USMC850T

Reversing top 8 finishers and shortening the second race to 20 minutes is weird..

Pretty common, they do it in indy lights and a number of other series.

Move off the dirt track and into the majors Hollywood.

What team is running that s60? Is atspeed back???

Hope you don't get busted!

There were some guys at a store by us that priced down a $6k ticket to $600!

There was also a girl at a different store by us that sold $99 PS3 to about 5 of her friends. She thought she would be slick if she just quit and severed all communication with the store. Too bad she forgot about her mom as an emergency contact! The store director chatted with her mom and gave her a chance to return all the PS3s or face prosecution.

Not sure if our store has yet to be audited, or ours just wasn't as off as those ones, but nothing happened to anyone.

I used to work there when I was in school ~2004-2006 or so. Really badly fucked up company, it's too bad a whole lot of rank and file sales associates have no job because of the blundering management.

I work 3rd floor at the edge of the glass.

Rochester Police Department, crime analyst. Sweet job, had an internship that helped. My degree is in poly sci and intel analysis. Polysci or CJ will help you get one of these jobs.

keep in mind when the car is off your brakes are only power assisted for a short period of time.

hahaha, ok. aviation experts don't know what they're talking about and you do. no one said they couldn't do a low fly pass but a Boeing 757 was not designed to fly a couple feet off the ground at over 500MPH, the ground effect (that pillow) of air and turbulance underneath the plane (yes I know what it is) you refer to would keep pushing the plane up and make it unstable. That Airbus certainly isn't traveling at 500+ MPH, which is the speed combined with flying a couple feet off the ground in question and certainly not 2 feet of the ground.

You are calling the facts and the overwhelming evidence to the contrary incredibly thin?

Aviation experts understand the ground effect, as do I. You, however, still do not. If you fast forward this video ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69DXf5_hB3c ) which I've already posted to around 25 seconds, you will see the airbus go by at 500 mph, 30 or so feet above the ground. Did the ground effect keep pushing that plane up and up in the air making it unstable?

NO - because it's just one of many forces acting on an aircraft in flight, which is in turn balanced by another force. You know T-5, the magnitude of the lift force exerted on the plane is astronomical compared to the magnitude of what the ground effect would be doing at that altitude. Maybe you should tell your conspiracy theory buddies that LIFT is the reason a 757 couldn't have crashed into the pentagon

The whole argument I've seen you put up is based on your misunderstandings and manipulations of facts, not actual facts. These aviation experts understand what they're talking about, and would probably tell you the exact same thing I've tried to convey. What these conspiracy theory groups have done is take FACTS and manipulate them, or just through plain misunderstanding (like you and your aviation "knowledge"), and spin so they fit into some convoluted conspiracy.

You assume experienced commercial airline pilots with 20+ years experienced didn't adjust for barimetric pressure, they did. Again, watch Pilots for 9/11 Truth Pandora's Black Box and they'll explain. Better yet contact them via their website, they'll explain.

Experienced pilots were not flying the plane into the side of the pentagon, terrorists were. I would be willing to guess that from the point where the plane was hijacked, which could have been in a totally different weather area, no adjustment was made.

You are insane, a 757 in tests by Boeing has been proven to not be able to fly very well at 500+ MPH below 50 feet. It is called turbulence / air pressure. It might have somewhat flown at best but would have been difficult to control especially for an alleged terrorist that couldn't even fly a Cesna by all accounts of his instructors.

I'm not insane, you just have no idea what you're talking about, and are simply repeating something you read somewhere and believed. Tests by boeing show it not being able to fly very well at 50 feet??? It's called turbulence / air pressure????? Don't think so. A 757 would not be any harder to fly down low than any other aircraft. Also, flying in close proximity to the ground, it is quite turbulent. This is something that affects all aircraft. A big airliner like a 757 is going to be affected by this to a much smaller degree than small aircraft, and in no way is this turbulence insurmountable, or tantamount proof that the government conspired to shoot missiles into the pentagon.

For your own information, the ground effect is a phenomenon which acts as a kind of pillow, or cushion, between an aircraft and the ground. It's also something that an aircraft needs to be very close to the ground to notice, especially aircraft with high gross weights relative to their wing area (also known as high wing loading). An aircraft as heavy as a 757 (with a lot of fuel on board) traveling at 500 mph has a fuck-ton of energy, and is going to be relatively unaffected by the ground effect at 50 feet, since it would an extremely weak force relative to the momentum of the aircraft.

uh, again, you don't think experienced professionals know this. this is not what they were seeing.

