why did the wtc's collapse? conclusive proof

[lord_casek]

obviously there's some disagreement in the pilot as truther community about this maneuver. Some think it's possible, some don't. You didn't answer the most important question, which was: If this move is impossible, then why use it as the cover up? Also, why not provide flight recorder information that supports your case?

 

 

I have no idea. I'd be being dishonest of I said otherwise.

 

Check this out:

 

 

"For some time, the Happy Hooligans have kept a permanent detachment with four F–16s, pilots, and crews on alert at Langley Air Force Base to provide air defense of the United States. I am not going to get into the details because it is important for national security not to reveal what they were doing, but they were very much in harm's way. I will not get into any more detail other than to say, these pilots —the Happy Hooligans, and any others who were involved in that scrambled mission to protect our Nation's Capital, and the region here in the DC area—really were willing to give their lives in a generally undefended position." -S9498, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE, September 19, 2001

[russell jones]

I have no idea. I'd be being dishonest of I said otherwise.

 

Check this out:

 

 

"For some time, the Happy Hooligans have kept a permanent detachment with four F–16s, pilots, and crews on alert at Langley Air Force Base to provide air defense of the United States. I am not going to get into the details because it is important for national security not to reveal what they were doing, but they were very much in harm's way. I will not get into any more detail other than to say, these pilots —the Happy Hooligans, and any others who were involved in that scrambled mission to protect our Nation's Capital, and the region here in the DC area—really were willing to give their lives in a generally undefended position." -S9498, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE, September 19, 2001

 

ahh... Your point? That the planes could have been intercepted (assuming that is possible)?

 

It seems to me, that if one was planning a conspiracy, in which one was going to be faking much of the evidence, that one would provide evidence that supports one's story unambiguously. It is a contradiction to believe that:

 

A. A plane did not hit the Pentagon

B. The faked evidence from the flight data recorder shows that a plane did not hit the Pentagon

 

I'm not saying that either proposition is true in itself, but it is difficult to believe the second if one believes the first. Real evidence sometimes can be interpreted in many ways, fake evidence that is being used to cover up a conspiracy should be as unambiguous as possible wouldn't you think?

Besides this, you are still left with providing evidence or explaining:

 

1. Plane parts at the Pentagon crash site, how were they planted without anyone noticing?

2. Where did the plane go? How were the aircraft controllers and tracking devices fooled?

3. Did any witness see a rocket hit the Pentagon?

4. How did they dispose of the bodies of everyone on the plane and the plane itself?

 

You have speculated on the answers to some of these questions, but you cannot provide actual hard evidence to support any of these claims. There seems to be more holes in the conspiracy theory than the standard theory, but maybe I'm crazy and am missing something.

[lord_casek]

ahh... Your point? That the planes could have been intercepted (assuming that is possible)?

 

It seems to me, that if one was planning a conspiracy, in which one was going to be faking much of the evidence, that one would provide evidence that supports one's story unambiguously. It is a contradiction to believe that:

 

A. A plane did not hit the Pentagon

B. The faked evidence from the flight data recorder shows that a plane did not hit the Pentagon

 

I'm not saying that either proposition is true in itself, but it is difficult to believe the second if one believes the first. Real evidence sometimes can be interpreted in many ways, fake evidence that is being used to cover up a conspiracy should be as unambiguous as possible wouldn't you think?

Besides this, you are still left with providing evidence or explaining:

 

1. Plane parts at the Pentagon crash site, how were they planted without anyone noticing?

2. Where did the plane go? How were the aircraft controllers and tracking devices fooled?

3. Did any witness see a rocket hit the Pentagon?

4. How did they dispose of the bodies of everyone on the plane and the plane itself?

 

You have speculated on the answers to some of these questions, but you cannot provide actual hard evidence to support any of these claims. There seems to be more holes in the conspiracy theory than the standard theory, but maybe I'm crazy and am missing something.

