Pick Your 2 Most Glaring Points of Questions For 9/11?

www.historycommons.org...

I am 100% positive that while researching Ogonowski I read that there was 1 extra pilot on each plane. The article above mentions the fact that the pilots were changed around at the last minute....which I found very curious. Curious again is the fact that Ogonowski's brother "had a dream" that Ogonowski was "kidnapped' on the way to the airport. Ogonowski's brother also wrote him a long letter about the status of his farm, etc. which again is very interesting to me. There is only one word that comes to mind when I read/study this particular pilot and that word is "diabolical". The other word is a better one. It is "alive".

letsrollforums.com...

Apparently here is one extra pilot in the cockpit that day. This site also talks a lot about the people being flown to Ohio.....and from there?

Originally posted by aviatrix
letsrollforums.com...

Apparently here is one extra pilot in the cockpit that day. This site also talks a lot about the people being flown to Ohio.....and from there?

From there, it went to that douchebag con artist Dylan Avery, who reported in his "Loose Change" flick that flight 93 actually landed in Ohio. What he doesn't mention is that this was an unconfirmed report that was floating around as events of 9/11 were still unfolding and everyone was still confused as to what was going on. The report was retracted soon after, but Avery never lets the facts get in the way of a really good conspiracy story.

I have said from the beginning that you truthers aren't stupid or even crackpots for wallowing in these absurd conspiracy stories. You're simply being swindled by these damned fool conspiracy web sites that are intentionally trying to get you all paranoid so you'll buy their knicknacks, and you just don't know you're being swindled. Here is a sterling example of the kind of stunts they're pulling, so you certainly should know you're being swindled now.

reply to post by aviatrix


ALL of that speculation is baseless.

Pilots are changing trips all of the time. It was that way at MY airline, and is likely similar at all major airlines. The methods used, and rules for personal choices may differ, due to various company policies and Union Contract language.

Here's how it is, in reality:

ON any given day, there are a host of "open" trips, for every crew-member position (including Flight Attendant).

F/As of course are cross-trained and qualified at all times, for all equipment types. Pilots aren't qualified on more than one equipment type at a time (except in the case of common type ratings, such as the Boeing 757/767, and in some cases, when they are working in management positions, such as Chief Pilots and their Assistants).

Also, pilots' qualifications are specific to their SEAT position....although, at COMPANY discretion, a CAPTAIN can be "forced" (some call it "drafted", our company calls it "junior manning") to work in the First Officer position....this only after ALL the available, and legal (time and duty limits-wise) pilots on Reserve (a special hell that is similar to a doctor being "on call") are used up, on other assignments. Some airlines cut their manpower staffing levels to the bone, and when contingencies arise, they are forced to "draft"...basically, calling you at home, ON YOUR DAY OFF, and catching you unawares....once they have you on the phone, they HAVE you! (Caller ID makes this VERY hard for the company, though!!) Once they say, "You are being "junior manned", you cannot refuse, except by saying you're sick. THEN you may be subject to disciplinary proceedings, depending on attendance history, and management's whim, all within the Union contract, of course.

Still, any Captain that is "drafted" still gets his/her normal Captain's pay rates, NOT the lower rate for the seat position. Some Union contracts impose a "time and a half" rate, as a disincentive for the Company...various strategies are negotiated with management.


Finally, there are personal trades, personal "drops" and so forth...pilots changing the original monthly schedule that was awarded as part of the monthly "bidding" process. You use seniority to select your choices....from what's available as the Company publishes each month..."voting" on what you like, hoping to get the choice that suits YOU best (IF you are number one in seniority, for you equipment/crew base/status, then you get your first choice). Many airlines are constantly tinkering with their schedules, and flights are added/dropped/changed, and the mess of trip differences, and crappy "lines of time" (a pilot's schedule) show this. Also, the daylight savings time changeover has a substantial effect too.

SO...there is a lot more detail, but you can probably see, by now, that there is nothing "suspicious" about the changing of pilots assigned to those trips (we call a sequence of legs, carried out whether just for one day ---"turns", or "turnarounds" --- or a multi-day trip of 2, 3, 4 or more sequentially). Flight crew-members change for a variety of reasons, within the rules and boundaries of their specific airline. For personal reasons (nice layover, in LA, compared to the crap trip that was going to over-night in some other city you aren't fond of, etc).

Certainly, no flight crew-member had foresight to predict 9/11 hijackings, and terrorist attacks.....

Why did so many never before and never again events occour on 911, even in relation to WTC 7, which was not struck by an airliner.

How is the sheer endless stream of coincidences explained that occoured on 911, which had a very low probability to have all occoured by chance.

reply to post by Cassius666


???

How many simultaneously-timed multiple airliner hijackings that were intended to be flown as suicidal guided missiles into structures, with intent to cause maximum damage and mayhem, occurred before September 11th?

