9/11 Conspiracy

Healio · 22-08-2005 12:31am

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

hmm... well if you're suggesting that because of bush's less-than-emotional reaction to being told about the attacks that he perhaps knew they were gonna happen or had either directly or indirectly made money from them then don't you think he would have been trying to act more emotional so people don't make these sorts of conspiricies. The last thing he would want to do is act unaffected by the news which would lead to ideas like yours that he was involved ( ah i managed to get one full stop in)

If you look at the footage of Bush being told, the guy takes about 3 seconds to explain that the towers have been hit. What would he have said in 3 seconds.................. two words come to mind "it's done".

Call Me Jimmy · 22-08-2005 12:31am

oh sorry angry fox! i completely misread the end of your post, you said it looked like he had NO previous knowledge of the attacks, my bad

Call Me Jimmy · 22-08-2005 12:34am

well healio, if it is in fact only 3 seconds (as im sure u have counted precisely how long it was) and assuming that the US knew there was going to be something big around that time then it could have easily been "the terrorists have attacked".... that could be said in 3 seconds.... and it's more plausible.

billy the squid · 22-08-2005 12:34am

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

if the transponders were turned off, how do they know they were deviating from their assigned routes?

I'm sure you're gonna reply with " oh they deviated from their routes before thinkin of turning the transponders off " and i'm sure there are convenient 'off' buttons for the transponders on commercial airliners. (unless you turn off the power but that's impossible because of the distance which needed to be travelled (as you say it was like an hour)

No i'm not. the FAA would have been following the aircraft and the fact that the transponder signals went off should have indicated that there was a problem. the planes would have still showed up on radar, even without the signals. all it would have taken would be for one person to follow the radar reflection to know that the aircraft they were watching had left its course.

angry_fox · 22-08-2005 12:36am

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

of course it's that's simple. So no companies are allowed make big money before a terrorist attack i suppose, or else they are co-conspirators.

Your right of course CMJ, how stupid of me......

we will never know what really happend on 9/11 or maybe we already do, that some nuttters flew planes into building and it was planned by an old man hiding out in a cave. But they had received training from the CIA and SAS in the 1980s so maybe they put their training to some use.

Call Me Jimmy · 22-08-2005 12:38am

woah u seem to know more than me about the location devices used by airline company's. So the transponder's only purpose is as a signal that something is wrong? Can you explain about the radar please? Are you talkin about military radar or commercial airline rader that would notice that the plane has left its course?

Call Me Jimmy · 22-08-2005 12:40am

angry_fox wrote:

But they had received training from the CIA and SAS in the 1980s so maybe they put their training to some use.

What's your point? Yeah the afghans were trained by the US, i don't understand why you have said it though as it's of no relevence to the rest of your post or any of mine.

billy the squid · 22-08-2005 12:41am

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

woah u seem to know more than me about the location devices used by airline company's. So the transponder's only purpose is as a signal that something is wrong? Can you explain about the radar please? Are you talkin about military radar or commercial airline rader that would notice that the plane has left its course?

no the transponder sends the flight number to air traffic control. this is then overlayed on the radar screen to give the flight controllers the info on which flight is where. the loss of the transponder would indicate the loss of power or some other malfunction within the aircraft and would require invistigation.

remember I referred to payne stewart. his plane malfunctioned and flew off its planned course. the USAF were able to find and observe the plane, and this was before 9-11.

angry_fox · 22-08-2005 12:45am

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

What's your point? Yeah the afghans were trained by the US, i don't understand why you have said it though as it's of no relevence to the rest of your post or any of mine.

They used the techniques learnt from the CIA to carry out the 9/11 attacks.

Call Me Jimmy · 22-08-2005 12:46am

where in that payne stewart article does it say that it was in the middle of nowhere? like where are you getting that information from?

angry_fox · 22-08-2005 12:49am

Have a look here CMJ. Has some good info on the subject. Author could be a bit nuts

Call Me Jimmy · 22-08-2005 12:49am

angry_fox wrote:

They used the techniques learnt from the CIA to carry out the 9/11 attacks.

