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 for Dummies?

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


I just picked up Scott McClellan's book "What Happened".

As many will no doubt recall, he was the Press spokesman for President George W. Bush, starting sometime in 2003 after Ari Fleischer stepped down. Prior to that, he was assistant in the Press office.

I would characterize McCleallan as being an avid Bush supporter, until after he lost his naivitee', learned just how many snakes and liars existed surrounding Bush, as the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame ("PlameGate") scandal broke.

He is undoubtedly 'persona nongrata' now, with the Bush crowd. he is NOT their ally, I get the impression he felt betrayed by the lies, some that he (unknowingly, at the time) repeated.

So, HE would not be one to pull any punches regarding the 9/11 events. He touches on the circumstances, a bit -- and no where does it seem in any way, shape or form that the events of 9/11 could have been instigated merely for the purpose of invading Iraq, as is alleged so often in the "conspiracy site" realm.

On the contrary -- the wish to topple Saddam Hussein existed from the moment the Bush transition team began preparing for his reign.

What is forgotten is, in the inital response to 9/11, the appropriate military resources were deployed to where they were SUPPOSED to, and most logically SHOULD have been sent. Afghanistan!!!

The Saddam angle was simply seen as able to be swept into the big 'grab bag' of the fog of "war". There was the ineffectual whispering campaign WELL AFTER THE FACT of 9/11 to somehow tie Saddam to that. Everyone knew that was bogus.

SO, they focused on the WMD aspect, which we now know was over-stated. Anyone remember "yellowcake"? Niger?? This is where Ambdr. Joe Wilson and his CIA deep-cover wife Plame come into the picture...

Yet, even today, the history of those days is being re-written by these ridiculous conspiracy websites, with little more than "gut feelings" and terribly flawed memories to go on, fueled in part, no doubt, by a certain amount of greed, and intentional dissembling. After all, there is a very profitable cottage industry of so-called "9/11 truth"...many trinkets to sell.

And, the most telling of all---these conspiracy sites, and their outrageous claims??

That ALL of the planning and preparation for the most horrendous act of "inside jobby-job" the "Gov't Did It!" baloney was all accomplished in just seven months....

Really?




posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by fleetlord
This is the way I see it.
The U.S. government claims terrorist group hijacked some airplanes and crashed them into the World Trade Center, Pentagon, and one somewhere in the woods.

Conspiracy people say that the Pentagon was hit by a missile. The WTC was either vaporized or destroyed through some type of energy beam in combination with very very hot fires. The plane that crashed in the woods was shot down.

Those are the two sides as I see them. My personal postition is this: On 9/11, the WTC and pentagon were attacked. Thats it. It will be just the facts for me until I find enough evidence pointing to either side myself.


This is a good start. I would also add that there is an exorbitant amount of outright bad and false information floating around the internet, coming mostly from people who really have no idea what the heck they're talkign about. Some obviosu examples are...

-The hijackers were all illiterate cavemen and camel drivers. WRONG. Many of the hijackers had extensive pilot training before they even got hooked up in the plot, and all the ring leaders have university degrees.

-No fighters were scrambled to intercept the hijacked planes. WRONG. Two flights of fighters, one from MA and one from VA were scrambled to intercept the planes. They simply didn't find them in time.

-The fires melted the steel. WRONG. the fires heated the steel to structural failure, which is only 50% of the melting point temperature

-The plane that hit the Pentagon should have been shot down by their AA batteries. WRONG. the Pentagon didn't have any AA batteries protecting it until after 9/11, and that was specifically becuase of 9/11.

...and on and on it goes. The point is, double check everything you read concernign these conspiracy stories, as my philosophy is that if these conspiracy theorists would only hold their own conspiracy claims up to the same high stringent level of critical analysis that they do the 9/11 commission report, they wouldn't be conspiracy theorists for very long. That one step alone would get rid of those ridiculous "hologram planes" and "lasers from outer space" claims right off the bat.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 12:02 PM
link   
[edit on 22-12-2009 by blankduck18]



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
-The hijackers were all illiterate cavemen and camel drivers. WRONG. Many of the hijackers had extensive pilot training before they even got hooked up in the plot, and all the ring leaders have university degrees.


and didn't one of the instructors say how much they sucked at flying? also didn't some of those hijackers turn out to be alive after 9/11?



Originally posted by GoodOlDave
-The fires melted the steel. WRONG. the fires heated the steel to structural failure, which is only 50% of the melting point temperature


then where did the melted steal come from that was under wct 1,2, and 7


Originally posted by GoodOlDave
That one step alone would get rid of those ridiculous "hologram planes" and "lasers from outer space" claims right off the bat.


couldn't agree with you more here though. my problem is "debunkers" focus so much on this kind of crap. hell for all I know this theory could of been a plant.



posted on Dec, 23 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


Sorry, I had to post this for you, Skyfloating.

