No Planes Theories on 9/11

Diogenes

mysterious wrote: »

American politics is like disney land. More than half the population don't vote. Although this was the largest turnout in history. Due to the fact the most people wanted republicans out and most black people voted also, as Obama was the first black Candidate.

While at the same time you claim most americans believe their government carried out 911 they just don't care.

American politics is hugely affected by the Media. Both far right and far left mission is to divide the nation in half. In alot of cases if your an anaylitical guy, you will see how the left and right play together to help either candidate to win.

Christ its the fisher price guide to american politics.

For example Fox news far right broadcaster, were using Obama as an escapegoat,

I gotta ask what is an escapegoat? A Goat who drives the getaway car?

and blaming him for trivial things like smoking and so forth.

Smoking? What? Seriously What?

These insinautions give a reverse psycology effect. Where the masses are been constantly shown images and reports of trivial nonsense where the right have little to attack him for. So they begin to like Obama more etc.
The left do the same in the opposite depending on what the shadow government want in:P

so if I have your weird little cognitive dissoance clear in my head. You believe that 60% of Americans blame their government for 911, ignoring the mass of lies and deceit you claim their government used to cover up 911. 60% of Americans don't buy their governments claims, yet at the same time you think this same body of people are puppets easily manipulated by the same shadow government you claim the people already see through.

Jesus.

It's one of the greatest deceptions in America, that currentley divides the nation every 4 years. The brutal fact to this. It's also qute smart. The powers of be, give you two option, two sides of the one coin. So no matter what election there is it's either republican or Democrat. You actually don't have much choice. Obama and McCain are backed by the money makers. The money makers are the ones who decide. They own the media, they influence your decision. But it doesnt always go right.

You do know that there were more than two candidates right. And if your claim that 60% of Americans believe "911 was an inside job" why didn't they vote for presidential candidates like the Greens Cythia Mc Kinney or Ron Paul?

For example John Kerry and Al gore won the popular vote and Bush stole the vote in florida. But Bush got in twice. Ironic eh. Many American's couldnt believe it.

You're pointing this out to me like you think should be some kind revelation
to me. Like I've never heard of someone like Greg Palast.

Your right im even surprised no one blew up the white house yet or caused riots, again shows just how much control the powers of be have in America.

Now IMO. Its basicailly. The powers be, is going, oh ****, the people are calling for a revolution, we need a "christ like figure in quick" the opposing figure of Bush. All the opposite traits, and he's even black.Another way of creating this shock and awe effect. Hopefully the sheeple of America would get all distracted again by nonsense. Like the inauguration. All scripted nonsense to suck the masses in again. But it's still back to businness, America in wars every few years and all that jazz.

look nothing you're saying isn't original or new. Or right for that matter.

Bush used to own them, then gave them to Saddam. it says made in USA.

Firstly "Bush" (George Bush Senior) doesn't or didn't personally own any WMDs. Secondly Saddam used Mustard Gas to kill thousands of people, nothing fancy the same stuff they used in WW1. Finally a Dutch man was arrested and charged with supplying the chemicals. None of which by themselves was lethal it was the combination that killed people.

But got the chair in USA. He got convicted once USA were occupying the nation.

Theres a few things here. Saddam didn't get "the chair" He was hung. And he wasn't hung in America but in Baghdad. Making such basic factual errors exposes your ignorance of the facts.

And he was convicted by an Iraqi court set up by the Iraqi interim government.

Do you not see the deception there.

No I just see your basic ignorance.

I was just curious, so are you American. If you don't want to answer, fine no worries.

My nationality is irrevelent. You just want to clearly label those who disagree with you with some simple label in order to ignore what they say. It's rather pathetic (and my use of idiom and spelling should clearly give my nationality and background away, in black and white, not in colour.) I'm irish.

quoted.

