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.

 

One Way to Fake Passengers

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by antelopone
 

Are you referring to flight 587, which crashed in Queens? Or was there another one.

Are you suggesting that the 587 flight was intended to land in the water, but that the pilot's efforts may have kept it over land?

I see you are new to this site. There are many eyewitnesses here who saw the planes with their own eyes, though personally I doubt that the planes they saw were what slammed the towers. It would be simple to fly some planes nearby and use missiles, as captured on this video:


www.youtube.com...

Or this one: www.youtube.com...

I'm not sure how official CT story believers manage to debunk this one. There were a bunch of kids sitting around with a camera, and, as in breast augmentation surgery, it is easier to add material than to remove it. Also, the second viddy was broadcast one time, just like when FOX tried to start a race riot by covering the botched assassination of Jospeh Moshe. Then, down the memory hole.




posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by davidmann
 


Oh dear, oh dear...those YouTube videos show you ...what, exactly??

I can only say....relying on that sort of dodgy nonsense from people who post crap on YouTube, and THEY don't know what they're looking at in the first place?

I've already trotted out poor old Jean Luc Picard...he still hasn't gotten over it, he's sobbing in his chair right now, face still in his hand. (***)

Here...this bloke agrees...(but, I think he might be starting to chuckle, hard to tell with that particular species):




__________________________________-

(***) - Oh, wait...that was another thread. So, here he is, once again to premiere in this thread:



[edit on 25 August 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by davidmann
 


How did I know you'd be a noplaner! It all makes sense.

Interesting that the first vid in the right sidebar shows a plane hitting the building. Of course that's the faked one...



posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   
...........ok........

Heres some SIMPLE logic......

Thousands of people died when the WTC towers came down....THOUSANDS....

If its true, and our government DID do this, if they are willing to kill THOUSANDS in the middle of New York by taking towers down......


Why the hell would they NEED or CARE to fake a relatively small number in comparison of passengers in 2 planes?

[edit on 25-8-2010 by ManBehindTheMask]



posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 


Where are you going to get four commerical airliners to hi-jack? The
story is a joke. Four pilots and their FO's failed to follow protocol
and maintain their positions in the cockpit? None of them tried to
maneuver the aircraft to offset the "terrorists"? (See FedEx hi-jack).

This would never / could never happen and that's why there was no
investigation.

The planes were military. Transponders turned off. No tracilibilty to
a commerical airline. Nothing.

Planes may have hit the towers to provide a case for their "demo",
but they were not commerical airliners, and they had no passengers.

Enter: Operation Northwoods.

[edit on 25-8-2010 by turbofan]



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by turbofan
 


>SIGH



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Hey Weed,

Look up the FedEx hijack.

Those pilots were hit with hammers, cracked skulls, nearly bled to death
but still managed to survive and stay in control.

I believe that jet didn't have a door either, so it was just walk-in service...
but don't quote me on that. I'll have to verify this point.

Here's the link:

www.youtube.com...

Quite a struggle to save cargo boxes and just three lives huh? Why didn't
they just give up the jet like the other 8 pilots/FO's?



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by turbofan
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 


Where are you going to get four commerical airliners to hi-jack? The
story is a joke. Four pilots and their FO's failed to follow protocol
and maintain their positions in the cockpit? None of them tried to
maneuver the aircraft to offset the "terrorists"? (See FedEx hi-jack).

This would never / could never happen and that's why there was no
investigation.

The planes were military. Transponders turned off. No tracilibilty to
a commerical airline. Nothing.

Planes may have hit the towers to provide a case for their "demo",
but they were not commerical airliners, and they had no passengers.

Enter: Operation Northwoods.

[edit on 25-8-2010 by turbofan]


Why the incredulity ? The hi-jacking of 4 planes in 1 day has happened before :-

news.bbc.co.uk...

And the hi-jackers were arabs; surprise surprise !



posted on Aug, 26 2010 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by turbofan
 


I've told you, you don't have the full story, not like WE got. Or, didn't it occur to you that WE WOULD HAVE STUDIED this, in our training?

Every year...once a year, it's called "re-current training", and covers a lot of areas. One module involves security, and threats...and this is usually conducted jointly, pilots and F/As together. (Rest of re-current, we are separated, since the job descriptions, and emphasis, are obviously quite different). Separate, except every other year, we have to have "hands-on" re-current with all Emergency Equipment, including operating the fire extinguishers, donning the smoke hoods, reviewing First Aid Kit contents, Raft equipment, the normal and Emergency door and window exits operations...etc...and these are also done in concert with the cabin crews. THEY have to do CPR too...but not us.



Those pilots were hit with hammers, cracked skulls, nearly bled to death but still managed to survive and stay in control.


Oh, how little you know.

The FE took the brunt of the injuries, and he never fully recovered. He could no longer qualify for a Medical, so is on permanent disability.
_________________
***BTW...in these re-current sessions we were shown photos of the cockpit...I looked online, and they are NOT coming up in a Google search, a good thing I think. But, I recall how we were amazed at the amount of blood, especially all over the Flilght Engineer's station. It was very gory...
_________________

The two up front sustained much less severe injuries. I think it was the FO who was the least injured (but it's been some years since we looked at this...when it was fresh).

The maneuvering was an instinctive idea, and possibly was helpful...although, it is equally a hindrance to those fighting back!! But, the logic was, the guy flying was strapped in, the bad guy wasn't...so...

However, I will NOT say what the current thinking is, in that regard, for future hijacking attempts.


I believe that jet didn't have a door either, so it was just walk-in service... but don't quote me on that. I'll have to verify this point.


Don't bother to "verify" it...just go rent that Tom Hanks movie, where he befriends the Volleyball after the crash, and stranding on the island.....names it "Wilson". I'll think of the movie title in a sec....

You can see a pretty accurate rendition of the actual layout of a FedEx DC-10 in the film.



Quite a struggle to save cargo boxes and just three lives huh?


Oh, being insulting and rude, again?

Yes..."rude". (BTW...hate to break it to you, but --- even with a full load of passengers, it is OUR butts that we care for the most, and whether WE will live to see another day... Our survival, and desire to do a damn good job of safe flying, means that the meat in the back benefits as a result...)


BUT...when I said "rude", I meant THIS:


Why didn't they just give up the jet like the other 8 pilots/FO's?



I hope our audience read that, and see it for the dreck that it truly is....for me to say what I REALLY think, would be to get into trouble here....


[edit on 26 August 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
I've told you, you don't have the full story, not like WE got. Or, didn't it occur to you that WE WOULD HAVE STUDIED this, in our training?


I have a good part of the story, and I also have researched other hi-jacks.
You may not know, but I e-mail a fellow truther in the US almost daily
who has a pilot license. Although he does not go into great detail about
protocol, there is enough discussion to understand that the OCT is a bunch
of BS.


Oh, how little you know.

The FE took the brunt of the injuries, and he never fully recovered. He could no longer qualify for a Medical, so is on permanent disability.


Don't worry, I watched the entire documentary and even some of the
investigation. What little do I know with respect to the injuries? What
does it matter?


Quite a struggle to save cargo boxes and just three lives huh?
Oh, being insulting and rude, again?


No, not rude. Maybe a little sarcastic. I'm just highlighting the obvious,
which is just that - YOUR OWN LIFE.

If you give up the plane, you die. Once you're out of the seat, your life
is in someone else's hands. The flight data shows no signs of struggle
and the data anomalies are impossible (IE: autopilot engaged).

Of course the pilot would value his own life over a passenger's life. Perhaps, he/she would be trained to put his life in danger to save the
entire mass of passengers. That's not the point I'm trying to make.

In any case, how do you propose these 'terrorists' would have made it
passed the cabin door unannounced?



[edit on 27-8-2010 by turbofan]



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by turbofan
If you give up the plane, you die.

[edit on 27-8-2010 by turbofan]


You do realise that they didn't know that?

Hijackings up to that point had always involved a landing, bargaining and, usually, most people getting out alive.

I find it strange that Truthers automatically assume that the pilots knew what was in store.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by turbofan
 


I hope to clear up a few misconceptions.

