Hmmmmm.
My initial thoughts were "utter bullshit", as there seemed to be some serious unfounded conjecture and outright bollocks in the first 10 minutes or so.
But watching the whole thing was fairly enlightening. Only fairly enlightening, as I've heard most of these conspiracy theories before in some way or another.
I'm not sure where I stand really. I think my heart goes with the bullshit theory.
But I have to pick Bob up on his "Zero evidence of an airplane hitting the pentagon" comment.
Maybe not in that documentary (although in fact there was evidence), but being as it is an entirely biased conspiracy theory, you're not preseneted with all the facts surrounding the situation. For evidence of an airplane (a jet airliner containing passengers) hitting the Pentagon, try this for starters:
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/bart.html
Or did all those people imagine it?
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Fairy wrote: [/QUOTENAME]And what would be the advantage the Bush administration has derived from this so-called conspiracy???
Guys, you're so busy applying political correctness that you seem to lose common sense.
Be careful though. Being critical of our own leaders is OK and necessary. Being understanding with terrorists is another thing. They will not return the favor.
[/QUOTE]
Fairy, I know you're fed up with the criticism of the far left, but there's definitely something wrong as well with the far right, and that's exactly how we can define the policies of the Bush administration.
Personally I've found that the majority of moderate conservative and liberals seem to CARE about their people, but there's no doubt that the extreme sides of politics only care about remaining in power and pushing their own political agendas.
The 9/11 Comission (a U.S. non-partisan government organization created to find out the flaws and causes that led to the attacks of Septmeber 11th) found that Bush and the members of his administration received a memo in August 6th 2001 warning of possible terrorist attacks involving hijacked planes. The memo was ignored, and Bush went on vacation to his Texas ranch without any worries. It wouldn't surprise me if the Bush administration actually was willing to allow a terrorist attack in order to manipulate America's thirst for revenge to convince people that the invasion of a nation that was no threat to this country was justified.
After Katrina it's become more than obvious that Americans (especially the poor and working class) are the least of the concerns of the Bush administration.
Guys, you're so busy applying political correctness that you seem to lose common sense.
Be careful though. Being critical of our own leaders is OK and necessary. Being understanding with terrorists is another thing. They will not return the favor.
[/QUOTE]
Fairy, I know you're fed up with the criticism of the far left, but there's definitely something wrong as well with the far right, and that's exactly how we can define the policies of the Bush administration.
Personally I've found that the majority of moderate conservative and liberals seem to CARE about their people, but there's no doubt that the extreme sides of politics only care about remaining in power and pushing their own political agendas.
The 9/11 Comission (a U.S. non-partisan government organization created to find out the flaws and causes that led to the attacks of Septmeber 11th) found that Bush and the members of his administration received a memo in August 6th 2001 warning of possible terrorist attacks involving hijacked planes. The memo was ignored, and Bush went on vacation to his Texas ranch without any worries. It wouldn't surprise me if the Bush administration actually was willing to allow a terrorist attack in order to manipulate America's thirst for revenge to convince people that the invasion of a nation that was no threat to this country was justified.
After Katrina it's become more than obvious that Americans (especially the poor and working class) are the least of the concerns of the Bush administration.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Bohardy-har-har wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Maybe not in that documentary (although in fact there was evidence), but being as it is an entirely biased conspiracy theory, you're not preseneted with all the facts surrounding the situation. For evidence of an airplane (a jet airliner containing passengers) hitting the Pentagon, try this for starters:
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/bart.html
Or did all those people imagine it?[/QUOTE]
I will never believe "eyewitness accounts" before I believe scientific evidence. I have yet to hear of a scientist coming forth with "evidence" to disprove what has been suggested here. We shall see what the future brings.
People's words are not evidence. At the moment, there are no pictures or videos of this airplane. There are cameras watching the pentagon at ALL TIMES. Not one of them has provided a picture of an airplane, or a part of something that can be proven to be from an airplane.
