The "witness" reports early on were very "diverse" on the news coverage, to say the least. I am still amazed at the footage showing a massive hole in the north tower, while the talking heads are talking about a "small commuter plane. Then, when the second plane hits, there's discussion of it being "at least a 727".
Now, visually mistaking a stretch 737 with a 767-200 is understandable, but a small commuter or a 727? The commentators and eyewitnesses were out of their league.
But the hole in the North tower says 767, not 737. That, along with the live news footage and the subsequent private videos made available, they were certainly 767s. Without pods or missiles. Airliners with frightened passengers and madmen aboard.
Sorry, LLL, the evidence says big heavy jets. If you have real evidence to the contrary, we'd love to see it. Tarheel, and many others, saw it happen first hand. You can't fake that.
(Tarheel, got bros. on the Outer Banks, haven't been there since the 70s, used to go every summer when it was a "sleepy" place, don't think I could handle the change if I went back today...and knew the Hendersonville area well, back then).

To say this was a “foul up” is an understatement. After the WTC devastation, NEADS clearly requested cover over Washington due to another incoming hijacked airliner… and fighters were sent in completely the wrong direction! Do you think that failure in the command chain should have been investigated and detailed by the 9/11 Commission?



I didn’t realise the fighters from Langley weren’t in the air until 09:30, I just saw the request from NEADS was made at 09:21. In that case, as it turned out, I agree they wouldn’t have made it in time to intercept Flight 77.

It appears that neither the NEADS training exercise or that the Langley fighters flew in the wrong direction made a difference in the end. I am though thinking, if I have a plan that relies on airliners impacting their targets, do I assume all will run to plan, the hijackings will be discovered too late and leave it to chance that the military won’t have time to intercept… or do I do everything possible to ensure the missions success?



I understand what you are saying, though that assumes that the military were not specifically requesting shootdown authorisation from Cheney. If the request had been made and specificially denied by Cheney, then a follow up request would be met with, “the orders still stand”. In any case, I am sure you have guessed from what I have said above that my opinion has shifted toward suspecting Cheney’s “order” could be in relation to the Langley fighters – is it possible Cheney had put an order in place for them to follow standard training procedure despite the NEADS request?



Not impossible, though as Cheney was already safe and where he should have been (in an underground bunker/command centre), your theory does not appear at all likely. The facts, frenet/mrbusdriver, are: -

1. Cheney had an order in place in relation to the incoming airliner.
2. The 9/11 Commission attempted to cover-up that this order existed.

As agreement is not going to be reached on what the “order” was, perhaps it is best to focus on the second point. Why was Norman Mineta’s testimony, which clearly places Dick Cheney in control and at the PEOC prior to the Pentagon impact, excluded from the Commission report and an alternative timeline created?

We had this exchange, mrbusdriver: -


You then suggested Mineta may have been mistaken and asked for any other evidence supporting his testimony which I addressed and supplied links to in my post here. Have you had a chance to come to a comprehensive conclusion, taking all the facts into account, yet?

I will rephrase my question because you obviously aren’t getting it - what jurisdiction does a foreign court have over the US? How could a case be brought before a foreign court when the event is outside of their jurisdiction? There were no nationals from countries supposedly involved in 9/11 that would gain by souring relations with the US.



Yes, the evidence for the Reichstag fire and the 9/11 false flag operations are of a similar persuasion (though I would say more convincing for 9/11) yet you see the former as possible and the latter as not. I know what you will say – the Reichstag fire did not involve the controlled demolitions or remotely flown Boeings that you have difficulty understanding. Ok, let’s say there really were hijackers with airliners and the WTC buildings collapsed ‘naturally’. Then do you see the 9/11 operation as possible in a ‘let it happen on purpose’ way?

- So within 1-2 seconds (?) of the single column 79 failing, the adjacent columns 76 and 80 simultaneously fail. Within the next couple of seconds this failure progresses to the adjacent West and South columns 73, 77 and 81. Perhaps columns 74 and 78 are the next to go.

At this point, if almost the whole East structure has failed, how is it still standing? Why has a collapse of the entire structure not begun on the East side?

- Next, around 5-6 seconds (?) after the column 79 failure, the majority of the penthouse debris reaches and damages the 7th floor. This would impact the East perimeter and East end of the North and South walls.

Now the entire East structure is effectively missing and the Eastern perimeters are damaged, yet still no collapse movement on that side? As the main structure is still standing, supported only by the Western side presumably, which way will forces be acting on those remaining columns? The whole structure has to be ‘pulling’ to the East.

- During the next step, let’s pretend the WTC1 debris had damaged columns 69, 72 and 75. In the next 1-2 seconds (?) the remaining columns, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70, 71 and the approximately 25 external columns for some reason all at once fail.

How can this many columns fail together so quickly? Why do they fall straight down through the path of most resistance when there are undoubtedly sideways forces acting on the columns, rather than falling to the East? With a progression from East to West over an approximately 7 second period, how can the West wall fall at precisely the same time as the East?

