lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Mar 10, 2006 12:54:51 GMT -4
I nominate this one: “Proof That Blue Screen Technology Was Used to Fake the 2nd Plane” reopen911.org/bluescreen.htmRunners up include: -“Silverstein admits he ordered the demolition of WTC 7” -“A missile hit the Pentagon” -The planes that struck the WTC were “pod planes” or “windowless jets” -“No plane parts in PA” Turbonium and feelfree, yeah I know you guys are going to say “19 Arab hijackers crashed passenger jets into the WTC towers (causing them to collapse) and the Pentagon” Len
|
|
|
Post by twinstead on Mar 10, 2006 13:27:33 GMT -4
Wow. Blue screen. It all makes sense now....
|
|
lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Mar 10, 2006 17:07:59 GMT -4
Wow. Blue screen. It all makes sense now.... Rather amazing they managed to blue screen it live on various networks simultaneously. Len
|
|
|
Post by twinstead on Mar 10, 2006 17:12:52 GMT -4
Wow. Blue screen. It all makes sense now.... Rather amazing they managed to blue screen it live on various networks simultaneously. Len Yea. Those dastardly clever fiendish bastards!
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Mar 10, 2006 19:19:20 GMT -4
Wow, the blue screen was so good that it convinced all the people who were there!
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Mar 11, 2006 1:22:06 GMT -4
Hmmm, yup I think that is better than the holographic planes.
|
|
|
Post by 911: Inside Job on Mar 29, 2006 13:02:49 GMT -4
I think the most improbable one is that one where a bunch of hung-over middle eastern amateur pilots hijacked four jet airplanes with box cutters, made NORAD stand down for over an hour, while they performed aerial maneuvers even professional pilots couldn't have done with commercial jets.
|
|
|
Post by phunk on Mar 29, 2006 14:06:25 GMT -4
Do you know what a box cutter is? How easily you could gut someone or slit their throat wide open with it?
I could fly a 767. Just don't ask me to takeoff or land. Does that make me a professional pilot? Nope.
The maneuvers that professionals couldn't do? Load of BS. They are maneuvers a professional WOULDN'T do, not COULDN'T. Sure signs that the pilots were not professionals because they flew recklessly and sloppily.
Norad didn't "stand down", they simply weren't setup to deal with this kind of situation. Nobody had ever hijacked a plane to use as a weapon before 9/11, hijackings before that were all about the hostages.
The hung-over bit is one I hadn't heard before, kinda funny too. So a couple of them (how many?) bought drinks (again, how many?) the night before. Understandable considering they were going to their deaths the next day.
|
|
|
Post by twinstead on Mar 29, 2006 14:06:51 GMT -4
I think the most improbable one is that one where a bunch of hung-over middle eastern amateur pilots hijacked four jet airplanes with box cutters, made NORAD stand down for over an hour, while they performed aerial maneuvers even professional pilots couldn't have done with commercial jets. LOL what a bunch of silly straw men Well, since the vast majority of pilots and structural engineers world wide disagree, I supposed you'd better come up with more evidence than some hyperbole, pseudoscience, conjecture, and uneducated opinions by folks not qualified to make them on obviously ideologically biased web sites, huh?
