Nobody doubts that 9-11 was commited by government insiders anymore, right?

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by dragonseeker
well, to be fair, not everyone who believes the official story is a fox news-loving bushbot, but you make a good point about amateur pilots hitting their targets. I've taken flying lessons, in a cessna 152 and a 172(skyhawk), hell that wasn't easy, I can't imagine what flying a 747 with their limited time as pilots would be like..that's one of the things that bother me most, frankly.

Not even that. According to the "confession" tape by OBL himself, they didn't even know the operation until they boarded the planes. Now, it becomes even harder to imagine that they would be able to hit their targets at all since they didn't even know them until that morning. Those are some expert pilots right there.

If that's true, the official story becomes even more impossible...

Griff, you must admit though that there is a certain ambiguity in his statement. Does he explicitly state that every single operative was clueless as to their mission? Could he have meant all of the jihadis except the pilots? Like many of the events on and proceeding 9/11, this can be viewed two ways.

WEEEEEEEEEEEEL! YES.... Pull your head out of "LaLa LAND".... With Politics being what they are "TODAY"! Anyone or Group, (available in the US, to be "Grabbed")Text Maroon that Killed "Thousands" and Destroyed @ 20 Billion in "Infrastructure", would have been "UP on Charges" a long time ago!TextText

Originally posted by dragonseeker
If that's true, the official story becomes even more impossible...

It's true.

UBL: The brothers, who conducted the operation, all they knew was that they have a martyrdom operation and we asked each of them to go to America but they didn't know anything about the operation, not even one letter. But they were trained and we did not reveal the operation to them until they are there and just before they boarded the planes.

Source: www.npr.org...

Edit: PartChimp. It seams unambiguous to me.

[edit on 6/4/2007 by Griff]

The translation seems loose to me. If you go literally by what he said, then yes, it does seem cut and dry. I would like to have an independent translation put together of the statement though, to define whether or not there is wiggle room in there. Even taking it literally though, he could have been talking about the majority of the high-jackers not knowing, maybe everyone except the US trained pilots.

I mean, how do you know that they were not well trained on the locations of the WTC's and the Pentagon, but were not informed of the mission to strike them with planes until the day of the operation? Just because they were not aware of the mission until hours before they executed it in no way shape or form means they could not have been adequately trained to carry it out. No smoking gun here.

[edit on 4-6-2007 by PartChimp]

[edit on 4-6-2007 by PartChimp]

Originally posted by PartChimp
The translation seems loose to me. If you go literally by what he said, then yes, it does seem cut and dry. I would like to have an independent translation put together of the statement though, to define whether or not there is wiggle room in there. Even taking it literally though, he could have been talking about the majority of the high-jackers not knowing, maybe everyone except the US trained pilots.

I mean, how do you know that they were not well trained on the locations of the WTC's and the Pentagon, but were not informed of the mission to strike them with planes until the day of the operation? Just because they were not aware of the mission until hours before they executed it in no way shape or form means they could not have been adequately trained to carry it out. No smoking gun here.

[edit on 4-6-2007 by PartChimp]

[edit on 4-6-2007 by PartChimp]

Partchimp: navigating airspace, especially in an area as busy as the east coast, is not something you can just "do".. knowing where targets on the ground are is much different than being able to intentionally fly an airplane into them. Cory Lidle, the yankee pitcher who died flying recently is testament to that..he even had a CFI(Certified flight instructor) onboard with him.

I never said it was a smoking gun. But, go ahead and give yourself all the excusses you want. He said it himself that they were not aware of the mission until they were about to board the planes.

Let's break this down.

UBL: The brothers

The highkackers.

, who conducted the operation

Which would include all since they all conducted the operation.

, all they knew was that they have a martyrdom operation

They know they will be martyrs.

and we asked each of them to go to America but they didn't know anything about the operation, not even one letter.

So, they know they will be martyrs but not what they will be doing. NOT EVEN ONE LETTER.

But they were trained and we did not reveal the operation to them until they are there and just before they boarded the planes.

So, again I ask. What is so ambiguous? Unless you don't want to see it?

Let's put it this way. They are trained on how to fly the planes. They are trained(for dragonseeker's sake ) how to navigate east coast airspace. They are trained on how to smuggle weaponry on to planes. They are trained on their respective targets (the Pentagon, WTC's, possibly the White House); i.e. how to locate them. They receive a phone call the morning of the attack; "Your team will assume command of plane A and ram it into World Trade Center One." So on and so on. That is the ambiguity of the statement. What was included in their training up to the notification?

[edit on 4-6-2007 by PartChimp]

I'd like to hear from our pilots etc. around here about this.

Is it possible (even probable) that somone could do that?

Originally posted by Griff
I'd like to hear from our pilots etc. around here about this.

Is it possible (even probable) that somone could do that?

I don't qualify as pilot, atm I'm just a guy who took some lessons, but what I do know is, american airspace is lettered and layered: class A,B, C, D airspace at so on. it's broken down so certain types of planes are only allowed at certain altitudes. If a cessna, say, goes too high, that's called "busting airspace" and you're not supposed to do that, and vice versa with larger aircraft being too low. a 747 flying the way it would have had to fly in order to hit lower manhattan should have raised all kinds of red flags, it's not just about the transponder. there's just a lot wrong with the official story; this part sticks out especially wrong to me., also there's nearly an hour's time difference between impact at the WTC and impact at the pentagon..that plane should have been tracked and shadowed by fighters, waiting for a shoot-down order, but it wasn't according to the admin..the eastern corridor is one of the most heavily defended pieces of airspace in the world...our pilots are the best of the best..no way we just got caught with our pants down.

