Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
redhen

911 inside job - for what?

4,447 posts in this topic

Thanks for responding skyeagle

He certainly is tenacious and thorough. I have not looked at this thread for a while, I just wanted to see what logically sound arguments there were for executing this "inside job". All the responses were made up of accusations, allegations and innuendos.

I would have thought that skyeagle would have moved on by now too, but he's still fighting the good fight, awesome!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Psyche

Irrefutable evidence can be found in the analysis offered by something over 2000 Architects & Engineers, as to the impossibility of the official story regarding the collapse of the buildings.

Hi BR

That is simply not the case. Any Engineer or Architect without "Truther" at the head of their report disagrees with them. It's a small group with an agenda. Sky has put up countless links that directly refute this claim, surely a repeat performance is not required?

Irrefutable evidence regarding the presence of a Boeing at Shanksville can be found in the statements of Wally Miller and his people, the photographic evidence now 'scrubbed' from the internet, and a follow up interview of Wally Miller in 2011 or 2012 by Christopher Bollyn in his book.

Then why was I able to refute it when you mentioned this the first time? Wally himself denies what you Are saying. You are only promoting the view of a truther, not actual information pertaining to Wally, hell you also said he never met a single person survived by the victims but that was wrong too. When you ignore such information, one can only see your stance as credulous and zealous. There is no substance to these claims. They are only claims.

Irrefutable evidence contradicting the official story at the Pentagon is ample.

Again that too is a negative. In fact, once someone has looked at the truther version of events I fail to see how one can hold this position. We have wreckage, we have lost lives, we have witnesses, we have hurt people, and we have people gleefully celebrating their murderous work, what more does it take?

I have made my own mind up Psyche. I rely upon various websites, including UM, for information, but I do my own thinking.

This makes more sense to me than anything so far. I do believe you have your own version of events, but I do not see any place where they reflect reality, only truther claims and nonsense. I would suspect you go to Truther sites, Alex Jones and UM, to be frank, those sites would encapsulate everything you have said, but if they were any more than BS I doubt you and I would be having this conversation right now.

And I forget if I mentioned it to you, but aviation has been my career for something over 40 years. I am still active and earning a bit of money from it. I am still active in flight instructing.

So is Skyeagle. So is Hazzard, many people here are pilots, in fact my brother in law holds a pilot license. If this is your expertise, why are we not seeing it? How come you canot provide any sort of detail for your claims, but push stuff and nonsense like the harassment of Wally MIller to create a story? You made claims about miller earlier, and I gave you Wally's own words to prove the CT is wrong. You never replied, as such I can only assume the provided information satisfied your requirement.

Part of the irrefutable evidence for me comes from my experiences in aviation, especially instructing. I know it is impossible for Hani to do what he is alleged to have done. It's simply impossible.

Then please elaborate. I have not yet seen a single claim that has not been torn to shreds. If you have something you feel stands to scrutiny, please show us, if we do not agree, at least one can see the reason for your conviction.

Further, Dennis Cimino, an expert in analysis of Flight Data Recorders, discovered that the 'evidence' offered by the federal government in the form of the FDR from "Flight 77" is completely bogus.

Ex flight data recorder analyst, who is again challenged. He seems to have speeds wrong, pitch wrong, no sensors were even connected to the cockpit door that he calls an anomaly, what does he have that is verified?

You sir, may believe whatever song and dance the government sings for you, but I choose the independent way, and looking at the big picture.

I keep saying, I am in Australia, the US Government has no influence on me. I am on the other side of the world. I do not feel your claims are in any way independent, they seem to be the Truther manual, and you have not looked at big pictures, and I would cite Wally Miller as a prime example. The explanation exists, it fits, the ones doing the song and dance about it, and endlessly it seems, and apt for the rejoicing murderers, are the truthers. Not sure how you see it any other way.

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YOU cannot be considered credible SkyEagle, but Dennis Cimino is very credible.

Your just choosing sides. What claim of Dennis's has proven Sky's version of events incorrect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wont do any good pshche101 ! THis Babe is like many,many C.T`s not a leg to stand on the more attention we give it the more B.S. that spews out.

I specially like the Drone aircraft bit,and that we talked the flight crew,all lost,and the passengers all dead,and all the other lives that day that perished in that Terror !To get into those drones.

To think in our world of high tech tracking,avaionics,training of those fine pilots and flight crews that a Arm chair C.T. has it all fingered out !

Kinda makes one sick if you really think about it ! Skyeagle & I both have a little bit of Avaition background,I have many,many Retired Commercial & Military pilots friends.

All to the Letter know that this is nonsense ! To even think that it was but what was proven by thousands of experts in the Field is to Run that Flag up the Stupid Pole !

I guess Babe Ruth didnt know anyone that died that day in THe North East? I did !

Edited by DONTEATUS
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how many 9/11 debunkers have actually read the NIST report, which has never been peer reviewed incidentally, so as far as a scientific paper goes it’s just a theory! And I wonder how many debunkers have taken the time to read the 9/11 commission report overseen by Philip Zelikow.

These two publications are a complete joke with so many omissions and falsehoods that it boggles the mind why anyone would defend such utter nonsense, but I guess some people won’t stray out of their comfort zones to actually do a little research and find it far easier to defend the official conspiracy with a few childish retorts calling people “troothers or twoofers”

The number of people questioning 9/11 is in the millions from scientists, the military, members of governments from all over the world ex CIA and FBI ,medics ,first responders, pilots the list is endless and is growing every day and until there is an independent inquiry these numbers will keep growing .

