Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Another reason that points to an inside job !

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 30 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Right, I'm off to bed now , because unlike TPTB in the good ol USA , I still find it easy to sleep at night .

Catch y'all on the flip side .




posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by snowspirit
IF the "terrorists" were the ones that flew into the buildings, they wouldn't have cared whether or not the buildings were full or half empty.

How would they have expected the buildings to go into such a perfect freefall straight down?

IF it were "terrorists" they wouldn't have expected anywhere near even half of the destruction that happened.


Sure they would've.What do you think they went into it with the expectation that no one would be killed except those on the plane?That is what terrorists do.They try to do as much damage possible.Again,I don't buy the official story.I'm more on the side that they knew it was going to happen and refused to stop it.Much easier to do that than to plan and execute it.Than expect everyone who was in on it to keep quiet.And until I see convincing evidence that says they were I'm sticking by what I said.And no,I haven't seen that evidence on here and certainly not in this thread.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   
the people I know who worked in the south tower were already at work. what planet are you from ?



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by nightstalker78

Originally posted by snowspirit
IF the "terrorists" were the ones that flew into the buildings, they wouldn't have cared whether or not the buildings were full or half empty.

How would they have expected the buildings to go into such a perfect freefall straight down?

IF it were "terrorists" they wouldn't have expected anywhere near even half of the destruction that happened.


Sure they would've.What do you think they went into it with the expectation that no one would be killed except those on the plane?That is what terrorists do.They try to do as much damage possible.Again,I don't buy the official story.I'm more on the side that they knew it was going to happen and refused to stop it.Much easier to do that than to plan and execute it.Than expect everyone who was in on it to keep quiet.And until I see convincing evidence that says they were I'm sticking by what I said.And no,I haven't seen that evidence on here and certainly not in this thread.


I don't think that if foreign terrorists flew into the buildings, that they would have expected whole buildings to collapse. They probably would have figured that they would have knocked the tops of the buildings off or something.

One would expect that everyone on those top floors would die, but both the towers (and building 7) to all go right down like they did?



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by snowspirit

Originally posted by nightstalker78

Originally posted by snowspirit
IF the "terrorists" were the ones that flew into the buildings, they wouldn't have cared whether or not the buildings were full or half empty.

How would they have expected the buildings to go into such a perfect freefall straight down?

IF it were "terrorists" they wouldn't have expected anywhere near even half of the destruction that happened.


Sure they would've.What do you think they went into it with the expectation that no one would be killed except those on the plane?That is what terrorists do.They try to do as much damage possible.Again,I don't buy the official story.I'm more on the side that they knew it was going to happen and refused to stop it.Much easier to do that than to plan and execute it.Than expect everyone who was in on it to keep quiet.And until I see convincing evidence that says they were I'm sticking by what I said.And no,I haven't seen that evidence on here and certainly not in this thread.


I don't think that if foreign terrorists flew into the buildings, that they would have expected whole buildings to collapse. They probably would have figured that they would have knocked the tops of the buildings off or something.

One would expect that everyone on those top floors would die, but both the towers (and building 7) to all go right down like they did?


I should've been clearer.I was replying to this part "IF it were "terrorists" they wouldn't have expected anywhere near even half of the destruction that happened"

They were trying to cause as many deaths and damage as possible.Again,as someone else pointed out,they hit high up on the first tower.It gave many people time to evacuate.Same with the 2nd tower. I do agree that they probably weren't expecting them to collapse.Building 7 is another story.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 04:17 AM
link   
reply to post by dawnprince
 


Something I was just thinking about were the phone calls from the planes.

Now we all know the stories. But let's talk about communication from the planes for a second. There was a radio in the cockpit, air phones and some crew and passengers had cell phones right? Some calls were made. Some claimed the planes had no air phones and others claimed there'd be no service. But WHEN were the calls made? Before the supposed plane swaps? And nothing after? When were the "terrorists" heard on the plane's radio? Again, prior to the potential plane swap that has been suggested?

I ask this because the black box and flight data recorder from flight 175 (second plane, south tower) was not recovered.

But when was the last communication from this particular 'plane'?

When were the phone calls and terrorists on the radio? Only before the supposed 'plane swap'?

How come no phone calls after the plane swap? How come no phone calls approaching NYC at only 2000 feet altitude? How come no terrorists switched on the radio as they passed over the statue of liberty and said what "terrorists" usually say when on a suicide mission? Why not "Take that infidel!!" as the plane veered into the tower? Why no one on the plane tried to call anyone while the plane was just outside New York, flying low and with clear blue skies?

When was the last communication from flight 175 (radio, air phone or cell phone) even heard?

After the 'plane swap' suspected maneuver? Or only before? Why no communication after suspected plane swap?

The same phones were on the same planes, the plane was undamaged so the radio probably worked?

