Main Index   Search   Register   Login   Who's Online   FAQ   Links
  1 Online, 0 Active   You are not logged in  
Main Index     The HIVE light edition (TM)
This is a historical archive
The forum is read-only. Private information has been removed. It is not possible to login.


The Couch Thread:   Previous  Forum index  Next

All 149 posts   Subject: 9-11 Reexamined: A Three Act Play + pics   Please login to post   Thread expires   Down

 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
09-28-04 00:23
No 533481
User Picture 
      9-11 Reexamined: A Three Act Play + pics     

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr67.html
part II and III are in the making, but this one is already shocking enough. LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    dwarfer
(esoteric)
09-28-04 19:38
No 533610
User Picture 
      conspiracy theories: retro-vision     

Yeah: when I saw those floors collapse like that, I was amazed:

Even demolition contractors with calculated charges and
superb timing mechanisms would have trouble pulling
that one off with such immaculate precision:

Bam Bam Bam Bam bam.....

I was amazed.



The perfectly symmetrical and total collapse
of three commercial highrise office buildings that day (WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7),
the first such collapses in history,
can only be explained as controlled demolitions,
requiring a considerable amount of advance planning,
preparation, expertise and access.




<YAWN> The forensic review of the fire-softening of the
under-insulated vertical support members,
combined with the catastrophic failure
of the above floor support,
and the additive weight of the floors
as they slammed into the next one down,
provides a compelling construct of the
failure mode which was noted.

Perhaps there are some good points made in the reference:
but when the author starts out with one
so patently incorrect, it makes it difficult to justify
what may likely  be a consummate time waste
in reading further.

Failure mode analysis is one of my "real-world"
professional activities.

No charge for this one..cool


dwarfer
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
09-28-04 23:46
No 533661
User Picture 
      In that case, you'll like this one too:     

http://website.lineone.net/~bosankoe/analysis.htm
I lost a bit where he's exactly aiming at, which conclusion I mean.

Well, for the fun of it, this one as an extra, after reading the above:
http://www.911-strike.com/pentagon.htm  (five pages, a lot to see and read). LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
09-29-04 00:30
No 533668
User Picture 
      Conspiracy     

There is certainly a lot of curious evidence surrounding 9-11. Supposing the whole event was managed by a conspiracy, 100s of people must have been directly involved and 1000s would be directly aware of what was going on. How could something like this be kept secret?

What is more likely: a conspiracy or gross incompetence? Both reasons would justify the level of government secrecy.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
09-29-04 00:54
No 533674
User Picture 
      not too many     


supposing the whole event was managed by a conspiracy, 100s of people must have been directly involved and 1000s would be directly aware of what was going on. How could something like this be kept secret?




Something like this would take surprisingly few people to execute, and many of those people were probably executed themselves shortly after. It could be handled out by underlings not even aware of what they were doing. Many in the Air Force were told it was a drill. You only need one person at the top to say it's a drill and order them not to mobilize in order to circumvent all the information that indicated it is not a drill.

Besides, you're forgetting the catch-all defense of government conspiracies: deny, deny, deny.

It doesn't matter what proof comes out, just deny it. The government has the final say on what the official word is. I think anyone who looked at a picture of the Pentagon the day of the attack realizes that a 757 could not have possibly made that hole. No one saw this jumbo Jet that, from the direction of the impact, would have had to be traveling near parallel to the ground from a few hundred feet and descending for a several miles before impact.

It would have had to fly below the upper floors of several office buildings and hotels. You would think that if someone looked out the window of their office and saw the top of a 757, they would take notice.

It would have had to clear a major highway by only a few feet, and would have, at the last minute, jumped over a row of trees which were higher than the point of impact on the Pentagon lawn, because those trees mysteriously remain standing.

No one actually heard or saw this plane, there was no plane wreckage in the damage, and the damage wasn't nearly extensive enough to indicate a plane wreck.

Oh yeah, and it hit a "vacant" portion of the building. How convenient.


Deny, deny, deny.
 
 
 
 
    buz
(Hive Bee)
09-29-04 01:34
No 533683
      smoke-screens of conspiracies     

its odd, that as we debate such fine-points in the rape and pillage which is now going on in such grandiose fashion, that many are unwilling to accept that "our government" could possibly bee involved in something so sleezy as a pre-planned disastor.

i have no problem accepting the possibility for such ruthless sleeze...after all, much greater sleeze and ruthlessness has occurred since 9-11, in response to that event; than the carnage of the event itself.

personaly, i think bush did it.
but that doesn't even matter anymore.
he's done a hell of alot more damage since then.

as far as the unlikeliness of covering up such henieousness?
we've always done that.
its not very difficult.
pearl harbor; gulf of tonkin; united fruit company; pepsi and coke; prozac; wonder drugs; etc, etc.

ever wonder why people pay 2-3 times more for "name-brand" meth precursors, for the congestion?
we are chumped-out to the max.

i can't prove that bush did it, nor do i want to, or need to.
it doesn't really matter who did it, or why.
what's interesting to beehold now, is how the evnt has been used to foster more hate and violence...the hand-maidens of dividing and seperating...and exploiting.
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
09-29-04 02:13
No 533693
User Picture 
      Stand corrected     

""No one actually heard or saw this plane, there was no plane wreckage in the damage, and the damage wasn't nearly extensive enough to indicate a plane wreck.""

http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm
There's a lot of plane wreck debris inside and outside the Pentagon.
The question is, what plane, how big, what model, and what was on the 2 black boxes found?
And it came in at a sharp angle, not straight. The wings will have folded back first on impact.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0203/S00030.htm
Eyewitness Reports Of The Crash….

Also from whatreallyhappened.com

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/planewitness.txt

Link To Real Audio Of Eye Witnesses : http://www.whatreallyhappened.com//091101-9v.rm

Steve Patterson, 43, said he was watching television reports of the World Trade Center being hit when he saw a silver commuter jet fly past the window of his 14th-floor apartment in Pentagon City. The plane was about 150 yards away, approaching from the west about 20 feet off the ground, Patterson said. He said the plane, which sounded like the high-pitched squeal of a fighter jet, flew over Arlington cemetary so low that he thought it was going to land on I-395. He said it was flying so fast that he couldn't read any writing on the side. The plane, which appeared to hold about eight to 12 people, headed straight for the Pentagon but was flying as if coming in for a landing on a nonexistent runway, Patterson said. "At first I thought 'Oh my God, there's a plane truly misrouted from National,'" Patterson said. "Then this thing just became part of the Pentagon .‚.‚. I was watching the World Trade Center go and then this. It was like Oh my God, what's next?" He said the plane, which approached the Pentagon below treetop level, seemed to be flying normally for a plane coming in for a landing other than going very fast for being so low. Then, he said, he saw the Pentagon "envelope" the plane and bright orange flames shoot out the back of the building. "It looked like a normal landing, as if someone knew exactly what they were doing," said Patterson, a graphics artist who works at home. "This looked intentional."

-------

A pilot who saw the impact, Tim Timmerman, said it had been an American Airways 757. "It added power on its way in," he said. "The nose hit, and the wings came forward and it went up in a fireball." Smoke and flames poured out of a large hole punched into the side of the Pentagon. Emergency crews rushed fire engines to the scene and ambulancemen ran towards the flames holding wooden pallets to carry bodies out. A few of the lightly injured, bleeding and covered in dust, were recovering on the lawn outside, some in civilian clothes, some in uniform. A piece of twisted aircraft fuselage lay nearby. No one knew how many people had been killed, but rescue workers were finding it nearly impossible to get to people trapped inside, beaten back by the flames and falling debris.

-------

He said another witness told him a helicopter exploded. AP reporter Dave Winslow also saw the crash. He said, "I saw the tail of a large airliner ... It ploughed right into the Pentagon.



There are many more eyewitness reports on the web.
http://www.rense.com/general20/hunt.htm
The same site which put the photos of the plane debris up, later put up also this link. LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
09-29-04 02:49
No 533706
User Picture 
      um     

You don't see a slight discripency in these two reports??

>>Steve Patterson, 43, said he was watching television reports of the World Trade Center being hit when he saw a silver commuter jet fly past the window of his 14th-floor apartment in Pentagon City.

And

>>A pilot who saw the impact, Tim Timmerman, said it had been an American Airways 757.

How bout these statements:

>>And it came in at a sharp angle, not straight. The wings will have folded back first on impact.

Versus

>>The plane, which appeared to hold about eight to 12 people, headed straight for the Pentagon but was flying as if coming in for a landing on a nonexistent runway, Patterson said. "At first I thought 'Oh my God, there's a plane truly misrouted from National,'" Patterson said.

And

>>The wings will have folded back first on impact.

Versus

>>"The nose hit, and the wings came forward and it went up in a fireball."

No one saw a 757 hit the Pentagon. It would have been impossible to witness the event because it never happened.

Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
09-29-04 03:35
No 533709
User Picture 
      Uhm,     

unob, did you actually SEE the photo's of the debris, and the landing weel in the 4th corridor of the Pentagon, in that first link with all the other debris photo's? Or do you believe that those pictures come actually from another plane crash in history, and are doctered and posted on the web, to fuck with us.

I myself added the remark about backfolding of the wings, I have somewhere a short video of a test fighterjet, hitting at full speed a concrete block of 10x10x10 meters, it went in as if it was butter, and the wings folded back against the body. Parts of it came out at the back of the block.
In an airliner, there are long beams from front to back, holding the frame together, these will penetrate a concrete building as if they were spears.

In the first link of this thread, you see that the "object" hit at an angle of about 50 degrees opposed to the building front.
The strange thing is, if you look at that first picture with the projected 757 in it in my second link, you see a big hole at the right side in the second corridor ring, and no hole at the other sidewall, but according to all news, the plane came from the left of the parking video camera, and went in to the right at an angle of 50 degrees. Then the hole in the second ring wall should have been on the LEFT side of the collapsed portion of the first ring.

I have another problem. Ever heard about the ground effect? When a big airplane comes close to the ground, it get "sucked" down. When this big bird came in already so low, hundreds of meters before impact, it would have normally been crashed in the ground when not having it's flaps out. And at top speed, you can't let your landing flaps out, they will be ripped off. And they tell us it came in at top speed. LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
09-29-04 05:12
No 533719
User Picture 
      let's watch the footage.     

Here is the video from the security camera at the Pentagon showing something (but not really) hitting the Pentagon in real time (kinda-sorta).

Of course, you can't see anything even though they draw a highlighted circle around it and tell you it's an airplane.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/03/07/gen.pentagon.pictures/

You'll notice a few things:

1) There's no way to tell if it's an airplane. However, a boeing 757 is half the height of the Pentagon, and it's obvious (from the lack of visability in the film) that the object stiking the Pentagon was not nearly that big. The damage afterward showed that only the ground floor was damaged and that the upper floors fell from fire damage later. A plane that is at least 2.5 stories high can not only impact the ground floor of a building.

2) He mentions the plane came in low off the ground, as do the "eye witnesses", yet no one has ever explained how trees and other objects directly in front of the point of impact are still standing, or why the ground is barely singed.  Also, the plane came in on approach, as if making a landing. The wings would not have folded back before impact. They would have had to at least strike the face of the building before the impact would have folded them back, but there are no marks on the Pentagon.

The plane supposedly struck the Pentagon at 50 degrees. That means at least one wing would have had to slam into the face of the wall, because 757 wings do not slope back very far.

Find an top view image of a 757 anywhere on line, and imagine it hitting a wall at 50 degrees. It would be impossible for the tip of one of the wings not to contact the wall before the body was embedded up to the base of the wing causing it to fold back.

3. The reporter was IN the Pentagon when it was hit and didn't hear anything or feel anything. I'm sorry, but if you're in a building that's hit at 300 mph by a 757, you're going to feel or hear something.

There was seismic activity detected during each tower collision and with the plane crash in Pensylvania, however there was none detected when the Pentagon was hit.

A few years ago a house exploded here due to a gas leak. It was 4 miles away from me, and the explosion wasn't anywhere near as large as what actually happened at the Pentagon, and I still heard it 4 miles away.

4. If a 757 were flying that low to the ground, the engines would have been embedded into the lawn. If they hadn't snapped off (which they would have), then at the very least there would be two huge groves in the lawn for at least 10 or 20 meters. But there's not. There were also several huge wire reels directly in the path of the impact that were left there from the construction that was being done on the Pentagon. Those reels would have been completely destroyed in a 757 smacked into them, but they weren't. They werent even pushed back into the building.

5. Look at the tape carefully. The video footage is datestamped Sept 12. I think we all know what day this supposedly happened on, and it wasn't the 12th. Do the security cameras at the Pentagon, the most heavily guarded building on Earth have the wrong dates on their surveilance equipment, or was someone doing a sloppy editing job? Incidentally, why does the most heavily guarded building on Earth have only one security camera pointing in one direction and of such shity quality? You would at least expect there to be a second camera opposite and pointing in the other directon.

6. Now watch the sequence of frames. It skips a frame and goes from :19 to :21, :22, :23. The missing frame is conspicuously the one that would have showed most clearly whatever was hitting the Pentagon. This is the only official video that has ever been released, however every building that was along the plane's route that had their own surveilance cameras, had their tapes confiscated by the FBI immediately after impact.

Those tapes, which have never been seen, even by the people who worked at the buildings, would have shown a plane passing by them. Why can't we see these videos? Why is the only video on this event an obvious doctored video from a security camera at the Pentagon? With all the news cameras covering the Pentagon on a daily basis and with all the tourist filming in the entire DC area, why hasn't one single independant video of a 757 hitting the Pentagon ever surfaced?

7. There is no way in hell a hijacker with no major flight experience could have piloted a plane that close to the ground for that amount of distance. <--period.


unob, did you actually SEE the photo's of the debris, and the landing weel in the 4th corridor of the Pentagon, in that first link with all the other debris photo's? Or do you believe that those pictures come actually from another plane crash in history, and are doctered and posted on the web, to fuck with us.




I've seen plenty of photos and I don't think the pictures were doctored. I think the crash site was though. I'm sure there really was landing gear and suitcases scattered around just like the pictures showed. That section of the Pentagon was under construction and pretty much empty (again, very convenient), they could have put anything in there they wanted. Don't you find it the least bit strange that luggage and clothing where able to withstand temperatures that instantaneously disintigrated an aluminum aircraft?
 
I didn't see the landing gear photo, but I'm sure it exists. Why wouldn't it? It can't be that hard to put a piece of landing gear in the debris. But here's an interesting photo:

turbine1.jpg

Anyone know what that disc is? Neither does anyone else. But it's not any part from a 757, although it does appear to be part of a (much smaller) turbine engine.

http://www.americanfreepress.net/10_10_03/Controversy_Swirling/controversy_swirling.html


Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    Osmium
(Stoni's sexual toy)
09-29-04 07:55
No 533731
User Picture 
      !     



http://www.eng.uct.ac.za/~victor/electric/Turbine4_256.gif

Wow, pickle has progressed to the HATER rank. Why do you hate freedom and democracy so much, co-worker unob?

BUSH/CHENEY 2004! After all, it ain't my country!
www.american-buddha.com/addict.war.1.htm
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
09-29-04 14:56
No 533752
User Picture 
      These things are all lookalikes,     

it's the measures which are missing. How big is it?
Put this: "" Rolls Royce AE 3007H "" in the Mozilla Firefox address bar, hit return, and you get this:
http://www.rolls-royce.com/civil_aerospace/technology/ae3007.jsp

and on another page, this :


the AE 3007 turbofan powers both civil and military aircraft, providing 6,000lb to 9,000lb of thrust. The AE 3007 is sole powerplant for the 30-50 seat Embraer ERJ 135, ERJ 140 and ERJ 145 regional jets; the Embraer Legacy and Cessna Citation X corporate jets; the Brazilian SIVAM military surveillance aircraft; and the ultra-high altitude Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle for the U.S. Air Force. The first AE 3007 engine entered service in 1996, powering an Embraer ERJ 145.




I was also thinking how a complicated civilian airplane at topspeed could be controlled by a hijacker with "proven" very bad skills at even operating small single prop airplanes.
However, it could be, that an arab fundamentalist believer or another suicidal experienced civilian/fighterjet pilot has steered the Pentagon plane, ofcourse. But why those idiots who were denied to fly alone in even a small Cessna, did all that kind of coverup work then, before boarding at last on flight 77 and the others, is totally insane. Have you ever tried to fly a similar flightpath within an MS Flightsimulator's Boeing 747?
Bet you need more than a year to even come close to skimming lightpoles before hitting a building at 2 m high. Did anybody ever tried to do that in a flightsimulator trial run on the Pentagon? As far as I know, MS has Washington DC included on their extra disks.

Btw, here's a photo of a cut-off lightpole :


This picture shows two vehicles on Route 27 that were damaged by light pole debris, clipped by the Flight 77 aircraft as it passed overhead and across Route 27, then plowed into the Pentagon. The pole to the left is one of several that were clipped by the aircraft. The pole is also not complete, you can see it was sheered at the top.



It comes from this page, nearly at the bottom, with huge info on flight 77 impact:
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flight77.htm

It strikes me also, that conspiracy believers post lots of info, but nearly all from sites which follow the same line of thought, why not also search government sites, like FEMA, to balance your thoughts ?
http://www.fema.gov/ , fill in search : "" photo pentagon "", and 1175 hits come up.
Some of them have much more info than conspiracy sites. For example these:
 http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photolibrary/index.jsp , fill in search again: "" photo pentagon "", and you find 903 photographs. You must have a fast connection, it loads slow, even with one at hand.
It gives 15 photos per page.
So a quick narrow down by searching for " photo pentagon debris " gave 17 photos, not that much, and no real plane debris to work with on identification, in fact nothing. Where are those FEMA photo's from rense com's http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm ?
----------------------------------
Btw, this one is for our chemists:
http://usfa.fema.gov/fire-service/techreports/tr127.shtm


The cause of the explosion is still under investigation. According to local authorities, CSI employees were in the process of distilling a diluted form of hydroxylamine at the time that the explosion occurred. Authorities indicated that this was the first production run of this material at the plant. The product was used to clean semiconductors and to manufacture pharmaceuticals and CSI was the first US manufacturer to produce the product.



----------------------------------

Here's a blend in of a 757 in the surveilance camera picture:


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
09-29-04 20:58
No 533794
User Picture 
      Read the link. http://www.americanfreepress.net...     

Read the link.

http://www.americanfreepress.net/10_10_03/Controversy_Swirling/controversy_swirling.html

The disc in the photo is the size that would have come out of the Cessna Citation or Global Hawk. There is no way it came from a 757.


It strikes me also, that conspiracy believers post lots of info, but nearly all from sites which follow the same line of thought, why not also search government sites, like FEMA, to balance your thoughts ?




The picture of the turbine disc came from FEMA. There's another one there two.


Btw, here's a photo of a cut-off lightpole :




Are you insinuating that 757's are the only things that can cut off lightposts?

That image of the plane superimposed on the camera is bullshit. That it not the silouette of 757's tail. It looks remarkably like part of the treeline way off in the background. The missing frame in the video should clearly show the object between the Pentagon and that box that's sticking up. But it seems to be missing.

I can super impose any object into any blurry picture with a random background and make it look real.


Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
09-29-04 23:31
No 533801
User Picture 
      That turbine     

Sorry not to reply and loose the thread somewhat.

Don't jets have a separate turbine generator for electricity? It could have come from that.

The Pentagon crash was the thing that made me start wondering. I know the building is fortified and made to much higher standards then your typical commercial box with a roof on, but what happened to the engines? The densest, toughest parts of an aeroplane are the engines - these don't fold inwards and go with the fusilage, they break off. The intial hole was what, 18 feet in diameter. What happened to the engines? There was no damage from the engines.

There are witness reports of a small very fast white plane at the time. To me, your typical fighter wouldn't cause that much damage or make that big a hole - it would have to be missile.

But then, what happened to the jumbo? You can't just pay of hundreds of passengers, you'd have to kill them. Did they somehow take remote control of the jet, land it, intern everyone and kill them? It's possible and bloody scary.

The official line doesn't add up, but the alternative is so bad and frightening that I can't see it happening. Can it? Maybe that is why Blair is such a rent boy, he is scared too.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
09-29-04 23:44
No 533804
User Picture 
      separate turbine generator for electricity?     


Several readers wrote to AFP suggesting that the unidentified disc was a piece from the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) mounted in the tail section of a Boeing 757. Honeywell makes the GTCP331-200 APU used on the 757 aircraft. No one suggested, however, that the small disc was a piece from one of the main engines of a 757-200.

AFP contacted Honeywell’s Aerospace division in Phoenix, Ariz., and sent high-resolution photos for their examination. “There’s no way that’s an APU wheel,” an expert at Honeywell told AFP. The expert, who cannot be named, added: “That turbine disc—there’s no way in the world that came out of an APU.”
http://www.americanfreepress.net/10_10_03/Controversy_Swirling/controversy_swirling.html




Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
09-29-04 23:51
No 533806
User Picture 
      RE: separate turbine generator for electricity?     

I see.

What did it come from, then?

Cruise missile, fighter, droid or what? Looks bigger than a cruise missile turbine.

Edit: and what about an amateur executing such a difficult manoeuvre

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
09-30-04 00:29
No 533809
User Picture 
      These?     

http://www.kathymcmahon.utvinternet.com/wag/wag/911_pentagon_turbine.htm

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=37640

After viewing the photo from the Pentagon, an un-named Honeywell employee told AFP: "That disc - that turbine disc - there's no way in the world that came out of an APU."

AFP also contacted Pratt & Whitney to ask if the disc could have come from one of their engines. Company spokesman Mark Sullivan told AFP: "If it was an American Airlines 757, it would have been a Rolls Royce engine."

John W. Brown from Rolls Royce told AFP earlier, "It is not a part from any Rolls Royce engine that I'm familiar with, and certainly not the AE3007H made here in Indy."

When AFP told Brown that, if the government version is correct, it MUST be a piece of a Rolls Royce engine, he balked. He asked who at Pratt & Whitney had provided the information.

Asked if the disc in the photo was a piece of a Rolls Royce RB211-535 (the turbofan engine for the Boeing 757-200) or from the AE3007 series, which power the GLOBAL HAWK and the Cessna Citation, Brown said he could not answer.

The RB211-535 is produced in England and the GLOBAL HAWK's AE3007H engine is hand-made in Indianapolis, Indiana.

AFP asked Brown, who works at the Indiana facility, if he was personally familiar with the parts of an AE3007H: "No. I don't build the engines," Brown said. "I am a spokesman for the company. I speak for the company."

American Free Press had earlier contacted the U.S. Air Force, American Airlines, Rolls Royce, and others to ask for help identifying the part, however, no one is willing to discuss the photographs.

IT MUST BE ROLLS ROYCE

The logical conclusion is: If the government version is true, that an American Airlines 757-200 hit the Pentagon, THEN the object in the photo must be a piece of a Rolls Royce RB211-535 turbofan engine.

If it cannot be proven to be a piece of a RB211-535 engine, then it is most likely from another turbofan engine.

If it is NOT from a RB211-535, then perhaps it is from a Rolls Royce AE3007 engine of the type used by the GLOBAL HAWK. If it is, then an aircraft of this type most probably hit the Pentagon.

In any case, identifying the small turbine disc in the FEMA photo is CLEARLY of the HIGHEST importance to understanding WHAT hit the Pentagon. The FEMA photo is the best evidence to obtaining that understanding.




Unob, I was in a bit of a hurry, and forgot to add the accompanying text to that superimposed 757 photo of the Pentagon security camera, btw, it came from my third post, it's page 1:
http://www.911-strike.com/pentagon.htm  (five pages, a lot to see and read).


First frame from security camera video, purportedly showing a 757 approaching the Pentagon; with animated overlay, showing how a 757 should have looked, superimposed in the correct scale and perspective into the security camera image.          source: http://0911.site.voila.fr/ldsxox.gif  (also see http://website.lineone.net/~bosankoe/analysis.htm  )

A set of five frames from a security camera video were released (allegedly by Pentagon sources) on March 7, 2002, and were shown widely on US media as evidence of a plane crash at the Pentagon.  This may have been  in response to the increasing notoriety of Thierry Meyssan's "Hunt the Boeing" website, and his growing popularity in Europe.  

However -- in a bizarre twist on the tale of the Emperor's Clothes --  none of these US media was willing to draw any significant conclusions from the problem that there is no 757 aircraft visible in the surveillance camera image sequence.  If anything, there possibly appears to be the white spiral exhaust plume of a missile, trailing behind what might be the tail of a very short aircraft.  Furthermore, Pierre Henri-Bunel, in a chapter in Meyssan's Pentagate book, argued that the explosion shown in the latter frames of this video were definitely caused by shaped explosive charges, and not by any conceivable kerosene fire.  Advocates of the missile theory viewed this, at first,  as manna from heaven.  But some  investigators began to look carefully at this possible Trojan Horse, and found numerous questionable aspects: missing frames and evidence of other image manipulations.   It was also noted that the source of the photos was unclear and their status as "officially endorsed" was uncertain.




WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
09-30-04 02:48
No 533827
User Picture 
      Can we find that part?     

We will have to look for detailed pics or drawings of a Rolls Royce RB211-535 turbofan engine, to be sure that that mystery part came from a Boeing-757.

http://www.rolls-royce.com/suppliers/supplier_info/sdro.jsp ,but alas:
""Standard Data Records Office (SDRO)
This section contains information on the web enabled internal document distribution system. There are now 1500 suppliers accessing internal UK specifications through this system. This site is password protected.""

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/print.asp?ID=1152 Still no proof what it is.
So, use googling: search for "" Rolls Royce RB211-535 turbofan engine "" : lots of hits, f.ex.:

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/RB211
at the bottom, this link: http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Boeing%20757
""The 757 is the first Boeing airliner launched with non-US engines, Rolls-Royce RB211-535, later, however, the Pratt & Whitney PW2000 was also offered as an option.
(Pratt & Whitney's PW2000 series engines is a high-bypass turbofan aero engine with a thrust range from 37,000 to 43,000 lb (165 to 190 kN) built by Pratt & Whitney . It is designed for the Boeing 757. As a 757 powerplant, the engine competes with the Rolls-Royce RB211-535. An improved version launched in 1994, offers better reliability, durability and reduced total maintenance cost, along with excellent environmental performance.)
 
Didn't I say you could find this? Download Boeing 757 for Flight Simulator:
http://flyawaysimulation.com/downloads-file-600-details.html

 Powerplants : Two Rolls-Royce RB211, or 2 Pratt & Whitney PW2037, or 2 Pratt & Whitney PW2040,
or 2 Pratt & Whitney PW2043 high-bypass ratio turbofan engines, rated at 36,600 pounds (162.8 kN) to 43,500 pounds (193.5 kN) thrust each.

 757-200 : The -200 is the definitive version and forms the majority of the 757. It has also been manufactured in freighter (757-200F) and passenger-freight combi (757-200M) versions. In the late 1990's some of the airliner 757-200 were converted to freighters.

 Private and Military variants : The governments of Saudi Arabia and the United States Air Force have fitted 757s for VIP transport duties (see C-32: The C-32 is the designation of a USAF passenger transportaion aircraft, a version of the Boeing 757. The C-32 provides safe, comfortable and reliable transportation for United States leaders to locations around the world. The primary customers are the vice president, using the distinctive call sign "Air Force Two," the first lady, and members of the Cabinet and Congress), and at least one is in use as a private aircraft (that of Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen (Paul G. Allen (born January 21, 1953) is an entrepreneur who first established himself by co-founding Microsoft Corporation with Bill Gates. He regularly appears on lists of the richest people in the world; as of 2004 he is ranked by Forbes magazine as the fifth richest, worth an estimated $21 billion, $5 billion of which is in Microsoft stock).
Presidential challenger John Kerry is using a chartered 757-200, nicknamed "Freedom Bird," during the 2004 U.S. presidential campaign.
That's a LOT of global and US keyplayers flying in potentially remotely takeover planes..If 9/11 was not a terrorist attack, but a dissident group plot, using remote control, it doesn't sound clever to not check all these 757s.
But no drawings of engine parts to find at these pages, so let's go on:


http://www.rolls-royce.com/education/schools/gasturbine/modules.jsp
""The RB211 family, to which the Trent belongs, features modular construction in its design. That is to say, it is built up from a number of large assemblies known as ‘modules’, each of which has its individual identity and service history.

The Trent 800 is built-up from eight basic modules:

    * Module 01 LP compressor rotor, (to which the fan blades are fitted)
    * Module 02 IP compressor
    * Module 03 Intermediate case
    * Module 04 HP system
    * Module 05 IP turbine
    * Module 06 High speed gearbox
    * Module 07 LP compressor case
    * Module 08 LP turbine

Modules 01, 02, 03, 04, 05 and 08 form the core engine which can be replaced as a complete assembly.
http://www.rolls-royce.com/education/schools/gasturbine/mainmodules.htm

It looks alot like the right part of module 04 HP system to me, especially the center piece combined with that outer ring, but again, with no measures at hand, it still can be any other engine part from any other brand and type.
However, if we compare the standing man in front of a RollsRoyce turbo fan engine in that picture in my former post, than it looks like the last ring of module 04 is at least 1 meter in diameter, and that's a lot bigger than the part on Unobs photo's!
LT/

PS: Unob, hack into that RR parts site, and take measures, if you want to change the elections.

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
09-30-04 03:09
No 533830
User Picture 
      And guess where we saw that part already?     

