ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags flight 93 , kinetic energy

Reply
Old 5th July 2009, 06:45 PM   #41
Rewey
Student
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 47
Another inconsistency with the ‘official story’ is the usual comparison to the Pan Am 103 crash. People should look up the huge crater left by the Pan Am crash. Here’s the kicker – that massive crater, which was over 150 foot long, and displaced 730yd³ of soil WAS CAUSED JUST BY THE WINGS HITTING THE GROUND at FREEFALL SPEED and the fuel inside them exploding. Yet an ENTIRE 757-200 crashed at around 900km/h, and only left a crater 50-odd foot wide and around 3 metres deep? Why the difference?

Also, according to the official report on Pan Am 103, this explosion ‘vapourised NEARBY houses AND their footings’. House footings are made of steel-reinforced concrete, or limestone blocks in older houses. The same jet fuel that ‘vapourised’ limestone or steel-reinforced concrete NEARBY, and burnt THREE steel-framed buildings until they collapsed at roughly free-fall speed, LEFT GRASS COMPLETELY UNBURNT INSIDE THE ACTUAL POINT OF EXPLOSION and around the alleged crash site.

If you want to ridicule me because I find those two events entirely inconsistent, go right ahead. Critically think your socks off.

Here’s a better challenge for you. Why don’t you actually take the time to read through the thread on ATS and see how the discussion has actually unfolded. You can find it here:

(can't post link - sorry, but it's not hard to find...)

One final point, to leftysergeant:

Quote:
“You can tell that that was originally added to the meme by a twoofer, because they show the bottom of the aircraft where the top should be”.

My God, man. Are you really that obtuse? The entire point of that image is to show that the width of the wings is three times wider than the width of the crater. Do you REALLY think they cared whether the plane was shown upside-down or not? I’m starting to think that your critical thinking is limited only to pointing out blatantly obvious and insignificant ‘errors’ to avoid answering the actual question that’s being posed. You also seem to miss the fact that the plane in the image is shown vertical, not at 40ŗ, but as that is more consistent with the crater left behind, and therefore supports your side of the argument, it’s probably best for you not to mention that, right? Awesome critical thinking skills… Awesome objectivity… Might I say the ‘OS movement in a nutshell’?

Quote:
“The soil in this picture… would have to be more compact that 5-10 year old fill”.

Again, why is it OK for you to make ASSUMPTIONS based on what you see in photos, and apparently know nothing about, but when I do the same you call me a moron? Again, awesome critical thinking…

Rewey
Rewey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 06:55 PM   #42
JimBenArm
Based on a true story!
 
JimBenArm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,092
So what happened to Flight 93? Where is the plane? What did they dig up from there? Where did the people on the plane disappear? What would be the purpose of faking a plane crash?

If you don't have the answer to all of those questions, all this is stupid speculation. Special emphasis on the stupid. So, please provide the answers to these questions, or admit the "discrepancies" you raise are idiotic in the extreme.

Thank you very little.
__________________
"JimBenArm is right" Hokulele Mom
JimBenArm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 07:04 PM   #43
Rewey
Student
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 47
Quote:
If you don't have the answer to all of those questions, all this is stupid speculation. Special emphasis on the stupid. So, please provide the answers to these questions, or admit the "discrepancies" you raise are idiotic in the extreme.
You guys are just the same - I don't get why you can't see that. If I had the answers to all of those questions, there would be no discrepancy or split opinions as to what really happened. But if YOU guys had all the answers to those questions, there would be no difference of opinion either. That's the entire point. Like it or not, I am entitled to an opinion, and MY opinion is that there are a few things about the 'official story' that don't seem to add up. If you think I'm stupid for having that opinion, please feel free to provide the actual evidence to help me adjust my opinion...

Quote:
So what happened to Flight 93? Where is the plane? What did they dig up from there? Where did the people on the plane disappear? What would be the purpose of faking a plane crash?
Please note very carefully - I'm NOT SAYING that F93 didn't end up in that field somewhere, somehow. What I AM saying, is that I don't believe, for a number of reasons, that the 'official version' of events is accurate. Again, if I knew exactly how, I'd tell you. But I don't (and neither do you), so I'm asking questions...

Rewey
Rewey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 07:09 PM   #44
A W Smith
Philosopher
 
A W Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,032
Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
You guys are just the same - I don't get why you can't see that. If I had the answers to all of those questions, there would be no discrepancy or split opinions as to what really happened. But if YOU guys had all the answers to those questions, there would be no difference of opinion either. That's the entire point. Like it or not, I am entitled to an opinion, and MY opinion is that there are a few things about the 'official story' that don't seem to add up. If you think I'm stupid for having that opinion, please feel free to provide the actual evidence to help me adjust my opinion...



Please note very carefully - I'm NOT SAYING that F93 didn't end up in that field somewhere, somehow. What I AM saying, is that I don't believe, for a number of reasons, that the 'official version' of events is accurate. Again, if I knew exactly how, I'd tell you. But I don't (and neither do you), so I'm asking questions...

Rewey
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93page1

Quote:
Evidence Summary: 10 Points

1) The four hijackers purchased tickets under their own names and boarded the plane. One was randomly selected for and passed additional security screening. Ziad Jarrah was a licensed pilot and had recent training on professional large jet flight simulators. United flight 93 was scheduled to depart at 8:00 am, but left 42 minutes late due to airport traffic. Aboard were 33 passengers, 7 crew members, and 4 hijackers.

2) Several passengers and crew called from the plane, spoke with loved ones, described the hijackers' attack, and related their plan to try to retake the plane so that it would not be used as a suicide weapon against a populated area. All but two of these calls were made using the plane's seatback Airfones.

3) The cockpit voice recorder recorded the hijackers' attack and apparent murder of the pilots and a flight attendant. Air traffic controllers heard a radio transmission by a man with an Arabic accent, warning of a bomb on board. Passengers reported that one of the hijackers had what appeared to be a bomb strapped to him.

4) After learning about the other attacks, passengers and cabin crew attempted to retake the cockpit but were apparently unable to gain entry. The sound of their attempts was recorded on the CVR. The CVR also recorded the hijackers' decision to end the flight, followed by repeated shouts of "Allahu Akbar!" ("God is greatest.") until the plane crashed. Families of victims heard the CVR recording.

5) Flight 93 was tracked by radar until it went down.

6) Many people in Pennsylvania saw the Boeing 757, traveling at low altitude and high speed, roll to the right and plummet upside-down, nose first, towards the ground. Many people witnessed the subsequent enormous explosion and fireball. Val McClatchey photographed the mushroom cloud.

7) Hundreds of first responders (mostly volunteer firefighters) and crime scene investigators were quickly on the scene. They saw human remains, aircraft wreckage, personal effects, jet fuel, etc.
The cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder were recovered and had usable data, all of which is consistent with the other evidence.

8) The remains of every victim was positively identified. Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller personally collected many remains and made 12 identifications through fingerprints and dental records. Personal effects of most passengers and crew were recovered and returned to their families.

9) Hijacker identification documents and personal effects were recovered, along with the remains of four people identified as the hijackers through the process of elimination.

10) Nearly all of the aircraft was recovered by professional investigators and by civilians. The debris was returned to United Airlines after being examined for evidence of explosives use.
__________________
911 resource site by Mark Roberts
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home
Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance.
Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane?
Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude.
A W Smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 07:11 PM   #45
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,777
I had de javu when I entered this thread. Quick quiz for you guys... what flight made this crater?

__________________
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 07:13 PM   #46
Baylor
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 6,087
Originally Posted by Rewey
Like it or not, I am entitled to an opinion, and MY opinion is that there are a few things about the 'official story' that don't seem to add up.
Welcome to 2005.

ETA: Actually, welcome to 1000 BCE. This faulty logic--which Homeland and Rewey think gives them the logical highground-- was discovered thousands of years ago. They still prefer ignorance over knowledge.
Originally Posted by Rewey
Please note very carefully - I'm NOT SAYING that F93 didn't end up in that field somewhere, somehow. What I AM saying, is that I don't believe, for a number of reasons, that the 'official version' of events is accurate. Again, if I knew exactly how, I'd tell you. But I don't (and neither do you), so I'm asking questions...

