Official story believers seen these videos?

Wow, looks like the debunkers have quickly jumped all over this thread.

What I find interesting is there's always a large and differing group of 9/11 truthers vs. the same ol', same ol' small group of loquacious debunkers who somehow find a way to discount every bit of evidence, no matter how damning and incriminating.

I'm convinced, some people's minds just can't handle the truth.

Originally posted by audas

Originally posted by johnny2127
These videos are nothing new. They are just propaganda hit pieces trying to go after Bush and Cheney. In reality, both the Bush and Clinton Administrations dropped the ball when it came to Al Qaeda.

Also, my father and 3 brothers are all pilots for major airlines and they all say that the video of the pilots talking about flying into the WTC is a bunch of crap. Each made the same point that an pilot with multi-engine time could have flown the planes in the WTC

So your brothers and dad all agree then that these people who were NOT PILOTS could not have done it. DER!

No my dad and brothers all agree that that video posted here was complete BS and yes the terrorists could have easily flown the planes into the trade center.

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
Wow, looks like the debunkers have quickly jumped all over this thread.

same ol' small group of loquacious debunkers who somehow find a way to discount every bit of evidence, no matter how damning and incriminating.

I'm convinced, some people's minds just can't handle the truth.

Couldn't your exact same point be made about those that believe in 9-11 conspiracy theories? No matter what evidence shown to them they will not believe it wasn't planned by govt or Bush or Cheney or all of them.

To me, I just look at things and what 9-11'ers offer as proof of the conspiracy is per conjecture, and people drawing conclusions on things without any proof of the conclusion they draw

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by R_Mackey
Anyway, I fired the old girl up (the simulator) and flew under the GG bridge, in a demo for my friend. At about 250 knots (even then, I still followed the 'rules'!!

Max 250 below 10,000. Coulda gone faster, just didn't occur to me. Now, if I could 'fly' a very basic simulator, with motion off, at 'night', under the Golden Gate bridge...I just can't see how someone couldn't 'hit' the WTC! Puzzles me......

But aren't you a professional pilot?

Oh no! If I had known that Bush authorized torture and that Cheney didn't care what the public thought I would have accused them of flying the planes into the WTC themselves.

Don't you "official story" believers see what a dick Cheney was being? Obviously he flew the planes himself and teleported off the plane at the last minute with super secret government technology.

It's the only logical explanation.

And if Bush authorized torture after the fact... then it all points to the undeniable fact that he assassinated Kennedy.

Just follow the facts guys. The science is settled on this one.



Edited to clear up which Kennedy I was referring to for those of you who were wondering. All of them. Bush killed Robert, John, and Ted.

And probably tortured them too... it's all there in the video.

[edit on 28-11-2009 by abefrohman]

So let's see, we have these evildoer hijackers entering the cockpit and overpowering the pilot and co-pilot with box cutters and subduing them with little or no resistance being offered. They then drag the pilot and co-pilot bodies out of their chairs and out of the cockpit and deposit them wherever.

Then they re-enter the cockpit and take over the flight controls. Being the expert pilot and navigator that they are (reportedly can't fly a Cessna), they abruptly change course around the vicinity of Newburgh, NY (Stewart Airport) and make an absolute perfect beeline for the WTC in lower Manhattan.

Without skipping a beat, while approaching Manhattan, they descend the plane to approximately 700 feet while traveling at the cruising speed of over 500 MPH. Whether or not a Boeing 767 is capable of flying and being perfectly controlled at that high rate of speed at such a low altitude is irrelevant because we got a good story happening here.

The pilot then scores a direct hit into the WTC tower target with a margin of error of 25 feet. The plane slices through the tower like a hot knife through butter and lodges within the tower or vaporizes or whatever.

This happens not once, not twice, but three times within an approximate two hour time period within the same day. Of course the second WTC tower strike was more difficult because the plane took a more circuitous route going down to south Jersey and then returning in a northbound direction prior to striking the second tower. And the Pentagon strike was even more difficult because of the building's low height, but nevermind.

