9/11 for Dummies: A Closer Look At Motive

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by TheLieWeLive
 



I also believe WTC 7 was an intended target until flight 93 crashed in Penn. after it was shot down by our military (the only one they could get to on time). Since the plane didn't make it's intended target the real terrorists went ahead and brought the WTC7 down by the pre-installed explosives in the building completing their objective. These explosives where in all three WTC buildings to make sure the job would be complete.


So if United 93 was destined for WTC 7

Why was it:

Flying all the way to Ohio, when it took off from Newark right across river

Heading Southeast toward Washington DC

Hijackers dialing in VOR radio beacon at Reagan National Airport IN Washington




posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by smyleegrl
I do agree that if it was a jihad event that we should have seen more attacks in the US... Perhaps good security?



We have seen more attacks in the US. One guy tried to blow up a plane with a bomb hidden in his shoe. Another guy attempted to set off a car bomb in Times Square. Yet another guy tried to set off a bomb in the middle of a Christmas tree lighting ceremony in Utah. Someone from Morocco was just arrested for trying to stage a suicide attack on the Capitol building just a few days ago.

Suicide attack on the US Capitol Building foiled

It isn't a secret that the Islamic fundamentalists are in an active terrorist campaign against the US. It's just that these damned fool conspiracy web sites are trying to get us to believe the 9/11 attack was really part of some sinister secret plot instead of the work of Islamic fundamentalists so they're not going to tell us any of that.

edit on 29-2-2012 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by TheLieWeLive
 



So many truthers are Anti-Semantic?

And Anti-Semitic as well. Thats my finding from communicating with those folks. Lots of it.

How do you justify this remark? Just because one believes Israel government was involved doesn't mean a hatred for the Jewish community.

Yeah, it pretty much does. You see there's no more evidence to tie Israel to 9/11 that there is to, say, Costa Rica but when was the last time you heard someone say they think Costa Rica was behind 9/11? If your trying that hard to tie Israel to one of the most dispicable crimes in recent history then you probably aren't being motivated by your yearning for the "truth".

I myself believe Israeli special operations where involved but I don't hate or distrust any Jewish people.

Sure you do, you just don't like to admit it.

I don't and won't see one bad apple and blame the whole apple cart.

Not saying "truther" = Anti-Semite, just saying chances are a lot better than in the general population.

Why does it always have to be "your racist or your anti semantic"?

Because thats the way it is.

Is it that easy to make others seem like they are full of hatred just so you can continue to believe what you do?

Based on what they say, yes it is very easy.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 10:34 AM
link   
I like the official story....

Couple of reasons
1. a lot of the truthers were like what 12 when 9/11 happened? I was close to 18.. BIG difference.
2. Truther movement is based on internet evidence... Which is flawed at best.
3. Its the same wheel in the mud, even if evidence is presented to break YOUR truther case.... You will stick your head in the dirt.

What's the point?



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Number 1. I don't think the USA was complicit in the attacks. I think we just got fat dumb and lazy. Incompetent to say the least at actually defending the nation.

I think we have gotten better at it though, only because we are more vigilant. I do not agree however with some of the steps and laws that have come to fruition since 9/11.

Peace



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by smyleegrl

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


Yeah they are around.
You have to dig them up.

Let's start with the fact all the hijackers were Arab.

Did we invade Saudi Arabia?

If it was number one - Islamic extremism alone, there would be no end to attacks on Americans and even Vatican City, regardless of our attempts to stop them because those people are impassioned - fanatical and frankly a little crazy - like a dog with a bone, and to the last man they will die trying to kill us.

We see a little of that now that we have inflamed the situation beyond repair but it took a decade to get factions there to hate us that thoroughly and completely.
edit on 29-2-2012 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)


Thank you for your response.

I'm not sure I'm following your comment about Saudi Arabia. Yes, the hijackers were Arab, but more importantly (IMO) they were Islamic. It's my understanding that the classification "Arab" is also used for members of other Middle Eastern countries.

I do agree that if it was a jihad event that we should have seen more attacks in the US... Perhaps good security?



If it was truly a religious war why does Rome go unmolested?



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by TheLieWeLive
 


If you think WTC 7 was the intended target of UA 93 why do you suppose they headed for Washington after the hi-jacking and turn ? And, in particular, why did they dial in the VHF omnidirectional range (VOR) frequency for the navigational aid at Reagan National Airport ?


None of the planes that day went straight to their target. They all show irrational patterns before they headed toward the target. UA 93 was brought down prematurely so to decisively say Washington was the intended target is just as much a guess as what I suggested.

