The 100% Impossible 9/11 Inside Job

...there is no evidence the plane was hijacked.
there is more proof that the plane was not hijacked, from the fact that the hijack code, which pilots are trained to transmit to the ground control was not received from any of the 4 planes...

Upon second thought, I think this is more interesting. Silver, can you agree to debate this topic now, and stick to this topic, until you and I have presented our evidence and our logic?
If you indicate that you are not willing to debate claims that you make on this forum, then I will know that you are a troll. Of which I honestly am not sure yet.

If you are willing to engage in this topic of "planes were not hijacked because no hijack code was squawked", I would first ask you to state what you believe DID happen most likely with these flights:
  • Do you believe that planes were flown into the twin towers?
  • If yes: Do you believe these planes were commercial flights AA11 and UA175?
  • If yes: How were they flown into the towers, since you say they were not hijacked?
 
how many pages have we spent discussing whether or not the passport could have survived?
a waste of time.
because the passport is a red herring, there is no evidence the hijackers were on the plane. there is no evidence the plane was hijacked.
there is more proof that the plane was not hijacked, from the fact that the hijack code, which pilots are trained to transmit to the ground control was not received from any of the 4 planes with a total of 8 pilots.
This was all debated on this thread, especially post 216 and before. Essentially, the pilots couldn't sqawk the code because they were busy being murdered.
 
how many pages have we spent discussing whether or not the passport could have survived?
a waste of time.
because the passport is a red herring, there is no evidence the hijackers were on the plane.
Tickets, security cameras.

there is no evidence the plane was hijacked.
I don't think their normal flight plans involved crashing into buildings.

there is more proof that the plane was not hijacked, from the fact that the hijack code, which pilots are trained to transmit to the ground control was not received from any of the 4 planes with a total of 8 pilots.
All of which were killed in seconds by armed lunatics bursting into their cockpits. They spent most of the time, y'know, trying not to die. Unsuccessfully.

there would have been ample time as the door to the cockpit is kept locked in flight and it would only take a few seconds to turn 4 knobs on the squawk box.
This is the equivalent of a teenager writing a story that combines stuff from Modern Warfare and Zelda and Dragonball Z just because they're all cool, regardless of whether it makes sense.

You have no source for this claim. It is false.

pilots have been trained for years how to react in a hijack, and sending the squawk code would have been the first priority.
Without considerable training or mental conditioning, the root command of every capable human being on the planet in a life-threatening situation is "don't die".

how stupid do you think pilots are?
the first thing isreali pilots are trained to do is put the plane in a steep dive and throw hijackers off balance.
And people in France eat snails. I live in England. Most people here do not eat escargot. And that's assuming you're claim is true.

You're throwing anything that sounds plausible to you into the conspiracy pot again, without considering if it plays well with the other ingredients.
 
how many pages have we spent discussing whether or not the passport could have survived?
It is a known fact things survive aircraft crashes. You lost this argument if you claim a passport can't survive an aircraft crash. You are batting zero.

a waste of time.
Only for you since you seem to be a poor typists. And even less of a waste of time for you since you did not know things survive aircraft accidents, you did ZERO research, you saved time being ignorant of the topic, all of 911 you have done ZERO rational research. Zip

A waste of time! Not for you, you make it up as you go, no time looking up anything!@

because the passport is a red herring,
The passport is evidence you can't use to support you idiotic claims! It proves you are wrong, it proves a hijacker was real. More like a murderer, since they took the plane to kill, not hijack, you are confused and can't form rational thoughts.

You think your lies are evidence, you can't figure out the passport is evidence.

there is no evidence the hijackers were on the plane.
Wrong again, DNA on all of the Flight 93 murderers. You failed again.

there is no evidence the plane was hijacked.
Off flight plan, off altitude, not talking to ATC, etc, etc.
The crew reported the plane was taken over... oops, you don't do any research; you don't waste time for sure.


there is more proof that the plane was not hijacked,
Why are you always wrong? Sorry, off course, off flight plan, off altitude, not talking to ATC, etc. You keep messing up out of ignorance.


from the fact that the hijack code, which pilots are trained to transmit to the ground control was not received from any of the 4 planes with a total of 8 pilots.
You are not a pilot. We would tell ATC we were hijacked on the RADIO. We talk. If we can't talk and we are alive, we could set the code when we are ready to tell ATC.

