• 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.

Questions for 9/11 Truthers

A-Train said:
DNA proof? Even if there is DNA proof someone was on the plane, it can't prove he was a hijacker.

video proof? There is none. You've been fooled.

passenger manifest proof? Which manifest? There are dozens.

witness proof? You mean the passenger phone calls? This proves the hijackers were "Middle Eastern," but from which country?

Now who is making stuff up out of his mind. At least I know when I am dealing with fact and when I am speculating.
Click to expand...

It is all there you have to prove it wrong and why it is wrong.

Witnesses on board the airplane reported the terrorist.

Manifest when the planes took off are proof and accurate.

Video proof of planes with the doors still on. Sorry. An open door would leave the plane, gone. The passengers would report the decompression. At altitude the passenger would pass out; but they used the phones. Both are not possible. Video of hijackers who later were manifested on the flight. Darn, you must not like facts and evidence so you make up stuff, which means you are telling lies.

DNA proof is there, they can not match it because the families will not come forward to identify and provide DNA stuff to find their kids; the terrorist kids of 9/11. Would you if it was your brother who was the terrorist.

After all when you post your evidence, which you do not have, we can review it. But so far you have stuck out. You were wrong as you start to type; proved wrong by events. Wrong before you knew you were going to be wrong. Got facts?

I will answer and save you a post. NO
 
A-Train said:
DNA proof? Even if there is DNA proof someone was on the plane, it can't prove he was a hijacker.
Click to expand...
Funny, the only ones on those planes whose relatives refused to offer DNS samples were the named hijackers. Their unmatched (from relatives)DNA matched DNA taken from the rental cars and hotel roome the named hijackers used. It's proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

video proof? There is none. You've been fooled.
Click to expand...
The video from the security checkpoints was faked?

passenger manifest proof? Which manifest? There are dozens.
Click to expand...
Should be no problem for you to present the "dozens" of manifests, no?

witness proof? You mean the passenger phone calls? This proves the hijackers were "Middle Eastern," but from which country?
Click to expand...
Betty Ong identified the seat numbers of 2 of the hijackers.

Now who is making stuff up out of his mind.
Click to expand...
You are.

At least I know when I am dealing with fact and when I am speculating.
Click to expand...
So you know you're speculating here, right? And that no evidence backs you up?
 
A-Train said:
Who says it had to be near the cities? If the hijackers bailed out of the planes with parachutes-- and that's a big if-- they could have done it:
Click to expand...
Glad you say it's a big if!
Of course, if the hijackers didn't parachute out of the planes, it were suicide missions. Do you have precedents of Israeli suicide missions???

A-Train said:
-in the Hudson River valley, somewhere South of Albany (AAL11)
Click to expand...
Wouldn't Betty Ong and Madeline Sweeney notice it?

A-Train said:
-along the Pennsylvania/New Jersey border (UAL175)
Click to expand...
Flight 175 was definitely NOT on autopilot.
See here (courtesy of babazaroni and apathoid).

A-Train said:
-West Virginia/Virginia (AAL77)
Click to expand...
Well, this one was also not on autopilot. Actually, CT'ers in general claim that the final manoeuvre was too difficult for Hanjour.

A-Train said:
-West of Pittsburgh, eastern Ohio

All rural areas, perhaps near an area where recreational skyjumpers are a common sight. Who was looking up at the skies for hijackers at 8-9 in the morning on 9/11? Were you?

We have nothing putting the hijackers still on the flights in the last 10-15 minutes of each. Except for the CVR from FL93, that of "Allah o Akbar" fame, which I consider suspect.

How many bodies were recovered at Shanksville? Only forty? What happened to the other four?
Click to expand...
For flight 93 we indeed have the CVR. You call it "suspect", but give no reason as to why it is suspect.
I think you confuse "suspect" with "doesn't fit into my theory".

I don't know where you got that only 40 bodies were recovered at Shanksville. :confused:

A few google-clicks and I found this:

Flight 93 remains yield no evidence
Thursday, December 20, 2001
By Tom Gibb, Post-Gazette Staff Writer

The coroner's assessment came yesterday as he confirmed that the Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory has used DNA samples to match recovered remains with the last of 40 crew members and passengers aboard the hijacked jetliner 14 weeks ago when it slammed into a recovered strip mine at around 500 mph.
...
Death certificates for the 40 victims list their deaths as homicides. The hijackers' death certificates, not released yet, call their deaths suicides.

The four hijackers' remains will stay in FBI custody in case they prove important to the evolving investigation.