President of Italy’s Supreme Court to Refer 9/11 Crimes To International Criminal Court

http://www.washingto...inal-court.html

The only people to mention the publications thus far are the truthers are they not? Critical thinkers have done thier level best to provide direct evidence from what I have seen in this thread. The most common rebuttal seems to be the publication itself, which truthers turn a blind eye to when it suits them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wont do any good pshche101 ! THis Babe is like many,many C.T`s not a leg to stand on the more attention we give it the more B.S. that spews out.

I specially like the Drone aircraft bit,and that we talked the flight crew,all lost,and the passengers all dead,and all the other lives that day that perished in that Terror !To get into those drones.

To think in our world of high tech tracking,avaionics,training of those fine pilots and flight crews that a Arm chair C.T. has it all fingered out !

Kinda makes one sick if you really think about it ! Skyeagle & I both have a little bit of Avaition background,I have many,many Retired Commercial & Military pilots friends.

All to the Letter know that this is nonsense ! To even think that it was but what was proven by thousands of experts in the Field is to Run that Flag up the Stupid Pole !

I guess Babe Ruth didnt know anyone that died that day in THe North East? I did !

And sadly, we know you are unfortunately not the only one. That is the offensive part here, the loss of life, and what that means to people. Not much with Truthers. Truthers seem to invalidate this aspect by playing dumb and saying "why isn't it OK to ask questions" when I am sure many of them know that have crossed moral and ethical boundaries and it would seem in some cases, gleefully, as hard as that is to understand. BR is not so bad, hell, Q tried to tell me a house is a genooine prison! For Petes sakes!

I think people like Sky should keep pushing these people back into the land of reality. And he is doing a terrific job, you can tell by how many people object to him. The world is bigger than any one truther, and far more important. They simply do not have the right to cause more grief for the sake of conversation and feeling clever about themselves. Trutherland has no moral ground, yet is claims to base itself on such. How so many miss that basic escapes me.

It makes one sick to find that some consider their opinion so important that lost lives can just be put on hold, or worse still, telling those who lost loved ones on the day that their family is in with the Government and faked their deaths just do not matter as much as their "right to ask questions" It shows very little humanity, and that is indeed saddening. Not as saddening as the twisted sickos who rejoiced the deaths, but all the same, not a well mind. It is one of the most selfish acts I have seen frankly.

Edited by psyche101
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the first image is from a blogger named Killtown who was involved in the dis-information program a few years back and the photoshopped boeing is from this site and under the image it states.

a newly-made video shows the true size of a 757, precisely calculated from published measurements, as well as engineering drawings from the ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers). This video displays what the Pentagon security camera would have recorded, had the official story been correct.

http://physics911.net/pentcrashvideo/

The big thing you seem to be missing is a simple calculation.

Frame speed vs plane speed. There were six frames from a security camera showing impact released after a FOIA request. Numerous witnesses saw it approach, the plane's wings took out several light posts on a nearby roadway on the way in, and plane components were scattered all over the Pentagon lawn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome, Poppet! Thanks for that--I get it now. Very effective, once you understant the point. :tu:

The point seems to be complete ignorance with regards to CCTV installations? There is nothing untoward in those pictures. I install and design such systems almost daily. Everything from a doorbell to a complete correctional centre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So that the American people would become so angered.

It would be "our choice" to fight the oil fight.

George Bush created problems to solve them , to guide us around by the nose.

Gov continues to do this... EVEN the firefighters that were there to help have stated , there were explosions in the lower

part of the buildings.. BUT don't listen to them.. RIGHT... TO this day

not 1 piece of aircraft has been found at the Pentagon site,,,,,,,THE GOV says is was burned up,,,, NEVER has a fire been so hot as to burn evey piece of an airplane... THE airplane burned up, not 1 piece left,,, BUT get this,,,,, THEY FOUND THE HI_JACKERS backpack he had on during the flight.....

YOU can let them guide you by the nose, and beliee evey word they say... I believe the firefighters over the GOV any day of the week..................................

There is your problem, you are picking sides instead of thinking. As such, it seem likely you would come to the wrong conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our foreign policy has blowback (unintended consequences). That's the only "conspiracy" about 9/11 we should all agree on.

If we stop messing with people thousands of miles away, they'll have more important things to go after (which may even include themselves, but that is still their business). The exciting workload of being the world-policeman needs to come to an end. And no neocons, the best defense is an awesome defense. I want a few brand new nuclear submarines, 100 more F-22s, hundreds of new F-16/F-18 variants, another squadron of B-2s, enhanced border security ON our borders.

Disarming the entire world of nuclear weapons should be our foreign policy. Not one at a time starting with North Korea, but by consensus. By sitting at a table with pencils and maturity and civility.

As the world superpower with so much unprecedented economic strength, look at what the US has squandered. Our foreign policy is provocative, it serves to keep the war racket going. A travesty against humanity imho.

As usual our policy is all-stick and no-carrot towards Iran. If the west wants to persuade Iran to let go of its nuclear ambitions let's dangle a carrot in front of them that they can't refuse! Options?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still can't get over how 19 guys were identified and their pictures posted on the news 25 hours later... with no mistakes.. no additions or subtractions since. I can't buy that one.

People were rejoicing it in the streets, even an idiot Muslim called Anthony Mundine said the US deserved it. Seeming as it was deliberate, and supposed to make some sort of statement against Americas wealth, and was celebrated, it does not seem all that unusual to me. They were proud of this sick act of murder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our foreign policy has blowback (unintended consequences). That's the only "conspiracy" about 9/11 we should all agree on.

