• 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!

You don't think they intended to pull WTC 7 without the aid of a plane crash do you? It was obviously demolished with explosives (which had to of been planted before 911) so what I said about flight 93 and it's original plan to hit WTC 7 makes perfect sense. Coupled with the fact that I just showed you a video of Rumsfield saying flight 93 was, in fact, shot down.
1. Sit Down.

2. Listen To Reason.

3. When Flight 93 made its turnaround - it was headed on a course towards Washington DC and NOT towards New York City.

4. If the cuddly but conspiring Feddies wanted to incite terror and get the country on a war fever pitch by Blowing Up Big Buildings - then WHY use jets at all? Seems like unnecessary complexity, no? Why not just load 'em up with 'splosives, wait for everyone to come to work, and then hit the Big Plunger? They had to do that ANYWAY for Building 7 (according to you). "Flight 93 didn't make it to WTC 7? Really? Darn! Okay, just go ahead and have the Fire Chiefs, Port Authority and The Mayor all hit the Big Plunger on the count of 3..."

5. Quit selling out your brain cells, join JREF, and begin your walk down the path of True Skepticism. You'll be happier.
 
What proof do we have, that those planes ever took off on 9/11? I saw something where one of the flights...wasn't even scheduled to fly on 9/11.
so are you goign to tell the families of the people on those flights their loved ones never got on a plane that morning?

and please cite a source for you "not scheduled" claim
 
you claimed WTC7 was brought down without the aid of the plane (rather than aborted) due to money, so the money garnered from 7 alone must be worth all the suspicion its drawing correct?

so how much did he make from 7, and how much did it cost him to rebuild?

BTW, yes, he was obligated to rebuild WTC7 (thats why it was built so quickly and without any tenants signed on, because he only had a certain amount of time to do it) and i wouldnt be surprised if he has similar obligations for the rest of the complex

also, IIRC, he did collect over 3 billion in insurance but he spent nearly all of that rebuilding 7 and now has to foot the bill for rest of the freedom tower complex

Donald Trump is building some high-rise condo/casinos in Las Vegas...it's a $3 billion+ project. Is he an idiot or what? Man, now he's in the hole 3 billion dollars.
 
Donald Trump is building some high-rise condo/casinos in Las Vegas...it's a $3 billion+ project. Is he an idiot or what? Man, now he's in the hole 3 billion dollars.
did he blow up an 8 billion dollar casino he owned to collect 3 billion insurance and spend 20 billion to rebuild it?
 
...managing to pull off air maneuvers that would test even the most skilled fighter pilots...

Stop right there. I don't know what any of the latest has to do with the metallic flows out of the South Tower, but fine. You've moved on.

Where did you get the idea that the 9/11 pilots "managed to pull off air maneuvers that would test even the most skilled fighter pilots"? This is a prime example to me of the "Truth" movement blowing something completely out of proportion.

There is only one canonical reference to the actions of the planes resembling fighter jets, and that's Flight 77. When it was first recognized on local radar, an ATC assumed it was a fighter jet because of how it was being flown. That does not mean manuevers - it was being flown at a breakneck speed. Passenger jets don't get flown that way. It was certainly not a manuever that would test even the most skilled fighter pilots - it fit more into her "fighter jet behavior" paradigm than her "passenger jet" paradigm. It was not a TESTING of fighter jet pilot skills, it appeared to be a SIMPLE EXAMPLE of fighter jet pilot skills.

Please notice those words APPEARED TO BE. That was actually Flight 77, being flown faster than passenger jets normally are. Flying fast is what made the ATC think it was a jet. Are we clear on that?

Out of that simple mistake, the advocates of the Truth Movement have built an entire rheotorical point, which you just repeated. The 9/11 pilots were doing things that would have "tested even the most skilled fighter pilots"? Like what exactly? It is exactly this kind of overarching flourish that drive me crazy when I read the twaddle that comes from advocates of the Truth Movement. There are no such manuevers. Someone has pulled that phrase out of their [rule8] and you are mindlessly repeating it.
 
What proof do we have, that those planes ever took off on 9/11? I saw something where one of the flights...wasn't even scheduled to fly on 9/11.

Gee I dont know. Maybe the ATC transcripts, the dispatchers, gate agents, rampers, fuelers and mechanics who worked the flights.

Dude, The Matrix is a work of fiction.......gheesh.
 
Last edited:
28th Kingdom, before connecting Donald Trump to 9/11, I would like to ask you to adress the points raised by Karl Johannes on this post. Thanks for replying.

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.
 
Rumsfield, even admits Flight 93 was shot down:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYqLA4X6dQ4

The full quote:

I think all of us have a sense if we imagine the kind of world we would face if the people who bombed the mess hall in Mosul, or the people who did the bombing in Spain, or the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania and attacked the Pentagon, the people who cut off peoples' heads on television to intimidate, to frighten – indeed the word 'terrorized' is just that. Its purpose is to terrorize, to alter behavior, to make people be something other than that which they want to be.