Apart from the above questions, where do the beams break as the internal structure ‘detaches itself from the perimeter columns – the fastenings with the internal or perimeter columns? Is it reasonable for this level of failure to occur all the way through 40 floors, especially with no visible effect from outside the building?



Regarding the penthouse failure, I have explained that initial charges used to weaken the structure ensuring complete collapse are a possible cause. I have shown other controlled demolitions exhibiting these early charges prior to the main collapse, notably the Fort Worth building. I have said the penthouse collapse was not likely a design of these charges but, due to column 79 being more isolated than others, loads were not able to be redistributed and the structure below the penthouse failed. What is your problem with understanding this?

The other issues you mention are not physical characteristics of the collapse; a separate issue to the failure process of the structure. All have been explained and that you personally choose to reject the possibilities is irrelevant.



I don’t see any evidence of explosives, residues or shrapnel in the photograph. A tree impact and fire obviously caused the damage How can you know from the picture that this was a car bomb?

Well, if you go in the "off season" it really is a "sleepy" place. But yeah it's definitely changed since the 70's.

It's truly amazing that people think that if the government is invovled somewhere it's automatically a conspiracy.

I have never considered any of these things before, and call me blind but I was unaware of why the government would do anything like this. Of course after reading the first post and all of the attachments I am kinda embarrassed that I even considered the story of 911 to be true in the first place. I am not a uneducated person although I did believe the reports of what happened. Now of course I feel really uninformed.

The question in my mind remains. Was this a form of population control, or what??? It is very amazing the information regarding the heat and collapsing of the towers, and of the terrorists that we found to be alive after they were supposedly to have died.

I just do not know what to think and really feel that I am living in an alternate reality.

Whispering Eagle

Good morning, Eagle,

There are a couple of basic scenarios bouncing around there. One is the "official" story, the one we saw unfold on TV and read about in the papers and Commission report. Some of the information is incomplete, details are missing, with some conflicting accounts. The government/military response was slow, trying to maneuver the government and military into a response to a rapidly unfolding and confusing situation. Mistakes were made, operational procedures were inadequate for the threat that came that morning.

The other scenario, the government conspiracy, assumes airtight operational security, the rapid design, planning, and execution of an incredibly complex multi skyscraper demolition scheme. This includes the selection of demolition experts, secretly installing a large amount of explosives throughout the three enormous skyscrapers, coordinating the preparation and flights of four large airliners. The aircraft impacts into the towers had to be in such a way as to not disable the installed explosives chains in the buildings. Perfect timing and infallable secure communications. This entire operation needed to be completely secret, involving hundreds if not thousands of specialists. There could be no mistakes, no foulups, no leaks whatsoever, with perfect command, control and communications.. And it had to be done in a matter of months, with a brand new administration, and with the previous President's bueracracy in place in the intelligence, political, and administrative positions. The entire government does not "roll over" on election day. It also presumes a evil in government beyond measure. Many point to Operation Northwoods, the "blame it on Cuba" conspiracy. What is seldom mentioned in that case is that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs who presented it to the President was quickly fired. Such loose cannons are not well tolerated in the military and government, it showed a dangerous lack of judgement and was not tolerated.

Knowing the way the government and military works, I choose to see the former scenario as more plausable. The terrorists knew our military defenses were small and in a "peacetime" mode. Our operational security was lax, airport security all but non existant. They caught us completely unprepared, knowing the response would be slow, measured, and confused by the rapidly unfolding events. The perfection of the latter, "conspiracy" scenario is beyond reality in my opinion. It resembles TV movies, with absolutely perfect operational C3I. That's not how things work. Hindsight is 20/20, and we can easily see the many systemic flaws and mistakes made that morning. None are surprising. The conspiracy demands no mistakes whatsoever.

The conspiracy theory, like so many, depends on the suspicion and ignorance of the viewer. Folks don't understand why "Mach 2" fighters couldn't zip to the targets while talking to the President for shootdown authority and vectors to target. It "looks like" controlled demolition. Bush and Cheney are evil.

No, it's just not that simple...think, and study, for yourself. Be as suspicious of the conspiracy claims as you are of the "official" story.

Right, when a building across the street falls for no reason, and the "official" report does NOTHING to explain that, none of the other buildings in the area were damaged, alot of money was made, and we go into a 7 year war obviously over oil.

These were not mistakes, plain and simple.

In the various 9/11 plane crashing vids, where do you see debris falling from the buildings? and why then, nearly a year later thousands of pictures of PAPER are suddenly released?

EDIT: i have nothing to gain, i only want to spread what i know.

Check again, the other buildings in the complex were demolished in the collapse. Look up the Deusche Bank building, across the way. Also taken down due to damage. WTC7 had been damaged by debris, a "large gash in the face".There was significant fire. You are wrong.

War over oil? Iraq is number 7 in our sources, behind the top 3, Canada, Saudi Arabia, and Mexico. You are again wrong and misled.

No debris? There was a lot of debris that fell from the impacts, gobs of it! Plane bits, building bits, body bits. Many were injured and a few killed by it. Read the accounts, man! Look at the many, many videos!The paper "like confetti"was mentioned countless times by eyewitnesses that morning (on the air), some found it eerily pretty. Strike three sir.

Well reasoned points as ever. Plus, Operation Northwoods was on a quite different scale; it talked about "faking" hijacks of supposedly civilian planes and such like, if I remember rightly. Nowhere was there any intention that US citizens would actually be killed. And that is the major problem with all the conspiracy theories to me: they assume that Bush is on a different level of evil even to Hitler (no one was actually killed in the Reichstag fire), or Stalin. That just seems a fantastic leap of suppostion to me. And it also, as you say, assumes that the Bush administration was the most flawlessly efficient government that's ever stalked the earth; and that, even now, seven years on, every single one of those who were involved in the conspiracy is still keeping quiet.

WTCs 4, 5, and 6 were steel-structured buildings, eight or nine stories tall.

As debris fell from WTC 2, the impact collapsed most of WTC 4, and burned one section.

Impacts from the twin towers perimeter columns caused localized collapses and fires in WTCs 5 and 6.

WTC 5 suffered extensive damage.

None suffered progresive collapse, despite localized failures.



A burning section of WTC 5.

WTC 5

Interior WTC 5

Heat-buckled column from WTC 5

WTC 5 was an L-shaped building.

All of these "9/11 conspiracy" threads seem to ignore the fact that there was indeed a conspiracy involved. But the conspirators were Osama, Atta, etc.

So despite the collapse of two 110 storey buildings and subsequent debris piles on top of WTC5, as well as an extensive fire...the structure still failed to collapse.

Interesting.

Also to add...I do happen to have the building codes and requirements for high rises and skyscrapers on a disk somewhere(I hope)...I will try and find it and post it soon. Or at least I will try to find the link as to where I found it. That will at least add some extra information to this debate from a structural POV.

Ok...here is one file that I have uploaded. I am somewhat new to the rapidshare system...and I do not know how many times I can upload it etc.

If anyone has any other sharing methods or sites let me know please

PM me for the link to the file

ASCE 7-05 Minimum Design Loads for buildings and other Structures (pdf format)

Here is a quick list of the files I was able to find that I have stored:

Civil Handbook Of Structural Engineering
ASCE Interaction of Shear Walls and Frames
ASCE 7-05 Minimum Design Loads for buildings and other Structures
CRC- Structural Engineering Handbook - Chen Wai-Fah -1999
Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics Vol.34 Issue 1 Jan 2005
Engineering - Structural - Ansys Tutorials
Engineering - Structural Steel Designer's Handbook (3rd Edition)
Forensic Structural Engineering Handbook
Handbook of Structural Engineering
Maple - Civil & Structural Engineering
Statistics and Probability for Engineering Applications with MS Excel - 2003
Modern Physical Metallurgy and Materials Engineering
Passive And Active Structural Vibration Control Of Civil Engineering
Schaum's Outline - Engineering Statics And Dynamics
Solidworks - Engineering design with Solid Works
Structural Engineering analysis statics2004
Structural Engineering Handbook 2004 - Structural Concrete Design
Structural Engineering Handbook - Basic Theory of Plates and Elastic Stability - E Yamaguchi
Structural Engineering Handbook - Fatigue & Fracture

Structural Engineering Spreadsheets in MS Excel
Engineering Civil Calculator v1.0

I hoard stuff...what can I say

Ah, no, that's impossible, because "a bunch of Arabs" couldn't possibly be able to learn how to fly a commercial aircraft.

(not my words, that's how some of the conspiracy believers seem to look at it.)

WTCs 4 and 6 were not safe to inspect. WTC 5 had fire damage from the fourth floor to the ninth floor. Those floors had localized collapse from debris impacts and fire.

Those buildings were not affected the same way, or constructed the same way, as the twin towers. WTC 5 had beams, not trusses like the towers. The failure in WTC 5 was in the beam connections. Just the opposite occured in the twin towers- the joints between the trusses and the perimeter columns held fast, snapping the perimeter columns when the trusses experienced thermal sagging and stresses.

The fires may have had one small thing in common. Flammable debris piled up to one side of the twin towers, causing concentrated fires on the structural supports.

In the case of WTC 5, it might be possible collapse happened where flammables were stored in higher concentrations.There was some fire-related buckling, but the beams were not generally twisted or warped. Instead, the failure occured at connection joints.

Examples from a test conducted in Cardington, U.K.-


Beam shear buckling, and flange buckling.


End plate split.


Sheer failure of bolts in fin plate connection.

Cardington, U.K.


WTC 5

right?!!?!?....did you know that the man that wired atta 100,000 dollars was meeting with porter goss on 9/11??? nevermind the videos of the implosions,eye witness testimony,microsperes,wtc meteorites and ensuing cover-up-- oh yeah ossama's cia codename was tim ossman and he did live in falls church,virginia for a while close to the cia headquarters-- did you know that the leading profiteering defense contractor "the carlyle group" is owned by the queen,osama bin laden's dad and the bushes in that order according to shares? just coincidence????? c'mon just say it

learning how to fly it and hi jacking one youve never been in,turn off tracking/navigation instruments,navigate across mutiple states staring into a windshield full of clouds then deciding at the perfect moment to pull a 330 degree bank,while descending 7000ft in just two and a half minutes perfectly leveling off to strike the "SIDE" of the pentagon with out scraping the lawn IS QUITE ANOTHER STORY!! why dont you consult some actual pilots here is a link with many experts ready to give their opinions
pilotsfor911truth.org

and all that is still less likely than that the actual planes were flown to Area 51 where the passengers were disposed of, and remote controlled substitutes, or possibly holograms, flown in the WTC, which was actually brought down by demolition charges detonated at precisely the same moment ????

here we go!! area 51 and holograms??!?!? try military installations and remotely operated commercila aircraft-- not to mention them mysterious e-4b that was seen at the wtc and the pentagon-- here are maps showing the flight paths in relation military bases--

I don't have to consult with other pilots.

I'm a private pilot, and have been in aviation for 20 years. I have a few friends who are B747 / B767 / B737 pilots (and are Captains). I have spoken to numerous pilots who have trained people to fly - including training to fly commercial (heavy RPT) aircraft.

I know that the hijackers had commercial licenses. I know they had simulator training in heavy jets. I know they had cockpit diagrammes of B757 / B767s. I know they had pilot notes for same. I know that you only need a basic understanding of the FMS to achieve that goal.

I also know that your linked website automatically bans any pilots that disagree with them.

I've done the research; you haven't.

"most heavily armed military and airforce (sic) bases in the United States"? I see a couple of AMC bases shown...cargo planes there. You have some numbers and information to back up this "claim"? What armament, types of planes, etc?

Did you miss my post here, mrbusdriver, or did it just beat you?

Leaving an outstanding contradiction/discrepancy is not good enough if you want to say the 'official' story is true. How do you explain the Commission Reports omission of Mineta's testimony and fabrication of Cheney's timeline? Was Mineta mistaken and somehow 'lost' an hour? Is he an outright liar? How and why? You see, the 'alternative' version of events can explain all of this very well whereas your theory has so far fallen short.

Make sure you read Mineta's testimony in full and the accounts corroborating his timeline all of which I have linked to before drawing your conclusion.

1. Did you know contingency planning exercises had simulated a plane crash at the Pentagon?
   
   
2. Did you know that coincidently, Charles Burlingame who was an ex-Navy pilot and had worked on anti-terrorism strategies in the Pentagon, was the pilot of Flight 77 on 9/11.
   
   
3. Did you know that Flight 77 had the potential for a fabricated passenger list with many of those onboard being government officials or those affiliated with it, including a large group of students with the National Geographic Society. Operation Northwoods detailed how the Chiefs of Staff thought it was possible to create a fake passenger list: “The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight”.
   
   
4. Did you know, following from the above Operation Northwoods quote - Flight 77 was not scheduled to fly on 9/11 (search link for “Bureau of Transportation Statistics”).
   
   
5. Did you know that Flight 77 disappeared from radar at 08:56am. After nearly 30 minutes at approximately 09:25am, an unidentified ‘blip’ assumed to be Flight 77 was sighted flying fast towards the Pentagon.
   
   
6. Did you know that Hani Hanjour, the ‘hijacker’ who supposedly flew Flight 77 into the Pentagon, was a poor pilot who had difficulty controlling a small Cessna aircraft. Yet on 9/11 he perfectly executed a steep descent whilst tightly banking before lining the aircraft up and skimming feet above the ground in a large Boeing 757.
   
   
7. Did you know that air traffic controllers said, “The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane”
   
   
8. Did you know that testimony given to the 9/11 Commission indicates Vice President Dick Cheney had an order in place, allowing the aircraft to approach and impact the Pentagon.
   
   
9. Did you know that the of only three calls from Flight 77, two ‘happened’ to be those of Barbara Olson to her husband. Her husband, who ‘happened’ to be US Solicitor General. The US Solicitor General, who ‘happened’ to be the man that successfully represented presidential candidate George W. Bush in the Supreme Court case Bush v. Gore, which effectively determined the final result of the contested 2000 Presedential election.
   
   
10. Did you know a C-130 military aircraft was at the scene, as the unidentified aircraft made its approach and impacted the Pentagon. Also a mystery E-4B military aircraft was in the area which has not been explained.
    
    
11. Did you know that in an interview with Parade magazine at the Pentagon in October 2001, whilst talking of the attacks, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld states, “the missile to damage this building”.
    
    
12. Did you know that the Pentagon was ‘luckily’ struck at its least vulnerable spot; an area that had recently been renovated with steel reinforcements and blast-resistant windows. A strike anywhere else would have caused more damage.
    
    
13. Did you know that within minutes of the impact, FBI agents confiscated all security camera footage surrounding the Pentagon. Still to this day, defying Freedom of Information Act requests, no footage showing Flight 77 impacting the Pentagon has been released.

kudo's Q24, we need like, 15 more of you and we will start a revolution!