If we stop messing with people thousands of miles away, they'll have more important things to go after (which may even include themselves, but that is still their business). The exciting workload of being the world-policeman needs to come to an end. And no neocons, the best defense is an awesome defense. I want a few brand new nuclear submarines, 100 more F-22s, hundreds of new F-16/F-18 variants, another squadron of B-2s, enhanced border security ON our borders.

Disarming the entire world of nuclear weapons should be our foreign policy. Not one at a time starting with North Korea, but by consensus. By sitting at a table with pencils and maturity and civility.

As the world superpower with so much unprecedented economic strength, look at what the US has squandered. Our foreign policy is provocative, it serves to keep the war racket going. A travesty against humanity imho.

As usual our policy is all-stick and no-carrot towards Iran. If the west wants to persuade Iran to let go of its nuclear ambitions let's dangle a carrot in front of them that they can't refuse! Options?

Not that I disagree with the ideal, but do you think global nuclear disarmament is achievable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not think you should put everyone in the same box as we are all individuals. The reason I do not follow any particular conspiracy theorist is that I like to think I can work out for myself which theories are possible and which ones aren't. As I've said previously, if the motivation is to get a new investigation, then that is what these truth movement groups should be concentrating on, not on which one of their pet theory is right or likely and arguing a toss about it with each other.

However, I do not like it when people say that truthers are hurting people that have suffered or disrespecting the victims of 9/11. You have to remember that some of those truthers such as the Jersey Girls do not believe in the official story either have lost loved ones. If you believe someone is lying or not telling the whole truth about what happened to those who died on 9/11, how can it be disrespectful to question it? Surely it is more honourable than keeping quiet about it. I find comments like that are designed and used to shut down debate or dissenting voices.

While I agree there are some conspiracies theorist out there who are out of touch with reality, I also find the same with some debunkers. (Not you of course, but I'll mention no names! ;) )

Hi Stundie

It is hard not to broad brush people when they seem to have the same goal. I understand that they might arrive there in different vehicles, but the end result seems to be the same - do not trust the Government, and that stament seems to hold more weight than all the proof in the world.

The Jersey Girls are very stand alone aren't they? I do not think Kristen Breitweiser denies the deaths, her husbands arms and ring were found in the wreckage (which is a horrifying thought in itself) but falls for the political stuff? She is making sure her daughter understand the Muslims way of life and is travelling to understand cultures and ways of life. It sure sounds like deep down she knows who did this, but she is having a hard time mentally. I might be wrong, but that is what I see, a very troubled lady who is pretty screwed up after being involved and directly affected by a traumatic event.

I do not find Sky out of touch, anything but, I find he just puts forth the most basic information which is good, because any person can understand what he is trying to get across. I see Q said earlier in the piece that MSM was not to be trusted, then he said it was OK if you can verify the facts, then did a complete turn around, and attacked Annovva for not being a person, despite the obvious information laid out before him, with an obvious evolution of a sentence Lets face it, truthers do not care about source, they care about people agreeing with them, I am not sure if it is just insecurity and a need for personal validation or if the agenda is far more nefarious than I imagined. But source will be used by these people as an appeal to authority argument. At the end of the day, it is what can be proven, and Sky has pictures that I do not see can be denied. Repetitive or not, they tell the story that answers the questions people are asking.

I imagine that the AIA doesn't want to be associated with a conspiracy but honestly, I do not put much thought into this article which clearly has an agenda and is full of logical fallacies. There are obviously members of the AIA who have signed Gages petition but I understand why the group as a whole doesn't want to associate themselves with A&E 9/11.

The fact that very few of these people - if they exist - are the minority in a crowd, and do not have the gumption to stand up for their beliefs, or claims, in public is not telling?

I work in a technical capacity, and if I see a colleague making an error, I will argue it with him. Either he will be wrong, or I will, but at the end of the day, the job benefits, as does our experience. That's the win. If I was to see something i this trutherism, and it stood to scrutiny, I would be making my colleagues prove what they say, or challenge them. I find it hard to believe I am the only one in the world who thinks like this. But nobody in Architects and Engineers for Truth holds this principal? To stand up for what they believe the be the right answer? Only from the closet?

I have seen many a CT which I think holds water, but that doesn't mean I automatically believe it to be true, just a possibility.

I do not think the laser beams theory makes any sense, but the thermite in my view makes perfect sense in that it can it's can be used to cut columns and can do it relatively silently in comparisons to traditional explosives. Hence the reason I suggest it as a possibility.

What doesn't make sense to me is that a 110 storey building which has less than 5% damage manages to collapse to the ground. Even after the NIST reports which explains the initiation of the collapse doesn't go into any of the same levels of details on the actual collapse itself. Even the FEMA reports of pancake collapse doesn't match the evidence which the NIST rejects.

Yet nobody mentioned anything about the refuting information I supplied when I first arrived? The thermite ideal is full of holes. In addition to that which I pointed out, the strategic positions had to be carefully laid out. It seems strange to me that CT'ers think that a plane full of fuel cannot burn down a building, but people can bring one down without being seen, ar accessing strategic areas that must be accessed for the ideal to work as explained.

Details of the collapse seem pretty wide ranging and very accessible, why must one hang ones hat on one of these two choices to consider the situation for oneself?

So what are we left with?? One report by FEMA which explains the collapse which is rejected by the NIST but they do not state how it collapses other than a few paragraphs.

Is it any wonder why people are sceptical of both reports?

I am in favour for people thinking for themselves. Too little of that goes on. Still, I do not think some etiquette for the families goes astray. It is not diverting the truth to give a damn about your fellow man.

