How 9/11 was done

[calebprime]

I'm glad that you can learn something because you can have real time voice morphing TONIGHT on you own computer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-v5Byi15Tfw
1:22-1:28 for real voices, the rest is robotic/alien nonsense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLw0hx1sFqs
Voice morphing applied to singing ('karaoke'). How to upgrade a horrible voice into something much better.



Never said anything different. But now you acknowledge it apparently as a distinct possibility after all.



Now be a good sports and admit that you just have been proven wrong on real-time voice morphing (at least anno 2008 on a home computer).

Again, this link talks about near real-time high quality voice morphing. Between that demo and 9/11 was two-and-a-half year. Computer technology around 2000 made huge increases in processing power, so it is not unreasonable to assume that we can drop the 'near' anno 9/11.

I'm not sure why you think those two examples are relevant, as they don't do anything like the kind of morphing you want--plus they sound ridiculous.

 

[Sabrina]

You're missing the point... nobody expects the passengers to converse with their relatives with an exalted voice; of course they would whisper. But what struck the relatives was the incredible calmness of the passenger on the phone, who were confronted with their own immanent death.

The real reason why the callers were calm was that they were having a good time somewhere on the ground leaning backwards with their feet on the table.

9/11 investigator, I suggest you read the following link. Pay close attention to the first myth discussed.

http://www.anbg.gov.au/disact/human-response.html

The long and the short of it is, you have absolutely NO idea how people will react in a crisis. Studies conducted have found that most people, when confronted with a crisis situation, will not panic and will become almost preternaturally calm while in a crisis. I will not deny that some people can and do panic in these sorts of situations, but to intimate that simply because someone, when calling their loved ones (and I will remind you that at the time of most of the phone calls from Flight 93, the passengers were not fully aware of the hijackers plans to fly the plane into a building and likely thought that there was still a decent chance they would get out of the situation alive) remains extremely calm while in a crisis situation is by no means an indication that the person calling is not the person they say they are. I suggest you take the time to study human psychology before making such a sweeping generalization in the future. Ultimately, for the passengers on Flight 93, it likely came down to one basic human decree; do whatever you have to do to survive for as long as you can. Panicking does absolutely nothing to advance that goal and in fact actively hinders it, so most people do not react in such a way in crisis situations.

 

[dtugg]

Strong language again. Ehhh, maybe it's my English but how about you reading on until the fourth paragraph: "After the judge made that ruling, Mohammed, Ali and Attash rescinded their offer to plead guilty."

It is my understanding that in the end KSM did NOT offer to plead guilty.

And I repeat: I reject any 'justice' system that operates on the basis of torture and plea bargain as barbaric and unworthy of any civil society.

You actually have very good English, so I am certain that you are lying also. That they rescinded their offer to plead guilty in no way means that they are now claiming they didn't do it.

You also have no evidence whatsoever that any confessions were extracted by the use of torture. Yes they did the waterboarding stuff to KSM and perhaps others, but that was almost certainly to gain information on current and future al Qaeda operations. And honestly, I do not give a damn that the CIA did that to them. Information that might be gained by doing this>the rights of terrorist scumbags that murdered 3,000 people.

 

[stateofgrace]

Strong language again. Ehhh, maybe it's my English but how about you reading on until the fourth paragraph: "After the judge made that ruling, Mohammed, Ali and Attash rescinded their offer to plead guilty."

It is my understanding that in the end KSM did NOT offer to plead guilty.

And I repeat: I reject any 'justice' system that operates on the basis of torture and plea bargain as barbaric and unworthy of any civil society.



Pray Lord that stateofgrace keeps his promise this time (in my heart I know better).

But stateofgrace, I really want to congratulate you that you found the 'mastermind of 9/11'. Chapeau!

P.S. ABC (MSM): "According to the sources, CIA officers who subjected themselves to the water boarding technique lasted an average of 14 seconds before caving in. They said al Qaeda's toughest prisoner, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, won the admiration of interrogators when he was able to last between two and two-and-a-half minutes before begging to confess."

Is anybody defending these practices, apart from stateofgrace?

Once again you lie, You stated.........

I'm sorry, but KSM withdrew his 'confession'.?

Where is this withdrawal of his confession?

The only reason I am now addressing you is because you have foolishly accusing of something I have never done. That is defending torture. I do not ignore such accusation

Edited by Gaspode: 

Edited for civility

Where is this withdrawal of his confession? Where did I defend these practices?

Retract your lies or prove them.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

I believed the Muslim-OCT a long time myself, then gradually shifted to a vague American-inside-job notion. The Israeli CT is of recent date... why? Because I cannot explain 9/11 in another way. And the fact that we're now in page 30 with 75% debunker posts and 25% ICT posts shows that it was not possible to blast my theory away at least as a possibility.

