Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's[W:191]

[Mark F]

Just for fun I thought I would create a thread where people can post the most interesting, bizarre, humorous or ridiculous CT claims they have encountered related to the events of 9/11/2001. I'm not talking about the usual suspects like "free-fall", "hole in the Pentagon too small", "molten steel" or any of that see it every day stuff that has been beaten to death countless times over. I'm talking about stuff outside of the mainstream of CT interweb discussion. The more obscure the better.

I'll start.

Claim: Flights 11 & 175 flew right over an Air Force Base at nearly the same time, where they should both have been shot down.

http://911anomalies.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/flightanimation.gif

The Air Force Base in question here is Stewart Air National Guard Base which is the home of the 105th Air Lift Wing, NYANG. They fly giant cargo planes - at the time the C-5A Galaxy - not fighters.



Ever been in one? Way cool - but I digress,...

There are a number of obvious problems with the claim that aircraft from this base should have shot down Flights 11 and 175.

1. First and foremost there is timeline. At the time these two flights had a semi near-miss and flyover of Stewart, Flight 175 in fact had not yet been hijacked. Flight 175 was still under the control if its flight crew and would be for another 7-10 minutes. Flight 11 was only just being reported as a hijack to NEADS at about this time so nobody at Stewart would have even known anything.

2. There is the fact the C-5 Galaxy has no air-to-air capability. There is in fact nothing at Stewart capable of shooting down a duck, let alone an airliner.

3. At 8:37am on the morning of 9/11/2001 there was no protocol in place for shooting down a commercial airliner full of civilians just because it had been hijacked.

This is as good an example as any of CT's not thinking the problem all the way through.

 

[KokomoJojo]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

yup been in one.

3. At 8:37am on the morning of 9/11/2001 there was no protocol in place for shooting down a commercial airliner full of civilians just because it had been hijacked.

Thats a joke right?

Yeh molten stuff that glows yellow white hot proves beyond a shadow of a doubt temperatures above 1100C, and freefall proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the structure beneath was removed and nothing there to support the building, and the pentagon has columns bent the outward so I agree those have been proven.

Possibly the most ridiculous claims I have heard from debunkers and huggers were, the facade (paint job standing) despite the columns holding it fell away, another was that the wtc perimeter was made of glass, another was that jet fuel 'poured' down the elevator, another was that jet fuel that poured down the elevator blew out the glass and marble off the walls of the lobby, another was that explosives were not used, another was that floors falling caused all the 'puffs' of air seen, another was that assymmetrical damage causes symmetrical inline uniform collapse, another is that a truck load of plane parts proves 4 giant jets impacted the buildings, another is that the buildings were planted with hundreds of exploding transformers, another is that a single column failure can bring down a whole building.

 

[Jango]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Nobody in our government, at least, and I don't think the prior government, could envision flying airplanes into buildings on such a massive scale.

I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon; that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile.

 

[Mark F]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Thats a joke right?

Prove me wrong. Prove to me there was a protocol in place at 8:37am on 9/11/2001 that allowed pilots to shoot down an commercial aircraft full of American civilians just because it was hijacked. Shouldn't be any problem for you, right?

BTW- I anticipate I will not hear from you again on this matter. You will, as you always do, run away, tail firmly tucked between legs.

 

[Scott]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Let's not forget about the real proof that the government was behind it.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...rce-its-way-onto-ballot-2.html#post1063453486

There was plenty of motivation to carry out a false flag attack.
Search | Global Research
Search | Global Research

 

[Jango]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Let's not forget about the real proof that the government was behind it.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...rce-its-way-onto-ballot-2.html#post1063453486

There was plenty of motivation to carry out a false flag attack.
Search | Global Research
Search | Global Research

Right on cue...

 

[Mark F]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Let's not forget about the real proof that the government was behind it.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...rce-its-way-onto-ballot-2.html#post1063453486

There was plenty of motivation to carry out a false flag attack.
Search | Global Research
Search | Global Research

Actually lets - that is off-topic for this thread.

 

[Scott]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Actually lets - that is off-topic for this thread.

When you try to mislead viewers who haven't had time to look at the actual proof with statements such as this...

I'm not talking about the usual suspects like "free-fall", "hole in the Pentagon too small", "molten steel" or any of that see it every day stuff that has been beaten to death countless times over.

...are we truthers supposed to just sit back and watch? No, we're going to give equal time to the proof that you're trying to obfuscate so the viewers can see the big picture.

 

[Mark F]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

As expected, the CT crowd aren't getting it. No matter, no expectation they would. Lets try another one shall we?

Claim: Dick Cheney Admitted that Bin Laden was innocent of 9/11

This claim comes from a March 29, 2006 interview in which the Vice President said:

"So we've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden [sic] was directly involved in 9/11."

Or at least that is how Conspiracy Theorist web sites and Youtube video's report it.

Here is the un-edited version both of what Snow asked and of Cheney's full answer, sans quote-mining and cherry-picking:

Tony Snow: "I want to be clear because I've heard you say this, and I've heard the President say it, but I want you to say it for my listeners, which is that the White House has never argued that Saddam was directly involved in September 11th, correct?"

Vice President Cheney: "That's correct. We had one report early on from another intelligence service that suggested that the lead hijacker, Mohamed Atta, had met with Iraqi intelligence officials in Prague, Czechoslovakia. And that reporting waxed and waned where the degree of confidence in it, and so forth, has been pretty well knocked down now at this stage, that that meeting ever took place. So we've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden [sic] was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming. But there -- that's a separate proposition from the question of whether or not there was some kind of a relationship between the Iraqi government, Iraqi intelligence services and the al Qaeda organization."

Clearly these men were talking about Iraq and Saddam Hussein. The Vice President in his answer merely slipped and got his names crossed. Personally I can't tell you how many times I have called my own children by the wrong name.

Here is the entire interview, which was clearly about Iraq, not bin Laden.

Interview of the Vice President by Tony Snow

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to defend or apologize for the former VP whom I very much dislike, but personal feelings aside, facts are facts. This particular example demonstrates the common CT tactic of cherry-picking evidence and removing it from proper context in order to support their beliefs.

 

[ozeco41]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Right on cue...

Yup! First reaction - try to derail.

Actually lets - that is off-topic for this thread.

Mark you surely didn't expect CTers or truthers to stay on topic?

2/2 so far have evaded and tried derail.

 

[Mark F]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Yup! First reaction - try to derail.

Mark you surely didn't expect CTers or truthers to stay on topic?

2/2 so far have evaded and tried derail.

Like clockwork

 

[Fledermaus]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

One of my favorites is that everything was done so the gold could be stolen from the basement of one of the WTC towers...

 

[Mark F]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Claim: Marvin Bush, who was head of security for the Twin Towers wasn't at work on 9/11

So far as I know he was at work. His office just didn't happen to be in the World Trade Center.

Marvin Bush, brother of then POTUS George W. Bush was NEVER the "head of security at the twin towers" on 9/11 or any other day. Security was the responsibility of the Port Authority and always was.

Marvin Bush in the 1990's was on the board of a company called Securacom which installed and integrated updated security equipment in the WTC towers from 1996-98 in the wake of the 93' terrorist bombing. Securacom installed equipment - they were never "in charge of security" at any time and Marvin Bush was on the Board of Directors, he wasn't even in charge of that project. Marvin Bush left Securacom in June of 2000.

This is one of those CT claims which relies on not just outright falsehoods but also a healthy dose of innuendo and implication. The claim is not usually specifically stated but rather implied; Marvin Bush (brother of the President) who was head of security for the Twin Towers didn't show up for work (at the WTC) on 9/11 (because he was forewarned by his brother the President)(which means inside job). The claimant doesn't bother to do the 2 minutes of Google searching required to figure out Marvin Bush didn't even work at the WTC on 9/11 and was never the "head of security".

 

[OldWorldOrder]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

It was all insurance fraud.

 

[Mark F]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

It was all insurance fraud.

Especially the Pentagon, on which Larry Silverstein stood to make millions,... Oh wait :slapme:

 

[ozeco41]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

This is one of those CT claims which relies on not just outright falsehoods but also a healthy dose of innuendo and implication...

How many don't rely on those features....?

PLUS - don't forget the ever present "reversed burden of (dis)proof"...

...which is why one of our members is so anxious to indoctrinate his followers with a ridiculous parody definition of 'burden of proof'.

 

[Jango]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

To date, the U.S. government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks. Ultimately the question is of little practical significance.

&

The most important failure was one of imagination.

&

Ten Commissioners-five Republicans and five Democrats chosen by elected leaders from our nation's capital at a time of great partisan division-have come together to present this report without dissent.

 

[idea_steed]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

One of my favorites is that everything was done so the gold could be stolen from the basement of one of the WTC towers...

The heist thing is the favorite of some people.

 

[Jango]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

To be fair:

The apparent fact that the Richter reading peaked at 2.3 and the disturbance lasted only 8 seconds indicates an extraordinary high-energy weapon was used top-down to preserve the bathtub and surrounding structures.

Since the beginning of this year we have been looking into the passengers and victims of 9/11. So far we have proven 17 of the passengers of the 4 planes to be fraudulent. Some from each plane. We believe all of them were fraudulent.

We have proven that the Pentagon victims listed as dying at the Pentagon were fraudulent. 65 of the 76 pictures originally placed in the CNN Memorial by the Pentagon have been recalled, and are now 404's. This is because the Exif/IPTC data showed in a simple way that the Pentagon pictures had all been created on 2/15/2000, 1 year, 6 months and 26 days before 9/11 happened.

We have also discovered the same type of fraud happening at the World Trade Center with many many fraudulent victims. People that simply never died at the WTC on 9/11 yet we were told they did.

Apart from these things, we have also made some stunning new 911 discoveries. One of these being a good reasonable explanation on why absolutely no contents of the world trade center were found in the debris pile.

Who installed the Fake Smoke & Piping Delivery System at the World Trade Center before 9/11? The question here isn't "if" there was a fake smoke system employed at WTC on 9/11, but rather who it was that installed it, as the system itself is fully visible and in plain sight, is an acre long in space, and is belching out thick black smoke from the right side of each pipe, which are located between each window, on what we believe is the 94th floor on the North Tower.

...you can clearly see that floors 92-100 are an are of the World Trade Center absolutely devoid of any floors.

It is likely that as we fill in all of the details on the 347 names listed below, that we will find them to be spread within the categories shown in this thread, ranging from total Operation Northwoods fakes, to real firemen who were allowed to disappear with a Platinum Parachute.

 

[KokomoJojo]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

To be fair:

utterly amazing what one airplane can do!

Then again maybe not, one flew all the way through wtc2 and never dented the nose.

and my personal fav is the over under explosions from those videos the media play incessantly




I am thinking that they had their camera up side down when they filmed one of them.

It always shocks me what some people will believe.

 

[Mark F]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Thats a joke right?

Still waiting for you to either:

A. Demonstrate there was a protocol in place at 8:37am to shoot down hijacked commercial airliners full of Americans Or
B. Admit you were wrong.

I do however anticipate the route you will chose is C, since you are nothing of not predictable.

 

[NWO_Spook]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

My favourite was the 'incontrovertible proof of the use of thermite cutters". The "NIST fraud" hyperbole runs a close second.

 

[Mark F]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

My favourite was the 'incontrovertible proof of the use of thermite cutters". The "NIST fraud" hyperbole runs a close second.

Ah yes, making a case for fraud when one can not identify who was defrauded is classic.

 

[KokomoJojo]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

Still waiting for you to either:

A. Demonstrate there was a protocol in place at 8:37am to shoot down hijacked commercial airliners full of Americans Or
B. Admit you were wrong.

I do however anticipate the route you will chose is C, since you are nothing of not predictable.

demonstrate it to yourself, take a tour of sac ops control someday and ask the guys sitting behind the big board LOL

I have no intention of scouring the net to dig **** up for you that has existed since the creation of the air force.

 

[MadLib]

Re: Favorite Obscure 9/11 related CT's

The fact that some Israelis were dancing (I don't even know if this is true or not) after 9/11 proves that Israel did 9/11.