Unanswered questions in regards to 9/11[W:762]

[Mark F]

The media is imperfect. Got it.

Welcome to the world.

Doesn't make wist43's case though does it?

 

[Bob0627]

It seems to me that those who subscribe to the "official theory" are the ones who are in the position of having to prove their thesis - b/c their thesis is so fantastical as to be unbelievable.

That is to say that in order to subscribe to the 9/11 Commission findings, one must suspend all belief in the laws of physics - not to mention abandon all logic and common sense.

So it follows, if the "official theory" is completely unsupportable, and it is, then it is only logical to set off in pursuit of supportable evidence - which by necessity quickly brings you to realize that the event is clearly a false flag, and that our government is behind the entire mess. All that needs to be worked out is how they did it.

We know the mechanics of the operation, i.e. that the commercial flights were swapped out for drones, and the evidence was smothered by control of the media, containment of the crime scenes, and disposal of the evidence. All that needs to be worked out is what materials did they use to bring down the towers? and where did they land the commercial flights to dispose of the passengers?

Being able to completely smother the truth, and control the agencies, the meida, and the politicians makes it next to impossible to break their stranglehold on what is presented to the sheeple. It could be a very, very long time before the true facts are ever found out - assuming some future generation will be able to break the chains of their enslavement.

While I agree for the most part with the above, I have to disagree with the highlighted.

1. It would have to be elements within the US government and it's disputable whether they were behind the whole thing or in concert with other entities, I lean toward the latter although it wouldn't shock me if it was the former. There's still the Saudi financing issue that is currently unresolved (which may or may not have included Bin Laden & Co.) and other possible factors. The point is we simply don't know. Nothing about 9/11 that comes from the US government can be accepted as credible. Either way, 9/11 was definitely a false flag, there's no question about that whatsoever.

2. We don't know the mechanics of the operations. We do know that the 2 planes that hit the twin towers were not conventional passenger airliners, that's pretty much impossible. And we don't really know what happened at the Pentagon and Shanksville. We do know the official narrative is a fairy tale for the ignorant and gullible.

As to the last sentence, I don't believe we'll ever know the truth. We do know that all attempts to genuinely investigate 9/11 have been deliberately impeded. What we're left with is a bunch of frauds masquerading and peddled as "investigations". That in itself says a lot about 9/11.

 

[Thoreau72]

Evasion noted.

Evasion???

I would say he is attempting to stay on topic, in accordance with the rules here at DP.

 

[wist43]

First off, welcome to the discussion.

OK, I'll bite. Which laws of physics were violated on 9/11 as told by the Official Story and how? What physics are even described in the 9/11 Commission Report?

The airplanes flying at impossible speeds is the most obvious. Can't fly commercial airliners that far beyond VMO without the planes simply coming apart - it is this reason inparticular why the pilots that have joined in with the pilotsfor911truth have put their names and reputations on the line.

The buildings coming down in near freefall is the other fairly obvious violation of the laws of physics. This is why all of the architects and engineers have put their names and reputations on the line by signing on with architectsandengineersfor911truth. Of course, as I'm sure it has been pointed out countless times to everyone, no steel, concrete structure has ever been brought down by fire - not before, and not since. Only on 9/11 did the laws of physics, logic, and common sense cease to exist for the briefest of moments in time.

Then there is the asking of everyone to believe that complete nincompoop, novice hijackers were capable of executing the incredible feats of flying - it is so incredible, that to believe it is to believe in the impossible.

The phone calls from the planes is another red flag. The inconsistency and changes made in the "official" story; Ted Olson's story changing 3 times; The lack of background noise and chrystal connection of Cee Cee Lyles message to her husband, when according to the official timeline she would have been cruising at 30,000+ feet and at near 400 mph. Then of course there is the her whisper at the end of the call where she says "... it's a frame".

Other traits common to a false flag event that are obvious are the confiscation of all video and most of the radio traffic; the event being carried out in conjunction with multiple "drills", i.e., and the immediate clean up of the crimes scenes with all of the evidence being quickly whisked away thereby preventing any real investigation.

Some of the drills that were operating that day were:

Amalgom Virgo, Vigilent Guardian
Northern Guardian, Vigilent Warrior
Norther Vigilence, Amalgom Warrior
Global Guardian, Crown Vigilence, Apollo Guardian
AWACS over Florida and DC
Fort Meyer VA firemen (Pentagon)
NYC area: TRIPOD II, Timely Alert II

Many more have since been uncovered. False flag "live" events are always carried out in conjunction with corresponding drills.

So specifically, what evidence is it that leads you to this conclusion? Can you produce a timeline of events that demonstrates this hypothesis which also encompasses everything we know about what happened on 9/11/2001 and why?

