9/11 Truth Manifesto

9/11 Truth Manifesto

lone wolf

Free Thinker

#421

Re: 9/11 Truth Manifesto

Nov 14th, 2008

Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmack

Very good... I knew you would post a clip on this.

Now... what is the difference? The plane was taking off as opposed to landing. People were at ground level as opposed to being up in the air. If the plane happened to be taking off from the Pentagon lawn you may have a point...however it was crashing. And believe me the guy wasn't going in at full thrust. Just about every witness said he seemed to be struggling with the plane.

Now was the plane taking off from the Pentagon...or landing (crashing) into the Pentagon? Whose clip is more closer to the attitude of the jet that crashed into the Pentagon?

"Crashing" is still in flight. At 400 mph plus and at allegedly a straight and level flight while fighting the additional resistance caused by ground effect, versus a stall speed of 120, that plane was NOT idling in for a landing on a wing configured for it. I assume you've probably seen an airplane - even a model of one. Please do study up on that....

Last edited by lone wolf; Nov 14th, 2008 at 01:51 PM..

Just the Facts

Free Thinker

#422

Re: 9/11 Truth Manifesto

Nov 14th, 2008

Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolf

Yeah ... you do.

No ... I don't.

Quote:

just question that final mile, the "inexperience" of the pilots,

Can't disagree with you there, I wouldn't want to be in a plane with Hanjour as pilot....if I wanted to live. If I wanted a building flown into, on the other hand, he would do just nicely.

The guy did have a commercial pilot's license. Sure I bet he sucked at take off and landing and a lot of other manoevers, but what did he care? Much like the gold-digging woman who goes to college to find a man, who cares what the profs say. If she failed every course but bagged a lawyer, she succeeded. Instructors be damned.

Quote:

and how they managed to carry it off undetected.

How were they undetected, it was known that there was a plan to fly aircraft into buildings afoot. They just didn't know when and where. Once they were in the air, it's game over Pedro.

Quote:

I've even found and described a viable means to accomplish the feat.

Excellent, I look forward to seeing you published in an aerodynamics journal. Congrats.

Quote:

Now, I'd love to hear your versions of the sciences of aeronautics and air control systems.

Guy got into the cockpit and flew the plane into the side of a building. When a guy went through a red light and hit me in an intersection, I didn't go running looking for physics professors to explain. I already knew what happened.

Quote:

How does a flight school profile that says the guy couldn't maintain a Cessna in straight and level flight

I'm not really sure that's true.

Quote:

match a flight that expertly bled off a compressive wave to fly a high-lift wing at much less than half the aircraft's wingspan?

As I said before, I'm pretty sure this whole compressive wave thing is way exagerrated. If it was a hovercraft or helicopter, OK, you got my attention. But it was a speeding jet.

You're asking me to explain how a guy with a reputation as being a wreckless maverik in the air, executed a wreckless maverickish manoever in the air? It's self explanatory.

Some points of interest from people who know way more than me:

In my opinion the official version of the fact is absolutely plausible, does not require exceptional circumstances, bending of any law of physics or superhuman capabilities. Like other (real pilots) have said, the manoeuvres required of the hijackers were within their (very limited) capabilities, they were performed without any degree of finesse and resulted in damage to the targets only after desperate overmanoeuvring of the planes. The hijackers took advantage of anything that might make their job easier, and decided not to rely on their low piloting skills. It is misleading to make people believe that the hijackers HAD to possess superior pilot skills to do what they did.
--

"It's not that difficult, and certainly not impossible," noting that it's much easier to crash intentionally into a target than to make a controlled landing. "If you're doing a suicide run, like these guys were doing, you'd just keep the nose down and push like the devil," says Capt. Bull, who flew 727s, 747s, 757s, and 767s for many years, internationally and domestically, including into the Washington, D.C., airports.