No, you didn't say something was set up to fail. :)

The 9/11 commissioners themselves who published the 9/11 commission report said they were set up to fail. Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton said that the government set up the commission to fail, they cite deception by various government agencies, funding, timescale to investigate and the denial of access to documentation and witnesses.

No, I was actually referring to Cheney and Bush being interviewed together by the commission the conditions that put on the commissioners. Such as no notes or recordings allowed, they were not under oath and the fact they insisted on being interviewed together.

Well for a start they could have not ignored the obvious warning signs that were coming in. The commission highlights some of the errors but I think that some of those errrors were intentional. Like sending fighters the wrong way. The commission give us 3 reason o explain all the things that could have been done differently would require a long post and I want to try and shorten them...lol

Tyey profited fro the incident, so I am not sure how I view the morals of these men, but what are their main complaints? Not enough money, not enough time. It is my experience that a poor tradesman blames his tools. Most of the people they spoke to were frightened they might end up somehow implicated, or have their name tarnished by the investigation, so they recieved little co-operation, which seems understandable. This is not evidence in any way, it is the opinion of men profiting from tragedy. To me it's the worlds smallest violin.

Well I'm not a fan of Icke and I would call him many things, I think that Reptilian Governments are a push to far and that is where I part company with Icke. He was right about Savile though and called him out on it many years before his death and on the day he died. So he must have access to some information that we didn't, but not all the information he receives is going to be correct either, hence things like reptilian governments. lol

There is no sympathy for him now because his crimes have been exposed. But at the time of this death, there was plenty of media coverage and public sympathy.

Have you heard Rolf Harris has been caught up in all of this too? There was a strange media blackout as the papers decided not to name in back in November. That could have been down to the Leveson Inquiry into press standards, but usually they wouldn't cut any celeb any slack if they were reporting facts.

I heard about Rolf yesterday, and am rather surprised. Although I always held him in bad light somewhat as he got me in trouble as a kid. I was a huge fan of his Dulux Paint commercials, and tried to repeat his signature drumming on the top of a paint can, I had 4 liters of varnish in my parents bedroom, to cut a story short, the 4 liters ended up in the carpet. I still remember that like 40 years later.

I meant the Hey Dad guy with the sympathy bit, nobody seems to be on his side, which if he is innocent is very sad. Personally, I have no idea.

I reckon Icke got his information from stalking the Royal family. Happened to be in the right place at the right time I guess. Which is a good plus, it is very nice to be able to say something good about Icke.

I find the opposite unsettling to be fair. The problem is that even with the criticisms of the official story, there are those who are willing to ignore those and pretend like they do not exist. It almost like a fear that agreeing with a CT even on the obvious problems of the 9/11 reports, might lead to a downward spiral. I find it amazing that people are scared of thoughts, because at the end of the day, that is all they are, thoughts. Unless there is some truth behind them...lol

I think the obvious problems with the 911 reports are the problems, They are being used as evidence for a conspiracy theory, but they are not evidence of a conspiracy theory. Therein lies the problem. People love a good drama and will listen just for the sake of entertainment. Whilst there might be 2-3% of truthers who are indeed genuine, and not just Government haters, that does not validate the ideal. We all know there was problems, and I feel anyone in the real world will realise they still exist, or have been replaced with other problems. That's just life. From my perspective, Bodine was the gate that opened and let this thing happen. But that too does not relieve blame form Al Qaeda. It just means that some incompetent people are in responsible positions that they are not suited to. Such is business.

Whats FTB stuff? I'm not clued on conspiracies, honestly. :)

Flaming True Believer :D Plenty of them, no matter the subject. It's not just 911, everything from aliens to Bigfoot has opposing sides, and in all cases, one side has proof, the other a claim.

I would hardly say that drunks seem to be the driving force behind trutherism, I think what is behind it is that the official story doesn't add up to be honest. I'm sure there are drunks and druggies taking all kinds of stuff to come out laser beams, lol I have seen some good debunking of some conspiracy theories but there are some which are just as drunk and drug induced as the stuff from the other side called panto debunking.

Look at this way, imagine there is a CT hierarchy with your Gages/Jones Griffins at the top and your tin foil believe any hold crap and probably sleeps with his cousins is at the lower end. Panto debunking is the latter end of the debunking hierarchy..lol

Cheers

Stundie :)

I think drunks and loudmouths are the driving force, they may not be the arrowhead, nor the brains, but the idiots at Ground Zero Lounge who embarrass the US on Yoube are quite eye opening, have you seen GZL recordings before? They are pretty pathetic. Those people really need something more in their lives. I understand panto debunking, but that's not the case here I do not think, there is enough information readily available that can be debated and countered, this is not the blind idiot ranting I have seen from GZL. This is where the truthers gather and a large concentration of them, so one I feel is right to assume this is a sizeable representation of this group, and mate, it's not one I would want to be associated with. In this case, the truthers have buried themselves I believe by not being conversant with facts before they jump on a podium and yell it to the world, some are so young the ideal is nothing short of laughable (seen that kid, like 19 years old on the tube telling life long experienced engineers that they are full of it? He is a tosser and a half) and some are just plain wrong, like the BS about Wally Miller. Like I said above the Thermite claim does not hold water either. I think we all know what cog was loose in this machine, the CIA. And that still does not absolve the sicko Jihadists who just wanted to kill any non-Muslim blindly.

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Q tried to tell me a house is a genooine prison!

Yes, waste of time that was with your mental block to anything that doesn’t suit your existing worldview. Does spelling ‘genuine’ wrong make it all go away for you?

