 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 (nobody)...and 335 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614224 Today 6 Topics 127549 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i was waiting for your post marlowe, i heard about this claim also, seems a little far fetched but i guess it will never be disclosed if true, i dont think its true, based on thethought of why it would be done, also based on the fact that those planes are not equipped with that device. i dont have some link proving it but, there commercial jets and that technology however advanced it exists as is used fo rmilitary andnot in commercial jets well yes you can now say it was a conspiacy yada yada yada |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i wanna move to australia |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It was the CIA who killed our Prime Minister Norman Kirk who was anti-nuclear and promoted trade with Russia and China to the annoyance of your government. He sent a boat to protest nuclear testing in the South Pacific. The French were pissed off they send agents and killed one of our beloved Greenpeace members who were protesting nuclear tests. Here in New Zealand we dont stand for that shit... we said no to US nuclear warships in our waters and we continue to do so despite pressure from the US government. People can make a difference... Red - wife of FLEA who is seeing the quack and will be back ;-) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The 757 and the 767 ARE fitted with that software - they are the only Boeings to be fitted with that software... a cockpit pilot COULD NOT override that software, and therefore COULD NOT make a turn of more than approx. 1.5Gs |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Another Theory Flight 77: "The Plane Was Flown With Extraordinary Skill" Once again: Operation 911 demanded that the attacks be tightly coordinated. Four jets took off within 15 minutes of each other at Boston, Dulles, and Newark airports, and roughly two hours later, it was over. If we are to believe the story we are being told, the masterminds needed, at an absolute minimum, pilots who could actually fly the planes and who could arrive at the right place at the right time. American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757, took off from Dulles Airport in northern Virginia at 8:10 a.m. and crashed into the Pentagon at 9:40 a.m. The Washington Post, September 12, says this: "Aviation sources said that the plane was flown with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm, possibly one of the hijackers. Someone even knew how to turn off the transponder, a move that is considerably less than obvious." According to the article, the air traffic controllers "had time to warn the White House that the jet was aimed directly at the president's mansion and was traveling at a gut-wrenching speed--full throttle. "But just as the plane seemed to be on a suicide mission into the White House, the unidentified pilot executed a pivot so tight that it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver. The plane circled 270 degrees from the right to approach the Pentagon from the west, whereupon Flight 77 fell below radar level, vanishing from controller's screens, the sources said." ("On Flight 77: 'Our Plane Is Being Hijacked'," The Washington Post, September 12, 2001, pgs. 1 & 11) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well, I won't say I have any answers to the "war" between the US and the East. but the first step is to locate the problem, to acknowledge it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Hey I read the article on the Collapsing of the Twin Towers, Flea - so the inference is that there were explosives already in the building? I would wonder if there are any reports of suspicious activity taking place in the towers in the days prior to their collapse |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"AMinal..what you got there WAS from mainstream media..so I dont know where you are coming from.." yeah i KNOW it was from the mainstream media..... so whats YOUR point? i think you should read my post again |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well AMinal I have reread your post and this is what you had to say.. "you know, automatically and consistently believing the opposite of the 'mainstream' media, just because it is mainstream doesn't make you some independant thinker" to which I responded by replying that most of what I am producing here IS from mainstream media.... so I really dont know what ARE on about really |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah it certainly IS an interesting theory...and sticking packets of plastique in the heating/cooling/electrical/sanitation units areas of the building..would have been a piece of cake..and if you are going there under the guise of maintenance service worker..no discernable suspsion can be aroused or logged... starting to sound a bt like a hollywood blockbuster plot?..heh..but then so was the picture perfect and extremely photogeneic collapse of the buildings... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I personally think America will proly get blown up pretty soon. I find myslef wanting to go to England. This whole topic seems rather pointless to. Some people will feel that we have the right to blow innocent people up if get the person we're after. Others will disagree. I don't see why we don't try to negotiate with any body. They should at least try... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