But all in all, this operation was a piece of cake, since anybody could do this, even people who cannot fly a Cessna. Of course there are also other small factors like being able to evade a multi-billion air defense system, but why ruin a good story with such boring details?

From the blatant and insulting in your face lack of honesty displayed in those other videos, it is not too difficult to see who the authors of these hijacking stories were.


[edit on 28-11-2009 by SphinxMontreal]

And why would I want to waste my time watching YouTube videos? I'd rather watch NCIS.

Nice videos there.

I'll look at them when in the morning.

reply to post by GoldenFleece

Wow, looks like the debunkers have quickly jumped all over this thread.

What I find interesting is there's always a large and differing group of 9/11 truthers vs. the same ol', same ol' small group of loquacious debunkers who somehow find a way to discount every bit of evidence, no matter how damning and incriminating.

I'm convinced, some people's minds just can't handle the truth.

Especially when they are the “same debunkers” over and over and over. When they cannot disprove our credible sources , then comes the ridiculing, insults and name-calling.
I do not believe all these people are in that state of denial, I believe they get high at ridiculing everyone. I have seen very few ever debunk anything about 911.

These wonderful videos are a joke to some, and there are some that will never look at them because; it will make their fantasy world explode. My opinion is, believing in the OS lies makes them feel safe; it makes them believe a fantasy that their government could not hurt them and is not capable of pulling off a defeat as 911. To believe the greatest supper power on earth could not pull off a 911, is ignorant in it self.

These are some credible videos the OP provided and they exposed some of the 911 criminals and the lairs.
Why they are not held accountable, is beyond me.


[edit on 29-11-2009 by impressme]

reply to post by johnny2127

Couldn't your exact same point be made about those that believe in 9-11 conspiracy theories? No matter what evidence shown to them they will not believe it wasn't planned by govt or Bush or Cheney or all of them.

The problem I have with this quote is, I have never seen any creditable evidences to support your OS. Until you, OS supporters can give us some alarming, tangible, creditable, and scientific evidences to support your OS, then some of us will continue to believe it was an inside job.

Some of you are in here screaming that the OS is all-true, yet you fail to produce any evidences to support your ridiculous claims. You want everyone to believe in the most unbelievable, things that defies sciences, physics, mathematics, gravity, and impossible heat. The OS is all hogwash.

reply to post by conar


Quite easily, to cover up 9/11 it would require so many people to keep there mouth shut, that it wouldn't have worked before it happened.

Rather then pointing inwards with the questions of "you did it", why is no one pointing inwards with the question "why was it allowed to happen". I personally think that this is more then likely the case then 1000's of people in on 1 giant conspiracy.

reply to post by Teki187

Quite easily, to cover up 9/11 it would require so many people to keep there mouth shut, that it wouldn't have worked before it happened.

Perhaps, but, a lot of us don’t believe many people were involved, especially when a lot of us are convinced that only a handful of experts in aviations and demolition is all that was required to pull of this false flag operation, and the FBI did the cover-up.

reply to post by impressme


Do you seriously seriously believe that only a handful of people are capable of manipulating so many public services to pull of a 2 plane strike on 2 of the most important American buildings for economics?

Just seriously contemplate that please, because it would require so many people it'd be like a leaky swimming pool.

reply to post by SphinxMontreal


Your post is a good example why people will believe groups like P4T. You mix arrogance with falsehood.

You find it hard to believe that a group of men, who have trained to take over an airliner, could do so in a matter of seconds. I wonder if you realize that we have several organizations in the US that train to clear an airliner in less than 15 seconds. And by "clear" I mean forced entry and elimination of bad guys who are alert.

In the case of 9/11, we are speaking of an unaware flight crew being assaulted and subdued by men who have trained to do that. Now, if SEAL Team 6, Delta Force and the FBI HRT can train and hone their skills to the point where they can take a jet in 15 seconds, why cannot a group of trained terrorists do the same? Are you assuming they are just dirty, ignorant Arabs, as so many on ATS do? That would be a pretty arrogant assumption on your part.

My personal theory on that, based on known history and testimony of captured combatants, is that the hijackers were trained by Abu Nidal prior to his 7.62mm induced heart attack....but thats another thread.

Then you go back to the old standby that they could barely fly a Cessna....which is a falsehood. Some of the hijackers had earned commercial pilot's licenses.......pretty sure they just dont hand those out to someone who could barely fly a Cessna.

reply to post by Teki187

Do you seriously seriously believe that only a handful of people are capable of manipulating so many public services to pull of a 2 plane strike on 2 of the most important American buildings for economics?

Yes, why not?

Just seriously contemplate that please, because it would require so many people it'd be like a leaky swimming pool.

This is your “opinion” unless you have some proof that all these hundreds or thousands of people were involved.

Just like my opinion, I think this false flag could be easily pulled of by a handful of people and covered up by a hand full of people. Where do you get the idea that thousands of people have to be involved? Hopefully not by the debunkers. Ever hear of the FBI being accused of giving gag orders to firemen, police officers, first responders, FAA, ect.. They where told by their superiors to keep quiet if they want to keep their jobs. So with everyone silent and the FBI given FEMA, NIST 911 commission, and the mainstream media the information they “WANT” us to believe, it is that easy. You do know the FBI are the one’s who did the “so call” 911 investigation. All you really need is a few men in the FBI who are already corrupt, and do not tell me there are no corrupt FBI agents because; I will have no problems proven you wrong.

reply to post by Swampfox46_1999

Then you go back to the old standby that they could barely fly a Cessna....which is a falsehood. Some of the hijackers had earned commercial pilot's licenses.......pretty sure they just dont hand those out to someone who could barely fly a Cessna.

How about proven to all of us, that any pilots in the United States who has a Cessna pilots licenses and never has flown a Boeing 767 tell you what, show me ONE pilot who has NEVER flown a Boeing 767 but has only a Cessna pilots license that has NEVER been inside a Boeing 767 fly the darn thing? Just “one pilot” with real creditable internet sources.

Originally posted by conar
Can anyone watch the following videos and still believe the official story?

They would find it pretty hard to, but if the last 8 years has taught me anything, it's that wilful ignorance is a tough nut to crack.

“at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened… I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The [Norad air defense] tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years. This is not spin.”

- John Farmer

“We to this day don’t know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us, it was just so far from the truth. . . ”

- Thomas Kean

Then we have this interview with Max Cleland.....

Let's start with the 9/11 commission. What are your concerns about how it's dealing with the White House?

First of all, as someone who co-sponsored legislation creating the 9/11 commission, against great opposition from the White House, this independent commission should be independent and should not be making deals with anybody. I start from there. It's been painfully obvious the administration not only fought the creation of the commission but that their objective was the war in Iraq, and one of the notions that was built on was there was a direct connection between al Qaida and 9/11 and Saddam Hussein. There was not.

So therefore they didn't want the 9/11 commission to get going. What you have is the fear from the White House that the commission would uncover pretty quickly the fact that one of four legs that the war stood on was nonexistent. So they slow-walked it, and they continue to slow-walk it. They want to kick this can down past the elections. We should not be making any deals; we should stick to our original timetable of [completing the final report by] May. However, we're coming up on Thanksgiving here and we're still struggling over access issues. It should be a national scandal.

What have some of the access problems been?

In May, the commission asked the FAA to give us the documents we're looking for. We've had to subpoena the FAA. We've now had to subpoena documents from Norad, which they have not given us. I for one think we ought to subpoena the White House for the presidential daily briefings, to know what the president knew, what the administration knew, and when they knew it so we can determine what changes ought to be made in our intelligence infrastructure, our warning system, so that we don't go through this kind of surprise attack again.

