9/11 Conspiracies(threads merged)

[clapper011]

Dangitt! I lost my reply!

your posts start from page 27 on

[Juan_Bottom]

Dangitt! I lost my reply!

your posts start from page 27 on

No buddy. This thread was merged twice. And both times I was re-typeing my reply. Both times I lost my reply.

And to all these xtra fans.... your great!

[Juan_Bottom]

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/

My new best friend just dropped this in my lap. It kills my dail-up.... but it is a nice source for certainly. I wanted to share it.

I was just glancing over the thread and realized that I dropped the ball here. Does anyone remember the odds of connecting to the ground on a cell? I think it was a two thousand feet you have a 75% chance of connecting... and then gets smaller and smaller. My browser is fighting me on the search here....Does anyone know/remember?

[Backglass]

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/

My new best friend just dropped this in my lap. It kills my dail-up.... but it is a nice source for certainly. I wanted to share it.

I was just glancing over the thread and realized that I dropped the ball here. Does anyone remember the odds of connecting to the ground on a cell? I think it was a two thousand feet you have a 75% chance of connecting... and then gets smaller and smaller. My browser is fighting me on the search here....Does anyone know/remember?

Also keep in mind that these planes weren't cruising happily along at 40,000 feet, but much lower than normal. Also some were using the in-seat phones so I understand.

[Juan_Bottom]

Also keep in mind that these planes weren't cruising happily along at 40,000 feet, but much lower than normal. Also some were using the in-seat phones so I understand.

Like Barbara Olsen???

Oh yeah! Air phones were definitly used. The original report had cells making a majority of calls, because family members said so... But now they've distanced themselves from cells, and most sources I believe will say that Airphones played the bigger role..

[jay_a2j]

WATCH the video! I mean come on! How far in denial do you have to be? The towers fell at about free fall speed. They say, that the fire from the burning jet fuel caused the steel beams to weaken. (because we KNOW it would have been impossible to MELT them) Ok, so we have weakened floors at about floor 100? When the tower started to collapse, the weakened floors collapsed, but WHY did the UNWEAKENED floors BELOW give way with NO RESISTANCE? In other words, the collapse SHOULD HAVE slowed as it fell, as the collapse came into contact with STURDY floors. But instead it came down just like a demolition.


At this point, if you still buy the governments story, you are in a form of denial that can not be reversed.

[Iliad]

WATCH the video! I mean come on! How far in denial do you have to be? The towers fell at about free fall speed. They say, that the fire from the burning jet fuel caused the steel beams to weaken. (because we KNOW it would have been impossible to MELT them) Ok, so we have weakened floors at about floor 100? When the tower started to collapse, the weakened floors collapsed, but WHY did the UNWEAKENED floors BELOW give way with NO RESISTANCE? In other words, the collapse SHOULD HAVE slowed as it fell, as the collapse came into contact with STURDY floors. But instead it came down just like a demolition.


At this point, if you still buy the governments story, you are in a form of denial that can not be reversed.

What's that smell? *sniff* I think it's irony

[cutebastard71]

Does it matter ?

[jay_a2j]

Does it matter ?

That our government killed almost 3,000 of its own citizens? No, not at all. Happens all the time. It's the "norm" don't ya know? What was I thinking, of course it doesn't matter.

[cutebastard71]

Well first of all it can be debated who did what? Were they involved or they just didn't stop them doing it, yadda yadda yadda....

The confrontation between West and East is inevitable. There is no superpower in the history of world which lost No. 1 spot without the war. USA will rather go to war than loose their precious standard of living. But people tend to focus on smaller issues rather than what's happening on a larger scale. Let's say that one day you can even prove who did it? Then what ? Sacrificing your civil population for political purposes has been around for quite a while... but please do continue your quixotic fight for THE TRUTH

[Juan_Bottom]

Sacrificing your civil population for political purposes has been around for quite a while... but please do continue your quixotic fight for THE TRUTH

And just how the hell do you know that I didn't lose someone in those towers? Who do you think you are to say that to anyone?

