It is currently Wed Apr 16, 2014 10:15 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Assertion: No Islamic Hijackers on 9/11/01
PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:24 pm 
After having spent a great deal of time looking at the events of 9/11, I have found no compelling reason to believe that any of the doomed aircraft were hijacked by Islamic terrorists. Can anybody provide real and compelling evidence that there were such hijackers?


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Assertion: No Islamic Hijackers on 9/11/01
PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2007 1:24 am 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:37 pm
Posts: 1646
Location: Denver
Hetware wrote:
After having spent a great deal of time looking at the events of 9/11, I have found no compelling reason to believe that any of the doomed aircraft were hijacked by Islamic terrorists. Can anybody provide real and compelling evidence that there were such hijackers?



Heh...apparently a real truth seeker. One in a million. Not basing this viewpoint on this post...but it didn't hurt. I don't buy hardly anything about the 'official' and the greatest 9/11 conspiracy story.

Drop me a line should you find yourself in Denver.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2007 11:18 am 
Strangely most so-called "truthers" don't even see this as a significant issue.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2007 3:01 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:37 pm
Posts: 1646
Location: Denver
It helps to have evidence when challenging the conventional and the most outrageous conspiracy theory.

I can't think of a way to dig up evidence that they were not Islamic hijackers. We can readily argue that it is improbable to jump from Cessna's to doing the supposed maneuvers in a 757. We can also argue that 757's are incapable of doing some of the supposed maneuvers.

It is scientifically impossible for the fuselage of a 757 to blast a 16 foot wide hole through three rings of the Pentagon while the 20,000 pound titanium alloy engines fail to inflict any damage whatsoever before disappearing into thin air.

But the identity of the hijackers? Thats a tough one.

The perpetrators clearly wanted Islam to be blamed for transparent reasons. They pulled off a magnificent crime but were overly ambitious. The only thing keeping it under wraps is that the perpetrators currently control the system that investigates and reports on these matters.

Plus they have most people frightened. I have made some casual efforts to put together an organization to deal with a possible collapse of our current system. So far I get wide eyes while an ex-con promised me that I was going straight to jail.

Our founding fathers had a collossal task I can assure you. I'm sure that people had more 'guts' back then however.

At least we can look at Kucinich for having the cajones to try and save us.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: counter argument
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 2:32 am 
Offline
Lots to Say
Lots to Say

Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 6:56 pm
Posts: 31
Location: earth
Skepticism of the official story is warranted. However, some people take it to the extreme (attacking those who don't) and claim definitively that there were NO hijackers, and that the planes were not hijacked by the named individuals at all.

This can't be proven.

What we have is a lack of evidence MADE PUBLIC. This does nto mean such evidence does not exist. It means they won't tell us. Two different scenarios.

You can find a lot of evidence concerning the alleged hijackers here:

[url=http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution.html]United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui
Criminal No. 01-455-A
Prosecution Trial Exhibits[/url]

There is high quantity. But notice the lack of quality on this massive list.

You can draw your own conclusions. However, just because evidence was not made public, does not mean it doesn't exist.

I have been called all sorts of names from "9/11 Truthers" who should probably call themselves "9/11 Speculators."

I have been burned by assuming too much before. These are highly delicate matters.

PS

Someone mentioned a "16 foot hole" above. Not true. The hole extended to the north 50 feet from that "hole." Bogus claims get us ridiculed in the press.

ERROR: 'The Pentagon Attack Left Only a Small Impact Hole'

_________________
John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State at:
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 2:55 am 
One of immediate responses to realizing 9/11 was a far different crime than the OCT would have it, was to suspend my belief that any Islamic terrorists were involved. The "evidence" from the Moussaoui show trial is laughable.

I don't have a serious doubt that the Pentagon was hit by a 757. I am 100% certain Hani Hanjour was not in control of the plane at the time. If you don't have very solid and compelling evidence leading to the conclusion that there were such Islamic terrorists, it is extremely immoral to perpetuate the myth.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: counter argument
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:04 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:37 pm
Posts: 1646
Location: Denver
johndoraemi wrote:
Skepticism of the official story is warranted. However, some people take it to the extreme (attacking those who don't) and claim definitively that there were NO hijackers, and that the planes were not hijacked by the named individuals at all.

This can't be proven.

What we have is a lack of evidence MADE PUBLIC. This does nto mean such evidence does not exist. It means they won't tell us. Two different scenarios.

