Like a good Conspiracy Theory

[R2B2]

Mmmmm.... That anger is indicative of how insulting the conspiracy stuff is to those a bit closer to the real events than we are. The more we learn on these threads the more the conspiracy theories quite rightly prove to be sick nonsense.

However..... back to witnesses.

Global Hawk - 11 tons (full of fuel), 13 metres long. Very quiet.

B 757 200 - 130 tons, 47 metres long. Very noisy!

I think the witnesses could tell the difference, yes? It's difficult to see how anybody could get these two mixed up, even in low level flight!! They know what they saw alright.

 

[Deadly Dave]

First witnesses that came immediately after crash mentioned... oh fuck it, you can read it all in the links provided if you want. Besides, let's say there were genuine witnesses who think they viewed a 757, others who genuinely believe they saw something smaller, why give more importance to the ones who believe one or the other? Bottom line is, there's no denying there's a discrepancy - so why? THAT would be interesting to know... Oh, I know, I have the solution: release the footage! :bang:
No footage, many people will continue to believe that us gov is lying and that witnesses for 'something else' are the real proper witnesses - simple!!!

As for experts, there will always be experts rubishing other experts. One thing for sure, pictures were NOT doctored - look at the history of them. So if it LOOKS doctored but is not, that means there is something there which shouldn't be. So what is it?

"And no - not all media are controlled..... that is simply spy film stuff!" I work in the industry and believe me - it is not.

Case 1:05-cv-00475-PLF Document 13 Filed 08/01/2005 Page 5 of 23

INTRODUCTION​

Tired of what plaintiff's complaint calls "outlandish conspiracy theories" about the crash of American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, plaintiff made a Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") request for any videotapes in the posession of the FBI that may have captured the impact. Plaintiff seeks to correct what he describes as "a veritable culture of misinformation," and to that end has created a website on which to disseminate what information he obtains. Defendant responded to plaintiff's request that, although a record had been located that was responsive to his request, the record was exempt from disclosure. Plaintiff subsequently filed this lawsuit.
Release of the document responsive to the plaintiff's FOIA request would threaten to interfere with the criminal prosecution of Zacarias Moussaoui, the only person to be bought to trial in the United States for the terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center. The process of selecting prospective jurors for the penalty phase of Moussaoui's trial is expected to begin in late 2005. Therefore, the FBI withheld the responsive record, a CD-ROM of time-lapse images from Pentagon security cameras, persuant to Exemption 7(A) because its release could reasonably be expected to intefere with the law enforcement proceeding . Fedreral prosecutors may ask the court to impose the death penalty. Widespread dissemination of this record could present significant harm to the government's criminal case.
This information should not be released to plaintiff untill the risk to the Moussaoui prosecution has passed. Defendant therefore seeks summary judgement in favour of its assertion of Exemption 7(A) and dismissal of plaintiff's lawsuit with predjudice.

Frenchuk I have a copy of the transcipt, you can get a copy of the transcript it is on public record even the conspiracy therorists are able to get a copy of the transcript, hell I bet even Blunkett can get a copy in braille if he so desires.

 

[Animal Mother]

Anybody hear that Jim Morrison was recently seen with Janis Joplin and Elvis at the local McDonald's c7u8 :wank:

First time I have seen that particular video though.

 

[Wolfie]

Anybody hear that Jim Morrison was recently seen with Janis Joplin and Elvis at the local McDonald's c7u8 :wank:

First time I have seen that particular video though.

you are joking right???


when did elvis start eating meat again????

 

[R2B2]

Ahhhhh, so you are following this thread then Andy :blush: :blush:

 

[R2B2]

2. The report which claims to verify the photos and the object shown. This report is attributed to a professor for whom I can find no published works anywhere. Although the report claims to be authored by him there are no statements or quotes to be found anywhere actually made by him.

I was intrigued by that so I've now done an extensive search around the Internet for any information on this individual, including reading up on as much as I can find on the University of Barcelona, at Mattaro, and I can't find anything either!

The University just do not mention his name anywhere, although they seem to list all their academics.

The only place I can find any reference to him is........... on that conspiracy site!!

Other than that - he doesn't seem to exist anywhere else at all! :dunno: :dunno:

So what does that now tell us about the propaganda sites??

 

[nitehawk]

I was intrigued by that so I've now done an extensive search around the Internet for any information on this individual, including reading up on as much as I can find on the University of Barcelona, at Mattaro, and I can't find anything either!