The documentary gives scientific evidence that it is entirely impossible, and even shows how this evidence was covered up. What more do you need?
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/bart.html
Or did all those people imagine it?[/QUOTE]
I will never believe "eyewitness accounts" before I believe scientific evidence. I have yet to hear of a scientist coming forth with "evidence" to disprove what has been suggested here. We shall see what the future brings.
People's words are not evidence. At the moment, there are no pictures or videos of this airplane. There are cameras watching the pentagon at ALL TIMES. Not one of them has provided a picture of an airplane, or a part of something that can be proven to be from an airplane.
The documentary gives scientific evidence that it is entirely impossible, and even shows how this evidence was covered up. What more do you need?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
I will never believe "eyewitness accounts" before I believe scientific evidence. I have yet to hear of a scientist coming forth with "evidence" to disprove what has been suggested here. We shall see what the future brings.[/QUOTE]
I don't have the time to watch this, so figure me in advance, Bob:
But who are the scientists bringing forth the evidence? What agenda do they have? Are they people who just want some time on camera? I say this because it seems that you are ready to accept what they say, but I see no critical discussion of the source.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
People's words are not evidence.[/QUOTE]
Yes, they are. A great many important and historical works are derived solely from people's words, and not from science. But, as with any other source (including science), you have to be critical of what they say.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
At the moment, there are no pictures or videos of this airplane. There are cameras watching the pentagon at ALL TIMES. Not one of them has provided a picture of an airplane, or a part of something that can be proven to be from an airplane.
[/QUOTE]
Are you sure about that? I seem to recall seeing stills from a camera that caught it. The problem is that the camera only took pictures (a frame second, or something like that), and not a video.
I wish I could remember where I saw that, but I'm dubious of the claim no film of the vent exists.
I will never believe "eyewitness accounts" before I believe scientific evidence. I have yet to hear of a scientist coming forth with "evidence" to disprove what has been suggested here. We shall see what the future brings.[/QUOTE]
I don't have the time to watch this, so figure me in advance, Bob:
But who are the scientists bringing forth the evidence? What agenda do they have? Are they people who just want some time on camera? I say this because it seems that you are ready to accept what they say, but I see no critical discussion of the source.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
People's words are not evidence.[/QUOTE]
Yes, they are. A great many important and historical works are derived solely from people's words, and not from science. But, as with any other source (including science), you have to be critical of what they say.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
At the moment, there are no pictures or videos of this airplane. There are cameras watching the pentagon at ALL TIMES. Not one of them has provided a picture of an airplane, or a part of something that can be proven to be from an airplane.
[/QUOTE]
Are you sure about that? I seem to recall seeing stills from a camera that caught it. The problem is that the camera only took pictures (a frame second, or something like that), and not a video.
I wish I could remember where I saw that, but I'm dubious of the claim no film of the vent exists.
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm
The best I could find quickly. Perhaps explains things a bit better.
EDIT
And this is what I was referring to:
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/03/07/gen.pentagon.pictures/index.html
The best I could find quickly. Perhaps explains things a bit better.
EDIT
And this is what I was referring to:
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/03/07/gen.pentagon.pictures/index.html
I saw the video, but even when the guy explained how the plane can only be seen for only one frame it's still very hard to spot.
Yet, if the Pentagon was hit by a missile (as conspiracy theorists suggest) where did the plane from flight 77 go?
Yet, if the Pentagon was hit by a missile (as conspiracy theorists suggest) where did the plane from flight 77 go?
Do you know there are people who actually believe man never landed on the moon? Would you waste even 30 minutes of your time to watch videos which seem to imply that??
I don't have 30 minutes to waste to watch this bull shit. But when I'm totally bored I will, maybe.
I don't have 30 minutes to waste to watch this bull shit. But when I'm totally bored I will, maybe.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Barry © wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I am not saying here that I believe in 9/11 conspiracy theories but it wouldn't be the first time a government has 'staged' something in order to attack another country. This happened before with the National Socialist regime in 1939. The SS shot some prisoners dressed them in German uniforms and then went to a radio station on the Polish border and killed those inside. They then proceeded to transmit in polish saying they were firing on the German soldiers inciting war. Of course in that case it was planned all along.
