Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 6 of 6 Posts

· Read Only
Joined
·
45,177 Posts
I took all the 9/11 questions to my father, an engineer, that builds nuclear facilities for a living. He knows a lot about things, such as reinforced concrete, how long it would take for a fire to weaken steel to the point where weight applied to it would cause it to fail, and a bunch of other things, such as nuclear bombs and their effect on structures, I mean some of the stuff he knows is beyond what happened at the World Trade Centers.

I asked him about the fire and the building, and the damage caused to it by the planes, and he said that it was definitely possible for the fuel, office fire to get hot enough to weaken the steel, especially when the howling winds that are present at such heights make the hole in the building, which essentially acts as a KILN. He also told me that the way the building fell was exactly how he would have expected it. Once a few floors' steel failed, the weight of all the above floors falling on floors below it would pancake exactly as we saw. I asked him about this years ago, so I forget all the specifics he gave me, but he said it was possible, and even gave me specific facts such as temperatures and the effect of wind on fire, physics. I believe him, and expert.

The problems that I have with 9/11 was that NORAD stood down, Cheney gave the order for the stand down, and supposedly the exact same scenario was being "practiced" at the exact same time 9/11 was taking place.

I think the building was damaged in the exact way it was said it did, and I believe it came down the exact way they said it did.

I just find some of the other strange things that happened that day to be completely fishy. Especially, a strange report on the news that I saw on 9/11 that said the last plane had been shot down by a jet, then a fighter pilot actually received a medal where he talked about shooting down the plane, and then I never heard another word about that on the news. Not to mention eye witnesses say they saw the jet as well. Next thing that I heard was that the passengers brought down the plane. While I know the official explanation sounds a heck of a lot better than the one I heard on the news report, I do find the sort of fishy as well.

I know the official explanation is a lot easier to swallow and personally makes my heart swell with pride, but I'm just not sure I can ever fully believe the official story on that one.

As far as JFK, its already been proven, physically, that one bullet did hit Kennedy through the back and chest, and traveled in a perfect straight line through to Governor Connally.

Connally was sitting much lower than Kennedy in the jump seat, and inches to the inside, because the jump seat had been created and put into the Limo. That's been proven. Connally was also turned to the right, and his body was twisted. That can be seen in the video. Its pretty much been proven that the bullet followed all normal laws of physics.

I don't believe there was a second shooter. Was Oswald the shooter, though? I honestly do not know. There is some evidence the the CIA and the failed Operation 40 guys could have had something to do with it. I also, don't believe Oswald was just some Lone Wolf that killed Kennedy all on his own. There were other things going on than just a Lone Wolf. He may or may not have been the shooter. If he was, I believe there were other people behind it. Other people that pushed him to do it.


Edited for spelling and clarity.
 

· Read Only
Joined
·
45,177 Posts
spector said:
Penn & Teller show exactly how JFK could've been shot:
Makes sense to me.

And aren't a bunch of pissed off muslims hijacking planes a big enough conspiracy? I doubt our government is competent enough to have pulled off something like that. They can't even deliver a letter properly.
Penn and Teller aren't the only ones that have proved that when a head is shot with that caliber, the head actually moves in the direction of the shot, due to the amount of physical matter leave the head from the exit wound. Back and to the left. The left comes from the fact that the exit wound was to the right of center. Its pure physics. Plain and simple.

Small entry wound, very little resistance, and then large exit wound, as matter is expelled out of the skull.

As far as the government pulling cover-ups, yes, some factions of our government are very good at cover ups. I don't think we should compare the post office to the CIA, DOJ or some of the other agencies within our government.

As a whole out government is very inefficient, but there are small groups within our government who don't have the large huge bureaucracies to work through that most of our government does. Mainly because what they do has basically no to poor bureaucratic oversight.
 

· Read Only
Joined
·
45,177 Posts
JiG said:
EJR914 said:
The problems that I have with 9/11 was that NORAD stood down, Cheney gave the order for the stand down, and supposedly the exact same scenario was being "practiced" at the exact same time 9/11 was taking place.

I think the building was damaged in the exact way it was said it did, and I believe it came down the exact way they said it did.

I just find some of the other strange things that happened that day to be completely fishy. Especially, a strange report on the news that I saw on 9/11 that said the last plane had been shot down by a jet, then a fighter pilot actually received a medal where he talked about shooting down the plane, and then I never heard another word about that on the news. Not to mention eye witnesses say they saw the jet as well. Next thing that I heard was that the passengers brought down the plane. While I know the official explanation sounds a heck of a lot better than the one I heard on the news report, I do find the sort of fishy as well.
OK, I'll play conspiracy theory:

NORAD was standing down so a missile could hit the pentagon..... Donnie Rumsfeld came out the day before 9/11 and said the pentagon had lost a lot of money. The next day, terrorists supposedly flew a plane into the pentagon and destroyed the computer that was to be audited for the loss of cash. Coincidence? I think not. The hole was too small at the pentagon nor were there any aircraft parts laying about. Plus, with all the high tech cameras at the pentagon, all we get is a horrible image that shows everything fine one moment, blew up the next.... why is there not pics of the aircraft on approach to hitting the pentagon?

