Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
No no no, they FORGOT about the internet, remember?!?!?

LOL!! Forgot about the internet.....in 2001......LOL!!

That's like forgetting about the computers in the 1980's!! LOL!! Too funny!!

Keep going, i've got all day to read this comedy!!
 
9/11-investigator said:
No, they failed to foresee the rise of internet forums...
Click to expand...
That is incorrect, the internet was started by DARPA and others, and in 70s forums first formed. Thus the NWO created the internet and forums.

I don't see how you were one of the first to join an internet forum in 2001/2002 when they were around since the 70s.

9/11-investigator said:
think it is plausible that 19 Arabian youngsters pulled off 'the most elaborate conspiracy known to man'?
Click to expand...
The question is it plausible for 19 people to murder? Do people murder people? You ask the hard questions.

I missed the "most elaborate conspiracy". Very complex plot.
1. Take plane.
2. Crash plane into largest office buildings in the world.
Very elaborate, must of taken years to memorize the complex steps. I think you are on to something. Good job.



9/11-investigator said:
Professional pilots have stated that it is impossible for Hanjour to have carried out the maneuver that he is said to have carried out. Several Arabs were too incompetent to even fly a Cessna.
Click to expand...
Next time look at the FDR for the exact bank angles and maneuvers. The truth is Flight 77 was flow as if a non-pilot was doint the flying, in turns where professional pilots hold exactly 25 degrees of bank for a turn the murder pilot varied from 8 degrees to 43 degrees, the sloppiest turn in history. I am an instructor pilot and our squadron wives who never flew before did better turn in large jet aircraft. So the terrorist pilot flew worse than USAF wives. There were no fancy hard maneuvers. Please look at the facts before dishing out false information.

The terrorist pilots had FAA liecence to fly. The incident where Hani was not allowed to rent a Cessna after his flight with an instructor is not uncommon. They requested he take more flights if he wanted to rent a plane. The fact is, Hani was practicing aiming the plane, or checking out the local area; no real intentino or motivation to fly well enough to land on a tiny 40 foot wide runway; since the Pentagon was over 900 feet wide.

77hanicntlandpentagoncansmall.jpg

Pentagon, too large of a target to miss, next to the tiny runway Hani had problems lining up with. On a runway you have to line up exactly on course, one solution, only two direction are correct. With the Pentagon you have infinite courses to attack from, infinitely easier to crash into the Pentagon, than land on a 40 foot runway correctly.

9/11-investigator said:
Haha, 'all you need'... trust me, it is far easier to find 19 people who do not need to die than 19 people who do need to die and remain determined about it for several months.
Click to expand...
Only 4 people had to know they were all dying on 911. The person flying the jet. For 911 you need 4 pilots who are murderers, and 15 not too smart guys. Simple plot.

9/11-investigator said:
Sure. 4/5 short frail Arabs with these stupid hardless box cutters can keep an plane of 100 or so 'Aryans' under control. Don't make me laugh.
Click to expand...
On 911 it was common practice to give in to demands of Hijackers, and be quiet, try to land. Flight 93 Passengerrs figured out 911 in mintues, and now hijackers will be beat up; end of story.
Since it only takes mintues to figure out 911 why do you present a web page which has no clue what happen on 911?
9/11-investigator said:
No I don't.
Click to expand...
Pure comedy, pure fantasy, "one hundred thousand pounds of thermite." - good one, never seen web sites so dumb until 911 truth was still-born in 2001.

Keep the comedy coming, but you need to stop the antisemitic and racist remarks, they distract from the plagarized paranoid conspiracy theories you present. Why are you unable to figure out 911?

The following chart is Flight 77 terrorist pilot bank angle sample in a turn, and Flight 93 real pilot sample bank - data available to anyone who can search the Internet. This data is what 911 truth can't comprehend.

11BankAnglecompare.jpg

Terrorist pilot erratic bank, compared to smooth professional pilot bank. People should check the data and learn about flying before making up comments based on nothing but the need to make up false information like:
9/11-investigator said:
Professional pilots have stated that it is impossible for Hanjour to have carried out the maneuver that he is said to have carried out. ...
Click to expand...
I am a pilot, I hold an ATP which is required to fly as a pilot in command with passengers on a Major Airline, and I was an instructor pilot and evaluator pilot in large jet aircraft; the data shows a pilot who was erratic and crashed into the Pentagon. Fully qualified to crash and do the sloppy maneuvers done on 911, over qualified. The only pilots who say Hani was unable to do the sloppy manuvers on 911, are the ones who never looked at the data and are paranoid conspracy theoriest with no evidence. Evidence looks like charts and data; stuff never used by 911 truth except to make up fantasy.
 
Last edited:
Sabrina said:
There are over two million people in the US alone who are willing to die for a cause right now. They're collectively referred to as the United States Armed Forces. Just saying.
Click to expand...

Correction: they take a small risk of dying while being employed and paid by the army. Of maybe 150,000 service people some 4,000 died so far in Iraq, that is 1:25. Everybody hopes he/she will be not among the dead.

So much for '2 million willing to die'.
 
9/11-investigator said:
Correction: they take a small risk of dying while being employed and paid by the army. Of maybe 150,000 service people some 4,000 died so far in Iraq, that is 1:25. Everybody hopes he/she will be not among the dead.

So much for '2 million willing to die'.
Click to expand...

more willing than those who choose instead to work for the city plowing snow from roads
 
Cl1mh4224rd said:
Bulletin Board Systems (BBS), the ancestors of modern World Wide Web-based forums like JREF, have existed since the mid 70's.
Click to expand...

These were used by nerds and techno hobyists, not by people with a broad vision. :cool:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletin_board_system

You cannot compare BBS-es with browser based WWW forums like this one. I had a (CompuServe) internet connection since 1996 and followed internet developments closely, but I do remember that internet forums became big not before 9/11 but did shortly after 9/11. Well at least in Holland. And boy did it turn me from a liberal into a right winger.
 
Not big before 2001???

I was on several internet forums by 1998. Prior to 2001 I was on some health issue related forums and a few general interest like the history channel forum and "The Blackvault", "Badastronomy", and "Apollo Hoax"

Maybe the Dutch were behind in these things though.
 
Last edited:
9/11-investigator said:
These were used by nerds and techno hobyists, not by people with a broad vision. :cool:
...
Click to expand...
The internet was first populated by intelligent rational people who posted reality based content, or content segregated to specific areas and tastes. Now we experience at a skeptics forum claims from 911 truth, claims based on fantasy and no evidence. Your claims on 911 are fantasy based, not exactly what people expect at a skeptic forum.

Nerds, techno hobbyists, scientists, engineers, research engineers etc, which equates to intelligent people with broad base of knowledge not prone to rank folly-fallen clotpole claims like those 911 truth comes up with; claims based on nonsense and fantasy.

:cool:Nerd = intelligent people:cool:
 
I like how tech-savvy people don't have "broad vision" in 9/11-investigator's world. That's pretty special. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
jaydeehess said:
No "broad vision" ....that's why we still make long distance phone calls to remote BBS with computers sporting monochrome displays, all at 9600 baud.
Click to expand...
9600 baud? You were lucky. We had 300 baud acoustic couplers, and we liked it! [/4Yorkshiremen]
 
I recall being on a BBS back when the just started becoming popular (I want to say 1994 or there-abouts). Augsburg BBS I believe. We had some pretty heated discussions about a great many topics, even some CT's.

Just because they weren't forum based, it didn't make them any less crazy and/or informative.
 
Sabretooth said:
I recall being on a BBS back when the just started becoming popular (I want to say 1994 or there-abouts). Augsburg BBS I believe. We had some pretty heated discussions about a great many topics, even some CT's.

Just because they weren't forum based, it didn't make them any less crazy and/or informative.
Click to expand...

about 1995 for me. I signed up for a dial up BBS with a gui and didn't even realize till weeks later that i wasn't really on the internet, just a local BBS, I couldn't get my NCSA Mosaic browser to connect with anything. Till I found the internet connect dohickey on Galacticomm's Worldgroup to connect. http://www.gcomm.com/HOME/Products.wgs
 
'95?? that late? I recall being on the internet when Windows 98 came out, or does my brain fail me?

In the early 90's my son ran up a $700 phone bill because his favourite BBS was in California.........:boggled:

ETA according to Wiki, commercial ISPs came into being about 1995, so I guess that's about right then.
 
Last edited:
jaydeehess said:
'95?? that late? I recall being on the internet when Windows 98 came out, or does my brain fail me?

In the early 90's my son ran up a $700 phone bill because his favourite BBS was in California.........:boggled:

ETA according to Wiki, commercial ISPs came into being about 1995, so I guess that's about right then.
Click to expand...


actually it was January 1 1996, just found an archived site for my old bbs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom