World War III, anyone?

[Tysonboss1]

An inbound 747 with no reason ( ie not an international schduled airliner / cargo flight ) to be approching Australian air space would be shot down long before it got close to land. One would be very lucky use a 747 as a delievery system...

with the help of goverment agencies, how easy would it be to load a device onto a scheduled cargo flight,... or even charter a plane fill out all the legal docs and fly right into sydney.

HMAS sydney was sunk by a war ship dressed up like a cargo ship,...

sydney has a sea port right in the middle of the city,... you could load a device in a shipping container, track it and remote detonate it as soon as th ship pull into the dock.

 

[metric]

with the help of goverment agencies, how easy would it be to load a device onto a scheduled cargo flight,... or even charter a plane fill out all the legal docs and fly right into sydney.

HMAS sydney was sunk by a war ship dressed up like a cargo ship,...

sydney has a sea port right in the middle of the city,... you could load a device in a shipping container, track it and remote detonate it as soon as th ship pull into the dock.

if the fake war on terror was all it was cracked up to be, there are plenty of easy targets available if muslims wanted to disrupt oz society.

it will only happen when the elite want more draconian legislation to take away more of australian citizens rights....

 

[Superfly]

with the help of goverment agencies, how easy would it be to load a device onto a scheduled cargo flight,... or even charter a plane fill out all the legal docs and fly right into sydney.

Very easy for a small weapon... capable of taking out a CBD of a western city..

Which is one good reason why rogue staes like a Saddam Iraq are no longer...

 

[metric]

the us put saddam into power to invade iran.

 

[Tysonboss1]

if the fake war on terror was all it was cracked up to be, there are plenty of easy targets available if muslims wanted to disrupt oz society.

...

Exactly which is why it is better to send our bravest and take the fight to them rather than wait for them to bring it to the streets of sydney in some sort of 911 or londan bombing attack.


I am not sure what else you were rambling on about in regards to the elite taking somthing away from the Australian citizens,you lost me.

 

[metric]

Exactly which is why it is better to send our bravest and take the fight to them rather than wait for them to bring it to the streets of sydney in some sort of 911 or londan bombing attack.


I am not sure what else you were rambling on about in regards to the elite taking somthing away from the Australian citizens,you lost me.

911, nor london wasnt comitted by muslims.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3770877779111334563

dont be like the cattle. have an open mind.

 

[Superfly]

911, nor london wasnt comitted by muslims.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3770877779111334563

dont be like the cattle. have an open mind.

Didn't know M Moore was a ASF poster...

 

[metric]

Didn't know M Moore was a ASF poster...

you are confused. mr moore is a fake! and produces false flag docos.

just keep an open mind about all this. i dont need mainstream media to do my thinking for me....do you?

 

[KIWIKARLOS]

Fact is there is only 3 incidences in history where high rise buildings have ever collapsed from fire.

1. World trade centre North tower
2.World trade centre south tower and
3. World trade centre building 7

There are numerous occasions when high rises built before the owrld trade centre have been on fire for hours and hours longer over more floors and even the entire building and still haven't collapsed.

There are so many holes it isn't funny.

Another 1st in history. The pentagon, Never before has a jet crashed and never left a single trace of large debris. Why doesn't the US Gov release footage from the half dozen other security cameras from near by buildings instead of the 5 frames of footage from the pentagon cameras which don't even show a plane!

Dodgy Dodgy Dodgy.

Its not that there are discrepancies its just that the Gov won't rebutt them with any evidence. They in fact have done the opposite and actively surpressed info. Hell even the recorded conversion from the firefighters wasn't released till 3 -4 years after and even then large bits were omitted.
On the actual day though go through and look at some of the news reporting from large media CNN etc they even report many times " a secondary explosion" What could cause that. Maybe also the fact there has never been an official explanation as to why trace amounts of thermite were found at the site. So many very reputable engineers from aeroplane companies, standards companies and construction firms have made statements and conclusions which contradict the story we are told.

 

[KIWIKARLOS]

I'll post a link to a video tonight that is def worth a watch. Help make your own decision but just provides some real facts that are not really common knowledge.

 

[Tysonboss1]

Fact is there is only 3 incidences in history where high rise buildings have ever collapsed from fire.

1. World trade centre North tower
2.World trade centre south tower and
3. World trade centre building 7

There are numerous occasions when high rises built before the owrld trade centre have been on fire for hours and hours longer over more floors and even the entire building and still haven't collapsed.

There are so many holes it isn't funny.

.

the trade centes were light weight buildings with a serious design flaw that let fire weaken the structure.

normally the internal steel structure of a building is encased in concrete so flames will not get to the structure to weaken,... however the trade centres had a light weight fire proof plaster board to protect the structure from flames,... but this light weight protection was blowen of in the blast,

 

[Tysonboss1]

you are confused. mr moore is a fake! and produces false flag docos.

just keep an open mind about all this. i dont need mainstream media to do my thinking for me....do you?

you are deluded,...

 

[metric]

you are deluded,...

the owner of the twin towers and building 7 is on film confirming they 'pulled' building 7 as it was a danger to other surrounding buildings. considering the length of time it takes to set charges in a building, (and it was on fire) how did they manage it? of course they set them days before.

if thinking for oneself is deluded, then you are not.

do you not ask questions at all? do you believe everything you are told?

children conspire. what? and adults dont?

 

[Tysonboss1]

if thinking for oneself is deluded, then you are not.

do you not ask questions at all? do you believe everything you are told?

children conspire. what? and adults dont?

your Mis guided ficticious rantings are completely false,...

you are a crackpot,. I won't respond to you any more, you need help.

