31 of 33
31
Official 9/11 Story is a hoax
Posted: 12 December 2010 05:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 331 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  61098
Joined  2005-04-14

2) The second part:  they were morons.

Well, I’m certainly not going to argue that they weren’t idiots to have done what they did.

 Signature 

“If any man wish to write in a clear style, let him be first clear in his thoughts.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 December 2010 05:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 332 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  61098
Joined  2005-04-14

3) The third part:  they lived in a cave.

Here the conspiracy theorists are mixing up cause and effect.  Some members of Al Qaeda were indeed living in caves at various times.  They were living there because the US and other countries had dropped bombs all over their above-ground buildings.  Their above-ground buildings were blown up because of the 9/11 attacks.  How, then, does it follow that the hijackers were a bunch of guys living in a cave?

In reality, Al Qaeda had many quite modern and well-equipped buildings to operate out of before the 9/11 attacks.  Heck, that was the reason why the Taliban in Afghanistan became so unpopular immediately after the attacks:  they’d been providing a whole fancy compound to Al Qaeda, along with training facilities.  Remember, bin Laden was a multimillionaire and Al Qaeda was a banking organisation.  Money was not in short supply for them.  They could afford nice lodgings and fancy equipment.

Besides, even if they had planned out the attacks while living in a cave, so what?  Ever heard of Cheyenne Mountain?

 Signature 

“If any man wish to write in a clear style, let him be first clear in his thoughts.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 December 2010 05:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 333 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  61098
Joined  2005-04-14

4.  They were armed with box-cutters.

This is one case where the conspiracy theorists are actively editing the evidence to fake their claims.  There was indeed one call where the person might have said that there were box cutters being used.  However, that is far from the whole story.

From on American Airlines Flight 11, two of the flight attendants managed to place telephone calls.  Both of them mentioned that the terrorists had used knives and something like pepper spray, and at least one of the callers said that the terrorists also claimed to have a bomb on board.

From United Airlines Flight 175, three of the people who managed to make calls mentioned knives, and one caller (Lee Hanson) mentioned knives and pepper spray and the threat of a bomb.

From United Airlines Flight 93, there were ten calls within which the callers mentioned that the terrorists had knives and a bomb, and we even had one of the terrorists himself hit the wrong button (he meant to turn on the intercom and instead turned on the radio) and announced the presence of a supposed bomb.

From American Airlines Flight 77, there were two people who were able to call and made mention of how the terrorists were armed.  One mentioned that the hijackers had knives.  The other, Barbara Olson, may have mentioned box cutters. . .and knives.  Why

 Signature 

“If any man wish to write in a clear style, let him be first clear in his thoughts.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 December 2010 05:22 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 334 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  61098
Joined  2005-04-14

5.  They couldn’t fly an airplane.

The Truthers repeatedly proclaim that there’s no way that Atta, Hanjour, Jarrah, and Shehhi could have been able to fly the airplanes once the hijackers took over.  For one thing, remember, these pilots are supposedly morons.  Also, they supposedly failed flight training.

The problem with that idea is that it’s false.  We’ve already seen that they were far from morons, even if they did make some decisions that are downright stupid.  But also, all four men had passed flight school and earned flying licenses.

Atta got his private flying license from Huffman Aviation in Florida in September of 2000, and his instrument rating in November.  In December the FAA granted him a commercial pilot’s license.  He flew numerous solo flights, as well as spent a good bit of time in airliner simulators.

Hanjour had most of his flight training in Arizona; though he was rather slack in his attendance, the FAA granted him his commercial pilot certificate in April 1999.

Jarrah took a six-month flight training course at Florida Flight Training Center in 2000, and obtained a small airplane license.  He then went on to training for flying large aircraft.

Shehhi went to Huffman Aviation in Florida with Atta, and received his commercial pilot’s license at the same time.  He also spent much time on airliner simulators.

So, all four of the pilots had earned at least basic piloting licenses.  Which means that all four had met the FAA’s standards of

 Signature 

“If any man wish to write in a clear style, let him be first clear in his thoughts.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 December 2010 05:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 335 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  61098
Joined  2005-04-14

Let’s look one last time at that list of claims by the Truthers:

1.  It was the work of just nineteen hijackers.  FALSE  It was the work of a large, wealthy, sophisticated organisation.

2.  They were morons.  FALSE  They were all at least of average intelligence (and some perhaps above average), and more than smart enough for what they needed to do.

3.  They lived in a cave.  FALSE  They lived all over the world, in completely modern buildings with modern equipment.

4.  They were armed with box-cutters.  FALSE  They were perhaps armed with box-cutters, and more certainly they were armed with knives and pepper-spray and the threat of bombs.

5.  They couldn’t pilot an airplane.  FALSE  The pilots were all qualified pilots, and they didn’t even have any difficult flying tasks to perform.

So the Truthers’ attempts to minimalise and marginalise to support their claims fail on all counts.