In other words, the collapse SHOULD HAVE slowed as it fell, as the collapse came into contact with STURDY floors. But instead it came down just like a demolition.

I agree Jay. In the very least ONE of the three towers should have fallen sideways. But they all came straight down.

But I can't watch the video anyway. Someone gave me this to post here.... But you all know that I can't watch it. And you all know how I feel about YOUTUBE anyway... But It's important to be an honest person, isn't it? I have no idea what it is..so if someone would share...that'd be great..

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=_0eC3uns3 ... re=related

[heavycola]

This just got merged?

Yes and appearantly I lost BOTH of my replies. So now I'm upset.

funny, then, that http://www.our.homewithgod.com/mkcathy/sirius.html here is a link to a site in memoriam of sirius, a New York Port Authority (the guys ACTUALLY in charge of security, remember?) sniffer dog who was killed while at work on 9/11.
the 'sniffer dogs taken out of security procedures' myth is just that - another half-baked load of nonsense.

Are you saying that I'm wrong? Most people point out the five day mark.

Did this dog work in, or out of the building? The memorandum seems to point to the latter.

Yes, i am saying you are wrong. This dog, if you do a bit of research, was left in its kennel in the basement of wtc1 on that day. it lived and worked inside the building, as a bomb sniffer, up to and includign 9/11.

speculation? or evidence?

I was VERY clear on that. You asked for speculation, and you got it. Stick to argueing facts.

Dude, I have been giving you facts. About the sniffer dog myth, about Marvin Bush. Backglass' commentary on the likelihood of controlled demoltion is rooted much more firmly in reality than the tinfoil hat version of events, for reasons I explained. Each time you have coem out with standard "truther" speculation and myth it has been shot down. Fair?

Oh the irony...

Juan, you need to stop coming out with these parrotted half-truths. Have you done any of your own research on this? Sniffer dogs? Closed buildings? nukes in coke cans? SEC filings?

Yes A butt-load.

So you checked that SEC filing? Do you admit that the Marvin Bush link is a load of cobblers, then?

Because what you are saying, if you actually believe this, is that a full laden jetliner hitting these buildings at 500mph was never enough to cause their collapse, but a bunch of wireless bombs, small enough to evade detection for the years of preparation necessary, were plenty powerful enough?

That's exactly what I'm saying(by the way, the raging fire caused the collapse).
Let me get you straight too..... You're saying that some dudes in a cave could do a job that our government can't? Correct?

Think about it. People have hijacked planes beofre - they divert them, sit on the runway and then get shot. No one had EVER used a fully laden jetliner as a weapon before.

In July 2001, a memo from an FBI field office to HQ mentioned that arabs had been training at flight schools in Florida, and that they had only been interested in flying, not take off or landing. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/phoenixmemo1.html a smoking gun link to part of that document.
If you are a terrorist of limited means, and you have this idea that there are massive weapons sitting on runways all over the northeastern seaboard, and that hijack and control of those weapons is possible - it was, from their POV, a stroke of genius.

Jay - I am going to ignore your closed-minded idiocy this time. Sorry.

[Dancing Mustard]

It's all in the latest loose change film. I can't pull their sources for you without being a member. I got banned for argueing with them.

Conspiracy Nuts kicking out people who have contrary views and who ask difficult questions? What strange behaviour.

They sure sound like they care more about truth and freedom of speech than they do about blindly holding onto easily discredited and imlausible points of view.

[Backglass]

WATCH the video! I mean come on! How far in denial do you have to be?

Pretty far to believe every silly conspiracy that comes long. Have you found a psychiatrist yet?

The towers fell at about free fall speed. They say, that the fire from the burning jet fuel caused the steel beams to weaken. (because we KNOW it would have been impossible to MELT them) Ok, so we have weakened floors at about floor 100? When the tower started to collapse, the weakened floors collapsed, but WHY did the UNWEAKENED floors BELOW give way with NO RESISTANCE? In other words, the collapse SHOULD HAVE slowed as it fell, as the collapse came into contact with STURDY floors. But instead it came down just like a demolition.

