So ... are you saying they just ignored it these times? Wouldn't they notice something was amiss with FOUR AT THE SAME TIME?
Wolf
9/11 conspiracy debate
- Thread starter Toro
- Start date
So ... are you saying they just ignored it these times? Wouldn't they notice something was amiss with FOUR AT THE SAME TIME?
Wolf
Ok, befoe I answer, I would appreciate a response to the following questions.
1) What do you believe hit the Pentagon?
2) Do you believe the US Air Force shot down the plane over Pennsylvania?
Of course.
At any given time, there is something like 150,000 people flying commercial aircraft during the working day in the United States. With the average plane carrying ~100 passengers, there are about 1500 planes (or so) flying around the US. Four planes go off course. Given the chaos of the air transportation in this country, it is not unreasonable that a few planes veering off course would not warrant a military response.
Try and think how unreasonable that would have sounded on September 10. Four planes aren't along their intended course, and you scramble fully-armed fighters to see what's going on?
I believe the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile - simply because of the angle of attack and it is physically impossible for a Boeing 757 to fly a flat trajectory at an altitude of less than half its wingspan at speeds much greater than its stall speed.
I believe Flight 93 was brought down by an air-to-air missile fired from an Air National Guard F-16. That would explain separation between engine and crash site and witness accounts of the aircraft going in inverted and in flames.
Wolf
I believe Flight 93 was brought down by an air-to-air missile fired from an Air National Guard F-16. That would explain separation between engine and crash site and witness accounts of the aircraft going in inverted and in flames.
Wolf
What about the people that were "allegedly" on board? Where did they go?
So back to the original question, where is the common sense that you shoot down 1 out of 3 planes and fire a missile into the Pentagon when they could have just as easily sent a plane?
What does common sense dictate. I'm not being facetious btw.
The BBC has a video out debunking the conspiracy theorists, and this question about the missing passengers came up. They interview one of the Loose Change guys - I think his name was Dylan, you know, one of the 22 year-old unemployed college drop-outs who pieced this whole think together sitting in an isolated log cabin in the middle of a forest using the Internet. Anyways, he said he figured they were diverted to Cleveland on another plane. So the BBC found a woman who had been on that plane, and she said, no, that plane wasn't the one ol' Dylan was talking about.
I posted the BBC video here.
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/i...video-debunking-9-11-conspiracy-theories.html
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/i...video-debunking-9-11-conspiracy-theories.html
Where did those people go? I don't know. Let's hope they are living comfortably if they are still alive.
Where is the common sense in anything that happened that day? One plane out of three missed its target. "Let's Roll" became a warcry. Two things are necessary to bring apathetic people onside: heroes and martyrs. WTC and Flight 93 offered both.
What does common sense dictate? Really, the point is moot....
Wolf
Where is the common sense in anything that happened that day? One plane out of three missed its target. "Let's Roll" became a warcry. Two things are necessary to bring apathetic people onside: heroes and martyrs. WTC and Flight 93 offered both.
What does common sense dictate? Really, the point is moot....
Wolf
Last edited:
I can't believe the actual attacks, the planes hitting, people dying, is up for debate.
People are scarred for life. They have these images etched in their brains because they were there and SAW it happen. That we sit around computer screens, staring at 2 dimensional images of what these people LIVED, and doubt what they explain, is beyond my comprehension.
People are scarred for life. They have these images etched in their brains because they were there and SAW it happen. That we sit around computer screens, staring at 2 dimensional images of what these people LIVED, and doubt what they explain, is beyond my comprehension.
See that was my point, if you don't believe in something you SHOULD have a completed theory, otherwise it's purely driven by bias. Eh?
So all of the quotes of the NYFD firemen who were there and saw the backside of WTC 7 are lying... or part of the conspiracy?
Hayden: Yeah. There was enough there and we were marking off. There were a lot of damaged apparatus there that were covered. We tried to get searches in those areas. By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.
And Another...
Boyle: There were four engines and at least three trucks. So we’re heading east on Vesey, we couldn’t see much past Broadway. We couldn’t see Church Street. We couldn’t see what was down there. It was really smoky and dusty."
"A little north of Vesey I said, we’ll go down, let’s see what’s going on. A couple of the other officers and I were going to see what was going on. We were told to go to Greenwich and Vesey and see what’s going on. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.
And Another...
"They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there - this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn't really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down."
But yet you still say it was untouched?
I'm not the one writing theory - or looking between lines for hidden meanings....:-|
Wolf
Normally yes. But when 9/11 is concerned... no complete theories are neccessary.
Just a note to all participants in the current 9/11 and WTC threads, to please keep the forum rules in mind. Multiple threads on the same topic are discouraged. Please don't create any new ones outside of the preexisting ones. These ones are too long now to merge without great confusion, but new ones will be subject to merging or deletion.
Wolf
We may argue and disagree on a great many issues, but I will acknowledge you have a brain (this isn't an isult) that can actually process information, contrary to others that just suck up the info.
You have your own beliefs as to what happened that day, and yet you don't have a completed opinion. It appears to be filled with gaps. For example, you must have your own theory why they would allow two planes to hit the towers while shooting a third one down and firing a missile into the Pentagon.
Why the inconsistency? I'd really like to hear your take on this. Truly.
We may argue and disagree on a great many issues, but I will acknowledge you have a brain (this isn't an isult) that can actually process information, contrary to others that just suck up the info.
You have your own beliefs as to what happened that day, and yet you don't have a completed opinion. It appears to be filled with gaps. For example, you must have your own theory why they would allow two planes to hit the towers while shooting a third one down and firing a missile into the Pentagon.
Why the inconsistency? I'd really like to hear your take on this. Truly.
Congratulations! You have just defined a closed mind.
What bias is there in looking at both sides of a coin? When you go in with a completed theory, you're not seeking answers - you're attempting to prove yourself right. No amount of brow-beating, accusation, slam or slander is going to make a fabrication fact.
Wolf