Our government is not our real enemy and liberty is not free. If you don't remember your history you don't know why this is so. Here is something true that reminds us of who are real enemy is.

WE PASS THIS ON AS A REMINDER.




From a speech by Naval Captain Dan Ouimette at Pensacola Florida Civitan Club. True according to Snopes. It sure points out our short comings when it comes to addressing the terrorists!


World War III Started in 1979
This is not very long, but very informative. You have to read the catalogue of events in this brief piece. Then, ask yourself how anyone can take the position that all we have to do is bring our troops home from Iraq, sit back, reset the snooze alarm, go back to sleep, and no one will ever bother us again. In case you missed it, World War III began in November 1979... that alarm has been ringing for years!
US Navy Captain Ouimette is the Executive Officer at Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida . Here is a copy of the speech he gave last month. It is an accurate account of why we are in so much trouble today and why this action is so necessary.


AMERICA NEEDS TO WAKE UP!

That's what we think we heard on the 11th of September 2001 (When more than 3,000 Americans were killed -AD) and maybe it was, but I think it should have been "Get Out of Bed!" In fact, I think the alarm clock has been buzzing since 1979 and we have continued to hit the snooze button and roll over for a few more minutes of peaceful sleep since then.
It was a cool fall day in November 1979 in a country going through a religious and political upheaval when a group of Iranian students attacked and seized the American Embassy in Tehran . This seizure was an outright attack on American soil; it was an attack that held the world's most powerful country hostage and paralyzed a Presidency. The attack on this sovereign U. S. embassy set the stage for events to follow for the next 25 years.


America was still reeling from the aftermath of the Vietnam experience and had a serious threat from the Soviet Union when then, President Carter, had to do something. He chose to conduct a clandestine raid in the desert. The ill-fated mission ended in ruin, but stood as a symbol of America's inability to deal with terrorism.

America's military had been decimated and down sized/right sized since the end of the Vietnam War. A poorly trained, poorly equipped and poorly organized military was called on to execute a complex mission that was doomed from the start.
Shortly after the Tehran experience, Americans began to be kidnapped and killed throughout the Middle East. America could do little to protect her citizens living and working abroad. The attacks against US soil continued.


In April of 1983 a large vehicle packed with high explosives was driven into the US Embassy compound in Beirut When it explodes, it kills 63 people. The alarm went off again and America hit the Snooze Button once more.


Then just six short months later in 1983 a large truck heavily laden down with over 2500 pounds of TNT smashed through the main gate of the US Marine Corps headquarters in Beirut and 241 US servicemen are killed. America mourns her dead and hit the Snooze Button once more.


Two months later in December 1983, another truck loaded with explosives is driven into the US Embassy in Kuwait, and America continues her slumber.


The following year, in September 1984, another van was driven into the gate of the US Embassy in Beirut and America slept.


Soon the terrorism spreads to Europe . In April 1985 a bomb explodes in a restaurant frequented by US soldiers in Madrid .


Then in August 1985 a Volkswagen loaded with explosives is driven into the main gate of the US Air Force Base at Rhein-Main, 22 are killed and the snooze alarm is buzzing louder and louder as US interests are continually attacked.


Fifty-nine days later in 1985 a cruise ship, the Achille Lauro is hijacked and we watched as an American in a wheelchair is singled out of the passenger list and executed.


The terrorists then shift their tactics to bombing civilian airliners when they bomb TWA Flight 840 in April of 1986 that killed 4 and the most tragic bombing, Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in1988, killing 259.


Clinton treated these terrorist acts as crimes; in fact we are still trying to bring these people to trial. These are acts of war.

The wake up alarm is getting louder and louder.
The terrorists decide to bring the fight to America. In January 1993, two CIA agents are shot and killed as they enter CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.


The following month, February 1993, a group of terrorists are arrested after a rented van packed with explosives is driven into the underground parking garage of the World Trade Center in New York City. Six people are killed and over 1000 are injured. Still this is a crime and not an act of war? The Snooze alarm is depressed again.


Then in November 1995 a car bomb explodes at a US military complex in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia killing seven service men and women.


A few months later in June of 1996, another truck bomb explodes only 35 yards from the US military compound in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. It destroys the Khobar Towers, a US Air Force barracks, killing 19 and injuring over 500. The terrorists are getting braver and smarter as they see that America does not respond decisively.


They move to coordinate their attacks in a simultaneous attack on two US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.. These attacks were planned with precision. They kill 224. America responds with cruise missile attacks and goes back to sleep.
The USS Cole was docked in the port of Aden, Yemen for refueling on 12 October 2000, when a small craft pulled along side the ship and exploded killing 17 US Navy Sailors. Attacking a US War Ship is an act of war, but we sent the FBI to investigate the crime and went back to sleep.


And of course you know the events of 11 September 2001. Most Americans think this was the first attack against US soil or in America. How wrong they are. America has been under a constant attack since 1979 and we chose to hit the snooze alarm and roll over and go back to sleep.


In the news lately we have seen lots of finger pointing from every high officials in government over what they knew and what they didn't know. But if you've read the papers and paid a little attention I think you can see exactly what they knew. You don't have to be in the FBI or CIA or on the National Security Council to see the pattern that has been developing since 1979.


I think we have been in a war for the past 25 years and it will continue until we as a people decide enough is enough.

America needs to "Get out of Bed" and act decisively now. America has been changed forever.. We have to be ready to pay the price and make the sacrifice to ensure our way of life continues. We cannot afford to keep hitting the snooze button again and again and roll over and go back to sleep.


After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Admiral Yamamoto said "... it seems all we have done is awakened a sleeping giant." This is the message we need to disseminate to terrorists around the world.

This is not a political thing to be hashed over in an election year this is an AMERICAN thing. This is about our Freedom and the Freedom of our children in years to come.
------
If you don't believe this go back to sleep!

quote Originally posted by avengador1: World War III Started in 1979

Personally, I believe it started in 1947.

quote Originally posted by Joseph Upson: The damage just didn't appear to mimic what you would expect from a large passenger plane. The engines are pretty big and you'd think they might have penetrated the building, but vaporize?

First, most plane crashes we are used to occur during take off and landing at low speeds, not at nearly 500mph. Second, how many planes hit reinforced buildings like the pentagon, let alone doing so while traveling at nearly 500mph?

The facts simply do not support the things the the conspiracy theorists throw out. They are professionals at only giving you the stuff that they think supports their argument and simply ignoring any and all evidence to the contrary. Virtually every MYTH surrounding 9/11 has been dispelled- and by reputable sources as opposed to two guys in their basement or wherever. The problem is that those who WANT to believe do so with emotion and thus easily throw out real evidence that does not agree with their standing assumptions because they are invested in the belief they have. They own the belief and become offended by anyone who disagrees, much as someone reacts when any of their other beliefs are put under scrutiny (religion, abortion, politics for example). They'll show pictures that show no airplane debris that are purported to support their argument, and it seems compelling, but the problem is, there are pictures that DO show airplane debris. I could go on, but I'll just cut and paste an example that shows that I can go out and find arguments against a conspiracy as easily as you can find ones for it. But most of it has factual basis rather than emotional basis:


***Proponents of the no-Plane hitting the Pentagon theory have made the following claims about the debris from the crash:

1. There was no aircraft debris.
2. There was insufficient aircraft debris for a jetliner crash.
3. There was an absence of aircraft wreckage that should have survived a jetliner crash, such as pieces of wings and tail.
4. The absence of signs of bodies, seats, and luggage in photographs of the crash site prove that the attack plane wasn't Flight 77.

Claim 1 is disproved by numerous post-attack photographs of the Pentagon.

Claim 2 is based on the unfounded assumptions that the quantities of debris can be established from public evidence.

Claim 3 is invalidated by a review of the debris fields of any number of jetliner crashes.

Claim 4 supposes that bodies, seats, and luggage should have survived in easily recognized forms, and that they would have ended up in places that were photographed. However, the impact holes would have admitted an entire fuselage of 757 into the building, and there is no complete photographic record of the interior wreckage available to the public


***Proponents of the no-Plane hitting the Pentagon theroy have made the following claims about the damage to the Pentagon's facade:

1. There was only one impact hole measuring no more than 18 feet across.
2. The impact hole was at most 65 feet across.
3. Standing columns remained where heavy 757 parts should have obliterated them.
4. The hole was too small to accommodate wing ends and tail.

Claim 1 is based on the selective presentation of photographs in which fire retardant spray obscures the entire first floor.

Claim 2 is based on the fallacy that the distance between the expansion joints bounding the collapsed region of the facade marked the maximum extent of impact punctures. Post-crash photographs clearly show impact punctures extending over twenty feet to the right and to the left of the expansion joints.

Claim 3 is based on the confusion of hanging sections of the second floor for columns.

Claim 4 is true, but consistent with the crash of a 757 whose wing ends and tail are too light to puncture the Pentagon's walls


Ultimately, it's fine to be open minded. It's fine to be suspicious. I prefer to know all of the view points.

Just BE CAREFUL what you choose to believe. The internet is a big and dangerous medium for crackpots of ALL kinds. Both those who believe in conspiracies AND those who DON'T QUESTION what it going on. We need both kinds of people to keep us on our toes and to keep us from becoming complacent. But always think for yourself and always, always, get both sides of the story before making any kind of decision if you can...

[This message has been edited by FieroFanatic13 (edited 06-23-2008).]

quote Originally posted by Joseph Upson: For those who have made comments along the lines of ending the thread due to its potential to provoke tactless debate and insults, here is what I do when I encounter a situation like this; I don't post a word, if it appears to be a disaster in progress, I back out of the thread and move on.

Well Joseph, I posted a link to something I genuinely thought you might find interesting on this topic and you didn't post a word on that either. Doesn't make for much of a discussion.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Joseph, are you aware of Zeitgeist which we discussed in This thread? If not, check it out.

Following up on what FieroFanatic13 was saying, the conspiracy theorists don't take into account the tremendous kinetic energy of an object travelling at

Take a look at the picture of what remained of this car, which was "only" travelling at 75-80mph when it hit something. Now imagine what would be left of a car, airliner or anything for that matter if that object hit something like a building while travelling at (reportedly) 400mph. I've heard that the kinetic energy of a car goes up at a very high rate with only a relatively small increase in speed. Now multiply that by a factor of 5, if the kinetic energy is linear. If not, then you have to multiply by a much higher amount. Hopefully, someone who knows more about physics than I will fill in these variables for us.

The bottom line is, an airliner going at nearly it's cruising speed isn't going to leave nice, neat, identifiable piece of itself at such a crash site as we had on 9-11.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: Now imagine what would be left of a car, airliner or anything for that matter if that object hit something like a building while travelling at (reportedly) 400mph.

Would the car's engine block disappear?

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Would the car's engine block disappear?

A jet engine is not a big solid block- it is made up of MANY smaller parts, many delicate. And even an engine block can disintegrate at high enough speeds, yes...but not at 75mph, no.

SPEED causes amazing disintegration...

[This message has been edited by FieroFanatic13 (edited 06-23-2008).]

quote Originally posted by FieroFanatic13: These images from the F-4 crash test, are from the Sandia National Laboratories Video Gallery. The crash of an F-4 into a concrete block at 480 mph...

Wow, I'd like to see (and hear) that video!

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Wow, I'd like to see (and hear) that video!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWdcVo6zIYI

Maybe this will quell some of the belief that there should have been a ton of "plane" parts at the pentagon site.

[This message has been edited by FieroFanatic13 (edited 06-23-2008).]