[/QUOTE]
Wow! I didn't know anyone outside Poland knew that part of the history :) ESPECIALLY as I found quite a large number of English people quite... ehm... ignorant when it gets to geography and/or history... Are you a historian Barry? Or just a hobby?
[/QUOTE]
Wow! I didn't know anyone outside Poland knew that part of the history :) ESPECIALLY as I found quite a large number of English people quite... ehm... ignorant when it gets to geography and/or history... Are you a historian Barry? Or just a hobby?
Why should Moore be informed about all this? Are all eye wittnesses lying? Why? Did all government workers stay home on Sept. 11th because they took part in the conspiracy? Where is all this scientific evidence? I mean, were you actually there to believe what he says? Why does what he claims constitute evidence?
How can such a man be credible? How can such a theory be credible?? Where did that missing plane go? Come on...I've read a whole lot about it. I can't waste more time watching rubbish which is called a documentary only by left-wingers.
And I'm so glad to see that even after such propaganda, Bush won anyway!
Ps. I didn't like Bush but all this crap has made me love him. Think about it. Maybe it is exactly this atttude which lead to his victory. There were many weakenesses of Bush's administration one could campain about. But using such lies, as clearly ridiculous as saying man never walked on the moon, eventually worked against Kerry. Too bad...Maybe Kerry would have made a good President.
How can such a man be credible? How can such a theory be credible?? Where did that missing plane go? Come on...I've read a whole lot about it. I can't waste more time watching rubbish which is called a documentary only by left-wingers.
And I'm so glad to see that even after such propaganda, Bush won anyway!
Ps. I didn't like Bush but all this crap has made me love him. Think about it. Maybe it is exactly this atttude which lead to his victory. There were many weakenesses of Bush's administration one could campain about. But using such lies, as clearly ridiculous as saying man never walked on the moon, eventually worked against Kerry. Too bad...Maybe Kerry would have made a good President.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Fairy wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Do you know there are people who actually believe man never landed on the moon? [/QUOTE]
Well kill me, but I actually am one of those weirdos...
How's the flag moving in the space, where's NO WIND? Just this one thing- someone will explain this to me and I will go back into believing. Seriously.
Well kill me, but I actually am one of those weirdos...
How's the flag moving in the space, where's NO WIND? Just this one thing- someone will explain this to me and I will go back into believing. Seriously.
Fenderek why don't you ask your question to NASA experts? I'm sure they will give you an answer.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Fenderek wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Fairy wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Do you know there are people who actually believe man never landed on the moon? [/QUOTE]
Well kill me, but I actually am one of those weirdos...
How's the flag moving in the space, where's NO WIND? Just this one thing- someone will explain this to me and I will go back into believing. Seriously.[/QUOTE]
Actually: I too think the moon landing was a propaganda hoax.
Well kill me, but I actually am one of those weirdos...
How's the flag moving in the space, where's NO WIND? Just this one thing- someone will explain this to me and I will go back into believing. Seriously.[/QUOTE]
Actually: I too think the moon landing was a propaganda hoax.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]John S Stuart wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir Archie Leach wrote: [/QUOTENAME]'Regardless of how patriotic we Brits feel about our country, Churchill knew that we would eventually get our arse kicked in Europe without US aid. Unfortunately, the US did not wish to get involved in a European war. By following the second course of action, he knew that the US would be dragged kicking and screaming into a world-wide conflict.'
Sorry to go off topic but I disagree totally. Had the US not got involved (militarily)the Allies would still have won, although it may have taken longer. Everybody always forgets the Russians and their overwhelming numbers.[/QUOTE]
Possible, but this does not negate the fact that Churchill knew about the attack before hand, and chose to keep that information secret because it would sting the US into the war.