Keep the good word flowing!

EDIT: if i may...
And now, more 9/11 creepy coincidences in movies!

Independence day, the nuclear bomb clock stops at... 9.11
End of Days, the climax of the movie sees the clock at 11:09 31 december 1999

I am Legend, End of the World scenario of 2012 set in Manhattan, he lives at 11 11, K being the 11th letter in the alphabet, this is a double K, something strange to note about this...

Take a gander at these, and tell me you dont see 11 11 within the K's, creepy, no?

The Hudsucker Proxy(cohen brothers), as the clock reaches 1959 in manhattan, a large 9 sits in the corner, as the second's hand passes the 11.

A 1st degree masonic tracing board...

Poster for the movie World Trade Center...

and United 93...

As you can see in these two posters, there is a concentration of light emphasized in the middle pillars, the masonic board holds the eye above the middle pillar...
Coincidence?

Is it still coincidence that there were 3 buildings destroyed in 9/11?

The movie, Escape from New York, kurt russell lands on top of the world trade center, and wouldn't you know it, the poster reveals...

mind you this was from the 80's. And now, i give you, the Rabbit hole...

The Pyramids of Giza stand one taller than the other, and one much lower. According to speculation concerning the various rituals performed in and around these pyramids, it is believed that thousands of people would circle them as part of religious ceremony. During the Hodge, in the Muslim faith, this same ritual can be seen as thousands of people circle the Grand Mosque of Mecca, as the centerpiece is the spherical stone of the Kaaba.
This means little, until you realize that the WTC plaza was built to mimic the pyramids of Giza, with as its centerpiece a sphere, set to rotate every 24 hours...
Coincidence? I think not.

The "kings chamber" of the pyramids of Giza is a cuboid room, the arc of the covenant also is of cuboid shape, along with the most commonly known representation, The Temple of Solomon, with its cuboid 'holiest of holies'...
Interesting to note that the above Masonic board is "supposed" to be a representation of Solomons temple, as Solomons Temple was founded after the Israelites Exodus(where they had to build their own Giza, so to speak)

The two pillars of Solomons Temple Boaz and Joachim, and, within them the "blazing" or morning star.

Is it a coincidence that the pentagon, a physical representation of the 5-pointed star played a part in the actual events?
Ill let yall decide...

MORE EDITY:

I dare you, go to a masonic lodge, you will see the towers boaz and joachim and a "blazing star" representation.
Religion is control, once you step past that(especially with masonry, a secretive religion) the door is open for true perception of what masonry is, and how it correlates to 9/11.
Not that masons "did it", but that more than likely unbeknownst even to them they were used, as they were used in germany...

a secret society inside a secret society.

Citizens of most countries were among the victims of 911. A court action in any of those countries against your supposed perpetrators would be possible, a civil case if the criminal courts didn't have jurisdiction, if only you had the evidence.

I've been arguing with you for months on the evidence of how the collapses occurred, rather than any other aspect of the "inside job" theories. It's this aspect, and in particular the "amateurs know best" approach to engineering issues that you personify, that interests me. I don't really know if the US intelligence services could have stopped the attacks, and this is certainly one aspect where I think that further investigation is needed.

Columns fail quickly when an extra load beyond their maximum capability is placed upon them. I've Gilsanz's structural model as evidence that column 79 lacked an alternate path capable of handling its load if it failed, so its load would be immediately placed on the remaining columns, particularly its two neighbours, overloading them in turn. As I said before, the timing depends on how the collapse progresses. If it is by load redistribution it can be very quick, fractions of a second. If it depends on elements damaging other elements by falling on them, then there is a delay caused by the time taken to fall. With the structure of WTC7, the outer wall is supported by the outer ring of columns, so providing the floor trusses between the inner and outer structures are not strong enough to pull the outer structure before they break, the interior group of columns can start to collapse without any visible movement of the outer wall. There is plenty of room in a steel-framed structure for elements to fall, as the volume within such a structure is mostly air space and weak secondary structure such as interior walls. At some point, falling debris from this interior collapse reaches the stronger lower floors, bringing down the outer structure as I've described.
As I've repeatedly said, the result does not depend on the exact sequence in which the columns fail, whether it goes westwards along the north row before southwards along the east row or vice versa is irrelevant.

You have shown examples where horizontal elements are severed before the main collapse charges, you have not shown any cases where vertical elements are severed in the same way. You were previously arguing that the penthouse collapse was an accident due to misplaced (on vertical rather than horizontal elements?) high-level charges. Are you now trying to argue that the penthouse collapse was somehow due to a low-level charge on column 79?
I am still waiting for your detailed scenario and any response at all to my list of the problems with your general theory. You may think you have covered those points, but I don't recall you doing that, so perhaps you could give the data I requested.

May I remind you that the car in the picture is your example, not mine. You are just trying to muddy the waters with it. I described the damage to my car, I said that your car bomb (taking your word that that was what it was) would have different damage and other evidence, not necessarily visible in a picture. Your picture is not relevant to my example.

