United 93, opening old wounds and exposing some truth?

[Lanny_MacDonald]

A comment on the released video.

This is NOT security video from the system used to cover any federal or state government building. The resolution and frame rate does not meet the government security standard. This looks like the observation video from a parking gate camera used to capture and digitally analyze employees pictures as they enter a restricted lot. The release of this video is NOT convincing in any manner. The vidoe system in use at ALL federal facilities is ultra-high resolution and captures data at 30 frames per second. Any images captured can be enlarged 4 or 5 times without any degradation of picture quality. As well, all building are covered in a mesh configuration, meaning two cameras are on any one spot at any given time. The cameras are also set in positions where it is impossible to tamper with them and they are protected in secure enclosures that are damn near indestructable. Since this is the Pentagon, you can be sure that there would be extra devices in use, like infrared and motion sensor equipment. All of this data would lead to irrefutable proof of what struck the Pentagon. The failure to release this data supports the claims that something is not on the up and up.

The Shanksville crash is also another huge question mark. The government has never explained how an engine, items from the cabin of the plane, and human remains ended up 8 and a half miles from where the impact crater (another anomoly in this event). There are other inconsistencies as well. What's quite interesting is the 9/11 Commission Report ignored large chunks of evidence and refused to hear testimony from witnesses that didn't fit their story. There is so much evidence of something larger than was represented by the government, and its not just a string of coincidences. I could go into great detail, supported by experts in their fields of research, stories and facts in the media during the events that have been glossed over, and testimony from those that were first responders. But why bother? If you question the highly questionable story that has been accepted as fact, and demand the inconsistencies be expalined, you're a conspiracy "wing nut theorist", even if you have 1000 times more information on the subject matter than those you are arguing with.

[transplant99]

Are you STILL on this tirade about the Pentagon Lanny?

Have you looked at this compilation of evidence and still have an ability to believe that the US hsot a missile at its own military headquarters??

Review the facts

Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)
Rims found in building match those of a 757
Small turbine engine outside is an APU
Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine
Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos
Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo
Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211
Structural components photographed in wreckage match Boeing paint primer schemes
Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object
Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon
60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage


http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/..._evidence.html


Also a very comprehensive report on the Pentagon's building performance.

http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Are you STILL on this tirade about the Pentagon Lanny?

I will continue to question the “official story” as long as there are so many holes in the logic. How many more lies and inconsistencies do you have to be exposed to before you begin to question the events that have unfolded in the past six years?

Have you looked at this compilation of evidence and still have an ability to believe that the

US hsot a missile at its own military headquarters??

That compilation of evidence that has been debunked in that same thread by people who have military and FAA crash scene investigation experience.

Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)

Yup, the fuselage of the plane is close to those dimensions, but what about those big heavy things on the wings that hang 30 feet off center of the aircraft? Where is the damage from the engines? Going by your theory, the engines some how got sucked into the same hole the fuselage made. What’s ironic is that the engines are what make the majority of the damage, as they are made of the most indestructible materials in a plane (outside of the black boxes). The fuselage should have crumpled like a beer can as it hit the reinforced concrete structure of the Pentagon, not managed to continue on to create a perfectly formed circular blast hole in the “C” ring of the building. The engines should have created the greatest damage, not the nose of the fuselage.

http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/ArticlesMeyer3March2006.html

And speaking of the black boxes, how comes the black boxes were not recovered? They are designed to survive 3400 Gs of force and temperatures in the thousands of degrees, but they did not survive the impact?

Rims found in building match those of a 757

And if the Smithsonian had been hit they would have found remnants of the Apollo lander. That wouldn’t mean that Neil Armstrong attacked the building. That wing of the Pentagon had been under renovation for months and access was restricted. Who knows what could have been planted in that building. As well, the rims have been identified as possibly being from numerous different aircraft.

Small turbine engine outside is an APU

That’s incorrect. That part was identified as not being part of any Boeing product. Dis can even back this up as he knows the 757 airframe extremely well.

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?read=37640

Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine

That’s great! Who said a Global Hawk hit the Pentagon? If they were going to remotely fly a vehicle into the Pentagon, a 757 would be just as easy to use as a Global Hawk to do the job. But neither vehicle is capable of creating the damage the Pentagon sustained.

Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos
Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo

Which some how were not there when the original media showed up on the scene and began filming. These pieces only showed up when the media was moved well back from the scene and the site secured. They are the “magic parts” that weren’t there one minute, but appeared while the first responders from the media were escorted from the scene.

Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211

That is still open to debate. There are as many people who refute that claim as support it.

Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object
Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion

This information is misleading. The damage and movement of the generator could very easily have been created by the explosion. The movement of the generator away or towards the Pentagon is dependent on the axis of which it moved. This is a red herring that is supposed to be accepted as fact, when in reality it holds no proof one way or another.

Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner
Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon

Multiple eye-witnesses say they did NOT see and airliner and did NOT seen an airliner hit the Pentagon. This testimony was ignored by the 9/11 Commission because it did not fit with their “official” explanation. Funny how that happened.

60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage

Months after the fact. Since you decided to broach this subject matter, how come not a single arab hijacker was found in the wreckage? How come they weren’t on the flight manifest? If all of these bodies were recovered, how come the body of a single hijacker was recovered? It doesn’t fit.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/..._evidence.html

Oh, the irony of you using a conspiracy theory web site to try and support your argument. That made me laugh out loud, in a good way btw (you've turned to the darkside?).

I guess you missed the part where much of what this guy said was debunked by people with military and FAA crash scene investigation experience?

Also a very comprehensive report on the Pentagon's building performance.

http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf

Comprehensive bunk. I work with NIST documents every day and they are long on structure and short on content. The NIST reports, along with the 9/11 Commission report, have both been shredded by those who should be supporting them, academia. The academics are coming out of the wood work to crucify these reports for the shoddy methods they used and the poor findings they came to. They have been identified as documents that were written with a purpose, not documents that outlined findings. The story was already written and what ever evidence could be found to support their cause was inserted. Anything that contradicted their story was omitted.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

How about you take a run at these questions now?


Flight 77 was tracked traveling at a velocity that should have had it hitting the Pentagon at 9:15. It disappeared from radar for some 20 minutes before mysteriously popping up on radar again over Washington, 20 minutes behind its original projected trajectory. Where did it go, and how is it possible that it lost 20 minutes of flight time?

NORAD has the most complex radar net on the planet and openly brags it knows of and can track anything in North American airspace at any time. But somehow it lost track of a 757?


There supposedly wasn’t enough time to scramble fighters to defend the capital. Edwards air force base is 11 miles from the Pentagon. How much time does it take to scramble fighters that are on 24x7 alert? NORAD also knew of high jacked planes at 8:40, so why the huge delay in getting planes in the air?


Flight 77 was supposedly flown by the most incompetent of the arab pilots, Hanjour, yet the plane takes an incredible flight path to hit the Pentagon, flying past it, then doing a 270 degree turn WHILE dropping 4,000 feet before skimming along the ground and striking the first floor of the Pentagon. No damage to the lawn (so no impact), so he went in cleanly. Pretty impressive flying for a guy who couldn’t land a Cessna. How it possible that Hanjour could have pulled off this flying maneuver that many experienced military pilots could not? This maneuver would have either stalled the engines or slammed the plane into the ground.

Why would Hanjour decide to take this course? The people that perpetrated this plot were supposedly highly intelligent and well informed. It is widely known that the east wing of the Pentagon houses all the brass, so why strike the wing as far away from there? If al Qaeda had been observing their targets they would have known that the west wing was under renovation and no one but civilian workers were there. That would have been no target. The correct target would have been directly in on the flight path the plane was on, not the sweeping 270 degree turn with a sudden drop in altitude. Why this obvious error in targeting?


The Pentagon is protected by several missile batteries designed to take out any air threat. Only planes with military transponders are considered a non-threat. Why did this system fail?


Finally, the Pentagon is one of the most secure above ground buildings in the world. It has some of the most sophisticated video monitoring systems available, yet the best they can produce as evidence of the attack is two manipulated videos from a parking lot.


http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/A...23May2006.html


Where are the other videos that would conclusively prove once and for all what hit the Pentagon. Speaking from experience, you do not release evidence that is damning to your cause unless directed to do so. There are supposed to be another 84 angles of this incident, all of them shot with ultra-high resolution cameras at 30 fps, so why is this footage not being released? If they are confident that their story is true, why not just release the video and put it to bed. If the “conspiracy theory” is a house of cards, why not destroy it by releasing the video?