[edit on 4-6-2007 by dragonseeker]

...and if a transponder is switched off that's considered to be as much as a distress signal as if 7700 were entered as the code. The smoking gun is the NORAD stand down.

Dick Cheney personally called the fighter aircraft off...
is one point against the guy isnt it?
bergle

this is a link to an interview with Dr. David Ray Griffin, this is video...
innworldreport.net...

Originally posted by nick7261
Here's the challenge...

Just list a one piece of evidence that overwhelmingly proves that anybody in the government was responsible for 9/11 -not just that a part of the official story doesn't seem to make sense to you.

Then list the specific people in the government that are tied directly to your one piece of evidence.

Good luck.

The only way you can make that challenge fair is by calling an opposing challenge -

“List one piece of evidence that overwhelmingly *CONFIRMS* the official story to be 100% true.”

As far as I'm concerned it’s impossible to do. Both parties will continually deny the evidence regardless of its credibility - this is our nature. I mean, god only knows what would happen to us if we just accepted defeat!

Also, can anybody give me a ‘good reason’ why I should trust ANYTHING the government tells me? Why should ‘their’ opinions be valued above those of the general public/conspiracy theorists? There are no ‘good reasons’.

There will be no retribution. Just tiresome, endless bickering. We’re heading for 9/11’s 6th anniversary now and people aren’t moving on. Wouldn't it be wiser to just snap out of it? Of course it's going to be difficult, but aren't there other more pressing matters to tend to? Shouldn't we be dedicating our time to exposing the villains 'here' and 'now'?

To expose what “they” did ‘then’ we need to convict them NOW!

Sorry for the rant but I feel like the hole we are digging for ourselves isn’t far from becoming an abyss.

Originally posted by wingman77
There's so much information available that overwhelmingly proves that people within the government were responsible for the attacks on 9-11. There aren't anymore skeptics left are there?

The whole US governement being the bad guy, i don't think so. My own private theory is more about a bunch of people (not that much, but dispatched from markets to intelligence) knowing there was a lame terrorist attack, financing it, and MAYBE using explosives for betters results. Not a whole governement could do that, try telling to an army patriot he'll have to kill its own, and then he'll laugh and shoot you.

But let's push thinks forward please all:

By the way, how could the american people have been told Afghanistan was involved in 911, Saddam had nuke and stuff like that without kicking the butt of the responsible of these huge lies?

Check it: US people are brainwashed, and thus responsible of their own country disasters from neglect to lack of involvment in their own democracy.

That something very hard to admit, but the first responsible of 911 (even in the "official" theory) is the american people itself. In the official theory for having been deaf to the misery and rise of fundamentalism in middle east and in the "unofficial" theory for having let such criminals govern their country.

This autocritic is way harder to do than blaming a bunch of pissed of muslim or a bunch of crooked intelligence officials for the death of thousands.

It's a well known fact that nobody feels responsible for their governement fault. Ask the germans a few years after the nazis falls what was the origin of the war and they had answered "Hitler". Took years for some to understand it was a way for a common death wish to express. Now germany is maybe the most fascist proof country in the world...

Hitler, like Bush, was elected. And nobody ever seems to take a causality about the neglect from a guy elected and whom elected it...

Try to think different, not about "who let the s****t happen" or caused it, but about "who done nothing" to prevent it.

It's not the first time the US people been tricked (remember JFK death ???), and without a strong will to change it, it won't be the last time...

[edit on 12-6-2007 by Fennec]

Originally posted by nick7261
Here's the challenge...

Just list a one piece of evidence that overwhelmingly proves that anybody in the government was responsible for 9/11 -not just that a part of the official story doesn't seem to make sense to you.

I agree with you, that there's little hard factual evidence tying our own government to the crime of 9/11.

What there isn't a lack of, is evidence that the official story is bunk and defies even the most basic principles of Newtonian physics.

I myself remain unconvinced of who actually committed the crimes on 9/11, I just know that more than terrorist hijacking planes and flying them into the twin towers caused global collapse in both towers and building 7. There's overwhelming physical evidence that this story is false, or at the very least, incomplete. And in fact, the problem I have with most conspiracy theories is that rather than focusing on the evidence and facts, they tend to focus on their own conculsions about who did it, which are shaky at best.

So perhaps the original post would do better to read "Is there anyone here still convinced that the official story is true". Given the overwhelming evidence that contradicts the official story, the number of official story champions is dwindling more and more each day.

Here's the challenge...

Just list a one piece of evidence that overwhelmingly proves that anybody in the government was responsible for 9/11 -not just that a part of the official story doesn't seem to make sense to you.

Then list the specific people in the government that are tied directly to your one piece of evidence.

Good luck.

thats the problem. holes in the story just mean the story is a lie, they dont shine a magic spotlight onto the absolute truth.

heres my challenge to you: find an unedited video of the pentagon being struck by a plane. there are over 80 in existence. good luck.