240 start here......

[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 cracks about it.

[Straw Man]

you guys are like two sides of the same coin - what would you do without each other?   

Oz - you mentioned previously that you think that bush knew about 911 before it happened (I think that's what you wrote).   I've never believed that particular CT but I'm curious what led you to believe this? 

[OzmO]

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


I can "dispute" that the Earth is round.  Anyone can dispute anything.  Not a good word choice.

lol    w/e

It's far away?  Funny, the rest of the plane shows up fine.  Background of the WTC?  um, no, the wing disappears in SIDE views where the SKY is the backdrop (you watched the video clip, right?) 
.

The rest of the plane shows up fine becuase of the direction of the sun light.   Video, especially low resolution video, doesn't deistingish or pick up greys the same way the human eye does.  That's why video doesn't look the same as what we see in real life.  But you know that.   

The side view is just a big blurr.  inconclusive (but not to nut job CT'ers!)

This plane didn't explosde until it was in the CENTER of the building - and even then, there was a second pause before it ignited.  To me, that makes no sense.  it SHOULD have ignited the moment it hit the building and that carbon nosed plane shredded.  Of course, unlike every plane crash in history, this one didn't explode until it had embedded itself in the spine of the building.

It's a very big building and i don;t see much of a delay.  And when you say "it should have ignited"  from what personal expert knowledge are you baseing this from?  You degree in economics?   

OzmO, even you HAVE to admit it's fucking fishy the chopper was parallel with a bright light.  What are the chances?  Why the light?  it ain't the sun, I wish you had done your research here.

I live 5 miles from a Major Airforce base.  I see c-5's, c-141's, and c-17's flying around everyday.  I also see helicopters frequently.  If you stand and watch these planes or copters on any given sunny day you could taek all sorts of photographs that would make them look completely like something they are not.  Like UFO's.

This helicopter might be something worht looking at if there wasn't the corresponding refections on the building.  That's just plain common sense.  nothing at all fishing about it.  unless of course you've lost your mind.

[OzmO]

you guys are like two sides of the same coin - what would you do without each other?   

Oz - you mentioned previously that you think that bush knew about 911 before it happened (I think that's what you wrote).   I've never believed that particular CT but I'm curious what led you to believe this? 

I believe it mainly becuase of the expression on bush's face when he was informed of the WTC's.   It's only a gut feeling.

[Straw Man]

I believe it mainly becuase of the expression on bush's face when he was informed of the WTC's.   It's only a gut feeling.

did your gut tell you how or when he found out? Was it from intelligence sources or was he actually involved in a conspiracy?

[240 is Back]

This helicopter might be something worht looking at if there wasn't the corresponding refections on the building.  That's just plain common sense.  nothing at all fishing about it.  unless of course you've lost your mind.

But there are no corresponding relflections.  The helicopter projects this bright light when in the sunlight, when behind the building, and when clear of the building.


And what is this "MIGHT be worth looking into"?  Dude, 3000 dead fucking bodies.  3000 dead, and you discount the odds of him being there right then shining a light the incoming flight?  You MIGHT look into it?

What the fuck is wrong with you?  You might?

And "nothing at all is fishy with it"... are you plain retarded, dude?  The location and timing alone should raise some serious flags. And the fact it has the odd light source - I mean, you would have to be the worst cop in the history of the world to not sit down with that chopper pilot and ask him to explain his action.

Fuck it.  you're a sucker.  If you can't smell anything fishy at all about the chopper in the perfect spot, perfect timing, and the big fucking light coming out of it...  and if you see nothing odd about the wing dissappeaing, well, then you live in the dark and you want to stay there.

[OzmO]

But there are no corresponding relflections.  The helicopter projects this bright light when in the sunlight, when behind the building, and when clear of the building.

And if that wasn't possible then we would see the moon at night.   Based on the angle, you would see the reflection as it comes from behind the building.

But that's common sense again.

This helicopter might be something worht looking at if there wasn't the corresponding refections on the building.  That's just plain

And what is this "MIGHT be worth looking into"?  Dude, 3000 dead fucking bodies.  3000 dead, and you discount the odds of him being there right then shining a light the incoming flight?  You MIGHT look into it?

What the f**k is wrong with you?  You might?

Here you go again with your 3000 dead tactic......  it's getting old dude.   You are taking my statement out of context...  which is a classic nut job CT'er method.  so i'll clear it up for you:  It might be worth looking into if the "reflection didn't match the direction fo the sun."  becuase it does match it, it doesn't need to be looked into.

And "nothing at all is fishy with it"... are you plain retarded, dude?  The location and timing alone should raise some serious flags. And the fact it has the odd light source - I mean, you would have to be the worst cop in the history of the world to not sit down with that chopper pilot and ask him to explain his action.

f**k it.  you're a sucker.  If you can't smell anything fishy at all about the chopper in the perfect spot, perfect timing, and the big fucking light coming out of it...  and if you see nothing odd about the wing dissappeaing, well, then you live in the dark and you want to stay there.