Call me a skeptic or a whacko or what ever it takes to let you sleep at night, but I refuse to believe anything that doesn’t have realistic proof behind it. When you have experts and academics question the story for its plausibility I think there is something there. This subject is no longer on the fringe and owned by the “nut jobs”. 70 million Americans believe the books were cooked and want 9/11 reinvestigated. That means they believe that the conspiracy theory cooked up by the government (and it is nothing more than a conspiracy theory, equally as implausible as many of those floating around the web) is not convincing. There are too many holes in the story. Way too many “coincidences” to have happened for there not to be more to this. Do I know what happened? Nope. But I certainly don’t believe the story that has been floated to this point. There is too much evidence to support something else going on. I’ll continue to wait until the trail either goes cold or consensus can be reached.

[transplant99]

Hey man...you want to be consumed by a conspiracy theory so completely out of the realm of reality....knock yourself out, Im far to busy doing other things and have already been having this silly debate for years on other sites.

the entire reason i linked that particular site was because it WAS a conspiracy site and was an extremely in depth debate as to what happened and was debunked by conspiracy theorists themselves...that was 2 years ago, and before the latest round of video was released.

Its pretty simple to understand IMO. A plane hit the Pentagon. It happened....no other way around it.

Otherwise where are the people that boarded that plane that morning? Pretty simple question and one without answer of any significance from the fringe whackos.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Hey man...you want to be consumed by a conspiracy theory so completely out of the realm of reality....knock yourself out, Im far to busy doing other things and have already been having this silly debate for years on other sites.

In your opinion. I also think you do not have enough information to go on and have a predisposition to believing what ever the government tells you. You believed every excused the Bush admin trotted out for the invasion of Iraq, so I think my case has been made. You don't have a history of questioning anything the government says. I have a history of questioning anything ANYONE says.

the entire reason i linked that particular site was because it WAS a conspiracy site and was an extremely in depth debate as to what happened and was debunked by conspiracy theorists themselves...that was 2 years ago, and before the latest round of video was released.

Nothing was debunked. As many holes in that gentleman's story have been poked as the ones he attempted to close.

Its pretty simple to understand IMO. A plane hit the Pentagon. It happened....no other way around it.

In your highly uneducated opinion. There are too many things that don't add up and too many people with a high level of expertise questioning the story. As more and more people begin to question the story the more analysis is done and the more credability the cover story continues to lose.

Otherwise where are the people that boarded that plane that morning? Pretty simple question and one without answer of any significance from the fringe whackos.

Where are they? Dead. Pretty simple. You think for a second that the government would not kill 60 of its own citizens based on the number of lies its untaken in the past six years? Those people are dead, killed for political gain, no matter how you want to look at it. I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I do not believe that they have been wisked away to soem tropical island retreat and are living out their days as patriots to the cause. They were dead the minute they booked passage on that plane. What is questionable is how and where they were killed. I don't believe they were on what ever hit the Pentagon. The damage to the building and the lack of damage to the grounds is just not condusive to a plane crash.

Hey, I'll ask you a question that none of the "mainstream whackos" have been able to answer. Where were the bodies at the Pentagon? Why were there no bodies or body parts strewn across the Pentagon lawn? I dn't want to sound macabre, but in a catestrophic crash like that, there are bodies and personal effects every where. Where's the beef? Where's the luggage???

[transplant99]

"We were the only people, we think, who saw it live," Dan Creed said. He and two colleagues from Oracle software were stopped in a car near the Naval Annex, next to the Pentagon, when they saw the plane dive down and level off. "It was no more than 30 feet off the ground, and it was screaming. It was just screaming. It was nothing more than a guided missile at that point," Creed said. "I can still see the plane. I can still see it right now. It's just the most frightening thing in the world, going full speed, going full throttle, its wheels up,"

Frank Probst, an information management specialist for the Pentagon Renovation Program, left his office trailer near the Pentagon's south parking lot at 9:36 a.m. Sept. 11. Walking north beside Route 27, he suddenly saw a commercial airliner crest the hilltop Navy Annex. American Airlines Flight 77 reached him so fast and flew so low that Probst dropped to the ground, fearing he'd lose his head to its right engine."
- "A Defiant Recovery." The Retired Officer Magazine, January 2002