On 911 pilots were strapped into seats facing forward when murderers came in and killed them. Shoulder harnesses and seat-belts, unable to stand and turn to fight, they died when their throats were cut from behind, in a surprise attack. Can't set code or talk when you are dead.

you lost this one too

On Flight 93 we hear the pilots screaming... good sign they were under-attack. The crews on each plane and passengers reported what they knew to the ground. Your research is crap.


there would have been ample time as the door to the cockpit is kept locked in flight and it would only take a few seconds to
You don't know the door was locked. The pilots would call ATC and talk on the radio. You don't know pilot procedures, you have no clue on this. Ignorance makes you make up lies and spew nonsense.


turn 4 knobs on the squawk box.
pilots have been trained for years how to react in a hijack,
Sorry, we talk first. We tell ATC we are being hijacked. In this case the call would be, "we are being killed", and only flight 93 was able to scream. Good job making fun of the dead by being completely ignorant on pilot procedures and reality. Good job

Why do we talk first? Setting the code for hijack would be a covert method, and ATC would be alerted, and they would want us to set a normal code. If we could not tell ATC on the Radio, we can set the hijack code, and they would be alerted to move traffic if needed. There will be no instant intercept, no shoot down, etc.



and sending the squawk code would have been the first priority.
Wrong, talking to ATC is the first priority, we tell them we are being attacked or hijacked. If we are dead, we don't do much. You have no clue.


If ATC was super busy and we could not get their attention because we would be "stepping on" their radio transmission (do you have a clue), we could set the code for hijacking and get priority. You should do some research, this make you look real dumb on a lot of issues!
how stupid do you think pilots are?
Several orders of magnitude less than your claims, and delusions.

the first thing isreali pilots are trained to do is put the plane in a steep dive and throw hijackers off balance.
They have locked doors, very secure locked doors; no need to throw hijacker off balance, they can't hijack the plane. Source please.


You don't know pilots tell ATC on the radio they are hijacked, you are not a pilot, you wasted zero time researching your claims. Wow, is there anything you do know?
 
Last edited:
Tickets, security cameras.

I don't think their normal flight plans involved crashing into buildings.

All of which were killed in seconds by armed lunatics bursting into their cockpits. They spent most of the time, y'know, trying not to die. Unsuccessfully.

could a lunatic armed with a very short bladed knife, (the official story, not a gun) break through a locked door and murder someone in under 2 or 3 seconds. because that is the time some pilots have said it would take them to set the squawk to 7500?
how many able bodied grown men do you think would be on an average 767 flight? you tell me.
could a lunatic armed with a short bladed knife even succeed in breaking through a locked door with these men throwing luggage from the overhead rack?
is it not possible one of the men would have the chance to grab his wrist and prevent him using the knife?
 
Why do you think the door was locked?

Doors were generally not locked pre 9/11.
 
Tickets, security cameras.

I don't think their normal flight plans involved crashing into buildings.

All of which were killed in seconds by armed lunatics bursting into their cockpits. They spent most of the time, y'know, trying not to die. Unsuccessfully.

could a lunatic armed with a very short bladed knife, (the official story, not a gun) break through a locked door and murder someone in under 2 or 3 seconds. because that is the time some pilots have said it would take them to set the squawk to 7500?
how many able bodied grown men do you think would be on an average 767 flight? you tell me.
could a lunatic armed with a short bladed knife even succeed in breaking through a locked door with these men throwing luggage from the overhead rack?
is it not possible one of the men would have the chance to grab his wrist and prevent him using the knife?


Show us evidence that the doors were even locked. Show us evidence that any US mainland aircraft hijackers have been overpowered pre 9/11. So far all you have shown here is a basket full of incredulous assumptions, And short bladed knives? Are you aware that many box cutters have break away blades that can extend two inches?
http://img.ehowcdn.com/article-page...ces-economy-heavyduty-box-cutters-800x800.jpg
Are you aware how fatal these knives can be?

http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2011/11/04/jury-convicts-jean-james-in-1992-boxcutter-murder/

http://arklatexhomepage.com/fulltext?nxd_id=6084

in the hands of an 11 year old
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sasebo_slashing
 
It is a known fact things survive aircraft crashes. You lost this argument if you claim a passport can't survive an aircraft crash. You are batting zero.