What techniques exactly? Sorry but I'm still not sure what your referring to.

Healio · 22-08-2005 12:49am

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

well healio, if it is in fact only 3 seconds (as im sure u have counted precisely how long it was) and assuming that the US knew there was going to be something big around that time then it could have easily been "the terrorists have attacked".... that could be said in 3 seconds.... and it's more plausible.

that is my point, he knew what was going to happen.

billy the squid · 22-08-2005 12:51am

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

where in that payne stewart article does it say that it was in the middle of nowhere? like where are you getting that information from?

I quoted the article more to prove that the US air force were able to intercept his private jet, which they failed to do in 9-11.

but to answer your question, it says it in the first paragraph

Three-time Major winner Payne Stewart was among five people killed when his Learjet crashed in a remote area of the United States

.

Call Me Jimmy · 22-08-2005 12:53am

Healio wrote:

that is my point, he knew what was going to happen.

No you didn't read my post. I said that they knew something big was going to happen, as in a terrorist attack. I believe also they knew something big was going to happen but that they didn't know when (exactly), where, how. And in a country as large as the US, it would be impossible for them to stop "something big". So what's your point? That they knew that the twin towers was gonna be attacked when it was, and that the guy came in and said it's done and that bush knew he was talkin bout the twin towers being attacked?

Healio · 22-08-2005 12:54am

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

That they knew that the twin towers was gonna be attacked when it was, and that the guy came in and said it's done and that bush knew he was talkin bout the twin towers being attacked?

Thats it in a nut shell, Uncle Sam took out the twin towers.

angry_fox · 22-08-2005 12:56am

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

What techniques exactly? Sorry but I'm still not sure what your referring to.

They were trained in guerrilla warfare techniques, espically to attack a larger enemy using minimal resources and causing maximum amount of damage to a target by what ever means possible. Dragging me way off topic here.

Call Me Jimmy · 22-08-2005 12:59am

well billy it's just that it says in the article you linked that the learjet CRASHED in a remote area of the united states. it says in the next sentence that the dallas bound plane flew uncontrolled for several HOURS. The plane took off from orlando florida (not a remote part of US) and according to the link angry fox posted the plane veered of course "shortly after take off" which basically disproves your point about the F-16s managing to get to it even though it was in a remote part of the US.

billy the squid · 22-08-2005 1:03am

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

well billy it's just that it says in the article you linked that the learjet CRASHED in a remote area of the united states. it says in the next sentence that the dallas bound plane flew uncontrolled for several HOURS. The plane took off from orlando florida (not a remote part of US) and according to the link angry fox posted the plane veered of course "shortly after take off" which basically disproves your point about the F-16s managing to get to it even though it was in a remote part of the US.

yes, the aircraft flew in a straight line on autopilot until it ran out of fuel. the USAF followed the plane until it crashed, it was observed that the people onboard were already dead.

Call Me Jimmy · 22-08-2005 1:04am

angry i didn't mean to drag you off topic i just wanted to be sure because what you were saying was quite vague. So the US taught them in guerrilla warfare? They didn't teach them exactly how to hijack and fly a plane into the twin towers. And it's not like the inocent extremists had never heard of guerrila warfare before, so the states didn't teach them anything new, or anything of relevence to the attacks, so you still don't have a point in your statement about the americans teaching them how to fight geurrilla warfare against russian tanks and soldiers

Call Me Jimmy · 22-08-2005 1:05am

billy the squid wrote:

yes, the aircraft flew in a straight line on autopilot until it ran out of fuel.

yes, thank you.

angry_fox · 22-08-2005 1:07am

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

where in that payne stewart article does it say that it was in the middle of nowhere? like where are you getting that information from?