 

 

1. Crates? That part was partially being remodelled.

2. A hangar? Easily. We live in the future.

3. Unsure. There was a witness inside who described it as feeling like a bomb went off.

4/ If you read any of what I was talking about when I mentioned Northwoods, you'd see that the plane in Northwoods was to be filled with CIA agents. Did this happen this time? Maybe. I don't really know.

 

Maybe you are. I'd be glad to flesh it out more.

[Lesbian Fisting]

1. Crates? That part was partially being remodelled.

2. A hangar? Easily. We live in the future.

3. Unsure. There was a witness inside who described it as feeling like a bomb went off.

4/ If you read any of what I was talking about when I mentioned Northwoods, you'd see that the plane in Northwoods was to be filled with CIA agents. Did this happen this time? Maybe. I don't really know.

 

Maybe you are. I'd be glad to flesh it out more.

 

1. They snuck in mangled airliner parts and managed to hide them in the exact place of impact? And threw them across the lawn?

 

2. That would require WAY more people to be involved in the conspiracy and to keep it hidden for this long or long enough to dismantle, then mass grave the civilians? A loooong stretch.

 

3. I imagine a plane exploding into the building I was in would feel like a bomb. When Im hungover, I feel like I was in a car wreck. I wasnt literally, but thats how I can make my point.

 

4. Im reading on Northwoods, but what Ive got so far it doesnt involve killing civilians.

[lord_casek]

1. They snuck in mangled airliner parts and managed to hide them in the exact place of impact? And threw them across the lawn?

 

2. That would require WAY more people to be involved in the conspiracy and to keep it hidden for this long or long enough to dismantle, then mass grave the civilians? A loooong stretch.

 

3. I imagine a plane exploding into the building I was in would feel like a bomb. When Im hungover, I feel like I was in a car wreck. I wasnt literally, but thats how I can make my point.

 

4. Im reading on Northwoods, but what Ive got so far it doesnt involve killing civilians.

 

 

In regards to Northwoods: I already told you, a plane filled with CIA agents posing as college students.

[russell jones]

1. Crates? That part was partially being remodelled.

2. A hangar? Easily. We live in the future.

3. Unsure. There was a witness inside who described it as feeling like a bomb went off.

4/ If you read any of what I was talking about when I mentioned Northwoods, you'd see that the plane in Northwoods was to be filled with CIA agents. Did this happen this time? Maybe. I don't really know.

 

Maybe you are. I'd be glad to flesh it out more.

 

This is more speculation. Where's the evidence?

 

Also, if a plane hit a building at 350 mph that I was inside of, I would imagine that would feel like a bomb, since essentially, if that is what happened, that is what it was.

 

My overall point in arguing against the plausibility of the conspiracy theories is not because I would not believe that people in government and in the military would be callous enough to do such a thing, I would guess they would if they could. I am saying that it would be more difficult to pull this off than conspiracy theorists might imagine. What one would like to do is different than what one can accomplish without getting caught. Besides, faking what happened on 9/11 would be far more difficult, involve far more risks of getting caught than just waiting for the next terrorist attack, which was pretty much inevitable. Considering how incompetently the Bush administration dealt with the aftermath of 9/11, the lead up to Iraq, and the war in Afghanistan, I hardly think they could plan and execute such a complex operation as 9/11 without leaving behind any physical evidence.

 

I am sympathetic to the possibilities here, but I don't see the hard evidence to support any of the conspiracy theories.

[lord_casek]

This is more speculation. Where's the evidence?

 

Also, if a plane hit a building at 350 mph that I was inside of, I would imagine that would feel like a bomb, since essentially, if that is what happened, that is what it was.

 

My overall point in arguing against the plausibility of the conspiracy theories is not because I would not believe that people in government and in the military would be callous enough to do such a thing, I would guess they would if they could. I am saying that it would be more difficult to pull this off than conspiracy theorists might imagine. What one would like to do is different than what one can accomplish without getting caught. Besides, faking what happened on 9/11 would be far more difficult, involve far more risks of getting caught than just waiting for the next terrorist attack, which was pretty much inevitable. Considering how incompetently the Bush administration dealt with the aftermath of 9/11, the lead up to Iraq, and the war in Afghanistan, I hardly think they could plan and execute such a complex operation as 9/11 without leaving behind any physical evidence.