George Williams of Waxhaw, North Carolina, piloted 707s, 727s, DC-10s, and 747s for Northwest Airlines for 38 years. "I don't see any merit to those arguments whatsoever," Capt. Williams told us. "The Pentagon is a pretty big target and I'd say hitting it was a fairly easy thing to do."
--

Last edited by Just the Facts; Nov 14th, 2008 at 05:55 PM..

lone wolf

Free Thinker

#423

Re: 9/11 Truth Manifesto

Nov 14th, 2008

Quote: Originally Posted by Just the Facts

No ... I don't.

Can't disagree with you there, I wouldn't want to be in a plane with Hanjour as pilot....if I wanted to live. If I wanted a building flown into, on the other hand, he would do just nicely.

The guy did have a commercial pilot's license. Sure I bet he sucked at take off and landing and a lot of other manoevers, but what did he care? Much like the gold-digging woman who goes to college to find a man, who cares what the profs say. If she failed every course but bagged a lawyer, she succeeded. Instructors be damned.

How were they undetected, it was known that there was a plan to fly aircraft into buildings afoot. They just didn't know when and where. Once they were in the air, it's game over Pedro.

Excellent, I look forward to seeing you published in an aerodynamics journal. Congrats.

Guy got into the cockpit and flew the plane into the side of a building. When a guy went through a red light and hit me in an intersection, I didn't go running looking for physics professors to explain. I already knew what happened.

I'm not really sure that's true.

As I said before, I'm pretty sure this whole compressive wave thing is way exagerrated. If it was a hovercraft or helicopter, OK, you got my attention. But it was a speeding jet.

You're asking me to explain how a guy with a reputation as being a wreckless maverik in the air, executed a wreckless maverickish manoever in the air? It's self explanatory.

Some points of interest from people who know way more than me:

In my opinion the official version of the fact is absolutely plausible, does not require exceptional circumstances, bending of any law of physics or superhuman capabilities. Like other (real pilots) have said, the manoeuvres required of the hijackers were within their (very limited) capabilities, they were performed without any degree of finesse and resulted in damage to the targets only after desperate overmanoeuvring of the planes. The hijackers took advantage of anything that might make their job easier, and decided not to rely on their low piloting skills. It is misleading to make people believe that the hijackers HAD to possess superior pilot skills to do what they did.
--
"It's not that difficult, and certainly not impossible," noting that it's much easier to crash intentionally into a target than to make a controlled landing. "If you're doing a suicide run, like these guys were doing, you'd just keep the nose down and push like the devil," says Capt. Bull, who flew 727s, 747s, 757s, and 767s for many years, internationally and domestically, including into the Washington, D.C., airports.
George Williams of Waxhaw, North Carolina, piloted 707s, 727s, DC-10s, and 747s for Northwest Airlines for 38 years. "I don't see any merit to those arguments whatsoever," Capt. Williams told us. "The Pentagon is a pretty big target and I'd say hitting it was a fairly easy thing to do."
--

It's all or nothing with the Mother Goose crowd, isn't it?. The straight and level approach isn't supported by recorded flight data which reveals the plane to be 180 feet above any light standard. Really, I don't care. You can be right if it makes you comfortable.

Last edited by lone wolf; Nov 14th, 2008 at 06:43 PM..

darkbeaver

Republican

#424

Re: 9/11 Truth Manifesto

Nov 14th, 2008

Reckless maverick! Evil super genius able to circumvent expensive security. Part of a diobalical group of evil geni,s bent on destroying the family values of a building. Holly-Wood.

Stretch

Free Thinker

#425

Re: 9/11 Truth Manifesto

Nov 30th, 2008

Never seen before!: Fox news 5 reports WTC 7 collapse before it happens

Tags:

<LI class="taxonomy_term_58 first">--
--

Webmaster's Commentary:
Looks like they jumped the gun by about 30 seconds.

YouTube - Never seen before Fox news 5 reports WTC 7 collapse before it happens

Stretch

Free Thinker

#426

Re: 9/11 Truth Manifesto

Dec 5th, 2008

9/11 coincidences and oddities page!

(and other note worthy tidbits.)
--

Stretch

Free Thinker

#427

Re: 9/11 Truth Manifesto

Dec 28th, 2008

Video of WTC North Tower Collapse.

By: --
Tags: --
Anyone who can watch this video and still believe the twin tower collapses are the result of kerosene/office fires and a structural failure truly has to have their head so far up their arse their tonsils must be staring them in the face.

http://www.ae911truth.org) here: --

darkbeaver

Republican

#428

Re: 9/11 Truth Manifesto

Dec 28th, 2008

You know I was just thinking how much that looked like a demolition job. I think it was an inside job. I wonder who would profit from such an investment? What are the likely returns? Who was chosen to do it? How come monies getting worthless? What will we eat when the ice-creame truck don't come arround no more?
Why did the Taleban attack those building?

Stretch

Free Thinker

#429

Re: 9/11 Truth Manifesto

Jan 23rd, 2009

EXCLUSIVE... 9/11, What's Wrong With This Picture?

Submitted by toast on 2008, December 19 - 11:45pm. KnowTheLies has reviewed the content herein and agrees the author, Robert Singer, has presented a new and different perspective on the events of 9/11.
And finally a warning from President Bush, “Let us never tolerate
outrageous conspiracy theories” aired on national television after the
attacks of 9/11 and right before the Patriot Act was forced down Congress.
Super misinformation.
Google “9/11 conspiracy” and you get 134,000,000 results.
Google “9/11 outrageous conspiracy” you get 556,000 results.
There is a 9/11-truth movement in every major city in the United States.
9/11 conspiracy theories are allowed and even encouraged. Could the 9/11
Truth movement be the cover for another story?

Many official government stories are so ridiculous that a select group of people some call the puppet masters don’t expect you to believe them. Disinformation is misleading information that is true, deliberately announced publicly or leaked by a government or an intelligence agency to sow confusion and undermine credibility. Misinformation is false or inaccurate information, which is deliberately intended to deceive.

September 11, 2001:

According to the government on 9/11, 19 fanatical Arab hijackers, masterminded by an evil genius named Osama bin Laden, crash airplanes into steel skyscrapers because they “hate our freedom to consume” and for the first time in history three buildings collapse at free fall speed due to a jet fuel fire. Jet fuel, which is basically kerosene that burns at about 400c, on 9/11 took on the qualities of an explosive demolition agent, vaporizing 70 tons of aircraft into a puff of smoke and causing 110-story buildings to collapse into a pile of rubble. Misinformation?
Yes, millions believe at least a LIHOP (Let It Happen on Purpose) version of the story because a MIHOP (Made It Happen on Purpose) version results in cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort felt when one realizes 3,000 American citizens died to build up the military, pass the Patriot Act, justify the invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq and, of course, FISA--the White House's warrantless wiretapping on Americans suspected of links to terrorists.
Anyone not in denial and offered an alternate explanation needs a New York minute to realize the official story is absurd, and that is before they find out the military was conducting Operation Vigilant Guardian, an exercise on 9/11 simulating hijacked planes in the NE sector of the United States crashing into skyscrapers. The government describes the coincidence of terrorists actually hijacking planes and flying them into the World Trade Center as just one of those “bizarre coincidences,” those little quirks of fate that do happen from time to time, like the same person winning the lottery three weeks in a row. The odds are astronomical, but these things happen.
There were other bizarre coincidences on 9/11, take World Trade Center 7. Never heard of WTC 7? That isn’t surprising because, although slick science TV programs "explained" the collapses of the Twin Towers, the 7-second collapse of Building 7 remains virtually unknown probably because it wasn’t hit by a plane. Chapter 5 of the FEMA World Trade Center Building Performance Study states: “WTC 7 is of significant interest because it appears the collapse was due primarily to fire, rather than any impact damage from the collapsing towers.”
FEMA admits there is no proof a fire caused the collapse of Building 7, and the final chapter (5., instead of offering conclusions offers “Recommendations”: “Certain issues should be explored before final conclusions are reached and additional studies of the performance of WTC 7, and related building performance issues should be conducted,” as well as “suggested mechanisms for a progressive collapse should be studied and confirmed,” and “how the collapse of an unknown number of gravity columns brought down the whole building must be explained.” The report does not mention WTC 7 was home to Giuliani's Secret Command Center and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Enron, WorldCom and 3 to 4,000 other companies won the lottery when the collapse of Building 7 destroyed their SEC case files.

And then the Penta-gone:

According to Jamie Mcintryre, CNN correspondent at the scene "From my close-up inspection, there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon. And as I said, the only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon.” This report is disinformation deliberately announced publicly in order to influence public opinion.
The attack targeted the portion of the building opposite the offices of Secretary of Defense. Instead of attacking Rumsfeld’s offices, the jet executed a 320-degree descending spiral to its east, south, and southwest, losing seven thousand feet before making its final approach from the southwest hitting the portion of the Pentagon just renovated and occupied by its newest tenant, The Office of Naval Intelligence. Thirty-four of those killed were civilian accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts.
Just the day before, on September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld was speaking to Congress and confessed the Pentagon is missing 2.3 trillion Dollars. Just vanished. And, in another one of those things that don’t happen very often, The Office of Naval Intelligence was investigating the missing 2.3 trillion.
In June 2006, Muckraker Report investigative reporter Ed Haas contacted the FBI to ask why 9/11 was not specifically mentioned on Bin Laden's wanted page on the FBI website. According to the FBI “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama Bin Laden's most wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11." But according to George W. Bush, the 2003 invasion of Iraq was required because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) and a connection to 9/11--and don’t forget Bush wanted to free the Iraqi people.
Recently, the Bush Administration has admitted there were no WMDs and Saddam Hussein had no ties to the attacks on 9/11. Enter Valerie Plame, the Spy Who Got Shoved Out Into the Cold.
The Plame leak was a breach of national security and a violation of law under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. One could "predict that the investigation” of Bush and Cheney would die in the CIA as George J. Tenet would stay loyal to Bush. But instead, in another one of those strange quirks of fate, Mr. Tenet decided to do “the right thing” and investigate the scandal – ad nauseaum. The story was in the news until 2007 and Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald during the investigation commented, "As you sit back, you want to learn why was this information going out. Why were people taking this information about Valerie Wilson and giving it to reporters?" Answer? Disinformation. Instead of organizing an elaborate PR campaign to disparage Wilson, Cheney could have directed the CIA to hide a few WMDs prior to the invasion. “We found them, he had them, look, here they are, Bush and Cheney were telling the truth.”
And finally a warning from President Bush, “Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories” aired on national television after the attacks of 9/11 and right before the Patriot Act was forced down Congress. Super misinformation. Evidentially David Ray Griffin was not watching television on 9/11. A philosopher at the Claremont School of Theology, Griffin scrutinizes the timeline and physical evidence of September 11 for unresolved inconsistencies in his widely read book “New Pearl Harbor”. Griffin draws heavily on The Big Lie--a bestseller in France. He claims that if standard procedures for scrambling fighter jets had been followed, the hijacked planes should have been intercepted in time, and that, structurally, the collapse of the World Trade Center towers most likely was caused by explosives placed throughout the towers, not from the plane crashes.
Amazon Customers who searched for or bought New Pearl Harbor or expressed interest in “This Item” can find 17 pages of related titles all by authors who missed the President’s warning.
Don’t want to read about 9/11? How about a movie? Here are just a few amateur selections: 9/11, Eyewitness Hoboken, Great Illusion, Painful Deceptions, Mysteries, Greatest Lie Ever Sold. Google Video has 6 pages of related 9/11 videos.
However, without a doubt the Oscar winner for Best Documentary is “Loose Change” (2005, 2006, 2007). A series of documentaries that assert the September 11, 2001 attacks were planned and conducted by elements within the United States government and base the claims on perceived anomalies in the historical record of the attacks. Loose Change is one of the most downloaded movies on the Internet and was featured on a New York local FOX affiliate, WICZ-TV. Watching it you would assume Oliver Stone was the director, not two college students Dylan Avery & Jason Bermas who allegedly made it by “accident.”
Google “9/11 conspiracy” and you get 134,000,000 results.
Google “9/11 outrageous conspiracy” you get 556,000 results.
There is a 9/11-truth movement in every major city in the United States.
9/11 conspiracy theories are allowed and even encouraged. Could the 9/11 Truth movement be the cover for another story?