That much you have to agree with. [/QUOTE]
I won't add anything more to what some people (Bob, Barry, Sonia, Caspar) have already said about this topic: I totally agree and, because of my bad use of English too, I couldn't have said it better myself...
About US involvement in WW2, I'd like to focus your attention on one key point (whose credibility has already been confirmed by many modern historians, as I was able to learn after a slighty deeper research): President Roosvelt was well aware of the future benefits that United States would have had if they had joined UK and USSR in their struggle against Germany, Italy and Japan, but the problem was to make American citizens swallow the involvement in a war they didn't feel as "theirs"...
A "casus belli" was needed: what better than a rain of Japanese Zeros over Pearl Harbour to raise public opinion's indignation and justify the declaration of war?
... Everybody is allowed to think what he wants, but still he won't convince me to believe that NOBODY had been able to see hundreds of Zeros approaching... Moreover, this would mean that the whole American intelligence service was made up of jerks who hadn't been able to come across anything about the actual Japanese plans...
Change the word "Japanese" with "Hijackers" and you'll have a reliable mirror of what I think about the whole matter...
Before you throw my body to rabid dogs, let me make one last point clear: I'm not saying that United States are the evil made country... It's just politics, you know: under this point of view, USA are neither better nor worse than any other country on Earth... I say this even if I'm far to be in the USA fan list...
All in all, though I'm known as one of the most cynical people in world's history, I'm just relying on what some quite famous one said almost sixty years ago...
... "One single death is a tragedy. One million deaths is statistic"...
Sorry for the space I've stolen: many compliments, though... It's for topics like this one which I sometimes feel the need to come back posting...
;)
Alberto
Sorry to go off topic but I disagree totally. Had the US not got involved (militarily)the Allies would still have won, although it may have taken longer. Everybody always forgets the Russians and their overwhelming numbers.[/QUOTE]
Possible, but this does not negate the fact that Churchill knew about the attack before hand, and chose to keep that information secret because it would sting the US into the war.
That much you have to agree with. [/QUOTE]
I won't add anything more to what some people (Bob, Barry, Sonia, Caspar) have already said about this topic: I totally agree and, because of my bad use of English too, I couldn't have said it better myself...
About US involvement in WW2, I'd like to focus your attention on one key point (whose credibility has already been confirmed by many modern historians, as I was able to learn after a slighty deeper research): President Roosvelt was well aware of the future benefits that United States would have had if they had joined UK and USSR in their struggle against Germany, Italy and Japan, but the problem was to make American citizens swallow the involvement in a war they didn't feel as "theirs"...
A "casus belli" was needed: what better than a rain of Japanese Zeros over Pearl Harbour to raise public opinion's indignation and justify the declaration of war?
... Everybody is allowed to think what he wants, but still he won't convince me to believe that NOBODY had been able to see hundreds of Zeros approaching... Moreover, this would mean that the whole American intelligence service was made up of jerks who hadn't been able to come across anything about the actual Japanese plans...
Change the word "Japanese" with "Hijackers" and you'll have a reliable mirror of what I think about the whole matter...
Before you throw my body to rabid dogs, let me make one last point clear: I'm not saying that United States are the evil made country... It's just politics, you know: under this point of view, USA are neither better nor worse than any other country on Earth... I say this even if I'm far to be in the USA fan list...
All in all, though I'm known as one of the most cynical people in world's history, I'm just relying on what some quite famous one said almost sixty years ago...
... "One single death is a tragedy. One million deaths is statistic"...
Sorry for the space I've stolen: many compliments, though... It's for topics like this one which I sometimes feel the need to come back posting...
;)
Alberto
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]John S Stuart wrote:
Actually: I too think the moon landing was a propaganda hoax.[/QUOTE]
I'm VERY disappointed John, that you've fallen for the load of old cobblers that is the Moon hoax landing conspiracy.
Starting in 1997, I actually spent about five or six years looking into the 'theories' and found them all severely lacking. The people who write books and produce videos on this subject do it for the notoriety and the money.