Post 533731 (Osmium: "!", The Couch)
Look what it says in Osmiums picture, above the fat numbers:
Module-No 4 High Pressure Sys (RB211-535)

However, the link he gave, gives this colorpicture of an example turbofan engine:
http://www.eng.uct.ac.za/~victor/electric/Turbine4_256.gif




So, where did he get that trade-secret copyrighted B/W parts catalog picture from Boeing???  LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Osmium
(Stoni's sexual toy)
09-30-04 07:13
No 533863
User Picture 
      far out     

> That's a LOT of global and US keyplayers flying in potentially remotely takeover
> planes..If 9/11 was not a terrorist attack, but a dissident group plot, using
> remote control, it doesn't sound clever to not check all these 757s.

Aren't you getting a bit too enthusiastic about this idea? Do you think the thousands of technicians worldwide who strip those planes down to the last wire and screw every few years for a complete overhaul have somehow overlooked that tiny black box with the yellow remote control sticker on it?

BUSH/CHENEY 2004! After all, it ain't my country!
www.american-buddha.com/addict.war.1.htm
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
09-30-04 15:19
No 533912
User Picture 
      Unob,     

""While the front fan of the RB211-535 has a 74.5-inch diameter, compression discs inside the engine are much smaller. Schwarz said the inner discs are between 29 and 41 inches in diameter. “It could well be” an inner compression disc, Schwarz said. The discs from the inner stages are made of titanium, he added.""
So now we know the measure of the front fan, the fan inside the engine housing.
On my modules drawing, that fan is 47.5 mm, compared to the ring part of module 04 having a diameter of 20 mm.
That makes 47,5 : 20 = 74,5 : 41 (or 29) makes 2.375 = 1.817 (or 2.569)
So, 2.375 can be compared to a range of 1.817 until 2.569
That means the ring shaped disk from your photo could match a disk of a 757-200 engine.
But that thing on your FEMA photo must be about 50 to 70 cm diameter, compared to the leg of the rescue worker in front of it.
1 inch = 2.540 cm.
The inner compression disks of a 757-200 jet engine must be between about 73.66 and 104.14 cm diameter.
So, with all the broken off parts of the outer ring substracted, it could be one of the smaller discs of a 757-200 jet engine. And that module 04 outer right part is one of the smaller ring sections.

Osmium, I just spouted some thoughts coming up, no solid theories, same as you do sometimes.
However, you also know that Lufthansa overhauled all their US planes, ripped out everything remotely possible to be influenced by US spooks to take over control during flight (or a highjacking of the plane). And it was all software handled, no hardware. So they made their own propprietary software solutions for fly by wire.
They were not pleased by the solely US handling of flight disasters. Good thinking by them. LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
09-30-04 18:29
No 533933
User Picture 
      So where are the other dozen or so compression     

So where are the other dozen or so compression disks? What about the other 9 wheel hubs? Just one of each? Pretty odd.

Don't you also think that in over 3 years, they could have confirmed what the part is by now? Why hasen't the government  made an official declaration to what it is?

Because if they announce the exact part number, someone will pull out a schematic and prove that they are full of shit. That's why.

Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
09-30-04 23:46
No 533976
User Picture 
      In fact,     

I'm full on your side of the picture, but, the problem with me and a lot of other people is:
we have been thoroughly teached to only discard or approve a theory, after playing the devils lawyer.
Which means that we try to find solid ways to disprove our own line of thoughts, until we have convinced ourselfs that the balance of pros and contras support our own theory, or not. (which is the hardest thing to do, concerning the human mind and ego.)

However, may I direct you and especially the other readers again at the 5 pages from 911-strike.com, where everything needed has already been said.
Sometimes I wonder if the very few people with enough evaluating power at hand here, do read all the links provided.
I have dropped a hint about having a test filed, where a plane hits a concrete block, and lo-an-behold, no one seems to be able to see all the fucking pics provided at http://www.911-strike.com/missing-confetti.htm where they could see that test, already provided by me.
And where you can see with your own damn eyes that the wings of the plane hitting the reinforced concrete block did NOT fold back.

(This seriously contradicts claims by Jean-Pierre Desmoulins that the wings of a 757 would have folded forward, as well as claims in the popular press that the wings folded back before entering the "too-small" hole.)




I get the impression we preach for a very small audience, with just a few individuals wise enough to see the implications of these very important discussions.
Or have they been surpressed in such a sheeplish neutral behavior by the relentless banning sprays of lately?
I remember the vivid discussions of the last century, where such things would have not slipped through the meticulous screening of all the members. No way José ! LT/ crazyfrownmadblushshocked


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-01-04 02:30
No 533986
User Picture 
      Re: I have dropped a hint about having a test...     


I have dropped a hint about having a test filed, where a plane hits a concrete block, and lo-an-behold, no one seems to be able to see all the fucking pics provided at http://www.911-strike.com/missing-confetti.htm where they could see that test, already provided by me.
And where you can see with your own damn eyes that the wings of the plane hitting the reinforced concrete block did NOT fold back.




I saw it, and don't see any significance at all between that test and the Pentagon. The conditions of the test were so drastically different that it has no relevance to the Pentagon. A smaller, lighter plane hitting a 10 foot thick solid concrete target head on is no indication of how a longer, heavier plane hitting a weaker object at a 50 degree angle will behave.


Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    abolt
(Hive Addict)
10-01-04 03:30
No 533990
User Picture 
      ????????     

A smaller, lighter plane hitting a 10 foot thick solid concrete target head on is no indication of how a longer, heavier plane hitting a weaker object at a 50 degree angle will behave.

I agree........I estimate at least 50% of the impact area is nothing more than glass, and the red trajectory lines clearly show the right wing missing the large pillar on the right.

Also, the trajectory of impact should have caused much more damage to the left.

........unless the building had the strength to spin the plane.

However, if that were the case then, this picture:

http://www.defenselink.mil/photos/Sep2001/010914-F-8006R-002.jpg

shows that virtually no debris has been spit out the right hand side.

And.........if you look closely, unless I'm mistaken, there appears to be scorch marks on the face of the second block(first interior block), that would coincide to the trajectory, which may further discount "plane spin", upon impact.

Also, does anyone think that the left hand wall of the impact area, is sheared away a bit too neatly, for the amount of debris on the inside, behind the first row?

It looks to me as if there was an implosion, from the inside.

He took Blood Money
They took Blood



 
 
 
 
    yei
(Newbee)
10-04-04 01:11
No 534330
      I wonder if a plane hit the pentagon, but it...     

I wonder if a plane hit the pentagon, but it was hit by a missile as well. Perhaps a just-too-late attempt to stop it by an airforce plane. Why cover it up? It would be very embarassing to admit they had a fighter to protect the pentagon, and that there was none for the other two towers. And that it failed.

Goverments often cover up things just because they are embarassing and inconvenient. Who fucked who, who dropped the ball and let people get hurt, etc.

There may be conspiracies out there, but I don't think they're all necessarily about world domination and illuminati. Maybe just as often about petty pride and beaurocratic buck-passing.

It's good to bee back! Don't trust your computer!!
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-05-04 15:30
No 534548
User Picture 
      Newsletter 68a,b,c + more     

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr68.html
""The black boxes have never been turned over to civilian authorities and their contents have never been publicly revealed.""

""Many questions have been left unanswered by the official story of the attack. For example, how could hijackers possibly have known that they would be able to fly unmolested for some 300 miles while headed directly into the heart of the nation's capital, through the most tightly controlled airspace in the world -- and do it not in a surprise attack, while the nation's defenses were sleeping, but rather while the country was on the highest state of alert, and actually anticipating the attack? ... while the whole world was watching, and all the broadcast and cable television networks were providing play-by-play coverage?

Wouldn't it have made far more sense for the Pentagon to be the first target struck, utilizing the element of surprise, considering that the home of U.S. military forces is obviously a little better defended than the World Trade Center? Wouldn't the logical way to implement the assault have been to hit the military command center first, then strike the civilian targets while the military was attempting to regroup and secure Washington? You would think that even a third-rate terrorist would know that, let alone a terrorist superstar like Osama bin Laden.""

""There are any number of curious anomalies in these images, perhaps the most obvious of which is the fact that the date/time stamps, added after the fact, are off by about thirty-two hours. The second frame differs from the other four in a number of ways: it is brighter, shifted slightly to the left, and obscured in both upper corners. The second frame also has the same time stamp, 17:37:19, as the first frame, though it obviously wasn't taken at the same time.

Some researchers, by the way, have claimed that the time stamps indicate a tape speed of 100 frames per second, which these same researchers have noted is extremely unlikely. These people apparently never learned how to tell time, so let me clue them in: the difference between 17:37:22 and 17:37:23 is one second, not 1/100 of a second. Time, you see, is generally recorded as hours:minutes:seconds. But no one should let that stop them from making stupid claims that further discredit the field of 9-11 research.

Another curious feature of the images can be observed by focusing your attention on the upper left corner of each frame -- the area where it looks like Bob Guccione snuck by and spread a little Vaseline on the camera lens. As can be clearly seen, the pattern of condensation drops (or whatever they are) is quite consistent in frames #1, #4, and #5, but much different in frames #2 and #3, as though the drops began to disperse and then inexplicably returned to their original configuration. Another curiosity is that the helicopter support structure that can be seen in silhouette in front of the fireball in frames #3 and #4 is incongruously painted a bright orange in frame #2.

What then are we to make of these images? Only one of the five purportedly shows an airplane about to crash, and it is of such poor quality that it is not possible to perform any sort of meaningful analysis. There is little question that the images have been manipulated in various ways, rendering them all but useless for shedding any light on what happened at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. The most likely scenario is that these doctored photos were 'leaked' quite deliberately for the express purpose of further muddying the waters. We will therefore treat these images with the respect that they deserve -- which is to say, we will pretty much ignore them.""

LT: Something very obvious has never been said about these doctered pics:
If you take in account the very long casted shadows of the entrance poles in the foreground, why the hell is there no obvious VERY long and broad dark shadow to see on the grass under it, casted by ALL the explosion clouds in the 4 last photo's?

Then I have another link for the reader:
http://www.rense.com/general38/77.htm
 STILL No Arabs On Flight 77
I see also no arab sounding names in that list, and the ex-Naval line officer and psychiatrist who wrote it, added a few other highly suspicious details about the DNA tracking of the victims.



http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr68b.html
""As I explained in my first Pentagon rant, it would have been physically impossible for the nosecone, or any other component, of a Boeing 757 to punch out an exit hole in the "C" ring of the Pentagon after plowing through three entire building rings. As the Los Angeles Times noted, five days after the attacks, the Pentagon was “built to be as strong and impenetrable as this country always hoped its military would be … When ground was broken on the building--eerily, on September 11, 1941, exactly 60 years before Tuesday’s attack--it was a state of the art bunker.” ""

""The Pentagon is an immense, and immensely strong, structure. It is composed primarily of thick, steel-reinforced concrete. The exterior walls are a full two feet thick – two feet of solid concrete, brick and limestone. ""

""The nosecone of a Boeing passenger plane, pictured below, is composed of carbon. Its function is to serve as an aerodynamic cover for the aircraft's navigation system. It is not designed to be utilized as, and it will not perform well as, a missile warhead. Impact with the very first masonry wall would have completely obliterated the plane's nosecone and enclosed electronics. The plane's fuselage, composed primarily of strong yet lightweight metals, would have fared only slightly better.""

""To account for these reports of surviving nose gear, and to account for an alleged exit hole that couldn't possibly have been punched out by a passenger airplane, I suggested in my previous Pentagon rant that the damage was likely caused by a particular type of cruise missile -- specifically, a Boeing AGM-86C Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile (CALCM) outfitted with a depleted uranium (DU) warhead. ""
""Everything seemed to fit -- the clean initial penetration, the low altitude flight capability, the ability to evade radar, the ability to penetrate multiple reinforced targets.""

""First of all, though no one seems to have given it much serious thought, it is not in the right location to be an exit wound. True, the hole is where it should be if a projectile following the alleged trajectory of the alleged plane sliced through the building in a perfectly straight line from the point of entry. But that would never actually happen in this place that we call the 'real world.' In the real world, when a fast-moving projectile strikes a flat, dense, stationary object at an angle (in this case, an angle of approximately 45 degrees, by most accounts), something called deflection comes into play.""

""it takes considerably more energy to penetrate at an angle than it does to penetrate head on. And when a projectile does penetrate through an angled surface, the trajectory of that projectile will change due to deflection.""

""What are we to conclude happened here? Did the strangely indestructible nosecone of Flight 77 somehow weave its way around those columns on the way out of the building? Or did it careen around as if it were in a giant pinball machine until, magically, it somehow ended up right back on course and with sufficient energy to punch its way out? Perhaps I am just a bit of a skeptic, but somehow I find either of those scenarios rather unlikely.
""

""But if the vast majority of the significant damage was to the first and second floors only, to such an extent that a second-story roof over a portion of the alleged path of travel shows no visible signs of damage, then we are not really being asked to believe that an enormous 757 jumbo jet disappeared without a trace into a five-story building; incredibly enough, we are actually being asked to believe that it essentially disappeared without a trace into a two-story building!""

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr68c.html
""Moving on, I am required by the Fairness Doctrine to show you some additional photos that allegedly depict aircraft debris. However, it is my understanding that the doctrine places no restrictions on my right to thoroughly mock and ridicule this alleged evidence.""

LT: read on, and make your mind up. LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Snakebyte
(Hive Bee)
10-05-04 20:10
No 534578
User Picture 
      Everyone who's interested in this HAS to watch     

Everyone who's interested in this HAS to watch "Painful Deceptions".  It lays out all the facts.  I've mentioned this before in another thread awhile back and I think it's extremely important for people to inform themselves about this.  You can download it using kazaa.

The easiest way to control people?  Make them believe they're free.
 
 
 
 
    Osmium
(Stoni's sexual toy)
10-05-04 21:41
No 534586
User Picture 
      > Everyone who's interested in this HAS to...     

> Everyone who's interested in this HAS to watch "Painful Deceptions". 
> It lays out all the facts.

You can watch 40 minutes of it here:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/121203painfuldeceptions.html

BUSH/CHENEY 2004! After all, it ain't my country!
www.american-buddha.com/addict.war.1.htm
 
 
 
 
    ampdup
(Newbee)
10-06-04 18:31
No 534711
User Picture 
      Pictures worth 1000 words goes both ways     

You can make people believe anything you want by manipulating angles and taking/finding photos to back your theory/story. 

If you buy this conspiracy theory, you probably also think that we never went to the moon and it was all staged in Arizona.  Personally, I think this belongs in the National Inquirer or Star magazine.  I am from this area and know people that work in and around the Pentagon.  Trust me on this one....it was a plane.  The Pentagon, being the hub of our nations defence ring, was secured so quickly and tightly, that most of the photo's we see were taken after the HAZMAT and FEMA personel already had searched and collected the site.  Unlike the Trade Center, the Pentagon isn't smack dab in the center of a city like Manhatten, and security measures for isolating the Pentagon were in place and enforceable.

If you REALLY must find a conspiracy theory that deals with 9/11, try the 4th Airliner that crashed in rural Pennsylvannia that noone really seems to talk about.  Other than a few transmissions from cell phones and stuff, and the great tales of passengers retaking he airplane and crashing it to the earth to foil the terrorist's plans, there isn't much media coverage.  It is my contention that the story is fabricated or exaggerated, and that the airliner was shot down by F-16s and the innocent passengers made into martyrs (for both a cover story and additional propaganda to be used for justifying later invasions of Afganastan and Iraq in the public's eyes.

Believe what you will.  I know that the USA plays just as dirty as the rest of the world, but I aint buyin this one!

Life is a lesson  and you'll learn it when your through
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-07-04 04:48
No 534785
User Picture 
      Re: The Pentagon, being the hub of our nations     


The Pentagon, being the hub of our nations defence ring, was secured so quickly and tightly, that most of the photo's we see were taken after the HAZMAT and FEMA personel already had searched and collected the site.  Unlike the Trade Center, the Pentagon isn't smack dab in the center of a city like Manhatten, and security measures for isolating the Pentagon were in place and enforceable.




Really? Is that why we didn't have fighters in the sky patrolling the hub of defense until an hour after the country was attacked and a known missing and suspected hijacked plane was in the vacinity? Not only should there have been sky patrols immediately to protect the Pentagon after the first tower was hit, but since the Whitehouse is only a few miles away, the airspace should have been doubly protected.

From aircraft carriers, we can launch a squadron of fighter jets in minutes and be within two hours of striking distance practically anywhere on the planet. You honestly believe we couldn't scramble together even one fighter from a land base 7 minutes away to guard the Pentagon after the country was attacked? Do you actually believe the story that the Airforce base didn't have any armed planes on standby in the captial city of the country?

Why was Airforce one flying around for an hour without a military escort?

If a plane hit the Pentagon, it wasn't the only thing that hit it. And whether it was a plane or not, whatever hit the Pentagon was allowed to hit it.


I know that the USA plays just as dirty as the rest of the world, but I aint buyin this one!




Are you aware that the US government knew about and did nothing to prevent Pearl Harbor?


Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    ampdup
(Newbee)
10-07-04 14:27
No 534824
User Picture 
      Having been in the Military     

Having been in two branches of the military, I have seen some stupid shit.  Every AF base does have "alert" aircraft, that are sitting on the tarmack fully armed and fueled, that are supposed to be capible of scrambling within 15 minutes.  Whether or not the are scrambled is up to the base commanding officer.  Maybe he wasnt at the helm to give the order and couldnt be located, or maybe hesitated because it wasnt clear it was an attack til the 2nd liner hit, or he just fucked up and needed a cover stiory.  Remember the USS Starks?  The skipper didnt shoot and the ship was nearly sank.  Then again, remember that Korean Airliner in the Gulf?  The skipper did shoot, and downed a civilian aircraft.  Damned if you do, damned if you dont.  Those pricks are facing retirement and some are more worried about punitive repremand that national security.  So someone or something  has to be the scapegoat, and the damage control team puts together a story to shift the blame elsewhere.  Granted that doesnt justify outright lying to the public, but it happens everyday.  Its a need to know situation, and they dont think you need to know. Just like the Marine barracks in Beruit that was car bombed.  We werent allowed to shoot back unless openly attacked, and even then had to ask permission 1st.  We weren't even allowed to carry loaded weapons!  Guys walking around w/ AK47s and RPGs and just like Barney Fife, our rounds had to stay in our pockets.

The trouble with being one of the biggest kids on the block is that the little guys can't challenge us to a fight, they have to just walk up and punch us in the nose as hard as they can and hope that they  hurt us enough so we cant chase them right away and make their escape.  THerefore, terrorism is really the only choice they have.   Look at Iraq.  The 4th largest army in the world and they barely slowed the US advance at all.  From a tactical point of view, the attack of 9/11 was nothing short of a logistical masterpiece and pure genius on the part of Al Quida (spelling?). The element of surprise was complete and effective.  We were caught with our pants around our ankles dispite the fact that the CIA and FBI may have had some advance warning that it was coming. And Tom Ridge's Homeland Security Act that resulted from all this (and was snuck by the American public in the aftermath and confusion, I might add) does nothing but strip the citizen's of the US of thier civil liberities and rights of privacy.  Pretty slick and underhanded way to get laws passed under our noses.  Even tho wiretaps and other illegal, privacy invading survallience methods have been employed by the CIA and FBI and other law enforcement agencies for years to collect evidence for years, the HLSA makes it submissable in court.  I think I heard Tom Ridge say in a press conference following its passing, when asked about it, he said "well, if your not breaking the law, you have nothing to worry about, the rights to privacy shouldn't apply to criminals anyways, and has been protecting guilty parties from prosicution too long now as it is".  yikes.

But I have strayed from the subject.

Can I answer those questions? No, probably not.  I can speculate and suggest possibilities, but the truth of that day may never be known.  Not by our generation anyways.  People in this country that hold high ranking positions are too busy covering thier own asses and pointing fingers, it's a wonder they even knew there were more hi-jacked planes in the air.  Maybe there WERE fighters up, and they did take out airliner #4, and the best way to cover up that story might just be to deny having planes in the air at all. Better to look surprised than to have to explain to an already angry public why it was decided to add to the day's death toll rather than risk trying to force it down and having another liner take out Camp David or the White house. Just like knowing the INJ navy was bearing down on Pearl and doing nothing to prepare for an attack (other than MAYBE putting the vulnerable carriers underway to save them from destruction and leaving all the more heavily armed battleships in port, because we underestimated the destructive power or overall size of the air strike) even after sightings of the INJ carriers by one of our patrolling subs, and numerous eye witnesses along the Hawiaan coast line of the inbound Vals and Kates that Sunday morning.

Your guess is as good as mine.

edit: as an afterthought, I wasnt  suggesting the pentagon had security messures in place to protect it from the terrorist attacks, just the US public and reporters in it's aftermath

Life is a lesson  and you'll learn it when your through
 
 
 
 
    maj
(Stranger)
10-07-04 15:32
No 534827
User Picture 
      This is Hunt the BOEING ...     

This is Hunt the BOEING
www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/ pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

Its an interesting site and since were on the topiccool
mthoreufkcin lnik

mthoreufkcin lnik
 
 
 
 
    hypo
(Balanced Ego)
10-07-04 15:44
No 534830
      geez, what a moron...     

if you'd spend the time it takes you to write your stupid rants
with reading chemistry books, you wouldn't have to ask stupid
questions... tongue

"And you for sure cant read nor write assembler, idiot." - orgy.
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-08-04 02:33
No 534891
User Picture 
      Re: Look at Iraq. The 4th largest army in the...     


Look at Iraq.  The 4th largest army in the world and they barely slowed the US advance at all.




They were actually the 8th largest army, and the US is the 6th largest army. But man power is pretty irrelevant when we're attacking from the air with more advanced weaponry. You'll notice that we are now fighting a small group of insurgents on the ground, and they are pretty much kicking our ass.

The theory that the CO didn't send up planes to save his ass doesn't fly with me. Sending up fighters in no way endangered his retirement. Sending up planes does not mean he had to order them to shoot down any aircraft. They should have been in the air no matter how sketchy the reports were. That's sort of their job.

The excuse that no planes were sent because they weren't armed is also bullshit, given the fact that the first fighters eventually sent to the scene were from unarmed training missions hundreds of miles away. Since they sent unarmed fighters in anyway, claiming that not having any armed planes at Andrews as a reason no planes were dispatched is a pretty see-through excuse. Incidently, the first fighters to arrive in DC should have gotten there in 6 minutes if they flew a direct route, and they would have arrived 1 minute before the Pentagon was hit. But instead they were told to take a detour over the Atlantic. They only flew to DC after one of the pilots noticed smoke on the horizon and radioed in for permission to investigate. There was no reason to send fighters half way into the Atlantic when the country is being attacked by domestic flights and a plane is missing from an inland position west of DC, unless they specifically didn't want the pilots there for a reason.

F-16s also have a 20mm cannon. I understand not leaving fighters around fully armed with missiles, but I can't see any reason why they would disarm the cannon every time a plane lands. The purpose of the Airforce is to defend the country. If it is common practice to completely disarm every fighter in the fleet and require more than an hour to scramble, then the Airforce isn't doing its job, and that is more of a threat to the CO's retirement than sending up a a few planes to investigate.


Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-08-04 02:48
No 534893
User Picture 
      Re: Aren't you getting a bit too enthusiastic...     


Aren't you getting a bit too enthusiastic about this idea? Do you think the thousands of technicians worldwide who strip those planes down to the last wire and screw every few years for a complete overhaul have somehow overlooked that tiny black box with the yellow remote control sticker on it?




I don't buy the remote control take over plot, but these systems do in fact exist. They were developed to regain control of hijacked planes during the 70s when hijackings were a frequent occurrance. It's only resonable to assume that all 727 - 767's commercial planes would have them. Boeing is the only company that knows for sure, and it would be bad for international business if it became known that every plane sent over seas could be controlled by the US government. Lufthansa at least believes they exist. They replaced the guidance system in their entire fleet of Boeing aircraft during the 90s.


Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-08-04 02:50
No 534894
User Picture 
      Stood Down     

The miltary aircraft must have been stood down. The US has an extremely tight miltary command structure. Whether or not fighters were scrambled, they did not receive the go-ahead to shoot the jumbos down. This is down to monkeyboy.

I don't accept all this conspiracy bullshit. It is incompetence and cowardice. Bush-baby and fellow monkeys did not know what to do and crapped themselves. No action was taken in time to save the WTC. When they finally removed their heads from their collective arses, command was given to shoot down 77, even though the passengers were regaining control.

This is why there is so much secrecy: Bush-baby fucked up big time - he didn't react fast enough and then he shot down 77. The conspiracy nuts are having a field-day from all the secrecy.

The Bush admin. is evil, but they did not execute 9-11: that is absurd. The cover-up is over the fuck-up.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-08-04 02:54
No 534897
User Picture 
      Re: they did not execute 9-11: that is absurd.     


they did not execute 9-11: that is absurd.




It is absurd. They did not execute it. But they knew it was happenning and allowed it to happen.


Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-08-04 03:02
No 534901
User Picture 
      ..."and allowed it to happen."     

That is possible, but it implies that all the follow-on stuff was planned ahead and they were waiting for the 'Pearl Harbor'. The current admin. doesn't seem competent to plan and execute such a thing. Yes, they have taken advantage of it, but to know about it and ignore it...I think they just ignored it. These people are mentally sub-normal.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-08-04 03:10
No 534904
User Picture 
      Really?     

Then why did Rice call her good buddy the mayor of San Francisco the morning of 9/11 and tell him not to get on a plane that day?

Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-08-04 13:46
No 534956
User Picture 
      That link is an eyeopener!     

The one posted above already:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/121203painfuldeceptions.html
Especially the demolition of Building 7 is highly suspicious, beside that, where the hell did they get the personel, the knowhow, materials and the TIME to blow up that building in such a controlled fashion in just a few hours after the 2 towers were hit? The experts need a FEW MONTH preparation to blow up such a huge building. And to me it is sure as hell they blew up nr 7.
And did you see those HUGE massive steel collumns? These were supposed to have been so badly damaged by fire less than 1800 F ? Impossible. Especially in the second tower the fires were nearly extinguished when it suddenly broke down, an hour earlier than the first hit tower, where the fires were much more visible. LT/shocked

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    buz
(Hive Bee)
10-08-04 18:29
No 534978
      conspiracy as whatever     

conspiracy is predation. cats stalk birds thru deception;racoons "steal" our garbage at night.

the whole enchilad is conspiratorial. god is  going to kill you, sometime this century.

certainly, the american plutocracy is conspiratorial. it happens beehind closed doors and on golf courses. friendships are made. conspiracies breed from golf courses. that's where the co-conspirators can meet and discuss the details of their revolution. in the hood, groups of co-conspirators are not permitted to gather on the streets to foment revolution.
the guys on the golf course have paid-off the cops to make sure that no one pretends to bee golfing on 14th street; much less hanging out with 12 men at some sort of take-out dinner.

advertizing is the conspiracy worth trashing, imho.
when we reject the deception of the predatory advertizing, it will have a very great effect in undermining the pornographic blunderings of a typicly sleezy administration.
 
 
 
 
    ampdup
(Newbee)
10-09-04 20:26
No 535075
User Picture 
      Re: They were actually the 8th largest army,...     


They were actually the 8th largest army, and the US is the 6th largest army




Ou of curiosity, who are the top 5 then?  i figured china, russia, and the us as the big 3. Iraq as #4 was something i recalled hearing on cnn, but maybe it was korea they were talking about..i forget


Life is a lesson  and you'll learn it when your through
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-09-04 22:38
No 535097
User Picture 
      It's hard to say because we can only guess...     

It's hard to say because we can only guess what some countries have, and we don't know how many of those are combat troops and how many are non-combat roles. Different countries have different statistics because they include non-combat roles and reserves, and some don't.

Some statistics place the US as number two or three, but the US has a greater portion of non-combat roles than any other country. The total number of the US military is around 1.4 million, and includes the Coast Guard which is pretty much useless outside of US waters. The actual active combat personnel of the Army, Navy, and Marines is less than 500,000.

China
India
North Korea
South Korea
Turkey
Pakistan
United States
Vietnam
Iraq (formerly)
Taiwan
Germany
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-09-04 23:50
No 535107
User Picture 
      Re: "HUGE massive steel collumns?"     

Steel weakens considerably with temperature:

steel-tensilestrength-temp.jpg

I saw a documentary on demolishing an office block the other night. A huge amount of work was required to get to the steel frame and place charges. In a building the size of the WTC, it would be nigh impossible to do secretly. The most straight forward explanation is that fire weakened the structure until it collapsed.

That is not to say that the administration did know that something was expected to happen.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-09-04 23:55
No 535108
User Picture 
      US Hawks     

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

This is a most chilling Sept 2000 report on US "defence" capabilities growth. Defence, my ass. It's purely based on aggression.
(One of the participants in this study, was Paul Wolfowitz, Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University. A good example of planning a government carreer, writing yourself to the attention of the Masters)

ABOUT THE PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY

“As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world’s most preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge:
Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievement of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?
“[What we require is] a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States’ global responsibilities.
“Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership of the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of the past century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.”
– From the Project’s founding Statement of Principles-




The Project for the New American Century was established in the spring of 1997. From its inception, the Project has been concerned with the decline in the strength of America’s defenses, and in the problems this would create for the exercise of American leadership around the globe and, ultimately, for the preservation of peace.



The use of the word "peace" in this context is so paradoxical, that the casual reader would easily oversee it.
But in the light of the aftermath of the 9/11 events, only a grimm smile would be worth it.


In broad terms, we saw the project as building upon the defense strategy outlined by the Cheney Defense Department in the waning days of the Bush Sr. Administration.
The Defense Policy Guidance (DPG) drafted in the early months of 1992 provided a blueprint for maintaining U.S.preeminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests.