Who is "they" when you said "why did they dial in the VHF..."?

edit on 29-2-2012 by TheLieWeLive because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 10:41 AM
link   
I'd go with #3 as well, and IMHO the main reasons behind it were:

1. US defense industry needed to sell their product

2. Quality of enlisted troops in the US military had taken a considerable dive, with lots of homeless people willing to "fight" in exchange for a roof and meals

3. Strategic control of the Middle East and consequently control of the oil flow throughout the planet

4. Hidden agendas related to the nature of the businesses and/or agencies in the WTC complex



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


I have already in posts before years ago. When you go back sometimes that information is gone. I have a terrible cold besides and I don't feel like it. If you are as interested as I was at the time...(and truly what ever I dig out will you believe it is not some conspiracy the other way unless you discover it for yourself???) you might do a search and see what you can come up with yourself...The above is not complete in its entirety as I can see from a glance. Do some kind of a search TOWER 7 tenants or leased to prior to 9/11, kill Fidel, NSA, FBI as search terms and see what you come up with. SECRET DOCUMENTS DESTROYED might be an exact phrase to use.

Now if you search around and don't come up with a thing I will go and try to dig them up FOR you.

edit on 29-2-2012 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by TheLieWeLive
 


If you think WTC 7 was the intended target of UA 93 why do you suppose they headed for Washington after the hi-jacking and turn ? And, in particular, why did they dial in the VHF omnidirectional range (VOR) frequency for the navigational aid at Reagan National Airport ?


None of the planes that day went straight to their target. They all show irrational patterns before they headed toward the target. UA 93 was brought down prematurely so to decisively say Washington was the intended target is just as much a guess as what I suggested.

Who is "they" when you said "why did they dial in the VHF..."?

edit on 29-2-2012 by TheLieWeLive because: (no reason given)


The hi-jackers dialed it in because it happened at 0955. Why would they seek navigational assistance to Washington when they really wanted to go to New York ?



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 11:05 AM
link   
I guess everyone is going to ignore my post because I'm on to something...

seriously if you were young when 9/11 happened you have no room to speak and are already bias



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 





The hi-jackers dialed it in because it happened at 0955. Why would they seek navigational assistance to Washington when they really wanted to go to New York ?


Novice pilots hi jacking a much bigger plane than they are use to. This could have happened in a lot of ways. It could have been a ploy to make them think they are headed in one direction and then go the other way. As I wrote before none of the other 3 planes went straight to their targets. Why would this one be any different?

Anyway I don't wanna continue and argue about it. You believe what you want and I'll do the same. To many inconsistencies in the story to just focus on one.
edit on 29-2-2012 by TheLieWeLive because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
None of the planes that day went straight to their target. They all show irrational patterns before they headed toward the target. UA 93 was brought down prematurely so to decisively say Washington was the intended target is just as much a guess as what I suggested.


This is of course true...but then again there's a difference between reasonable speculation (I.E. flight 93 was heading to Washington because it was generally heading toward that direction) and outlandish speculation (I.E. the plane was heading to NYC to hit WTC 7 because you want to believe it was to act as a cover story for secretly planted controlled demolitions).



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by TheLieWeLive
 


I will try not to belabor the UAL 93 issue (no one should) except inasmuch as it does pertain a little to the OP's premise...her "three" questions regarding scenarios.

UAL 93 was NOT heading to New York. Period. It was NOT "shot down". Period.

The information from the "black boxes" (Flight Recorders) is conclusive. AS TO its (UAL 93) heading....the ground track details of all four jets is in this link:

www.ntsb.gov...


Pay particular attention to the graphics near the end. UAL 93 is in blue, on one sheet that shows them all. American 77 in pink/lavender. Note where AAL 77 ended its ground track....in Washington, D.C.

Then note the line for UAL 93.....draw it to its logical conclusion, @ Washington, D.C.

The little curlicue on the end of UAL93's track shows the deviations in heading and thus, course, that occurred during the passenger revolt, as the hijackers violently maneuvered the airplane to try to throw them off of their feet, as they gathered to storm the cockpit.

Finally, to clear up the "shoot-down" claims .... the aforementioned "black boxes", specifically the SSFDR (Solid State Flight Data Recorder) indicated that there were NO systems malfunctions of any kind, prior to impact. Any "shoot-down" would have shown up on the SSFDR, as many systems failures and indications. There were none.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by fabio5
As far as motivations for George Bush, the CIA et. al. (or whoever within the American government, or even a third party w/ close ties or controlling elements of the state i.e. a corporation who sold weapons etc.) you really have a grab bag of options to choose from. perhaps the most compelling is that war is the health of the state. Those who maintain their financial and political dominance over the rest of us do so through the governnment (taxation wealth redistribution). Their power is expanded if they go to war. This is what the nazis did as well. The burning of the reichstag to justify war. Stage an event, blame it on the enemy and denounce those who oppose war as traitors and pacifists. [quote/]

Interesting reference to the Reichstag fire.

I have to ask you to clarify how war is the health of the state. From what I see, we've been at war for over a decade and our financial outlook is fairly glum. I realize economics are a product of multiple factors, but I don't really see our economy booming.

Thank you very much for your response!



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by DrNotforhire
 


Sorry youngman that is a pretty general statment which i think shows your complete and utter ignorance....and make comments from you questionable....I was forty....hmmmmm....richard gage was i would say 45-50...many of truther movement are....Older highly educated persons....just as many from the OS movement.....you my friend IT would seem from a generation just gaining in your knowledge base....and will keep gaining in knowledge as you ....that is like saying a lot of the OSER's are 28.....what do they know.

When you have something that actually could be considered a sensible thing then maybe someone would respond to what you said....as for the other two generalizations you can just search through and find out there is loads of scientifically evidence from both sides of the fence.

my take is one most look at all aspects of the attacks which have been discussed thoroughly on the subject...and even with all the data flowing back and forth I know what side i am on until solid proof otherwise....
it was not done by whom the OS says it was....The OS puposefully failed in looking into all aspects of a investigation.....there are to many holes in the OS to be filled....I do think Israel had participated ..... the dancing israelis....Dov S. Zakheim standard oil pipelines Iraq and Afghanistan.....Ehud Barak within 30mins anouncing Al Qaida.

things like John O'Neil....coincedences with connections of the identities of the passengers on the plane and ones in the know with valuble information.....

and sooo sooo sooo much more....PTECH.....

Need i keep going....and i will not rehash all of this info as it has all been said before...So just go look and....I will not even go into m engineering back ground about the collapse of three steel strcutures that collapsed.....all on one day yet others in the area took extremely large hit has greater fires in them and still survived...shall we mention 3,4,5,6 WTC .......holes holes holes......all filled with lies.

3,4,5,6

the look on the presidents face when informed......has there been a face analysist hired to check that out.

the fact that NORAD was in a stand down.....(i have the Norad Tapes) Don't need an OSer explaining those they explain themselves.....a mock up the same day.......Emergncy response was set up on NYC pier already for more mock ups that were supposed to happen on the 12th.....but oh well.....all perfectly explainable in a 28yr olds mind.

age should not matter though cause you know alot of the truthers were only 10 when this occured and i was like 18......big difference......

now shall we also question the investigation...the main people who were to supply the report were NOT allowed access and only physicallly looked at 2% of ay given material off the site....but hey that is perfectly normal for a crime scene plane crash combination.....who would have thought huh.

you see there are holes holes holes......and most the holes come from people just believing what is told to them through the tele.

oh well.......since i am a truther i guess that i must be be stupid not to believe the OS.....i mean how dare i at my age question anything in life....i best go back to my geriatric world and sit on my bed and pee in my depends...cause i feel safe knowing my life will be taken care of by 28yr olds who make sweeping generalizations that make absolute perfect sense.

Oh yes i forgot to mention all our information is only internet based...where as ummmm....DR not's info is ummmmm...what...television based......oh yes....the disney channel.....way cool



oh yes third line.......Mud ........the OS story is absolutely clear as Mud so i will glady keep on sifting through the Mud....as that is where someone will find that little gem that will show the truth.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 
so you want to take a trip down the rabbit hole,

here are some things to look in to: who owned WTC what was the cost of gutting it out, all of WTC 1-7 for EPA reasons namely Asbestos: what was in the Pentagon that needed to be lost "white papers", was flight 93 shot down? look in to them, you might not find what you like. the ask why did they have the "P"act so ready so soon 9/11 2001 the Pact signed 10 26 2001.

it would have taken a year to know all the laws it would replace or over ride make a mends too. here is the back ground of it some times a reference is a good thing to use en.wikipedia.org... look up the laws and see how long it takes you to understand one wire taping is a good one not only does it cover US but International calls or this one ^ USA PATRIOT Act (U.S. H.R. 3162, Public Law 107-56), Title II, Sec. 209. see if you can find it and then post the answer not just the law or what the "P" act says but all of it who's in involved how is it used who enforces it when it is to be used does a warrant need to be used.

that should keep you going for a few days and to make it easy for you if your up to the challenge or just one that thinks he/ she knows why 9/11 happened and does not want to know the real truth for it all about control, money, power, oil,and keeping the sheepole sheepole www.sec.gov...
edit on 29-2-2012 by bekod because: editing added link added info
edit on 29-2-2012 by bekod because: line editing



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by newcovenant
 



Tower 7 held a great deal of sensitive information regarding covert plots, secret atomic testing, tests that went badly, chemical warfare testing on populations, assassination attempts on foreign leaders, plots carried out by the CIA, NSA and other secret black ops projects that IF FOUND might have presented a sticky and embarrassing legal battle and so it ALL HAD TO GO. Are Cheney and Rumsfeld above suspicion? I think not.