And quoted. Now please again answer the question. (I've done the courtesy of answering your question above) Would you prefer to operated upon by a trained surgeon, or someone with no training and acting on instinct, and intuition?

bonkey

mysterious wrote: »

Most of einsteins, theorys, on the universe, came from creative thoughts and intution. He failed at logical subjects in school.

No. Most of Einsteins theories got dreamed up by creative thoughts and intuition, then turned into theories using logic and mathematics, and finally accepted using evidence.

And no, Einstein didn't fail logical subjects at school. Its a common myth, caused by someone being too lazy look into the marking systems in detail.

He did, however, have problems with the non-mathematical subjects in German, and failed his original application to the Federal Polytechnic Academy (Zurich) first time round because of his results in the non-scientific studies. He was, at the time, two years younger than the average applicant. He studied in Switzerland (Aargau) for a year, then passed his entrance exams (still one year younger than average).

His problems with non-scientific studies are mostly attributed to the schooling system in Germany at the time, which was one of the reasons he moved to a Swiss school.

But hey...if your intuition tells you otherwise...you go right on believing that. I'll stick to the evidence.

bonkey

Incidentally, are we finished discussing the "No Planes" theory? It seems to have been abandoned along the way.

We have 911 threads, Obama threads, and all the rest of it. We don't need this thread to act as some sort of "catchall" for the same stuff again.

Sofa_King Good

Diogenes wrote: »

I gotta ask what is an escapegoat? A Goat who drives the getaway car?

No you silly billy this is an escapegoat (wish that was username).



Just had an epipheny of how pathetic I am.

On the no planes thing just seen the video, makes a compelling argument but its just too far removed from possibilty for me.

PullMyFinger!

Could we keep this discussion on topic, i.e. No Planes Theories, whether you're for or against is irrelevant, I want to see a debate on the topic at hand - not the usual 9/11 stuff which is what this thread seems to be thus far.

Diogenes

PullMyFinger! wrote: »

Could we keep this discussion on topic, i.e. No Planes Theories, whether you're for or against is irrelevant, I want to see a debate on the topic at hand - not the usual 9/11 stuff which is what this thread seems to be thus far.

The small, tiniest ickle flaw with "no planes" theory is THE PLANES CRASHED INTO THE SIDES OF TWO BUILDINGS IN BROAD DAYLIGHT IN FRONT OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF WITNESSES

I hate to bring it up, but it's just one of those ickle things.

uncleoswald

Diogenes wrote: »

The small, tiniest ickle flaw with "no planes" theory is THE PLANES CRASHED INTO THE SIDES OF TWO BUILDINGS IN BROAD DAYLIGHT IN FRONT OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF WITNESSES

Why get bogged down with the minute details?

Originally Posted by PullMyFinger!
Could we keep this discussion on topic, i.e. No Planes Theories, whether you're for or against is irrelevant, I want to see a debate on the topic at hand - not the usual 9/11 stuff which is what this thread seems to be thus far.

I'd really prefer someone who believes the theories to clearly lay out their hypothesis of how this worked.

Its all very well saying you think it was an inside job and there were no planes and pointing to a little bit of evidence here, a little bit of evidence there then listing some coincidences too large to be just a coincidence(:rolleyes:) but I want to hear the ins and outs of how it worked.

What happened to the planes? What happened to the passengers? Where they just shot or gassed and if so who did it? How many people were involved (the list grows into the thousands if you try to think about it logically?) How did they suppress all the videos CLEARLY showing a missile which must exist considering the TT's were among the most heavily photographed buildings in the world (especially by the time the 2nd plane hit?) How did they convince thousands of ordinary Joe's to come forward and claim they saw the planes? When did they rig (ie gut) the buildings with explosives and how did they do it without employees noticing? Or did they notice and were part of it? Who rigged it (the numbers involved are now getting mind boggling?) Why would so many Americans be part of a conspiracy to kill so many of their own? And how did they manage to convince every one of them to do it or at the very least not to come forward and tell others of the plot? How did they fake the phonecalls from passengers saying that the planes had been hijacked? And again who did it (put yourself in the place of the sound engineer who has just been asked to do it?) Many seem to say the firefighters knew building 7 was about to be demolished so they evacuated so why did they allow so many other of their colleagues to die in the towers? Are these people so inhuman that they haven't come forward out of guilt? If you were a video editor at newscorp or whatever and you were asked to manipulate the live feed (or let someone elso do it) would you just nod your head and say okay? And would you not tell people about it in the later years? I'm sure there are tons more questions like this that could be asked but you get my drift.