Investigators segregated remains which yielded DNA samples that did not match DNA profiles of the 40 passengers and crew. Those, by process of elimination, are the hijackers, and their remains are being grouped by common DNA.
Click to expand...
Probably you will say that this is suspect. :rolleyes:

I'm still underwhelmed by your "overwhelming evidence of Israeli-Zionist direct involvement".
You seem to be getting nowhere for now. A lot of baseless speculation, but not one fact that resists any scrutiny.
 
Last edited:
Firestone said:
Of course, if the hijackers didn't parachute out of the planes, it were suicide missions. Do you have precedents of Israeli suicide missions???
Click to expand...

No, highly trained professionals like the ones who did 9/11 are not known for suicide missions. That's why we should take a close look at the possibility of parachutes.

Firestone said:
Wouldn't Betty Ong and Madeline Sweeney notice it?
Click to expand...

No. Phone calls from all four flights indicate the passengers were all herded to the back of the plane. Possibly, from the front of the plane, the hijackers take a hatch to the cargo hold, from there deplane?

Firestone said:
Flight 175 was definitely NOT on autopilot.
See here (courtesy of babazaroni and apathoid).

Well, this one was also not on autopilot. Actually, CT'ers in general claim that the final manoeuvre was too difficult for Hanjour.
Click to expand...

"Autopilot" can mean a lot of things. Is it the plane's FMC, or some kind of remote navigation system like Global Hawk? We don't know. But don't be so quick to talk yourself into believing these planes were hand flown, unless you are intimately familiar with all the remote navigation systems out there.

Firestone said:
For flight 93 we indeed have the CVR. You call it "suspect", but give no reason as to why it is suspect.
I think you confuse "suspect" with "doesn't fit into my theory".
Click to expand...

It has never been released to the public, but some victims' family members were allowed to listen to it. Some of them thought it had been tampered with. That's a matter of public record.

Firestone said:
I don't know where you got that only 40 bodies were recovered at Shanksville. :confused:

A few google-clicks and I found this:
Click to expand...

The wording in the article is vague. Some of the remains yield no DNA evidence, so are they assuming that these are the hijackers?
 
A-Train said:
No, highly trained professionals like the ones who did 9/11 are not known for suicide missions. That's why we should take a close look at the possibility of parachutes.
Click to expand...
So the use of parachutes is not a "big if"!
But you now acknowledge that it is unlikely to the extreme that 19 "highly trained professionals" from the Mossad or the Sayeret Matkal would be sacrified in this type of operation. Please remember this point.

A-Train said:
No. Phone calls from all four flights indicate the passengers were all herded to the back of the plane. Possibly, from the front of the plane, the hijackers take a hatch to the cargo hold, from there deplane?
Click to expand...
More baseless speculation.
A-Train said:
"Autopilot" can mean a lot of things. Is it the plane's FMC, or some kind of remote navigation system like Global Hawk? We don't know. But don't be so quick to talk yourself into believing these planes were hand flown, unless you are intimately familiar with all the remote navigation systems out there.
Click to expand...
I am not, but others on this forum are.
It is certain that flight 93, flight 175 and flight 77 were not on autopilot when they crashed.

It is also certain that the planes involved could not be piloted by remoted control.
Others on this forum will have to go into the technicalities. Or if you want, I can look up the links.

Anyway, there is no doubt that hijackers were in the planes till the end.

A-Train said:
It has never been released to the public, but some victims' family members were allowed to listen to it. Some of them thought it had been tampered with. That's a matter of public record.
Click to expand...
The tape was aired at the Moussaoui trial to the jury, the transcripts were released.
The tape was not aired publicly because some families objected to the tapes being played publicly.

A-Train said:
The wording in the article is vague. Some of the remains yield no DNA evidence, so are they assuming that these are the hijackers?
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:

Nothing vague:
Investigators segregated remains which yielded DNA samples that did not match DNA profiles of the 40 passengers and crew. Those, by process of elimination, are the hijackers, and their remains are being grouped by common DNA.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
A-Train said:
No, highly trained professionals like the ones who did 9/11 are not known for suicide missions. That's why we should take a close look at the possibility of parachutes.
Click to expand...

So we can force the facts to fit your hypothesis.

OR...

We could reject your hypothesis. That way, no need to explain parachutes. How bout it?

No. Phone calls from all four flights indicate the passengers were all herded to the back of the plane. Possibly, from the front of the plane, the hijackers take a hatch to the cargo hold, from there deplane?
Click to expand...

I thought you said it wouldn't be a suicide mission? Has anyone ever survived deplaning from a jet moving at hundreds of miles an hour, less than a thousand feet above the ground (without an ejection seat, that is)?

