September 11, 2001: Interesting and Less Talked About 911 Info!

a reply to: AgentSmith

You are such a rude poster, which is why I don't wish to discuss anything with you. First of all, I was making a broad statement about the OSers.

But yes, if you think 19 guys with box cutters, directed by a man in a cave, on dialysis, were able to penetrate our airspace, fly around for an hour without being intercepted, knocking over three buildings, and putting a hole in the Pentagon, then you subscribe to a wacky conspiracy theory.

Call me all the names you want, it doesn't change the FACT that the OS is a conspiracy theory, and a wild one at that. So, just admit it, you are a conspiracy theorist. By definition. Just the one of your choosing.

a reply to: Jchristopher5

Factually inaccurate would be the best words to describe your beliefs. Osama did not "direct" anything that day. It had been planned out long before, and the 19 were following the plan.

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Jchristopher5

Factually inaccurate would be the best words to describe your beliefs. Osama did not "direct" anything that day. It had been planned out long before, and the 19 were following the plan.

As usual you cherry picked what you wanted to comment on. This is the official story.

Osama Bin Laden was the head of the Al Qaeda terrorist group and organized a group of 19 devout religious fundamentalists (who like strippers and coc aine), who were trained to fly in the US. The 19 (several of who are alive per the BBC and the Guardian) boarded four flights on September 11, 2001. They overpowered passengers and the crew, and flew off course for an hour (given or take) without so much as being intercepted by one fighter jet. They crashed into three buildings, toppling three buildings in NYC, and putting a hole in the Pentagon.

That is exactly the official story. And it is, in my opinion, a wacky conspiracy theory. There is no doubt, none whatsoever, that it is a conspiracy theory. It is that by definition. It is, also, in my opinion, considering the facts that I mentioned above, wacky.

You and your gang tacking compadres can call me whatever you want, which you will, but that is my opinion. And my opinion is not for sale, nor is my integrity.

originally posted by: Jchristopher5
That is exactly the official story.

Now let us look at the conspiracy theory nonsense....

No planes were used, they were holograms.
The planes were fitted with pods that fired missiles before they hit the buildings.
Silent explosives were used'
nanoo nanoo thermite was used'
mini nuclear weapons were used.
The planes were swapped and military planes were used.
The buildings were actually empty.
Beam weapons from space were used.
The planes were remote controlled.
A cruise missile was used.
Tonnes of explosives were fitted in the building, but no one noticed - this was done without shutting the building down, so they carried the tonnes of explosives required in their pockets.
Also the silly claim that people said $2.3 trillion was missing.

So which silly conspiracy theory do you support?

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Jchristopher5
That is exactly the official story.

Now let us look at the conspiracy theory nonsense....

No planes were used, they were holograms.
The planes were fitted with pods that fired missiles before they hit the buildings.
Silent explosives were used'
nanoo nanoo thermite was used'
mini nuclear weapons were used.
The planes were swapped and military planes were used.
The buildings were actually empty.
Beam weapons from space were used.
The planes were remote controlled.
A cruise missile was used.
Tonnes of explosives were fitted in the building, but no one noticed - this was done without shutting the building down, so they carried the tonnes of explosives required in their pockets.
Also the silly claim that people said $2.3 trillion was missing.

So which silly conspiracy theory do you support?

Brucie, is next on the scene for the pile on!

Ah, right out of the playbook. Dont agree to anything negative, regurgitate a bunch of confusing garbage.

You will now admit that your OS is a conspiracy theory? I say its wacky, but I know you will never say that. You have no ability to be intellectually honest.

So, we make progress if you first agree the OS is a conspiracy theory. Brucie?

originally posted by: Jchristopher5
So, we make progress if you first agree the OS is a conspiracy theory. Brucie?

How about you tell us which silly conspiracy theory you support, so what do you think happened? You probably will not want to, as when it is closely examined even you will realise how silly it actually is!

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Jchristopher5
So, we make progress if you first agree the OS is a conspiracy theory. Brucie?

How about you tell us which silly conspiracy theory you support, so what do you think happened?

Nope, because that is what you want. I have no desire to please you, your opinion of what I think means less than nothing to me.

However, I would like an answer to my question. Agree that the OS is a conspiracy theory? Are you even allowed to do that? I mean with your OS conviction, of course.

a reply to: hellobruce

You have mentioned every false conspiracy theory started by the very people that are trying to cover up the facts behind 911. Those theories were created to make truth seekers look foolish as your reply proved the very reason why those fake theories were promoted.

no real investigator or truth seeker has ever subscribe or believe in those theories and they have been fought and argued against by truth seekers themselves on this site.

originally posted by: Shadow Herder
a reply to: hellobruce

You have mentioned every false conspiracy theories started by the very people that are trying to cover up the facts behind 911.

All started by "truthers". Funny how you admit "truthers" are trying to cover up the facts behind 9/11!

