View Full Version : OT..again...9/11 Pentagon Attack
Here is an interesting bit about the 9/11 Pentagon attack someone sent me a link to. Anyone else see this before? What has anyone heard about this? Is there anything to it or is it a crock? Whatcha think :scratch: ??????
http://www.elchulo.net/files/pentagon.swf
HAMC8112
10-10-2004, 14:23
The Hitler speech in the beginning doesnt convince me atall.
cyradis2003
10-10-2004, 14:26
O.O
wow - that was an eyeopener.
It is kind of amazing that you never did see pieces of the plane sticking out when you think back on it.
But then what happened to the plane and all the passengers that people say were lost? They had a list of names - they had greiving families ....
Power_Play
10-10-2004, 14:40
I have seen this one.
But hey, comming from outside america (The Netherlands) I'm already sceptic against anything the american propaganda machine can spill out over the world.
HAMC8112
10-10-2004, 14:53
I have seen this one.
But hey, comming from outside america (The Netherlands) I'm already sceptic against anything the american propaganda machine can spill out over the world.
Elaborate please, i feel we can get a good discussion going here.
I have seen this one.
But hey, comming from outside america (The Netherlands) I'm already sceptic against anything the american propaganda machine can spill out over the world.
Coming outside of America, I'm already sceptic of everything in the U.S -_-
Still luv all posters here :).
Nerf-Herder
10-10-2004, 15:14
link seems to be dead
what was it all about?
Grumble grumble I had the entire news cast from about 3 seconds after the first plane hittill well into the afternoon till my wife used the tape to record an episode of Friends.
Honestly i dont recall seeing an airplane in the WTC either. Its possible and this is my opinion that the heat of the planes burning melted them. The temperature was enough to melt the iron beams supporting the WTC and i doubt that planes are built to those specifics
Elaborate please, i feel we can get a good discussion going here.
Well...how about the invasion of Iraq? How about the fact that even Cheney has mistakingly blamed Saddam for 9/11? Just the obvious things about American Propeganda.
I don't know if I believe that but it was interesting...the most damning piece of evidence for that flash's argument was that pic of the hole. I don't know much but I'd think a plane would carve a bigger hole!
TheCerberus
10-10-2004, 16:39
That was interesting.
HAMC8112
10-10-2004, 16:48
Well...how about the invasion of Iraq? How about the fact that even Cheney has mistakingly blamed Saddam for 9/11? Just the obvious things about American Propeganda.
I don't know if I believe that but it was interesting...the most damning piece of evidence for that flash's argument was that pic of the hole. I don't know much but I'd think a plane would carve a bigger hole!
Well... what about the invasion of iraq?
Cheney made a mistake, so? it's not like the US did Sadam wrong or what do you mean to say? Remember the towns that were massacered with poison gas, those video's we saw were for real, unlike the video from above's post. It was on Sadams orders remember? The man killed 100.000's ppl, mutilated, murdered, *****, gassed etc... But the US is the great Satan and Sadam is k.
It doesnt surprice me that you are from Holland, i can hear the left wing influence in everything you say.
Edit: Ohh, your not from holland, or maybe you are, this was intended at the Dutch poster, sorry Turnips.
Yes, but Power_play orginally said "American Propeganda". They were right about him being a vicious leader, but they also said he was targeting the states with WMD attacks in the near future. And, the state of Iraq hasn't much improved with the invasion and occupation by the US...if you think it's gotten better you're lying to yourself. You can't make a country Democratic through force...that's not Democratic! He said Propeganda, the US propeganda is misleading and false in many cases, and the invasion of Iraq is the example I gave; enough said. And Left Wing??? Is questioning your gov't extreme Left Wing or are you supposed to swallow their garbage without questioning it?
Trithatol
10-10-2004, 17:24
The temperature was enough to melt the iron beams supporting the WTC
You realize the melting point of iron is about 2700 C. The fuel used by planes burns at about 700 C. The black smoke coming out of the building indicates that the fire was not hot enough to melt the beams. 700 C Fire melting 2700 C metal? Connect the dots folks, those planes DID NOT cause the buildings to callopse.
P.S. The melting and burning points listed above may be off by a bit due to the fact that it's off the top of my head, but ask any Chemistry teacher if you want EXACT numbers.
HAMC8112
10-10-2004, 17:40
Yes, but Power_play orginally said "American Propeganda". They were right about him being a vicious leader, but they also said he was targeting the states with WMD attacks in the near future. And, the state of Iraq hasn't much improved with the invasion and occupation by the US...if you think it's gotten better you're lying to yourself. You can't make a country Democratic through force...that's not Democratic! He said Propeganda, the US propeganda is misleading and false in many cases, and the invasion of Iraq is the example I gave; enough said. And Left Wing??? Is questioning your gov't extreme Left Wing or are you supposed to swallow their garbage without questioning it?
About propaganda, US propaganda serve's US interrests, what do you expect?
Tell me more clear please how removing a tyrant with force can make a country worse? It's worse now then before in Iraq? Well i suppose thats true in a way, the reason? Muslim bombs, not US policy! Yes muslim bombs that are trown with one purpose in mind: to prevent democraty in Iraq. Now that's something you cannot blame the US for right?
So if we cannot make a country democratic with force then i'll ask you: how do you achive democraty? Remember WW2, the US used force to make europe democratic again, remember? Are you gonna tell us that was a crime? Are you telling us that they should have asked Hitler to leave? MUAHAHAHA!
From your left wing propaganda spare us please.
Hitler's plan was world domination. Saddam's plans were...to be a vicious dictator.
Is that propeganda because according to the new, improved, true intelligence that's what Saddam had in mind. Muslim bombs?? Maybe because a lot of them don't want to be freed, what if Iraq came into the US with overpowering force and tried to change it for good. Would you sit down and give up?? NO, you'd resort to what any people do when they're significantly overpowered; guerilla tactics. Just because their beliefs differ from ours doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to live however they want. As far as I remember Iraqi territory isn't American!
I think both Iraqi's and American's are doing awful things, but the US was the one who invaded using an unproven reason which has been proven to be false. Plus, they had but a few real allies, and they're all backing out. Tony Blair's got no support, once he's out so are the Brits, and Poland, yes Poland, they left too.
If that was the same Pentagon clip I've seen before, it's been proven false.
http://www.snopes2.com/rumors/pentagon.htm
The Real Siggik
10-10-2004, 18:09
i think it was right taking saddam out of the way, but the way it was done was wrong ..... and i think the planes hit the wtc, since a plane traveling at that speed hitting a sky scraper ... the building cant stand for long after that hit, it doesent need to melt ....
0takuPryd3
10-10-2004, 18:14
I typed out a long response and I accidentally hit back...
So to sum up my post... the flash animation is fake and if you don't trust my unsupported statement then here's a link(http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm), Bush lied to gain support for the war in Iraq, there have been a lot of deaths for the benefit of Bush, and he still has a hold on about half of America, the majority of which is doubtless from the South/Midwest.
Trithatol
10-10-2004, 18:16
Siggick, there were melted beams found in the wreckage. No steel building in the history of the world has fallen due to fire. Buildings have burned for over five hours and still stood their ground. Not to mention the fact that the building fell at a faster rate then possible. Using the Law of Falling Bodies, discovered by Galileo, the buildings can fall in 9.1 seconds at the FASTEST. The north tower fell in 8.1 seconds. This is only possible via nuclear weapons! And the famous white smoke and debris that covered the people, ever wondered what that was? It was crystallized cement. It is not possible to crstallyze cement with that little heat (also shown by the black smoke.)
0takuPryd3
10-10-2004, 18:19
and i think the planes hit the wtc, since a plane traveling at that speed hitting a sky scraper ... the building cant stand for long after that hit, it doesent need to melt ....
Please. You think your understanding of the melting point of metals is better than qualified chemists and other experienced scientists? "Well, planes are big they probably blow stuff up when they hit them". Planes have hit skyscrapers in the past and like flight 11 and 175 one 9/11, they had quite an impact, but not necessarily a strong enough one to entirely demolish the towers. The planes on 9/11 must have had something extra to take down the towers. To me, it doesn't matter one bit whether the planes had bombs on them or not. The point is the trade towers were taken down, and I highly doubt Bush or any other American would organize an attack like that on their own country. It was terrorists, and they succeeded... Bush probably could have stopped it, but he didn't... get over it.
The Real Siggik
10-10-2004, 18:24
hehe easy champs i wasent saying it was some conspiracy i just sayd that the towers could probably fall down with out the melting ...
Trithatol
10-10-2004, 18:27
heh, not flaming you or anything, just trying to prove a few points
HAMC8112
10-10-2004, 18:43
Hitler's plan was world domination. Saddam's plans were...to be a vicious dictator.
Is that propeganda because according to the new, improved, true intelligence that's what Saddam had in mind. Muslim bombs?? Maybe because a lot of them don't want to be freed, what if Iraq came into the US with overpowering force and tried to change it for good. Would you sit down and give up?? NO, you'd resort to what any people do when they're significantly overpowered; guerilla tactics. Just because their beliefs differ from ours doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to live however they want. As far as I remember Iraqi territory isn't American!
I think both Iraqi's and American's are doing awful things, but the US was the one who invaded using an unproven reason which has been proven to be false. Plus, they had but a few real allies, and they're all backing out. Tony Blair's got no support, once he's out so are the Brits, and Poland, yes Poland, they left too.
Do you remember when Sadam invaded quwait? He controlled 35% off the oil in the world, if you think that fitted into his plan to be just a vicious diktator you are plainly naive.
They found no proof of doomsday weapons, what about the 35 tons, yes 35000 kilo's of sarin gas that are still unaccounted for? Or do you mean to tell me he didnt gas 1000's of ppl?
Muslim bombs because the ppl of Iraq dont want to be freed? Who is lieing to himself here? The bombs are trown mainly by shiite muslims, the ones that want to install an ayatholla regime, the ppl dont want to be freed my arse!
About the allies, the US has indeed few allies, the war on terrorism is indeed a hard road to commit to, its unpopular to say the least. Belgium gouvernement didnt want a part in it, why? Well its a bit strange to send soldiers to a strange and far away country to fight terrorists that have their headquarters in Brussels, the belgian capitol. Most of the worldterror groups have their headquarters in Brussels, they walk around here in possesion of belgian diplomatic passports. Now, i was already ashamed of being called a belgian so this dont change much for me.
And then to come back to the leftwing remark, it's very clear, Sadam was the chieftain in the Baath party. What is( or was ) the Baath party? It's the Iraqi socialist party. Do you really think that the Soviet Union would have given Sadam Scudmissile's if he wasnt a socialst?
You say both Iraq and the US are doing awfull things? First of all Iraq isnt doing anything, do not confuse terrorists with the legitimate gouvernement of Iraq.
The the awfull things the US is doing? Could you be more precies? Could you explain into somewhat detail what that is suppossed to be? And Please dont tell me about the horrifying things the prisonguards did to the Iraqi prisonors, because awfull as that was, its hardly US policy.
Hitler's plan was world domination.
I beg to differ, That was not Hitlers plan atall, Hitler wanted Russia, or more precies: the Soviet Union. But this is another discussion, maybe we can save this one for the next time. :lol:
Honestly i dont recall seeing an airplane in the WTC either. Its possible and this is my opinion that the heat of the planes burning melted them. The temperature was enough to melt the iron beams supporting the WTC and i doubt that planes are built to those specifics
there were plane parts scattered around everywhere, i vaguely remember seeing pictures of this.
You need to calm down.
I'm sure no one reading this board liked Saddam, but I'm almost as sure that no one outside America likes the way U.S is acting eg in Iraq.
Don't know what you've been taught, but just by taking a quick look at the history, you'll see that the U.S acting as the world police have only failed time after time. Can't really understand the way people are talking about September 11th, when the U.S have killed hunreds of thousands innocent civils themselves. It actually makes me sick sometimes.
I wonder how much money they've wasted for their stupid war. What if they would have used all the money to make the world a better place to live?
That's all. Peace, make love not war.
0takuPryd3
10-10-2004, 20:57
I wonder how much money they've wasted for their stupid war.
Hundreds of billions.
HAMC8112
10-10-2004, 21:35
You need to calm down.
I'm sure no one reading this board liked Saddam, but I'm almost as sure that no one outside America likes the way U.S is acting eg in Iraq.
Come on man talking generalisations like this doesnt say anything. Explain pls, how is the US acting in Iraq?
Don't know what you've been taught, but just by taking a quick look at the history, you'll see that the U.S acting as the world police have only failed time after time..
Hmm... WW1, WW2 come to mind iirc europeans at the time were very glad to policed by the US. Because the US restored freedom in Europe.
the U.S have killed hunreds of thousands innocent civils themselves.
When and where?
I wonder how much money they've wasted for their stupid war. What if they would have used all the money to make the world a better place to live?
Actualy removing a tyrant from power is making the world a better place.
That's all. Peace, make love not war.
Like Ceasar said: If you want peace, prepare for war.
MoUsE_WiZ
10-10-2004, 21:39
When and where?Not to jump in on the debate, and not to try and start another seperate debate, but the name 'Hiroshima' comes to mind.
Power_Play
10-10-2004, 21:42
Elaborate please, i feel we can get a good discussion going here.-Going to war under false pretenses.
-This flash (and all the video material I keep of that day) showing absolutely NO plane at the pentagon.
-US breaking the rules of some several conventions>
-US supporting Israël who are even worse in breaking those rules.
-US ignoring NATO rulings. (Are they even members? Or do they pretend?)
Should I continue?
Power_Play
10-10-2004, 21:44
Not to jump in on the debate, and not to try and start another seperate debate, but the name 'Hiroshima' comes to mind.Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan (not directly but do we remember exactly HOW the Taliban got power there? YES! US SUPPORT!)
Iraq (I please, don't tell me all those children there were iraqi soldiers)
Gaza? (not directly but in support of Israëls illegal occupation of that general area)
HAMC8112
10-10-2004, 22:44
Not to jump in on the debate, and not to try and start another seperate debate, but the name 'Hiroshima' comes to mind.
This one is debateble, alot of ppl died there but we have to look at those first a-bombs in a somewhat broader picture. Those bombs stopped the war and told Stalin do not break the Jalta treaty or we will bomb you into oblivion, thereby making sure that Stalin understood that the US only helped the Soviet Union against Hitler for aslong as Hitler was around. When Hitler died the US and the USSR fell back into their natural role: Mortal enemy's.
HAMC8112
10-10-2004, 23:14
Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan (not directly but do we remember exactly HOW the Taliban got power there? YES! US SUPPORT!)
Iraq (I please, don't tell me all those children there were iraqi soldiers)
Gaza? (not directly but in support of Israëls illegal occupation of that general area)
South Vietnam was invaded by communist North Vietnam, the US tried to help, is that a crime?
South Korea was invaded by communist North Korea, the US tried to help, is that a crime?
The Taliban turned bad, it's kinda like a friend you trust turning in to a rat, trusting the wrong ppl is a mistake, a judgement error, not a crime.
All those children? This one is a bit of a mistery to me, are you trying to tell us that american soldiers go out and kill children as a policy? Come on!
Gaza, another "not directly", in the end it's like this: the US is not responcible for the actions of other countries.
Do you see the red line here? Your sympathy seems to go to: communism=socialism=Sadam=socialist=left wing.
stevethatsmyname
10-10-2004, 23:45
This one is debateble, alot of ppl died there but we have to look at those first a-bombs in a somewhat broader picture. Those bombs stopped the war and told Stalin do not break the Jalta treaty or we will bomb you into oblivion, thereby making sure that Stalin understood that the US only helped the Soviet Union against Hitler for aslong as Hitler was around. When Hitler died the US and the USSR fell back into their natural role: Mortal enemy's.
SO we should probably nuke africa so they dont spread more AIDS to us, no?
HAMC8112
11-10-2004, 00:42
SO we should probably nuke africa so they dont spread more AIDS to us, no?
Hmm..., what is it you want to prove with contributions like this?
Hmm..., what is it you want to prove with contributions like this?
He's implying that that's the way the US solves problems...often problems that don't affect them directly. If you really want to go to Iraq and lose an arm/leg or even your life, feel free...I'd rather stay here and not die in vain.
HAMC8112
11-10-2004, 01:06
He's implying that that's the way the US solves problems...often problems that don't affect them directly. If you really want to go to Iraq and lose an arm/leg or even your life, feel free...I'd rather stay here and not die in vain.
Well to be honest, i dont want to go to Iraq and loose an arm/leg or even my life. And dieing in vain isnt my style either.
However, staying home and acting like it doesnt concern us is not an option for ppl with responsabillity. Like for instance the Pres. of the US. The US, being the only true democraty in the world, has the duty to fight tyrants where ever they are.
MarkDavis
11-10-2004, 01:46
Um, I recall hearing from my (back on topic) relatives that live 5 miles from the Pennsylvania crash site about what they saw there. They all went to see what had happened because it made alot of noise in the surrounding area. My aunt and uncle had their camera on them at the time and took photos of the crash site.
To my surprise, there was no plane there either. Big hole, no plane. First thing that I thought of when I read this was the PA crash that day. They found nothing there either.
If you believe this conspiracy theory, then please call all passenger's relatives from the crash and tell them so. That way you can help them with their grieving by telling them that it never happened.
MoUsE_WiZ
11-10-2004, 01:57
The US, being the only true democraty in the world, 1) The US is *NOT* a true democracy. It is representational democracy, as a real democratic nation could not possibly exist and have anything accomplished.
2) IF you're going to claim that representational democracy is true democracy then the US is quite specifically NOT the only one of such countries in the world.
3) Following your arguement...
Russia was the only true communist country in the world.
As such it was their job to spread communism to those countries without it, and to fight countries supporting the evils of capitalism.
Right?
HAMC8112
11-10-2004, 02:23
1) The US is *NOT* a true democracy. It is representational democracy, as a real democratic nation could not possibly exist and have anything accomplished.
2) IF you're going to claim that representational democracy is true democracy then the US is quite specifically NOT the only one of such countries in the world.
3) Following your arguement...
Russia was the only true communist country in the world.
As such it was their job to spread communism to those countries without it, and to fight countries supporting the evils of capitalism.
Right?
Well, the US has freedom of speech, in my book thats a democraty.
Nerf-Herder
11-10-2004, 03:02
Not to jump in on the debate, and not to try and start another seperate debate, but the name 'Hiroshima' comes to mind.
first of all, the bombing of hiroshima and nagasaki SAVED lives for both japan and america -- japan was losing the war at that point -- yet hirohito was determined that japanese soldiers fight to the death and to the last man taking as many americans with them as possible
as horrific as it was to kill hundreds of thousands of civilians, IT SAVED LIVES
another thing -- comparing those bombings to the iraqi war is just plain stupid
HELLO -- KNOCK KNOCK -- MCFLY -- IS THERE ANYBODY HOME?
JAPAN ****ING BOMBED US ON DEC 7 1941 AT PEARL ****ING HARBOR!!!
did they really think we were gonna go in there and settle that by throwing water balloons?
iraq was not a direct threat to the US, they had nothing to do with 9/11 and had no WMDs -- bush lied to the american people and the world so he could get revenge for his daddy bubba texas style
0takuPryd3
11-10-2004, 03:09
Well, the US has freedom of speech, in my book thats a democraty.
Both your book and your understanding of democracy are highly inaccurate.
0takuPryd3
11-10-2004, 03:15
South Vietnam was invaded by communist North Vietnam, the US tried to help, is that a crime?
South Korea was invaded by communist North Korea, the US tried to help, is that a crime?
The Taliban turned bad, it's kinda like a friend you trust turning in to a rat, trusting the wrong ppl is a mistake, a judgement error, not a crime.
All those children? This one is a bit of a mistery to me, are you trying to tell us that american soldiers go out and kill children as a policy? Come on!
Gaza, another "not directly", in the end it's like this: the US is not responcible for the actions of other countries.
Do you see the red line here? Your sympathy seems to go to: communism=socialism=Sadam=socialist=left wing.
Grenada, different areas of Indonesia, Iraq between the Gulf War and the current war (in one bombing there were as many casualties as there were when the World Trade Center was attacked on 9/11), and many other invasions to assert power and try to spread what we think is the right way to think and live.
And please, if you're going to throw out partisan insults, don't repeat them in the same list.
HAMC8112
11-10-2004, 03:22
Both your book and your understanding of democracy are highly inaccurate.
Explain democraty for me please? Because when freedom of speech is not included my book is indeed wrong.
HAMC8112
11-10-2004, 03:29
Grenada, different areas of Indonesia, Iraq between the Gulf War and the current war (in one bombing there were as many casualties as there were when the World Trade Center was attacked on 9/11), and many other invasions to assert power and try to spread what we think is the right way to think and live.
And please, if you're going to throw out partisan insults, don't repeat them in the same list.
Grenada, is that where the 1000's of Cuban soldiers(communists again! It seems that they are defended most here.) were posing as bricklayers? :lol:
About casualties, human loss is alway's to be avoided as much as possible. However in war things tend to go wrong very quickly, how many casualty's were there in the invasion of Iraq? Please dont include the victims of the bombs that are trown by terrorists.
Edit: Ohh, what is a partisan insult? Sorry dont have a clue.
MoUsE_WiZ
11-10-2004, 04:18
first of all, the bombing of hiroshima and nagasaki SAVED lives for both japan and america -- japan was losing the war at that point -- yet hirohito was determined that japanese soldiers fight to the death and to the last man taking as many americans with them as possible
as horrific as it was to kill hundreds of thousands of civilians, IT SAVED LIVES
another thing -- comparing those bombings to the iraqi war is just plain stupid
HELLO -- KNOCK KNOCK -- MCFLY -- IS THERE ANYBODY HOME?
JAPAN ****ING BOMBED US ON DEC 7 1941 AT PEARL ****ING HARBOR!!!
did they really think we were gonna go in there and settle that by throwing water balloons?
iraq was not a direct threat to the US, they had nothing to do with 9/11 and had no WMDs -- bush lied to the american people and the world so he could get revenge for his daddy bubba texas styleRead the context.
He asked for an example of a time when the US killed civillians, I listed one.
Further more, I'm aware that there is a POSSIBILITY that dropping the bombs saved lives, you can't list that as a fact, as there is no way to know what would have happened had they not fallen. I agree that they likely did save lives on both sides, but there is no way to know that they did, which is why I included the "not to try and start another debate" bit of the post.
The United States is evil. We're all just a bunch of crazy cowboys who do absolutely no good in the world.
That is all.
0takuPryd3
11-10-2004, 04:41
Grenada, is that where the 1000's of Cuban soldiers(communists again! It seems that they are defended most here.) were posing as bricklayers? :lol:
About casualties, human loss is alway's to be avoided as much as possible. However in war things tend to go wrong very quickly, how many casualty's were there in the invasion of Iraq? Please dont include the victims of the bombs that are trown by terrorists.
Edit: Ohh, what is a partisan insult? Sorry dont have a clue.
I meant insulting based on which which side of the political spectrum someone is one, e.g. labelling someone a 'liberal' or 'conservative' or the like. Yeah, I m aware it didn't make much since but eh... either way these "partisan insults" take focus from the real argument, which is about American's carelessly attacking enemies and therefore killing innocent people. I offered some examples... I've only heard a little about Grenada but what I've read made it seem like a very poor decision, but my sources were few and able to be strongly biased so I had to take the chance that I was dead wrong. However, I'm quite sure that someone a little more knowledgeable could do a better job coming up with examples than I could. It's really that I just have nothing to do while I wait for CS Source to download. Anyway, I'm sure that I began to make a point in there and then never did. So uh... have a nice night.
Edit: it's at 99.1% so this is the last you'll see of me.
Nerf-Herder
11-10-2004, 08:03
Read the context.
