• 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.

A Flight 93 : WTC 7 connection

little grey rabbit

Banned
L
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
3,164
Has any troother ever suggested a connection between the downed airliner in Shanksville (flight 93???) and the collapse of WTC-7?

Think how tempting the combination is, instead of heading for the White House, Flight 93 (or the drone plane pretending to be Flight 93 or whatever the latest fashion is) was instead heading for WTC7. WTC7 being the 3rd highest building after 1 and 2 would make a logical target.

Then after the "Lets Roll" (TM) heroism (or malfunction of the Flight-93 look-alike drone) this was no longer available for a strike. What to do? The explosives were all in place, with everyone running around the WTC there was no way they could be removed without people noticing.

There was only one thing to do and so Larry Silverstein decided to "pull the building".

Someone must have already come up with this, though. Any names?
 
thanks, I dont follow truthing.

But it was my path to Holocaust Denial, as I thought HD would be a more stable area and it would be easier to pick the red herrings. In the end they are looking at the same ugly beast.

Whats the best site for a serious minded truther?
 
If you mean the best site to try to bring a Truther back to sanity, I'd recommend 911 Myths. I have no idea where their hangouts are these days -- they're getting to be quite scarce, thankfully.
 
R.Mackey said:
If you mean the best site to try to bring a Truther back to sanity, I'd recommend 911 Myths. I have no idea where their hangouts are these days -- they're getting to be quite scarce, thankfully.
Click to expand...

In the world of the blind, the one eyed man is insane. Nope, the best sort of truther friendly zone. And not Keith Barrett.
 
Exactly, as far as sanity is gone I am a lost cause.

But still interested in what anyone would recommend as the best truther place.
 
Hokulele said:
Yep. Saul of Tarsus, he ain't.
Click to expand...

That is true, although for me the quote means something different from what most people understand it.

For me it describes someone who has such confidence in his understanding of the world he becomes conceited and arrogant (the arrogance of Dawkins and his ilk, if you like) but who through the confrontation with his "thorn" is forced to understand how feeble and ignorant his former confidence really was. Therefore he both hates the thorn and life it forced him to, but recognizes that it was a path to understanding of the limitations of knowledge and as well as his own limitations.

So the full quote is here
So to keep me from becoming conceited because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to harass me, to keep me from becoming conceited. Three times I pleaded with the Lord about this, that it should leave me. But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me. For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong.
Click to expand...

All of which is by the by while I wait for the recommendation of the highest quality truth site out there.
You guys are the experts, after all.
 
little grey rabbit said:
Has any troother ever suggested a connection between the downed airliner in Shanksville (flight 93???) and the collapse of WTC-7?

Think how tempting the combination is, instead of heading for the White House, Flight 93 (or the drone plane pretending to be Flight 93 or whatever the latest fashion is) was instead heading for WTC7. WTC7 being the 3rd highest building after 1 and 2 would make a logical target.

Then after the "Lets Roll" (TM) heroism (or malfunction of the Flight-93 look-alike drone) this was no longer available for a strike. What to do? The explosives were all in place, with everyone running around the WTC there was no way they could be removed without people noticing.

There was only one thing to do and so Larry Silverstein decided to "pull the building".

Someone must have already come up with this, though. Any names?
Click to expand...

The concern is, and I've asked, without satisfaction, many truthers to explain this:

If Flight 93 was to hit WTC 7 and, as happened, it failed to, the perpetrators would still need something to damage WTC 7 and start fires to allow them a plausible explanation for the collapse. So how did the perpetrators get debris from the falling WTC 2 to hit WTC 7, damage it, and start fires so that the above requirements were satisfied? Were they just extremely fortunate? Wonderful serendipity? Do truthers think that the NWO caused debris to hit WTC 7? Also, why didn't the NWO perps destroy WTC 7 in the shroud of either of the considerable dust clouds caused by the collapse of the other two buildings? Instead they wait almost eight hours and destroy it when they surely knew that many cameras would be focused on it. None of their wild speculation makes sense.
 
Mince said:
The concern is, and I've asked, without satisfaction, many truthers to explain this:

If Flight 93 was to hit WTC 7 and, as happened, it failed to, the perpetrators would still need something to damage WTC 7 and start fires to allow them a plausible explanation for the collapse. So how did the perpetrators get debris from the falling WTC 2 to hit WTC 7, damage it, and start fires so that the above requirements were satisfied? Were they just extremely fortunate? Wonderful serendipity? Do truthers think that the NWO caused debris to hit WTC 7? Also, why didn't the NWO perps destroy WTC 7 in the shroud of either of the considerable dust clouds caused by the collapse of the other two buildings? Instead they wait almost eight hours and destroy it when they surely knew that many cameras would be focused on it. None of their wild speculation makes sense.
Click to expand...

Coulda, shoulda, woulda.

