willo said:
pretty simple and reasonable explanation. My intuition said the same thing, the planes would be almost crashed before anybody realised anything was unusual.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
911 Truth Movement
- Thread starter Harry
- Start date
pretty simple and reasonable explanation. My intuition said the same thing, the planes would be almost crashed before anybody realised anything was unusual.
Azza said:
Maybe, maybe not
http://rense.com/general64/fbi.htm
Another conundrum. Were they found? If so, why the denial that they were?
Still many questions remain unanswered
Harry said:
Is that from a layman perspective or do you know a bit about structural engineering ?
Yes, but the only one that's considered "magic" by the Twoofers is the WTC passport. There was a lot of debris recovered from Flight 93 so finding the 2 there passports isn't considered anything special.
If the WTC passport was a plant, why would an organisation that could conceive, execute and hide a conspiracy so huge be silly enough to just drop a passport on the footpath in the hopes it gets handed in ? Doesn't make any sense. Neither does ID.
tigersnake said:
You could imagine the confusion. With the plane transponders turned off, and hundreds of aircraft in the vicinity, who would want to make such a call to shoot down a plane full of passengers?
Remembering the Iranian and Korean passenger planes shot down. Poor innocent travellers paid the ultimate price.
willo said:
So, even though they had trained for the exact scenario of hijacked aircraft and were aware of an increased threat of terrorist activity, only 14 jets were on alert? Not odd?
I've also watched enough Air Crash Investgation to know that any passenger jet deviating off course or going off radar is noticed almost immediately. Turning off the transponder should be an unmissable event given the number of eyes watching their movement. There are also very distinct routes for commercial travel and altitude "freeways" for aircraft travelling in opposite directions. NORAD should have had no trouble at all either identifying a plane going off course or tracking it.
Baloo, sorry I'd mis-remembered the details about NORAD's response. The other points still stand though:
1 month earlier pilots were banned from carryning guns.
1 month earlier orders were changed to make intercepts reliant on clearance from the Secretary of Defense.
Defense personnel were confused as to how to react due to the exercises simulating hijacked aircraft taking place on the same day.
Only 14 jets were available to intercept hijacked aircraft despite the government's awareness of increased terrorist threats specifically using hijacked aircraft.
You guys seriously think these are all coincidence or easily explained?
Disco08 said:
Emphatically yes, especially when the alternative is the greatest conspiracy known to man pulled off by a government willing to kill 5000 of their innocent civilians working in one of their greatest cities most recognized landmarks yet still bumbling enough to deliberately drop a passport on the footpath of the crash site in the hope someone hands it in to police.
You seriously think the whole WTC was manufactured by the government or faceless power brokers.
Baloo said:
so you fully accept that fires brought down building 7 in a symmetrical fashion at free fall ?
this building had 58 perimeter columns and 25 core columns. for it to fall the way it did all columns would have to completely give way at the same time. apparently steel melts at approx. 2700 degrees F, and jet fuel burns at 800 to 1500.
Harry said:
My layman reading of the explanations I've read on non-conspiracy sites has me nodding my head. I don't know enough about structural engineering, demolition or anything related to make me question what I've read.
But I'm not prone to conspiracy theories in general so maybe my view is blinkered.
Tell me though, in your opinion, why would te US Government do it ? What purpose ? What was so important about the destruction of WTC7 that they would run the risk of being exposed right in the middle of the biggest terrorist attack on US soil.
Baloo said:
dunno. could be that the puppet masters wanted to see how much they could get away with. maybe the shadow government really exists and have a greater satanic agenda. maybe they really are reptilian hybrids. who knows. many theories out there, don't subscribe to many of them but when explanations to what occurred contradicts your perception of logic you start to think about this kind of stuff a bit deeper. Either things are happening behind the scenes which most are unaware of our my perception of truth and logic is distorted. you start to question whether things are as they seem. hollywood could not have written a script like the events of 911 in a hundred years. maybe they already have. who knows, I'm just a bozo who, like an ant, follows the same trail each day to work and home, and like that ant I probably have no idea what's happening around me.
Baloo said:
I absolutely think people inside the government knew the attacks were coming and took measures to make sure they succeeded. Looking at worldwide opinion polls it seems that position is shared by about half the population. Not surprising when every single aspect of the official narrative of the attacks looks suspicious in one way or another.
How would you explain those four facts? Coinicidence?
Disco08 said:
I'd need to look deeper into the facts. Where those decisions to disarm the pilots something that was being debated a while, we're they out of the blue ? What was the reasoning behind it ?
Without that knowledge I couldn't make any call other than coincidence.
Disco08 said:
So all the Twoofists have is a "maybe" for this ? I said earlier that I wouldn't be shocked to hear Larry sat on his hands and did nothing extra to try and keep his building up. I mean he's just seen his new investment literally crumble to the ground. Despite the insurance it's hard to know what went through his mind.
But to plant explosives and blow the building up in the middle of what was happening ? That's the difference between not trying to stop it collapsing and trying t Mae it collapse.
Oh, in this maybe, did he plan the explosives before the WTC event or during it ?
Disco08 said:
$7 billion or $4.2 billion?
A federal jury on Monday ruled that the assault on the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center was in fact two occurrences for insurance purposes. The finding in U.S. District Court in Manhattan means leaseholder Larry Silverstein may collect up to $4.6 billion, according to reports. [Forbes.com 12/06/04]
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/silverstein.html
Another theory...
$1.08 trillion Worth of Gold, 102 million oz of silver were stolen from under the World Trade Center.
http://silverdoctors.blogspot.com.au/2011/09/108-trillion-worth-of-gold-was-stolen.html
But other figures differ
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/gold.html
Silverstein had the lease for office space. Frank Lowy/Westfield had the lease for the mall areas. They paid $3.2 billion for a 99 year lease.
So far I've heard it's Bush and/or the military/industrial complex, American Jews/Israel/Mossad, OBL/Al Quaida, Gold/silver thieves, Silverstein/(no mention of Westfield though), the "shadow government", some ultra rich string pullers. Is there anyone else that could be a suspect?
Baloo said:
Just a point of interest "Larry" only signed the lease for the entire WTC site on July 24, 2011. 6 weeks or so before 911.
(He previously built 7 WTC in 1987 or thereabouts)
rosy23 said:
But back then we didn't have that conundrum.
Now though, we'll have to keep a close eye on any such happenings. But then again, they couldn't plan or carry out anything so complex. Luna Park or Coney Island would be more likely.
Disco08 said:
I can't believe youre hung up on this particular fact. I've been involved in small scale business deals, and been on the periphery of some biggish ones, what I've learnt is, as the $$ gets bigger, the contracts get fatter and the possibilities covered get more remote and whacky. Its just the way things work, they want to cover every single base. And the WTC had been attacked before anyway. The thing is, with all these eyebrow raising anomolies, I bet there is a heap more that would suggest the opposite. Business deals signed just before the disaster that resulted in huge losses that nobody saw coming. But Conspiracy theorists just don't notice that stuff, it doesn't register, they just trawl for stuff that fits their pre-concieved view.
Noam Chompsky, you really didn't like his analysis right? Too clean? Too sensible?
snaps truly said:
Again, why ? Why did they need to risk the lives of thousands of civilians ? What did they have to gain ? How many people would have been in on the decision to let it happen ? What are the odds all of them have kept their mouths shut despite seeing the gut wrenching scenes of people dying, the families trying to deal with it, watching brave firefighters sacrifice their lives trying to save people?
IMO there is less chance of everyone involved keeping their mouth shut than there is of the Bush government knowing planes were flying towards the US. This is the same intelligence that swore there were WMD in Iraq and when they couldnt find them were unable to plant a y fake evidence to cover their arse.
