OMG! You REALLY can see a missile being fired on 911! New Video

[spooked]

I have never given much legitimacy to the missile "pod" theory of 911 (A missile being fired from plane just before impacting Tower 2)
BUT check out this new video! You can see what looks just like a missile flash 1/3 of a second before the plane hits the building.

Check it out here:

http://www.911uncovered.com

[Stephanie]

1. oh please

internet video proves there was a MISSILE? please.

[mot78]

3. If there was really a missle pod, wouldn't the passengers have noticed it

while the planes were still docked at their airports? they could've just peaked through the windows next to the gates and checkout counters.

[TomNickell]

58. No, Mind Control Machines..... n/t

[Demonaut]

64. what a load of crap.

so would the missile aid in the penetration by the plane??

[ScreamingMeemie]

99. I see a shadow of the engine and that's about it.

This is really all quite goofy. And besides, not needed these days to bring down Bushco. :hi:

[AP]

2. And it's not like there hasn't been plenty of opportunity to, um, edit the

video.

[Alerter_]

4. sorry, the event was witness by thousands of people

there was no missle. There were two planes that crashed into the WTC. Frankly that's all we really know for sure.

[renegade000]

5. what

is the purpose of firing a missile so small one needs a frame-by-frame deconstruction and copious amount of highlighting arrows to see when you are about to crash an airliner filled with jet fuel into a building?

[Guaranteed]

15. LOL. BOOM.

Seriously. What the FUCK do you need a missile for- especially one on the OUTSIDE of the plane, the presence of which has a very good chance of compromising the mission?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

6. Right. And the ground crew never noticed it before the plane took off?

[Guaranteed]

13. Exactly. Come ON, folks.

USE YOUR BRAIN.

[oasis]

7. Why would you fire a missile into a building that you were just about to

fly your plane into?

[TomNickell]

59. To set off the Controlled Demolition, of course..... n/t

[leyton]

93. why not detonate it in the plane on contact?

that is, if you're being serious...

[Dont Hurt Me]

8. Um

what? I don't see any missile being fired. How do you fire a missile from a 747 and keep people from seeing it. and most importantly why? what would firing a missile 1/3 of a second before crashing into a building do? Please remove foil hat.

[mot78]

9. This proves the bullshit of MIHOP

If anything happened on that day that we weren't aware of, it would be at most LIHOP (which doesn't require leaving any evidence behind in preparing for things like the demolition of 7 WTC, or the firing of a missle), and even in the case of LIHOP, there's not enough evidence for it.

[maggrwaggr]

10. exactly. That's why they're spreading this info

to make people who know it was MIHOP look like a bunch of crazy idiots.

So they can say "well these are the same people who believe __________"

Thanks, missle-pod people!!

Go back to your toilets now!

[TomNickell]

20. It's not real hard...

"to make people who know it was MIHOP look like a bunch of crazy idiots."

Usually, you don't even have to do -anything-.

[Alerter_]

56. exactly, this is rank disinformation to discredit skeptics

someone posts this crap every few weeks.

[Dont Hurt Me]

14. Please

inform me what mihop and lihop are, I was out sick that day

[Stephanie]

17. Let It Happen On Purpose

Made It Happen On Purpose

[Dont Hurt Me]

18. thanks...n/t

[goclark]

22. I was out sick

on tin foil hat day. What does that mean?

[Guaranteed]

19. Made It Happen, On Purpose; Let It Happen, On Purpose nt

[Dont Hurt Me]

21. thank you too...n/t

[Minstrel Boy]

11. Stop with this, already.

It's disinformation, which can lead only to wasted time and squandered credibility.

Some folks must be feeling the heat regarding exposure of the real story, as trawling for suckers to sap the energy and reputations of the 9/11 truth movement with this discrediting fantasy demonstrates.

FYI, just look at the sum total of the links list:

http://www.prisonplanet.com
http://www.prisonplanet.tv
http://www.infowars.com
http://www.propagandamatrix.com

Aren't those all Alex Jones sites? This isn't exactly turning people on to the best the 9/11 skeptics have to offer. Where, for instance, is a link to the indispensible 9/11 tool, Paul Thompson's timeline? Where's From the Wilderness? Where are so many others, of much greater value and reputation than Jones's pages?