But you are yet, once again, with an uninterrupted flair, incorrect.

The concept of the events of 9/11 being any kind of an "inside job" are 100% impossible. Not possible. Couldn't (and didn't) happen.

I admit I cannot prove it...

Psst. That's because it didn't happen your way.

...but at least my theory is more satisfying than yours (in my eyes at least).

So it's "satisfaction" you're searching for? Not a surprise.

 

[9/11-investigator]

I'm not sure why you think those two examples are relevant, as they don't do anything like the kind of morphing you want--plus they sound ridiculous.

They do exactly what 'I want': you speak in a microphone and in your headset you hear the voice of somebody else.

The voices in the first video between 1:22 and 1:28 did not sound 'ridiculous' at all.

 

[9/11-investigator]

9/11 investigator, I suggest you read the following link. Pay close attention to the first myth discussed.

http://www.anbg.gov.au/disact/human-response.html

The long and the short of it is, you have absolutely NO idea how people will react in a crisis. Studies conducted have found that most people, when confronted with a crisis situation, will not panic and will become almost preternaturally calm while in a crisis. I will not deny that some people can and do panic in these sorts of situations, but to intimate that simply because someone, when calling their loved ones (and I will remind you that at the time of most of the phone calls from Flight 93, the passengers were not fully aware of the hijackers plans to fly the plane into a building and likely thought that there was still a decent chance they would get out of the situation alive) remains extremely calm while in a crisis situation is by no means an indication that the person calling is not the person they say they are. I suggest you take the time to study human psychology before making such a sweeping generalization in the future. Ultimately, for the passengers on Flight 93, it likely came down to one basic human decree; do whatever you have to do to survive for as long as you can. Panicking does absolutely nothing to advance that goal and in fact actively hinders it, so most people do not react in such a way in crisis situations.

Sabrina,

I never said that the passengers should panic; remaining calm is no reason to reject the idea that it was indeed the passengers that called in stead of Mossad agents... it is this husband on the ground who said that his wife sounded like she was 'ordering a pizza' that makes me reject the idea that it was indeed his wife who called. The only reason why he (or another receiver) in the end believed he had spoken to the real person was because he had seen it on tv. It is the lack of drama that makes one suspicious.

 

[Bell]

Sabrina,

I never said that the passengers should panic; remaining calm is no reason to reject the idea that it was indeed the passengers that called in stead of Mossad agents... it is this husband on the ground who said that his wife sounded like she was 'ordering a pizza' that makes me reject the idea that it was indeed his wife who called. The only reason why he (or another receiver) in the end believed he had spoken to the real person was because he had seen it on tv. It is the lack of drama that makes one suspicious.

Have you contacted Jack Grandcolas and asked him what he meant by saying that Lauren sounded like she was ordering a pizza? Could it be that he meant that she remained calm? That she did not panic?

Simile: A simile is a figure of speech comparing two unlike things, often introduced with the word "like" or "as".

 

[9/11-investigator]

You actually have very good English, so I am certain that you are lying also. That they rescinded their offer to plead guilty in no way means that they are now claiming they didn't do it.

Torture/plea bargaining practices make any statement worthless.

You also have no evidence whatsoever that any confessions were extracted by the use of torture. Yes they did the waterboarding stuff to KSM and perhaps others, but that was almost certainly to gain information on current and future al Qaeda operations.

The 2nd sentence immediately contradicts the 1st.

And honestly, I do not give a damn that the CIA did that to them. Information that might be gained by doing this>the rights of terrorist scumbags that murdered 3,000 people.

Medieval witch hunt reasoning. ABC stated clearly that KSM begged to confess after 2.5 minutes of torture. But you would not mind working for an American Cheka under Chertoff's leadership, would you? Same people, same story, different country. Poor America, the next Sovjet-Union, only one 2nd (nuclear) false flag away. It's people like you who motivate me to fight.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

- First of all thank you for the extensive answer.

You're welcome.

- Second: I never claimed that the essence of 9/11 was an attempt at making Larry even richer than he already was. The real combined geo-strategic aim was PNAC/Clean Break. But, Larry probably would not have gone along with the plot if he had to suffer damage because of it.

You have failed to address your misperception of PNAC in the earlier posts; you do not understand what the PNAC document truly laid out. I suggest you go back to post #125 on and reasses what you think you know about it. Your claim of his involvement with this group is invalidated on that misperception alone, nevermind the fact that you've provided zero evidence that's he's even aware of the group, let alone aware of their publications, let alone even associated with them.