"Aydan Kizildrgli, an English language student who is a native of Turkey, saw the jetliner bank slightly then strike a western wall of the huge five-sided building that is the headquarters of the nation's military. 'There was a big boom,' he said. 'Everybody was in shock. I turned around to the car behind me and yelled "Did you see that?" Nobody could believe it.'"
- "Bush Vows Retaliation for 'Evil Acts'." USA Today, 11 Sep 2001

Gary Bauer former Presidential candidate,

"I looked at the woman sitting in the car next to me. She had this startled look on her face. We were all thinking the same thing. We looked out the front of our windows to try to see the plane, and it wasn�t until a few seconds later that we realized the jet was coming up behind us on that major highway. And it veered to the right into the Pentagon. The blast literally rocked all of our cars. It was an incredible moment." Massachusetts News

Sean Boger, Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower chief - "I just looked up and I saw the big nose and the wings of the aircraft coming right at us and I just watched it hit the building," Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower chief Sean Boger said. "It exploded. I fell to the ground and covered my head. I could actually hear the metal going through the building." dcmilitary.com November 16, 2001

"The only way you could tell that an aircraft was inside was that we saw pieces of the nose gear. The devastation was horrific. It was obvious that some of the victims we found had no time to react. The distance the firefighters had to travel down corridors to reach the fires was a problem. With only a good 25 minutes of air in their SCBA bottles, to save air they left off their face pieces as they walked and took in a lot of smoke," Captain Defina said. Captain Defina was the shift commander [of an aircraft rescue firefighters crew.] NFPA Journal November 1, 2001

All these people, and literally thousands of others, would have to be part of the worlds largest fraud.deceit and subsequent cover-up. All of them liars as well.

Think of who would of had to be "in on it" to make it anything other than an airplane Lanny.

Firstly the Pentagon itself and hundreds of employees inside their on that day. Hundreds and hundreds of eyewitnesses, the DC police, the DC firefighters, the FBI, the CIA, the FAA, and the entire Bush administration including aides and employees. Also, in order for the US military to launch a missile at any time, there would have to be a chain of command that would issue orders for the target on US soil, that would start with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and work its way down the chain.

Literally IMPOSSIBLE to pull off no matter what the fringe wants to say and/or believe.

And to top it all off, the masterminds of this "missile strike" and subsequent cover-up, who (if this happened) pulled off the greatest fraud of all time and plotted beyond everything ever seen, would of been the same guys that didnt have the foresight to plant WMD in Iraq after going into the country based on those claims.

You really believe that ANY of the above is reasonable or believeable? Honestly...its so ridiculous its almost funny.

But because I, and literally 100's of millions of others, disagree with the bizarre and impossible scenario you are trying to sell....we are (to quote you) "highly uneducated".

Beautiful.

[White Doors]

Hard to argue with that Transplant. I'm sure Lanny will however.
:/

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by transplant99

All these people, and literally thousands of others, would have to be part of the worlds largest fraud.deceit and subsequent cover-up. All of them liars as well.

Nice list of witnesses, some of the dubious (Gary Bauer, sweet jesus!), but some very good. I could trot out a list as well, but what is the use. It's one guys word against another. It is always difficult to argue with "eye witnesses", especially if they have not been properly deposed. The biggest issue with all of thee witnesses is whether they would know a 757 from 737 from a commuter jet. Would they be able to differentiate between what they saw and what hit the Pentagon. The window of opportunity to see anything was very small based on the flight path the "plane" took. The reliability of witnesses is questionable at the best of times. Cooberating physical evidence (like video from survellience systems for example) would sew up the case.

Think of who would of had to be "in on it" to make it anything other than an airplane Lanny.

How many? Not many. It's called compartmentalization. How many do you think were involved in the release of Valerie Plame's name? How many do you think were involved in Iran Contra? Compartmentalization restricts the number of resources that have the full story.

Firstly the Pentagon itself and hundreds of employees inside their on that day.

That's misleading, and you know it. The Pentagon is one of the biggest buildings in the world, and it is broken into wings. The west wing was deserted for renovations. Outside of contractors working on the wing, it was empty.

Hundreds and hundreds of eyewitnesses, the DC police, the DC firefighters, the FBI, the CIA, the FAA, and the entire Bush administration including aides and employees.