 

I am sympathetic to the possibilities here, but I don't see the hard evidence to support any of the conspiracy theories.

 

 

Haven't you been asking be to speculate? I don't have all the answers. If I did I'd go forward to the media, but I don't. All I can really do is think something was fishy due to the circumstances of that day and point out what I think is wrong with the official story

using the evidence available.

 

There are two different theories. One is called MIHOP, which stands for "Made It Happen On Purpose" and the other LIHOP, which stands for "Let It Happen On Purpose."

 

I don't really stand with either. I just know what I saw that day and how suspicious was on that day and the days since due to an overwhelming amount of evidence.

 

You seem to think that major operations can't go down without someone spilling the beans. There have been bean spillers who have come forward. Plenty of evidence that something very wrong happened that day and that we are being denied the real story.

I'm not sure if you choose to ignore it out of ignorance or if you chalk it up to "another truther spewing shit".

 

I'm really trying my best to provide you with hard facts.

 

BTW: 500 MPH.

[toluene_causes_tumors]

Are there any interviews with family members of the dead passengers from the flight that crashed into the pentagon?

and one question i always had was if the gov't was involved/knew about it, they weren't able to predict what happened to our economy after all this? 9/11 really fucked our country up. the government is a business. businesses don't like losing money.

i didn't read anything before the most recent page of this thread, btw. sorry if it was already discussed. honest questions.

[russell jones]

Haven't you been asking be to speculate? I don't have all the answers. If I did I'd go forward to the media, but I don't. All I can really do is think something was fishy due to the circumstances of that day and point out what I think is wrong with the official story

using the evidence available.

 

There are two different theories. One is called MIHOP, which stands for "Made It Happen On Purpose" and the other LIHOP, which stands for "Let It Happen On Purpose."

 

I don't really stand with either. I just know what I saw that day and how suspicious was on that day and the days since due to an overwhelming amount of evidence.

 

You seem to think that major operations can't go down without someone spilling the beans. There have been bean spillers who have come forward. Plenty of evidence that something very wrong happened that day and that we are being denied the real story.

I'm not sure if you choose to ignore it out of ignorance or if you chalk it up to "another truther spewing shit".

 

I'm really trying my best to provide you with hard facts.

 

BTW: 500 MPH.

 

I think there is an overwhelming amount of evidence pointing toward terrorists begin responsible for the attack. I may have missed evidence out of ignorance, but I do not ignore evidence simply based on the source. That being said, eyewitness testimony is inherently unreliable, and I tend to give little weight to non-expert interpretations of material evidence. Needless to say at this point, I believe MIHOP is the least likely scenario to be true.

 

LIHOP may have some merit, but I couldn't see too many people knowing about the actual plan and date without that getting out. Instead, a plausible LIHOP scenario would work like this:

 

1. Various intelligence agencies are competitive and do not share information well.

2. Encourage competition while discouraging communication. This could be done by just a few people at the top in hierarchal organization

3. Give some protections, subtly but not overtly, to people most likely to successfully carry out a terrorist attack and arrest those who are unlikely to do it. This is basically what the CIA did in LA with crack dealers.

4. Sit back and wait for the inevitable.

 

Something like this could be done by less than a dozen people at the top of intelligence organizations, and the results would look like poor organization rather than intentional obfuscation. In other words, deniability and lack of an evidence trail. But as the CIA example shows, even in a very tight organization, secrets tend to get out, so even this plan may involve too much risk.

[lord_casek]

You have no idea how deep black projects work. I know a guy that's been deep black. He was so deep that he doesn't discuss what he did, where, or how to anyone outside of his clearance level. Why? Because he did what he did for what he believes was a good cause.

