Terrorism (1 Viewer)

[mikhail]

The arguements on that site Gray gave are interesting: read them people, then rationally argue against them, if you would.

I find the video evidence that at least one of the planes wasn't a standard Boeing to be worrying, though inconclusive. I decline to accept their arguements that an exploding jet full of jet fuel couldn't do sufficient damage to a building like that to make it collapse until I see the calculations myself (I suspect they may have neglected the momentum of the plane, or the shock wave from the explosion). There is a lot of food for thought there though.

BTW, for those who argue that the plane's debris all entered the Pentagon, I've seen a picture of its entry hole, with an appropriately scaled plane placed in front of it - the wings would have had to have snapped off, and then been sucked in after the fuselage. Maybe that could happen - my stress and air-flow analyses aren't what they could be.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[The Pado]

The plane that hit the Pentagon actually hit the ground first, coming up short of the building, continuing into the Pentagon, so debris was all over the place, saw it on the live television coverage.

 

[Bjerknes]

Yeah, if I remember correctly, they even showed part of the broken tail on the ground. There was a lot of debris, no question. Most of it, though, not recognizable, for obvious reasons.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Damn, Graham stipened again.

 

[gray]

++ [ originally posted by Padovano ] ++
The plane that hit the Pentagon actually hit the ground first, coming up short of the building, continuing into the Pentagon, so debris was all over the place, saw it on the live television coverage.

Robbie, did you take a look at the flash movie I posted a couple of pages back? I initially thought the plane hit the ground and went into the Pentagon too, but it showed that the grass just ahead of the point of impact was untouched and green as... grass.

I'm still undecided on the whole issue, but as John said, I urge you to take a look at the arguments on the other side, just so you see the points that are made.

++ [ originally posted by BayernFussball ] ++
Damn, Graham stipened again.

what does stipened mean?

 

[Majed]

While this thread is about Terrorism.... I think I should start posting stories about Iraqi civilians regularly. Maybe those who think that generations of People grow up hating do it because of envy or pure evil. Maybe pictures can huminize the iraqi civilians so hartless people can see that you can't fight terror with terror!

is this not Terror? LINK1

If you wonder about the source.... Yes, Al-Jazeera. For those of you who think that it's any worse then CNN, MSNBC, or FOX crap, read some more.. There's BS everywhere. Go through it all and find. not just one pile.

 

[la_dynamite86]

If they were really fighting against terror...First, you can't really fight against it because it's something very difficult to define. What is terror? Did these people who died during the Iraq-war or in Afghanistan really represent "Terror"?
And instead of trying to find the roots to "terror" they just bomb everything that has to do with it, but also people and things that aren't really connected to "terror"...

 

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by Majed ] ++
While this thread is about Terrorism.... I think I should start posting stories about Iraqi civilians regularly. Maybe those who think that generations of People grow up hating do it because of envy or pure evil. Maybe pictures can huminize the iraqi civilians so hartless people can see that you can't fight terror with terror!

is this not Terror? LINK1

If you wonder about the source.... Yes, Al-Jazeera. For those of you who think that it's any worse then CNN, MSNBC, or FOX crap, read some more.. There's BS everywhere. Go through it all and find. not just one pile.

Yeah, there is BS everywhere, but a lot of it is coming from the behind of Al-Jazeera. They might as well say "we sponsor terrorists" because it is clearly evident that they have a penchant for making the terrorists look good. All that channel does is show repeated video of terrorist success in Iraq and inother places, and also keeps showing the video of an American soldier shooting an insurgent. But of course this wonderful little channel does not have any qualms about terrorists capturing hostages and beheading them, not really covering those specific stories at all. NBC at least shows both sides of the story, even our own misdeeds. The Al-Jazeera producers should be placed on our terror watch list, all they do is create more hatred towards the U.S.

 

[Majed]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++


Yeah, there is BS everywhere, but a lot of it is coming from the behind of Al-Jazeera. They might as well say "we sponsor terrorists" because it is clearly evident that they have a penchant for making the terrorists look good. All that channel does is show repeated video of terrorist success in Iraq and inother places, and also keeps showing the video of an American soldier shooting an insurgent. But of course this wonderful little channel does not have any qualms about terrorists capturing hostages and beheading them, not really covering those specific stories at all. NBC at least shows both sides of the story, even our own misdeeds. The Al-Jazeera producers should be placed on our terror watch list, all they do is create more hatred towards the U.S.

Sorry andy, but you obviously don't speak from experience.