The whole concept to create an illusion for people to believe. The illusion can be created by a few and the results create the cover story. All that has to be done is get the events rolling. This is the type of operation that the CIA has done successfully in the past on numerous occassions.

Also, in order for the US military to launch a missile at any time, there would have to be a chain of command that would issue orders for the target on US soil, that would start with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and work its way down the chain.

Doesn't have to be the military. Could be the CIA. Compartmentalization.

Literally IMPOSSIBLE to pull off no matter what the fringe wants to say and/or believe.

Yeah, just like its impossible to put one over on the American people and some how execute a plan to invade Iraq that had been on the books for five years?

And to top it all off, the masterminds of this "missile strike" and subsequent cover-up, who (if this happened) pulled off the greatest fraud of all time and plotted beyond everything ever seen, would of been the same guys that didnt have the foresight to plant WMD in Iraq after going into the country based on those claims.

You really believe that ANY of the above is reasonable or believeable? Honestly...its so ridiculous its almost funny.

But because I, and literally 100's of millions of others, disagree with the bizarre and impossible scenario you are trying to sell....we are (to quote you) "highly uneducated".

Beautiful.

Very plausible and very believable. Do the research. Once you go through the evidence you'll change your mind and understand that too many things don't fit.

Now that I've answered your points, how about you be polite and answer mine? I've played nice, now you do the same.

How about you take a run at these questions now?


Flight 77 was tracked traveling at a velocity that should have had it hitting the Pentagon at 9:15. It disappeared from radar for some 20 minutes before mysteriously popping up on radar again over Washington, 20 minutes behind its original projected trajectory. Where did it go, and how is it possible that it lost 20 minutes of flight time?

NORAD has the most complex radar net on the planet and openly brags it knows of and can track anything in North American airspace at any time. But somehow it lost track of a 757?


There supposedly wasn’t enough time to scramble fighters to defend the capital. Edwards air force base is 11 miles from the Pentagon. How much time does it take to scramble fighters that are on 24x7 alert? NORAD also knew of high jacked planes at 8:40, so why the huge delay in getting planes in the air?


Flight 77 was supposedly flown by the most incompetent of the arab pilots, Hanjour, yet the plane takes an incredible flight path to hit the Pentagon, flying past it, then doing a 270 degree turn WHILE dropping 4,000 feet before skimming along the ground and striking the first floor of the Pentagon. No damage to the lawn (so no impact), so he went in cleanly. Pretty impressive flying for a guy who couldn’t land a Cessna. How it possible that Hanjour could have pulled off this flying maneuver that many experienced military pilots could not? This maneuver would have either stalled the engines or slammed the plane into the ground.

Why would Hanjour decide to take this course? The people that perpetrated this plot were supposedly highly intelligent and well informed. It is widely known that the east wing of the Pentagon houses all the brass, so why strike the wing as far away from there? If al Qaeda had been observing their targets they would have known that the west wing was under renovation and no one but civilian workers were there. That would have been no target. The correct target would have been directly in on the flight path the plane was on, not the sweeping 270 degree turn with a sudden drop in altitude. Why this obvious error in targeting?


The Pentagon is protected by several missile batteries designed to take out any air threat. Only planes with military transponders are considered a non-threat. Why did this system fail?


Finally, the Pentagon is one of the most secure above ground buildings in the world. It has some of the most sophisticated video monitoring systems available, yet the best they can produce as evidence of the attack is two manipulated videos from a parking lot.


http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/A...23May2006.html


Where are the other videos that would conclusively prove once and for all what hit the Pentagon. Speaking from experience, you do not release evidence that is damning to your cause unless directed to do so. There are supposed to be another 84 angles of this incident, all of them shot with ultra-high resolution cameras at 30 fps, so why is this footage not being released? If they are confident that their story is true, why not just release the video and put it to bed. If the “conspiracy theory” is a house of cards, why not destroy it by releasing the video?

[snappyk]

10 whole pages of all this conspiracy garbage. We all have an opinion on what happened, mine is that it was terrorists that did it all, it was a plane that hit the pentagon and I really don't think that flight 93 was shot down but it crashed. Lanny is not going to change his stance on any of this, it's time to move on, honour the people that lost their lives in the attacks, that is the important thing.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

The biggest issue with all of thee witnesses is whether they would know a 757 from 737 from a commuter jet.