 

He also believes that 9/11 was at least partially an inside job.

 

I'd trust this man with my life, btw. He's stable mentally, very normal, and a genuine guy.

[russell jones]

You have no idea how deep black projects work. I know a guy that's been deep black. He was so deep that he doesn't discuss what he did, where, or how to anyone outside of his clearance level. Why? Because he did what he did for what he believes was a good cause.

 

He also believes that 9/11 was at least partially an inside job.

 

I'd trust this man with my life, btw. He's stable mentally, very normal, and a genuine guy.

 

With all due respect, and for your own benefit, I would like to give you some advice. Amongst intelligent company, the "I know someone on the inside" argument does not look good, because the information is unverifiable, therefore, nearly useless. To be more honest, many people I have seen make this argument in a crowd get rolled eyes and lose respect. Just some advice. :) I'm not saying your guy isn't right, I'm just letting you know how this style of argument does not work on certain audiences. May be helpful in the future!

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

You guys are arguing about shit that can't be explained, so of course to someone who is defending the official story, this will be easier.

 

Can someone on the official story side please acknowledge William Rodriguez, his story and how it plays into all of this.

 

Jesus christ, you guys want to argue over stuff that can only be argued. Like the Pentagon, camera's everywhere, but yet we only see a few frames from one camera. Where did the parts from the plane go, they're we're only a few pieces of aluminum or whatever on the lawn, with a big hole....

 

I've been trying to get someone, thats right ONE PERSON that defends the official story, to respond to William Rodrigeuz's story, it hasn't happened. So, whatever. Debate information we will never have access too, it only makes the official story seem more complete. When actually, it isn't.

 

__________________________________

 

Just to add onto this, I don't think it's fair to have someone who isn't educated in such manner to fill in holes left by the Official story, of course it is going to be easy for you to sit back and pick apart his/her assumptions, guesses, just plain old trying to fill in the blanks, with things that could be plausible or could have happened. What you don't want to admit though, is that the official story, is just that, the government's version of what happened, and regardless to where you sit on this issue you all know how governments behave and who they look out for. The story doesn't explain it all, that to anyone anywhere in America should throw up a red flag, and get them angry.

 

Keep drinking that purple drank though.

[lord_casek]

With all due respect, and for your own benefit, I would like to give you some advice. Amongst intelligent company, the "I know someone on the inside" argument does not look good, because the information is unverifiable, therefore, nearly useless. To be more honest, many people I have seen make this argument in a crowd get rolled eyes and lose respect. Just some advice. :) I'm not saying your guy isn't right, I'm just letting you know how this style of argument does not work on certain audiences. May be helpful in the future!

 

No doubt, but I absolutely know someone who was on the inside. Now he's just another govt lackey. Aren't we all?

[lord_casek]

You guys are arguing about shit that can't be explained, so of course to someone who is defending the official story, this will be easier.

 

Can someone on the official story side please acknowledge William Rodriguez, his story and how it plays into all of this.

 

Jesus christ, you guys want to argue over stuff that can only be argued. Like the Pentagon, camera's everywhere, but yet we only see a few frames from one camera. Where did the parts from the plane go, they're we're only a few pieces of aluminum or whatever on the lawn, with a big hole....

 

I've been trying to get someone, thats right ONE PERSON that defends the official story, to respond to William Rodrigeuz's story, it hasn't happened. So, whatever. Debate information we will never have access too, it only makes the official story seem more complete. When actually, it isn't.

 

__________________________________

 

Just to add onto this, I don't think it's fair to have someone who isn't educated in such manner to fill in holes left by the Official story, of course it is going to be easy for you to sit back and pick apart his/her assumptions, guesses, just plain old trying to fill in the blanks, with things that could be plausible or could have happened. What you don't want to admit though, is that the official story, is just that, the government's version of what happened, and regardless to where you sit on this issue you all know how governments behave and who they look out for. The story doesn't explain it all, that to anyone anywhere in America should throw up a red flag, and get them angry.

 

Keep drinking that purple drank though.

 

 

A couple of really good points. What about the city worker who was inside 7 when the bombs were going off? He and Rodriguez alone are really very interesting people to listen to. Both very credible.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

And not for nothing, but everyone effected by 9/11 medically should be 100% covered by the government, THE GOVERNMENT SAID IT WAS OKAY TO GO DOWN THERE AND HELP.

 

Which we find out in hindsight was an actual death sentence to thousands of people.

 

This is just adding more to the atrocity.

[lord_casek]

And not for nothing, but everyone effected by 9/11 medically should be 100% covered by the government, THE GOVERNMENT SAID IT WAS OKAY TO GO DOWN THERE AND HELP.

 

Which we find out in hindsight was an actual death sentence to thousands of people.

 

This is just adding more to the atrocity.

 

 

Did you ever see the video of the firefighter who was pleading for help? I choked on that one.

 

 

Here's Kevin McPadden, a 9/11 first responder talking about the demolition countdown

 

[Lesbian Fisting]

A google search of Kevin McPadden comes up with a bunch of different claims, each progressing from hearing that it would be "brought down" to actually hearing the countdown. Reported by both sides.

[TheoHuxtable..]

I find the "no planes" faction of the Truther movement to be the most fascinating.

 

And that doesn't include those that believe a missile hit the Pentagon. The fact that there isn't any video (or released video) of the plane hitting the Pentagon, I can understand the conspiracies surrounding a "no plane" theory for the Pentagon. Or that there was no plane that landed in Shanksville, PA for that matter.

 

What I don't understand are the people that say no planes hit the WTC. That it was "CGI planes" embedded in videos on the news. And that all the civilians with their handheld cameras filming amateur video were really government agents in on it, and their footage was doctored. Like it doesn't cross their mind that NYC is a big city and when a tragedy happens, people will be grabbing their cameras to point it towards the tragedy. And there were probably thousands of New Yorkers looking up that saw the plane, as many have testified to seeing it. Everyone living and working in NYC aren't government agents. They're regular people.

 

I honestly think these people don't simply just have wild theories, but actually have a mental issue of some sort, and should be on medication, combined with some type of cognitive therapy.

[lord_casek]

I find the "no planes" faction of the Truther movement to be the most fascinating.

 

And that doesn't include those that believe a missile hit the Pentagon. The fact that there isn't any video (or released video) of the plane hitting the Pentagon, I can understand the conspiracies surrounding a "no plane" theory.

 

What I don't understand are the people that say no planes hit the WTC. That it was "CGI" embedded in videos on the news. And that all the civilians with their handheld cameras filming amateur video were really government agents in on it. Like it doesn't cross their mind that NYC is a big city and when a tragedy happens, people will be grabbing their cameras to point it towards the tragedy. And there were probably thousands of New Yorkers looking up that saw the plane, as many have testified to seeing it. I honestly think these people don't simply just have wild theories, but actually have a mental issue and should be on medication, combined some type of cognitive therapy.

 

 

Remember that kid who kept posting in here telling us that it was all CGI, lasers, etc.?

He was a nice guy, but damn.

[TheoHuxtable..]

Haha yeah I remember you telling him you were worried about him and that he needs help

[Zig]

I find the "no planes" faction of the Truther movement to be the most fascinating.

 

And that doesn't include those that believe a missile hit the Pentagon. The fact that there isn't any video (or released video) of the plane hitting the Pentagon, I can understand the conspiracies surrounding a "no plane" theory for the Pentagon. Or that there was no plane that landed in Shanksville, PA for that matter.

 

What I don't understand are the people that say no planes hit the WTC. That it was "CGI planes" embedded in videos on the news. And that all the civilians with their handheld cameras filming amateur video were really government agents in on it, and their footage was doctored. Like it doesn't cross their mind that NYC is a big city and when a tragedy happens, people will be grabbing their cameras to point it towards the tragedy. And there were probably thousands of New Yorkers looking up that saw the plane, as many have testified to seeing it. Everyone living and working in NYC aren't government agents. They're regular people.

