no7rosman

You obviously haven't read it because nobody can find what that "engine part" actually goes to. Rolls Royce has printed documents that it didn't belong to anything they have built.

Here is the universe. The surviving fragments of steel from the Twin Towers, most of them between 10 and 30 feet in length, and the larger remaining steel sections from Building 7, were essential to any serious investigation of the collapses. These catastrophic failures were at least as deserving of careful study as other rare events that are studied intensively, such as the aviation disasters investigated by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Normally, great care is taken in preserving the evidence from structural failures and crime scenes. No such effort was made to preserve the evidence of the unprecedented and unexplained collapses of skyscrapers WTC 1, WTC 2, and Building 7 in lower Manhattan -- easily the three largest and least understood structural failures in World history. Indeed the evidence was destroyed with remarkable speed and efficiency. ------------------------------------------------------------ Steel was the structural material of the buildings. As such it was the most important evidence to preserve in order to puzzle out how the structures held up to the impacts and fires, but then disintegrated into rubble. Since no steel frame buildings had ever collapsed due to fires, the steel should have been subjected to detailed analysis. So what did the authorities do with this key evidence of the vast crime and unprecedented engineering failure? They recycled it! Some 185,101 tons of structural steel have been hauled away from Ground Zero. Most of the steel has been recycled as per the city's decision to swiftly send the wreckage to salvage yards in New Jersey. The city's hasty move has outraged many victims' families who believe the steel should have been examined more thoroughly. Last month, fire experts told Congress that about 80% of the steel was scrapped without being examined because investigators did not have the authority to preserve the wreckage. 1 Â The bulk of the steel was apparently shipped to China and India. The Chinese firm Baosteel purchased 50,000 tons at a rate of $120 per ton, compared to an average price of $160 paid by local mills in the previous year. 2 Â http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/steel.html

I have been through a lot of those links. They don't prove any of the questions I have asked. For example...I have seen interviews with people who saw and heard an airplane, and seen interviews with groups of people who saw and heard something else. Until someone can tell me how an airplane hit that building, made an almost perfectly round hole...(I have seen that damage in picutures) then completely disenigrate...(Including Wings and Tail section, and engines)I don't believe their story. The only people who show how that could have happened use computer drawings, and computer animations...not real pictures.

The Trade Towers are a good thing to argue about because nobody will ever be able to prove anything. They are gone and coincedently the remains were scooped up immediately and hauled away. And tracked via GPS while being hauled away to make sure nobody could prove anything. I would rather talk about the Pentagon where we can see picutures of the damage. And we can ask...If an airplane hit the building where did the wings hit? If the wings desinigrated...What did they hit to cause them to disinegrate? Where is the damage? Where did the engines enter the building? Why is the orginal hole almost a perfect 16 foot diameter with an unbroken window 3 feet from the damage? Of 3 survailence cameras...why did we only see 8 frames of 1 video that proves nothing..(you can see these 8 frames on the web) No airplane is visible. These questions are still unanswered. You can't look at these pictures and not ask questions. If you have facts to prove any of this wrong please post them.

Not sure if you are interested, but here is a recent radio show where a guy argues this point with a Tax Lawyer. If you listen to it have the laws in front of you...it helps. http://www.petermacshow.com/content/view/12/38/ The person who says Income Tax is illegal is asking a Tax Lawyer the following 6 questions. I think the radio show said they had these questions posted for two years asking any Tax Lawyer to get on the show and answer the questions. 1) Should I use the rules found in 26 USC § 861(b), and the related regulations beginning at 26 CFR § 1.861-8, to determine my taxable domestic income? 2) If some individuals—including myself—should not use those sections for determining their taxable domestic income, please show me where the regulations say who should or should not use those sections for that. ** Reason for first two questions: The regulations under 26 USC § 861(b) (26 CFR § 1.861-8 and following) begin by stating that Sections 861(b) and 863(a) state in general terms “how to determine taxable income of a taxpayer from sources within the United States” after gross income from the U.S. has been determined. (The regulations then say that Sections 862(b) and 863(a) describe how to determine taxable income from outside of the U.S.) Section 1.861-1(a)(1) of the regulations confirms that “taxable income from sources within the United States” is to be determined in accordance with the rules of 26 USC § 861(b) and 26 CFR § 1.861-8. (See also 26 CFR §§ 1.862-1(b), 1.863-1(c).) 3) If a U.S. citizen lives and works exclusively within the 50 states, and receives all of his income from within the 50 states, do 26 USC § 861(b) and 26 CFR § 1.861-8 show such income to be taxable? ** Reason for question: Section 217 of the Revenue Act of 1921, statutory predecessor of 26 USC § 861 and following, stated that income from within the U.S. was taxable for foreigners and for U.S. citizens and corporations deriving most of their income from federal possessions (but did not say the same about the domestic income of most Americans). The regulations under the equivalent section of the 1939 Code (e.g. §§ 29.119-1, 29.119-2, 29.119-9, 29.119-10 (1945)) showed the same thing. The current regulations at 1.861-8 still show income to be taxable only when derived from certain “specific sources and activities,” which, concerning domestic income, still relate only to foreigners and certain Americans receiving income from federal possessions (26 CFR §§ 1.861-8(a)(1), 1.861-8(a)(4), 1.861-8(f)(1)). 4) Should one refer to 26 CFR § 1.861-8T(d)(2) to determine whether the “items” of income he receives (such as compensation, interest, rents, dividends, etc.) are excluded for federal income tax purposes? ** Reason for question: The regulations (26 CFR § 1.861-8(a)(3)) state that a “class of gross income” consists of the “items” of income listed in 26 USC § 61 (e.g. compensation, interest, etc.). The regulations (26 CFR §§ 1.861-8(b)(1)) then direct the reader to “paragraph (d)(2)” of the section, which provides that such “classes of gross income” may include some income which is excluded for federal income tax purposes. 5) What is the purpose of the list of non-exempt types of income found in 26 CFR § 1.861-8T(d)(2)(iii), and why is the income of the average American not on that list? ** Reason for question: After defining “exempt income” to mean income which is exempt, eliminated, or excluded for federal income tax purposes (26 CFR § 1.861-8T(d)(2)(ii)), the regulations give a list of types of income which are not exempt (i.e. which are subject to tax), which includes the domestic income of foreigners, certain foreign income of Americans, income of certain possessions corporations, and income of international and foreign sales corporations, but which does not include the domestic income of the average American (26 CFR § 1.861-8T(d)(2)(iii)). 6) What types of income (if any) are not exempted from taxation by any statute, but are nonetheless “excluded by law” (not subject to the federal income tax) because they are, under the Constitution, not taxable by the federal government? ** Reason for question: Older income tax regulations defining “gross income” and “net income” said that neither income exempted by statute “or fundamental law” were subject to the tax (§ 39.21-1 (1956)), and said that in addition to those types of income exempted by statute, other types of income were exempt because they were, “under the Constitution, not taxable by the Federal Government” (§ 39.22(b)-1 (1956)).

That is good information and convincing for me at first...I will look into it. If it was so easy for you to find it for me, why couldn't they supply it in this court case? http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?ChannelID=111 In the video Freedom To Facism there is an interview with Sheldon Cohen who is the Former IRS Commisioner and he could not provide this information either. In fact they show a video where they are asking Congress for the law and they cannot provide it. I will look into your link...It is interesting

http://www.freedomtofascism.com/ In June of 2000, the "We The People Foundation" put an add in the USA Today offering anyone $50,000 who could prove there is actually a law that states we are required to pay an income tax. To Date nobody has been able to get the money. Can anyone defend the Tax Law?

http://www.fourwinds10.com/NewsServer/ArticleFunctions/ArticleDetails.php?ArticleID=10744 This link was posted by someone else but didn't get much attention. _____________________________________________ You’ve got to be lucky to make $4 Billion killing on a 6-month investment of $124 Million Larry Silverstein is the New York property tycoon who purchased the entire WTC complex just 6 months prior to the 9/11 attacks. That was the first time in its 33-year history the complex had EVER changed ownership. Mr. Silverstein’s first order of business as the new owner was to change the company responsible for the security of the complex. The new security company he hired was Securacom (now Stratasec). George W. Bush's brother, Marvin Bush, was on its board of directors, and Marvin’s cousin, Wirt Walker III, was its CEO. According to public records, not only did Securacom provide electronic security for the World Trade Center, it also covered Dulles International Airport and United Airlines — two key players in the 9/11 attacks. The company was backed by an investment firm, the Kuwait-American Corp., also linked for many years to the Bush family. KuwAm has been linked to the Bush family financially since the Gulf War. One of its principals and a member of the Kuwaiti royal family, Mishal Yousef Saud al Sabah, served on the board of Stratesec. Now, consider: The members of a small cabal owned the WTC complex, controlled its electronic security, and also controlled the security not only for one of the airlines whose aircraft were hijacked on 9/11, but the airport from which they originated. Another little “coincidence” -- Mr. Silversten, who made a down-payment of $124 million on this $3.2 billion complex, promptly insured it for $7 Billion. Not only that, he covered the complex against “terrorist attacks”. Following the attacks, Silverstein filed TWO insurance claims for the maximum amount of the policy ($7B), based on the two -- in Silverstein's view -- separate attacks. The insurance company, Swiss Re, paid Mr. Silverstein $4.6 Billion — a princely return on a relatively paltry investment of $124 million. There’s more. You see, the World Trade Towers were not the real estate plum we are led to believe. From an economic standpoint, the trade center -- subsidized since its inception by the NY Port Authority -- has never functioned, nor was it intended to function, unprotected in the rough-and-tumble real estate marketplace. How could Silverstein Group have been ignorant of this? The towers required some $200 million in renovations and improvements, most of which related to removal and replacement of building materials declared to be health hazards in the years since the towers were built. It was well-known by the city of New York that the WTC was an asbestos bombshell. For years, the Port Authority treated the building like an aging dinosaur, attempting on several occasions to get permits to demolish the building for liability reasons, but being turned down due the known asbestos problem. Further, it was well-known the only reason the building was still standing until 9/11 was because it was too costly to disassemble the twin towers floor by floor since the Port Authority was prohibited legally from demolishing the buildings. The projected cost to disassemble the towers: $15 Billion. Just the scaffolding for the operation was estimated at $2.4 Billion! In other words, the Twin Towers were condemned structures. How convenient that an unexpected “terrorist” attack demolished the buildings completely. WTC Building 7 was a part of the WTC complex, and covered under the same insurance policy. This 47-storey steel-framed structure, which was NOT struck by an aircraft, mysteriously collapsed 8 hours later that same day into its own footprint at freefall speed — exactly in the manner of the Twin Towers. How could this have happened? Mr. Silverstein gave the world the answer when he slipped up during a PBS television interview a year later, on 9/11/2002: "I remember getting a call from the...er...fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse." As anyone who knows anything about construction can tell you, “Pull” is common industry jargon for a controlled demolition. One thing is for sure, the decision to 'pull' WTC 7 would have delighted many people. Especially because it has been reported that thousands of sensitive files relating to some of the biggest financial scams in history — including Enron and WorldCom -- were stored in the offices of some of the building’s tenants: US Secret Service NSA CIA IRS BATF SEC NAIC Securities Salomon Smith Barney American Express Bank International Standard Chartered Bank Provident Financial Management ITT Hartford Insurance Group Federal Home Loan Bank The Securities and Exchange Commission has not quantified the number of active cases in which substantial files were destroyed by 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." 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. 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. 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. What a neat, complete, and fortuitous turn of events was 9/11. Incidentally, it’s worth noting that one of Lucky Larry’s closest friends — a person with whom it’s said he speaks almost daily by phone — is none other than former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. More on that cozy little relationship later...

Proof is not somehting like " understand all the proven documented business connections between the voting machine manufactures and the Bush Crime Family are probably circumstantial, and another false conspiracy" ------------------------------------------------------------ Here is a link where the officials of Leon County in Florida prove (via public testing) the machines/votes can be easily manipulated. There are many more people who have also proven this if you search. http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1636 And here is a link to an article discussing the x-CEO of Diebold's visit to the Bush Ranch, and the hundreds of thousands of dollars in contribution money. Not only Dielbold, but ES&S (the largest voting machine manufacturer) The link also discusses the very first "question" of voting machine accuracy in 1996...(Interesting to follow the money from there) I understand you can't base an opinion on a couple of articles...but there are lots more of them like this by reputable reporters. You have to wonder. http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2004/03/03_200.html ---------------------------------------------------- OK so you think that BOTH sides do it, and that the system has a problem. Fine. But you do not seem all upset when it is shown that dead people have voted for Democrats. Where is your rage then? --------------- I don't think they both do it...In fact I don't think it has anything to do with the political party...I believe it has to do with who "they" want in office. "They" = not voters. You are right...I don't give a crap about dead Demo voting. The fact of the matter is we no longer elect our officals. The voting machine scandal is just one more in the long list of gov. scandals. This just seems like an awful convienent place to have questionable accuracy. I have no rage...As long as I can fly airplanes and jump out of them...I will do nothing like most other Americans....except argue and talk shit with people who blindly believe everything our political people tell us.

There is proof of it all over the place...Have you looked? http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/3/2003/793 http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHI411B.html I understand all the proven documented business connections between the voting machine manufactures and the Bush Crime Family are probably circumstantial, and another false conspiracy...However the Unreliability of our current voting system has been proven and documented by people from both political parites. And not just a few people...hundreds of them.

You are pretty frustrated about this....Calm down!!! I won't keep aruging as I didn't know people here don't work. You proved my point exactly however...All of the things mentioned above are things that absolutely cannot be tested or proven either way. Someone mentioned JFK...If you believe that the official story released was true...You are a minority in America today...why... because of people continuing to call bullshit. Its not because they are "wearing us down", they have evidence. Last post for me. If you want to keep arguing PM me.

Why would they be on the lawn? Some pictures are posted below. but since there are no cameras that can capture the whole pentagon and the bodies in the same frame, one can probably said they were planes ------------------------------------------------------------ I didn't say they would be on the lawn someone else did. Are those pictures posted anywhere where I could read about the source? ------------------------------------------------------------ It looked like it, but the dimensions allow for the fuselage to make it. the 757 is a narrow body. ------------------------------------------------------- That is possible I agree...but where are the holes from the wings and tail section? The engines would have made some damage. They obviously descenigrated inside the pentagon or there would have been remains outside...I can't see where they went in. The edges of the entrance hole can be seen pretty clearly in multiple pictures. Something else I don't understand...The structure was strong enough to crash through all that concrete then just desin. into nothing. The way the exit hole looks...I would have expected the nose cone to be sticking out...Or some piece of the structure. ------------------------------------------------------------ Who said that? That internet movie? Which engine manufacturer issued that report. If it was a GE engine and Rolls Royce made that statement, then that statement would be true. Why would Boeing comment. They don't make those engines. ----------------------------------------------------------- The information came from "Loose Change". Without watching it again I can't remember how the info was presented, however it came from Rolls Royce. They asked Boeing after the engine manufacturer said it wasn't theirs. They wanted to find out if it could have come from a different part of the airplane. ----------------------------------------------- I'm a Navy Sailor that had to fight some Class Bravo fires. Kerosene or Jet A or JP 5, may or may not burn that hot, but they can definitely create an atmosphere that can burn that hot. Other things that burn that hot can be caught on fire by burning Jet A. ------------------------------------------------------------ I understand that, but we are talking about mostly vacant office space. What would have been the accelerant? ------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------------------- How is this a conspiracy? They report what they see and most importantly, what they feel. They usually get that mixed up. ---------------------------------------- It isn't...but if you look at many other airplane crashes...It is not hard to spot the parts of the airplane. Not the case here...In fact you couldn't make out one single piece from the fence. That is where the suspicion comes from.

I am not sure. I don't know much about missles. In one of the links above it shows the 8 frames of footage from a camera that was released to the public. What ever hit it (there are people who say they saw a much smaller aircraft) can be seen mostly exploding outside the building. It is like the sundevil said...I didn't think structurely an aircraft could penetrate that much concrete. And the holes just aren't big enough to be a 757.

Those pics are useless. --------------- Why? do they look modified? ---------------- So, you agree that many/most of the assertions are crazy, but hold out for an explanation to the "hard ones". The fact that the conspiracy advocates put forth so many crazy ideas should make you wonder why you should believe anything they put forward. ---------------- If you search it on the web you will see there are many people with very hard facts. You can't just discount pictures with no reason...and say that's bullshit with no facts. There are literlly hunderds of pictures posted the pose very good questions. It is funny you comment on my beliefs and people lying to me...but you are the same way. Who is lying to who. ----------------------- Which "hard ones" do you have trouble with. Why do people think that the structure of an airplane is such a solid object? They are designed to withstand aerodynamic forces with as little weight as possible. They do not hold up well to impacting the ground or concrete/steel buildings. -------------------- Good point....Look at this picture and notice the 6 concrete walls it traveled through. Showing the exit hole someone mentioned earlier. I understand these pics could have been modified...but there are lots of them from different people and they all look the same.

They only write and talk about the theorys that are easy to prove invalid. I agree there a lots of crazy ideas. But they don't address the really hard ones. How often do you see the Pentagon in the news compared to the big towers. I cut and pasted the link in my browser and it worked fine. I attached a couple pictures if you want to take a look. Look for the holes where the wings and engines went in. Notice the lawn on the second one. Don't forget these are both within 45 minutes of impact...that is how long it took for the roof to cave in. (Not time for cleanup) That is the entrance hole they are spraying water into. Could a 757 have made that hole? I am not sure....

I have read some about S&B. To me is sounds like a pretty powerful organization. I always thought it was wierd that Bush (GW and Sr.) are members, and also John Kerry. Hard for S&B to loose when both Presidential Candidates are members.

Sounds good. If you have time...watch this and see what you think. It is only about 2 minutes long. http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php#Main They are high res pictures, proving what you have called bullshit.