Pardon me for not knowing this, but is the theory that it was a 737 and not a 757 (or the other way around) that crashed into the Pentagon? Or is the theory that it was a commuter jet? Or was it a missile?

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Pardon me for not knowing this, but is the theory that it was a 737 and not a 757 (or the other way around) that crashed into the Pentagon? Or is the theory that it was a commuter jet? Or was it a missile?

There are theories that contend all of the above. The approach, attack angle, ability to control the vehicle, and damage to the Pentagon suggests something other than commercial airliner. It is up to the individual to decide what information is believable. If an airliner hit the Pentagon, it was NOT pilotted by Hanjour. A 270 degree turn while losing 4000 feet in altitude is not possible for the best pilots in the world, let alone a guy who could not manage a single engine Cessna on a straight on approach. Yet Hanjour was supposed to perform this miraculous turn AND maintain control of the plane at full throttle (500+ mph) with meer inches between the engines and the ground. That is a physical impossibility. Add in the numerous coincidences that would have been required for this to come to fruition and it just doesn't add up. The "official" story would not hold up in a court of law. The physical evidence doesn't suport it, and the expert testimony would rip it to pieces. But it is up to the individual to look at the data and decide for themselves. I recommend people make the effort to do the homework and learn the facts. Its interesting as hell and very eye opening.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

There are theories that contend all of the above. The approach, attack angle, ability to control the vehicle, and damage to the Pentagon suggests something other than commercial airliner. It is up to the individual to decide what information is believable. If an airliner hit the Pentagon, it was NOT pilotted by Hanjour. A 270 degree turn while losing 4000 feet in altitude is not possible for the best pilots in the world, let alone a guy who could not manage a single engine Cessna on a straight on approach. Yet Hanjour was supposed to perform this miraculous turn AND maintain control of the plane at full throttle (500+ mph) with meer inches between the engines and the ground. That is a physical impossibility. Add in the numerous coincidences that would have been required for this to come to fruition and it just doesn't add up. The "official" story would not hold up in a court of law. The physical evidence doesn't suport it, and the expert testimony would rip it to pieces. But it is up to the individual to look at the data and decide for themselves. I recommend people make the effort to do the homework and learn the facts. Its interesting as hell and very eye opening.

Hey I don't know all the details and the whatnots, but some really big questions arise out of these theories. Maybe the biggest one being "how could they be so smart and so dumb at the same time"?

If "they" (the people you believe were behind all of this) were smart enough to pull off this masterpiece, why were the dumb enough to A) crash the wrong model of airplane into the building or B) plant wreckage from the wrong kind of plane at the crash site or C) fire a missile into an office building in the middle of a major city and hope nobody notices or D) if they did make that plane "disappear" and murdered all the passengers, why didn't they just crash that plane into the building in the first place instead of going through this whole rigmarole of pretending it crashed into the building?

I don't trust Bush and his cronies any more than you do, but this hoax stuff is impossible to believe. It just doesn't add up. If the intent was to create an attack on the same scale as Pearl Harbor then why did they make it so damn complicated?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I don't trust Bush and his cronies any more than you do, but this hoax stuff is impossible to believe. It just doesn't add up. If the intent was to create an attack on the same scale as Pearl Harbor then why did they make it so damn complicated?

Hell, you had to be a genius to pull that off, and still keep the whole country away from the information. What I don't understand, is if Bush did pull this off, why didn't he plant WMD in Iraq?

[CaptainCrunch]

entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem

Occams razor explains all

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Hey I don't know all the details and the whatnots, but some really big questions arise out of these theories. Maybe the biggest one being "how could they be so smart and so dumb at the same time"?

Exactly, how could they (the terrorists) be so smart, and so dumb? They supposedly snuck into the United States undetected (we know that's a lie), managed to hijack the planes without anyone considering the possibility of this happening (we know that's a lie), managed to elude the most sensitive radar net on the planet (we know that's a lie), manage to some how make every defensive system and procol, put together by the government and military, fail miserably allowing them free reign to attack their targets (we know that's not possible). Then the worst pilot of the bunch makes an impossible maneuver (we know that's not possible) to attack the one side of the target where the the damage would be minimal (we know that's not consistent with their plan and makes little sense).

If "they" (the people you believe were behind all of this) were smart enough to pull off this masterpiece, why were the dumb enough to A) crash the wrong model of airplane into the building

The potential for the precision nature of the strike was likely not possible with a plane like a 757. The plane had to hit the Pentagon as an increibly precise angle at a very high rate of speed to inflict the damage suggested (the plane and its contents essentially vaporized on impact).

B) plant wreckage from the wrong kind of plane at the crash site

They likely didn't think that anyone would bother to contest their evidence. It would be "unAmerican" and not "patriotic" to just follow the story as it was painted. You might also be interested to know that none of the evidence was ever secured, catalogued, or stored using evidenturay procedures. The evidence was carted away and destroyed within 48 hours. There was never going to be an investigation and the handling of the crime scene is proof of that.

C) fire a missile into an office building in the middle of a major city and hope nobody notices

It would not have met the goals of the operation.

D) if they did make that plane "disappear" and murdered all the passengers, why didn't they just crash that plane into the building in the first place instead of going through this whole rigmarole of pretending it crashed into the building?

See "A" for that answer. The logistics likely were not possible to crash the 757 in question.

I don't trust Bush and his cronies any more than you do, but this hoax stuff is impossible to believe. It just doesn't add up. If the intent was to create an attack on the same scale as Pearl Harbor then why did they make it so damn complicated?

They wanted to make sure that the whole nation was in support of the cause. The best way to do that was to attack the pillars of American life. That is why the financial, military and government were all targetted in this attack. It had to be so outrageous that no one in the nation would second guess what ever the administration did, and no one did just that.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Azure

Hell, you had to be a genius to pull that off, and still keep the whole country away from the information. What I don't understand, is if Bush did pull this off, why didn't he plant WMD in Iraq?

Because there were too many other countries that would have known if he tried this end around, and it would have caused a wide conflict. That would have polarized the rest of the world against the United States. I don't doubt for a second that planting WMD's was part of the plan all along, but the potential for other countries to release their intelligence on the situation, and escalate the incident into a greater conflict, was high and Bush didn't want that. Hence the string of other excuses that were dreamed up that couldn't hold water either. The Bushies don't want any further conflict in the region until their military bases are complete and they have that springboard to operate anywhere within the region.

[White Doors]

They wanted to make sure that the whole nation was in support of the cause. The best way to do that was to attack the pillars of American life. That is why the financial, military and government were all targetted in this attack. It had to be so outrageous that no one in the nation would second guess what ever the administration did, and no one did just that.

Well that should say it all for all here. Lanny thinks Bush did it.
Nothing, including reality, is going to change his mind.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Because there were too many other countries that would have known if he tried this end around, and it would have caused a wide conflict. That would have polarized the rest of the world against the United States. I don't doubt for a second that planting WMD's was part of the plan all along, but the potential for other countries to release their intelligence on the situation, and escalate the incident into a greater conflict, was high and Bush didn't want that. Hence the string of other excuses that were dreamed up that couldn't hold water either. The Bushies don't want any further conflict in the region until their military bases are complete and they have that springboard to operate anywhere within the region.

No Lanny, during the invasion of Iraq, Bush could have easily used black ops to plant WMD in Iraq. They knew where the troops were going to be searching, plant them before they came there.

Simple really, but I course there is no changing your mind.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Azure

No Lanny, during the invasion of Iraq, Bush could have easily used black ops to plant WMD in Iraq. They knew where the troops were going to be searching, plant them before they came there.

Simple really, but I course there is no changing your mind.

Uh no, he really couldn't have. The international community was shown the evidence that the Bushies had cooked up and it was not convincing. The Bushies knew it wouldn't sell in the Security Council chambers, because the other members would shoot it down with their own intel, so they took it to the General Assembly where they were essentioally laughed at. No one took their claims seriously. If they had tried to pull a quick one and plant the evidence, it would have blown up in their faces even worse than it did. It would have created an even greater chasm between the United States and the rest of the world, likely killing what coalition the Bushies could pull together using borrowed money from China. I'm sure it was in Georgie's simple mind, but I'm sure President Cheney hit Judy over the head with a bat and put the puppet straight on how it would play out. The Russians were already suspect of the American's actions and Cheney probably didn't want to take the chance of pushing the Franco-Greman-Russian leaning countries even further away from the center. But hey, that's just analyzing it geo-politically. I'm sure even "military intelligence" could figure that one out.