9/11: Where the evidence has led me so far

reply to post by jlm912


Interesting hypothesis about the plane paint but I am not persuaded. One thing that does not seem to be in dispute is that the red/gray chips are everywhere, in both the Millette and Jones/Harrit samples.

If that is so does it not seem improbable to you that the tiny contribution represented by the paint livery of two aircraft should have become so widespread ?

And, the gray is iron, shouldn't it be aluminium if from an aircraft ?

Btw, as regards your statement that " the absence of evidence does not disprove it's validity " does that mean you would be happy to be convicted on a serious charge on the basis that a complete lack of evidence against you did not disprove the charge ?

reply to post by jlm912


'IF' this post is an attempt to infer that the PAINT on the exterior of the two jets is "somehow" not "in" the samples???

I mean...WOW!!!!!!

This (apparent) exaggeration of the facts (and simple common sense) seems to be prevalent.... time-and-time again.....

Considering that YES!!!! United 175's fuselage was primarily painted.....do you EVEN know the actual weight (or mass) of paint applied to an airliner?? Such as a United 767, of that era??

(edit).....here, a video with NO sound, showing ANOTHER airline's airplane, a B-767, being painted:



(Sometimes,. facts and research PAY OFF!!!)....along with a bit of experience...and those of us WITH experience will be ignored, to others' detriment......

(HANG ON< I WILL FIND A REFERENCE FOR YOU!!)

Want to read some opinions of ACTUAL paint weight? I found this:

www.airliners.net...

(Just peruse the entire thread).......there is MORE, if anyone cares to do the research, for themselves.....

... ......

(AND....well....American 11.......with the LEAST amount of point, of ANY U.S. airline company.....!!!!!!! As part of the livery!!!!!)


Still......back to United 175.....let;s say it had....300 pounds of PAINT applied to the airframe (ROUGH estimate....Hey!!...let's go 'balls to the wall" and say it was....5,000 pounds!!!! OK??)....

Still....even THAT much of an exaggeration, of paint weight, compared to the ENTIRE mass of just one of the World Trade Center Tower skyscrapers??

As I alluded to.......the "desperation" of those who continue, here nearly eleven years on (with no real facts) .....seems to speak volumes.....especially in light of all of the real, tangible, and verifiable evidence of four airliners that were hijacked that day.....almost, and I ay almost.....let me repeat.....almost 'simultaneously", on pre-planned time-line scenario.....that didn 't quite "work out" as originally "planned"......by the ARAB perps......most, from Saudi Arabia.....OH!!!! But, the "Saudis" are our "friends".....AND, the Saudis are ARABS>>>>we cannot escape this fact.....BUT, ....NOT ALL SAUDIS are the "enemy"......just as, not ALL AMERICANS are the "enemy"!! (ONLY certain ones....in both examples).

......Yes, so far.....and, for good reasons........BUT, a person (or persons') Nationality, when they commit a crime is NOT...I repeat, NOT an indictment of the rest of the Nation's inhabitants.......

GO out, and talk to actual AIRLINE PILOTS!!! Everywhere......don't just "trust" me.....I;m "anonymous"....although, vetted by ATS Staff.....

HERE's an idea????

Contact the "Air Line Pilots Association", or..... ALPA or... the "International" side of the HUGE group of airline pilots......to get the latest NUMBER of pilots, WorldWide....and then "ASK" yourself, aout of those over 50,000, why have onlhy a tiny, tiny, TINY handful "come forward"???

ADD to those numbers, the hundreds of thousands of not one ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY pilots, but those who have LONG AGO retired....and....AND......could, very, very, very easily contribute to the so-called "9/11 conspiracy" with complete anonymity..........whether still 'ad' ("active duty") or retired......after ALL OF THESE YEARS????


NOT one.....one....ONE person has come 'forward'??

Sort of blows the "conspiracy" thing apart......AND to add:

The Bush administration stepped on their.....well, most of them were male, and we all know what that reference alludes to......they STEPPED ON IT!! In the 'lead up' to the 9/11 attacks.......it seems, that "they" (the Bush Administration) did not realize, due to inter-agency rivalries and EGOS......that the ones who were actually PLANNING the attacks, were not "contained" .........meaning, it seems (in hindsight) that Bush and Company thought they had the "attacks" under control....and could "PREVENT" them, at last minute, to then "appear" to be "heroes".....


And THAT is the COVER UP!!!!!!!!!!