He asked for an example of a time when the US killed civillians, I listed one.
Further more, I'm aware that there is a POSSIBILITY that dropping the bombs saved lives, you can't list that as a fact, as there is no way to know what would have happened had they not fallen. I agree that they likely did save lives on both sides, but there is no way to know that they did, which is why I included the "not to try and start another debate" bit of the post.
i went off on a tangent -- i just despise people comparing this ******** invasion of iraq with WW2
Back to the orginal post. I couldn't watch the flash, I think the guy was having bandwidth problems. But I've seen some sites that claim it wasn't really a plane that hit the pentagon on 9/11.
Assuming that's what the flash shows, the dozens and dozens of eyewitnesses who saw the airplane hit the pentagon (including several USA Today employess/managers) in real life is pretty much an indication that it wasn't a 'truck bomb' or some other type of explosion. Apparently the plane almost took out the cars sitting in traffic on the highway that runs near the pentagon. Most of those people therefore saw the whole incident including the crash.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html
Siggick, there were melted beams found in the wreckage. No steel building in the history of the world has fallen due to fire. Buildings have burned for over five hours and still stood their ground. Not to mention the fact that the building fell at a faster rate then possible. Using the Law of Falling Bodies, discovered by Galileo, the buildings can fall in 9.1 seconds at the FASTEST. The north tower fell in 8.1 seconds. This is only possible via nuclear weapons! And the famous white smoke and debris that covered the people, ever wondered what that was? It was crystallized cement. It is not possible to crstallyze cement with that little heat (also shown by the black smoke.)
May I suggest that you take that aluminium paper off your head?
Power_Play
11-10-2004, 10:35
South Vietnam was invaded by communist North Vietnam, the US tried to help, is that a crime?
South Korea was invaded by communist North Korea, the US tried to help, is that a crime?
The Taliban turned bad, it's kinda like a friend you trust turning in to a rat, trusting the wrong ppl is a mistake, a judgement error, not a crime.
All those children? This one is a bit of a mistery to me, are you trying to tell us that american soldiers go out and kill children as a policy? Come on!
Gaza, another "not directly", in the end it's like this: the US is not responcible for the actions of other countries.
Do you see the red line here? Your sympathy seems to go to: communism=socialism=Sadam=socialist=left wing.
Tried to help and failed. And the only reason they tried to help because some other country using communism was doing it? If south korea had invaded norht (the other way around) your O SO Great country wouldn't even look that way.
Same story about vietnam. (only in vietnam they started napalming their way through everything killing several thousands of innocents who weren't even involved (but that way got involved)
Taliban turned bad?
On organisation with beliefs deeply imbedded in their beliefs isn't going to do everything you say. They will accept your help untill it loses usefullness. (same way as america will only help as long as it helps their own cause)
Maybe not as a policy but every child killed by your great american soldiers is one too many. You have to break eggs to make omelettes? BREAK YOUR OWN GODDAMN EGGS!
I don't think the parents of all those children are very happy with this current occupational force. (hey, look. Were helping by suppressing you and forcing you to do everything our way!)
US isn't responsible for israels actions? But they ARE the biggest supporters israel (and all the rules and conventions they break. And you totally failed to answer my comment on all the rules and conventions set up by nato countries the US breaks. And hell, they even add in their own rules stating that any country who tries to impose the rules of the majority on them can get invaded? (whoohoo, were democratic as long as it serves our needs. Otherwise it's not good to be that way)
And just because communists have a different way of viewing things and organising things in their own country they must automatically be evil?
Just like every muslim is inherently evil because he isnt a christian?
Like Otaku said: Partisan Insults
Or as I would call it: "narrow mindedness"
Not allowing other people their, beliefs, their way of life and their own political systems. You know what they call that? FASCISM! (as long as we're throwing Partisan Insults I think I'll join in)
HAMC8112
11-10-2004, 12:51
Tried to help and failed. And the only reason they tried to help because some other country using communism was doing it? If south korea had invaded norht (the other way around) your O SO Great country wouldn't even look that way.
Same story about vietnam. (only in vietnam they started napalming their way through everything killing several thousands of innocents who weren't even involved (but that way got involved)
Taliban turned bad?
On organisation with beliefs deeply imbedded in their beliefs isn't going to do everything you say. They will accept your help untill it loses usefullness. (same way as america will only help as long as it helps their own cause)
Maybe not as a policy but every child killed by your great american soldiers is one too many. You have to break eggs to make omelettes? BREAK YOUR OWN GODDAMN EGGS!
I don't think the parents of all those children are very happy with this current occupational force. (hey, look. Were helping by suppressing you and forcing you to do everything our way!)
US isn't responsible for israels actions? But they ARE the biggest supporters israel (and all the rules and conventions they break. And you totally failed to answer my comment on all the rules and conventions set up by nato countries the US breaks. And hell, they even add in their own rules stating that any country who tries to impose the rules of the majority on them can get invaded? (whoohoo, were democratic as long as it serves our needs. Otherwise it's not good to be that way)
And just because communists have a different way of viewing things and organising things in their own country they must automatically be evil?
Just like every muslim is inherently evil because he isnt a christian?
Like Otaku said: Partisan Insults
Or as I would call it: "narrow mindedness"
Not allowing other people their, beliefs, their way of life and their own political systems. You know what they call that? FASCISM! (as long as we're throwing Partisan Insults I think I'll join in)
ohh, i see now:
American democraty = facism.
Communism = Freedom.
My father was Polish, 1/4 of his family there was killed by the germans National socialists. 2/4 were killed after the war by russian socialists. 1/4 escaped to free europe that was liberated by the US fascists.
Allowing the rusian socialists to spread their way of life killed millions of ppl, millions more than Hitler has ever killed. Or do you have history books that say different? In that case i'd say trow them away, they are probably made by the comminterm.
When the germans collapsed at the end of the war, general Patton said leave the Germans their weapons, lets work togetter to destroy the USSR, a week after that he gets "killed" in a car crash.
Anyway we have seen what happened to the USSR in the end, Russian communism has died, you may find that to bad, but if you are such a fan of communism than why are'nt you living in the greatest democraty in the world: China.
For me personnaly i prefer American "fascism" over communism any day.
Refer to the original topic, let see the facts
Bush is in the oil energy business
It happens that Sadam is nasty dictator
It happens that Iraq has about 35% of the world oil.
If the oil production is halted, the oil price will go up.
Cash cow!!!!!
Who will get the cash?
Things that make you goes hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Cleglaw_Himself
11-10-2004, 13:50
Can I ask:
Why did the US go after Iraq and Saddam when Osama Bin Laden (born in Saudi Arabia) was supposedly the mastermind?
Answer: To ensure oil supplies were uninterrupted by being able to establish a new government in Iraq.
Why were the Bin Laden family (who were in the US at the time of 9/11) allowed to leave the US without question soon after 9/11?
Why was George Bush Senior in a meeting with Osama Bin Laden's brother when the 9/11 happened?
Answers: Because the Bush's have or had oil companies in Texas themselves and the Bin Laden family have been doing business with the Bush family for many years (back to Bush snr's time).
I'm not saying that getting rid of Saddam was bad - he was a cruel dictator, but what I am saying is that there seemed to be another agenda happening here.
Also, hasn't anyone realized that the world is starting to become more "Big Brother-like" since these terrorist attacks?
Everyone needs to be safer - install more video cameras.
Video cameras everywhere now, under control of government.
Popular TV shows called "Big Brother" (in Australia anyway).
Getting people ready for the new world where Big Brother is watching...
Bluejay451
11-10-2004, 14:08
My father was Polish, 1/4 of his family there was killed by the germans National socialists. 2/4 were killed after the war by russian socialists. 1/4 escaped to free europe that was liberated by the US fascists.
Allowing the rusian socialists to spread their way of life killed millions of ppl, millions more than Hitler has ever killed. Or do you have history books that say different? In that case i'd say trow them away, they are probably made by the comminterm.
When the germans collapsed at the end of the war, general Patton said leave the Germans their weapons, lets work togetter to destroy the USSR, a week after that he gets "killed" in a car crash.
Anyway we have seen what happened to the USSR in the end, Russian communism has died, you may find that to bad, but if you are such a fan of communism than why are'nt you living in the greatest democraty in the world: China.
For me personnaly i prefer American "fascism" over communism any day.
First of all, I'm sorry about your family. But face the facts: your opinion is biased because of them. Socialism in theory is a wonderful idea. Just because someone F'ed it up doesn't mean it is inherrently wrong. I mean, read this sentence "if you are such a fan of communism than why are'nt you living in the greatest democraty in the world: China."
It's crap like that that makes me oh so proud to be an American. Look at what's going on. There never were WMD's in Iraq, the gov't knew that, they LIED about it to not only the UN but THEIR OWN PEOPLE, and have blown 100 billion dollars on a war that could have been spent fixing our horrible education system and getting the millions of homeless off the streets. Not everything America does is so great, dude. And freedom of speech? Look at all the fines and indecency garbage that's going on. Its freedom of speech as long as the government says its ok. Bleh. America needs to learn to fix its own problems before it goes about fixing others'. That's my opinion.
BattleCookie
11-10-2004, 14:10
At first i want to mention that its really sad to see how ignorant some of you people are. Why cant you just accept someone else's opinion and try to discuss in a gentle manner? No, some of you just have to start insulting. Did you ever think about, that living at another location in this world could cause some other opinions on those issues?
Living in the US "forces" you to see a lot of positive comments about the actions taken by the US. Living somewhere outside of the US or any other involved countries may let you have more clinical/impartial impressions on those topics. Maybe you should think about that!
Then i want to mention that most of you have to learn what some words mean. That includes words like "democraty", "communism", "socialism" and so on. I just see that some people here have a totally naive and insular view of those things.
http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&lr=&oi=defmore&q=define:democracy
http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&q=definition%3Asocialism&btnG=Google-Suche&meta=
http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&q=define%3Acommunism&btnG=Suche&meta=
And the last point i want to mention is that you should also think about, if some states like the US really are a "democratic" countries. And maybe its worth to mention too, that the USSR was NOT a real communism. It was more a kind of (state-)forced socialism.
Oh, and before you start flaming me now: really, THINK ABOUT IT!
Thanx for reading!
Cookie
PS:
Education and Tolerance are the base for a good discussion.
And that i am really missing here! Sorry if anyone feels offended now!
Cleglaw_Himself
11-10-2004, 14:13
Yes, freedom of speech...
I just was reading about Fox News "Fair and Balanced"...
Soon the media will be telling you what to do and you'll do it.
Big Brother, 1984, here we come...
HAMC8112
11-10-2004, 14:52
Yes, freedom of speech...
I just was reading about Fox News "Fair and Balanced"...
Soon the media will be telling you what to do and you'll do it.
Big Brother, 1984, here we come...
I do not care what the media says, afterall they have there own agenda. It's what the state says here in belgium that bothers me, here you have mandatory opinions, do you have another opinion, then you go to jail for a couple years.
Americans have freedom of speech, its in the constitution.
Belgians do not have freedom of speech, its in the constitution.
So please dont tell me how bad the US is, try living in belgium for a while, come live here and have your political rights taken away, come live here and enjoy some mandatory opinions, then come tell me how bad America is.
HAMC8112
11-10-2004, 16:46
http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&lr=&oi=defmore&q=define:democracy
http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&q=definition%3Asocialism&btnG=Google-Suche&meta=
http://www.google.de/search?hl=de&q=define%3Acommunism&btnG=Suche&meta=
And the last point i want to mention is that you should also think about, if some states like the US really are a "democratic" countries. And maybe its worth to mention too, that the USSR was NOT a real communism. It was more a kind of (state-)forced socialism.
Thanx for reading!
Cookie
You say the USSR was not real communism and yet the links you provide as "proof" state otherwise.
The United States is evil. We're all just a bunch of crazy cowboys who do absolutely no good in the world.
That is all.
laffo i'll kill you hu-yuck
You say the USSR was not real communism and yet the links you provide as "proof" state otherwise.
