The Serious 9/11 Arguments Compilation.

SO THIS LEAVES THE OTHER BIG QUESTION – WHO WERE THE PASSENGERS AND WHERE DID THEY GO?

Researchers who have studied The September 11th Victim’s Compensation Fund and The Social Security Death Index (SSDI) have discovered inconsistent data. SSDI is privately-owned and is not part of Social Security. The SSDI has an accuracy rate of 83%. The Victim’s Fund is where the government gave family members of those who lost their lives on that day a load of money. In return these families were told to keep quiet about 9/11. Human greed or not, any family should want compensation to help deal with what has been taken from them.

Comparing the SSDI and the Comp Fund, this is what we get:
Flight 11: SSDI = 20 dead (out of 92 passengers) Comp = 3 (only 3 families received money)
Judy Larocque, Laura Neira and Candance Williams.
Flight 77: SSDI = 14 dead (out of 64 passengers) Comp = 5 (only 5 families received money)
William Caswell, Eddie Dillard, Ian Gray, John Sammartino and Leonard Taylor.
Flight 175: SSDI = 18 dead (out of 65 passengers) Comp = 3 (only 3 families received money)
Michael Tarrou, Gloria Debarrera and Timothy Ward.
Flight 93: SSDI = 6 dead (out of 45 passengers) Comp = 0 (none of the families received money)
Not one single family applied for compensation?

Of the 266 people that we are told died, only 78 passengers show up dead on the SSSDI? And of the 266 people that we are told died; only 11 families received any money? To get the money the families only had to agree to not sue the airlines. The minimum federal award was $250,000. The average payout was $1,800,000.

Comparing the SSDI comp percentage with the governments’ final comp report (with no names listed) we get this:
Flight 11: SSDI = 22% / Gov = 71%
Flight 77: SSDI = 22% / Gov = 52%
Flight 93: SSDI = 13% / Gov = 56%
Flight 175: SSDI = 28% / Gov = 71%
As usual for 9/11, things do not add up. Except that there was no 100% pay out. 1.8 million dollars… nah, that’s cool, I don’t need your blood money. I’ll just keep paying my taxes like nothing happened.

Lastly, take a look at some of the passengers that were supposedly on Flight 77:
3 Boeing Engineers (one former Air Force and NSA)
Navy Test Pilot
Navy Scientist
Navy Lawyer
Navy Engineer
Navy Electronics Tech
Software Developer (former Navy)
Consultant Manager (former Marine)
BAE Electrical Engineer
Wife of Solicitor General

Epilog:

My guess is that these passengers enrolled in a secret government program, one that would allow them to start new lives if they sacrificed their old identities. The good part in me is guessing that they were used, that they did NOT KNOW that there would be thousands of people murdered that day. They could have been told about the mid-air plane switches and that their old identities would die in those staged plane crashes because of terrorist, but NOT that anyone would really die. Who knows, maybe THAT is why the air controllers could hear screaming on the plane? Maybe the passengers were PISSED when they found out they had been duped?

Once they had done their thing it was too late, and for one of them to admit what had happened would put ALL of them in a bad light. And of course they could be murdered if they came out with the truth. Maybe those 11 people on that showed up on the list WERE murdered after wards for not following the plan?

Maybe the air crews were all CIA and the passengers were all government employees or were going to be government employees from that point on? Agents, engineers, designers, etcetera… they all went to new assignments or retired on that day, starting a new life with new identities. They probably all got compensation too.

Summation:

So there you have it, 1 month of study, 15,246 words.

In short, this is how I see it:

Those at the top of the US military/government caused the 9/11 attacks.

For the twin towers there are three options:

1 - They struck the towers using cruise missiles, possibly launched from a submarine right off the coast. These cruise missiles were cloaked in a 3D hologram most likely generated by a B2 flying above the missile. The FAA and military radar show 2 traces, one for each, and no altering of radar data was needed.

OR

2 - They struck the towers using remotely flown military 767 fuel tankers. If they used 767’s, they also used some sort of weapon attached to the plane to blow holes in the outer walls of the towers right before impact. If they used 767’s, they also altered the radar information for the two planes to make it look like they were flying fast enough to go right into the buildings.

OR

3 – There were no planes or missiles at all.

Either way - they then blew the towers up from within, so they would be completely destroyed and kill as many innocent people as possible. Even locking the rooftop doors so people within could not be rescued by helicopter. Looting gold from the WTC was probably just the gravy on top.

The next part of their plan may have been aborted, because the crash in Shanksville should have happened at Building 7, or maybe at the White House.

They blew Building 7 up because it had all of the evidence of their plot in it. Like the other buildings, it was blown up from within.