Lets hear it all laid out. I won't scream for evidence if you say something that I think is preposterous I know you have no real evidence for, I genuinely want to know what your "gut" tells you. If you believe it then enough with the scraps you throw us (many of which often contradict each other,) talk us through your theory as best you can.

Kernel

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

On the no planes thing just seen the video, makes a compelling argument but its just too far removed from possibilty for me.

As I said, disinfo brother. Just like directed particle beam energy plasma weapon thingies.

thecommander

Kernel wrote: »

As I said, disinfo brother

Disinfo suggests that this theory has been put out to cover up the truth. Would the case not more likely be that whoever put this out is just a nut, and just wants to be part of something?

Diogenes

Kernel wrote: »

As I said, disinfo brother. Just like directed particle beam energy plasma weapon thingies.

Its hi-larious you basically plane anyone with a different theory to your preferred conspiracy theory as disinfo. Hey Kernel, No planers consider you as to be disinfo.

espinolman

I remember on 9/11/01 ,i was watching television , i think it was in the evening , i'm not sure what channel , it might have been CNN , but there was this pilot talking and he was saying that the best pilots' in the world could not fly those planes' into the twin towers unless there was transponders' in the towers.
Now i have always thought it very strange that i have not heard anything about this since then from the mainstream media , and also not heard about this from conspiracy theororists' !

Diogenes

espinolman wrote: »

I remember on 9/11/01 ,i was watching television , i think it was in the evening , i'm not sure what channel , it might have been CNN , but there was this pilot talking and he was saying that the best pilots' in the world could not fly those planes' into the twin towers unless there was transponders' in the towers.
Now i have always thought it very strange that i have not heard anything about this since then from the mainstream media , and also not heard about this from conspiracy theororists' !

So lets be clear you have some kind of imaginary memory of someone who seems think that flying a plane into a building as wide as any runway would be impossible.


Riiiiiighhhht.

Well if you heard someone on CNN saying Santa could land a plane on your mum's roof would you believe it.

Jesus.

espinolman

Diogenes wrote: »

So lets be clear you have some kind of imaginary memory of someone who seems think that flying a plane into a building as wide as any runway would be impossible.


Riiiiiighhhht.

Well if you heard someone on CNN saying Santa could land a plane on your mum's roof would you believe it.

Jesus.

Ohhh so we are not supposed to talk about this - someone might find out !

Diogenes

espinolman wrote: »

Ohhh so we are not supposed to talk about this .

The width and length of the twin towers is 208 ft x 208 ft

The minimum width of an International runway is 147ft wide.

Are you trying to say that a plane needs that extra 50 feet before it could conceivably land. Furthermore how exactly do you think international flights managed pre transponders?

espinolman

Diogenes wrote: »

The width and length of the twin towers is 208 ft x 208 ft

The minimum width of an International runway is 147ft wide.

Are you trying to say that a plane needs that extra 50 feet before it could conceivably land. Furthermore how exactly do you think international flights managed pre transponders?

No what i am trying to say , you see i have not heard much in relation to transponders in the towers in the media yet i did on 9/11 , why is this , is that intentional , is there a media blackout on this or something !

GerardKeating

espinolman wrote: »

No what i am trying to say , you see i have not heard much in relation to transponders in the towers in the media yet i did on 9/11 , why is this , is that intentional , is there a media blackout on this or something !

