Muslim researcher explains how 9/11 was made

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by mehmetin
You seem not understanding! We are speaking about the IMPOSSIBLE official claim telling "ONLY ONE TERRORIST PILOT WAS AWARE OF THE SUICIDE ATTACK".

Your being dis-honest again. Where is it "officially claimed" that only one pilot was aware of the plot? You're making this up as you go along.

You are the dishonest one. In the followings days to the strikes, it was told that "only one of them need to be aware, the pilot". On post 1169 dated of 3/13, Sideroxylon told "You don't actually have to find 19 people willing to commit suicide either - only the pilots need know the ultimate aim of the hijack."

All such claims are never proved meaningless explanation to try to prove that there were 4 terror teams. But all facts and evidences shows that "there were no 4 terror teams, there was no Arab terrorists". And the only thing t-you can speak out is the "official caracter" of the claim. It can be official or not, it's told by the supporters of the official story.

 

[DGM]

You are the dishonest one. In the followings days to the strikes, it was told that "only one of them need to be aware, the pilot".

This is a lie. Told by who?

 

[mehmetin]

Quote:
None was able to explain one simple question:

"How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?"

Lying again. You have yet to answer any of our questions. You just keep saying 'believe it because I say so'.

Don't you get tired of lying? This is, I believe, the fourth or fifth time I've posted this:

Quote:
Plane #1 takes off. As soon as terrorists see an opening they take it over and fly it into a building.

Plane #2 takes off. As soon as terrorists see an opening they take it over and fly it into a building.

Plane #3 takes off. As soon as terrorists see an opening they take it over and fly it into a building.

Plane #4 takes off. As soon as terrorists see an opening they take it over. Passengers get wind of what's been going on and try to take back control of the plane. Terrorists crash plane into a field.

Your explanation does not explain "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?"

You do not explain why such succession was planne, and you do not explain how they managed to succeed in such successive hijacks.

You on the other hand have yet to explain how your little chart shows that one team controlled all the planes. Not once despite being asked multiple times. Your only attempted answers have been full of arguments from personal incredulity and are hardly adequate explanations.

So I'll ask you one more time:

How is it that your chart shows that one team controlled the planes on 9/11?

You just need to be a little bit honest to understand the graphic. If yo uare honest, you need to be a little bit more intelligent to undersatnd the graphic.

But you can help yourself: If you try to explain "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?", you may begin to understand.

 

[mehmetin]

It's already been shown that a 41 minute delay is NOT suspicious. Everybody on this forum who has flown regularly has experienced delays.

So, I must ask Mehmetin as well to PROVE THAT A 41 MINUTE DELAY IS SUSPICIOUS. Otherwise stop saying it.

On a plane which is ready and gets out of the gate one minute before take off time, 41 minutes delay may occur for some reasons, like:
- Technical problem
- Heavy snow/glace
- Bomb alert and requires checking again
- Struggle in the plane before take off
- Ill people in the plane
- Accident on the strip
...

But it can NOT happen for "heavy traffic" reason. The schedule of the take offs is made to let some gap and solve some delays. The official explanation is definitely wrong.

As credulous people, you can continue to believe the official story. But that will not change the fact that “41 minutes delay for ONLY heavy traffic is wrong”.

 

[mehmetin]

I think the others did know but its not really important as they would not have realized what he planned until too late. All he would have to do is tell the others to go watch the passengers and I'll fly the plane......

That's just an argument of credulity to the official story. But you have no evidence supporting that.

 

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by mehmetin
Sorry! I won't copy my web site here. You just have a small file of 6MB t odownload.

In your dreams.......go sell your story elsewhere.

I sell nothing. The power point file is free o down load! But you can continue to remain ignorant about the strikes.

 

[Justin39640]

On a plane which is ready and gets out of the gate one minute before take off time, 41 minutes delay may occur for some reasons, like:
- Technical problem
- Heavy snow/glace
- Bomb alert and requires checking again
- Struggle in the plane before take off
- Ill people in the plane
- Accident on the strip
...

But it can NOT happen for "heavy traffic" reason. The schedule of the take offs is made to let some gap and solve some delays. The official explanation is definitely wrong.

As credulous people, you can continue to believe the official story. But that will not change the fact that “41 minutes delay for ONLY heavy traffic is wrong”.

Obviously, you've never been to JFK, Newark, or LaGuardia.

You want to get an impressive "collective groan" from a large group of people? Tell a plane load of them staring at Jamaica Bay that they're 15th in line to take off.

