Forest_Fifer Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Plenty of planes have hit skyscrapers in the past, not one has collapsed the way the twin towers did. Poor attempt, not biting. 0/10 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Even Putin isn't baller enough to order a fucking drive by right beside The Kremlin. He's likely the only one with the balls too, tbh. Possibly Putin, though the guy likely had a number of enemies. Possible CIA involvement shouldn't surprise anyone. My money is on aliens. Maybe its just me, but the fact he was about to host a massive Anti-Putin rally the day after sort of sways my opinion of the things. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banana Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Poor attempt, not biting. 0/10 10-1+0=9 10+1=11 9/11 1 1 = twin towers -1+1=0 .... ground zero QED Though to be frank, Bush looked even more dodgy upon hearing the news then than Putin does now, and the reluctance to release video of the Pentagon attack does leave a question mark that I wish they'd address. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banana Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 He's likely the only one with the balls too, tbh. Maybe its just me, but the fact he was about to host a massive Anti-Putin rally the day after sort of sways my opinion of the things. Circumstantial, that fact could easily have been used by another party so that the finger would point more heavily at Putin. It would certainly be a smart thing to do. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zetterlund Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 I think thats the most cut and dry Government issued assassination of all time. Putins "Who?! Me?!" reaction to it is fairly humourous though This is precisely why it's very unlikely that this is what happened. When it's so brazen and public it's much more likely to be the work of another party wanting it pinned on the government. According to former KGB and CIA agents, government assassinations tend to be 'suicides' in private or car or light aircraft accidents. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 This is precisely why it's very unlikely that this is what happened. When it's so brazen and public it's much more likely to be the work of another party wanting it pinned on the government. According to former KGB and CIA agents, government assassinations tend to be 'suicides' in private or car or light aircraft accidents. Unless it's designed as a message to critics of a megalomaniac and increasingly deranged and paranoid President. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Archer (Raconteur) Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Plenty of planes have hit skyscrapers in the past, not one has collapsed the way the twin towers did. Poor attempt, not biting. 0/10 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-25_Empire_State_Building_crash At 9:40 a.m., the aircraft crashed into the north side of the Empire State Building, between the 78th and 80th floors, carving an 18-by-20-foot (5.5 m × 6.1 m) hole in the building[8] where the offices of the National Catholic Welfare Council were located. One engine shot through the South side opposite the impact and flew as far as the next block, dropping 900 feet and landing on the roof of a nearby building and starting a fire that destroyed a penthouse. The other engine and part of the landing gear plummeted down an elevator shaft. The resulting fire was extinguished in 40 minutes. It is still the only fire at such a height to be brought under control.[8 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Circumstantial, that fact could easily have been used by another party so that the finger would point more heavily at Putin. It would certainly be a smart thing to do. It could yes, but again, who'd have the balls to do it where it was done? Especially when you'd then have Putin after you. This is precisely why it's very unlikely that this is what happened. When it's so brazen and public it's much more likely to be the work of another party wanting it pinned on the government. According to former KGB and CIA agents, government assassinations tend to be 'suicides' in private or car or light aircraft accidents. Maybe Putin done it in a way he knew would be blamed on him, so he could pin it on someone else for trying to pin it on him? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banana Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Unless it's designed as a message to critics of a megalomaniac and increasingly deranged and paranoid President. Does a message need sent? There have been numerous rallies that Nemtsov has headed in the past, he wasn't killed before any of those. Why now and not then, and does Putin really have more to gain than lose from Nemtsov's new martyr status? From the outside we simply cannot know the web of friends and foes, ploys and deals at work in Russian politics, or any country for that matter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banana Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 (edited) It could yes, but again, who'd have the balls to do it where it was done? Especially when you'd then have Putin after you. Maybe Putin done it in a way he knew would be blamed on him, so he could pin it on someone else for trying to pin it on him? 'Russian' and 'balls' goes well together. If indeed Putin does have more to gain than lose from Nemtsov's death, it still doesn't mean he was responsible, and it might well be that Putin won't be after anyone, which the actual perpetrator surmised in advanced. Maybe Putin done it in a way he knew would be blamed on him, so he could pin it on someone else for trying to pin it on him? Indeed. Like I said, we can't really know. Edited March 1, 2015 by banana 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 I don't think Putin signed off on it. I do think that someone else within the upper echelons of Russian "government" (for want of a better word) did order it, whether or not that's an attempt to put pressure on Putin, or just someone who was fed up of Nemtsov. IMR (I've no idea how reliable they are) speculated - several weeks ago - about unrest within Moscow's corridors of power. Mind you, it does read like a batshit mental conspiracy theory. There's other speculation that the fundamentalist groups in the Caucasus took out Nemtsov (seemingly he was a supporter of Charlie Hebdo) but again, it does read as a bit far fetched. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zetterlund Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Unless it's designed as a message to critics of a megalomaniac and increasingly deranged and paranoid President. Nemtsov wasn't any political threat to Putin, so as someone suggested above having him assassinated would probably do him more harm than good. Maybe being a deranged, paranoid megalomaniac is the way forward in politics, since it has earned him an 85% approval rating with the voting public (compared to 41% for David Cameron and 46% for Obama). Or maybe those polled all did so at gunpoint. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 I don't think Putin signed off on it. Wouldn't surprise me he said as an aside "Will someone rid me of this troublesome priest?" and someone took him a bit too literally. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Nemtsov wasn't any political threat to Putin, so as someone suggested above having him assassinated would probably do him more harm than good. Maybe being a deranged, paranoid megalomaniac is the way forward in politics, since it has earned him an 85% approval rating with the voting public (compared to 41% for David Cameron and 46% for Obama). Or maybe those polled all did so at gunpoint. Helps if you control the media and feed them with a constant diet of Nationalist warlike rhetoric. Here's an example: Russian Strategic Missile Forces will parry all nuclear attacks and punish the enemy with a devastating retaliatory strike. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banana Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 (edited) Helps if you control the media and feed them with a constant diet of Nationalist warlike rhetoric. Here's an example: Russian Strategic Missile Forces will parry all nuclear attacks and punish the enemy with a devastating retaliatory strike. Indeed. But lets not pretend that the western media is unbiased, agendaless, and has no government hand in places to get the 'right message' across, which includes the public perception of Putin and Russia. Edited March 1, 2015 by banana 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zetterlund Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Helps if you control the media and feed them with a constant diet of Nationalist warlike rhetoric. Here's an example: Russian Strategic Missile Forces will parry all nuclear attacks and punish the enemy with a devastating retaliatory strike. They do love a nice big missile article. Surely you're not suggesting we have a free, unbiased media ourselves though? The tripe in the UK and US media about Russia is at least as bad or worse than the sometimes comical state media there. Yesterday we had the former head of MI6 saying that Russia is a danger to the UK and we need to take steps to defend ourselves. That is just utter nonsense propaganda designed to scare us simple folk and no doubt prep us to accept getting involved militarily in Ukraine in the near future. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigmouth Strikes Again Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 (edited) One might say they went down quicker than Peter Pawlett at Dens Park. Yes, or your mum. Edited March 1, 2015 by Bigmouth Strikes Again 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-25_Empire_State_Building_crash At 9:40 a.m., the aircraft crashed into the north side of the Empire State Building, between the 78th and 80th floors, carving an 18-by-20-foot (5.5 m × 6.1 m) hole in the building[8] where the offices of the National Catholic Welfare Council were located. One engine shot through the South side opposite the impact and flew as far as the next block, dropping 900 feet and landing on the roof of a nearby building and starting a fire that destroyed a penthouse. The other engine and part of the landing gear plummeted down an elevator shaft. The resulting fire was extinguished in 40 minutes. It is still the only fire at such a height to be brought under control.[8 I doubt if you'd get 10,000 gallons of fuel in one of them wee things.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Young Joseph Stalin Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Helps if you control the media and feed them with a constant diet of Nationalist warlike rhetoric. Here's an example: Russian Strategic Missile Forces will parry all nuclear attacks and punish the enemy with a devastating retaliatory strike. In the same way the media here keeps Lab/Lib/Con in power. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ned Nederlander Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 (edited) Though to be frank, Bush looked even more dodgy upon hearing the news then than Putin does now, and the reluctance to release video of the Pentagon attack does leave a question mark that I wish they'd address. The notion that the U.S of A would inflict anything as rip-roaringly embarrassing and also utterly tragic on themselves is clearly absurd. Why, also, would they make it so intricate ? Surely hundreds of people would have been involved and surely one of them would have cracked by now!? and why hit multiple targets ? surly one aircraft into one tower would have provided whatever end result the Government were supposed to have been trying to engineer. Anyone who believes 9/11 was a conspiracy is a moron. I also laugh when these c'nts tell us to open our minds and not be sheep !! Most folk are capable of comprehending information and coming to our own conclusions about events - those fandans follow Youtube experts who believe lizard folk walk amongst us Edited March 1, 2015 by Ned Nederlander 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.