9/11 What evidence would make you believe in a conspiracy?

reply to post by Pilgrum


Exactly Pilgrum....

I try not to say too much about WTC-7 seeing that NIST has yet to release their findings.

I do find it quite a coincidence that the gash up the front of WTC7 is in such close proximity of the fuel lines. (i am not saying this explains the collapse)

there where serveral op´s going on that day , note serveral

fema was in new york conduction a real live simulation of an attack with debrise and explotions to make it look real , get empirical training

norad and the us air force where conducting real live simulations that day of an attack with debrise and explotions to make it look real , get empirical training

the planes that flew had real live simulations going on that day with "terrorists" ( mossad and cia and probobly blackwater )and box cutters to get empirical training

you know a staged terror attack for people in the service to get the experience, nothing wrong with that as long as everyone is in on it


all this above goes for the londong bombings aswell

on the day there where serveral operations envolving a stage terror attack that had to be dealth with



now heres the fluke on 9/11

several of the hi jackers presented as evidience are alive ( + that atta was/is an asset of the u.s goverment )

why did the planes fly in to the building

why did the buildings collape

why did wtc 7 go down

why has no one in charge of the operations been charged with anything

why did dick order a stand down on norad and why did he continue to keep it that way


flukes on london bombings

He who had put the operation together said on live tv and radio it is exactly the same simulation we had in mind
and they had a simulation that day




we know they where there conducting these operations on thouse very days , their own documents and voice proof sais so
yet they are not responsible for these civilian lives that have been lost

???

i have to admit its a very skill full scheme , multible overlapsing operations with international co operation

my personal guess is that only guilliani and silverstein only know why the buildings collapsed

dick had his hopes as did rumsfeld and bush

could even be that the saudies threatend to remove assets because of israeli nukes and bully tactics

there is a saying here " that they are pissing in both your eyes "
meaning its very clear but hard to see due to multible streams of piss puoring on to you , you know its piss and that there is several

Originally posted by Pilgrum
So let's look at what actual verifiable facts are presented:

Yes lets look at the facts.

1. 12,000 gallons of fuel missing (no evidence of it being burned in the fire).

2. 20,000 gallons of fuel recovered.

More facts.
www.wtc7.net...

Similarly, the SSB pump, which had a pumping rate of 75 gpm, would have drained the two 6,000 gallon tanks serving that system in less than 3 hours. This could have accounted for the lost 12,000 gallons reported by EPA or the tanks could have been ruptured and the oil spilled into the debris pile.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
I try not to say too much about WTC-7 seeing that NIST has yet to release their findings.

You will be waiting a long time for a verifiable report from NIST on buidling 7 since they did not recover any steel for testing.





[edit on 26-4-2008 by ULTIMA1]

reply to post by ULTIMA1


Without splitting hairs you've demonstrated at last that ALL fuel was not recovered as you originally claimed and at least 12000 gallons of diesel alone escaped within the building (the figures suggest even more but that would be enough). Remember that next time you're trying to tell us there was no fuel because it was all recovered - it wasn't.

It's OK to assume that it avoided the fires but where did it go if not burnt considering that not recovered means, well, it was just gone. Where did it go? your source suggests into the rubble and I read something about fires burning in there and also the lack of soil contamination by fuel verified by environmental contractors.

Fair enough, you can deny that it burnt but the evidence suggests otherwise. I'm just looking for that heat source you mention quite a bit as if it's beyond explanation

Is accurate information about the fuel load in that building evidence? Yes it is
Is it evidence of conspiracy to demolish a building? No


[edit on 26/4/2008 by Pilgrum]

once again, another thread to discuss it DEAD.
sorry, just use the SEARCH ENGINE.

Originally posted by anti72
once again, another thread to discuss it DEAD.
sorry, just use the SEARCH ENGINE.

Well my hopes in starting this thread was that people would post actual evidence as opposed to OPINION and SPECULATION. Some have and I commend them for that but some insist on making CLAIMS as evidence which has been disappointing.

The idea was to eliminate silly theories and get down to the nitty gritty evidence. Silly idea's such as nuclear bombs, anti matter bombs, super beam weapons, holograms, etc. These things detract from possible real questions and make those interested in 9/11, look like wackos.

Sorry you're disappointed with the thread.

Originally posted by zerbot565



now heres the fluke on 9/11

several of the hi jackers presented as evidience are alive ( + that atta was/is an asset of the u.s goverment )

why did the planes fly in to the building

why did the buildings collape

why did wtc 7 go down

why has no one in charge of the operations been charged with anything

why did dick order a stand down on norad and why did he continue to keep it that way

Zerbot... Dude...I am far from a great speller, but GEESH... your English teacher would not be very proud of you.

Anyway...back to your question. You signed up here almost a year ago. I would have to say ALL of what you have questioned has been answered. Those able to think can see the facts that answer all your questions. All of your "flukes" are not flukes at all.

Originally posted by jfj123
Well my hopes in starting this thread was that people would post actual evidence as opposed to OPINION and SPECULATION.

I understand what you mean.

I've been waiting for evidence of wreckage that positively identifies the alleged planes that were allegedly used to crash into the towers.

But, all I read from some people is speculative opinion that planes crashed, without being able to show me any evidence that they did.

If they found some traces of explosives used or some melted metal towards the base of the tower... Oh wait...

Originally posted by Pilgrum
Without splitting hairs you've demonstrated at last that ALL fuel was not recovered as you originally claimed and at least 12000 gallons of diesel alone escaped within the building (the figures suggest even more but that would be enough).

I never stated ALL the fuel was recovered, i stated a major amount of the fuel was recovered as i have supportred with quotes from websites.

I have also shown there is no evidence that the missing fuel was burned in the fire.

Please read my post before posting so you do not not misquote me.

Here is some info about flight 11 prior to takeoff and up to the point of the hijacking. Please post any new evidence that PROVES some or all of this information is NOT true.

The flight was regularly scheduled for takeoff at 7:45 a.m. However, boarding was running behind schedule, and at 7:45 a.m., lead hijackers Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari were still boarding the plane. In the rush, Atta's bags were not loaded onto the plane in time. The aircraft departed from Gate 26, and after a 14 minute delay, the flight took off from Logan International Airport at 7:59 a.m. from runway 4R. At 8:13:29 a.m., as the aircraft was passing through 26,000 feet over central Massachusetts, the pilot responded to a request from Boston Air Traffic Control Center to make a 20° turn to the right. At 8:13:47, Boston Center then instructed the pilots to ascend to a cruising altitude of 35,000 feet. The aircraft never responded to this request. At 8:16 a.m., the aircraft leveled off at 29,000 feet.

source wiki

Originally posted by jfj123
Well my hopes in starting this thread was that people would post actual evidence as opposed to OPINION and SPECULATION.

Yes, i have been asking for years for evidence to support the official story, but so far people have just been posting opinions.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
Well my hopes in starting this thread was that people would post actual evidence as opposed to OPINION and SPECULATION.

Yes, i have been asking for years for evidence to support the official story, but so far people have just been posting opinions.

What I just posted about flight 11 is the official account and so what you're saying is that there is NO evidence to suggest the official account is wrong.

Originally posted by jfj123
What I just posted about flight 11 is the official account

I am asking for evidence to support the offical story, so far i have not seen any posted.

What happened from the time the hijackers took over?

Why did the pilots not get off an emergency call or signal, specailly if they had just been tlaking to ATC ?

Where are the reports matching parts found to FLight 11?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by jfj123
What I just posted about flight 11 is the official account

What happened from the time the hijackers took over?

I'll post that after we can determine what I have posted thus far is accurate or can be disproven.

REGARDING WHAT I"VE POSTED ABOUT FLIGHT 11
Have you found any evidence to contradict what has been posted so far? YES or NO?
Do you agree with what has been posted so far? YES or NO.

[edit on 27-4-2008 by jfj123]

Originally posted by jfj123
Do you agree with what has been posted so far? YES or NO.

Yes, just the point from takeoff to hijacking.

Now do you agree the pilots did not get off an emergect call or signal ? YES or NO ?

Do you agree there is no reports matching the parts found to Flight 11? YES or NO ?

So to this point, everyone seems to agree that Flight 11 was a real flight with real passengers with a real destination. Nobody has disputed any of the posted facts on my first post. Thanks for your input so far.

Here is the next part of my post
The Hijacking

The 9/11 Commission estimates that the hijacking began at 8:14 a.m. John Ogonowski (captain) and Thomas McGuinness (first officer) were in control until the plane was hijacked. Shortly thereafter, the aircraft started to deviate from its scheduled path. Boston Air Control made multiple attempts at contacting Flight 11 but received no response. At 8:21 a.m. the flight stopped transmitting its Mode-C transponder signal.