A crew member or passenger should have been heard calling someone as the plane approached New York. The "terrorists" can fly the plane but not know how to use the radio to send a message, a last defining message to the world? Why let the plane be the only message? A silent message? The last few minutes and seconds of flight 175 no communication from the plane? Strange. Very strange.


Cheers



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 04:20 AM
link   
I'm sorry folks , but I'm not pursuing this any further .
I have stepped into an area that I know nothing about , nor really want to know about .

My apologies , but I'm getting bad vibes .

DP



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 04:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by NWOwned
reply to post by dawnprince
 


Something I was just thinking about were the phone calls from the planes.

Now we all know the stories. But let's talk about communication from the planes for a second. There was a radio in the cockpit, air phones and some crew and passengers had cell phones right? Some calls were made. Some claimed the planes had no air phones and others claimed there'd be no service. But WHEN were the calls made? Before the supposed plane swaps? And nothing after? When were the "terrorists" heard on the plane's radio? Again, prior to the potential plane swap that has been suggested?

I ask this because the black box and flight data recorder from flight 175 (second plane, south tower) was not recovered.

But when was the last communication from this particular 'plane'?

When were the phone calls and terrorists on the radio? Only before the supposed 'plane swap'?

How come no phone calls after the plane swap? How come no phone calls approaching NYC at only 2000 feet altitude? How come no terrorists switched on the radio as they passed over the statue of liberty and said what "terrorists" usually say when on a suicide mission? Why not "Take that infidel!!" as the plane veered into the tower? Why no one on the plane tried to call anyone while the plane was just outside New York, flying low and with clear blue skies?

When was the last communication from flight 175 (radio, air phone or cell phone) even heard?

After the 'plane swap' suspected maneuver? Or only before? Why no communication after suspected plane swap?

The same phones were on the same planes, the plane was undamaged so the radio probably worked?

A crew member or passenger should have been heard calling someone as the plane approached New York. The "terrorists" can fly the plane but not know how to use the radio to send a message, a last defining message to the world? Why let the plane be the only message? A silent message? The last few minutes and seconds of flight 175 no communication from the plane? Strange. Very strange.


Cheers


Dont forget that going for max casualties was never the goal, the took the planes qith the smallest occupation of the day.
All they needed is to be able to go into the ME, and they did, iraq has WMD anyone?



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by NWOwned
 


I think from memory the last phone call from UA 175 was 5 or 6 minutes before impact and I am sure you can check that out.

So far as flight 11 is concerned flight attendant Betty Ong was evidently on the line until the end :-


www.youtube.com...



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 06:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Another flight attendent, Amy Sweeney, on American 11 also called in to her base

She was on the line when plane impacted North Tower.........

911research.wtc7.net...



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by dawnprince
reply to post by jazz10
 


I'm with you , pal .
Are we talking Rumsfeld and the missing 2.3 trillion dollars ?


"I'll take How to become irrelevant in one quick post for $1000, Alex!"

Not that the OP didn't establish irrelevance from the git-go, but redundancy is great, redundancy is.

Antiquated and stand-alone accounting systems that could not keep up with hundreds of billions of dollars a year defense budget. Simple as that. The bane of a monolithic, corpulent and obese central government that cares little for good business or accounting practices. Anyone with half a mind...a quarter, even...can see what Rumsfeld was speaking of.

It wasn't "missing". It wasn't missing any more than what $$$ you spent last month on groceries is "missing". Can you provide receipts and vouchers and 100% accounting for every penny you've spent in the last 5 years?



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by dawnprince
 


ACtually it's a fluke that the buildings weren't filled to capacity that day. Yes, there were various vacant floors and such, but the times of the strikes were timed (in my opinion) for a few reasons..

8-9 am is the average time joe blow is getting to his desk at work, so you could expect plenty of people in the towers at that time. As well, it's still rush hour traffic, with millions doing their morning commute, who would see this happening with their own eyes.

And act of terrorism is designed to do just as the name implies, terrorize. It's not about the people or amount you actually kill, it's about the terror you instill in those who are still alive, hopefully persuading them to whatever side of whatever cause you are fighting for.

The WTC was picked, either by an inside job or honest to goodness fanatical terrorists, because New york is the financial capital of the world, and the WTC was a giant multi-phallic image of that.

Attacking them dealt a massive blow to wallstreet and also anyone in New York, timed as such, as to maximize damage and terror as well as ensuring live news coverage.

Which in itself begs the question, how good at manipulation and planning are we supposed to believe Al Queda, operating in caves, really was?



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by trebor451
 





It wasn't "missing". It wasn't missing any more than what $$$ you spent last month on groceries is "missing". Can you provide receipts and vouchers and 100% accounting for every penny you've spent in the last 5 years?


He isn't running a defense department program on a budget that is accountable to agencies above him. As well, I doubt they would start a massive investigation to find the missing gas receipt.

You can argue semantics all you want. On September 10th, the story was Rumsfeld talking about the quote "missing trillions" that could not be accounted for in the budget.

