The 100% Impossible 9/11 Inside Job

minnemouse said:
But dearest Tri; didnt you know that that was either:

a) A hologram, and it didnt happen

b) The evil gubment faked the films (and mind washed the eyewitnesses)

c) The evil gubment had someone standing in the towers, throwing out the papers, whilst detonating the charges that demolitioned the towers

:p
Click to expand...

Yes, Minnemouse, you would like it that way. It would be so easy to show how stupid your opponents are, isn't it?
Midaircrash? LOL See any difference?
 
Last edited:
achimspok said:
[qimg]http://i43.tinypic.com/eaiixu.png[/qimg]


To illustrate the point of the saneer, scroll back up to the first pic and notice that huge long piece of debris.
Click to expand...


WTF is a "saneer"? Indian for "truther"? :D

And why would I want to scroll op to the first pic? Thats a picture from the Milan Linate accident. Here; more pics from the Linate accident. Notice the 3 pic, its identical to the first pic in my original link, that you think is from the Überlingen mid air.

http://www.google.no/search?hl=no&q...urce=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=ZwwMT_rQH8zZ4QT2x9SeBg

Google it, and you will see that that was not a mid air like the one in Überlingen. The Linate crash was a collision between a Cessna Citation and a MD87 during take off, the Cessna was on the ground. The SAS MD87 hit the taxing Cessna, whilst doing 270km pr hour. Its very different from two planes hitting each other in cruising speed. Duh.

I think you need to do a wee bit of research into aircraft accidents, before you make (further) fool of yourself.
 
Last edited:
Travis said:
You are aware that MKULTRA was a colossal failure right? I mean it proved that you could screw someone's mind up. But controlling that person was essentially impossible.
Click to expand...
They started "Paperclip" because they knew that Russians and Chinese had about 99% success rate in brainwashing prisoners of war without any drugs.
The CIA wanted to know how far it goes if you use drugs.

Well, pressure, fear, money and some ill kind of patriotism do a better job than LSD. You are perfectly right.
 
achimspok said:
Yes, Minnemouse, you would like it that way. It would be so easy to show how stupid your opponents are, isn't it?
Midaircrash? LOL See any difference?
Click to expand...

I would like it that way? No, not at all. Why would I want it to happen like that, when I already know the facts of it? What a silly little "arguement". I really thought you could do better.

And are you just a little slow, or something? I said that EVEN in mid air collisions between two aircrafts travelling at around 900km towards eachother, you will find personal effects amongst the debris, that has not only survived but also are in pristine condition. I could try to explain this even more detailed, but I really dont have smaller spoons (or in your case, pipettes may be a better instrument). :rolleyes:
 
minnemouse said:
Indian for "truther"?
Click to expand...
Oh, minnemouse, I'm so ashamed by that typo. I immediately believe in farting debunkers.

140bsl2.jpg

What do you think should happen to the all the paper in the cockpit of the red airplane? Why not?
 
achimspok said:
Massive SPAM attack?
Try it with logic just one time Mr. 17000 posts of failure. We know ya! ;)



Already answered. Go back to post #1485.
Click to expand...
Why are you people thinking that a passport thrown to the wind hundreds of feet above ground level is going to land at a spot roughly perpendicular to the release points.

It made of *********** PAPER. It opens up like a book.

THINK.
 
leftysergeant said:
Why are you people thinking that a passport thrown to the wind hundreds of feet above ground level is going to land at a spot roughly perpendicular to the release points.

It made of *********** PAPER. It opens up like a book.

THINK.
Click to expand...
Right, but AA11 came from north, the wind blew from north, Vesey St is in the north. ...just besides all the other points I mentioned. It didn't bounce back and flapped against the wind while the entire tail just went in.
 
achimspok said:
[qimg]http://i43.tinypic.com/140bsl2.jpg[/qimg]
What do you think should happen to the all the paper in the cockpit of the red airplane? Why not?
Click to expand...

Paper in the noses of both planes will,, naturally, for the most part, continue forward. At some point, the nose will break up, probably on impact with the ground, but may bounce repeatedly or skid great distances, scattering loose paper, equipment, aircraft parts and body parts over a wide area, largely unpredictible by any but the most highly competent mathematician trained in chaos theory. Everything in the fuselage will be whirled about randomly and scattered over miles upon miles, most of it down-wind of the location of the collision. Bear in mind that cameras, seats and bodies will be found much closer to the collision site, in tighter groups, largely sorted to the source aircraft, than will books, billfolds papers and passports. Far different aerodynmics.
 
achimspok said:
Right, but AA11 came from north, the wind blew from north, Vesey St is in the north. ...just besides all the other points I mentioned. It didn't bounce back and flapped against the wind while the entire tail just went in.
Click to expand...
Never been to a big fire, have you?

Why are you assuming that the wind will be uniform at all elevations in a city like NYC?
 
achimspok said:
I guess, you are a little slow. You obviously don't get the difference between your Überlingen mid air and 500mph against the wall.

Well, the biggest difference might be that the Suqami passport never was inside any airplane.
Click to expand...

I dont get the difference?? Riiiiite. I think you are projecting here; its you that dont get the point. Sorry; I dont have a pipette.

