Muslim researcher explains how 9/11 was made

[Oystein]

Let me now start on the debunking:

Page 5-Anomalies 1
Your claim: "Flight passenger lists had none of the terrorists names"
Fact: The passenger lists did contain all 19 terrorists.
Material evidence: Exhibit P200018 from the Moussaoui trial. This document contains the passenger lists for all 4 flight. For example, Mohammed Atta is listed on AA11 in seat 8D, and Hani Hanjour is listed on flight AA77 on seat 1B.
A more thorough debunking can be found here:
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/No_hijackers_on_the_passenger_manifests
This page has links to copies of the actual flight manifests, which include the 19 Arab hijackers.

Your claim: "Several terrorists reported alive. See BBC"
Fact: The BBC made subsequently clear that to their best knowledge, none of the 19 terrorists is still alive.
Material evidence: You linked to an article from 23 September, 2001 - a mere 2 weeks after the attacks when things were still confusing. Here is a BBC statement from 2006:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html

Your claim: "FBI director Mueller admitted that the identity of several of the hijackers is in doubt"
Fact: You fail to provide a date and source for that statement. Mueller made statements to that effect still in september 2001. By november 2001, the identities were in no doubt any longer.
Material evidence: Can be found on http://www.911myths.com/index.php/FBI_doubts_over_hijacker_identities

Your claim: "almost all information has been classified secret and became inaccessible"
Fact: A great amount of information is accessible - there is hardly any other event of that kind for which more information is publicly available
Material evidence: Too much to list. What is your material evidence for the claim?

 

[BCR]

Question: How does implicating the Mossad in 9/11 have racial implications?

Question #2: What is the Jewish race anyhow?

Nor will I explain the Jewish-Muslim racial divide that is at the heart of the whole mess - the two sons of Abraham, each with a 'nation', each claiming the promise.

 

[Oystein]

6-Anomalies 2

Your claim: None of the black boxes have ever been released to the public
Fact: The black boxes for flights 11 and 175 were never found, so it's no surprise they were not released.
However, the Flight Data Recorder data is available and has been decoded and analysed by JREF-member Warren Stutt. Search for posts by member "wstutt"
Material evidence: On Warren's homepage http://www.warrenstutt.com/AAL77FDRDecoder/index.html

(Can anyone fill me in on what's available for flight 93?)

Your claim: "None of the plane parts have been identified by their serial numbers"
Fact: You don't need the serial numbers to identify the plane type.
Material evidence: (not applicable here)

Your claim: "The twin towers could not collapse. They were designed to resist an impact of a similar sized 707"
Fact: This claim ignores two important factors: Speed of the plane impact, and whether or not this design requirement included consideration of subsequent fires.
In fact, the twin towers DID resist the plane crashes as such. They only later succumbed to the additional damage by fire.
When the WTC was designed in the 1960s, it was impossible to model the full scale of conceivable plane crashes and ensuing fires, so in all likelyhood, fires were not considered.
The Titanic could not sink, according to its designers. Yet it did.
Material evidence: (Not applicable here - YOU did not include any material evidence for your claim)

Your claim: "The official reports contain too many omissions, distortions, and lies"
Fact: This is not proof against the 19-Arabs theory, and no proof for any Mossad involvement
Material evidence: Not applicable here. You include no material evidence for your claim

 

[Oystein]

7-What's the reality?

Your claim: "All four planes were controlled by only ONE team. They used American electronic weapon technology"
Fact: There exists no material evidence that this technology exists or was used. What technology, anyway?
Material evidence: n/a

Your claim: "Twin towers were demolished by explosives"
Fact: No material evidence exists for the use of explosives
Material evidence: All the videos on record lack the distinct sound and flashing lights of explosives.

Your claim: "The plane that hit the Pentagon was not a Boeing 757"
Fact: Yes, it was a 757
Material evidence: The FDR, all recovered plane parts, the passengers of AA's 757 that had departed as flight 77 identified by DNA, radar tracking of AA77 from take-off until it got lost immediately before crashing (that radar track never reappeared, indicating that that flight got lost near or in the Pentagon).

 

[Thunder]

Muslim researcher explains how 9/11 was made

debunked.

 

[George 152]

Muslim researcher explains how 9/11 was made

debunked.

Muslim in denial and nowhere near Egypt

 

[ImANiceGuy]

Nor will I explain the Jewish-Muslim racial divide that is at the heart of the whole mess - the two sons of Abraham, each with a 'nation', each claiming the promise.

Well....interesting tongue and cheek response. (EDIT: If you start a sentence with "nor", you have to have already said something; this is a conjunction like "and".)

