Paid Members DJ Kris Posted September 29, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted September 29, 2011 Having watched the Jessie Ventura Conspiracy Theory's on 9/11 Pentagon, that's one that currently I find interesting. It seems odd to me that the FBI (?) confiscated all the CCTV that would have caught it and only released footage that barely showed anything. I don't get why they would do that? However, if a plane didn't really hit that building I have real trouble understanding what happened to the plane and it's passengers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dynamite Duane Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 (edited) Having watched the Jessie Ventura Conspiracy Theory's on 9/11 Pentagon, that's one that currently I find interesting. It seems odd to me that the FBI (?) confiscated all the CCTV that would have caught it and only released footage that barely showed anything. I don't get why they would do that? However, if a plane didn't really hit that building I have real trouble understanding what happened to the plane and it's passengers. Ian R Crane in one of his talks shown on Edge Media puts forward that a plane was seen flying near the Pentagon. So some people have witnessed one in the air, yet the menoeuvre needed for the plane to have crashed into the Pentagon at the angle and height by this plane is impossible, so he claims. Also people located in closer vicinity didn't witness a plane. This is a little tricky clearly explain in just text. Anyone else watch this on Edge Media care to comment? (I don't think the video is available on youtube) Â Back to Charlie Veitch: Paradigm Shift TV aired a docufilm - Into The Fire, about the Toronto G20 protest from 2010. It focusses on C.Veitch filming at the protest and being arrested and his terrible treatment. What he endured garnered him hero status to many. The video also shows what appears to be agent provocateurs and Black Bloc Anarchists causing mayhem and destruction in the city. I'm urged to question why Charlie being aware of this and being known as a peaceful and lawful rebel would later at the demo held March 26, 2011 in London choose to align himself with the Black Bloc Anarchists and in fact declare himself an Anarchist? Â Into The Fire A Toronto G20 Film (Pt.1of9) - it's an excellent film by the way Edited September 29, 2011 by Dynamite Duane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dynamite Duane Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 The problem here is the buildings were built in the 60s to the withstand the impact of a Boeing airliner colliding into them, 9/11 is the first case of a building being destroyed by a plane hitting it with the steel girders melting instead part of the structure still standing. Strictly speaking, the towers weren't designed to withstand any aircraft impact; rather the lead designer took it upon himself to carry out a post-design assessment as a result of publicised safety related complaints raised by a rival property owner. It's believed it was a pretty simple analysis, based on initial impact, considering speeds of under 200mph, and taking no account of fuel and the effects from widespread fires. Â Even if a detailed assessment was an integral feature of the design, carried out by specialists rather than a plain old Structural Engineer, it goes without saying that in the 60s, technology related to Fire Engineering was a whole lot more primitive than it is today. Added to the fact that these designs were so innovative at the time, it would have been practically impossible for anyone to say with any certainty how the buildings would behave in such a scenario. Â 9/11 is the first case of a building being destroyed by a plane hitting it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 So the possibility that Charlie Veitch has, as a result of being presented with new information, had a genuine change of mind over this... that's inconceivable to you? Â Â Also... I'll take Popular Mechanics' opinion over any theorist on the internet every time. Your criteria for who you do and don't believe is absolutely arse about face. Â But, come on, please let's move on from the obvious non-story of 9/11. All normal, sane people will need some proper evidence before they believe anything was dodgy about the event, and the Duanes and Keelans of this world wouldn't believe it was genuine if they were transported back in time and put on one of the fucking planes. So let's move on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted September 29, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted September 29, 2011 Duane's not taken Veitch's heel turn at all well, has he? He must feel like I did when HBK stuck Jannetty through the window. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Duane's not taken Veitch's heel turn at all well, has he? He must feel like I did when HBK stuck Jannetty through the window. But was it Jannetty though? I read that it was a actually a sphere from space and Jannetty was superimposed afterwards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Surf Digby Posted September 29, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted September 29, 2011 Ian R Crane in one of his talks shown on Edge Media puts forward that a plane was seen flying near the Pentagon. So some people have witnessed one in the air, yet the menoeuvre needed for the plane to have crashed into the Pentagon at the angle and height by this plane is impossible, so he claims. Also people located in closer vicinity didn't witness a plane. This is a little tricky clearly explain in just text. Anyone else watch this on Edge Media care to comment? (I don't think the video is available on youtube) Ian R Crane is neither a Pentagon eye witness nor a pilot or aerospace engineer. Eyewitnesses saw planes. Pilots and aerospace engineers say it was possible. Â Back to Charlie Veitch: Paradigm Shift TV aired a docufilm - Into The Fire, about the Toronto G20 protest from 2010. It focusses on C.Veitch filming at the protest and being arrested and his terrible treatment. What he endured garnered him hero status to many. The video also shows what appears to be agent provocateurs and Black Bloc Anarchists causing mayhem and destruction in the city. I'm urged to question why Charlie being aware of this and being known as a peaceful and lawful rebel would later at the demo held March 26, 2011 in London choose to align himself with the Black Bloc Anarchists and in fact declare himself an Anarchist? Â Into The Fire A Toronto G20 Film (Pt.1of9) - it's an excellent film by the way I can't believe the mainstream media has gotten to you, Duane. Â Charlie has been an anarchist (of the no boundries, everyone's equal, no laws, no heirachy type) ever since he left the bank. He also did not align himself with the Black Bloc on March 26th. He was interviewed by ITV, who then played his words over footage of Black Bloc smashing up stores. If you watch Charlie's own footage - or that of those who were with him - you'll see he does his usual "I'm just in here browsing, like all the other shoppers. You'd like me to leave? Is that a formal request? Okay then, I'll leave." routine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur B. Funky Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 David Icke is on my radio show this Sunday (therockshow.co.uk) from 11am ... take a listen, hear what the man has to say. Then opine away ... there are always at least 2 sides to every story. Â Yours. Mine. Theirs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Surf Digby Posted September 30, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted September 30, 2011 David Icke is on my radio show this Sunday (therockshow.co.uk) from 11am ... take a listen, hear what the man has to say. Then opine away ... there are always at least 2 sides to every story. Yours. Mine. Theirs. Everybody. Everybody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matbro1984 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Duane's not taken Veitch's heel turn at all well, has he? He must feel like I did when HBK stuck Jannetty through the window. But was it Jannetty though? I read that it was a actually a sphere from space and Jannetty was superimposed afterwards. Outstanding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 David Icke is on my radio show this Sunday (therockshow.co.uk) from 11am ... take a listen, hear what the man has to say. Then opine away ... there are always at least 2 sides to every story. Yours. Mine. Theirs.  Yes. One side is that he used to be a professional footballer; the other is that he's now a professional mental case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dynamite Duane Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 Ian R Crane in one of his talks shown on Edge Media puts forward that a plane was seen flying near the Pentagon. So some people have witnessed one in the air, yet the menoeuvre needed for the plane to have crashed into the Pentagon at the angle and height by this plane is impossible, so he claims. Also people located in closer vicinity didn't witness a plane. This is a little tricky clearly explain in just text.Anyone else watch this on Edge Media care to comment? (I don't think the video is available on youtube)Ian R Crane is neither a Pentagon eye witness nor a pilot or aerospace engineer. Eyewitnesses saw planes. Pilots and aerospace engineers say it was possible.Back to Charlie Veitch:Paradigm Shift TV aired a docufilm - Into The Fire, about the Toronto G20 protest from 2010. It focusses on C.Veitch filming at the protest and being arrested and his terrible treatment. What he endured garnered him hero status to many. The video also shows what appears to be agent provocateurs and Black Bloc Anarchists causing mayhem and destruction in the city. I'm urged to question why Charlie being aware of this and being known as a peaceful and lawful rebel would later at the demo held March 26, 2011 in London choose to align himself with the Black Bloc Anarchists and in fact declare himself an Anarchist? Into The Fire A Toronto G20 Film (Pt.1of9) - it's an excellent film by the way I can't believe the mainstream media has gotten to you, Duane. Charlie has been an anarchist (of the no boundries, everyone's equal, no laws, no heirachy type) ever since he left the bank. He also did not align himself with the Black Bloc on March 26th. He was interviewed by ITV, who then played his words over footage of Black Bloc smashing up stores. If you watch Charlie's own footage - or that of those who were with him - you'll see he does his usual "I'm just in here browsing, like all the other shoppers. You'd like me to leave? Is that a formal request? Okay then, I'll leave." routine.No the MSM hasn't gotten to me, I just think he's a silly boy. There is one of Charlie's own videos recruiting people to join Black Bloc prior to March 26. Fair enough having Anarchism as a political philosophy but with Charlie it was like he was playing a role in film, living out a fantasy, donning the balaclava one moment then showing his face live on TV the next. If you have nothing to hide why hide your face? He was on Facebook, then off it, then back on it again. No I've not the taken the heel turn well Really though I'm just to make sense of the guy, I do still agree with him on some of what he stands for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 it was like he was playing a role in film, living out a fantasy,Imagine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted October 1, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted October 1, 2011 No I've not the taken the heel turn well Really though I'm just to make sense of the guy, I do still agree with him on some of what he stands for.Why? Whichever side he's on, he's a completely unfunny and irrelevant cock and he isn't worth anyone wasting their time and thoughts on. If losing the likes of Veitch from your cause is really that much of a catastrophe then the tinfoil hat mob is even more desperate than I thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dynamite Duane Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 (edited) So the possibility that Charlie Veitch has, as a result of being presented with new information, had a genuine change of mind over this... that's inconceivable to you?Also... I'll take Popular Mechanics' opinion over any theorist on the internet every time. Your criteria for who you do and don't believe is absolutely arse about face.But, come on, please let's move on from the obvious non-story of 9/11. All normal, sane people will need some proper evidence before they believe anything was dodgy about the event, and the Duanes and Keelans of this world wouldn't believe it was genuine if they were transported back in time and put on one of the fucking planes. So let's move on.Ah well I'll give up on waiting on that CCTV evidence etc promised then, since the almighty Loki declares 9/11 discussion officially over When it comes down it, a lot of this is about affinity - some members have decided I'm an idiot and accept the official story because "they wouldn't do that!" then knock whatever comes from an unofficial source even if I'm quoting scientific minded people, who are scholars, engineers, architects etc. (Granted Ian R Crane isn't of that school, he's right-brain-thinker who sees the patterns and joins together all the dots.) Why should Popular Mechanics be any more an authority on this topic than the hundreds of architects, engineers, pilots, scholars etc who do not support what we are officially told? Oh it's because they're quoted in the MSM, so it must be accurate and correct. And what you're saying is all what we're told on Fox, CNN, BBC is true? Oh crikey I better switch over from Russia Today and Press TV and start watching those news channels, I've been missing out! This 9/11 discussion is just like the political tribalism on Question Time - they aren't going to agree on much because they're stuck in that mind set of left v right, that doesn't solve a problem to meet in the middle what so ever. It's a battle of egos basically with no conclusion except for one ego always trying to win. For that reason I'm out Edited October 1, 2011 by Dynamite Duane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.