Or maybe the media quickly realised it was rubish and dropped it like a stone...

espinolman

GerardKeating wrote: »

Or maybe the media quickly realised it was rubish and dropped it like a stone...

Or quickly realised how dangerous it was to address and dropped it like a hot stone...

Diogenes

espinolman wrote: »

No what i am trying to say , you see i have not heard much in relation to transponders in the towers in the media yet i did on 9/11 , why is this , is that intentional , is there a media blackout on this or something !

No. Because the WTC were the most iconic elements of the NYC skyline and very large buildings, there were no need to have transponders to spot them, you could, y'know, see them.

Asking whether there was a media black out about transponders is like claiming why isn't there media questions about giant neon smurfs guiding the planes in.

Its absurd.

espinolman

Diogenes wrote: »

Asking whether there was a media black out about transponders is like claiming why isn't there media questions about giant neon smurfs guiding the planes in. .

I don't think there were transponders but what i'm getting to is that if transponders were needed but were not there then you see how else could it have been done !

Diogenes

espinolman wrote: »

I don't think there were transponders but what i'm getting to is that if transponders were needed but were not there then you see how else could it have been done !

Okay, the sheer inconsistency of your argument is out there, you're basically saying that transponders weren't needed according to you, but if they were needed they werent there. It's inane. The buildings were the most iconic buildings in the world, and as wide as run way, so why on earth would transponders be needed.

Seriously you're just digging yourself deeper into a hole of stupid keeping this up.

espinolman

Diogenes wrote: »

Okay, the sheer inconsistency of your argument is out there, you're basically saying that transponders weren't needed according to you, but if they were needed they werent there. It's inane. The buildings were the most iconic buildings in the world, and as wide as run way, so why on earth would transponders be needed.

Seriously you're just digging yourself deeper into a hole of stupid keeping this up.

You don't understand and if you think just anyone could fly those aeroplanes' into those towers without assistance then i would think you are drinking too much fluoride water!

Diogenes

espinolman wrote: »

You don't understand and if you think just anyone could fly those aeroplanes' into those towers without assistance then i would think you are drinking too much fluoride water!

Yeah er

you wrote:

I don't think there were transponders but what i'm getting to is that if transponders were needed but were not there then you see how else could it have been done !

you wrote:

You don't understand and if you think just anyone could fly those aeroplanes' into those towers without assistance then i would think you are drinking too much fluoride water!

At least you are consistent in your inconsistency.

Pick up any microsoft flight sim it's pretty easy to fly into the trade center. They were massive structures towering over the landscape of Manhattan.

Your own personal incredibility isn't enough here. You're basically saying that somewhere you heard that transponders would be needed to fly into the WTC and without a shred of supporting evidence are taking this a gospel, despite the fact that the WTC are slightly less wide than the average run way, and pilots were landing planes for nearly fifty years without transponders.

Why let reality get in the way of your fantasy though eh?

bonkey

espinolman wrote: »

No what i am trying to say , you see i have not heard much in relation to transponders in the towers in the media yet i did on 9/11 , why is this , is that intentional , is there a media blackout on this or something !

I'm guessing its like this...

On September 11, the media got anyone and everyone they could to offer opinion.
Starting September 12, they started being more picky.

I'll see if I can find the link, but someone took up the challenge regarding this and other alleged difficulties (some other pilot...probably the guy behind Pilots for Truth...alleged that no-one other than a fully-trained, professional pilot could even find their way around the cockpit of a modern airliner, let alone fly it)

They got some random civilians, put them in a 757 flight simulator which was already in flight, and asked them to hit the towers. I think they have have given them a 30 minute intro to the layout of the cockpit, to make up for the training that the hijacker's pilots are believed to have had. Every single one of them succeeded

Like I said...I'll see if I can find the link.

GerardKeating

espinolman wrote: »

I don't think there were transponders but what i'm getting to is that if transponders were needed but were not there then you see how else could it have been done !