|
|
|
Post by 911: Inside Job on Mar 29, 2006 14:53:40 GMT -4
LOL what a bunch of silly straw menStraw men? I simply repeated the government's official story of what happened. Why not refute the facts? Well, since the vast majority of pilots and structural engineers world wide disagree, I supposed you'd better come up with more evidence than some hyperbole, pseudoscience, conjecture, and uneducated opinions by folks not qualified to make them on obviously ideologically biased web sites, huh?You think the 9/11 Commission didn't have a bias? Most of them were Bush appointed cronies or business associates of the Bush and Bin Laden families. (Why did Bush fly the Bin Ladens out the same day of the attacks?) They are maneuvers a professional WOULDN'T do, not COULDN'T. Sure signs that the pilots were not professionals because they flew recklessly and sloppily.You think a poorly trained "pilot" who never saw a cockpit could perform this maneuver? good luck, lol It required making a tight 270-degree turn while descending seven thousand feet, then leveling out so as to fly low enough over the highway just west of the Pentagon to knock down lamp posts. After crossing the highway the pilot had to take the plane to within inches of the ground so as to crash into the Pentagon at the first-floor level and at such a shallow angle that an engine penetrated three rings of the building, while managing to avoid touching the lawn. And he had to do all of this while flying over 400 mph. Quite a feat for a flight school flunky who had never sat in the cockpit of a jet! Norad didn't "stand down", they simply weren't setup to deal with this kind of situation. Nobody had ever hijacked a plane to use as a weapon before 9/11, hijackings before that were all about the hostages.Ah yes, the incompetence defence. How lucky for the hijackers that the NORAD was completely incompetent that day, and couldn't perform a single intercept in over an hour! lol Also they were running drills that morning with the scenario of flying airplanes as weapons into buildings. They never heard of such an idea? good one. So maybe NORAD thought it was a drill instead of the real thing? How convenient for the hijackers that they were running drills that morning of the exact same operation. (This is a documented fact, not a theory.) Then there are the numerous mainstream news reports of people being warned not to fly that day. And then there were the put option purchases of United and American that were 6 times higher than normal. All urban legends, I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Mar 29, 2006 17:06:49 GMT -4
Straw men? I simply repeated the government's official story of what happened. You did more than that... you added your own spin to make the hijackers appear to be too incompetant to do what the "official story" says they did. Those "facts" have been refuted many times already. That's a myth. Many Bin Laden family members did leave the country but not until after the ban on air travel was lifted. Another thing that bothers me about what you said is that it implies all members of the Bin Laden family (and anyone else even remotely associated with them) are guilty of the crimes of Osama Bin Laden. If a relative of your commited a murder would you want to be held responsible for it as well? Guilt by association is what you're talking about, and that is EXACTLY why members of the Bin Laden family wanted to leave the country. I've never been in the cockpit of a large airplane but I've got enough understanding of the controls from using MS Flight Simulator to change the autopilot to a new course. If you don't care whether or not the plane crashes it would be pretty easy to fly the way the hijackers did. Even if the plane missed the intended target (the Pentagon) the hijackers still would have succeeded in killing the passengers. How does that support the theory that the US government was behind the 9/11 attacks? Osama Bin Laden was very wealthy and he had prior knowledge of the attacks... he could have been trying to benefit financially from the attacks. I'm not saying that is definately what it was, but if you're allowed to theorize about what it means then so am I.
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Mar 29, 2006 17:10:51 GMT -4
NORAD did not stand down that day. It was in a routine peacetime posture that had minimal planes on alert, looking towards a threat from outside. Were you ever in the Air Defense business? Do you know what "scramble" means? 5 minute alert? MSO? CAP? Your ignorance of these things is astounding...you watch and believe way too much TV...
|
|
|
Post by 911: Inside Job on Mar 29, 2006 20:43:54 GMT -4
All I've got to say is look here and elsewhere, and educate yourselves to the actual facts, while you still can. Prison Planet and Infowars are good at documenting the growing world police state. The truth is less pleasant than believing the establishment fiction, but it's the only thing that will prevent the next staged attack on America and elsewhere. If a critical mass of people haven't woken up by then, it will probably be too late to save the dwindling freedoms we have left in the western world.
|
|
|
Post by twinstead on Mar 29, 2006 21:06:05 GMT -4
All I've got to say is look here and elsewhere, and educate yourselves to the actual facts, while you still can. Prison Planet and Infowars are good at documenting the growing world police state. The truth is less pleasant than believing the establishment fiction, but it's the only thing that will prevent the next staged attack on America and elsewhere. If a critical mass of people haven't woken up by then, it will probably be too late to save the dwindling freedoms we have left in the western world. Perhaps you could take your own advice and think for yourself instead of being force fed from biased conspiracy sites what you will believe. Folks here think for themselves, and base their opinions about things like evidence and opinions of experts in their fields. Folks like you are told what to think, and you spew it verbatim on threads like this, all the while ignoring any evidence contrary to your predisposed beliefs. You are fooling no one on this board. Perhaps conspiracy site forums are a better choice?
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Mar 29, 2006 21:17:15 GMT -4
The sites are rubbish. If they indeed are so factual and revealing of the conspiracy, why do they still exist? Seems the "dark forces" would have swept in and taken them out along with all involved with them.
Alas, your conspiracy is just a child's fantasy world...geared to the ignorant and paranoid....and their "facts" are still totally wrong.
|
|