Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

To those who believe the 911 official story


Zaus

Recommended Posts

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!! .... etc

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 ????

:unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • flyingswan

    313

  • Q24

    205

  • turbonium

    180

  • merril

    113

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

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 ????

:unsure:

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--

linked-image

linked-image

Edited by Sunofone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

  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.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...

linked-image

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...

linked-image

Poster for the movie World Trade Center...

linked-image

and United 93...

linked-image

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...

linked-image

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)

linked-image

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.

Edited by Zaus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

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.

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?

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- 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?

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

Edited by flyingswan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Keep the good word flowing!

And now, more 9/11 creepy coincidences in movies!

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.

Edited by merril
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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 :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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).

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[*]Did you know contingency planning exercises had simulated a plane crash at the Pentagon?

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

[*]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.

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

[*]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”.

Potential. Could. Not proof.

[*]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”).

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).

[*]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.

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.

[*]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.

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.

[*]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

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

[*]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.

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

[*]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.

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

[*]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.

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

In any case: PROOF?

[*]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”.

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?

[*]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.

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?

[*]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.

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

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

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: -

Still want to discuss court cases?

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.

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: -

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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…

  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.

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 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?

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.

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: -

Regarding explosives/charges/thermite surviving the impacts, this must be the third time you have asked the question! Take your pick from or better, use a combination of, the answers I have given: -

  • Tertiary explosives, also called blasting agents, are so insensitive to shock that they cannot be reliably detonated by practical quantities of primary explosive, and instead require an intermediate explosive booster of secondary explosive. These are primarily used in large-scale mining and construction operation, and in terrorism.

  • Conventional thermite reactions require very high temperatures for initiation. These cannot be reached with conventional black-powder fuses, nitrocellulose rods, detonators, or other common igniting substances. Even when the thermite is hot enough to glow bright red, it will not ignite as it must be at or near white-hot to initiate the reaction.

  • They know approximately on which floors the airliners will impact the towers so they simply place the explosives a slight distance (maybe 3-4 floors?) below the impact level. This would work as we know fire was not widespread below the impact level due to recorded firefighter communications. The explosives could perhaps have even been enclosed/protected in units to ensure further that fire did not detonate them. I believe that cutting the main central supports of the towers slightly below the fire area would still bring the top of the buildings down and look as though the collapses initiated from the impact level.

  • It is possible the detonation system was electrical or chemical. This would cause them to be destroyed by any fire rather than set off. As the fire was on limited areas of limited floors in the building, the large majority of the explosives would remain untouched.

CD set-up of occupied building: -

Perhaps you are looking at things too simply? Obviously a 100 strong demolition team did not stroll through the front door of the towers at the peak of the working day, with boxes of dynamite under their arms, wires trailing behind them and wander from office to office priming the buildings... "yes excuse me sir/madam working there, please step aside a moment while I place this explosive under your desk."

Who though would question a 'security guard' patrolling service areas of the WTC or a 'maintenance team' working in the elevator shafts of the WTC? What if (due to an insider) they all carried the correct security passes? What if furthermore this was during the weekend or night when the towers were more sparsely populated? What if the demolition charges were transported straight to the car park/delivery areas beneath the WTC towers and taken immediately through the elevator shafts to where they were needed? State the obvious but that is the whole point in covert ops - they are carried out quietly.. secretly.. planned so no one notices.

Would normal people going about their daily lives stop to question them? Would you challenge maintenance men with official passes working in the elevator shafts carrying out, as far as you are concerned, legitimate work AROCES? Would you challenge uniformed security guards moving say, plain boxes around the building AROCES? Assuming you did ask what they were doing and they say “we are carrying out maintenance,” now what will you do? Tell security? Security will tell you “ah yes we have a maintenance team booked into the building.” Being honest though, not you or anyone else would question them in the first place.

Absence of physical evidence of CD: -

  • Eyewitness and media accounts of multiple explosions below the impact zones
  • FBI reporting they believed “secondary devices” were in the Towers
  • Sudden onset of virtually symmetrical, near freefall, complete collapses
  • Visible ‘squibs’
  • High-temperature steel corrosion reported by FEMA
  • Molten iron spheres found by Steven Jones
  • The visible thermite resembling flow from WTC2
  • Extreme ‘hot spots’ in the debris pile
  • The descriptions of like a “foundry” or “lava” in the debris pile
  • Rescue workers stating WTC7 was about to “blow up”
  • Larry Silverstein’s “pull it” comment
  • Mossad agents reported with explosives in their van on 9/11

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.

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.

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

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).

Edited by MolonLabe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

EDIT: if i may...

And now, more 9/11 creepy coincidences in movies!

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?

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

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...

--SNIP--

Poster for the movie World Trade Center...

--SNIP--

and United 93...

--SNIP--

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?

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.

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.

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.

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)

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.

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...

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.

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.

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??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

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.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've got to be kidding - right?

Nope, i really don't think he is.

:blink:

Link to comment
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.