9/11 Debunking for Dummies


For the most part, I stay off the 9/11 Forum, not because I cannot debate people honestly, without name calling, or without twisting everything, but because I have found so few who can actually discuss the topic without jumping off into a nightmare of references to a certain political party, a certain theory, and a certain pushing off into calling the other side a whack-a-doo no matter what their theory.

Personally, I know why 9/11 happened, and when I release a thread on it, it will be twenty-five posts long before anyone else has posted on it.

However, in fairness of your thread, I am going to make some light assessements.

1) Operation Cyclone

CIA's "Operation Cyclone" in Afghanstan in 1980's


2) Charlie Wilson's War

Charlie Wilson's War - Trailer(HD) Tom Hanks, Julia Roberts


3) Foreign Policy of the United States

U.S. Foreign Policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan


4) The Bin Ladens (Osama bin Laden) and Steve Coll

Steve Coll: The Bin Laden Family


Conversations with History: Steve Coll


5) Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001

Sorry, that's the shortest possible route, Osama bin Laden, through his family, supported and built Saudia Arabia, Osama being the "black sheep" of the Bin Laden family, wanting to stay in the Muslim faith, and the rest of his family wanting, desiring, and adapting to the Western mindset, became the ultimate taboo for his family after kicking the Russian's out of Afghanistan through covert funding from the C.I.A., Senator Charles Wilson, and then President Jimmy Carter and the transtion to Ronald Reagan and the policy of assisting the Mujahideen in a Cold War of surrogate means to keep Russia unknowing of our assistance then saw the West as his next target because of the false premise that he was mighty due to killing off Russians.

We backed out of funding Afghanistan being rebuilt, a typical maneuver, seeing as we were never "in Afghanistan" to begin with, and Osama bin Laden seeing us as abandoning his people would be the clearest and quickest path to the events of 9/11.

Had to explain it, give back reference materials, and leave some of it up to you to discover.

9/11 For Dummies : The Short Version for Skyfloating


[edit on 23-12-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 08:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by impressme

911 was an inside job.


Snip a lot of
"facts" that really are just opinions.




Im open toward the "official version", but thats not a valid debunk right there, and you know it. Impressme made a list that impressed me.
_______________________________________

Id very much appreciate e a counter-list by a sincere official-version proponent...



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 08:16 AM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


Thanks SKL - your replies are always lengthy, no matter what topic. I did not watch the vids, sorry, its too long for me. Im interest in 9/11, but not THAT interested.

Do i understand you correctly that you provided a framework to explain why the official-version (Osama masterminded it all) is correct?

And if so, do you think there is anything being covered-up about 9/11?



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
*Fact*, No passengers families showed up at arrival airports in SF, LA demanding answers, nothing.


This struck me as really strange. Anyone have more info on this?



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 


Thanks SKL - your replies are always lengthy, no matter what topic. I did not watch the vids, sorry, its too long for me. Im interest in 9/11, but not THAT interested.

Do i understand you correctly that you provided a framework to explain why the official-version (Osama masterminded it all) is correct?

And if so, do you think there is anything being covered-up about 9/11?



It's okay, Skyfloating, I know my posts are usually long.

You are correct, I provided the frame-work of the why, for the official version.

The cover-up comes thought from who was pulling the strings behind the scenes, and it was not Osama bin Laden, of course that is not included in the official version.

I have concluded, and could prove it it without a shadow of a doubt to the United Nations International Criminal Court, that Osama bin Laden was merely a player, and that his strings were pulled via our own Government, through a surreptitious manner.

[edit on 24-12-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by impressme
*Fact*, No passengers families showed up at arrival airports in SF, LA demanding answers, nothing.


This struck me as really strange. Anyone have more info on this?


Yes, I do. There is really nothing strange about it at all.

Lets look at flight 93.

13 of the 33 passengers were not even scheduled on that flight.

So far, in my brief search, 17 of the 33 passengers did not even live in CA. It appears many were going on business, getting connecting flights to overseas..etc.

Linda Gronlund was going on a business trip.

Mark Rothenberg was another passenger from NY traveling to Taiwan.

Toshiya Kuge was on his way back home to Japan.

Colleen Fraser was on her way to a writing seminar.

I think you get the picture here. Might I suggest you go through the passenger lists and figure out what each of them were doing on 9/11.

I will not spend the rest of my morning dealing with people questioning the actions of family members that have just suffered the deaths of their loved ones. Anyone that wants to suggest all the family members are in on it too are simply disgusting.



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Do you think it would be possible to speak to me like a Dummy so that I understand your side?


Hey dummy 'Get Smart! Epispde 52'


www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by impressme

*Fact*, No passengers families showed up at arrival airports in SF, LA demanding answers, nothing.


This struck me as really strange. Anyone have more info on this?


Now that is interesting.

[edit on 24-12-2009 by In nothing we trust]



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ohhwataloser
and didn't one of the instructors say how much they sucked at flying? also didn't some of those hijackers turn out to be alive after 9/11?


a) They didn't need to be experts at flying, for what they were intending to do. They didn't need to learn how to take off, since the actual pilots were going to do that, and they didn't need to land since it was a suicide attack. They didn't need to understand call signs since they weren't going to be talking to anyone, and they didn't even need to learn how to navigate or file a flight plan, since the autopilot is what brought them into the target area. The only things they did need to know, is how to steer, and how to use the autopilot. The pilot instructors, OTOH were expecting them to know all that stuff, so to them, the hijackers DID suck at flying.

