I Was A Professional 9/11 Truther (And I Gave It Up)

a reply to: dashen

See this is the point i am making.

WTC7 took about 13 seconds to collapse fully, for it to have been falling at free fall it would have taken about 6 seconds so your claim that the building fell at free fall its untrue is it not.

PS: Sources all in this thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Also why was there molten metal under the buildings?

Again don't just make a statement back it up with sources.

There are too many things, building 7, passports of terrorists found, or the terrorists still being alive. Bush Sr was having lunch with OBL's dad when the towers were hit. Thats an odd coincidence. And then the only folks in the air on 9/12 were the Bin Laden family, flying back to, guess where? Thats right, Saudi Arabia. And Cheney owns a company perfectly capable of planting expolsives covertly. Its called blackwater. There are so many other issues that just dont add up, you would have to be crazy, or totally uninformed, not to think something was up, or there was a conspiracy behind it all.

a reply to: panaque

And then the only folks in the air on 9/12 were the Bin Laden family, flying back to, guess where?

Ohhh look again no sources!

Also they did not leave until the 19th of September.

Link

the "Ground stop" ended on the 13th of September with full air traffic starting up shortly after.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Smh, oh wow. Ok, I'll just ask a couple of questions that have been unanswered.

1.How was the Pentagon hit 80 minutes after the attacks began? An Air Force Base was 10 miles away.

2. How did the VERY novice terrorist execute a difficult aerobatic maneuver to strike the Pentagon?

3. Why are key pages of the 9/11 report classified? If you are a truther go ahead and assume whatever you want.

4. If there is nothing to hide then why all the "Hush" money. By accepting victims compensation, families were barred from pursuing discovery through litigation.

5. Why was the Patriot Act was written before 9/11?

6. Why did the BBC report the destruction of WTC7 BEFORE its demise? How did they know it "fell" while it was still standing?

youtu.be...

7. Why were the buildings the longest structural fire in recorded history? Even with millions of gallons of water being poured on top of the side it was the longest burning structural fire ever recorded.

There are many more examples. This is just a few that came to mind

In conclusion, I believe all these have very simple answers. But for truthers, it's all about aliens or some other crazy government conspiracy.

a reply to: Asktheanimals

I wish i could give you a round of applause for that post Asktheanimals , Cue Bono is the way to look at that particular event with 100,000s of thousands of people involved in the arms industry in America and millions worldwide the last thing that some people want is for peace to break out what would all those usefull idiots do for a living in a peacefull world

Eisenhowers last speech is very prophetic to that and other events for all those not guzzling the Kool Aid on a daily basis globally .

I have come across some great research on ATS by people who can see outside the box , from computer screens still on the desk at the Pentagon , i will leave a link for the kool aid crew to how the laws of physics stopped and time stopped on that day

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...


I saw a fire in a bar once what it did to the coins in a juke box yet not one picture of the gold that melted along with all those lovely bonds and precious stones that we never heard from again .

The money that has been blown on the war machine since that years has been mind blowing but war is a great thing for keeping the dumb masses entertained

originally posted by: TheSorrow

1.How was the Pentagon hit 80 minutes after the attacks began? An Air Force Base was 10 miles away.

Not every base had armed fighters. There were only 7 that had them ready to launch on that day, for the entire continental US, and only two in the Northeast. Both had already launched all their ready fighters. It takes between 90 minutes and three hours to arm aircraft from a cold start.

They also didn't have the exact position of 77 to start with. Once an aircraft turns off their transponder, the Secondary radar that is the most commonly used by the FAA can't see them anymore, only a Primary radar can, and there was only one Primary radar where they made the turn. Until they overflew another Primary set, no one knew exactly where they were.

2. How did the VERY novice terrorist execute a difficult aerobatic maneuver to strike the Pentagon?

Hani Hanjour was an FAA certified commercial pilot and was training in simulators on 737s, which have cockpits that aren't that different from a 757. It was hardly a "difficult aerobatic maneuver" though, it was a descending turn, and if you watch the FDR animation put out by the NTSB, you'll see that he was constantly correcting and it was a very uncoordinated maneuver.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I agree. Easy answers. But to get this right, the one Air Force Base that was in charge of the protection of the capital of the United States of America did not have any armed fighters? How is this OK?

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Heres your source. If you need more, feel free to find them on your own.
news.sky.com...

a reply to: TheSorrow

Almost no bases did on 9/11, after they gutted the Alert Force in the 90s. Andrews was deselected, and it was given to Langley, and Otis. Langley was considered close enough to Andrews to do the mission. The 121st Fighter Squadron was eventually taken off the alert mission because when they transitioned to the F-16 in 1989, they got Block 5 and 10 aircraft, second hand. The Block 5/10 didn't have a BVR capability, which made flying alert much harder, required much more control than other units in the area did. They eventually transitioned to more capable aircraft, but the alert mission was already being cut hard when they did.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Zaphod58

Zap i am curious what your views are on this.