The Jewish-Muslim divide is a religious one, not a racial one. Muslim and Jewish people are the same race...(If you believe in the socially constructed term; race)

But how does implicating the Mossad have religious or racial(whatever you prefer) implications? This is silly. Would implicating the Greek Intelligence Service have Orthodox implications?

I bet you are one of those 'if you say Israel did it, you're a Nazi' guy, right?

 

[Oystein]

7.1 End of 2002...

Your claim: "this high temperature explosion (color) proves the presence of a bomb"
Fact: The parking lot camera was not adjusted for the brightness of fires of any kind. The fire ball is simply overexposed, rendering any color just plain white
Material evidence: Any overexposed photograph of bright colors (I could attach sample photos from my own camera if you don't understand what I mean)


8-How could the US government make the strikes?

Your claim: (You don't actually make any, just imagination)
Fact: (No need to counter pure imagination with facts.
Material evidence: (You provide none)


9-One team / 4 teams

Fact: Your column for "4 teams" accurately describes what actually happened: 4 teams acted independently of each other once their plane tickets were booked. They didn't contact each other during the flights. That's why the flights and hijacks overlapped each other and took different times.
Material evidence: You provide it yourself in the following pages, in particular page 13.


13-Timeline graphic and conclusions

Your claim: "All hijacks were made sequentially, one plane at a time!"
Fact: This is to be expected. However, for some minutes at a time, flights 11 and 175 were hijacked simultaneously. The same is true for 175 and 77, and for 77 and 93. So actually two planes at a time were hijacked
Material evidence: Included in your own graph

Your claim: "Before deviating from its flight route, each plane waited for the previous plane to be put on target"
Fact: This is wrong in all 3 cases:
- Flight 175 deviated before 11 was put into target, it didn't wait
- Flight 77 deviated before 175 was put into target, it didn't wait
- Flight 93 deviated before 77 was put into target, it didn't wait
Material evidence: Included in your own graph on that page

Your claim: "The deviation of any plane was dependent on the situation of the previous plane"
Fact: Refuted by the falseness two previous claims
Material evidence: See above.



14-CONCLUSION

Your claim: "The timeline ... is fully consistent with a central control ... by ONE TEAM"
Fact: While it may be fully consistent with one team, it is also connsistent with 4 teams, and there exists neither material evidence nor any compelling logic why one team should be preferred. In fact, you have failed to even tell us how one team would have done the coordinating - what technology was used?
Material evidence: See page 13.

Your claim: "This timeline is impossible to make by four different teams"
Fact: Wrong. Each hijacking was done according to the same plan, differing only slightly in timing. There is no reason to speculate about any meaning of the timing between planes, except that all take-offs took place within less than an hour. All hijacks happened within 1:25 hours, the same is about true for all crashs. This is to be expected when all 4 teams acted according to the same general plan for hijacking a plane.
There exists no logic or material problem that would make the timeline "impossible".
Material evidence: None required.

 

[WildCat]

Let me now start on the debunking:

Page 5-Anomalies 1
Your claim: "Flight passenger lists had none of the terrorists names"
Fact: The passenger lists did contain all 19 terrorists.
Material evidence: Exhibit P200018 from the Moussaoui trial. This document contains the passenger lists for all 4 flight. For example, Mohammed Atta is listed on AA11 in seat 8D, and Hani Hanjour is listed on flight AA77 on seat 1B.
A more thorough debunking can be found here:
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/No_hijackers_on_the_passenger_manifests
This page has links to copies of the actual flight manifests, which include the 19 Arab hijackers.

Your claim: "Several terrorists reported alive. See BBC"
Fact: The BBC made subsequently clear that to their best knowledge, none of the 19 terrorists is still alive.
Material evidence: You linked to an article from 23 September, 2001 - a mere 2 weeks after the attacks when things were still confusing. Here is a BBC statement from 2006:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html

Your claim: "FBI director Mueller admitted that the identity of several of the hijackers is in doubt"
Fact: You fail to provide a date and source for that statement. Mueller made statements to that effect still in september 2001. By november 2001, the identities were in no doubt any longer.
Material evidence: Can be found on http://www.911myths.com/index.php/FBI_doubts_over_hijacker_identities

Your claim: "almost all information has been classified secret and became inaccessible"
Fact: A great amount of information is accessible - there is hardly any other event of that kind for which more information is publicly available
Material evidence: Too much to list. What is your material evidence for the claim?

Zionist lies!

/mehmetin

 

[beachnut]

... The conclusion is also simple:
Muslims are NOT involved in 9/11. The strikes were made by common work of Massad and Bush administration.

19 terrorists, who thought they were for Islam, committed murder on 911. We have their DNA, come collect it, they were morons, and they don't need your apologies. They took credit, UBL calls them heroes for Islam. You failed big time.

