Interesting tidbit about 9/11...

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: MisterJackson

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: geno

They could've used screwdrivers, fewer moving parts than a box cutter.

a blade's effectiveness is due to it's slashing nature, not stabbing.

A knife is more dangerous than a gun within a meter or two of an opponent.

WTF man....your breath must really stink because you seem to talk out of your ass quite a lot.

I would love to demonstrate how effective a gun can be on you "within a few meters" while you bring your knife to a gun fight.

I patiently await your "But....I'm a ninja with mad knife/hand-to-hand combat skills" reply.

I used to competively compete in martial arts...not a ninja though.

You however have proven time and time again you rather attack the poster on an issue than knowing what the fuck you are even talking about.

Most hand to hand experts would rather face a gun up close than a knife anyday.

 

[rh71]

yeah, someone would've talked by now.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: cpmer
Wow!! A lot of sheep in here to afraid to open their eyes. Don't wanna believe that big brother would ever do anything bad. Just wanna thank you for being the way you are and allowing stuff like the patriot act to pass without any real problems. Also to those people complaining about government and business's not be able to keep secrets, the point of a secret is that no one knows. Sure you know about this and that different event but your a fool if you think the government doesn't have secrets that we don't know about.

Wow! A guy who's too afraid to admit that a bunch of relatively poorly educated individuals from 1/2 way around the world brought the most powerful country in the world to its knees.

9/11 gets a lot scarier when you're ready to admit the government wasn't involved.

 

[jemcam]

And what's with those rainbows that I see whenever a sprinkler is on? Check on youtube or break, alkemyst's Mom made a great video about this.

THERE'S A LOT OF UNANSWERED QUESTIONS OUT THERE!!!!!

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: jemcam
And what's with those rainbows that I see whenever a sprinkler is on? Check on youtube or break, alkemyst's Mom made a great video about this.

THERE'S A LOT OF UNANSWERED QUESTIONS OUT THERE!!!!!

I wish I could share the video I made with your mom.

 

[jemcam]

The insult is on you if it's true, LOL.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
I heard aliens from Area 51 teamed up with Bigfoot and the chupacabra, and flew to NY on a UFO with Jimmy Hoffa to bring down the towers. What hit the pentagon was nothing more than a Yeti riding a Unicorn.

Actually, Bigfoot, Al Queda, and Al Leiter got together and decided to blow up the WTC and make it look like a terrorist attack. They knew that the more people involved, the higher likelihood that someone would talk. Therefore, they called in the pros: Chuck Norris and Apollo Anton Ohno. Apollo was in Tower 1 and using his super-sharp skates and dashing good looks, he smashed the support structures just after the plane crashed into the building. He then escaped through a cleverly-constructed ice-luge-tunnel down the middle of the tower into the earth where the crew from The Core picked up him and ferried him to safety. Meanwhile, Chuck Norris simply roundhouse-kicked the supports in Tower 2 and jumped to safety.

How I got this information, you don't want to know.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: geno
I in no way believe any of the conspiracy theories, but the one point the tinfoil hats make from time to time is the absence of either planes' black box. Other than, "there was a lot of rubble" which is the logical explanation, why wouldn't either of them have turned up anywhere? Any chance they were destroyed in the fire / collapse?

The Black Boxes burned up DUUUH! EVERYTHING was reduced to rubble except for the one passport they found.

I don't think any resonably intelligent person would think not finding a black box, but there was a passport is really fucking odd.

All I want is an explination to how the Passport turned up when nothing else survived, also how was it that the person the passport belonged to is still alive.

If you look at the pentagon pictures although 'everything vaporized' you can see nice and neat offices to the left and right of the gaping hole.

Steel dissolved but wood and paper products must have a higher melting point at the Pentagon I guess.

 

[jemcam]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: geno
I in no way believe any of the conspiracy theories, but the one point the tinfoil hats make from time to time is the absence of either planes' black box. Other than, "there was a lot of rubble" which is the logical explanation, why wouldn't either of them have turned up anywhere? Any chance they were destroyed in the fire / collapse?

The Black Boxes burned up DUUUH! EVERYTHING was reduced to rubble except for the one passport they found.

I don't think any resonably intelligent person would think not finding a black box, but there was a passport is really fucking odd.

All I want is an explination to how the Passport turned up when nothing else survived, also how was it that the person the passport belonged to is still alive.

If you look at the pentagon pictures although 'everything vaporized' you can see nice and neat offices to the left and right of the gaping hole.

Steel dissolved but wood and paper products must have a higher melting point at the Pentagon I guess.

Oh, right. That DOES explain why it's a conspiracy.

What's your point to this post, and post photos taken before rescue efforts or demolition began to prove this is true. Now you're REALLY pulling stuff out of your ass.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: geno
I in no way believe any of the conspiracy theories, but the one point the tinfoil hats make from time to time is the absence of either planes' black box. Other than, "there was a lot of rubble" which is the logical explanation, why wouldn't either of them have turned up anywhere? Any chance they were destroyed in the fire / collapse?

The Black Boxes burned up DUUUH! EVERYTHING was reduced to rubble except for the one passport they found.

I don't think any resonably intelligent person would think not finding a black box, but there was a passport is really fucking odd.

All I want is an explination to how the Passport turned up when nothing else survived, also how was it that the person the passport belonged to is still alive.

If you look at the pentagon pictures although 'everything vaporized' you can see nice and neat offices to the left and right of the gaping hole.

Steel dissolved but wood and paper products must have a higher melting point at the Pentagon I guess.

Imagine a car slams into my living room at 100 mph. The wall where the car hit would be destroyed, as would the area immediately surrounding it. The far interior wall, though, would probably be relatively undamaged.

Now substitute a car for a plane and 100 mph for ~250 something and it's the same principle.

Either way, how does this indicate any conspiracy? After all conspiracy theorists say that a missile slammed into the Pentagon, which would have been more explosive than a plane.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: QueBert

Originally posted by: geno
I in no way believe any of the conspiracy theories, but the one point the tinfoil hats make from time to time is the absence of either planes' black box. Other than, "there was a lot of rubble" which is the logical explanation, why wouldn't either of them have turned up anywhere? Any chance they were destroyed in the fire / collapse?

The Black Boxes burned up DUUUH! EVERYTHING was reduced to rubble except for the one passport they found.

I don't think any resonably intelligent person would think not finding a black box, but there was a passport is really fucking odd.

All I want is an explination to how the Passport turned up when nothing else survived, also how was it that the person the passport belonged to is still alive.

If you look at the pentagon pictures although 'everything vaporized' you can see nice and neat offices to the left and right of the gaping hole.

Steel dissolved but wood and paper products must have a higher melting point at the Pentagon I guess.

Wake up. Guess what, the rest of the Pentagon didn't vaporize either. Neither did lower NYC from the WTC collapse.

Want to answer any of my questions I have posed, or can't find answers so just would rather go on in the belief that some elaborate hoax is covering up the truth behind 9/11?

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: alkemyst
If you look at the pentagon pictures although 'everything vaporized' you can see nice and neat offices to the left and right of the gaping hole.

Steel dissolved but wood and paper products must have a higher melting point at the Pentagon I guess.

I know, right! And the conspiracy absolutely required the tacked on shooting of a missile into the pentagon because, you know, knocking down the fucking twin towers wouldn't have been nearly enough to piss off the country to mobilize for war! They absolutely had to pull some ridiculous scheme involving the firing of a missile which they would claim was a plane and the "mysterious" disappearing of 100 or so passengers including Barbara Olsen, wife of the US Supreme Court solicitor general! So the conspiracy didn't even need to subject itself to scrutiny over an unnecessary attack on the pentagon but they did it anyway because they are so badass. You're so on top of this. Mo power.

 

[MisterJackson]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: MisterJackson

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: geno

They could've used screwdrivers, fewer moving parts than a box cutter.

a blade's effectiveness is due to it's slashing nature, not stabbing.

A knife is more dangerous than a gun within a meter or two of an opponent.

WTF man....your breath must really stink because you seem to talk out of your ass quite a lot.

I would love to demonstrate how effective a gun can be on you "within a few meters" while you bring your knife to a gun fight.

I patiently await your "But....I'm a ninja with mad knife/hand-to-hand combat skills" reply.

I used to competively compete in martial arts...not a ninja though.

You however have proven time and time again you rather attack the poster on an issue than knowing what the fuck you are even talking about.

Most hand to hand experts would rather face a gun up close than a knife anyday.