500 mph? Thats a bloody blatant lie. Not only are you more than a little slow, but you are a liar too.
Have you even read the report on the Linate accident? It hit the wall at 156mph, not 500mph. Or perhaps that was a "typo" too? The captain made a maneuver (applying breaks and thrust reverser, and tried to guide the plane thru the flight control surfaces) that was so skillfull that it has been incorporated into the SAS´s manuals. So get a grip; and at least TRY to appear as if you actually can read.
 
leftysergeant said:
Paper in the noses of both planes will,, naturally, for the most part, continue forward. At some point, the nose will break up, probably on impact with the ground, but may bounce repeatedly or skid great distances, scattering loose paper, equipment, aircraft parts and body parts over a wide area, largely unpredictible by any but the most highly competent mathematician trained in chaos theory. Everything in the fuselage will be whirled about randomly and scattered over miles upon miles, most of it down-wind of the location of the collision. Bear in mind that cameras, seats and bodies will be found much closer to the collision site, in tighter groups, largely sorted to the source aircraft, than will books, billfolds papers and passports. Far different aerodynmics.
Click to expand...

I see you already adressed the subject. I agree with you, Lefty.
 
leftysergeant said:
Never been to a big fire, have you?

Why are you assuming that the wind will be uniform at all elevations in a city like NYC?
Click to expand...
Uniform?

It blew almost exactly from true north. At WTC top level at about 9m/s and less at lower levels. It has to do with the weather not with the fire.
 
minnemouse said:
I dont get the difference?? Riiiiite. I think you are projecting here; its you that dont get the point. Sorry; I dont have a pipette.

500 mph? Thats a bloody blatant lie. Not only are you more than a little slow, but you are a liar too.
Have you even read the report on the Linate accident? It hit the wall at 156mph, not 500mph. Or perhaps that was a "typo" too? The captain made a maneuver (applying breaks and thrust reverser, and tried to guide the plane thru the flight control surfaces) that was so skillfull that it has been incorporated into the SAS´s manuals. So get a grip; and at least TRY to appear as if you actually can read.
Click to expand...

YAWN! Where are you? What are we talking about?
AA11 ~ 493mph
UA175 ~583mph

Take your passport. Put it on steel. Take a sledge hammer. Hit the passport at 500mph. Show me your correction fluid.
 
achim, you present quirky evidence, but instead of telling straight what it meansm, you basically wink wink nudge nudge and ask loaded questions.

Quite honestly, I don't know what you are driving at. Could you present a case in calmk language, beginning with the premises, presenting the evidence, explaining what it means and listting your conclusions concisely? Thanks. No need at this point to re-link every image and document, just a concise case. What is your evidence evidence for?

As a bonus, how do you think it most likely alters the story of the day as most of us accept it? I have no clue which element you are doubtful of.
 
achimspok said:
YAWN! Where are you? What are we talking about?
AA11 ~ 493mph
UA175 ~583mph

Take your passport. Put it on steel. Take a sledge hammer. Hit the passport at 500mph. Show me your correction fluid.
Click to expand...

Moving goal posts again? Is that a prerequisition to become a "truther"?? :D

You were referring to the Linate accident pic and the intact windows on the wreckage; I replied to that. Now you are suddenly on about the towers again? And the "correction fluid"..... You are making no sense whatsoever.

You keep saying that the passport was not on the plane. How do you know? Where YOU on board? :rolleyes:

You REALLY think that your nitpicking will give any more credit to the "thruthers"? Dont think so. In fact; I think you are just supporting the "debunkers" case in a fantastic way:) Keep up the good work.
 
Oystein said:
achim, you present quirky evidence, but instead of telling straight what it meansm, you basically wink wink nudge nudge and ask loaded questions.

Quite honestly, I don't know what you are driving at. Could you present a case in calmk language, beginning with the premises, presenting the evidence, explaining what it means and listting your conclusions concisely? Thanks. No need at this point to re-link every image and document, just a concise case. What is your evidence evidence for?

As a bonus, how do you think it most likely alters the story of the day as most of us accept it? I have no clue which element you are doubtful of.
Click to expand...

Come on, Oystein!
1) Saudi Air pilot Abdul Rahman Alomari didn't have a parking lot for any of Attas vehicles.
2) The alleged Hijacker Abdul Aziz Alomari didn't steal neither the identity of Abdul Rahman Alomari nor the identity of the student Abdul Aziz in Boston 6 years earlier.
3) If there is no connection regarding 9/11 between these Alomaris then why should hijacker Alomari steal the identity of Bukhari (the neighbor of Abdul Rahman)
4) If the FBI would have found the Alomari passport in the luggage (we are talking about the only two delayed pieces) on 9/11 then the FBI wouldn't have gone through 3 years of completely inconsistent Alomari-stories, two Alomaris who turned out to be alive, wrong birthdays and so on.

Conclusion: Only one conclusion is left.
parking lot = fabricated
Bukharis stolen identity = fabricated
Hence,
car = fabricated
delayed luggage = fabricated
Alomaris passport = fabricated in the same way like Suqamis
Hence,
Suqamis passport = fabricated

Question: Who was the crop duster Atta while Atta was still in Hamburg?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom