[Moderated]175 did NOT hit the South tower.

[SOMERLED]

This is not true. Global Guardian is always held in the Fall, but not always October. The 2001 exercise, for example, was originally scheduled for November. The 1999 exercise piggybacked a US Navy FIX (Field Exercise) called "Global" which started in early September.

I would like to know what you think the relevance of this exercise is? It is a CPX (Command Post Exercise - simulated) not a FIX (Field exercise - live). USSTATCOM have no part in the NORAD Air Sovereignty mission (their peacetime operations).

NORAD's own CPX, Vigilant Guardian, which accompanies Global Guardian, did not start until September 10th. According to Richard Meyers (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) These two CPXs improved the response to the attack. He should know - Vigilant Guardian is a "Vigilant Overview" type exercise, which means it was sponsored by him.
-Gumboot

No,the exercises I referred to were altered for 2001 only.

 

[SOMERLED]

The NTSB provided support to the FBI's investigation, and they positively identified each of the four aircraft involved in the attacks.

-Gumboot

So where are the serial numbers from the engine?

 

[stateofgrace]

Is there anything at all about 9-11, that youfind suspicious?

I will tell you what I find suspicious Malcolm, and I say this in seriousness.

I have a suspicious feeling that no matter what evidence, logic, facts or data that is presented to you will not believe it. The fact that you have convinced yourself that on the morning of 911 a plane full of innocent people was not flow at high speed inside of a building full of innocent people. This event was witnessed not just by people in New York or even America but the mass majority of the planet, live. Most people simply acknowledge this as a truly appalling event, an event of barbaric murder. Most people on the planet now choose to show their respect for this matter by not pretending them are important and that this did not happen, most people choose not to try and make out they are self important researchers that have uncovered a dastardly plan.

See Malcolm most people don't really care what guys like you say, or any many times you say it, but I have a sneaky suspicion you know this already.

Back to the popcorn for me, I really don’t see the point in further adding to the fifty page thread, I equally have a sneaky suspicion that other people feel the same way, but hey that’s just me.

 

[MRC_Hans]

So where are the serial numbers from the engine?

Is the serial number from the engine, in your opinion, the only way to identify a plane from wreckage?

Hans

And stateofgrace: You are quite right. I am also wondering how seemingly sane people, myself included, can be compelled to bang their heads at a wall for thousands of posts.

 

[Belz...]

Is there anything at all about 9-11, that youfind suspicious?

Unfortunate ? Yes. Suspicious ? No.

But even if I did, what would that prove ?

You will have no difficulty proving the photo is genuine then, will you?

The FBI's already done that. Plus, aside from 1-2 accounts, what makes you think that the picture is fake in the first place ?

 

[gumboot]

No,the exercises I referred to were altered for 2001 only.

No they weren't. Did you even read my post?

-Gumboot

 

[gumboot]

So where are the serial numbers from the engine?

In the FBI's PENTTBOM case files. And probably the NTSB's as well.

-Gumboot

 

[slyjoe]

...snip...The FBI's already done that. Plus, aside from 1-2 accounts, what makes you think that the picture is fake in the first place ?

We were talking about the picture of steel beams bent over wood timbers, not the Shanksville picture from the other thread.

 

[Belz...]

Ah.

 

[pomeroo]

Is there anything at all about 9-11, that youfind suspicious?

Yes, I find it suspicious that America was the victim of an unprovoked attack and various bizarre characters will attempt to stand reality on its head to prove that what obviously happened really didn't.

 

[Belz...]

I find suspicious the ability that some people have to fit reality within their world-view rather than do the opposite. Suspicious, and dangerous.

 

[SOMERLED]

I had no difficulty believing the OCT for years. It was only when I learned of WTC7 dropping at or around free fall speed, that I realised something was badly wrong. When a steel and concrete building is clearly demolished by explosives, when that demolition is admitted and when one realises that those explosives could not possibly have been planted/set in place on 9/11 itself, then it is other people who then disturb me. I can accept someone who has such a busy day that they have no time to review material that is not on the MSM, still believing the OCT (as I did). My problems now revolve around people who claim to be au fait, yet still deny the truth.
Can you explain this?