Last edited by Baylor; 5th July 2009 at 07:24 PM.
Baylor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 07:26 PM   #47
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
 
Stellafane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,637
Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
...so I'm asking questions...

Oh jeebus, jeebus, jeebus.

The polite thing for me to do is to welcome you to the forum, at least in a perfunctory way. But despite the fact that I'm usually a reasonably well-mannered person, in this case I'm not going to do that. Because doing so would be more than a little hypocritical. You see, I'm so sick of this -- people who haven't the slightest clue what they're talking about making nonsense claims, claims that anyone with a partially functioning brain should instantly realize can only be true if hundreds of people conspired to kill thousands of innocent civilians for some murky and insane purpose.

What do you get out of this? I'm serious, I really want to know: what do you get out of this? Does it make you feel special somehow, accusing people you don't know of murder based upon some nursery-school misunderstanding of the science involved? Does the attention of a few lonely, misguided paranoids justify making such a vicious attack, while simultaneously disgracing the memory of the victims? Bear in mind, if what you're claiming is true, Todd Beamer and the other passengers lied -- indeed, they themselves where apparently in on the conspiracy. What do you think the victims' families would think of that? Does that bother you at all?

"Asking questions." I can scarcely believe that after nearly eight years after the fact, there are people still trying to justify their malicious, libelous crap under that tired old canard.
__________________
Another Shameless Googlebomb Plug for www.stopsylvia.com

Last edited by Stellafane; 5th July 2009 at 07:37 PM.
Stellafane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 07:31 PM   #48
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
 
Stellafane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,637
Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
...Like it or not, I am entitled to an opinion, and MY opinion is that there are a few things about the 'official story' that don't seem to add up. If you think I'm stupid for having that opinion, please feel free to provide the actual evidence to help me adjust my opinion...
Ah, I hear the distant "doink" of a xylaphone (inside joke).

Yes, everyone is entitled to an opinion. But not all opinions are equally meritorious, or deserve equal amounts of respect. As I suspect you would agree (perhaps not in this case, but at least in principle), an opinion based on facts, logic, and reason deserves more respect than one based on ignorance and paranoia.
__________________
Another Shameless Googlebomb Plug for www.stopsylvia.com
Stellafane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 07:31 PM   #49
Baylor
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 6,087
Rewey--what do you think of this? Was this staged? Do you think you and the mighty truthers are about to uncover the secret plot? Are you and the heroic truthers about to put the perps to justice and have them contemplate the errors of their ways while you ride off into the sunset?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4904600.stm

Last edited by Baylor; 5th July 2009 at 07:33 PM.
Baylor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 07:34 PM   #50
BigBird
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 67
Originally Posted by A W Smith View Post
Evidence Summary: 10 Points
I had not seen that yet... Excellent post. Thanks!
BigBird is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 07:34 PM   #51
JimBenArm
Based on a true story!
 
JimBenArm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,092
Oh, yes, just asking questions. Spectacularly stupid questions.

Sorry, unless there is some reason for them to have faked this, it's asinine!
__________________
"JimBenArm is right" Hokulele Mom
JimBenArm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 08:01 PM   #52
Rewey
Student
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 47
Originally Posted by JimBenArm View Post
Oh, yes, just asking questions. Spectacularly stupid questions.

Sorry, unless there is some reason for them to have faked this, it's asinine!
I've NEVER said faked. I just don't buy the official version.

OK then - how about 'prior knowledge'? Assuming that everything unravelled just as you say it did, would you accept that the Government had prior knowledge (and therefore implying complicity), but just let it happen?

Hate to point this out to you, but have a look at how long the 'truth' about the US involvement in other wars has taken to come out? Before it's FINALLY admitted as truth. Decades.

The truth about the warnings before the sinking of the Lusitania, whilst the US claimed they had no knowledge about German uboats. No-one could believe that the US would send a passenger ship deliberately into uboat infested waters, but it's now known that they did. The truth about the knowledge of the impending Pearl Harbour attack, and the response of the US government to just let it happen, which we now know that they did. The truth about the USS Liberty attack by Israel. The truth about US operations in Loas and Cambodia during Vietnam, which is now admitted to. The truth about the US involvement with Afghanistan against the Soviets, which is now widely known. The truth about the US involvement with weapons during the Iran contra scandal, which is now admited to.

Seriously... has there EVER been a war that the US has EVER been just dragged into without any prior involvement, or prior knowledge that they were about to be attacked and therefore have their involvement and declaration of war justified? Do you think the incursion into Iraq, even though it had NOTHING to do with 9/11, would have been approved, had 9/11 not happened? If you honestly believe so, I find that naive.

A hundred years of this stuff going on, and you think there was not at LEAST prior knowledge (and therefore complicity) on this one? I find that a truly naive way of thinking. Do you really think the world believes that the 'greatest super power on Earth' was bamboozled by guys living in caves half a world away?

Rewey

[it's also noted that so far, no-one has bothered to demonstrate how my understanding of physics is wrong, as per the numerous comments that I "can't do physics"...]
Rewey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 08:04 PM   #53
MarkyX
Master Poster
 
MarkyX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,157
Quote:
Please note very carefully - I'm NOT SAYING that F93 didn't end up in that field somewhere, somehow. What I AM saying, is that I don't believe, for a number of reasons, that the 'official version' of events is accurate. Again, if I knew exactly how, I'd tell you. But I don't (and neither do you), so I'm asking questions...
Okay so basically you can't prove that Flight 93 didn't crash there, yet you still don't believe the "official story" for the sake of...not believing the official story.

I'm so used to performing mental masochist on myself. At least I don't have to listen to Linkin' Park.
__________________
MarkyX's Haunted Bloghouse - Read my boredom
MarkyX is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 08:08 PM   #54
BigAl
Philosopher
 
BigAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,397
Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
I've NEVER said faked. I just don't buy the official version.
Here is just some of the evidence for the basic story for Flight 93. You should familiarize yourself with and be prepared to explain how all of it is fabricated.

Some Flight 93 Evidence Updated 5/27/09
http://911links.webs.com/Flight93.htm

[1] DNA for all passangers crew found and identified
[2] The hole
[3] 95% of the airplane recovered in the hole
[4] Black boxes recovered and analyzed
[5] Video of Phanton hitting wall
[6] Lots of Flight 93 links
[[7]
[8] Analysis of Flt 93 Balck Boxes
[9] 1,200 investigators and first responders,.
[10] Remains of aircraft in storage.
[11] Papers & light objects found up to 8 miles from the crash
[12] Pictures
[13] Largest peice of Flt 93 was half a ton
[14] Coroner Statement
[15] Flight Data Recorder data and WTC data for Flt 93
[16] THE NORAD RESPONSE TO 9/11 COmplete timing and FAA info
[17] VIDEO: Eyewitnesses to Flt93 crash
[18] Phone calls from Flight 93
[19] Flight 93 Radar track
[20] Crash debris found 8 miles away
[21] Olsen Phone calls discussed
[1] --------------------------------------------------------------
DNA http://www.post-gazette.com/headline...ille1220p2.asp http://preview.tinyurl.com/2fhpe8 Links to forensics and hijacker identification http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/link...timidentificat The hijacker's license http://bp0.blogger.com/_rLV-ZuNPwJ4/...h/PA00101A.jpg

[2] --------------------------------------------------------------
The Hole: The aircraft impacted at approximately 563 mph (906 km/h), at a 40 degree angle.[26] The impact left a crater about 115 feet (35 m) wide and 10 to 12 feet (about 3.5 m) deep. There were no survivors among the 44 passengers, crew and terrorists (all were killed by the impact or had been previously killed during flight). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_93 http://preview.tinyurl.com/5tvkk
--- The National Park Service description of the hole:
"The crash and the subsequent investigation created
a depression approximately 85 feet by 85 feet with a
maximum depth of 27 feet ... the plane impacted the
relatively soft stripmine backfill, plowing to a depth of
30 ft, then collided with the remaining strip excavation
rock highwall, causing the plane to explode.ā€¯
http://www.nps.gov/flni/parkmgmt/upl...20affected.pdf
[3] --------------------------------------------------------------
Here's the in the news on 9/24/2001, CNN reports 95% or the aircraft was recovered form that hole including both black boxes. http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/2...ite.index.html CNN.com FBI finished with Pennsylvania crash site probe SHANKSVILLE, Pennsylvania (CNN) --The FBI announced Monday that its investigation of the site where a hijacked jet slammed into a field here is complete and that 95 percent of the plane was recovered. The federal investigation into the September 11 terrorist attacks continues. Evidence-gathering was halted Saturday afternoon and the pieces of United Airlines Flight 93 that had been recovered were turned over Sunday to the airline, with the exception of the flight data recorder and the voice recorder, which are being held and analyzed by the FBI, according to FBI agent Bill Crowley. Crowley said the biggest piece of the plane that was recovered was a 6-by-7-foot piece of the fuselage skin, including about four windows. The heaviest piece, Crowley said, was part of an engine fan, weighing about 1,000 pounds. Flight 93 was one of four jets hijacked Sept. 11. Authorities believe the flight, which originated in Newark, New Jersey, and had been destined for San Francisco, was headed for the nation's capital, where the hijackers may have intended to slam it into the White House or the Capitol. Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller have praised the passengers of that flight, saying it appears their actions in trying to regain control of the aircraft averted a greater tragedy. People who spoke by phone with passengers after the plane was hijacked say that after the passengers found out about the earlier World Trade Center attack, they decided to try to overpower the hijackers. And officials familiar with the flight's cockpit voice recorder say it shows there was a "definite struggle," which they described as desperate and wild, between hijackers and some of the passengers. All 44 people on board the flight were killed when it slammed into the ground.
[4] --------------------------------------------------------------
Black boxes recovered and analyzed http://www.ntsb.gov/info/autopilot_AA77_UA93_study.pdf Black boxes recovered and analyzed http://www.ntsb.gov/info/autopilot_AA77_UA93_study.pdf Of the airliner parts, the pieces that investigators judged most significant were the plane's cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder, both unearthed within 3 1/2 days of the crash. The voice recording that remained is being analyzed for clues to confirm the identities of the four hijackers who seized the Newark-to-San Francisco flight before it crashed. http://www.post-gazette.com/headline...cene0925p2.asp
[5] --------------------------------------------------------------
Video of Phanton hitting wall http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--_RGM4Abv8
[6] --------------------------------------------------------------
Lots of Flight 93 links
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flig...evidence%2Cman
[7] --------------------------------------------------------------
[8] --------------------------------------------------------------
Black boxes recovered and analyzed http://www.ntsb.gov/info/autopilot_AA77_UA93_study.pdf Discussed : http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=102924
[9] --------------------------------------------------------------
1,200 investigators and first responders,. http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flig...evidence%2Cman
[10] --------------------------------------------------------------
Remains of aircraft in storage. Since it had no more use for it, the FBI turned the airliner debris -- but not the data and voice recorders -- over to United Airlines yesterday. Asked what United will do with the debris, airline spokeswoman Whitney Staley said, "I don't think a decision has been made ... but we're not commenting." http://www.post-gazette.com/headline...cene0925p2.asp "With the recovery Friday night of the cockpit voice recorder from United Flight 93, workers at the crash site have shifted their focus to a long, arduous search for what remains of the jet and its victims. http://www.post-gazette.com/headline...rjetnat5p5.asp
[11] --------------------------------------------------------------
Debris from the crash has been found up to 8 miles from the crash site, but searchers are concentrating on the crater where most of the remains are located. Papers and other light objects were carried aloft by the explosion after impact of the plane and they were transported by a nine-knot wind. http://www.post-gazette.com/headline...rjetnat5p5.asp
[12] --------------------------------------------------------------
Pictures http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notable...n/P200061.html http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notable...n/P200062.html Live news coverage showing debris http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeWi0JpI__M The hijacker's license http://bp0.blogger.com/_rLV-ZuNPwJ4/...h/PA00101A.jpg
[13] --------------------------------------------------------------
FBI spokesman Bill Crowley said that the largest piece
of plane recovered was a shred of fuselage skin that
covered four windows -- a piece seven feet long
from a jetliner that was 155 feet long. The
heaviest piece, he said, was a half-ton section
of engine fan.

http://www.post-gazette.com/headline...cene0925p2.asp
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...&notFound=true
[14] --------------------------------------------------------------
Once he was able to absorb the scene, Miller says, "I stopped being coroner after about 20 minutes, because there were no bodies there. It became like a giant funeral service." As a funeral director, Miller says, he is honored and humbled to preside over what has become essentially an immense cemetery stretching far into the scenic wooded mountain ridge. He considers it the final resting place of 40 national heroes. He saw dust, not bodies.
[15] --------------------------------------------------------------
Flight Data Recorder data and WTC data for Flt 93 http://www.ntsb.gov/info/foia_fri.htm
[16] --------------------------------------------------------------
THE NORAD RESPONSE TO 9/11 Compiled by Andrew Burfield http://www.internationalskeptics.com...77#post2164577
[17] --------------------------------------------------------------
VIDEO: Eyewitnesses to Flt93 crash (0:1:15) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxsmhnZeM6w
[18] --------------------------------------------------------------
Phone calls from Flight 93 9/11 Commission folder entitled "Flight 93 Calls - General". http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:..._General.2.pdf
[19] --------------------------------------------------------------
Flight 93 Radar track http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...RadarTrack.jpg
[20] --------------------------------------------------------------
Crash debris found 8 miles away
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pitt...b/s_12967.html
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pitt...b/s_47536.html
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pitt...b/s_12942.html
[21] --------------------------------------------------------------
Olsen Phone calls discussed
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...35#post4687535
__________________
------
Eric Pode of Croydon
Chief Assistant to the Assistance Chief,
Dept of Redundancy Dept.
BigAl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 08:18 PM   #55
Rewey
Student
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 47
Quote:
1) The four hijackers purchased tickets under their own names and boarded the plane.
None of whom appeared on the passenger manifests.

Quote:
3) ...by a man with an Arabic accent, warning of a bomb on board. Passengers reported that one of the hijackers had what appeared to be a bomb strapped to him.
So there is a chance that there WAS a bomb on board? There is a chance then that this was used moments before it hit the ground? This might explain a different style of debris field...

Quote:
4) ...passengers and cabin crew attempted to retake the cockpit but were apparently unable to gain entry. The CVR also recorded the hijackers' decision to end the flight, followed by repeated shouts of "Allahu Akbar!" ("God is greatest.") until the plane crashed.
They were unable to get into the cockpit, yet the terrorists just crashed the plane instead of continuing to their original destination? Were they scared of the banging on the cockpit door? They clearly weren't afraid of dying, just loud shouting?

Quote:
6) Val McClatchey photographed the mushroom cloud.
The same fireball that burnt no grass inside the actual point of explosion?

Quote:
7) They saw human remains, aircraft wreckage, personal effects, jet fuel, etc.
OK - the jet fuel. This has been discussed before. (a) the EPA says that the soil at the site after clean up was 'within acceptable limits' for pollutants such as jetfuel (which is tiny - mere parts per million), (b) the soil that was used to fill the crater was the same soil that was excavated from the area, and (c) the only way to remove fuel contamination from soil is to replace it with cleanfill. Therefore, this would suggest to some that there was no spilt fuel in the area.

Just food for thought...

Rewey
Rewey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 08:20 PM   #56
BigAl
Philosopher
 
BigAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,397
Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
None of whom appeared on the passenger manifests.
Wrong. See several items in this summary.


The 19 Arab Islamist Hijackers Edited 6/22/09
http://911links.webs.com/19Hijackers.htm
Table of Contents
[1] Reading list for all the evidence we have about the hijackers.
[2] The martyrdom videos made by 7 of the hijackers.
[3] Arabic spoken in cockpits of hijacked planes.
[4] Boarding manifest for Flt11 that shows hijacker's names
[5] The names of the hijackers
[6] BBC on the names and reporting of the hijackers
[7]
[8] Status of Hijacker DNA - (2009)
[9] Answer to "At Least 7 of the 9/11 Hijackers are Still Alive"
[10] bin Laden Connections to the 19 hijackers
[11] News Report on hijackers as of Nov 2, 2001
[12] Hanjour as a pilot
[13] Photo and DNA ID match of some of the hijackers.
[14] Identification of the Flt 77 hijackers
[15] Pictures of the Hanjour and another hijacker boarding the airplanes.
[16] Details of airline tickets for some of the hijackers.
If you want to knowwhy each person is on the list, read any or all of these books to get an idea of just how much evidence for who hijacked the planes and how they are connected directly to bin Laden and KSM and the American Embassy bombings in Africa and the attack on the USS Cole. Some of these names were known to the FBI even before 9/11/2001 for their crimes.

[1] ----- Essential reading list ---------------------------

The Looming Tower: Al Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 by Lawrence
Perfect Soldiers: The 9/11 Hijackers: Who They Were, Why They Did It by Terry Mcdermott
The Shadow Factory: The Ultra-Secret NSA from 9/11 to the Eavesdropping on America, by James Bamford.
PBS Video on Bamford http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/spyfactory/program.html
Spying Blind by Amy Zegart
Perfect Soldiers by Terry McDermott

[2] -------Hijacker videos -------------------------------------------

This video has the martyrdom videos made by some of the hijackers.
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fu...ideoid=1619489
Hijackers video wills (Scroll down to the bottom)
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Responsibility

[3] -------Arab Audio on Voice recorders --------------

We have the audio of Arabs on the recovered cockpit voice recorders.
The CVR clearly captured the words of the hijackers, including words in Arabic from the microphone in the pilot headset up to the end of the flight. The hijackers' statements, the clarity of the recording, the position of the microphone in the pilot headset, and the corresponding manipulations of flight controls provide the evidence. The quotes are taken from our listening to the CVR, aided by an Arabic speaker.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/9/11_C...t/Notes/Part_1

[4] -----------Boarding Manifests ---------------------------

I have the boarding manifest for Flt11 that shows the names. http://www.911myths.com/images/8/84/...1_Manifest.gif http://www.911myths.com/images/8/84/...1_Manifest.gif Discussion http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=124907 Flash app shows seating, calls , hijackers,
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notable...s/P200018.html

[5] -----Hijacker names ------------------------------

AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77
1) Khalid Almihdhar - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of San Diego, California, and New York -Alias: Sannan Al-Makki; Khalid Bin Muhammad; 'Addallah Al-Mihdhar; Khalid Mohammad Al-Saqaf 2) Majed Moqed - Possible Saudi national
-Alias: Majed M.GH Moqed; Majed Moqed, Majed Mashaan Moqed 3) Nawaf Alhazmi - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of Fort Lee, New Jersey; Wayne, New Jersey; San Diego, California -Alias: Nawaf Al-Hazmi; Nawaf Al Hazmi; Nawaf M.S. Al Hazmi 4) Salem Alhazmi - Possible Saudi national
-Possible resident of Fort Lee, New Jersey; Wayne, New Jersey 5) Hani Hanjour -
-Possible resident of Phoenix, Arizona, and San Diego, California -Alias: Hani Saleh Hanjour; Hani Saleh; Hani Hanjour, Hani Saleh H. Hanjour AMERICAN AIRLINES #11 BOEING 767
1) Satam M.A. Al Suqami- Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: June 28, 1976; Last known address: United Arab Emirates
2) Waleed M. Alshehri - Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: September 13, 1974; January 1, 1976; March 3, 1976; July 8, 1977; December 20, 1978; May 11, 1979; November 5, 1979 -Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Orlando, Florida; Daytona Beach, Florida -Believed to be a pilot
3) Wail M. Alshehri
-Date of birth used: September 1, 1968 -Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Newton, Massachusetts -Believed to be a pilot
4) Mohamed Atta - Possible Egyptian national
-Date of birth used: September 1, 1968 -Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida; Coral Springs, Florida; Hamburg, Germany -Believed to be a pilot -Alias: Mehan Atta; Mohammad El Amir; Muhammad Atta; Mohamed El Sayed; Mohamed Elsayed; Muhammad Muhammad Al Amir Awag Al Sayyid Atta; Muhammad Muhammad Al-Amir Awad Al Sayad
5) Abdulaziz Alomari - Possible Saudi national
-Dates of birth used: December 24, 1972 and May 28, 1979 -Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida -Believed to be a pilot
UNITED AIRLINES #175 BOEING 767
1) Marwan Al-Shehhi
-Date of birth used: May 9, 1978 -Possible residence(s): Hollywood, Florida -Believed to be a pilot -Alias: Marwan Yusif Muhammad Rashid Al-Shehi; Marwan Yusif Muhammad Rashid Lakrab Al-Shihhi; Abu Abdullah
2) Fayez Rashid Ahmed Hassan Al Qadi Banihammad
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida -Alias: Fayez Ahmad; Banihammad Fayez Abu Dhabi Banihammad; Fayez Rashid Ahmed; Banihammad Fayez; Rasid Ahmed Hassen Alqadi; Abu Dhabi Banihammad ; Ahmed Fayez; Faez Ahmed 3) Ahmed Alghamdi
-Alias: Ahmed Salah Alghamdi
4) Hamza Alghamdi
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida -Alias: Hamza Al-Ghamdi; Hamza Ghamdi; Hamzah Alghamdi; Hamza Alghamdi Saleh
5) Mohand Alshehri
-Possible residence(s): Delray Beach, Florida -Alias: Mohammed Alshehhi; Mohamd Alshehri; Mohald Alshehri
UNITED AIRLINES #93 BOEING 757
1) Saeed Alghamdi
-Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida -Alias: Abdul Rahman Saed Alghamdi; Ali S Alghamdi; Al- Gamdi; Saad M.S. Al Ghamdi; Sadda Al Ghamdi; Saheed Al-Ghamdi; Seed Al Ghamdi
2) Ahmed Ibrahim A. Al Haznawi - Possible Saudi national
-Date of birth used: October 11, 1980 -Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida -Alias: Ahmed Alhaznawi
3) Ahmed Alnami
-Possible residence: Delray Beach, Florida -Alias: Ali Ahmed Alnami; Ahmed A. Al-Nami; Ahmed Al- Nawi
4) Ziad Samir Jarrah
-Believed to be a pilot -Alias: Zaid Jarrahi; Zaid Samr Jarrah; Ziad S. Jarrah; Ziad Jarrah Jarrat, Ziad Samir Jarrahi

[6] -----------------------------------------

BBC on the names and reporting of the hijackers http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditor..._theory_1.html
[7] ----------------------------------

[8] ------------------------------------------------

Newsweek - Remains of the Day Nineteen hijackers died on 9/11. What should be done with what's left of them? Eve Conant From the magazine issue dated Jan 12, 2009 ...Through a combination of innovative DNA-mapping techniques, help from the FBI's crime lab and dumb luck, the scientists have now ID'd four of the 10 New York hijackers. The remains of the nine hijackers from the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crash sites have also been confirmed; six other hijackers have yet to be identified. ... http://www.newsweek.com/id/177724/output/print
[9] -----------------------------------------------

At Least 7 of the 9/11 Hijackers are Still Alive http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHART...hijackers.html BBC Response http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditor..._theory_1.html
[10] ----------------------------------------------------


bib Laden Connections to the 19 hijackers

[11] -------------------------------------------------------

News report as of Nov 2, 2001 http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/...in316806.shtml

[12] --------------------------------------------

New York Newsday article from 9/23/01. "Despite Hanjour's poor reviews, he did have some ability as a pilot, said Bernard of Freeway Airport. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said." Most of the complaints that I've seen were that he couldn't land well. Considering what he was planning on doing, I wouldn't be surprised if that wasn't exactly the top of his "skills to hone" list. http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/di...day_sep23.html Woman taught 9/11 hijacker how to fly http://www.capeargus.co.za/index.php...icleId=3171841

[13] -------------------------

Photo and DNA ID match of some of the pilots. This 9/11 Commission document explains how the FBI attempted to verify the hijackers identities (includes an apparent DNA match with Jarrah). http://www.scribd.com/doc/13950034/T...mbers-PENTTBOM http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:...ijackers-1.pdf

[14] ---- Identification of the Flt 77 hijackers ---------

This 9/11 Commission document includes details of a forensic examination of hijacker ID cards recovered from the Pentagon, and a list of identification documents belonging to the hijackers (passports, visas, driving licences, more). http://911myths.com/images/b/ba/Team...ifications.pdf

[15] --------------------------------

http://www.democraticunderground.com...ress=125x34702

[16] ---------------------------------

Details in hijacker tickets. http://www.internationalskeptics.com...24#post4722224
__________________
------
Eric Pode of Croydon
Chief Assistant to the Assistance Chief,
Dept of Redundancy Dept.
BigAl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 08:29 PM   #57
A W Smith
Philosopher
 
A W Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,032
Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
I've NEVER said faked. I just don't buy the official version.
the first responders, witnesses, victims family members who received phone calls from the plane are all lying then? The volunteers who collected debris, papers, personal effects were fooled by a faked crash scene?
Quote:

OK then - how about 'prior knowledge'? Assuming that everything unravelled just as you say it did, would you accept that the Government had prior knowledge (and therefore implying complicity), but just let it happen?