"Autopilot" can mean a lot of things. Is it the plane's FMC, or some kind of remote navigation system like Global Hawk? We don't know. But don't be so quick to talk yourself into believing these planes were hand flown, unless you are intimately familiar with all the remote navigation systems out there.
Click to expand...

Also, don't make up stuff if you don't have the information.

It has never been released to the public, but some victims' family members were allowed to listen to it. Some of them thought it had been tampered with. That's a matter of public record.
Click to expand...

A lot of people think a lot of things. Doesn't make it true. Or are we supposed to accept this as evidence out of sympathy for the families?

The wording in the article is vague. Some of the remains yield no DNA evidence, so are they assuming that these are the hijackers?
Click to expand...

There were two methods by which hijackers were identified: First, process of elimination. If the DNA found didn't match the DNA provided by the families of the victims, then it can be deduced that these were the hijackers. Second, DNA found in the vehicles driven by the hijackers matched some of the DNA found on the planes.

As far as I know, no one made an assumption that certain remains were those of hijackers simply because there was no viable DNA left.
 
A-Train said:
"Autopilot" can mean a lot of things. Is it the plane's FMC, or some kind of remote navigation system like Global Hawk? We don't know. But don't be so quick to talk yourself into believing these planes were hand flown, unless you are intimately familiar with all the remote navigation systems out there.
Click to expand...

As it turns out, the members here in toto are extremely familiar with autopilot and remote navigation systems. Indeed, a fellow who used to work for me -- and I keep in touch with -- went to Northrop Grumman last year, where he's one of the leads on the next-generation Global Hawk navigation and control.

Now please, stop embarrassing yourself. You were silly enough when you demanded non-existent silencers before you could pin this on Israel. Now you demand a forged CVR, hijackers bailing out (unseen) from the aircraft at cruising speed, and an unobtainium autopilot? What, did they smuggle it on the plane in their socks??

Disgusting, that's what I call it.
 
Firestone said:
It is also certain that the planes involved could not be piloted by remoted control.
Others on this forum will have to go into the technicalities. Or if you want, I can look up the links.

Anyway, there is no doubt that hijackers were in the planes till the end.
Click to expand...

Well, you guys seem to have a tendency to be able to talk yourselves into just about anything. Is it the same "others on this forum" who are "certain" that WTC7 was brought down by a burning diesel generator tank?
 
A-Train said:
Well, you guys seem to have a tendency to be able to talk yourselves into just about anything. Is it the same "others on this forum" who are "certain" that WTC7 was brought down by a burning diesel generator tank?
Click to expand...
When are you going to produce the "dozens" of manifests?
 
aggle-rithm said:
I thought you said it wouldn't be a suicide mission? Has anyone ever survived deplaning from a jet moving at hundreds of miles an hour, less than a thousand feet above the ground (without an ejection seat, that is)?
Click to expand...

You must have missed my posting of the very interesting article by former Navy SEAL Chuck Pfarrer. It is located here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?post=2339966#post2339966
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2339966#post2339966
 
A-Train said:
No. Phone calls from all four flights indicate the passengers were all herded to the back of the plane. Possibly, from the front of the plane, the hijackers take a hatch to the cargo hold, from there deplane?
Click to expand...
Can someone confirm whether this is even possible or has A-Train been watching too many Hollywood movies?
 
aggle-rithm said:
So we can force the facts to fit your hypothesis.

OR...

We could reject your hypothesis. That way, no need to explain parachutes. How bout it?
Click to expand...
I'd say go with the latter because the parachute thing is nothing more than pure tin-foil speculation.
 
A-Train said:
You must have missed my posting of the very interesting article by former Navy SEAL Chuck Pfarrer. It is located here:
Click to expand...

(I can't post URL's yet)

"In a HALO drop, you exit the aircraft at 35,000 feet on oxygen and open your parachute low, at 2,000 feet, to avoid detection. A jumper falling at terminal velocity, roughly 120 miles an hour, would scream in for a full three minutes before opening his parachute.

"In a HAHO drop, jumpers exit the aircraft above 35,000 feet, but their parachutes are deployed after a brief delay, maybe three seconds, opening high instead of low-sometimes literally in the jet stream. The team floats under canopy at 33,000 feet, then groups together and glides in formation toward the target."

Was there a bit in there about jumping at 1000 feet and, of necessity, opening the parachute while still travelling at several hundred mph that I missed?

Dave
 
What A-Train is proposing could be called the LAMO (Low Altitude, Multiple Opening) drop. You jump out of the plane at 1,000 feet, are immediately torn limb from limb by the wind force, and a tiny parachute on each limb then opens and drops the limb into the target area.

OK, this might be how they planted the body parts, but I bet there'd be few volunteers.

Anyone want to critique my LAMO theory?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom