TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- September 11th Attacks - Do You Think It Was a Conspiracy?
Pages (19): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 »

quote:

Originally posted by LittleGoku Bill Maher. This popular figure for the liberal wing confirms this particular forum has some _____________ people.

_____________ = critically thinking and/or rationally sceptic

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X Eyewitness Don Wright said that it looked like a small commuter plane.

and that supports your "it was a missile" theory how?

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN and that supports your "it was a missile" theory how?

Don't you remember (several) previous references here regarding UAV's?

It wasn't that long ago that this was mentioned but just in case you aren't fully aware of their existence:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmann...bat_Air_Vehicle

interesting. does that link also explain what happened to flight 77 and where the debris with american airlines insignia came from?

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN interesting. does that link also explain what happened to flight 77 and where the debris with american airlines insignia came from?

No, but I'm almost positive that someone has already identified that piece of AA fuselage as being a part of a plane that went down in some South American rainforest at a relatively low speed.

The debris' mild degree of being bent/twisted definitely suggests that it wasn't a part of anything that hit a reinforced concrete wall at such a high speed.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X No, but I'm almost positive that someone has already identified that piece of AA fuselage as being a part of a plane that went down in some South American rainforest at a relatively low speed.

oh, and how on earth did they manage to link the two up? could you find me the source please, id love to see how they managed that!

quote:

The debris' mild degree of being bent/twisted definitely suggests that it wasn't a part of anything that hit a reinforced concrete wall at such a high speed.

that is completely untrue. you cannot, for a second, predict what debris might come from/survive a plane crash. its hardly an exact science. plenty of debris survived the WTC impacts, wasnt there plane debris scattered around new york?

anywayz, that's merely conjecture about an unknown and not evidence no matter which way you look at it.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN oh, and how on earth did they manage to link the two up? could you find me the source please, id love to see how they managed that! that is completely untrue. you cannot, for a second, predict what debris might come from/survive a plane crash. its hardly an exact science. plenty of debris survived the WTC impacts, wasnt there plane debris scattered around new york? anywayz, that's merely conjecture about an unknown and not evidence no matter which way you look at it.

I read about it a few months ago so I'll have to search for the link to the original source.

All that I'm able to gather at this very moment is that it was Jim Hanson who pointed James Fetzer in that direction. Fetzer stated it publically in this PR excerpt:

quote:

"Don't be taken in by photos showing damage to the second floor or those taken after the upper floors collapsed, which happened 20-30 minutes later," Fetzer said. "In fact, debris begins to show up on the completely clean lawn in short order, which might have been dropped from a C-130 that was circling above the Pentagon or placed there by men in suits who were photographed carrying debris with them." The most striking is a piece from the fuselage of a commercial airliner, which is frequently adduced as evidence. James Hanson, a newspaper reporter who earned his law degree from the University of Michigan College of Law, has traced that debris to an American Airlines 757 that crashed in a rain forest above Cali, Columbia in 1995. "It was the kind of slow-speed crash that would have torn off paneling in this fashion, with no fires, leaving them largely intact." Fetzer has been so impressed with his research he has invited Hanson to submit his study to Scholars for consideration for publication on its web site, 911scholars.org. (source)

lucky they had all that 757 gear just lying around then isnt it!

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN lucky they had all that 757 gear just lying around then isnt it!

I wonder why they never bothered to cross reference the part numbers to make sure that it was all legitimate.

Here's a message that someone posted on the ABC News forum which they deleted (but not before someone happened to take screenshots of Google's cached page)

quote:

Mr Forbes, Please quote a theory from our website at pilotsfor911truth.org. I havent had a chance to read through the replies. But please check our homepage for corrections/comments to this article as we did not write it. However, we did write this press release... http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pressrelease.html The Flight Data Recorder information does not support the govt story. When asked, the FBI and NTSB refuse to comment. Recordings can be found at our site. This should raise a serious eyebrow for any journalist who has respect for his work. AA77 was never positively identified through Radar, parts or eyewitnesses (not sure how an eyewitness can positively ID a flight number) as the plane which struck the pentagon. The parts found on location were never matched with maintenance logs, please read article(1) from Accident Investigator LtCol George Nelson USAF (Ret) (bottom of page). Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not offer theory. We do not place blame at this point in time (unlike the govt who had their man 2 days after 9/11 yet the FBI doesnt seem to have him listed as wanted for the crime perpetrated on 9/11(2) due to the fact they feel there is "No Hard Evidedence linking Bin Laden to 9/11")(3). Any responsible journalist doing their job properly will see this clearly. Surely any investigative reporter would want to offer responsible journalism instead of typical ad homs, and ridicule as an excuse to not do his/her job..Why is mainstream media not doing their job? 1. http://pilotsfor911truth.org/latestnews.html (bottom of page) 2. http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm 3. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...bi+9%2F11+osama

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X They're so strong that wild Geese are able to puncture them in mid-flight http://www.strangemilitary.com/content/item/952.html Edit: and again, I STILL can't imagine how a nose cone could have punched though nine feet of reinforced concrete - especially after reading Lt. Kevin Schaeffer's alleged account (he works for the DoD, after all) of how he saw a chunk of it laying near the B ring wall (in between the B and C rings of the Pentagon.)

do you know that the plane in your picture has the same nose cone as the plane in question?

it comes down to momentum..... if a goose weighing about 10-20 lbs can puncture through aluminum nose cone, is it not feasible that a plane weighing a hundred tons could feasibly blast through 9 feet of concrete.....

quote:

Originally posted by colonelcrisp do you know that the plane in your picture has the same nose cone as the plane in question? it comes down to momentum..... if a goose weighing about 10-20 lbs can puncture through aluminum nose cone, is it not feasible that a plane weighing a hundred tons could feasibly blast through 9 feet of concrete.....

and yet two of the heaviest, densest parts of the alleged plane (the motors) didn't even seem to make a mark on the exterior of the wall?

To be honest with you, that picture isn't even one of the ones that I was looking for. There was a whole page that I had recently found that had various pictures of damage done to commercial aircraft by birds. It showed wings, nosecones, etc. that had either been shredded or had pieces of birds still lodged in them. When I have more time to look for it I'll find it.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X I wonder why they never bothered to cross reference the part numbers to make sure that it was all legitimate.

i wonder how they fooled the scientists testing the remains to identify them??



your government really is pretty clever, being able to sneak dead charred bodies of those from flight 77 into the pentagon without anybody noticing!

so trancer, why did the government commandeer flight 77 if they werent going to fly it into the pentagon?

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X I'm sure it's intentional, but you really are a waste of my time (as you're probably just a low waged psy-op) so now you're finally on ignore. It's been fun but I'm tired of debating with someone who only seems to know how to argue out of what seems to be sheer ignorance while consistently issuing personal attacks, baseless innuendo, etc.

The only thing being covered up was a monumental failure in the USAF. End of. Nothing more, nothing less.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN

quote:

Originally posted by LazFX

There we go with the adolescent pictures again.

Don't you kids ever want to grow up?

quote:

Originally posted by The Arbiter The only thing being covered up was a monumental failure in the USAF. End of. Nothing more, nothing less.

How many months of research did it take you to come to this conclusion or is that just your guesstimation?

quote:

Originally posted by The Arbiter The only thing being covered up was a monumental failure in the USAF. End of. Nothing more, nothing less.

This has been my thought since the beginning of these conspiracy theories. What would happen if it was discovered that Bush and most of his administration were guilty of negligence? Ignoring intelligence, whether it be accidental or intentional is a serious crime. There is a cover up, otherwise, the 9/11 commission wouldn't have had a hard time interviewing certain officials. I just think it's far less sinister than our own government having orchestrated the attacks. That's just silly, really REALLY silly. It's based off of fantasies that are found in movies and books, not reality.

The last "conspiracy" was Iran-contra, and they were caught red handed, Reagan was never looked at the same way again.

quote:

Originally posted by Marc Summers I just think it's far less sinister than our own government having orchestrated the attacks. That's just silly, really REALLY silly. It's based off of fantasies that are found in movies and books, not reality. The last "conspiracy" was Iran-contra, and they were caught red handed, Reagan was never looked at the same way again.

I'm thinking that perhaps you missed a major part of the discussion which started a few years ago because we've been saying all along that it would probably have been based more or less off of the Operation Northwoods documents rather than something out of Hollywood.

In regards to the last "conspiracy" I think that there's a high probability that there have been many more since then. It might be safer to say that Iran-Contra was the last "highly publicised" conspiracy.

In author James Bamford's own words,

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X I'm thinking that perhaps you missed a major part of the discussion which started a few years ago because we've been saying all along that it would probably have been based more or less off of the Operation Northwoods documents rather than something out of Hollywood.

Northwoods? Oh thanks, I didn't know about this declassified document that means absolutely nothing!

And... Wikipedia? Come on now.

quote:

Originally posted by Marc Summers Northwoods? Oh thanks, I didn't know about this declassified document that means absolutely nothing! And... Wikipedia? Come on now.

oh come on! surely you can see the relevance of what a previous US administration did over 40 years ago!

quote:

Originally posted by Marc Summers Northwoods? Oh thanks, I didn't know about this declassified document that means absolutely nothing! And... Wikipedia? Come on now.

Yeah, it's been declassified. So?

You're not that inept that you can't scroll down to the dozens of links (and footnotes) on that Wikipedia page, are you?

Maybe you folks could learn to do some of your own due diligence for once in your lives rather than having to depend on people like myself to spoonfeed it to you.

Wal-Mart gets Truthed

I thought that this was pretty funny

even more effective, though:

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.