Обнародована видеозапись теракта в Пентагоне

[n0xyl]

можно посмотреть здесь:

http://botinok.co.il/node/19659


Америкосы опять врут, как они в своё время в Луну слетали :-)
Это явно не самолет!!!

[elDoraDo]

ya toje tak podumal -
bs eto vse. Ya udivlyayus kak im ne stydno eto pokazyvat

[ДЖИГИТ]

Vot primerno kak na samom dele doljen bil viglyadet' samolyot. Boeing 757 eto massivniy samolyot s visotoy (do konchika hvosta) v neskol'ko etajey.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/may2006/170506doctored.gif


A vot chem promivayut mozgi:

http://www.total911.info/160506_plane77_contrast_adj.jpg

Ochen' pohoj na etot unmanned plane !!!
http://www.total911.info/agm-86a.jpg


!!!OBRATITE VNIMANIE NA KONCHIK KONCHIK NOSA SAMOLYOTA, U BOEINGA ON NE OSTRIY, ON TUPOY, A V TOM, CHTO POKAZALA ADMINISTRATSIYA AMERIKI, KONCHIK NOSA SAMOLYOTA OSTRIY! ETO NE BOEING!
http://www.total911.info/2006/05/new-pentagon-video-shows-no-boeing.html


K tomu je, sam samolyot ne nashli, soslallis'' na ogon', kotoriy rasplavil samolyot, no kak togda oni umudrilis' opoznat' tela pogibshih, kogda nichego ot metalla ne ostalos??? Eto opyat' dokazivaet amerikanskuyu previtel'stvnnuyu loj'. Takje, gde dva 6 tonnih dvigatelya ot Boeinga? Gde mesto stolknoveniya dvigateley!?

http://www.pizdec.net/pentagon2.jpghttp://www.pizdec.net/pentagon4.jpghttp://www.pizdec.net/pentagon3.jpg
http://www.pizdec.net/pentagon-2.jpg

Kto nibud' vidit mesto stolknoveniya Boeinga 757 s pentagonom?? - NET!

A vot kakov Boeing:
http://www.pizdec.net/7572.jpg
http://www.pizdec.net/7571.jpg

[UzLand]

Что-то я там самолета не вижу.

[elDoraDo]

UzLand, bu haqida VOA da toxtab ota olasizmi?

[ARA]

yolg'onchi co'pon ertadi bor ediku.

bu cho'ponning yuzi qachon shuvit bo'lar ekan?

[ДЖИГИТ]

UzLand, bu haqida VOA da toxtab ota olasizmi?

U think administration will let him do that??? VOA news tak i znaet, chto podigrivat' neofaschistam-satanistam. I really doubt he can do that.

50% amerikosov litsemeri vklyuchaya ih administratsiyu, do Andijanskih sobitiy kak oni IAKa podderjivali, kak budto do Andijanskih sobitiy pravonarusheniy ne bilo, on bil im nujen poetomu oni i zakrivali na eto glaza. Evil est amerikanskaya politika.

[Ulugbek_99]

By releasing this video they said that now it would put and to all kinds of conspiracy theories. Do they think people are idiots?

[UzLand]

U think administration will let him do that??? VOA news tak i znaet, chto podigrivat' neofaschistam-satanistam. I really doubt he can do that.


Комплимент учун рахмат:) Похоже, что вы работу Голоса Америки знаете изнутри. Какие познания, однако.

[ДЖИГИТ]

Комплимент учун рахмат:) Похоже, что вы работу Голоса Америки знаете изнутри. Какие познания, однако.

Prove that I'm wrong! I'll be just glad :D .

[Legend]

Nu esli eti tupiye Amerikosi i v eto poveryat tada ne znayu ...:)

[elDoraDo]

UzLand,
however you don't answer to my question.
Thanks

[bacha]

If the plane that hit the Pentagon was not that Boeing, where is the real plane then? Lets say they hit it on the way, then it is very arguable that no one would notice it. The theory that it was destroyed somewhere on the land, and its people killed is simply unbelievable. So, most probably the plane really did hit the Pentagon.

[ДЖИГИТ]

If the plane that hit the Pentagon was not that Boeing, where is the real plane then? Lets say they hit it on the way, then it is very arguable that no one would notice it. The theory that it was destroyed somewhere on the land, and its people killed is simply unbelievable. So, most probably the plane really did hit the Pentagon.