 

[SOMERLED]

Yes, I find it suspicious that America was the victim of an unprovoked attack and various bizarre characters will attempt to stand reality on its head to prove that what obviously happened really didn't.

Do you find anything suspicious about the admitted controlled demolition of WTC7?

 

[SOMERLED]

I will tell you what I find suspicious Malcolm, and I say this in seriousness.

I have a suspicious feeling that no matter what evidence, logic, facts or data that is presented to you will not believe it. The fact that you have convinced yourself that on the morning of 911 a plane full of innocent people was not flow at high speed inside of a building full of innocent people. This event was witnessed not just by people in New York or even America but the mass majority of the planet, live. Most people simply acknowledge this as a truly appalling event, an event of barbaric murder. Most people on the planet now choose to show their respect for this matter by not pretending them are important and that this did not happen, most people choose not to try and make out they are self important researchers that have uncovered a dastardly plan.

See Malcolm most people don't really care what guys like you say, or any many times you say it, but I have a sneaky suspicion you know this already.

Back to the popcorn for me, I really don’t see the point in further adding to the fifty page thread, I equally have a sneaky suspicion that other people feel the same way, but hey that’s just me.

I had no difficulty in believing the OCT for years and I still have no difficulty with people believing the OCT when those people have not gone beyond MSM accounts.
What I do have difficulty with are people who have looked into the subject, yet still support the OCT.
For example, WTC7 was brought down in free fall or near free fall time by admitted controlled demolition.
How can you now support that?

 

[A W Smith]

I had no difficulty in believing the OCT for years and I still have no difficulty with people believing the OCT when those people have not gone beyond MSM accounts.

you mean like going beyond and using agenda driven and fear mongering sources such as prison planet and the like? l

What I do have difficulty with are people who have looked into the subject, yet still support the OCT.

well then you will have a problem with the thousands of scientists and engineers worldwide even those of our enemies. and me of course.

For example, WTC7 was brought down in free fall or near free fall time by admitted controlled demolition.
How can you now support that?

I see your are playing the Silverstein mis quote card.

 

[uk_dave]

I see your are playing the Silverstein mis quote card.

Conspiracy theorists believe what they're told to believe.

 

[DGM]

For example, WTC7 was brought down in free fall or near free fall time by admitted controlled demolition.

14 second collapse is free fall?

The old "pull it" misquote again. Actually I'm assuming that. He could have some new ground breaking evidence.

 

[pomeroo]

Do you find anything suspicious about the admitted controlled demolition of WTC7?

Your dishonest claim that the alleged demolition of WTC 7 has been demonstrated to everyone's satisfaction exposes the unfalsifiable nature of your beliefs. No demolition expert, with the single exception of Danny Jowenko of the Netherlands, agrees with you. So, apart from the fantasists themselves, who "admits" that explosives were used? People in the demolition industry reject your myth. No conspiracy liar has, to date, managed to explain how the collapse of building 7 fits into the Impossibly Vast Conspiracy's grand scheme.

 

[simakperrce]

Certainly, Raytheon flew around a passenger jet by remote control, as I said in my first post.
If you wish anything more technical, allow me to refer you to Pilots for 9/11 truth.

I can't believe this has been dug out AGAIN. Raytheon did NOT fly passenger jets "around" via "remote control". They constructed a GPS-enabled device that can guide a plane to a dedicated location. IOW: the device is somewhere and sends out a signal. The plane flies to where the signal guides it. Nobody on the ground holds a remote control in their hands.

http://www.raytheon.com/products/jpals/

Read up on JPALS before you repeat this nonsense of "remote contolled" planes. And please provide a link for the original SPIEGEL article. I am German so I can read it.

 

[Z]

Do you find anything suspicious about the admitted controlled demolition of WTC7?

I do find something suspicious... that you'd consider making the false claim that WTC7 was an admitted controlled demolition, knowing that we've been around this block about a dozen times.

You took a long break - didn't you learn anything in all that time?

Return when you have some better game.