If MILITARY plane(s) were what flew into WTC, then how did the real plane(s), passengers perish?

reply to post by Aliensun


Besides the fact that we all saw the second plane hit and it was large and silver ...DUH

Regarding the 2nd plane that hit (and its missing wing) I'm confident that's been discussed on other ATS threads.



This topic is about the MILITARY plane theory, and the reason why I'm enquiring then what happened to the real planes and passengers, is given an alternate theory, where the commercial planes were not directly involved in the WTC attack, it stands to reason that part of that theory would entail not only were thousands within the WTC towers killed by that military twin/triplet demolition, but there must have been another geographically separate operation where 1 or 2 commercial airlines and their passengers were disposed of (or less likely, used for other military experiments) with apparently no trace of video or eyewitness evidence. I mean, black box, DNA, etc could have been planted & recovered much later during the months & years of CSI. Of course, all of this plotting in the hands of soulless heartless American terrorists if not foreign ones.

Beyond 9/11, above top secret, the truth is still out there!

www.youtube.com...

And it doesn't help that multiple key eyewitnesses,



and even fellow theorists have also perished/been silenced in various freak accidents & other misfortunes in the aftermath as if the attacks are still ongoing in some form..

I have only looked at the video for a short time.

I am amazed how the video uses witness testimony at face value.

When the one guy says "fighter jet", for instance, or the countless other testimonies where people SAY what they SEE.

The problem here: The average person knows very little about aircraft, fighter-jets etc...in the same way as the average Joe off the street (which they asked in the video) pretty much is not even qualified to make a statement when they see a light/craft/UFO and is even remotely qualified to know what height, speed etc. a spot in the air is actually going.

Do you REALLY take some average person's testimony at face value that WHAT THEY THINK THEY SAW (in an otherwise extremely stressful, chaotic situation of a terrorist attack!) was "a fighter-jet"...because this average Joe knows exactly the difference between a commercial jet and a fighter jet? ---- sorry, LOL

What is the conclusion? It was a "fighter jet" because Tharisha Brown from 12th street in Manhattan just told you so?
Or "some dude" told you the plane was "smaller than a commercial aircraft" even if that guy has probably never ever seen a plane flying close and low as happened at 9/11?
Or "the plane was black" because it appeared dark against the background? (Which can be assumed since the sun doesn't shine from downwards up towards the plane, the underside will obviously in the shade ..etc..etc..)

SERIOUSLY...lame and ridiculous evidence.

This is the same nonsense as those testimonies where laymen heard "explosions", like they are able to discern of what an explosion is supposed to sound...implying that those people asked must be experts who already witnessed countless building explosions/destructions in the midst of NYC. More likely that 9/11 and what happened was a VERY unique event for any of those witnesses and NONE of them would be qualified to know whether what they heard was really "explosions".

Problem is that MANY of the 9/11 theorists use such ridiculous amateurish statements to bolster their claims.

reply to post by NoRulesAllowed

This is the same nonsense as those testimonies where laymen heard "explosions", like they are able to discern of what an explosion is supposed to sound...implying that those people asked must be experts who already witnessed countless building explosions/destructions in the midst of NYC. More likely that 9/11 and what happened was a VERY unique event for any of those witnesses and NONE of them would be qualified to know whether what they heard was really "explosions".

Problem is that MANY of the 9/11 theorists use such ridiculous amateurish statements to bolster their claims.

Sorry, but that is quite possibly one of the most ridiculous statements I've seen posted on this forum. What exactly qualifies someone to correctly recognize an explosion? Is there a bachelor's degree available?

If it may be helpful, rather than argue over speculation of what the documents do or do not say? I figured I'd find some of it to share directly with Northwoods, as it came up.