The only place I can find any reference to him is........... on that conspiracy site!!

Other than that - he doesn't seem to exist anywhere else at all! :dunno: :dunno:

So what does that now tell us about the propaganda sites??

Try here:

Click

Professor Amparo Sacristan Carrasco

From what I can gather (although my spanish is crap) is that he is involved in imaging techniques and research etc..

 

[nitehawk]

The only place I can find any reference to him is........... on that conspiracy site!!

Other than that - he doesn't seem to exist anywhere else at all! :dunno: :dunno:

So what does that now tell us about the propaganda sites??

He does exist !!

 

[Duck n Dive]

OK well done he does exist, it would appear from the two published works that they were in 1990 a study into competitive learning and memory and in 2001 a study of breast cancer.

It might me but I can't actually find those works on the polytechnics? own website listing of published works?



The point I was making (not very clearly it seems) is that why some obscure Spanish academic would be so suitably qualified to be referred to in the link posted on this site as "official picture analysis".



Exactly what's "official" about this?



It also still doesn't prove that this chap did actually publish the work being referred to - as I've mentioned any student doing basic study knows the various fraudulent and falsely attributed articles/studies/works that can be found on the internet. They are always warned that internet sources cannot be taken as primary research may be quoted sparingly as "bulking material" to show research activity has taken place.



I find it notable that this chap has not apparently published his picture analysis himself anywhere but left to the conspiracy website.



I'm highly sceptical of the analysis and the conclusions drawn because I know from my personal knowledge sufficient about aircraft to be certain in my own mind that an attachment in the position claimed is just not feasible.



It's a bit like you telling me that the type of car I drive can be fitted with square wheels as an optional extra. I know it's not the case and not possible although I'm sure you could put together all sorts of documents, reports and analysis that would prove it is the case. It still wouldn't make it possible!!



I've also posted a few bits from aviation forums that I take part in. Some of the comments are from pilots and a reading of some of this indicates an in depth knowledge of the topic.



I'm sorry but a Columbian newspaper and an obscure Spanish professor just don't add up to credible data in my view.



The claim that a country that can't stop the world finding out a president got a blow job from an intern or that it's abused POW's has somehow managed to stage something like this and somehow persuade a large number of it's citizens, officials and friends and families of the victims to go along with it just doesn't add up.



What does make "common sense" to me is that various officials terrified of carrying the can for some perceived/actual failure of duty etc. will be as economical as they can in providing information to anyone digging as it might cost then their jobs. But history tells us these things do get out. The scale of this as a conspiracy is just too lunatic to be plausible.



Back at the beginning I mentioned having watched on TV as it unfolded. It appeared that I was watching live pictures and my personal aviation experience tells me that what was subsequently reported matched what I saw.

 

[nitehawk]

OK well done he does exist, it would appear from the two published works that they were in 1990 a study into competitive learning and memory and in 2001 a study of breast cancer.

It might me but I can't actually find those works on the polytechnics? own website listing of published works?

I know what you mean but his field does seem to be imaging techniques and enhancement so it does fit in.

As to why this particular project was not listed on the Polytechnic's website, I can only speculate that it wouldn't be desirable for them to list it. Maybe he didn't have their approval.

The scale of this as a conspiracy is just too lunatic to be plausible.

It is huge but that doesn't mean that it should be completely discounted on those grounds. As unlikely as it may seem that a developed world government may create or allow such an attrocity, there does seem to be complicity to some significant degree.

Unfortunately, the Bush administration is the only organisation that has access to all the avialable information, consequently, the individuals who believe this story to be utter shite can only make those assumptions on what we have seen or read. If there was complete disclosure of the (known) facts including video evidence then there would be no case to answer - that is, unless there is something to hide and so the data will never emerge in it's entirety.

Interestingly, I read that mayor Guiliani's records containing detailed info about the Sept 11th attacks have been sealed and vaulted for 25 years. There weren't any majorly controversial incidents whilst he was in office were there :dunno:

As for the validation of evidence, I can see how the source of data is very important but when it comes to information releases from a source that has a vested interest in the interpretation of that information, none of it can be taken as fact. Especially when the said source is a suspect and controls the rest of the information flow.