I forget I'm dealing with an "expert" when you post. I still don't care what you say.....within a few meters a gun will inflict more damage if one knows how to simply fire it.

Of course I know a knife is deadly at close range, but a bullet at close range has higher odds of doing much more damage than a thrust or slice when you've got, as you put it, a few meters between the two.

I'm not going to argue the finer points, as I'd have more luck convincing a Donkey that it's an Emu, but I would relish the chance to prove you wrong in person.....Mr. Myagi

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: MisterJackson

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: MisterJackson

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: geno

They could've used screwdrivers, fewer moving parts than a box cutter.

a blade's effectiveness is due to it's slashing nature, not stabbing.

A knife is more dangerous than a gun within a meter or two of an opponent.

WTF man....your breath must really stink because you seem to talk out of your ass quite a lot.

I would love to demonstrate how effective a gun can be on you "within a few meters" while you bring your knife to a gun fight.

I patiently await your "But....I'm a ninja with mad knife/hand-to-hand combat skills" reply.

I used to competively compete in martial arts...not a ninja though.

You however have proven time and time again you rather attack the poster on an issue than knowing what the fuck you are even talking about.

Most hand to hand experts would rather face a gun up close than a knife anyday.

I forget I'm dealing with an "expert" when you post. I still don't care what you say.....within a few meters a gun will inflict more damage if one knows how to simply fire it.

Of course I know a knife is deadly at close range, but a bullet at close range has higher odds of doing much more damage than a thrust or slice when you've got, as you put it, a few meters between the two.

I'm not going to argue the finer points, as I'd have more luck convincing a Donkey that it's an Emu, but I would relish the chance to prove you wrong in person.....Mr. Myagi

I want to record it so I can put it on Youtube

 

[Soundmanred]

And then there's the FOURTH tower.
WHY DOES NOBODY SPEAK OF THE FOURTH TOWER?!?!?!
EXPLAINS THAT TO ME SIRS!

 

[TheVrolok]

Originally posted by: Turin39789
But as the gun weilder, I'm going to run away from you until I can clear the holster and cock my pistol.

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
I seriously doubt that drawing a knife is significantly faster than drawing a gun. And at a meter or two of range, there's no need to meticulously aim a handgun, point-shooting is sufficiently accurate at 3-6 feet on a human sized target.

Now, if the knife is already out then yes, I'll agree. And I'll admit that it can take quite a while after being shot for someone to be incapacitated, so you are still likely to sustain injury from someone with a knife even after they have been shot. However, if both parties have to draw, I don't see how a knife has much of an advantage.

ZV

I wasn't relaying my opinion. I was stating fact, this is what law enforcement/military personnel are taught. Within 2 meters or so, a knife is a better weapon than a gun. Period. "Running away and then firing a pistol" assumes that you are faster than your attacker, well out of reach as it is, and quick enough to stop, turn around, and fire accurately. If you stop and turn to shoot, you better make sure it's a lethal shot because if it isn't, stopping is going to put the knife wielder on top of you, and then it's game over.

Z, I think the point is that the gun wielder will have to inflict a lethal/or completely incapacitating shot with his first/maybe second shot at the absolute best. If not, the knife wielder is close enough to do anything he pleases.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: jemcam

Oh, right. That DOES explain why it's a conspiracy.

What's your point to this post, and post photos taken before rescue efforts or demolition began to prove this is true. Now you're REALLY pulling stuff out of your ass.

I don't understand this...you can view all the pentagon pics...regardless that there are no plane parts there, the interior of each room on the sides of the blast radius aren't burned at all and soft materials like cloth and paper fully intact.

...or are you just trying to derail the thread with absurdity.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: TheVrolok

Originally posted by: Turin39789
But as the gun weilder, I'm going to run away from you until I can clear the holster and cock my pistol.

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
I seriously doubt that drawing a knife is significantly faster than drawing a gun. And at a meter or two of range, there's no need to meticulously aim a handgun, point-shooting is sufficiently accurate at 3-6 feet on a human sized target.

Now, if the knife is already out then yes, I'll agree. And I'll admit that it can take quite a while after being shot for someone to be incapacitated, so you are still likely to sustain injury from someone with a knife even after they have been shot. However, if both parties have to draw, I don't see how a knife has much of an advantage.

