Quote# 24751

HORSESHIT THERE WAS NO PLANE, DID YOU SEE THE HOLE?! JUST A HOLE INTO THE EARTH!!

e-dog, Loose Change 3 Comments [4/14/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Gravy

Quote# 24752

Were the hijackers really devout muslims, or someone posing as muslim>? Even more outrageous, is it possible that the captains Dahl and Homer thought they were participating in an anti-hijacking DRILL, therefore thought that the cabin intrusion was part of game, for which they were rewarded handsomely? Just a speculation, based on the fact that Pilot Homer had previously flown Dick Cheney, and Pilot Jason Dahl had reportedly just lavished a new car and a new piano on his family. (where did the money come from?)

jdolam, Loose Change 0 Comments [4/14/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Gravy

Quote# 24753

[responding to a question about why the plane at the Pentagon wasn't reconstructed]

well why do u think ?? i think cuz all the major organizations like the FBI,CIA,FAA,MI5,NSA,NASA etc. are in control of the guys who did this ....

i know there's a scret organization running EVERYTHING... and bush just a puppet and if bush would do things that they didnt like they'd just eliminate him like they did with kenedy and 2pac or clinton... why do u think the guy who killed 2pac or kenedy was never found.. i mean YOU CAN FIND SOMEONE UNDER GROUND IN IRAK but u cant find the murderor who shot the greatest rapper ever.. in LAS VEGAS?!!! or the guy sho shot my fav president :P all these stories reeeaaalllyy stink!

e-dog, Loose Change 1 Comments [4/14/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: chipmunk stew

Quote# 24754

[on photos of FBI agents combing for evidence]

After seeing the pentagon research site, i noticed it spoke of a C130 possibly dropping planted debris-- ala Northwoods fake debris release scenario.

...

longshot theory: the FBI agents combing the area FAR from the pentagon were 'collecting' any faked, dropped, plane parts that might have been damning -- if someone else found them -- photographed them -- or maybe covering evidence regarding light-pole shenanigans.

it appears that the consistent job performed by the FBI was to suppress evidence - so this would be in keeping.

I welcome any other theories to explain what FBI agents were doing out there with paper bags.

jdyolam, Loose Change 1 Comments [4/14/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: chipmunk stew

Quote# 24755

[on the 100+ eyewitnesses of the Pentagon crash]

You have to remember that if 1 and only 1 of the 4 main areas of 911 deviate from the governments story you have to conclude that the government did it. Because you can't say for example that building 7 was imploded by the government but the pentagon, twin towers and 83 were all done by the hijackers, that makes less sense than the original governments story.

We know about the implosion of bldg 7 and that it would take weeks to set that up, we must assume, I do, that the eyewitnesses as well versed as they present their case are liars and shills.

xtratabasco, Loose Change 0 Comments [4/14/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: chipmunk stew

Quote# 24756

["...The two parts shown in those photos are BOTH from and RB-211, the main engines from AA 757...."]

You can plant pieces to engines anywhere. Its not difinitive proof that that was flight 77. PERIOD. A couple of parts do not a plane make...

Zor, Loose Change 1 Comments [4/14/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 0
Submitted By: chipmunk stew

Quote# 24757

[on the 100+ eyewitnesses of the Pentagon crash]

Many or most of the "eyewitnesses" were employed by the media or military. The photographic evidence proves there was no plane.

The idea that a plane crashed into the Pentagon is as absurd as the idea that the two towers collapsed due to plane crashes.

bingo, Loose Change 3 Comments [4/14/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 0
Submitted By: chipmunk stew

Quote# 24758

I'm of the opinion that it's possible that both a small plane AND a missile hit the building, not just one or the other. Think of the planes that hit the twin towers, and the flashes that occured before they hit. A missile or some sort of incendiary device/weapon was launched/detonated beforehand--before the plane hit.