. . . There were dead bodies found. Do a search. there's their charred remains on the internet. _______________________________________________ Please Post them. I have not seen any. And I have scoured the net. All of the pictures I have seen show a relatively "clean" lawn at the pentagon. That's what all the news people were saying when they were standing at the fence of the Pentagon moments after it happened too. ______________________________________________ . . .That perfect hole was an exit hole on the opposite side of one of the concentric buildings. _______________________________________________ I know which hole was the exit hole. The entrance hole looked very much like it before the roof caved in. These pictures are also posted on the net. ________________________________________________ . . .There were a lot of engine parts everywhere. At least one high-speed turbine/compressor disc survived somewhat intact. ________________________________________________ There were not "a lot" of engine parts all over. In fact the reports say and pictures show that most of the wreckage could be carried off the lawn by hand. The engine manufacturer issued a report and said that disc was absolutely no part of their engine. It was way to small. Boeing wouldn't comment. ________________________________________________ . . .Wings and fuselage and their skeletal members are the softer metals of the plane. What was found there were wheel rims, landing gear and pieces of engines that survived the high temperatures of the fires that otherwise disentigrated the rest of the plane. _______________________________________________ I have not seen any pictures of wings, or tail sections, or any of that big stuff. I agree lots of stuff gets disentigrated from the high speed, but the fires aren't all that hot....Kerosene doesn't burn that hot. Certainly not hot enough to decenigrate the engines. And other than the picture of that little object mentioned above...I have seen no pictures of the engines. did they find any wings at the Twin Towers? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There a lot of facts and proof that a plane hit the Pentagon. Unfortunately, Conspiracy Theorists are rarely employed in those positions that would allow on-the-site access to the Pentagon or Groom Lake for that matter. ___________________________________________ You are correct. Only select people were allowed on the site. However there were news reporters with good lenses showing the lawn. Numberous reporters said "We have reports that Airplane hit the Pentagon, but we see no signs of it." These are live reports. Not trying to get people stirred up. I just think there are lots of good questions going unanswered.

If you google search that book you will see the Chief Editor for Popular Mechanics is cousins to the Secretary of Homeland Security. Chertoff is their last name. There is also a video called Loose Change that can be see for free at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5946593973848835726 I am very intersted in this subject. I put a link to this video and was basically scorned by all DZ.commers because it had been over argued...I never did find the thread. I thought it was awful odd there was no dead bodies found at the pentagon. Also if you look at the pictures of the petagon before the roof caved in the hole is an almost perfect 16' diameter hole. There were no holes from the wings and engines...(In fact they never found any engines) There is actually a window right next the hole fully in tact. And there are absolutely zero facts indicating a plane hit the Pentagon. It seems there lots who are critisizing Conspiracy Theorys with no facts. Yes they did find one person who said they saw a plane hit the Pentagon...But there is a lot more people who saw and heard something else.

Wondering how many people have seen this. It is about an hour long so if you haven't it takes time. Make sure volume is on. It is a documentary showing some different views of the actual crashes on the Trade Towers. [http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2023320890224991194]

I read through the threads and didn't get a clear understanding as to the intentions of the chart. Is it being created and perfected to be used as a reference tool, or are the intentions for the USPA to enforce this chart?

Canuck. Got my Javelin....Very impressed with the comfort, not impressed with design. I liked my Mirage better.

Safire 2 149 - Loading 1.3 - 200 Jumps on it DZ MSL 4200 ft. I have experienced the same thing with my canopy. (Not much bottom end flare) It definitely lands better with a bit of speed, and you have to find the sweet spot.

Can anyone tell me how the front riser pressure is on the Safire. (Not Safire II) I would be jumping a 149 loaded at 1.4.

I just got off the phone with Ralph at DS. The XAOS questions will be answered tonight. Ralph did not have the answers. If it does go bad...I can tell you Chris Gray will be staying at DS this summer and available for coaching almost anytime. I think he tied for second at Nationals last year in the sport swoop comp. They are struggling to make this boogie happen without the CASA to be honest. There is still a chance for another bigger airplane to add to their KA. I don't want to make any promises though because I am just a middle man... As for the spot.....Jesse(our Sat pilot) does not have problems with it, however Phil has been having a hard time getting anyone on the DZ for the past 2 weeks. Very frustrating to say the least. There was a go-around for a Tandem and they still didn't make it back with no uppers. Roland was on the plane and helped Phil, and all the loads after that were good, but we will have to wait and see when the winds and uppers change. Sorry guys...hopefully I will have some good news soon. Please feel free to call Ralph or Randy at DS if you need answers to questions right away.