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 5
Uranium_235

Government lies

281 posts in this topic

This argument does make a couple of good points regarding the remains of the plane, but it fails to suggest either where the remains of a truck/van might be found in the photos or what actually happened to AA 77.

I don't recall seeing any plane debris at the WTC site either, did those perhaps not get hit by planes either?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the WTC there did not appear to be any parts of the plane because it pretty much desintigrated on impact, but at the pentigon, the damage does not even indicate a plane hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

already discussed

This takes you to a thread that was actually the second thread discussing this, but this thread has a link to the original, more detailed thread that seems to longer be available.

Truth is, there is no conspiracy here, as the plane literally melted by the heat. There are a few web sites that discuss this, and even reference the site that was linked

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At the WTC there did not appear to be any parts of the plane because it pretty much desintigrated on impact, but at the pentigon, the damage does not even indicate a plane hit.

How could anyone possibly know how much damage a plane would cause to the Pentagon if not based on this event? The is the only plane of that size that hit the pentagon, and what you see is the damage caused by one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WARNING: While I know it was already discussed, I missed the other discussions as I only became aware of this wonderful place recently. This is a bitter opinion, my opinion, that I post in defiance of the heavy hesitation making knots out of my stomach. It may or may not be factual. It is part of what I believe happened on that day and the reason behind it. It may be offensive to some who consider the corporate US and one of its affiliates to be honorable institutions. Comment on this at will, for the more minds we have trying to tear to the source of the problem, the more likely it is that the solution will present itself.

Yes, Flt 77's supposed plunge into the Pentagon leaves many unanswered questions....

....as it was supposed to.

As long as they can keep our minds thinking of things like this, the bigger picture gets small enough to fade from view. According to the last site linked in the original thread, rumsfeld (his name doesn't deserve the standard capitalization that proper nouns are usually given) reported that the plane penetrated 3 of the 5 concentric rings of the pentagon. In every photograph I've seen depicting all 5 rings, I could only see damage to the outside ring...

As for the sand? Significant only because the corporate US wants it to be. Some say it was because of the mass spilled jet fuel (which probably burned off completely in the explosion), some say because big trucks hauling debris out would have been slipping and sliding in the grass (could be, but after having experienced an ex-boyfriend who got his truck stuck in both dry and wet sand while trying to show off his ability to do 'donuts', I doubt it...). In either case, it was meant to simply cause speculation as to what the purpose of the sand really might be. Stop and look at the big picture...

What happened to the plane? It was probably rigged with bombs and detonated just before impact, blown to pieces before it even fully broke through the first ring. No large debris, but lots of little pieces. This was most likely done to ensure that questions would be asked as to where the fuselage went, questions worthy of large debate, large debate worthy of taking your attention off of other things that happened that day. Again, stop and look at the bigger picture...

One of the more telling factors lies in the choice of targets and the paths taken to those targets...

Earlier that day, AA Flt 11 and UA Flt 175 were flown into the North & South towers of the the World Trade Center, respectively. I'm no 'terrorist', but that doesn't mean I can't imagine being one. If I had control of the planes and my agenda was terrorism and causing as much chaos and destruction as I could, the towers would've been a secondary, possibly even a tertiary target. Both of those planes flew either very close to or directly over a place called Indian Point, about 40 miles north of the WTC on the Hudson River. At Indian Point are three nuclear reactors, two of which have been online since the mid 70s. A Boeing 757 colliding into one of these would've resulted in at least 3 more zeros at the end of the body count. The north eastern US would resemeble parts of Afghanistan & Iraq; radioactive wastelands for thousands of years. If this was the actions of terrorists and not a rogue corporation in unlawful control of a republic once called America wanting to sway public opinion in favor of another war without scrapping too much of the collateral on the table (taxpayer lives), why did they not take Indian Point out?

Another telling factor is in the order in which the towers collapse.

The south tower falls first, the north tower was hit first. The north tower was impacted closer to center, yet the south tower falls first. How? Those two buildings were not destroyed by the planes. They were blown up. Controlled demolition. If it wasn't, then why were the remains of the columns shipped almost immediately out of the country? If it wasn't, then why'd a seismograph at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, New York, 21 miles north of the WTC, pick up tremors measuring 2.1 and 2.3 (the highest readings on the scale during the incident) before the collapses started rather than the moment the debris hit the ground?

Another telling factor is in the delay times between the ATC & NORAD.

Accoriding to NORAD's official timeline, an open line of communcation was not started between the two agencies until 3 planes were down. Other sources indicate that for each of the three hijackings previous to the open line, a minimum of 20 minutes elapsed before the ATC notified NORAD. In the case of Payne Stewart's tragic accident, ATC notified NORAD of the loss of contact IMMEDIATELY. One has to wonder, was the delay a product of malfunction in equipment or mis-execution of procedure, or was it intentional?

And there are still other things that make mincemeat out of any official explanation trying to pin 9/11 on osama bin laden, the taliban, al qaeda, saddam hussein, or any other 'terrorist' organization (other than themselves):

Why was there heavy short selling of stocks (a classic indicator of foreknowledge), particularly in the airline industry, during the week preceeding the tragedy? Who knew and how?

Why did WTC-7 collapse? Nothing hit it. Why'd it fall?

Why is all evidence linking any part of this to israelis so highly classified that people talk of losing their jobs at the mere mention of it?

Only one word can logically answer all of these questions (and it isn't terrorism): money.

9/11 happened for the exact same reason that Pearl Harbor happened; to put the general public in a state of fear intense enough so that they can perpetuate their war machine, milk the profit of blood and spoils of war for themselves, alienate its own slaves even further with heinous pieces of legislation (like the Patriot Act), and implement their grotesque collectivist agenda throughout the world with military force without arousing too much dissent. While containing information has become very difficult with the inception of the Internet, polluting the media with massive amounts of false information can distort one's sense of truth rather easily.

The wars and forceful occupations, the depleted uranium poisoning of the world, the "terrorist attacks", the national threat level, the "debt", the feds, the kidnapping of America by the corporation, the drug wars and the wars on drugs, terminal diseases like cancer and AIDS and the wars to treat their symptoms rather than cure the problem, the mercury contamination in most of the world's oceans, obesity, feminism, neurotoxins such as flouride in toothpaste and tap water, being able to identify the source of manufacturization and genetic manipulation rather than the source of origin of the ingredients in alot of the foods we consume, airport security, the FDA approving Aspartame knowing full well what it does, the technological rape of the planet, the corporate US military using unknowing human beings to test biological and chemical weapons, the misrepresentation of knowledge in the textbooks that our children are subject to in federally funded schools, the Patriot Act, the enslaving of the American people from the day they are born, and the wasting away of what is left of the American Republic will continue so long as both the money continues to spin the world on its own personal axis of evil and the majority of We the People are content with their blue pill prescriptions...

Living in Hawaii and being told stories of Pearl Harbor by people who were actually alive at the time (one of which is my grandmother, who today lives less than 20 minutes from the harbor as does the rest of my family) and then knowing the reality of what made that day happen, I can no longer put anything past the monsters of the corporation. Blood means nothing to them, only money and power.

Like I said, comment on this at will. If you feel offended, please take a moment to relax; everyone has an opinion and this was mine...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe terrorists didn't know about the reactor...tall buildings are much more attractive to a kamikaze pilot.

I feel that something is up though, how can you not? There's just too many questions, and a president we are beginning to trust less and less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i personnally think that any speculation on the 9/11 attacks should be made outwith the usa...no offence but you guys are so paranoid that to break wind next to you ,would encur a lawsuit for exposure to biologigal chemicals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

about the reactors....

Tests were caried out in the 1960's or somthing on nuclear power station walls. They slamed airplains into them as fast as they could but the concreate wall withstood the collision. Therefore crashing a plane into the reactors is probably futile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well guys, I viewed the site and as a matter of fact, it all made sense. I recently downloaded this video clip call "The Truth and Lies behind 9-11" I highly recommend viewing it since it puts alot of things into prespective. The entire video is fully authentic and has a US$1,000 reward if you can prove that anything he says in the video is false!