Btw, does anybody have any idea where those SIX aircraft carrier Battle Groups are at the moment. They left ports one and a half months ago. They were supposed to all go to the Western Pacific - Chinese Sea area. Something big is brewing.
This is an unprecedented tactical show of force.
The Chinese navy has been buying at an alarming rate, the latests russian missile-cruisers and supersonic ship to ship missiles, outfitted with the latests russian and chinese tactical nuclear weapons. The US Navy has  >NO<  effective defence against them, and those aircraft carriers are basically "sitting ducks" when a major crisis would ever occure.(see their view on page 57 of 90)
 
And don't forget what they said on page 11:


REPOSITION : U.S. FORCES to respond to 21st century strategic realities by shifting permanently-based forces to Southeast Europe and Southeast Asia, and by changing deployment patterns to reflect growing U.S. strategic concerns in East Asia.





I advice everyone, americans or other nationals, to read these 90 pages, so you know what's coming to us in the near future. LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Osmium
(Stoni's sexual toy)
10-10-04 00:53
No 535117
User Picture 
      > Something big is brewing.     

> Something big is brewing.
> This is an unprecedented tactical show of force.

Yup. A big show is brewing. 'Mission accomplished' or something like that. Lots of bark and no bite like usual. Maybe the big October surprise to make sure that Dubya gets reelected.

> The Chinese navy has been buying at an alarming rate, the latests russian
> missile-cruisers and supersonic ship to ship missiles,

Says who?

> outfitted with the latests russian and chinese tactical nuclear weapons.

What drugs are you on?

> The US Navy has  >NO<  effective defence against them,

No? Why not?

> and those aircraft carriers are basically "sitting ducks" when a major crisis
> would ever occure.

Good stuff you've been smoking there.

BUSH/CHENEY 2004! After all, it ain't my country!
www.american-buddha.com/addict.war.1.htm
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-10-04 01:10
No 535122
User Picture 
      Dear Margaret,     

Did you see how Building 7 collapsed in the 40 minutes video link ? Four different angles shot.
1. Nr 7 is situated much further from the collapsed twin towers than other buildings, which did not collaps at all or totally.
2. On the videos shown in that link, only a few small fires in a few floors of nr 7 were visible all day, while the buildings closer to the twin towers were burning verosiously. That nr 7 was burning only at some minor places outside.
3. When nr 7 collapsed at 5 o'clock, it started from the top floor centre, you see the aircon manifold structure on the roof centre collaps FIRST, while there were no fires at all visible all day anywhere near the top floors of nr 7.
4. Then the centre part collapsed downwards, and the outer walls folded all 4 inwards, and fell on top of the rubble from the centre parts. This is exactly what you see from a controlled demolition video. Remember, nr 7 was build around massive steel columns, concrete only used for floor slabs.
5. Did you pay attention to the fact that only a few pieces of the heap of rubble left from all buildings which collapsed, needed to be cut by torches? All pieces recovered were in such convenient shape, that they all fitted exactly on the standard length of the hauling trucks lorries. This is also standard procedure followed by a demolition firm. Keep the rubble small enough to speed up the cleanup work. A "normal" collaps would have shown hundreds of curved, even spiralled much longer steel column parts.
6. The second WTC tower was all the time burning at a conciderable smaller rate than WTC 1, but collapsed 1 hr earlier. Despite the fact that the plane hit WTC2 at an angle, and at the far right side, dropping the biggest part of its fuel in thin air instead of inside the building floors, where it burned away causing no damage to the steel structure. The plane has had no chance to hit the 4 elevator shafts in the centre. The photo's with the 2 women looking down if there were any safety nets set up by the fire department at ground level, show clearly that there were NO fires burning at the entrance hole of the impacting airplane and as far as you can look inside the hole.
That WTC2 building should have leaned to the right and toppled over to the right, when really only the right part of all 367 special japanese steel beams were damaged by fire. And those elevator shafts centre  beams are huge massive beams.

7. One possible theory is, that already the first WTC basement garage carbombing was a CIA or whatever agency steered effort, but failed because the driver of that bus parked it not against the wall with the steel columns in it, but several meters away from the wall. That saved the WTC the first time.
There was a major structural overhaul a short period before 9/11, of a few floors of both WTC buildings. The theory is, that the CIA cum suis placed C4 or DREXTS charges around most critical steel columns, and covered them with normal plastering. The demolition of the 2 WTC towers was then radio controlled from the special emergency floor, build for major Guiliano, in building nr 7, which floor was reinforced with bullet and explosion proof glass, and had its own air support and could withstand winds of 140 miles per hour (thus also rubble, dust and poisonous air from collapsing WTC towers). Moreover, both attack planes flight paths were exactly over and towards building 7, thus possibly following an eventual homing signal inside that nr 7 building. If true, nr 7 ofcourse must fall, to cover all traces of such a dirty operation.

The CIA used to set up 3 homing beacons in the jungle of Columbia to guide their planes, while they were hauling away tons of cocaine from there to Panama, where colonel Noriega and 2 CIA officers and one Mossad agent were waiting for them to ship the loads further to colonel North and his cabal at their secret airfield in Arkansas, and then use the profits to pay for the Iran Contra scandal. Those beacons helped those freighter planes to use only forward concentrated radio signals instead of radar, and thus assisted to be able to fly without radar and stay under the radar from the Columbian airforce. (proof available) They also proofed myriads of times to give a flying fart about collateral damage in the form of any amount of human victims of their private games.
The US army and the CIA and NSA together have proofed without doubt in the past to be able to set up such an unbelievable (for most of their own citizens, and the rest of the world) dirty conspiracy.

Did you see the whole 40 minutes video? LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-10-04 01:14
No 535126
User Picture 
      I'll have to print that     

and read it in bed. I grabbed the film and watched it in its entirety. Yes, the collapse was striking. I'll think about it.

Maggie.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-10-04 02:01
No 535131
User Picture 
      Do you drink battery acid lately?     

Osmium, why do I have to repeat particularly for you always this simple sentence:
You did not read the link. (Or worse, did not understand what is presented).

This time I even made it simple, extra for you: page 57.

The one recent operation where naval forces, and carrier forces in particular, did play the leading role is also suggestive of the Navy’s future: the dispatching of two carrier battle groups to the waters off Taiwan during the 1996 Chinese “missile blockade.”
Several factors are worth noting. First, the crisis occurred in East Asia, in the western Pacific Ocean. Thus, the Navy was uniquely positioned and postured to respond.
Not only did the Seventh Fleet make it first on the scene, but deploying and sustaining ground forces or land-based aircraft to the region would have been difficult. Second, the potential enemy was China. Although Pentagon thinking about major theater war in East Asia has centered on Korea – where again land and land-based air forces would likely play the leading role – the Taiwan crisis was perhaps more indicative of the longer-range future. A third question has no easy answer: what, indeed, would these
carrier battle groups have been able to do in the event of escalation or the outbreak of hostilities? Had the Chinese actually targeted missiles at Taiwan, it is doubtful that the Aegis air-defense systems aboard the cruisers and destroyers in the battle groups could have provided an effective
defense
. Punitive strikes against Chinese forces by carrier aircraft, or cruise missile strikes, might have been a second option, but a problematic option. And, as in recent strike operations elsewhere, initial attacks certainly would have employed cruise missiles exclusively, or perhaps cruise missiles and stealthy, land-based aircraft




> The Chinese navy has been buying at an alarming rate, the latests russian
> missile-cruisers and supersonic ship to ship missiles,

Says who?
The same link, and this time you should be punished and have to read and find it yourself.
However, showing you that I have still some decency left, opposed to you, here it is:
Page 77


Already potential adversaries from China to Iran are investing in quiet diesel submarines, tactical ballistic missiles, cruise and other shore- and sea-launched anti-ship missiles, and other weapons that will complicate the operations of U.S. fleets in restricted, littoral waters. The Chinese navy has just recently taken delivery of the first of several planned Sovremenny class
destroyers, purchased along with supersonic, anti-ship cruise missiles from Russia, greatly improving China’s ability to attack U.S. Navy ships.
(China’s acquisition of modern Russian destroyers and supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles will complicate U.S. surface fleet operations. -Under a photo of such a ship-)
In addition, America’s adversaries will gradually acquire the ability to target surface fleets, not only in littoral waters but perhaps on the open oceans. Regional powers have increasing access to commercial satellites that not only can provide them with detection and militarily useful targeting
information, but provide also important elements of the command, control and communication capabilities that would be needed. As Fages put it, “Of concern in the 21st century is the potential that the combination of space-based reconnaissance, long-range precision strike weapons and robust command and control networks could make non-stealthy platforms increasingly vulnerable to attack near the world’s littorals.”




> outfitted with the latests russian and chinese tactical nuclear weapons.

What drugs are you on?
Luckily not the ones you are on, causing your kind of childish behavior.
We would like to know what causes your behavior, so we can avoid taking the same prescriptions.

> The US Navy has  >NO<  effective defence against them,

No? Why not?
Read before you write.
And you hereby showed very bad behavior for a true researcher, you do not like to read reports contradictionary to your own worldview. This is the main cause for so many opposition against the new world order to fail.
Know your enemy as if it were yourself. LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-10-04 02:19
No 535133
User Picture 
      No matter how well a building is designed to...     

No matter how well a building is designed to collapse on itself, it will never come down in a nice pile unless it is demoed with explosives. In order for a building to collapse verticly, the charges go of split seconds apart from the top to bottom around the peimieter so that every floor is blown out and falls to the floor beneath it, which is blown out fractions of a second before the falling upper floor hits it.

It is impossible for this kind of precision to occur in a fire. Even if the fire consumed the entire building for the same amount of time, due to subtle differences in the steel and construction throughout a single building, it would be very unlikely that the joints would all fail at exactly the same time and collapse the building nicely all at once.

Every building that collapses due to fire collapses at the point of the fire (not at the top) one wall at a time, and that collapsing wall pulls down the rest of the building in a big mess, but leaves the non fire damaged portions pretty much in tact once they hit the ground.

Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-10-04 02:32
No 535136
User Picture 
      china     

I posted a link here a few months ago that the Chinese were practicing beach landing manuevers. The Chinese admited it was a simulation of landing on Taiwan.

The original link was on The Australian at

www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/ story_page/0,5744,10071374%255E2703,00.html

It's no longer there but was mirrored on Rense



Chinese Military To Hold
Practice Invasion Of Taiwan
By Oliver August
The Australian
7-8-4
 

Chinese soldiers will for the first time practise a D-Day style invasion of Taiwan on a densely populated island off the mainland coast this month.
 
The 18,000-man mock landing on the beaches of Dongshan Island is to involve amphibious assault craft, Russian-built fighter jets and submarines operating in the Taiwan Strait to ward off a simulated counter-attack by the US Seventh Fleet.
 
Reports of the exercise were greeted with thousands of supportive messages yesterday in mainland internet chatrooms, a sign of the immense popularity of Beijing's policy of striving for the eventual return of Taiwan.
 
One said: "Taking back Taiwan by force is only a matter of time. We don't have to be afraid of the US. China is never afraid of a paper tiger."
 
Another wrote: "It seems there is a common understanding among people in every chatroom: we should recapture Taiwan by force"
Dongshan Island is 240km from the southern tip of Taiwan and has the same geography and local dialect. The island is inhabited by a million people, compared with 22 million on Taiwan, which has a significantly larger land mass.
 
The mock invasion will be the first exercise aimed at "taking control of the Taiwan Strait", according to a Shanghai newspaper.
 
"Sukhoi SU27 fighter jets will be outfitted with guided air-to-surface missiles to ensure tank brigades can make a landing and engage in warfare," the New Express Daily reported.
 
The military exercise comes at a time of high tension across the Taiwan Strait after the re-election of Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian, who is intensely disliked by Beijing for his pro-independence stand.
 
Regional security concerns will top the agenda when US national security adviser Condoleezza Rice visits Beijing this week between trips to Tokyo and Seoul.
 
She will have two days of talks with China's leaders - the first high-level consultation since a North Korea summit in Beijing last month and a visit to the Pentagon by Taiwanese arms buyers.
 
China is concerned that Mr Chen is moving further towards declaring independence - a step that would probably trigger a Chinese military response, possibly a naval blockade.
 
However, few analysts believe the People's Liberation Army is capable of getting a full-scale armada across the Taiwan Strait.




The US has been arming Taiwan and the Chinese don't like it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3877523.stm


Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-10-04 02:56
No 535143
User Picture 
      Latest on Taiwan     

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3730456.stm

This year many of the traditional symbols have been replaced. Instead Taiwan will promote its own identity - a move that is likely to anger China.

Beijing claims the island is little more than a breakaway province.

Controversial move

China is sensitive to gestures which promote a national identity for Taiwan. It complains vociferously about anything it sees as a move towards independence.




http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3701114.stm


  The next US president, whoever he is, will find that one of his pre-occupations will be China and Taiwan - and how to stop their war of words from becoming a full-blown conflict.

The latest verbal exchange between Beijing and Taipei raises a potentially new danger - that of Taiwan acquiring an offensive missile capability.

Taiwan's current defence policy is precisely that - defence.

If it decided to develop or buy ballistic or, more likely, cruise missiles - with which it could threaten Chinese cities - the delicate balance that now exists could be upset.

China might regard such weapons as a threat - or even an excuse for an invasion.

A $18bn US arms package agreed in 2001 is due to provide Taiwan with a series of defensive systems - four ex-US Navy destroyers, eight diesel submarines, 12 P-3 Orion anti-submarine aircraft and a number of anti-ship missiles, artillery pieces and helicopters.

Subsequently the US agreed to sell Taiwan the advanced Patriot anti-missile system PAC-3, which would be its main defence against any Chinese ballistic attack.

The issue of an offensive capability was raised recently by Taiwanese Premier Yu Shyi-kun, who said that if China was able to attack cities in Taiwan, then Taiwan should be able to respond.

"If you attack Taipei and Kaohsiung, I should at least be able to strike Shanghai," he declared.

China accused him of "clamouring for war" and claimed that Taiwan was "obstinately carrying out splittist activities".

In Chinese Communist Party vocabulary "splittist" is about as bad as it gets. It means Taiwanese independence, something China will not accept.

Missile imbalance

According to Doug Richardson, editor of Jane's Missiles and Rockets, Taiwanese talk of missiles has been prompted by the military imbalance between Beijing and Taipei.

China has 500 ballistic missiles stationed opposite Taiwan, he says, and the build-up is clearly designed to deter Taiwan from declaring independence.

"It's pretty one-sided," Mr Richardson said.

He added that China was also testing its own cruise missile called Dong Hai-10, or East China Sea-10. Taiwan is in the East China Sea.

The United States is committed to defending Taiwan, but under a doctrine known as "strategic ambiguity" the nature of that defence was left unclear for years.

Certainly it included selling arms, albeit of a defensive type, but there was no commitment to going to war on Taiwan's behalf if China ever invaded.

The Bush administration sought to change "strategic ambiguity" into what it calls "strategic clarity".

President Bush made a statement in 2001 that the US would do "whatever it took to help Taiwan defend herself."

However at the same time, the US does not want Taiwan to declare independence. In effect, it wants the status quo to persist.

The Republican presidential election platform has restated this policy with the words: "America will help Taiwan defend itself."

But the Democrats are vaguer. "We are committed to a One China policy and will continue to support a peaceful resolution of cross-Straits issues," the party states.

Adam Ward, Senior Fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, said the clarity sought by Mr Bush had not been entirely successful.

"Each side interprets it to its own advantage," he argued. "This will require continuing deep engagement by whoever is president."

Pentagon report

The Pentagon also "muddied the waters" in a report to Congress in July about China's military strength, he added.

This report said: "Asymmetric capabilities that Taiwan possesses or is acquiring could deter a Chinese attack by making it unacceptably costly. Taiwan will most likely expand these capabilities either in tandem with or in lieu of improving its conventional forces."
Proponents of strikes against the mainland apparently hope that merely presenting credible threats to China's urban population or high-value targets, such as the Three Gorges Dam, will deter Chinese military coercion
Pentagon report

The report specifically referred to types of weapons system.

"Taipei political and military leaders have recently suggested acquiring weapons systems capable of stand-off strikes against the Chinese mainland as a cost-effective means of deterrence."

"Leaders have publicly cited the need for ballistic and land-attack cruise missiles," it went on.

Even specific targets were mentioned.

"Proponents of strikes against the mainland apparently hope that merely presenting credible threats to China's urban population or high-value targets, such as the Three Gorges Dam, will deter Chinese military coercion."

Such comments sparked concern among analysts in the US.

David Lampton, a veteran China watcher at the John Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies and the Nixon Center (itself no friend of communist regimes) wrote in the Straits Times: "Offensive deterrence is a terrible idea for Taiwan."

"In moving in offensive directions, Taipei could well provide Beijing with a pretext for pre-emption," he stated.

Some observers hope that the recent change of command over the Chinese armed forces from Jiang Zemin to President Hu Jintao will reduce tensions.

Most analysts say that while the new Chinese leadership is not giving up a claim to Taiwan, it might be more patient in pursuing it.

The question is also whether Taiwan, too, will be patient - and not go for its own offensive weapons.




WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-10-04 03:14
No 535149
User Picture 
      The Chinese government is about as fucked up...     

The Chinese government is about as fucked up as the North Koreans. Taiwan is, and has been for years, an independent country. China can bitch and complain all they want, but Taiwan is not anymore a part China than Australia is a part of Great Britain. Sure they share a similar history, but that's about it.

Unfortunately I think the Chinese are crazy enough to actually invade. They have circulated an unwritten deadline for "unification" by 2020, which would mean a war several years prior to that. Now is a good time to do it. The US, having just been in a war and having to spend the next several years with most of its military in the Middle East, will be hesitant to get involved in a war in the Pacific (unless Bush is re-appointed).

I think that if China invaded Taiwan, North Korea would take the opportunity to invade South Korea since the US could never handle a war against both at the same time while it is still spread thin in Iraq.

Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    abolt
(Hive Addict)
10-10-04 03:24
No 535151
User Picture 
      off topic     

but Taiwan is not anymore a part China than Australia is a part of Great Britain. Sure they share a similar history, but that's about it.

Oz & England is a bad example to use, in this case.

Carry on.

The U.S.A, just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem solve itself.


 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-10-04 03:29
No 535152
User Picture 
      Not really.     

Australia is still part of the "commonwealth" of England. So is Canada, but neither are a part of England, no one in their right mind would consider them a part of England, and the British would never attempt to unify with them.

If and when Australia decided to declare itself a republic instead of part of the commonwealth, the British will probably say "are you sure? Very well then. Would you care for a spot of tea?"

Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    Osmium
(Stoni's sexual toy)
10-10-04 08:48
No 535165
User Picture 
      There is no commonwealth of England.     

There is no commonwealth of England.
Do you call people from Cardiff or Belfast 'English' too?

Cannot be arsed to reply to LT's post right now, just a few questions:

Where in your reference did you find that comment about nuclear armed anti ship missiles being sold by Russia to China? Does "delivery of the first of several planned Sovremenny class destroyers" prove an alarming, "massive" effort by China to involve the US into a nuclear war? Isn't quoting and believing all that alarmist PNAC bullshit more childish than using common sense? Why aren't we using Tom Clancy novels to predict the future instead?
If the Aegis ship defense system isn't suitable to deal with incoming nuclear missiles, what other ship defense sytems are there that can be used? Name them.

BUSH/CHENEY 2004! After all, it ain't my country!
www.american-buddha.com/addict.war.1.htm
 
 
 
 
    Osmium
(Stoni's sexual toy)
10-10-04 09:26
No 535170
User Picture 
      Name these terrorists:     





Who said the following?
"What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?"

BUSH/CHENEY 2004! After all, it ain't my country!
www.american-buddha.com/addict.war.1.htm
 
 
 
 
    Saddam_Hussein
(Hive Bee)
10-10-04 11:41
No 535178
User Picture 
      Iraqi Bureau of Investigation     

Name these terrorists

The guy at the left is Zbigniew Brzezinski. I first thought the guy at the right was Hamid Karzai, but I now think it is Osama bin-Laden. I have never seen pictures of the latter in a military uniform though. Nice find! laugh

President of the Iraqi Chemical Weapons of Mass Destruction Development Society
 
 
 
 
    Osmium
(Stoni's sexual toy)
10-10-04 13:04
No 535185
User Picture 
      Correct.     

http://www.geocities.com/RepresentativePress/binLadenphoto.html

Former Friends: President Carter's national security adviser ZbiGniew Brzezinski on his 1980 tour of the Afghan border. Bin Laden first went to Peshawar, Pakistan, here in these photos Brezezinski checks out bin Laden's gun on the border of Afghanistan in 1980. This is what the CIA considers a "good idea": funding terrorists. Photographs by Philippe Ledru/Corbis Sygma.

Also: "It should be noted that there is no demonstrable connection between the Afghanistan war and the breakup of the Soviet Union and its satellites."

BUSH/CHENEY 2004! After all, it ain't my country!
www.american-buddha.com/addict.war.1.htm
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-10-04 13:38
No 535187
User Picture 
      China's capabilities are rapidly improving.     

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3809067.stm  (15 June, 2004)
US accuses China of weapons trade.
Satellite image of nuclear power reactor in Bushehr, Iran. Photo: Digitalglobe.
Tehran denies it has a nuclear weapons programme.
A new report from the US Congress has accused China of passing nuclear technology to Iran in exchange for oil.
READ more of it. Especially the chinese ultracentrifuge project and uranium ore mining assistance.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/video/40278000/rm/_40278421_china11_oppenheimer_vi.ram (Real Player video)
 Watch and listen:
Andy Oppenheimer from Jane's information group.
""China does need oil...the relationship with Iran is serving its purpose".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3938617.stm  (30 July, 2004)
Beijing warns of war with Taiwan.
A senior Chinese official has warned that Beijing may attack Taiwan by 2008 if President Chen Shui-bian pursues his plans for constitutional change.
(Unobs 2020 assume of events was a few optimistic years off).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3899819.stm
China simulates Taiwan invasion.
They are an annual exercise, but the focus this year is reported to be on demonstrating Chinese air superiority, as Beijing strives to close the technology gap with Taiwan's US-supplied hardware.
In Washington itself, officials have held a crisis simulation looking at responses to the rising tensions.
Washington denies that either this or a new deployment of US aircraft carrier strike groups was aimed at anyone in particular.
But this year's election victory by Taiwan's pro-independence President Chen Shui-bian has left Beijing deeply worried by the drift towards a separate identity on the island.
And Chinese leaders could at some point be goaded into action by the voices in Taipei who say Beijing is bluffing when it threatens to retake Taiwan by force.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3825927.stm  (22 June, 2004)
Seven and a half lines of text, tucked away at the end of an inch-thick Pentagon report on the military capabilities of China's People's Liberation Army, have provoked a stream of vitriol from China's state media.

http://www.dod.gov/pubs/d20040528PRC.pdf
ANNUAL REPORT ON THE MILITARY POWER OF THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA. (54 pages.)
page 29.

Also, China has an extensive and well-established ballistic missile industrial infrastructure and has developed and produced a wide variety of land- and sea-based ballistic missiles.
China is concentrating on replacing liquid-propellant missiles with mobile solidpropellant ones, reflecting concerns for survivability, maintenance, and reliability, and is developing high-priority land-attack cruise missiles for theater and strategic missions. In addition, China produces several types of land-, sea-, and air-launched cruise missiles, mostly for short-range and anti-ship operations.




Please read this report first and discuss the implications then.
Does it get clearer now why the Pentagon had to invade Iraq? Following THEIR specific doctrines, ofcourse, not mine. LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Saddam_Hussein
(Hive Bee)
10-10-04 14:28
No 535191
User Picture 
      China invading Taiwan     

I don't know what rock some people have been living under, but China is invading Taiwan for half a century.

Personally, I think it is a good thing Iran has its own nuke(s).

President of the Iraqi Chemical Weapons of Mass Destruction Development Society
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-10-04 15:31
No 535192
User Picture 
      No defence     


Areas key to PLAN modernization include antisubmarine warfare (ASW), shipborne antiair warfare (AAW), and sustained naval operations. The Navy is addressing these concerns with domestic construction and purchases of state-of-the-art equipment, including Russian submarines, destroyers, and frigates.
To improve the PLAN’s surface warfare capabilities, China has purchased two SOVREMENNYY Class destroyers from Russia, with two more on order. These provide an effective multipurpose ship capable of antiship, AAW, and ASW operations and are armed with 8 SS-N-22 supersonic antiship cruise missiles,

**** (the famous Sunburn's from Joe Vials website, which ofcourse will be able to deliver a tactical nuclear warhead instead of a conventional one, see : http://www.joevialls.co.uk/myahudi/sunburn.html and if you can't load this page, go to http://www.vialls.com/index.html and look it up in the list. That page provides lots of pics of them, and the ships used to launch them )*****

 , 48 SA-N-7 SAMs, and 1 Ka-27 ASW helicopter. China is producing a new class of larger, more capable destroyers.
Four units have been launched and are the first Chinese craft to incorporate vertically launched missile systems, possibly the domestic HQ-9 SAM. By late 2003, construction of the new-class frigate had accelerated, with production at two shipyards.
China is expanding and upgrading its submarine fleet with the purchase of four Russian KILO Class attack submarines (SSNs). The KILO is a major improvement for the PLAN over its noisy ROMEO Class submarines. In addition, the KILO may be armed with wake-homing torpedoes, which are very difficult to detect.


LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-10-04 15:39
No 535194
User Picture 
      Back to 9/11     

Live Film Footage of United Airlines Flight 175's Long Range Approach to World Trade Center
http://joevialls.altermedia.info/wtc/radiocontrol.html
The plane comes in from the right, in and under the smoke billowing from the first tower hit.
Just spool back the film a few times by clicking on the video frame, untill you see at what speed this plane hit its target.

But that was then and now is now. Why would the Federal Government be happy enough to let you see the last 1,000 yards of Flight 175's approach into the World Trade Center [thousands of times over], but at the same be so obsessed with eliminating any and all film footage showing the aircraft's earlier attack profile, displayed at the top pf this page?
            The most likely answer is because, as you can see, this continuous footage allows you time to study the flight profile over and over again, until you reach the inevitable conclusion that this giant and very clumsy 400,000# Airliner, is being flown with the sort of dexterity more normally associated with nimble combat aircraft. and at a very similar speed.
              As any airline pilot will confirm independently, the 'reverse feel' on  a Boeing 767 travelling at 575 mph is so high that the controls feel like lead, and simply cannot be moved as  quickly as you see in the film without overwhelming hydraulic assistance, which can be provided only by the automatic flight director. The pilots themselves cannot disengage the 'reverse feel' placed on the controls, because it is an integrated feature designed to stop the pilots accidentally injuring passengers by imposing extreme "G" forces at high speeds.
              In turn this reveals the obvious: If qualified airline captains are incapable of flying a Boeing 767 in this manner, then it is completely out of the question for a bunch of "Arab Terrorist Hijackers", who failed their basic Cessna training courses in Florida.

             Put bluntly, this is the only known footage of United Airlines Flight 175 that completely destroys the government myth about 'Muslim fanatics' allegedly taking over American commercial jets. The [permissable] short clips showing Flight 175 just before impact do not allow time for such detailed analysis, but this long attack profile certainly does.
            The fact that the Federal Government appears to have hunted down and captured or otherwise removed footage of this kind, does not mean that "George Bush did it". In my personal opinion he did not, and I am still entitled to a personal opinion, despite the large number of emails I receive each week suggesting that I am not.
            What the evidence does suggest, perhaps even confirm, is that the Federal Government prematurely decided on a strategy, and could not suddenly throw the whole thing into reverse once they had peddled the "Osama Bin Laden did it" line. In turn this then allowed them the irresistable opportunity to impose new Communist-style restrictions on the American people as a whole, and they jumped at at. Can you name a Federal official who would not?  



LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Saddam_Hussein
(Hive Bee)
10-10-04 17:33
No 535207
User Picture 
      Uncle Saddam and the Sunshine Band     

**** (the famous Sunburn's from Joe Vials website, which ofcourse will be able to deliver a tactical nuclear warhead instead of a conventional one, see : http://www.joevialls.co.uk/myahudi/sunburn.html and if you can't load this page, go to http://www.vialls.com/index.html and look it up in the list. That page provides lots of pics of them, and the ships used to launch them )*****

I even made a song about it! I made millions in Iran, North Korea, Palestine and China. Post 527718 (Saddam_Hussein: "The Sun Can Be Hot", The Couch)

President of the Iraqi Chemical Weapons of Mass Destruction Development Society
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-11-04 00:29
No 535253
User Picture 
      Re: Building 7 and stuff (labtop's posting)     

Dear LabTop

Your post filled an entire A4 sheet and caused me to fall asleep rapidly without so much as bashing the bishop.

No. 7 was certainly suspicious - the fact that a physically remote building catching fire combined with it's function. The building did indeed appear to collapse from the top downwards but without knowledge of its structure and the internal heating, it is difficult to comment. Again wrt the rubble, it would be nice to hear from someone involved in the clean-up. If a building was to be mined, surely the last thing on their intentions would be ease of clean-up work?

Didn't the WTC design require an intact skin to provide stiffness to the structure? I thought the idea was that fire weakened the trusses allowing the skin to detach from the central load carrying spine. That said, I don't see how it would cause the whole thing to collapse in free-fall. The floors might pile-drive down through each other, but what happened to the central spine? This would be a massive structure. It does point to demolition charges, but this seems too fantastic to believe.

At least one of the fires was either extinguished or burnt out just before the tower collapsed. I suspect it burnt itself out because there weren't enough men to extinguish a burning floor. I think there was a big fire inside with kerosine and office furniture, possibly enough to weaken the steel frame enough to fail, but I can't understand the mode of failure.

During the first car park bombing, the CIA was involved. They supplied material to the bombers and were supposedly supposed to switch it for inactive material but didn't.