The delay was presumably caused because of dithering and a lack of a proper chain of command to give the pull order. After all, a lot was going on that day and you can certainly understand a lack of decisiveness.

As for debris and fire etc, presumably that was just fortuitous. Had the WTC 7 building been 3 blocks away Silverstein and friends might have had to find another solution, but given it was right next door, it was easy enough just to let the fire burn and then trigger the explosives (alternatively the explosives might have been set off by the fire anyway). Perhaps even the fire could have been deliberately lit under screen of the chaos?

No one would have planned for the 4th plane/drone strike to fail, so after that what occurred was just improvisation.
 
little grey rabbit said:
...
No one would have planned for the 4th plane/drone strike to fail, so after that what occurred was just improvisation.
Click to expand...

Actually, there is no reason why the perps would not factor in the failure of one or several of their separate actions. Wouldn't be the first time in history that a drone gets lost, or a hitchhiking fails, or an airliner or drone gets shot out of the sky by zealous air defense.

In the case of the 19 Arabs, several modes of partial failure would still have resulted in overall success - which confirms it was a good and reasonable plan:
- The built in redundancy by taking 4 planes. If they gain control over only one and make it crash into a highly symbolic building, that would be great
- If the air force steps in and shoots one or several of them down, that would have been a huge success for the terrorists - just imagine that, forcing the mighiest country on earth to kill its own citizens at home!
- Had none of the buildings collapsed - it still would have been a terrible and frightning attack with lots of lives lost. The ruins of the burned-out twin towers would have towered over the city for weeks if not months, a great beakon to the world of Al Qaeda's success

In the case of a conspiracy that seeks to stealthily destroy buildings, any failure to damage a building they had rigged for demolition would have exposed the rigging and thus the conspiracy. You can not presume at the same time that they are oh so powerful and clever, and be so stupid as not have comsidered partial failure!
 
Oystein said:
In the case of the 19 Arabs, several modes of partial failure would still have resulted in overall success - which confirms it was a good and reasonable plan:
- The built in redundancy by taking 4 planes. If they gain control over only one and make it crash into a highly symbolic building, that would be great
- If the air force steps in and shoots one or several of them down, that would have been a huge success for the terrorists - just imagine that, forcing the mighiest country on earth to kill its own citizens at home!
- Had none of the buildings collapsed - it still would have been a terrible and frightning attack with lots of lives lost. The ruins of the burned-out twin towers would have towered over the city for weeks if not months, a great beakon to the world of Al Qaeda's success
Click to expand...

Well, exactly have two buildings collapse like that was indeed a rather lucky accident. One could easily imagine how the fires could have just burnt out in upper stories and the buildings left standing.

Not only that, the Arabs got a bonus building collapse thrown in for the bargain - and they didnt have to do anything.

Allah must have been on their side that morning.

In the case of a conspiracy that seeks to stealthily destroy buildings, any failure to damage a building they had rigged for demolition would have exposed the rigging and thus the conspiracy. You can not presume at the same time that they are oh so powerful and clever, and be so stupid as not have comsidered partial failure!
Click to expand...

Powerful yes, but not clever. If you are powerful you don't need to be clever, in my opinion. In my Holocaust Denying activities I have seen some truly cringe-making documents, things that just scream out fake fake fake. What keeps them and the entire narrative propped up, is not the their diabolical sophistication - far from it, but the brute force of having a cadre of people working together, determined to argue black is white (We must all hang together or we shall all hang separately). When you have such power, you can tend to become a bit lazy and not build in plan Bs. Besides, it all worked out all right, didn't it? 99.9% of people believe and the remaining 0.1% can fairly easily be marginalized.

Incidentally, rather than start a new thread, what is the story about this you-tube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3PxBF_qmNE

I am sure its been covered and you have the rebuttal for it, I am just curious to know what the reason for it actually was.
 
Last edited:
Isn't Bill Smith a proponent of the idea that Flight 93 was headed for Building 7? I thought he mentioned that at some point?
 
Well it sure seems to make sense. Given progressive collapse of buildings is a rather rare event, Occam's razor would suggest when 3 progressive collapses happen in a small radius and a small time frame that they would each have the same cause.

Ergo, planes were an optional extra for causing progressive collapse on 9/11.

And if that isnt a great application of the ol' shaving implement, I don't know what is.

Any heads up on the best truther site? And any views on the N175F thingy that youtube clip shows? I am sure it must have come up here before.
 
911truth.org (although today it seems to be down, google it, click on the Cache under it, and you will see) is where most of the idiots hang.

TAM:)
 
little grey rabbit said:
Whats the best site for a serious minded truther?
Click to expand...

Labeling aside, the best site for any 9/11 research is cooperativeresearch.org.

And despite Mackey's wishful thinking, for daily updates and headlines for all things 9/11 check 911blogger. Most of the sites that Mackey et al will recommend,such as http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/ are biased and wildly out of date.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom