boyst Posted November 19, 2010 Posted November 19, 2010 I have tuned in to several of his shows in passing and not reeally getting all that in to them, however, this weeks show I might watch the entirity, though. I find it amazing that JFK remains so controversal. I have seen enough to make me believe that it was just 1 shooter that made contact but the rest I am unsure upon. The Oliver Stone movie was off base on a lot to most shows I have seen. Link
BuffaloBill Posted November 20, 2010 Posted November 20, 2010 The sad truth is that we will never know for sure if Oswald acted alone. There have been so many rumors and attempts to prove otherwise that separating fact from fiction is nearly impossible. I occasionally have to drive through the "grassy knoll" it is haunting in a way.
Marv's Neighbor Posted November 20, 2010 Posted November 20, 2010 If our Government had a better rep for telling the Truth, we wouldn't have all the "conspiracy" stuff. Jesse occasionally makes some good points. Whenever any kind of sh*t happens, and the FBI gets involved, you know you'll never get the straight story because the FBI is too politically connected. I never heard that there were missing frames in the Zapruder film? If that's true, it screws up the whole time sequence of the assination. The 9/11 show asks why did WTC-7 "fall down?" Well, that's very much unanswered today? Did the Government have a hand in it? I don't think so but there are too many unanswered questions to put it to rest. They also asked where the Aircraft Flight Recorders were? The FBI says "officially" that they were never recovered but eye witness accounts say they were. Since they are by nature designed to withstand crash G's & temps., painted bright orange etc., how could they "not be found?" Jesse is a showman, to be sure. I love to watch his righteous indignation when he gets to the sites and they tell him to pound sand. it's pure WWF all over again. I was in High School when JFK was assinated. That event was on the same emotional level as 9/11. Everybody was upset and asking for answers and all you get is some windy presidential Commission to solve everything. As we all know, the Commissions drive many more questions than answers and that's where the conspiracy stuff, for better or worse, gets started.
Wacka Posted November 21, 2010 Posted November 21, 2010 If our Government had a better rep for telling the Truth, we wouldn't have all the "conspiracy" stuff. Jesse occasionally makes some good points. Whenever any kind of sh*t happens, and the FBI gets involved, you know you'll never get the straight story because the FBI is too politically connected. I never heard that there were missing frames in the Zapruder film? If that's true, it screws up the whole time sequence of the assination. The 9/11 show asks why did WTC-7 "fall down?" Well, that's very much unanswered today? Did the Government have a hand in it? I don't think so but there are too many unanswered questions to put it to rest. They also asked where the Aircraft Flight Recorders were? The FBI says "officially" that they were never recovered but eye witness accounts say they were. Since they are by nature designed to withstand crash G's & temps., painted bright orange etc., how could they "not be found?" Jesse is a showman, to be sure. I love to watch his righteous indignation when he gets to the sites and they tell him to pound sand. it's pure WWF all over again. I was in High School when JFK was assinated. That event was on the same emotional level as 9/11. Everybody was upset and asking for answers and all you get is some windy presidential Commission to solve everything. As we all know, the Commissions drive many more questions than answers and that's where the conspiracy stuff, for better or worse, gets started. There was a show on the History Channel I believe that looked at each of the questions in the Kennedy assassination that could be answered scientifically and the showed that Oswald did it alone. As for WTC7, a big piece of the falling towers hit it. Otherwise you are in Connor territory.
/dev/null Posted November 21, 2010 Posted November 21, 2010 If our Government had a better rep for telling the Truth, we wouldn't have all the "conspiracy" stuff. Jesse occasionally makes some good points. Whenever any kind of sh*t happens, and the FBI gets involved, you know you'll never get the straight story because the FBI is too politically connected. I never heard that there were missing frames in the Zapruder film? If that's true, it screws up the whole time sequence of the assination. The 9/11 show asks why did WTC-7 "fall down?" Well, that's very much unanswered today? Did the Government have a hand in it? I don't think so but there are too many unanswered questions to put it to rest. They also asked where the Aircraft Flight Recorders were? The FBI says "officially" that they were never recovered but eye witness accounts say they were. Since they are by nature designed to withstand crash G's & temps., painted bright orange etc., how could they "not be found?" Jesse is a showman, to be sure. I love to watch his righteous indignation when he gets to the sites and they tell him to pound sand. it's pure WWF all over again. I was in High School when JFK was assinated. That event was on the same emotional level as 9/11. Everybody was upset and asking for answers and all you get is some windy presidential Commission to solve everything. As we all know, the Commissions drive many more questions than answers and that's where the conspiracy stuff, for better or worse, gets started. Hush you and your rational explinations The former gimmick Governor, Pro Wrestler, and actor has a TV show to promote
DC Tom Posted November 21, 2010 Posted November 21, 2010 They also asked where the Aircraft Flight Recorders were? The FBI says "officially" that they were never recovered but eye witness accounts say they were. Since they are by nature designed to withstand crash G's & temps., painted bright orange etc., how could they "not be found?" Uh...a couple of big-ass skyscrapers fell on them?