Well then, I'm not quite sure what they would have been seeing (and I know you don't know what they saw that made them things this way), cause having some experience with this, when I think of the way a military jet would appear on a radar screen, I would think about high speeds, and abrupt turns. Again it's conceivable for a terrorist fly a plane, fly slowly and smoothly like a commercial pilot is supposed to. In fact, they would probably leave the throttle to the stop and make hard turns rather than flying with the finesse that a seasoned airline pilot would. Again if you cannot tell me why this unnamed ATC thought flight 77 was a military plane, you cannot really disprove anything i've said.

uh, a plane as large and as close as the 757 would have been, there would have been some frame showing this. flying that low it would have just about covered the entire view of the overpass.

you're assuming the highway department has some nice high quality cameras setup shooting 29.97fps mpeg video, when in actuality, they are low quality, low FPS cameras.

The whole 9/11 conspiracy is incredibly thin.

For instance:

-the ATC saying that flight 77 appeared to be making military maneuvers, therefore it must have been a military aircraft with rockets

-the ground effect and turbulence prove beyond a doubt that a plane cannot possibly fly as low as 50 feet and remain in control (your fact-packed video claimed "a 757 flying this low would likely flip due to the ground effect" - which is a statement clearly crafted by some shit-for brains tin hat wearing moron whom cannot possibly have any aviation experience, and most certainly not basing that statement on FACTS

850 T-5 : please watch this video. It was crafted by the government to make us believe that jets can in fact fly low and remain in control: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69DXf5_hB3c

and here's another with a 757 low pass followed by a military like steep climb

1. Experienced Air traffic controllers saw what they said resembled Military Aircraft maneuvers, NOT those of a 757 and said they all thought it was a military fighter plane. Air Traffic Controllers like Sybil Edmonds have been threatened and gagged from speaking out.

Airliners are capable of turing at several G's. Also, there is an FAA regulation "speed limit" of 250mph under 10,000ft in effect for noise control. This might make anything making abrupt turns and traveling in excess of this speed limit seem like a military aircraft.

2. Blackbox Altitude analyzed by Pilots for 9/11 turth (founded by a pilot with 20 + years experience), at the time of impact was 479 feet, not low enough to impact light poles and obviously not low enough to hit the building where it supposedly hit. They requested further information and the NTSB declined stating "what you have is what you have".

Blackboxes read absolute altitudes, based off sea level. They are also linked to the instruments, which often times have corrections for barimetric pressure. Do you think terrorists were worried about compensating for pressure changes as they were flying?

3. There is also DOT footage for the nearby highway that would have clearly shown the supposed 757 that hit, Govt. won't release it.

A nearby highway camera shooting at 2-3HZ should be pretty effective at capturing a nice image of a 500mph airliner, shouldn't it!.

4. Ground effects, (AKA the laws of physics and commercial aircraft design), make it impossible for a 757 to fly over 500MPH a couple feet off the ground as claimed, even any experienced aviation expert agrees. Again, watch the video about it.

The ground effect doesn't have a goddamn thing to do with flying jets within feet of the ground. The person who made this video, and yourself, have no idea what the ground effect is, and what it does to a jet.

5. Look at the video, in the link. If you can see you'll see something being shot from a jet and a streak, which is what was likely a missile.

Watch the video again, without the mushrooms. All I see is a fucking blob on a security camera video. Luckily, that blob was outlined into the shape of a fighter jet and missile, so that I would infer that there was some massive government conspiracy behind the 757 crash at the pentagon.

6. Commercial aviation experts have studied the size and type of plane the wreckage came from, these are people who have experience studying crash photos. the size of the wreckage is inconsistant for a Boeing 757

Not sure how many crash photos they had to study showing a 757 impacting a very, very heavily fortified structure. Also not sure who has qualified them as "Comercial aviation experts" but whatever.

I mean come on, get real. Even if this was somehow not true, we have missile defense systems that could have taken an approaching 757 out. These systems were designed to intercept faster moving fighter jets and incoming missiles so explain why they weren't used? Let me guess, you are one of those nuts that claim "We just didn't have anything like that".

Prior to that day, terrorism of this manner was based on the threat of actual violence, rather than the random application of violence, as we saw on 9/11. This is why if you tried to convince anyone on september 10th that shooting down a hijacked airliner was a reasonable thing to do they would probably have punched you. Today, there might be some weight to that argument.