There is undoubtedly a huge amount of bullshit on the net (and elsewhere) concerning this subject but there is also some very valid stuff. It can be difficult to ascertain fact from fiction but during this thread and the last one, there have been instances where non-believers of conspiracy have suggested that video evidence has been doctored when it almost definitely has not. Some of the evidence that was under scrutiny was 'live-feed' reporting and video etc... My point in mentioning this is that even those who believe the official story have some continuity errors cropping up in the sequence of events and detail. Added to which, the official story has also been evolved/modified since the initial version was released.

I'm all for agreeing with the 'don't believe all of what you hear/see' brigade but it does work both ways. Whatever you choose to believe as 'truth' in this subject is obviously down to your own perceptions but I doubt anyone here is close to accurate on what actually happened that day.

Hopefully we will one day learn the truth, I can't wait g0551p

Does this make sense, I'm a bit pissed ?

 

[R2B2]

.... but when it comes to information releases from a source that has a vested interest in the interpretation of that information, none of it can be taken as fact.

Lol!........ A perfect assessment of the propaganda sites!

For heavens sake Nitehawk, you really need to get yer head out of the sand for a short while and take a look back at what these threads have revealed. Just about all the major points of 'evidence' proffered by your propaganda sources have, under scrutiny, proved to have much more plausible, logical and common sense alternative explanations.

What is there left?? Speculation that some unknown Spanish Professor didn't have his Uni's approval to publish his accreditations. D & D has explained a couple of times that nothing can be mounted on the aircraft at those points. oh - and a new one about Guliani's records......... Ahhh, the conspiracy must be true then!! That really is getting desperate. (Where did you read about Guiliani's records being vaulted? I'd be interested to read about that).

Oh, and the video's..... didn't you read in the post by DD that they are the subject of evidence in the prosecution of Malawi (sp?), and therefore cannot be released. Do you honestly still believe that those video's will show something other than a 757??

Face it - these sites have not only been selective (we know how they work now, you yourself have confirmed that they are economical and biased), but have now been proved to downright lie about things!! Why??

Yet still you hang on to the the most desperate and flimsiest of hopes that somehow all of this is going to miraculously swing the other way and that most if the world has got it all wrong! Why do you suppose you were so ridiculed and lambasted when you tried to take this to the American Forum? :dunno:

How would you account for the observations of the freight plane pilot who observed the airliner crashing into the WTC? (ftrom the aviation forum). He had somebody he knew on that plane - is he upholding the conspiracy? (As an example of just one individual of the thousands needed to pull off this cover-up).

What about the WTC emloyee unwittingly describing how the dust got into the lower lobby? Why does that count for nothing and yet the conspiracy site explanation of 'proof' that it was high explosives must be accepted by all?

It's obvious enough to me from some of the things you've said on these threads that it is your burning hatred of the yank administration that is now driving your unmovable faith in these theories, and not the content of the conspiracy sites...... accept it - the claims of these sites have now been exposed for what they really are. Seriously, how can anybody now trust anything perpetrated by these shocking sites?

There is undoubtedly a huge amount of bullshit on the net (and elsewhere) concerning this subject but there is also some very valid stuff.

Where?? Where is the valid stuff?? You keep talking about it but we never see it!! What else is REALLY left that has ANY credibility at all?? :dunno:

 

[Theoldgit1]

The mayors records are vaulted for 25 years?

So are the British Governments, (more like 50 years) the prison services, most insurance companies..Nothing out of the ordinary here, even if it is true......


Innuendo rules on these conspiracy sites.

Elvis IS Ronald Macdonald. man8um

 

[ianrobbo1]

and some people still belive in santa

 

[derek kelly]

and some people still belive in santa

Fook off Ian, My brothers tried getting me with that one years ago, but I've seen him, so there. :f

 

[nitehawk]

Lol!........ A perfect assessment of the propaganda sites!

For heavens sake Nitehawk, you really need to get yer head out of the sand for a short while and take a look back at what these threads have revealed. Just about all the major points of 'evidence' proffered by your propaganda sources have, under scrutiny, proved to have much more plausible, logical and common sense alternative explanations.

What is there left?? Speculation that some unknown Spanish Professor didn't have his Uni's approval to publish his accreditations. D & D has explained a couple of times that nothing can be mounted on the aircraft at those points. oh - and a new one about Guliani's records......... Ahhh, the conspiracy must be true then!! That really is getting desperate. (Where did you read about Guiliani's records being vaulted? I'd be interested to read about that).

Oh, and the video's..... didn't you read in the post by DD that they are the subject of evidence in the prosecution of Malawi (sp?), and therefore cannot be released. Do you honestly still believe that those video's will show something other than a 757??