Would they need homing beacons for this kind of operation? It could all be done on GPS or inertial guidance.

To pull something like this off just seems too difficult. Too many people required, too many things to go wrong. I dunno.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-11-04 00:37
No 535254
User Picture 
      There's a theory that after the first World...     

There's a theory that after the first World Trade Center bombing attempt failed, the towers were wired for demolition in the event a future attempt succeeded. The only way to prevent the buildings from falling over on their side and causing massive devestation would be to collapse them vertically, and since there would be no time to wire a the buildings once they'd been hit, they were wired years ago.

Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    paranoid
(Quick-witted Quibbler)
10-11-04 01:25
No 535262
User Picture 
      Makes sense, but considering that the ...     

Makes sense, but considering that the buildings may not have collapsed anyways, a rather risky move to actually detonate them.  If true, it means they were set off despite that the building were not necessarily in imminent danger of collapse, and therefore the people responsible for their detonation in effect murdered thousands.

Furthermore, it all seems way too convenient regardless.  In any event, it means that americans had a large hand in killing americans that day.  All the political strife notwithstanding.

My ideal vacation - Juxtaposed along the precipice intersecting reality and fantasy (i.e. wanking).
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-11-04 02:10
No 535268
User Picture 
      maybe no one set them off.     

The fire could have set off the first explosions and there was a chain reaction down the building.

2.jpg

The top part of the tower breaks away in one piece and starts to fall away from the bulding. This is how you would expect a fire to destroy a building. At the level of the fire, which was only on one side of the building, there's a ring of smoke bellowing out all the way around the perimeter. The whole time previously, smoke only came out of where the hole was in the tower.

Beneath the huge plume of black smoke, there is a smaller white plume. That is not burning jet fuel. It looks more like dust from an exploding wall. It shoots straight out well the rest of the smoke rises.

There's another picture somewhere that shows the buildings from further away, and you can clearly see a halo of smoke form around the building right below the fire and a second before it starts to fall.

The top of the tower fell off to the side. Everything below that point crumbled to pieces straight down, even though there was no fire further down, and the lower floors would have been able to survive the impact of the few upper floors falling on them. After the top piece fell off, the rest of the building should have remained standing. There was nothing below the point of impact that would knock down the whole tower.

Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    abolt
(Hive Addict)
10-11-04 02:50
No 535274
User Picture 
      My 9/11 experience     

There's a theory that after the first World Trade Center bombing attempt failed, the towers were wired for demolition in the event a future attempt succeeded.

O.K., I had been out all day fucking around and came in at night time 10-11 p.m. and turned on the idiot box to see the daily lies. A T.V. program, which I forget, was interrupted with a newsflash that the WTC, in New York, was on fire. I watched intently thinking "how the fuck did that happen" when rumors that a plane had hit it started to surface. "What a horrible accident", I concluded. "I hope they get those people out of there" I was thinking when the second plane loomed in the near distance. From that point on I knew it was an attack.

I remember thinking at that time that the world was never going to be the same again.

After a time, I heard (repeat heard) a series of explosions and one of the towers (the second one if memory serves), then started to collapse.

My question is..........how could the sound of the tower collapsing get to Australia, before the vision of the tower collapsing?

The sound/picture, on the T.V., was not out of synch before or after the event.

One person I raised this with told me that the building collapsed internally, before it collapsed externally.

Now..........I know I am an imbicile.........but this doesn't make sense to me.

Australia, just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem solve itself.


 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-11-04 03:53
No 535285
User Picture 
      Joe Vialls makes me nervous.     

Beside the clear anti zionist stance of Joe Vialls, there is something strange about lots of the info he throws around inbetween highly anti Israel biased reports from his hands. It seems as if he is provided with non-US intelligence reports, especially russian ones.
Many times now, I must admit that I rejected most of the "facts" he provided. However, every time, after sometimes weeks or months, that specific info turned out to be true, however ridiculous his accusations seemed to be at first.
 
I especially dislike him not providing links or sources he uses for his stories, thus forcing the reader, despite this lack of sources, to start searching around for his sources. Many times now, I found these sources on the web (Peak Oil denial, deep russian oil-wells(however lacking greatly in production data), abiotic oil theory, Sunburn supersonic nuclear missiles etc) and was every time surprised that he did not lie about them, while I was expecting he did.

The only most shocking "fact" he throws around in the further on down shown 3 links to his website; his mini nukes from the Dimona testsite in Israel; I still can't find reliable sources for it.
This frustrates me to no end, because the video of the blast itself (link 3 at the top), and photo's from the blast at the Australian embassy in Jakarta compared to a nuclear explosion at the US Nevada testsite (link 3 at the bottom) share a shocking resemblance. I personally never heard about mini nukes, which leave only alpha radiation behind which deminishes within a few days. He talks about mini nukes as big as a coffee cup.
His theories about the flightpathes of the 9/11 planes and now again about the 2 blown-up russian planes don't sound straight ridiculous, a simple bomb belt exploding in a toilet would not cut off all radio traffic in a split second, and cutoff the data to the black boxes also.
The man hits my nerves with his rabient hate toward all zionist jews, but seems to have too often at least one good lead to high profile good intelligence agencies info. It looks as if he is used to get certain messages out on the net.

http://www.vialls.com/wecontrolamerica/blackops.html
http://joevialls.altermedia.info/myahudi/beslanpsyop.html
http://joevialls.altermedia.info/myahudi/embassynuke.html

Though every Zionist-controlled western leader you have ever seen on television will swear blind that a crazed bunch of Muslims is solely responsible for attacking you and your children, President Vladimir Putin of Russia, and Aslanbek Aslakhanov, Putin's adviser for North Caucasian affairs, do not share that view. In a recent shock statement not aired by the Zionist-controlled media in the west, Putin vowed to hunt down the "international terrorists" responsible for murdering the Russian children at Beslan School, and made it crystal clear who he considers those international terrorists to be.
            President Putin, former Chairman of the feared KGB, stated that "the school massacre showed that certain western circles would like to weaken Russia, just as the Romans wanted to destroy Carthage." Putin was therefore stating unequivocally that the US and UK, not content with having bested Russia in the Cold War, now wanted to proceed to the dismemberment and total destruction of Russia in­ a Carthaginian peace like the one the Romans finally imposed at the end of the Punic Wars in 146 BC, when they poured salt into the land of Carthage so nothing would ever grow there again.
            "There is no link between Russian policy in Chechnya and the hostage-taking in Beslan," said Putin, meaning that the terrorists were using the Chechen situation as a pretext to attack Russia. According to a precis version in the French in Le Monde: "The aim of that international terrorism, supported more or less openly by western states, is to weaken Russia from the inside, by criminalizing its economy, by provoking its disintegration through propagating separatism in the Caucasus, and the transformation of the region into a staging ground for actions directed against the Russian Federation."
            Pouring oil onto an already blazing political fire, Aslanbek Aslakhanov added that the terrorists were receiving their orders from abroad. "The men had their conversations not within Russia but with other countries. They were led on a leash. Our self-styled friends have been working for several decades, I deem, to dismember Russia. They are doing a huge, really titanic job. It's clear as daylight that those people are coming up as puppeteers and are financing terror." Aslakhanov was on the site throughout the tragedy, and contacted the gang on the telephone. "The men were certainly not Chechens. When I spoke Chechen with them, they said they couldn't make out a word."
            If you asked Putin, Aslakhanov or any KGB officer today if they believed that 'Jemaah Islamiah' was responsible for nuking the Australian Embassy in Jakarta, they would probably all stare back at you in blank amazement.  All senior Russian officials know what a nuclear signature look like, and all now know[red] that the only residual radiation in the crater was Alpha. Simple stuff really, the bomb outside the Embassy in Jakarta was placed and remotely detonated by "international terrorists".



I would really like to know where Joe V. got that info that "they all know NOW" about the residual radiation.
Alpha radiation can be measured at any given place as the normal background radiation of the soil within certain boundaries. If the measured alpha radiation was however explicately above that, then I would start getting even more nervous as I get from him already. LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-11-04 04:08
No 535287
User Picture 
      Re: President Putin, former Chairman of the...     


President Putin, former Chairman of the feared KGB, stated that "the school massacre showed that certain western circles would like to weaken Russia, just as the Romans wanted to destroy Carthage." Putin was therefore stating unequivocally that the US and UK, not content with having bested Russia in the Cold War, now wanted to proceed to the dismemberment and total destruction of Russia....




Sorry, JoeBob, but that is not what Putin "unequivocally" stated. In fact, he stated nothing remotely resembling that.


Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-11-04 04:59
No 535293
User Picture 
      Uhm,     

http://en.rian.ru/rian/index.cfm?prd_id=160&msg_id=4814496&startrow=1&date=2004-09-06&do_alert=0
Russian Information Agenca Novosti :

2004-09-06 21:23     * RUSSIA * BESLAN * TERRORISTS * ORDERS * ASLAKHANOV *

SCHOOL TERRORISTS GOT ORDERS FROM ABROAD: PUTIN'S ADVISER

MOSCOW, September 6 (RIA Novosti) - Terrorists who seized a school in North Ossetia's Beslan, September 1, were receiving orders from abroad throughout the three suspense-laden days, says Aslanbek Aslakhanov, President Vladimir Putin's adviser for North Caucasian affairs.

"The men had their conversations not within Russia but with other countries. They were led on a leash. Our self-styled friends have been working for several decades, I deem, to dismember Russia. They are doing a huge, really titanic job. It's clear as daylight that those people are coming up as puppeteers and are financing terror," he said to the Rossia television company, national Channel Two, tonight.

Though the bandits named certain people they wanted to see as negotiators, and Mr. Aslakhanov was among them, he is sure the terrorist gang really did not mean whatever contacts.

Aslanbek Aslakhanov, a Chechen, was on the site throughout the tragedy, and contacted the gang on the telephone. "The men were certainly not Chechens. When I spoke Chechen with them, they said they couldn't make out a word. 'Speak Russian,' they told me. Well, I did as they wished, though I speak Russian with a Caucasian accent," he said in his TV interview.




http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_international&Number=292922707
LT: This sounds like another anti zionist forum, they got their info from above link. However, a poster ads this about a statement from Putin :

"" It's interesting that in the western press it's mentioned that Putin was on a working vacation at the Black Sea. No mention at all that Putin was meeting with Germany and France, I wonder why.""
LT: There seems some handshaking going on behind the scenes between Russia, France and Germany lately about a lot of possible blueprints for the future.

""This is beginning to be a very interesting Chess match. Russia may be playing "divide and conquer" by making these threatening remarks in the direction of UK. UK is the weakest link.
With Germany and France meeting with Russia, and with Russia possibly re-targeting nukes, this could get very, very interesting indeed.
China? Watching and building... ""

"" media started barking "ARABS" right after the tragedy. then they said "chechens" but what really mysterious was the attitude of russian officials. They hesitated to blame anyone. ""

""     It's clear as daylight that those people are coming up as puppeteers and are financing terror...
That's not Old Russian for "The Muslims did it.""

"" they were trying to get Putin's support for the war in Iraq and The Wall in Israel - judging from Putin's curious remarks in his speach the zionists might have miscalculated...""

""  Just look at the jew press, NPR for example.
The scripts and talking points they had lined up just got thrown out because of Putin's un-expected reaction. ""

LT: there seem to have been curious remarks by Putin, do you have other info Unob?


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-11-04 05:26
No 535298
User Picture 
      Uhm2     

http://groups.msn.com/AMERICASSURVIVAL/newspost.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID_Message=3200&LastModified=4675490180813774968
This is an american message board, where Joe Vialls seems to have gotten his info from, and now I start getting really nervous:

Now, then, how does Putin, the president of Russia view the US?
The following quotes are not from the US media - but you can read them for yourself at the following url:
http://tinyurl.com/6tznx
 
This a very long article and has many more quotes other than the sample that I am providing.
 
There are great differences of opinion about the facts - but IT IS A FACT that this is what the Russians (Putin) thinks - and THAT IS WHAT IS IMPORTANT!
---------
"On Monday September 6, Putin spoke for three and one half hours with a group of some 30 western correspondents..."
 
"...accounts have been published in The Guardian, The Independent, and Le Monde. The Washington Post waited until Friday, September 10 to publish an article, but left out the most significant remarks." (LT: Unob, it seems that americans are forced to NOT get balanced information on basis whereoff they should be able to judge their administrations idiot dangerous path toward WWWIII, and vote the fucker out of office, better, get rid of your fuckin 2 party system, better known as 2 hands on the same belly. This is fuckin unbelievable, that crazy Joe Vialls was right AGAIN! While I was sure, as you were, that this time I caught him redhanded!
 
"Putin, a KGB veteran who knows whereof he speaks, told the gathering that the school massacre showed that "certain western circles would like to weaken Russia..."
 
"He thus suggested that the US and UK, not content with having bested Russia in the Cold War, now wanted to proceed to the dismemberment and total destruction of Russia
-"

(Le Monde, September 8, 2004)
 
"Mr. Putin," continues Le Monde, "reiterated the accusation he had launched in a veiled form against western countries which appear to use double-talk. On the one side, their leaders assure the Russian President of their solidarity in the fight against terrorism. On the other hand, the intelligence services and the military - 'who have not abandoned their Cold War prejudices,' in Putin's words -- entertain contacts with those the international press calls the 'rebels.'
 
'Why are those who emulate Bin Laden called terrorists and the people who kill children, rebels? Where is the logic?' asked Vladimir Putin, and then gave the answer: 'Because certain political circles in the West want to weaken Russia ...." 'But, continued Putin, "we will not allow this scenario to come to pass.'"
 
"Some people would like to tear from us a tasty morsel. Others are helping them. They are helping, reasoning that Russia still remains one of the world's major nuclear powers, and as such still represents a threat to them. And so they reason that this threat should be removed. Terrorism, of course, is just an instrument to achieve these gains."
-----------
[Bottom line is - Russia blames the US for the school bombing, the two planes that came down a week ago, and many other such events.
Whether or not you think that is true - matters not - the issue is what the Russians think and how they will respond. -Bruce]
------------
"SCHOOL SEIZURE WAS PLANNED IN WASHINGTON AND LONDON"
 
That was the headline of an even more explicit unsigned commentary by the Russian news agency KMNews.ru.
 
KMNews: "CHECHEN TERROR BOSS ON US STATE DEPARTMENT PAYROLL"
 
KMNews writes: "In early August, ... 'Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Chechen Republic-Ichkeria' Ilyas Akhmadov received political asylum in the USA. And for his 'outstanding services,' Akhmadov received a Reagan-Fascell grant," including a monthly stipend, medical insurance, and a well-equipped office with all necessary support services, including the possibility of meetings with political circles and leading U.S. media.. LT: WHATTTT????
 
"CZECH NGO BLOWS UP RUSSIAN TANK; BRITISH EXPERTS TRAIN CHECHEN GANGS"
 
The RBC commentary goes on to cite the Economist of August 19, which contained what RBC characterizes as a virtual ultimatum to Russia. RBC notes that "the carrying out of such a series of coordinated, highly professional terrorist attacks, would be impossible without the help of qualified 'specialists'." RBC notes that at the end of August one such "specialist," working for an NGO based in the Czech republic, was arrested for blowing up a Russian armed personnel carrier. Also, British "experts" have been found instructing Chechen gangs in how to lay mines. "It cannot be excluded, that also in Beslan, the logistics of the operation were provided by just such 'specialists'," notes RBC.
-------------
"The Russians think that the US trained and paid Osama bin Laden to fight against them in Afghanistan before he got out of hand - and they think that the US supports and trains the Chechens.- Bruce]
--------------
"What we are dealing with, are not isolated acts intended to frighten us, not isolated terrorist attacks. What we are facing is direct intervention of international terror directed against Russia. This is a total, cruel and full-scale war that again and again is taking the lives of our fellow citizens." (Kremlin.ru, September 6, 2004)
 
"The terrorists who seized the school in Beslan, North Ossetia, took their orders from abroad. 'They were talking with people not from Russia, but from abroad. They were being directed,' said Aslambek Aslakhanov, advisor to the President of the Russian Federation. 'It is the desire of our "friends" - in quotation marks -- who have probably for more than a decade been carrying out enormous, titanic work, aimed at dismembering Russia.(RIA Novosti, September 6, 2004)
-----------
[Notice the use of the word 'friends' just as Colin Powell used it.
This is much like two heavy weight boxers at a news conference before the big match. They shake hands and smile - but in the match that we are talking about there is NO referee rules set time or place for the match.- Bruce]
---------------
On September 7, RIA Novosti reported on the demand of the Russian Foreign Ministry that two leading Chechen figures be extradited from London and Washington to stand trial in Russia. A statement from the Russia Foreign Ministry's Department of Information and Press indicated that Russia will put the United States and Britain on the spot about extraditing two top Chechen separatist officials, who have been given asylum in Washington and London, respectively. They are Akhmad Zakayev, known as a "special representative" of Aslan Maskhadov (currently enjoying asylum in London), and Ilyas Akhmadov, the "Foreign Minister" of the unrecognized "Chechen Republic-Ichkeria" (now residing in the USA). (RIA Novosti, September 7,
2004)
---------
[The US asks its 'friends' to turn over people that it thinks are terrorists-
(and some of those that they capture- simply 'disappear') and Russia does the same.
Remember - whatever your view, this is the Russian view.- Bruce]
------------
[In case you are wondering what it may all really be about - some think this may be the answer - Bruce]
 
"Washington and London fear that Russia will soon agree to accept euros in payment for its oil deliveries. This would not just prevent the Anglo-Americans from further skimming off oil transactions between Russia and Europe. It would represent the beginning of the end of the dollar as the reserve currency of the world, a role which the battered greenback, weakened by Bush's $500 billion yearly trade deficit and Bush's $750 billion budget deficit, can no longer fulfill. If Russia moves to the euro, it is expected that the Eurasian giant may be quickly followed by Iran, Indonesia, Venezuela, and other countries. This could put an end to the ability of the US to run astronomical foreign trade deficits, and would place the question of a US return to a production-based economy on the agenda."
 
[Some people are of the opinion that this is the real reason that the US invaded Iraq - because of THE FACT that Saddam started demanding Euros instead of dollars.- Bruce]
-------------
The Russians feel, as I have pointed out in previous newsletters that the US is tightening a noose about them with NATO new military bases on their borders and in the their previous satellites.
 
The Chinese likewise feel that as loudly as their 'friend' the US- is proclaiming its belief in "One China" that it is still helping Taiwan to separate and is tightening a noose about them with China and South Korea and others.
 
Syria and Iran feel that they are having nooses tightened about them by the World's one Superpower.
 
I had some other news items to send but my server bounced my first try on this message - saying it is too long, so I am having to shorten it.

I am way, way behind on answering dozens of emails about survival CDs and building shelters. I am sorry - I just can't keep up with it any more. I now get more inquiries in a day - than I used to get in a year.
 
Still, relatively speaking, to the US population - [/u]far LESS than 1/10th of one percent is that interested and making preparation[u].
Peace and love, Bruce
 
Arktwo mailing list Arktwo@ns.pairowoodies.com http://ns.pairowoodies.com/mailman/listinfo/arktwo
This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm




Even in Europe those remarks of Putin didn't turn up on the daily news.
What's going on, are we getting blindfolded, and lead to a sudden war who none of us would understand, if we can't hear what Russia and China are really saying? LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-11-04 05:42
No 535299
User Picture 
      That was a whole lot of nothing.     

JoeBob quoted a vague staement by Putin and then in his very next sentence said that Putin "unequivocally" blaimed the  the UK and America for all of Russia's problems. Putin, however, said no such thing. Whether or not he believes it, he has not made a statement echoing those beliefs, and if he had, it certainly wasn't the one JoeBob cited. Putin's statement and the ludicirous conclusion JoeBob drew from it afterwards had entirely nothing to do with each other. You should pay more attention to the quote itself, and not the person telling you what it means afterwards.

Similarly, each and every quote you just printed says nothing about Russia pointing the finger at the US or UK. Not a single line. I says they doubt Checen involvement in the massacre, it mentions political talks between russia, germany, and france, it talks about the rough relationship between russia and the UK. That's all it says.

I'm not saying they dont, I'm saying they've never said it, and therefore they can never be quoted as "unequivocally" saying it. You, JoeBob, and "Bruce" can twist their words around all you like, it doesn't make them true.

The Russians seem convinced that this was not the work of Chechen  separatists, and that is all they have revealed. If you want to think anything not caused by Chechen separatists must therefore be caused by US/UK plots, then go right ahead.

My toilet clogged up yesterday. I know Chechens weren't involved, but I don't know where Bush and Blair were.

Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-11-04 05:46
No 535300
User Picture 
      Rebutting part of above article     

http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=793  (this is that tinyurl link above)
In fact it's followed by an answer on the same message board, read and get even more confused:

Re: Tarpley: Putin exposes US-UK Terror strategy behind school atrocity.
Tarpley's article is biased and based on poor sources

I was very sorry to read this kind of propaganda at the great INN.globalfreepress site. I have valued the work of Webster Griffin Tarpley before. This article is based on official Russian sources, such as the KGB veteran and war criminal Vladimir Putin's statements. It is as ridiculous as to quote CIA or president Bush as saying "Al-Qaida orchestrated the attacks on 9/11".
LT: so, to be clear, Putin SAID all things in above post! Read on...

Tarpley's soarces say that Britain and US are harbouring "Chechen terrorists". These "terrorists" are the kulture minister of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria (ChRI), Mr Akhmed Zakayev in Britain and the foreign minister of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria, Mr Ilyas Akhmadov in U.S. Could Webster Tarpley tell us what makes these men terrorists? Vladimir Putin's announcement just isn't good enough! Both of these men happen to be secular Chechen politicians who have had serious conflicts with the islamist warlords like Shamil Basajev. The government of ChRI led by president Aslan Maskhadov is LEGAL and was recognized initially by the OSCE and also the Russian Federation. These people are fighting against occupation of their country. What is wrong about that?
<>It is also very disturbing that Tarpley is referring to a pro-Russian propagandist Michel Chossudovsky, who knows nothing about Chechnya. Chossydovsky is a promoter of the Bin Laden myth and some false trails, like the Pakistan-connection concerning the 9/11. In his articles Chossudovsky has not revealed his sources about the alleged Basayev-CIA connection. In reality Shamil Basayev and a couple of hundred Chechens vere trained by the Russian GRU (military intelligence), and they formed the North-Caucasian batallion of volunteers in a Russian orchestrated war between Georgia and the separatist Abkhazia in 1992-93. These men later became officers of the Chechen armed forces. Some Chechens were also Soviet officers, like artillery colonel Aslan Maskhadov, the chief of staff of the Chechen armed forces in the first Chechen war and later the elected president and commander in chief in the present war.

I do not know who orchestrated the Beslan terror event and neither does Mr. Tarpley. There might be several motives. This might be connected to the conflict between Georgia and the Russian backed separatist enclave South-Ossetia. Russia has many times asked the West for a permission to invade Georgia and is renewing these requests at the moment. This could also be part of a new strategy of Chechen command to expand the war through the whole northern Caucasus to pressure the Russians to start the peace talks. Or this could be a Russian iniative to take a firmer control of these North-Caucasian republics and further discredit the Chechen cause and expand president Putin's powers. It could also be a combination of these. Shamil Basayev has taken the responsibility for Beslan, but he always takes responsibility for everything that happens in Russia. He also took the responsibility for sinking the Kursk submarine and the burning of the Ostankino TV-tower in the summer of 2000!

The Russians are very clever organising false flag terror operations. The pretext for the second Chechen war were the mysterious demolitions of the apartment blocks of flats in Moskow, Volgodonsk and Buinakhs. However the circumstantial evidence points to the Russian security service FSB, the successor of the notorious KGB. The Swedish daily Svenska Dagbladet even wrote in july 1999 based on inside sources of Kremlin that they had a plan to stage acts of terror in Moskow and blame it on Chechens. The motive was to guarantee the controlled transfer of power to the chosen successor of Boris Yeltsin in the coming presidential election. An exellent overview of this incident is John Sweeney's article THE FIFTH BOMB: DID PUTIN’S SECRET POLICE BOMB MOSCOW IN A DEADLY BLACK OPERATION? I have a copy of it at my website http://members.surfeu.fi/11syyskuu/fifthbomb.htm

Another high profile terrorist event happened two years ago in Moskow, at the Duprovka Theatre. A group of Chechen terrorists took a theatre audience hostage. However, some independent journalists like Anne Nivat pointed out that several of the terrorists vere in fact captured by Russian army some time before the incident and kept as prisoners until they were seen at the Duprovka. One of these was also the nominal leader of the terrorists, Movsar Barayev (nephew of the notorious Chechen kidnapper and most certainly an FSB-agent Arbi Barayev). Furthermore, two of the key figures of the event where Russian provocator agents, namely Khanpash Terkibayev and Abubakar alias Ruslan Elmurzayev, who was the real leader of the group. Both of these men escaped the theatre before it was gased by the Russian special forces. A very interesting article by the Russian journalist Sanobar Shermatova about Movsar and Arbi Barayev: http://www.iwpr.net/index.pl?archive/cau/cau_200210_153_1_eng.txt

Elmurzayev disappeared and is not even wanted by the police. Police officer Yevgeni Taratorin would have liked to search for Mr Elmurzayev, but he was dismissed and jailed based on false charges. A couple of months later Mr. Terkibayev was seen in Strasbourg (EU) as a member of the official Russian delegation led by Dimitri Rogozin! The official Russia also stated about this Duprovka incident that the terrorists were led from outside Russian borders. So it pretty much looks like the Beslan incident. The Duprovka hostagetaking happened a couple of days before the Chechen World Congress was about to begin in Denmark. Russia tried to put pressure on Denmark to cancel the congress. Is it a co-incident that half a year earlier the same kind of chain of events took place in Turkey where the Chechen World Congress was initially meant to take place? In Turkey, a couple of days before the beginning of the congress, a Turkish man named Mustafa Yildir arranged some kind of terrorist incident in a hotel and protested the Chechen war. Russia pressurised Turkey to cancel the Chechen World Congress and the Turkish authorities gave in.

The only thorough research about the Duprovka hostagetaking has been made by John Dunlop and the three-part article is at the Radio Liberty's website:
http://www.rferl.org/reports/corruptionwatch/2003/12/42-181203.asp
http://www.rferl.org/reports/corruptionwatch/2004/01/1-080104.asp
http://www.rferl.org/reports/corruptionwatch/2004/01/2-150104.asp

Let's not take a simplistic view of the word. What makes Russia in any way a better empire than the U.S.? Chechens have fought against the Russians some 400 years. The war in Chechnya is useful for the United States and Britain, but that does not mean that they are involved in the situation in North-Caucasus in any significant way. They have not helped Chechens, quite the contrary, they have used Chechens for their own purposes to blackmail Russia.

Chechens have really tried to please the U.S. leadership to get some support, but in vain. An example of this is the support that Chechen president Maskhadov gave to U.S. invasion of Iraq. That is called Realpolitik. But they face like a brick wall in Washington. If someone states that Chechens get help from the west, please give us the proof! Chechens have no choice, they are alone against a superpower that tries to annihilate them by using Stalin's methods. Any help would be welcome, even from the Neocons.

I am very sorry that a respected writer like Webster Griffin Tarpley lowers himself to a conspiracy theorist by writing a politically motiveted article about a subject he knows nothing about and by using selectively sources that are unreliable, to put it mildly. We all want to resolve the 9/11 mass murder, but let's stick to the facts and make real research instead of propaganda.

Hannu Yli-Karjanmaa
webmaster, http://members.surfeu.fi/11syyskuu/
Finland




The fact still is, that Putin said all those incredible things, and the whole world seemed to ignore it, but especially all US media whores. What the fuck is going on? LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Saddam_Hussein
(Hive Bee)
10-11-04 06:18
No 535303
User Picture 
      WTC construction     

One person I raised this with told me that the building collapsed internally, before it collapsed externally.

Now..........I know I am an imbicile.........but this doesn't make sense to me.



They used a new construction technique for the WTC (at least, new at that time). The outside walls are connected by hooks to an internal core. This makes there is some flexibility, necessary for earthquakes and storms. The towers actually moved. When planes hit the towers, a fire developed in the central cores, causing the hooks to break and the walls to collapse.

As I remember the collapse of the building, the part of the tower above the floors hit by the plane started collapsing first, followed by the rest of the building. If they wire a building, I would expect the building to collapse starting from the ground level.

President of the Iraqi Chemical Weapons of Mass Destruction Development Society
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-11-04 06:27
No 535305
User Picture 
      Re: If they wire a building, I would expect...     


If they wire a building, I would expect the building to collapse starting from the ground level.




Well your wrong. They always collapse from the top down. It is the only way it can be done so that the building falls in on itself, which i explained here Post 535133 (Unobtainium: "No matter how well a building is designed to...", The Couch).

There are plenty of pictures and videos on google of buildings being demoed.


Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-11-04 11:27
No 535327
User Picture 
      Saddam is Correct     

During demolition, the first charges initiated are those at the base of the building.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    maj
(Stranger)
10-11-04 20:35
No 535392
User Picture 
      Bringing down a building basically involves...     

Bringing down a building basically involves removing vertical supports--the columns--in a controlled, sequential way that then uses gravity to collapse the structure. You can control the direction of fall by taking out supports that force the building to fall where you want it to go…kind of like taking one leg away from a three-legged stool. The weight of the structure and gravity do the rest.

While the theory is simple, planning a successful drop is quite complicated. The shape and composition of the columns has to be studied and tested. Core samples are taken, the original construction drawings studied, and at least one test "shot" will be fired to verify the calculations.

Although less than 200 lbs. of dynamite and detonating ("det") cord will be required for the Pacific Palisades building, those charges have to be placed with great precision to be effective. The basic idea is to weaken the columns on one side of the building's lower floors, starting at the bottom and working upward over a period of about ten seconds. Each charge will cut through the concrete of a column and the weight of the structure above will start the collapse.

Part of the art of implosion demolition involves slowing the event down in many small, calculated blasts instead of one huge explosion. That is accomplished with time-delay blasting caps that will initiate the dynamite and det cord over a period of several seconds.

The explosives will shatter the concrete around the reinforcing rods--and since the concrete provides nearly all the strength of the column, that part of the building quickly begins to fall. If enough columns are shattered the building will collapse. This much is easy. The art of demolition, is knowing which part of the building to take out at each moment, over a period of ten seconds or so; errors in this kind of calculation can be rather embarrassing, especially if the structure comes down where it isn't supposed to.

Wiring explosives
Explosives
Explosives come in all sorts of forms--gels, granules, powders, cord, liquids, plastics (in blocks and sheets), and old reliable, stick dynamite. All have properties designed for specific conditions. Huge quantities are used every year, often in urban areas and often without anybody even noticing the detonations.

Dynamite is a mixture of nitroglycerin, a liquid and a binder. It was the first practical high explosive and revolutionized mining and construction by making the blasting process safer and more efficient. As everybody knows, dynamite is sold in sticks, typically 1.25 inches by 8 inches. As few people know. Dynamite is rather insensitive and difficult to initiate.

Dynamite won't detonate unless "initiated" with a priming charge, normally from a blasting cap. While some blasting is still done with time fuse and suitable nonelectric caps, virtually all construction and building demolition blasting today uses only electrical caps, fired by wire from a remote location. That means that you can wire 100 charges into a big firing circuit and fire them all at the same instant with a single push of a button. Timed detonating caps allow you to press that same single button and stagger your single explosions by ten seconds or more.

Rather than firing all the charges at once, they design the shot to evolve over a period of ten or fifteen seconds. That's possible because blasting caps are now available with built-in and extremely accurate tiny fuses that permit delays of ten or more seconds. For a tall building like Pacific Palisades, the charges on the lowest floors and in the basement fire first, chopping the base from under part of the building and leaving part intact to act as a kind of hinge. The weight of the structure will begin to pull the building down in a controlled direction. The remaining charges fire at preset intervals of about one second, fracturing the structure's internal supports, weakening it from the inside out. Then, as it falls, the once strong structure's own weight tears it apart leaving nothing but a pile of pulverized concrete and reinforcing rod.

Testshot
Test Shot
Early in the design sequence, a column is found, normally in the basement, for a test shot. Based on a core sample and available information about the nature of the material in the column, locations will be marked for placement of explosives. The drill crew bore the holes to specifications, usually dead center and almost all the way through. On a job like Pacific Palisades, four holes might be drilled into the test column, each deep enough for four 8 inch sticks of dynamite.
Then, after receiving authority from the city for the shot. The holes are loaded and fired. Deep inside the building, the blast's noise and "fly rock" are fully enclosed; people nearby probably don't even hear the detonation. Then the crew reenters the structure to inspect the damage. The column should be completely shattered, although the rebar will still be intact; if the column isn't demolished, more holes and more explosives are required.

So, how much dynamite does it take to drop a twenty-two-story building? Not much, if it is placed correctly. The design for the Pacific Palisades building uses a bit less than 200 lbs. Plus a small amount of 'det' cord. Actually, gauging the amount of explosive to be used is key to a successful drop. Dynamite is cheap, about $1 per stick, so the cost of the material isn't a factor. The trick is using enough to be sure that the building comes down exactly where it is supposed to without excess flying debris or breaking windows with the noise of the shot.

There is a real art to the business and some do it better than others. If the dust clears from a shot and the building is still standing, it's more than embarrassing--the standing building is now a disaster waiting to happen, weakened by the blast and threatening to fall at any time.

Once the test shot confirms or refines the understanding of the structure, the exact location of each bore hole is marked. Then the drillers come along, bore the holes, then mark each with a length of red-painted rebar. Other people will wrap exposed columns with a special fabric used in construction, then enclose all with chain link fencing, leaving the red rebar exposed to mark the bore holes.

Columns picture

Priming and Loading
For most people, whose notion of dynamite is that it is extremely sensitive and dangerous, the priming process is full of surprises. It begins, for example, by taking a stick of dynamite and poking a hole in it with a sharp tool. Into the hole goes the blasting cap, a bright aluminum tube with a long pair of wires attached. The wires are extended, then a quick pair of half-hitches are tied around the stick, then inserted in the bore hole. Finally, using a wooden tamping rod, the stick is pushed into position at the bottom of the hole. Two other sticks follow the first, each slit with a pocket knife before insertion. The exposed ends of the wires are twisted together as a safety measure until the firing circuit is connected later.

But first, to finish off the bore hole, an applicator is inserted in the hole releasing a bit of foam. The material quickly expands, then hardens, forming a seal that will concentrate the force of the explosion. Without it, the charge would squirt some of its energy out the hole, drastically reducing the effect of the explosives.

Once all the charges are loaded, the wires are spliced together into a big electrical circuit. A continuity test is applied and then everything is done, except the waiting.

Blast Time
A button is pressed that connects the firing circuit, sending voltage to all the electrical blasting caps in all the holes throughout the structure.

Down on the ground level, in the old lobby, the charges fire instantaneously with a sharp, hard, startling, BANG that echoes from the buildings surrounding the site as small puffs of dust squirt from under the fabric and chain link fencing.

Two seconds later, another BANG, this one much milder, as the columns on the second and third stories fire. Another set of small dust clouds reveal the location of the blasts, but nothing else happens. After another brief interval, another set of charges fire. No chunks of concrete fly through space, no dramatic eruptions of material but the front of the structure begins to slide toward the ground.

BANG, another set of charges fire. Now the elevator house on top of the building starts to lean. The basic structure remains essentially vertical, but the front of the building is shattered. It tears itself apart, progressively, just as intended.

The rear of the structure, without any explosives and reinforced by massive cables, provides a hinge for the collapse, anchoring the back of the building and forcing the decaying building to fall into what had once been a handsome and elegant entry.

The roof disappears into a massive cloud of dust, right where it was supposed to go. The long, rippling roar of the dying building echoes for a few seconds against the surviving buildings of Vancouver's skyline.

That roar is replaced by another, this time from the audience who hoot and cheer and yell. It was, indeed, a fine performance.
Pacific Palisades Hotel +2 seconds after detonation Zero-plus-two seconds:
About two seconds after the button was pushed, the big charges at ground level have all fired, notching the structure and beginning the failure sequence. It will certainly fall now, but nobody (except a few hundred blood-thirsty spectators, perhaps) wants it to fall over intact. A second set of charges has just detonated along the right side of the structure, along with those in some interior columns. While the building is still apparently intact, the lower floors already show evidence of structural failure.

Pacific Palisades Hotel +3 seconds after detonation Zero-plus-three seconds:
Only one second later, the whole right side of the building collapsed and the elevator support structure began to lean crazily, while the back wall remained intact.

The falling elements of the structure will pull the back wall away from the adjacent building, only twenty feet from the back wall.

Charges continue to fire inside the building even through the firing circuit has probably been cut in dozens of places.


Pacific Palisades Hotel +4 seconds after detonation Zero-plus-four seconds:

Shattered, but still held somewhat together by rebar and inertia, the Pacific Palisades starts toward the ground.

Pacific Palisades Hotel +5 seconds after detonation Zero-plus-five seconds:

With the front of the structure tugging at the back wall, the destruction of the building is about half complete.


Even with pictures:

http://www.pacificblasting.com/implosionstory.html
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-11-04 23:28
No 535425
User Picture 
      A theory of mine :     

The first WTC bombing was the test shot, in the basement, and directly after it, the "CIA planners" could check their calculations on the damaged columns, to be prepared and install the charges for the big one coming on 9/11.
The amount of the charges, in total weight, needed to bring both WTC towers down, is surprisingly low, and charges with time delayed blastcaps have been hidden under the new applied plaster and masonry plates round the steel columns (from elevator core and outside walls) of the renovated floors and in the basement.

The planners have also done some testruns on remote takeovers and subsequently gassing the pilots on a few planes before 9/11.
Then some big planes were remotely taken over on 9/11, aided by the build-in anti-hijacking software,
 
-(this must have caused hilarious moments during early planning stages, while finding out that some genius had prepped up in advance a basically good idea, so perfectly suited for double crossing it)-
 
and dumped into both towers, guided by a radio beacon in Building 7. At the moment of impact, the first sequence of charges were ignited remotely guided from B7.
See for yourself: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2004/090904northtowerbombs.htm
These first charges were meant to keep the initial damage of the square towers even at all corners of the structure.
Then, after some waiting and observing, one by one the towers were demolished.
Especially the second tower hit caused a problem (and a lot of shouting to eachother at floor 28 of B7), because the remote operator had nearly missed the second tower, and spilled that dearly needed kerosine for the most part in the open air, and the end-effect was, that the secondairy hit towers fires, were rapidly extinguishing, so the planners had to bring it down much earlier than planned, before the much better hit first tower, that burned more obviously.   

You ofcourse still keep asking, WHY did "they" do it?

Because it was found some time earlier, that the whole WTC structure was slowly crumbling caused by changes in the bedrock formation, and substantial flaws in construction materials.
When this immens problem was brought to the attention of a very small inner circle, the CIA got involved, and someone saw the implications of a grand plan :

No need to tell the public the shamefull news,
What a perfect chance to bring in place the stage settings for a new world order, based on fear and smear.
LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-12-04 00:01
No 535427
User Picture 
      This is a Conspiracy     

LaBTop and Unob. are going to get everyone going along with this stuff and then, when everyone is believing it, burst the bubble.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    psytech
(Hive Bee)
10-12-04 02:36
No 535451
      2nd plane     

It can been seen on the video that the tower had some incincendiar device. Because right before the plane hit an explosion is seen coming from the tower, then the plane goes through the building. Has anyone else seen this in slow motion. That the biggest piece on evidence for me.
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-14-04 01:29
No 535730
User Picture 
      Joe again.     

http://joevialls.altermedia.info/myahudi/tabanuke.html

His remark of former Yukos russian oil company directors blown away by that blast, is that possible to check? LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-14-04 01:58
No 535737
User Picture 
      And Peak Oil..     

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

Given Simmons’ background, what he has to say about the situation is truly terrifying. For instance, in an August 2003 interview with From the Wilderness publisher Michael Ruppert, Simmons was asked if it was time for Peak Oil to become part of the public policy debate. He responded:

"It is past time. As I have said, the experts and politicians have no Plan B to fall back on. If energy peaks, particularly while 5 of the world’s 6.5 billion people have little or no use of modern energy, it will be a tremendous jolt to our economic well-being and to our health — greater than anyone could ever imagine."

When asked if there is a solution to the impending natural gas crisis, Simmons responded:

"I don’t think there is one. The solution is to pray. Under the best of circumstances, if all prayers are answered there will be no crisis for maybe two years. After that it’s a certainty."

In May 2004, Simmons explained that in order for demand to be appropriately controlled, the price of oil would have to reach $182 per barrel. With oil prices at $182 per barrel, gas prices would likely rise to $7.00 per gallon.

To put Simmons’ statements in perspective, consider the fact Osama Bin-Laden believes $200 to be the fair price for a barrel of oil. The phrase, “Politics makes strange bedfellows,” doesn’t quite do this one justice.

Simmons isn't the only member of the Bush team extraordinarily concerned about Peak Oil. In late 1999, Dick Cheney stated:

“By some estimates, there will be an average of two-percent annual growth in global oil demand over the years ahead, along with, conservatively, a three-percent natural decline in production from existing reserves.”

Cheney ended on an alarming note, “That means by 2010 we will need on the order of an additional 50 million barrels a day.”  This is six times the amount produced by Saudi Arabia, the world's leading oil producer.




WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-14-04 21:38
No 535869
User Picture 
      Wow, that's a very dark future he paints there.     

But I begin to think that he's basically right on most points.

I have been analyzing, just as most of you, what triggered all these outright aggressive events of the last few years, and why a formerly carefull operating US administration (so not only a new president and his new team, but also all long time existing thinktanks and Pentagon planners ) suddenly opted for such a brutal approach to solve a few obvious problems they had been struggling with for years already and de facto nearly solved without show of excessive force
.
And used outright lies in such proportions, that only shear despair could cause such blunt behavior.
Let's pray that they haven't staged the 9/11 events for the same underlying reasons, however, looking at all the discrepansies in the official explanations, I have reached a point, far above 50% possibility range, where such a heinious behavior would explain all those events and the follow up in Afghanistan, Iraq, and who knows which countries will be getting the same treatment next. Not difficult to predict.

I admit that I was looking myself for ways out of an obvious oil crisis propagated by geologists and oil companies, much worse than the one in the seventies. And I have been looking for proponents of the abiotic oilformation theory, and found some proof that not all what they say is a fairytale.

But yes, after reading this man's following simple explanation, I admit there's no sudden solution to stop the devastating effects of a Peak Oil drama :
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/100404_abiotic_oil.shtml
There is not enough time for eventual abiotic oil (the soft theory) to replinish existing oil wells.
So prepare yourself for the worst case scenario, and it will be real bad.

The man from the link in above post, has given free access to all of his book now, up till the first week of November, read his plea to get those warring politicians to read his book, or at least some lower echelons in the political picking order :
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/downloads.html
Life After the Oil Crash
"Deal with Reality, or Reality will Deal with You"
At the bottom of that page are 4 downloads, 2 in pdf format.
Get them, and read the book. It's chilling, even when he's half right, it's still a doomsday scenario for the western cultures. And even more for our eastern and southern ones.

I'm for sure gonna take preparations for me and my family, because when the shit hits the fan, it will be too late and too expensive to prep up for the inevitable. The times of endless economic grow are over.

It's quite obvious that the US republicans AND the democrats plus the Pentagon know already very well what's coming to America, with its long shipping lanes for crude oil.
They just can't address the matter properly, or the whole house of cards they so silently prepared, will be demolished like the World Trade Centre, by their own panicking populace.
WTC, what a doomed name, in hindsight. There's only decentralised World Competition for energy sources and raw materials left.

Understanding the severe conclusions of a major energy crisis scenario, it's quite sure that many competing agencies of many energy cramming nations are already bombing and killing eachothers commodities, to get as far in the front seats as possible, when the oil slumber party is over.
And Putin knows the faul play unfolding :
'Why are those who emulate Bin Laden called terrorists and the people who kill children, rebels? Where is the logic?' asked Vladimir Putin, and then gave the answer: 'Because certain political circles in the West want to weaken Russia ...." 'But, continued Putin, "we will not allow this scenario to come to pass.'" LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    psytech
(Hive Bee)
10-14-04 23:34
No 535879
      1,2,3     

It all makes sense now, they stole election of 2000, they had to get Bush in office. 9-11, how else to get an illigitamate president creditability, and at the same time have all your goals fulfilled. Fucking Brillant
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-15-04 00:10
No 535885
User Picture 
      The Shit Will Hit The Fan     

But it could be worse. At current rates of CO2 production, the biosphere will pass the tipping point at around 2050. The last time this happened was 50 million years ago when global temperatures rose by 15-20 degrees Celsius above today's. This change happened within 100 years or so. I hope we run out of fossil fuels first. If we don't, the loonies will keep on burning them until doomsday comes.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-15-04 10:23
No 535948
User Picture 
      Well, if the overall efects of the book     

come out as predicted, I'm sorry to say that my interest in chemistry will be a deminishing one, and especially illegal drugs. Because just plain survival will be the imminent danger, not any form of oppression of an underground drug culture.
That will become a thing of the past, and damn fast.
And I will have to concentrate, just as the wise ones between you, my friends, on scavenging the libraries and the Internet for solid, proven means of survival during apocalyptic times to come.
Luckily it seems we still have a few years of reasonable peace to come, so it is not too late already. However some grimm decisions will have to be made by parents and bachelors alike.

I invite anybody with the same interest to PM me about possible communities (safe havens) to be set up to survive the inevitable. I'm damn serious about this; imhop, this book will be our sole survival bible from which to derive pathes of salvation from the mayhem on our doorsteps.
I hope long term members of which I know they already live a life off the land without depending on bought energy will knock on my PM-door especially, and provide indispensable assistance and info.
And anyone else who seriously wants to concider finding longterm, simple and effective solutions for a small community of likeminded individuals. We will need to setup a dedicated webforum.

I strongly believe in the argumentation provided by the writer of this book, and found it the most important peace of info I read in a few decades. And when you will have read it all too, including all his refs, you will have to agree with him.


I always thought that the oil companies had a joker in their pack of trump cards, in the form of methane hydrates to be harvested on the ocean floors and under the permafrost.
That hope is deminishing too:


35. What about using methane hydrates from the ocean floor as fuel?

Methane hydrates are deposits of ice-like crystals found on the ocean floor. They contain absolutely massive amounts of natural gas.(ref.124)
This has led many people to believe they will eventually serve as a replacement for oil.
Unfortunately natural gas derived from methane hydrates is an unsuitable replacement for oil for the following reasons:
1. Although abundant, methane hydrates are difficult to accumulate in commercial quantities.
2. Recovery is extremely dangerous and considerably more expensive than the extraction of traditional oil and gas reserves.(ref.125)



Ref.125 is this one:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3493349.stm


Ocean methane stocks 'overstated'
By Paul Rincon
BBC News Online science staff

(Photo of an Hydrate)
Commercial exploitation of hydrates may still be possible.

Stocks of a potential new source of natural gas in the sea-floor are much smaller than previous estimates have suggested, an expert claims.
Gas hydrates contain huge quantities of natural gases - mainly methane - and are tipped as a future energy source.
Estimates of hydrate-bound gas fell steadily in the last 30 years due to growing knowledge of their distribution and concentration in sediments.
The findings are presented in the academic journal Earth Science Reviews.
Gas hydrates are deposits of ice-like crystals that trap natural gas under conditions of high pressure and low temperature such as those found in sea-floor sediments or in permafrost.

Limited reservoir.
One widely cited estimate proposes that 10,000 gigatonnes (Gt) of methane carbon is bound up as hydrate on the ocean floor.
The worldwide numbers are important but they don't have much to do with the resource issue. (Tim Collett, US Geological Survey), but Dr Alexei Milkov of BP America says his research shows reserves are between 500 and 2,500 Gt, a significantly smaller figure than has been previously estimated.
The scientist reviewed previous data on the area of hydrate-bearing sediments and the gas yield of sediments to arrive at his conclusions.
Many researchers believe gas hydrates play an important role in the carbon cycle - one of the most important ecological processes on our planet.
For example, bursts of methane from these hydrate reservoirs have been implicated in several rapid warmings in the Earth's climate record.
Professor Gerald Dickens of Rice University, US, argues that a a sharp rise in global temperatures about 55 million years ago was caused by just such a burst.

'Profitable future'.
Based on his own findings, Dr Milkov proposes the amount of methane released must have been an order of magnitude lower than was needed to cause this warming event.
Gas hydrates contain twice the methane of other fuel deposits (photo)
But the large, concentrated amount of methane contained in individual deposits convinces many experts - including Dr Milkov - that prospects for the profitable recovery of gas hydrates are realistic.
Hydrate accumulations supposedly contain about twice the methane carbon present in other fuel deposits.
"The worldwide numbers are important but they don't have much to do with the resource issue," said Tim Collett of the US Geological Survey in Denver.
"No matter if you take the lowest or biggest number, it still tells you there's a lot of gas out there."
In 1999, the Japan National Oil Company began drilling in the Nankai Trough, off Japan's coast.
There are also three drilling projects under way in the US, one in the Gulf of Mexico and two in Alaska.
But gas hydrate recovery carries a considerable risk. Destabilisation of hydrate reserves could cause sudden, massive releases of gas from the seafloor, threatening drilling platforms and ships.
"Drilling gas hydrates is estimated to be six times more expensive than exploitation of oil and other gas sources," said Prof Bahman Tohidi, director of the Centre for Gas Hydrate Research in Edinburgh.

Burning methane is supposedly "cleaner" than other fossil fuels. But the prospect of exploiting new large resources of fossil fuels alarms environmentalists who advocate cuts in carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere.




I'm afraid the environmentalists will quickly loose the battle between an energy despaired populace and logic. Panic will win. LT/frown


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-15-04 11:00
No 535950
User Picture 
      More on gas hydrates:     

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2940045.stm
 Methane theory gets frosty response.


http://www.netl.doe.gov/scng/hydrate/about-hydrates/science.htm
 All About Hydrates.
If you can't get the page, search for hydrate or hydrates at:
http://www.netl.doe.gov/
 2004 National Energy Technology Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy.
(f.ex. one of many: http://www.netl.doe.gov/scngo/Natural%20Gas/hydrates/databank/databank.htm
and the original page with the statement that methane hydrates may, in fact, contain more organic carbon than all the world's coal, oil, and non-hydrate natural gas combined:
http://www.netl.doe.gov/scngo/Natural%20Gas/hydrates/about-hydrates/about_hydrates.htm )
but,
At their main page you can read a lot more, f.ex on this page:
http://www.fossil.energy.gov/
 President Bush's 10-year, $2 billion Clean Coal Power Initiative.
or this page:
http://www.eere.energy.gov/
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
or this page:
http://www.netl.doe.gov/scngo/index.html
Strategic Center for Natural Gas & Oil.
or this page:
http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal
Strategic Center for Coal.
or this page:
http://www.netl.doe.gov/osta
Office of Science, Technology & Analysis.
or this page:
http://www.netl.doe.gov/OIA/index.html
Office of Advanced Initiatives.


http://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/project-pages/hydrates/index.html
 Gas Hydrates (Woods Hole/USGS).

http://www.geog.ucl.ac.uk/ecrc/
 UCL Environmental Change Research Centre.

http://www.gashydrate.de/
 Geomar.

http://www.copernicus.org/egsagueug/index.html
 EGS-AGU-EUG Joint Assembly.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1047249.stm
North Sea wreck laying in methane pocket is a mystery.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1045000/video/_1047249_gas13_dhariwal_vi.ram
The BBC's Navdip Dhariwal : "It's eerily named the Witch's Hole" (Real video)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_166000/166427.stm
Future fuel lies ocean deep. 
LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-15-04 12:50
No 535959
User Picture 
      Latest research     

http://www.netl.doe.gov/osta/news/HMNewsSummer04.pdf
Using a 15 liter high pressure chamber, they still standing in toddlers shoes regarding this dangerous endeavour into finding ways to exploid this huge source of energy.
Any testing in vivo on the ocean floor could triger a tremendous explosion, and that's what everyone is afraid of.

We still have those Tocomac experiments running in Moscow, Geneva and a few other places in the USA and perhaps China, on finding the holy grail of cheap energy, controlled hydrogen fusion.
 
Someone having the latest news on that? LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Osmium
(Stoni's sexual toy)
10-15-04 13:13
No 535961
User Picture 
      It still doesn't work.     

It still doesn't work.

BUSH/CHENEY 2004! After all, it ain't my country!
www.american-buddha.com/addict.war.1.htm
 
 
 
 
    jsorex
(Hive Addict)
10-15-04 16:34
No 535977
      more. http://www.muchosucko.com/flash/pentagonl...     

more.

http://www.muchosucko.com/flash/pentagonlies.html#Main

033102beer_1_prv.gif
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-15-04 22:29
No 536011
User Picture 
      Hydrates and stuff     

Hydrates are irrelevent, as is coal. If we keep burning fossil fuels, the point will be reached where the negative feedback loop, which controls CO2, becomes a positive feedback loop. There will be runaway warming to 15-20 Celsius above today's temperatures. This is happening now. The Greenland icecap is melting, parts of Antarctica are 8 degrees above normal. If runaway heating happens, the effects will be far worse than running out of oil.

Fusion probably will work, but is far more complicated to control than fission. The world's largest tokamak is JET, in the UK. It has produced high output for short periods.

http://www.fusion.org.uk/
http://www.jet.efda.org/

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    psytech
(Hive Bee)
10-18-04 06:33
No 536305
      here's all the proof anyone needs     

http://www.theinternationalforecaster.com/trainwreck.php?Id=49&PHPSESSID=01864dc252fb080e57e2c39cb172a086

As we have said prior to Afghanistan’s invasion, the CIA wanted to control the opium trade and have they been successful in doing so. Production will be up 6% this year from a record 3,600 tons last year. The US investment, of course, is protected by US troops, some of who are giving their lives to protect elitist’s drug interests. Of course, European governments are hopping mad because their countries are being flooded with cheap heroin. Drug enforcement is non-existent. Profits are spectacular. Agents pay the farmer $2,000 for heroin they sell in Europe for $70,000. Not only does the CIA make a profit, but also they ensure the loyalty of warlords and politicians.

As we said long before it happened, the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan were for geopolitical advantages, opium and natural resources, mainly oil. All the cheap oil in the world has been found and the only large untapped cheap pool left is in Iraq and in other parts of the Middle East. Big oil companies have more money than they have ever had and they want to develop Iraq. Unfortunately for them, prior to the invasion, other countries had made deals with the Iraq government shutting them out – hence the neocon invasions. From a production viewpoint Iraq’s oil reserves have not even been touched. It is the premier deposit of the future. This is what Dick Cheney’s secret meeting in the spring of 2001 with major oil companies was all about. They were carving up the oil reserves prior to the invasion. Before the invasion, there were 63 oil companies from 30 countries with interests in Iraq. They now are all in the hands of US oil interests backed by the US Army. Of course, might is right – right?

Derision nor not, this was an invasion to steal oil. An expedited invasion to beat Saddam who was about to cut a deal with the UN on lifting sanctions. Its just to know our children and grandchildren are being murdered so America’s elitist oil companies can get richer. Any excuse will do. If we want someone’s assets, we just label them a rogue or terrorist state. Dick Cheney was behind the whole invasion representing the oil interests. He spoke on the need of more oil reserves in 1999, and designated the Middle East as the place to acquire them. This brought about Iraq’s regime change. It is interesting to note, due to nationalization, major oil companies only control 4% of world oil reserves. The goal of the US and UK is to ferment wars and revolutions in order to takeover more of the world’s oil production. Thus, this is what Iraq’s nationalized production was about: to become the property of privatization via US oil ownership. This is fortunate as production falls and usage increases. This is especially true in the US where production has definitely peaked. Canada also figures largely in the equation as the largest supplier of oil to the US. When Canada signed the NAFTA agreement in 1993, they gave up the right to cut back on the amount of oil exported to the US. Mexico on the other hand flat refused to agree to that section of the agreement and was granted an exemption. Canada will eventually be drained of all its oil and gas to satisfy US desires. On the other hand, whoever controls the big oil reserves of the Middle East will control the world.
 
 
 
 
    buz
(Hive Bee)
10-18-04 19:29
No 536408
      ship of fools     

sounds like its time to start living.

while we can still max-out our credit cards, i'm a fan of an ocean-worthy vessal and several small sailboats in a floating community of sorts. its my favorite paranoid fantasy, beecause i think it would bee fun even if the shit wasn't hitting the fan.

liquidating assests now might bee a good idea, while they're still assets...and turning them into survival tools.
the best survival tool may likely bee community.
one that can scatter and hide when need bee, and find each other again.
its too late to go to the library.
instead, an intentional group of folks who had already been to the library would bee effective.

but who's paranoid?
i just want to sail to beautiful beeches and eat sea-food  with enough of a crew to  make it affordable.

such a thing has been done beefore. probably extremely difficult. yet i suspect that alot of our problems with letting go will fall by the wayside if the shit actually hits the fan.

i've given up on the revolution. i'm after a ten year vacation now. and a low-oil diet.

arrgh, anybee?
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-18-04 21:55
No 536449
User Picture 
      Necessary readings     

Life after the Oil Crash book links :


http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/downloads.html

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/Microsoft_Word_-_IntroductoryPages_1_.pdf
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/Microsoft_Word_-_TheOilAgeIsOverPressReadyInteriorPages_1_.pdf

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/Table-Of-Contents.pdf
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/InteriorPages1-184.pdf
When you have time at your hands, don't forget to read also the links in the circa 300 references.




http://www.hubbertpeak.com/whatToDo/DeindustrialAge.htm


In a violent age, practical knowledge is a life insurance policy; if you're more useful alive than dead, you're likely to stay that way. The pirate enclaves of the seventeenth-century Carribbean were among the most lawless societies in history, but physicians, navigators, shipwrights, and other skilled craftsmen were safe from the pervasive violence, since it was in everyone's best interests to keep them alive.