They are a bit graphic, but they show it all..
They do show the hostages in Iraq pleeding for life. They cover that more than the US!
They talk about the curruption even in Arab countries and their talk shows are critical of Arab leaders.

In terms of creating hatred, the US gov. is doing that all on its own.

 

[Layce Erayce]

Majed while your right, you have to admit that a lot of it comes from propaganda and ignorance. Oh- lets not forget poverty.

 

[Majed]

++ [ originally posted by DukeVonEggwaffle? ] ++
Majed while your right, you have to admit that a lot of it comes from propaganda and ignorance. Oh- lets not forget poverty.

true. Point taken.

Though i'd like to call it, "counter-western-propoganda."

That's why AlJazeera is not my only source for news. That's why I have to read CNN and BBC's versions too.

 

[Layce Erayce]

why is it counter-western propaganda? hardly any of america's direct influence in the middle east is political.

 

[Zlatan]

Al J is the Arab CNN.

 

[gray]

tell me Andy, have you read Al-Jazeera's website? Of course their views are going to have a different edge from that of say, CNN, but can you honestly tell me that CNN isn't massively biased itself?

Al-Jazeera doesn't support terrorists; it's just that the terrorists send their threatening videos etc. to the biggest news source of the Arab world. It's like if Timothy McVeigh made threats and demands, he'd send the video to CNN. That's not to say that they support his cause. Don't shoot the messenger.

 

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by Majed ] ++



Sorry andy, but you obviously don't speak from experience.

They are a bit graphic, but they show it all..
They do show the hostages in Iraq pleeding for life. They cover that more than the US!
They talk about the curruption even in Arab countries and their talk shows are critical of Arab leaders.

In terms of creating hatred, the US gov. is doing that all on its own.

So Al-Jazeera does not influence terrorist activity? I find that absurd Majed. I just watched a story an NBC which showed what Al-Jazeera influences terrorism. I know that it might be a biased source, but it has validity. It was rather eye opening.

Your whole response does not include a single arguement against my claim that it influences terrorism, by the way. That channel shows little of the good that goes on in Iraq, and focuses mostly on the bad, in which the producers try to put the U.S. soldiers in the worst light.

 

[Majed]

++ [ originally posted by DukeVonEggwaffle? ] ++
why is it counter-western propaganda? hardly any of america's direct influence in the middle east is political.

I mean that in their influence on western audiences.

 

[gray]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++
I just watched a story an NBC which showed what Al-Jazeera influences terrorism.

I saw a documentary on MUTV saying why Arsenal is a bad bad team...

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++
That channel shows little of the good that goes on in Iraq, and focuses mostly on the bad, in which the producers try to put the U.S. soldiers in the worst light.

How exactly can they show the good that the U.S. soldiers are doing? I don't imagine there's much footage of them helping little old Iraqi women across the road and digging wells for the people... they're soldiers, not charity workers. Besides, doesn't NBC do much the same; I don't recall them showing footage of a U.S. soldier shooting an injured unarmed man in the head yelling "He's f***ing faking he's dead!"

 

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by gray ] ++
tell me Andy, have you read Al-Jazeera's website? Of course their views are going to have a different edge from that of say, CNN, but can you honestly tell me that CNN isn't massively biased itself?

It is not as biased as Al-Jazeera, that's for sure. They bring all the available information to light; even the Abu Grabe prison incident was beaten like a dead horse on CNN. They show the misdeeds of the terrorists, as well as our mistakes in world affairs. They do not show Osama's entire video on live television either. Every news agency shows some sort of bias, obviously, but some agencies have more bias than others.

 

[Bjerknes]

++ [ originally posted by gray ] ++

I saw a documentary on MUTV saying why Arsenal is a bad bad team...

How exactly can they show the good that the U.S. soldiers are doing? I don't imagine there's much footage of them helping little old Iraqi women across the road and digging wells for the people... they're soldiers, not charity workers. Besides, doesn't NBC do much the same; I don't recall them showing footage of a U.S. soldier shooting an injured unarmed man in the head yelling "He's f***ing faking he's dead!"

That is where you are wrong, Graham. That video has been played by NBC News over the past few days, making it the top story the day it surfaced. They showed that the soldier's actions were not the right choice.

 

[gray]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++
It is not as biased as Al-Jazeera, that's for sure.

is that not a biased opinion in itself? I'm pretty sure someone living in the Arab world would say that CNN and NBC are much more biased than Al-Jazeera

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++
They do not show Osama's entire video on live television either.

What does that mean? Is that part of your argument why NBC isn't as biased? Because it doesn't show Osama's entire video? I thought news agencies are supposed to show all the information...