Face it - these sites have not only been selective (we know how they work now, you yourself have confirmed that they are economical and biased), but have now been proved to downright lie about things!! Why??

Yet still you hang on to the the most desperate and flimsiest of hopes that somehow all of this is going to miraculously swing the other way and that most if the world has got it all wrong! Why do you suppose you were so ridiculed and lambasted when you tried to take this to the American Forum? :dunno:

How would you account for the observations of the freight plane pilot who observed the airliner crashing into the WTC? (ftrom the aviation forum). He had somebody he knew on that plane - is he upholding the conspiracy? (As an example of just one individual of the thousands needed to pull off this cover-up).

What about the WTC emloyee unwittingly describing how the dust got into the lower lobby? Why does that count for nothing and yet the conspiracy site explanation of 'proof' that it was high explosives must be accepted by all?

It's obvious enough to me from some of the things you've said on these threads that it is your burning hatred of the yank administration that is now driving your unmovable faith in these theories, and not the content of the conspiracy sites...... accept it - the claims of these sites have now been exposed for what they really are. Seriously, how can anybody now trust anything perpetrated by these shocking sites?


Where?? Where is the valid stuff?? You keep talking about it but we never see it!! What else is REALLY left that has ANY credibility at all?? :dunno:

After careful consideration of all that's been said on these threads, I've come to the conclusion that you are totally right. I have been blinded by what I thought were intelligent and concerned individuals whom I now realise had nothing better to do than criticise the government and trying to capitalise on it too.


1. There is nothing funny going on in relation to the three collapsed buildings.

2. It was a passenger plane that hit the Pentagon - probably a 747 though.

3. The Bush administration are not a bunch of seriously evil cnuts and their 'War on Terror' is making the world a safer and more stable place.

4. Key officials in the US government may have interests in the defence companies who are sponsoring the war but probably only 3 shares each maximum so it wouldn't have affected their reasoning.

5. Osama Bin Laden is a wiley little fella who is extremely difficult to catch and has not been allowed to escape for political reasons.

6. Saddam Hussain definitely had a hand in the attacks on America, can't believe the audacity of the guy. How did he possibly think he's get away with it ?

7. The fourth plane involved on Sept 11th was not shot down, it probably fell 'cos they ran out of juice.

8. The statements that were made by the US administration have evolved. I initially thought there were some cover-ups occuring but now realise it was just down to my paranoid and twisted interpretation of what they were trying to tell us.

9. The reason they will not release the footage from the camera sites near the Pentagon is because they have to prosecute that guy and he might get away with it if people are able to form an opinion prior to his trial. They'll definitely release the vids after he's convicted, I'm sure.

10. The experts who made statements on behalf of the administration were much more clued up than the ones hired by the conspiracy theory investigators who clearly have no concept of the laws of physics and structural engineering.

11. The new laws that are being introduced in the US and UK are being implemented in order to protect us from the nasty fcukers who may want to stop us from shopping. They are not, contrary to popular belief, some half arsed scam to remove civil liberties and control the general population.

12. There is no such thing as 'The New World Order' and global elite, they are just terms coined by the media to categorise the natural progression of democracy.


:yo: Really appreciate you guys setting me straight, I'll be able to sleep well tonight for the first time in ages without 'crazy' thoughts running through the troubled abyss that was my mind.

I guess it comes from life experience. Hopefully I will one day learn to trust the government who's hard work and relentless protection of myself and my family has been such a thankless task.

If you're reading this, Mr. Blair and Mr. Bush, my sincere apologies. I shall never doubt you again. Keep up the good work :bow:


Again, may I apologise for my foolish and irrational behavior - may the lord have mercy on my soul for the trouble I have caused.

 

[ianrobbo1]

glad to see you've "seen the light" :bow: now about Santa!!!!

 

[R2B2]

As you like Nitehawk, as you like.

Sweet dreams!

 

[nitehawk]

As you like Nitehawk, as you like.

Sweet dreams!

Don't let the bed bugs bite :cry:

 

[Theoldgit1]

Don't let the bed bugs bite :cry:

Definition of "Expert".



Ex is a has been, Spurt is a drip under pressure.....


What's causing the pressure? The wish to be taken seriously :wank:

 

[derek kelly]

Don't let the bed bugs bite :cry:

These bed bugs are actually planted by the government, to listen in to our bedrom conversations, big brother is watching us all.