another 9/11 cover up video

[mfactor420]

Yeah it's total insanity- look at the lengths they got to so they can have an excuse to lay their oil pipe lines around the world, just so they can pump their cars full of petrol and fuck the environment up even more. It's the middle of January here and it should be freezing, and what are they doing about it? go round thieving petrol of other countries to put in their SUVs. WTF is the world coming to.

What I want to know is who is feeding Bush a bunch of crap telling him it is ok to keep burning oil & gas, knowing it is harmful to the environment and yet telling him it is all right, it won't hurt at all.

How much longer will we allow the facade to go on unchecked? I find this thought interesting (found it in another post):

What if the people actually discovered it was all a conspiracy? What if the elections were bogus? Would the people then bring into question all previous events? In other words if 9/11 was an American lead attack, what else has the American government lied to us about? If Bush cheated his way into office 2x, who else cheated? Surely Bush knows that the bigger a lie gets, the harder it is to stop and eventually the truth is revealed.

So what really happened?

[mfactor420]

this video has nothing to do with alex jones too...it's mislabeled...it's by dylan avery. i don't know if anyone pointed that out.

Ok pisshead, (sounding like psycho4bud) now tell us Dylan Avery and Alex Jones aren't connected in some way. :thumbsup:

Not that I don't believe what you post - I appreciate the alternative viewpoint and the questions it raises.

[pisshead]

okay, they aren't connected, other than what the subjects they discuss...there are many many many people out there talking about this that have never heard of alex jones...

i was just pointing it out that the video was mislabeled...

[pisshead]

i'm conflicted as to what extent our actions influence the earth's heating and cooling...i lean more towards this though i think...i think we're in a general cooling cycle, with spikes of heat waves that last hundreds of years...

[align=left]Visit to Greenland May Chill Hot Air Hoax [/align]

[align=left]American Free Press/Jack Phillips | December 22 2005[/align]


[align=left]SCORESBYSUND, GREENLANDâ??Mainstream newspaper, Internet and TV reports claim global warming is causing extensive melting of glaciers, icebergs and permafrost, which might lead to drastic increases in sea level and threaten inundation of coastal cities. But there is no evidence that the sea level is actually rising, only forecasts by computer models that have been based on thousands of assumptions.[/align]

[align=left]Photographs of the shore of Greenland show the sea ice surrounding it has been melting. But upon my visit, this reporter was shown evidence that the icecap, where most of the ice is located, is growing significantly.[/align]

In Antarctica, temperatures on the icecap are decreasing. Satellite radar surveys of Antarctica and Greenland have shown that the icecaps are getting larger. Reports from the Mohn Sverdrup Center for Global Ocean studies in Norway state that, in the past 11 years, Greenlandâ??s icecap has increased over 21 inches.

A recent paper published in Science claims that ice is being deposited at the net rate of 26.8 billion tons a year in Antarctica.

Greenland, a Danish possession, is the largest island in the world, with an area of 1 million square miles. About 5 percent of the worldâ??s ice sits in a cap that covers its entire interior. Only 200,000 square miles on the coast is not under the cap.

In some places the cap is almost 10,000 feet thick. Greenlandâ??s northern extremity is the closest land to the North Pole. Water from the Arctic Ocean flows southward along the East Coast carrying icebergs from Greenland, which help cool the North Atlantic Ocean.

On my recent visit to Scoresbysund, about halfway up the eastern coast of Greenland, I had an opportunity to observe glaciers and icebergs first hand in the worldâ??s largest complex of fjords.

A few hours in this region provided a glimpse of life above the Arctic Circle. This municipality, first settled in 1925, contains about 500 people, whose principal occupations are hunting and fishing. It is about the size of Great Britain and is relatively close to the largest national park in the world, encompassing about a third of the icecap.

This reporter saw firsthand how some glaciers near the mouth of Scoresbysund and the open ocean had melted away, leaving beds of stones at the waterâ??s edge.

However, as the ship I was on, the Professor Molchanov, a former Russian Arctic research vessel, sailed deeper into the sound, away from the sea and toward the central icecap, I saw many glaciers that were not melting, and lots of icebergs produced by glaciers, which are clearly growing.

One glacier I saw was said to be six miles wide. One of the largest, I was told, is a 60-mile-wide glacier located some distance away on Greenland.

Inspecting a group of icebergs in a rubber Zodiac boat at close range is awe-inspiring. I saw several bergs that were at least 30 to 50 stories tall. Someone in the group I was traveling with estimated a height of more than 80 yards for one.

As we got close to one of these mammoths I could see its foundation deep under the water. Most of the ice, about 66 percent of the berg, remains submerged as it floats on the surface. These icebergs are part of the Earthâ??s conveyor system, which is responsible for the movement of air and
ocean currents that influence weather conditions. As the icebergs from the polar regions melt, the cold water they generate travels toward the equator.