I think it's entirely possible that the same tactic was used here. Missile hits building, small plane hits shortly after. The "missile" could have opened a hole into the building so that the "plane" or whatever could enter without leaving much wreckage on the outside. This would explain why the video shows no plane (perhaps it came after those five frames?) and would also explain the cordite smell.

It would also explain any objects hit along the path. In my mind, a missile would have a hard time maneuvering on its own to hit the Pentagon at the angle it hit. It would have to be guided somehow, and specifically, it would have to be carried by something to achieve the reported trajectory.

This also validates eye-witness reports that a plane--not a lone missile--hit the building.

While it's still doubtful that a 757 could have possibly crashed into the building, a smaller plane with a "pod" attached, or perhaps some sort of military plane still could have. The ideas that a small plane or a missile hit are not mutually exclusive. I think they're simultaneously possible, and judging by what we've seen of the other attacks, probable. Let me know what you think.

reno, Loose Change 1 Comments [4/14/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: chipmunk stew

Quote# 24759

Have you found your plane yet?.....I did not think so

No luggage...no engines...no wings....no fusalodge....no cockpit....no bodies....no tail...no black boxes.......Where is all that stuff hell it only weighted 100 Tons..

These "terrorist" can barely blow up aroad side bomb ...let alone pull this "JOB" off...as far as you Artist renderings of the pentagon....looks like some of Colon Powels stuff...Remember the WMD Moblie"BIO" Trucks he showed us all at the UN.....looks like the same SH*T.

A 757 plane flys at 500mph at tree top level...weight 100 Tons...crashes into the side of the pentagon..flown by a wannabee pilots..fits through a mouse hole with no plane parts left out side...travels through three buildings and six walls and there is nothing left of the 757...Oh there was an Engine part at the site...but the 757 engine makers say that is none of there's...not sure what the F*CK it is..everybody on board is ID...there is no hanger filled with all the parts...even when they crash in the bottom of the Ocean....there are parts....OH and there is more three or four differant camers caught the crash on film...but that is a secret..TOP SECRET HANDS OFF B*TCH THAT IS OUR LIE!!

Man I have heard of door-to-door selling candy....or a used car sales man...but this guy is good at the sales pitch........A CLOSER HE IS NOT.

Did bush do it YES or No...it's OK still free speech do not be affraid...Hey Moto that is one Hard Sell....there is no plane there...

OCMARK, Loose Change 1 Comments [4/14/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: chipmunk stew

Quote# 24760

[on survivors' families who have given "United 93" their blessing]

wownder how much those folks were cooerced with royalties... you know $$ played a part in that.

Zor, Loose Change 3 Comments [4/14/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 0
Submitted By: chipmunk stew

Quote# 24761

The technology to lessen (or strengthen) and redirect the impact of hurricanes has been around for years, this is a fact. US military and civilian contractors, as well as others interntationally, have access to this. Since our military obviously knows this, why isn't it even mentioned in the media as a possibility? Why is the fact that some other country could be creating these hurricances not discussed? Why isn't the fact that we could be using technology to lessen the impact discussed? Why is the entire issue of weather manipulation not even addressed by the Administration at a time when hurricance patterns are behaving in ways they never have?

Who's getting the bulk of the rebuilding contracts from Katrina? Who benefits by oil prices going higher? Who benefits by turning New Orleans into the next Las Vegas? Who was happy to use the disaster to run a complete martial law excercise complete with door to door gun confiscations (illegal) and many power-trip mishaps? Who? They all run in the same circle... and they don't care about any of us.

Conspiracy Realist, Bullshit! 0 Comments [4/14/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 0
Submitted By: chipmunk stew

Quote# 24762

Atlantis: Island or World?

So considering that the end of the Ice Age heralded a rise of sea level by approximately 200 meters; what if this rise in sea level occurred in days or months or even years; rather than decades?

What if Atlantis was not an Island, but the entire world. An ancient world during the Ice Age when sea-levels were lower, when the Sahara was a vast grass land with huge rivers?

