If Al Qaeda Planned 9/11...

and wanted to create maximum impact and terror, why would they not choose flights that coincided with when the towers were full? Does anyone wonder whether there was a specific reason for choosing these particular flights?

Read "AMERICA'S SECRET WAR" by Dr George Friedman of Stratfor private intelligence
service - outlines that hijackers needed early morning flights because as day wore on
delays would come into play from weather, overcrowding, mechanical problems, etc

Flights had to be clustetred as close as possible to allow for simultaneous hijackings -
witness what happened to Flight 93. Took off 40 minutes late giving passengers
enough time to learn of WTC & Pentagon attacks and organize resistance
 
It is said that pet owners become like their pets. The same seems to apply to those who adopt Truthers as their pets.

Perhaps I can help prevent more “critical thinkers” disappearing up their own preconceptions with a reminder I didn't doubt the al Qaeda Alone story for several years after 9/11/01.

Heh. Of all things you could credit OBL with, you choose the one thing that was an absolute certainty given the situation. As if there was a chance that those events wouldn't have been broadcast live if they had occurred at any other time of the day. :rolleyes:

I was impressed by the fact that the perpetrators got millions of people to watch their TVs and then gave them a repeat, live, performance. It was a perfect psychological operation. Those here who, in their unthinking, knee-jerk fashion, translate this into meaning that I question the authenticity of the Naudet brothers documentary are simply revealing their naivety about the mass media and their over-reliance on comforting stereotypes about "Truthers" . The mass media can be manipulated simply by staging events.

And yet JihadJane seems incredulous to its authenticity, considering it part of "mass media manipulation".



What a shock.

What a shock that your tribalism causes you to write such rubbish!
 
Last edited:
I was impressed by the fact that the perpetrators got millions of people to watch their TV’s and then gave them a repeat, live, performance. It was a perfect psychological operation.

That is the way I read it, and I agree...
 
I am impressed that such paranoia exists as to take a horrific act that killed thousands, and turn it into a cheap Tom Clancy Novel.

impressed, but not surprised...paranoia big destroya!

TAM:)
 
I am impressed that such paranoia exists as to take a horrific act that killed thousands, and turn it into a cheap Tom Clancy Novel.

impressed, but not surprised...paranoia big destroya!

TAM:)

Paranoia is only harmful if it debilitates your life. It could be looked on as a form of heightened awareness if it is not allowed to run uncontrolled. Is 9/11 supposed to be some sort of sacred cow, that is exempt from being fictionalised because you find it distasteful?
 
I doubt that having any of the strikes broadcast live on TV was a priority to the perpetrators. Getting the strikes to occur as close as possible in time would be the main priority to ensure success. I think purposely delaying an attack so it could be broadcast live would be too risky. Like njslim said, just look at what a delay did to 93. Obviously this is all opinion, but so is the supposition that they planned it to be shown live.
 
Paranoia is only harmful if it debilitates your life. It could be looked on as a form of heightened awareness if it is not allowed to run uncontrolled. Is 9/11 supposed to be some sort of sacred cow, that is exempt from being fictionalised because you find it distasteful?

you want to fictionalize it, fine, your business...as long as you keep it to yourself.

However, when your "fictionalization" accuses many good people of murder WITHOUT EVIDENCE, and you produce your "fictionalization" on public forums, you can expect, and deserve hostility, and contempt.

As for your comments on paranoia being some form of heightened awareness, all I have to say is such crap usually only comes from too many hits from the Bong...utter tripe.

TAM:)
 
Paranoia is only harmful if it debilitates your life. It could be looked on as a form of heightened awareness if it is not allowed to run uncontrolled. Is 9/11 supposed to be some sort of sacred cow, that is exempt from being fictionalised because you find it distasteful?
I think you missed the point there but I could be wrong.
 
you want to fictionalize it, fine, your business...as long as you keep it to yourself.

However, when your "fictionalization" accuses many good people of murder WITHOUT EVIDENCE, and you produce your "fictionalization" on public forums, you can expect, and deserve hostility, and contempt.
But do the makers of films like Flight 93 get a pass because it isn't really fiction then, or did you criticise that too?
As for your comments on paranoia being some form of heightened awareness, all I have to say is such crap usually only comes from too many hits from the Bong...utter tripe.

TAM:)

Are you denying there can be any such thing as 'heightened awareness'? You'll be telling me tennis players never see the ball as large a football next.
 
no, of course not. I am simply telling you that PARANOIA is in no way shape or form, a "heightened state of awareness".

TAM:)
 
But do the makers of films like Flight 93 get a pass because it isn't really fiction then, or did you criticise that too?

Did the makers of flight 93 making up stories without any proof, without any solid basis in fact? No, they created a movie based on the facts and evidence from the events of that day. Truther theory, truther movies, take speculation, misrepresentation, and unimportant "coincidences" and try to spin them all together in some big weave of government deception.

Anyway, arguing this with someone with your perspective is pointless.

Onward.

TAM:)
 
Did the makers of flight 93 making up stories without any proof, without any solid basis in fact? No, they created a movie based on the facts and evidence from the events of that day. Truther theory, truther movies, take speculation, misrepresentation, and unimportant "coincidences" and try to spin them all together in some big weave of government deception.

Anyway, arguing this with someone with your perspective is pointless.

Onward.

TAM:)

Yes, because you obviously know me well enough to judge that from a few posts, don't you! :rolleyes:
 
I doubt that having any of the strikes broadcast live on TV was a priority to the perpetrators. Getting the strikes to occur as close as possible in time would be the main priority to ensure success. I think purposely delaying an attack so it could be broadcast live would be too risky. Like njslim said, just look at what a delay did to 93. Obviously this is all opinion, but so is the supposition that they planned it to be shown live.

They definitely planned on getting the second tower strike broadcast live; Flight 175's detour over New Jersey was to make sure that all the cameras in the NY area were trained on the WTC when it hit.
 
Al Qaeda was the first Terrorist group in the world to have a media department that was responsible for contacting and using the media to further its goals. I'm sure that OBL knew what effect the first hit would have and planned accordingly.
 

Back
Top Bottom