• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
tmd2_1 said:
Let's say the official story is true (for what I'm about to say it doesn't really matter) with the exception that 93 was shot down.
Click to expand...

Why should we waste our time believing falsehoods? We have proof-positive that 93 was flown into the ground using its own controls and flight surfaces. The FDR tells us this. Had it been shot, then the FDR would reveal that very clearly.
We have precise records of where the armed fighters were at the time: Far away from Shanksville.

You, on the other hand, have zero evidence for a shoot-down. You tried to substitute your incredulity. Didn't work.

tmd2_1 said:
You don't think people would be a little upset it took them that long to respond? You don't think they would want to keep that secret, by giving some BS about why they couldn't respond at all. If you believe in the theory I presented you would even want to keep it a secret more,
Click to expand...

What a moronic tale! It doesn't make any sense at all!

tmd2_1 said:
because the pentagon would be a total Bush administration idea. If you can't see this we will just have to agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

Nonsense.
 
Mr. Skinny said:
Come on, tmd2_1. Who was there to stop him from picking up a piece of debris from the wreckage moments after it happened? I'd guess no one.

Do you think there were FBI and DoD and Virginia cops making sure no one picked up debris moments after it happened? I suppose they had more urgent issues at the moment.

Geez, debris lands near car. Pick up debris. Drive into Navy Annex. Get photographed at Navy Annex. Take debris to TV channel at 5PM. Say you were at the Pentagon for 20 minutes.

Yep, totally suspicious, slightly weird, and proof solid that there was a conspiracy.
Click to expand...


Why would he do those things? I mean go to the annex at all? Why would he lie about where he was at. Sure he could pick up a piece of evidence...but that is a crime...a crime. Nothing was ever done about this, he just dropped off the face of the earth. Proof positive of anything or course not...just one more thing to add to an awful lot of other evidence.
 
tmd2_1 said:
Did you even read the website I showed you?

Right here along with many other descriptions of what he did.

Aviation sources said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm, possibly one of the hijackers. Someone even knew how to turn off the transponder, a move that is considerably less than obvious. [Washington Post]

Ask the Washington Post for who their experts were and then ask them.
Click to expand...

Do your own research and stop believing cultists.
That page spreads lies.
 
Grizzly Bear said:
We can prove the feasibility of remote controlling the aircraft all day. I suppose the real question is what proof can you offer, besides Hanjour being a piss poor pilot, that the plane was actually remote controlled?
Click to expand...


As I said Boeing's suspicious comment that for national security reasons they can't comment on 175. The fact that those planes were maxed out speed wise, but were still able to hit those buildings square, and level. Not pointed up or down. Hit in such a way that not even the slightest bit of the wing hit nothing but the building...ie if it didn't parts of the plane would have flown to the ground. Is it hard evidence? No, but a fair amount of circumstantial.
 
tmd2_1 said:
Simple...while I don't know this is what happened...it was simply not the plane it was supposed to be, but one of those modified tankers. How it got there...I don't know, as I said the Airport security would have had to have been involved. Read the article....it says it would have been a fairly innocuous device along with giving a blueprint of how to do it.
Click to expand...

What took off at Boston, Newark, Dulles wasn't modified tankers. It was commercial airliners type 757/767 with regular passengers aboard.
 
tmd2_1 said:
Why would he do those things? I mean go to the annex at all? Why would he lie about where he was at. Sure he could pick up a piece of evidence...but that is a crime...a crime. Nothing was ever done about this, he just dropped off the face of the earth. Proof positive of anything or course not...just one more thing to add to an awful lot of other evidence.
Click to expand...
As I said before, you can find weird things in any investigation. That's why there are still people proposing alternate theories for the JFK assination, the sinking of the Titanic and the Maine, the attack on Pearl Harbor/Hickham AFB, etc.

You really need to take the time to ask yourself the questions we've been asking you and try to put together a real conspiracy theory that holds water. If you do, you'll be the first.