The USA contingent (membership...of which I am proud to be a member) is roughly,

reply to post by ProudBird


Hey ProudBird...just to digress a bit...I have an hones question for you..

Do you find the official story satisfactory? Are you satisfied with the results? Are all your questions answered? Do you have any doubts?

I know...4 questions, but they are essentially the same one. Thanks.

Originally posted by ProudBird
As I alluded to.......the "desperation" of those who continue, here nearly eleven years on

I'm actually sensing a lot more desperation from you in this post, than I have from just about anyone else in this thread.

reply to post by petrus4


Yes..I'm not sure why the members of the ATS that support the official story often get angry at unbelievers. They should be content that their side is winning. THe OS is generally accepted as the truth...which is why I'm sorry...but...we unbelievers should get angry.

In this day of age, I'm stunned that a grown human being is able to look at the event and say they are happy with the conclusions of the investigations. Even after the some of the investigators on the comitee claim that the investigation was compromised and twarted on multiple levels...they are still happy. Everything is fine. Move along you crazy conspiracy kooks...

After reading that...I really don't understand how anyone can be not suspicious...or at least push for a new investigation. Some are happy with that. However compromised it was. Apparently it doesn't matter. Makes me sad...

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by petrus4

 

Yes..I'm not sure why the members of the ATS that support the official story often get angry at unbelievers. They should be content that their side is winning. THe OS is generally accepted as the truth...which is why I'm sorry...but...we unbelievers should get angry.

In this day of age, I'm stunned that a grown human being is able to look at the event and say they are happy with the conclusions of the investigations. Even after the some of the investigators on the comitee claim that the investigation was compromised and twarted on multiple levels...they are still happy. Everything is fine. Move along you crazy conspiracy kooks...

After reading that...I really don't understand how anyone can be not suspicious...or at least push for a new investigation. Some are happy with that. However compromised it was. Apparently it doesn't matter. Makes me sad...

It's not so much anger as it is a reaction to people ignoring basic logical reasoning skills. I literally encounter the same responses and mental processes when I try to convince an evolution-denier what evolution really is. They won't have it. Even if you show them 100% undeniable proof, they will deny it or say it's made up by scientists.

I'm stunned that a grown human being is able to look at the event and say that they are certain without a doubt that it had to be demolitions. That's not logic. That's belief and faith, especially under the weight of the the overwhelming evidence that supports the "official story," and the underwhelming (specifically none at all) evidence supporting the theory for demolitions.

The only argument I've seen really used is that "it didn't look right." Well, tell me, how many airliners have you seen hit buildings? Now how many of these were on purpose? How many of these buildings had a design like the towers on 9/11, which was highly unconventional? How many buildings like Building 7 have had a building collapse debris onto it and then burn without any real firefighter effort?

You just can't draw on previous experience when it comes to dissecting 9/11. You must start with an empty cup and fill it with the evidence. There was no precedent, so stop acting like you know it's a demolition just because that's something where a building collapses.

Anyway, that's why I think the way I do about it. I hate seeing people come to conclusions irrationally.

reply to post by petrus4


"desperation??

sorry....MAKES ME CHUCKLE...( if there is any "sense" of "desperation".....it;s for those who are so deluded......because they have been deluded, over the years, by the Internet nonsense.

Look....YOU have "NO" way to know who I am.....of course, IF I were some "horrible CIA "spook"....or any other 'alphabet agency-that-you-wish-to-imagine......"whatever"....do you REALLY think I ....(or ANYONE of that stature, and level.....??) would bother to "swat flies" here at ATS!!!?????!!!

Really.....have a sit-down, and think it through....for a bit........

Oh, on (edit)....true "conspirator" -(ally) minded" would "EXPECT" that exact answer.....oh, man...!!!!
Thanks.....I am still trying to craft a screenplay, in hopes to sell it one day!! (These types of "paranoia" replies, just help......immensely!!).

(I am not giving too much away.....one "working title" is "Dirty" (and, do NOT expect to see that as a reall "movie" title....in fact.....now that I've revealed it, well....it's done!!!!! (so, will be changed)....I have little expertise with CIA, other than what I see on TV, or in the movies.....but, THAT is the BRILLIANCE of it!! When you write about them, and try to make a teleplay or screenplay!!! You can just MAKE IT UP!!! (LOL!!!).....

....Sadly, so (far, too many) of those in the ATS audience seem to base THEIR perceptions on the same fictional media sources......sad........

reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

Yes..I'm not sure why the members of the ATS that support the official story often get angry at unbelievers.

Well, one reason could be that so many of these conspiracy narratives require people to believe that a lot of innocent folk to be soulless mass murderers or at the least, complicit in mass murder.

They should be content that their side is winning. THe OS is generally accepted as the truth...which is why I'm sorry...but...we unbelievers should get angry.

Generally? Try completely.

In this day of age, I'm stunned that a grown human being is able to look at the event and say they are happy with the conclusions of the investigations.

How so? And what does "in this day and age" have to do with it?

Even after the some of the investigators on the comitee claim that the investigation was compromised and twarted on multiple levels...they are still happy.

Thats because the grown ups understand that there may have been multiple screw ups by those persons tasked with providing security for the USA and that those same folks may have been involved in some CYA activities. And since the primary public investigation was tasked with making recommendations for improvements in our security and intelligence systems, it was quite frustrating knowing that they may not be getting a full picture of the existing system and its potential weaknesses. Not because they think the planes were remote controlled into buildings wired for demolition.

Everything is fine.

No, everything is not fine, but good people are trying to make it better.

Move along you crazy conspiracy kooks...

Actually, you can stay right where you are, you're not in anyone's way.

After reading that...I really don't understand how anyone can be not suspicious...or at least push for a new investigation.

Here we go with the "new investigation". I've asked this question before without ever getting any answers - who? what? where? and who pays? what authority?

Some are happy with that.

Well, actually everyone is happy with that.

However compromised it was.

We know where the compromises were made and pretty much why.

Apparently it doesn't matter. Makes me sad...

It does matter, but like I said, the grown ups are dealing with it. Cheer up.

reply to post by Varemia


Hey man...I will only say that it looks to me as if it was a demolition. I have no proof of it. I have stated many times, that debating on the evidence will get us nowhere.

The fact that the comitee members claim that the investigation was compromised...is enough for me. How about you? Enough to be at least suspicious? Or does that even matter...and if it doesn't...how come?

reply to post by hooper


Thanks Hoop.

But why would investigators claim that their investigation was compromised, if it had no barring on the purpose of the investigation?

I'm tired of banging that trumpet as it gets us nowhere...you ask who should pay for the investigation ? How about you pay it from the victims fund that is not fully claimed. The victims fund. If anyone deserves it...it's the victims. You make it sound as if this is a clear cut situation when it isn't. There are at least some shady aspects of this story that werent investigated. Like the Saudi connection, or who payed for the attack, and many more in my opinion.

Don't the victims families deserve to know who payed for their loved ones to be killed ? Yet we have no official answer on this question, as if it doesn't matter. But who is more guilty? 19 apparent footsoldiers...or the ones that payed them to do it?

edit: let me use this small analogy. If you hire a killer to kill your wife, and you pay him for it. Who is the killer?

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

 

Yes..I'm not sure why the members of the ATS that support the official story often get angry at unbelievers.

Well, one reason could be that so many of these conspiracy narratives require people to believe that a lot of innocent folk to be soulless mass murderers or at the least, complicit in mass murder.

Not a lot of innocents, at all. The psychopaths are only 4-7% of the overall population.

You are correct, however, that unwillingness to recognise the genuine magnitude of the evil of the American government, is the single main reason why most so-called rationalists insist on believing the official account of 9/11. The alternative is simply too unspeakable to contemplate; so they don't contemplate it.

It's not about wanting to protect the innocent. It's about protecting the guilty, because the person engaging in said protection, is too much of a coward to be willing to face the truth about said guilty parties' real nature.

If you think I and others enjoy gazing into the Abyss, to the extent that the actions of individuals like Richard Cheney morally require us to do, then think again. We don't do it because we like it, at all.

We do it because the only way to stop these monsters from committing such acts again, is to identify and expose them for who and what they truly are.

Thats because the grown ups understand that there may have been multiple screw ups by those persons tasked with providing security for the USA and that those same folks may have been involved in some CYA activities.

Here's another logical fallacy. I could call it the Appeal to Maturity. It implies that there is an inherent correlation between certain ideas and a person being an adult. It is part of the usual attempt to shame, belittle, or patronise an opponent.

It does matter, but like I said, the grown ups are dealing with it. Cheer up.

Another element of what I've called the Wikipedia School of Rhetoric. As in, all the little people in the world don't need to trouble their poor heads about anything, because the all-wise, mature, "experts," and "authorities," have already figured it all out. Said rationale is nothing but an appeal to voluntary, self-imposed mental fascism.

reply to post by MarioOnTheFly


I hope that by "thanking" member hooper.....you might begin to re-evaluate the many lies that have promulgated on the Internet, as regards the events of 11 September, 2001.