PILGER: THIS WAR IS A FRAUD By John Pilger, Former Mirror chief foreign correspondent The war against terrorism is a fraud. After three weeks' bombing, not a single terrorist implicated in the attacks on America has been caught or killed in Afghanistan. Instead, one of the poorest, most stricken nations has been terrorised by the most powerful - to the point where American pilots have run out of dubious "military" targets and are now destroying mud houses, a hospital, Red Cross warehouses, lorries carrying refugees. Unlike the relentless pictures from New York, we are seeing almost nothing of this. Tony Blair has yet to tell us what the violent death of children - seven in one family - has to do with Osama bin Laden. And why are cluster bombs being used? The British public should know about these bombs, which the RAF also uses. They spray hundreds of bomblets that have only one purpose; to kill and maim people. Those that do not explode lie on the ground like landmines, waiting for people to step on them. If ever a weapon was designed specifically for acts of terrorism, this is it. I have seen the victims of American cluster weapons in other countries, such as the Laotian toddler who picked one up and had her right leg and face blown off. Be assured this is now happening in Afghanistan, in your name. None of those directly involved in the September 11 atrocity was Afghani. Most were Saudis, who apparently did their planning and training in Germany and the United States. The camps which the Taliban allowed bin Laden to use were emptied weeks ago. Moreover, the Taliban itself is a creation of the Americans and the British. In the 1980s, the tribal army that produced them was funded by the CIA and trained by the SAS to fight the Russians. The hypocrisy does not stop there. When the Taliban took Kabul in 1996, Washington said nothing. Why? Because Taliban leaders were soon on their way to Houston, Texas, to be entertained by executives of the oil company, Unocal. With secre |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
With secret US government approval, the company offered them a generous cut of the profits of the oil and gas pumped through a pipeline that the Americans wanted to build from Soviet central Asia through Afghanistan. A US diplomat said: "The Taliban will probably develop like the Saudis did." He explained that Afghanistan would become an American oil colony, there would be huge profits for the West, no democracy and the legal persecution of women. "We can live with that," he said. Although the deal fell through, it remains an urgent priority of the administration of George W. Bush, which is steeped in the oil industry. Bush's concealed agenda is to exploit the oil and gas reserves in the Caspian basin, the greatest source of untapped fossil fuel on earth and enough, according to one estimate, to meet America's voracious energy needs for a generation. Only if the pipeline runs through Afghanistan can the Americans hope to control it. So, not surprisingly, US Secretary of State Colin Powell is now referring to "moderate" Taliban, who will join an American-sponsored "loose federation" to run Afghanistan. The "war on terrorism" is a cover for this: a means of achieving American strategic aims that lie behind the flag-waving facade of great power. The Royal Marines, who will do the real dirty work, will be little more than mercenaries for Washington's imperial ambitions, not to mention the extraordinary pretensions of Blair himself. Having made Britain a target for terrorism with his bellicose "shoulder to shoulder" with Bush nonsense, he is now prepared to send troops to a battlefield where the goals are so uncertain that even the Chief of the Defence Staff says the conflict "could last 50 years". The irresponsibility of this is breathtaking; the pressure on Pakistan alone could ignite an unprecedented crisis across the Indian sub-continent. Having reported many wars, I am always struck by the absurdity of effete politicians eager to wave farewell to young soldiers, but who themselves |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
In the days of gunboats, our imperial leaders covered their violence in the "morality" of their actions. Blair is no different. Like them, his selective moralising omits the most basic truth. Nothing justified the killing of innocent people in America on September 11, and nothing justifies the killing of innocent people anywhere else. By killing innocents in Afghanistan, Blair and Bush stoop to the level of the criminal outrage in New York. Once you cluster bomb, "mistakes" and "blunders" are a pretence. Murder is murder, regardless of whether you crash a plane into a building or order and collude with it from the Oval Office and Downing Street. GRIEF: A father weeps over his dead son after the bombs blunder in Kabul If Blair was really opposed to all forms of terrorism, he would get Britain out of the arms trade. On the day of the twin towers attack, an "arms fair", selling weapons of terror (like cluster bombs and missiles) to assorted tyrants and human rights abusers, opened in London's Docklands with the full backing of the Blair government. Britain's biggest arms customer is the medieval Saudi regime, which beheads heretics and spawned the religious fanaticism of the Taliban. If he really wanted to demonstrate "the moral fibre of Britain", Blair would do everything in his power to lift the threat of violence in those parts of the world where there is great and justifiable grievance and anger. He would do more than make gestures; he would demand that Israel ends its illegal occupation of Palestine and withdraw to its borders prior to the 1967 war, as ordered by the Security Council, of which Britain is a permanent member. He would call for an end to the genocidal blockade which the UN - in reality, America and Britain - has imposed on the suffering people of Iraq for more than a decade, causing the deaths of half a million children under the age of five. That's more deaths of infants every month than the number killed in the World Trade Center. There are signs |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i really hate the fact that we have dumbass George W. Bush representing the American public |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I'm listening to (Don't fear) The Reaper by Blue Öyster Cult. Heard it on Discovery yesterday, where they were showing a hunter with a rifle, and an eagle trying to get away. -P |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I heard recently that Blair and Bush were up for the Nobel Peace Prize!! Is this just one of those urban myths/silly rumours or a fact, I dread to think!? I hope that the UN diplomats finally get off their arses and veto the US/UK military initiative/request to take action against Iraq. This morning Bush was calling for an "international coalition" against Saddam, what a joke! Maybe for once Schroeder and Chirac will stand strong (as they said they would) and not bypass UN approval: HANOVER, Germany - German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and French President Jacques Chirac underlined what they called a cohesive European stance against unilateral U.S. military action against Iraq on Saturday, insisting that the United Nations must be involved. Schroeder has come out hard over the past weeks against the U.S. government's insistence for the need of military action to remove Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, causing a strain in U.S.-German relations. Speaking to reporters after a receiving Chirac in his home for informal discussions late Saturday, Schroeder said the return of U.N. weapons inspectors to Baghdad was a top priority and warned that military action could cause chaos in the Middle East. "We must include powers in the region" in any action against Iraq, Schroeder said. Chirac said that France was waiting for a decision by the U.N. security council before taking an official stance on the issue, stressing the importance of a cohesive European position. "France considers a unilateral solution unacceptable," Chirac said. Even as the two leaders were speaking in Germany, U.S. President George W. Bush was greeting British Prime Minister Tony Blair at Camp David, saying there is ample evidence the Iraqi leader is developing weapons of mass destruction. Bush is to address the security council on the Iraq issue next week. Blair has been more supportive of Bush's talk of a military attack than other European leaders who favor increased diplomatic efforts before taking action |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Foreign ministers Joschka Fischer from Germany and Dominique de Villepin of France were also present for the meeting in Schroeder's home, which is the seventh in a series of informal discussions between the two European countries. After a meeting in late June, the two heads of state agreed to meet once a month in an attempt to maintain open communication. Let us not forget that AIDS kills three times more people than were killed in the WTC EVERY DAY, and we are proposing solving the world's problem by sending million dollar cruise missiles over to Iraq (to kill even more people). With that sum you could provide anti-retroviral drugs to thousands of HIV sufferers for decades! What the west still doesn't seem to understand is that AIDS, apart from being responsible for the greatest human catastrophy of time is a major cause of political/economic instability (disorder that eventually leads towards the emerge of violent despair and fanaticism). Africa and nations where large portions of the population suffer from HIV/Aids should receive all the financial/medical help we can offer. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
where's the profit in saving lives ? AIDS cures don't win you oilfields |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yup sad isn't it: but the fact that countries severely disabled by AIDS could become politically unstable and turn towards anti-american and anti-western feeling (rightly so) should be enough of an incentive. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Novus Ordo Seclorum means "A New Order of the Ages" (not new world order) and I should know having survived the 6 years of latin classes forced upon me in my younger years! America behaves badly enough without our needing to mystify things with silly conspiracy theories concerning "the plot to take over the world"... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
