Eh

[OzmO]

I still can't believe you, OzmO, would argue against this without doing your research. 

OZMO,

here is what we have:

1) a parallel flying helicopter shining a bright light directly at the incoming plane

2) a plane whose wing disappears when that light is removed

3) a plane which slices into the building with very minimal external damage to the building, very uncharacteristic of most plane building collisions where the plane turns to sawdust upon hitting

4) A video clip showing a black, cylindrical object approx 20 feet tall jutting out the other side of the building.

5) The very unlikely result that the bulk of the damage from the fuel manages to happen INSIDE the building despite the fact that if a jet hit the building, the fuel would have instantly ignited OUTSIDE the building.  This explosiosn VERY clearly begins dead center of the WTC.


Please explain each of these events.  Please do so with a theory more credible than the hologram theory.

Is this the only video of the plane hitting the building?  no

Are these appearant on other videos?  no

You remember the pic of the UFO i posted on another thread?

Please explain each of these events.  Please do so with a theory more credible than the UFO theory.

..............Flawed debating tactic
..............Flawed logic
..............wacked conjecture
..............with all due repsect....  you are losing your mind.

end of story

[a_joker10]

yeah, 2.3 trillion went missing.  Nearly a quarter of their budget since the start was just gone. 

According to CBS:
Rumsfeld promised change but the next day – Sept. 11-- the world changed and in the rush to fund the war on terrorism, the war on waste seems to have been forgotten.

Rumsfeld promised change.  Would there have been an investigation into 2.3 missing trillion dollars? You bet your ass there would hae been.


Maybe it's a coincidence.  But if YOU were going to announce the biggest loss/mismgmt/or theft of money in US history, what day would you choose?

He chose to announce it on the afternoon before the biggest attack in history.  Not only did that take away ALL the spotlight from his money woes and GUARANTEE the story was be buried, but it also guaranteed additional defense spending.

Maybe it was a coincidence.  You can believe what you wish. 

You do realize this debate already took place 4 months ago.

I would pull it up but I think it was merged into one of those crappy 9-11 threads.
You are misinterpreting the 2.3 trillion dollars. The story was about poor or over spending on military equipment for since the defense department was set up. The 2.3 trillion dollars is all accounting money. It exists on paper but no where else. This money is over 10X the entire defense budget, but I posted that as well.

But you know this already.

Some sort of video projection system is actually a reasonable explanation for that we see here.  The left wing disappears from EVERY camerea angle as the beam of light from the coincidentally parallel helicopter is cut off by the building.

I suppose you have a more reasonable explanation for where that wing goes?  And the "probably just light and angles" point of view is defaced a bit when you see the wing disappears from every angle shot.

If the government was going to kill 3000 people why wouldn't they just fly the planes into the building and into the pentagon?
I don't understand your logic. when putting out improbable scenarios always follow the KISS principle. If it sounds too complex it is. People are inherently lazy and that much planning would take too much work.

That is the whole problem with all of your conspiracies, they are too complex. There is a reason why organizations like the mob survive. KISS. People are idiots and will talk. Anything complex with lots of people means leaked information.

[AlliedPowers]

If the government was going to kill 3000 people why wouldn't they just fly the planes into the building and into the pentagon?

I have been of the Jimmy Walters crowd - the "pod theory" group - for some time.  For me, it's pointless to argue - it's common sense.  It'd be like arguying if the sky was blue.  If I had a million dollars, I'd buy a building and a few planes and show you that when you crash a plane into a building at high speeds.  They disintegrate.  And the fuel burns up primarily on the outside.  Look at the WTC attack.  The explosion is dead center.  There's the smoking gun.  No plane can do that.  And Walters is currently in Venezuela assembling tests with Hugo Chavez (a favorite of berserker!) which will duplicate the attacks.  And it will become VERY obvious to the world that when planes hit buildings, they turn into burning shit falling to the ground.

You enjoy your viewpoint and I'll sit here with mine.  Idiot.

[a_joker10]

I have been of the Jimmy Walters crowd - the "pod theory" group - for some time.  For me, it's pointless to argue - it's common sense.  It'd be like arguying if the sky was blue.  If I had a million dollars, I'd buy a building and a few planes and show you that when you crash a plane into a building at high speeds.  They disintegrate.  And the fuel burns up primarily on the outside.  Look at the WTC attack.  The explosion is dead center.  There's the smoking gun.  No plane can do that.  And Walters is currently in Venezuela assembling tests with Hugo Chavez (a favorite of berserker!) which will duplicate the attacks.  And it will become VERY obvious to the world that when planes hit buildings, they turn into burning shit falling to the ground.

You enjoy your viewpoint and I'll sit here with mine.  Idiot.

Name calling is week.

BTW you know nothing of which you speak.
You don't have the background or the experience to make those judgments about how a plane would interact with the towers.

The scientific community stands behind the NIST reports. You haven't read them and could not comprehend how the modeling or the engineering works.

Have a nice day.

[b.c.]

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911security.html

[OzmO]

I have been of the Jimmy Walters crowd - the "pod theory" group - for some time.  For me, it's pointless to argue - it's common sense.  It'd be like arguying if the sky was blue.  If I had a million dollars, I'd buy a building and a few planes and show you that when you crash a plane into a building at high speeds.  They disintegrate.  And the fuel burns up primarily on the outside.  Look at the WTC attack.  The explosion is dead center.  There's the smoking gun.  No plane can do that.  And Walters is currently in Venezuela assembling tests with Hugo Chavez (a favorite of berserker!) which will duplicate the attacks.  And it will become VERY obvious to the world that when planes hit buildings, they turn into burning shit falling to the ground.