Source

And I think this sums it up quite well.....

21) Unanswered Questions and the "Final Fraud" of the 9/11 Commission:

a. The September 11th families who fought for and gained an independent investigation (the 9/11 Commission) posed 400-plus questions, which the 9/11 Commission adopted as its roadmap. The vast majority of these questions were completely ignored in the Commission hearings and the final report.

b. The membership and staff of the 9/11 Commission displayed awesome conflicts of interest. The families called for the resignation of Executive Director Philip Zelikow, a Bush administration member and close associate of "star witness" Condoleezza Rice, and were snubbed. Commission member Max Cleland resigned, condemning the entire exercise as a "scam" and "whitewash."

c. The 9/11 Commission Report is notable mainly for its obvious omissions, distortions and outright falsehoods - ignoring anything incompatible with the official story, banishing the issues to footnotes, and even dismissing the still-unresolved question of who financed 9/11 as being "of little practical significance."

Source

Originally posted by Teki187
Quite easily, to cover up 9/11 it would require so many people to keep there mouth shut, that it wouldn't have worked before it happened.

The irony being, the "official" story has us believe it only took 19 people to carry it out, so the argument a cover up would require hundreds, thousands even to cover it up doesn't make sense.

At the end of the day, ONE FACT that cannot be debunked in any way shape or form, is that they knew an attack was going to happen, and they stood by and did nothing. 50 years on it is now accepted fact, except for the wilfully ignorant of course, that they knew Pearl Harbour was going to be attacked, FACT!! We know they knew because of the intercepted Japanese messages.

History repeated it's self 8 years ago, and thanks to modern technology, mainly being the internet, what may have taken 50 years to find out before, was done in just a few years after 9/11.

I'm past debating controlled demolitions, WTC 7, no plane hitting the Pentagon ect ect ect, because all it does it distract from that one fact I've mentioned above, which no one has yet been held accountable for.

The Amalgam Virgo exercise of June 2001, which was run only two months prior to 9/11, composed of:

o Osama Bin Laden terror theme.

o A terrorist hijacking of an airliner.

o Suicide attacks with planes.

o Multi-coordinated and varied attacks on different targets.

o Attacking civilians, cities, and large buildings (Panama City, FL)

o Using MQM-107 drones masquerading as cruise missiles.

o The drones were being remote-controlled from a circling aircraft that relayed signals from the ground.

o Coordination with FEMA and FBI during and after the attacks.

911exposed.org...



The cover of NORAD’s June 2001 Amalgam Virgo exercise even had Osama Bin Laden on it


New details of a NORAD exercise called Amalgam Virgo 01-02 have been found in a document at the National Archives.
www.911blogger.com...

Cynthia McKinney asked General Richard Myers whether or not the activities of the 4 Wargames going on 911 impaired our (the U.S. air defense) ability to respond to the attacks.


[edit on 29-11-2009 by conar]

reply to post by impressme



Real, creditable internet sources??

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...you guys are SLAYING me today......

Well here are some creditable sources, that I already know that you will not accept...

Atta and Shehhi finished up at Huffman and earned their instrument certificates from the FAA in November. In mid-December 2000, they passed their commercial pilot tests and received their licenses.They then began training to fly large jets on a flight simulator. At about the same time, Jarrah began simulator training, also in Florida but at a different center. By the end of 2000, less than six months after their arrival, the three pilots on the East Coast were simulating flights on large jets.

Training to fly large jets.....last time I checked, Cessna didnt make large jets...