The Pentagon was to be struck by something flying, to give the impression of terrorist hijackers. But like the towers, it was really blown up from within. Like Building 7, they attacked the Pentagon to destroy evidence and to bring on the military “Pearl Harbor” scenario - the excuse to go to war. This of course gives them power and makes them money – which is what THEY are all about. They had to cause maximum destruction through a sneak attack to get the American people to want to go to war. Pearl Harbor all over again.

REMEMBER THE MAINE!

When questioning why the 9/11 attack event happened - we are told THE GOVERNMENT SAYS IT WAS OFFICIALLY A CONSPIRACY – but one perpetrated by Muslim Terrorist.

When confronted with the idea that the government is lying – and that the 9/11 attack event was actually caused by the US government - the first question we ask ourselves is usually – would our own government actually murder thousands of their own people just to start a war?

This seems almost inconceivable to the average person. Even I – someone who knows from the UFO experience that the government lies all the time – did not want to believe that 9/11 was a big lie. But once the average person learns - and accepts - the history of the way their government works – that person starts to question things.

Now it might take you a week to see it, or it might take you a month, but THERE ARE 2 SIMPLE REASONS TO BELIEVE NO TERRORIST WERE INVOLVED.

1 - THE TERRORIST COULD NOT JUST BOLT ON A LARGE POD UNDER AN AIRLINER LIKE THE ONE SEEN ON THE FLIGHT 175 PLANE. It takes hours to reinforce the interior of the plane with beams and mountings added to the airframe. The military calls these hard points. Without them, aero drag would shear off anything like that pod and leave a big hole in the plane long before it reached 500 mph. NO COMMERCIAL AIRPORT WOULD HAVE ALLOWED THIS AIRLINER TO TAKE OFF LOOKING LIKE THAT.

2 - The people that blow up buildings for a living say that it should take at least 50,000 pounds of explosives to take down the towers. They say the terrorist would need to get into the elevator shafts next to the vertical support columns and above the ceiling panels next to the horizontal beams. This takes weeks and weeks of work and there is no way terrorist would have been allowed into a building that had already been bombed less than ten years before without them being fully vetted. Are we really supposed to believe that this could happen, especially with the President of the United States brother is involved in running security for the towers?

The entire week before 9/11, the fire alarms In Building 7 were set to “test condition” and would not have worked. In the towers, some of the elevators were not working for weeks before 9/11, with people being told the elevators were either being serviced or modernized. The companies that would be the best at doing this work would be the ACE elevator people and the LVI asbestos people. Both companies worked in the towers for years and LVI worked in the Pentagon too. Do you think terrorist were working for them and that they could do their dirty work without being seen, for weeks and weeks and weeks? DO YOU REALLY THINK ELEVATOR AND ASBESTOS WORKERS WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO SUPER EXPENSIVE MILITARY NANO THERMITE?

AND IF THE TERRORIST HAD PLANTED BOMBS INSIDE THESE FOUR BUILDINGS, WHY WOULD THEY BOTHER TO HIJACK AIRPLANES?

Once it is obvious that the official story is not true - that it could not simply be a small group of terrorist - then we have to decide who in the military or the government is involved. It is easy to say that Israel could be behind it – because anything anti-Arab benefits them. But they could not get away with it without the US government being involved, in either the attack or the cover-up. Sure the US let the Israelis get away with the Liberty – but that is a big step down from the death toll of 9/11. The US controls its airspace, not Israel. So you can try and talk it away from US involvement all you want - but it always comes right back to them. NO MATTER HOW YOU SPLICE IT, THE TOP MEMBERS OF THE US GOVERNMENT ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE 9/11 ATTACKS.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

1 - They struck the towers using cruise missiles, possibly launched from a submarine right off the coast. These cruise missiles were cloaked in a 3D hologram most likely generated by a B2 flying above the missile. The FAA and military radar show 2 traces, one for each, and no altering of radar data was needed.

Pure fantasy from someone who spends too much time with video games.

The next part of their plan may have been aborted, because the crash in Shanksville should have happened at Building 7, or maybe at the White House.

How do you crash a hologram?

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

Let’s start here...

You claim this

So there you have it, 1 month of study, 15,246 words.

And this

THE TERRORIST COULD NOT JUST BOLT ON A LARGE POD UNDER AN AIRLINER LIKE THE ONE SEEN ON THE FLIGHT 175 PLANE.

But you never came across there was no pod....

Debunking 9/11 Myths: About the Airplanes
www.popularmechanics.com...

