SIG Sauer 556 Arms Forum banner

1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
803 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Fox News hit piece against 9/11 truth and Jesse Ventura inadvertently reveals a shocking truth; WTC leaseholder was “on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the buildingâ€
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
592 Posts
So, someone went into a structurally unsound building, while on fire and set explosives up to intentionally bring it down?



























:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
803 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Building 7 was reported to be on fire from debris hitting it at 4:02pm. By 5:20 pm it collapsed. Even if they started wiring it for demolition at 9:03 AM when the first building collapsed, which there would be NO reason to..............that means they accessed all of the internal structures, drilled, and wired them with charges, did the math on the order in which the charges must go and demolished it in less than eight hours and nobody saw anybody from the demolition crews?

My guess is that Flight 93 wasn't headed for the Capitol, it was supposed to hit WTC 7. Each flight was hijacked approximately 20 minutes from when it left the ground.

Think about this people. WTC 7 WAS WIRED FOR DEMOLITION!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
592 Posts
quite a leap there. once again, no smoking gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
803 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
There are about 500 smoking guns. There are soooooooooooo many inconsistencies surrounding the official theory presented by the official reports, that it is ridiculous. But yeah, the fact that Building 7 had a tiny fires on 3 or 4 floors and then fell into it's own footprint an hour and sixteen minutes after the fires were reported makes perfect sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Couldn't agree more, Trey! I'm not smart enough to know WHAT happened, but the official explanation doesn't jive with the facts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
365 Posts
:roll:

I swear these conspiracy theories will persist until the end of time.

I wonder why no one has ever suggested Rockefeller wasn't behind the sinking of the Titanic, or the King of Prussia was behind Lincoln's assassination .... or FDR burned up the Hindenberg? :?

This is getting tiresome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
238 Posts
TommyGunn said:
:roll:

I swear these conspiracy theories will persist until the end of time.

I wonder why no one has ever suggested Rockefeller wasn't behind the sinking of the Titanic, or the King of Prussia was behind Lincoln's assassination .... or FDR burned up the Hindenberg? :?

This is getting tiresome.
Please then feel free to not read or comment on the posts!

I personally question the official stories of many modern events and I will rattle off a few of the easiest to see the inconsistencies:

Flight 800
This was at one point the "official" explanation as to why so many folks reported seeing what appeared to be a missile strike the 747. It is EXTREMELY hard to believe that the 747 could shear the front of the plane off and climb several thousand feet rapidly. Please share your comments on this when you watch the video:

Here is a hand drawn sketch from a witness and a private animation of what he described in the sketch. There were hundreds of similar stories and perspectives from the entire length of Long Island and the media reported many of them until the "official" story started to gel and the media outlets started singing from the same sheet of music. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXtojzTR ... re=related

Christmas in Detroit or The Fruit of the Boom
Here is a story from an extremely credible eyewitness, corroborated by other passengers and squashed because it does not fit into the official story.
Please note the bomb-sniffing dog story at the end of the segment and it is consistent with this story: http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index ... s_msn.html
Now, do you believe that a passenger from another flight was allowed to mingle with passengers being detained because of a bomb on a plane? I for one find that very, very hard to believe. The official story drifted from this to simply not talking about it: http://www.examiner.com/x-3284-Detroit- ... flight-253

Remember also, Ruby Ridge would have been an official cover-up except for the inconvenient fact that the FBI HRT left people alive to tell a different story. That living witness sued the FBI for wrongful death and received a $3.1 million payout. Please let me know what your explanation of that payout is if you please.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
365 Posts
Flight 800 lost the nose of the aircraft, which did two things; it lessoned the weight of the aircraft. This alone, given that the lift would remain the same, would cause the aircraft to tend to want to climb. In addition, losing the nose would make the front of the jet want to raise up, and the tail to dip, as it would cause the jet to go out of balance, and increase the angle of attack of the wings -- yet another factor that would make the jet want to climb. Eventually the jet would become unstable, or disintegrate, and crash, in a manner the damage to the jet caused.
I'm quite aware of the many tales of people who "saw" a missile "shoot down" the plane. I am also aware that eyewitness accounts are questionable, often contradictory, and unreliable.
I ve discussed this with more than one detective over my years and have been told every time one or another iteration of "the more witnesses there are to an event, the more stories there are of what happened."
People often see the tail end of something and think they've witnessed the whole event -- a phenomenon that seems especially applicable to witnessing an aircraft descending and crashing.
No terrorist organization ever claimed credit for the event, and the inventory of military SAM and AtoA missiles were all accounted for after the crash. Leaving really gaping and perplexing holes in this conspiracy theory.
Investigating the conspiracy behind Lincoln's assassination could be a lot more fruitful. There actually was a conspiracy there. :wink: 8)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
238 Posts
Climbing thousands of feet requires stable flight. You are right about the tail dip from a weight and balance perspective but it would not be able to continue stable forward flight. If you take the nose off of a plane it begins to tumble immediately, not in a minute or so it would take to climb thousands of feet.