Once again the argument is brought up about "remote controlled" planes, etc. This is the question I've always been asking... how many people needed to have been involved in such a scheme? To equip the selected planes, and/or switch them with ones prepared earlier, and/or whatever? How many people would have needed to have been persuaded to turn a blind eye? And why have we never heard from any of the people involved in this scheme? Just as we've never heard anyone who planted the explosives in the Twin Towers come forward? And just supposing that the real planes were flown to some military base, where the passengers were disposed of by some monstrous means... does anyone really, seriously think that everyone involved there, everyone on the base conccerned, would have kept quiet ever since? That no one would have been driven by their conscience to come forward about their involvement in such a monstrous act? Or is there just the belief among the conspiracy movement that the moment someone joins the Military™, they sign their conscience away and are prepared to do anything, however wicked, against their fellow citizens if their goverment orders them to? Look at Abu Ghraib; or Guantanamo Bay; how long did they manage to hush up what was going on there? And that was on a vastly smaller scale, in terms of the numbers of people involved, than the 9/11 conspiracy.

(Oh, incidentally, how many military bases are really "heavily armed"? They're not ringed with anti-aircraft guns and SAMs, that's only in the realm of fiction, and just because it's an Air Force base, that doesn't mean that they necesarily have ranks of fighters standing by ready to scramble at the drop of a hat, like in the Battle of Britain).

Nothing personal, Q24, but your premise is wrong to begin with.

Then, you launch into a volumous attempt to use inductive reasoning to prove your, and forgive me here, misguided efforts.

You could continue for years, expend a hugh amout of resources, and fall exhuasted and self-defeated when it is all over.

My advise is to redirect your concerns toward something with a higher chance of return on time invested.

I could get no further than the doughnut business. My advise is to move, or change drinking water- because something is unhinged, here.

All I know about that company is their stock was once highly over-valued, and their product is of no interest to me. But, to allege secret codes in their packaging or marketing, is a little over the top. Give them some credit, at least, for being sane.

You got that far? I'm impressed.

My premise is based on the facts - show me where it's wrong. Or even better - show me where yours is right.

I did like your post here, merril, with the WTC5 picture. It does highlight how after a steel-framed building has been impacted by a mass of heavy debris and suffered severe fire, even with the floors and support structure failing, the main structural columns are still standing. Hmm I wonder, if one of those columns in the picture had failed, would this have led to a progressive collapse of the whole structure? Not a chance by the look of it.

PS The doughnut thing put me off too

Turning a blind eye is as easy as money, of which our government has been spending plenty to get and keep this war marching on.

Irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the ability of a pilot to fly the aircraft into the building. If anything, it shows that realistic scenarios were being employed. There are numerous buildings that have practiced fire drills... and have had fire! They must be in on it. All airport fire & rescue crews training for an aircraft crash... and there have been crashes! They must be in on it. Aircrew practice for aircraft emergencies... and they have had aircraft emergencies! They must be in on it.

http://www.911myths.com/html/hijacking_drill.html



How many ex-Navy pilots are currently flying as RPT pilots for major airlines, and have done tours at the Pentagon and / or have been "involved" in anti-terrorist strategies or planning? (and what exactly is meant by "worked on" and how long ago?)

http://www.911myths.com/html/burlingame_and_mascal.html



Potential. Could. Not proof.



Killclown? Bzzzt. ANYTHING that idiot says is suspect. Both "missing" flights were from American; perhaps they didn't report the data, because the flights had crashed? Not proof (I'll keep reminding you of that word: PROOF).



Do you mean to say that an aircraft, not in primary radar coverage, turns off it's transponder and disappears from the SSR picture? Amazing. Pity it is exactly what is expected to happen.



No, Hanjour - an FAA registered commercial pilot with logged time in 'heavy' simulators - flew the aircraft into a building. Hundreds of thousands of commercial pilots around the world have no difficulty in understanding how this happened.



You missed off the last part of the quote:

"You don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe."

THAT'S why they thought it was military. A commercial aircraft does not do that because the passengers would be disressed. Hanjour, on the other hand, did care about the passengers or aircraft, because he knew they were going to be destroyed.

http://www.911myths.com/html/military_plane.html



It couldn't be that Mr Mineta got the times mixed (seeing how all records disagree with his timings)?

http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Norman_Mineta



Sorry to be a pain, but it's that little thing called PROOF again.



You mean this guy, who was the pilot of the C-130, and saw it all happen?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q9ag6brfWro

In any case: PROOF?



The full quote is:

"Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center."

He's talking about the aircraft being used as missiles - a very good analogy. Besides - once again - PROOF?



Gee - one in five chance. Never heard of such outrageous odds before. Especially since he came over the area too high, then had to do a tight turn to lose height, and lined up on the first available side.

I should also mention the lack of logic, whereby the government is quite prepared to kill all these people that were supposed to be on the airliners, but wants to minimise the damage to the Pentagon?