At 8:23:38 a.m., Atta tried to make an announcement to the passengers, but he pressed the wrong button and sent the message to the Boston Center. Air traffic controllers heard Atta announcing, "We have some planes, just stay quiet and you'll be okay. We are returning to the airport". At 8:24:56, he announced "Nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet." Once again, Atta thought he was speaking only to the passengers; when in fact, his voice was being picked up and recorded by Air Traffic Controllers. At 8:26 a.m., approximately over Voorheesville, New York, the plane made a 100-degree turn to the south heading toward New York City. The flight attendants then tried to access the cockpit and at 8:33:59, Atta announced "Nobody move please, we are going back to the airport, don't try to make any stupid moves." At 08:37:08, the pilots of United Airlines Flight 175 verified AA11's location and heading to flight control. At 8:37 a.m., the aircraft began descending from 29,000 feet at 3,200 feet/minute, and made a final turn towards Manhattan at 8:43 a.m.

If anyone believes these facts are in error, please post which facts and why. Please post evidence that disputes the facts.

reply to post by jfj123


All looking like a very good rendition of the way it was reported to have happened plus there are recordings, transcripts, multiple competent sources to back it up so yes - it's evidence.

I have no evidence in opposition to the above.

I might be able to think of a couple of questions but they are far from being any kind of evidence at all - just plain personal opinion and collective conjecture


[edit on 27/4/2008 by Pilgrum]

Originally posted by Pilgrum
reply to post by jfj123

 

All looking like a very good rendition of the way it was reported to have happened plus there are recordings, transcripts, multiple competent sources to back it up so yes - it's evidence.

I have no evidence in opposition to the above.

I might be able to think of a couple of questions but they are far from being any kind of evidence at all - just plain personal opinion and collective conjecture

[edit on 27/4/2008 by Pilgrum]

Here is how some of the information was obtained. Hopefully this may help answer a question or two.

Phone calls
Flight attendants Madeline Amy Sweeney and Betty Ong supplied information on what happened. According to them, three people – two attendants (Karen Martin and Barbara Arestegui) and a passenger – were stabbed or had their throats slashed by the hijackers. The passenger, Daniel Lewin, a notable Internet entrepreneur, had also previously served as an officer in the elite Sayeret Matkal unit of the Israeli military. It is unknown if the hijackers targeted him specifically because he was Israeli or if it was coincidental. A 2002 FAA memo referenced Lewin as possibly being killed by Satam al-Suqami after he attempted to stop the hijacking. Apparently, Lewin, seated in 9B, was attacked by al-Suqami, who was sitting immediately behind him in seat 10B. Betty Ong provided details to American Airlines' operations center. In a four minute call, she provided information regarding lack of communication with the cockpit, lack of access to the cockpit, and passenger injuries. She provided the seat locations of the hijackers, which helped to determine their identities.

Here's the next part of my post:
THE CRASH part 1

At 8:46:40 a.m., Flight 11 was deliberately crashed into the northern facade of the North Tower (Tower 1) of the World Trade Center. The aircraft, which was traveling at approximately 466 miles per hour (750 km/h), impacted between the 93rd and 99th floors with approximately 10,000 gallons of flammable jet fuel.

This was the first crash in the attacks of the day. All on board (11 crew, 76 passengers, and 5 hijackers) were killed. The crash was also witnessed by nearby pedestrians and drivers.

The first news and radio organizations reported an explosion or incident at the World Trade Center, CNN broke into a commercial at 8:49 a.m. CNN headlines first read 'World Trade Center Disaster.' Carol Lin, who was the first anchor to break the news of the attacks, said:

"Yeah. This just in. You are looking at obviously a very disturbing live shot there. That is the World Trade Center, and we have unconfirmed reports this morning that a plane has crashed into one of the towers of the World Trade Center. CNN Center right now is just beginning to work on this story, obviously calling our sources and trying to figure out exactly what happened, but clearly something relatively devastating happening this morning there on the south end of the island of Manhattan. That is once again, a picture of one of the towers of the World Trade Center."

Does anyone disagree with any of this information? If so, please post your contradictory evidence. Thanks.

Here are a few interesting parts about this section:
-The crash was also witnessed by nearby pedestrians and drivers.
-At 8:46:40 a.m., Flight 11 was crashed into the North Tower (Tower 1)
-CNN broke in at 8:49 a.m. CNN (approx. 3 min. after it happened) and said the following:
"Yeah. This just in. You are looking at obviously a very disturbing live shot there. That is the World Trade Center, and we have unconfirmed reports this morning that a plane has crashed into one of the towers of the World Trade Center. "

Notice that only 3 minutes after the plane crash, they showed a live shot of the damage done by the 1st plane?


[edit on 27-4-2008 by jfj123]