Once you have seen that, you realize that the US Government has been lying all along. Currently in the news, the Head of the CIA admits to giving unconfirmed reports of Nuclear wepons being in Iraq. There never was any! The war was just a means to be able to get control of the oil fields. Why was bush so worried about protecting the oil fields in the first place? I didnt realize any of this until I took one giant step back and analyzed every single piece of information.

A little facts: 20% of facts are absorbed by reading

60% " " seeing and hearing

80% " " seeing, hearing, and doing

9-11 was 80%, we believed everything they said. For example, when an aircraft is hijacked, F-16's deploy 10 minutes later to escort the hijacked aircraft without the need for any Presidential Orders. Presidential orders are only required to shoot the aircraft down. On 9/11, 4 aircrafts were hijacked, but the F-16 were only deployed 75 minutes later! Why is that???

Guys get the video as mentioned above and your entire prespective on todays Politics will change.

cool.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I forgot to mention, there was confirmed reports of a 600% surge in the amount of put options on both airlines 2 days before the attack. Whoever made those Put Options, made 2.5 Million US$ but till today, it remains unclaimed. FurtherMore, the Israeli's who had an entire floor in the WTC, cut their lease short of a week, and cleared out their people.

The reason I feel so strongly about this is because I, being a Muslim, am disgusted by the way the media has spoilt the religion's name. Im not a hardcore muslim, but still I respect my religion as well as others. In the news, do you hear of Christian Snipers? No. Only Muslim or Muslim converted snipers. The US Govt has alot of issues. With their policy of nuclear warhead, where there should be no nukes in the world, why does the US have 12,544 (time mag, 1997)??

Guys just throwing my opinion out there.. original.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should take away all the weapons from the US, they should not be allowed to have a military like japan, until they get bush out of office, but i dought getting bush out of office will change anything because it is still th same puppeteer just a differnet puppet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 9/11, 4 aircrafts were hijacked, but the F-16 were only deployed 75 minutes later!  Why is that???

Not 75 minutes later...

In all of this, when you see the word 'hijacked', it can be defined as follows: When the ATC/FAA has lost both voice contact & IFF transponder of an airliner. All times indicating that NORAD has claimed such are derived from NORAD's official timeline release of the event (found at www.norad.mil -> newsroom -> news releases). Instead of separating it by flight, I organized it into chronological order.

AA Flt 11 was hijacked at approximately 8:20am.

NORAD claims that notification of Flt 11's hijacking was received at 8:40am.

UA Flt 175 was hijacked at approximately 8:42am.

NORAD claims that notification of Flt 175's hijacking was received at 8:43am.

NORAD ordered 2 F-15s out of Otis in the air at 8:46am.

AA Flt 11 impacts the North tower at 8:46am. No F-15s or F-16s in the skies yet.

NORAD claims 2 F-15s were up in the air at 8:52am.

AA Flt 77 was hijacked at approximately 8:56am, 9/11/01.

UA Flt 175 impacts the South tower at 9:02am. NORAD claims that the F-15s were still 71 miles away*.

UA Flt 93 was hijacked at approximately 9:20am.

NORAD claims that notification of Flt 77's hijacking was received at 9:24am and immediately orders two F-16s to scramble out of Langley. It is speculated that at this point, the FAA/ATC and NORAD establish an open line of communiciation.

NORAD claims 2 F-16s airborne out of Langley at 9:30am.

AA Flt 77 impacts the Pentagon at 9:37am. NORAD claims that the F-16s were over 100 miles away at the time of impact*.

NORAD estimates that UA flt 93 impacted ground in Pennsylvania at 10:03am. NORAD claims that F-16s were still 100 miles away at the time of impact.*

*-Estimations of distance to target at time of impact were done by NORAD using a speed factor of .9 mach, less than 50% of the top speed of an F-15 or an F-16.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey im in full support for the demolition theory- the official thoery just doesnt make any sense! we also now know that the WMD theory is now almost complete crap and here in the uk it is really boiling up with all these lies!