Where is the real plane? We don't know, that's what has to be investigated. But after take off, the plane disappeared in the radar, so did all other planes!!! This is a time frame when they could be changed for some other planes and passangers unboarded at a special location. Pentagon was hit, but not by Boeing 757!

[elDoraDo]

It is bad when others lie to you, but the worst is when you lie to yourself.

[UzLand]

Prove that I'm wrong! I'll be just glad :D .

Well, I can't hire you:) If you worked here you would know you were wrong.

[UzLand]

UzLand,
however you don't answer to my question.
Thanks

It is not an easy thing to do. You need to have an insider who can prove things were not as described. You can't just judge by the video.

And it is not within the topics of interests to VOA Uzbek.

For us it is more important to investigate what happened in Andijan rather than 9/11. Кесареву - кесарево. Let's leave this for US media .

[elDoraDo]

Lol, thanks for your answer, UzLand.
However not having an insider gives you a lot more confidence to state different things around Andijan Event. And if you call them witnesses, there were many more witnesses around 911. And you say - you can't just judge by the video. Wow, yes, when they show different videos with those exxtremists claims during Andijan - you close your eyes to this, here comes another video - you again do so. Well, maybe it is now time when we have to reject all evidences (right, wrong - all) - and just claim only what we think...

One more thing, that is really interesting to find that you sometimes contradict to yourself, UzLand. I remember you telling me that neither you nor your service have any interest (concerning your professional activity). You said you just show what happens around. Now you say it is not the interest of VOA Uzbek. Okay, let's assume that's not the interest point of VOA Uzbek, but what about whole VOA? Or is it that impossible to come up with a such idea for any member of the VOA team? Please don't even try to separate those two services of yours (VOA) into different groups.

I am so dissappointed at what you do.

[ДЖИГИТ]

Well, I can't hire you:) If you worked here you would know you were wrong.

I don't need to be hired by you or VOA, and I already know the truth, how bitter it is.

[UzLand]

I don't need to by hired by you or VOA, and I already know the truth, how bitter it is.

That's a bit arrogant, isn't it?

[UzLand]

Lol, thanks for your answer, UzLand.
However not having an insider gives you a lot more confidence to state different things around Andijan Event. And if you call them witnesses, there were many more witnesses around 911. And you say - you can't just judge by the video. Wow, yes, when they show different videos with those exxtremists claims during Andijan - you close your eyes to this, here comes another video - you again do so. Well, maybe it is now time when we have to reject all evidences (right, wrong - all) - and just claim only what we think...

One more thing, that is really interesting to find that you sometimes contradict to yourself, UzLand. I remember you telling me that neither you nor your service have any interest (concerning your professional activity). You said you just show what happens around. Now you say it is not the interest of VOA Uzbek. Okay, let's assume that's not the interest point of VOA Uzbek, but what about whole VOA? Or is it that impossible to come up with a such idea for any member of the VOA team? Please don't even try to separate those two services of yours (VOA) into different groups.

I am so dissappointed at what you do.

Don't be disappointed. You just don't know the structure of the organization. I do news for an Uzbek audience in Uzbek. Your request is like asking a journalist form a sports desk to do a story on elections. We mostly do what concerns Uzbeks, Uzbekistan and Central Asia. There were 2 9/11 victims from Uzbekistan as far as I remember. If I had worked back then, my concentration would be on those two victims. You can't expect a journalist to be on top of everything and cover everything. It is impossible. It is easy for you to judge sitting in front of your computer.

So I don't really contradict myself:)

Besides, even if I covered 9/11 and made some sensational discoveries as to what really happened, would you believe me? I guess not. You would probably believe more if a similar report was published in New York Times or carried by CNN. You would say like "How does an Uzbek journalist know this whereas other journalists are silent?"

Think about it:)

[ДЖИГИТ]

That's a bit arrogant, isn't it?
Where's arrogance? Simple words with no emotions or offence, just telling I don't need a job with VOA. We all know never in the world can VOA expose 9/11 false PR.

[UzLand]

Where's arrogance? Simple words with no emotions or offence, just telling I don't need a job with VOA. We all know never in the world can VOA expose 9/11 false PR.

Stating knowledge of truth is arrogance. It means you don't need to prove anything. So it is like an axiom.