When you say "... everything we know about what happened on 9/11", I'm not sure what you specifically are referring to - so perhaps you could ask me something specific?

We do? How do we know this? Can you be more specific?

The mechanics of how they pulled it off are for the most part taken from Operation Northwoods, i.e. the swapping out of commercial airliners for drones. I suppose it is possible that a couple of the flights were drones from the gitgo, but I haven't taken the time to work out if the phone calls supposedly made from the planes were from legitimate passengers or not.

It is entirely possible that most of the supposed passengers were in fact crisis actors and weren't victims at all; but we do know that some of the passengers were real people, so those people would have had to have been killed. As for Barabra Olson, it is likely that she never boarded the flight at all, but if she did she would have been seperated from the other passengers who would have been killed - it is pretty obvious that Ted and Barbra Olson are conspirators.

Continued... (single post was too long, sorry)

 

[wist43]

Continued...

That's a lot of people that by necessity have to be in on it. Tens of thousands at the minimum. And yet not a single leak, accidental or intentional? Does that seem plausible to you or so fantastical as to be unbelievable? I mean look at Watergate for example. Less than a dozen people knew about that, many of them specially trained to handle top secret operations and information yet within 2 years it brought down a President.

Not "tens of thousands", but to be sure scores of people. It really doesn't take that many when you consider the overall chaos of the situation once it goes live, and the fact that the crime scenes are always very quickly secured. Eyewitness testimony is wildly inconsistent and unreliable, all video evidence with rare exception was very quickly confiscated and never saw the light of day again (that should be a huge clue right there).

As for "leaks" - who is anyone going to tell?? The media who not in on it are carried with their emotional reporting, and of course the government is in full coverup mode. The 9/11 Commission Report was a whitewash cover up put together by the same people that had heavy involvement with the crime to begin with, i.e. Science Apllications Internatioal Corporation, SAIC.

SAIC is essentially the private sector equivalent of our CIA. They have a lot of CIA personnel on their payroll, they have many subsidiary companies that are involved in exotic explosives manufacturing, they train foreign armies, etc, etc; and it was SAIC personnel that were primarily responsible for putting together the 9/11 Commission Report.

That is tantamount to have the fox investigate a crime spree of missing chickens.

Or, you could be wrong, guided by ideology, not evidence. Had you considered that?

You have it backwards - it is the believers in the fantastical "official" version that are driven by ideology and the unbelievable. I go where the evidence leads. What seperates someone like me from the average citizen is that I am reasonably familiar with how false flag operations work, how covert ops work, and that there are people in the world who are maniacally driven by a lust for power. They are without conscience, and are willing to go to any lengths to achieve their goals.

These people are part of an underlying power structure reaches into ever aspect of our societies and institutions - going back many decades. They use their position, privalege, money and power to orchestrate events to bring about endless war, terrorism, and economic calamity so as to manipulate conditions on the chess board to bring about their total hegemonic rule.

Study how they operate long enough, and it is easy to see their machinations and patterns of repeated gambits and behavior. War, terror, money, crisis, etc, are nothing more than tools they use to achieve their ends.

 

[mike2810]

Wist43.

Then by all means prove your thesis.

Do you agree that an explanation should stand on its own merits? If so, lay out the explanation you accept with supporting documentation to back it up.

Start with your comment of " "We know the mechanics of the operation, i.e. that the commercial flights were swapped out for drones".

 

[wist43]

Wist43.

Then by all means prove your thesis.

Do you agree that an explanation should stand on its own merits? If so, lay out the explanation you accept with supporting documentation to back it up.

Start with your comment of " "We know the mechanics of the operation, i.e. that the commercial flights were swapped out for drones".

Packer game is coming on

I'll have to get back to this in a bit... don't mind answering your questions at all...

Go Pack Go!!! arty

 

[KokomoJojo]

Lmao... At best this is one of those pot and kettle things, realistically, you must know the games you play, the games that get pointed out by everyone but those that like to blow smoke up your arse for you?

Why would you degrade your credibility with such nonsense?

Seriously, if your position were so strong and infallible, you would think such games to not be required, even counterproductive but instead, you double down each time your games get pointed out for what they are and get even less logical and rational.

yeh people that have that MO are the type that would fart in a crown and wear a halo when everyone is pointing at them complaining. That said he did make a point I am forced to acknowledge that I did post that one statement in this thread and I made the mistake of assuming it would all continue in the appropriate thread. However on the second issue, it is so not even in the same universe to evasion as he grossly mischaracterized it which really borders on pathetic frankly.