Like i said above something i find interesting is why people believe 9/11 conspiracies.

Do you not think that ignorance plays a big role in it, for example the member you were addressing talking about flight 93 asks the question "where is the wreckage". I myself once asked the same question when researching 9/11 so went out done my own research and discovered iron mountain and their facility that store a whole load of interesting stuff. Yet some believers of 9/11 truth will say "where is the wreckage" as if this is some kind of smoking gun point, all most as if it does not exist. I do not think they do this because they have seen a youtube video where the same question is asked by a 9/11 turthers but then they do not actually bother to corroborate this information for themselves.

Seems to me that a lot of 9/11 truthers could debunk themselves if they just done a little bit of research.

So you discovered Iron Mountain! Well, well. Fancy that! Did they let you wander around and scrutinise the serial numbers of the machine parts of Flight 93? Did you lift up all the tons of wreckage that we never saw got taken away from the crash site? Did you make sure it really was Flight 93 when you examined it with your magnifying glass?

You didn't?! Oh! I see. So all you did when you carried out "my own research" was - like all those reckless 9/11 truthers - to spend a few minutes searching around on the internet until you discovered some piece of government/media disinfo that confirmed your pre-conceived acceptance of the official 9/11 scenario. And now you accuse 9/11 truthers of not investigating the facts properly. What a laugh! Talk about the kettle calling the pot black!

Debunkers of 9/11 truth do not even bother to research the facts because they would debunk themselves if they did. 9/11 truthers RIGHTFULLY ask "where was all the wreckage?" because we never saw it at the alleged crash site. Why not? Because the so-called crash site was just a natural crater, not a REAL impacted, plane crash site, that's why. The ACTUAL wreckage (strewn over six miles) was quickly taken away so that no one would notice the bullet holes in the hull caused by cannon fire from the jet planes that Cheney ordered to fire at it, an order he later admitted to issuing, as this video proves:
Why was lots of US mail Flight 93 was carrying found EIGHT miles from the supposed crash site? How could it have remained airborne for over an hour before falling to earth, according to estimates? Because the plane was shot down far from the official crash site and this act was then covered up because the US government did not want Americans to learn that it had killed dozens of them.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Are you suggesting that on 9/11 the east coast (maybe all of the mainland US) was protected by unarmed fighters and no one was held accountable?

Again, this is less about a conspiracy and more about dereliction of duty or incompetence. I don't believe 9/11 has anything to do with aliens or mass conspiracies.

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Also why was there molten metal under the buildings?

Another false claim, there was no molten metal under the building, what is your source for that claim

originally posted by: TheSorrow
a reply to: Zaphod58

Are you suggesting that on 9/11 the east coast (maybe all of the mainland US) was protected by unarmed fighters and no one was held accountable?

Who suggested that? Please detail the aircraft that were on air defence, and what their role actually was!

a reply to: hellobruce

Exactly my point. You cannot answer those seven basic questions. Because of the lack of information those who have a conspiracy theory are free to believe what they want

a reply to: TheSorrow

No that's not what I'm saying. Once again, there were seven bases that had fighters on ready status, armed and ready to launch. Langley and Otis in the Northeast, Homestead and Tyndall in Fl, Portland in Oregon, March in California, and Ellington in Texas. That is all that was deemed necessary, because there was no longer a large scale threat against the US that they would have to fight, such as the Soviet Air Force. They were a ready force to intercept and identify aircraft entering the ADIZ without properly identifying themselves largely, instead of having to be ready to fight waves of bombers coming in from the sea.

The rest of the fighters were unarmed. Only those aircraft that were on alert status were sitting on the ground armed and ready to launch. The Air Force doesn't keep armed fighters sitting around on the ramp, even now, because the aircraft have to fly training missions. They'd have to constantly be downloading the missiles and reuploading them to other aircraft when they had to fly that aircraft on a training mission.

a reply to: Zaphod58

The United States Capitol had no air defense? And the Russians are to blame? Yet another conspiracy theory. Did the Russians plan 911? Smh

a reply to: TheSorrow

Where did I day the Russians are to blame? Please point that out.

I SAID the alert force was designed to fight waves of Soviet bombers, which was the threat for the entire Cold War. Once they were no longer a threat, the alert force wasn't needed at the levels it was at, so they cut it down to where it was on 9/11.

Maybe if you read what I wrote, instead of what you decided I meant, I wouldn't have to keep repeating myself and explaining it in post after post.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Bruh, there were NO Russian bombers on 9/11. I promise you.

If you want to avoid the questions I posted that's completely fine.

FYI- I am sarcastically agreeing with you

Screw it, I give up.