More of your optional belief in Science Jay? Yes, they fell fast. This proves nothing.

Since you chose NOT to listen to your Physics teachers in High School (believing that Science is all bunk) it is not a surprise that this basic concept baffles your uneducated mind.

Please read and attempt to comprehend:

NIST estimated the elapsed times for the first exterior panels to strike the ground after the collapse initiated in each of the towers to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2. These elapsed times were based on: (1) precise timing of the initiation of collapse from video evidence, and (2) ground motion (seismic) signals recorded at Palisades, N.Y., that also were precisely time-calibrated for wave transmission times from lower Manhattan (see NCSTAR 1-5A).

As documented in Section 6.14.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1, these collapse times show that:

“… the structure below the level of collapse initiation offered minimal resistance to the falling building mass at and above the impact zone. The potential energy released by the downward movement of the large building mass far exceeded the capacity of the intact structure below to absorb that energy through energy of deformation.

Since the stories below the level of collapse initiation provided little resistance to the tremendous energy released by the falling building mass, the building section above came down essentially in free fall, as seen in videos. As the stories below sequentially failed, the falling mass increased, further increasing the demand on the floors below, which were unable to arrest the moving mass.”

In other words, the momentum (which equals mass times velocity) of the 12 to 28 stories (WTC 1 and WTC 2, respectively) falling on the supporting structure below (which was designed to support only the static weight of the floors above and not any dynamic effects due to the downward momentum) so greatly exceeded the strength capacity of the structure below that it (the structure below) was unable to stop or even to slow the falling mass. The downward momentum felt by each successive lower floor was even larger due to the increasing mass.

At this point, if you still buy the governments story, you are in a form of denial that can not be reversed.

Even this last silly jab is blatantly false at it's root. You are again blindly assuming that only shadowy government officials beholden to no one investigated this disaster. Nothing could be further from the truth. They WELCOMED outside assistance and received it. NIST gathered world-class technical expertise from both within and outside the agency. External experts were drawn from academia, practice, and government, and used all throughout the investigation. On top of this, the findings are used as case studies in EVERY engineering school worldwide. Architects & Structural engineers worldwide who had NOTHING to do with the investigation have poured over the findings and found them to be sound.

Your fundamental mis-understanding of science leads you down all the wrong paths. Science is NOT like your church where the leaders proclaim something to be true and everyone must follow and believe it without question. Plenty of non-government people have studied the results Jay. Nothing is hidden.

But like rest of your sad life, you just can't bear to face reality as it goes against your "beliefs".

[Neoteny]

This looks like a job for physics! Free body diagram, anyone?

[InkL0sed]

I blame the Bible.

[muy_thaiguy]

I blame New England.

Better? Or worse?

[InkL0sed]

I blame New England.

Better? Or worse?

Worse. Much worse.

[Juan_Bottom]

External experts were drawn from academia, practice, and government, and used all throughout the investigation.

But the Public has no right to do their own investigation. All peices of debris are considered federal property(making it a huge crime to steal them). They are transported by truck, put on a barge, and shipped to CHINA.

And I agree with Jay, the rate of speed, combined with the fact that they fell on their own footprint is very suspicios. The 9-11 commission report even said it was very unusual. I think that is the exact phrase they used.
And the deal is, the government can give you a fancy excuse as to why it happened that way. But it's never happened that way before.
It's never happened before, ever. Neither has a skyscraper been felled by fire. Which, in my opinion, wouldn't have ever been hot enought to melt the steel used.

All these things add up.

They WELCOMED outside assistance and received it.

Take a look at the Patriot link above.

Conspiracy Nuts kicking out people who have contrary views and who ask difficult questions? What strange behaviour.

They sure sound like they care more about truth and freedom of speech than they do about blindly holding onto easily discredited and imlausible points of view.