Those theories were created to make truth seekers look foolish

"Truthers" are NOT truth seekers, they ignore the truth to push their silly conspiracy theories.

no real investigator or truth seeker has ever subscribe or believe in those series

True, however "truthers" are NOT truth seekers or real investigators.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Jchristopher5
That is exactly the official story.

Now let us look at the conspiracy theory nonsense....

No planes were used, they were holograms.
The planes were fitted with pods that fired missiles before they hit the buildings.
Silent explosives were used'
nanoo nanoo thermite was used'
mini nuclear weapons were used.
The planes were swapped and military planes were used.
The buildings were actually empty.
Beam weapons from space were used.
The planes were remote controlled.
A cruise missile was used.
Tonnes of explosives were fitted in the building, but no one noticed - this was done without shutting the building down, so they carried the tonnes of explosives required in their pockets.
Also the silly claim that people said $2.3 trillion was missing.

So which silly conspiracy theory do you support?

Did you know that all those theories originated and were promoted by Phil jayhan of letsroll and webfairy which were later found to be working with Meigs from popular mechanics, the vanity fair. Jayhan funded loose change.

So yes, the theories you mentioned were created not by truthers but by the by the perpetrators of 911.

Is it not true that the elevators were being overhauled in the months before the attack? Or that bomb sniffing dogs, present since the '93 attack, were not at work on 2/6 or thereabouts?

Or that all but one maintenance elevator shaft on the opposite side of the buildings do not connect from top to bottom?

What about the "phantom plane"flying south west?

How about all the top officials whose responsibility it was to oversee military protocol that were absent from work and/or unreachable?

Or the guys that were seen messing with the wreckage aka crime scene at the pentagon?

Or the lack of footage of the so called "hijackers" via airport security?

Or the 23rd frame of the pentagon footage?

The many eyewitnesses that heard explosions? ( there's even audio and video footage )

I'm sorry but if there's a checklist for building demolition, all three buildings meet the criteria.

originally posted by: CheckPointCharlie
Is it not true that the elevators were being overhauled in the months before the attack? Or that bomb sniffing dogs, present since the '93 attack, were not at work on 2/6 or thereabouts?

]

No, it is not true - Police K9 Sirius died on 9/11 at the WTC. Care to show us a valid source that the elevators were being overhauled?

Or that all but one maintenance elevator shaft on the opposite side of the buildings do not connect from top to bottom?

???? So what? sites.google.com...

What about the "phantom plane"flying south west?

What "phantom plane"? Source?

How about all the top officials whose responsibility it was to oversee military protocol that were absent from work and/or unreachable?

Please detail who was not where....

Or the guys that were seen messing with the wreckage aka crime scene at the pentagon?

What are you babbling about now? You really are not making any sense, how about give some sources for your claims, as some are just not true.

a reply to: hellobruce

K9 "Sirius" is irrelevant to the date of 9/6 ... rather the days prior to the attacks. It's been reported that security was eased in the days leading up to the attacks. To be fair, it was also reported that drills were implemented prior to the attack and that the "easing" of security was actually ( security ) returning to normal.

I've asked these questions because I don't know the answers as to their truthfulness. Please bare with me ...

a reply to: hellobruce

Forgive me for not addressing each counterpoint offered up by you in one post.

The reason it's important that only one elevator scaled the length of the building(s) is that it offers little in the idea that the remaining jet fuel could poor down the one shaft located on the opposite side, the full length of the building, and cause as much damage as the OS claims. Not only that, being liberal in the estimation that half the fuel remained, was it even enough to reach the basement where multiple reports of explosions occurred? It's been surmised that probably not even a quarter of the fuel remained and that was barely enough to fill a common above ground pool which most certainly would not have made it to the basement.

elavator world article from 4/11 which certainly offers cover for planting explosives. Again, I'm not claiming this is true, I'm asking "is it possible"? And searching for answers to satisfy my curious mind.

The phantom plane refers to AA11, which was reported to be in flight even after it already hit wtc. Interestingly enough, it appears as though the source of that recording has never been identified. What's more interesting is that this phantom plane and one more over Ohio had flight controllers looking for interceptors. The two interceptors sent to investigate AA11 were sent out over the Atlantic no where near threat and the one in Ohio couldn't gain support because his authority was questioned. All the while, even after the pentagon was struck, the military exercises carried on. Funny that?

To touch on earlier points made in the thread, the FAA has always maintained tracking control over internal flight threats. That's the protocol. Additionally, each plane was tracked almost the entire time. The confusion that day was solely based on the inability to determine if the ( four? ) flights were part of military exercises or not. It appears as though someone was able to take advantage of those exercises.

chain of command absent on 9/11

a reply to: Shadow Herder

Then what DOES a "real investigator" believe? Because I have yet to see a "real" investigator using anything OTHER than the theories that routinely show up here.