Wow that must have been some stuff considering that most of space in WTC 7 was used by Salomon Brothers
Smith Barmey brokers




Floor Tenant

46-47 Mechanical floors
28-45 Salomon Smith Barney (SSB)
26-27 Standard Chartered Bank
25 Inland Revenue Service (IRS)
25 Department of Defense (DOD)
25 Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
24 Inland Revenue Service (IRS)
23 Office of Emergency Management (OEM)
22 Federal Home Loan Bank of New York
21 First State Management Group
19-21 ITT Hartford Insurance Group
19 National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC)
18 Equal Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
14-17 Vacant
13 Provident Financial Management
11-13 Securities and Exchange Commission
9-10 US Secret Service
7-8 American Express Bank International
7 OEM generators and day tank
6 Switchgear, storage
5 Switchgear, generators, transformers
4 Upper level of 3rd floor, switchgear
3 Lobby, SSB Conference Center, rentable space, manage
2 Open to first floor lobby, transformer vault upper level, upper level switchgear
1 Lobby, loading docks, existing Con Ed transformer vaults, fuel storage, lower level switchgear


Most of the building was leased by major corporations, the US gubmint on several of the floors

Care to tell us where the goodies were kept ........



I've also heard this rumour, that there were "sensitive" materials that conveninetly burned up in the attack.

Looking at the list of corporations using the trade towers, it would seem that some could potentially have sensitive materials, including the CIA, Secret Service, some of the banks, etc. But if they wanted the information destroyed, who was stopping them from toting it to an incenerator and getting rid of it? I've always thought that the thought of 9/11 as a means to get rid of evidence was a bit of overkill.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by TheLieWeLive
 


So what is "irregular" about this fligh path ?

American 11 - Boston to LA



Plane takes off from Boston (Logan) , heads west along scheduled route . after hijacking heads due south
following Hudson River to NYC

Or this Flight path

United 175 Boston to LA

Takeoff from Boston (Logan), heads Southwest along route, hijacked near Bethlem PA, heads due east to NYC



Or this flight

American 77

Washington DC to LA

Takeoff from Washington (Dulles), heads due west, hijacked and heads back due east to Pentagon

[img]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flightpath-AA77.gif[/img

United 93 Newark to San Francisco

Takeoff from Newark - Liberty, hijacked near Cleveland, heads South east toward Washington , at end of flight
the hijackers are fighting off attempt by passengers to retake the plane, crashed in Shanksville when passengers
storm cockpit



Notice something? Once hijackers have gained control of aircraft will turn on beeline toward target and hold that
heading . Only deviation was on United 93 due to passengers fighting to retake aircraft



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by smyleegrl
I do agree that if it was a jihad event that we should have seen more attacks in the US... Perhaps good security?



We have seen more attacks in the US. One guy tried to blow up a plane with a bomb hidden in his shoe. Another guy attempted to set off a car bomb in Times Square. Yet another guy tried to set off a bomb in the middle of a Christmas tree lighting ceremony in Utah. Someone from Morocco was just arrested for trying to stage a suicide attack on the Capitol building just a few days ago.

Suicide attack on the US Capitol Building foiled

It isn't a secret that the Islamic fundamentalists are in an active terrorist campaign against the US. It's just that these damned fool conspiracy web sites are trying to get us to believe the 9/11 attack was really part of some sinister secret plot instead of the work of Islamic fundamentalists so they're not going to tell us any of that.

edit on 29-2-2012 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)


Hello GoodoleDave,

Yes, I agree there have been other attacks on the US, including all those you mentioned above. Of course, if you wanted to keep a conspiracy alive, you could argue that those examples were "allowed" to happen...but I think that's a little farfetched.

My only question, and its a minor one, is why haven't we seen more attacks? I'm not trying to upset anyone, but I think it would be fairly easy to bypass security at certain events. In fact, I've always wondered why we haven't seen more attacks in small towns. Frankly, the thought of terrorists attacking Everywhere, USA is a lot more disturbing than the thought of them attacking New York.





new topics
top topics
 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join