Why, it's almost as if somebody wants to keep people from discovering them.

[Jim Sagle]

12. Chickenshit bullshit. I don't see no steenkin' missile. I see some stuff

that looks as if it might be, may be, could be a missile. Pffffbbbbtttt!!!!!!!!

[TomNickell]

16. ROFLMAO!! Once again....

The elite Corp of Suicide Pilots, a Division of the Department of Terrorism under command of the Directorate for Nefarious Deeds has arranged for a corp of highly trained pilots to hijack a bunch of jetliners and fly them into skyscrapers. And, just for good measure, they attach these Rocket Pods beneath the wings of the jetliners so they can blow holes in the skyscrapers just before the jetliners crash into them. And nobody notices anything.

Meanwhile, the Army Corp of Controlled Demolition has carefully placed hundreds of explosive charges throughout the Twin Towers and WTC7 so that the building will collapse in a controlled manner and not hurt any other buildings. And Conspiracy Hobbyists can figure it all out.

This all makes -perfect- sense.....

[JayS]

25. And we won't even talk about what...

...the U.S. Bureau Of Unspecified Services was up to that day. :)

[stickdog]

47. Yes, some idiot claims something idiotic so you can make fun of

it while pretending that ALL 9/11 skeptics are just as ridiculous.

It all DOES make perfect sense.

[TomNickell]

57. 9/11 Skeptics? Or....

9/11 Hobbyists?

Show me something that deserves serious thought and I will treat it seriously.

Meanwhile, Rocket Pods and Controlled Demolitions and Scalar Electromagnetic Beams and Earthquake Machines and Disappearing JetLiners and Perfectly Functioning Bureaucracies and Lists of Coincidences and Unverified Rumors and Black Helicopters, and ....


will keep me in comic material.


On Edit--And Mind Control Devices....

[stickdog]

60. How about 911 completely legitimate unanswered questions?

Start here:

http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/local/6742902.htm?1c

But I suppose Will Bunch is just a "hobbyist" as well?

[TomNickell]

63. These are legitimate questions.

Some have been answered by the 9/11 commission hearings.

-None- have been answered by Internet Conspiracy Hobbyists.

To the contrary, one of the reasons investigations have been so limited is that the Internet conspiracy speculation made it very dangerous for any public figure to ask hard questions.

I think we are actually in agreement on much of this.

-Real- investigations are needed. These will -not- show that the Twin Towers fell because of controlled demoliton, or that there were rocket pods placed on the jetliners.

[bpilgrim]

73. that's right

and the internet community helped generate them.

remember it's NOT our job to ANSWER them just to RAISE the them.

if you had your way we would all be in the dark. your just mad since you've ALWAYS been against ASKING the QUESTIONS on DU.

the internet community has done a GREAT DEAL in helping to document and inform folks of the MANY problems with the official story.

check out the BEST timeline on this horrible event here...
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org

put together by one of DU's best and brightest paul thompson. without the internet it wouldn't be possible.

you should be thankful and respectful to the folks who have contributed so much to bring some daylight to these major concerns but of course that isn't your mo now is it.

peace

[stickdog]

76. I agree that there's a difference between substance and nonsense

when it comes to questioning "official stories."

My problem is that some people (not to name names or anything) ALWAYS seem discourage ANY sort of individual questioning -- whether it's nonsense or substance.

All you have to do to realize how wrongheaded this viewpoint is is to read the today's NY Times. "Internet conspiracy hobbyists" worked long and hard to bring the problems of black box voting to this nation's attention. And they endured all the "Internet Conspiracy Hobbyists" slings and arrows along the way.

To defend yourself against this truth, you invoke a grammatical sleight of hand that distinguishes instead between legitimate (ie corporate) questioning and illegitimate "hobbyist" questioning, such that sanctioned questioning become "legitimate" and is thus no longer the province of your "hobbyist" whipping boys. Therefore, in a system of grammar where all unsanctioned questioning is derided using ad hominem attacks but all NOW sanctioned questioning becomes "legitimate", one is foolish or at best unduly speculative to question anything ON ONE'S OWN.

The net effect of this grammatical game is a meta-conspiracy designed to shut people up, to keep them from spontaneously speculating on subjects that they have not been directed to think about.