(Believe me, after 11 September, had a great deal of time to sit there, and imagine the scenarios in those cockpits....sitting there IN THE SEAT, and realizing how easy it would be, to have been taken by surprise like that. Because, it hadn't happened in that way before, and there really was no awareness of it ever happening at all....)

As already mentioned, nearly every other hijacking example had a pattern, and that's what we were taught. Overall, the main thing that, in "theory" up 'til then was, that the hijackers did NOT want to die.

(There are ecxeptions, of course....the "disgruntled employee" aspect, as seen on PSA and FedEx. BUT, only two isolated cases, and not really "hijackings" in that sense --- as in, the sense that the "traditonal" hijacking had a motive OTHER than mayhem and suicide).



If you give up the plane, you die.


Irrelelvant, since that never happened. Don't know where that silly idea sprouted, unless from the fact that a non-rev pilot was onboard one flight?? AND, was mistaken for a working crewmwmber??

NO pilot was voluntarily removed from his seat!



The flight data shows no signs of struggle
and the data anomalies are impossible (IE: autopilot engaged).


Incorrect, and yet another misconception. The A/P does NOT instantly disconnect, just from a minor "bump" on the control column.

many, many times I've exited/entered the seat, and bumped the column...NO disconnect. It WILL disconnect when moved purposefully a certain distance.... sorry, never memorized that particular bit of data...



In any case, how do you propose these 'terrorists' would have made it passed the cabin door unannounced?


When it was opened??

As I said, the awareness of intrusion was NOT top of our list, on September 10th.....



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 01:35 AM
link   
Alright, fair enough. I'll accept your logic with respect to hijackers not having
a history of suicide missions.

Let's talk more about some points that still do not make sense:


Originally posted by weedwhackerIncorrect, and yet another misconception. The A/P does NOT instantly disconnect, just from a minor "bump" on the control column.


We are discussing events that are far from a slight 'bump' on the control
stick. There is full deflection of the yoke, and complete change of flight
plan.

This is not possible while the A/P is engaged.

What is your best hypothesis to why/how the A/P is still active during this
segment of flight data?


In any case, how do you propose these 'terrorists' would have made it passed the cabin door unannounced?


When it was opened??

As I said, the awareness of intrusion was NOT top of our list, on September 10th.....

When, or perhaps why was the door open in your opinion?

Who opens the door in your scenario?

Unfortunately we don't have any data to show when/if the doors were open,
but I'm wanting to hear your thoughts on typical cases of who opens the
door and the procedure used.

IE: If a flight attendent wants to serve coffee to the cabin, etc.

Last bit to think about: If there is a hijack, and the pilots or ATC is
communicating the 'secret' code word/protocol, do all airborne pilots
receive this information?

[edit on 1-9-2010 by turbofan]



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 07:54 AM
link   
reply to post by turbofan
 


Allow me to further clarify. Based on my actual experience, decades of experience, as a pilot for a major (U.S.) airline:


We are discussing events that are far from a slight 'bump' on the control stick.


IF a person, whilst seated in either seat, is slain there (throat slashed, which is the most likely case) then the body will still not affect the control column. (Possibly, I suppose.....a dead body might slump down, and the legs and feet impinge upon the rudder pedals. BUT, the seatbelts would prevent that).

Here's another point to consider: Our seat positons are quite varied...and, except for critical phases of flight, takeoffs and landings, we CAN push back a little, for more comfort. During the less critical phases of the flight.

Even back a bit, STILL able to reach all controls (possibly with exception of rudders, but don't use them anyway, except for an engine failure scenario...in which case, will set the seat in proper position anyway....)

BTW....a COMMON posture, in flight....(not sure if I should share this??)

Take a look at any photo of an airliner's cockpit, and note the instrument panel...and the portion at the BOTTOM....it is a common place to rest one's feet. (Will try to find a photo for example). IOW....(those seats are NOT ergonomically comfortable), we will often adjust our posture, and seated position, with legs up...for variety. Hard to describe...you just have to DO IT, to understand the relief one can feel....
____________________________

Found a photo to illustrate. It is subtle, but look closely at the patterns of wear, at the BOTTOM of the panels. Where one would normally put their feet up, to rest them. If you see other Boeing, or even Airbus cockpit photos, you will seeother examples. Please peruse the airliners.net site, LOTS of good photos there!!)

