When I get a spam email with another 9/11 WTC and Pentagon conspiracy video link, I just ignore and delete it. But, when a staff administrator posts a link to some new conspiracy video online and wants us, the students, to "spread it too," that just bothers me. I already had a teacher year or so ago who made students to watch a similar video (it claimed no commerical airplane crashed in the Pentagon). Ugh.

Here's the link from the email: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change

It good to question major events, I guess. But enough with these videos. They say the same things over and over, often talking about things they don't really know much about.

Bush fired missiles at the buildings and planted bombs in them too!!!11!1! LOL

aren't there eye witnesses account of seeing a air plane moving extremely fast? What about the passengers on the plane that hit the pentagon? did they just cease to exist?

Optical illusion. It was really a seagull. And the people were killed by the government. Yes, this is all more or less exactly how I thought it up.




(Above text does not accurately represent my lack of a point of view)

the other thing that bothers me is they try to compare these crashes to previous wrecks. The crash in pennslyvania was almost oblitterated byt the impact speed. When was the last time someone flew a passenger airliner at maximum thrust into a building previous. Remeber force is effected exponentially by speed, i don't think most plane crashes in history were done at .5 mach or into the sides of buildings that are made to absorb impacts

OMG AMERICANS ARE EVIL

evil schmevil BURGERFACEs

omgson

Probably one of the best responses to idiots who ask "Why isn't there more wreckage from the place?!!1!"

[Possible content/link warning other than the video...]

That was a F-14, these planes were a little bigger than that which is why that video wouldn't satisfy that.


Did anyone actually watch the video though? I'm not saying I believe it 100% but after watching it, it could certainly give one doubt.

I was an F-4, F-14s look completely different.

Passenger aircraft are much larger than an F-4, but the Pentagon is built with thick reinforced concrete and steel walls designed to withstand small bombs. And the fact that there was wreckage inside the Pentagon. That video satisfies this perfectly, the sheer momentum would not only detroy most of the aircraft, but would carry the surviving pieces into the center.

I watched it. I must honestly say that there is a lot of stuff in there that is really interesting.

Almost everyone's usual reaction is to ridicule any government conspiracy theories, but there are so many things off with these 9/11 attacks, it's not strange people are investigating it some more i.m.o. And it certainly can't hurt.

For example, It IS definitely suspicious that a lot of the 'victims' in the Pentagon smelled the typical smell of explosives after the incident. If the government released those securitytapes they confiscated from the nearby hotels and gas station, we could see if it really was a plane that hit the building.

I think people couldn't be more foolish than by blatantly accepting any official explanation their governments give them, no matter what country they live. Especially because throughout history, governments have lied, time and again, for political reasons.

I definitely think it's good that people keep looking into this.

[edit]
Did you guys miss the part where experts from Boeing and Rolls Royce said that the pieces found in the Pentagon were definitely NOT from a Boeing 757?[/edit]

OMG THE CIA IS COMING TO KILL YOU AND YOUR TEACHER NOW!!!111111one

As pointed out it is an F-4 Phantom though that really doesn't matter. The issue is that the plane crashing into the wall is an armored military aircraft, commercial airline aircraft like a 757 are just flying aluminum cans.

I agree with this completly. You shouldn't always accept the "official account". If everyone does, then it is easier for the "official account" to be fabricated.

I'm not saying I believe that it was a conspiracy but that the video does raise some important questions I think.



In the loose change video, they claim to debunk this explination by pointing out irregularities in the wreckage. They also point out various other irregularities with the entire pentagon incident that are quite interesting.

Um...fighter aircraft like that aren't armored. A commercial aircraft has more rigid construction than any F-series I can think of.

I'll watch the video when I can be arsed into wasting an hour and a half most-likely listening to the same stuff over and over again that I've already heard for the past 4 years. I really don't care what they have to say about the wreckage in the Pentagon though, I've already seen pictures, and those pictures were compaired to other aircraft. They would have to present some jaw-dropping facts to the table to get me to listen at this point.

If you ignore all the other evidence, you can always come up with "facts" to support any position. And of course because it's big newz it has to be a conspiracy. This is retarded.

It's the pentagon for crying out loud. Who knows what kinds of things they have in there. Does "top secret military installation" mean anything to them?

Also, if it wasn't an air-liner, where did the missing people and air lines go? Did ghosts eat them? Oh noes. We do have things like records and radar you know.

How many people do you know who actually can recognize the smell of explosives? Can you accurately describe a smell? In the trama, chaos and confusion during the incident, memory of smells don't remain perfect.

And how many witnesses saw something other than a 757 plane, other than an anonymous person quoted? People do see big things like those planes, especially when they go toward buildings.



I doubt whoever the person who made this can recognize destroyed plane parts and fully understand airplane engineering plans. Alot of the debris there, in the small pieces they were in, was noted to belong to this type of craft.