But they wernt needed.

espinolman

Diogenes wrote: »

Why let reality get in the way of your fantasy though eh?

No not fantasy , conspiracy theory , now is what you need to do is look up the definition of conspiracy theory in a dictionary and then check what the name of this forum is , now i have always tried to post about conspiracy theories in this forum and have withheld from being critical of other posters on this forum .
Now if you just want to criticise and invalidate people i am sure there are other forums which could accomodate you.

espinolman

Diogenes wrote: »

Why let reality get in the way of your fantasy though eh?

Are you the thought police or what.

espinolman

Diogenes wrote: »

Why let reality get in the way of your fantasy though eh?

So, conspiracy theororists' reading this , do you know you are not SUPPOSED to think about anything i have addressed in the last few posts here!

Diogenes

espinolman wrote: »

So, conspiracy theororists' reading this , do you know you are not SUPPOSED to think about anything i have addressed in the last few posts here!

Did you have to post three difference responses to the same post of mine.

It still doesn't escape from the fact that your "transponder" theory doesn't make a wit of sense.

Sofa_King Good

espinolman wrote: »

but there was this pilot talking and he was saying that the best pilots' in the world could not fly those planes' into the twin towers unless there was transponders' in the towers. Now i have always thought it very strange that i have not heard anything about this since then from the mainstream media , and also not heard about this from conspiracy theororists' !

Diogenes please note he does not commit to anything other than a recollection of a news interview, but attempts to positively add to the debate.

Diogenes wrote: »

So lets be clear you have some kind of imaginary memory of someone who seems think that flying a plane into a building as wide as any runway would be impossible.

Why imaginary? And the someone was a pilot.
And what gives you the right to clarify someone elses point wrongly to antagonise them?

Diogenes wrote: »

Are you trying to say that a plane needs that extra 50 feet before it could conceivably land.

If you could actually read his posts you would never made such a claim,

espinolman wrote: »

No what i am trying to say , you see i have not heard much in relation to transponders in the towers in the media yet i did on 9/11 , why is this , is that intentional , is there a media blackout on this or something !

Has to repeat initial recollection and follows up with 2 questions.

espinolman wrote: »

I don't think there were transponders. … what … if transponders were needed but were not there then … how else could it have been done !

?


Confirms that he doesn't actually think that there was responders; so you are both of the same view. And follows up with another question.

Diogenes wrote: »

.
You're basically saying that somewhere you heard that transponders would be needed to fly into the WTC

Yay! now you've got it.

Diogenes wrote: »

Did you have to post three difference responses to the same post of mine.

It still doesn't escape from the fact that your "transponder" theory doesn't make a wit of sense.

Not his theory. And as you can now see it is a bit rich complaining about 3 responses to you when you had all these posts to come to the same conclusion that was apparent from his first.

Diogenes

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

Diogenes please note he does not commit to anything other than a recollection of a news interview, but attempts to positively add to the debate.

Positive to the debate? A Half remembered missunderstood theory that doesn't make a wit of sense post isn't a positive contribution.

Why imaginary? And e]the someone was a pilot.

Really what was this pilot's name?

If you could actually read his posts you would never made such a claim,

I can read his posts they don't make any sense.

Confirms that he doesn't actually think that there was responders; so you are both of the same view. And follows up with another question.

Responders? You mean Transponders, or you don't you like espional don't seem to like to make sense.

Not his theory. And as you can now see it is a bit rich complaining about 3 responses to you when you had all these posts to come to the same conclusion that was apparent from his first.

So to be clear, You think it's okay for Espional to claim he heard somewhere, that transponders would be needed, he just can't remember where, and doesn't like to have it pointed out that the towers are as wide as a runway, and highly iconic landmarks.

Right.....

Sofa_King Good

Diogenes wrote: »

Diogenes wrote: »

I can read his posts they don't make any sense.

Then why comment. He was perfectly civil to you at all times

Diogenes wrote: »

Responders? You mean Transponders, or you don't you like espional don't seem to like to make sense.