No one was actually offering you a job at VOA. It was said to explain that without knowing the structure of the organization, it is kinda lame to judge it. VOA has completely different objectives than, let's say, CNN, ABC or NBC. Different.

Another sign of arrogance is when you try to generalize like "we all know". Please, speak for yourself. Because I am part of that "ALL" too:)

[ДЖИГИТ]

Stating knowledge of truth is arrogance. It means you don't need to prove anything. So it is like an axiom.

No one was actually offering you a job at VOA. It was said to explain that without knowing the structure of the organization, it is kinda lame to judge it. VOA has completely different objectives than, let's say, CNN, ABC or NBC. Different.

Another sign of arrogance is when you try to generalize like "we all know". Please, speak for yourself. Because I am part of that "ALL" too:)

Can't believe you said that :rolleyes: . Telling Truth = arrogance? You said that as a journalist?

No one was asking for a job, it was to explain that the news agency where journalists consider telling the truth as arrogance, is not for decent ppl.

Speak for myself? I do, but if you are aslo part of "ALL", don't you know then? Or maybe you don't know for real?

What objectives has VOA? VOA is accountable to state department and is therefor a part of dirty PR. Its Journalists are like helpless mice in the hands of employers, dependable on their salary and doing what they are told. What else can they do!? Nothing, excuses like always.

[elDoraDo]

UzLand

all other journalists are silent and you do so?
isnt this a little different from - all other uzbeks are silent and I be silent?
anways that's too "ezma" chat coming up.

one thing I would tell you - you underestimated yourself by saying I would prefer some cnn or NYT crap. Even if I am dissappointed at your work, I would still believe in your reports more than those of other cnn/NYT reporters. Maybe it is because I have some little MHO about the real sources of their news (which doesnot matter now).

By the way - contradiction part was all about having particular interest from news-broadcasting.

[Martingale]

Djigit, yana America shanini himoya qilishga tushdizmi?:D

Im sorry to interfere with your discussions, but the video is NOT enough to prove that there was no plane....the conspracy theorists say that this was all set up by pentagon or by other gov. officials...yet they can't just prove it by providing those video files...Why?:rolleyes: because videofiles, tapes etc. cannot create a basis for beyond reasonable doubt for courts in US.

There was a case recently, when a teenager was prosecuted for child-porn business. He opened a website and sold videofiles(you know what kind of files Im talking about:) ). However, FBI did NOT sue him (even if those files included himself) until they caught him actually taping those files...I mean in action:) ...of course, if those videofiles or audiofiles create a basis for beyond reasonable doubt, they may be accepted as evidence. For example, "Watergate" scandal including American President Nixon.
However, in this case, Im sorry the image is too blurry and it's hard to make conclusions. Besides, what about the people who died because of the crash and where did the plane go? If it was a setup, then they must have killed those passnegers somewhere else.:) ...too many questions for both sides and that's why, I understand why VOA's uzbek service does not say anything about it.

Moreover, it's really like asking a sport commentator to make a weather report!:lol:

peace,;)

[Martingale]

Eldorado, aytgandan nima foyda?
usizda ham hamma aytib yotibdiku.
NYT yoki CNN aytsa ularda evidence bor...direct evidence.. i to bazi hollarda ularni ham tagiga suv quyib turishadi...VOA uzbek hizmati agar osamadan tape oganda live qib kursatishga haqqi bor...direct evidence bumasa...CNNni quote qib aytadimi?:)
undan keyin, tuliq isbotlanmagan narsani hech kim aytolmaydi...man daje CNNni yoki Foxni kurmadim...bu setup degan joyini..albatta hamma SMI uje report qib buldi bu filelarni chunki pentagonni uzi bergan bu filelarni...lekin hali hech kim!!! ana qarelar 9/11 uydirma ekan degani yuq! deyolmaydi ham!!! isbot!!! isbot!!! va yana bir marta isbot!!!;)

[ДЖИГИТ]

Djigit, yana America shanini himoya qilishga tushdizmi?:D

Im sorry to interfere with your discussions, but the video is NOT enough to prove that there was no plane....the conspracy theorists say that this was all set up by pentagon or by other gov. officials...yet they can't just prove it by providing those video files...Why?:rolleyes: because videofiles, tapes etc. cannot create a basis for beyond reasonable doubt for courts in US.