The Citego - open only to DoD personnel - and they actually got to the cameras quick smart. Some call that a quick response; you call that suspicious. How long did it take to confiscate ALL the tapes from all the various locations?

There are a number of the tapes released, but none show the impact. Why? Perhaps because none were in the correct location to see it, or the video quality is too poor? Have you seen various security camera footage on TV? Just how clear is it?

http://www.flight77.info/

http://www.flight77.info/85videos.html

Yes, I've done the research.

So you think the government of say… El Salvador… could/would put Dick Cheney on trial?

Speaking of court cases, when is the Bush Administration going to make their case against Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda? Notwithstanding this should have been carried out before the Afghanistan war, it is now nearly 7 years later and we are still waiting. We know that the Taliban offered to hand over Bin Laden if the US could present evidence of his guilt… shortly after the bombing started, the Taliban even offered to hand him over with no evidence for trial in a neutral country.

Of course the US turned down both offers – couldn’t have their pretext spoilt before the war got going could they. But realistically the case never was going to go to court because of these small problems: -

• FBI Director Robert Mueller told CNN twice that there is “no legal proof to prove the identities of the suicidal hijackers.”
  
  
• Also in a speech Mueller stated, “The hijackers also left no paper trail. In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper”.
  
  
• Then the FBI themselves have stated “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”

Still want to discuss court cases?



Sorry to disappoint, but the hundreds of engineers, architects, scientists, former military and government officials, amongst many other scholars and academics calling for a new and independent 9/11 investigation are all experts in their fields. It’s ok, you just keep telling yourself they aren’t there if it makes you feel better.

It was your version of the Curse of Klass referring to wider issues, including government involvement, which started this line of discussion. I didn’t ask if you think US intelligence services could have stopped the attacks; I specifically asked if you think it is possible that they purposefully didn’t? Here is some information to help you make up your mind: -

• The presidential brief of August 2001 entitled “Bin Laden determined To Strike in US” highlighted Al Qaeda were looking to hijack aircraft.
  
  
• The Able Danger military intelligence program identified lead hijacker Mohamed Atta and a number of other hijackers prior to 9/11.
  
  
• The 9/11 Commission Report states, "During the spring and summer of 2001, U.S. intelligence agencies received a stream of warnings about an attack al Qaeda planned”. Indeed, intelligence warnings were received from a number of foreign services specifically indicating agents of Al Qaeda living in the US, receiving flight training and planning a massive strike involving aircraft.

Ok we say, the above points could perhaps be written off as incompetence of the current US administration, negligence of intelligence agencies or an overall ‘failure to connect the dots’. But there is more, again amongst others: -

• FBI and military intelligence officials in Washington were told to ‘back off’ full investigations into members of the Bin Laden family and related organisations in the US before the terrorist attacks of 9/11.
  
  
• FBI agent and Al-Qaeda expert John O'Neill was featured in a Frontline documentary entitled “The Man Who Knew”. The program intro states…
  
  

  “For six years, John O’Neill was the FBI’s leading expert on Al Qaeda. He warned of its reach. He warned of its threat to the U.S. But to the people at FBI headquarters, O’Neill was too much of a maverick, and they stopped listening to him. He left the FBI in the summer of 2001 and took a new job as the head of security at the World Trade Centre.”

  O’Neill was killed in the 9/11 attacks only 2 days after taking up his new job, the night before telling the Director of Emergency Management for NYC, “We're due, and we're due for something big.”
  
  
• In 2002, FBI agent Coleen Rowley wrote to FBI director Robert Mueller describing her experience working with Minneapolis FBI agents tracking suspected terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui prior to the attacks. Rowley describes her superior, as “consistently, almost deliberately thwarting the Minneapolis FBI agents' efforts” to attain a search warrant. Senator Chuck Grassley later wrote that “If the application for the FISA warrant had gone forward, agents would have found information in Moussaoui's belongings that linked him ... to a major financier of the hijacking plot".

So it appears there was deliberate hindrance and obstruction from sections of the FBI and military into investigations that may have prevented the attacks. We could perhaps now say ok, so elements of agencies in the US knew the attacks were coming and intentionally allowed the events to unfold – a ‘let it happen on purpose’ scenario. But still there is more: -

• Two of the hijackers lived with an FBI informant.
  
  
• Five of the hijackers lived right outside the gates of the America’s most powerful spy agency, the NSA.
  
  
• Reports indicate CIA agents met with Osama Bin Laden 2 months prior to 9/11.
  
  
• It was at the same time CIA agents of the Bin Laden Issue Station infiltrated Afghan militant units and Al Qaeda in 1999, that the Hamburg cell comprising of the hijackers Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi and Ziad Jarrah, plus other figures linked with the 9/11 plot, just so happened to join with Al Qaeda.

Now this is becoming too close for comfort; ‘failure to connect the dots’ is one thing, to ‘let it happen on purpose’ is another but these last points are suggestive of complicity by some elements of US agencies. As a final point: -

• The lead hijacker, Mohammed Atta, was wired $100,000 from Omar Sheikh, an individual with connections to both the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Al Qaeda. Who was the intermediary the CIA used to fund and train the Mujahideen resistance of which Osama Bin Laden was a member during the Soviet-Afghan war? The Pakistani ISI.

