Osama's Message to America!

[racer270]

quote:
As far as the ground observers saying that the planes that flew into the towers were only small planes, that is can not be true. There are a variety of video tapes that all show large commercial jet planes flying into those towers.

ken,
i was speaking of : " the small plain that hit the pentagon ", everyone has seen the film of the big plains slamming into the "WTS", but the "most watched place on earth" , "the pentagon" has / had , no video film.......????



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11145948/ it's about the ......$$$$$$

[Joel Wright]

Here's pictures of the Pentagon taken from a security camera before, during and after the incident.IMO the plane entered the complex after the outer wall ,appears to be a sharp angle of attack. http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/03/07/g ... .pictures/

[racer270]

the whole in the Pentagon was too small to be made by a jumbo jet, the plane I saw crash in San Diego took out eight square blocks, the Pentagon was a mostly wood frame building and the fact that they opened the majority of it within a few weeks just doesn't wash with being a major airliner crash.

Also the fireball was more like a cruise missile with a moderate warhead the angle of attack in the video is not clear. What is clear is either the airplane was flying too fast for the cameras to spot, or maybe it was just too small and too fast.

The devastation of a fully loaded jumbo jet, and the intensity of the kerosene to burn would not have been contained to a small portion of the huge building.

ps. here is the one i saw crash......... it burned 8 sq. blocks +, i detent need high speed video to see this one.....!
i was there 3 to 5 min. after the crash , before the cops, the firemen, before anyone.........very big and very ugly....!

http://www.psa-history.org/museum/crash.htm
Gordy

[AgingYoung]

The crash killed about 200 people, including all 64 on the plane.

Where did the 64 people on board the plane go?

Gene

[ken_behrendt]

racer270 wrote:

ken,
i was speaking of : " the small plain that hit the pentagon ", everyone has seen the film of the big plains slamming into the "WTS", but the "most watched place on earth" , "the pentagon" has / had , no video film.......????

Apparently, the entrances to the Pentagon, like many mall parking lots and banks, only use security cameras that take a frame every few seconds. This allows much more data to be recorded than if they had to record a real time video image.

Actually, I think its extremely lucky that they had one frame that, at least, showed the jet as a blur just before it slammed into the Pentagon.

I think that the ringed structure of the building acted as a dampener to minimize the damage done to the surrounding structures.


ken

[Trev]

The engine and wheel hub that were the few discernable pieces of aircraft wreckage photographed at the pentagon were identified by independent aircraft engineers as being from a small military jet.
Also the engine photographed with an FBI man on the street bellow the WTC was identified as a type only ever used on 737's

[ken_behrendt]

Trev wrote:

The engine and wheel hub that were the few discernable pieces of aircraft wreckage photographed at the pentagon were identified by independent aircraft engineers as being from a small military jet.

IF that is, indeed, the case and the pentagon was actually hit by one of our military jets, then what happened, as Gene previously asked, to the 64 people that were supposed to be on the commercial jetliner that it was claimed hit the building?


ken

[AgingYoung]

All this conspiracy is interesting but my question is where did all those people go that had booked flights on the 'alleged' planes that crashed. Where in the heck are those people? Did the cia put them in the witness protection program?? I mean there are some folks missing aren't there?

Gene

[Joel Wright]

Is there a reputable source for this statement Trev?[quote="Trev"]The engine and wheel hub that were the few discernable pieces of aircraft wreckage photographed at the pentagon were identified by independent aircraft engineers as being from a small military jet.

[terry5732]

Sure is a peace loving lot of devout ragheads on the news burning embassies the last couple days. All over some editorial cartoons which are extremely tame compared to what al-jazeera and the like run about christians. Real tolerant and peaceable huh? I don't think they are worth trying to appease.

[AgingYoung]

Terry,

You thought they were saying peace lovers? They are saying piece lovers!

Gene

[ken_behrendt]

Although I can not condone the "civil disobedience" that is presently occurring in various muslim countries over the cartoons of Muhammad being published in cwertain European newspapers, I can certainly appreciate what is fueling the anger.