[Zuni]

74. right on!

perfectly functioning buearacracies where no one leaks anything, no doubt.

[stickdog]

78. Why haven't any of 9/11's legitimate unanswered questions

been leaked?

Just asking ...

[RobinA]

87. Wait a Minute

What suicide pilots, I thought those jets were remote controlled. If those are really jets, I mean.

[andino]

23. Ummm I think ....

that is the sun reflecting off of the plane into the metal and glass on the tower.

And why the hell would a 767 have a missile pod?

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[markses]

26. Laughable and stupid. The best part about both LIHOP and MIHOP

is that both use the childish construction "On Purpose." It makes me laugh every time to hear a bunch of adults walking arounf saying "on purpose," like a pack of five year-olds. Much credibility would be gained by scuttling that infantile contruction...

[Media_Lies_Daily]

27. What makes me laugh even harder than the "missile fired by the plane"....

...theory is the idea that 911 happened just as the NeoCons have told us. The NeoCons have lied about everything else, but you want to believe they had nothing to do with facilitating 911?? LOL!!!

Please tell me how many lies have been told by the NeoCons over the last several years...I've lost count.

You might gain some credibility on this subject if you actually did some research.

[DenverDem]

29. The explaination that requires the most suspension of disbelief

is the "official" version.

Lots of Kool Aid drinkers around here.

All you MIHOP scoffers answer one question credibly, "Who stood down NORAD?".

[LoZoccolo]

34. "I don't know; let's find out."

The most credible answer I can give. Much more than "let's fit it into whatever we want to blame whoever we want."

[bpilgrim]

37. actually there is a lot of good research on this...

and the neoCONs are HIGH on the list of SUSPECTS.

keep reading DU you'll get up to speed quicker than the avg. bear ;->

peace

[Cassandra]

70. My theory

The admin knew an attack was coming and knew, whatever it was, it would be spectacular. They thought the body count would be low but the PR value high. They thought this would provide the perfect excuse to go into Iraq. So they got out of the way and the attack exceeded their, and Bin Laden's, wildest dreams. No one, even Osama, thought the buildings would collapse. For the admin's plans to go forward, a building collapse was not really necessary, just a lucky extra for them.
So please stop thinking that every single detail needed to be thought out by the gang that couldn't shoot straight. These are opportunists, not geniuses.

[Beatrix]

89. I don't believe it was stood down

by order. Here are the rules in the military to stand something down

1. You must have proper authority to give the order.
2. You must be of superior rank to the person you give the order to.
3. In order for a person to accept an order they must A. Know who it came from B. Confirm that person is who they claim and C. Confirm that person has authority to give the order.

So in order for NORAD to be ordered to stand down there would be no "who gave the order?".

First - There is a VERY narrow list of people who have sufficient rank and authority who could POSSIBLY give the order. (see points 1 and 2) So the possiblity is... A. Congress B. The president C. a VERY high ranking military officer. Not exactly a big list now is it? I think we can safely discount choice A.

Second - In order for that order to even be acted on the people at NORAD would HAVE to KNOW who it came from. (they don't exactly obey anonymous phone calls directing them to stand down you know) After this order was given the CO would have to relay the same order to stand down to his underlings. (read, the lower ranked individuals) So, if they were ordered to stand down don't you think at least ONE soldier present would have the fortitude to blow the whistle that they were given such an order? And further, they could name who gave it to them as the order can't by anonymous? Hell, a letter to a US Congress person with spine would be all that was needed. One letter/phone call to Kucinich for example and the whole thing would be blown wide open, and I'm sure Kucinich could arrange for protection of the whistle blower if needed. (i.e. come to congress and we will stand in the middle of the house floor before we say anything)

[leyton]

94. Help!

What is NORAD, what does it mean to stand down, and what are the implications in the context of 9/11?

[mountainvue]

92. Now those

are objective questions.

[LoZoccolo]

33. They have lied about everything else...

...but you want to believe they had nothing to do with with the tiger attacking Roy of Sigfried and Roy? LOL!!

(It seems like a lot of the spread of conspiracy theories has to do with the initiated LOL'ing the uninitiated.)

"Man you are just so naive!"

[markses]

61. It's the paranoid methodology

If X lied about A, X must have lied about B, C, and D as well. Needless to say, the conclusion is not warranted unless you have the bizarre underlying assumption that any group that lies about one thing (or two or three) probably lies about all things. To be fair, this tactic is generally used to "disbuse" folks of the government version of the story, so it generally only serves as a starting point, to unblock the vision of the blind, or to "demystify" folks, in the old Marxist or Christian language (the scales have fallen from my eyes! Praise Jesus!). It's the first step in an extended conversion rhetoric, which is why you always have people saying "I believe MIHOP now!" - as dubious an operation as the born again dogma of Christian proselytizers.

The second paranoid move is the quick response nature of the "researchers" (I've read the 9/11 forums and connected "timelines" with care and interest, and have yet to determine a research methodology, so I often chuckle when I hear the term research applied to the "google searches+paranoid hermeneutic operations" method), who seem to assume that anyone who says states or implies the most minute doubts about any facet of a growing body of incoherent theorization (say, for eample, the notion that the plane that hit the south tower was equipped with a small missile, which launched .3 seconds prior to impact!) is a strident believer in every facet of the so-called "official version." This is paranoia strictly speaking, and resembles most America's other pack of paranoids, the "with us or agin us" crew of the Bush War Rooms, the conservative think tanks, and the rotting bowels of the DOD. The official version (the "coincidence theory" in the singular) and the LIHOP/MIHOP versions (the "conspiracy theories" in wild and yet coherent variety) are in fact two sides of the same coin, two dementias pointing to the same sickness ravaging our body politic from head to toe. Clowns to the left of me/ Jokers to the right...and here we are.....

[Beatrix]

88. Even Nazi propagandists

told the truth at times. Just because someone has a history of lieing does NOT mean they lie 100% of the time.

Your logic is flawed because you make the assumption that a history of lieing = everything is a lie.

[bpilgrim]

28. 'infantile contruction' - you said it

but whatever works... some laghed at sony when they came out with the new word 'walkman' ;->

anyways... there is OBVIOULSY a huge conspiracy to cover-up what really happened that day and we are left with just-us asking the hard questions ourselves publicly. at least we are able to still do that at DU inspite of the typical, predictable pithy comments, from some, in a childish attempt at disruption.

and so it goes...

peace

[Spider Jerusalem]

66. Sony, at least, can be forgiven.

That "Walkman" was dreamed up in Japan, by people for whom English was not a primary language. However, these are native English speakers, choosing to sound like ignorant, uneducated, quasi-literate fools by saying something happened "on purpose" rather than "purposely" or "purposefully" (or, perhaps, they really don't know any better, which wouldn't surprise me, to be honest).

[markses]

75. It's comical

Oh well. Since I think "on purpose" sounds silly, I guess I'm a government stooge, with blinders on, waiting for the blessed conversion of "those who know"...:eyes:

[MrSlayer]

30. This video isn't new.

There are plenty of other things that prove MIHOP. Stuff like this makes it all seem ridiculous.

[Fear]

31. I don't see it

[ironflange]

32. Gee you guys

I always see missile pods on airliners! You gotta know where to look!

:silly: :tinfoilhat: :crazy:

[TheWizardOfMudd]

35. What a load of bogus crap!

The plane in that video disintegrates before it hits the building! And the angle is all wrong. That's not how it happened.

Uh . . . . NO!

[coda]

36. How many cameras were trained on the TTs.

Thousands? c'mon.

[fujiyama]

38. Wait now you're telling me

that passenger jets flying out of several major airports were somehow fastened with missiles? Was this also done by the administration? Were all the major airlines a part of MIHOP too?

These conspiracies get more ridiculous with every new one.

First the towers didn't collapse because of the plane's jet fuel burning. It was a "controlled explosion".

Now it's a missile.

Now what was it?

[bpilgrim]

39. wtc7 collapse CAUGHT ON TAPE ----------------------------- swf

http://news.globalfreepress.com/movs/wtc7.swf

you are mocking out wuestiong of this event?

please, any fair person can see that we aren't being told the whole story. but just out of curiosity... what do YOU think happend to wtc7?

peace

[fujiyama]

50. Actually I'll admit

I don't know enough about WTC7 to make a decision.