Any comments?

BTW, what PROOF do you have that the 136 witnesses are lying? You know, 104 of which actually saw the aircraft hit the Pentagon?

Troublesome details which truthers don't like to talk about.

1. Oh you have Gilsanz model at last – can you provide a link to it please?
2. When you answer all of the questions I asked regarding WTC7, I might then take you seriously.

I don’t think column damage at a low-level is going to make a section of the building fall ‘through’ itself all the way up to the roof. You say ‘misplaced’ high-level charges which is possible I guess, but I was thinking more along the lines of a charge being too close to column 79 at a high-level.

Now I think again, why couldn’t a high-level charge have been meant to damage column 79 to weaken the structure? The charge was just more effective than planned and the penthouse collapsed prior to the main demolition. How do we know the high-level charges in the Fort Worth demolition did not cut the vertical columns?



Ah sorry, I didn’t realise there were two flyingswans on UM. I had a long chat with the other flyingswan on another thread but I shall repeat the points here for your benefit.

Controlled demolition set-up surviving damage and fire: -


CD set-up of occupied building: -


Absence of physical evidence of CD: -

Page upon page can be written for each of the above, suffice to say there is only one phenomenon on its own – controlled demolition – that can account for all, whereas the ‘official’ story must introduce multiple contentious excuses to cover for each point separately and then failing still.



The point is that the car “looks like” it has explosive damage, as did the WTC buildings. Your argument that the WTC collapses were natural is precisely equivalent to me claiming the car suffered damage from a crash. Afterall, we know that a tree impact can distort a car… we know that a resultant fire could have caused the car explosion… we know that a car battery could reach unimaginable temperatures… so why should it have been a car bomb, right?

What is absolutely amusing about your BS about Freemasons, is that I know of three Masons(Master Masons all and one Temple Knight for sure) at present who all accept that 9/11 was an inside job. One of them is a physical engineer and is adamant about the use of HE in the structures to bring them down(discussions usually border on energy sinks). All three of them believe that the US has been usurped by fascists for the last 60 years since WW2.

So how exactly does that work into your anti-Mason rhetoric?

As a minor point, my Teacher(one of the Masons) asked a simple question about melting steel. How much steel was found melted, and more importantly, how long in a foundry does it take to melt a ton of steel. The answer will surprise you(thermate based discussion).

No, not creepy - just something that your own mind WANTS to see, so you see it.


You've got to be kidding - right? The fact that they use backlighting and edge shading to draw your attention to the center of the drawing/painting is a tried and true technique that is THOUSANDS of years old. You need to do a little reading.

Make that a LOT of reading.

So, which one of the WTC towers was taller than the others? Which pyramid is shaped like a pentagon?

And, please, where do you get your up to the date information about the ceremonies they conducted several thousand years ago - of which there are no records, neither written OR oral??

Oh, and while you read up on artistic techniques, you might want to check on Muslim religious practices. That's The "Haaj."

And your analogy is a bit flawed. No, let me correct that - it's totally whack. You realize that you are asserting that the centerpiece that the New Yorkers are/were rotating around the SUN?!?! You really are special, and I don't mean that in a good way.


And then you can research the "king's chamber" - of which there has been only ONE found... and they just tacked the title of "king's chamber" to it because at the time it was the biggest. Then there are many more chambers of which they have no ideas what purpose they fulfill... of many different shapes and sizes.

Going from the Biblical description, you may want to research the shape of the Arc of the Covenant. 'Tweren't as cubic as you give it credit for. I'd like to know where the cubic shape was at in the WTC or the Pentagon.

Is it a coincidents that the target in question was the command post of the military of the attackers' sworn enemy? I'll let you decide. If the Department of Defense had their headquarters in a shoe box, you'd see a similarity to something.

Well, the PILLARS (not towers) are named Boaz and Jachin, and the blazing star represents the the Sun... and the Light of Illumination, intimating that we seek to learn... something you might try doing before you make up your mind.

In a decade of being a Freemason, I have seen precious little "religion" in Lodge. The fact that you already see a secretive religion where none exists explains a whole lot. And how, exactly, were the Freemasons "used" in Germany? In all my research, I have failed to see any usury there.

zaus, are there ANY conspiracy theories that you haven't totally accepted as absolute truth??

I wonder if he is talking about the "usury" of the Masons before and during WW2 where they hunted them down and executed them outright. Undesirables in Nazi Germany were rounded up and put into concentration camps...then worked to death and finally executed.

The Masons never had it that good...instead they were executed outright, many in their own homes...clearly because they posed a direct threat to fascism in Germany.

But according to Zaus, that is akin to being "used"

I just knew this would get back to the Freemasons. Maybe Jack the Ripper was one of the pilots!!!

Seems so far to be the only answer that the conspiracy theorists have come up with.