How to Destroy a 9/11 Truther

bsbray, outstanding effort! You've definitely responded in an excellent and concise manner, clearing up any straw that was deposited around my post.

Originally posted by defcon5
reply to post by wavemaker

 

They shut off their transponder which made them blend in with the rest of the clutter on the radar screens.

Originally posted by defcon5

Or do you honestly think that NORAD tracks every single commuter flight, Commercial flight, Private pilot, Radio traffic aircraft, Hospital transport aircraft, aerial application aircraft (bug sprayers, crop dusters, etc...), etc...?

Hypothetical scenario:

5 outdated Russian mig 27s are flying towards the US coast. They turn their transponders off and approach at 10ft ASL, pulling mach 1.
They launch a tactical nuclear cruise missile 250nm off the coast in international waters, turn around and return to their roost. It appears to be a training exercise. Next thing two major US cities erupt in 20kt nuclear explosions and the USA doesn't know where it came from?

Yeah right.

They can track bits of space junk and you're telling me a plane with it's transponder off is invisible? Even a 100 tonne and near 50 meter wide aluminium boeing, allegedly times four. Of course having drills simulating the same thing at the same time don't help do they? What an ungodly coincidence that must be. Also NORAD isn't the only tracking system around.

edit for quote formatting

[edit on 16/2/10 by GhostR1der]

Originally posted by Darth Logan

I am utterly amazed in how "twoothers" can only hear what they want, when they want to. Even then the information gets garbled before it reaches their brain.
Defcon: You would make more progress arguing with a brick wall.

Hello, Pot. I'm Kettle.

Originally posted by Dramey
reply to post by SquirrelNutz

 

this clearly is the greatest thread of all time on ats posted by whats clearly the owner of the best avatar on ats

is there anything else to be said? no but i just didnt want it to be a one line post

p.s. love the squirrel

another p.s. the way the guy says truther is hysterical

Thank you, my friend. Here to please (and debate)

[edit on 2/16/2010 by SquirrelNutz]

Originally posted by Dramey
you truly believe the pentagon has no defenses? its just some office building? like really?

So show us a valid source for these defences then... but of course you will be unable to, as it had none.

why would America bomb her own buildings?

reply to post by Moonsouljah


Look at the economy and control, you have your answer

reply to post by Point of No Return


Exactly!

Stage an event
Set up all kinds of new police powers and control policies
Topple Middle East Governments
Set up permanent bases in the Middle East
Collapse the Economy
Destroy the Middle Class through economy collapse and job loss
Install the NAU and create the Euro (or whatever they are going to call it)
Microchip everyone (use a pandemic to make it happen)....coming

GLOBAL GOVERNMENT

And 9/11 was the tool to get all the above rolling

"Let's roll"



[edit on 16-2-2010 by arizonascott]

Originally posted by defcon5

Originally posted by wavemaker
Some guys just attacked the Twin Towers and these guys at the Pentagon decided to shut down their transponder and in effect they became a sitting duck for attack?!

Christ...
If you are going to engage the rest of us in a debate on the subject go do some reading first.
All four aircraft shut down their transponders.

Originally posted by wavemaker
Are there no other military establishments (or radars) near that area that can detect that slow moving plane that is going to the Pentagon?

Relatively speaking they were not moving slowly, and they blended in with other traffic.

Originally posted by wavemaker
Is the Pentagon that stupid not be on red alert even if there are "terrorist attacks" in NY and in White House?

What would you have them do?
Shoot it down over the city?
They had few options...
They only shoot down over unpopulated areas, or the ocean.

Originally posted by wavemaker
Here is the Pentagon's motto: "When under attack, turn off the transponder."

The plane shut off its transponder...
Did you go read that page?
You are making a fool out of yourself!


Deny Ignorance my friend.

[edit on 2/16/2010 by defcon5]

I didn't bother read the link that you gave. That's a pretty long read.

Anyway, from the way you said it, the four planes shut down their transponders and then they can't be detected anymore. So it's that easy to avoid the radars eh?

If we follow your logic, the Russian bombers just need to shut down their transponders and then they can't be detected anymore. They are then free to bomb the Pentagon.

Use your mind sometimes.

reply to post by wavemaker

I didn't bother read the link that you gave. That's a pretty long read.

Then, you have pretty much lost any platform/credibility to debate.

Use your mind sometimes.

Take your own advice, sometimes.

reply to post by arizonascott

 

Install the NAU and create the Euro (or whatever they are going to call it)

The 'Amero', I believe.




[edit on 2/16/2010 by SquirrelNutz]

Originally posted by defcon5
pretty simple math, they still teach that in college, right?
Lets see, less then 1000 people are members of Pilots4truth, out of millions of aviation personnel.
Speaks volumes as to the other 99.999999999999% professionals thoughts on the subjects, eh?

No, it doesn't. Yes they teach math, and they teach formal logic and debate as well. Nowhere is it said that everyone airline professional who disagrees with the official story MUST sign up with this organization, or even have heard of it. That is why you should actually take a scientific survey, or have a survey ready, or just shut up and stop pretending you are talking facts, because you aren't and never were. You just keep offering your personal conjecture as fact. And I have already explained that your buddies aren't a significant sample and I don't give a damn what they think.

But then we see truther tactics right in the same thread where they tried to apply them to the rest of us normal people out there.

If "truther tactics" is using common sense against your fallacious reasoning then yes, absolutely. The more I'm reading of your posts the more I would NOT even trust you to work on any plane I'd ever fly in. Hopefully they have you on something simple and repetitive with someone standing over your shoulder pretty often huh? If you are as attentive there as you are here then I really feel sorry for whoever employs you.

Originally posted by bsbray11
I hardly care what you and your like-minded friends think, because that is not a significant sample to begin with.

Like-minded?
Try normal people...
Go bring his garbage up at places like Airliners.net and see how fast you get laughed off their board....

Several scientific polls have already shown either most Americans think something was up and want a re-investigation, or else a fraction of the population very close to half. This is why you should qualify your own statements with something other than your personal opinion, or "go post on this forum and see who laughs at you," because you NEED the taste of reality that scientific surveying offers. Not just talking to your buddies, and then trying to extrapolate from that what millions of people you don't even know think, and then on top of that pretending there is a damned lick of sense to be found anywhere in that ignorant method.

Originally posted by bsbray11
You're apparently incapable of even admitting the difference between a statistical fact and your personal opinion. :shk:

Excuse me?
Again, if first hand experience is not valid

Once again, I don't care about your buddies. Now you have either reading comprehension problems or a god-awful memory, too. Great.

Go re-read my post if you still have trouble understanding what exactly I'm asking for. Actually it would be more like reading it for the first time, since you obviously failed to understand it. I just hope you can remember what it says long enough to reply to it.

If the stats aren't in your next post, I'm not even going to respond to your garbage anymore. I am asking for verified STATISTICS, not just what you feel like making up in internet arguments, and not just what you claim your buddies all think.

make CIT appologize to the rest of us and place their posts under the [HOAX] title...

I never even said a damned thing about CIT and I don't follow what they do, or much else related to the Pentagon. Though I'm not surprised you are just leaping from one fallacy to another to another and being too ignorant to realize you are even doing it. You're having a lot of trouble with this man.

First hand experience is first hand experience, hence the fact its called “First hand experience”, not “Opinion”... I am pretty sure that they still teach English in school, right?

I thought so, but you really make me wonder, considering you apparently can't read or comprehend this statement from my last post to you:

Originally posted by bsbray11
I was talking about your assertion that only a handful of airline professionals out of a million believe 9/11 was an inside job. I hardly care what you and your like-minded friends think, because that is not a significant sample to begin with. [Do you know what a "sample" is in this context?]

If you don't have the stats to back up THAT claim then don't bother responding.

But you responded anyway...

And English class is not where you learn the difference between opinion and fact. Though I really am not AT ALL surprised you would say such a stupid thing because you have already repeatedly demonstrated that you can't tell the difference between the two in the first place.


Like I said, if the stats verifying your claim aren't in your next post, you are every bit as much of a LIAR as you would claim "truthers" are and I'm not even going to honor you with another response. You are just deluding yourself until you find objective data. Feigning stupidity and ignoring what I'm asking isn't going to look well on you considering people here CAN READ.

[edit on 16-2-2010 by bsbray11]

reply to post by wavemaker


I understand the transponders were off but it doesn't change the speed or heading of the now non transponding blip.
Also if only one aircraft stops transponding, by deductive reasoning would'nt one be able to determine who is "it"?

During wartime, the enemy doesn't exactly transpond identifying (no IFF) tags and radar has historically worked very well in tracking enemy aircraft as mere blips amidst the clutter?

