Outstanding Article, Best I have read yet..

Originally posted by infinityoreilly


Thanks for answering the first question how about the second? Are all aspects of the official story cool with you? Are you skeptical of anything in the 911 Commissions Report and if so could you be specific? Are you skeptical of any of the NISTs findings?

Sorry infinity...

Cool with me? Not really. I am a Bush hater and believe that he covered up the *-ups that happened prior to that day. ie: being questioned WITH Cheney and not being able to answer why.

This does not however lead me to beleive that he was at all involved in LIHOP or MIHOP.

NIST, from what I have studied from countelss people were not perfect. BUT, from their imperfections does not lead me to believe there was a CD at the WTC towers and WTC7. There have been many independant papers that have been written that support NIST findings. Many that refute it. Unless your background is in the behaviour of buildings, engineering, fire safety, etc etc,,, it's kind of tough to know where to go. Personally, I go with credited people that have submitted their white papers. So, for that I will agree I am a wee bit biased.

Hope that sums it up for ya!

Thanks,

C.O.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1


Unless the pilots were real wimps and were afraid of 2 guys with box cutters.

Hey Ultima... why dont you call the wives of these pilots, or thier children...and say that to them.

This is something I'd expect to read at the Loose Change Forum with 13 year olds. Not here. DISGUSTING POST !!!

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Hey Ultima... why dont you call the wives of these pilots, or thier children...and say that to them.

This is something I'd expect to read at the Loose Change Forum with 13 year olds. Not here. DISGUSTING POST !!!

Hey i am one of the few people on this forum who is looking for the truth, just like the familes. Not like others on here that just go along with what the media feeds them.

I know their were pilots who were vietnam vets, they are not going to be scared of 2 guys with box cutters, so i am still waiting for a good reason why the pilots could not get off an emergency call or signal. Specailly when receiving proir warnings.

[edit on 20-9-2007 by ULTIMA1]

reply to post by CaptainObvious


OK how about No. 2 senario in the posted writers list, The Incompetency Theory, that about some it up for you.

And No. 5, the anthrax thing you like how that turned out, supposed insider never arrested and charged.

for spelling


[edit on 9/20/2007 by infinityoreilly]

reply to post by ULTIMA1


Bull [snip] You are accusing the pilots of either:

a) Not being there
b) beiing wimps and letting the terrorists take over
c) being in on it

If I am wrong... please direct me in the proper direction as to wht you believe. In all the time you have been a member ehre, you must have drawn some type of hypothisis.

Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 23-9-2007 by elevatedone]

reply to post by infinityoreilly


infinity... where is this list your talking about? sorry... not sure where you got this from

EDIT... sorry... the OP's link to that list... let me re-read it and get back to you

[edit on 20-9-2007 by CaptainObvious]

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Bull [snip] You are accusing the pilots of either:

a) Not being there
b) beiing wimps and letting the terrorists take over
c) being in on it

If I am wrong... please direct me in the proper direction as to wht you believe. In all the time you have been a member ehre, you must have drawn some type of hypothisis.

I am simply asking for a reason why out of 4 planes not 1 got off an emergency call or signal. Specially when at least Flight 93 had prior warnings. It just seems very odd, something esle thats missing mfor the official story.





[edit on 23-9-2007 by elevatedone]

reply to post by ULTIMA1


Looks like you have been here at ATS for amost two years ultima... what do YOU think happened? There is no way to know exactly what happened in the cockpits!

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
There is no way to know exactly what happened in the cockpits!

If you completely understood what you're saying here then you wouldn't be arguing with Ultima about what did or didn't happen in there. There's absolutely no way you can debunk anything he suggests, simply because, as you stated, there's no way to know what happened in the cockpits.

He's just curious at the fact that apparently no one was able to get out a signal, despite how easy it is to do so. So what?

This is something I'd expect to read at the Loose Change Forum with 13 year olds. Not here. DISGUSTING POST !!!

"What? Is he here?"

The emotional card is lame and you're not going to get anyone riled up and raging. No one here knew the guy. No one cares. What's really disgusting is how you fake giving a damn just to try to give somebody hell.