Only for you since you seem to be a poor typists. And even less of a waste of time for you since you did not know things survive aircraft accidents, you did ZERO research, you saved time being ignorant of the topic, all of 911 you have done ZERO rational research. Zip

A waste of time! Not for you, you make it up as you go, no time looking up anything!@

The passport is evidence you can't use to support you idiotic claims! It proves you are wrong, it proves a hijacker was real. More like a murderer, since they took the plane to kill, not hijack, you are confused and can't form rational thoughts.

You think your lies are evidence, you can't figure out the passport is evidence.

Wrong again, DNA on all of the Flight 93 murderers. You failed again.


Off flight plan, off altitude, not talking to ATC, etc, etc.
The crew reported the plane was taken over... oops, you don't do any research; you don't waste time for sure.


Why are you always wrong? Sorry, off course, off flight plan, off altitude, not talking to ATC, etc. You keep messing up out of ignorance.


You are not a pilot. We would tell ATC we were hijacked on the RADIO. We talk. If we can't talk and we are alive, we could set the code when we are ready to tell ATC.

On 911 pilots were strapped into seats facing forward when murderers came in and killed them. Shoulder harnesses and seat-belts, unable to stand and turn to fight, they died when their throats were cut from behind, in a surprise attack. Can't set code or talk when you are dead.

you lost this one too

On Flight 93 we hear the pilots screaming... good sign they were under-attack. The crews on each plane and passengers reported what they knew to the ground. Your research is crap.


You don't know the door was locked. The pilots would call ATC and talk on the radio. You don't know pilot procedures, you have no clue on this. Ignorance makes you make up lies and spew nonsense.



Sorry, we talk first. We tell ATC we are being hijacked. In this case the call would be, "we are being killed", and only flight 93 was able to scream. Good job making fun of the dead by being completely ignorant on pilot procedures and reality. Good job

Why do we talk first? Setting the code for hijack would be a covert method, and ATC would be alerted, and they would want us to set a normal code. If we could not tell ATC on the Radio, we can set the hijack code, and they would be alerted to move traffic if needed. There will be no instant intercept, no shoot down, etc.




Wrong, talking to ATC is the first priority, we tell them we are being attacked or hijacked. If we are dead, we don't do much. You have no clue.


If ATC was super busy and we could not get their attention because we would be "stepping on" their radio transmission (do you have a clue), we could set the code for hijacking and get priority. You should do some research, this make you look real dumb on a lot of issues!
Several orders of magnitude less than your claims, and delusions.


first of all- 'we tell them we are being attacked' so you are an airline pilot then. perhaps you could tell me about your experiences of being hijacked, I would love to hear them.
the squawk transmits over the transponder, which is telemetry which is not the same frequency as voice.
so in a matter of life and death, when every second counts, its still too bad mannered to squawk without asking first, I see.

the new pearl harbour revisited, page 177-
the 9/11 commission did acknowledge that sending the code would have been standard procedure, writing,
FAA guidance to controllers on hijack procedures assumed that the aircraft pilot would notify the controller via radio OR by sqawking a transponder code of 7500- the universal code for a hijack in progress.
 
It is a known fact things survive aircraft crashes. You lost this argument if you claim a passport can't survive an aircraft crash. You are batting zero.

Only for you since you seem to be a poor typists. And even less of a waste of time for you since you did not know things survive aircraft accidents, you did ZERO research, you saved time being ignorant of the topic, all of 911 you have done ZERO rational research. Zip

A waste of time! Not for you, you make it up as you go, no time looking up anything!@

The passport is evidence you can't use to support you idiotic claims! It proves you are wrong, it proves a hijacker was real. More like a murderer, since they took the plane to kill, not hijack, you are confused and can't form rational thoughts.

You think your lies are evidence, you can't figure out the passport is evidence.

Wrong again, DNA on all of the Flight 93 murderers. You failed again.


Off flight plan, off altitude, not talking to ATC, etc, etc.
The crew reported the plane was taken over... oops, you don't do any research; you don't waste time for sure.


Why are you always wrong? Sorry, off course, off flight plan, off altitude, not talking to ATC, etc. You keep messing up out of ignorance.


You are not a pilot. We would tell ATC we were hijacked on the RADIO. We talk. If we can't talk and we are alive, we could set the code when we are ready to tell ATC.

On 911 pilots were strapped into seats facing forward when murderers came in and killed them. Shoulder harnesses and seat-belts, unable to stand and turn to fight, they died when their throats were cut from behind, in a surprise attack. Can't set code or talk when you are dead.

you lost this one too

On Flight 93 we hear the pilots screaming... good sign they were under-attack. The crews on each plane and passengers reported what they knew to the ground. Your research is crap.