ALSO, in this photo, (a B-767 cockpit, but the SIZE is very much the same in the B-757) you can see how far back the seats can be moved, and the amount of leg space a person has, when the seats are fully aft and out.


____________________________



Sorry, digressed a bit, to clarify....continuing:



There is full deflection of the yoke, and complete change of flight plan.


Not sure why/how you make that claim.

Only SSFDRs that were recovered were from AAL 77 and UAL 93. In BOTH cases, any control inputs, as you seem to describe, occured WHILE the A/P was engaged. AND, no....there was never any "full deflection of the yoke". That seems to be yet another misconception/false assumption/urban legend.


What is your best hypothesis to why/how the A/P is still active during this segment of flight data?


I have cited the NTSB reports, repeatedly here at ATS, that document SPECIFIC attributes, functions, and activity of the AutoFlight systems, from AAL 77 and UAL 93. Perhaps I should begin a thread on them? Might be a good idea.....



In any case, how do you propose these 'terrorists' would have made it passed the cabin door unannounced?

When it was opened??


Well....(again, am speaking about a time BEFORE 11 September) the F/As DID happen to bring stuff into the cockpit, for our benefit!!! You know....food, beverages, etc. [***]

It was the MORNING!!! AND, long flights....most employee contracts (both pilots and F/As) require CREW MEALS be made available at specific intervals, and under certain variables....such as LENGTH of flight, time of day, etc.

So...the answer to this:


When, or perhaps why was the door open in your opinion?


Should be obvious.

Flight deck doors were opened and NOT worried about, pre-9/11. With common regularity.

Interesting FACT....my last holiday to Europe, in 2009....on a European carrier, I sat in Business....THEY were completely cavalier about the cockpit door!!! (Maybe I shouldn't write and post this....BUT, doesn't matter, since if I saw it, ANYONE ELSE could too).

B'Fast was served to the 'pit, and the door WAS OPEN for several minutes, whilst the F/A busied herself in the galley!!!

Look....THAT was the way it worked, in the U.S. too!!!

F/A's have to call, to gain access....they can't bring EVERYTHING in at once, sometimes....and, to not have to repeat the process (this, again...in the OLD days) they just keep the door open, or hold their foot there, whatever.....

So, the answer to THIS, is above:


Who opens the door in your scenario?


And, anyone who's worked in the biz, or flown in the past, has probably witnessed such. (Unless you were stuck WAY back in coach!)

Finally:


Last bit to think about: If there is a hijack, and the pilots or ATC is communicating the 'secret' code word/protocol, do all airborne pilots
receive this information?


No. I won't describe on a public forum al the details about that question, but....NO! It never has the ability to alert "all airborne pilots", as you asked.

As regards any covert or "secret" code words...yes, there are a few.

BUT, there use is relegated to instances where YOU (the pilot) cannot "speak in the clear". IF you are aware of a hijacking (and there is, yet, no cockpit intrusion) then...you simply communicate that fact to ATC, and the wheels are set in motion....(on the ground, by authorities).

IF you are operating "under duress", THEN we have the "code words" and phrases....(which, AFAIK, are still active, so I will NOT discuss them).

ATC personnel ALSO know them, BTW....




[***] This reminds me of a VERY crude and off-color joke, that is a mainstay of the airline biz.

Shall I? OK....if you've read down this far, then that means you intend to see it ALL.
_____________________________________
Edit....well, we're all (mostly) adults, right??

I added a bit of space, so that scroll-down is required...
_____________________________________










(OLD) joke....(one) of the pilots accidentally keys the PA mic, as they are chatting up in the cockpit. So, unwittingly, everything they are saying is being blasted to the cabin speakers.

One says (after his meal), "Well, after that steak all I need now is a good cup of coffee and a [insert term for sexual activity of some kind....usually, the oral kind]." (I HAD to do that, to self-edit....)