If you were to have clutter as usual but one blip that is obviously moving much faster with a distinct heading wouldn't that imply that you might have identified a rogue, potentially dangerous aircraft? An aircraft that NORAD might at least intercept before striking a populated area or another structure after the first tower was struck ?

These air traffic controllers look at noise and blips 24/7 .

Why not one interception from all of our air defenses at Otis, or Langley ? Otis is right across the Long Island sound from NYC on Cape Cod.

Are our air defense structures that inept ?

Or was the Mexican Air Force guarding our nation's skies that day ?



I just don't buy it.

[edit on 16-2-2010 by nh_ee]

[edit on 16-2-2010 by nh_ee]

Originally posted by franspeakfree
To suggest to me that a small group of extremist of any colour,creed,race,religion carried out the act of 9/11 is completely absurd, please research the entire subject for at least an hour before you retort.

Well since the OP video said to research it an hour or two, I thought an hour might be on the low side, so I'm going to make it two!

That was pretty funny, so was the family guy video. BTW Fran I know you were joking, but that family guy cartoon definitely isn't for children, at least not young ones, I'm amazed how much they get past the censors.

Originally posted by GhostR1der
Hypothetical scenario:

5 outdated Russian mig 27s are flying towards the US coast. They turn their transponders off and approach at 10ft ASL, pulling mach 1.

Is it really so much for all you truth movement guys to pick up an actual book on aviation, and read it, rather then spend all your time memorizing your favorite truth movement site/youtube?

I already explained this, including a pretty little picture if it was not clear enough...

Originally posted by defcon5
NORAD monitors the DEW Line, bar-Lant, and Bar-Pac, not internal ATC.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/814caa59d0e3.jpg[/atsimg]

Bar-Pac = Pacific Barrier
Bar-Lant = Atlantic Barrier
Dew Line = Arctic Barrier

That is where Norad is looking for aircraft like your supposed Mig coming in from another country. They are not concerned with aircraft that take off and land domestically like the ones on 911. They are concerned with bombers/fighters from other countries, and drug smugglers.

Originally posted by wavemaker
I didn't bother read the link that you gave. That's a pretty long read.

Yeah, I wouldn't want you to learn anything or any such thing...
Just keep following the Truth movement like a good little zealot.

Originally posted by wavemaker
Anyway, from the way you said it, the four planes shut down their transponders and then they can't be detected anymore. So it's that easy to avoid the radars eh?

Its that easy to hide in the clutter, yes.
Pilots will not do it because they do not want their tickets pulled....

Originally posted by wavemaker
If we follow your logic, the Russian bombers just need to shut down their transponders and then they can't be detected anymore. They are then free to bomb the Pentagon.

No they have to cross the monitored Bar-Lant, Bar-Pac, or Dew lines. NORAD watches for foreign flights coming over the boarders, not flights inside the boarders. I already stated this, please learn to read it will save us time and bandwidth.

Originally posted by wavemaker
Use your mind sometimes.

You should...
Again, read the stuff I put up, from reality land, and less from fantasy truther land, and you might actually deny ignorance.

Great thread and video. The video pretty much tells you the tactics employed by loyalists of the 911 attack official narrative.

i can see that it touched a few nerves here and what is sickly funny and ironic is that the replies and tactics from the resident debunkers are exactly what the 1st post video describes as being lame tactics employed by these cover up goons.

It is almost like they havent seen the video or again, chose to be willfully ignorant that it exists. Slamming youtube, the viewers and forums members, while trying to generalize them as kids in mommies basement or toofers is quite immature and transparent.

Originally posted by nh_ee
I understand the transponders were off but it doesn't change the speed or heading of the now non transponding blip.

But it gets lost in the clutter

Originally posted by nh_ee
Also if only one aircraft stops transponding, by deductive reasoning would'nt one be able to determine who is "it"?

There is too much crap up there to do that.

Originally posted by nh_ee
During wartime, the enemy doesn't exactly transpond identifying (no IFF) tags and radar has historically worked very well in tracking enemy aircraft as mere blips amidst the clutter?

They come in from over the boarder and are tagged by NORAD. Completely different then an aircraft that NORAD had no idea went rogue until after ATC lost it in the clutter between stations.

Originally posted by nh_ee
If you were to have clutter as usual but one blip that is obviously moving much faster with a distinct heading wouldn't that imply that you might have identified a rogue, potentially dangerous aircraft? An aircraft that NORAD might at least intercept before striking a populated area or another structure after the first tower was struck ?

NORAD has no internal radar, they rely on ATC radar for internal intercepts, at the request of ATC.

Originally posted by nh_ee
These air traffic controllers look at noise and blips 24/7 .

No ATC uses secondary radar.

Originally posted by nh_ee
Why not one interception from all of our air defenses at Otis, or Langley ? Otis is right across the Long Island sound from NYC on Cape Cod.

They would not respond to an internal intercept until ATC asked them too.

Originally posted by nh_ee
Are our air defense structures that inept ?

Not at all, they are just designed to look for bombers coming in from over the boarders, not aircraft that take off from inside the US.

I have an alternate theory that I have yet to see anywhere else.

Clinton was an outsider. Sure he is whatever you want him to be, but to the world the Bush's travel in he couldn't have been more outside. The Bush's were intimately involved with a lot of the key players and enablers of 911. Bush came into office with the power of a lot of people behind him. The Taliban had been to Texas, they were dear friends with the Binladens, and the Saudis.

I believe the Bush administration thought they were working at a level the Clinton's couldn't understand. That is why they neglected the warnings and the data. The Bush's aren't really very intelligent people. That lack of intellect carried over to the views of foreign policy and defense.

I think they new something was coming. I also think they contacted their dear friends in the middle east and were reassured they would handle the problem with the unruly child. I also believe they were fed disinformation by those who they were sure were their friends and partners. I believe when you see the video of bush where he is informed, you see the eyes of a man realizing he was had, and as it sunk in you see the eyes of a good ole boy that is about to make someones life a living hell. I further believe the subsequent "cover up" was more to do with covering their butts than a black flag op. Putting the word of your friend above your own security people is a serious dereliction of duty and grounds for immediate impeachment. That makes no sense. These people know leaving a trail of bodies is not conducive to a good con.

I believe the plan for Iraq was already in the works and was totally separate from all of this. I also imagine the royal family already knew as well. 911 really gummed up the works and forced them into another war they really didn't want, they thought they would have a pipeline. They thought they had a deal. 911 forced them to act well before they were ready, and proved their undoing.

One does not have to look far to find engineering/architectural wonders that turned out to be deathtraps. The flaw sitting un-noticed until the right set of circumstances. I was watching one of the movies on 911 (loose change?) where two guys are talking or one is being interviewed and an explosion happens. That is not a small explosion. Anyone who has ever been around a really big bang knows the difference. That was more like a 500 pound bomb than anything else, not a transformer they go pop. So I find it perfectly plausible that they also used explosives, and who knows maybe thermite, but I don't think it was an inside job. I think this is all a smoke screen to keep people misdirected from the real and not that interesting truth. As to the flight crashing, probably shot down and hero's made of those who died on the flight. Why piss on their graves, and forever doom the already damned who may have had to do it.

Bush is out of office, and hopefully they entire family is out permanently. No need to prosecute as there is no crime. Incompetence isn't a crime.

I keep an open mind on the subject and read about anything new I can find, but the more I learn the more I think I am correct.

reply to post by soundguy


Another tactic used by believers of the official rubbish is that if the buildings were demolished then how come we dont here explosions. Well that is a false claim. You can hear explosions. The difference is that the explosions that took down the 3 towers/buildings, weren't detonated back to back such as a traditional demolition. The majority of the demolitions took place mere seconds or during the plane strikes. The plane striking was a diversion. Other explosions were heard and used periodically during the event as not to raise suspicion.

The majority of the core columns were in a state of collapse many moments before the initial collapse. All it took was a small 'chop' to bring it all down at the end with very little evidence that demolition explosives or otheres were used.

reply to post by Whyhi


you still arent clear what the individual words "conspiracy" and "theory" mean, and still unclear as to their meaning being used in tandem

Hi Squirrel,
We need more levity like that. I was posting just yesterday about the strawman tactic, it was all over that thread.

[edit on 16-2-2010 by smurfy]

Originally posted by 814ck0u7
reply to post by Whyhi

 

you still arent clear what the individual words "conspiracy" and "theory" mean, and still unclear as to their meaning being used in tandem

Instead, I'm going to start using "Scientific Controversy" - has a nicer ring to it, and is a helluva lot more accurate.


[Thanks, smurfy]

reply to post by humilisunus


i got mad at first too but then i read ur post and those ppl are just an example of the losers that we have to overcome