I was talking about the twin towers - the two main ones. I saw the video of WTC7 and it's possible THAT was a controlled explosion. Simply because it may have been felt that the structure was too weak, and it would be a better idea to force it down (now I say this not exactly knowing how long it takes to arrange for a building collapse, so I'll admit I could be way off). However, it's difficult to completely dismiss the tower falling down because of the debris and heat from the other two towers that had already collapsed. So I'm pretty much open to various explanations regarding wtc7.

However, if that's the case, it still doesn't prove anything about a controlled explosion in the main towers. As I recall, no one died in WTC7. Wasn't the building evacuated by the time it collapsed?

I wouldn't be surprised if the WH was lying about WTC7. Lies come very easily to this administration regarding anything and everything. Same goes with secrecy. They classify anything and everything. They stonewalled the 9/11 investigation and tried stopping it from forming and starting in the first place so it's very evident they have SOMETHING to hide.

So I'm definetely not buying the complete "official story". There are certain aspects I do believe, but many of which I have many questions about as well.

[bpilgrim]

72. the charges could have been in there all along

as part of some sort of failsafe... the problem is we dont know.

my only point is it's not fair to MOCK the questioners of the official theory.

got a problem with a paticular theory, fine, point it out in a reasoned manner and it will be much more helpful to all those concerned.

peace

[stickdog]

48. It's a bunch of legitimate questions which have never been answered.

And you would have people believe that these questions don't need to be answered because of a couple of fake disinfo conspiracy "whackos."

[fujiyama]

51. Did I ever completely dismiss anything?

I dismissed this idea of a missile being fired from a passenger jet. That IS ridiculous and makes little sense.

I also dismiss the idea that the main twin towers were brought in a controlled explosion (I think the planes were enough to bring them down). I also don't buy that the planes were controlled by remote controls.

However, as I told the other poster, I haven't made my mind up regarding WTC7.

Either way, I neither accept nor dismiss any conspiracy theories. I remain skeptical of the administration's official strory, as well as the various theories on the internet.

[Rex]

40. As an official DU crackpot, I have to call bull-wooie on this conspiracy.

There would have been no way for the missile to gain enough momentum to spring ahead of the plane that close to the impact site. Sorry but that is glare from a light source shining off the planes underbelly.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[imax2268]

42. Come on now...

this is crap...

like some have said here...if there was a missle...how did it get there without the ground crew seeing it...?
Did it just magically attach itself to the airplane in mid-flight...?

Or wait...I know...it was a special plane fitted with a bombay doors and the missle dropped down during flight...

come on...I will say this...there was a missle...the plane was the missle...

[Rex]

43. Even if we give in to the absurd and say that EVERYONE saw

a missile pod on the plane, and yet it still took off...it still wouldn't change the fact that there is no way for it to shoot out of the pod and hit the building before the plane does. The timing of such event would be impossible. You would have maybe a 60 foot window to launch a missile from a plane traveling hundreds of miles an hour, whose nose is only a few feet away from the impact area. Can't be done.

[okieinpain]

44. I don't believe the missle crap, but what is that on the side of the plane

[progdonkey]

45. OBVIOUSLY MINOR EXPLOSION OR ELEC. SHOCK FROM NOSE HITTING TOWER!

Really, this is probably one of the stupidest conspiracy explanations I've heard of (even worse than the 3000 Jews thing). It's quite obviously a minor explosion caused when the nose hit the tower.

Now, let's play devil's advocate and say there's even the remotest possibility that the explosion is from a missile.

--The missile would have had to be loaded on to the plane with no one noticing. There's only one explosion, so it follows that there was only one missile. Don't you think the pilots would notice that one wing was much heavier than the other?

--Why would someone fire a missile into a building into which they're flying a 747 loaded with jet fuel? The plane and its fuel would more than suffice to cause a massive explosion and produce fires hot enough to melt the structural metal.

--Why is the spark so short and starts at the FRONT of the plane? It actually looks more like a lightning bolt than anything else. Maybe it's a massive electrical shock produced when this plane filled with intricate circuity crashed into a giant steel structure?