Imagine a world of trade; one common language; and though maybe not technology comprable today, certainly more than the ancient world shortly after.

A world completely drowned in a deluge with the end of the Ice Age; over-crowding leads to war and the end of civilization. People return to tribalistic savages.

Language barriers are created once more.

And trade ends as technology is a product of stable society.

Plato put the age of Atlantis' destruction at 9,000 years before his time. This is at the end of the Ice Age.

Scientists today; looking for an Island, think he must have been wrong and he meant 900 years which is the destruction of Thera.

But why is Atlantis considered an Island? Plato said it was a continent beyond the pilars of Herakles.

Perhaps when he was saying it was as large as Africa and Asia he meant it spanned across these lands.

And this entire continent was sunk; because there is no evidence of Atlantis anymore; it is beneath 200 meters of Ocean.

But around the world, we constantly find ruins in the sea...is there a coordinated effort to correlate the ages of these ruins?


Stratrf_Rus, AboveTopSecret 3 Comments [4/14/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 0
Submitted By: CousinTed

Quote# 24667

[On 9/11 destruction of WTC]

There was not 1 reason for this, but many.
Starting with the most simple motives - the asbsetos, the insurance, the lack of tennants ( income ), the aging and corrosion problems ( aluminum clad steel ).
To the political - the taliban walking out on the talks on the oil pipeline thru Afghanistan, Sadam talking about converting his economy to the Euro, etc.
To the unimaginable - do a google search on the " Georgia Guidestones " and you will soon realize what I mean. Keep in mind the current global population is ~6.5 Billion. Then think about the timeline of the erection of this monument and the "discovery" of many of our modern "diseases".

Other reasons would be the silencing of certain individuals who "knew too much".
Do some research on the backgrounds of the victims.

JFK, Loose Change 3 Comments [4/13/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Gravy

Quote# 24668

Lots of stuff happening before the top falls. Its in reverse to all known properties of physics in this universe....you get the floors popping out before the weight gets down to them. For a natural collapse there sure is lots of debris being ejected.

FM258, Loose Change 2 Comments [4/13/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Gravy

Quote# 24669

Do you want to argue against the laws of physics? The WTC fell as if it was falling with almost 0 resistance through the air. The ONLY way this can be accomplished is with CD. There is no other plausible explanation, not even the lame attempt by the BOSS.

Zor, Loose Change 7 Comments [4/13/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Gravy

Quote# 24670

[On the theory that world-renowned demolitions experts Controlled Demolitions Inc. were involved in a conspiracy in Oklahomy City in 1995 and on 9/11]

It is of considerable mention that CDI presided over the clean-up of Oklahoma City, and this is important because there is essentially undeniable evidence that there were multiple explosives found in the Murrah building (which I can link you to). So it seems likely to me that if elements of CDI were involved with a cover-up then, they would do the same now. Their expertise in controlled demolitions is not in question, but their credibility on post-explosive analysis or their honesty is as far as I'm concerned.

Robo, Loose Change 0 Comments [4/13/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Gravy

Quote# 24671

It is now interesting to note that the WTC complex stored $160 billion of gold and precious metals. Thats a lot of metal, dump trucks worth of gold. In fact a dump truck full of gold was found by the teams at ground zero. Where on earth did this truck come from? Did someone in all the confusion decide to grab a dump truck and somehow manage to fill it with gold before driving off (to under building 5). Out of the $160 billion of gold and precious metals stored only $430 was recovered. I would speculate that tunnel access was organised for the CD team and dump trucks full of explosives were driven in underground over the weekend. Then after the first tower was hit and certain explosions were set off in the basement these very same dump trucks rolled in via the tunnel access to fill up with gold and drive off under building five to who knows? One dump truck was slow or got held up on the way out and the guys driving it bailed out, upwards away from the huge underground charges timed to blow when the south tower collapsed. Sounds like the plot of a James Bond film but the evidence supports it.

