|
9/11 and american media
[1 2]
|
Sheriff
Admin
6285 сообщений
 автор
|
 отправлено 11 Сен 2007 10:35:00 PM
 ответить
#1
Today is 6th anniversary of the attack.
I am watching MSNBC and CNN. Supposedly, the world news agencies. Tragic footage, the show plains hit the World Trade Center towers over, and over. And over. And over. There is no commentary, no news, just footage.
I guess they will have good ratings today.
In the mean time, the real news is that 130 architects signed a petition, that the Towers couldn't fall themselves, that it was FOR SURE A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION EVENT.
That is what I would classify as NEWS. Not in this country.
So basically, we have 2 remote-controlled planes hit the towers, one plane shut down by military aircrafts over Pennsylvania, and a missile that hit Pentagon. The news, however, is backwards, thanks to wonderful "how it happened" "coverage" by local media.
I am guessing, it was indeed a plan that third airplane would hit Pentagon. Possibly it just went out of control and had to be shut down, but the news already went out so they had to do something about it, and shot a missile. Who cares now.
|
|
|
Sheriff
Admin
6285 сообщений
автор
|
отправлено 11 Сен 2007 10:43:21 PM
ответить
#2
Короче, я даже не буду это всё переводить, никого не волнует. На и альтернативных новостных сайтах прошла информация, что 130 архитекторов в США подписали петицию о том, что здания World Trade Центра были взорваны, что они не могли сами упасть.
Это - новости.
Вместе с тем локальные каналы гоняют по кругу просто кадры первых двух ударов в башни.
Моё предположение таково - два Боинга, контролируемые дистанционно, взорваны в башнях. Третий Боинг был сбит над Пенсильванией, скорее всего он то и предназначался Пентагону, но что-то не заладилось. Поскольку новости уже ушли, пришлось в Пентагон выстрелить ракетой. То что в Пентагон никакой самолёт не врезался ясно даже непосвящённым.
Джулиани за хорошее поведение получил звание хорошей собачки и возможность избираться в президенты.
Интересно вот что. Клинтона за какую-то деваху дрючили годами по всем каналам. Буш младший подтасовывает выборы, разрешает взрывать башни, начинает несанкционированныю войну...я думаю этого не мало. И что? А ничего.
Я полагаю, Буша младшего нужно судить как международного преступника. НО никому до этого не будет дела.
|
brad62
2373 сообщения
автор
|
отправлено 11 Сен 2007 11:51:47 PM
ответить
#3
Sheriff, I don't have a t.v.. But I have a computer. And I also have watched a lot of news footage about 911 today. I watched a documentary on youtube from loveorhate.com. 2 hours of footage. When I went to the website, it was a porn site. So whether good or bad, I trust the mainstream media more than a company that strips videos from one place. Posts them on youtube, then directs you to a porn site.
But whichever view you have? It was still a tragedy what happend to the innocent people.
[Message edited by brad62 on 9/11/2007 11:53:34 PM]
|
Акакий
7242 сообщения
автор
|
отправлено 12 Сен 2007 1:29:01 AM
ответить
#4
the only surprize is why only 130 architektors? it's kinda obvious it could not fall down that way(all way to/from the buttom!) from the fire.
also i already said a 20+year expirienced pilot of a usa major airline i personally know said, there is no way he could manage to fly like that into the buildings without guidance.
and still many americans do not believe that something is wrong!
BTW this pilot was scammed by his airline(robbed from his pension). now he moved to another country and got much better job. this is just a good example for those smartasses like Vodolejka who do not believe people move out of america.
Sherriff, you forgot to mention the bullshit about those guys calling from cell phones from the airplane.
Brad, try to call from a cell phone from an airplane:-)
forget about internet. just come to a plane, and make a call when flying.
i guess most americans have no idea about this stuff, so they get ripped off by government bullshit stories so easily.
|
brad62
2373 сообщения
автор
|
отправлено 12 Сен 2007 2:14:40 AM
ответить
#5
Brad, try to call from a cell phone from an airplane:-)
forget about internet. just come to a plane, and make a call when flying.
i guess most americans have no idea about this stuff, so they get ripped off by government bullshit stories so easily.