:D:D So tempting to mention the irony in that statement but then I don't condider myself to have elitist tendencies.

Diogenes wrote: »

So to be clear, You think it's okay for Espional to claim he heard somewhere, that transponders would be needed, he just can't remember where, and doesn't like to have it pointed out that the towers are as wide as a runway, and highly iconic landmarks.

Right.....

Yes I do. That is what a public forum is for is it not? Expression of ideas. If they don't conform to anyones deluded intellectual standing it doesn't make the contributor less valid regardless of the amount of hounding that takes place.

For what its worth I personally hold you in high regard, you are very well informed and knowledgeable on most subjects but any tendencies on anyones part, I myself am guilty to stifle discussion is pointless. Its not a quiz afterall so there is no need to score points.

I would say it was more likely the pilot was talking about difficult maneouver that occured in the striking of the Pentagon.

As far as I knew the hijackers had turned off the transponders thats why they couldn't be tracked.

Diogenes

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

:D:D So tempting to mention the irony in that statement but then I don't condider myself to have elitist tendencies.

So you don't mention the irony you just snidely imply it, you are a class act.

I would say it was more likely the pilot was talking about difficult maneouver that occured in the striking of the Pentagon.

What difficult manoeuvre? Y'know those silly moments when I point out your absolute ignorance of your argument, well here comes one. You're referring to the turn? A 35 degree banked lazy descent the kind any pilot can do?

Now please have a quote from someone saying "it moved like a rocket"
And we can have a nice conversation about metaphor and simile.

As far as I knew the hijackers had turned off the transponders thats why they couldn't be tracked.

HE SPECIFICALLY SAID TRANSPONDERS IN TOWERS NOT PLANES.

Sofa_King Good

Diogenes wrote: »

What difficult manoeuvre? Y'know those silly moments when I point out your absolute ignorance of your argument, well here comes one. You're referring to the turn? A 35 degree banked lazy descent the kind any pilot can do?

Now please have a quote from someone saying "it moved like a rocket"
And we can have a nice conversation about metaphor and simile.
.

This manoeuvre.

"
So, to sum up. Hani Hanjour, took a 757, with zero time in type, did the maneuver described above, a 400 knot 330 degree sprialing dive at 2500 fpm, only gaining 30 knots, then 30 knots more descending from 2200 feet at full power, with a very steady hand as to not overshoot or hit the lawn, inside ground effect, at 460 knots impact speed, but was refused to rent a 172 cause he couldnt land it at 65 knots? C'mon... sounds like a bad B movie... Please see right margin for more testimony regarding Hani and his training.

My conclusion is, the manever looks possible, for guys like me and you. But for Hani? unlikely. He either got REALLY lucky, or someone/something else was flying that plane. Sure wish we had clear video of a 757 hitting the pentagon to silence all these "Conspiracy theorists". They want us to believe the pentagon is only covered by a parking gate camera? C'mon..."

From Pilots for 911 truth
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pentagon.html

Diogenes

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

This manoeuvre.

"
So, to sum up. Hani Hanjour, took a 757, with zero time in type, did the maneuver described above, a 400 knot 330 degree sprialing dive at 2500 fpm, only gaining 30 knots, then 30 knots more descending from 2200 feet at full power, with a very steady hand as to not overshoot or hit the lawn, inside ground effect, at 460 knots impact speed, but was refused to rent a 172 cause he couldnt land it at 65 knots? C'mon... sounds like a bad B movie... Please see right margin for more testimony regarding Hani and his training.

We've been over Hanjour qualifications as a pilot already, this is tedious crap.

Here's actual pilot describing how easy the manoeuvre was.