Hate to point this out to you, but have a look at how long the 'truth' about the US involvement in other wars has taken to come out? Before it's FINALLY admitted as truth. Decades.

The truth about the warnings before the sinking of the Lusitania, whilst the US claimed they had no knowledge about German uboats. No-one could believe that the US would send a passenger ship deliberately into uboat infested waters, but it's now known that they did. The truth about the knowledge of the impending Pearl Harbour attack, and the response of the US government to just let it happen, which we now know that they did. The truth about the USS Liberty attack by Israel. The truth about US operations in Loas and Cambodia during Vietnam, which is now admitted to. The truth about the US involvement with Afghanistan against the Soviets, which is now widely known. The truth about the US involvement with weapons during the Iran contra scandal, which is now admited to.

Seriously... has there EVER been a war that the US has EVER been just dragged into without any prior involvement, or prior knowledge that they were about to be attacked and therefore have their involvement and declaration of war justified? Do you think the incursion into Iraq, even though it had NOTHING to do with 9/11, would have been approved, had 9/11 not happened? If you honestly believe so, I find that naive.

A hundred years of this stuff going on, and you think there was not at LEAST prior knowledge (and therefore complicity) on this one? I find that a truly naive way of thinking. Do you really think the world believes that the 'greatest super power on Earth' was bamboozled by guys living in caves half a world away?
We understands that you need to hate the US and attach a conspiracy to all it ever has done because of your feelings of inadequacy and powerlessness.
Quote:

Rewey

[it's also noted that so far, no-one has bothered to demonstrate how my understanding of physics is wrong, as per the numerous comments that I "can't do physics"...]
Ill take one point to illustrate that don't know physics. Your ridiculous sand bag and projectile comparison. First the plane is not a small projectile. It is a huge aircraft composed of many parts. Try shooting your sand bag with an automatic weapon on full auto. This reminds me of the time when I was seven and saw a construction crew installing dewatering well points using nothing but water pressure. I repeated what I had observed in my parents back yard much to their dismay using nothing but a 10 foot length of steel pipe hooked up to a garden hose. sinking it repeatedsly to its full length using only light pressure and leaving 3/4 inch holes ten foot deep all over the back yard. Are you sure you're a soil scientist and not some simple minded dirt farmer?
__________________
911 resource site by Mark Roberts
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home
Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance.
Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane?
Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude.
A W Smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 08:44 PM   #58
Rewey
Student
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 47
Originally Posted by A W Smith View Post
the first responders, witnesses, victims family members who received phone calls from the plane are all lying then? The volunteers who collected debris, papers, personal effects were fooled by a faked crash scene?
Did I just say that I NEVER SAID THE PLANE DIDN'T LAND THERE? Where do you get this from???

Quote:
We understands that you need to hate the US and attach a conspiracy to all it ever has done because of your feelings of inadequacy and powerlessness.
OK - I'll take umbrage to that comment. Everything I mentioned in that list was FACT. It has nothing to do with hatred or conspiracy. Are you saying that you believe that I was wrong in all of those historical examples, even though the Government agrees with me?

Quote:
Ill take one point to illustrate that don't know physics. Your ridiculous sand bag and projectile comparison. First the plane is not a small projectile. It is a huge aircraft composed of many parts.
Yeah... I said that (?)

Quote:
Are you sure you're a soil scientist and not some simple minded dirt farmer?
My goodness... what is it with you and reading??? I never called myself a 'soil scientist' - you guys at this forum did. Why is that so hard for you?

Rewey
Rewey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 08:51 PM   #59
Justin39640
Illuminator
 
Justin39640's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,199
Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
(snip)

Firstly, there’s something you guys need to accept. THERE IS NO OFFICIAL STORY with regards to Flight 93. NIST didn’t bother to make a report on this one. What does this mean? (snip)
the reason for that was
the NIST makes recommendations to improve future designs and improve existing ones

they dont investigate airplane crashes
since this plane crash was a crime the NTSB handed it off to the FBI
since there was no structures involved or egress plans (or lack of) to save lives
the NIST would have no business with flight 93

ETA: i think this shows that you may not fully grasp the reality of the situations youre typing about (not to mention disrespecting the dead, and apologizing for murderous terrorists)

Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
Secondly, why do I think it’s ludicrous that tiny fragments of plane could bury themselves up to 50 feet deep in the sand?
(snip)
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
"I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine
"The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus

Last edited by Justin39640; 5th July 2009 at 08:54 PM.
Justin39640 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 08:55 PM   #60
Rewey
Student
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 47
Thanks for pointing out the hijackers name thing - I found another thread from your link regarding 'victim lists' as opposed to 'passenger lists'...

Rewey
Rewey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 09:05 PM   #61
Justin39640
Illuminator
 
Justin39640's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,199
dont forget
bullets bury themselves in sandbags they dont bounce off
__________________
"I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine
"The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus
Justin39640 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 11:04 PM   #62
Rewey
Student
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 47
Originally Posted by A W Smith View Post
I repeated what I had observed in my parents back yard much to their dismay using nothing but a 10 foot length of steel pipe hooked up to a garden hose. sinking it repeatedsly to its full length using only light pressure and leaving 3/4 inch holes ten foot deep all over the back yard. Are you sure you're a soil scientist and not some simple minded dirt farmer?

Sorry, but I just can't let this one go. Do you even know how that works??? It has nothing to DO with pressure. The running water, when pushed into the ground, carries with it to the surface the loose grains of sand that are washed out of the hole. They are washed to the surface because the water going down the hole has nowhere to go but back up the hole again (once the surrounding soil is saturated).

So what's the point? Did Flight 93 have a garden hose attached?

Seriously... and you say I bring up dumb examples...

Rewey
Rewey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2009, 11:05 PM   #63
Rewey
Student
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 47
Originally Posted by Justin39640 View Post
dont forget
bullets bury themselves in sandbags they dont bounce off
You're absolutely right there, but not 50 feet into it.
Rewey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 12:24 AM   #64
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
 
LashL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 35,518
Originally Posted by Stellafane View Post
Oh jeebus, jeebus, jeebus.

The polite thing for me to do is to welcome you to the forum, at least in a perfunctory way. But despite the fact that I'm usually a reasonably well-mannered person, in this case I'm not going to do that. Because doing so would be more than a little hypocritical. You see, I'm so sick of this -- people who haven't the slightest clue what they're talking about making nonsense claims, claims that anyone with a partially functioning brain should instantly realize can only be true if hundreds of people conspired to kill thousands of innocent civilians for some murky and insane purpose.

What do you get out of this? I'm serious, I really want to know: what do you get out of this? Does it make you feel special somehow, accusing people you don't know of murder based upon some nursery-school misunderstanding of the science involved? Does the attention of a few lonely, misguided paranoids justify making such a vicious attack, while simultaneously disgracing the memory of the victims? Bear in mind, if what you're claiming is true, Todd Beamer and the other passengers lied -- indeed, they themselves where apparently in on the conspiracy. What do you think the victims' families would think of that? Does that bother you at all?