ZV

I wasn't relaying my opinion. I was stating fact, this is what law enforcement/military personnel are taught. Within 2 meters or so, a knife is a better weapon than a gun. Period. "Running away and then firing a pistol" assumes that you are faster than your attacker, well out of reach as it is, and quick enough to stop, turn around, and fire accurately. If you stop and turn to shoot, you better make sure it's a lethal shot because if it isn't, stopping is going to put the knife wielder on top of you, and then it's game over.

Z, I think the point is that the gun wielder will have to inflict a lethal/or completely incapacitating shot with his first/maybe second shot at the absolute best. If not, the knife wielder is close enough to do anything he pleases.

I think ZV is basing fact on movies and tv.

 

[mesthead21]

I think this pretty much sums it up

Text

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: MisterJackson

I forget I'm dealing with an "expert" when you post. I still don't care what you say.....within a few meters a gun will inflict more damage if one knows how to simply fire it.

Of course I know a knife is deadly at close range, but a bullet at close range has higher odds of doing much more damage than a thrust or slice when you've got, as you put it, a few meters between the two.

I'm not going to argue the finer points, as I'd have more luck convincing a Donkey that it's an Emu, but I would relish the chance to prove you wrong in person.....Mr. Myagi

Don't believe me fine, go to any forum that specializes in this topic. A gun is an inferior hand to hand weapon.

Even Jackie Chan whose book should be able to be found online has said this...his levels were up close Martial Arts>Knife>gun

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: mesthead21
I think this pretty much sums it up

Text

hahahahahaha

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: jemcam

Oh, right. That DOES explain why it's a conspiracy.

What's your point to this post, and post photos taken before rescue efforts or demolition began to prove this is true. Now you're REALLY pulling stuff out of your ass.

I don't understand this...you can view all the pentagon pics...regardless that there are no plane parts there, the interior of each room on the sides of the blast radius aren't burned at all and soft materials like cloth and paper fully intact.

...or are you just trying to derail the thread with absurdity.

There are PLENTY of plane parts visible, plus a number of witnesses that actually saw the aircraft. The fact that a hollow plane hit the side of a reinfornced concrete and steel building specifically designed to withstand attack seems to upset you. Are you mad that it did not level everything within a couple of miles like some Rambo movie?

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: MisterJackson

I forget I'm dealing with an "expert" when you post. I still don't care what you say.....within a few meters a gun will inflict more damage if one knows how to simply fire it.

Of course I know a knife is deadly at close range, but a bullet at close range has higher odds of doing much more damage than a thrust or slice when you've got, as you put it, a few meters between the two.

I'm not going to argue the finer points, as I'd have more luck convincing a Donkey that it's an Emu, but I would relish the chance to prove you wrong in person.....Mr. Myagi

Don't believe me fine, go to any forum that specializes in this topic. A gun is an inferior hand to hand weapon.

Even Jackie Chan whose book should be able to be found online has said this...his levels were up close Martial Arts>Knife>gun

Ultimately I would agree with you but the outcome is going to be determined by the training of the person. Anyone with any real experience with a handgun would "win" against an inexperienced and untrained knife wielder. The opposite is also true.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: jemcam

Oh, right. That DOES explain why it's a conspiracy.

What's your point to this post, and post photos taken before rescue efforts or demolition began to prove this is true. Now you're REALLY pulling stuff out of your ass.

I don't understand this...you can view all the pentagon pics...regardless that there are no plane parts there, the interior of each room on the sides of the blast radius aren't burned at all and soft materials like cloth and paper fully intact.

...or are you just trying to derail the thread with absurdity.

You know the plane wasn't on fire when it crashed into the pentagon?

 

[Softballslug]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: jemcam

Oh, right. That DOES explain why it's a conspiracy.

What's your point to this post, and post photos taken before rescue efforts or demolition began to prove this is true. Now you're REALLY pulling stuff out of your ass.

I don't understand this...you can view all the pentagon pics...regardless that there are no plane parts there, the interior of each room on the sides of the blast radius aren't burned at all and soft materials like cloth and paper fully intact.

...or are you just trying to derail the thread with absurdity.

Here is the absurdity... You claim that since there was no plane it had to be something else, IE: a missle, or ...

Ok, mr. smarty pants where is the picture of WHATEVER it was that blew the fricking hole in the side of the pentagon???? oh yea, it was a water canon......