--I'm not an expert on munitions, so if I'm wrong on this one, please correct me: as far as I know, missiles don't just launch like they're laser or small arms fire. Some are dropped from the plane and then fire their rockets; others do launch straight from the wing, but the flame from the rockets would shoot to the back of the plane. The flame seen in this video fits neither of these.

Again, this has got to be one of the stupidest conspiracy theories ever. Not only is the evidence extremely flimsy and provides for multiple, logical explanations, but the very idea of someone using a missile in this manner so defies logic (in both preparation and action) that it is ludicrous on it's face!

:spank:

I do want to thank you for providing this link, though, if only for all of us to see just how fucked up the people at www.911uncovered.com are.

:tinfoilhat:

[CJCRANE]

46. Get real

There's a big difference between rational questioning and muddying the waters with far-out theories like this.

[stickdog]

49. It's obvious bullshit.

If you thought this through before you posted, then I must question your sincerity.

[tinanator]

52. sick and stupid, or slick and smart?

the only reasonable explanation is to discredit concerned citizens. The plane was all the missile they needed, and that was a tiny tiny fraction of a second, not a "third" so the whole notion is retarded. Who is behind this website? I doubt any legit researchers are associated with it. Its called cointelpro.
lol-whoops I didnt bother to see who the original poster was...
resting my case.

[Paradise]

53. the new pearl harbor by david ray griffin

may be worth reading, and i will.

[spooked]

54. Look, I said "I have never given much legitimacy

to the missile "pod" theory of 911".

Why is it wrong to consider all aspects, and everything that others are believing about 911?

Someone asked why would we add a missile to a plane when the airplane itself would add enough of an explosion...

Let me ask you...

WHY would we add Depleted Uranium to coat ammunition, and why would we use it in Iraq today when we saw the devasting effect it is having on birth defects in both Iraqis and Gulf War vets??






Why would we develop and USE the MOAB, a 21,000 Super-Bomb capable of killing thousands??? (Massive Ordinance Air Blast (MOAB), aka "the mother of all bombs")





"The missile-shaped MOAB could have a huge impact if dropped near Iraqi soldiers. Besides blowing stuff up, this is designed to SHOCK AND AWE the Iraqis," says Chris Bolkcom, a military analyst.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-11-us-bomb-test_x.htm

Who knows, perhaps Bushco wanted to make sure that Americans got a little "Shock and Awe" on 911. Who Knows?

SHOCK AND AWE
SHOCK AND AWE
SHOCK AND AWE

[UTUSN]

55. Depleted Uranium Is Also in Ceramic Tile and Other Things n/t

[UTUSN]

65. "Radioactive Consumer Products" (Astounding!) Dentures, Nu-Salt

(Whoops! the graphic of the purdy uranium glass was a HUGE bandwidth-eater. Unless somebody knows how to shrink it, look in the links.)

*******QUOTE*******

http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/ruxh.html

.... Ceramic dinnerware: the glaze of orange-colored ceramic dinnerware may contain up to 20% of uranium by weight .

Ceramic tiles:

Uranium glass: contains approx. 1% of uranium

Enamel jewelry: concentrations of depleted uranium of 10% were found in yellow enamel powder currently produced in France (see details). ....

20% of 15 uranium-glazed ceramic dinnerware samples tested contained easily removable surface compounds of natural uranium .


Vinegar leached up to 30 µg/l of uranium from uranium glass. From a uranium-glazed plate, vinegar leached 31,800 µg/l of uranium, and nitric acid even leached 304,000 µg/l of uranium .


Based on these leaching factors and certain consumption rates assumed by the U.S. NRC, an individual could ingest approximately 0.21 g of uranium during 1 year. Thus, given an ingestion dose factor of 1.9 mSv/g adopted by NRC, this would correspond to an annual effective dose equivalent of about 0.4 mSv (40 mrem) from ingestion of uranium leached from glazed ceramic tableware . The annual limit on intake based on chemical toxicity would be exceeded around 10-fold. ....


http://www.orau.org/ptp/collection/consumer%20products/vaseline.htm

.... Vaseline glass is a recent term that probably dates from the 1950s. Uranium glass, an older and more general term, is sometimes used as a synonym for Vaseline glass, but this can lead to confusion because some types of glass colored with uranium (e.g., custard glass and Burmese glass) are opaque whereas Vaseline glass is transparent. Canary glass is an even older name that was first used in the 1840s to describe what is now referred to as Vaseline glass. ....