But the fact is that the bin Laden compound is ideal match to a prison/safe house detention facility and the numerous professional security analysts that I quoted agree.

You have failed to show any other ‘house’ with a double-ended security corridor/gate: -

Bin-Laden-compound-4col.gif

Or matching the list of other prison-like features.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the fact is that the bin Laden compound is ideal match to a prison/safe house detention facility and the numerous professional security analysts that I quoted agree.

LOL, yeah right, a prison with four wives and satellite TV....

I presume that you, your friends, and your conspiracy "experts" are also convinced that the Boston marathon bombing was a government conspiracy, as was yesterdays averted jihadi train bombing in Canada?

Seek help...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, waste of time that was with your mental block to anything that doesn’t suit your existing worldview. Does spelling ‘genuine’ wrong make it all go away for you?

But the fact is that the bin Laden compound is ideal match to a prison/safe house detention facility and the numerous professional security analysts that I quoted agree.

You have failed to show any other ‘house’ with a double-ended security corridor/gate: -

Bin-Laden-compound-4col.gif

Or matching the list of other prison-like features.

Nothing to do with my world view, it has to do with the real world. Misspelling genuine was a laugh for me, nothing to do with you, and why would that make anything go away? What a silly thing to say!

No, I do not have a plan handy, designs with high security are not publicly available, and I cannot post something from our files because it would be against the law. There is a reason these places are designed with security in mind, and it really should not take too much thinking to work out that it's another security measure, having a house plan on the net is a big risk and allows other to plan a break in. Not rocket science old chap. What you have is a long airlock, also known as a man trap. It makes it harder to get into a house, and gives an occupant the opportunity to call authorities if a person gets past the first gate. Most department stores have them to leading to their cash room/accounts. It's not some sort of prison special, it's a basic design.

You can pretend this house is a prison if you like, but you wont convince anyone who has built anything larger than a cubby house. And the opinions of a few people do not change that very fact. And that is what you presented, opinion. If this was a building connected to any sort of prison, it would have been off site admin, but considering the layout, it seems more residential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, yeah right, a prison with four wives and satellite TV....

What does satellite tv prove? Most prisons I know of have satellite tv. It is more notable that the compound had no telephone or internet (communication) services connected. That quote comes from numerous media reports and a U.S. official: -

"It is also noteworthy that the property is valued at approximately $1 million but has no telephone or Internet service connected to it," an administration official said.

http://www.reuters.c...E7411NX20110502

Who is to say his wives were not detained under house-arrest with bin Laden in this “gentle imprisonment”, as Fox News analyst, U.S. Lt Col Ralph Peters, said: -

“I think the reason bin Laden stayed there so long was very straightforward - he was a prisoner in a gilded cage. The Pakistani ISI had him there, he wasn't free to go. They were in my view keeping him there until they needed him. So it was a gentle imprisonment.”

So LOL, yeah right... what?

I’ll add you to the list of people who cannot provide an example to back their claim that a ‘house’ has double-ended security corridors/gates, and disagrees with numerous professional security analysts, and comes up with strange reasoning (satellite tv?) to shield their existing worldview.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its is so sad that the people that died that day,and all the Families that lost loved ones might read this dribble some day ! THe Facts are the Facts ! The Four Aircraft went in and people died ! No Government plots involved at all!

Get a Life people ! Skyeagle what are we going to do wit deez peep`s ?

Because i don't happen to believe the 'official' version of events on the morning of 9-11-01 does not mean that i have any less respect for life, loss of life, or peoples feelings, than someone who does believe the official C.T. I had an Aunt and cousins living nearby.. I , of course thought of them immediately that morning. They were not hurt, thank goodness.

According to skyeagle's pie chart .... less than half of the people questioned (46%) believe the official Conspiracy Theory .

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Psyche

What YOU consider to be a refutation of facts is not necessarily a legitimate refutation. That you consider the material posted here by Sky to be authentic accurate and valid is consistent with your position here in support of the Official Conspiracy Theory. You may not be aware of it, but last year or so Sky posted a video, very convincing, of an F-18 crashing into a civilian apartment building or some such. When called upon it, Sky did (admirably) admit that it was a concocted video, completely fake.

Since then, I don't look at any of his gazillions of pictures and videos, and I do not trust what he says. I understand the feeling is mutual, and have no problem with that.

And now YOU, from the Land of Oz on the other side of the planet, are going to tell me that Wally Miller "denies what I am saying". Guess what Psyche? I have never ever met Wally Miller. I have seen him on TV snips, I have heard recorded telephone interviews with him, and I have read statements he has made in private interviews. So how on earth can Wally deny what I am saying? You are as deep in denial as Sky is. In an interview conducted by Christopher Bollyn in late 2011, it seems that in Shanksville PA many people are able to joke about how the feds created the story by getting Wally to "be a team player." They are joking about it Psyche. The yanks are joking about it. It's local common knowledge. And you're going to lecture me from Australia. :whistle:

The OCT is a bald-faced lie, and all the evidence, the preponderance of the evidence, shows that. Get a grip, Mate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What YOU consider to be a refutation of facts is not necessarily a legitimate refutation. That you consider the material posted here by Sky to be authentic accurate and valid is consistent with your position here in support of the Official Conspiracy Theory. You may not be aware of it, but last year or so Sky posted a video, very convincing, of an F-18 crashing into a civilian apartment building or some such. When called upon it, Sky did (admirably) admit that it was a concocted video, completely fake.

