• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

This is the thread that may very well change the way you look at 9/11 FOREVER!

28th Kingdom said:
Since, the government were the ones who hired these 19 men (just like 1993 bombings) they obviously knew everything about them, so that's how they "discovered," the identities of the "hijackers" in less than a day.
Click to expand...

Or they read the passenger lists of the flights. All of them in less than one day! Dang the FBI is snappy.

ETA: But hey atleast you have a theory. thumbsup
 
did they send the men to afghanistan to appear in training videos and martyrdom videos?
why would they have to mislead people who time and time again have commited their devotion to jihad and suicide?
are bin laden ksm, binalshibh, zawahiri, atef etc also paid off men?
if not how do you explain how bin laden refers to each one by name and repeatedly extols their task?
is a 767 (a plane that is not fly by wire) able to be remotley flown over the mechanical input of the pilots?
if not then who was on that plane when they were electronically hijacked?
if no one then where were all the alleged passengers? crew?
who made the phone calls?
what happened to the hijackers if they were not on the plane?
what happened to the passengers?
how do you account for the extensive delay in the remote flight system (image to plane, plane to controller, controllers reaction, controllers input, input to plane, signal to control surfaces) when taking into account the incredible speed and precision of flight 175's left bank at the last moment?
what elements within the govt are you referring to?
do you have any evidence besides a connection to a dubious claim to earlier govt involvment in a terrorist attack? even if that were true it does not prove anything about september 11
what does the pakistani ISI (which is stock full of radical islamists who do not exactly always listen to the dictates of military coup leader in cheif pervez musharraf) have to do with the USA CIA?

as i am no gravy i cant roll off a list of debunkification at you, but these are questions you must have asked yourself before you posted such an astonishing claim and therefore i would be interested in how you would account for these minor discrepancies

but most importantly...

do you honestly believe america, global hegemon, imperial leader, sole superpower, colonial collossus, is so bereft of enemies who want to kill us that we have to invent them?
that one goes for all the deniers.
 
Last edited:
yes i appreciate what he represents, and i follow that to, but i cannot replicate his insane depth of knowledge, i joined this forum in hopes that i could learn more on the subject so i can better snuff out this retardation should i ever come across it in the future, and thanks to all of the people here, i am learning a lot. but i am honestly interested in how 28th addresses those issues. i hope he replies.

ps. JAStewart, your sig reminds me of that other avery quote: "i am one of the most humble people you will ever meet"
hmmmmm
 
Last edited:
28th Kingdom said:
My Theory: Elements of the US government hired 19 arab men to take part in some kind of training/mission/operation - in the same way the FBI hired Emad Salem to take part in the 1993 WTC bombing. The FBI mislead Emad to believe he was taking part in a sting operation that was designed to thwart the bombings, but when Emad discovered that he had been intentionally mislead, he blew the whistle on the FBI, and said they knew the four men accused of the bombings - were going to try and blow up the WTC. http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc_bombing3.wmv (Note: notice how Dan Rather says the FBI were applauded for how quickly they apprehended the four suspects...much in the same way the government discovered the 19 identities of the supposed hijackers from 9/11 in less than a day)

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00617FE3A5C0C7B8EDDA90994DB494D81

There have been reports of a connection between a Pakistani ISI (CIA) chief (General Mahumd) being directly involved in the wiring of $100,000 to Mohammad Atta (lead hijacker)

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?xml=0&art_id=1454238160

On Sept. 11, 2001, this ISI chief General Mahumd was in Washington meeting with US congress members and he also met with Colin Powell, Secretary of State. Mysterious September 11 Breakfast Meeting on Capitol Hill. "This meeting was described by one press report as a 'follow-up meeting' to that held in Pakistan in late August." Neither the Congressional 9-11 inquiry or the 9-11 Commission would touch this money trail from the ISI with a ten-foot pole.

So, the US government hired these 19 men to participate in some type of training/mission/operation - (the US probably mislead them about the exact intent of the operation much in the same way they lied to Emad Salem about his role in the 1993 bombings) They had these 19 men train at various US flight schools in order to create a compelling back story that meshed with the official story. The 19 men probably had no idea of the elaborate plot they were taking part in.

On 9/11 - I believe the US government simply took drone aircrafts (a la ONW) and flew them into the twin towers. I think the reason they used drone aircraft was not to save the lives of the people on board the flights, but because they couldn't find pilots who would fly the planes into buildings.

Since, the government were the ones who hired these 19 men (just like 1993 bombings) they obviously knew everything about them, so that's how they "discovered," the identities of the "hijackers" in less than a day.
Click to expand...

They knew all the passengers on the darn jets. Are you insane? you are suppose to be on a thermite how it works thread you started!

But now you look up more CT junk.

It is not clear if anyone knew the target of the bomb you mention; darn.

They got the bomb idiots cause the guy asked for a refund on the van; he is a dolt like someone who posts this junk.

This is the dumbest CT story I have heard yet.

There were no drone aircraft! The flight are as they were, 11, 175, 77, and 93. End of story.\\

You are officially debunked again. Check my stuff!
 
Last edited:
thanks for launching into ad hominem to give him a reason to go off on some other tangent and ignore all of my questions :confused:
 
huh? how can you post such an outlandish theory and have no courage to back up legitimate criticism to its feasability?
instead you just ramble off to the next lie
wow this is more frustrating than i thought it would be
 
No, I have used just facts. It is a fact, all I said you will find out or if you read all of his beautiful work, it is great.

He does not read or reply to your post, therefore...

He post great CT stuff, the best, therefore...

If he ever replies to you, it is just at random

How can it be ad hominem, I have reserached this very carefully and found all my statements to be true.

Who started this thread that was going to change the way we view 9/11!

Questions? ad hominem, tangent, have I missed something, he stuff is the tangent of 90 degrees.

Good luck - but I posted facts
 
28th Kingdom said:
"NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers ... Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from the top to the bottom..."

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm - NIST FAQ 2

Classic Doublethink.
Click to expand...

Since the stories below the level of collapse initiation provided little resistance to the tremendous energy released by the falling building mass, the building section above came down essentially in free fall, as seen in videos. As the stories below sequentially failed, the falling mass increased, further increasing the demand on the floors below, which were unable to arrest the moving mass.” NIST FAQ 6
What is this describing, if not a progressive, pancake-like collapse? How is the upper falling mass increasing if the floors aren't progressively stacking like pancakes?

So here is the translation:

NISTs findings conclude that there was no pancake-like progressive collapse of WTC 1 & 2, but the collapse of the buildings was due to a progressive pancaking of the upper mass.

Now, I see why they didn't create a computer animation for the entire collapse. That would have been fun to see a Doublethink illustrated.
 
Last edited:
my apologies, i thought you were calling him an idiot, its just bad form to resort to those levels, no doubt you are accurate but i fear he would just use name calling as an excuse to further detract from substantive arguments, but he never strayed into that realm in the first place, so i guess im the idiot, but this guy clearly is not interested in finding out the truth, just in getting people to believe his rediculous opinions.

28th, i think you are confused about the collapse, it didnt start from floor 110 onto floor 109 and then that floor fell onto 108 etc. in a top down fashion like that, but rather the entire mass of floors 80ish to 110 immediatley fell onto the floor below it, thats a pretty big difference i dont think you are addressing
 
Last edited:
Karl Johannes said:
my apologies, i thought you were calling him an idiot, its just bad form to resort to those levels, no doubt you are accurate but i fear he would just use name calling as an excuse to further detract from substantive arguments, but he never strayed into that realm in the first place, so i guess im the idiot, but this guy clearly is not interested in finding out the truth, just in getting people to believe his rediculous opinions.
Click to expand...

No, you are correct, I may have! I will work on it. But I would do the same to my brother.

I was just checking in while sending photos to great grandmothers. Earlier the credit card stuff was out of order.

He may answer you but he is presenting any new CT stuff.

good luck
 
i assumed he would respond to most posts, so excuse my ignorance on the subject, had i known how stubborn he is i would probably not make a big deal out of it.
 
28th Kingdom would you please answer the questions Karl Johannes presented regarding things that contradict your theory on what happend on 9/11.

Thank you
 
Last edited:
28th Kingdom said:
Remember, how I was talking about the core columns being vertical to the ground...which meant they would have had to basically telescope down on themselves...because of the way the towers collapsed straight down (although the exterior of the building was blasted outwards) Well, that's why the columns were cut at an angle....because if they would have cut them completely horizontal...the force of gravity...would try to push the split column down upon itself. (not very effective...as trying to push solid steel through solid steel - kind of defies the laws of the physical world) However, if you cut it at an angle...like this pic...than once the cut is made, gravity can pull the split column in a downward direction.
Click to expand...

Being called a maron is not a good thing.

I wish you luck with the rabbit.
 
Well, I'll give him this - he actually stated an alternate theory. That's pretty rare and a step forward from "just asking questions" in my opinion. Of course, his theory is an absolute unresolvable mess. Weighing it, we must dismiss it out of hand. But still slightly more intellectually honest than other Tr00thers.
 
are bin laden ksm, binalshibh, zawahiri, atef etc also paid off men?
if not how do you explain how bin laden refers to each one by name and repeatedly extols their task?
Click to expand...
and if they are paid off, why do CTers continually point to bin ladens supposed denial of involvement

28th Kingdom said:
"NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers ... Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from the top to the bottom..."

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm - NIST FAQ 2

Classic Doublethink.
Click to expand...
a "pancake collapse" as NIST uses the term refers to a failure of the joints between the floor trusses and the support columns, thsi didnt happen on 9/11

but seriously, are you trying to claim a contradiction because they used the word "progress?" if so you are seriously reaching

28th Kingdom said:
NISTs findings conclude that there was no pancake-like progressive collapse of WTC 1 & 2, but the collapse of the buildings was due to a progressive pancaking of the upper mass.
Click to expand...
wrong, NIST concludes there was not a failure of the connections between the floor trusses and the columns (a "pancake collapse," its an engineering term, look it up)

this does not mean the floors didnt "stack up like pancakes" however
24912509.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom