Gitmo Prosecutor: Flight 93 Was Shot Down On 9/11!, page 4
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 30 times


reply posted on 24-7-2008 @ 03:43 PM by VitriolAndAngst
Originally posted by burdman30ott6
I simply find it fascinating that the government is criticized for not having NORAD activated and not shooting down the planes... until the idea that maybe they did shoot down one of the planes surfaces and then they are still criticized. Here's a brand new rope, I believe you know what to do with it, even though we all know it will still not please you.


They are being criticized for shooting it down and lying about it -- I think. Not for shooting it down.

However, I think it was shot down AFTER they realized the passengers had taken control. The scenario where the bad guys and passengers are fighting over the controls makes no sense -- if you are trying to fly the plane and someone is hitting you in the head -- you lose pretty quickly. Flying a plane straight in the air can be accomplished by almost anyone. If the Nose Dive were a last-ditch attempt by the bad guy to stop the passengers -- well, they would be too busy falling to do much now wouldn't they? So the passengers took back control, and the plane would then be flying straight. IF, this happened at all.

The crash site does not look like ANY debris field I've seen in other photos of planes. And why no reassembled plane as is usual in these cases?

>> I also believe that perhaps we should consider that building 7 was the target -- not the White House and the call the "Pull the Building" was made when they realized that no plane would be coming to fly into it, and if they waited much longer, it would stretch the credulity of the American public which is thankfully, pretty gullible as it is.


reply posted on 24-7-2008 @ 04:05 PM by VitriolAndAngst
reply to post by johnsky



Great points.

Yes, after the Cold War was over -- the military needed an enemy to justify all the expenses we pay on it.

Big Oil certainly did profit from what happened in Iraq -- do you think they actually pay that price per barrel that gets quoted? A lot of these outfits are helping to pull the oil from the ground -- it's a vertical business. Out of their profits, the holders of the oil wells get paid. Peak Oil was always going to arrive -- the REASON we don't have all those developed oil wells in the US is because it is cheaper to import it than to drill for it here.

The idea that we would have heard more slip-ups on 9/11 is nonsense. The people who do the dirty work for the Bush family, are not as much of a nitwit as the Decider. He's only bad at public speaking -- but he isn't as much of a nitwit as he pretends to be -- merely addled by all the drugs he has taken.

But they sure did line their pockets. There wasn't a failure in Iraq -- it was a complete success. Civil war makes sure the weapons keep selling while the oil flows cheap. The only reason we need all those bases there and the continued occupation is that BushCo wants to have production selling agreements and the bases guarantee they don't change once we have a new President. They want to keep what they steal.

9/11 didn't go off without a hitch -- mainly because we now have the internet to compete with the propaganda on the TV. Without the Internet, it would just be a few people with suspicions. I would never have learned about a pancake collapse taking 90 seconds for 80 stories, nor that the yellow-white liquid flowing out could ONLY be steel, and that indicated that Thermate was used. A lot of other lies and propaganda would have just gone over my head, because I am not an engineer, a chemist, or a historian. I learned that a fire raged over three floors on the North tower two weeks before it opened and before they added sprinklers -- so much for fire destroying it. I also learned that a fire from Kerosene (jet fuel) cannot get hot enough.

And about conspiracies in general; if you made millions on a job, but could be convicted of treason and sent to a firing squad -- I think all of us could keep our mouths shut.

Not everyone needs to be "in on it." You dupe a few people and then give a cover story. The guy who shot down the plane, probably feels bad -- but he was told that the public wouldn't understand. He doesn't need to know that it wasn't a mistake -- nor the rest of the planes that actually HIT their targets not being shot down.

The people at NORAD weren't in on it. Merely Dick Cheney who ordered all the drills -- maybe one conspirator who was in charge of things.

The FAA wasn't in on it, but only one person, to make sure there was confusion and that lose ends were tied up.

There hasn't been too many mistakes in Iraq nor in the 9/11 operation. It has worked out very well for them. The main hitch for them has been the educating power of the internet -- where we learned first about Abu Ghraib -- another Conspiracy Theory.



reply posted on 24-7-2008 @ 04:27 PM by VitriolAndAngst
Originally posted by noangels
Love the bitter twisted vultures here gloating over the corpse of DD's error!Good job their not mods

I dont believe this story in the slightest,and thought something was wrong when i read it in the papers earlier this week

Only the fat Bin laden actor has admitted to the 9/11 attacks and all of a sudden we have someone else saying he planned it!Pure BS,If Bin Laden did plan it then He would have boasted as soon as he could!

He came out and said he had nothing to do with it right after the attacks

This story is rubbish and is designed to be another link between the attacks and the long dead Bin laden


I think this is plausible.

Hamden is either telling the truth as he knows it, or he is lying and helping out our government.

Lying to help out A Q makes no sense.

>> I'm pretty sure Bin Laden was killed in December of 2001. Which is what that lady said on Charlie Rose a couple of weeks before she was assassinated in Pakistan. But an un-findable Bogey man is the best thing of all. You can have him say he endorses Senator Obama just before the election and not have a living Osama to disagree.

But I don't know much of what A Q would or wouldn't do. Bush increased their financing budget within the CIA the first year he was in office. They have a Saudi Prince at the head of an organization, that seems to organize the rage against the Saudi leadership to waste their time trying to overthrow Saddam Hussein. "al Qaeda" means "the base" or perhaps a CIA database. Other than helping to bankrupt the soviets in Afghanistan, and work for the CIA -- we don't know much about this outfit.

I suspect that some spook just convinced a few of their operatives to do this job against America -- that is the extent of any foreign involvement. The lead hijacker's girlfriend (a stripper), was interviewed on some HBO special talking about his training (at an airstrip that was a CIA drop) and the partying they did before undergoing their mission. The press also, for a time, talked about they hypocrisy of Religious fundamentalists going to strip clubs before dying for Allah.

What happened to that story? I guess it flew in the face of the "they hate us for our freedoms" line that worked so well.

This is all just marketing. I don't have any clue what the truth is -- its' just like the Iraq war -- all focus group nonsense. If the people are worried about WMDs -- then that is the reason. If they like Democracy, liberation, or peace -- use those as well. Once we are in -- we can't "abandon" Iraqis -- you mean we cared about them so much we invaded them on false pretenses? We can't impeach Bush during a war. Now we can't impeach Bush because the elections are coming up. It's all a stalling tactic until they grab more power, and have added more money to their pockets. They are consolidating power, while we keep trying to rationally explain things and let the system work.

WE won't know that the system has failed to work or that we are up Sh!ts creek without a paddle until it is too late to do anything about it. When the invasion of Iran is underway, we will have so many angry people after us, we will be forced to choose a side.

When all of us "Truthers" are proven right -- none of us are going to get much joy over it. All the economic systems will fail so that one Bank will emerge -- with privatized profits and socialized losses. The Airlines are failing, and will continue until there are no unions. The magically become profitable and we won't need all those security checks.

Terrorism was sure great to get rid of Unions and free speech, eh?

Every "failure" helps them. Disaster capitalism. And we sit around trying to "figure out" what they are doing. By the time we have all the answers someone will be shouting "duck!"


reply posted on 24-7-2008 @ 07:16 PM by Boone 870
reply to post by Maxmars

All 'standard' policies which most US Airmen were aware of since many, many years ago was if a hijacked plane were to be identified as a threat it would be shot down, if necessary, to protect the lives of those who might be killed by it's impact. This is no 'extraordinary scenario'.
I have never heard of these ''standard policies'', would you mind pointing them out?

I know that those regulations had been recently 'amended' by Rumsfeld's office, but still, it seems unlikely that any pilot would simply 'allow' the plane to go on it's way.
How did these amendments affect anything regarding 9/11?



reply posted on 24-7-2008 @ 07:29 PM by amazed
what reason did they invade Iraq for? Oil


As I read somewhere the tanks rolled for what President Bush originally called "Operation Iraqi Liberation" -- O.I.L."

I hope this is ok to link to as it is an interesting article.

www.gregpalast.com...

Remember this war did very well, for Big Oil. The war has caused an oil squeeze, as Iraq oil went down from 4 million barrels a day to 2.1 (which is equal to the entire planets reserve production capacity). Lovely reason for Oil companies to increase prices claiming they can't keep up with demand.

Also the value of the reserves of the five biggest oil companies more than doubled to $2.36 trillion since the start of the war.

Here is an interesting website that I found called A TIMELINE OF OIL AND VIOLENCE (Again, I hope its allright to link to it)

www.ringnebula.com...

Upon taking office, the Bush administration engaged in active negotiations with Taliban representatives with meetings in Washington, DC, Berlin, and Islamabad.

Bush (oil) administration includes:

* Dick Cheney, VP: Until 2000 - President of Halliburton (in position to build the Afghan pipeline).
* Condoleezza Rice, National Security Advisor: 1991-2000 - Manager of Chevron Oil, and Kazakhstan go-between.
* Donald Evans, Sec. Commerce: former CEO, Tom Brown, Inc. (a $1.2 billion oil company).
* Gale Norton, Sec. Interior: former national chairwoman of the Coalition of Republican Environmental Advocates - funded by, among others, BP Amoco.
* Spencer Abraham, Sec. Energy: Up through his failed bid for senatorial reelection in the 2000, he received more oil and gas industry money than all but three other senators (January 1997 through July 2000) (30).
* Thomas White, Secretary of the Army: former Vice Chairman of Enron and a large shareholder of that company's stock.

Anyone notice the common theme in the Bush administration? Seems an awful lot of "oil" folks running this country to me for this war to NOT be about oil.


reply posted on 24-7-2008 @ 07:48 PM by amazed
As to the 'evidence' of the 'fake' phone calls, link me one to a real website, not a conspiracy theorist site/blog.


Ok, though it is hard to find information regarding when cell phone use on airlines might have been possible. It could be that if the airplane was low enough, then towers could have been available for cell phone usage.

www.qualcomm.com...

American Airlines and Qualcomm Complete Test Flight to Evaluate In-Cabin Mobile Phone Use

July 15, 2004 — Qualcomm Incorporated (Nasdaq: QCOM), pioneer and world leader of Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) digital wireless technology, and American Airlines, the world’s largest carrier, today successfully demonstrated in-cabin voice communications using commercially available CDMA mobile phones on a commercial American Airlines aircraft. Through the use of an in-cabin third-generation (3G) “picocell” network, passengers on the test flight were able to place and receive calls as if they were on the ground.


reply posted on 24-7-2008 @ 08:28 PM by EneMy_On3
Originally posted by Neaux
reply to
post by MrWendal



Yes, gas prices are rising. Oil companies hanging you with your own rope because you are willing to pay the high prices. Economics 101, supply and demand. They can rise prices as high as they wish, they are in the business of making money and they are doing very well at it. Do I support it? Not really, but it's a capitalist society and that comes with it. But seriously lets stay a little more on-topic.

I believe you can send and receive phone calls from an airplane, never tried though. However, you should look at the head rest in front of you next time you enter a airplane and notice the pay phone.

As to the 'evidence' of the 'fake' phone calls, link me one to a real website, not a conspiracy theorist site/blog.

It's late I'm off to bed.
wow thats actualy right supply and demand go as high as you wish until they refuse to buy anymore but that wont happen because we need rides to work school and plastics and wait should i continue to mention everything we use today relating to oil in some way to ya i dont think we wont be needing oil anytime soon so i think theyll just keep on lying to us we need a total new approach at everything there is new ways to do things and its not like people dont want to its that the greedy old men in power refuse to lose profits and power so we keep heading towards this fascist police state im scared hold me


reply posted on 25-7-2008 @ 05:01 AM by Myendica
reply to post by titorite



I'm with this guy! I saw the satellite photo from what, 94? 95? That shows the same scar that was supposedly the crater left from the wings. The whole things is shady. That whole day is shady. And yeah, I'm annoyed people just let it go. I admit, that day I was dumbfounded. Nothing made sense. President reads to kids? I don't know. And for like 3 years I didn't even wanna talk about it, I was shocked everytime someone brought it up. I guess I tried to forget it. Then I remembered how dumbfounded I was and decided to look again, and I wish i had stayed confused and dumbfounded. We are all wimps. We have no back bone. We don't even have a chance if we wanted to. I don't even know anymore. Impeach today! Yeah kucinich



reply posted on 25-7-2008 @ 07:16 AM by tide88
Originally posted by titorite
Flight 93 was not shoot down. Just look for the shanksville stripmining scar.

911 was one big giant shock and awe based on deception meant to put america into a state of shock to make them accept whatever actions we took next.

In shanksville the USGS has the photographic survey of the area... it looks EXACTLY the same as it did on 911 minus one crater.

What you have is the news media lying.. If you know what CIA project mockingbird is then you know what I say has merit.

TV fakery is another proven fact. All of us that pushed record on 911 and seen the september clues videos have compared what they pointed out to our own videos.

What your left with is three explosions. Two in the towers and one in the pentagon. No video from the pentagon because their is no plane.

Passports that could survive plane crashes because their was no crash. Only explosions and lies.

No shoot down of flight 93 because it never existed. Just a an explosion in a strip mine and a lie.

To make things worse they gave us this scraps of this, tried to get us to argue about that. Lies piled upon lies to distract us from the heart of the matter.

No planes were used. The media lied in every aspect.... But you know in this aspect you can identify every major CIA agent from the produce/witnesses...

Of course the prosecutor said flight 93 was shoot down... That is what he has been fed and that is what we are supposed to argue about.

Fact is there was no flight 93. Just a stripmine with a crater blown into it and some debries spread around... but not enough to re-assemble...


[edit on 10/18/2007 by titorite]

That strip mining scar is not where the plane crashed. It is some two hunder or more yards away from the actuall plane crash. I know people claim that those are not wing marks in the ground, but a previous strip mining scar. That is false. Not only did the plane crash hundreds of years away from that scar but if you measure the scar by using those houses you can see that the scar is huge. You could fit almost 15-20 houses in it. Those wing scars are much much smaller then the actual strip mining scar. But good try spread false info. Maybe do some research before you post. Also wrong myendica. Look at this video here claiming the crash site is the mining scar.
mining scar look half way through video Look around the 220 mark. This is the problem with that theory
1. The wing marks are significantly closer to the trees then the mining scar. The pictures of the scar is taken by satallite not by helecopter.
2. Look at the houses in the distance. The ones that were covered in debris by the accident. Look how tiny they are compared to the scar shown in the goelogical survey. The marks left by the plane crash are much much much smaller then that scar.
With all the talk about sheep on this website, I love the people who just blindly believe anything they here about the 9/11 consiracy. Regardless whether the planes was shot down or not that mining scar has nothing to do with the crash. Also if it is true those planes were shot that would indicate that the government wasnt behind 9/11. Right? That is funny someone gave the guy above me a star and his information isnt even correct.



[edit on 25-7-2008 by tide88]

[edit on 25-7-2008 by tide88]


reply posted on 25-7-2008 @ 07:51 AM by tide88
Originally posted by MrWendal
reply to
post by Neaux




I will be MORE than happy to do your research for you just as soon as you show me the plane.

You can continue to deflect, argue, distract and change the subject all you wish. It's not gonna work with me. So go ahead and get a good night's sleep. When you wake, feel free to show me the plane

Here is some wreakage from flight 93:
wreakage
wreakage
wreakage

eyewitness accounts

One guy was working near the old mining scar when he saw the actual plane crash. Are these people lying?
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



Russian scientists reach buried Antarctic Lake Vostok
  Posted 5 days ago with 83 member flags
Monsanto quits as GM results announced (EUROPE)
  Posted 6 days ago with 72 member flags
Strange noises reported around North Battleford
  Posted 17 days ago with 67 member flags
Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel
  Posted 5 days ago with 49 member flags

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Free Psychic Readings
  General Chit Chat, Posted 16 hours ago, 24 flags
Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 15 hours ago, 23 flags
My Brain = about to explode
  Member Art, Posted 7 hours ago, 20 flags
ATS's Gutter-rats and the 90+ intro thread
  Rant, Posted 15 hours ago, 20 flags
Amazing French Indigo Girl in Africa (Tippi)
  Survival, Posted 6 hours ago, 13 flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Free Psychic Readings
  General Chit Chat, Posted 16 hours ago, 126 replies
Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 15 hours ago, 99 replies
Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 11 hours ago, 64 replies