High jacked air planes prior to 9/11 had never been used as giant suicide rockets. What they did during 9/11 was pretty much what they would have done during any other high jacking pre-9/11.
Happy False Flag Day!
- Thread starter lukep
- Start date
High jacked air planes prior to 9/11 had never been used as giant suicide rockets. What they did during 9/11 was pretty much what they would have done during any other high jacking pre-9/11.
Yeah because when you can create a grand conspiracy, blow up several buildings, and kill thousands of people, you have to inform all of the news media ahead of time that the buildings are going to fall, because otherwise the plan just won't work....
People that believe in these theories and tote around all of these various things as "evidence" have the worst possible logic.
Face it - you have a predetermined desire to believe it, so you're gonna see things the way that you want to see them and logic be damned.
I think people who aren't, at some meaningful level, involved in government work but make observations such as these are like consumers making blanket statements about marketers and trying to explain the inner-workings of advertising because of a Psych 101 course they got an A in and an essay they wrote in English covering the topic of marketing.
I've seen no arguement upheld by first hand experience, and to some degree, that's discrediting.
I've seen no arguement upheld by first hand experience, and to some degree, that's discrediting.
Lukep, dragging WF even deeper into the toilet than it already was. When people actually step forward and say stuff like this, it's like uncovering just the tip of the iceberg. There is something so fundamentally flawed with their entire paradigm and their understanding of how the world works that it's not necessarily shocking that they spew this bullshit, it's shocking that they can actually function in this universe believing the utter garbage they do. They have no conception of the true enemies, the true adversaries, where the real lines are drawn, that they are gonna be in for one hell of a paradigm shift, possibly resulting in total mental breakdown, when the shit truly hits the fan and the real players start to step out into the open.
I noticed that loudmouth LukeP is unusually quiet in his own thread lately. Maybe he finally realizes what a giant tool he is?
LukeP essentially follows the Alex Jones playbook to a T. LukeP will make an outragous statement such as that Ron Paul will win the GOP nomination, and then when it doesn't happen he gives a totally lame excuse and then moves on to his next fixation such as the mid-western drought killing all corn or 9/11 being an inside job. Alex Jones does the same exact thing, and whenever he's proven wrong he just sweeps it under the rug and moves on to the next big thing.
I also remember LukeP promised everyone that if Ron Paul doesn't get elected, he's going to move to Thailand. I can't wait to hear the next lame excuse LukeP gives when he doesn't end up moving there.
Actions speak louder than words LukeP. Either take action or shut the fuck up already.
LukeP essentially follows the Alex Jones playbook to a T. LukeP will make an outragous statement such as that Ron Paul will win the GOP nomination, and then when it doesn't happen he gives a totally lame excuse and then moves on to his next fixation such as the mid-western drought killing all corn or 9/11 being an inside job. Alex Jones does the same exact thing, and whenever he's proven wrong he just sweeps it under the rug and moves on to the next big thing.
I also remember LukeP promised everyone that if Ron Paul doesn't get elected, he's going to move to Thailand. I can't wait to hear the next lame excuse LukeP gives when he doesn't end up moving there.
Actions speak louder than words LukeP. Either take action or shut the fuck up already.
What level of Government work would you say makes someone qualified?
Marketers don't have a monopoly on violence. If I give my money to a marketer it's voluntary. Marketers don't kill people and blow shit up.
4-Star General advising Rumsfeld high enough up? He believes (at least in 2007) the official story. He's politically connected. He agrees with Afghanistan. Here's his take from 2007.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TY2DKzastu8]Wes Clark - America's Foreign Policy "Coup" - YouTube[/ame]
Does that strategy sound familiar?
How many times would I have to lie to you for you to stop trusting everything I say? Would 3 be enough?
-Iraq played no part in 9/11.
-Iraq had no WMD's.
-Iraq did not greet us as liberators.
It's healthy to question the Government's motives. Especially when they act like ours.
I know I said I wasn't going to jump back into this thread, but bluechinagroup is such a flaming zealot faggot that he's been picking this fight again on other threads, bringing up this argument wherever he finds me... Then he calls me a string of names over there when I don't answer his demands on those unrelated threads. I feel like I've been called out on the playground by a kid in his underoos...
So it's time to do the OK Corral @ high noon thing... Because sometimes you just shouldn't run from faggots.
First of all, I only stopped replying to this thread because arguing about 9/11 is like arguing about religion. The official NIST report and the initial FBI investigation both say that only some arabs were behind the attack when this is so implausible that It's far easier for atheists to believe in a virgin birth.
But if some people around here want to keep on believing against all the evidence to the contrary, then far be it for me to pop their little denial bubbles... Just like with religion, it's far smarter not to get into arguments about their incredibly silly, implausible worldview.
Yes, bluechinagroup, the government cares about you, and keeps you safe from those evil people in the middle east who hate you for your freedoms. They'd never have any reason whatsoever to do something bad to americans, & certainly there is no power to be gained by such destruction, so you're perfectly safe.
Please forget that you ever saw this thread. It wasn't meant for you, it's only for us wacky conspiracy theorists who have secret decoder rings to make out the true meaning of what was said here anyway. :thumbsup:
Secondly, I don't listen to Alex Jones other than what's been posted here on WF, and then only occasionally because he's quite an annoying man. As far as I can tell he's right about 50% of the time, so there's no point in listening to him when I can just flip a coin.
Third, and most importantly, I've said twice now on this thread not to take my word for it that 9/11 was impossible as stated; but to ask a structural engineer. Have you found one yet (who doesn't work for the government) who agrees with the NIST pancaking theory? You know, that theory that has never been observed before from this type of damage in the history of structural engineering, except for three times on one day on 9/11?
I'm not going to read any more evidence on this subject unless it's from a qualified individual, and those qualifications would obviously need to include a structural engineering background. You shouldn't either.
Now, to briefly respond to this little gem:
That's right, I'm moving to BKK this year, likely in November. Still working on the details now but my rental contract here is up on Halloween so that's likely when I'll be starting the move.
The goal is to physically be there by thanksgiving, but we're also working in a trip to Japan this fall (planned it for years, meeting old friends, gotta do it) so I'm not sure about any dates yet... But we've already been researching places to live online and with family over there, and I'm still a fan of downtown area so I'd be happy to meet with someone from WF to prove that I'm over there in December or January when things start to normalize.
Now answer me this; Why did you feel the need to bring all of that playground bullshit into a thread about anonymous business structures? I've always pictured you as an older expat living in HK so I had afforded you a larger amount of maturity than you apparently deserve. I see now that I was wrong in that assumption.
So it's time to do the OK Corral @ high noon thing... Because sometimes you just shouldn't run from faggots.
First of all, I only stopped replying to this thread because arguing about 9/11 is like arguing about religion. The official NIST report and the initial FBI investigation both say that only some arabs were behind the attack when this is so implausible that It's far easier for atheists to believe in a virgin birth.
But if some people around here want to keep on believing against all the evidence to the contrary, then far be it for me to pop their little denial bubbles... Just like with religion, it's far smarter not to get into arguments about their incredibly silly, implausible worldview.
Yes, bluechinagroup, the government cares about you, and keeps you safe from those evil people in the middle east who hate you for your freedoms. They'd never have any reason whatsoever to do something bad to americans, & certainly there is no power to be gained by such destruction, so you're perfectly safe.
Please forget that you ever saw this thread. It wasn't meant for you, it's only for us wacky conspiracy theorists who have secret decoder rings to make out the true meaning of what was said here anyway. :thumbsup:
Secondly, I don't listen to Alex Jones other than what's been posted here on WF, and then only occasionally because he's quite an annoying man. As far as I can tell he's right about 50% of the time, so there's no point in listening to him when I can just flip a coin.
Third, and most importantly, I've said twice now on this thread not to take my word for it that 9/11 was impossible as stated; but to ask a structural engineer. Have you found one yet (who doesn't work for the government) who agrees with the NIST pancaking theory? You know, that theory that has never been observed before from this type of damage in the history of structural engineering, except for three times on one day on 9/11?
I'm not going to read any more evidence on this subject unless it's from a qualified individual, and those qualifications would obviously need to include a structural engineering background. You shouldn't either.
Now, to briefly respond to this little gem:
No one said I was afraid; I said I don't like the heat... Yet I'm moving there anyway.
That's right, I'm moving to BKK this year, likely in November. Still working on the details now but my rental contract here is up on Halloween so that's likely when I'll be starting the move.
The goal is to physically be there by thanksgiving, but we're also working in a trip to Japan this fall (planned it for years, meeting old friends, gotta do it) so I'm not sure about any dates yet... But we've already been researching places to live online and with family over there, and I'm still a fan of downtown area so I'd be happy to meet with someone from WF to prove that I'm over there in December or January when things start to normalize.
Now answer me this; Why did you feel the need to bring all of that playground bullshit into a thread about anonymous business structures? I've always pictured you as an older expat living in HK so I had afforded you a larger amount of maturity than you apparently deserve. I see now that I was wrong in that assumption.
OPERATION NORTHWOODS [SIZE=-1]below
[/SIZE]Proposed by the Chairman of the Joint Cheifs of Staff Lyman Louis Lemnitzer, the 1962 document called for the US Military-Intell-Special Forces to secretly carry out acts of violence against Americans, to be blamed on Cuba. The intention was to create support for US military action against Cuba, ultimately to engage the USSR, hopefully in a "winnable" nuclear war which would only kill 170 million Americans.
One of the many shocking proposals included blowing up drone aircraft that would be falsely reported to be full of college students on a holiday.
ABC News reported in May of 2001, "US Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba". Although this plan never came to fruition, it highlights the intentions of the highest military chiefs to intentionally kill American citizens to realize political and military goals. Additionally, it shows that back in 1962 they were thinking about their capacity to use hijacked or remote-controlled commercial airliners to stage high profile terror attacks.
ORIGINAL NORTHWOODS DOCUMENT (unclassified)
[SIZE=-1]A high-level plan to stage terrorist attacks on civilians in U.S. cities, by definition Northwoods was a secret conspiracy.
Suppose you found a typed, signed contract proposal to murder you and your family. Would you ignore it because it was "just one proposal"? This was how some people responded to these facts. Baffling state of denial.
src= http://www.takeoverworld.info/false-flag.html
JFK vetoed that shit
[/SIZE]
[/SIZE]Proposed by the Chairman of the Joint Cheifs of Staff Lyman Louis Lemnitzer, the 1962 document called for the US Military-Intell-Special Forces to secretly carry out acts of violence against Americans, to be blamed on Cuba. The intention was to create support for US military action against Cuba, ultimately to engage the USSR, hopefully in a "winnable" nuclear war which would only kill 170 million Americans.
One of the many shocking proposals included blowing up drone aircraft that would be falsely reported to be full of college students on a holiday.
ABC News reported in May of 2001, "US Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba". Although this plan never came to fruition, it highlights the intentions of the highest military chiefs to intentionally kill American citizens to realize political and military goals. Additionally, it shows that back in 1962 they were thinking about their capacity to use hijacked or remote-controlled commercial airliners to stage high profile terror attacks.
ORIGINAL NORTHWOODS DOCUMENT (unclassified)
[SIZE=-1]A high-level plan to stage terrorist attacks on civilians in U.S. cities, by definition Northwoods was a secret conspiracy.
Suppose you found a typed, signed contract proposal to murder you and your family. Would you ignore it because it was "just one proposal"? This was how some people responded to these facts. Baffling state of denial.
src= http://www.takeoverworld.info/false-flag.html
JFK vetoed that shit
[/SIZE]
Just because I don't buy into your bullshit conspiracy theory doesn't mean I don't think the US government or ANY government isn't capable of killing their own citizens if they think they can get away with it. Thankfully due to the information age, this is becoming increasingly difficult to do.
I am simply skeptical of your claims that the US government intentionally killed its own citizens on 9/11, especially through a controlled demolition.
Part of the reason why I have so much contempt for you is because you are totally dismissive to anyone who doesn't buy your opinions as fact.
Keep in mind that I used to live in the US and immigrated to Hong Kong on an Investment Visa. I have always been a fan of small fiscally conservative governments, and that is exactly what I have here in Hong Kong. I am anything but a fan of the US government which is bloated and engages in never ending deficit spending that will never be paid off.
So maybe you should stop painting anyone who disagrees with you as some kind of a naive ignoramus who thinks the US government wants to only kill all the bad people in the middle east/world. There are obviously many other factors at play and neither of us knows exactly what is really going on behind the scenes. We can speculate, as well as glean some interesting info from history. The US has been a war monger for quite some time, and they've used flimsy excuses to engage in warfare in the past too. Hell, that is how the US acquired the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Guam.