As usual, you have a moronic conclusion based on your failed delusions.

Radio controlled explosives? No blast effects on 911. Sorry, you flunked and the radio controlled stuff, is moronic nonsense.

Oops, the Pentagon, the 757 was found will all the DNA of those who go on board that day. Failure comes easy for you, maybe you should not be talking about 911.

It is amazing you got the date right for 911.

Zep, your visit was extremely short, you studied almost nothing. Just for the fun, from 2003 to 2011 it makes 8 years, not 5!
... .

I would not brag about 5 vs 8 years of failure. You would help yourself if we mess up the math and said 2 years; you would not look as failed.

 

[Oystein]

I am running out of time now.
On pages 15-20 you speculate about remote controling of planes, about poison gas, etc.

I note that you provide no material evidence from the four flights to back up that claim.
Fact is, Boeing 767s and 757s could not have been manipulated for remote control or autopilot without pilots retaking control.
Material evidence has been posted here at JREF by user... A... grrrr don't remember his name. An aircraft technician.


Page 21: You claim there are more videos that show the Pentagon strike.
Fact is: No, such videos do not exist.
You provide no material evidence for your claim.


Page 22-25: The photos are insufficient to back up your claims that the damage path was too narrow

Page 26-29 rehashes very old arguments from sources you deem unreliable yourself

Page 33: Your claim "Official theory: Kerosene fire highly weakend the metal and made the tower collapse" is FALSE. Fact is: The burning office contents provided a lot more heat than the fuel. Also, plane crash damage played an important role, too.
Your claim "heating is a speculation object" is only partially true. In fact, fire science knows a lot about heating in fires. It is much less speculation than your theory
Your claim "dark smoke shows low temperature" is false. Many office contents burn very hot yet have dark smoke. Also, dark smoke from cooler spots may mix with exhausts from very hot spots, making it all seem dark.
Your claim "no steel framed building collapsing by fire" is false. Many steel framed buildings have collapsed by fire. Example: Kader toy factory.
Your claim "bottom levels of the buildings were not heated at all" is irrelevant. They were not designed to arrest the dynamic load of an already collapsing top. You apparently don't understand structural engineering. Look up the papers by Zdenek Bazhant.

Page 34 misrepresents the NIST reports, and gives no references

Page 35 makes false claims

Page 36 makes an irrelevant claim - the apparent size of columns in a drawing is not important

Page 37: Same mistake

Page 38 makes an undefined claim

Pages 39-41 speculate. No engineering qualification behind those fantasies

Page 42 misrepresents the "official reports"

Page 43 is irrelevant (WTC wasn't concrete structure)

Page 44 makes unsupported claims by a layman

Pages 45+46 contradict pages 39-41

47-49 speculate

49.1-50 are without evidence

52-54 make a false claims about the damage by explosives



etc.
etc.
etc.


We see that your entire presentations is full of errors of fact, and void of evidence.

 

[mehmetin]

Mehmet:
From your letter to GW Bush,

There's a graph that goes with it.

What exactly are you going on about?

As for the rest of your "open letter"...........

The succession of the hijacks is explained in slides 8 to 21 of the power point file. Mainly, the succession of the hijacks is impossible to be made by 4 different teams who can not contact each other to make such "successive" synchronisation.

 

[dtugg]

The succession of the hijacks is explained in slides 8 to 21 of the power point file. Mainly, the succession of the hijacks is impossible to be made by 4 different teams who can not contact each other to make such "successive" synchronisation.

You don't know that they planned to do it in succession. So like Dave Rogers pointed out, Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy. Furthermore, they could have easily planned to do it that way. There is such a thing called watches.

 

[Thunder]

The succession of the hijacks is explained in slides 8 to 21 of the power point file. Mainly, the succession of the hijacks is impossible to be made by 4 different teams who can not contact each other to make such "successive" synchronisation.

its called a plan and a watch.

 

[beachnut]

The succession of the hijacks is explained in slides 8 to 21 of the power point file. Mainly, the succession of the hijacks is impossible to be made by 4 different teams who can not contact each other to make such "successive" synchronisation.

This is nonsense. Do you have a watch? Can you set it? I have synchronized many things with other people without talking to them. This idea is nonsense, does not make sense.



Muslim researcher explains how 9/11 was made; Who is the muslim researcher?

 

[mehmetin]

Mehmet,

Apart from the usual rubbish which we've known to be nonsense for years, your only novel content seems to be the graph showing that, according to your analysis, the four planes must all have been controlled by a single group. There are two obvious and fatal flaws to this.