In Islam, it is considered an extreme act of blasphemy to even attempt to portray the Prophet with any sort of an image. Why? Well, back in the, I think, late 6th century, when Muhammad was just starting to create his religion, he entered the Kaba (that stone building that muslims circumambulate around seven times at the beginning of their Haage) and found over 300 statues representing a wide variety of deities that the local arabs were worshipping. He immediately had them destroyed and forbade the creation of such images of veneration as a way of saying that there was only ONE god...Allah. Thus, to a devout muslim, any attempt to depict the Prophet or Allah with a statue or drawing is equivalent violating this important religious principle and, indeed, to pretending to have the same creative powers as Allah.

Aside from this, I think the cartoons depicted Muhammad as wearing a turban which carried a lit fuse and was supposed to be concealing a bomb of some type. Again, this could be considered as suggesting that all muslims are dangerous fanatics who want to blow people up.

Yet, on the other hand, the western demoncracies pride themselves on having freedom of the press and being able to express their opinions on any topic such as religion.

I have to consider this incident to have been in bad taste on the part of the newspapers involved. In order to "win" the "war" on terrorism, the west needs to convince the muslim countries that the west respects their religion and is not out to demean or destroy it. This incident certainly was not a good step in the direction of doing that.


ken

[terry5732]

Unfortunately there are too many Kens who want to believe in the inherent goodness of these bastards. In what country could you burn an islamic nations embassy without being arrested? They broadcast offensive things daily. Could we have violent protests in Washington DC after the next beheading? NO! You would be punished more than the perpetrators. Most newspapers won't print the cartoons in question for FEAR of being the target of these lunatics. They are winning the war. They are being appeased daily. They have proven violence works. They have succeeded in censoring the US press where the religious right has failed. The right didn't get violent. The more you appease, the more of this misbehavior you can expect from them. IT WORKS! If Iran was reduced to glass, it would make an impression with them. Or Syria. Every day of appeasement makes what it will take to undo bigger. This alleged "war on terror" has done nothing in 5 years because it doesn't target the root cause. Osama raghead is inconsequential. The islamic churches are the ROOT. How many Imams have we removed?
Ken, stop making excuses for them. Every other religion wants to gain converts. Theirs wants to kill anyone who isn't one of them. They have more regard for sheep or camels than nonmuslims. And Ken, you aren't one of their kind.

[jim_mich]

Most wars are fought because one country's government is greedy and wants something from another country. In the process the people of the other country are represented in a derogatory manner. The American Indian was depicted as being savage. The Germans were portrayed as heartless monsters that did horrible things. The Japanese and the Vietcong were called many names. My point is that the majority of humans are peace-loving individuals that just want to be left alone, raise a family, make a living, etc. They don't like others telling them what to do. Yet many seem to think it OK or even their right to tell others how they should act, talk, live, etc.

What this earth needs is more tolerance and less greed. Many diverse people from many races founded the United States as a republic. Most people today don't know the difference between a republic and a democracy. The reason I bring this up is because a true republic is a form of government in which individuals have rights and the governments main purpose is to enforce and protect those rights. In a true republic each citizen has complete freedom as long as he/she does not harm others. Harm is defined as physical harm, financial harm, or reputation harm. In other words life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In a true republic there is minimal government. In contrast a democracy demands that each citizen conform to the will of the majority. In a democracy the government is constantly telling individuals what the majority say they can or can't do.

Today the U.S. government is trying to export democracy to other countries. The American people have been brainwashed into thinking that democracy means freedom. Democracy does not mean freedom. Democracy means conforming to the will of the majority. If you are in the minority then tough! In a true republic there is no debate about what can or can't be published or said. In a republic there is true freedom.

The last U.S. president to refer to the U.S. as a 'republic' was John F. Kennedy. Our great republic died the day he was shot. The next president was Johnson, who tried to force his will upon the Vietnamese people, an example of a democracy trying to force the will of a government upon a people, rather than letting people be free to live as they desire.

The very first U.S. flag depicted a coiled snake with the words "Don't tread on me". That is the essence of true freedom. A rattlesnake will not strike unless you try to walk on it. Also it gives fair warning before striking.

This world would be a much better place if all people would adopt an attitude of 'Live and let live." rather than trying to cram one peoples philosophy down another people's throat.

[ovyyus]

I absolutely agree Jim. So many get caught up in the dumbed-down propaganda drip-feed instead of putting it together for themselves. There is no race difference at a genetic level - it's all socio-political conditioning in the name of outdated erroneous notions of race supremacy.