How did we know...

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   
The one thing that's always made me wonder...how did we know so quickly who the 19 hijackers were in 9/11?

Call me stupid or naive, but with all the chaos of that day, how did we figure out so quickly who they were? How did we find their Al-Qaeda ties so fast? If we knew who they were already, why did we allow them to stay here? Didn't Al-Qaeda attack the USS Stark?

I'm not playing stupid, I honestly don't understand how we had all their info so fast if it was such a surprise.




posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by BobM88
 


Betty Ong a flight attendant on AA11 identified the hijackers, on that flight, by seat numbers, before the plane even hit the building.

Google Betty Ong. You can hear her recording.

edit on 22-6-2012 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by BobM88
 


They found mohammed atta's passport or ID or something on the sidewalk,,,
and I guess his cellphone too and went thru his contacts



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by skycowboy
reply to post by BobM88
 


They found mohammed atta's passport or ID or something on the sidewalk,,, :


It was Satam Al Suqami's passport.




posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne
reply to post by BobM88
 


Betty Ong a flight attendant on AA11 identified the hijackers, on that flight, by seat numbers, before the plane even hit the building.

Google Betty Ong. You can hear her recording.

edit on 22-6-2012 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)


Thank you, sir, I'm listening to her call now on youtube.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:29 PM
link   
I think of this: 'Underwear bomber' was working for the CIA

www.guardian.co.uk...


A would-be "underwear bomber" involved in a plot to attack a US-based jet was in fact working as an undercover informer with Saudi intelligence and the CIA, it has emerged. The revelation is the latest twist in an increasingly bizarre story about the disruption of an apparent attempt by al-Qaida to strike at a high-profile American target using a sophisticated device hidden in the clothing of an attacker.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by thisisnotaname
 


I read that article you linked to...that's not the same underwear bomber as the guy that was on the Detroit bound plane is it?

I get what you're saying though, as an answer to my question. I used to not believe in "truthers" but I've lately been questioning it again. I think that the world I had always believed in was a lie.
edit on 22-6-2012 by BobM88 because: .



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by BobM88
The one thing that's always made me wonder...how did we know so quickly who the 19 hijackers were in 9/11?

Call me stupid or naive, but with all the chaos of that day, how did we figure out so quickly who they were? How did we find their Al-Qaeda ties so fast? If we knew who they were already, why did we allow them to stay here? Didn't Al-Qaeda attack the USS Stark?

I'm not playing stupid, I honestly don't understand how we had all their info so fast if it was such a surprise.


Because their passports were found on the street completely intact. Convenient, no?



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by BobM88
 


There is also flight attendant Amy Sweeney




edit on 22-6-2012 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 


Utterly moronic post. One passport was found.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeadSeraph
Because their passports were found on the street completely intact. Convenient, no?


2nd post about the passports...

Ok, I remember the day vividly...and yet, I never heard that about the passports, and I've always thought of myself as one that knew what was going on in the world....

So, if I get you guys (the two of you that have mentioned the passports now) right...the aircraft hit hard enough to bring down the twin towers, but a paper passport survived the fires we all saw?

I'd have to say that is remarkably convenient.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 


Utterly moronic post. One passport was found.


Utterly moronic reply. One passport was found on the street completely intact yet the black box of the plane itself wasn't. Logical much?



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 

The passport was signed and the flight data recorders were in the tails of the jets and never came out the other side of the buildings. In other words, they had skyscrapers collapse on them.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeadSeraph
One passport was found on the street completely intact yet the black box of the plane itself wasn't. Logical much?


The passport made it out of the building. The CVR and FDR didn't. Logic much ?



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 

The passport was signed and the flight data recorders were in the tails of the jets and never came out the other side of the buildings. In other words, they had skyscrapers collapse on them.


So let me get this straight: A piece of paper in someones pocket somehow survived the very fires you claim melted structural steel to initiate a magical collapse of not one but TWO world trade center buildings, yet those fires, damage, and impact weren't enough to destroy Mohammed Attah's passport, which was found completely intact on a New York street?

Convenient indeed.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by BobM88
 


and burning kerosene will NOT melt steel columns, multiple floors below initial impact, to the point that molten steel is in place for days



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by waypastvne
 


Ok, watched the video...what I wonder is why didn't the air in the cabin blow out the tail of the airplane when it impacted instead of shooting forward as they claim it did? I'd think the nose of the plane impacting and accordioning inwards would force air out the rear of the plane, instead of shooting forwards, like when you compress a bellows.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 



One more time..... It was not Atta's passport. And it was out the other side of the building before the fire ball.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by skycowboy
 


What do you mean molten steel for days? How was the fire not smothered by the debris when the towers collapsed?



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 



One more time..... It was not Atta's passport. And it was out the other side of the building before the fire ball.


One more time: The black box did not survive, yet a passport did. Convenient again.

It never fails to amuse me at what lengths people will go to in order to utterly defy the laws of physics and science in order to conserve their simple and safe little paradigm. This is a smoking gun you simply can't deny, yet you have abandoned all rational thought in favor of a theory that is a gigantic stretch at best to preserve your own world view.

Pathetic. Ask yourself how a black box does not survive the impact yet a passport does (without even a hint of fire damage). In the mean time, I won't be back to lead the blind.





new topics
top topics
 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join