Read also their Solutions page. That's a good start for a discussion on safe communities.

http://eia.doe.gov/indexnjava.html (has a textbase form also, no need to use java)
Official Energy statistics from the U.S.Government (prepare for sugarcoated smokescreens!).
Scroll down to Forecasts, then click one of these:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/steo/pub/contents.html  - Short Term (18 months)
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/index.html          - Annual (to 2025)
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/index.html          - International

This site will need your attention during the coming 2 years, and please, do never forget that in times of mayhem, the politicians will decide to strangle free information, the Internet or part of it will be one of the first commodities to fall victim of political survival techniques and catastrophies. So, do not expect that this endless ocean of knowledge will stand forever.
Imagine you didn't listen to my words, and suddenly your access to this indispensable source of survival knowledge will be cut off.
Where do you get all information to survive with your family then, with no petrol to feed your cars or motorbikes, which you need, to go frantically searching the nearest library (which will have been looted empty by then).
We still are on the top of the bell curve of available knowledge, but electricity shortages and many other reasons will cause a steep decline in internet usage, not so far in the future.
Did you really believe that steep incline of energy demands, causing a line of heavy duty fuses to blow, caused the grid-lock and Blackout at 16:11 PM on 13 August 2003 in the whole Northeastern US seashore region and Southeast Canada? That is normally a time inbetween energy demands peaks, so probably your government needed to burn into memory what will keep happening if a major oil deficit would hit the US and its repercussions for the electricity grid. Prepared your unconscious thoughts for an aggressive policy of seizing any nondefendable oilproperty on foreign soil.

http://www.endofsuburbia.com/preview3.htm   - "The War That Will Not End in Our Lifetimes"
http://www.endofsuburbia.com/preview2.htm   - "The Blackout of 2003"
http://www.endofsuburbia.com/preview1.htm   - "The Beginning of The End"

and this interview :
James Howard Kunstler discussing oil peak & the future of suburbia...
(Telephone interview to New York State on 7th March 2003 )
http://media.globalpublicmedia.com/RAM/2003/03/JamesHowardKunstler.edited-mono.2003-03-07.ram  audio 53 min. and also a transcript.
Better read the transcript-link at
http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/INTERVIEWS/JAMES.HOWARD.KUNSTLER/ 
LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    buz
(Hive Bee)
10-19-04 17:58
No 536636
      i have some skills     

In a violent age, practical knowledge is a life insurance policy; if you're more useful alive than dead, you're likely to stay that way. The pirate enclaves of the seventeenth-century Carribbean were among the most lawless societies in history, but physicians, navigators, shipwrights, and other skilled craftsmen were safe from the pervasive violence, since it was in everyone's best interests to keep them alive.



LT,

we should stay alive for awhile.

assembling a crew is slow, hard work
 
 
 
 
    ampdup
(Newbee)
10-19-04 20:48
No 536681
User Picture 
      bringing down the towers     

Having seen a building being demolished via explosive charges in person, I find it extremely hard to believe that they were brought down intentionally with demo charges.  The initial charges that weaken the structure go off in timed sequence and are highly visable, and would have been caught on film by someone.  It would also stand to reason, that if the government planned all this, it would more likely happened at night or maybe on the weekend rather than on a workday to lower the collective casuality head count.   True, that the structures may have been weakened in the 1st attempt, seeing as how that part of Manhatten was created during the construction by making a seawall out of the earth they displaced while digging the foundations. But that in itself could help explain all the seemingly instantanious collapse of the surrounding structures in the WTC complex. The entire 14 acres that the WTC sat on had many sub levels of underground storage areas, parking garages and subway system areas (the WTC was almost the final stop on that subway line (I think only one more stop at Battery Park) and passed directly under the towers themselves, if they collapsed under the force of the initial tower's fall, one would reason that it would compromise the structural integrity of the surrounding buildings.

Just a thought

Life is a lesson  and you'll learn it when your through
 
 
 
 
    psytech
(Hive Bee)
10-19-04 23:47
No 536697
      50,000 ppl wroked at WTC, yet only 2000+ died...     

50,000 ppl wroked at WTC, yet only 2000+ died there, strange indeed.
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-19-04 23:57
No 536699
User Picture 
      That isn't that strange.     

That isn't that strange. Most of the people that died were on floors above the crash who couldn't escape. The rest is the proper ratio of idiots who could have left but were too stupid to.

Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    Sredni_Vashtar
(Hive Bee)
10-20-04 00:01
No 536700
User Picture 
      Strange Indeed?     

Not strange. How many people were in the towers and what period of time was available to evacuate them before the buildings collapsed? Nothing out of the ordinary. The towers collapsed due to thermal weakening of the steel structure. All this explosives stuff is BS. Whether Bushbaby & co. knew what was going to happen and let it is another matter. I think pure incompetence is the simplest solution, hence the secrecy.

His enemies called for peace, but he brought them death.  
Sredni Vashtar the Beautiful.
 
 
 
 
    Osmium
(Stoni's sexual toy)
10-20-04 09:24
No 536768
User Picture 
      > The towers collapsed due to thermal ...     

> The towers collapsed due to thermal weakening of the steel structure.

He we go again, repeating the same bullshit arguments over and over:
wasn't there a picture up in those links above showing the impact site of one of the towers, with no fire being visible and at least one person standing there and looking out of the building?

I find it strange that the buildings collapsed the way they did. Especially that other WTC7 (?) building.
If columns are weakened by fire then they will give in. I totally agree with that. But the failure mode most likely would be somewhat irregular, considering that the crashing airliner caused quite some damage to the columns, causing the upper stories to come down much more irregularly. Most people would rather have expected the towers to fall to the side, not collapse the way they did.
And don't get me started on WTC7. 3 years later and still no convincing explanation why that building was destroyed.

BUSH/CHENEY 2004! After all, it ain't my country!
www.american-buddha.com/addict.war.1.htm
 
 
 
 
    b4u
10-20-04 18:32
      has anybody ever given you
(Rated as: redundant)
    
 
 
 
    PolytheneSam
10-24-04 01:56
      http://issues-answers.com/forum/index.php?
(Rated as: citing yourself as a source isn't a source.)
    
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-24-04 02:05
No 537403
User Picture 
      great satan     

So that's where you spend most of your time posting. Must be nice to surround yourself with neo-con idiots.

I do see that you pulled a classic neo-con manuever though by completely changing the subject from Iraq to Communism. I guess when you run out of things to say, you'll grasp at anything that's similar enough to fool the rest of the idiots in the chior that you preach to.

Bush does the same thing. He knows that his worshipers are far to dumb to realize that Saddam and Osama are two different people. So when Osama attacks, we strike back at Saddam and this all makes perfect sense in your little world.

Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-24-04 02:39
No 537415
User Picture 
      Back to Peak Oil     

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr70.html
NEWSLETTER #70
October 12, 2004
Beware the 'Peak Oil' Agenda.

This, my friends, is the harsh reality, so pay very close attention: the fact that 'Peak Oil' is an entirely manufactured construct does not mean that the doomsday scenarios painted by the 'Peak' crowd will therefore not become our new reality. This is not just another scam to further pad the pockets of the oil industry and other financial elites. The stakes are much higher than that. Much higher.



Quite a long one, this one. LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Saddam_Hussein
(Hive Bee)
10-24-04 20:48
No 537514
User Picture 
      Uncle Saddam: the Source of all Evil     

According to the following *excellent* book, your favorite Uncle is to blame for 9/11, and he also would have connections with OBL...

Saddam’s Attacks on America: 1993; September 11, 2001; and the Anthrax Attacks




Dr. Hugh Cort’s new book, Saddam’s Attacks on America: 1993; September 11, 2001; and the Anthrax Attacks shows the following:

Saddam Hussein instigated and funded Osama bin Laden’s attacks on America in the bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, the destruction of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, and the anthrax attacks of September and October 2001.

Saddam did import uranium from Africa (British intelligence has proven Ambassador Joe Wilson wrong) and he wanted to get a nuclear weapon to give to al-Qaida as soon as he could get U.N. sanctions lifted.

Bush was right to take out Saddam because Saddam would eventually have given nuclear bombs to al-Qaida that would have blown up New York City and Washington D.C.

Saddam sent most of his weapons of mass destruction to Syria the month before the Iraq War. Israeli intelligence photos show convoys of 18-wheeler trucks with mobile chemical and biological labs pouring into Syria the month before the war.

The book tells Bush how to catch Osama bin Laden - send U.S. troops into Pakistan to search the caves on the Afghan-Pakistan border. It is doubtful the Pakistanis will ever catch Osama.

The book tells Bush how to truly stabilize Iraq – send 100,000 more U.S. troops to guard all the ammo dumps Saddam set up so Iraqis can’t get rocket propelled grenades, mortars, assault rifles, and explosive shells to make roadside bombs, and the troops will also guard the border between Iran and Iraq, so Iran can’t send any more terrorists in to de-stabilize Iraq.

The book shows Bush how to take out Iran’s and North Korea’s nuclear facilities with surgical bombing strikes. If we don’t take them out, they will give nukes to terrorists who will blow up New York, Washington, Chicago, LA, Boston, and other major cities. Iran will have five nuclear bombs one year from now. Iran is planning a terror attack on America – two Iranian security guards at the Iran U.N. mission were recently expelled from the United States by the F.B.I. for surveilling and video taping New York City landmarks and infrastructure. We must stop Iran and North Korea from giving nukes to terrorists before it’s too late.

You can read the first 8 pages of the book for FREE on the publisher’s website, www.iuniverse.com and then order the book for $9.95.

Why do 70% of Americans think 9/11 was Hussein’s doing? Because they’re right, says Dr. Hugh Cort. He says Saddam instigated both the 1993 and 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center, and funded Osama bin Laden to carry them out. The anthrax incidents? Saddam’s handiwork, too. All these events were his payback for the Gulf War.

Dr. Cort sets the country straight on these proven facts and reveals his detailed plan for capturing bin Laden. The dangers from nuclear weapons, biological agents, and other unfathomable terrorist methods are imminent. You don’t have one more minute to waste before learning from Dr. Cort.
  • Saddam did import uranium from Africa and hid his weapons of mass destruction in Syria – where they’re still a major threat.
  • The countless foreign policy mistakes made by politicians past and present that we’re still paying for.
  • How the U.S. can truly stabilize Iraq with minimum loss of life.
  • What we must do now to remove the nuclear threats in North Korea, Iran – and elsewhere – and restore U.S. security.

CREDENTIALS: Dr. Hugh Cort is a psychiatrist who took a year and a half off to research the sources of terrorism. He belongs to Republican National Committee groups such as the Senatorial Inner Circle and the President’s Club. Veterans’ Vision magazine invited Dr. Cort to speak at their meeting October 27 where Dr. Cort will share the podium with Douglas Feith, Under Secretary for Defense Policy. Dr. Cort plans to run for President in the 2008 Republican primary. He wrote Saddam’s Attacks on America: 1993; September 11, 2001; and the Anthrax Attacks: A Freewheeling and Hard-Hitting Commentary on the Life-Threatening Problems Facing America and the Prescription for Their Cure.

You can order the book on the publisher’s website, www.iuniverse.com, or call 1-800-525-6435, or order at Amazon.com, or any Barnes & Noble or Books-A-Million (http://www.newsmax.com/adv/cort/)

President of the Iraqi Chemical Weapons of Mass Destruction Development Society
 
 
 
 
    Saddam_Hussein
(Hive Bee)
10-24-04 20:59
No 537517
User Picture 
      The 9/11-Hiro-Hito Conspiracy Complex     

The Japs seem to have been involved in the 9/11 attacks as well!



Support the American economy today! Buy a patriotic print for shiny pennies: http://savillustrations.com/valasek/index.htm

The following is very insightful as well:



President of the Iraqi Chemical Weapons of Mass Destruction Development Society
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-24-04 22:10
No 537530
User Picture 
      Oil shortage. Really?     

http://www.oilandgasreporter.com/stories/090101/cov_opinions.shtml

July 8, 2001

Forum: We don't need refuge oil

Considering the number of large oil fields the oil industry already has under lease, drilled and capped on the North Slope of Alaska, there is no need to develop oil inside the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

I base this statement on a reading of the Annual Statements provided by the three major oil companies in which I hold stock. Oil companies often tell shareholders how many new oil-producing fields each company has obtained every year on the North Slope of Alaska, along with the estimated barrels of oil in each field.

As a shareholder I also know that of all the oil ever known to exist in the Texas and Oklahoma oil fields, only one-third has been removed from the ground, with the remaining two-thirds still in the ground. Why? Because it is cheaper to buy Saudi Arabian oil. When the world price of oil goes up, the oil industry will bring their Texas/Oklahoma oil out of the ground. So again, we do not need more oil in America. All we need is already here in capped oil wells.

Could the real problem in America be lack of refinery capacity? Newspaper articles report that existing refineries are running 24 hours a day, seven days a week. New refineries do cost a lot to build -- and that is money the oil industry does not want to spend. The electric power industry did not really want to build new production plants in California because power off the Grid was once very cheap. So too, are the oil companies reluctant to increase refining capacity because refined Saudi oil is still considered cheap.

So the current problem we have with high gasoline cost has more to do with a lack of oil-refinery capacity than with oil supply. The California power problem is a lack of power production caused by the reluctance of the industry to build new and expensive power plants. Similarly, high gasoline prices are caused by a lack of refinery capacity brought on by the reluctance of the oil industry to lower prices by increasing refinery capacity.

There is no shortage of oil in America. Instead, there is a shortage of its refinery capacity.

As an oil company stockholder, I do not understand why my oil companies want or need to drill the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. There is plenty of oil available from land already under lease to the oil industry.

In 1995 the Alaskan Congressional delegation convinced Congress to change federal law to allow Alaskan oil to be sold to Japan and China. So again we see that there is no real relationship between oil that may be found in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the price of gasoline in America.

Are we being asked to pay high gasoline prices just so we will demand Congress give the oil industry access to oil from the nation's public lands, or is the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge being used as a distraction to keep us from looking at the real problem, the oil industry's effort to keep prices high by not expanding refinery capacity?

This month, the price of gasoline will go up -- not because the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is not being drilled, but because oil refineries will reduce gasoline production and start making winter heating oil. The reason is not an oil shortage, as the industry would like you to think, but a shortage in refining capacity that the industry doesn't want you to understand.

As the oil companies' own annual statements show, we don't need to look to ''America's Serengeti'' where more effective solutions are available. At a time when industry profits are soaring, Congress should put heat on the oil companies to pay for new refining capacity and put a freeze on oil drilling in the Arctic Refuge.

--This Forum was written by Sam Booher, a shareholder in EXXON-Mobil, Phillips and BP-Amoco Oil Companies and chairman of the Georgia Chapter of the Sierra Club. He lives in Augusta.
=======================================
In the Peninsula Clarion, Kenai, Alaska

March 14

ANWR issue needs to be put in proper perspective

In order to better visualize the extremely small percentage of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge that will be the possible home of drilling and production facilities, which according to U.S. Sen. Frank Murkowski will be less than 2,000 acres, I suggest the following:

A side-by-side bar graph in which 10,000 acres would be represented by one millimeter, about the distance between these two dots .., then 19,000,000 acres (the size of ANWR) would scale out at over six feet.

A response from the environmental community would be welcome.

--Bill Reeder, Soldotna
=======================================
I am also amused to learn that Rep. Richard Gephardt who led the fight against ANWR drilling also campaigned to block an amendment to raise gas mileage requirements for SUVs and light trucks.
=======================================




So, why did Shell announced plans to close their huge profitable Californian oil refinery plant in last October, AND DEMOLISH the plant instead of selling it?

There's only one answer which looks right, according to the policy of the few huge oil conglomerates which are left over after all the mergers of the last 3 years:
They have formed an evil cartel, to artificially raise the gasoline prices all over the world, and on a sidetrack, to provide the politicians on their payrolls, with false reasonings to instruct their armies to go get the remaining huge oil fields.

Some really evil men and women are trying to play an unbelievable cruel powerplay, with no concideration at all for colateral damage in the form of lost human lifes, which will sore skyhigh, if we let them proceed with their satanesque policies. LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-24-04 22:57
No 537536
User Picture 
      Fuck Them     

I just put 400 mm rockwool in the loft and got cavity wall insulation. My viking friends laugh at me: '400mm, 400mm! Are there no laws in England? What will you do when it is winter, keep an ice-pick by the toilet?'. Little do they know, as they sit in their comfy, draft-free dolls houses, drinking illegally distilled spirits. But in England, 400mm of rockwool makes a palace. With that much insulation, one person, a knackered labrador and a candle will put out enough heat to make the house tropical. When Peak-Oil hits, neighbours will pay me to come and stand in my hall and soak up the warmth. I've got a bicycle and when petrol prices become too much, I'll just garage the old but reliable Jaguar XJ12S until better days.

Maybe I'll marry a Thai girl too. They certainly look better than English girls - they don't have that bulldog-that-swallowed-a-wasp look, and they can cook too. I can cook but I'd like someone that can share the work. English girls can't cook. In fact they can't do much except eat chocolate and get fat (except whine all the time). I hope they have Peak-Chocolate too, that would really piss them off.

You know, Saddam was a good guy really. Maybe he was a bit rough sometimes, but he knew that all the God-Squad stuff was bollocks and he knew that Capitalism was bollocks too. Now he's gone, all the crazies are coming in - Crusaders, Talliban, the works. The bloke they caught is a double. I saw Saddam this morning, just outside Finchley.

mossontrain.jpg

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-24-04 23:28
No 537540
User Picture 
      The real reasons given by Dave's website     

seem based on logical reasoning.
http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr70.html

At least one researcher has doggedly claimed that the Central Asian and Middle Eastern military ventures are but a prelude to military confrontations with Russia and China. But that hardly seems to be the case. It does not appear as though there is any urgent need for 'regime change' in Russia or China, since the West seems to already have 'friendly' regimes in place in both countries. And I have to add here that if the ruling regimes of Russia and China really are enemies of the United States, they will undoubtedly go down in history as the stupidest enemies of all time for watching approvingly as the United States entrenched its military machine in their backyards on the most transparent of pretexts.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, I believe that the Central Asian adventure has been wildly successful. True, the West hasn't reaped the bounty of the region's oil and gas reserves -- but I don't think that was ever the goal. To the contrary, I think the U.S. has done exactly what it set out to do: deny anyone else the opportunity - by force if necessary, and it will become necessary - to exploit the area's resources.

Also contrary to conventional wisdom, I believe that the Iraq adventure has also been successful. Again, the goal was not to steal Iraqi oil; the goal was to shut down or severely limit the flow of Iraqi oil, and that goal has obviously been accomplished. Indeed, some reports have held that American troops (and American mercenaries) are responsible for at least some of the pipeline bombings and other attacks on the Iraqi oil infrastructure.



Doesn't look like such a far out theory, after reading that above post of mine about refinery capacity, at all.
So, let's follow Dave's lead a bit further:


--- that the CIA's future playbook is packed with false-flag terrorist operations directed at critical oil facilities -- especially in countries that haven't yet been convinced that their vast oil reserves don't really exist.



Like Mexico, Venezuela, FarawayeStan etc.?


Much to the consternation of Ruppert and his PeakOil handlers, Saudi officials announced on April 28 2004 that the Kingdom's estimate of recoverable reserves had nearly quintupled! (The article below says "tripled," but the math isn't that hard to do.)



Ooops, those PeakOil boys don't speak Arabic that well, to keep the scary fairytale believable?


http://www.arabnews.com/?page=6§ion=0&article=44011&d=29&m=4&y=2004  :
WASHINGTON, 29 April 2004 — Officials from Saudi Arabia’s oil industry and the international petroleum organizations shocked a gathering of foreign policy experts in Washington yesterday with an announcement that the Kingdom’s previous estimate of 261 billion barrels of recoverable petroleum has now more than tripled, to 1.2 trillion barrels.

Additionally, Saudi Arabia’s key oil and finance ministers assured the audience — which included US Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan — that the Kingdom has the capability to quickly double its oil output and sustain such a production surge for as long as 50 years.
- - - This estimate is very conservative. Our analysis gives us reason to be very optimistic. We are continuing to discover new resources, and we are using new technologies to extract even more oil from existing reserves,” the minister said.

    Naimi said Saudi Arabia is committed to sustaining the average price of $25 per barrel set by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. He said prices should never increase to more than $28 or drop under $22 (Yep, very accurate prediction indeedtongue).

    [...]

    “Saudi Arabia’s vast oil reserves are certainly there,” Naimi added. “None of these reserves requires advanced recovery techniques. We have more than sufficient reserves to increase output. If required, we can increase output from 10.5 million barrels a day to 12 - 15 million barrels a day. And we can sustain this increased output for 50 years or more. There will be no shortage of oil for the next 50 years. Perhaps much longer.”

Note that the oil reserves claimed by Saudi Arabia alone (1.2 trillion barrels) exceed what the Peakers claim are the total recoverable oil reserves for the entire planet. Let's pause here for a minute and think about the significance of that: one tiny patch of land, accounting for less than than 1/2 of 1% of the earth's total surface area, potentially contains more oil that the 'Peak' pitchmen claim the entire planet has to offer! Is there not something clearly wrong with this picture?

Needless to say, that sort of candor by the Saudis could put a serious crimp in Washington's plans to sell the 'Peak Oil' scam. Perhaps that is why, just three days after that announcement, the Saudi oil industry was attacked by some of those terr'ists. Not to be deterred, however, Saudi officials announced three weeks later, on May 21, that the Kingdom still intended to dramatically increase its petroleum output. And a week after that, on May 29, those crafty terr'ists launched yet another brazen attack on the Saudi oil industry. Shit happens, I guess.

At that very same time, and in the months that followed, the U.S. was sending clear signals that it would not hesitate to set its military dogs loose on the Kingdom if necessary. Michael Moore's "the Saudis are the real enemy" movie, for example, splashed across America's screens. Various voices involved in both the official and unofficial 9-11 investigations were pointing the finger toward the Saudis as well. The message couldn't have been clearer: "we can easily drum up public support for 'regime change' if you won't play ball." The Saudis, it would appear, have now fallen in line.



Damn dumb Arab kings and Princes, sending there sons and daughters all first to Harvard etc., and then forget to listen to them when important decisions which could fill their pockets with even more bribe money, really have to be made when their US and EU patrimonies give them The Hint.
Wouldn't be surprised when one of the Harvard boys suddenly feels the urge to overthrow that bunch of old, camelracing-loving retards
.


"Yukos," according to the Times, "produces about 1.7 million barrels of oil a day, equal to some OPEC countries." The turning point in the case against Yukos, the Times noted, came "when court bailiffs moving to execute an initial $3.4-billion tax judgment announced that they were preparing to seize and sell not one of the dozens of small Yukos assets that might easily settle the tax bill, but the company's production unit, Yuganskneftegaz ... the two-month deadline for selling the company means there would be little time to raise financing, and a potential buyer would acquire it at a fire-sale price, analysts said. The government listed the unit's official value at about $1.8 billion."

The actual value of Yuganskneftegaz, as the Times admitted, is probably closer to $30 billion, or nearly 17 times the Russian government's ludicrous assessment. And who do you suppose will acquire the assets of Yukos, and the control of Yukos, at these fire-sale prices? I'm guessing it could very well be one or more of the Western oil giants. The Russian people, of course, will be less than thrilled with such a scenario, which is probably one of the key reasons that Putin has recently opted to reveal the iron fist within the velvet glove.



Seems like Putin stands inline with the rest of the scammers, but he always has a trick up his sleeves.


The 'Peak Oil' crowd has claimed, with nothing to offer in the way of supporting evidence, that the Saudis are lying about their oil reserves and their ability to increase production. The Peakers have also strongly implied that the Saudis actually attacked their own facilities, so that they would not have to deliver on their promises. No logical explanation has been offered though for why the Saudis would lie and then immediately attack themselves to cover up the fact that they were lying. It seems to me like it would have taken less effort to just not tell the lie to begin with. The Saudis, meanwhile, have insisted that it is the Peakers who are lying. ( http://www.menafn.com/qn_news_story_s.asp?StoryId=42933 )



Who can you believe these days?


Meanwhile, Mexico, which also hasn't been reading the 'Peak' memos, recently announced the discovery of massive quantities of new petroleum reserves. The Peakers, as we all know, repeatedly claim that no new reserves of any consequence have been found for years. In fact, they go so far as to say that there are no new reserves to be found. In one recent collection of lies posted on the FTW website, Julian Darley writes: "Major oil discoveries have declined every year so that 2003 saw no new field over 500 million barrels ... It is well over twenty years since more oil was found than consumed in a year."
( http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/031704_two_planets.html )

Really, Mr. Darley? Are you sure about that? Let's check with the Mexican press to see if you are correct:

Three years of exploration has enabled Pemex to map oilfields that the state-owned oil monopoly believes will more than double the nation's known crude oil reserves. Luis Ramírez Corzo, Pemex's director for exploration, told EL UNIVERSAL that on a "conservative" estimate, almost 54 billion barrels lie underneath the oilfields. That would take Mexico's reserves to 102 billion barrels, more than the United Arab Emirates (which has reserves of 97.8 billion barrels), Kuwait (94 billion) and Iran (89.7 billion), and almost as much as Iraq (112.5 billion). The official also said the discovery could enable Pemex to increase Mexico's oil production from the current level of 4 million barrels per day (bpd) to 7 million bpd. Saudi Arabia currently produces 7.5 million bpd, while Russia's oil output is 7.4 million bpd.  Ramírez Corzo said the exploration, at an investment of US 4.6 billion, led to the identification of seven separate blocks rich in oil and natural gas. The most promising blocks are under water in the Gulf of Mexico, thought to contain around 45 billion barrels.
( http://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=6110&tabla=miami )

No new fields over 500 million barrels? How about the 45 billion new barrels sitting in the Gulf of Mexico, right in our own backyard? Isn't that just a tiny bit more than is "consumed in a year"?

Of course, the oil will not be easy to extract. Mexico will need some help, since it "lacks the technology for deep water pumping." And there is another problem as well: "there are territoriality issues with the United States and Cuba over the fields." In order to bring the oil to market, Mexico will need the cooperation of both the United States government and the major players in the oil industry. In other words, the newly discovered oil isn't going to be extracted any time soon, which is why the American media, and the 'Peak' crowd, haven't bothered to acknowledge its existence.
( http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=15958 )

It will no doubt be determined that it is not economically feasible to extract the oil in the Gulf of Mexico. After all, Reuters has reported that, "Oil from deep-water reserves could cost $4 a barrel to extract, nearly double the cost of oil from shallow water." And we certainly can't expect any responsible corporation to shell out $4 a barrel to extract something that they can then trade for $50 a barrel, can we?



Tsk tsk tsk, somewhere some people are bad liers.


For more on oil in the Gulf of Mexico, and various other issues directly related to the 'Peak Oil' debate, see:
http://www.oralchelation.com/faq/wsj4.htm
http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf124/sf124p10.htm
http://www.newaus.com.au/040908-oil-sources.html
http://www.pnl.gov/er_news/08_95/ER_News/oil1.kb.html

The real problem with the Saudi crude, as near as I can determine, is that the Saudis and the 'Peakers' have entirely different ideas about what the price of crude oil should be. At the time of the attacks in Saudi Arabia, it was hovering at about $40.00/barrel, and is now at about $50.00/barrel. The Saudis would like to bring it down to $25.00/barrel. And the 'Peakers' would like to see it raised to - are you ready for this? - a whopping $182.00/barrel -- which would, quite obviously, place oil out of reach for the vast majority of the world's people.
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3777413.stm)

The $182.00/barrel figure was provided by Matthew Simmons to a BBC reporter at the 'Peak Oil' conference held earlier this year in Berlin. According to Simmons, "Oil is far too cheap at the moment ... we need to price oil realistically to control its demand." Simmons is described in the BBC article as "an energy investment banker and adviser to the controversial Bush-Cheney energy plan." He is, in other words, a perfectly credible source -- if we choose to overlook the fact that everyone connected to the Bush-Cheney team reeks of corruption and outrageous lies.

Nevertheless, the Peakers just adore Mr. Simmons, who was described by Michael Ruppert as "the de facto star of the [Peak Oil conference]." 'Peak Oil' pitchmen just love to quote Simmons, says Ruppert, "because his voice is refreshing."
( http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/062104_berlin_peak.html )

Simmons is a member of ASPO (Association for the Study of Peak Oil), founded and led by 'Peak Oil' guru Colin Campbell and promoted relentlessly by Michael Ruppert, who boasts of having "a great many friends in ASPO." According to the BBC, ASPO includes in its ranks "a diverse range of oil industry insiders," including a good number of "oil executives" and "investment bankers." Just the sort of salesmen we should trust, in other words, when shopping for a suitably apocalyptic future.



I would not trust them with my last can of petrol in the middle of the Sahara. Let it be with our global oil reserves.


The truth is that such a future awaits us only if the claims of the 'Peakers' are true, or, more importantly, if we allow ourselves to be convinced that the claims are true when they most certainly are not. It is vitally important, therefore, that the people of the world be given the opportunity to thoroughly review all sides of this issue. After all, if the Peakers are right, then all of our lives are very much on the line.



I'm still preparing for the worst case scenario, since it looks that some strange US-oriented God has chosen GWBush as his apostel of the Last Days to come. Can't take any risks on this issue, I am not convinced that the oposition will get enough time to counter this greedy flock.


As I said earlier in this post, these people are deadly serious about staging this apocalyptic scenario. And the stakes, for all of us, are very high. Consider that, for many years now, concerted efforts have been made to program our children to passively accept death as a mundane, routine occurrence. Do not make the mistake of assuming that that is a phenomenon unrelated to the 'Peak Oil' agenda.

Television, movies, and video games dwell relentlessly on death, frequently violent death. Each and every year, the volume and intensity of such propaganda is cranked up higher and higher. By the time our kids reach adulthood, they have processed through their malleable minds thousands of graphic images of death. Many of those deaths they may even have caused themselves, as operators of graphically violent "first person" computer and video games.

The next in the series of "Harry Potter" books - promoted endlessly as the best thing to happen to children's books since Dr. Seuss - will reportedly feature the death of one of the beloved characters. One of the new features of the latest version of the wildly popular "Simms" computer game is that the virtual characters that our children create to populate their virtual worlds will now die virtual deaths.

Our high schools for some time now have offered students "death education." The Citizens Commission on Human Rights has noted that, "For decades, schools around the world have used 'death education,' a psychological experiment in which the children are made to discuss suicide, what they would like placed in their coffins, and write their own epitaphs in an effort to 'get kids more comfortable with death.'"
( http://www.cchr.org/topics/educators/violence/ )

Dr. Samuel Blumenfeld writes that "Death education has been a part of the progressive curriculum in virtually every public school in America for at least the last fifteen years. Yet no one in the establishment, let alone the U.S. Department of Education, has sought to find out what death education is doing to the minds and souls of the millions of children who are subjected to it. But we do have plenty of anecdotal information on hand."
( http://www.ritalindeath.com/blumenfeld31.htm )

Why are our children being conditioned to accept death? How thorough will this depopulation program be? How long will it take to shatter all remaining social bonds -- to instill in the masses an "every man for himself" mind set? How quickly will we collectively descend into barbarism? If the masters of our collective illusion can convince us that we live in a "kill or be killed" world, how much of the dirty work of depopulation can they get us to do ourselves? What would we all do to stay alive in a high stakes game of global Survivor?