Robert Singer - December 13, 2008 - Exclusive to KnowTheLies
Other great articles by Robert Singer can be found here:
--
--
--
--

Authors Bio: Robert Singer is a retired information technology professional and an environmental activist living in southern California. In 1995 he and his cousin Adam D. Singer founded IPC The Hospitalist Company, Inc., where he served as chief technology officer. Today the company manages more than 130 practice groups, providing care in some 300 medical facilities in 18 states. Prior to that he was president of Useful Software, a developer and publisher of business and consumer software for the personal computing Industry.

--

Stretch

Free Thinker

#430

Re: 9/11 Truth Manifesto

Feb 10th, 2009

Fire Consumes WTC 7-Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse

'Giant flames engulf every floor of 44-story building and it remains standing, yet limited fires across just 8 floors of WTC 7 brought down building within 7 seconds on 9/11. How can NIST's "new phenomenon" explain this one?'
--

Stretch

Free Thinker

#431

Re: 9/11 Truth Manifesto

Feb 10th, 2009

--

Tags: --
Here is the kicker. Al-Omari is not dead. After the FBI named the wrong guy, based on a man with the same name in Florida wh owent to a flight school, they changed it to a new person and they changed the birth date too to make it match. They have a photo of this man. Well the second Alomari also turned out to be alive. He said his pass port had been stolen. Now wait a minute. If this man is alive and his passport was stolen...then just who the Hell was it that went out of their way with Atta to get photographed on Two ATMs and one Airport security video?
--

Stretch

Free Thinker

#432

Re: 9/11 Truth Manifesto

Feb 11th, 2009

Eyewitness to 9/11 Pentagon Strike Says 'There Was 2nd Plane'

Stretch

Free Thinker

#433

Re: 9/11 Truth Manifesto

Feb 11th, 2009

--

Tags:

<LI class="taxonomy_term_58 first">-- <LI class=taxonomy_term_68>--
--

Between August 26 and September 11, 2001, a group of speculators, identified by the American Securities and Exchange Commission as Israeli citizens, sold "short" a list of 38 stocks that could reasonably be expected to fall in value as a result of the pending attacks. These speculators operated out of the Toronto, Canada and Frankfurt, Germany, stock exchanges and their profits were specifically stated to be "in the millions of dollars."

Webmaster's Commentary:
A reader asked a cogent question of how it was possible to know that Bernie Madoff's wife withdrew $15 million days before he confessed to his ponzi scheme, yet nobody ever found out who shorted the stocks of the airlines involved with 9-11.
So I dug this out in reply, and especially in light of Bernie Madoff's scam-capades, decided to relink it here to the front page.
--

Similar Threads

114

The Bankers Manifesto 1892
by darkbeaver | Mar 9th, 2010

Diary of a Manifesto
by jellyfarm | Jul 14th, 2008

el solipsisto manifesto (not everyone's cup of tea... =)
by mayasecret | Aug 23rd, 2006

MANIFESTO: against extremism in Islam
by Finder | Mar 7th, 2006