It reminds me of the kindergartener tattling, not because of any personal grievance, but just because he knows he can get the other kid in trouble and wants to see it. Is that not disgusting? Think about it. You know you don't give a damn about the pilots. You'd have to look up their names just to tell me something about any of them.

[edit on 21-9-2007 by bsbray11]

Originally posted by CaptainObvious

Looks like you have been here at ATS for amost two years ultima... what do YOU think happened? There is no way to know exactly what happened in the cockpits!

Yes we do not know. We do not have the reports we should have. Like the FBI and NIST crime scene reports.

Reports on parts found at the Pentagon matching flight 77.

Reports on where the parts were taken.

Reports on the different and seperate debris fields for Flgiht 93.

The official report just raises more questions then it answers.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious

infinity... where is this list your talking about? sorry... not sure where you got this from

EDIT... sorry... the OP's link to that list... let me re-read it and get back to you

[edit on 20-9-2007 by CaptainObvious]

When you get around to my questions about this thread and some of the issues of 911 it describes I'd appreciate it. Once again #2 The Imcompetency Threory, is this the way you see it that we just got caught with our pants down that day. #5 the anthax scare, the strain was traced to a US source with no arrest or filed charges.

Originally posted by infinityoreilly
[Once again #2 The Imcompetency Threory, is this the way you see it that we just got caught with our pants down that day. .

My question is. If agencies were so incompetent that day why was no one fired ?

Originally posted by bsbray11
"What? Is he here?"

The emotional card is lame and you're not going to get anyone riled up and raging. No one here knew the guy. No one cares. What's really disgusting is how you fake giving a damn just to try to give somebody hell.

It reminds me of the kindergartener tattling, not because of any personal grievance, but just because he knows he can get the other kid in trouble and wants to see it. Is that not disgusting? Think about it. You know you don't give a damn about the pilots. You'd have to look up their names just to tell me something about any of them.

I was not attempting to get anyone riled up. I was stating that to suggest the pilots were "wimps" IMO was disgusting.

You do NOT know me, where I am from or what ties I have with anyone that was a victim of 911. To say I don't "give a damn" is pathetic. I admit I would have to look up all but one of their names. Why not one of them...well perhaps although you don't think I give a damn...maybe i do. Sometimes bsray, you appear pretty bright. Your little rant however in your previous post does not solidify my initial perception.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious

I was not attempting to get anyone riled up. I was stating that to suggest the pilots were "wimps" IMO was disgusting.

But you still cannot come up with a good reason why none of the pilots on 9/11 could get off an emergency call or signal, even if some had prior warnings of the other hijackings.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


Take your pick:

1. They were dead
2. They were dying
3. They were fighting
4. Terrorists were threating to blow up the plane
5. They were maced

I'm sure I can come up with a many more. These are just off the top of my head.

ETA: And only ONE had prior knowledge (Flight 93) and he was asking for a confirmation when his cockpit was breeched.

[edit on 23-9-2007 by CaptainObvious]

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Take your pick:

1. They were dead
2. They were dying
3. They were fighting
4. Terrorists were threating to blow up the plane
5. They were maced

ETA: And only ONE had prior knowledge (Flight 93) and he was asking for a confirmation when his cockpit was breeched.

1. So they did not fight back.

2. They could not fight back against 2 guys with box cutters.

3. They could not take 2 seconds to set the emergency code on the transponder.

4. They could not take 2 seconds to set the emergency code on the transponder.

5. They could not take 2 seconds to set the emergency code on the transponder.


So Flight 93 had prior warnings, (lock cockpit door and message about hijackings) but were still surprised and unable to take 2 seconds to set transponder.

[edit on 23-9-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1


1. So they did not fight back.

2. They could not fight back against 2 guys with box cutters.

(3-5 A great impersentation of Porky Pig) - snipped

So Flight 93 had prior warnings, (lock cockpit door and message about hijackings) but were still surprised and unable to take 2 seconds to set transponder.

There was a struggle in the cockpit,(93) I have posted the recordings many times. (how secure were the locks PRE-911?)