You don't know the door was locked. The pilots would call ATC and talk on the radio. You don't know pilot procedures, you have no clue on this. Ignorance makes you make up lies and spew nonsense.



Sorry, we talk first. We tell ATC we are being hijacked. In this case the call would be, "we are being killed", and only flight 93 was able to scream. Good job making fun of the dead by being completely ignorant on pilot procedures and reality. Good job

Why do we talk first? Setting the code for hijack would be a covert method, and ATC would be alerted, and they would want us to set a normal code. If we could not tell ATC on the Radio, we can set the hijack code, and they would be alerted to move traffic if needed. There will be no instant intercept, no shoot down, etc.




Wrong, talking to ATC is the first priority, we tell them we are being attacked or hijacked. If we are dead, we don't do much. You have no clue.


If ATC was super busy and we could not get their attention because we would be "stepping on" their radio transmission (do you have a clue), we could set the code for hijacking and get priority. You should do some research, this make you look real dumb on a lot of issues!
Several orders of magnitude less than your claims, and delusions.


first of all- 'we tell them we are being attacked' so you are an airline pilot then. perhaps you could tell me about your experiences of being hijacked, I would love to hear them.
the squawk transmits over the transponder, which is telemetry which is not the same frequency as voice.
so in a matter of life and death, when every second counts, its still too bad mannered to squawk without asking first, I see.

the new pearl harbour revisited, page 177-
the 9/11 commission did acknowledge that sending the code would have been standard procedure, writing,
FAA guidance to controllers on hijack procedures assumed that the aircraft pilot would notify the controller via radio OR by sqawking a transponder code of 7500- the universal code for a hijack in progress.

I'm convinced.
 
What would have happened if the pilot did manage to "squawk 7500"? Would the events of 9/11 not happened?
why do you ask such a stupid question?
I was making the claim that not recieving the hijack code was proof the planes were not hijacked. therefore there must be an alternative explanation for the events of 9/11.
 
why do you ask such a stupid question?
I was making the claim that not recieving the hijack code was proof the planes were not hijacked. therefore there must be an alternative explanation for the events of 9/11.

You don't know how the code is entered do you?
Or how long it takes?
and since those hijacking the various aircraft would know enough to prevent the aircrew doing so...
 
could a lunatic armed with a very short bladed knife, (the official story, not a gun) break through a locked door

Pre-911, quite often, the door to the cockpit was open. In fact, pre-911, I myself have taken my kids to see the cockpit. Again, you're ignorant of how things were pre-911.

and murder someone in under 2 or 3 seconds. because that is the time some pilots have said it would take them to set the squawk to 7500?

A licensed, credible pilot has already told you they don't do that first. They talk to ATC first via the radio.

Could you do anything other than struggle to breathe with your throat slashed?


how many able bodied grown men do you think would be on an average 767 flight? you tell me.

Speculation, and irrelevant.

could a lunatic armed with a short bladed knife even succeed in breaking through a locked door with these men throwing luggage from the overhead rack?

Yes, as proof, they did. BTW, you're poisoning the well. Assuming facts not in evidence also. Proof that the door was locked?


is it not possible one of the men would have the chance to grab his wrist and prevent him using the knife?

Not when everyone was in the back of the plane. But, don't let facts get in your way.
 
why do you ask such a stupid question?
I was making the claim that not recieving the hijack code was proof the planes were not hijacked. therefore there must be an alternative explanation for the events of 9/11.

What about the phone calls and radio calls from the passengers reporting that the plane was hijacked?

You're making a mountain out of a molehill. Not to mention, the ol' fashioned "Texas Sharpshooter " logical fallacy.

I am going to assume you've never really read up on the events of 911, except on CT websites. Ie: Alex Jones, PFFFT, and others. Am I correct?
 
It's never entered into his head to grab a stewardess and threaten to cut her throat if the rest of you passengers don't move to back of the plane. And being suicide hijackers they also would not do something as despicable as lie about having a bomb.
 
Tickets, security cameras.

in the uk, just after 9/11, we were shown cctv pictures of 2 of the hijackers boarding.
what we are not told, it was the WRONG airport, it was a connecting flight from portland, there are no cctv pictures of hijackers boarding at boston.
 

Back
Top Bottom