Charlotte Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Iv only met her dad 4th time and I'm slowling getting to know him So - which meeting did he divulge all of NASA's top secrets - the first one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Septic Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 more info please ie : last case of carpet bombing, what weapons have left lasting effect in Iraq, other than the current war what other countries have been invaded? be specific please. Please keep answers current as everything up to and including Vietnam counts as history. So you made a vague statement and now you want a more specific one from Imi? Lol. As for Scott M and Jazz- you guys are hilarious. Keep it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cje001 Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Can i throw this one in here please - forget the twin towers etc for a second.... - The Pentagon - what happened there - this 'Plane' hit the pentagon creating a pretty small hole, no marks to a perfectly mown lawn nearby, no CCTV etc etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Anyone who thinks it was all a conspiracy should watch this before commenting further in this thread or any others on the subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 - The Pentagon - what happened there - this 'Plane' hit the pentagon creating a pretty small hole, no marks to a perfectly mown lawn nearby, no CCTV etc etc a trained missile, or an explosives-laden small military plane, obviously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbourner Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Can i throw this one in here please - forget the twin towers etc for a second.... - The Pentagon - what happened there - this 'Plane' hit the pentagon creating a pretty small hole, no marks to a perfectly mown lawn nearby, no CCTV etc etc It only created a small hole because the Pentagon is the headquarters for the department of defense rather than an office block, and isn't 110 stories high. Not exactly comparable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I thought it was accepted that a missile hit the pentagon? There's a video of it somewhere? If the pictures of the pentagon are legit then there's no way a plane hit that building. Not even an engine from a plane hit that building as the damage would be FAR greater. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustGav Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I was involved with Nasa as well, well... when I say involved, I mean I walked past the launch pad... when I say I walked past... I mean I have thought about it..... well okay, I have a picture on my wall that I walk past.....well... I don't even have a picture, I have a screen shot...... Have you seen my dad's holiday snaps of his holiday back in 70's.... http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/574950main_image_2020_800-600.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I thought it was accepted that a missile hit the pentagon? There's a video of it somewhere? If the pictures of the pentagon are legit then there's no way a plane hit that building. Not even an engine from a plane hit that building as the damage would be FAR greater. This: Anyone who thinks it was all a conspiracy should watch this before commenting further in this thread or any others on the subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Awww come on, that's an hour long!!! My attention span isn't that high, I need high input in short bursts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Oh just watch the 'experts' on Youtube instead then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 This: I can't watch videos at work. But I don't think it was conspiracy. Now what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I can't watch videos at work. But I don't think it was conspiracy. Now what? Don't stick your tongue out at me. It's rude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Oh just watch the 'experts' on Youtube instead then I don't watch any of that drivvel either. The problem with most of the people who make these videos is that they have already made their minds up and so can only see things that point to their way of thinking. That's the same for both sides of the divide though. To be truely impartial someone completely, totally and utterly impartial should be investigating it. I don't think anyone in that situation has yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I don't watch any of that drivvel either. The problem with most of the people who make these videos is that they have already made their minds up and so can only see things that point to their way of thinking. That's the same for both sides of the divide though. To be truely impartial someone completely totally and utterly impartial should be investigating it. I don't think anyone in that situation has yet. Seriously, when you get an hour watch the BBC link I posted. It's exactly that, and takes five people who are 'truth movement' types to America to try and prove it wasn't a conspiracy. They meet structural engineers who know exactly why the buildings fell down vertically, meet people who explain the Pentagon thing etc etc. They even had one 'non-believer' actually land a light aircraft after 30 mins training to prove the hijackers were able to carry out their plan in the first place. I have to say I was sceptical, but the more I watch the less I believe anything untoward happened (other than a terrorist attack of course). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I was involved with Nasa as well, well... when I say involved, I mean I walked past the launch pad... when I say I walked past... I mean I have thought about it..... well okay, I have a picture on my wall that I walk past.....well... I don't even have a picture, I have a screen shot...... Have you seen my dad's holiday snaps of his holiday back in 70's.... http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/574950main_image_2020_800-600.jpg Wow, you're Dad's the man!