Luke you have a problem with selective bias. You're no different than the nutjobs who think the US faked the moon landing. You only look at evidence that confirms your bias and dismiss everything else. Also you're not introducing any new information here.
How many structural engineers have you talked to? You make it sound like every independent structural engineer is going to agree with you, and you're completely wrong about this. You managed to find a few structural engineers that are part of a biased organization that confirms your bias and now you're assuming every structural engineer must confirm your bias as well, and if they don't then they either work for the government or are sworn to secrecy because their family would be in danger, am I right?
According to wikipedia:
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Your conspiracy theory does not conform with the beliefs of the mainstream scientific and engineering community as a whole. You can't just cherry pick an outlier like this and then proclaim that it's the mainstream view of all structural engineers.
Oh look, here's a peer reviewed paper that further discredits your theory that 9/11 involved controlled demolition:
Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition - The Paper
That's a lot of engineers and academics (one of them is based in Hong Kong!) that pretty much say that you and your crackpots are full of shit.
Great! Hopefully you'll actually follow through with it.
I'm part of the post 80s generation; there are many people in my age range on this forum. I'm pegging you as a baby boomer, but I could be totally off base.
This section is called shooting the shit and shockingly trolling is a regular occurrence here as well as on the other WF sections.
So just because I am dissenting and calling you out on your bullshit I lack maturity? Even Jon calls people out on their bullshit, and even insults them, on here. So why single me out?
Everyone knows you need to have a thick skin on WF, so why are you being so thin skinned?
I think you really get off on the idea of being some kind of libertarian philosopher-king who has a loyal flock of mindless sheep that you can share your "knowledge" with. Like any tyrant though, you have a fragile ego and therefore zero tolerance for dissent and will do everything in your power to try to stamp it out or at the very least discredit it. Thankfully you pretty much have no real power, except for influencing the SERPS and I hear even that is waning.
operation DICKBUSH was paper shredded. the rest is not important now. without sigs on a paper with letterhead - no proof
oh did i say it without proof?
This is another magazine article (about two pages of text) proposing a "hypothesis" about what "may" have happened.
FEMA once stated "the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence." Proposing hypotheses (especially ones that are low probability) about how the buildings could have collapsed without explosives, does not negate the possibility that they were used.
The basement of one of the towers was bombed in 1993. It's not very scientific to not even consider the possibility that at least one bomb could have been planted on 9/11.
Nice work dismissing the evidence that is supported by multiple independent structural engineers and academics (this was after all peer reviewed) and then throwing in an unsourced statement that supports your bias.
By the way, can you explain to me how the Clinton administration managed to fuck up the 1993 WTC bombings? After all, according to you this was all an inside job.
Huh? I didn't "dismiss" anything, I pointed out that the "paper" is actually just a very short article in a magazine. Most of this forum probably has no idea what detailed peer reviewed scientific analysis looks like. The FEMA quote is relatively well known and easily looked up on the googles.
And where did I say that?
recommended reading :
Your logical fallacy is black-or-white
Your logical fallacy is strawman
LukeP said to ask any structural engineer. I proved him wrong by pointing out that mainstream structural engineers and academics generally do not support the controlled demolition myth.
Also this magazine is geared towards professional structural engineers. It's not equivalent to Popular Science which is geared towards lay persons who have a passing interest in science.
So who do you think was behind the 1993 WTC bombings anyway? Do you support the official story?
I honestly just can't see why anyone would find this hard to believe though. How many people have those same bastards sent off to war to die for oil or petrodollars or some other type of power? Surely it's many multiple times the number of 9/11 deaths.
If it seems that I am dismissive, that's just because I am giving you the credit to see the bigger picture that I see too... Once you see that you'd dismiss you too for making silly assertations like how you are "skeptical of the claims that the US government intentionally killed its own citizens" -When they do so at a record rate every single damn day.
(And they aren't even drafting us to go die for them anymore... Imagine how many of us they can kill every day once they reinstate the draft!)
Lulz... I wouldn't dream of stopping with just the bad people!
I really don't mean to stoke your fires higher, but it seems kinda batty to me that you can know these things but still think that the guv wouldn't want to kill its' own citizens. Are you sure that you've thought your position thru enough?
Of course I'm not introducing new information here... I've said a few times before that arguing this shit is like arguing religion. Both sides have tons of evidence, but it's too hard for one side to prove the other wrong.
If I had the time and will to do a 9/11 thread the right way, and I wasn't afraid of pissing off uncle Homey Sec, I'd list all kinds of evidence in an organized manner, scientifically, such as:
- Stats on how many steel-framed buildings have fallen this way around the world,
- How media reports don't match observations chronologically,
- How the US air force was conveniently on stand-down mode for the entire event in the entire region, (including over the Pentagon, US military HQ #1???)
- How the offices in building 7 and the pentagon were the only two places on earth investigating a missing multi-billion dollars that congress demanded they find, (we know this because the investigation was abandoned that day!)
- How hard it is to fly a jumbo jet while the alleged highjackers never passed their pilots license testing,
- How the airplanes that both WTC towers were designed to take a direct hit from would have hit the towers with MORE energy than the ones that actually did,
- How many independently-obtained dust samples from rooftops of many of the nearby buildings contained tiny steel spheres,
- How lots of people recorded on camera that fatal day at the site were not allowed to testify on the record with NIST, and have come forward saying they saw things like other explosions before the planes hit,
- How millions of tons of evidence (namely the entire compliments of the three destroyed buildings were removed and DESTROYED at break-neck speeds without anyone at all but the feds themselves doing any kind of a crime-scene investigation,
- How an ex-CIA agent was the first person imprisoned under the Patriot act for coming forward about what she knew about her agencies' involvement in 9/11,
- Or even how lots of people came forwards claiming to see the little black boxes from both planes at the crash site and yet the FBI claims that NONE of those 4 boxes were ever recovered at all. (And of course to support that idiocy I'd post the recovery rates of black boxes found worldwide, which is damn close to 100%, even over the deepest of ocean crashes.)
...And lots more. This is just shit off the top of my head, but youtube's got dozens or even hundreds of other solid chunks of evidence out there, sadly among among the Alex Jones crap as well. Yes, you have to do some digging to find the realistic ones from the crap but lots of people have done that digging already.
Anyway, I'd dig up all of the good ones and and place them in order, so you could refute them one by one, because that's how you make a strong case and and boil down the facts correctly... Except for the little problem of me not having a month off to do it up that well.
Sure, you can overlook this chunk of evidence or that chunk of evidence, one at a time, all day long; but when you place them all side by side, the official story adds up to a pile of shit so big and stinky smelling that you'd have to be completely, utterly deluded to accept it anywhere near face value.
Again, it would literally be easier to accept the fact of a virgin birth. At least that would only require One miracle!
I have personally talked to one that wasn't included in that AIA film, nor was he in the group in any way.
He tells me that there are basically three types of structural engineers these days:
A. Those that have bigger balls than brains... And speak out like the AIA film bunch.
B. Those that live in perpetual denial about 9/11... When they hear about evidence for that event they immediately stick their fingers in their ears and go "nyaa nyaa I can't hear you!" And then tell everyone else you're a loon because they are scared shitless of the implications.
C. Those, like him, who have the smarts enough to shut the fuck up about how they paid attention during their freshmen year about how steel-framed buildings can't be knocked down that easily...
He says that they ALL know and the group C ppl discuss it with each other when no one else is around, but they also know that the truth implies that the instigators wouldn't want them talking about it, and have the power to make their lives really bad, or simply end outright. I tried to press him about if any engineers he knows have been contacted directly by feds and told to shut up, but he said there was no need... The hole is too big and obvious, so it's simply a matter of time until some of the group A engineers spills enough beans.
We didn't talk specifically about the ones who have come out against the conspiracy story, like the ones who wrote your source papers, but he implied that they were group B folks... Obviously with advanced powers of denial.
Seriously, get a structural engineer alone, maybe at a bar with some beers, and without talking about 9/11 directly, ask him how much punishment a steel-framed building can take... You'll get one of those three types for sure, and that's a 66.6% odds that he'll tell you the truth if he trusts you at all and doesn't feel like he's being watched.
(cont.)