The architects of 'Peak Oil' hope to find out soon.



I'm preparing for every possible scenario, and that can only be done by forming caring communities, capable of surviving in any scenario. LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-24-04 23:45
No 537544
User Picture 
      Global Warming     

If, as you say, Peak-Oil is bull, then we are going to keep spilling CO2 into the atmosphere, keep using unsustainable agricultural practises and generally destroy the environment. I was rather hoping that Peak-Oil would bring a halt to all that crap.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-25-04 00:10
No 537555
User Picture 
      It looks as if     

the PeakOil scam will be unstoppable in the foreseeable future, and the problem seems to be, that the thinktanks behind all this, are very well understanding that Global warming (Pentagon knows it very well, they even went public with it!) combined with irrissistable greedy oil conglomerates( the Pentagon is just the Iron fist extension of these guys), will inevitably cause a decimation of the global populace.
And, coldhearted mathemachigians as they ought to be, they start planning for that inevitable event.
And that's where it becomes scary, they seem to see no way out.

Do you?
Hiding in your cosy little warm enclave won't help you that much, when a bunch of cockneys are axing their way in your frontdoor, while their freezing children are anxiously waiting to get in, ain't that so?
Especially when your neighbours won't move a finger, since they see you as a selfish hermit, who didn't share his knowledge and refused to socialize, before the shit really hit the fan. LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-25-04 00:35
No 537563
User Picture 
      Bunch of Cockneys     

Squire, I wasn't serious. In fact, I am very community minded. I look after the old lady next door and try and get as involved as possible in the local community, unlike the many 4-wheel driving coneheads that seem to have moved in recently.

Peak-oil or not, things are a worry. Current consumption is not sustainable in the West, let alone when the rest of the world starts behaving similarly. Ecosystems will start collapsing: land and sea. This is going to happen.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-25-04 00:43
No 537564
User Picture 
      like I said     

The oil "shortage" is bullshit. The only threat to our oil supply in the foreseeable future is by those who pump it out of the ground.


If, as you say, Peak-Oil is bull, then we are going to keep spilling CO2 into the atmosphere, keep using unsustainable agricultural practises and generally destroy the environment. I was rather hoping that Peak-Oil would bring a halt to all that crap.




Not exactly. The peak oil myth will have the same effect as an actual oil shortage as long as enough people believe it. There will be changes throughout industry because of fears of an oil shortage and skyrocketing prices. Companies should be looking for alternatives to oil even without a real shortage. There are better and cheaper ways to do almost everything currently dependant on oil.


Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-25-04 00:54
No 537568
User Picture 
      Non-oil Resources     

Yes, but what about water, agricultural land and fishing?

All these things are being squeezed. For example, when I was a wee lad, cod was dirt cheap, now it is flown in as a luxury commodity from Iceland. Top feeding fish have gone, middle feeders are going, now it is bottom feeders. Soon there will be nothing.

Agriculture and industry requires water, but it is running short everywhere. Rivers and aquifers can supply only so much.

Agricultural land is in short supply and being destroyed by intensive farming techniques.

It's all going down the pan, just like Soylent Green.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-25-04 00:55
No 537569
User Picture 
      Those things have nothing to do with peak oil.     

Those things have nothing to do with peak oil. Obviously the world needs more conservation of it's reources. I don't see anyone arguing that.

Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-25-04 01:02
No 537570
User Picture 
      Agriculture does     

The agrochemicals and food production are heavily dependent on oil. The rest don't, but they will fuck things up just as much as oil does.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-25-04 01:34
No 537578
User Picture 
      Maggie, I knew.     

Btw, anybody ever spend some thoughts on which countries have state owned national oil companies which exploit their oil wealth (and/or wells) ?

Well, prepare yourself for some ashtonishing facts, and see the controversy behind what is going on:
Venezuela     now mostly state owned
Indonesia     state owned
Mexico        state owned
Russia        now state owned (de facto)
Saudi Arabia  state owned (Aramco)
Iraq          "state" owned
Iran          state owned
China         state owned
USA           independent (many big ones, not one state owned, SURPRISE?)
Canada        state owned
France        state owned and independent (ELF?)
Britain+NL    independent (Shell, BP)
Norway        state owned
Nigeria       state owned

There will be a few more, but the shocking part of that list is, that none of these state owned national oil companies have the expertice in-house to practically exploit their wealth.
They all hire know-how, personel and especially hardware from those independent oil companies, who are nearly all english speaking and writing companies.(with the exception of the french ELF).
And the Echelon spying network originates from those english speaking countries where all the independent oil companies reside. Coincidental? They steal as much economic viable knowhow as they can, via this network. Which info, very conveniently, is provided to their own national conglomerates.
So where is the PeakOil conspiracy originating?
Why are these independent companies not already long ago nationalized, like in all the other countries, where politicians realized that you can't let individuals play with such a national asset?
Because there is only one country where not the government orders to print the local money, but a privately controlled bank, the Federal Reserve Bank, and that's the USA. Where seemingly all the mayhem originates, which is now coming upon us. And also the home of the World Bank and some more clearly fascistoid oligarchic organizations.

How will a few men of good will, ever be able to break the chains with which a whole superpower is strangled with?
And which spreads its neo-conservative tentacles rapidly over the rest of the world. LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    paranoid
(Quick-witted Quibbler)
10-25-04 02:51
No 537591
User Picture 
      I'd rather have state owned oil companies than     

I'd rather have state owned oil companies than independent ones any day.  At least the money is funnelled into the national economy as opposed to some fat cat's pockets.

My ideal vacation - Juxtaposed along the precipice intersecting reality and fantasy (i.e. wanking).
 
 
 
 
    Love_N_it
(Beeman)
10-25-04 07:16
No 537641
User Picture 
      "Why are our children being conditioned...     

"Why are our children being conditioned to accept death? How thorough will this depopulation program be?  What would we all do to stay alive in a high stakes game of global Survivor?"

Children aren't being conditioned to accept death as much as they are being conditioned to be 'connected' to death.
to be involved in the incident, related to the victim, or hearing another sad story on the news.
Nothing changes you life as much as being involved in the loss of another's, especially a loved one. But we could care less about a death that doesn't have anything to do with us, personally.
are they desensitized from games?.. . i gave away my new X-box when I moved to Az because they didn't have any 'shoot'emupbangbang' war games that didn't focus straight down the end of a barrel. everything was "right there" like sniper sites.
maybe the console games they play to occupy their minds, and the movies and music they absorb wouldn't be classified as barbaric, but they are becoming pretty damn obvious.
Everybody's getting blunt, and they should be. 
We are electing leaders to assume a position in their part of a 'chess' game, who are all totally dependend on the possibility that something or somebody else is going to come and clean up their little mess.
We made a machine, and it almost looks like were being prepared to eat ourselves out of it.

"How long will it take to shatter all remaining social bonds -- to instill in the masses an "every man for himself" mind set?  If the masters of our collective illusion can convince us that we live in a "kill or be killed" world, how much of the dirty work of depopulation can they get us to do ourselves?

The massess will come together, and it won't be about 'every man for himself' either,
and if it is, it won't be that way for very long.
Enough depopulation would occur naturally in the initial stages of a revolution,
so,
that might mean we are doing our own dirty work. 
or would that be making the decisions on what to do with the bodies or starving people.
If you cut off their source of food and life, how long would it take for people to leave the inner cities in masses with whatever they had, to go somewhere else and start providing for their own?
Is this human spirit still strong enough to pursue
"our darkest hour"? how about a year or two?

It almost sounds like the worst thing in the world, but everybody loves Survivor?

keep your fingers crossed, or one straight out! wink

dreading work
 
 
 
 
    ampdup
(Hive Bee)
10-25-04 18:47
No 537749
User Picture 
      us oil reserves     

i seem to recall my Uncle, who worked on an offshore oil rig, telling me that the U.S. had more untapped oil deposits beneath it's crust than on any other place in the world that the major oil companies were sitting on until we exhausted the resources in other parts of the world.  I never researched it, but it does make sence to use up all the outside resources before you have to tap your own.

Life is a lesson  and you'll learn it when your through
 
 
 
 
    hypo
(Balanced Ego)
10-25-04 20:15
No 537763
      if only it was true!     

if only the oil companies would shoot themself in their foot and created "peak oil"
panic! but since they're not dumb, they don't. actually this summer there was a study
by BP saying that more oil is discovered every year than is produced. and it was phrased
in a way that made people believe that there's actually more _new_ oil than we use.
of course you ignore this study since it doesn't fit your conspiracy theory du-jour.

and in the end it's completely irrelevant. you can make hydrocarbons out of coal and
soon maybe out of methane (which is so abundant that it's burnt!), but the problem
is of course CO2 production. in that light everything that brings a higher oil price
and leads to alternatives or more energy efficiency is a good thing.

HΨ=EΨ
 
 
 
 
    paranoid
(Quick-witted Quibbler)
10-25-04 22:13
No 537784
User Picture 
      "but the problem is of course CO2 ...     

"but the problem is of course CO2 production. in that light everything that brings a higher oil price and leads to alternatives or more energy efficiency is a good thing. "

I agree, but...

The economic disharmony caused by either the false information that peak oil production is being achieved or that it truly is the case is a large problem unto itself of course.  It wreaks havoc on world markets and especially on transortation and energy costs, therefore causing all sorts of problems on the home front.

Its a freakin mess either way crazy

My ideal vacation - Juxtaposed along the precipice intersecting reality and fantasy (i.e. wanking).
 
 
 
 
    buz
(Hive Bee)
10-25-04 22:47
No 537788
      its like a drug addiction     

weaning ourselves gradually from our oil addiction will solve a  host of other problems.

it has to bee done, regardless of various angles of spin.
soon, the damaged eco-system will bee the new terrorism, and we will gain the fabulous opportunity of beecoming intelligent.

we've given it the college try, at least in the u.s., of beeing stupid.
sure, it was fun for awhile. and then it got boring.

i sense a wave of non-boredom coming soon.
 
 
 
 
    maj
(Hive Bee)
10-26-04 18:07
No 537939
User Picture 
      oil     

Now ya'll know we don't have to worry about oil.  Were gonna be living of sunlight and methane gas.laugh

Little_fat_boy is bad for your health
 
 
 
 
    Love_N_it
10-27-04 05:34
      isn't that the way it's supposed to go down?
(Rated as: incomprehensible)
    
 
 
 
    abolt
(Comandante A)
10-27-04 07:08
No 538068
User Picture 
      Radioactive Pentagon?     

Depleted Uranium Released During Canadian Plane Crash

Little-Known Use of DU in Commercial Jets Exposed

By Christopher Bollyn

The recent crash of a Boeing 747 in Halifax, Canada, raises a number of questions about the use of depleted uranium (DU) in airplanes, public health concerns and the 9-11 attacks. When a Boeing 747 crashed and burned on takeoff at Halifax International Airport in Nova Scotia, Canada, on Oct. 14, an official accident investigator said the aircraft probably contained radioactive depleted uranium.

Bill Fowler, an investigator with the Transportation Safety Board of Canada, said the plane was likely equipped with DU as counterweights in its wings and rudder.

“A 747 may contain as much as 1,500 kilograms [3,300 lbs.] of the material,” the Canadian Press reported. It took 60 firefighters and 20 trucks about three hours to control the fire.

Fowler said: “there is no threat or concern” about DU exposure to those working on the wreckage.

“That’s baloney,” Marion Fulk, a retired staff scientist from Lawrence Livermore National Lab, told American Free Press. Fulk, 83, is currently researching how low-level ionizing radiation causes cancer, birth defects and a host of other health problems. Burning depleted uranium creates a “whole mess of oxides,” Fulk said, “which is what makes it so wicked biologically.”

In 1988, American physicist Robert L. Parker wrote that in the worst-case scenario, the crash of a Boeing 747 could affect the health of 250,000 people through exposure to uranium oxide particles. “Extended tests by the Navy and NASA showed that the temperature of the fireball in a plane crash can reach 1,200 degrees Celsius. Such temperatures are high enough to cause very rapid oxidation of depleted uranium,” he wrote.

“Large pieces of uranium will oxidize rapidly and will sustain slow combustion when heated in air to temperatures of about 500 degrees Celsius,” Paul Lowenstein, technical director and vice-president of Nuclear Metals Inc., the company that has supplied DU to Boeing, wrote in a 1993 article.

Now, some researchers are turning to the large number of sick firefighters and workers from the World Trade Center site and reports of elevated radiation levels around the Pentagon after 9-11. They contend that the Boeing 757 and 767 aircraft involved in the attacks may have also contained depleted uranium counterweights.

PENTAGON RADIATION LEVELS

Around the Pentagon there were reports of high radiation levels after 9-11. American Free Press has documentation that radiation levels in Alexandria and Leesburg, Va., were much higher than usual on 9-11 and persisted for at least one week afterward.

In Alexandria, seven miles south of the burning Pentagon, a doctor with years of experience working with radiation issues found elevated radiation levels on 9-11 of 35 to 52 counts per minute (cpm) using a “Radalert 50” Geiger counter.

One week after 9-11, in Leesburg, 33 miles northwest of the Pentagon, soil readings taken in a residential neighborhood showed even higher readings of 75 to 83 cpm.

“That’s pretty high,” Cindy Folkers of the Washing ton-based Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) told AFP. Folkers said 7 to 12 cpm is normal background radiation inside the NIRS building, and that outdoor readings of between 12 to 20 cpm are normal in Chevy Chase, Md., outside Washington.

The Radalert 50, Folkers said, is primarily a gamma ray detector and “detects only 7 percent of the beta radiation and even less of the alpha.” This suggests that actual radiation levels may have been significantly higher than those detected by the doctor’s Geiger counter.

“The question is, why?” Folkers said.

If the radiation came from the explosion and fire at the Pentagon, it most likely did not come from a Boeing 757, which is the type of aircraft that allegedly hit the building.

“Boeing has never used DU on either the 757 or the 767, and we no longer use it on the 747,” Leslie M. Nichols, product spokesperson for Boeing’s 767, told AFP. “Sometime ago, we switched to tungsten, because it is heavier, more readily available and more cost effective.”

The cost effectiveness argument is debatable. A waste product of U.S. nuclear weapons and energy facilities, DU is reportedly provided by the Department of Energy to national and foreign armament companies free of charge.

DU is used in a wide variety of missiles in the U.S. arsenal as an armor penetrator. It is also used in the bunker-buster bombs and cruise missiles. Because no photographic evidence of a Boeing 757 hitting the Pentagon is available to the public, 9-11 skeptics and independent researchers claim something else, such as a missile, struck the Pentagon.

A white flash, not unlike those seen in videos of the planes as they struck the twin towers, occurs when a DU penetrator hits a target.

Photographs from the Pentagon reveal that large round holes were punched through six walls in the three outer rings. The outside wall is 24 inches thick with a six-inch limestone exterior, eight inches of brick and 10 inches of steel reinforced concrete; the other walls are 18 inches thick.

The object that hit the Pentagon on 9-11 penetrated several feet of reinforced concrete, leaving holes with diameters between 11 and 16 feet.

Bill Bellinger, then head of the EPA’s Radiation Program for Region III, which includes Virginia, told AFP that he had received information of elevated radiation levels and contacted EPA officials at the Pentagon.

“I was concerned about that,” Bellinger said. “I didn’t disregard it at all.”

Bellinger told AFP that he thought the radiation was from DU in the aircraft.

Bellinger, who was based in Philadelphia, did not personally visit the Pentagon site and said that EPA personnel at the site had not reported high levels of radioactivity. However, the EPA official who Bellinger said had worked at the Pentagon, Craig Conklin, now at FEMA, told AFP that he had not been involved at the site, “directly or indirectly.”

Workers and FEMA officials at the Pentagon were seen wearing special protective outfits and respirators. FEMA photos show the workers going through decontamination procedures.

Bellinger told AFP that the Department of Defense was responsible for on-site safety procedures at the Pentagon.

In New York, however, considerably less attention was paid to the health risks the burning rubble posed to workers at the WTC site. A recent screening done by Mount Sinai Hospital found that nearly three-quarters of the 1,138 first responders had experienced respiratory problems while working at Ground Zero, and half had respiratory ailments that persisted for an average of eight months afterward.

“We were dumfounded by how many people were sick, and how sick they were, and how sick they still are,” said Robin Herbert, co-director of the program.

Thomas Cahill, professor of physics and atmospheric sciences, analyzed the plumes from a station one mile north of the burning WTC rubble. “The small particles worried me the most,” Cahill told AFP, referring to the sub-micron-size particles, which can pass through the filters of respirators.

Cahill said the high levels of silicon, vanadium, nickel and sulfuric acid concerned him. The fine concrete dust, he said, acted “like Drano” in the lungs of the workers, where it irritated and burned the wet membranes.

Until Dec. 15, the pile was so hot, a piece of paper would ignite on contact with the rubble, Cahill said. “You had the workers working on top of a huge incinerator in the rush to get Wall Street going again,” Cahill said. “It was really dumb.

“Only 30 percent of the firefighters working at the site in October were wearing any protection at all,” he said.

A class action lawsuit on behalf of more than 800 people who suffer health effects was filed against WTC leaseholder Larry Silverstein and the companies that supervised the cleanup: AMEC, Bovis Lend Lease, Turner, and Tully Construction.

The suit was filed on Sept. 10, the last day set by a federal three-year statute of limitations for lawsuits related to 9-11.

“Under state labor law, employers have a duty to provide a safe place to work,” lead attorney David Worby said. “They violated that duty. Everyone knew what was on the ground.”

As many as 100,000 workers at Ground Zero and hundreds of thousands more people in the area were exposed to airborne toxins, Worby said.

“If you expose a person to this amount of lead, cadmium, benzene, asbestos and glass shards, they are going to be sick,” he said. “More people could die from this than died on the day of 9-11.”

AMEC Construction Management, a subsidiary of the British engineering firm AMEC, renovated Wedge One of the Pentagon before 9-11 and cleaned it up afterward.

AMEC had also renovated Silverstein’s WTC 7, which collapsed mysteriously on 9-11, and then headed the cleanup of the WTC site afterward. The AMEC construction firm is currently in the process of closing all its offices in the United States.

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/depleted_uranium.html

http://www.earthtoamerica.org/
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-27-04 07:29
No 538071
User Picture 
      stop the presses     



AMEC Construction Management, a subsidiary of the British engineering firm AMEC, renovated Wedge One of the Pentagon before 9-11 and cleaned it up afterward.

AMEC had also renovated Silverstein’s WTC 7, which collapsed mysteriously on 9-11, and then headed the cleanup of the WTC site afterward. The AMEC construction firm is currently in the process of closing all its offices in the United States.




I knew about them having the Pentagon contract. But their work on WTC 7 is very interesting news to me. Does anyone really believe that AMEC, a foreign company, just happened to coincidentally do work on the two buildings hit on 9/11 that went down under questionable circumstances? What the fuck are the odds?

And now they can just pack up and go back overseas taking all their records with them. Very convenient.


Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-27-04 08:12
No 538077
User Picture 
      Amazing coincidences     

AMEC was hired by the US government to renovate the Pentagon. Coincidentally, they were hired by the private sector (Silverstein) to renovate WTC 7.

Why is the US government even contracting out to a foriegn company to renovate the most top secret building we have?
Why did they rehire them to fix the damage after the attack when it's obvious they can't properly strengthen a building. According to everyone, appearently, a 757 should have disintigrated into a billion pieces if it hit the Pentagon. Yet for some reason it managed to carve a hole through three re-enforced concrete and steel rings. This can only mean one of two things: It wasn't a 757, or AMEC can't build a decent wall.

Wedge 1 of the Pentagon was the only wedge undergoing renovations. Coincidentally, it was the only wedge hit. Why wasn't the rest of the Pentagon in need of renevations? Do all the wedges of the Pentagon not age at the same time?

AMEC was given the clean up contract for both the Pentagon and WTC.

AMEC is a British company, and the UK was America's strongest ally in the war. I wonder how many billions of dollars we pumped into the UK's economy by hiring a British firm to do all this work, then rehire them to clean up the mess. No wonder Blair sucked Bush's cock all the way to Iraq. I bet the government didn't even solicit bids for the work.

It would be interesting to see how common it is for the US government to hire foreign companies to do construction on top secret military compounds. My guess is not very often. AMEC seems to get special favors.

AMEC can now conveniently pack their bags and head back home and never have to answer any questions about their work in the US.

It seems AMEC is also making a bit of profit in Iraq now.



 AMEC is playing an important role in the restoration of Iraq following the award of three major contracts for work worth up to US$1.6 billion, of which AMEC’s share will be worth up to US$780 million.

The awards, won in conjunction with Fluor, AMEC’s joint venture partner in Iraq, cover the restoration of power generation facilities and water and waste infrastructure across the country. They reflect AMEC’s status as one of the world’s largest and most experienced project management and engineering services companies.

The power contract for up to US$500 million (AMEC share US$245 million) was awarded on 12 March 2004 to the Fluor AMEC LLC joint venture and covers the provision of engineering services for the restoration, rehabilitation, operation and maintenance of power generation facilities across Iraq.

The two public works and water infrastructure contracts worth up to US$1.1 billion (AMEC share US$540 million) were awarded on 24 March 2004 to the Fluor AMEC LLC joint venture and cover the provision of design and build services for the rehabilitation of existing, and construction of new, potable water distribution and treatment systems, municipal sewer collection and treatment systems and solid waste management systems across Iraq.

In addition, AMEC is supporting Fluor as its prime subcontractor on a further contract worth up to US$154 million, which was awarded to Fluor in 17 February 2004 and which involves the restoration of damaged power generation, transmission and distribution systems in Iraq. Fluor secured this contract with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and it will potentially involve task orders worth up to US$1.5 billion to Fluor over the next five years, to provide services to the US Central Command area of operations, which includes Iraq. Fluor and AMEC started work in February on this power contract.

All contracts have been awarded on a cost-reimbursable basis.

In February 2004 AMEC appointed Christopher Wilkinson as Managing Director to lead the Company’s operations in Iraq. Christopher joined AMEC from Intergen, an independent power developer, where he was Vice President and Country Manager for Turkey and the surrounding regions and was responsible for the development, financing and construction of 3800 MW of new gas fired power generation.

Safety will be of paramount importance and Fluor AMEC LLC will be retaining its own security services in addition to the security teams provided by the coalition forces.

http://www.amec.com/careers/careers_normal2ndlevel.asp?pageid=699




Looks like AMEC is the UK's version of Haliburton.


Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    Osmium
(Stoni's sexual toy)
10-27-04 15:18
No 538112
User Picture 
      DU in passenger planes is nothing new.     

DU in passenger planes is nothing new.

BUSH/CHENEY 2004! After all, it ain't my country!
www.american-buddha.com/addict.war.1.htm
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-27-04 15:43
No 538115
User Picture 
      DU     

DU isn't used in 757s.

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-28-04 00:47
No 538216
User Picture 
      DU     

Post 534548 (LaBTop: "Newsletter 68a,b,c + more", The Couch)

...damage was likely caused by a particular type of cruise missile -- specifically, a Boeing AGM-86C Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile (CALCM) outfitted with a depleted uranium (DU) warhead. "" ""Everything seemed to fit -- the clean initial penetration, the low altitude flight capability, the ability to evade radar, the ability to penetrate multiple reinforced targets."" ""



And the fact that that 757 was off the radar for about 40 minutes, then an object with no transponder on board, but accepted as that 757, reappeared on radar again, making some amazing multiple G turns, hopped with a few feet clearing over multiple objects near the Pentagon, and nearly cut the grass on the lawn, then entered the newly reinforced wings, penetrating all of them. Leaving no wing marks on the outer walls, even left glass windows undamaged where the wings would have hit.
If that was a 757 you can also eat my couch.

More and more evidence support a thought stream I had within a week after 9/11.
That a faction of the US military had tried a sort of sophisticated military coup, using airplanes and a cruisemissile, all loaded with DU spikes, to warn the politicians that more would follow if they didn't follow up on the long term plans already proposed by their think tanks for a decade.
In my opinion, they have succeeded.

Other usefull topics to reread:
Post 534350 (LaBTop: "KISS OF DEATH - NUCLEAR WEAPONS STEALTH TAKEOVER", The Couch)


4th GENERATION NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND DEPLETED URANIUM The development of 4th generation nuclear weapons is now underway in the US (in first place), Germany and Japan (tied for second place), followed by Russia and other nuclear and non-nuclear States.



Post 474574 (LaBTop: "Dwarfer ,", The Couch)


Where did you find the info which turned you round? Perhaps here : http://traprockpeace.org/depleteduranium.html



Post 460826 (LaBTop: "dwarfer: -THE CASE IS NOT MADE.-", The Couch)


1. British army is planning to end the use of depleted uranium tank rounds
http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/diss.html#UKARMY
21Sept2003: The Government continues to insist that the munition is safe, but is preparing to remove depleted uranium rounds from service under Ministry of Defence plans to improve the fighting capability of the Army's Challenger 2 tank. As part of the enhancement programme, the tank will be fitted with a different gun which can fire a wider variety of more effective, and less controversial, ammunition types.
British tanks currently use a rifled gun which can fire only two types of ordnance, high explosive and depleted uranium rounds. This limitation will disappear in the next few years, if, as expected, the MoD decides to have its new tanks built with a smooth bore 120mm gun, which is now used by most Nato armies.
Recent advances in tank ammunition have also led to the development of a new generation of rounds that will no longer be dependent on depleted uranium to achieve the same level of penetration against modern armour. The production of depleted uranium ammunition by the Royal Ordnance, the British arms manufacturer, ceased earlier this year. (The Telegraph Sep. 21, 2003)
2. European Parliament debate and resolution on unexploded ordnance and depleted uranium ammunition
http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/diss.html#EP03212
3. Chromosome aberrations found in Gulf and Balkans Wars veterans
http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/diss.html#CHROMSCHOTT
Gulf veteran babies 'risk deformities'
Children of British soldiers who fought in wars in which depleted uranium ammunition was used are at greater risk of suffering genetic diseases passed on by their fathers, new research reveals.
Veterans of the conflicts in the Gulf, Bosnia and Kosovo have been found to have up to 14 times the usual level of chromosome abnormalities in their genes. That has raised fears they will pass cancers and genetic illnesses to their offspring. The study is the first to analyse chromosome deformation in soldiers.
4. Bill requiring suspension of DU munitions introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives
http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/diss.html#HR3155
5. Council of Europe calls for ban on DU weapons
http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/diss.html#COEDUBAN
6. European Parliament demands moratorium for DU weapons
http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/diss.html#EPDU
7. U.S. NRC denies petition against use of depleted uranium munitions
http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/diss.html#2206ROKKE
June 1, 2000 : The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has denied a petition dated June 1, 2000, filed by Doug Rokke, Ph.D.
8. Britain's navy to phase out depleted uranium weapons
http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/diss.html#UKNAVY
   Jan. 13, 2001: Britain's Royal Navy is to phase out depleted uranium ammunition after the US manufacturers ceased producing the shells. The programme of moving to tungsten–tipped ammunition is believed to have already begun.
9. Greens in German Parliament start initiative for ban of DU weapons
http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/diss.html#GRBTBAN
10. Finding of No Significant Impact for DU ammunition use in M1 Abram tanks
http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/diss.html#M1FONSI
    1998!:  The current use of the depleted uranium (DU) armor package on the Abrams MBT has been re-evaluated to determine whether the environmental impacts of its continued use remain insignificant, taking into consideration the current use of the tank and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) reduction in allowable radiation exposure from 500 mrem/year to 100 mrem/year for tank and maintenance crews (individual members of the public).
11. UN Subcommission condemns DU weapons
http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/diss.html#UNSC
August 1996: Urged all States to be guided in their national policies by the need to curb production and spread of weapons of mass destruction or with indiscriminate effect, in particular nuclear weapons, chemical weapons, fuel-air bombs, napalm, cluster bombs, biological weaponry and weaponry containing depleted uranium;

IT'S FUCKIN UNBELIEVABLE THAT SOCALLED CIVILIZED NATIONS use THE WEAPONS OF MASSDESTRUCTION ISSUE TO GO TO WAR, and
THEN USE THE SAME goddamm FUCKIN THINGS IN THAT WAR. 



Post 460630 (LaBTop: "Link to that symposium, and more BAD news:", The Couch)
Post 460624 (LaBTop: "Dwarfer,", The Couch)
Post 460554 (LaBTop: "CHILDREN !", The Couch)


""Children, because they are extremely sensitive to both chemical and radiation toxicity, are particularly at risk of harm from exposure to depleted uranium."" Yet in the making, yet unborn or unwantedly placed in the middle of the aftermath of a very uncivilized war.



Better read that whole thread again, about DU :
Post 459474 (LaBTop: "This is OUTRAGEOUS !", The Couch)
LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-28-04 01:17
No 538223
User Picture 
      What happened     

to the 757 then? If they had the means to take control and it didn't hit the pentagon, where did it go and why? What happened to the passengers?

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-28-04 02:20
No 538231
User Picture 
      Maggie, if     

you can let a 757 disappear from radar for so long (during THE most tense few hours in american airspace control history!), why can't you dump it in any place (sea or land) where it will never be found, or can easily be cloaked off from the public eye? Such as the Pensylvanian plane.
Or just simply put the transponder on again with a new code, at a totally different spot, and just identify as another plane and fly on and land as a different plane. And let all your co-conspirors (the crew + passengers) embark normally and disappear with their old unknown identities?
 