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Seriously, when you get an hour watch the BBC link I posted. It's exactly that, and takes five people who are 'truth movement' types to America to try and prove it wasn't a conspiracy. Hmm, I'll give it a go. However, the only thing I don't like about that statement is that they are trying to prove it wasn't a conspiracy. I don't want anyone to try and do anything other than find the truth. They shouldn't be trying to prove it is or is not a conspiracy. Conspiracy theorists and anti-government types are trying to prove it is a conspiracy. That's enough reason to discredit just about everything they say. The same must be said for the other side of the divide in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz6002 Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Hmm, I'll give it a go. However, the only thing I don't like about that statement is that they are trying to prove it wasn't a conspiracy. I don't want anyone to try and do anything other than find the truth. They shouldn't be trying to prove it is or is not a conspiracy. Conspiracy theorists and anti-government types are trying to prove it is a conspiracy. That's enough reason to discredit just about everything they say. The same must be said for the other side of the divide in my opinion. OK, poor choice of words but it's about disproving what these people believe, not proving categorically that Bin Laden orchestrated it etc. Each of the five people has specific beliefs about what happened which have been picked up on the 'net. The programme goes about showing them that their beliefs aren't entirely plausable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_b Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I don't have an hour to spare right now, but I'll watch that programme later. Thanks Gaz. I see Scott's point, and there's a high risk that whoever makes a documentary or writes a newspaper article about it will have already formed their opinion, and their work will be little more than propaganda to support their view. I can't comment on the iPlayer programme because I haven't seen it yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbourner Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Hmm, I'll give it a go. However, the only thing I don't like about that statement is that they are trying to prove it wasn't a conspiracy. I don't want anyone to try and do anything other than find the truth. They shouldn't be trying to prove it is or is not a conspiracy. Did you look at Cliffs video posted earlier? The 3rd part is good. the 'host' is a bit of a plum but the scientist dude he's talking to seems pretty impartial and willing to let peer review run on his workings (if anyone were willing to). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Did you look at Cliffs video posted earlier? The 3rd part is good. the 'host' is a bit of a plum but the scientist dude he's talking to seems pretty impartial and willing to let peer review run on his workings (if anyone were willing to). I watched the first part, didn't get as far as part 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I see Scott's point, and there's a high risk that whoever makes a documentary or writes a newspaper article about it will have already formed their opinion, and their work will be little more than propaganda to support their view. I can't comment on the iPlayer programme because I haven't seen it yet. It's the same reason that things from the actual day have been misconstrued - not necessarily by the reporters but perhaps 'bad' reporting, one such example relating to a conspiracy theory of the bombings on 7/7:- (taken from a times article http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article6187493.ece) Ultimately all such reports could be sourced to one place, a Guardian journalist called Mark Honigsbaum. In June 2006 Honigsbaum gave an account of how the idea of the blast from below had come into existence. On July 7 he had been sent by his newsdesk to Edgware Road, the site of one of the explosions, where among scenes of complete confusion he had managed to grab quick interviews with some of the survivors as they left a makeshift triage centre in a local store. Two of them told Honigsbaum that when the bomb exploded, the covering on the floor of the carriage had “raised up”. With no time to check what the passengers had said, Honigsbaum phoned in an audio report to The Guardian, which was used on its website. It was Honigsbaum who added the elaboration that it “was believed” that the explosion had happened underneath the train, and “some passengers described how the tiles, the covers on the floors of the train, flew up, raised up”. After filing Honigsbaum spoke at greater length to more survivors who had been much closer to the blast, and they told him that the explosion had happened inside the carriage. His earlier report, admitted Honigsbaum, had been “flawed”, but unfortunately “my comments, disseminated over the internet where they could be replayed ad nauseam, were already taking on a life of their own”. Ruefully, the reporter concluded that in the old days of telephones and books it would have taken some time for rumour to paint itself full of tongues, but today “such networks can be created instantaneously with a few clicks of a mouse”. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooter Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 more info please ie : lwhat weapons have left lasting effect in Iraq I think I read something about 'depleted uranium shells' (but still radioactive) being an issue.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Septic Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I think I read something about 'depleted uranium shells' (but still radioactive) being an issue.......... You could also cite the use of 'daisy cutter' bombs (but they were used in Afghanistan), Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 I think I read something about 'depleted uranium shells' (but still radioactive) being an issue.......... Not as bad as the miles of unmapped mines laid by these countrys You could also cite the use of 'daisy cutter' bombs (but they were used in Afghanistan), Hardly comes under the heading of carpet bombing 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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.