Of course, since the PA is active, the Interphone doesn't work, and the frantic F/As calling the cockpit go unheard (they've all been congregated in the AFT galley)....so, the Lead F/A starts to run up the aisle, to bang on the cockpit door....and a passenger calls out, "Don't forget the coffee!"

Bah dah bump!


Yah.....I know....sexist, and just plain WRONG!!!

(But, still funny, after all these years....IF you drop the 'politically correct' aspect away....sorry....)



BTW (PPS?): Accidental PAs? Yup, I witnessed it personally.

One that stands out in memory --- I was a new-hire, and still just a Second Officer on the 'panel' (that is the "Flight Engineer" station, in olden terms) on the B-727. (WE were ALL pilots, but had to "pay our dues", so to speak....senority, and all that....)

So....sitting there, I had my earpiece/headset, and an audio panel, so could monitor ALL the VHF and even the interphone and PA. (Hey! It got boring...what better than to listen in...OK, 'eavesdrop'....)

ANYWAY.....sittig there, still a "newbie"....and the Captain drops his pen. NO biggie, right? Weeeeeeellllllll..........

He squirms, and fusses, looking about (we've all been there, right? I mean...other than actually GETTING UP and OUT of the seat, he just was hoping it would be an 'easy' find, his lost pen. ON the floor---within easy reach.

ANYWAY, have seen this before, paid little attention...UNTIL! ----

AS the Captain leaned a certain way, his SHOULDER hit the MIC button....on the MIC that hangs there, on the aft part of the center pedestal of the B-727...and he ACTIVATED the PTT button, just as a stream of VERY bad words began to issue forth!

I WAS NOT THE ONLY ONE in the cockpit that heard this....we other two heard his comments....sice, of course, we were sitting right there.

I WAS THE ONLY ONE who IMMEDIATELY (since I was monitoring the PA in my headset) KNEW that he'd transmitted all that foul language to the entire CABIN, on the PA!!!

Well...a split second later....Ding! Ding! Ding! (Three quick chimes, on the Interphone....OUR "emergency" signal, in-house....meaning, "Answer immediately!")

I think he (the Captain) eventually found his dropped pen. He was eternally embarrassed (and I hold it over him, to this day!)

The Lead F/A, to her credit....and this is priceless!!! (Because, again ....I heard it, since I was bored and monitoring the PA)


SHE said (and I paraphase)....


....."I apologize for anything you just heard. I think it might have been Gremlins."

KID YOU NOT, true story, cross my heart, and all that......




[edit on 1 September 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 08:38 AM
link   
I always wondered how long it would take Rod Hilderman to get round to no planes and 9/11?

Yet another example of how certain people with video cameras shouldn't be allowed out on their own!



His fake plane videos are really face palm viewing.

il.youtube.com...





The brightly coloured aircraft in the above video is a Monarch Airlines Airbus A330.

www.airliners.net...

www.airliners.net...

His evidence. 'Three trails from a twin engined aircraft' when in reality the aircraft is a three engined airliner!



Rod strikes gold with this one.



This aircraft is an Air Canada Airbus A320. It is in a unique anniversary colour scheme.

It is distinctive as it is the only Airbus in Canada with this livery.
The registration is C-FFWN. It was painted to celebrate the 65th Anniversary.

www.airliners.net...

www.airliners.net...

www.airliners.net...

TJ



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by turbofan
 


As regards terrorists gaining access to the cockpit: I think they just waited for the door to open. I did look at all the times once and I cant be bothered to repeat it but all the times between take-off and hi-jack on 9/11 were variable.

My experience of flying as a passenger before 9/11 was that the door was opened pretty frequently for flight attendants to go in or for flight crew to come out and go to the lavatory whatever. I remember on a flight to Florida, when I was head of the lavatory queue, a member of the flight crew came out and asked if he could take my place. I said fine if I could take his place in the cockpit for a spell, which I did. It was that casual then.



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 



....a member of the flight crew came out and asked if he could take my place. I said fine if I could take his place in the cockpit for a spell, which I did. It was that casual then.


I guess, based on my post up-thread, I can relate this OTHER actual experience, back when I was a "new-hire".**

** BTW....typical airline protocol is, for "new hires", you are "on probation" for at LEAST the first six months...often TWELVE months, depends.

While "on probation" you don't 'rock the boat', so to speak....comprende'?


SO...back when I was "new", and therefore 'on probation', and still a Second Officer (sitting at the 'panel' of a Boeing 727. We were ALL hired as pilots, had to sit our "senority", though).


ANYWAY, while a "newbie' we had occasion when the cockpit door was opened, because the First Officer (co-pilot) was exiting to go do his business....("poop" or "pee"? I didin't inquire...)

While the door was open, a (to my mind VERY underaged) 'girl', or "woman' was standing there. She, albeit somewhat startled (as she had intended to enter the lavatory, which is located JUST AFT of the cockpit) to see, in full view the airliner's cockpit....a place that, to most average passenger's understadings, is verbotten territory, still stood there, seemingly rather stunned, and frozen in place.

The Captain, on this particular trip (who, BTW, was a very, very effervescent person...and NOT prone --- at least I think not, since he had children, and little girls of his own -- prone to any sort of weird sexual deviance) invited this girl IN to the cockpit!!

Against ALL regulations!!!

WE (the other two) welcomed any opportunity (even IF it 'violated' certain 'regulations') the opportunity to satisfy the curiosity of a person.....

BUT, THAT was then....nowadays, that same sort of attitude just isn't appropriate.

AND, that is sad, in a way.













[edit on 1 September 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 02:12 AM
link   
Well let's not carried away yet Weed.

In the case of AA77, we were told via Barbara Olsen's "phone call" that
all passengers and pilots were moved to the back of the plane.

This is documented.

So, the pilots' throats were not slashed. They were still alive...and just
gave up their seats. Hmmm....

Another thing that you do not realize is that the aircraft banked and
made 180 degree change in direction while the autopilot remained active.

Two items that you overlooked in your reply. Very important and significant
items I will add.

Do you still stick your response?



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by turbofan
 


First, RE: Barbara Olson. It is quite likely that AAL 77 WAS the airplane that had the non-revving pilot(s) onboard. In fact, one (and his wife) IS established as being among the victims:



Wilson "Bud" and Darlene "Dee" Flagg of Millwood, Va., planned to visit family and friends in Orange County. Wilson Flagg was a retired Navy admiral and current pilot for American Airlines.


www.usatoday.com...

That is by no means a comprehensive list of ALL passengers and crew. You will note that the First Officer (David Charlesbois), for example, is not in that article. (I knew of him, through mutual friends).

No reason, other than the USAToday staff were only able to get together a partial list, is most likely.

Unknown whether American Airliens pilot Wilson Flagg was in uniform. He could have had his wife meet him, after he finished a trip, for their holiday out to Los Angeles....OR, they came from home that morning, both dressed in typical non-revenue attire.

Not certain. BUT, a more thorough investigation will perhaps result in finding out about other non-rev pilots onboard.

I wouldn't put much stock into Olson's non-recorded, and therefore hearsay, comments based on what her husband remembers from the phone call. All that it indcates is that she might have seen AT LEAST one guy in a uniform, and does not prove that it was either Burlingame or Charlesbois. (I seriously doubt it, because NO! No one would "hand over" the airplane like that!)


Now, this is incorrect....I DO "realize":


Another thing that you do not realize is that the aircraft banked and made 180 degree change in direction while the autopilot remained active.


Yes, because Hanjour was USING the A/P to fly the airplane! Just like WE do.

READ this report:

www.ntsb.gov...

Especially the chart, and graph, page 9....

I can help interpret it, if it's confusing or unclear.



posted on Sep, 3 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Weed I hate to say this, but your arguments are futile........

To some of the truther crowd, you can have all the proof in the world and common sense logic, and it wont help, they will believe what they want to believe......

Just like in my post earlier......The obvious question as to why fake all that and have empty planes if youre just going to kill 3,000 people anyway, still didnt make sense to him.......

Its much easier if you believe that the government did it, to believe that AGENTS took control of the planes instead of terrorist, and crashed them......

I dont believe that, but it makes more sense then this outlandish bait and switch the OP has come up with........



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join