Stundie's "people who don't buy the official theory" thread

[Childlike Empress]

Do you have a better source image for that pic, CLE? I can't tell what it says. For all I know, you've posted a recipe for hot cross buns.

I scanned it from the book. The original isn't much better and i had to reduce it to 800px height to upload it here. In line 4 after "Charlie" it says "blowing up the world trade center and who knows what else" and in line 7 "about the airplanes beeing used ..."

Assuming it says exactly what you've said it does (assuming nothing else), what planes are to be used? From wich airfield? What means are to be used to acquire the planes? How close (as of the time of the memo) are they to completeing the operation?

I don't think that Glass had such detailed information but the problem was that no action was taken. In the video i posted in #61 you can hear what Graham had to say and that Glass said he was never contacted by any agency. If i remember correctly, he sent the FAX out of prison.

BTW, i don't take everything he says at face value and so does Hicks in his book, but the fact that he sent the warning is confirmed. And it is not the only instance.

 

[tsig]

Well, you are wrong. Read #61? Here is a FAX* Glass sent to Graham's office (Younts was a staff worker) in July 2001:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/99074568fb9813ab5.gif[/qimg]​

Method: Using planes as weapons
Location: WTC
Time: soon

*Source: "Big Wedding" by Sander Hicks

I think tey were inbiting you to someting unspeakable.

 

[Oliver]

Where did the memo (in this book) come from? Declassified?

 

[Childlike Empress]

Hicks interviewed Glass several times. The FAX is not confirmed and came directly from Glass but the fact that Graham received warnings from Glass is.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Hicks interviewed Glass several times. The FAX is not confirmed and came directly from Glass but the fact that Graham received warnings from Glass is.

So in other words, it's virtually useless as evidence of a conspiracy.

 

[Oliver]

Hicks interviewed Glass several times. The FAX is not confirmed and came directly from Glass but the fact that Graham received warnings from Glass is.

So Graham is/was Senator at this time. What
did the Senator do with this information?

ETA: Could you post the Memo in a bigger size
in two parts?

 

[Childlike Empress]

So in other words, it's virtually useless as evidence of a conspiracy.

It's something that should be investigated. In the book (which by the way is a must read) is an incredible description of Glass' testimony in front of the senate comitee ... but i think it would violate copyright laws to scan it

Oliver, please watch the video and do some investigoogling.

ETA: I'll scan it in 300dpi and link it.

 

[Oliver]

Oliver, please watch the video and do some investigoogling.

I did. No serious sources beside book reviews and nut-sites.

BTW: Which movie? I thought it was a book.

 

[tsig]

It's something that should be investigated. In the book (which by the way is a must read) is an incredible description of Glass' testimony in front of the senate comitee ... but i think it would violate copyright laws to scan it

Oliver, please watch the video and do some investigoogling.

ETA: I'll scan it in 300dpi and link it.

What does is say in your own words.

 

[tsig]

I did. No serious sources beside book reviews and nut-sites.

BTW: Which movie? I thought it was a book.

You and CE should have an avater standoff.

 

[twinstead]

You and CE should have an avater standoff.

Ohhhh. Chick fight!

 

[Childlike Empress]

I did. No serious sources beside book reviews and nut-sites.

BTW: Which movie? I thought it was a book.

You did what, Oliver? Investigoogling? You are fast. This video (transcript).

Here is the scan in 300dpi.

@DHR: Step by step. If you folks dismiss Glass as another "nut" there is no point in reporting further details.

 

[Horatius]

I scanned it from the book. The original isn't much better and i had to reduce it to 800px height to upload it here. In line 4 after "Charlie" it says "blowing up the world trade center and who knows what else" and in line 7 "about the airplanes beeing used ..."

Yeah, except....just before that he's talking about his "terrorist case - the sophisticated weapons systems: nuclear components". As well, he just mentions airplanes "being used". Not being used as weapons, and not hijacked planes being used as weapons.

If I had received that note, I'd have thought he was warning about nuclear weapons being smuggled or deployed by airplane, not what happened on 9/11.

This is what we mean when we say there were no specific warnings. There were lots of warnings of various attacks, most of which never actually panned out. How could they pick out the one that was most likely to happen? And if there were 10 plots afoot that could actually work, even 90% success still leaves one attack that gets pulled off, and we're back to CT land.

 

[Oliver]

Was there a follow up to the news-report "next week"?
The video does not support the details from the memo.
I guess you have the book - so there is no mention about
the source in it?

 

[Childlike Empress]

Oliver, i don't know if there was a follow up but i strongly doubt it because Hicks' book is from late 2005 and he would have mentioned any follow ups. What source do you mean? As i said, the FAX was given (FAXed) to Hicks directly by Randy Glass.

@Horatius: Yeah, except... this FAX is a follow up as indicated by the sentence "I've told you repeatedly about my terrorist case".

What do you think the airplanes should be used for in a context involving the WTC other then flying them in it?

 

[twinstead]

@Horatius: Yeah, except... this FAX is a follow up as indicated by the sentence "I've told you repeatedly about my terrorist case".

All that says it that repeatedly there was a warning. It's not as if you can prove there was a repeated warning that airliners were being hijacked on a certain day to crash into the WTC

 

[Oliver]

I don´t see how this incident proves something really serious
and new. I mean we have an agent, a senator and a book author.

Every forewarning from foreign countries is much more important
for the issue. But maybe i missed something because it´s your
style to throw something apparently important into the discussion
without explaining why you think it´s important and why you think
the sources are interesting.

 

[Childlike Empress]

I know that you know there were numerous warnings. Stundie collected a lot of them in this thread. Infamous Gravy asked him to name one specificly relevant and i did that. After TAM again denied the level of details some of the warnings had, i felt like throwing in the FAX. Why not?

@twinstead: There is lot more if you look in detail but this was it for today from me. I wish you people could stop your obsession with the disinformation part of the "truth movement" and really start looking for yourself without peer pressure. Good night.

 

[Pardalis]

A fax written by hand? Emails didn't exist back in 2001?

 

[Oliver]

I know that you know there were numerous warnings. Stundie collected a lot of them in this thread. Infamous Gravy asked him to name one specificly relevant and i did that. After TAM again denied the level of details some of the warnings had, i felt like throwing in the FAX. Why not?

I´m still waiting for the day when you start a thread
with all your knowledge, the logical pursuable sources
and the connections of your research. I see you jumping
in from time to time with some spectacular news and then
your whole argument disappears again in a cloud of logic.

Nothing personal - that´s what i see.