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

reply to post by lambros56

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

And neither has the truthers theory, because until the official story has been proven wrong it is all speculation.

soulwaxer
And I hope I don't have to explain that a missile (you know, the one that hit the Pentagon) doesn't carry passengers.

How do you explain the passengers DNA, body parts and luggage being found in the Pentagon?
how do you explain the 757 engine found inside the Pentagon?
how do you explain the 757 wheels found inside the Pentagon?
how do you explain 757 fuselage parts being found inside and outside the Pentagon?
how do you explain the damage done by a 757 size aircraft to the Pentagon?

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!

Opportunity for what? To gas the passengers, you mean?

In flight. Turn off cabin air, substitute gas...passengers are gone in seconds. Purge the cabin, restore air. The whole process would have taken minutes at the most.

The other points are dependent on how many pairs of hands you have removing the dead or unconscious passengers, and whether or not ALL of the passengers and their possessions were transferred.

Assuming they were all transferred, a relatively small team of 'unpatriotic pairs of hands' could manage it quickly and relatively easily, for that many passengers (again, assuming all were moved to the substitute aircraft) a typical US army squad of around 13 - 15 strong men, each taking around 15 bodies each...deploy the inflatable emergency evacuation ramps, throw the bodies from the exits..quick and simple.

Of course this is all speculation and obviously hypothetical, and as such is surely not going to mirror an assumed actual scenario exactly...for one, perhaps most of the bodies were not transferred to the substitute aircraft, as little as 20 or 30 along with their effects may have been transferred in order for some remains to be found, the rest would be thought to have perished and have been effectively cremated by the infernos...as long as some remains were discovered, it would have been enough to ensure that people would have believed the passengers were all aboard on impact, and so the aircraft were original and flown by the amateur pilots (terrorists) named.

I don't consider myself 'a truther' as you put it, nor an OS'er (if that's the right term), more an 'agnostic' on the issue..although i would appreciate it as i'm sure other members who post on these subjects would, if you could try to control yourself and limit the impulse to insinuate that anyone who doesn't agree with your point of view, of being illogical and stupid...please try, it's good manners and stimulates rather than stifles further debate...which is after all why we're all here, isn't it?

reply to post by QUANTUMGR4V17Y

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.

That still doesn't prove the truther's story is the truth. There may be reasonable doubt it still isn't concrete proof.

You see until it can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt all you have is speculation, and speculation doesn't prove the official story as being wrong.

Wrabbit2000
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.

What part of f.a.b.r.i.c.a.t.e.d. e.v.i.d.e.n.c.e. do you not understand? Government agencies took complete control over all the crime scenes, removing and planting evidence. The "regular people" who were at the scene of "the flight 93 crash site" from the start say that there was nothing there that pointed to an aircraft having crashed there. The coroner present said that he stopped being a coroner after 20 minutes because there were no bodies: "To this day, I have never seen a single drop of blood." Yet your Prosecution Exhibits show a perfectly preserved bandana from one of the hijackers? He would have been in the front of the plane that nose-dived at 600 miles per hour, so his bandana would receive the full mass of the rest of the plane trailing behind it. Yet it comes out of this looking brand new. How can you honestly believe that crap?

soulwaxer

reply to post by soulwaxer

He would have been in the front of the plane that nose-dived at 600 miles per hour, so his bandana would receive the full mass of the rest of the plane trailing behind it. Yet it comes out of this looking brand new.

Any chance you can find a pic of that bandana?

MysterX
for one, perhaps most of the bodies were not transferred to the substitute aircraft, as little as 20 or 30 along with their effects may have been transferred in order for some remains to be found, the rest would be thought to have perished and have been effectively cremated by the infernos...as long as some remains were discovered,

Except for the fact that remains from every victim were recovered and positively identified for Flight 93...
The remains of every flight 77 victim but one (a two-year-old) were recovered and positively identified by forensics experts. Personal effects of many survived the crash and fires and were returned to the victims' families.
Flight 11 had remains of 37 people discovered,
Flight 175 had remains of 26 people found....

You also failed to explain how this could be done, as the planes had to land somewhere, be offloaded and then the other planes loaded, then the planes had to take off, yet ATC never noticed....

reply to post by gardener


Hows this for a theory. They were put aboard an remote controlled aircraft which flew out over the ocean and the plane crashed or, they were put on board a plane flown by the Mossad and simply jettinsioned by the pilots over the ocean.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h

red bandana from flight 93

soulwaxer

reply to post by micpsi

It's happened before. Other crash sites have shown similar results in that type of nose in crash. Planes are a whole lot less "substantial" than people seem to believe for just what mass is actually there in a catastrophic impact.

The engines are fairly solid, and once again, a large part of one of them is clearly photographed being extracted from the ground. This wasn't a 'special' or even especially strange crash site as I understand reports and photos of previous ones over the many years before 9/11 happened.

One could start, in the real world, with ValuJet Flight 592. That was a DC-10 that went into a shallow area of the Everglades at over 500mph in 1996. It "shattered" as some reports describe it, on impact with the bedrock below the mud. Reports generally all include the fact that a plane of 110 people left very little of size to recognize. It literally disintegrated. Just like Somerset PA.

That also isn't the only plane to have gone in fast, sharp and come apart in similar ways. It surprises me how many seem to miss what is claimed to not exist....when it's public record and easily found. There is a long and fully documented history of plane crashes to compare ..and nothing more than a search engine is needed to find the majority, in detail.

Wrabbit2000
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.

Thank you Wrabbit.

Yes, it all looks above board and genuine and more or less exactly what one would expect to see and find in a genuine crash or genuinely hi-jacked aircraft as per the OS, although assuming a high level conspiracy was in fact being played out that morning, it is also exactly what one would expect to find having been planted in advance of the act, in order to convince the public of the authenticity of the story.

Again, hypothesis only here, one would naturally accept that assuming a conspiracy the details would have been planned out well in advance of the act, that's common sense...obviously, nothing was done on the spur of the moment.

It would have been easy to dig a hole, bury aircraft parts and wreckage, under which was a remotely operated explosive device and fill in the hole, all weeks or even months ahead of 9/11.

Same thing goes for the towers and the Pentagon, all of which had teams working inside them, ostensibly updating or otherwise carrying out works to them, in or near to the locations that the aircraft struck, prior to and relatively recently to 9/11...this would obviously have given the assumed conspirators opportunity to fulfill major elements of the plan, namely rigging the buildings.

On the day, as far as Shanksville goes...the explosives (debatable exactly what type..perhaps containers of Jet fuel under pressure would have been appropriate and untraceable after the fact) under the buried and concealed wreckage planted in advance would be remotely detonated, throwing pieces of wreckage far and wide and leaving what was discovered later, a smoking hole in the ground with pieces of wreckage and debris in and around it.

Again, being a more moderate member Wrabbit (see what i did there), i know you accept this is speculation and just a 'what if'...but if in 10 minutes or so, I can come up with a rough, admittedly imperfect, but altogether plausible scenario to support what may have happened given an actual conspiracy...imagine what could have been achieved with the resources and years of opportunity to carefully plan and prepare, by a Government (or elements thereof) as powerful as yours is?

There are many different possible scenarios for what happened after the planes were switched.

We know that the military and intelligence agencies dream up all kinds of possible scenarios, and train for them (as they were actually doing on the day of 911...). These involve some of the brightest minds in the world. They have technology at their disposal that we could only dream of.

soulwaxer

reply to post by MysterX


So basically, any evidence is planted evidence, because your theory has to be right, so that alone proves the evidence was planted?

That's really what I'm reading from you. Apparently no evidence offered can or ever will be accepted ...and that's not the making of a debate, that's simply an argument. Not my thing....

By the way, those 1,200+ trial exhibits I've linked earlier were introduced in a TWO SIDED trial, where defense attorneys were also fully participating and able to challenge any of it on behalf of the last hijacker. This was a civilian trial under standard rules of evidence. The evidence was accepted by the court. It was admitted for the record. Among that were the airliner parts that contained serial numbers ...flight recorders that had the voices of the crew and hijackers.... this is all real, physical evidence which exists in the real world.

The towers didn't have this evidence. PA did. Whatever else happened that day, the PHYSICAL event in PA is self evident, logical, and as well documented as anything. What happened up to the moment before it hit that field? I have no idea...the voice and data recorders indicate some, but can't show all of the details. The impact was recorded though. Recorded and documented.

In the absence of other evidence (...and just saying it must have all been buried doesn't work for me, for even an instant...) I accept what is logical, proven and supported by evidence already reviewed in open court.

reply to post by soulwaxer

The "regular people" who were at the scene of "the flight 93 crash site" from the start say that there was nothing there that pointed to an aircraft having crashed there.

You can link to something credible and support that claim, correct?

I'd expect you'd be able to..as that would be a simple deal breaker for settling the debate if sworn witness statements from first responders or anyone else present at the Somerset crash site indicate that.

I'm not aware of any officially recorded or sworn statements from people who were there? However, I sure don't know all aspects of this subject. No one can. So I'm interested to read your support for the above.

Thanks.

reply to post by soulwaxer

The coroner present said that he stopped being a coroner after 20 minutes because there were no bodies: "To this day, I have never seen a single drop of blood." Yet your Prosecution Exhibits show a perfectly preserved bandana from one of the hijackers?

Would that be the same coroner that said this?

Hendrix and Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller said for most of the other families, the personal effects and the remains of the crash victims will be returned at the same time in mid-February.

old.post-gazette.com...

Interesting that a coroner who says there were no bodies discusses the returning of the remains to the family.

This is also interesting...