Actually 'real' communism would presumably refer to 'Marxist' communism. Under Marxist communism the government would not exist except to initially set-up the system. Once the system was set-up, the government would 'vanish' leaving control of everything to the people.
The problem is, in practice the people with power do not ever like to give up that power, so the government never actually disbands, and the end result is Soviet-style communism or Chinese-style communism.
In other words 'totalitarian rule' is not part of 'real' communism, but it sure seems to be part of 'practical' communism.
HAMC8112
11-10-2004, 17:08
Anyway, it was a good thread, i'd like to thank all of you that participated eventhough we didnt really see eye to eye. :lol:
Power_Play
11-10-2004, 18:01
ohh, i see now:
American democraty = facism.
Communism = Freedom.
My father was Polish, 1/4 of his family there was killed by the germans National socialists. 2/4 were killed after the war by russian socialists. 1/4 escaped to free europe that was liberated by the US fascists.
Allowing the rusian socialists to spread their way of life killed millions of ppl, millions more than Hitler has ever killed. Or do you have history books that say different? In that case i'd say trow them away, they are probably made by the comminterm.
When the germans collapsed at the end of the war, general Patton said leave the Germans their weapons, lets work togetter to destroy the USSR, a week after that he gets "killed" in a car crash.
Anyway we have seen what happened to the USSR in the end, Russian communism has died, you may find that to bad, but if you are such a fan of communism than why are'nt you living in the greatest democraty in the world: China.
For me personnaly i prefer American "fascism" over communism any day.Communism has been abused just like america is abusing their "Democracy" now to let one stupid MOFO who's spelling is even worse than mine play around with an army big enough to blow up the entire planet.
And just because I don't like the things america does I'm immediatly communist?
FYI I'm Free-thinker and therefore I make my own decisions based on all things I read and my own morals.
War = BAD (even if it is a means to an end and the goal is good. WAR = BAD)
Killing = BAD (even as a means to an end)
Lies = BAD (even as a means to an end)
SO
America attacks iraq thus killing hunderds if not thousands of people and to get the approval (which they didn't) they told EVERYBODY lies.
I don't care they 'freed' Iraq (not that Iraq is free now. They're still oppressed by american troops at the moment) they used means I see as bad to do so.
And because I find those things bad I'm a communist?
Well if America is pro-killing, pro-war and pro-lying I'm damn proud to be anything but an american.
(And no. Attacking iraq didn't attack first. So a totally unprovoked attack against just because they felt like it under false pretences.... Let me see, how many conventions did they break? Not to mention that they didn't get NATO approval)
hey yo, think about it, bush own oil energy company, find any reason to earn more, cook the book (Enron), or else find a way to make oil expansive, beat iraq, oil price goes up he earn more, find ANY reason to take control further energy resources, protect his future income stream, beat iraq.
Who cares if Iraq is in chaos coz it serves 2 purpose, 1 is to have US forces in the country and help to expresses their infulence in the country, 2 the more chaos the less likely they will organise again to use up the oil reserve, save the reasources for future bush family.
yes it is cynical, yes it is bad, but no, it is not entirely stupid.
HAMC8112
11-10-2004, 18:51
Communism has been abused just like america is abusing their "Democracy" now to let one stupid MOFO who's spelling is even worse than mine play around with an army big enough to blow up the entire planet.
And just because I don't like the things america does I'm immediatly communist?
FYI I'm Free-thinker and therefore I make my own decisions based on all things I read and my own morals.
War = BAD (even if it is a means to an end and the goal is good. WAR = BAD)
Killing = BAD (even as a means to an end)
Lies = BAD (even as a means to an end)
SO
America attacks iraq thus killing hunderds if not thousands of people and to get the approval (which they didn't) they told EVERYBODY lies.
I don't care they 'freed' Iraq (not that Iraq is free now. They're still oppressed by american troops at the moment) they used means I see as bad to do so.
And because I find those things bad I'm a communist?
Well if America is pro-killing, pro-war and pro-lying I'm damn proud to be anything but an american.
(And no. Attacking iraq didn't attack first. So a totally unprovoked attack against just because they felt like it under false pretences.... Let me see, how many conventions did they break? Not to mention that they didn't get NATO approval)
Let me ask you this:
Never in your life you have told a lie? Not even to yourself?
If your country was attacked would you not defend it and thereby participate in war?
When you participate in war you will probably kill enemy soldiers right?
So would all of the above make you = Bad?
If you believe everything you read about the US
To take the famous words of Eminem
"Then we'll kill you"
Find the song and it will give this statement meaning for you before you respond.
Also another thing with the Nagasaki and Hiroshima events. Before we ever dropped the bomb we flew over dropping pamplets telling the people to leave. Wonder if terrorist would start to comply to that philosophy?
One last dealio: Im sure not opposed to us keeping to ourselves. I would love to see us pull out of the UN (its a bunch of crock anyway) and kick it out of our country. Along the way maybe some of the countries we helped rebuild after WW1 and 2 could pay us some of that money back. It would sure help us out.
Power_Play
11-10-2004, 20:11
Let me ask you this:
Never in your life you have told a lie? Not even to yourself?
If your country was attacked would you not defend it and thereby participate in war?
When you participate in war you will probably kill enemy soldiers right?
So would all of the above make you = Bad?The ony thing people love (and hate) about me is no matter what I won't hide my opinions or try to put ANY water with the wine.
Honest even when it hurts. (and it hurts. But the pay-off is great)
Sure, before I made this vow to myself I lied at times.
Not anymore. I will not live with the fear of getting caught and having to face the music.
Honest to myself, honest to others.
That's why most of my friends always come to me for advise. I will give them an honest opinion not clouded by what others think but only by what I think.
If my country was attacked I would not defend it as I will not kill and I will not aid others in killing people. If I have to defend myself in a fight I will defend myself in a matter that does not involve killing.
Me being an (ex-)suicidal do not care if I have to get killed because I see death as a release from this world. So if you feel like killing me, go ahead.
This is me, larger than life. I don't care.
If you don't believe it: I don't care
I refuse to kill and/or aid a war.
(accidental killings not included. I.E.: Car Crashes and the like)
EDIT:
Don't assume that because you do so. I would also do so.
Never ASSUME for it makes an *** out of U and ME
HAMC8112
11-10-2004, 20:35
The ony thing people love (and hate) about me is no matter what I won't hide my opinions or try to put ANY water with the wine.
Honest even when it hurts. (and it hurts. But the pay-off is great)
Sure, before I made this vow to myself I lied at times.
Not anymore. I will not live with the fear of getting caught and having to face the music.
Honest to myself, honest to others.
That's why most of my friends always come to me for advise. I will give them an honest opinion not clouded by what others think but only by what I think.
If my country was attacked I would not defend it as I will not kill and I will not aid others in killing people. If I have to defend myself in a fight I will defend myself in a matter that does not involve killing.
Me being an (ex-)suicidal do not care if I have to get killed because I see death as a release from this world. So if you feel like killing me, go ahead.
This is me, larger than life. I don't care.
If you don't believe it: I don't care
I refuse to kill and/or aid a war.
(accidental killings not included. I.E.: Car Crashes and the like)
EDIT:
Don't assume that because you do so. I would also do so.
Never ASSUME for it makes an *** out of U and ME
What can i say to this, it's as extreme as it gets, fanatic almost. C.G. Jung says fanaticisme is alway's compensated doubt.
Well if America is pro-killing, pro-war and pro-lying I'm damn proud to be anything but an american.
I think you're being a bit unfair. The majority of americans voted for Al Gore not george bush. So its not accurate to view the bush administration's policies as a reflection of what america is all about.
We will get rid of him in November, and show the world just WHY america is so great! :)
Wolfedude
11-10-2004, 20:53
Sigh. I really get tired of reading posts like these which are full of lies and distortions. As a citizen of the United States I hear all of these criticisms from abroad and feel that we, in the U.S. should let the world police itself. When we are threatened we should react quickly and violently to protect our citizens and our interests. Other than that we should probably have let the Serb/Croat/Eastern Europe disputes just continue. We shouldn't have helped our European allies to resolve the dispute and let Europe handle it. Those guided bombs we used cost 1 million dollars each. We could have spent that money much more wisely at home.
I guess we should not police any other part of the world either. The U.S. spent tons of our treasure to continue the cold war and defeat communism. Had it not been for our doing so Eastern Europe and perhaps much of Western Europe would be under the U.S.S.R. domination. Do any of you really think that the world would be better off with a healthy U.S.S.R. eying new conquests and expansion.
But don't thank us for that. Point out our faults to us and tell us that whatever happens in our country we deserve. Tell the troups that were anchored in the Pacific that instead of dropping bombs on Hiroshima & Nagasaki that they should have invaded the Japanese homeland and died on their beaches instead of the Japanese dying. It would just be so much more "fair" if when we killed the Japanese that we had men dying too. How ridiculous.
When catastrophies happen anywhere in the world, who is the first country to send aid? What country spends more in foreign aid than any other in the world? Appreciation, nah. Don't think the the U.S. deserves any appreciation. Only condemnation because you don't agree with their present policies.
But don't worry too much. I am probably in the minority. When the world or Europe or Asia gets its rear end in trouble again, when there is a massive earthquake or typhoon; we will send our aid and money to help. We will send our people to help. Don't worry.
Oh, and by the way; I want to thank all of those countries, our allies, for all of the assistance they sent to help the citizens of Florida after the recent rash of Hurricanes. That is if any of them sent some. I am sure somebody did, at least a little from somewhere.
It really amazes me that this country is the favored destination of the vast majority of the immigrants in the world. People leaving the utopian paradises, at least you would think they were to read here, just to come to a country that bullies and dominates the rest of the world. Yes it is truly amazing that anyone would want to come to such a horrendous place like the United States.
HAMC8112
11-10-2004, 21:22
@ Wolfedude:
here i was thinking that i was the only one on the forum defending the US. We are 2 now :clap:
kudos to kurg and wolfedude
0takuPryd3
11-10-2004, 21:58
@ Wolfedude:
here i was thinking that i was the only one on the forum defending the US. We are 2 now :clap:
Regardless, you've both done a poor job. Not that your opponents (including myself) were much (if at all) better.
You are not 2. My post was in defence of this great nation we live in. I just refuse to get into much of a discussion with people who's opinion I could really give a rats @ss about. Like I said lets withdraw from the UN and from all the aid we give and let them have at each other. They could call it the United Nations of un-American.
Trithatol
11-10-2004, 22:41
May I suggest that you take that aluminium paper off your head?
Thats not aluminium paper, thats a thinking cap. I got a few others if you'd like one.
For the cats who don't believe that a plane can bring down a building, here comes the science. (http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html)
You all really ought to go to the OTF instead of inflicting this on the HC forum.
HAMC8112
11-10-2004, 22:50
You are not 2. My post was in defence of this great nation we live in. I just refuse to get into much of a discussion with people who's opinion I could really give a rats @ss about.
kk.
Like I said lets withdraw from the UN and from all the aid we give and let them have at each other. They could call it the United Nations of un-American.
But the US cant do that, if they could they would have done that long ago. There are political reasons for that.
Let me ask you this:
Never in your life you have told a lie? Not even to yourself?
If your country was attacked would you not defend it and thereby participate in war?
When you participate in war you will probably kill enemy soldiers right?
So would all of the above make you = Bad?
Sure, but it didn't kill anyone, guilty or innocent.
Yes, we did that in Afghanistan, which I fully supported.
Of course, but when you're there based on a complete lie and you're killing thousands and thousands of innocent Iraqi's you really should think it over and regroup/pack up.
I guess- done in the correct sense it wouldn't make you bad (i.e. fighting in WW1 or 2) But this isn't a war, it's an invasion and occupation orchestrated with lies and deceiving Americans and their Allies.
MoUsE_WiZ
12-10-2004, 01:34
Thats not aluminium paper, thats a thinking cap. I got a few others if you'd like one.Have any with more than 1 durability?