 

[KIWIKARLOS]

the trade centes were light weight buildings with a serious design flaw that let fire weaken the structure.

normally the internal steel structure of a building is encased in concrete so flames will not get to the structure to weaken,... however the trade centres had a light weight fire proof plaster board to protect the structure from flames,... but this light weight protection was blowen of in the blast,

Thats balony mate a few years before the entire structure had been redone covering all the surfaces with fire redardant material 2-4 inches thick that stuff is designed to last for a couple hours and it is certainly not a type of plaster board it is a material that is sprayed on. We use it in every zone substation in sydney and it is capable of containing electrical fires for many hours. Regardless of the fire proofing the melting point of stell is 3800 degrees centigrade the fires that burned in the buildings were almost half that (there is infrared video to back it up) and it only burned for about 45 -60mins.

Lets say for arguement though that the fire did weaken the steel causing it to collapse how the hell does the building collapse in free fall ? Only 5-10 levels were directly effected by fire and heat that leaves tens of floors below the effected area with structurally sound steel that somehow broke up into relatively small pieces

anyways I could ramble on forever but ill post the link when i get home and you can judge for yourself. I only started to doubt the story recently but everything i looked into regarding it just kept making the story look more and more unlikely.

 

[KIWIKARLOS]

the owner of the twin towers and building 7 is on film confirming they 'pulled' building 7 as it was a danger to other surrounding buildings. considering the length of time it takes to set charges in a building, (and it was on fire) how did they manage it? of course they set them days before.

if thinking for oneself is deluded, then you are not.

do you not ask questions at all? do you believe everything you are told?

children conspire. what? and adults dont?

Agreed and is it any surprise that some of the most influential and rich people in the world own large media companies and have vested interested in getting certain people to power ? In 1997 Bill Clinton passed a law revoking a law (at the push of big business) that was passed in 1934 which specifically barred commercial banks (ie. the banks that have us plebs money) from investing in these dodgy investment vehicles. The law was past in 1934 because that was a major factor highlighted in causing the great depression and surprise surprise alomost ten years after its revoked "World has worst financial crises since the great depression"

 

[metric]

your Mis guided ficticious rantings are completely false,...

you are a crackpot,. I won't respond to you any more, you need help.

so instead of responding with 'facts' you revert to name calling...?

oh, it was larry silverstein whom owned all 3 buildings.....the only 3 that fell. and it was he who said in a recorded interview that no 7 was pulled....the video is available all over the net. its not a secret.

DYOR

 

[Tysonboss1]

Thats balony mate a few years before the entire structure had been redone covering all the surfaces with fire redardant material 2-4 inches thick that stuff is designed to last for a couple hours and it is certainly not a type of plaster board it is a material that is sprayed on. We use it in every zone substation in sydney and it is capable of containing electrical fires for many hours. Regardless of the fire proofing the melting point of stell is 3800 degrees centigrade the fires that burned in the buildings were almost half that (there is infrared video to back it up) and it only burned for about 45 -60mins.

Lets say for arguement though that the fire did weaken the steel causing it to collapse how the hell does the building collapse in free fall ? Only 5-10 levels were directly effected by fire and heat that leaves tens of floors below the effected area with structurally sound steel that somehow broke up into relatively small pieces

anyways I could ramble on forever but ill post the link when i get home and you can judge for yourself. I only started to doubt the story recently but everything i looked into regarding it just kept making the story look more and more unlikely.

The point is the fire protection was blown off when the plane exploded,

secondly the steel does not have to reach melting piont before it will fail especially if it has alot of weight on it,

thirdly steel coducts heat so even though the fire was only on a few floors the heat was conducted down the length of the steel shaft,

 

[KIWIKARLOS]

hahahahaha
Exactly steel does dissipate and conduct heat well so the net effect of dispersing heat would in effect cause the localised temperature to decrease.

Besides any of this weakened steel does not and can not lead to a controlled demoltion style collapse of the entire building.

Also with the pentagon they said the reason no large pieces INCLUDING THE JET ENGINES weren't found was that they were vapourised You have to be pretty nieve to believe that jet fuel AKA kerosene burns at a high enough temperature to vapourise titanium alloy components.

Also with a burning temp of around 1300-1500 degrees kerosene is very unlikely to cause enough heat to substantially weaken the steel of the WTC. You can argue the facts but you can't argue the physics and science.

 

[metric]

hahahahaha
exactly steel does dissipate and conduct heat well so the net effect of dispersing heat would in effect cause the localised temperature to decrease.

Besides any of this weakened steel does not and can not lead to a controlled demoltion style collapse of the entire building.

Also with the pentagon they said the reason no large pieces INCLUDING THE JET ENGINES weren't found was that they were vapourised You have to be pretty nieve to believe that jet fuel AKA kerosene burns at a high enough temperature to vapourise titanium alloy components.

Also with a burning temp of around 1300-1500 degrees kerosene is very unlikely to cause enough heat to substantially weaken the steel of the WTC. You can argue the facts but you can't argue the physics and science.

we agree.

in the gaping wound of the pentagon, there were books, wooden chairs, tables, computors etc, all of which were not even singed. considering that the 'plane' was supposed to be full of fuel and the exact same planes supposedly burned hot enough to bring down the twin towers, it is unbelieveable that even open books at the opening of the hole in the pentagon were not even singed!!!!

also, all that fuel supposedly left no contaminants in the soil or the building. which is impossible of course.

the hole in the pentagon is not consistent with a plane hitting it. DYOR.