boyst Posted November 21, 2010 Author Posted November 21, 2010 Hush you and your rational explinations The former gimmick Governor, Pro Wrestler, and actor has a TV show to promote (Sorry for the delay, I drove up to see my sister, brother in law and nephew in Ohio; been busy.) You get my point, though. It's a show about conspiracies and rather right or wrong I see a lot of interesting points made out. I never really get the whole kool-aid thing, and very cynical and believe that the gov is beyond capable of doing whatever it wants whenever it wants without anyone knowing or stopping them. That the high tech gizmos in movies are real, too.
Marv's Neighbor Posted November 24, 2010 Posted November 24, 2010 Uh...a couple of big-ass skyscrapers fell on them? Uh actually, WTC-6 was hit and only partially collapsed. Had to be demoloshed later. Your big-ass skyscrapers must have jumped over WTC-5, partially hit WTC-6, but never touched WTC-7, yet somehow it just fell down! So far, there's no rational explaination for that!
McBeane Posted November 24, 2010 Posted November 24, 2010 Uh actually, WTC-6 was hit and only partially collapsed. Had to be demoloshed later. Your big-ass skyscrapers must have jumped over WTC-5, partially hit WTC-6, but never touched WTC-7, yet somehow it just fell down! So far, there's no rational explaination for that! Thank you.
Dan Posted November 24, 2010 Posted November 24, 2010 Uh actually, WTC-6 was hit and only partially collapsed. Had to be demoloshed later. Your big-ass skyscrapers must have jumped over WTC-5, partially hit WTC-6, but never touched WTC-7, yet somehow it just fell down! So far, there's no rational explaination for that! Actually, WTC 4, 5, and 6 were all damaged quite severely. #5 mostly on the south facing side away from #7. #6 had a hole in the middle of the building and severe damage extending to the north towards #7. #7 was completely collapsed. It's completely plausible that parts of WTC #1 fell on #6 and into #7 causing the collapse. I'm not a structural engineer nor am I an expert in falling buildingolgy; but many of the buildings around the site were structurally unstable and on the verge of collapse (1Liberty Plaza, for example). On the surface, they appeared to receive minimal damage; yet it took several weeks to confirm they wouldn't fall as well. Perhaps #7 was built poorly. Perhaps debris fell more directly on it than it would appear. Perhaps NYC OEM blew it up because they really wanted a new office. Perhaps there's no real mystery at all. But, I guess it's fun to postulate.
KD in CA Posted November 24, 2010 Posted November 24, 2010 Perhaps #7 was built poorly. Perhaps debris fell more directly on it than it would appear. Perhaps NYC OEM blew it up because they really wanted a new office. Perhaps there's no real mystery at all. But, I guess it's fun to postulate. Aside from the randomness at which debris from a couple of collapsing 110 story towers would fall onto surrounding buildings, the WTC #7 nuts would apparently have us believe that one of two things happened: 1) 9-11 was completely and entirely an inside job, as the building would have had to be wired in advance. I suppose this means WTC #1 and #2 were likewise wired and a missile rather than airplane hit the Pentagon. or, 2) After the two towers fell, someone not only decided in the middle of unfathomable damage and chaos, "hey, let's blow up that badly damaged and fully evacuated building next door", but managed to put a team of people together to actually wire and explode that building within a few hours, while in the middle of unfathomable damage and chaos, and while billions of people around the planet watch on TV. Sounds very plausible.