A valid skeptic does not have to have a competing theory to offer to challenge a theory. I do not have any information or theories on the source of the missile. I am asserting my informed opinion that 800 did not explode from a mysterous center fuel tank wire chafe, the official story felt massaged to me at the time and that video they produced was laughable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
365 Posts
And yet .... we still do not know, or have any really viable theories, about who fired the missile, where it came from ... or anything else.
Flt. 800 was certainly a bizarre event.
But Occam's Razor still suggests that the theory with the fewest assumptions is most likely atleast close to the truth than "conspiracy theories."

It isn't a matter of having a "valid competing theory" it's a matter of explaining the facts.
How a plane would climb as far as 800 apparantly did is a hard nut, but it still provides fewer assumptions than a mystery missile.
A problem with conspiracies (in my opinion) is that there will always be someone who "spills the beans" and outs the nature of the conspiracy.
'Til I see this happen (convincingly, not on Art Bell's radio show) I think I will continue to "avoid" conspracy theories with regards to Flt. #800.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
238 Posts
It is interesting to me that the theory that I see having the fewest assumptions is the external missile strike. To believe the official story you need to believe an unlikely source of ignition causing an explosion of Jet-A fuel rather than a garden variety fuel fire, explosive residue left by a bomb dog test at an airport several days earlier conducted on an unspecified TWA 747, and a what is difficult to believe physical act by a seriously broken aircraft.

A missile requires a SAM launched from a ship that is consistent with eyewitnesses and an administration desprate to not have a crisis to deal with. The latter is the hardest part of the story though. Let me think if I can think of any other examples of that administration walking away from a crisis. I will select as my examples the Cole bombing, African embasy bombings, the Y2K bomber stopped coming in from Victoria and the Branch Dividians. (Clinton tried to distance himself from that and was mostly successful with J Reno taking most of the heat.). I view burying the 800 story as being consistent with that administration
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
365 Posts
In all probability, we will never have all the answers. I have a feeling that people come up with questions based on false premises a lot of times when mysteries like Flight 800 happen.

I recall watching a TV documentary on the Hindenburg explosion. For a long time there was speculation about there being some type of bomb on board (a George C. Scott movie was made about that one), or some kind of electrical or lightning effect starting the fire. I was pretty surprised when it was revealed (fairly recently, historically speaking) that the Germans applied a type of varnish to the dirigible that was very flammable. I mean, everyone was blaming the hydrogen gas (which of course was a large part of the problem) but it turned out that varnish would have flared up very well had some type of lightning hit it.
The sinking of the R.M.S. Titanic has been slightly re-written. For decades it was believed a long 300 foot gash was opened, but recent investigations seem to indicate the starboard bow received a poke here, a jab there, and enough holes were opened up, enough rivets were popped, to sink the ship. But it also seems there might have been additional damage along the bottom of the ship.
So a lot of things are not always quite as they seem, or should be, atleast from the history books.
I am naturally skeptical of witness testimony, as I said. I should think it rather unusual to "happen to be looking" up in the sky at a plane at the right time to see the initial explosion or event. I would think it far more likely one might see, in their peripheral vision, some kind of flash which would draw their attention to the consequences. Seeing only that, they might not know what initially caused it .... but they might mistakenly think they did know. ...... Or -- they might hear a explosion. In this case, the fact that sound travels comparatively slowly ... they might notice the crash even farther along in progress, and be even less aware of what caused the event.
My central problem with the missile theory is that no one can apparantly account for the missile, and no group has taken credit for it. IIRC, the aircraft was too high for a Stinger missile, or a Strella, man-portable shoulder launched IR guided missile. That would leave a larger missile with some kind of ground based launch system (which could mean ship-based to be more specific).
I am not ruling out this (heck, I'm not ruling out Klingons for that matter) but I'm just saying what I believe to be the case.
Did I trust the Clinton Administration? Heck no. Their shenanigans and Clinton's impeachment show they (and he) were very capable of lying. Hillary "lost" records in relationship to the Rose Law Firm .... but they were discovered in the White House Library, literally with her fingerprinst on them
But with the missile theory there would come a lot of people outside the white house who would know and be far more willing to blab ...like Dick Morris blabbing about Slick Willie's involvement with Waco recently.
Strange mechanical/electrical malfunctions do happen in life. This to me seems more likely than a mystery missile.
For now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
238 Posts
TommyGunn said:
In all probability, we will never have all the answers. I have a feeling that people come up with questions based on false premises a lot of times when mysteries like Flight 800 happen.