There was a case recently, when a teenager was prosecuted for child-porn business. He opened a website and sold videofiles(you know what kind of files Im talking about:) ). However, FBI did NOT sue him (even if those files included himself) until they caught him actually taping those files...I mean in action:) ...of course, if those videofiles or audiofiles create a basis for beyond reasonable doubt, they may be accepted as evidence. For example, "Watergate" scandal including American President Nixon.
However, in this case, Im sorry the image is too blurry and it's hard to make conclusions. Besides, what about the people who died because of the crash and where did the plane go? If it was a setup, then they must have killed those passnegers somewhere else.:) ...too many questions for both sides and that's why, I understand why VOA's uzbek service does not say anything about it.

Moreover, it's really like asking a sport commentator to make a weather report!:lol:

peace,;)

I'm sorry, but you are wrong, There was a plane, but it was not Boeing 575. Video files are not poof, because these video files are only 1% of what is government hudung, Pentagon has around 84 cameras, plus cameras at nearby gas station and Sheraton hotel, recordings of which have been confiscated by FBI and hidden, instead FBI released blurred video tape that misleads everyone. If they are telling truth, they must release videos, but they'll never do that. Proof is the place of accident, the impact place, laws of physics. How come they could not find 2 titanium engines at the impact place, but could easily identify bodies? What human bodies are sustainable to fire than titanium engines? By the way, they found at the impact place only 1 (one) small engine. Here's what experts saying:

A Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon
by Michael Meyer, Mechanical Engineer
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/ArticlesMeyer3March2006.html

To the members of the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven:
I would like to give you my input as to the events on September 11, and why it is a physically provable fact that some of the damage done to the Pentagon could not have occurred from a Boeing 757 impact, and therefore the 9/11 Commission report is not complete and arguably a cover-up. I will not speculate about what may have been covered up, I will only speak from my professional opinion. But I will explain why I do not believe the Pentagon was hit by a Boeing 757.

I am a Mechanical Engineer who spent many years in Aerospace, including structural design, and in the design, and use of shaped charge explosives (like those that would be used in missile warheads).

The structural design of a large aircraft like a 757 is based around managing the structural loads of a pressurized vessel, the cabin, to near-atmospheric conditions while at the lower pressure region of cruising altitudes, and to handle the structural and aerodynamic loads of the wings, control surfaces, and the fuel load. It is made as light as possible, and is certainly not made to handle impact loads of any kind.

If a 757 were to strike a reinforced concrete wall, the energy from the speed and weight of the aircraft will be transferred, in part into the wall, and to the structural failure of the aircraft. It is not too far of an analogy as if you had an empty aluminum can, traveling at high speed hitting a reinforced concrete wall. The aluminum can would crumple (the proper engineering term is buckle) and, depending on the structural integrity of the wall, crack, crumble or fail completely. The wall failure would not be a neat little hole, as the energy of the impact would be spread throughout the wall by the reinforcing steel.

This is difficult to model accurately, as any high speed, high energy, impact of a complex structure like an aircraft, into a discontinuous wall with windows etc. is difficult. What is known is that nearly all of the energy from this event would be dissipated in the initial impact, and subsequent buckling of the aircraft.

We are lead to believe that not only did the 757 penetrate the outer wall, but continued on to penetrate separate internal walls totaling 9 feet of reinforced concrete. The final breach of concrete was a nearly perfectly cut circular hole (see below) in a reinforced concrete wall, with no subsequent damage to the rest of the wall. (If we are to believe that somehow this aluminum aircraft did in fact reach this sixth final wall.)

EXIT HOLE IN PENTAGON RING-C
American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757, is alleged to have punched through 6 blast-resistant concrete walls‹a total of nine feet of reinforced concrete‹before exiting through this hole.

It is physically impossible for the wall to have failed in a neat clean cut circle, period. When I first saw this hole, a chill went down my spine because I knew it was not possible to have a reinforced concrete wall fail in this manner, it should have caved in, in some fashion.

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/images/066.jpg

How do you create a nice clean hole in a reinforced concrete wall? with an explosive shaped charge. An explosive shaped charge, or cutting charge is used in various military warhead devices. You design the geometry of the explosive charge so that you create a focused line of energy. You essentially focus nearly all of the explosive energy in what is referred to as a jet. You use this jet to cut and penetrate armor on a tank, or the walls of a bunker. The signature is clear and unmistakable. In a missile, the explosive charge is circular to allow the payload behind the initial shaped charge to enter whatever has been penetrated.