Didga1133, Loose Change 6 Comments [4/13/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Gravy

Quote# 24672

I don't believe for one second that there wasn't a plane that hit the WTC, but there is a thread on here where a video is posted of a silhouette of the plane hitting where the plane looks a ton like Air Force One.

PeteLI, Loose Change 1 Comments [4/13/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 6
Submitted By: Gravy

Quote# 24673

The most accurate characterization of my position is "the plane missed the south tower". I have offered evidence to support it. Is there "evidence" to the contrary? Yes. Could it be bogus? Yes. With total control of the MSM, wouldn't it be cheaper and more reliable to create the fiction that the plane hit the south tower, rather than risk flying a 767-type drone into NYC? I believe so.

ke Ono Klast, Loose Change 2 Comments [4/13/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Gravy

Quote# 24674

I think it is foolish to dismiss any theory, no matter how ridiculous it might appear at first sight, without looking into it (after all schoolkids came to their teachers and told them what's going to happen on 9/11, doesn't seem like a ridiculous theory now).

MoreLikeNo, Loose Change 3 Comments [4/13/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Gravy

Quote# 24675

[On debris blowing in front of WTC 2]
My guess is that the target is being "painted with a laser".

This technology is common with the precision smart bombs used over the last decade.

I have seen this many times and each time I watch it, can find no other explanation.

I do not believe it is faked.

LondonEye, Loose Change 2 Comments [4/13/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Gravy

Quote# 24676

Scpetics dont have a leg to stand on

After reading several of the major UFO cases:

The 1942 'Battle of Los Angeles
Betty and Barney Hill Abduction Case
Travis Walton Abduction Case
The Shag Harbour Incident

(Just to name a few)

how can one refute presents of alien/UFO ?, i can understand being extremely cautious not to back a case that mite be a hoax. BUT when you have Army anti-aircraft batteries firing nearly 2,000 rounds of 12 pound of high explosive shells in full view of hundreds of thousands of residents thats abit hard to pass off as swap gas or Venus. So scpetics please by all means deny the existence alien/UFO, BUT dont say its "cause there is just no hard proof".

helium3, AboveTopSecret 0 Comments [4/13/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: CousinTed

Quote# 24677

Now, take control of the video progress button and make the plane go in and out of the tower slowly several times and then quickly, all the while paying attention to the relative distance between the main wingtips and the tail wingtips. You'll notice that the distance between the 2 sets of wingtips never changes as the plane enters the tower even thought the wingroots which hold the wings in place have long since been destroyed in the tower. This is an absolute impossibility. This 'collision' or entry into the tower looks totally photoshopped.

TheQuest, Loose Change 3 Comments [4/13/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Gravy

Quote# 24678

Many people question the Pentagon eyewitnesses yet only a few question the photographic evidence from the 2nd tower 'plane strike'. I find this highly illogical.

The perps had to had spent MILLIONS on planting demo charges in 2 towers and WTC7, rigging explosives/plane/missle/whatever for the pentagon, shipped the steel from the towers to China, fake Osama and Zarqawi videos and on and on.....

TheQuest, Loose Change 1 Comments [4/13/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Submitted By: Gravy

Quote# 24679

Here, again, is one example of video fakery that can be verified by anyone - In the documentary 9/11: In Plane Site at 28:00, the plane approaches the south tower at about 1/4 of the speed that we see at 10:23 in the same documentary - HOW CAN THIS BE? The widely-stated approach speed is 530 mph, even though those who know say a 767 CANNOT fly that fast at low altitude. Could we unintentionally be supporting one of the central tenets of the "Official Story" if we accept a high-speed approach? How about if we accept the physics-defying behavior of the plane in the CNN "Butterplane" south tower impact? How can we IGNORE videos of Fox goons spreading the "Official Story" at Ground Zero almost immediately, despite eyewitnesses to the contrary? Why should we take VIDEO FAKERY off the table when we discuss 9/11 here?

Ike Ono Klast, Loose Change 0 Comments [4/13/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Gravy