For the cats who don't believe that a plane can bring down a building, here comes the science. (http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html)
You all really ought to go to the OTF instead of inflicting this on the HC forum.
posting in a mac thread!
For the cats who don't believe that a plane can bring down a building, here comes the science. (http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html)
You all really ought to go to the OTF instead of inflicting this on the HC forum.
I read all that and it pretty much comes down to this...
However, the building was not able to withstand the intense heat of the jet fuel fire. While it was impossible for the fuel-rich, diffuse-flame fire to burn at a temperature high enough to melt the steel, its quick ignition and intense heat caused the steel to lose at least half its strength and to deform, causing buckling or crippling. This weakening and deformation caused a few floors to fall, while the weight of the stories above them crushed the floors below, initiating a domino collapse.
Time to drop some knowledge. Both WTC 1 and 2 (North and South) were built with 47 enormous interior steel core columns and 236 exterior columns, that were bolted and welded together with steel plates. Also, there were steel trusses which criss-crossed making a mesh that connected every other exterior column. Plus there were diagonal bracing and steel rods connecting the trusses. There were also corrugated pans with poured concrete on every floor, all of this was anchored in a very deep and heavy foundation. All covered in fire-proof material. In short, this was one bad motha... Let me also include that NO STEEL STRUCTURED BUILDING IN THE WORLD HAS EVER COME DOWN DUE TO FIRE. This includes the Merdian Plaza in Philidelphia, a 37 story office building that burned on 8 floors for 19 hours - and it didnt even come close to collapsing. The WTC North Tower last 1 hour and 53 minutes and the WTC South Tower only lasted 56 minutes. Both towers gave off black smoke meaning they were burning insufficiently and were relatively cool fires. Steel melts (or "softens" as the so called "Science" puts it) at 2700*F, jet fuel (when mixed in precise porportions with air) will burn briefly at 1800*F. But due to the debirs (carpeting, funiture, concrete ect) and lack of oxygen, the fire most likely didnt surpass 1200*F. Let it also be known that most of the jet fuel exploded outside of the building (go check videos - that huge ball of fire is jet fuel) and only the exterior columns were exposed to this explosion and only for a few seconds and they were all coated with fire-proof material. You can also check the hole in the North Tower created by the plane, there are only relatively small fires and the heat must not be that excesive because you can see people standing, looking out in the hole! The planes did not take down those buildings.
Let me also touch upon the "domino" collapse, also known as the pancake theory. According to the Law of Falling Bodies, put foward by Galileo and still accepted today by all scientists, states that the total distance traveled at the end of any specific time in a total vacuum is calculated by this formula: Distance (D) = (32.16/2) * Times In Seconds Squared. Also, if there was any resistance (which was the massive lower sections of the building, that were stablelized by over 250 major interior and exterior steel columns and thousands of steel trusses) the time of the slowing body would of course slow down in relation to this resistance. In the case of the WTCs, we know that the towers were 1350 ft so the equation for the fastest time of total drop in a vacuum:
1350 = (32.16 / 2) * Times In Seconds Squared
This works out to 9.1627 seconds as the fastest time these buildings could come down - without resistance. Well with resistance the South Tower came down in 10.4 seconds (fine) and the North Tower came down in 8.1 seconds. This defies the laws of gravity! So either the height of the buildings is inaccurate, the times of the falls are inaccurate, the scientific calculation that has been used for hundreds of years is inaccurate, or something pulled these buildings are a higher rate. But fine lets put that aside and say that the pancake theory did take place, for the WTC buildings to reac in this was literally thousands of super heavy-duty joints welds would have to "snap" at precisely the same instant - which couldnt have taken place because the building WERE engineered for expansions and flexibility and the steel had fire retardant sprayed all over them, also the burning patterns were incosistent throughout the floors. A pancake collapse could not come down with such speed as explained above. A pancake collapse would not have the latent energy to crystallize the building materails, to shared aluminum or blast rubble to such distances. A pancake collapse would not create, or maintain, the astronomical heat patterns which were recorded and were monitored for weeks afterwards. Not to mention that WTC 6 was also on fire and did not collapse. I can still go on but.. yea
EDIT: A couple typos
Nerf-Herder
12-10-2004, 03:42
i remember hearing something about the engineers report concerning the collapse of the WTC -- they said that due to the advanced age of the material, most of the fireproofing was blown off the steel supports in the areas immediately around the impact zone
also -- we are not talking about old school steel reinforced concrete here (much more structurally sound) -- we are talking about a steel strusture that had a coat of fireproof material sprayed on
Cleglaw_Himself
12-10-2004, 04:01
Also another thing with the Nagasaki and Hiroshima events. Before we ever dropped the bomb we flew over dropping pamplets telling the people to leave.
Written in English no doubt?
Cleglaw_Himself
12-10-2004, 04:09
We will get rid of him in November, and show the world just WHY america is so great! :)
Good! I think the world will breath a collective sigh of relief when this happens.
(Even though he shouldn't have been elected in the first place from what I read).
GDawgUnit
12-10-2004, 04:16
imho, bush and sadamm are in this together. Bush got the FBI to plant explosives on the towers and arranged for Sadam to get those planes and burn those mofo's. Then to cover it all up he launched the war and now it backfired and he has to kill his best friend. Oh well, those Americans had it comming to them. Peace.
imho, bush and sadamm are in this together. Bush got the FBI to plant explosives on the towers and arranged for Sadam to get those planes and burn those mofo's. Then to cover it all up he launched the war and now it backfired and he has to kill his best friend. Oh well, those Americans had it comming to them. Peace.
i hope you mean those americans as in bush and whoever did his thinking for him, instead of everyone that happens to live in the states. otherwise you'd just look like a total jerk! :(
Refer to the original topic, let see the facts
Bush is in the oil energy business
It happens that Sadam is nasty dictator
It happens that Iraq has about 35% of the world oil.
If the oil production is halted, the oil price will go up.
Cash cow!!!!!
Who will get the cash?
Things that make you goes hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Shouldn't we choose to follow just ONE conspiracy theory?
Either bush invaded irak to get iraqi oil, or he invaded it to destroy it.
You can't have it both ways, you know.
Children...
War = BAD (even if it is a means to an end and the goal is good. WAR = BAD)
Killing = BAD (even as a means to an end)
Ok, so we should have let Hitler rule the world rather than wage war against him? :scratch:
Thats not aluminium paper, thats a thinking cap. I got a few others if you'd like one.
lol, no thanks, i have a brain and that should be enough.
Seriously, it seems you don't have much knowledge in mechanics/physics/architecture.
It is because of their metal structure that the towers went down like that.
Shouldn't we choose to follow just ONE conspiracy theory?
Either bush invaded irak to get iraqi oil, or he invaded it to destroy it.
You can't have it both ways, you know.
Children...
for the oil. for the oil. he love $$$ so much he will not destroy it.
edit: thinking about it, Bush of coz would opt out of kyoto treaty, coz he is in the energy business, to conform with the treaty means he shoot himself in the foot.
Trithatol
12-10-2004, 11:13
Seriously, it seems you don't have much knowledge in mechanics/physics/architecture.
It is because of their metal structure that the towers went down like that.
Did you read Broke's post? I would say something, but there isn't much that he didn't say. Next thing you know, you'll be telling me Oswald shot Kennedy.
HAMC8112
12-10-2004, 11:26
Next thing you know, you'll be telling me Oswald shot Kennedy.
If Oswald didnt shoot Kennedy, why did he shoot the police man that went after him into the shoe store ten minutes after Kennedy was shot, the police man said that the guy (Oswald) was acting very suspicious, that's why he went after him, and Oswald shot him, why i wonder?
edit: this will be the greatest OT ever written, maybe we should start a new thread for this one :lol:
Trithatol
12-10-2004, 11:41
this will be the greatest OT ever written, maybe we should start a new thread for this one :lol:
:lol: Indeed it shall. There's barely any posts about the original topic
Power_Play
12-10-2004, 14:09
What can i say to this, it's as extreme as it gets, fanatic almost. C.G. Jung says fanaticisme is alway's compensated doubt.Again a partisan insult
Because someone who I didn't even know existed says I'm in doubt it must be so?
Taking the easy way out? Just call me names, tell lies about me and off with it you just put off everything I said?
It's starting to look like a religious discussion with me being the atheïst and you being the extremist believer....
Power_Play
12-10-2004, 14:11
I think you're being a bit unfair. The majority of americans voted for Al Gore not george bush. So its not accurate to view the bush administration's policies as a reflection of what america is all about.
We will get rid of him in November, and show the world just WHY america is so great! :)I'd have to see it first.
Because I didn't even understand it why that dimwit got elected in the first place when the majority was against him.
HAMC8112
12-10-2004, 14:12
Again a partisan insult
Because someone who I didn't even know existed says I'm in doubt it must be so?
Taking the easy way out? Just call me names, tell lies about me and off with it you just put off everything I said?
It's starting to look like a religious discussion with me being the atheïst and you being the extremist believer....
Never ment to insult you (still dont know what a partisan insult is) sorry if i did. I think you are taken this to personal.
Power_Play
12-10-2004, 15:15
Never ment to insult you (still dont know what a partisan insult is) sorry if i did. I think you are taken this to personal.Partisan Insult is explaned a few pages back.
It's somewhat like I give my reasons and instead of a reply I get a direct attack on my person.
It's off-topic and it doesn't add anything to a discussion.
I gave my reasons not to kill.
Instead of your reasons, or a question if I would like to explain it some more I got a direct nonsense reply(/insult) which in itself did absolutely NOTHING to add anything into this discussion.
Therefor my atheist/agnost vs extremist-believer comparison.
Atheïst: I do not believe in god <que reasons not to believe in god>
Extremist-believer: If you do not believe in god you are bad.
It doesn't make sense, it doesn't add to a discussion. Hell, it's only usefull to break down discussion and then call yourself the moral winner because you made the other party so frustrated he didn't even bother to join into the discussion anymore because he didn't get any normal answers or arguments.
Did you watch the last debat between Bush and Kerry?
As soon as Bush got a change to speak all he did was sling Partisan Insults at Kerry instead of answering the question. (trying to make Kerry look bad but don't add anything constructive)
EDIT: And as soon as you feel insulted by someone via internet: STOP! SHUT DOWN YOUR COMPUTER! GO OUTSIDE! GET A LIFE!
EDIT2: You know, outside. With that awfully bright yellow dot on that blue screen.
*tries to remember why he started this thread*
*tries reading through half the posts here*
*head hurts*
*goes outside to kick a rock down the street*
*feels better*
*hums a little tune*
The US, being the only true democraty in the world, has the duty to fight tyrants where ever they are.
Hehe, I can see your psyched up over this Ham but I think you are a little bit out of line when you make your statements!
Even you can't believe that statement is true ;)
/Magnus
edit: Just finished reading the whole thread and now I don't have any ene r g y lef.. to writ.. anyth... *snores*
HAMC8112
12-10-2004, 16:21
Hehe, I can see your psyched up over this Ham but I think you are a little bit out of line when you make your statements!
Even you can't believe that statement is true ;)
/Magnus
edit: Just finished reading the whole thread and now I don't have any ene r g y lef.. to writ.. anyth... *snores*
I can see that the statement is steering up some heat, however what i ment to say was that rule nr1 in a democraty is freedom of speech, in the US its in the constitution, in Belgium its in the constitution that you dont have freedom of speech.
Written in English no doubt?
Why in gods name would we print them in japanese?
You just exposed yourself as an idiot.
GG
Power_Play
12-10-2004, 19:07
I can see that the statement is steering up some heat, however what i ment to say was that rule nr1 in a democraty is freedom of speech, in the US its in the constitution, in Belgium its in the constitution that you dont have freedom of speech.So with that explenation and looking at the Dutch constitution we can now easily say The Netherlands are a real democracy too :)
So no more 'US is the only true democracy' if that's your only proof :)
HAMC8112
12-10-2004, 19:35
So with that explenation and looking at the Dutch constitution we can now easily say The Netherlands are a real democracy too :)
So no more 'US is the only true democracy' if that's your only proof :)
Untill some dutchmann speaks out and gets shot in the head for it. Remember?
Partisan Insult is explaned a few pages back.
It's somewhat like I give my reasons and instead of a reply I get a direct attack on my person.
It's off-topic and it doesn't add anything to a discussion.
I gave my reasons not to kill.
Instead of your reasons, or a question if I would like to explain it some more I got a direct nonsense reply(/insult) which in itself did absolutely NOTHING to add anything into this discussion.
Therefor my atheist/agnost vs extremist-believer comparison.
Atheïst: I do not believe in god <que reasons not to believe in god>
Extremist-believer: If you do not believe in god you are bad.
It doesn't make sense, it doesn't add to a discussion. Hell, it's only usefull to break down discussion and then call yourself the moral winner because you made the other party so frustrated he didn't even bother to join into the discussion anymore because he didn't get any normal answers or arguments.
Did you watch the last debat between Bush and Kerry?
As soon as Bush got a change to speak all he did was sling Partisan Insults at Kerry instead of answering the question. (trying to make Kerry look bad but don't add anything constructive)
EDIT: And as soon as you feel insulted by someone via internet: STOP! SHUT DOWN YOUR COMPUTER! GO OUTSIDE! GET A LIFE!
EDIT2: You know, outside. With that awfully bright yellow dot on that blue screen.
Actually, a partisan insult is nothing more than an insult that states, or implies, that the only reason a person thinks something is because they are partisan, i.e., biased. In politics, a partisan is a democrat or republican, or, more likely, someone described as a liberal or conservative.
What you were describing is an ad hominem attack, an attack on the person. A personal attack. I.e., you are stupid, you are ugly, etc. An attack that is personal, with no particular basis or relationship to the argument at hand.
This was provided simply for the edification of those non-English as first language posters, so that the terms are more clear. :)
And Mac, you know most of this stuff wouldn't pass muster in the OTF forum, what are you trying to set them up for anyway. :)
Ed
Power_Play
13-10-2004, 09:34
Untill some dutchmann speaks out and gets shot in the head for it. Remember?Yeah I remember.
And disapprove (just like all of the people I know)
I didn't agree with the man but that doesn't mean he had to be shot.
But about getting shot. How many of the american presidents got shot?
(Hell, even their first president got shot :P)
Did you read Broke's post? I would say something, but there isn't much that he didn't say. Next thing you know, you'll be telling me Oswald shot Kennedy.
Yeah I read it, that's why I corrected it. :lol:
And if you seriously think a nuclear device can be the cause of towers falling down like that, it' not a physics class you need, it's glasses.
By the way, Kennedy shooting was setup by Wolfowitz when he learned that Kennedy was about to present a plan to fund reseach on electrical cars. Oswald was indeed the only shooter, but he used top-secret FBI/CIA black program nuclear bullets, that's what baffled garrison.
There. I won the conspiracy competition. :winner:
Nerf-Herder
13-10-2004, 11:54
Yeah I remember.
And disapprove (just like all of the people I know)
I didn't agree with the man but that doesn't mean he had to be shot.
But about getting shot. How many of the american presidents got shot?
(Hell, even their first president got shot :P)
american presidents who were assassinated......
lincoln, garfield, mckinley, kennedy
there was also a shooting attempt on reagen
if bush wins this upcoming election, i hope he gets added to this list
HAMC8112
13-10-2004, 15:28
if bush wins this upcoming election, i hope he gets added to this list
Dont hope about it, just do it :lol:
Infact if you are at it, i have a list, can i PM it to you? :lol:
HAMC8112
13-10-2004, 15:29
Dont hope about it, just do it :lol:
Infact if you are at it, i have a list, can i PM it to you? :lol:
Edit: It seems that you do not like democraty after all :lol:
Another edit: ohh man how did i do that?
Power_Play
13-10-2004, 18:29
american presidents who were assassinated......
lincoln, garfield, mckinley, kennedy
there was also a shooting attempt on reagen
if bush wins this upcoming election, i hope he gets added to this list
Too late.....
You've should have done that the instant he got elected.
:flip:
Funny how the Europeans want us to elect a pres they can push around.
Hope it doesnt happen.
HAMC8112
14-10-2004, 01:46
Funny how the Europeans want us to elect a pres they can push around.
Hope it doesnt happen.
Europeans pushing the US pres around? I dont think so. It's just that the Europeans have to live with the result of the US foreign policy. :lol:
Toliphar
14-10-2004, 06:28
Hey there Ham...
Reading your posts here makes me drop my chin. I've tried to understand how anyone, especially a US citizen, would want to vote for Bush in the upcoming election. It's people like you?! But, how many people like you exists? I'm talking about blind patriotists, there's really millions of you over there?
Wow, talk about a fanatic people in a fanatic regime.
I gave up a few pages ago... "US is the only true democracy" actually offended me so I stopped arguing.
Nerf-Herder
14-10-2004, 07:22
its the bible belt -- conservatives wave the bible around telling god-fearing rednecks to "vote their faith or JC and the boys will smack them down"
i found it funny when bush said in debate #2 in response to a qustion about stem cell research and abortion that he would not tolerate taking lives to save lives
yet that seems to be their stance on iraq -- or is it taking lives for oil that makes one a good christian........
Power_Play
14-10-2004, 08:38
its the bible belt -- conservatives wave the bible around telling god-fearing rednecks to "vote their faith or JC and the boys will smack them down"
i found it funny when bush said in debate #2 in response to a qustion about stem cell research and abortion that he would not tolerate taking lives to save lives
yet that seems to be their stance on iraq -- or is it taking lives for oil that makes one a good christian........
1 word about christians: Hypocrites
HAMC8112
14-10-2004, 13:08
I dont see how the son of a jewish family that lived 2000 years ago is relative to this thread?
HAMC8112
14-10-2004, 13:35
Hey there Ham...
Reading your posts here makes me drop my chin. I've tried to understand how anyone, especially a US citizen, would want to vote for Bush in the upcoming election. It's people like you?! But, how many people like you exists? I'm talking about blind patriotists, there's really millions of you over there?
Wow, talk about a fanatic people in a fanatic regime.
Hi Toli, been a long time since we talked. Anyway you dont understand how ppl can vote Bush over Kerry/someone else? Basicly there's no need to understand, it's democraty, ppl vote and then the votes are counted, best man wins.
As a european i do not really care about the US domestic policy because i dont live there and i am dinied access to the states anyway. When i was in the army, i couldnt enter US millitary bases coz my family was eastern block (poland), now at a later age im not allowed into the US coz i have the wrong kinda friends^^.
I am well aware that the US is not pefect, however come live here for a while, you will see that the states arent so bad afterall.
So that leaves us with the foreign pollicy of the US, for me it is simple, i live in a europe that is bassicly leftwing, in belgium they have gone sofar that they have done away with freedom of speech, the state now tells you what your opinion is about certain things, you do not comply, you go to jail! If the choise is between Bush ( who enforces democraty, bad choise of words i know) or kerry (who will let the left reclaim much of the free world) the choise is simple.
If Reagan would here this discussion he would turn in his grave. Do not forget, as the only true democraty in the world, the US has obligations to the free world, coz in the end, the part of the world that is free has to thank the US for that. And you all know this.
Now, start flaming :lol:
Hi Toli, been a long time since we talked. Anyway you dont understand how ppl can vote Bush over Kerry/someone else? Basicly there's no need to understand, it's democraty, ppl vote and then the votes are counted, best man wins.
As a european i do not really care about the US domestic policy because i dont live there and i am dinied access to the states anyway. When i was in the army, i couldnt enter US millitary bases coz my family was eastern block (poland), now at a later age im not allowed into the US coz i have the wrong kinda friends^^.
I am well aware that the US is not pefect, however come live here for a while, you will see that the states arent so bad afterall.
So that leaves us with the foreign pollicy of the US, for me it is simple, i live in a europe that is bassicly leftwing, in belgium they have gone sofar that they have done away with freedom of speech, the state now tells you what your opinion is about certain things, you do not comply, you go to jail! If the choise is between Bush ( who enforces democraty, bad choise of words i know) or kerry (who will let the left reclaim much of the free world) the choise is simple.
If Reagan would here this discussion he would turn in his grave. Do not forget, as the only true democraty in the world, the US has obligations to the free world, coz in the end, the part of the world that is free has to thank the US for that. And you all know this.
Now, start flaming :lol:
Ham,
Im more and more disappointed with your views.
Sorry mate, but thats the way I feel...........
Kev
Nerf-Herder
14-10-2004, 14:08
I dont see how the son of a jewish family that lived 2000 years ago is relative to this thread?
toli seemed curious as tohow someone like bush could be elected in the first place -- i was explaining that it was possible because of the right wing manipulation of the "bible belt" in the US
HAMC8112
14-10-2004, 14:45
Ham,
Im more and more disappointed with your views.
Sorry mate, but thats the way I feel...........
Kev
That's k Kev, afterall thats what democraty is all about right? Now if you were to explain in what way you were dissapointed maybe i could explain me views, now i have to guess, so i'll make a couple:
Your dissapointed coz i am not left wing? They killed have my family!
your dissapointed coz... Explain pls?
HAMC8112
14-10-2004, 14:48
toli seemed curious as tohow someone like bush could be elected in the first place -- i was explaining that it was possible because of the right wing manipulation of the "bible belt" in the US
Does it matter who voted for Bush? The point is he won the election, it seems to me that there are ppl who do not understand/like democraty.
Or do you mean to say that a vote from biblebelt ppl is not as good as yours?
slick4hire
14-10-2004, 15:04
Or do you mean to say that a vote from biblebelt ppl is not as good as yours?
Touche.
Whoever it was that said christians are hypocrites, that may be true in many cases. However, do you not hold christians to a higher standard because of their stances on the issues? Nobody is perfect.
I am a christian, and I will be the first to say I am far from perfect. The difference is that I realize that some of the things I do aren't good, but I do my best to not repeat those mistakes, or what some christians would call "sin".
What is the definition of christian? To be like Christ. What did Christ teach when broken down to its simplest terms? To love God with all of your heart, and to love your neighbor as yourself. Anything else said about JC is mans hand, not JC's. Man has that funny way of taking something wonderful and distorting it to suit their means. But in its purest form, christians should only try to be like Christ. And remember, we, as in christians, are not perfect, but we are trying.
HAMC8112
14-10-2004, 15:28
Touche.
Whoever it was that said christians are hypocrites, that may be true in many cases. However, do you not hold christians to a higher standard because of their stances on the issues? Nobody is perfect.
I am a christian, and I will be the first to say I am far from perfect. The difference is that I realize that some of the things I do aren't good, but I do my best to not repeat those mistakes, or what some christians would call "sin".
What is the definition of christian? To be like Christ. What did Christ teach when broken down to its simplest terms? To love God with all of your heart, and to love your neighbor as yourself. Anything else said about JC is mans hand, not JC's. Man has that funny way of taking something wonderful and distorting it to suit their means. But in its purest form, christians should only try to be like Christ. And remember, we, as in christians, are not perfect, but we are trying.
To me, some people are hypochrit or not, the fact that they could be Christians, Muslims or Athiests doesnt really matter, hell i might be considered hypochrit by some people and maybe i am, who's to say.
We are not perfect indeed, and basicly there's no need to be perfect, maybe we try to hard.
The difference is that I realize that some of the things I do aren't good
This is another matter, for this we have to dig into psychology, to realise that you are wrong you have to be a certain psychological type. (i recommend C.G.Jung for this, forget Freud!) For there is a certain type, that has his analitical thinking in his subconsious, so you'll understand that this type of Human cannot realise anything (atleast not consious) wich means in his head that he is never wrong :lol:
Anyway, i feel all alone here at the forum on this topic so it was nice to here the tone of your post, it makes a nice change!
I'm still yet to hear why the US is the ONLY true democracy in the world. I'd say Canada or the UK are far more democratic than the US in that their leaders have to answer to the opposition in debate regularily. Bush didn't have to do that, and the presidential debates were a farce...the agreement over debate procedures was 36 pages long! Tony Blair was berated daily from the opposition and his own party for his views because they didn't represent the majority of the country. I'm sure others could find better democracies than the US, and saying that they're the only true democracy because they bomb Muslim countries and force their ideologies upon its civilians is laughable...that's not democratic.
HAMC8112
14-10-2004, 16:05
I'm still yet to hear why the US is the ONLY true democracy in the world. I'd say Canada or the UK are far more democratic than the US in that their leaders have to answer to the opposition in debate regularily. Bush didn't have to do that, and the presidential debates were a farce...the agreement over debate procedures was 36 pages long! Tony Blair was berated daily from the opposition and his own party for his views because they didn't represent the majority of the country. I'm sure others could find better democracies than the US, and saying that they're the only true democracy because they bomb Muslim countries and force their ideologies upon its civilians is laughable...that's not democratic.
Its not gonna be easy explaining that, Canada or the UK are "more" democratic? You are democratic or not, there's no inbetween space there, you are or you are not.
Bush didnt have to answer to the opposision, indeed he had not, he has the majority, thats what's it all about in a democraty. So explain to me that when a majority has to answer to a minority how exactly does that make it "more" democratic.
And its not that the US is a true democraty coz they bomb Muslimcountries( you sound biased here) it's because they do not run away from there responsability's and took on a tyrant who has killed 100.000's ppl, sound familiar? WW1, WW2 come to mind.
The UK is far more democratic? If the US haddent been a true democraty there would be no states like the UK, they would have spoken german if it wasnt for America.
Edit: in a previous post someone even called the Netherlands a better democraty, hahahahah, the Netherlands where the head of state is in power coz she is the daughter of her mother! How can a monarchy be a Democraty?
Nerf-Herder
14-10-2004, 16:21
bush does NOT have the majority -- he didnt hav it in the 2000 election and does not have it to this day
fact -- he lost the popular vote in 2000 election
Power_Play
14-10-2004, 16:29
That's k Kev, afterall thats what democraty is all about right? Now if you were to explain in what way you were dissapointed maybe i could explain me views, now i have to guess, so i'll make a couple:
Your dissapointed coz i am not left wing? They killed have my family!
your dissapointed coz... Explain pls?
But seeing those right wing conservative racist bastards kill hundreds if not thousands of people in America is great and fine because it happend in a democratic way? (and it's still hapening. See: Klu Klux Klan)
Power_Play
14-10-2004, 16:37
Its not gonna be easy explaining that, Canada or the UK are "more" democratic? You are democratic or not, there's no inbetween space there, you are or you are not.
Bush didnt have to answer to the opposision, indeed he had not, he has the majority, thats what's it all about in a democraty. So explain to me that when a majority has to answer to a minority how exactly does that make it "more" democratic.
And its not that the US is a true democraty coz they bomb Muslimcountries( you sound biased here) it's because they do not run away from there responsability's and took on a tyrant who has killed 100.000's ppl, sound familiar? WW1, WW2 come to mind.
The UK is far more democratic? If the US haddent been a true democraty there would be no states like the UK, they would have spoken german if it wasnt for America.
Edit: in a previous post someone even called the Netherlands a better democraty, hahahahah, the Netherlands where the head of state is in power coz she is the daughter of her mother! How can a monarchy be a Democraty?
Now that's where you're wrong.
The monarchy died ages ago and is only a 'show' which a lot of dutch people would like to get rid of. Too bad not the majority. They do NOTHING but cost us millions of tax euro's....
Our prime minister is what could be equated to a president and every decision is made by our parliament (divided into "eerste kamer" en "tweede kamer")
Members of the Parliament are elected via public votings HELL even our Provincial-leadership and (gemeenteraad. Don't know a correct english word) are elected via public votings.
So yes, she might be queen in name but no way in heaven or hell is she queen in the way that she gets to rule our country. (she is head of state in name but not in function. Our prime minister is our head of state. And what a loser he turned out to be so far)
So yes, The Netherlands is a better democracy because we only use the popularity vote. If a certain political party gets most votes they get the biggest amount of people into the parliament. (based on percentages)
Biggest party gets to provide the Prime Minister.
Wheras the american president just has to get lucky and hope he gets a few big point states (and so maybe even get more votes overal in the US but lose on points provided by each state)
HAMC8112
14-10-2004, 16:43
But seeing those right wing conservative racist bastards kill hundreds if not thousands of people in America is great and fine because it happend in a democratic way? (and it's still hapening. See: Klu Klux Klan)
Ahh, now we are getting close, is there a legal Klan in europe? i dont think so. They are banned, if your opinion in europe is racist, you go to jail. When you are white that is, its k to be racist when you are colored, in belgium that is called positive discrimination!
When the US**** party is being taken to court to get them banned, they have jewish lawyers there and they win the case, you know why? Coz America has freedom of speech, its in the constitution.
Now about killing 100's if not 1000's of ppl, correct me if i am wrong, isnt that against the law? We are taking murder here right? America isnt a democraty coz there are crazies there that kill ppl? Ppl get muredered in the UK aswell and yet you say it's more democratic than the US?!?
HAMC8112
14-10-2004, 16:55
Now that's where you're wrong.
The monarchy died ages ago and is only a 'show' which a lot of dutch people would like to get rid of. Too bad not the majority. They do NOTHING but cost us millions of tax euro's....
Our prime minister is what could be equated to a president and every decision is made by our parliament (divided into "eerste kamer" en "tweede kamer")
Members of the Parliament are elected via public votings HELL even our Provincial-leadership and (gemeenteraad. Don't know a correct english word) are elected via public votings.
So yes, she might be queen in name but no way in heaven or hell is she queen in the way that she gets to rule our country. (she is head of state in name but not in function. Our prime minister is our head of state. And what a loser he turned out to be so far)
So yes, The Netherlands is a better democracy because we only use the popularity vote. If a certain political party gets most votes they get the biggest amount of people into the parliament. (based on percentages)
Biggest party gets to provide the Prime Minister.
Wheras the american president just has to get lucky and hope he gets a few big point states (and so maybe even get more votes overal in the US but lose on points provided by each state)
Who appoints the mayors in the Netherlands? Is it the queen? (de rijkscommisaris or something the mayors are called there)
The prime minister is kinda like the president? Come on man! The president doenst have to answer to the head of state, he is the head of state. In the Netherlands the head of state is a queen, and pretty soon you guy's will have King. wich makes the Netherlands a monarchy.
Ham, read your PM's plz!
/Magnus
Its not gonna be easy explaining that, Canada or the UK are "more" democratic? You are democratic or not, there's no inbetween space there, you are or you are not.
Bush didnt have to answer to the opposision, indeed he had not, he has the majority, thats what's it all about in a democraty. So explain to me that when a majority has to answer to a minority how exactly does that make it "more" democratic.
You said that the US is the only true democracy, and now you're saying that Canada/UK both democratic? So what differs and makes the US "truly" democratic vs. other 1st nations such as Canada and England?
In a democracy everyone is equal, being in the majority means that you can probably pass laws using your majority, but the minority must be heard. Not answering to a minority is against the law since everyone is equal right? Besides the fact that Bush has represented fewer Americans than Gore would've so therefore you could say he's representing the minority??
HAMC8112
14-10-2004, 18:15
You said that the US is the only true democracy, and now you're saying that Canada/UK both democratic? So what differs and makes the US "truly" democratic vs. other 1st nations such as Canada and England?
In a democracy everyone is equal, being in the majority means that you can probably pass laws using your majority, but the minority must be heard. Not answering to a minority is against the law since everyone is equal right? Besides the fact that Bush has represented fewer Americans than Gore would've so therefore you could say he's representing the minority??
You said they were more democratic, not me.
Power_Play
14-10-2004, 18:23
Who appoints the mayors in the Netherlands? Is it the queen? (de rijkscommisaris or something the mayors are called there)
The prime minister is kinda like the president? Come on man! The president doenst have to answer to the head of state, he is the head of state. In the Netherlands the head of state is a queen, and pretty soon you guy's will have King. wich makes the Netherlands a monarchy.
They answer to the queen maybe. But the queen has no might AT ALL above that.
The queen has no rights of making decisions (she has to approve SOME things but will never veto. Because any veto will just outright kill her job (ever seen the way dutch can riot/demonstrate agains anything they don't like to quite some effect :P)
So maybe to look at it's a monarchy. The works are democratic.
(and guess what, changes are being made so mayors are elected also)
But our elections are based on 'most votes' while US elections are based on 'luck of the draw in getting a few big point states.
Bush didn't get most votes overall but had the luck of getting a few big states. Majority is against bush.
Had the Democractic party not blocked several thousands of votes from military over seas, Bush would have won the popular vote also, so easy on all you who keep weilding that stick.
I love the Christianity stick being weilded to demean our country. Wasnt the US based on religious freedom? Wasnt it based on God? We dont dictate which god. Just that this country was based on the freedom to pay your respects to the diety of your choice or no diety at all if you so choose.
Now you ask why an individual like Bush could get elected in this country. Well here is what I say. The majority of the people here vote their morals.
One other note. To compare abortion and war is an incredible show of stupidity. Please do not even attempt to defend yourself on this issue if you made that statement it is complete lunacy.
One more point. Please dont assume you know how the Iraqi or Afghani people feel as a whole or in part unless you are from there and can speak from what is going on. The fact that the US freed those countries with the help of its only real alllies from under the old regimes is irrefulably good. Don't get me wrong there are still many wrongs in this world that probably need some attention also, but only so much can be taken on at one time.
For those of you who will say that the US is inflicting its beliefs on others. Your right. We hope eveyone can be free everywhere in the world. Free to express themselves as they wish. Free to worship the god of their choosing or no god if they choose. Free to cast a vote for who represents them and to express their unhappiness or happiness in the choice made by the majority.
MoUsE_WiZ
15-10-2004, 00:14
One more point. Please dont assume you know how the Iraqi or Afghani people feel as a whole or in part unless you are from there and can speak from what is going on. The fact that the US freed those countries with the help of its only real alllies from under the old regimes is irrefulably good. You're from there then, or is this probably the most hypocritical statement I've seen thus far in this thread?
You said they were more democratic, not me.Yes, but you said they were just NOT democratic.
Not to mention that it is possible to be "more" or "less" democratic, just as it is possible to have a "more" free market based economy. IE: The US has, to the best of my knowledge, the economy most based on the concepts of free market, capitalism, laisez faire, etc, than any other nation in the world. They do, however, still have various regulations...if they didn't the concepts of "anti-trust suit" and "insider trading" wouldn't exist. Canada on the other hand is much more regulated than the US, various instutions are owned and run by the state and everyone pays for them. However Canada is still considered to have a free market economy, it's just that the US leans further towards the extreme of no-regulation whatsoever and could therefore be said to be "more capitalistic".
Similarily, no country, to the best of my knowledge, has a government in which all citizens vote on all issues. That is what a democracy is. Now, in say, Canada, we currently have a minority government (the party that won the election did not win the majority of the votes). As such our current PM is accountable to those people who did not vote for him...seems to me that the current situation in Canada is doing a better job of accurately representing the wishes of the population of Canada than in the US where the opinions of approximately 50% of their population is essentially worth nothing to the president? As such how is the US both:
A) a democracy
B) the ONLY true democracy and
B) NOT less of a democracy than some other country (not necessarily Canada, I just use it as an example to demonstrate that relativity exists...there's probably a better example out there, but I live here).
Also, PLEASE stop using words like "constitution" and "freedom of speech" in your definition of democracy. Ever heard a teacher tell a class that their class room isn't a democracy? While that may be true, for the most part the students persist in having certain rights...I could make the similar arguement with a hypothetical China. IF China were to adopt and uphold a constitution similar to that of the US plus/minus a few key points, would that make them a democracy?
