It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

9/11 too Risky for Bush Administration to Pull off?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2007 @ 10:20 PM
link   
I have watched and read as many things on the 9/11 conspiracies as I could but do you think such a stunt could be pulled off? Has there been any proof of this type of stunt being achieved? The only similar thing I can find to the 9/11 conspiracy theory is Operation Northwood which was reportedly denied by President John F. Kennedy.

Theres also the alleged highjackers, such as Waleed al-Shehri, still alive and well when they were pointed by the FBI as hijackers of the Boeing airplanes.


Then theres suspicion about the collapse of the towers and WTC 7, which was said by Larry Silverstein to "pull it" which is a demolition term. Problems in that are why would explosives already be set in the building and why would the building collapse when not hit by any airplanes.


Ive also read and seen videos about flashes going on during the impact of the planes hitting the towers, which is supposedly the effect of a bomb.


Then theres all the stuff about the anamolies of the Pentagon hit, how there was no shell of the plane found and no plane wreckage on the ground.


However, doesnt this all seem a bit much just to have an excuse to go to war? And what happened to all the passengers on those airlines, where are documents of their bodies and if they werent killed in any crash (except Flight 93 which has been said to be shot down) where are they now? Surely someone would recognize them.


These things keep me from making a firm decision, its such a back and forth issue its hard to stand your ground with it. In all, the conspiracy theories seem possible but highly unlikely, and the official report of 9/11 does have holes yet if something is researched enough anything can have holes in it but doesnt necessarily make it wrong.

[edit on 25-2-2007 by RomanianDacianHun]

[edit on 25-2-2007 by RomanianDacianHun]




posted on Feb, 25 2007 @ 04:42 AM
link   

However, doesnt this all seem a bit much just to have an excuse to go to war? And what happened to all the passengers on those airlines, where are documents of their bodies and if they werent killed in any crash (except Flight 93 which has been said to be shot down) where are they now? Surely someone would recognize them.


Actually you NEED to have something much. How would something small justify a war? Besides, the WTC collpase probably can't even compare to the devestation we put on Iraq.

Also, I believe the passengers on all those planes did in fact die, one way or another.



posted on Feb, 25 2007 @ 04:56 AM
link   
To be honest, Ive never seen a family member from the wtc plane victims..

how do you know, they were even REAL flights?



posted on Feb, 25 2007 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by RomanianDacianHun
However, doesnt this all seem a bit much just to have an excuse to go to war? And what happened to all the passengers on those airlines, where are documents of their bodies and if they werent killed in any crash (except Flight 93 which has been said to be shot down) where are they now? Surely someone would recognize them.
[edit on 25-2-2007 by RomanianDacianHun]

[edit on 25-2-2007 by RomanianDacianHun]


Well if the government let Pearl Harbor happen as an excuse to go to war letting a few planes hit some buildings is not that much.



posted on Feb, 25 2007 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by RomanianDacianHun
However, doesnt this all seem a bit much just to have an excuse to go to war? And what happened to all the passengers on those airlines, where are documents of their bodies and if they werent killed in any crash (except Flight 93 which has been said to be shot down) where are they now? Surely someone would recognize them.
[edit on 25-2-2007 by RomanianDacianHun]

[edit on 25-2-2007 by RomanianDacianHun]


Well if the government let Pearl Harbor happen as an excuse to go to war letting a few planes hit some buildings is not that much.


Okay, but Imperial Japan was planning to bomb Pearl Harbor anyways, whether the American government was going to allow them or not. Here, they needed to plant the alleged bombs going unnoticed, hitting the Pentagon, and destroying the hijacked aircrafts or moving them elsewhere. Just seems a bit much to me.



posted on Feb, 25 2007 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
To be honest, Ive never seen a family member from the wtc plane victims..

how do you know, they were even REAL flights?




They have recorded phone messages from flight attendants and a passenger, Todd Beamer. Theres also been documentaries with people related to those who were passengers or flight attendants on those planes. However, we dont know if theyre just good actors; but I think after that kind of publicity it would be difficult to go unnoticed.



posted on Feb, 25 2007 @ 05:56 PM
link   
i don't believe the government conspiracy idea not because they are too good to do such things the government has over and over agin done stupid evil things mostly through ignorance, the reason i don't believe it is the government have never ever been able to keep a secret they even blew the atomic secrets and cia secrets evil perhaps inept no doubt.



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by RomanianDacianHun
Okay, but Imperial Japan was planning to bomb Pearl Harbor anyways, whether the American government was going to allow them or not. Here, they needed to plant the alleged bombs going unnoticed, hitting the Pentagon, and destroying the hijacked aircrafts or moving them elsewhere. Just seems a bit much to me.


I am stating that thier is not enough evidnece that government did it. I am stating the government knew more then what they have stated in the media reports and may have left it happen.



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by RomanianDacianHun
Okay, but Imperial Japan was planning to bomb Pearl Harbor anyways, whether the American government was going to allow them or not. Here, they needed to plant the alleged bombs going unnoticed, hitting the Pentagon, and destroying the hijacked aircrafts or moving them elsewhere. Just seems a bit much to me.


I am stating that thier is not enough evidnece that government did it. I am stating the government knew more then what they have stated in the media reports and may have left it happen.


Alright, try to be more clear next time. What makes you think this, besides Pearl Harbor.



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by RomanianDacianHun
Alright, try to be more clear next time. What makes you think this, besides Pearl Harbor.

\
Well thier are several reasons, like the following.

By the actions of NORAD. Thier is no way a plane should have gotten into restricted airspace let alone hit the Pentagon. Those 4 planes were in the air for hours without transponders and off course, they should have been intercepted.

NORAD had pulled aircraft away from thier normal patrol zones to monitor a Russion exercise, we have airborne and spaceborne platforms for that purpose thier was no reason to pull other aircraft.



[edit on 26-2-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 06:33 PM
link   
Right, I remember the NORAD thing about commercial airplanes not allowed to fly over the Pentagon, I also read some article that supposedly showed one of the flights landing on an airstrip and letting passengers off and I think getting new passengers on all in about 5 minutes.



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 06:36 PM
link   
In response to ULTIMA 1:

Okay, there are two things that could have caused the coincidental timing of the NORAD exercises, as I see it.

1. Whoever planned the exercises had foreknowledge of the impending attacks.

2. Whoever planned the attacks had foreknowledge of the NORAD exercises that day.

To me number 2 seems more likely and more plausible.


my 1 and a half cents.



posted on Feb, 26 2007 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by RomanianDacianHun
Right, I remember the NORAD thing about commercial airplanes not allowed to fly over the Pentagon, I also read some article that supposedly showed one of the flights landing on an airstrip and letting passengers off and I think getting new passengers on all in about 5 minutes.


Well the Capital, White House, and Pentagon area is retricted airspace. Its a wonder flight 77 did not get shot down when it overflew the restrcted airspace on its way to the Pentagon.

I believe your thinking about the Delta flight 1989, that plane got confused with flight 93 because it overflew flight 93s path and also had its transponder off and was reporting a bomb on board. It landed and was searched and nothing was found.

Because it overflew flight 93s path the air traafiic controllers got it confused with flight 93.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join