RADIOACTIVE CONSUMER PRODUCTS: http://www.orau.org/ptp/collection/consumer%20products/consumer.htm

********UNQUOTE*******

[Spider Jerusalem]

68. Re: Depleted Uranium

Depleted uranium is used to manufacture armour-piercing rounds for use against tanks and armoured troop carriers. The reason depleted uranium is used is that the metal has a MUCH greater density than any material from which conventional rounds are produced. It is the greater density which gives the projectile the requisite hardness and mass to penetrate armour.


There IS a good reason for its use, but the ill effects of radioactive particles (which can remain in the atmosphere/water table for years afterward) are more than enough to make one think that there should be a revised Geneva Convention banning DU projectiles, as there was banning dum-dum bullets a hundred years ago.

[Zuni]

83. There is a problem with the depleted uranium hypothesis

Studying from the Gulf War usuage, there were so many other toxins that contaminated Iraq during the war, including mustard agent (which also causes birth defects. Mustard agent was used heavily against Iran in Southern Iraq and it got into the water and soil. Also, bunkers full of mustard agent were no doubt destroyed during the war, causing further contamination) and oil fires and mass spillage. The oil dumped into Iraq and Kuwait's coastal waters was among the top 5 environmental catastrophes of all time. Compared to these, the amount of Depleted Uranium dust released in the atmosphere was negligible.

[stickdog]

97. Yes, there were so many other toxins.

What's a little wind-borne low level radioactive heavy metal powder in addition? It just sort of fades into the background.

[RetroLounge]

62. Whatever.

RL

[DS1]

67. No you can't.

[Zynx]

69. What a joke.

There are so many things wrong with this idea that I won't waste my time.

[SmokingJacket]

71. This is what BUSH WANTS

Whacked out conspiracy theories are getting mixed up with absolutely legitimate questions, which suits the Busholes just fine. But we can't stop asking questions because we're afraid of wearing tinfoil hats.

Keeping everything secret -- which is their m.o. -- makes the perfect atmosphere for conspiracy theories to grow in.

The only way to combat it is to keep asking questions, with feet on the ground.

[neebob]

77. OMG! Why'd they need a missile?

Especially if you happen to believe the buildings were rigged with explosives.

[spooked]

80. Ok, I get it...It's really the "OMG!" that makes everyone

most upset...

How strange. Should I have said OMS! (Oh my Satan)? Would that make Americans happier?

[neebob]

85. Forgive me - I couldn't resist.

And don't feel bad; I fell for the one about the hole in the Pentagon being too small for a 757.

[baldguy]

79. Call Pierre Salinger

[robertpaulsen]

81. This ranks up there with the JFK assassination theory...

that Oswald was really aiming for Jackie. Anyone looking for the real dirt on the BFEE, check out the links at the bottom of Minstrel Boy's post 11. The missile pod theory is a classic red herring.

[Zuni]

82. This is the dumbest post I have seen yet on DU

I feel less intelligent for having read it.

Passenger planes are not equipped to fire missles, period.

[Stuckinthebush]

84. Not at all...

That is debris from the nose impact into the tower.

[drdigi420]

86. In Texas they had to remove the numbers 911 from the cop cars

Rednecks kept stealing them thinking they were Porsches

[WoodrowFan]

90. MHG YOU CAN SEE WHO IS REALLY GULLIABLE!

Sheesh. No body has considered the increadible TIMING involved it would take to fire a missile just a split second before hitting a building, not a second to soon and not a split second later.

Get a grip, it's a reflection flash on a GLASS BUILDING!!! geeeeeeeeeeze.

[mountainvue]

91. Not

this shit again.:crazy:

[banana republican]

95. Just load the cargo hold with high explosives

no more problems...

[MallRat]

96. Sorry. That just looks like the cockpit impacting first.

n/t

[Rationality]

98. Hmm...

That is some very credible information. Thanks for sharing. I will investigate this right away. We need Americans to know that it wasn't Osama, but... but... pixels. That's right folks! Video pixels, that blew up the WTC...