It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by jnl07142008
The real conspiracy here is not how the towers were brought down, but the United States' inability to see this coming / lack of action IF it did. The heads of our intelligence services should have rolled. People at the FBI should have been fired for lack of investigating "fly planes but not land" memo.
Originally posted by jnl07142008
The real conspiracy here is not how the towers were brought down, but the United States' inability to see this coming / lack of action IF it did. The heads of our intelligence services should have rolled. People at the FBI should have been fired for lack of investigating "fly planes but not land" memo.
The hijackers were identified
FBI Denies Mix-Up Of 9/11 Terrorists
The stunning news prompted FBI Director Robert Mueller to admit that some of the hijackers may have stolen identities of innocent citizens. In September 2002, Mueller told CNN twice that there is "no legal proof to prove the identities of the suicidal hijackers." After that admission a strange thing happened - nothing. No follow-up stories. No follow-up questions. There was dead silence and the story disappeared. It was almost as if no one wanted to know what had happened. In fact, the FBI didn't bother to change the names, backgrounds or photographs of the alleged 19 hijackers. It didn't even deny the news reports suggesting that the names and identities of at least six of the hijackers may be unknown. Mueller just left the door open.
Originally posted by trueforger
reply to post by mmiichael
The option you plaintively rhetorically ask for is called "Home Run".All US airliners have it.It is remote control.This is probably how it WAS done.
Back to specially formulated incendiaries,please.
Originally posted by chiron613
I'm not convinced there is any sort of smoking gun here. First, why did it take eight years to figure out this stuff was "super thermite"? The chips were collected in the first week or so; what took so long to identify them and make an announcement?
Iron oxide is rust. Aluminum is a common metal, used for airplane fuselages among many other things. I wonder whether the metals vaporized from the heat of the fire, then condensed as an extremely fine powder. Just a thought.
Originally posted by mmiichael
Not claiming any great knowledge, I recall reading about the suggested remote controls. An untested patent pending system concept for returning planes home if pilot became incapacitated.
Originally posted by bsbray11
Home Run may have been untested, but there were definitely tested equivalents of what you describe. You can even find old NASA video from the 80's on YouTube showing them flying around Boeings remotely and trying to land them.
Originally posted by mmiichael
We have nothing except surmise and suggestion of possibilities that the hijackings were not what has been reported.
But the argument gets back to overwhelming substantiated evidence from the US, and abroad, including testimonies, confessions, written notes, emails, etc.
Many people from many countries with no affiliations with the US government have gone over the evidence with a fine tooth comb.
Originally posted by bsbray11
The only foolish thing one could do is assume one or the other happened and exclude the other possibility.
No, what it always gets back to is people like you mentioning all this overwhelming evidence, but it never gets back to the evidence itself. That's what always separates the wheat from the chaff. I would like it to get back to the evidence, because I haven't seen very much personally, and I'm one of the few American citizens that actually actively looked for it for a time.
I would like to see what kind of "fine tooth comb" you're talking about.
Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by pteridine
The hijackers were identified
This time I will take the word of our government, since you do.
FBI Denies Mix-Up Of 9/11 Terrorists
The stunning news prompted FBI Director Robert Mueller to admit that some of the hijackers may have stolen identities of innocent citizens. In September 2002, Mueller told CNN twice that there is "no legal proof to prove the identities of the suicidal hijackers." After that admission a strange thing happened - nothing. No follow-up stories. No follow-up questions. There was dead silence and the story disappeared. It was almost as if no one wanted to know what had happened. In fact, the FBI didn't bother to change the names, backgrounds or photographs of the alleged 19 hijackers. It didn't even deny the news reports suggesting that the names and identities of at least six of the hijackers may be unknown. Mueller just left the door open.
www.prisonplanet.com...
I guess FBI Director Robert Mueller got it right, they do not know who the highjackers are, and they have no proof no DNA to match to anyone nothing, nada.
More lies being unearth that proves cover-up.
Originally posted by Jezus
FBI Denies Mix-Up Of 9/11 Terrorists
The stunning news prompted FBI Director Robert Mueller to admit that some of the hijackers may have stolen identities of innocent citizens. In September 2002, Mueller told CNN ...
Semantics
en.wikipedia.org...
Rhetoric
en.wikipedia.org...
Has semantics and rhetoric won over science?
Has naive trust and apathy won over critical thinking?
Originally posted by mmiichael
Rejecting one version of events and accepting another as the only possible interpretation blindly is naive trust and apathy.
Originally posted by mmiichael
Not my style linking to articles and videos, but I have read extensively and exchanged insights with a number of credible unbiased sources. Tens of thousands qualified professionals with no allegiance to the US have weighed in consistently on the causes of the collapse of the buildings.
...what it always gets back to is people like you mentioning all this overwhelming evidence, but it never gets back to the evidence itself. That's what always separates the wheat from the chaff. I would like it to get back to the evidence, because I haven't seen very much personally
Originally posted by bsbray11
I asked you for evidence and these are more appeals to various unnamed authorities. Remember I just posted this?:
...what it always gets back to is people like you mentioning all this overwhelming evidence, but it never gets back to the evidence itself. That's what always separates the wheat from the chaff. I would like it to get back to the evidence, because I haven't seen very much personally
This is exactly the kind of endless circle presenting absolutely no evidence. You can appeal to authority all day and it doesn't matter, because it's a logical fallacy. You could argue any number of illogical things all day, and you won't ever change my mind.
Originally posted by mmiichael
I am not the final word or a source of evidence.