Films/DVD Asylum

• Those two scenarios are apples and oranges - Bersani 10:12:14 04/30/06 (2)
  In Reply to: Re: Wondering whether to see United 93 tomorrrow. I hate movies that are set up for sequels... posted by rico on April 30, 2006 at 09:00:36:

  I don't have enough information to agree or disagree with Clark, but it seems to me that an air-to-air missile strike is plausible. If that was the case, it is also plausible that the information could be successfully withheld from the general public.

  I have absolutely no expertise in this area so I'm just speculating, but... given the location and size of the aircraft's engines (the target to which a missile would steer itself), damage to the fuselage and wing might not be severe enough to cause the plane to break apart in the air. Air-to-air missiles are not giant bombs, and have only as much explosive potential as necessary to cripple a plane.

  OTOH, the hypothesis that the WTC buildings were purposefully demolished with explosives is ludicrous. It is hardly plausible, but certainly an idea embraced by many conspiracy "theorists." It would have been impossible to have kept such activity secret from the buildings' tenants... you are not going to the the number of people required for the job actually WILLING to do it... and... a thousand other reasons.

  
  -Anthony
  
  

  ---

  • That's more-or-less the hypothesis on UA 93, thank you. BUT... - clarkjohnsen 11:40:41 04/30/06 (1)
    In Reply to: Those two scenarios are apples and oranges posted by Bersani on April 30, 2006 at 10:12:14:

    ..."the hypothesis that the WTC buildings were purposefully demolished with explosives is ludicrous." Sorry, but it isn't. You don't have to make too thorough a study to discover the dissenting views. PLUS we have on camera the owner saying that #7, which went down later that day, was an intended demolition. On camera, on PBS!

    Now I ask you, how different did that fall look from the two towers?

    And also, since it normally takes days if not weeks to set up a demolition, how did it happen that the charges were successfully put into place in just a few short hours? And with such confusion and danger nearby?

    You have to think these things through for yourself, unassisted by consensus reality.

    clark
    
    

    ---

    • Re: That's more-or-less the hypothesis on UA 93, thank you. BUT... - Wendell Narrod 18:04:33 05/20/06 (0)
      In Reply to: That's more-or-less the hypothesis on UA 93, thank you. BUT... posted by clarkjohnsen on April 30, 2006 at 11:40:41:

      Clark, that is simply not true. I visited the site last October. I had a long talk with the farmer who saw it crash. It was directly below his home. He was loading firewood for the winter when he saw the plane come in, invert, and go nose first into the ground. There were no flames and obvious signs of damage. There was no missile. People always want a conspiracy.
      
      

      ---

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Parts Connexion

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---