And I hate to be condescending, but you really do seem like a first or second year university student. Likely intelligent, and well spoken orally and with written language, but rather naive about the way critical thinking, science, technology, engineering, and mathmatics work.

I may jump in occasionally, but for now I'm going to bow out. Best of luck in your discussion with others.
 
tmd2_1 said:
Sunstealer said:
LOL no...this would have been a change Boeing would not have known about, and could therefore not approve.
Click to expand...

Who would have designed that change? How many people does that take?
Who would have developed that change? How many people does that take?
Who would have tested that change? How many people does that take?
Who would have installed that change? How many people does that take?
Who would have signed that change during maintenance? How many people does that take?
Why would the pilot not notice that change and take off, or notice it and take off anyway?
Click to expand...
 
tmd2_1 said:
The Washington Post spreads lies? The New York Times spreads lies?
Click to expand...
Nope. They do however want to get the story out quick. Did you know the other day a gunman opened fire in Norway and (possibly) killed hundreds? Want to see the story?

Did hundreds actually die in that tragedy?
 
tmd2_1 said:
I didn't say a plane didn't crash into the pentagon. Simply saying this guy along with many other reasons I have questions. Actually all you have to do is read the message board that I linked to...it sums it all up
Click to expand...

We are all aware of the pilots for change forum and the loose change forum. Many of us have made our experiences there. These typically include lies, abuse, censorship and banning.
One member even was banned before he got to write his first post :D
 
Mr. Skinny said:
As I said before, you can find weird things in any investigation. That's why there are still people proposing alternate theories for the JFK assination, the sinking of the Titanic and the Maine, the attack on Pearl Harbor/Hickham AFB, etc.

You really need to take the time to ask yourself the questions we've been asking you and try to put together a real conspiracy theory that holds water. If you do, you'll be the first.

And I hate to be condescending, but you really do seem like a first or second year university student. Likely intelligent, and well spoken orally and with written language, but rather naive about the way critical thinking, science, technology, engineering, and mathmatics work.

I may jump in occasionally, but for now I'm going to bow out. Best of luck in your discussion with others.
Click to expand...

I did see post #5. There is evidence to it...and it is plausible..Believe what you want...opening yourself up to the possibility of alternative theories is not easy...you seem like a nice guy...maybe you will be able to do it one day.
 
Oystein said:
We are all aware of the pilots for change forum and the loose change forum. Many of us have made our experiences there. These typically include lies, abuse, censorship and banning.
One member even was banned before he got to write his first post :D
Click to expand...

I told you that came from an official military photographer.
 
tmd2_1 said:
You know there's people who would say when someone starts throwing out the antisemite card they are getting desperate. I never made any mention to his religion...I mean the guy was the comptroller....as I said it's all in the article, how it can be done...believe or don't believe. As for the flying skills, check this out...I linked to it before. If you have a problem with it..talk to the Washington Post find out who they talked to in aviation and ask them.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/hanjour.html
Click to expand...

That link has nothing to with the topic of the quoted post.
The other article you linked to, you know, the one abour RC tech for unmanned craft, made a big deal out of the fact that the man had Israeli roots. The wording and tone were very typical for the antisemiting branch of CT nuts.
That's the kind of nuts you chose to believe.
 
DGM said:
Why would you trust him? Would it be because it fits your pre-conceived notions? Why is that right and not the news report?
Click to expand...

Because he's an official military photographer, whose other photos from that day were released by DOD..but not that one.
 
Oystein said:
That link has nothing to with the topic of the quoted post.
The other article you linked to, you know, the one abour RC tech for unmanned craft, made a big deal out of the fact that the man had Israeli roots. The wording and tone were very typical for the antisemiting branch of CT nuts.
That's the kind of nuts you chose to believe.
Click to expand...

Let me try to address all of your posts here...if I miss something I apologize.
This site talks extensively about 767 and how they could be used. The same one I gave earlier. I think it seals the deal...but you believe what you want. http://911review.org/brad.com/blog/Physics911=56.html

Also I was asked to provide proof of bad piloting skills of hani. Say what you will about that site...it has all mainstream articles as sources.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom