**Sent[/]b, any response to this portion of my last post?
Wrong! Many of those 19 Arabs were using stolen and/or fake IDs.
I keep seeing out-of-context references to that article. I have yet to see proof that the article is an actual and non-edited Times article.
Good question, why aren’t more people saying anything? I would like to see a survey done of experienced commerical pilots who have closely examined the alleged events of that day as to what their opinions are. I think conclusions have been drawn based more on the belief that it is impossible there is a conspiracy so even though it doesn’t make sense based on my knowledge or experience I have to accept that it happened than the actual good sense or objective professional judgment of these various fields. After all, nobody wants to labelled a “psycho CTer”, as we all have seen tends to happen.
No. This is the same guy, who matches the description as to his whereabouts in Daytona Beach, etc. at the specified times…but he left the United States afterwards. Did you even read the article?
Wouldn’t be that hard to find out now would it?
One who is under a massive amount of adrenaline and is nervous about his next course of action?
So go find it. You’re the one currently using it as a cite.
That does not mean that he wasn’t a victim of identity theft.
It’s interesting how willing you are to accept the unreliability of experts when they aren’t supporting your preconceived notions. Some guy claims that a particular flying maneuver is impossible, and you believe him utterly and without criticisms. Any one who disagrees with that guy has been too cowed by government propaganda to question something he knows for a fact to be impossible. Do you see the inherent hypocrisy of your position, here?
No, do you see your own?
Sent, sorry but it doesn’t matter. You can speculate all you like on the motives for the 9/11 attacks; over the course of many pages in at least two threads you not yet have posted a single fragment of primary evidence supporting them.
Given the utterly laughable gullibility and complete failure to think critically that you have displayed here, there is no chance you will ever have the slightest shred of credibility on this subject, unless or until you do at least one of the following.
-
Demonstrate that anyone, anyone at all, can show to a legal standard of evidence they were asked, ordered or compelled to a) fabricate physical evidence supporting the conclusions of the 9/11 Commission; or b) hide physical evidence that points toward US government orchestration of the attacks. I’m not talking about stuff you think you saw in grainy videos.
-
Produce any physical evidence, of any kind, that the aircraft registered as N334AA, N612UA, N644AA, and N591UA were not in fact destroyed by impact, at the locations stated in offical reports, on 11 September 2001. I’m not talking about stuff you think you saw in grainy videos.
-
Produce any physical evidence at all that the people who were supposed to be aboard the planes, passengers, crew and hijackers alike either were not in fact aboard or did not die in the impacts of said aircraft.
-
Produce any actual physical evidence, of any kind, that the damage caused during the attacks resulted from the direct or follow-on effects of anything other than the high-velocity impacts of commercial airliners. Once again, I’m not talking about stuff you think you saw in grainy videos.
If you are posting mainly in an effort to support the re-opening of an investigation in the attacks, surely you realize that at this point it’s going to be extremely difficult to find much in the way of physical evidence remaining from the attacks, regardless of which particular hypothesis the evidence supports. Thus, as with most such events many years later, anything in the way of circumstantial evidence you may come up with is essentially a lost cause and a complete waste of everyone’s time.
Finally, neither repeating your position over and over, nor repeatedly citing secondary sources with no particular credibility, will work. Gotta be at least one of the points above; preferably more.
Well I still dont see any anomalies or bizarre coincidences. Everything I have read and seen fits with what has been reported, and the motives behind them
Many might disagree, you are correct. However, thousands upon thousands of people who were also there, and who also studied the attacks, agree on the official story. So you have to ask, are a few people sharper than the few thousands of people who all report the same thing?
Perhaps…but didnt you just do the same thing? Didn’t you just, in one line, disregard the fact that muslim extremists hate us to their very soul? And want to see our way life wiped from the face of the earth? Since the hostage crisis in Iran in the late 70’s, to the Beruit bombings in the 80’s, to the USS Cole in the 90’s, they have been trying to kill Americans. Dont disregard the hundreds of americans killed in these attacks, and what they were trying to accomplish by doing so.
Again…lots of data, with no reasons behind it. I have no idea who the person who wrote that piece is. I have no idea if Mr. Salem is a informer, and while the site seemed sure a FBI Supervisor was involved, nobody mentions names, times, places…or anything that links them together. So while you wont believe what experts everywhere said, you do believe an unknown source named Mr. Salem. come on…really?
So now voice experts were called in to help fake all this? This CT just grows and grows…
And dont you think it strange that the government was able to pull of 9/11 with nobody the wiser, but they weren’t smart enough to edit a faked recording to remove a son from using his last name? really?
Well no, not really. If Ashcroft knew about this plot, why draw suspicsion upon himself by canceling flight plans months ahead of time? He could have just as easily called in ‘sick’ that day and stayed home. Or just not flown on 9/11, but flown every other day up till then. I mean, he knew the details, why would he have to cancel more flights than just those on 9/11?
Im not going to list all your court-room questions, because they all point to the same thing. You think the government did this to rebuild the crumbling US defense…which I guess you would be right if you consider the 281 billion that was spent for defense in 1999, crumbling.
But okay, for arguments sake, lets say that is what they wanted to do. Increase military spending. So the put together a hugely complicated plot that would involve;
Pilots
Passengers
Demolition experts
Document forgers
Radar software experts
Voice dubbing experts
And who knows how many other experts, to increase budget spending from 280 billion to 470 billion in 2005? Thats it? All this, for 190 billion dollars in 7 years? Did you know 470 billion is only about 3.7% of the US GDP? Do you know how much MORE they could be spending if that truly was their goal?
You have to do better than that Sent…really. What exactly does the government want, that it doesnt already have, that would cause them to risk everything…for a little bit more. Help me out with the reason…thats all I want. Give me a reson that makes sense.
Oh yes of course, it’s well known that when people get excited they use their full names when identifying themselves to family members.
Here’s a question: how many Arab people have actually seen in your life? Have any Arab friends? Can you tell the difference between two different Arab people, or do you think they all look the same? Apparently, the American people can’t.
Here is an image:
Wow…I apologize for the many spelling mistakes in my post above, forgot the ol’ spell check!
Oh yes of course, it’s well known that when people get excited they use their full names when identifying themselves to family members.
Here’s a question: how many Arab people have actually seen in your life? Have any Arab friends? Can you tell the difference between two different Arab people, or do you think they all look the same? Apparently, the American people can’t.
Here is an image:
http://911blimp.net/images/fake_osama_comparo1.jpg
On the right is the Osama we are all familiar with from past videos in Afghanistan. On the left is the person who appears the “Osama Smoking Gun” video confession used to justify war against Afghanistan. Anyone bother to notice that these are two completely different people?
Now, would you care to actually respond to the point of my post?
You included this guy on a list of people involved in a group called physics911. How does a small town lawyer who may have recieved an MSc 20 years ago become a “scholar” and expert for such a group.
Again, I have an MBA, and work as a professional. Can I be considered a “scholar” and expert. Why will you listen to that guy, but you won’t listen to me?
I don’t see Cheney there. Do you?
No. That authority went to the Secretary of Defense (i.e.: Donald Rumsfeld).
Cheney had nothing to do with it. Rumsfeld did, and he’s an idiot.
How, exactly, are buldings supposed to collapse after being hit by a 767?
Damage to WTC 6 was consistent with a big explosion under WTC 7. What would cause such an explosion? A giant oil tank that was installed in violation of NYC fire codes, perhaps?
That is absolutely not a fact. That is conjecture.
:rolleyes:
No, but it is a well known fact that people do strange things, perhaps even things they wouldn’t normally do, when under stress.
Cite? Who can infer anything from that blurry pic?
Oh, right, you and the erstwhile Señor Diaz who use blurry images as “evidence”. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Do you know what a think tank is? Are you aware that PNAC, which came up with this plan, is a neoconservative think tank of which Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney became members in 1997? Come now, you know better than that. There was not innaccurate in that statement of fact. Every member of PNAC supports the overall goals of PNAC. Wolfowitz who’s name is even on the document itself was appointed to the World Bank by the administration, several others were appointed to positions in the administration…there is no point in trying to obfuscate these facts.
Either you’re not very bright, or you are trying to distort the reality of what happened here. That Joint Chiefs Insutruction played a pivitol role in allowing 9/11 to happen.
Prior to this instruction:
Field commanders had authority to shoot down commercial aircraft, and would have done so if a commercial aircraft was headed towards the Pentagon and orders were not forthcoming.
After this instruction:
All authority to shoot down the aircraft goes to Rumsfeld. Who does Rumsfeld answer to? That’s right, Dick Cheney and George W. Bush. Rumsfeld hands over control to his boss Dick Cheney, who is in the situation room directing things. Therefore, Dick Cheney becomes effectively in control of our air defenses against these aircraft. Capice?
Well when I have some spare 110-story buildings to crash 767s into, I’ll let you know. They aren’t supposed to collapse at all, or if they do, they are not supposed to collapse so quickly and with additional explosions in the basements and demolition charge pops, flashes and quibs going around the buildings.
Have you bothered to read Rebuilding America’s Defenses? How can you dispute that every objective mentioned is on the way to being achieved as a result of 9/11? Read it and get back to me.