 

[KokomoJojo]

@BmanMcfly - why degrade yourself by joining this bit of Koko false claim >>>evasion nonsense?
1) koko made a false claim:

2) I called him on the false claim:

3) I again call him on this debating trickery:

4) koko responds untruthfully:

5) ..and his desperation gets sillier:

Why don't you tell us what are the other options for debate or discussion. This is what I said:

Answered here in the appropriate thread:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...y-demolitions-w-1022-a-55.html#post1064135766

please respond there.

 

[Mark F]

Thank you Wist43 for your considered reply. I would like to address each of your points one at a time, but before we do that I think it might be helpful if we quantify exactly what the official story is that you disagree with. So if you will indulge me I would like to briefly summarize what I consider to be the commonly accepted narrative (to let you know I object to the term "Official Story") and you can tell me if you agree or disagree that it is the commonly accepted narrative. That way we are both starting the discussion from the same point of reference.

Let me know if you feel I left anything important out.

On 9/11/2001 a group of 19 men picked for the job by Osama Bin Laden, Khalid Sheik Mohammed and Ayman Al-Zawahiri - terrorist d-bags with a long history of attacking the U.S. and American interests - hijacked 4 commercial airliners and flew 3 them into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon with the 4th crashing before hitting its intended target in Washington D.C. (likely either the Capitol Building or White House).

These terrorists with a long history of attacking the U.S. and American interests had been doing pretty well at it, sticking mostly to targets overseas. An ever escalating series of embassy bombings and attacks on U.S. warships and the like are all well and good but not really achieving the desired effect. Requiring something REALLY BIG that will grab the headlines and the attention of the world means attacking high profile targets within the United States. An early attempt, the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center where a truck with a half-ton in TNT equivalent failed to destroy even a single support column of the building was only partly successful. The follow-up Bojinka Plot fell apart before implementation so the plotters realized they needed a new plan to cause the kind of spectacular damage and massive casualties they needed, yet not be too complicated to improve the chance of success. They needed to attack really important, symbolic targets. So they devised a better plan, a blazingly SIMPLE PLAN.

How about using airplanes as "missiles"? They know how to hijack airplanes - done it plenty of times. And they know how to do suicide bombs. What could be better than combining the two?

Thus they concocted this relatively simple yet audacious plan to attack four symbols of American economic, political and military power by combining two of their long-standing favorite plays; hijacking and suicide bombing. This plan required modest resources, few plotters (a few dozen) and very little special skill. Dedicated, compartmentalized, low tech and operating on the cheap it would be almost impossible to catch them prior to the act. Thus the risk was very low and the potential payoff very high. All they would need was some basic flight instruction - no need to worry about the technically difficult parts like take offs (the pilots will do that for them) and they certainly don't need to know how to land (irrelevant) - they just need to know how to steer the thing once it's airborne. And that is far and away the easiest bit. Children can and are taught to do that.

It was absurdly easy to pull of what they did. That's why they did it! The baddies enter the country legally and lay low until the day when they take advantage of loopholes in security when boarding the planes to hijack 4 long distance flights that are LOADED with fuel and fly them to nearby targets before authorities have any time to react, let alone intercept. Box cutters and Mace were legal to bring on planes. Doors to the cabin weren't locked. They saw our weaknesses and exploited them. They knew prior to 9/11 a grand total of zero hijackings resulted in planes being flown into buildings. Hijackings had always followed a simple pattern:

Grab plane
Land plane
Demand stuff.

(Continued below)

 

[Mark F]

(Continued from above)

The terrorists flew 2 of those planes into the WTC Twin Towers, 1 into the Pentagon with the 4th hijacked plane crashing into a field in Pennsylvania due to the heroics of the passengers and crew of United Flight 93 who had the time and opportunity to figure out what was happening and intervene. The terrorists had the element of surprise on their side and got a lucky shot in. They hit 3 of their 4 targets. Not bad for a days work. The damage suffered in New York, Washington DC and Shanksville is entirely consistent with Kamikaze suicide attack by hijacked airliner AND NOTHING ELSE. Even if they had not hit any targets and just managed to crash 4 airliners full of American's the plan would still have been a huge success. Even the collapse of the Twin Towers was just a nice bonus but not a requirement for the plan to be successful. The collapses were incidental as the attacks were intended to cause terror, not re-arrange the New York real estate market. Similarly, Building 7 was collateral damage, just like Fiterman Hall, the Duetsche Bank Building, the Marriot, St Nicholas Church, etc, etc, etc,…

The planes were the explosive preparations.

The attacks were preventable if American authorities had displayed just a bit more competence and a lot less institutional intransigence. But there is no evidence anyone in the U.S. government actively participated in or consciously allowed the plot to succeed. The determination of the terrorists kept them going. We had many opportunities to prevent this from happening, but time and time again the agencies ignored the warning signs, and squabbled about resources and responsibility. That enabled the terrorists to slip in unnoticed. Not enough people were paying attention.

Bin Laden traced the roots of his grievances to the betrayal of 1919 - the U.S. has for decades supported brutal, autocratic, and largely secular rulers in the Middle East in order to guarantee the continued flow of cheap oil while at the same time being the #1 supporter of the hated Israel. The motive is pretty clear and the guys who planned it and are in custody awaiting trial are quite proud of their work.

Does this accurately summarize the major points of the commonly accepted narrative? A cabal of terrorists with a long history of attacking the U.S. escalating their attacks until they strike at 4 symbols of American economic, military and political power in order to advance their agenda?

 

[Bob0627]

Let me know if you feel I left anything important out.

This?:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-911REPORT/pdf/GPO-911REPORT.pdf
http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=909017
http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610

You're welcome Mark.

 

[mike2810]

Packer game is coming on

I'll have to get back to this in a bit... don't mind answering your questions at all...

Go Pack Go!!! arty

We can agree on one thing
Go Packers.

 

[KokomoJojo]

How about using airplanes as "missiles"? They know how to hijack airplanes - done it plenty of times. And they know how to do suicide bombs. What could be better than combining the two?

Thus they concocted this relatively simple yet audacious plan to attack four symbols of American economic, political and military power by combining two of their long-standing favorite plays; hijacking and suicide bombing.

So you are claiming that the terrorists installed war heads in the planes and used them as missiles? I dont think so.

"symbols of American economic, political and military power"

What Irony!

...and who had the most to gain???

the banks
the politicians and
the military industrial complex

So many mysteries and ironic coincidences on 911

So instead of hurting them they helped them!

Truly amazing isnt it?

 

[KokomoJojo]

This?:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-911REPORT/pdf/GPO-911REPORT.pdf
http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=909017
http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610

You're welcome Mark.

OMG!

Touche'



LMFAO

 

[Mark F]

This?:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-911REPORT/pdf/GPO-911REPORT.pdf
http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=909017
http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610

You're welcome Mark.

Thank you Bob. You may now return your head to its proper place in your hindquarters. Next time I don't ask you for something you don't have to respond. I'm talking to someone else now.

 

[Fledermaus]

This?:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-911REPORT/pdf/GPO-911REPORT.pdf
http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=909017
http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610

You're welcome Mark.

May as well add just about every investigating body both at home and abroad.

And the majority of news agencies at home and abroad.

And every major engineering and construction organization.

 

[Bob0627]

Thank you Bob. You may now return your head to its proper place in your hindquarters.

No problem Mark, anytime you forget something, just look it up, I gave you the links. Or you could look also look it up my hindquarters, it could just as easily be its proper place.

Next time I don't ask you for something you don't have to respond.

I was just trying to help you out. There isn't a rule that says I can't respond to any post I want to respond to is there?

I'm talking to someone else now.

Yes, I'm sorry for helping you out, do continue now that you have the links to what you were missing.

 

[Fledermaus]

No problem Mark, anytime you forget something, just look it up, I gave you the links. Or you could look also look it up my hindquarters, it could just as easily be its proper place.

I was just trying to help you out. There isn't a rule that says I can't respond to any post I want to respond to is there?

Yes, I'm sorry for helping you out, do continue now that you have the links to what you were missing.

Have you anything intelligent to add to the thread?

 

[Mark F]

Most of what comes out of you Bob comes out of your hindquarters. Of that there can be little doubt.

 

[Bob0627]

Most of what comes out of you Bob comes out of your hindquarters. Of that there can be little doubt.

So you're saying the official reports came out of my hindquarters. I don't think so, I could be wrong though, but I'm glad to see you finally believe that it could have.

 

[Fledermaus]

So you're saying the official reports came out of my hindquarters. I don't think so, I could be wrong though, but I'm glad to see you finally believe that it could have.

Bob,

Anything intelligent to add?

 

[Kanzaki]

No, anyone that doesn't agree with him pretty much qualifies as a duped shill. That was more or less the position he adopted two months ago, no further discussion. He can be ignored

 

[KokomoJojo]

No, anyone that doesn't agree with him pretty much qualifies as a duped shill. That was more or less the position he adopted two months ago, no further discussion. He can be ignored

Oh btw forgot to tell you that I answered your question here: http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...y-demolitions-w-1022-a-55.html#post1064133797

Well no fully but partly since I wanted to give Oz a chance to respond first, but I will return to it eventually if he continues to remain awol from the thread.

 

[wist43]

Was hoping to give this a go tonight, but it's late and I'm out of gas... the Packer game wiped me out, lol.

I'll take this up again as soon as I get a chance guys.