I do not know what happened on 9/11, I do not know how politics works in this country, I can not explain why the mainstream media does not report on the problems with the 9/11 Commission. But I am an engineer, and I know what happens in high speed impacts, and how shaped charges are used to "cut" through materials.

I have not addressed several other major gaps in the Pentagon/757 incident. The fact that this aircraft somehow ripped several light towers clean out of the ground without any damage to the aircraft (which I also feel is impossible), the fact that the two main engines were never recovered from the wreckage, and the fact that our government has direct video coverage of the flight path, and impact, from at least a gas station and hotel, which they have refused to release.

You can call me a "tin hat", crazy, conspiracy theory, etc, but I can say from my expertise that the damage at the Pentagon was not caused by a Boeing 757. Sincerely,
Michael Meyer

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pentmorris.jpg

http://home.comcast.net/~skydrifter/STRK.jpg

http://physics911.net/
http://www.911blogger.com/
http://www.911truth.org/
http://www.v911t.org/
http://www.pentagonresearch.com/

[Martingale]

I'm sorry, but you are wrong, There was a plane, but it was not Boeing 575. Video files are not poof, because these video files are only 1% of what is government hudung, Pentagon has around 84 cameras, plus cameras at nearby gas station and Sheraton hotel, recordings of which have been confiscated by FBI and hidden, instead FBI released blurred video tape that misleads everyone. If they are telling truth, they must release videos, but they'll never do that. Proof is the place of accident, the impact place, laws of physics. How come they could not find 2 titanium engines at the impact place, but could easily identify bodies? What human bodies are sustainable to fire than titanium engines? By the way, they found at the impact place only 1 (one) small engine. Here's what experts saying:


Djigit...whther FBI hides tapes or not...it's not relevant. The fact is there is no such evidence and all other things don't matter.

BTW, in no way Im trying to take Bush adminstration's position and most likely, I might agree with some of those facts...however, I think those information are not enough to make conclusions.
IMHO

[ДЖИГИТ]

Djigit...whther FBI hides tapes or not...it's not relevant. The fact is there is no such evidence and all other things don't matter.

For you doesn't matter, for some does! If there's no such evidence, then why government hiding other tapes? I don't say there was no attack, there was, but it is all planned within.

[Martingale]

For you doesn't matter, for some does!
well..for what I can assure you is Im much more concerned about Andijan events than 9/11;)... less inhumane? maybe...:rolleyes:

If there's no such evidence, then why government hiding other tapes? I don't say there was no attack, there was, but it is all planned within.
you seem to be not getting my point, sir. whether it was planned within cannot be proven by all those tapes...at least for now...Im not saying this is the end...Im sure attempts to prove this will continue...however, you should admit that those videofiles cannot give you enough evidence to blame Bush adminstration for 9/11..if they really did, now you would be talking about whther Bush is going to be impeached or not instead of posting engineering articles.

Remember, unless you are proven guilty, you are innocent!!!;)
if you can't prove it, then there is no room for arguing.;)

[ДЖИГИТ]

well..for what I can assure you is Im much more concerned about Andijan events than 9/11;)... less inhumane? maybe...:rolleyes:


you seem to be not getting my point, sir. whether it was planned within cannot be proven by all those tapes...at least for now...Im not saying this is the end...Im sure attempts to prove this will continue...however, you should admit that those videofiles cannot give you enough evidence to blame Bush adminstration for 9/11..if they really did, now you would be talking about whther Bush is going to be impeached or not instead of posting engineering articles.

Remember, unless you are proven guilty, you are innocent!!!;)
if you can't prove it, then there is no room for arguing.;)

Oooouch, please, hold on your horses, if I can't proove now, I'd be able to do it in future, it doesn't mean that I stop arguing!

By the way, impeachment is on democrats agenda.

You are trying to confuse, maybe you yourself confused, why are you calling this an engineering article? Investigation involves any kind of research, whether it is engineering or some other field. You want impeachment happen in a click? It takes time and lots of work.

[UzLand]

Can't believe you said that :rolleyes: . Telling Truth = arrogance? You said that as a journalist?


Telling truth is not an arrogance unless you know for sure it is a truth. Saying only you know the truth is arrogance.