Also, I'm not that familiar with the actual flight path of the aircraft. Presumably if it was headed straight for the pentagon for quite some time, they would have had some warning. This is where the above argument may have been hastily discussed. Also, keep in mind, if the jet was below a certain altitude, it would not be visible on radar.

he is arguing that fact that NOW people do not want us in there anymore

Which is certainly a gross generalization. The north of Iraq, which is kurdish, could not be any happier that we are there and that we deposed saddam. The south is quite similar in their disposition towards americans and their presence. Both areas are pretty quiet, and it bugs me that the media chooses to completely ignore the success we have had in both regions.

As a side note, while there certainly are Iraqi's who don't want us there, I'd be confident to say that there are waaaaay more americans who don't want us there than Iraqis who feel the same way. (by Americans, i mean the smelly protester move on dot org kind)

"Never talk when you can nod, and never nod when you can wink, and never write an e-mail because it's death. You're giving prosecutors all the evidence we need," - Client number 9.

We should be more focused on the rising economies of China and India, and what THAT will be doing to world energy supplies, not Mr. Hummer in Southern California.

+1. It also seems that the fighting between turks and kurdish rebels has had something to do with the spike in pricing this winter.

With the datalogger / Accelerometer for the formula car

sorry, i just had to.

This is what happened when i went to a F1 race a few years ago .

That dude totally pissed his pants.

+1

Collusion all the way. Evidence = Record profits. Fish, Bush is an oil-man. No sincere Renewable energy efforts, no sincere electric vehicle support, no support for even plug-in hybrids (which is the beginning of the end for big oil).

record profits are not an indication of collusion. Collusion is basically what OPEC is for, control supply against almost perfectly inelastic demand and you control market prices.

hahahahahah if you want a crater where Israel is, sure.

And whom would create this crater?

it won't be a republican, that's guaranteed.

thankfully

Don't count on it. Your party has a really piss poor method of targeting and attempting to swing key districts / regions. They think if they just blanket an area with enough money for adds and pamphlets that they will get the results they want. Guess what, it doesn't really work too well! The republicans on the other hand are fairly adept at swinging key districts. I think they'll also run a good candidate (Mccain). Guaranteed democrat victory? Far from it. Clinton or Obama as the democratic candidate...Guaranteed loss. This country is not ready for a woman, or a black man. I'll also guarentee we will see our first black president before we see a woman.

the board of directors for the major corporations of america who decide how much campaign money to contribute to a given canidate.

money=ability to run a campaign for presidency

It's not some grand conspiracy, but it is corrupting democracy

You and I are the powers that be, not a corporation.

'allows for self determination when it is in our best interest, or in the interests of that region' ... wow, that is really kind, generous, and gracious of the US. Thank you.

As for 'proactively changing unfriendly hostile regimes to those which better suit our interest', my interpretation is that the change was for the better of the people of that country involved as well, could you name, say three in the last 100 years ... not including Iraq, of course, the one that is going so well presently.

1.) Germany

2.) Italy

3.) Japan

4.) France (Vischy regime - nazi/ axis collaborator)

There are many more which are not quite as obvious as the fallout of WWII

We've motivated the officer corps of many nations to plot and execute many a coup d'etat in latin american and to a much smaller extent black africa. there seems to be a relationship between periods of economic stagnation, lack of the public's political participation oppertunities and the occurence of such coups. Usually a military intervention into politics results in a period of improvement for the people of that nation. There are obvious examples when this is not the case, but by and large things usually improve. The topic of transitional civil military relations is probably a good for a dissertation, but we can generalize and say they usually benifit that nation for varying periods of time.

Let it be noted that we typically won't get involved in such things unless they have some kind of benefit for us, another harsh reality of the real world .

1. Democracy I thought, meant that people were entitled to their own beliefs, religion, and cultural values. Why does the US, a democratic country, insist on being 'undemocratic' in that other people cannot have whatever worldview/religious/cultural beliefs that they want, including iron-fisted theocracy? Unless democracy has been distorted to mean the imposition of all nations to the Western capitalistic democracy of the US.

Democracy is different that self determination. Our foriegn policy typically allows for self determination when it is in our best interest, or in the interests of that region. Our foriegn policy has also had quite a history in proactively changing unfriendly or hostile regimes to those which better suit our interests. Welcome to the real world.