"Asking questions." I can scarcely believe that after nearly eight years after the fact, there are people still trying to justify their malicious, libelous crap under that tired old canard.
This bears repeating in its entirety. So, here it is.

Originally Posted by Stellafane View Post
Ah, I hear the distant "doink" of a xylaphone (inside joke).

Yes, everyone is entitled to an opinion. But not all opinions are equally meritorious, or deserve equal amounts of respect. As I suspect you would agree (perhaps not in this case, but at least in principle), an opinion based on facts, logic, and reason deserves more respect than one based on ignorance and paranoia.
This also bears repeating in its entirety. So, here it is.

Last edited by LashL; 6th July 2009 at 12:26 AM.
LashL is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 03:57 AM   #65
Rewey
Student
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 47
Originally Posted by Stellafane View Post
Does the attention of a few lonely, misguided paranoids justify making such a vicious attack, while simultaneously disgracing the memory of the victims?... What do you think the victims' families would think of that? Does that bother you at all?

I can scarcely believe that after nearly eight years after the fact, there are people still trying to justify their malicious, libelous crap under that tired old canard.

You know what? You would have been one of those people in 1915 saying "There's NO WAY the government would sacrifice over a thousand people JUST so they could get dragged into a war", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that the sinking of the Lusitania was exactly that.

And you would have been one of those people in 1941 saying "There's NO WAY the government would sacrifice thousands of servicemen JUST so they could get dragged into a war", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that the Pearl Harbour was exactly that.

And you would have been one of those people in the 60s saying "There's NO WAY the government would kill hundreds of civilians and engage in domestic terrorism JUST so they could overthrow a neighbouring government", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that Operation Northwood was exactly that.

And you would have been one of those people in 1964 saying "There's NO WAY the government would make up an imaginary torpedo attack JUST so they could get dragged into a war", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was exactly that.

And you would have been one of those people in 1993 saying "There's NO WAY the government would know about a truckbomb heading for the WTC and just let it happen", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that the WTC bombing was exactly that.

You know what? You can hassle me all you like about 'disgracing the memory of the victims', and whatever other emotive language you want to use, but at the end of the day, the track record speaks for itself. IN EVERY OTHER CASE it was people like YOU who ended up disgracing the memory of the victims with your ignorance...

You all carry on like 8 years is an eternity... Believe it or not, it's still within the statute of limitations for crimes such as murder, so the courts don't agree with you that it's too long for the truth to come out. For all of the examples above, the truth took decades to come out. The same will happen here... You blindly stand up for the government - what has it ever done for you? Seriously?
Rewey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 04:12 AM   #66
jhunter1163
beer-swilling semiliterate
 
jhunter1163's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Connecticut, or King Arthur's Court. Hard to tell sometimes.
Posts: 25,016
Someone here doesn't KNOW as much as he thinks he does.
__________________
A mųųse ųnce bit my sister
jhunter1163 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 04:13 AM   #67
T.A.M.
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,795
Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
None of whom appeared on the passenger manifests.
So you have seen the manifest? You state they did not appear on them, so please show us the copies of the manifests so we can confirm what you have said.

No don't bother, as I know you cannot. The fact is the closest ANYONE in the public domain has to the passenger manifests (not the victim list from CNN) are the passenger lists that McDermmott got from the FBI, which do reveal the hijackers. Your comments are so 2006.

Quote:
So there is a chance that there WAS a bomb on board? There is a chance then that this was used moments before it hit the ground? This might explain a different style of debris field...
He also said they would be returning to the airport to have their demands met, did he not (or at least one of the hijackers did)? That didn't happen, so why is his comment of a "bomb on board" to be taken any differently then an attempt at passenger control (just like the airport/demands comment).

Quote:
They were unable to get into the cockpit, yet the terrorists just crashed the plane instead of continuing to their original destination? Were they scared of the banging on the cockpit door? They clearly weren't afraid of dying, just loud shouting?
speculate much? Ok, while we are "speculating" what YOU think they should have done, here is what I speculate,

I speculate that they panicked, and in that panic, decided that rather then let the passengers in the cockpit, where they would be overwhelmed, and possibly (thinking in their panicked state) lose control of the aircraft back to the passengers, they decided to make sure they at least killed all on board, if they could not make it to their predefined target.

So how long before we find out you are a Dom or CIT sockpuppet? Or are you just one of the half dozen or so people foolish enough to believe their tripe?

TAM
T.A.M. is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 04:18 AM   #68
A W Smith
Philosopher
 
A W Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,032
Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
Sorry, but I just can't let this one go. Do you even know how that works??? It has nothing to DO with pressure. The running water, when pushed into the ground, carries with it to the surface the loose grains of sand that are washed out of the hole. They are washed to the surface because the water going down the hole has nowhere to go but back up the hole again (once the surrounding soil is saturated).

So what's the point? Did Flight 93 have a garden hose attached?

Seriously... and you say I bring up dumb examples...

Rewey
Was the fuel on flight 93 a liquid or a solid genius?
__________________
911 resource site by Mark Roberts
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home
Gravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance.
Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane?
Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude.
A W Smith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 04:25 AM   #69
JimBenArm
Based on a true story!
 
JimBenArm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,092
Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
You're absolutely right there, but not 50 feet into it.
So, would you like to compare the mass and kinetic energy of a bullet to that of a commercial airliner? Do you really think this is a valid comparison? Really? Really and truly?

Here's an exercise for you. I know that goes against your normal mode of operation, but try it anyway. Calculate the mass and inertia of a bullet, say a 9 millimeter from a handgun. Find out how far it would penetrate into said sandbags. Now, calculate the same thing for said airliner. I'm somewhat certain the values you come up with will be a tad bit larger than those for the projectile. Also, for extra credit, see if you can figure out how much further into the sandbag the pieces of the airliner will go after the fuel-air explosion after the crash. Bet it's even further. Of course, I'm only speculating. Nothing wrong with just asking questions, is there?

The only thing surprising about the 50 foot value is that it was ONLY 50 feet. At least to people with working brain stems.
__________________
"JimBenArm is right" Hokulele Mom
JimBenArm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 04:37 AM   #70
sleahead
Critical Thinker
 
sleahead's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 406
Originally Posted by rewey
Hate to point this out to you, but have a look at how long the 'truth' about the US involvement in other wars has taken to come out? Before it's FINALLY admitted as truth. Decades.

The truth about the warnings before the sinking of the Lusitania, whilst the US claimed they had no knowledge about German uboats. No-one could believe that the US would send a passenger ship deliberately into uboat infested waters, but it's now known that they did.


Did they really claim they knew nothing about the danger despite a warning from the German embassy being published in US newpapers?

No, the US did not send the Lusitania into dangerous waters. It was a British ship. Here is a list of the US ships sunk or damaged prior to the US declaration of war:

January 27, 1915: Schooner William P. Frye, gross 3,374 tons; captured by German auxiliary cruiser Prinz Eitel Friedrich (commerce raider) in South Atlantic, southeast of Brazil. Sunk January 28, 1915; no casualties

May 1, 1915: Steamship Gulflight, tanker, gross 5,189 tons; torpedoed by German submarine U-30, 20 miles west of Scilly Islands; towed in; 3 killed.

May 25, 1915: Steamship Nebraskan, gross 4,409 tons; torpedoed by German submarine 40 miles south by west of Southcliffe, off southwest; salvaged; no casualties.

July 25, 1915: Steamship Leelenaw, gross 1,923 tons fired on, torpedoed and sunk by German submarine off the north coast of Scotland about 60 miles northwest of the Orkney Islands; no casualties.

August 4, 1915: Pass of Balhamas, motor vessel, gross 1,571 tons, voluntarily surrendered by the master to a German submarine in the North Sea; converted into raider Seeadler; wrecked August 2, 1917; no casualties.

October 28, 1916: Steamship Lenao (Philippine steamship), gross 692 tons; bombed and sunk by a German submarine 30 miles off Cape Vincent, Portugal; no casualties.

November 7, 1916: Steamship Columbian, gross 8,673 tons; bombed and sunk by German submarine U-49, 50 miles northwest of Cape Ortegal, Spain, no casualties.