I lived it.....I know a LOT more than can be easily conveyed, here online.....and the junk that happens to "bob" up to the "surface" of the Internet, now and then???? Flotsam, and jetsam......part of the same filth that poked its nasty heads up, in just a few hours after the events.....really.....some research, please......

reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

Thanks Hoop.

You're welcome. And its Hooper.

But why would investigators claim that their investigation was compromised, if it had no barring on the purpose of the investigation?

It did. Read my post. The investigators (well at least the 9/11 Commission) was tasked with making recommendations for improvements in the national security system. To and for that end there MAY have been some compromise. But those guys on the commission weren't dummies. They had a pretty good idea who was jerking them around and why.

I'm tired of banging that trumpet as it gets us nowhere...you ask who should pay for the investigation ? How about you pay it from the victims fund that is not fully claimed.

So we take money out of the victim's fund and give it to whom and to do what? And don't just tell me a "new investigation" I want nuts and bolts. I want to know how your new investigation is going to satisfy EVERY conspiracy theory.

There are at least some shady aspects of this story that werent investigated. Like the Saudi connection, or who payed for the attack, and many more in my opinion.

Please remember that just because the 9/11 Commission issued its final report doesn't mean its all done and over with.

Don't the victims families deserve to know who payed for their loved ones to be killed ? Yet we have no official answer on this question, as if it doesn't matter. But who is more guilty? 19 apparent footsoldiers...or the ones that payed them to do it?

Actually I think we do know, I believe it was in the Commission report. And like I said, they are still investigating this from a criminal standpoint.

edit: let me use this small analogy. If you hire a killer to kill your wife, and you pay him for it. Who is the killer?

The husband and the hitman. But is the husband's boss guilty because he pays the husband and the husband used that money to pay the hitman?

reply to post by petrus4

Not a lot of innocents, at all. The psychopaths are only 4-7% of the overall population.

Huh? Anyway - what about all the conspiracy theories that say the families of the victims are lying or that the fireman are lying or that rescue workers are lying? Are they all psychopaths? Also, I would do a little more research into that 4-7% stuff. You are making some very uneducated assumptions about what those numbers mean and what a psychopath is and what they may or may not be capable of.

You are correct, however, that unwillingness to recognise the genuine magnitude of the evil of the American government, is the single main reason why most so-called rationalists insist on believing the official account of 9/11. The alternative is simply too unspeakable to contemplate; so they don't contemplate it.

And you are unable to recognize the nature of conspiracist and their addiction to the thrill of paranoia.

It's not about wanting to protect the innocent. It's about protecting the guilty, because the person engaging in said protection, is too much of a coward to be willing to face the truth about said guilty parties' real nature.

No, its about protecting the innocent. Because sometimes what seem like harmless little lies promoted for the sake of spinning an interesting conspiracy yarn can actually hurt innocent people.

If you think I and others enjoy gazing into the Abyss, to the extent that the actions of individuals like Richard Cheney morally require us to do, then think again. We don't do it because we like it, at all.

Really? Gazing into the Abyss? Being just a tad melodramatic there aren't you? And maybe its an Abyss because there's nothing there.

We do it because the only way to stop these monsters from committing such acts again, is to identify and expose them for who and what they truly are.

And not beause you think it makes you better than everyone else, this unique ability to see the "truth" when everyone else is mired in the fog?

Here's another logical fallacy. I could call it the Appeal to Maturity. It implies that there is an inherent correlation between certain ideas and a person being an adult. It is part of the usual attempt to shame, belittle, or patronise an opponent.

Well, actually there is a correlation between certain ideas and a person being an adult. That's why we consider them adults.

Another element of what I've called the Wikipedia School of Rhetoric. As in, all the little people in the world don't need to trouble their poor heads about anything, because the all-wise, mature, "experts," and "authorities," have already figured it all out. Said rationale is nothing but an appeal to voluntary, self-imposed mental fascism.

Well, its not that they have it all figured out, but they are working on it. And there are people that are experts and authorities. Its called specialization and complex cultures have been doing it for eons now.

reply to post by petrus4

Not a lot of innocents, at all. The psychopaths are only 4-7% of the overall population.

Huh? Anyway - what about all the conspiracy theories that say the families of the victims are lying or that the fireman are lying or that rescue workers are lying? Are they all psychopaths? Also, I would do a little more research into that 4-7% stuff. You are making some very uneducated assumptions about what those numbers mean and what a psychopath is and what they may or may not be capable of.

You are correct, however, that unwillingness to recognise the genuine magnitude of the evil of the American government, is the single main reason why most so-called rationalists insist on believing the official account of 9/11. The alternative is simply too unspeakable to contemplate; so they don't contemplate it.

And you are unable to recognize the nature of conspiracist and their addiction to the thrill of paranoia.

It's not about wanting to protect the innocent. It's about protecting the guilty, because the person engaging in said protection, is too much of a coward to be willing to face the truth about said guilty parties' real nature.

No, its about protecting the innocent. Because sometimes what seem like harmless little lies promoted for the sake of spinning an interesting conspiracy yarn can actually hurt innocent people.

If you think I and others enjoy gazing into the Abyss, to the extent that the actions of individuals like Richard Cheney morally require us to do, then think again. We don't do it because we like it, at all.

Really? Gazing into the Abyss? Being just a tad melodramatic there aren't you? And maybe its an Abyss because there's nothing there.

We do it because the only way to stop these monsters from committing such acts again, is to identify and expose them for who and what they truly are.

And not beause you think it makes you better than everyone else, this unique ability to see the "truth" when everyone else is mired in the fog?

Here's another logical fallacy. I could call it the Appeal to Maturity. It implies that there is an inherent correlation between certain ideas and a person being an adult. It is part of the usual attempt to shame, belittle, or patronise an opponent.

Well, actually there is a correlation between certain ideas and a person being an adult. That's why we consider them adults.

Another element of what I've called the Wikipedia School of Rhetoric. As in, all the little people in the world don't need to trouble their poor heads about anything, because the all-wise, mature, "experts," and "authorities," have already figured it all out. Said rationale is nothing but an appeal to voluntary, self-imposed mental fascism.

Well, its not that they have it all figured out, but they are working on it. And there are people that are experts and authorities. Its called specialization and complex cultures have been doing it for eons now.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by petrus4

 

Also, I would do a little more research into that 4-7% stuff. You are making some very uneducated assumptions about what those numbers mean and what a psychopath is and what they may or may not be capable of.

You didn't ask me to cite this source, but I will do so regardless.

Political Ponerology (A Science on the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes) Andrzej M. Lobaczewski (Author), Laura Knight-Jadczyk. (Editor)

You are correct, however, that unwillingness to recognise the genuine magnitude of the evil of the American government, is the single main reason why most so-called rationalists insist on believing the official account of 9/11. The alternative is simply too unspeakable to contemplate; so they don't contemplate it.

And you are unable to recognize the nature of conspiracist and their addiction to the thrill of paranoia.

If you are going to accuse me of that, then I must assume that you are unaware of the number of threads that I have authored on this site, requesting a cessation of the posting of unnecessary and gratuitous fear porn.

It's not about wanting to protect the innocent. It's about protecting the guilty, because the person engaging in said protection, is too much of a coward to be willing to face the truth about said guilty parties' real nature.

No, its about protecting the innocent. Because sometimes what seem like harmless little lies promoted for the sake of spinning an interesting conspiracy yarn can actually hurt innocent people.

I assure you that I have no interest, in engaging in unjustified witch hunts.

If you think I and others enjoy gazing into the Abyss, to the extent that the actions of individuals like Richard Cheney morally require us to do, then think again. We don't do it because we like it, at all.

Really? Gazing into the Abyss? Being just a tad melodramatic there aren't you? And maybe its an Abyss because there's nothing there.

This is the perpetual cry of the pseudo-rationalist. "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!"

If only you realised, that the only reason why you think the way you do, is because you not only have been taught to do so, but an appeal has been made to your ego in the process. I have not encountered a self-identified rationalist yet, who was not also a cerebral narcissist.

Bogus rationalism first and foremost makes the assumption that it is capable of judging what does and does not exist, because whether consciously or unconsciously, it makes the underlying assumption that it has already catalogued the totality of existence. Those of us who are posessed with a marginally higher degree of humility, would never claim anything so absurd.

We do it because the only way to stop these monsters from committing such acts again, is to identify and expose them for who and what they truly are.

And not beause you think it makes you better than everyone else, this unique ability to see the "truth" when everyone else is mired in the fog?

My level of ability is not the unique element, here. My level of willingness is.

