Mike Lee on No Planes, Protecting the house and other 911 aspects

First out of the gate I have a respect for what others think or believe regarding 911 and for that matter, any other conspiracy theory. The fact that I chose to become a member here on ATS I believe indicates I love a conspiracy theory as much as the next person. However,

Regarding the no plane theories, I have looked, read and researched every single peice of information and video including the websites of people who have many degrees in various fields that deal with the subject. Still I just cannot believe none of the no plane theories because of one important question: Where are the passengers then?

Lets be honest here many people believe or buy into any given theory because it either plays into what they have come to think is the case about the subject or just sounds really really good to them. Mysterys that are unsolved then surrounded within a coverup is the classic recipe for the fascination of many. Thats all well & good however the no plane theories leave out an important aspect of terrorism, the people. Terrorism on 911 I believe was payback for U.S. politics, percieved actions against muslims by extremists with probably a few other reasons as well. But in order for the goal of terrorism to be peaked at its maximum effectivemess it has got to involve the killing of people. Obviously flying aircraft into the WTC's empty would achieve that except that no one has ever come forward and said, "my loved one was on flight xxx and is now missing". That in and of itself would at the very least indicate that maybe the person wasn't on the plane, heard of the events and wanted to start a new life. Wouldn't be the first time that happened either. However only if multiple people came forward and made that missing loved one statement then, we may have an issue here.

So far by the simple ommission of no loved one's statements or inquiries as to the whereabouts of their loved ones, the no plane theories remains to me as a "no brains" theory. Meaning it don't take a lot of common sense to figure this one out that there were people on board those aircrafts. Without a doubt. I myself hold conclusions as to the events of that day and many of you already know what they are, but for the sake of those who do not they are:

* WTC was hit by 2 aircraft but was not brought down by those aircraft.
* The Pentagon was hit by an airborne "something" (my gut tells me aircraft) however I have no answer for the lack of passenegrs so I go with aircraft.
* Finally, flight 93 was shot down. Thats why there were multiple debris fields not made avalible to the public.

The no plane theory regarding flight 93 perplexes me as to why some people defend this shallow theory. First, we all know the crater in Shanksville didn;t "swallow upo" the aircraft as the OS told us. Thats pure manure. However those other debris fields did exist and were briefly disclosed in the national media on 911. national & local media stated that "the debris site is located in the dense Pennsylvania forest and cannot be easily reached by rescuers at this time." I myself saw that and I know many other people may recall it as well. Now, the Shanksville crater is easily accessed by roads leading to it so this is not the site they were refferring to at all. There was no mistake, that was not the site they were citing on 911.



The debris trail extends from new Baltimore PA to Shanksville PA and is 10 miles long. Contrary to what many skeptical minds say or have been led to believe this is a fact that once again, escaped the national media because of the media's failure to do their job and was misled by politics and backroom promises of access to other storys in the future if they would "let this one slide by". The debris of flight 93 luckily for those who wished to cover it up was almost hidden for many weeks in the forest and htose who retrieved wreckage and the remains of passengers benefitted from this. Only the Shanksville site was ever exposed due to the easy access by locals and others who swamped local 911 dispatch centers with their calls.

Why the cover up then?

Mainly "the left hand didn't know what the right hand was doing". Jet fighters scrambled on that day were seeking targets as the order was relayed to "protect the house at all costs" (or something to that effect, the exact wording is still unclear but the intent was clearly understood) is a well known fact. The order was also given by President George Bush to "bring'em down if you have to" and thats what they did. Except for the fact that by the time the official order was given, flight 93 was already being targeted. By the time the words/order of the President reached the fighter pilots the first percieved order was being acted upon. The flight path of flight 93 was directly towards the DC area after it turned from it's original path, this is exactly what the Secret Service saw and why the order to protect the house was issued directly over the frequency by the U.S.S.S. to the fighter pilots as to ensure it was recieved without confusion & delay. This is clearly evident that the Secret Service suspected that flight 93 was headed to another "prime target" .



The flight path above clearly shows the intended path to DC and this is what un-nerved the Secret Service when they saw it unfolding on their radar screens. For the Secret Service they already many executive level personnel were still in the Capitol and other buildings including VP Cheney. One thing is clear, while other people and agencys either refused to act or were simply stunned by the events they saw unfolding, the Secret Service acted swiftly by issuing those orders. They knew the intention of flight 93 at that time. Therefore THAT order was acted upon and flight 93 shot down.

Think about this, those fighter pilots wouldn't have known if flight 93 had a dirty bomb on board or perhaps a biological weapon, all they knew was is that the WTC towers had been hit and now another inbound hostile was heading for DC. The fighter pilots did what they do best...take care of hostile targets that are airborne. And I for one am glad they do!

The cover up that followed was in my opinion, good luck for those who conspired on that day and a poor one that will taint the political historys of those who had no clue as to what was happening. My personal belief is that Cheney had more to do with 911 than many realize or will admit. Bush is just too quite because I think he knows for a facft that he had no clue what was going on at all. Cheney on the other hand had full and prior knowledge well before 911 going back to the days when Pakistan's ISI Chief Lt.-General Mahmoud Ahmad funneled funds to Mohamad Attwa for their 911 endeavors. The CIA and the ISI were cozy in the fight when Russia was invading Afghanistan which is the time that Al Qaeda was created, the two agencys helped to support the Afghan narcotic trade in which is now again back in business stronger than ever. It is rumored that the CIA while targeting Usama Bin Laden and in the early days of Tora Bora actually provided intel to U.S. forces not to position themselves on one particualr side of a mountain known and strongly believed at the time used by UBL and his entourage as their headquarters. While the other three sides of that mountain were surrounded the other side is the one in which UBL along with his upper echelon staff slipped across the border into Pakistan. The "funny" thing is that:

They did not go undercover not sneak into Pakistan, they went in a convoy of 1000 vehicles along a well known and surveilled road by the American forces and CIA.

In that period of 911 there were no aircraft or vehicle movement happeneing in that region in which the U.S. did not know about at any given time of the day or night. Thats a fact admitted by those who have spoken regarding this in media, books and other sources. In other words its established. What happened then is UBL and his clique were allowed to cross...allowed to get away...allowed to pass...allowed to escape if you will because of the relationship between the CIA and the ISI.

Justification

Something many people do not understand is that in order to have an intelligence agency, army, navy, air force or another like agency the government must keep those people at work doing something. A war must be "on the brink" or a "spy must be in our house" or "the war on terror must be won" in order to validate financial backing for those agencys and forces. No nation that maintains a large modern fighting force including moderate to even smaller ones can maintain them without some avenue or source of mission in order to get money to sustain them. The war on terror is such a plight on the behalf of the U.S. government. That terror battle cry will carry the U.S. government for at least until 2018 worldwide unless a major event takes it's place. Think about the men and women who died on 911 the next time you hear some politico begging for more funding for the "war on terror" or about a "new threat emerging from..." They died for nothing more than a war budget created by greedy and self serving politicians who do not care baout you. If they did care then we would already have "change" in place and would not be so easily fooled when one of them stands up and promises it.

Originally posted by mikelee

Still I just cannot believe none of the no plane theories because of one important question: Where are the passengers then?

My thoughts are you are writing this thread strictly for attention. Whether their were no planes or not that has nothing to do with the passengers. We know there were no planes at the Pentagon or Penn. so why is it so hard to believe that there were no planes in ny.

reply to post by warisover


In order to prevent ATS from banning me if I post what I'm really thinking about your post....I won't.

Whether their were no planes or not that has nothing to do with the passengers.

No planes + no passengers = no 911. How can you mistake that?

Or better yet....

I'd really love to see some concrete evidence aside from alien ships, moon beams, energy weapon theory's from disassociated scientists and the lot. I realize you cannot do it, but just thought I'd give you the chance to explain yourself rather than insulting you within the same childish context as you have done.

[edit on 3/18/2010 by mikelee]

reply to post by mikelee


If you attempted to not insult me you failed. The "planes" that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon and Pennsylvania were "supposedly" carrying passengers right? There was NO trace of debris found from those "flights" that could positively identify the aircraft, so where did THOSE passengers go?


[edit on 18-3-2010 by warisover]

reply to post by warisover


As I suspected you didn't read my post, rather you simply read a few lines then posted because the answers to your questions are in my post. Try reading it in it's entirety next time. BTW, nice re-direct but epic fail!!

My opinion is not "where is the debris" for either PA or the Pentagon. I told what my opinion is with the Pentagon agree with it or not. As for flight 93 again, there were 3 debris sites and you no plane folk cannot see beyond the crater in Shanksville...

[edit on 3/18/2010 by mikelee]

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by warisover

 

As I suspected you didn't read my post, rather you simply read a few lines then posted because the answers to your questions are in my post. Try reading it in it's entirety next time. BTW, nice re-direct but epic fail!!

[edit on 3/18/2010 by mikelee]

Are you avoiding my question? No plane hit the Pentagon, the hole wasn't big enough, where did those passengers go that were supposed to be on that plane. No plane no passengers no Pentagon strike

reply to post by warisover


"avoiding your question..."

I do not care about the hole in the Pentagon but apparently you do, so go talk to someone else about it. Simple as that.

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by warisover

 

"avoiding your question..."

I do not care about the hole in the Pentagon but apparently you do, so go talk to someone else about it. Simple as that.

I figured as much.

Cat got your tongue

You will never win an argument with me. epic fail on you

[edit on 18-3-2010 by warisover]

Originally posted by warisover

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by warisover

 

"avoiding your question..."

I do not care about the hole in the Pentagon but apparently you do, so go talk to someone else about it. Simple as that.

I figured as much.

Cat got your tongue

You will never will an argument with me. epic fail on you

Ah what the heck, I need a good laugh tonight....

First off, your questions were answered in my post and reply. Now my turn:

* Where are the passengers on the aircraft then? Thats a question all of you no plane supporters refuse to answer because...You can't.

* I saw the two aircraft fly into the buildings and so did thousands of other people around the world and in NYC. The Play Station based notion of no planes but fake images flying around and into the WTC won't / can't make the type of damage seen in NYC. Why? Because somehting that isn't there does not cause damage (i.e. holograms, cartoons, illusions etc)

* The no plane theory is nothing more than an attempt to divert serious inquiry's into 911 by people who think more with their mouths than their minds.

[edit on 3/18/2010 by mikelee]

Originally posted by mikelee


* Where are the passengers on the aircraft then? Thats a question all of you no plane supporters refuse to answer because...You can't.

O.K. I'll play ball. Maybe if you and everyone else would support a new investigation into the criminal acts of 9-11, we could finally get some answers.
Then we can all find out where the passengers went and where the "planes" went too.

Have a great night. It was nice chatting with you.

reply to post by warisover


Funny, I have always said that I 100% support a real investigation in a lot of other threads and posts.

Respectfully Warisover,

Getting a new or real investigation I feel confident is not going to tell you where the passengers are because they are dead. The planes in NYC are trashed. As for the one supposedly used at the Pentagon I'll say is trashed also BUT, I myself would like more proof of that! As for flight 93 it was shot down and the main debris carted away to an undisclosed locale.

Take care...Mike

reply to post by mikelee


if there were 3 debris fields, and a large crater they said was the crash site... sounds like a cover up... agree?

reply to post by mikelee

.....carted away to an undisclosed locale.

I read a post here at ATS that the debris belongs to United Airlines. Possibly being stored at Iron Mountain.

Care to research that for us? Could help your case.

For AAL 77, I suggest the other poster look into the various ATS threads here, on the topic, for enlightenment.

How does not knowing what happened to the passengers refute all the other evidence for the lack of a plane crash at pentagon or shanksville?

How does not knowing one variables refute all the other evidence?

reply to post by Myendica


Hey Myendica,

100% and I have never thought otherwise.

reply to post by weedwhacker


I have posted the Iron Mtn site vid in another two threads...I'll go find them in a bit...and yes, I believe part of it is there but the Iron Mountain facility isn't the only gov leased storgae facility, there are other ones as well.

reply to post by Jezus


I believe in using the simple approach which is usually the best option to get on the path to the truth, whatever it may be. After that, it may get complex but in order to arrive at truth's doorstep you first have to start out with not much...simply. Too many times humans complicate things more than they really need to.

Fact: No one has ever come forward claiming that their loved one(s) was supposed to be on any of the 911 flights and are now simply missing.

Logical conclusion: They died when the planes crashed.

Conspiracy Theory: They were taken elsewhere and killed (or whatever). heavy claim with no real way to gain any evidence. In other words, a deadended theory that goes on and on.


Proof required to validate no planes:
* People who were supposed to be on the flight suddenly re-appear if they were only "re-located" as I have read elsewhere.
* Family members proving that their loved ones never boarded any of the flights.
* family members making claims as to the whereabouts of their loved ones to the media, which they would surely do.
* Citing or claims of people who saw "hologram machines" or generators station in or around NYC at the time. Something has to generate the image if we are to take this in some serious fashion.
* Acoustic device capable of making wide spectrum aircraft sounds & explosion noises in or around NYC at the time.
* The question of "how did people rig the towers with explosives do it" regarding Thermate or Thermite, then the same question must be asked of the explosions seen by hundreds of thousands as those "images/holograms" struck the towers. How did the explosives get attached to the oputer walls or just inside of the buildings in what was occupied office space where people were working.

Hundreds of thousands of people SAW aircraft strike the WTC not just on TV but in person. Thats a helluva an illusion to pull off in midair and one that I believe just didn't happen at all. is any of 911 a conspiracy? I say yes with no doubt but the actual conspiracy aspects are more than likely more mundane and less thrilling than many wish them to be.



[edit on 3/18/2010 by mikelee]

The Iron Mountain video.




One thing anyone must question is that if they didn't have any debris or evidence as they have claimed, then what exactly is stored at Iron Mountain then as it relates to flight 93?

I'll tell what then, its the evidence indicating that it was shot down.




[edit on 3/18/2010 by mikelee]

Originally posted by mikelee

I'll tell what then, its the evidence indicating that it was shot down.

Mike, there were no planes shot down over Pennsylvania, the debris that was found 7 miles away was supposed to be dumped over the crater(that was caused by shooting a missile into the ground) when it was realized that they missed their target they quietly collected the fake evidence

reply to post by warisover


If thats your belief then I respect it. Mine is obviously different.