I recall watching a TV documentary on the Hindenburg explosion. For a long time there was speculation about there being some type of bomb on board (a George C. Scott movie was made about that one), or some kind of electrical or lightning effect starting the fire. I was pretty surprised when it was revealed (fairly recently, historically speaking) that the Germans applied a type of varnish to the dirigible that was very flammable. I mean, everyone was blaming the hydrogen gas (which of course was a large part of the problem) but it turned out that varnish would have flared up very well had some type of lightning hit it.
The sinking of the R.M.S. Titanic has been slightly re-written. For decades it was believed a long 300 foot gash was opened, but recent investigations seem to indicate the starboard bow received a poke here, a jab there, and enough holes were opened up, enough rivets were popped, to sink the ship. But it also seems there might have been additional damage along the bottom of the ship.
So a lot of things are not always quite as they seem, or should be, atleast from the history books.
I am naturally skeptical of witness testimony, as I said. I should think it rather unusual to "happen to be looking" up in the sky at a plane at the right time to see the initial explosion or event. I would think it far more likely one might see, in their peripheral vision, some kind of flash which would draw their attention to the consequences. Seeing only that, they might not know what initially caused it .... but they might mistakenly think they did know. ...... Or -- they might hear a explosion. In this case, the fact that sound travels comparatively slowly ... they might notice the crash even farther along in progress, and be even less aware of what caused the event.
My central problem with the missile theory is that no one can apparantly account for the missile, and no group has taken credit for it. IIRC, the aircraft was too high for a Stinger missile, or a Strella, man-portable shoulder launched IR guided missile. That would leave a larger missile with some kind of ground based launch system (which could mean ship-based to be more specific).
I am not ruling out this (heck, I'm not ruling out Klingons for that matter) but I'm just saying what I believe to be the case.
Did I trust the Clinton Administration? Heck no. Their shenanigans and Clinton's impeachment show they (and he) were very capable of lying. Hillary "lost" records in relationship to the Rose Law Firm .... but they were discovered in the White House Library, literally with her fingerprinst on them
But with the missile theory there would come a lot of people outside the white house who would know and be far more willing to blab ...like Dick Morris blabbing about Slick Willie's involvement with Waco recently.
Strange mechanical/electrical malfunctions do happen in life. This to me seems more likely than a mystery missile.
For now.
We are definitely getting to a point where we can amiably agree to disagree. As far as the eyewitnesses goes I offer this:

1. The date of the event is July 17, 1996. It was reported to be a clear summer night with good visibility. According to wikipedia, the island is 118 miles long and has 3/4 million residence living on it.
2. There are many beaches, cafes, restaurants, etc facing the Atlantic. I do not believe that having hundreds or low thousands of eyewitnesses is out of the realm of possibilities.
3. (For the sake of this point, lets agree there was a sea launched missile) With the angle of the flight path and the orientation of the island, it is predictable that eyewitnesses will see different angles and orientations of a sea launched missile intercepting the 747 and this is consistent with the eyewitnesses. There is an eyewitness alliance that took out a full page ad in 2000 demanding that they be heard. I guess no one really paid any attention.