You can find a lot of evidence concerning the alleged hijackers here:

[url=http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution.html]United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui
Criminal No. 01-455-A
Prosecution Trial Exhibits[/url]

There is high quantity. But notice the lack of quality on this massive list.

You can draw your own conclusions. However, just because evidence was not made public, does not mean it doesn't exist.

I have been called all sorts of names from "9/11 Truthers" who should probably call themselves "9/11 Speculators."

I have been burned by assuming too much before. These are highly delicate matters.

PS

Someone mentioned a "16 foot hole" above. Not true. The hole extended to the north 50 feet from that "hole." Bogus claims get us ridiculed in the press.

ERROR: 'The Pentagon Attack Left Only a Small Impact Hole'


The waters are so muddy now that one can find several links to support almost anything. The Pentagon wall did not collapse for 1/2 hour. During that time period there was a 16 foot hole punching through three rings whcih amounts to 9 feet of heavily reinforced concrete. The photos were on the Pentagon web site for awhile.

In addition, there was no evidence that was unique to a 757 which weighs 100 tons. The main titanium alloy engines weigh 20,000 pound each. The peice of brightly painted aluminum which was so prominently displayed had not one scorch or burn mark on it. Its separation for the main wreckage made it appear as though it were carried in by hand. The remaining engine from the wreckage was not that of a 757.

You mention redicule from the press? Who cares? We all know who controls the press. Do you expect the perpetrators to fail to throw every switch available while protecting their hoax?

I probably have ten 9/11 DVDs and books scattered about. Of course I can't prove it. The question noyone answers is why was the Pentagon video confiscated from the Sheraton, the convenience store, the Pentagon, and possibly the highway that the 757 flew over?

I'm sure they will release video as soon as they have the technology to make a credible fake. It has been six years now. Six years. In that time, they released exactly one frame which still fails to show a 757.

I think a 757 flew over the Pentagon. I'm not disputing the presence of a 757. But there was no 757 at the crash site.

If they have evidence and with hold it...I would ask what purpose that would serve. Do you expect thinking people to believe something that looks to have taken over 6 years to produce?

Why was the video confiscated in the first place?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: counter argument
PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 6:54 pm 
Purple Tang wrote:
The waters are so muddy now that one can find several links to support almost anything. The Pentagon wall did not collapse for 1/2 hour.


And there were reports of hearing multiple explosions several minutes after the impact.

Purple Tang wrote:
During that time period there was a 16 foot hole punching through three rings whcih amounts to 9 feet of heavily reinforced concrete. The photos were on the Pentagon web site for awhile.


That is not correct. Only the outer facade was heavily reinforced. Furthermore, the first floor was contiguous from the point of entry to the point of exit. It was also fairly empty due to the renovation work.

Purple Tang wrote:
The remaining engine from the wreckage was not that of a 757.


I believe it was from a 757. A few of us on the LC forum analyzed this carefully and found parts in the maintenance graphics to match the recovered parts.

Purple Tang wrote:
We all know who controls the press.


Indeed.

Purple Tang wrote:
The question noyone answers is why was the Pentagon video confiscated from the Sheraton, the convenience store, the Pentagon, and possibly the highway that the 757 flew over?


The virtually immediate response is suspicious. There are legitimate national security arguments for wanting to conceal images of a successful strike on a target of vital military significance. In so doing, there are, of course, interests of the perpetrators served as well.

Purple Tang wrote:
I think a 757 flew over the Pentagon. I'm not disputing the presence of a 757. But there was no 757 at the crash site.


What do you know about General Stubblebine?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:32 am 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:37 pm
Posts: 1646
Location: Denver
What I meant by heavily reinforced is that the concrete had a couple things going for it:
It had a lot of quality rebar in it.
It was quality concrete. The strenght of concrete varies tremendously. Next time you have cement poured, buy it from the cement company and get their good stuff. You probably don't need the sidewalk quality stuff but you get my drift.

I know nothing of Gen Stubblebine and I'm a bit tired right now.

The immediate confiscation of all of the video is more than "a little suspicious." I suspect they were Mossad or some shadowy operatives posing as FBI myself. Once you have barged in and flipped an FBI badge, not many are going to ask questions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: counter argument
PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:13 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:37 pm
Posts: 1646
Location: Denver
Hetware wrote:
Purple Tang wrote:
The waters are so muddy now that one can find several links to support almost anything. The Pentagon wall did not collapse for 1/2 hour.


And there were reports of hearing multiple explosions several minutes after the impact.

Purple Tang wrote:
During that time period there was a 16 foot hole punching through three rings whcih amounts to 9 feet of heavily reinforced concrete. The photos were on the Pentagon web site for awhile.


That is not correct. Only the outer facade was heavily reinforced. Furthermore, the first floor was contiguous from the point of entry to the point of exit. It was also fairly empty due to the renovation work.

Purple Tang wrote:
The remaining engine from the wreckage was not that of a 757.


I believe it was from a 757. A few of us on the LC forum analyzed this carefully and found parts in the maintenance graphics to match the recovered parts.

Purple Tang wrote:
We all know who controls the press.


Indeed.

Purple Tang wrote:
The question noyone answers is why was the Pentagon video confiscated from the Sheraton, the convenience store, the Pentagon, and possibly the highway that the 757 flew over?


The virtually immediate response is suspicious. There are legitimate national security arguments for wanting to conceal images of a successful strike on a target of vital military significance. In so doing, there are, of course, interests of the perpetrators served as well.

Purple Tang wrote:
I think a 757 flew over the Pentagon. I'm not disputing the presence of a 757. But there was no 757 at the crash site.


What do you know about General Stubblebine?


Actually I had seen the vidoe of Gen Stubblebines testimony that a 757 could not have created the hole in the Pentagon. Since it was his job to conduct measurement and analysis like this....he does have credibility.

There are literlly dozens of experts calling bullshit of course.

One probem is that disinformation agents have infiltrated the 9/11 truth movements and are doing what they are trained to do.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 7:51 pm 
That wasn't Stubbelbine's most recent job. He was a top spook.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:41 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:37 pm
Posts: 1646
Location: Denver
I wonder about the old insiders who have grown so critical. I am a little skeptical if they used to be in the dis information business.

We know that the 9/11 truth movements are bursting to the gills with penetration by agents posing as truth loving patriots.

I started a little truth movement once. I disbanded it after deciding that the majority of members were in fact agents.


wow....I made senior member just now. Do you think I will get some respect around here? lol


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 1:27 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
Congrats Purple making the century mark. We need more new members making that figure. Thanks for persevering.

I've been to a few meetings with 911 groups as well as union organizations and they all suspect infiltration, especially with new people. Our world is full of deceptions and mistrust as well. I think you and hetwire are both questioning those things we questioned for a while too about 911. Now that the initial rush of emotion over 911 has passed, things return to normal and we find that the distractions created by government causes one to refocus their energies towards what they think they can work on. 911 has become such a distant reality- people respond as they are conditioned to and so return to their petty political partisanships in hopes that someone will drag us out of this dilemma we find in the world.

Meanwhile, no one can prove anything that happened except that most of the supposed hijackers were Saudi's. Other than that, the silence of evidence is deafening for us who know how important this issue is.

Keep trying and keep the heat on. Never forget what happened to our countries as a result of the lies that grew from that day of infamy.

_________________
Completely sane world
madness the only freedom

An ability to see both sides of a question
one of the marks of a mature mind

People don't choose to be dishonest
the choice chooses them

Now I know how Kusinich feels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 4:02 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:37 pm
Posts: 1646
Location: Denver
Thanks!

I don't really think I'm putting any heat on anything. I just keep exploring in the hopes of finding some more answers.

It looks to me like 9/11 will lead to WWIII. Their lust for oil fields is too great to be satisfied. The resulting likely bankruptcy of America will have a de-stabilizing effect on the global economy.

I would occasionally argue that the Great Depression (it was world wide) created ripe conditions for WWII. Many other factors of course.

There are a billion Islamic followers I think. I doubt that the masters of America can massacre them without significant repercussions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2007 6:35 pm 
Purple Tang wrote:
Thanks!

I don't really think I'm putting any heat on anything. I just keep exploring in the hopes of finding some more answers.

It looks to me like 9/11 will lead to WWIII. Their lust for oil fields is too great to be satisfied. The resulting likely bankruptcy of America will have a de-stabilizing effect on the global economy.

I would occasionally argue that the Great Depression (it was world wide) created ripe conditions for WWII. Many other factors of course.

There are a billion Islamic followers I think. I doubt that the masters of America can massacre them without significant repercussions.


Best I can tell those results are by design, and are not unforeseen consequences.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Blue Moon by Trent © 2007
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group