In the equatorial regions, heat from the sun is more intense than elsewhere and it produces both currents of warm water and clouds of water vapor, which travel toward the poles. Some of the water vapor is deposited as snow on the ice caps and subsequently turns into ice. The heat released by the conversion of water vapor into liquid water, snow and ice in the polar regions is mostly radiated into outer space. This process creates very low temperatures in the icecaps. For example, â??94 degrees Fahrenheit has been found in Greenland.

Despite what has been reported in the mainstream press, many scientists do not subscribe to the theory of global warming and believe that, overall, objective science is showing that the Earth is cooling, not warming.

The Physics of Glaciers, now in its second edition, by retired Canadian scientist Dr. W.S.B. Patterson, discloses that the maximum temperatures of the Holocene, the epoch in which we live, occurred about 5,000 years ago and that the Earth has been cooling since then.

Of course, superimposed on this long-term trend are shorter-term fluctuations in temperature. For example, in A.D. 1000 it was warmer than it is now and Northern Europe had a â??Golden Ageâ?� when Vikings farmed Greenland.

However, Nordic settlements quickly disappeared when the Earth cooled from about A.D. 1300 to 1700, in what has been known as â??the Little Ice Age,â?� an historical fact. Manâ??s actions did not cause this. It was Mother Natureâ??s work.

Subsequently, the Earth has been warming for the past 300 years. Consequently, it is reasonable to expect some ice to melt after that many years of warming.

However, the fact that temperatures now are lower overall than they were in A.D. 1000 indicates that the long-term trend is still in force. There is no evidence that a mere 300 years of warming has reversed the 4,600-year cooling trend. It is a fact that carbon dioxide increased during the last 100 years as a result of the industrial revolution and increasing population. But what caused temperatures to rise during the first 200 years? Many scientists argue that it was Mother Nature at work again.

The available data do not support the contention that the minuscule increase in carbon dioxide concentrationâ??from 0.03 percent to 0.04 percent of the atmosphereâ??has significantly affected Earthâ??s temperatures.

On the other hand it is easy to find a close connection between cyclical changes in the radiation supplied by the sun and conditions on the Earth. In fact, Serbian scientist Milutin Milankovic, while incarcerated in a jail cell, provided mathematical support for the theory that variations in the orbits of the Earth, sun and moon were responsible for recurrent ice ages without the aid of a computer.

Nature is highly cyclical: night follows day, winter follows summer, global cooling follows global warming, and glaciations follow interglacial periods. All of these cycles can be explained in terms of movements of the Earth-moon system around the sun.

Dr. Willard Libbey carbon dated material connected with the end of the last glaciation and found that it was 11,000 years old. Other scientists have found that, during the past 20 million years, these periods have never lasted longer than 13,500 years. Therefore it is reasonable to believe that we are coming to the end of our present interglacial period and that sometime, within the next 1,700 years, it is likely the Earth will get much colder and less hospitable.

Donâ??t think that there are not doomsday scenarios associated with increased cooling. As heat from the sun diminishes during the end of interglacials, the increasing mass of the growing icecaps stresses the Earthâ??s crust. According to one theory, this increases volcanic activity.

About 80 percent of Earthâ??s volcanoes are underwater. When they erupt ocean temperatures will likely increase. Then air temperatures will increase and temperate zone glaciers will melt. Sea ice and ice on coastal areas will melt.

Evaporation will increase in the tropics, and more water vapor will travel to the poles, where it will deposit as snow. When this volcanic action diminishes, as the crust adjusts, the Earth will cool faster, and the probability of glaciation will likely increase.

Perhaps people should be grateful for the present warmth, disregard the politically modified science promoted by the global warmers, and pray that the warmth continues. Conditions in the Arctic leave a great deal to be desired, in my experience.

[Raiden]

The pentagon theory is interesting. The WTC isnt. what is this video trying to tell us? Our government did this or what? Sounds like this guy is anti american and bush. He mentioned numerous buildings that have burnt for hours and never fallen yet the WTC was burning for less than an hour and fell. HELLO! the god damn building was hit by a 747 with a full tank of gas going over 500 mph. The speed of impact itself is going to cause alot of damage. Thats why the buildings fell so quickly. THey werent just on fire they were hit by a massive moving bomb flown by people.

The power of this explosion is so mind bogeling that it is hard to tell why some odd things happended on different floors of the building.

Our govt. didnt plan this. If other explosions were planned it certainly wasnt by us, it was by terrorists.

This guy is like micheal moore. I think he is just taking facts and turning it into a video to make a scene about the US.