And yes, I realise that most of the information I used in the above arguments was from

 Signature 

“If any man wish to write in a clear style, let him be first clear in his thoughts.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 May 2011 01:07 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 336 ]
New Member
Rank
Total Posts:  20
Joined  2011-05-17

Accipiter, if you do not work for the Government, you should.  If you had spent as much time reading the facts of the case as you have spent blathering on this forum you might be a wiser man for it.  The “list” is not even relevent or correct and does not address the important questions regarding 9/11.  The large sophisticated organization you refer to is the Military Industrial Complex.  No serious researcher has stated the hi-jackers were morons or lived in a cave or only had box cutters.  The task of flying the plane into the Pentagon was considered almost impossible according to qualified jet pilots with that particular aircraft.  Rather than crashing straight into it, he had to perform a very complicated manuver to hit the building precisely where there was construction taking place accounting for the low loss of life in that building.  Also since the entry hole was far to small it was most likely a cruise missile that hit.  I see by your 60,000 posts you have a lot of time on your hands.  Question authority and examine both sides of an issue before posting tripe.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 May 2011 01:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 337 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5151
Joined  2005-01-27

hrmpppfff

 Signature 


“By the sweat on our brows, and the strengths of´╗┐ our backs…Gentlemen. Hoist the Colours! And you, madam, I warn you, I know the entire Geneva Convention by heart!”
Trust me.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 May 2011 04:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 338 ]
New Member
Rank
Total Posts:  20
Joined  2011-05-17

UB, I apologize somewhat for my bluntness.  I am new on this forum but I take very seriously my oath when I joined the USAF to protect my country from enemies both foreign and domestic.  In doing my research on 9/11 I have come up with enough valid points to completely reject the official story.  Anyone who ignores the facts and accepts the official story is guilty of only ignorance.  When you actually get up and defend the story in the face of mounting evidence against it you become a defender of injustice and become an accessory to the lie.  If you don’t know the problems with the official story and don’t mistrust authority than you are not doing what our founding fathers charged us with; to keep the Republic from harm.  Even the most trusting of people when confronted with the plethora of problems with the official story must admit there are things that need to be looked at more deeply.  These so called “truthers” are not idiots running around with tin foil hats.  Many engineers and architects that understand the WTC construction methods have signed petitions to get at the truth.  While I understand many conspiracies are complete BS, they must be seperated from valid examples of treason against the American people such as the killing of JFK, RFK and MLK to mention a few.  Eisenhower and Smedley Butler warned us against the Military Industrial Complex and they were in a position to know.  For another good example of a conspiracy that almost no one knows about, google “The Business Plot”.  Thanks for your time.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 May 2011 03:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 339 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  141
Joined  2010-09-21
Bulletdodger - 17 May 2011 08:57 PM

  I am new on this forum but I take very seriously my oath when I joined the USAF to protect my country from enemies both foreign and domestic.

Which ( if a true statement) means you are a patriot, not that you have any expertise in the areas covered by the official story.

In doing my research on 9/11 I have come up with enough valid points to completely reject the official story.

Where did you do your research, and where did the data that caused you to reject the official story come from?

From your suggestion to look up an item on Google, I suspect the answer to both questions is “the internet”.

It’s also possible to do “research” (using google)  and find a lot of information on bigfoot, crop circles, and Atlantis ( probably the Loch Ness monster too).

 Signature 

“Facts are meaningless - you could use facts to prove anything that’s even remotely true!

“Weaseling out of things is what separates us from the animals. Except the weasel.” ... H Simpson

“The voices in my head may not be real, but they have some good ideas.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 May 2011 01:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 340 ]
New Member
Rank
Total Posts:  20
Joined  2011-05-17

Most of the information I based my conclusions on came from the book “The New Pearl Harbour”.  Google has plenty of information from detractors and supporters of the “Truthers”.  Based on a video documentary I saw produced by the Veteran’s for Truth organization I came to see some of the major fallacies in the official story which led me to the book.  Once I saw the WTC building 7 collapse which was clearly a demolition, yet not even mentioned in the official 9/11 Commision Report, I began to analyze deeper into the official story.  WTC building 7 is the key because video evidence clearly shows it was taken down by explosives and no sane person who saw the video of it coming down could say otherwise.  Also in both WTC buildings a pool of molten steel was found still incredibly hot weeks after the event.  For steel to melt and pool, and stay hot for that period of time would take temperatures only high explosives could create.  I do not purport to be an expert of any type, but I have taken the time to learn about the demolition of buildings and also learned through my associations with Fire Marshalls, (experts on structure fires), that no steel building has ever collapsed, even one that burned for over 24 hours in Brazil.
    Now, what have you done to convince yourself one way or another that this was not a “false Flag” exercise that precipitated the worst violation of our Civil Rights through the aggregious Patriot Act.  Not to mention an excuse to enter two illegal wars.  How many deaths of innocents can you carry on your conscious by not questioning the “Official Story”.  I have spent many years studying the duplicity involving the murders of JFK, RFK and MLK and can see a clearly similar pattern involving the cover-up and the disregarding of key evidence that keeps Americans in the dark.  Feotu, is this what you stand for, questioning someones patriotism because they dare to question authority? I hope not…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 May 2011 06:22 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 341 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  61098
Joined  2005-04-14
Bulletdodger - 17 May 2011 05:07 PM

Accipiter, if you do not work for the Government, you should.  If you had spent as much time reading the facts of the case as you have spent blathering on this forum you might be a wiser man for it.

Ummm. . .if you’d bothered to read any of that

 Signature 

“If any man wish to write in a clear style, let him be first clear in his thoughts.”

Profile
 
 
   
31 of 33
31