Long Island Wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Island

Eyewitness info: http://www.twa800.com/eyewitnesses.htm

In light of this information, I CANNOT accept the official story as accurate and I have doubted the official story while it was happening. I can accept that you feel differently but I standby my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
365 Posts
anhedonic said:
Occam's razor...
Yes .... you were saying something ....? :?
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
825 Posts
Even if you don't believe the government's account of the accident, jumping to a missile that is secretly being covered up requires a whole lot of unfounded, and unbelievable, assumptions.

Why was the ship that launched the missile never found?
Why were missile fragments never found?
Why was there no evidence of a high explosive detonation on any of the aluminum fragments found?
Why would a missile theory make the aerodynamics of a plane climbing after it lost its nose any easier to accept?
How did the government manage to silence the navy who shot the missile, and the crash investigators and salvage crews who recovered the debris, and the air traffic controllers who tracked the missile, and the secret service who overheard the plans, and the NSA which must have recorded the radio transmissions, and the FBI that investigated it.

Remember, we are talking about a government where a crooked president couldn't even keep a BJ from an intern secret ... what makes you think our government is capable of quickly silencing hundreds of people who witnessed the murder of our fellow countrymen?

You think none of those people, after witnessing 9/11 would not have come forward and spilled the beans, or gotten drunk one night, and confessed to a friend?

I applaud that you do not believe the facts as presented, but jumping from disbelief to an alternate theory of a missle is not supported by the test of reasonableness. It's just not credible that a missile was launched, and covered up.

Heck, even Bush couldn't fire 6 Attorneys General without getting it all over the press, and that was legal.

I will buy that Hillary might have pulled some dirty stuff with 'losing' or hiding files, or making some crooked real estate deals, but those would be the kinds of things that only 1 or 2 people know about. Not thousands.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
803 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
I'm quite surprised by what i see here. What I see here is intelligent dialogue. Instead of resorting to ad hominem attacks, people are having rational discussion about some events that are very painful for some and that have shaken the core beliefs of others. When the topic of 9/11 comes up the most common response that I get is that GWB was not intelligent enough to have planned and executed such an event. The general consensus among intelligent researchers who doubt the official story, is that GWB was as surprised as the rest of us and in fact had absolutely nothing to do with the events that day. On the day of the attack there were several reports of dancing Israeli citizens set up an filming from nearby rooftops, and Israeli intelligence operatives apprehended and detained for questioning. Of course there were many highly suspect things broadcast the first day, which were never broadcast, or even mentioned again. Whatever happened, the victims deserve the truth to come to light. Why was so much of the evidence immediately physically covered up, such as steel being immediately shipped off for recycling. Why were so many vital questions about events related to the attacks never even addressed? Certain members of the actual 9/11 Commission made comments to the effect that there should be a criminal investigation, and that it was a cover up, and a national scandal, and these comments were never even touched upon by corporate media.

9/11 was the beginning of the end of America as we knew it. We now live in a society where the word terrorist is thrown around recklessly, we no longer have a true right to privacy, and we are on the verge of an Orwellian society where our every move, communication, and purchase is tracked, traced, and databased in the name of the War on Terror. It is frightening watching the militarization of domestic Law Enforcement, the effective repeal of Posse Comitatus, and the buildup to a massive police state. For the control freaks who support the push for world government and global banking centralization, our tragedy was their dream come true. We are gradually sweeping across the middle east just according to the plans of groups like PNAC and the authors of documents like
"Securing the Realm". Isn't it a coincidence that the people who benefit most from our policies following 9/11 are the same folks who have profited most from the financial terrorism waged against the citizens of this country by the like of Goldman-Sachs and the other "too big to fails" associated with the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, Federal Reserve, and Bank of England?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
TommyGunn said:
anhedonic said:
Occam's razor...
Yes .... you were saying something ....? :?
Yes I was-when there are a number of possible scenarios to explain an observation, the least complex solution is often the correct one.

My question is, what were you saying when you ask me what I was? :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
238 Posts
Trey, I like you're info and the detail and passion you bring. There were several points where either I or TommyGunn could have resorted to personal snipes. I too am very happy it did not come to that. If you "slow your roll" a bit when it comes to getting angry you will likely find more converations instead of flame wars. You have a lot to offer and I think more folks here like what you bring that what you realize. Ease off the anger trigger a bit. I am very happy to find your self imposed exile is coming to an end (hopefully). Welcome back!!
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top