Sure, it's not "missing" it was obviously spent on something, but as it's a government program with oversight, it has to account for the spending, and 2.3 trillion was not accounted for in spending receipts, yet was not in the "bank" so to say, there fore, it's missing.

Also, just because you don't account for your spending, doesn't mean you aren't supposed to. You are legally obligated to file income tax (yes, i know, it was never ratified, blah blah) and as such you are supposed to account for all of your spending to ensure you don't under pay or over pay.



edit on 31-5-2012 by phishyblankwaters because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 09:12 AM
link   
The point of the terrorist attack wasn't how many people they could kill it was the fact that they could do it.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by dawnprince
I'm sorry folks , but I'm not pursuing this any further .
I have stepped into an area that I know nothing about , nor really want to know about .

My apologies , but I'm getting bad vibes .

DP


I think this essentially describes the entire truther movement in a nutshell. Literally every single thing they're quoting...Cheney ordered a stand down, there were no fires in WTC 7, trillions of dollars were missing from the Pentagon budget, flight 93 landed in Ohio, etc etc etc...has all been shown to be entirely the inventions of the con artists and crackpots behind those damned fool conspiracy websites. The "Pull it is lingo for controlled demolitions" claim for instance was invented by Alex Jones, and that whole "no calls could reach out from the planes" claim was cooked up by David Ray Griffin. Not to mention, the entire "cruise missile hit the Pentagon" hoax was concocted by a guy in France to sell a bunch of books. Let's be honest here- I'm not an expert on the events of 9/11 by any means, but I can at least enter a search phrase into Google and look up answers to my questions. I don't need to shell out $19.95 to some huckster telling me everything I know is false and I can only find out the REAL truth if I give them my money.

Simply accepting ridiculous claims like Morgan Reynorlds' "no planes hit the towers" claims or Judy Wood's "lasers from outer space" claims at face value, without further critical analysis, is keeping yourself intentionally uninformed, and is hardly the road to "denying ignorance" ATS encourages. Heck, there was one guy here who insisted on documentation showing how smashed vehicles in and around the WTC complex were removed from the ground zero area. Has this guy never actually heard of a tow truck?



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by NWOwned
reply to post by dawnprince
 


Something I was just thinking about were the phone calls from the planes.

Now we all know the stories. But let's talk about communication from the planes for a second. There was a radio in the cockpit, air phones and some crew and passengers had cell phones right? Some calls were made. Some claimed the planes had no air phones and others claimed there'd be no service. But WHEN were the calls made? Before the supposed plane swaps? And nothing after? When were the "terrorists" heard on the plane's radio? Again, prior to the potential plane swap that has been suggested?

I ask this because the black box and flight data recorder from flight 175 (second plane, south tower) was not recovered.

But when was the last communication from this particular 'plane'?

When were the phone calls and terrorists on the radio? Only before the supposed 'plane swap'?

How come no phone calls after the plane swap? How come no phone calls approaching NYC at only 2000 feet altitude? How come no terrorists switched on the radio as they passed over the statue of liberty and said what "terrorists" usually say when on a suicide mission? Why not "Take that infidel!!" as the plane veered into the tower? Why no one on the plane tried to call anyone while the plane was just outside New York, flying low and with clear blue skies?

When was the last communication from flight 175 (radio, air phone or cell phone) even heard?

After the 'plane swap' suspected maneuver? Or only before? Why no communication after suspected plane swap?

The same phones were on the same planes, the plane was undamaged so the radio probably worked?

A crew member or passenger should have been heard calling someone as the plane approached New York. The "terrorists" can fly the plane but not know how to use the radio to send a message, a last defining message to the world? Why let the plane be the only message? A silent message? The last few minutes and seconds of flight 175 no communication from the plane? Strange. Very strange.


Cheers


Also, How come the military/air traffic control saw 3 of the planes pop back up on radar after the impacts?

No one seems to have addressed this.



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I am so glad you eventually raised your head . Knowing I have ruffled your feathers will give me the drive to see this through and when this thread is done , I will start another and then another .

I'm telling you 9/11 researchers , that when this guy appears , you know you are onto something .

Bring it on dude



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by dawnprince
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I am so glad you eventually raised your head . Knowing I have ruffled your feathers will give me the drive to see this through and when this thread is done , I will start another and then another .

I'm telling you 9/11 researchers , that when this guy appears , you know you are onto something .

Bring it on dude


Having baled out on your own thread declaring above that you have "stepped into an area I know nothing about" it is more than a bit incongruous to now boldly announce "Bring it on dude."



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 



You wanna see how much I know ?
Don't go down that road , coz if you do you're gonna get burned .

And just so everybody knows .... It was my partner who authored my " Bale out " while i was sleeping .



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Another flight attendent, Amy Sweeney, on American 11 also called in to her base

She was on the line when plane impacted North Tower.........

911research.wtc7.net...


Yes thanks. I had forgotten about Amy Sweeney. Makes even more nonsense of NWOwned's plane swap theories.





new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join