2. If the US had better foreign policy, ie. you leave Iran alone, do not provoke them, nor impose American values on them, steal their oil, I highly doubt that they will nuke the US for no reason other than religious extremism. Think about it. Why are there never any talks about Iran wanting to nuke Sweden. Ans: because Sweden doesn't piss people off through their international foreign policy. In other words, there is good reason for Iranian hostility towards the US and other Western countries. I think the majority of Iranians are like you and me, it is not fair to paint Iranians as extremists any more than to paint all Americans like Timothy McVeigh. Even you said that it was an extreme form of Islam. Iranians in general (not extremists) are nice people. They want to provide for their families, they want to put food on the table, they want security and a roof over their heads just like you and me.

I don't think America has been provoking or imposing values on Iran. I can't think of many nations aside from Iran who think it's a good idea for them to posess nuclear capabilities, and it's not totally unreasonable to take measures to ensure they not be able to obtain them. They certainly present a danger to our interests in the region, most specifically Israel. They hate isreal. Hate them - not even up for debate. Listen to some of the speeches their 'president" gives on the subject.

There is absolutely no need for the united states to invade them. I'm sure at this very minute the centcom commanders have a very good idea where the nuclear development facilities are. All it would take are a few cruise missles and some 5,000lb JDAMS and we can put their nuc program in a state of stagnation. As for the border, I think we need to set up air patrols and kill boxes along their border. Anything which does not pass through an official checkpoint becomes a piece of char broiled wreckage courtesy of the air patrols.

It was a state trooper. In every state I know of they are allowed to pace you.

They are allowed to do that from a known distance and angle from the road though, I don't think it's just a stand anywhere at any distance and angle to the oncoming traffic and make up a number.

Hammered!!111!

This Is Really Funny You Mention the TV comparsion , as I just had a Run in with a TV repair Crew sort of Speak , The Short Version , I have Been Using Extended Warranty's on Applinances , that I didn't have Time for and or didn't what to Fix Myself , as Far as, TV's go I haven't Fixed On since I had to go to a Harware Store and Buy a Tube for $2.50 and Plug It in the Back of the My Dads Set ! Anyway I had this extended Warranty and 10 days after I bought It Bam , Light Out No

Boob Tube , We had an Ice Storm , and Power surges. I called It In and a Three Days Later the Warranty Repair Guy , calls me on the Phone and ask a Few ?s Like waht's wrong and When did this happen etc. - Bam He says this Must have Been Pre-exiting and I will Need to Charge You to come Out , and then the Warranty will Kick In - Hello KIck In , I just Paid Like $385.00 for a Three Yr. Plan .

Then This Air Head says So Will I Get Paid When I get There , Paid When You Get Here , I already Paid and You haven't been Here Yet , so How Can You say It was Pre-existing , On an On , I called their Boss and the Under writers and Everybody , What a Pain in the jerk Three Hrs. and No where I took the Time Off , to let them in the House - I Swear I was going to take the Bastards to Court !

So, This Big Wig Mrg. calls Me the next day and apploizes and all that BS , and says He won't be able to Honor Our agreement , says once before We had a Service Call on a Product that had a warranty on It , Well Isn't That the Idea Buddy !

So I Get a Full Refund and Two Weeks go by , I deside to say what the Hell I'll Pull this Baby apart and see what makes it Tick !

5 yr. Old JVC 32" Table Top , as the Best Quote I got was $115.00 plus Parts just to solder them in !

I did some research and I found a Blog Just Like a Volvo Blog TV repair Guys talking about repairing TV Sets !

My Model was on the site , I read about Issues with the set and It sounded , like what My set did, so I went to Radio Shake got $1.69 Cent Capacitor

Heated up the Old one removed It and Solder in the New One , something I have never done before. IT WAS EASY A FARMER WITH FAT FINGERS COULD HAVE DONE IT - COST ME $ 6.95 Total as I needed Silver Solder .018 wire - It Works Great , They even inform readers where to find the bad parts !

Savings $379.00 and I had My Credit Card Company Debit it out of their Bank On Top Of the Refund Just to put them thou some HELL , TWICE !

EngTech

Shut the fuck up about diesel cars already and start typing in black font.

Of course they don't want their cars to last as long, they want you to buy another in a few years. Ever compare the quality of a TV 10 years ago to today??

This isn't myspace we don't need 9 fucking colors in each post.