is anyone considering the role of Israel here? im getting increasingly angry about the "american crusade" thats becoming increasingly obvious to us more and more! po.gifpo.gifpo.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure Bush was behind it or went along with it. There was a cheap old building a few years ago that caught fire. The building was in a lot worse condition than the twin towers and it burned a lot longer. And, remember when Bush said he saw the first plane hit the first tower? How is that possible? No one had footage of the first plane hitting the first tower because it wasn't expected. AND firefighters said they heard explosions before the buildings started to collapse. I saw some pictures a while ago where you can see bombs or something in the building.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

actualy they do have footage of the first plane. Some one was filming an apartment fire when they saw the plane go over head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but that footage was not available to the dicta....err president when he made the remark about having seen it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be brutally honest, im really not sure what to believe! sad.gif I mean think about it, the entire world has been fed so may stories, its purely based on circumstantial evidence!... no proof what so ever!!! disgust.gif So i guess everyone has to decide whats true n whats not... for eg. the sniper for JFK, he got shot from the front, but the shooter they caught shot him from an angle behind ???? make any sense? No.

Unless they used a special curved bullet that goes to where the shooter places an X

lol laugh.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

holy crap, well i can see the points, well i like to keep my mind open at this stage until something is proved outright, and btw kennedy was shot by his driver, which is why jfks wife is trying to get out of the car immediatley after the first shot, and also there was a third shooter (grassy knoll?), anyway i don't trust the UK goverment but at the end of the day they got rid of saddam right? if he was left there how many more kurds or iraqis would have died debatin the issue? and on another point i think we should at lest respect those who died at WTC, whatever happened at 9/11 people still died, and i think they need a DECENT explanation of what actually happened. and as for goverments, i kind of don't vote i have a vote but decide not to, because at the end of the day it will still be the same like you said puppets. i just try to survive. ph34r.gifgunsmilie.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just happened to bump into this thread, being referred here by Bizzaro's thread

started today. In that new thread, there is mention of whether or not a Boeing Jet actually hit the Pentagon........ LINK below:

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pen.../erreurs_en.htm

I have read all the posts here and have done my best to absorb all the information presented... many of them quite DETAILED and great effort put into the Posts.

Question: IF a Boeing Jet did NOT hit the Pentagon, could someone explain to me what DID happen to that flight, wherein many individuals perished, including one VERY prominent US Journalist???

blink.gif I am certain I will be considered totally "naive" by these next statements, and being a US Citizen appears to put me in an unfavorable light....

HOWEVER, I can tell you why WTC #7 collapsed. It was weakened by the tremendous collapse of WTC #1 and #2. It was observed for quite a few hours, subsequent to the Twin Towers falling. I know a very special Fireman who was caught under the collapse of #7. NONE, I repeat... NONE of these buildings were NEW.

The fires that burned for months at the WTC, above AND below ground are proof of the massive amount of jet fuel, NOT "pre-set explosions".... That same Fireman spent MONTHS in "VOIDS"...... repeat..... MONTHS.

Just recently, I ran into BIG trouble here on The Forum for my comments regarding Terrorism, I do not intend to repeat THAT error.

A conspiracy with September 11, 2001 involving the US Government? HELL NO!

Nancy <~~ officially OFF her soapbox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are absolutely right Nancy. This whole government conspiracy thing is silly, and although it does make for an interesting discussion, there isn't anything to it.

The jet did slam into the pentagon, and WTC#7 collapsed for the reasons you mentioned.

Again, it's an interesting discussion, but certainly no conspiracy rolleyes.gif

And you can stay on your soap box as long as you want original.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Homer.

Thank You...... Tis nice to know someone took the time to read my efforts.

I am still "walking on eggshells" here and tend to be skiddish concerning this subject. Perhaps it is still too emotional for me, although the Second Anniversary

is fast approaching, it will take years to stop the ache, IF ever. sad.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you have a look at the passenger manifest of all the four flights....There was not a single arab on board any of those flights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you have a look at the passenger manifest of all the four flights....There was not a single arab on board any of those flights.

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Could you please run that by me, one more time???????

Lionel, on reviewing that site, I find no date for reference purposes.

Who is the individual or persons who have posted this site? Without legitimate

credibility, I question the Contents, totally!

NOTE: The site to which your link takes me refers to information DATED September 13, 2001.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/lib...0913-usia18.htm

Has there been NO further investigation, since THEN?????????????????

Show me CURRENT stats, CURRENT data and we'll "talk." disgust.gifblink.gif

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 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.