The WTC towers were designed to withstand impact from the LARGEST AIRCRAFT IN EXISTENCE AT THE TIME, WHICH WAS 4 TIMES SMALLER THAN THE PLANES THAT STRUCK THEM.

If it was a fighter the towers would never have fallen. Heck, if the 757's were empty they wouldn't have. But they were full of gass and the fires and melted some of the bolts that held the place together.

Did someone say conspiracy?

Except scent is usually the strongest tie to memory.

yeah, the towers survived the impact, what caused them to collapse was the sheer amount of aircraft fuel that melted critical support structures.

I think the video at Jokaroo sums up the pentagon incident, literally the F4 was reduced to dust on impact, the only parts of the plane that would have survived the impact would be those that hit weak spots, such as windows and doors.

Its hard to imagine what something travelling at 500mph does when it hits a solid virtually un-movable object, I think none of us here can honestly say how things behave in those conditions.

I've done a quick, rather crude calculation of energies involved in a 757 travelling at 500mph compared to a car travelling at 150mph hitting a solid wall and the 757 would displace ~250 times as much energy as the car on impact.

Its hard enough picturing what happens to a car in a 150mph impact, let alone something with ~250 times the energy. This doesn't take into account the vaporisation effect of the fuel in the airplane which would cause even more energy to be released.

[edit - adjusted numbers (500 --> 250) to reflect actual mass (takeoff) of 757 instead of something based off an estimate from the 747 mass]

It's just one of those things. If you belive everything the government tells you about it, your an idiot. If you belive everything some random conspiracy video tells you no it, your an idiot. The whole truth of something isn't going be right in front of your face, in either form.

I do hate how conspiracy videos are formatted usually, though. A bunch of random facts put in a specific order to make it seem like they are related. Bugs me because they all claim to be "looking for the truth" when they still bend the facts to suit their needs just as much as any government would.


Northwoods was some scary **** though.

HOW NICE OF YOU TO USE CAPS TO EXPLAIN SOMETHING WHEN YOU DID NOT REALLY EXPLAIN ANYTHING BECAUSE THATS NOT WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT

I was talking about the differences between the F4 and the 757 in relation to people thinking it's a conspiracy because there wasn't any debris left from the plane hitting the PENTAGON. I wasn't talking about the towers at all.

how would you know if there are any jaw-dropping facts if you refuse to look at their argument.

lol, good point

*cue X-files music*

It was an ALIEN SPACESHIP that crashed into the pentagon. Also the aliens abducted all the people that were on the 757; that's where they went. They're still being anal-probed to this day.

the video actually takes a lot of time explaining that that is totally impossible for the context of the WTC towers.

There were people on the planes, civillians, they were abducted and killed... so all this crap about the commercial planes NOT being passenger planes is BULL CRAP.

EDIT: Plus videos and audio recordings of inside the planes.

Try as I might, I don't have the faintest clue what the hell you're talking about.

It could, if that person didn't know any physics and was capable of doubting legitimate evidence based on statements by laypersons saying things like "It sounded like a missile."

if you'll watch the video, you'll see that it's much more than based on what people say (althought it does emphasize that too much)

One thing that I would like to be explained is the cell phone calls, I've always heard that at the altitude they were at that it was impossible for them to get service (and many people i've talked to don't get service during most of their flights) and recently a french airline company announced that it would become the first to offer inflight service.

Supposedly (at physics911.org which is also a conspiracy site mind you) they have done tests showing that at the claimed altitudes compared to the cell phone tower range, it was impossible for them to have been made.

That plus all the other acusations and things pointed out in the various theories, one can not help but to atleast question those events.

I would like to atleast see a valid rebuttal to these theories other than "so all this crap about the commercial planes NOT being passenger planes is BULL CRAP"



what videos

Fo sho, yo.

The melting? No. While the WTC steel was RATED for 3000 degrees melting, at 2000 degrees, steel loses more than 75% of it's strength. Also, kerosene is not hot enough to melt steel, but kerosene as well as carpet, paper, and wood, can bring steel to a malleable state. That means that you can easily shape it with a hammer, much less a whole buidling on top of a beam. I hope that made sense because I am sick as ****.



The calls were not made at cruising altitude, they were made from only several thousand feet.

The video goes into those things too. It goes into what happened to the planes that (they said) didn't crash. And also the recordings. I don't know if it is true, but you should at least check it out before saying that.

I will when I can be arsed into wasting an hour and a half of my time. So far it sounds like the best thing that video has is "experts from Boeing and RR saying it's not a 757." The thing is, I've already seen the photographic analysis, it really was.

I asked my grandfather, an engineer, about some of this stuff, and he said the loose change video was a bunch of crap when it came to what it said about the metal beams and stuff with the WTC.

Just... throwing that out there.

Hehe

Well, I'm sure gay!

so you're saying that you will refuse to look at their argument, yet dismiss it as crap?