Akakiy, do you forget you you talking to with that question?
I know about this crap all Governments feed us.
I'm only saying.
You have to make you're own mind up. You should not rely on Governments, news media, T.V.
We are all very smart people here. " With the exception of a few un named" We form our own opinions, with the resourses that are available to each person
[Message edited by brad62 on 9/12/2007 2:18:29 AM]
|
Акакий
7242 сообщения
автор
|
отправлено 12 Сен 2007 2:34:29 AM
ответить
#6
Brad, before your wrote:
>>>So whether good or bad, I trust the mainstream media more >>>than a company that strips videos from one place.
then you're saying not to rely on media..
this "mainstream" media was just showing the crying women telling how her husband called her from that airplane!
check this out:
http://physics911.net/cellphoneflight93
BTW, the ****ing phone stops working when you're only on a runway. so **** this show they're still making!
|
brad62
2373 сообщения
автор
|
отправлено 12 Сен 2007 2:54:25 AM
ответить
#7
Akakiy, I'm not talking about those things. I'm talking about making up your own mind. Not reling on web sites. That's all I'm saying.
You've known my long enough now.
|
Акакий
7242 сообщения
автор
|
отправлено 12 Сен 2007 3:36:42 AM
ответить
#8
Brad, right, but you do not wanna rely on the official media only either. at least you gotta checkout media from other countries on the same subject. if internet web sites make more sense, then i'd trust them more than the "official" media.
|
brad62
2373 сообщения
автор
|
отправлено 12 Сен 2007 4:14:03 AM
ответить
#9
Akakiy, like I said. I'm not just writing, and listening to views on this site. It's the Internet. I go to many sites. I read, I listen. I make up my own mind.
You can go to a 100 sites that say the American Government was behind 911. You can also go to a 100 sites that say Mossad was behind it.
And every place, " site " says the same thing.
You get to much heresay, without actual proof. Then all the sites tell you. It's the Bilderbergs, or the Council of Foreign Relation. And then it's the Illumanti. It never stops. This place also.
Jeez, gimme a break here.
|
brad62
2373 сообщения
автор
|
отправлено 12 Сен 2007 11:45:45 PM
ответить
#10
A. K. Dewdney
Acknowledgment: I wish to thank Brad Mayeaux for assistance in preparing this article
Introduction
If the hijackings of September 11 were staged, the organization responsible would also be sure to add other elements to the basic plan, not only developing lists of hijackers, but sending fake cellphone calls from some of the passengers. The following analysis focuses on Flight 93, from which more alleged cellphone calls were made than from the other three flights combined. It could be called the “Cellphone Flight.” Like the staged attacks themselves, the calling operation would be complex, involving the a) deployment of voice mimicry techniques, b) gathering personal intelligence on at least some of the passengers, c) coordination of calls with the operation’s timeline.
1. Background
Any analysis of the cellphone and “airfone” calls from Flight 93 must begin with some basic, high-altitude cellphone facts. According to AT&T spokesperson Alexa Graf, cellphones are not designed for calls from the high altitudes at which most airliners normally operate. It was, in her opinion, a “fluke” that so many calls reached their destinations. (Harter 2001) In the opinion of a colleague of mine who has worked in the cellphone industry, it was a “miracle” that any of the calls got through from altitude. (See the recent proposal to install equipment to make cellphone calls possible from aircraft.) An aircraft, having a metal skin and fuselage, acts like a Faraday cage, tending to block or attenuate electromagnetic radiation. One can make a cellphone call from inside an aircraft while on the ground because the weakened signal is still close enough to the nearest cellsite (relay tower) to get picked up. Once above 10,000 feet, however, calls rarely get through, if ever.