In 1996, Hanjour returned to the United States to pursue flight training,after being rejected by a Saudi flight school. He checked out flight schools in Florida, California, and Arizona; and he briefly started at a couple of them before returning to Saudi Arabia. In 1997, he returned to Florida and then, along with two friends, went back to Arizona and began his flight training there in earnest. After about three months, Hanjour was able to obtain his private pilot's license. Several more months of training yielded him a commercial pilot certificate, issued by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in April 1999... Settling in Mesa, Hanjour began refresher training at his old school,Arizona Aviation. He wanted to train on multi-engine planes, but had difficulties because his English was not good enough.The instructor advised him to discontinue but Hanjour said he could not go home without completing the training. In early 2001, he started training on a Boeing 737 simulator at Pan Am International Flight Academy in Mesa.An instructor there found his work well below standard and discouraged him from continuing.Again, Hanjour persevered; he completed the initial training by the end of March 2001.

Completed initial training on multi engine jets.....obtained commercial pilot's license.......pretty sure, but not quite completely positive that 737's arent made by Cessna....(yes thats sarcasm)

One of the common themes against Hanjour was his poor skills, and yet the lady that questioned the FAA on why he had a commercial license said this...

Chevrette said that the school's student, Hani Hanjour, lacked adequate English skills to gain his pilot's license. An FAA official responded to her concerns by suggesting that Hanjour could use an interpreter even though mastery of English is a requirement for a pilot.

Hmmm, seems she is questioning his LANGUAGE skills...not his flying skills.

In addition, she had this to say...

Chevrette said that when the Sept. 11 attacks occurred, she knew Hanjour must have been involved. "I remember crying all the way to work knowing our company helped to do this," she said.

www.cbsnews.com...

Well one of the instructors had no problems believing Hanjour could pilot an airliner....

Whoops...here is another instructor that says Hanjour was average..not bad, not good, just average...

That instructor said he told agents that Hanjour was "a very average pilot, maybe struggling a little bit." The instructor added, "Maybe his English wasn't very good."

www.cbsnews.com...

Then there is this from Marcel Bernard, who declined to rent Hanjour a plane without Hanjour taking more lessons...

"Despite Hanjour's poor reviews, he did have some ability as a pilot, said Bernard of Freeway Airport. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said

www.pentagonresearch.com...

Granted, a bit of this was taken from the 9/11 Commission Report...which you will decry that John Farmer states the Report is "almost entirely untrue" but even that typical "truther" statement would be misleading...

This is what John Farmer had to say about his book...

JF- Well, let me just say that I think the report is, uh, extremely accurate, and- and sets forth the facts of 9/11. And we actually did point out in the report the discrepancies between the accounts that were given and what we actually found

911reports.wordpress.com...

What Mr. Farmer had been referring to as "untrue" were these statements...

First, the official version indicated that the Langley fighters were scrambled in response to American 77, and thus omitted completely the pivotal report of the morning and the source of the Langley scramble: the report that American 11, the first hijack, was still airborne and heading for Washington.

Second, the administration insisted that the military was tracking United 93 and, as a consequence, was positioned to intercept the flight if it approached Washington. This was untrue; the military could not locate the flight to track it because it had crashed by the time of notification.

Third, the official version insisted that President Bush had issued an authorization to shoot down hijacked commercial flights, and that the order had been processed through the chain of command and passed to the fighters. This was untrue.

Fourth, the administration version implied, where it did not state implicitly, that the chain of command had been functioning on 9/11, and that the critical decisions had been made by the appropriate top officials. Thus, the president issued the shoot-down order; top FAA Headquarters officials coordinated closely with the military; Transportation secretary Norman Mineta issued the order to land all airplanes; NORAD Commanding General Eberhart monitoring closely the decisions taken at NEADS and CONR; and so on. None of this captures how things actually unfolded on the day.

Taken from "The Ground Truth" by John Farmer

Notice that NONE of those points are about the hijackers or their piloting skills.

So let me get this straight.

The socalled "debunkers" dont want to investigate 911 to be absolutely sure we have the right perpetraitors, even though so many signs points to that we dont know who did it.

Why do you risk your loved ones lives, by not investigating 911 thoroughly?

What if you lose one of your loved ones in the next attack?