Not that it matters, since there were at least three experienced pilots in their ranks, so there was enough talent present to pull it off even with the ones that sucked.

b) that is obsolete information. Most of those cases were of mistaken identities involving people of the same name. Since then, the Saudi gov't had confirmed the identities of 11 of the hijackers as being Saudi citizens.



then where did the melted steal come from that was under wct 1,2, and 7


I'm not a metallurgist and I wasn't there to see what "melted steel" actually is so I can't say, but if you're asking me to speculate, then I'd say it was due to prolonged exposure to the underground fires that were documented to have been burning for months after the collapse.



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

There are trillions of other subjects of study in the world. Some of us would just prefer to have the experts weed through all of it for us and then present summaries. An expert can find their own words to explain what was read.



And that's where opinions of 9/11 will diverge.

REAL experts poo-poo EVERY CT theory, claim, etc ever made.

IF one chooses to take the conspiracy angle on it, then you will say that they are lying, or could be wrong, or something similar.

Unfortunately the investigooglers (9/11 truthers) believe themselves to be the intellectual equal of all these demonstrated experts. Or, they believe some folks with dubious experience at best that something is wrong about the "os".

It is a perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

en.wikipedia.org...

My sig spells it out.



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


*Fact*, No passengers families showed up at arrival airports in SF, LA demanding answers, nothing.

This struck me as really strange. Anyone have more info on this?




12:04 p.m.: Los Angeles International Airport, the destination of three of the crashed airplanes, is evacuated.
12:15 p.m: San Francisco International Airport is evacuated and shut down. The airport was the destination of United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania.

archives.cnn.com...


The LA, & SF airports were closed shortly after 12pm however, I have yet to see any News stories of any families showing up demanding answers that day and why was there any News reporters at any of these airports interviewing these families, like they always do in all major crash disasters.

I can tell you if my wife and kids were on any of those planes you could not keep me from a closed airport. I would be demanding answers I would want to know if there were any chance if my family may have survived, if not that then, I would want their bodies found immediately or identified. Yes, I would be devastated, but I would not sit at home and watch TV all day about the event of that day.

Knowing the media, their job is to make money and if I was working for the Press, you could not keep me away from the outside of the closed airports to interview people especially surviving families from the crash flights. Something just not right here.



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 06:59 PM
link   
One thing, Skyfloating:

World Trade Center Building #7.



Now I know you have a well-developed sense of intuition. They say a picture says a thousand words. How about an animated gif or three?









The thing sank right down into itself as if it were free-falling through air. More specifically, some 2-second period of its extremely short collapse time was confirmed by NIST to have been at the rate of free-fall in a vacuum, ie 32 ft/s.

I'm sure you will notice the symmetry, how all four corners start dropping at the same time, as well.

Most people have never even heard of this building, and its collapse was not repeated on TV after 9/11 like the Twin Tower collapses were. It was not mentioned at all in the 9/11 Commission Report and the investigating federal agency (NIST) pushed the final report on this building back and back for years, and ultimately claimed it collapsed due to some totally new phenomena caused by fire alone. There is a lot of other "interesting" trivia about this building and its tenants, but I'll leave it there I guess.


This building's collapse is what personally sent me down the 9/11 rabbit hole. WTC7 is the most obvious and blatant lie regarding that day imo.



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
REAL experts poo-poo EVERY CT theory, claim, etc ever made.


There are hundreds of relevant experts, from engineers of all fields, scientists, mathematicians, pilots, psychologists, military veterans, politicians, you name it, that are publicly outspoken against the "official story."


Here is a challenge to you, Joey:


List as many experts (names and degrees only) that support the "official story" as you possibly can. Let's see how big this list really is. Because I can pull up hundreds of engineers that contradict them in seconds.

Let's see what your count is, Joey. Because I am going to go ahead and say more experts have come out AGAINST the "official story" than have come out to publicly support it. By the numbers. But go ahead and see what you can find.



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Skyfloating, whether you check it out, or not, I just did a 9/11 thread.

Truth and Lies of 9/11 : Mike Ruppert, C.I.A. Drug Running, and Your Government

Lot's of videos, lots of links, but no attitude, fighting, or name-calling, at least on my part.



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
Because I can pull up hundreds of engineers that contradict them in seconds.


Then show us that list, and exactly where they contradict what really happened, the OS



posted on Dec, 24 2009 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by dereks
 


www.ae911truth.org...
stj911.org...
www.pilotsfor911truth.org...

Between those three organizations alone you have hundreds of individuals, each and every one explicitly putting their own name with these organizations that call for re-investigation. A structural engineer with the username "Griff" that used to post here was a member of AE911.

Where's your list of experts?



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join