Is this the real truth about the 9/11 planes

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by lambros56
My research brings me to believe that the planes that hit the towers were remotely controlled and that there were no passengers on board at all.

Add this to your "research" - USA Today - 911 Passenger List
List of passengers who died on the airplanes. Their names. Their homes. Some occupations listed.
They were real. They died.

That doesn't prove that the planes that hit the towers had passengers in them.
The people on the lists didn't die in the towers.
The planes that hit them were rigged by the perpetrators of the attack !

Originally posted by lambros56

Originally posted by FlyersFan
USA Today - 911 Passenger List
List of passengers who died on the airplanes. Their names. Their homes. Some occupations listed.
They were real. They died.

That doesn't prove that the planes that hit the towers had passengers in them.
The people on the lists didn't die in the towers.

What are you talking about? These are real people. They were on the flight manifests. They died
when the planes hit the towers and hit the pentagon and hit the field in shanksville. Their names
and where they are from are listed. They aren't fake lists. The funerals and memorial services
were real .. and they were for real people who died in those planes on that day.

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by SunnyDee

 

Video of planes hitting is questionable, could have been planes of course, but with CGI

CGI, then how would we have had all those witnesses?

England reported on building 7 in advance

Actually it was reported on a number of American news channels that the FDNY had put in place a cordon round WTC-7 and that they suspected it was going to collapse because of the extensive damage. the BBC received a local report suggesting it had collapsed which they reported on. You will note if you watch that interview with Jane Standly she uses phases like "details are very very sketchy" when asked about WTC7 then quickly moves on pointing out she only knows what the news anchor knows. That was because this was based on some random report, there was so much going on that day. what seems to have happened is that one news wire picked up the FDNY cordon and interpreted it as the building had collapsed and the BBC then ran with it.

Besides do you really think that they would tell the press about this in advance, what possible reason would they have for giving the press prior knowledge of their plan to blow up WTC-7.

Because of the extensive damage? Really? debris falling on a building doesn't make it pancake on itself in free fall. Laughable, just as you feigning disgust over the insult of the dead.

Couldn't the same argument be made that by not questioning th official narrative, in the event it was a false flag, also be an insult to the dead?

But by all means, keep on keeping on.....It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that there are way to many Inconsistencies in the official narrative.

reply to post by Rosinitiate

Because of the extensive damage? Really? debris falling on a building doesn't make it pancake on itself in free fall

Yes because of extensive damage, there were fires burning out of contorl on multiple floors in that building that was already venerable due to its unique design. The reason it pancaked almost into its own foot print was because its innereds collapsed first then the outer shell collapsed.

And all this took longer than the 6.5 seconds that Jones et al would have you believe, it took more like 13 seconds at a minimum, hardly free fall. What is true is that for about 2.5 (i would need to check the exact numbers) the building was in free fall, but the actual length of time it took the building to collapse was longer than free fall time. in short WTC-7 did not collapse in free fall, its just that truthers dont like showing the collapse of the east penthouse.

Couldn't the same argument be made that by not questioning th official narrative, in the event it was a false flag, also be an insult to the dead?

This I happen to agree with you on.

It is only right for the victims that we continue to question the official version of events, that however does not excuse accusing the families of those victims of lying and being part of the conspiracy and it also means accepting the truth.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that there are way to many Inconsistencies in the official narrative.

true there are but they point to cock-up rather than conspiracy.

also there are a hell of a lot more inconsistencies in the conspiracy theoristsversion of events

Originally posted by Lazarus Short

Originally posted by SupersonicSerpent
...but why the pentagon was hit i do not know.

The day before the Pentagon was hit, it was announced that 2 trillion dollars of Pentagon funds could not be accounted for. The plane (or whatever) hit the Pentagon in just the right spot to destroy the evidence.

2.3 trillion to be exact

That 300 billion is significant in such a large number.

reply to post by lambros56


WHAT!!!!

You....


This is whyi dont get you "truthers".


you were confronted with a list of the those who died on the plane and you have this to say

That doesn't prove that the planes that hit the towers had passengers in them.

What kind of pointless argument is that, we have cockpit voice recordings of the hijackings, we have a solid chronology of the flight paths those planes took and it clearly shows that they hit the twin towers. We also have the flight manifests that show who was on those planes. Yet you are saying "ahhh but that doesn't prove anything"

The people on the lists didn't die in the towers.

PROVE IT!

The planes that hit them were rigged by the perpetrators of the attack !

again...

PROVE IT!

Really i cannot believe anyone would actually post what you just posted.

Why can you not accept that those people died on those planes?

Wow, I haven't been in a 9/11 thread in years. Mostly because the cognitive dissonance is so darn loud. But it doesn't seem like much has changed since the last time. The truthers asking all the right questions, and the other side responding with nothing more or less than what the government told everyone. Forget Science, Physics, Common Sense, Logic. If the government says we can hang an elephant off a cliff with it's tail tied to a daisy, well by god it must be true?

The thing that is most baffling to me about these types of discussions is a lot of people who swallow what the government is peddling in this situation have no use or trust in the government in any other circumstance. So in essence what they are saying is that 99.9% of the time the government lies and cannot be trusted, but on this one horrible day they're telling the truth about everything.

reply to post by Malynn

The truthers asking all the right questions, and the other side responding with nothing more or less than what the government told everyone

Do you have a specific question in mind?

That is a genuine request, I am curious to know what specific question(s) you have in mind, just post one and lets watch what happens.

with nothing more or less than what the government told everyone. Forget Science, Physics, Common Sense, Logic.

I can understand this predicament and it is a difficulty that will probably never go away. If you are of the position that the government done it then someone quoting say the 9/11 commission is not going to wash with you. The same goes if you also believe the media were in on it, your not going to believe anyone who re-bucks your claims with a source form say the BBC. And if you also believe that NIST and FEMA were all in on it as well because of there connections to the government, again you wont believe any of that either or any academic really. Same goes for the eye whiteness, you think they are in on it, then they dont pass for a credible source.

But this works both ways remember, I think Steven Jones and Gage, Griffen, Jones and so on are all in it for some extra cash and attention so I refuse to believe anythign they say.

Truthers and OSers will always be in conflict, I just hope that in the middle of that conflict a little bit of truth starts to seep through.

reply to post by Malynn

Wow, I haven't been in a 9/11 thread in years. Mostly because the cognitive dissonance is so darn loud.

And after all these years the conspiracy side hasn't come up with any evidence that can stand the test of the experts.
Nothing more than hearsay.

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
Do you have a specific question in mind?

That is a genuine request, I am curious to know what specific question(s) you have in mind, just post one and lets watch what happens.

Ok, I'll bite.

Can you please explain why, that in (give or take) 100 years of steel framed skyscrapers, none, in any country, had ever collapsed due to fire, yet on 11th Sept 2001, not one, not two, but THREE collapsed (freefall speed) into dust that very morning and all within mere yards of each other?

Go on, tell me it was pure coincidence, Larry Silverstein was the victim and that the Palestinians are our enemy.

reply to post by AuntieChrist

Can you please explain why, that in (give or take) 100 years of steel framed skyscrapers, none, in any country, had ever collapsed due to fire, yet on 11th Sept 2001, not one, not two, but THREE collapsed (freefall speed) into dust that very morning and all within mere yards of each other?

Sure go read the NIST report.


seriously its all in there, and yes i have read the entire thing. I could not possibly have the space to explain it all in a single thread and you know that hence why you have asked such a broad but admittedly important question.

I would point out though that they did not collapse in free fall.....

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


Brilliant...!

I just wonder if you truly believe that which you write. Dazzle them with details eh? Damned convenient.

Off out now but I'll be back.

Seeing as you clearly have all the answers, you can finally enlighten us conspiracy nuts.

For all the posters that keep repeating over and over how none of the planes could have been remote controlled, you are basically admitting that you believe the official story. I suggest you go back and read this thread a few times then come back and tell us, no PROVE to us that those terrorists possessed the knowledge and training to fly those planes like that.

post by Blue_Jay33

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


It's the "brilliance" of the conspiracy movement for 9/11. Take the evidence that exists that shows how it really happened, then twist it to suit their agenda. They've never presented any original hard evidence for their side of the theory. Just opinions and interpretations on how they see things.

So all the airplane parts and debris were planted, all the passengers (and their families) were fake, all the phone calls were fake, all the terrorists were fake, all the videos were fake, everything was fake. It was all done with missiles, remote controlled planes, controlled demo, and numerous actors and liars, all perfectly timed to execute the biggest most widely viewed terrorist attack this world has ever seen. We also needed to be sure that all the airlines were in on it, a number of politicians, and military personnel. We also had to get Al Qaeda to agree to admit to doing this. Of course tho, conspiracy folks will say that theyre the CIA...