- Third: in order to judge if financial gain could have played a role in Larry's going along with Zakheim's master plan one should look at the financial perspective of 2001, not what materialized of these expectations anno 2008.

Fine then. What profit would he have made? That does not overcome the problem regarding your misperception of PNAC, and doesn't prove any sort of conspiracy exists, let alone that Silverstein would be part of it, but at least it establishes some basic information that can then be analyzed for its impact on the thesis.

But above and beyond that, the logic behind arguing that Silverstein demolished the towers in order to avoid the asbestos repair presumes that he believed he would receive sufficient compensation for the tower's fall. Otherwise, you're arguing that he was willing to take a loss, and you explicitly rejected that notion in your statement above. Anyway, refer to the Forbes article on his insurance issues with the WTC complex. Note that he insured for less than the replacement cost of the towers. Then think about that. He was going to have the buildings demolished to avoid the asbestos removal costs, yet didn't take out enough insurance to cover rebuilding them? And he was originally going to take out even less than what he ended up settling on?

That simply doesn't sound like the act of a man who knew the buildings were to be demolished. Unless you can make the argument that he was going to just suffer the loss to further PNAC's supposed plans, and again, you stated the opposite above.

- Fourth: what is missing in your review is any consideration regarding the asbestos issues. Architect Richard Gage (somewhat mildly disrespected around here) claims that at least 1 billion was needed to solve this problem; further he claims that the twin towers were big money losers.

That asbestos and supposed "money losers" issue was already discussed earlier. A W Smith (not Adam! Don't know why I said that in an earlier post...) gave you a link back in post #20, and there's additional information at: 911 Myths ("Losing money at the WTC?").

As an aside: It's polite to give us credit, so thank you for that. But in all honesty, you understate how many here feel towards Richard Gage. "Fraud" is the most polite term used, and others have stated harsher assesments. In my opinion, he's fully earned the first assessment at least. The general forum consensus goes beyond him being "mildly disrespected". "Openly disgusted" comes closer.

What did Silverstein have in july 2001?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Silverstein
In January 2001, Silverstein, via Silverstein Properties and Westfield America, made a $3.2 billion bid for the lease to the World Trade Center...Silverstein's bid for the lease to the World Trade Center was accepted on July 24, 2001... The lease agreement applied to One, Two, Four, and Five World Trade Center, and about 425,000 square feet (39,500 m2) of retail space.

What does this mean? This is a sincere question. He had a 99 year 'lease'. I interpret this as 'rent'.
1. Does this mean that he paid 3.2 billion just to be allowed to pay an additional rent? (these 10 million/month)
2. Or was this 3.2 billion smeared out over 99 years?
3. Was it assumed that the buildings would be written off after a century?

What does that matter? The fact remains: He would need to pay out at minimum the $6.3 billion I stated earlier to just get the rebuild project partially done, regardless of anything he's already spent or not. Maybe up to the $10 billion that comprises the 2003 estimate. Nothing about what you've brought up impacts the fact that he's getting less from insurance and bonds than it costs to rebuild the site.

Thank you for your response.

 

[9/11-investigator]

Have you contacted Jack Grandcolas and asked him what he meant by saying that Lauren sounded like she was ordering a pizza?

No.

Here's an impression of the phone calls of 9/11, under the title "Shockingly Calm".

 

[dtugg]

Torture/plea bargaining practices make any statement worthless.

Fine through out anything he has said since in custody. You still have him bragging about it to an al Jazeera journalist before he was captured. Did you forget about it? It is mighty inconvenient to your totally unfounded, libelous, jooooo job fantasy.

The 2nd sentence immediately contradicts the 1st.

Not it does not. You have no idea what the purpose of the waterboarding was. It makes much more sense that it was to get him to give up information about any current or future operations of al Qaeda since he had already bragged about being the mastermind of 9/11. KSM may well have admitted everything about 9/11 before the waterboarding.

Medieval witch hunt reasoning. ABC stated clearly that KSM begged to confess after 2.5 minutes of torture. But you would not mind working for an American Cheka under Chertoff's leadership, would you? Same people, same story, different country. Poor America, the next Sovjet-Union, only one 2nd (nuclear) false flag away. It's people like you who motivate me to fight.

I bet you cannot produce a quote from ABC saying that it took waterboarding to get him to confess to the 9/11 attacks. And even if you can, you cannot prove that ABC is right.

US becoming the Soviet Union? Please. I don't give a damn what you say. You are a liar and a fraud. I am just here to point make this clear to any lurkers.