There was a very good reason why I posted that video. Now, may I remind you that it was YOU that threw in an P700 anti-ship missile as striking the Pentagon, and it was YOU who threw in explosives as responsible for knocking down those light poles near the Pentagon and it was YOU who claimed that no aircraft crashed into the Pentagon despited the fact the wreckage outside and inside the Pentagon are consistent with B-757 wreckage. Then, YOU turned around and said the aircraft passed north of the gas station. YOU have claimed that no Boeing crashed near Shanksville despite the fact that wreckage from United 93 and remains from passengers and crew were recovered from the crash site.

You have been spewing disinformation and misinformation and yet you have the audacity to talk about an F-18 video???

In an interview conducted by Christopher Bollyn in late 2011, it seems that in Shanksville PA many people are able to joke about how the feds created the story by getting Wally to "be a team player."

Let's take another look.

Flight 93 victims' effects to go back to families

United Airlines Flight 93 slammed into the earth Sept. 11 near Shanksville, Somerset County, at more than 500 mph, with a ferocity that disintegrated metal, bone and flesh. It took more than three months to identify the remains of the 40 passengers and crew, and, by process of elimination, the four hijackers.

http://old.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011230flight931230p3.asp

Coroner identifies seven more victims of Flight 93 crash

Seven victims of the Sept. 11 United Airlines Flight 93 crash in Somerset County were positively identified over the weekend, bringing the number of identified bodies to 11. But Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller said that additional identifications could take months. There were 44 passengers and crew members on the flight.

http://old.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010924scenenat5p5.asp

The OCT is a bald-faced lie, and all the evidence, the preponderance of the evidence, shows that.

Actually, myself, and others, are well aware of where you have been coming from and we are also aware of your distortion routine. Facts and evidence support the official story, not your fantasies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sky

I THEORIZED about the Granit missle. Still do. I offer it as a possibility, and stated that right up front.

You presented a fake video as genuine, and told the truth only when confronted about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I THEORIZED about the Granit missle.

That was a MAJOR mistake on your part because it shows that you did not do your homework.

You presented a fake video as genuine, and told the truth only when confronted about it.

And, what did I post afterward? I have to say it again, we are well aware of your distortion routine. :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

snapback.pngReann, on 21 April 2013 - 10:53 AM, said:

Maybe commercial planes ought to have an remote auto pilot control system set up with the airforce , where as, if ever someone did try to take one over , they would not be able to do so, like an airforce personal would be able to operate full conrol of the plane, dismantle any attempt for the plane to be flown by highjakers..

I thought i had heard and read about such anti highjacking remote control systems. And, being installed on commercial airliners by the 70's? (can't seem to find info about it on the web anymore¿)

all i can find now are 'conspiracy' sites on the subject.

http://www.911-strike.com/remote.htm

New Questions about remote control and 9-11

By Jerry Russell

British aeronautical engineer Joe Vialls claims that all 757 and 767 aircraft are equipped with computerized remote flight control systems for the purposes of rescuing the planes from attempted hijackings. If this were true, it would raise some very interesting questions. On the one hand, if the systems were used to control the aircraft and pilot them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, then who was at the controls? How did they get access to the secret codes?

But on the other hand: if these systems were on the aircraft, and they were not compromised by some enemy trick of espionage, then why weren't they used on September 11 to save the four ill-fated flights?

quote from Vialls, who posted in October 2001:

In the mid-seventies America faced a new and escalating crisis, with US commercial jets being hijacked for geopolitical purposes. Determined to gain the upper hand in this new form of aerial warfare, two American multinationals collaborated with the Defense Advanced Projects Agency (DARPA) on a project designed to facilitate the remote recovery of hijacked American aircraft. Brilliant both in concept and operation, “Home Run” [not its real code name] allowed specialist ground controllers to listen in to cockpit conversations on the target aircraft, then take absolute control of its computerized flight control system by remote means.

◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊

http://911review.com...otecontrol.html

All modern jetliners have sophisticated flight control computers, which allow the planes to be flown with at least the precision of a skilled human pilot. The 757s and 767s used in the 9/11/01 attack were developed in the 1970s and employ similar avionics. Both contain integrated flight management computer systems (FMCS) which provide automatic guidance and control of the aircraft "from immediately after takeoff to final approach and landing." 1

Researcher Don Paul was among the first to describes the possible use of remote and programmed control in the execution of the 9/11/01 attack, in his 2002 book Facing Our Fascist State: e x c e r p t title: Facing Our Fascist State authors: Don Paul

Home Run and Global Hawk

If the supposed pilots are impossible or unlikely prospects for flying a Boeing 757 or 767 through sharp turns and complex maneuvers, how COULD those airliners otherwise have been flown?

In an interview with the German newspaper Tagesspeigel on January 13, 2002, Andreas von Buelow, Minister of Technology for the united Germany in the early 1990s, a person who first worked in West Germany's Secretary of Defense 30 years ago, told about a technology by which airliners can be commanded through remote control.

The former Minister of Technology said: '"The Americans had developed a method in the 1970s, whereby they could rescue hijacked planes by intervening into the computer piloting."'

...one more

http://www.kolki.com...ce/Home-Run.htm

Interesting. Thanks for sharing . I guess they depend on those steal doors now to keep them safe . That's got to be annoying , having to pilot a plane under those conditions.

Edited by Reann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. Thanks for sharing . I guess they depend on those steal doors now to keep them safe . That's got to be annoying , having to pilot a plane under those conditions.

There was a very good reason why those doors were strengthen.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Stundie

It is hard not to broad brush people when they seem to have the same goal. I understand that they might arrive there in different vehicles, but the end result seems to be the same - do not trust the Government, and that stament seems to hold more weight than all the proof in the world.

The Jersey Girls are very stand alone aren't they? I do not think Kristen Breitweiser denies the deaths, her husbands arms and ring were found in the wreckage (which is a horrifying thought in itself) but falls for the political stuff? She is making sure her daughter understand the Muslims way of life and is travelling to understand cultures and ways of life. It sure sounds like deep down she knows who did this, but she is having a hard time mentally. I might be wrong, but that is what I see, a very troubled lady who is pretty screwed up after being involved and directly affected by a traumatic event.

I do not find Sky out of touch, anything but, I find he just puts forth the most basic information which is good, because any person can understand what he is trying to get across. I see Q said earlier in the piece that MSM was not to be trusted, then he said it was OK if you can verify the facts, then did a complete turn around, and attacked Annovva for not being a person, despite the obvious information laid out before him, with an obvious evolution of a sentence Lets face it, truthers do not care about source, they care about people agreeing with them, I am not sure if it is just insecurity and a need for personal validation or if the agenda is far more nefarious than I imagined. But source will be used by these people as an appeal to authority argument. At the end of the day, it is what can be proven, and Sky has pictures that I do not see can be denied. Repetitive or not, they tell the story that answers the questions people are asking.

I find it strange that you would believe or think that people who believe in CT whether its 9/11 or Bigfoot stuff "thinking" boils down to a distrust of government. I think we all understand that there is a need for laws for us to be governed by social contracts that society creates but criticism of governments and those laws, doesn't always equate to being anti government. Its a poor attack and label designed as a argument to stifle the debates even before it starts. I'm critical of lots Formula 1, but that doesn't mean I'm anti Formula 1. Everyone knows that governments do lots of good work and but just because they do good work, that doesn't mean they do no wrong.

The government does lots of things wrong, is it that hard to theorise that the government did wrong on 9/11?

The fact that very few of these people - if they exist - are the minority in a crowd, and do not have the gumption to stand up for their beliefs, or claims, in public is not telling?
No, it's not telling at all because we do not know how many AIA member have read the NIST reports. It's a logical fallacy to claim that AIA doesn't agree with the CT's and they have 80,000 members who don't agree when we do not know if every single member has read the reports or even if they are aware of A&E 9/11? Clearly some have read and joined with Gage but even if I was an architect, I probably wouldn't join.

If I had said that AIA don't agree with any particular religious beliefs and therefore all AIA 80,000 members are atheists. Would that be a logical argument? lol I hope not.

I work in a technical capacity, and if I see a colleague making an error, I will argue it with him. Either he will be wrong, or I will, but at the end of the day, the job benefits, as does our experience. That's the win. If I was to see something i this trutherism, and it stood to scrutiny, I would be making my colleagues prove what they say, or challenge them. I find it hard to believe I am the only one in the world who thinks like this. But nobody in Architects and Engineers for Truth holds this principal? To stand up for what they believe the be the right answer? Only from the closet?
If I can prove that Christians are wrong about how humans came to be, do I have to provide a better theory of how we came to be to disprove the original theory? When the reality is even though I believe in evolution and I believe it provides a better theory, I do not and can never truly know how we came to be, have to present that theory if the original is already disproven.

The problem is in life, there are no absolutes, look at how the Higgs Boson experiments are changing everything we thought we knew. This is why I work with possibilities. If I thought you had robbed me and you disproved it wasn't you, you do not then have to come up with a better theory and expecting truthers or architect and engineers to do it by examining evidence that has been made accessible, then I think you are asking to much and will never be satisfied because so many individuals have different alternative theories. Some good some very bad as you have no doubt seen, like the hologramers. :blink:

Yet nobody mentioned anything about the refuting information I supplied when I first arrived? The thermite ideal is full of holes. In addition to that which I pointed out, the strategic positions had to be carefully laid out. It seems strange to me that CT'ers think that a plane full of fuel cannot burn down a building, but people can bring one down without being seen, ar accessing strategic areas that must be accessed for the ideal to work as explained.

Details of the collapse seem pretty wide ranging and very accessible, why must one hang ones hat on one of these two choices to consider the situation for oneself?

See this is where I get confused.... :huh:

If a airplane crashes into the WTC and it collapses, it requires no explosives.....but...

If a airplane crashes into the WTC rigged with explosives/thermite, it wont collapse without explosives or thermite being in strategic positions or without there needing tons and tons of them.

Maybe it is me and I just don't understand that by adding a explosive thermitey cocktail to a building that some already believe would collapse without it, would hinder the collapse. This is why I do not understand the logic or sense of those who are strongly opposed to the idea of explosives/thermite. The WTC were huge and full of people doing all sort of things and wherever these strategic place are, it would be easy for anyone to access them and blend in with the crowd.

I am in favour for people thinking for themselves. Too little of that goes on. Still, I do not think some etiquette for the families goes astray. It is not diverting the truth to give a damn about your fellow man.
Well I do not know that many truthers, but I have not met or spoke to many other than on the forums and I've not met anyone one of them who doesn't give a damn about their fellow man.
Tyey profited fro the incident, so I am not sure how I view the morals of these men, but what are their main complaints? Not enough money, not enough time. It is my experience that a poor tradesman blames his tools. Most of the people they spoke to were frightened they might end up somehow implicated, or have their name tarnished by the investigation, so they recieved little co-operation, which seems understandable. This is not evidence in any way, it is the opinion of men profiting from tragedy. To me it's the worlds smallest violin.
To understand the complaints from the commissioners requires it own thread but it is clear that the White House were steering the commission with Zeiklow at the wheel. I don't think by saying they were set up to fail helped sell books or to profit from the tragedy, they already profited as they were both head commissioners and would have been paid to do the report. But it's not the just the opinion of men profiting, the 9/11 commission is their opinions too and it is their opinion they were set up to fail.