I had "disagreements with a dozen or so members for how they were distributing information. They weren't talking facts. All they were distributing was speculation. And how are you gonna win anyone over with guesses????

Fair?

Nope. I'm far from done...and have yet to understanfd the missing tapes, or the vaporized bodies..... But I have a lot more...

Do you admit that the Marvin Bush link is a load of cobblers

Pretty much.....
'Secrecy surrounds a Bush brother's role in 9/11 security'

American Reporter | January 20, 2002
By Margie Burns
WASHINGTON -- A company that provided security at New York City's World Trade Center, Dulles International Airport in Washington, D.C., and to United Airlines between 1995 and 2001, was backed by a private Kuwaiti-American investment firm with ties to a brother of President Bush and the Bush family, according to records obtained by the American Reporter.

Two planes hijacked on Sept. 11, 2001 were United Airlines planes, and another took off from Dulles International Airport; two, of course, slammed into the World Trade Center. But the Bush Administration has never disclosed the ties of a presidential brother and the Bush family with the firm that intersected the weapons and targets on a day of national tragedy.

Marvin P. Bush, a younger brother of George W. Bush, was a principal in the company from 1993 to 2000, when most of the work on the big projects was done. But White House responses to 9/11 have not publicly disclosed the company's part in providing security to any of the named facilities, and many of the public records revealing the relationships are not public.

Nonetheless, public records reveal that the firm, formerly named Securacom, listed Bush on its board of directors and as a significant shareholder. The firm, now named Stratesec, Inc., is located in Sterling, Va., a suburb of Washington, D.C., and emphasizes federal clients. Bush is no longer on the board.

Think about it. People have hijacked planes beofre

How about you think about it-

The Gulf of Tonkin has now been declassified as a fake attack on ourselves. We blew up our own patrol boat as an excuse to go to war. The Remember the Main! incident has now been declassified. We blew up our own Battaleship as an excuse to go to war. It's been done before. This exact same way... Then there's this..Neo-con document called "Re-arming America's Defenses", published by the "Project for a New American Century", in the year 2000, calls for a "new Pearl Harbor" to get the American public on board for a global war of aggression to secure oil reserves?[/i]
That Oil Reserves thing sounds familier. Too much coincidence.

A gang of Arabs beat NORAD three times in one day, including an attack on the pentagon (the most highly protected airspace on the planet) using boxcutters?
Just after control of take down order is transferred to the President/Vice president only?
http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/260607_mineta.html
http://aolsearcht3.search.aol.com/aol/s ... ery=google

You're asking me to just dismiss all of this as coincidence?

In July 2001, a memo from an FBI field office to HQ mentioned that arabs had been training at flight schools in Florida, and that they had only been interested in flying, not take off or landing. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/phoenixmemo1.html a smoking gun link to part of that document.

OOooo!!!!! And what about the Flight School Head who admits Hani Hanjour Couldn't Fly a Plane? The dude failed his flight test, and wasn't allowed to fly a Cessna?
http://killtown.911review.org/flight77/hijackers.html

And I know you're gonna say he only had to crash one..... But if you look at where/how he hit the pentagon... And managed to vaporize his plane in the process...

[icicletasty69]

The Gulf of Tonkin has now been declassified as a fake attack on ourselves. We blew up our own patrol boat as an excuse to go to war. The Remember the Main! incident has now been declassified. We blew up our own Battaleship as an excuse to go to war. It's been done before. This exact same way... Then there's this..Neo-con document called "Re-arming America's Defenses", published by the "Project for a New American Century", in the year 2000, calls for a "new Pearl Harbor" to get the American public on board for a global war of aggression to secure oil reserves?[/i]
That Oil Reserves thing sounds familier. Too much coincidence.

In the gulf on tonkin incident, there were no causalties. We thought we were being fired upon, but it was just the sonar acting funny. So, we were firing at nothing, and the whole incident was about how we thought the n. vietnamese were firing at us...not that one of our ships blew up.

As for the Maine. The whole controversy there is whether or not the spanish hit us. It has been determined that it is most likely that a boiler exploded and the ship sank because of that, and not the spanish. There is, however, no evidence that we sank our own ship. So, that just about renders that point moot...try doing some research before you open your mouth

[Backglass]

All peices of debris are considered federal property(making it a huge crime to steal them). They are transported by truck, put on a barge, and shipped to CHINA.

Link Please showing that all pieces of Pentagon debris were shipped to CHINA.

And I agree with Jay, the rate of speed, combined with the fact that they fell on their own footprint is very suspicios. The 9-11 commission report even said it was very unusual. I think that is the exact phrase they used.

I quoted the NIST article. It explains the building fall in detail. To quote XTRATABASCO..."Please go back and re-read. :loll:

And the deal is, the government can give you a fancy excuse as to why it happened that way. But it's never happened that way before.

The "government" again. You mean the coalition of authorities from inside & outside NIST?

But it's never happened that way before. It's never happened before, ever.

You are correct. Nobody has flown a fully loaded, recently fueled 767 at full throttle into a building using the unique load bearing design of the World Trade Towers.

Neither has a skyscraper been felled by fire. Which, in my opinion, wouldn't have ever been hot enought to melt the steel used.

The steel didn't melt. The reports never claimed it did.

They sure sound like they care more about truth and freedom of speech than they do about blindly holding onto easily discredited and imlausible points of view.

Easily discredited? LOL. You have discredited nothing my good Sir. You simply use the Jay approach of saying "NO, that's wrong" when given Scientific evidence to the contrary.

Then there's this..Neo-con document called "Re-arming America's Defenses", published by the "Project for a New American Century", in the year 2000, calls for a "new Pearl Harbor" to get the American public on board for a global war of aggression to secure oil reserves?[ That Oil Reserves thing sounds familier. Too much coincidence.

There is this author called HG Wells that wrote of Submarines decades before they existed. Now they do. It sounds WAY too familiar...too much coincidence.

A gang of Arabs beat NORAD three times in one day, including an attack on the pentagon (the most highly protected airspace on the planet) using boxcutters?

No. A gang of Arabs beat a frightened airline crew three times. Crews that were following their company policy of "do not resist and do what they ask".

Are you suggesting that instead, the fighters should have just shot down a packed civilian jetliner over the nations capitol?

OOooo!!!!! And what about the Flight School Head who admits Hani Hanjour Couldn't Fly a Plane? The dude failed his flight test, and wasn't allowed to fly a Cessna?

So...who did fly the plane then? Government Suicide Robots?

But if you look at where/how he hit the pentagon... And managed to vaporize his plane in the process...

The plane didn't "vaporize"...why do you keep pulling this term out of your ass? There was TONS of wreckage...most of it inside the building.

[Juan_Bottom]

The Gulf of Tonkin has now been declassified as a fake attack on ourselves. We blew up our own patrol boat as an excuse to go to war. The Remember the Main! incident has now been declassified. We blew up our own Battaleship as an excuse to go to war. It's been done before. This exact same way... Then there's this..Neo-con document called "Re-arming America's Defenses", published by the "Project for a New American Century", in the year 2000, calls for a "new Pearl Harbor" to get the American public on board for a global war of aggression to secure oil reserves?[/i]
That Oil Reserves thing sounds familier. Too much coincidence.

In the gulf on tonkin incident, there were no causalties. We thought we were being fired upon, but it was just the sonar acting funny. So, we were firing at nothing, and the whole incident was about how we thought the n. vietnamese were firing at us...not that one of our ships blew up.

As for the Maine. The whole controversy there is whether or not the spanish hit us. It has been determined that it is most likely that a boiler exploded and the ship sank because of that, and not the spanish. There is, however, no evidence that we sank our own ship. So, that just about renders that point moot...try doing some research before you open your mouth

YOUR POINT IS MOOT. Do your own fraggin' research. Both have recently been declassified, AND WE DID BOTH TO OURSELVES ON PURPOSE!

[icicletasty69]

YOUR POINT IS MOOT. Do your own fraggin' research. Both have recently been declassified, AND WE DID BOTH TO OURSELVES ON PURPOSE!

I did my own "fraggin' research" It' s called reading. Unfortunately it's rather difficult to cite books online, so I'll just use wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Am ... #USS_Maine for the USS Maine and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_To ... rst_attack for the gulf on tonkin...

[Neoteny]

The Gulf of Tonkin has now been declassified as a fake attack on ourselves. We blew up our own patrol boat as an excuse to go to war. The Remember the Main! incident has now been declassified. We blew up our own Battaleship as an excuse to go to war. It's been done before. This exact same way... Then there's this..Neo-con document called "Re-arming America's Defenses", published by the "Project for a New American Century", in the year 2000, calls for a "new Pearl Harbor" to get the American public on board for a global war of aggression to secure oil reserves?[/i]
That Oil Reserves thing sounds familier. Too much coincidence.

In the gulf on tonkin incident, there were no causalties. We thought we were being fired upon, but it was just the sonar acting funny. So, we were firing at nothing, and the whole incident was about how we thought the n. vietnamese were firing at us...not that one of our ships blew up.

As for the Maine. The whole controversy there is whether or not the spanish hit us. It has been determined that it is most likely that a boiler exploded and the ship sank because of that, and not the spanish. There is, however, no evidence that we sank our own ship. So, that just about renders that point moot...try doing some research before you open your mouth

YOUR POINT IS MOOT. Do your own fraggin' research. Both have recently been declassified, AND WE DID BOTH TO OURSELVES ON PURPOSE!

Here is some lithium for you.

[Juan_Bottom]

Link Please showing that all pieces of Pentagon debris were shipped to CHINA.

It wasn't, I believe it's sitting in a classified warehouse now. At least it was last I checked. There was almost no debri from this crash, "because it vaporized."

I quoted the NIST article. It explains the building fall in detail. To quote XTRATABASCO..."Please go back and re-read. :loll:

I did. It's still very suspicious.

The "government" again. You mean the coalition of authorities from inside & outside NIST?

Yes, and all of their reports and comments that were edited out of the commission report. Are you new to this?

You are correct. Nobody has flown a fully loaded, recently fueled 767 at full throttle into a building using the unique load bearing design of the World Trade Towers.

Out of context. Firstly, the fire is blamed for the collapse, not the planes. They don't enter into it.

Secondly, I'm talking about three buildings falling at and about free fall speed onto their own footprint. 911 was a day full of firsts.

The steel didn't melt. The reports never claimed it did.

No? I think that you're missing out on some interesting photos and testimony!

Easily discredited? LOL. You have discredited nothing my good Sir. You simply use the Jay approach of saying "NO, that's wrong" when given Scientific evidence to the contrary.

You're starting to suck. And you're wasting your own time. I've been very cordial my friend. But here you're argueing with DANCING MUSTARD, who is on your side.
Scientific evidence like kerosiene can make 11 tons of Titanium vaporize, but not 100 people? Or free-fall speed? Or earthquakes being recorded just before the towers fell? I'm just asking questions is all. Just because you pick and choose which to answer does not negate the question as a whole.

There is this author called HG Wells that wrote of Submarines decades before they existed. Now they do. It sounds WAY too familiar...too much coincidence.

Again, all you're doing is dismissing evidence. Look up and see who took part in the think tank that came up with that document.

No. A gang of Arabs beat a frightened airline crew three times. Crews that were following their company policy of "do not resist and do what they ask".

Are you suggesting that instead, the fighters should have just shot down a packed civilian jetliner over the nations capitol?

Just after control of take down order is transferred to the President/Vice president only?
http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/260607_mineta.html
http://aolsearcht3.search.aol.com/aol/s ... ery=google

They never even sent up a jet. And yes, take down would have been the order given.