In his new exposé of the National Security Agency entitled Body of Secrets, author James Bamford highlights a set of proposals on Cuba by the Joint Chiefs of Staff codenamed OPERATION NORTHWOODS. This document, titled “Justification for U.S. Military Intervention in Cuba” was provided by the JCS to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara on March 13, 1962, as the key component of Northwoods. Written in response to a request from the Chief of the Cuba Project, Col. Edward Lansdale, the Top Secret memorandum describes U.S. plans to covertly engineer various pretexts that would justify a U.S. invasion of Cuba. These proposals - part of a secret anti-Castro program known as Operation Mongoose - included staging the assassinations of Cubans living in the United States, developing a fake “Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington,” including “sink[ing] a boatload of Cuban refugees (real or simulated),” faking a Cuban airforce attack on a civilian jetliner, and concocting a “Remember the Maine” incident by blowing up a U.S. ship in Cuban waters and then blaming the incident on Cuban sabotage. Bamford himself writes that Operation Northwoods “may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government.”

Source

and this links to the original raw copies in PDF form: Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba

It's not too long a document. Only 15 pages, counting the cover sheet. So, it's not bad to get through. Why wonder when it's quick to read.

OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by soulwaxer

 

Operation NorthWoods is another joke.

The document never actually talked about any action which would actually kill any Americans it was all about targeting Cubans (have you even read it?) and they released it before 9/11. That's the bit I really dont get, truthers talk about Northwoods like it was the blue print for 9/11, if that was true they why ever make that public?

It was also written almost 40 years before 9/11, really, thats what truthers are using cold war era military plans that where shelved at the time as some kind of evidence in their 9/11 "truth!. It was even dismissed by McNamara years later as "stupid", I think he had a point in more ways than one.

sigh....

same crap different thread....

edit on 11-1-2014 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)

IMHO....

If an agency that was designed to protect and serve a populace, would entertain, even for a moment, the idea of killing a portion of said populace as a means of furthering it's own goals......That very same agency would actually be fully capable of moving forward and committing such an act.

Simply put, someone in the military actually thought this through. They wrote it down. They submitted it on the table for discussion with their superiors. It was discussed. It was considered and weighed as an option.

The very idea of this alone is sickening.

Indeed it's not a stretch to realize the US military elaborately plan to fly plane(s) into buildings, in order to justify a war on Cuba, does decribe the chain of events leading up to the war on Iraq/Afghanistan, complete with controlled demolitions.

911review.com...

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international Community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, Communist Fidel Castro.

While other countries sit on their nukes, US was actually the first and only country to actually use them upon another country.

Likewise, while other countries arent dropping hundreds of thousands of tons of their Uranium bombs all over the mideast, US is on one heck of a role since 1990s doing so, till present, a' la drones.

reply to post by gardener


I have thought about this for a while,my thoughts are that if our government is evil enough to kill almost 3000 people in a tower,then its evil enough to kill any people on a plane that it wanted to dispose of. How would the families ever know? The government comes in the plane and pulls they're phones .Tells them it will be alright and then takes them out and 'gets rid of them'. End of story.

They can dig up dinosaur bones, from like 10 million years ago; but a plane buried in rubble, impossible to find. lol 9-11 was a magic show. Tah-dah.

Truth be told, George W. Bush, Jr., and his ENTIRE STAFF should have been tried and convicted. He was reading elementary books, while the country was "under attack"? And when he found out, he just sat there, with a blank look on his face! Dereliction of duties, at least!

Dereliction of duty is a specific offense under United States Code Title 10,892. Article 92 and applies to all branches of the US military. A service member who is derelict has willfully refused to perform his duties (or follow a given order) or has incapacitated himself in such a way that he cannot perform his duties en.wikipedia.org...

tsurfer2000h
reply to post by QUANTUMGR4V17Y

 

It isn't up to the "Truthers" to explain away the deaths or missing peoples, the burden of proving the truth falls upon those perpetuating the official story.

Actually, it is up to the truther's to prove the official story is wrong.

It is up to the truthers to expose the official story as having inconsistencies, skewed test results, and completely omitting information entirely, which has been proven time and time again. Being that there is reasonable doubt in the official story, their needs to be further investigations.

Peace.

reply to post by WonderBoi

They can dig up dinosaur bones, from like 10 million years ago; but a plane buried in rubble, impossible to find. lol 9-11 was a magic show. Tah-dah.

That would make sense if the planes were buried. These ones were blown to pieces on impact and spread into the buildings as well as across lower Manhattan.

(By May 2002, when the cleanup officially ended, workers had moved more than 108,000 truckloads–1.8 million tons–of rubble to a Staten Island landfill.) But the site was still dangerous. Underground fires continued to burn for months. Every time a crane moved a large chunk of debris, the sudden rush of oxygen intensified the flames. Downtown Manhattan reeked of smoke and burning rubber, plastic and steel.

Source

Then the rubble burned for weeks or months, depending on area. How much of an aluminum airplane with soft burnable things like seats and plastic inside would you have expected to find?

This isn't proof of anything, but I read a thread a while back about a 'psychic' who was asked what happened to the passengers; she said they all thought they were acting out a military training exercise (of which there were several that day) and were taken off the planes to a secure location and had their throats slit by men in commando gear.

Like I said, no proof of anything but an interesting tidbit and possibility to consider.

It's my own theory that the planes were remote controlled, the 'hijackers' were patsies with way too many links to the CIA who thought they were going to survive the gambit, and the buildings fell as a result of mininukes set on every few floors and detonated in sequence.

Nothing else but mininukes explains the sustained heat in the basement, or the ~10 second destruction of the buildings. Feel free to read Jeff Prager's work on residual fission products in the dust and debunk it if you can, but that's slightly OT to this thread.

tsurfer2000h
reply to post by QUANTUMGR4V17Y

 

It isn't up to the "Truthers" to explain away the deaths or missing peoples, the burden of proving the truth falls upon those perpetuating the official story.

Actually, it is up to the truther's to prove the official story is wrong.

Actually you're wrong because the official theory has NEVER been proven.......

Everything that video put out has been debunked, again, years ago. From the pod people to the no windows, to the eyewitnesses saying it was small.

Let us remember a few things: your average Joe Schmoe probably is not well versed or familiar with aircraft designations. Also, looking from a distance, aircraft may look smaller than normal. Also, in regards to the dark or windowless aircraft, how many of you can see windows on a plane from a distance? How about when it is in a shadow? The aircraft was flying in the shadow of the smoke from WTC. Hence why it was appearing to be dark. As for the pod, it is the fairing for the landing gear.

This is why "Truther" videos lose ALL credibility with me. They may ask or point out such "incredible" things, and add sinister music and circle things, and add arrows, and take accounts and take them as gospel, and think they have all the "proof" they need. But upon closer review and just using some basic brain power, it falls apart like cheap toilet paper in a downpour.

As for the passengers. They were real. They are dead. The plane was real, it crashed with the people on board. I am tired of listening to "Truthers" come up with such ridiculously complex and intricate stories to explain how it was an "inside job", and it all hinges on perfect timing, everyone on board, no errors, etc. Whatever happened to the easiest method? What is easy? Hire a tweaked out home-grown terrorist, have him hijack the plane, and crash it. Or, it really was 19 terrorists, trained with AQ, hijacked the planes, and flew them kamikaze into the buildings. Hell they could have hired 19 terrorists to do it. Why the hell do we need to have them spend millions on retrofitting an airliner with drone technology, modifying the airliner, faking passengers, faking phone calls, faking everything? Why fake the passengers when over 3000 ACTUAL Americans were killed in the Twin Towers themselves and the Pentagon? I mean it hurts my brain trying to make sense of the "Truther" version of events. It is just so insanely plotted, it looks like Harry and Lloyd from Dumb & Dumber thought it up. And then to try and make us believe that the evil shadow government or whatever boogieman group behind it would support this absurd plan to the max, with all of its complexity, and insane timing and so many moving parts that one wrong step could send it all into serious jeopardy?

There was no KC-767 even designed at that time. Wasnt even built till years later.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I'll pop some popcorn and see how folks address this issue.... I'm genuinely curious to see anything beyond pure guesswork or 'the gov is evil so they musta killed 'em all'.

