It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by TheBobert
Are you saying that the government officials began their investigation with the belief that terrorists did this?
Do you believe 9-11 was an inside job?
Originally posted by Leo Strauss
reply to post by TheBobert
So you are a former member of CIT???? Former truther turned debunker??
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
The physical reality that the airliners simply are not capable of CIT's flyover/turns means that it is "pulverized". No he said/she said is needed to show that.
As for the other theories go, the he said/she said comes into play again, but this thread is ONLY about CIT's theories. And they're not necessary here.
Originally posted by jamie83
Originally posted by Seymour Butz
The physical reality that the airliners simply are not capable of CIT's flyover/turns means that it is "pulverized". No he said/she said is needed to show that.
As for the other theories go, the he said/she said comes into play again, but this thread is ONLY about CIT's theories. And they're not necessary here.
OMG... where have you guys been??? This is so obvious, and it will make EVERY piece of evidence fit!
One of the planes was actually a hologram! The hologram plane wouldn't be constrained by the physical limitations of a real plane. Therefore, CIT's theory can be explained by the flyover plane being a hologram.
This also explains why nobody saw the plane emerge on the other side. They simply turned the hologram off.
Lol, I hope you are kidding. There was no Inside job, two planes hit the twin towers another hit the pentagon. Oh and also one plane crashed in penn. AND I SAY CRASHED. If there is any cover up, which I dont believe there is, it is that some people in the government know it was a possibilty there would be an attack on that horrible day and ignored it.
Originally posted by TheBobert
Griff,
At least other truthers on this board admit they are truthers.
I like how you act as though you are not.
So you think that the officer who found that passport was what a NWO plant?
Was the passport planted?
There was plenty of debris that day and it is called chance that the passport was found.
That does not at all prove an inside job.
You say you are more of a skeptic yet even the slightest thing will make you believe an inside job.
I dont think that you are being very honest.
You also brought up Silverstein but still have not posted a link to whatever it is that you claim.
Originally posted by TheBobert
There was plenty of debris that day and it is called chance that the passport was found.
That does not at all prove an inside job.
Originally posted by TheBobert
You also brought up Silverstein but still have not posted a link to whatever it is that you claim.
Professional Demolition of World Trade Center Building 7
Larry Silverstein, the owner of the WTC complex, admitted on a September 2002 PBS documentary, 'America Rebuilds', that he and the NYFD decided to 'pull' WTC 7 on the day of the attack. The word 'pull' is industry jargon for taking a building down with explosives.
We have attempted to call Larry Silverstein's office on several occasions. Silverstein has never issued a retraction for his comments.
Photos taken moments before the collapse of WTC 7 show small office fires on just two floors.
Firefighters were told to move away from the building moments before it collapsed.
In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7. Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. So: This building's collapse resulted in a profit of about $500 million!
www.prisonplanet.com...
Originally posted by TheBobert
Oooooooh man Griff you got me buddy 9-11 was an inside job.
You win.
Originally posted by TheBobert
well nothing new here from the truthers posting here.
The same tired old arguments that have been debunked time and time again.
Originally posted by Griff
Originally posted by TheBobert
Oooooooh man Griff you got me buddy 9-11 was an inside job.
You win.
No wonder Craig stopped working with you. You remind me of the guy who stands in front of the newstand outside my building and argues with the magazine covers all day long. I.E. You're delusional.
Originally posted by jamie83
There IS something very new. Now CIT claims that working for USA Today and seeing a 2nd plane are both proof of complicity in the 9/11 attacks.
Reagan Airport flight control instructs a military C-130 (Golfer 06) that has just departed Andrews Air Force Base to intercept Flight 77 and identify it. [New York Times, 10/16/2001; Guardian, 10/17/2001] Remarkably, this C-130 is the same C-130 that is 17 miles from Flight 93 when it later crashes into the Pennsylvania countryside (see 10:08 a.m. September 11, 2001). [Pittsburgh Channel, 9/15/2001; Star-Tribune (Minneapolis), 9/11/2002] The pilot, Lt. Col. Steve O’Brien, claims he took off around 9:30 a.m., planning to return to Minnesota after dropping supplies off in the Caribbean. He later describes his close encounter: “When air traffic control asked me if we had him [Flight 77] in sight, I told him that was an understatement—by then, he had pretty much filled our windscreen. Then he made a pretty aggressive turn so he was moving right in front of us, a mile and a half, two miles away. I said we had him in sight, then the controller asked me what kind of plane it was. That caught us up, because normally they have all that information. The controller didn’t seem to know anything.” O’Brien reports that the plane is either a 757 or 767 and its silver fuselage means it is probably an American Airlines plane. “They told us to turn and follow that aircraft—in 20 plus years of flying, I’ve never been asked to do something like that.” [Star-Tribune (Minneapolis), 9/11/2002] The 9/11 Commission Reports that it is a C-130H and the pilot specifically identifies the hijacked plane as a 757. Seconds after impact, he reports, “Looks like that aircraft crashed into the Pentagon, sir.”
Originally posted by jamie83
Originally posted by TheBobert
well nothing new here from the truthers posting here.
The same tired old arguments that have been debunked time and time again.
No, this is incorrect.
There IS something very new. Now CIT claims that working for USA Today and seeing a 2nd plane are both proof of complicity in the 9/11 attacks.
What's new is the level of serious debate has sunken even lower.