So Al Qaeda shot down flight 93 ?
 
28th in a NUT shell

From psycologist Dr Saintys blog

The hallmark of the paranoid individual and the paranoid style is constant anticipation or expectation of either attack or personal betrayal. Paranoia finds causal connections everywhere and in everything; for them, nothing is coincidental. They can develop complicated conspiracies about innocuous behaviors and seemingly irrelevant events. Their paranoia makes them constantly on guard, searching for hidden motives and meanings in everyone else's behavior. (Just go check out the Democratic Underground, where these fantasies on every action or inaction on the part of the Bush administration are immediately converted into conspiracies and plots). The tragic death of a reporter -- Bush et al had him killed because he knew too much. Osama's most recent tape -- a Rovian plot to show how frightened we should be. And so on.

Paranoia can be conceptualized as "rationality in the service of the irrational." Once fixed on a particular idea or explanation -- no matter how bizarre or irrational; the paranoid person looks for evidence to validate their prejudices. It is almost impossible to change their minds. Their entire concept of themselves is tied up with the paranoid idea or conspiracy. If it did not exist, or was proven to be untrue or false-- then they would need to question their underlying assumptions and ideas--and those are what usually form the foundation of who they believe themselves to be.

For example, a belief that one is important enough to be the subject of a determined (and often vague) FBI or CIA plot may be frightening, but is likely to be vastly superior to accepting that you have a severe and lifelong psychiatric disorder.

It is far easier to disregard reality; and/or to simply incorporate the person who tries to disabuse you of your idea or conspiracy into the complex paranoid fantasy itself, rather than deal with the trauma of a disintegrating self.

When setbacks occur, or when something goes wrong in the life of the paranoid, they will prefer to believe that another person or group is to blame, rather than accept any personal responsibility.

In Part II, I will discuss how paranoia can originate from both biological and psychological causes; and how the current political paranoia and rhetoric of the left have profound implications for our society. It has led to severe breaks in the social fabric that bind us together as a nation. I hope that these can, with time, be mended. But the worse effect of this paranoid style is that it seriously impedes those who express it from being able to appropriately face and respond to reality.

Thus, those who adopt the paranoid style in their rhetoric and their behavior not only are unable to help the rest of us deal with the very real threats we face in the 21st century; they actively undermine our efforts and enable our enemies

My bolding above
 
Last edited:
YOO HOOO, TUMSHIE 28TH?????

Will those be the "magical collapses" due to fire that I posted a technical response on, then you ran away and put me on your ignore list?

Are you ready to finally respond, or are you hoping that we all forgot?

Quoted, just incase...
 

I have never understood the mania involved with trying to demonstrate that the 9/11 attacks was just like one of the proposed Northwoods attacks in every detail.

I mean, honestly. After BushCo had made the leap from ditching a single drone plane of fake people near Cuba to flying four planes into buildings which would then be demolished intentionally, killing thousands in the process, why would they then balk at hijacking four actual planes to do the dirty work? Why did they have to go into the expense, let alone the effort, of building the identities of all those people and their families, who must still be on the payroll...

It just boggles my mind to understand how people can believe something so foolish.
 
did he blow up an 8 billion dollar casino he owned to collect 3 billion insurance and spend 20 billion to rebuild it?

I can't say it any simpler than this. Silverstein purchased something (buildings) he metaphorically sold them to the insurance companies for a profit of 3 billion dollars. That's the difference between how much he paid for the buildings and how much he got for them through the insurance claim.

Now... Silverstein is up $3 billion dollars in profit. At this point...it doesn't matter how much he wants to spend to build new projects. If he spends 3 billion or 10 billion - he will still own a new property that is worth whatever it cost him to build it...and he will make profit off of the new project, because that's why people build things - it's a business...designed to make money. Just like the Trump Casino in Vegas.
 
I can't say it any simpler than this. Silverstein purchased something (buildings) he metaphorically sold them to the insurance companies for a profit of 3 billion dollars. That's the difference between how much he paid for the buildings and how much he got for them through the insurance claim.

Now... Silverstein is up $3 billion dollars in profit. At this point...it doesn't matter how much he wants to spend to build new projects. If he spends 3 billion or 10 billion - he will still own a new property that is worth whatever it cost him to build it...and he will make profit off of the new project, because that's why people build things - it's a business...designed to make money. Just like the Trump Casino in Vegas.
Who owned WTC 1, 2, 4 and 5?
 
Hang on..... you own a car...you insure it...if your car is destroyed you get insurance money to buy a replacement....how do you profit?

Not only that, but in this case while you're haggling with the insurance companies and shopping around for your model of choice your limo business isn't making any money but you still have to pay the rent on your offices.
 

Back
Top Bottom