Further more, it is possible to have a democracy without certain rights such as freedom of speech which are taken for granted. Let's imagine for a second that the US was made up of 60% KKK members, 20% white yuppies, and 20% people of various non-white Christain heritages. That democracy could possibly be an actual democracy, where every citizen voted on every law/bill/whatever. Now, do you think that things such as "freedom of religion" or "right to life/liberty/pursuit of happiness" would exist in this imaginary country's consititution without multiple astrixes pointing out "providing you are Christian and White"?
This hypothetical country would be MUCH more a democracy than any country currently in existence that I know of, now would they have the right to enforce their beliefs on any other country simply because they were the only true democracy?
Now, if you were to completely retract your statement of "The US is the only true democracy, and therefore has the responsibility to police the world" and perhaps replace it with "The US has what all fair-minded people should consider a reasonable constitution, and therefore has the responsibility to spread those same rights to people who don't have those rights" I won't say another word. I don't actually have an issue with the policing the world issue, or at least not one that I care to debate on a diabloii forum at any rate, just where you imply that Canada is quite specifically not democratic for some arbitrary reason bothers me.
mechanics/physics/architecture.
It is because of their metal structure that the towers went down like that.
You are still telling me that the steel melted because of the planes, even when I already proved to you it, not only is it not logical, that it isn't possible? C'mon homie, don't even respond without backing yourself up with some "proof" (I'll show you why it's in quotation marks if you actually decide to step up). Only way those buildings fell down is with a small-scale nuclear device OR with hi-tech explosives (Trithatol forgot to mention this). Since there are no unusual signs of radioactivity that can be confirmed, this only leads to one conclusion: modern hi-tech explosives.
By the way, Trith and I do have glasses :lol: :thumbsup:
HAMC8112
15-10-2004, 00:54
Speaking for myself here, i'd like to point out that sometimes when i answer a post i am not always thinking clear, i mean sometimes you make statements that with hindsight make no sense atall. So to anyone that i possibly annoyed, do not take it personal.
We should know better by now than to talk politics :lol:
[QUOTE=MoUsE_WiZ]You're from there then, or is this probably the most hypocritical statement I've seen thus far in this thread?
I apologize for my hypocracy.
Your right. I also shouldnt assume things are better there because I do have a biased opinion of freedom. It is all I have ever known. Thank God.
slick4hire
15-10-2004, 01:18
I'm still yet to hear why the US is the ONLY true democracy in the world. I'd say Canada or the UK are far more democratic than the US in that their leaders have to answer to the opposition in debate regularily. Bush didn't have to do that, and the presidential debates were a farce...the agreement over debate procedures was 36 pages long! Tony Blair was berated daily from the opposition and his own party for his views because they didn't represent the majority of the country. I'm sure others could find better democracies than the US, and saying that they're the only true democracy because they bomb Muslim countries and force their ideologies upon its civilians is laughable...that's not democratic.
The US is a representative republic, not a democracy (remember the electoral college). Anyone who says the US is a democracy didn't pay enough attention in government/civics.
laughingtiger
15-10-2004, 02:04
TEACHER ARRESTED
At New York's Kennedy airport today, an individual, later discovered to be a
public school teacher, was arrested trying to board a flight while in
possession of a ruler, a protractor, a set square, a slide rule, and a
calculator.
At a morning press conference, Attorney General John Ashcroft said he
believes the man is a member of the notorious Al-gebra movement. He is being
charged by the FBI with carrying weapons of math instruction.
"Al-gebra is a fearsome cult," Ashcroft said. "They desire average solutions
by means and extremes, and sometimes go off on tangents in a search of
absolute value. They use secret code names like 'x' and 'y' and refer to
themselves as 'unknowns,' but we have determined they belong to a common
denominator of the axis of medieval with coordinates in every country. As
the Greek philanderer Isosceles used to say, "There are 3 sides to every
triangle."
When asked to comment on the arrest, President Bush said, "If God had wanted
us to have better weapons of math instruction, He would have given us more
fingers and toes." :thumbsup:
Hmmm.. I feel an urge to post recipes coming on.... :surprise:
All Hail the Great NAGA!!! :clap:
HAMC8112
15-10-2004, 02:14
TEACHER ARRESTED
At New York's Kennedy airport today, an individual, later discovered to be a
public school teacher, was arrested trying to board a flight while in
possession of a ruler, a protractor, a set square, a slide rule, and a
calculator.
At a morning press conference, Attorney General John Ashcroft said he
believes the man is a member of the notorious Al-gebra movement. He is being
charged by the FBI with carrying weapons of math instruction.
"Al-gebra is a fearsome cult," Ashcroft said. "They desire average solutions
by means and extremes, and sometimes go off on tangents in a search of
absolute value. They use secret code names like 'x' and 'y' and refer to
themselves as 'unknowns,' but we have determined they belong to a common
denominator of the axis of medieval with coordinates in every country. As
the Greek philanderer Isosceles used to say, "There are 3 sides to every
triangle."
When asked to comment on the arrest, President Bush said, "If God had wanted
us to have better weapons of math instruction, He would have given us more
fingers and toes."
Hmmm.. I feel an urge to post recipes coming on....
All Hail the Great NAGA!!!
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Like Ceasar said: If you want peace, prepare for war.
This quote is from Flavius Vegetius Renatus a military strategist for the roman army who lived 400 years after Caeser ( not Ceasar! )
Power_Play
15-10-2004, 06:38
when i answer a post i am not always thinking clear
So we noticed :flip: :drool:
That's k Kev, afterall thats what democraty is all about right? Now if you were to explain in what way you were dissapointed maybe i could explain me views, now i have to guess, so i'll make a couple:
Your dissapointed coz i am not left wing? They killed have my family!
your dissapointed coz... Explain pls?
Im not disappointed because your left wing or whatever...
Im disappointed that you believe that america is the only democracy on this planet.
Im disappointed that you (and a fair few others) keep bringing up the subject of how america "Saved" us poor europeans in the last war.
I dont dispute it, but its a bit wearying to hear it all the time........
I looked up democracy btw - its quoted (well 1 of the 5 meanings) as
"Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives. "
Doesnt that represent most countries - or have I been misled.
Ahh well - whatever your views - their your views and I cant (and wouldnt want to) change them............
Kev
Toliphar
15-10-2004, 08:36
Ofcourse the US is the only true democracy in the world. Hasn't always been? No problem having connections to some certain arabic and muslim people/organizations. Yeah, sure, you just won't be able to go anywhere by airplain.
'Is he a terrorist?'
'I have no idea, let's throw him in jail for half a year without a trial just to be sure.'
Not to mention the witch hunt for communists in the mid 20th century, that was very democratic. So, you have read a book the sympethizes with the ideas of Lenin? Interrogations! I suppose it's very democratic to be harressed 24 hours a day.
Not even with the MAJORITY of the votes in the US did Al Gore get elected, now THAT'S a true democracy. Yiiihaaa!
Its not gonna be easy explaining that, Canada or the UK are "more" democratic? You are democratic or not, there's no inbetween space there, you are or you are not.
Bush didnt have to answer to the opposision, indeed he had not, he has the majority, thats what's it all about in a democraty. So explain to me that when a majority has to answer to a minority how exactly does that make it "more" democratic.
And its not that the US is a true democraty coz they bomb Muslimcountries( you sound biased here) it's because they do not run away from there responsability's and took on a tyrant who has killed 100.000's ppl, sound familiar? WW1, WW2 come to mind.
The UK is far more democratic? If the US haddent been a true democraty there would be no states like the UK, they would have spoken german if it wasnt for America.
Edit: in a previous post someone even called the Netherlands a better democraty, hahahahah, the Netherlands where the head of state is in power coz she is the daughter of her mother! How can a monarchy be a Democraty?
Ham,
Again with the - we would be speaking German..........
May have, might have, whatever - we arent....
We dont KNOW what would have happened if America didnt come in........
For all you know, the Soviets may have crushed the Germans - they did have the ability...........
Again - read my quote of democracy.......... its all about the leaders being elected by the people.
Its not about whether we are a better democracy or you are. Or whether a country is a democracy or not (purely because they defend the rest of the world.......)
UK is a democracy, Canada is a democracy, America is a democracy.......
Theres no shades here mate - they just are :)
Kev
Actually one further point - you mention the courage to stand up against dictators etc - Hasnt the UK done this? Even when we were losing WW2, and Hitler offered peace, we still continued to fight..........
Think about that one please Ham :)
And of course we are always only looking back 60 - 70 years when Germany threatened the world or 90 years when Germany lost the first World War. 200 years ago and the Genocide on Indians or Aboriginies is forgotten? Well...the winner writes the history books..and technically it was our European ancestors and Convicts who "conquered" Australia and America...
I should have known better not to post in this Thread :lol: Taking this back 2 centuries is just going baaaaaaadly OT on an OT
The funny thing is that even with worldwide media coverage and having "all the informations at our fingertips" we still seem to know nothing for sure and can't even seem to agree on such a simple thing as what is "democracy".
The only thing that kept irking me is the insistence that "America has the only true democracy". At least I Germany I have the feeling that with the Christian Democrats, the Social Democrats, the Liberal democrats and the Green Party we have 4 different (and influencial) political parties, while in Amercica you pretty much have 2 Parties that are not that different in their beliefs. Personally I am not even Pro-Kerry, I am just Anti-Bush..its like chosing between 2 wrongs... (both voted pro Iraq war, while in Germany at least the political parties were split. If we'd had a CDU government, led by Angela Merkel, there would be German Soldiers in Iraq. Being in Afghanistan is already pretty much impossible to swallow as the Bundeswehr is ment to be a purely defensive army that is only allowed to defend the borders of Germany. So duddenly our borders are at the Hindukusk? Wait..its a humanitarian misson ... now its okay.)
Whoops..going even more OT if that is possible.
With all
HAMC8112
15-10-2004, 10:27
I had to check the date today, then it all dawned on me, it was get that "Hamguyday!"
:lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Nah..you are just a man with strong opinions.
I could put together a flash that quoted 100 people saying they saw GW himself fire a rocket at the pentagon. Doesn't make it true. This flash is full of loop holes and ignorance. Sorry to say but if you believe in this kind of stuff your not a very bright person. There is no conspiracy behind 9-11. Take off the tinfoil hats guys.
Nerf-Herder
15-10-2004, 11:37
"i thought a plane would make a bigger hole in the pentagon when it hit"
dont remember who said that in this thread and i dont care to go back and look
i live in washington DC -- have you ever SEEN the ****ing pentagon?
that bulding is HUGE!! -- its the largest non-skyscraper office complex in the world and since its offices are government//military its structure is reinforced to the hilt -- THAT is why that hole seemed so "small" on TV
and what about all the commuters in the area on 911 who witnessed the plane hit the pentagon?
People love conspiracy theories:
Who shot JFK (and why)?
Was there really a man on the moon?
What is locked in the vaults of the Vatikan?
What happens in Area 51?
Elvis is really still alive....
etc etc etc.........
now 9/11..
Cleglaw_Himself
15-10-2004, 12:22
and what about all the commuters in the area on 911 who witnessed the plane hit the pentagon?
Ok, a plane hit it. But why didn't they aim it towards the end of the building where the prez sits? Noooo, instead, they hit the other end...
People love conspiracy theories:
Who shot JFK (and why)?
Can't answer this one.
Was there really a man on the moon?
No.
As the Red Hot Chilli Peppers said in Californication: "It was done in a Hollywood basement"
Or, actually in Area 51. Check the 'moon' pictures on NASA website. Shocking cut and paste photography. They had to beat the Russians so they faked it. No harm in that, but suddenly everyone is massively patriotic. Doh. Can't tell anyone its fake now...
What is locked in the vaults of the Vatikan?
That's easy. All the records of all the Vatican assets, dating back to when they first built the church on St Peter's grave.
What happens in Area 51?
Making fake moon movies.
Learning about UFO technologies.
Elvis is really still alive....
Nope, he's gone.
now 9/11..
Don't get me started again!
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.