I don't know if the government had its hand in the Trade Centers, but it looks like they (the real powers that be) knew it was going to happen and didn't let a crisis go to waste.

I think I've about heard it all from the official story all the way to the wildest evil conspiracy theory. I still don't know what to think, mainly because there's something that I see is extremely improbable and yet it happened before my eyes..... both towers came down perfectly like a controlled demolition. One coming down, pancaking each level below it, never toppling to any side, was pretty wild.... but the next went down the same way.... what are the odds? Why didn't during the collapse did weight not shift due to variances in damage, fire locations, etc. I think at least one should have leaned and toppled more. To me, that's the equivalent of lightning striking twice.

And then there's the fact that I read something back in 1994 that predicted a 9/11 type of event would happen in the near future (it had predicted late summer 1999) and that it would be your cue to watch government start stripping away your freedoms and rights. It happened, just 2 years after when the author thought it would. Just as soon as they (the powers that be) get their security cameras up, RFIDs, cripple your ability to travel by air, and have tag tracking/cell phone tracking/internet tracking in place, the gates will close and the Constitution dies. "But, but, but, we got guns, they'll never..... " Yes, they will. If another conspiracy theory is true, you're all drugged up on lithium and flouride to make you too docile and passive to do anything.....which may be true already considering how easily tea partiers were herded back onto the republican plantation.

All I have to say to everyone, is that none of us are given all the facts. There's agendas at work, butts being covered, etc. etc. You should be questioning events as they were told to you because quite simply, the government's story and many facts just don't jive.
I agree with most of what you said, ESPECIALLY the part when Donald Rumsfeld and out and said that there was 2.3 Trillion taxpayer dollars MISSING on 9/10/01, ONE DAY before 9/11 and SOMEHOW, the "plane" hit exactly where the accounting departments computers were, destroying them completely, and killing all the accountants in the Pentagon. I'm sorry, but that is just a little bit too much of a coincidence for me to ignore.

If anybody doesn't believe this happened, just go watch it for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLU ... re=related

Watch the 2nd video. Now do you believe that our government is not out of control. You try and find a mere 300 million and you will be intimidated into the ground.

I believe that was completely an enemy action to preserve itself. Was it a missile? Was it a plane? I honestly don't know. It didn't look like a plane hit the building, and it really didn't look to me like a plane crashed out in the country, either, but I'm no expert on either.

I do believe the buildings came down naturally, due to fire, weakened steel, and weight. My father builds reinforced buildings for a living, I am going to believe him, as he is basically an expert in that field, especially when it comes to steel, physics, structures, and damage. He's fairly smart.
 

· Read Only
Joined
·
45,177 Posts
I believe Oswald could have pulled off the shots, but I think there is probably a greater chance it was a true professional that pulled off those shots.

I've seen the shots recreated, and they seem extremely tough on a moving target. Its something you would most likely have to practice a lot to pull off.

The shots could have definitely been made in the time given. Its not like he was reloading a musket or something.

It just takes a very good shot.
 

· Read Only
Joined
·
45,177 Posts
spector said:
EJR914 said:
I believe Oswald could have pulled off the shots, but I think there is probably a greater chance it was a true professional that pulled off those shots.

I've seen the shots recreated, and they seem extremely tough on a moving target. Its something you would most likely have to practice a lot to pull off.

The shots could have definitely been made in the time given. Its not like he was reloading a musket or something.

It just takes a very good shot.
I would suggest that a marine who earned "sharpshooter" probably qualifies as a good shot/professional.
I never suggested that he wasn't a very good shot/professional. It just hitting a moving target, from that distance, and getting two good shot, including a very clean kill shot to the head, would probably take a little bit of practice.

If Oswald had practice a similar shot when he was in Russia, or somewhere else, I would have a lot better belief that he was the one who pulled off the shot. That's all I was saying. That is one of the most difficult shots I've ever heard of being pulled off. I will say that the fact the driver hit breaks, instead of speeding up when he heard the first two shots, pretty much put Kennedy's head up on a platter for an expert sharpshooter.

Believe me, I know how Marine's can shoot. I'm married to a girl who's father is a Marine. That guy can shoot from very great distances very accurately. He's a good shot, and he did not make sharpshooter status. I can only imagine how good a marine is who gets sharpshooter status.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top