They have an answer for everything. They also seem to conveniently forget that the first attempts to bring the towers down in 1993 failed and were known to be caused by the same network of terrorists who succeeded in 2001... So their theory should include those actors as well... but it never does

reply to post by SMOKINGGUN2012

For reasons that I don't have the time to explain at the moment (but which involve proof of controlled demolition) the 9/11 planes that impacted the north and south towers of the WTC MUST have been remotely piloted and were almost certainly drone aircraft swapped in during the 9/11 War Games Operations.

reply to post by PhotonEffect

So all the airplane parts and debris were planted, all the passengers (and their families) were fake, all the phone calls were fake, all the terrorists were fake, all the videos were fake, everything was fake. It was all done with missiles, remote controlled planes, controlled demo, and numerous actors and liars, all perfectly timed to execute the biggest most widely viewed terrorist attack this world has ever seen. We also needed to be sure that all the airlines were in on it, a number of politicians, and military personnel. We also had to get Al Qaeda to agree to admit to doing this. Of course tho, conspiracy folks will say that theyre the CIA...

yup!

when you put it like that i am amazed that anyone actually believes in the 9/11 false flag.

Hey your link you provided yesterday:

www.consensus911.org...

Mysteriously no longer works. It had some good info I wanted to read.


post by signalfire

Originally posted by AuntieChrist
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

 

Brilliant...!

I just wonder if you truly believe that which you write. Dazzle them with details eh? Damned convenient.

Off out now but I'll be back.

Seeing as you clearly have all the answers, you can finally enlighten us conspiracy nuts.

Not to defend either side of the argument or draw conclusions on what caused damage ... but if you're going to talk about the cause of the structural collapse, you cant just talk about fire damage. You have to consider all aspects of the damage to the structure prior to the collapse. In these cases, that would include fire damage and both internal and external supporting and non-supporting structure damage. Nobody is claiming it was solely fire, in any of the cases.

Originally posted by SMOKINGGUN2012
Hey your link you provided yesterday:

www.consensus911.org...

Mysteriously no longer works. It had some good info I wanted to read.


post by signalfire

 

actually "debunking 9/11 is also down....

I think someone is attacking 9/11 debunking sites.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
The real truth of the 9/11 airplanes is ... they were airplanes. Fully loaded with fuel. Hijacked by 19 radical islamics. Flown into prearranged target buildings. (except for Shanksville that fell short because the passengers took it down before the Air Force could).

And I personally spoke with a cabbie in DC who watched the plane hit the pentagon. Lots of people saw it fly into the building. Lots of people saw the planes fly into the Trade Center as well.

That's the truth about the airplanes.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Sometimes a radical islamic extremist is just a radical islamic extremist.

The shoddy coverup kind of stuff comes afterwards. Bush secretly flying the Bin Laden family out of the US. The Israeli government may have caught wind of this ahead of time but let it happen so as to drag the USA into a war against the Muslims. That kind of thing.

But the planes? They were real. They crashed into the buildings. People died.

That's just the truth of it.

These same 19 terrorists of whom many are walking around in various countries today? How convenient that a paper passport survived that inferno and was found so quickly so they could blame some guy in a cave with a laptop and just happened to pull off the biggest terrorist event in history on the same day NORAD was running a duplicate scenario and no jets were available to take them out?

There are HUNDREDS of video cameras around the Pentagon. Why is it we only see 6 terrible images that shows nothing like a plane hitting the Pentagon? How does a plane with two seven foot titanium encased engines that would hit many feet outside of the 16 foot hole created by said plane not damage the building, but just fold up into a nice hole and there is not skid mark on the ground? How is a pilot who cannot fly a twin engine small plane with any proficiency do an ace maneuver that jet pilot aces with over 20 years experience can't pull off that stunt?

How does a plane crash in Pennsylvania and there are no bodies to recover per the coroner on scene? Where is the wreckage? How does a plane hit multiple light poles at the Pentagon and the wings are not sheared off? Nothing about 911 adds up. How does a building called the Solomon building get reported as having come down twenty minutes prior to the event and you can see it behind the reporter as she is speaking to her BBC audience and no one says, "Hmmm... looks like it's standing Ms. so and so, are you sure building 7 has come down? How do you know it is going to come down? Is this a planned demolition? Larry Silverstein made billions off of a 126 million dollar investment, sounds like you follow the money and who has the most to gain.

How did thousands of put options get placed on those airlines before the event. Did someone know about it? Why has nothing ever come of that investigation? A day before the event it was admitted the Government just lost 2 TRILLION dollars. Then nothing was done about it because 9/11 happened the next day. Never let a good crisis go to waste, ya know? We have had our liberties stolen. We have been trained to be treated like criminals by our government, and get used to unlawful search and seizure because there might be some terrorist lurking around.

You can believe the lie, but it's not based in anything logical or factual?