Well whatever you think it sure was convenient as an excuse for Bush and his far right loony colleagues to whip up the American tendency for nationalism and xenophobia (which is bred out of paranoia and fear), and go prancing round whatever country they wanted in the world doing whatever they want. I suppose you think it is complete coincidence that nearly half the world remaining oil is in Iraq and there were no WMDs found there? There are a hell of a lot more nasty people in the world than saddam but he doesn't do sweet FA about any of them. Pakistan is Americas buddy now but you get your head cut off there if you criticise the Koran.

This has nothing to do with being anti american but Bush and his collegaues really are a bunch of deranged psycopaths and those redneck hillbillies who think it is anti-american to point this out when infact Bush is dragging your country down into the gutter and you will be no better than those nutcases like the one in Iran whos can now justify to his people why they need to start making nukes. You would have to be more than naive not to see this, you would have to be downright stupid

[mfactor420]

okay, they aren't connected, other than what the subjects they discuss...there are many many many people out there talking about this that have never heard of alex jones...

i was just pointing it out that the video was mislabeled...

Hey, I was just joking with you. :thumbsup:

Personally, I believe your version not lordbushit's version.

[mfactor420]

the WTC was burning for less than an hour and fell. HELLO! the god damn building was hit by a 747 with a full tank of gas going over 500 mph.

This is the quote I am talking about. I don't recall the WTC being hit by any "747". Where'd you get this info Smokey McPot? No wonder no one can discern the truth. It can't even be repeated accurately.

[nicholasstanko]

The pentagon theory is interesting. The WTC isnt. what is this video trying to tell us? Our government did this or what? Sounds like this guy is anti american and bush.

Freedom of speech and free thinking is anti-american?

He mentioned numerous buildings that have burnt for hours and never fallen yet the WTC was burning for less than an hour and fell. HELLO! the god damn building was hit by a 747 with a full tank of gas going over 500 mph. The speed of impact itself is going to cause alot of damage. Thats why the buildings fell so quickly.

That doesnt really make a good arguement. The buildings fell within five minutes of each other. And also, the planes impacted on the upper floors...how then does a building fall vertically straight down if it didnt even bend or sway after impact.

I dont know what you were doing at the time of impact, but the building looked pretty rock-solid to me.


THey werent just on fire they were hit by a massive moving bomb flown by people.

Question. Were you paying attention? it was explained that even at peak temperature, there wasn't enough of it to melt the steel and cause a complete building collapse.

let's say that i have a vacuum cleaner that can hold five pounds of dirt. There's enough dirt on my floor to make up six pounds...according to your logic, it shouldnt matter what limitations there are on dirt-cleaning because vacuums suck up dirt...and extreme temperatures can melt steel.

it's okay if you cant make the connection. psycho's been a thorn in my side on this issue for quite some time now.

The power of this explosion is so mind bogeling that it is hard to tell why some odd things happended on different floors of the building.

okay. The laws of physics and gravity were also acting oddly on that day... perfect reasoning. it explains why jet fuel which is nothing more than kerosene, melted steel that could withstand the peak temperature of steel.

But i have an idea. what probably happened was that the impact was so great when the planes hit, that Chronos, Master of all Space and Time was caught off-guard and had to reboot his universal computer.

Our govt. didnt plan this. If other explosions were planned it certainly wasnt by us, it was by terrorists.

Wow! a double conspiracy. It makes even more sense to assume that the government and terrorists might have carried out attacks on the same day at roughly the same time.

Anything to not have to wake up i see...

This guy is like micheal moore. I think he is just taking facts and turning it into a video to make a scene about the US.

You sound like rush limbaugh. I think you're just taking sound bites and spinning it to make a negative viewpoint about muslims that never posed a threat to you.

[Psycho4Bud]

You sound like rush limbaugh. I think you're just taking sound bites and spinning it to make a negative viewpoint about muslims that never posed a threat to you.

You conspiracy freaks should get your stories together some time. Someone, of your thought waves, stated that Bush found out of Osama's plan and took over the plot. :rasta:

[nicholasstanko]

Are you an architect? After witnessing the events in NYC on 9/11 first hand, I met one (architect) in the subway, shortly before the towers fell. He told me what was going to happen: How they were built to implode and collapse straight down, and he was 100% correct.

Hmmm... the documentary i watched on the History Channel (talking about its creation) and Discovery (detailing the events of that day) never mentioned that.

One more thing: Either Bush was involved in the attacks, or he wasn't. If you say that he didn't "handle" the situation correctly ("shameful") when informed of the attacks, then it does not make any sense to insinuate that he knew about, or even ordered, them in the first place. I mean, come on! If he WAS complicit in the attack(s), then what is it you expected from him after they took place? Wouldn't he have devised a better plan of action than the way he appeard in that classroom? Oh yeah, it was all part of the "plot".

Please, if you can, elaborate on what a mass-murderer is supposed to do after his plan is enacted that is NOT "shameful" - other than confess.

Breuk,

Miss Green obviously meant that he should have reacted better to the "surprise" attack, if it were indeed a surprise.

Read more closely next time.