What objectives has VOA? VOA is accountable to state department and is therefor a part of dirty PR.

Go to their website and read their objectives. They are not accountable to SD, per say.

UzLand

all other journalists are silent and you do so?
isnt this a little different from - all other uzbeks are silent and I be silent? anways that's too "ezma" chat coming up.

If you do a google-search, you will see that I've never been silent while all other Uzbeks were.

Maybe it is because I have some little MHO about the real sources of their news (which doesnot matter now).

MHO doesn always mean you are right:)

[elDoraDo]

UzLand,

balki jurnalistligingizdandur, balki tabiiy hususiyatingizdur
lekin siz yo'llanmaning butun qismining emas, balki bir qismini olib oz tomoningizga ogdirishga judayam usta ekansiz. Ammo biling, bu ustalik bilan siz oz poziciyangizni mustahkamlab ololmaysiz, balki qochishga urungan odamdek korinasiz holos.

P.s. 9/11 bilan Andjion ortasidagi sizning harakatlaringizni solishtirganim maqsadi esa - siz ikki yerda ikki yuzli ekaningizni korsatish edi holos. Ba'zida inson insoniyatning bir qismigina emas, balki butun insoniyat haqida qayguradi. Rahmat.

Postlaringizda sizni hech ham tark etmayotgan tabassum umr buyi sizga hamroh bolishini tilab

p.s. MHO doesn always mean you are right
btw this was kind of arrogance

[UzLand]

UzLand,

balki jurnalistligingizdandur, balki tabiiy hususiyatingizdur
lekin siz yo'llanmaning butun qismining emas, balki bir qismini olib oz tomoningizga ogdirishga judayam usta ekansiz. Ammo biling, bu ustalik bilan siz oz poziciyangizni mustahkamlab ololmaysiz, balki qochishga urungan odamdek korinasiz holos.

I hope this was also in your humble opinion only:)

P.s. 9/11 bilan Andjion ortasidagi sizning harakatlaringizni solishtirganim maqsadi esa - siz ikki yerda ikki yuzli ekaningizni korsatish edi holos. Ba'zida inson insoniyatning bir qismigina emas, balki butun insoniyat haqida qayguradi. Rahmat.

Биз сиз билан инсоният хакида кайгуриш хакида гаплашганимиз йук. Биз масалага хиссиетларсиз, профессионал нуктаи назардан ендашдик. Инсон сифатида мен 9/11 га хам, Андижон вокеаларига хам бефарк эмасман, лекин журналист сифатида мени Андижон вокеалари ва улар ортидаги сабаблар купрок кизиктиради. Шу икки нарсани сиз аралаштириб юборяпсиз, мен эса ажратиб куйяпман. Агар сизнингча бу иккиюзламачилик булса, майли, була колсин.

p.s. btw this was kind of arrogance

It would be arrogance if I said "MHO doesn't mean truth". But I said "MHO doesn't always mean truth". So denying the fact that peoples' opinions cannot always be true is, by the way, an arrogance. Or are you saying that your opinion always reflects truth?

I get this feeling that you are an idealistic person. Nothing wrong with that except that the reality is tougher and different.

[n0xyl]

Martingale
Im sorry to interfere with your discussions, but the video is NOT enough to prove that there was no plane....the conspracy theorists say that this was all set up by pentagon or by other gov. officials...yet they can't just prove it by providing those video files...Why? because videofiles, tapes etc. cannot create a basis for beyond reasonable doubt for courts in US.

Эту пленку официально предоставила Правительство США. Так что о чем базар, почему видео не может быть доказательством?

[ДЖИГИТ]

Martingale


Эту пленку официально предоставила Правительство США. Так что о чем базар, почему видео не может быть доказательством?

Ti prav, pochemu to pravitel'stvo i nekotorie pitayutsya dokazat' etoy zapis'yu, chto imenno Boeing 757 s passajirami vrezalsya v Pentagon, no kogda delo dohodit do voprosa o zagovore ili togo, chto ne Boeing vrezalsya, oni uje utverjdayut, chto eta video zapis' uje ne slujit dokazatel'stvom. Znachit eto odnostoronnyaya zapi's? Znachit etoy zapis'yu mojno pitat'sya dokazivat', chto Beoing vrezalsya no nel'zya pitat'sya dokazivat', chto Boeing ne vrezalsya v Pentagon???