Firstly, you claim that, for the four arliners to be controlled by a single group, it would be necessary for them to be taken over serially rather than simultaneously, and that this would require that each one crash before the next is taken over. You then present a graph showing that each one crashed after the next was taken over. Therefore, your own data refutes your reasoning.

You are right, that’s a key point, but it’s consistent with one team made operation. In fact, the only technology which could be used to make those planes hit so precisely their targets is “tomahawk missile system” installed inside the plane and made able to control the planes. That implies the missile (the plane) is able to find its target without human intervention. Due to the nature of the system, that operation of “finding its target” should be made without human intervention. That means the team work finishes some minutes before the impact. That’s what we see in all cases.

Secondly, you claim that it would be impossible for four separate groups to co-ordinate their actions to this degree. This is variant on what is known as the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy^WP, in which a posteriori results is confused with a priori intentions. Since you present no evidence that four separate groups intended to achieve the specific temporal relationships that occurred, you have no grounds for presenting as evidence the difficulty of achieving that result. And, of course, since the operation of four completely separate groups neither implies nor preculdes any specific correlation, you have no grounds for your claim that this sequence of events was impossible with four separate groups; with no interaction between groups, any sequence is equally possible.

You may be right if they were able to foresee the delay times of the planes, then they can make plans and decide to make such successive hijacks (even if there is no reason for them to make the hijacks successive). But they are unable to foresee the delays of each plane.

And especially about the last plane, there is a huge problem: It was delayed by 41 minutes. As they were delayed, the team inside that plane should think they are delayed out of the plans and they should hijack the plane as soon as possible. Let’s say within 15 minutes, like the first plane. But they waited 53 minutes before takeover the plane, the longest time. And by coincidence, that happened at 9:35; 3 minutes before the impact of the Pentagon at 9:38.

I'm sorry to have to tell you that Moslems are equally capable of acts of evil as Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Shintoists, atheists or people of any other belief or lack of belief, but until you learn to recognise this basic fact of human nature you will never be able to understand the world.

That’s we agree. Even if using statistical data we can give some characteristics to the evil doing in each community, but that does not mean other type of evil actions are impossible in specific community.

 

[Jackanory]

The succession of the hijacks is explained in slides 8 to 21 of the power point file. Mainly, the succession of the hijacks is impossible to be made by 4 different teams who can not contact each other to make such "successive" synchronisation.

The only thing that the murderous teams needed was a scheduled aircraft's take off time x 4. How difficult is it to choose 4 aircraft that all take off within the scope and timescale they wanted? I doubt very much if each terrorist pilot was working to a specific time!!!!! 'Just get on it and crash it'!

It's easy.............you can do a current 'dry run' yourself today!

Choose 19 friends and split them into imaginary teams.

Choose 4 targets. (Sticking with those used on 911 would be more specific)

Choose a time, say 08:00am. (Or any time your prefer)

Choose your take off points. (Sticking with those used would be more specific)

Crash planes.

Did you manage to achieve the 75% that the terrorists did? I did.......each and every time I try.

 

[Oystein]

The succession of the hijacks is explained in slides 8 to 21 of the power point file. Mainly, the succession of the hijacks is impossible to be made by 4 different teams who can not contact each other to make such "successive" synchronisation.

There was no synchronisation other than buying tickets for 4 planes that took off within less than an hour of each other, and a very simple plan: "Wait till plane is on cruise altitude and the situation looks promising, then take over cockpit and fly to target".

You have failed to explain why the timeline is impossible. You have failed to explain why the supposed synchromnisation is relevant. And you have failed to meet your own standard of only using logic and material evidence for your claims.

In short: You failed.

 

[Jackanory]

You are right, that’s a key point, but it’s consistent with one team made operation. In fact, the only technology which could be used to make those planes hit so precisely their targets is “tomahawk missile system” installed inside the plane and made able to control the planes. That implies the missile (the plane) is able to find its target without human intervention. Due to the nature of the system, that operation of “finding its target” should be made without human intervention. That means the team work finishes some minutes before the impact. That’s what we see in all cases.

Did that "tomahawk missile system" chant to Allah too?

 

[mehmetin]

If this guy ever comes back which I doubt he will, I want to see if we can get him to admit he is wrong which I also doubt he will.

mehmetin

This has been thoroughly debunked. The terrorist were 100% without a doubt on the passenger list. You are confusing a passenger list with a list of victims that were published in a news paper. It is time for you to remove this from your website.

I can give you some amount of credibility. But why and how the companies published a victims' list, which is the passengers list with removed unknown terrorists' names? At that time, the terrorists were not identified, so it was impossible for them to remove those names.

Any way, that's a meaningless small detail in my work. It does not deserve to be discussed more. It can be true or wrong, it changes nothing in my conclusions. I won't waste time on such minor questions.