FACT: One of the clearest, most widely seen pictures of the doomed jet's undercarriage was taken by photographer Rob Howard and published in New York magazine and elsewhere (opening page). PM sent a digital scan of the original photo to Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University. Greeley is an expert at analyzing images to determine the shape and features of geological formations based on shadow and light effects. After studying the high-resolution image and comparing it to photos of a Boeing 767-200ER's undercarriage, Greeley dismissed the notion that the Howard photo reveals a "pod." In fact, the photo reveals only the Boeing's right fairing, a pronounced bulge that contains the landing gear.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

The Pentagon was to be struck by something flying, to give the impression of terrorist hijackers. But like the towers, it was really blown up from within.

Way was three no crater in the pentagon floor from a blast. How was the front of the pentagon blown in, and not out. Why was the pentagon roof not blown off. Way was the damage in the pentagon from wreckage with points of damage in decreasing diameters in a line of direction. Not a expanding and diminishing blast cone. Why was the interior of the pentagon not blasted out onto the lawn. Why where windows not broken, or broken in only the direction of wreckage travel. The pentagon facade windows where not blown out. Why no telltale signs of demolitions shrapnel knocking out windows? Or why is there no evidence of demolitions shrapnel recovered with the human remains?

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

Either way - they then blew the towers up from within,

There is absolutely no evidence of this in the video, audio, or seismic evidence.

No cutting charges cutting through the building’s facade for the fantasy of exterior columns cut by CD. No audio evidence of a blast with the force to cut steel. No evidence of a pressure wave with the force to cut steel. No indication of demolitions shrapnel being ejected at 140km/h.

Is is false the collapse of WTC 1 and 2 started in areas of the jet impacts. Impacts that cut core columns, elevator cables, fire mains, and other building services. Yet a CD system maintained its integrity to start the collapse in the areas with the most impact and fire damage?

For WTC 2. The below link contains the video that show WTC 2’s collapse initiation.

the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/
www.metabunk.org...

WTC 2’s collapse was initiated by the exterior columns being pulled in by cooling and contracting floor trusses. The outer vertical columns are bowing in. No signs of cutting charges. Nothing being ejected by explosives. No indication of a detention with a pressure wave with the force to cut steel columns. No evidence of columns being cut period. But the video does show the vertical columns buckling.

You didn’t spend a month studying the actual twin towers’ video, collapse, audio, seismic data, metallurgy, and the American welding society reports concerning WTC 1 and 2.

You spent a month weaving together truth movement lies, and ignoring the numerous sources that debunk those lies. With theories not supported by the actual WTC video and audio.

And why didn’t you mention there are at least three reports concerning WTC 7 that conclude collapse from fire related stresses. One of those studies was a signed deposition for a court case.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

One problem - the "767 tanker" aka KC46 did not exist at that time

15 years later Boeing is still trying to get it to work

You think Boeing has a sekrit stash of planes getting sitting around ?

Boeing builds aircraft to order, each one cost 100 million plus and takes months to build

Think someone at Boeing would notice that been building extra 767/KC46 …….??

a reply to: samkent
You are right about fantasy, there is a lot of fantasy involved with the governments ideas of 9/11.

You are right on video games too, though I do not play video games, I am aware of what they look like. I am also aware that pilots say that learning to fly airliners is just like playing a video game. And pilots that launch missiles at targets also say it is just like playing video games.

As for crashing a hologram, the hologram would envelope the cruise missile prior to it hitting the building. At that point the projection would end, which is what should have happened at the second tower, but the hologram continues out the other side of the tower for a second too long.

Operator error, which we will excuse the hologram operator for, because it was a big explosion.

There was no building involved in the Shanksville crash, so no hologram was deployed at the time of the crash – because the crash was an accident – or an abort.

a reply to: firerescue
Thank you for your comment. Boeing says that in 2001, Congress authorized the Air Force to explore leasing 100 Boeing 767 tankers. If the Air Force did not actually have any available on the day of 9/11 that would remove part of my what hit the tower question.

My information came from someone saying that the military had several 767 tankers parked on an air base in Florida at the time of 9/11. Now I will have to spend weeks trying to track down that info again, to see where it came from and if there is any validity to it.

a reply to: firerescue
Have not found the info I first saw, but I found the airport. Eglin Air Force Base in Florida is the headquarters of Air Force Special Operations Command. Apparently at the time of 9/11 there were at least 2 military Boeing 757’s there. But these do not seem to be tankers – these seem to be the C-32 variant.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

The first KC46 was not built until 2015 ………..