You are calling me a sucker?  and this is from the guy who tought the 2-star general was an expert on physics and strutual engineering not to mention the fact you are the same guy who now thinks it's a hologram.

240  don't you get it?

you are nut job,  EVERYONE here knows it. 

All you have left is to call me sucker?

fucking funny ddue.

[OzmO]

No, you're a sucker because you automatically discount these theories without looking at the evidence or, at the very least, thinking about the statistical possibilities of what happened that day.  When you consider the placement of the chopper, the light (which you are wrong about - look at the video), the "nosecone" jutting out the building....

whatever.  Your mind cannot comprehend the fact that 2 planes wouldn't bring down the towers they said in 1989 would be demoished in 10-12 years.    You can accept that our govt would LET it happen, but not that we'd facilitate it.  And that's cool.  you'll get there.

That's rich.............  you're accusing me of not looking at the evidence!

It's not a nose cone dippy.  Or it's as much a nose cone as the pic of the UFO is a UFO..........  now you are just being thick.

[OzmO]

ok, what is it then?

It's precisely where the nosecone should be.  If you would watch the video clip, you'd see it is a long cylindrical object.

It's also precisely where a blast would be exiting the building.  And Blasts can take all kinds of shapes when you break them down to frames. 

Addtioinally, if it was a missle.... the explosives are in the front part of the missle.  That part would have been gone.

Again basic common sense.

[OzmO]

And Blasts can take all kinds of shapes when you break them down to frames. 

Watch it in real time.  Perfectly slices into the building, retains its cylinder shape, juts out the other end, then detonates in the center.  The cylinder/nosecose is shown BEFORE ANY BLAST.


Addtioinally, if it was a missle.... the explosives are in the front part of the missle.  That part would have been gone.



NO!  DEAD WRONG! In a JDAM cruise missile, the head of the missile is a concrete penetrator.  It allows the missile to embed itself into the center of a target before exploding.  The payload is in the shaft. 

(A penetrator missile is what you would use if you were targeting a building like that.  You wouldn't blow a gash in the side of it, topple the top down the side, and leave 80% of it standing.  you'd go for dead center)

Nope....  it's doesn't detonate in the center.  It's part of the explosion.

AS far as missiles:


You wouldn't need a pantrator missle for the WTC.  You need those for harden fortifications.

More common sense

[Cavalier22]

after further review, the call on the field stands

9/11 was not the result of some super complicated Conspiracy

[OzmO]

LOOK AT THE FUUUCKING VIDEO!

The plane/missile penetrates the building - the nose juts out the other end.  THEN the explosions erupts from dead center and envelopes the head.  IT COMES FROM THE CENTER OF THE BUILDING.

I will not address this again.  I invite others to look at the video and make their call.  You're blind, stupid, or too pigheaded to view it.


If you wanted to deliver the impression of a symmetrical collapse, you abso- FUCKING - loutly would need a hit in THE CENTER OF THE BUILDING.



Do you disagree with this?

You really need to calm down.


First of all, what that is, it's too blurry to determine one way or the other.

Have you ever looked at the pics of the hole the plane made in WTC2 before it collapsed.  you should.  A person with common sense would see how silly the missile theory is.


AND by the FUCKING  way............  i've watched the video 4 times. 

[OzmO]

Oz, I'm starting to think you are a 21-year old kid who has watched maybe 20 hours of news in his life.  I'm starting to think your historical point of reference is really bad.  I think you're a waste of time.

Very cute comment from a guy who thinks he's an expert in physics, structual engineering, airplane construction etc...

And to top it off thinks the WTC's were hit by holograms cloaking missiles.

You should call your mom, and tell her how stupid you've become.

also:

A crusie missle would be able   penatrate teh building and blow it up from the inside.

But think about this:

Why would they need a missle if they supposidly wired the building with bombs the day before?   HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH

(i think you'll run with that statement)  lol

[OzmO]

Easy.

Because if a soft plane shredded on the outside of the building, it'd be pretty hard to sell the bulding falling.  The Official story - planes hit, penetrated, blew up, burned, weakened, and it fell.

If planes didn't penetrate (and they dont in real life), no fire, and surely no one believes it when the building collapses 45 min later.

And why are you laughing?  Is this funny?

It doesn't seem like you're really understanding everything here.

no,  you don;t get it.  If they wired the building then all they'd need is a hologram!  that's why it's funny!

[240 is Back]

no,  you don;t get it.  If they wired the building then all they'd need is a hologram!  that's why it's funny!

No. 

A very big object hit the building and exploded.  Of course this was needed. 

You don't get it.  And it's cool.  many people cannot fathom the level of complexity required to pull off such a massive inside job.

[OzmO]

No. 

A very big object hit the building and exploded.  Of course this was needed. 

You don't get it.  And it's cool.  many people cannot fathom the level of complexity required to pull off such a massive inside job.

No you don't.  look a the pics of the hole.  A missle would have made those holes.  It's in the shape of a plane.

More common sense