November 26, 1916: Steamship Chemung, gross 3,061 tons; torpedoed and sunk with gunfire by Austrian submarine in Mediterranean, 14 miles east of Cape de Gata, no casualties.

January 4, 1917: Steamship Norlina, gross 4,596 tons; damaged by torpedo fired by German submarine U-88 in Atlantic Ocean about 180 miles northwest of Inishtrahull Island off the north coast of Ireland, did not sink; no casualties.

January 13, 1917: Steamship Nyanza, damaged by gunfire from German submarine; 1 wounded.*

February 3, 1917: Steamship Housatonic, gross 3,143 tons; bombed and sunk by German submarine U-53, 20 miles south of Bishops Light off Scilly Islands, Great Britain, no casualties.

February 12, 1917: Lyman M. Law, schooner, gross 1,300 tons; captured and sunk by German submarine U-35 in the Mediterranean about 25 miles from land near Cagliari, Sardinia, no casualties.

March 12, 1917: Steamship Algonquin, gross 2,832 tons; sunk with gunfire and bombs by German submarine U-62, 65 miles west of Bishops, off Scilly Islands, Great Britain, no casualties.

March 16, 1917: Steamship Vigilancia, gross 4.115 tons; torpedoed and sunk by German submarine U-70, 145 miles west of Bishops, off Scilly Islands, Great Britain; 15 killed.

March 17, 1917: Steamship City of Memphis, gross 5,252 tons; sunk with gunfire by German submarine (UC type), 33 miles south of Fastnet, Ireland; no casualties.

March 18. 1917: Steamship Illinois, tanker, gross 5,225 tons; sunk with bombs by German submarine (UC type) in the English Channel, 20 miles north of Alderney, Channel Islands; no casualties.

March 21, 1917: Steamship Healdton, tanker, gross 4,489 tons; torpedoed and sunk by a German submarine 25 miles north of Terschelling, Holland, 20 killed.

April 1, 1917: Steamship Aztec, gross 3,727 tons; torpedoed and sunk by an enemy submarine (UC type), off Ushant Light, Quessant Island, northwest coast of France; 28 killed.

April 4, 1917: Marguerite, schooner, gross 1,553 tons; sunk with bombs by German submarine U-35 in the Mediterranean, 35 miles southwest of Sardinia; no casualties.

April 4, 1917: Steamship Missourian, gross 7,924 tons; shelled with gunfire and sunk by German submarine U-52 in the Mediterranean, near Porto Maurizio, Italy, no casualties.

April 7, 1917: Steamship Seward, gross 3,390 tons; bombed and sunk by German submarine U-52 in the Gulf of Lyons, Mediterranean Sea, about 25 miles east of Port Vendres, France, or 22 miles northeast of Cape Bagur, Spain; no casualties.

April 7, 1917: Edwin R. Hunt, schooner, gross 1,132 tons; sunk with gunfire by German submarine UC-25 in the Mediterranean 40 miles off Cape de Gata, Spain; no casualties
sleahead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 04:55 AM   #71
LightinDarkness
Master Poster
 
LightinDarkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,583
Oh god, yet another twoofer who absolutely failed political science and public policy. First of Rewey, no one believes you blindly "stumbled" upon JREF, you were googling your own posts because you have a ego that is larger than that of most twoofers.

Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
You know what? You would have been one of those people in 1915 saying "There's NO WAY the government would sacrifice over a thousand people JUST so they could get dragged into a war", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that the sinking of the Lusitania was exactly that.
Yes, I am ABSOLUTELY SURE the government would not fake terrorists attacks to get into a war where we gain absolutely nothing. Instead, if we just wanted to fake something to get into a war, a much smarter thing to do would to fake a foreign invasion via carpet bombing a town or two.

Failed history too. Don't twoofers usually use wikipedia to back up their sources. Have you read the wiki on the RMS Lusitania? Guess what, even Wikipedia acknowledges there is no evidence the United States government did anything to get it sinked:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Lusitania

Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
And you would have been one of those people in 1941 saying "There's NO WAY the government would sacrifice thousands of servicemen JUST so they could get dragged into a war", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that the Pearl Harbour was exactly that.
What we have here folks is full blown woo. No, the United States didn't sacrafice anyone to get into a war. Pearl Harbor was attacked by Japan.

Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
And you would have been one of those people in the 60s saying "There's NO WAY the government would kill hundreds of civilians and engage in domestic terrorism JUST so they could overthrow a neighbouring government", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that Operation Northwood was exactly that.
Bzzt. WRONG AGAIN! Operation Northwoods was never officially adopted or carried out.

Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
And you would have been one of those people in 1964 saying "There's NO WAY the government would make up an imaginary torpedo attack JUST so they could get dragged into a war", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was exactly that.
WRONG! There were indeed real attacks at the Gulf, the second attack claim was exaggerated.

Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
And you would have been one of those people in 1993 saying "There's NO WAY the government would know about a truckbomb heading for the WTC and just let it happen", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that the WTC bombing was exactly that.
WRONG! This did not happen anywhere except in twoofer imaginations.

And this is why no one will ever take you, ATS, or twoofers seriously, Rewey. Because from start to finish, you lie and distort and present things that are not real. None of the above were examples of the government doing anything to get us into a war. None of them.

Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
You know what? You can hassle me all you like about 'disgracing the memory of the victims', and whatever other emotive language you want to use, but at the end of the day, the track record speaks for itself. IN EVERY OTHER CASE it was people like YOU who ended up disgracing the memory of the victims with your ignorance...
Yes, the track record does speak for itself: In EVERY OTHER CASE THE HISTORICAL RECORD SHOWS YOU ARE A LIAR.


Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
ou blindly stand up for the government - what has it ever done for you? Seriously?
Actually, at JREF we stand up for reality. You, on the other hand, blindly rage against the machine.

Last edited by LightinDarkness; 6th July 2009 at 04:58 AM.
LightinDarkness is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 04:56 AM   #72
Pinch
Critical Thinker
 
Pinch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 400
Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
You know what? You would have been one of those people in 1915...

And you would have been one of those people in 1941...

And you would have been one of those people in the 60s...

And you would have been one of those people in 1964...

more historical revisionism snipped.
Rarely have I seen history so completely butchered through ignorance and selective annotation of conspiracy fantasies. It seems like every historical event was referenced in nothing more than its worst concoction by the CT'ers. I'll grant that many events of the past have anomalies in or about them - it is the nature of life - the same that 9/11 has anomalies in and about it, not to mention the human element in any of these events. Pursuing those anomalies to a conclusion that is always the absolute worst and assuming human decision making is *always* in a nefarious mode is nothing more than poor scholarship and ignorant reading of the past. People who are so fixed in hating their government regardless what facts or evidence is available are, really, sad and should stay away from the intellectual heavy lifting of the questions of the day.
__________________
"There's this thing about being so "open minded" your brain falls out". --Unknown
Pinch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 05:10 AM   #73
JimBenArm
Based on a true story!
 
JimBenArm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,092
Originally Posted by Pinch View Post
>snip< and should stay away from the intellectual heavy lifting of the questions of the day.
Oh, don't worry. They do. After all, all they do is ask questions. Really, really stupid questions. Then ignore the answers.
__________________
"JimBenArm is right" Hokulele Mom
JimBenArm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 06:24 AM   #74
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
 
kookbreaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,500
In what version of history did the USA enter WW1 in 1915?
__________________
www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun!

Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.
kookbreaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 06:25 AM   #75
Justin39640
Illuminator
 
Justin39640's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,199
Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
You're absolutely right there, but not 50 feet into it.
Originally Posted by JimBenArm View Post
So, would you like to compare the mass and kinetic energy of a bullet to that of a commercial airliner? Do you really think this is a valid comparison? Really? Really and truly?

Here's an exercise for you. I know that goes against your normal mode of operation, but try it anyway. Calculate the mass and inertia of a bullet, say a 9 millimeter from a handgun. Find out how far it would penetrate into said sandbags. Now, calculate the same thing for said airliner. I'm somewhat certain the values you come up with will be a tad bit larger than those for the projectile. Also, for extra credit, see if you can figure out how much further into the sandbag the pieces of the airliner will go after the fuel-air explosion after the crash. Bet it's even further. Of course, I'm only speculating. Nothing wrong with just asking questions, is there?

The only thing surprising about the 50 foot value is that it was ONLY 50 feet. At least to people with working brain stems.
sand is natures kevlar lol
yeah i cant understand why he cant understand why it happened that way

a bullet going just above the speed of sound buries itself say 5 inches
a bullet is a few grams
what happens when an object hits sand thats hundreds of thousands of kilograms?
it buries much further (say... 50 feet?)
and the parts didnt hit the ground individually they were still one whole airplane

you never answered the 1st part of what i pointed out to you in post 59
Originally Posted by Justin39640 View Post
the reason for that was
the NIST makes recommendations to improve future designs and improve existing ones

they dont investigate airplane crashes
since this plane crash was a crime the NTSB handed it off to the FBI
since there was no structures involved or egress plans (or lack of) to save lives
the NIST would have no business with flight 93

ETA: i think this shows that you may not fully grasp the reality of the situations youre typing about (not to mention disrespecting the dead, and apologizing for murderous terrorists)
seeing your concepts and beliefs are obviously WRONG there (you should understand the NIST's mission before you wrongly criticize what it did or didnt do)
wouldnt you go back at that point and reanalyze what you think to look for other errors? (esp after having all of your errors pointed out in B&W here and esp if youre ideas only came from sites with "911 truth" in the title or addy)
__________________
"I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine
"The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus
Justin39640 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 06:29 AM   #76
Justin39640
Illuminator
 
Justin39640's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,199
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
In what version of history did the USA enter WW1 in 1915?
lol
whats history when you have the "truth?"
just make it up as you go along lol
__________________
"I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine
"The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus
Justin39640 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 06:30 AM   #77
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
 
Stellafane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 7,637
Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
You know what? You would have been one of those people in 1915 saying "There's NO WAY the government would sacrifice over a thousand people JUST so they could get dragged into a war", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that the sinking of the Lusitania was exactly that.

And you would have been one of those people in 1941 saying "There's NO WAY the government would sacrifice thousands of servicemen JUST so they could get dragged into a war", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that the Pearl Harbour was exactly that.

And you would have been one of those people in the 60s saying "There's NO WAY the government would kill hundreds of civilians and engage in domestic terrorism JUST so they could overthrow a neighbouring government", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that Operation Northwood was exactly that.

And you would have been one of those people in 1964 saying "There's NO WAY the government would make up an imaginary torpedo attack JUST so they could get dragged into a war", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was exactly that.

And you would have been one of those people in 1993 saying "There's NO WAY the government would know about a truckbomb heading for the WTC and just let it happen", but guess what - we NOW KNOW that the WTC bombing was exactly that.

You know what? You can hassle me all you like about 'disgracing the memory of the victims', and whatever other emotive language you want to use, but at the end of the day, the track record speaks for itself. IN EVERY OTHER CASE it was people like YOU who ended up disgracing the memory of the victims with your ignorance...

You all carry on like 8 years is an eternity... Believe it or not, it's still within the statute of limitations for crimes such as murder, so the courts don't agree with you that it's too long for the truth to come out. For all of the examples above, the truth took decades to come out. The same will happen here... You blindly stand up for the government - what has it ever done for you? Seriously?
Wow -- from "just asking questions" mode to full-scale bug-eyed spittle-flying "all-history-as-CT, wake-up-sheeple!!" rant in one single post! That's got to be some sort of record.

You happen to be 100% correct in that I am "one of those people" you describe. You see, I don't base my beliefs on simply imagining what might have happened; I actually like to see a little something called "evidence." Which, I'm afraid, is in very short supply regarding the things you claim. Until you produce such evidence (and no, the paranoid delusions of some obscure CTers don't count) then you KNOW nothing; what you IMAGINE is another question entirely (and not one I care to go into too deeply, frankly).

Although I have to ask: Why didn't you lay your CT cards on the table when you came here? Why did you pretend that you were just "asking questions" about Shanksville and not making any claims that anything malicious happened? In other words, why did you follow lockstep in the same overworn and obvious path as countless Truthers before you? Did you actually think for a nanosecond we didn't see this coming 10 miles away?
__________________
Another Shameless Googlebomb Plug for www.stopsylvia.com
Stellafane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 06:46 AM   #78
Rewey
Student
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 47
Originally Posted by LightinDarkness View Post
First of Rewey, no one believes you blindly "stumbled" upon JREF, you were googling your own posts because you have a ego that is larger than that of most twoofers.
Actually, I googled "Shanksville physics" to find out more about it, and it was the second option... feel free to try it yourself.

Quote:
Failed history too. Don't twoofers usually use wikipedia to back up their sources. Have you read the wiki on the RMS Lusitania? Guess what, even Wikipedia acknowledges there is no evidence the United States government did anything to get it sinked
Well, gosh, if Wikipedia says so... How can you ridicule 'twoofers' for using it, then use it reliably yourself? The ads placed by the German embassy in the US newspapers warning about u-boat attacks were a response to reports to the German embassy that armaments were being carried as cargo on a passenger ship. Look it up... and try somewhere other than Wikipedia... who do you think was loading armaments on to the Lusitania, headed for England? It was an extension of the lend-lease scheme.

Quote:
What we have here folks is full blown woo. No, the United States didn't sacrafice anyone to get into a war. Pearl Harbor was attacked by Japan.
Of course it was attacked by Japan, but you need to look into the McCollum memo. FDR knew where the Japanese naval fleet was heading. He just didn't tell those in Hawaii. A diary entry by Secretary of Interior Harold Ickes: "For a long time I have believed that our best entrance into the war would be by way of Japan." Does this not equate to 'sacrificing' to you? It does to me...

Quote:
Bzzt. WRONG AGAIN! Operation Northwoods was never officially adopted or carried out.
Of COURSE it wasn't carried out. My God. But it showed the lengths that were considered in order to overthrow a foreign government. The fact that it was even considered by those in command should surely be bad enough?

Quote:
WRONG! There were indeed real attacks at the Gulf, the second attack claim was exaggerated.
I never said there weren't real attacks - but look further into the incident which sparked US involvement...

The funny thing is, I bet if I mentioned the Nazi's burning the Reichstag building for political benefit, you'd probably all agree, right? Is that just because they were the 'bad guys'?


Everyone here seems to be forgetting the "friendly and lively way"...
Rewey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 06:52 AM   #79
Rewey
Student
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 47
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
In what version of history did the USA enter WW1 in 1915?
The Lusitania was the first of three events which were required to change the public US perception of the war, as much of the public held to the US's traditional policy of isolationism.

This was followed by the Zimmerman telegram, and the sinking of more US merchant ships. It was after this that the US declared war...
Rewey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2009, 07:03 AM   #80
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
Originally Posted by Rewey View Post
Besides the fact that those comments are obviously in violation of the T&C’s of this site (awesome moderating), I get the feeling there are a few people here who feel proud that they are critical thinkers for no other reason that they post their thoughts on a website which claims it’s for critical thinking.
You were not at that time a member, and we will not apologize, especially in light of the way you are acting now. There is no violation of the terms and conditions. Don't get uppity about our natural reaction to your assertions.

Quote:
And leftysergeant, with regards to me drifting to the Pentagon from time to time – this was stated in the report as being well off topic. For those who continued with the thread on ATS, you’d also know that when someone pointed out evidence contrary to what I’d said, I THANKED THEM AND AMENDED MY REPORT. You see, unlike most people on both sides of the 9/11 debate, when someone points out evidence to show I’m wrong, I actually go back and amend my paper. I don’t immediately abuse the **** out of them. I’m currently working on Revision 1, which I’d hoped to finish tonight, but thought I’d better say a few things here instead. [continued...]
You don't get to do that. It has been nearly eight years. There is no excuse for you to be spewing Bunel's crap at people anymore. No one with a brain that works right has claimed that the plane went through six concrete walls in YEARS.

Last edited by leftysergeant; 6th July 2009 at 07:04 AM. Reason: typos
leftysergeant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:55 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.