You enjoy your viewpoint and I'll sit here with mine.  Idiot.

That all makes sense of the building was solid concrete.  But the WTC's were glass/sheets of metal wrapped around a steel frame. 

[gtbro1]

  Boy...I must have missed this theory.   Let me see if I got this straight. Some people think that a helicopter was projecting a "movie" type thing making it look like a plane hit the towers...but there was no plane..? Is that the theory?

[OzmO]

The plane penetrated the steel-reinforced concrete outer columns of the building and the windows equally.

Watch the tape -- zero difference.  I don't know what that means.  When the B52 hit the empire state building in 1949, it shredded.

Very big difference considering they didn't have B-52 til the 50's.  (1954 )

And what crashed into the Empire state building was a b-25,  the same 2-engine prop bomber that was used to in the doolittle raid in 1942.

But who's concerned with common sense and facts when believing holagrams were used by helicopters to mask missles flying into the WTC?

BTW,  the colums on the WTC were not a solid wall.  So just like the c-130 that crashed into the aprtment building the plane desentagrated into the WTC.

But why take into consideration and isolated incident like the tehran c-130 that supports both the WTC's and pentagon planes when you have your expert knowledge in physics and video imaging?

Oh,  yeah  Iran is on on the 9/11 inside job and the tehran thing was set up for this very purpose right?

[OzmO]

Did anyone see the picture of Jesus in one of the explosions?   

[24KT]

Monster urban myths

That's NOT a myth xpac2. I saw the video with my own eyes.
FEMA got the call Monday night. September 10th.   

...and don't forget the money wired to Atta from the Pakistani ISI

There are sooo many smoking guns, ...I'm surprised you people haven't suffocated from smoke inhalation yet.

[24KT]

It's okay to fear this shit... but don't embarass yourself by saying "You people don't use credible evidence" when the links above are mainstream media.

{LOL} Rob, in fairness to xpac2, ...he does have a point. After the job "mainstream media" has done on the public, not to mention what they haven't done for the past few years, ...it's not really a huge leap to call their credibility into question. 

But since this thread is already 4 pages, and I'm still on page 1, ...I'll shut up til I read further. 

[OzmO]

OzmO,

I think the people reading our little debates should notice a few things.

over the past few months, my arguments have matured.  I try to always have a mainstream media source (or multiples) for everything I post.  I post pics, videos, and break down ideas clearly.  I don't jump to conclusions, as with this missile theory.  I put it out there with the case and ask the people here to debunk it.   

Your arguements have matured?  you are tripping dude.

Here's your basic technique:

-  Throw up some stupid video complete dramatic music and gay graphics like for example the 2-star general

-  Make inaccurate claims

-  Refuse to answer simple questions like "how is this 2-star general any more of an expert at physics, structual engineering etc.... than you or i

-  When those claims are de-bunked then you rotate to another point.

-  And then you complain that your questions aren't answered...........lol

Not very mature.

And then you've reached new hieghts with this hologram thing.   

It's all asnwered pretty much with similar answers to the most UFO photos.

Are you telling me you are not smart enough to get that?

OzmO,
   

You, however, have regressed.  You used to debate the points.  However, as my arguments have become more fact-based, and some things cannot be disputed whatsoever, you have stopped debating.

Fact based like the 2-star general?
Fact based like the "ring leader gets released"?
Fact based like the "Pentagon's top brass"
Fact based like a "document on the web"?
Fact based like the allaege 25 link non-CT site links to anomolies about fllight 77?

Show me shit that can't be disputed.  99% of it can.  including your hologram theory.

You have nothing and your mind is no longer under your control at least the common sense part of it anyway.

Now you make alien jokes, call everything a conspiracy, and you start multiple threads trashing the people who believe 911 was an inside job.  You've gone from a serious debater - helping you, me, and all of us learn - to a common troll with predictable responses to well-constructed arguments.

I've made alien jokes becuase your arguements and theories have become a joke.

You haven't done the research

Instead you've only researched CT sites.  That's not research.

I've told how to do REAL research and all you do is either argue or rotate to another gay ass stupid theory.

Pretty much everyone on this forum agrees.

Some don;t even argue with you becuase they feel they are dealing with a crazy person.

I for one, thought i was dealing with a person who was interested in the truth.

But it's been obvious to me lately you are not.

I hope you can bring your game back.  I've matured my theories and debating methods greatly and I would like to seriously hear your arguments on the missile issue.

My game back?   lololollololol

I hope you can bring your mind back.

Now let's talk about your halagram theory and i'll answer a few of yoru questions:

The wing:

-  The wiing is lost in the background of the WTC with a combinatiion of poor lighting (sun's on the otherside of the plane) and poor resolution (it's far away and fast).  You see things similar like this i videos all the time.  You don't see it in movies or TV shows becuase they make sure the lighting is right.

The explosion:

-  You can get all sorts of shapes from explosions.  This one looks to me like the explosion was partially and temporarily contained in between 1 or 2 floors causing the split second missle shape.   That's the root of the Jesus joke.  But you have to use objective thinking to figure that out.  What you did was get real defensive becuase in your heart you know how stupid this hologram theory is.

The helcopter:

Was the corner of the WTC a hologram projector also?  How about the object on top of the WTC?  All it was, was the reflection fo the sun.  you can see it on the WTC also.


These are very obvious explanations. 

Becuase i figured you were smart enough "and mature" enough to see that you'd have discounted this hologram theory all together.  But i was wrong.  That's why i've been making wise crakss about it.