And, how many such incidents since then? You know, to compare to; to compare the "occurrences".

We need precedents to look at, for the similarities....oh, wait. There ARE no precedents.......

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Cassius666

 

???

How many simultaneously-timed multiple airliner hijackings that were intended to be flown as suicidal guided missiles into structures, with intent to cause maximum damage and mayhem, occurred before September 11th?

And, how many such incidents since then? You know, to compare to; to compare the "occurrences".

We need precedents to look at, for the similarities....oh, wait. There ARE no precedents.......

edit on 18 November 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)

"Even in relation to WTC 7 which was not struck by an airliner"

You conviniently overlooked that one. And no source code has been released for the conducted simulations, or even the parameters to digit them in the used program yourself. Only the nice animations.

You seem to have quite an hardon for me. Or is this your dayjob or something? Why do you care so much, that the official tale is believed?

Originally posted by Cassius666

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Cassius666

 

???

How many simultaneously-timed multiple airliner hijackings that were intended to be flown as suicidal guided missiles into structures, with intent to cause maximum damage and mayhem, occurred before September 11th?

And, how many such incidents since then? You know, to compare to; to compare the "occurrences".

We need precedents to look at, for the similarities....oh, wait. There ARE no precedents.......

edit on 18 November 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)

"Even in relation to WTC 7 which was not struck by an airliner"

You conviniently overlooked that one. And no source code has been released for the conducted simulations, or even the parameters to digit them in the used program yourself. Only the nice animations.

You seem to have quite an hardon for me. Or is this your dayjob or something? Why do you care so much, that the official tale is believed?

edit on 18-11-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)

Maybe you forgot a BUILDING COLLAPSED ON WTC 7?

Check out some LiDar:
www.noaanews.noaa.gov...

You can clearly see a path of destruction in the direction of WTC 7, much of the WTC 6 damage may have even been caused by WTC 7's collapse.

Also, no one ever seems to want to mention WTC 3 and 4, which were almost completely annihilated by the debris.

reply to post by Cassius666

How is the sheer endless stream of coincidences explained that occoured on 911, which had a very low probability to have all occoured by chance.

Maybe you should take your "questions" to Ripley's . Because you sure as hell are not comprehending anything you have been shown , in this thread and the six or eight others you are raping .

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by Cassius666

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Cassius666

 

???

How many simultaneously-timed multiple airliner hijackings that were intended to be flown as suicidal guided missiles into structures, with intent to cause maximum damage and mayhem, occurred before September 11th?

And, how many such incidents since then? You know, to compare to; to compare the "occurrences".

We need precedents to look at, for the similarities....oh, wait. There ARE no precedents.......

edit on 18 November 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)

"Even in relation to WTC 7 which was not struck by an airliner"

You conviniently overlooked that one. And no source code has been released for the conducted simulations, or even the parameters to digit them in the used program yourself. Only the nice animations.

You seem to have quite an hardon for me. Or is this your dayjob or something? Why do you care so much, that the official tale is believed?

edit on 18-11-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)

Maybe you forgot a BUILDING COLLAPSED ON WTC 7?

Check out some LiDar:
www.noaanews.noaa.gov...

You can clearly see a path of destruction in the direction of WTC 7, much of the WTC 6 damage may have even been caused by WTC 7's collapse.

Also, no one ever seems to want to mention WTC 3 and 4, which were almost completely annihilated by the debris.

No a building collapsed on WTC 3 4 5 and 6 but not on 7. Quite the feat for those debries to single out a building out of an area and take it down. And while you talk of these buildings, a freaking skyscraper collapsed on them, not just an airliner. They were banged up good, had alot of their concrete stripped off (some of them) and their frame was all out of shape, but they did not collapse. They were demolished in the cleanup process.

If you want to convince me, you must make all the other experts who were not under the NIST umbrella BELIEVE first. Untill you do that, I am gonna side with the majority on this one, rather than to embrace the fantastic tales of the NIST report, which would put me on the fringe of society.

reply to post by Cassius666


You can very clearly see in the LiDar that I posted that they more than just got "stripped." Half the buildings around the trade centers completely collapsed in whole or in part. They also can't be physically compared to WTC 7 because, guess what? They weren't nearly as tall! omg I know! I guess height doesn't play a part in your physics, and you will only believe if your idols agree, right?

But enough of my silly commentary. I just find it amazing that you showed up on this site a relatively new member, rearing to support every single anti-official story story, and then walk around accusing other people of being daft.

Debris hitting WTC 7:


In this video, even though it's focusing on the debris that hit WFC, watch WTC 7, you can see debris clearly ejecting far enough to hit it:


This one is a narrated video about the damage WTC 7 took from the tower:

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by Cassius666

 

You can very clearly see in the LiDar that I posted that they more than just got "stripped." Half the buildings around the trade centers completely collapsed in whole or in part. They also can't be physically compared to WTC 7 because, guess what? They weren't nearly as tall! omg I know! I guess height doesn't play a part in your physics, and you will only believe if your idols agree, right?

But enough of my silly commentary. I just find it amazing that you showed up on this site a relatively new member, rearing to support every single anti-official story story, and then walk around accusing other people of being daft.

Debris hitting WTC 7:

In this video, even though it's focusing on the debris that hit WTF, watch WTC 7, you can see debris clearly ejecting far enough to hit it:

This one is a narrated video about the damage WTC 7 took from the tower:

You still think its me you gotta convince. You gotta convince a lot more people first. I am not going to go through life and tell people I believe in UFOs and the NIST report, to be known as the odd crazy guy, who believes in UFOs and the NIST report.

I am not saying somebody who believes in the moonhaux or the NIST report is stupid. They make a very good case. I am no expert. But if you are an expert and want somebody like me to side with you, you gotta convince the experts not under the NIST umbrella first, because I am not going to go through life as the crazy guy who thinks the NIST report is real. Again, I dont mean to say you are crazy, many smart people were called crazy in their time, but I still dont want to be singeled out as the odd crazy guy.

reply to post by Cassius666


Your logic completely escapes me here... So, you don't want to listen to reason, because you don't want to unpopular here. Then you keep acting like I am telling people I believe in every UFO story. This isn't a popularity contest. It's an attempt to find the truth.

Plus, I honestly don't know how to contact the engineers, and since I'm NOT an expert on the subject matter, they would probably just chalk me up as someone less knowledgeable than their much older mind and logic. Some people will be literally impossible to convince because they believe it like a religion.

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by Cassius666

 

Your logic completely escapes me here... So, you don't want to listen to reason, because you don't want to unpopular here. Then you keep acting like I am telling people I believe in every UFO story. This isn't a popularity contest. It's an attempt to find the truth.

Plus, I honestly don't know how to contact the engineers, and since I'm NOT an expert on the subject matter, they would probably just chalk me up as someone less knowledgeable than their much older mind and logic. Some people will be literally impossible to convince because they believe it like a religion.

I side with experts on the matter. If a scientist or 2 say we did not land on the moon and the other scientists say we did, I am gonna side with the majority there. Why would the majority of the scientific world conspire against me? Why would the scientists who are not under the NIST umbrella lie to me? Applying Cui Bono I can see who stands to gain and who is unbiased. Then there is the fact they never released any simulations, just the animations, thats not a simulation.

#1- Since Saudi Arabia financed 9-11 why were they never held accountable?

24 months ago Saudi Arabia was saying it wasn't accepting US dollars for oil anymore and was going to start the Gulf Monetary Union. The CIA got Barrack elected who bowed to the Saudi King, gave them their Victory Mosque to celebrate their successful attack, we paid off all their debts...and they are getting $60 Billion in military hardware?



The truth is we didn't have anything to keep giving Saudi Arabia to keep getting their oil. They wanted our military out of their country and forced us out. Barrack Obama/9-11 are all tools used by the CIA/DOD to keep getting crude oil from the Royal Kingdom. The evil we have done to keep getting crude oil from them and keeping the rich in our country rich....is a criminal act.

There is much more to the 9-11 story that people know, but they can't tell you because it would stop the flow of crude oil into America from Saudi Arabia. We are doing evil things to keep the status quo. If the truth were to ever come out this country would no longer exist, we would erupt into Civil War. It doesn't matter really. It's a matter of time before we have to pay the piper and won't be able to get oil from Saudi anymore. Those people in that country hate us, everyone of them. With China now the largest buyer of their crude oil there is a global paradigm that is changing.

We now will have to knock China off it's block or risk losing access to our energy needs. We can't attack and take over Saudi Arabia to secure our energy needs. You see the Saudi's saw us coming when they read the Congressional reports stating Diego Garcia was obtained to solely be used to take over Saudi Arabia. So the Saud's financed the Pakistani nuclear bomb program in exchange for a few bombs of their own. They now are a nuclear power, hence we can't touch them. We don't know where their bombs are. They could be in our country for all we know.

Everyone should forget the 9-11 conspiracy as it was a conspiracy...which is still unfolding to secure our energy needs.

Our government refused to hold Saudi Arabia liable for funding 9-11 and attacking us. We also failed to act when Saudi Arabia said they were going to cease accepting US dollars for oil and start the Gulf Monetary Union. There are other acts Saudi Arabia did to us that you don't know about...that our Government failed to hold the Saud's accountable for.

Why? There's lots of people getting rich over it and they do not want to get into a nuclear war. There's a price you are paying to have a oil heated home and cheap gas....our country is being robbed...but it's considered an acceptable loss if we can avoid nuclear war I guess.

Originally posted by Pervius
#1- Since Saudi Arabia financed 9-11 why were they never held accountable?

24 months ago Saudi Arabia was saying it wasn't accepting US dollars for oil anymore and was going to start the Gulf Monetary Union. The CIA got Barrack elected who bowed to the Saudi King, gave them their Victory Mosque to celebrate their successful attack, we paid off all their debts...and they are getting $60 Billion in military hardware?



The truth is we didn't have anything to keep giving Saudi Arabia to keep getting their oil. They wanted our military out of their country and forced us out. Barrack Obama/9-11 are all tools used by the CIA/DOD to keep getting crude oil from the Royal Kingdom. The evil we have done to keep getting crude oil from them and keeping the rich in our country rich....is a criminal act.

There is much more to the 9-11 story that people know, but they can't tell you because it would stop the flow of crude oil into America from Saudi Arabia. We are doing evil things to keep the status quo. If the truth were to ever come out this country would no longer exist, we would erupt into Civil War. It doesn't matter really. It's a matter of time before we have to pay the piper and won't be able to get oil from Saudi anymore. Those people in that country hate us, everyone of them. With China now the largest buyer of their crude oil there is a global paradigm that is changing.

We now will have to knock China off it's block or risk losing access to our energy needs. We can't attack and take over Saudi Arabia to secure our energy needs. You see the Saudi's saw us coming when they read the Congressional reports stating Diego Garcia was obtained to solely be used to take over Saudi Arabia. So the Saud's financed the Pakistani nuclear bomb program in exchange for a few bombs of their own. They now are a nuclear power, hence we can't touch them. We don't know where their bombs are. They could be in our country for all we know.

Everyone should forget the 9-11 conspiracy as it was a conspiracy...which is still unfolding to secure our energy needs.

Our government refused to hold Saudi Arabia liable for funding 9-11 and attacking us. We also failed to act when Saudi Arabia said they were going to cease accepting US dollars for oil and start the Gulf Monetary Union. There are other acts Saudi Arabia did to us that you don't know about...that our Government failed to hold the Saud's accountable for.

Why? There's lots of people getting rich over it and they do not want to get into a nuclear war. There's a price you are paying to have a oil heated home and cheap gas....our country is being robbed...but it's considered an acceptable loss if we can avoid nuclear war I guess.

If it is true that Saudi Arabia is heavily invested in America and holds a lot of US currency, I am sure they were never serious with their threats if they made those threats.

good old dave i dont think i have ever come across anybody as deluded as you!

just out of interest what is your occupation? hobbies? as it appears to me you spend every day of your life dedicated to these, as you so often call it (dammed fooled crazy conspiracy sites)

this thread was asking the users to state their two most glaring things that appear odd about 9/11 you obviously have no problem with the os according to you everything is fine and dandy so why bother coming on these sites? i genuinely would like to know?

you go on about the 9/11 commission report as being gospel yet guys who are part of the commission have admitted its a white wash??????full of lies?????

all truthers are crazy nutters yet the commission report was only conducted because of the hard dedicated work of a couple of women who lost their husbands and where un happy with the os, sorry to rant on but it sickens me that just because people want to know the truth about an event that was so full of holes oddities and coincedences they are classes as trash

iv read through this whole thread and alot of my thoughts have already been posted but i'll give it another shot.....

1) if this castrostophy was due to terrorists then why didnt the us government respond? they have a trillion dollar defence system yet the only explanation i am aware of for this gross failure is confusion?? not prepared for this? give me a break!!!

2) wtc 7 not hit my an airliner very minimal fires very minimal damage from the collapse of the other wtc collapses at free fall speed into its own foot print and please dont bore with with that good old chestnut that the building was damaged beyond repair!

reply to post by kaya82


You might want to go back and reread what the 9-11 Commissioners actually said. What they said was that the story as put forth by the government was a whitewash to hide years of failure by our elected officials to take the terriorist threat seriously. They also said that their report was an accurate account of that day and the events leading up to it.

Then you mention our trillion dollar defense system and you cannot understand that we were not prepared. Quick question for you. How many fighter aircraft did the US military have armed for combat in the United States that day?

Fourteen. Fourteen aircraft for the continental United States. No anti-aircraft guns, no anti-aircraft missiles, just fourteen aircraft to cover forty-eight states. And those rarely practiced to intercept aircraft within our own airspace, let alone practicing to shoot down such an aircraft.

You can spend all the money in the world, but if you don't prepare, you will fail miserably. And we did.

the commission failed to mention why a 47 story steel and concrete buiding fell! so excuse me for not believing anything they have got the say.

they had ample time from the first time they knew of hijacked air craft up until the pentagon was hit and still nothing was done? your happy with that? unbelievable