Miller identified the last of the bodies Dec. 19. He is still doing DNA tests on additional tissue samples.

How does one identify bodies that weren't there?

hellobruce

MysterX
for one, perhaps most of the bodies were not transferred to the substitute aircraft, as little as 20 or 30 along with their effects may have been transferred in order for some remains to be found, the rest would be thought to have perished and have been effectively cremated by the infernos...as long as some remains were discovered,

Except for the fact that remains from every victim were recovered and positively identified for Flight 93...
The remains of every flight 77 victim but one (a two-year-old) were recovered and positively identified by forensics experts. Personal effects of many survived the crash and fires and were returned to the victims' families.
Flight 11 had remains of 37 people discovered,
Flight 175 had remains of 26 people found....

You also failed to explain how this could be done, as the planes had to land somewhere, be offloaded and then the other planes loaded, then the planes had to take off, yet ATC never noticed....

edit on 12-1-2014 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)

The ATC element is another hypothesis altogether, and one that i have not as yet speculated upon...but at a push, which you seem to be doing, an off the cuff speculation would be either ATC, knowing there were extensive aviation related training exercises happening that day, replete with false scenarios and one would assume possible false radar data accompanying and supporting the exercises - confusion was present, over what was actual real world data and false exercise related data...i believe there is a recording of a telephone call made to ATC informing them of a hi-jacking event, where a staff member displayed a level of confusion whether or not it was an actual real world hi-jacking, or part of the concurrent aviation exercises...

Another possibility for speculation, is that there were 'on-side' elements within ATC itself, acting to influence the judgement of other ATC staff as to whether the data on screen was real world or false data..buying the required time intervals to substitute the aircraft and passengers.

May i say, i find it somewhat disingenuous of you hellobruce, to ask me to speculate on exactly how 246 (247) passengers could be substituted from the genuine aircraft to the substitute aircraft given a consiracy, when you yourself say that 162 passengers remains were discovered, a difference of 85 souls which would of course have altered the amount of time or numbers of personel taken to remove them all.

Apart from fires hot enough and fierce enough to ultimately cause the collapse of three skyscrapers and a large section of a recently hardened fortress, leaving behind identifiable remains at all, much less the majority of them from each of the four flights..is startling to say the least.

But hey ho...it's all only mental exercise isn't it, and we're having fun.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

So basically, any evidence is planted evidence, because your theory has to be right, so that alone proves the evidence was planted? That's really what I'm reading from you. Apparently no evidence offered can or ever will be accepted ...and that's not the making of a debate, that's simply an argument. Not my thing....

Not at all Wrabbit, you missunderstand my position, despite me going to great lengths to inform you otherwise..i'm frankly surpised at your attitude.

Perhaps i caught you on a bad day.

Never mind...ignore what i've posted previously, it obviously isn't worth your time.

Like you, like your government and it's agencies, and everyone else here i am, and more importantly, i recognise and acknowledge myself to be an ordinary Human being and so am fallible...i do not have a personality defect that compels me 'to have to be right'...i'll leave that trait for others here to wallow in.

Have a good day.

my 2 cents,
thewebfairy.com...
I have deliberately kept this, some of the information here has been disproven, but I will direct you to just one small area of strangeness
thewebfairy.com...:34am-Flight93_bomb
in this small part at the top of the page, it says that flight 93 was identified not only by others, but by united itself. that's curious because united would seem to be the ones to make a positive ID of their own airplane....at the bottom of the article it says "it was a preliminary AP story, and it was factually incorrect"....really?...united would misidentify it's own aircraft??....there is an large ID number painted on each plane, somehow that was wrongly identified?...and not only by the ground crew, but the people in the tower, and by united airlines itself?......and again, not one reporter, went back and asked any of these people how they could misidentify the large written numbers on the side of the plane?

here's where I have trouble with this, a good reporter(s) would naturally be curious and would want to follow "the dots"....but, there is nothing more said about this... and, if this initial story was so wrong a good reporter(s) would want to clear the air, to protect his reputation and that of the media company he worked for.

i have dug through this massive amount of information, and tidbits abound about why there were no follow-up to many of the media reports

apparently there are a lot of people that are still trying to find the answers, and who have went public doing so...of course, this news wasn't widely reported...hmm...wonder why?
911blogger.com...

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by soulwaxer

 

The "regular people" who were at the scene of "the flight 93 crash site" from the start say that there was nothing there that pointed to an aircraft having crashed there.

You can link to something credible and support that claim, correct?

I'd expect you'd be able to..as that would be a simple deal breaker for settling the debate if sworn witness statements from first responders or anyone else present at the Somerset crash site indicate that.

I'm not aware of any officially recorded or sworn statements from people who were there? However, I sure don't know all aspects of this subject. No one can. So I'm interested to read your support for the above.

Thanks.

Do your own research. You should have no problem at all finding these claims.

soulwaxer