You're right, just saying 'the government must have killed the passenger' is pretty glib, but assuming the conspiracy is 100% correct, that is the logical fate of the passengers.

Government murders thousands of people in, around and underneath the towers and Pentagon, they are surely not going to be squeamish about murdering those people unlucky enough to have boarded those planes are they?

Not that it's any consolation, far from it, but their death would probably have been a much gentler and quiet affair than those in the towers and Pentagon...the aircraft air supply could easily have been adulterated with gas and they would have quietly drifted away...no mess, no fuss and no chance of escape.

Then unloaded and transferred along with their luggage and personal possessions on to the substitute remote operated aircraft.

For the likes of us here debating these issues, it's kind of difficult to comprehend the mindset that could do this, and most of us wouldn't be able to properly fathom the necessary resources needed to be put in place to pull off a scam of this size, but for a wealthy, powerful and immoral government with an agenda?

Pretty easy...it's not meant to sound cold, but the passengers are probably one of the easier elements of the entire plan.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


He's talking about the one that supposedly buried itself in that small hole in the ground at Shanksville.

MysterX
the aircraft air supply could easily have been adulterated with gas and they would have quietly drifted away...no mess, no fuss and no chance of escape.

Then unloaded and transferred along with their luggage and personal possessions on to the substitute remote operated aircraft.

When did the have the opportunity to do that? The planes took off from their designated airports, then had to land at another airport, hurriedly unload 4 aircraft with 246 dead people and reload them onto 4 other planes, then unload and reload their luggage as well, then the planes had to take off again... without ATC noticing?

Just how long do you think it would take to remove 246 bodies from 4 planes and put them on another one....

Then they had to dispose of 4 airliners, and explain the loss of 4 others....

if truthers just stopped and thought about their conspiracy logically for a few minutes, they would realise how stupid it was!

reply to post by MysterX

Indeed, I'm very familiar with that crash site from other threads on this in the past couple months.

United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui

That link leads to the evidence used at what is essentially the murder trial for 9/11. If you click the Prosecution Exhibits, you can use ctrl-f for P200057, which is the first number of the Somerset PA crash site series. the series runs to P200069. No gore, but plenty of aircraft parts and airliner parts at that. This one was the clearest for what happened, on a morning where nothing is quite completely clear.





Both flight recorders were recovered from the Somerset site as well. What wasn't a very big hole from overhead photos was shown to go a bit deeper with one photo showing heavy equipment pulling a large engine piece out of the ground, where it deeply embedded itself. That's happened at other crash sites as well, in the past. Steep angles at very high speed don't leave much and the trial photos show the recovery stretched well into the woods around the impact point.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


If you believe that planes crashing at steep angles turn into confetti, conveniently leaving no larger pieces of debris so that it cannot be identified any more, then you live in la-la land.

hellobruce

MysterX
the aircraft air supply could easily have been adulterated with gas and they would have quietly drifted away...no mess, no fuss and no chance of escape.

Then unloaded and transferred along with their luggage and personal possessions on to the substitute remote operated aircraft.

When did the have the opportunity to do that? The planes took off from their designated airports, then had to land at another airport, hurriedly unload 4 aircraft with 246 dead people and reload them onto 4 other planes, then unload and reload their luggage as well, then the planes had to take off again... without ATC noticing?

Just how long do you think it would take to remove 246 bodies from 4 planes and put them on another one....

Then they had to dispose of 4 airliners, and explain the loss of 4 others....

if truthers just stopped and thought about their conspiracy logically for a few minutes, they would realise how stupid it was!

Why do you assume that all truthers believe this?

The passengers were obviously not put onto those remote controlled planes. All the "evidence" of passengers at the crash sites was fabricated after the facts. In fact, all the real evidence points to no passengers on those flights. And I hope I don't have to explain that a missile (you know, the one that hit the Pentagon) doesn't carry passengers.

In the OP video, you will see that flight 11 was confirmed to still be air-born after "it hit the World Trade Center".

soulwaxer