The extensive TV and Video footage of the Apollo missions could not be faked TODAY, let alone in the 1960s. Hours and hours of this footage, much of it filmed by the astronauts themselves, exists in the archives completely unedited. I own much of this material on DVD and the lunar orbital broadcasts are far too detailed to be anything but the real thing.
For a detailed discussion of this subject, I kindly suggest that any doubters fully peruse the following sites:
http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1137632105
http://www.clavius.org/
Actually: I too think the moon landing was a propaganda hoax.[/QUOTE]
I'm VERY disappointed John, that you've fallen for the load of old cobblers that is the Moon hoax landing conspiracy.
Starting in 1997, I actually spent about five or six years looking into the 'theories' and found them all severely lacking. The people who write books and produce videos on this subject do it for the notoriety and the money.
The extensive TV and Video footage of the Apollo missions could not be faked TODAY, let alone in the 1960s. Hours and hours of this footage, much of it filmed by the astronauts themselves, exists in the archives completely unedited. I own much of this material on DVD and the lunar orbital broadcasts are far too detailed to be anything but the real thing.
For a detailed discussion of this subject, I kindly suggest that any doubters fully peruse the following sites:
http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=1137632105
http://www.clavius.org/
I think Bob Braeunig gives a very good explantion of why people tend to believe in things like the Moon landing hoax:
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Why do people believe this stuff? [/QUOTENAME]
I am no psychologist, however I have seen and heard enough over the past years to recognize certain reoccurring personality traits in those professing to be hoax believers. Although there are varying degrees of each, I have come to categorize the hoax believers into two generalized types: the Confused and the Hardcore.
The Confused are average people who have seen or heard the claims of the hoax advocates on TV, the Internet, or from friends and associates. They usually lack the scientific knowledge or experience necessary to dispute the claims, so they begin to doubt the authenticity of the moon landings. Despite their doubts, these people tend to be open-minded and willing to listen to varying points of view. When giving the opportunity to study both sides of the argument, they usually agree the moon landings were real.
The Hardcore, on the other hand, are a completely different type of personality. They almost always exhibit strong paranoid tendencies with an extreme distrust and hatred of the U.S. government. Rather then allowing the evidence to speak for itself, they will often begin by assuming a hoax and then search for evidence to support that preconception. When they see something that looks suspicious they immediately accept it as proof of their belief. When someone attempts to offer an alternate explanation they dismiss it as a NASA lie. Any evidence that contradicts their belief is described as an attempt by the government to deceive us. They will say that anyone who believes in the moon landings has been brainwashed or is in denial. They are usually argumentative and often hostile.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Why do people believe this stuff? [/QUOTENAME]
I am no psychologist, however I have seen and heard enough over the past years to recognize certain reoccurring personality traits in those professing to be hoax believers. Although there are varying degrees of each, I have come to categorize the hoax believers into two generalized types: the Confused and the Hardcore.
The Confused are average people who have seen or heard the claims of the hoax advocates on TV, the Internet, or from friends and associates. They usually lack the scientific knowledge or experience necessary to dispute the claims, so they begin to doubt the authenticity of the moon landings. Despite their doubts, these people tend to be open-minded and willing to listen to varying points of view. When giving the opportunity to study both sides of the argument, they usually agree the moon landings were real.
The Hardcore, on the other hand, are a completely different type of personality. They almost always exhibit strong paranoid tendencies with an extreme distrust and hatred of the U.S. government. Rather then allowing the evidence to speak for itself, they will often begin by assuming a hoax and then search for evidence to support that preconception. When they see something that looks suspicious they immediately accept it as proof of their belief. When someone attempts to offer an alternate explanation they dismiss it as a NASA lie. Any evidence that contradicts their belief is described as an attempt by the government to deceive us. They will say that anyone who believes in the moon landings has been brainwashed or is in denial. They are usually argumentative and often hostile.
[/QUOTE]