oops somebody already made that point, i should read the threads more carefully, sorry! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I usually don't stick myself in conversations like these to often. that reason being that I really don't have that much to contribute. however I am a little curious about something because there seems to be a lot of people who hate America. they hate america because of its present position of power in the world today. if we take england for example-was there a time in history in which england had a powerful grip on the world? a time when they threw their weight around against other nations who didn't want to feel it's(england) presence. what about france? I'm not much of a history student but I'm just curious if those times existed. let me just say that I am an american who doesn't much care for bush jr-I liked his father even less. however I do think sometime has to be done about iraq. every once in a while when the bashing starts kicking in I get a little offended and I start to wonder what those of you in other countries think of your own countries when or if they experienced their own rise to power. lastly, let me say that I admire england very much. in a lot of ways I think england is superior to the U.S. I just chose england because there are a lot of members from there. I sorry in advance for typos and sentence struture. its six in the morning and I've yet to sleep. take care |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I dont if anybody here actually hates America and definetly not the American people..when I personally use the word America it Implicitly implies, the US Govts, the foreigh policy, the Oil Industry and Millitary-Industrial machine churning out death machines and subsequently enforcing the Govt to seek bloody playgrounds to field test these death machines. A lot of us non americans on the board have access to media and information that is being consitently, jammed, blocked out and trvialised by the US media. I think the US govt owes to it's public an explanation with a bit more substance than the jingoistic sloganeering such as The Ultimate Evil, The Axis of Evil, Wanted Dead or Alive, A Threat to the Mankind etc..that it uses to justify its various brutal, horrific and inhumane actions it has carried out around the world and plans to continue carrying out without a definite conclusion or end in sight. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Agreed, but the point he is making is that superpowers of all ages were despised as the US gov and State is today. The term "jingoistic" first applied to the arrogant imperialism of the British (and still does to those who out of nostalgia or weakness of spirit remain entangled in the racist pomp of that age). As for the French let us not forget one of the bloodiest wars of Africa took place less than half a century ago on Algerian soil... What is so amazing about the US attitude is that many americans still behave in the century old nationalist self-interest driven way that used to dominate europe and have not managed to learn from the errors of the past. The US, instead of using its status as world power to bring about positive change in the world has jumped on the "neo-colonial" band-wagon: the extension of liberal capitalist ideas all over the world through so called international institutions (IMF, WTO) regardless of culture, ideology or history. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
perceptor> interesting questions you raise; Yes, England (or more specifically Great Britain) was the global hegemon from some point in the C19th until around the time of WW1. Seizing land and its resources around the world in a crass ignorant manner , The british empire spanned 30% of the world. It was merely a case of putting a flag in the ground and saying "You people have no flag raised here.... here's our flag ; therefore its ours" (the aborigines looked on... confused) "You people have no fences, therefore you don't own the land....here's some fences. Now its ours" (the natives looked on... bemused) WW1 was a monstrosity of a conflict which set Europe back, and importantly put a hole in the British economy so large, that the role of global hegemon was put up for grabs. Nazi Germany rose to take it ; and the resulting carnage in Europe left the USA (thanks in part to huge trade-offs from the allies, including Britain) as the sole beneficiary. A large multi-ethnic nation who could steer the world peacefully into the new economic era. The problem is that whichever nation has the hegemonic role, it drives itself by exploiting the poorer world around it for its own gain. Its called Imperialism. Great Britain has spent the last 50 years coming to terms with the fact that it is a less and less significant player in the world scene. It has also been forced to face up to the many wrongs of its imperialist past , though more still needs to be done. When we hear England football fans singing "Rule Britannia" at matches, we hear an echo of the past, a sad pining for something we will never see again (unless we become the 51st sate of America, perhaps..... Mr Blair ?). I resent the Imperialist role-player, whoever it may be. In my lifetime it is the USA. Many Americans are blind to what their nation is doing in this world and I hope that there is still a world left when it finally opens its eyes. peace>: |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