GG Posted November 24, 2010 Posted November 24, 2010 Aside from the randomness at which debris from a couple of collapsing 110 story towers would fall onto surrounding buildings, the WTC #7 nuts would apparently have us believe that one of two things happened: 1) 9-11 was completely and entirely an inside job, as the building would have had to be wired in advance. I suppose this means WTC #1 and #2 were likewise wired and a missile rather than airplane hit the Pentagon. or, 2) After the two towers fell, someone not only decided in the middle of unfathomable damage and chaos, "hey, let's blow up that badly damaged and fully evacuated building next door", but managed to put a team of people together to actually wire and explode that building within a few hours, while in the middle of unfathomable damage and chaos, and while billions of people around the planet watch on TV. Sounds very plausible. There's always the insurance angle.
DC Tom Posted November 24, 2010 Posted November 24, 2010 So far, there's no rational explaination for that! Personally, I thought the "big-ass skyscraper" theory was rational enough.
McBeane Posted November 24, 2010 Posted November 24, 2010 (edited) 1) 9-11 was completely and entirely an inside job, as the building would have had to be wired in advance. I suppose this means WTC #1 and #2 were likewise wired and a missile rather than airplane hit the Pentagon. How do you explain the hole in the Pentagon then? And the lack of engine debris and large debris that planes would undoubtedly leave? Also, the debris and damage to the Shanksville site is completely inconsistent to a plane hitting the ground. There are a lot of questions that can't be answered logically. Edited November 24, 2010 by SpillerTime21
BarkLessWagMore Posted November 24, 2010 Posted November 24, 2010 How do you explain the hole in the Pentagon then? And the lack of engine debris and large debris that planes would undoubtedly leave? Also, the debris and damage to the Shanksville site is completely inconsistent to a plane hitting the ground. There are a lot of questions that can't be answered logically. Oh god, not again.
ajzepp Posted November 24, 2010 Posted November 24, 2010 Since Tom chimed in on this topic, I want to give him Kudos, cuase he was one of the main reasons I didn't end up in a psych ward immediately after watching "Zeitgeist", lol. That damn film shook my foundation, and I needed to find my center again, so to speak. Anyway, I didn't really give any credit whatsoever to conspiracy theories and such until I saw actual government documents that discussed a potential false flag operation during the Kennedy administration. In fact, I think that's one of the theories as to why JFK was assassinated - he didn't want to go along with the operation. It had something to do with blowing up a plane full of Americans and blaming it on Cuba or some other communist entity. Maybe the documents were fake, I dunno...but being from a family with many relatives who fought proudly in every war of the 20th century, it makes me sick to think our gov't would have anything to do with any sort of false flag operation.
Just Jack Posted November 24, 2010 Posted November 24, 2010 2) After the two towers fell, someone not only decided in the middle of unfathomable damage and chaos, "hey, let's blow up that badly damaged and fully evacuated building next door", but managed to put a team of people together to actually wire and explode that building within a few hours, while in the middle of unfathomable damage and chaos, and while billions of people around the planet watch on TV. Sounds very plausible. I saw Tommy Lee Jones wire up a 40 story hotel in 20 minutes and drop it right where he needed it in Volcano.
KD in CA Posted November 24, 2010 Posted November 24, 2010 How do you explain the hole in the Pentagon then? And the lack of engine debris and large debris that planes would undoubtedly leave? Also, the debris and damage to the Shanksville site is completely inconsistent to a plane hitting the ground. There are a lot of questions that can't be answered logically. Ok...just for fun. Who says there was a 'lack of engine debris'?? Wouldn't such debris have ended up deep inside the middle of the Pentagon? Isn't access to the middle of the Pentagon somewhat restricted to the general public? What did you expect, amateur video of the engines lying in some Admiral's office? I didn't see any evidence of 'engine debris' either when I was looking at the impact site of the north tower --- probably since it was lying in Battery Park City.
Just Jack Posted November 24, 2010 Posted November 24, 2010 I believe a plane did hit the Pentagon. Why? Because DCTom saw it hit.
Wacka Posted November 24, 2010 Posted November 24, 2010 How do you explain the hole in the Pentagon then? And the lack of engine debris and large debris that planes would undoubtedly leave? Also, the debris and damage to the Shanksville site is completely inconsistent to a plane hitting the ground. There are a lot of questions that can't be answered logically. Then explain what was that large plane that flew low over DCTom's apartment seconds before the Pentagon was hit. Tom lived close to the Pentagon and saw the plane. Is this Conner???
Recommended Posts