This is not uncommon here. I've been on many many flights from all three that were delayed for nothing other than traffic in front of us waiting to take off. Crap, I've been delayed that long at McGarthur (ISP) for traffic .

 

[DGM]

I sell nothing. The power point file is free o down load! But you can continue to remain ignorant about the strikes.

You don't have a book for sale? Are you actually capable of telling the truth?

 

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by mehmetin
It remains the possibility to find 19 people ready to suicide together. That is also impossible.

Difficult, maybe. Impossible: No. Do you remember the 2008 Bombay (Mumbai) attacks? That was a team of 10 Muslims, all ready to die. 9 of the 10 did indeed die in the course of the attack.
So it was possible in 2008 to recruit 10 terrorists ready to suicide together. Why not 19 in 2001?
You claim this is impossible, but it isn't it is only difficult.

Amongst the victims, there was 9 Muslims. But were they terrorists or not, I need open source strong evidence and strong investigation. I am not decided that this was suicide attack. Also, the terrorists may have planned an exit scenario, for example by blaming innocents to whom they gave weapons and they may get out as innocent people.

Mumbai is not an example for several suicide bombers acting together. You need to find other examples. But I bet, you’ll never find 19 suicide terrorists acting together.

 

[mehmetin]

With no mechanism for taking control of the aircraft the rest of your 'speculation' doesn't count.

Tell us how it was done. Vague references to clamps and wires doesn't do it.

I designed the automatic system to make the strikes as they happened. And finally I realised that everything exists in tomahawk kind missiles.

You may not believe me, but you can ask around yourself for technically skilled people: Is such system possible or not?

You can also study automatic systems and try to design as I did it.

 

[mehmetin]

You guys have attracted some really wild truthers to this forum but this one takes the cake.

Mehmetin, for the 100th time your "evidence" proves exactly nothing.

The fact the the hijacks occurred in succession proves nothing. The most plausible explanation is that the hijackers simply agreed to hijack their respective flights after the planes had leveled off. The fact that the planes took off at different times accounts for the succession of hijacks. You have offered absolutely NOTHING in the way of evidence or reason to discredit this explanation. You just continue to insist that it's not possible for no reason whatsoever.

You can repeat that as many times as you want. That will not make your will true. I need some strong argument. And such strong argument could be for example explaining us "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?"

But you all refuse to explain that.

The fact that a flight was delayed proves nothing. Flights are delayed all the time. You state that it's not possible because of outgoing traffic. But the fact that there were few outgoing planes proves nothing, and additionally other posters have pointed out that a plane cannot just stand on a runway for no reason. Many people (gound crew, flight tower, etc) would have been invovled, a fact you have simply refuse to acknowledge.

Yes, some people in Newark airport were involved in the strikes. You just need some zionists linked people to make that. WHat's the problem? Do you claim that there was no zionist linked people in Newark?

 

[Oystein]

Amongst the victims, there was 9 Muslims. But were they terrorists or not, I need open source strong evidence and strong investigation. I am not decided that this was suicide attack. Also, the terrorists may have planned an exit scenario, for example by blaming innocents to whom they gave weapons and they may get out as innocent people.

Mumbai is not an example for several suicide bombers acting together. You need to find other examples.

Amongst the victims I am sure there were several more muslims - killed by the 10 muslim terrorists acting together.

You hand wave established facts, but expect us to believe your imaginations?
Sheesh...

You have ignored several other points I raised.

But I bet, you’ll never find 19 suicide terrorists acting together.

Besides the obvious fact that we already know such a group (the Atta group that commited the 9/11 events), this is an appeal to perfection. You hand wave the Mumbai group, but the fact remains that someone found 10 Muslims, acting together in a terror action that had for them the high risk of their own deaths. I agree it was not strictly a suicide mission (as far as I know they did not kill themselves in a planned fashion), but illustrates the fact that Muslim terrorists can be willing to die together in groups.
You claimed this is impossible.
One example is enough to proof you are wrong.
I know already 2 examples.
No doubt I will find more groups of Muslim terrorists willing to die together, if I only take a little time to research. Wanna bet?

 

[Oystein]

You can repeat that as many times as you want. That will not make your will true. I need some strong argument. And such strong argument could be for example explaining us "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?"
...

How: By booking tickets for 4 different flights. Any 4 flights are virtually guaranteed to take off in succession, as the alternative "at the same time" is unlikely without any coordination between them.

Why: Because there aren't any 4 commercial flights which take off at the same time. It isn't necessary for the success of the plan that they act concurrently. It is enough if all teams act within a short enough time of, say, 60 to 90 minutes.