 

[9/11-investigator]

What does that matter? The fact remains: He would need to pay out at minimum the $6.3 billion I stated earlier to just get the rebuild project partially done, regardless of anything he's already spent or not. Maybe up to the $10 billion that comprises the 2003 estimate. Nothing about what you've brought up impacts the fact that he's getting less from insurance and bonds than it costs to rebuild the site.

Well, I'm puzzled by the behaviour of Silverstein. If he obtained a lease (as in rent) then I don't understand why he does all the sueing, rather than the real owner, the NYPA.

Before 9/11 he was a sort of WTC tenant.
After 9/11 he becomes the owner of (I believe) 3 of the 5 buildings, yet to be build. The Freedom Tower, which is supposed to be the least attractive building from an exploitational point of view (too far away from public transport stations) will not be his.

 

[9/11-investigator]

It's beyond ridiculous. So these super-smart Mossad agents not only had voice samples of ever single person on the planes they also had everyone's family members home, work, and cell phone numbers. In addition they knew exactly number to call which means they knew which family members were at work, which were at home, who works nights, etc.

Never said anything of the sort... the Mossad only needed to know the telephone numbers of the people who later were said to have made phone calls from the planes (plus some extra for reserve). They could have obtained these by eavesdropping on the telephone of the airline booking office. Once you have a set of telephone numbers you can start eavesdropping on these people to learn a bit about them and to collect sound samples to feed your voice morphing computer.

 

[Sparky]

Never said anything of the sort... the Mossad only needed to know the telephone numbers of the people who later were said to have made phone calls from the planes (plus some extra for reserve). They could have obtained these by eavesdropping on the telephone of the airline booking office. Once you have a set of telephone numbers you can start eavesdropping on these people to learn a bit about them and to collect sound samples to feed your voice morphing computer.

Just so I'm clear on this, you're saying that the phone calls DID NOT come from the planes. If so, I think we can refute that from the phone records which will show that the calls originated from the planes.

 

[TheWeirdSkeptic]

Just so I'm clear on this, you're saying that the phone calls DID NOT come from the planes. If so, I think we can refute that from the phone records which will show that the calls originated from the planes.

I'm assuming he has also conveniently forgotten that some passengers booked a flight without that much time in advance.

 

[Trojan]

- Fourth: what is missing in your review is any consideration regarding the asbestos issues. Architect Richard Gage (somewhat mildly disrespected around here) claims that at least 1 billion was needed to solve this problem; further he claims that the twin towers were big money losers.

Why is it that you think a claim by Richard Gage should be considered as evidence? If Mr. Gage makes this claim, he needs to support it, as do you.

Would you expect anything less from your opposition?

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Well, I'm puzzled by the behaviour of Silverstein. If he obtained a lease (as in rent) then I don't understand why he does all the sueing, rather than the real owner, the NYPA.

Before 9/11 he was a sort of WTC tenant.
After 9/11 he becomes the owner of (I believe) 3 of the 5 buildings, yet to be build. The Freedom Tower, which is supposed to be the least attractive building from an exploitational point of view (too far away from public transport stations) will not be his.

It's very simple. PANYNJ owns the site, Silverstein owned the buildings. Silverstein leases the land in return for putting his own buildings on it and generating business that way. The person with the proper standing to sue is the owner of the buildings, because those were what got destroyed by the jet impacts and fires on 9/11. With the buildings gone, he has no income from the tenants, but with the land still there and leased to him, he's still forced to pay his lease to PANYNJ

PANYNJ couldn't be the ones to sue Swiss Re. They didn't construct the buildings, and they weren't the ones collecting profits from the rents and other income generation. Silverstein was.

 

[Trojan]

Conspirator in my definition means somebody who really has to do something:

Conspirtors can be before and after the fact, and conspirator should be considered anyone with knowledge that may have turned a blind eye or otherwise aided in the conspiracy.

come up with an integral plan in the first place (Zakheim), get a lease for WTC (Silverstein),

An issue I have always had is why would Silverstein be required? What decisive role did he play?

Let the Kroll brothers who became responsible for the WTC security make sure that specific vans get access to the parking garage in the basement and that specific elevators are put out of operation for 'maintenance purposes'.

The NYPA is, was and always has been in charge of security for the WTC.

Let a team around demotion expert Peer Segalovitz mount the charges into the elevator shafts.

Charges in an elevator shaft can not bring down the WTC.

Where are the holes?

In every aspect of your theory.

 

[bynmdsue]

Just so I'm clear on this, you're saying that the phone calls DID NOT come from the planes. If so, I think we can refute that from the phone records which will show that the calls originated from the planes.

"uhhhh,the phone records are fake."

man this CT nonsense is easy.Everyone is lying,and all the evidence is planted.