Oh, that stuttering problem...you should see a speech patholiogist!

One more...how long does it take to take a box cutter across someones throat?

Define the issues and isolate them and hammer the point home: Here are the FACTS: Not ONE pilot OR other flight crew member activated the highjack alarm, which notifies the ground so alerts can be sent and plans made. The fact that not one crew member was able to do so is PROOF positive of remote highjacking. No way around the logic. Examine it for a second:

Look at the LIKELY scenario: It is LIKELY that all four cockpit doors were kept closed, as per rules. To believe that any highjacker armed with small bladed weapons could : Break down a cockpit door before the switch could be flipped; drag two fighting men, fighting for their very lives, from a cramped cockpit and secure them; then occupy the seats and turn off the transponders as their first act, thereby alerting the ground that something was wrong. The flight was still tracked, as radar does not depend on transponders, and it makes NO SENSE to turn off transponders anyway: The ' highjackers ' could well assume that the FAA would simply decudt the known targets from the bogey to identify it, at any rate regular radar could vector fighters so transponders were turned off for one reason and one reason only: It was part and parcel of the takeover by the remote controllers.

The tapes of the alleged highjackers is a PHONY, a pre recorded part of the plan just like Betty Ongs drmamatic debut reading a script and the duped voices of others; the call and tapes all reek of manipulated intel work at the higest levels of technology. The guys who pulles thios are at the top, the core, of our defense system and they have agendas that include but transcend money, and that makes them even more dangerous.

The entire ' recording ' of the ' triggered mike ' was a staged attempt at making us believe that a highjacker who could perform superhuman feats to take over a plane ands fly it with precision would make the simple mistake of not knwoing if he was talking to the passengers or the ground!!! The new pilots could turn the transponders off and fly effortlessly, despite never having been behind the wheel of the jets before,but they could not see the fact that the radio was on!! What are the odds?

What are the odds of NOT ONE highjack code being sent out? This fact alone, ranking with Norman Minetas testimony about Cheneys involvement, is the smoking guns of this case. No person in their right mind could believe that eigtht pilots, EIGHT determined and trained pilots, could not flip a switch while a cockpit door was being attacked and breached.No one can believe that the very lightly armed highjackers could have slashed their way through eight pilots before one of them could activate the alarm; that would be their FIRST instinct in case of trouble.

Why hasn't someone a lot smarter than me done a really definitive analysis of the supposed scenario that took place according to the OFFICIAL LIE and show the ridiculousness of it? How DOES the government explain the cockpit takeovers anyway, and how can they square their version with the likley factors such as resistance, doors needing to be broken down, etc.

The whole thing stinks to high heaven and we all know it. Common sense tells you that there is no way that the ' highjackers ' were anything more than patsies, part of the victims from the get go, and no doubt as suprised as anyone at what happened. There is adequate reason to doubt that there were any highjackers at all. At any rate, the planes were all remotely taken and flown to their destinations, wherever that may have been, the intel guys faked the radio ' mistaken ' transmission, and the phone calls were set ups with duplicated voices and or the victims being told they were cooperating in a drill, part of the many ' drills ' taking place that very day.

Those are the logical choices, and there is not a shred of a chance that highjackers can BREAK DOWN COCKPIT DOORS, DISABLE EIGHT PILOTS AND REMOVE THEM BEFORE ONE CREW MEMBER COULD PLACE THE ALARM. It is beyond the realms of possibility, it cannot be true. If you look at it is detail it is impossible. Why hasn't the dynamics of the takeover been looked at before? It is PROOF!!

reply to post by CaptainObvious


Hey Captain, did you actually read this thread at all? I started another 911 thread "Why are you researching 911", the idea was to maybe get you to bite there and reveal why you are here. My questions to you earlier in this thread and the way you have answered lead me to assumptions about what your doing here.

Please disspell them by answering the specific inqueries.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
One more...how long does it take to take a box cutter across someones throat?

About the same time it takes to knock the box cutter of a persons hand?
And the amount of time it would take to set the emergency code on the transponder.


[edit on 24-9-2007 by ULTIMA1]