While not exactly the same I will try to make an analogy to the relationship between sound pressure and energy. The power needed to raise the volume in your stereo system is a logarithmic progression. That means that in order to raise the volume of your stereo 3db you need to double your power. EX: If I am playing my stereo at 10db and using 10 Watts of power then to go to 13db I need 20 Watts. 16db 40 Watts, 19db 80 Watts, 22db 160 Watts, 25db 320 Watts.....etc. You can see how the amount of energy needed to raise the volume just a little very quickly requires tremendous power increases. The same holds true for matter. As the velocity of an object increases the amount of energy that object is capable of imparting on a unmoving object also increases logarithmically. Try to imagine the amount of energy a plane traveling at 400+ mph has.

quote Originally posted by FieroFanatic13: Maybe this will quell some of the belief that there should have been a ton of "plane" parts at the pentagon site.

Damn, I also wanted to see the video played back at normal speed!

Seriously, I don't think it's totally fair to compare a large airliner hitting a building at an angle to a fighter plane hitting absolutely dead-on a solid ten foot thick concrete slab specially designed to withstand such an impact. Apples and oranges...

[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 06-23-2008).]

quote Originally posted by fierobear: I've heard that the kinetic energy of a car goes up at a very high rate with only a relatively small increase in speed. Now multiply that by a factor of 5, if the kinetic energy is linear. If not, then you have to multiply by a much higher amount. Hopefully, someone who knows more about physics than I will fill in these variables for us. The bottom line is, an airliner going at nearly it's cruising speed isn't going to leave nice, neat, identifiable piece of itself at such a crash site as we had on 9-11.

Kinetic energy is 0.5*mass*(velocity^2). That's the square of the velocity. So basically if you double velocity, you QUADRUPLE kinetic energy. Also, you can't ignore the fact that people make comparisons to what they know, a car is relatively compact with little open space. Enough for the occupants, some fuel and a bit of cargo. An airplane is basically a big envelope of air surrounded by very thin aluminium and composites.

All in all, the conspiracy theorists are trying to use physics to snow the public. Fortunately (unfortunately?) they don't understand the physics themselves, which makes their claims relatively easy to debunk.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: If not, then you have to multiply by a much higher amount. Hopefully, someone who knows more about physics than I will fill in these variables for us.

E=MCsquared

energy increases exponentially when you double the speed.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Damn, I also wanted to see the video played back at normal speed! Seriously, I don't think it's totally fair to compare a large airliner hitting a building at an angle to a fighter plane hitting absolutely dead-on a solid ten foot thick concrete slab specially designed to withstand such an impact. Apples and oranges...

The Pentagon is reinforced concrete. Though not a ten foot thick impact wall, I guarantee it is a heck of a lot harder than the plane that hit it. The plane is a large and basically fragile machine compared to the ground or the wall of the Pentagon. Traveling at 400mph, this is a fair example that shows what CAN happen when a plane hits something hard. It's not an exact reproduction, no. But it isn't apples and oranges. Oranges and nectarines, maybe.

quote Originally posted by Joseph Upson: .........The facts that interest me are those surrounding what happens to a plane when it crashes, I've watched many retold air crash stories and the engines don't disappear into thin air. If I'm missing something I'm sure I'll be brought up to speed at some point by someone who knows better.

There was a documentary on (I think) CBS a few years ago using footage taped by two brothers who were filming a documentary on the N.Y. Fire Dept. and happened to be filming when the attacks happened. In fact, the footage of the first plane hitting the tower was from one of their cameras. One of them got a shot of one of the engine cores lying on a sidewalk some distance from the Towers. It is still smoking from the heat, and is definately an engine from a 767. I work on them for a living and know what they look like. I've got the show on video tape somewhere.......
One thing to keep in mind, most of an airplane is empty space--theres not as much heavy structure in one as you may think.

------------------
Rod Schneider, Woodstock, Ga.
"You can't have too many toys!"
1988 Fiero GT
1966 Porsche 911
Van's RV-6 airplane-under construction

quote Originally posted by Toddster: E=MCsquared energy increases exponentially when you double the speed.

You have the right concept, but the wrong equation. The equation for kinetic energy is this:

E_k = (mv²)/2

E_k = kinetic energy
m = mass
v = velocity