[elDoraDo]

Rahmat UzLand

Siz bergan butun msg ichidan faqatgina quyidagi qismigina mavzuga aloqadorligini sezdim
Биз сиз билан инсоният хакида кайгуриш хакида гаплашганимиз йук. Биз масалага хиссиетларсиз, профессионал нуктаи назардан ендашдик. Инсон сифатида мен 9/11 га хам, Андижон вокеаларига хам бефарк эмасман, лекин журналист сифатида мени Андижон вокеалари ва улар ортидаги сабаблар купрок кизиктиради. Шу икки нарсани сиз аралаштириб юборяпсиз, мен эса ажратиб куйяпман. Агар сизнингча бу иккиюзламачилик булса, майли, була колсин.

p.s. Qolgan MHO doesn always mean you are right va It would be arrogance if I said "MHO doesn't mean truth". But I said "MHO doesn't always mean truth". So denying the fact that peoples' opinions cannot always be true is, by the way, an arrogance. Or are you saying that your opinion always reflects truth?
kabi uncha aloqador bolmagan qismlarni nazardan chetda qoldirishga ruxsat bersangiz. Chunki bu yerda men ma'lum reporterlarning ma'lum faoliyatlariga qanday yondoshishim haqida edi. Bu yerda "bizning oylashimiz har doim ham haqiqat bolavermaydi" kabi umumiy tavtalogiksimon iboralarning ishlatishilishi soglom munozaraga umuman hos bolmaganligini untuganingiz meni achintiradi. Balki qabul qilmassiz, lekin bir kichkina tavsiya bilan murojaat etmoqchi edim : - siz bilan Andijon voqeasi boyicha ancha suhbat qurganmiz. Keyingi safar mana shunday munozara davomida tepada aytilgan "MHO doesn always mean you are right" iborasini ozingizning poziciyangizga nisbatan ishlatib korishni maslahat beraman.

I get this feeling that you are an idealistic person. Nothing wrong with that except that the reality is tougher and different.

Judayam kalondimog'dorlik. Keyingi safar u bu kimsa truth va reality haqida qiziqadigan bolsa faqat va faqatgina sizga murojaat qilishini aytib quyaman :). Omon qoling, UzLand

[UzLand]

Balki qabul qilmassiz, lekin bir kichkina tavsiya bilan murojaat etmoqchi edim : - siz bilan Andijon voqeasi boyicha ancha suhbat qurganmiz. Keyingi safar mana shunday munozara davomida tepada aytilgan "MHO doesn always mean you are right" iborasini ozingizning poziciyangizga nisbatan ishlatib korishni maslahat beraman.

Sure, that's your personal choice and right. I can't ask you to support my opinion if you have a different one. I never said my opinion was always right, but we tend to express them anyways. I do not recall talking to you about Andijan at all unless you reveal your identity to me in private.

Judayam kalondimog'dorlik. Keyingi safar u bu kimsa truth va reality haqida qiziqadigan bolsa faqat va faqatgina sizga murojaat qilishini aytib quyaman :). Omon qoling, UzLand

Please, don't be pathetic. Your comments have more irrevelancies to our topic of discussion than mine - full of judgements, sarcasm and arrogance. Read them yourself before reacting again in the same manner or don't react at all.

siz bilan Andijon voqeasi boyicha ancha suhbat qurganmiz.

Umid, is that you?

[elDoraDo]

Yes that is me, Odil

[UzLand]

Yes that is me, Odil

No wonder.

Yes that is me, Odil

And it would be Odil aka for you:)

[elDoraDo]

Well that would be so in Uzbek ;)
cheers.

p.s. Iltimos keyingi postlarni yigib bittada yozsangiz, bu yerda yaqin muddat ichida kop post qoldirish flood sifatida qabul qilinishi mumkin ekan ;)

Mavzu boyicha davom etamiz...

[UzLand]

Well that would be so in Uzbek ;)
cheers.

p.s. Iltimos keyingi postlarni yigib bittada yozsangiz, bu yerda yaqin muddat ichida kop post qoldirish flood sifatida qabul qilinishi mumkin ekan ;)

Mavzu boyicha davom etamiz...

Well, you can use your power of moderator and ban me or warn me or something like this. I am sure you already have other reasons for that too:)