My conclusion is, the manever looks possible,

Just a quick tip the pilot I referenced to Giulio Bernacchio despite being Italian has a modicum more experience than Rob Ballismo. You can tell because Guilio unlike Rob can spell the word manoeuvre.

meglome

If no one saw the planes hit them maybe, but thousands of people saw the planes coming across the city and quite sizeable amount of people saw them hit the towers (certainly the second hit) and several people videoed the event. To say it didn't happen is utterly ludicrous, I watched the second hit live on TV myself. I'm hoping bonkey can find that test they did with people off the street to show how easy it would be to actually hit these towers.

mysterious

IT's gone to a stage I feel, that that everyone is spinning conspiracies on 9/11 and the there is no bigger player than the government, purpose and objective is for us to get further cot up.

The next one will be, that pentagon wasnt hit by plane it was blown up by fire, create it and click send onto CT.site. then the babbles begins...More time wasted.

I'm tired of seeing this trivial nonsense.
Like it was Osama, it wasn't, he was involved, he wasnt', it was 19 hijackers, from afghanistan, it was some were from Iraq, turned out it wasnt' some were from Saudi Arabia(don't invade them anyhow) then it's pakistan then its Saddam link him and 9/11 seems to fit, now its like a guy speaks and waves his hand and says my son was a hijacker, what like he flew the plane and it was him all along.

We are still here, and no one gets it the illogic all along. The government don't even make sense.

Now it's another conspiracy it wasnt even a plane, so what now? A flying bus?

Reason I posted this paragraph to get people to be aware of the constant distraction to the real core problem of this CT. There needs to be more focus and attention on the government in this whole conpiracy. It seems to me that they are also throwing all these conspiracies for the fun of it.

Well that's me done. I'm burnt out from these threads, cus after I'm gone people will argue for years over this, because some people who play and smoke cigars and drive big mercedes in Texas will never be blamed.............

Blame the muslims. as usual. Funny that zionist run America though.

Tom Trojan

PullMyFinger! wrote: »

The maker is basically saying that no planes hit the buildings on 9/11 and he does a damn good job of trying to prove such an outlandish, even ludicrous, point

"outlandish... ludicrous!"

espinolman

mysterious wrote: »

IT's gone to a stage I feel, that that everyone is spinning conspiracies on 9/11 and the there is no bigger player than the government, purpose and objective is for us to get further cot up.

There is a third party , playing both sides , that hardly anyone can face , its like this person is so evil that people will not look in that direction , people just cannot face evil and so the third party remains hidden , unfortunately.

meglome

mysterious wrote: »

IT's gone to a stage I feel, that that everyone is spinning conspiracies on 9/11 and the there is no bigger player than the government, purpose and objective is for us to get further cot up.

The next one will be, that pentagon wasnt hit by plane it was blown up by fire, create it and click send onto CT.site. then the babbles begins...More time wasted.

I'm tired of seeing this trivial nonsense.
Like it was Osama, it wasn't, he was involved, he wasnt', it was 19 hijackers, from afghanistan, it was some were from Iraq, turned out it wasnt' some were from Saudi Arabia(don't invade them anyhow) then it's pakistan then its Saddam link him and 9/11 seems to fit, now its like a guy speaks and waves his hand and says my son was a hijacker, what like he flew the plane and it was him all along.

We are still here, and no one gets it the illogic all along. The government don't even make sense.

Now it's another conspiracy it wasnt even a plane, so what now? A flying bus?

Reason I posted this paragraph to get people to be aware of the constant distraction to the real core problem of this CT. There needs to be more focus and attention on the government in this whole conpiracy. It seems to me that they are also throwing all these conspiracies for the fun of it.

Well that's me done. I'm burnt out from these threads, cus after I'm gone people will argue for years over this, because some people who play and smoke cigars and drive big mercedes in Texas will never be blamed.............

Blame the muslims. as usual. Funny that zionist run America though.

Man my brain hurt even reading that. May I make a suggestion, so out in the world, travel, meet lots of people. Get yer head outta where it's firmly implanted. Live a little.

meglome

espinolman wrote: »

There is a third party , playing both sides , that hardly anyone can face , its like this person is so evil that people will not look in that direction , people just cannot face evil and so the third party remains hidden , unfortunately.