Heres the CNN report on the crash. Mind you they could never find out why the plane lost pressure. Maybe its a conspiracy:rolleyes:

Healio · 22-08-2005 1:08am

9/11 was planned and carried by the us government, to turn america (and possibly the world) against Islam. What better way to do such a thing. Attack a world renowned building, kill 3,000 people, and blame 19 Arab men.

billy the squid · 22-08-2005 1:08am

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

angry i didn't mean to drag you off topic i just wanted to be sure because what you were saying was quite vague. So the US taught them in guerrilla warfare? They didn't teach them exactly how to hijack and fly a plane into the twin towers. And it's not like the inocent extremists had ever heard of guerrila warfare before, so the states didn't teach them anything new, or anything of relevence to the attacks, so you still don't have a point in your statement about the americans teaching them how to fight geurrilla warfare against russian tanks and soldiers

flying planes into a designated target is not a new thing. the japanese did it during world war II.

Call Me Jimmy · 22-08-2005 1:09am

angry yer a bit late

i knew where he was getting his information from, but knew he was wrong, that's why i asked to be sure what line he was reading it from.

Call Me Jimmy · 22-08-2005 1:11am

billy i never said that flying planes into targets was anything new. I said that the americans didn't teach them how to do that, and in a different sentence I said the americans didn't teach them anything new. In fact your statement that flying airplanes into targets isn't anything new further enforces my previous statement that the extremists weren't introduced by american training to the idea of geurrilla warfare

billy the squid · 22-08-2005 1:12am

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

angry yer a bit late i knew where he was getting his information from, but knew he was wrong, that's why i asked to be sure what line he was reading it from.

i am assuming that that was directed at me. my point in referring to the payne stewart crash is that the USAF were able to intercept this plane. and they followed it and were able to send reports back for several hours before it ran out of fuel, whereas they were unable to intercept an aircraft in the most populated portion of the US

Healio · 22-08-2005 1:14am

Dare i ask the question:

Does Osama Bin laden actually exist?

Call Me Jimmy · 22-08-2005 1:18am

billy the squid wrote:

i am assuming that that was directed at me. my point in referring to the payne stewart crash is that the USAF were able to intercept this plane. and they followed it and were able to send reports back for several hours before it ran out of fuel, whereas they were unable to intercept an aircraft in the most populated portion of the US

Yes and part of your point was that the F-16s were able to intercept a plane that was in the middle of nowhere and that they should have been able to intercept the 9/11 planes which were not in the middle of nowhere.

I said that the plane was only in the middle of nowhere when it crashed a few hours after the planes intercepted it shortly after take off.

what im sayin is his plane was in a populated portion of the us when the problem arose, whereas the 9/11 planes would have left the populated area (new york or whichever one) and had their transponder signal lost while they were out there and a good bit out (further than payne stewarts plane) and then they did a complete U-turn, making them much harder to locate than payne's.

billy the squid · 22-08-2005 1:18am

Call Me Jimmy wrote:

billy i never said that flying planes into targets was anything new. I said that the americans didn't teach them how to do that, and in a different sentence I said the americans didn't teach them anything new. In fact your statement that flying airplanes into targets isn't anything new further enforces my previous statement that the extremists weren't introduced by american training to the idea of geurrilla warfare

well considering that they received flying lessons in florida, you could say that it was americans that thought them how to fly

I do believe that they would have also used flight sim programs as part of their preparations for the attacks.

The american support of the afghani mujahadine (sp) being mentioned in this thread is a bit of a distraction considering that the hijackers were mostly saudis, and given the way al queda operates with each cell being independent of other cells etc.

to re-iterate my views, I would disagree with healio and some of the others in that while the US did not know what was exactly going to happen, once they realised on the morning of 9-11 that it was happening, they decided to let the series of events run its course rather than prevent it from happening. thus giving them their excuse to invade the arab nations.

9/11 Conspiracy

Comments