If you accept that it is physically impossible that a 757 bursted into that Pentagon wing, and penetrated all these reinforced walls, then you have quite a lot of reasoning to do to explain all anomalies.
And you don't have the massive help available to provide those reasons, contrary to the eventual planners and executioners of these events.
You will have to find a logical explanation for all those passengers, whose families were really mourning.
But why was there not ONE arabic name on all those passenger lists? And how came the FBI up within a few days with that bunch of arab names who were responsible, and later several of these names proved to belong to people still happily living in Maroc, Tunesia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia? And some of these were Arab airline pilots!

If you believe in a grand conspiracy, one should try to come up with possible answers.
Why didn't we ever hear from any people spotting a VERY low flying 757 somewhere along the flightpath we have been fed by the media, on its way to Washington and the Pentagon, trying to keep out of reach of all sorts of radar devices working at top notch during those very tight airspace controller hours?
It must have flown quite a long time at very low altitude, to keep out of reach of ALL radar stations!
 
And why were there so distinctively small amounts of passengers aboard all 4 highjacked planes?
During rush hour take-off periods, when all commuters take normally those planes to be at a convenient arrival time at their place of destination. These planes at those hours are normally booked full, with a waiting list, the later planes are the ones with less passengers. For a conspiracist, the less passengers, the less problems afterwards.
Why was the San Francisco mayor warned not to fly on that day? Easy for some high level conspirors to let no more people on those planes then who they wanted, by just simply overtaking the booking lines and computers for those 4 planes, and booking people on other flights.

And the grimmest picture is painted by the idea that in case all these passengers were really aboard these planes, they were coldbloodedly murdered by gas or toxins, before the planes hit, or even grimmer, at home or where ever, and hauled away to secret graves.(That seems to be a bit far fetched, too much work and risk of failure for conspiracists, so probably murdered onboard, so they could not interfere with ongoing events).

If you accept a conspiracy, the most simplistic reasoning: why not accept the fact that those passengers were just a few more victims on top of the already planned victims at the buildings?
And the real 757 was dumped at sea, far out the coast.

If you want to read much more theories, read on here:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc7.html
THE CONTROLLED COLLAPSE OF WTC 7.
or
http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl%40listserv.aol.com/index.html#116395
LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-28-04 02:39
No 538235
User Picture 
      WTC 7, more on it:     


There can be only one conclusion as to what happened to WTC 7: it was demolished.

The fires in WTC 7 were supposedly started by the collapse of WTC 1 meaning there would have been no time the rig the building for demolition on 9/11, therefore this had to have been done whilst the building was still occupied prior to 9/11.

Doesn't this strike you as an odd and dangerous thing to do? If there were no terrorist attacks on 9/11 then a disgruntled employee could have brought down WTC 7 simply by thumping a red button - it makes no sense whatsoever.

There had to be a very good reason for this building to be rigged for demolition whilst it was still occupied. Did Silverstein, the new WTC owner who wisely invested in insurance against terrorism, have prior knowledge of the attacks?

One thing is for sure, his decision to 'pull' WTC 7 would have delighted many people:
The SEC has not quantified the number of active cases in which substantial files were destroyed [in the collapse of WTC 7]. Reuters news service and the Los Angeles Times published reports estimating them at 3,000 to 4,000. They include the agency's major inquiry into the manner in which investment banks divvied up hot shares of initial public offerings during the high-tech boom. ..."Ongoing investigations at the New York SEC will be dramatically affected because so much of their work is paper-intensive," said Max Berger of New York's Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann. "This is a disaster for these cases." [New York Lawyer]

Citigroup says some information that the committee is seeking [about WorldCom] was destroyed in the Sept. 11 terror attack on the World Trade Center. Salomon had offices in 7 World Trade Center, one of the buildings that collapsed in the aftermath of the attack. The bank says that back-up tapes of corporate emails from September 1998 through December 2000 were stored at the building and destroyed in the attack. [TheStreet]

Inside [WTC 7 was] the US Secret Service's largest field office with more than 200 employees. ..."All the evidence that we stored at 7 World Trade, in all our cases, went down with the building," according to US Secret Service Special Agent David Curran. [TechTV]

The fact that WTC 7 was demolished has major implications for the twin towers.



http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/cutter.html
LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    MargaretThatcher
(Hive Bee)
10-28-04 23:32
No 538375
User Picture 
      The Simplest Answer     

To me is that some headcases hijacked the planes and flew them into the WTC and Pentagon. No remote control, no missiles, just lunatics. The Bush regime was warned but did nothing and during the attacks behaved totally negligently and incompetently. So many people are trying to protect themselves that evidence is hidden and destroyed, encouraging conspiracy theories. The regime likes and encourages conspiracy theories because they distract from the real facts - criminal negligence that would bring down the government.

Against this explanation is:

1. Pentagon site.
2. WTC 7

From the What Really Happened site, they quote

"Larry Silverstein, the controller of the destroyed WTC complex, stated in a PBS documentary that he and the FDNY decided jointly to demolish WTC 7 late in the afternoon of September 11, 2001."

Is this true? Does anyone have the video to back this up?

Are you, or have you ever been a Liberal? YES / NO
 
 
 
 
    Unobtainium
(Minister of Propaganda)
10-28-04 23:57
No 538384
User Picture 
      I doubt it     

It takes demolition companies days to properly place explosives in a building that size. No one saw demolition crews entering. I doubt the fire deparment would have the equipment or expertise to carry out a demolition. They weren't even wasting man power on putting out the fires in WTC 7 because there were obviously much bigger problems that day.

If it is true that they decided to demo it, it doesn't explain why they would bring down a building that was in no danger of collapsing. It also doesn't explain why the building was prewired with explosives.

I've also never seen a building being brought down without informing the public first for their protection and to escapse liability. You can't just demo a building with thousands of people standing around. Even though most people were far away at that point, there were still rescue workers and tons of people wondering through the wreckage close to building 7.

Every documentary I've seen of a building being taken down, they clear everyone out of the area in a radius of about a half mile or more and usually sound an air raid siren before detonation. They don't just blast it without warning and watch people flee in a panic. If he really did say that, then he openned himself and the city of New York up to a shitload of lawsuits.

Besides, do you think the NYFD would have the balls to demo the CIA headquarters in a building that wasn't in danger without previously having gotten permission to do so?

Milk rots your brain.
 
 
 
 
    scarmani
(Hive Bee)
10-29-04 02:03
No 538415
User Picture 
      Peak Oil & 9/11     

Peak oil is a reality -- a genuine physical shortage, not artificially created through some conspiracy.  It is already upon us, and will become evident beyond dispute during the four year term of the next US president.  We will see War break out across the globe wherever energy resources are involved.  There will be further large-scale acts of terrorism, global economic instability and further erosion of democratic vestiges and slide towards an explicit institution of fascist / authoritarian government in the United States.  The US economy may implode.

I became persuaded of the coming energy catastrophe well before it was picked up by the mass media, when it was still a fringe view held by a few veteran petroleum geologists and malthusians.  Even today, Peak Oil has still not been publically acknowledged by corporate and political elites.

Normally when there is a massive criminal conspiracy affecting public wellfare, it is accompanied by an intensive and well-funded propaganda campaign designed to get the public to accept the desired conclusions.  In the case of Peak Oil the opposite is true: as prices of petroleum and natural gas shoot out of control, there has been a pointed effort to avoid the issue.  In the financial media, every combination of non-depletion excuses have been given with each fresh record high for a barrel of oil.

The frightning truth is that as of now, no one is in control of the energy situation.

As for 9/11, portions of the US government unquestionably knew of the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance and took no actions to prevent them.  This has been documented exhaustively and can be demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt.

It is also highly likely, (though not in my opinion conclusively demonstrated), that the attacks were actively guided and facilitated by elements within the US, Pakistani and Israeli intelligence services.

I would recommend the book "Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil" by Michael C. Ruppert, publisher and editor of "From The Wilderness".  It is hefty, plausible, and fully sourced.  It is also a gripping read.

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0865715408/002-6054087-0409647?v=glance

"The attacks of September 11, 2001 were accomplished through an amazing orchestration of logistics and personnel. Crossing the Rubicon discovers and identifies key suspects - finding some of them in the highest echelons of American government - by showing how they acted in concert to guarantee that the attacks produced the desired result.

Crossing the Rubicon is unique not only for its case-breaking examination of 9/11, but for the breadth and depth of its world picture - an interdisciplinary analysis of petroleum, geopolitics, narco-traffic, intelligence and militarism - without which 9/11 cannot be understood.

The US manufacturing sector has been mostly replaced by speculation on financial data whose underlying economic reality is a dark secret. Hundreds of billions of dollars in laundered drug money flow through Wall Street each year from opium and coca fields maintained by CIA-sponsored warlords and US-backed covert paramilitary violence. America's global dominance depends on a continually turning mill of guns, drugs, oil and money. Oil and natural gas - the fuels that make economic growth possible - are subsidized by American military force and foreign lending.

In reality, 9/11 and the resulting "War on Terror" are parts of a massive authoritarian response to an emerging economic crisis of unprecedented scale. Peak Oil - the beginning of the end for our industrial civilization - is driving the elites of American power to implement unthinkably draconian measures of repression, warfare and population control. Crossing the Rubicon is more than a story. It is a map of the perilous terrain through which, together and alone, we are all now making our way."





boot from the shadow of a broken mirror
 
 
 
 
    buz
(Hive Bee)
10-29-04 06:24
No 538459
      the good news:     

um,

i forget what the good news is.

there must bee some
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-29-04 13:56
No 538530
User Picture 
      Some things keep nagging me.     

Unob's remark:
""Wedge 1 of the Pentagon was the only wedge undergoing renovations. Coincidentally, it was the only wedge hit. Why wasn't the rest of the Pentagon in need of renevations? Do all the wedges of the Pentagon not age at the same time?""
Together with some remarks about huge amounts of CIA backup dossiers and Salomons backup dossiers which were destructed during demolition of WTC and the Twin Towers.

Was the whole idea behind 9/11 to clean up massive traces of some very bad proof of indecent political and economical behavior, combined with, launched in the aftermath of events, an unprecedental chain of repressive events which will affect the whole world, destroying all of the advantages already applied for possible optimistic futures.

Scarmani,
read my Daveweb pages links, he provides a lot of counter arguments against the theories of Peak Oil and their followers, like Ruppert.
Especially my links to the Saudi and Mexican announcements of doubled or even trippled reserves found in the last years. And Ampdup's argument, that it makes sense to bleed external sources first, before falling back on your own backyard reserves.

I feel a tendency in my own reasoning, to believe in the inevitability of some sort of Peak Oil event, but tend to think it will be an orchestrated event, not a natural occuring one.
Not that the real Peak Oil will never occure, but that an artificial one will preceed that one.
Because the powermongers opt for one they can manipulate. While they still have safety options build in.
In case of a naturally occuring oil disaster, they will be wiped away. That's why they have started all this, better put forward Peak Oil one or two decades, and line your pockets, while you still can manipulate the outcome, that's their real intention. LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    P6_mmc
(Stranger)
10-29-04 13:59
No 538532
      Here is the show     

http://64.4.30.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang=EN&lah=13a91677f7f3674b6fa70782142c9402&lat=1099058118&hm___action=http%3a%2f%2fwww%2e911truthla%2eus
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-29-04 14:07
No 538535
User Picture 
      Scarmani ,     

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr70.html
Beware the 'Peak Oil' Agenda

Act III is out, October 27, 2004.
September 11, 2001 Revisited: Act III
http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69.html
http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69b.html
READ !  LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-29-04 17:43
No 538579
User Picture 
      pc_mmc, you moron,     

why not just give the right link:
http://www.911truthla.us
LT/

WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    P6_mmc
(Stranger)
10-29-04 22:53
No 538631
      how do you     

How do you get that to link like that, fuck i cant get the thing to do , throw this junk in the trash   g.d.......computer.... where is the plane boss ,the plane boss, the plane !
 
 
 
 
    LaBTop
(Daddy)
10-30-04 23:07
No 538817
User Picture 
      Trust your leaders? Better NOT.     

http://www.globalresearch.org/view_article.php?aid=342536303

 Whitewashing Pearl Harbour


A particularly stark example of this is the answer to the self-posed question “Do all the ignored warnings about 9-11 prove conspiracy or just incompetence?”:

“Actually, ignored warnings prove neither. It is possible, for example, that there were many warnings but that these warnings were not readily distinguishable from the thousands of other intelligence reports being received at the same time. Despite the conspiracy theories claiming FDR knew in advance about Pearl Harbor, it remains the case that the most compelling explanation for the missed warnings in 1941 was the inability to detect the significant information from the noise. (This is the argument of Roberta Wohlstetter, Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision, 1962.)”

Many things are possible. What we are interested in, however, is not what was or was not “possible” in relation to September 11th, but what actually happened. Speculation on what could or could not have been the case is not always helpful in decisively discerning the reality of the matter. It is, of course, very easy for both “conspiracy theorists” and “institutional theorists” to continue sitting in their respective bubbles of irrelevant “theory” with respect to 9/11, Pearl Harbour, and any other event. None of them, however, will in reality have the slightest clue what they are talking about unless they leave the bubble of “theory” and enter into the domain of factual analysis. Shalom and Albert, however, like the extreme “conspiracy theorists” they criticise, completely fail to do this in a meaningful way. Their dismissal of the “conspiracy theories claiming FDR knew in advance about Pearl Harbor” is a particularly illustrative example of this. Instead of discussing the matter by referral to the documented facts, they cite the stale hypothetical argument of Roberta Wohlstetter put forth in 1962.

But that sort of blanket dismissal of the case for President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s advanced knowledge of Pearl Harbour is no longer tenable. The History Channel (U.S.A.) recently aired a BBC-produced documentary, Betrayal at Pearl Harbor, which demonstrated using among other, historical records, declassified U.S. documents, that then U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt and his chief military advisers knew full well that Japan was about to spring a “surprise attack” on the U.S. under the latter’s provocation, but allowed the attack to occur to justify U.S. entry into war.[41] Detailed documentation of this fact has been provided by historian Robert Stinnett in his recent study, Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor. Stinnett served in the U.S. Navy from 1942-46 where he earned ten battle stars and a Presidential Unit Citation. Examining recently declassified American documents, he concludes that far more than merely knowing of the Japanese plan to bomb Pearl Harbour, Roosevelt deliberately steered Japan into war with America.[42]

“Lieutenant Commander Arthur McCollum, a U.S. Naval officer in the Office of Naval Intelligence, saw an opportunity to counter the U.S. anti-war movement by provoking Japan into a state of war with the U.S., and triggering the mutual assistance provisions of the Tripartite Pact. Memorialized in a secret memo dated October 7, 1940, McCollum’s proposal called for eight provocations aimed at Japan. President Roosevelt acted swiftly, and throughout 1941, implemented the remaining seven provocations. The island nation’s militarists used the provocations to seize control of Japan and organize their military forces for war against the U.S., Great Britain, and the Netherlands. During the next 11 months, the White House followed the Japanese war plans through the intercepted and decoded diplomatic and military communications intelligence. At least 1,000 Japanese radio messages per day were intercepted by monitoring stations operated by the U.S. and her Allies, and the message contents were summarized for the White House. The intercept summaries from Station CAST on Corregidor Island were current—contrary to the assertions of some who claim that the messages were not decoded and translated until years later—and they were clear: Pearl Harbor would be attacked on December 7, 1941, by Japanese forces advancing through the Central and North Pacific Oceans.”[43]

Other elements of the case have also been put well by Daryl S. Borgquist, a U.S. Naval Reserve Public Affairs Officer and a Media Affairs Officer for the Community Relations Service Headquarters at the U.S. Department of Justice: “President Franklin D. Roosevelt requested the national office of the American Red Cross to send medical supplies secretly to Pearl Harbor in advance of the 7 December 1941 Japanese attack…

“Don C. Smith, who directed the War Service for the Red Cross before World War II and was deputy administrator of services to the armed forces from 1942 to 1946, when he became administrator, apparently knew about the timing of the Pearl Harbor attack in advance. Unfortunately, Smith died in 1990 at age 98. But when his daughter, Helen E. Hamman, saw news coverage of efforts by the families of Husband Kimmel and Walter Short to restore the two Pearl Harbor commanders posthumously to what the families contend to be their deserved ranks, she wrote a letter to President Bill Clinton on 5 September 1995. Recalling a conversation with her father, Hamman wrote:

‘… Shortly before the attack in 1941 President Roosevelt called him [Smith] to the White House for a meeting concerning a Top Secret matter. At this meeting the President advised my father that his intelligence staff had informed him of a pending attack on Pearl Harbor, by the Japanese. He anticipated many casualties and much loss, he instructed my father to send workers and supplies to a holding area at a P.O.E. [port of entry] on the West Coast where they would await further orders to ship out, no destination was to be revealed. He left no doubt in my father’s mind that none of the Naval and Military officials in Hawaii were to be informed and he was not to advise the Red Cross officers who were already stationed in the area. When he protested to the President, President Roosevelt told him that the American people would never agree to enter the war in Europe unless they were attack [sic] within their own borders…

‘He [Smith] was privy to Top Secret operations and worked directly with all of our outstanding leaders. He followed the orders of his President and spent many later years contemplating this action which he considered ethically and morally wrong. I do not know the Kimmel family, therefore would gain nothing by fabricating this situation, however, I do feel the time has come for this conspiracy to be exposed and Admiral Kimmel be vindicated of all charges. In this manner perhaps both he and my father may rest in peace.’”

In a detailed historical account published by the respected journal Naval History, affiliated to the U.S. Naval Institute, Borgquist documents the U.S. government’s foreknowledge and provocation of Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor, through analysis of many other aspects of the relationship between the government and the Red Cross.[44]

Thus, we see how compelling evidence of the U.S. government’s role in both provoking and permitting the attack on Pearl Harbour is simply ignored by Shalom and Albert. As a result, their commentary on these matters fails to retain any credibility. Thus, they ignore a key example of how the U.S. government and military intelligence infrastructure has in the past deliberately provoked acts of terrorism against U.S. targets, anticipating U.S. casualties, in order to justify military action.

[41] History Channel, ‘Betrayal at Pearl Harbor,’ 7 December 2001.

[42] Stinnett, Robert B., Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor, Touchstone Books, 2001.

[43] Stinnett, ‘Pentagon Still Scapegoats Pearl Harbor Fall Guys,’ Providence Journal, The Independent Institute, Oakland, 7 December 2001.

[44] Borgquist, Daryl S., ‘Advance Warning? The Red Cross Connection,’ Navy History, The Naval Institute, May/June 1999.




Believe your government against all odds, and live a happy life?
Or suddenly die, with a damn big questionmark engraved on your coffin, for the relatives left behind? What's your choice?
If you still have the idea you indeed do have some choice.
Get rid of your idiot two party system, that's your main problem.
And btw, thus ours too.

Next investigation should be that mysterious Pensylvanian plane.
Did you ever tried to evaluate the facts of Lockerbie, where the whole cockpit part of a 747 fell from 33,000 feet (10 km) high, and was still highly intact? And lots of other huge chunks of the plane were shattered all around that village. And that was a piece of C4 hidden in a transistor radio in the luggage. We have since Lockerbie, those molecule sniffers in luggage handling areas, just to check for plastic explosives.
So how on earth could a relatively small explosive smuggled on board (yeah, my ass! Impossible) shatter the Pensylvanian plane in such small pieces, from which the biggest piece left only a small hole in the ground, as the biggest piece of evidence?

Fuck off! There has been a stand off between two or more rival parties at very high places in the Pentagon, at 9/11, and the bad ones won.
If Stalin or Chroestyof still had lived at 9/11, their advisors would have pressed them to start a preemptive strike at the USA, directly, since all evidence on that day proofed that they were totally inadequate in handling any form of attack on the nation, and NORAD and their other airdefence systems were a FARCE.
Btw, not many seem to know, but the US has been defenceless against an atomic strike for nearly 8 months shortly before 9/11, because of a major software problem at NORAD and other defence installations. You lucky bunch. Lucky, since your adversaries seem to have higher moral standards as your leaders showed through all of american history. 
LT/


WISDOMwillWIN
 
 
 
 
    Love_N_it
(Beeman)
11-01-04 03:16
No 539020
User Picture 
      Act 3     

building a mystery.

since your sooooo into dwelling on the past,
what's the truth behind the sightings of the
 Loch Ness Monster?

is it real, is that story true?
is it true is it true!!!

My daddy wasn't the kind of person that swore about much,
not much at all that is...
but he told this story a handfull of times about encountering something deep in the Honey Island Swamp of South Louisiana early one foggy morning that nearly scared him to death.keep in mind that he scares less than he swears
He never used the words "Big Foot" in his story, but if you heard him talking about this one, you could tell that's what he was trying to explain when he said "something about two steps in front of me broke out that moved the brush and trees like no other animal could and the whole area smelled like you were standing in the center of the gorillas and monkeys at the Audubon Zoo"
but since he didn't see it, eye to eye, he would never say what it was. 

Sometimes people just don't want to, or can't find a way to tell you what they've experienced.
Initially, the Fire Chief who responded to the Pentagon site was quoted as saying... "this building was not hit by an airplane", and afterwords,
he had to recant his own words.
but the few times he's been questioned on camera about the events of that day, you can tell that he's responding the way he was told to.... not the way he saw it.

How many people turned in videotape of an airplane hitting the Pentagon? and it supposedly made a U-turn? 
and it occured well after the WTC had been attacked by airplanes...
scandalous.

   We are the product of what happens when our elders dwell on what their forefathers said or did wrong in the past, yet YOU want to keep following in their footsteps.

how ignorant of you, to ignore me.

If only some of you would focus on finding that damned deep water monster, she would answer all of your questionswink

my computer's really fucked up, not me.
 
 
 
 
    scarmani
(Hive Bee)
11-14-04 10:41
No 541501
User Picture 
      Global Public Media Website Updated     

The alternative news website, Global Public Media, has been completely updated!

http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/

There is some really excellent information on this site available for free.  In particular I can mention:

http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/news/kellia_ramares_reports_on_peak_oil_on_pacifica_sta

In this interview with many of the most important proponents of Peak Oil, a number of issues are addressed in a very clear and informative manner.  For example, the theory of abiotic oil is discusssed near the beginning.

"In a groundbreaking radio broadcast, Kellia Ramares of Radio Internet Story Exchange speaks with a noteworthy group of peak oil realists on Pacific Station KPFA's Noon show, The Living Room including Colin campbell, Richard Heinberg, Dale Alan Pfeiffer, Julian Darley, Matt Simmons, and Ali Samsam Bakhtiari."


http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/interviews/matt_savinar_speaks_with_jim_puplava

This is another nice clear discussion and overview of peak oil, and its financial implications.

Matt Savinar of LifeAfterTheOilCrash.net speaks with Jim Puplava about his book "The Oil Age is Over: What to Expect as the World Runs Out of Cheap Oil, 2005-2050"


Also definitely worth checking out is the audio recording of Mike Ruppert giving a speech about the 9/11 conspiracy at the Commonwealth Club.

http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/lectures/mike_ruppert_at_the_commonwealth_club_in_san_franc

"On the eve of the publication of his new book, Crossing the Rubicon, Mike Ruppert spoke at the prestigious San Francisco Commonwealth Club. His research, laid out on 600 pages and supported by over 1000 footnotes, shows that members of the Bush administration knew about the impending attack of 9-11 and helped them succeed.
Ruppert describes war games that were conducted on the same day as the WTC attacks with the same scenario, leading the FAA and NORAD to question whether what they saw on their screens was a game or reality.
In part one of the program, Ruppert investigates the motive for the creation of a new Pearl Harbor, i.e. the dwindling supplies of oil; in part two he names names, including Dick Cheney.
In part two, Mike Ruppert presents an answer to the most famous of all unanswered questions: Why were no fighter planes scrambled to intercept the hijacked airliners? Ruppert says that Dick Cheney was the person in charge of war games that were conducted on 9-11, war games that had the same scenario as the hi-jacking of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Towers. This dual scenario confused the response of the FAA and NORAD. Ruppert also reports on a bio-weapons drill that took place in New York City on the very same day and placed FEMA and members of the Department of Justice in a temporary command and disaster preparedness center on Pier 92. Ruppert says that these incidents show that Dick Cheney must be held responsible for participating in the events of 9-11."




The latest issue of the ASPO newsletter is out, a ton of good info:

http://www.peakoil.net/Newsletter/NL47/newsletter47.pdf
http://www.peakoil.net/


And as always, the latest news can be found at:

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/BreakingNews.html


______  _____  ____  ___  __  _



LaBTop, thank you for the information you have posted.  Since the topic of 9/11 and Peak Oil is so important, it is important not to get caught up in a divisive argument, and to get as many second opinions as possible. 

I have read through most of what you linked to.  My opinion has not changed; I still think there will be a crisis some time before 2008 based on physical, geological limitations on the supply and maximum extraction rate of hydrocarbon energy (petroleum and natural gas).  I do not think that it is a fabrication, or even that it will be intentionally hastened.  I base this opinion on the assessments of petroleum geologists and the hard figures of petroleum discovery and production, but even more so on my feeling that an energy crisis represents a much greater threat to the status quo and entrenched corporate/political elites than it does an opportunity.  I find it implausible that a conspiracy supposedly initiated by these old-energy dinosaurs (and their political servants) would at first be given credence by a fringe of people who are - in large part - deeply skeptical of these dinosaurs' actions.

If I saw President Bush giving speeches about Peak Oil, or well-funded public relations material from oil companies trying to explicitly ingrain the idea of a coming shortage (not just hint at it), then I would be more disposed to believe in the idea of Peak Oil as a massive conspiracy.  Instead, even now politicians have done everything to avoid the issue, and oil companies / oil producing nations / government agencies continue to deny the impending Peak despite strong, growing evidence for it.  Surely, if these entities wished to create a false crisis and use it to forward their agenda, they could do it easily by spreading the idea of Peak and causing mass panic.

Global discoveries of petroleum have been declining since 1960.  This, despite the fact that oil companies have been spending ever increasing amounts - billions of dollars - in a desperate search for new reserves in an attempt to continue growing their businesses.  This may have changed in the last few years, but only because they have come to the realization that there may not be much more resource out there to find.  But the current shortage we face has been decades in the making.  For me, the actions of the oil companies don't seem to fit the idea that Peak Oil was pre-planned.

Certainly the oil companies will try to profit from the situation as much as possible now.  However, this price gouging is only made possible by an underlying shortage.  If there really was a vast abundance of petroleum and natural gas out there, it would be very difficult to sustain an artificial shortage that was severe enough to threaten the world economy.  For example, the political oil shocks of the 70's gave way to the oil glut of the 80's.  Also, if such an artificial shortage were attempted, how could it be kept secret?  And more importantly, WHY would it be kept secret?  In the 70's, the shortages were mainly due to public announcement of the explcit aims of OPEC.  They were driven by fear more than actual supply fundamentals.

It doesn't make sense to simply limit supply artificially and not announce it.  Production of petroleum is far from a monolithic enterprise.  Many of the world's major oil producers have nationalized their oil industry and acted independently of the US govt's wishes (thus the unprovoked invasions, and attempts to overthrow democratically elected heads of state.)  Then, there are a large number of smaller US corporate players who would eagerly exploit opportunities "overlooked" by the big boys - if such opportunities existed!  This would especially be the case the with oil priced above $40 / bbl.

The idea that the US has exhausted foreign sources of oil while preserving its own domestic reserves just is not true.  This policy was certainly carried out during WWII, when the US supplied much of the world demand for petroleum...  There was serious concern in US that there were less than 20 years of domestic reserves remaining which were being rapidly used up to supply the Allies.

As a result, soon after the war the US and British used the military, diplomacy and the Lend Lease act to ensure access to and development of Middle Eastern oil.  (Many of our Middle Eastern problems today stem from those decisions.)

However, this push for access to foreign oil did not result in the shut-down or even slow-down of domestic production.  Quite the contrary: up until the 70's the US continued to supply nearly all of its energy needs domestically, at a time when demand was growing very fast every year.  The American oil industry continued to operate and grow production, and by 1970 was operating flat out: as fast as possible.  In fact, it was only the emerging physical need of America for foreign oil which permitted the oil shocks of the 1970's to occur - till then, the US had generally avoided dependence on foreign oil as much as possible. 

Since 1970, US oil production has declined steadily regardless of financial incentives.  This is not due to government interference, and it was not for lack of trying on the part of US oil companies to raise production (for example, look at number of wells drilled at times of high vs. low prices, and the fact that it has had nearly no effect on the overall inevitable depletion curve).  In fact, as soon as new domestic reserves were discovered in Alaska, they were immediately exploited.  (There is the exception of ANWR, but the Bush adminstration is pushing to open that to drilling, not trying to keep it off-limits.) 

The geological data for the original amount of oil in the United States has been established for a long time.  If you look at the numbers for discovery and production, all the data for the US is consistent with a standard depletion curve.  In fact, US oil production was the first vindication of King Hubbert's model, (for which he was ridiculed at the time he proposed it & reviled by US oil companies convinced that they could continue growing production and profits ad infinitum.)

boot from the shadow of a broken mirror
 
 

All 149 posts   End of thread   Top
   

 https://the-hive.archive.erowid.org    the-hive@erowid.org
   
Powered by Damn Things® v.1.00.3, © 2017-2020, Silly Gooses Solutions. All rights reserved.

Links     Erowid     Rhodium

PIHKAL     TIHKAL     Total Synthesis II

Date: 07-16-24, Release: 1.6 (10-04-15), Links: static, unique