See, that was easy

 

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by mehmetin
The criminals of 9/11/2001 attacks are Bush Administration and Mossad!

Y'know, just anyone can't go into the kitchen and whip up a souffle of this flavor crazy. It requires dedicated, long-term practice.

Yes, you are right. Mossad and their zionist ancestors have hundreds years of practice in terror crimes and plots. Also Donald Rumsfeld entered into the representatives in 1962, that means he was in republicans party some years before, and "Operation Northwoods" was pkanned in 1962, and Kennedy was assassinated in 1963; Rumsfeld had to be part in both. ...

Yes You are right, long-term practice is required. Only Bush administration and Mossad have such long-term practice.

 

[Oystein]

...Yes, some people in Newark airport were involved in the strikes. You just need some zionists linked people to make that. WHat's the problem? Do you claim that there was no zionist linked people in Newark?

Yikes.
Got any prrof that any Zionists in Newark were involved?
You could just as well claim that you just need some black men with thick eyeglasses, or some vegetarians who drive a Ford, or some Italians secretly in love with the neighbours' daughter. Do you claim that there were no blacks with thick eyeglasses in Newark? No vegetarians who drive a Ford?

 

[Oystein]

Yes, you are right. Mossad and their zionist ancestors have hundreds years of practice in terror crimes and plots. Also Donald Rumsfeld entered into the representatives in 1962, that means he was in republicans party some years before, and "Operation Northwoods" was pkanned in 1962, and Kennedy was assassinated in 1963; Rumsfeld had to be part in both. ...

Yes You are right, long-term practice is required. Only Bush administration and Mossad have such long-term practice.

My father was born in 1928. So he had to be part in both, too, plus the Cold War, the moon landing, and the invention of the internet. Right?

 

[mehmetin]

One example is enough to proof you are wrong.
I know already 2 examples.
No doubt I will find more groups of Muslim terrorists willing to die together, if I only take a little time to research. Wanna bet?

You have two false examples. You need to find ONE proved by open evidence and independent investigation. Just ONE with at least 10 people (I accept only 10 is enough).

 

[EventHorizon]

Your explanation does not explain "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?"

You do not explain why such succession was planne, and you do not explain how they managed to succeed in such successive hijacks.

Already explained but since you are being intentionally obtuse, Oystein has taken care of a more detailed explanation. I'll repost here:

How: By booking tickets for 4 different flights. Any 4 flights are virtually guaranteed to take off in succession, as the alternative "at the same time" is unlikely without any coordination between them.

Why: Because there aren't any 4 commercial flights which take off at the same time. It isn't necessary for the success of the plan that they act concurrently. It is enough if all teams act within a short enough time of, say, 60 to 90 minutes.


See, that was easy

You just need to be a little bit honest to understand the graphic. If yo uare honest, you need to be a little bit more intelligent to undersatnd the graphic.

But you can help yourself: If you try to explain "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?", you may begin to understand.

As I said, 'because I say so' is not an answer. The question you have posed has now been explained more than adequately. Now either explain why you're chart says what you say it does or admit you are wrong.

 

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by mehmetin
You can repeat that as many times as you want. That will not make your will true. I need some strong argument. And such strong argument could be for example explaining us "How and Why 4 different teams planned and succeeded to make 4 successive hijacks?"
...

How: By booking tickets for 4 different flights. Any 4 flights are virtually guaranteed to take off in succession, as the alternative "at the same time" is unlikely without any coordination between them.

Why: Because there aren't any 4 commercial flights which take off at the same time. It isn't necessary for the success of the plan that they act concurrently. It is enough if all teams act within a short enough time of, say, 60 to 90 minutes.


See, that was easy

You did not explain us "planned and succeeded ".

Also, actually if they worked independently one from another, they should have finished in a shorter time. They whould have finished at about 9:00, instead of 10:06. So, that's NOT a logical action by 4 different teams.

The only logical explanation is: The action was made by ONE team.

 

[EventHorizon]

You did not explain us "planned and succeeded ".

Are you really that dense that you need it spelled out to you? That's incredible since we're supposed to accept your story without any explanation whatsoever.

Also, actually if they worked independently one from another, they should have finished in a shorter time. They whould have finished at about 9:00, instead of 10:06.

Argument from personal incredulity again. Why do you feel this way? 'Because I said so' is not an answer.

So, that's NOT a logical action by 4 different teams.

The only logical explanation is: The action was made by ONE team.

Argument from personal incredulity again. Why do you feel this way? 'Because I said so' is not an answer. You need to explain this.