Here is the statement of an experienced airline pilot: “The idea of being able to use a cellphone while flying is completely impractical. Once through about 10,000 feet, the thing is useless, since you are too high and moving too fast (and thus changing cells too rapidly) for the phone to provide a signal.” (AVWeb, 1999)
People boarding aircraft for the last decade or so have all heard the warnings to turn off their cellphones for the duration of the flight. The reasons for this regulation are somewhat mysterious, since the usual explanation, that delicate aircraft electronics might be affected by cellphone signals, is cast somewhat in doubt by the fact that all avionics are shielded from stray electromagnetic radiation. (Spitzer 1987) On the other hand, the FCC had apparently requested that airlines make this rule, owing to the tendency for cell phone calls made from aircraft at lower altitudes to create “cascades” that may lead to breakdown of cellsite operations. (Fraizer 2002)
The cascade problem is more likely at altitudes of 10,000 feet or lower, where reaching a cellsite, although still a touch-and-go matter, is more easily accomplished. However, because of its superior position, the cellphone may reach several cellsites at once. This can create problems, as software that determines which site is to handle the call makes its judgment based on the relative strength of calls. If the call is made from an overhead position, it may well not be able to distinguish relative strength at different cellsites. When this happens it is designed to close off the calling channel, selecting another channel in its place. But the
|
brad62
2373 сообщения
автор
|
отправлено 12 Сен 2007 11:47:38 PM
ответить
#11
Thatwas the url that Akakiy sent me
|
Serega13
Moderator
2270 сообщений
автор
|
отправлено 13 Сен 2007 8:45:08 AM
ответить
#12
The best proof of how bogus 9/11 is - look at the 3rd building that collapsed in NY - WTC building 7 - it's about 70 stories high and was not hit by planes but it did collapse. The owner of the building said and I quote "we had to pull it". WTF does that mean - pull it? Look at the footage of building 7 and you see a controlled detonation and the building collapses. Again, I'm not talking about tower1 or 2, I'm talking about World Trade Center building 7. Once you research into all of this it becomes perfectly clear.
|
brad62
2373 сообщения
автор
|
отправлено 13 Сен 2007 8:52:30 AM
ответить
#13
I guess it doesn't matter anymore. If it could be proved that an Government agency was behind it? The whole world would demand justice. But it will never be proven as fact.
|
Sheriff
Admin
6285 сообщений
автор
|
отправлено 13 Сен 2007 11:33:17 AM
ответить
#14
http://vazhno.ru/important/article/9039/
|
RoadRunner
9 сообщений
автор
|
отправлено 13 Сен 2007 11:59:56 AM
ответить
#15
the real news, actually is not the petition by architects or speculation of remote-controlled planes... THE REAL NEWS is that now more people were sent to death in Iraq for no good reason!! the real news is that those young men and women are still dieing for President's idiotic decisions and the blind following that is the American public (well, at least the majority that voted for him!) I hate this!! it drives me mad to see so much suffering!
|
brad62
2373 сообщения
автор
|
отправлено 13 Сен 2007 1:10:36 PM
ответить
#16
The real news is, most Americans didn't vote for that idiot.
Sheriff, Before I look at the url. Is it in Russian? Because my Russian is only good enough for 1 or 2 sentences at a time. Not whole paragraphs.
|
brad62
2373 сообщения
автор
|
отправлено 13 Сен 2007 1:13:40 PM
ответить
#17
I hate to be a nit-pick. But Sheriff.
Tragic footage, the show plains hit the World Trade Center towers over, and over
It should have been "Planes" as in "airplanes"
|
Bourgeois
297 сообщений
автор
|
отправлено 13 Сен 2007 5:53:02 PM
ответить
#18
**The news, however, is backwards, thanks to wonderful "how it happened" "coverage" by local media.**
No, there are some small newspapers which blame Mr. Bush even in earthquakes. But main American media doesn’t fall so deep in anti-Bush paranoia. I can explain why. America is not Russia, there are not so mach idiots in America who will buy this paranoia (Буш младший подтасовывает выборы, разрешает взрывать башни).
|
RoadRunner
9 сообщений
автор
|
отправлено 13 Сен 2007 6:30:54 PM
ответить
#19
"The real news is, most Americans didn't vote for that idiot."
while i can agree that intelligent Americans did not vote for Bush... the result is still the same - only parts of the US (and all ocean-side) voted against him... and the "idiot" is ruling this country his second term!!
|
brad62
2373 сообщения
автор
|
отправлено 13 Сен 2007 9:08:39 PM
ответить
#20
Roadrunner? Until you put up your name to the people who are members? You will not be taken as a serious person.
So, stay out of the threads
|
|
следующие 20 >>
|
En 
Рус
Новая тема
наверх