On 12 December 2013, Boeing joined the wings and fuselage for the first 767-2C to be adapted into a KC-46A.[45] On 23 December 2013, the first two PW4062 engines were delivered.[46] The first of four 767-2C provision freighters were to complete assembly by the end of January 2014. Once assembled, it would go through ground vibration and instrumentation testing and have body fuel tanks added. The first test flight would occur during summer 2014 and include measuring its rate of climb and descent. The Engineering Manufacturing and Design (EMD) model would be integrated with instrumentation, electronics, and technologies needed to become a military-standard KC-46A by January 2015. Seven low-rate production KC-46s are to be delivered in 2015, 12 in 2016, and 15 delivered annually from 2017 to 2027. The KC-46A can carry 212,299 lb (96,297 kg) of fuel,[47] 10 percent more than the KC-135, and 65,000 lb (29,000 kg) of cargo. It has both a probe and drogue and a boom and receptacle to conduct multiple refueling missions on a single mission. Survivability is improved with infrared countermeasures and the aircraft has limited electronic warfare capabilities.[48] The airframe can be configured to carry 114 passengers and to serve as an aero-medical evacuation aircraft. The last of four test aircraft began assembly on 16 January 2014.[49]

en.wikipedia.org...

Boeing is still trying to work out the kinks
First operational squadron is to be based at McConnell Air base in Kansas

There is a thread on this board under AIRCRAFT PROJECTS outlining deployment of KC46

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
even though those tips are so fragile they cannot be walked upon!

a reply to: spiritualarchitect


Please show an example TODAY of a plane sized hologram in the dark never mind daylight as the the planes going through the walls first of all about half of the facade is GLASS second do you understand physics at all.

Collisions are all about ENERGY



Or how about a foam dart through wood



or an aluminium can



If you took time to look at the holes created by the aircraft you will see mainly failure at the coulmn tree joints.

Go and learn some physics

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

With all the video and audio of the twin towers shows buckling induced their collapse, not cut or blown apart columns. Is that a false statement?

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
even though those tips are so fragile they cannot be walked upon!

How many gallons of fuel are stored in the wings at takeoff?

a reply to: waypastvne
The wingtip is the tip of the wing. The part where the guy is NOT walking. It is the fragile part that you are not supposed to walk on. It is not strong enough to hold fuel. It holds the light bulb.

On a 767 it is also about 25 feet back from where the wing meets the fuselage, meaning the wing should break off before the tip even gets near the building.

But on the video it all enters the tower like butter, like the tower is not even there.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

Collisions are all about ENERGY



Or how about a foam dart through wood



or an aluminium can



Do you think people looking at high speed collisions use 25-30 frames per second cameras, remember these videos at the time are from consumer cameras.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

You

As for crashing a hologram, the hologram would envelope the cruise missile prior to it hitting the building. At that point the projection would end, which is what should have happened at the second tower, but the hologram continues out the other side of the tower for a second too long.

One, what lamps have the power to create the illusion in broad daylight.

Two, how was the illusion projected block after block through a city of high rise buildings.

Three. This specifically “but the hologram continues out the other side of the tower” was a dust cloud from the ejected pressure wave of compressed air from the jet. The hologram could not be projected through the building. Why was the hologram not mistakenly projected on the side of the tower. What projector was mounted on the towers to creat the supposed illusion of the front nose cone and leading wing edges. Why would there be a projector on the opposite side of the tower for a “hologram continues out the other side of the tower”? Why? How?

Four, how would a missile 4 foot in diameter mimic the dimensions and physics of a jet liner impact.

Five. There was no explosives planted on the exterior of the towers to mimic a directional impact forcing the outwall in.

Six, examination showed the impact hole boundaries were created from weld joints breaking by a massive impact at where sections of columns where joined. No evidence the steel was worked on by explosives.

Seven, where was the thousands of gallons of fuel staged in the towers to simulate the fire balls of a jet liner impact.

In your attempt to look intelligent, you just look like a person that falls for truth movement pseudoscience. A person with no understanding of physics.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

You

wing should break off before the tip even gets near the building.

One, why?

Two, because it breaks off its velocity instantly becomes zero, and then drops straight down to the ground. Hell no. It still would be traveling at 500 mph with the momentum to be carried into the towers.


Three. On page 49 of the below linked document, please describe the dimensions of the impact holes in relation to the jet images layered over the impact detonations?

Aircraft Impact Damage
web.mit.edu...

Four. Hard to tell frame by frame what actual happened when the jets hit with such speed the jet’s position changed as much as 12 feet between frames.

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

You make a compelling argument. Especially on the missing passengers.
WhTs even more frightening however is the listed ones and their fields of work.

All military or former.
All specializing in aeroengineering or aerospace, or in software development.

Sounds like a specialist tech op if you ask me.
I don't believe in coincidence.