Of course there are going to be people who were frightened, didn't want their names tarnished or did not want to cooperate, but that is not the reason they came up with the statement. So they state "..there were all kinds of reasons we thought we were set up to fail."

In the book they state "Fog of war could explain why some people were confused on the day of 9/11, but it could not explain why all of the after-action reports, accident investigations and public testimony by FAA and NORAD officials advanced an account of 9/11 that was untrue,"

Max Cleland resigned from the commission saying it was a scam and that America had been cheated because the rest of the commissioners made a deal to not look to far into the CIA reports to the White House that suggested advanced warnings were known about to the Bush admin. So dismissing Hamilton and Kean criticisms who were from both sides of the political spectrum, when they were in the best position to see exactly what was happening isn't really an argument.

I heard about Rolf yesterday, and am rather surprised. Although I always held him in bad light somewhat as he got me in trouble as a kid. I was a huge fan of his Dulux Paint commercials, and tried to repeat his signature drumming on the top of a paint can, I had 4 liters of varnish in my parents bedroom, to cut a story short, the 4 liters ended up in the carpet. I still remember that like 40 years later.

I meant the Hey Dad guy with the sympathy bit, nobody seems to be on his side, which if he is innocent is very sad. Personally, I have no idea.

I reckon Icke got his information from stalking the Royal family. Happened to be in the right place at the right time I guess. Which is a good plus, it is very nice to be able to say something good about Icke.

I was a bit surprised by Rolf, I remember he used to do commercials for getting kids to swim and I didn't realise it was Rolf Harris until years later. I just thought he was a creepy looking man back then but learned to like him and thought he was alright.
I think the obvious problems with the 911 reports are the problems, They are being used as evidence for a conspiracy theory, but they are not evidence of a conspiracy theory. Therein lies the problem. People love a good drama and will listen just for the sake of entertainment. Whilst there might be 2-3% of truthers who are indeed genuine, and not just Government haters, that does not validate the ideal. We all know there was problems, and I feel anyone in the real world will realise they still exist, or have been replaced with other problems. That's just life. From my perspective, Bodine was the gate that opened and let this thing happen. But that too does not relieve blame form Al Qaeda. It just means that some incompetent people are in responsible positions that they are not suited to. Such is business.
I agree they are not evidence of a conspiracy, but they do point to the possibility of a conspiracy.

Of course there are problems and life always throws out the unexpected, like it did for a lot of people on 9/11 and people will make mistakes and sometimes lie, but what if there is a pattern to these mistakes and lies? Do we consider the possibility that they are a series of unrelated lies and mistakes, or do we consider the possibility there might be a reason for this pattern?

The problem is that even though there is plenty of evidence pointing to the possibility of a conspiracy and not a real definitive conspiracy, the other side of panto debunkers won't even admit to possibility and will reject at any cost any suggestion, even as a thought experiment. Lets us assume for a moment that we suddenly find rock hard evidence that the towers were rigged with explosives, that still doesn't mean there is a conspiracy because AQ could have rigged them. This is why I do not subscribe a definitive conspiracy theory. I will always argue that it was possible that the towers were rigged because I believe it is possible, the reason to reject why it is not possible seems odd when I am arguing with people that believe

Flaming True Believer :D Plenty of them, no matter the subject. It's not just 911, everything from aliens to Bigfoot has opposing sides, and in all cases, one side has proof, the other a claim.

I see...lol.
I think drunks and loudmouths are the driving force, they may not be the arrowhead, nor the brains, but the idiots at Ground Zero Lounge who embarrass the US on Yoube are quite eye opening, have you seen GZL recordings before? They are pretty pathetic. Those people really need something more in their lives. I understand panto debunking, but that's not the case here I do not think, there is enough information readily available that can be debated and countered, this is not the blind idiot ranting I have seen from GZL. This is where the truthers gather and a large concentration of them, so one I feel is right to assume this is a sizeable representation of this group, and mate, it's not one I would want to be associated with. In this case, the truthers have buried themselves I believe by not being conversant with facts before they jump on a podium and yell it to the world, some are so young the ideal is nothing short of laughable (seen that kid, like 19 years old on the tube telling life long experienced engineers that they are full of it? He is a tosser and a half) and some are just plain wrong, like the BS about Wally Miller. Like I said above the Thermite claim does not hold water either. I think we all know what cog was loose in this machine, the CIA. And that still does not absolve the sicko Jihadists who just wanted to kill any non-Muslim blindly.

No, I've not seen the GZL recordings before and I have no interest in what they do or say. You see I would rather debate what I claim and provide as evidence rather than what this or that truther group believe. I am not part of a group and most of the people who I've spoke to on forums are labelled a truthers and are not part of these groups. A lot of people I know believe in the possibility of a conspiracy but are not part of these groups either.

While I think it is more likely this group of people planned this attack and elements within the government let it happen rather them being patsies and elements within the government planed it and made it happen, it would not absolve them but it wouldn't absolve the government not doing anything and letting it happen. I think this CIA had a big part to play, but with them being so secretive, its going to be hard to uncover which if any theory holds water, unless it was genuinely just a series of mistakes of course.

Cheers

Stundie :)

Edited by Stundie
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.