 

I honestly think these people don't simply just have wild theories, but actually have a mental issue of some sort, and should be on medication, combined with some type of cognitive therapy.

 

well it's definitely fascinating to witness someone actually believing something so fucking ridiculous. if anyone genuinely believes in that stupid shit... that itself is amazing. probably would need to get their heads checked out. but those ridiculous theories are usually just created by disinfo agencies to poison the well, so to speak, of good truthful information that is leaking which could do damage to the cover up, of whatever is being covered up. they want to make those people look ridiculous and kooky, so they come up with theories that sound blatantly nutty which then end up getting tied together with other more factually based and sound alternative theories. how many times has someone been accused of believing in b, c, d, and e conspiracy theory just because you mentioned a. it happens all the time, and usually those other theories are ridiculously absurd like aliens coming from outer space and creating laser holograms of jet planes flying into the twin towers, but actually it was laser beams from their space ships that disintegrated everything. thats a real theory btw, a disinformation theory meant to make anyone who believes in other alternative 9/11 theories all of a sudden UFO abductees.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

Did you ever see the video of the firefighter who was pleading for help? I choked on that one.

 

 

Here's Kevin McPadden, a 9/11 first responder talking about the demolition countdown

 

 

Was it the guy who for at least part of the interview was standing on some roof, which looks like it was somewhere in Brooklyn? I think they went around to other House's too. Was was actually stationed across the street from the WTC?

 

Perhaps I'm mixing up interview's, I've seen too many.

 

Oh look, another eye witness that contradicts the official story. This guy must have seen some crazy youtube video's or something to get him to believe that stuff. Oh and an architect, I bet he has to smoke pot recreationally, I mean, what professional could actually come to those conclusions.

[lord_casek]

Was it the guy who for at least part of the interview was standing on some roof, which looks like it was somewhere in Brooklyn? I think they went around to other House's too. Was was actually stationed across the street from the WTC?

 

Perhaps I'm mixing up interview's, I've seen too many.

 

Oh look, another eye witness that contradicts the official story. This guy must have seen some crazy youtube video's or something to get him to believe that stuff. Oh and an architect, I bet he has to smoke pot recreationally, I mean, what professional could actually come to those conclusions.

 

 

No, it was the guy in the wheelchair who kept coughing. I think he was in front of a courthouse. Possibly from RI?

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

Never seen that one.

[wearekilluminati]

the whole educated world knows who are the engineers of the 9 11 tragedy..............and ya are till here debating it........................geezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz wake the fuck up and i mean the fuck up.....................

[lord_casek]

I used to tell people to "wake up, maaaaaaan" and then I realized that I was being an annoying douche and stopped immediately.

[DeSent]

Zeitgeist Movie 9/11 segment part 1 - 4 (sorry if this is a repost)

 

 

[dontneedagun]

WATCH WTC 7 FALL!!!!!!

its was an inside job and I will die for that statement!!!!

water the tree of liberty!!!

[dontneedagun]

keep being a nnoying douche we need to wake up. you write graffiti and are talking about stoping to annoy people.. WAKE THE SHEEPLE UP!!!!

[lord_casek]

keep being a nnoying douche we need to wake up. you write graffiti and are talking about stoping to annoy people.. WAKE THE SHEEPLE UP!!!!

 

 

I used to do this, too. It's annoying and offensive. I'll be the first to admit that I find something really fishy with the official story. I also find something very wrong with what happened that day from what I witnessed as it was going down (I was watching the news

in the morning and saw an outside shot of the first plane as it hit. Never saw that clip again).

 

You've got to back down a little, though. No one outside of those involved knows what really happened with absolute certainty.

 

Gotta treat people with a little more respect and talk to them like people, not toddlers.