about, in a timely way? And anyone knows that WIND actually makes fires HOTTER becuase it introduces more oxygen.
3b.. Again, I'm not sure what you are rambling about. People say there were charges placed that went off while the building was falling, and these charges blew crap out into the air. I'm not sure if you are argueing for the case of the conspiracists, or against....
4. Again you didn't read WTC7's collapse in full. It fell becuase of internal fires, and very much for the same reason the twin towers did... The heated steel weakened enough to where it wouldn't support the load, paired with the unusual structural design of WT7.. And it did take time for WT7 to collapse, WTC7 took seven hours to fall after the twin towers did JESUS man
And then you didn't even bother after that. I think I see where all these wild theories come from. People not understanding or misinterpeting what really happened. You rise arguements against what's said with no factual basis. Anytime something comes along that threatens to debunk your silly little beliefs you get frusterated and swear it off as close-minded jargon. You're closed minded. You see this crap crop up on the news from time to time, but fortunately most news orgnizations have sense enough not to pay these theories too much attention and not give them much air-time.
So C-Span has a blurb about it and you wet yourself in glee. And you hoped this forum would be filled a bunch of like-minded dolts that can stomach this 'fight big brother' dirreah. Well it's not, and most our more reputable memebers knew to stay away from this old, tired topic (admittedly, I probably should have paid no attention to it either). Anyways, I've said what I had to say, I'm not going to waste anymore time on these OMG WAROIL9/11CONSPIRACY GG threads...