So what exactly has that got to do with the fact planes did or didn't hit the WTC?

And seriously people if literally thousands of people hadn't seen these planes then we could talk but they did so it's ridiculous to believe otherwise. Flat earthers can believe what they want too but I have seen with my own eyes that the earth is basically a sphere so they're clearly deluded.

espinolman

meglome wrote: »

So what exactly has that got to do with the fact planes did or didn't hit the WTC?

I am answering something mysterious wrote , do you have a problem with that .

mysterious

meglome wrote: »

Man my brain hurt even reading that. May I make a suggestion, so out in the world, travel, meet lots of people. Get yer head outta where it's firmly implanted. Live a little.

Don't make personal judgments on me, You don't know me. I happened to be out meeting lots of people today, what I do in my everday life has nothing to do with this thread.

meglome

mysterious wrote: »

Don't make personal judgments on me, You don't know me. I happened to be out meeting lots of people today, what I do in my everyday life has nothing to do with this thread.

But how we are in everyday life has a lot to do with this. I meet people especially in here who see connections upon connections in many situations but most people can't see these connections. People like bonkey who have a very scientific approach can't understand or make sense of these same connections or even see they exist. Now either the majority are deluded, or science doesn't work, or perhaps those connections are not there in the first place.

mysterious

meglome wrote: »

But how we are in everyday life has a lot to do with this. I meet people especially in here who see connections upon connections in many situations but most people can't see these connections. People like bonkey who have a very scientific approach can't understand or make sense of these same connections or even see they exist. Now either the majority are deluded, or science doesn't work, or perhaps those connections are not there in the first place.

Your post was insulting and quite patronising, you basically told me how to live me everyday life, that is disrespectful and rude.

Your basically tell me how to live.
Logic can't prove everything, especially whats hidden or deceptive in a case like sept 11. We are dealing with dodgy information, many sources, many sides and most of all this is a very sensitive issue

Since many people died, and the government are indierectly involved even if not proven to be directly behind the plotting of these events.

bonkey

OK - this is the final warning.

1) Please stop making personal comments at each other.

2) If you're going to report a post, please don't also take it upon yourself to respond to it.

3) I don't care who started it.

PullMyFinger!

bonkey wrote: »

OK - this is the final warning.

1) Please stop making personal comments at each other.

2) If you're going to report a post, please don't also take it upon yourself to respond to it.

3) I don't care who started it.

Please listen to the powers that be. I dont want this locked.

Ive been away for awhile so I had to get back to this thread;

The following 3 videos are Must Sees

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbYAV5fCGiM

humanji

PullMyFinger! wrote: »

Please listen to the powers that be. I dont want this locked.

Ive been away for awhile so I had to get back to this thread;

The following 3 videos are Must Sees

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbYAV5fCGiM

By any chance do these vids explain where the planes went? I don't have sound on my PC in work, and I've only been able to flick quickly through them, so I've missed a good part of them, but from what I've seen they've taken an incredibly simplistic view and discounted even the simplest explanations in order to prove their conspiracy.

feoil

Planes were used. Buy why

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yllhB2HYIP0&feature=related

meglome

feoil wrote: »

Planes were used. Buy why

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yllhB2HYIP0&feature=related

To inflict a lot of damage?

murphaph

Well I guess I'm another one of the "nutters" who believes the whole thing was a con. The Reichstag here in Berlin was burned down by the Nazis and blamed on the communists in the early 30's. It helped secure Adolf Hitler as leader of this country. Adolf Hitler himself said the "bigger the lie, the more people will believe it". If Adolf Hitler had access to video editing software, would he have used it for propaganda purposes? Hell yes he would. So why do people find it so hard to believe that it could be used to perpetuate a lie in this day and age.

9/11 was and is the biggest lie ever told IMO.