Here's another logical fallacy. I could call it the Appeal to Maturity. It implies that there is an inherent correlation between certain ideas and a person being an adult. It is part of the usual attempt to shame, belittle, or patronise an opponent.

Well, actually there is a correlation between certain ideas and a person being an adult. That's why we consider them adults.

Not in this specific case, there isn't.

Another element of what I've called the Wikipedia School of Rhetoric. As in, all the little people in the world don't need to trouble their poor heads about anything, because the all-wise, mature, "experts," and "authorities," have already figured it all out. Said rationale is nothing but an appeal to voluntary, self-imposed mental fascism.

Well, its not that they have it all figured out, but they are working on it. And there are people that are experts and authorities. Its called specialization and complex cultures have been doing it for eons now.

The presence of specialists should not entirely prohibit the thought or expression of others.

Sorry for the misnomer....

They had a pretty good idea who was jerking them around and why.

I am still amazed how you can cold bloodedly (hope that's a word) admit that everybody knew (as apparently you know also) who was jerking them around and why...and you let that pass just like that. Oh, I guess it's ok...because "some" people just didn't want for the fact that they had private ties to possible suspects of this mini holocaust, publicly known. Just that. No biggie....

Your nonchalance about that fact that these people could potentially have had advanced and even prior knowledge of the events that day...I must say, makes me sick to my stomach. No offence to you. Just my naive notion of truth, and honesty get in the way of a good war story.

So we take money out of the victim's fund and give it to whom and to do what? And don't just tell me a "new investigation" I want nuts and bolts. I want to know how your new investigation is going to satisfy EVERY conspiracy theory.

How? Just release all....I'm mean all evidence collected, from the FBI, CIA, DOD, FAA and alike...release....release. Whatever the evidence points to...I'm fine with that. Evidence that is available currently is only partial...and we all know that. And you can not get to the truth with only a partial picture. This event is one of the largest globally impacting events of our times. we must see the whole picture. Whoever is not satisfied with all that released evidence...he can stuff it where the sun don't shine. I have a problem with secrecy and withholding the evidence...for whatever reason it's done. It should make one suspicious. If your family member was killed, I think you have a right to know who did it and why and how. The truth...must always come first...however naive that maybe sounds. It is the only way possible in the long run.

Actually I think we do know, I believe it was in the Commission report. And like I said, they are still investigating this from a criminal standpoint.

so...how is that going? Can we expect some results within our lifetimes?

The husband and the hitman. But is the husband's boss guilty because he pays the husband and the husband used that money to pay the hitman?

ridiculous attempt at a joke I hope...

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by Varemia

 

Hey man...I will only say that it looks to me as if it was a demolition. I have no proof of it. I have stated many times, that debating on the evidence will get us nowhere.

The fact that the comitee members claim that the investigation was compromised...is enough for me. How about you? Enough to be at least suspicious? Or does that even matter...and if it doesn't...how come?

Well, yeah. It's obvious to anyone with a functioning brain that something has been covered up, but I've seen no evidence to suggest that demolitions were used. The physics seem sound based on the engineering reports done on the collapses of the towers.

What isn't sound is the cause of the attacks and how the "terrorists" were able to bypass all the security and obtain training at flight schools. It's as if entities within the US government were turning a blind eye or even making sure that the guys would succeed with their plan. It's well known that the towers were considered hot targets before 9/11. I think it's most likely that the government is responsible for allowing the attacks to happen, but all this stuff about demolitions and fake planes is just crazy. None of it is based on evidence.

reply to post by hooper

Huh? Anyway - what about all the conspiracy theories that say the families of the victims are lying or that the fireman are lying or that rescue workers are lying? Are they all psychopaths? Also, I would do a little more research into that 4-7% stuff. You are making some very uneducated assumptions about what those numbers mean and what a psychopath is and what they may or may not be capable of.

There were cases where that turned out to be true in fact. At least one known....So it's not baseless accusation.

Jordan Liflander





why can't I link this??

reply to post by Varemia


I'm not hung up on the demolition. I admit it looks man made to me if I compare it to the controlled demolitions I've seen on TV. But honestly, I dont care about that. It's a side issue in my opinion. Since the evidence was removed from the site (China), no real investigation could have been done. And in lack of evidence, people speculate. That's a human trait. Sure some theories are wild, but if you would disclose the evidence, you would destroy the majority of them.

I somehow see it pointless to discuss the way it was done. Even the official story makes assumptions, which are "logical", but not proven. Rather we should be focusing on who did it...and why. The tool is not important...the perp is.